Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Logan v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Jackson

May 15, 2019

CHRISTOPHER DANTA LOGAN
v.
STATE OF TENNESSEE

          Assigned on Briefs April 2, 2019

          Appeal from the Circuit Court for Tipton County No. 8879 Joe H. Walker, III, Judge.

         The Petitioner, Christopher Danta Logan, appeals the Tipton County Circuit Court's summary dismissal of his pro se petition for post-conviction relief. The Petitioner argues that he timely filed his petition alleging he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. The State agrees that the Petitioner timely filed his petition. After a review of the record and applicable law, we conclude that the post-conviction court committed reversible error; therefore, we reverse the post-conviction court's summary dismissal of the petition and remand for a hearing regarding the timeliness of the Petitioner's post-conviction petition.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Reversed; Case Remanded

          Christopher Danta Logan, Tiptonville, Tennessee, pro se.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Clark B. Thornton, Assistant Attorney General; and Mark E. Davidson, District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

          John Everett Williams, P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Alan E. Glenn and Timothy L. Easter, JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, PRESIDING JUDGE.

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On May 12, 2017, the Petitioner pleaded guilty to felony failure to appear in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-16-609 and received an effective sentence of six years as a career offender. The judgment was entered on the same day. The Petitioner's notarized petition for post-conviction relief is dated June 8, 2018, and the petition was stamped as filed on June 14, 2018. The Petitioner asserts that he did not enter his plea voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently. He also asserted that trial counsel was ineffective for not investigating whether he qualified as a career offender and that trial counsel failed to inform him of the possible outcome of a jury trial.

         The post-conviction court entered an order on June 14, 2018, finding that the petition was untimely and summarily dismissing the petition. The Petitioner now appeals.

         ANALYSIS

         On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that his petition was timely and that, thus, the post-conviction court erred in summarily dismissing his petition. The State agrees with the Petitioner that the petition was timely filed.

         This court reviews a post-conviction court's summary dismissal of a post-conviction petition de novo. See Burnett v. State, 92 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tenn. 2002). Post-conviction relief is available to petitioners for any conviction or sentence that is "void or voidable because of the abridgment of any right guaranteed by the Constitution of Tennessee or the Constitution of the United States." T.C.A. § 40-30-103. A pro se petitioner is required to file for post-conviction relief "within one (1) year of the date of the final action of the highest state appellate court to which an appeal is taken or, if no appeal is taken, within one (1) year of the date on which the judgment became final." T.C.A. § 40-30-102(a). As a general rule, a trial court's ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.