T en n. C t
. A p p . R

. 1 0 p ro vid es: 1
T h e C o u rt, w ith the c o n c u rr e n c e o f all ju d g e s p a rtic ip a ting in th e c a se , m a y a ff irm , re v e rs e o r m o d ify t he act i o ns o f

t he t ri al co urt by me m o randum op i ni o n when a fo rma l op i ni o n w o u ld h ave no prec edent i al val ue. W hen a c as e i s deci ded b y memo r andum opi ni on, i t s hal l be des i gn at ed “M E M O R A N D U M O P IN IO N ,” s h a ll no t be pub l i shed, and s hal l not b e ci t ed or rel i ed on f o r any r eas on i n a ny un r el at ed cas e. 

### IN THE COURT OF APP EALS OF TENNESS EE

AT NAS HVILLE A ssi gne d on Brie fs Ja nuary12, 200 4 MA RV IN M AR TIN v. MEM BER S A ND CH AIR MA N O F B OAR D O F

PR OBA TION AN D P AR OLE Appeal f romthe Chancer y Court for Davidson Cou nty No. 02-3695-I Ir vin Kilcre ase, Chancellor

No. M2003- 00790-COA-R 3-CV - F iled Fe bruary 8, 2005
This appea l involves a prisoner’ s conce rns about overc rowding at t he correc tional fac ilityin which he is incar cer ated. The prisoner f iled a petition for c ommon-law writ of certiorari in the Chance ry Court for Da vidson Countyseeking an orde r compe lling the Te nnessee Boa rd of P ro b at i o n and Paro le to a dv a nc e his re le a se e lig ibi lit y date . T he tria l c ou rt

g rante d th e B oa

rd ’s Te nn . R. Civ . P. 12 .0 2( 6) mot ionto d ism iss , a ndthepriso ne r a pp e a le d. We v a c a te thejud g me nt andre ma nd thec a se w i t h d i r e c t i o n s t o d i s m i s s t h e p e t i t i o n b e c au s e i tw a s f i l e d i n t h e w r o n g c o u n t y. Tenn. R. App . P . 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgme nt of th e Chancer y Court Vac ated W I L L I AM C. K O CH , J R ., P.J ., M.S., delivered the opinion of the court, in which W I L L I AM B. C A IN and P ATR I C I A J. C O T T RE LL , J J ., joined. Marvin Martin, Cl ifton, Tennesse e, Pro Se. Paul G . Su mme rs , A tto rn e y Ge ne ra l a ndRe po rt e r, a nd S tep han ie R. Re e ve rs , A sso c iate De pu ty Attorney Gene ral, for

the appe llees, Member s and Chairman of Boa rd of Probation and Parole. M EM OR AN DU M OP IN ION 1 On Dec ember

10, 2002, Marvin Martin, a prisoner incar cer ated in the Way ne County Boot Camp, filed a pr o se petition for common-law writ of certiorari in the C hance ry Court for Da vidson Cou nty . M r. Ma

rt in w a s c on c e rn e d a

bout ov e rc ro wd ing a t th e fa c ili ty , a ndthepu rp os e of his petition was to obtain an orde r re quiring the Tenne ssee B oard of Probation and Parole to invoke the-2-

safe ty valve r elea se provisions in Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 41-1-501 to - 510 (2003). The B oard f iled a motion to di smiss under Tenn. R

. Civ. P. 12.02(1), ( 3), and ( 6). The trial court g rante d the motion on the g ro un d that Mr

. Ma rt in ha d faile d to state a c la im up on wh ic h re lie f c ou ld b e g rante d b e c aus e his “petition does not seek re view of any particula r dec ision made by

the B oard in an y j u d i ci al or quasi-judicial ca

pacity .” Mr. Ma

rtin has appe aled. I n th e abs e nc e of

a no the r a pp lic ableve nu e pr ov isi on , s tate priso ne rs mu st file a ll l a ws uit s involving ca

uses of a ction that acc rue w hile they are incar cer ated in the courts of the county wher e the cor rec tional fac ilityin which they are housed is located. T enn. Code Ann. § 41- 21-803 (2003)

. This venue pr ovision applies to pe ti ti o n s for writs of common-law c ertiora ri involving the c onditions of inca rce ration or the c onduct of those r esponsible for the care and c ustody of the prisone r. Ha wk ins v . Te nn e sse e De p’ t of Cor r. , 127 S.W .3d 749, 764-65 (Te nn. Ct. App. 2002). Th e B oa rd sp e c if ic a lly re lie d o n T e nn . Co de An n. § 4 1- 21 -80 3 in it s Ten n. R. C iv. P. 12.02(3) motion to dismi ss. I ts re l i anceon this statute was appropriate bec ause Mr . Martin’s complaint stems from the conditions of his confine ment in Way ne County

. Acc ording ly , the trial c ou rt sh ou ld h a ve dis mis se d M r. Ma rtin’ s c omp la int

be c aus e it w a s f

ile d inthewrong cou nty

in acc ordanc e with Tenn. Code A nn. § 41-21-803. We vacate the orde r dismissing Mr. Martin’s petition for failure to state a c laim upon which relief can beg rante d, and we rema nd the ca se to the tri al court with instructions to enter an order dis mis sin g thepe tit ionbe c aus e it w a s f ile d inthewr on g c ou nty . We ta x the c os ts o f this app e a l to Marvin Martin for which e x ecution, if ne cessa ry , may issue. We also find that Mr. Martin’s pe tition for writ of common-law c ertiora ri and subseque nt appea l are fr i v o l o u s in acc ordanc e with Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 41-21- 807(c) , -816(a )(1) (2003).

______________________________ WILL I AM C. K OC H, JR., P. J., M. S.