ÿWPC …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0JH 0T’ 0^æ 0hD 0r¬ 0| 0†š 0 1u° 0d% U>‰ U*Ç B)ñ DC AM] BªíÇv~´vÓ2 D3 0@8 AOxÆÇ 0D D/Ñ B˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ®D¯xe°U±D²³E´µE¶Ó€Âz!bB4Bt–3|xÂ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d ãÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€!ÔÔ€!ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€!XÔÌÌò òNovember€12,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€!ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPt HHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÔ€!ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œ›à@ àòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÌÌà@ àòòAT€œJACKSONóó›ÌÌà@ àMARCH€1996€SESSIONÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à*à àC.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9412„CC„00265€Ìà àÌà àAPPELLEE,à àà àà àà à*à àHENRY€COUNTYÌÙ€€ÙœßL€$&#;+'h|ˆ½` Å `€€Lß›ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à*à àHON.ÏJULIAN€P.€GUINN,€œÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJUDGE›à àÌTERESA€DEION€SMITH€HARRIS,à à*à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(FirstÏDegree€Felony€Murder)Ìà àAPPELLANT.à àà àà à*à à€Ìà àà àÔ€ ÔÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€!Ôòòò òDISSENTING€OPINIONó óóóÌÓ  ÓÌÌÓÓà àà àI€concur€with€my€colleagues€that€the€conviction€should€be€affirmed.€€InÏmy€view,€however,€there€should€be€a€remand€on€the€sentence.€€Thus,€I€must€dissentÏin€part.ÌÌà àà àThe€jury€clearly€found€that€one€of€the€two€aggravating€circumstancesÏapplied€to€the€defendant:€ð ð[t]he€murder€was€committed€for€the€purpose€of€avoiding,Ïinterfering€with,€or€preventing€a€lawful€arrest€or€prosecution€of€the€defendant€orÏanother[.]ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€35„13„204(i)(6).€€My€concern€is€with€the€jury€reportÏon€the€second€aggravating€circumstance€found€to€be€applicable.€€€€€ÌÌà àà àMy€colleagues€characterize€issue€4(a)€as€whether€ð ðthe€trial€courtÏimproperly€sentenced€the€appellant€to€life€without€parole€[because€of]€the€failure€ofÏthe€jury€to€completely€fill€in€the€verdict€form€with€all€the€elements€of€the€firstÏaggravating€factor.ðð€€That€is€a€misstatement,€in€my€view,€because€the€recordÏestablishes€that€the€jury€found€applicable€only€a€portion€of€the€ð ðheinous,€atrocious,Ïor€cruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€serious€abuseðð€circumstance€but€neverthelessÏused€that€factor€in€the€enhancement€of€the€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(5).ÌÑ7€VlXXdìXXdì7ÑÌà àà àWhen€the€jury€returned€with€the€verdict,€the€following€exchangeÏoccurred€between€the€trial€judge€and€the€jury€foreman:ÌÌÒ ä ÒÒ  ÒÓÓà àTHE€COURT:€I€notice€that€where€you€set€out€theÏaggravating€circumstances€number€one€that€you€do€notÏhave€the€entire€aggravating€circumstance€written€out.Ìà àIs€there€some€reason?Ìà àà àÌà àJURY€FOREMAN:€Well,€we€just[„„]Ìà àà àÌà àTHE€COURT:€Was€it€intended€to€be€that€you€foundÏthe€entire€circumstance€there?Ìà àà àÌà àJURY€FOREMAN:€Well,€just€what€Iððve€got€writtenÏout.Ìà àà àÌà àTHE€COURT:€Youððve€written€here€that€òòyou€foundÏthat€the€murder€was€especially€heinous€and€atrociousóó.Ìà àà àÌà àJURY€FOREMAN:€Yes,€sir.Ìà àà àÌà àTHE€COURT:€òòYou€have€omitted€that€it€was€cruel,Ïinvolved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyond€thatÏnecessary€to€produce€deathóó.Ìà àIs€that€what€you€intended€for€it€to€be?Ìà àà àÌà àJURY€FOREMAN:€Yes,€sir.Ìà àà àÌà àTHE€COURT:€All€right,€but€then€you€have€foundÏthat€the€second€aggravating€circumstance€there€in€itsÏentirety€is€correct.Ìà àà àÌà àJURY€FOREMAN:€Yes,€sir.Ìà àà àÌà àTHE€COURT:€Based€upon€that€you€fixed€aÏsentence€of€life€imprisonment€without€the€possibility€ofÏparole.Ìà àHave€I€read€it€correctly?Ìà àà àÌà àJURY€FOREMAN:€Thatððs€correct.ÌÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌ(Emphasis€added).ÌÌà àà àThe€statute€provides€as€follows:€ð ð[t]he€murder€was€especially€heinous,Ïatrocious,€or€cruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€serious€abuse€beyond€that€necessaryÏto€produce€death[.]ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(5).€€It€is€apparent€the€jury€didÏnot€find€all€the€necessary€elements€of€the€first€aggravator;€that€is,€they€did€not€findÍthat€ð ðit€involved€torture€or€serious€abuse.ðð€€In€effect,€they€applied€this€section€of€theÏstatute€without€finding€all€elements€present.€€The€majority€appears€to€treat€that€asÏan€oversight.€€I€must€conclude€that€the€jury,€perhaps€in€its€desire€to€compromise€anÏinternal€disagreement,€improperly€applied€the€first€aggravating€factor.€€The€entireÏsection€of€the€statute€must€be€established€by€the€proof€and€accepted€by€the€juryÏbefore€it€can€be€considered€as€an€aggravating€circumstance.€€Their€lack€ofÏunanimity€on€this€important€issue€is€evident.ÌÌà àà àIn€òòState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€238,€259€(Tenn.€1993),€òòcert.€deniedóó,Ï510€U.S.€1215€(1994),€our€supreme€court€developed€a€standard€to€determineÏwhether€the€juryððs€use€of€an€invalid€aggravating€factor€in€imposing€death€mightÏqualify€as€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€That€is,€would€the€jury€haveÏreached€the€same€conclusion€(life€without€the€possibility€of€parole)€had€they€notÏconsidered€the€invalid€aggravator?€€The€òòHowellóó€court€considered€four€factors€inÏdetermining€whether€the€error€was€harmless:€(1)€the€number€and€strength€ofÏremaining€valid€aggravating€circumstances;€(2)€the€prosecutorððs€argument€atÏsentencing;€(3)€the€evidence€admitted€to€establish€the€invalid€aggravator,€and€(4)Ïthe€nature,€quality,€and€strength€of€mitigating€evidence.€€òòIdóó.€at€261.€ÌÌà àà àIn€its€consideration€of€the€first€of€the€four€factors,€our€supreme€courtÍruled€as€follows:ÌÒ ä ÒÒ  ÒÓÓ[W]e€necessarily€consider€the€òònumber€of€remaining€validÏaggravating€circumstancesóó€...;€but€even€more€crucialÏthan€the€sum€of€the€remaining€aggravatingÏcircumstances€is€the€qualitative€nature€of€eachÏcircumstance,€its€substance€and€persuasiveness,€as€wellÏas€the€quantum€of€proof€supporting€it.€€òòÌóóÌÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÓÓòòHowellóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€261€(emphasis€added).€€The€single€legitimate€aggravatingÏcircumstance€left€is€that€the€murder€was€committed€to€ð ðprevent€the€lawful€arrest€orÏprosecutionðð€of€the€defendant.€€That€there€were€no€other€aggravating€circumstancesÏwould€weigh€against€a€finding€of€harmlessness.€€Although€there€is€clearly€aÏð ðquantum€of€proof€supportingðð€the€remaining€statutory€aggravating€circumstance,Ïthe€ð ðpersuasivenessðð€of€a€single€remaining€factor€is€often€not€enough€to€warrantÏeither€the€death€penalty€or€the€imposition€of€a€life€sentence€without€the€possibility€ofÏparole.€€This€may€be€best€understood€by€comparing€the€facts€here€to€those€inÏòòHowellóó,€where€the€supreme€court€affirmed€the€death€sentence€even€though€thereÏwas€only€one€remaining€aggravator.€€òòIdóó.€€In€òòHowellóó,€the€remaining€aggravator€wasÏthat€the€defendant€had€prior€violent€felony€convictions.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(2).€€The€defendant€had€committed€a€ð ðcold„blooded€execution€styleÏmurder€...€within€twenty„four€hours€of€[the€second€victimððs]€murderðð€as€well€as€anÏattempted€murder€in€a€shootout€with€police.€€òòState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€261.€ÏThat€the€defendant€committed€two€execution€style€murders€within€a€twenty„fourÍhour€time€period€is€especially€€persuasive€when€compared€to€the€facts€here.€ÏMoreover,€in€€òòState€v.€Walkeróó,€910€S.W.2d€381,€398€(Tenn.€1995),€òòcert.€deniedóó,Ï_____S.€Ct.€_____,€1996€WL€183342€(Oct.€7,€1996),€our€supreme€court€held€thatÏthe€single€remaining€aggravator,€the€defendantððs€prior€conviction€for€manslaughter,Ïwas€ð ðnot€nearly€as€positiveðð€as€that€remaining€in€òòHowellóó.€€Thus,€remand€forÏresentencing€was€ordered.€€òòIdóó.€€The€circumstances€here€align€more€closely€withÏthose€in€òòWalkeróó.€ÌÌà àà àThe€second€factor€to€consider€in€determining€the€harmlessness€of€theÏerror€is€the€prosecutorððs€argument€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€òòHowellóó,€868€S.W.2dÏat€261.€€In€opening€statement,€the€prosecutor€briefly€argued€that€both€aggravatorsÏwere€applicable.€€One€received€no€more€emphasis€than€the€other.€€The€bulk€ofÏclosing€argument€was€directed€toward€discrediting€the€mitigating€evidence.€€ThisÏfactor,€in€my€view,€is€relatively€neutral.€€Had€the€state€emphasized€the€avoidingÏdetection€aggravator,€it€might€weigh€more€favorably€for€the€state.€€In€€òòState€v.ÏNicholsóó,€877€S.W.2d€722,€739€(Tenn.€1994),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€_____€U.S.€_____,€115ÏS.€Ct.€909€(1995),€a€death€sentence€was€affirmed€when€the€ð ðbulk€of€the€argumentÏrelative€to€aggravating€circumstances€focusedðð€on€the€remaining€valid€factor.€€UsingÏthe€ruling€in€òòNicholsóó€as€a€guide,€I€would€consider€this€factor€to€weigh€slightlyÏagainst€a€finding€of€harmlessness.ÌÌà àà àThe€third€factor€is€whether€the€evidence€admitted€to€establish€theÏinvalid€aggravator€would€have€been€allowed€into€proof€anyway.€€If€proof€of€theÏinvalid€aggravator€included€the€admission€of€prejudicial€evidence,€the€factor€wouldÏweigh€in€favor€of€the€defendant.€€òòHowellóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€261.€€Obviously,€however,Ïthe€heinous€nature€of€this€killing€and€what€occurred€afterwards€was€admissible.€ÏThus,€the€factor€weights€favorably€for€the€state.€ÌÌà àà àThe€final€òòHowellóó€factor€is€the€nature€of€the€mitigating€evidence.€€òòIdóó.€ÏThe€defendant€presented€evidence€that€she€œhad€had›€drug€and€alcohol€problemsÏsince€she€was€twelve€or€thirteen€years€of€age.€€She€also€presented€proof€€that€sheÏsuffered€from€post„traumatic€stress€disorder€and€that€a€personality€disorder€thatÏmade€her€dependent€and€passive.€€The€defendant€has€a€history€of€being€sexuallyÏabused€and€she€has€attempted€suicide€more€than€once.€€While€it€is€true€that€thereÏð ðwas€virtually€no€mitigating€evidence€relating€to€the€good€character€of€theÏdefendant,€other€than€the€evidence€offered€to€explain€[her]€anti„social€behavior,ðð€òòIdóó.Ïat€262,€there€was€at€least€some€evidence€admitted€to€mitigate€or€explain€herÏbehavior.€€This€factor,€in€my€view,€is€neither€helpful€to€the€defendant€nor€the€state.ÌÌà àà àObviously,€this€is€a€close€case.€€A€sentence€of€life€without€theÍpossibility€of€parole,€however,€requires€the€same€kind€of€procedure€and€proofÏutilized€in€a€death€penalty€case.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(a)€and€„207.€ÏOur€supreme€court€has€consistently€and€carefully€scrutinized€verdicts€in€which€anÏaggravating€circumstance€has€been€misapplied.€€Despite€the€gruesome€nature€ofÏthis€crime,€the€same€reasoning€should€apply€here.€€I€hesitate,€in€theseÏcircumstances,€to€substitute€my€own€opinion€for€that€of€the€jury.€€ÌÌà àà àOn€the€balance,€I€am€unable€to€conclude€beyond€a€reasonable€doubtÏthat€the€jury€would€have€rendered€the€same€sentence€had€they€not€considered€theÏinappropriate€aggravator.€€Accordingly,€I€would€remand€for€resentencing.€€I€doÏrecognize€that€under€these€particular€facts,€the€same€result€may€very€well€occur.ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌÓÓ