# FILED
February 13, 1998 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Cou rt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CRIMI NAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE DECEMBER 1997 SESSION

BILLY W. ALDRIDGE, ) No. 01C01-9704-CR-00142 ) Appellant ) ) DAVIDSON COUNTY V. ) ) HON. CHERYL BLACKBURN, STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE ) Appellee. ) (Habeas Corpus) ) ) For the Appellant: For the Appellee: Billy W. Ald ridge John Knox Walkup Riverbend Maximum Security Attorney General and Repor ter Institution 7475 Cockrill Bend Industr ial Rd. Ellen H. Pollack Nashville, 37209 Assistant Attorney Gener al 425 Fifth Avenue North Nashville, TN 37243-0493 Victor S. Johnson, III District Attorney General Roger D. Moore Assistant District A

ttorney 222 Second Avenue North Washington Square Nashville, TN 37201-1649

OPINION FILED: ___________________
AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO R ULE 20
William M. Barker, Judge1 In addit ion to t he jurisdi ctionalbar, we note that post- convicti on reli ef for the appellant is barred by the st

atute of l imitati ons. Tenn. Code Ann. §40-30-202 (Supp. 1996) 2 OPINION The appellant, Billy W. Aldridge, appe als as of right the dismis sal in the Davidson County Cr

iminal Court of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. In that petition , appella nt challe nged the va lidity of h is convicti ons allegi ng a defe ctive indictment and an unconstitutional sentence. The trial court s ummarily dismissed the petitio n, findi ng that the gro unds all eged w ere appr opriate for post -convi ction r

elief, but not cognizable in a habeas corpus proceeding. Because appellant was conv icted in Shelby County, the t rial court was unabl e to treat the petition as one seeking postconvic tion re lief. 1 See Tenn. Code Ann. §40-30-204(a) (S upp. 1996) (requiringpostconviction petition be fil ed in the court of convicti on). According to appellant’s petition, he pled guilty

on May 18, 1992, to attempted second degree murder, agg ravated rape, and aggr avated robbery and rece ived a sentence of eight years. H is only challenge on appeal is that the indictment c harging him with aggrav

ated rape was deficient for fail ing to state the requis ite mens rea . Unfortunately, we are un able to review appell ant’s issue because of an insufficient record. The technical recor d does not contain a copy of the i ndictment, nor does appellant’s petition or appel late brief cite the languag e that was contained in the indictment. Without the contested language, we are unable to determine i ts sufficiency. It is the duty of the appellant to prepare a record whi ch conveys a fair, accurate and complete account of what transpired with respect to the issues f orming the basis of the appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 24(b) and State v. Ballard , 855 S.W.2d 557, 560 (Tenn. 1993) (citations omitt ed). An appellate court is precluded from considering the merits of an issue where th e relevant material is absent from the record. Id. We must decline to review the issue.3 Moreover, appellant supports his argument by relying on this Court’s opinion in State v. Roger Dale Hill, Sr. , No. 01C01-9508-CC-00267 ( Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashvill e, June 20, 1996), a decisi on which w as recently

reversed by our supr

eme court. State v. Roger Dale Hill, Sr. , No. 01S01-9701-CC-0005 (Tenn.at Nashville, November 3, 1997). Therefore, even if appellant’s indictm ent were in the record before us, in all likelih ood, appellant’s claim w ould be without merit. We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.

_______________________________ William M. Barker, Judge

____________________________ Joe B. Jones, Pre siding Judge

____________________________ Paul G. Summers, Judge