James Michael Pitts v. State ( 1999 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT NASHVILLE FILED
FEBRUARY 1999 SESSION
March 18, 1999
Cecil W. Crowson
Appellate Court Clerk
JAMES MICHAEL PITTS, )
)
Appellant, ) C.C.A. No. 01C01-9803-CR-00130
)
vs. ) Davidson County
)
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) Honorable Walter C. Kurtz, Judge
)
Appellee. ) (Post-Conviction)
)
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
DALE M. QUILLEN JOHN KNOX WALKUP
MICHAEL J. FLANAGAN Attorney General & Reporter
95 White Bridge Road, Suite 208
Nashville, TN 37205 DARYL J. BRAND
Assistant Attorney General
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243
JOHN ZIMMERMAN
Asst. Dist. Attorney General
Washington Sq., Suite 500
222-2nd Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37201-1649
OPINION FILED: _____________
AFFIRMED - RULE 20
JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE
OPINION
The petitioner, James Michael Pitts, appeals the Davidson County
Criminal Court’s dismissal of his 1997 petition for post-conviction relief in which he
attacked his 1993 conviction on multiple counts of delivery of cocaine. In his
petition, petitioner alleges various instances of the ineffective assistance of trial
counsel, including the failure to file a timely motion to suppress the defendant’s pre-
trial statement, the failure to adequately prepare for trial, the failure to supervise the
defendant in his conversations with law enforcement officers, the failure to prevent
the introduction at trial evidence of the defendant’s other crimes and prior bad acts,
the failure to present evidence on the issue of sentencing enhancement, and the
failure to appear at the hearing on the motion for new trial. We have heard oral
argument and reviewed the record and applicable law, and we affirm the judgment
of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the rules of this court.
The record contains a transcript of the post-conviction hearing. The
transcript and the record as a whole fail to establish any of the allegations of
ineffective assistance of counsel. The transcript reflects that some of the
allegations were expressly waived during the hearing. Notably, the petitioner was
unable to prove any merit to the untimely-filed motion to suppress his pre-trial
statement, trial counsel’s failure to prepare the petitioner’s case, counsel’s failure
to appear at the hearing on the motion for new trial or that, if he failed to appear,
any resulting prejudice, counsel’s responsibility for conversations between the
petitioner and law enforcement officers, or counsel’s responsibility for any breach
of agreement between the petitioner and the officers. He failed to present any
evidence that, if presented at trial, could have resulted in any different result.
The petitioner had the burden of proving his allegations by clear and
convincing evidence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-210(f) (1997). The post-conviction
court’s findings of fact are afforded the weight of a jury verdict and are conclusive
2
on appeal unless the evidence in the record preponderates against them. State v.
Henley, 960 S.W.2d 572, 578 (Tenn. 1997). We do not reweigh or reevaluate the
evidence. Id. at 579. The burden is on the appellant to demonstrate that the
evidence preponderates against the post-conviction court’s findings. Id. In this
case, the petitioner failed to carry his burden both at the trial court level and on
appeal, and moreover, there would be no precedential value to a full opinion in this
matter.
Accordingly, the matter is affirmed pursuant to Rule 20.
_____________________________
JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., Judge
CONCUR:
______________________________
DAVID G. HAYES, Judge
______________________________
JOHN EVERETT W ILLIAMS, Judge
3