1



### IN THE COURT OF CRIMI NAL AP PEALS OF TENNES SEE AT NASHVILLE

LACORRI CK C. WI LLI AMS, P RO 

### S E 

### v. JA M ES M
. D A V IS

Appeal f rom the Circ uit Court for Wayne County No. 12944 Stella L. Hargrove, Judge

No. M2003- 00991-CCA -R3-C O F iled March 5, 2004

The Petitioner, L aCorric k C. W illiams, appeals the trial c ourt' s deni al o f h i s petition for habe as corpus r elief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial c ourt' s denial of re lief pursua

nt to Rul e 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appea ls. The Petitioner fails to asser t a cognizable claim for whic h habea s corpus re lief may be g rante d. Acc ording ly , the State' s motion is gr anted a

nd the judg ment of the trial c ourt is affir med.
Tenn. R. App . P . 3; Judgme nt of th e Trial Court Affirm ed P ursuan t to Rule 20, Rules of th e Co ur t o f Cr im ina l A ppe als

R OB E R T W. W EDEMEYER , J

. , d e l i v e r e d th e o p i n i o no f th e c o urt , i nw h i c hD A V ID H. WEL L ES and JERRY L. SMI TH, joined.

L aCorric k C. W illiams, pro se.

Pa ul G . Summe rs , A tto rn e y

Ge ne ra l & Re po rt e r; El iza be th B . M arn e y , A ssi sta

nt A tto rn e y

Ge ne ra l, for the a ppellee, State of

Tenne ssee.

M EM OR

AN DU M OP IN ION

On June 10 , 1 99 8, Pe tit ion e r e nte re d guil ty pl eas to a tte mpt e d f ir st d e g re e mur de r a s a standard 30% offe nder to a sentenc e of 35 y ear s. On December 17, 2002, Petitioner filed, pr o s e , a pe tit ion fo r wr it of ha

be a s c or pu s re lie f, a lle g ing that his se nte nc e wa s ill e g a l and , the re fo re , v oid based upon his cla im that he p led guilty and agree d to a sentenc e that excee ded the statutory g uidelines.
By order enter ed Mar ch 8, 20 0 3 , the trial cour t denied Petitioner' s application for habea s c or pu s r e lie f. Th e tr ia l c ourt fou nd th a t th e 35 y e ar s e nte nc e to whic h Pe tit ion e r a g re e d w a s a “hy brid sentenc e” that was not illeg al. Acc ording ly , the cour t dismi ssed the petition.2

A writ of ha

beas c orpus may

be g rante d only

when the pe titioner has established lac k of jur isd ic tio n f

or the or de r o f c on fi ne me nt o r t hat he is o the rw ise e nti tle d to imm e diate re le a se beca use of the e x piration of his sentenc e. See U ssery v . Ave ry, 222 Tenn. 50, 432 S.W.2d 656 (1 96 8) ; Sta te e

xre l. W ad e v . No rv e ll, 1 Tenn. Crim. App. 447, 443 S.W.2d 839 (1969). Habe as corpus r elief is ava ilable in this state only when it appe ars on the f

ace of the judg ment or the
rec ord that the trial c ourt was without jurisdiction to convict or sentenc e the de fenda nt or that the sentenc e of imprisonment has other wise expired. Archer v . State, 851 S.W .2d 157, 164 (Tenn. 19 93 ); Potts v. State, 833 S.W .2d 60, 62 (Tenn. 1992) . Unlike the post-convic tion petition, t he purpose of

the habe as cor

pus petition is t o contest a void, not mere ly voidable, judg ment. Sta te
ex re l. Newsome v. He nderson, 221 Tenn. 24, 424 S.W.2d 186, 189 (1968). A petitioner c annot collater ally

attack a fac ially valid conviction in a habe as cor pus proce eding

. Potts v. State, 833 S.W. 2d 60 , 6 2 ( Te nn . 1 99 2) ; Sta te e xre l. H olb ro ok v . B om ar , 211 Tenn. 243, 364 S.W.2d 887, 888 (1963).

The Petitioner has f

ailed to set for

th any alleg ations that would indicate that the tria l court lacke d jurisdiction to convict or sentenc e him or that he is unlawf ully restra ined for a

sentenc e that ha s e xpir e d. Pe tit ion e r’ s h a be a s c or pu s a c tio n is ba se d o n th e a lle g a tio n th a t hi s se nte nc e is illega l beca

use he a g ree d to a sentenc e that excee ded the statutory g uidelines. Petitioner pled g uilty to attempted first deg ree murder a nd ag ree d to a sentenc e of thirty -five year s, with the leng th of incar cer ation in one ra ng e and the rele ase e ligibility perc entag e in another . This court ha s r e c og nize d th a t un de r t he Se nte nc ingRe fo rm

Ac t of 19 89 , it is p ro pe r i n a

ple a a g re e me nt t o mix the leng th of incar cer ation and the r elea se elig ibilit y status. Blan d v . S

tate , 97 S.W .3d 133 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002)

.

Ac c or din g ly , th e State ’s mot ion is g ra nte d. Th e jud g me nt o f t

he tr ia l c ourt

is a ff ir me d in
acc ordanc e with Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appea ls.



### ___

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ ROBERT W. W EDEMEYER, JUDGE