Timothy Lee Armstrong v. Tammy Ford, Warden, W2016-00891-CCA-R3-HC

Timothy Lee Armstrong pleaded guilty in 1994 to felony murder and especially aggravated robbery; received concurrent sentences (life and 22 years).
Indictment alleged robbery of victim Theresa Patterson by use of a deadly weapon (listed as an iron skillet and a butcher knife; exact description "unknown").
In April 2016 Armstrong filed a pro se habeas corpus petition arguing double jeopardy barred both convictions and that the robbery indictment was facially defective; he also alleged ineffective assistance of counsel for allowing the guilty plea to a defective indictment.
The habeas court dismissed the petition, finding the sentences were not expired and the trial court had authority to sentence him.
Armstrong appealed; the Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed de novo and affirmed dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Double jeopardy/multiplicity of convictions	Convictions for felony murder and the underlying especially aggravated robbery violate double jeopardy because they require the same facts/elements	Double jeopardy claim is not cognizable in habeas and, on the merits, felony murder and underlying felony can both stand	Dismissed: claim is voidable not void; not proper for habeas; convictions may coexist
Facial defect in indictment (ambiguity/multiple offenses in one count)	Indictment ambiguous and alleges two separate offenses in same count; thus defective	Indictment informed accused of charge: stated date, victim, statutory reference; listing multiple/unknown weapons is permissible	Dismissed: indictment not so defective as to deprive court of jurisdiction; claim waived on appeal but fails on merits
Ineffective assistance for allowing guilty plea to defective indictment	Trial counsel ineffective for permitting plea to a facially defective indictment	Even if raised, indictment was sufficient; no habeas relief because judgment not void	Dismissed: ineffective-assistance claim did not render judgment void
Habeas corpus availability	Habeas available to remedy void judgments only (lack of jurisdiction or expired sentence)	State: petitioner must show judgment is void on face of record; this record does not	Dismissed: petitioner failed to show facial invalidity; habeas not appropriate

Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007) (standard of review for habeas corpus dismissal)
Archer v. State, 851 S.W.2d 157 (Tenn. 1993) (habeas relief limited to facially void judgments or expired sentences)
Taylor v. State, 995 S.W.2d 78 (Tenn. 1999) (grounds for habeas corpus are narrow)
Wyatt v. State, 24 S.W.3d 319 (Tenn. 2000) (burden on petitioner to show sentence is void)
State v. Godsey, 60 S.W.3d 759 (Tenn. 2001) (first-degree felony murder and underlying felony can be tried/convicted together without double jeopardy violation)
State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725 (Tenn. 1997) (indictment sufficiency principles)
State v. Sledge, 15 S.W.3d 93 (Tenn. 2000) (statutory reference in indictment may be sufficient notice)
State v. Hammonds, 30 S.W.3d 294 (Tenn. 2000) (failure to specify type of deadly weapon does not render indictment insufficient)