ÿWPCg ÄzôñÇó2$"¤3¬H?¨÷t€)†_Úò¶h¤,Z'C3iA˳\2ᘫÑÄ;˜ƒôVºáa^@ÿL+5è9’»üR¡®Æ‹ã:¤ºARà0|€G¡Ì¦mDû%ZKYY\“ðdb¸çCÙ¸X%ÞÄ £8[IŸÑ}yÀ³Zẍ´SXÌèŸ×Ž$Ú—Þ®ºÌ_‰fÿ®²¤’Ì‹äº;V³3t2cšcíÄ}>(OCµWº½öÆ—¾Ü3f£DÃ"µ:3MãG€(÷î§øŽ^áó&ëÓ©(…oÄQ‚@z¾´µ¤@tmv‚dýáÌX~sX{2ò/²ÓüéVG–‡¬³U¼b9äN#N?}úмMšzYŽVIkÓp™\ïX2»ò˜_£WÆÞÐÚ‰z’d7÷ä´»ÿ6"“¥Ü¯ù žr„¥¶ø8õÍB® ” öbq.ù=7S<¯rÁÉYnœg@@o“¶ŽÄsªÎN‘Ñ5¨YŽVÐ9©Ž9·Ï Pð«ðµ_ÏóM3U#¦”‘4ÇAget´¶l×yP–®ë(à8…Ê)øž$Riز«ŽåßÉ]îOy÷˜IrxßzÌUµL¤Ÿ­}“…R;­´ ã{aL,ìÛ½~d4b %\Nb 0ˆdUNìì z:Ò´ z† Ò ^ Ò wÞ 4â ö Æ ÆË Æ‘ ÆW N m!UN8E†#Áˆ 0DIIIIIÏb\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 0ëdddd BOO 0¤l D3 D-C 0Kpp AS»Æ 0¤Ô 0Dx A«¼»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular˜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.wpt ˜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.wptHP-s 3j1,49­ ¡di°3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÅÝ ƒR÷º$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô´mò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€An€accused€who€wishes€to€plead€guilty€yet€assert€his€innocence€may€enter€what€is€known€as€a€ð ðbest€interestððÐ ° Ðguilty€pleaòòóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòNorth€Carolina€v.€Ô_ÔAlfordÔ_Ôóó,€400€U.S.€25,€37„38,€91€S.€Ct.€160,€167„168€(1970).€€òòóóA€trial€court€may€acceptÐ tÄ Ðsuch€a€plea€if€the€court€is€satisfied€that€there€is€a€factual€basis€for€the€plea.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔDortchÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€705€S.W.2d€687,€689Ð 8ˆ Ð(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1985).òòóó- ù-(|G2÷º$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô´mò»»Ô d(|3¿b$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿b$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€H‰XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î4ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼»îî4 #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJune€18,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XH‰X»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XXH‰#ÔòòJESSE€E.€ROGERSóó€v.€òòóóSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEÔ‡XH‰X»¼Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Hawkins€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€7934€€€€€€James€Edward€Ô_ÔBecknerÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2001„02869„CCA„R3„PCÐ ¥õ  ÐOctober€16,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡XH‰XXXH‰ÔThe€petitioner,€Jesse€E.€Rogers,€entered€ð ðbest€interestðð€guilty€pleas€to€five€counts€of€rape€of€a€child.€Ð xÈ  ÐHe€was€sentenced€to€twenty„five€years€incarceration€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction€forÐ d´ Ðeach€offense,€with€the€sentences€to€be€served€concurrently.€€The€petitioner€subsequently€filed€forÐ P  Ðpost„conviction€relief.€€Following€an€evidentiary€hearing,€the€post„conviction€court€denied€relief€andÐ <Œ Ðthe€petitioner€timely€appealed.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€post„conviction€court.Ô#†XH‰XXXH‰ê#ÔÔ#†¼»XXH‰Š#ÔÔ‡XH‰X»¼ÔÐ (x ÐÓÞÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ P ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼»àXH‰#ÔÔ‡XH‰X.¼ÔNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòGary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ôóó,€andÐ Ø( ÐòòDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€joined.Ð Ä ÐÌJohn€S.€Anderson,€Rogersville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Jesse€E.€Rogers.Ð œì ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Kathy€D.€Ô_ÔAslingerÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð tÄ ÐC.€Berkeley€Bell,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Douglas€Ô_ÔGodbeeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ `° ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð L œ ÐÓFÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼»XXH‰u#ÔÔ‡XH‰X»¼ÔÐ $"t! ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼»XXH‰ #ÔÔ‡XH‰X»¼ÔÓ  Óà@ìàòòò òI.€€Factual€Backgroundó óóóÔ#†¼»XXH‰ß #ÔÔ€XH‰X»¼ÔˆÐ ü#L# Ðà  àà ` àÔ‡XH‰XXXH‰ÔOn€June€5,€2000,€the€petitioner€was€indicted€by€the€Hawkins€County€Grand€Jury€onÐ è$8 $ Ðfive€counts€of€rape€of€a€child€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„522€(1997).€Ð Ô%$!% ÐThe€alleged€victim€was€the€petitionerððs€eight„year„old€daughter.€€Thereafter,€on€October€6,€2000,€theÐ À&"& Ðpetitioner€entered€ð ðbest€interestðð€guilty€pleas€to€all€five€counts€of€rape€of€a€child.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€accordance€withÐ ¬'ü"' Ðthe€plea€agreement,€the€petitioner€was€sentenced€to€twenty„five€years€incarceration€for€each€countÐ ˜(è#(ýà Ðwith€the€sentences€to€be€served€concurrently.€€As€a€child€rapist,€the€petitioner€was€required€to€serveÐ ° Ðone€hundred€percent€(100€%)€of€his€sentence€in€confinement.Ð œì Ѐ€€Ð ˆØ Ðà  àà ` àOn€August€22,€2001,€the€petitioner€filed€for€post„conviction€relief,€alleging€that€heÐ tÄ Ðreceived€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€Specifically,€the€petitioner€claimed€that€his€trial€counselÐ `° Ðfailed€to€file€proper€pre„trial€motions€and€failed€to€properly€investigate€his€case.€€Additionally,€theÐ L œ Ðpetitioner€alleged€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€not€knowing€or€voluntary€because€counsel€failed€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðadvise€the€petitioner€of€the€sentence€he€would€receive€if€he€went€to€trial€as€opposed€to€pleadingÐ $ t Ðguilty.€Moreover,€the€petitioner€claimed€that€he€was€not€ð ðin€the€right€state€of€mindðð€to€accept€a€pleaÐ  ` Ðand€did€not€remember€if€he€was€even€present€at€the€time€the€pleas€were€entered.Ð ü L  Ѐ€Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€appointed€counsel€and€conducted€an€evidentiary€hearing.€Ð Ô$  ÐFollowing€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€post„conviction€court€made€detailed€findings€and€concludedÐ À  Ðthat€the€petition€was€without€merit.€€It€is€from€this€determination€that€the€petitioner€now€appeals.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà@éé$ìàòòò òII.€€Analysisó óóóˆÐ „Ô  Ðà  àà ` àWe€begin€by€noting€that€although€the€petitioner€cites€authority€addressing€ineffectiveÐ pÀ Ðassistance€of€counsel€and€knowing€and€voluntary€guilty€pleas,€he€has€failed€to€support€his€issues€withÐ \¬ Ðargument.€€Accordingly,€this€court€could€consider€these€issues€waived.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Ct.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.Ð H˜ ÐR.€10(b).€€Nevertheless,€we€will€address€the€petitionerððs€claims.€€To€be€successful€in€his€claim€forÐ 4„ Ðpost„conviction€relief,€the€petitioner€must€prove€all€factual€allegations€contained€in€his€post„Ð  p Ðconviction€petition€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210(f)€(1997).€Ð  \ Ðð ðððClear€and€convincing€evidence€means€evidence€in€which€there€is€no€serious€or€substantial€doubtÐ øH Ðabout€the€correctness€of€the€conclusions€drawn€from€the€evidence.ðððð€€òòState€v.€Holderóó,€15€S.W.3d€905,Ð ä4 Ð911€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1999)€(quoting€òòHodges€v.€S.C.€Ô_ÔToofÔ_Ô€&€Co.óó,€833€S.W.2d€896,€901€n.2€(Tenn.Ð Ð  Ð1992)).€Issues€regarding€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€accorded€theirÐ ¼  Ðtestimony,€and€the€factual€questions€raised€by€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€are€to€be€resolved€by€theÐ ¨ø Ðpost„conviction€court€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,€960€S.W.2d€572,€579€(Tenn.€1997).€Ð ”ä ÐTherefore,€we€afford€the€post„conviction€courtððs€findings€of€fact€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict,€withÐ €Ð Ðsuch€findings€being€conclusive€on€appeal€absent€a€showing€that€the€evidence€in€the€recordÐ l¼ Ðpreponderates€against€those€findings.€€òòId.óó€at€578.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà@é é ìàA.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€Counsel€€ˆÐ 0"€  Ðà  àà ` àA€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€is€a€mixed€question€of€law€and€fact.€€òòStateÐ #l! Ðv.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€461€(Tenn.€1999).€€In€òòFields€v.€Stateóó,€40€S.W.3d€450,€458€(Tenn.€2001)Ð $X" Ð(citations€omitted),€our€supreme€court€further€explained€the€standard€of€review€in€cases€of€ineffectiveÐ ô$D # Ðassistance€of€counsel:€Ð à%0!$ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[A€post„conviction]€courtððs€òòfindings€of€factóó€underlying€a€claim€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel€are€reviewed€on€appeal€under€a€òòdeÐ ¸'#& Ðnovoóó€standard,€accompanied€with€a€presumption€that€those€findingsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðare€correct€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€Ð )à$( ÐHowever,€a€[post„conviction]€courtððs€òòconclusions€of€lawóó„„such€asÐ |*Ì%) Ðwhether€counselððs€performance€was€deficient€or€whether€thatÐ h+¸&* Ðdeficiency€was€prejudicial„„are€reviewed€under€a€purely€òòde€novoóóÐ ° Ðstandard,€with€no€presumption€of€correctness€given€to€the€[post„Ð œì Ðconviction]€courtððs€conclusions.ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àð ðTo€establish€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€petitioner€bears€the€burden€ofÐ `° Ðproving€both€that€counselððs€performance€was€deficient€and€that€the€deficiency€prejudiced€theÐ L œ Ðdefense.ðð€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.€1996)€(citing€òòÔ_ÔStricklandÔ_Ô€v.€Washingtonóó,€466Ð 8 ˆ ÐU.S.€668,€687,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€2064€(1984)).€€In€evaluating€whether€the€petitioner€has€met€thisÐ $ t Ðburden,€this€court€must€determine€whether€counselððs€performance€was€within€the€range€ofÐ  ` Ðcompetence€required€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.Ð ü L  Ð1975).€€Moreover,€in€the€context€of€a€guilty€plea,€ð ðthe€petitioner€must€show€ððprejudiceðð€byÐ è 8  Ðdemonstrating€that,€but€for€counselððs€errors,€he€would€not€have€pleaded€guilty€but€would€haveÐ Ô$  Ðinsisted€upon€going€to€trial.ðð€€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€983€S.W.2d€240,€246€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1998);€òòsee€alsoóóÐ À  ÐòòHill€v.€Ô_ÔLockhartÔ_Ôóó,€474€U.S.€52,€59,€106€S.€Ct.€366,€370€(1985).Ð ¬ü  Ѐ€€Ð ˜è  Ðà  àà ` àAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€the€petitioner€called€his€trial€counsel€and€counselððs€Ð „Ô  Ðinvestigator€to€testify€on€his€behalf.€€Trial€counsel€testified€that€he€filed€motions€for€discovery€andÐ pÀ Ðdiscussed€the€Stateððs€evidence€with€the€petitioner.€€Counsel€stated€that€he€discussed€possibleÐ \¬ Ðsentences€with€Ô_ÔtheÔ_Ô€petitioner,€including€the€possibility€that€consecutive€sentences€could€be€ordered.€Ð H˜ ÐCounsel€met€with€the€petitioner€two€or€three€times€with€the€defense€investigator€present,€and€also€Ð 4„ Ðmet€with€the€petitioner€alone€on€a€number€of€occasions.€Counsel€testified€that€ð ð[the€petitioner]Ð  p Ðseemed€to€be€a€reasonably€intelligent€man€and,€yes,€as€I€recall,€he€didnððt€seem€to€have€any€problemsÐ  \ Ðunderstanding€what€I€told€him.ðð€€Counsel€did€not€recall€if€he€had€filed€a€motion€to€suppress€theÐ øH Ðpetitionerððs€statements.Ð ä4 Ѐ€€Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àCounsel€recalled€that€the€petitioner€wavered€regarding€whether€he€wanted€to€pleadÐ ¼  Ðguilty€or€go€to€trial.€€However,€counsel€testified€that€he€had€two€primary€concerns€about€going€toÐ ¨ø Ðtrial.€€He€noted€that€the€petitioner€had€made€two€incriminating€statements€and€there€was€alsoÐ ”ä Ðdamaging€physical€evidence.€€Additionally,€counsel€recalled€that€the€victim€was€very€articulate€andÐ €Ð Ðhad€provided€graphic€details€regarding€the€offenses.Ð l¼ Ѐ€€Ð X ¨ Ðà  àà ` àLawrence€Smith,€the€defense€investigator,€testified€regarding€the€petitionerððs€case.€Ð D!” ÐSmith€related€that€he€had€more€than€twenty„five€years€of€experience€in€law€enforcement€and€as€anÐ 0"€  Ðinvestigator€with€the€public€defenderððs€office.€€He€has€an€associateððs€degree€from€Walters€StateÐ #l! ÐCommunity€College€and€had€almost€completed€the€requirements€for€a€bachelorððs€degree€in€criminalÐ $X" Ðjustice€at€East€Tennessee€State€University.€€Smith€also€teaches€and€lectures€at€various€colleges€andÐ ô$D # Ðat€seminars€relating€to€child€abuse€investigations.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àSmith€testified€that€he€spent€a€great€deal€of€time€with€the€petitioner€while€theÐ ¸'#& Ðpetitioner€was€incarcerated€in€the€Hawkins€County€Jail.€€He€estimated€that€he€met€with€the€petitionerÐ ¤(ô#' Ðat€least€ten€times.€€Smith€interviewed€witnesses,€reviewed€discovery€materials€and€lab€reports,€andÐ )à$( ÐÔ_ÔandÔ_Ô€discussed€the€evidence€with€the€petitioner.€€He€and€the€petitionerððs€trial€counsel€also€discussedÐ |*Ì%) Ðwith€the€petitioner€the€advantages€and€disadvantages€of€going€to€trial€or€pleading€guilty.€€AlthoughÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€petitioner€did€not€necessarily€want€to€plead€guilty,€he€did€not€want€to€go€to€trial.€€Smith€explainedÐ ° Ðthat€the€petitioner€was€reluctant€to€go€to€trial€because€he€did€not€want€his€daughter€to€have€to€testify.€Ð œì ÐEventually,€the€petitioner€chose€to€plead€guilty.€€Smith€recalled,Ð ˆØ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[Ô_Ôt]hisÔ_Ô€was€not€one€of€these€quick€decisions€to€enter€into€a€pleaÐ tÄ Ðbargain.€€It,€certainly,€was€a€very,€very€long€process.€€We€wasÐ `° Ðprepared€to€go€to€trial,€but€[the€petitioner]€finally€arrived€at€thatÐ L œ Ðdecision€to€enter€the€plea€bargain€after€it€was€explained€to€him€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðpossibility€of€what€the€evidence€would€possibly€prove€against€him,Ð $ t Ðbeing€the€Ô_ÔD.N.A.Ô_Ô,€and€all€the€statements,€and€everything.€€It€was€oneÐ  ` Ðof€the€best€prepared€cases€that€I€have€saw€as€far€as€the€evidence,€as€farÐ ü L  Ðas€corroborating€statements,€for€his€Ô_ÔD.N.A.Ô_Ô,€and,€of€course,€veryÐ è 8  Ðdamaging€statements€that€[the€petitioner]€had€made€to€lawÐ Ô$  Ðenforcement€officers.ÐÀ ` x` x Ѐ€€Ð ¬ü  Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€testified€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€that€he€was€not€guilty€of€rape.Ð ˜è  ÐHe€contended€that€if€he€was€guilty€of€anything,€it€was€a€lesser€offense.€€The€petitioner€asserted€thatÐ „Ô  Ðhe€entered€ð ðbest€interestðð€pleas€because€he€did€not€want€to€plead€guilty,€Ô#†XH‰XXXH‰® #ÔÔ‡XH‰XXXH‰Ôand€now€believes€that€heÐ pÀ Ðshould€have€gone€to€trial.€€Although€he€claimed€that€counsel€should€have€filed€a€motion€to€suppressÐ \¬ Ðhis€statements,€the€petitioner€admitted€that€he€made€the€statements.€€However,€he€explained,€ð ð[Ô_ÔA]fterÔ_ÔÐ H˜ ÐI€reflected€on€it,€I€had€no€memory,€or€really€what€happened.€€I€still€donððt.€€I€canððt€tell€you€today€whatÐ 4„ Ðhappened.€€I€donððt€know.ðð€€He€alleged€that€he€should€have€requested€an€attorney€before€he€made€theÐ  p Ðstatements.€€The€petitioner€conceded€that,€prior€to€his€plea,€he€was€evaluated€by€mental€healthÐ  \ Ðprofessionals.€€Moreover,€despite€his€limited€memory€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€hisÐ øH Ðstatements,€the€petitioner€admitted€that€he€was€aware€that€the€Stateððs€evidence€included€laboratoryÐ ä4 Ðresults€and€DNA€evidence.€€The€petitioner€presented€no€other€evidence€to€support€his€claims€ofÐ Ð  Ðineffective€assistance.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àAs€noted€earlier,€€the€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€petitioner€received€effectiveÐ ”ä Ðassistance€of€counsel.€€The€post„conviction€court€obviously€accredited€the€testimony€of€trial€counselÐ €Ð Ðand€the€defense€investigator€rather€than€the€testimony€of€petitioner.€€The€post„conviction€courtÐ l¼ Ðconcluded€that€counsel,€with€the€assistance€of€the€defense€investigator,€thoroughly€investigated€theÐ X ¨ Ðcase,€talked€with€witnesses,€consulted€€with€the€petitioner,€and€obtained€discovery.€€Further,€the€courtÐ D!” Ðnoted€that€the€original€court€file€reflected€that€counsel€had€filed€several€motions,€including€a€motionÐ 0"€  Ðfor€a€mental€evaluation€of€petitioner.€€The€court€asserted€after€reviewing€the€record€that€there€ð ðwasÐ #l! Ðsuch€that€a€very€strong€case€existed€against€the€petitioner,€for€which€he,€in€all€likelihood,€would€beÐ $X" Ðfound€guilty.€€He€could€have€received€up€to€125€years€in€this€case,€instead€of€the€25€years€that€he€did€Ð ô$D # Ðreceive€at€100€percent€release€eligibility€date.ðð€€Additionally,€the€court€concluded€that€the€petitionerÐ à%0!$ Ðhad€failed€to€show€that€if€not€for€counselððs€errors,€he€would€have€insisted€on€going€to€trial.€€Indeed,Ð Ì&"% Ðthe€petitioner€testified€that€he€wanted€to€plead€guilty€in€order€to€prevent€his€daughter€from€beingÐ ¸'#& Ðforced€to€testify€at€trial.€€The€court€asserted€after€reviewing€the€record€that€had€the€petitioner€goneÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€trial€rather€than€entering€a€guilty€plea,€ð ðthe€probability€is€that€a€much€worse€result€would€haveÐ )à$( Ðoccurred.ðð€Ð |*Ì%) Ѐ€€Ð h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àAgain,€we€note€that€the€findings€of€fact€of€the€post„conviction€judge€are€afforded€theÐ ° Ðweight€of€a€jury€verdict,€and€those€findings€are€conclusive€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€in€theÐ œì Ðrecord€preponderates€otherwise.€€There€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€preponderate€against€theÐ ˆØ Ðconclusion€of€the€post„conviction€court€that€the€petitioner€did€not€meet€his€burden€of€provingÐ tÄ Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð `° ÐÌà@vv"ìàB.€€Guilty€PleasˆÐ 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€also€complains€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€neither€knowing€nor€voluntaryÐ $ t Ðbecause€the€pleas€were€ð ð[Ô_Ôe]nteredÔ_Ô€without€[the]€petitionerððs€understanding€of€awareness€of€theÐ  ` Ðimportant€constitutional€rights€he€was€waiving€by€pleading€guilty.ðð€Again,€we€observe€that€theÐ ü L  Ðpetitioner€has€failed€to€support€this€issue€with€argument.€€Regardless,€we€conclude€that€the€petitionerÐ è 8  Ðhas€failed€to€show€that€he€is€entitled€to€relief.€€Ð Ô$  Ѐ€€€Ð À  Ðà  àà ` àWhen€a€defendant€enters€a€plea€of€guilty,€certain€constitutional€rights€are€waived,Ð ¬ü  Ðincluding€the€privilege€against€self„incrimination,€the€right€to€confront€witnesses,€and€the€right€to€aÐ ˜è  Ðtrial€by€juryòòóó.€€òòÔ_ÔBoykinÔ_Ô€v.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€243,€89€S.€Ct.€1709,€1712€(1969).€€Therefore,€inÐ „Ô  Ðorder€to€comply€with€constitutional€requirements€a€guilty€plea€must€be€a€ð ðvoluntary€and€intelligentÐ pÀ Ðchoice€among€the€alternative€courses€of€action€open€to€the€defendant.ðð€€òòNorth€Carolina€v.€Ô_ÔAlfordÔ_Ôóó,€400Ð \¬ ÐU.S.€25,€31,€91€S.€Ct.€160,€164€(1970).€€In€order€to€ensure€that€a€defendant€understands€theÐ H˜ Ðconstitutional€rights€being€relinquished,€the€trial€court€must€advise€the€defendant€of€the€consequencesÐ 4„ Ðof€a€guilty€plea,€and€determine€whether€the€defendant€understands€those€consequences.€€òòÔ_ÔBoykinÔ_Ôóó,€395Ð  p ÐU.S.€at€244,€89€S.€Ct.€at€1712Ô#†XH‰XXXH‰g9#ÔÔ‡XH‰XXXH‰Ô.Ð  \ Ѐ€€Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court,€in€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔMackeyÔ_Ôóó,€553€S.W.2d€337,€341€(Ô_ÔTennÔ_Ô.Ð ä4 Ð1977),€set€out€the€procedure€trial€courts€in€Tennessee€should€follow€when€accepting€guilty€pleas.€Ð Ð  ÐPrior€to€accepting€the€guilty€plea,€the€trial€court€must€address€the€defendant€personally€in€open€court,Ð ¼  Ðinform€the€defendant€of€the€consequences€of€the€guilty€plea,€and€determine€whether€the€defendantÐ ¨ø Ðunderstands€those€consequences.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó;€Ô_ÔTennÔ_Ô.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€11(c).€€A€verbatim€record€of€the€guiltyÐ ”ä Ðplea€proceedings€must€be€made€and€must€include,€without€limitation,€ð ð(a)€the€courtððs€advice€to€theÐ €Ð Ðdefendant,€(b)€the€inquiry€into€the€voluntariness€of€the€plea€including€any€plea€agreement€and€intoÐ l¼ Ðdefendantððs€understanding€of€the€consequences€of€his€entering€a€plea€of€guilty,€and€(c)€the€inquiryÐ X ¨ Ðinto€the€accuracy€of€a€guilty€plea.ðð€òòÔ_ÔMackeyÔ_Ôóó,€553€S.W.2d€at€341.Ð D!” Ѐ€€Ð 0"€  Ðà  àà ` àIn€determining€whether€the€petitionerððs€guilty€pleas€were€knowing€and€voluntary,€thisÐ #l! Ðcourt€looks€to€the€following€factors:€Ð $X" Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àthe€relative€intelligence€of€the€[petitioner];€the€degree€of€hisÐ ô$D # Ðfamiliarity€with€criminal€proceedings;€whether€he€was€represented€byÐ à%0!$ Ðcompetent€counsel€and€had€the€opportunity€to€confer€with€counselÐ Ì&"% Ðabout€the€options€available€to€him;€the€extent€of€advice€from€counselÐ ¸'#& Ðand€the€court€concerning€the€charges€against€him;€and€the€reasons€forÐ ¤(ô#' Ðhis€decision€to€Ô_ÔpleadÔ_Ô€guilty,€including€a€desire€to€avoid€a€greaterÐ )à$( Ðpenalty€that€might€result€from€a€jury€trial.€€Ð|*Ì%)` x` x ÐòòÔ_ÔBlankenshipÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€858€S.W.2d€897,€904€(Ô_ÔTennÔ_Ô.€1993).Ð h+¸&* Ѐ€€Ð ° Ðà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€noted€that€it€had€reviewed€the€entire€record,€including€theÐ œì Ðtranscript€of€the€guilty€plea€hearing.€€€The€plea€transcript€reflects€that€the€trial€court€explained€to€theÐ ˆØ Ðpetitioner€his€constitutional€rights€and€the€consequences€of€pleading€guilty.€€The€trial€court€carefullyÐ tÄ Ðexplained€to€the€petitioner€the€Stateððs€burden€in€proving€rape€of€a€child,€specifically€defining€theÐ `° Ðstatutory€definition€of€penetration.€€The€petitioner€advised€the€court€that€he€understood€the€chargesÐ L œ Ðagainst€him,€was€entering€his€plea€voluntarily,€and€was€aware€of€the€constitutional€rights€beingÐ 8 ˆ Ðrelinquished.€€The€trial€court€further€explained€to€the€petitioner€the€sentence€he€would€receive€andÐ $ t Ðthat€he€was€required€to€serve€one€hundred€percent€(100%)€Ô_ÔofÔ_Ô€his€sentence€in€confinement.€€TheÐ  ` Ðpetitioner€advised€the€trial€court€that€he€had€completed€high€school,€had€two€years€of€college€study,Ð ü L  Ðand€had€no€mental€or€physical€conditions€that€limited€his€understanding€of€the€proceedings.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€the€petitioner€contended€that€he€was€not€ð ðin€the€rightÐ À  Ðstate€of€mind€to€even€make€a€plea.ðð€€The€post„conviction€court€noted€that,€prior€to€the€petitionerððsÐ ¬ü  Ðpleas,€the€petitioner€had€been€evaluated€by€mental€health€professionals€who€found€the€petitioner€Ð ˜è  Ðcompetent€to€stand€trial€and€who€concluded€that€an€insanity€defense€could€not€be€supported.€€TheÐ „Ô  Ðpetitioner€asserted€that€he€should€have€gone€to€trial€and,€at€most,€should€have€been€convicted€of€aÐ pÀ Ðlesser€offense.€€Again,€the€post„conviction€court€considered€the€evidence,€accredited€the€testimonyÐ \¬ Ðof€the€trial€counsel€and€the€defense€€investigator,€and€determined€that€the€petitionerððs€plea€ð ðin€allÐ H˜ Ðrespects€was€voluntarily,€intelligently,€and€understandably€made.ðð€€We€conclude€that€the€evidenceÐ 4„ Ðdoes€not€preponderate€against€this€determination.Ð  p ÐÌà@MM"ìàòòò òIII.€€Conclusionóóó óˆÐ øH Ðà  àà ` àAccordingly,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€post„conviction€courtÔ#†XH‰XXXH‰+N#ÔÐ ä4 ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNORMA€Ô_ÔMcGEEÔ_Ô€OGLE,€JUDGE