### IN THE CO URT OF CR IMINAL APPEALS OF T ENN ESSEE AT NASHVILL E Ass ig ne d o n B rie fs Apri l 1 9, 2 01 1

ROBE RT N. HELT ON v . STATE O F TENNESSE E

A p p e a l f r o m t h e C i r c u i t C o u r t f o r B e d f o r d C o u n t y N o . 1 2 0 3 1 L e e R u s s e l l , J u d g e

N o . M 2 0 1 0

- 0 1 5 9 1

- C C A

- R 3

- P C

- F i l e d J u n e 1 3 , 2 0 1 1

T h e p etitio n er, R o b ert N

. H elto n , ap p eals t h 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

f ro m h is co n v ictio n s f

o r th ef t o f p ro p erty o v er $ 1 0 ,0 0 0
, b u rg lary
, an d v an d alism

. O n ap p eal, h e a r g u es th at th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt erred in d ism issin g h is p etitio n b ecau se h e receiv ed th e in ef f e c tiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel. A f ter

rev iew , w e af

f irm th e d ism issal o f

th e p etitio n

.

T e n n . R

. A p p . P

. 3 A p p e a l a s o f R i g h t ; J u d g m e n t o f t h e C i r c u i t C o u r t A f f i r m e d

A LA N E

. G LE N N , J

. , d e l i v e r e d t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t , i n w h i c h J

. C

. M C L IN a n d C A M ILL E R

. M C M U LLE N , J J

. , j o i n e d

.

G r e g o r y D

. S m i t h
, C l a r k s v i l l e , T e n n e s s e e ( o n a p p e a l ) ; a n d A n d r e w J a c k s o n D e a r i n g , I I I
, A s s i s t a n t P u b l i c D e f

e n d e r ( a t h e a r i n g )
, f

o r t h e a p p e l l a n t , R o b e r t N

. H e l t o n

.

R o b e r t E

. C o o p e r , J r

. , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l a n d R e p o r t e r ; N i c h o l a s W

. S p a n g l e r , A s s i s t a n t A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ; C h a r l e s F r a n k C r a w f o r d
, J r

. , D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ; a n d M i c h a e l D

. R a n d l e s , A s s i s t a n t D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l
, f o r t h e a p p e l l e e , S t a t e o f T e n n e s s e e

.

O P I N I O N

F A C T S

T h e p etitio n e r w as co n v icted o f th ef t o f p ro p erty o v er $ 1 0 ,0 0 0
, b u rg lary
, an d

v an d alism b y a B ed f

o rd C o u n ty C ircu it C o u rt j u ry an d sen te n c e d to an ef f ectiv e term o f
tw en ty -sev en y e a rs in th e T en n essee D ep artm en t o f C o rrectio n

. T h is co u rt af f irm ed h is

co n v ictio n s an d sen ten ces o n d irect ap p eal, an d n o ap p licatio n f o r p erm issio n to ap p eal w as f i l e d w ith th e T en n essee S u p rem e C o u rt. S ee S tate v

. R o b ert N

. H elto n , N o

. M 2 0 0 7 -0 2 8 7 3 -C C A -R 3 -C D
, 2 0 0 9 WL 4 4 3 8 3 6 3 (T en n

. C r im

. A p p

. D ec. 2
, 2 0 0 9 ). T h ep etitio n er’s co n v ictio n s aro se o u t o f h is b reak in g o n to th e f

arm p ro p erty an d in to th e b arn

o w n ed b y h is f

o rm er em p lo y ers an d stealin g p ieces o f th eir f arm an d recreatio n al eq u ip m en t,

w h ich h e th en su b seq u en tly so ld . Id . at * 1 -5

.

T h e p etitio n er f

iled a p ro se p etitio n f

o r p o st-co n v ictio n relief in w h ich h e alleg ed
, am o n g o th er th in g s, th at h e receiv ed th e in ef f ectiv e a s s i stan ce o f co u n sel. A f ter th e ap p o in tm en t o f co u n sel, an am en d ed p etitio n w as f iled

. T h e trial co u rt co n d u cted an

ev id en tiary h earin g at w h ich th e p etitio n er testif ied th at h e retain ed co u n sel to r e p r esen t 1 h im

. In p rep aratio n f

o r trial, h e an d co u n sel m et f o u r t i me s f

o r a to tal o f tw o an d a h alf h o u rs. H e an d co u n sel d iscu ssed th e p o ssib le sen ten ces h e f aced
, w ith co u n sel tellin g h im th at th e w o rst case scen ario w a s t h a t h e c o u ld receiv e “[ t] en y ears at 3 5 p ercen t.” T h e p etitio n er ex p lain ed th at th e S tate h ad o f f ered h im a n in e-y ear sen ten ce at th irty -f iv e p ercen t,

so h e o p ted to g o to trial b ecau se “if I d o lo se, it’s j u st an o th er y ear.” H e said th at h e b ased h is d ecisio n to g o to trial o n co u n sel’s ad v ice, an d h e w o u l d n o t h av e g o n e to trial h ad h e k n o w n h e co u ld b e sen ten ced to tw en ty -sev en y ears.

T rial co u n sel, an atto rn ey w ith alm o st th irty y ears o f ex p erien ce p rim arily in crim in al law
, testif ied th at h e w as retain ed b y th e p etitio n er w ith in a w eek o f th e p etitio n er’s arrest. C o u n sel co u ld n o t recall ex actly h o w m an y

tim es h e m et w ith th e p etitio n er b u t estim ated th at h e saw h im “at least o n ce a w eek ” f o r a to tal o f m o re th an tw en ty h o u rs. A sk ed to recall h is d iscu ssio n s w ith th e p etitio n er reg ard in g th e p o ten tial sen ten ces h e f aced
, co u n sel said
, “H e cam e in

. We w en t o v er th em

. We calcu lated th em .” C o u n sel stated th at h e in f o rm ed th e p etitio n er th at th e t r i a l co u rt w as k n o w n f o r g iv in g v ery h arsh sen ten ces an d th at h e alw ay s in f

o rm ed h is clien ts o f th e m ax im u m sen ten ce f

aced if co n v icted

. H e also in f o rm ed th e p etitio n er th at h e w o u ld b e elig ib le f o r co n secu tiv e sen ten c i n g d u e t o h is ex ten siv e crim in al reco rd

. O n cro ss-ex am in atio n , co u n sel sp e c i f i cally d en ied th at h e to ld th e p etitio n er th e h arsh est sen ten ce h e f aced w as ten y ears at th irty -f iv e p ercen t.

A t th e co n clu sio n o f th e h earin g , th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt o b serv ed th at trial

co u n sel’s testim o n y o n th e issu e o f th e p o ten tial sen ten ces th e p etitio n er f aced w as “en tirely cred ib le” an d th at “it’s sim p ly irratio n al f

o r h im to h av e m ad e th at k in d o f rep resen tatio n

.

. . [ an d ] I d o n ’t f

in d it cred ib le at all th at [ co u n sel] w o u ld h av e m ad e th at m isrep resen tatio n .” T h ereaf ter, in its w ritten d ism issal o f th e p etitio n er’s p etitio n f o r p o st-co n v ictio n relief

, th e

co u rt f o u n d
, relev an t to th e issu e o n ap p eal, th at trial co u n sel’s testim o n y w as cred ib le th at

co u n sel h ad accu rately in f o rm ed th e p etitio n er o f th e p o ten tial m ax im u m sen ten ced h e f

aced

an d th at th e trial co u rt “im p o ses sto u t sen t e n c e s a n d f req u en tly h as sen ten ces ru n

co n secu tiv ely w h ere th e law allo w s th at.” T h e co u rt sp ecif ically d iscred ited th e p etitio n er’s testim o n y th at co u n sel h ad ad v ised h im th at h e f aced a p o ssib le m ax im

u m sen ten ce o f o n ly

We con fi ne t he maj ori ty of our re ci ta ti on o f t he t est imony to th at re le vant t o t his app eal

. 1

-2-ten y ears. T h e co u rt o b serv ed th at co u n sel “is a v astly ex p erien ced crim in al atto rn ey , w ith

n early th ree d ecad es o f ex p erien ce d o in g p rim arily crim in al w o rk
, an d it is d if f icu lt ev en to im ag in e a m o tiv e f

o r so g ro ssly u n d erestim atin g th e p o ten tial p u n ish m en t in th e [ p ] etitio n er’s case.”

A N A L Y S IS

T h e p etitio n er arg u es o n ap p eal th at th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt erred in d ism issin g h is
p etitio n b ecau se h e receiv e d t h e i n e f f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel at trial d u e to co u n sel’s in f o rm in g h im , erro n eo u sly , th at th e m ax im u m sen ten ce h e f

aced w as ten y ears.

P o st-co n v ictio n relief “sh all b e g ran ted w h en th e co n v i ctio n o r sen ten ce is v o id o r

v o id ab le b ecau se of th e ab rid g m en t o f an y rig h t g u aran teed b y th e C o n stitu tio n o f T en n essee

o r th e C o n stitu tio n o f th e U n i t e d S t ates.” T en n

. C o d e A n n

. § 4 0 -3 0 -1 0 3 (2 0 0 6 ). T h e p etitio n er b ears th e b u rd en o f p ro v in g f actu al alleg atio n s b y clear an d co n v in cin g ev id en ce. Id

. § 4 0 -3 0 -1 1 0 (f

). Wh en an ev id en tiary h earin g is h eld in th e p o st-co n v ictio n settin g , th e f in d in g s o f f

act m ad e b y th e co u r t a r e c o n c l u siv e o n ap p eal u n less th e ev id en ce p rep o n d erates ag ain st th em

. S ee Wiley v

. S tate, 1 8 3 S .W.3 d 3 1 7
, 3 2 5 (T en n

. 2 0 0 6 ). Wh en

rev iew in g f

actu al issu es, th e ap p ellate co u rt w ill n o t rew eig h th e ev id en ce an d w ill in stead d ef er to th e tr i a l c o u rt’s f

in d in g s as to th e cred ib ility o f w itn esses o r th e w eig h t o f th eir testim o n y

. Id .; see D ellin g er v

. S tate, 2 7 9 S .W.3 d 2 8 2
, 2 9 2 (T en n

. 2 0 0 9 ). H o w ev er, rev iew

o f a trial co u rt’s ap p licatio n o f t h e law to th e f acts o f th e case is d

e n o vo , w ith n o p resu m p tio n o f co rrectn ess. S ee R u f f v

. S tate, 9 7 8 S .W.2 d 9 5
, 9 6 (T en n

. 1 9 9 8 ). T h e issu e

o f in ef f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel, w h ich p resen ts m ix ed q u estio n s o f f act an d law
, is

rev iew ed d

e n o vo , w ith a p resu m

p tio n o f c o r r ectn ess g iv en o n ly to th e p o st-co n v ictio n

co u rt’s f in d in g s o f f

act. S ee F ield s v

. S tate, 4 0 S

. W.3 d 4 5 0
, 4 5 8 (T en n

. 2 0 0 1 ); B u rn s v

. S tate, 6 S .W.3 d 4 5 3 , 4 6 1 (T en n . 1 9 9 9 ).

T o estab lish a claim o f in ef f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel, th e p etitio n er h as th e b u rd en t o s h o w b o th th at trial co u n sel’s p erf o rm an ce w as d ef

icien t an d th at co u n sel’s d ef icien t p erf o rm an ce p rej u d iced th e o u tco m e o f th e p ro ceed in g

. S trick lan d v

. Wash in g to n , 4 6 6 U .S

. 6 6 8
, 6 8 7 (1 9 8 4 ); see S tate v

. T ay lo r, 9 6 8 S .W.2 d 9 0 0
, 9 0 5 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 1 9 9 7 ) (n o tin g th at sam e stan d ard f

o r d eterm in in g in ef

f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel th at is ap p lied in f ed eral cases also ap p lies in T en n essee). T h e S trick lan d stan d ard is a tw o -p ro n g test:

F irst, th e def

en d an t m u st sh o w th at co u n sel’s p erf o rm an ce w as d ef

icien t. T h is
req u ir es sh o w in g th at co u n sel m ad e erro rs so serio u s th at co u n sel w as n o t f u n ctio n in g as th e “co u n sel” g u aran teed th e d ef en d an t b y th e S ix th A m en d m en t. S eco n d
, th e d ef enda n t m u st sh o w th at th e d ef

icien t p erf

o rm an ce p rej u d iced th e d ef

en se. T h is req u ires sh o w in g th at co u n sel’s erro rs w ere so

-3-serio u s a s to d ep riv e th e d ef en d an t o f a f

air trial, a trial w h o se resu lt is reliab le.

4 6 6 U .S . at 6 8 7

.

T h e d ef icien t p erf

o rm an ce p ro n g o f th e test is satisf ied b y sh o w in g th at “co u n sel’s
acts o r o m issio n s w ere so serio u s as to f all b elo w an o b

j ectiv e stan d ard o f reaso n ab len ess

u n d er p rev ailin g p ro f

essio n al n o rm s.” G o ad v

. S t a t e , 9 3 8 S .W.2 d 3 6 3
, 3 6 9 (T en n

. 1 9 9 6 ) (citin g S trick lan d
, 4 6 6 U .S

. at 6 8 8 ; B a x ter v

. R o se, 5 2 3 S .W.2 d 9 3 0
, 9 3 6 (T en n

. 1 9 7 5 )). T h e rev iew in g co u rt mu s t i n d u lg e a stro n g p resu m p tio n th at th e co n d u ct o f co u n sel f alls

w ith in th e ran g e o f reaso n ab le p ro f essio n al assistan ce, see S trick lan d
, 4 6 6 U .S

. at 6 9 0
, an d

m ay n o t seco n d -g u ess th e tactical an d strateg ic ch o ices m ad e b y trial co u n sel u n less th o se ch o ices w ere u n in f

o rm ed b ecau se o f i n a d eq u ate p rep aratio n

. S ee H ellard v

. S tate, 6 2 9 S .W.2 d 4
, 9 (T en n

. 1 9 8 2 ). T h e p r e j u d ice p ro n g o f th e test is satisf ied b y sh o w in g a

r e a so n ab le p ro b ab ility
, i.e., a “p ro b ab ility su f f icien t to u n d erm in e co n f id en ce in th e

o u tco m e,” th at “b u t f

o r co u n sel’s u n p ro f

essio n al erro rs, th e resu lt o f th e p ro ceed in g w o u ld h av e b een d if

f eren t.” S trick lan d , 4 6 6 U .S . at 6 9 4

.

U p o n rev iew
, w e co n clu d e th at th e p eti tio n er h as f ailed to estab lish an y d ef icien cy in co u n sel’s p erf

o rm an ce. T h e p etitio n er co n ten d s th at c ouns e l e r ro n eo u sly ad v ised h im th at th e lo n g est sen ten ce h e co u ld receiv e af ter a trial w as ten y ears. H o w ev er, co u n sel ex p licitly d en ied g iv in g th e p etitio n er su c h ad v ice. A sk ed ab o u t h is d iscu ssio n s w ith th e p etitio n er reg ard in g th e p o ten tial sen ten c e s , c o u n s e l stated
, “H e cam e in

. We w en t o v er th em

. We calcu lated th em .” C o u n sel said th at h e also in f o rm ed th e p etitio n er th at th e trial co u rt w as k n o w n f o r g iv in g h arsh sen ten ces an d th at th e p etitio n er f aced th e p o ssib ility

o f receiv in g

c onsecu tiv e sen ten ces. T h e p o st-co n v ic t i on c our t s pe c i fi c a l l y a c c r e di t e d c ouns e l ’ s t e s t i m ony th at h e d id n o t in f

o rm th e p etitio n er th at th e m ax im u m sen ten ce h e f

aced w as ten y ears, an d th e co u rt d iscred ited th e p etitio n er’s testim o n y to th e co n t r a r y

. It is w ell estab lish ed th at ap p ellate co u rts d o n o t reassess cred ib ility d eterm in atio n s. R .D .S

. v

. S tate, 2 4 5 S .W.3 d 3 5 6
, 3 6 2 (T en n . 2 0 0 8 ) (“Q u estio n s su rro u n d in g th e cred ib ility o f w itn esses an d th e ‘reso lu tio n

o f co n f licts in th e ev id en ce are m atters en tru sted to th e trial j u d g e a s t h e trier o f f act.’”) (q u o tin g S tate v

. O d o m , 9 2 8 S .W.2 d 1 8
, 2 3 (T en n

. 1 9 9 6 )). T h e p etitio n er em p h asizes th at

co u n sel n ev er testif

ied “as to w h at h e to ld [ th e p etitio n er] w as th e m ax im u m p o ssib le

sen ten ce,” h o w ev er, w e n o te th at co u n sel w as n o t ask ed th at sp ecif ic q u estio n

. T h e p etitio n er h as f

ailed to p ro v e h is claim b y clear an d co n v in cin g ev id en ce an d is n o t en titled
to relief

.

C O N C L U S IO N

B ased o n th e f

o reg o in g au th o rities an d reaso n in g , w e a f f i r m th e p o st-co n v ictio n

-4-co u rt’s d ism issal o f th e p etitio n

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A L A N E

. G L E N N
, J U D G E

-5-