ÿWPCø( ¾«NVo™(=MžÚ¾%9ÛH)!ÁÒU†Pˆ6mѨTäÔ¿ý6…y"qjÑ.®L+¹$4ÿœŸñåÒøi[×”©q :³eºco‹©½ÎÔ‰0um2’ôZ¢›-Ë +’¼Ê—˜Ös0[´•óC扶/CF½Ô Êmžˆ„ °ãøåKê–.(>)ŠÇ˜Æú*¥Y¡S·‹£ÊÖÓšïþg¼SôÔÈß= žüxùH¹‰lô´‰×«yôPeÚåœæ`UcOÇ/J&ðpLS¬ƒWnú”“ÛršbÙŒþXc³‹a?ÛŒ“í–&e>}VMDlŸ¯0‚¶67 '½p„ž¡Á°tåõ æðݺ5nÔÁ·î=Ãk[=ÖÖš¾p7ÑlaÂõƒlÏ-DB”Ä”­ƒ¦W±9<,Š·\á1k’ŪC +H6íuZ‰L/ñµP¿²×åç"2Uhr99¡’/(TüM—ž¤sí8ØÇö'‡hœ·!A6æ…øõZq>[d¼[;8¨´B³2¦¯Ë'`_«íìÒgwî(¬¨n+KÔÃÂýY¤ëƒ¦‘ ¯fÓ³»X’L¾P—NÛû3¸ÿ(©â³°ÅºË’%Ù÷÷#„Õø»b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U"N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ´‘ ÆE Æ ÆÑÆ— 0 D]N¡!£ÃÄE‡U@‰U@É; rDD³¶ðiiYYíaŸN"N"N"N"N"N"N"N"N"N"N"N"bí#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í#í# 0 ëõ#õ#õ#õ# Bà$à$ 0¤ý$ D3¡% D-Ô% 0K&& ASL&ÆŸ& 0¤e' 0D ( A«M(˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»籇) (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÖJ~'l£¨ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ªÝ ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔPetitioner€was€released€on€bond€for€the€first€theft€when€he€committed€the€second€theft.€€Having€been€convictedÐ ° Ðof€both,€the€petitioner€was€subject€to€the€provisions€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40„20„111(b),€whichÐ n¾ Ðmandates€consecutive€manner€of€service.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔNeither€this€motion,€nor€the€transcript€of€the€hearing€on€the€motion€held€on€February€11,€1999,€was€includedÐ ° Ðin€the€record€on€appeal. ¹Ý ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€State€claimed€that€the€value€of€the€vehicle€was€$4,000.(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman (ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman  1Ý ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€only€names€of€€potential€witnesses€the€petitioner€advised€Tennent€of,€according€to€the€petitioner,€wereÐ ° Ðthe€names€of€his€former€employer€and€of€the€victim. hÝ ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€estimate,€as€stated€in€petitionerððs€amended€post„conviction€petition,€is€inconsistent€with€an€estimate€ofÐ ° Ðduration€of€meetings€of€ð ðfour€or€five€minutes,ðð€as€stated€in€petitionerððs€appellate€brief.€ ©Ý ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€petitioner€points€to€questions€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€ask€him€at€the€plea€submission€hearing€andÐ ° Ðalleges,€without€arguing€it,€that€such€failure€also€rendered€his€guilty€plea€unknowing€and€involuntary.€€The€question€wasÐ n¾ Ðwhether€he€agreed€with€the€facts€of€his€case€as€presented€by€the€State.€€The€question€noted€above€is€occasionally€askedÐ ,| Ðby€trial€courts,€but€a€careful€reading€of€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€11(c)„(d)€and€relevant€case€law€indicatesÐ ê: Ðthat€it€is€not€required.€As€a€supervisory,€at€the€most,€rather€than€a€constitutionally€based€requirement€of€the€trial€court,Ð ¨ø Ðit€cannot€be€addressed€under€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act.€òòSeeóó€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€983€S.W.2d€240,€247€n.10€(Tenn.Ð f¶ ÐCrim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1998)€(advising€a€defendant€that€answers€to€the€courtððs€preguilty€plea€questionsÐ $ t Ðmust€be€under€oath€and€false€answers€can€later€be€used€in€a€perjury€prosecution,€as€well€as€questions€about€whether€theÐ â 2 Ðplea€resulted€from€conversations€with€the€defense€attorney€and€the€district€attorney€are€ð ðsupervisory€rather€thanÐ   ð Ðconstitutionally€based€requirementsðð). æÝ ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSince€òòMackeyóó€was€decided€on€June€20,€1977,€prior€to€the€effective€date€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CriminalÐ ° ÐProcedure€(July€13,€1978),€portions€of€that€decision€have€been€superseded€by€the€rules.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Brandon€Wilsonóó,Ð n¾ ÐNo.€E1996„00006„SC„R11„CD,€2000WL€1336633,€at€*6€(Tenn.€Sept.€18,€2000).òòóó  ãÝ ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔControlling€law€in€Tennessee€concerning€the€withdrawal€of€a€guilty€plea€is€set€out€in€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ ° ÐCriminal€Procedure€as€follows:Ð n¾ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWithdrawal€of€Plea€of€Guilty.ð"ðA€motion€to€withdraw€a€plea€of€guilty€may€beÐ ê: Ðmade€upon€a€showing€by€the€defendant€of€any€fair€and€just€reason€only€beforeÐ ¨ø Ðsentence€is€imposed;€but€to€correct€manifest€injustice,€the€court€after€sentence,€butÐ f¶ Ðbefore€the€judgment€becomes€final,€may€set€aside€the€judgment€of€conviction€andÐ $ t Ðpermit€the€defendant€to€withdraw€the€plea.Ðâ 2` x` x ÐÌTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(f).€Therefore,€the€trial€court,€technically,€did€not€have€jurisdiction€under€Rule€32(f),€judgmentÐ ^ ®  Ðhaving€been€final€for€some€six€months.€€In€this€case,€the€issue€is€not€determinative€because€petitioner€filed€his€petitionÐ  l  Ðseeking€post„conviction€relief€within€the€one„year€statute€of€limitations€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€SectionÐ Ú *  Ð40„30„202(a)€(1997). •Ý ƒR^¹$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40„30„206(e)€states€that€ð ðCounsel€may€file€an€amended€petition€withinÐ ° Ðthirty€(30)€days€of€appointment.ðð€€The€record€indicates€that€the€trial€court€accepted€the€amendment€well€outside€this€timeÐ n¾ Ðperiod.- ù-(|G2^¹$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Pà»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<ôò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Pà»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Pà»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Pà»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Pà»»»ÔÑ8€=ŒXXdæ»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îx“PàÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Pà»îîx“ #ԈРР ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€October€3,€2000Ð ð@ ÐÔ‡X=ŒX»¼PàÔÌò òÔ#†¼Pà»XX=Œ #ÔSTEPHEN€W.€MURPHYòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡X=ŒX»¼PàÔó óÐ ä4 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ Ø ( Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„B„1111€€€€€€J.€Randall€Wyatt,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<o` AßÐ pÀ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„00014„CCA„R3„PC€„€Filed€December€7,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ eµ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<0` AßÐ 1  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€petitioner€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€Davidson€County€Criminal€Courtððs€denial€of€post„Ð &v  Ðconviction€relief.€The€petitioner€pled€guilty€in€1998€to€two€counts€of€theft€and€was€sentenced€as€aÐ  \ Ðcareer€offender€to€twelve€years€for€D€felony€theft€and€six€years€for€an€E€felony€theft.€€The€sentencesÐ òB Ðwere€statutorily€required€to€be€served€consecutively.€€Petitioner€filed€a€timely€òòpro€seóó€petition€seekingÐ Ø( Ðpost„conviction€relief,€alleging€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€and€involuntary€and€unknowingÐ ¾ Ðguilty€pleas.€€After€an€evidentiary€hearing,€the€post„conviction€court€denied€relief.€€Based€upon€ourÐ ¤ô Ðreview,€we€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€the€petitionerððs€request€for€post„convictionÐ ŠÚ Ðrelief.€€Ð pÀ ÐÔ#†¼Pà»XX=Œ™#ÔÔ‡X=ŒX»¼PàÔÓÃÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ <Œ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Pà»àX=Œh#ÔÔ‡X=ŒX.¼PàÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayesóó€and€òòJerry€L.Ð X ÐSmith,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð î> ÐÌJefre€S.€Goldtrap,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Stephen€W.€Murphy.Ð º  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Marvin€E.€Clements,€Jr.,€Assistant€AttorneyÐ † Ö  ÐGeneral;€Victor€S.€Johnson,€III,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Philip€H.€Wehby,€Assistant€DistrictÐ l!¼! ÐAttorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð R"¢" ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Pà»XX=Œ4 #ÔÔ‡X=ŒX»¼PàÔÐ $n$ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Pà»XX=Œæ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X=ŒX»¼PàÔà  àThe€petitioner,€Stephen€W.€Murphy,€entered€a€guilty€plea€on€July€13,€1998,€in€DavidsonÐ ê%:!& ÐCounty€Criminal€Court€to€theft€of€property€valued€at€$1,000€or€more€but€less€than€$10,000,€a€ClassÐ Ð& "' ÐD€felony;€and€theft€of€property€valued€at€more€than€$500€but€less€than€$1,000,€a€Class€E€felony.€Ð ¶'#( Ðâ âAccording€to€a€plea€agreement,€he€was€sentenced€as€a€career€offender€to€twelve€years€for€the€DÐ œ(ì#)ýÿ Ðfelony€theft€and€six€years€for€the€E€felony€theft,€for€an€effective€sentence€of€eighteen€years€in€theÐ ° ÐDepartment€of€Correction.€€By€statute,€the€sentences€were€required€to€be€served€consecutively.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð –æ Ðâ âÌà  à€On€September€8,€1998,€the€petitioner€filed€aòò€pro€seóó€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,Ð b² Ðalleging€the€following:Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àI.€€That€he€€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel;€andÐ d` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àII.€€That€his€guilty€plea€was€unknowing€and€involuntary.€Ðà 0` x` x ЀÌà  àNew€counsel€was€appointed.€€On€January€27,€1999,€petitioner,€through€counsel,€filed€aÐ ¬ ü  Ðmotion€to€withdraw€his€guilty€plea,€alleging€various€grounds€for€relief,€including,€apparently,€hisÐ ’â  Ðalleged€intoxication€at€the€time€of€the€pleas.׃Ê×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€judgment,€having€been€entered€on€July€13,€1998,Ð xÈ  Ðwas€final€at€this€point€and€his€motion,€therefore,€was€not€timely.€€The€trial€court€chose€to€address€theÐ ^®  Ðmotion€on€the€merits,€pursuant€to€Rule€32(f)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure.׃!×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€OnÐ D”  ÐFebruary€25,€1999,€after€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€the€motion€to€withdraw€guilty€plea,Ð *z  Ðconcluding€that€no€ð ðmanifest€injusticeðð€required€permitting€the€petitioner€to€withdraw€his€guilty€plea.Ð ` ÐÌà  àOn€August€20,€1999,€the€petitioner€resumed€his€post„conviction€petition€action€and€filed€anÐ Ü, Ðamendment€to€his€original€petition,€alleging,€in€greater€detail,€that€he€received€ineffective€assistanceÐ Â Ðof€counsel€and€that€his€guilty€plea€was€not€entered€knowingly€and€voluntarily.׃"|×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€After€a€full€hearing,Ð ¨ø Ðthe€post„conviction€court€entered€a€memorandum€order€finding€that€the€petitioner€had€receivedÐ ŽÞ Ðeffective€assistance€of€counsel€and€that€the€guilty€pleas€were€entered€knowingly€and€voluntarily.€Ð tÄ ÐTherefore,€the€post„conviction€court€denied€the€petition€on€November€29,€1999.€€It€is€this€denial€thatÐ ° Ðis€the€subject€of€the€present€appeal.€€€Ð –æ ÐÌà  àAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record€before€this€court,€we€conclude€that€the€petitioner€hasÐ b² Ðfailed€to€meet€his€burden€of€showing€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€he€received€ineffectiveÐ H˜ Ðassistance€of€counsel€or€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€entered€unknowingly€and€involuntarily.€€TheÐ . ~ Ðjudgment€of€the€post„conviction€court€is€affirmed.Ð  d ÐÌòòà@¤¤(ìàò òFACTSóóó óˆÐ à 0 ÐÌà  à€The€facts€of€this€case€appear€in€the€transcripts€of€the€guilty€plea€proceedings;€the€post„Ð ¬ ü  Ðconviction€hearing;€and€the€post„conviction€courtððs€order€denying€the€petition.€€According€to€theÐ ’â  ÐState,€in€July€of€1997,€the€petitioner€was€working€at€the€Baptist€Sunday€School€Board,€AramarkÐ xÈ  ÐFood€Preparation€Service€in€Davidson€County.€€The€victim€in€this€case,€Kathryn€Comer,€was€aÐ ^®  Ðcoworker.€€At€the€end€of€her€workday,€July€11,€1997,€Ms.€Comer€went€to€the€parking€lot€to€leave,Ð D”  Ðonly€to€discover€that€her€1989€Ford€Mustang€was€missing.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€She€called€Metro€Police€and€reportedÐ *z  Ðthat€her€vehicle€had€been€stolen.€€Later€that€same€evening,€two€Metro€officers€spotted€the€stolen€carÐ ` Ðin€an€area€close€to€the€residence€of€the€petitioner€and€pulled€it€over.€€The€petitioner€was€the€driverÐ öF Ðof€the€car.€Ð Ü, ÐÌà  à€The€petitioner€first€claimed€that€the€car€belonged€to€his€brother.€€After€the€officers€recoveredÐ ¨ø Ðregistration€papers€from€the€glove€compartment€showing€the€owners€as€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Comer,€theÐ ŽÞ Ðpetitioner€changed€his€story€and€claimed€that€he€had€gotten€the€car€from€ð ðtwo€dudes.ðð€€The€petitionerÐ tÄ Ðwas€arrested;€a€preliminary€hearing€was€held;€and€the€petitioner€was€placed€on€bond.Ð Zª ÐÌà  àOn€August€1,€1997,€two€events€occurred:€€the€petitioner€was€terminated€from€his€job€at€theÐ &v ÐBaptist€Sunday€School€Board,€and€Ms.€Comerððs€1989€Ford€Mustang€was€stolen€again.€€Some€threeÐ  \ Ðweeks€later,€Jackson€County€police€stopped€a€Ford€Mustang€for€speeding€in€Gainsboro,€Tennessee.€Ð òB ÐRegistration€papers€again€indicated€that€the€owners€were€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Comer,€and€a€check€revealedÐ Ø( Ðthat€the€car€was€stolen.€€This€time,€the€petitioner€was€a€passenger€in€the€car.€€He€stated€to€police€thatÐ ¾ Ðhe€knew€the€owner€of€the€car,€that€he€worked€with€the€owner,€and€that€she€had€given€him€permissionÐ ¤ô Ðto€have€the€car.€€The€victim€was€prepared€to€testify€that€this€was€not€true.€€The€petitioner€was€againÐ Š Ú Ðcharged€with€theft€and€released€on€bond.Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àRichard€Tennent,€an€assistant€public€defender€in€Nashville,€was€assigned€to€the€petitionerððsÐ <#Œ" Ðcase.€€Over€the€months€of€his€representation€of€the€petitioner,€the€State€made€a€number€of€pleaÐ "$r# Ðbargain€offers,€each€one€of€which€Tennent€relayed€to€the€petitioner.€€Tennent€testified€at€the€post„Ð %X $ Ðconviction€hearing€that€the€Stateððs€offers,€initially€quite€favorable,€became€increasingly€unfavorable,Ð î%>!% Ðbut€that€the€petitioner€refused€to€accept€any€offer€until€the€one€he€ultimately€accepted€on€the€day€ofÐ Ô&$"& Ðtrialð"ðthe€one€for€eighteen€years€as€a€career€offender€that€he€is€presently€serving.Ð º' #' ÐÌà@òò&ìàò òòòANALYSISóóˆÐ †)Ö$) Їà@  ìàIssue€I.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€CounselˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àó óThe€petitioner€argues€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€and€that,€but€for€thatÐ |Ì Ðdeficient€representation,€he€would€not€have€entered€pleas€of€guilty€to€the€two€theft€charges€he€faced.€Ð b² ÐThe€petitioner€argues€specifically€the€following:Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€€That€counsel€failed€to€investigate€certain€witnesses€supposedlyÐ  d Ðfavorable€to€the€defense€and€therefore€counsel€was€not€prepared€forÐ ú J Ðtrial;Ðà 0` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€That€counsel€failed€to€allow€sufficient€time€to€meet€with€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðpetitioner;Ð’â ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€€That€counsel€failed€to€stop€the€guilty€plea€proceeding€when€heÐ ^®  Ðknew,€or€should€have€known,€that€the€petitioner€was€intoxicated;€andÐD” ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à4.€€That€counsel€incorrectly€advised€the€petitioner€concerning€theÐ ` Ðadmissibility€of€his€past€criminal€record€at€trial.€€ÐöF` x` x ÐÌÔ‡X=ŒXXX=ŒÔà  àIn€elaborating€upon€the€requirement€that€an€accused€is€entitled€to€constitutionally€effectiveÐ Â Ðassistance€of€counsel,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court,€in€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,Ð ¨ø Ð686,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€2064,€80€L.€Ed.€2d€674€(1984),€stated€that€the€ð ðbenchmark€for€judging€anyÐ ŽÞ Ðclaim€of€ineffectiveness€must€be€whether€counselððs€conduct€so€undermined€the€proper€functioningÐ tÄ Ðof€the€adversarial€process€that€the€trial€cannot€be€relied€on€as€having€produced€a€just€result.ðð€€TheÐ Zª ÐTennessee€Supreme€Court€has€often€recited€the€two€prong€test€set€forth€in€òòStricklandóó€to€be€appliedÐ @ Ðto€ineffective€assistance€claims:€€€Ð &v ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTo€prevail€on€a€claim€of€ineffective€counsel€in€this€proceeding,€theÐ òB Ðappellant€must€prove€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€theÐ Ø( Ðadvice€given€or€services€rendered€by€his€counsel€fell€below€the€rangeÐ ¾ Ðof€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€€òòBaxter€v.Ð ¤ô ÐRoseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€He€must€also€demonstrateÐ Š Ú Ðprejudice€by€showing€a€reasonable€probability€that€but€for€counsels'Ð p!À  Ðerror,€the€result€of€the€trial€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€Ð V"¦! ÐòòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€2064,Ð <#Œ" Ð80€L.€Ed.€2d€674€(1984);€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.Ð "$r# Ð1996).Ð%X $` x` x ÐòòÌKing€v.€Stateóó,€989€S.W.2d€319,€330€(Tenn.€1999).€€à  à€€Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌà  àWhen€determining€whether€counselððs€performance€was€deficient,€ð ðevery€effort€[must]€beÐ  (ð#( Ðmade€to€eliminate€the€distorting€effects€of€hindsight,€to€reconstruct€the€circumstances€of€counselððsÐ †)Ö$) Ðchallenged€conduct,€and€to€evaluate€the€conduct€from€counselððs€perspective€at€the€time.ðð€€òòStricklandóó,Ð l*¼%* Ð466€U.S.€at€689,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2065.€€ð ðThus,€the€fact€that€a€particular€strategy€or€tactic€failed€or€evenÐ R+¢&+ Ðhurt€the€defense€does€not,€alone,€support€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance.ðð€€òòCooper€v.€Stateóó,€847Ð 8,ˆ', ÐS.W.2d€521,€528€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€In€summary,€a€reviewing€court€must€indulge€a€strongÐ ° Ðpresumption€that€counsel's€conduct€falls€within€the€range€of€reasonable€professional€assistance.€Ð –æ ÐMoreover,€with€respect€to€the€prejudice€prong€of€the€òòStricklandóó€analysis,€the€petitioner€mustÐ |Ì Ðdemonstrate€that€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that€but€for€counsel's€deficient€performance,€theÐ b² Ðresult€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€òòIdóó.;€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€983€S.W.2d€240,€246€(Tenn.Ð H˜ ÐCrim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1998).€€€ò òó óÐ . ~ ÐÌÔ#†X=ŒXXX=Œù+#ÔÔ‡X=ŒXXX=ŒÔò òòòó óóóà  àòòóóCourts€need€not€approach€the€òòStricklandóó€test€in€a€specific€order€or€even€ð ðaddress€bothÐ ú J Ðcomponents€of€the€inquiry€if€the€petitioner€makes€an€insufficient€showing€on€one.ðð€€òòIdóó.€466€U.S.€atÐ à 0 Ð697,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2069;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€370€(Tenn.€1996)€(stating€thatÐ Æ   Ðð ðfailure€to€prove€either€deficiency€or€prejudice€provides€a€sufficient€basis€to€deny€relief€on€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðineffective€assistance€claimðð).Ð ’â  ÐÌà  àBy€statute€in€Tennessee,€the€petitioner€at€a€post„conviction€relief€hearing€has€the€burden€ofÐ ^®  Ðproving€the€allegations€of€fact€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„Ð D”  Ð210(f)€(1997).€€Evidence€is€clear€and€convincing€when€there€is€no€serious€or€substantial€doubt€aboutÐ *z  Ðthe€correctness€of€the€conclusions€drawn€from€the€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòHodges€v.€S.€C.€Toof€&€Co.óó,€833Ð ` ÐS.W.2d€896,€901€n.3€(Tenn.€1992).€€Ð öF ÐÌà  àWe€note€that€when€post„conviction€proceedings€have€included€a€full€evidentiary€hearing,€asÐ Â Ðwas€true€in€this€case,€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€given€the€effect€andÐ ¨ø Ðweight€of€a€jury€verdict,€and€this€court€is€ð ðbound€by€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€of€fact€unless€weÐ ŽÞ Ðconclude€that€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€judgment€entered€in€theÐ tÄ Ðcause.ðð€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).€Ð Zª ÐHowever,€the€appellate€courtððs€review€of€the€application€of€the€facts€to€the€law€is€òòde€novoóó€withoutÐ @ Ða€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòState€v.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€461€(Tenn.€1999).Ð &v ЀÌà@  ìàò òA.€€Trial€Preparednessó ó€ˆÐ òB ÐÌà  àFirst,€the€petitioner€asserts€that€counsel,€Richard€Tennent,€failed€to€investigate€certainÐ ¾ Ðwitnesses€who€were€friends€of€the€petitioner€and€could€supply€alibi€testimony€and€other€generallyÐ ¤ô Ðfavorable€testimony€to€corroborate€his€allegation€that€he€was€simply€returning€the€car€on€the€date€ofÐ Š Ú Ðthe€first€theft.€€Petitioner€asserts,€additionally,€that€the€victim€was€prepared€to€testify€on€his€behalf.€Ð p!À  ÐTennent€testified€that€the€petitioner€did€tell€him€of€these€potential€witnesses,€but€on€Thursday€beforeÐ V"¦! Ðtrial€was€set€for€Monday,€July€13,€he€still€had€no€last€names,€telephone€numbers,€or€addresses.€Ð <#Œ" ÐTennent€discussed€informally€with€Assistant€District€Attorney€General€Bret€Gunn€and€the€trial€judgeÐ "$r# Ðthe€possibility€of€General€Gunnððs€trying€another€case€before€the€petitionerððs€to€allow€Tennent€timeÐ %X $ Ðto€talk€with€the€witnesses.€€He€told€the€petitioner€to€come€to€his€office€on€Friday€before€trial€with€allÐ î%>!% Ðthe€missing€information.€€Tennent€testified€that€he€planned€to€work€as€many€hours€as€necessary€overÐ Ô&$"& Ðthe€weekend€to€be€ready€for€trial.Ð º' #' ÐÌà  àWhen€asked€if€the€petitioner€supplied€the€necessary€information€concerning€the€witnesses,Ð †)Ö$) ÐTennent€testified€to€the€following:Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âÐ R+¢&+ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€No,€he€didnððt.€€In€fact,€he€didnððt€show€up€Friday.€€And€I€lost€allÐ ° Ðâ âtouch€with€him€over€the€weekend,€though€I€repeatedly€called€all€of€hisÐ –æ Ðphone€numbers€that€I€had.€€And€my€understanding€was€he€had€leftÐ |Ì Ðtown.Ðb²` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€Okay.€€When€was€the€next€contact€you€had€with€him€pertaining€toÐ . ~ Ðhis€trial?Ð d` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€He€showed€up€five€minutes€before€the€docket€call€MondayÐ à 0 Ðmorning.€ÐÆ  ` x` x ÐÌÒe°Òà  àThe€petitionerððs€testimony€directly€contradicted€Tennentððs€concerning€the€Friday€meeting.€Ð ’â  ÐThe€petitioner€testified€that€he€did€show€up€for€the€meeting€but€that€Tennent€told€him€that€he€had€allÐ xÈ  Ðthe€information€he€needed€from€the€petitioner€and€that€they€would€meet€on€Monday€morning.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€TheÐ ^®  Ðpetitioner€further€testified€that€he€was€not€out€of€town€but€at€a€family€reunion€and€then€aÐ D”  Ðhousewarming€and€that€when€he€got€the€message€that€Tennent€was€urgently€trying€to€reach€him,€heÐ *z  Ðcalled€the€only€number€he€had€for€Tennent,€his€office€number,€on€Sunday€and€left€a€message.Ð ` ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€concluded€the€following€concerning€Mr.€Tennentððs€representation:Ð Ü, ÐÌà8  àà8` !!àHe€kept€in€contact€with€the€petitioner,€reviewed€the€discovery€andÐ ¨ø Ðlistened€to€the€tape€of€the€preliminary€hearing.€€Any€lack€ofÐ ŽÞ Ðpreparation€for€trial,€can€be€imputed€to€the€failure€of€petitioner€toÐ tÄ Ðmaintain€contact€with€Mr.€Tennent€and€supply€him€the€informationÐ Zª Ðnecessary€to€contact€the€witnessðð€[sic]€which€petitioner€felt€may€helpÐ @ Ðhis€cause.Ð&v` Ã` à ÐÌà  àNot€only€do€we€agree€that€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€that€counselððs€assistance€in€regardÐ òB Ðto€location€of€witnesses€and€preparedness€for€trial€was€ineffective,€but€we€further€conclude€that€theÐ Ø( Ðpetitioner€has€failed€to€show€that€if€the€witnesses€had€been€available,€he€would€have€chosen€to€go€toÐ ¾ Ðtrial.€€€The€victim€was€in€the€courtroom€at€the€time€of€the€plea€submission,€and€nothing€in€the€recordÐ ¤ô Ðindicates€that€the€petitioner€found€this€fact€of€any€significance€as€far€as€his€choosing€to€go€to€trialÐ Š Ú Ðrather€than€plead€guilty.€€Alibi€testimony€seems€inappropriate,€given€the€fact€that€the€petitioner€doesÐ p!À  Ðnot€contend€that€he€was€not€the€person€the€police€arrested€twice€in€the€same€stolen€Ford€Mustang.€Ð V"¦! ÐMoreover,€petitioner€failed€to€present€any€material€witness€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€who€eitherÐ <#Œ" Ðcould€have€been€found€by€reasonable€investigation€or€who€would€have€testified€favorably€in€supportÐ "$r# Ðof€his€defense.€€òòSeeóó€òòBlackóó,€794€S.W.2d€at€757.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð %X $ ÐÌà@AAàò òB.€€Sufficient€Time€With€PetitionerˆÐ Ô&$"& Ðâ âÐ º' #' Ðà  àó óThis€issue€is€closely€related€to€the€petitionerððs€claim€that€his€counsel€was€unprepared€for€trial.€Ð ° Ðâ âPetitioner€asserts€that€he€met€with€counsel€ð ðthree€or€fourðð€times€prior€to€trial€and€that€the€meetingsÐ –æ Ðwere€ð ðapproximately€ten€to€fifteen€minutes€long.ðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Petitioner€alleges€that€this€amount€of€time€wasÐ |Ì Ðinsufficient€for€counsel€to€prepare€for€trial€and€that,€as€a€result,€petitioner€was€forced€to€accept€anÐ b² Ðunfavorable€plea€agreement€rather€than€proceed€to€trial€unprepared.€€Mr.€Tennent€testified€that€he€andÐ H˜ Ðpetitioner€met€ð ða€number€of€times,ðð€but€that€he€could€not€remember€an€exact€number.€€TennentÐ . ~ Ðtestified€that€he€relayed€each€of€the€Stateððs€offers€to€the€petitioner,€and€they€discussed€the€petitionerððsÐ  d Ðversion€of€the€facts€and€reviewed€the€discovery€materials€and€petitionerððs€criminal€record.€€TennentÐ ú J Ðtried€repeatedly€to€contact€the€petitioner€over€the€weekend€before€the€trial€but€was€told€by€someoneÐ à 0 Ðhe€assumed€to€be€a€family€member€at€petitionerððs€home,€that€petitioner€was€out€of€town€for€theÐ Æ   Ðweekend.€€Tennent€considered€the€petitioner€to€have€ð ðvanishedðð€and€was€actually€surprised€that€heÐ ¬ ü  Ðshowed€up€minutes€before€his€trial€was€to€begin.€Ð ’â  ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€that€the€number€of€meetings€he€had€with€counsel€was€soÐ ^®  Ðdeficient€as€to€constitute€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€Nothing€in€the€record€indicates€that€Ð D”  ÐTennent€failed€to€meet€with€the€petitioner€and€keep€him€informed.€€Although€the€petitioner€claims€toÐ *z  Ðhave€met€with€counsel€on€the€Friday€before€trial,€the€post„conviction€court€accredited€the€testimonyÐ ` Ðof€Tennent,€which€was€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€show€up€for€the€Friday€meeting€and€that,€as€aÐ öF Ðresult,€Tennent€felt€underprepared€for€trial€since€the€possibility€of€favorable€witnesses€had€not€beenÐ Ü, Ðresolved.€€The€full€names€and€locations€of€these€witnesses€were€information€that€the€petitioner€failedÐ Â Ðto€make€available€to€counsel€before€trial€date.€€Having€created€the€problem,€petitioner€cannot€nowÐ ¨ø Ðreasonably€claim€prejudice.€€We€conclude€that€this€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ŽÞ ÐÌÐ  Zª Ðà@ÏÏàò òC.€€Failure€to€Halt€Proceedings€ˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àó óThe€petitionerððs€third€allegation€in€support€of€his€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim€is€thatÐ |Ì ÐTennent€knew,€or€should€have€known,€that€petitioner€was€intoxicated€on€the€day€of€the€guilty€pleaÐ b² Ðproceeding.€€Petitioner€testified€that€he€had€been€drinking€heavily€all€weekend€prior€to€his€trial€dateÐ H˜ Ðon€Monday,€July€13,€1998.€€Tennent€testified€that€the€petitioner€smelled€of€alcohol€and€cigarettesÐ . ~ Ðwhen€he€arrived€at€the€courthouse€prior€to€his€trial.€€Tennent€questioned€the€petitioner€concerningÐ  d Ðalcohol€or€drug€use€and€petitioner€told€him€that€ð ðhe€was€not€under€the€influence€of€anything€at€thatÐ ú J Ðtime,€that€he€felt€clear„headed.ðð€€Tennent€testified€further€as€follows:Ð à 0 ÐÌà8  àà8` !!àQ.€€Let€me€ask€you€this,€Mr.€Tennent:€Would€you€have€allowed€Mr.Ð ¬ ü  ÐMurphy€to€enter€a€plea€if€you€believed€he€was€intoxicated€thatÐ ’â  Ðmorning?ÐxÈ ` Ã` à ÐÌà8  àà8` !!àA.€€No,€I€wouldnððt€have.ÐD” ` Ã` à ÐÌà  àThe€post„conviction€court€stated€that€there€was€simply€no€credible€evidence€to€suggest€thatÐ ` Ðthe€lingering€effects€of€alcohol€influenced€the€petitionerððs€guilty€pleas€and€that,€ð ð[t]he€Court€remainsÐ öF Ðof€the€opinion€that€the€plea€was€not€affected€by€any€lingering€effect€the€alcohol€may€have€had.ððÐ Ü, ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€the€evidence€in€the€record€does€not€preponderate€against€the€findings€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðpost„conviction€court.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ŽÞ ÐÌà@  àò òD.€€Erroneous€Advice€Concerning€Admissibility€of€EvidenceˆÐ Zª ÐÌà  àó óFinally,€the€petitioner€asserts€that€his€counsel€failed€to€explain€to€him€that€evidence€of€his€priorÐ &v Ðcriminal€record€could€come€in€at€his€trial€only€if€he€testified,€and€that€he€had€the€right€to€choose€notÐ  \ Ðto€testify.€€This€failure,€according€to€petitioner,€constitutes€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€Ð òB ÐPetitioner€does€not€contest€the€fact€that€the€trial€court€made€his€right€to€testify,€or€not,€perfectly€clearÐ Ø( Ðto€him€during€the€plea€submission€colloquy.Ð ¾ ÐÌà  àTo€meet€his€burden€of€showing€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€what€he€asserts€was€a€failure€ofÐ Š Ú Ðcounsel,€petitioner€must€show€that€if€he€had€known€that€he€could€chose€not€to€testify€and€thus€keepÐ p!À  Ðknowledge€of€his€criminal€record€away€from€the€jury,€he€would€have€gone€to€trial.€€This€assertionÐ V"¦! Ðpresumes€that€without€evidence€of€his€prior€convictions,€the€State€would€have€had€a€difficult€timeÐ <#Œ" Ðconvicting€him.€€In€fact,€the€record€shows€that€the€Stateððs€evidence€was€substantial.€€Mr.€TennentÐ "$r# Ðtestified€that,€even€had€he€been€able€to€put€on€proof€that€the€petitioner€was€trying€to€return€the€car€inÐ %X $ Ðthe€first€count,€ð ðI€never€did€have€an€adequate€defense€to€explain€why€he€would€have€takenÐ î%>!% Ðsomebodyððs€car€a€second€time€after€being€wrongfully€accused€of€stealing€it€the€first€time.ðð€€WeÐ Ô&$"& Ðconclude€that€the€petitioner€suffered€no€prejudice€as€a€result€of€his€supposed€misunderstandingÐ º' #' Ðconcerning€the€admissibility€of€evidence€of€his€prior€criminal€record.€€€€€à8 @( àà8 @( à€€€€€€€€Ð  (ð#( ÐÌà  àThe€post„conviction€court€stated€the€following:Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âÐ R+¢&+ Ðà8  àà8` !!àThe€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€Richard€Tennent€is€an€experienced€andÐ ° Ðâ âcompetent€criminal€defense€attorney€whose€representation€of€petitionerÐ –æ Ðwas€well€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€criminalÐ |Ì Ðdefense€attorneys.