ÿWPC€: [#  UN %c 0 ñiU :Zw@”4Ôè 0Ò÷ 0:É 0L 05O 0d„ ²è 0DšÜÞ 1mº {d' 0Ä‹ 0XO 0L§ {Êó {R½ {¾ {dÍ {Ê1 {Rû 0cM 0z° {¾* 0è 0t 0Jt B¾ 0TÛ B*/ 0LY 0^¥ 0h  Bs B B­ BÊÆç D+­ AQØ AI) AIr 0r» 1t- 0@¡Æá 0D§ D/ë 0| 0 – £"£" «" D3±" 0†ä"U@j#eª# 0$«# 0Ï% 1u_& 0DÔ& 0d'U>|'U *º'B)ä'DC ( AMP(‚(+Ä2-Oö.êE1v~/3vÓ­4˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(ÉÞÍ$¡¡Ñ  ÑÔ€XíèXXXÔÑ` ` ÑÑÜÜÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular •–E—˜™šD›[œDÓ€žäzz!—Sÿÿ`°3|xžZ<< €z.quotesindentions for quotesÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓ XÓÓÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓ XÓÓÓZpp º_2opinionsopinions text styleÓ °ÓÓ ÓÓÓÔ€Xn¬XXXn¬ÔÔ€Xn¬XXXn¬ÔÓ °ÓÓ ÓÓÓÔ€Xn¬XXXn¬ÔÔ€Xn¬XXXn¬Ô> ÿÿ$Small Circleððà0 à(å(319$¤¤Ý ƒÞÍ!ÝÑ  ÑÔ€Xm“XXXÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÝ  Ýà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(Wf|$ÄÄò òòòà@ìì*ìàÔ  ÔÔ AÔó óóóFlanaryBlountvilleBurson HarrS.W.2dtriersByrge Crim App03C01MedlineTiptonMedlinBallardDarronCanadyHyattRhodenPartinCaughron S.W.2dBurgin Evid3d(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóFlanaryBlountvilleBurson HarrS.W.2dtriersByrge Crim App03C01MedlineTipton#c$"Small Circleð"ðà0 à2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôþÿ dýÿ düÿP Pdûÿ   d Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5'ÈÈÈÈdxd7;689Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ/0A°°Cÿÿ/0Aüÿ°°Cÿÿ2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ;=CIOU[ckOUTL0I.A.1.a.I.(1)(a)(i)1("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó--'÷ÿ dxd2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô(å3Ì$¢¢Ý ƒÞÍ!ÝÑ  ÑÔ€Xm“XXXÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÝ  ÝH…$$$$'ÿÿdxd2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô É¸·`(ZapfCalligr BTTT(å3NŽ$¥¥Ý ƒÞÍ!ÝÑ  ÑÔ€Xm“XXXÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÝ  ÝÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô#%(*4:@D ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)($Ó$‘‘òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 dQQQQ7Border 1dd76RCþÿ << Gÿÿ xÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€OÔÑ  ÑÔ€PÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ;"ÝÝ  Ýò òÔ€PÔÓ  ÓÔ eee ÔFILEDÔ€PXÔó óÌò òÔ€P¼ÔÔ"USú ú, úÔÔ ƒB ÔÔ!  Ôó óÔ€PXÔÌÌò òCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.Ô€AÔó óÔ  ÔÌÔ€AÂÔÔ€PÔÔ eee Ôò òAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó óÔ  ÔÔ€AÔÔ€AXÔ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€OÔÑ  ÑÔ€PÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓÓIt€is€the€policy€of€this€court€to€refer€to€the€defendant€by€the€name€listed€on€theÏindictment.€€The€defendant€was€referred€to€as€Janice€Eason€in€many€of€the€courtÏdocuments.€€Ì ºÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€OÔÑ  ÑÔ€PÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý"ÓÓSecond€degree€murder€is€a€knowing€killing€of€another."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€39„13„210(a)(1).€€Ì EÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€OÔÑ  ÑÔ€PÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý"ÓÓVoluntary€Manslaughter€is€the€intentional€or€knowing€killing€of€another€in€aÏstate€of€passion€produced€by€adequate€provocation€sufficient€to€lead€a€reasonableÏperson€to€act€in€an€irrational€manner."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„211(a).Ì àÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€OÔÑ  ÑÔ€PÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý"ÓÓCriminally€negligent€conduct€which€results€in€death€constitutes€criminallyÏnegligent€homicide."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„212(a).€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€OÔÑ  ÑÔ€PÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  Ý›à@ àÞ ÞÌòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÌà@ àòòAT€JACKSON€óóÌà@ àMARCH€1996€SESSIONÌ̜ـ7ÙßR€STRA1-j|.—º- `€€@ÿRß›STATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à€€*à àC.C.A.€#€02C01„9504„CR„00098€Ìà àà àAppellee,à àà à€€*à àSHELBY€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à€€*à àHon.€Bernie€Weinman,€JudgeÌJANICE€HANSBROUGH„EASON,€€*à à(Voluntary€Manslaughter)Ìà àà àAppellant.à àà à€€*ÌÌÌòòFor€Appellant:óóà àà àà àà àòòFor€Appellee:óóÌÓÓA.€C.€Wharton,€Jr.€à àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌAttorney€at€Law€à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ147€Jefferson€Avenue€ÌSuite€1205€à àà àà àà àà àEllen€H.€Pollack€ÌMemphis,€TN€€38103à àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€Division€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0485à àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPatience€BranhamÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€General€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àShelby€County€District€Attorney€General'sÏà àà àà àà àà àà àà àOffice€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à201€Poplar€Avenue€„€Third€FloorÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103€ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌOPINION€FILED:_____________________ÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEò òÇÑ7€ÖXXdìXXdæ7Ñà@ àòòOPINIONóóÌÌó óà àà àÓÓThe€defendant,€Janice€Hansbrough„Eason,× ƒU ××  ×€was€convicted€ofÏvoluntary€manslaughter.€€The€trial€court€imposed€a€three„year,€Range€I€sentenceÏand€ordered€the€sentence€suspended€after€one€year€at€the€Shelby€CountyÏCorrectional€Center.€€In€this€appeal€of€right,€the€defendant€claims€the€trial€courtÏerred€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(1)€€by€failing€to€grant€a€new€trial€because€the€juryÏforeman€failed€to€reveal€relevant,€potentially€prejudicialÏinformation;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(2)€€by€failing€to€charge€the€jury€on€criminally€negligentÏhomicide;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(3)€€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€defense€ofÏanother;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(4)€€by€failing€to€allow€the€defendant€to€present€testimonyÏthat€the€victim€told€others€he€did€not€want€to€prosecuteÏthe€defendant€for€the€shooting;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(5)€€by€failing€to€grant€a€mistrial,€when€the€state€asked€aÏwitness€a€question€in€violation€of€a€prior€ruling;€andÌÌà8 àà8 à(6)€€by€failing€to€suppress€a€statement€made€by€theÏdefendant€to€police€officers.€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àWe€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€the€judgment.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€was€indicted€for€second€degree€murder€following€theÏSeptember€23,€1993,€shooting€death€of€her€husband,€Malcomb€Eason.€€Only€theÏdefendant,€the€victim,€and€their€infant€child€were€present€at€the€time€of€the€homicide.€ÌÌà àà àFelicia€Ballard,€the€defendant's€downstairs€apartment€neighbor,Ïtestified€that€just€after€the€shooting,€the€defendant€knocked€on€her€door€and,€in€aÏcalm€voice,€asked€that€she€come€to€the€Eason€apartment.€€The€defendant€explainedÏthat€she€had€made€a€mistake€and€shot€her€husband.€€She€added€that€he€had€comeÏclose€to€hitting€her.€€Ms.€Ballard€described€the€victim€as€a€"nice„going,€easy€typeÏperson"€who€was€a€good€husband€and€father;€she€characterized€the€defendant€asÏbeing€the€"dominating€type"€and€"aggressive."€€Ì€Ìà àà àWayne€Weston,€a€college€friend€of€both€the€victim€and€the€defendant,Ïdescribed€the€victim€as€"laid„back"€and€the€defendant€as€"outgoing"€andÏ"dominant."€€The€victim,€he€said,€was€an€ideal€father.€€Weston€claimed€that€he€hadÏnever€seen€the€victim€with€a€gun€but€was€aware€that€the€defendant,€who€had€invitedÏhim€to€go€shooting€at€a€firing€range,€carried€one€for€protection.€€ÌÌà àà àDarron€Clark,€another€friend€of€the€victim,€testified€that€he€was€a€well„composed€man,€a€loyal€husband,€and€a€good€father.€€€He€described€the€defendantÏas€verbally€abusive€toward€her€husband.ÌÌà àà àRita€May€Smith,€a€convenience€market€clerk,€had€given€the€defendantÏa€ride€to€the€Eason€apartment€shortly€before€the€shooting.€€Several€months€after€theÏshooting,€Ms.€Smith€received€a€phone€call€and€a€thank„you€note€from€the€defendantÏexpressing€her€appreciation€for€the€ride€home.€€€ÌÌà àà àOfficer€Tim€Canady€of€the€Memphis€police€department€was€the€firstÏofficer€to€arrive€at€the€scene€of€the€shooting.€€He€was€met€at€the€door€by€theÏdefendant,€who€abruptly€exclaimed€that€she€had€just€shot€her€husband.€€OfficerÏCanady€arrested€the€defendant,€took€her€to€the€police€station,€and€uponÏquestioning,€learned€that€she€had€slapped€the€victim€just€before€the€shooting.€€AnÏambulance€took€the€victim€to€a€hospital€where,€despite€emergency€surgery,€he€diedÏseveral€hours€later.ÌÌà àà àJacqueline€Eason,€the€victim's€sister,€identified€a€photograph€of€theÏvictim.€€Later,€Dr.€O.€C.€Smith€identified€the€man€in€this€photo€as€the€person€heÍexamined€during€the€autopsy.€€Dr.€Smith,€an€assistant€medical€examiner€for€ShelbyÏCounty,€performed€the€autopsy€and€determined€the€cause€of€death€was€a€gunshotÏwound€to€the€abdomen.€€Because€of€the€absence€of€powder€burns,€it€was€hisÏopinion€that€the€victim€was€shot€at€a€distance€of€24€inches€or€greater.€€There€wereÏno€traces€of€alcohol€or€drugs,€except€those€administered€at€the€hospital,€found€inÏthe€victim's€blood.€€ÌÌà àà àSergeant€George€Olive€of€the€Memphis€Police€Department€was€calledÏas€a€witness€for€the€defense.€€He€testified€that€there€were€two€doors€leading€into€theÏapartment,€one€in€the€kitchen€and€a€second€door€in€the€living€room€which€had€beenÏblocked.ÌÌà àà àMemphis€Police€Officer€Steven€Opler,€who€had€spoken€to€theÏdefendant€shortly€after€the€shooting,€testified€that€the€defendant€acknowledged€thatÏthere€had€been€an€argument.€€He€recalled€her€contention€that€she€shot€the€victim€asÏhe€"approached"€her.€€The€officer€was€unable€to€explain€what€the€defendant€meantÏby€"approach."ÌÌà àà àOrelia€Merchant,€a€college€friend€of€the€defendant,€testified€that€onÏone€occasion€she€had€seen€the€victim€drink€so€much€that€he€became€sick.€€SheÍstated€that€on€the€next€day,€she€saw€the€victim€try€to€force€the€defendant€into€his€carÏby€pulling,€grabbing,€and€shaking€her.ÌÌà àà àThe€defense€offered€several€character€witnesses.€€Emma€TomÏJohnson,€a€member€of€the€defendant's€church,€testified€that€the€defendant€was€"aÏgood€Christian"€and€"respectful"€and€"obedient"€to€the€elderly.€€Robert€Hewitt,€aÏfriend€of€the€defendant's€family,€testified€that€she€was€a€compassionate€person€whoÏcared€for€the€sick€and€taught€the€young.€€Robert€and€Billie€Hansbrough,€theÏdefendant's€father€and€mother,€attested€to€her€honesty€and€her€calm€nature.€€€€€ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€testified€at€trial.€€She€claimed€that€she€and€the€victimÏhad€enjoyed€a€pleasant€family€visit€at€her€parents'€house€in€the€hours€just€beforeÏthe€shooting.€€The€defendant€recalled€that€the€victim,€while€very€sleepy€on€the€wayÏhome,€had€declined€her€offers€to€drive€even€though€he€was€swerving€into€the€wrongÏlane€of€traffic.€€She€claimed€that€when€the€victim€stopped€to€get€gas€at€aÏconvenience€market,€she€carried€the€child€out€of€the€car€and€called€her€parents,Ïwho€suggested€that€she€call€the€police€for€a€ride.€€The€police€refused€her€request,Ïbut€the€store€clerk€offered€to€drive€her€home€at€the€end€of€her€shift€two€hours€later.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€testified€that€when€she€reached€her€apartment,€theÏvictim€stood€in€front€of€the€door€and€refused€to€let€her€and€the€child€inside.€TheÏdefendant€admitted€that€she€struck€the€victim€and€pushed€her€way€in.€€SheÏdescribed€the€blow€as€accidental.€€The€defendant€claimed€that€the€victim€yelled,Ïtelling€her€she€should€not€have€come€home.€€She€contended€that€when€she€wentÏinto€the€bedroom,€the€victim€followed€her,€grabbed€their€child,€and€threw€the€infantÏinto€the€baby€bed.€€She€testified€that€the€victim€raised€his€arm€and€approached€herÏas€if€to€strike€her;€at€that€point,€she€opened€the€dresser€drawer,€pulled€out€the€gun,Ïremoved€the€safety,€and€shot€him.€€The€victim€stumbled€backwards€into€the€livingÏroom€and€fell€to€the€floor.€€ÌÌà@ àIÌà àà àDuring€voir€dire,€defense€counsel€asked€prospective€jurors€theÏfollowing:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àCOUNSEL:€€[C]ircumstances€do€require€me€to€ask€someÏfairly€personal€questions.€€What€I€want€to€say€is€that€inÏthe€event€as€I€go€through€these€questions€„„€because€itÏcan€get€into€your€marital€relationships,€and€I€don't€mindÏtelling€you€that€right€now€„„€òòif€there€is€a€particularÏquestion€that€you€would€prefer€to€deal€with€not€in€theÏhearing€of€the€others,€raise€your€hand€and€let€us€knowóóÏand€we€can€ask€the€Court€if€òòwe€can€step€up€there€andÏdeal€with€thatóó.€ÌÌà@ à***ÌÌà8 àà8 àCOUNSEL:€€[Ô% €> ÔW]e€are€influenced€by€what€happens€to€usÏin€our€lives,€and€we€tend€to€see€the€world€through€ourÏpersonal€experiences,€so€I€will€get€into€those€questions,Ïas€I€said.ÌÌà@ à***ÌÌÓÓÓÓà8 àà8 àCOUNSEL:€€Have€any€of€you€ever€been€accused€of€anyÏtype€of€„„€I'm€going€to€use€the€term€that's€in€vogue€now€„„Ïspousal€abuse?Ìà8 àÌà8 àà8 àPROSPECTIVE€JURORS:€€(No€response.)ÌÓÓÓÓÌÓÓÓÓà8 àà8 àCOUNSEL:€€Have€any€of€you€ever€felt€that€you€were€theÏvictims€of€spousal€abuse?ÌÌà8 àà8 àPROSPECTIVE€JURORS:€€(No€response.)ÌÌÓÓ(Emphasis€added.)ÌÌà àà àDuring€the€questioning,€several€potential€jurors€described€theirÏexperiences€with€and€feelings€about€spousal€violence.€€Delbert€Danley,€who€didÏnot€Ìrespond€to€the€questions,€was€impaneled€as€a€juror,€was€later€elected€foreman,€andÏwas€responsible€for€reporting€the€verdict.€€ÌÌà àà àLater,€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€a€new€trial,€DanleyÏacknowledged€that€prior€to€this€trial,€his€wife€had€filed€for€divorce,€alleging€he€hadÏabused€her;€in€his€formal€answer€to€the€complaint,€he€denied€that€he€had€ever€beenÏguilty€of€abusive€behavior€and€asserted€that€his€wife€had,€in€fact,€abused€him.€ÏDanley€conceded€that€he€had€not€forgotten€about€these€events,€which€occurredÏsome€five€years€before€trial,€when€defense€counsel€submitted€the€question.€€WhenÏthe€defense€counsel€asked€why€he€did€not€respond€to€the€voir€dire€question,ÏDanley€replied:€€"I€felt€like€it€was€mostly€a€misunderstanding€between€my€wife€and€IÏ[sic],€and€we€ended€up€working€things€out€satisfactory€[sic]€to€both€of€us,€and€it's„„asÏfar€as€I'm€concerned,€it's€over€...€I€was€thinking€since€everything€was€dropped,€thatÏdidn't€matter."€€The€following€dialogue€then€took€place:ÌÓÓà8 àà0 àà àà8 àDEFENSE:€€You€made€a€conscious€decision€not€to€disclose€itÏbecause€you€felt€it€was€over€and€done€with?Ìà àÌà8 àà àA:€€Yes.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDEFENSE:€€Did€you€ever€consider€that€maybe€it€wouldÏbe€better€to€accept€my€invitation€to€step€up€to€the€judgeÏand€explain€that€and€let€the€judge€make€the€decision€asÏto€whether€it€had€anything€to€do€with€your€ability€to€serveÏas€a€fair€and€impartial€juror?ÌÌà8 àà8 àA:€€I€thought€about€it€at€the€time,€but€you€asked€wouldÏanything€affect€my€decision,€and€I€answered€no.ÌÌà@ à***Ìà àÌà8 àà8 àSTATE:€€Did€you€place€any€significance€on€this€eventÏ[allegation€of€abuse]€that€happened€in€your€life€duringÏthe€jury€selection?€€ÌÌà8 àà8 àA:€€I€didn't.ÌÌà8 àà8 àSTATE:€€Did€you€place€any€significance€on€it€in€any€ofÏyour€deliberations?ÌÌà8 àà8 àA:€€No,€ma'am.ÌÌà@ à***ÌÌà8 àà8 àSTATE:€€Did€in€any€way€it€affect€your€decision€on€theÏverdict?ÌÌà8 àà8 àA:€€No,€ma'am.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€defendant€insists€that€she€was€denied€a€fair€and€impartial€jury.€ÏShe€argues€that€Danley€would€not€have€been€seated€as€a€juror€if€he€had€answeredÏtruthfully.€ÌÌà àà àThe€common€law€rules€governing€challenges€to€juror€qualificationsÏfall€into€two€categories:€€(1)€propter€defectum€or€(2)€propter€affectum.òò€€òòóóPartin€v.ÏHendersonòòóó,óó€686€S.W.2d€587,€589€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.1984).€€€Objections€based€uponÏgeneral€disqualifications,€such€as€alienage,€family€relationship,€or€statutoryÏmandate,€are€within€the€propter€defectum€class€and,€as€such,€must€be€made€beforeÍthe€return€of€a€jury€verdict.€€€Literally€translated,€propter€defectum€means€"onÏaccount€of€defect."òò€€òòóóState€v.€Akinsòòóó,óó€867€S.W.2d€350,€355€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).ÌÌà àà àIn€contrast,€a€propter€affectum€challenge,€translated€as€"on€account€ofÏprejudice,"€is€based€upon€the€existence€of€bias,€prejudice,€or€partiality€towards€oneÏparty€in€the€litigation€"actually€shown€to€exist€or€presumed€to€exist€fromÏcircumstances."€€òòDurham€v.€Stateóóòò,óó€188€S.W.2d€555,€559€(Tenn.€1945);òò€òòóósee€alsoòòóóÏòòóóToombs€v.€Stateòòóó,óó€270€S.W.2d€649€(Tenn.€1954).€€€Propter€affectum€challenges€mayÏbe€made€after€the€return€of€the€jury€verdict.òò€€òòóóState€v.€Furloughòòóó,óó€797€S.W.2d€631,€652Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€"Thus,€when€a€juror€conceals€or€misrepresentsÏinformation€tending€to€indicate€a€lack€of€impartiality,€a€challenge€may€be€made€...€inÏa€motion€for€new€trial."€€òòAkinsòòóó,óó€867€S.W.2d€at€355.€€The€burden€is€on€the€defendantÏto€show€that€the€juror€had€actual€bias€or€prejudice.òò€€óóòòState€v.€Caughronóóòò,óó€855€S.W.2dÏ526,€539€(Tenn.€1993).ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant,€of€course,€has€the€burden€of€providing€a€prima€facieÏcase€of€bias€or€partiality.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€669€S.W.2d€694,€700€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1983).€€If€a€juror€intentionally€fails€to€disclose€information€on€voir€dire€whichÏmight€indicate€partiality,€the€presumption€of€prejudice€arises.€€òòDurhamóó,€188€S.W.2dÏat€559.€€"Silence€on€the€juror's€part€when€asked€a€question€reasonably€calculatedÍto€produce€an€answer€is€tantamount€to€a€negative€answer."€€€òòAkinsòòóó,óó€867€S.W.2d€atÏ354.€€"[T]he€theory€[is]€that€a€prejudicial€bias€has€been€implanted€in€the€mind€whichÏwill€probably€influence€the€judgment."€€òòDurhamóó,€188€S.W.2d€at€558.€òòÌóóÌà àà àJuror€Danley€admitted€that€his€wife€had€filed€for€divorce€claiming€thatÏhe€had€physically€abused€her.€€The€complaint,€an€exhibit€at€the€hearing€on€theÏmotion€for€a€new€trial,€alleged€that€Ms.€Danley€sought€medical€treatment€at€a€localÏhospital€for€her€injuries€and€had€called€the€police€to€her€home€more€than€once€forÏprotection€from€further€abuse.€€In€his€answer€to€the€divorce€complaint,€DanleyÏdenied€any€abusive€behavior,€insisting€that€he,€in€fact,€had€been€physicallyÏassaulted€by€Ms.€Danley€on€numerous€occasions.€€ÌÌà àà àAt€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€new€trial,€Danley€denied€that€thisÏexperience€had€prejudiced€him€as€a€juror.€€Because€he€and€his€wife€had€reconciledÏsome€five€years€before€the€voir€dire,€he€insisted€that€the€information€was€notÏsignificant€enough€to€disclose.€Ìà àÌà àà àIn€the€ruling€on€the€motion€for€new€trial,€the€trial€court€correctly€quotedÏthe€applicable€law€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€[F]ailure€to€disclose€information€in€the€face€of€materialÏquestions€reasonably€calculated€to€produce€the€answerÏor€false€disclosure€gives€œ[rise]›€to€a€òòpresumption€of€biasÏand€partialityóó.€€The€theory€being€that€a€prejudicial€biasÏhas€been€implanted€in€the€mind€which€will€probablyÏinfluence€the€judgment.€€The€question€must€be€materialÏand€one€of€which€counsel€could€reasonably€be€expectedÏto€give€substantial€weight.€€ÌÌ(Emphasis€added.)ÌÌà àÌÌÓÓà àà àAfter€hearing€all€of€the€evidence€offered€at€the€motion€for€new€trial,€theÏtrial€court€specifically€found€that€the€defendant€had€failed€to€meet€its€burden€toÏprove€undue€influence€by€Danley€through€bias€or€favor.€€That€is,€the€defendantÏfailed€to€show€improper€influence.€€While€this€language€does€not€neatly€fit€withÏpresumptive€bias€described€by€law,€the€record€does€demonstrate€that€the€trial€courtÏconsidered€the€presumption€and€then€accredited€the€testimony€of€the€juror;€implicitÏin€the€ruling€is€that€the€state€successfully€rebutted€the€presumption€of€bias.€€UnderÏthat€circumstance,€our€scope€of€review€is€limited.€€Findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trialÏcourt€are€given€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict.òò€€òòóóSeeòòóó€óóòòState€v.€Burginóóòò,óó€668€S.W.2d€668Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).€€€We€cannot€reverse€the€holding€unless€the€evidenceÏclearly€preponderates€against€the€trial€court's€conclusion€that€the€juror€had€beenÏable€to€set€aside€his€bias€and€perform€his€duties€with€impartiality.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€question€is€whether€the€defendant€was€denied€her€constitutionalÏright€to€a€fair€and€impartial€jury.€€"Article€1,€Section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,Ïlike€the€Sixth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution,€provides€the€accusedÏwith€the€right€to€trial€by€an€impartial€jury."€€òòAkinsóó,€867€S.W.2d€at€354.€€Trial€courtsÏmust€carefully€guard€the€jury€selection€process€to€ensure€that€no€defendant€isÏdenied€his€right€to€a€fair€trial€and€that€his€right€to€a€verdict€from€an€impartial€jury€isÏnot€violated.€€Our€state€constitution€guarantees€all€citizens€"a€trial€by€a€jury€free€of€Ì...€disqualification€on€account€of€some€bias€or€partiality€toward€one€side€or€the€otherÏof€the€litigation."€€òòToombsóó,€270€S.W.2d€at€650.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€recent€case€of€òòState€v.€Akinsóó€€is€directly€on€point.€€In€òòAkinsóó,ÏSupreme€Court€Justice€Penny€White,€then€writing€for€a€panel€of€this€court,€cited€aÏnumber€of€Tennessee€cases€dealing€with€juror€disqualifications.€€Justice€WhiteÏdescribed€"bias€in€a€juror€[as]€a€'leaning€of€the€mind;€propensity€or€prepossessionÏtowards€an€object€or€view,€not€leaving€the€mind€indifferent;€[a]€bent;€[for]Ïinclination.'"€€òòAkinsòòóó,óó€867€S.W.2d€at€354€(quoting€òòDurham€v.€Stateóó,€188€S.W.2d€555,Ï559€(Tenn.€1945)).€€She€wrote€of€a€natural€predisposition€"'in€response€to€thoseÏnatural€and€human€instincts€common€to€mankind,'€[which]€interfere€with€theÏunderpinnings€of€our€justice€system."€€òòIdóó.€€This€court€ruled€that€jurors€are€obligatedÍto€make€'"full€and€truthful€answers€...€neither€falsely€stating€any€fact€nor€concealingÏany€material€matter.'"€€òòIdóó.€(quoting€47€Am.€Jur.€2d,€Jury€ðð€208€(1969)).ÌÌà àà àHere,€the€juror€at€issue€failed€to€respond€to€straightforward€questionsÏasked€on€voir€dire€which€dealt€with€matters€relevant€to€the€defense€theory.€€WhetherÏthe€charge€of€spousal€violence€in€Ms.€Danley's€divorce€complaint€was€true€was€notÏnecessarily€at€issue.€€These€events€at€least€raised€the€possibility€that€juror€DanleyÏhad€some€"leaning€of€the€mind,"€a€"bent"€or€"inclination."€€Counsel€for€the€defense,Ïin€an€effort€to€assure€an€impartial€jury,€was€entitled€to€further€inquiry.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€based€the€core€of€her€defense€on€the€theory€that€sheÏwas€a€victim€of€spousal€violence€protecting€herself€when€she€shot€her€husband.€ÏThe€jury€was€charged€with€self„defense€pattern€jury€instructions.€€Defense€counselÏshould€have€received€accurate€information€on€voir€dire.€€That€juror€Danley€failed€toÏdisclose€this€information€tends€to€trivialize€the€jury€selection€process.€€TheÏpresumption€of€bias€certainly€applied.€€It€is€only€because€the€trial€court€specificallyÏaccredited€the€juror's€assertion€that€he€was€able€to€remain€fair€and€impartial€that€aÏnew€trial€is€not€warranted.€€Certainly€a€trial€judge€who€sees€and€hears€a€witness€firstÏhand€and€determines€that€he€or€she€spoke€truthfully€is€in€a€far€better€position€toÏmake€that€assessment€than€an€appellate€court€with€only€the€transcript€of€theÍproceedings.€€It€is€likely€that€a€verdict€of€voluntary€manslaughter€in€the€face€of€aÏreasonably€strong€case€of€second€degree€murder€lends€credence€to€the€juror'sÏclaims€that€he€could€be€fair.€€In€short,€we€defer€to€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€theÏtrial€court.€€ÌÌà@ àò òIIó óÌà àà àAs€her€second€issue,€the€defendant€claims€the€trial€court€erred€byÏrefusing€to€charge€criminally€negligent€homicide€as€a€lesser€included€offense.€€TheÏdefendant€was€indicted€for€second€degree€murder;€the€jury€was€so€charged.× ƒV ××  ×€€TheÏtrial€court€also€instructed€the€jury€on€voluntary€manslaughter.× ƒW ××  ×€€€The€defendant'sÏspecific€complaint€is€that€the€evidence€also€warranted€an€instruction€on€criminallyÏnegligent€homicide.× ƒX ××  ×ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€suggested€and€the€jury€couldÏhave€found€that€the€shooting€was€accidental,€a€result€of€her€ignorance€of€weaponsÏand€the€poor€quality€of€the€gun€itself.€€Thus,€she€claims€an€entitlement€to€theÏinstruction€of€criminally€negligent€homicide.€€In€response,€the€state€submits€thatÏbecause€the€defendant€admitted€arming€herself€and€intentionally€firing€a€gun€at€theÏvictim,€there€was€simply€no€evidence€of€"negligent€conduct"€and€thus€anything€lessÏthan€voluntary€manslaughter.ÌÌà àà àIn€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€our€supreme€court€observed€that€ð ðTennessee€lawÏrecognizes€two€types€of€lesser€offenses€...€:€€a€lesser€grade€or€class€of€the€chargedÏoffense€and€a€lesser€included€offense.ðð€€919€S.W.2d€305,€310€(Tenn.€1996).€€TheÏtrial€judge€has€a€statutory€duty€to€charge€the€jury€ð ðon€lesser€grades€or€classes€of€theÏcharged€offense€supported€by€the€evidence.ðð€€òòIdóó.;€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„18„110.€ÏThe€trial€judge€also€has€a€duty€grounded€in€case€law€to€instruct€the€jury€on€lesserÏincluded€offenses.€€òòTrustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€311.€€Failure€to€charge€the€jury€with€eitherÏa€lesser€grade€offense€or€lesser€included€offense€denies€a€defendant€herÏconstitutional€right€of€trial€by€a€jury.€€òòState€v.€Wrightóó,€618€S.W.2d€310,€315€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1981);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„18„110.€ÌÌà àà àA€lesser€grade€or€class€of€the€charged€offense€is€determined€byÏreference€to€the€statutory€scheme.€€œòòWrightóó,›€618€S.W.2d€at€315.€€For€example,€theÏvarying€grades€or€classes€of€homicide€are€defined€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201Ïand€codified€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€ðð€39„13„202€through€„213.ÌÌà àà àThe€other€type€of€lesser€offense€is€one€ð ðnecessarily€included€in€theÏindictment.ðð€€òòTrustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€311.€€In€òòWright€v.€Stateóó,€549€S.W.2d€682€(Tenn.Ï1977),€our€supreme€court€outlined€the€test€to€determine€whether€an€offense€isÏlesser€and€included€in€the€greater€offense.€€Quoting€the€late€Justice€Weldon€WhiteÏin€òòJohnson€v.€Stateóó,€397€S.W.2d€170,€174€(Tenn.€1965),€the€court€ruled€as€follows:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€true€test€of€which€is€a€lesser€and€which€is€a€greaterÏcrime€is€whether€the€elements€of€the€former€areÏcompletely€contained€within€the€latter,€so€that€to€proveÏthe€greater€the€State€must€first€prove€the€elements€of€theÏlesser.€€ÌÌòòWright€v.€Stateóó,€549€S.W.2d€at€685„86.€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àTwo€years€later,€our€supreme€court€again€addressed€the€subject:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àWe€believe€that€the€better€rule,€and€the€one€to€beÏfollowed€henceforth€in€this€State,€is€the€rule€adoptedÏimplicitly€by€this€court€in€òòWright€v.€Stateóó,€òòsupraóó,€that,€inÏthis€context,€an€offense€is€necessarily€included€inÏanother€if€the€elements€of€the€greater€offense,€as€thoseÏelements€are€set€forth€in€the€indictment,€include,€but€areÍnot€congruent€with,€all€the€elements€of€the€lesser.€€IfÏthere€is€evidence€to€support€a€conviction€for€such€aÏlesser€offense,€it€must€be€charged€by€the€trial€judge.€ÏT.C.A.€ðð€40„2519€[now€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„18„118(a)];€òòWhitwell€v.€Stateóó,€520€S.W.2d€338€(Tenn.€1975).€€ÌÌòòHoward€v.€Stateóó,€578€S.W.2d€83,€85€(Tenn.€1979).€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€defendant€was€indicted€for€second€degree€murder.€€The€trial€courtÏcharged€the€lesser€offense€of€voluntary€manslaughter€but€not€of€criminally€negligentÏhomicide.€€€Voluntary€manslaughter€is€clearly€a€lesser€included€offense€of€secondÏdegree€murder.€€òòSeeóó€òòWright€v.€Stateóó,€549€S.W.2d€œat€685„86.›€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ39„13„211(a)€provides€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àVoluntary€manslaughter€is€the€intentional€or€knowingÏkilling€of€another€in€a€state€of€passion€produced€byÏadequate€provocation€sufficient€to€lead€a€reasonableÏperson€to€act€in€an€irrational€manner.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àCriminally€negligent€homicide€is€also€a€lesser€included€offense€ofÏsecond€degree€murder,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530€(Tenn.€1994),Ïand€is€defined€as€"[c]riminally€negligent€conduct€which€results€in€death."€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€39„13„212(a).€€The€degree€of€negligence€required€to€prove€theÏoffense€is€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àCriminal€negligence€refers€to€a€person€who€acts€withÏcriminal€negligence€with€respect€to€the€circumstancesÏsurrounding€that€person's€conduct€or€the€result€of€thatÏconduct€when€the€person€ought€to€be€aware€of€aÏsubstantial€and€unjustifiable€risk€that€the€circumstancesÏexist€or€the€result€will€occur.€€The€risk€must€be€of€such€aÏnature€and€degree€that€the€failure€to€perceive€itÏconstitutes€a€gross€deviation€from€the€standard€of€careÏthat€an€ordinary€person€would€exercise€under€all€theÏcircumstances€as€viewed€from€the€accused€person'sÏstandpoint[.]ÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(4).ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€trial€court€has€a€duty€to€give€a€complete€charge€of€the€lawÏapplicable€to€the€facts€of€the€case.€€òòState€v.€Harbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€314,€319€(Tenn.Ï1986).€€It€is€settled€law€that€when€"there€are€any€facts€that€are€susceptible€ofÏinferring€guilt€of€any€lesser€included€offense€or€offenses,€then€there€is€a€mandatoryÏduty€upon€the€trial€judge€to€charge€on€such€offense€or€offenses.€€Failure€to€do€soÏdenies€a€defendant€his€constitutional€right€of€trial€by€a€jury."€€œòòWrightóó,›€618€S.W.2d€œatÏ315€(citations›€omitted);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„18„110(a).€€When€there€is€a€trial€on€aÏsingle€charge€of€a€felony,€there€is€also€a€trial€on€all€lesser€included€offenses,€"as€theÏfacts€may€be."€€òòStrader€v.€Stateóó,€362€S.W.2d€224,€227€(Tenn.€1962).€€ÌÌà àà àTrial€courts,€however,€are€not€required€to€charge€the€jury€on€a€lesserÏincluded€offense€when€the€record€is€devoid€of€evidence€to€support€an€inference€ofÌguilt€of€the€lesser€offense.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€at€549„50;€òòState€v.ÏBoydóó,€797€S.W.2d€589,€593€(Tenn.€1990);€òòState€v.€Dulsworthóó,€781€S.W.2d€277,€287Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989).€€In€determining€whether€evidence€fairly€raises€an€issue,Ïtrial€courts€must€assess€the€defendant's€position€without€ascertaining€itsÏtruthfulness€or€the€weight€to€which€it€might€be€entitled.€€òòState€v.€Dorie€Miller€Currinóó,ÏNo.€02C01„9201„CC„00018€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Jackson,€August€26,€1992);€òòseeóóÏòòPotter€v.€Stateóó,€85€Tenn.€88,€1€S.W.€614€(1886).€€Even€where€the€evidence€is€strongÏthat€the€defendant€had€the€intent€required€to€warrant€a€conviction€for€a€greaterÏoffense,€trial€courts€must€still€instruct€on€the€lesser€offense.€€It€is€the€jury's€duty€toÏresolve€the€factual€dispute€and€ascertain€the€applicable€law.ÌÌà àà àDuring€the€trial,€defense€counsel€questioned€several€witnesses€aboutÏthe€gun€used€in€the€shooting.€€It€would€appear€that€through€these€questions,Ïcounsel€attempted€to€show€that€the€gun€was€a€cheap„quality€model;€that€its€safetyÏcould€be€easily€released;€and€that€the€weapon€jammed€after€the€defendant€fired.€ÏThe€defendant€also€testified€she€had€never€shot€this€particular€gun€before€the€nightÏof€the€killing.€ÌÌà àà àThis€is€a€close€issue.€€But€these€facts,€in€our€view,€are€not€enough€toÏhave€warranted€the€negligent€homicide€instruction.€€The€defendant,€by€her€ownÏtestimony,€had€argued€with€the€victim.€€She€claimed€that€the€victim€threatened€her.€ÏHaving€some€experience€with€guns,€the€defendant€opened€a€drawer,€tookÏpossession€of€the€pistol,€removed€the€safety,€and€fired€at€the€victim.€€All€of€thatÏsignifies€an€intentional€act,€not€one€of€neglect.€€Moreover,€the€direct€examination€byÏdefense€counsel€did€not€produce€testimony€that€suggested€an€accidental€ratherÏthan€an€intentional€act.€€ÌÌà@ àIIIÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€insists€that€the€trial€court€should€have€given€anÏinstruction€on€the€defense€of€third€party,€based€on€her€claim€that€the€victim€grabbedÏthe€baby€from€her€arms€and€tossed€him€into€the€crib,€where€he€lay€crying.€€ÌÌà àà àDefense€of€a€third€party€is€set€out€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„612:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àA€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€force€againstÏanother€to€protect€a€third€person€if:ÌÌà8 àà8 à(1)€€Under€the€circumstances€as€the€person€reasonablyÏbelieves€them€to€be,€the€person€would€be€justified€underÏ[self„defense]€in€threatening€or€using€force€to€protectÏagainst€the€use€or€attempted€use€of€unlawful€forceÍreasonably€believed€to€be€threatening€the€third€personÏsought€to€be€protected;€andÌÌà8 àà8 à(2)€€òòThe€person€reasonably€believes€that€the€interventionÏis€immediately€necessary€to€protect€the€third€personóó.ÌÌ(Emphasis€added.)ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€law€on€defense€of€third€person€is€paraphrased€inòò€òòóóState€v.€Barnesóóòò,óóÏ675€S.W.2d€195,€196€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984):ÌÓÓà8 àà0 àòòWhere€a€person€is€about€to€be€injured€by€an€assailantóó,€thenÏanother€person€may€make€resistance€sufficient€to€prevent€theÏoffense€.€.€.€.€€Further,€a€person€interfering€in€a€dispute,€affray,€orÏfight€on€behalf€of€another€simply€steps€into€the€latter's€shoes.€ÏHe€may€lawfully€do€in€another's€defense€only€what€that€personÏcould€have€done,€and€no€more.€€€He€stands€on€the€same€plane,Ïis€entitled€to€the€same€rights,€and€is€subject€to€the€sameÏconditions,€limitations,€and€responsibilities€as€the€personÏdefended.€€€And€his€act€must€receive€the€same€construction€asÏthe€act€of€the€person€defended€would€receive€if€the€killing€hadÏbeen€committed€by€that€person.€€€Thus,€a€person€is€not€entitledÏto€the€plea€of€defense€of€another€unless€a€plea€of€self„defenseÏwould€have€been€available€to€the€person€on€whose€behalf€heÏintervened.€ÌÌÓÓ(Emphasis€added.)€€The€defendant€did€testify€that€the€victim€grabbed€the€child€fromÏher€arms€and€tossed€him€into€the€crib.€€The€defendant€repeatedly€testified€that€sheÏthought€the€victim€was€going€to€hit€her.€€She€told€how€she€screamed,€"don't€hit€me."€ÏShe€testified€that€she€had€been€hit€and€pushed€by€the€victim€before.€€TheÏdefendant,€however,€never€testified€that€she€believed€that€the€victim€was€about€toÍharm€the€baby€when€she€shot€him;€instead,€she€spoke€of€how€the€victim€was€aÏdevoted€father,€who€loved€his€only€son.€€ÌÌà àà àIn€order€for€the€defendant€to€be€justified€in€using€force€to€protect€theÏchild,€she€must€have€believed€that€the€child€was€in€peril.€€The€proof€simply€did€notÏrise€to€that€level;€thus€the€issue€was€not€fairly€raised.€€€The€trial€court€correctlyÏdeclined€to€charge€the€jury€on€defense€of€a€third€party.ÌÌà@ àò òIVó óÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€allowingÏstatements€made€by€the€victim€to€medical€personnel€and€police€officers€before€hisÏdeath.€€The€police€report€was€not€included€in€the€record.€€ÌÌà àà àAt€trial,€defense€counsel€made€the€following€statement€out€of€theÏpresence€of€the€jury:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àI€do€have€Sergeant€Olive€here.€€If€Your€Honor€willÏaccept€my€statements€as€a€formal€proffer,€this€is€theÏofficer€who€will€testify€that€he€went€to€the€hospital€andÏwas€told€by€Mr.€Eason€that€he€did€not€wish€to€prosecute.€ÏIf€Your€Honor€will€accept€that€as€a€proffer,€I€need€notÏeven€have€him€make€the€formal€proffer.ÌÌÓÓThe€trial€court€accepted€this€proffer€and€made€it€part€of€the€record;€the€state€offeredÏno€resistance€to€the€procedure.€€The€court€then€determined€that€this€evidence€wasÏnot€probative€of€any€issue€in€the€case.€€ÌÌà àà àBy€reading€the€side€bar€transcript,€we€deduce€that€while€at€theÏhospital,€the€victim€said€he€did€not€wish€to€prosecute€the€defendant€for€shootingÏhim.€€While€the€defendant's€brief€argues€the€relevancy€of€the€evidence,€counselÏnever€addressed€the€hearsay€issue€raised€by€the€state.€€We€believe€that€even€if€theÏstatement€met€the€relevancy€requirements€of€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401,€the€evidenceÏwould€not€qualify€as€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule.ÌÌà àà àThe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€provide€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(a)€Statement.€€A€"statement"€is€(1)€an€oral€or€writtenÏassertion€or€(2)€nonverbal€conduct€of€a€person€if€it€isÏintended€by€the€person€as€an€assertion.ÌÌà8 àà8 à(b)€Declarant.€€A€"declarant"€is€a€person€who€makes€aÏstatement.ÌÌà8 àà8 à(c)€Hearsay.€"Hearsay"€is€a€statement,€other€than€oneÏmade€by€the€declarant€while€testifying€at€the€trial€orÏhearing,€offered€in€evidence€to€prove€the€truth€of€theÏmatter€asserted.ÌÌÓÓTenn.€R.€Evid.€801.€€The€victim's€statement€meets€the€definition€of€hearsay€underÏthis€rule.€€Ì€Ìà àà àœHearsay›€is€not€admitted€unless€it€qualifies€as€an€exception€under€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€or€otherwise€by€law.€€œTenn.€R.€Evid.€802.€€Under›ÏTenn.€R.€Evid.€803€(3)€"a€statement€of€the€declarant's€then€existing€state€of€mind€...Ïsuch€as€intent€...."€is€admissible€unless€the€"statement€is€of€memory€or€belief€toÏprove€the€fact€remembered€or€believed€..."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€803(3).€€In€addition,€theÏadvisory€commission€comment€adds€further€guidance:€€"Normally€[state€of€mind]Ïdeclarations€are€inadmissible€to€prove€past€conduct."€€Rule€803(3)€"does€not€permitÏstatements€of€mental€condition€amounting€to€memory€or€belief€to€prove€theÏdeclarant's€consistent€òòpastóó€conduct."€€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,òò€óóòòTennessee€Law€ofÏEvidenceóó€ðð€803(3).5€at€547€(3d€ed.€1995).€€€€ÌÌà àà àFrom€the€transcripts€and€motion€for€a€new€trial,€it€would€appear€thatÏthe€defense€wanted€to€prove€that€the€victim€did€not€want€to€prosecute;€this,€theÏdefendant€argued,€would€create€an€inference€that€the€victim€was€the€initialÏaggressor.€€Because€the€defendant€wanted€to€use€the€victim's€statement€of€presentÏintent€to€prove€his€conduct€just€prior€to€the€shooting,€the€statement€does€not€qualifyÍunder€this€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule.€€The€trial€court€was€correct€in€not€allowingÏdefense€counsel€to€admit€the€statement€into€evidence.€€ÌÌà àà àAt€this€point€we€would€like€to€explain€why€this€statement€would€not€beÏconsidered€a€dying€declaration.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€804€(b)(2)€creates€a€hearsayÏexception€for€statements€made€under€belief€of€impending€death:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIn€a€prosecution€for€homicide,€a€statement€made€by€theÏvictim€while€believing€that€the€declarant's€death€wasÏimminent€and€concerning€the€cause€or€circumstances€ofÏwhat€the€declarant€believed€to€be€impending€death.€€ÌÌÓÓThe€statement,€in€all€probability,€would€meet€four€of€the€elements€of€a€dyingÏdeclaration:€€(1)€the€declarant€was€the€victim;€(2)€the€statement€was€offered€in€aÏhomicide€trial;€(3)€the€declarant€believed€he€was€dying;€(4)€the€declarant€later€died.€ÏThe€fifth€element€requires€that€a€dying€declaration,€a€narrow€exception€to€theÏhearsay€rule,€œmust›€relate€to€the€cause€or€circumstances€of€the€declarant's€death.€ÏThe€cause€or€circumstances€of€the€impending€death€"includes€an€identification€orÏdescription€of€the€killer€and€a€recitation€of€the€events€that€occurred€during€theÏhomicide.€...€[it€may€also€be€about]€events€or€conditions€that€preceded€the€homicideÏbut€precipitated€or€caused€it."€€Cohen,€òòsupraóó€at€ðð€804(b)(2).1.€€In€our€view,€thisÏstatement€does€not€relate€to€the€circumstances€of€the€death.€€ÌÌà@ àò òVó óÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€should€have€declared€aÏmistrial€when€the€state€asked€one€of€the€witnesses€about€a€statement€the€victimÏmade.€After€the€court€had€excluded€the€statements€made€by€the€victim€at€theÏhospital,€the€state,€during€cross„examination€of€one€of€the€officers,€asked€if€theÏvictim€had€expressed€his€love€for€the€defendant.€€Defense€counsel€immediatelyÏobjected.€€The€court€instructed€the€witness€not€to€answer€the€question€and€gave€theÏjury€a€corrective€instruction.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€had€already€ruled€the€victim's€statements€to€beÏirrelevant.€€The€question€was€never€answered.€€A€mistrial€is€warranted€only€whenÏan€event€has€occurred€which€would€preclude€an€impartial€verdict;€there€must€be€aÏmanifest€necessity€for€the€declaration€of€a€mistrial.€€òòArnold€v.€Stateóó,€563€S.W.2d€Ï792€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€Here,€the€trial€court€provided€a€curative€instruction.€ÏThe€jury€is€presumed€to€have€followed€that€directive.€€Under€these€circumstances,Ïthere€is€clearly€no€error.ÌÌò òà@ àVIó óÌšà àà àAs€her€final€contention,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erredÏby€not€granting€the€motion€to€suppress€her€statements€to€police€officers€shortly€afterÍthe€shooting.€€There€is€no€transcript€of€the€suppression€hearing€in€the€record.€€ThereÏwere€no€findings€of€fact€in€the€trial€court's€order€denying€the€motion€to€suppress.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€has€failed€to€include€in€the€record€on€appeal€theÏstatements€in€question€or€a€transcript€from€the€suppression€hearing.€€It€is€the€duty€ofÏthe€appellant€to€prepare€a€record€which€conveys€a€fair,€accurate€and€completeÏaccount€of€what€transpired€in€the€trial€court€with€respect€to€the€issues€which€form€theÏbasis€of€the€appeal.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(b);€òòState€v.€Rhodenóó,€739€S.W.2d€6€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1987);€òòState€v.€Milleróó,€737€S.W.2d€556,€558€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€ÏGenerally,€this€court€is€precluded€from€addressing€an€issue€on€appeal€when€theÏrecord€fails€to€include€relevant€documents.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Bennettóó,€798€S.W.2d€783Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24.€€Because€the€hearing€on€the€motionÏto€suppress€is€not€in€the€record,€the€issue€has€been€waived.ÌÌà àà àHad€the€record€been€complete,€however,€we€would€have€affirmed€theÏtrial€court's€denial€of€the€motion€to€suppress€the€defendant's€statement.€€While€it€isÏtrue€that€the€statement€meets€the€definition€of€hearsay€and€although€hearsay€isÏgenerally€inadmissible,€statements€by€a€party„opponent€are€an€exception€to€theÏrule€against€hearsay.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€803(1.2)(A).€€Here,€the€defendant's€statementsÏappear€to€have€been€made€spontaneously€shortly€after€the€shooting.€ÌÌà àà àMoreover,€the€statements€of€the€defendant€were€first€introduced€byÏdefense€counsel€during€the€cross„examination€of€Officer€Canady.€€The€defendantÏrepeated€the€statement€during€her€direct€examination.€€It€was€only€after€the€defenseÏtwice€questioned€witnesses€about€the€statements€that€the€state€used€the€statementsÏto€impeach€the€defendant.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€find€no€error€in€the€trialÏcourt's€decision€to€allow€the€state€to€question€the€defendant€about€statements€sheÏmade€shortly€after€the€offense.€€ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌÌ____________________________________ÌWilliam€M.€Barker,€JudgeòòÌÌ