ÿWPCT “aŒ¨Ú"¯ù‚»!Îvün—ø7€eþìQºœ êä«ítâTlx¼7mäp‰~¸¯8. x´}7Ñæ¦üGëÞùùVë±Ñ’= HЦ¯Úx°=ÒýƒyA ¿Û˜è¥T›øˆ§yºSh8ƒß.—Ê{\ý}†^ê [¬{E³£>|1‰ ÛO1 p\ï”Õh娩veÐÈÈ}r9W’5Rßämø3·eg|3¬&k*®T+ÿ;·:·¬2›FUøFZ¹Bi `$êCÚvð |-&Û¡¬&Rá'xL­&;Q@MÉöº[X¯¯Ç¡«—•žv.h²#]ü·ªçÑq¶.ïâzÈâjv“û´•:œA éÒ×PUüŸ6wl»ËaŠþ„K'nË:— êœÅce…Æ_“«!ê [Û‘YTÅ+w‘‹KD€ð¬5·ôpW%¸S[ñž•fWqYÚÜìžÃÜåõ„coW—Öt“éÕ©ôðm×ó¯âÖ±f×± P›€ Q¾“™i:9àB=«m4t>wõa% åõÚ‰¹„ç‘Á4ô㬻U‰ŽtÁ@IÑYxiE|¥ªÍÕ· Qüd…åF %+ U.1 _ nXo 0PÇ 4 + 0”3 0DÇ w@ U:K U:… … V¿  B D3888 0Dkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk AO¯Æþþ 0DÄ D/ B7 ÛÔ€ X”ºXX XÔÔ€ ¥@X X”ºÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ X”ºX ¥@ÔÐ  ÐÌMarch€9,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó X%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|X€«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓuM%(D(3¾Á$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó nDoUpqErUsUt£uÀvPwÓ€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular LÝ ƒ ¾Á$ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Óà œ àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ ô»¸ôX XÔ€€The€police€had€photocopied€the€money€given€to€the€informant€to€buy€the€crack€cocaine.€€AsÐ `  Ðsuch,€the€police€were€able€to€identify€the€bills€according€to€their€serial€number.H  d$$$$'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ` °ÑÑX°Ññwñ›ñwñÑ  ÑÑTR[  AØ'Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€Xé’XX XÔÑ7€ ”º XXdædÈ7Ññwñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@EÒf ` 8ttxP ` ð  rß›ñwñà œ àà ô àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌà@cc:;àAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌà@))6;àDECEMBER€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ¤ à€à ü àà T à)ó óÐ Ðp  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àò ò)ó óà ¬ àò òC.C.A.€NO.€œ01C01›„9802„CR„00073ó óÐ À`  Ðà œ àà ô àAppellee,à ¤ àò ò€€€€€à ü àà T à)Ð °P  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)à ¬ àœSUMNER›€COUNTYó óÐ  @  МVS›.à œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àò ò)Ð 0  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)à ¬ àHON.€JANE€œWHEATCRAFT›,Ð €  ÐCHARLES€A.€œCRENSHAW›,€a.k.aà T à)à ¬ àJUDGEÐ p Ðð ðBOOððà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)Ð ` Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)Ìà œ àà ô àó óAppellant.ò òà ¤ àà ü àà T à)à ¬ àó ó(Ineffective€Assistance€of€Counsel)ò òÐ @à Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà ¤ àà ü àà T à€€€€€òòà ¬ àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÐ   Ðà œ àÌÌò òBRENT€HORSTà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ Ð p Ðó ó42€œRutledge›€St.à L àà ¤ àà ü àò òà T àà ¬ àó óAttorney€General€&€Reporterò òÐ À!` Ðó óNashville,€TN€37210ò òÐ °"P Ðó óà œ à(On€Appeal)à L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àò òKIM€R.€HELPERÐ  #@ Ðó óà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àAsst.€Attorney€Generalò òÐ $0 ÐROGER€œSINDLE›à L àó óà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àCordell€Hull€œBldg›.,€œ2nd›€Fl.Ð €%  Ð103€Bluegrass€Commons€Blvd.à ü àò òà T àó óà ¬ à425€Fifth€Ave.,€NorthÐ p& МHendersonville›,€TN€37075à ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àNashville,€TN€37243„0493Ð `'  Ðà œ à(At€Trial)à L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àà  àÐ P(ð! Ðò òà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àLAWRENCE€RAY€WHITLEYó óÐ @)à" Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àDistrict€Attorney€General€Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àò òDEE€GAYó óÐ ,°"% Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ à113€West€Main€St.Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àœGallatin›,€TN€37066Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àà  àÌÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àÌOPINION€FILED:òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 30*- ÐÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÐ P7ð-1 ÐÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÐ  :À04 ÐJudgeÌÐ  < 26 ÐÑXÑñtñÓ  Óñtñà@‡‡:;àò òòòñuñÔ‡¼7%¼XXé’ÔñuñO€P€I€N€I€O€NñuñÔ#†Xé’X¼¼7%ß#ÔñuñˆÐ `  ÐÌÌó óóóà œ àà ô àÌÓÓà œ àà ô àOn€April€1,€1997,€the€defendant€was€found€guilty€by€a€jury€of€facilitation€ofÏthe€sale€of€cocaine€and€of€possession€of€marijuana.€€The€defendant€was€sentenced€asÏa€Range€II€multiple€offender€to€a€term€of€eight€years€for€the€facilitation€of€the€sale€ofÏcocaine€and€a€term€of€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days€for€the€possession€of€marijuana.€ÏThese€sentences€were€to€run€consecutively€and€were€to€be€served€in€the€TennesseeÏDepartment€of€Correction.€€The€defendantððs€subsequent€motion€for€a€new€trial€was€deniedÏby€the€trial€court.€€The€defendant€now€appeals€and€argues€that€he€was€denied€theÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€After€a€review€of€the€record€and€applicable€law,€we€findÏthe€defendantððs€contention€to€be€without€merit€and€thus€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€courtÏbelow.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€defendantððs€convictions€stem€from€his€involvement€with€a€sale€of€crackÏcocaine€on€February€2,€1996,€to€an€informant€working€with€the€œSumner›€County€Drug€TaskÏForce.€€The€evidence€at€trial€indicated€that€the€defendant,€while€in€Michael€Everettððs€car,Ïgave€a€quantity€of€crack€cocaine€to€Eric€Oldham.€€After€dropping€the€defendant€off,€Mr.ÏEverett€and€Mr.€Oldham€drove€around€the€neighborhood.€€€Mr.€Oldham€then€sold€theÏcocaine€he€received€from€the€defendant€to€the€confidential€informant.€€After€the€sale,€theÏinformant€returned€to€the€drug€task€force€location€where€he€had€been€wired€and€searchedÏbefore€the€sale.€€After€the€informant€briefed€the€officers€and€gave€them€the€purchasedÏcocaine,€the€officers€began€to€search€for€Mr.€Everettððs€vehicle.€€Mr.€Everett€testified€thatÏafter€the€sale€to€the€informant,€he€and€Mr.€Oldham€went€to€a€friendððs€nearby€residence.€ÏThe€defendant€arrived€shortly€thereafter,€at€which€point€the€defendant€and€Mr.€OldhamÏwent€outside€the€residence€for€a€few€minutes.€€Mr.€Everett,€Mr.€Oldham,€and€theÐ †6&-0 Ðdefendant€then€left€the€residence€and€were€spotted€by€police€a€few€minutes€later.€€AfterÐ †6&-2 Ðthe€police€initiated€a€traffic€stop€of€Mr.€Everettððs€car,€the€three€men€were€searched.€€UponÏsearching€the€defendant,€the€police€found€six€hundred€fifty€dollars€($650)€in€cash.€€AfterÏexamining€the€cash,€the€police€found€that€two€of€the€twenty€dollar€($20)€bills€were€the€billsÏused€by€the€informant€to€purchase€the€cocaine€from€Mr.€Oldham.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€police€also€foundÐ Äd Ð1.3€grams€of€marijuana€in€the€car.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€defendant€now€contends€that€his€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€forÏseveral€reasons.€€In€reviewing€the€petitionerððs€Sixth€Amendment€claim€of€ineffectiveÏassistance€of€counsel,€this€Court€must€determine€whether€the€advice€given€or€servicesÏrendered€by€the€attorney€were€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneysÏin€criminal€cases.€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€To€prevail€on€aÐ Xø Ðclaim€of€ineffective€counsel,€a€petitioner€ð ðmust€show€that€counselððs€representation€fellÏbelow€an€objective€standard€of€reasonablenessðð€and€that€this€performance€prejudiced€theÏdefense.€€There€must€be€a€reasonable€probability€that€but€for€counselððs€error€the€resultÏof€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,Ð ˆ"( Ð687„88,€692,€694€(1984);€òòBest€v.€Stateóó,€708€S.W.2d€421,€422€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).Ð T$ô ÐÌà œ àà ô àThe€defendant€claims€that€his€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€his€failure€toÏobject€to,€and€his€own€solicitation€of,€evidence€of€other€bad€acts€and€crimes€committedÏby€the€defendant.€€Specifically,€the€defendant€points€to€Mr.€Everettððs€œtestimony,›€whichÏreferred€to€the€defendant€selling€cocaine€to€various€other€people€on€the€day€Mr.€OldhamÏsold€the€cocaine€to€the€informant.€€The€defendant€claims€that€there€was€no€connectionÏbetween€these€earlier€sales€to€other€people€and€the€sale€to€the€confidential€informant.€ÏThe€defendant€contends€that€his€trial€counsel€should€have€objected€to€the€testimony.€€ÌÐ €4 +0 Ðà œ àà ô àTennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€404(b)€governs€the€admissibility€of€priorÏmisconduct.€€It€states,ÌÓÓà œ àà ô àEvidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€is€not€admissible€to€prove€Ìà œ àà ô àthe€character€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€with€Ìà œ àà ô àthe€character€trait.€€It€may,€however,€be€admissible€for€other€purposes.€€¼à œ àà ô àThe€conditions€which€must€be€satisfied€before€allowing€such€evidence€¼à œ àà ô àare:Ìà œ àà ô àà L à(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outside€the€juryððs€¼à œ àà ô àà L àpresence;Ìà œ àà ô àà L à(2)€The€court€must€determine€that€a€material€issue€exists€other€¼à œ àà ô àà L àthan€conduct€conforming€with€a€character€trait€and€must€upon€¼à œ àà ô àà L àrequest€state€on€the€record€the€material€issue,€the€ruling,€and€Ìà œ àà ô àà L àthe€reasons€for€admitting€the€evidence;€andÌà œ àà ô àà L à(3)€The€court€must€exclude€the€evidence€if€its€probative€value€ÌÓŠ!Óà œ àà ô àà L àis€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.ÌTenn.€R.€œEvid›.€404(b).€€However,€there€are€exceptions€to€this€rule.€€€ð ð[œE]vidence›€of€otherÏcrimes€may€be€admissible€to€show€(1)€motive;€(2)€intent;€(3)€guilty€knowledge;€(4)€identityÏof€the€defendant;€(5)€absence€of€mistake€or€accident;€or€(6)€a€common€scheme€or€planÏfor€commission€of€two€or€more€crimes€so€related€to€each€other€that€proof€of€one€tends€toÏestablish€the€other.ðð€€òòState€v.€œHoyt›óó,€928€S.W.2d€935,€944€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(citingÐ ¼ \ ÐòòCollard€v.€Stateóó,€526€S.W.2d€112,€114€(Tenn.€1975));€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€œBordis›óó,€905Ð ˆ"( ÐS.W.2d€214,€227€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌà œ àà ô àIn€the€case€at€bar,€the€evidence€of€other€bad€acts€referred€to€the€defendantÏselling€drugs€to€other€people€shortly€before€the€sale€to€the€informant.€€As€this€evidenceÏtends€to€show€that€the€defendant,€who€furnished€the€cocaine€that€Mr.€Oldham€ultimatelyÏsold€to€the€informant,€was€involved€in€a€common€scheme€to€sell€drugs,€it€was€admissibleÏas€an€exception€to€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€404(b).€€As€such,€the€defendantððs€trialÏcounsel€did€not€err€in€failing€to€object€to€the€introduction€of€the€evidence.€€This€contentionÏis€without€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€he€received€the€ineffective€assistance€ofÐ L6ì,2 Ðcounsel€when€his€trial€counsel€elicited€testimony€from€Mr.€Everett€that€the€defendant€had,Ïon€several€prior€occasions,€given€Mr.€Everett€drugs.€€The€actual€testimony€is€as€œfollows:›ÌÓÓà œ àà ô àœQ.›€Let€me€go€over€your€testimony€for€you.€€Your€testimony€was€[the€¼à œ àà ô àdefendant]€gave€[you]€[drugs]€because€[you]€gave€him€a€ride.€€So€you€¼à œ àà ô àtransported€[the€defendant]€that€day,€right?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€Yeah,€I€did€transport€him€that€day,€yes,€sir.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€And€in€the€past,€have€people€like€[the€defendant],€maybe€[the€à d# àÐ 0 Ðà œ àà ô àdefendant]€himself€or€friends€or€acquaintances,€have€they€given€you€¼à œ àà ô àsome€dope?ÌÓ ,ÓÓÓà œ àà ô àA.€€Yes,€sir.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€There€is€nothing€unusual€about€that,€is€there?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€No,€sir.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€I€really€have€a€problem€with€this,€too,€and€maybe€you€can€help€me.Ìà œ àà ô àYour€testimony€is,€Iððm€riding€along€in€the€car€with€these€people,€or€Iððm€inÌà œ àà ô àtheir€acquaintance,€and€Iððm€not€selling€any€dope;€but€[the€defendant]€Ìà œ àà ô àgives€to€Mr.€Oldham€the€dope€and€says,€ð ðGo€sell€this,€and€bring€me€the€¼à œ àà ô àmoney€back.ðð€€Now,€did€you€ever€give€anybody€dope€and€say,€ð ðGo€sell€¼à œ àà ô àthis€and€bring€the€money€backðð?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€No,€sir.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€You€never€have€done€that?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€No,€sir.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€Why?€Why€wouldnððt€you€do€that?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€No,€sir.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€Why€not?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€I€was€too€strung€out,€and€I€always€smoked€it.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€So€that€would€be€kind€of€unusual,€wouldnððt€it,€for€somebody€that€is€a€¼à œ àà ô àuser?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€It€would€be€unusual€for€somebody€that€was€using,€for€the€dope€dealer€¼à œ àà ô àto€give€the€user€the€dope€and€thinking€that€heððs€going€to€go€out€and€sell€¼à œ àà ô àit.€€More€than€likely,€heððs€going€to€smoke€it.€.€.€.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€Mr.€Oldham,€is€he€a€user?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€I€donððt€know€.€.€.€.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€Wait€a€minute.€€How€long€have€you€known€Mr.€Oldham?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€Iððve€known€Mr.€Oldham€a€long€time.€€Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€Youððre€telling€the€ladies€and€gentlemen€you€never€saw€him€use€à d# àÐ ¸)X $ Ðà œ àœñvñà ô àñvñdrugs.›€€Think€about€that.Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€I€have€seen€him€use€drugs.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€So€now€he€is€a€user?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€Yeah,€he€is€somewhat€of€a€user€.€.€.€.Ìà œ àà ô àQ.€€€Mr.€Everett,€in€all€honesty,€can€you€look€at€the€.€.€.€jury€and€you€tell€¼à œ àà ô àthem€this?€€You€donððt€think€it€was€a€little€bit€unusual€about€the€fact€of€¼à œ àà ô àyour€testimony€.€.€.€.€[The€defendant]€is€going€to€give€to€a€user€some€¼à œ àà ô àdrugs€and€say,€you€know,€go€out€and€sell€this,€you€know,€and€bring€the€¼à œ àà ô àmoney€back?€€You€donððt€see€anything€unusual?Ìà œ àà ô àA.€€It€is€uncommon.ÌÓx.ÓÌIn€light€of€this€series€of€questions,€it€seems€clear€that€the€defendantððs€trial€counsel€wasÏtrying€to€raise€doubt€as€to€whether€the€defendant€had€given€drugs€to€Mr.€Oldham€forÐ 27Ò-3 Ðresale.€€This€Court€should€not€second„guess€trial€counselððs€tactical€and€strategic€choicesÏunless€those€choices€were€uninformed€because€of€inadequate€preparation,€òòœHellard›€v.Ð , Ì ÐStateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982),€and€counsel€should€not€be€deemed€to€have€beenÐ ø ˜ Ðineffective€merely€because€a€different€procedure€or€strategy€might€have€produced€aÏdifferent€result.€€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€599€S.W.2d€276,€280€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980).€€As€itÐ 0 Ðseems€that€trial€counselððs€strategy€in€this€line€of€questioning€was€to€impeach€the€credibilityÏof€the€witness,€we€will€not€second„guess€his€tactics€because€another€tactic€might€haveÏproduced€a€different€result.€€In€addition,€even€assuming€that€this€line€of€questioning€wasÏdue€to€inadequate€preparation€or€fell€below€an€objective€standard€of€reasonableness,€inÏlight€of€the€evidence€against€him,€the€defendant€has€failed€to€show€that€but€for€this€errorÏthe€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€òòœStrickland›óó,€466€U.S.€at€687„88,Ð Xø Ð692,€694.€€As€such,€this€contention€is€also€without€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€he€received€the€ineffective€assistance€ofÏcounsel€because€his€trial€counsel€did€not€object€to€Officer€Bunchððs€testimony€thatÏindicated€he€knew€the€defendant€ð ðon€sightðð€for€most€of€his€police€career,€that€theÏdefendant€cussed€and€yelled€at€the€time€of€his€arrest,€and€that€the€defendant€had€alwaysÏhad€that€kind€of€attitude.€€However,€the€defendantððs€trial€counsel€specifically€stated€duringÏcross„examination€of€Officer€Bunch€that€there€were€some€questions€asked€during€directÏexamination€to€which€he€did€not€object€because€he€wanted€to€go€over€them€during€cross„¼examination.€€The€defendantððs€trial€counsel€then€questioned€the€officer€regarding€theÏdefendantððs€demeanor€at€the€time€of€his€arrest.€€Trial€counsel€made€the€point,€and€OfficerÏBunch€agreed,€that€it€is€not€unusual€for€people€to€become€upset€when€they€are€arrestedÏfor€a€crime€they€did€not€commit.€€Once€again,€this€is€a€matter€of€trial€strategy.€€As€thisÏchoice€of€strategy€was€not€due€to€inadequate€preparation€and€it€did€not€fall€below€anÏobjective€standard€of€reasonableness,€the€defendant€has€failed€to€show€that€he€receivedÐ L6ì,2 Ðthe€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€The€defendant€has€also€failed€to€show€that€anyÏcomments€by€Officer€Bunch€that€he€knew€the€defendant€prior€to€this€arrest€had€anyÏprejudicial€effect€or€that€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different€had€hisÏtrial€counsel€objected€to€this€testimony.€€This€contention€is€also€without€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€defendant€finally€contends€that€he€did€not€receive€the€effectiveÏassistance€of€counsel€because€his€trial€counsel€did€not€object€to€the€prosecutorððsÏcomments€during€closing€argument€that€the€defendant€is€a€ð ðbig€œkahuna›,ðð€that€theÏdefendant€had€been€selling€drugs€all€day€that€day,€and€that€providing€marijuana€ð ðis€theÏregular€for€[the€defendant].ðð€€The€defendant€argues€that€these€comments€rise€to€the€levelÏof€prosecutorial€misconduct€and€his€trial€counselððs€failure€to€object€to€these€commentsÏconstitutes€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.ÌÌà œ àà ô àWhen€claiming€prosecutorial€misconduct,€the€defendant€is€required€to€showÏthat€the€argument€was€so€inflammatory€or€the€conduct€so€improper€that€it€affected€theÏverdict€to€his€detriment.€€òòœHarrington›€v.€Stateóó,€385€S.W.2d€758,€759€(Tenn.€1965).€€InÐ T$ô Ðreviewing€an€allegation€of€improper€conduct,€this€Court€should€consider€several€factorsÏincluding€the€intent€of€the€prosecutor,€the€curative€measures€that€were€undertaken€by€theÏcourt,€the€improper€conduct€viewed€in€context€and€in€light€of€the€facts€and€circumstancesÏof€the€case,€the€cumulative€effect€of€the€remarks€with€any€other€errors€in€the€record,€andÏthe€relative€strength€or€weakness€of€the€case.€€òòJudge€v.€Stateóó,€539€S.W.2d€340,€344Ð P-ð#( Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1976).€€ÌÌà œ àà ô àIn€the€case€at€bar,€the€prosecutor€referred€to€the€defendant€as€a€ð ðbigÏœkahuna›ðð€in€an€attempt€to€portray€the€defendant€as€the€leader€of€a€small€scale€drug€ring.€ÏAs€for€the€statement€that€the€defendant€had€been€selling€drugs€all€day€that€day€and€thatÐ L6ì,2 Ðproviding€marijuana€is€ð ðthe€regularðð€for€him,€the€prosecutor€was€simply€paraphrasing€theÏtestimony€of€Mr.€Everett.€€In€light€of€this€and€the€strength€of€the€Stateððs€case€against€theÏdefendant,€the€defendant€has€failed€to€show€that€the€prosecutorððs€argument€was€soÏinflammatory€or€improper€that€it€prejudiced€the€defendant.€€Therefore,€this€contention€isÏwithout€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àIn€sum,€we€find€that€the€defendant€received€the€effective€assistance€ofÏcounsel.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€the€defendantððs€motion€for€aÏnew€trial.ÌñtñœñtñœÌÓÓà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ à______________________________›€€œñtñ›ñtñ›Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àœJOHN›€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌœñmñÌÌñmñCONCUR:›ÌÌÌœñnñòò€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€›€ñnñ›Ìœñnñóóñnññpñ______________________________ñpññoñÌñoñJOSEPH›€M.€œTIPTON›,€JudgeÌÌÌœñqñòòñqññtñ›ñtññrñÌñrññtñ›ñtññrñ______________________________ñrñ›€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌœñqñóóñqñNORMA›€Ô% € ÔœMcGEE›€OGLE,€œJudgeñsñÌñsñ›