IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT JACKSON FILED
MARCH SESSION , 1999 May 18, 1999
Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Appellate Court Clerk
PATRICK TRAWICK, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9802-CR-00054
)
Appe llant, )
) SHELBY COUNTY
V. )
)
) HON. CHRIS CRAFT, JUDGE
STATE OF TENNESSEE )
)
Appellee. ) (POST -CON VICTIO N)
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
GERALD STANLEY GREEN JOHN KNOX WALKUP
147 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 1115 Attorney General & Reporter
Memphis, TN 38103
ELIZABETH T. RYAN
Assistant Attorney General
2nd Floor, Cordell Hull Building
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243
JOH N W. P IERO TTI
District Attorn ey Ge neral
DANIEL S. BYER
Assistant District Attorney General
Criminal Justice Center, Suite 301
201 Poplar Avenue
Memphis, TN 38103
OPINION FILED ________________________
AFFIRMED PURSU ANT TO RU LE 20
THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
ORDER
In this case, the Petitioner, Patrick Trawick, appea ls from the Shelby C ounty
Crimina l Court’s d ismissa l of his petition fo r post-co nviction relief.
Origin ally charged with one (1) count of aggravated rape, Petitioner was
convicted of the lesser included offense of rape and senten ced to nine (9 ) years in
the Depa rtment o f Correc tion. On April 16, 1996, Petitioner filed a petition for post-
conviction relief which was correctly dismissed without a hearing because
Petition er’s direct a ppea l was s till pending. Following the supreme court’s denial of
his application for permission to appeal, Petitioner filed the insta nt petition for post-
conviction relief on May 1, 1997. Counsel was appointed to represent Petitioner and
an amended petition was filed on June 16, 1997. Following an evidentiary hearing,
the trial cou rt enter ed an order d enying the pe tition on Janu ary 27 , 1998 . Time ly
notice of appeal was filed by Petitioner. In this appeal, Petitioner alleges that his trial
coun sel ren dered ineffec tive ass istanc e of co unse l.
Trial counsel testified during the evidentiary hearing. Her testimony was
contrary in all mate rial points to the testimony o f Petitioner. Further, Petitioner failed
to produce at the post-conviction hearing any of the alleged witnesses whom he sa id
counsel failed to interview. He is therefore unable to establish that he suffered
prejudice by couns el’s failure to subpo ena the se witnes ses. See Dento n v. State ,
945 S.W.2d 793, 803 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn. 199 7).
In a detailed memorandum of findings of fact and conclusions of law, the trial court
addressed all issues raised and dismiss ed the p etition for po st-convictio n relief. The
-2-
trial court concluded that Petitioner had not proven the facts alleged by clear and
convincing evidence.
The judgment dismissing the petition for post-conviction relief was rendered
by the trial court without a jury, the jud gme nt is not a determination of guilt, and the
evidence does not preponderate against the findings of the trial court. There is no
error of law apparent on the record which would require a reversal of the judgment
of the trial cou rt.
Neither a detailed discussion of the facts nor a lengthy opinion concerning the
law would be of precede ntial valu e in this case . We are sa tisfied th at the re sult
reached by the trial court is correct. Based on a thorough reading of the record, the
briefs of the parties, and the law governing th e issues pres ented for review, the
judgment of the trial c ourt is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of
Criminal Appeals of Tennessee.
____________________________________
THOMAS T. W OODALL, Judge
CONCUR:
___________________________________
GARY R. WA DE, Presiding Judge
___________________________________
JOSEPH M. TIPTON, Judge
-3-