ÿWPC‚  …UBV %˜U .žÌnXÜ 0P4 4„ w ˜ 0”¢ 0D6 z 0Jz 0TÄ 0^ 0hv 0rÞ 0|P 0†Ì 0R 1uâ U,W 0dƒ BçU, D30U6cB)™ 0@ÂDC AMEB’þÔáÒ›³U>Nv~ŒvÓ  AOÝÆ, 0Dò D/6 Be <þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|X/«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Óà~| $Ó€(D(3¾Á$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà œ 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)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Monaco$$$$'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò,,,,7Border 1dd€-.Cþÿ << Gÿÿ 8Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÔ€+ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òMayÏ2,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó ôÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÔ€+ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€+ôÔÔ€ÔAlthough€Jackson€denied€that€he€and€the€others€had€smoked€cocaine,€Woods€testified€that€allÏthree€of€them€had€been€ð ðgeeked›ðð€(high)€on€cocaine€and€Spence€tested€positive€for€both€alcohol€andÏcocaine€when€he€was€admitted€into€the€hospital€after€he€had€been€shot.Ì ×Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÔ€+ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€+ôÔÔ€ÔWhile€the€Advisory€Commission€Comments€to€Rule€13€indicate€that€a€court€orderedÏconsolidation€puts€the€joinder€in€the€ð ðpermissiveðð€status€of€Rule€8(b),€Rule€8(a)€specifically€states€thatÏmandatory€joinder€is€available€under€Rule€13.Ì ‘Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÔ€+ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€+ôÔÔ€ÔBecause€we€find€the€consolidation€to€have€been€improper,€no€motion€to€sever€was€necessaryÏand€we€need€not€consider€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€that€motion.Ì< Œ 9p`(&Times New RomanPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA:Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA:Op Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÓ&€))X„d&ÓÑ#€))Xd#ÑÔ€+ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÑ X Ñ›Ñ7€§ŸXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÔ€Ôà àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINALÏAPPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÙ€€ÙœßL€/0.;+'h|` 81 `€€Lß›à@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÓ  Óà@ àJANUARY€1996€SESSIONÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà àò òC.C.A.ÏNO.€œ03C01›„9501„CR„00002ó óÌà àà àAppellee,à àò ò€€€€€à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHAMILTON€COUNTYó óÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.ÏSTEPHEN€M.€œBEVIL›,ÌLUCIUS€œMACINEO›€MOSS,à àà à)à àJUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óAppellant.ò òà àà àà à)à àó ó(SecondÏdegree€murder;€aggravatedÏà àà àà àà àà àà àà àrobbery;Ïreckless€endangerment)ò òÌó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà àà àà à€€€€€òòà àFOR€THEÏAPPELLEE:óóÌÌÌò òPHILIP€L.ÏœDUVAL›à àà àà àà àà àCHARLES€W.ÏBURSONÌó óMarket€Court,€Suite€204à àà àà àà àAttorneyÏGeneral€&€Reporterò òÌó ó537€Market€St.ò òÌó óChattanooga,€TN€€€37402à àà àà àà àò òœDARIAN›ÏB.€TAYLORó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœAsst›.ÏAttorney€GeneralÌ€€à àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€JamesÍRobertson€Pkwy.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€Ï37243„0493Ìà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àò òà àà àà àGARY€D.€œGERBITZ›ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àò òà àà àà àRODNEY€C.€STRONGó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœAsst›.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à600€Market€œSt.,›€Suite€300à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àChattanooga,€TN€€€37402à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSEDÌAND€REMANDED€IN€PARTó óÌÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÌJudgeÌÇÑ  Ñà@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌó óóóÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àà àThe€defendant€was€indicted€œseparately›€for€reckless€œendangerment,›Ïaggravated€œrobbery,›€and€first„degree€murder.€€The€defendant€was€sixteen€years€oldÏat€the€time€of€the€offenses,€and€after€a€hearing€in€juvenile€court,€was€transferred€toÏcriminal€court.€€After€a€single€jury€trial€of€all€three€offenses,€the€defendant€wasÏconvicted€œof›€reckless€œendangerment,›€aggravated€œrobbery,›€and€second„degreeÏmurder.€€In€this€œappeal€as€of€right,›€the€defendant€raises€four€issues:ÌÓÓÌÒ ô ÒÒ ¦ Ò1.€€The€trial€court€erred€when€it€denied€the€defendantððs€motion€to€sever€€€€€Ïthe€offenses;ÌÌ2.€€The€trial€court€erred€in€its€response€œto›€œquestions€by€the€jury›€during€€€€€Ïdeliberations€seeking€clarification€of€its€instructions;€ÌÌ3.€€The€trial€court€erred€when€it€refused€to€consider€juror€affidavits€filedÏin€support€of€the€defendantððs€motion€for€new€trial;€andÌÌ4.€€The€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdicts€and/or€the€weight€€Ïof€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€verdicts€of€guilt.ÌÌÌÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÓÓBecause€we€find€merit€in€the€first€two€of€the€defendantððs€issues,€we€reverse€theÏmurder€conviction€and€remand€this€matter€for€a€new€trial.€€We€affirm€the€defendantððsÏconvictions€of€reckless€endangerment€and€aggravated€robbery.ÌÌà àà àOn€February€œ15,›€1993,€Derrick€Lamar€Jackson,€Georgia€Woods,€andÏthe€murder€victim,€Robert€Spence,€had€spent€several€hours€together€drinking€alcoholÏand€smoking€crack€cocaine.œ× ƒ1 ××  ×›€€At€one€point,€Woods€went€to€œGilbert€Trimbleððs›€house€toÏbuy€some€more€cocaine.€€The€defendant€was€at€œTrimbleððs›€house€when€she€arrived.€ÏSpence€and€Jackson€joined€Woods€while€she€was€there.ÌÌà àà àAfter€Woods,€Jackson€and€Spence€left€œTrimbleððs›€house,€heading€towardÏJacksonððs€house,€the€defendant€became€convinced€that€Woods€œhad€taken€twentyÏdollars€($20)€she€owed€him€for€a€crack€rock€he€had€sold€her.›€€Accordingly,€he€went€toÏJacksonððs€house€to€try€and€retrieve€his€money.€€Upon€entering€the€house,€he€startedÏarguing€with€Woods€about€the€money.€€She€denied€having€œit›€and,€at€some€point,€theÏdefendant€withdrew€a€œ22›€pistol€he€had€been€carrying€and€started€waving€it€around€inÏan€attempt€to€scare€Woods€into€giving€him€the€money.€€While€he€and€WoodsÏ"scuffled,"€the€gun€went€off,€perhaps€because€Woods€œhad€slapped›€it.€€No€one€wasÏhurt€by€the€gunfire;€Woods€testified€that€she€had€not€been€frightened€by€the€gun.€ÏEventually,€the€defendant€œgot›€two€dollars€œ($2.00)€from›€Woods€œand,€sometime€afterÏmidnight,›€left€the€house.ÌÌà àà àœAccording€to€Jackson,€Spence€left€the€house€three›€to€five€minutes€œlater.€ÏHe€was€unarmed€at€the€time€he€left.›€€Jackson€testified€that€about€five€minutes€afterÏthat,€he€had€gone€outside€to€take€Spenceððs€jacket€to€him€because€it€was€raining.€€HeÏsaw€the€defendant€and€Spence€"tussling€with€each€other,"€and€a€few€seconds€later,Ïhe€saw€and€heard€a€gun€go€off.€€He€testified€that€he€could€not€tell€who€shot€the€gun.€ÏAt€trial,€Jackson€testified€that€he€had€heard€three€more€shots€after€the€first€one.€€œOnÏcross„examination,€the€defendantððs€lawyer€referred€to€a€prior€statement€made€duringÏthe€juvenile€court€hearing€in€which€Jackson›€had€apparently€stated€"three€or€four€moreÏshots."ÌÌà àà àWoods€testified€that,€œat€the€time€the€defendant€had€come€to€JacksonððsÏhouse,€Spence€had€been€"geeked€and€mad€and€high,€drunk,"€and€that,€before›€he€œleftÏJacksonððs€house,›€Spence€had€said,€"Iððm€going€to€rob€this€young€punk."€€œAccording€toÏWoods,€Spence€"like[d]€to€pick€a€fight"€and€was€"mean€sometimes."€€She›€alsoÏtestified€that,€after€he€left€the€house,€Spence€had€walked€over€to€a€car€parked€nearbyÏand€got€a€gun.€€œHer€vantage€point€was€outside,€"like€on€the€side€of€the€house,€likeÏback€of€the€house."€€Shortly›€thereafter,€she€testified,€"I€heard€a€loud€shot€first,€then€IÏheard€four€smaller€shots,€not€as€loud€as€the€first€one."€€After€the€shots€had€been€fired,Íshe€stated,€she€saw€the€defendant€start€to€run€off,€then€reach€down€to€pick€somethingÏup,€and€then€run€œoff.€€Woods€also€testified€that,€after€the€shooting,€Jackson€had€toldÏher€not€to€say€anything€to€the€police€about€the€cocaine€or€about€the€driver€of€the€carÏfrom€which€Spence€had€gotten€the€gun.›ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€testified€that,€after€he€had€left€Jacksonððs€house,€heÏstarted€to€walk€home.€€œHe€saw€Spence€walk€up€to€a€car€and€reach€in.€€He›€then€heardÏSpence€call€him,€so€he€"turned€around€and€started€back€towards€[Spence],€and€thenÏwhen€he€got€up€on€me,€he€pulled€the€gun€out."€€According€to€œthe€defendant,›€SpenceÏhad€then€tried€to€rob€him,€pointing€a€gun€at€his€temple.€€The€defendant€testified€thatÏhe€had€kept€trying€to€push€the€gun€away,€that€Spence€had€eventually€shot€the€gun,Ïmissing€him,€and€that€he,€the€defendant,€had€then€shot€his€own€gun€at€Spence.€ÏWhen€Spence€fell,€he€œ(the€defendant)€reached›€down€and€grabbed€Spenceððs€gun€toÏavoid€being€shot€as€he€ran€away.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€went€home€and€went€to€bed.€€Neither€he€nor€his€motherÏcalled€the€police.€€However,€when€Officer€Phillips€arrived€at€the€defendantððs€œhouseÏearly€in€the€morning€of€February€16,€1993,›€the€defendantððs€mother€admitted€him€andÏpermitted€a€search.€€While€there,€the€officer€recovered€the€defendantððs€œ22›€pistol€and€aÍœ38›€pistol.€€Both€weapons€had€been€hidden€in€the€defendantððs€bed.€€After€being€takenÏœinto€custody€and€transported€to€the€Police€Service€Center€with€his€mother,›€theÏdefendant€œsigned€a€waiver€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights›€and€a€tape€recorded€statement€wasÏmade.€€This€statement€was€played€for€the€jury.ÌÌà àà àSpence€died€of€gunshot€wounds€ten€days€after€he€was€shot.€€He€hadÏbeen€shot€four€times€with€22€caliber€œbullets€from€a€distance€of€at€least€two€feet.›€€HeÏwas€approximately€twenty„five€years€old€at€his€death.ÌÌà àà àFive€or€six€empty€bullet€casings€were€recovered€from€the€œ22›€pistol.€€TheÏœ38›€pistol€contained€one€spent€round€and€five€live€rounds€when€it€was€recovered.€€NoÏgun€residue€test€was€done€on€the€victimððs€hands.Ì€€€Ìà àà àWith€respect€to€the€defendantððs€first€issue,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€trying€these€cases€together.€€The€defendant€was€indicted€in€three€separateÏ"True€Bills."€€Although€the€court€apparently€consolidated€these€cases€òòœsua›óó€òòsponteóó,€theÏrecord€contains€no€such€order.€€œUnder›€Rule€13€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CriminalÏProcedure,€consolidation€would€have€been€proper€if€the€trial€court€had€found€òòeitheróó€€ÌÓÓÌÒ ô ÒÒ ¦ Òthat€"the€offenses€are€based€upon€the€same€conduct€or€arise€from€theÏsame€criminal€episode,"ÌÌòòoróóÌÌthat€"the€offenses€constitute€parts€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan€or€.€.€.Ïthey€are€of€the€same€or€similar€character."ÌÌÌÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒTenn.€R.€Crim.€Proc.€8(a),(b).ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àOn€the€defendantððs€motion€to€œsever,›€the€trial€court€found€the€threeÏseparate€charges€to€be€"€continuing€criminal€episode€and€that€proof€of€one€would€beÏpart€of€the€proof€of€the€other."€€The€trial€courtððs€use€of€the€term€"a€continuing€criminalÏepisode"€implies€that€it€considered€these€cases€to€have€been€joined€pursuant€to€RuleÏ8(a):€that€is,€that€their€joinder€was€mandatory.œ× ƒ2 ××  ×›€€The€œinitial€issue›€for€this€Court€toÏdetermine,€then,€œis›€whether€the€trial€court€properly€consolidated€these€cases€underÏRule€œ8(a).›ÌÌà àà à€€€€Mandatory€joinder€under€Rule€8(a)€occurs€where€the€offenses€areÏ"based€upon€the€same€conduct€or€arise€from€the€same€criminal€episode."€€In€thisÍcase,€we€agree€that€the€reckless€endangerment€offense€and€the€aggravated€robberyÏoffense€are€based€upon€the€same€conduct€and€arise€from€the€same€criminal€episode.€ÏBoth€of€these€crimes€occurred€when€the€defendant€entered€Jacksonððs€house€andÏwaved€his€pistol€around€in€an€attempt€to€frighten€Woods€into€giving€him€money.€ÏHowever,€this€particular€conduct€and€episode€ended€when€the€defendant€leftÏJacksonððs€house.€€There€is€no€proof€that€he€was€continuing€to€threaten€anyone€in€theÏhouse€or€that€he€had€threatened€to€return.€€Rather,€the€proof€was€that€the€defendantÏwas€simply€walking€away€from€the€œhouse,€headed,€according€to€him,€toward€home.›€ÏMoreover,€the€testimony€œof€the€Stateððs€chief€witness€at›€trial€established€that€it€wasÏthree€to€five€minutes€before€Spence€left€the€house€to€go€after€the€defendant.€€WhileÏthis€is€not€a€long€time€in€absolute€terms,€it€is€sufficient€time€to€indicate€that€theÏdefendant€had€concluded€his€attack€on€Woods€and€decided€to€go€on€about€hisÏbusiness.€€That€Spence€decided,€for€whatever€reason,€to€go€after€the€defendant€doesÏnot€lead€to€a€finding€that€the€defendant€was€still€engaged€in€a€criminal€episode.€€ÌÌà àà àThis€case€is€clearly€distinguishable€from€one€in€which€a€robbed€victimÏgives€immediate€chase€as€the€perpetrator€tries€to€flee€with€the€œbounty›€and€turns€toÏshoot€his€pursuer€as€she€catches€up.€€œThe€proof€did€not€establish€that€any€such›Ïimmediate€pursuit€occurred€here.ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€consolidating€under€Rules€13Ïand€8(a)€the€murder€case€with€the€other€two€offenses.€We€would€also€find€an€abuseÏof€discretion€had€the€trial€court€joined€all€three€offenses€pursuant€to€œRule€8(b),›€whichÏstates€that€offenses€may€be€joined€if€they€"constitute€parts€of€a€common€scheme€orÏplan€or€if€they€are€of€the€same€or€similar€character."€€Obviously,€the€murder€charge€isÏnot€of€the€same€or€similar€character€as€the€endangerment€and€robbery€charges.€€NorÏwas€there€any€proof€at€trial€tending€to€show€that€the€homicide€was€part€of€a€commonÏscheme€or€plan€in€which€the€robbery€and€endangerment€also€figured.€ÌÌà àà àMoreover,€the€trial€courtððs€error€in€consolidating€these€cases€was€notÏharmless.€€As€set€forth€below,€it€is€clear€that€the€jury€was€unable€to€conclude€that€theÏincident€in€Jacksonððs€house€was€distinct€from€the€later€incident€in€the€street.€€œWe€find,›Ïtherefore,€that€the€erroneous€consolidation€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€the€meritsÏand€was€harmful€œerror€as€to€the€murder€charge.›€€Accordingly,€because€œconsolidation›Ïof€the€murder€offense€with€the€other€two€offenses€was€not€proper€under€either€RuleÏ8(a)€or€œ8(b),›€and€because€the€defendant€was€prejudiced€thereby,€we€reverse€theÍmurder€conviction€and€remand€it€for€a€separate€trial.× ƒ3 ××  ×ÌÌÔ€4Ôà àà àÔ€ÔWe€do€not,€however,€reverse€and€remand€for€retrial€the€aggravatedÏrobbery€and€reckless€endangerment€convictions.€€The€defendant€suffered€noÏprejudice€on€these€charges€as€a€result€of€the€erroneous€consolidation.€€Obviously,€noÏissue€of€self„defense€was€raised€on€these€offenses;€indeed,€no€significant€defenseÏwas€made€to€these€charges€at€all.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court's€error€in€consolidatingÏthe€murder€charge€with€these€charges€was€harmless€as€to€these€offenses.ÌÌà àà àWe€also€find€merit€in€the€defendantððs€complaint€about€the€juryÏinstructions€in€this€matter.€€First,€the€record€is€unclear€as€to€precisely€what€instructionsÏthe€jury€received.€€Although€the€œ"technical›€œrecord"›€contains€a€typed€document€titledÏœ"Judgesðð€[sic]›€charge€to€the€jury,"€the€actual€reading€of€the€charge€to€the€jury€was€notÏtranscribed.€€It€is€therefore€impossible€for€this€Court€to€determine€if€œthe€instructions›Ïcontained€in€the€technical€record€œare,›€in€fact,€œwhat€were€read€to€the€jury.›€€Moreover,Ïthe€jury€in€this€case€twice€asked€the€court€for€clarification€on€the€self„defense€charge.€ÏThe€first€time,€it€passed€a€note€to€the€court€œasking,›€"When€Moss€provoked€Spence€inÍthe€house,€does€that€give€up€the€defendantððs€right€to€self„defense€when€he€was€in€theÏstreet?€€When€is€the€defendant€considered€to€leave€the€situation?"€The€lower€courtÏrefused€to€give€a€supplemental€instruction,€responding€in€writing,€"You€are€the€judgesÏof€the€facts€as€they€apply€to€the€law.€€Re„read€the€Courtððs€instruction€on€self„defense."€ÏWhen€the€jury€then€sought€verbal€guidance€from€the€court€œto€the€same€questionsÏthrough›€its€foreman,€the€court€read€aloud€its€written€response.€€Seventeen€minutesÏlater,€the€jury€returned€with€its€verdict.ÌÌà àà àThe€relevant€portion€of€the€written€jury€charge€which€is€included€in€theÏtechnical€record€œstates:›€ÌÓÓÌÒ ô ÒÒ  ÒThe›€use€of€force€against€another€is€not€justified€if€theÏdefendant€provoked€the€alleged€victimððs€use€or€attemptedÏuse€of€unlawful€force,€unless€the€defendant€abandoned€theÏencounter€or€clearly€communicated€to€the€alleged€victimÏthe€intent€to€do€so,€and€the€alleged€victim€neverthelessÏcontinued€to€use€unlawful€force€against€the€defendant.ÌÌÌÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÓÓThis€is€in€accordance€with€the€Tennessee€pattern€jury€instruction€on€self„defense.€ÏHowever,€this€jury€was€obviously€having€difficulty€understanding€this€instruction.€ÏWhile€the€trial€court€could€certainly€not€have€answered€the€first€of€the€juryððs€questionsÏwith€either€a€"yes"€or€a€"no,"€œnor€specifically€answered€the€second€question,€we›€thinkÍthat€the€trial€court€could€and€should€have€told€the€jury€that€it€was€up€to€them€to€decideÏwhether€or€not€the€defendant€had€"abandoned€the€encounter€or€clearlyÏcommunicated€to€the€alleged€victim€the€intent€to€do€so"€as€of€the€time€the€shootingÏoccurred,€and€that€if€they€determined€he€had,€then€they€were€not€precluded€fromÏdetermining€that€the€defendant€had€acted€in€self„defense.ÌÌà àà à"A€trial€judge€has€the€authority€to€give€supplemental€instructions€whenÏthe€jury€poses€a€question€that€indicates€the€jurors€are€confused€regarding€a€questionÏof€law."€€òòState€v.€œDulsworth›óó,€781€S.W.2d€277,€288€n.6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989).€ÏòòAccordóó€€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€751€S.W.2d€464,€467€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€òòState€v.ÏœMcAffee›óó,€737€S.W.2d€304,€œ307€n.2›€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€òòU.S.€v.ÏDuncanóó,€850€F.2d€1104,€1115€(œ6th›€Cir.€1988)€(ð ðA€question€from€a€deliberating€juryÏoften€represents€a€pivotal€moment€in€a€criminal€trial.€€Particularly€in€a€close€case€likeÏthis,€a€trial€judge€has€a€'duty€of€special€care'€when€responding€to€a€request€for€ððfurtherÏlight€on€a€vital€issueðð€from€the€œforeperson›€of€a€confused€jury.€.€.€.€'When€a€jury€makesÏexplicit€its€difficulties€a€trial€judge€should€clear€them€away€with€concrete€accuracy.'€œ")›Ï(citation€omitted).€€The€lower€court€erred,€to€the€defendantððs€obvious€prejudice,€whenÏit€did€not€supplement€its€instructions€to€this€confused€jury.ÌÌà àà àWe€disagree€with€the€defendant€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€refusedÏto€consider€the€juror€affidavits€offered€in€support€of€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€When€theÏvalidity€of€a€verdict€is€questioned,€no€juror€affidavits€may€be€considered€except€"onÏthe€question€of€whether€extraneous€prejudicial€information€was€improperly€brought€toÏthe€juryððs€attention,€whether€any€outside€influence€was€improperly€brought€to€bearÏupon€any€juror,€or€whether€the€jurors€agreed€in€advance€to€be€bound€by€a€quotient€orÏgambling€verdict€without€further€discussion."€€Tenn.€R.€œEvid›.€606(b).€€The€jurorÏaffidavits€submitted€by€the€defendant€do€not€address€any€of€these€limited€issues.€ÏTherefore,€the€trial€court€was€correct€in€refusing€to€consider€them.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendantððs€final€issue€addresses€the€sufficiency€and€weight€of€theÏproof€in€this€œmatter.€€When›€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convictingÏevidence,€we€must€review€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecutionÏin€determining€whether€"òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.Ï307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€We€do€not€reweigh€or€re„evaluateÏthe€evidence€and€are€required€to€afford€the€State€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€theÏproof€contained€in€the€record€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€infer‚encesÏwhich€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.Í1978).€ÌÌà àà àœQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€valueÏto€be€given€to€the€evidence,€as€well€as€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835.€€A€guiltyÏverdict€rendered€by€the€jury€and€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€testimonyÏof€the€witnesses€for€the€State,€and€a€presumption€of€guilt€replaces€the€presumption€ofÏinnocence.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).ÌÌà àà àUnder€these€standards€of€review,€we€think€the€evidence€was€sufficientÏto€convict€the€defendant€of€reckless€endangerment€and€aggravated€robbery.à à€ÏAlthough€the€defendant€argues€that€the€aggravated€robbery€conviction€cannot€standÏbecause€the€victim€testified€that€she€had€not€been€in€fear,€the€crime€of€aggravatedÏrobbery€does€not€require€that€the€victim€experience€fear.€€"Robbery€is€the€intentionalÏor€knowing€theft€of€property€from€the€person€of€another€by€violence€òòoróó€putting€theÏperson€in€fear."€€T.C.A.€Ìðð€39„13„401(a)€(emphasis€added).€€Aggravated€robbery€is€robbery€(as€just€defined)Ï"[a]ccomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon€or€by€display€of€any€article€used€or€fashionedÏto€lead€the€victim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€a€deadly€weapon."€€T.C.A.€Ìðð€39„13„402(a)(1).€€The€defendantððs€own€testimony€established€that€he€wasÏstruggling€with€Woods€and€waving€his€pistol€around€in€order€to€make€her€give€himÏmoney.€€€She€did€eventually€give€him€two€dollars€($2.00).€€We€think€this€evidence€isÏsufficient€for€the€jury€to€have€properly€found€that€the€defendant€committed€bothÏoffenses.ÌÌà àà àWith€respect€to€the€defendantððs€claim€that€the€evidence€does€notÏsupport€his€murder€conviction,€we€find€this€issue€to€be€moot€because€of€our€rulingÏthat€the€murder€case€was€incorrectly€consolidated€with€the€other€two€offenses.ÌÌà àà àFor€the€reasons€set€forth€above,€we€affirm€the€defendantððs€convictions€ofÏreckless€endangerment€and€aggravated€robbery.€€We€reverse€his€conviction€ofÏsecond„€degree€murder€and€remand€that€cause€for€a€new€trial.ÌÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌJOE€B.€JONES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€Judge