FILED

March 26, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

DECEMBER SESSION, 1997

JERRY NELSON, ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9704-CR-00142

)

Appellant, )

)

) JOHNSON COUNTY

VS. )

) HON. LYNN BROWN

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE

)

Appellee. ) (Habeas Corpus)

ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE

CRIMINAL COURT OF JOHNSON COUNTY

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

JERRY NELSON JOHN KNOX WALKUP

Pro Se Attorney General and Reporter

TIMOTHY F. BEHAN

Assistant Attorney General

425 Fifth Avenue North

Nashville, TN 37243

DAVID CROCKETT

District Attorney General

Route 19, Box 99

Johnson City, 37601

OPINION FILED ________________________

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE
-2-

ORDER

The Appellant appeals as of right from the trial court’s dismissal of his pro

se petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. It appears from the petition and exhibits

filed therewith that the Appellant was convicted of rape and sentenced to life

imprisonment in 1977. On September 11, 1996, the Appellant filed the instant

habeas corpus petition alleging that his judgment of conviction was void because

the indictment failed to adequately allege the culpable mental state required of

the offense charged. The trial court dismissed the petition. We conclude that the

Appellant is not entitled to habeas corpus relief and we therefore affirm the trial

court’s order of dismissal.

In support of his petition and argument, the Appellant relies primarily upon

the decision of this Court in State v. Roger Dale Hill, C.C.A. No. 01C01-9508-CC00267, Wayne County, (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, June 20, 1996). We first

note that this Court’s decision in Hill was based upon an interpretation of our new

criminal code, and this code is applicable only to offenses occurring after

November 1, 1989. Secondly, our supreme court has reversed this Court’s

decision in Hill. See State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725 (Tenn. 1997).

In the case sub judice, we have examined the language of the challenged

indictment and we conclude that the indictment adequately alleged the criminal

offense charged and sufficiently informed the Appellant of the charge against him

such that the convicting court had jurisdiction. We see no reason for further

discussion or analysis. The Appellant’s conviction is not void. See Charles
-3-

Edward Orren v. State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9704-CR-00141, Johnson County

(Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Feb. 13, 1998); George F. Jones, Jr. v. State,

C.C.A. No. 03C01-9702-CR-00062, Johnson County (Tenn. Crim. App.,

Knoxville, Feb. 3, 1998); Randy Blaine Knight v. Carlton, Warden, C.C.A. No.

03C01-9705-CR-00162, Johnson County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Jan. 26,

1998); Perry C. Riley v. State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9705-CR-00181, Morgan

County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Jan. 23, 1998); Roy A. Burch v. State,

C.C.A. No. 03C01-9610-CR-00391, Johnson County, (Tenn. Crim. App.,

Knoxville, Jan. 16, 1998); State v. Darel G. Bolin, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9212-CR00450, Cumberland County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Jan. 15, 1998); Joseph

Ronald Duclos v. State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9705-CR-00182, Morgan County

(Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Jan. 16, 1998);State v. Rogers L. McKinley, C.C.A.

No. 03C01-9612-CR-00455, Bledsoe County; (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Jan.

6, 1998); Timothy Wayne Johnson v. Bowlen, Warden, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9611-

CR-00443, Bledsoe County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Dec. 23, 1997); Darryl

Douglas Sheets v. State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9701-CR-00031, Johnson County

(Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Dec. 23, 1997); Jerry Cox v. State,C.C.A. No.

03C01-9610-CR-00392, Johnson County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Dec. 23,

1997); Bruce Belk v. State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9703-CR-00109, Morgan County

(Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Dec. 23, 1997); Abel Rodriguez, Jr. v. State,C.C.A.

No. 03C01-9612-CR-00463, Greene County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Dec.

23, 1997); Donald Wayne Holt v. State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9702-CR-00059,

Johnson County (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Dec. 23, 1997; Gene Hibbard v.

State, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9702-CR-00077, Knox County (Tenn. Crim. App.,

Knoxville, Dec. 23, 1997).
-4-

We conclude that no error of law requiring a reversal of the judgment is

apparent on the record. Based upon a thorough reading of the record, the briefs

of the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, the

judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of

Criminal Appeals of Tennessee.

____________________________________

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE

CONCUR:

___________________________________

DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE

___________________________________

THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE