ÿWPCP …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝåw@í4- A 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ 0d- U>‘ U *Ï B)ù DC" AMe² BÊv~çvÓe D38 0@k AO«Æú 0DÀ D/ B3˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- µ [¶ D· ¸ E¹ º »  ¼ ½ E¾ Ó€ƒ‰"3|xÉ 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€ ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌò òApril€24,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó dPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ŠÔÔ€ ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€ìXXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÙ€€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€œKNOXVILLE›ÌÌœDECEMBER›€SESSION,€œ1996›ÌÌÌÓ  ÓœSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,›à à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€œ03C01„9507„CC„00203›Ìà àà àà àà àà à)ó óÌà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àœSULLIVAN›€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€œR.€JERRY€BECKó ó›Ìœò òNATHAN€ALLEN€CALLAHAN,)›à àœJUDGE›ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à àœó ó(First€Degree€Murder)ò ò›Ìó óÌÌò òÓ  ÓON€APPEAL€FROM€THE€JUDGMENT€OF€THEÌœCRIMINAL›€COURT€OF€œSULLIVAN€COUNTY›ó óÌÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌœSTEPHEN€M.€WALLACE›à àà àœCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDARIAN€B.€TAYLORÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àH.€GREELEY€WELLSÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNANCY€S.€HARRÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àBlountville,€TN€37617›ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌœAFFIRMED›ÌÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÇò òòòÓ  ÓÔ€ °ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ€ ŠÔÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àThis€is€an€appeal€as€of€right€pursuant€to€Rule€3,€Tennessee€Rules€ofÏAppellate€Procedure.€€The€Defendant,€Nathan€Allen€Callahan,€was€convictedÏby€a€Sullivan€County€jury€of€€one€count€of€first„degree€murder€and€one€count€ofÏsecond„degree€murder,€respectively,€for€the€shooting€deaths€of€his€mother€andÏyounger€sister.€€œThe›€jury€set€punishment€for€the€first„degree€murder€conviction€atÏlife€imprisonment€and€fined€the€Defendant€$47,000.00€for€the€count€of€second„degree€murder.€€The€trial€court€ordered€twenty„two€œyears›€imprisonment€on€theÏconviction€for€second„degree€murder€to€be€served€concurrently€with€the€lifeÏsentence.€€The€Defendant€appeals€his€convictions€and€raises€the€followingÏissues:€(1)€That€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction€for€murder€inÏthe€first€degree;€(2)€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€the€Defendantððs€specialÏjury€request;€(3)€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€suppress€his€confession;€andÏ(4)€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€suspending€the€fine€imposed€by€the€jury.€€AfterÏcareful€review€of€the€issues€and€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt.ÌÌà àOn€March€30,€1994,€Gale€Callahan€and€her€thirteen„year„old€daughter,ÏHolly,€were€shot€to€death€in€the€garage€of€their€home.€€œAt›€the€time€of€the€murders,Íthe€Defendant€had€just€turned€fifteen.€€He€lived€with€his€parents,€Gale€and€GlenÏCallahan,€and€his€younger€sister,€Holly,€in€a€suburban€neighborhood€in€theÏIndian€Hills€community€of€Sullivan€County.€€At€around€age€fourteen,€theÏDefendantððs€behavior€œhad€changed;›€he€had€new€friends,€his€grades€began€toÏœdrop,›€œhe›€stopped€doing€homework,€and€he€started€skipping€classes.€€In€the€fallÏof€1993,€after€becoming€suspicious€that€his€son€might€be€using€drugs,€GlenÏCallahan€installed€a€recorder€to€tape€his€sonððs€telephone€calls.€€On€New€YearððsÏEve,€1993,€Mr.€Callahan€recorded€the€Defendant€talking€with€a€friend€aboutÏusing€marijuana.€€He€also€talked€about€sneaking€out€of€the€house€and€drivingÏthe€new€Trans„Am€Pontiac€his€grandfather€had€bought€for€him.€€Mr.€CallahanÏconfronted€the€Defendant,€who€denied€that€this€€was€true€and€refused€to€revealÏhis€drug€source.€€Mr.€Callahan€became€enraged€and€smashed€the€DefendantððsÏelectric€guitar,€another€gift€from€his€grandfather.€€ÌÌà àMr.€Callahan€stayed€œthat€night€with›€the€Defendant€œwho›€lived€in€theÏdownstairs€area€of€the€house,€fearful€of€how€he€might€react.€€œThe€next€morning,›Ïthe€Defendant€went€into€the€bathroom€to€take€a€shower,€but€actually€crawledÏout€the€window.€€After€discovering€he€was€missing,€his€parents€searched€for€himÏand€later€found€him€lying€under€the€basement€steps.€€Mr.€Callahan€sold€theÏDefendantððs€car,€took€him€for€random€drug€tests,€and€became€very€restrictive€ofÏhis€activities€and€his€access€to€money.€€He€had€an€outpatient€mental€healthÍevaluation€in€January€which€revealed€no€significant€mental€disturbance,€œbut€didÏindicate€substance›€abuse.€€The€recommended€treatment€was€outpatientÏcounseling,€with€more€extensive€treatment€possible€if€the€œdrug›€screens€continuedÏto€appear€positive.