Talley v. State
This text of Talley v. State (Talley 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 KNOXVILLE FILED APRIL SESSION, 1998 August 17, 1998
Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk Sam uel L ee T alley, ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9702-CR-00063 ) Appe llant, ) ) ) Hamilton COUNTY VS. ) ) Hon. Stephen M. Bevil. JUDGE STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) Appellee. ) (Post Conviction - Sentencing)
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
SAMUEL LEE TALLEY JOHN KNOX WALKUP W.T.H.S.F. Attorney General and Reporter P. O. Box 1050 Henning, TN 38041-1050 SANDY C. PATRICK Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenu e North Nashville, TN 37243-0943
BILL COX District Attorney General 600 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-1972
ORDER FILED ________________________
AFFIRMED PURSU ANT TO RU LE 20
JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE ORDER In this appe al of the summary dismissal of his post-conviction petition
Appe llant, Samu el Lee Talley, as ks this Court to re view the validity of h is
conviction entered on July 17 , 1991. A ppellant w as foun d guilty of the offense
of especially aggra vated robbe ry. The court fixed his s entence at twe nty-five
years in the De partment o f Correction as a Range I S tandard O ffender.
Appellant argues that the trial court improperly dismissed his petition for
post conviction relief as being outside th e statute of limitations period. Appellant
was convicted in 1991; he did not file for post conviction relief until 1996. At the
time petitioner pled guilty, he had three years in which to file a petition for post
conviction relief. He faile d to do so. In 1995, the legislature repealed the former
Post-Conviction Procedure Act; the new act, which governs this petition, replaced
the three year statute of limitations with a one year statu te. Tenn . Code . Ann. §
49-30-201 Compiler’s Notes; Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-202. Thus, Petitioner had
until May 10, 1996 to file his petition for relief. His petition filed July 1, 1996, was
not timely filed. Under Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-30-20 2(a), Courts ha ve
jurisdiction to consider late pe titions only if the claim is based on a previously
unrecognized constitutional right, new scientific evidence establishes the
petitioner’s innocence, or the sentence was enhanced because of a pervious
conviction which was subsequently invalidated. Appellant’s petition does not fall
into any of these ca tegories. Thu s the petition for post-conviction relief was
properly dismissed.
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in all respects
pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
-2- Beca use it a ppea rs to the Cour t that Ap pellan t, Sam uel Le e Ta lley, is
indigent, costs will be paid by the State.
____________________________________ JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE
CONCUR:
___________________________________ PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE
___________________________________ CURWOOD WITT, JUDGE
-3-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Talley v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/talley-v-state-tenncrimapp-1998.