ÿWPC¿2 «*Æ!Z¨´ºz‹fÍ'š0+®|Ù+ µf Û¶$mÝäX BÈŽ H,"] xkL8ôðŒéaGráÏí.ŒÄ£&—SÛ¹iÓY“jZz±ì:­ºH§§R2WÔM› Y[OXu}c_Öñia8Œ¹­ž::á˜ê_óתíp™:g©YüIE2{3n˜IÆš%‰’6÷ô©Ö¨Åå+ý£Ó 9­Å©"„ËxM¯¹u¢®Új%5º³°n±}ò®@Øèšþþ-nͯ¹2Öô¸>ÁF¥ü­¾–ÕöeiM²rRÆAñ ÕÆé¥"L(Vð§.€3w}ùÐ*fWQ¯[ÌVP7w‚‘þ[P±éa8Ê ¥bÙ–szpëÝæo¨ á”î’BäWüX¾àà“vóI?®õjL\0Þê˜Ü% £Cí³UX]ìAñØ $6~ÕåpŠûeV6%¢©äÒ\Mpró ÞÛE<—Æ:…ò ´'.Ÿ·~oý.•Káa5Ìaå²­OãO§ƒŽ:€ â¼‚8ke'l-lìs8@[sHì€Ý…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ U:Í L w@S 4“ § ½¶ U .s ­¡ U :NU:ˆÂ‹ÊU:UUNyÝZVU:°°¦ê’”è&!ƒ#‹‘&U:*UNV*]¤*>,?-y].]. BÖ/Ö/Ö/Ö/Ö/Ö/ D3ó/ó/ó/ 0D&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0 0lj0 0DÖ0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0Ö0 AO1Æi1i1 0D/2 D/s2 B¢2˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLÐ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial RegularC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT % E& ' E( ) D* + D, - +. Ó€ýhµ&3|x9  ³Ò4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€State€also€relied€upon€the€petitionerððs€1971€conviction€for€concealing€stolenÐ `  Ðproperty.€€However,€the€Criminal€Court€of€Sullivan€County€vacated€this€conviction€in€post„¼conviction€proceedings.€€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€909,€1991€WL€87245,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð @ à Ðat€Knoxville,€May€29,€1991).%ä2¼A`ArialTT £Ò4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝContrary€to€the€petitionerððs€assertion€in€his€brief,€the€trial€court€correctly€noted€thatÐ `  Ðthe€statute€of€limitations€applicable€in€the€petitionerððs€case€was€three€years.€€Tenn.€Code.ÏAnn.€ðð€40„30„102€(Repealed,€May€10,€1995).€€The€petitionerððs€conviction€became€final€onÏMay€18,€1989.€€Accordingly,€the€statute€of€limitations€expired€in€his€case€on€May€18,€1992.€ÏEffective€May€10,€1995,€the€legislature€enacted€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€of€1995.€ÏThe€1995€Act€provided€a€one€year€statute€of€limitations€for€post„conviction€petitions.€€Tenn.ÏCode.€Ann.€ðð€4„30„202(a)€(1997).€€However,€in€òòCarter€v.€Stateóó,€952€S.W.2d€417,€418€(Tenn.Ð   Ð1997),€our€supreme€court€held€that€the€new€act€did€not€revive€cases€in€which€the€applicableÏstatute€of€limitations€had€already€expired., øð AZ‹"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular Ò4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€post„conviction€court€actually€cited€òòMcMathóó€for€the€closely€related€propositionÐ `  Ðthat€Ô‡XLXXXÔthe€State€was€permitted€in€an€habitual€criminal€trial€to€introduce€evidence€ofÐ P ð Ðmore€than€the€requisite€number€of€convictions€because€of€the€possibility€that€theÏdefense€might€successfully€dispute€the€validity€of€some€of€the€convictions€inÏsubsequent€proceedings.Ô#†X\XX XLÒ#Ô€€Similarly,€on€appeal€from€the€post„conviction€courtððs€judgment,Ð , Ì Ðthis€court€rejected€the€proposition€that€the€petitionerððs€sentence€was€constitutionally€void,Ïbecause€the€trial€court€subsequently€vacated€the€petitionerððs€conviction€for€concealing€stolenÏproperty.€€òòWilsonóó,€No.€909,€1991€WL€87245,€at€*3., øð AZ‹"Arial Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular oÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€at€the€outset€that,€in€òòWilsonóó,€No.€03C01„9604„CC„00142,€1997€WL€459728,Ð `  Ðat€*2,€this€court€concluded€that€the€petitionerððs€judgments€of€conviction€in€the€burglary,Ïperjury,€and€felonious€assault€cases€are€at€most€voidable,€and€not€void. PÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòGaskin€v.€Collinsóó,€661€S.W.2d€865€(Tenn.€1983),€did€not€affect€the€holding€in€thisÐ `  Ðcase,€as€òòGaskinóó€rested€upon€the€state€constitutional€provision€prohibiting€retroactiveÐ P ð Ðdisenfranchisement.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular œÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€this€post„conviction€appeal,€this€court€has€also€reviewed€the€record€in€this€case€onÐ `  Ðdirect€appeal.€€ð ð[C]ourts€may€take€judicial€notice€of€...€court€records€in€an€earlier€proceedingÏof€the€same€case€and€the€actions€of€the€court€thereon.ðð€€òòDelbridge€v.€Stateóó,€742€S.W.2d€266,Ð @ à Ð267€(Tenn.€1987).€€Additionally,€the€appellate€courts€are€authorized€to€supplementÏincomplete€records€by€the€terms€of€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(e)€and€may€also€consider€the€contentsÏof€their€own€court€records€in€their€consideration€of€related€cases. úÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€that,€according€to€the€record,€the€trial€court€did€rule€upon€the€sufficiency€ofÐ `  Ðthe€prior€convictions€prior€to€their€submission€to€the€jury.€€The€sole€exception€was€theÏconviction€for€concealing€stolen€property.€€However,€this€conviction€was€subsequentlyÏvacated€by€the€Sullivan€County€Criminal€Court€and€was€not€necessary€to€support€theÏpetitionerððs€habitual€criminal€conviction. ˆÝ ƒ\üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝContrary€to€the€petitionerððs€assertion€in€his€brief,€the€trial€court€correctly€noted€that€theÐ `  Ðstatute€of€limitations€applicable€in€the€petitionerððs€case€was€three€years.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€40„¼30„102€(Repealed,€May€10,€1995).€€The€petitionerððs€conviction€became€final€on€May€18,€1989.€ÏAccordingly,€the€statute€of€limitations€expired€in€his€case€on€May€18,€1992.€€Effective€May€10,Ï1995,€the€legislature€enacted€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€of€1995.€€The€1995€Act€providedÏa€one€year€statute€of€limitations€for€post„conviction€petitions.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€4„30„202(a)Ï(1997).€€However,€in€òòCarter€v.€Stateóó,€952€S.W.2d€417,€418€(Tenn.€1997),€our€supreme€court€heldÐ  @ Ðthat€the€new€act€did€not€revive€cases€in€which€the€applicable€statute€of€limitations€had€alreadyÏexpired. ÞÝ ƒ\üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€that,€according€to€the€record,€the€trial€court€did€rule€upon€the€sufficiency€of€theÐ `  Ðprior€convictions€prior€to€their€submission€to€the€jury.€€The€sole€exception€was€the€conviction€forÏconcealing€stolen€property.€€However,€this€conviction€was€subsequently€vacated€by€the€SullivanÏCounty€Criminal€Court€and€was€not€necessary€to€support€the€petitionerððs€habitual€criminalÏconviction. yÝ ƒ\üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€post„conviction€court€actually€cited€òòMcMathóó€for€the€closely€related€proposition€thatÐ `  ÐÔ‡Xœ2XXXÔthe€State€was€permitted€in€an€habitual€criminal€trial€to€introduce€evidence€of€more€thanÐ P ð Ðthe€requisite€number€of€convictions€because€of€the€possibility€that€the€defense€mightÏsuccessfully€dispute€the€validity€of€some€of€the€convictions€in€subsequent€proceedings.Ô#†XÌXX Xœ2¶#ԀР0 Ð ÐSimilarly,€on€appeal€from€the€post„conviction€courtððs€judgment,€this€court€rejected€theÏproposition€that€the€petitionerððs€sentence€was€constitutionally€void,€because€the€trial€courtÏsubsequently€vacated€the€petitionerððs€conviction€for€concealing€stolen€property.€€òòWilsonóó,€No.Ð  ¬ Ð909,€1991€WL€87245,€at€*3. Ò4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€post„conviction€court€actually€cited€òòMcMathóó€for€the€closely€related€propositionÐ `  Ðthat€Ô‡ XLXXXÔthe€State€was€permitted€in€an€habitual€criminal€trial€to€introduce€evidence€ofÐ P ð Ðmore€than€the€requisite€number€of€convictions€because€of€the€possibility€that€theÏdefense€might€successfully€dispute€the€validity€of€some€of€the€convictions€inÏsubsequent€proceedings.Ô#†X\XX XLÒ#Ô€€Similarly,€on€appeal€from€the€post„conviction€courtððs€judgment,Ð , Ì Ðthis€court€rejected€the€proposition€that€the€petitionerððs€sentence€was€constitutionally€void,Ïbecause€the€trial€court€subsequently€vacated€the€petitionerððs€conviction€for€concealing€stolenÏproperty.€€òòWilsonóó,€No.€909,€1991€WL€87245,€at€*3., øð AZ‹"Arial Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular SÝ ƒ\üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€at€the€outset€that,€in€òòWilsonóó,€No.€03C01„9604„CC„00142,€1997€WL€459728,€atÐ `  Ð*2,€this€court€concluded€that€the€petitionerððs€judgments€of€conviction€in€the€burglary,€perjury,Ïand€felonious€assault€cases€are€at€most€voidable,€and€not€void. 4Ý ƒ\üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòGaskin€v.€Collinsóó,€661€S.W.2d€865€(Tenn.€1983),€did€not€affect€the€holding€in€this€case,Ð `  Ðas€òòGaskinóó€rested€upon€the€state€constitutional€provision€prohibiting€retroactiveÐ P ð Ðdisenfranchisement. Ô€XÂuXXXÔÔ€î4ÊîXXÂuÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ ¥îî4ÊÔÐ  ÐÌò òJune€24,€1999Ð ¶¶ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô¨ ô ¥ÔAppellate€CourtÐ –– ÐClerkó ó oÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÝ ƒ\üÝÿÝà Œ àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€at€the€outset€that,€in€òòWilsonóó,€No.€03C01„9604„CC„00142,€1997€WL€459728,Ð `  Ðat€*2,€this€court€concluded€that€the€petitionerððs€judgments€of€conviction€in€the€burglary,Ïperjury,€and€felonious€assault€cases€are€at€most€voidable,€and€not€void. d$$$$'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ. ñ›ñ. ñÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X¼YXXXÔÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑò òòòÑ7€LûXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ññ. ñßr€!*<,(j 8 `€€@Ehf  tt0" ` ¨Ørß›ñ. ñà@Q Q ÚàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ `  ÐÌà@üü*ÚàAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌóóÌà@‘‘'ÚàMARCH€1999€SESSIONó óˆÐ  À ÐÌÌÌò òJIMMY€WAYNE€WILSON,à ì àà D à*ó óà œ àC.C.A.€03C01„9806„CR„00206Ð à€ ÐÌà Œ àAppellant,à < àà ” àà ì àà D à*à œ àSULLIVAN€COUNTYÐ À`  ÐÌvs.€à Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D à*à œ àHon.€Lynn€W.€Brown,€JudgeÐ  @  ÐÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ” àà ì àà D à*ó óà œ à(Petition€for€Habeas€Corpus€Relief)Ð €  ÐÌà Œ àAppellee.à < àà ” àà ì àà D à*Ð ` ÐÌÌÌòòFor€Appellantóó:à < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àòòFor€Appelleeóó:Ð  À ÐÌJimmy€Wayne€Wilsonà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àJohn€Knox€WalkupÐ   ÐMCRCF„BMCXà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ ð ÐP.O.€Box€2000à < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÐ à€ ÐWartburg,€TN€€37887à ” àà ì àà D àà œ àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ð Ð p ÐÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àEllen€H.€PollackÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ  +À!$ ÐÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌNORMA€MCGEE€OGLE,€JUDGEÐ   2@), ÐÓÓà@33-Úàò òòòOPINIONó óóóˆÐ `  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner,€Jimmy€Wayne€Wilson,€appeals€the€summary€dismissalÏof€his€petition€for€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€œñ) ñrelief›€ñ) ñby€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€Countyñ* ñ.ñ* ñÏñ+ ñoñ+ ññ, ñOñ, ññ% ñfñ% ññ' ññ& ñbñ& ññ' ññ( ñnñ( ñ€May€26,€1998,€the€Court€dismissed›€the€petition€on€the€basis€of€the€petitionerððsÏfailure€to€state€a€cognizable€ground€for€relief.€€On€appeal,€the€petitioner€asserts€thatÏthe€trial€court€erroneously€dismissed€his€petition,€because€his€conviction€andÏsentence€as€an€habitual€criminal€are€void.€€Following€a€thorough€review€of€theÏrecord,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà@88'Úàò òòòProcedural€Historyóóó ó׃×Ý ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׈Ð  À Ðà Œ àà ä àOn€January€18,€1985,€a€Sullivan€County€Grand€Jury€returned€aÏpresentment,€charging€the€petitioner€with€one€count€of€rape,€occurring€on€OctoberÏ12,€1984,€and€one€count€of€habitual€criminality.€€With€respect€to€the€habitual€criminalÏcharge,€the€State€relied€upon€the€following€prior€convictions€of€the€petitioner:ÌÓÓà8 Œ à1.à8ä Œ (#Œ (#à1971€conviction€for€assault€with€intent€to€commit€secondÐ €%  Ðdegree€murder.Ð ä Ð ä Ð  Ðà8 Œ à2.à8ä Œ (#Œ (#à1979€conviction€for€burglary€of€a€motor€vehicle.Ð`' ä Ð ä Ð  Ðà8 Œ à3.à8ä Œ (#Œ (#à1980€conviction€for€perjury.׃ 0×Ý ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ÐP(ð!ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌÓHÓA€jury€found€the€petitioner€guilty€of€both€counts€contained€in€the€presentment€andÏsentenced€the€petitioner€to€life€imprisonment.€€This€court€affirmed€the€petitionerððsÐ ,°"% Ðconvictions€and€sentence€on€direct€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Wilsonóó,€No.€717,€1986€WLÐ `  Ð12922€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€November€14,€1986),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,Ð @ à Ð(Tenn.€1987€and€1989).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àSubsequently,€the€petitioner€flooded€the€courts€with€various€petitionsÏfor€post„conviction€and€habeas€corpus€relief.€€All€of€these€petitions€were€denied€bothÏby€the€trial€court€and,€ultimately,€by€this€court€on€appeal.€€òòWilsonóó,€No.€909,€1991€WLÐ  @  Ð87245;€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€970,€1991€WL€99520€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,Ð €  ÐJune€12,€1991);€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9203„CR„00104,€1992€WL€350809Ð ` Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€December€1,€1992),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ð @à Ð1993);€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9406„CR„00229,€1995€WL€215241€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð  À ÐApp.€at€Knoxville),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995);€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.Ð   Ð03C01„9602„CC„00085,€1997€WL€214842€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville),€òòperm.€toÐ à€ Ðappeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1997);€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9604„CC„00142,€1997€WLÐ À!` Ð459728€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€August€12,€1997);€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.Ð  #@ Ð03C01„9612„CR„00452,€1997€WL€658991€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€OctoberÏ22,€1997),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1998);€òòWilson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9611„Ð `'  ÐCR„00409,€1997€WL€672644€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€October€30,€1997).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner€filed€this€most€recent€petition€for€habeas€corpus€relief€onÏApril€20,€1998.