ÿWPCç “˜È~‰~ÃÚd,<.üb‰H…ÃÜþ}ÞßVZЫÓËê6dîÖ/º£û'?TFÕPlÐo=9³º&F}úÙ`C‡PZ„(¾ÎÁ`æŸ{Âe*ó¹}ØÃiRË7ò?1¸<î |ð¾çQ§tnQJÎr°7‚q¹ç²'Û¯' DÝ8ÃДåÙzæµW#d6*GÕØýÓµÆCw'Ú|k¿šo,òÕ32ÚÿáT¬4s®ójä½ãY! Ó7,sëiÃhîì¢ÔTSðy-B ×÷ ÌY¨–j2hüs…|êq¹_ô×â÷Û¤ äytÿ‡Ø_ÙUlu$ÛÕ»L ”Õ§ý3/z™âåω/vüÿ2–× jðµêÉ}ߥÑ:íŸÀˆ(éf'œœú6ÄtƒüzIí—‹…ž v“ê/>ôÊù0iÖýŸ†(0íõ;í÷­sÜß“^aá´¾´Cǥ ác‹/ý6ULú%þkù ËÆ2@7ë§»¼&ÛoWgWé‚)^ð§ÑG‰”pÒ|Ç)»eÆTD"0Ù *ø¡¨d›.µE3úö¬shuhïpY_ÄѲ²›’d‹¡!™ÄÖš£-„1¶½b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U!N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ¤‘ Æ5 Æû ÆÁ ƇU@MN 0D¢Eæè°ðf ffttttttttttttttttttbÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚÚ 0ëââââ BÍÍ 0¤ê D5Ž D-à 0Kðð AS;ÆŽ 0¤T 0Dø A«<˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»ª©œ+ (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÖJ~'˜CüÁ¡k10ž ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ šÝ ƒR?c$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôå-ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€n.€2,€òòsupraóó.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(µ\Z  Z(Times New Roman  Ý ƒR?c$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôå-ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€claims€listed€below€and€raised€on€appeal€are€as€presented€in€the€amended€petition€filed€by€post„convictionÐ ° Ðcounsel.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó  ¦Ý ƒR?c$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôå-ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSee€óón.€2,€supra.òòóóòòóóòòóó \Ñ\R3Ø' Letter\Ñ þÝ ƒR?c$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôå-ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€by€no€means€suggest€that€counsel€performed€deficiently€in€this€issue,€but€we€take€the€opportunity€toÐ ° Ðcomment€at€this€juncture€that€ð ððða€clientððs€expressed€intention€to€plead€guilty€does€not€relieve€counsel€of€[his]€duty€toÐ tÄ Ðinvestigate€possible€defenses€and€to€advise€the€defendant€so€that€he€can€make€an€informed€decision.ðððð€òòKelvin€A.€TaylorÐ 8ˆ Ðv.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9512„CC„00387,€concurring€op.€at€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Apr.€3,€1997)€(Hayes,€J.,Ð üL Ðconcurring)€(quoting€òòSavino€v.€Murrayóó,€82€F.3d€593,€599€(4òòthóó€Cir.€1996)).€ \Ñ\R3Ø' Letter\Ñ \Ñ\R3Ø' Letter\Ñ- ù-(|G2?c$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Rå»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôå-ò»»Ô d(|3G‘$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Rå»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G‘$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Rå»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Rå»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Rå»»»ÔÑ8€YXXdì»»d8ÑÑ€³/ÑÑ€³/ÑÑ€³/Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îG¤î»¼RåÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Rå»îîG¤?#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€August€21,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔÌò òÔ#†¼Rå»XXYS#ÔLARRY€N.€WILSONòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„C„1651€&€98„C„2307€€€€€€Cheryl€Blackburn,€Judge€Ð æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„00022„CCA„R3„PC€„€Filed€December€28,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÌThe€post„conviction€petitioner,€Larry€N.€Wilson,€seeks€to€set€aside€his€four€Davidson€CountyÐ d´ ÐCriminal€Court€convictions€of€aggravated€robbery€and€his€effective€24„year€sentence.€€TheÐ P  Ðconvictions€were€based€on€guilty€pleas.€€In€his€post„conviction€proceeding,€he€posited€that€the€pleasÐ <Œ Ðwere€involuntarily€or€unknowingly€made€and€that€they€were€the€result€of€the€ineffective€assistanceÐ (x Ðof€counsel.€€After€an€evidentiary€hearing,€the€post„conviction€court€denied€relief.€€Concluding€thatÐ d Ðthe€record€supports€that€determination,€we€affirm.