Joey Godwin v. State of Tennessee, W2015-01535-CCA-R3-PC

Petitioner Joey Godwin was convicted after a second trial of two counts of sale of cocaine (.5+ grams) based on controlled buys by a confidential informant; jury convicted and he received consecutive 30-year sentences.
First trial ended in a hung jury; same 12-year consecutive plea offer was made before the second trial but was rejected by the petitioner.
At the post-conviction hearing petitioner alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel for (1) preventing him from testifying, (2) failing to move for a change of venue, and (3) advising him to reject the State’s 12-year consecutive plea offer.
Trial counsel testified she advised against testifying (because of petitioner’s prior convictions) but did not prevent him, that no venue motion was warranted (no publicity), and that she repeatedly urged acceptance of the plea; petitioner declined.
The post-conviction court credited trial counsel’s testimony, found counsel’s performance reasonable and strategic, and denied relief; this Court affirmed, emphasizing lack of clear-and-convincing proof of deficient performance or prejudice.

Issue	Petitioner’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Whether counsel prevented Godwin from testifying	Counsel barred him from testifying; denial of right to testify	Counsel advised against testifying but left decision to client	Denied — court credited counsel; no proof counsel coerced or prevented testimony
Whether counsel erred by not moving for change of venue	Counsel failed to move despite petitioner’s local notoriety	No publicity existed; motion would have been frivolous	Denied — counsel’s choice reasonable; petitioner produced no evidence venue would succeed
Whether counsel improperly advised rejection of plea offer	Counsel advised rejection or failed to pursue plea after jury selection	Counsel urged acceptance repeatedly; petitioner chose to reject; plea not shown to remain available	Denied — petitioner failed to show counsel advised rejection or that he was prejudiced
Whether petitioner proved prejudice under Strickland	Testimony would have altered outcome / plea would have been accepted	No proffer of what petitioner would have testified; evidence against him was strong	Denied — no reasonable probability of a different result; petitioner failed to establish prejudice

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance requires deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Burns, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999) (right to reasonably effective counsel under state and federal constitutions)
Grindstaff v. State, 297 S.W.3d 208 (Tenn. 2009) (standard for clear-and-convincing evidence in post-conviction)
Dellinger v. State, 279 S.W.3d 282 (Tenn. 2009) (post-conviction proof and Strickland principles)
Baxter v. Rose, 523 S.W.2d 930 (Tenn. 1975) (standard of competence for counsel in Tennessee)
Adkins v. State, 911 S.W.2d 334 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994) (deference to reasonable trial strategy)
Howell v. State, 185 S.W.3d 319 (Tenn. 2006) (evaluating counsel’s conduct from counsel’s perspective)
Davis v. State, 912 S.W.2d 689 (Tenn. 1995) (need to proffer what omitted testimony would have been)
Fields v. State, 40 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2001) (standard of review for mixed questions in ineffective assistance claims)
State v. Mitchell, 810 S.W.2d 733 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991) (trial court credibility findings are binding on appeal)