The opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT JACKSON
JANUARY 1998 SESSION
FILED
March 18, 1998
Cecil Crowson, Jr.
JOSEPH L. BROWN, ) Appellate C ourt Clerk
) No. 02-C-01-9611-CR-00387
APPELLANT, )
) Shelby County
v. )
) Honorable Chris Craft, Judge
STATE OF TENNESSEE, )
) (Post-Conviction Relief)
APPELLEE. )
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
Howard B. Manis John Knox Walkup
Attorney at Law Attorney General & Reporter
200 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 1313 425 Fifth Avenue, North
Memphis, TN 38103 Nashville, TN 37243-0493
Clinton J. Morgan
Counsel for the State
425 Fifth Avenue, North
Nashville, TN 37243-0493
William L. Gibbons
District Attorney General
201 Poplar Avenue, Suite 3-01
Memphis, TN 38103
Daniel R. Woody
Assistant District Attorney General
201 Poplar Avenue, Suite 3-01
Memphis, TN 38103
OPINION FILED: ______________________________
AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20
Joe B. Jones, Presiding Judge
OPINION
The appellant, Joseph L. Brown (petitioner), appeals as of right from a judgment of
the trial court dismissing his post-conviction action after an evidentiary hearing. In this
court, the petitioner contends the trial court “erred in failing to Sustain your Petitioner’s
Petition for Post Conviction Relief, and grant him a new trial in his case.” After a thorough
review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the law governing the issues
presented for review, it is the opinion of this court that the judgment of the trial court should
be affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. The evidence
contained in the record does not preponderate against the trial court’s findings of fact.
The petitioner claimed he was denied his constitutional right to the effective
assistance of counsel. He faults counsel for failing to provide him with copies of everything
contained in counsel’s file and for assuring him the parole board would release him after
he served 30 percent of his sentence.
Defense counsel testified he met with the petitioner on several occasions. Counsel
discussed the content of the petitioner’s statement, the co-defendant’s statement, and the
results of the investigation. The petitioner told another assistant public defender he would
plead guilty if the state would offer the minimum sentence. The state reduced the offer to
the minimum sentence, and the petitioner entered a plea of guilty pursuant to the plea
agreement. Counsel testified he explained the parole process to the petitioner, but he did
not tell or guarantee the petitioner he would automatically be released on parole after
serving 30 percent of his sentence.
The petitioner admitted he committed the crime. He also admitted he was pleased
with the guilty plea and sentence until he was turned down for parole. He did not seek
post-conviction relief until he met the parole board on two occasions and was denied
parole. At the post-conviction hearing, the petitioner said he understood that while a co-
defendant shot and seriously injured the victim, he could be tried for the same offense
because they committed the crime together.
_____________________________________
JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE
2
CONCUR:
___________________________________
PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE
___________________________________
DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE
3