# FILED
March 26, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L APPEALS OF T ENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE DECEMB ER SESSION, 1997 JERRY NELSON, ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9704-CR-00142 ) Appe llant, ) ) ) JOHNSON COUNTY VS. ) ) HON.LYNN BROWN STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE ) Appellee. ) (Habeas Corpus)

ON APPEA L FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE CRIMINAL COURT OF JOHNSON COUN TY
FOR THE APPELLANT : FOR THE APPELLEE : JERRY NE LSON JOHN KNOX WALKUP Pro Se Attorney Generaland Reporter TIMOTHY F. BEHAN Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenu e North Nashvill e, TN 37243 DAVID CROCKETT Distri ct Attorney General Route 19, Box 99 Johnson City, 37601
OPINION FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED PURSU ANT TO RU LE 20 DAVID H. WELLES , JUD GE-2- 

# ORDER

The Appellant appeals as of right f rom the trial court’s dismissal of hi s pro se petiti on for Writ of

Habeas Corpus. It appears from the petition an d exhibits filedtherewith that the App ellant wa s convicte d of rape and se ntence d to life impriso nme nt in 1977. On September 11, 1996, the Appellant filed the instant habeas corpu s petitio n alleg ing tha t his judgment of conviction was voi d because the indict ment fail ed to adequately allege the c ulpable mental state required of the offense charged. The trialcourt dis missed the petition. We concludethat the Appellant

is not ent itled t

o habeas corpus reli efand we therefor e affirm the trial court’s order o f dism issal.

In support of h is peti tion and argument , the Appell ant reli es primarily upon the decision of

this Court

in State v. Rog er Da le Hill , C.C. A. No. 01C01- 9508- CC00267, W ayne Cou nty, (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashvil le, June 20, 1996). We first note that thi s Court’s decision in Hill was based upon an interpretat ion ofour new criminalcode, an d this cod e is applica ble only to o ffe nses occ urring af ter November 1, 1989 . Secon dly, our sup reme c ourt h as rev ersed this Co urt’s decision i n Hill

. See State v. Hill , 954 S.W .2d 725 (Te nn. 1997).

In the case sub judice , we have examined the language of the chal lenged indict ment and we conclude that the indi ctment adequately alleged the criminal offense charged and sufficie ntly infor med the Ap pellan t of the c harge again st him such that the convicti ng court had j urisdic tion. We see no reason for fur ther discussionor analys is. Th e Appe llant’s conv iction is not vo id. See Charles-3-

Edward Orren v. S tate , C.C.A. No. 03C01- 9704-CR-00141, Johnson Coun ty (Tenn. Crim. App. , Knoxvi lle, Feb. 13 , 1998); Georg e F. Jon es, Jr. v. State , C.C.A. No. 03C 01-970 2-CR -00062 , J ohnso n Cou nty (Ten n. Crim. A pp., Knoxvill e, Feb. 3, 1 998); Randy Blaine Knight v. Carlton, Warden , C.C.A. No. 03C01-9705-CR-00162, Johnson Coun ty (Tenn . Crim. A pp., Knoxvill e, Jan. 26, 1998); Perr y C. Riley v. State , C.C.A. No. 03C01- 9705-CR-00181, Morgan Coun ty(Tenn

. Crim. App. , Knoxville, Ja n. 23, 199 8); Roy A. B urch v. Sta te , C.C.A. No. 03C01-9610-CR-00391, Johnson Cou nty, ( Tenn . Crim. A pp., Knoxvill e, Jan. 16, 1 998); State v. Dare l G. Bo lin , C.C.A . No. 03C01- 9212- CR00450, Cum berland Coun ty (Tenn . Crim. A pp., Kno xville, Jan. 15 , 1998); Joseph Ron ald Duclos v. State , C.C. A. No. 03C01- 9705- CR-001 82, Mo r gan C ounty (Tenn. Cri m. App., Knoxvi lle, J an. 16, 1998); State v. Rogers L. McKinley , C.C. A. No. 03C01-9612-CR-00455, Bledsoe C ounty; (Tenn. Crim. App. , Knoxvil le, Jan. 6, 1998); Timothy Wayne Johnson v. Bowlen, Warden , C.C.A. No. 03C01- 9611- CR-00443, Bledsoe County (Tenn.Cri m. App., Kn oxville, Dec . 23, 1997 ); Darryl Douglas Sheets v. State , C.C .A . No. 03C 01-970 1-CR -00031 , Johnso n Cou nty (Tenn. Crim. A pp., Kn oxville, Dec . 23, 1997 ); Jerry Co x v. State ,C.C.A. No. 03C01-9610-CR-00392, Johnson County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxvill e, Dec. 23, 1997); Bruce B elk v. State , C.C.A. N o. 03C 01-970 3-CR -00109 , Morga n Cou nty (Tenn. Crim. App., Knox vill e, Dec. 23, 1997); Abel Rod riguez, Jr. v. State ,C.C. A. No. 03C01-9612-CR-00463, Greene Co unty (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxvil le, Dec. 23, 1997); Dona ld W ayne H olt v. State , C.C.A. No. 03C01- 970 2-CR- 00059, Johnson County (T enn. C rim. App ., Knoxville, D ec. 23, 19 97; Gene H ibbard v. State , C.C.A . No. 03C 01-970 2-CR -00077 , Knox Coun ty (Tenn . Crim. A pp., Knoxville, Dec. 23 , 1997).-4- We conc lude th at no e rror of la w requ irin g a rev ersal o f the jud gme nt is apparenton the re cord. Ba sed up on a tho rough re ading o f the record , the briefs ofthe parti es, and the l aw gover ning the issues pr esented for r

eview, t he judgmentof the tria l court is affirme d in ac corda nce w ith Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeal s of Tennessee.

____________________________________ DAVID H. WELLES , JUD GE

CONCUR:

___________________________________ DAVID G. HAY ES, J UDGE

___________________________________ THOMAS T. WOODALL, J UDGE