# FILED

Ma rch 12, 1996 Cec il Cr ow son , Jr . Ap p e l l a te C o u rt C l e rk IN THE CO UR T OF CR IM IN AL AP PEALS OF TENN ESSEE

AT KN OXVILLE DE CE MB ER1995 SESSI ON

HA RO LD V. S MI TH, * C. C. A. # 03C 01- 9506- CR -0 0168

AP PE LL AN T, * H AW KI N S C OU N TY VS

. * Ho n . J a m e s E . B e ck n e r, Ju d ge STATE OF TENN ESSEE , * (P ost -C onv ic ti on)

APPEL LEE. *

For the Appel lan t: For the Appel lee : Harold V. Smit h Cha rl es W . Bu rs on Pro Se Atto rn ey Gene ra l and R epor

ter P.O. Box 500 450 J ames R ober tso n Par kw ay Nor theas t C or re cti on C enter Nas hv il le, TN 37243- 0493 Mo untai n C it y , TN 37683 Cl int on J . M org an Ass is tant Atto rn ey

Gene ra l 450 J ames R ober

tso n Par kw ay Nas hv il le, TN 37243- 0493 C. Berkeley Bell Jr

. Di str ic t At tor ney

Gene ra l John Dou g las Godb ee Ass t. Di str ic t At tor ney

Gene ra l Haw kins Coun ty Courth ouse Rog ersv il le, TN 37857

OPIN ION F ILED :
AFF IR ME D
W ill ia m M. B a rke r, Ju d geThe Pos t- Con v ic ti on Procedu re Ac t g ov er nin g thi s s uitco ntai ned a three y ear 1 sta tute of li mita ti ons. Tenn. Cod e Ann. §40- 30- 102 (1 990 R epl .)

. This prov is ion , al ong w it h the re mainde r of t he Act , w as re peal ed by Act s 1995, ch. 207 §1. See Tenn. C ode Ann . §40 -30-20 1 et seq. (199 5 Sup p
. ). The new Post -Convi ction Pro cedu re Act cont ain s a one y ear

st atute of li mita ti ons. Tenn. Cod e Ann. §4 0 -30-2 02( a) (1 995 Supp.)

. 2 OPIN ION The appel lan t, Harold V. Smit h, ap peal s from the Haw ki ns Cou nty C r i mi n a l C o u rt ' s j u d g me n t s u mm a r i l y d i s mi s s i n g h i s p e t i t i o n fo r p o s t
- c o n v i c t i o n re l i e f. The tr ial co urt di smi ss ed th e pet it ion on M ay 17, 1995, w it hout appoi nti ng co unsel or hol din g an e v ide nti ar

y hear ing

. The cour

t found t hat t he pet it ion w as bar re d by the statu te of

limitation s and thatthe issue s had bee n previou s ly dete rmine d. Af ter a 1
re v iew of the record and appl ic abl e aut hor it y , w e aff ir m the jud g ment.
The peti ti on w as filed on Apr il 12, 1995, and the Stat e filed an answ er to the p eti ti on on Ma y

15, 1995. Ac cordin g to the peti ti on, the appel lan t w as conv ic ted o f
sev er al count s o f armed robber y and adj udg ed a habi tual crim in al on J uly 15, 1981. Ou r c ou rt affi r me d th e j ud g me nt

. St at e v . H arol d Ve r no n Sm i th , N o. 5 5 ( Ten n. C r i m. App ., June 1 1, 198 2, Kno xv ille). T he T enn essee S upre me Co urt den ied th e ap pellan t's appl ic ati on for per mis si on to a p p e a l o n September 7, 1982. A l ong l ine of law sui ts
re q uest ing co ll ateral re li ef f ro m the habi tual c ri minal co nv ic ti on and the u nder ly ing
c o n vic t io n s fo ll o we d

. Se e , e
. g. , S m it h v. S t a t e , 8 1 4 S

. W

. 2 d 4 5 (T e n n
. 1 9 9 1 ); S m it h v. Stat e, 75 7 S. W .2d 6 83 ( Tenn. C ri m. App. 1988) ; H arold V. Smit h v . St ate, No. 03C 01- 9312- CR -0 0393 ( Tenn. C ri m. App. , J uly 1, 1994, Knoxv il le) ; Harold V. Smit h v . St ate, No. 95 (Ten n. Crim. Ap p., Ju ne 2 5, 19 87, Knoxv ille).

In th is petition , the app ellantalleged tha t his "en han ced pun ishm ent[as] an h a bitua l cri min al is inv alid be cause it does no t com port wi th th e stat uto ry p re re qu is it e s wit h re s p e c tt o p ri o r f e lo n y c o n vic t io n s
. " T h e a p p e ll a n t c it e s B e e c h u m v.3 Uni ted S tates , ___

U .S. ___, 114 S.C t. 1669, 128 L.Ed. 2d 383 (1 994) , and arg ues that the s uiti s n ot t ime bar re d bec ause Beec hum w as not a v ail abl e as a g ro und for re li ef
un t i l i tw a s d e c i d e d o n M a y 1 6 , 1 9 9 4

. O n a p p e a l , h e m a i n t a i n s t h a th e i s e n t i t l e d to
re li ef under

Beec hum. He als o c omplai ns that the t ri al judge a n d t h e Sta te fail ed to compl y w it h the st atuto ry

r eq uirements of the P ost -C onv ic ti on Procedu re s A ct.

W e di sag re e. In B eechu m v . U nit ed St ate s, su pr a, t he U nit ed St ates Supreme Cour

t inter pr eted 18 U.S. C. §921( a) (2 0) , a sta tute deal ing w it h the defini ti on of a " co n v icti on" for pur poses of the federal fire ar ms s tatut e. Id. at 16 71. The defendants had cl aimed thatpri or f ederal conv ic ti ons coul d not be used a g ain st them b e ca u se thei r ci v il r ig hts had been rest or ed pursuantto sta te l aw
. The cour t hel d as a matt er of federal st atuto ry

i nter pr eti on th at a re sto ra ti on of ci vil r ig hts for federal felons must be pursuant to federal law

. Id. In sum, Beec hum does not afford any reli ef to t he appe ll ant. See Dew ey Scot t Fraz ier v . St ate, No. 03C 01- 9505- CR -0 0142 ( Tenn. Cr im. App., Feb. 8, 1995, Knoxv il le)

. It follo w s that it als o does not ser v e as a bas is for
ex empti ng thi s c ase from the sta tute of li mita ti ons. I d.

T his pet ition w as clearly barred bythe th ree year statute of limitation s, and i t w as subj ectto summar y di smi ss al. Se e H ardin v . St ate, 873 S. W .2d 2 , 3 (Tenn. Cr im. Ap p. 19 93). T he a ppe llant's con ten tions th at th e trial judge shou ld have appoi nted couns el, co nduct ed a hear ing , and entered detai led findi ng s o f factand law
are w ithou t me rit. Likew ise, be caus e t he ground s in the pe tition were conclusively inc or re ct, th e appel lan t w as not h ar med by the Stat e's apparent fai lure to ser v e the appel lan t w it h a c opy

of it s a nsw er

to the p eti ti on. See, e.g ., Gi v e n s v . St ate, 702 S.W .2d 578, 579 (Tenn. Cr im. App. 1985) ; Tonia Lee Dav enpor t v . State, N o. 02 C01
- 930 7-CC-0015 1 (Te nn. Cri m. App. , Feb. 8 , 199 5, Jackso n).4 ______ _________

_________

___ W il li am M . Ba rk er , J udg e

_________

_________

_________

___ Da vid G . Ha yes , J u d ge

_________

_________

_________

___ Je rry L. Sm it h , J u d ge