### IN THE CO URT OF CR IMINAL APPEALS OF T ENN ESSEE
AT JACKSON

Ass ig ne d o n B rie fs Decem be r 1, 2 00 9

LAMARIO SUMNER a/ k /a LAMARIO FLEMI NG v

. STATE OF TENNESS EE

D irect A p p ea l f

ro m th e C rim in a l C o u rt f o r S h elb y C o u n ty
N o . 0 3 -0 7 1 1 8 P a u la S ka h a n , J u d g e

N o . W 2 0 0 9 -0 0 4 5 3 -C C A -R 3 -P C - F iled N o v em b er 1 0 , 2 0 1 0

P etitio n er, L arm io S u m n er a/k /a L a ma r i o F lem m in g , ap p eals th 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 reli e f in w h ich h e alleg ed th e in ef f ectiv e assistan ce o f trial co u n sel. S p ecif ically

, P etitio n er co n ten d s th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce

w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se h e f

ailed to (1 ) req u est a j u ry in stru ctio n o n ag g rav ated assau lt as

a lesser in clu d ed o f

f en se o f each co u n t ch arg ed in t h e in d ictm en t; an d (2 ) ap p eal th e trial

co u rt’s im

p o sitio n o f co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g

. A f ter a th o ro u g h rev iew

, w e af f i rm th e j u d g m en t o f

th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt.

T en n . R . A p p . P . 3 A p p ea l a s o f R ig h t; J u d g m en t o f

th e C rim in a l C o u rt A f

f irm ed

T H O M A S T

. W O O D A L L , J., d eliv ered th e o p in io n o f th e C o u rt, in w h ich J O H N E V E R E T T W IL L IA M S an d J.C

. M C L IN , JJ., j o in ed

.

L an ce R . C h ism , M em

p h is, T en n essee, f

o r th e ap p ellan t, L am ario S u m n er.

R o b e r t E

. C o o p er, Jr., A tto rn ey G en eral an d R ep o rter; D esh ea D u lan y F au g h n , A ssista n t
A tto rn ey G en eral; William L

. G ib b o n s, D istrict A tto rn ey G en eral; a n d B y ro n B

. Win sett, III, A ssistan t D istrict A tto rn ey G en eral, f

o r th e ap p ellee, S tate o f

T en n essee.

O P IN IO N

I. B a ckg ro u n d

F o llo w in g a j u ry trial, P etitio n er w as co n v icted o f tw o co u n ts o f ag g rav ated ro b b ery

. T h e trial co u rt sen ten ced P etitio n er as a R an g e III, p ersisten t o f f en d er, to tw en ty

y ears f o r each co n v ictio n

. T h e trial co u rt o rd ered P etitio n er to serv e h is sen ten ces co n secu tiv ely f o r

an ef f ectiv e sen ten ce o f

f o rty y ears.T h e f acts su p p o rtin g P etitio n er’s co n v ictio n s w ere su m ma rized b y th is C o u rt o n

ap p eal as f

o llo w s:

O n A p r i l 2 6

, 2 0 0 3

, th e tw o v ictim s, M aria L aw so n an d A n g el S il v a ,

m et at M em

p h is d e N o ch e, a lo cal M em p h is clu b

. A f

ter a b rief co n v ersatio n , th e tw o w en t o u tsid e to L aw so n ’s Jeep C h ero k ee an d d ro v e b eh in d th e clu b
in o rd er to “h av e sex .” L aw so n ad m itted to p ro stitu tin g at th e clu b

. L aw so n

w as seated in th e d riv er’s seat o f th e v eh icle, an d S ilv a w as stan d in g o u tsid e th e p assen g er d o o r w h en a car w ith tw o b lack m ales p u lled u p b eh in d

L aw so n ’s v eh icle. T h e p a s s en g er o f th e v eh icle, later id en tif ied as th e A p p e l l a n t, ex ited th e car an d b ran d ish in g a p isto l, ap p ro ach ed S ilv a an d
d em an d ed m o n ey . S ilv a rem o v ed h is w allet f ro m h is p o ck et an d th rew it to th e g ro u n d

. A s th e A p p ellan t b en t to retriev e th e w allet, S i l v a f led an d h id
b etw een tw o p ark ed cars. T h e A p p ellan t th en ap p ro ach ed L aw so n ’s sid e o f

t h e v eh icle, d em an d in g th at sh e su rren d er h er k ey s to th e v eh icle

. L a w s o n h an d ed th e A p p ellan t th e k e y s , b u t as h e attem p ted to en ter th e v eh icle, sh e “h o llered real lo u d .” A t th is p o in t, rescu e-m in d ed p atro n s o f th e b ar em erg ed

. T h e A p p ellan t f

led th e Jeep C h ero k ee, tak in g L aw so n ’s p u rse w ith h im

, an d
h e b eg an f

irin g h is g u n at th e o n co m in g p atro n s. O n e o r m o re o f th e p atro n s,

w h o w ere also arm ed

, retu rn ed f ire. A f ter th e g u n f

ire sto p p ed

, S ilv a em erg ed
f ro m h is h id in g sp o t an d p ro ceed ed b ack aro u n d th e b u ild in g

. T h e A p p ellan t,

w h o w as still p resen t at th is tim e, sh o t S ilv a in th e ch est. T h e A p p ellan t th en f l e d t h e scen e o n f

o o t. T h e d riv er o f th e v eh icle, w h o h ad rem ain ed i n t h e

v eh icle d u rin g th e co m m issio n o f th e o f f en ses, d ro v e aw ay

.

A clu b secu rity g u ard esco rted L aw so n as sh e m o v ed h er v eh icle to a

m o re secu re lo catio n

. D u rin g th e p r o c ess o f m o v in g h er v eh icle, L aw so n f o u n d th e A p p ellan t ’ s d riv er licen se in th e f lo o rb o ard

. Wh en th e p o lice
arriv ed o n th e scen e, L aw so n an d th e secu rity g u ard retu rn ed to th e scen e, an d

L aw so n g av e th e d riv er licen se to an o f f icer, id en tif

y in g t h e m an as th e

p erp etrato r.

S ilv a w as tran sp o rted to a n earb y h o sp ital w h ere h e u n d erw en t su rg ery f o r a g u n sh o t w o u n d to th e ch est. A f ter h is d isch arg e, S ilv a w as in terv iew ed
b y th e p o lice th ro u g h an in t e r p reter, an d h e id en tif ied th e A p p ellan t as h is
assailan t f

ro m a p h o to lin e-u p

.

S ta te v. L a m a rio S

u m n er , N o

. W2 0 0 5 -0 0 1 2 2 -C C A -R 3 -C D

, 2 0 0 6 WL 4 4 3 7 7

, at * 1 (T en n

. C rim . A p p ., at Jack so n , Jan . 6 , 2 0 0 6 ), p erm . to a p p ea l d en ied (T en n . M ay

3 0 , 2 0 0 6 ).

-2

-II. P o st-C o n v ictio n H ea rin g

P etitio n er testif

ied th at h e retain ed trial co u n sel in A p ril 2 0 0 3

. P etitio n er said th at h e

me t w i t h trial co u n sel ap p ro x im ately sev en o r eig h t tim es b ef o re trial, an d trial co u n s e l

rev iew ed th e f

acts o f th e case w ith h im

. P etitio n er to ld trial co u n sel th at h e, F red R ich ard s

an d M ich ael B en to n w ere rid in g d o w n L am ar A v en u e o n A p ril 2 6

, 2 0 0 3

, at ap p ro x im ately

1 1 :3 0 p .m

. to m id n ig h t. T h e g ro u p sto p p ed b rief ly at o n e b ar an d th en d ecid ed n o t to g o in to th e estab lish m en t. P etitio n er g o t o u t o f th e v eh icle o n L u cy S t r e et an d w as p ick ed u p b y T o n y T h o m as, C o u rtn ey G o rd o n , an d A n to n io D riv e. T h e f o u r m en w en t to a b ar o n E lv is

P resley B o u lev ard

, arriv in g at ap p ro x im ately 1 2 :3 0 a.m

. T h ey stay ed f o r a f ew m in u tes an d
th en d ro v e to a n ig h tclu b at ap p ro x im ately 1 :0 0 a.m

. P etitio n er n o ticed th at h e d id n o t h av e h is d riv er’ s l i c e n se w ith h im

. P etitio n er said th at h e receiv ed a telep h o n e call f ro m h is

m o th er at ap p ro x im ately

2 :0 0 a.m . S h e to ld P etitio n er th at p o lice o f f icers h ad b een to h er h o u se lo o k in g f

o r P etitio n er. T h e o f

f icers to ld h er th at P etitio n er w as arm ed an d d an g ero u s. P etitio n er said th at h is g irlf rien d

, S io b h an F lem in g p ick ed h im u p at th e clu b an d th ey d ro v e
to M s. F lem in g ’s h o u se w h ere P etitio n er sp en t th e n ig h t.

P etitio n er stated th at h e p ro v id ed th e n am es an d telep h o n e n u m b ers o f h is f

rien d s to
h is trial co u n sel. P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at h e h ad tro u b le try in g to co n tact th ese p eo p le
b u t said trial co u n sel d id n o t d o an y in v estig atio n as to th eir w h ereab o u ts. P etitio n er stated
th at trial co u n sel d id n o t f

ile a m o tio n to su p p ress th e d riv er’s licen se f o u n d in M s. L aw so n ’s

v eh icle. T rial co u n sel also d id n o t ask f o r a D N A an aly sis o f th e h at P etitio n er w as alleg ed ly

w ea r i n g a t t h e tim e o f th e co m m issio n o f th e o f f en ses, as P etitio n er h ad req u ested

. P etitio n er stated th at trial co u n sel “co n stan tly ” u rg ed h im to en ter a p lea o f g u ilty

. P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at trial co u n sel n eg o tiated a sen ten ce o f “sev en p o in t tw o ,” b u t P etitio n er said th at h e w an ted to p ro ceed to trial b ecau se h e d id n o t w an t to accep t an y sen ten ce th at carried a p erio d o f co n f

in em en t. P etitio n er stated th at trial co u n sel d id n o t w an t to g o to trial
b ecau se P etitio n er’s f

am ily co u ld n o t af

f o rd to p ay th e atto rn ey ’s f

ee f o r serv ices b ey o n d th e

p lea n eg o tiatio n stag e.

O n cro ss-ex am in atio n , P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at th e S tate ex ten d ed six o f f ers o f
settlem en t, each o f

f er in v o lv in g less co n f

in em en t t i me t h an th e p rev io u s. P etitio n er also
ack n o w led g ed th at trial co u n sel ex p lain ed each o f f er to h im

. P e t i tio n er stated th at h e f elt
th at trial co u n sel w as p ressu rin g h im to en ter a p lea o f g u ilty b ecau se h e k ep t b rin g in g d if f eren t o f f ers o f settlem en t to h im

. P etitio n er said th at h e w as n o t aw are th at trial co u n sel

w as req u ired to p resen t each o f f er to h im

. P etitio n er d id n o t reco llect trial co u n sel statin g th at h e co u ld n o t f

in d an y o f th e alib i w itn esses b ased o n th e in f o rm atio n P etitio n er

p ro v id ed

. P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at h e d id n o t try to f in d th e alib i w itn esses h im self
b ef o re trial. P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at M r. S ilv a d id n o t id en tif y h im as th e p erp etrato r f ro m a lin e-u p o f eig h t A f rican -A m erican m en

. P etitio n er ag reed th at trial co u n sel m o v ed

-3

-f

o r a d ism issal o f th e case b ased o n th e resu lts o f th e l i n e

- u p , w h i c h w as g ran ted b y th e G en eral S essio n s C o u rt. P etitio n er ack n o w led g ed th at h e w as arrested ag ain f o r th e ch arg es in th e crim in al trial co u rt ap p ro x im ately f iv e m o n th s later.

S e r g e a n t Jam es T erry M ax , w ith th e M em p h is P o lice D ep artm en t, testif ied th at h e in terv iew ed M r. S ilv a in th e h o sp ital o n A p ril 2 9 , 2 0 0 3

. S p eak in g th ro u g h an in terp reter,
M r. S ilv a d escrib ed th e p erp etrato r’s v eh icle b u t co u ld o n ly g iv e a g en eral d escrip tio n o f th e

p erp etrato r h im self

. S erg ean t M ax stated th at th e in terv iew lasted o n ly a sh o rt tim e b ecau se M r. S ilv a w as h eav ily m ed icated

. T h e n ex t in terv iew o ccu rred o n M ay 9

, 2 0 0 3

. M r. S ilv a, th ro u g h an in terp reter, d escrib ed th e p erp etrat o r as an A f rican -A m erican m ale an d g av e in f o rm atio n co n cern in g th e m an ’s h eig h t an d co m p lex io n

. S erg ean t M ax sh o w ed M r. S ilv a

a p h o to g rap h ic lin e-u p

. A f ter a f ew m in u tes, M r. S ilv a id en tif ied P etitio n er as th e

p erp etrato r, b u t M r. S ilv a d id n o t d isp lay m u ch co n f id e n c e i n h is ch o ice. S erg ean t M ax d escrib ed M r. S ilv a’s id en tif icatio n as “ten tativ e.” O n cro ss- e x a min atio n , S erg ean t M ax stated th at M s. L aw so n id en tif ied P etitio n er as th e p erp etrato r f ro m th e p h o to g rap h o n th e d riv er’s licen se th at w as f o u n d in h er v eh icle.

T rial co u n sel stated th at h e d id n o t ap p eal th e im p o sitio n o f co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g b ecau se h e d id n o t f

eel th at h e w o u ld p rev ail o n th e issu e, an d h e f elt th at th ere w as m o re

su p p o rt f o r th e issu es h e d id raise. T rial co u n sel said th at th e trial co u rt w as v ery th o ro u g h
in its f in d in g s su p p o rtin g co n secu tiv e sen ten ces an d “ru led w ith in th e b o u n d s o f th e law .”

T rial co u n sel said th at h e d id n o t req u est a j u ry in stru ctio n o n ag g rav ated assau lt as

a lesser in clu d ed o f

f en se o f ag g rav ated ro b b ery b ecau se th e th eo ry o f d ef en se w as b ased o n id en tity

, n o t th at th e ch arg ed o f f en se d id n o t o ccu r. T rial co u n sel also b eliev ed th at th e j u ry

w o u ld n o t h av e co n v icted P etitio n er o f ag g rav ated assau lt b ased o n th e ev id en ce p resen ted

co n cern in g th e ro b b ery

o f tw o p erso n s at g u n p o in t.

T rial co u n sel said th at P etitio n er w as co n sisten t in h is d escrip tio n o f h is activ ities o n A p ril 2 6

, 2 0 0 3

. In itially

, h o w ev er, h e d id n o t d iscu ss th e p o ten tial o f an alib i w ith P etitio n er b ecau se P etitio n er w as f

o cu sed o n ly o n secu rin g th e d ism issal o f th e ch arg es ag ain st h im

. T rial co u n sel said th at th e S tate b eg an settlem en t n eg o tiatio n s “p retty q u ick ly .” Wh en th e

o f f er in clu d ed a sen ten ce o f 7 .2 y ears at tw en ty p ercen t, trial co u n sel stated th at h e “b eg an

p ractic a l l y b e g g in g ” P etitio n er to accep t th e o f f er. T rial co u n sel w as aw are th at th e S tate
h ad f o u n d M s. L aw so n , an d th at M s. L aw so n w o u ld testif y at trial.

T rial co u n sel stated th at P etit i o n e r alw ay s ref erred to h is alib i w itn esses b y th eir

n ick n am es ex cep t f

o r M s. F lem in g

. T rial co u n s e l a s k e d P etitio n er to g iv e h im an y in f o rm atio n th at w o u ld allo w h im to lo cate th ese p eo p le. P etitio n er g av e trial co u n sel so m e telep h o n e n u m

b ers in M ay 2 0 0 3

. A ttem p ts to reach th e w itn esses b y th ese n u m b ers w ere

-4

-u n su ccessf

u l. T rial co u n sel ask ed P etitio n er to en list h is m o th er’s an d M s. F lem in g ’s
assistan ce in f

in d in g th e w itn esses, b u t h e n ev er h eard f ro m th em

. T r i al co u n sel said th at
P etitio n er n ev er sh o w ed an y in terest in talk in g ab o u t h is alib i w itn esses, an d trial co u n s e l
d o u b ted th at ev en if f

o u n d th ey w o u ld co rro b o rate P etitio n er’s v ersio n o f th e ev en ts. T rial

co u n sel stated th at “th e S tate” h ad a list o f th e p o ten tial alib i w itn esses an d w as also u n ab le

to lo cate an y

o f th em

.

III. S ta n d a rd o f

R ev iew

T o su cceed o n a ch a llen g e o f in ef f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel, th e p etitio n er b ears th e b u r d e n o f estab lish in g th e alleg atio n s set f o rth in h is p etitio n b y clear an d co n v in cin g

ev id en ce. T .C .A

. § 4 0 -3 0 -2 1 0 (f ). H o w ev er, th e trial co u rt’s ap p licatio n o f th e law to th e f acts is rev iew ed d

e n o vo , w ith o u t a p resu m

p tio n o f co rrectn ess. F

ield s v. S ta te

, 4 0 S .W.3 d

4 5 0

, 4 5 8 ( T e n n

. 2 0 0 1 ). A claim th at co u n sel ren d ered in ef f ectiv e assistan ce is a m ix ed

q u estio n o f f

act an d law an d th eref

o re also su b

j ect to d e n o vo rev iew

. Id .; S ta te v. B u rn s , 6 S .W.3 d 4 5 3 , 4 6 1 (T en n . 1 9 9 9 ).

Wh en a p etitio n er seek s p o st-co n v ictio n relief o n th e b asis o f in ef f ectiv e assistan ce

o f c o u n sel, h e o r sh e m

u st estab lish th at co u n sel’s p erf o rm an ce f

ell b elo w “th e ran g e o f

co m p eten ce d em an d ed o f atto rn ey s in crim in al cases.” B a xter v. R o se , 5 2 3 S .W.2 d 9 3 0

, 9 3 6 (T en n

. 1 9 7 5 ). In ad d itio n , h e o r sh e m u st sh o w th at co u n sel’s in ef f ectiv e p erf

o r m an ce
actu ally ad v ersely im

p acted h is d ef

en se. S trickla n d v. Wa sh in g to n , 4 6 6 U .S

. 6 6 8

, 6 9 3

, 1 0 4
S

. C t. 2 0 5 2

, 2 0 6 7 (1 9 8 4 ). In rev iew in g co u n sel’s p erf o rm an ce, th e d isto rtio n s o f h in d sig h t

m u st b e av o id ed

, an d th is C o u rt w ill n o t seco n d -g u ess co u n sel’s d e c isio n s reg ard in g trial
strateg ies an d tactics. H

ella rd v. S ta te

, 6 2 9 S .W.2 d 4

, 9 (T en n

. 1 9 8 2 ). T h e rev iew in g co u rt, th eref o re, sh o u ld n o t co n clu d e th at a p articu lar act o r o m issio n b y co u n sel is u n reaso n ab le

m er e l y b ecau se th e strateg y w as u n su ccessf u l. S trickla n d

, 4 6 6 U .S

. at 6 8 9

, 1 0 4 S

. C t. at
2 0 6 5

. R ath er, co u n sel’s alleg ed erro rs sh o u ld b e j u d g ed f ro m co u n sel’s p ersp ectiv e at th e

p o in t o f tim e th ey w ere m ad e in lig h t o f all th e f acts an d circu m stan ces at th at tim e. Id . at
6 9 0 , 1 0 4 S . C t. at 2 0 6 6

.

A p eti t i o n e r m

u st satisf y b o th p ro n g s o f th e S trickla n d test b ef o re h e o r sh e m ay

p rev ail o n a claim o f in ef

f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel. S ee H en ley v. S ta te

, 9 6 0 S .W.2 d 5 7 2

, 5 8 0 ( T e n n

. 1 9 9 7 ). T h at is, a p etitio n er m u st n o t o n ly sh o w th at h is o r h er co u n sel’s

p erf o rm an ce f

ell b elo w accep tab le stan d ard s, b u t th at su ch p erf o rm an ce w as p rej u d icial to th e p etitio n er. Id

. F a i l u re to satisf y eith er p ro n g w ill resu lt in th e d en ial o f relief

. Id

. A cco rd in g ly

, th is C o u rt n eed n o t ad d r e s s o n e o f th e co m p o n en ts if th e p etitio n er f ails to estab lish th e o th er. S trickla n d , 4 6 6 U .S . at 6 9 7 , 1 0 4 S . C t. at 2 0 6 9

.

-5

-IV. J u ry In stru ctio n s

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se h e f

ailed to

req u est in w ritin g a j u ry in stru ctio n o n ag g rav at e d a s s a u lt as a lesser in clu d ed o f f en se o f

ag g rav ated ro b b ery

. P etitio n er co n ten d s th at h e w as p rej u d iced b y trial co u n sel’s d ecisio n
to f o reg o su ch a req u est b ecau se th e S tate d id n o t estab lish b ey o n d a reaso n ab le d o u b t th at th e j u r y w o u l d n o t h av e co n v icted h im o f ag g rav ated assau lt h ad th ey b een ex ten d ed th e

o p p o rtu n ity

to d o so

.

We n o te at th e o u tset th at P etitio n er, n o t th e S tate, h as th e b u rd en o f p ro v in g th at h e

o r sh e w as p rej u d iced b y an alleg ed d ef icien cy o n th e p art o f t r i a l o r a p p ellate co u n sel.
S trickla n d

, 4 6 6 U .S

. at 6 8 7

, 1 0 4 S .C t. 2 0 5 2

. T o estab lish p rej u d ice, th e p etitio n er m u st sh o w th at “th ere is a reaso n ab le p ro b ab ility 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. A reaso n ab le p ro b ab ility is 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.” Id ., 4 6 6 U .S . at 6 9 4

. A d ef en d an t is req u ired to req u est in w ritin g th at th e trial co u rt in stru ct th e j u ry o n

an y sp ecif

ically id en tif

ied lesser in clu d ed o f

f en se. T .C .A

. § 4 0 -1 8 -1 1 0 (a). In th e ab sen ce

o f su ch a req u est, th e trial co u rt m ay ch arg e th e id en tif ied lesser in clu d ed o f

f en se, b u t th e d ef en d an t is n o t en titled to th e ch arg e. Id

. § 4 0 -1 8 -1 1 0 (b ). A g g rav ated assau lt is a lesser
in clu d ed o f

f en se o f ag g rav ated ro b b ery

. S ta te v. S w ift

, 3 0 8 S .W.3 d 8 2 7

, 8 3 1 -3 2 (T en n

. 2 0 1 0 ); S ta te v. F

ra n klin

, 1 3 0 S .W.3 d 7 8 9

, 7 9 8 ( T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 2 0 0 3 ); S ta te v. Ja m es C a rlo s Wa rd

, N o

. M 2 0 0 9

- 0 0 4 1 7 -C C A -R 3 -C D

, 2 0 1 0 WL 1 9 4 9 1 5 5

, at * 9 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p ., at N ash v ille, M ay 1 4

, 2 0 1 0 ); S ta te v. Jo sep h Wa yn e G ra ves , N o

. W2 0 0 7 -0 2 5 5 2 -C C A

R 3 -C D

, 2 0 0 9 WL 3 2 7 3 9 5 9

, at * 1 0 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p ., at Jack so n , O ct. 1 3

, 2 0 1 0 ), p erm

. to

a p p ea l d en ied (T en n . A p r. 1 5 , 2 0 1 0 ).

In th e case s u b j u d ice

, P etitio n er w as in d icted f o r esp ecially ag g rav ated ro b b ery in

o n e co u n t an d co n v icted o f th e lesser in cl u d e d o f f en se o f ag g rav ated ro b b ery

. In an o th er

co u n t, P etitio n er w as ch arg ed w ith an d co n v icted o f ag g rav ated ro b b ery

. We n o te th at th e j u ry co n sid ered th e lesser-in clu d ed o f f en ses o f a ggr av ated ro b b ery an d ro b b ery in o n e co u n t,

an d ro b b ery in th e o th er co u n t, an d co n v icted P etitio n er o f ag g rav ated ro b b ery in each co u n t,

to th e ex clu sio n o f

th e im m ed iate lesser in clu d ed o f f en se o f ro b b ery

. H arm less erro r m ay b e sh o w n w h ere th e j u ry co n v icts o n th e h ig h er o f f en se to th e ex clu sio n o f th e im m ed iately
lesser o f f en se, n ecessarily rej ectin g o th er lesser o f f en ses. S ta te v

. Willia m s , 9 7 7 S .W.2 d

1 0 1

, 1 0 6 (T en n

. 1 9 9 8 ). F o r th is reaso n , w e co n clu d e th at P etitio n er w as n o t p rej u d iced b y h is trial co u n sel’s f

ailu re to req u est an i n s t r u ctio n o n th e lesser in clu d ed o f f en se o f

ag g rav ated assau lt.

N o tw i t h s tan d in g th e j u ry ’s rej ectio n o f an in term ed iate lesser o f f en se, w e also

co n clu d e th at th e erro r is h arm less in th at it ap p ears b ey o n d a reaso n ab le d o u b t th at th e erro r

-6

-d id n o t af

f ect th e o u tco m e o f th e trial.” S ee S ta te v. A llen

, 6 9 S .W.3 d 1 8 1

, 1 9 1 ( T en n

. 2 0 0 2 ). A s P e t i tio n er can d id ly ack n o w led g es in h is b rief

, f ailu re to in stru ct th e j u ry o n

ag g rav ated assau lt a s a lesser in clu d ed o f f en se is h arm less erro r “w h en th e p ro o f

o v erw h elm in g ly sh o w ed th at a th ef t o ccu rred .” S

ee S ta te v. B a n ks

, 2 7 1 S .W.3 d 9 0

, 1 2 9 -3 0 (T en n

. 2 0 0 8 ) (n o tin g th at th e o n ly v ariatio n b etw een ag g rav ated ro b b ery an d ag g rav ated

assau lt is t h e r o b b ery co m p o n en t); see a lso S ta te v. H en ry H a w kin s , N o

. W2 0 0 5 -0 0 7 8 1

- C C A -R 3 -C D

, 2 0 0 6 WL 1 7 0 3 8 1 7

, at * 1 6 (T en n

. C rim. A p p

. , a t Jack so n , Ju n e 2 1

, 2 0 0 6 ),

p erm

. to a

p p . d en ied (T en n . O ct. 3 0 , 2 0 0 6 ) (co n clu d in g th at “n o ratio n al j u ro r co u ld h av e f o u n d th e d ef

en d an t co m m itted an assau lt o r ag g rav ated assau lt w ith o u t co m m ittin g a

ro b b ery o r an ag g rav ated ro b b ery an d

, th eref o re, th e trial co u rt’s f

ailu re to cha

r g e ag g rav ated

assau lt a s a lesser in clu d ed o f f en se is h arm less erro r). M s. L aw so n testif ied at trial th at
P etitio n er w as arm ed w i t h t w o g u n s. H e p o in ted o n e g u n at h er h ead w h en h e d em an d ed
h e r c a r k ey s an d k ep t th e o th er g u n b y h is sid e. M s. L aw so n said th at w h en th e o t h e r b a r

p atro n s ru sh ed in to th e p ark in g lo t in resp o n se to h er s c r e a ms , P e t itio n er ran o f f w ith h er

p u rse. M r. S ilv a testif

ied th at P e t i tio n er ap p ro ach ed h im

, p o in ted a g u n at h im

, an d
d em an d ed m o n ey

. M r. S ilv a s a id th at h e th rew h is w allet o n th e g ro u n d in f ro n t o f

P etitio n er an d th en ran aw ay

.

P etitio n er ack n o w led g es th at “th e p ro o f clearly sh o w ed th at h e co m m itted a th ef t

ag ain st b o th A n g el S ilv a an d M aria L aw so n .” T rial co u n sel testif ied at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g th at h e d id n o t req u est an in stru ctio n o n ag g rav ated assau lt b ecau se P etitio n er d id

n o t d en y th at th e o f

f en ses o ccu rred

, j u st th at h e w as n o t th e p erp etrato r. P etitio n er d o es n o t

o f f er an y reaso n w h y h is case is d istin g u ish ab le f ro m th e situ atio n s p resen ted in B a n ks an d

H en ry H a w kin s

. B ased o n th e f

o reg o in g , w e co n clu d e th at P etitio n er h as f ailed to sh o w th at
h e w as p rej u d iced b y trial co u n sel’s f ailu re to req u est a j u ry i n s t r u c t i o n o n ag g rav ated

assau lt. P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is issu e.

V. S en ten cin g Issu es

P etitio n er arg u es th at trial co u n sel’s assistan ce w as in ef f ectiv e b ecau se h e f

ailed to

ap p eal th e tr i a l c o u r t’s im p o sitio n o f co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g

. P etitio n er su b m its th at an ef f ectiv e sen ten ce o f f

o rty y ears w as “g reater th an th at d eserv ed f o r th e o f f en se co m m itted ”

an d n o t “j u stly d eserv ed .” S ee T .C .A .§ 4 0 -3 5 -1 0 2 (1 ), -1 0 3 (2 ). P etitio n er p o in ts o u t th at h e

w as acq u itted o f esp ecially ag g rav ated ro b b ery reg ard in g th e o f f en se ag ain st M r. S ilv a, th e j u ry h av in g co n clu d ed h e d id n o t cau se an y serio u s b o d ily in j u ry

. H e also a r g u e s t h at h is

p rio r crim in al reco rd c o n sists p rim arily o f j u v en ile o f f en ses, an d th e cu rren t crim es w ere

co m m itted “in a sh o rt p erio d o f tim e as p art o f o n e ep iso d e.” P etitio n er also arg u es th at n o

o n e w as in

j u red d u rin g th e co m m issio n o f th e p rio r o f f en ses f o r w h ich h e h ad b een

co n v icted

.

-7

-A crim in al d ef en d an t h as a co n stitu tio n al rig h t to co u n sel o n h is f irst ap p eal, an d th is rig h t n ecessarily in clu d es th e rig h t t o e f f ectiv e assistan ce o f co u n sel. H o u se v. S ta te

, 9 1 1
S .W.2 d 7 0 5

, 7 1 2 ( T e n n

. 1 9 9 5 ) (citin g D o u g la s v. C a lifo rn ia

, 3 7 2 U .S

. 3 5 3

, 8 3 S .C t. 8 1 4 (1 9 6 3 ); C o o p er v. S ta te

, 8 4 9 S .W.2 d 7 4 4

, 7 4 6 (T en n

. 1 9 9 3 )). T h e sam e p rin cip les ap p licab le

to d ecid in g th e ef

f ectiv en ess o f trial co u n sel ap p ly to ap p ellate co u n sel. H o u se , 9 1 1 S .W.2 d

at 7 1 2

. T h u s , P etitio n er’s ap p ellate co u n sel m u st n o t o n ly h av e b een in ef f ectiv e in h is

p erf o rm an ce, P etitio n er m

u st also h av e b een p rej u d iced b y ap p ellate co u n sel’s d ef icien t

co n d u ct. S trickla n d

, 4 6 6 U .S

. at 6 9 3

. T o d em o n strate h e w as p rej u d iced b y a p p e l late

co u n sel’s actio n s, P etitio n er m u st sh o w th at th ere is a reaso n ab le p ro b ab ility th at th e resu lt

o n ap p eal w o u ld h av e b een d if f eren t b u t f

o r th e erro rs o f

co u n sel. Id . at 6 9 4

.

T h e trial co u rt sen ten ced P etitio n er as a R an g e III, p ersisten t o f f en d er, b ased o n P etitio n er’s co n v ictio n in N o v em b er 2 0 0 0 o f tw o co u n ts o f esp ecially ag g ra v a ted
k id n ap p in g an d o n e co u n t o f esp ecially ag g rav ated ro b b ery , all C lass B f elo n ies, in

N o v em b er 2 0 0 0

. S

ee T .C .A

. § 4 0 -3 5 -1 0 7 (2 ). A cco rd in g t o t h e p r e sen ten ce rep o rt,
P etitio n er w as six teen y ears o ld w h en th ese o f f en ses w ere co m m itted in Ju ly 1 9 9 8

, an d h e

w as tran sf

erred to th e S h elb y C o u n ty C rim in al C o u rt to b e tried as an ad u lt. In ad d itio n , if

a d e f e n d a n t is co n v icted o f o n e o r m o re crim in al o f f en se, co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g m ay b e im p o sed at th e d iscretio n o f th e trial co u rt if o n e o r m o re o f th e criteria in T en n essee C o d e A n n o tated sectio n 4 0 -3 5 -1 1 5 (b ) is p rese n t

. I n t h i s in stan ce, th e trial co u rt f o u n d th at
P etitio n er h ad an ex ten siv e h isto ry o f crim in al activ ity

, an d th at h e w as a d an g ero u s o f f en d er

w h o se b e h a v i o r i n d icated little o r n o reg ard f o r h u m an lif

e an d n o h esitatio n ab o u t

co m m ittin g a crim e in w h ich th e risk to h u m an lif e is h ig h

. T .C .A

. § 4 0 -3 5 -1 1 5 (b )(2 ), (4 ).

In ad d itio n to h is th ree co n v ictio n s in 2 0 0 0

, P etitio n er h as th e f o llo w in g j u v en ile
ad j u d icatio n s: u n l a w f

u l p o ssessio n o f a w eap o n , d riv in g w h ile licen se su sp en d ed

, ref u sal

to su b m it to a b lo o d alco h o l test, an d reck less d riv in g in 1 9 9 8 ; b u rg lary o f an au to m o b ile,
th ef t o f an au to m o b ile an d p o ssessio n o f co cain e w ith in ten t to sell in 1 9 9 6 ; ag g rav ated

assau lt, co ercio n o f a w itn ess, ro b b ery , ev ad in g arrest, an d tw o ad j u d icatio n s f

o r th ef t o f a

v eh icle in 1 9 9 5

. In ad d itio n , P etitio n er’s p re-sen ten ce rep o rt in d icates th at h e d ro p p ed o u t

o f sch o o l in th e n in th g rad e an d h as n o h isto ry o f em p lo y m en t.

In d eterm in in g th at P etitio n er w as a d an g ero u s o f f en d er, th e trial co u rt f

o u n d th at th e circu m stan ces su rro u n d in g th e co m m issio n o f th e o f f en ses w ere ag g rav ated n o tin g th at n o t

o n ly d id P etitio n er ro b tw o p eo p le at g u n p o in t, h e d isch arg ed h i s w eap o n in a cro w d ed

p ark in g lo t. T h e trial co u rt also co n sid ered th e circu m stan ces o f P etitio n er’s p rio r o f f en ses. A t th e sen ten cin g h earin g o n h is ag g rav ated ro b b ery co n v ictio n s, D an a S an to s, th e v ictim

o f o n e o f th e esp ecially ag g rav ated k id n ap p in g o f f en ses, testif

ied th at sh e an d h er f

rien d

, Jessica N eig h b o rs, w ere sto p p ed at a red lig h t w h en P etitio n er g o t in to th e b ack p assen g er
seat. P etitio n er o rd ered M s. N eig h b o rs to “tak e h im w h ere h e n eed ed to g o o r h e w as g o in g

-8

-to h u rt u s.” M s. N eig h b o rs cro ssed th e M ississip p i state lin e an d P etitio n er d irected h er to

an ab an d o n ed ap artm en t b u ild in g

. P etitio n er to ld M s. N eig h b o rs to tu rn th e h ead lig h ts o f f

. P etitio n er h eld a g u n to M s. N eig h b o rs’ tem p le, an d to ld th e w o m en to g et o u t o f th e v eh icle.

T h e w o m en co m

p lied

, an d M s. S an to s stated th at sh e an d M s. N eig h b o rs ran b eh in d a tree b ecau se th ey w ere af

raid th at P etitio n er w as g o in g to sh o o t th em

. M s. S an to s id en tif ied

P etitio n er as h er assailan t at th e sen ten cin g h earin g

.

B ased o n th ese f

acto rs, th e trial co u rt f

o u n d th at co n f

in em en t f o r an ex ten d ed p erio d

w as n ecessary

to p ro tect so ciety

f ro m P etitio n er’s u n w illin g n ess to lead a p ro d u ctiv e lif e. T h e trial co u rt o b serv ed th at it w as ap p aren t th at “all th is [ p etitio n er] w an ts to d o is p u t g u n s

o n p eo p le an d terro rize th e co m m u n ity an d b e a b ig m an w ith a g u n .” T h e trial co u rt f o u n d
th at im p o sitio n o f th e m in im

u m sen ten ce f

o r e ach ag g rav ated ro b b ery co n v ictio n an d th e

o rd er o f co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g w as reaso n ab ly related to th e serio u sn ess o f th e o f f en ses.

T rial co u n sel testif

ied at th e p o st-co n v ictio n h earin g th at h e rev iew ed th e m o tio n f o r

n ew trial an d ch o se th o se issu es w h ich h e b eliev ed h ad a ch an ce o f su ccess o n th e m erits.

T rial co u n sel said

, h o w ev er, th at h e b eliev ed th at P etitio n er m et th e criteria f o r co n secu tiv e

s e n t e n c i n g an d th at th e trial co u rt p ro p erly co n sid ered th e p rin cip les o f sen ten cin g i n

o rd erin g P etitio n er to serv e h is sen ten c es co n secu tiv ely

. T h ere is n o req u irem en t th at

co u n sel raise a n o n -f

riv o lo u s issu e o n ap p eal if

, as a m atter o f p ro f

essio n al j u d g me n t,

co u n sel f eels th e issu e sh o u ld n o t b e ad d ressed

. S ee C a rp en ter v. S ta te

, 1 2 6 S .W.3 d 8 7 9

, 8 8 7 (T en n

. 2 0 0 4 )

. B ased o n o u r rev iew

, w e co n clu d e th at th e ev id en ce d o es n o t

p rep o n d erate ag ain st th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt’s f in d in g th at trial co u rt’s assistan ce in th is

reg ard w as n o t d ef

icien t.

M o reo v er, w e co n clu d e th at P etitio n er h as f ailed to sh o w th at th ere is a reaso n ab le

p ro b ab ility th at th e o u tco m e o f th e ap p eal w o u ld h av e b een d if f eren t h ad trial co u n sel raised
th e issu e o f co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g o n ap p e a l. P etitio n er’s h isto ry o f crim in al activ ity

su p p o rts th e trial co u rt’s f in d in g th at P etitio n er h as an ex ten siv e crim in al reco rd

. T h is C o u rt
h as rep eated ly ap p ro v ed th e co n sid eratio n o f a d ef en d an t’s h isto ry o f

j u v en ile ad

j u d icatio n s i n d e t erm in in g w h eth er a d ef en d an t h as an ex ten siv e reco rd o f crim in al activ ity f o r

co n secu tiv e sen ten cin g p u rp o ses. S ee S ta te v. G a n n , 2 5 1 S .W.3 d 4 4 6

, 4 6 5 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 2 0 0 7 ); S ta te v. M

icken s , 1 2 3 S .W.3 d 3 5 5

, 3 9 6 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p

. 2 0 0 3 ); S ta te v. A n d re P erkin s , N o

. W2 0 0 7 -0 2 7 7 4 -C C A -R 3 -C D

, 2 0 0 9 WL 1 7 4 1 4 0 0

, at * 9 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p ., at Jack so n , Ju n e 1 7

, 2 0 0 9 ), n o p erm

. to a p p ea l filed ; S ta te v. R o b ert D o n terio u s C o n n o r , N o

. M 2 0 0 7 -0 1 6 1 9 -C C A

- R 3

- C D

, 2 0 0 8 WL 4 6 1 4 4 4 9

, at * 1 4 (T en n

. C rim

. A p p ., at N ash v ille,
O ct. 1 7

, 2 0 0 8 ), p erm

. to a p p ea l d en ied (T en n

. Ju ly 2 7

, 2 0 0 9 ). T h e reco rd also su p p o rts th e trial co u rt’s f

in d in g th at P etitio n er is a d an g ero u s o f f en d er, an d th at th e trial co u rt co n sid ered
all o f th e p rin cip les o f

sen ten cin g . P etitio n er is n o t en titled to relief o n th is issu e.

-9

-C O N C L U S IO N

A f ter a th o ro u g h rev iew , w e af f irm th e j u d g m en t o f

th e p o st-co n v ictio n co u rt.

_______________

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T H O M A S T . WO O D A L L , JU D G E

-1 0

-