FILED

July 25, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE 

 JUNE 1997 SESSION

DAVID PALMER, )

)

Appellant, ) No. 03C01-9608-CR-00311

 )

) Loudon County

v. ) 

) Honorable E. Eugene Eblen, Judge 

)

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) (Post-Conviction)

) 

Appellee. )

For the Appellant: For the Appellee:

A. Wayne Henry Charles W. Burson

322 Grove Street Attorney General of Tennessee

P.O. Box 366 and

Loudon, TN 37774-0366 Clinton J. Morgan

Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee 

450 James Robertson Parkway

Nashville, TN 37243-0493

Charles Hawk

District Attorney General

and

Roger Delp

Assistant District Attorney General

P.O. Box 703

Kingston, TN 37763-0703

OPINION FILED:____________________

AFFIRMED

Joseph M. Tipton

Judge
2

O P I N I O N

The petitioner, David Palmer, appeals as of right from the trial court’s

summary dismissal of his second petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court

dismissed the petition on various grounds, including the petition’s failure to state a claim

for relief that had not been waived or previously determined. The sole issue for our

review is whether the trial court erred by dismissing the petition. We conclude that it did

not.

In 1987, the petitioner was convicted of aggravated rape and joyriding. As

a Range II, especially aggravated offender, he received concurrent sentences of forty

and two years, respectively. On May 11, 1990, the petitioner filed his first petition for

post-conviction relief alleging that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. 

The trial court granted the petitioner a delayed appeal but concluded that the petitioner

failed to demonstrate that his counsel was otherwise ineffective. This court affirmed the

petitioner’s convictions on the delayed appeal and also affirmed the denial of postconviction relief. State v. David Palmer, Nos. 03C01-9303-CR-00076, 03C01-9303-CR00077, Loudon County (Tenn. Crim. App. Apr. 7, 1994); David Palmer v. State, No.

03C01-9303-CR-00079, Loudon County (Tenn. Crim. App. May 20, 1994), app. denied

(Tenn. Sept. 12, 1994). 

The petitioner filed the present petition on July 6, 1995. The petition

alleges that trial counsel was ineffective and that the petitioner’s convictions violate due

process because the jury was given an instruction equating moral certainty with

reasonable doubt. The trial court concluded that the issue concerning the effectiveness

of trial counsel was previously determined, see T.C.A. § 40-30-206(g), and that the

petitioner’s challenge to the jury instruction was waived because he failed to present it
1

 W e also note that we have repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of the reasonable

doubt instruction that the petitioner challenges. See State v. Sexton, 917 S.W .2d at 266; Pettyjohn v.

State, 885 S.W .2d 364, 366 (Tenn. Crim . App.); State v. Hallock, 875 S.W .2d 285, 294 (Tenn. Crim. App.

1993); see also Nichols v. State, 877 S.W .2d 722, 734 (Tenn. 1994).

3

in his first post-conviction petition, see T.C.A. § 40-30-206(g). We agree with the trial

court’s conclusions.1

In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, the judgment

of the trial is affirmed.

 

Joseph M. Tipton, Judge 

CONCUR:

 

John H. Peay, Judge 

 

Curwood Witt, Judge