WPC 2# UN %% 0(+Sb[w@c4 BU@ 0J# 0Tm 0^ 0Dc 0h) 0rW 0| AOE 0D 0 0^ 1u 0dc 0@ D3 U>: D/x U* B B) DC AMZ e   v~v1HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nL(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($- - DEӀ@1dn >"|x d `(ZapfCalligr BTTT2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  (3$ !  ݁Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 526 0Indent40 0 0 23  ԃLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  $(C<< C($$   1  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X("$     'dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman**' dxd<  9p`(ArialP Pd% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd$,C << G  !  #d#'  "  '  ) eee FILED)X )"US ,  . !  )X CecilCrowson,Jr.     ) eee AppellateCourtClerk     XPtPtHHHV,(hh hd'0F Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   BA Op Geneva  BA Op Geneva ! . '     ` ')\RA'\7XXdd7      L-/,;+'h|< `LINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATJACKSONSEPTEMBERSESSION,1996  STATEOFTENNESSEE, ) C.C.A.NO.02C019510CR00316     )  Appellee,   )     )     ) SHELBYCOUNTYVS.     )      ) HON.CHRISCRAFT WILLIEH.JOHNSON,   ) JUDGE      )  Appellant.   ) (Burglary)   ONAPPEALFROMTHEJUDGMENTOFTHECRIMINALCOURTOFSHELBYCOUNTY   FORTHEAPPELLANT:   FORTHEAPPELLEE:A.C.WHARTON    CHARLESW.BURSONPublicDefender    AttorneyGeneralWALKERGWINN    CYRILV.FRASERAssistantPublicDefender  AssistantAttorneyGeneral201PoplarSuite201   450JamesRobertsonParkwayMemphis,TN38103   Nashville,TN372430493      JOHNW.PIEROTTI      DistrictAttorneyGeneral      TERRELLHARRIS      AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral      ThirdFloor,CriminalJusticeComplex      201Poplar      Memphis,TN38103OPINIONFILED________________________AFFIRMEDDAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE  ) OPINION )  ӛ ThisisanappealasofrightpursuanttoRule3oftheTennesseeRulesofAppellateProcedure.AShelbyCountyjuryfoundtheDefendantguiltyofburglary.ThetrialjudgefoundtheDefendanttobeacareeroffenderandsentencedhimtotwelveyearsintheDepartmentofCorrection.Inthisappeal,hearguesthattheevidencepresentedattrialwasinsufficienttosupportthejurysfindingofguiltbeyondareasonabledoubt.Wedisagreeandaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.̜ Whenanaccusedchallengesthesufficiencyoftheconvictingevidence,thestandardiswhether,afterreviewingtheevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletotheprosecution,anyrationaltrieroffactcouldhavefoundtheessentialelementsofthecrimebeyondareasonabledoubt.Jacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,319(1979).Questionsconcerningthecredibilityofthewitnesses,theweightandvaluetobegiventheevidence,aswellasallfactualissuesraisedbytheevidence,areresolvedbythetrieroffact,notthiscourt.Statev.Pappas,754S.W.2d620,623(Tenn.Crim.App.),perm.toappealdenied,id.(Tenn.1987).Normaythiscourtreweighorreevaluatetheevidence.Statev.Cabbage,571S.W.2d832,835(Tenn.1978). AjuryverdictapprovedbythetrialjudgeaccreditstheStateswitnessesandresolvesallconflictsinfavoroftheState.Statev.Grace,493S.W.2d474,476(Tenn.1973).Onappeal,theStateisentitledtothestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidenceandallinferencestherefrom.Cabbage,571S.W.2dat835.Becauseaverdictofguiltremovesthepresumptionofinnocenceandreplacesitwithapresumptionofguilt,theaccusedhastheburdeninthiscourtofillustratingwhytheevidenceisinsufficienttosupporttheverdictreturnedbythetrieroffact.Statev.Tuggle,639S.W.2d913,914(Tenn.1982);Grace,493S.W.2dat476.̛̜ WewillbrieflysummarizetheevidencepresentedonbehalfoftheState.EarlyoneSundaymorningthepolicerespondedtoaburglaralarmwhichhadbeenactivatedatabusinesslocatedonRiversideDriveindowntownMemphis,Tennessee.Thefirstofficertoarriveatthebuildingobservedthatawindowhadbeenbrokenout.TheofficerlookedintothebuildingthroughanotherwindowandsawtheDefendantinside.TheofficeridentifiedhimselfasapolicemanandtheDefendantrantowardthebackofthebuilding.Theofficerradioedforassistanceandotherofficersresponded.Theysecuredthebuildingandoneoftheownersofthebuildingarrivedandunlockedthedoor.Anofficerenteredthebuildingand,withtheassistanceofapolicedog,locatedtheDefendanthidinginacloset.AlthoughtheDefendantstruggledwiththeofficer,theofficerwasagainassistedbythedogandtheDefendantwasrestrainedandplacedunderarrest.Theownerofthebusinesstestifiedthatnumerousitemshadbeenremovedfromtheirusuallocationinthebuildingandhadbeenstackedupinsuchafashiontoindicatethattheyweregoingtoberemovedfromthebuilding.Photographsoftheseitemsandphotographsofthebrokenwindowwereintroducedasevidence.ThreepoliceofficersidentifiedtheDefendantasthepersontheyapprehendedintheburglarizedbuildingthatmorning. Facedwiththisratheroverwhelmingevidence,theDefendanttestifiedthathewaswalkingalongthestreetthatmorningwhentwopoliceofficersinapatrolcarpulledupandaskedhimifheknewanythingaboutaburglary.Hesaidthathetoldthepolicementhathedidnotandthattheythenpulledtheirgunsonhimandforcedhim,atgunpoint,toclimbthroughthebrokenwindowtoϜfindhis partnerandtopersuadehis partnertocomeoutofthebuilding.Hesaidthatshortlyafterheenteredthebuildingthepolicecamethroughthedoor,handcuffedhim,andthatapolicemanthen sicsthedogonmeandtriestomakemesaidthatIburglarizedthisbuildingwithmypartnerandallthis.Hesaidthattheonlyreasonheenteredthebuildingwasbecausetheofficersforcedhimtodosoatgunpoint. TheDefendantarguesthat norationaltrieroffactcouldhavefoundtheDefendantscontentionssounfoundedinthisrecordorsounreasonablethatitcouldhavefoundhimguiltyofburglarybeyondareasonabledoubt.Werespectfullyrejectthisargument.WebelievethatarationaltrieroffactcouldhavecreditedthetestimonyofthepoliceofficersanddiscreditedthetestimonyoftheDefendant.Thisisobviouslywhatthejurydid. Weconcludethattheevidenceissufficienttosupportthefindingbythetrieroffactofguiltbeyondareasonabledoubt.Therefore,thisappealhasnomerit.Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.     ____________________________________     DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________JOEB.JONES,PRESIDINGJUDGE___________________________________JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE