State v. Jeffery Braden

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT JACKSON FILED
MAY SESSION, 1997 October 7, 1997
Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Appellate C ourt Clerk
JEFFERY L. BRADEN, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9607-CR-00208
)
Appe llant, )
) SHELBY COUNTY
)
V. )
) HON . JOHN P. CO LTO N, JR.,
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE
)
Appellee. ) (POST-C ONVIC TION)
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
JEFFERY L. BRADEN, pro se JOHN KNOX WALKUP
Inmate #158340 Attorney General & Reporter
Cold C reek C orrection al Facility
P.O. Box 1000 JANIS L. TURNER
Henning, TN 38041-1000 Assistant Attorney General
2nd Floor, Cordell Hull Building
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243
JOHN W. PIEROTTI
District Attorney General
DAWN DORAN
Assistant District Attorney General
201 Poplar Avenue, Ste. 301
Memphis, TN 38103
OPINION FILED ________________________
AFFIRMED PURSU ANT TO RU LE 20
THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
ORDER
The Petitioner, Jeffery L. Braden, appeals as of right from the trial
court’s dism issal of his second petition for post-conviction relief without an
evidentiary hearing or appointment of counsel. The petition was filed in the
Criminal Court of Shelby County, Tennessee on May 2, 1996. The allegations
of the petition set forth tha t he pled g uilty to first degree murder in the trial court
on September 11, 1991 and received a sentence of life imprisonment. His first
petition for p ost-con viction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel was
denied on Septem ber 14, 1992 . If an appeal was taken from this o rder, it is not
in the reco rd.
At the time Petitioner pled guilty to the offense in 1991 there was a
three-year statute of limitations for filing a petition for post-conviction relief. Tenn.
Code Ann. § 40-30-102 (repealed 1995). Under the P ost-Conviction P rocedure
Act in effect at the time the present petition was filed in the trial court, Tennessee
Code Annotated section 40-30-202(c) (Supp. 1996) provided in pertinent part that
“[i]f a prior petition has been filed which was resolved on the merits by a court of
competent jurisdiction, a ny seco nd or su bsequ ent petition [for post-conviction
relief] shall be summ arily dismis sed.”
The trial cou rt in the case sub judice dismissed the petition without
appointment of counsel or an evidentiary hearing based upon the fact that it was
filed outside the applicable statute of limitations, and that a previous p ost-
conviction relief pe tition had been previo usly deter mined on the m erits. See
-2-
Arno ld Carter v. S tate, ____ S.W .2d ____, No. 03-S-01-9612-CR-00117, Monroe
County (T enn., at Knoxville, Sep t. 8, 1997).
Finding that a full opinion in this case would have no precedential
value, and that the evidence does not preponderate against the finding of the trial
court, and that there is no error of law requiring a reversal of the judgment
apparent on the record, we affirm the order of the trial court dismissing the
petition for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal
Appeals of Tennessee.
____________________________________
THOMAS T. W OODALL, Judge
CONCUR:
___________________________________
GARY R. WA DE, Judge
___________________________________
JOHN H. PEAY, Judge
-3-