€Ô#†¼Rå»XXYÊ#ÔÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔÐ P ÐÓüÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Rå»àXY¨#ÔÔ‡XYX.¼RåÔJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€andÐ ° ÐòòJohn€Everett€Williams,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌMike€Anderson,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Larry€N.€Wilson.Ð tÄ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€J.€Ross€Dyer,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€VictorÐ L œ ÐS.€Johnson,€III,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Roger€Moore,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,Ð 8!ˆ  Ðfor€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $"t! ÐÓHÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Rå»XXYw#ÔÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔÐ ü#L# ÐòòóóÔ#†¼Rå»XXY… #ÔÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔÓ  ÓÌà  àà ` àOn€January€28,€1999,€the€petitioner€entered€into€a€plea„bargaining€agreement.€€By€itsÐ Ô%$!% Ðterms,€he€pleaded€guilty€to€four€counts€of€aggravated€robbery€and€accepted€three€concurrentÐ À&"& Ðsentences€of€twelve€years€each,€to€run€consecutively€to€a€fourth€twelve„year€sentence.€€This€effectiveÐ ¬'ü"' Ðsentence€of€24€years€was€to€run€consecutively€to€a€Sumner€County€twelve„year€sentence.€€The€stateÐ ˜(è#( Ðagreed€to€dismiss€one€count€of€aggravated€robbery,€a€count€of€attempted€aggravated€robbery,€and€aÐ „)Ô$) Ðcount€of€aggravated€assault.€Ð p*À%* ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€filed€a€timely€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€The€post„convictionÐ H,˜', Ðcourt€ordered€the€preparation€of€a€transcript€of€the€plea€submission€hearing€and€conducted€anÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôevidentiary€hearing,€during€which€the€petitionerððs€trial€counsel€and€the€petitioner€testified€and€theÐ ° Ðplea€submission€transcript€was€admitted€as€an€exhibit.€€The€petitionerððs€testimony€was,€in€a€word,Ð œì Ðinarticulate.€€He€failed€to€elaborate€upon€his€post„conviction€claims,€except€to€assert€first€that,€hadÐ ˆØ Ðhe€submitted€an€open€plea,€he€would€have€received€a€lesser€sentence€at€the€hands€of€the€trial€judge,Ð tÄ Ðand€second€that€he€was€influenced€to€plead€because€the€guilty€plea€of€his€co„defendant€wasÐ `° Ðsimultaneously€submitted€to€the€trial€court.€€The€post„conviction€court€made€extensive€writtenÐ L œ Ðfindings,€in€which€it€reviewed€and€rejected€the€petitionerððs€claims€that€his€guilty€pleas€wereÐ 8 ˆ Ðinvoluntary€or€unknowing€and€that€his€trial€counsel€was€ineffective.€€The€petitioner€timely€appealedÐ $ t Ðthe€courtððs€denial€of€post„conviction€relief.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€petitioner€bears€the€burden€of€proving€his€or€her€allegations€byÐ è 8  Ðclear€and€convincing€evidence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210(f)€(1997).€€On€appeal,€the€appellateÐ Ô$  Ðcourt€accords€to€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict,€and€these€findings€areÐ À  Ðconclusive€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€them.€€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,€960€S.W.2d€572,€578„Ð ¬ü  Ð79€(Tenn.€1997);€òòBates€v.€Stateóó,€973€S.W.2d€615,€631€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€By€contrast,€the€trialÐ ˜è  Ðcourtððs€conclusions€of€law€receive€no€deference€or€presumption€of€correctness€on€appeal.€€òòFields€v.Ð „Ô  ÐStateóó,€40€S.W.3d€450,€453€(Tenn.€2001).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€this€case,€the€petitioner€argues€that€he€was€hampered€by€the€ineffective€assistance€Ð H˜ Ðof€trial€and€appellate€counsel.€€When€an€appeal€challenges€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel,€theÐ 4„ Ðappellant€has€the€burden€of€establishing€(1)€deficient€representation€and€(2)€prejudice€resulting€fromÐ  p Ðthat€deficiency.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€686,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€2065€(1984);€òòBaxterÐ  \ Ðv.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€Deficient€representation€occurs€when€counsel€providesÐ øH Ðassistance€that€falls€below€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€Ð ä4 ÐòòBankston€v.€Stateóó,€815€S.W.2d€213,€215€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Prejudice€is€the€reasonableÐ Ð  Ðlikelihood€that,€but€for€deficient€representation,€the€outcome€of€the€proceedings€would€have€beenÐ ¼  Ðdifferent.€€òòOverton€v.€Stateóó,€874€S.W.2d€6,€11€(Tenn.€1994).€€On€review,€there€is€a€strongÐ ¨ø Ðpresumption€of€satisfactory€representation.€€òòBarr€v.€Stateóó,€910€S.W.2d€462,€464€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ”ä Ð1995).Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€there€is€a€claim€that€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€resulted€in€a€guilty€plea,Ð X ¨ Ðthe€two„part€òòStrickland€v.€Washington€óótest€is€modified€slightly.Ð D!” ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒIn€the€context€of€guilty€pleas,€the€first€half€of€the€òòStrickland€v.Ð #l! ÐWashington€óótest€is€nothing€more€than€a€restatement€of€the€standard€ofÐ $X" Ðattorney€competence€already€set€forth€in€òòTollett€v.€Hendersonóó,€[411Ð ô$D # ÐU.S.€258,€93€S.€Ct.€1602€(1973)],€and€òòMcMann€v.€Richardsonóó,€[397Ð à%0!$ ÐU.S.€759,€90€S.€Ct.€1441€(1970)].€€The€second,€or€ð ðprejudice,ððÐ Ì&"% Ðrequirement,€on€the€other€hand,€focuses€on€whether€counselððsÐ ¸'#& Ðconstitutionally€ineffective€performance€affected€the€outcome€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðplea€process.€€In€other€words,€in€order€to€satisfy€the€ð ðprejudiceððÐ )à$( Ðâ ârequirement,€the€defendant€must€show€that€there€is€a€reasonableÐ |*Ì%) Ðѳ/Ñâ âÑTRY,3Ø' LetterXà3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑâ âÑ  Ñprobability€that,€but€for€counselððs€errors,€he€would€not€have€pleadedÐ ° Ðguilty€and€would€have€insisted€on€going€to€trial.Ð œì Ðâ âÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474€U.S.€52,€58„59,€106€S.€Ct.€366,€370€(1985);€òòsee€Hicks€v.€Stateóó,€983€S.W.2d€Ð tÄ Ð240,€246€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).Ô#†¼Rå»XXYâ #ÔÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔÐ `° ÐÔ‡XYXXXYÔÌà  àà ` àÔ#†XYXXXY3##ÔÔ#†¼Rå»XXYÿ"#ÔÔ‡XYX»¼RåÔIn€addition€to€the€claims€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€petitioner€claims€thatÐ 8 ˆ Ðhis€guilty€pleas€were€involuntary€or€unknowing.€When€reviewing€the€entry€of€a€guilty€plea,€theÐ $ t Ðoverriding€concern€is€whether€the€plea€is€knowingly,€voluntarily€and€understandingly€made.€€òòBoykinÐ  ` Ðv.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€242„44,€89€S.€Ct.€1709,€1712€(1969).€€ð ð[A]€plea€is€not€ððvoluntaryðð€if€it€isÐ ü L  Ðthe€product€of€ðð[i]gnorance,€incomprehension,€coercion,€terror,€inducements,€[or]€subtle€or€blatantÐ è 8  Ðthreats€.€.€.€.ðððð€òòBlankenship€v.€Stateóó,€858€S.W.2d€897,€904€(Tenn.€1993)€(quoting€òòBoykinóó,€395€U.S.Ð Ô$  Ðat€242„43,€89€S.€Ct.€at€1712).€€Moreover,€a€plea€cannot€be€voluntary€if€the€defendant€is€ð ðððincompetentÐ À  Ðor€otherwise€not€in€control€of€his€mental€facilitiesðððð€at€the€time€it€is€entered.€€òòIdóó.€at€904€(quotingÐ ¬ü  ÐòòBrown€v.€Perinióó,€718€F.2d€784,€788€(6òòthóó€Cir.€1983)).€€To€determine€if€a€plea€is€voluntary€andÐ ˜è  Ðknowing,€a€court€looks€at€factors€such€asÐ „Ô  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òthe€relative€intelligence€of€the€defendant;€the€degree€of€his€familiarityÐ \¬ Ðwith€criminal€proceedings;€whether€he€was€represented€by€competentÐ H˜ Ðcounsel€and€had€the€opportunity€to€confer€with€counsel€.€.€.€;€theÐ 4„ Ðextent€of€advice€from€counsel€and€the€court€.€.€.€;€and€the€reasons€forÐ  p Ðhis€decision€to€plead€guilty,€including€a€desire€to€avoid€a€greaterÐ  \ Ðpenalty€.€.€.€.Ð øH ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòPowers€v.€Stateóó,€942€S.W.2d€551,€556€(Tenn.€1996)€(quoting€òòBlankenshipóó,€858€S.W.2d€at€904).€€ð ðInÐ Ð  Ðevaluating€the€knowing€and€voluntary€nature€of€the€.€.€.€pleas,€this€court€must€look€to€the€totality€ofÐ ¼  Ðthe€circumstances.ðð€€òòPowersóó,€942€S.W.2d€at€556.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àWith€these€guidelines€in€mind,€we€review€the€petitionerððs€post„conviction€claims.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò ò€ó óÐ €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` à1.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€request€discovery€in€Case€No.€98„C„2307óó.€€Ð \ ¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€trial€counsel€testified€that€the€petitioner€admitted€hisÐ 4"„  Ðguilt€to€the€charged€offenses€and€instructed€counsel€to€negotiate€a€plea€agreement.€€Counsel€obtainedÐ  #p! Ðfull€discovery€for€the€offenses€charged€in€indictment€number€98„C„1651,€the€indictment€that€is€theÐ  $\" Ðbasis€for€three€of€the€convictions.€€The€state€omitted€from€this€indictment€two€other€related€offenses,Ð ø$H # Ðaggravated€robbery€and€aggravated€assault,€€and€charged€these€offenses€in€a€new€indictment,€€numberÐ ä%4!$ Ð98„C„2307.€€Counsel€requested€no€discovery€on€the€new€indictment€because€he€learned€of€it€the€dayÐ Ð& "% Ðbefore€case€number€98„C„1651€was€scheduled€for€plea€discussions;€however,€he€receivedÐ ¼' #& Ðinformation€on€the€new€charges€from€the€assistant€district€attorney€general,€the€arresting€officers,€andÐ ¨(ø#' Ðѳ/Ñâ âÑTRY,3Ø' LetterY,3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letter 3Ø' LetterTÑâ âÑ  Ñthe€petitioner.€He€stated€that€the€petitioner€desired€to€proceed€to€plea€negotiations€on€all€of€theÐ ° Ðpending€charges.€Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€trial€counselððs€representation€of€the€petitionerÐ tÄ Ðð ðon€these€new€charges€was€consistent€with€his€performance€on€behalf€of€the€[p]etitioner€on€hisÐ `° Ðprevious€chargesðð€and€that€the€petitioner€wanted€the€charges€in€both€cases€settled.€The€court€foundÐ L œ Ðinsufficient€proof€of€deficient€performance.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€agree€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€establish€ineffective€assistance€on€this€issue;Ð  ` Ðhowever,€we€base€our€conclusion€upon€the€evidence€admitted€during€the€evidentiary€hearing€beingÐ ü L  Ðdevoid€of€any€proof€that€counselððs€failure€to€seek€formal€discovery€in€case€number€98„C„1651€hadÐ è 8  Ðany€bearing€upon€his€decision€to€plead€guilty.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ô$  Ðà  àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ à€€€2.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€interview€fact€witnessesóó.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€that€he€interviewed€several€fact€witnesses,€including€arrestingÐ „Ô  Ðofficers;€however,€he€interviewed€only€one€of€the€victims€of€the€petitionerððs€crimes.€€He€reviewedÐ pÀ Ðthe€warrants€and€relied€upon€the€petitionerððs€admissions€that€the€allegations€were€true.€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€lower€court€found€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€contradict€trial€counselððs€testimonyÐ 4„ Ðand€failed€to€prove€his€claims€of€deficient€performance.€€We€conclude€that€the€petitioner€failed€toÐ  p Ðestablish€prejudice.׃ d×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€petitioner€failed€to€establish€that€he€would€not€have€pleaded€guilty€but€forÐ  \ Ðcounselððs€lack€of€preparation€or€that€there€was€any€information€held€by€a€putative€witness€that,€ifÐ øH Ðknown,€would€have€induced€him€to€eschew€the€plea.€€òòSee€Hillóó,€474€U.S.€at€59,€106€S.€Ct.€at€370Ð ä4 Ð(decision€whether€to€plead€€may€turn€ð ðin€large€part€on€a€prediction€whether€the€[undiscovered]Ð Ð  Ðevidence€likely€would€have€changed€the€outcome€of€a€trialðð).Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` à€€€€€€€3.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€request€a€psychiatric€evaluationóó.òòÐ ”ä Ðóóà0  àÐ (#(# Ðà  àà ` àDuring€the€preliminary€hearing€phase€of€the€proceedings€against€the€petitioner,€trialÐ l¼ Ðcounsel€moved€for€and€obtained€a€psychiatric€evaluation€of€the€petitioner€at€Vanderbilt€ForensicÐ X ¨ ÐPsychiatry,€whose€ensuing€report€revealed€no€incompetency€to€stand€trial€and€no€mental€disease€orÐ D!” Ðdefect€that€would€support€an€insanity€defense.€€Even€though€the€defendantððs€pleas€were€not€submittedÐ 0"€  Ðuntil€a€few€months€after€the€evaluation,€counsel€saw€no€reason€to€seek€further€psychiatric€testing.€IfÐ #l! Ðanything,€he€believed€that€by€the€time€of€the€plea€submission€hearing,€the€petitionerððs€mental€statusÐ $X" Ðhad€improved.€Ð ô$D # Ðѳ/Ñâ âÑTRY,3Ø' LetterY,3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letter 3Ø' LetterTÑâ âÑ  ÑÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€trial€counselððs€impressions€of€the€petitionerððsÐ œì Ðcompetency€were€congruent€with€the€psychiatric€report€previously€obtained.€€The€court€found€thatÐ ˆØ Ðð ð[n]othing€was€introduced€at€any€point€.€.€.€since€that€evaluation€to€suggest€that€a€subsequentÐ tÄ Ðpsychiatric€evaluation€be€conducted€at€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court.ðð€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€agree€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€show€deficient€performance€of€trial€counsel,Ð 8 ˆ Ðespecially€in€light€of€the€mental€evaluation€that€counsel€obtained€and€reviewed.€€Furthermore,€€theÐ $ t Ðpetitioner€failed€to€inject€any€proof€into€the€evidentiary€hearing€that€he€was€incompetent€to€submitÐ  ` Ða€plea€or€that€he€would€have€not€pleaded€guilty€had€he€known€of€a€basis€for€asserting€an€insanityÐ ü L  Ðdefense€at€trial.€€Accordingly,€he€also€has€failed€to€demonstrate€prejudice.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  à4.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€adequately€advise€the€petitioner€of€the€criteria€for€determining€theÐ À  Ðapplication€of€consecutive€sentencingóó.òòÐ ¬ü  ÐóóÌà  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€that€he€extensively€discussed€the€factors€for€consecutiveÐ „Ô  Ðsentencing€with€the€petitioner€and€that€during€the€plea€submission€hearing,€the€trial€court€explainedÐ pÀ Ðthe€factors.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€during€the€plea€submission€hearing,€itÐ 4„ Ðð ðextensively€reviewed€the€.€€.€€.€factors€that€would€have€been€considered€had€a€sentencing€hearingÐ  p Ðbeen€heldðð€and€that€the€petitioner€was€informed€that€he€could€have€ð ða€sentencing€hearing€after€theÐ  \ Ðacceptance€of€his€guilty€plea€if€he€so€desired.ðð€€Although€the€petitioner€ð ðwas€reluctant€to€accept€aÐ øH Ðsentence€longer€than€he€had€convinced€himself€was€appropriate€considering€his€own€inexpertÐ ä4 Ðestimation€of€his€degree€of€drug€addiction€and€abuse,ðð€the€court€found€that€the€petitioner€did€not€wishÐ Ð  Ðto€ð ðchance€either€a€trial€[]€or€a€sentencing€hearingðð€and€that€he€reluctantly€accepted€the€pleaÐ ¼  Ðagreement,€a€choice€that€was€neither€ð ðcoerced€[nor]€improperly€influenced€in€any€way.ðð€€The€courtÐ ¨ø Ðheld€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€establish€his€claims€of€deficient€performance€on€this€issue.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àA€review€of€the€plea€submission€hearing€transcript€reveals€that€the€petitioner€askedÐ l¼ Ðthe€trial€court€about€the€factors€that€the€court€would€use€at€a€sentencing€hearing€when€it€determinedÐ X ¨ Ðwhether€to€impose€consecutive€sentences.€€The€trial€court€explained€the€bases€for€consecutiveÐ D!” Ðsentencing€as€set€forth€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„115€and€in€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€Ð 0"€  Ð905€S.W.2d€933€(1995).€€The€petitioner€expressed€his€doubt€that€he€qualified€for€any€of€theÐ #l! Ðconsecutive€sentencing€rubrics€and€expressed€uncertainty€about€whether€he€should€accept€theÐ $X" Ðsentence€as€structured€in€the€plea€agreement€or€whether€he€should€request€the€court€to€conduct€aÐ ô$D # Ðsentencing€hearing€and€determine€the€sentences.€€The€record€reflects€that€the€trial€court€took€painsÐ à%0!$ Ðto€explain€the€petitionerððs€options,€which€included€going€to€trial€or€submitting€an€open€guilty€pleaÐ Ì&"% Ðfollowed€by€a€sentencing€hearing€and€court„imposed€sentences.€The€court€also€explained€theÐ ¸'#& Ðpetitionerððs€options€with€respect€to€appeal,€including€the€waiver€of€a€sentencing€appeal€if€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðproposed€sentences€remained€a€part€of€the€plea€agreement.€€After€a€lengthy€exchange€between€theÐ )à$( Ðtrial€court€and€the€petitioner,€he€then€indicated€his€willingness€to€proceed€with€the€plea€submissionÐ |*Ì%) Ðas€proposed.€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àà ` àWe€further€note€that€at€the€time€of€the€plea€submission€hearing€the€petitioner€hadÐ ° Ðcompleted€eleven€and€one„half€years€of€schooling€and€could€read.€€He€had€prior€experience€in€at€leastÐ œì Ðone€criminal€case€in€which€he€pleaded€guilty€to€aggravated€robbery€in€Sumner€County.€€He€had€theÐ ˆØ Ðopportunity€to€reflect€upon€his€plea€options€and€to€seek€the€advice€of€counsel;€the€case€had€been€resetÐ tÄ Ðfor€ð ðdiscussionðð€numerous€times.€€Additionally,€the€trial€court€exhaustively€explained€the€petitionerððsÐ `° Ðrights€as€a€criminal€defendant,€as€well€as€the€waiver€of€some€of€those€rights€as€a€function€of€pleadingÐ L œ Ðguilty.€€The€trial€court€fully€informed€the€defendant€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Rule€of€CriminalÐ 8 ˆ ÐProcedure€11.€€Moreover,€the€trial€court€accredited€the€testimony€of€trial€counsel€during€theÐ $ t Ðevidentiary€hearing€that€counsel€had€visited€the€petitioner€in€the€jail,€furnished€him€a€copy€of€CodeÐ  ` Ðsection€40„35„115,€and€explained€to€him€the€sentencing€guidelines,€including€the€criteria€forÐ ü L  Ðconsecutive€sentencing.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àà ` àAccordingly,€the€record€fully€supports€the€trial€courtððs€factual€determination€that€theÐ À  Ðpetitioner€was€fully€informed€about€the€criteria€for€consecutive€sentencing.€€No€basis€for€post„Ð ¬ü  Ðconviction€relief€on€this€issue€has€been€demonstrated.Ð ˜è  ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€€à  à€€€€€€5.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€move€to€suppress€the€petitionerððs€pretrial€statementsóó.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€that€he€filed€no€motion€to€suppress€the€defendantððs€confessionÐ H˜ Ðbecause€the€petitioner€gave€him€no€basis€for€asserting€that€the€statements€were€coerced,€unknowing,Ð 4„ Ðor€involuntary.€€The€petitioner€had€been€ð ðMirandizedðð€before€giving€the€statements€and€hadÐ  p Ðunderstood€his€rights.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€noted€that€trial€counsel€filed€a€number€of€pretrial€motions.€Ð ä4 ÐIt€found€that€there€was€ð ðno€reason€.€.€.€to€file€a€motion€to€suppressðð€because€the€petitioner€insistedÐ Ð  Ðfrom€the€beginning€that€counsel€negotiate€a€guilty€plea.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€conclude€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€demonstrate€deficient€performance€orÐ ”ä Ðprejudice€from€the€failure€to€move€to€suppress€the€statements.€€He€not€only€failed€to€establish€thatÐ €Ð Ðhe€would€have€disdained€guilty€pleas€had€the€statements€been€suppressed,€but€he€failed€to€show€anyÐ l¼ Ðbasis€for€suppressing€the€statements.€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€à  àà0 ` à€€€€€€€6.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€give€notice€of€an€insanity€defenseóó.Ð0"€ ` (#` (# ÐÌà  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€that€based€upon€the€Vanderbilt€psychiatric€report,€there€was€noÐ $X" Ðbasis€for€a€notice€of€an€insanity€defense.€€The€post„conviction€court€agreed€and€concluded€that€theÐ ô$D # Ðpetitioner€failed€to€establish€that€counsel€deficiently€performed€in€failing€to€file€notice€of€an€insanityÐ à%0!$ Ðdefense.€€We€agree€with€the€trial€court.€€The€post„conviction€record€evinces€no€basis€for€a€Ð Ì&"% Ðnotice€of€an€insanity€defense€and€no€prejudice€to€the€petitioner€caused€by€the€lack€of€a€notice.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  à7.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€review€videotapes€of€the€petitionerððs€pretrial€statementsóó.€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àCounsel€testified€that€the€petitioner€had€admitted€to€him€that€his€pretrial€statementsÐ ° Ðâ âgiven€to€police€investigators€were€truthfully€made.€€€He€saw€no€reason€to€review€the€videotapes€ofÐ œì Ðthe€interview.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€lower€court€found€that€the€failure€to€review€the€videotape€was€ð ðneither€prejudicialÐ `° Ðnor€incompetent€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.ðð€€We€agree€that€deficient€performance€was€notÐ L œ Ðshown.€€òòStricklandóó€points€out€that€the€need€to€further€investigate€ð ðmay€be€considerably€diminishedÐ 8 ˆ Ðor€eliminated€altogether,ðð€depending€upon€what€information€the€client€imparts€to€counsel.€Ð $ t ÐòòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€691,€104€S.Ct.€at€2066.€€We€also€agree€that€the€petitioner€failed€toÐ  ` Ðdemonstrate€any€prejudice;€he€offered€no€evidence€that€counselððs€failure€to€review€the€videotapeÐ ü L  Ðcaused€him€to€plead€guilty€when€otherwise€he€would€have€gone€to€trial.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  à8.€€òòCounsel€failed€to€review€surveillance€videotapes€from€the€victimsðð€storesóó.Ð À  ÐÌà  àà ` àCounsel€opined€that€reviewing€the€surveillance€tapes€from€the€stores€robbed€by€theÐ ˜è  Ðpetitioner€would€have€served€no€purpose€because€the€petitioner€insisted€that€the€allegations€againstÐ „Ô  Ðhim€were€true.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€court€again€found€that€counselððs€conduct€was€ð ðneither€prejudicial€norÐ H˜ Ðincompetent€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.ðð€€We€agree€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€demonstrateÐ 4„ Ðthat€counselððs€failure€to€review€the€surveillance€tapes€caused€him€to€plead€guilty€and€forego€trial.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð  p ÐÌà  à9.€€òòThe€trial€court€accepted€the€petitionerððs€guilty€pleas€despite€the€courtððs€concern€as€toÐ øH Ðwhether€the€pleas€were€voluntaryóó.€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€judge€found€that,€as€the€trial€judge€who€presided€over€theÐ ¼  Ðpetitionerððs€plea€submission€hearing,€she€ð ðclosely€questioned€Petitioner€in€open€court€in€this€matter.ðð€Ð ¨ø ÐShe€characterized€her€concerns€about€the€petitionerððs€pleas€as€being€no€different€than€those€that€sheÐ ”ä Ðexpresses€whenever€she€accepts€a€plea€from€a€ð ðsimilarly€situated€offender.ðð€€She€commented€in€herÐ €Ð Ðfindings€that€she€endeavors€to€be€satisfied€that€the€guilty„pleading€defendant€understands€the€natureÐ l¼ Ðof€the€agreement€and€the€sentence€to€be€imposed€and€that€the€plea€is€voluntary.€€Essentially,€sheÐ X ¨ Ðfound€that€she€had€no€concerns€that€were€not€incidental€to€a€routine€plea€submission.€Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àViewing€this€claim€as€a€complaint€that€the€trial€judge€subjectively€harbored€doubtsÐ #l! Ðabout€the€petitionerððs€understanding€and€voluntariness€of€the€plea,€we€conclude€that€the€record€of€theÐ $X" Ðplea€submission€hearing€supports€the€post„conviction€judgeððs€characterizations€of€her€submission„Ð ô$D # Ðhearing€demeanor.€At€the€submission€hearing,€the€judge€carefully€and€patiently€addressed€theÐ à%0!$ Ðpetitionerððs€questions€and€took€pains€to€stress€that€she€had€no€preference€for€whether€he€pleadedÐ Ì&"% Ðguilty€or€not.€€We€see€no€basis€for€concluding€that€the€judgeððs€careful€and€painstaking€mannerÐ ¸'#& Ðevinced€her€subjective€doubts€about€the€petitionerððs€comprehension€of€the€proceedings.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÐ )à$( Ðà  à10.€€òòDuring€the€plea€submission€hearing,€counsel€failed€to€answer€the€petitionerððs€questionsÐ ° Ðand€instructed€the€petitioner€to€give€the€ð ðrightðð€answers€to€the€court€or€else€the€petitioner€wouldÐ œì Ðreceive€a€sentence€of€98€yearsóó.€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àTestifying€at€the€evidentiary€hearing,€trial€counsel€denied€that€he€told€the€petitionerÐ `° Ðto€testify€in€a€ð ðright€manner.ðð€€He€stated€that€he€told€the€petitioner€that€the€trial€judge€would€be€veryÐ L œ Ðthorough€in€conducting€the€plea€submission€hearing€and€that€she€would€not€accept€the€plea€if€sheÐ 8 ˆ Ðwere€not€satisfied€that€he€understood€all€aspects€of€it.€€Counsel€denied€making€any€reference€to€a€ð ð98„Ð $ t Ðyear€sentence.ðð€€He€stated€that€he€invited€the€petitioner€to€ask€him€any€questions€he€had€before€goingÐ  ` Ðinto€court€to€submit€his€plea.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post„conviction€court€accredited€counselððs€version€of€his€discussions€with€theÐ Ô$  Ðpetitioner€and€found€no€deficient€performance.€€The€record€supports€this€factual€determination.€Ð À  ÐThus,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€establish€that€his€trial€counsel€deficiently€performed€in€this€manner.€Ð ¬ü  Ðà  àÌà  à€€€€€€€€€€€€11.€òòThe€guilty€pleas€were€neither€knowing€nor€voluntaryóó.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€that€he€advised€the€petitioner€of€his€rights€before€the€plea€wasÐ \¬ Ðsubmitted.€€The€court€accredited€this€testimony€and€further€found€that€the€trial€court€fully€advisedÐ H˜ Ðthe€petitioner€of€his€rights€ð!ð€and€the€waiver€thereof€ð!ð€during€the€plea€submission€hearing.€€The€post„Ð 4„ Ðconviction€court€held€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€establish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€hisÐ  p Ðpleas€were€involuntary€or€unknowing.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€agree.€€As€we€explained€above,€the€trial€court€at€the€plea€submission€hearingÐ ä4 Ðadministered€a€full€litany€of€constitutional€and€extra„constitutional€rights,€as€well€as€commensurateÐ Ð  Ðwaiver€admonitions.€€The€petitioner€indicated€his€understanding€of€each€explanation€given.€Ð ¼  ÐMoreover,€he€asked€pertinent,€thoughtful€questions,€to€which€the€trial€court€responded€withÐ ¨ø Ðinformative€answers.€€The€petitioner€responded€affirmatively€when€asked€if€he€wished€to€persist€inÐ ”ä Ðthe€guilty€plea.€€During€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€petitioner€testified€that€he€told€the€truth€at€theÐ €Ð Ðplea€submission€hearing.€€The€record€fully€supports€the€post„conviction€courtððs€determination€thatÐ l¼ Ðthe€petitioner€failed€to€establish€an€involuntary€or€unknowing€guilty€plea.€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€conclusion,€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€post„Ð 0"€  Ðconviction€relief.€Ô#†¼Rå»XXY±##ÔÔ€XYX»¼RåÔÐ #l! ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE