State v. Audrey Downs
Docket: 02C01-9710-CR-00390
Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee; October 23, 1998; Tennessee; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
The petitioner appeals the denial of post-conviction relief after pleading guilty to felony murder and aggravated rape, receiving a life sentence without parole and a concurrent 25-year sentence. He contests the felony murder plea, claiming it was involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Key points of the appeal include: 1. **Ineffective Assistance of Counsel**: The petitioner argues that his attorney did not conduct an adequate factual investigation or confer sufficiently with him, particularly failing to interview his sister, who had critical evidence (the clothing worn during the homicide). 2. **Lack of Awareness**: The petitioner contends he was unaware of his constitutional rights and would have opted for trial had he known the potential penalties were not solely death. 3. **Mental State**: He claims that a mental evaluation done shortly before his plea did not accurately reflect his mental state at the time of the murder, suggesting he was still affected by drugs. 4. **Trial Counsel's Testimony**: The trial attorney testified that they conducted a thorough investigation, including reviewing witness lists and discussing the case with family and friends. Counsel had filed motions to suppress the petitioner’s statements, which were denied, and believed the petitioner faced a likely death penalty if tried due to a prior violent conviction. 5. **Trial Court’s Findings**: Judge Bernie Weinman concluded that the petitioner entered the plea voluntarily to avoid the death penalty and that trial counsel provided adequate representation. The court found no evidence that the clothing would exonerate the petitioner or that he would have chosen not to plead guilty had the evidence been reviewed. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, citing that the evidence did not support the petitioner’s claims of ineffective assistance and that the trial court's findings were not against the preponderance of the evidence. Costs were taxed to the state due to the petitioner’s indigent status.