Billy Aldridge v. State ( 1998 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT NASHVILLE FILED
DECEMBER 1997 SESSION
February 13, 1998
Cecil W. Crowson
Appellate Court Clerk
BILLY W. ALDRIDGE, ) No. 01C01-9704-CR-00142
)
Appellant )
) DAVIDSON COUNTY
V. )
) HON. CHERYL BLACKBURN,
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE
)
Appellee. ) (Habeas Corpus)
)
)
For the Appellant: For the Appellee:
Billy W. Aldridge John Knox Walkup
Riverbend Maximum Security Attorney General and Reporter
Institution
7475 Cockrill Bend Industrial Rd. Ellen H. Pollack
Nashville, 37209 Assistant Attorney General
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243-0493
Victor S. Johnson, III
District Attorney General
Roger D. Moore
Assistant District Attorney
222 Second Avenue North
Washington Square
Nashville, TN 37201-1649
OPINION FILED: ___________________
AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20
William M. Barker, Judge
OPINION
The appellant, Billy W. Aldridge, appeals as of right the dismissal in the
Davidson County Criminal Court of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. In that
petition, appellant challenged the validity of his convictions alleging a defective
indictment and an unconstitutional sentence. The trial court summarily dismissed the
petition, finding that the grounds alleged were appropriate for post-conviction relief,
but not cognizable in a habeas corpus proceeding. Because appellant was convicted
in Shelby County, the trial court was unable to treat the petition as one seeking post-
conviction relief.1 See Tenn. Code Ann. §40-30-204(a) (Supp. 1996) (requiring post-
conviction petition be filed in the court of conviction).
According to appellant’s petition, he pled guilty on May 18, 1992, to attempted
second degree murder, aggravated rape, and aggravated robbery and received a
sentence of eight years. His only challenge on appeal is that the indictment charging
him with aggravated rape was deficient for failing to state the requisite mens rea.
Unfortunately, we are unable to review appellant’s issue because of an insufficient
record. The technical record does not contain a copy of the indictment, nor does
appellant’s petition or appellate brief cite the language that was contained in the
indictment. Without the contested language, we are unable to determine its
sufficiency.
It is the duty of the appellant to prepare a record which conveys a fair, accurate
and complete account of what transpired with respect to the issues forming the basis
of the appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 24(b) and State v. Ballard, 855 S.W.2d 557, 560
(Tenn. 1993) (citations omitted). An appellate court is precluded from considering the
merits of an issue where the relevant material is absent from the record. Id. We must
decline to review the issue.
1
In addition to the jurisdictional bar, we note that post-conviction relief for the appellant is barred
by the statute of limitations. Tenn. Code Ann. §40-30-202 (Supp. 1996)
2
Moreover, appellant supports his argument by relying on this Court’s opinion in
State v. Roger Dale Hill, Sr., No. 01C01-9508-CC-00267 (Tenn. Crim. App. at
Nashville, June 20, 1996), a decision which was recently reversed by our supreme
court. State v. Roger Dale Hill, Sr., No. 01S01-9701-CC-0005 (Tenn. at Nashville,
November 3, 1997). Therefore, even if appellant’s indictment were in the record
before us, in all likelihood, appellant’s claim would be without merit.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Tennessee
Court of Criminal Appeals.
_______________________________
William M. Barker, Judge
____________________________
Joe B. Jones, Presiding Judge
____________________________
Paul G. Summers, Judge
3