€€In€his€petition€and€on€appeal,€the€petitioner€essentially€alleges€theÏfollowing€grounds€for€relief:ÌÓÓà8 Œ à1.à8ä Œ (#Œ (#àð ðWhether€the€Trial€Court€Erred€in€First€ConsideringÐ  2@), ÐPetitionerððs€Writ€of€Habeas€Corpus€as€a€Post„ConvictionÏPetition;€Then€Dismissing€the€Writ,€and€Considering€it€aÏWrit€of€Habeas€Corpus?ððÐ ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ à2.à8ä Œ (#Œ (#àWhether€the€trial€court€properly€dismissed€the€petition€forÐ P7ð-1 Ða€writ€of€habeas€corpus.Ð@8à.2ä Ð ä Ð  Їà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#àA.à8<ä Ð ä Ð àWhether€the€trial€courtððs€instructions€to€theÐ `  Ðjury€in€the€petitionerððs€habitual€criminal€trialÏwere€adequate.Ð <x<x ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#àB.à8<ä Ð ä Ð àWhether,€in€the€petitionerððs€habitual€criminalÐ  À Ðtrial,€the€trial€court€should€have€determinedÏthe€sufficiency€of€the€predicate€convictionsÏprior€to€submitting€them€to€the€jury.Ð <x<x ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#àC.à8<ä Ð ä Ð àWhether€the€petitionerððs€habitual€criminalÐ Ðp  Ðconviction€was€supported€by€a€sufficientÏnumber€of€prior€felony€convictions€asÏrequired€by€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€39„1„801Ï(1982).Ð <x<x ÐÌÓÓÌà@==,Úàòòò òAnalysisó óóóˆÐ Pð Ðà Œ àà ä àÔ‡XLXXXLÔInitially,€the€procedural€provisions€of€the€habeas€corpus€statute€areÐ 0Ð Ðmandatory€and€must€be€scrupulously€followed.€€òòArcher€v.€Stateóó,€851€S.W.2d€157,Ð ° Ð165€(Tenn.€1993).€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€29„21„107(b)(2)€(1980)€provides€that€a€copyÏof€any€judgment€of€conviction€must€be€attached€to€a€petition€for€habeas€corpusÏrelief.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€29„21„107(b)(4)€provides€that€copies€of€prior€petitions€forÏthe€writ€of€habeas€corpus€must€be€attached€to€the€current€petition.€€The€petitionerÏfailed€to€comply€with€either€of€these€requirements,€and€this€court€could€affirm€the€trialÏcourtððs€dismissal€of€the€instant€petition€on€this€basis€alone.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòState€ex€rel.Ð P(ð! ÐWood€v.€Johnsonóó,€393€S.W.2d€135,€136€(Tenn.€1965).Ð 0*Ð # ÐÌà Œ àà ä àMoreover,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„21„105€(1980)€provides€that€aÏpetition€for€habeas€corpus€relief€should€be€filed€in€the€court€most€convenient€in€pointÏof€distance€to€the€applicant.€€Ô#†XLXXXL#ÔÔ‡XLXXXLÔThe€record€reflects€that€the€petitioner€is€incarcerated€inÐ °1P(+ ÐMorgan€County.€€Nevertheless,€he€filed€his€petition€in€Sullivan€County.€€Although€theÏpetitioner€states€that€the€records€pertaining€to€his€case€are€located€in€SullivanÏCounty,€we€have€previously€held€that€this€contention€does€not€constitute€ð ðsufficientÐ P7ð-1 Ðreasonðð€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„21„105€for€filing€a€petition€for€a€writ€of€habeasÏcorpus€in€the€court€of€conviction€rather€than€the€court€closest€to€the€applicant.€€òòSeeóóÐ @ à ÐòòMuhammad€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9707„CC„00300,€1997€WL€779095,€at€*1€(Tenn.Ð  À ÐCrim.€App.€at€Nashville,€December€18,€1997).Ô#†XLXXXL\"#ÔÔ‡XLXXXLÔ€€Moreover,€although€the€petitionerÐ   Ðasserts€in€his€petition€that€potential€witnesses€are€located€in€Sullivan€County,€theÏpetitioner€has€failed€to€explain€the€relevance€of€any€witnessððs€testimony€in€theseÏhabeas€corpus€proceedings.€€Ô#†XLXXXL\%#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔIf€a€claim€would€necessarily€involve€investigationÐ  @  Ðbeyond€the€face€of€the€judgment€or€the€record€of€the€proceedings,€the€claim€will€notÏbe€cognizable€in€habeas€corpus€proceedings.€€òòSeeÔ#†XLXX XL&#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔ,€e.g.,óó€òòMartin€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„Ð ` Ð9804„CC„00101,€1998€WL€467098,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€August€12,Ï1998).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àWe€further€note€that,€in€his€petition€for€habeas€corpus€relief,€theÏpetitioner€refers€on€several€occasions€to€the€decision€of€the€post„conviction€court€inÏhis€first€post„conviction€proceeding,€challenging€that€courtððs€findings€andÏconclusions.€€The€petitioner€was€entitled€to€appeal€that€decision,€and€òòdidóó€appeal€thatÐ €%  Ðdecision.€€This€court€largely€rejected€the€petitionerððs€claims,€but€remanded€his€caseÏfor€an€evidentiary€hearing€on€the€issue€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€òòWilsonóó,Ð @)à" ÐNo.€909,€1991€WL€87245.€€Following€an€evidentiary€hearing,€the€post„convictionÏcourt€again€denied€the€petitioner€relief.€€This€court€affirmed€the€post„convictionÏcourtððs€judgment.€€òòWilsonóó,€No.€03C01„9203„CR„104,€1992€WL€350809.Ð à.