You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

State v. Tyler Banes

Citation: Not availableDocket: 02C01-9812-CC-00378

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee; November 30, 2010; Tennessee; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appellant seeking post-conviction relief for his 1992 conviction of aggravated rape, after an appeal dismissed his aggravated sexual battery conviction in 1993, with the Tennessee Supreme Court denying further appeal in 1994. The appellant filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief on December 2, 1997, claiming prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel, improper jury instructions, and a defective indictment. However, the petition was dismissed by the Circuit Court of Madison County as time-barred. Under the new Post-Conviction Procedure Act effective May 10, 1995, the appellant was required to file within one year, by May 10, 1996. The court found that none of the statutory exceptions for late filing applied. Despite an amended petition alleging an earlier filing date and lost documents, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal, reinforcing the statute of limitations as a bar to the appellant's claims.

Legal Issues Addressed

Exceptions to Statute of Limitations

Application: The court considered whether any statutory exceptions applied to allow for late filing of the post-conviction petition, finding that none did.

Reasoning: Consequently, the petition is barred, and none of the statutory exceptions apply.

Impact of Newly Discovered Evidence

Application: The appellant's claim of newly discovered evidence through a victim's recantation was previously addressed and denied in a petition for writ of error coram nobis.

Reasoning: Banes later filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis based on newly discovered evidence, specifically a recantation from the victim, which was denied by the trial court.

Pro Se Filing in Post-Conviction Relief

Application: The court reviewed the pro se petition filed by the appellant, addressing claims such as prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel, and found them barred by statute.

Reasoning: Banes's current appeal alleges prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel, improper jury instructions, and a defective indictment.

Statute of Limitations for Post-Conviction Relief

Application: The court applied the statute of limitations under the new Post-Conviction Procedure Act, which required filing within one year of the conviction becoming final, to determine the timeliness of the petition.

Reasoning: Banes had until May 10, 1996, to file his petition under the new act, but he filed after this deadline, making his claims ineligible for review unless they fell under specific exceptions for late filings.