ÿWPCO …#†VU:Ü % 0(4DXg 0Jo 0T¹ 0^ 0hk 0rÓ 0|E 0†Á 0G 1u× U,L 0dx U,Ü U* B)2 DC[ AMž 4ë fv~…vÓ BÖ D3ó 0@& AOfƵ 0D{ 0D¿ D/ B2˜IBM Proprinter X24ePROPRN24ÈÈ0®ØP ÿ=®—LRƒ P,@ ÐAZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡3x23|xu2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d7Border 1dd€-Cþÿ << Gÿÿ *Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òJanuary€31,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó \Ñ\R AØ'\ÑPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò d%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ € ÒÒ X ÒÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€Ø„XdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€ŠÔÓ` °‚X! ˜XÓÙ€€ÙßL€ !;+'h|` Å `€€Lßà@ àÔ€XÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINALÏAPPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌà@ àOCTOBER€1995€SESSIONÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEà àà àà à)à àNO.€02C01„9503„CC„00058Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àAppelleeà àà àà à)à àLAKE€COUNTYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€JOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌKENNY€CLAY,à àà àà àà à)à à(Burglary€„€2€Counts;Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€€Theft€Over€$1,000€„€2€Counts)Ìà àà àAppellantà àà àà à)à àÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌClarence€N.€Cochranà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌAsst.€District€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ208€N.€Mill€Avenueà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌP.O.€Box€742à àà àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0493ÌDyersburg,€Tennessee€38025„0742Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àClinton€J.€MorganÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Atty.€Gen.€&€ReporterÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.€Phillip€BivensÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à115€E.€Market€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDyersburg,€Tennessee€38024Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJohnny€Vaughn€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÏà àà àà àà àà àà àà àChurch€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTiptonville,€Tennessee€38079ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóà àÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌWilliam€M.€Barker,€JudgeÓÓÓ Ð Óà@ àòòOPINIONóóÌThe€appellant,€Kenny€Clay,€appeals€as€of€right€from€four€judgments€ofÏconviction€entered€on€August€22,€1994,€by€the€Circuit€Court€of€Lake€County€followingÏjury€verdicts€finding€the€appellant€guilty€of€two€(2)€counts€of€burglary€and€two€(2)Ïcounts€of€theft€over€one€thousand€($1,000)€dollars.€€In€this€appeal,€the€appellantÏpresents€two€issues€for€review.€€First,€he€argues€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€toÏsupport€the€guilty€verdicts.€€Second,€he€contends€that€the€State€engaged€inÏprosecutorial€misconduct€in€connection€with€its€presentation€of€the€testimony€of€stateÏwitness€Michael€Foster.€ÌFollowing€a€review€of€the€record€in€this€appeal,€we€find€no€reversible€errorÏand€affirm€the€trial€court.ÌOn€March€14,€1994,€the€appellant€was€indicted€by€the€Grand€Jury€of€LakeÏCounty€in€a€four„count€indictment.€€Count€one€charged€the€appellant€with€theÏJanuary6,€1994,€burglary€of€a€Piggly€Wiggly€Grocery€Store€owned€and€operated€byÍJack€Ervin.€€Count€two€charged€the€appellant€with€the€theft€of€$2,895€in€cash€as€aÏresult€of€the€January€burglary€of€the€Piggly€Wiggly€Grocery€Store.€€Count€threeÏcharged€the€appellant€with€the€February€20,€1994,€burglary€of€the€same€PigglyÏWiggly€Grocery€Store.€€Finally,€Count€four€charged€the€appellant€with€the€theft€ofÏ$3,100€cash€and€twenty„one€cartons€of€cigarettes€taken€during€the€February€1994Ïburglary.€€ÌThe€evidence€introduced€at€trial€established€that€on€January€6,€1994,€aÏburglary€occurred€at€the€Piggly€Wiggly€Grocery€Store€located€in€Tiptonville,ÏTennessee.€€The€business€was€owned€and€operated€by€Mr.€Jack€Ervin,€and€theÏburglary€occurred€sometime€between€the€hours€of€3:00€a.m.€and€4:00€a.m.€€EntranceÏto€the€building€was€obtained€by€breaking€a€glass€door€on€the€north€side€of€theÏbuilding.€€Thereafter,€the€burglar€went€into€the€business€office€and€pried€open€certainÏfiling€cabinets€apparently€by€using€a€tire€tool€and€screwdrivers€which€were€later€foundÏon€the€floor€of€the€office€close€to€the€filing€cabinets.€€€Approximately€$2,300€was€takenÏfrom€the€cash€box€located€within€the€filing€cabinet€in€the€January€burglary.€€The€tireÏtool€used€to€pry€open€the€filing€cabinet€was€discovered€by€members€of€the€TiptonvilleÏPolice€Department,€and€it€was€introduced€in€evidence.€€The€tire€tool€was€identified€byÏJohn€Higgins€as€belonging€to€him.€€Higgins€testified€that€the€appellant,€a€friend,€hadÏborrowed€his€tire€tool€in€January€1994,€along€with€a€screwdriver.€€Higgins€testifiedÏthat€he€later€asked€the€appellant€to€return€the€tools€to€him,€but€the€appellant€did€not.€€ÌCheryl€Tate,€appellant's€live„in€companion,€testified€that€the€appellant€had€noÏjob€in€January€or€February€1994,€and€in€fact€had€not€maintained€any€regular€job€forÏapproximately€two€years.€€She€testified€that€on€the€evening€prior€to€the€JanuaryÏburglary,€the€appellant€left€home€at€about€6:00€or€6:30€p.m.,€saying€he€was€going€toÏshoot€pool€and€drink€some€beer.€€He€asked€Ms.€Tate€for€some€money€before€leavingÏfor€the€evening.€€He€did€not€return€home€until€early€the€next€morning,€and€when€heÏreturned€he€was€in€the€possession€of€"folding"€money.€€Cheryl€Tate€estimated€theÏtotal€amount€to€be€"maybe€over€one€hundred€dollars."€€Later€that€morning€sheÏdiscovered€paper€quarter„roll€wrappers€in€the€house€which€had€not€been€thereÏearlier.€€ÌA€second€burglary€of€the€Piggly€Wiggly€Grocery€Store€occurred€just€afterÏ1:00a.m.€on€the€morning€of€February€20,€1994.€€The€second€burglary€bore€a€strikingÏresemblance€to€the€one€which€had€occurred€in€January.€€Entrance€to€the€buildingÏwas€obtained€through€the€back€door€of€the€Piggly€Wiggly,€and€once€again€the€sameÏor€similar€filing€cabinet€located€in€the€office€of€the€grocery€store€had€been€pried€openÏand€approximately€$3,100€removed€from€the€cash€box€inside€of€the€filing€cabinet.€ÌTerrance€Montgomery,€a€friend€of€the€appellant,€testified€that€he€lived€in€theÏOak€Haven€Apartments€which€were€located€behind€the€Piggly€Wiggly€store.€ÏMontgomery€testified€that€he€had€seen€and€talked€with€the€appellant€earlier€the€nightÏof€the€February€burglary€when€the€appellant€came€to€Montgomery's€apartment€atÍ12:39€a.m.€€The€appellant€came€inside€the€apartment€and€visited€with€Montgomery€forÏa€very€short€period€of€time€and€thereafter€left.€€Montgomery€testified€that€a€little€afterÑ€"ÑÇ1:00€a.m.€he€looked€from€his€apartment€and€saw€the€back€door€of€the€PigglyÏWiggly€being€opened.€€He€could€tell€that€the€door€was€open€because€he€could€seeÏthe€light€from€inside€the€building€shining€out.€€He€reported€the€break„in€to€the€sheriff'sÏdepartment.€ÌMontgomery€testified€that€after€the€break„in€the€appellant€came€back€toÏMontgomery's€apartment€and€asked€for€a€ride€home.€€Montgomery€testified€that€heÏdid€not€give€the€appellant€a€ride,€but€believed€Lynn€Kimball€and€Avis€Flowers€droveÏthe€appellant.€€About€one€hour€later,€however,€Montgomery€saw€the€appellant€at€aÏneighbor's€home€in€the€Oak€Haven€apartment€complex.€€Montgomery€testified€thatÏapproximately€thirty€minutes€later€he€went€to€the€neighboring€apartment.€€TheÏappellant€was€there€and€at€that€time€he€saw€the€appellant€in€possession€of€about€"twoÏinches"€of€folded€paper€money.€€Although€he€said€he€was€not€certain,€MontgomeryÏbelieved€the€appellant€told€him€he€got€the€money€at€the€Piggly€Wiggly€store.€€TheÏappellant€told€Montgomery€to€say€that€he€had€not€seen€the€appellant€if€asked.€€ÌJohn€Higgins,€the€owner€of€the€tire€tool€identified€as€being€used€in€theÏJanuary€burglary,€testified€that€on€the€day€after€the€second€burglary,€the€appellantÏgave€Higgins€twenty€dollars€to€drive€him€to€Ridgely,€Tennessee.€€At€that€time€HigginsÏsaw€the€appellant€in€possession€of€a€roll€of€money€"like€maybe€two€or€three€hundredÏdollars."€€The€appellant€told€Higgins€the€money€had€come€from€the€Piggly€WigglyÏbreak„in,€but€that€was€going€to€be€his€"last€job."€€ÌRegarding€the€second€burglary,€Cheryl€Tate,€who€lived€with€the€appellantÏuntil€his€arrest,€testified€that€on€February€20,€1994,€the€appellant€left€before€dark€andÏdid€not€return€home€until€the€following€day.€€When€he€did€return,€he€had€a€lot€ofÏmoney,€and€Tate€saw€him€counting€it.€€She€described€the€money€as€"stacks€ofÏhundreds."€€The€appellant€told€Cheryl€Tate€to€"keep€her€mouth€shut."€€On€cross„examination,€Tate€said€she€saw€the€appellant€counting€the€money€a€couple€of€daysÏafter€the€February€burglary,€not€the€following€day.