### IN THE CO URT OF CR IMINAL APPEALS OF T ENN ESSEE AT KNOX VILLE Ass ig ne d o n B rie fs Aug us t 3 0, 2 01 1

JACK IE F. CUR RY v. HO WARD CARLTON, WARDEN

A p p e a l f r o m t h e C i r c u i t C o u r t f o r J o h n s o n C o u n t y N o . 5 6 5 8 R o b e r t C u p p , J u d g e

N o . E 2 0 1 1

- 0 0 6 0 7

- C C A

- R 3

- H C

- F i l e d O c t o b e r 6 , 2 0 1 1

T h e p etitio n er, Jack ie F

. C u rry , ap p eals th e Jo h n so n C o u n ty C ir cu it C o u rt’s su m m ary d ism issal o f h is p ro se p etitio n f o r w rit o f h ab eas co rp u s. F o llo w in g o u r rev iew , w e af f irm th e su m m ary d ism issal o f

th e p etitio n

.

T e n n . R

. A p p . P

. 3 A p p e a l a s o f R i g h t ; J u d g m e n t o f t h e C i r c u i t C o u r t A f f i r m e d

A LA N E

. G LE N N , J

. , d e l i v e r e d t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t , i n w h i c h T H O M A S T

. W O O D A LL a n d J O H N E V E R E T T W ILL IA M S , J J

. , j o i n e d

.

J a c k i e F

. C u r r y , M o u n t a i n C i t y , T e n n e s s e e , P r o S e

.

R o b e r t E

. C o o p e r , J r

. , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l a n d R e p o r t e r ; a n d S o p h i a S

. L e e , A s s i s t a n t A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , f

o r t h e a p p e l l e e , S t a t e o f T e n n e s s e e

.

O P I N I O N

F A C T S
“[ T h e] [ p ] etitio n er p h y sically f o rced th e v i c t i m, w h o w as h is ex -g irlf rien d , f ro m a
n ig h tclu b

. A f

ter tak in g h er to an E co n o m y In n , h e rap ed h er o rally , v ag in ally an d an ally .” Jack ie F

. C u rry v

. S tate, N o

. E 2 0 0 7 -0 2 5 2 6 -C C A -R 3 -H C , 2 0 0 8 WL 3 0 6 6 8 2 3 , at * 1 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. A u g

. 4 , 2 0 0 8 ), p erm

. to ap p eal d en ied (T en n

. D ec. 8 , 2 0 0 8 ) (citin g S tate v

. Jack ie F

. C u rry , N o

. E 2 0 0 0 -0 2 4 7 5 -C C A -R 3 -C D , 2 0 0 1 WL 8 7 2 7 8 9 , at * 1 -3 (T en n . C rim

. A p p

. A u g

. 2 , 2 0 0 1 ), p erm

. to ap p eal d en ied (T en n

. N o v

. 5 , 2 0 0 1 ) )

. O n A u g u st 1 5 , 2 0 0 0 , th e p etitio n er w as co n v icted b y a K n o x C o u n ty C rim in al C o u rt j u ry o f th re e co u n ts o f ag g rav ated rap e an d w as sen ten ced as a v io len t o f f en d er to tw en ty -tw o y ears o n each co u n t, to b e serv ed co n secu tiv ely to each o th er an d co n secu tiv ely to a p rio r eig h t-y ear sen ten ce f o r
w h ich h e w as o n p ro b atio n at th e tim e o f th e i n c i d e n t

. I d

. a t * 1

. T h is co u rt af f irm ed th ej u d g m en ts o f th e trial co u rt, a n d o u r su p rem e co u rt d en ied th e p etitio n er’s ap p licatio n f o r p erm issio n to ap p eal. Id

.
O n M arch 2 9 , 2 0 0 4 , th e p etitio n er f iled a p etitio n f

o r w rit o f h ab eas co rp u s, arg u in g th at th e co u rt o f co n v ictio n v io lated h is d u e p ro cess rig h ts b y ex clu d in g ev id en ce ren d erin g h is j u d g m en ts o f co n v ictio n v o id , th e p ro secu to r w ith h eld ex cu lp ato ry ev id e n ce, h is trial

co u n sel ren d ered in ef

f ectiv e as s i s t a n ce, th e in d ictm en t v io lated p rin cip les o f d o u b le j eo p ard y in th at it in co rp o rated th ree co u n ts, th e co n v ictin g ev id en ce w as leg ally in su f f icien t

an d m aterially v aried f

ro m th e o f

f en ses ch arg ed in th e in d ictm en t, an d th e trial co u rt erred in en h an cin g h is sen ten ces an d in im p o sin g co n secu tiv e sen ten ces. S ee Jack ie F

. C u rry v

. S tate, N o

. E 2 0 0 4 -0 1 2 2 7 -C C A -R 3 -H C , 2 0 0 5 WL 9 2 7 1 5 8 , at * 1 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. A p r. 2 1 , 2 0 0 5 ). T h e h ab eas co u rt d ism issed th e p etitio n , an d th is co u rt g ran ted th e S tate’s m o tio n to af f irm th e d ism issal u n d er R u le 2 0 o f th e R u les o f

th e C o u rt o f

C rim in al A p p eals. Id

.
O n Jan u ary 1 1 , 2 0 0 5 , th e p etitio n er f iled an u n tim ely p etitio n f o r p o st-co n v ictio n relief in w h ich h e arg u ed th at th e trial co u rt im p ro p erly en h an ced h is sen ten ce u n d er B lak ely

v

. Wash in g to n , 5 4 2 U .S

. 2 9 6 (2 0 0 4 ). S ee Jack ie F

. C u rry v

. S t a t e , N o

. E20 0 5 -0 0 4 1 8 -C C A -R 3 -P C , 2 0 0 5 WL 3 3 4 3 8 2 6 , at * 1 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. D ec. 7 , 2 0 0 5)

. The p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt d ism issed th e p etitio n as b arred b y th e statu te o f lim itatio n s, an d th is

co u rt af f irm ed th e d ism issal o n ap p eal. Id

.
O n Jan u ary 3 1 , 2 0 0 7 , th e p etitio n er f iled a seco n d p etitio n f

o r w rit o f h ab eas co rp u s,
as w ell as an am en d ed p etitio n o n F eb ru ary 2 2 , 2 0 0 7 , i n w h ich h e m ad e th e f o llo w in g alleg atio n s:
(1 ) th e in d ictm en ts w ere d ef ectiv e b ecau se th ey

f ailed to alleg e th at f

o rce o r
co ercio n w as u sed to acco m p lish t h e a ct o f sex u al p en etratio n ; (2 ) th e in d ictm en ts are f

acially v o id b ecau se th ey f ail to alleg e th at sex u al p en etratio n
w as a c c o mp lish ed w ith o u t th e v ictim ’s co n sen t an d th at P etitio n er k n ew h e d id n o t h av e th e v ictim ’s co n sen t; (3 ) th e in d ictm en t is in v alid b ecau se it f ails to “state th e f

acts co n stitu tin g th e o f

f en se in o rd in ary an d co n cise lan g u ag e”

so th at “a p erso n o f co m m o n u n d erstan d in g [ w o u ld ] k n o w w h at is in ten d ed ;” (4 ) th e trial co u rt co n stru ctiv ely altered th e ch arg in g term s o f th e in d ictm en t b y in stru ctin g th e j u ry o n statu to ry elem en ts n o t in c l u d ed in th e in d ictm en t; (5 ) h is co n v ictio n s are v o id b ecau se th e ag g rav ated rap e statu te u n d er w h ich h e w as co n v icted is u n co n stitu tio n al; (6 ) th e p ro o f d id n o t su p p o rt th e j u ry ’s f in d in g th at h e en g ag ed in co n d u ct th at co n stitu ted a su b stan tial step to w ard th e th ree ag g rav ated rap e co n v ictio n s; a n d ( 7 ) th e trial co u rt d id n o t h av e j u risd ictio n to rev o k e th e co m m u n ity co rrectio n s sen ten ce h e w as serv in g at th e tim e o f

th e in cid en t.

