ÿWPCc /# ¢U:­ %ç 0(íw@4Uix 0J€ 0TÊ 0^ 0h| 0rä 0|V 0†Ò 0X 1uè 0d]U*ÁB)ë 0@ D3T B‡ DC¤ AMç ó4 v~' vÓ¥ AQxÆÉ 0D 0DÓ D/ BF˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nL,Î,†r‰AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡ ¢£D¤¥¦D§¨U©eªÓ€¶Œƒ*#úÿÿú, ú3|x¶2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d7Border 1dd* #Cþÿ << Gÿÿ éÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òSeptember€23,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑœÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€JACKSON̜ـ*ÙßR€$%#A1-j|•þ#` Å `€€@ÿRß›ÌMARCH€1997€SESSIONÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌJOHNNY€MOFFITT,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àAPPELLANT,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02„C„01„9609„CC„00304Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHenderson€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJulian€P.€Guinn,€Judge,Ïà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSitting€by€DesignationÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction€Relief)ÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà à€€€APPELLEE,à à)ÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌLloyd€R.€Tatumà àà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ124€East€Main€Streetà àà àà àà à500€Charlotte€AvenueÌHenderson,€TN€38340à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0497ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDeborah€A.€TullisÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJames€G.€WoodallÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€2825Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€38302„2825ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAlfred€L.€EarlsÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€2825Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€38302„2825ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:____________________________ÌÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€JudgeÇÑ7€‡ŸXXdæXXdæ7ÑØØÙ  ÙÓ  ÓÔ€„Ôò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌÓ  ÓÔ€XÔÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€appellant,€Johnny€Moffitt€(petitioner),€appeals€as€of€right€from€a€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court€dismissing€his€suit€for€post„conviction€relief€following€an€evidentiaryÏhearing.€The€trial€court€found€the€grounds€asserted€by€the€petitioner€had€been€waivedÏbecause€he€failed€to€include€the€grounds€in€a€prior€suit€for€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€inÏthe€Federal€District€Court€for€the€Western€District€of€Tennessee,€which€was€determinedÏupon€the€merits.€€The€court€further€found€that€if€the€suit€was€considered€on€the€merits€ofÏthe€grounds€asserted,€the€petitioner€would€not€be€entitled€to€relief€from€his€conviction.€ÏIn€this€Court,€the€petitioner€contends€the€failure€of€the€trial€court€to€instruct€on€theÏdefense€of€alibi€constituted€a€denial€of€federal€and€state€due€process€and€was€theÏresult€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€He€further€contends€he€has€neitherÏpreviously€litigated€nor€waived€this€issue.€€After€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€theÏbriefs€submitted€by€the€parties,€and€the€law€governing€the€issues€presented€for€review,Ïit€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€should€be€reversed€and€thisÏcause€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€the€reasons€hereinafter€set€forth€in€this€opinion.Ìà àThe€petitioner€was€tried€and€convicted€of€murder€in€the€first€degree€by€use€of€aÏdeadly€weapon€and€shooting€into€an€occupied€dwelling.€€He€was€sentenced€to€life€plusÏfive€(5)€years€for€first€degree€murder,€and€he€was€sentenced€to€six€(6)€years€forÏshooting€into€the€dwelling.€€This€Court€affirmed€his€convictions€and€sentences.€€òòState€v.ÏJohnny€Moffittóó,€Henderson€County€No.€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€December€5,Ï1990),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.,€March€4,€1991).€€On€April€11,€1991,€the€petitionerÏsought€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€in€the€United€States€District€Court€for€the€WesternÍDistrict€of€Tennessee.€€The€petitioner€raised€the€issue€of€alibi€in€the€petition.€€He€did€notÏraise€the€question€of€whether€his€denial€of€an€instruction€constituted€a€denial€of€dueÏprocess€or€whether€it€resulted€from€the€ineffective€assistance€of€trial€counsel.€€OnÏDecember€2,€1992,€the€magistrate€filed€his€report€recommending€the€petitionerððs€suitÏbe€dismissed€based€upon€the€merits.€€The€district€court€judge€adopted€the€magistrateððsÏreport€and€dismissed€the€petition€on€February€17,€€1993,€after€thorough€considerationÏof€the€grounds€raised€in€the€petition.€€The€present€post„conviction€suit€was€filed€MarchÏ4,€1993.€à àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àThe€evidence€presented€by€the€State€of€Tennessee€during€the€trial€of€this€caseÏwas€entirely€circumstantial.€€The€transcript€of€the€trial€proceedings€reveals€theÏpetitioner€had€threatened€to€kill€the€victim.€€Moreover,€there€was€a€history€of€discordÏbetween€the€petitioner,€his€former€wife,€and€the€family.€€The€victim€was€the€brother€ofÏthe€petitionerððs€former€wife.Ìà àThe€9mm€shell€casing€found€in€the€petitionerððs€yard€and€the€shell€casings€foundÏat€the€situs€of€the€crime€were€fired€from€the€same€weapon.€€An€officer€had€previouslyÏbeen€to€the€petitionerððs€residence.