Opinion

Rodney Dimitri Caples v. State of Tennessee - Order

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
Filed
Apr 14, 2003
Status
Published
On the bench
Judge David H. Welles
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 30.0%

The opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs March 4, 2003

RODNEY DIMITRI CAPLES v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County

No. P-23806 Chris Craft, Judge

No. W2001-01976-CCA-MR3-CD - Filed April 14, 2003

ORDER

The Defendant, Rodney Dimitri Caples, was originally indicted for rape of a child. He

subsequently entered a “best- interest” plea of guilty1 to the lesser-included offense of aggravated

sexual battery. He later filed for post-conviction relief, alleging that he had received ineffective

assistance of counsel and that, as a result, his guilty plea was not knowing or voluntary. After an

evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied his petition. This appeal followed.

The only proof offered by the Defendant at his post-conviction hearing was his own

testimony. He complained that his lawyers,2 provided by the Public Defender’s office, did not

prepare for trial and, as a result, coerced him into pleading guilty. The State called Sherry Brown,

the lawyer who both supervised the Defendant’s first lawyer and assumed the Defendant’s

representation when that lawyer left the office. Ms. Brown’s testimony contradicted the Defendant’s

testimony in numerous respects. A transcript of the Defendant’s plea hearing was also admitted.

The trial court took the matter under advisement and subsequently entered a thorough order denying

the Defendant’s claim for relief. In pertinent part, the Order provides:

Petitioner’s testimony on cross-examination that he was coerced into entering

his plea, and that he didn’t understand the judge’s questions [at the plea hearing] due

to an unspecified illness, is simply not credible. This Court finds that the Public

Defender’s office investigated his case early on, prior to the date set for his

preliminary hearing. His prior attorney obtained discovery, and Ms. Brown

explained the issues in his case with petitioner. The allegations against petitioner,

although serious, were simple and straightforward, pitting petitioner’s possible

testimony against that of the 12 year old victim. After being informed on trial date

1

See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S .Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 16 2 (1970 ).

2

The D efendant’s initial lawyer was later replaced by Assistant Public Defender Sherry Brown.

that his attorney had left the Public Defender’s officer, petitioner was told by his new

attorney that his case would not be going to trial, and was reset three days to allow

him to think about an offer of settlement. On that date, after discussing his options

with his new attorney, he decided to enter a best interest plea to a lesser included

offense. Petitioner has not suggested any additional investigation or witnesses that

would have induced him to change his plea or the State’s offer. He has failed to carry

his “burden of proving the allegations of fact by clear and convincing evidence.”

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-210(f). He has neither shown that his attorney was

deficient nor that he was prejudiced by her representation, and this Court finds that

his plea was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily made.

The evidence does not preponderate against the trial court’s findings of fact. No error of law

requiring a reversal of the judgment is apparent on the record. Based upon a thorough reading of the

record, the briefs of the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, the judgment

of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals of

Tennessee.

Because it appears to the Court that the Appellant, Rodney Dimitri Caples, is indigent, costs

are assessed against the State of Tennessee.

___________________________________

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE

____________________________________

JOSEPH M. TIPTON, JUDGE

____________________________________

JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE

-2-

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.