### IN THE COURT OFCRIMI NAL AP PEALS OF TENNES SEE ATJAC KSON February2, 201 0 S es sio n DERRIC K D . F UTC H v. S TAT E OFTEN NES SEE D irec t A p p ea l f

ro m th e C rim ina l C o u rt fo r S h elb y C o u n ty N o. 07- 06992 L ee V . C of f ee, Judge

N o. W 2009- 01678- C C A - R 3- P C - F i l ed A pri l 9, 2010

T he p et i t i on er, D err ick D . F u tch , pleaded g uil t y to aggravated sexual bat t ery, a C l ass B fel ony. T he tr i al cour ts ent ence d hi m t o 8 year s , at 100 per cent , i n t he Tennes s ee D epar t m ent o f C o rre c tio n . T h e p e tit io n e r file d a p e tit io n fo r p o st-c o n v ictio n re lief, w h ich th e p o stc o n v ictio n c o u rt su m m a rily d ism iss e d . T h e p e tit io n e r a p p e a ls th e su m m a ry d ism iss a l o f h is pet i t i on for p o st- convi ct i on r el i ef
. A f t era r evi ew of

t he r ecor d, t he par t i es ’ br i efs , and appl i cabl e l aw , w e re ver s e t he j udgm ent of t he pos t
- convi ct i on cour tand r em and forf ur t her pr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i t h t hi s opi ni on. T enn. R . A pp. P . 3 A ppeal as of R i ght ; Judgm ent of

t he C ri m i nal C ourt R ever s ed and R em anded J
. C. M C L IN , J
. , del i ver ed t he opi ni on of t he cour t , i n w hi ch J ER R Y L. S MI TH and C AMI LLE R. M C M ULL EN , J J
. , j oi ned. D e rr ic k D . F u tc h , H e n n in g , T e n n e s s e e , P ro S e . R ober tE
. C ooper , J r . , A t t or ney G ener al and R epor t er ; C am er on L. Hyd e r , As s i s t antA t t or ney G en era l; W il li am L
. G ibb o n s, D istri ct A tt o rne y G en era l; an d G lenn B ait ey , A s s i s t antD i s tr i ct A t t or ney G ener al , fort he appe l l ee, St at e of T ennes s ee. OP I NI ON F act s and P roce dural H i s t ory T he Shel by C ount y G r and J ur y i ndi ct ed the pet i t i oner , D errick D
. Fut ch, for a g g ra v a ted se x u a l b a ttery , a C las s B fe lo n y . O n Ju n e 2 , 2 0 0 8 , th e p e tit io n e r p lea d e d g u ilt y t o t h e c h a r g e , a n d t h e tr i a l c o u r ts e n t e n c e d h i m t o s e r v e 8 y e a r s , a t1 0 0 p e r c e n t , i n t he T en n esse e D ep artm en t of C o rrecti o n . T h e p eti ti o n er d id n o t fi le a d ir ec t app ea l; h o w ev er, o n J u n e 2 5 , 2 0 0 9 , th e p e titio n e r file d a p e t i t i o n fo r p o s t- c o n v ic tio n re lie f. In hi s pro se-2-

pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef, t he pet i t i oneral l eged that( 1) hi s r i ghtagai ns ts el fi ncr i m ination w as vi ol at ed; ( 2) hi s gui l t ypl ea w as unl aw ful , i nvol unt ary , and unknow i ng; ( 3) t her e w as il lega l e vi dence admi t t ed dur i ng hi s tr i al ; ( 4) ther e w as an uncons t i tut i onal fai l ur e t o di s cl os e fa vor abl e evi dence ; and ( 5) thathi s tr i al couns el w as i neff ect i ve. T he pos t
- convi ct i on cour tdi d not appoi nt an at t orney or hol d an evi dent i aryhear i ng befor e di s m i s s i ng the pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el ief. In it s or der , the tr i al courts t at ed th a t: T he Pet i t i on s hal l be di s m i s s ed w i t houtt he nec es s i t yof an e vi dent i aryhear i ng.

. . . . T he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons bar s t he pet i t i on er’s pet i t i on [for ] pos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef pur s uantt o T. C. A. §40- 30- 102 i n thatone ( 1) y earhas pas s ed s i nce the dat e of the fi nal court act i on on t he pet i t i oner ’ s cas e. . . . T he expi r at i on of the s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s o c c u rr e d o n J u n e 2 , 2 0 0 9

. N o courts hal l have j ur i s di ct i on t o cons i der a pet i t i on fi l ed af t erthe expi r at i on o f th e lim itatio n s p e rio d . T h e re a re n o a llo w a n c e s f o r th e to lli n g o f

th e sta tu te of l i m i t at i ons ; how ever , due pr oces s m ayr equi r e the court s to d is r egar d the s t at ut e of l i mi t a t i o n s . . . . Th e p e t i t i o n e r h a s n o t s h o wn th a t h e f i t s wi t h i n an e x c e p tio n to th e s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s . R e lief is a v a ilab le u n d e r th e P o st-C o n v ictio n P ro c e d u re A c t o f th is S tate o n ly w hen the convi ct i on ors ent ence att acke d i s voi d orvoi dabl e bec aus e of the a b ri d g m e n t o f a ri g h t g u a ra n te e d b y th e S ta te o r F e d e ra l C o n s titu tio n . T. C. A. §40- 30- 103.

. . . T he pet i t i onerhas fai l ed t o s t at e anyl egal gr ounds on w hi ch th e C o u rt c a n c o n s id e r t h is re q u e s t. T he pet i t i oner t i m el y appea l s fr om t hi s or der di s m i s s i ng hi s pet i t i on fo r pos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef. A n a ly sis T he pet i t i onercont ends t hat t he t r i al cour t err ed w hen i tdet erm i ned thatt he pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef w as t i m e barr ed and di s m i s s ed t he pet i t i on w i t hout conduct i ng an evi dent i aryhear i ng. Speci fi cal l y , t he pet i t i oner ar gues t hat t he one- y ear s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons p e rio d d id n o t ex p ire u n til Ju ly2 , 2 0 0 9 , an d th a t an e v id e n tiary he a rin g w a s n e c e ss a ryto d e ter m in e w h e th e r du e p ro c e ss c o n sid e ra tio n s tolle d th e sta tu te o f lim itatio n s. T h e s ta te-3-

agr ees t hatt he pet i t i onerhad unt i l J ul y 2, 2009, t o fi l e hi s pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef. T h u s, th e sta te c o n c e d e s th a t th e trial c o u rt in c o rre c tlyd ism iss e d th e p e tit io n f o r p o stc o n v ic tio n re lie f

a s u n tim e ly. T h e T e n n e ss e e P o st-C o n v ictio n P ro c e d u re A c t sta tes th a t: a per s on i n cus t ody undera s ent ence of a c our tof thi s s t at e mustpet i t i on for pos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef unde rthi s partw i t hi n one ( 1) y ear of the dat e of the fi nal act i on of the hi ghes ts t at e appe l l at e courtt o w hi ch an a ppeal i s t aken or , i f no a p p e a l i s t a k e n , wi t h i n o n e ( 1 ) y e a r o f t h e d a t e o n wh i c h th e j u d g me n tb e c a me f in a l, o r c o n s id e ra tio n o f th e p e titio n s h a ll b e b a rr e d

. T enn. C ode A nn. §40- 30- 102( a)

. “A j udgm entof convi ct i on ent er ed upon a gui l t ypl ea b e c o m e s f

in a l th ir ty d a y s a f

te r a c c e p ta n c e o f

th e p le a a g re e m e n t a n d im p o s itio n o f s e n te n c e .” Stat e v. G r een , 1 0 6 S .W .3 d 6 4 6 , 6 5 0 (T e n n . 2 0 0 3 ). T h e s ta tu te o f lim itatio n s f

o r p o stc o n v ic tio n re lie f

d o e s n o t b e g in to ru n u n til th ir ty d a y s a f te r a p e titio n e r’ s g u ilty p le a . A l l en O live r v . S ta te , No
. W 2 0 0 2

- 0 2 0 8 5

- CCA- R3

- P C, 2 0 0 3 W L 2 1 3 3 8 9 3 8 , a t * 1 ( Te nn . Cr i m. A p p . a t J a c k s o n M a y1 6 , 2 0 0 3 ). O n J une 2, 2008, t he pet i t i onerpl eade d gui l t yt o the cha r ge of a ggr avat ed s exual b a ttery, a n d th e c o u rt e n ter e d ju d g m e n t th a t d a y . T h e sta tu te o f lim itatio n s f

o r p o stconvi ct i on r el i ef di d notbegi n t o run unt i l J ul y2, 2008, t hi r t yday s l at er . T hus , t he pet i t i oner h a d u n til Ju ly2 , 2 0 0 9 , to f ile h is p e tit io n f

o r p o st-c o n v ictio n re lief. T h e p e tit io n e r tim e ly fi l ed hi s pet i t i on on J une 25, 2009. A ccor di ngl y , w e ca nnotagr ee w i t h the pos t
- convi ct i on cour tt hatt he pet i t i oner unt i m el y fi l ed hi s pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef. W e conc l ude t hatt he pet i t i oner t i m el y fi l ed hi s pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef, and he i s ent i t l ed t o an e v i d e n t i a r yh e a r i n g o n t h e me r i t s o f h i s p o s t
- c o n v i c t i o n c l a i m. We n o t e th a tb e c a u s e we concl ude tha tt he pet i t i onert i m el yfi l ed hi s pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef, the i s s ue of w h e th e r d u e p ro c e s s c o n s id e ra tio n s to lle d th e s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s is m o o t. I n i t s or d er, the tr ial cour tal s o s t at ed thatthe pet i t i onerfai l ed t o s t at e anyl egal gr ounds on w hi ch the courtcoul d cons i derhi s pet i t i on forpos t
- convi ct i on r el i ef. W hether a pos t
- convi ct i on court pr oper l y di s m i s s ed a pet i t i on for fai l ur e t o s t at e a cl ai m i s a ques t i on o f la w a n d is th e re f

o re re v ie w e d d e n o v o . S e e B u rn e tt v. S ta te , 92 S. W
. 3d 403, 406 ( T enn. 2 0 0 2 ); F ield

s v . S ta te , 40 S. W
. 3d 450, 457 ( T enn. 2 001)

. Pur s uantt o t he Pos t
- C onvi ct i on P roc ed u re A ct, a p o st- co n v ict ion p eti ti o n m u st spe ci fygr ounds forreli ef inclu d ing d iscl o su re of t he fac tual bas i s of thos e gr ounds

. T enn. C ode A nn. § 40- 30- 106( d)

. Sect i on 40- 30- 106 o f th e P o st-C o n v ictio n P ro c e d u re A c t p ro v id e s in p e rtin e n t p a rt:-4-

( d) T he pet i t i on m us tcont ai n a cl earand s peci fi c s t at ementof al l gr ounds upon w hi ch r el ief is so u ght , i ncl udi ng ful l di s cl os ur e of the fa ctual bas i s of t hos e gr ounds

. A bar e al l egat i on t hat a const i tut i onal r i ght has been vi ol at ed and mer e conc l us i ons of l aw s hal l notbe s uffi ci entt o w arr antanyfur t her p ro c e e d in g s. F a ilu re to sta te a f a c tu a l b a sis f

o r th e g ro u n d s a lleg e d sh a ll res u lt in im m ed iat e d ism issal of the p eti ti o n . If, h o w ev er, the p eti ti o n w as f il ed p ro s e, t he j udge mayent eran or ders tat ing t hatthe pet i t i onerm us tfi l e an amended pet i t i on t hat compl i es w i t h t hi s s ect i on w i t hi n fi ft een ( 15) day s ort he p e titio n w ill b e d is m is s e d

. T e n n . C o d e A n n . § 4 0 -3 0 -1 0 6 (d ). L ooki ng t o t he Tennes s ee Supre m e C ourtR ul es , w e not e thatonce a pet i t i onerfi l es a peti t i on , a j ud ge w i l l revi ew t he p et i t i on and determ i ne w heth e r th e p et i t i on st at es a col or abl e cl ai m . T enn. Sup. C t
. R
. 28, § 6( B ) ( 2)

. A col or abl e cl ai m i s “a cl ai m , i n a pet i t i on fo r po st- co n v ict ion reli ef , that, if t ak en as tru e, in the li g h t m o st f av o rab le t o the p eti ti o n er, w oul d ent i t l e the pet i t i onert o r el i ef unde rthe Pos t
- C onvi ct i on Pr ocedur e A ct
. ” A r nold v. State , 1 4 3 S

. W
. 3 d 7 8 4 , 7 8 6 (T en n . 2 0 0 4 ) (qu o ti n g T en n . S u p . C t. R
. 2 8 , § 2 (H )).
“ P o st-c o n v ictio n re lief

is a v a ilab le o n ly w h e n ‘th e c o n v ictio n o r se n ten c e is v o id o r v o id a b le beca us e of the abr i dgm entof anyr i ght guar ant eed by t he C ons t i tut i on of Tennes s ee ort he C o n sti tut i on of the U ni t ed St at es . ’ ” Id

. ( quot i ng T enn. C ode A nn. § 40- 30- 203)

. In det erm i ni ng w hethera col or abl e cl ai m exi s t s “pr o s e pet i t i ons ar e t o be hel d t o l es s s t r i ngent s t andar ds t han form al pl ea d ing s d raf t ed byl aw y er s . ” A llen v . S ta te , 854 S. W
. 2d 873, 875 (T e n n . 1 9 9 3 ) (c itatio n s o m itt e d ). “I n th e e v e n t a c o lo ra b le c la im is s ta te d , the ju d g e sh a ll ent era pr el i m i naryor derw hi ch .

. . appoi nt s couns el , i f pet i t i oneri s i ndi gent
. ” Tenn. Sup. C t
. R
. 28, § 6( B ) ( 3) ( a)

. “I n t he event t he courtconcl udes aft erthe pr el i m i naryr evi ew t hat a col or abl e cl ai m i s notas s er t ed by the pet i t i on, t he cour t s hal l ent eran or derdi s m i s s i ng the pet i t i on or an orde r r equi r i ng t hat t he pet i t i on be amended. ” Id

. at § 6 (B )(4)(a). H o w ev er, “[n] o pr o se p eti ti o n s hal l be di s m i s s ed forfai l ur e t o fol l ow t he pr es cr i bed form unt i l t he cour thas gi ven pet i t i oner a re as onabl e opportuni t y t o amend t he pet i t i on w i t h t he as s i s t ance of couns el

. ” Id . at § 6 (B )(4 )(b ) (e m p h a sis a d d e d ); s ee al s o A l l en , 854 S. W
. 2d at875. In iti a lly , w e n o te th a t se v e ra l o f th e p e tit io n e r’s c laim s a re im p ro p e r f o r p o stconvi ct i on r el i ef. H ow ever , vi ew ed i n t he l i ght m os t favor abl e t o t he pet i t i oner , the pet i t i on and the att ache d m emoran d u m al s o al l ege c l ai m s that , i f t aken a s true, w oul d ent i t l e the pet i t i onert o r el i ef. T h e m emora ndum al l eges thatthe pet i t i onert ook s ever al m edi cat i ons t hataff ect ed hi s l evel of aw ar enes s of hi s s urr oundi ngs . B ec au se o f thi s , t he pet i t i oner ar gues t hathi s confe s s i on of gui l t t hr ough t he pl ea agr eement w as unr el i abl e. T he pet i t i on fur t heras s ert s t hatt he pet i t i oners i gned “a paperhe di d [not ] know orunderst and the co n tents an d p u rpo se o f,” a n d h e b eli ev ed that the p ap er w as to d rop the c h arg es. F u rth er,-5-

t he pet i t i on s tat es thatt he gui l t ypl ea w as unknow i ng, i nvol unt ary , and i l l egal beca us e the s t ate u nl aw ful l yi nduced the pet i t i oner , t hr ough m i s r epr es ent at i on, t o s i gn t he pl ea agr eement
. Fi nal l y , t he pet i t i on as s ert s t hat t he pet i t i oner r ece i ved i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance of couns el beca us e tr i al couns el di d notcal l s ever al w i t nes s es t o t es t i fy for t he pet i t i oner . T he p e tit io n a lso sta tes th a t tria l c o u n se l f a iled to p re se rv e c e rtifie d q u e stio n s o f law f o r a p p e a l, a s k a b o u t t h e p e t i t i o n e r ’ s d e s i r e t o a p p e a l , a n d t i me l yf i l e a n a p p e a l

. Ac c o r d i n g l y , we concl ude thatt hes e al l egat i ons es t abl i s h a col or abl e cl ai m for r el i ef thatent i t l es t he pet i t i oner t o t he appoi nt m entof couns el , amendm entof the pet i t i on, and an e vi dent i aryhear i ng. C oncl usi on B as ed upon t he for egoi ng and t he r ecor d as a w hol e, w e r ever s e t he t ri al co u rt ’s di s m i s s al of the pet it ion and r emand t he ca s e t o the tr i al courtforfur t herpr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i t h t hi s opi ni on.

___________________________________ J
. C. M c L I N, J UDGE