WPC" # VUNa % 0gw@ 4\ p   0 0D2 {(v  d * 0J 0T: 0^ 0h 0rT 0| 0B 0 1uX 0d 0@1 Bq D+ 0K D3U>D;; AOvB)DC A1 AOU*GXffKv~v/ AO!Q! 0D" D/[" B"HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(?U$TiTXX VUWEXUYUZU[D\D]U^Ӏj 3|xj([(3v$ U!TчTXX      0  (#$  0  ($Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X("$     d'dxd( $ Figure  2  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5####'dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman7Border 1dd&!%,C << G% Line 7 d....7Border 2dd&!%$ I&mage <=8C HKKKK!%/C << G<  9p`(Arial  !+   !   22   YYY FILED2X August22,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.2AppellateCourtClerk   !+       $       TheindictmentinthiscaseallegesviolationofT.C.A.3914504,whichisnotthepropercodesection.TheproperciteisT.C.A.3913504.Thereferencetoacodesectionisdeemedtobesurplusage;andtheinsertionofawrongcodesectiondoesnotrendertheindictmentinvalid.Colev.State,512S.W.2d598,601602(Tenn.Crim.App.1974);McCrackenv.State,489S.W.2d48,51(Tenn.Crim.App.1972).SeeStatev.Beal,614S.W.2d77,80(Tenn.Crim.App.1981). \\RA'\ \\RA'\PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva !C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   2  ' dxdP Pd ! . +      T\RA'\&\RA'\P-,?/+h|  `PߛR13/A1-j|<`  `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLE@ AUGUST1997SESSION̜ ̛ THOMASV.CASE    ) C.C.A.NO.01C019610CC00444      ) Appellant    ) DICKSONCOUNTY      )VS.      ) Hon.RobertE.Burch,Judge      )STATEOFTENNESSEE   )      ) (PostConviction)  Appellee.    )̜FORTHEAPPELLANT:    FORTHEAPPELLEE:THOMASV.CASE,PROSE   JOHNKNOXWALKUP SouthCentralCorrectionsCenter   AttorneyGeneralandReporterP.O.Box279Clifton,Tennessee384250279   LISAA.NAYLOR       AssistantAttorneyGeneral       450JamesRobertsonParkway       Nashville,Tennessee372430493       DANALSOBROOKS       DistrictAttorneyGeneral       P.O.Box580       Charlotte,Tennessee37036 OPINIONFILED:____________________AFFIRMED JOEH.WALKER,IIISp.JUDGE @ OPINION̛̜   Petitioner,ThomasV.Case,appealstheorderoftheCircuitCourtofDicksonCountysummarilydismissinghispetitionforpostconvictionrelief. Petitionerwasconvictedforaggravatedsexualbattery(T.C.A.3913504) 4   כonSeptember1,1993,afterenteringapleaofnolocontendere,andisservingatenyearsentence. Petitionerenteredthepleareservingtherighttoappealacertifiedquestionoflaw.OnApril28,1994,theCourtofCriminalAppealsofTennessee,affirmedtheconviction.Statev.Case,884S.W.2d146(Ct.Crim.App.1994). ThepetitionforpostconvictionreliefwasfiledAugust15,1996. OnSeptember30,1996,thecourtenteredanorderdenyingpostconvictionrelief. ThepetitionercontendsthattheindictmentmustbedismissedundertherecentopinionofStatev.RogerDaleHill,becausetheindictmentfailstoincludeaspecificmensrea,andmerelystatesthedefendantacted unlawfully. Theindictmentinthiscasechargedinrelevantpartthatthepetitioneronoraboutthe8thdayofJanuary,1993,inthecountyofDickson,unlawfully,willfully,andfeloniouslydidhaveunlawfulsexualcontactwithanother,anamedminor,andthatthevictimwaslessthanthirteenyearsofage.      I.  Petitionercontendstheindictmentchargingaggravatedsexualbatterywasfatallydefectiveinthatitdidnotcontaintherequisitemensreaelementoftheoffense.Petitionerrelies5uponStatev.Hill,1996Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS369,C.C.A.No.01C019508CC00267(Tenn.Crim.App.filedJune20,1996,atNashville).Thepetitionerdidnotraisethisissueinthetrialcourt. ThedefendantinHillwaschargedwiththeoffenseofaggravatedrape.Thecourt6concludedthatthefailureoftheindictmenttospecificallyallegethemensreawasfatallydefective.T.C.A.4013202providesasfollows: Theindictmentmuststatethefactsconstitutingtheoffenseinordinaryandconciselanguage,withoutprolixityorrepetition,insuchamannerastoenableapersonofcommonunderstandingtoknowwhatisintended,andwiththatdegreeofcertaintywhichwillenablethecourt,onconviction,topronouncetheproperjudgment;andinnocasearesuchwordsas"forceandarms"or"contrarytotheformofthestatute"necessary.  Fairandreasonablenoticeofthechargesagainstadefendantisafundamentalconstitutionalrequirement.U.S.Const.amend.VI;Tenn.Const.art.I,9.Anindictmenthasthree(3)purposesinTennessee;namely,(1)toinformthedefendantoftheprecisecharges;(2)toenablethetrialcourtuponconvictiontoenteranappropriatejudgmentandsentence;and(3)toprotectthedefendantagainstdoublejeopardy.Statev.Trusty,919S.W.2d305,309(Tenn.1996).Thefactsmustbestatedinordinaryandconciselanguagesothatapersonof"commonunderstanding"willknowwhatisintended.Wardenv.State,214Tenn.391,381S.W.2d244(1964). Theindictmentinthiscaseallegedthatthepetitionerhadunlawfulsexualcontactwithanamedvictimlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage.Thepetitionerwasinformedbythisindictmentoftheprecisecharge.Thechargewasstatedinordinaryandconciselanguagesothatapersonofcommonunderstandingwouldknowwhatwasintended.Thechargeclearlyenabledthetrialcourtuponconvictiontoentertheappropriatejudgmentandsentence.Finally,thechargesprotectedthepetitioneragainstanydoublejeopardyproblems. FortheabovereasonswedeclinetofollowHillandfindthisindictmentwassufficienttochargeaggravatedsexualbattery.Furthermore,iftherehadbeenanobjectiontotheindictmentbaseduponthefailuretoallegearequisitementalstate,itshouldhavebeenraisedpretrial.SeeT.R.Cr.P.12(b)(2).@ II.  EvenifHillhasvitality,itisdistinguishablefromtheinstantcase.UnlikeHill,theindictmentchargedthatthedefendantdidhaveunlawfulsexualcontactwith[MMN],achildlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage.  Atthetimeofthedefendantsacts,T.C.A.3913504definedaggravatedsexualbatteryasunlawfulsexualcontact accompaniedbyanyofthecircumstanceslistedinsection3913502(a).Petitionerappealedthecertifiedquestionoflawastothevalidityoftheaggravatedcircumstanceofthesexualbatteryofachildlessthanthirteenyearsofage.TheCourtofCriminalAppeals,atNashville,determinedthattheoffenseofaggravatedsexualbatteryofachildlessthanthirteenyearsofagewasacrimeinJanuary,1993,andremainedpunishableunderT.C.A.3913504asaClassBfelony.Statev.Case,884S.W.2d146(Ct.Crim.App.1994). T.C.A.3913501(6)defines"sexualcontact"asthe0 ... intentional touchingofthevictim's,thedefendant's,oranyotherperson'sintimateparts,orthe intentional touchingoftheclothingcoveringtheimmediateareaofthevictim's,thedefendant's,oranyotherperson'sintimateparts,ifthat intentional touchingcanbereasonablyconstruedasbeingforthepurposeofsexualarousalorgratification(emphasisadded).   Therefore,thementalelementof"intentional"isincludedinthedefinitionof"sexualcontact"andisimpliedlyincludedwithintheindictment.Bystatutorydefinitiontheonlywayonecanhave"sexualcontact"isbythe"intentional"touching...forthepurposeofsexualarousalorgratification."Id. Thestatehastheburdenofprovingtherequisiteculpablementalstateregardlessofwhetherthestatutedoesordoesnotsetforththeculpablementalstate.Statev.GriffisandRogers,1997Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS427,No.01C019506CC00201atNashville,April30,1997. Inaprosecutionforaggravatedsexualbattery,mererecklessnessastotheageofthevictimwassufficientevidencetoestablishdefendantsguilt.Statev.Parker,887S.W.2d825(Tenn.Crim.App.1994). We,therefore,concludethatHillisdistinguishablebaseduponthechargedoffense.TheCourtfindsthattheindictmentinthiscasewasnotdefective,inthatitallegedtheoffense,thetrialcourthadsubjectmatterjurisdiction,andthatthepostconvictioncourtproperlydismissedthepetition. ThejudgmentofthetrialcourtisAFFIRMED.        __________________________        JOEH.WALKER,III        Sp.JUDGECONCUR:_______________________JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE______________________J.CURWOODWHITT,JR.,JUDGE