€€It€is€evident€to€the€Court€from€testimony€at€theÐ b² Ðhearings€that,€under€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€Richard€TennentÐ H˜ Ðperformed€conscientiously€in€his€representation€of€the€petitioner.€€TheÐ . ~ ÐCourt€further€finds,€that€Richard€Tennent€conducted€a€competentÐ  d Ðinvestigation€of€the€petitionerððs€case,€and€discussed€with€the€petitionerÐ ú J Ðthe€Stateððs€evidence,€as€well€as€the€potential€punishment€he€faced€uponÐ à 0 Ðconviction.€€In€short,€the€Court€finds€no€credible€evidence€to€supportÐ Æ   Ðthe€petitionerððs€assertion€of€deficient€representation€and,€obviously,€noÐ ¬ ü  Ðresulting€prejudice€to€his€decision€to€plead€guilty.€€In€reaching€itsÐ ’â  Ðconclusion,€the€Court€accredits€the€testimony€of€Richard€Tennent.ÐxÈ ` Ã` à ÐÌ€à  àWe€conclude€that€the€record€fully€supports€the€determination€of€the€post„conviction€court€thatÐ D”  Ðthe€petitioner€received€effective€assistance€of€counsel.Ð *z  ÐÌà@{ { àò òIssue€II.€€Knowing€and€Voluntary€Guilty€PleaˆÐ öF ÐÌà  àó óThe€petitioner€finally€asserts€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€not€entered€knowingly€and€voluntarily€Ð  Ðbecause€he€was€under€the€influence€of€alcohol€to€so€great€an€extent€that€ð ðhis€state€of€mind,€beingÐ ¨ø Ðunder€the€influence€of€alcohol,€rendered€his€plea€unknowing€and€involuntary.ððÐ ŽÞ ÐÌà  àIn€determining€whether€a€plea€of€guilty€was€voluntarily,€knowingly,€and€intelligently€entered,Ð Zª Ðthis€court,€like€the€trial€court,€must€consider€all€€relevant€circumstances€that€existed€at€the€entry€of€theÐ @ Ðplea.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Turneróó,€919€S.W.2d€346,€353€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.Ð &v Ð1996).€€A€reviewing€court€may€look€to€any€relevant€evidence€in€the€record€to€determine€theÐ  \ Ðvoluntariness€of€the€plea.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.€€The€guilty€plea€process€in€Tennessee€is€controlled€both€by€Rule€11Ð òB Ðof€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€and€by€case€law,€specifically,€two€decisions€of€ourÐ Ø( Ðsupreme€court,€òòState€v.€Mackeyóó,€553€S.W.2d€337€(Tenn.€1977)׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×,€and€òòState€v.€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2dÐ ¾ Ð268€(Tenn.€1987).€€Trial€judges€are€required€to€adhere€substantially€to€the€procedure€prescribed€inÐ ¤ô ÐRule€11.€€A€submission€hearing€transcript€must€establish€on€its€face€that€the€trial€court€substantiallyÐ Š Ú Ðcomplied€with€the€requirements€of€Rule€11,€as€well€as€the€constitutional€standard€set€out€in€òòBoykinÐ p!À  Ðv.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€89€S.€Ct.€1709,€23€L.€Ed.€2d€274€(1969),€and€the€teachings€of€òòMackeyóó€andÐ V"¦! ÐòòMcClintockóó.€€€Ð <#Œ" ÐÌà  àAt€the€guilty€plea€proceeding€in€this€case,€the€trial€court€questioned€the€petitioner€concerningÐ %X $ Ðthe€petition€to€enter€plea€of€guilty€formÔ#†X=ŒXXX=Œ_8#ÔÔ‡X=ŒXXX=ŒÔ€petitioner€had€signed€and€asked,€ð ðDid€you€go€over€each€andÐ î%>!% Ðevery€part€of€that€petition€to€enter€a€plea€of€guilty,€Mr.€Murphy,€and€do€you€think€you€understandÐ Ô&$"& Ðexactly€what€youððre€doing€here€this€morning?ðð€€Petitioner€responded€affirmatively.€€That€form,€signedÐ º' #' Ðby€the€petitioner€on€July€13,€1998,€included€the€following€declaration:€ð ðI€declare€that€during€myÐ ° Ðdiscussion€with€my€lawyer€about€this€case,€and€while€I€read€and/or€discussed€this€petition€with€myÐ –æ Ðlawyer,€I€was€not€under€the€influence€of€any€alcoholic€beverage€or€intoxicating€drug.ðð€€Nothing€onÐ |Ì Ðthe€face€of€this€form€indicates€that€the€petitioner€was€incapacitated€by€alcohol.€€Having€also€concludedÐ b² Ðabove€that€nothing€in€the€record€as€a€whole€suggests€that€any€lingering€effects€of€alcohol€influencedÐ H˜ Ðthe€petitionerððs€plea,€we€conclude€that€this€issue€is€without€merit.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð . ~ ÐÌà@kk%àò òòòCONCLUSIONóóˆÐ ú J ÐÌà  àó óThe€evidence€in€the€record€fully€supports€the€findings€of€the€post„conviction€court.€€WeÐ Æ   Ðconclude€that€the€petitioner€received€effective€assistance€of€counsel€and€entered€his€guilty€pleasÐ ¬ ü  Ðknowingly€and€voluntarily.€€We€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€the€petitionerððs€requestÐ ’â  Ðfor€post„conviction€relief.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à À à€Ð xÈ  ÐÔ#†X=ŒXXX=Œ{#ÔÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð öF Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGEÐ Ü, Ð