€€He€saw€a€9mm€pistol€inside€the€residence.€€AnotherÏofficer€saw€the€petitioner€purchase€9mm€cartridges€in€a€Jackson,€Tennessee€gun€storeÏprior€to€the€murder.€€The€victim€died€from€multiple€gunshot€wounds€caused€by€9mmÏprojectiles.Ìà àA€search€of€the€defendantððs€residence€pursuant€to€a€search€warrant€did€notÏreveal€a€9mm€pistol€or€ammunition€for€a€9mm€pistol.€€Later,€the€petitioner€gave€theÏofficers€a€9mm€pistol€with€empty€cartridges€for€examination€by€the€state.Ìà àA€stateððs€witness€testified€she€saw€a€male€enter€the€victimððs€residence€justÏbefore€the€shooting€resulting€in€the€death€of€the€victim.€€The€man€had€an€orange€pieceÏof€clothing€over€his€arm.€€However,€the€description€of€the€person€she€saw€compared€toÏthe€defendant€was€hotly€disputed.€€In€this€Courtððs€previous€decision,€this€Court€said:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àThere€was€a€dispute€as€to€whether€or€not€her€description€fitÏthe€defendant,€and€this€witness€in€fact€testified€on€cross„examination€that€the€characteristics€of€the€person€whom€sheÏobserved€on€the€day€of€the€murder€did€not€match€orÏresemble€the€defendantððs.€€This€witness€further€testified€thatÏshe€heard€what€she€thought€were€several€gunshots€andÏthen€shortly€thereafter€saw€the€same€individual€she€hadÏdescribed€leave€in€his€car.€ÌÌÓÓòòState€v.€Johnny€Moffittóó,€Henderson€County€No.€7,€slip€op.€at€4„5.Ìà àA€stateððs€witness,€Richard€Baxter,€gave€evidence€which€would€support€aÏdefense€of€alibi.€Baxter€testified€he€was€with€the€petitioner€from€6:45€a.m.€until€ð ðaroundÏlunchtimeðð€on€the€date€of€the€murder.€€He€claimed€he€went€to€the€petitionerððs€residenceÏwhere€he€and€the€petitioner€ate€breakfast,€talked,€and€drank€alcoholic€beveragesÏbefore€parting€company€at€approximately€1:00€p.m.€€Baxter€subsequently€had€aÏconfrontation€with€John€Threadgill,€who€was€operating€a€backhoe.€€The€backhoe€wasÏblocking€the€roadway.€€Threadgill€and€Baxter€had€a€heated€argument€regarding€theÏlocation€of€the€backhoe.€€This€argument€led€to€a€fight.€€Threadgill€estimated€theÏconfrontation€and€subsequent€fight€occurred€between€1:00€p.m.€and€2:00€p.m.Ìà àThe€medical€examiner€testified€as€a€prosecution€witness.€€He€opined€the€victimÏdied€between€11:00€a.m.€and€1:00€p.m.€€He€related€the€death€could€not€have€occurredÏafter€1:00€p.m.€€Ìà àThe€trial€court€was€prepared€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€defense€of€alibi.€€TheÍState€of€Tennessee€objected€to€this€instruction€being€included€in€the€charge.€€TheÏassistant€district€attorney€general€argued€the€defense€of€alibi€had€not€been€fairly€raisedÏby€the€evidence.€€Defense€counsel€agreed€the€alibi€defense€had€not€been€fairly€raisedÏby€the€evidence.€€The€trial€court€agreed€with€counsel.€€The€court€did€not€instruct€the€juryÏon€the€defense€of€alibi.Ìà àIn€order€for€the€petitioner€to€be€granted€relief€on€grounds€of€ineffective€counsel,Ïhe€is€required€to€establish€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€the€advice€given€or€theÏservices€rendered€were€not€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€inÏcriminal€cases€and€that,€but€for€counselððs€deficient€performance,€the€result€of€the€trialÏwould€have€been€different.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€104€S.Ct.€2052,Ï80€L.Ed.2d€674€(1984);€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930€(Tenn.€1975).€€In€òòStricklandóó,Ïthe€standard€of€review€on€the€issue€of€assistance€of€counsel€was€stated€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àFirst,€the€defendant€must€show€that€counselððs€performanceÏwas€deficient.€€This€requires€showing€that€counsel€madeÏerrors€so€serious€that€counsel€was€not€functioning€as€theÏð ðcounselðð€guaranteed€the€defendant€by€the€SixthÏAmendment.€€Second,€the€defendant€must€show€that€theÏdeficient€performance€prejudiced€the€defense.€€ThisÏrequires€showing€that€counselððs€errors€were€so€serious€asÏto€deprive€the€defendant€of€a€fair€trial,€a€trial€whose€result€isÏreliable.€€Unless€a€defendant€makes€both€showings,€itÏcannot€be€said€that€the€conviction€or€.€.€.€sentence€resultedÏfrom€a€breakdown€in€the€adversary€process€that€renders€theÏresult€unreliable.ÌÌÌÓÓ466€U.S.€at€687,€104€S.Ct.€at€2064,€80€L.Ed.2d€at€693.€€To€establish€prejudice,€anyÏfailure€in€the€performance€of€counsel€ð ðmust€be€significant,€but€it€does€not€necessarilyÏfollow€that€the€trial€would€have€otherwise€resulted€in€an€acquittal.ðð€€òòState€v.ÍZimmermanóó,€823€S.W.2d€220,€224€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ìà àThis€Court€is€of€the€opinion€the€record€establishes€that€the€petitioner€was€deniedÏhis€constitutional€right€to€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel€by€counselððs€statement€anÏalibi€defense€had€not€been€fairly€raised€by€the€evidence.€€The€evidence€fairly€raisedÏthe€issue€of€alibi,€and€defense€counsel€should€have€insisted€that€the€trial€court€instructÏthe€jury€on€the€defense€of€alibi.€€This€Court€is€of€the€opinion€this€case€should€beÏremanded€to€determine€whether€the€petitioner€was€prejudiced€within€the€meaning€ofÏòòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€687,€104€S.Ct.€at€2064,€80€L.Ed.2d€at€693.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àJOE€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________________Ì€€à à€€€€€GARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ______________________________________Ìà à€€€CURWOOD€WITT,€JUDGE