# FILED

Au gust 15, 1997 Cecil W. Crowson Ap pellate Cou rt Clerk IN THE COUR T OF CRIMIN AL APPEALS OF TENN ESSEE

AT NASHVILLE JUNE 1997 SES SION

AMOS CURT IS COPENY, ) No.01C01-9606- CR-00240 ) Appellee ) ) DAVID SON C OUNTY V. ) ) HON. THOMAS H. SHRIVER, STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE ) Appellant. ) (Habeas Corpus) ) ) For the Appell ant: For the Appell ee: Geoffrey Coston John Knox Walkup 2813 West End Avenue Attorney Gen eral and Repor ter Nashvil le, TN 37203 Daryl J . Brand Assistant Att orney Gener al 450 James Roberts on Parkway Nashvil le, TN 37243-0493
Victor S. J ohnson, III Distric t Attorney General Pamela S. Anderson Assistant D istrict A

ttorney Washington Square, Suite 50 0 222 Second Avenue, North Nashvil le, TN 37201

OPINION FILE D: ___________________
AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO R ULE 20
W illiam M. B arker, Ju dge2 OPINION The appellant, Amos C urtis Copeny , appeals as of ri ght the denial by the Davidson C ounty Cri minal Court of hi s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition all eges that appel lant is ser ving a s ixty (60) year

sentence as a c areer offender for a 1991 second deg ree murder conv iction. He argues in h is petition that the statutory

sentencing scheme viol ates the separati on of powers c lause of the Tennessee Constit ution. See Tenn. Const. art . II, §§1 & 2. H e also contends that the sentencing s tatutes vi olate the prohi bition agai nst indeterminat e sentences. See Tenn. Code Ann. §4 0-35-211 (1990). W e affirm the trial court’s den ial of appellant’s petition pursuant to Rule 20 o f the Tennesse e Court of Criminal Appeals. Permitt ing the ju diciary to p lace of fend ers within le gislatively-d efine d range classificati ons which determine punishment and release el igibili ty does not v iolate the separation of pow ers. Likew ise, we c annot agree that the range cl assifications coupled wi th release el igibili ty dates render an offender’s sent ence indeterminat e. These very arguments advanced by appellant have been rejected by panels of this Court on numerous

occasions. See Kenneth Steele v . State , No. 01C01-9512-CC00409 (Tenn. Cri m. App. at Nashv ille, Apri l 30, 1997); Steve L. Br yant v. State , No. 01C01-9605-00190 ( Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashvi lle, April 24, 1997); William Lee Tollett v. State , No. 01C01-9605-CR-00180 (Te nn. Crim. App. at Nashville, April 24, 1997); Jackie Lee Chi lds v. St ate , No. 01C01-960 4-CR-00164 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashvi lle, April 24, 1997) ; Eric C. Pen dleton v. St ate , No. 0 1C01- 9604-C R-001 58 (Tenn . Cri m. App. at Nashv ille, Febr uary 12, 1997) ; Frank Bell v. Rick y Bell, Warden and State of Tennessee , No. 01C01-960 2-CR-00058 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashvi lle, January 30, 1997), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn. 1997). See also Joe T hom as Ba ker, Jr. v. State , No. 01C01-960 4-CR-00129 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashvi lle, Februar y 20, 1997) (rejecting argument on i ndeterminate sentenc es), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn. 1997); Terry Mer rell v. State , No. 01C01-960 4-CR-00147 (Tenn. Crim. App. at3

Nashvil le, February

20, 1997) (rejecting ar gument on indeter minate sentences)

. Similarly , appellant’s arguments arewithout mer it. Finding that no error of l aw was committed by the trial c ourt and that an opi nion would have no precedential value, the dismissal of appel lant’s habeas c orpus petitio n is affirmed pursua nt to Rule 20 of the Te nnessee Court of Criminal App eals.

_______________________________ W illiam M. B arker, Ju dge CONCUR:

____________________________ Joe B. Jo nes, Pre siding Jud ge

____________________________ Thom as T. W oodall , Judge