Reginald Hendrix v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee·Decided December 1, 2010·No. 01C01-9708-CR-00343·Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE FILED JUNE 1998 SESSION October 9, 1998

Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Court Clerk REGINALD HENDRIX, ) ) C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9708-CR-00343 Appellant, ) ) DAVIDSON COUNTY V. S ) ) HON. THOMAS SHRIVER, STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE ) Appellee. ) (P onvic ost-C tion)

FORTHEAPPELLANT: F RT EA P L E : O H P EL E

JOHN B. BLAIR, III JOHN KNOX WALKUP 211UnionSt., Suite915 Attorney General &Reporter Nashville, TN37201 LISA A. NAYLOR Asst. Attorney General JohnSevierBldg. 425FifthAve., North Nashville, TN 37243-0493

VICTOR S. JOHNSON, III District Attorney General

MARY HAUSMAN Asst. District Attorney General 222SecondAve., North, Suite500 Nashville, TN37201-1649

OPINIONFILED:____________________

REVERSED

JOHN H. PEAY, Judge OPINION

Thepetitionerfiledapetitionfor post-convictionrelief, arguingthat but forhisattorney’sfailuretoadvisehim

of his rig toappeal after the sentencing hearing, he would have appealed fromthe sentence im ht posed and likely succeeded.

Following ahearing, thetrial court deniedthepetition, andthepetitionernowappeals. Aftera revie of thereco w agreew w rd, e ith

thepetitionerandreversetheactionofthetrial court.

Thepetitionerwaschargedwithandpledguiltytoseveralcountsofaggravatedassa t,aggravatedburglary, ul

andburglary. Foroneof theaggravatedburglary counts, thetrial court orderedthe petitionertosuccessfullycompletethe Lifeline

drug treatm programandim ent posedaone-yearsentenceof incarcerationtobeservedday-for-day. Byagreement, thetrial court

postponed se nc ontherem ingco ts, sta tha it wo se nc th p nte ing ain un ting t uld nte e e etition to concurrent sentences on the er

remainingcountsif hesuccessfullycompletedtheLifelineprogramandmaintaineda“goodinstitutional record.” At thetim ofthis e

hearing, thepetitionerwasrepresentedbyMr. DavidBaker ofthePublicDefender’sOfficeinNashville.

After the petitioner was released early from jail to the Comm Corrections program, and while his unity

sentencing hearing on the remaining charges wa still pending, the petitioner com itted other crim W the petitioner s m es. hen

appearedincourt forsentencingontherem ningcha 1 M r . P a u l N e w m a n , a l s o o f t h e P u b l i c D e f e n d e r ’ s ai rges,

O f f i c e in N a s h v ille , a p p e a r e d o n b e h a lf o f th e p e titio n e r b e c a u s e M r . B a k e r h a d b e e n

t r a n s f e r r e d t o a n o t h e r c o u r t . A t t h i s s e c o n d s e n t e n c in g h e a r i n g , t h e t r i a l c o u r t i m p o s e d

c o n s e c u tiv e s e n te n c e s o n t h e r e m a in in g c o u n ts . T h e d e f e n d a n t d id n o t a p p e a l f r o m

t h e s e s e n te n c e s , a n d t h e r e c o rd in t h is c a s e d o e s n o t c o n ta in a w r it t e n w a iv e r o f a p p e a l

p u r s u a n t to T e n n e s s e e R u le o f C r im in a l P r o c e d u re 3 7 ( d ) .

T h e p e titio n e r file d a p e titio n f o r p o s t- c o n v ic tio n r e lie f, w h ic h h a s

1 The petitioner was sentenced separately on the crimes he committed while released. These senten ces are not involve d in the insta nt petition for p ost-con viction relief.

2 s u b s e q u e n t l y b e e n a m e n d e d t o a l l e g e t h a t M r . N e w m a n w a s in e f f e c t i v e f o r f a i l i n g t o

in fo r m h im o f h is r ig h t to a p p e a l fro m th e c o n s e c u tiv e s e n te n c e s im p o s e d o n th e

r e m a i n i n g c h a r g e s . A p o s t - c o n v i c t i o n h e a r i n g w a s h e ld , a t w h i c h t h e p e t i t i o n e r t e s t i f i e d

t h a t M r . N e w m a n n e v e r in f o r m e d h im o f h is rig h t t o a p p e a l a n d th a t if h e h a d , h e w o u ld

h a v e a p p e a le d . M r . N e w m a n a ls o t e s tif ie d a t t h e h e a r in g . H e t e s tif ie d t h a t p r io r t o t h e

s e n t e n c i n g h e a r i n g , h e t o l d t h e p e t i t i o n e r t h a t h e w o u l d p r o b a b l y r e c e iv e c o n s e c u t i v e

s e n te n c e s a n d t h e p e t it io n e r r e s p o n d e d t h a t h e w a n t e d t o a p p e a l. T o t h a t , M r . N e w m a n

t o l d h im t h a t if h e w a n t e d t o a p p e a l, h e n e e d e d to c o n ta c t t o M r . B a k e r . A fte r th e

s e n t e n c in g h e a r i n g , M r . N e w m a n h a d n o c o n t a c t w i t h t h e p e t i t i o n e r a t a l l , e v e n t h o u g h

h e a d m itte d th a t th e P u b lic D e f e n d e r ’s O ffic e w a s th e p e titio n e r ’s c o u r t - a p p o in t e d

a t t o r n e y a n d t h a t h e w a s a s s ig n e d t o r e p r e s e n t t h e p e t i t i o n e r ’ s in t e r e s t s a t t h a t t i m e .

H o w e v e r, h e d id t a lk w it h M r . B a k e r, in f o r m in g M r . B a k e r o f w h a t h e t o ld t h e p e tit io n e r

a n d t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n e r w o u l d l i k e ly b e g e tt i n g i n t o u c h w i t h h i m . M r . B a k e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t

h e d i d n o t r e c a ll a d v is in g t h e p e t i t i o n e r o f h i s r i g h t t o a p p e a l o r t a l k in g t o t h e p e t i t i o n e r

a b o u t w h e t h e r h e w a n t e d t o a p p e a l. A f t e r h e a r in g t h i s t e s t im o n y , t h e t r ia l c o u r t f o u n d ,

in te r a lia , t h a t t h e p e tit io n e r w a s a w a r e o f h is rig h t t o a p p e a l a n d th a t h is fa ilu r e t o a p p e a l

w a s d u e to h is o w n n e g l e c t.

In r e v ie w i n g th e p e titio n e r ’s S ix th A m e n d m e n t c la i m o f in e ff e c tiv e

a s s i s t a n c e o f c o u n s e l , t h i s C o u r t m u s t d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e a d v ic e g iv e n o r s e r v ic e s

r e n d e r e d b y th e p e tit io n e r ’s a tt o r n e y , M r . N e w m a n , a r e w it h in t h e r a n g e o f c o m p e t e n c e

d e m a n d e d o f a tto r n e y s in c rim in a l c a s e s . B a x t e r v . R o s e , 5 2 3 S .W .2 d 9 3 0 , 9 3 6 ( T e n n .

1 9 7 5 ) . D e f e n s e c o u n s e l h a s a n a f f i r m a t i v e d u t y t o a d v is e h i s o r h e r c li e n t o f t h e r i g h t t o

a p p e a l a s e n te n c e , a n d t h e f a i l u r e t o d o s o c o n s t i t u t e s d e fi c ie n t p e r f o r m a n c e . G a r v i n

S h e p h e r d v . S t a t e , C . C . A . N o . 0 1 C 0 1 - 9 3 0 3 - C R - 0 0 0 8 0 , D a v id s o n C o u n t y ( T e n n . C r i m .

A p p . file d M a r c h 1 7 , 1 9 9 4 , a t N a s h v ille ) . M o r e o v e r, c o u n s e l fo r a d e fe n d a n t w ith a r ig h t

3 to a p p e a l fro m a ju d g m e n t o f c o n v ic tio n m u s t e it h e r t im e ly file a n o t ic e o f a p p e a l o r a

w r i t t e n w a i v e r o f a p p e a l s ig n e d b y th e d e f e n d a n t . T e n n e s s e e R u l e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e

3 7 ( d ) . F a ilu r e to file a w r it t e n w a iv e r o f a p p e a l d o e s n o t r e n d e r a ju d g m e n t in v a lid if t h e

r e c o r d c le a r l y a n d u n a m b i g u o u s ly s h o w s t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t k n e w o f h i s r i g h t t o a p p e a l

a n d in t e n d e d to w a iv e th a t r ig h t. S e e D a le M . J e n k in s v . S t a t e , C . C . A . N o . 0 1 C 0 1 - 9 4 0 5 -

C R - 0 0 1 5 6 , M o n tg o m e r y C o u n t y (T e n n . C r im . A p p . file d A p r il 1 3 , 1 9 9 5 , a t N a s h v ille ) ; s e e

a ls o R a in e r v . S t a te , 9 5 8 S . W . 2 d 3 5 6 ( T e n n . C r im . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ) .

H e r e , t h e e v id e n c e s h o w s t h a t M r . N e w m a n t a l k e d t o t h e p e t i t i o n e r p r i o r t o

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

Reginald Hendrix v. State, (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010).

Reginald Hendrix v. State (Reginald Hendrix v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.