ÿWPC+ /# ¢UN­ %û 0ÆÇ4Ïãw@ò 0J2 0T| 0^Ð 0h. 0r– 0| 0†„ 0 1uš 0d U>s U*± 0@Û D3 BN B)k DC” AM× Ë$ v~ï vÓm AQ@Æ‘ 0DW 0D› D/ß B˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(žjÆ$¡¡Ñ` ` ÑÑÜÜÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓìSï"3|xh QDRDTVUDVWXEYÓ€eh 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd* $Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÁÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òJulyÏ18,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÑ7€vXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÙ€*ÙßR€%&$A1-j|]` ´- `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÌà@ àòòAT€JACKSONóóÌà@ àMARCH€1997€SESSIONÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à*à àC.C.A.€#€02C01„9610„CC„00360€Ìà àœà àAppellee,›à àà àœ*›à àHARDEMAN€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à*à àHon.€Jon€Kerry€Blackwood,€JudgeÌÓÓTONY€LEON€HIGGS,à àà à*à à(Aggravated€Burglary€and€Theft€of€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àProperty€$1,000.00€or€more€but€lessÏà àà àà àAppellant.à àà à*à àthan€œ$10,000.00)ÌÌÌ›ÌÌòòFor€Appellant:óóà àà àà àà àòòFor€Appellee:óóÌœÌGary›€Antrican€à àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌÌJeannie€Kaessà àà àà àà àKenneth€W.€Rucker€ÌAsst.€District€Public€Defenderà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ118€East€Market€Streetà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€Division€ÌP.O.€Box€700à àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌSomerville,€TN€€38068à àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„4351à àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àElizabeth€RiceÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€General€Ìà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJerry€Norwood€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à302€Market€Street€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TN€€38068ÌÌÌœÌÌOPINION›€FILED:_____________________ÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌà àà àThe€defendant,€Tony€Leon€Higgs,€was€convicted€of€aggravatedÏburglary€and€theft€of€property€valued€over€$1,000.00€but€less€than€$10,000.00.€€TheÏtrial€court€imposed€Range€II,€seven„€and€four„year€sentences,€respectively.€€TheÏsentences€are€to€be€served€concurrently.€€ÌÌà àà àIn€this€appeal€of€right,€the€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€theÏevidence€and€contends€that€certain€testimony€should€not€have€been€admitted€atÏtrial.€€We€find€no€error€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€ÌÌà àà àOn€the€afternoon€of€September€4,€1995,€Unice€Woods,€accompaniedÏby€her€son,€Jarvis€Beasley,€drove€into€the€driveway€of€their€residence€and€noticedÏthat€someone€had€broken€into€their€front€door.€€They€heard€noises€from€inside€theÏresidence.€€Beasley,€œfourteen›€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial,€then€saw€a€man,€whoÏwas€wearing€a€black€bandanna€around€his€hand,€carry€a€radio€out€the€side€door€ofÏthe€Woodses'€residence.€€When€the€burglar€went€back€inside€the€house,€Ms.ÏWoods€drove€to€the€Bolivar€Police€Department€to€report€the€crime.ÌÌà àà àDeputies€Wesley€Green€and€Anthony€Bynum€of€the€Hardeman€CountyÏSheriff's€Department€responded€to€a€dispatch,€made€sure€the€residence€wasÍsecure,€and€then€reported€that€it€was€safe€for€the€family€to€return.€€When€Ms.ÏœWoods's€husband,›€Joe€Woods,€arrived€at€the€residence,€he€saw€that€the€front€doorÏhad€been€knocked€down.€€A€bedroom€television€had€been€moved€into€the€livingÏroom,€jewelry€had€been€scattered,€and€a€VCR€and€a€second€television€had€beenÏunplugged.€€Several€items€were€reported€as€œamong€those€missing:›€€a€Pulsar€watch,Ïa€tiger„eye€ring,€a€wedding€band,€a€ruby€and€diamond€ring,€a€gold€ring€with€aÏdiamond,€two€pairs€of€diamond€earrings,€two€gold€bracelets,€a€gold€chain€with€aÏcharm,€some€clothing,€and€$475.00€in€cash.€€Another€VCR€and€compact€discs€hadÏbeen€placed€in€a€front€room€of€the€house€as€if€about€to€be€carried€away.€€ÌÌà àà àWhile€at€the€police€station,€Beasley€identified€the€defendant€from€aÏlineup€consisting€of€ten€photographs.€€Beasley€remembered€having€talked€with€theÏdefendant€on€several€occasions€prior€to€the€burglary;€he€described€the€burglar€as€aÏblack€male€and,€prior€to€the€photographic€lineup,€told€his€mother€that€the€burglarÏwas€the€person€who€had€borrowed€his€bike€sometime€earlier.€€When€Ms.€WoodsÏasked€if€he€was€referring€to€Tony€Higgs,€Beasley€replied,€"Yes."€€Eventually,€theÏWoodses€received€approximately€$1,500.00€in€insurance€œproceeds.›€€ÌÌà àà àAt€trial,€Earnestine€McNeal,€Unice€Woods's€cousin,€testified€that€sheÏhad€seen€the€defendant€in€the€possession€of€four€or€five€rings€sometime€after€theÍburglary.€€When€the€defendant€asked€if€she€would€like€to€purchase€a€ring,€Ms.ÏMcNeal€recognized€one€of€the€rings,€which€had€not€been€reported€as€stolen,€asÏbelonging€to€Ms.€Woods.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€defense€produced€several€witnesses.€€Virginia€Williams€recalledÏthat€the€defendant€had€attended€a€barbeque€at€her€residence€in€Middleton,ÏTennessee,€late€on€the€afternoon€of€September€4,€1995,€which€was€Labor€Day.€ÏShe€did€not€recall,€however,€when€the€defendant€arrived.€€Other€witnesses€saidÏthey€observed€the€defendant€at€the€barbeque€but€could€not€pinpoint€his€time€ofÏarrival.€€Clyde€Braddock,€however,€claimed€that€he€was€with€the€defendant€on€thatÏLabor€Day€from€between€2:00€or€3:00€P.M.€until€the€end€of€the€day.€€Braddock,€whoÏconceded€that€he€was€a€friend€and€co„worker€of€the€defendant,€admitted€on€cross„examination€that€he€had€not€informed€authorities€of€the€alibi€from€the€time€of€theÏarrest€until€the€time€of€trial.€€€ÌÌà@ àIÌà àà àInitially,€the€defendant€contends€that€there€was€"no€competentÏevidence€of€the€value€of€the€property"€to€support€the€conviction€of€theft€over€$1,000.€ÏThe€defendant€points€out€that€Joe€Woods's€testimony€was€that€he€filed€anÏinsurance€claim€around€"$1,100.00,€if€that€much,"€and€Eunice€Woods€estimatedÍinsurance€coverage€in€the€amount€of€$1,500.00.€€The€defendant€insists€that€theÏamount€of€the€coverage€was€not€sufficient.Ìà àÌà àà àA€jury€verdict,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€ofÏthe€witnesses€for€the€state€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€theÏstate.€€òòState€v.€Hatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€627€(Tenn.€1978).€€On€appeal,€the€state€isÏentitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonableÏinferences€which€might€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€835Ï(Tenn.€1978).€€The€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€theirÏtestimony,€and€the€reconciliation€of€conflicts€in€the€evidence€are€matters€entrustedÏexclusively€to€the€jury€as€triers€of€fact.€€òòByrge€v.€Stateóó,€575€S.W.2d€295€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1978).€€This€court€may€not€reevaluate€the€evidence€or€substitute€its€inferencesÏfor€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€51€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1978).€€A€conviction€may€be€set€aside€only€when€the€reviewing€court€finds€thatÏthe€"evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€finding€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyondÏa€reasonable€doubt."€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).̜Ǜà àà àOne€commits€a€theft€of€property€if,€with€the€intent€to€deprive€the€ownerÏthereof,€the€person€knowingly€obtains€or€exercises€control€without€the€owner'sÏeffective€consent.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„103.€€Traditionally,€the€carrying€awayÏof€property,€no€matter€how€slight€the€distance,€with€any€intent€to€deprive€the€owner,Ïconstituted€a€larceny.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòCaruso€v.€Stateóó,€326€S.W.2d€434,€435€(Tenn.Ï1958).€€The€successor€offense,€theft,€is€a€Class€D€felony€if€the€property€obtained€isÏ$1,000€or€more€but€less€than€$10,000.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„105(3).€€ÌÌà àà àValue€is€defined€as€follows:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(i)€€[t]he€fair€market€value€of€the€property€or€service€at€theÏtime€and€place€of€the€offense;€orÌÌà8 àà8 à(ii)€€[i]f€the€fair€market€value€of€the€property€cannot€beÏascertained,€the€cost€of€replacing€the€property€within€aÏreasonable€time€after€the€offense.ÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€39„11„106(a)(35)(A).ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àIn€addition€to€the€sum€of€$475.00€in€cash,€the€Woodses€collectivelyÏtestified€that€a€Pulsar€watch,€a€tiger„eye€ring,€a€wedding€band,€a€ruby€and€diamondÏring,€a€diamond€ring€and€band,€a€gold€ring€with€diamonds,€a€gold€chain€with€aÏdiamond€charm,€two€pairs€of€diamond€earrings,€a€thin€gold€chain€with€a€diamondÏcharm,€two€gold€bracelets,€a€Tommy€Hilfiger€shirt,€a€compact€disc,€a€radio/compactÍdisc€player€with€a€dual€cassette,€a€denim€jacket,€and€one€leather€jacket€had€beenÏstolen€from€their€residence.€€None€of€the€items€were€recovered.€€Other€property€hadÏbeen€moved€around€by€the€burglar€and,€by€all€appearances,€would€have€also€beenÏhauled€away€had€the€Woodses€not€interrupted€the€burglary.€€Insurance€benefitsÏranged€between€$1,100.00€and€$1,500.00.€€òòSeeóó€Rule€701(b),€Tenn.€R.€Evid.;€NeilÏP.€œCohen›€et€œal.,€òòTennessee›€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€ðð€701.6€(3d€ed.€1995).€€ÌÌà àà àFrom€all€of€the€circumstantial€evidence,€a€jury€could€properly€infer€thatÏthe€value€of€the€property€taken€was€between€$1,000.00€and€$10,000.00.€€A€trier€ofÏfact€may,€from€all€of€the€evidence€presented€at€trial,€determine€the€fair€market€valueÏof€the€stolen€property.€€òòState€v.€Hammóó,€611€S.W.2d€826,€828„29€(Tenn.€1981).€ÏThus,€the€evidence€is€sufficient.€€Moreover,€any€suggestion€that€Beasley€did€notÏadequately€identify€the€defendant€would€not€be€a€basis€for€reversal.€€He€had€knownÏthe€defendant€for€several€years,€used€to€be€a€neighbor€to€the€defendant,€had€talkedÏto€the€defendant€on€prior€occasions,€and€had€once€allowed€the€defendant€to€borrowÏhis€bicycle.€€There€is€no€indication€that€the€photographic€lineup€was€suggestive€orÏimproperly€conducted.€€òòSeeóó€òòNeil€v.€Biggersóó,€409€U.S.€188€(1972);€òòBennett€v.€Stateóó,Ï530€S.W.2d€511€(Tenn.€1975).€€€€ÌÌà@ àIIÌà àà àThe€defendant€also€complains€that€the€trial€court€should€haveÏexcluded€the€testimony€of€Earnestine€McNeal€who€stated€that€she€had€seen€theÏdefendant€in€possession€of€Ms.€Woods's€jewelry.€€The€defendant€complained€thatÏthe€testimony€was€irrelevant€because€Ms.€McNeal€described€a€piece€of€jewelry€thatÏMs.€Woods€had€not€reported€as€stolen€in€the€burglary.€€The€defendant€points€outÏthat€evidence€is€relevant€only€if€it€has€"any€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€anyÏfact€that€is€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€lessÏprobable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence."€€Rule€401,€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€€TheÏdefendant€argues€that€the€evidence€should€have€also€been€excluded€under€theÏrule€prohibiting€evidence€of€other€crimes.€€The€defendant€also€argues€that€otherÏcrimes,€wrongs,€or€bad€acts€are€not€admissible€to€prove€the€character€of€a€person€inÏorder€to€show€action€and€conformity€with€a€character€trait.€€Rule€404(b),€Tenn.€R.ÏEvid.;€òòState€v.€Partonóó,€694€S.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1985).€€ÌÌà àà à"The€decision€to€admit€or€exclude€evidence€is€left€to€the€discretion€ofÏthe€trial€judge€and€his€decision€will€not€be€disturbed€unless€it€is€arbitrarilyÏexercised."€€òòState€v.€Bakeróó,€785€S.W.2d€132,€134€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989).€€Here,Ïthe€trial€court€made€the€determination€that€Ms.€McNeal's€testimony€qualified€withinÏthe€definition€of€relevance.€€That€the€Woodses€might€not€have€discovered€and€thenÏreported€to€police€all€of€the€property€taken€in€the€burglary€would€not€have€been€anÍunreasonable€inference.€€Certainly,€that€Ms.€McNeal,€even€though€a€relative,€hadÏrecognized€the€defendant€in€possession€of€a€ring€belonging€to€Ms.€Woods€wasÏprobative€of€the€crimes.€€The€unexplained€possession€of€stolen€goods€hasÏtraditionally€permitted€the€trier€of€fact€to€infer€that€the€possessor€has€stolen€theÏitems.€€òòBush€v.€Stateóó,€541€S.W.2d€391€(Tenn.€1976);€òòState€v.€Gautneyóó,€607€S.W.2dÏ907€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980).€€The€credibility€of€the€witness€and€the€weight€to€beÏgiven€the€testimony€was€for€the€jury€to€determine.€€ÌÌà àà àMoreover,€this€evidence€does€not,€in€our€view,€qualify€as€evidence€ofÏanother€crime.€€It€is€not,€in€the€words€of€the€ruling€in€òòPartonóó,€"wholly€independent€ofÏthat€for€which€[the€defendant]€is€charged."€€694€S.W.2d€at€302€(citing€òòBunch€v.ÏStateóó,€605€S.W.2d€227,€229„30€(Tenn.€œ1980)).›€€That€Ms.€McNeal€testified€that,Ïsometime€after€the€burglary,€she€saw€a€ring€which€belonged€to€Ms.€Woods€in€theÏpossession€of€the€defendant€€related€to€the€offenses€at€issue.€€It€was€the€jury'sÏprerogative€to€accept€or€reject€any€possible€implication€of€guilt.€€ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€is€affirmed.€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌÇCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€Judge€ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌCurwood€Witt,€Judge€