State v. Jesse Tharpe ( 2010 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT JACKSON
SEPTEMBER 1998 SESSION
JESSE LEVENT THARPE, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9803-CC-00069
)
Appellant, ) HENRY COUNTY NO. 12642
)
VS. ) HON. JULIAN P. GUINN,
) JUDGE
STATE OF TENNESSEE, )
) AFFIRMED - RULE 20
Appellee. )
FILED
November 9, 1998
ORDER
Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Appellate C ourt Clerk
The petitioner appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. He
previously pled guilty to eight (8) counts of aggravated robbery and received an
agreed effective sentence of sixteen (16) years as a Range I, standard offender.
Petitioner contends that he was induced to plead guilty due to the ineffective
assistance of counsel. He testified trial counsel failed to adequately investigate,
failed to properly research the law and erroneously told him that sixteen (16) years
was the minimum sentence for aggravated robbery. Trial counsel’s testimony
contradicted the petitioner’s testimony in all material respects as did the affidavit
signed by the petitioner on the date of the guilty plea.
Initially, we note the petitioner has failed to include a transcript of the guilty
plea hearing. It is the appellant’s duty to have prepared an adequate record in order
to allow a meaningful review on appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 24; State v. Ballard, 855
S.W.2d 557, 560 (Tenn. 1993); State v. Bunch, 646 S.W.2d 158, 160 (Tenn. 1983);
State v. Carey, 914 S.W.2d 93, 97 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995); State v. Goodwin, 909
S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995); State v. Banes, 874 S.W.2d 73, 82 (Tenn.
Crim. App. 1993). Thus, the issue is waived.
Were the issue not considered waived, we would still affirm the judgment of
the trial court. The trial court found the petitioner was thoroughly advised of his
alternatives following proper research of the law and a proper investigation of the
facts by the three (3) attorneys who worked on his case. The trial court further
found the pleas were knowing and voluntary. The trial court concluded by stating,
“nothing in the record even remotely suggests an abridgement of any right
guaranteed the petitioner by the constitutions of the United States of America or the
State of Tennessee.” The evidence does not preponderate against the findings of
the trial court.
Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 20 of the Tennessee Court of Criminal
Appeals, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. Costs are taxed to the state as
the appellant is indigent.
All of which is so ORDERED.
_________________________
JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE
CONCUR:
_________________________
PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE
_________________________
DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE