WPC( # VU:a % 04Y m | 0 0D 0D 0J w@R 0T 0^ 0hD 0r 0|b 0 0( 1u D3- 0d`U*B)DC AMZf+v~ Bv, 0@ 0D? AO 0D D/ B HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh,  AZ"Arial RegularX( 7$` ` TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalTڃ"3|x((3C6$  7!` TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   `   0  (#$  0  6 $Triangle0 2 0Indent123  vPwxyDz{|}e~eӀ2" 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)****'dxdP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d$$$$7Border 1dd-%C << G z !  #d##    ` \RA'\  #   YYY FILED#X October8,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.#AppellateCourtClerk  \\RA'\PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'` dStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ("$    6b$Triangle0 -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . #    ` \RA'\  ݛ7XXdd7    ӜR&'%A1-j|` . `@Rߛ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATKNOXVILLEJULY1997SESSION  RALPHDEANPURKEY,   ) C.C.A.NO.03C019607CC00257      )  Petitioner/Appellant  ) COCKECOUNTY       )v.      ) HON.REXHENRYOGLE,       ) JUDGESTATEOFTENNESSEE,   )      ) POSTCONVICTIOǸ Respondent/Appellee  ) FORTHEAPPELLANT    FORTHEAPPELLEECharlesR.Ray,Esq.    CharlesW.Burson211ThirdAvenueNorth    AttorneyGeneral&ReporterP.O.Box198288Nashville,TN37219    MarvinE.Clements,Jr.       AssistantAttorneyGeneral        450JamesRobertsonParkway        Nashville,TN372430493     OPINIONFILED򀀀AFFIRMEDJOHNK.BYERSSENIORJUDGE   OPINION      Thisisanappealfromthesummarydismissalofapetitionforpostconvictionrelief. OnSeptember25,1986,thedefendantwasconvictedofgrandlarceny,concealingstolenproperty,andbeingahabitualcriminal.Hewassentencedtoserve10yearsonthegrandlarcenyandconcealingstolenpropertyconvictions,andamandatorylifesentenceonthehabitualcriminalconviction.Thesentenceswereorderedtobeservedconcurrently.ThetrialcourtsjudgmentbecamefinalonNovember30,1986. Thedefendantstrialcounseltimelymovedforanewtrial,butthemotionwasdismissedbecauseofthedefendantsescapestatus.Thedefendanttooknoappealoftheconvictions.Sincehisreturntocustody,thedefendanthasfiledthree(3)prosepetitionsforpostconvictionrelief,eachofwhichwassummarilydismissedasfallingoutsidetheapplicablestatuteoflimitations.  ThisthirdpetitionforpostconvictionreliefwasfiledMay10,1996anddismissedMay28,1996.Thedefendantspostconvictioncounselraisesthefollowingissueonappeal:0 I. Whetherthetrialcourterredbydismissingthepetitionforpostconvictionrelief,asbeingbarredbytheapplicablestatuteoflimitations,withouttheopportunityforafullandfairhearingonthemerits. Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed. Underthelawineffectwhenthedefendantwasconvicted,8 Aprisonerincustodyundersentenceofacourtofthisstatemustpetitionforpostconvictionreliefunderthischapterwithinthree(3)yearsofthedateofthefinalactionofthehigheststateappellatecourttowhichanappealistakenorconsiderationofsuchpetitionshallbebarred.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030102(repealedby1995Tenn.Pub.Act207,Section1). ThetrialcourtsjudgmentbecamefinalonNovember30,1986,andthedefendanttooknoappealoftheconvictions.Therefore,thedefendantsopportunitytopetitionforpostconvictionreliefexpiredthreeyearslater,onNovember30,1989.SeeRickieJ.Wallenv.State,No.03C019601CC00039,SullivanCounty(Tenn.(  Crim.App.Jan.9,1997),app.filed(Tenn.Feb.5,1997);Warrenv.State,833S.W.2d101(Tenn.Crim.App.1992),appealdenied(Tenn.May11,1992)(bothcasesholdingthatthethreeyearstatuteoflimitationsforpostconvictionreliefbeginstorunfromthedateoffinalconvictionifnoactiontoperfecttherighttoappealistaken). SincethedefendantspetitionwasnottimelyfiledunderTenn.CodeAnn.4030102,thetrialjudgeproperlydismissedit. Incontestingthisconclusion,thedefendantarguesthattherecentdecisionofthisCourtinArnoldCarterv.State,No.03C019509CC00270,MonroeCounty(Tenn.Crim.App.July11,1996),app.granted(Tenn.Dec.2,1996),affordshimrelief. InCarter,apanelofthisCourt,withJudgeWellesdissenting,construedthenewPostConvictionProcedureAct,Tenn.CodeAnn.4030201(1996Supp.),asprovidinga oneyearwindowduringwhichanydefendantcouldfileapostconvictionpetition.ThecaseheldthattheoneyearwindowisavailableevenifthepetitionwouldhavebeenbarredbythethreeyearstatuteoflimitationsallowedunderthepreviousAct. However,theSupremeCourtrecentlyresolvedthisissueandheldthat petitionersforwhomthestatuteoflimitationsexpiredpriortotheeffectivedateofthenewAct,i.e.,May10,1995,donothaveanadditionalyearinwhichtofilepetitionsforpostconvictionrelief.Carterv.State,___S.W.2d___(Tenn.1997)(filedSept.8,1997,atKnoxville).InterpretingthenewAct,theSupremeCourtexplained: Weagreewiththeviewthatthestatutewasintendedtorestrictthetimeandopportunitytoseekpostconvictionrelief.Clearly,thispurposeisnotservedbyastatutoryconstructionthatallowsadditionaltimeandopportunityforpetitionerswhoseclaimsarealreadybarredbythepriorstatuteoflimitations.Id.Therefore,thedefendantsissueonappealhasnomerit. Thetrialcourtsdismissalofthepetitionwasproperandweaffirmthejudgmentbelow.            JohnK.Byers,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:̀DavidH.Welles,Judge򀀀ThomasT.Woodall,Judge