Christopher v. State

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedSeptember 26, 1997
Docket03C01-9608-CC-00306
StatusPublished

This text of Christopher v. State (Christopher v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Christopher v. State, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE FILED MAY 1997 SESSION September 26, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk ROBERT DALE CHRISTOPHER,) ) Appellant, ) No. 03C01-9608-CC-00306 ) ) Cocke County v. ) ) Honorable Rex Henry Ogle, Judge ) STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) (Post-Conviction) ) Appellee. )

For the Appellant: For the Appellee:

Joseph S. Ozment Charles W. Burson 217 Exchange Avenue Attorney General of Tennessee Memphis, TN 38105 and Georgia Blythe Felner Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493

Alfred C. Schmutzer, Sr. District Attorney General 301 Sevier County Courthouse Sevierville, TN 37862 and Richard R. Vance Assistant District Attorney General 339A Main Street Newport, TN 37821

OPINION FILED:____________________

AFFIRMED

Joseph M. Tipton Judge OPINION

The petitioner, Robert Dale Christopher, appeals as of right from the

dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Circuit Court for Cocke County

as being untimely filed. He contends that his petition was timely under the 1995 Post-

Conviction Procedure Act as interpreted in Arnold Carter v. State, No. 03C01-9509-CC-

00270, Monroe County (Tenn. Crim. App. July 11, 1996). The trial court is affirmed.

The petitioner collaterally attacks his 1985 convictions for third degree

burglary and attempt to commit a felony. He filed his petition on May 7, 1996. Under

this court’s opinion in Carter, the petition would have been deemed timely because it

was filed within one year of the effective date of the 1995 Act. However, the

Tennessee Supreme Court reversed this court and concluded that the 1995 Act did not

reinstate a filing period for post-conviction cases relative to convictions for which the

former three-year post-conviction statute of limitations had run. Arnold Carter v. State,

No. 03-S-01-9612-CR-00117, Monroe County (Tenn. Sept. 8, 1997) (for publication).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

______________________________ Joseph M. Tipton, Judge

CONCUR:

_____________________________ Joe B. Jones, Presiding Judge

_____________________________ Curwood Witt, Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Christopher v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-v-state-tenncrimapp-1997.