ÿWPC­ ÏJƒƒ(wÐF_ê÷VU¥fAqª­bJù‘ÿ‡ˆÙèwÞëdM½Ã¸acjîE˜ã?sI0K•᥅–*Òq¥ks4¶ý-H“î8#©+ã÷€ž-l¢Tc¨ÂŒL´¦]>4“bÃ)r…U­ˆîv;90B"[£h±v´i2É3’X­Œ^Ý8d’w™ÄŠ’†š¸‘yŸ_^4tÐD)¸éut]s/|ùgABÓØ›KmT 3ÞÇs}~×Nå6uïí1}Ð$¸ÿ‡MBƒçtk~¿7êðÆHæ¬l†{ž"=ˆ‘Í*Än³6Ô:xScê³ <Ç/c±æPÀÔñôž—iª8Ç#©Èèלߑ^XìÖ’~)4ë]ÅOº¬ä[íX[×GAÓ´Xëì ØÙBÈÈ>+=Dø8é³5L¸PsΘÓ?ËÒÃÔ÷ ¯Á’M”^ÖÏ€¹ìâ½'*(ƒÅšª|¤9±tûãÚ %º`±­Ã)HýX`«“1ÑÜÐ÷†[g"l¡çØBàFqq¡_"ÏW©¹¥ëwlK÷£òÈt×ÈmÓbÁÈ_£*휇°dR ¼Cü¬µÅ‹0# TçÇÁKï߾ͿýæøDˆ¾U‰1ƒv…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ LÍ U: bS w@[ 4› ¯ 0ƾ 0D„ èÈ ù° E©—îU:…U:¿EùU:>—xU:IéQU::::::: Bttttttttttt D3‘‘‘ 0DÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ AOÆWW 0D D/a B˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT,“í|AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- WEXYZE[U\P]E^_Ó€iuM%3|xs(v(2‚`$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X¹øXXXÔÔ€ôÆÜôXX¹øÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÞÔ€X¹øXXXÔÔ€šb XX¹øÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¹øX šbÔÐ  ÐÌJanuary€14,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó ïÝ ƒ ‚`$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X¹øXXXÔÔ€ôÆÜôXX¹øÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€judgments€of€conviction€indicate€that€Morrowððs€sentences€for€attempted€aggravatedÐ `  Ðkidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation€are€to€run€concurrently€with€one€another€but€consecutively€to€the€lifeÏsentence€for€first€degree€murder.€€However,€a€review€of€the€sentencing€hearing€transcript€reveals€that€theÏtrial€court€intended€for€all€three€(3)€sentences€to€run€consecutively€to€one€another.€€When€there€is€a€conflictÏbetween€the€transcript€and€the€judgment,€the€transcript€controls.€€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€814€S.W.2d€381,€383Ð X ø Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991). ;Ý ƒ R$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X9¯XXXÔÔ€ôFøôXX9¯Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€testimony€at€the€hearing€somewhat€conflicts€in€this€respect.€€Counsel€for€the€defendantsÐ `  Ðtestified€that€they€were€notified€that€the€state€was€filing€a€ð ðmotionðð€or€an€ð ðapplicationðð€to€revoke€Darden€andÏMerriweatherððs€bond.€ò òó ó€However,€it€is€clear€from€the€testimony€that€counsel€were€informed€that€the€stateÐ Ü | Ðintended€to€revoke€the€defendantsðð€bond. Ý ƒ R$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X9¯XXXÔÔ€ôFøôXX9¯Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€trial€court€revoked€bond€on€the€basis€that€defendantsðð€incarceration€in€Kentucky€would€be€inÐ `  Ðdirect€violation€of€the€conditions€of€bond€requiring€that€they€remain€within€50€miles€of€Springfield,ÏTennessee.€ò òó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ;Ý ƒ R$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X0s XXXÔÔ€ô×ô XX0sÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€testimony€at€the€hearing€somewhat€conflicts€in€this€respect.€€Counsel€for€the€defendantsÐ `  Ðtestified€that€they€were€notified€that€the€state€was€filing€a€ð ðmotionðð€or€an€ð ðapplicationðð€to€revoke€Darden€andÏMerriweatherððs€bond.€ò òó ó€However,€it€is€clear€from€the€testimony€that€counsel€were€informed€that€the€stateÐ Ü | Ðintended€to€revoke€the€defendantsðð€bond.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ R$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X0s XXXÔÔ€ô×ô XX0sÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€trial€court€revoked€bond€on€the€basis€that€defendantsðð€incarceration€in€Kentucky€would€be€inÐ `  Ðdirect€violation€of€the€conditions€of€bond€requiring€that€they€remain€within€50€miles€of€Springfield,ÏTennessee.€ò òó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ßÔ€X¹øXXXÔÔ€šb XX¹øÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¹øX šbÔÐ  ÐÌDecember€22,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ_ñ›ñ_ñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€ŠBŒŠXXÔÔ€Šp{ŠŠŠBŒÔÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€– XXdìXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñiññ_ñßr€ *<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` 8ttxP,` ð  rßñ_ññiññiñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` 8ttxP,` ð  rßñiññ_ñ›ñ_ñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌMAY€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À à)à  àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9612„CC„00512Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó ó)Ð ` Ðà ` àAppellee,à  àà h àà À àò ò)Ð Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àROBERTSON€COUNTYÐ Xø  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHON.€ROBERT€W.€WEDEMEYERó óÐ Xø  Ðò òFREDDIE€MORROW€andó óà À àò ò)à  àJUDGEó óÐ Xø  Ðò òDAMIEN€DARDEN,ó óà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ Xø Ðà ` àœAppellants.›à  àà h àà À àò ò)à  à(Direct€œAppealñYñ„Felony€Murder„Civil€ñYññZññYñrigñYññZññ[ñÐ Xø Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àñ[ñ)ñ\ñà  àRights€Inñ\ññ]ññ\ñdimitñ\ññ]ññ^ñtimidation)ñ^ñ›Ð Xø Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð 8Ø ÐÌCOLLIER€W.€GOODLETTà À àà  àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ (!È ÐAssistant€Public€Defenderà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ  "À Ð109€S.€Second€StreetÌClarksville,€TN€€37040à h àà À àà  àDARYL€J.€BRANDÐ $° Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOHN€CARNEYÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àARTHUR€BIEBERÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à500€South€MainÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àSpringfield,€TN€€37172ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÐ  x6-.W ÐÓ  Óò òòòÔ‡„#Á„ŠŠp{ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ#†Šp{Š„„#Á" #ÔÐ `  ÐÌÓ  ÓÓÓœñ^ñòòóóñ^ñ›Ìà ` àThe€appellants,€Frederick€D.€Morrow€and€Damien€Darden,€were€convictedÏafter€a€Robertson€County€bench€trial€of€one€(1)€count€of€felony€murder,€one€(1)Ïcount€of€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€one€(1)€count€of€civil€rightsÏintimidation.€€Both€appellants€were€sentenced€to€life€imprisonment€for€first€degreeÏmurder.€€Morrow€was€sentenced€as€a€Range€I€offender€to€consecutive€terms€ofÏfour€(4)€years€for€civil€rights€intimidation€and€five€(5)€years€for€attemptedÏaggravated€kidnapping.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Darden€received€Range€I€sentences€of€three€(3)€yearsÐ Lì Ðfor€civil€rights€intimidation€and€four€(4)€years€for€attempted€aggravatedÏkidnapping,€to€run€concurrently€with€each€other€but€consecutively€to€the€lifeÏsentence€for€first€degree€murder.€€On€appeal,€appellants€raise€the€following€jointÏissues€for€our€review:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€appellantsðð€motion€toÏdismiss€Counts€One,€Three€and€Four€of€the€indictment;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(2)€whether€they€were€denied€their€constitutional€rights€to€dueÏprocess€and€equal€protection€by€the€abolition€of€an€acceptanceÏhearing€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„159;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(3)€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€findings€of€guiltÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt;€andÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(4)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€consecutive€sentences.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓAppellant€Morrow€further€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€(1)€failing€to€dismissÏthe€indictment€on€the€basis€that€the€grand€jury€selection€process€under€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€22„1„102€violates€the€Americans€with€Disabilities€Act€and€theÐ |2)* ÐRehabilitation€Act€of€1973;€(2)€imposing€excessive€sentences;€and€(3)€failing€toÏallow€Morrow€to€serve€his€civil€rights€intimidation€and€attempted€aggravatedÏkidnapping€sentences€on€probation.€€Appellant€Darden€raises€the€additional€issueÏof€whether€the€trial€judge€erred€in€failing€to€recuse€himself€as€a€result€of€òòex€parteóóÐ 0Ð Ðcommunications€with€the€Assistant€District€Attorney.€€After€a€thorough€review€ofÏthe€record€before€this€Court,€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€the€judgmentÏof€the€trial€court.ÌÌà@II,®àò òòòFACTSó óóóˆÐ à€ ÐÌà ` àOn€January€14,€1995,€Michael€and€Hannah€Westerman€were€traveling€fromÏtheir€home€in€Kentucky€to€Springfield,€Tennessee,€to€do€some€shopping€and€haveÏdinner.€€From€the€back€of€the€Westermansðð€Chevrolet€pick„up€truck€flew€aÏConfederate€battle€flag,€which€was€attached€to€a€pole€mounted€on€the€truckððs€toolÏbox.€€On€their€way€to€Springfield,€the€Westermans€stopped€at€Janieððs€Market€inÏGuthrie,€Kentucky,€to€get€some€gas.€€Mr.€Westerman€paid€for€the€gas,€and€whileÏhe€and€Mrs.€Westerman€sat€in€the€truck€talking,€Mrs.€Westerman€noticed€a€blackÏman€in€a€dark€blue€car€pointing€at€them.€Ìà ` àMr.€Westerman€pulled€the€truck€onto€the€road,€and€as€they€crossed€intoÏTennessee,€Mrs.€Westerman€noticed€two€(2)€cars,€one€light€blue€and€the€otherÏdark€blue,€following€them.€€Mr.€Westerman€passed€a€car€in€front€of€them,€andÏboth€blue€cars€were€able€to€catch€up€with€the€Westermans.€€Although€theÏWestermansðð€truck€was€traveling€at€approximately€85€miles€per€hour,€the€lightÏblue€car€began€to€pass€them€on€the€left.€€Mr.€Westerman€pushed€Mrs.Ïâ âWesterman€on€the€floorboard€of€the€truck€as€the€car€passed€them.€€After€the€carÐ ð7.0 Ðpassed,€Mrs.€Westerman€sat€up€in€her€seat,€and€Mr.€Westerman€told€her€that€heÏhad€been€shot.Ìâ âà ` àMrs.€Westerman€climbed€over€to€the€driverððs€side€so€that€she€could€driveÏthe€truck.ò ò€ó ó€Suddenly,€the€light€blue€car€came€to€a€complete€stop€in€the€middle€ofÐ 0Ð Ðthe€road€in€front€of€the€Westermansðð€truck,€and€Mrs.€Westerman€saw€a€black€manÏsitting€in€the€car€pointing€a€gun€at€the€truck.€The€dark€blue€car€which€had€beenÏfollowing€the€Westermans€completely€stopped€behind€the€Westerman€vehicle,Ïand€Mrs.€Westerman€was€forced€to€drive€through€a€ditch,€across€an€embankmentÏand€into€a€parking€lot€in€an€attempt€to€flee€the€scene.€€However,€because€the€twoÏcars€had€blocked€her€access€to€the€paved€driveways€into€the€parking€lot,€Mrs.