€%( ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner,€in€part,€is€using€the€current€habeas€corpus€proceedingsÏas€a€vehicle€to€again€challenge€the€decision€of€the€post„conviction€court€in€his€firstÏpost„conviction€proceeding.€€Moreover,€the€petitioner€has€previously€raised,€on€directÏappeal€and€in€other€collateral€proceedings,€many€of€the€issues€currently€before€thisÐ @8à.2 Ðcourt.€€While€we€acknowledge€that,€in€contrast€to€petitions€for€post„conviction€relief,Ïpetitions€for€habeas€corpus€relief€are€not€strictly€subject€to€principles€of€waiver€andÏprevious€determination,€surely€at€some€point€the€process€that€is€due€a€criminalÏdefendant€is€done.€€Thus,€this€court€has€applied€the€principle€of€res€judicata€inÏhabeas€corpus€proceedings.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòYates€v.€Sundquistóó,€No.€01C01„9707„CC„Ð à€ Ð00299,€1998€WL€299290,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville),€òòperm.€to€appealÐ À`  Ðdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1998).Ô#†XLXX XL®'#ÔÔ‡XLXXXLÔÐ  @  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àÔ#†XLXXXLz/#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔNotwithstanding€these€concerns€and€the€petitionerððs€proceduralÐ ` Ðomissions,€and€to€the€extent€that€judicial€economy€has€any€vestige€of€meaning€inÏthese€proceedings,€we€will€address€all€of€the€issues€raised€in€the€current€petitionÔ#†XLXX XLê/#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔ€inÐ  À Ðthe€completely€unfounded€hope€that€we€might€forestall€future€habeas€corpusÏpetitions€raising€these€same€issues.€€Upon€examination€of€the€petition€for€habeasÏcorpus€relief€and€the€petitionerððs€brief,€we€conclude€that€the€petitioner€has€failed€toÏstate€any€cognizable€ground€for€relief€or,€if€cognizable,€any€ground€that€possessesÏmerit.Ô#†XLXX XL&1#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔÐ €%  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àFirst,€the€petitioner€complains€that€the€trial€court€entered€a€PreliminaryÏOrder€denying€the€petitioner€post„conviction€relief€prior€to€addressing€the€availabilityÏof€habeas€corpus€relief.€€However,€we€have€previously€held€that€a€court€Ô#†XLXX XLÒ2#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔis€not€boundÐ - #& Ðby€the€title€of€a€pleading,€but€has€the€discretion€to€treat€the€pleading€according€to€theÏrelief€sought.Ô#†XLXX XL.4#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔ€€òòBonds€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9508„CC„00260,€1996€WL€170676,€at€*2Ð À0`'* Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€April€12,€1996)(citing€€òòNorton€v.€Everhartóó,€895Ð  2@), ÐS.W.2d€317,€319€(Tenn.€1995)).€€Moreover,€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€40„30„205(c)€(1997)Ïprovides€that€a€trial€court€may€treat€a€habeas€corpus€petition€as€a€petition€for€post„¼conviction€relief.€€As€the€convicting€court,€the€Sullivan€County€Criminal€Court€was€theÐ @8à.2 Ðappropriate€venue€for€post„conviction€proceedings.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€40„30„¼204(a)€(1997).€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€acted€well€within€the€bounds€of€itsÏauthority€in€first€considering€the€availability€of€post„conviction€relief€and€determiningÏthat€the€applicable€statute€of€limitations€had€long€since€expired.Ô#†XLXX XLù4#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔñ$ ñ׃ ×ñ$ ññ$ ñ׃×ñ$ ñÝ ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð   ÐÌà Œ àà ä àMoreover,€Ô#†XLXX XLU8#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔthe€trial€court€properly€dismissed€the€petition€for€habeasÐ À`  Ðcorpus€relief.€€The€Habeas€Corpus€Act€requires€a€court€to€review€a€petition€andÏdismiss€it€unless€it€alleges€a€cognizable€ground€for€relief.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€29„¼21„101€to€ð!ð109€(1980).€€In€other€words,€a€petition€for€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€may€beÏsummarily€dismissed€by€the€trial€court€without€appointment€of€counsel,€without€anÏevidentiary€hearing,€and€without€the€opportunity€to€amend€the€petition,€if€the€face€ofÏthe€petition€does€not€present€a€cognizable€claim.€€òòMitchell€v.€Carltonóó,€No.€03C01„Ð   Ð9704„CR„00125,€1998€WL€8505,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€January€12,Ï1998).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€ex€rel.€Byrd€v.€Bomaróó,€381€S.W.2d€280,€283€(Ten.€1964).Ô#†XLXX XLH9#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔÐ À!` ÐÌà Œ àà ä àÔ#†XLXX XLœ<#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔThe€remedy€of€the€writ€of€habeas€corpus€is€limited€to€relief€from€voidÐ €%  Ðand€not€merely€voidable€judgments.€€òòArcheróó,€851€S.W.2d€at€163;€€òòPassarella€v.Ð `'  ÐStateóó,€891€S.W.2d€619,€628€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)Ô#†XLXX XL =#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔ;€òòDonald€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„Ð @)à" Ð9710„CR„00481,€1998€WL€468646,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€August€12,Ï1998),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1999).€€In€other€words,€it€must€appear€uponÐ - #& Ðthe€face€of€the€judgment€or€the€record€of€the€proceedings€upon€which€the€judgmentÐ à.€%( Ðis€rendered€that€a€court€was€without€jurisdiction€or€authority€to€convict€or€sentence€aÏdefendant,€or€that€a€defendantððs€sentence€of€imprisonment€has€expired.€€òòArcheróó,€851Ð @ à ÐS.W.2d€at€164;€òòRitchie€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9601„CC„00029,€1998€WL€855517,€at€*2Ð  À Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€December€10,€1998).Ô#†XLXX XLI>#Ô€€Ô‡ XLXXXLÔThe€petitioner€has€not€carriedÐ   Ðhis€burden€of€establishing€either€a€void€judgment€or€an€illegal€confinement.€ÏòòÔ#†XLXX XLMA#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔPassarellaóó,€891€S.W.2d€at€627Ô#†XLXX XLB#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔ.Ô#†XLXX XLuB#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔÐ À`  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner€asserts€in€his€petition€for€habeas€corpus€relief€that€theÏtrial€courtððs€instructions€to€the€jury€in€his€habitual€criminal€trial€were€inadequateÏpursuant€to€òòState€v.€McAfeeóó,€737€S.W.2d€304€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€This€courtÐ @à Ðhas€repeatedly€held€that€a€challenge€to€a€jury€instruction€does€not€present€a€claimÏfor€habeas€corpus€relief.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€Ô#†XLXX XL¸B#ÔòòKing€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9710„CR„00487,€1998Ð   ÐWL€712345,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€October€13,€1998),€òòperm.€toÐ à€ Ðappeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1999).€€In€any€event,€this€issue€is€without€merit.€€In€òòMcAfeeóó,Ð À!` Ð737€S.W.2d€at€308„309,€this€court€held€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€errorÏby€merely€reading€to€the€jury€the€habitual€criminal€statutes,€without€explaining€thatÏthe€defendantððs€record€of€criminal€convictions€must€have€included€three€predicateÏoffenses€at€the€time€of€the€triggering€offense.€€In€contrast€to€the€trial€court€in€òòMcAfeeóó,Ð @)à" Ðthe€trial€court€in€the€instant€case€did€òònotóó€simply€read€the€habitual€criminal€statutes€toÐ  +À!$ Ðthe€jury.€€Rather,€the€record€of€the€trial€court€proceedings€reflects€that€the€trial€courtððsÏinstructions€followed€the€applicable€pattern€jury€instructions.€€T.P.I.€Crim.€No.€32.01Ï(1988).€€These€instructions€included€the€explanation€mandated€in€òòMcAfeeóó.Ð À0`'* ÐÌà Œ àà ä àAdditionally,€although€not€entirely€clear€from€the€petition€for€habeasÏcorpus€relief,€the€petitioner€apparently€contends€œthat›€the€trial€œcourt€in€his€habitualÏcriminal€trial›€should€have€ruled€upon€the€sufficiency€of€his€prior€convictions€under€theÐ @8à.2 Ðhabitual€criminal€statutes,€before€submitting€the€convictions€to€the€jury.ñ$ ñ׃×ñ$ ññ$ ñ׃×ñ$ ñÝ ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Once€again,Ð `  Ðthe€petitioner€does€not€allege€that€œthe€trial›€Ô‡ XLXXXLÔcourt€was€without€jurisdiction€or€authorityÐ @ à Ðto€convict€or€sentence€him,€or€that€his€sentence€of€imprisonment€has€expired.€€ThisÏcourt€has€previously€observed€that€ð ð[a]€petition€for€habeas€corpus€relief€is€anÏinappropriate€procedure€in€which€to€review€potential€errors€of€a€trial€court.ðð€€òòYatesóó,Ð à€ ÐNo.€01C01„9707„CC„00299,€1998€WL€299290,€at€*2.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€any€case,€the€petitionerððs€assertion€is€without€merit.€€The€petitionerÏcomplains€that,€in€approving€the€actions€of€the€trial€court,€the€post„conviction€court€inÏhis€first€post„conviction€proceeding€incorrectly€relied€upon€òòMcMath€v.€Stateóó,€544Ð @à ÐS.W.2d€902,€905€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1976).€€In€òòMcMathóó,€544€S.W.2d€at€905,€thisÐ  À Ðcourt€determined€that€the€trial€court€correctly€permitted€the€jury€to€hear€evidence€of€aÏdefendantððs€prior€convictions€before€ruling€that€the€convictions€qualified€as€predicateÏconvictions€under€the€habitual€criminal€statutes.ñ$ ññ- ñ׃@×ñ- ññ- ñ׃@×ñ- ññ$ ññ$ ñ׃@×ñ$ ñÝ ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†XLXX XLK#ÔÔ‡ XLXXXLÔ€€The€œpetitioner€correctly›€argues€thatÐ À!` ÐòòMcMathóó€has€been€overruled.€€Ô#†XLXX XLùO#ÔHowever,€òòMcMathóó€was€overruled€on€an€entirelyÐ  #@ Ðdifferent€issue.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€751€S.W.2d€464,€466€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð €%  Ð1988)(citing€òòState€v.€Cookóó,€696€S.W.2d€6,€7„8€(Tenn.€1985)).€€The€narrow€overrulingÐ `'  Ðof€òòMcMathóó€provides€no€relief€to€the€petitioner.Ð @)à" Їà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner€also€contends€that€he€did€not€possess€the€requisiteÏnumber€of€prior€convictions€under€the€habitual€criminal€statutes.€€Initially,€we€noteÏthat€this€court€has€previously€held€that€the€petitioner€did€possess€the€requisiteÏnumber€of€prior€felonies€to€qualify€as€an€habitual€offender.€€òòWilsonóó,€No.€970,€1991Ð   ÐWL€87245,€at€*3;€òòWilsonóó,€No.€717,€1986€WL€12922,€at€*11.€€As€already€noted,€at€theÐ à€ Ðtime€of€the€petitionerððs€rape€offense,€œhis›€record€included€three€felonies:€feloniousÏassault,€perjury,€and€burglary.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€39„1„801€provided€that,€in€orderÏto€qualify€as€an€habitual€offender,€a€defendantððs€prior€criminal€record€must€include€atÏleast€three€felony€convictions,€two€of€which€were€for€offenses€enumerated€inÏspecified€statutes.€€The€specified€statutes€included€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€€40„20„112,Ïthe€ð ðinfamy€statute.ðð€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€40„20„112,€at€the€time€of€the€petitionerððsÏcommission€of€rape,€provided€that€the€habitual€criminal€statutes€only€referred€toÏcrimes€designated€as€infamous€prior€to€May€18,€1981.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€40„20„¼112€(1982).€€Prior€to€that€date,€the€infamy€statute€included€both€burglary€and€perjury.€ÏòòId.óó€Compilerððs€Notes;€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€40„2712€(1975).€€Ð  #@ ÐÌà Œ àà ä àNevertheless,€the€petitioner€challenges€the€validity€of€his€burglary€andÏperjury€convictions.ñ$ ññ- ñ׃"×ñ- ññ- ñ׃×ñ- ññ$ ññ$ ñ׃×ñ$ ñÝ ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€first€argues€that€his€1980€perjury€conviction€lacks€a€factualÐ @)à" Ðbasis€and€his€plea€of€guilt€to€perjury€was€not€knowing€and€voluntary.€€Our€supremeÏcourt€has€stated€œthat›€habeas€corpus€proceedings€do€not€constitute€an€availableÏavenue€of€œrelief€if€extrinsic€evidence€is€necessary€to€demonstrate€that€predicateÏconvictions€in€an€habitual€criminal€prosecution€are€anything€but€facially€valid.›€ÏòòBurford€v.€Stateóó,€845€S.W.2d€204,€209„210€(Tenn.€1992).€Ô‡ XLXXXLÔ€Moreover,€challenges€toÐ  2@), Ðthe€voluntary€and€knowing€nature€of€guilty€pleas€and€challenges€to€a€trial€courtððsÐ €4 +. Ðcompliance€with€procedural€requirements€in€accepting€guilty€pleas€are€notÏcognizable€issues€in€habeas€corpus€proceedings.€€òòArcheróó,€851€S.W.2d€at€164;€òòStateÐ @ à Ðv.€Lordóó,€894€S.W.2d€312,€316€(Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€1994).€Ô#†XLXX XLCZ#Ô€òòSee€alsoóó€òòRansom€v.€Stateóó,Ð  À ÐNo.€01C01„9410„CR„00361,€1995€WL€555064,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,Ï1995)(a€complaint€that€a€defendantððs€guilty€pleas€to€predicate€offenses€in€an€habitualÏcriminal€prosecution€were€invalid€rendered€the€habitual€criminal€conviction€voidable,Ïnot€void).€€This€claim€is€without€merit.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner€next€alleges€that€he€could€not€have€committed€perjury,Ïbecause€he€had€previously€been€declared€infamous€and€was€not€qualified€to€giveÏevidence.€€Even€assuming€that€the€petitionerððs€allegation€would€render€his€perjuryÏconviction€void,€this€allegation€is€without€merit.€€In€1953,€in€Chapter€194€of€the€PublicÏActs€of€1953,€the€legislature€amended€the€infamy€statute€to€remove€anyÏdisqualification€from€testifying€because€of€conviction€of€an€infamous€crime.€€TheÏpetitionerððs€perjury€offense€occurred€in€1979.€€Moreover,€even€if€the€petitionerððsÏinfamous€status€pre„dated€1953,€the€supreme€court€held€in€òòStrunk€v.€Stateóó,€348Ð €%  ÐS.W.2d€339,€343„344€(Tenn.€1957),€that€the€1953€amendment€removed€theÏdisqualification€from€those€convicted€of€infamous€crimes€prior€to€amendment€of€theÏinfamy€statute.ñ$ ñ׃×ñ$ ññ$ ñ׃ ×ñ$ ñÝ ƒ]#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Additionally,€even€prior€to€the€1953€amendment,€the€fact€that€aÐ  +À!$ Ðdefendant€had€been€previously€rendered€infamous€did€not€constitute€a€defense€toÏperjury.€€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€244€S.W.2d€996,€997€€(Tenn.€1951).Ð à.€%( ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€petitioner€also€alleges€that€burglary€of€an€automobile€does€notÏconstitute€a€burglary€within€the€meaning€of€the€pre„1981€infamy€statute.€€OnceÐ €4 +. Ðagain,€even€assuming€that€this€allegation€would€render€the€petitionerððs€convictionÏand€sentence€void,€we€addressed€and€rejected€this€argument€on€direct€appeal€in€thisÏcase.€€We€relied€upon€the€supreme€courtððs€decision€in€òòHickson€v.€Stateóó,€270€S.W.2dÐ  À Ð313,€314„315€(1954),€in€which€our€supreme€court€concluded€that€the€term€ð ðburglaryððÏin€the€infamy€statute€included€breaking€into€a€freight€car.€€The€court€noted€that€theÏoffense€of€breaking€into€a€freight€car€was€contained€in€ðð€10914€of€the€1932€Code,€asÏamended€by€the€Acts€of€1941.€€òòId.óó€€The€offense€set€forth€in€that€statutory€provisionÐ  @  Ðalso€included€breaking€into€an€automobile.€€Thus,€the€decision€in€òòHicksonóó€isÐ €  Ðcontrolling€in€this€case.€€Nevertheless,€the€petitioner€argues€that€the€supreme€courtððsÏdecision€is€erroneous.€€We€simply€conclude€that€this€court€is€bound€by€the€decisionsÏof€our€supreme€court.€€òòThompson€v.€Stateóó,€958€S.W.2d€156,€173€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Ð  À Ðòòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1997).Ð   ÐÌà Œ àà ä àFinally,€the€petitioner€argues€that€the€infamy€statute€as€it€existed€priorÏto€1981€was€unconstitutionally€vague.€€Moreover,€the€petitioner€argues€that€if€theÏstatute€prior€to€1981€included€burglary€of€an€automobile,€the€caption€of€the€statuteÏwas€unconstitutional.€€Of€course,€the€challenged€statute€was€only€in€existence€at€theÏtime€of€the€petitionerððs€offense€and€convictions€to€the€extent€that€the€statute€wasÏincorporated€into€the€habitual€criminal€statutes.€€Thus,€the€petitioner€is€reallyÏchallenging€the€constitutionality€of€the€habitual€criminal€statutes.€€If€the€habitualÏcriminal€statutes€were€unconstitutional,€they€would€have€been€void€from€the€date€ofÏenactment,€and€the€trial€court€would€have€lacked€subject€matter€jurisdiction€to€hearÏthe€petitionerððs€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòCapri€Adult€Cinema€v.€Stateóó,€537€S.W.2d€896,€900€(Tenn.Ð  2@), Ð1976);€òòHerron€v.€Raneyóó,€No.€02C01„9805„CC„00153,€1998€WL€725797,€at€*1€(Tenn.Ð €4 +. ÐCrim.€App.€at€Jackson,€October€19,€1998).€€Thus,€this€claim€would€be€cognizable€inÏhabeas€corpus€proceedings.€€òòHerronóó,€No.€02C01„9805„CC„00153,€1998€WLÐ @8à.2 Ð725797,€at€*1.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àHowever,€the€petitionerððs€claim€is€without€merit.€€First,€the€title€of€theÏpre„1981€infamy€statute€has€no€bearing€upon€the€petitionerððs€case.€€Again,€theÏpetitioner€is€effectively€challenging€the€constitutionality€of€the€habitual€criminalÏstatutes.€€The€pre„1981€infamy€statute€is€implicated€in€the€petitionerððs€case€only€toÏthe€extent€that€the€listed€offenses€were€incorporated€into€the€habitual€criminalÏstatutes.€€Second,€the€petitioner€has€no€standing€to€contest€the€constitutionality€ofÏthose€sections€or€parts€of€a€statute€which€do€not€affect€him.€€òòState€v.€Vanzantóó,€659Ð ` ÐS.W.2d€816,€819€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983);€òòState€v.€Garrisonóó,€No.€03C01„9702„CC„Ð @à Ð00047,€1998€WL€103318,€at€*18€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€February€27,€1998),Ïòòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóó,€(Tenn.€1998).€€In€this€case,€the€only€parts€of€the€pre„1981Ð   Ðinfamy€statute€which€affected€the€petitioner€were€those€parts€referring€to€burglaryÏand€perjury.€€With€respect€to€these€parts,€the€petitioner€arguably€asserts€that€theÏword€ð ðburglaryðð€is€unconstitutionally€vague.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThis€court€has€previously€concluded€that,€to€the€extent€the€habitualÏcriminal€statutes€relied€upon€the€infamy€statute€to€define€triggering€offenses,€theÏstatutes€provided€adequate€notice€to€a€defendant€of€the€triggering€offense€of€thirdÏdegree€burglary.€€òòState€v.€Hodgeóó,€No.€6,€1987€WL€13169,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÐ - #& ÐJackson,€June€30,€1987).€€In€this€case,€we€similarly€conclude€that,€to€the€extent€theÏhabitual€criminal€statutes€relied€upon€the€infamy€statute€to€define€the€predicateÏconvictions,€the€petitioner€was€provided€with€adequate€notice€of€the€predicateÏoffense€of€burglary€of€an€automobile.€€The€clarity€of€a€statute€required€by€dueÏprocess€may€be€derived€from€sources€other€than€the€statutory€language,€includingÏjudicial€interpretations.€€òòState€v.€Hayesóó,€899€S.W.2d€175,€181€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð @8à.2 Ð1995).€€As€noted€earlier,€our€supreme€court€in€òòHicksonóó,€270€S.W.2d€at€313,€clarifiedÐ `  Ðthe€meaning€of€ð ðburglaryðð€as€set€forth€in€the€pre„1981€infamy€statute.€€This€issue€isÏwithout€merit.̛̜Ìà@(Úàòòò òIII.€€Conclusionó óóóˆÐ À`  Ðà Œ àà ä àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€courtÏdismissing€the€petition€for€habeas€corpus€relief.ÌÌÓÓà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àà ô àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð @à Ðà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àà ô àóóNorma€McGee€Ogle,€JudgeÐ 0Ð ÐÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ À!` Мñ! ñGary€ñ! ññ" ñR.€Wade,€Preñ" ññ# ñsidingñ# ññ" ñJohn››€H.›€Peayñ" ñ,›€JudgeÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ p& ÐCornelia€A.€Clark,€Special€Judge