ÿWPCD! —™"e²WÔwä/95Å££Ò?(Õôi¸cP0œÝ¨ßg¢ô@+›7¸ÇèƒYÇX[$þ·¨e6Ëê«ËrúK0é—Àý/p½Ûcº¸¾:ÓbAîØd¶#4ã 9˜ŽyFaÐdìØ±õ¾¸šZ£·Ý³¨í4EŸŸà¬}wˆekVHÑî9›>±PêËe0rÊ8·Ô,/ê²—uí3f”f9ê¯Ç'n¾›9Ÿ_Ê]»†*ämò#’aFÎ’_¯$-1g€yüåÕ1Î!ñ:b˜ó8á¹)…úÀÇÖh¸ÅsÆËÝîÔ|}+¢ˆÿ™Ó‚”ZTâ>X÷|å!Ñ …àpÈóWN,ªP«!% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÐ ,)$"& Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àP.€O.€Box€878Ð * #' Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àFayetteville,€TN€€37334Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ v/n(- ÐÌAFFIRMEDÐ B1:*/ ÐÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayes,ó ó€JudgeÐ Ú4Ò-3 ÐÐ  À5¸.43 ÐÔ_ÔÓÓà@+®àòòò òOPINIONóóó óˆÐ  ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant,€Michael€Brown,€appeals€òòpro€seóó,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€his€conviction€for€one€countÐ   ˜ Ðof€sale€of€cocaine,€a€class€B€felony.€€The€Lincoln€County€Circuit€Court€subsequentlyÐ l d Ðsentenced€the€appellant,€as€a€range€II€offender,€to€twenty€years€in€the€TennesseeÐ 80 ÐDepartment€of€Correction.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€the€appellant€raises€theÐ ü  Ðfollowing€issues:Ð ÐÈ  ÐÓÓà8 ` àI.€€Whether€the€prosecutionððs€failure€to€disclose€the€identity€of€allÐ œ”  Ðpersons€present€at€the€time€of€the€alleged€offense€was€error;Ђz ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àII.€€Whether€the€prosecution€violated€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„16„107€&Ð NF Ð39„16„507€(1991)€by€bribery€and€coercion€of€a€Stateððs€witness;Ð4,` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àIII.€€Whether€the€prosecutionððs€failure€to€produce€òòJencksóó€material€andÐ ø Ðthe€trial€courtððs€failure€to€impose€contemporaneous€sanctions€upon€theÐ æÞ ÐState€was€error;ÐÌÄ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àIV.€€Whether€the€appellant€was€denied€a€fair€trial€by€the€prosecutorððsÐ ˜ Ðremarks€during€closing€argument€vouching€for€a€witnessððs€identificationÐ ~v Ðof€the€appellant;Ðd\` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àV.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€aÐ 0 ( Ðlesser€included€offense;€andÐ!` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àVI.€€Whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€as€a€matter€of€law€to€supportÐ â"Ú Ðthe€conviction.ÐÈ#À ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓÌà ` àAfter€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð `'X $ ÐÌÌà@ff)®àò òBackgroundó óˆÐ Ä,¼%* ÐÌà ` àIn€January€1995,€TBI€Agent€Patrick€Howell€was€assigned€to€assist€the€17thÐ \0T). ÐJudicial€District€Drug€Task€Force€in€the€surveillance€and€purchase€of€drugs€inÐ (2 +0 ÐLincoln€County.€€Also€assigned€to€the€Drug€Task€Force€were€Agents€Robert€BriscoÐ ô3ì,2 Ðand€Ray€Brisco€€who€were€employed€as€deputies€with€the€Lincoln€County€SheriffððsÐ  ÐDepartment.€€Agents€Robert€Brisco€and€Ray€Brisco€contacted€Francine€Strong,€whoÐ ÔÌ Ðwas€acting€as€a€confidential€informant€for€the€Drug€Task€Force,€to€arrange€a€largeÐ   ˜ Ðpurchase€of€cocaine€for€an€undercover€agent.€€On€Wednesday,€January€25,€1995,Ð l d ÐFrancine€Strong€succeeded€in€setting€up€a€ð ðdrug€buyðð€at€Sandra€Odenððs€residenceÐ 80 Ðat€the€Oak€€View€Apartments€in€Fayetteville.€€Special€Agent€Howell,€outfitted€with€anÐ ü  Ðaudio€transmitter€and€a€tape€recorder,€met€Strong€and€Oden€at€a€local€convenienceÐ ÐÈ  Ðstore€and€rode€to€the€Oak€View€Apartments€in€Strongððs€vehicle.€€Strong€advisedÐ œ”  ÐAgent€Howell€that€she€and€Oden€had€arranged€for€the€appellant€to€meet€Howell€thatÐ h` Ðevening€for€the€purpose€of€selling€an€eight„ball€(ðBð€ounce)€of€crack€cocaine.€€StrongÐ 4, Ðadded€that€the€appellant€wanted€$175€for€the€drugs.€€Upon€arriving€at€the€apartmentÐ ø Ðcomplex,€Agent€Howell€was€directed€to€Strongððs€apartment;€fifteen€minutes€later,€heÐ ÌÄ Ðwas€instructed€to€go€down€the€stairway€to€Odenððs€apartment.€€Several€other€peopleÐ ˜ Ðwho€were€unknown€to€Agent€Howell€were€also€present€in€the€apartment.€€Agent€RoyÐ d\ ÐBrisco€and€Agent€Robert€Brisco€set€up€surveillance€in€the€parking€lot€outside€theÐ 0 ( Ðapartment.€€€Shortly€thereafter,€Strong€advised€Agent€Howell€that€the€appellant€hadÐ ü!ô Ðpulled€in€the€parking€lot.€€At€that€time,€an€unidentified€black€female,€identified€at€trialÐ È#À  Ðas€Beverly€Brown,€left€the€apartment.€€Several€minutes€later,€the€female€returned€toÐ ”%Œ" Ðthe€apartment€accompanied€by€the€appellant.€€Agent€Robert€Brisco,€who€wasÐ `'X $ Ðoutside€at€the€time,€later€confirmed€that€the€appellant€arrived€in€a€Cadillac€and€that€aÐ ,)$"& Ðblack€female€approached€the€vehicle.€Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌà ` àOnce€in€the€apartment,€the€appellant€gave€the€cocaine€to€Strong.€€AgentÐ .ˆ', ÐHowell€instructed€Strong€ð ðto€let€[him]€examine€it.ðð€€ð ð[He]€looked€at€it.€€Then€[he]€askedÐ \0T). Ð[the€appellant]€what€the€price€was€[€€.€.€.€ð ðif€it€was€$150.ðð]€€[ðð[The€appellant]€€toldÐ (2 +0 Ð[Howell]€that€he€was€incorrect]€.€.€.€the€price€would€be€$175.ðð€€Agent€Howell€thenÐ ô3ì,2 Ðasked€the€appellant€if€he€had€five€dollars€change€and€handed€the€appellant€$180Ð À5¸.4 Ðcash.€€The€appellant€gave€Agent€Howell€five€one€dollar€bills€in€return.€€Within€three€Ð Œ7„06 ÐÐ X9P28 Ðminutes,€the€appellant€left€the€apartment.€€The€entire€transaction€€lasted€about€six€toÐ  Ðeight€minutes.Ð ÔÌ ÐÌà ` àAt€trial,€the€testimony€and€evidence€presented€by€the€State€confirmed€that€theÐ l d Ðsubstance€sold€to€Agent€Howell€for€$175€was€3.1€grams€of€ð ðcocaine€base;ðð€enoughÐ 80 Ðcocaine€for€25€to€50€uses.€€The€jury€was€also€informed€that€Francine€Strong€was€aÐ ü  Ðconfidential€informant€for€the€Lincoln€County€Drug€Task€Force.€€She€testified€thatÐ ÐÈ  Ðshe€agreed€to€ð ðworkðð€for€the€task€force€in€exchange€for€a€suspended€sentenceÐ œ”  Ðarising€from€drug„related€charges€against€her.€€Strong€stated€that€Beverly€Brown,Ð h` Ðwho€was€present€at€the€time€of€the€undercover€transaction€and€was€the€female€whoÐ 4, Ðaccompanied€the€appellant€into€the€apartment,€did€not€know€anything€of€theÐ ø Ðarranged€sale.€€She€added€that€Ms.€Brown€was€a€relative€of€the€appellant.€€InÐ ÌÄ Ðaddition€to€Agents€Howellððs€and€Briscoððs€identifications€of€the€appellant,€Strong€alsoÐ ˜ Ðmade€an€in„court€identification€of€the€appellant.€€Sandra€Oden,€also€a€confidentialÐ d\ Ðinformant,€could€not€make€a€positive€identification€of€the€appellant€as€the€personÐ 0 ( Ðengaged€in€the€drug€transaction€with€Agent€Howell€on€January€25.€€She€explainedÐ ü!ô Ðthat€ð ð[she]€was€really€on€drugs,€and€[she]€just€really€didnððt€care€about€faces.ððÐ È#À  ÐÌà ` àBased€upon€this€information,€the€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€class€BÐ `'X $ Ðsale€of€cocaine.Ð ,)$"& ÐÌÌà@õõ)®àò òI.€€Waiveró óˆÐ .ˆ', ÐÌà ` àThe€appellantððs€issues€I€through€V€are€presented€within€the€context€of€plainÐ (2 +0 Ðerror,€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b),€and,€thus,€are€raised€for€the€first€time€on€appeal.€€TheÐ ô3ì,2 ÐState€argues€that€these€issues€are€waived€as€they€were€not€included€in€theÐ À5¸.4 Ðappellantððs€motion€for€new€trial.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a);€3(e).€€The€general€ruleÐ Œ7„06 Ðis€that€this€court€does€not€consider€issues€that€are€not€raised€in€the€trial€court.€€òòSeeóó€Ð X9P28 ÐòòState€v.€Hoytóó,€928€S.W.2d€935,€946€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€€However,€this€courtÐ  Ðmay€ð ðonly€recognize€errors€pursuant€to€rule€52(b)€that€ððseriously€affect€the€fairness,Ð ÔÌ Ðintegrity€or€public€reputation€of€judicial€proceedingsðð€when€necessary€to€prevent€aÐ   ˜ Ðmiscarriage€of€justice.ðð€€òòState€v.€Adkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€626,€639-40€(Tenn.Crim.App.Ð l d Ð1994)€(footnotes€omitted).€€ð ðThis€rule€should€not€be€invoked€to€recognize€an€errorÐ 80 Ðthat€is€not€plain€or€does€not€affect€a€substantial€right€of€the€accused.ðð€€òòId.óó€€€InÐ ü  Ðdetermining€whether€an€error€constitutes€plain€error,€the€reviewing€court€mustÐ ÐÈ  Ðconsider€the€following€factors:Ð œ”  ÐÓÓ(a)€the€record€must€clearly€establish€what€occurred€in€the€trial€court;€Ð h` Ð(b)€a€clear€and€unequivocal€rule€of€law€must€have€been€breached;€Ð NF Ð(c)€a€substantial€right€of€the€accused€must€have€been€adversely€affected;€Ð 4, Ð(d)€the€accused€did€not€waive€the€issue€for€tactical€reasons;€and€Ð  Ð(e)€consideration€of€the€error€is€ððnecessary€to€do€substantial€justice.Ð ø ÐÌÓý/Ó€òòId.óó€at€€641„642€(footnotes€omitted).€Thus,€our€review€will€be€limited€to€addressÐ ÌÄ Ðalleged€errors€encompassed€within€these€guidelines.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).Ð ˜ ÐÌà@  ®àò òA.€€Failure€to€Disclose€Identity€of€Beverly€Brownó óˆÐ 0 ( Ðà ` àIn€his€first€issue,€the€appellant€contends€that,€despite€his€specific€request€inÐ ü!ô Ðboth€his€Rule€16€motion€for€discovery€and€Rule€7€motion€for€bill€of€particulars,€theÐ È#À  ÐState€failed€to€reveal€the€identity€of€Beverly€Brown€as€a€person€present€at€the€time€ofÐ ”%Œ" Ðthe€alleged€offense.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€contends€that€the€Stateððs€failure€to€do€so€prejudiced€hisÐ `'X $ Ðdefense€in€that€Beverly€Brown€would€have€provided€information€to€exonerate€theÐ ,)$"& Ðappellant.׃F×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌÌÐ \0T). Ðà ` àThere€is€no€general€constitutional€right€to€discovery€in€a€criminal€case,€òòseeóó€Ð  ÐòòPennsylvania€v.€Richieóó,€480€U.S.€39,€107€S.Ct.€989€(1987);€€òòWeatherford€v.€Burseyóó,Ð ÔÌ Ð429€U.S.€545,€97€S.Ct.€837€(1977),€and€the€State€is€not€obliged€to€make€anÐ   ˜ Ðinvestigation€or€to€gather€evidence€for€the€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Reynoldsóó,€671Ð l d ÐS.W.2d€854,€856€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).€€A€distinction€exists€between€a€statutoryÐ 80 Ðright€to€discovery€and€the€constitutional€right€to€the€production€of€exculpatoryÐ ü  Ðevidence.€€òòState€v.€Brownellóó,€696€S.W.2d€362,€363€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985);Ð ÐÈ  ÐòòHamilton€v.€Stateóó,€555€S.W.2d€724,€730€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€€€Unless€theÐ œ”  Ðomission€deprived€the€defendant€of€a€fair€trial€by€failing€to€provide€favorableÐ h` Ðevidence,€there€is€no€constitutional€violation€requiring€that€the€verdict€be€set€aside,Ð 4, Ðand€there€is€no€breach€of€the€prosecutorððs€constitutional€duty€to€disclose.€€òòSeeóó€Ð ø ÐòòKyles€v.€Whitleyóó,€€514€U.S.€419,€115€S.Ct.€1555€(1995).€€The€State€had€threeÐ ÌÄ Ðwitnesses€who€could€positively€identify€the€appellant€as€the€seller.€€òòSeeóó€€òòRoberts€v.Ð ˜ ÐStateóó,€489€S.W.2d€263,€265„66€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1972)€(the€law€does€not€requireÐ d\ Ðthat€the€State€call€any€particular€witness€in€a€criminal€prosecution€or€that€it€use€all€ofÐ 0 ( Ðthe€witnesses€it€might€have€available).€€Prior€to€and€during€the€appellantððs€trial,€thereÐ ü!ô Ðis€no€indication€in€the€record€that€the€identity€of€Ms.€Brown,€who€was€not€called€as€aÐ È#À  Ðwitness€at€trial,€was€potentially€favorable€information€for€the€defense.€€òòSee€generallyóó€Ð ”%Œ" ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Bagleyóó,€473€U.S.€667,€105€S.Ct.€3375€(1985);€òòBrady€v.€Marylandóó,Ð `'X $ Ð373€U.S.€83,€83€S.Ct.€1194€(1963).€€Thus,€we€decline€to€determine€this€issue€underÐ ,)$"& Ðplain€error.€€Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌà@®àò òB.€€Bribery€of€Witness€Francine€Strongó óˆÐ .ˆ', Ðà ` àThe€appellant€next€asserts€that€ð ðthe€State€violated€[Tenn.€Code€Ann.]€ðððð€39„Ð \0T). Ð16„107€[and€39„16„507]€by€offering,€conferring€or€agreeing€to€confer€anything€ofÐ (2 +0 Ðvalue€to€the€witness€[Francine€Strong]€in€exchange€for€the€giving€of€trial€testimony.ðð€€Ð ô3ì,2 ÐThe€only€support€for€his€position€is€an€affidavit€of€Francine€Strong,€signed€two€yearsÐ À5¸.4 Ðafter€the€date€of€the€offense,€recanting€her€testimony€at€trial.€€This€affidavit€wasÐ Œ7„06 Ðentered€in€an€offer€of€proof€at€the€appellantððs€motion€for€new€trial.€€€Ð X9P28 Їà ` àAt€the€appellantððs€trial,€the€jury€was€aware€of€Strongððs€criminal€history€and€herÐ  Ðcooperation€with€the€Drug€Task€Force€in€exchange€for€a€suspended€sentence.€Ð ÔÌ ÐProvided€with€this€knowledge,€it€was€the€juryððs€function€as€the€sole€judges€of€theÐ   ˜ Ðcredibility€to€weigh€any€bias€or€motive€for€her€testimony€and€ascertain€the€truth€of€theÐ l d Ðinformant's€account€in€light€of€all€the€circumstances.€€Her€subsequent€affidavit€doesÐ 80 Ðnot€offer€anything€more€than€what€was€before€the€jury€at€the€time€of€the€trialÐ ü  Ðregarding€the€motivation€for€Strongððs€testimony.€Thus,€the€issue€is€one€of€StrongððsÐ ÐÈ  Ðcredibility€and€does€not€affect€a€substantial€right€of€the€appellant.€€This€issue€isÐ œ”  Ðwaived.Ð h` ÐÌà@»»®àò òC.€€Failure€to€Provide€Jencks€Materialó óˆÐ ø Ðà ` àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€Stateððs€failure€to€provide€him€withÐ ÌÄ ÐòòJencksóó€material€and€the€trial€courtððs€inaction€thereupon€denied€him€a€fair€trial.€€WeÐ ˜ Ðreject€review€of€this€issue€as€plain€error.€€€Because€the€original€òòJencksóó€opinion€wasÐ d\ Ðfounded€on€the€United€States€Supreme€Court's€supervisory€powers,€and€not€onÐ 0 ( Ðconstitutional€grounds,€a€denial€of€that€right€does€not,€òòper€seóó,€result€in€constitutionalÐ ü!ô Ðerror.€€òòSeeóó€€òòJencks€v.€United€Statesóó,€353€U.S.€657,€77€S.Ct.€1007€(1957);€€òòPalermoÐ È#À  Ðv.€United€Statesóó,€360€U.S.€343,€345,€362,€79€S.Ct.€1217,€1221,€1229-30€(1959).€Ð ”%Œ" ÐThus,€this€issue€is€also€waived.€€Ð `'X $ ÐÌà@I I ®àò òD.€€Prosecutorial€Misconduct€in€Closing€StatementˆÐ ø*ð#( Ðó óÔ‡ XH£XXXÔà ` àThe€appellant€asserts€that€the€prosecutor,€during€closing€argument,Ð Ä,¼%* Ðimproperly€vouched€for€a€Stateððs€witnessððs€identification€of€the€appellant,€effectively,Ð .ˆ', Ðdenying€him€due€process€rights€under€Article€1,€Section€8€and€Article€1,€Section€16Ð \0T). Ðof€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€He€complains€that€this€reference€inserted€theÐ (2 +0 Ðprosecutorððs€personal€knowledge€into€the€trial,€thus€undermining€confidence€in€theÐ ô3ì,2 Ðverdict.€€The€comment€complained€of€provides:Ð À5¸.4 ÐÓÓà8 ` àAnd€I€know€that€Brisco€had€seen€him€any€number€of€times,€and€heÐ Œ7„06 Ðidentified€him€as€having€seen€him€that€night€and€had€seen€him€the€dayÐ r8j17 Ðbefore.€€This€is€not,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€a€case€of€mistaken€identity.€ÐX9P28` ü!` ü! ÐÐ >:639 ÐÓÓÌà ` àAs€argued€by€the€State,€the€appellant€has€waived€review€of€this€issue€byÐ ÔÌ Ðfailing€to€raise€an€objection€during€closing€argument.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a).€Ð   ˜ ÐNotwithstanding€waiver€of€this€issue,€we€acknowledge€that€our€supreme€court€hasÐ l d Ðrecognized€that€closing€argument€is€a€valuable€privilege€for€both€the€State€and€theÐ 80 Ðdefense€and€that€counsel€is€afforded€wide€latitude€in€presenting€final€argument€toÐ ü  Ðthe€jury.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cribbsóó,€967€S.W.2d€773,€783€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„,Ð ÐÈ  Ð119€S.Ct.€343€(1998);€òòState€v.€Coneóó,€665€S.W.2d€87,€94€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€467Ð œ”  ÐU.S.€1210,€104€S.Ct.€2400€(1984).€€In€order€for€a€defendant€to€be€granted€a€new€trialÐ h` Ðon€the€basis€of€improper€closing€argument,€he€must€show€that€the€argument€was€soÐ 4, Ðinflammatory€or€the€conduct€so€improper€that€it€affected€the€verdict€to€his€detriment.€Ð ø ÐòòSeeóó€òòHarrington€v.€Stateóó,€385€S.W.2d€758,€759€(1965).€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€€òòJudge€v.€Stateóó,Ð ÌÄ Ð539€S.W.2d€340,€344€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1976)€(factors€considered€in€assessingÐ ˜ Ðwhether€comments€affected€verdict).Ð d\ ЀÌà ` àFrom€our€review€of€the€record,€it€is€clear€that€the€prosecutor€was€not€insertingÐ ü!ô Ðany€personal€accreditation€to€the€witnessððs€identification.€€The€comment€by€theÐ È#À  Ðprosecutor€merely€reiterated€the€witnessððs€testimony€that€he€had€seen€the€appellantÐ ”%Œ" Ðthe€night€of€the€offense€and€the€day€before,òò€i.e.óó,€a€number€of€times.€€Thus,€weÐ `'X $ Ðconclude€that€the€prosecutorððs€comment€does€not€serve€as€a€basis€for€a€new€trial.€Ð ,)$"& ÐThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€Ô#†XH£XX XH£ÊH#ÔÐ ø*ð#( ÐÌà@BB®àò òE.€€Failure€to€Instruct€on€Lesser€Offenseó óˆÐ .ˆ', Ðà ` àà ¸ àNext,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€courtððs€failure€to€instruct€theÐ \0T). Ðjury€on€the€lesser€offense€of€casual€exchange€denied€him€his€constitutional€right€toÐ (2 +0 Ðtrial€by€jury.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Phippsóó,€883€S.W.2d€138,€142€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);Ð ô3ì,2 ÐòòState€v.€Wrightóó,€618€S.W.2d€310,€315€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€A€trial€court€mustÐ À5¸.4 Ðfully€instruct€the€jury€on€the€general€principles€of€law€relevant€to€the€issues€raised€byÐ Œ7„06 Ðthe€evidence,€including€instructions€on€lesser€offenses€included€in€the€indictment.€Ð X9P28 ÐòòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-18-110(a)(1990).€€This€obligation€includes€givingÐ  Ðinstructions€on€lesser€offenses€included€in€the€indictment,€without€any€request€on€theÐ ÔÌ Ðpart€of€the€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-18-110(a).€€However,€there€is€noÐ   ˜ Ðconstitutional€right€to€a€jury€instruction€on€a€lesser€offense€in€every€case.€€òòSeeóóÐ l d ÐòòKeeble€v.€United€Statesóó,€412€U.S.€205,€208,€93€S.Ct.€1993,€1995€(1973).€€€Thus,Ð 80 Ðwhere€there€is€no€proof€in€the€record€to€support€the€instruction,€no€jury€instruction€onÐ ü  Ðthe€lesser€offense€need€be€submitted.€€òòState€v.€Elderóó,€982€S.W.2d€871,€877€(Tenn.Ð ÐÈ  ÐCrim.€App.€1998)€(citing€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€305,€311€(Tenn.€1991)).€Ð œ”  ÐÌà ` àIt€may€be€inferred€from€the€amount€of€a€controlled€substance€possessed€byÐ 4, Ðan€offender,€along€with€other€relevant€facts€surrounding€the€arrest,€that€theÐ ø Ðcontrolled€substance€was€possessed€for€the€purpose€of€selling.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ÌÄ Ð39„17„419€(1991).€€It€may€likewise€be€inferred€from€circumstances€indicating€anÐ ˜ Ðexchange€of€a€small€amount€of€a€controlled€substance€that€the€controlled€substanceÐ d\ Ðexchanged€was€not€possessed€for€the€purpose€of€selling.€€òòId.óó€€€€Indeed,€a€casualÐ 0 ( Ðexchange€is€one€that€occurs€without€design;€it€contemplates€a€spontaneous€passingÐ ü!ô Ðof€a€small€amount€of€drugs,€for€instance,€at€a€party.€€òòSeeóó€€òòLoveday€v.€Stateóó,€547Ð È#À  ÐS.W.2d€822€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1976).€€In€the€present€case,€Agent€Howell€purchasedÐ ”%Œ" Ð$175€worth€of€cocaine€as€part€of€an€undercover€drug€transaction€set€up€by€aÐ `'X $ Ðconfidential€informant.€The€evidence€is€overwhelming€that€the€transaction€in€theÐ ,)$"& Ðpresent€case€was€a€designed€sale.€€There€is€no€evidence€of€a€casual€exchange.€Ð ø*ð#( ÐUnder€similar€circumstances,€this€court€has€previously€refused€to€require€that€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðjury€be€instructed€as€to€simple€possession€as€a€lesser€included€offense.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€Ð .ˆ', ÐòòState€v.€George€Roseóó,€No.€02C01„9710„CR„00405€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,Ð \0T). ÐJul.€2,€1998),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€Jan.€11,€1999);€€òòState€v.€DavidÐ (2 +0 ÐHumphreyóó,€No.€01C01„9404„CR„00134€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Feb.€8,Ð ô3ì,2 Ð1995);€€€òòState€v.€William€Howard€Hortonóó,€No.€01C01„9312„CR„00435€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð À5¸.4 ÐApp.€at€Nashville,€Oct.€6,€1994),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995);€òòState€v.€JayÐ Œ7„06 ÐF.€Salts€IIIóó,€No.€01C01„9306„CC„00181€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Mar.€29,Ð X9P28 Ð1994).€€The€trial€court€was€not€required€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€lesser€offense.€Ð  ÐThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ÔÌ ÐÌÌà@  ®àò òII.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óˆÐ 80 ÐÌà ` àIn€his€final€issue,€the€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidenceÐ ÐÈ  Ðsupporting€his€conviction.€€Specifically,€he€contends€that€(1)€Agent€HowellððsÐ œ”  Ðtestimony€regarding€the€ð ðgeneral€practiceðð€and€procedures€of€the€TBI€were€notÐ h` Ðfollowed€because€Howell€failed€to€make€several€purchases€from€the€target€in€orderÐ 4, Ðto€properly€identify€the€supplier;€€(2)€the€State€failed€to€show€that€Agent€Howell€wasÐ ø Ðissued€$180€dollars€to€make€the€alleged€purchase;€(3)€the€State€failed€to€prove€thatÐ ÌÄ Ðthe€appellant€received€any€money€from€Agent€Howell;€(4)€the€State€failed€to€showÐ ˜ Ðthat€any€exchange€of€money€for€drugs€occurred€between€the€appellant€and€any€ofÐ d\ Ðthe€prosecution€witnesses;€(5)€confidential€informant€Francine€Strong€€gave€falseÐ 0 ( Ðtestimony€at€trial;€€and€(6)€conflicts€existed€in€the€testimony€of€Stateððs€witnesses.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ü!ô ÐÌà ` àOnce€the€accused€is€convicted€of€an€offense,€the€presumption€of€innocenceÐ ”%Œ" Ðonce€attached€to€him€is€replaced€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal€he€has€theÐ `'X $ Ðburden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639Ð ,)$"& ÐS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€On€appeal,€this€court€neither€reweighs€norÐ ø*ð#( Ðreevaluates€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€Ð Ä,¼%* ÐFurthermore,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidenceÐ .ˆ', Ðand€all€reasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.Ð \0T). ÐHarrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€If€the€evidence,€viewed€under€theseÐ (2 +0 Ðstandards,€is€sufficient€for€any€rational€trier€of€fact€to€have€found€the€essentialÐ ô3ì,2 Ðelements€of€the€offenses€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€then€this€court€must€affirm€theÐ À5¸.4 Ðconviction.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€317,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979);€Ð  ÐòòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).Ð ÔÌ ÐÌà ` àThe€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€sale€of€cocaine€over€one-half€gram€inÐ l d Ðviolation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-17-417(a)(3),€(c)(1)€(1995€Supp.).€€In€order€toÐ 80 Ðconvict€under€this€statute,€the€State€must€prove€that€the€accused€knowingly€sold€aÐ ü  Ðcontrolled€substance,€cocaine,€in€an€amount€equal€to€or€greater€than€one-half€gram.€Ð ÐÈ  ÐòòId.óó€The€substance€and€quantity€of€the€sale€are€not€disputed.€€Moreover,€AgentsÐ œ”  ÐHowell€and€Brisco€and€confidential€informant€Francine€Strong€positively€identifiedÐ h` Ðthe€appellant€as€being€the€person€who€sold€an€ð ðeight€ballðð€of€cocaine€to€AgentÐ 4, ÐHowell€on€January€25,€1995.€€Questions€involving€the€credibility€of€eyewitnessÐ ø Ðtestimony€identifying€the€accused€as€the€perpetrator€of€the€indicted€offense€are€forÐ ÌÄ Ðthe€jury's€determination€and€not€this€court's.€€òòState€v.€Stricklandóó,€885€S.W.2d€85,€87Ð ˜ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(citing€òòState€v.€Crawfordóó,€635€S.W.2d€704,€705€(Tenn.Ð d\ ÐCrim.€App.€1982));€€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€623€S.W.2d€118,€120€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð 0 ( ÐApp.€1981).€€Accordingly,€the€appellant€has€failed€to€show€that€the€evidence€at€trialÐ ü!ô Ðis€insufficient€for€any€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€the€essential€elements€of€thisÐ È#À  Ðoffense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€This€issue€is€withoutÐ ”%Œ" Ðmerit.Ð `'X $ ÐÌÌà@)®àò òConclusionó óˆÐ Ä,¼%* ÐÌà ` àBased€upon€our€review€of€the€record€and€the€applicable€law,€we€affirm€theÐ \0T). Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð (2 +0 ÐÌÌÐ  Œ7„06 ÐÌÓÓÌÌÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ð R J Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÐ 80 ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:Ð ÐÈ  ÐÌÌÌÌ___________________________________Ð NF ÐJOE€G.€RILEY,€JudgeÐ 4, ÐÌÌÌ___________________________________Ð ÌÄ ÐL.€T.€LAFFERTY,€Senior€Judge