ÿWPC¸) …# VUNa %¯ 0 (µw@Ý4 1 @ 0JH 0T’ 0læ 0DR 0^– bô 0hü 0rd D3Ö B 0|& 0@¢ 0†â 0h 1uø 0dmU >ÑU*B)9DCb AM¥òe ënšYÚóWÍ $“/v~ vÓ@" AO(Æb( 0D() D/l) B›)˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ AEB[C[D[E[FÓ€R SDTUÚƒç"°3|xU2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô- ù-26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô++++'ÿÿdxd d2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô (),/1 ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d<<<<7Border 1dd€-=Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€;XÔÌÌò òJuly€24,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€;ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó [Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔð ðRape€of€a€child€is€the€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€theÏà àà0 àdefendant€by€a€victim,€òòif€such€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€ageóó.ðð€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð39„13„522(a).€(emphasis€added).€€ð ðEspecially€aggravated€kidnapping€is€falseÏimprisonment,€as€defined€in€ðð€39„13„302:€1)€Accomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon€or€byÏdisplay€or€any€article€used€or€fashioned€to€lead€the€victim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€aÏdeadly€weapon;€(2)€òòWhere€the€victim€was€under€the€age€of€thirteen€(13)€at€the€time€of€theÏremoval€or€confinementóó;€(3)€Committed€to€hold€the€victim€for€ransom€or€reward,€or€as€aÏshield€or€hostage;€€or€(4)€Where€the€victim€suffers€serious€bodily€injury.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€39„13„305.€(emphasis€added).€The€indictment€charging€the€Defendant€with€especiallyÏaggravated€kidnapping€alleged€that€the€victim€was€under€the€age€of€thirteen€(13).Ì áÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔ€Butler€was€an€interlocutory€appeal€in€a€case€in€which€the€State€sought€life€without€parole€and€notÏà0 àthe€death€penalty.€€The€panel€held€that€the€State€may€enhance€a€sentence€to€life€without€paroleÏusing€aggravating€factor€(I)(7)€without€implicating€the€concerns€in€òòMiddlebrooks.óóÌ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔ€€This€result€could€be€different€had€the€felony€murder€indictment€charged€rape€of€a€child€underÏà0 àsection€39„13„522€and€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€under€section€39„13„305€as€theÏunderlying€felonies.Ì ÐÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔ€ð ðRape€of€a€child€is€the€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€theÏà àà0 àdefendant€by€a€victim,€òòif€such€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€ageóó.ðð€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.Ìà à€ðð€39„13„522(a).€(emphasis€added).Ìà à€Ì MÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔThe€indictment€charging€the€Defendant€with€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€alleged€that€theÏà0 àvictim€was€under€the€age€of€thirteen€(13).Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔð ðEspecially€aggravated€kidnapping€is€false€imprisonment,€as€defined€in€ðð€39„13„302:€Ìà0 à(1)€Accomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon€or€by€display€or€any€article€used€or€fashioned€to€lead€theÏvictim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€a€deadly€weapon;Ìà à(2)€òòWhere€the€victim€was€under€the€age€of€thirteen€(13)€at€the€time€of€the€removal€or€confinementóó;Ïà0 à(3)€Committed€to€hold€the€victim€for€ransom€or€reward,€or€as€a€shield€or€hostage;€€or€Ìà0 à(4)€Where€the€victim€suffers€serious€bodily€injury.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„305.€(emphasisÏadded).Ì ‰Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€;ÔÔ€;ôÔThe€expert€medical€testimony€offered€by€the€defense€in€òòHammockóó€was€that€of€the€same€Dr.Ïà0 àCraddock,€a€licensed€clinical€psychologist,€offered€by€the€State€in€the€case€at€bar.€€òòIdóó.€at€9.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 Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€:ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€:ŠÔÔ€;ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€¼¡XXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò ò›Þ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙßR€>?=A1-j|oü` Å `€€@ÿRß›ÌAT€œKNOXVILLE›ÌÌœDECEMBER›€SESSION,€œ1996›ÌÌÌÓ  ÓœSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,›à à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€œ03€C01„9511„CV„00371›Ìà àà àà àà àà à)ó óÌà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àœLOUDON›€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€œE.€EUGENE€EBLENó ó›Ìœò òJAMES€LLOYD€JULIAN,€II,ó ó›à àò ò)à àJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à àœó ó(Esp.€Agg.€Kidnapping,€Rape€of€a€Child,›Ìœà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà àand€Felony€Murder)ÌÌÓ  ÓON€APPEAL€FROM€THE€JUDGMENT€OF€THEÌCRIMINAL›€COURT€OF€œLOUDON€COUNTY›ÌÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌœROBERT€M.€COHEN›à àà àà àœJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌ303€High€Streetà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌMaryville,€TN€37804Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àMICHAEL€J.€FAHEY,€IIÌWILLIAM€LEE€BROWNà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ706€Walnut€Streetà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌKnoxville,€TN€37902à àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCHARLES€E.€HAWKÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àROGER€DELPÌà àà àà àà àà àà àFRANK€HARVEYÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorneys€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€703Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àKingston,€TN€37763›ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌœAFFIRMED›ÌÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÇò òòòÓ  ÓÔ€;°ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ€;ŠÔÌÌÌà àà àà àà àÓ  ÓÓÓÌÔ€;XÔà àÔ€;ŠÔThis€is€an€appeal€as€of€right€pursuant€to€Rule€3,€Tennessee€Rules€ofÏAppellate€Procedure.€€The€Defendant,€James€Lloyd€Julian,€II,€was€convicted€byÏa€Loudon€County€jury€of€rape€of€œa€child,›€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€andÏfirst„degree€felony€murder.€€The€State€sought€the€death€penalty€and€during€theÏsentencing€phase€of€the€trial,€the€jury€found€two€aggravating€circumstances:€(1)Ïthat€the€victim€was€less€than€twelve€(12)€years€of€age€and€the€defendant€wasÏover€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age,€and;€(2)€that€the€murder€was€œespeciallyÏheinous,›€atrocious€and€cruel.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€œðððð›€39„13„204(i)(1),(5).€ÏHowever,€the€jury€determined€that€the€aggravating€circumstances€did€notÏoutweigh€the€mitigating€circumstances€and€sentenced€the€Defendant€to€Ïimprisonment€for€life€without€parole.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(f)(2).€€AtÏa€separate€sentencing€hearing€for€the€two€remaining€counts,€the€trial€courtÏsentenced€the€Defendant€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender€to€twenty„five€yearsÏ(25)€for€the€rape€and€twenty„five€years€(25)€for€the€kidnapping€to€runÏconcurrently€with€each€other€but€consecutive€to€the€sentence€of€life€withoutÏparole.€€The€Defendant€appeals€his€convictions€and€sentences.ÌÌà àIn€this€appeal,€the€Defendant€presents€several€issues€for€review:€(1)€ThatÏthe€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€find€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€to€beÏincidental€to€the€rape;€(2)€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€photographs€of€theÏvictim€at€both€the€guilt€and€sentencing€phases€of€the€trial;€(3)€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€allowing€the€jury€to€consider€the€victimððs€age€as€an€aggravatingÏcircumstance€œin›€sentencing€for€the€felony€murder€conviction;€(4)€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€by€sentencing€the€Defendant€at€the€top€of€the€applicable€ranges€for€theÏrape€and€kidnapping;€(5)€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€his€motion€toÏsuppress€evidence€as€a€result€of€a€search€of€his€automobile;€and€(6)€that€theÏevidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction€for€felony€murder.€€During€theÏpendency€of€this€appeal,€the€Defendant€also€submitted€a€supplemental€briefÏasserting€that€the€conviction€for€rape€of€a€child€must€be€set€aside€because€theÏindictment€charging€the€offense€did€not€allege€the€requisite€œòòmensóó›€òòreaóó.€€In€turn,Ïbecause€the€indictment€for€felony€murder€charged€rape€and€kidnapping,€heÏargues€that€conviction€must€also€be€dismissed.ÌÌÓ  ÓFactual€BackgroundÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€State€presented€the€following€proof€at€the€guilt€phase€of€theÏprosecution.€The€Defendant,€James€Julian,€became€acquainted€with€the€victimððsÏparents€in€early€1993€while€working€at€a€fast„food€restaurant€in€Knoxville.€€TheÍDefendant€and€the€victimððs€family,€including€the€victim€Kaile€Lynn€Lee,€nearlyÏthree€years€old,€and€a€younger€brother€and€sister,€began€to€socialize.€€He€wentÏwith€the€family€on€trips€to€the€lake€and€became€friends€with€the€children.€€€OnÏone€or€two€occasions€he€took€Kaile€with€him€in€his€vehicle€to€get€cigarettes€at€aÏconvenience€store€down€the€street€from€the€familyððs€apartment.€€In€May€of€1993,Ïthe€Defendant€told€Kaileððs€mother€that€he€abused€œintravenous›€drugs.€€After€that,ÏKaileððs€parents€became€concerned€and€made€an€effort€to€distance€themselvesÏfrom€the€Defendant.€€They€did€not€observe€any€unusual€behavior.€€During€thisÏtime,€the€victimððs€œparentsðð›€marriage€was€disintegrating€and€they€separated.ÌÌà àKaileððs€mother€and€the€children€continued€to€live€in€the€apartment.€€€KaileÏturned€three€on€June€29,€1993.€€The€Defendant€had€no€contact€with€them€untilÏhe€stopped€by€briefly€on€July€3,€1993.€€On€the€evening€of€July€10,€KaileððsÏmother€and€a€friend€went€out€to€a€party€and€the€friendððs€sister€babysat€theÏchildren.€€Everyone€spent€the€œnight€in€the€victimððs€apartment.›€€The€babysitter€andÏthe€children€slept€in€the€living€room€and€the€others€were€in€the€bedroom.€€AtÏapproximately€6:30€a.m.,€the€babysitter€awoke€to€the€œDefendantððs›€knocking€onÏthe€apartment€door.€€She€asked€who€it€was€and€the€Defendant€said€ð ðJim.ðð€€€€HeÏmentioned€the€names€of€family€members€and€the€babysitter€let€him€in.€€He€satÏon€the€couch€and€talked€with€her€an€hour€or€less.€€He€was€drinking€a€glass€ofÏbourbon€and€coke€and€she€noticed€that€he€was€barefoot.€€The€babysitterÍpersuaded€him€to€leave.€€She€drifted€off€to€sleep€again€until€awakened€byÏknocking€on€the€door€sometime€around€7:30€a.m.€€The€babysitter€did€not€answerÏthe€door€right€away€because€ð ðI€knew€that€he€was€drunk€and€I€didnððt€trust€him.ðð€ÏKaile€woke€up€and€asked€who€was€knocking€and€wanted€to€open€the€door.€ÏThe€babysitter€let€in€the€Defendant.€€He€sat€on€the€couch€with€€Kaile€and€talkedÏwith€her,€then€they€appeared€to€sleep.€€The€babysitter€dozed€off€andÏawakened€to€the€Defendant€carrying€the€child€in€his€arms€and€walking€out€theÏdoor.ÌÌà àThe€babysitter€woke€Kaileððs€mother€and€they€went€outside€to€look€forÏthem.€€This€was€approximately€8:30€to€9:00€a.m.€€They€did€not€report€the€childÏas€missing€until€approximately€11:00€a.m.€because€they€initially€thought€theÏDefendant€may€have€taken€her€to€the€store.€€They€reported€that€the€DefendantÏœmight€be›€driving€a€red,€older€model€Maverick.€€Kaile€was€last€seen€wearing€aÏœð ðBeauty›€and€the€œBeastðð›€shorts€outfit.€€The€Defendant€took€the€child€to€a€remoteÏlocation€at€the€Wearððs€Bend€area€of€Tellico€Lake€in€Loudon€County.