Roach v. State ( 1997 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE FILED FEBRUARY 1997 SESSION October 30, 1997 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk JEFFERY DEWAYNE ROACH, ) ) Appellant, ) No. 03C01-9604-CC-00155 ) ) Hamblen County v. ) ) Honorable James E. Beckner, Judge ) STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) (Post-Conviction) ) Appellee. ) For the Appellant: For the Appellee: Jeffery Dewayne Roach, Pro Se Charles W. Burson #12043-074 E-3 Attorney General of Tennessee P.O. Box 1000 and United States Penitentiary Elizabeth T. Ryan Lewisburg, Pennsylvania 17837-1000 Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493 C. Berkeley Bell, Jr. District Attorney General 113J W. Church Street Greeneville, TN 37743 OPINION FILED:____________________ AFFIRMED Joseph M. Tipton Judge OPINION The petitioner, Jeffery Dewayne Roach, appeals as of right from the Hamblen County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief.1 The trial court dismissed the petition, concluding that it was barred by the statute of limitations. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. The petitioner pled guilty to three counts of felony drug possession in 1981. On July 17, 1995, he filed the present petition collaterally attacking the three convictions. We agree with the trial court’s determination that the petition is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. See Arnold Carter v. State, No. 03-S-01-9612-CR- 00117, Monroe County (Tenn. Sept. 8, 1997) (for publication). Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. ______________________________ Joseph M. Tipton, Judge CONCUR: Jerry L. Smith, Judge Thomas T. Woodall, Judge 1 The petition is titled a “MOTION TO VACATE, SET ASIDE AND EXPUNGE RESTRICTIONS OF RIGHTS AND CON STITUTIONAL LAW -- EQUAL PROTECT ION -- CRIMINAL DISFRANCHISEMENT LAW AN D INFAMOUS LAW OF THE STATE OF TENN ESSEE AND EX POST FACTO CLAUSE TO APPLY IN THIS CASE AND OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF T ENNESSEE. T.C.A. (1994), VOLUME 7; T.C.A. 39-17-1307 OF STATE LAW .” The trial court properly treated the petition as one for post-conviction relief. 2