ÿWPCð ù/^{R\œ–¸m×ýâE½~• ´RóÙg8j® RºæËüØ­—Yw<ù³x’Šèò&Êì{ Ö],I °SÍèÔOYCÔFž´?Äë¡Ü)„WQµ2 [™&Äwö´]²ÿùRñw»jcˆ6.ÊÚ øO6Ù/ãH.SÜÁ"˜Oü73ÈôG¨‰`è—¾á>ºç§Ié6rí×ÏÄR!úéEMgYê–´ ¿ÆD5c ÷îÖÁÚ¹: 1\ÿnE‰Õ§1H­©<ÕšS>J(¦™µ`ä…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ U:Í b w@ 4O c 0Ær 0D8 | šA¸U:ùU:3çmU:TŽç–U:}}}}}}}}}} B··········· D3ÔÔÔ 0D AOKÆšš 0D` D/¤ BÓ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6HPBXLBÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,“í|AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- RDSDT[UV[WXEYZÓ€duM%3|xf(v(2§Ÿ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XuÙXXXÔÔ€ô ïôXXuÙÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒ Äç$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X£u XXXÔÔ€ô¸˜ ô XX£uÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€State€contends€that€Appellant€waived€this€issue€pursuant€to€Rule€12(b)(2)€of€the€TennesseeÐ `  ÐRules€of€Criminal€Procedure€by€failing€to€raise€it€either€before€trial€or€in€his€motion€for€a€new€trial.€€RuleÏ12(b)(2),€however,€provides€that€either€jurisdictional€defects€or€the€failure€to€properly€charge€an€offenseÏð ðshall€be€noticed€by€the€court€at€any€time€during€the€pendency€of€the€proceedings.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Ï12(b)(2).€€Thus,€the€waiver€rule€does€not€apply€when€the€indictment€fails€to€assert€an€essential€element€ofÏthe€offense.€€òòState€v.€Perkinsonóó,€867€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992). Ý ƒ Äç$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X§÷XXXÔÔ€ôØ“ ôXX§÷Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€State€contends€that€Appellant€waived€this€issue€pursuant€to€Rule€12(b)(2)€of€the€TennesseeÐ `  ÐRules€of€Criminal€Procedure€by€failing€to€raise€it€either€before€trial€or€in€his€motion€for€a€new€trial.€€RuleÏ12(b)(2),€however,€provides€that€either€jurisdictional€defects€or€the€failure€to€properly€charge€an€offenseÏð ðshall€be€noticed€by€the€court€at€any€time€during€the€pendency€of€the€proceedings.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Ï12(b)(2).€€Thus,€the€waiver€rule€does€not€apply€when€the€indictment€fails€to€assert€an€essential€element€ofÏthe€offense.€€òòState€v.€Perkinsonóó,€867€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992). 7Ý ƒ Äç$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X§÷XXXÔÔ€ôØ“ ôXX§÷Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€State€contends€that€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„16„602(b)€does€not€require€theÐ `  Ðevading€of€police€to€take€place€on€a€ð ðpublicðð€road,€but€only€on€ð ðany€street,€road,€alley€or€highway€in€thisÏstate.ðð€€We€disagree.€€Under€the€Stateððs€interpretation,€this€statute€would€encompass€evading€of€policeÏwhile€driving€a€motor€vehicle€on€any€private€driveway,€parking€lot,€or€any€other€property€designed€toÏaccommodate€the€operation€of€motor€vehicles.€€If€that€had€been€what€the€legislature€intended,€it€wouldÏhave€used€language€similar€to€that€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„401,€which€prohibitsÏdriving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€ð ðon€any€of€the€public€roads€and€highways€of€the€state,€or€on€anyÏstreets€or€alleys,€or€while€on€the€premises€of€any€shopping€center,€trailer€park€or€any€apartment€houseÏcomplex,€or€any€other€premises€which€is€generally€frequented€by€the€public€at€large.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ55„10„401(a)€(1998).€€In€addition,€because€section€39„16„603€is€a€criminal€statute,€it€must€be€strictlyÏconstrued€in€favor€of€Appellant.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Levandowskióó,€955€S.W.2d€603,€605€(Tenn.€1997).,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ÝÔ€XuÙXXXÔÔ€ù’ XXuÙÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XuÙX ù’ÔÐ  ÐÌAugust€20,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,–ûyAZ‹"Arial Regular ÝÔ€XuÙXXXÔÔ€ù’ XXuÙÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XuÙX ù’ÔÐ  ÐÌAugust€19,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,–ûyAZ‹"Arial Regular d'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñZñ›ñZñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€ŠاŠXXÔÔ€Š¿ÔŠŠŠاÔÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€©XXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñdññZñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` ttx0,` ð ærßñZññdññdñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` ttx0,` ð ærßñdññZñ›ñZñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌNOVEMBER€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À à)à  àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9712„CC„00568Ð (È Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó ó)Ð  À Ðà ` àAppellee,à  àà h àà À àò ò)Ð ¸  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àMAURY€COUNTYÐ ¨  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ    Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHON.€JAMES€L.€WEATHERFORDó óÐ ø˜  Ðò òJASON€ERIC€BRADBURN,ó óà À àò ò)à  àJUDGEó óÐ ð  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ èˆ Ðà ` àAppellant.à  àà h àà À àò ò)à  à(Direct€Appeal€„€Class€D€Felony)Ð à€ Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð ¸X ÐÌMICHAEL€J.€FLANAGANà À àà  àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ ¨H Ð95€White€Bridge€Road,€Suite€208à  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ   @ ÐNashville,€TN€€37205Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDARYL€J.€BRANDÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àMIKE€BOTTOMSÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àP.€O.€Box€459Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àLawrenceburg,€TN€€38464ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSED€IN€PARTÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÐ  2°(*— ÐÓ  ÓÔ€°ƒ)°ŠŠ¿ÔÔò òòòÔ‡„“n „°°ƒ)ÔOPINIONÔ#†°ƒ)° „„“nÒ #Ôóóó óÔ€Š¿ÔŠ°°ƒ)ÔÐ `  ÐÌÒX„ÒÓ  ÓÓÓœñRñÔ‡X9XŠŠ“pÔñRñ›Ìà ` àOn€July€29,€1997,€a€Maury€County€jury€convicted€Appellant€Jason€E.€BradburnÏof€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest€and€reckless€driving.€€After€a€sentencing€hearing€onÏOctober€30,€1997,€the€trial€court€sentenced€Appellant€as€a€Range€II€multiple€offenderÏto€six€years€imprisonment€for€felony€evading€arrest€and€11€months€and€29€days€forÏreckless€driving.€€The€sentence€for€felony€evading€arrest€was€ordered€to€runÏconsecutively€to€a€sentence€that€Appellant€had€received€in€another€case€and€theÏsentence€for€reckless€driving€was€ordered€to€run€concurrently€with€the€otherÏsentences.€€Appellant€challenges€his€convictions,€raising€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà0 ` à1)€whether€the€indictment€was€sufficient€to€charge€Appellant€with€felonyÏevading€arrest;Ð ` €%` €% Ðà0 ` à2)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€Appellantððs€conviction€forÏClass€D€felony€evading€arrest;Ð ` €%` €% Ðà0 ` à3)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€failed€to€instruct€the€jury€as€to€theÏlesser€included€offenses€of€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest;Ð ` €%` €% Ðà0 ` à4)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€failed€to€instruct€the€jury€as€to€aÏstatutory€defense;€andÐ ` €%` €% Ðà0 ` à5)€whether€principles€of€due€process€and€double€jeopardy€prohibit€convictionsÏfor€both€€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest€and€reckless€driving€that€arise€out€ofÏthe€same€conduct.Ð ` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€in€part€andÏreverse€in€part.ÌÌà@dd+Dàò òI.€€FACTSó óˆÐ ’.2%& ÐÌà ` àOn€July€26,€1996,€Officer€John€Beech€of€the€Columbia€Police€Department€andÏcivilian€informant€John€Johnston,€in€conjunction€with€the€Maury€County€Drug€TaskÏForce,€set€up€a€ð ðreverse€sting€operationðð€in€which€they€were€to€sell€two€pounds€ofÏâ âmarijuana€to€Appellant€for€$2,000.€€After€a€series€of€conversations€and€an€initialÐ B8â.0 Ðmeeting€to€inspect€the€marijuana,€Appellant€agreed€to€meet€Beech€and€Johnston€inÏa€Wal„Mart€parking€lot€later€that€afternoon.Ìâ âÌà ` àAfter€Appellant€arrived€at€the€Wal„Mart€parking€lot,€he€parked€his€small€pickupÏtruck€and€got€into€Officer€Beechððs€car.€€Appellant€then€paid€for€and€took€theÏmarijuana€and€got€back€into€his€truck.€€At€this€point,€Officer€Beech€signaled€someÏother€officers€who€had€been€waiting€nearby.ò ò€€ó óOfficer€Mike€Johnson€then€drove€hisÐ    Ðunmarked€vehicle€directly€in€front€of€Appellantððs€truck.€€As€he€pulled€in€front€ofÏAppellantððs€truck,€Officer€Johnson€activated€his€vehicleððs€emergency€equipment,Ïwhich€consisted€of€a€bank€of€strobe€lights€with€the€bank€of€headlights.€€As€OfficerÏJohnson€and€his€passenger,€Officer€Lonnie€Lyles,€were€about€to€get€out€of€the€car,ÏAppellant€looked€at€them€momentarily€and€then€rammed€his€truck€into€the€right€frontÏcorner€of€Officer€Johnsonððs€car.€€Appellant€then€sped€away€across€the€parking€lot.€ÏOfficer€Bill€Denton€then€activated€the€blue€lights€and€siren€on€his€vehicle€and€beganÏpursuit.ÌÌà ` àAfter€striking€Officer€Johnsonððs€car,€Appellant€traveled€through€the€Wal„MartÏparking€lot,€ran€a€stop€sign,€crossed€Brookmede€Drive,€and€entered€the€parking€lotÏof€the€Shady€Brook€Mall.€€Appellant€then€drove€down€a€row€of€parked€cars€in€the€mallÏparking€lot€and€threw€the€two€pounds€of€marijuana€out€his€truck€window.€€AppellantÏthen€drove€toward€the€main€exit€of€the€mall€parking€lot,€but€the€heavy€traffic€forcedÏhim€to€stop.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Appellant€was€apprehended€and€taken€into€custody.€ÌÌà@{{Dàò òII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€INDICTMENTó óˆÐ 6 ,. Ðâ âÐ 8 .0 Ðà ` àAppellant€contends€that€his€conviction€for€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest€shouldÏâ âbe€reversed€because€the€indictment€did€not€allege€a€felony.€€Specifically,€AppellantÏclaims€that€because€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„16„603(b)(1)€states€thatÏevading€arrest€must€occur€on€a€ð ðstreet,€road,€alley€or€highwayðð€in€order€to€be€aÏfelony,€the€indictment€was€insufficient€because€it€did€not€allege€that€the€fleeingÏoccurred€on€a€ð ðstreet,€road,€alley€or€highway.