ÿWPC©7 …U:V % 0Ü–4r † 0 • 0Dµ 0Jù 0TC 0^— 0hõ 0r] 0|Ï 0†K 0Ñ 1uaU,Ö 0d D3fU,™U*ÅB)ïDC AM[Ú¨U‚­×Ú„È^¸&wÞöU BK!Éh!1# 0@@%F€%ÝÆ(£*v~»,vÓ9. AO 4Æ[4 0ø!5 0D7 D/]7 BŒ7, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ño„p3|xz(Ð(3Q™$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€̪XXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ****'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d7Border 1dd€- Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÐÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌFeb…ruaryÏ1,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏW.ÏCrowsonÌAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó ó KÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝConsistent€with€the€policy€of€this€court,€we€will€withhold€the€identity€ofÏyoung€children€involved€in€sexual€abuse€cases,€identifying€them€by€initials€only.€ÏòòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Schimpfóó,€782€S.W.2d€188,€òònoteóó€1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989).Ì £Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€record€does€not€establish€whether€this€was€also€the€appellant'sÏresidence.Ì ÐÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€victim's€younger€sister,€who€was€three€years€old€at€the€time€thisÏoffense€occurred,€was€not€called€to€testify€at€trial.Ì ¾Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€that€the€trial€court€did€instruct€the€jury€as€to€the€lesser€offense€ofÏaggravated€sexual€battery.Ì ®Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThis€standard€of€review€is€the€same€as€for€a€sufficiency€of€the€evidenceÏissue.€€òòSeeóó€òòinfraóó€Section€III.Ì mÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€"thirteenth€juror€rule"€was€abandoned€in€this€state€in€1978,€òòseeóóÏòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832€(Tenn.€1978),€but€was€reinstated€with€theÏ1991€promulgation€of€subsection€(f)€of€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.ÏBaroneóó,€852€S.W.2d€216€(Tenn.€1993).Ì ìÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€the€appellant's€error€in€his€contention€that€the€evidence€wasÏcircumstantial.€€The€victim€testified€at€trial;€this€constitutes€direct€evidence.Ì d ¿Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€offense€of€second€degree€murder€was€committed€while€theÏappellant€was€on€bail€for€the€instant€offense.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAt€the€hearing,€neither€the€appellant€nor€the€State€made€any€argumentÏregarding€the€1990€theft€conviction.€€The€admissibility€of€this€conviction€is€not€atÏissue€in€this€appeal.Ì("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò <Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝEven€though€the€appellant€did€not€take€the€witness€stand€due€to€thisÏruling,€this€issue€can€nonetheless€be€raised€properly€on€appeal.€€AdvisoryÏCommission€Comments,€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609.€€This€rule€rejects€federal€authorityÏholding€that€the€accused€must€testify€and€be€subject€to€cross„examination€aboutÏthe€prior€conviction€before€being€permitted€to€appeal€the€decision€allowing€theÏconviction€to€be€used.€€òòSeeóó€€òòLuce€v.€United€Statesóó,€469€U.S.€38,43,€105€S.Ct.Ï460,464€(1984).Ì ÓÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó"'Intimate€parts'€includes€the€primary€genital€area,€groin,€inner€thigh,Ïbuttock€or€breast€of€a€human€being."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„501(2)€(1991).Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€record€shows€that€the€appellant€first€committed€the€instant€offense,Ïthen,€while€on€bail€for€this€offense,€committed€the€offense€that€led€to€hisÏconviction€for€second€degree€murder.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(Ð3šü$¢¢Ý ƒ`!ÝÑÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ7€̪XXdæXXdæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÙ€€Ùò òßL€!" ;+'h|` õ `€€Lßà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OFÏCRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌà@ àMARCH€SESSION,Ï1995Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€01C01„9410„CC„00350Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àBEDFORDÏCOUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.ò òÏCHARLES€LEEó ó,€JudgeÌò òCHARLES€EDWARD€BLANTON€ó ó)Ìò òaka€BUDDYÏBLANTONó ó,à àà à)à à(Aggravated€SexualÏBattery)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌò òAndrew€Jackson€Dearing,€IIIà àà àCharles€W.€Bursonó óÌ117€South€Main€Streetà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌSuite€101à àÌShelbyville,€TN€€37160à àà àà àò òKimbra€R.€Spannó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€AttorneyÏGeneralà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òWilliam€Michael€McCownó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àò òà àGary€Jones€and€Robert€Crigleró óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorneys€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àBedford€County€CourthouseÌà àà àà àà àà àà àShelbyville,€TN€€37160ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Charles€"Buddy"€Blanton,€appeals€from€a€conviction€forÏaggravated€sexual€battery€entered€by€the€Circuit€Court€of€Bedford€County.€€TheÏappellant€raises€five€issues€for€our€review.€€First,€the€appellant€argues€that€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€failing€to€grant€his€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal€at€theÏconclusion€of€the€State's€case„in„chief€and€at€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€Second,Ïthe€appellant€contends€that€the€State€presented€insufficient€evidence€at€trial€toÏobtain€a€conviction.€€Third,€the€appellant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏholding€evidence€of€a€prior€conviction€admissible€for€impeachment€purposes.€ÏFourth,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€failed€to€instruct€theÏjury€on€the€lesser€included€offense€of€child€abuse.€€Fifth,€the€appellant€arguesÏthat€the€trial€court€improperly€ordered€his€sentence€to€run€consecutive€with€theÏsentence€for€a€previous€conviction€for€second€degree€murder.€€ÌÌà àAfter€reviewing€the€record,€we€affirm€the€appellant's€conviction€andÏsentence.ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òI.€€Factual€Backgroundóóó óÌÌà àThe€record€indicates€that€the€appellant€was€previously€married€to€theÍsister€of€the€victim's€mother.€€After€his€divorce,€€the€appellant€maintained€aÏrelationship€with€the€victim's€family.€On€September€2,€1992,€the€appellant€droveÏto€the€home€of€his€former€sister„in„law€and€her€family.€€Jeff€Prince,€a€formerÏneighbor€of€the€family,€accompanied€the€appellant.€€When€the€two€men€arrivedÏat€the€house,€the€victim€(LW× ƒ# ××  ×),€her€younger€sister,€€and€her€father€were€outside.€ÏLW€and€her€sister€asked€the€appellant€to€take€them€to€the€Dairy€Queen€acrossÏthe€street€from€their€house;€as€he€had€previously€done€so€on€numerousÏoccasions.€€The€appellant€agreed€and€obtained€the€permission€of€the€children'sÏfather.€€€The€appellant€also€asked€the€children's€father€if€he€could€take€LW€andÏher€sister€fishing.€€The€children's€father€denied€this€request€because€it€wasÏgetting€late.€€The€appellant€then€took€the€children€to€the€Dairy€Queen.ÌÌà àThe€children's€father€observed€the€appellant's€car€leave€the€Dairy€Queen.€ÏHe€noticed€that€the€car€was€headed€in€the€wrong€direction.€€He€was€notÏalarmed,€reasoning€that€the€appellant€"was€just€going€to€drive€them€down€to€theÏdam€to€throw€rocks€in€the€water€or€whatever€and€bring€them€right€back."€ÏHowever,€when€it€started€getting€dark,€he€became€concerned.ÌÌà àAs€his€concern€grew,€the€children's€father,€now€accompanied€by€his€wife,Íbegan€to€look€for€the€two€children€and€the€appellant.€€Since€they€did€not€knowÏwhere€the€appellant€lived,€the€children's€parents€drove€to€numerous€homesÏtrying€to€locate€the€whereabouts€of€the€appellant.€€Their€search€was€futile.€ÏFinally,€the€children's€mother€telephoned€her€sister,€the€ex„wife€of€the€appellant,Ïfrom€whom€she€learned€the€address€of€the€appellant's€mother.