# FILED

Au gust 22, 1997 Cecil Crowson, Jr . App ellate C ou rt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CRIMIN AL APPEALS OF TENN ESSEE

AT NASHVILLE JULY 1997 SE SSION

JAMES EDWARD HUGHES, ) NO. 01C01-9605- CC-00188 a.k.a. LARRY

WAYNE HUGHES )

) Appellant ) RUTHE RFOR D COU NTY ) V. ) HON. J.S. D ANIEL, JUDG E ) STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) (Post-Conv iction) ) Appellee ) )
FOR THE APPELLANT FOR THE APPELLEE Cheryl J. Skidmore John Knox Walkup 629 East Main S treet Attorney Gen eral and Repor ter Hendersonvi lle, Tennessee 37075 450 James Roberts on Parkway Nashvil le, Tennessee 37243- 0493 (app eal o nly) Eugene J. Honea Assistant Att orney Gener al 450 James Roberts on Parkway Nashvil le, Tennessee 37243- 0493 W illiam C. W hitesell Distric t Attorney General Judicial Bui lding, thi rd floor Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37130

OPINION FILE D:______

AFFIRMED1 Prio r t o the ena ctment of t he 1986 Post- Convict ion Pr ocedure Act , no st atut e of l imit ati ons for post- convi cti on appl icat ions exi sted. 2 W illiam M. B arker, Ju dge Opinion The Appellant, Jam es Edward Hughes, appeals as of right the Rutherf ord County Ci rcuit Cour

t’s dismiss al of his petiti on for post-conv iction rel ief. On July 10, 1985, the Appellant

pled guil ty to robber

y wi th the use of a deadly weapon. On Dece mbe r 9, 19 93, t he Ap pell ant wa s con victe d of poss essi on of a fir earm by a convicted felon in the Unit ed States District Cour t for the Middl e Distric

t of Tennessee. The Distric

t Court used t he robbery convicti on to enhance the Appel lant’s sentence. The Appellant filed t his post-conv iction rel ief petition to ov erturn the Rut herford County robbery conviction in order to ha ve his sen tence in the federal penitentiary reduced. On March 21, 1 996, without an evidenti ary heari ng, the tri al court dis missed the petition, rul ing that it

was barr

ed by the stat ute of limitations

. Pursuant to the now-repeal ed Post-Conv iction Procedure Act, the statute of limitation applicable to the Ap pellant’s post-conviction claims was three years. 1 Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30- 102 (repealed 1995 ). That three- year peri od began runnin g on July 1, 1986 , the effective dateof the statute. The l ast day on w hich the Appell ant could have fil ed such a petiti on was in July of 1989. See e.g. State v. M ullins , 767 S.W.2d 668, 669 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988) ; Smith v. Stat e , 757 S.W.2d 683, 685 (Tenn. Crim. Ap p. 1988); State v. Masucci , 754 S.W.2d 90, 91 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988); Abston v. St ate , 749 S.W.2d 487, 488 (Tenn. Crim. App . 1988). The Appellant’s pet ition was filed in March of 1996, more than si x year s after the statute expired. Consequently , the trial court properl y dismiss ed the Appellant’ s petition. Any contenti on by the Appel lant that the new Post-Conv iction Procedure Act, effective May 10, 1995, provided him with a one-year window of opportunity within which to fil e his post-conviction petition is meritless. Similar attempts to circumv ent the statute of limita tions in this manner have been previously rejected by panels of this3

Court. See Roy Barnet t v. State , C.C .A. No . 03C01 -9512- CV-00 394 (Ten n. Cr im. App., Knoxv ille, Feb. 20, 1997); Stephen Koprowski v. S tate , C.A.A. No. 03C01-9511- CC-00365 (Tenn. Crim. App., Kn oxvil le, Jan. 28, 1997) ; Johnny L. Butl er v. Stat e , C.C.A. No. 02C01-9509-CR -00289 (Tenn. Cr im. App., Jacks on, Dec. 2, 1996)

. But
see Arnold Cart er v. Stat e , C.C.A. No . 03C01-9509-C C-00270 (Tenn. C rim. App., Knoxville, July 11, 1996). Accordingl y, the tri al court’s dismissal of the Appellant’s pet ition for postconvicti on relief is affir med.

__________________________ WILLIAM M. BARKER, JUDG E
CONCUR:

__________________________ JOHN H. PE AY, JUDG E

__________________________ JERRY L. SMITH, JUDG E