Joshua Matthew Cline v. State of Tennessee
M2017-00168-CCA-R3-PC
Tenn. Crim. App.Dec 4, 2017Background
- In 2008 Petitioner Joshua Matthew Cline raped his six‑year‑old adopted daughter; a video of the assault existed and Cline was federally convicted for production of child pornography.
- In state court Cline entered open guilty pleas to two counts of rape of a child and received consecutive 25‑year sentences (one run concurrent with his federal sentence).
- Cline filed a pro se post‑conviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel and that his pleas were not knowing and voluntary; counsel later amended the petition.
- At the post‑conviction hearing Cline (via deposition) claimed limited meetings with counsel, lack of disclosure of certain materials (including a DCS report), no meaningful investigation or suppression efforts regarding the video, and that he would have gone to trial if properly advised.
- Trial counsel testified she met multiple times with Cline, provided discovery (DCS report and video), viewed and advised on the video’s admissibility, negotiated plea options, presented mitigation at sentencing, and objected to improper testimony.
- The post‑conviction court found Cline’s plea knowing and voluntary and that counsel’s assistance was effective; the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (general) | Cline: counsel failed to investigate, failed to disclose documents, met too infrequently, offered inadequate mitigation and advice | State: counsel met repeatedly, provided discovery, reviewed video, researched admissibility, negotiated pleas, presented mitigation | Denied — counsel’s performance objectively reasonable |
| Prejudice from counsel’s alleged deficiencies (plea context) | Cline: would not have pled guilty and would have insisted on trial if properly informed | State: Cline admitted the conduct and counsel advised that conviction at trial was likely with far greater exposure | Denied — no reasonable probability result would differ; plea voluntary |
| Voluntariness/knowing plea (independent claim) | Cline: plea not knowing/voluntary (barely argued) | State: plea was knowing and voluntary; petitioner affirmed rights and admitted guilt at plea colloquy | Waived as independent claim for lack of developed argument; court found plea knowing and voluntary |
| Sentencing/consecutive exposure knowledge | Cline: misunderstood that state sentences could run consecutively to each other | State: court properly informed him and he acknowledged understanding rights; counsel warned of sentencing exposure | Denied — no showing counsel’s conduct caused different outcome |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice standard for counsel errors in guilty‑plea context)
- Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364 (prejudice requires undermining confidence in outcome)
- Burns v. State, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999) (deference to tactical decisions if adequately prepared)
- Henley v. State, 960 S.W.2d 572 (Tenn. 1997) (both deficient performance and prejudice required)
- Strickland‑related Tennessee precedent: Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363 (Tenn. 1996) (credibility and factual findings for post‑conviction court)
- Momon v. State, 18 S.W.3d 152 (Tenn. 1999) (burden of proof and post‑conviction standards)
- Davidson v. State, 453 S.W.3d 386 (Tenn. 2014) (constitutional right to effective counsel)
- Baxter v. Rose, 523 S.W.2d 930 (Tenn. 1975) (standard for competence of counsel)
- Grindstaff v. State, 297 S.W.3d 208 (Tenn. 2009) (applying Hill prejudice standard in Tennessee plea cases)