ÏWesterman€had€to€cross€another€ditch€in€order€to€exit€the€parking€lot.€€Mrs.ÏWesterman€then€proceeded€in€the€opposite€direction,€towards€Guthrie,€in€an€effortÏto€seek€medical€attention€for€her€husband€and€avoid€further€confrontation€with€theÏindividuals€in€the€blue€cars.€Ìà ` àMr.€Westerman€died€the€next€day€at€Vanderbilt€Hospital€as€a€result€of€aÏgunshot€wound€to€the€heart.€Ìà ` àShortly€after€the€incident,€the€police€developed€appellant€Darden€as€aÏsuspect€in€the€shooting.€€While€law€enforcement€authorities€were€conducting€anÏinterview€with€Darden€concerning€the€incident,€appellant€Morrow€appeared€at€theÏpolice€station€and€confessed€to€the€shooting.€€In€his€statement€to€the€police,ÏMorrow€acknowledged€that€he€was€a€passenger€in€Dardenððs€car€when€he€shotÏseveral€times€at€the€Westermansðð€truck.€€He€stated€that€they€chased€theÏWestermans€after€someone€in€the€truck€shook€the€Confederate€flag€at€them€andÏshouted€a€racial€epithet.€ò òñDññ:ñ.ñ:ññDñó óÐ 6 ,. Ðà ` àAt€the€time€the€incident€occurred,€both€Morrow€and€Darden€were€seventeenÏ(17)€years€of€age.€€€Tony€Andrews€and€Marcus€Merriweather,€other€passengersÐ à9€02 Ðin€Dardenððs€car€during€the€incident,€were€also€juveniles.€€Andrews€was€seventeenÏ(17)€years€of€age,€and€Merriweather€was€fifteen€(15)€years€of€age.€€€All€four€wereÏcharged€in€juvenile€court€with€the€delinquent€act€of€premeditated€first€degreeÏmurder,€and€upon€a€transfer€hearing€in€that€court,€were€transferred€to€theÏRobertson€County€Circuit€Court€to€be€tried€as€adults.Ìà ` àSubsequently,€Darden,€Morrow,€Andrews€and€Merriweather€were€eachÏindicted€on€one€(1)€count€of€civil€rights€intimidation,€one€(1)€count€of€premeditatedÏfirst€degree€murder,€one€(1)€count€of€felony€murder€and€one€(1)€count€ofÏattempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Andrews€entered€into€a€plea€agreement€withÏthe€state€wherein€he€pled€guilty€to€criminally€negligent€homicide€and€was€placedÏon€diversion€for€two€(2)€years.€€Merriweather€was€tried€on€the€instant€offenses€inÏa€joint€trial€with€Morrow€and€Darden.Ìà ` àAt€trial,€Andrews€testified€for€the€state.€€€Andrews€stated€that€on€theÏafternoon€of€the€incident,€he€and€Darden€were€driving€around€Guthrie€in€DardenððsÏlight€blue€car.€€Merriweather€and€Morrow€eventually€joined€them,€and€they€wentÏto€a€friendððs€house€so€that€Darden€could€collect€some€money€owed€to€him.€WhileÏthey€were€sitting€in€the€car,€they€noticed€a€red€pick„up€with€a€Confederate€flag€onÏits€toolbox€driving€by.€€Subsequently,€they€saw€the€pick„up€truck€parked€atÏJanieððs.€€€Darden€remarked€that€he€wanted€to€fight€the€people€in€the€truck€andÏdrove€to€a€local€hangout€to€inform€others€that€he€intended€to€fight€the€occupantsÏof€the€truck.€The€group€went€back€to€Janieððs,€and€the€truck€was€still€in€the€parkingÏlot.€€The€truck€then€began€to€pull€out€of€the€parking€lot,€and€when€the€truck€wasÏbeside€Dardenððs€car,€Morrow€rolled€his€window€down€and€began€pointing€at€theÏflag.€€€Andrews€testified€that€he€then€saw€someone€reach€out€of€the€truckððs€backÏâ âwindow€and€shake€the€Confederate€flag.€Ð à7€.0 Ðà ` àDardenððs€car€then€pulled€out€of€Janieððs€parking€lot€and€alongside€a€carÏâ âcontaining€Robert€Bell,€Ricky€Williams€and€Michael€Mimms.€ò ò€ó óOctavius€Burks€andÐ P ð ÐMarcus€Darden€were€in€another€car€behind€Bellððs.€€ò ò€ó óWhen€the€Westerman€truckÐ P ð Ðbegan€to€exit€Janieððs,€Appellant€Darden€remarked,€ð ðthere€it€goes.ðð€€Bell€and€BurksÏbegan€to€follow€the€truck,€and€the€Darden€car€turned€around€and€followed€as€well.€Ï€The€Darden€car€was€approximately€four€(4)€cars€behind€the€Westerman€truck,Ïand€Morrow€told€Darden€to€ð ðcatchðð€Bell.€€At€this€point,€Morrow€informed€the€otherÏoccupants€of€the€car€that€he€was€armed.€Ìà ` àThe€Darden€car€caught€up€with€Burks€and€Bell€and€eventually€passed€bothÏcars,€putting€them€directly€behind€the€Westerman€truck.€€€Dardenððs€car€wasÏtraveling€approximately€70€to€80€miles€per€hour,€and€the€truck€began€to€speed€upÏin€front€of€them.€€€Darden€began€to€speed€up,€and€Andrews€heard€shots€fired€fromÏthe€back€seat€on€the€driverððs€side,€where€Morrow€was€sitting.€€Andrews€turnedÏaround€and€saw€Morrow€leaning€out€of€the€window€firing€his€gun.€€€Bell€wasÏfollowing€the€Darden€car€approximately€three€(3)€to€four€(4)€car€lengths€behind.€Ìà ` àBecause€Morrowððs€gun€jammed,€he€began€fumbling€with€the€weapon.€ÏMorrow€then€told€Darden€to€pass€the€Westerman€truck,€and€as€they€started€toÏpass€the€truck€on€the€left€side,€Andrews€heard€another€shot€fired€from€the€sameÏdirection.€€When€the€car€pulled€alongside€the€Westerman€truck,€Andrews€heardÏanother€shot€fired€from€the€back€passenger€seat.€€€After€they€passed€the€truck,ÏAndrews€noticed€that€the€truck€slowed€down.€€Darden€began€to€slow€down€andÏthen€stopped€his€vehicle€in€the€middle€of€the€road.€€€The€truck€stopped€behindÏthem,€and€Morrow€leaned€out€of€his€window,€pointed€his€gun€at€the€truck€andÏexclaimed,€ð ð[Iððve]€got€them€now.ðð€€€The€truck€veered€off€into€a€ditch,€and€MorrowÏâ âcontinued€to€fire€his€gun.€€Eventually,€the€truck€was€able€to€maneuver€through€theÐ 8 .0 Ðditch,€out€of€the€parking€lot€and€back€onto€the€road€proceeding€in€the€oppositeÏdirection.€€Ìâ âà ` àMorrow€testified€on€his€own€behalf€at€trial.€€He€stated€that€on€the€day€of€theÏincident,€he€was€carrying€a€gun€for€protection€because€his€life€had€beenÏthreatened.€€He€testified€that€they€followed€the€Westerman€truck€because€all€ofÏthe€occupants€in€the€car€were€ð ðlooking€for€a€fight.ðð€€€Although€he€acknowledgedÏthat€they€wanted€to€fight€because€someone€in€the€truck€waved€the€ConfederateÏflag,€he€insisted€that€he€did€not€shoot€at€the€truck€because€of€the€flag.€€Instead,Ïhe€testified€that€as€Darden€began€to€pass€the€Westerman€truck,€Darden,ÏMerriweather€and€Andrews€started€yelling,€ð ðshoot!ðð€€Because€of€the€ð ðpressureððÏfrom€the€others€in€the€car,€he€started€firing€his€gun€into€the€air.€€He€stated€that€heÏnever€told€Darden€to€stop€his€car€in€the€road€and€did€not€point€his€gun€at€the€truckÏwhen€the€car€was€stopped.€€He€further€testified€that€he€never€intended€to€harmÏanyone€during€the€incident.€€Ìà ` àAppellant€Darden€also€testified€for€the€defense€at€trial.€€He€claimed€that€noÏone€in€the€car€discussed€fighting€with€the€occupants€of€the€truck.€€He€wasÏoffended€when€someone€in€the€truck€shook€the€flag,€but€had€no€intention€ofÏshooting€anyone.€€He€was€chasing€the€truck€to€ð ðmessðð€with€its€occupants€and€didÏnot€know€that€Morrow€was€armed.€€€He€denied€that€anyone€in€the€car€coercedÏMorrow€into€shooting€his€weapon.€€When€he€heard€the€gunshots,€he€assumedÏthat€the€truck€was€merely€ð ðbackfiring.ðð€€He€further€denied€stopping€in€the€roadwayÏor€attempting€to€ð ðbox€inðð€the€Westermansðð€truck.€Ìà ` àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€proof,€the€trial€court€found€both€Morrow€andÏDarden€guilty€of€one€(1)€count€of€civil€rights€intimidation,€one€(1)€count€of€firstÏdegree€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€an€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€andÏone€(1)€count€of€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Merriweather€was€acquittedÐ Ð9p02 Ðof€all€charges.€€Both€Morrow€and€Darden€were€sentenced€to€life€imprisonment€forÏfirst€degree€murder.€€Morrow€was€sentenced€as€a€Range€I€offender€to€consecutiveÏterms€of€four€(4)€years€for€civil€rights€intimidation€and€five€(5)€years€for€attemptedÏaggravated€kidnapping.€€€Darden€received€Range€I€sentences€of€three€(3)€yearsÏfor€civil€rights€intimidation€and€four€(4)€years€for€attempted€aggravatedÏkidnapping,€to€run€concurrently€with€each€other€but€consecutively€to€the€lifeÏsentence€for€first€degree€murder.€€From€their€convictions€and€sentences,Ïappellants€now€bring€this€appeal€as€of€right.ÌÌà@  ®àò òòòMOTION€TO€DISMISS€„€MORROW€AND€DARDENó óóóˆÐ Ðp ÐÌà ` àBoth€appellants€maintain€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€dismissÏCounts€One,€Three€and€Four€of€the€indictment€charging€them€with€civil€rightsÏintimidation,€felony€murder€and€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€AppellantsÏclaim€that€they€were€transferred€on€the€charge€of€premeditated€first€degreeÏmurder€only,€and€there€was€no€determination€made€in€the€juvenile€court€whetherÏappellants€were€subject€to€be€tried€as€adults€on€the€charges€of€civil€rightsÏintimidation,€felony€murder€and€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€AppellantsÏtherefore€argue€that€the€œñJñCñJññKñcñKñircuit›€œñLñCñLññMñcñMñourt›€lacked€jurisdiction€over€the€charges€notÏproperly€transferred€from€juvenile€court,€and€they€were€erroneously€indicted€onÏthese€charges€as€a€result.Ìà ` àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a)€provides€for€the€transfer€of€a€juvenile€toÏcriminal€court€ð ðto€be€held€according€to€law€and€to€be€dealt€with€as€an€adult€in€theÏcriminal€courtðð€once€a€petition€alleging€delinquency€has€been€filed.€€Effective€JulyÏ1,€1994,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(c)€was€amended€to€provide€for€theÏfollowing:ÓÓÐ à9€02 Їà8 ` àà ¸ à(c)€The€transfer€pursuant€to€subsection€(a)€terminatesÏjurisdiction€of€the€juvenile€court€with€respect€to€any€and€allÏdelinquent€acts€with€which€the€child€may€then€or€thereafter€beÏcharged,€and€the€child€shall€thereafter€be€dealt€with€as€an€adult€asÏto€all€pending€and€subsequent€criminal€charges;€€provided,€that€if€aÏchild€transferred€pursuant€to€this€section€is€acquitted€in€criminalÏcourt€on€the€charge€or€charges€resulting€in€such€transfer,€or€if€suchÏcharge€or€charges€are€dismissed€in€such€court,€this€subsection€shallÏnot€apply€and€the€juvenile€court€shall€retain€jurisdiction€over€suchÏchild.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓà ` àAlthough€the€juvenile€courts€retain€original€and€exclusive€jurisdiction€overÏjuvenile€matters,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„103,€a€transfer€pursuant€to€Tenn.Ð ø˜  ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a)€vests€jurisdiction€in€the€criminal€courts€over€the€juvenile.€ÏSubsection€(c)€serves€to€divest€the€juvenile€court€of€its€jurisdiction€over€the€childÏð ðwith€respect€to€any€and€all€delinquent€acts€with€which€the€child€may€then€orÏthereafter€be€charged.ðð€€Once€the€criminal€court€obtains€jurisdiction€over€the€child,Ïthe€child€is€to€be€ð ðdealt€with€as€an€adult€as€to€all€pending€and€subsequent€criminalÏcharges.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(c).Ìà ` àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€appellants,€upon€being€duly€transferred€fromÐ ˆ#( Ðjuvenile€court,€were€subject€to€indictment€by€the€Grand€Jury€of€Robertson€County.€ÏThe€grand€jurors€found€probable€cause€to€believe€that€appellants€committed€notÏonly€the€offense€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder,€but€also€the€offenses€ofÏfelony€murder,€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation.€€WeÏbelieve€that€appellants€were€properly€ð ðdealt€with€as€[adults]€as€to€all€pending€andÏsubsequent€criminal€chargesðð€within€the€meaning€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„¼134(c).Ìà ` àFurthermore,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(e)€provides€that€ð ðno€child,€eitherÏbefore€or€after€reaching€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age,€shall€be€prosecuted€for€anÏoffense€previously€committed€unless€òòthe€caseóó€has€been€transferred€as€providedÐ è6ˆ-/ Ðin€subsection€(a).ðð€€Emphasis€added.€€Generally,€when€construing€a€statute,€everyÐ Ø8x/1 Ðword€within€the€statute€is€presumed€to€ð ðhave€meaning€and€purpose€and€shouldÏbe€given€full€effect.ðð€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€29„30€(Tenn.€1996)€(quotingÐ P ð ÐòòMarsh€v.€Hendersonóó,€221€Tenn.€42,€424€S.W.2d€193,€196€(1968)).€€If€theÐ @ à Ðlegislature€had€intended€for€the€juvenile€transfer€hearing€to€be€offense„specific,Ïð ðoffenseðð€or€ð ðchargeðð€should€have€been€substituted€for€the€word€ð ðcase.ðð€€Similarly,ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a)€provides€for€the€transfer€of€the€ð ðchild,ðð€not€theÏð ðoffense.ððÌà ` àCertainly,€this€Court€in€no€way€aims€to€trivialize€the€importance€of€theÏprobable€cause€determination€within€the€juvenile€transfer€hearing€context.€€TheÏjuvenile€court€must€find€that€there€are€ð ðreasonable€groundsðð€to€believe€that€theÏchild€committed€the€delinquent€act€in€order€to€properly€transfer€the€child€toÏcriminal€court.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a)(4)(A).€€However,€we€do€not€agreeÏwith€appellantsðð€interpretation€of€the€statute.Ìà ` àMoreover,€even€if€this€Court€were€to€find€that€the€offenses€of€felony€murder,Ïattempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation€were€not€properlyÏtransferred€from€juvenile€court€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134,Ïappellants€would€not€necessarily€be€entitled€to€relief.€€ð ð[T]he€absence€of€a€transferÏorder€cannot€be€said€to€affect€the€courtððs€subject€matter€jurisdiction,€which,€in€aÏreal€sense,€is€concurrent€with€that€of€the€juvenile€court€as€to€certain€offensesÏcommitted€by€children€falling€within€a€specified€age€span.ðð€€òòSawyers€v.€Stateóó,€814Ð 0.Ð$& ÐS.W.2d€725,€729€(Tenn.€1991);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Haleóó,€833€S.W.2d€65,€67€(Tenn.Ð  0À&( Ð1992).€€The€failure€to€properly€transfer€a€child€from€juvenile€court€is€subject€to€aÏharmless€error€analysis,€with€this€Courtððs€primary€inquiry€being€whether€transferÏfrom€juvenile€court€would€have€been€appropriate.€€òòSawyers€v.€Stateóó,€814€S.W.2dÐ ð5,. Ðâ âat€729.Ð à7€.0 Ðà ` àA€child€may€be€transferred€from€juvenile€court€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïâ âðð€37„1„134(a),€if€the€juvenile€court€finds€ð ðreasonable€grounds€to€believe€that:€€(A)Ï[t]he€child€committed€the€delinquent€act€as€alleged;€(B)€[t]he€child€is€notÏcommittable€to€an€institution€for€the€mentally€retarded€or€mentally€ill;€€and€(C)€[t]heÏinterests€of€the€community€require€that€the€child€be€put€under€legal€restraint€orÏdiscipline.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a)(4).€€In€determining€that€transfer€wasÏappropriate,€the€juvenile€court€found€that€appellants€were€not€committable€to€aÏmental€institution€and€that€it€was€in€the€best€interest€of€the€community€thatÏappellants€be€put€under€legal€restraint.€€Although€the€juvenile€court€did€notÏspecifically€find€ð ðreasonable€grounds€to€believeðð€that€appellants€committed€theÏoffenses€of€felony€murder,€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rightsÏintimidation,€clearly€there€were€reasonable€grounds€in€that€appellants€wereÏsubsequently€found€guilty€of€these€offenses€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€As€aÏresult,€we€find€that€transfer€would€have€been€appropriate€on€these€offenses,€andÏany€error€in€the€transfer€procedure€is€at€worst€harmless.Ìà ` àAdditionally,€this€Court€notes€that€the€state€dismissed€the€premeditated€firstÏdegree€murder€count€against€Darden,€and€Morrow€was€acquitted€of€that€offense.€Ï€At€first€glance,€this€would€appear€to€trigger€the€second€clause€of€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€37„1„134(c)€which€provides,€ð ðif€a€child€transferred€pursuant€to€this€sectionÏis€acquitted€in€criminal€court€on€the€charge€or€charges€resulting€in€such€transfer,Ïor€if€such€charge€or€charges€are€dismissed€in€such€court,€this€subsection€shall€notÏapply€and€the€juvenile€court€shall€retain€jurisdiction€over€such€child.ðð€€BecauseÏneither€appellant€was€convicted€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder,€theÏdelinquent€act€alleged€in€juvenile€court,€a€strict€reading€of€that€clause€couldÏarguably€require€that€the€juvenile€court€assume€jurisdiction€over€the€appellants.€ÏHowever,€as€the€state€points€out,€a€literal€interpretation€of€the€statute€would€alsoÐ Ð9p02 Ðrequire€the€juvenile€court€to€retain€jurisdiction€in€instances€where€the€juvenile€wasÏacquitted€of€the€charged€offense,€but€convicted€of€a€lesser€included€offense.€€WeÏdo€not€believe€that€the€legislature€intended€such€an€absurd€result.Ìà ` àThis€Courtððs€primary€duty€in€construing€a€statute€is€ð ðto€ascertain€and€giveÏeffect€to€the€legislative€intent€without€unduly€restricting€or€expanding€a€statuteððsÏcoverage€beyond€its€intended€scope.ðð€€òòOwens€v.€Stateóó,€908€S.W.2d€923,€926Ð °  Ð(Tenn.€1995);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€940€S.W.2d€558,€561€(Tenn.€1997).€Ð    ÐLegislative€intent€should€be€gleaned€from€the€ð ðnatural€and€ordinary€meaning€ofÏthe€language€used,€without€a€forced€or€subtle€construction€that€would€limit€orÏextend€the€meaning€of€the€language.ðð€€òòCarter€v.€Stateóó,€952€S.W.2d€417,€419Ð Ðp Ð(Tenn.€1997).€€Furthermore,€this€Court€should€construe€a€statute€so€that€itsÏcomponent€parts€are€consistent€and€reasonable,€and€inconsistent€parts€shouldÏbe€harmonized,€where€possible.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€30.Ð   @ Ðà ` àOnce€a€juvenile€has€been€transferred€out€of€juvenile€court€pursuant€toÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a),€the€criminal€court€has€jurisdiction€to€indict€andÏtry€that€juvenile€as€an€adult.€€The€criminal€court€thereafter€has€jurisdiction€over€theÏchild,€unless€the€transfer€proceedings€are,€in€effect,€reversed€by€reason€ofÏacquittal€or€dismissal€of€all€the€charges€in€the€criminal€court.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€37„1„134(c).€€If€the€child€is€completely€absolved€of€all€criminal€charges,€and€theÏtransfer€proceedings€are€rendered€invalid€as€a€result,€the€juvenile€court€thenÏretains€jurisdiction€over€the€child.€€òòId.óóÐ  0À&( Ðà ` àWe€think€that€the€second€clause€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(c)€appliesÏonly€when€the€juvenile€is€fully€exonerated€on€the€charges€brought€against€him€orÏher€in€criminal€court.€€We€think€this€to€be€a€more€sensible€interpretation€of€theÏphrase,€ð ðcharge€or€charges€resulting€in€such€transfer.ðð€€Principles€of€doubleÏjeopardy€might€be€implicated€if€appellants€were€forced€to€endure€a€delinquencyÐ Ð9p02 Ðhearing€after€having€been€found€guilty€of€these€crimes€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€However,€if€the€juvenile€court€were€to€retain€jurisdiction€over€theÏappellants€and€a€delinquency€hearing€were€barred€by€double€jeopardy,€appellantsÏwould€effectively€receive€no€penalty€for€these€very€serious€crimes.€€Indeed,€suchÏa€result€would€contravene€the€principles€and€purposes€of€the€penal€laws€of€thisÏstate.Ìà ` àAccordingly,€we€conclude€that€appellants€were€properly€indicted€on€CountsÏOne,€Three€and€Four,€charging€them€with€civil€rights€intimidation,€felony€murderÏand€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@˜ ˜ ®àò òòòCONSTITUTIONALITY€OF€TENN.€CODE€ANN.€ðð€37„1„159ˆÐ À` Ðà@»»&®àMORROW€AND€DARDENó óóóˆÐ À` ÐÌà ` àAppellants€also€claim€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„159(d)€isÏunconstitutional€in€that€it€denies€them€the€right€to€seek€an€acceptance€hearing€inÏcriminal€court€because€they€were€transferred€out€of€juvenile€court€by€a€lawyerÏjudge.€€Darden€argues€that€the€abolition€of€an€acceptance€hearing€under€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€37„1„159(d)€deprives€him€of€due€process€of€law.€€Morrow€assertsÏthat€there€is€no€rational€basis€for€distinguishing€between€those€juvenilesÏtransferred€by€lawyer€€and€non„lawyer€judges;€therefore,€the€denial€of€anÏacceptance€hearing€for€those€juveniles€transferred€by€lawyer€judges€is€aÏdeprivation€of€equal€protection€of€the€law.Ìà ` àPrior€to€April€15,€1994,€all€juveniles€transferred€from€juvenile€court€had€theÏright€to€seek€an€acceptance€hearing€in€criminal€court€to€determine€whether€theÏcriminal€court€would€accept€jurisdiction€over€the€child.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„¼159€(1991).€€However,€effective€April€15,€1994,€the€Tennessee€LegislatureÐ ð902 Ðabolished€the€right€to€seek€an€acceptance€hearing€for€those€juveniles€transferredÏby€a€lawyer€judge.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„159(d)€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€ð ð[i]fÏand€only€if€a€nonlawyer€judge€presides€at€the€transfer€hearing€in€juvenile€court,Ïthen€the€criminal€court,€upon€motion€of€the€child€filed€within€ten€(10)€days€of€theÏjuvenile€court€order,€excluding€nonjudicial€days,€shall€hold€a€hearing€asÏexpeditiously€as€possible€to€determine€whether€it€will€accept€jurisdiction€over€theÏchild.ððÌà ` àThe€right€to€a€transfer€hearing€is€ð ðsufficiently€fundamental€to€be€consideredÏa€matter€of€due€process,€in€the€context€of€juvenile€justice.ðð€€òòSawyers€v.€Stateóó,€814Ð à€ ÐS.W.2d€at€729.€€The€transfer€hearing€in€juvenile€court€has€been€likened€to€aÏpreliminary€hearing€with€regard€to€the€issue€of€probable€cause.€€òòState€v.€Womackóó,Ð À` Ð591€S.W.2d€437,€443€(Tenn.€App.€1979).€€However,€the€acceptance€hearing€inÏcriminal€court€was€created€by€statute€as€a€review€of€the€juvenile€courtððs€decisionÏto€transfer€a€juvenile€into€criminal€court.€€òòColyer€v.€Stateóó,€577€S.W.2d€460,€463€n.Ð "0 Ð2€(Tenn.€1979).€€There€is€no€constitutional€right€to€such€an€acceptance€hearingÏin€criminal€court.€€òòState€v.€Joshua€McDanielóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9605„CC„00178,Ð p& ÐMcMinn€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€June€5,€1997,€at€Knoxville).€€Furthermore,Ïother€avenues€of€review€exist€for€a€juvenile€to€appeal€the€juvenile€courtððs€decisionÏto€transfer,€including€preserving€the€issue€on€appeal€to€this€Court.€€òòState€v.€Griffinóó,Ð @,à"$ Ð914€S.W.2d€564,€566€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Darden€was€not€denied€dueÏprocess€of€law€by€the€abolition€of€an€acceptance€hearing€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€37„1„159(d).Ìà ` àMorrow€contends€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„159(d)€deprives€him€ofÏequal€protection€of€the€laws€under€Article€I,€ðð€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€ÏAs€no€fundamental€right€or€suspect€classification€is€involved,€this€Courtððs€inquiryÏis€limited€to€a€rational€basis€review.€€òòState€v.€Rayóó,€880€S.W.2d€700,€706€(Tenn.Ð Ð9p02 ÐCrim.€App.€1993).€€Under€this€review,€this€Court€must€uphold€the€statute€if€theÏclassification€is€rationally€related€to€a€legitimate€governmental€interest.€€òòId.óóÐ P ð Ðà ` àAlthough€the€juvenile€transfer€hearing€is€considered€ð ðfundamentalðð€in€theÏcontext€of€juvenile€justice,€there€is€no€right€to€an€attorney€juvenile€judge€at€theÏtransfer€hearing.€€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€637€S.W.2d€471,€474€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982);Ð  À ÐòòState€v.€Brileyóó,€619€S.W.2d€149,€152€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€In€abolishing€theÐ °  Ðright€to€seek€an€acceptance€hearing€for€juveniles€transferred€by€a€lawyer€judge,Ïthe€legislature€saw€fit€to€retain€the€added€tier€of€review€for€those€juvenilesÏtransferred€by€€judges€not€formally€trained€in€the€law.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„Ð à€ Ð1„159(d).€€Our€Supreme€Court€has€recognized€the€significance€of€lawyer€versusÏnon„lawyer€judges€within€the€context€of€deprivation€of€liberty.€€òòSeeóó€òòCity€of€WhiteÐ À` ÐHouse€v.€Whitleyóó,€òò€€€€€óó€S.W.2d€òò€€€€€€óó€(Tenn.€1998);€òòState€òòex€rel.óó€Anglin€v.€Mitchellóó,Ð °P Ð596€S.W.2d€779,€791€(Tenn.€1980).€€Therefore,€due€to€the€significant€issuesÏinvolved€in€a€juvenile€transfer€hearing,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134(a),€(d),Ð "0 Ðwe€find€the€distinction€between€those€transferred€by€a€non„lawyer€as€opposed€toÏa€lawyer€to€be€neither€arbitrary€nor€capricious.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Rayóó,€880€S.W.2d€atÐ p& Ð706.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„159(d)€does€not€violate€Morrowððs€rights€to€equalÏprotection€of€the€law.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@d d ®àò òòòTENN.€CODE€ANN.€ðð€22„1„102€„€MORROWó óóóˆÐ  0À&( ÐÌà ` àIn€his€next€issue,€appellant€Morrow€asserts€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€22„1„¼102€violates€the€Americans€with€Disabilities€Act€(ð ðADAðð),€42€U.S.C.€ðð€12101,€òòetÐ 6 ,. Ðseq.óó,€and€the€Rehabilitation€Act€of€1973€(ð ðRehabilitation€Actðð),€29€U.S.C.€ðð€701,Ð ð7.0 Ðòòet€seq.óó€€He€argues€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€22„1„102€excludes€ð ð[p]ersons€ofÐ à9€02 Ðunsound€mind€and€habitual€drunkardsðð€from€jury€service.€€Because€theseÏindividuals€are€considered€ð ðhandicappedðð€within€the€meaning€of€the€RehabilitationÏAct€and€the€ADA,€he€maintains€that€the€state€statute€runs€afoul€of€the€federalÏstatutes.€€As€a€result,€he€claims€that€he€was€indicted€by€a€grand€jury€which€wasÏnot€composed€of€a€representative€cross„section€of€the€community.Ìà ` àThe€ADA€and€the€Rehabilitation€Act€prohibit€an€entity€from€discriminatingÏagainst€a€qualified€individual€with€a€disability,€or€excluding€that€individual€ð ðfromÏparticipation€in€or€œñNñ[being]ñNññOñ.›€.›€.ñOñ›€denied€the€benefits€of€[its]€services,€programs,€orÏactivities.ðð€€42€U.S.C.€ðð€12132;€òòsee€alsoóó€29€U.S.C.€ðð€794.€€However,€because€theÐ à€ ÐRehabilitation€Act€applies€only€to€entities€receiving€ð ðFederal€financial€assistance,ððÏit€is€inapplicable€in€this€case.€€29€U.S.C.€ðð€794(a);€òòseeóó€òòState€òòex€rel.óó€McCormickÐ À` Ðv.€Bursonóó,€894€S.W.2d€739,€747€(Tenn.€App.€1994).€€Therefore,€we€will€restrictÐ °P Ðour€review€to€Morrowððs€claim€under€the€ADA,€which€does€apply€to€stateÏgovernments.€€42€U.S.C.€ðð€12131(1)(A);€òòMcCormick€v.€Bursonóó,€894€S.W.2d€atÐ "0 Ð747.Ìà ` àUnder€the€ADA,€ð ð€no€qualified€individual€with€a€disability€shall,€by€reasonÏof€such€disability,€be€excluded€from€participation€in€or€be€denied€the€benefits€ofÏthe€services,€programs,€or€activities€of€a€public€entity,€or€be€subjected€toÏdiscrimination€by€any€such€entity.ðð€€42€U.S.C.€ðð€12132.€€A€ð ðqualified€individual€withÏa€disabilityðð€is€defined€as€ð ðan€individual€with€a€disability€who,€with€or€withoutÏreasonable€modifications€to€rules,€policies,€or€practices€.€.€.€meets€the€essentialÏeligibility€requirements€for€the€receipt€of€services€or€the€participation€in€programsÏor€activities€provided€by€a€public€entity.ðð€€42€U.S.C.€ðð€12131(2).€€Thus,€in€order€toÏprove€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€22„1„102€contravenes€the€ADA,€there€must€be€aÏshowing€that€ð ðpersons€of€unsound€mind€and€habitual€drunkardsðð€are€otherwiseÏqualified€to€serve€as€jurors.€€In€other€words,€appellant€must€demonstrate€that,Ð Ð9p02 Ðnotwithstanding€their€handicap,€these€individuals€meet€all€of€the€requirements€ofÏjurors.€€òòSeeóó€òòSoutheastern€Community€College€v.€Davisóó,€442€U.S.€397,€406,€€99Ð P ð ÐS.Ct.€2361,€2367,€60€L.Ed.2d€980€(1979)€(holding€that€an€ð ðotherwise€qualifiedÏindividualðð€under€the€Rehabilitation€Act€is€ð ðone€who€is€able€to€meet€all€of€aÏprogramððs€requirements€in€spite€of€his€handicapðð).Ìà ` àThe€grand€jury€serves€an€important€function,€as€its€members€are€called€onÏto€ð ðexamine[]€and€scrutinize[]€evidence€in€support€of€[a]€charge,€and€must€thenÏsay€from€that€whether€there€is€probable€cause€to€believe€that€the€person€inÏquestion€committed€the€offense€and€should€be€formally€accused€thereof€by€anÏindictment€or€presentment€and€brought€to€trial.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hudsonóó,€487€S.W.2dÐ Ðp Ð672,€674€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1972).€€Certainly,€the€state€has€a€legitimate€interestÏin€assuring€that€those€making€determinations€involving€the€fundamental€interestÏof€liberty€possess€a€sound€and€sober€mind.€€It€is€illogical€to€assume€that€€ð ðpersonsÏof€unsound€mind€and€habitual€drunkardsðð€are€able€to€rationally€analyze€evidenceÏto€determine€whether€an€indictment€should€be€issued.€€We,€therefore,€concludeÏthat€ð ðpersons€of€unsound€mind€and€habitual€drunkardsðð€are€not€properlyÏð ðqualifiedðð€within€the€meaning€of€the€ADA,€and€as€a€result,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€22„¼1„102€does€not€violate€the€ADA.Ìà ` àFurthermore,€this€Court€sincerely€doubts€that€Morrow€has€standing€to€raiseÏa€claim€under€the€ADA.€€The€ADA€establishes€a€òòcivil€remedyóó€for€those€personsÐ 0.Ð$& Ðð ðalleging€discrimination€on€the€basis€of€[a]€disability.ðð€€42€U.S.C.€ðð€12133;€òòseeÐ  0À&( Ðalsoóó€29€U.S.C.€ðð€794a(a)(2)€(establishing€a€remedy€for€ð ðany€person€aggrievedððÐ 2°(* Ðby€reason€of€his€or€her€disability).€€There€is€no€showing€that€Morrow€wasÏdiscriminated€against€on€the€basis€of€a€disability.€€Additionally,€even€if€this€CourtÏwere€to€find€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€22„1„102€violates€the€ADA,€this€would€notÏnecessitate€a€reversal€of€Morrowððs€conviction€or€a€dismissal€of€the€indictment.Ð Ð9p02 Ðà ` àMorrow€also€claims€that,€due€to€the€exclusion€of€habitual€drunkards€andÏpersons€of€unsound€mind€from€the€grand€jury,€he€was€denied€a€jury€representingÏa€fair€cross„section€of€the€community€in€violation€of€his€constitutional€rights.€€AÏstate€is€ð ðfree€to€prescribe€relevant€qualifications€for€[its]€jurors€and€to€provideÏreasonable€exemptions€so€long€as€it€may€be€fairly€said€that€the€jury€lists€or€panelsÏare€representative€of€the€community.ðð€€òòTaylor€v.€Louisianaóó,€419€U.S.€522,€538,€95Ð °  ÐS.Ct.€692,€701,€42€L.Ed.2d€690€(1975).€€The€United€States€Supreme€Court€hasÏheld€that,€in€order€to€establish€a€prima€facie€violation€of€the€fair€cross„sectionÏrequirement,€the€appellant€must€demonstrate:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€that€the€group€alleged€to€be€excluded€is€a€ð ðdistinctiveðð€group€inÏthe€community;€€(2)€that€the€representation€of€this€group€in€veniresÏfrom€which€juries€are€selected€is€not€fair€and€reasonable€in€relationÏto€the€number€of€such€persons€in€the€community;€€and€(3)€that€thisÏunderrepresentation€is€due€to€systematic€exclusion€of€the€group€inÏthe€jury-selection€process.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓòòDuren€v.€Missourióó,€439€U.S.€357,€364,€99€S.Ct.€664,€668,€58€L.Ed.2d€579€(1979);Ð ˜!8 Ðòòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Bellóó,€745€S.W.2d€858,€860„61€(Tenn.€1988).Ð ˆ#( Ðà ` àMorrow€has€failed€to€prove€any€of€the€aforementioned€factors.€€The€bareÏallegation€that€he€was€denied€a€jury€composed€of€a€fair€cross„section€of€theÏcommunity€as€a€result€of€the€exclusion€of€persons€of€unsound€minds€and€habitualÏdrunkards€from€jury€service€is€insufficient€to€establish€a€constitutional€violation.€ÏAs€such,€this€argument€must€fail.Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@Ý Ý ®àò òòòRECUSAL€OF€TRIAL€JUDGE€„€DARDENó óóóˆÐ 3¨)+ ÐÌà ` àIn€his€next€issue,€Darden€claims€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€failing€to€recuseÏhimself€after€having€òòex€parteóó€communications€with€an€Assistant€District€Attorney.€Ð è8ˆ/1 ÐHe€asserts€that€such€communication€was€improper€and€created€an€appearanceÏof€impropriety.€€Therefore,€he€maintains€that€the€trial€judge€abused€its€discretionÏin€failing€to€recuse€himself.Ìà ` àSeveral€months€prior€to€trial€Assistant€Attorney€General€Dent€MorrissÏlearned€that€Darden€and€Marcus€Merriweather,€who€had€been€released€on€bond,Ïhad€felony€charges€pending€against€them€in€Kentucky.€€General€Morriss€traveledÏto€Kentucky,€verified€that€this€information€was€correct€and€was€informed€that€bothÏDarden€and€Merriweather€were€scheduled€to€be€transported€to€a€juvenile€facilityÏin€Eastern€Kentucky.€€€Out€of€concern€that€a€lengthy€extradition€process€would€beÏnecessary€in€order€to€secure€Darden€and€Merriweatherððs€presence€in€court,ÏMorriss€prepared€an€order€revoking€their€bond.€€Counsel€for€both€defendantsÏwere€notified€of€the€stateððs€intentions.ñHñ׃×ñHññHñ׃×ñHñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð °P Ðà ` àGeneral€Morriss€brought€the€order€to€Judge€Wedemeyer,€who€wasÏpresiding€over€another€trial€at€the€time.€€Morriss€and€Judge€Wedemeyer€engagedÏin€a€conversation€lasting€approximately€thirty€(30)€seconds,€whereby€MorrissÏinformed€him€of€the€situation€and€presented€certified€copies€of€the€KentuckyÏcharging€instruments.€€Judge€Wedemeyer€signed€the€order€revoking€defendantsððÏbond,€on€the€condition€that€a€full€hearing€on€the€issue€would€be€held€within€fourÏ(4)€days.€€Four€days€later,€a€bond€hearing€was€held,€and€the€trial€court€orderedÏthat€defendantsðð€bond€remain€revoked.ñHñ׃ˆ×ñHññHñ׃ˆ×ñHñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð 0.Ð$& Ðà ` àSubsequently,€Darden€and€Merriweather€filed€a€motion€for€recusal,Ïclaiming€that€Judge€Wedemeyerððs€impartiality€was€tainted€by€the€òòex€parteóóÐ 2°(* Ðcommunications€with€the€Assistant€District€Attorney.€€At€the€conclusion€of€theÏhearing€on€the€motion€to€recuse,€the€trial€judge€found€that€he€could€be€impartialÏdespite€any€òòex€parteóó€communications€with€the€state.€€€The€trial€court€stated:Ð @ à ÐÓÓà8 ` àThe€issue€on€Monday€that€brought€this€all€up,€like€I€said,€it€wasÏprobably€all€of€30€seconds,€pertains€to€bond.€€This€Court,€not€on€aÏdaily€basis€but€certainly€on€a€weekly€basis,€hears€bond€matters€onÏcases€that€are€going€to€eventually€go€to€trial€before€this€Court.€€In€theÏprocess€of€that€the€Court€hears€things€both€favorable€andÏunfavorable€to€defendants€on€bond€issues.€€Just€numerous,Ïnumerous€times€the€Court€has€heard€on€different€defendants€on€whyÏtheir€bond€should€be€reduced€or€modified€from€the€Defense€andÏfrom€the€State€why€the€bond€should€remain€at€a€high€level€fromÏSessions€Court€or€why€bond€should€be€revoked,€et€cetera.€€TheÏCourt€believes€that€[it]€is€able€to€go€ahead€and€preside€on€thoseÏcases€keeping€in€mind€that€this€Court€practiced€law€for€13€years€andÏhas€been€on€the€bench€more€than€5.€€I€have€to€follow€the€law€and€notÏconsider€bond€issues€later€during€the€trial€unless€they€somehowÏwork€themselves€into€the€evidence€in€an€appropriate€manner.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà ` à.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 ` àà ¸ àI€do€not€find€that€the€recusal€motion€should€be€granted.€€I€doÏnot€think€that€my€impartiality,€and€I€realize€itððs€kind€of€difficult€whenÏyou€are€ruling€on€your€own€impartiality,€I€believe€that€I€will€continueÏto€be€fair€and€impartial€to€the€defendants€in€this€case€despite€signingÏthat€order.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓà ` àA€motion€to€recuse€is€a€matter€that€rests€within€the€sound€discretion€of€theÏtrial€court,€which€will€not€be€overturned€on€appeal€unless€an€abuse€of€discretionÏis€evident€from€the€record.€€òòState€v.€Hinesóó,€919€S.W.2d€573,€578€(Tenn.€1995);Ð P*ð " ÐòòState€v.€Smithóó,€906€S.W.2d€6,€11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€A€trial€judge€shouldÐ @,à"$ Ðrecuse€himself€whenever€he€has€any€doubt€as€to€his€ability€to€preside€impartiallyÏor€whenever€his€ð ðimpartiality€might€reasonably€be€questioned.ðð€€S.Ct.€Rule€10,ÏCanon€3(C)(1)€(1995);€òòState€v.€Hinesóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€578;€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932Ð 2°(* ÐS.W.2d€467,€472€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòState€v.€Cashóó,€867€S.W.2d€741,€749Ð 4 *, Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€However,€the€issue€for€this€Court€to€consider€is€whetherÏthe€trial€judge€ð ðcommitted€an€error€which€resulted€in€an€unjust€disposition€of€theÏcase.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hurleyóó,€876€S.W.2d€57,€64€(Tenn.€1993).Ð Ð9p02 Ðà ` àThe€trial€judge€found€that€he€could€remain€impartial€notwithstanding€hisÏcommunication€with€the€Assistant€District€Attorney.€€Certainly,€the€fact€that€theÏtrial€judge€acquitted€Merriweather€of€all€charges€is€indicative€of€his€impartiality.€ÏThe€trial€judge€assured€the€parties€that€he€would€disregard€any€irrelevantÏinformation€during€the€defendantsðð€trial,€and€there€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€showÏotherwise.€€We€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€from€the€record.Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@› › ®àò òòòSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCE€„€MORROW€AND€DARDENó óóóˆÐ à€ ÐÌà ` àIn€their€next€issue,€both€appellants€contend€that€the€evidence€wasÏinsufficient€to€support€their€convictions.€€In€a€bench€trial,€the€verdict€of€a€trial€judgeÏis€entitled€to€the€same€weight€on€appeal€as€a€jury€verdict.€€òòState€v.€Hatchettóó,€560Ð ° P ÐS.W.2d€627,€630€(Tenn.€1978);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Hortonóó,€880€S.W.2d€€732,€734Ð  "@ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€A€guilty€verdict€accredits€the€stateððs€witnesses€and€allÏconflicts€are€resolved€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803Ð €&  Ð(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€On€appeal,€theÐ p(  Ðstate€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€legitimateÏor€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòId.óóÐ P,ð"$ Ðà ` à€€This€Court€is€not€at€liberty€to€reweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòStateÐ @.à$& Ðv.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Furthermore,€this€Court€will€notÐ 00Ð&( Ðdisturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€due€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€unless€theÏdefendant€demonstrates€that€the€facts€contained€in€the€record€and€the€inferencesÏwhich€may€be€drawn€therefrom€are€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€for€a€rationalÏtrier€of€fact€to€find€the€accused€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.Ð ð7.0 ÐBreweróó,€932€S.W.2d€1,€19€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Accordingly,€it€is€this€CourtððsÐ à9€02 Ðduty€to€affirm€the€convictions€if€the€evidence,€viewed€under€these€standards,€wasÏsufficient€for€any€rational€trier€of€fact€to€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€theÏoffense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,Ð @ à Ð443€U.S.€307,€317,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,Ð 0Ð Ð875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994).Ìà@77 ®àò òA.€€Civil€Rights€Intimidationó óˆÐ °  Ðà ` àAppellants€claim€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€theirÏconvictions€for€civil€rights€intimidation€because€there€was€no€evidence€presentedÏat€trial€that€the€victims€in€this€case,€Michael€and€Hannah€Westerman,€wereÏexercising€a€constitutional€right€at€the€time€of€the€incident.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„¼17„309(b)(2)€(1991)€provides:ÌÓÓà8 ` à[a]€person€commits€the€offense€of€intimidating€others€from€exercisingÏcivil€rights€who€.€.€.€[i]njures€or€threatens€to€injure€or€coerces€anotherÏperson€with€the€intent€to€unlawfully€intimidate€another€because€thatÏother€exercised€any€right€or€privilege€secured€by€the€constitution€orÏlaws€of€the€United€States€or€the€constitution€or€laws€of€the€State€ofÏTennessee.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓà ` àBoth€Darden€and€Morrow€testified€at€trial€that€they€noticed€the€WestermansððÏtruck€because€of€the€Confederate€flag,€and€they€wanted€to€fight€with€theÏoccupants€of€the€truck.€After€becoming€angered€by€one€of€the€truckððs€occupantsÏshaking€the€Confederate€flag€at€them,€Darden,€Morrow€and€their€cohorts€chasedÏthe€truck€at€excessive€speeds€until€Morrow€was€in€position€to€fire€his€weapon€atÏthe€truck,€resulting€in€the€death€of€Mr.€Westerman.€€When€Darden€was€askedÏwhether€he€intended€to€catch€the€Westermansðð€truck€and€fight,€he€responded,€ð ð[i]tÏmight€have€crossed€my€mind.ðð€Ìà ` àTaking€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€it€is€clear€thatÏDarden€and€Morrow€intended€to€injure€or€threaten€the€Westermans€because€theÏConfederate€flag€was€displayed€on€their€truck.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„Ð è8ˆ/1 Ð309(b)(2)€(1991).€€No€matter€how€offensive€a€symbol€€the€Confederate€flag€mayÏbe€to€ñHñsomñHññHñsomeñHñ€members€of€our€society,€it€is€well„established€that€displaying€a€flag€isÏconstitutionally€protected€ð ðsymbolic€speech.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòSpence€v.€Washingtonóó,€418Ð @ à ÐU.S.€405,€94€S.Ct.€2727,€41€L.Ed.2d€842€(1974);€òòStromberg€v.€Californiaóó,€283Ð 0Ð ÐU.S.€359,€51€S.Ct.€532,€75€L.Ed.€1117€(1931).€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€theÏevidence€is€sufficient€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€that€appellants€committedÏthe€offense€of€civil€rights€intimidation€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.Ìà@®àò òB.€€Attempted€Aggravated€Kidnappingó óˆÐ à€ Ðà ` àAppellants€also€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€for€theirÏconvictions€of€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Aggravated€kidnapping€is€ð ðfalseÏimprisonment€.€.€.€committed€.€.€.€[w]ith€the€intent€to€inflict€serious€bodily€injury€onÏor€to€terrorize€the€victim€or€another.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„304(a)(3)€(1991).€ÏFalse€imprisonment€is€defined€as€ð ðknowingly€remov[ing]€or€confin[ing]€anotherÏunlawfully€so€as€to€interfere€substantially€with€the€otherððs€liberty.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€39„13„302(a)€(1991).€€A€criminal€attempt€is€committed€when€a€person,Ïð ðacting€with€the€kind€of€culpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense€.€.€.€[a]ctsÏwith€intent€to€cause€a€result€that€is€an€element€of€the€offense,€and€believes€theÏconduct€will€cause€the€result€without€further€conduct€on€the€personððs€part.ðð€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€39„12„101(a)(2)€(1991).Ìà ` àHannah€Westerman€testified€that€after€her€husband€was€shot,€the€light€blueÏcar€that€had€passed€them€came€to€a€complete€stop€in€the€roadway€in€front€ofÏthem,€and€another€car€stopped€behind€them.€As€a€result€of€this,€she€was€forcedÏto€drive€the€truck€through€a€ditch,€across€an€embankment€and€into€a€parking€lotÏin€an€effort€to€flee€the€scene.€€€However,€when€she€tried€to€exit€the€parking€lot,€theÏcars€had€blocked€her€access€to€the€paved€driveway,€so€she€drove€throughÐ à9€02 Ðanother€ditch€to€exit€the€parking€lot.€€€All€the€while,€someone€in€the€light€blue€carÏwas€leaning€out€of€the€window€pointing€a€gun€at€the€truck.€Ìà ` àFurthermore,€Andrews€testified€that€Darden€stopped€his€car€in€the€middleÏof€the€roadway,€and€Morrow€leaned€out€of€the€window,€pointed€his€gun€at€theÏtruck€and€exclaimed,€ð ð[Iððve]€got€them€now.ððÌà ` àLooking€at€this€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€a€rationalÏtrier€of€fact€could€conclude€that€appellants€attempted€to€confine€the€WestermansÏso€as€to€ð ðinterfere€substantiallyðð€with€their€liberty€and€with€the€intent€to€inflictÏserious€bodily€injury€on€or€to€terrorize€them.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„302(a),Ï39„13„304(a)(3)€(1991).€€The€evidence€is€sufficient€to€sustain€appellantsððÏconvictions€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà@  &®àò òC.€€Felony€Murderó óˆÐ   @ Ðà ` àAppellants€also€contend€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€sustain€theirÏconvictions€for€felony€murder.€€Appellant€Darden€claims€that€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient€to€support€the€underlying€felony€of€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping;Ïtherefore€he€can€not€be€convicted€of€first€degree€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€theÏattempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Morrow€contends€that€the€killing€of€MichaelÏWesterman€was€collateral€to€the€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping,€and€thereforeÏcan€not€be€sustained€under€òòState€v.€Seversóó,€759€S.W.2d€935,€938€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð @.à$& ÐApp.€1988).Ìà ` àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)€(1991)€provides,€in€pertinent€part,Ïð ð[f]irst€degree€murder€is€.€.€.€[a]€reckless€killing€of€another€committed€in€theÏperpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€any€first€degree€murder,€arson,€rape,Ïrobbery,€burglary,€theft,€kidnapping€or€aircraft€piracy.ðð€€In€the€case€of€òòState€v.Ð ð7.0 ÐSeversóó,€this€Court€held€that€ð ðto€sustain€a€conviction€of€first„degree€felony€murder,Ð à9€02 Ðthe€killing€must€have€been€in€pursuance€of,€rather€than€collateral€to,€the€unlawfulÏact€described€by€the€statute.ðð€€759€S.W.2d€at€938.€€However,€there€is€noÏrequirement€that€the€murder€occur€as€a€proximate€cause€of€the€underlying€felony.€ÏòòState€v.€Middlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317,€332€(Tenn.€1992).€€The€statute€merelyÐ 0Ð Ðrequires€that€the€murder€occur€during€the€ð ðperpetration€of,€or€attempt€toÏperpetrateðð€the€underlying€felony.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2);€òòState€v.Ð °  ÐMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€332.Ð    Ðà ` àIn€this€case,€the€evidence€is€clear€that€the€murder€occurred€during€theÏattempted€perpetration€of€an€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Darden€and€Morrow€wantedÏto€fight€the€occupants€of€the€truck€as€a€result€of€seeing€the€Confederate€flagÏdisplayed€on€the€truck.€In€an€effort€to€catch€the€Westerman€vehicle€and€stop€it,Ïthey€began€chasing€the€Westermans.€€As€they€were€passing€the€WestermanÏtruck,€Morrow€began€shooting€his€gun€and€killed€Michael€Westerman.€€TheÏshooting€occurred€in€the€ð ðpursuance€ofðð€and€was€not€merely€collateral€to€theÏattempted€aggravated€kidnapping.Ìà ` àMoreover,€because€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€appellantsððÏconvictions€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping,€Dardenððs€argument€also€fails.€ÏThe€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€appellantsðð€convictions€for€first€degreeÏmurder€in€the€perpetration€of€an€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@— — ®àò òòòSENTENCING€„€MORROW€AND€DARDENó óóóˆÐ 2°(* ÐÌà ` àIn€their€final€issues,€appellants€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposingÏtheir€sentences.€€Both€appellants€challenge€the€trial€courtððs€imposition€ofÏconsecutive€sentences.€€Further,€Morrow€argues€that€his€sentences€for€attemptedÐ à9€02 Ðaggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation€are€excessive,€and€the€trialÏcourt€erred€in€failing€to€grant€probation.Ìà@»»®àò òA.€€Sentencing€Standard€of€Reviewó óˆÐ @ à Ðà ` àThis€Court's€review€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóóÐ @à Ðwith€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d).€€ThisÏpresumption€is€conditioned€upon€an€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trialÏjudge€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€andÏcircumstances.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€If€the€trialÐ    Ðcourt€fails€to€comply€with€the€statutory€directives,€there€is€no€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€and€our€review€is€òòde€novoóó.€€òòState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€96€(Tenn.Ð à€ Ð1997).Ìà ` àThe€burden€is€upon€the€appealing€party€to€show€that€the€sentence€isÏimproper.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d)€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.€ÏIn€conducting€our€review,€we€are€required,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40-35-210,€to€consider€the€following€factors€in€sentencing:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€[t]he€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencingÏhearing;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(2)€[t]he€presentence€report;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(3)€[t]he€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencingÏalternatives;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(4)€[t]he€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(5)€[e]vidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€theÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€ðððð€40-35-113€and€40-35-114;ÏandÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(6)€[a]ny€statement€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€the€defendant'sÏown€behalf€about€sentencing.Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðâ âÐ 6 ,. ÐÓÓà ` àBecause€the€trial€court€considered€the€principles€and€purposes€of€the€1989ÏSentencing€Act,€we€will€review€appellantsðð€sentences€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumptionÐ P ð Ðof€correctness.Ìâ âà@ùù®àò òB.€Excessive€Sentences€„€Morrowó óˆÐ 0Ð Ðà ` àMorrow€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€excessive€sentencesÏfor€his€convictions€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rightsÏintimidation.€€Specifically,€he€asserts€that€the€trial€court€misapplied€fiveÏenhancement€factors€to€his€convictions.Ìà ` àUnder€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€the€presumptive€sentence€for€theseÏoffenses€is€the€minimum€within€the€applicable€range€if€no€mitigating€orÏenhancement€factors€for€sentencing€are€present.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40-35-210(c);€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€788€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€Ð À` ÐHowever,€if€such€factors€do€exist,€a€trial€court€should€start€at€the€minimumÏsentence,€enhance€the€minimum€sentence€within€the€range€for€enhancementÏfactors€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€the€range€for€the€mitigating€factors.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(e).€€No€particular€weight€for€each€factor€isÏprescribed€by€the€statute,€as€the€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€left€to€theÏdiscretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€as€its€findings€are€supported€by€the€record.€ÏòòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€116,€125€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€€òòseeóó€Tenn.Ð P,ð"$ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.Ìà ` àIn€imposing€Morrowððs€sentence€for€civil€rights€intimidation,€the€trial€courtÏfound€that€the€following€enhancement€factors€applied:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€the€offense€involved€more€than€one€(1)€victim,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„114(3);Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(2)€the€personal€injuries€inflicted€upon€the€victim€were€particularlyÏgreat,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(6);Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðâ âÐ è8ˆ/1 Ðà8 ` à(3)€the€defendant€possessed€a€firearm€during€the€commission€of€theÏâ âoffense,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(9);€andÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(4)€the€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€whereÏthe€risk€to€human€life€was€high,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(10).Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓThe€trial€court€also€found€as€a€mitigating€factor€that€the€defendant,€because€of€hisÏyouth,€lacked€substantial€judgment€in€committing€the€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„113(6).€€After€weighing€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€the€trialÏcourt€sentenced€Morrow€to€four€(4)€years,€the€maximum€Range€I€sentence€for€aÏClass€D€felony.Ìà ` àWith€regard€to€Morrowððs€conviction€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping,Ïthe€trial€court€found€two€enhancement€factors€to€be€applicable,€namely:€(1)€theÏdefendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€an€offense€when€the€risk€to€humanÏlife€was€high,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(10);€and€(2)€the€crime€wasÏcommitted€under€circumstances€under€which€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€aÏvictim€was€great,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(16).€€The€trial€court€also€foundÏthat€Morrow€lacked€substantial€judgment€due€to€his€youth€and€applied€that€as€aÏmitigating€factor.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(6).€€The€trial€court€then€imposedÏa€sentence€of€five€(5)€years€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping,€a€Class€CÏfelony.Ìà@TT-®àò ò1.ó óˆÐ @,à"$ Ðà ` àMorrow€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€applying€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„¼35„114(3),€that€the€offense€involved€more€than€one€(1)€victim,€to€his€conviction€forÏcivil€rights€intimidation.€€He€maintains€that€there€is€no€proof€in€the€record€to€showÏthat€he€was€aware€that€there€was€more€than€one€(1)€person€in€the€truck€duringÏthe€incident.€€He€further€argues€that€Hannah€Westerman€is€not€a€ð ðvictimðð€withinÏâ âthe€meaning€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(3).Ð ð7.0 Ðà ` àWe€find€Morrowððs€claim€to€be€totally€without€merit.€€First€of€all,€theÏâ âindictment€lists€both€Michael€and€Hannah€Westerman€as€victims€of€the€civil€rightsÏintimidation€charge.€€While€Morrow€is€correct€in€his€assertion€that€a€person€whoÏhas€lost€a€loved€one€is€not€a€ð ðvictimðð€under€this€enhancement€factor,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.Ð 0Ð ÐRainesóó,€882€S.W.2d€376,€384€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994),€such€is€not€the€case€here.€Ð  À ÐDuring€a€high€speed€car€chase,€Morrow€fired€his€gun€at€the€Westermansðð€truck,Ïnot€only€killing€Michael€Westerman,€but€also€threatening€serious€bodily€injury€toÏHannah€Westerman.€€Certainly,€she€is€a€ð ðvictimðð€as€contemplated€by€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(3).€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Rainesóó,€882€S.W.2d€at€384€(holding€that€aÐ à€ Ðð ðvictimðð€is€one€who€is€ð ðinjured,€killed,€had€property€stolen,€or€had€propertyÏdestroyed€by€the€perpetrator€of€the€crimeðð).Ìà ` àFurthermore,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(3)€does€not€require€that€theÏdefendant€must€be€aware€of€the€number€of€persons€he€is€victimizing€in€order€forÏthis€enhancement€factor€to€apply,€nor€does€Morrow€cite€any€authority€that€standsÏfor€such€a€proposition.€€The€trial€court€properly€applied€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼114(3)€as€an€enhancement€factor.Ìà@TT-®àò ò2.ó óˆÐ `(  Ðà ` àMorrow€next€contends€that€the€application€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼114(6),€that€the€offense€involved€particularly€great€personal€injuries,€wasÏinappropriate.€€He€claims€that€the€particularly€great€personal€injury€sustained€byÏMichael€Westerman€was€ð ðinherent€in€his€death€and€his€death€cannot€beÏseparated€from€the€felony€murder€count€for€which€he€has€been€sentenced€andÏseparately€applied€to€the€civil€rights€intimidation€count.ððÌà ` àWhile€Morrowððs€argument€would€be€correct€if€this€enhancement€factor€wereÏapplied€to€a€homicide€conviction,€his€reasoning€is€erroneous€with€regard€to€theÏcivil€rights€intimidation€charge.€€Serious€bodily€injury€is€not€an€essential€elementÐ à9€02 Ðof€the€offense€of€civil€rights€intimidation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„309(b)(2).€Ð `  ÐBecause€Michael€Westerman€died€during€the€course€of€the€offense,€thisÏdemonstrates€greater€culpability€for€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Nixóó,€922€S.W.2dÐ @ à Ð894,€903€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€The€trial€court,€therefore,€did€not€err€inÏapplying€this€enhancement€factor.Ìà@TT-®àò ò3.ó óˆÐ °  Ðà ` àMorrow€next€insists€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€applying€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„114(9),€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€during€the€commission€of€theÏoffense,€as€an€enhancement€factor€for€his€convictions€for€attempted€aggravatedÏkidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation.€€He€alleges€that€the€use€of€a€deadlyÏweapon€was€the€aggravating€circumstance€in€the€attempted€aggravatingÏkidnapping€conviction€and€was€thus€an€essential€element€of€that€offense.€€HeÏfurther€maintains€that€ð ðthe€proof€is€not€clear€if€the€weapon€played€any€part€in€theÏCivil€Rights€Intimidation€conviction€and€thus€is€inapplicable€to€that€count.ððÌà ` àWe€must€note€that€Morrow€is€incorrect€in€his€assertion€that€the€trial€courtÏapplied€this€enhancement€factor€on€the€attempted€aggravated€kidnappingÏconviction.€€Our€review€of€the€record€indicates€that€the€trial€court€did€not€considerÏthe€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€as€an€enhancement€factor€for€this€conviction.€ÏNonetheless,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€would€have€been€justified€in€doing€so.€ÏMorrow€was€indicted€on€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€with€the€intent€to€inflictÏserious€bodily€injury€on€or€to€terrorize€the€victims.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„Ð 00Ð&( Ð13„302(a),€39„13„304(a)(3)€(1991).€€The€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€is€not€anÏessential€element€of€the€offense€for€which€he€was€convicted,€and€the€trial€courtÏcould€properly€have€considered€this€as€an€enhancement€factor.Ìà ` àSecondly,€contrary€to€Morrowððs€assertion,€the€record€is€abundantly€clearÏthat€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€was€instrumental€in€injuring€or€threatening€toÐ à9€02 Ðinjure€the€Westermans€during€the€commission€of€the€civil€rights€intimidationÏoffense.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„309(b)(2)€(1991).€€The€trial€court€properlyÐ P ð Ðapplied€this€enhancement€factor€to€Morrowððs€conviction€for€civil€rights€intimidation.Ìà@TT-®àò ò4.ó óˆÐ 0Ð Ðà ` àMorrow€also€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€as€an€enhancementÏfactor€that€he€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€risk€to€humanÏlife€was€high€for€his€conviction€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(10).€€He€argues€that€this€enhancement€factor€was€appliedÏsolely€because€a€deadly€weapon€was€used€in€the€commission€of€the€offense,€andÏbecause€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€is€an€element€of€the€offense,€this€was€anÏinappropriate€enhancement€factor.Ìà ` àOnce€again,€Morrow€is€incorrect€in€his€argument€that€the€use€of€a€deadlyÏweapon€is€an€element€of€the€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€conviction.€€In€anyÏevent,€the€proof€showed€that€other€motorists€were€on€the€roadway€during€the€highÏspeed€chase.€€Any€of€these€motorists€were€subject€to€injury€or€death€by€MorrowððsÏactions.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Williamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€83€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€Ð €&  ÐThe€trial€court€properly€applied€this€enhancement€factor.Ìà@TT-®àò ò5.ó óˆÐ `*!" Ðà ` àMorrow€also€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€as€an€enhancementÏfactor€for€his€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€conviction€that€the€crime€wasÏcommitted€under€circumstances€under€which€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€aÏvictim€was€great.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(16).Ìà ` àThe€evidence€at€trial€showed€that€Darden€drove€his€car€at€excessiveÏspeeds€while€Morrow€fired€a€weapon€at€the€Westermans€in€an€effort€to€stop€theÏtruck€and€substantially€interfere€with€Hannah€Westermanððs€liberty.€€By€his€actions,ÏMorrow€could€have€shot€Mrs.€Westerman€and€injured€or€killed€her.€€He€couldÐ ð902 Ðhave€caused€a€serious€car€accident,€resulting€in€injuries€or€death€to€Mrs.ÏWesterman.€€We€conclude€that€Morrowððs€actions€ð ðdemonstrate€a€culpabilityÏdistinct€from€and€appreciably€greater€than€that€incidentðð€to€the€attemptedÏaggravated€kidnapping.€€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€603€(Tenn.€1994).€Ð 0Ð ÐTherefore,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€applying€factor€(16)€to€enhance€MorrowððsÏsentence.Ìà@TT-®àò ò6.ó óˆÐ    Ðà ` àWe€find€no€error€with€regard€to€the€trial€courtððs€application€of€enhancementÏfactors.€€Furthermore,€the€weight€given€to€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors€isÏleft€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€as€its€findings€are€supported€by€theÏrecord.€€òòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€at€125.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€thatÐ Ðp ÐMorrowððs€sentences€of€five€(5)€years€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€andÏfour€(4)€years€for€civil€rights€intimidation€œwñPñasñPññQñereñQñ›€appropriate.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.Ìà@%%#®àò òC.€€Probation€„€Morrowó óˆÐ $0 Ðà ` àMorrow€maintains€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€grant€probation€onÏhis€sentences€for€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation.€ÏHe€claims€that€he€is€a€proper€candidate€for€probation€due€to€his€ð ðinsignificantððÏcriminal€history€and€there€is€no€evidence€in€the€record€which€would€rebut€hisÏstatutory€presumption€favoring€alternative€sentencing.Ìà ` àAn€especially€mitigated€or€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,€D€orÏE€felony€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€in€theÏabsence€of€evidence€to€the€contrary.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-102(6).€€A€trialÏcourt€must€presume€that€a€defendant€sentenced€to€eight€years€or€less€and€whoÏis€not€an€offender€for€whom€incarceration€is€a€priority€is€subject€to€alternativeÏsentencing.