ÿWPCó  …# VU:a %› 0(¡U.Éw|÷4s ‡ Æ– Æ\ Æ" Æè Æ® 0”t 0D 0JL– 0Tž 0^ò 0hP 0r¸ 0|* 0†¦ 0, 1u¼ 0d1 B•B)²DCÛ 0@ AO^ D3­Îàr®„ v~¤vÓ" D+õ 0K  A©k AO 0Dc D/§ BÖ ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡%ä2¼A`ArialTTƒ/„/…/†/‡/ˆ/‰/Š/‹/Œ//Ž///‘/’/“/”Fe•D–Ó€Ô¡¨ ‚G/3|xŸLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(D(2´¤$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò (5'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ$$$$'ÿÿdxd ÄÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌNovember€10,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó hÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defendant€contends€the€victim€did€not€return€his€gun€to€his€apartmentÏduring€the€argument.€€He€also€states€the€victim€actually€held€the€gun€to€his€head€duringÏthe€altercation.Ì zÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝEyewitnesses€contend€the€defendant€was€three€to€four€car€lengths€from€theÏvictim€when€he€began€shooting€and€that€he€did€not€start€moving€towards€the€victim€untilÏafter€the€initial€shots€were€fired.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva Ò'ÈÈÈÈdxd( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó (54›&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK (‚ƒCþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ќـ ÙÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€)+'A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌà@ àJUNE€1997€SESSIONÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à@ à)Ìà@ à)Ìà àà àà à€€€€APPELLEE,à@ à)Ìà@ à)à àNo.€01„C„01„9608„CR„00357Ìà@ à)Ìà@ à)à àDavidson€CountyÌà@ à)Ìv.à@ à)à àSeth€Norman,€JudgeÌà@ à)Ìà@ à)à à(Second€Degree€Murder)Ìà@ à)Ìà@ à)ÌPATRICK€V.€KELFALLA,à@ à)Ìà@ à)Ìà àà àà à€€€€APPELLANT.à@ à)ÌÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌJeffrey€A.€DeVasherà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ1202€Stahlman€Buildingà àà àà àà à500€Charlotte€AvenueÌNashville,€TN€37201„5730à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0497ÌÌDavid€M.€Siegelà àà àà àà àà àPeter€M.€CoughlanÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ1202€Stahlman€Buildingà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌNashville,€TN€37201„5730à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌRalph€W.€Newmanà àà àà àà àà àVictor€S.€Johnson€IIIÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌ1202€Stahlman€Building€à àà àà àà à222€Second€Avenue,€Suite€500ÌNashville,€TN€37201„5730à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37201„1649ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àKymberly€HaasÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à222€Second€Avenue,€Suite€500Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37201„1649ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDED€FOR€A€NEW€TRIALÌÌÓ  ÓJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€JudgeÇÓÓÑ7€J¸XdæXXdæ7Ñà@ àò òòòOPINIONó óóóÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Patrick€V.€Kelfalla€(defendant),€was€convicted€of€second€degreeÏmurder,€a€Class€A€felony,€by€a€jury€of€his€peers.€€The€trial€court€found€the€defendantÏwas€a€standard€offender€and€imposed€a€Range€I€sentence€of€fifteen€(15)€years€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction.€€In€this€Court€the€defendant€contends€(a)€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient€to€support€his€conviction€and€(b)€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€inÏpermitting€improper€rebuttal€testimony.€€After€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€the€briefsÏsubmitted€by€the€parties,€and€the€law€governing€the€issues€presented€for€review,€it€isÏthe€opinion€of€this€Court€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€should€be€reversed.Ìà àThe€victim,€Timothy€Gibson,€€had€harassed€the€defendant€on€several€occasions.€ÏIn€April€of€1994,€the€victim€told€the€defendant€to€ð ðgo€back€to€Africa€and€swing€the€treesÏlike€a€monkeyðð€after€losing€a€basketball€game€to€the€defendant.€€The€victim€then€pulledÏa€gun€out€of€his€pocket€and€waved€it€at€the€defendant.€€In€May€of€1994,€the€victimÏrobbed€the€defendant,€taking€his€paycheck€from€Captain€Dððs€restaurant€and€tenÏdollars.€€Also€in€May€of€1994,€the€victim€confronted€the€defendant€while€he€was€walkingÏwith€Ronald€Petway.€€The€victim€said,€ð ðevery€time€I€see€you€when€you€got€some€moneyÏin€your€pocket,€Iððm€going€to€keep€it.ðð€€The€victim€then€reached€into€the€defendantððsÏpocket€and€took€five€dollars.€€€Later€that€month,€the€victim€chased€the€defendant€with€aÏgun€until€he€ran€into€a€Krystal€restaurant.€€The€defendant€spoke€with€the€police€aboutÏthe€incident€but€did€not€reveal€the€identity€of€the€person€who€chased€him.Ìà àOn€May€27,€1994,€the€defendant€and€the€victim€had€an€argument€in€the€parkingÍlot€of€the€Woodhaven€Apartments.€€The€victim€confronted€the€defendant€in€front€ofÏseveral€onlookers€about€ð ðsnitchingðð€on€him€to€the€police,€saying€ð ðif€you€donððt€stay€out€ofÏmy€business,€Iððm€going€to€kill€you€before€I€go€to€jail.ðð€€The€victim€pulled€a€gun€on€theÏdefendant€during€this€altercation.€€The€defendant€was€also€in€possession€of€a€revolverÏwhich€he€had€obtained€from€his€friend,€Mario,€a€few€moments€before€the€confrontation.Ìà àApproximately€thirty€minutes€into€the€argument,€the€victim€returned€to€hisÏapartment€€and€put€away€his€gun.× ƒ, ××  ×€€€The€victim€then€went€outside€the€apartment€andÏbegan€arguing€with€the€defendant€again.€€The€victimððs€sister,€Vanessa€Sharpton,Ïarrived€at€the€apartment€complex€and€encouraged€her€brother€to€withdraw€from€theÏargument.€€Ìà àThe€victim€withdrew€from€the€argument€and€rode€away€from€the€scene€on€aÏbicycle,€stating€that€he€was€going€to€the€store€to€purchase€beer.€€The€defendant€wentÏacross€the€street€to€Marcus€Johnsonððs€apartment€in€Terrace€Hills€with€Marcus€JohnsonÏand€two€other€friends,€where€he€cried€over€the€incident.€€Ìà àThe€defendant€left€Johnsonððs€apartment€between€twenty€minutes€to€an€hourÏlater,€cutting€€across€the€Woodhaven€Apartment€parking€lot€to€go€play€basketball€at€theÏapartment€complex.€€The€victim€returned,€unarmed,€€to€the€parking€lot€on€his€bicycle.€ÏThe€defendant€contends€the€victim€began€to€push€and€threaten€him€while€straddlingÏthe€bicycle,€and€then€told€the€defendant€to€come€closer€to€him.€€The€defendantÏcontends€the€victim€said,€€ð ðI€ainððt€through€with€you€yet.€€Donððt€forget€Iððm€„„€kill€you€beforeÍI€go€to€jailðð€and€reached€behind€his€back.€€The€defendant€then€shot€the€victim€four€timesÏwhile€moving€towards€the€victim.× ƒ- ××  ×€€€€The€victim€€fell€to€the€ground€with€his€bicycle€stillÏbetween€his€legs.€€Eyewitnesses€contend€the€defendant€continued€to€shoot€the€victimÏafter€he€fell€to€the€ground.€€The€defendant€stopped€shooting€when€the€back€tire€of€theÏbicycle€fell€onto€his€feet.€€The€victim€died€within€a€few€minutes€of€being€shot.€€Ìà àThe€victim€suffered€gunshot€wounds€to€the€left€back€side€of€his€head,€the€leftÏside€of€his€jaw,€the€bicep€of€his€right€forearm,€and€his€back.€€The€victim€also€suffered€aÏcontemporaneous€head€contusion€consistent€with€hitting€his€head€on€the€pavementÏwhen€he€fell€to€the€ground.€€The€pathologist€testified€that€the€gun€was€at€least€two€feetÏfrom€the€victim€when€it€was€fired.€€The€pathologist€testified€the€victim€received€theÏwounds€from€three€different€directions.€€This€could€have€been€the€result€of€the€victimÏmoving€while€he€was€being€shot.€€The€wounds€could€also€have€been€received€in€thisÏmanner€if€the€victim€had€fallen€face€down€to€the€ground€before€the€final€shots€wereÏfired.€€The€right€arm€was€extended€away€from€the€body€at€the€time€it€was€shot,€but€theÏpathologist€was€unable€to€conclusively€determine€exactly€how€the€arm€was€extendedÏat€the€time€of€the€shooting€since€this€bullet€exited€the€body€and€was€not€subsequentlyÏrecovered.€€The€cause€of€death€was€multiple€gunshot€wounds.€Ìà àThe€defendant€fled€to€New€York€City,€where€he€disposed€of€the€murder€weaponÏby€throwing€it€off€the€Brooklyn€Bridge.€€Once€arrested,€extradition€proceedings€wereÏbegun€to€return€the€defendant€to€Tennessee.€€However,€the€defendant€eventuallyÍagreed€to€be€extradited.€€Ìà@ àò òI.ó óÌÌà àThe€defendant€contends€the€evidence€is€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€toÏsupport€a€finding€by€a€rational€trier€of€fact€that€he€was€guilty€of€murder€in€the€secondÏdegree€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€He€argues€he€acted€in€self„defense.€€In€theÏalternative,€he€claims€the€evidence€establishes€he€was€guilty€at€most€of€voluntaryÏmanslaughter.ÌÌà@ àò òA.ó óÌÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€thisÏCourt€must€review€the€record€to€determine€if€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€is€sufficientÏ"to€support€the€finding€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€13(e).€This€rule€is€applicable€to€findings€of€guilt€based€upon€direct€evidence,Ïcircumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòStateÏv.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€253€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).Ìà àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€does€notÏreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).€€Nor€may€this€Court€substitute€itsÏinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòLiakas€v.ÏStateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859,€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€352€U.S.€845,€77€S.Ct.Ï39,€1€L.Ed.2d€49€(1956).€€To€the€contrary,€this€Court€is€required€to€afford€the€State€ofÍTennessee€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€asÏwell€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€theÏevidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).Ìà àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€toÏbe€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€835.€€In€òòState€v.ÏGraceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973),€our€Supreme€Court€said:€€"A€guilty€verdictÏby€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€theÏState€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€State."Ìà àSince€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replaces€itÏwith€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused,€as€the€appellant,€has€the€burden€in€this€CourtÏof€illustrating€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdicts€returned€by€theÏtrier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€This€Court€will€notÏdisturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€due€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€unless€the€factsÏcontained€in€the€record€are€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€toÏfind€that€the€accused€is€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914.ÌÌà@ àò òB.ó óÌÌà àThe€offense€of€murder€in€the€second€degree€is€defined€by€statute€as€theÏð ðknowing€killing€of€another.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210(a)(1).€€Before€theÏdefendant€could€be€convicted€of€murder€in€the€second€degree,€the€State€of€TennesseeÏwas€required€to€establish€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€the€defendant€(a)€unlawfullyÍkilled€Gibson€and€(b)€did€so€knowingly.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€39„13„201(a)€andÏ210(a)(1).€€The€record€establishes€both€elements€of€this€offense.Ìà àThe€defendant€admitted€returning€to€Woodhaven€Apartments€with€a€gun€at€leastÏtwenty€minutes€after€he€and€the€victim€had€an€argument€outside€the€complex.€€TheÏdefendant€admitted€that€when€the€victim€returned€to€the€area€on€a€bicycle€he€no€longerÏappeared€to€be€in€possession€of€a€gun.€€The€defendant€began€firing€his€gun€at€theÏvictim€€after€he€claimed€to€see€the€victim€reach€behind€his€back.€The€defendant€movedÏtowards€the€victim,€firing€the€gun€until€the€tire€of€the€bicycle€the€victim€was€straddlingÏfell€onto€the€defendantððs€feet.€€The€victim€died€within€a€few€minutes€of€being€shot.€€TheÏdefendant€fled€to€New€York€City,€where€he€disposed€of€the€gun€by€throwing€it€off€theÏBrooklyn€Bridge.€€While€there€was€evidence€the€defendant€killed€the€victim€in€self„defense,€it€is€obvious€the€jury€did€not€believe€the€statements€given€by€the€defendant.€ÏAs€previously€stated,€the€resolution€of€conflicting€evidence€is€for€the€jury,€not€this€Court.€ÏThe€jury€saw€the€witnesses,€observed€their€demeanor,€assessed€their€credibility,€andÏconcluded€that€the€defendant€did€not€act€in€self„defense€or€in€the€heat€of€passion.Ìà àThere€is€sufficient€evidence€to€support€a€finding€by€a€rational€trier€of€fact€theÏdefendant€was€guilty€of€murdering€Gibson€in€the€second€degree€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€13(e).€€Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òII.ó óÌÌ€à àThe€defendant€next€contends€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€his€motion€toÍstrike,€or€in€the€alternative,€for€a€mistrial,€following€the€introduction€of€improper€rebuttalÏtestimony€€by€the€state.€ÌÌà@ àò òA.ó óÌÌà àThe€defendant€testified€that€at€the€time€of€the€shooting€the€victim€began€pushingÏhim€and€told€the€defendant€to€come€closer.€€The€defendant€stated€he€began€to€walkÏslowly€towards€the€victim,€then€proceeded€at€a€faster€pace€when€the€victim€told€theÏdefendant€to€move€faster.€€The€defendant€indicated€he€kept€the€gun€in€his€pocket€whileÏhe€walked€towards€the€victim.Ìà àThe€state€called€Judy€Brundige€as€a€rebuttal€witness.€€Ms.€Brundige€testified€sheÏwas€a€passenger€in€the€car€of€Mr.€Sprague,€the€stateððs€first€eyewitness,€when€sheÏwitnessed€the€shooting.€€Ms.€Brundige€stated€she€heard€two€ð ðpopsðð€and€noticed€theÏvictim€immobile€on€the€ground€with€a€bicycle€between€his€legs.€€Ms.€Brundige€then€toldÏjurors€she€saw€a€black€male€run€towards€the€victim€from€three€to€four€car€lengths€awayÏand€shoot€a€gun€at€the€victim€three€times.€€Ìà àMs.€Brundigeððs€name€did€not€appear€in€the€police€reports€or€in€the€assistantÏdistrict€attorney€generalððs€notes.€€The€first€encounter€between€the€assistant€districtÏattorney€general€and€Ms.€Brundige€occurred€when€the€assistant€district€attorneyÏgeneral€interviewed€Mr.€Sprague€who€was€driving€the€motor€vehicle€in€which€Ms.ÏBrundige€was€a€passenger.€€The€assistant€district€attorney€general€stated€SpragueÏdominated€the€interview.€€Ms.€Brundige€became€emotional€during€the€interview.€€TheÏassistant€district€attorney€general€decided€to€use€Sprague€as€a€witness.€€It€was€alsoÍdecided€Ms.€Brundige€would€not€be€called€as€a€witness€notwithstanding€the€fact€sheÏhad€an€unobstructed€view€of€the€murder€as€the€events€unfolded.€€The€events€leading€toÏthe€murder€occurred€on€the€passenger€side€of€Spragueððs€vehicle.€€The€state€did€notÏsubpoena€Ms.€Brundige€as€a€witness.Ìà àPrior€to€trial,€defense€counsel€inquired€about€the€witnesses€known€to€the€state.€ÏThe€assistant€district€attorney€general€advised€defense€counsel€about€a€woman€whoÏwas€riding€in€Spragueððs€vehicle€when€the€murder€occurred.€€She€also€told€counsel€thatÏð ðI€couldnððt€tell€what€she€[Brundige]€saw€and€what€she€didnððt€see.ððÌà àMs.€Brundige€appeared€at€the€trial.€€She€sat€outside€the€courtroom€during€theÏentire€trial€because€she€felt€a€ð ðkinshipðð€with€the€victimððs€family.€€The€assistant€districtÏattorney€general€spoke€with€Ms.€Brundige€during€the€morning€hours€of€the€second€dayÏof€the€trial.€€It€was€during€this€conversation€the€assistant€district€attorney€generalÏlearned€the€defendant€ran,€not€walked,€towards€the€victim€as€he€fired€the€pistol€at€theÏvictim.€€This€information€was€obtained€ð ðhoursðð€before€the€defendant€testified€in€supportÏof€his€defense.Ìà àWhen€the€assistant€district€attorney€general€received€this€information,€the€stateÏwas€presenting€its€evidence€in€chief.€€However,€the€assistant€district€attorney€generalÏopted€not€to€call€Ms.€Brundige€before€resting€the€stateððs€case„in„chief€prior€to€the€noonÏbreak.€€Furthermore,€the€assistant€district€attorney€general€did€not€tell€defense€counselÏof€Ms.€Brundigeððs€presence€at€the€trial,€she€was€available€and€could€be€interviewed,€orÏthe€nature€of€her€testimony€until€after€the€defendant€had€rested.€€This€revelation€wasÏmade€immediately€before€Ms.€Brundige€was€called€as€a€rebuttal€witness.Ìà àThe€assistant€district€attorney€general€stated€she€did€not€decide€to€call€Ms.ÍBrundige€as€a€rebuttal€witness€until€the€defendant€testified€he€was€walking,€notÏrunning,€toward€the€victim€after€the€victim€directed€the€defendant€to€approach€him.€€AsÏthe€assistant€district€attorney€general€stated,€Ms.€Brundigeððs€testimony€would€contradictÏthis€testimony€and€show€ð ðhe€was€not€running€toward€the€victim€because€the€victimÏcalled€him€over.€€He€was€running€toward€the€victim€because€he€was€shooting€at€theÏvictim.ððÌà àWhen€defense€counsel€completed€his€cross„examination€of€Ms.€Brundige,€heÏrequested€a€jury„out€hearing.€€Counsel€moved€the€trial€court€to€strike€Ms.€BrundigeððsÏtestimony,€or€in€the€alternative,€grant€a€mistrial.€€Counsel€contended€Ms.€BrundigeððsÏrebuttal€testimony€was€improper€pursuant€to€òòState€v.€Westóó,€825€S.W.2d€695,€698Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982).€€He€argued€Ms.€Brundigeððs€testimony€should€have€beenÏpresented€during€the€stateððs€case„in„chief€as€opposed€to€presenting€this€testimony€inÏrebuttal.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€œmotion.›Ìà@ àò òB.ó óÌÌà àThe€defendant€asserts€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€grant€his€motion€to€strike,€or€inÏthe€alternative,€for€a€mistrial,€due€to€the€stateððs€introduction€of€an€improper€rebuttalÏwitness€constitutes€reversible€error€pursuant€to€òòState€v.€Westóó,€825€S.W.2d€695€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1992).€€òòÌà àWestóó€is€factually€similar€to€the€present€case.€€In€òòWestóó,€this€Court€held€thatÏrebuttal€testimony€is€not€proper€if€the€witness€was€an€eyewitness,€provides€the€stateððsÏstrongest€evidence,€and€the€witness€should€have€been€presented€during€the€stateððsÏcase„in„chief.€€òòWestóó,€825€S.W.2d€at€698.€€Additionally,€this€Court€found€that€the€failureÍto€provide€the€defendant€with€notice€of€a€rebuttal€witness€known€to€the€prosecutionÏbefore€trial€was€not€ð ðwithin€the€context€of€the€applicable€norms€of€a€level„handedÏprosecutionðð€and€was€therefore€prejudicial€error.€€òòWestóó,€825€S.W.2d€at€698.Ìà àIn€this€case,€Ms.€Brundige€was€an€eyewitness€to€the€shooting€whoseÏperspective€as€a€passenger€with€an€unobstructed€view€of€the€crime€made€her€aÏpotentially€better€witness€than€the€driver,€who€testified€for€the€state€in€its€case„in„chief.€ÏThe€state€was€aware€Ms.€Brundige€was€a€witness€to€the€shooting€prior€to€trial,€yet€noÏnotice€was€provided€to€the€defendant€of€her€existence.€The€state€also€failed€to€notifyÏthe€defendant€that€Ms.€Brundige€was€outside€the€courtroom€and€available€to€testifyÏthroughout€the€course€of€the€trial.€€Ìà àThe€state€contends€that€Ms.€Brundige€was€a€proper€rebuttal€witness€pursuant€toÏòòState€v.€Sinclairóó,€Madison€County€No.€02C01„9503„CC„00066,€slip€op.€11„12€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Jackson,€€April€17,€1996),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€October€7,€1996).€€€InÏòòSinclairóó,€an€eyewitness€€testified€as€a€rebuttal€witness€to€contradict€the€defendantððsÏclaim€of€self„defense.€€The€witness€testified€the€victim€was€not€wielding€a€knife€prior€toÏthe€shooting.€€òòSinclairóó,€slip€op.€at€11.€This€court€refused€to€apply€òòWestóó€because€theÏrebuttal€witness€was€ð ðnot€called€to€recount€eyewitness€testimony;€she€was€calledÏdirectly€to€refute€the€Defendantððs€testimony.ðð€€òòSinclairóó,€slip€op.€at€12.€€The€court€alsoÏnoted€prosecutors€were€not€aware€of€the€existence€of€the€witness€until€the€night€beforeÏthe€witness€was€called€to€testify.€€òòSinclairóó,€slip€op.€at€12.€€à àÌà àAlthough€Ms.€Brundige€was€an€eyewitness€to€the€shooting,€her€testimony€didÏdirectly€refute€the€testimony€of€the€defendant.€€The€state€contends€the€testimony€of€Ms.ÏBrundige€refutes€why€the€defendant€was€moving€towards€the€victim.€€The€stateÍcontends€Ms.€Brundigeððs€testimony€shows€the€defendant€was€moving€towards€theÏvictim€because€he€was€shooting€the€victim,€not€because€the€victim€called€the€defendantÏover.€€A€stronger€argument€can€be€made€that€the€testimony€was€proper€rebuttalÏevidence€because€it€contradicted€the€defendantððs€statements€that€he€did€not€shoot€theÏvictim€after€he€had€fallen€to€the€ground€and€that€he€was€close€enough€to€the€victim€toÏbe€pushed€by€him€immediately€prior€to€the€shooting.€€Ìà àHowever,€the€stateððs€reliance€on€òòSinclairóó€is€misplaced€because€the€state€wasÏaware€Ms.€Brundige€was€an€eyewitness€prior€to€trial.€€The€state€contends€òòSinclairóóÏapplies€because€the€prosecution€was€ð ðnot€aware€of€the€substance€or€value€of€theÏwitnessðð€testimony€until€the€trialðð€since€the€state€had€no€notice€of€the€defendantððs€claimÏof€self„defense€until€he€testified.€€It€is€irrelevant€that€the€state€may€not€have€been€awareÏof€the€defendantððs€claim€of€self„defense€in€the€present€case€because€the€defendant€didÏnot€make€a€statement€prior€to€trial.€òò€Sinclairóó€does€not€address€the€failure€of€the€state€toÏfully€understand€the€significance€of€a€known€eyewitnessððs€testimony.€€òòSinclairóó€onlyÏprovides€for€use€of€a€rebuttal€witness€without€notice€to€the€defense€when€the€state€isÏunaware€that€the€individual€is€an€eyewitness€Ñ7€Š…XXdæXdæ7Ñprior€to€trial.€€In€the€present€case,€the€stateÏwas€aware€prior€to€trial€that€Ms.€Brundige€was€an€eyewitness€to€the€shooting.€€TheÏburden€of€the€stateððs€failure€to€fully€determine€the€content€of€an€eyewitnessððs€testimonyÏfalls€upon€the€state.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà@ àò òC.ó óÌÓÓÌÓÓ€à àThe€phrase€ð ðrebuttal€evidenceðð€may€be€defined€as€evidence€ð ðwhich€tends€toÏexplain€or€controvert€evidence€produced€by€an€adverse€party.ðð€€€€òòCozzolino€v.€Stateóó,Í584€S.W.2d€765,€768€(Tenn.€1979).€€This€phrase€encompasses€ð ð[a]ny€competentÏevidence€which€explains€or€is€a€direct€reply€to,€or€a€contradiction€of,€material€evidenceÏintroducedðð€by€an€adverse€party.€€òòNease€v.€Stateóó,€592€S.W.2d€327,€331€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1979).€€Questions€concerning€the€admission€or€rejectionÏof€rebuttal€evidence€rest€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court;€and€an€appellateÏcourt€will€not€interfere€with€the€exercise€of€this€discretion€unless€it€is€clear€on€the€face€ofÏthe€record€that€the€trial€court€has€abused€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Scottóó,€735€S.W.2d€825,Ï828€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1987).€€Ìà àThe€testimony€by€Ms.€Brundige€was€sufficiently€contradictory€to€the€defendantððsÏtestimony€to€constitute€proper€rebuttal€testimony.€€However,€the€state€should€haveÏcalled€this€witness€during€its€case„in„chief.€€Moreover,€by€not€providing€notice€to€theÏdefendant€regarding€the€existence€of€Ms.€Brundige€as€an€eyewitness€the€state€fellÏshort€of€meeting€ð ðthe€applicable€norms€of€a€level„handed€prosecution.ðð€€òòWestóó,€825ÏS.W.2d€at€698.€€Ìà àThe€defendant€had€no€prior€notice€of€the€substance€of€Ms.€Brundigeððs€testimony.€ÏThe€rebuttal€testimony€was€not€merely€corrobative€testimony;€the€testimony€showed€theÏdefendant€ran€towards€the€victim€after€the€initial€shots€were€fired€and€that€he€continuedÏto€shoot€the€victim€after€he€fell€to€the€ground.€€Thus,€the€information€given€by€theÏassistant€district€attorney€general€to€defense€counsel€prior€to€trial€was€no€longer€valid.€ÏThe€assistant€district€attorney€general€had€a€duty€to€promptly€disclose€this€newlyÏacquired€information€to€defense€counsel€rather€than€wait€until€Ms.€Brundige€was€beingÏcalled€as€a€rebuttal€witness.Ìà àConsidering€the€record€as€a€whole,€allowing€this€testimony€as€rebuttal€evidenceÍand€without€prior€notice€to€the€defense€of€the€eyewitnessððs€existence€constituted€errorÏinvolving€a€substantial€right€which€may€have€affected€the€verdict€of€the€jury€or€resultedÏin€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€36(b).€€It€was€therefore€prejudicialÏerror€for€the€trial€court€to€deny€the€defendantððs€motion€to€strike€or€for€a€mistrial.€€ÌÌÓÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€JOE€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________Ìà àWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ___________________________________Ì€€€€€€€THOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGE