Michael Barnes v. State of Tennessee
E2017-00048-CCA-R3-PC
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Dec 13, 2017Background
- Michael Barnes, incarcerated at Northeast Correctional Complex, was convicted in 2013 of possession of Suboxone (buprenorphine) and sentenced to 15 years as a career offender; conviction was affirmed on direct appeal.
- Barnes filed a pro se post-conviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel and disparate treatment; counsel was later appointed and an amended petition was filed focusing on ineffective assistance claims.
- At the post-conviction hearing trial counsel testified she met Barnes multiple times, explained plea offers (10- and 6-year offers), advised Barnes a conviction could result in up to 15 years, cross-examined witnesses about chain of custody, and did not recall certain juror relationships.
- Barnes testified he did not know he faced 15 years, that counsel failed to object to chain-of-custody or exhibit-admission defects, did not obtain a medical expert about Suboxone, and refused to pursue alleged selective/vindictive prosecution.
- The post-conviction court credited trial counsel, found no deficient performance or prejudice on the chain-of-custody, exhibit-publication, sentencing-advice, or selective-prosecution complaints, and denied relief; the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Barnes's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to object to chain of custody | Counsel should have objected; it could have changed outcome | Counsel cross-examined and record supported chain of custody; no prejudice | No deficient performance or prejudice; prior appeal found chain established |
| Failure to object to exhibits published but not formally admitted | Counsel should have objected to publication of exhibits not entered into evidence | Publication was harmless because exhibits were admissible and identified at trial | No prejudice shown; failure was harmless/oversight, not ineffective assistance |
| Failure to explain maximum sentence | Counsel did not tell Barnes he faced up to 15 years so plea decision was uninformed | Counsel clearly advised Barnes of plea offers and the potential 15-year exposure; Barnes rejected plea on record | Court credited counsel; Barnes knew of 15-year exposure; claim without merit |
| Failure to raise selective prosecution/vindictiveness | Counsel refused to pursue selective prosecution or show disparate plea offers | Barnes waived some claims; no evidence of impermissible selective prosecution or vindictive motive; relevance to guilt doubtful | Counsel not deficient; Barnes failed to prove selective or vindictive prosecution or resulting prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-pronged ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Henley v. State, 960 S.W.2d 572 (Tenn. 1997) (trial court findings of fact entitled to deference; counsel performance standard)
- Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363 (Tenn. 1996) (objective standard for counsel competence)
- Fields v. State, 40 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2001) (appellate review standards in post-conviction proceedings)
- Jaco v. State, 120 S.W.3d 828 (Tenn. 2003) (petitioner must prove post-conviction allegations by clear and convincing evidence)
- State v. Harton, 108 S.W.3d 253 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002) (distinguishing selective prosecution from disparate plea offers)