€€ÌMichael€Foster,€a€close€friend€of€the€appellant,€testified€that€the€appellant€hadÏadmitted€the€burglaries€to€him.€€ÌThe€appellant€offered€no€evidence.ÌAn€earlier€trial€of€the€appellant€resulted€in€a€mistrial€when€the€jury€was€unableÏto€reach€a€unanimous€verdict.€€During€that€initial€trial,€Michael€Foster€testified€that€heÏhad€never€had€any€discussions€with€the€appellant€following€the€burglaries.€€It€isÏapparent€from€reading€his€testimony€during€the€first€trial€that€the€prosecutor€wasÏsurprised€when€Foster€denied€under€oath€that€the€appellant€had€admitted€to€FosterÏthat€he€had€burglarized€and€stolen€money€from€the€grocery€store.€€Apparently€FosterÏhad€previously€met€with€Mr.€Jack€Ervin,€the€owner€of€the€Piggly€Wiggly€store,€andÏseveral€police€officers€in€Mr.€Ervin's€office€at€the€Piggly€Wiggly€store€and€advisedÏthem€that€the€appellant€had€admitted€to€Foster€his€involvement€in€one€or€bothÏburglaries.ÌFollowing€the€mistrial€Foster€was€indicted€for€perjury€in€connection€with€hisÏtestimony€in€the€May€12,€1994,€aborted€trial€of€the€appellant.€€ÌPrior€to€the€appellant's€second€trial€on€July€20,€1994,€which€resulted€in€hisÏconvictions,€the€district€attorney€general€advised€Foster€that€he€would€dismiss€theÏperjury€charge€against€him€if€Foster€would€testify€truthfully€regarding€his€conversationÏwith€the€appellant€wherein€the€appellant€admitted€his€guilt€to€Foster.€€ÌPrior€to€Foster€testifying€in€the€second€trial,€counsel€for€the€appellant€advisedÏthe€trial€court€of€the€situation€regarding€the€district€attorney's€agreement€with€Foster€toÏsecure€his€testimony,€but€made€no€objection€to€the€proposed€testimony.€€CounselÏconcluded€his€statement€to€the€court€by€saying,€"It€just€is€a€deal€that€I€just€don't€like,Ïand€I€just€think€the€court€ought€to€be€aware€of€it,€and€I€also€think€the€jury€ought€to€beÏaware€of€it."€€The€trial€court€advised€counsel€that€he€certainly€could€cross„examine€theÏwitness€so€as€to€make€the€jury€aware€of€his€previous€testimony,€the€agreement€withÏthe€State€to€drop€the€perjury€charge,€and€how€his€anticipated€testimony€varied€fromÏhis€previous€testimony.€€The€trial€judge€was€of€the€opinion€that€Foster's€testimonyÏwould€be€admissible€and€that€the€weight€to€be€given€to€it€and€the€credibility€of€theÏwitness€would€be€a€matter€for€the€jury.€€We€agree.ÌBy€not€objecting€to€the€proposed€testimony€of€Foster€in€the€second€trial,€theÏappellant€has€waived€consideration€by€this€Court€of€the€issue€on€appeal.€€òòSeeóóÍòòTeague€v.€Stateóó,€772€S.W.2d€915,€926€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€òòState€v.€Killebrewóó,Ï760€S.W.2d€228,€235€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€T.R.A.P.€36(a).ÌFrom€a€reading€of€the€record€in€this€case,€however,€it€is€clear€that€theÏagreement€made€by€the€district€attorney€general€with€Foster€was€that€the€perjuryÏcharge€against€Foster€would€be€dismissed€conditioned€upon€Foster€testifyingÏtruthfully€during€the€appellant's€second€trial.€€It€can€hardly€be€said€to€be€prosecutorialÏmisconduct€for€the€district€attorney€general€to€pressure€a€witness€to€give€truthfulÏtestimony.€€There€is€no€indication€anywhere€in€this€record€that€the€district€attorneyÏgeneral€pressured€Michael€Foster€or€made€an€agreement€with€him€to€secureÏuntruthful€testimony.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌThe€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€convict€him€ofÏany€of€the€offenses€with€which€he€was€indicted.€€Initially,€we€note€that€our€standard€ofÏreview€when€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€questioned€on€appeal€is€"whether,Ïafter€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rationalÏtrier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt."€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789Ï(1979).€€This€means€that€we€may€not€reweigh€the€evidence,€but€must€presume€thatÏthe€jury€has€resolved€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€and€drawn€all€reasonableÏinferences€from€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676ÏS.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.Í1978).€€A€guilty€verdict€rendered€by€the€jury€and€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accreditsÏthe€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State,€and€a€presumption€of€guilt€replaces€theÏpresumption€of€innocence.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).ÌA€defendant€challenging€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€has€the€burden€ofÏillustrating€to€this€Court€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€returnedÏby€the€trier€of€fact€in€his€or€her€case.€€This€Court€will€not€disturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€forÏlack€of€sufficient€evidence€unless€the€facts€contained€in€the€record€and€anyÏinferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€facts€are€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€for€aÏrational€trier€of€fact€to€find€the€defendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.ÏTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€ÌWith€regard€to€the€burglary€and€theft€of€January€6,€1994,€the€evidence€of€theÏdefendant's€guilt€is€circumstantial€in€nature.€€However,€it€is€a€well€establishedÏprinciple€of€law€in€this€State€that€circumstantial€evidence€alone€may€be€sufficient€toÏsupport€a€conviction.€€òòState€v.€Buttreyóó,€756€S.W.2d€718,€721€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€ÏIn€order€for€a€conviction€to€be€sustained€based€on€circumstantial€evidence,€theÏevidence€"must€be€not€only€consistent€with€the€guilt€of€the€accused€but€it€must€also€beÏinconsistent€with€his€[or€her]€innocence€and€must€exclude€every€other€reasonableÏtheory€or€hypothesis€except€that€of€guilt."€€òòState€v.€Tharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€896,€900Ï(Tenn.€1987).€€In€addition,€"it€must€establish€such€a€certainty€of€guilty€of€the€accusedÍas€to€convince€the€mind€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€[the€defendant]€is€the€oneÏwho€committed€the€crime."€òòTharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€at€896.€€ÌWhile€following€the€above€guidelines,€this€Court€must€remember€that€the€juryÏdecides€the€weight€to€be€given€to€circumstantial€evidence€and€that€"the€inferences€toÏbe€drawn€from€such€evidence,€and€extent€to€which€the€circumstances€are€consistentÏwith€guilt€and€inconsistent€with€innocence€are€questions€primarily€for€the€jury."€ÏòòMarable€v.€Stateóó,€313€S.W.2d€451,€457€(Tenn.€1958);€òòState€v.€Couryóó,€697€S.W.2dÏ373,€377€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985);€òòPruitt€v.€Stateóó,€460€S.W.2d€385,€391€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1970).€€ÌViewing€the€evidence€of€the€January€offenses€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÏthe€State,€and€based€upon€the€above€principles,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€wasÏmore€than€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€the€burglary€and€theft€of€the€PigglyÏWiggly€Grocery€Store.€€The€evidence€established€that,€at€about€the€time€of€theÏJanuary€burglary,€the€appellant€had€borrowed€a€tire€tool€from€his€friend,€JohnÏHiggins.€€The€tire€tool€was€never€returned€by€the€appellant€to€Mr.€Higgins,€but€insteadÏwas€found€on€the€floor€of€the€office€of€the€grocery€store€next€to€the€pried„open€filingÏcabinet.€€Moreover,€the€evidence€established€that€the€appellant,€who€wasÏunemployed,€had€no€money€on€the€evening€prior€to€the€burglary,€his€whereaboutsÏthe€night€of€the€burglary€were€not€accounted€for,€and€he€was€seen€the€following€dayÏwith€a€substantial€amount€of€"folding"€money€after€being€away€from€home€the€entireÍevening.€€Additionally,€paper€quarter€wrappers€were€found€after€his€arrival€at€home.€ÏThe€foregoing€evidence€and€circumstances€were€sufficient€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€toÏfind€the€appellant€guilty€of€the€January€offenses€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ÌLikewise,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€regarding€the€February€burglaryÏand€theft€amply€supported€the€jury's€verdict€of€guilt.€€The€appellant€was€seen€a€shortÏdistance€from€the€Piggly€Wiggly€store€several€minutes€before€the€burglary,€theÏburglary€bore€a€striking€resemblance€to€the€one€which€occurred€a€month€earlier,€heÏwas€seen€shortly€after€the€burglary€with€a€large€amount€of€paper€money,€and€heÏadmitted€his€guilt€to€John€Higgins,€Michael€Foster,€and€perhaps€TerranceÏMontgomery.€€We€conclude€that€the€evidence€against€the€appellant€regarding€theÏburglary€and€theft€of€February€20,€1994,€was€not€only€sufficient€but€was€indeedÏoverwhelming.€€ÌAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€M.€BARKERÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌJOE€B.€JONES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JUDGE