Tommy Lee Kelley v. State

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE FILED SEPTEMBE R SESSION, 1999 October 13, 1999 Cecil Crowson, Jr. TOMMY LEE KELLEY, ) Appellate Court Clerk C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9811-CR-00452 ) Appe llant, ) ) ) DAVIDSON COUNTY VS. ) ) HON . J. RAND ALL W YATT, J R., STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE ) Appellee. ) (Post-Conviction) ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE CRIMINAL COURT OF DAVIDSON COUNTY FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: JENNIFER LYNN THOMPSON PAUL G. SUMMERS 715 Crescent Road Attorney General and Reporter Nashville, TN 37205 MARK E. DAVIDSON Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenu e North Nashville, TN 37243 VICTOR S. JOHNSON District Attorney General BRET T. GUINN Assistant District Attorney General Washington Square, Suite 500 222 Se cond A venue N orth Nashville, TN 37201-1649 ORDER FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 20 DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE ORDER The Defendant appeals as of right pursuant to Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure from the trial cour t’s denial of h is petition for p ost- conviction relief. In a negotiate d plea ag reeme nt, the De fendan t pleaded guilty to two cou nts of aggravated burglary. His agreed sentence for each conviction was seven ye ars as a R ange II multip le offender, with the sentences to be served concurren tly. He sub seque ntly petitione d for pos t-conviction relief, alleging that his guilty pleas were not knowing and voluntary and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. After conducting an evidentiary hearing on the p ost- conviction petition, the trial judge denied the Defendant’s claim. We affirm the judgm ent of the tria l court. The Defendant and his former attorney were the only witnesses who testified at the hearing on the petition for post-conviction relief. In its order denying the De fenda nt relief, th e trial court found that the Defendant was effective ly repres ented by his trial couns el and tha t the Defe ndant’s g uilty pleas were knowin gly, voluntar ily and intellige ntly entered. The trial court accredited the testimony of the Defendant’s former attorney and found “no credible evidence to support the petitioner’s assertion of deficient representation and, obviously, no resulting prejud ice to h is decision to plead guilty.” From our review of this record, the evidence clearly supports the findings of the trial judge. No error of law requiring a reversa l of the judg ment is a pparen t on the rec ord. W e are satisfied that the res ult reache d by the trial c ourt is corre ct. -2- Based upon a thorough reading of the reco rd, the briefs of the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, the judgm ent of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee. ____________________________________ DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE CONCUR: ___________________________________ JOHN H. PEAY, JUDGE ___________________________________ JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE -3-