ÿWPC’  ±xëþ‚™vw±L¼ñ³ì›q µäÖFÂe²š¨<Ýš uŠ3¨fßš(îÖ–lµß^—Î2˜uè5DŽ,®¿×sy«w÷‹ö*ÝèžE×*ÈX­I¶T#­ïˆñaVr=ò‘;lÕE½j0O墩o³Ú¼·3ýo’PM ÙÆTÝ+¨Î T*¼ GÀœlÊý=ûbS[Òbñ 'Ð)|qfÔu¬§R¼¤h¶—”ªôzUn^´ÂzÅœŠžÅ8 »hÞÊ ZEB}"Øk}5Î?äœZÍW?~fA3–ÞiY£jR |rdqâCúÌáWíÁ£ºg̾¥Tn;~[4q^+a æ¹›%TQOª¬·Ìdkˆ‘S*ÅÔvtÌÏˆé ¼G[a)¿’õ8¥`¾cËWÎÝ ²T3îÊo &_:·s³KtO{7¼ç¡ågEÜïø.íõ]ÄÆòJ5¢´‹ŒH)š,-ù¡Ý´ñ`ƒ§Xñw.ۃ˄g"veåMv?…SÙH3äÉ?Ì_¡eDcc/ôå ßê÷§YÜ+²Aù,|•âM­½7oÌü ºzC®b1M!2±o É\q¬poØ8)7‡|Jåç,# hUNs %Á 0(Çw@ï4/CU:RŒ”œ"¤ 0lÆ 0D2 U:v )° D3Ù U: 0DF BŠ Š Š Š AQ§ Æø 0D¾ 0D D/F Bu ˜HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,ð,,,,,ð0nLÜÏ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡  D D  D D     Ó€V&x3|x , øð AZ‹"Arial Regular Ò°ÒÝ ƒ þÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ¸ àÔ€X#XXXÔAt€times,€the€evidence€may€be€admitted€to€demonstrate€either€theÐ ° Ðdefendantððs€or€the€victimððs€state€of€mind,€to€impeach€or€rebut€the€stateððs€evidenceÏthat€the€deceased€had€a€peaceful€character,€or€so€that€the€jury€can€determineÏwho€was€the€true€aggressor.€€òòState€v.€Furloughóó,€797€S.W.2d€631,€648„49€(Tenn.Ð €Ð ÐCrim.€App.€1990)€(citations€to€other€cases€omitted).((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ(¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XE’XXXÔÔ€ê.XXE’ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XE’Xê.ÔÐ  ÐÌò òFebruary€25,€1999Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô%ÄôXXE’ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó""""'ÿÿdxd,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d'(!)*Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó++'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ ñ›ñ ñÒ°ÒÓÓÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€XE’XXXÔÑ7€6uXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  Ññ ñßr€&<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrß›ñ ñà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à€€€€€€ò òÐ ° ÐÓ  ÓòŒòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌAT€KNOXVILLEóŒóÌNOVEMBER€1998€SESSIONÌÌÓ  ÓòŒòÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,óŒóà h àà À àà  à)Ð Ü ,  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àAppellee,à h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9803„CR„00110Ð ´  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€Knox€CountyÐ ŒÜ  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)ÌòŒòWILLIAM€BRIAN€BELSER,óŒóà À àà  à)€€€€€€Honorable€Ray€L.€Jenkins,€JudgeÐ d´ ÐòŒòà ` àà ¸ àóŒóà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€(Second€Degree€Murder)Ð <Œ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)ÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€FOR€THE€APPELLEE:Ð P ÐÌó óTOM€SLAUGHTERà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€JOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ Ø( ÐAttorney€At€Lawà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€Attorney€General€&€Reporterò òÐ ¾ Ðó ó602€S.€Gay€Street,€Suite€600Ð ¤ô ÐKnoxville,€TN€37902à h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€R.€STEPHEN€JOBEÐ ŠÚ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€Assistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€2d€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€Nashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€RANDALL€E.€NICHOLSÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€City„County€BuildingÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€Knoxville,€TN€37902ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ROBERT€JOLLEYÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€Asst.€Dist.€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€City„County€BuildingÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€€Knoxville,€TN€37902à x àò òÐ )n$( ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€_____________ÌÌòŒòAFFIRMEDÌÌÌóŒóJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓÐ ˆ;Ø6<S ÐÓ  ÓOPINIONó óÐ ° ÐÌÌÓ  Óà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant,€William€Brian€Belser,€was€convicted€by€a€Knox€CountyÏCriminal€Court€jury€of€the€second„degree€murder€of€Brian€Shaver,€and€the€trial€courtÏsentenced€the€defendant€as€a€Range€I€offender€to€serve€25€years€in€the€DepartmentÏof€Correction.€The€sentence€runs€consecutively€to€a€federal€sentence€the€defendantÏwas€serving€at€the€time€of€his€Knox€County€conviction.€In€this€direct€appeal,€theÏdefendant€raises€the€following€issues:Ìà ` àà ¸ à1.€€Failure€of€the€trial€court€to€grant€a€continuance€when€the€à Ð àÐ è8 Ðà ` àdefendant€was€belatedly€transported€to€Knox€County€from€federal€à Ð àÐ ´ Ðà ` àcustody€in€Atlanta;Ìà ` àà ¸ à2.€€The€insufficiency€of€the€evidence€to€support€a€second„degree€¼à ` àmurder€conviction;Ìà ` àà ¸ à3.€€Failure€of€the€trial€court€to€allow€defense€counsel€to€cross„¼à ` àexamine€a€state€witness€about€the€victimððs€violent€disposition;€andÌà ` àà ¸ à4.€€Imposing€the€sentence€to€run€consecutively€to€the€federal€¼à ` àsentence€the€defendant€was€serving€at€the€time€of€trial.€€ÌAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€the€briefs,€and€the€applicable€law,€we€affirm€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€conviction€from€which€the€defendant€now€appeals€is€theÏdefendantððs€œsecond›€conviction€for€the€homicide€of€Brian€Shaver.€€This€courtÏoverturned€the€first€conviction€of€second„degree€murder€because€the€trial€courtÏfailed€to€instruct€the€jury€as€to€the€lesser€included€offense€of€voluntaryÏmanslaughter.€€òòState€v.€Belseróó,€945€S.W.2d€776€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€TheÐ ¨1ø,2 Ðpresent€conviction€resulted€from€the€retrial€upon€remand€from€this€court.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àOn€March€29,€1993,€the€victim€Brian€Shaver€and€four€other€youngÏadults€lived€in€a€Knox€County€townhouse.€€Angie€Barbeau,€who€was€working€at€theÐ Ø8(4: Ðtime€as€a€ð ðstripper,ðð€€was€one€of€these€residents€and€ñêñœñêñhad€beenñêñ›ñêñ€the€victimððs€girlfriend.ÏñêñœñêñOnñêñ›ñêñ€the€evening€of€March€29€the€victim€spoke€by€telephone€from€the€townhouse€withÏMs.€Barbeau€and€with€members€of€her€family.€œñìñPersonsñìññíñ€Accñíññîññíñprdomñíññîññðññïñpñïññðññññording€to€personsñññ›€who€wereÏpresent€in€the€townhouse€that€œeveningñòñ,€ñòññóñ›€testified›€that›€ñóñthe›€victim€became€upset€and€angry€becauseÏhe€thought€€Ms.€Barbeauððs€family€had€been€abusive€ñêñœñêñtoñêñ›ñêñ€him€over€the€telephone€andÏbecause€he€believed€that€the€ñêñœñêñdefendantñêñ›ñêñ€had€bought€a€car€for€Angie€Barbeau.€€ÏñêñœñêñDuring€their€telephone€conversation,€theñêñ›ñêñ€victim€and€Ms.€Barbeau€ñêñœñêñagreed€that€heÏwouldñêñ›ñêñ€place€some€of€her€belongings€on€the€front€porch€for€her€to€pick€up.€€ñêñœñêñTheñêñ›ñêñ€victimÏwas€ñêñœñêñagitatedñêñ›ñêñ€and€ñêñœñêñrepeatedlyñêñ›ñêñ€declared€that€ñêñœñêñheñêñ›ñêñ€would€ñêñœñêñnot€allow€Ms.€Barbeauñêñ›ñêñ€to€comeÏback€into€the€townhouse.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€victim€gathered€a€large€pile€of€Ms.€Barbeauððs€clothing€and€otherÏpersonalty€and€stacked€it€on€the€front€œporch›œñÿññþñ...ñþñ.ñÿññ ñ.€€ñ ññ ññýñ€ñýñ€ñ ññüññõñ€ñõññüññøññ÷ñKñ÷ññøññúññùñJñùññúññûñHñûñowever,›€as€he€became€moreÏdistraught,€he€returned€to€the€porch€and€kicked€and€threw€her€things€and€scatteredÏthem€across€the€lawn.€€Later,€Ms.€Barbeau€arrived€at€the€front€door.€€The€victim€metÏher€at€the€door€and€placed€his€hand€on€her€chest€and€€pushed€her€away€so€he€couldÏclose€the€door.€€As€a€result€of€this€push,€Ms.€Barbeau€may€have€stumbled€or€fallenÏdown.€€The€victim€moved€back€upstairs€and€continued€to€express€displeasure€withÏMs.€Barbeau.€€Within€moments,€the€victim€returned€to€the€same€door€to€answerÏeither€the€door€bell€or€a€knock.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àRobert€John€Bowlby€testified€that€when€the€victim€opened€the€door€thisÏsecond€time,€Bowlby€saw€a€red€beam€shining€into€the€room.€€He€heard€someoneÏshout,€ð ðHeððs€got€a€gun!ðð€€Bowlby€saw€the€victim€push,€or€ð ðwalk,ðð€Ms.€Barbeau€backÏinto€the€defendant,€who€was€standing€three€or€four€feet€behind€her.€€Bowlby€€noticedÏthat€the€red€beam€was€coming€from€a€gun€which€the€defendant€held€œñ ñin›€his›€hand›€ñ ñat›€shoulderÏlevel.€€The€unarmed€victim,€who€was€then€outside,€closed€the€door€behind€him.€Ð 09€48 ÐBowlby€heard€two€male€voices€shouting,€a€scream€and€then€a€gunshot.€The€victimÏthen€walked€back€into€the€townhouse€holding€his€chest€and€bleeding.€€Bowlby€calledÏan€ambulance.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àBowlby€also€testified€that,€before€March€29,€he€saw€the€defendant€€inÏWest€Knoxville€when€the€defendant€had€the€same€pistol€that€he€had€at€theÏtownhouse€on€March€29.€€The€defendant€said€that€he€was€ð ðgoing€to€use€it€for€anyÏm„„„„„€f„„„„„„€that€f„„„„€with€me,€and€that€includes€that€Shaver€guy.ððÌÌà ` àà ¸ àBill€Ferrell€testified€that€he€was€at€the€townhouse€on€March€29.€€€WhenÏthe€victim€answered€the€door€the€second€time,€Ferrell€saw€the€defendant€standingÏoutside€behind€Ms.€Barbeau.€He€testified€that€the€victim€told€both€Belser€andÏBarbeau€to€leave.€€When€Ms.€Barbeau€tried€to€come€past€him€into€the€house,€theÏvictim€ð ðscooped€her€up,€caught€her€on€his€left€side,€pushed€her€back.€€She€hitÏBelserððs€right€arm.ðð€€Ferrell€testified€that€she€moved€away€and€the€defendant€pulledÏa€9mm€pistol€from€his€trenchcoat€pocket.€Ferrell€saw€the€flash€of€the€light€beam€andÏyelled€that€the€defendant€had€a€gun.€Ferrell€tried€to€pull€the€victim€back€inside€butÏwas€unable€to€do€so€because€he€was€ð ðtoo€busy€running.ðð€€He€heard€the€gunshot€andÏthe€victim€say€to€the€defendant,€ð ðYou€shot€me.€€Now€youððre€going€to€jail.ðð€€FerrellÏthen€looked€out€€the€window€and€saw€the€defendant€trying€to€pull€Ms.€Barbeau€to€aÏcar.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àJeffrey€Chandler€Jackson€and€Kevin€Hall€were€also€present€in€theÏtownhouse€on€March€29.€€Jackson€testified€that€after€he€heard€the€shouting€and€€theÏgunshot€ten€seconds€later,€he€looked€out€the€front€door€and€saw€the€defendantÏstanding€in€the€yard€and€€swinging€a€gun€down€to€his€right€side.Ì€€Ìà ` àà ¸ àLisa€Michelle€Hubbard€and€Guy€Adams€testified€that€they€were€atÏHubbardððs€residence€at€about€10:30€or€11:00€on€the€night€of€March€29,€1993€whenÐ 09€48 Ðthe€defendant€and€Ms.€Barbeau€arrived.€€€The€defendant€€laid€a€pistol€on€HubbardððsÏtable€and€said€no€one€should€touch€it€because€he€thought€he€had€ð ðshot€Shaver.ððÏHubbard€testified€that€the€defendant€said€that€Shaver€had€pulled€Angie€Barbeau€outÏof€the€car€and€had€hit€her,€although€Hubbard€saw€no€evidence€of€an€assault€onÏBarbeauððs€person.€Hubbard€further€testified€that€the€defendant€said€that€he€shot€theÏvictim€as€the€victim€was€hitting€him.€€However,€Adams€testified€that€the€defendantÏsaid€that€he€had€lowered€the€sight€beam€from€the€victimððs€head€to€his€chest€whenÏthe€gun€went€off.€€At€the€defendantððs€request,€€Adams€took€the€pistol€to€a€locationÏon€Clinton€Highway€where€he€left€it.€€Adams€identified€the€pistol€in€evidence€as€theÏsame€pistol€which€the€defendant€brought€to€Hubbardððs€residence.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThrough€other€proof,€the€state€established€that€the€pistol€wasÏrecovered€from€the€Clinton€Highway€location,€that€the€cartridge€found€in€theÏtownhouse€lawn€had€the€same€ð ðmechanical€fingerprintsðð€as€the€cartridges€test„firedÏthrough€€the€pistol€by€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation,€that€the€gunshotÏresidue€test€performed€on€the€defendant€indicated€he€had€ð ðfired,€handled,€or€wasÏnear€a€gun€when€it€was€fired,ðð€and€that€the€victim€bled€to€death€as€a€result€of€theÏgunshot€wound.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€second„degree€murder,€and€theÏtrial€court€imposed€the€maximum€Range€I€sentence€of€25€years€to€run€consecutivelyÏto€the€federal€sentence€the€defendant€was€serving€at€the€time.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àBefore€proceeding€to€discuss€the€issues€on€appeal,€we€acknowledgeÏthat€the€notice€of€appeal€in€this€case€was€filed€one€day€late;€however,€in€the€interestÏof€justice€we€excuse€the€untimely€filing.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a).€Ð 3à.2 ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àFirst,€we€examine€the€defendantððs€complaint€that€the€trial€court€erredÏin€failing€to€grant€a€continuance€of€the€trial.€Defense€counsel€was€appointed€in€thisÐ 09€48 Ðcase€on€May€14,€1997€after€the€court€had€successively€excused€two€previously„¼appointed€attorneys.€Although€trial€had€already€been€set€for€November€17,€1997,Ïat€some€point€and€through€some€means€not€reflected€in€the€record€the€trial€date€wasÏaccelerated€to€September€30,€1997.€€Counsel€filed€motions€to€continue€onÏSeptember€23€and€28;€however,€only€the€grounds€alleged€in€the€latter€motion€haveÏbeen€preserved€as€an€issue€on€appeal.€In€that€motion,€defense€counsel€asserted€(1)Ïthe€defendant€was€in€federal€custody€in€Atlanta€pursuant€to€1996€federalÏconvictions,€(2)€counsel€wished€him€to€be€brought€to€Knoxville€at€least€two€weeksÏprior€to€trial,€(3)€as€of€September€28€he€had€not€arrived,€and€(4)€the€federalÏauthorities€were€not€being€cooperative€in€arranging€his€transit€to€Knoxville.€OnÏSeptember€29,€the€trial€court€continued€the€trial€from€September€30€until€October€1Ïand€continued€the€hearing€on€the€motion€until€the€next€day,€September€30.€TheÏdefendant€arrived€in€Knoxville€at€about€9:00€pm€on€Monday,€September€29.€€At€theÏhearing€on€Tuesday€morning,€the€trial€court€decided€to€begin€the€trial€onÏWednesday,€October€1,€at€1:30€pm€and€announced€that€it€believed€that€the€day€andÏa€half€would€be€sufficient€time€for€counsel€to€consult€with€the€defendant.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àOn€appeal,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€allotted€time€was€insufficient;Ïhowever,€during€the€arguments€on€the€continuance€in€the€trial€court,€defenseÏcounsel€acknowledged€that€normal€preparation€requirements€were€alleviatedÏbecause€of€the€earlier€trial€of€the€case,€that€counsel€had€made€one€trip€to€Atlanta€toÏmeet€with€the€defendant,€that€counsel€would€ð ðneed€at€least€a€day€with€[theÏdefendant],ðð€and€that€ð ðif€we€can€get€him€here€today€[Monday,€September€29]€and€IÏcan€have€tomorrow€[Tuesday]€with€him,€perhaps€Wednesday€I€could€go.ððÌÌà ` àà ¸ àð ðThe€question€of€whether€a€criminal€trial€should€be€continued€to€a€laterÏdate€is€entrusted€to€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court.ðð€€òòState€v.€Covingtonóó,€845Ð p5À04 ÐS.W.2d€784,€787€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€On€appeal,€this€court€will€not€ð ðinterfereÏwith€the€exercise€of€this€discretion€unless€it€appears€on€the€face€of€the€record€thatÐ 09€48 Ð(a)€the€trial€court€has€abused€its€discretion€and€(b)€prejudice€enured€to€the€accusedÏas€a€direct€result€of€the€trial€courtððs€ruling.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€We€agree€with€the€state€that€theÐ à Ðdefendant€has€shown€neither€an€abuse€of€discretion€nor€prejudice€in€this€instance.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAlthough€defense€counsel€originally€alleged€in€a€separate€motion€forÏcontinuance€that€he€had€not€had€sufficient€time€to€interview€or€plan€for€the€use€ofÏwitnesses€and€that€an€expert€in€firearm€forensics€with€which€the€defense€hadÏconsulted€was€unavailable€for€the€trial€date,€the€grounds€of€that€motion€wereÏabandoned.€€Moreover,€the€defendant€has€not€articulated€any€specific€instance€ofÏlack€of€preparation€as€a€result€of€the€defendantððs€belated€arrival€in€Knoxville,€theÏground€for€continuance€which€is€asserted€on€appeal.€There€is€cause€to€believe€theÏfederal€authorities€were€capricious€in€their€handling€of€the€Tennessee€requests€toÏhave€their€prisoner€made€available€for€his€state€homicide€trial.€€Although€aÏTennessee€trial€court€in€this€situation€should€not€hold€any€such€federal€capricesÏagainst€the€accused€on€the€question€of€a€continuance,€there€is€no€showing€of€anÏabuse€of€discretion.€€The€trial€court€partially€granted€the€motion,€continuing€the€trialÏa€day€and€a€half,€a€period€of€time€which€defense€counsel€said€would€be€theÏminimum€he€would€need.€€Counsel€had€served€on€the€case€since€May€1997,€hadÏpreviously€met€with€the€defendant€at€his€place€of€confinement€in€Atlanta,€and€hadÏthe€benefit€of€the€record€of€the€previous€trial€in€the€case.€€We€find€no€suggestion€ofÏprejudice€to€the€defendant€because€a€longer€continuance€was€not€granted.€ÏAlthough€the€defendant€neither€testified€nor€called€any€witnesses€in€his€behalf,€heÏhas€made€no€attempt€to€show€that€his€lack€of€evidence€in€chief€resulted€fromÏinsufficient€preparation€time€rather€than€defense€strategy.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€thatÏthe€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€refusing€to€grant€the€continuance€motionÏin€full.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€next€issue€is€the€defendantððs€claim€that€the€evidence€presentedÏat€trial€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€of€second„degree€murder.€€It€is€wellÐ 09€48 Ðestablished€that€a€jury€verdict,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimonyÏof€the€witnesses€for€the€state€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€theÏstate.€€òòState€v.€Hatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€627,€630€(Tenn.€1978);€òòState€v.€Townsendóó,Ð pÀ Ð525€S.W.2d€842,€843€(Tenn.€1975).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€whichÏmay€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€836€(Tenn.€1978).ò òÐ `  ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àó óMoreover,€a€verdict€against€the€defendant€removes€the€presumptionÐ Ð  Ðof€innocence€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€œappealñ ñ,ñ ñ›œñ ñ.€€ñ ññ ñ›€ñ ñòòState›€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.Ð ° Ð2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973);€òòAnglin€v.€Stateóó,€553€S.W.2d€616,€620€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð à Ð1977).€€œñ ñWhich›€tñ ññ ñTñ ñhe›€defendant€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€the€presumption€on€appeal.€ÏòòState€v.€Brownóó,€551€S.W.2d€329,€331€(Tenn.€1977).ò òÐ P  ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àó óMost€significantly,€where€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,Ð ` Ðthe€relevant€question€for€an€appellate€court€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidenceÏin€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€haveÏfound€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.Ð °"  ÐVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2782€(1979);€Tenn€R.€App.€P.€13;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóóÐ $à" ÐòòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405€(Tenn.€1983).€€This€rule€applies€to€findings€basedÐ p&À!$ Ðon€both€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Thomasóó,€755€S.W.2d€838,€842Ð P( #& Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€Circumstantial€evidence€alone€may€be€sufficient€to€convictÏone€of€a€crime.€€òòState€v.€Bolingóó,€840€S.W.2d€944,€947€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).Ð ,`'* ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àTo€establish€a€defendantððs€guilt€of€murder€in€the€second€degree,€theÏstate€must€prove€that€the€accused€knowingly€€killed€€another€person.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð °1-0 ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210€(a)(1)€(1991).€€The€proof€in€this€case,€as€outlined€above,Ïoverwhelmingly€supports€the€juryððs€conclusion€that€the€defendant€knowingly€killedÏBrian€Shaver.€Any€issues€of€fact€which€the€defendant€may€have€raised€and/orÏargued€were€resolved€in€the€stateððs€favor€by€the€jury,€and€such€was€the€juryððsÐ 09€48 Ðprerogative.€òòState€v.€Gilbertóó,€612€S.W.2d€188€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980).€We€hold€thatÐ ° Ðthe€evidence€was€sufficient€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€to€convict€the€defendant€ofÏsecond„degree€murder.€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€his€third€issue,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€whenÏit€did€not€allow€the€defendant€to€open€his€cross„examination€of€Mr.€Bowlby,€theÏstateððs€first€witness,€by€asking€him€whether€the€victim€was€an€ð ðaggressive€typeðð€ofÏperson.€€Upon€the€stateððs€objection€to€the€question,€the€court€held€a€jury„out€hearing.€ÏAfter€hearing€argument€about€the€ð ðfirst€aggressorðð€rule€and€about€the€applicabilityÏof€the€facts€to€the€presence€of€provocation€that€might€reduce€the€charge€to€voluntaryÏmanslaughter,€the€court€ruled€that€any€questions€of€this€first€witness€about€theÏvictimððs€history€of€aggression€or€violence€were€premature.€€The€defendant€did€notÏrevisit€the€issue€throughout€the€trial,€did€not€attempt€any€other€cross„examination€ofÏthis€type,€and€did€not€present€any€independent€proof€of€the€victimððs€history€ofÏaggression€or€violence.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àUnder€Tennessee€law,€evidence€of€a€homicide€victimððs€violent€actsÏagainst€the€defendant€and€others€may€be€admissible€under€certain€circumstancesÏeven€if€they€occurred€prior€to€the€events€that€led€to€the€murder.€€òòSeeóóòòState€v.€Ruaneóó,Ð p&À!$ Ð912€S.W.2d€766,€780„781€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€885€S.W.2d€357,Ð P( #& Ð361€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€Furloughóó,€797€S.W.2d€631€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð 0*€%( Ð1990);€òòState€v.€Laterral€Jollyóó,€No.€02C01„9207„CR„00169€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð ,`'* ÐJackson,€Dec.€15,€œ1993)ñ ñ,ñ ñ›€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€rules€of€admissibilityÐ ð-@), Ðvary€with€the€purpose€for€which€the€evidence€is€admitted.׃ ×Ý ƒ%ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ð/ +. ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àWe€need€not€elaborate€upon€the€interplay€between€Tennessee€RulesÐ 3à.2 Ðof€Evidence€405€and€the€rules€for€the€admissibility€of€ð ðfirst€aggressorðð€evidenceÏdeveloped€by€Tennessee€case€law.€€The€œpñ ñrñ ñerñ ñeñ ñquisite›€for€the€admission€of€evidenceÏof€a€deceasedððs€violent€acts€in€every€instance€is€the€same.€€Before€first€aggressorÏevidence€may€be€admitted,€the€issue€of€whether€the€deceased€was€the€firstÏaggressor€must€be€raised€by€the€proof.€€òòState€v.€Ruaneóó,€912€S.W.2d€at€766.€Ð 0 € ÐAllegations€of€counsel€and€pleadings€are€not€sufficient€to€raise€the€issue€of€self„¼defense.€€òòState€v.€Laterral€Jollyóó,€slip€op.€at€7.€€Here,€defense€counselððs€first€questionÐ ð@  Ðof€the€stateððs€first€witness€was€whether€the€victim€was€an€ð ðaggressive€typeðð€ofÏperson.€€Bowlbyððs€testimony€on€direct€examination€contained€no€suggestion€that€theÏdefendant€may€have€acted€in€self€defense€or€that€the€deceased€was€the€ð ðfirstÏaggressor.ðð€€The€trial€court€properly€found€that€this€line€of€questioning€wasÏpremature.€€The€trial€court€did€not€rule€that€first€aggressor€evidence,€if€otherwiseÏproper,€would€not€be€allowed€later€in€the€trial€after€the€pertinent€issues€had€beenÏraised€by€the€proof.€€The€issue€of€self„defense€was€not€raised€by€BowlbyððsÏtestimony,€and€the€defendant€made€no€effort€to€offer€the€evidence€again.€€There€isÏno€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€handling€of€the€first€aggressor€issue.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendantððs€argument€about€his€attempt€to€cross„examine€BowlbyÏwas€based€in€part€upon€his€claim€that€the€victimððs€status€as€an€ð ðaggressive€typeððÏperson€provoked€a€mental€reaction€in€the€defendant€that€could€reduce€his€culpabilityÏfor€the€killing€to€that€of€voluntary€manslaughter.€€However,€the€use€of€evidence€of€Ìthe€victimððs€prior€violent€misconduct€to€establish€this€defense€requires€that€theÏdefendant€knew,€at€the€time€of€the€killing,€that€the€victim€had€the€violent€tendencies.Ð ð-@), ÐòòFurloughóó,€797€S.W.2d€at€648.€€The€evidence,€offered€for€this€purpose,€relates€toÐ Ð/ +. Ðð ðapprehension€on€the€part€of€the€defendantðð€and€must€be€introduced€through€theÏdefendant€in€his€proof€in€chief,€unless€it€is€needed€ð ðin€rebuttal€if€the€state€ððpresentsÏevidence€to€disprove€defendant€had€received€such€information.ðððð€òòIdóó.€(citing€òòWilliamsÐ p5À04 Ðv.€Stateóó,€565€S.W.2d€503,€505€(Tenn.€1978)).€€In€the€present€case,€the€questionÐ P7 26 Ðposed€to€Bowlby€was€premature€for€the€purpose€of€showing€the€defendantððsÐ 09€48 Ðapprehension.€Moreover,€the€defendant€never€testified€and€never€injected€into€theÏtrial€any€basis€for€the€court€to€conclude€that€he€knew€of€any€violent€acts€of€the€victim.€ÏThus,€to€the€extent€that€the€defendant€sought€the€evidence€in€order€to€show€aÏreduced€culpability,€the€claim€is€meritless.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àFinally,€we€address€the€the€defendantððs€sentencng€issue.€€He€correctlyÏobserves€in€his€brief€that€a€maximum€Range€I€sentence€of€25€years€was€approvedÏby€this€court€in€the€previous€appeal€from€the€first€second„degree€murder€conviction,Ð Ð  Ðòòseeóó€òòBelseróó,€945€S.W.2d€at€791„92,€and€the€defendant€restricts€his€sentencingÐ ° Ðcomplaint€to€the€impostion€of€his€sentence€to€run€consecutively€to€the€existingÏfederal€sentence.€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWe€cannot€review€even€this€issue,€however,€because€the€defendantÏhas€not€included€in€the€appellate€record€any€transcript€of€sentencing€proceedings.€ÏThe€record€contains€no€presentence€report,€no€transcript€of€a€sentencing€hearing,Ïand€no€findings€and€conclusions€of€the€trial€court.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„Ð Ð  Ð203,€205,€209€(1997).ò ò€€ó óIt€is€the€duty€of€the€appellant€to€prepare€a€record€whichÐ °"  Ðconveys€a€fair,€accurate,€and€complete€account€of€what€transpired€in€the€trial€courtÏwith€respect€to€the€issues€which€form€the€basis€of€the€appeal.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï24(b);€òòState€v.€Rhodenóó,€739€S.W.2d€6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);€òòState€v.€Milleróó,€737Ð P( #& ÐS.W.2d€556,€558€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€Generally,€this€court€is€precluded€fromÏaddressing€an€issue€on€appeal€when€the€record€fails€to€include€relevant€documents.€ÏòòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Bennettóó,€798€S.W.2d€783€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990);€Tenn.€R.€App.Ð ð-@), ÐP.€24.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAlthough€we€are€precluded€from€reviewing€the€consecutive€sentencingÏissue€raised€by€the€defendant€in€his€brief,€we€note€that€Tennessee€Rule€of€CriminalÏProcedure€32(c)(2)€provides€that,€when€the€trial€court€is€sentencing€a€defendant€whoÏhas€ð ðadditional€sentences€or€portions€thereof€to€serve,€as€the€result€of€conviction€inÐ 09€48 Ðother€states€or€in€òòfederalóó€court,€the€sentence€imposed€òòshall€be€consecutiveóó€theretoÐ ° Ðunless€the€court€shall€determine€.€.€.€that€good€cause€exists€to€run€the€sentencesÏconcurrently€and€explicitly€so€orders.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(2)€(emphasis€added).ÏThe€trial€courtððs€judgment€did€just€the€opposite€from€explicitly€ordering€concurrentÏservice;€it€explicity€ordered€consecutive€sentences.€€Accordingly,€Rule€32(c)(2)Ïappears€to€preclude€any€claim€to€concurrent€sentencing€which€the€defendant€couldÏhave€made€had€he€presented€an€adequate€record.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àà  àà x àà Ð à¼à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à__________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌL.T.€LAFFERTY,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