FILED

October 23, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

AUGUST SESSION, 1997

RICKY HARRIS, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9610-CC-00324

)

Appellant, ) 

) LAKE COUNTY

)

V. ) 

) HON. JOE G. RILEY, JR., JUDGE 

BILLY COMPTON, WARDEN, ) 

) 

Appellee. ) (HABEAS CORPUS) 

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

RICKY HARRIS, PRO SE JOHN KNOX WALKUP 

#121445, L.C.R.C.F Attorney General & Reporter

Route 1, Box 330

Tiptonville, TN 38079-9775 CLINTON J. MORGAN 

Assistant Attorney General

2nd Floor, Cordell Hull Building

425 Fifth Avenue North 

Nashville, TN 37243

C. PHILLIP BIVENS 

District Attorney General

P.O. Drawer E 

Dyersburg, TN 38024

OPINION FILED ________________________

AFFIRMED 

THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
-2-

OPINION

Petitioner, Ricky Harris, appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for

writ of habeas corpus. The Petitioner was indicted and pled guilty to a forgery

charge. Subsequently he was convicted of first degree m urder. Currently,

Petitioner is serving a life sentence on the first degree murder conviction which

is consecutive to a three-year sentence for forgery. In this appeal, the Petitioner,

relying on State v. Roger Dale Hill, C.C.A. No. 01C01-9508-CC-00267, Wayne

County (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, June 20, 1996), perm. to app. granted,

(Tenn. 1996), contends the judgment entered against him on the forgery charge

is void because the indictment failed to allege the mens rea of the offense. W e

affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Habeas corpus relief is only available when “it appears upon the face of the

judgment or the record of the proceedings upon which the judgment is rendered

that a convicting court was without jurisdiction or authority to sentence a

defendant, or that a defendant’s sentence of imprisonment or other restraint has

expired.” Archer v. State, 851 S.W .2d 157, 164 (Tenn. 1993). Petitioner asserts

the forgery conviction is void due to the failure of the indictment to allege he

intentionally, knowingly or recklessly signed the name of a corporation not yet in

existence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-3-802 (repealed 1989). The trial judge

dismissed the petition stating that it was without merit for two reasons: (1) The

sufficiency of the indictment is not the proper subject of habeas corpus relief and

(2) Petitioner’s life sentence has not expired. 
-3-

Habeas corpus relief is not available if the Petitioner may still be legally

detained under a conviction other than the one being attacked in the petition for

writ of habeas corpus. Ussery v. Avery, 222 Tenn. 50, 432 S.W.2d 656, 658-59

(1968); Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-122(b)(2). It is clear from the record that

Petitioner is serving a sentence of life imprisonment for the conviction of first

degree murder, and he does not contest that conviction. Furthermore, a logical

interpretation of the facts, as set forth in the petition, suggests that Petitioner has

completely served his sentence for forgery. He was convicted of forgery on June

13, 1986, and was placed on probation for three years. On May 8, 1988, after

conviction for first degree murder, his probation on the forgery conviction was

revoked and the sentence of life imprisonment was ordered to run consecutive

to the three-year sentence for forgery. Assuming that he served the entire threeyear sentence for forgery, that sentence would have been completely served no

later than May of 1991, a little more than five years prior to the filing of his petition

for writ of habeas corpus. In any event, Petitioner is presently lawfully

incarcerated on a sentence of life imprisonment, and is not entitled to habeas

corpus relief on the forgery conviction. Ussery v. Avery, 432 S.W.2d at 659.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgm ent of the trial court.

____________________________________

THOMAS T. W OODALL, Judge 

CONCUR:
-4-

___________________________________

DAVID G. HAYES, Judge

___________________________________

JERRY L. SMITH, Judge