### IN THE CO URT OF CR IMINAL APPEALS OF T ENN ESSEE
AT NASHVILL E

Ass ig ne d o n B rie fs Marc h 2 4, 2 01 0

MATTH EW R. HAK ODA v. ST ATE OF TE NNESSEE

D irect A p p ea l f

ro m th e C rim in a l C o u rt f o r D a v id so n C o u n ty
N o . 2 0 0 4 -B -1 2 1 2 S tev e D o zier, J u d g e

N o . M 2 0 0 9 -0 1 1 5 2 -C C A -R 3 -P C - F iled N o v em b er 3 0 , 2 0 1 0

P etitio n er, M atth ew R

. H ak o d a, ap p eals th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt’s d ism issal o f h is p etitio n f o r p o st-co n v ictio n relief in w h ich h e alleg ed th e in ef f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel at trial an d

o n ap p eal. A f

ter a th o ro u g h rev iew , w e af f irm th e j u d g m en t o f

th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt.

T en n . R . A p p . P . A p p ea l a s o f R ig h t; J u d g m en t o f

th e C rim in a l C o u rt A f

f irm ed

T H O M A S T

. W O O D A L L , J., d eliv ered th e o p in io n o f th e C o u rt, in w h ich J E R R Y L

. S M IT H an d

R O B E R T W. W E D E M E Y E R , JJ., j o in ed

.

J. D av id Wick er, Jr., N ash v ille, T en n essee, f o r th e ap p ellan t, M atth ew R . H ak o d a.

R o b ert E

. C o o p er, Jr., A tto rn ey G en eral an d R ep o rter; B en j am in A

. B all, A ssistan t A tto rn ey G en eral; V icto r S

. (T o rry ) Jo h n so n , I I I

, D istrict A tto rn ey G en eral; A m y H

. E isen b eck

, A ssistan t D istrict A tto rn ey G en eral; an d R ach el S o b r e ro , A ssistan t D istrict A tto rn ey G en eral, f

o r th e ap p ellee, th e S tate o f T en n essee.

O P IN IO N

I. B a ckg ro u n d

F o llo w in g a j u ry trial, P etitio n er w as co n v icted o f th ree co u n ts o f so licitatio n o f f irst
d eg ree m u rd er, a C lass B f

elo n y , an d t h e trial co u rt sen ten ced P etitio n er as a R an g e I,

stan d ard o f

f en d er, to an ef

f ectiv e sen ten ce o f tw en ty -n in e y ears. T h e f acts su rro u n d in g P etitio n er’s co n v ictio n s w ere su m m arized b y th is C o u rt o n ap p eal as f o llo w s:

T h e d e f e n d an t w as ch arg ed w ith so licitin g f ello w j ail in m ate, Jo sep h
C h a mb erlain

, to m

u rd er h is w if

e an d h er tw o ch ild ren

. A t th e tr i a l

,In v esti gato r K ev in C arro ll w ith th e D av id so n C o u n ty S h erif f ’s D ep artm en t testif ied th at ev ery telep h o n e call m ad e b y j ail in m ates w as reco rd ed in th e

n o rm al co u rse o f b u sin ess. H e said th e d ef e n d a n t w as h o u sed at th e D av id so n C o u n ty C o rrectio n al Wo rk C en ter (C WC ) o n Jan u ary 2 7

, 2 0 0 4

. T h e state in tro d u ced ex cerp ts o f th ree telep h o n e calls th e d ef en d an t m ad e
to h is m o t h e r o n Jan u ary 2 7

. In th e f irst ex cerp t, f

ro m a co n v ersatio n at
8 :3 2 a.m ., th e d ef

en d an t to ld h is m o th er to w rite d o w n a series o f item s th at
h e w a n ted

. H e to ld h er, “I w an t o n e to d o d eer w ith

, o n e to d o q u ail w ith

... o n e to d o d ef

en se w ith

, h o m e d ef

en se

... o n e to h o se d o w n [ a] car w ith .”

T h e d ef en d an t to ld h is m o th er th at h e h o p e d s h e co u ld “f ig u re th is o u t.”

T h e d ef en d an t also in stru cted h is m o th er th at h e w o u ld “n eed all th e b ells

an d w h istles to g o w ith th o se.”

In th e seco n d ex cerp t, f ro m a telep h o n e call ma d e a t 5 :2 0 p .m ., th e d ef en d an t’s m o th er rem in d ed th e d ef en d an t th at th e telep h o n e calls w ere b ein g reco rd ed . D u rin g th is co n v ersatio n , th e d ef en d an t ex p ressed an g er

an d in stru cted h is m o th er to “p u t th e sm ack d o w n w h ere it n eed s to b e p u t d o w n .” H e also in stru cted h er to g et h is “ g a r b a g e” an d to g iv e it to h is

g irlf rien d

, S carla. T h e d ef

en d an t’s m o th er assu red h im th at “ w e ’ v e g o t

ev e r y t h i n g tak en care o f

.” T h ey also talk ed ab o u t f am ily m em

b ers, in clu d in g h is t w o b ro th ers, an d h o w th ey w ere “tak in g all th is.” T h e d ef en d an t ag ain stat e d t h at h e h o p ed th ey w ere “o n track ,” to w h ich h is

m o th er resp o n d e d

, “It d o esn ’t tak e a ro ck et scien tist to p u t

... p u zzles

t o g eth er.” T h e d ef

en d an t talk ed ab o u t g ettin g h is “b u sin ess” o u t o f th e h o u se, an d h is m o th er stated th at sh e w o u ld p u t a g u n in th e tru n k an d

am m u n itio n in th e g lo v e b o x o f a car. H is m o th er also stated th at, “as f ar

as I’m co n cern ed

, I d o n ’t h a v e a f

- i n g sister .” T h e seco n d ex cerp t en d s

w ith th e d ef

en d an t statin g t h a t “ h o p ef u lly co m e S u n d ay , w e’ll m o u rn
to g eth er ab o u t th e lo ss o f f am ily m em b ers.”

D u rin g th e th ird ex cerp ted co n v ersatio n , f ro m a telep h o n e call m ad e at 7 :1 4

p .m ., th e d e f

e n d a n t to ld h is m o th er to “tran sf er th e g o o d ies” an d to tak e

p o ssessio n o f cash

. H e s p o k e rep eated ly o f a “g o o d y b ag ” an d to ld h is

m o th er to u se telep h o n es “th at aren ’t

... y o u k n o w .” T h e d ef en d a n t g o t

an g ry w ith h is m o th er, w h o d id n o t im m ed iately u n d erstan d h is d irectio n s,

an d h e to ld h er th at sh e w as “so slo w .”

N ex t, Jo sep h C h am

b erlain testif

ied th at h e w as an in m ate at C WC o n Jan u ary 2 8

, 2 0 0 4

. H e testif ie d t h a t w h i l e w o rk in g in th e k itch en o n th at d ay , th e d ef

en d an t ap p ro ach ed h im an d ask ed if C h am b erlain “co u ld g et a

-2

-j o b d o n e f o r h im .” C h am

b erlain stated th at th e d ef

en d an t ex p lain ed th at h e

w an ted h is step ch ild ren an d p o ssib ly h is w if e k illed

. C h am

b erlain said th e d e f e n d a n t w as p articu larly in terested in h av in g th e tw o ch ild ren k illed
b ec au se “it w o u ld d ev astate th e m o th er.” H e testif ied th at th e d ef

en d an t d id n o t tell h im h o w h e w an ted th e k i llin g s acco m p lish ed b u t th at th e d ef en d an t d id tell h im ab o u t w eap o n s th at h e h ad , in clu d in g a .2 2 calib er h an d g u n w ith a silen cer, w h ich th e d ef en d an t ref

erred to as “a p ea-sh o o ter

w ith a m u f f ler,” an d a .4 5 calib er g u n th at th e d ef en d an t d id n o t w an t to u se b ecau se it w as reg istered in th e d ef en d an t’s n am e.

A cco rd in g to C h am

b erlain

, th e d ef

en d an t also said h e w an ted th e k illin g s d o n e b ef o re th e d ef

en d an t w as released f

ro m j ail, so h e co u ld h av e an alib i

an d b ecau se “h e w as alread y u n d er in v estig atio n an d b ein g w atch ed f o r a

... p rev io u s f

ire an d stalk in g .” C h am

b erlain said th at h e to ld th e d ef en d an t
h e w o u ld h elp b ecau se h e w as af raid th e d ef

en d an t w o u ld f

in d so m eb o d y else to d o i t a n d t h at h e ask ed th e d ef en d an t to p ro v id e h im w ith
in f o rm atio n o n th e v ictim s. H e stated th at h e h ad n o in ten tio n o f actu ally
h elp in g th e d ef

en d an t an d th at h e im

m ed iately to ld h is “p o d c o u n selo r”
ab o u t h is co n v ersatio n w ith th e d ef en d an t.

C h am b erlain te s t i f

i e d th at tw o d ay s af

ter th is in itial en co u n ter, th e d ef en d an t ag ain ap p ro ach ed h im

. T h e d ef en d an t g av e h im a p iece o f p ap er,

w h ich w as in tro d u ced in to e vi de nc e , wi t h ha ndwr i t t e n pe r s ona l i n f

o rm atio n ab o u t th e d ef

en d an t’s w if

e, in clu d in g h er f

u ll na m e, so cial secu rity n u m b er, d ate o f b irth

, p lace o f em p lo y m en t, v eh icle d escrip tio n , licen se p late

n u m b er, an d p h y sical d escrip tio n

. T h e p ap er also in clu d ed in f o rm atio n ab o u t h is w if

e’s tw o ch ild ren , in clu d in g w h ere th ey w en t to sch o o l. T h e

n o te stated

, “T h e ch ild ren d ef in itely n eed to b e tak en care o f at all co sts, b ecau se th ey ’re so p recio u s.” T h e n o te also co n tain ed in f o rm atio n ab o u t th e d ef en d an t, in clu d in g h is d ate o f b irth

, so cial secu rity n u m b er, ad d ress,

an d cellu lar telep h o n e n u m b ers. C h am

b erlain testif

ied th at o n F eb ru ary 2

, th e d ef en d an t ag ain ap p ro ach ed h im an d ask ed if h e h ad an y g u n s f o r sale.

H e said th e d ef

en d an t d iscu ssed p o ssib le p ay m en t o p tio n s, in clu d in g a b o n d h is m o th er w as su p p o sed to sig n , so m e ap p lian ces th e d ef en d an t h ad
in sto rag e, an d a litter o f

p u p p ies. H e said th at th ey talk ed ab o u t p o ssib le
in stallm en t p ay

m en ts b u t th at n o s e t a mo u n t w as ev er d eterm in ed

. C h am b erlain said th e d ef

en d an t rep eated th at h e d ef in itely w a n t e d th e ch ild re n k i l l e d b u t th at h e p o ssib ly w an ted th e w if e h u rt o r m aim ed

, p erh ap s th ro u g h th e u se o f acid

.

-3

-C h am b erlain testif

ied th at th e n ex t tim e h e m et w ith th e d ef en d an t w as o n F eb ru ary 3 an d th at h e h ad w o rn a “w ire” p ro v id ed b y th e p o lice. H e said
th e d ef en d an t ap p eared su sp icio u s o f h i m an d d id n o t p ro v id e m u ch
in f o rm atio n

. H e also stated th at th e tran sm ittin g an d reco rd in g d ev ices d id

n o t w o rk an d th at au th o rities w ere u n ab le to h ear h is co n v ersatio n w ith th e d ef en d an t. C h am

b erlain testif

ied th at h e sp o k e to th e d ef en d an t b rief

ly o n
tw o o th er o ccasio n s. H e said th e d ef en d an t w as an g r y a t th e lack o f

p ro g ress w ith h is req u est. H e said th e d ef e n d a n t to ld h im th at th e p o lice
h ad search ed h is au n t’s h o u se, w h ere h e w as p rev io u sly liv in g , an d h ad
f o u n d h is .4 5 calib er g u n

. T h e d ef en d an t also to ld h im th at th e .2 2 calib er

p isto l w as in a sh ed o n a n eig h b o r’s p ro p erty th at w as g u ard ed b y a p it b u ll.
C h am b erlain testif

ied th at th e p o lice in f

o rm ed h i m t h a t h e w o u ld n o t g et

o u t o f j ail an y so o n er o r receiv e an y o th er h elp as a resu lt o f h is co o p eratio n in th e d ef

en d an t’s case. H e stated th at, in f act, j ail lif

e b ecam e m o re d if f icu lt f o r h im af terw ard

, as h e w as lab eled a “s n i t c h ” b y o th er in m ates

an d w as tak en o u t o f

co m m u n al f acilities.

O n cr os s

- e xam in atio n , th e d ef en se q u estio n ed C h am

b erlain ab o u t ap p aren t
in co n sisten cies b etw een h is cu rren t testim o n y a n d h is testim o n y at th e

p relim in ary h earin g

. C h am b erlain ad m itted th at at th e p relim in ary h earin g , h e st a t ed th at th e f

irst tim e th e d ef

en d an t to ld h im h e w an ted to k ill th e

c h ild ren w as Jan u ary 3 0

, n o t Jan u ary 2 8

. C h am b erlain said h e w a s

m istak en d u rin g th e p relim in ary h earin g

. H e testif ied th at th e d ef

en d an t
h ad ap p ro ach ed h im b ecau se h e h ad a rep u tatio n f o r k n o w in g “h o w to clear

o u t a p arty ,” b ased o n a p rev io u s in cid en t w h en h e in f o rm ed a f rien d to call
th e p o lice to sto p a p arty

. C h am b erlain testif

ied th at h e w as p rev io u sly in j ail b ecau se h e h ad n o t p a i d ch ild su p p o rt an d th at w h en th e d ef en d an t
in itially ap p ro ach ed h im

, th e d ef en d an t o n ly h ad th irteen d ay s lef t o f h is j ail

sen ten ce w h ereas C h am

b erlain w as n o t sch ed u led f o r release f

o r an o th er f iv e m o n th s. C h am

b erlain said h e led th e d ef en d an t t o b eliev e th at h is

atto rn ey s an d h is b ro th er w ere w o rk in g to g et h im o u t early

. T h e d ef en se also q u estio n ed C h am

b erlain o n th e m eth o d s o f p ay m en t p ro p o sed b y th e d ef en d an t, an d C h am

b erlain stated th at h e k n ew th e d ef en d an t w a s

u n em p lo y ed

.

O f f icer William K irb y o f th e M etro p o litan N ash v ille P o lice D ep artm en t testif ied th at h e ex am i n e d an d lo cated laten t f in g erp rin ts o n th e p ap er alleg ed ly w ritten b y th e d ef en d an t a n d g i v en to C h am b erlain

. L in d a Wilso n , an Id en tif

icatio n A n aly st w ith M etro P o l i c e , w as q u alif ied as an

ex p ert in f

in g erp rin t id en tif

icat i o n

. S h e testif

ied th at sh e id en tif

ied f o u r

-4

-laten t f in g erp rin ts o n th e p ap er as b elo n g in g to th e d ef en d an t. M etro P o lice

D etectiv e T im o th y S n eed

, w ith th e D o m estic V io len ce D iv isio n , testif ied

t h a t h e sp o k e w ith staf f at C WC an d w ith C h am b erlain ab o u t t h e alleg atio n s ag ain st th e d ef en d a n t. H e said h e in f

o rm ed C h am

b erlain th at th e p o lice d ep artm en t co u ld n o t assist h im w ith g ettin g o u t o f j ail early

. H e said C h am

b erlain ’s w ritten statem en ts w ere co n sisten t w ith h is in terv iew s. H e stated th at th ro u g h a search w arran t b ased o n in f o rm atio n p ro v id ed b y C h am b erlain

, h e f

o u n d th e .4 5 calib er g u n in th e d ef en d an t’s au n t’s h o u se

an d a m ag azin e f

o r a .4 5 c a l i b e r g u n in a sh ed in th e d ef en d an t’s au n t’s

y ard w h ich w as g u ard ed b y a p it b u ll. S n eed also said th e d ef en d an t w as

su sp ected in th e b u rn in g o f th e d ef en d an t’s w if

e’s h o u se.

O n cro ss-ex am in atio n , D etectiv e S n eed testif ied th at th e p o lice d id n o t f in d

a .2 2 calib er g u n d u rin g th eir search es. H e stated th at h e d id n o t q u estio n

an y j ail in m ates o th er th an C h am b erlain

. H e said th at h e k n ew th e d ef en d an t w as “ab o u t to g et o u t” o f j ail b y th e tim e h e b ecam e in v o lv ed in
th e in v estig atio n an d th at C h am b erlain h ad ap p ro x im ately f iv e m o n th s lef

t

to serv e. H e testif

ied th at th ere w as n o th i n g i n th e n o te w ritten b y th e d ef en d an t an d g iv en to C h am b erlain th at in d icat e d a m u rd er w as to tak e

p lace o r a p rice, lo catio n , d ate, o r m eth o d f o r a m u rd er. H e said h e d id n o t
i n terv iew th e d ef

en d an t’s m o th er o r ch arg e h er w ith an y crim e i n

co n n ectio n w ith th e alleg ed so licitatio n

. H e stated th at h e learn ed th at th e d ef en d an t h ad attem

p ted to h ire a p riv ate in v estig ato r b u t th at h e d id n o t
f o llo w u p o n th at in f

o rm atio n

. O n re-d irect ex am in atio n , D etectiv e S n eed
stated th at Jo sep h C h am

b erlain w as n o t a p riv ate in v estig ato r an d th at it

w o u ld v io late an o rd er o f p ro tectio n to k eep o b serv atio n o r m ak e co n tact

w ith th e p ro tected p arty

th ro u g h a th ird p erso n

.

T h e d ef en d an t’s w if

e, R u th D ren -H a k o d a, testif ied th at sh e an d th e d ef en d an t m arried in 1 9 9 9

, d iv o rced

, an d rem arried in 2 0 0 1

. S h e f iled f o r

a seco n d d iv o rce in 2 0 0 3

. S h e s t ated th at sh e o b tain ed an o rd er o f

p ro tectio n ag ain st th e d e f e n d a n t in S ep tem

b er 2 0 0 3 an d th at sh e saw th e d ef en d an t o n h er p ro p erty in v io latio n o f th e o rd er sev eral tim es. S h e said
th e in f o rm atio n ab o u t h er an d h er ch ild r e n g iv en b y th e d ef en d an t to
C h am b erlain w as co rrect, w ith th e ex cep tio n o f h er h eig h t. S h e id en tif ied
th e h an d w ritin g o n th e p ap er as b elo n g in g to th e d ef en d an t. S h e said th at af ter h earin g o f th e alleg atio n s in th e p resen t case, s h e a n d h er ch ild ren

w en t in to h id in g o u t o f f

ear f o r th eir saf

ety

. S h e said th e d ef

en d an t o w n ed

a .4 5 calib er h an d g u n an d a .2 2 calib er g u n , an d sh e b eliev ed th e latter w as

reg istered in h er n am e. A s to ap p lian ces in th e d ef en d an t’s p o ssessio n , sh e

-5

-said h e h ad a ref rig erato r. S h e also said h e h ad p it p u lls th at h e b r e d an d

w h o se p u p p ies h e so ld f

o r an y w h ere b etw een $ 1 0 0 an d $ 2 5 0

.

O n cro ss-ex am in at i o n , M s. D ren -H ak o d a testif ied th at th e d ef

en d an t d id

n o t to u ch h er o n th e o ccasio n s t h a t h e v io lated th e p ro tectiv e o rd er. S h e

s a i d sh e n ev er to ld p o lice th at h e th reaten ed to k ill o r h arm h er o r h e r ch ild ren . S h e d id say , h o w ev er, th at sh e f elt th reaten ed b y th e d ef

en d an t.

T h e d ef en d an t’s m o th er, D eb b ie K eller, testif ied f o r th e d ef en d an t. S h e d iscu ssed th e e x cerp ted telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s w ith h er so n th at w ere

p rev io u sly su b m itted in to ev id en ce. S h e said th at w h ile h er so n w as in j ail,
sh e talk ed to h im o n th e telep h o n e m u ltip le tim es a d ay f

o r ap p ro x im ately
f if teen m in u tes at a tim e, f

o r a to tal o f at least th irty h o u rs. S h e ex p lain ed
th at in th e Jan u ary 2 7

, 8 :3 2 a.m

. co n v ersatio n , sh e u n d ersto o d th at h er so n

w as ask in g h er f

o r n eed les. S h e said th e d ef en d an t lik ed to sew an d h ad a d eersk in th at h e p lan n ed to m ak e in to m o ccasin b o o ts. S h e s aid “q u ails”

w ere item s u sed to d eco rate th e b o o ts. S h e said sh e th o u g h t h er so n w as also talk in g ab o u t a h o se n eed ed f o r a carw ash an d d id n o t k n o w w h at h e

m ean t b y “h o m e d ef

en se.” S h e said th at th e d ef en d an t h ad aw ak en ed h er f ro m sleep an d th at sh e j u st p reten d ed to u n d erstan d an d w rite d o w n w h at
h e said in o rd er to g o b ack to sleep

. S h e said th at sh e d id n o t th in k h e w as talk in g in a co d e an d th at h e w a s n o t t a l k i n g ab o u t g u n s. S h e said th at d u rin g t h e 7 :1 4 p .m

. co n v ersatio n , th e d ef en d an t w as in stru ctin g h er to

sp eak to a b o n d sm an ab o u t g ettin g a f rien d o u t o f j ai l

. S h e s a i d sh e

u n d ersto o d o n ly p art o f w h at th e d ef en d an t w as say in g

. S h e said sh e

u n d ersto o d th at “g o o d y b ag ” ref er r e d t o m o n ey f

o r th e b o n d

. S h e also
testif ied th at d u rin g t h e 5 : 2 0 p .m

. co n v ersatio n , sh e an d h er so n w ere talk in g ab o u t strai n e d f

am ily relatio n sh ip s. S h e said h er sister C aro l, in

w h o se h o u se sh e w as liv in g , w as u n h ap p y ab o u t th e p o lice co m in g to h er h o u se b ecau se o f

th e d ef en d an t. S h e said “sm ack d o w n ” w as a w restlin g
term an d a f

ig u re o f sp eech th at th e d ef en d an t o n ly u sed as a j o k e. S h e said
th e “g arb ag e” th e d ef

e n d an t ref

erred to w ere h is clo th es th at h e w an ted

rem o v ed f

ro m C aro l’s h o u se. S h e said th at th e d ef en d an t w an ted h er to g et

so m e g u n s o u t o f C aro l’s h o u se b u t th at sh e d id n o t d o so

. S h e said th at th e d ef en d an t h ad recen tly h ad a f allin g o u t w ith h is b ro th er B en j i an d th at th e

co m m en t ab o u t m o u rn in g th e lo ss o f f a mi ly m em

b ers ref erred to h is

co n f lict w ith B en

j i an d h er p lan to cu t o f

f ties w ith C aro l.

M s. K eller also testif

ied th at th e th ree tap es p lay ed f o r th e j u ry w ere n o t th e

co m p lete co n v ersatio n s th at sh e h ad w ith th e d ef en d an t, alth o u g h sh e co u ld

-6

-n o t rem em b er w h at else w as d is c u s s e d

. S h e said th e o n ly ap p lian ces th e d ef en d an t h ad w ere an o ld h o m em ad e co m p u ter, a n o n -f

u n c t i o n i n g telev isio n set, an d a h an d saw

. S h e said th at th e d ef en d an t n ev er th reaten ed
h is w if e an d th at h e cared ab o u t h is step -ch ild ren

. O n cro ss-ex am in atio n , M s. K e l l e r s t a t e d th at sh e d id n o t k n o w to w h at th e $ 6 0 0 0 to $ 8 0 0 0 th e d ef en d an t d iscu ssed w ith h er r e f e rred an d th at sh e so m etim es o n ly

p reten d ed to u n d erstan d h er so n

. S h e later said th e larg e su m o f m o n ey w as f o r a d o w n p ay

m en t o n a h o u se. S h e said sh e d id n o t k n o w w h at h er so n ’s
ref eren ce to “carw ash ” o r “h o m e d ef en se” m ean t.

M ar i o H a mb rick

, a b ail b o n d sm an , testif ied th at h e h ad w o rk ed w ith th e d ef en d an t s e v eral tim es. H e said th at af ter a co n v ersatio n w ith th e d ef en d an t, h e h ad g iv en th e d ef en d an t telep h o n e n u m

b ers f o r tw o p riv ate
in v estig ato rs. T o m m y Jaco b s, a retired p o lice o f f icer an d p r o f

essio n al

p riv ate in v estig ato r, te s t i f i e d th at, in h is ex p erien ce, it is co m m o n f o r

p eo p le in v o lv ed in d iv o rces to h ire p riv ate in v estig ato rs. H e testif ied th at

a p riv ate in v estig ato r w o u ld n eed in f o rm atio n f

ro m a c l i e n t ab o u t th e

p erso n to b e in v estig at e d

, su ch as th e p erso n ’s n am e, ad d ress, p lace an d
h o u rs o f em

p lo y m en t, an d f

req u en ted lo catio n s. H e said it w o u ld b e im p o rtan t to h av e in f

o rm atio n o n an y

ch ild ren in v o lv ed , in clu d in g w h ere th ey w en t to sch o o l.

S ta te v. M a tth ew R

. H

a ko d a , N o

. M 2 0 0 5 -0 1 8 6 4 -C C A -R 3 -C D

, 2 0 0 6 WL 2 7 3 8 8 8 1

, at * 1 -5 (T en n . C rim . A p p ., at N ash v ille, S ep t. 2 1 , 2 0 0 6 ), p erm . to a p p ea l d en ied (T en n . O ct.
2 7 , 2 0 0 8 ).

II. P o st-C o n v ictio n H ea rin g

A t th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g , P etitio n er testif ied th at h e an d trial co u n s e l “m et

sev eral tim es, to g o o v er stu f f .” P etitio n er s t a t e d th at h e an d co u n sel w ere aw are th at th e

p u b lic d ef

en d er’s o f

f ice h ad ap p ro x im ately f

o rty h o u rs o f P etitio n er’ s t a p ed telep h o n e

co n v ersatio n s w ith h is m o th er o n D V D

, b u t trial co u n sel d id n o t receiv e a co p y o f th e D V D

u n til t he n ig h t b ef

o re a sch ed u led h earin g

. P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at trial co u n sel m o v ed
f o r a co n tin u an ce at th e h earin g in o rd er to h av e tim e to rev iew th e D V D

, an d th e trial co u rt d en ied h er m o tio n

. P etitio n er stated th at h e d i d n o t b e l i e v e th at trial co u n sel h ad ev er

rev iew ed th e tap ed co n v ersatio n s in th eir en tirety

. P etitio n er said th at h e an d trial co u n sel

n ev er d iscu ssed a trial strateg y

. T rial co u n sel ad v ised P etitio n er n o t to testif y at trial b ecau se th e S tate “d id n ’t [ sic] h av e a case an d th at it w o u ld p ro b ab ly b e d etrim en tal f o r [ h im ] to tak e th e stan d .” P etitio n er said th at h e u n d ersto o d th e elem en ts o f th e o f f en se o f so licitatio n o f

-7

-f

irst d eg ree m

u rd er, b u t h e d id n o t u n d erstan d th e co n cep t o f “m en s rea.” P etitio n er stated
th at trial co u n sel d id n o t ch allen g e th e trial co u rt’s sen ten cin g d eterm in atio n s o n ap p eal.

P etitio n er said th at at th e tim e th e o f f en ses w ere co m m itted

, h e w as serv in g tw en ty d ay s f o r v ario u s v io latio n s o f an o rd er o f p ro tectio n . P etitio n er ex p lain ed th at h e to ld M r. C h am b erlain th at th e v io latio n s w ere a “set u p ,” an d h e w an ted M r. C h am b erlain to h ire a

p riv ate in v estig ato r so th at P etitio n er co u ld f in d th e w itn ess w h o said th at h e h ad co m m itted

t h e v io latio n s. P etitio n er stated th at h e g av e M r. C h am b erlain th e p erso n al in f

o rm atio n ab o u t h is w if

e an d step -ch ild ren to assist th e p riv ate in v estig ato r. In stead

, M r. C h am b erlain

to ld th e law en f

o rcem en t o f

f icials th at P etitio n er “ w as try in g to h ire h im to d o a h it.”

P etitio n er stated

, h o w ev er, th at M r. C h am b erlain to ld th e p o lic e th at P etitio n er h ad

ren o u n ced th e so licitatio n p lan

. P etitio n er said th at M r. C h am b erlain to ld th e p o lice ab o u t th e p lan to m

u rd er P etitio n er’s w if

e an d step -ch ild ren in o rd er to h av e M r. C h am b erlain ’s

sen ten ce o f six m o n th s red u ced

. P etitio n er stated th at o th er in m ates w ere in th e k itch en

w h en h e sp o k e w ith M r. C h am b erlain

, b u t trial co u n sel d id n o t in terv iew th em p rio r to trial.

P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at h is th eo ry o f d ef en se, th at h e w as o n ly try in g to h ire a p riv ate
in v estig ato r, w as p resen ted at trial.

O n cro s s

- e x a min atio n , P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at h e an d trial co u n sel rev iew ed
th e tran scrip ts o f th e p o rtio n s o f h is tap ed telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s w h ich th e S tate in ten d ed

to in tro d u ce at trial. P etitio n er al s o a c k n o w l e d g ed th at h e d id n o t k n o w th e n am es o f h is
f ello w in m ates w h o w ere in th e k itch en w h en h e sp o k e to M r. C h am b erlain

. P etitio n er stated th at h e ch o se n o t to testif y at trial, b u t h e ex p lain ed th at w as “at th at tim e.” P etitio n er said th at th e ex cerp ts o f h is tap ed telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s to h is m o th er w ere tak en o u t o f

co n tex t. H e stated th at h is statem en ts ab o u t m o u rn in g f am ily me mb e r s a n d h is u se o f th e

p h rase “sm ack d o w n ” w ere j u st “f ig u res o f sp eech .” P etitio n er said th at th e mo n e y

m en tio n ed d u rin g th e co n v ersatio n s co n cern ed th e am o u n t o f a b o n d h is m o th er w as to

o b tain f o r a f ello w in m ate. O n red irect e x am in atio n , P etitio n er stated th at h e an d trial

co u n sel d id n o t rev iew th e telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s u n til th e d ay o f trial.

T rial co u n sel testif

ied th at sh e h ad w o rk ed in th e P u b lic D ef en d er’s O f

f ice f o r f iv e

y ears b ef o re en terin g p riv ate p ractice f iv e o r six y ears p rio r to th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g

. T rial c o u n sel stated th at ap p ro x im ately n in ety p ercen t o f h er p riv ate p ractice in v o lv ed
crim in al cases. T rial co u n sel said th at sh e a n d P e t i t i o n er d iscu ssed trial strateg y o n

n u m ero u s o ccasio n s. P etitio n er’s d ef en se w as th at h e w as ask in g M r. C h am b erlai n ’ s assistan ce in f

in d in g a p riv ate in v estig ato r. T rial co u n sel stated th at sh e em p h asized d u rin g

o p en in g arg u m en t th at th e S tate h ad “j u m p ed to co n clu sio n s” in ch arg in g P etitio n er w ith th e

o f f en ses, a n d th at th e ev id en ce w o u ld n o t sh o w th at P etitio n er h ad th e req u isite in ten t to

m u rd er h is w if

e an d step ch ild ren

. T rial co u n sel ack n o w led g ed th at sh e d id n o t o b j ect to th e S tate’s ref eren ce d u rin g o p en in g arg u m en t to a ch arg e o f ag g rav ated arso n ag ain st P etitio n er

-8

-th at w as p en d in g at th e tim e o f trial. T rial co u n sel stated th at a h earin g h ad b een co n d u cted

p rio r to trial af

ter w h ich th e trial co u rt f o u n d th at th e f

act th at P etitio n er h ad b een ch arg ed

w i t h a rso n in co n n ectio n w ith th e b u rn in g o f h is w if e’s h o u se w as ad m issib le u n d e r R u l e 4 0 4 ( b ) o f th e T en n essee R u les o f E v id en ce. T h e trial co u rt also f o u n d

, h o w ev er, th at t h e circu m stan ces su rro u n d in g th e arso n ch arg e w as in ad m issib le.

T rial co u n sel said at th e p o st- c o n v i ctio n h earin g th at sh e d id n o t receiv e th e en tire
tap ed telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s b etw een P etitio n er an d h is m o th er u n til th e d ay b ef o re trial. (We n o te th at th e tran scrip t o f th e h earin g o n trial co u n sel’s m o tio n to co n tin u e ref lects th at trial co u n sel receiv ed th e D V D o f th e telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s o n M arch 3 1

, 2 0 0 5

, th e d ay b ef o re th e h earin g an d f

o u r d ay s b ef

o re trial.) T rial co u n sel co n sid ered th e ex cerp ts o f th e telep h o n e co n v ersatio n w h ich w ere p lay ed f o r th e j u ry d am ag in g b ecau se o f th e to n e o f

P etitio n er’s v o ice an d h is d em ean o r d u rin g th e co n v ersatio n

. T rial co u n sel b ro u g h t o u t at trial th at th e j u ry w as n o t h earin g th e co m p lete co n v ersatio n s, an d th e ex cerp ts h ad b een tak en o u t o f co n tex t. T rial co u n sel said th at sh e rev iew ed w ith P etitio n er “n u m ero u s tim es,”

M r. C h am

b erlain ’s letters, statem en t to th e p o lice, an d p relim in ary h earin g testim o n y

. T rial

co u n sel stated th at sh e also rev iew ed th e ex cerp ts o f th e tap ed telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s w ith

M s. K ell e r p r i o r t o trial. T rial co u n sel said th at if sh e h ad f elt th ere w ere an y issu es

p ertain in g to sen ten cin g th at co u ld h av e b een raised o n ap p eal, sh e w o u ld h av e d o n e so

.

III. S ta n d a rd o f

R ev iew

T o su cceed o n a ch allen g e o f in ef f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel, th e p etitio n er b ears th e b u rd en o f e s t ab lish in g th e alleg atio n s set f o rth in h is p etitio n b y clear an d co n v in cin g

ev id en ce. T .C .A

. § 4 0 -3 0 -2 1 0 (f ). H o w ev er, th e trial co u rt’s ap p licatio n o f th e law to th e f acts is rev iew ed d

e n o vo , w ith o u t a p resu m

p tio n o f co rrectn ess. F

ield s v. S ta te, 4 0 S .W.3 d

4 5 0

, 4 5 8 (T en n

. 2 0 0 1 )

. A c l a i m th at co u n sel ren d ered in ef f ectiv e assistan ce is a m ix ed

q u estio n o f f

act an d law an d th eref

o re also su b

j ect to d e n o vo rev iew

. Id

. ; S ta te v. B u rn s, 6 S .W.3 d 4 5 3 , 4 6 1 (T en n . 1 9 9 9 ).

Wh en a p etitio n er seek s p o st-co n v ictio n relief o n th e b asis o f in ef f ectiv e assistan ce

o f co u n sel, h e o r sh e m

u st estab lish th at co u n sel’s p erf o rm an ce f

ell b elo w “th e r a n g e o f

co m p eten ce d em an d ed o f atto rn ey s in crim in al cases.” B a xter v. R o se , 5 2 3 S .W.2 d 9 3 0

, 9 3 6 (T en n

. 1 9 7 5 ). In ad d it i o n , h e o r sh e m u st sh o w th at co u n sel’s in ef f ectiv e p erf

o rm an ce
actu ally ad v ersely im

p acted h is d ef

en se. S trickla n d v. Wa sh in g to n , 4 6 6 U .S

. 6 6 8

, 6 9 3

, 1 0 4
S

. C t. 2 0 5 2

, 2 0 6 7 (1 9 8 4 ). In rev iew in g co u n sel’s p erf o rm an ce, th e d isto rtio n s o f h in d sig h t

m u st b e av o id ed

, an d th is C o u rt w ill n o t seco n d -g u ess co u n sel’s d ecisio n s reg ard in g trial
strateg ies an d tactics. H

ella rd v. S ta te

, 6 2 9 S .W.2 d 4

, 9 (T en n

. 1 9 8 2 ). T h e rev iew in g co u rt, th eref o re, sh o u ld n o t co n clu d e th at a p articu lar act o r o m issio n b y co u n sel is u n reaso n ab le

m erely b ecau se th e strateg y w as u n su ccessf u l. S trickla n d

, 4 6 6 U

. S

. at 6 8 9

, 1 0 4 S

. C t. at

-9

-2 0 6 5

. R ath er, co u n sel’s alleg ed erro rs sh o u ld b e j u d g ed f ro m co u n sel’s p ersp ectiv e at th e

p o in t o f tim e th ey w ere m ad e in lig h t o f

all th e f acts an d circu m stan ces at th at tim e. Id . at
6 9 0 , 1 0 4 S . C t. at 2 0 6 6

.

A p etitio n er m

u st satisf y b o th p r o n g s o f th e S trickla n d test b ef o re h e o r sh e m ay

p rev ail o n a claim o f in ef

f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel. S ee H en ley v. S ta te

, 9 6 0 S .W.2 d 5 7 2

, 5 8 0 (T en n

. 1 9 9 7 ). T h at is, a p e t i t i o n e r m u st n o t o n ly sh o w th at h is o r h er co u n sel’s

p erf o rm an ce f

ell b elo w accep tab le stan d ard s, b u t th at su ch p erf o rm an ce w as p rej u d icial to th e p etitio n er. Id

. F a i l u re to satisf y eith er p ro n g w ill resu lt in th e d en ial o f relief

. Id

. A cco rd in g ly

, th is C o u rt n eed n o t ad d ress o n e o f th e c o mp o n en ts if th e p etitio n er f ails to estab lish th e o th er. S trickla n d , 4 6 6 U .S . at 6 9 7 , 1 0 4 S . C t. at 2 0 6 9

.

IV. O p en in g S ta tem en ts

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n se l ’ s a s s i s tan ce w as d ef icien t b ecau se sh e f

ailed to

o b j e ct to th e p ro secu to r’s statem en t d u rin g o p en in g statem en ts th at P etitio n er to ld M r. C h am b erlain to co m m it th e so licitatio n o f f en ses w h ile P etitio n er w as still in j ail “so th at h e

co u ld h av e an alib i, b ecau se h e w as su sp ected o f b u rn in g h is w if e’s h o u se d o w n .” P etitio n er also p o in ts o u t th at trial co u n sel d id n o t ask f o r a cu rativ e in stru ctio n to th e j u ry co n cern in g th e ref eren ce to p rio r b ad acts.

T rial co u n sel testif

ied th at sh e d id n o t o b

j ect to th e arso n ref

eren ce b ecau se th e trial

co u rt h ad ru led th e ev id en ce ad m issib le p rio r to trial. F u rth erm o re, alth o u g h trial co u n sel
d id n o t p reserv e th e issu e f o r ap p ellate rev iew b y f

ailin g to o b

j ect to th e co m m en t, th is C o u rt

n o n eth eless ad d ressed P etitio n er’s claim o n ap p eal th at th e ref eren ce co n stitu ted

p ro secu to rial m isco n d u ct. O n ap p eal, w e co n clu d ed th at “[ r] eg ard less o f an y w aiv er, th is
issu e d o es n o t w arran t rev ersal. T h e p ro secu to r’s statem en t w as a ref eren ce to ev id en ce th at,

as d iscu ssed ab o v e, w h ile n o t p ro p erly ad m itted

, w as h arm less.” M a tth ew R

. H

a ko d a , 2 0 0 6

WL 2 7 3 8 8 1 at * 1 0

. It is w ell-estab lish ed t h a t p o s t

- c o n v ictio n p ro ceed in g s m ay n o t b e

e mp lo y ed to raise an d re-litig ate issu es p rev io u sly d eterm in ed o n d irect ap p eal. R o y E

. K eo u g h v. S ta te

, N o

. W2 0 0 8 -0 1 9 1 6 -C C A -R 3 -P D

, 2 0 1 0 WL 2 6 1 2 9 3 7

, at * 3 8 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p ., at Jack so n , Ju n e 3 0

, 2 0 1 0 ) (citin g M iller v. S ta te

, 5 4 S .W.3 d 7 4 3

, 7 4 7 -4 8 (T en n

. 2 0 0 1 )). A cco rd in g ly , w e co n clu d e th at P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is g ro u n d

.

Pe t i t i one r a lso arg u es th at trial co u n sel’s o p en in g statem en t w as d ef icien t b ecau se sh e f ailed to “n am e a sin g l e w itn ess,” ad d ress th e S tate’s b u rd en o f p ro o f an d th e elem en ts o f
th e o f f en se, an d p resen t P etitio n er’s “v ersio n o f th e f acts.” T h e rig h t to ef

f ectiv e assistan ce

o f co u n sel ex ten d s to o p en in g an d clo sin g arg u m en ts. Y a rb o ro u g h v. G en try , 5 4 0 U .S . 1

, 5 -6

, 1 2 4 S

. C t

. 1

, 4 (2 0 0 3 ); B ell v. C o n e , 5 3 5 U .S

. 6 8 5

, 7 0 1 -0 2

, 1 2 2 S .C t. 1 8 4 3 (2 0 0 2 ).

N o n eth eless, co u n s e l h a s w id e latitu d e in d ecid in g h o w b est to rep resen t a clien t, an d

-1 0

-d ef

eren ce to c o u n s e l ’ s tactical d ecisio n s in h is o r h er o p en in g o r clo sin g arg u m en t is

p articu larly

im p o rtan t.

In h er o p en in g statem en t, trial co u n sel stressed th e f act th at th e S tate h ad “j u m p ed to

co n clu sio n [ sic] ” b ased o n th e stat e me n t o f o n e w itn ess. T rial co u n sel u rg ed th e j u ry to

co n sid er w h eth er M r. C h am b erlain ’s t e s t i mo n y w as reaso n ab le o r ev en lo g ical. T rial

co u n sel o u tlin ed w h at th e S tate’s ev id en ce w o u ld n o t sh o w , an d p o sited th at th e ev id en ce in stead w o u ld su p p o rt P e t i t i o n er’s p o sitio n th at h e w as g o in g th ro u g h a d iv o rce an d w as

o n ly attem

p tin g to f in d a p riv ate in v estig ato r. A lth o u g h trial co u n sel’s arg u m en ts f ailed to

set f o rth an y f acts o f th e c r i me s o r th e elem en ts o f th e o f f en se th e S tate w as req u ired to

p ro v e, th e ev id en ce d o es n o t p rep o n d erate ag ain st th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt’s f in d in g th at th e co m p o sitio n o f trial co u n sel’s o p en in g arg u m en t w as a tactical d ecisio n n o t su b j ect to
h in d sig h t rev iew

. M o reo v er, w e co n clu d e th at P et i t i o n e r h as f ailed to sh o w th at h ad trial

co u n sel p resen ted a d if

f eren t o p en in g arg u m en t, a d if f eren t res u l t w o u l d h av e o ccu rred

. P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is claim

.

V. A d m issio n o f

th e T a p ed T elep h o n e C o n v ersa tio n s

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se sh e f

ailed to

o b j e c t t o th e in tro d u ctio n at trial o f th e tap ed ex cerp ts o f P etitio n er’s telep h o n e

co n v ersatio n s w ith h is m o th er w h ile P etitio n er w as in j ail. C itin g S ta te v. Jo n es , 5 9 8 S .W.2 d

2 0 9

, 2 2 3 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 1 9 8 0 ), su p ersed ed b y sta tu te o n o th er g ro u n d

s a s sta ted in S ta te

v. S h ro p sh ire

, 8 7 4 S .W.2 d 6 3 4

, 6 3 8 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 1 9 9 3 ), P etitio n er also co n ten d s th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as d ef icien t b ecau se sh e f

ailed to r eq u est a lim itin g in stru ctio n
to th e j u ry “th at o n ly th e statem en ts, ad m issio n s, an d d eclaratio n s o f [ P etitio n er] in th e tap ed

co n v ersatio n s m ay

b e co n sid ered .”

P etitio n er’s f

irst co n ten tio n , trial co u n sel’s f ailu re to o b

j e c t

, w a s ad d ressed b y th is
C o u rt o n d irect ap p eal. B ased o n o u r rev iew

, w e c o n clu d ed th at P etitio n er h ad f ailed to estab lish th at h e w as u n f

airly p rej u d iced b y th e in tro d u ctio n s o f th e tap ed ex cerp ts. M a tth ew R

. H a ko d a , 2 0 0 6 WL 2 7 3 8 8 8 1

, at * 8

. T h u s, P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is claim

. S ee T .C .A

. § 4 0 -3 0 -1 0 6 (h ). P etitio n er’s seco n d co n ten tio n , trial co u n sel’s f ailu re to req u est

a lim itin g in stru ctio n to th e j u ry , w as also raised in h is d irect ap p eal b u t w as f o u n d w aiv ed
b y th is C o u rt. M

a tth ew R

. H

a ko d a , 2 0 0 6 WL 2 7 3 8 8 8 1

, at * 8 (citin g T en n

. R

. A p p

. P

. 3 (e),

3 6 (a); S ta te v. H

o w ell

, 8 6 8 S .W.2 d 2 3 8

, 2 5 5 -5 6 (T en n

. 1 9 9 3 ); S ta t e v

. S m i t h

, 2 4 S .W.3 d

2 7 4

, 2 7 9 (T en n

. 2 0 0 0 )) (n o tin g th at trial co u n sel d id n o t req u est an in stru ctio n an d f ailed to raise th e issu e in h er m o tio n f o r n ew trial).

N o n eth eless, P etitio n er h as f ailed to sh o w th at h e w as p rej u d iced b y th e o m issio n

. T rial c o u n s el testif

ied at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g th at sh e b ro u g h t o u t o n cro ss-

-1 1

-ex am in atio n th e f act th at th e tap es d id n o t p o rtray P etitio n er’s en tire co n v ersatio n s w ith h is

m o th er. P etitio n er called M s. K elle r a t trial as a d ef en se w itn ess to ex p lain th e co n tex t in

w h ich th e statem en ts w ere m ad e. B ased o n o u r rev iew

, w e co n clu d e th at th e ev id en ce d o es

n o t p rep o n d erate ag ain st th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt’s f in d in g th at trial co u n sel’s co n d u ct w as

n o t d ef icien t in th is reg ard

.

VI. E x p ert T estim o n y

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n s e l ’ s c o n d u ct f ell b elo w th e stan d ard ex p ected o f
d ef en se co u n sel w h en sh e f

ailed to co n su lt w ith a f

in g erp rin t ex p ert p rio r to trial an d f ailed

to cro ss-ex am in e th e S tate’s ex p ert w itn ess. A t trial, O f f icer L in d a Wilso n , an id en tif icatio n

an aly st w ith th e M etro N ash v ille P o lice D ep artm en t, testif ied th at th e f

o u r laten t f

in g erp rin ts
lif ted f ro m a n o te co n tain in g p erso n al in f o rm atio n ab o u t P etitio n er’s w if e an d step ch ild ren b elo n g ed to P etitio n er. M a tth ew R

. H

a ko d a , 2 0 0 6 WL 2 7 3 8 8 8 1

, at * 3

. T rial co u n sel
testif ied at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g th at th ere w as n o reaso n to h ire a f in g erp rin t ex p ert b ecau se P etitio n er d id n o t d en y th at h e h ad w ritten th e in f o rm atio n f

o r M r. C h am

b erlain

, an d
it w as P etitio n er’s d ef

en se th eo ry

at trial th at h e h ad p ro v id ed th is in f o rm atio n so th at M r. C h am b erlain co u ld g iv e it to a p riv ate in v estig ato r. B ased o n o u r rev iew

, w e co n clu d e th at th e ev id en ce d o es n o t p rep o n d erate a ga i ns t t he pos t

- c onvi c t i on c our

t ’s f in d in g th at P etitio n er h as f ailed to sh o w th at h is trial co u n sel’s co n d u ct w as d ef icien t o r th at h e w as p rej u d iced b y
t rial co u n sel’s f

ailu re to co n su lt an ex p ert b ef o re trial o r cro ss-ex am in e O f f icer Wilso n a t trial. P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is issu e.

VII. C ro ss-ex a m in a tio n o f M r. C h a m b erla in

P etitio n er arg u es t h at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as in ef f ectiv e d u rin g M r. C h am b erlain ’s cro ss-ex am in atio n

. P etitio n er ack n o w led g e s t h at trial co u n sel h ig h lig h ted
th e i n c o n sisten cies b etw een M r. C h am b erlain ’s trial testim o n y , p relim in ary h earin g testim o n y , an d h is statem en t t o th e p o lice, b u t co n ten d s g en erally th at “co u n sel f ailed to

ma k e n u m ero u s o b v io u s p o in ts th at w o u ld h av e u n d erm in ed th e su b stan ce o f M r

. C h am b erlain ’s testim o n y .” P etitio n er d o es n o t state in h is b rief w h at th o se “o b v io u s p o in ts”

m ig h t h av e b een

. T r i a l c o u n sel stated at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g th at sh e th o ro u g h ly

cro s s

- e x am in ed M r. C h am b erlain co n cern in g h is in co n sisten t statem en ts an d th e trial

tran scrip t so ref

lects. B ased o n o u r rev iew

, w e co n clu d e th at P etitio n er h as f ailed to estab lish th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as d ef icien t in th is reg ard

.

P etitio n er also arg u es th at trial co uns e l ’ s a s s i stan ce w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se sh e f

ailed

to in terv iew p rio r to trial an y k itch en w o r k e r s w h o m ay h av e b een p resen t d u rin g P etitio n er’s co n v ersatio n s w ith M r. C h am b erlain

. T rial co u n s e l at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g stated t h a t s h e h ad n o reco llectio n o f P etitio n er ask in g h er to lo cate an y sp ecif ic

-1 2

-w itn esses. P etitio n er d id n o t call an y w itn esses at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g to estab lish

w h at in f o rm atio n , if an y , th e w itn esses m ay h av e h ad ab o u t th e co n v ersatio n s o r ev en th at

su ch w itn ess e s e x i s t e d

. A cco rd in g ly P etitio n er h as f ailed to estab lish an y p rej u d ice. S ee B la ck v. S ta te

, 7 9 4 S .W.2 d 7 5 2

, 7 5 7 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 1 9 9 0 ) (w h en a p etitio n er co n ten d s th at trial co u n sel f

ailed to d isco v er, in terv iew

, o r p resen t w itn esses in su p p o rt o f h is d ef en se, th ese w itn esses sh o u ld b e p resen ted b y th e p etitio n er at th e ev id en tiary h earin g ). P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief

o n th is g ro u n d

.

VIII. F a ilu re to R ev iew th e T a p ed C o n v ersa tio n s in th eir E n tirety

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se sh e f

ailed to

req u est f ro m th e S tate th e ap p ro x im ately f o rty h o u rs o f tap ed telep h o n e co n v e r satio n s b etw een P etitio n er an d h is m o th er u n til a w eek b ef o re trial. A t th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g , trial co u n sel ex p lain ed th at P etitio n er w as in itially rep resen ted b y th e P u b lic D ef en d e r ’ s O f f ice. T rial co u n sel b eliev ed th at sh e h ad receiv ed all o f th e p u b lic d ef en d er’s f ile af ter sh e h ad b een retain ed to rep resen t P etitio n er. Wh en sh e realized th at sh e h ad n o t receiv ed
th e D V D co n tain in g th e en tire tap ed telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s , trial co u n sel f iled a m o tio n f o r a co n tin u an ce w h ich w as d en ied b y th e trial co u rt. T rial co u n sel stated th at sh e receiv ed
th e tap ed co n v ersatio n s f

ro m th e S tate th e af

tern o o n b ef

o re trial an d rev iew ed th e reco rd in g s

p rio r to trial. H o w ev er, as n o ted ab o v e, th e reco rd in d icates th at trial co u n sel receiv ed th e D V D at issu e th e d ay b ef

o re th e h earin g o n h er m o tio n to co n tin u e, o r f o u r d ay s b ef

o re trial.

N o n eth eless, trial co u n sel w as p ro v id ed tran scrip ts o f th e ex cerp ts th e S tate in ten d ed

to in tro d u ce at trial, an d sh e rev iew ed th e tran scrip ts w ith b o th P etitio n er an d M s. K eller.

P etitio n er d id n o t o f

f er an y p ro o f at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g as to th e ex isten ce o f an y

ex cu lp ato ry in f

o rm atio n in th e u n red acted p o rtio n o f th e telep h o n e co n v ersatio n , o r th at
h av in g m o re tim e to rev iew th e D V D w o u ld h av e b en ef itted h is d ef

en se. A cco rd in g ly

, w e

co n clu d e th at P etitio n er h as f ailed to sh o w th at h e w as p rej u d iced b y trial co u n sel’s d elay
in receiv in g th e tap e o f P etitio n er’s en tire telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s w i t h h is m o th er. P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is issu e.

IX . R eq u isite In ten t

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n sel f ailed “to h ig h lig h t” th e f

acto rs n eg atin g a f

in d in g th at P etitio n er in ten d ed to so licit M r. C h am b erl a in to m

u rd er h is w if

e an d step ch ild ren

. Pe titio n er ack n o w led g es th at trial co u n sel’s clo sin g arg u m en t f o cu sed o n th e inc ons i s t e nc i e s b etw een M r. C h am

b erlain ’s p re-trial statem en ts an d testim o n y an d th at p resen ted at trial.

P etitio n er, h o w ev er, co n ten d s th at trial co u n sel d id n o t d o th at “in an y su b stan tiv e w ay th at

w o u ld su p p o rt an y d ef

en se th eo ry .” P etitio n er co n clu d es, th eref o re, th at tri al co u n sel
ab an d o n ed h is th eo ry

o f d ef en se af ter M r. C h am

b erlain ’s testim o n y

.

-1 3

-T h e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt f ound c r ed ib le trial co u n sel’s testim o n y th at sh e d ev elo p ed

a th eo ry o f d ef

en se b ased o n P etitio n er’s in ten tio n t o h ire a p riv ate in v estig ato r an d n o t a

m u rd erer, an d th at sh e d iscu ssed th is th eo ry w ith b o th P etitio n er an d M s. K eller p rio r to trial.

T rial co u n sel th o ro u g h ly cro ss-ex am in ed M r. C h am b erlain

, stressin g th e f

act th at P etitio n er,

w h o alleg ed ly w an ted th e m u rd ers co m m itted b ef

o re h e w as released f

ro m j ail in th irteen
d ay s, k n ew th at M r. C h am b erlain w as n o t sch ed u led to b e released f o r an o th er f

iv e m o n th s. T rial co u n sel co n tin u ed t h i s th em e in h er clo sin g arg u m en t, in clu d in g su ch f acto rs as M r. C h am b erlain ’s testim o n ial in co n sisten cies, h is ac k n o w l ed g m en t th at a to tal f ee f o r th e

m u rd ers w as n ev er d iscu ssed

, th at h e k n ew P etitio n er d id n o t h av e a j o b

, th e f a c t th at th e in v estig atin g o f

f icers d id n o t lo cate a .2 2 calib er h an d g u n in th e lo catio n d escrib ed b y M r. C h am b er l a i n, an d th e f

act th at o n ly ex cerp ts f

ro m P etitio n er’s tap ed telep h o n e co n v ersatio n s h ad b een p lay ed f

o r th e j u ry

.

C lo sin g arg u m en ts sh o u ld sh arp en an d clarif y th e issu es f

o r reso lu tio n b y th e trier o f
f act, b u t w h ich issu es to sh arp en an d h o w b est to clarif y th em are q u estio n s w ith m an y

reaso n ab le an sw ers. H

errin g v. N

ew Y o rk

, 4 2 2 U .S

. 8 5 3

, 8 6 2

, 9 5 S

. C t. 2 5 5 0

, 2 5 5 5 (1 9 7 5 ).

Ju di c i a l r e vi e w of a de fe nse atto rn ey ’s su m m atio n is th eref o re h ig h ly d ef

eren tial. Y

a rb ro u g h

5 4 0 U .S . at 5 -6 , 1 2 4 S . C t. at 4

.

B ased o n o u r rev iew

, w e co n clu d e th at P e t itio n er h as f ailed to estab lish th at eith er trial co u n sel’s cro ss-ex am in atio n o f M r

. C h am b erlain o r h er clo sin g arg u m en t f ell b elo w

reaso n ab le stan d ard s o f

rep resen tatio n . P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is issu e.

X . F a ilu re to C h a llen g e S en ten ce

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se sh e f

ailed to

o b j ect at th e sen ten cin g h earin g to th e trial co u rt’s u se o f en h an cem en t f acto rs to d eterm in e th e len g th o f P etitio n er’s sen ten ce in v io latio n o f B la kely v. Wa sh in g to n , 5 4 2 U .S

. 2 9 6

, 1 2 4
S

. C t. 2 5 3 1 (2 0 0 4 ), an d f

ailed to ap p eal th e issu e. In Ju n e 2 0 0 4

, th e U n ited S tates S u p rem e C o u rt h eld in B la kely th at “[ o ] th er th an th e f act o f a p rio r co n v ictio n , an y f act th at in creases th e p en alty f

o r a crim e b ey o n d th e p rescrib ed statu to ry m ax im u m m u st b e su b m itted to a j u ry , an d p ro v ed b ey o n d a reaso n ab le d o u b t.” B la kely

, 5 4 2 U .S

. at 3 0 1 (q u o tin g A p p ren d i
v. N ew Jersey , 5 3 0 U .S . 4 6 6 , 4 9 0 , 1 2 0 S . C t. 2 3 4 8 (2 0 0 0 )).

F o llo w in g B la kely

, th e T en n essee S u p rem e C o u rt, in an o p in io n issu ed o n A p ril 1 5

, 2 0 0 5

, co n clu d ed th at th e T en n essee S en ten cin g R ef o rm A ct o f 1 9 8 9 d id n o t im p erm issib ly
in f rin g e o n th e p ro v in ce o f th e j u ry in v io latio n o f a d ef en d an t’s S ix th A m en d m en t rig h t to j u ry trial. S ta te v. G o m ez , 1 6 3 S .W.3 d 6 3 2

, 6 6 1 (T en n

. 2 0 0 5 ) (“ G o m ez I ”). T h ereaf

ter, th e U n ited S tat e s S u p r e me C o u rt v acated th e d ecisio n in G o m ez I an d rem an d ed f o r

reco n sid eratio n in lig h t o f its d ecisio n in C u n n in g h a m v. C a lifo rn ia

, 5 4 9 U .S

. 2 7 0 , 1 2 7 S

.

-1 4

-C t. 8 5 6 (2 0 0 7 ). O n rem an d

, o u r su p rem e co u rt h eld o n O cto b er 9

, 2 0 0 7

, th at a trial co u rt’s

en h an cem en t o f a d ef

en d an t’s sen ten ce o n th e b asis o f j u d icially d eterm in ed f acts o th er th an th e d ef en d an t’s p rio r co n v ictio n s v io lates th e d ef en d an t’s S ix th A m en d m en t rig h ts. S ta te v. G o m ez , 2 3 9 S .W.3 d 7 3 3 , 7 4 0 -4 1 (T en n . 2 0 0 7 ) (“ G o m ez II ”).

D ef en d an t’s o f

f en ses o ccu rred in Jan u ary 2 0 0 4 b ef o re th e issu an ce o f B l a k e l y

. A lth o u g h D ef

en d an t’s sen ten cin g h earin g o n M ay 2 0

, 2 0 0 5

, w as h eld af ter B la kely

, G o m ez I

, f in d in g T en n essee’s sen ten cin g sch em e co n stitu tio n al, w as th e co n tro llin g law

. Thi s Co u rt issu ed th e o p in io n o n P etitio n er’s d irect ap p eal o n S ep tem b er 2 1

, 2 0 0 6

, an d G o m ez II w as

n o t f iled u n til O cto b er 9 , 2 0 0 7

. B ased o n o u r rev iew , w e co n clu d e th at th e ev id en ce d o es

n o t p rep o n d erate ag ain st th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt’s f in d in g th at trial c ouns el’s p erf o rm an ce

w as n o t d ef

ici e n t f o r f ailin g to an ticip ate a ch an g e in th e law as it ex isted in T en n essee at th e tim e o f P etitio n er’s d irect ap p eal. S ee S ta te v. Jeffrey Wa lters

, N o

. M 2 0 0 8 -0 1 8 0 6 -C C A

R 3 -P C

, 2 0 0 9 WL 3 4 0 0 6 8 7

, at * 6 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p ., at N ash v ille, O ct. 2 0

, 2 0 0 9 ). P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief

o n th is issu e.

C O N C L U S IO N

A f ter a th o ro u g h rev iew , w e af f irm th e j u d g m en t o f

th e trial co u rt.

_ ________________

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T H O M A S T . WO O D A L L , JU D G E

-1 5

-