WPC@ 2# UN %% 0(+bSw@[4 BU@e# 0J$ 0Dn 0T 0^d 0h* 0r AQ 0DU 0| 0 0 1u+ 0d 0@ D3D D/w U> B U* B)+ DCT AM   v~vmHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($- - yEz{D|}D~DӀzz!3|x d `(ZapfCalligr BTTT2 0Indent123  (3$ !  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  ԃLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 526 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  $(C<< C($$   1  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X("$     'dxd**' dxd<  9p`(&Times New RomanP Pd<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d,,,,7Border 1dd$-C << G  !  #d#)  "  )  + eee FILED+X +"US ,   !  +X CecilCrowson,Jr.     + eee AppellateCourtClerk     XPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . )  `       \RA'\+\RA'\7v&XXdd7      INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATJACKSONAUGUSTSESSION,1996  LEMUELS.NELSON,  ) C.C.A.NO.02C019510CC00294     )  Appellant,   )̜R./-A1-j|^  `@Rߛ     )     ) SHELBYCOUNTYVS.     )      ) HON.BERNIEWEINMAN STATEOFTENNESSEE,   ) JUDGE      )  Appellee.   ) (PostconvictionRelief)     FORTHEAPPELLANT:   FORTHEAPPELLEE:̜W.MARKWARD    CHARLESW.BURSONAssistantShelbyCounty   AttorneyGeneralandReporterPublicDefender̜147Jefferson,Suite900   CLINTONJ.MORGANMemphis,TN38103   AssistantAttorneyGeneral̜(onappeal)     450JamesRobertsonParkway      Nashville,TN37243̜DONNAJ.ARMSTARD̜AssistantShelbyCounty   JOHNW.PIEROTTI̜PublicDefender    DistrictAttorneyGeneral̜201PoplarAvenue    ̜Memphis,TN38103   REGINALDR.HENDERSON      AssistantDistrictAttorney      201PoplarAvenue      Memphis,TN38103OPINIONFILED________________________AFFIRMEDJERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE   +OPINION+    AppellantLemuelS.Nelsonappealsthetrialcourtsdenialofhispetitionforpostconvictionrelief.Hepresentsthefollowingissuesforreview:(1)whetherthetrialcourterredinfindingthathisguiltypleawasknowingandvoluntary;and(2)whetherthetrialcourterredinfindingthathistrialcounselrenderedeffectiveassistance. Afterareviewoftherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. I.FACTUALBACKGROUND  OnOctober18,1993,Appellantpledguiltytoninecountsofaggravatedrobbery,twocountsoftheftofpropertyover$1000,andonecountofattemptedaggravatedrobbery.Asprovidedforinthepleaagreement,AppellantreceivedaneffectivesentenceofseventeenyearsintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection. OnFebruary1,1995,Appellantfiledapetitionforpostconvictionrelief,alleginganinvoluntaryguiltypleaandineffectiveassistanceofcounselattrial.Followingahearing,thetrialcourtdeniedAppellantspetition,findingthattheguiltypleawasknowingandvoluntaryandthattrialcounselhadrenderedeffectiveassistance. II.POSTCONVICTIONRELIEF  AppellantallegesthatthetrialcourterredinfindingthathisguiltypleawasknowingandvoluntaryandthathistrialcounselrenderedeffectiveϜrepresentation.Inpostconvictionproceedings,thepetitionerhastheburdenofprovingtheclaimsraisedbyapreponderanceoftheevidence.Tidwellv.State,922S.W.2d497,500(Tenn.1996);Wadev.State,914S.W.2d97,101(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).Findingsoffactmadebythetrialcourtareconclusiveonappealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthejudgment.Cooperv.State,849S.W.2d744,746(Tenn.1993);Butlerv.State,789S.W.2d898,899(Tenn.1990). A.PLEA  Appellantfirstarguesthathisguiltypleawasinvoluntary.Atthepostconvictionhearing,hetestifiedthathewasscaredandintimidatedbythetrialcourt.Hefurthertestifiedthatthetrialcourtthreatenedhimwithasentenceofoveronehundredyearsifheproceededtotrial.Appellantstatedthatheenteredaguiltypleabecause [he]hadnootherchoice.However,nothingintherecordsubstantiatesAppellantsclaimofunduepressure.Onthecontrary,trialcounseltestifiedthatitwasAppellantwhomadethedecisiontopleadguiltyafterongoingdiscussionsregardingthepleaagreement.Attheconclusionofthepostconvictionhearing,thetrialcourtfoundthatAppellantfreelyandvoluntarilyenteredhisguiltypleasand,furthermore,explicitlyfoundthathewasnotthreatenedconcerninghissentence. Whenreviewingtheentryofaguiltyplea,theoverridingconcerniswhetherthepleaisknowinglyandvoluntarilymade.Woodsv.State,928S.W.2d52,55(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).However,apetitionersuncorroboratedtestimonyisinsufficienttocarrythenecessaryburdenofproofinapostconvictionpetition.Statev.Kerley,820S.W.2d753,757(Tenn.Crim.App.1991).Here,therecordcontainsnoevidenceofthreatsorunduepressureplaceduponAppellantnoranycorroborationofhisclaim.Asstatedpreviously,thefactualfindingsofthetrialcourtareconclusiveonappealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthosefindings.SeeCooper,849S.W.2dat746.Afterareviewoftherecord,weconcludethattheevidencefailstopreponderateagainstthefactualfindingsofthetrialcourt.Appellantisnotentitledtoreliefonthisissue.̜ @ B.EFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFTRIALCOUNSEL  Appellantalsoarguesthathistrialcounselrenderedineffectiveassistance.Mostsignificantly,Appellantmaintainsthathistrialcounsel,knowingthatcertainincriminatingstatementscontainedforgedsignatures,failedtotakeanypretrialactiontosuppressthestatements.Trialcounseltestifiedthat,inhisopinion,theissueofwhetherthesignatureswereforgerieswasafactualquestionforthejurytodetermine.Consequently,trialcounselmadepreparationstoattackthestatementsduringtrialratherthanbymeansofamotiontosuppress.Appellantarguesthathewasneverinformedofthisplan.Attheconclusionofthepostconvictionhearing,thetrialcourtmadethefollowingfindingsinawrittenorder:   ` `  ` [Appellants]attorneythoroughlyinvestigatedthecaseandwaspreparedtotrythecaseif[Appellant]desiredtoproceedwiththetrial.Andtheattorneywaspreparedtochallengetheauthenticityoftheallegedconfessions. TheCourtfurtherfindsthattheattorneyhadplacedthehandwritingexpertonnoticeandintheeventshewasneededasawitness,hewaspreparedtohavehercometoMemphistotestify. Itwouldappearthatthedefenseattorneynegotiatedanextremelyfavorableguiltypleasettlementforhisclient....TheCourtfindsthattheadvicegivenandtheservicesrenderedby[Appellants]counselwerewithintherangeofcompetencydemandedbyanattorneyinacriminalcaseand[the]representationof[Appellant]athisguiltypleacompliedwiththerequirementssetoutbytheSupremeCourtofTennesseeinthecaseofBaxterv.Rose.     Whenanappealchallengestheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel,theappellanthastheburdenofestablishing(1)deficientrepresentationand(2)prejudiceresultingfromthatdeficiency.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,686(1984);Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Deficientrepresentationoccurswhencounselprovidesassistancethatfallsbelowtherangeofcompetencedemandedofcriminalattorneys.Bankstonv.State,815S.W.2d213,215(Tenn.Crim.App.1991).Prejudiceisthereasonablelikelihoodthat,butfordeficientrepresentation,theoutcomeoftheproceedingswouldhavebeendifferent.Overtonv.State,874S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994).Onreview,thereisastrongpresumptionofsatisfactoryrepresentation.Barrv.State,910S.W.2d462,464(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).  TheprimarythrustofAppellantsineffectiveassistanceclaimisthathistrialcounselwasdeficientinfailingtoattackthevalidityoftheincriminatingstatementsbymeansofapretrialmotion.However,allegationsrelatingtomattersoftrialstrategyortacticscannotprovideabasisforaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Taylorv.State,814S.W.2d374,378(TennCrim.App.1991).Trialcounseltestified,andthetrialcourtspecificallyfound,thathewaspreparedtochallengetheauthenticityofthesignaturesattrial.Wewillnotemployhindsighttosecondguesstrialcounselsdecisiononthispoint.SeeCoxv.State,880S.W.2d713,718(Tenn.Crim.App.1994). Finally,trialcounseltestifiedthattherewereongoingdiscussionswithAppellantaboutboththeguiltypleaandthepreparationfortrial.HavingheardfirsthandAppellantstestimonyandthatofhistrialcounsel,thetrialcourtdeterminedthattrialcounselstestimonywastheaccurateaccountofwhatacuallytranspired.Weareboundtoaffirmthatdeterminationunlesstheevidenceintherecordpreponderatesagainstthetrialcourt'sfindings.SeeBlackv.State,794S.W.2d752,755(Tenn.Crim.App.1990).Afterareviewoftherecord,webelievethatAppellanthasfailedtomakeanadequateshowinginsupportofhisclaimofineffectiveassistance.Thus,weconcludethatAppellantisnotentitledtoreliefonthisissue. Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirm.     ____________________________________     JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________GARYR.WADE,JUDGE___________________________________WILLIAMM.BARKER,JUDGE