WPC) 2UN % 0( w@H4 0 0D; 0J 0T 0^ 0h{ 0r 0|U 0 0W 1u 0d\ AQ 0D 0@ 0D[ D/ B B D3 U>; U*y B) DC AM 3\ I v~vV(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ EEUEӀn~<$3|x(8(2$ !  X X `   0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  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 !"#%C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ("$    ($$   1  ''' dxd dP Pd&&&&'dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd ",C << G ) !  #d#)  !"  **   YYY FILED*X August13,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.*AppellateCourtClerk  ? !#d#)   $           ݀Unfortunately,thestatementgivenbythedefendantisnotintherecord.Basedupontheentirerecord,weassumethestatementwasincriminating.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . )       *\RA'\75ZXXdd7   R-.,A1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATJACKSON@ JUNE1998SESSIONWILLIAMCHARLESPARKER, @ )@ ) NO.02C019711CC00432  Appellant,@ )@ ) HENRYCOUNTY VS. @ )@ ) HON.JULIANP.GUINN,STATEOFTENNESSEE, @ ) JUDGE @ ) Appellee.@ ) (PostConviction)y FORTHEAPPELLANT:TERESAMcCAIGMARSHALL 308W.WashingtonStreetP.O.Box459Paris,TN382420459 FORTHEAPPELLEE:JOHNKNOXWALKUP AttorneyGeneralandReporter CLINTONJ.MORGAN AssistantAttorneyGeneralCordellHullBuilding,2ndFloor425FifthAvenueNorthNashville,TN372430493 G.ROBERTRADFORD DistrictAttorneyGeneral STEVENL.GARRETT AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral111ChurchStreetP.O.Box686Huntingdon,TN383440686 OPINIONFILED:򀀀AFFIRMEDJOEG.RILEY,JUDGE  OPINION   Thepetitioner,WilliamCharlesParker,appealsthetrialcourtsdenialofhispetitionforpostconvictionrelief.Hereceivedalifesentenceafterpleadingguiltytofirstdegreemurderandnowclaimsthepleawastheresultofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.ThejudgmentofthetrialcourtisAFFIRMED.  I.   Thepetitioner,accompaniedbytwo(2)uncles,presentedhimselfattheHenryCountyjailandstatedhewishedtoconfesstoamurder.Thepetitionerhadpreviouslyadmittedtohisuncleshisinvolvementinthemurder.Theofficerspresentinstructedthepetitionernottomakeanystatementuntilcounselhadbeenobtained. Thepetitionersappointedcounselarrivedatthejailashorttimelater.Theattorneywasinformedbytheofficersthattheyhadbeentoldbyseveralpersonsthatthedefendanthadadmittedhisinvolvementinthemurder,andthatthedefendanthadbeenseenwiththevictimwithinhoursofthemurder.Thepetitionerinformedcounselthathewasworriedabouthis soulandwishedtoconfesstoclearhisconscience.Counselinformedthepetitionerthathecouldnotbeforcedtogiveastatementortestifyagainsthimself,andthatthestatewouldbeforcedtoprovetheircaseagainsthimwithoutthatevidence.Counselalsodiscussedpossibledefenseswithpetitioner,includingpresentingevidenceofdiminishedcapacity.Counseltestifiedthatheadvisedthepetitionerthatifhegaveastatement,heshouldtellthetruth. ThepetitionerinsisteduponmakingastatementandadmittedinvolvementinthemurderafterbeingreadhisMirandarightsbytheofficers. /   ׀Aftergivingthestatement,thepetitionerwasformallyarrestedandlaterpledguiltytofirstdegreemurder.Pursuanttoapleaagreement,thepetitionerwassentencedtolifeimprisonmentwiththepossibilityofparole.  II.    Thepetitionercontendsthathisguiltypleawastheresultofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Thepetitionerclaimshiscounselshouldnothaveallowedhimtogiveastatementtothepolicewithoutaninvestigationtodeterminewhethersuchastatementwasinthepetitionersbestinterests.  A.   ThisCourtreviewsaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselunderthestandardsofBaxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975),andStricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,104S.Ct.2052,80L.Ed.2d674(1984).Thepetitionerhastheburdentoprovethat(1)theattorneysperformancewasdeficient,and(2)thedeficientperformanceresultedinprejudicetothedefendantsoastodeprivehimofafairtrial.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at687,104S.Ct.at2064;Goadv.State,938S.W.2d363,369(Tenn.1996);Overtonv.State,874S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994);Butlerv.State,789S.W.2d898,899(Tenn.1990). ThetestinTennesseeindeterminingwhethercounselprovidedeffectiveassistanceiswhetherhisperformancewaswithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2dat936.Thepetitionermustovercomethepresumptionthatcounselsconductfallswithinthewiderangeofacceptableprofessionalassistance.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065;Alleyv.State,958S.W.2d138,149(Tenn.Crim.App.1997);Statev.Williams,929S.W.2d385,389(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Therefore,inordertoproveadeficiency,apetitionermustshowthatcounselsactsoromissionsweresoseriousastofallbelowanobjectivestandardofreasonablenessunderprevailingprofessionalnorms.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at688,104S.Ct.at2065;Henleyv.State,960S.W.2d572,579(Tenn.1997);Goadv.State,938S.W.2dat369. Inreviewingcounsel'sconduct,a"fairassessment...requiresthateveryeffortbemadetoeliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthecircumstancesofcounsel'schallengedconduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounsel'sperspectiveatthetime."Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065.Thefactthataparticularstrategyortacticfailedorhurtthedefense,doesnot,standingalone,establishunreasonablerepresentation.However,deferencetomattersofstrategyandtacticalchoicesappliesonlyifthechoicesareinformedonesbaseduponadequatepreparation.Goadv.State,938S.W.2dat369;Hellardv.State,629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982);Alleyv.State,958S.W.2dat149;Cooperv.State,847S.W.2d521,528(Tenn.Crim.App.1992). InHillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52,106S.Ct.366,88L.Ed.2d203(1985),theSupremeCourtappliedthetwopartStricklandstandardtoineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaimsarisingoutofaguiltyplea.TheCourtinHillmodifiedtheprejudicerequirementbyrequiringadefendanttoshowthatthereisareasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounsel'serrors,hewouldnothavepleadedguiltyandwouldhaveinsistedongoingtotrial.474U.S.at59,106S.Ct.at370.̛̜  B.   Thepetitionerscounseldidnotspecificallyadvisethepetitioneragainstmakingastatement.ThefailuretodosoatleastraisesthequestionofthefirstStricklandprong,deficientperformance.However,counselsperformancemustbejudgedinthelightofthecircumstancesatthetime,notfromhindsight.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065. CounselwassummonedtothejailonaSundayafternoonandinformedhehadbeenappointedtorepresentapersonwhowishedtoconfesstoamurderinordertoclearhisconscience.Counselhadbeenapprisedbytheofficersofotherevidenceimplicatingthepetitionerinthemurder.Counselfullyexplainedtothepetitionerhisconstitutionalrightagainstselfincrimination,yetthepetitionerinsisteduponmakingastatement.Counseladvisedthepetitionerthatifheinsisteduponmakingastatement,tobetruthfulindoingsoasitwouldinuretohisbenefitinsentencing.Counselrealizedthatpetitionerfacedthepossibilityofthedeathpenalty. Inhisexcellentfindingsoffact,JudgeJulianP.Guinnnotedthefollowing:   `  Somefivedaysfollowingthekillingthatgaverisetotheunderlyingcase,petitionerrevealedhisinvolvementtotwoofhisuncles.Followingdiscussion,theunclestookhimtothecountyjailforquestioning.Itwasduringthisquestioningthatpetitionerindicatedthathewanted getitoff(his)consciencebyadmittingguilt.Questioningwashaltedatthattimeandcounselcontacted.Petitionerwasnotunderarrestatthattime.Counselimmediatelycametothejailandconferredwithbothpetitionerandhisuncles.Petitionerwasinsistentuponadmittingguiltanddidsoafterbeingfully,properlyandcompletelyinformedofhisconstitutionalrightagainstselfincrimination.Aninvestigationthatrevealedeveryiotaandscintillaofevidenceavailableatthattimewouldhavebeenofnoavailinviewofthepetitionersadamantinsistenceuponadmittingguilt.    ThisCourtisboundbythesefindingsunlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Henleyv.State,960S.W.2dat578;Dixonv.State,934S.W.2d69,72(Tenn.Crim.App.1996). Baseduponthecircumstancessurroundingthepetitionersstatement,wearereluctanttofindcounselsperformancedeficient.Counselwasfacedwithaclientwho,accordingtothetrialcourt,was adamantinconfessingtotheϜmurder.Underthetotalityofthecircumstances,weareunabletodeterminethatcounselwasdeficient. Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  C.   Inaddition,thepetitionerbearstheburdenofdemonstratingthathewouldnothaveenteredapleaofguiltyhadhenotgiventhestatement.SeeHillv.Lockhart,474U.S.at59,106S.Ct.at320.Thesubstanceofpetitionersargumentinthisregardisthatthestatementwasgivenbeforehiscooperationcouldbeusedasabargainingtoolforalightersentence. Petitionerscooperationwasapparentlyhelpfulinsecuringevidenceagainsthiscodefendant.Thedefendantwasofferedand,infact,receivedalifesentencewiththepossibilityofparole.Consideringtheevidenceagainstthedefendantatthetimeofhisstatementandthepossibilityofthedeathpenaltyifhewenttotrial,thepetitionerhasfailedtoshowthathewouldnothavepledguiltyabsentthisstatement. Thisissueiswithoutmerit.̛̜   CONCLUSION   Theevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourtsfindingthatcounselwasnotdeficient.Further,petitionerhasfailedtodemonstrateprejudice.Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisAFFIRMED.        _________________________       JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE̛̜CONCUR:_________________________PAULG.SUMMERS,JUDGE_________________________DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE