Anthony T. Brandon v. State of Tennessee
M2017-00080-CCA-R3-PC
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Aug 25, 2017Background
- Shelbyville police responded to a hotel for a noise complaint; Petitioner invited officers inside and admitted owning a bag with a white powdery substance.
- Two Crown Royal bags were found on Petitioner; one contained over $1,400 and the other contained two marijuana blunts; later a drug-detection dog alerted on a Crown Royal bag with powder cocaine, crack cocaine, and over $7,000.
- The hotel room was rented in Shana Bryan’s name; Amy Merlow stayed there and was not charged; extensive cash tied to Merlow was discussed at trial.
- Petitioner was convicted of multiple cocaine and marijuana offenses; the trial court merged certain counts and imposed a 24-year term, later reduced on direct appeal after cocaine merge to 12 years, 11 months, and 29 days; amended judgments were entered in 2016.
- Petitioner filed a timely post-conviction petition on June 1, 2016; an evidentiary hearing was held on November 2, 2016, where trial counsel and Petitioner testified to trial preparation and witness strategy.
- Post-conviction court denied relief, concluding no deficient performance or prejudice; Petitioner appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver of ineffective-assistance claims | Brandon argues trial counsel failed to prepare and to present witnesses; claims are preserved for review. | State asserts waiver due to no adequate appellate argument; even if reviewed, claims fail on merits. | Waiver approved; no clear and convincing evidence of deficient performance or prejudice. |
| Ineffective assistance—trial preparation and witness strategy | Trial counsel inadequately prepared and failed to interview/present key witnesses, prejudicing Brandon. | Counsel conducted reasonable preparation and made strategic decisions; witnesses' absence did not prejudice. | No deficiency or prejudice proven; strategy and preparation deemed reasonable. |
| Batson challenge and suppression motion | Counsel should have objected to potential racial discrimination in jury selection and filed a suppression motion. | No prima facie Batson showing; suppression not warranted due to standing/other issues. | Issues abandoned on appeal; no relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong standard for ineffective assistance; deficient performance and prejudice)
- Baxter v. Rose, 523 S.W.2d 930 (Tenn. 1975) (deficient performance requires prejudice for relief)
- Henley v. State, 960 S.W.2d 572 (Tenn. 1997) (objective standard of reasonableness for counsel's performance)
- Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363 (Tenn. 1996) (deference to strategic decisions made after adequate preparation)
- Felts v. State, 354 S.W.3d 266 (Tenn. 2011) (unchallengeable tactical decisions if adequately prepared)
- Momon v. State, 18 S.W.3d 152 (Tenn. 1999) (post-conviction standards of proof and review)
- Burns v. State, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999) (prejudice inquiry in Strickland analysis)
- Adkins v. State, 911 S.W.2d 334 (Tenn. 1994) (courts defer to counsel's trial strategy after adequate preparation)
- Williams v. State, 599 S.W.2d 276 (Tenn. 1980) (contextual standards for evaluating trial strategy)
- Hellard v. State, 629 S.W.2d 4 (Tenn. 1982) (framework for evaluating witness credibility and trial conduct)