WPC4 'd).fS@*U)imE#.d"')5a 68ut W;!U+2F+ ~˃I=|YP":ND]9۠*"U". sjgWf2'FOO[Ԣ{ s4cFF^aՉs[|Pu y!RG(E?"D2Pd%'pپ7|E.f$= */6Pm"NREU_q6۽3Z$MA'h9/ 5.ɠG]߶u1YPxaIU'1@YX<|C4+5 F;c 34iZ$ { Izͤ >^4穄\d dfBIW0/,kZ ,\@h2vi'a 'q-+#b#\UN% %s 0:y ^ w 4   m  N UN 0Ue 0 0 0 0l 0L 0) 0E 0 0C 0 0 0 0o 0= 0 0 0 0@U 0 0i 0: 0 0 0 0` 0" 00 0< 0K 0> ! 0vG! 0`! 0`" 0`}" 0`" 0`=# 08# 0# 02$ 0$ 0:% 0Y& 0_h& 0 & 0j' 0;) B** D/* D++ 0C+ D/, 0, 06- 0- 0:/ 0^0U*00 1u'1 7211b2222222 B22 AS2 3 0V3 0V(4 0D~4~4 D54\\IB01S01\CLERK1NAS,,,,0(@ Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,˖/ qdj/:i+003|xU  Jaco("  Z6Times New Roman Regular*+ (_2623  ..*G+M (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *D+M (_24   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *A+M (_23  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *>+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_1723  Ԁ*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  (DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  &2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      (&H2  (&H3  (&H4 XXX (&H5  (&H6  20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKK<6X9`(Courier NewKSL\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard KK<6X9`(Courier NewKSL\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/KK<6X9`(Courier NewKSL\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7?(X7  ?M%2A`Arial?  SL\  `&Times New RomanS7@(X7&  d d>)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For7B(X7  ?M%2A`Arial?  SL\  `&Times New RomanS7@(X7>)2dxd0KS.SampleKK<6X9`(Courier NewKSL\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKK<6X9`(Courier NewKSL\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB   35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(O$<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Oi)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- - d\]^_aE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(.3$ !USUS.,  (.3$ !USUS.,  ($$   1  YYYY)!dxdx !USUS.,  _    XXXX Y:X XR8XXdd8  =XXdd=INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @@WW$ATNASHVILLE# XX Y:n# &  YX XOctober1,2003Session# XX Y# Y:X X L  # XX Y:# YX X_CLESSIE_ԀJACO,Jr.v.STATEOFTENNESSEE # XX Y^# Y:X X 4  # XX Y:#@@ AppealbypermissionfromtheCourtofCriminalAppeals n  dCircuitdCourtforMauryCounty@@ Z  No.9854RobertL.Jones,Judge F  @@*AY) ` dE< ` A  Z  @@TTNo.M200102150SCR11PCFiledDecember5,2003 U  ________________________ A  #XXX XO# @Wegrantedpermissiontoappeal inthispostconvictioncasetodeterminewhethertheCourtof  CriminalAppealserredinholdingthatMr.Jacosguiltypleawasknowinglyandvoluntarily  enteredeventhoughhewasnotinformedofthepsychiatriccertificationmandatedbyTennessee  CodeAnnotatedsection4035503(c)forsexoffendersbeforereleaseonparole.Weholdthat  Mr.Jacosguiltypleametthestandardofknowingandvoluntary.Adefendantneednotbe y informedofallcriteriathataffecthispossiblereleaseonparoleinorderforhisguiltypleatobe e constitutionallysound.Accordingly,theholdingoftheCourtofCriminalAppealsisaffirmed.  Q  XXXXTenn.R.App.P.11;JudgmentoftheCourtofCriminalAppealsAffirmed )y  FrankF.Drowota,III,C.J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichE.RileyAnderson, Q AdolphoA.Birch,Jr.,JaniceM.Holder,andWilliamM.Barker,JJ.,joined.#XXX XΜ# XXXX YX X  =  # XX Y> #JohnS.Colley,III,Columbia,Tennessee,fortheappellant,ClessieJaco,Jr. #XXX X # =  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelMoore,SolicitorGeneral;KimR. ! Helper,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;T.MichaelBottoms,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andLarry "  Nickell,Jr.,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee.  #!   OPINION  @`  a&!$ y    FactualandProceduralBackground  %)u$'    ClessieJacowaschargedwithtwocountsofrapeofhisthirteenyearoldniece.He *a%( pleadedguiltytotwocountsofattemptedrape.Pursuanttothepleaagreement,hereceiveda *M&) sixyearsentenceoneachconviction,whichsentencesthetrialcourtorderedserved +9'* consecutively.TheCourtofCriminalAppealsaffirmedthetrialcourtsdenialofalternative ,%(+ sentencinganditsdecisiontoorderconsecutivesentences . -), Ї  Thereafter,Mr.Jacofiledatimelypetitionforpostconvictionrelief,allegingthathis  pleawasnotknowingly,intelligently,andvoluntarilyenteredbecausehewasnotadvisedofthe  effectofTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection4035503(c)(2003),whichprovides:  8  8`   Nopersonconvictedofasexcrimeshallbereleasedonparole ` unlessapsychiatristorlicensedpsychologistdesignatedasahealth L  serviceproviderhasexaminedandevaluatedsuchinmateand 8  certifiedthat,toareasonablemedicalcertainty,theinmatedoesnot $ t posethelikelihoodofcommittingsexualassaultsuponrelease  ` fromconfinement.Theexaminationandevaluationshallbe  L  providedbypsychiatristsorlicensedpsychologistsdesignatedas  8  healthserviceproviderswhoseservicesarecontractedorfundedby $  thedepartmentofcorrectionortheboardofparoles.Theboard   shallconsideranysuchotherevaluationbyapsychiatristor   licensedpsychologistdesignatedasahealthserviceproviderwhich   maybeprovidedbythedefendant. ` x` x   Followingahearing,thepostconvictioncourtfoundthatatthetimeheenteredtheplea, \ Mr.Jacounderstoodthathewouldbeeligibleforparoleandpossiblereleaseafterservingthirty H percentofhissentence.AlthoughMr.Jacosformerattorneyindicatedthatduringtheplea 4 hearinghehadadvisedMr.JacoabouttheimplicationsofTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection40  p 35503(c),thepostconvictioncourtfoundthatdefensecounselprobablyhadnotprovidedthis  \ advice.Furthermore,thepostconvictioncourtfoundthatnosexoffenderhadbeenreleased H afterservingonlythirtypercentofasentenceunlessamentalhealthprofessionalhadopinedthat 4 afuturesexoffensewasphysicallyimpossible.Finally,thepostconvictioncourtfoundthatthe   trialcourthadfailedtoconsiderthisstatutewhenitacceptedMr.Jacospleaandhadcommented   thatMr.Jacoshouldbeeligibleforreleaseafterservingthirtypercentofhissentence.  Nonetheless,thepostconvictioncourtruledthatcounselsfailureandthetrialcourtscomments  didnotaffectthevalidityofhisguiltyplea.Accordingly,thepetitionforpostconvictionrelief  wasdenied. l   Mr.Jacoappealed,andtheCourtofCriminalAppealsaffirmedthedenial.Wegranted D! Mr.Jacosapplicationforpermissiontoappealtoconsiderthisissueoffirstimpression. 0"     `   @!StandardofReview  $D # LXXXX  Toprevailuponaclaimforpostconvictionrelief,apetitionerbearstheburdenof %0!$ provingfactualallegationsbyclearandconvincingevidence.Tenn.CodeAnn.#XXXLXή#4030110(f) &"% (2003) ;Momonv.State,18S.W.3d152,156(Tenn.1999).Whereappellatereviewinvolves '#& purelyfactualissues,thisCourtwillnotreweighorreevaluatetheevidence.Momon,18 (#' S.W.3dat156;Henleyv.State,960S.W.2d572,57879(Tenn.1997).Thetrialjudge'sfindings )$( offactareaffordedtheweightofajuryverdictandareconclusiveonappealunlesstheevidence |*%) preponderatesagainstthosefindings.Momon,18S.W.3dat156;Henley,960S.W.2dat57879. h+&* However,reviewofatrialcourt'sapplicationofthelawtothefactsofthecaseisdenovo,with  nopresumptionofcorrectness.SeeRuffv.State,978S.W.2d95,96(Tenn.1998).Whethera  guiltypleameetstheconstitutionalstandardsofvoluntaryandknowingisamixedquestionof  lawandfact.See,e.g.,UnitedStatesv.Gray,152F.3d816,819(8thCir.1998).Mixed t questionsoffactandlawarerevieweddenovo,withapresumptionofcorrectnessgivenonlyto ` thepostconvictioncourt'sfindingsoffact.See,e.g.,Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,458(Tenn. L  2001). 8     Analysis  L  9"   Postconvictionreliefmaybegrantedonlyifaconvictionorsentenceisvoidorvoidable  8  becauseofaviolationofaconstitutionalright.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030d103(2003).TheDue $  ProcessClauseoftheUnitedStatesConstitutionrequiresthatguiltypleasbeknowingand   voluntary.Statev.Wilson,31S.W.3d189,194(Tenn.2001).ThecasesofBoykinv.Alabama   andStatev.Mackeyarethelandmarkconstitutionalcasesforanalysesofguiltypleas.Boykinv.   Alabama,395U.S.238(1969)(federalstandard);Statev.Mackey,553S.W.2d337(Tenn.   1977)(statestandard).InBoykin,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthatbeforeatrialjudge p canacceptaguiltyplea,theremustbeanaffirmativeshowingthatitwasgivenintelligentlyand \ voluntarily.395U.S.at242.   Inordertofindthatthepleawasentered"intelligently"or H "voluntarily,"thecourtmust"canvass[]thematterwiththeaccusedtomakesurehehasafull 8 understandingofwhatthepleaconnotesandofitsconsequences."Id.at244.Apleais $t  knowingifthecourtinformedtheaccusedofhisconstitutionalrightsagainstself ` incrimination,toconfrontaccusers,andtotrialbyjury.Id.at243. dLikewise,inMackey,this L Courtheldthat"therecordofacceptanceofadefendant'spleaofguiltymustaffirmatively < demonstratethathisdecisionwasbothvoluntaryandknowledgeable,i.e.,thathehasbeenmade ( awareofthesignificantconsequencesofsuchaplea...."553S.W.2dat340.Anyrequirement  inexcessofBoykinisnotbasedonthefederalorstateconstitution.Statev.Prince,781S.W.2d  846,853(Tenn.1989).Therefore,inevaluatingtheknowingandvoluntarynatureofaguilty  plea, [t]hestandardwasandremainswhethertheplearepresentsavoluntaryandintelligent  choiceamongthealternativecoursesofactionopentothedefendant.NorthCarolinav.Alford, t 400U.S.25,31(1970).TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthas neverheldthattheUnitedStates `  ConstitutionrequirestheStatetofurnishadefendantwithinformationaboutparoleeligibilityin L! orderforthedefendantspleaofguiltytobevoluntary.Hillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52,56 8"  (1985). $#t!   Mr.Jacodoesnotcontendthatthispleaagreementfailedtomeettherequirementsof $L # Boykin.Hewasinformedofandindicatedthatheunderstoodtheconstitutionalrightsthathe %8!$ waivedbyenteringtheguiltyplea.Instead,Mr.Jacoarguesthathispleawasnotknowinglyand &$"% voluntarilyenteredbecausehewasnotinformedofoneofthecriteriathatguidesthe '#& determinationofwhetherhewillactuallybereleaseduponarrivingathisreleaseeligibilitydate. (#'   Assupportforthisproposition,hereliesonHowellv.State,569S.W.2d428(Tenn. *%) 1978).InHowell,thedefendantpleadedguiltytotwocountsoffirstdegreemurderwith p+&* consecutivelifesentences.Helaterchallengedthevalidityofthesepleasbecausehisattorney  andthetrialcourthaderroneouslyadvisedhimthatconsecutivelifesentenceswouldresultinan  earlierparoleeligibilitydatethanwouldconsecutivethirtyfiveyearsentences.Id.at430.After  clarifyingtheformulafordeterminingparoleeligibilityforlifesentences,thisCourtgrantedMr. t Howellreliefbecausehehad agreedtolifesentencesundermistakenadviceastotheirtrue ` effectonhisparoleeligibilitydate.Id.at435.Therearesignificantdifferencesbetweenthis L  caseandHowell.InHowell,thepleaagreementwasthedirectresultofinaccurateinformation 8  thatresultedinMr.Howellagreeingtoalongerprisonterm.Incontrast,Mr.Jacowasnot $ t advisednordidheagreetoalongerprisontermonthemistakenbeliefthatalongertermwould  ` resultinanearlierreleaseeligibilitydate.Indeed,hadMr.Jacorefusedthepleaagreement,he  L  couldhavebeentriedonchargesofrape,andifconvicted,sentencedtoamuchlengthier  8  sentence.SeeTenn.Code.Ann.3913503(b)(classifyingrapeasaClassBfelony)(2003) ; $  4035112(a)(2)(2003) (providingthataRangeIsentenceforeachClassBfelonyisnot less   thaneightmonthsnormorethantwelveyears.)     UnlikethedefendantinHowell,Mr.Jacowasnotmisinformedabouthisparole   eligibilitydate.Hewillinfactbecomeparoleeligibleafterservingthirtypercentofhissentence p althoughhemaynotactuallybereleased.Hisreleaseeligibilitydateissimplythepointatwhich \ hewillbeconsideredforparoleundertheapplicablestandards. Thereleaseeligibilitydate H providedforinthissectionistheearliestdateaninmateconvictedofafelonyiseligiblefor 4 parole....Tenn.CodeAnn.4035501(k)(2003) .Afteraninmatebecomesparoleeligible,  p releaseisnotguaranteed. Releaseonparoleisaprivilege,notaright....Tenn.CodeAnn.  \ 4035503(b)(2003) .TheCriminalSentencingReformActincludesthefollowingcriteriafor H denyingreleasetoaparoleeligibleinmate:1)ifthereissubstantialriskthatthedefendantwill 4 notconformtotheconditionsofthereleaseprograms;2)ifthereleaseatthattimewould   depreciatetheseriousnessofthecrimeorpromotedisrespectofthelaw;3)ifthereleasewould   haveasubstantiallyadverseeffectoninstitutionaldiscipline;or4)iftheinmatescontinued  correctionaltreatment,medicalcare,orvocationalorothertrainingintheinstitutionwill  substantiallyenhancetheinmatescapacitytoleadalawabidinglifeatalaterreleasetime.Id.  Forsexoffenders,thereisanadditionalprerequisitewhichmustbesatisfiedbeforereleaseon l paroleisappropriate!certificationbyapsychiatristorlicensedpsychologistwhohasexamined X  andevaluatedtheinmatethat,toareasonablemedicalcertainty,theinmatedoesnotposethe D! likelihoodofcommittingsexualassaultsuponreleasefromconfinement.Tenn.CodeAnn.40 0"  35503(c)(2003) . #l!   Inthiscase,thepostconvictiontrialcourtfoundthatnosexoffenderhasbeenreleased $D # afterservingonlythirtypercentofhissentenceunlessthementalhealthprofessionalconcluded %0!$ thatafuturesexoffensewasphysicallyimpossible.Nonetheless,aRangeIstandardoffender &"% convictedofasexcrimebecomesparoleeligibleafterservingthirtypercentoftheactual '#& sentenceimposed.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035501(c)(2003). Therequiredevaluationaffectsthe (#' likelihoodofactualrelease,butitdoesnotaffectthereleaseeligibilitydate.Thus,unlikethe )$( defendantinHowell,Mr.Jacoreceivedaccurateinformationregardinghisreleaseeligibilitydate |*%) priortoenteringhisplea. h+&* Ї  Asgroundsforinvalidatinghisplea,Mr.Jacoreliesuponthefollowingstatementofthe  trialcourt: Ifranklythinkthattheserviceofatwelveyearsentencewouldbemorethanthis  offensedeserves.AtthesametimeIknowthatitishighlyunusualunlessheengagesinfuture  misconductthathewouldeverserveanythingneartwelveyears.Asastandardrangeone t offenderhewouldnothavetoservemorethanthirtypercentofthetwelveyearsentenceof3.6 ` years...Isuspectthatweighedheavilyonthemindoftheattorneygeneralandhisstaffin L  reachingthedecisiontosettlethiscaseasitwassettled. Inourview,thisstatementprovidesno 8  basisforinvalidatingtheplea.Mr.Jacoapparentlyfailstorecognizethatthetrialcourtmade $ t thisstatementafter theguiltypleahadbeenentered.Therefore,thisstatementcouldnothave  ` influencedMr.Jacosdecisiontopleadguiltyanddidnotvitiatetheknowingandvoluntary  L  natureofhisplea.  8    Finally,werewetoadoptMr.Jacosargumentthataguiltypleaofasexoffenderwillbe   constitutionallydeficientunlesstheoffenderisinformedofthemandatorypsychological   evaluationandcertificationthatisrequiredbeforereleaseonparoleisappropriate,thenguilty   pleastootherfelonyoffensesarearguablyinvalidaswellunlesstheoffenderisadvisedofallthe   criteriathatwillaffecttheoffendersreleaseonparole.Wedeclinetoadoptsucharule. p    `  H   @  %Conclusion  4   Fortheforegoingreasons,weconcludethatMr._Jaco_sguiltypleametthe  p constitutionallyrequiredstandardofknowingandvoluntary.Actualreleaseisadecisionleftto  \ theparoleboard.Mr.Jacowascorrectlyinformedofhisreleaseeligibilitydate.Neitherthe H federalnorthestateconstitutionrequiresthathebeinformedofallpossiblefactorsthatcould 4 affecttheparoleboardsdecision.Mr.Jacounderstoodtheconstitutionalrightshewaivedin   ordertoaccepttwoconsecutivesix yearsentencesratherthanfacetrialontworapecharges.   DueProcessisnotoffendedbysuchanagreement.Itappearingthatthepetitionerisindigent,  costsofthisappealareassessedagainsttheStateofTennessee.    _   `     h      p      x _ XXXX0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#_______________________________________________ @"  @"  @"  @"  @" #l!h(#h(#    `     h FRANKF._DROWOTA_,III,CHIEFJUSTICE#XXX XuO#