# FIL ED Janu ary 16, 1997 Cecil W. Crow son A pp ellat e C ou rtC lerk IN T HE C OU RTOF C RI MI NA L A PPEA LS OF T EN NE SSEE

A T NASHVILLE TER ESA

K IN G, ) ) C. C. A . N O. 01C 01- 9610- CR -0 0449 Appel lan t, ) ( N o . 9 1 - C - 1 5 2 4B e l o w) ) DA VIDSON COUNTY V S . ) ) Th e H on . T ho mas H. Sh river STA TE OF T EN NE SSEE, ) ) (Denial of Post-Conv iction Relie f) Appel lee . ) ) A FF IR ME D PU RS UA NTT O R UL E 20 O R D E R This matte r is before the C our t upo n the st ate’ s mot ion req uest ing thatthe jud g ment in the abov e- sty led cause be af firmed pursuantto Rul e 20, Tenness ee C our t of Cr imi nal Appea ls R ule s.

It appears that the pe ti ti oner was or ig ina ll y

co nv icted b y

a j ur y of firs t- deg re e murde r and s entenc ed to l ife i mpri sonment . This Cou rt aff ir med the peti ti oner ’s co nv icti on on A pr i l 2 9, 1 99 3. S ee Sta te v . Teres a M . Ki ng , N o. 0 1C 01 - 92 04 - C R - 00 14 6 ( Ten n. C r i m. Ap p. , atN as hv i l l e, A pr i l 2 9, 1 99 3) . P er mi s s i on t o ap pe al was d en i ed b y o ur S up rem e Cou rton S eptember

13, 1993. The pet it ion er t h e n f il ed her peti ti on for post -c onv icti on re li ef on Jun e 17, 1996. The t ria l co u rt di smi ss ed th e pet it ion w it hout a hear ing upon a findi ng thatthe peti ti on was filed outside th e one- y ear st atute of li mita ti on and that the peti ti oner ’s cl aims di d notfall w it hin one of the except ion s t o the statut e of l imi tati on as se t forth in T.C. A. § 40- 30- 206. W e ag re e.

Pursuantto T.C. A. § 40- 30-2 0 6( a) , a peti ti oner mustpeti ti on for post conv icti on reli ef w it hin one y ear of the date of t he final acti on of the hig hestst ate a ppel lat e cour t to w hic h an appeal w as tak en. The C ompil er ’s N otes to T.C. A. § 40- 30- 201 s tates that the 1 995 Po st- Con v icti on Act g ov er ns all peti ti ons for pos t- conv icti on reli ef f il ed after Ma y 10, 1995. M oreov er , t he C ompil er ’s N otes i ndi cat e tha t “a ny person hav ing g ro und for reli ef rec og niz ed unde r thi s p art s hal l hav e at lea st one ( 1) y ear from Ma y 10, 1995, to file a pet it ion or

a mot ion to re open a peti ti on unde r thi s p art.”-2- Und er T.C .A. § 40- 30- 202( b) , a cour t doe s n ot hav e jur is dicti on to co nsi der a p e ti ti on for post -c onv icti on reli ef if itwas filed outs ide the one- y ear st atute of li mita ti on unle ss (1) the claim in the petitio n is based upo n a f inal ruling of an ap pellat e cou rt esta blishing a co nstitu tiona l right thatwas no t recogniz ed a s ex isting at the tim e of trial, if re trospecti v e appl ic ati on of thatr ig ht i s req uired; ( 2) the cl aim in the peti ti on is bas ed upon new sci ent if ic ev iden ce esta blishing thatsuch pe titione r is actu ally inno cent of the of fense or o f fe n s es for w hich th e pe titione r was con v icted; or (3) the claim in the petitio n see ks relief f ro m a s e nte nce th at w as en han ced b ecau se of a previ ous co nviction and such conv icti on i n the ca se in w hic h the cl aim is as ser ted was not a g uil ty

plea w it h an ag re ed sent ence, and the p re v iou s c onv icti on has su bseq uentl y been hel d to be i nv ali d. In t he presentca se, the peti ti oner f il ed her peti ti on for

pos t- conv icti on reli ef on J une 27, 1996. Ac cordin g ly , t he pet it ion i s g ov er ned by the 1995 Post -C onv icti on Act, and the pe tition was filed outsid e the statu te of limitat ion set forth in T.C.A. § 40-30 -202 (a). Mo re ov er, th e p e ti ti oner has fail ed to sh ow

thatany of her cl aims fall w it hin one of the exception s set forth in T .C.A. § 4 0-30 -202 (b).

IT IS, THER EFO RE , O RD ERE D that the s tate’ s mot ion to aff ir m the judgme nt of

the trial court un der Rule 20 , T enn essee Court of Crimina l Appe als Rules, is grant ed, and t he judgme nt of t he trial co urt is a f

f irmed . Co sts are taxed to th e pe titione r. EN TER, thi s t he ____

day of Janua ry , 199 7.

_________

_________

_________

__ DA VID H . W ELLES, JU DG E CONCUR:

_________

_________

_________

__ JOH N H. PEA

Y , J UD GE

_________

_________

_________

__ JER RY L. SM ITH, JU DG E