WPC %^*yʇӷLVVzA79Pd=\*~0sQ+>JAygo]6! ?u6=ּNc! n$t rEg8Ʃ䦊bmPc*Ch?U^zG-Zp+ˊ?p!`=`|[*<9@K[ZQpȰasEˋb,Zj7! ʴӒc~Kp!|ܨJVEJ2Nvh?8YbXpSC|L@MB}ǘdiq`8^hÉA-ygt#Ι?z^ϋ^K O_EgrweQq \W1Ko sĽ}xǹb[ٽIT]՗[0ٔ Vm/Dt~, # F U>Q % 0 UB 4  n U: f 4 "< w@^  U: B D3 0D AOV 0Dk D/ BHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh<( 9Z &Courier RegularX($  7'CXXdXXd7    iUX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXi<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiuM%3|x<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@,rAZ"Arial Regular \\RA' Legal\     P{D DDӀ XXXXgwXX   Ad FILEDXXgw  September10,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular d%%%%'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !  7KXXdd7    iUX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXi  ݛXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T † : XXXX7  XXdXXd7r*<,(j 8` `@E  ` 8ttxPX  rߛ8 @ D x xINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @#DATNASHVILLE@@66-R   JUNE1998SESSIONTOMMYJOEWALKER h   )   80 Ѐ    h   )    Appellant, h   )  No.01C019707CR00297       h   )       h   )  DavidsonCounty   v.    h   )       h   )  HonorableWalterC.Kurtz,Judge       h   )STATEOFTENNESSEE, h   )  (WritofHabeasCorpus) h` ExRel.DonalCampbell, h   ) NF CommissioneroftheTennessee  ) 4, DepartmentofCorrectionsand  )  RICKYJ.BELL,Warden, h   )      h   ) Appellees. h   )  @&D DISSENTINGOPINION  d\  Irespectfullydissent.Ibelievethatthejudgmentofconvictionorderstheimposedsentencetobeservedconcurrentlywiththesentencesforwhichthepetitionerwasonparole.ThejudgmentsreferencetotheParoleBoardsdiscretionandabilitytolimitthe concurrencyaspectinitsrevocationproceedings񛀜isirrelevanttowhetherthesentenceswereorderedtobeservedconcurrently.begsthequestion.񛀀TheBoardmayhavethediscretiontodecidehowmuchoftherevokedparolesentenceistobeservedinconfinement,butitisthestatute,T.C.A.403620,thatbarsconcurrentsentencing,nottheBoard.Inthisrespect,thetrialcourtsconcurrentsentencingisvoidunderHendersonv.Stateex .', rel.Lance,220Tenn.520,419S.W.2d176(1967). h0`).  Also,Iquestiontheanalysisusedbythemajorityopinionindecidingthat itisnotclearonitsfacethatthejudgmentisvoid.Althoughthejudgmentclearlystatesthatthepetitionerisbeingconvictedofafelony,has priorcasesinwhichhehasbeenparoledandchargedwithparoleviolation,andthesentencewillrunconcurrently d9\28 tothosesentences,themajorityopinionreferstomattersoutsidetherecordthatareunclear,suchas,whetherparolewasrevokedandwhetherheservedhissentencesconsecutively,topresentacloudedviewoftherecord.However,thebartoconcurrentsentencesprovidedbyT.C.A.403620operatesandthevoidnatureofthejudgmentremainsregardlessofwhethertheparoleisrevokedorhowthesentenceisserved. Also,althoughIfullyagreewithmycolleaguesconcernsaboutinordinatetimepassingbeforeapetitionermakesacollateralattackuponajudgmentofconviction,IdonotbelievethatthedoctrineoflatchesshouldapplytobarhabeascorpusreliefinTennesseefromavoidjudgment.Mostofthecasescitedbythemajorityopinionrelatetoproceduresinvolvingorsimilartoourpostconvictionlaws,nottheissueofavoidjudgment.Asthemajorityopinionnotes,though,oursupremecourthasstatedthathabeascorpushasnotimelimitation.Pottsv.State,833S.W.2d60,62  (Tenn.1992).Inthisrespect,noamountoftimeshouldbeabletoturnavoidjudgmentintoavalidjudgment.      h      p ___________________________    h      p jmtJosephM.Tipton,Judge    h