Willie C. Cole v. State of Tennessee
M2016-00625-CCA-R3-PC
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Mar 1, 2017Background
- Petitioner Willie C. Cole pled guilty in 2013 to aggravated robbery and theft of property (separate indictments), with an effective consecutive sentence of 14 years; plea accepted after a colloquy where he waived jury trial and other rights.
- State’s proffer: Cole and a codefendant arranged a robbery; Cole threatened victim with what looked like a handgun (later determined to be a pellet gun), took cash and a phone, and was later found with the property and a signed confession/waiver of Miranda rights.
- Ten days later Cole stole a running vehicle containing a child; he admitted the theft and said he needed money for bail; value exceeded $20,000; kidnapping charge was not presented to the grand jury.
- Cole filed a lengthy pro se post-conviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to file suppression motion, poor negotiation, inadequate meetings/investigation, failure to address mental-health/medication issues, and that his plea was involuntary).
- At the post-conviction hearing, trial counsel testified about multiple consultations, review of facts, advice that the plea was the best deal, and no basis to file a suppression motion; the trial court accredited counsel’s testimony and denied relief.
Issues
| Issue | Cole's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to file motion to suppress confession | Counsel should have filed; confession coerced and Miranda not given | Waiver of Miranda was signed; counsel found no basis to suppress; Cole produced no evidence the motion would succeed | Denied — Cole failed to show a suppression motion would have succeeded or prejudice under Strickland |
| Failure to negotiate lesser charge or concurrent sentences | Counsel failed to pursue joyriding reduction and concurrent service | Rule and facts required consecutive sentences (committed while released on bail); State would not agree to reduction | Denied — consecutive required by rule; no proof a lesser plea was available |
| Insufficient meetings/investigation | Counsel didn’t meet enough or investigate further | Counsel met multiple times, reviewed strategy, prepared for trial | Denied — testimony credited; Cole didn’t identify what further work would have achieved |
| Failure to pursue mental-health evidence re: plea validity | Counsel failed to investigate medication, institutionalization, suicide attempt; plea involuntary | Counsel aware but saw no impairment; Cole produced no medical evidence of incompetence or medication effects | Denied — Cole failed to present favorable medical evidence to show prejudice |
| Voluntariness of plea | Plea not knowing/intelligent due to counsel’s errors and mental state | Plea colloquy shows advisement of rights, understanding, and voluntary waiver; statements in court are presumptively true | Denied — plea was knowing and voluntary based on plea transcript and Blankenship factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice standard for guilty-plea ineffective-assistance claims)
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (requirement to canvass defendant to ensure plea is voluntary and intelligent)
- Blankenship v. State, 858 S.W.2d 897 (Tenn. 1993) (factors for determining voluntariness of plea)
- Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63 (statements made in open court carry strong presumption of truth)