State v. Sammartino

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

FEBRUARY 1998 SESSION FILED March 19, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk RICKY L. SAMMARTINO, ) ) No. 02-C-01-9701-CC-00040 APPELLANT, ) ) Dyer County v. ) ) Honorable Joe G. Riley, Judge STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) (Post-Conviction Relief) APPELLEE. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

Vanedda Prince John Knox Walkup Attorney at Law Attorney General & Reporter P. O. Box 26 425 Fifth Avenue, North Union City, TN 38281 Nashville, TN 37243-0493

Elizabeth T. Ryan Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenue, North Nashville, TN 37243-0493

C. Phillip Bivens District Attorney General P. O. Box E Dyersburg, TN 38025

OPINION FILED: ______________________________________

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

Joe B. Jones, Presiding Judge OPINION

The appellant, Ricky L. Sammartino (petitioner), appeals as of right from a judgment

of the trial court dismissing his post-conviction action after an evidentiary hearing. The trial

court found the petitioner was afforded the effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by

the United States and Tennessee Constitutions, and his pleas of guilty passed

constitutional muster. The petitioner presents two issues for review. He contends (a) “the

trial court erred in holding that the Appellant received the effective assistance of counsel,”

and (b) “the trial court erred in holding that the Petitioner voluntarily entered a plea of

guilty.” After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the

law governing the issues presented for review, it is the opinion of this court that the

judgment of the trial court should be affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee Court of

Criminal Appeals.

The petitioner and defense counsel testified at the evidentiary hearing. Their

respective testimony conflicted as to every material issue and fact. It is evident the court

accredited the testimony of defense counsel thereby rejecting the testimony given by the

petitioner. Thus, the evidence contained in the record does not preponderate against the

findings of fact made by the trial court.

________________________________________ JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE

CONCUR:

___________________________________ JOHN H. PEAY, JUDGE

___________________________________ THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE