Clinton W.Lynch v. State
This text of Clinton W.Lynch v. State (Clinton W.Lynch 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.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT NASHVILLE FILED MARCH 1998 SESSION April 23, 1998
Cecil W. Crowson CLINTON W. LYNCH, ) Appellate Court Clerk ) Appellant, ) No. 01C01-9705-CR-00187 ) ) Davidson County v. ) ) Honorable Seth Norman, Judge ) RICKY BELL, Warden, ) (Writ of Habeas Corpus) ) Appellee. )
For the Appellant: For the Appellee:
Clinton W. Lynch, Pro Se, #111631 John Knox Walkup R.M.S.I. Unit 6-A-101 Attorney General of Tennessee 7475 Cockrill Bend Road and Nashville, TN 37209-1010 Lisa A. Naylor Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493
Victor S. Johnson, III District Attorney General and Steve Dozier Assistant District Attorney General Washington Square 222 2nd Avenue North Nashville, ,TN 37201-1649
OPINION FILED:____________________
AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20
Joseph M. Tipton Judge OPINION
The petitioner, Clinton W. Lynch, appeals as of right from the Davidson
County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. He contends
that the trial court erred by dismissing his petition without an evidentiary hearing or the
appointment of counsel. We affirm the dismissal of the petition.
The petitioner was initially charged with first degree murder and
aggravated rape. He pled guilty to second degree murder and was sentenced to forty
years as a Range II, especially aggravated offender. His petition for habeas corpus
relief alleges that his conviction is void because the indictment is fatally defective in that
it is vague, lacks factual allegations, and contains “highly immaterial, prejudicial and
inflammatory allegations.”
In relevant part, the first degree murder count of the indictment charges
that the defendant unlawfully and feloniously killed and murdered the victim in the
perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate a rape. Because the indictment sufficiently
alleged the offense of first degree murder, see T.C.A. § 39-2-202 (1982), the trial court
had jurisdiction to accept the petitioner’s guilty plea to second degree murder, and the
petitioner’s conviction is not void.
After full consideration of the record, the briefs, and the law governing the
issue presented, we are of the opinion that the trial court properly dismissed the
petitioner’s petition for habeas corpus relief and that no precedential value would be
derived from the rendering of a full opinion. Therefore we conclude that the judgment
of the trial court should be affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Tenn Ct. Crim. App. R.
Joseph M. Tipton, Judge
2 CONCUR:
David H. Welles, Judge
Joe G. Riley, Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Clinton W.Lynch v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clinton-wlynch-v-state-tenncrimapp-1998.