WPC c>'涓*x(`9Fcoޞ)l*κ7"1v;nV3n("dqҖI5Q$zE/0R?Lo HS(}b: wHga<"GaKsY\6؇lbw38!*){P@NոgEm`=]yF|fyA.XϦ8 BXN߆P&&Oi^\)쿨D24Vf"㥘('Ƭ`{sqioiI%fjO*lI[e=`TYrwC[jz ")g/!CFd{w.r6O5}0Pv$wmׅy^s0uˏP8>][u0urC%+kw28خ?c|D|r#:@P5|)ĝ4SfX*? O[M3jx ? %F U:L 0( U N w@ 4< P U:_ U: U:  U: U:U:V 0l 0D6@U:vU:U:U:$U:^U:U:U:U:6 BpU:U:U:U:;;;; D3uuu 0D AO;; 0D D/E BtX,  AZ"Arial Regular($(hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular EEU[[[ eӀuM%3|x#,  AZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular 8XXXXXX  `   1    ݀Asnotedabove,theindictmentchargedbothstatutoryrapeandtherapeofachildfor  May1995.ThevictimbecamethirteenyearsoldonMay18,1995.Therefore,consistentwiththepatternofchargingonlyoneoffensepermonth,thesubmittedchargeforMay15,1995,wasrapeofachild,notstatutoryrape.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.#,# ,3913506;#, (#Ԁ ,Ԁ3913522.#, ~#,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular((3$ !      0  (#$  0   ,8XXXX  #XSkXXX#XXXXSk XX  `   2    Ifthejuryonlyintendedtoconfirmthattheappellantcommittedanoffenseeachmonth,then  thiswouldbeanelection/unanimityconcern;if,however,#, j# ,Ԁthejuryfound,astheverdictsindicate,that n theoffensesoccurredonthefifteenthofeachmonth,thenthisisasufficiencyproblem.#, # ,ԀWewill ,| presumethattheverdictsmeanwhattheysay.#, #,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular X/XXX9XX/   Ad FILEDX/X9  January27,1999CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular d,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular,kAZ"Arial Regular""""'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !  8X/XXX  TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'Tr*<,(j 8` `@EF` 8ttxP~  rߛ@ T INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @'TATNASHVILLE@#TOCTOBER1998SESSIONSTATEOFTENNESSEE, @33-T)  ` @33-T) p NO.01C019709CC00405   L   ` Appellee,@33-T)  8  @33-T) p BEDFORDCOUNTY     VS. @33-T)   @33-T) p HON.CHARLESLEE,   JOHNNYLEEHINES, @33-T) p JUDGE    @33-T) ` Appellant.@33-T) p (RapeofaChild;StatutoryRape) d (  @##( FORTHEAPPELLANT: L GREGORYD.SMITH(OnAppeal) ContractAppellateDefender  OnePublicSquare,Suite321Clarksville,TN37040 MICHAELD.RANDLES D (TrialandAppeal) AssistantDistrictPublicDefender  l 105SouthMainStreetFayetteville,TN37334 !8   FORTHEAPPELLEE: L  JOHNKNOXWALKUP  $" AttorneyGeneralandReporter DARYLJ.BRAND  % AssistantAttorneyGeneralCordellHullBuilding,2ndFloor425FifthAvenueNorthNashville,TN372430493 WILLIAMMICHAELMCCOWN   F+ DistrictAttorneyGeneral CHARLESCRAWFORD  #.  HOLLYHEWGLEY  $/ AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneralOnePublicSquare,Ste.100Shelbyville,TN371603953 8(#3 (  @( OPINIONFILED:򀀀 h/*9 AFFIRMEDINPART;REVERSEDINPART;REMANDEDJOEG.RILEY,JUDGE  73B  7SXdXXd7@'T OPINION    X/XXX/ ` JohnnyLeeHineswasconvictedbyaBedfordCountyjuryoffifteencountsof h statutoryrape,seeTenn.CodeAnn.3913506, X/XX X/X/XX X/Ԁandthirteencountsofrapeofa 4  child,seeTenn.CodeAnn.# X/XXX/j #3913522.Hereceivedaneffectivesentenceof47  T years.Heappeals,arguingthatthetrialcourterredin(1)notgrantingamistrialfollowingobjectionabletestimonybythevictimand(2)failingtograntajudgmentofacquittalonallcountsexceptthoseforwhichthestateidentifiedspecificincidentsofcriminalconduct.Forthereasonssetforthbelow,weaffirminpart,reverseinpart,andremandforresentencing.@(T INDICTMENT    ` Theappellantwasindictedfor106countsofsexualoffensesinvolvingmultipleminorvictims.Ofthese,twentyninecounts(numbered113and91106)pertainingtoasinglevictimwereseveredandtriedtoajury.Theinstantcasedealsonlywiththesetwentyninecounts. ` ThesecountschargedtheoccurrenceofonesexualoffenseeachmonthfromMay1994throughAugust1996.BecausethevictimbecamethirteenyearsofageduringMay1995,counts113,coveringtheperiodfromMay1994throughMay1995,chargedtherapeofachild,andcounts91106,coveringMay1995throughAugust1996,chargedstatutoryrape.Bothcrimeswerechargedforthevictimsbirthmonthascounts13and91,respectively.XSXX X/# X/XXXS#X/XX X/@$T BILLOFPARTICULARS  /`*/  `  X/XXX/ ` Duetothenatureoftheindictment,thedefendantfiledamotionforabillof 2.3 particulars.Ultimately,thestatedescribedonlyfourspecificincidents;namely,rapeofachildinMarch1995ascontainedinCount11,andthreestatutoryrapesinJune1995,May1996,andAugust1996,ascontainedinCounts92,103and106, 945; respectively.Thestateindicatedinitsresponsethatitcouldnot narrowwithanygreaterreater̛̛respectively.Thestateindicatedinitsresponsethatitcouldnot narrowwithϛanyϛgreaterspecificitythespecificdateandtimefortheothercountsoftheindictment.@&T TRIALELECTIONS   d  ` Attrial,thestatepresentedspecificproofastothefouroffensesspecifiedinitsbillofparticularsCounts11,92,103,and106.Asfortheremainingcounts,thevictimtestifiedthatfromMay1994throughAugust1996,theappellanthadsexwithhereverydayexceptduringhermenstrualcycleorwhenherparentswereathome. ` Atthecloseofthestatesproof,thestateelectedtoproceedonlyonthefourcountsforwhichithadspecificallyidentifiedtheincidentsoftheoffenses.However,thetrialcourtsuggestedthatthestateproceedtoverdictonallcountsandspecifythefifteenthofeachmonthfortheoccurrenceofeachofthenonspecificcounts.Thestaterelatedthatitwas perfectlycontentwiththissuggestion. ` Afterthestateelectedthefifteenthofeachmonthastheallegedoffensedate,thecourtwithdrewthestatutoryrapecountforMay1995.  #  1      ׀Thejurydidnot,  therefore,returnaverdictoncount91.Nevertheless,apparentlybyoversight,thetrialcourtcompletedajudgmentsheetoncount91,indicatingaconviction.Wevacatethetrialcourtsjudgmentconvictingtheappellantofcount91,statutoryrape.πXSkXX X &0"& # XXXXSk#@YY#T PREJUDICIALTESTIMONY    XXX X (#( XXX X ` Theappellantfirstarguesthatthetrialcourterredinfailingtograntamistrial P,', followingtwoinstancesofobjectionabletestimonybythevictim.Inthefirstinstance,XXXXthevictimtestifiedthattheappellanthadbabysather,herbrotherandsister,and /8+0 otherchildren.Thevictimthenstatedthattheappellant wasmessingaroundwith 1-2 us.(emphasisadded).Thestateaskedwhatshemeantby messingaround,and 3.4 thevictimresponded, Havingsex. L506  ` Becausethechargesrelatingtoothervictimshadbeensevered,thedefenseobjectedandarguedthistestimony XXXXimpermissiblysuggestedthattheappellanthad | sexually#XXX X#XSkXXXԀ#XXXXSkj#!XXXXoffendedotherchildren.Defendantmovedforamistrial.Thetrialcourt H sustainedtheobjectionandofferedacurativeinstruction,whichthedefensedeclined.However,thecourtdeniedthedefensesmotionforamistrial. ` Thesecondinstanceoccurredafewmomentslater,stillduringdirectexaminationofthevictim.Thevictimwasaskedwhethertheappellantwastheonlypersonwhohadeverhadsexwithher.Sherespondedthattherehadbeenanotherman.Thestatethenaskedwhathadhappenedtothisman,andthevictimstated, Hegotputinthepenitentiary.Uponobjection,thetrialcourtfoundthatthetestimonywasbothhearsayandirrelevantandsustainedtheobjection.Thetrialcourtagain#XXX!XXXX#Xoverruled##XXXX!#thedefensesmotionforamistrial.Thedefensedidnot  requestacurativeinstruction.XXX#X%XXXX ` Amistrialwillbegrantedonlyincasesofmanifestnecessity.Statev.Mounce, h 859S.W.2d319,321(Tenn.1993).Itisgenerallyappropriateonlywhencontinuationofthetrialwouldresultinamiscarriageofjustice.Statev.Williams,929  S.W.2d385,388(Tenn.Crim.App.1996). Theburdenofestablishingmanifestnecessitylieswiththeappellant.Id.Whetheramistrialiswarrantedisadecision H#" entrustedtothesounddiscretionofthetrialjudge.Mounce,859S.W.2dat322; %d $ Williams,929S.W.2dat388.We willnotinterferewiththeexerciseofthisdiscretion &0"& absentclearabuseappearingonthefaceoftherecord.Statev.McPherson,882 (#( S.W.2d365,370(Tenn.Crim.App.1994).#XXX%X"#$XXXX ` Inbothinstancesofwhichtheappellantcomplains,thetrialcourtdetermined D,', thatalthoughthevictimstestimonywasimproper,amistrialwasnotwarranted.Astothefirstincident,thetrialjudgereasoned:48 Now,itseemstotheCourtthatthiscase...isgoingtobeaquestionofwhetherthejurybelievestheallegationsbytheStatesmainwitnessorbelievesthedefendant.Andconsequently,withthisparticularstatementmade,iftheStatedoesntproduceandtheywillnotbeallowedtoproduceanyevidencethatwouldcorroboratethatparticularstatement,thatwouldseemtoinuretothebenefitofthedefendant.Atleastthatifthewitnesssays, Isaidthis.AndiftheStatedoesntproduceanyevidencetothejurythatthat,infact,didhappen,thatwouldseemtoinuretothebenefitofthedefendantgiven 95; thestatusofthecasenowandgiventhatthisappearsasthoughitsgoingtobeastraightcredibilityofthewitnessestypeofsituation. '84' 48 ....[S]incetherearenodetailsandtherewillbenodetailsofthegeneralstatementmadebythewitness,itdoesnotrisetothelevelatthistimetojustifyagrantingofamistrial. C+84Q+' ` Regardingthedefensessecondmotionforamistrial,thetrialjudgefoundthat,atworse,thetestimonyimpermissiblybolsteredthevictimscredibility.Thatis,becausetheconvictionprovedthereliabilityofherprioraccusation,ittendedtosuggestthereliabilityofherpresentaccusation.Therequestformistrialwasdenied. ` Neitherincident,whenconsideredasawholeandinlightofthetotalityoftheevidence,wassoprejudicialastoprecludeafairtrial.Therecorddemonstratesthatthetrialjudgecarefullyconsideredeachincident,andhisdecisionnottograntamistrialdidnotapproachaclearabuseofdiscretion. ` Inaddition,thedefensedeclinedacurativeinstructionforthefirstincidentandfailedtorequestacurativeinstructionforthesecondincident.Inacaseinvolvingsimilarcircumstances,thisCourtnotedthat,whilethedecisionnottorequestacurativeinstructionmaybeunderstandableasatacticalmatter, anaccusedisnotentitledtoreliefwhenhefailstotakewhateveraction...reasonablyavailabletopreventornullifytheharmfuleffectofanerror.McPherson,882S.W.2dat371 <#" (quotingTenn.R.App.P.36(a)). ` Theappellantsfirstissueiswithoutmerit.   &$"& @ T SUFFICIENCYOFTHEEVIDENCE  l*%*  ` Theappellantnextarguesthatthetrialcourterredinfailingtograntajudgmentofacquittaloneachofthecountsforwhichthestatefailedtoidentifyandprovespecificincidentsofcriminalconduct.Theappellantpressesthisissueasan electionofoffensesproblem,whilethestateaddressesitasaquestionof sufficiencyoftheevidence.Althoughweagreewiththestatethattheissueis @506 ultimatelymoreakintoaquestionofsufficiencyoftheevidence, #  2      ׀electionconcerns   arecertainlyinterrelated. 4 cX ` [T]hepurposeofelectionistoensurethateachjurorisconsideringthesameoccurrence.Iftheprosecutioncannotidentifyaneventforwhichtoaskaconviction,thenthecourtcannotbeassuredofaunanimousdecision.Statev.Walton,958  0 S.W.2d724,727(Tenn.1997)(quotingStatev.Shelton,851S.W.2d134,138    (Tenn.1993)).#XXX$X&#&XXXXInadditiontojuryunanimity,therequirementofelectionservestwo x  otherconcerns: (1)toenablethedefendanttoprepareforanddefendagainstthespecificcharge(s);[and](2)toprotectthedefendantfromdoublejeopardybyindividualizationoftheissue.Tidwellv.State,922S.W.2d497,500(Tenn.1996). , #XXX&X6#$XXXX ` Inmakinganelection,thestateisnotrequiredtoidentifytheparticulardate  ofthechosenoffense,asthetimeoftheoffenseisoftenimmaterial.Shelton,851 t S.W.2dat137.Anydescriptionthatwillidentifythechosenoffensewillsuffice.Id. @ at138.Inthecaseatbarthestateatthesuggestionofthetrialcourtelectedparticulardates. ` Theelectionofparticulardatessatisfiestheelectionrequirementandwouldordinarilypresentnoproblem.However,theoffensemustbeproveninaccordancewiththeelection,i.e.,tohaveoccurredonthatdate.Ifajuryisallowedtoconvictwithoutspecificevidencesupportingtheelection,thentheelectionissuperficialandmeaningless.Accordingly,whilewefindthatthestateselectionwas,inform,sufficient,wemustdeterminewhethertheoffensesaselectedweresupportedbytheevidence.! 4 cD4 ! ` Whenconsideringthesufficiencyofevidence,thisCourtmustdeterminewhether,afterviewingtheevidenceinalightmostfavorabletothestate,anyrationaltrieroffactcouldhavefoundtheessentialelementsofacrimebeyondareasonable / +0 doubt.Seee.g.,Statev.Duncan,698S.W.2d63,67(Tenn.1985);Tenn.R.App. 1,2 P.13(e).Proofofthespecificdateofanoffenseisnot,ofcourse,astatutoryelementofanoffense.Rather,theidentificationof,anddistinctionamong,alleged 8506 incidentsinmultiplesexoffensecasesisrequiredprimarilytoensureunanimityofaverdict. ` Thus,withregardtotheelectionofoffenses,thestandardforsufficiencyoftheevidenceappliestothedesignationofoffensesasthoughitwereanelementoftheoffenses.Notonlymustthestateselectionidentifyanddistinguishoffensessufficientlytoallowthetrieroffacttorenderdiscreteandunanimousverdictsoneach,thestatemustobviouslysupportthiselectionwithevidencesufficientforareasonabletrieroffacttofindthattheoffensesoccurredaselectedbeyondareasonabledoubt.Inthepresentcase,becausethestatemadenoattempttoprovethattheoffensesactuallyoccurredonthefifteenthofeachmonthaswaselected,thisstandardhasnotbeenmet. ` Lookingattheevidenceinalightmostfavorabletothestate,thevictimstestimonydoesnotestablishsexualmisconductonthefifteenthofeachmonth.Althoughthevictimtestifiedthatthesexualmisconductoccurredalmostdaily,shestateditdidnotoccurondayswhenherparentswerehomeorondaysduringhermenstrualcycle.Therewasnoproofastowhetherherparentswerehomeorwhethershewasinhermenstrualcycleonthefifteenthofanygivenmonth.Thus,onemustspeculatetodetermineifsexualmisconductoccurredonthefifteenthofanygivenmonth.Althoughthejurycouldhaveconcluded,andobviouslydidconclude,thatthevictimwasviolatedoneormoretimeseachmonth,itcouldnotconcludethataviolationtookplaceonthefifteenthofanygivenmonthaselectedbythestate. ` Thestatewascorrectwhenitinitiallyconcededthatitcouldnotproceedonthesenonspecificcounts.Althoughthedesignationofthefifteenthofeachmonthwasanelection,theproofdoesnotsupporttheelection.@(T CONCLUSION  h3.4  ` We,therefore,reverseanddismisstheappellantsconvictionsastocounts1through10,12,13,93through102,104,and105;thejudgmentofconvictionon 8(4: count91isvacated;andthejudgmentsconvictingtheappellantofcounts11,92,103,and106areaffirmed.Weremandforresentencinginlightofthesereversals.  ! 4 4 cD! `   _______________________________ 4 4 N  `   JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE      CONCUR:  V 򀀀(NotParticipating)   PAULG.SUMMERS,JUDGE   _____________________________#XXX$XP8# XXXXJOSEPHM.TIPTON,JUDGE ^