WPCn ?MDj\iAQEzuNDR$W[z9*o[/hγS>n'f@e?V)*tǃ5-< \o,ID'VP"inc1>:OK\xfΏͲw+mv%"ɑF˟Z&oJ5CxlTU m@WE________________________baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 0iiii BTT 0q D5 D-J 0Kww AS 0 0D AHP LaserJet 40500,cAZArial (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z(Times New Roman ^-s  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(9 Z(Times New Roman 3j1,C:i+003|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5U - -(|G2C$ !.8K-dd8         0  u d(|3x$ !.8K-dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3x$ !.8K-dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8K-dd8     _   K-8XXdd8@ttDK-INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#K-D #Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsAugust20,2002 L XXK- #K-XX#ANTONIOYOUNGv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXXK-  J  AppealfromtheCriminalCourtforHamiltonCounty  J @@No.226025DouglasA.Meyer,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200100761CCAR3PC   October30,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }      XXXXAntonioYoungappealstheHamiltonCountyCriminalCourtsdenialofhispetitionforpost x  convictionrelief.Thelowercourtfoundhisallegationsofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel d unsupportedbytheevidenceanddeniedrelief.Becauseweareunpersuadedoferror,weaffirm.#XXX X##K-XX}#XXK- P  Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtisAffirmed.  (x   #K-XM#XX.K-James_Curwood_Ԁ_Witt_,Jr.,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichGaryR.Wade,_P.J._and P RobertW._Wedemeyer_,J.,joined. < KeithA.Black,Chattanooga,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,AntonioYoung.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneral&Reporter;ChristineM._Lapps_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;  WilliamH.Cox,III,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andRodneyC.Strong,AssistantDistrictAttorney  General,fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. t @@OO& OPINION #K-XX#XXK- L  #K-XXu #  XXK-XXXXX XXX   ` #XX XX # XXXXFollowingthepetitionersindictmentforchargesoffirstdegreemurderand "n! aggravatedrobbery,theattorneywhoseperformanceisquestionedinthisactionwasappointedto  #Z" representthepetitioner.Throughnegotiationwiththestate,counselwasabletoobtainapleaoffer #F# forthepetitionertopleadguiltytoseconddegreemurderandreceiveaRangeIIsentenceof40 $2 $ years,tobeservedatnolessthan85percentbeforeparoleeligibility.ThepetitionerwasaRange %!% Ioffender;however,thisdealwasadvantageoustohimbecauseitavoidedapossiblelifesentence, & "& disposedoftheaggravatedrobberycharge,anddisposedofseveralotherunrelatedfelonycharges '"' thatthepetitionerhadgarneredwhileonbond.Thepetitioneracceptedtheofferandwassentenced (#( inaccordwiththeagreement. ~)$)    ` Thereafter,thepetitionerbecamedisenchantedandfiledapetitionforpostconviction V+&+  reliefallegingnumerousinfirmitiesinhisconviction.Aftercounselwasappointedandanamended B,', _petitionfiled,thepetitionernarrowedhisrequestforrelieftothesoleissueofineffectiveassistance  ofcounsel.      ` Atthehearingonthepetition,thepetitionertestifiedthathisattorneyhadnotmet t withhimoftenenough,andwhenhedidso,theydiscussedbasketball,ratherthanthepetitioners ` case.Heclaimedthathedidnotunderstandthepleaagreementandhadbeenerroneouslyadvised L  bycounselthatnotwithstandingthe85percentservicerequirementofthe40yearsentence,the 8  petitionerwouldbeentitledtoappearbeforetheparoleboardeveryfiveyears.Heclaimedthatbut $ t forthisunderstanding,hewouldnothaveenteredaguiltyplea.  `    ` Thepetitionersattorneytestifiedthathemetwiththepetitionerseveraltimes  8  throughoutthecourseofhisrepresentation.Counseladmittedthatheandthepetitionerdiscussed $  basketballinordertoestablishrapport,buttheircommunicationalsoentaileddiscussionofthe   petitionerscaseandthestatesevidenceagainsthim.Counselattemptedtostayinregular   communicationwiththepetitionerwhilethepetitionerwasreleasedonbond,butthepetitioner   missedappointmentsanddidnotprovidecounselwithinformationregardinghiswhereabouts.After   negotiatingapleaofferwiththestate,counselcommunicatedittohisclientandmetwiththeclient p twoadditionaltimesbeforethepleawasentered.Counselcategoricallydeniedhavingadvisedthe \ petitionerthathewouldbeeligibleforparoleconsiderationbeforecompletionof85percentofhis H 40yearsentence. 4    ` Thepetitionerpresentedhismotherstestimonyasrebuttalevidence.Sheclaimed  \ thatcounseltoldherthatduetoprisonovercrowding,thepetitionermightbereleasedafterserving H tenyearsofhis40yearsentence.Shecouldnotrememberwhethercounseltoldherthatthe 4 petitionerwouldbeconsideredforparoleatfiveortenyearincrements,althoughhemighthavesaid   so.      ` Thecourtaccreditedthetestimonyofcounsel.Insodoing,thecourtfoundthatthe  petitionerandhismotherprobablygenuinelybelievedthattheyaccuratelyrecalledtheevents  surroundingtheplea,buttheirrecollectionsofwhathadactuallyhappenedwerefaulty.Moreover, l thecourtfoundthatthepleaagreementandsentencestructurehadbeenclearlyandcorrectly X  explainedtothepetitionerbythecourtatthetimeofthesubmissionhearing.Thus,thepost D! convictioncourtfoundthatthepetitionerhadfailedtosustainhisburdenofproofanddeniedrelief. 0"     ` Thesoleissuebeforeus,then,istheproprietyofthelowercourtsruling.Whena $X" petitionerchallengestheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel,hehastheburdenofestablishing(1) $D # deficientrepresentationand(2)prejudiceresultingfromthatdeficiency.Stricklandv.Washington, %0!$ 466U.S.668,686,104S.Ct.2052,2064(1984);Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975). &"% Deficientrepresentationoccurswhencounselprovidesassistancethatfallsbelowtherangeof '#& competencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Bankstonv.State,815S.W.2d213,215 (#' (Tenn.Crim.App.1991).Prejudiceisthereasonablelikelihoodthat,butfordeficient )$( representation,theoutcomeoftheproceedingswouldhavebeendifferent.Overtonv.State,874 |*%) S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994).Inthecontextofaguiltyplea,prejudiceisshownwhere,butfor h+&* counselsdeficientperformance,theoutcomeofthepleaprocesswouldhavebeendifferent.Hill  v.Lockhart,474U.S.52,59,106S.Ct.366,370(1985);Housev.State,44S.W.3d508,516(Tenn.  2001).Proofofprejudiceisestablishedwhenthepetitionerdemonstrates thatthereisareasonable  probabilitythat,butforcounselserror,hewouldnothavepleadedguiltyandwouldhaveinsisted t ongoingtotrial.Hill,474U.S.at59,106S.Ct.at370.Onreview,thereisastrongpresumption ` ofsatisfactoryrepresentation.Barrv.State,910S.W.2d462,464(Tenn.Crim.App.1995). L     ` Inpostconvictionproceedings,thepetitionerhastheburdenofprovingtheclaims $ t raisedbyclearandconvincingevidence.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030210(f)(1997).Thepost  ` convictioncourtsfactualfindingsarerevieweddenovowithapresumptionofcorrectnessunless  L  theevidencepreponderatesotherwise;however,thatcourtsconclusionsoflawreceivepurelyde  8  novoreviewwithnopresumptionofcorrectness.Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,(Tenn.2001). $     ` Inthecaseatbar,thetestimonygivenbythepetitionerandhismotherconflictedwith   thatofhisattorney.Thelowercourtaccreditedthetestimonyofcounselandfoundthatthe   petitionerunderstoodthetermsofthepleaagreementandenteredaknowingandvoluntaryguilty   plea.Thus,itrejectedthepetitionersclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Uponreviewof p therecord,wecannotsaythattheevidencepreponderatestothecontraryofthelowercourtsfactual \ determinations.Moreover,weareunpersuadedthatthelowercourterredinitsdeterminationthat H counseleffectivelyrepresentedthepetitioner. 4    ` Thus,thejudgmentofthelowercourtisaffirmed.  \    `     h     ___________________________________      `     h     JAMESCURWOODWITT,JR.,JUDGE