€€He€parkedÏhis€vehicle€near€a€stand€of€pine€trees,€blocking€the€area€such€that€he€could€seeÏany€cars€coming€into€the€area.€€After€undressing€himself,€he€took€her€to€swim€inÏthe€lake.€€She€was€still€clothed.ÌÌà àAfter€swimming,€the€Defendant€and€Kaile€went€back€to€the€car.€€HeÏturned€the€car€radio€up€loudly.€€He€took€a€green€towel€out€of€the€car€and€took€theÏchild€to€the€pine€thicket.€€There,€he€undressed€her€and€positioned€her€on€theÏtowel€so€he€could€see€the€roadway.€€He€attempted€penile€penetration€vaginally,Ïbut€was€unable€to€do€so.€€The€victim€squirmed€and€began€to€cry.€€He€placedÏher€on€her€stomach€and€penetrated€her€anally.€€He€had€penetrated€withÏapproximately€half€of€his€penis€œwhen›€Kaile€began€to€scream,€squirm€and€cryÏloudly.€€He€attempted€to€muffle€her€screams€by€using€his€right€hand.€€When€thisÏwas€unsuccessful,€he€grabbed€her€neck€and€began€to€choke€her.€€The€criesÏceased€and€he€ð ðknew€he€hurtðð€the€victim€when€she€went€limp€and€he€sawÏblood€coming€from€her€mouth.€€€He€withdrew,€then€masturbated€to€ejaculation.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€picked€up€the€child€and€took€her€to€the€lake,€cleanedÏhimself€and€washed€her€off,€immersing€her€in€the€water.€€He€knew€she€wasÏdead€at€that€point.€€The€Defendant€put€on€a€pair€of€shorts€and€carried€her€upÏthe€roadway.€€The€underbrush€was€thick€so€he€could€not€walk€into€it,€so€heÏtossed€the€victimððs€naked€body€into€the€underbrush.€€He€returned€to€the€car,Ïpicked€up€the€towel€and€the€victimððs€clothes€and€put€them€in€the€trunk€of€his€car.€ÏThe€Defendant€returned€home€and€prepared€for€a€work€trip€that€he€wasÏscheduled€to€begin€at€12:00€p.m.à àÌÌà àEarlier€during€the€day€after€Kaileððs€mother€reported€her€daughter€missing,Ïlaw€enforcement€officers€from€Knox€and€Blount€counties€located€the€DefendantððsÏMaverick€at€Colvin€and€Sons€Heating€and€Air,€his€place€of€employment.€€€OfficerÏGary€Hamilton€of€the€Blount€County€Sheriffððs€Department€arrived€at€Colvin€andÏSons€and€spoke€on€the€telephone€with€Investigator€Tom€Presley€of€theÏKnoxville€Police€Department.€€Investigator€Presley€provided€more€details€aboutÏthe€disappearance€of€the€victim.€€€€The€officers€observed€a€childððs€toy€in€plainÏview€on€the€front€seat€and€mud€and€grass€on€the€carððs€exterior.€€€While€talkingÏwith€Investigator€Presley,€Officer€Hamilton€became€increasingly€concerned€thatÏthe€child€might€be€locked€in€the€trunk€of€the€Defendantððs€vehicle€and€that€sheÏœmight€still›€be€alive.€€€The€day€was€hot€and€sunny,€which€contributed€to€theÏurgency€expressed€by€Investigator€Presley.€€At€this€time,€the€DefendantððsÏgrandmother€arrived€with€the€keys€to€the€vehicle€and€gave€her€consent€to€openÏthe€trunk.€€The€officers€opened€the€trunk,€but€observed€only€a€childððs€outfit€and€aÏgreen€towel€covered€with€what€appeared€to€be€blood,€feces,€sticks€and€leaves.€ÏThey€closed€the€trunk,€obtained€a€search€warrant,€and€towed€the€Maverick€toÏthe€crime€laboratory€in€Knoxville.ÌÌà à€€The€Defendant€was€employed€by€Colvin€and€Sons€Heating€and€Air€inÏBlount€County€and€was€scheduled€to€deliver€equipment€to€Savannah,€Georgia.ÏHe€left€his€vehicle€in€the€company€parking€lot€and€left€with€Dale€Sinard€in€aÍdelivery€truck.€€Mr.€Sinard€noticed€the€Defendant€was€clad€only€in€a€pair€ofÏshorts,€but€noted€no€unusual€behavior.€€The€Defendant€fell€asleep€shortly€afterÏthe€trip€began.€€The€two€stopped€at€a€rest€area€near€Chattanooga€and€theÏDefendant€placed€a€call€on€a€pay€telephone.€€He€called€his€grandmother,€whoÏtold€him€that€the€police€were€looking€for€him.€€After€that,€he€appeared€nervousÏand€wanted€to€return€home,€stating€he€needed€to€go€to€court€and€to€get€his€car.€ÏSinard€did€not€stop,€but€the€Defendant€asked€several€times€how€much€longerÏthe€trip€was€and€what€time€it€was.€€When€they€reached€Macon,€Georgia,€theÏDefendant€wanted€Sinard€to€take€him€to€the€airport,€but€he€refused.€€TheÏDefendant€gathered€his€things,€put€on€some€clothes€and€left.€€He€rented€a€carÏand€drove€back€to€Tennessee.ÌÌà àAfter€returning€from€Georgia€in€œthe›€rented€car,€the€Defendant€revisited€theÏlake€area€where€the€killing€occurred,€then€returned€to€Blount€County.€€Near€hisÏhome,€the€Defendant€stopped€at€Red€Eyeððs€Market€on€Highway€411€andÏcalled€his€father€on€a€pay€telephone€from€his€car.€€He€then€called€Blount€CountyÏlaw€enforcement.€€The€Defendant€was€arrested€by€officers€of€the€Blount€CountyÏSheriffððs€Department€while€still€on€the€phone.€€He€was€handcuffed,€givenÏòòMirandaóó€warnings,€and€placed€in€the€back€of€a€police€cruiser.€€Officer€DavidÏMaples€had€the€first€contact€with€the€Defendant,€who€initially€admitted€seeingÏthe€victim€at€her€apartment,€but€denied€any€further€contact.€€Chief€of€DetectivesÍDale€Gourley€joined€them€and€asked€the€Defendant€where€Kaile€was€located.€ÏThe€Defendant€agreed€to€lead€the€officers€to€the€body.ÌÌà àThe€officers€and€the€Defendant€drove€to€the€œsite›€near€the€lake€andÏdirected€them€to€the€victimððs€body€in€the€underbrush.€€Officer€Maples€and€theÏDefendant€walked€down€to€the€bank€of€the€lake,€the€Defendant€smoked€aÏcigarette€and€recounted€the€events€surrounding€the€killing€of€Kaile.€ÏSubsequently,€the€officers€made€an€audiotape€of€Officer€Maples€describing€theÏstatement€made€by€the€Defendant,€who€agreed€to€its€accuracy.€€It€wasÏdetermined€that€the€crime€occurred€in€Loudon€County,€so€the€Defendant€wasÏreleased€to€a€Loudon€County€officer.ÌÌà àSubsequent€forensic€examinations€of€Kaileððs€body€revealed€severalÏareas€of€trauma.€€There€was€bruising€and€soft€tissue€injury€consistent€withÏstrangulation,€as€well€as€bruising€on€her€forehead,€knees€and€back.€€There€wasÏswelling€and€severe€tissue€damage€to€the€vaginal€and€anal€openings.€€SemenÏwas€detected€in€the€victimððs€mouth,€vagina€and€anus.€€The€cause€of€death€wasÏfound€to€be€asphyxiation,€secondary€to€strangulation.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€submitted€proof€in€support€of€a€diminished€œcapacityÏmanner€of›€defense.€€Dr.€Worley€Fain,€a€clinical€psychologist,€described€theÍDefendantððs€history€of€polysubstance€abuse,€including€alcohol,€marijuana,Ïcocaine,€LSD,€PCP,€€and€inhalants.€€The€Defendant€also€€was€sexuallyÏabused€as€a€child€by€his€maternal€grandfather.€€His€mother€was€an€alcoholicÏand€divorced€his€father.€€The€Defendant€has€had€episodes€in€the€past€whereÏhe€became€disoriented€and€violent€after€ingesting€large€amounts€of€alcohol€andÏtaking€hallucinogens.€The€Defendant€was€diagnosed€with€depressive€disorderÏand€a€mixed€personality€disorder€with€borderline€features.€€Dr.€Fain€testified€thatÏthe€Defendant€claimed€to€have€consumed€a€fifth€of€bourbon€and€smokedÏmarijuana€in€the€hours€before€the€incident.€€Bennie€Fleming,€a€licensed€clinicalÏsocial€worker,€concurred€with€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Fain.€€Other€witnesses€testifiedÏregarding€the€Defendantððs€neglect€by€his€mother€and€his€violent€outbursts.ÌÌà àThe€State€called€Dr.€Samuel€Craddock,€a€clinical€psychologist€from€MiddleÏTennessee€Mental€Institute,€who€conducted€the€forensic€mental€healthÏevaluation€of€the€Defendant.€€The€evaluation€team,€under€Dr.€CraddockððsÏsupervision,€determined€that€the€Defendant€did€not€suffer€from€a€mental€illnessÏsuch€that€he€was€unable€to€form€intent.€€Dr.€Craddock€considered€substanceÏabuse€when€conducting€the€evaluation.€€Yet,€he€admitted€that€he€was€not€aÏspecialist€in€the€area€of€addictions€and€drug€counseling.€€The€evaluation€teamÏdid€conduct€a€battery€of€tests€and€diagnosed€the€Defendant€similarly€to€theÏconclusions€made€by€Dr.€Fain.ÌÌà àThe€jury€found€the€Defendant€guilty€of€rape€of€a€child,€especiallyÏaggravated€kidnapping,€and€first„degree€felony€murder.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„522,€39„13„305(a)(2),€€39„13„202(a)(2).€€During€the€sentencing€portion€of€thisÏcapital€case,€the€State€admitted€evidence€of€the€victimððs€age€and€photographsÏof€the€victim€in€support€of€a€finding€of€statutory€aggravating€circumstances.€€òòSeeóóÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i).€€€The€Defendant€called€Dr.€Eric€Engum,€aÏclinical€psychologist,€who€testified€regarding€the€Defendantððs€dysfunctional€familyÏbackground€and€current€psychological€disorders,€including€substance€abuse.€ÏThe€Defendantððs€mother€testified€regarding€her€alcoholism€and€prescription€drugÏabuse,€sexual€abuse€by€her€father,€her€divorce,€and€the€Defendantððs€history€ofÏalcohol€abuse.€€The€jury€found€two€aggravating€factors,€that€the€victim€wasÏunder€twelve€(12)€œyears›€old€and€that€the€murder€was€especially€heinous,Ïatrocious,€or€cruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyondÏthat€necessary€to€produce€death.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€œðððð›€39„13„204(i)(1),(5).€€TheÏjury€also€found€that€the€aggravating€circumstances€did€not€outweigh€theÏmitigating€circumstances€and€sentenced€the€Defendant€to€imprisonment€for€lifeÏwithout€parole.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(f)(2).€€€The€trial€courtÏsentenced€the€Defendant€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender€to€twenty„five€(25)Ïyears€for€the€rape€conviction€and€twenty„five€(25)€years€for€the€kidnappingÍconviction€to€run€concurrently€with€each€other€but€consecutive€to€the€sentence€ofÏlife€without€parole.€€Ô€:ÔÌÌœÓ  ÓÔ€;ÔI.›€€Kidnapping€ConvictionÌÓ  ÓÌà àAs€his€first€issue,€the€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÏfailing€to€grant€a€judgment€of€acquittal€on€the€kidnapping€charge€on€the€groundÏthat€the€kidnapping€was€merely€incidental€to€the€rape.€€In€òòState€v.€œAnthonyóó,817›ÏS.W.2d€299,€300€(Tenn.1991),€our€supreme€court€held€that€due€processÏprecludes€conviction€for€kidnapping€where€the€detention€of€the€victim€occurs€asÏmerely€incidental€to€the€commission€of€another€felony€such€as€robbery€or€rape.ÏœòòId.ó󛀀€The€test€is€"whether€the€confinement,€movement,€or€detention€is€essentiallyÏincidental€to€the€accompanying€felony€and€is€not,€therefore,€sufficient€to€supportÏa€separate€conviction€for€kidnapping,€or€whether€it€is€significant€enough,€in€andÏof€itself,€to€warrant€independent€prosecution€and€is,€therefore,€sufficient€toÏsupport€such€a€conviction".€€€òòId.óó€at€306.€€€"[O]ne€method€of€resolving€thisÏquestion€is€to€ask€whether€the€defendant's€conduct€'substantially€increased€[the]Ïrisk€of€harm€over€and€above€that€necessarily€present€in€the€crime€of€the€robberyÏitself'€".€€€òòId.óó€€Finally,€the€kidnapping€statute€is€to€be€narrowly€applied€to€protect€Ïdue€process€rights.€€€òòId.óóÌÌà àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€kidnapping€was€incidental€to€the€rape€inÏthis€case.€€First,€the€Defendant€claims€that€the€victim€willingly€went€with€him€suchÏthat€any€restraint€of€liberty€constituting€kidnapping€occurred€after€he€instigated€theÏsexual€assault.€€Second,€he€claims€that€he€brought€the€victim€to€the€remoteÏlocation€knowing€that€he€intended€to€have€sex€with€her,€therefore,€the€actionsÏthat€were€considered€to€be€kidnapping€were€actually€perpetrated€in€pursuanceÏof€the€rape.€€€€Furthermore,€he€contends€that,€because€the€kidnapping€chargeÏshould€properly€be€dismissed,€the€conviction€for€felony€murder€also€fails€becauseÏthe€underlying€felonies€of€rape€and€kidnapping€were€charged€conjunctively.€€òòSeeóóÏòòState€v.€Coxóó.,€644€S.W.2d€692€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982);€òòTurner€v.€Stateóó,€50ÏTenn.€452€(1871).€€The€indictment€charging€first„degree€felony€murder€containedÏthe€following€language:€ð ð[O]n€the€11th€day€of€July,€1993€and€in€the€State€andÏCounty€aforesaid,€the€said€JAMES€LLOYD€JULIAN,€II€aforesaid,€did€unlawfullyÏand€recklessly€kill€Kaile€Lynn€Lee€during€the€perpetration€of€Kidnapping€òòandóóÏRape,€in€violation€of€T.C.A.€39„13„202.ðð€(emphasis€added).ÌÌà àWe€cannot€agree€that€because€the€three„year„old€victim€went€willinglyÏwith€the€Defendant,€she€was€capable€of€consent€such€that€the€actions€takenÏby€the€Defendant€did€not€constitute€kidnapping€from€the€time€her€took€her€fromÏher€home.€€Also,€even€though€the€Defendant€stated€that€he€took€œthe€child›€withÏthe€intent€to€rape€her,€this€does€not€necessarily€mean€that€the€kidnapping€wasÍpurely€incidental€to€the€rape.€€The€State€argues€that€the€kidnappingÏð ðsubstantially€increased€[the]€risk€of€harm€over€and€above€that€necessarilyÏpresent€in€the€[accompanying€felony]€itself.ðð€€òòAnthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€at€306.€€€TheÏState€cites€two€opinions€from€this€Court€where€the€kidnappings€were€consideredÏseparate€offenses€from€the€rapes.€€òòState€v.€Michael€Eugene€Duffóó,€C.C.A.€No.Ï03C01„9501„CR„00008,€Knox€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Feb.€8,Ï1996),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1996);€òòThomas€Ray€Tarpley€v.€Stateóó,ÏC.C.A.€No.€03C01„9303„CR„00067,€Hamilton€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏKnoxville,€Dec.€20,€1993),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1994).€€In€òòTarpleyóó,€theÏdefendant€kidnapped€the€victim€while€she€was€walking€along€a€roadside,€droveÏher€to€an€isolated€cemetery€and€raped€her.€€Slip€op.€at€2„3.€€In€òòDuffóó,€the€victimÏwas€tricked€into€pulling€her€car€off€the€road.€€She€was€forced€to€the€floorboard€ofÏthe€car€while€her€attackers€drove€it€around€to€the€back€of€restaurant€where€sheÏwas€raped.€€Slip€op.€at€3.€€€ÌÌà àIn€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó,€the€Defendant€took€the€victim€from€her€home€inÏKnoxville€and€drove€her€to€an€isolated€lake€area€miles€away€that€was€onlyÏapproachable€by€rutted€dirt€roads.€€At€that€location,€the€Defendant€€substantiallyÏreduced€the€probability€of€being€detected€and€allowed€ample€time€to€perpetrateÏthe€sexual€assault.€€This€also€increased€the€risk€of€harm€to€the€victim,€whichÏresulted€in€Kaileððs€death.€€We€conclude€that€this€is€sufficient€to€support€theÍconviction€for€kidnapping€and€that€it€was€not€ð ðessentially€incidentalðð€to€the€rape.€ÏAs€a€result,€the€conviction€for€felony€murder€remains€valid€as€based€on€theÏunderlying€kidnapping€charge.€€This€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓII.€€PhotographsÌÓ  ÓÌà àNext,€the€Defendant€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€allowing€the€State€toÏintroduce€photographs€of€the€victim€at€both€the€guilt€and€sentencing€phases€ofÏthe€trial.€€The€admissibility€of€photographs€is€governed€by€Tennessee€Rule€ofÏEvidence€403€and€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947€(Tenn.1978).€€"AlthoughÏrelevant,€evidence€may€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€is€substantiallyÏoutweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€orÏmisleading€the€jury...."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€€€Whether€to€admit€the€photographsÏis€within€the€discretionary€authority€of€the€trial€court€and€will€not€be€reversedÏabsent€a€clear€showing€of€an€abuse€of€discretion€appearing€on€the€face€of€theÏrecord.€€òòBanksóó,€564€S.W.2d€at€949;€€òòState€v.€Bradenóó,€867€S.W.2d€750,€758Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€€òòState€v.€Dickersonóó,€885€S.W.2d€90,€92€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.1993).ÌÌà àDuring€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial,€the€State€introduced€a€photographÏdepicting€the€victim€as€she€was€found€at€the€crime€scene.€€The€photographÍconsisted€of€the€victimððs€naked€body,€lying€face€down€in€the€underbrush.€€TheÏDefendant€argues€that€this€photograph€was€overly€prejudicial€such€that€itÏoutweighed€any€probative€value.€€He€also€contends€that€the€State€was€unableÏto€support€that€the€photograph€was€probative€of€a€contested€issue€of€fact.€ÏWhen€photographs€are€gruesome€in€nature€and€are€not€probative€of€someÏcontested€issue€of€fact,€they€are€not€admissible.€€òòState€v.€Harbisonóó,€704€S.W.2dÏ314,€317€(Tenn.€1986).€€Here,€however,€although€the€photograph€in€question€isÏdisturbing,€it€is€not€shocking€or€gruesome€in€nature.€€In€fact,€it€was€taken€at€someÏdistance€from€the€victim€and€revealed€no€details€of€trauma€to€her€body.€ÏFurthermore,€it€showed€the€location€and€position€of€the€body€supporting€theÏinvestigating€officersðð€testimony€describing€the€crime€scene.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.ÏCaughronóó,€855€S.W.2d€526,€536€(Tenn.€1993);€òòState€v.€Wilcoxsonóó,€772€S.W.2dÏ33,€37€(Tenn.€1989);€òòHarbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€at€317.€€We€find€no€clear€evidenceÏof€an€abuse€of€discretion€in€admitting€this€photograph.€€In€fact,€the€trial€courtÏadmitted€only€one€objected„to€photograph€during€the€guilt€phase.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€also€asserts€that€the€photographs€of€the€victim€admittedÏby€the€trial€court€during€the€sentencing€phase€were€severely€prejudicial.€€TwoÏphotographs€show€the€victimððs€head€and€torso€from€two€angles.€€Dried€blood€isÏevident€in€and€around€the€childððs€mouth,€nose€and€eyes,€there€are€numerousÏinsect€bites,€as€well€as€effects€from€exposure€and€rigor€mortis.€€The€thirdÍphotograph€shows€the€victimððs€vaginal/anal€area,€which€is€swollen,€red€andÏevidences€the€tearing€of€the€vagina€and€anus€as€described€by€the€medicalÏexaminer.€€The€Defendant€argues€that€the€photographs€showing€theÏpostmortem€effects€unrelated€to€the€cause€of€death€are€misleading.€€He€alsoÏasserts€that€the€photographs€evoked€strong€emotions€in€the€jurors€(in€fact,Ïseveral€jurors€were€visibly€upset)€and€that€the€State€did€not€justify€theirÏintroduction.ÌÌà àAlthough€the€photographs€are€graphic€and€gruesome,€they€accuratelyÏdepict€the€nature€and€extent€of€the€victimððs€injuries.€€This€evidence€was€relevantÏto€support€the€Stateððs€proof€of€the€aggravating€circumstance€that€the€murderÏwas€ð ðespecially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€seriousÏphysical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produce€death.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ39„13„204(i)(5);€òòState€v.€McNishóó,€727€S.W.2d€490,€495€(Tenn.€1987).€€TheyÏclarify€the€testimony€of€the€medical€examiner€regarding€the€severity€of€the€injuries.€ÏSimilarly€to€the€òòHarbisonóó€case,€they€indicate€that€the€degree€of€injury€inflicted€inÏperpetration€of€the€rapes€was€more€damaging€than€as€described€in€theÏDefendantððs€confession.€€òòHarbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€at€317.€€Although€theÏphotographs€were€prejudicial€to€the€Defendantððs€case,€they€were€highlyÏprobative€in€determining€an€aggravating€circumstance.€€We€cannot€conclude€thatÏthe€trial€judge€abused€his€discretion€by€admitting€these€photographs€during€theÍsentencing€process.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.R.Evid.€403;€€€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185Ï(Tenn.1992);€€€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947€œ(Tenn.1978).›ÌÌThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓœIII.›€€Sentencing€for€Felony€MurderÌœÓ  ÓÌ›à àNext,€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€jury€toÏconsider€the€victimððs€age€as€an€aggravating€circumstance€for€felony€murder.€TheÏindictment€for€felony€murder€for€which€he€was€convicted€alleges€that€he€ð ðdidÏunlawfully€and€recklessly€œkill›€Kaile€Lynn€Lee€during€the€perpetration€ofÏKidnapping€and€Rape,€in€violation€of€T.C.A.€39„13„202.ðð€€The€felonies€for€whichÏthe€Defendant€was€convicted€are€rape€of€a€child€and€especially€aggravatedÏkidnapping.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„522,€39„13„305.€€Both€felonies,€asÏcharged,€included€age€as€an€element€of€the€crimes.œ× ƒ@ ××  ×›€€The€Defendant€wasÍconvicted€of€first„degree€felony€murder€based€on€the€above€indictment.€€TheÏState€sought€the€death€penalty€in€this€case€and€submitted€two€aggravatingÏcircumstances€for€the€juryððs€consideration€during€a€separate€sentencingÏprocedure.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i).€€Those€submitted€were€thatÏ(1)€[t]he€murder€was€committed€against€a€person€less€than€twelve€(12)€years€ofÏage€and€the€defendant€was€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age,€or€older;€and€(5)€[t]heÏmurder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€orÏserious€physical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produce€death.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€œ39„13„204(i)(1),(5).›€€The€jury€found€both€aggravating€circumstances,€butÏdetermined€that€they€did€not€outweigh€the€mitigating€circumstances€andÏsentenced€the€Defendant€€to€life€without€parole.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(f)(2).€€The€Defendant€urges€that,€because€the€underlying€felonies€for€whichÏhe€was€convicted€contained€the€victimððs€age€as€essential€elements,€it€wasÏimproper€for€the€trial€court€to€allow€age€to€be€considered€as€an€aggravatingÏcircumstance€for€felony€murder,€citing€òòState€v.€Middlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317Ï(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àThe€constitutional€concern€in€òòMiddlebrooksóó€was€that€the€class€ofÏdeath„eligible€murderers€be€narrowed€so€that€only€the€worst€offenders€receiveÏthe€death€penalty.€€€òòSeeóó€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€341„47.€€€The€supremeÏcourt€observed€that€the€felony€murder€aggravating€circumstance€duplicates€theÍcrime€of€felony€murder€and€thereby€makes€all€felony€murderers€susceptible€to€theÏdeath€penalty.€€That€result€violates€the€Eighth€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesÏConstitution,€as€well€as€Article€I,€Section€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€€òòId.óóÏat€346.€€€When€an€aggravating€circumstance€is€improperly€injected€into€theÏprocess€by€which€the€jurors€must€weigh€aggravating€and€mitigatingÏcircumstances€to€determine€a€sentence,€the€integrity€and€reliability€of€theÏsentencing€process€is€jeopardized€because€the€death€penalty€may€not€beÏreserved€for€only€the€most€culpable€defendants.€€òòBarber€v.€Stateóó,€€889€S.W.2dÏ185,€187€(Tenn.€1994).ÌÌà àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€Defendant€did€not€receive€the€death€penalty,Ïbut€life€without€parole.€€The€State€argues€that€the€constitutional€concernsÏpresented€in€òòMiddlebrooksóó€are€inapplicable€when€a€defendant€receives€aÏsentence€of€life€without€parole€and€that€double€enhancement€is€not€specificallyÏbarred.€€However,€the€capital€sentencing€scheme€was€applied€when€using€theÏaggravating€circumstances€in€an€attempt€to€secure€the€death€penalty€for€theÏDefendant.€€Thus,€the€application€of€the€age€circumstance€was€used€toÏdetermine€the€Defendantððs€death€òòeligibilityóó€and€the€òòMiddlebrooksóó„type€doubleÏenhancement€is€at€issue.€òòBut€cf.óó€òòState€v.€Frederick€D.€Butler,€DeWayne€B.ÏButler,€and€Eric€D.€Alexanderóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9604„CR„00128,€ShelbyÍCounty€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Mar.€19,€1997),€òòperm.€to€appeal€not€filed.óóœ× ƒA ××  ×›€ÏIn€addition,€the€non„capital€sentencing€scheme€bars€double€enhancement.€€òòSeeóóÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114.€€ð ðIn€order€to€comply€with€the€Eighth€Amendment,Ïaggravating€circumstances€must€ððgenuinely€narrow€the€class€of€persons€eligibleÏfor€the€death€penalty€and€must€reasonably€justify€the€imposition€of€a€moreÏsevere€sentence€on€the€defendant€compared€to€others€found€guilty€of€murder.ðð€ÏòòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€342)(quoting€òòZant€v.€Stephensóó,€462€U.S.€862,Ï877,€103€S.Ct.€2733,€2742,€77€L.Ed.2d€235,€249„50€œ(1983)).›€€The€supreme€courtÏœð ðalso›€relied€upon€Tennessee€statutes€that€prohibit€duplication€in€non„capitalÏsentencing€and€concluded€that€Article€I,€ðð€16,€imposed€the€same€prohibition€inÏcapital€cases.ðð€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€816€(Tenn.€1994).€€WeÏdo€not€believe€the€legislature€intended€to€except€those€receiving€life€withoutÏparole€from€the€protections€against€double€enhancement€afforded€thoseÏreceiving€death€and€those€receiving€lesser€sentences.€ÌÌà àNevertheless,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€allowing€the€juryÏto€consider€age€an€aggravating€circumstance€for€felony€murder.€€€€MultipleÏpunishments€for€felony€murder€and€the€underlying€felonies€are€permissible.€€òòStateÏv.€Blackburnóó,€694€S.W.2d€934,€937€(Tenn.€1985).€As€charged€in€the€indictment,Íthe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€felony€murder€based€on€the€elements€specifiedÏfor€that€offense.€€The€felony€murder€indictment€did€not€allege€specifically€ð ðrape€ofÏa€childðð€and€ð ðespecially€aggravated€kidnapping.ðð€€The€indictment€required€thatÏthe€State€needed€only€to€prove€the€Defendant€recklessly€killed€the€victim€duringÏthe€perpetration€of€a€rape€and€a€kidnapping.€€The€record€reflects€that€the€StateÏproved€the€Defendant€perpetrated€the€offense€of€rape€independently€of€any€ageÏfactor€by€showing€there€was€sexual€penetration€and€that€he€accomplished€theÏrape€by€force.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„502.€€Also,€the€State€provedÏaggravated€kidnapping€by€showing€there€was€false€imprisonment€and€that€theÏDefendant€secreted€the€child€to€a€remote€location.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„304.€€€This€was€sufficient€to€satisfy€the€elements€of€felony€murder€as€chargedÏin€the€indictment.€ÌÌà à€In€addition,€the€State€prosecuted€the€Defendant€separately€for€the€rapeÏand€kidnapping€offenses€and€used€the€victimððs€age€to€enhance€the€potentialÏpenalties€for€those€individual€crimes.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„522;€39„13„305.€€Rape€of€a€child€is€a€Class€A€felony€and€one€convicted€as€a€childÏrapist€is€required€to€serve€the€entire€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„522;Ï39„13„523(a)(1),€(b).€€Especially€aggravated€kidnapping€is€a€Class€A€felonyÏwhile€kidnapping€is€a€Class€C€felony.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„305;€39„13„304.€€However,€the€conviction€for€felony€murder€was€not€dependent€upon€anyÍage€factorœ× ƒB ××  ×›,€therefore€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€allowing€the€jury€to€consider€theÏvictimððs€age€as€an€aggravating€factor€for€felony€murder.ÌÌÌÓ  ÓœÇIV.›€€Sentencing€for€Rape€of€a€Child€and€Especially€Aggravated€KidnappingÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€sentencing€him€at€theÏtop€of€the€range€for€his€convictions€of€rape€of€a€child€and€especially€aggravatedÏkidnapping.€€When€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€the€manner€ofÏservice€of€a€sentence,€this€court€has€a€duty€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€theÏsentence€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€areÏcorrect.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditionedÏupon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€theÏsentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,Ï823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àIn€conducting€a€de€novo€review€of€a€sentence,€this€court€must€consider:Ï(a)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing;€(b)€theÏpresentence€report;€(c)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€toÏsentencing€alternatives;€(d)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conductÏinvolved;€(e)€any€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(f)€any€statementÏthat€the€defendant€made€on€his€own€behalf;€and€(g)€the€potential€or€lack€ofÏpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,Ïand€„210;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).ÌÌà àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencingÏprocedure,€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€andÏproper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principals€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,Ïand€that€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record,Ïthen€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€aÏdifferent€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).ÌÌà àIn€the€case€at€bar,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€as€a€Range€IÏstandard€offender€to€twenty„five€years€(25)€for€the€rape€of€a€child€and€twenty„five€years€(25)€for€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€to€run€concurrently€withÏeach€other€but€consecutive€to€the€sentence€of€life€without€parole.€€€Both€areÏClass€A€felonies.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„305,€„522.€€€The€applicableÏsentencing€range€for€a€Class€A€felony€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender€is€fifteenÏ(15)€to€twenty„five€(25)€years.€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„25„112(a)(1).€€At€the€timeÏthe€Defendant€was€sentenced,€the€presumptive€minimum€sentence€for€a€ClassÏA€€felony€was€at€the€bottom€of€the€range,€to€be€adjusted€accordingly€inÏconsideration€of€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c)€(1990).€€The€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€either€failing€toÏconsider€or€failing€to€place€in€the€œrecord›€its€findings€regarding€mitigating€factors.€€ÏHe€also€charges€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€state€on€the€record€how€eachÏenhancement€factor€applied€to€each€separate€conviction€for€rape€of€a€child€andÍespecially€aggravated€kidnapping.€Because€we€find€that€the€trial€court€failed€toÏadequately€discuss€the€application€of€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€onÏthe€record,€we€review€the€sentence€in€this€appeal€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€without€theÏpresumption€of€correctness.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Chrismanóó,€885€S.W.2d€834€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€Diesóó,€829€S.W.2d€706€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ìà àÌà àAt€the€time€the€presentence€report€was€prepared,€the€Defendant€was€aÏ23€year„old€single€male.€€Prior€to€the€commission€of€the€offenses€in€question,€heÏhad€a€history€of€criminal€behavior€primarily€for€drug€possession,€but€includingÏDUIs,€assault,€evading€arrest€and€reckless€endangerment.€€At€trial€during€bothÏthe€guilt€and€sentencing€phases,€evidence€was€introduced€regarding€theÏDefendantððs€unstable€family€history,€his€emotional€problems€and€drug€abuse.€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€considered€and€found€the€following€enhancement€factorsÏapplicable€to€both€offenses€for€which€the€Defendant€was€convicted:€(1)€That€theÏDefendant€had€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€inÏaddition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range;€(2)€that€theÏvictim€of€the€offense€was€particularly€vulnerable€because€of€age;€(3)€that€theÏpersonal€injuries€inflicted€upon€the€victim€were€particularly€great;€(4)€that€theÏoffense€was€committed€to€gratify€the€Defendantððs€desire€for€pleasure€orÏexcitement;€(5)€that€the€Defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crimeÍwhen€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high;€(6)€that€the€Defendant€abused€a€positionÏof€private€trust;€and€(7)€that€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€underÏwhich€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€the€victim€was€great.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€œðððð›Ï40„35„114(1),€(4),€(6),€(7),€(10),€(15),€(16).€€The€trial€court€found€no€applicableÏmitigating€factors.€€We€shall€address€œthe›€convictions€for€rape€of€a€child€andÏespecially€aggravated€kidnapping€separately.ÌÓ  ÓÌà àA.€Rape€of€a€ChildÌÌÓ  Óà à€The€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factor€(1)€because€of€theÏDefendantððs€prior€criminal€behavior.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€There€isÏevidence€in€the€record€that€he€was€convicted€for€DUI€and€for€an€assault.€ThereÏwas€testimony€at€trial€that€the€Defendant€assaulted€and€choked€his€motherÏwhile€he€was€intoxicated.€€The€Defendant€also€made€admissions€that€he€usedÏcontrolled€substances,€including€PCP,€LSD,€cocaine€and€€marijuana.€€WeÏbelieve€this€is€sufficient€to€support€the€application€of€factor€(1).Ìà àÌà àThe€trial€court€also€applied€enhancement€factor€(4),€that€the€victim€wasÏparticularly€vulnerable€because€of€age.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4).€€TheÏDefendant€argues€that€this€factor€should€not€be€applied€because€the€age€of€theÍvictim€is€an€essential€element€of€the€crime€of€rape€of€a€child.€œ× ƒC ××  ×›€€€€In€òòState€v.ÏAdamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€31€(Tenn.1993),€our€supreme€court€held€that€although€ageÏis€an€element€of€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape€involving€a€child€under€the€ageÏof€thirteen,€factor€(4)€may€be€used€if€"circumstances€show€that€the€victim,Ïbecause€of€[the€victim's]€age€or€physical€or€mental€condition,€was€in€fact,Ïparticularly€vulnerable."€€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€at€35;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€ChadÏDouglas€Pooleóó,€No.€œ02S01„9607„CC„00064,›€Hardeman€County€(Tenn.,ÏJackson,€May€12,€1997).€€€Thus,€the€factor€may€be€used€to€enhance€sentencesÏwhen€a€victim's€natural€physical€and€mental€limitations€œrender›€the€victimÏparticularly€vulnerable€for€his€or€her€age€because€of€an€inability€to€resist,€aÏdifficulty€in€calling€for€help,€or€a€difficulty€in€testifying€against€the€perpetrator.€€òòStateÏv.€Kissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€482,€487€(Tenn.€1996);€€òòState€v.€Melvinóó,€913€S.W.2dÏ195,€203€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Hayesóó,€899€S.W.2d€175,€185€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1995).€€This€factor€is€assessed€on€a€case€specific€basis€and€ð ðtheÏState€bears€the€burden€of€proving€the€victim's€limitations€rendering€him€or€herÏparticularly€vulnerable.ðð€€€òòPooleóó,€slip€op.€at€7„8€(quoting€òòAdamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€atÏ35).ÌÌà àThis€limitation€is€likewise€applicable€to€the€offenses€of€rape€of€a€child€andÏespecially€aggravated€kidnapping€in€which€the€victimððs€age€is€an€essentialÏelement€of€the€offense.œ× ƒD ××  ×›€€We€believe€that€the€State€has€presented€facts€thatÏsupport€the€application€of€factor€(4)€for€the€rape€of€a€child.€It€is€clear€that€KaileÏwas€physically€vulnerable€and€was€unable€to€defend€against€the€sexualÏassault.€€€Her€attempts€to€scream€were€muffled€and€she€was€physicallyÏrestrained€when€she€attempted€to€free€herself€from€the€Defendant.€€Furthermore,Ïin€such€a€remote€location,€any€attempt€to€escape€would€have€been€fruitless.€ÌÌà àApplication€of€factor€(5),€that€the€victim€was€treated€with€exceptionalÏcruelty,€is€supported€by€the€facts.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(5).€ÏExceptional€cruelty€is€usually€found€in€cases€of€abuse€or€torture.€€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€259€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€825ÏS.W.2d€109,€113€(Tenn.1991);€€òòState€v.€Haynesóó,€720€S.W.2d€76,€86Ï(Tenn.Crim.App.1986).€€€Here,€there€is€evidence€of€multiple€penetrations€of€theÏvictim,€including€the€oral,€vaginal€and€anal€openings.€€There€is€also€evidence€thatÏthe€Defendant€became€angry€when€he€was€unable€to€achieve€satisfactoryÏvaginal€penetration.€€This€resulted€in€anal€penetration€and€€the€victim€screamingÏand€attempting€to€get€away.€€The€victimððs€suffering€motivated€the€Defendant€toÍmuffle€her€screams,€which€eventually€caused€the€strangulation€death€for€whichÏhe€was€convicted€of€felony€murder.€€This€is€sufficient€to€show€that€the€victim€wasÏabused€beyond€a€penetration€necessary€to€prove€rape€of€a€child.€€€In€addition,Ïthe€record€supports€a€finding€that€Kaile€suffered€personal€injury€that€wasÏparticularly€great.€€œTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(6).›€€The€postmortemÏexamination€of€the€victim€revealed€severe€tearing€of€the€vaginal€and€anal€walls,Ïsuch€that€the€tissue€dividing€the€vagina€and€the€anus€was€extremely€thinned.€ÏSuch€bodily€injury€is€not€an€essential€element€of€the€crime€of€rape€of€a€child,Ïwhich€requires€no€injury,€and€thus,€can€properly€be€applied€as€an€enhancementÏfactor.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„522.ÌÌœà àThe›€sentencing€court€also€applied€enhancement€factor€(7)€providing€forÏenhancement€when€the€offense€was€committed€to€satisfy€the€defendant's€desireÏfor€pleasure.€€€Tenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(7).€€In€€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€864ÏS.W.2d€31,€34„35€(Tenn.1993),€our€supreme€court€rejected€the€proposition€that,Ï"as€a€matter€of€law,€every€rape€is€implicitly€committed€for€the€purpose€ofÏpleasure€or€excitement."€€€The€supreme€court€noted€that€not€all€such€crimes€areÏcommitted€for€pleasure,€but€rather€may€be€motivated€by€acts€such€as€brutality,Ïrevenge,€punishment,€or€intimidation.€€€òòId.óó;€òòState€v.€Hoytóó,€928€S.W.2d€935,€949Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€In€òòState€v.€Kissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€482,€491€(Tenn.Ï1996),€the€supreme€court€added€that€the€commission€of€crime€to€gratify€a€desireÍfor€pleasure€or€excitement€is€not€limited€to€proof€of€sexual€desire€or€sexualÏpleasure.€€Thus,€evidence€of€the€achievement€of€sexual€orgasm€will€not,€byÏitself,€prove€factor€(7),€nor€will€the€absence€of€orgasm€negate€such€application.€ÏòòId.óó€€The€State€must€demonstrate€that€a€defendant€was€òòmotivatedóó€to€commit€aÏcrime€to€gratify€a€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement.€€òòId.óó€€ð ðThe€focus€is€theÏoffenderððs€motive,€not€the€eventual€result.ðð€€òòId.óó€€In€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€theÏDefendant€indicated€that€he€kidnapped€Kaile€with€the€intent€to€ð ðhave€sex€withÏher.ðð€€He€took€her€to€an€isolated€location,€raped€her,€and€strangled€her€during€theÏcommission€of€the€rape.€€After€the€Defendant€withdrew,€he€continued€toÏmasturbate€to€achieve€an€orgasm.€€€There€is€some€evidence€in€the€DefendantððsÏmental€health€examination€that€he€had€some€feelings€œfor€or›€a€desire€for€aÏrelationship€with€the€victimððs€mother.€€However,€his€only€statements€regardingÏmotivation€were€to€have€sex€with€the€child.€Also,€although€he€had€alreadyÏachieved€penetration€and€killed€the€victim,€he€continued€to€sexually€stimulateÏhimself.€€This€suggests€that€the€Defendant€was€indeed€motivated€to€perpetrateÏthe€crime€to€gratify€a€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement.€€We€conclude€that€theÏapplication€of€enhancement€factor€(7)€should€be€upheld.ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€Defendant€had€no€hesitation€aboutÏcommitting€a€crime€where€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„114(10),€and€that€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€underÍwhich€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„114(16).€€€The€judge€did€not€state€what€evidence€led€him€to€theseÏconclusions.€€€We€feel€that€the€commission€of€the€rape€supports€bothÏenhancement€factors.€€Although€the€Defendant€has€been€punished€andÏconvicted€for€felony€murder€for€the€killing,€the€manner€in€which€he€perpetrated€theÏrape€placed€Kaileððs€life€at€risk€before€the€murder€occurred.€€The€Defendant€tookÏthe€victim€to€an€isolated€location€which€provided€ample€time€and€privacy€toÏsexually€assault€her€without€being€detected.€€It€is€clear€that€the€penileÏpenetration€of€a€child€only€three€years€old€was€likely€to€produce€bodily€injuries.€ÏFurthermore,€€if€the€victim€had€remained€alive€and€in€need€of€medical€treatment,Ïthe€remoteness€of€the€crime€scene€increased€the€risk€that€the€victim€would€not€beÏfound.€€Therefore,€the€application€of€factors€(10)€and€(16)€is€proper.ÌÌà àFinally,€we€agree€that€the€Defendant€abused€a€position€of€private€trust.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(15).€€He€had€developed€a€friendly€relationshipÏwith€the€family€of€the€victim.€€The€Defendant€had€taken€Kaile€alone€with€him€toÏthe€store€on€one€or€two€occasions.€€He€secured€entrance€to€the€victimððsÏapartment€and€talked€and€played€with€her€before€kidnapping€her.€€There€isÏevidence€that€the€victim€knew€and€trusted€the€Defendant.€€The€Defendant€statedÏthat€she€willingly€went€with€him.€€Moreover,€the€Defendant€took€the€childÏswimming€with€him€at€the€lake,€disrobed€himself€before€they€went€swimming,Íand€eventually€took€off€her€wet€clothes.€€The€Defendant€used€his€relationshipÏwith€the€child€to€place€himself€in€a€position€to€perpetrate€the€rape,€thus€factorÏ(15)€applies.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€has€proposed€several€mitigating€factors.€€He€alsoÏcontends€that,€because€the€jury,€when€considering€his€sentence€for€felonyÏmurder,€found€that€the€aggravating€circumstances€did€not€outweigh€the€mitigatingÏcircumstances,€this€should€be€considered€when€weighing€enhancement€andÏmitigating€factors€for€his€other€convictions.€€However,€we€find€this€argumentÏunpersuasive.€€The€jury€considered€circumstances€designed€to€determine€deathÏeligibility.€€They€are€not€applicable€to€the€factors€considered€in€the€sentencing€forÏother€offenses.ÌÌà àWe€have€reviewed€the€mitigating€factors€as€are€provided€in€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€section€40„35„113,€and€find€only€two€that€apply.€€It€is€clear€fromÏthe€facts€that€the€Defendant€contacted€the€authorities€and€led€them€to€the€crimeÏscene.€€Therefore,€we€find€that€factor€(10)€may€be€œapplied,€but€with€little€weight.›€ÏFurthermore,€the€Defendant€has€expressed€remorse€about€perpetrating€theÏcrime.€€He€became€tearful€and€requested€that€the€arresting€officers€shoot€him.€€ÏThis€Court€has€previously€held€that€genuine,€sincere€remorse€is€a€properÏmitigating€factor.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(13);€òòState€v.€Williamsonóó,Í919€S.W.2d€69,€83€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Buttreyóó,€756€S.W.2d€718,Ï722€(Tenn.Crim.App.€1988).€€Although€the€Defendant€did€assist€law€œenforcementÏofficials›€and€appears€to€regret€his€crime,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€œcombinedÏmitigating›€factors€carry€much€weight,€if€any.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€that,€withÏthe€number€and€severity€of€the€enhancement€factors,€they€outweigh€any€weightÏthat€might€be€afforded€to€the€mitigating€factors.€€€The€twenty„five€(25)€yearÏsentence€for€rape€of€œa€child›€œis›€affirmed.ÌÌÓ  ÓB.€€Especially€Aggravated€KidnappingÌÓ  ÓÌà àWe€have€also€considered€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€asÏthey€apply€to€the€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€As€for€theÏprevious€conviction,€we€have€no€hesitation€applying€enhancement€factor€(1)€forÏprior€criminal€behavior.€€€It€is€also€appropriate€to€apply€factor€(4),€that€the€victimÏwas€particularly€vulnerable€because€of€age,€to€the€kidnapping.œ× ƒE ××  ×›€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(4).€€Kaile€was€three€years€old.€€It€is€unlikely€that€sheÏpossessed€the€knowledge€to€adequately€œrecognize›€the€potential€danger€ofÍleaving€the€apartment€with€the€Defendant.€€She€had€gone€on€trips€alone€withÏhim€to€the€store€in€the€past,€and€on€this€occasion,€he€apparently€offered€to€buyÏher€a€soft€drink.€€After€the€Defendant€picked€her€up€and€put€her€in€his€car,€theÏvictimððs€ability€to€get€away€from€him€or€request€help€was€extremely€limited.€€This,Ïwe€feel,€sufficiently€supports€the€imposition€of€factor€(4).ÌÌà àWe€consider€enhancement€factor€(7)€applicable,€that€the€offense€wasÏcommitted€to€satisfy€the€Defendantððs€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(7).€€The€record€reflects€that€the€Defendant€kidnappedÏthe€victim€for€the€purpose€of€having€sex€with€her.€€As€with€our€analysis€of€theÏrape,€the€decision€to€kidnap€the€victim€was€motivated€by€the€Defendantððs€desireÏfor€pleasure€and€excitement.€€òòKissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€at€491.€€Thus,€factor€(7)€isÏrelevant.ÌÌà àWe€have€also€considered€and€find€œapplicable›€factors€(10)€and€(16),€thatÏthe€Defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€risk€toÏhuman€life€was€high€and€that€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstancesÏunder€which€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(10),€(16).€€Again,€we€note€that€the€Defendant€took€the€victimÏto€an€extremely€isolated€location€for€the€purpose€of€sexually€assaulting€her.€€ThisÏincreased€the€likelihood€that€other€crimes€could€be€committed€beyond€theÍkidnapping.€€The€Defendant€was€at€his€leisure€in€treating€the€victim€as€he€sawÏfit€without€the€risk€of€detection,€which€ended€with€tragic€results.€€The€probabilityÏthat€bodily€injury€would€result€and€that€the€victimððs€life€was€at€risk€wasÏsubstantially€increased€by€the€Defendantððs€course€of€action.ÌÌà àThe€record€also€supports€the€application€of€factor€(15),€the€abuse€of€aÏposition€of€private€œtrust.›€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(15).€We€do€feel€that€theÏage€of€the€child€contributed€to€her€trust€in€the€actions€of€the€Defendant.€€SheÏrecognized€him,€played€with€him,€and€willingly€agreed€to€leave€with€him€becauseÏhe€had€developed€a€trust€relationship€with€her€parents.€€This€enabled€theÏDefendant€to€kidnap€the€child€from€her€home.€€Beyond€this,€the€familyððs€priorÏrelationship€with€the€Defendant€contributed€to€a€two„hour€delay€in€reporting€theÏchildððs€disappearance.€€This€delay€enabled€him€to€transport€the€victim€fromÏKnoxville€to€the€remote€lake€location€where€the€other€crimes€were€committed.€ÏTherefore,€the€application€of€factor€(15)€is€warranted.̜Ԁ;XÔÌ›à àWe€have€considered€the€other€enhancement€factors€and€conclude€that€theÏrecord€does€not€support€the€application€of€factor€(5).€€We€have€also€reviewed€theÏœmitigating›€factors€and€find€that€factors€(10)€and€(13)€do€apply.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€œðððð›Ï40„35„113(10),€(13).€€Yet,€as€with€the€conviction€for€rape€of€œa€child,›€we€concludeÏthat€these€mitigating€factors€merit€very€little€weight,€if€any.€€We€œconclude›€that€theÍnumber€and€the€seriousness€of€the€enhancement€factors€dramatically€outweigh€anyÏmitigating€factors€and€therefore,€imposition€of€the€maximum€sentence€is€appropriateÏfor€the€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Thus,€we€affirm€theÏDefendantððs€twenty„five€(25)€year€sentence.ÌÌÓ  ÓV.€€Motion€to€Suppressà àÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€grant€his€motionÏto€suppress€evidence€obtained€through€a€search€of€his€vehicle.€€On€a€motion€toÏsuppress,€deference€is€given€to€the€trial€court€to€assess€the€credibility€of€theÏwitnesses€and€determine€issues€of€œfact,›€and€the€prevailing€party€is€entitled€to€theÏstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23Ï(Tenn.€1996).€œThe€findings›€of€fact€of€the€trial€court€at€a€suppression€hearing€will€notÏbe€disturbed€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderatesÏotherwise.€€œòòId.óó›ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€argues€that€law€enforcement€officers€searched€his€vehicleÏwithout€consent€and€that€no€exigent€circumstances€existed€to€except€the€searchÏfrom€the€warrant€requirement.€€He€asserts€that€the€search€was€violative€of€both€theÏFourth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€section€7€of€theÍTennessee€Constitution€and€that€the€evidence€seized€as€a€result€should€have€beenÏsuppressed.ÌÌà àBoth€the€Fourth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€1,ÏSection€7€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€prohibit€"unreasonable"€searches€andÏœseizures.›€€œAny›€warrantless€search€is€œpresumptively€òòperóó›€òòseóó€unreasonable€under€theÏFourth€Amendment.€€However,€there€are€a€few€exceptions€to€the€warrantÏœrequirement.›€€òòCoolidge€v.€New€Hampshireóó,€403€U.S.€443,€454„55,€91€S.Ct.€2022,Ï2032,€€29€L.Ed.2d€564,€576€œ(1971);›€òòFuqua€v.€Armouróó,€543€S.W.2d€64,€66Ï(Tenn.1976).€€Exceptions€are€"jealously€and€carefully€drawn."€€€There€must€be€aÏshowing€by€those€asserting€the€exception€that€the€exigencies€of€the€situation€madeÏthe€search€imperative.€òòCoolidgeóó,€403€U.S.€at€454„55,€91€S.Ct.€at€2032,€€29€L.Ed.2dÏat€576.€œThe›€burden€is€on€those€seeking€the€exception€to€show€the€need.€€òòState€v.ÏBartramóó,€925€S.W.2d€227,€230€(Tenn.€œ1996).›ÌÌà àWarrantless€searches€of€automobiles€under€certain€circumstances€areÏallowed.€€€òòCarroll€v.€United€Statesóó,€267€U.S.€132,€45€S.Ct.€280,€69€L.Ed.€543€(1925);€€ÏòòState€v.€Shrumóó,€643€S.W.2d€891,€893€(Tenn.1982).€€An€automobile€may€beÏsearched€without€a€warrant€if€the€officer€has€probable€cause€to€believe€that€theÏvehicle€contains€contraband€and€if€exigent€circumstances€require€an€immediateÍsearch.€€òòCarrollóó,€267€U.S.€at€149,€45€S.Ct.€at€œ283„84.€€Where›€probable€cause€toÏsearch€exists,€the€immediate€search€of€a€vehicle€is€no€more€intrusive€than€a€seizureÏand€subsequent€search.€òòChambers€v.€Maroneyóó,€399€U.S.€42,€90€S.Ct.€1975,€26ÏL.Ed.2d€419€(1970).€€Furthermore,€the€inherent€mobility€of€a€vehicle€parked€in€aÏpublic€location€after€a€recent€crime€and€when€there€is€probable€cause€raises€aÏpresumption€of€exigent€œcircumstances.€€òòCalifornia›€v.€Carneyóó,€471€œU.S.›€386,€105ÏS.Ct.€2066,€85€L.Ed.2d€406€(1985);€òòState€v.€Leveyeóó,€796€S.W.2d€948,€952€(Tenn.Ï1990).€€Therefore,€the€Fourth€Amendment€authorizes€the€police€either€to€seize€andÏhold€the€vehicle€until€a€search€warrant€has€issued€or€to€search€the€vehicleÏimmediately.€òòChambersóó,€399€U.S.€at€52,€90€S.Ct.€at€1981.€€€The€vehicle€exceptionÏhas€been€held€to€apply€in€the€context€of€a€locked€car€trunk.€€€€òòUnited€States€v.€Rossóó,Ï456€U.S.€798,€102€S.Ct.€2157,€72€L.Ed.2d€572€(1982).€€In€€òòRossóó,€the€United€StatesÏSupreme€Court€held€that:ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓThe€scope€of€a€warrantless€search€of€an€automobile€...€is€not€defined€byÏthe€nature€of€the€container€in€which€the€contraband€is€secreted.€€€Rather,Ïit€is€defined€by€the€object€of€the€search€and€the€places€in€which€there€isÏprobable€cause€to€believe€that€it€may€be€found.€€ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓÌ456€U.S.€at€824,€102€S.Ct.€at€2172.ÌÔ€;ŠÔÌ€à àœIn›€the€case€at€bar,€the€Defendant€was€known€to€be€the€person€who€tookÏthe€victim€from€her€home.€€The€child€had€been€missing€for€several€hours.€€PoliceÏofficers€located€his€red€Maverick€parked€at€Colvin€and€Sons,€his€employer€inÏBlount€County.€€A€childððs€toy€was€in€plain€view€on€the€front€passenger€seat€ofÏthe€car€and€mud€and€grass€œwere›€observed€on€the€exterior.€€When€OfficerÏHamilton€arrived€on€the€scene,€he€spoke€with€Officer€Presley€in€Knoxville,€whoÏwas€very€concerned€that€œthe€victim€might€still›€be€alive€in€the€trunk€of€the€car.€ÏTwenty„five€to€thirty€minutes€elapsed€between€the€time€the€officers€arrived€andÏœthe€time›€the€Defendantððs€grandmother€arrived€with€the€car€keys.€€She€allowedÏthe€officers€to€open€the€trunk.€They€viewed€several€items,€including€the€victimððsÏshorts€outfit€and€a€green€towel€containing€blood,€feces,€œsticks€and€leaves.›€€TheÏcar,€still€containing€the€items,€was€towed€to€the€crime€laboratory€in€Knoxville.€ÏThe€two€items€found€in€the€Defendantððs€trunk€were€admitted€as€evidence€at€trial.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€first€charges€that€his€grandmother€did€not€have€theÏœauthority€to›€consent€to€a€search€of€his€vehicle.€€€Second,€he€asserts€that€exigentÏcircumstances€did€not€exist€to€justify€the€search.€€He€argues€that€the€time€lapseÏat€the€scene€demonstrated€a€lack€of€urgency,€which€refutes€the€officersððÏexplanation€of€concern€for€the€victimððs€safety.€€We€need€not€address€whetherÏthe€Defendantððs€grandmother€could€validly€consent€to€the€search€of€his€vehicleÏbecause€we€believe€that€there€was€sufficient€exigency€to€support€the€search.€ÍThe€officers€had€probable€cause€to€search€the€Defendantððs€car€because€heÏwas€identified€as€the€suspect€in€the€disappearance€of€the€victim.€€He€was€seenÏtaking€the€child€from€her€home.€€The€vehicle€parked€at€Colvin€and€Sons€wasÏidentified€as€that€belonging€to€the€Defendant.€€The€officers€saw€a€childððs€toy€inÏplain€view€in€the€Defendantððs€Maverick.€€The€presumption€of€exigency€existsÏwhen€a€vehicle€is€parked€in€a€public€place€simply€because€of€its€inherentÏmobility.€€With€probable€cause,€the€officers€were€permitted€to€conduct€a€search.€€ÏIn€addition,€there€was€grave€concern€for€the€life€of€the€victim€and€the€possibilityÏthat€she€may€have€been€locked€in€the€trunk€of€the€car.€€€The€weather€was€hotÏand€the€car€was€parked€in€the€sun.€€€This€created€an€actual€exigency€beyondÏthat€which€is€presumed,€thus€rendering€the€search€of€the€Defendantððs€trunk€valid.Ïà àÌÌà à€From€the€evidence€before€us€in€the€record,€we€cannot€conclude€that€theÏtrial€court€erred€by€failing€to€grant€the€Defendantððs€motion€to€suppress.€€HeÏcontends€that€the€search€was€illegal€and€that€subsequent€incriminatingÏstatements€elicited€by€telling€him€that€the€items€were€found€in€his€trunk€should€beÏsuppressed€as€ð ðfruit€of€the€poisonous€tree.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòWong€Sun€v.€United€Statesóó,Ï371€U.S.€471,€83€S.Ct.€407,€9€L.Ed.2d€441€(1963).€€Yet,€because€we€find€theÏsearch€to€be€valid,€the€Defendantððs€subsequent€confession€was€properlyÏadmitted.ÌÌà àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓVI.€€Sufficiency€of€the€EvidenceÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà àThe€Defendant€next€asserts€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€supportÏthe€juryððs€finding€of€guilt.€€Specifically,€he€challenges€his€conviction€for€first„degreeÏfelony€murder€and€claims€that€the€State€did€not€prove€that€he€ð ðrecklesslyðð€killedÏthe€victim.€€As€his€defense,€he€submits€that€the€was€unable€to€form€the€requisiteÏœòòmensóó›€òòœreaóó›€such€that€he€could€œnot€have›€consciously€disregarded€the€risk€of€deathÏto€the€œvictim›€because€of€his€psychological€and€drug€addiction€problems.€€ÏFurthermore,€he€claims€that€because€he€was€unable€to€recklessly€kill€the€victim,Ïhe€was€also€unable€œtoððknowinglyðð›€perpetrate€the€kidnapping.ÌÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,Ïthe€standard€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÏto€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443ÏU.S.€307,€319€(1979).€€Questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€theÏweight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raisedÏby€the€evidence,€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€court.€€òòState€v.ÍPappasóó,€754€S.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€Nor€may€this€courtÏreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ï(Tenn.€1978).€€ÌÌà àA€jury€verdict€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€Stateððs€witnessesÏand€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,Ï476€(Tenn.€1973).€€On€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€and€all€inferences€therefrom.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€atÏ835.€€Because€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€andÏreplaces€it€with€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused€has€the€burden€in€this€courtÏof€illustrating€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€returned€byÏthe€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982);€òòGraceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€at€476.ÌÌà àUnder€the€version€of€the€felony„murder€statute€in€effect€at€the€time€of€theÏDefendantððs€crimes,€first„degree€murder€included€€"[a]€reckless€killing€of€anotherÏcommitted€in€the€perpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€any€first€degree€murder,Ïarson,€rape,€robbery,€burglary,€theft,€kidnapping€or€aircraft€piracy."€€€Tenn.CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)€(1991).€€Thus,€the€offense€of€felony€murder€was€anÏunintentional€killing;€recklessness€as€a€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€would€suffice€to€support€aÏconviction€for€a€death€occurring€in€the€course€of€one€of€the€enumerated€felonies.€ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓ€ð ðRecklessðð€refers€to€a€person€who€acts€recklessly€with€respect€toÏcircumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€or€the€result€of€the€conductÏwhen€the€person€€is€aware€of€but€consciously€disregards€aÏsubstantial€and€unjustifiable€risk€that€the€circumstances€exist€or€theÏresult€will€occur.€€The€risk€must€be€of€such€a€nature€and€degree€that€itsÏdisregard€constitutes€a€gross€deviation€from€the€standard€of€care€thatÏan€ordinary€person€would€exercise€under€all€the€circumstances€asÏviewed€from€the€accused€person's€standpoint.€€ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓÌTenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„302(c)€(1991).€€€ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€argues€that€because€of€his€psychological€problems,€heÏwas€compelled€to€ingest€alcohol€and€drugs€which€impaired€his€ability€to€beÏaware€of€the€risks€to€the€victim.€€This€Court€has€recognized€that€the€admission€ofÏevidence€regarding€a€defendantððs€mental€illness€may€establish€a€claim€ofÏð ðdiminished€capacityðð€to€form€the€requisite€criminal€intent.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Phippsóó,Ï883€S.W.2d€138,€148€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Furthermore,€we€have€admittedÏevidence€of€voluntary€intoxication€to€negate€the€state€of€mind€requirement.€€òòSeeóóÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„503(a);€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€121€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.1992).€€€ð ðVoluntary€intoxication,€generally€considered€sociallyÏunacceptable,€is€within€the€control€of€the€defendant.€€€On€the€other€hand,€mostÏconditions€which€give€rise€to€diminished€capacity€are€not€volitional€and€notÏcontrolled€by€the€defendant.ðð€€òòPhippsóó,€883€S.W.2d€at€148.€€ÌÌà àHere,€the€Defendant€appears€to€argue€that€he€had€severe€psychologicalÏproblems€which€in€turn€compelled€him€to€become€intoxicated€to€the€extent€that€Ïhis€ingestion€of€substances€over€time€became€involuntary.€€The€legislature€hasÏestablished€distinctions€between€voluntary€and€involuntary€intoxication.€€œNeither›Ïdiminished€capacity€nor€voluntary€intoxication€are€true€defenses.€€œòòSeeóó›ÏTenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„503(a).€ð ð[I]ntoxication€itself€is€not€a€defense€toÏprosecution€for€an€offense.€€However,€intoxication,€whether€voluntary€orÏinvoluntary,€is€œadmissible›€in€evidence€if€it€is€relevant€to€negate€a€culpable€mentalÏstate."€Tenn€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„503(a).€€Moreover,€ð ð[i]f€recklessnessÏestablishes€an€element€of€an€offense€and€the€person€is€unaware€of€a€riskÏbecause€of€voluntary€intoxication,€the€personððs€unawareness€is€immaterial€in€aÏprosecution€for€that€offense.ðð€€ðð€39„11„503(b).€€€The€legislature€has€also€chosenÏto€address€the€interplay€between€intoxication€and€insanity:ÌÌÓÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒIntoxication€itself€does€not€constitute€a€mental€disease€or€defect€withinÏthe€meaning€of€ðð€39„11„501.€€However,€involuntary€intoxication€is€aÏdefense€to€prosecution€if,€as€a€result€of€the€involuntary€intoxication,€theÏperson€lacked€substantial€capacity€either€to€appreciate€theÏwrongfulness€of€the€person's€conduct€or€to€conform€that€conduct€to€theÏrequirements€of€the€law€allegedly€violated.ÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓÌœTenn.Code›€Ann.€ðð€39„11„503(c).€€ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€contends€that€this€compulsion€to€use€drugs€amounted€toÏan€involuntary€intoxication€making€him€incapable€of€forming€the€œòòmensóó›€òòreaóó€ofÏrecklessness€required€to€prove€felony€murder.€€€€He€has€not€claimed€involuntaryÏintoxication€as€a€defense€against€prosecution€and€clearly€if€his€intoxication€isÏconsidered€voluntary,€he€cannot€assert€such€evidence€to€negate€the€requisiteÏòòmensóó€òòreaóó€of€recklessness.€€Rather,€he€presented€a€hybridized€theory€ofÏdiminished€capacity€based€on€claims€of€involuntary€intoxication€due€to€hisÏmental€illness.€€ÌÌà àThis€Court€has€held€under€former€law€that€the€compulsion€to€drink€alcoholÏor€ingest€narcotics€due€to€an€addiction€does€not€constitute€involuntaryÏintoxication.€€òòBurns€v.€œStateóó,›€591€S.W.2d€780,€783€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1979);ÏòòLayne€v.€œStateóó,›€531€S.W.2d€802,€803€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1975).›€€Moreover,€whileÏinvoluntary€intoxication€has€been€defined€in€our€current€law€as€ð ðintoxication€thatÏis€not€voluntary,ðð€voluntary€intoxication€requires€that€a€substance€has€beenÏð ðknowingly€introduced€into€the€personððs€body.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€œðððð›€39„11„503(d)(2),€(3).€€This€suggests€that€involuntary€intoxication€requires€that€theÏingestion€of€a€substance€is€not€ð ðknowing,ðð€but€rather€attributable€to€a€ð ðmistake,Ïtrick,€accident,€or€œcoercion.ð𛀜òòLayneóó,›€531€S.W.2d€at€803.€€œTherefore,›€we€cannotÏconclude€the€Defendantððs€alcohol€dependence€amounted€to€involuntaryÏintoxication.€€On€this€œground›€,€evidence€about€his€alcohol€consumption€was€notÍproperly€available€to€negate€the€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€for€felony€murder.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„11„503(b).€€However,€assuming€òòarguendoóó€that€testimony€about€theÏDefendantððs€mental€state€was€admissible€because€he€was€involuntarilyÏintoxicated,€we€believe€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€establish€recklessnessÏbeyond€a€reasonable€œdoubt.›ÌœÌ›à àBy€the€Defendantððs€self„report,€on€the€morning€of€the€incident€he€ingestedÏapproximately€thirty€(30)€ounces€of€whiskey,€two€beers€and€a€marijuanaÏcigarette.€€However,€witnesses€who€observed€him€that€morning€noted€noÏapparent€symptoms€of€intoxication.€€The€Defendant€also€reported€having€noÏtrouble€operating€his€vehicle.€€When€he€was€arrested,€the€Defendant€confessed,Ïin€detail,€about€the€crimes.€€He€admitted€to€taking€the€victim€from€her€home€and€toÏthe€remote€location€with€the€intent€to€have€sex€with€her.€€When€interviewed€byÏDr.€Worley€Fain,€a€psychiatrist,€€addictionologist€and€expert€witness€for€theÏdefense,€the€Defendant€reported€being€unable€to€remember€the€details€of€theÏincident.à àÌà àDr.€Fain€testified€at€trial€that€the€Defendant€had€psychological€disorders,Ïincluding€alcohol€dependence€and€a€mixed€personality€disorder.€€His€exposureÏto€child€sex€abuse,€parental€alcoholism€and€neglect€contributed€to€his€chronicÏalcoholism€that€began€when€he€was€a€teenager.€€Dr.€Fain€also€testified€that€heÏfelt€the€Defendant€could€not€control€his€alcohol€consumption€and€stated€theÍfollowing:€€ð ðI€feel€like€he€was€doing€the€normal€thing€alcoholics€do,€which€is€to€getÏup€and€drink.€.€.€.€Thatððs€really€not€a€choice.€.€.€.€Thatððs€what€heððs€compelled€toÏdo.ðð€€ÌÌà àThe€State€offered€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Samuel€Craddock,€a€licensedÏclinical€psychologist€for€Middle€Tennessee€Mental€Health€Institute,€in€rebuttal.€€Dr.ÏCraddock€stated€that€the€evaluation€team€ð ðdid€not€find€a€mental€illness€presentÏat€the€time€of€the€alleged€incident€.€.€.€that€would€have€removed€Mr.€JulianððsÏcapacity€to€be€able€to€form€intent.ðð€€Moreover,€Dr.€Craddock€testified€that€alcoholÏconsumption€could€impair€oneððs€perception€and€judgment€regarding€the€risks€ofÏoneððs€behavior,€but€that€the€evidence€he€considered€regarding€the€DefendantððsÏintoxication€did€not€establish€sufficient€diminished€capacity€to€negate€theÏformation€of€the€necessary€òòmensóó€òòreaóó.ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€asserts€that€the€State€failed€to€rebut€the€testimony€of€theÏexpert€witness€for€the€defense€regarding€his€intoxication€and€cites€òòState€v.ÏHammockóó,€867€S.W.2d€8€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Yet,€in€òòHammockóó,€theÏdefendant€offered€expert€testimonyœ× ƒF ××  ×›€for€which€the€State€offered€only€layÏtestimony€in€rebuttal€and€this€Court€found€the€evidence€insufficient€to€support€theÍguilty€verdict.€€òòId.óó€at€9.€€ð ðThe€State€offered€no€òòmedical€testimonyóó€to€refute€thatÏpresented€by€the€appellant€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòId.óó€(emphasis€added).€€Here,€the€State€offeredÏthe€testimony€of€Dr.€Craddock,€its€expert€witness,€to€rebut€Dr.€Fain.€€€AlthoughÏDr.€Fain€specializes€in€the€effects€of€substance€abuse€on€behavior,€both€Dr.ÏFain€and€Dr.€Craddock€were€qualified€as€experts€on€assessing€the€DefendantððsÏcapability€to€form€the€requisite€òòmensóó€òòreaóó.ÌÌà àThe€jury€accredited€the€testimony€of€the€Stateððs€witnesses€and€rejectedÏthat€of€the€Defendantððs.€€Obviously,€they€discounted€the€defenseððs€theory€thatÏan€alcoholicððs€compulsion€to€drink€rendered€the€Defendant€incapable€of€formingÏthe€intent€that€rendered€him€culpable€for€his€crimes.€€€From€the€Defendantððs€ownÏconfession,€he€acknowledged€choking€the€victim€in€an€attempt€to€cease€herÏscreaming.€€We€can€only€conclude€that€the€jury€properly€found€that€squeezingÏthe€neck€of€the€three„year„old€victim€constituted€a€conscious€disregard€of€a€riskÏthat€was€a€gross€deviation€from€the€standard€of€œcare€of€an€ordinary€person.›€ÌÌà à€As€for€the€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€we€alsoÏconclude€that€the€evidence€was€sufficient.€€To€be€convicted€of€especiallyÏaggravated€kidnapping,€one€must€ð ðknowingly€remove€or€confine€another.ðð€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„305;€39„13„302.€€To€ð ðknowinglyðð€perform€an€act,€one€isÏð ðaware€of€the€nature€of€the€conduct€or€that€the€circumstances€exist€[and]€isÍaware€that€the€conduct€is€reasonably€certain€to€cause€the€result.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„11„302(b).€€Here,€the€Defendant€arrived€at€the€victimððs€home€andÏgained€entrance.€€He€sat€in€the€front€room€and€talked€with€the€babysitter€whereÏthe€victim€remained€asleep.€€After€leaving€once,€the€Defendant€returned€to€theÏhome,€played€with€the€child€who€was€then€awake,€and€took€her€withoutÏpermission€while€everyone€was€asleep.€€The€jury€contemplated€theÏcircumstances€of€the€crime€and€conflicting€expert€testimony€and€resolved€theÏissue€in€favor€of€the€State.€€We€cannot€reweigh€such€evidence,€therefore,€thisÏissue€has€no€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓVI.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Indictment€ÌÓ  ÓÌà àIn€an€amended€brief€filed€by€the€Defendant€during€the€pendency€of€thisÏappeal,€he€contends€that€the€fourth€count€of€the€indictment€charging€rape€of€aÏchild€is€insufficient€because€it€does€not€allege€the€requisite€òòmensóó€òòreaóó.€€He€alsoÏargues€that€if€the€rape€indictment€is€invalid,€this€negates€his€conviction€for€felonyÏmurder€because€that€indictment€charged€both€rape€and€kidnapping.̛̜à àThe€indictment€charging€the€Defendant€with€rape€of€a€child€states€ð ðThat,Ïon€the€11th€day€of€July,€1993,€and€in€the€State€and€County€aforesaid,€the€sameÏJAMES€LLOOYD€[sic]€JULIAN,€II€aforesaid,€did€unlawfully€sexually€penetrateÍKaile€Lynn€Lee,€a€child€of€less€than€thirteen€years€of€age,€in€violation€of€€T.C.A.€ððÏ39„13„522."€œ€Our€law€provides€that€"[i]f€the€definition€of€an€offense€within€this€titleÏdoes€not€plainly€dispense€with€a€mental€element,€intent,€knowledge,€orÏrecklessness€suffices€to€establish€the€culpable€mental€state."€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€39„11„301(c).›€Rape€of€a€child€is€charged€as€:€ð ðRape€of€a€child€is€the€unlawfulÏsexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€the€defendant€by€the€victim,€ifÏsuch€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„522.€€ð ðððSexual€penetrationðð€means€sexual€intercourse,€cunnilingus,€fellatio,€analÏintercourse,€or€any€other€intrusion,€however€slight,€of€any€part€of€a€person's€bodyÏor€of€any€object€into€the€genital€or€anal€openings€of€the€victim's,€the€defendant's,Ïor€any€other€person's€body,€but€emission€of€semen€is€not€required.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„501(7).€€ÌÌà àAn€indictment€or€presentment€must€provide€notice€of€the€offense€charged,Ïan€adequate€basis€for€the€entry€of€a€proper€judgment,€and€suitable€protectionÏagainst€double€jeopardy.€€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€305,€310€(Tenn.€1996);ÏòòState€v.€Byrdóó,€820€S.W.2d€739,€741€(Tenn.€1991);€€€òòState€v.€Lindsayóó,€637ÏS.W.2d€886,€890€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.1982).€€€The€indictment€ð ðmust€state€the€factsÏin€ordinary€and€concise€language€in€a€manner€that€would€enable€a€person€ofÏcommon€understanding€to€know€what€is€intended,€and€with€a€degree€of€certaintyÍwhich€would€enable€the€court€upon€conviction,€to€pronounce€the€properÏjudgment.ðð€€€€€òòWarden€v.€Stateóó,€214€Tenn.€391,€381€S.W.2d€244,€245€(1964).ÌÌà àA€lawful€accusation€is€an€essential€jurisdictional€element,€thus,€aÏprosecution€cannot€proceed€without€an€indictment€that€sufficiently€informs€theÏaccused€of€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense.€òòState€v.€Perkinsonóó,€867ÏS.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992);€òòState€v.Morganóó,€598€S.W.2d€796,€797Ïœ(Tenn.›€Crim.€App.€1979).€€€A€judgment€based€on€an€indictment€that€does€notÏallege€all€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense€is€a€nullity.€€€òòWarden€v.€Stateóó,Ï381€S.W.2d€at€245;€€€òòMcCracken€v.€Stateóó,€489€S.W.2d€48,€53€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1972).ÌÌà àThere€is€no€language€in€the€rape€of€a€child€statute€that€plainly€dispensesÏwith€a€mental€element.€€Therefore,€the€Defendant€alleges€that€the€State€mustÏhave€charged€in€the€indictment€at€least€that€the€act€was€done€ð ðrecklessly.ðð€€TheÏState€counters€that€the€purpose€of€an€indictment€is€to€provide€an€accused€withÏnotice€of€the€offense€for€which€he€must€defend.€€The€Defendant€cites€a€recentÏdecision€of€a€panel€of€this€Court€that€held€an€indictment€invalid€which€chargedÏthe€offense€of€aggravated€rape€in€language€nearly€identical€œto›€that€in€the€caseÏòòsub€judiceóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Roger€Dale€Hillóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9508„CC„00267,ÏWayne€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€June€20,€1996),€òòperm.€to€appealÍgrantedóó€(Tenn.€1997).€€Yet,€other€panels€of€this€court€have€declined€to€follow€òòHillóó,ÏòòDavid€Cross€v.€Robert€Conley,€Wardenóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9702„CC„00072,ÏLauderdale€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€May€14,€1997);òò€State€v.€PhillipÏRay€œGriffis›€and€Melissa€Faith€Rogersóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9506„CC„00201,ÏMaury€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€œApp.,›€Nashville,€Apr.€30,€1997);€€òòState€v.€JohnÏJamesóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9601„CR„00016,€Davidson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Nashville,€Mar.€27,€1997);€òòState€v.€Larry€Steve€Wilsonóó,€C.C.A.€No.Ï03C01„9511„CC„00355,€Blount€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Mar.€25,Ï1997);€òòState€v.€Milton€S.€Jones,€Jr.óó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9503„CR„00061,€ShelbyÏCounty€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Mar.€7,€1997);òò€State€v.€Johns€Haws€Burrellóó,ÏC.C.A.€No.€03C01„9404„CR„00157€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Feb.€11,€1997);ÏòòState€v.€James€Disonóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9602„CC„00051€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏKnoxville,€Jan.€31,€1997),€and€a€decision€is€pending€from€our€supreme€court.€€ÌÌà àThis€Court€has€held€that€nothing€in€our€criminal€code€requires€that€anÏindictment€or€presentment€allege€the€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€unless€the€statute€specificallyÏstates€the€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€as€an€element€of€the€offense.€€€òòSeeóó€òòDisonóó,€slip€op.€at€17.ÏAll€that€is€required€is€that€a€defendant€is€provided€notice€of€the€elements€of€theÏoffense€which€ð ðsufficiently€apprises€the€accused€of€the€offense€he€is€called€uponÏto€defend.ðð€€òòState€v.€Tateóó,€912€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€ÏTherefore,€the€allegation€of€the€criminal€conduct€in€an€indictment€providesÍconstitutionally€adequate€notice€and€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€is€not€an€essential€element€of€theÏoffense.€€òòSeeóó€òòDisonóó,€slip€op.€at€17;€òòGriffisóó,€slip€op.€at€16;€òòCrossóó,€slip€op.€at€2.€ÏAs€a€result,€the€indictment€for€rape€of€a€child€as€charged€in€the€indictment€in€theÏcase€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó€was€constitutionally€sufficient€and€therefore€valid.ÌÌà àHowever,€even€if€we€were€to€œfind›€œthat€the€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€is€an€essentialÏelement€of€the€offense€of€rape€of€a€child,›€we€œconclude€that€the€form€of€theÏindictment€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó€sufficiently€apprised€the€Defendant€of€the€òòmensóóÏòòreaóó.€€In€an›€unpublished€decision€of€this€Court,€òòState€v.€Nathaniel€Whiteóó,€C.C.A.ÏNo.€03C01„9408„CR„00277,€Sullivan€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€JuneÏ7,€œ1995),›€the€indictment€for€the€offense€did€not€specify€the€mental€element€ofÏð ðknowingðð€as€wasœ€required€by€the€statute€charging€the€offense.€€However,€theÏindictment€did€allege€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€possess€a€controlledÏsubstance.ðð€€This›€Court€concluded€that€the€word€ð ðððunlawfullyðð€does€not,€in€theÏordinary€use€of€the€term,€connote€mental€culpability.ðð€Slip€op.€at€5.€œ€€Specifically,Ïthe€panel€noted€that€ð ðone€cannot€logically€infer€that€an€accused€actingÏð ðunlawfullyðð€necessarily€acts€ð ðknowingly.ðð€€òòId.óó€€In€òòHillóó,€the€Court€expanded€thisÏand€concluded€that€ð ðunlawfulðð€was€inadequate€to€allege€a€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€ofÏintentionally,€knowingly,€or€recklessly€when€a€specific€mental€state€is€notÏspecified€by€the€offense€charged.€€Slip€op.€at€€6.€€We€believe€that,€althoughÏinadequate€to€describe€a€specific€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€such€as€ð ðknowingly,ðð€when€it€isÍrequired€by€the€offense€charged,€ð ðunlawfullyðð€sufficiently€indicates€mentalÏculpability€when€no€mental€state€is€specified.›ÌœÌ›à àThe€basic€rule€of€statutory€construction€is€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€toÏthe€intent€or€purpose€of€the€legislature€as€expressed€in€the€statute.€€òòMetropolitanÏGovernment€of€Nashville€&€Davidson€Co.€v.€Motel€Systems,€Inc.óó,€525€S.W.2dÏ840€œ(Tenn.1975);›€€òòState€v.€œSouth€land€News€Co.,€Inc.óó,€587€S.W.2d€103,106Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1979).€€We€must€consider€the€natural€and€ordinary€meaning€ofÏthe€language€used,€when€read€in€context€of€the€entire€statute,€without€anyÏforced€or€subtle€construction€to€limit€or€extend€the€import€of€that€language.€€òòWorrallÏv.€Kroger€Co.óó,€€545€S.W.2d€736€(Tenn.€1977).ÌÌà àWe€must€try€to€reconcile€inconsistent€or€repugnant€provisions€of€a€statuteÏand€attempt€to€construe€a€statute€so€that€no€part€will€be€inoperative,Ïsuperfluous,€void€or€insignificant.€€€We€must€try€to€give€effect€to€every€word,Ïphrase,€clause€and€sentence€of€the€act€in€order€to€achieve€the€Legislature'sÏintent,€and€we€must€construe€a€statute€so€that€no€section€will€destroy€another.€ÏòòTidwell€v.€Collinsóó,€522€S.W.2d€674,€676„77€(Tenn.€1975);€òòCity€of€Caryville€v.ÏCampbell€Countyóó,€660€S.W.2d€510,€512€(Tenn.€App.€1983).€€Moreover,€weÏcannot€presume€that€the€legislature€intended€to€place€superfluous€terms€in€theÏstatute;€and€all€language€in€a€statute€is€presumed€to€have€some€meaning.€ÍòòState€v.€Vestalóó,€611€S.W.2d€819,€821€(Tenn.€1981);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Northcuttóó,€€568ÏS.W.2d€636€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).ÌÌà àWe€believe€that€the€use€of€the€word€ð ðunlawfulðð€as€used€in€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€section€39„13„522€informs€a€defendant€of€a€mental€culpabilityÏrequirement.€€If€we€are€to€give€meaning€to€every€word€in€the€statute,€€theÏlegislature€must€have€included€the€word€ð ðunlawfulðð,€in€the€absence€of€a€specificÏòòmensóó€òòreaóó,€for€a€purpose.€€ð ðUnlawfulðð€has€been€interpreted€in€prior€judicialÏdecisions€in€our€state€as€a€word€that€connotes€mental€culpability.€€òòErby€v.€Stateóó,Ï184€S.W.2d€14,€16€(Tenn.€1944);€òòTerrell€v.€Stateóó,€8€S.W.€212,€215€(Tenn.€1888);ÏòòState€v.€Haynorthóó,€35€Tenn.€64,€€65,€3€Sneed€34,€35€(1855).€ð ðUnlawfulðð€generallyÏmeans€ð ðwithout€legal€justification,ðð€yet€our€supreme€court€has€determined€that€if€aÏdefendant€is€charged€to€have€committed€a€crime€ð ðunlawfully,ðð€this€means€that€heÏhad€no€legal€justification€and€that€the€defendant€had€some€form€of€intent€orÏknowledge€of€this€fact.€òòTerrellóó,€8€S.W.€at€214;€Blackððs€Law€Dictionary€1536€(6thÏed.€1990).€€ð ðIn€[its]€ordinary€acceptation,€the€word[]€ððunlawfullyðð,€when€applied€toÏan€act€or€thing€done,€import[s]€knowledge€of€the€act€or€thing€so€done,€as€well€asÏan€evil€intent€or€bad€purpose€in€doing€such€thing.ðð€€òòErbyóó,€184€S.W.2d€at€16.€Ïð ð[T]he€act€was€unlawful,€and,€that€being€so,€malice€would€be€implied.ðð€€òòTerrellóó,€8ÏS.W.€at€215.€€€In€finding€that€ð ðillegalðð€and€ð ðunlawfulðð€were€synonymous,€theÏòòHaynorthóó€court€stated€that€ð ðillegallyðð€ð ðimplies€that€the€party€had€knowledge,€orÍwas€bound€to€have€had€knowledge,€of€the€facts€which€constituted€the€voteÏillegal.ðð€€òòHaynorthóó,€35€Tenn.€at€65.ÌÌà àOur€current€criminal€code€demonstrates€that€the€legislature€must€haveÏintended€some€meaning€for€the€word€ð ðunlawfulðð€in€the€rape€of€a€child€statute.€€ByÏcomparison,€statutory€rape€is€defined€as€ð ðsexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€theÏdefendant€or€of€the€defendant€by€the€victim€when€the€victim€is€at€least€thirteenÏ(13)€but€less€than€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age€and€the€defendant€is€at€least€fourÏ(4)€years€older€than€the€victim.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„506(a).€€Also,€weÏnote€that€statutory€rape€has€been€considered€a€strict€liability€crime;€all€that€isÏrequired€is€that€the€act€be€performed.€ð ðIf€the€defendant€is€at€least€four€years€olderÏthan€the€victim,€proof€of€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€between€the€ages€ofÏthirteen€and€eighteen,€is€all€that€is€necessary.ðð€€€òòState€v.€McKnightóó,€900€S.W.2dÏ36,€48€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€We€also€note€that,€unlike€rape€of€a€child,€withÏstatutory€rape€there€is€no€mention€of€ð ðunlawfulðð€or€any€other€language€regardingÏòòmensóó€òòreaóó.ÌÌà à€The€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€mandates€that€we€interpretÏ"according€to€the€fair€import€of€[the€statute's]€terms,€including€reference€to€judicialÏdecisions€and€common€law€interpretations,€to€promote€justice,€and€effect€theÏobjectives€of€the€criminal€code."€€€Tenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„104€(1991).€€Í"Questions€involving€statutory€construction€'must€be€answered€in€the€light€ofÏreason,€having€in€mind€the€object€of€the€statute,€and€the€mischief€it€aims€at.'€"€ÏòòState€v.€Nettoóó,€486€S.W.2d€725,€728€(Tenn.1972)€(citations€omitted);€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsóó,€854€S.W.2d€904,€908€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€€The€intent€of€theÏlegislature€must€govern,€and,€where€possible,€courts€must€not€construe€a€statuteÏin€a€manner€that€will€defeat€the€obvious€legislative€purpose.€òòWilliamsóó,€854ÏS.W.2d€at€908.ÌÌà àIt€is€clear€that€the€legislature€intended€to€single€out€the€rape€of€a€child€as€aÏcrime.€€It€is€also€apparent€that€the€legislature€enacted€the€criminal€code€whichÏrequires€some€proof€of€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€ð ð[i]f€the€definition€of€the€offense€within€this€titleÏdoes€not€plainly€dispense€with€a€mental€element.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„1„301(c).€€It€would€have€been€clearer,€of€course,€had€the€legislature€includedÏð ðintentionally,€knowingly,€or€recklesslyðð€in€the€language€of€the€statute€for€rape€ofÏa€child.€€However,€in€order€to€effect€the€legislatureððs€intent€to€proscribe€this€activityÏand€to€interpret€the€statutes€to€prevent€one€section€from€defeating€the€purpose€ofÏanother,€we€believe€that€the€use€of€the€word€ð ðunlawfulðð€in€section€39„13„522Ïinforms€the€Defendant€of€a€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€required€for€this€offense.€€Thus,€the€use€ofÏthe€word€ð ðunlawfullyðð€in€the€charging€instrument€was€sufficient€notice€to€theÏDefendant€of€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense.€€Because€we€find€theÍindictment€for€rape€of€a€child€to€be€valid,€the€convictions€for€both€rape€of€a€childÏand€first„degree€felony€murder€are€affirmed€on€this€issue.ÌÌà àAfter€careful€consideration€of€the€record€and€the€issues€in€this€case,€weÏaffirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìà à€€ÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGE