ÿWPC( !Ÿ‹>fH]¯ô\Sq<Òº~{—¶[jM7fdÕD=Ãñ™ÔýWPuÛõÖpnûþgG·´å >„‹å[ dRÝ@ܽƚ"®¹µÁªd Óñ'âz'øæ$ÁöÚdÔ< þíØ'Þ í@G~ºÓãISL›¾ ž°#¬UP&2IîïÍÕÁ½b¥1«FõûäÃ}¡·¿íPÚ‹¢©¯ÜËs&1|BûÈæ@˜LªŽU}G=!òÈ!2¾¶$Æ|VµqÃÕøšxXr¹úQsÕ­ÂóM»8Ÿg<éÖHq¤œfÆn…Gðt¼]±–êÀòÛðÇ£ƒ#P©Û¤˜X¦ ëÅm½tžófó‰‡jºýG*ÃÊ9[Ì×oÌ­Iå@xŸmàµÓýp侕F7Ç¡ˆéà íÞÕÜ EyFÜ̃«úÊ?$íÍp§<S~qÏÉ/[ë ½ôš’`ì!(ÀŽb&É…³€×)±ÈUá~Z*§áªursk8Ô?~EªGXSÕi”M­ò&øò¢™ÞëˆÏ¥™Š>FkÈš²Ú¿ZÚy,ô=·sÖÂèoóà ›0.ïöÃ˦’D:"‚5"$ïƒJ~mKë”pöìß_«âUÿà¦ÚÀú†3aÓLØ‘b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë 1‡±N8 72: 1ulEá 72ã 0c 1‡x 72ÿ 1‡1 72¸ 1‡ê 72q£¹U NÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏÏb 0ë%%%% B 0¤- D3Ñ D- 0K11 AS|ÆÏ 0¤• 0D9 A«}˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0!»©™b*â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularOo”) œk1˜~£ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(нCEKQW]cioAutoList1A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(š½CEKQW]cioAutoList2A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.(ª½CEKQW]cioAutoList3A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.(º½CEKQW]cioAutoList4A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A. Ñ X Ñ Ñ ° Ñ(ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular- ù-(|G29f$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Qô»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X4|X»»Ô d(|3Î$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Qô»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Î$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Qô»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€\¬»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€!¼L»»!»ÔÑ8€.ŒXXdê»»d 8ÑÑ€/VÑÑ€ OaÑà@HHìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@''%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ  Ðà@¹ ¹ ìàAssigned€on€Briefs€June€13,€2000ˆÐ Ô$ ÐÔ‡!XX X»!¼LÔÌò òÔ#†!¼L»X!XX Ó#ÔÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€òòóóANTONIO€JACKSONÔ‡!XX X»!¼LÔó óÐ Ò" ÐÓÓÌà@0 0 ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyˆÐ Ò " Ðà@í í ìàNo.€97„13179„80€€€€€€James€C.€Beasley,€Jr.,€JudgeˆÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` A߈Ð ‚Ò  ÐÌà@ ìàNo.€W1999„00712„CCA„R3„CD€„€Ô_ÔFiledÔ_Ô€March€1,€2001ˆÐ }Í  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<T` AßÐ U¥  Ðó óÌThe€defendant€appeals€his€convictions€for€facilitation€of€first€degree€murder€and€especiallyÐ P   Ðaggravated€kidnapping.€€He€raises€issues€regarding€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€relative€toÐ <Œ Ðaccomplice€testimony,€the€competency€of€a€witness,€the€exhibition€of€the€victimððs€skull€to€the€jury,Ð (x Ðand€the€failure€to€merge€the€convictions€for€due€process€and€double€jeopardy€purposes.€€We€affirmÐ d Ðthe€trial€court.Ð P ÐÌÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed€ó óÐ Ä ÐÓ—ÓÌòòJoseph€M.€TiptonÔ#†!¼L»à!XX V#ÔÔ‡!XX X.!¼LÔóó,€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoe€G.€Rileyóó€and€òòAlan€E.Ð œì ÐGlenn,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ˆØ ÐÌJeffery€S.€Glatstein,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Antonio€Jackson.Ð `° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€J.€Ross€Dyer,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð 8ˆ ÐWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€Paula€Wulff,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General;Ð $ t Ðand€Patience€Branham,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.€Ð !`  ÐÌà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†!¼L»X!XX Q#ÔÔ‡!XX X»!¼LԈРè"8" ÐÌòòóóÔ#†!¼L»X!XX  #ÔÔ‡!XX X»!¼LÔ€€€€€€€€The€defendant,€Antonio€Jackson,€appeals€as€of€right€from€his€jury€convictions€in€the€ShelbyÐ À$ $ ÐCounty€Criminal€Court€for€facilitation€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder€and€especially€aggravatedÐ ¬%ü % Ðkidnapping€of€Vernon€Green,€Class€A€felonies,€for€which€he€received€consecutive€twenty„five„yearÐ ˜&è!& Ðsentences.€€The€defendant€contends€the€following:Ð „'Ô"' ÐÌà  à(1)€The€evidence€is€insufficient€to€sustain€the€convictions;Ð \)¬$) Ðà  à(2)€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Christopher€James€was€not€an€accomplice;Ð H*˜%* Ðà0  à(3)€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Jamesððs€testimony€corroborated€the€testimony€of€JarvisÐ 4+„&+ ÐShipp;Ð ,p',(#(# ÐÐ  -\(-ý Ðà0  à(4)€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€striking€Jamesððs€testimony€after€he€said€he€did€not€know€whatÐ ° Ðit€meant€to€tell€the€truth;Мì(#(# Ðà0  à(5)€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€victimððs€skull€to€be€exhibited€to€the€jury€during€theÐ ˆØ Ðtrial;ÐtÄ(#(# Ðà0  à(6)€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€merge€the€defendantððs€convictions€in€violation€of€dueÐ `° Ðprocess;€and€ÐL œ(#(# Ðà0  à(7)€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€merge€the€defendantððs€convictions€in€violation€of€theÐ 8 ˆ ÐDouble€Jeopardy€Clause€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.Ð$ t(#(# ÐÔ#†!¼L»X!XX f #ÔÔ€!XX X»!¼LÔÌWe€affirm€the€judgments€of€conviction.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€killing€of€Vernon€Green€late€April€30€or€early€May€1,€1997,€arose€from€a€conflictÐ Ô$  Ðbetween€two€Memphis€gangs,€the€Gangster€Disciples€and€the€Vice€Lords.€€The€victim€was€found€shotÐ À  Ðto€death€in€Bellevue€Park,€also€known€as€Jessie€Turner€Park.€€The€evidence€against€the€defendantÐ ¬ü  Ðprincipally€came€from€two€individuals,€Christopher€James€and€Jarvis€Shipp.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àChristopher€James,€known€as€Big€Chris,€testified€that€he€had€been€a€member€of€the€GangsterÐ pÀ ÐDisciples€for€three€to€four€months€when€the€events€of€April€30,€1997,€occurred.€€He€said€that€a€fightÐ \¬ Ðerupted€between€Jarvis€Shippððs€girlfriend€and€the€girlfriend€of€a€member€of€the€Vice€Lords€knownÐ H˜ Ðas€Snoop.€€Then€Shipp€and€Snoop€started€fighting€which€led€to€others€fighting.€€One€of€the€ViceÐ 4„ ÐLords€shot€a€Gangster€Disciple€known€as€Popcorn.€€James€indicated€that€he€ran€away€once€the€fightÐ  p Ðstarted.€Ð  \ ÐÌà  à€James€testified€that€members€of€the€Gangster€Disciples€from€all€over€Memphis€gathered€inÐ ä4 Ðan€apartment€in€Hurt€Village.€€He€said€that€there€could€have€been€thirty€people€present€and€that€heÐ Ð  Ðstayed€in€the€hallway€outside€the€apartment.€€James€testified€that€Prentiss€Phillips,€the€head€of€theÐ ¼  ÐHurt€Village€Disciples,€stated€that€the€victim€was€outside€the€building€watching€them€for€the€ViceÐ ¨ø ÐLords.€€Gregory€Robinson,€the€ð ðchief€of€securityðð€for€the€Disciples€in€Memphis,€ordered€that€theÐ ”ä Ðvictim€be€brought€inside.€€Once€inside,€the€victim€was€beaten€by€Shipp€and€several€others.€€JamesÐ €Ð Ðsaid€the€defendant€arrived€after€the€victim€was€seized€and€stood€against€a€wall€during€the€victimððsÐ l¼ Ðbeating.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àJames€testified€that€Robinson€ordered€that€the€victim€be€taken€to€a€car€and€that€the€defendantÐ 0"€  Ðand€others€took€the€victim€outside,€two€holding€him€by€his€arms.€€James€said€that€the€defendant€hadÐ #l! Ða€ð ð.12€gauge€Mossbergðð€which€looked€like€a€.20€gauge€shotgun€with€a€pistol€grip.€€James€deniedÐ $X" Ðknowing€what€was€going€to€happen€to€the€victim.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àJames€testified€that€at€the€same€meeting,€he€was€beaten€by€six€gang€members€because€he€hadÐ Ì&"% Ðnot€helped€Ô_ÔShippÔ_Ô€fight€earlier€that€day.€€He€said€that€he€had€not€been€a€member€of€the€Disciples€sinceÐ ¸'#& Ðthat€day.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àJarvis€Shipp,€known€as€J„Roc,€testified€that€he€was€ð ðchief€of€securityðð€for€the€Hurt€VillageÐ |*Ì%) ÐGangster€Disciples€when€the€events€in€question€occurred.€€He€said€his€main€duty€was€to€protectÐ h+¸&* ÐPrentiss€Phillips,€the€ð ðcoordinatorðð€or€head€of€the€Disciples€in€Hurt€Village.€€He€said€that€a€fightÐ ° Ðbetween€the€Disciples€and€Vice€Lords€earlier€in€the€evening€resulted€in€a€gathering€of€GangsterÐ œì ÐDisciples€at€an€apartment€in€Hurt€Village.€€Shipp€stated€that€Gregory€Robinson,€chief€of€security€forÐ ˆØ Ðthe€Disciples€in€Memphis,€saw€the€victim€peeking€around€the€corner€of€the€building€when€RobinsonÐ tÄ Ðarrived.€€Phillips€told€Robinson€that€the€victim€was€with€the€Vice€Lords,€and€Shipp€and€others€wereÐ `° Ðsent€to€bring€the€victim€inside.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àShipp€testified€that€although€the€victim€wore€his€hat€like€the€Vice€Lords€did,€he€knew€theÐ $ t Ðvictim€was€not€actually€a€member.€€The€victim€also€denied€being€a€member,€but€Phillips€claimed€heÐ  ` Ðwas€and€hit€him€with€a€gun.€€The€victim€denied€knowing€anything,€but€after€he€was€beaten,€he€saidÐ ü L  Ðthat€the€Vice€Lords€were€ð ðposting€upðð€in€another€building€in€the€Village.€€Shipp€and€others€went€toÐ è 8  Ðverify€the€victimððs€story,€but€they€saw€no€Vice€Lords.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àShipp€testified€that€when€he€returned€to€the€apartment€with€his€report,€the€victim€was€sentÐ ¬ü  Ðupstairs€while€Robinson€had€Christopher€James€beaten€for€not€helping€in€the€earlier€fight.€Ð ˜è  ÐAfterwards,€the€head€of€the€Disciples€of€Memphis,€Kevin€Foley,€also€known€as€Kaos,€told€PhillipsÐ „Ô  Ðand€Robinson€that€they€knew€what€to€do€to€take€care€of€their€own€and€then€left€the€apartment.€€ShippÐ pÀ Ðsaid€that€after€Foley€left,€Robinson€talked€to€him€by€telephone€and€reported€to€them€that€Kaos€saidÐ \¬ Ðto€take€the€victim€ð ðfishing.ðð€€Shipp€said€that€he,€the€defendant,€and€other€members€took€the€victimÐ H˜ Ðto€a€car€and€then€drove€to€Jessie€Turner€Park€in€two€separate€cars.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àShipp€testified€that€they€took€the€victim€to€the€top€of€the€hill.€€He€said€that€the€defendantÐ  \ Ðretrieved€a€pump€shotgun€with€a€pistol€grip€from€the€trunk€of€a€car.€€The€victim€was€placed€on€theÐ øH Ðground€and€the€members€stood€around€him,€with€the€defendant€at€his€feet.€€Shipp€said€the€defendantÐ ä4 Ðshot€the€victim€in€the€buttocks€and€in€the€right€side€of€the€face.€€The€defendant€said€the€victim€wasÐ Ð  Ðnot€dead,€and€after€obtaining€a€handgun€from€one€of€the€others,€he€shot€the€victim€twice€more.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àShipp€testified€that€after€everyone€returned€to€the€apartment,€the€defendant€said€that€he€hopedÐ ”ä Ðeveryone€would€stay€silent.€€Shipp€said€that€after€he€was€arrested€and€in€jail€with€the€defendant,€theÐ €Ð Ðdefendant€offered€him€money€to€make€bail€and€leave.€€Shipp€said€he€was€in€protective€isolation€inÐ l¼ Ðthe€jail€at€the€time€he€was€testifying.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€autopsy€showed€that€the€victim€received€shotgun€wounds€to€the€right€side€of€the€head,Ð 0"€  Ðthe€upper€back,€and€the€left€buttock.€€He€also€received€two€gunshot€wounds€to€the€right€temple.€€Dr.Ð #l! ÐThomas€Deering,€the€assistant€medical€examiner,€testified€that€from€the€nature€of€the€skull€fractureÐ $X" Ðlines,€he€could€conclude€that€the€gunshot€wounds€to€the€head€came€after€the€shotgun€wound.€€HeÐ ô$D # Ðexplained€that€a€fracture€line€from€the€gunshot€to€the€temple€stopped€at€the€shotgunððs€fracture€line.€Ð à%0!$ ÐHe€said€that€each€of€the€shots€to€the€head€was€fatal.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà@† † ìàI.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEˆÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€defendantððs€first€three€issues€are€related€and€will€be€considered€together.€€He€claims€thatÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€evidence€is€insufficient€to€convict€him€because€his€connection€with€the€offenses€was€proven€onlyÐ h+¸&* Ðby€accomplice€testimony.€€In€this€vein,€he€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€findÐ ° ÐChristopher€James€to€be€an€accomplice€as€a€matter€of€law.Ð œì ÐÌà  àA€conviction€in€Tennessee€cannot€be€had€upon€the€uncorroborated€testimony€of€anÐ tÄ Ðaccomplice.€€òòSherrill€v.€Stateóó,€204€Tenn.€427,€433,€321€S.W.2d€811,€814€(1959).€€The€corroboratingÐ `° Ðevidence€must€be€entirely€independent€from€the€accompliceððs€testimony€and€must€independently€leadÐ L œ Ðto€the€inference€that€the€defendant€is€implicated€in€the€commission€of€the€crime.€€òòSeeóó€òòHawkins€v.Ð 8 ˆ ÐStateóó,€4€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€121,€133,€469€S.W.2d€515,€520€(1971).€€However,€the€corroboratingÐ $ t Ðevidence€need€not,€itself,€be€sufficient€to€convict€the€defendant.€€òòId.óó€€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àAn€accomplice€is€one€who€ð ðknowingly,€voluntarily,€and€with€common€intent€unites€with€theÐ è 8  Ðprincipal€offender€in€the€commission€of€a€crime.ðð€€òòState€v.€Greenóó,€915€S.W.2d€827,€830€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð Ô$  ÐApp.€1995).€€This€means€that€the€person€must€do€more€than€have€guilty€knowledge,€be€morallyÐ À  Ðdelinquent,€or€participate€in€other€offenses€with€the€principal€actor.€€òòSeeóó€òòPennington€v.€Stateóó,€478Ð ¬ü  ÐS.W.2d€892,€898€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1971).€€Essentially,€an€accomplice€must€be€a€person€who€couldÐ ˜è  Ðbe€indicted€for€the€offense€in€issue.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àWhen€it€is€clear€and€undisputed€that€the€witness€participated€in€the€crime,€the€trial€court€mustÐ \¬ Ðdeclare€the€witness€to€be€an€accomplice€as€a€matter€of€law€and€so€advise€the€jury.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð H˜ ÐLawsonóó,€794€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€When€the€evidence€is€unclear,€conflicts,Ð 4„ Ðor€is€subject€to€different€inferences,€then€the€jury€is€to€determine€whether€the€witness€is€anÐ  p Ðaccomplice.€€òòId.òòóóóóÐ  \ ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€Jarvis€Shipp€was€clearly€an€accomplice€to€the€kidnapping€and€murder.€Ð ä4 ÐThe€remaining€question€is€the€status€of€Christopher€James.€€The€defendant€contends€that€James€wasÐ Ð  Ða€gang€member€at€a€gang€meeting€who€was€there€ð ðto€do€whatever€he€was€suppose€to€doðð€as€aÐ ¼  Ðmember.€€The€defendant€notes€that€James€was€present€for€all€of€the€events€involving€the€victim.€€TheÐ ¨ø Ðstate€responds€that€Jamesððs€presence€at€the€gang€meetings€did€not€make€him€an€accomplice.€€WeÐ ”ä Ðagree€that€the€evidence€does€not€show€James€to€be€an€accomplice€as€a€matter€of€law.€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€gang€meeting€resulted€from€the€fight€that€occurred€earlier€that€day.€€James€was€alsoÐ X ¨ Ðpresent€to€be€punished€for€failing€to€help€in€the€fight.€€James€testified€that€he€was€in€the€hallway€theÐ D!” Ðentire€time€that€the€victim€was€being€held€and€questioned.€€He€denied€any€involvement€with€theÐ 0"€  Ðvictim€or€knowledge€of€what€was€going€to€happen.€€We€do€not€believe€that€Jamesððs€presence€at€theÐ #l! Ðmeeting€implicates€him€in€either€the€kidnapping€or€murder€in€such€a€way€as€to€be€an€accomplice€asÐ $X" Ða€matter€of€law.€€Moreover,€we€believe€that€the€evidence€would€justify€the€jury€determining€thatÐ ô$D # ÐJames€was€not€an€accomplice.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAs€for€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€our€standard€of€review€is€ð ðwhether,€after€viewing€theÐ ¸'#& Ðevidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€foundÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,Ð )à$( Ð319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979).€€This€means€that€we€do€not€reweigh€the€evidence€but€presume€thatÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€jury€has€resolved€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€and€drawn€all€reasonable€inferences€from€theÐ h+¸&* ÐÑ/VÑâ âÑX°Ñâ âÑ  Ñevidence€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.Ð ° ÐCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).Ð œì ÐÌà  àIn€our€analysis,€we€are€mindful€that€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€facilitation€of€first€degreeÐ tÄ Ðmurder.€€This€means€that€the€jury€found€only€that€he€knowingly€furnished€substantial€assistance€inÐ `° Ðthe€murder€while€knowing€that€others€intended€to€murder€the€victim.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„Ð L œ Ð403.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àChristopher€James€testified€that€Gregory€Robinson€ordered€€the€victim€be€taken€to€a€car.€€HeÐ  ` Ðsaid€the€defendant€and€others€took€the€victim€outside€by€the€victimððs€arms.€€He€also€said€that€theÐ ü L  Ðdefendant€was€carrying€a€shotgun€with€a€pistol€grip.€€The€victimððs€body€was€found€with€shotgunÐ è 8  Ðwounds.€€Jamesððs€testimony€corroborated€Jarvis€Shippððs€testimony€regarding€what€occurred€at€theÐ Ô$  Ðgang€meeting€and€the€victimððs€removal€to€a€car€by€the€defendant€and€others.€€In€the€light€mostÐ À  Ðfavorable€to€the€state,€the€evidence€shows€that€the€defendant€participated€in€the€victimððs€kidnapping.€Ð ¬ü  ÐLikewise,€one€can€rationally€conclude€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€armed€defendant€providedÐ ˜è  Ðsubstantial€assistance€to€the€victimððs€removal€by€car,€knowing€it€was€for€the€purpose€of€murderingÐ „Ô  Ðthe€victim.€€In€fact,€we€believe€that€Jamesððs€testimony€sufficiently€corroborated€Shippððs€descriptionÐ pÀ Ðof€the€events€so€as€to€have€supported€a€first€degree€murder€conviction€if€the€jury€had€so€found.€€InÐ \¬ Ðany€event,€the€evidence€is€sufficient.Ð H˜ ÐÌà@û û ìàII.€€COMPETENCY€OF€A€WITNESSˆÐ  p ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€stricken€Christopher€JamesððsÐ øH Ðtestimony€after€he€said€that€he€did€not€know€what€it€meant€to€tell€the€truth.€€The€defendant€argues€thatÐ ä4 ÐJames€was€incompetent€as€a€witness€because€he€obviously€could€not€understand€the€obligation€of€theÐ Ð  Ðoath€regarding€telling€the€truth.€€òòóó€The€state€responds€that€the€record€does€not€support€a€conclusion€thatÐ ¼  ÐJames€was€incompetent€as€a€witness.€€We€agree.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€record€reflects€that€James€was€a€rather€inarticulate€witness€who€was€prone€to€crypticÐ €Ð Ðresponses.€€On€cross„examination,€defense€counsel€vigorously€attacked€Jamesððs€truthfulness€andÐ l¼ Ðproved€several€inconsistent€statements€by€James.€€€At€one€point,€the€following€exchange€occurred:Ð X ¨ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€€€€€€What€does€it€mean€„€„€do€you€know€what€it€means,€sir,€to€tellÐ 0"€  Ðthe€truth€when€youððre€up€there?Ð#l!` x` x ÐÓ€ (ª½83ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£±IÝÔ2ª½ÔÚ  ÚAÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  Ý€Yeah݃3£±IþIÝŒÐ$X"¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  Ý.à8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ,à0¸ ` x` xà€What€is€the€truth,€sir?Ðô$D #¸ x¸ x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€€€€€€€€€I€donððt€know€you€tell€me€the€meaning.Ðà%0!$` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€€€€€€€€€Iððm€going€to€ask€you.€€I€think€I€know€what€it€means.ÐÌ&"%` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€€€€€€€€€I€donððt€know€the€meaning.и'#&` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€€€€€€€You€donððt€know€what€it€means.€€Do€you€know€what€a€lieÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmeans?Ð)à$(` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€€€€€€€€€Nope.€€I€ainððt€educated.Ð|*Ì%)` x` x Ðò òó óÌÓÓThe€defense€counsel€then€sought€to€strike€Jamesððs€testimony,€but€the€trial€court€refused.Ð T,¤'+ ÐÓÓÐ ,.|)- ÐÑ OaÑâ  âѰXÑâ  âÑ  Ñà  àGenerally,€every€person€is€presumed€competent€to€be€a€witness.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€601.€€Ð ° ÐIn€order€to€testify,€a€witness€must€declare€that€he€or€she€ð ðwill€testify€truthfully€by€oath€or€affirmation,Ð œì Ðadministered€in€a€form€calculated€to€awaken€the€witnessððs€conscious€and€impress€the€witnessððs€mindÐ ˆØ Ðwith€the€duty€to€do€so.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€603.€€This€court€has€previously€noted€that€understanding€theÐ tÄ Ðobligation€of€an€oath€does€not€mean€that€the€witness€is€required€to€have€ð ðsufficient€academic€learningÐ `° Ðto€define€an€oath€or€articulate€its€obligations.ðð€€òòState€v.€Fearsóó,€659€S.W.2d€370,€375€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð L œ ÐApp.€1983).€€In€other€words,€the€crux€of€Rule€603€is€that€the€witness€must€be€aware€of€and€sensitiveÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€the€obligation€to€tell€the€truth€under€oath.€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€the€record€reflects€that€defense€counsel€aggressively€cross„examined€ChristopherÐ ü L  ÐJames€and€made€direct€attacks€on€his€credibility.€€At€one€point,€James€told€counsel€to€stop€yellingÐ è 8  Ðat€him.€€Obviously,€some€of€the€exchanges€were€heated.€€In€this€respect,€we€view€the€statements€uponÐ Ô$  Ðwhich€the€defendant€bases€his€claim€of€incompetency€to€be€nothing€more€than€an€angry€exchangeÐ À  Ðthat€did€not€set€limits€on€Mr.€Jamesððs€understanding€of€his€obligation€to€tell€the€truth€under€oath.€€WeÐ ¬ü  Ðconclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€refusing€to€strike€Mr.€Jamesððs€testimony.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà@˜˜!ìàIII.€€USE€OF€SKULLˆÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€victimððs€skull€to€be€exhibitedÐ H˜ Ðto€the€jury.€€He€argues€that€its€probative€value€was€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfairÐ 4„ Ðprejudice.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€€The€state€responds€that€the€skull€was€needed€to€demonstrate€theÐ  p Ðnumber€of€wounds€and€that€the€killing€was€premeditated€and€intentional.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àAt€trial,€the€state€asserted€that€the€skull€was€needed€to€demonstrate€the€nature€of€the€injuriesÐ ä4 Ðand€the€order€in€which€the€shots€were€fired.€€It€stated€that€the€evidence€related€to€the€premeditationÐ Ð  Ðand€intent€of€the€defendant.€€It€claimed€that€the€cleaned€and€sterile€skull€was€less€graphic€than€theÐ ¼  Ðphotographs€that€the€state€could€display€for€the€same€purpose.€€The€trial€court,€referring€to€trials€ofÐ ¨ø Ðco„defendants,€noted€that€it€had€heard€Dr.€Deeringððs€testimony€before.€€It€stated€that€it€anticipatedÐ ”ä Ðthat€he€would€use€the€skull€for€demonstrative€purposes€in€a€ð ðvery€professional€and€.€.€.€clinicalÐ €Ð Ðclassroom„type€teaching€style.ðð€€It€found€that€the€skull€was€relevant€to€proving€intent€andÐ l¼ Ðpremeditation€and€concluded€that€the€skull€would€be€allowed€as€a€demonstrative€tool.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àAs€in€the€trial€court,€the€defendant€now€asserts€that€use€of€the€skull€was€not€relevant€to€anyÐ 0"€  Ðissues€at€trial€and€was€inflammatory.€€He€states€that€photographs€of€the€victimððs€wounds€that€wereÐ #l! Ðintroduced€ð ðmore€than€adequatelyðð€presented€the€jury€with€a€description€of€the€injuries€and€theirÐ $X" Ðimpact€on€the€victim.€€He€relies€upon€two€cases€in€which€this€court€reversed€second€degree€murderÐ ô$D # Ðconvictions€because€of€the€stateððs€use€of€photographs€of€victims€that€were€deemed€unnecessary€andÐ à%0!$ Ðinflammatory.€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àIn€òòGladson€v.€Stateóó,€577€S.W.2d€686€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978),€the€defendant€was€claimingÐ ¤(ô#' Ðself„defense.€€The€state€sought€to€admit€two€autopsy€slide€pictures€depicting€the€victimððs€cranial€boneÐ )à$( Ðafter€removal€of€the€scalp€and€the€brain€after€removal€of€the€cranial€bone.€€It€contended€that€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðpictures€were€necessary€because€there€was€a€dispute€as€to€the€cause€of€death,€noting€that€questionsÐ h+¸&* Ðwere€asked€regarding€the€victim€being€struck€on€the€head€earlier€that€day.€€The€defendantððs€attorneyÐ ° Ðoffered€to€stipulate€that€the€death€resulted€from€injuries€received€in€his€altercation€with€the€deceased,Ð œì Ðbut€the€state€refused€to€agree.€€This€court€determined€that€the€pictures€were€inflammatory€and€addedÐ ˆØ Ðnothing€to€the€evidence,€noting€that€other€pictures€were€introduced€showing€the€wounds€before€theÐ tÄ Ðscalp€was€cut€in€the€autopsy.€€òòId.óó€at€687.€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Collinsóó,€986€S.W.2d€13€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998),€the€defendant€was€convictedÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€second€degree€murder€of€her€newly€born€child€who€was€found€dead€in€a€toilet€shortly€after€itsÐ $ t Ðbirth.€€The€state€submitted€color€photographs€of€the€infant€taken€at€the€morgue.€€The€medicalÐ  ` Ðexaminer€testified€that€the€pictures€would€show€the€babyððs€size,€but€was€not€needed€to€aid€hisÐ ü L  Ðtestimony.€€After€initially€refusing€their€admission,€the€trial€court€reversed€its€ruling€and€allowed€theÐ è 8  Ðphotographs€to€be€used€relative€to€whether€or€not€the€defendant€knew€that€she€had€delivered€theÐ Ô$  Ðinfant€and€that€it€had€died.€€This€court€stated€that€neither€the€viability€of€the€victim,€its€size,€nor€thatÐ À  Ðdeath€was€due€to€drowning€were€in€dispute.€€It€stated€that€the€primary€issue€was€whether€the€killingÐ ¬ü  Ðwas€knowing,€the€mental€state€necessary€for€second€degree€murder.€€It€concluded€that€theÐ ˜è  Ðphotographs€were€marginally€relevant€regarding€the€size€of€the€victim,€but€such€fact€had€beenÐ „Ô  Ðestablished€by€other€proof€and€was€not€in€dispute.€€òòId.óó€at€20„21.€€The€court€noted€an€increasingÐ pÀ Ðconcern€about€the€liberal€admission€of€inflammatory€autopsy€photographs.€€It€stated€that€ð ðwhereÐ \¬ Ðmedical€testimony€adequately€describes€the€degree€or€extent€of€injury,€gruesome€and€graphicÐ H˜ Ðphotographs€should€not€be€admitted.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€21.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€state€asserts€that€the€skull€was€used€to€show€how€the€wounds€supported€the€stateððs€theoryÐ  \ Ðthat€the€murder€was€a€premeditated€execution„style€killing.€€It€notes€that€the€Tennessee€SupremeÐ øH ÐCourt€has€held€that€a€clean€and€reconstructed€skull€used€to€illustrate€an€expertððs€testimony€is€highlyÐ ä4 Ðrelevant€in€establishing€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pikeóó,€978€S.W.2dÐ Ð  Ð904,€925€(Tenn.€1998);€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€263€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Morrisóó,€641Ð ¼  ÐS.W.2d€883,€888€(Tenn.€1982).€€It€also€notes€that€Rule€403,€Tenn.€R.€Evid.,€requires€that€theÐ ¨ø Ðprobative€value€must€be€òòsubstantiallyóó€outweighed€by€òòunfairóó€prejudice.€€It€argues€that€such€is€not€theÐ ”ä Ðcase€before€us.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€admission€of€evidence€under€Rule€403,€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.,€will€not€be€disturbedÐ X ¨ Ðabsent€an€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€McCaryóó,€922€S.W.2d€511,€515€(Tenn.€1996).€This€meansÐ D!” Ðthat€if€material€evidence€exists€to€support€the€decision,€we€will€affirm€the€trial€court.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€concluded€that€the€use€of€the€skull€as€a€demonstrative€aide€was€appropriateÐ $X" Ðto€help€prove€that€the€murder€was€intended€and€premeditated,€elements€that€distinguish€first€degreeÐ ô$D # Ðmurder€from€second€degree€murder.€€Dr.€Deeringððs€use€of€the€skull€corroborated€Jarvis€ShippððsÐ à%0!$ Ðtestimony€regarding€the€order€of€the€shots€to€the€victim,€which€does€indicate€premeditated€murder.€Ð Ì&"% ÐHowever,€we€see€little€need€for€the€skull,€given€the€photographs€that€were€admitted€and€Dr.Ð ¸'#& ÐDeeringððs€clear€and€cogent€testimony.€€The€manner€in€which€the€victim€was€killed€was€not€disputed.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐThat€is,€the€thrust€of€the€defense€dealt€with€whether€the€defendant€was€involved€with€the€killing,€notÐ )à$( Ðwith€the€nature€of€the€crime.€€In€fact,€the€defendant€did€not€ask€Dr.€Deering€any€questions.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àOn€the€other€hand,€the€record€reflects€that€Dr.€Deeringððs€use€of€the€skull€was€sedate€in€hisÐ ° Ðdescription€of€the€victimððs€wounds.€€The€skull€was€not€handled€by€the€jurors€but€remained€in€theÐ œì Ðdoctorððs€possession€for€the€relatively€short€period€of€time€he€took€to€describe€the€damages€to€it.€Ð ˆØ ÐMoreover,€we€note€that€the€defendant€was€only€convicted€for€facilitation€of€first€degree€murder,€aÐ tÄ Ðcircumstance€that€does€not€indicate€that€he€was€the€victim€of€an€inflamed€jury.€€Thus,€although€theÐ `° Ðpotential€for€unfair€prejudice€existed,€we€do€not€believe€that€use€of€the€skull€affirmatively€appearsÐ L œ Ðto€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(a).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà@œœìàIV.€€MERGER€OF€OFFENSES€€€€ˆÐ  ` ÐÌà  àThe€defendantððs€two€remaining€issues€relate€to€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€merge€theÐ è 8  Ðdefendantððs€two€convictions.€€The€defendant€contends€that€due€process€and€the€Double€JeopardyÐ Ô$  ÐClause€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€require€that€the€convictions€merge.€€The€state€responds€that€theÐ À  Ðlaw€does€not€support€the€defendantððs€claims.€€We€agree€with€the€state.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Anthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1991),€our€supreme€court€held€that€separateÐ „Ô  Ðconvictions€for€kidnapping€and€robbery€violated€due€process€when€the€evidence€reflected€that€theÐ pÀ Ðkidnapping€was€essentially€incidental€to€the€commission€of€the€robbery.€€It€noted€that€every€robberyÐ \¬ Ðwill€include€the€elements€for€kidnapping€and€concluded€that€the€legislature€did€not€contemplate€dualÐ H˜ Ðconvictions€under€such€circumstances.€€òòId.óó€at€306.€€The€defendant€asserts€that€òòAnthonyóó€applies€to€hisÐ 4„ Ðcircumstances.€€However,€he€was€convicted€of€facilitation€of€first€degree€murder,€an€offense€whichÐ  p Ðdoes€not€necessarily€entail€a€kidnapping.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Ralphóó,€6€S.W.3d€251€(Tenn.€1999)Ð  \ Ð(upholding€separate€convictions€for€burglary€and€theft€of€a€vehicle,€noting€that€not€every€theft€of€aÐ øH Ðvehicle€includes€burglary€of€the€vehicle).€€Moreover,€the€victimððs€kidnapping€by€which€he€wasÐ ä4 Ðforcibly€taken€to€a€park€where€he€was€killed€was€far€from€incidental€to€the€killing.€€The€defendantððsÐ Ð  Ðdue€process€rights€were€not€violated€by€separate€convictions.Ð ¼  Ðà  àÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373,€381€(Tenn.€1996),€our€supreme€court€discussed€theÐ ”ä Ðanalysis€to€be€used€to€determine€whether€two€offenses€are€the€same€for€double€jeopardy€purposesÐ €Ð Ðunder€article€1,€section10€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€First,€the€court€must€determine€whetherÐ l¼ Ðeach€offense€requires€proof€of€an€element€that€the€other€does€not€as€provided€in€òòBlockburger€v.Ð X ¨ ÐUnited€Statesóó,€284€U.S.€299,€52€S.€Ct.€180€(1932).€€òòDentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€381.€€Second,€we€mustÐ D!” Ðlook€to€the€specific€evidence€offered€in€the€case€to€determine€whether€different€evidence€was€usedÐ 0"€  Ðto€prove€each€offense.€€òòId.óó€€Third,€we€must€consider€whether€there€were€multiple€victims€or€multipleÐ #l! Ðepisodes.€€òòId.óó€€Fourth,€we€must€examine€the€purposes€of€the€respective€statutes€prohibiting€theÐ $X" Ðdefendantððs€conduct€and€determine€whether€the€statutes€serve€different€purposes.€€òòId.óó€€Finally,€weÐ ô$D # Ðmust€conduct€a€balancing€test€of€the€factors€in€relation€to€each€other.€€òòId.óóÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àEspecially€aggravated€kidnapping€and€facilitation€to€commit€murder€each€requires€elementsÐ ¸'#& Ðthat€the€other€does€not.€€Although€the€same€conduct€by€the€defendant€would€prove€both€especiallyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðaggravated€kidnapping€and€facilitation€to€commit€first€degree€murder€of€the€same€victim,€theÐ )à$( Ðinterests€to€be€served€by€the€statutes€prohibiting€these€offenses€are€not€the€same.€€Unquestionably,€Ð |*Ì%) Ðthe€murder€statutes€protect€peopleððs€lives.€€The€interests€to€be€served€by€the€kidnapping€statutes€relateÐ h+¸&* Ðto€protecting€people€from€being€confined€against€their€will.€€One€of€the€concerns€relates€to€the€factÐ ° Ðthat€kidnapping€makes€victims€more€vulnerable€to€harm.€€The€fact€that€the€harm€occurs€so€as€toÐ œì Ðenhance€the€kidnapping€to€an€especially€aggravated€form€and€to€involve€another€offense,€such€asÐ ˆØ Ðmurder,€does€not€mean€that€only€one€conviction€may€be€had.€€In€this€respect,€facilitating€a€murderÐ tÄ Ðis€not€intended€to€address€the€increased€risk€of€harm€that€exists€for€a€kidnapping€victim.€€Therefore,Ð `° Ðwe€conclude€that€separate€convictions€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€and€facilitation€of€firstÐ L œ Ðdegree€murder€are€appropriate.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àIn€consideration€of€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€the€judgments€of€conviction€areÐ  ` Ðaffirmed.Ð ü L  Ðò òó óÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_________________________________Ð À  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JUDGE