Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville
Assigned on Briefs at Knoxville April 23, 2019
from the Circuit Court for Bedford County No. 18042-PC
Franklin Lee Russell, Judge
Petitioner, John Willie Stone, appeals from the Bedford
County Circuit Court's denial of his petition for
post-conviction relief from his burglary of an automobile,
misdemeanor theft, and aggravated assault convictions, for
which he is serving a twenty-one-year sentence. The
Petitioner contends that he received the ineffective
assistance of trial and appellate counsel. We affirm the
judgment of the post-conviction court.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit
Garrett D. Haynes, Shelbyville, Tennessee, for the appellant,
John Willie Stone.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter;
Benjamin A. Ball, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Robert
James Carter, District Attorney General; and Michael David
Randles, Assistant District Attorney General, for the
appellee, State of Tennessee.
H. Montgomery, Jr., J., delivered the opinion of the court,
in which Thomas T. Woodall and Robert W. Wedemeyer, JJ.,
H. MONTGOMERY, JR., JUDGE
a jury trial, the Petitioner was convicted of one count each
of burglary of an automobile, theft of property valued at
$500 or less, and the aggravated assault of Andrew Doak.
See State v. John Willie Stone, No.
M2016-01269-CCA-R3-PC, 2017 WL 2438580, *1 (Tenn. Crim. App.
June 6, 2017), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Oct. 4,
2017). After the conclusion of the trial but before the
sentencing hearing, the Petitioner filed a pro se motion
seeking the appointment of new counsel. The trial court
treated this motion as a petition for post-conviction relief
based on the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The
court appointed new counsel and, following a hearing
addressing both the Petitioner's motion for new trial and
the designated petition for post-conviction relief, the court
denied all claims. On appeal from the conviction proceedings,
this court determined that the trial court mistakenly treated
the Petitioner's motion for the appointment of new
counsel as a petition for post-conviction relief. This court
vacated the portion of the trial court's order denying
post-conviction relief, but this court addressed the claim of
ineffective assistance of trial counsel, denied relief, and
determined that the Petitioner had exhausted all claims
related to the ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
Id. *1, 10.
opinion, this court summarized the facts as follows:
The State's proof at trial showed that on the night of
August 26, 2014, Caitlin Pope drove her truck to her
parents' residence on East Franklin Street in
Shelbyville. She arrived at approximately 9:30 p.m. and
parked in front of the house. Ms. Pope left the vehicle
unlocked with the windows down, and she placed her wallet in
a cup holder between the two front seats of the vehicle while
she went inside the house.
Andrew Joel Doak testified that his parents lived next door
to Ms. Pope's parents and that on the night of August 26,
he had driven to his parents' house to pick up some food.
As he was walking to his vehicle which was parked on Franklin
Street, he noticed "some legs hanging out a driver's
side vehicle next door." Finding this suspicious, Mr.
Doak approached the vehicle, and the man, who was
"hanging out of the driver's side window" and
who was later identified as the [Petitioner], jumped to the
ground and began to walk away. Mr. Doak followed the
[Petitioner] and noticed that he "st[uck] something
under his shirt and down in his pockets." Due to the
darkness and the fact that the [Petitioner] was wearing a
hat, Mr. Doak was initially unable to discern much about his
After Mr. Doak had followed the [Petitioner] a short
distance, the [Petitioner] suddenly turned and "threw
his hands" up, asking Mr. Doak, "What's
up?" Mr. Doak inquired what the [Petitioner] was doing,
and the [Petitioner] responded that he wasn't "doing
nothing." Mr. Doak then accused the [Petitioner] of
breaking into the truck, which the [Petitioner] denied. The
[Petitioner] then began to run. Mr. Doak gave chase, and the
[Petitioner] reached under his shirt and told Mr. Doak,
"Don't make me pull this on you." The
[Petitioner] "darted away," and Mr. Doak attempted
to round a tree and cut him off when the [Petitioner] tripped
and fell to the ground. The [Petitioner] immediately jumped
to his feet and lunged at Mr. Doak; Mr. Doak was "really
scared," and his only thought was "don't let
him get close enough if he does have" a weapon. To keep
the [Petitioner] at bay, Mr. Doak kicked him in the head, but
the [Petitioner] managed to stay on his feet. Mr. Doak and
the [Petitioner] continued to scuffle, during which Mr. Doak
saw "something get throwed [sic] out from under [the
Petitioner's] shirt." Eventually, Mr. Doak gained
control of the [Petitioner] and held him on the ground while
Mr. Doak called 9-1-1. While Mr. Doak was speaking with the
9-1-1 dispatcher, he felt something hit his arm. Mr. Doak
noticed that his right forearm had been cut near his elbow,
and he saw "the blade . . . coming at [his] arm
again." Mr. Doak informed the dispatcher that the
[Petitioner] had a knife, and he tossed his telephone aside
so that he could concentrate on ...