€€òòState€v.€Byrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,€379-80€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€ItÐ ð902 Ðis€further€presumed€that€a€sentence€other€than€incarceration€would€result€inÏsuccessful€rehabilitation€unless€rebutted€by€sufficient€evidence€in€the€record.€€òòId.óóÐ P ð Ðat€380.Ìà ` àUnder€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€sentences€which€involve€confinement€areÏto€be€based€on€the€following€considerations:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(A)€[c]onfinement€is€necessary€to€protect€society€by€restraining€aÏdefendant€who€has€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(B)€[c]onfinement€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousnessÏof€the€offense€or€confinement€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€anÏeffective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses;€€orÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(C)€[m]easures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€frequently€orÏrecently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€the€defendant.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-103(1);€òòState€v.€Bostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€435,€438€(Tenn.Ð À` ÐCrim.€App.€1996).€€A€trial€court€may€consider€the€enhancement€and€mitigatingÏfactors€set€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„113,€40„35„114€as€they€areÏrelevant€to€the€ðð€40„35„103(1)€considerations.€€òòState€v.€Bostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€atÐ "0 Ð438;€òòState€v.€Zeoliaóó,€928€S.W.2d€457,€461€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€The€trialÐ €$  Ðcourt€should€also€consider€the€defendantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation€whenÏdetermining€whether€an€alternative€sentence€would€be€appropriate.€€òòState€v.Ð `(  ÐZeoliaóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€461.Ð P*ð " Ðà ` àIn€determining€whether€to€grant€or€deny€probation,€a€trial€court€shouldÏconsider€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€defendant's€criminal€record,€theÏdefendant's€social€history€and€present€condition,€the€need€for€deterrence,€and€theÏbest€interest€of€the€defendant€and€the€public.€€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€925€S.W.2d€237,Ð 2°(* Ð244€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€924€S.W.2d€912,€917€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð 4 *, ÐApp.€1995).Ìà ` àProbation€may€be€denied€based€solely€upon€the€circumstancesÏsurrounding€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€456€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð Ð9p02 ÐApp.€1995).€€€However,€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€as€committed€must€beÏespecially€ð ðviolent,€horrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,€offensive€or€otherwise€ofÏan€excessive€or€exaggerated€degree,€€and€the€nature€of€the€offense€mustÏoutweigh€all€factors€favoring€probation.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€370,Ð 0Ð Ð374-75€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(quoting€òòState€v.€Cleavoróó,€691€S.W.2d€541,€543Ð  À Ð(Tenn.€1985)).Ìà ` àThere€is€no€mathematical€equation€to€be€utilized€in€determining€sentencingÏalternatives.€€Not€only€should€the€sentence€fit€the€offense,€but€it€should€fit€theÏoffender€as€well.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-103(2);€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2dÐ à€ Ð467,€476„77€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€ð ðIndeed,€individualized€punishment€is€theÏessence€of€alternative€sentencing.ðð€€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€305€(Tenn.Ð À` ÐCrim.€App.€1994).€€In€summary,€sentencing€must€be€determined€on€aÏcase-by-case€basis,€tailoring€each€sentence€to€that€particular€defendant€basedÏupon€the€facts€of€that€case€and€the€circumstances€of€that€defendant.€€òòState€v.Ð "0 ÐMossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€235€(Tenn.€1986).Ð €$  Ðà ` àThe€trial€court€determined€that€confinement€was€necessary€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offenses€committed€and€was€particularlyÏsuited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commit€similarÏoffenses.€€As€a€result,€the€trial€court€denied€probation€on€appellantsðð€convictionsÏfor€attempted€aggravated€kidnapping€and€civil€rights€intimidation.Ìà ` àWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€the€circumstances€of€the€offensesÏmandate€incarceration€in€this€case.€€After€observing€the€Confederate€flag€on€theÏWestermansðð€truck,€the€appellants€decided€to€ð ðfightðð€with€the€occupants€of€theÏtruck.€€Therefore,€they€pursued€the€Westerman€truck,€traveling€in€excess€of€theÏspeed€limit,€and€Morrow€began€firing€a€weapon€at€the€Westermans,€endangeringÏnot€only€his€intended€victims,€but€also€other€motorists€in€the€area.€€Darden€thenÐ Ð9p02 Ðpassed€the€truck€on€the€left,€putting€Morrow€in€the€position€to€fire€the€fatal€shot.€ÏDarden€then€brought€his€vehicle€to€a€stop€in€front€of€the€Westermans,€and€MorrowÏcontinued€to€shoot.€€As€a€result,€Mrs.€Westerman€had€to€maneuver€her€vehicleÏoff€of€the€paved€roadway€in€order€to€elude€the€gunfire.€€We€hold€that€theÏcircumstances€of€the€offense€are€especially€violent,€horrifying,€shocking,Ïreprehensible€and€offensive€to€warrant€the€denial€of€probation€in€this€case.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.Ìà@É É ®àò òD.€€Consecutive€Sentencing€„€Morrow€and€Dardenó óˆÐ ð  Ðà ` àIn€their€final€issue,€appellants€assert€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposingÏconsecutive€sentences.€€Consecutive€sentencing€is€governed€by€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„115.€€A€trial€court€may€order€sentences€to€run€consecutively€if€itÏfinds€that€one€or€more€of€the€statutory€criteria€exists€by€a€preponderance€of€theÏevidence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b);€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€924€S.W.2d€œñRñ912ñRññSñatñSññTñ,ñTñ›€œ917ñWñ€ñWñ›œñXñ.ñXññXñ›ñXññWññVñ.ñVññWññVñ›ñVññUñ(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€ñUñ›Ð ° P ÐAdditionally,€when€a€trial€court€imposes€consecutive€sentences€on€the€basis€thatÏthe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender,€the€court€must€also€find€that€an€extendedÏsentence€is€ð ðnecessary€to€protect€the€public€against€further€criminal€conduct€byÏthe€defendant€and€that€the€consecutive€sentences€must€reasonably€relate€to€theÏseverity€of€the€offenses€committed.ðð€€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€939Ð `*!" Ð(Tenn.€1995).Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€found€that€both€appellants€were€dangerous€offenders€ð ðwhoseÏbehavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€and€no€hesitation€aboutÏcommitting€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„115(b)(4).€€The€trial€court€stated:ÌÓÓà8 ` àMr.€Darden€was€the€individual€who€decided€that€a€fight€wasÏappropriate€based€on€the€truck€and€the€flag.€€Mr.€Darden€basicallyÏrecruited€the€other€vehicle€and€its€occupants€to€help€with€what€wasÏgoing€to€be€a€fight.€.€.€So,€the€critical€thing€for€the€Court€is,€as€far€asÏMr.€Dardenððs€involvement,€what€did€he€do€at€the€time€that€he€knewÐ à9€02 Ðit€was€potentially€more€than€a€fight?€€That€would€have€been€at€theÏtime€that€Mr.€Morrow€pulled€out€his€pistol€and€commenced€fire€andÏattempting€to€fire€and€repeatedly€firing€the€weapon.€€Obviously€inÏretrospect,€if€Mr.€Darden€had€simply€stopped€his€vehicle€realizingÏthat€the€situation€had€gotten€out€of€hand€we€wouldnððt€be€here€today,Ï.€.€.€But€he€didnððt.€€What€he€did€was€speed€up.€€When€he€learned€ofÏthe€weapon€before€it€was€fired€he€sped€up€and€passed€the€otherÏvehicle.€€He€then€proceeded€to€drive€80€miles€an€hour€parallel€in€theÏwrong€lane€to€the€truck€to€put€Mr.€Morrow€in€a€position€to€shoot€andÏafter€shots€were€fired€Mr.€Darden€then€proceed[ed]€to€pass€the€truckÏand€stop.€.€.€€Then€after€the€truck€pulled€through€the€ditch€into€theÏparking€lot€Mr.€Darden€proceeded€to€drive€his€vehicle€into€that€lotÏand€a€further€attempt€to€block€the€occupants€of€the€truck.€€All€theÏwhile€his€companion€Mr.€Morrow€was€continuing€to€fire,€and€orÏattempt€to€fire,€the€pistol.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓThe€court€also€noted€that€Morrow€had€ð ðrepeated€opportunities€to€refrain€from€theÏuse€of€a€firearmðð€but€continued€ð ðrecklessly€with€no€hesitation€and€no€indication€ofÏany€regard€for€human€life€to€repeatedly€fire€the€weapon.ðð€Ìà ` àWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€both€appellants€are€dangerous€offendersÏwithin€the€meaning€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(4).€€Furthermore,€we€findÏthat€the€terms€imposed€by€the€trial€court€are€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€ofÏthe€offenses€and€are€necessary€to€protect€the€public€from€further€criminal€acts€byÏthe€appellants.€€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€938.€€€Although€the€trial€courtÐ p& Ðdid€not€make€the€findings€required€by€òòWilkersonóó,€we€find€that€these€factors€areÐ `(  Ðpresent€under€our€power€of€òòde€novoóó€review.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Samuel€Paul€Fieldsóó,Ð P*ð " ÐC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9512„CR„00414,€Davidson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filedÏFebruary€26,€1998,€at€Nashville);€òòState€v.€Edward€Thompsonóó,€C.C.A.€No.Ð 0.Ð$& Ð03C01-9503-CR-00060,€Cocke€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€December€12,Ï1996,€at€Knoxville).€€Consecutive€sentencing€was€appropriate€in€this€case.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌÌÐ Ð9p02 Ðà@ØØ)®àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ `  ÐÌà ` àUpon€our€review€of€the€record,€we€find€that€appellantsðð€issues€are€withoutÏmerit.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ñ?ññ:ñÔ#†ŠÑyŠ XX0s1 #Ôñ:ññ?ñÌñFñÌà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àÌÌÌÌñFñÓ  ÓñFñà ` àÌÌÌñFññGñÌñGñÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGE