The trial took place in 1998 in Davidson County, the Honorable Cheryl Blackburn. The courts have already ruled the autopsy report used during my trial was clearly of the wrong victim but also went on to hold that this was in the province of the jury to determine. However this was never made an issue before the just, my lawyer during trial (sam wallace jr) never objected to the introduction of the wrong autopsy report. Ive fought it through the courts but as to date nothing has been done. It just doesnt make much sense or even seen possible for the court to knowingly use a wrong autopsy report to convict someone for murder. Any advice, assistance or recommendation that you may have will be truly appreciated. THANK YOU
There are several appealable issues with this kind of mess and even post conviction relief issues such as ineffective assistance of counsel. You definately need to seek legal counsel.
The normal methods of review available would be direct appeal, state collateral review and then federal habeas corpus. If you have pursued all of those without success then your claim has almost certainly either been decided against you or has been procedurally forfeited, depending on whether you raised it and lost, on the one hand, or have failed to raise it, on the other. The kind of issue you are asking about is very case- and fact-specific. An attorney would have to be familar with the transcript of your trial, the trial discovery, and the entire history of appeal and collateral review of your case in order to tell you whether anything can still be done at this point. Sometimes the law reaches results that litigants find inexplicable or unfair. That does not necessarily mean that they are legally wrong or that anything can be done about them. But you should retain an attorey for a full review of you case.
Your recitation of the facts leads me to believe that you are Mr. Jerry Carney (if I am incorrect please feel free to correct me). I would encourage you to read case numbers M2011-02766-CCA-R3-CO; M1999-01139-CCA-R3-CD, 2000 WL 1335770 (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 15, 2000); and M2002-024160-CCA-R3-PC, 2005 WL 351238 (Tenn. Crim. App. Feb. 14, 2005). I am sure that you have read these opinions; however, read them and if you have specific questions feel free to ask.
It would appear that you argued self defense and admitted that the shooting and death occurred. Self-defense is a species of justification defense. The underlying facts are largely admitted and the defendant attempts to persuade the jury that the defendant was justified in acting as they did. Since there is no real argument as to the underlying facts; then, legally there was no harm in the wrong report being entered or discussed. This is especially the case when the defendant takes the stand and admits to the shooting even though arguing justification. At least that is what the courts have found.
Ideally, you hope to win over the jury and to be found no guilty. If this does not occur the defendant must: a) perfect the appeal by timely raising all issues at the trial court level in a request for a new trial; b) appeal after the denial of the request for a new trial; c) file a timely petition for post conviction relief alleging all grounds. First, you are well past all of this. Second, hypothetically your strongest argument would have been that you received inadequate counsel and that but for such counsel you would not have made some decision at the trial level the making of which lead to your conviction (not argued self defense, possibly, because you were not effectively advised of the ramifications; not taken the stand waiving your right; etc.) if there are facts to support such an argument. If such argument has not been made by now; then, it is too late now. At this time, the best you can really hope for is to find out that there was some jury misconduct or a witness has recanted their testimony. How? Jury questionnaires and private investigators or attorneys poking around and asking questions.
On a side note, if the autopsy report used was more 'prejudicial' (it contradicted your version of events where the correct one would have supported your version?) then the correct one maybe something could be made of that fact. But, really, that should have happened long ago and I doubt anyone could legitimately be expected to hear the argument now. If this is the case though give it a try (via coram nobis). I would not think the chances would be that good though.
