Wallace v. State

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE FILED OCTOBER SESSION, 1997 March 6, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

STEVE WALLACE, ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9608-CC-00312 )

Appe llant, )

)

) BRADLEY COUNTY

VS. )

) HON. MAYO L. MASHBURN STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE )

Appellee. ) (Post-Co nviction Re lief)

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

STEVE WALLACE Pro Se JOHN KNOX WALKUP M.C.R.C.F. Attorney General and Reporter P. O. Box 2000 Wartburg, TN 37887-2000 TIMOTHY F. BEHAN Assistant Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243

JERRY ESTES

District Attorney General

OPINION FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED PURSU ANT TO RU LE 20 JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE

OPINION

On July 18, 1975, Appellant Steve Wallace pleaded guilty in the Bradley Coun ty Criminal Court to second degree murder. He was sentenced to 150 years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Corre ction. In this ap peal, Appellant presen ts the follow ing issue for review: whether the trial cou rt erred in dismiss ing App ellant's pe tition for post-c onviction re lief.

After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20.

Prior to the adoption of the recent Post-Conviction Procedure Act, petitions like the present one had to be filed within three years of the date of the effective date of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-102 (1995, R epl.); State v. Abston, 749 S.W.2d 487, 488 (Ten n. Crim. App . 1988). Accordingly, Appellant's statute of limitations for the filing of a petition for post-conviction relief began to run on July 1, 1986 and expired three years later on June 30, 1989. However, the ne w Post- Conviction Procedure Act, which took effect on May 10, 19 95, su bseq uently shortened the three -year statu te of limitation s to one y ear. Te nn. Co de Ann . § 40-30-201 et seq. (Supp. 1996). In Carter v. S tate, the Tennessee Supreme Court held that the new Post-Conviction Procedure Act of 1995 doe s not afford petitioners for whom the statute of limitations expired prior to May 10, 1995--the effective date of the new Act--a n add itional ye ar in wh ich to file new petitions for post-conviction relief. 952 S.W.2d 417, 418 (Tenn. 1997). Thu s, the trial court prope rly dismissed Appellant's May 9, 1996 petition as being barred by the statute of limitations.

3

According ly, we affirm the trial court's judgment pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20.

____________________________________

JERRY L. SMITH JUDGE

CONCUR:

___________________________________

GARY R. WADE, JUDGE

___________________________________

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE