WPC" @HK],% .=2^^sK]3, x#'EXGkAj1kuxu ˝n⇺ 6"0<xJ3;E_[>ZG.˞y4͈݅Z@Pc̞]$= T/ykQM`?0AP`ٷĂb"{?qVbu J2̉0BI)M؃uْAzEѺMoT´ط5e쁊)8q ciWLShϒE{birQC⦕ZP 3X<n8c"? ɔRЗ(>nfx9*/A࠷dդ,r1\hx"Uƣ~n'yуXlV~ͯ>B^Nm0hm%w!y]A$P:6Xhvor8'ۻ &,byb#\ %% N+ 0- UN UN ^ Q z]  w 4 b    d*N m Eb 0 B 0% D5 D- 0K++ ASv 0 0D3 Aw\\IB01S02\CLERKJAC,,,,0(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z6Times New Roman Regularn41  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt~/C:i+00- -3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5U - -(|G28$ !.8idXXd8         0  l d(|3$ !.8idXXd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8idXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8idd8     __  i8ڷXXdd8  @hhbiINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#ib#Ԉ #   AssignedonBriefsApril13,2004 F XڷXi #iXXڷ#_SEANISE_ԀSHAWv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXڷXi  ? @@ AppealfromtheCriminalCourtforShelbyCounty  9 @@No.P26630ArthurT.Bennett,Judge  # @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200302041CCAR3PC!FiledSeptember17,_2004_   AV) ` dE<]` A ^     _Seanise_ԀShaw,thepetitioner,appealstheShelbyCountyCriminalCourtsdenialofherpetitionfor V  post-convictionrelief.Thelowercourtfoundherallegationsofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel ? unsupportedbytheevidenceanddeniedrelief.Becauseweareunpersuadedoferror,weaffirm.#iXXڷ#XڷXi (x  Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtisAffirmed.  J   #iXڷq#XڷX.iJames_Curwood_Ԁ_Witt_,Jr.,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidG.Hayesand  NormaMcGeeOgle,JJ.,joined.  WilliamD.Massey,Memphis,Tennessee(attrial);andC.MichaelRobbins,Memphis,Tennessee  (attrialandonappeal),fortheAppellant,_Seanise_ԀShaw. q PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneral&Reporter;RichardH._Dunavant_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral; C WilliamL.Gibbons,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andJulieMosey,AssistantDistrictAttorney ,| General;fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. e  OPINION #iXXڷC#XڷXi  7  #iXXڷ #  XڷXi0   . (#(# 8pX XdXXd8   ` In2003,thepetitionerpleadedguiltytotwocountsofidentitytheft,ninecountsof " " forgery,andonecountoftheft.Althoughhermaximumsentenceexposureexceededninetyyears, ## hereffectivepleabargainedsentencewastwentyfouryears.Atthetimeofherguiltyplea, $$ petitionerhadninepriorfelonyconvictionsandoverfifteenmisdemeanorconvictions.Basedon u% % herpriorrecord,thepetitionerwasacareeroffender;however,thepleaofferobtainedbycounsel ^&!& calledforthepetitionertobesentencedasapersistentoffender.Inacceptingtheguiltyplea,the G'"' courtreferredtothepetitionerasa onepersoncrimewave...inflictinguntoldmiseryanddamage 0(#( onthevictimsof[her]crimes. )i$) Ѐ *R%*    ` Afterthepleaentry,newcounselfiledapetitionforcommunitycorrections *;&+ placementpursuanttoTennesseeRuleofCriminalProcedure35,whichthecourtdismissedwithout +$', ahearing.Inthepostconvictioncourt,thepetitionerclaimedineffectiveassistanceofcounselbased , (- ontrialcounselsfailuretoinformherofthecommunitycorrectionsalternative.Sheclaimedinthe -(. _postconvictionhearingthatshewouldhaverequestedcommunitycorrectionsatthetimeofherplea  hadsheknownabouttheoption.Thepetitionertestifiedthatsheunderstoodtheadvantagesofa  guiltyplearatherthanatrialbuttestifiedthatpriortothedateofherplea,counselneverspokeof  themannerinwhichshewouldservehersentence,onlythatshedidnotqualifyforprobation. k    ` Atthepostconvictionhearing,trialcounseladmittedthatbecauseofthepetitioners =  priorrecord,hedidnotpetitionfor,nordidhediscussthepossibilityof,communitycorrectionswith & v thepetitioner.Althoughherrecorddidnotdisqualifyher,herrepeatedrecalcitrantbehaviorledhim  _ tobelievethatapetitionforcommunitycorrections wouldbeafruitlesseffort.  H    ` Inthepostconvictionhearing,thepetitionersmothertestifiedthatthepetitioners    behaviorhadchangedatthetimeofthepleaagreementandthatthepetitionerwasnolonger going   instores.      ` Agreeingwithtrialcounselsopinionthatarequestforcommunitycorrectionswould n  havebeenfutile,thepostconvictioncourtconsideredsuchanefforta wasteofjudicialtime.The W  pleasubmissioncourthadpreviouslyreferredtopetitionerasa onepersoncrimewave,indicating @ theunlikelihoodthatarequestforcommunitycorrectionsplacementwouldhavebeengranted. )y Thus,thepostconvictioncourtheldthatthepetitionersclaimwasunsupportedbytheevidenceand b deniedrelief. K Ѐ 4    ` Inpost-convictionproceedings,thepetitionerhastheburdenofprovingbyclearand  convincingevidencetheclaimsraised.Tenn.CodeAnn.40-30-110(f)(2003).Onappeal,the  lowercourtsfindingsoffactarerevieweddenovowithapresumptionofcorrectnessthatmayonly  beovercomeiftheevidencepreponderatesagainstthosefindings.Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,  458(Tenn.2001). q    ` Whenapetitionerchallengestheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel,shehastheburden C ofestablishing(1)deficientrepresentationand(2)prejudiceresultingfromthatdeficiency. ,| Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,686,104S.Ct.2052,2064(1984);Baxterv.Rose,523 e S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Deficientrepresentationoccurswhencounselsservicesfallbelow N therangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Bankstonv.State,815S.W.2d  7 213,215(Tenn.Crim.App.1991).Prejudiceisthereasonablelikelihoodthat,butfordeficient !   representation,theoutcomeoftheproceedingswouldhavebeendifferent.Overtonv.State,874 " ! S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994).Whenitisallegedthattheineffectiveassistanceofcounselresultedin #" aguiltyplea,theburdenisuponthedefendanttoestablishtheprejudiceprongofStricklandby $# provingthat thereisareasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounselserrors,hewouldnothave t% $ pleadedguiltyandwouldhaveinsistedongoingtotrial.Hillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52,59,106S. ]&!% Ct.366,370(1985).Onreview,thereisastrongpresumptionofsatisfactoryrepresentation.Barr F'"& v.State,910S.W.2d462,464(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).Ifprejudiceisabsent,thereisnoneedto /(#' examineallegationsofdeficientperformance.Strickland,466U.S.at697,104S.Ct.at2069. )h$(    ` Inthepresentcase,thepostconvictioncourtrejectedthenotionthatthesentencing *:&* courtwouldhaveruleddifferentlyhadcounselrequestedcommunitycorrections.Thesentencing +#'+ courtdescribedthepetitionerasa onepersoncrimewave.Thus,thepostconvictioncourt  rejectedtheclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Inviewoftherecord,weagreewiththe  lowercourt.     ` Asacareeroffender,thepetitionerwasnotentitledtothepresumptionoffavorable T candidacyforalternativesentencing.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035102(6)(2003).That,coupled =  withthetrialcourtsapparentviewthatthepetitionerwasnotagoodprospectforrehabilitation, & v providesastrongindicationthatthetrialcourtwouldnothavegrantedcommunitycorrections  _ placementhaditbeenrequestedtodoso.SeeEddieL.Coley,Jr.v.State,No.M200103130CCA  H R3PC,slipop.at67(Tenn.Crim.App.,Nashville,Sept.4,2002)(prejudiceforineffective  1  assistanceofcounselpurposesisnotshownwhenitappearsthatthereliefnotsoughtbytrial    counselwouldnothavebeengranted).Atanyrate,whetherthetrialcourtwouldhavegranted   communitycorrectionsplacementavertstheissueinthisclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel   inthesubmissionofaguiltyplea.Thepetitionerhasnotshownthatshewouldhaveeschewedthe   pleaofferandoptedfortrialhadsheknownabouttheprospect!howeverfaint!ofcommunity n  correctionsplacement.Thus,weholdthatthepetitionerfailedtocarryherburdeninestablishing W  ineffectiveassistanceofcounsel. @    ` Thus,weaffirmthedenialofpostconvictionrelief. b    K        `     h     ___________________________________     `     h     JAMESCURWOODWITT,JR.,JUDGE