ððñMñ׃ ×ñMññMñ׃ ×ñMñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð °  ÐÌà ` àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€stated€that€ð ðan€indictment€is€valid€if€itÏprovides€sufficient€information€(1)€to€enable€the€accused€to€know€the€accusation€toÏwhich€answer€is€required,€(2)€to€furnish€the€court€adequate€basis€for€the€entry€of€aÏproper€judgment,€and€(3)€to€protect€the€accused€from€double€jeopardy.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hillóó,Ð À` Ð954€S.W.2d€725,€727€(Tenn.€1997)€(citations€omitted).€€Further,€ð ðan€indictment€needÏnot€conform€to€traditionally€strict€pleading€requirements.ðð€€òòId.óó€€ð ðThus,€we€nowÐ   @ Ðapproach€ððattacks€upon€indictments,€especially€of€this€kind,€from€the€broad€andÏenlightened€standpoint€of€common€sense€and€right€reason€rather€than€from€theÏnarrow€standpoint€of€petty€preciosity,€pettifogging,€technicality€or€hair€splitting€faultÏfinding.ðððð€€òòId.óó€(quoting€òòUnited€States€v.€Purvisóó,€580€F.2d€853,€857€(5th€Cir.1978)).€€Ð `(  ÐÌà ` àA€ð ðcommon€senseðð€reading€of€count€two€of€the€indictment€indicates€that€it€wasÏsufficient€to€comply€with€the€constitutional€notice€requirements€recited€in€òòHillóó.€€CountÐ 0.Ð$& Ðtwo€of€the€indictment€alleged€that€on€July€26,€1996,€AppellantÌÓÓà0 ` àdid€unlawfully€while€operating€a€motor€vehicle€intentionally€flee€or€attempt€toÏelude€a€law€enforcement€officer,€after€having€received€a€signal€from€suchÏofficer€to€bring€the€vehicle€to€a€stop,€creating€a€risk€of€death€or€injury€toÐ 4 *, Ðinnocent€bystanders€or€others,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€39„¼16„603(b)(1)(3)€.€.€.€.Ð ` €%` €% ÐÌÓ"ÓñMñò òó óñMñThus,€the€indictment€informed€Appellant€of€the€date€of€the€offense,€the€fact€that€heÏoperated€a€motor€vehicle,€that€he€intentionally€fled€from€a€law€enforcement€officerÏafter€receiving€a€signal€to€stop,€and€that€his€conduct€created€a€risk€of€injury€or€deathÏto€others.€€Further,€by€specific€reference€to€the€statute,€the€indictment€left€no€doubtÏthat€Appellant€was€being€charged€with€violating€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sectionÏ39„16„603(b)(1),€(3).€€Even€without€a€specific€reference€to€ð ðstreet,€road,€alley€orÏhighway,ðð€the€indictment€clearly€put€Appellant€on€notice€of€the€offense€he€was€beingÏcharged€with,€appraised€the€trial€court€of€the€specific€charge€for€purposes€of€enteringÏan€appropriate€judgment€and€sentence,€and€protected€Appellant€from€doubleÏjeopardy.€€This€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@ÐÐDàò òIII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óˆÐ ˜!8 ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€his€convictionÏfor€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„16„¼603(b),€which€€states,ÌÓÓà0 ` à(1)€It€is€unlawful€for€any€person,€while€operating€a€motor€vehicle€on€any€street,Ïroad,€alley€or€highway€in€this€state,€to€intentionally€flee€or€attempt€to€elude€anyÏlaw€enforcement€officer,€after€having€received€any€signal€from€such€officer€toÏbring€the€vehicle€to€a€stop.Ð ` €%` €% Ðà0 ` àà0¸ ` €%` €%à.€.€.€.Ð ¸ €%¸ €% Ðà0 ` à(3)€A€violation€of€subsection€(b)€is€a€Class€E€felony€unless€the€flight€or€attemptÏto€elude€creates€a€risk€of€death€or€injury€to€innocent€bystanders€or€other€thirdÏparties,€in€which€case€a€violation€of€subsection€(b)€is€a€Class€D€felony.Ð ` €%` €% ÐÌÓð'ÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„603(b)€(1997).€€We€agree€that€the€evidence€wasÏinsufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€a€Class€D€felony.Ìâ âÐ ð7.0 Ðà ` àWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€isÏâ âobliged€to€review€that€challenge€according€to€certain€well-settled€principles.€€A€verdictÏof€guilty€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€StateððsÏwitnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.Ð 0Ð ÐCazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75Ð  À Ð(Tenn.€1992).€€Although€an€accused€is€originally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€ofÏinnocence,€a€jury€verdict€removes€this€presumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt.€ÏòòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€Hence,€on€appeal,€the€burdenÐ ð  Ðof€proof€rests€with€Appellant€to€demonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convictingÏevidence.€€òòId.óó€€On€appeal,€ð ðthe€[S]tate€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€ofÐ Ðp Ðthe€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawnÏtherefrom.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978)).€Ð °P ÐWhere€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€contested€on€appeal,€the€relevant€questionÏfor€the€reviewing€court€is€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€theÏaccused€guilty€of€every€element€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòHarrisóó,Ð €$  Ð839€S.W.2d€at€75;€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,€61Ð p& ÐL.€Ed.€2d€560€(1979).€€In€conducting€our€evaluation€of€the€convicting€evidence,€thisÏCourt€is€precluded€from€reweighing€or€reconsidering€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,Ð P*ð " Ð929€S.W.2d€380,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,Ð @,à"$ Ð779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€Moreover,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€ownÏinferences€ð ðfor€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.ððÏœñSñ€ñSññTñòòñTññSñId.ñSññUññUññVñòòñVññUñMatthewsñUññVñóóñVññUññUññXññWñ.ñWññXññYñ,ñYññUñ€805€S.W.2dñUññTñóóñTñ›€at€779.€€Finally,€Rule€13(e)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ 2°(* ÐAppellate€Procedure€provides,€ð ðfindings€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€theÏtrial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€theÏfindings€by€the€trier€of€fact€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòMatthewsóó,€805Ð à7€.0 ÐS.W.2d€at€780.Ð Ð9p02 Їà ` àInitially,€Appellant€claims€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€hisÏconviction€for€felony€evading€arrest€because€there€was€no€evidence€that€he€crossedÏa€ð ðpublicðð€street€during€the€chase.€€We€disagree.€€A€review€of€the€record€indicatesÏthat€there€is€evidence€by€which€a€rational€jury€could€conclude€that€at€least€part€of€theÏvehicle€chase€occurred€on€a€street,€road,€alley,€or€highway.€€When€Officer€JohnsonÏwas€asked€whether€Appellant€had€crossed€any€streets€during€the€police€chase,€heÏresponded,€ð ðAny€streets?€€Well,€he€crossed€Brookmede€Drive,€the€stop€sign€here.ðð€ÏFurther,€Officer€Lyles€testified€that€during€the€chase,€Appellant€went€ð ðthrough€theÏintersection€there€at€Brookmede€and€over€into€Shady€Brook€Mall€parking€lot.ðð€€In€fact,ÏAppellant€himself€admitted€that€he€crossed€a€road€during€the€chase€and€heÏspecifically€referred€to€Brookmede€Drive€as€ð ðthe€street€between€[Wal„Mart]€and€theÏmall.ðð€€A€rational€jury€could€conclude€from€this€evidence€that€Appellant€had€crossedÏa€public€street€during€his€flight€from€the€police.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð   @ ÐÌà ` àHowever,€we€hold€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€convictionÏfor€a€Class€D€felony€for€another€reason.€€In€order€to€commit€Class€D€felony€evadingÏarrest€under€section€39„16„603(b),€a€person€must€ð ðcreate[]€a€risk€of€death€or€injuryÏto€innocent€bystanders€or€other€third€parties,ðð€ð ðwhile€operating€a€motor€vehicle€on€anyÏstreet,€road,€alley€or€highway.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„603(b)(1),€(3)€(1997).€ÏThere€is€no€evidence€in€the€record€that€Appellant€created€any€risk€of€death€or€injuryÏto€a€third€person€while€he€was€driving€across€Brookmede€Drive.€€In€fact,€the€onlyÐ  0À&( Ðevidence€about€whether€third€persons€were€even€on€Brookmede€Drive€came€fromÏAppellant,€who€testified€that€he€slowed€down€enough€to€see€that€no€cars€wereÏcoming€before€he€crossed€Brookmede€Drive.€€Although€we€agree€with€the€State€thatÏthere€was€ample€evidence€that€Appellant€created€a€risk€a€risk€of€injury€or€death€toÏthird€persons€when€he€drove€through€the€crowded€parking€lots,€that€is€not€what€theÏstatute€requires.€€ÌÌà ` àBecause€there€was€no€evidence€that€Appellant€created€a€risk€of€injury€or€deathÏto€third€parties€while€he€was€driving€across€Brookmede€Drive,€we€hold€thatÏAppellantððs€conviction€for€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest€must€be€reversed€and€theÏcharge€dismissed.€€However,€in€finding€Appellant€guilty€of€Class€D€felony€evadingÏarrest,€the€jury€necessarily€found€that€the€elements€of€Class€E€felony€evading€arrestÏwere€satisfied:€that€Appellant€operated€a€motor€vehicle€on€a€street€while€intentionallyÏfleeing€a€police€officer€after€receiving€a€signal€from€the€police€officer€to€stop€hisÏvehicle.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„603(b)(1)€(1997).€€Indeed,€a€rational€juryÐ €$  Ðcould€conclude,€from€the€evidence€that€Officer€Johnson€activated€his€emergencyÏlights€when€he€approached€Appellant€in€the€Wal„Mart€parking€lot,€that€Appellant€wasÏintentionally€fleeing€a€police€officer€who€had€given€him€a€signal€to€stop€whenÏAppellant€drove€his€vehicle€across€Brookmede€Drive.€Thus,€the€evidence€wasÏsufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€Class€E€felony€evading€arrest.€€However,Ïbecause€of€the€error€discussed€in€Part€IV,€òòinfraóó,€we€hold€that€this€case€must€beÐ  0À&( Ðremanded€for€a€new€trial€for€that€offense.ÌÌà@E E Dàò òIV.€€€€FAILURE€TO€INSTRUCT€ON€LESSER€INCLUDED€OFFENSESó óˆÐ ð5,. Ðâ âÐ ð7.0 Ðà ` àAppellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€error€when€it€failedÏâ âto€instruct€the€jury€as€to€the€lesser€included€offenses€of€Class€D€felony€evadingÏarrest.€€Even€though€we€hold€that€Appellantððs€conviction€for€Class€D€felony€evadingÏarrest€must€be€reversed,€we€must€address€this€issue€because€the€evidence€wasÏsufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€Class€E€felony€evading€arrest.ÌÌà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40-18-110(a)€provides€that€a€trial€judgeÏmust€charge€the€jury€with€all€lesser€grades€or€classes€of€an€offense€supported€by€theÏevidence,€without€any€request€on€the€part€of€the€defendant€to€do€so.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòStateÐ à€ Ðv.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€305,€311€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Harbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€314,Ð Ðp Ð319€(Tenn.€1986).€€Failure€to€charge€such€lesser€offense(s)€denies€a€defendant€hisÏconstitutional€right€to€trial€by€a€jury€if€there€are€any€facts€ð ðsusceptible€of€inferring€guiltÏon€any€lesser€included€offense€or€offenses.ðð€€òòState€v.€Wrightóó,€618€S.W.2d€310,€315Ð   @ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€This€requirement€is€avoided€only€when€the€record€isÏdevoid€of€evidence€to€support€an€inference€of€guilt€of€the€lesser€offense.€€òòState€v.Ð €$  ÐStephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€550€(Tenn.€1994).Ð p& ÐÌà ` àIn€this€case,€the€proof€clearly€established€that€Appellant€committed€the€offenseÏof€misdemeanor€evading€arrest.€€In€fact,€Appellant€admitted€that€after€he€crossedÏBrookmede€Drive,€he€continued€to€flee€even€though€he€had€seen€the€flashing€blueÏlights€on€Officer€Dentonððs€vehicle€and€he€knew€that€the€police€were€trying€toÏapprehend€him.€€However,€as€previously€discussed,€whether€Appellant€hadÏcommitted€Class€E€felony€evading€arrest€depends€on€whether€he€knew€that€he€hadÏreceived€a€signal€from€the€police€to€stop€his€vehicle€before€he€crossed€BrookmedeÏDrive.€€Indeed,€Appellant€denied€that€he€had€seen€the€strobe€lights€on€OfficerÏJohnsonððs€unmarked€vehicle€and€he€claimed€that€he€did€not€know€that€Johnson€andÐ Ð9p02 ÐLyle€were€police€officers€because€they€were€wearing€plain€clothes€and€he€could€notÏsee€the€badges€they€were€wearing€around€their€necks.€€Appellant€claimed€that€heÏfled€from€Officers€Johnson€and€Lyle€because€he€could€see€that€Lyle€had€a€gun€andÏhe€believed€that€the€two€men€were€trying€to€rob€him.€€Therefore,€the€record€clearlyÏcontained€evidence€that€would€support€an€inference€of€guilt€for€the€lesser€includedÏoffense€of€misdemeanor€evading€arrest.€€By€failing€to€charge€the€jury€on€the€lesserÏincluded€offense,€the€trial€court€deprived€Appellant€of€his€right€to€have€the€juryÏdetermine€his€guilt.€€As€this€Court€stated€in€òòState€v.€Boyceóó,Ð ð  ÐÓÓà0 ` àð ðHowever€plain€it€may€be€to€the€mind€of€the€Court€that€one€certain€offense€hasÏbeen€committed€and€none€other,€he€must€not€confine€himself€in€his€charge€toÏthat€offense.€€When€he€does€so€he€invades€the€province€of€the€jury,€whoseÏpeculiar€duty€it€is€to€ascertain€the€grade€of€the€offense.€€However€clear€it€mayÏbe,€the€Court€should€never€decide€the€facts,€but€must€leave€themÏunembarrassed€to€the€jury.ððñHñÐ ` €%` €% ÐñHñÌÓáMÓ920€S.W.2d€224,€227€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(quoting€òòPoole€v.€Stateóó,€61€Tenn.Ð ¨H Ð288,€294€(1872)).€€Thus,€the€trial€court€clearly€erred€when€it€failed€to€instruct€the€juryÏon€the€lesser€included€offenses.ÌñIñÌÌÌñIñÌà@\ \ Dàò òV.€€FAILURE€TO€INSTRUCT€ON€THE€STATUTORY€DEFENSEó óˆÐ 8-Ø#% ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€failed€to€instruct€the€juryÏthat€ð ð[i]t€is€a€defense€to€prosecution€[for€evading€arrest]€that€the€attempted€arrest€wasÏunlawful.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„603(a)(2),€(b)(2)€(1997).€€We€disagree.€€ThisÏCourt€has€stated€that€the€trial€court€need€not€instruct€the€jury€regarding€a€defenseÏunless€that€defense€is€fairly€raised€by€the€proof.€€òòState€v.€Shropshireóó,€874€S.W.2dÐ è8ˆ/1 Ð634,€639€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€Appellant€contends€that€because€he€wasÏarrested€for€possession€of€marijuana€and€the€jury€found€him€not€guilty€of€possessionÏof€marijuana€by€reason€of€entrapment,€his€arrest€was€necessarily€unlawful.€ÏHowever,€Appellant€cites€no€authority€for€the€proposition€that€an€acquittal€for€aÏcharged€offense€means€that€the€arrest€for€that€offense€was€unlawful.€€Indeed,€thatÏis€not€the€standard.€€The€lawfulness€of€an€arrest€depends€on€whether€it€is€foundedÏupon€probable€cause€to€believe€that€the€person€arrested€has€committed€a€criminalÏoffense.€€òòState€v.€Downeyóó,€945€S.W.2d€102,€106€(Tenn.€1997).€€ð ðWhether€probableÐ ð  Ðcause€is€present€depends€upon€whether€the€facts€and€circumstances€and€reliableÏinformation€known€to€the€police€officer€at€the€time€of€the€arrest€ððwere€sufficient€toÏwarrant€a€prudent€man€in€believing€that€the€[individual]€had€committed€an€offense.ðððð€ÏòòId.óó€(quoting€òòBeck€v.€Ohioóó,€379€U.S.€89,€91,€85€S.€Ct.€223,€225,€13€L.€Ed.€2d€142Ð °P Ð(1964)).€€In€this€case,€Appellant€paid€$2,000€to€Officer€Beech€for€two€pounds€ofÏmarijuana€in€a€transaction€that€was€overheard€through€listening€devices€by€the€otherÏofficers€who€subsequently€pursued€and€arrested€Appellant.€€Thus,€the€arrestingÏofficers€clearly€had€probable€cause€to€believe€that€Appellant€had€committed€aÏcriminal€offense.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@Dàò òVI.€€CONVICTIONS€FOR€BOTH€EVADING€ARREST€AND€RECKLESS€DRIVINGó óˆÐ @,à"$ ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€his€convictions€for€both€Class€D€felony€evading€arrestÏand€reckless€driving€cannot€be€sustained€because€they€arose€out€of€the€same€set€ofÏcircumstances.€€We€agree€that€an€accused€cannot€be€convicted€of€these€twoÏoffenses€for€the€same€course€of€conduct.€€Indeed,€this€Court€stated€in€òòState€v.€KerryÐ 6 ,. ÐD.€Garfinkleóó,€No.€01C01„9611„CC„00484,€1997€WL€709477,€at€*4„5€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ð7.0 ÐApp.,€Nashville,€Nov.€7,€1997),€that€convictions€for€both€reckless€driving€and€ClassÐ à9€02 ÐD€felony€evading€arrest€for€the€same€conduct€violate€principles€of€due€process€andÏdouble€jeopardy.€€However,€because€we€have€reversed€Appellantððs€conviction€forÏClass€D€felony€evading€arrest,€Appellantððs€conviction€for€reckless€driving€must€beÏaffirmed.€€Because€the€State€could€decide€not€to€prosecute€Appellant€or€a€jury€couldÏacquit€Appellant€of€Class€E€or€misdemeanor€evading€arrest,€we€need€not€decideÏwhether€a€conviction€for€both€reckless€driving€and€either€of€those€offenses€would€alsoÏviolate€principles€of€due€process€and€double€jeopardy.ÌÌœñNñà@??&®àñNññOñà@'DàñOñò òVII.›€€CONCLUSIONó óˆÐ à€ ÐÌà ` àBecause€we€find€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€AppellantððsÏconviction€for€Class€D€felony€evading€arrest,€the€conviction€for€that€offense€isÏreversed€and€the€charge€is€dismissed.€€Because€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€toÏinstruct€the€jury€on€the€lesser€included€offenses,€Appellant€is€entitled€to€a€new€trialÏfor€the€offense€of€Class€E€felony€or€misdemeanor€evading€arrest.€€In€all€otherÏrespects,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€œaffirmed.ñRñÔ#†Š3LŠXXã#÷ #ÔñRñ›ÌñJñÌà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àÌÌÌÌñJñÓ  ÓñJñà ` àÌÌñJññKñÌñKñÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌñLñÌñLñÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JUDGE