IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
FILED
AT KNOXVILLE
October 5, 1999
AUGUST 1999 SESSION Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Appellate Court Clerk
JAMES K. ROBBINS, )
)
Appellant, ) No. 03C01-9903-CR-00095
)
) Morgan County
v. )
) Honorable E. Eugene Eblen, Judge
)
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) (Habeas corpus, aggravated rape
and aggravated assault)
)
Appellee. )
For the Appellant: For the Appellee:
James K. Robbins, Pro Se Paul G. Summers
TDOC# 114297 Attorney General of Tennessee
B.M.C.C. and
Post Office Box 2000 Elizabeth B. Marney
Wartburg, TN 37887-2000 Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243
J. Scott McCluen
District Attorney General
Post Office Box 703
Kingston, TN 37763-0703
OPINION FILED:____________________
AFFIRMED
Joseph M. Tipton
Judge
OPINION
The petitioner, James K. Robbins, appeals as of right from the judgment
of the Morgan County Criminal Court denying him habeas corpus relief from his 1988
convictions for four counts of aggravated rape and one count of aggravated assault
relative to his stepdaughter and from his resulting effective sentence of forty years as a
Range II offender in the custody of the Department of Correction. The trial court
dismissed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus1 without appointing him counsel or
conducting a hearing because it concluded that the petition failed to state grounds for
relief. In this appeal, the petitioner contends that the trial court erred (1) by holding that
no claim for relief was alleged and (2) by refusing to appoint counsel and to provide a
hearing. We affirm the trial court.
The petitioner asserts six claims for relief: (1) that the indictment was
invalid for multiplicity and violated his right against double jeopardy, (2) that the
evidence was insufficient to convict him, (3) that his convictions resulted from
prosecutorial misconduct, (4) that the trial court improperly instructed the jury on
reasonable doubt and gave no instructions on lesser included offenses, (5) that the
Range II sentences are illegal because the petitioner had no prior criminal history and
the offenses included the factors necessary for enhancement, and (6) that he received
the ineffective assistance of counsel. The state responds that even if the petitioner’s
challenges to his convictions had merit, this would lead to voidable, not void,
judgments, which are not justiciable in a habeas corpus action. See Dykes v. Compton,
978 S.W.2d 528, 529 (Tenn. 1998); Passarella v. State, 891 S.W.2d 619, 627 (Tenn.
Crim. App. 1994).
1
We note that the petitioner has previously filed for both post-conviction relief and habeas
corpus relief. See Jam es K. R obbins v . State, No. 0 3A0 1-90 12-C R-0 006 4, Sc ott Co unty (T enn . Crim .
App. Ju ne 19, 19 91), app. denied (Tenn . Nov. 12 , 1991); Jam es K. R obbins v . State, No. 03C01-9703-
CC-00108, Bleds oe County (Tenn. Crim . App. May 20, 1998).
2
We essentially agree with the state. Moreover, we note that in the direct
appeal, this court concluded that the evidence was sufficient, delineating the four
separate acts of aggravated rape and one act of aggravated assault. State v. James K.
Robbins and Dolly Robbins, No. 57, Scott County (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 13, 1988),
app. denied (Tenn. Apr. 3, 1989). These findings necessarily foreclose any concern
about the sufficiency of the evidence, the sufficiency of the indictment, and the
petitioner being convicted twice for the same crime. Also, the petitioner’s Range II
sentences for the aggravated rapes stem from the fact that his victim was less than
thirteen years old. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-107(5) (1988 Supp.) (repealed 1989).
In any event, the petitioner has failed to assert any claim that would show that his
convictions are void or that his sentences have expired, either being a necessary
prerequisite to a grant of relief. See Passarella, 891 S.W.2d at 627.
As for the petitioner’s complaint that the trial court did not appoint him
counsel and conduct a hearing, the petitioner’s failure to state a claim for relief justifies
the trial court’s actions. Absent an allegation showing a fatal jurisdictional fault, a trial
court need not appoint an attorney, and a petition for a writ of habeas corpus may be
dismissed without a hearing. See State ex rel. Edmondson v. Henderson, 220 Tenn.
605, 609, 421 S.W.2d 635, 636-37 (1967).
In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, the judgment
of the trial court is affirmed.
______________________________
Joseph M. Tipton, Judge
3
CONCUR:
_____________________________
John Everett W illiams, Judge
_____________________________
Alan E. Glenn, Judge
4