 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Patterson v. State9/10/1999
On February 23, 1988, Petitioner Brett Allen Patterson was convicted of two counts of first degree murder, one count of first degree burglary, and one count of aggravated rape. On March 18, 1988, Petitioner received consecutive sentences of life, life, and forty years for the two first degree murder convictions and the aggravated rape conviction. Petitioner also received a concurrent ten year sentence for his first degree burglary conviction. Petitioner's convictions and sentences were upheld by this Court on December 8, 1989. Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief on October 29, 1992; a first amended petition for post-conviction relief on November 5, 1993; a second amended petition for post-conviction relief on December 4, 1995; and a third amended petition for post-conviction relief on September 13, 1996. After a two day hearing on December 9, 1996, and April 4, 1997, the post-conviction court dismissed the petition. Petitioner challenges the dismissal of his petition, raising the following issues:
1) whether Petitioner's statement to police should have been suppressed as the result of an illegal arrest;
2) whether trial counsel were ineffective in failing to conduct a full and fair hearing on the lawfulness of Petitioner's arrest;
3) whether the search warrant in this case was void because the supporting affidavit was invalid;
4) whether trial counsel were ineffective in failing to conduct a full and fair hearing on the validity of the warrant;
5) whether Petitioner was denied due process by being tried jointly with a co-defendant;
6) whether trial counsel were ineffective in failing to seek a severance;
7) whether Petitioner's statement to police was inadmissible because it was involuntary;
8) whether trial counsel were ineffective in failing to conduct a full and fair hearing on the voluntariness of Petitioner's statement;
9) whether the trial court erred when it imposed consecutive sentencing;
10) whether appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to include the transcript of the sentencing hearing in the record on direct appeal;
11) whether the State's opening statement and closing argument were improper;
12) whether trial counsel were ineffective in failing to object to certain comments during the State's opening statement and closing argument; and
13) whether trial counsel were ineffective in the manner in which they investigated the case and conducted the trial.
After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Trial
In State v. Brett Patterson, No. 88-245-III, 1989 WL 147404, at *1-2 (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, Dec. 8, 1989), this Court gave the following summary of the evidence presented at trial:
On the night of January 9, 1987, Brett Patterson and Ronnie Cauthern drove to the home of Patrick and Rosemary Smith, who were both Captains in the United States Army assigned to Fort Campbell as nurses. The defendants wore masks and gloves, and each carried a loaded revolver. After severing the telephone line, the defendants broke a door pane, unlocked the door, and entered the Smiths' house. They were after a large sum of money thought to be kept in the bedroom.
Once inside, the defendants discovered that the Smiths were at home asleep. They awakened them and pulled them out of bed. Patrick Smith tried to fight them off, while Patterson made repeated attempts to subdue him by applying a "sleeper," a wrestling hold designed to cause unconsciousness. Failing this, P
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|