Joey D. Herrell v. Howard Carlton, Warden - Concurring ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •         IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT KNOXVILLE
    Assigned on Briefs October 27, 2009
    JOEY E. HERRELL v. HOWARD CARLTON, WARDEN
    Appeal from the Circuit Court for Johnson County
    No. 5157 Robert E. Cupp, Judge
    No. E2009-01162-CCA-R3-HC - Filed June 30, 2010
    J OSEPH M. T IPTON, P.J., concurring.
    I concur in the result reached in the majority opinion, given existing precedent. I
    believe though, that once the habeas court concludes that a judgment is void, it should
    transfer the case to the convicting court—a court of equal jurisdiction—for further
    proceedings. The habeas court should not be allowed to act further regarding the convicting
    case by limiting the options available to the Petitioner or to the convicting court upon transfer
    of the case.
    The procedure followed in the present case, by developing a record in the habeas court
    to determine whether or not a guilty plea may be withdrawn, stems from the interpretation
    this court made in Summers v. Fortner, 
    267 S.W.3d 1
     (Tenn. Crim. App. 2008), regarding
    two Tennessee Supreme Court opinions. See Summers v. State, 
    212 S.W.3d 251
     (Tenn.
    2007); Smith v. Lewis, 
    202 S.W.3d 124
     (Tenn. 2006). However, I see nothing in the
    supreme court cases that even hints at allowing the habeas court to bind a convicting court
    by determining whether a Petitioner is entitled to withdraw a guilty plea. Upon determining
    that a conviction or sentence is void, the habeas court should vacate the judgment of
    conviction and remand the case to the convicting court for further proceedings. Whether or
    not the Petitioner is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea should be left to the convicting court
    to decide.
    Because Summers v. Fortner is binding precedent, I must concur wholly in this case.
    See Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 4(G)(2). I believe, however, that its holdings should be reviewed by
    the Tennessee Supreme Court in this case and that the convicting court should be determined
    to be the forum for deciding whether or not a guilty plea may be withdrawn.
    JOSEPH M. TIPTON, PRESIDING JUDGE
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: E2009-01162-CCA-R3-HC

Judges: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton

Filed Date: 6/30/2010

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014