Alvin Waller, Jr. v. State of Tennessee, W2016-00265-CCA-R3-PC

Victim accepted a ride from Alvin Waller, Jr.; after consensual sex in the car he prevented her from leaving, threatened her with a gun, and later shot her in the head when she tried to leave.
Waller was tried and convicted of especially aggravated kidnapping and aggravated assault; attempted voluntary manslaughter (a lesser-included) was later merged into aggravated assault.
On direct appeal, this Court reversed the attempted voluntary manslaughter conviction but affirmed the kidnapping and aggravated assault convictions, applying State v. White’s “essentially incidental” test.
Waller filed multiple post-conviction petitions claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to request a White-based special jury instruction on whether the confinement was essentially incidental to the aggravated assault.
The trial record (now in the post-conviction proceedings) showed the jury was not instructed under White; trial counsel admitted awareness of White but did not request the special instruction.
The post-conviction court denied relief, finding no deficient performance or prejudice; Waller appealed that denial.

Issue	Petitioner’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request a State v. White special jury instruction on “essentially incidental” confinement	Counsel’s omission was deficient and, had the jury been properly instructed, Waller would have been acquitted of kidnapping	No prejudice resulted from omission; record supports kidnapping not being incidental so no ineffective assistance	Even if omission was deficient, no prejudice shown; post-conviction court’s denial affirmed

State v. White, 362 S.W.3d 559 (Tenn. 2012) (establishes that kidnapping is unlawful only if removal/confinement is more than "essentially incidental" to an accompanying felony and requires jury instruction)
Vaughn v. State, 202 S.W.3d 106 (Tenn. 2006) (standards for post-conviction review and ineffective assistance analysis)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance test: deficiency and prejudice)
Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363 (Tenn. 1996) (deficiency and prejudice framework applied in Tennessee)
Moore v. State, 485 S.W.3d 411 (Tenn. 2016) (prejudice inquiry for erroneous jury instruction in ineffective assistance claims mirrors harmless-error analysis)