Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville
WILLIE C. COLE
STATE OF TENNESSEE
Assigned on Briefs February 15, 2017
from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County Nos. 41300139,
41300140 William R. Goodman, III, Judge
Willie C. Cole, filed a pro se petition for post-conviction
relief, challenging various aspects of trial counsel's
representation as ineffective, among other things. After
appointment of counsel and a hearing, the post-conviction
court denied relief and dismissed the petition. We affirm the
judgment of the post-conviction court.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit
Nathan Hunt, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellant,
Willie Charles Cole.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; James
E. Gaylord, Senior Counsel; John W. Carney, District Attorney
General; and Dan Brollier, Assistant District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Timothy L. Easter, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in
which Thomas T. Woodall, P.J., and Robert W. Wedemeyer, J.,
TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JUDGE
February of 2013, Petitioner was indicted in Case Number
41300139 for theft of property valued over $10, 000 and in
Case Number 41300140 for aggravated robbery. On September 13,
2013, Petitioner, with the assistance of trial counsel,
entered a guilty to both crimes. At the guilty plea hearing,
counsel for the State informed the trial court that it was
prepared to put forth proof at trial to show that on December
[Petitioner] and his codefendant Marquex Townsend entered
into an agreement whereby Mr. Townsend w[ould] take the
victim . . . in the Wal-Mart store and cash a check, . . .
g[e]t some cash while in the store. They -- they were - - we
actually have text messages between them kind of setting up
When Mr. Townsend and [the victim] came back out of the store
and got into [the victim's] vehicle, [Petitioner] met
them and approached them with a gun in his hand. I believe it
did turn out to be a pellet gun, but I - - I have a
photograph of it here for the Court if the Court wants to see
it. It had every bit of the appearance of being a real
automatic handgun. [Petitioner] did take [$]632 in cash and a
cell phone - - cell phone from . . . [the victim].
He was caught later that night with the stolen property in
his possession and with the gun in his possession.
[Petitioner] made a full confession to the robbery as did Mr.
Townsend, who had - - has already been charged and entered a
plea in this case.
facts giving rise to Case Number 41300139 took place on
December 12, 2012. On that day:
[Ms.] Blevins left her 2009 Chrysler 300 running while she
ran into the Dollar General Store. Her seven year old child
was in the car at the time. [Petitioner] saw the car running,
jumped into it, took off with it, eventually stopped at
Wal-Mart, put the child out of the car, and [was] eventually
apprehended a little bit later by the police. He had the
stolen vehicle car keys in his pocket at the time he was
apprehended. He did admit to that theft as well. He told
officers he took the car because he needed the money for the
bail in the aggravated robbery case. And the value of that
car was over $20, 000. He was [also] initially charged with
kidnapping. The State chose not to present th[at] to the
to accepting the plea, the trial court informed Petitioner of
the range of punishment for each offense, taking into account
that Petitioner was a Range II offender. The trial court also
notified Petitioner that the sentences would be served
consecutively to any sentence he was already serving.
Petitioner acknowledged that he was giving up his right to a
jury trial, his right to confront witnesses, his right to
subpoena witnesses, his right to remain silent, his right to
testify, and his right to appeal. Petitioner acknowledged his
understanding that these convictions could be used to enhance
any future convictions he received. Petitioner informed the
trial court that it was in his best interest to plead guilty
and admitted to the trial court that he was guilty of the
trial court approved the negotiated settlement of the cases,
sentencing Petitioner to eight years for aggravated robbery
to be served at 100 percent and six years for theft of
property to be served as a Range II, multiple offender. The
trial court did not award Petitioner any jail credits because
he was "presently serving" a sentence on a
probation violation at the time of the guilty plea hearing.
The trial court ordered the sentences in the present cases to
be served ...