€€The€parentsÏthen€drove€to€the€residence€of€the€appellant's€mother.× ƒ$ ××  ×ÌÌà àAt€the€appellant's€mother's€house,€the€children's€parents€noticed€a€lightÏon€inside€the€house€and€proceeded€to€knock€at€the€front€door.€€Through€theÏglass€in€the€door,€they€observed€their€youngest€daughter€crying.€€When€theÏchildren€were€able€to€get€the€door€opened,€LW€rushed€outside€in€an€agitatedÏstate€and€declared,€"Let's€go€now€damn€it.€€Let's€go.€€I€hate€him.€€I€want€to€leave."€ÏLW€proceeded€to€the€family€car.€€The€parents€noticed€that€both€children€wereÏdirty,€that€LW's€shirt€was€on€backwards,€and€that€she€was€missing€her€socks.€ÏThe€children's€parents€then€ventured€into€the€house€where€they€found€theÏappellant€"passed€out"€on€the€couch.€€The€appellant€eventually€roused€himselfÏand€asked€the€children's€father€if€he€"wanted€a€beer."€€At€that€point,€the€parentsÏleft€the€house.ÌÌà àOn€their€way€home,€LW€told€her€parents€that€"her€Uncle€Buddy€had€takenÍher€clothes€off€and€touched€her€where€she€is€not€supposed€to€be€touched."€ÏInstead€of€driving€home,€they€went€to€the€home€of€the€victim's€paternalÏgrandmother.€€The€children€were€washed€and€were€provided€clean€clothes.€ÏThe€parents€then€took€LW€to€a€local€hospital€for€a€rape€exam.€Subsequently,€theÏBedford€County€Grand€Jury€indicted€the€appellant€for€one€count€of€rape€of€aÏchild€and€one€count€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€Prior€to€trial,€the€StateÏdismissed€the€aggravated€sexual€battery€charge,€and€the€appellant€proceededÏto€trial€on€the€charge€of€rape€of€a€child.ÌÌà àAt€trial,€LW,€age€7,€€testified€concerning€the€events€that€took€place€whileÏshe€was€in€the€appellant's€care.× ƒ% ××  ×€€LW€stated€that,€after€taking€her€and€her€sisterÏfor€ice€cream,€the€appellant€dropped€Jeff€Prince€off€and€then€drove€to€aÏconvenience€store€and€purchased€"some€beer."€€After€he€purchased€the€beer,Ïthe€appellant€drove€to€"his€house."€€Once€at€the€appellant's€house,€LW€testifiedÏthat€the€three€of€them€watched€movies€while€the€appellant€drank€beer.€€SheÏfurther€stated€that,€later€that€evening,€the€appellant€choked€her€and€took€off€herÏclothes.€€When€asked€what€the€appellant€did€after€disrobing€her,€the€victim€said,Ï"he€put€his€fingers€„„„."€€At€that€point,€she€hesitated,€and€the€prosecutor€told€herÏthat€she€could€just€point€to€where€the€appellant€put€his€fingers.€€She€thenÏpointed€to€her€lower€genital€area.€€She€also€testified€that€she€told€her€motherÍwhat€the€appellant€had€done€to€her.€€ÌÌà àThe€victim's€mother€corroborated€LW's€testimony.€€The€mother€testifiedÏthat€when€she€and€her€husband€finally€found€LW,€the€child€was€"hysterical."€ÏShe€also€stated€that€her€daughter's€clothes€were€muddy€and€had€blood€onÏthem.€€Dr.€Pedro€Galvez,€the€physician€who€examined€the€victim€at€theÏemergency€room,€testified€that€the€victim€had€a€bruise€on€her€neck.€€The€bruiseÏwas€located€in€the€same€area€where€the€victim€testified€the€appellant€hadÏchoked€her.ÌÌà àAt€the€close€of€the€State's€evidence,€the€appellant€moved€for€a€judgmentÏof€acquittal.€€The€appellant€argued€that€the€State€failed€to€offer€sufficient€proof€ofÏsexual€contact.€€The€trial€court,€however,€denied€the€motion.ÌÌà àThe€appellant€then€requested€that€the€court€preclude€the€State€fromÏintroducing€evidence€of€the€appellant's€conviction€for€second€degree€murder.€ÏThe€court€ruled€that€the€prosecution€could€use€the€conviction€for€the€limitedÏpurpose€of€impeachment€should€the€appellant€decide€to€testify.ÌÌà àDuring€the€appellant's€case„in„chief,€Shirley€Louise€Lloyd,€theÏappellant's€sister,€was€called€as€his€sole€witness.€€Ms.€Lloyd€testified€that€sheÏsaw€the€appellant€with€the€children€shortly€before€the€children's€parents€arrived.€ÍLloyd€further€testified€that€she€saw€the€children€playing€very€rough€with€oneÏanother.€ÌÌShe€stated€that,€at€one€point,€"the€youngest€child€yelled,€'God€damn€you'€"€at€theÏvictim.€€According€to€Ms.€Lloyd,€the€appellant€scolded€the€child€and€told€her€thatÏ"little€girls€didn't€talk€like€that."€€Ms.€Lloyd€further€testified€that€the€appellant€hadÏnot€been€drinking€nor€did€he€appear€drunk€during€the€time€she€spent€with€himÏthat€evening.€€The€appellant€did€not€testify,€and€no€other€proof€was€presented.ÌÌà àAt€the€close€of€the€proof,€the€appellant€requested€a€jury€instruction€onÏlesser€included€offenses.€€The€appellant€requested€that€the€court€instruct€the€juryÏto€consider€the€offenses€of€sexual€battery€and€child€abuse.€€The€trial€courtÏdenied€the€requested€charge€for€the€offense€of€sexual€battery,€finding€there€wasÏno€issue€as€to€the€age€of€the€child.× ƒ& ××  ×€€As€to€the€request€that€the€jury€be€instructedÏon€the€offense€of€child€abuse,€the€trial€judge€found€that€"there€is€no€evidence€ofÏany€other€purpose€than€sexual€arousal,"€and€therefore,€the€facts€of€this€case€"doÏnot€support€a€charge€of€child€abuse."€€Upon€conclusion€of€the€court'sÏinstructions,€the€jury€convicted€the€appellant€of€the€lesser€included€offense€ofÏaggravated€sexual€battery€and€affixed€a€fine€of€$25,000.ÌÌà àA€sentencing€hearing€was€held€on€December€16,€1993.€€EvidenceÏpresented€at€the€hearing€revealed€that€the€appellant€had€been€recentlyÏconvicted€of€second€degree€murder.€€The€record€indicates€that€the€appellantÏcommitted€the€murder€while€released€on€bail€for€the€current€charge.€€FollowingÏthe€introduction€of€evidence,€the€court€applied€one€mitigating€factor,€€"that€theÏdefendant's€criminal€conduct€neither€caused€nor€threatened€serious€bodilyÏinjury."€€However,€€the€court€noted€that€it€would€"place€very,€very€little€weight€onÏthat€mitigating€factor."€€As€to€enhancement€factors,€the€court€found€that€"theÏdefendant€has€a€history€of€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€that€necessary€toÏestablish€the€appropriate€range,"€€"the€defendant€€.€.€.€was€in€a€custodial€situationÏ.€.€.€and€abused€a€position€of€private€trust,"€and€"the€potential€of€bodily€injury€wasÏgreat."€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€court€sentenced€theÏappellant€to€eleven€years€and€three€months.€€The€sentence€was€to€be€servedÏconsecutive€to€the€sentence€for€second€degree€murder.€€In€the€trial€court'sÏopinion,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(3)(C)€mandated€consecutive€sentences.€€TheÏappellant€now€seeks€our€review€of€his€aggravated€sexual€battery€conviction€andÏthe€accompanying€sentence.Ìà àÌÌà0 àà àà@ àòòò òII.€€Motion€for€Judgment€of€Acquittalóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€first€contends€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€denied€hisÍmotion€for€judgment€of€acquittal€at€the€conclusion€of€the€State's€case„in„chief.€ÏAs€the€appellant€offered€evidence€in€support€of€his€defense€rather€than€rest€hisÏcase,€the€appellant€waived€this€issue€for€purposes€of€appellate€review.€€òòMathisÏv.€Stateóó,€590€S.W.2d€449,€453€(Tenn.€1979);€€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735ÏS.W.2d€859,€862€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);€€òòState€v.€Campbellóó,€No.€01„C„01„9402„CC„00034€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€March€9,€1995).€€Thus,€thisÏissue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àThe€appellant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€dismissing€hisÏmotion€for€judgment€of€acquittal€at€the€close€of€all€the€evidence€pursuant€toÏTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€29,€and,€in€the€alternative,€by€denying€his€motion€for€new€trialÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33.€€When€the€trial€court€is€presented€with€a€motionÏfor€judgment€of€acquittal,€the€only€concern€is€the€legal€sufficiency,€as€opposed€toÏthe€weight,€of€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Campbellóó,€No.€01„C„01„9402„CC„00034.€ÏTo€determine€whether€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€sustain€the€conviction,€theÏtrial€court€must€consider€"the€evidence€introduced€by€both€parties,€disregard€anyÏevidence€introduced€by€the€accused€that€conflicts€with€the€evidence€adduced€byÏthe€State,€and€afford€the€State€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence,Ïincluding€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.× ƒ' ××  ×€ÏòòIdóó.€€(citing€€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€656€S.W.2d€60,€61€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983)).€€PursuantÍto€this€standard,€the€trial€court€properly€denied€the€appellant's€motion€at€theÏconclusion€of€all€the€evidence.€€Clearly,€the€State's€proof€€was€sufficient€toÏestablish€the€elements€of€the€offense€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€ThisÏcontention€is€also€without€merit.ÌÌà àAs€to€the€appellant's€motion€for€a€new€trial€under€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33,€Ïagain€we€find€this€issue€to€be€meritless.€€Rule€33(f)€states€that€"the€trial€court€mayÏgrant€a€new€trial€following€a€verdict€of€guilty€if€it€disagrees€with€the€jury€about€theÏweight€of€the€evidence."€€This€portion€of€the€Rule€is€the€modern€equivalent€to€theÏ"thirteenth€juror€rule,"€whereby€the€trial€court€must€weigh€the€evidence€and€grantÏa€new€trial€if€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€weight€of€the€verdict.× ƒ( ××  ×€€òòSeeÏgenerallyóó€€òòState€v.€Curran€v.€Stateóó,€157€Tenn.€7,€4€S.W.2d€957€(1928).ÌÌà àOur€supreme€court€has€held€that€"Rule€33(f)€imposes€upon€a€trial€judgeÏthe€mandatory€duty€to€serve€as€the€thirteenth€juror€in€every€criminal€case."€€òòStateÏv.€Carteróó,€896€S.W.2d€119,€122€(Tenn.€1995).€€Moreover,€the€approval€by€theÏtrial€judge€of€the€jury's€verdict€as€the€thirteenth€juror€is€a€necessary€prerequisiteÏto€the€imposition€of€a€valid€judgment.€€òòIdóó.€€However,€when€a€trial€judge€overrulesÏa€motion€for€new€trial,€this€court€may€presume€that€the€trial€judge€has€served€asÍthe€thirteenth€juror€and€approved€the€jury's€verdict.€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€present€case,€theÏtrial€judge€overruled€the€appellant's€motion€for€new€trial,€therefore,€the€appellantÏis€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€ground.€€ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òIII.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidenceóóó óÌÌà àNext,€the€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€to€sustain€aÏconviction€for€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€The€appellant€asserts€that€theÏevidence€is€circumstantial× ƒ) ××  ×€and€does€not€sufficiently€show€his€guilt.€€Specifically,Ïthe€appellant€argues€that€"[t]he€facts€and€circumstances€in€Charles€E.€Blanton'sÏcase€as€revealed€to€the€jury€trial€are€no€more€than€'straws€in€the€wind'€and€areÏ'not€numerous€or€important€enough€to€weave€a€net€of€guilt€around€him€fromÏwhich€he€cannot€escape.'€"€€ÌÌà àA€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€aÏdefendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appealÏa€convicted€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€In€determiningÏthe€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€does€not€reweigh€or€reevaluate€theÍevidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€On€appeal,Ïthe€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€allÏreasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.ÏHarrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€It€is€the€appellate€court's€duty€to€affirmÏthe€conviction€if€the€evidence,€viewed€under€these€standards,€was€sufficient€forÏany€rational€trier€of€fact€to€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€offensesÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€317,€99€S.Ct.Ï2781,€2789€(1979);€€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);€€Tenn.ÏR.€App.€P.€13(e).ÌÌà àThe€victim,€seven€years€old€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€testified€that€theÏappellant€held€her€by€the€throat€and€took€off€most€of€her€clothing.€€He€thenÏtouched€her€in€the€genital€area.€€Soon€after€the€incident,€she€told€her€mother€thatÏthe€appellant€"touched€her€where€she€is€not€supposed€to€be€touched."€€The€factÏthat€her€mother€found€her€with€a€sock€missing€and€her€blouse€on€backwardsÏcorroborated€the€victim's€testimony.€The€jury€could€have€properly€inferred€thatÏthe€blood€on€her€blouse€resulted€from€sexual€contact.€€Furthermore,€Dr.€GalvezÏtestified€that€the€victim€had€a€bruise€on€her€neck€in€the€same€area€where€theÏappellant€allegedly€grabbed€her.€€From€these€facts,€any€rational€trier€of€factÏcould€have€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òIV.€€Admissibility€of€Prior€Convictionsóóó óÌÌà àPrior€to€trial,€the€State€provided€the€appellant€with€notice€of€their€intent€toÏuse€the€appellant's€two€prior€convictions€for€impeachment€purposes.€€TheseÏconvictions€include€a€1990€conviction€for€theft€of€property€and€a€1993€convictionÏfor€second€degree€murder.× ƒ+ ××  ×€€At€the€close€of€the€State's€case„in„chief,€the€trialÏcourt€held€a€hearing,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609(a),€to€determine€theÏadmissibility€of€these€two€convictions.€€After€hearing€arguments€as€to€theÏadmissibility€of€the€second€degree€murder€conviction,€the€trial€judge€ruled€thatÏthe€convictions€were€admissible€for€impeachment€purposes.× ƒ, ××  ×€€As€a€result€of€thisÏruling,€the€appellant€chose€not€to€testify,€but€proceeded€to€present€a€defense.× ƒ. ××  ×€ÏThe€appellant€now€challenges€the€trial€court's€ruling,€claiming€that€his€priorÏconviction€for€second€degree€murder€should€not€be€admitted€as€it€is€similar€toÍthe€crime€of€aggravated€rape,€and€it€is€not€probative€as€to€his€credibility.€€€ÌÌà àTenn.€R.€Evid.€609€permits€the€accused's€credibility€to€be€impeached€byÏprior€criminal€convictions€on€cross„examination€if€certain€conditions€andÏprocedures€are€satisfied.€€Pursuant€to€Rule€609,€the€conviction€must€be€(1)€for€aÏcrime€punishable€by€incarceration€in€excess€of€one€year,€or€(2)€for€a€crimeÏinvolving€dishonesty€or€false€statement.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609(a)(2).€€However,€theÏconviction€is€not€admissible€if€more€than€ten€years€has€elapsed€between€theÏdate€of€release€from€confinement€and€commencement€of€the€present€action.€ÏTenn.€R.€Evid.€609(b).€€The€rule€also€mandates€that€the€State€give€reasonableÏwritten€notice€prior€to€trial€of€the€particular€convictions€it€intends€to€use€toÏimpeach€the€accused.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609(a)(3).€€Finally,€before€permitting€theÏuse€of€a€prior€conviction,€the€trial€court€must€find€that€the€probative€value€of€theÏconviction€on€the€issue€of€credibility€outweighs€its€unfair€prejudicial€effect€on€theÏsubstantive€issues.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609(a)(3).ÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€the€State€provided€the€appellant€with€notice€of€itsÏintended€use€of€the€appellant's€convictions€prior€to€trial.€€Both€convictions€wereÏpunishable€by€imprisonment€in€excess€of€one€year,€and€both€convictions€wereÏwithin€the€ten€year€time€limit.€€Thus,€the€only€question€for€our€review€is€whetherÏthe€trial€court€properly€balanced€the€probative€value€of€the€convictions€againstÏtheir€prejudicial€effect.ÌÌà àBefore€the€trial€court€rules€on€the€probative€value€of€the€prior€convictions,Ïthe€court€must€first€assess€the€similarity€between€the€crime€on€trial€and€the€crimeÏunderlying€the€impeaching€conviction.€€òòState€v.€Farmeróó,€841€S.W.2d€837,€839Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992);€€òòState€v.€Finchóó,€No.€02C01„9309„CC„00224€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€at€Jackson,€June€7,€1995).€€€The€trial€court€must€then€analyze€theÏrelevance€the€impeaching€conviction€has€to€the€issue€of€credibility.€€òòIdóó.ÌÌà àAt€the€609€hearing,€the€trial€judge,€after€a€lengthy€discussion,€stated€withÏregard€to€the€admissibility€of€the€murder€conviction,€that:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ€[A]lthough€it€is€a€type€of€assaultive€offense,€child€rape,€it€isÏof€great€dissimilarity€than€the€intentional€taking€of€life.€€SinceÏit€is€an€infraction€of€the€higher€degrees€against€society,€theÏCourt€feels€that€the€probative€value€in€this€case€outweighsÏthe€prejudicial€effect€and€will€allow€the€State€to€use€that€forÏpurposes€of€impeachment€only.ÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓA€ruling€under€Rule€609€will€not€be€reversed€unless€the€trial€court€has€abused€itsÏdiscretion.€€òòFinchóó,€No.€02C01„9309„CC„00224€(citations€omitted).€€From€ourÏreview€of€the€record,€we€do€not€find€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion.€€ÌÌà àWe€conclude€that€the€crime€of€aggravated€sexual€battery€is€not€so€similarÏto€the€crime€of€second€degree€murder€as€to€compel€a€finding€of€prejudice.€ÏFurthermore,€this€court€has€held€that€"felonies€of€a€violent€nature€reflect€on€theÍmoral€character€of€a€witness";€and,€therefore,€"this€evidence€is€not€usuallyÏwithout€probative€value."€€òòState€v.€Strongóó,€No.€88„82„III€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville,€April€12,€1989).€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€notÏerr€in€finding€the€appellant's€conviction€for€second€degree€murder€moreÏprobative€as€to€credibility€than€prejudicial€as€to€a€substantive€issue.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€ÏòòState€v.€Wigginsóó,€729€S.W.2d€291,€294€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)€(holding€thatÏconvictions€for€voluntary€manslaughter€and€possession€of€a€controlledÏsubstance€for€resale€admissible€for€impeachment€purposes€in€trial€forÏaggravated€kidnapping€and€aggravated€rape);€€òòState€v.€Ratliffóó,€673€S.W.2d€884,Ï885€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984)€(holding€that€convictions€for€escape€and€assaultÏwith€intent€to€commit€second€degree€murder€admissible€for€impeachmentÏpurposes€in€trial€for€concealing€stolen€property);€€òòState€v.€Lakinsóó,€No.€32€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€May€24,€1991)€(holding€that€conviction€for€secondÏdegree€murder€admissible€for€impeachment€purposes€in€trial€for€aggravatedÏassault);€òòState€v.€Reaganóó,€No.€3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€August€30,€1989)Ï(holding€that€conviction€for€aggravated€assault€admissible€for€impeachmentÏpurposes€in€trial€for€receiving€stolen€property);€òòStrongóó,€No.€88„82„III€(holdingÏconviction€for€malicious€shooting€admissible€for€impeachment€purposes€in€trialÏfor€assault€with€intent€to€commit€first€degree€murder€and€assault€with€intent€toÏcommit€rape).€€Thus,€the€trial€court€properly€determined€that€evidence€of€theÏappellant's€two€prior€convictions€would€be€admissible€for€impeachmentÏpurposes.€€This€issue€is,€therefore,€without€merit.ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òV.€€Failure€to€Instruct€on€Lesser€Included€Offense€of€Child€Abuseóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€next€argues€that€the€trial€court's€jury€charge€constitutedÏreversible€error.€Specifically,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€shouldÏhave€charged€the€jury€on€the€lesser€included€offense€of€child€abuse.€€WeÏdisagree.ÌÌà àError€cannot€be€predicated€on€a€trial€court's€failure€to€charge€a€lesserÏincluded€offense€when€the€evidence€clearly€demonstrates€that€the€defendant€isÏguilty€of€a€greater€offense.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,550€(Tenn.Ï1994);€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€797€S.W.2d€589,€593€(Tenn.€1990);€€òòState€v.€Kingóó,€718ÏS.W.2d€241,€245€(Tenn.€1986).€€To€prove€a€case€of€aggravated€sexual€battery,Ïthe€State€must€show€(1)€that€the€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€years€of€age€and€(2)Ïthat€the€defendant€had€unlawful€sexual€contact€with€the€victim.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€39„13„504€(1991).€€"Sexual€contact"€is€the€intentional€touching€of€the€victim'sÏintimate€parts,× ƒ/ ××  ×€if€that€intentional€touching€can€be€reasonably€construed€asÏbeing€for€the€purpose€of€sexual€arousal€or€gratification.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„501(6)€(1991).€€In€the€case€before€us,€the€record€clearly€shows€that€theÍappellant€committed€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€The€victim€was€seven€years€oldÏat€the€time€of€the€offense,€which€meets€the€statutory€requirement€to€showÏaggravation.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„504(a)(4)€(1991).€€Moreover,€theÏvictim€testified€that€the€appellant€held€her€by€the€neck€and€removed€her€pants,Ïand€that€he€touched€her€"where€she€is€not€supposed€to€be€touched,"€i.e.,€herÏlower€genital€area.€€Thus,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€onÏthe€lesser€included€offense€of€child€abuse.ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òVI.€€Consecutive€Sentencingóóó óÌÌà àIn€his€final€issue,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperlyÏinterpreted€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(3)(C)€as€mandating€consecutive€sentences.€ÏRule€32(c)(3)€provides:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(3)€Mandatory€Consecutive€Sentences.€„„„€Where€aÏdefendant€is€convicted€of€multiple€offenses€from€one€trial€orÏwhere€the€defendant€has€additional€sentences€not€yet€fullyÏserved€as€the€result€of€the€convictions€in€the€same€or€otherÏcourt€and€the€law€requires€consecutive€sentences,€theÏsentence€shall€be€consecutive€whether€the€judgmentÏexplicitly€so€orders€or€not.€€This€rule€shall€apply:ÌÌ€€€€€(A)€€To€a€sentence€for€a€felony€committed€while€on€paroleÏfor€a€felony;ÌÌ€€€€€(B)€€To€a€sentence€for€escape€or€for€a€felony€committedÏwhile€on€escape;ÌÌ€€€€€(C)€€To€a€sentence€for€a€felony€where€the€defendant€wasÏòòreleased€on€bail€óóand€the€defendant€is€òòconvicted€of€bothÏoffensesóó;€andÌÌ€€€€€(D)€€Any€other€ground€provided€by€law.€€ÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓ(emphasis€added).€€Although€the€appellant€was€not€on€bail€when€the€instantÏoffense€was€committed,€the€trial€judge€reasoned€that:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ[A]€strict€reading€of€that€statute€[32(c)(3)(C)]€would€mean€thatÏone€conviction€has€to€follow€the€other,€that€the€first€caseÏshould€be€tried€first€if€there€is€a€conviction€and€then€there€isÏa€conviction€on€the€second€case.€€But€that€would€lead€toÏludicrous€results.€.€.€.€ÌÌI€believe€what€the€Supreme€Court€intended€is€that€if€you€areÏout€on€bail€and€you€commit€another€offense€and€you€areÏconvicted€of€both€offenses,€those€sentences€shall€runÏconsecutive.€ÌÌ€ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓThe€appellant€contends€that,€because€he€was€not€on€bail€at€the€time€heÏcommitted€the€instant€offense,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(3)(C)€does€not€apply.× ƒ0 ××  ×€ÏWe€disagree€and€affirm€the€decision€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(3)(C),€we€conclude€that€theÏlanguage€does€not€specify€that€there€òòmust€óóbe€a€conviction€for€the€earlier€offenseÏand€òòthen€óóa€conviction€for€the€latter€one.€€Thus,€we€hold€that€it€is€irrelevantÍwhether€the€conviction€for€the€first€offense,€releasing€the€defendant€on€bail,Ïoccurs€prior€to€the€conviction€for€the€second€offense,€occurring€while€theÏdefendant€is€on€bail.€€òòContraóó,€òòState€v.€Hyderóó,€No.€1040€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏKnoxville,€March€13,€1986)€(holding€that€since€the€defendant€was€not€on€bail€atÏthe€time€of€the€instant€offense€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(3)(C)€was€not€applicable).€ÏIn€other€words,€it€is€immaterial€whether€sentence€one€is€consecutive€to€sentenceÏtwo,€or€vice€versa,€as€the€sentences€are€consecutive€in€either€case.€ÏAccordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€properly€imposed€consecutiveÏsentences€when€the€appellant€was€first€convicted€of€the€offense€committed€whileÏon€bail€and€then€convicted€of€the€offense€which€released€him€on€bail.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌà àFor€the€reasons€set€forth€in€this€opinion,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isÏaffirmed.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________à àà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò(Not€participating)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌJERRY€SCOTT,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JUDGE€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï