State of Tennessee v. Byron Becton

Summary

The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the summary dismissal of Byron Becton’s motion to correct an illegal sentence under Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. The court held that his double-jeopardy claim challenged the underlying convictions rather than the sentences, and that his challenge to the 100-percent service requirement was waived and, in any event, did not establish an illegal sentence.

Holdings

1. A claimed double jeopardy violation attacks the underlying convictions rather than the legality of the sentences and therefore does not constitute a colorable claim for relief under Rule 36.1.
2. The requirement that Becton serve 100 percent of his effective sentence, less applicable sentence credits, was not illegal because Tennessee law required defendants convicted of aggravated rape to serve 100 percent of the sentence imposed.
3. The trial court properly summarily dismissed Becton's Rule 36.1 motion without a hearing or appointment of counsel because he failed to state a colorable claim for relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Becton's double jeopardy challenge to his multiple aggravated-rape convictions stated a colorable claim for relief under Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1.
2. Whether Becton's challenge to the requirement that he serve 100 percent of his effective sentence stated a colorable Rule 36.1 claim.
3. Whether the trial court properly summarily dismissed the Rule 36.1 motion without a hearing or appointment of counsel.

Disposition

affirmed