ÿWPCí "U:ì %& 0Ü,w@4H\k 0 s 0D“ 0J× 0T! 0^u 0hÓ 0r; 0|­ 0†) 0¯ 1u? 0d´ U* «B ’í Bv~œvÓ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ »U¼Qe½¾¿DÀÁÂEÃÄDÍD0"(Ô3|xÄ(Ð(3^˜$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€,÷XXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial ¡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€sole€defense€theory€at€trial€was€that€the€homicide€was€of€a€lesser€grade€than€firstÏdegree€murder.Ì ˆÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóòòSandstrom€v.€Montanaóó,€442€U.S.510,€99€S.Ct.€2450,€61€L.Ed.2d€39€(1979).Ì dPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ý›ò òÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ àJANUARY€SESSION,€1997Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02C01„9602„CR„00058Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àSHELBY€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€ò òARTHUR€T.€BENNETTó ó,€JudgeÌò òSTEVEN€B.€BUGGSó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Murder€in€the€PerpetrationÌà àAppellantà àà àà à)à àof€a€Robbery)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌò òA.€C.€WHARTON,€JR.ó óà àà àà àò òCHARLES€W.€BURSONó óÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌà àÌò òW.€MARK€WARDó óà àà àà àà àò òSARAH€M.€BRANCHó óÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€General€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï147€Jefferson,€Ste.€900à àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌMemphis,€TN€€38103à 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€GIBBONSó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òTHOMAS€HENDERSONó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à201€Poplar€Avenue,€Third€FloorÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Steven€B.€Buggs,€appeals€the€verdict€of€a€Shelby€CountyÏjury€finding€him€guilty€of€the€offense€of€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€a€robbery.€ÏHe€was€sentenced€to€a€term€of€life€imprisonment.€€The€sole€issue€presented€on€Ïappeal€is€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€sustain€his€conviction.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌÌà@ àò òI.€€Backgroundó óÌÌà àOn€June€30,€1994,€a€Shelby€County€Grand€Jury€returned€a€two€countÏindictment€charging€the€appellant€with€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€robberyÏand,€in€the€alternative,€premeditated€first€degree€murder.€€On€May€15,€1995,€theÏappellant's€case€proceeded€to€trial,€during€which€the€following€facts€wereÏdeveloped.ÌÌà àIn€June,€1994,€Karen€Beasley,€a€twenty„six€year€old€mother€of€threeÏchildren,€was€employed€as€a€certified€nursing€assistant€at€the€Overton€ParkÏHealth€Care€Center,€a€nursing€home.€€Through€her€employment,€she€met€andÏbegan€dating€the€appellant,€also€a€certified€nursing€assistant€at€the€nursingÍhome.€€Approximately€three€weeks€following€the€commencement€of€theirÏrelationship,€the€appellant,€who€was€married€at€the€time,€moved€in€with€Ms.ÏBeasley.€€The€two€shared€a€duplex€located€at€2425€Shasta€Street€in€Memphis.ÌÌÌà àOn€June€21,€the€appellant€and€Ms.€Beasley€received€their€paychecksÏfrom€the€nursing€home.€€The€appellant€testified€that€his€paycheck€was€in€theÏamount€of€$500.00€and€Ms.€Beasley's€paycheck€was€in€the€amount€of€$270.00.€ÏAt€the€end€of€their€respective€œshifts,›€at€approximately€3:00€p.m.,€the€coupleÏ"cashed"€their€paychecks,€paid€Ms.€Beasley's€car€note,€and€visited€with€Ms.ÏBeasley's€children€who€were€staying€at€her€mother's€house.€€The€couple€thenÏreturned€to€the€duplex€on€Shasta€Street.€€The€remaining€cash€money€from€theirÏpaychecks€was€placed€in€a€dresser€in€the€partiesðð€bedroom.€€ÌÌà àShortly€after€arriving€home,€Ms.€Beasley€left€the€residence€in€her€car,€aÏ1986€blue€Dodge€Lancer.€€While€she€was€gone,€the€appellant€smokedÏmarijuana,€drank€beer,€and€purchased€a€$25€rock€of€crack€cocaine,€which€heÏalso€smoked.€€When€Ms.€Beasley€returned,€the€appellant€left,€in€Beasley'sÏvehicle,€to€purchase€some€chicken€from€a€nearby€Kentucky€Fried€ChickenÏrestaurant.€€However,€rather€than€purchasing€the€chicken€as€planned,€theÏappellant€proceeded€to€a€"drug€area"€where€he€"picked€up€a€prostitute"€andÏsmoked€$100€worth€of€crack€cocaine.€€When€he€had€exhausted€this€supply,€heÍattempted€to€make€another€purchase.€€However,€the€"dope€man"€had€"run€out€ofÏcrack€rock,"€but€sold€him€"something€that€looked€like€crack€rock."€€The€appellantÏexplained€that€he€later€discovered€that€this€substance€was€"ice."€€He€related€thatÏ"the€'ice'€got€[him]€higher€than€crack,"€tunneling€his€vision€and€"stopp[ing]€up"€hisÏhearing.ÌÌà àIntoxicated€from€his€abuse€of€crack€cocaine€and€"ice,"€the€appellantÏreturned€to€the€duplex€between€11:30€p.m.€and€12:00€midnight€in€order€to€obtainÏmore€money€to€buy€more€crack€cocaine.€€The€appellant€testified€that,€uponÏentering€the€duplex,€he€was€confronted€by€an€upset€Beasley.€€In€his€statement€toÏthe€police,€which€was€read€to€the€jury,€he€stated,€ð ðKaren€was€mad€.€.€.€.€€KarenÏwas€talking€but€[I]€couldnððt€hear€her€.€.€.€.ðð€€Unable€to€hear€her,€he€contends€thatÏhe€"snapped."€€He€went€into€the€kitchen€and€obtained€a€large€knife.€€TheÏappellant€then€returned€to€the€living€room€where€he€began€stabbing€Beasley.€ÏAfter€stabbing€her€repeatedly,€he€went€into€the€bedroom,€where€he€took€theÏcash€remaining€from€their€payroll€checks.€€He€then€left,€in€Beasley's€car,€andÏreturned€to€the€"drug€area,"€where€he€smoked€crack€cocaine€with€a€prostitute€forÏthe€remainder€of€the€night.€€ÌÌà àThe€next€morning,€June€22,€the€appellant€returned€to€the€duplex.€€SeeingÏBeasley€on€the€floor,€he€pulled€her€body€into€the€hallway,€where€the€body€wouldÏbe€less€visible€from€the€windows.€€The€appellant€then€gathered€his€clothesÍalong€with€two€televisions,€a€hair€dryer,€and€a€lamp,€all€belonging€to€Beasley.€ÏLater€that€œafternoon,›€at€around€1:40€p.m.,€he€pawned€the€two€televisions€atÏAmerican€Loan,€in€Memphis.€€The€following€day,€June€23,€he€pawned€the€hairÏdryer€and€the€lamp€at€Cash€American€Pawn,€also€in€Memphis.€€The€appellantÏreceived€a€total€amount€of€œ$125›€in€exchange€for€the€items.€€With€this€money,€heÏagain€purchased€and€smoked€crack€cocaine.€€Then,€realizing€that€he€needed€toÏleave€Memphis,€he€took€the€victimððs€Dodge€vehicle€and€first€traveled€to€Victoria,ÏMississippi.€€However,€because€this€location€was€too€close€to€Memphis,€he€laterÏdrove€to€Milwaukee,€Wisconsin,€where€he€stayed€with€relatives.€€Several€daysÏlater,€the€appellant€was€arrested€at€his€auntððs€house€in€Milwaukee.ÌÌà àDr.€Jerry€Francisco,€county€medical€examiner€for€Shelby€County,Ïperformed€the€autopsy€of€Karen€Beasley.€€At€trial,€his€findings€revealed€that€Ms.ÏBeasley€had€received€multiple€stab€wounds€to€her€chest€and€back,€whichÏresulted€in€her€death.€€Additionally,€Ms.€Beasley€had€suffered€cuts€to€both€kneesÏand€hands,€which€appeared€to€be€defensive€wounds.ÌÌà àDr.€Wyatt€Nichols,€a€clinical€psychologist€with€the€Mid„town€Mental€HealthÏCenter,€completed€two€evaluations€of€the€œappellant,›€on€November€23,€1994,Ïand€May€10,€1995.€€Although€he€determined€that€the€appellant€was€both€saneÏand€competent€to€stand€trial,€he€stated€that€"due€to€[the€appellant's]€intoxicationÏ[at€the€time€of€the€crime],€his€judgment€was€impaired,€his€ability€to€understandÍthe€consequences€of€what€he€was€doing€was€impaired,€and€that€he's€more€likelyÏto€be€impulsive,€he's€more€likely€to€act€out€feelings€that€he€might€have€.€.€.€."ÌÌà àBased€upon€this€evidence,€the€jury€returned€a€verdict€finding€theÏappellant€guilty€of€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€robbery.ÌÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óÌÌà àIn€his€only€issue,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€against€him€isÏinsufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€to€justify€a€rational€trier€of€fact€finding€him€guilty€ofÏmurder€in€the€perpetration€of€a€robbery.€€Specifically,€he€contends€that€the€proofÏfails€to€establish€that€the€appellantððs€intent€to€rob€the€victim€was€formed€prior€toÏher€death.€€In€sum,€it€is€the€appellantððs€position€that€the€killing,€which€he€doesÏnot€dispute,€was€collateral€to,€rather€than€ð ðin€the€perpetration€of,ðð€the€murder.× ƒ ××  ×€ÏThe€State€argues€that€the€appellantððs€theft€of€the€victim's€money€immediatelyÏafter€the€murder€raises€a€"strong€presumption"€that€he€had€the€intent€to€commit€aÏfelony€at€the€time€of€her€murder,€and,€thus,€the€evidence€sufficiently€supports€theÏconviction.€€òòMullendore€v.€Stateóó,€191€S.W.2d€149,€152€(Tenn.€1945).ÌÌà àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€verdict€based€upon€the€sufficiency€of€theÏevidence,€this€court€must€review€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÏprosecution€and€determine€whether€"any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€foundÏthe€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòJackson€v.ÏVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979);€òòState€v.€€Cazesóó,€875ÏS.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€We€do€not€reweigh€orÏreevaluate€the€evidence;€these€are€issues€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.ÏCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Furthermore,€a€guilty€verdictÏaccredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State,€and€a€presumption€of€guiltÏreplaces€the€presumption€of€innocence.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476Ï(Tenn.€1973).€€€Guilt€may€be€predicated€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantialÏevidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.ÏCareyóó,€914€S.W.2d€93,€95€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Moreover,€the€appellantÏbears€the€burden€of€proving€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€juryÏverdict€in€his€case.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àThe€appellant€was€convicted€of€felony€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€aÏrobbery.€€Felony€murder€is€defined€as€"[a]€reckless€killing€of€another€committedÏin€òòthe€perpetration€of€or€attempt€to€perpetrateóó€any€.€.€.€robbery€.€.€.€."€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)€(1993€Supp.).€(emphasis€added).€€Our€courts€have€heldÏthat,€in€order€to€fall€within€the€provisions€of€the€felony€murder€statute,€theÏhomicide€must€have€been€committed€"in€pursuance€of€the€unlawful€act,€and€notÍcollateral€to€it."€€òòState€v.€Farmeróó,€296€S.W.2d€879,€883€(Tenn.€1956).€€"The€killingÏmust€have€had€an€intimate€relation€and€close€connection€with€the€felony€and€notÏbe€separate,€distinct,€and€independent€from€it."€€òòIdóó.€(citing€òòWharton€on€Homicideóó,Ïðð€126).€€In€other€words,€the€felony€murder€statute€applies€when€the€underlyingÏfelony€and€the€homicide€were€parts€of€one€continuous€transaction,€and€wereÏclosely€connected€in€point€of€time,€place,€and€causal€relation.€€òòIdóó.€€Accordingly,Ïthe€killing€may€precede,€coincide€with,€or€follow€the€felony,€and€still€be€done€inÏthe€perpetration€or€commission€of€the€felony.€€€40€C.J.S.€òòHomicideóó€ðð53€(1991);Ïòòsee€alsoóó€òòWayne€R.€LaFave€et€al.,€Criminal€Law€óóðð71,€at€555€(1972).€€However,Ïmere€coincidence€in€time€is€insufficient;€the€killing€must€take€place€during€theÏfacilitation€of€the€felony,€and€the€felony€or€attempt€thereof€must€be€the€cause€ofÏthe€victim's€death.€€40€C.J.S.€òòHomicideóó€ðð€53.Ìà àÌÌÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€victim's€death€wasÏcollateral€to€the€robbery€because€he€did€not€intend€to€rob€her€at€the€time€of€theÏkilling.€€Robbery€is€the€"intentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€the€personÏof€another€by€violence€or€putting€the€person€in€fear."€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„401€(1991).€€Moreover,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€held:ÌÓÓà8 à[E]vidence€that€a€person€took€the€property€of€another€after€killingÍhim,€and€appropriated€it€to€his€own€use,€is€sufficient€to€sustain€aÏconviction€of€murder€in€an€attempt€to€commit€a€robbery,€though€noÏprevious€purpose€to€rob€appears,€since€his€act€raises€a€strongÏpresumption€that€he€intended€to€do€what€he€afterwards€voluntarilyÏdid.ÌÌÓÓòòMullendoreóó,€191€S.W.2d€at€152€(quoting€òòWharton€on€Homicideóó,€3d.€Ed.,€188).ÌÌà àAlthough,€there€is€no€longer€a€presumption€of€intent,× ƒ ××  ×€the€question€ofÏwhether€the€appellant€formed€an€intent€to€rob€before€the€victim€was€killed€orÏafter€her€death€occurred,€is€a€question€of€fact€for€the€jury.€€Because€intent€is€aÏstate€of€mind,€it€is€not€commonly€proven€by€direct€evidence,€but€may€be€inferredÏfrom€the€character€of€the€appellantððs€acts€and€the€circumstances€surroundingÏthe€commission€of€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€59€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1993).ÌÌà à€The€facts€presented€at€trial€reveal€that€the€appellant€returned€to€theÏduplex€he€shared€with€the€victim€in€order€to€obtain€additional€money€for€drugs.€ÏHe€was€confronted€by€the€victim,€who€was€angry.€€He€went€to€the€kitchen€for€aÏknife,€returned€to€the€living€room,€and€repeatedly€stabbed€the€victim€to€death.€ÏImmediately€after€the€murder,€the€appellant€went€to€the€bedroom€and€removedÏmoney,€belonging€to€both€him€and€the€victim,€from€the€bedroom€dresser.€€HeÏthen€left€the€duplex€and€returned€to€the€"drug€area"€in€the€victim's€vehicle.€€TheÍnext€day,€the€appellant€returned€to€the€duplex,€concealed€the€victim's€body,€andÏtook€numerous€additional€items€belonging€to€the€victim,€which€he€later€pawnedÏfor€money.ÌÌÌà àFrom€this€evidence,€we€conclude€that€the€robbery€and€the€homicide€wereÏparts€of€one€continuous€criminal€transaction,€and€were€closely€connected€inÏpoint€of€time,€place,€and€causal€relation.€€This€inference€is€supported€by€theÏappellantððs€exercise,€immediately€after€the€killing,€of€control€over€the€property€ofÏthe€victim.€€òòMullendoreóó,€191€S.W.2d€at€152.€€Accordingly,€we€find€that€there€isÏconsiderable€circumstantial€evidence€from€which€a€jury€could€rationally€inferÏthat€the€murder€of€the€victim€was€committed€in€the€perpetration€of€robbery.€€òòSee.Ïe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Rushingóó,€No.€01C01„9501„CR„00020€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville,€Feb.€13,€1996),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€July€22,€1996);€òòStateÏv.€Hugh€Williamsóó,€No.€02C01„9209„CR„00020€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,ÏOct.€12,€1994).ÌÌà àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€the€judgment€of€conviction€is€affirmed.ÌÌÌÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌœJOE€B.€JONES,€Presiding›€JudgeÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