-2-Jack ie F

. C u r r y , 2 0 0 8 WL 3 0 6 6 8 2 3 , at * 1

. A s w ith h is f irst p etitio n , th e h ab eas co u rt

su m m arily

d ism issed th e p etitio n , an d th is co u rt af f irm ed o n ap p eal. Id . at * 2 , * 6

.
T h e p etitio n er f

iled th e cu rren t p etitio n f

o r p o st-co n v ictio n relief

, p ro se , o n A p ril 9 , 2 0 1 0

. A s w e u n d erstan d h is arg u m en t, th e p etitio n er asserted in h is p etitio n th at h is sen ten ce
w as illeg al b ecau se it w as g reater th an th e p resu m p t i v e mi n im

u m sen ten ce, h is o f

f en ses sh o u ld h av e b een co n so lid ated p u rsu an t to th e m erg er d o ctrin e f o r h av in g o ccu rred w ith in

a 2 4 -h o u r p erio d o f tim e, h e w as erro n eo u sly “treated as so m e so rt o f ‘recid iv ist’ o f f en d er,” h is sen ten ce w as en h an ced b ased o n th e erro n eo u s ap p licatio n o f th e “‘ex cep tio n al cru elty ’”

an d “‘d esire f

o r p leasu re an d ex citem en t’” en h an cem en t f acto rs, an d th e trial co u rt d id n o t

su b m it th e en h an cem en t f acto rs to th e j u ry co n trary to B lak ely

. T h e S tate m o v ed to d ism iss th e p etitio n , an d th e h a b eas co u rt g ran ted th e S tate’s m o tio n o n D ecem b er 2 8 , 2 0 1 0 , 1

co n clu d in g th at th e p etitio n f ailed to ad h ere to th e m an d ato ry p ro ced u ral req u irem en ts f o r seek in g a w rit an d f

ailed to raise a co g n izab le claim f o r h ab eas co rp u s relief

. T h e p etitio n er f iled a n o tice o f

ap p eal o n F eb ru ary

1 1 , 2 0 1 1

.
A N A L Y S IS

A s a n in itial m atter, th e S tate u rg es th is co u rt to d ism iss th e ap p eal b ecau se th e p etitio n er f

iled an u n tim ely n o tice o f ap p eal. T en n essee R u le o f A p p ellate P ro ced u re 4 (a) p ro v id es th at th e n o tice o f ap p eal m u st b e f iled “w ith in 3 0 d ay s af

ter th e d ate o f en try o f th e j u d g m en t ap p ealed f

ro m [ .] ” H o w ev er, th e ru le f u rth er p ro v id es th at “in all crim in al cases th e ‘n o tice o f ap p eal’ d o cu m en t is n o t j u risd ictio n al an d th e f ilin g o f su ch d o cu m en t m ay b e
w aiv ed in th e in terest o f j u stice.” Id

. E v en th o u g h th e h ab e a s c o u r t ’ s o r d er w as f iled o n D ecem b er 2 8 , 2 0 1 0 , co n sid erin g th at th e reco rd ref lects th at a co p y o f th e o rd er w as n o t sen t to th e p etitio n er u n til F eb ru ary 4 , 2 0 1 1 , w e w ill rev iew th e p etitio n er’s claim s in th e in terest

o f j u stice.

T h e p etitio n er arg u es th at th e h ab eas co u rt erred in d ism issin g h is p etitio n d esp ite h is f ailu re to co n f

o rm to th e p ro ced u ral req u irem en ts an d also asserts th at h e raised a co g n izab le claim f o r h ab eas relief

.
Wh eth er th e p etitio n er is en titled to h ab eas co rp u s r e l i e f i s a q u estio n o f law

. S u mme r s v

. S tate, 2 1 2 S .W.3 d 2 5 1 , 2 5 5 (T en n

. 2 0 0 7 ); H art v

. S tate, 2 1 S .W.3 d 9 0 1 , 9 0 3 (T en n

. 2 0 0 0 ). A s su ch , o u r rev iew is d e n o vo w ith n o p resu m

p tio n o f co rrectn ess g iv en to th e trial co u rt’s f

in d in g s an d co n clu sio n s. Id

.
It is w ell-estab lish ed in T en n essee th a t th e rem ed y p ro v id ed b y a w rit o f h ab eas

T he rec ord re fl ect s that a copy of the ord er was not sen t to the pet it ion er unt il Feb rua ry 4, 20 11. 1

-3-co rp u s is lim ited in sco p e an d m ay o n ly b e in v o k ed w h ere th e j u d g m en t is v o id o r th e

p etitio n er’s term o f im

p riso n m en t h as ex p ired

. F au lk n e r v

. S t a t e, 2 2 6 S .W.3 d 3 5 8 , 3 6 1 (T en n

. 2 0 0 7 ); S tate v . R itch ie, 2 0 S .W.3 d 6 2 4 , 6 2 9 (T en n

. 2 0 0 0 ); S tate v

. D av en p o rt, 9 8 0 S .W.2 d 4 0 7 , 4 0 9 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 1 9 9 8 ). A v o id , as o p p o sed to a v o id ab le, j u d g m en t is “o n e th at is f

acially in v alid b ecau se th e co u rt d id n o t h av e th e statu to ry au th o rity to ren d er
su ch j u d g m en t.” S u m m ers, 2 1 2 S .W.3 d at 2 5 6 (citin g D y k es v

. C o m

p to n , 9 7 8 S .W.2 d 5 2 8 , 5 2 9 (T en n

. 1 9 9 8 )). A p etitio n er b ears th e b u rd en o f estab lish in g a v o id j u d g m en t o r illeg al

co n f in em en t b y a p rep o n d eran ce o f th e ev i d e n c e

. Wy att v

. S tate, 2 4 S .W.3 d 3 1 9 , 3 2 2 (T en n

. 2 0 0 0 ). F u rth erm o re, w h en “a h ab eas co rp u s p etitio n f ails to estab lish th at a j u d g m en t is v o id , a trial co u rt m ay d ism iss th e p etitio n w ith o u t a h earin g .” S u m m ers, 2 1 2 S .W.3 d at 2 6 0 (citin g H o g an v . M ills, 1 6 8 S .W.3 d 7 5 3 , 7 5 5 (T en n . 2 0 0 5 )).

We co n clu d e th at su m

m ary d ism issal w as ap p ro p riate. F irst, th e p etitio n er f ailed to

co m p ly w ith th e m an d ato ry req u irem en ts f o r h ab eas co rp u s p etitio n s u n d er T en n essee C o d e A n n o tated sectio n 2 9 -2 1 -1 0 7 . S ectio n 2 9 -2 1 -1 0 7 p ro v id es:

(a) A p p licatio n f

o r th e w rit sh all b e m ad e b y p etitio n , sig n ed eith er b y th e p arty f o r w h o se b en ef

it it is in ten d ed , o r so m e p erso n o n th e p etitio n er’s b eh alf , an d v erif

ied b y af f id av it.
(b ) T h e p etitio n sh all state:
( 1 ) T h at th e p erso n in w h o se b eh alf th e w rit is so u g h t, is illeg ally restrain ed o f lib erty , an d th e p erso n b y w h o m an d p lace

w h ere restrain ed , m en tio n in g th e n am e o f su ch p e r s o n , if k n o w n , an d , if u n k n o w n , d escrib in g th e p erso n w ith as m u c h p articu larity

as p racticab le;
(2 ) T h e cau se o r p reten se o f su ch restrain t acco rd in g to th e b est in f o rm atio n o f th e ap p lican t, an d if it b e b y v irtu e o f an y leg al p ro cess, a co p y th er e o f sh all b e an n ex ed , o r a satisf acto ry
reaso n g iv en f

o r its ab sen ce;
(3 ) T h at th e leg ality o f th e restrain t h as n o t alread y b een ad j u d g ed u p o n a p rio r p ro ceed in g o f th e sam e ch aracter, to th e b est o f th e ap p lican t’s k n o w led g e an d b elief ; an d
(4 ) T h at it is f

irst ap p l i c a tio n f

o r th e w rit, o r, if a p rev io u s ap p licatio n h as b een m ad e, a co p y o f th e p etitio n an d p ro ceed in g s th ereo n sh all b e p ro d u ced , o r satisf acto ry reaso n s

-4-b e g iv en f o r th e f ailu re so to d o

.
T h e p r o ced u ral req u irem en ts f o r h ab eas co rp u s relief are m an d ato ry an d m u st b e
scru p u lo u sly f

o llo w ed

. S ee H ick m an v

. S tate, 1 5 3 S .W.3 d 1 6 , 2 1 (T en n

. 2 0 0 4 ). A h ab eas
co rp u s co u rt “p ro p erly m ay ch o o se to su m m arily d ism iss a p etitio n f o r f aili n g to co m

p ly

w ith th e statu to ry p ro ced u ral req u irem en ts.” S u m m ers, 2 1 2 S .W.3 d at 2 6 0

. H ere, it d o es
n o t ap p ear th at th e p etitio n w as v erif ied b y af f id av it. S ee T en n

. C o d e A n n

. § 2 9 -2 1 -1 0 7 (a). T h e p etitio n al s o f

a i ls to state th at th e leg ality o f th e im p riso n m en t h ad n o t alread y b een ad j u d g ed at a p rio r p ro ceed in g o f th e sam e ch aracter and w h eth er th is w as th e p etitio n er’s f irst ap p licatio n f

o r th e w rit. S ee id

. § 2 9 -2 1 -1 0 7 (b )(3 ), (4 ). T h e p etitio n er d o es m en tio n in h is p etitio n th at h e h ad f iled a p o st-co n v ictio n p etitio n f o r relief , b u t h e f ailed to m en tio n th at th is w as h i s t h i r d p etitio n f o r w rit o f h ab eas co rp u s o r p ro v id e co p ies o f h is f irst tw o p etitio n s an d th e co rresp o n d in g p ro ceed in g s as req u ired

.
M o reo v er, th e p etitio n er f ailed to raise a co g n izab le claim f o r h ab eas co rp u s relief

. H e asserts th at th e th ree ag g rav ated rap es o ccu rred w it h i n t h e s am e crim in al ep iso d e an d th eref o re sh o u ld h av e b een trea t e d as o n e co n v ictio n u n d er T en n essee C o d e A n n o tated sectio n 4 0 -3 5 -1 0 6 (b )(4 ). T h e p etitio n er’s relian ce o n sectio n 4 0 -3 5 -1 0 6 is m isp laced

. T h at statu te p ro v id es:
(b ) In d eterm in in g th e n u m b er o f p rio r co n v ictio n s a d ef en d an t h as receiv ed :
(1 ) “P rio r co n v ictio n ” m ean s a c o n v ictio n f o r an o f f en se
o ccu rrin g p rio r to th e co m m issio n o f th e o f f en se f o r w h ich th e d ef en d an t is b ein g sen ten ced ;

. . . . (4 ) E x cep t f

o r co n v ictio n s f

o r w h ich th e statu to r y e l e m en ts in clu d e serio u s b o d ily

in j u ry , b o d ily

in j u ry , th reaten ed serio u s b o d i l y i n j u ry o r th reaten ed b o d ily in j u ry to th e v ictim o r
v ictim s, o r co n v ictio n s f

o r th e o f f en se o f a g g rav ated b u rg lary

u n d er § 3 9 -1 4 -4 0 3 , co n v ictio n s f o r m u ltip le f elo n ies co m

m itted

w ith in th e sam e tw en ty -f o u r-h o u r p eri o d co n stitu te o n e (1 )

co n v ictio n f

o r th e p u rp o se o f

d eterm in in g p rio r co n v ictio n s[ .]

Id

. § 4 0 -3 5 -1 0 6 (b )(1 ), (4 ). T h e statu te g o v ern s th e n u m b er o f p rio r co n v ictio n s a d ef en d an t

m u st p o ss e s s i n o r d er to b e sen ten ced as a m u ltip le o f f en d er. T h e su b sectio n h e relies o n clearly ap p lies to p rio r co n v ictio n s, n o t p resen t o f f en ses, an d h as n o a p p licab ility to th e p etitio n er’s co n v ictio n s f o r ag g r a v ated rap e b ecau se h e w as n o t sen ten ced as a m u ltip le

-5-o f

f en d er. M o reo v er, a ch allen g e to a d ef en d an t’s o f

f en d er classif

icatio n is n o t a co g n izab le claim f o r h ab eas co rp u s relief as it w o u ld ren d er th e j u d g m en t, at m o st, v o id ab le an d n o t

v o id . S ee E d w ard s v . S tate, 2 6 9 S .W.3 d 9 1 5 , 9 2 4 -2 5 (T en n . 2 0 0 8 ).

T h e p etitio n er also arg u es th at h is receiv in g th ree sep arate co n v ictio n s f o r o f f en ses
o ccu rrin g d u rin g o n e crim in al ep iso d e v io lated th e d o u b le j eo p ard y clau se an d also th at th e th ree o f f en ses sh o u ld h av e b een co n so lid ated u n d er T en n essee R u les o f C rim in al P ro ced u re 8 , 1 3 , an d 1 4 as h av in g b een a p art o f a co m m o n sch em e an d p lan

. T h e p e t itio n er’s arg u m en t m isap p reh en d s th e p u rp o se o f th ese ru les. R u le 8 states in p art:
(a) M an d ato ry

Jo in d er o f

O f f en ses.
(1 ) C riteria f

o r M an d ato ry Jo in d er. T w o o r m o re o f f en ses sh all b e j o in ed in th e sam e in d ictm en t, p resen tm en t, o r in f o rm atio n , w ith each o f

f en se stated in a sep ar a t e c o u n t, o r th e o f f en ses
co n so lid ated p u rsu an t to R u le 1 3 , if th e o f f en ses are:
(A ) b ased o n th e sam e co n d u ct o r arise f ro m th e
sam e crim in al ep iso d e;
(B ) w ith in th e j u risd ictio n o f a sin g le co u rt; an d
(C ) k n o w n to th e ap p ro p riate p ro secu tin g o f f icial at th e tim e o f th e retu r n o f t h e in d ictm en t(s), p resen tm en t(s), o r in f

o rm atio n (s).
(2 ) F ailu re t o J o i n S u ch O f f en ses. A d ef

en d an t sh all n o t b e
su b j e c t t o sep arate trials f

o r m u ltip le o f f en ses f allin g w ith in R u le 8 (a)(1 ) u n less th ey

are sev ered p u rsu an t to R u le 1 4

. (b ) P erm issiv e Jo in d er o f O f f en ses. T w o o r m o re o f

f en ses m ay b e j o in ed in th e sam e in d ictm en t, p resen tm en t, o r in f o rm atio n , w ith each o f

f en se stated in a sep arate co u n t, o r co n so lid ated p u rsu an t to R u le 1 3 , if :
(1 ) th e o f f en ses co n stitu te p arts o f a co m m o n sch em e o r p lan ;
o r
(2 ) th ey are o f th e sam e o r sim ilar ch aracter.

R u le 1 3 states:

-6-(a) C o n so lid atio n

. T h e co u rt m ay o rd er co n so lid atio n f o r trial o f tw o o r m o re in d ictm en ts, p resen tm en ts, o r in f o rm atio n s if th e o f

f en ses an d all d ef

en d an ts

co u ld h av e b e en j o in ed in a sin g le in d ictm en t, p resen tm en t, o r in f o rm atio n p u rsu an t to R u le 8

. (b ) S ev eran ce. T h e co u rt m ay o rd er a sev eran ce o f o f f en ses o r d ef

en d an ts b ef o re trial if a sev eran ce co u ld b e o b tain ed o n m o tio n o f a d ef en d an t o r o f th e state p u rsu an t to R u le 1 4

.
H ere, th e p etitio n er’s o f

f en ses w ere j o in ed in th e sam e in d ictm en t an d d isp o s e d o f in th e sam e trial as p ro v id ed f o r u n d er th e ab o v em en tio n ed ru les. T h ese ru les reg ard in g
co n so lid atio n an d m erg er d o n o t o p erate to co m b in e m u ltip le o f f en ses in to o n ly o n e o f

f en se
as asserted b y th e p etitio n er. M o reo v er, th e p etitio n er’s th ree sep arate co n v ictio n s w ere th e
resu lt o f th ree d iscreet acts o f ag g rav ated rap e an d th e r e f o r e w ere n o t in v io latio n o f th e d o u b le j eo p ard y

clau se.

T h e p etitio n er f

u rth er arg u es th at h is sen ten ces are illeg al b ecau se h e w as sen ten ced ab o v e th e m in im

u m sen ten ce in th e ran g e, th e trial co u rt in co rrectly en h an ced h is sen ten ces b ased o n f

in d in g s o f

“ex cep tio n al cru elty ,” see T en n

. C o d e A n n

. § 4 0 -3 5 -1 1 4 (5 ), an d th at th e o f f en ses w ere co m m itted to g ratif y h is d esire f

o r p leasu re o r ex citem en t, see id

. § 4 0 -3 5

- 1 1 4 (7 ), an d n o n e o f th e en h an cem en t f acto rs w ere su b m itted to th e j u ry in v io la t i o n o f B lak ely

.
With reg ard to th e p etitio n er’s co n ten tio n s reg ard in g h is sen ten ce, w e f irst n o te th at th e trial co u rt d id n o t ev en ap p ly th e ex cep tio n al cru elty en h an cem en t f

acto r in en h an cin g th e p etitio n er’s sen ten ce. S ee Jack ie F

. C u rry , 2 0 0 1 W L 8 7 2 7 8 9 , at * 6

. In ad d itio n , th e ap p licab ility o f en h an cem en t f acto rs w as d eterm in ed o n d irect ap p eal, see id ., th e p etitio n er
m ad e th e sam e ch allen g e reg ard in g th e len g th o f h is sen ten ces in h is f irst p etitio n f

o r w rit

o f h ab eas co rp u s, see Jack ie F . C u rry , 2 0 0 5 WL 9 2 7 1 5 8 , at * 1 -2 , an d th e p etitio n er raised th e sam e B lak ely issu e in h is p etitio n f o r p o st-co n v ictio n relief

. S ee Jack ie F

. C u rry , 2 0 0 5 WL 3 3 4 3 8 2 6 , at * 1

. “‘[ I] t is a f u n d am en tal p rin cip le o f law th at th e r e me d y o f h a b eas
c o r p u s m ay n o t b e u sed to resu rrect an d relitig ate m atters w h ich h av e b een raised an d d eterm in ed in a p rio r su it f o r h ab eas co rp u s, a p rio r su it f o r p o s t

- c o n v ictio n relief

, o r o n d irect ap p eal u n less a ch an g e in th e law ren d ers th e p etitio n er’s co n v ictio n v o id .’” R o b ert M

. Win ters v

. Jim M o rro w , Ward en , N o

. E 2 0 0 9 -0 1 3 3 4 -C C A -R 3 -H C , 2 0 1 0 WL 2 2 6 5 4 4 1 , at * 2 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. Ju n e 7 , 2 0 1 0 ), p erm

. to ap p eal d en ied (T en n

. O ct. 1 2 , 2 0 1 0 ) (citin g F red d ie O ld en v

. D av id M ills, Ward en & th e S tate o f T en n essee, N o

. 3 3 2 , 1 9 9 1 WL 5 9 3 6 6 , at * 2 (T en n . C rim . A p p . A p r. 1 2 , 1 9 9 1 ) (citatio n s o m itted )).

-7-M o reo v er, ad d itio n ally w ith sp ecif ic reg ard to th e p etitio n er’s B lak ely c l a i m, t h e p etitio n er’s case b ecam e f in al b ef o re B lak ely w as d ecid ed , an d “A p p ren d i /B lak ely ty p e issu es reg ard in g allo catin g f act-f in d in g au th o rity to j u d g es d u rin g sen ten cin g are n o t in th e
n arro w class o f p ro ced u ral ru les th at ap p ly retro activ ely .” U ly sses R ich ard so n v

. S tate, N o

. W2 0 0 6 -0 1 8 5 6 -C C A -R 3 -P C , 2 0 0 7 WL 1 5 1 5 1 6 2 , at * 2 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. M ay 2 4 , 2 0 0 7 ), p erm

. to ap p eal d en ied (T en n

. S e p t

. 1 7 , 2 0 0 7 ). F u rth erm o re, ev en a v alid B lak ely claim

ren d ers a co n v ictio n v o id ab le, n o t v o id , an d is th u s n o n -co g n izab le in h ab eas co rp u s rev iew

. R ich ard so n , 2 0 0 7 WL 1 5 1 5 1 6 2 , at * 3

.
C O N C L U S IO N

B ased o n th e f

o reg o in g au th o rities an d reaso n in g , af f irm th e su m m ary

d ism issal o f th e p etitio n

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A L A N E

. G L E N N , J U D G E

-8-