Charles Ray Dowling v. State

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: December 1, 2010
• Docket: 03C01-9801-CC-00039
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE FILED May 5, 1999 JANUARY 1999 SESSION Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appe llate Court C lerk

CHARLES RAY DOWLING, ) ) Appellant, ) C.C.A. No. 03C01-9801-CC-00039 ) vs. ) Blount County ) STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) Hon. D. Kelly Thomas, Judge ) Appellee. ) (Post-Conviction) )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

STEVE MERRITT JOHN KNOX WALKUP Attorney at Law Attorney General & Reporter 116 E. Harper Ave. Maryville, TN 37804 GEORGIA BLYTHE FELNER Counsel for the State 425 Fifth Ave. N., 2d Floor Nashville, TN 37243-0493

MICHAEL L. FLYNN District Attorney General

EDWARD P. BAILEY, JR. Asst. District Attorney General 363 Court St. Maryville, TN 37804

OPINION FILED:________________

AFFIRMED - RULE 20

JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE OPINION

The petitioner, Charles Ray Dowling, filed this post-conviction action attacking his

especially aggravated burglary and aggravated assault convictions. He alleged that he received

ineffective assistance of counsel, but for which he would not have entered guilty pleas. At the post-

conviction hearing, the testimonyof the petitioner and his trial attorney differedsharply on the material

points. After receiving the evidence, the trial court accredited the evidence offered by the state over

that presented by the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner failed to carry his burden of proof, and the

petition was dismissed.1 See McBee v. State, 655 S.W.2d 191, 195 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1983). Upon

our review of this appeal, we have determined that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the

evidence preponderates against the trial court's findings. See Butler v. State, 798 S.W 898, 899 .2d

(Tenn. 1990). Moreover, we have discerned no apparent error of law which requires reversal of the

judgment. See Tenn. R. Ct. Crim. App. 20.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirm pursuant to Court of Criminal ed

Appeals Rule 20.

________________________________ JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE

CONCUR:

_______________________________ GARY R. WADE, PRESIDING JUDGE

_______________________________ JOHN K. BYERS, SENIOR JUDGE

1 This action was filed prior to enactment of the Post-Conviction Act of 1995. Accordingly, its provisions do not apply.