€€Subsequent€drug€screens€continued€to€test€positive€forÏmarijuana€and€the€Defendantððs€parents€monitored€his€activities€at€school.€€TheyÏbought€a€new€€black€Chevrolet€Camaro€and€promised€the€Defendant€aÏlearnerððs€permit€to€drive€if€two€drugs€screens€came€back€negative.€€The€car€keysÏwere€kept€locked€up.ÌÌà àThe€situation€remained€somewhat€the€same€during€the€month€before€theÏmurders.€€Mr.€Callahan€noted€at€trial€that€the€Defendant€rarely€expressedÏemotion€and€that€he€had€never€seen€him€cry.€€The€Defendant€never€expressedÏanger,€even€after€his€guitar€was€smashed,€his€car€was€sold,€and€he€wasÏrestricted.€€However,€two€days€before€the€killings,€the€Defendant€asked€hisÏsister,€in€the€presence€of€her€friend,€ð ðwhat€would€you€do€if€I€killed€my€Mom€andÏDad?ðð€€His€sister€Holly€replied:€ð ðNathan,€shut€up.€€Thatððs€not€nice€to€say.€€œYou›Ïshouldnððt€do€that,€I€would€hate€you€forever€if€you€did.ððÌÌà àOn€the€day€of€the€murders,€the€Defendant€had€lengthy€telephoneÏconversations€with€two€of€his€friends.€€He€initiated€a€discussion€about€whetherÏhe€should€kill€his€parents.€€Unbeknownst€to€the€Defendant,€these€telephoneÍcalls€were€tape„recorded.€€They€revealed€the€animosity€he€harbored€œtoward›€hisÏœfamily€and›€the€planning€and€execution€of€the€murders.€€The€Defendant€devisedÏthe€plan€to€kill€his€mother€and€sister€after€they€returned€home€from€a€shoppingÏtrip.€€€His€father€was€away€on€a€business€trip€and€œwas€expected›€to€be€backÏlater€that€evening.€€€The€Defendant€retrieved€a€20€gauge€shotgun,€a€presentÏfrom€his€grandfather€that€was€stored€under€his€parents€bed.€€He€located€a€boxÏof€ammunition,€loaded€the€chamber€with€four€shells€and€placed€the€gun€outsideÏbehind€a€fence€near€the€garage.€€During€this€time,€the€Defendant€remained€inÏphone€contact€with€James€Saylor,€who€participated€actively€and€madeÏsuggestions.ÌÌà àWhen€the€Defendant€saw€that€his€mother€and€sister€had€returned,€he€setÏthe€telephone€down,€still€œoff›€the€hook,€and€went€outside.€€He€picked€up€theÏshotgun€and€hid€behind€his€Camaro,€that€was€parked€in€the€driveway.€€HisÏmother€and€sister€opened€the€garage€door€and€walked€inside€œtoward›€a€doorÏleading€into€the€house.€€As€they€neared€the€door,€the€Defendant€walked€into€theÏgarage.€€His€sister,€Holly,€turned€around€and€he€shot€her€in€the€lower€front.€€HeÏthen€shot€his€mother€in€the€shoulder.€€He€walked€within€a€few€feet€of€his€sisterÏand€shot€her€in€the€head,€then€reloaded€the€gun€and€shot€his€mother€in€theÏbuttocks,€in€her€back,€and€in€her€head.€€The€brains€of€both€victims€were€blownÏfrom€their€heads.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€left€the€garage€and€picked€up€the€telephone,€telling€JamesÏSaylor€that€he€had€killed€his€mother€and€sister.€€He€took€money€and€his€motherððsÏcellular€phone€and€put€the€shotgun€and€a€box€of€shells€in€the€Camaro.€€SaylorÏbecame€concerned€and€told€his€mother,€Terrell€Saylor,€what€the€Defendant€had€Ïdone.€€Terrell€Saylor€called€the€Defendant,€then€allowed€her€son€James€to€talkÏwith€him€while€still€listening€on€the€line.€€The€Defendant€again€stated€that€he€hadÏkilled€his€mother€and€sister.€€Fearful€that€he€would€come€to€their€home,€TerrellÏSaylor€called€911€and€reported€the€incident.€€The€Defendant€left€the€house,Ïdriving€the€black€Camaro.ÌÌà àMembers€of€the€Sullivan€County€Sheriffððs€Department€were€dispatched€toÏthe€Callahan€residence.€€Noticing€that€the€garage€door€was€open,€the€officersÏwent€inside€and€discovered€the€bodies€of€Gale€and€Holly€Callahan.€€The€officersÏalso€did€a€protective€sweep€of€the€home,€noticing€a€number€of€bloody€footprintsÏboth€in€the€garage€and€in€some€areas€of€the€house.€€Lieutenant€ReeceÏChristian€arrived€on€the€scene€to€investigate.€€A€number€of€shell€casings€wereÏobserved€in€the€garage.€€Gale€Callahanððs€purse€was€lying€in€a€laundry€basket,Ïwhere€the€Defendant€had€left€it€after€taking€some€cash.ÌÌà àMeanwhile,€the€Defendant€drove€to€the€Fort€Henry€Mall€to€look€forÏJonathan€Mann,€another€friend.€€He€approached€Andrew€Carter,€a€schoolÏclassmate,€in€€a€video€arcade€and€announced€that€he€had€just€killed€his€motherÏand€sister.€€The€Defendant€pulled€the€car€keys€out€of€his€pocket€and€asked€ð ðyouÏbelieve€me€now?ðð€€The€Defendant€also€stated€that€he€needed€to€findÏsomewhere€to€hide.€€He€left€the€mall€and€went€to€a€convenience€store,€theÏGreenwood€Market.€€While€he€was€using€the€pay€phone,€someone€at€theÏmarket€called€911€and€reported€his€presence.€€He€then€left€and€drove€to€theÏB&C€Market,€another€convenience€store.€€Charles€Addison,€a€local€resident,Ïsaw€the€Defendant€at€the€Greenwood€Market€and€followed€him€to€the€B&C.€ÏHe€observed€the€Defendant€on€the€pay€phone.€€Mr.€Addison€then€reported€theÏDefendantððs€whereabouts.€€Soon€thereafter,€Lieutenant€Christian€and€two€otherÏofficers€arrested€him€at€the€B&C€Market.€€The€officers€saw€a€shotgun€and€a€boxÏof€shells€through€the€hatchback€window.€€The€Defendant€was€transported€toÏthe€Sheriffððs€Department.ÌÌà àThere,€Glen€Callahan,€who€had€returned€from€his€business€trip,€gaveÏpermission€to€question€the€Defendant.€€After€being€advised€of€his€rights,€theÏDefendant€gave€a€lengthy€confession.€€Lieutenant€Christian€wrote€out€theÏstatement€as€œthe€Defendant›€made€the€oral€confession.€€The€DefendantÏreviewed€and€signed€the€document.€€A€urine€drug€screen€was€conducted€andÍthe€results€were€negative.€€The€Defendant€was€housed€œin›€the€Upper€EastÏTennessee€Regional€Juvenile€Detention€Center€until€he€was€transferred€to€theÏLakeshore€Mental€Institute€for€an€evaluation.€€He€was€determined€to€beÏcompetent€to€stand€trial.€€He€was€returned€to€the€Detention€Center.€€On€July€7,Ï1994,€the€Defendant€was€transferred€to€the€Sullivan€County€Criminal€Court€forÏprosecution€as€an€adult.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€was€indicted€on€two€counts€of€first„degree€murder€for€theÏshotgun€deaths€of€Gale€and€Holly€Callahan.€€He€was€transferred€to€the€SullivanÏCounty€Jail,€a€secure€facility,€and€was€housed€separately€from€the€adultÏpopulation.€€The€Defendant€was€tried€on€March€13„17,€1995,€and€wasÏconvicted€œon€a›€jury€verdict€of€one€count€œof€first„degree›€murder€and€one€count€œofÏsecond„degree›€murder.€€The€jury€imposed€a€sentence€of€life€imprisonment€for€theÏfirst„degree€murder€and€a€$47,000.00€fine€for€the€second„degree€murder.€€AÏsentencing€hearing€was€held€on€March€18,€1995,€œafter€which›€the€trial€judgeÏimposed€a€sentence€of€twenty„two€years€for€the€charge€of€second„degreeÏmurder€to€be€served€concurrently€with€the€life€sentence.€€The€Defendant€contestsÏhis€convictions€and€the€fine€set€by€the€jury.ÌÌÓ  ÓI.€Sufficiency€of€the€EvidenceÌÓ  Óà àÌà àIn€his€first€issue,€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€was€insufficientÏto€support€the€verdict€of€murder€in€the€œfirst€degree›€for€the€death€of€Gale€Callahan.€ÏHe€contends€that€the€State€failed€to€prove€the€element€of€deliberation€becauseÏhe€was€in€an€emotional€state€when€the€killings€occurred.€€ÌÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,Ïthe€standard€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÏto€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443ÏU.S.€307,€319€(1979).€€Questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€theÏweight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raisedÏby€the€evidence,€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€court.€€òòState€v.ÏPappasóó,€754€S.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€œApp.€1987).›€€Nor€may€this€courtÏreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ï(Tenn.€1978).€€ÌÌà àA€jury€verdict€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€Stateððs€witnessesÏand€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,Ï476€(Tenn.€1973).€€On€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€and€all€inferences€therefrom.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€atÏ835.€€Because€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€andÍreplaces€it€with€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused€has€the€burden€in€this€courtÏof€illustrating€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€returned€byÏthe€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982);€òòGraceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€at€476.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€claims€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€proveÏdeliberation€as€required€for€first„degree€murder.€€€The€trial€judge€instructed€the€juryÏunder€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„202(a)(1),€which€states,€"(a)ÏFirst€degree€murder€is:€€(1)€An€intentional,€premeditated€and€deliberate€killing€ofÏanother...."€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1)€(1991).€A€"€'[p]remeditated€act'Ïmeans€one€done€after€the€exercise€of€reflection€and€judgment.€€€PremeditationÏmay€include€instances€of€homicide€committed€by€poison€or€by€lying€in€wait."€ÏTenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(b)(2)€(1991).€A€"ðð[d]eliberate€act'€means€oneÏperformed€with€a€cool€purpose."€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(b)(1)€(1991).€€Ìà àÌà àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€addressed€the€issues€ofÏpremeditation€and€deliberation€in€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530€(Tenn.€1992),Ïand€in€€òòState€v.€Westóó,€844€S.W.2d€144€(Tenn.1992).€€€In€òòBrownóó,€the€courtÏemphasized€that€deliberation€and€premeditation€are€two€separate€elements€ofÏfirst„degree€murder.€€Deliberation,€the€court€said,€"requires€some€period€ofÏreflection,€during€which€the€mind€is€'free€from€the€influence€of€excitement,€orÍpassion.'€"€òòBrownóó,€836€S.W.2d€at€540.€€Thus,€deliberation€requires€ð ðthe€formationÏof€a€cool,€dispassionate€intent€to€kill.ðð€€òòWestóó,€844€S.W.2d€at€147.€€€PremeditationÏdoes€not€require€a€specific€amount€of€time€to€pass€between€the€formation€of€theÏidea€and€the€act.€òòBrownóó,€836€S.W.2d€at€540.€€However,€the€intent€necessary€toÏcommit€first„degree€murder€may€not€be€formed€in€an€instant€because€of€theÏadditional€requirement€of€deliberation.€€òòId.óó€at€543.€€€The€court€also€noted€thatÏrepeated€blows€or€shots,€alone,€were€not€enough€to€prove€first„degree€murder.€ÏòòId.óó;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Darnellóó,€905€S.W.2d€953,€961„62€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€contends€that€the€act€of€shooting€his€mother€was€not€freeÏfrom€passion€such€that€the€deliberation€was€formed€to€support€his€conviction.€Ïð ðPassionðð€has€been€defined€as€ð ðany€of€the€human€emotions€known€as€anger,Ïrage,€sudden€resentment€or€terror€which€renders€the€mind€incapable€of€coolÏreflection.ðð€€òòState€v.€Tuneóó,€872€S.W.2d€922,€926€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)Ï(quoting€òòState€v.€Bullingtonóó,€532€S.W.2d€556,€560€(Tenn.€1976)).€€Yet,€theÏpresence€of€agitation€or€anger€does€not€necessarily€preclude€a€finding€that€theÏact€was€performed€with€the€necessary€deliberation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Gentryóó,€881ÏS.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€points€to€the€tape€recording€of€his€telephoneÏconversations€just€prior€to€the€murders.€€He€asserts€that€his€demeanorÍdemonstrates€that€he€was€not€free€from€the€passion€of€the€moment.€€The€tapeÏrecording€was€played€for€the€jury€at€trial.€€The€Defendantððs€father€andÏgrandfather€testified€that€the€tape€recorded€conversation€did€not€sound€like€hisÏnormal€voice€and€that€he€sounded€agitated.€€The€Defendant€highlights€excerptsÏof€the€tape€in€which€he€forms€the€intent€to€kill.€€However,€he€claims€that€it€wasÏdone€in€an€excited€state€fueled€by€his€œfriend,›€James€œSaylorððs›€encouragement.€ÏThe€Defendant€does€make€some€statements€such€as€ð ðAh€shit,€Iððm€going€to€beÏso€goddamn€nervous€trying€to€drive€(after€he€murders€the€victims)ðð€and€that€itÏwould€be€ð ðdamn€funðð€or€that€ð ð[s]on€of€a€bitch,€Iððm€going€to€try€it.€€You€want€me€toÏcall€you€back?ðð€€At€a€later€point€in€the€conversation,€they€discuss€Saylor€comingÏover€to€the€Defendantððs€house€after€he€does€the€killings,€yet€Saylor€conditions€itÏby€saying€ð ðI€thought€you€were€going€to€do€that€firstðð€and€ð ðif€youððll€do€it,€Iððll€comeÏover.ðð€€The€Defendant€voices€some€agitation€by€saying€ð ðI€canððt€believe€what€theÏfuck€weððre€doing.ðð€€He€asserts€that€the€anxiety€he€was€experiencing€just€prior€toÏthe€murders€had€not€subsided€such€that€he€was€free€from€passion.ÌÌà àYet,€there€is€evidence€that€the€Defendant€coolly€calculated€a€plan,€that€heÏimplemented€the€plan,€and€that€he€considered€the€consequences€before€heÏacted.€€€In€his€confession,€he€admitted€to€thinking€about€killing€his€parents€twoÏweeks€before€the€œmurders€and€he›€talked€to€others€about€killing€his€parents€twoÏdays€before€the€murders.€œIn€his€confession,€he€states:€ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ 4 ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓI€told€my€sister€that€I€was€thinking€about€killing€our€parents€to€see€whatÏHolly€thought€about€it.€€Holly€did€not€believe€me€and€told€me€not€to€do€it.€ÏShe€did€not€think€I€was€serious€but€I€was€definitely€serious€about€killingÏmy€parents.€.€.€.€[I]€called€Jonathan€at€his€home€and€talked€with€him.€€WeÏtalked€about€killing€my€sister€and€my€mother€and€he€did€not€believe€me.€€IÏtold€him€I€did€not€like€the€way€my€sister€and€my€mother€were€treating€me.€.Ï.€.€I€have€been€thinking€about€killing€my€father,€mother€and€sister€for€aboutÏ2€weeks.€€Because€they€would€never€let€me€go€out€and€do€anything€withÏmy€friends.ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓà àFrom›€the€recorded€telephone€conversations,€€the€Defendant€consideredÏthat€if€he€killed€his€family€ð ðweððre€going€to€need€some€place€to€stay.ðð€Also,€heÏplans€the€event:€ð ðThey€just€went€out€to€eat.€€Why€donððt€you€come€over.€€IððmÏgoing€to€shoot€them€as€soon€as€they€walk€in€the€door.€€Come€up€behind€them,Ïand€shoot€them€in€the€garage€so€I€donððt€get€blood€all€over€the€house.ðð€€ð ðYouÏknow€where€my€car€is€at,€out€back€there,€Iððve€got€the€gun€laying€down€there.ðð€ÏWhen€the€Defendant€hears€that€two€other€boys€are€at€Saylorððs€house€he€asks:Ïð ðDoes€he€know€what€Iððm€going€to€do?€€Hey,€you€better€not€tell€them,€just€inÏcase.ðð€€He€states€that€ð ðif€I€get€caught.€€Iððll€go€to€jail.€.€.€.€If€I€get€pulled€over,€IððmÏgonna€have€to€shoot€the€goddamn€cop.€€I€canððt€outrun€his€fuckinðð€ass€ððcauseÏtheyððll€have€roadblocks.€.€.€.€I€could€get€myself€in€a€shit€load€of€trouble€right€now.€ÏHow€many€years€do€you€think€Iððd€get?€Life?ðð€€ð ðWeððre€going€to€pawn€all€myÏMomððs€jewelry€out€of€state.ðð€€Finally,€when€Saylor€suggests€giving€theÏDefendantððs€mother€Valium€in€her€food,€the€Defendant€responds:ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ 4 ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓà àDefendant:€€No,€Iððm€shooting€her€ass,€bitch.Ìà àSaylor:€€à àPoison€her.€€That€would€be€the€best€way.Ìà àDefendant:à àI€have€to€kill€her,€bitch,€what€if€she€wakes€up,€whatÏthe€à àà àà àfuck€am€I€gonna€say?Ìà àSaylor:à àShe€ainððt€gonna€wake€up€if€you€poison€her€right.Ìà àDefendant:à àI€want€to€leave€tonight,€you€sorry€bitch.€€Iððm€gonnaÏshoot€à àà àà àher,€shut€the€fuck€up,€Iððm€shooting€her.ÌÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓà àÌà àDr.€Nancy€Lanthorn,€a€clinical€psychologist,€testified€for€the€Defendant.€ÏShe€had€evaluated€him€and€listened€to€the€audio€tape€of€the€telephoneÏconversations.€€She€concluded€that€the€Defendant€was€socially€and€emotionallyÏimmature.€€She€related€that€his€cognitive€development€had€not€reached€a€pointÏwhere€he€could€effectively€evaluate€and€assess€the€consequences€of€hisÏactions€to€support€a€finding€that€he€deliberated€about€the€killings.€€Essentially,Ïshe€stated€that€ð ðhe€was€not€reflecting.€€He€was€not€planning€realistically€at€thatÏtimeðð€(before€the€killings).ÌÌà àThe€State€presented€Dr.€Kevin€Blanton€in€rebuttal,€who€evaluated€theÏDefendant€at€Lakeshore€Mental€Health€Institute€and€had€listened€to€the€audioÏtape.€€He€concluded€that€the€Defendant€had€enough€maturity€in€his€egoÏdevelopment€to€empathize€with€others,€or€to€consider€future€actions,€or€to€takeÏresponsibility€for€behavior.ðð€€He€opined€that€the€Defendant€had€weighed€matters,Ïplanned€the€killings€and€reflected€upon€the€consequences€such€that€he€wasÏable€to€deliberate€prior€to€the€act.€Although€admitting€that€the€DefendantÏsounded€anxious€and€nervous€or€nervous€and€elated,€he€asserted€that€theÍDefendantððs€speech€did€not€suggest€that€he€was€consumed€by€emotion.€€€Dr.ÏKris€Houser,€a€psychiatrist,€also€testified€that€the€Defendant€appeared€to€haveÏconsidered€the€ð ðwisdom€of€his€decision€to€killðð€and€that€he€considered€theÏpossible€negative€consequences.€€Dr.€Houser€œstated€that›€the€Defendant€wasÏnot€anxious€and€nervous€such€that€his€judgment€was€clouded.€€ÌÌà àAfter€a€careful€evaluation€of€the€record,€we€œconclude›€that€the€evidenceÏwas€œsufficient›€to€support€a€conviction€for€first„degree€murder€for€the€death€of€GaleÏCallahan.€€It€appears€that€the€jury€could€have€found€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt€that€the€Defendant€possessed€the€ability€to€deliberate€about€his€plan€toÏmurder€his€mother€and€that€he€weighed€the€consequences€of€his€actions.€ÏAlthough€he€may€have€been€anxious€or€elated€about€perpetrating€this€crime,Ïthis€does€not€necessarily€mean€that€his€emotions€clouded€his€ability€toÏdeliberate.€€A€ð ðcool€purposeðð€is€not€synonymous€with€a€complete€absence€ofÏemotion.€€It€merely€requires€that€the€act€be€done€without€passion€or€provocationÏand€free€from€the€influence€of€excitement.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Farmeróó,€927€S.W.2d€582,Ï589€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€œHere,€in€a€lengthy€confession,€the€DefendantÏadmitted€to€thinking€about€killing€his€parents€two€weeks€before€the€murders.€He›Ïtalked€about€murdering€his€parents€two€days€before€the€killings.€€œ€€He›€talked€withÏa€friend€on€the€telephone€while€he€planned€and€implemented€the€murders.€€HeÍshot€his€mother€and€sister€from€behind,€without€warning€and€without€provocationÏin€such€a€manner€as€to€insure€their€deaths.ÌÌà àThere€is€no€merit€to€this€issue.ÌÌÓ  ÓœII.›ÌÓ  ÓÌà àIn€his€second€issue,€the€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÏdenying€his€special€request€for€a€jury€instruction.€€At€trial,€the€DefendantÏrequested€that€the€trial€judge€charge€the€jury€the€following€from€òòState€v.€Brownóó,Ï836€S.W.2d€530€(Tenn.€1992).à àÌÌÒ  ÒÒ Ü ÒÒ ` ÒÒ Ü ÒÓÓThe€fact€that€repeated€shots€were€inflicted€upon€the€victim€is€notÏsufficient,€by€itself,€to€establish€first„degree€murder.€€Repeated€shotsÏcan€be€delivered€with€no€design€or€reflection.€€Only€if€such€shotsÏare€inflicted€as€the€result€of€premeditation€or€deliberation€can€theyÏbe€said€to€prove€first„degree€murder.ÌÒ  ÒÒ Ü ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓœòòÌId.óó›€at€541.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€request€on€the€ground€that€the€instructionÏwould€amount€to€an€improper€comment€on€the€evidence€because€it€suggestsÏthat€€premeditation€or€deliberation€could€be€inferred€from€repeated€shots.€€WithoutÏthe€instruction,€the€jury€would€decide€whether€repeated€shots€would€support€aÏfinding€of€first„degree€murder.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€claims,€however,€that€the€State€emphasized€the€fact€thatÏrepeated€shots€were€fired€through€testimony€by€the€medical€examiner€regardingÏthe€wounds€on€the€victims€and€the€number€of€shotgun€shells€found€at€theÏscene.€€He€argues€that€the€omission€of€the€special€jury€instruction€deprived€himÏœof€having›€every€issue€of€fact€submitted€to€the€jury€with€proper€instructions.ÌÌà àA€defendant€is€entitled€to€a€complete€and€correct€charge€of€the€law.€€òòStateÏv.€Teelóó,€793€S.W.2d€236,€249€(Tenn.€1990).€€A€trial€judge€should€properly€instructÏthe€jury€on€the€law€governing€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€introduced€at€trial.€ÏòòState€v.€McAfeeóó,€737€S.W.2d€304,€308€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.1987).€€If€a€trial€judgeÏgives€instructions€that€correctly,€fully,€and€fairly€set€forth€the€applicable€law,€it€isÏnot€error€to€refuse€to€give€a€special€requested€instruction.€€òòState€v.€Bohananóó,€745ÏS.W.2d€892,€897€œ(Tenn.Crim.App.1987).€›€Upon€reviewing€the€entire€charge€weÏmay€only€invalidate€it€if,€when€read€as€a€whole,€it€fails€to€fairly€submit€the€legalÏissues€or€misleads€the€jury€as€to€the€applicable€law.€€òòIn€re€Estate€of€Elamóó,€738ÏS.W.2d€169,€174€(Tenn.1987).ÌÌà àSpecial€instructions€should€be€given€if€"fundamental"€to€the€case.€€€WhereÏthe€charge€is€one€that€is€"fundamental€in€nature"€and€"essential€to€a€fair€trial,"Ïfailure€to€give€the€charge€may€result€in€error.€€òòState€v.€Phippsóó,€883€S.W.2d€138,Í142€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€€òòTeelóó,€793€S.W.2d€at€249;€€òòSouey€v.€Stateóó,€81ÏTenn.€€(13€Lea)€472,€480€(1884).ÌÌà àHere,€the€trial€court€gave€instructions€to€the€jury€in€accordance€with€theÏTennessee€Pattern€Jury€Instructions€for€first„degree€murder€as€well€as€theÏholdings€in€òòBrownóó€and€òòWestóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530€(Tenn.Ï1992);€€òòState€v.€Westóó,€844€S.W.2d€144€(Tenn.1992);€T.P.I.„Crim.€7.01€(3d.€ed.).€ÏThis€included€sections€defining€the€elements€of€the€crime€and€both€premeditationÏand€deliberation.€€This€was€a€complete€instruction€on€the€law€of€first„degreeÏmurder€as€to€the€required€elements€to€prove€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€Considering€the€facts€in€this€case,€the€instruction€that€was€given€wasÏsufficient.ÌÌà àA€special€instruction€must€be€fundamental€to€the€case€before€the€failure€toÏissue€it€becomes€error.€€Unlike€òòBrownóó,€repeated€shots€were€not€integral€toÏproving€the€case€at€bar.€€In€òòBrownóó,€the€Defendant€beat€his€three„year„old€son€toÏdeath.€€òòBrownóó,€836€S.W.2d€at€534.€€In€order€to€support€a€conviction€for€first„degree€murder,€the€State€relied€solely€on€circumstantial€evidence€that€the€victimÏhad€received€repeated€blows.€€òòId.óó€at€543.€€Our€supreme€court€œheld€that›Ïð ðrepeated€blowsðð€alone€could€œnot€support›€a€conviction.€€The€proof€in€this€case,Ïhowever,€does€not€rely€on€the€fact€that€the€Defendant€inflicted€repeated€shots.€ÍThere€was€ample€evidence€through€his€confession,€the€taped€telephone€calls,Ïand€the€testimony€of€witnesses€that€would€sustain€a€finding€that€the€killingsÏwere€premeditated€and€deliberate.€€The€necessity€of€a€special€instruction€mustÏbe€determined€by€ð ðthe€nature€of€the€proceedings€and€the€evidence€introducedÏduring€trial.ðð€€òòTeelóó,€793€S.W.2d€at€249;€òòseeóó€òòMcAfeeóó,€737€S.W.2d€at€308.€Thus,Ïthe€issue€of€repeated€shots€was€not€fundamental€to€the€proof€of€this€case.ÌÌà à€We€cannot€conclude€that€the€failure€of€the€trial€judge€to€issue€the€specialÏjury€instructions€prevented€the€Defendant€from€receiving€a€fair€trial.€€We€alsoÏagree€that€the€evidence€of€repeated€shots€was€an€issue€of€fact€and€that€anyÏinference€drawn€therefrom,€whether€it€supported€or€hindered€the€defense,€wasÏproperly€left€to€the€jury€to€decide.ÌÌà àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓIII.Ìœ›Ó  Ӝ̛à àIn€his€third€issue,€the€Defendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€admittingÏhis€confession€on€two€œgrounds:›€(1)€œThat›€the€failure€of€Sheriffððs€DepartmentÏdetectives€to€inform€him€that€he€could€be€tried€as€an€adult€rendered€hisÍconfession€involuntary;€and€(2)€that€the€confession€should€have€beenÏsuppressed€because€it€was€not€recorded€on€audio€tape.€€ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€asserts€that€his€waiver€of€his€right€to€remain€silent€wasÏinvoluntary€and€violative€of€the€Fifth€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesÏConstitution€and€Article€I,€Section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€The€FifthÏAmendment€to€the€Constitution€as€applied€to€the€States€through€the€FourteenthÏAmendment€insures€that€the€accused€may€not€be€compelled€to€be€a€witnessÏagainst€himself.€€The€Tennessee€Constitution€also€provides€that€a€defendantÏcannot€be€compelled€to€give€evidence€against€himself.€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€9.€ÏThe€accused€may€waive€these€rights,€but€the€waiver€must€be€made€ð ðvoluntarily,Ïknowingly,€and€intelligentlyðð€and€ð ðthe€accused€must€be€adequately€andÏeffectively€apprised€of€his€rights€and€the€exercise€of€those€rights€must€be€fullyÏhonored.ðð€€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€œ384›€U.S.€436,€444,€467,€86€S.Ct.€1602,€1612,Ïœ1624,›€16€L.Ed.2d€694,706,€719€(1966).€ÌÌà àThe€voluntariness€test€under€the€Tennessee€Constitution€is€moreÏprotective€of€individual€rights€than€the€test€under€the€Fifth€Amendment.€€òòState€v.ÏStephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€544€(Tenn.€1994);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Crumpóó,€834ÏS.W.2d€265,€268€(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€834€S.W.2d€915€(Tenn.€1992).€AÏwaiver€is€valid€if€the€suspect€is€aware€of€the€nature€of€the€right€beingÍabandoned€and€the€consequences€of€the€decision€to€abandon€the€right.€€òòId.óó€atÏ547.€€€In€assessing€whether€a€waiver€of€œa€right›€was€voluntary,€we€must€look€atÏthe€totality€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€relinquishment€of€the€right.òòÔ€ XÔ€€StateÏv.€Bentonóó,€759€S.W.2d€427,€431„32€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).Ô€ ŠÔ€ÌÌà àAfter€the€Defendant€was€arrested,€he€was€transported€to€the€SullivanÏCounty€Sheriffððs€Department€and€was€placed€in€an€interview€room.€€This€wasÏat€approximately€9:30€p.m.€€Glen€Callahan€arrived€at€the€Sheriffððs€œDepartmentÏand›€œgave›€his€permission€for€Lieutenants€Christian€and€Boyd€to€interview€theÏDefendant.€€Christian€presented€the€Defendant€with€a€standard€rights€formÏcontaining€the€òòMirandaóó€warnings€and€read€it€to€him.€€The€Defendant€also€readÏthe€form€himself€and€stated€that€he€understood€it.€Christian€asked€the€DefendantÏwhether€he€was€willing€to€talk,€and€he€indicated€his€assent.€€Christian€then€readÏa€waiver€of€rights€form,€which€the€Defendant€signed.€€He€then€made€aÏstatement.€€€He€was€calm€and€polite.€€€During€this€time,€Lieutenant€ChristianÏwrote€out,€verbatim,€the€Defendantððs€statement.€€The€Defendant€reviewed€theÏstatement,€initialed€any€changes,€and€signed€it.€€The€statement€chronicled€theÏevents€leading€up€to,€during,€and€after€the€killings,€resulting€in€a€thirteen„pageÏconfession.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€does€not€contend€that€he€was€coerced€into€giving€aÏconfession,€but€claims€that€œhis›€age€and€the€fact€that€he€was€not€informed€thatÏhe€œcould€be›€prosecuted€as€an€adult€precluded€him€from€making€a€knowing€andÏintelligent€waiver.€€He€asserts€that€he€is€potentially€exposed€to€two€differingÏranges€of€punishment€as€a€juvenile€and€as€an€adult.€€ÌÌà àThe€totality€of€the€circumstances€approach€has€been€applied€to€theÏcustodial€interrogation€of€juveniles.€€òòSeeóó€òòFare€v.€Michael€C.óó,€442€U.S.€705,€99ÏS.Ct.€2572,€61€L.Ed.2d€197€(1979).€€This€includes€assessing€ð ðthe€juvenileððs€age,Ïexperience,€education,€background,€and€intelligence,€and€into€whether€he€hasÏthe€capacity€to€understand€the€warnings€given€him,€the€nature€of€his€FifthÏAmendment€rights,€and€the€consequences€of€waiving€those€rights.ðð€€442€U.S.€atÏ725,€99€S.Ct€at€2572.€€€However,€ð ð[t]he€(United€States)€Constitution€does€notÏrequire€that€a€criminal€suspect€know€and€understand€every€possibleÏconsequence€of€a€waiver.ðð€€òòColorado€v.€Springóó,€479€U.S.€564,€574,€107€S.Ct.Ï851,€857,€93€L.Ed.2d€954€(1987);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòMoran€v.€Burbineóó,€475€U.S.€412,€106ÏS.Ct.€1135,€89€L.Ed.2d€410€(1986).€€The€primary€protection€afforded€by€theÏòòMirandaóó€warnings€are€to€prevent€coerced€self„incrimination€and€ð ðrelevantÏdefendant€ignorance.ðð€€òòStephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€at€547.ÌÌà àOur€examination€of€the€totality€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€theÏstatement€made€by€the€Defendant€œindicates›€that€the€relinquishment€of€his€rightsÏwas€not€the€product€of€intimidation,€coercion,€or€deception,€but€that€it€was€theÏresult€of€the€appellant's€free€and€deliberate€choice.€€The€Defendant€was€givenÏMiranda€warnings€and€read€them.€€He€read€and€signed€the€waiver€as€well.€€HisÏdemeanor€was€calm€and€cooperative.€€He€was€given€something€to€drink€and€toÏeat.€€€Although€he€was€of€a€young€age,€the€Defendant€has€above„averageÏintelligence€and€indicated€no€reason€why€he€could€not€comprehend€what€rightsÏhe€was€relinquishing.ÌÌà àAs€for€not€informing€him€that€he€could€be€tried€as€an€adult,€there€is€noÏconstitutional€requirement€that€mandates€such€information€be€provided€to€secureÏa€knowing€waiver.€€òòMirandaóó€warnings€inform€a€defendant€that€ð ðanything€youÏsay€can€be€used€against€you€in€court.ðð€€This€applies€to€any€court.€€Furthermore,Ïthe€ultimate€decision€to€try€the€Defendant€as€an€adult€was€not€made€until€afterÏhe€was€questioned€and€gave€his€statement.€€It€would€have€been€prematureÏand€inappropriate€for€the€detectives€to€outline€all€the€legal€consequences€of€aÏrelinquishment€of€rights.€€ÌœÌ›à àDeference€is€given€to€the€trial€court€to€assess€the€credibility€of€theÏwitnesses€and€determine€issues€of€fact.€€At€an€evidentiary€hearing€on€a€motionÍto€suppress€evidence,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€are€conclusive.€€òòState€v.ÏJacksonóó,€889€S.W.2d€219,€222€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€The€findings€of€the€trialÏjudge€are€afforded€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict€and€will€not€be€disturbed€onÏappeal€unless€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court.€€òòId.óó;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Kellyóó,€603€S.W.2d€726,€728„29€(Tenn.1980).€òòÏState€v.€Killebrewóó,€760€S.W.2d€228,€233€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€€€TheÏevidence€in€the€record€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€court's€findings.ÏThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€also€asserts€that€his€confession€should€have€beenÏsuppressed€because€it€was€not€tape„recorded.€€He€readily€admits€that€there€isÏno€precedent€in€this€state€requiring€confessions€to€be€recorded.€€He€argues€thatÏthe€law€should€be€changed.€€He€cites€opinions€from€two€state€supreme€courtsÏthat€have€instituted€a€policy€that€œconfessions›€must€be€œtape€recorded›€if€at€allÏpossible.€€òòState€v.€Scalesóó,€518€N.W.2d€587€(Minn.€1994);€òòStephan€v.€Stateóó,Ï711€P.2d€1156€(Alaska€1985).Ìœ›Ìà àIn€òòStephanóó,€the€court€ruled€that€custodial€interrogations€in€a€place€ofÏdetention€must€be€electronically€recorded.€€711€P.2d€at€1162.€€This€holding€wasÏbased€entirely€on€that€courtððs€interpretation€of€the€Alaska€Constitution.€òòId.óó€atÏœ1160.€€The›€Minnesota€Supreme€Court€exercised€its€supervisory€power€toÍinstitute€a€recording€requirement€for€custodial€interrogations.€€òòScalesóó,€518€N.W.2dÏ592.€€Although€we€agree€that€it€is€preferable€to€œrecord›€œelectronically€the›€reading€ofÏòòMirandaóó€warnings,€the€waiver€of€rights,€and€custodial€interrogations,€we€declineÏto€impose€this€as€a€œrequirement€for€admissability€of€statements.›€€It€inures€to€theÏbenefit€of€law€enforcement€to€record€the€processes€by€which€it€garnersÏconfessions€by€showing€that€the€procedures€were€done€properly€and€withoutÏcoercion.€€It€is€œrather€curious›€œthat›€the€detectives€in€this€case€chose€to€write€outÏthe€Defendantððs€statement€in€longhand.€€Yet,€neither€the€federal€nor€stateÏconstitutions€mandate€the€use€of€recording€devices.€€Therefore,€we€find€that€theÏtrial€court€properly€admitted€the€Defendantððs€written€statement.€€This€issue€hasÏno€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓIV.ÌÓ  Óà àÌà àAs€his€fourth€and€final€issue,€the€Defendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€erredÏin€declining€to€waive€the€$47,000€fine€assessed€by€the€jury€on€the€count€ofÏsecond„degree€murder.€€The€imposition€of€fines€is€guided€by€the€1989ÏSentencing€Act.€€Second„degree€murder€is€a€Class€A€felony€for€which€the€juryÏmay€impose€a€fine€not€to€exceed€fifty€thousand€dollars€($50,000).€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðððð€39„13„210(b),€40„35„111(b)(1).€€Furthermore,€the€punishment€should€beÍjustly€deserved€in€relation€to€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„102(1).ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€asserts€that€because€he€is€indigent€and€the€fine€wouldÏpose€an€economic€hardship,€the€trial€court€should€have€waived€the€fine.€€HeÏcites€òòState€v.€Bryantóó,€805€S.W.2d€762€(Tenn.€1991)€which€approved€of€theÏappellate€review€of€fines.€€He€also€notes€that€the€court€upheld€this€CourtððsÏvacating€a€fine€œimposed›€on€an€indigent€woman€who€worked€as€a€waitress€andÏnewspaper€delivery€person.€€She€also€was€convicted€for€selling€cocaine€andÏwas€fined€$200,000.€€òòState€v.€Brenda€G.€Bryantóó,€C.C.A.€No.€872,€SullivanÏCounty€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Dec.€27,€1989),€òòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóóÏ(Tenn.€1990).€€The€Defendant€contends€that€he€is€indigent,€will€likely€spendÏtwenty„five€years€in€prison,€was€in€high€school€and€has€no€employment€record.€ÏYet,€proof€of€indigency€and€hardship€does€not€necessarily€preclude€theÏpunishment€of€a€fine.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Marshallóó,€870€S.W.2d€532,€542€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1993).€€If,€however,€it€hampers€a€defendantððs€rehabilitation,€a€fine€mayÏrepresent€an€unreasonable€punishment.€€òòId.óó€€ÌÌà àHere,€the€Defendant€is€clearly€underage,€indigent€and€has€not€developedÏjob€skills.€€There€is€evidence,€though,€that€he€has€support€from€his€family€thatÏhas€not€abated€even€after€this€calculated€and€tragic€œcrime.›€€We€do€not€feel€thatÍthe€imposition€of€the€fine€in€this€case€is€such€that€it€contravenes€the€purpose€ofÏthe€Sentencing€œAct;›€rather€it€reflects€the€seriousness€of€the€crime€for€which€theÏDefendant€was€convicted.€€We€find€no€error.ÌÌà àAfter€thoroughly€reviewing€the€record€and€the€Defendantððs€œarguments€in›Ïthis€appeal,€we€conclude€that€none€have€merit.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìà àÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌœDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGE›ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌœTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGE›