IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs January 9, 2007

JEFFERY YATES v. STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hardeman County

No. 06-02-0137 Joseph H. Walker, III, Judge

No. W2006-00969-CCA-R3-HC - Filed March 29, 2007

The petitioner, Jeffery Yates, appeals the Hardeman County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for

habeas corpus relief from his convictions for especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated

kidnapping, and attempted aggravated robbery. He contends that his sentences are illegal and,

therefore, that his judgments of conviction are void. Upon review of the record and the parties’

briefs, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the petition for habeas corpus relief. 

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court is Affirmed.

NORMA MCGEE OGLE, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which DAVID G. HAYES and J.C.

MCLIN, JJ., joined.

Jeffery Yates, Pro se.

 

Michael E. Moore, Acting Attorney General and Reporter; David H. Findley Assistant Attorney

General; D. Michael Dunavant, District Attorney General; and James Pentecost, Assistant District

Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

I. Factual Background

The record reflects that on April 23, 1993, the petitioner was convicted by a Shelby County

Criminal Court jury of especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, and attempted

aggravated robbery and received an effective eighteen-year sentence. On June 14, 1994, the

petitioner pled guilty in the Shelby County Criminal Court to five counts of aggravated assault and

two counts of possessing cocaine and received an effective ten-yearsentence. The trial court ordered

that the ten-year sentence be served concurrently with the eighteen-year sentence. On April 10,

2006, the petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Hardeman County Circuit

Court, alleging that he was on bail for the five aggravated assaults and for one count of possessing

cocaine when he committed the especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, and
-2-

attempted aggravated robbery and, therefore, that his effective eighteen-year sentence was illegal

because he was required to serve it consecutively to the effective ten-year sentence. The habeas

corpus court concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated a right to relief and dismissed the

petition without appointing counsel or conducting a hearing. On appeal, the petitioner claims that

the habeas corpus court erred by denying his petition, arguing that it is “irrefutable” that his

sentences are illegal and that the judgments of conviction are void. 

II. Analysis

The purpose of a habeas corpus petition is to contest void and not merely voidable

judgments. Archer v. State, 851 S.W.2d 157, 163 (Tenn. 1993) (citing State ex rel. Newsom v.

Henderson, 221 Tenn. 24, 424 S.W.2d 186, 189 (1968)). Habeas corpus relief is available only when

it appears on the face of the judgment or the record that the trial court was without jurisdiction to

convict or sentence the defendant or that his sentence has expired. Archer, 851 S.W.2d at 164. The

burden is on the petitioner to establish that the judgment is void or that the sentence has expired.

State ex rel. Kuntz v. Bomar, 214 Tenn. 500, 504, 381 S.W.2d 290, 291-92 (1964). A trial court

may summarily dismiss a petition for writ of habeas corpus without the appointment of counsel and

without an evidentiary hearing if there is nothing on the face of the judgment to indicate that the

convictions addressed therein are void. Passarella v. State, 891 S.W.2d 619 (Tenn. Crim. App.

1994).

Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-20-111(b) provides that if a defendant commits a

felony while on bail “and the defendant is convicted of both offenses, the trial judge . . . shall order

that the sentences be served cumulatively.” TheTennesseeRule of Criminal Procedure 32(c)(3) also

provides that

[w]hen a defendant is convicted of multiple offenses from one trial or

when the defendant has additional sentences not yet fully served as

the result of convictions in the same or other court and the law

requires consecutive sentences, the sentence shall be consecutive

whether the judgment explicitly so orders or not. This rule shall

apply:

. . .

(C) to a sentence for a felony committed while the defendant was

released on bail and the defendant is convicted of both offenses[.]

Turning to the instant case, the petitioner attached ten judgment forms to his petition.

According to the judgment forms, between November 1990 and July 1991, the petitioner committed

the five aggravated assaults and one count of possessing cocaine. The judgment forms for the

especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, and attempted aggravated robbery at issue

show that he committed those offenses in December 1991 but are silent as to whether he was on bail
-3-

when he committed the offenses. Moreover, the petitioner has failed to attach any other documents

to his petition which show that he was on bail for the prior six offenses when he committed the latter

three offenses. As our supreme court recently explained,

In the case of an illegal sentence claim based on facts not apparent

from the face of the judgment, an adequate record for summary

review must include pertinent documents to support those factual

assertions. When such documents from the record of the underlying

proceedings are not attached to the habeas corpus petition, a trial

court may properly choose to dismiss the petition without the

appointment of counsel and without an evidentiary hearing. 

Charles G. Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251, No. M2004-02806-SC-R11-HC, 2007 Tenn. LEXIS

15, at **25-26 (Nashville, Jan. 23, 2007). Because the judgment forms for the especially aggravated

kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, and attempted aggravated robbery convictions are facially valid,

the habeas corpus court properly denied the petition for habeas corpus relief. 

III. Conclusion

Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus

court.

___________________________________ 

NORMA McGEE OGLE, JUDGE