ÿWPC=9 (I£|j@º.««”ëÁßÞðfíΨ©˜¿=´‰r‡#ë•ù ²|—Þ¶n 1T§9¾a¡ÂF *S¤S#Z¾¾Ö¤¬–¯†ˆ6~+cÉañcË(Ö„© Qsû®s…~Î`%I`j´ý¢õ7Úü#a3¿k–Ó$eˆðXæÒÇŒ;Ëêk¸Ð /{m¼wU4€ö¾.ˆ‚7êÐ DÅÈ»þºFáýH«ð<R-6qž¯Õ€q70’Ò{»"l/³MÒ™ã/Ÿ'Î-þo¿úå­ØÄ·•_0ý&é}Ï?”èû ªŒ¨0td6`½~yôjXÅûòìýØw6[ ±KÎ@£Ñ™Ôóú[`HP´ºy|Ó]þn§PÏwþb¯êŒ>6rOão,¶Ã4åq o¦rKÌ…# F U:Q %‹ 0D‘ w@Õ 4 ) U8 0ˆ 0D ëY DYds ×Ãäw§Úø¿…‹D£Ï2r€¤¼$ Và#6&çR*æ9+, B4,õQ,U:F.·€.å70§1U:Ã2Ã2Ã2Ã2Ã2 D3ý20303 0DL7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L7L777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 AO˜7Æç7ç7 0D­8 D/ñ8 B 9˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX(ñÄ$¡¡Ò€°ÒÒX°Ò "D" "D " "D " e " " D"Ó€"uM%3|x" KÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEÏôXXÔIn€1995,€the€General€Assembly€amended€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„503(a).€€The€offense€ofÐ  Ðrape€accomplished€by€fraud€was€preserved€and€is€currently€codified€at€section€39„13„503(a)(4).€€(8(3Åå$¤¤Ý ƒñÄ!ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°ÒÝ  Ýà Ø àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó áÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔDue€to€the€nature€of€the€crimes€in€this€case,€we€shall€refer€to€the€victims€only€by€their€initials. Ñ  Ñ Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔAs€part€of€appellantððs€fantasy,€he€instructed€K.N.€not€to€say€anything€to€him€or€touch€him€onceÐ  Ðhe€entered€the€hotel€room.€ ZÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThe€appellant€told€Detective€Marlar€that€he€spoke€to€C.S.€in€the€parking€lot€of€her€apartmentÐ  Ðcomplex€before€he€contacted€her€by€telephone.€€He€obtained€her€telephone€number€from€directoryÏassistance. Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThe€appellant€did€not€testify€at€trial.€€However,€his€statements€to€Detective€Marlar€were€admittedÐ  Ðinto€evidence. ¹Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔMs.€Cooley€was€not€at€the€apartment€when€the€rape€occurred. mÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔBefore€his€arrest,€the€appellant€agreed€to€be€interviewed€by€Detective€Marlar€in€the€presence€ofÐ  Ðappellantððs€attorney.€€Detective€Marlar€works€in€the€sex€abuse€unit€of€the€Nashville€Metropolitan€PoliceÏDepartment.€€€ ÐÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThe€State€also€refers€to€òòBlackððs€Law€Dictionaryóó€(5th€ed.€1979),€which€defines€ð ðfraudðð€in€part€as:€Ð  Ðà8 Ø à[a]n€intentional€perversion€of€truth€for€the€purpose€of€inducing€another€in€reliance€upon€itÏto€part€with€some€valuable€thing€belonging€to€him€or€to€surrender€a€legal€right.€€A€falseÏrepresentation€of€a€matter€of€fact,€whether€by€words€or€by€conduct,€by€false€orÏmisleading€allegations,€or€by€concealment€of€that€which€should€have€been€disclosed,Ïwhich€deceives€and€is€intended€to€deceive€another€so€that€he€shall€act€upon€it€to€hisÏlegal€injury.€ ƒÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThere€was€evidence€that€the€appellant€placed€a€subsequent€telephone€call€to€C.S.ððs€apartmentÐ  Ðapproximately€three€months€after€the€rape.€Ms.€Cooley€answered€the€telephone€and€recognized€that€theÏwhispering€voice€matched€the€description€given€by€C.S.€€Ms.€Cooley€immediately€contacted€DetectiveÏMarlar€and€informed€him€of€the€telephone€call.€€That€call€and€the€earlier€July€telephone€call€were€tracedÏon€C.S.ððs€caller€identification€box€to€two€public€telephone€booths€in€the€Nashville€area.€€ µÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€7(c)€(Advisory€Commission€Comments). Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔIf€the€requested€information€is€in€the€indictment€or€has€been€provided€otherwise€by€the€State€inÐ  Ðsome€satisfactory€form,€no€bill€of€particulars€is€required.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€539Рƾ Ð(Tenn.€1994). ™Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔAs€stated€earlier,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„202€provides€that€an€indictment€must€include€theÐ  Ðcharged€offense€in€ordinary€and€concise€language€that€will€provide€the€accused€with€a€commonÏunderstanding€and€will€enable€the€trial€court€to€enter€a€proper€judgment.€ (Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThe€State€argued€at€trial€that€the€stocking€cap€was€similar€to€the€cap€described€by€victim€K.N.Ð  Ðas€being€worn€by€the€man€outside€of€her€hotel€window. vÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThe€severed€count€of€rape€of€victim€M.J.€was€later€amended€to€state€that€the€unlawful€sexualÐ  Ðpenetration€was€committed€intentionally,€knowingly,€or€recklessly.€€The€appellant€does€not€challenge€thatÏcount€of€rape€in€this€issue. ²Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔRule€404(b)€establishes€three€conditions€that€the€trial€court€must€satisfy€before€allowing€theÐ  Ðadmission€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€into€evidence.€€The€court€must,€upon€request,€conduct€aÏhearing€outside€of€the€juryððs€presence.€€The€court€must€then€determine€ð ðthat€a€material€issue€exists€otherÏthan€conduct€conforming€with€a€character€trait€and€must€upon€request€state€on€the€record€the€materialÏissue,€the€ruling,€and€the€reasons€for€admitting€the€evidence.ðð€€In€addition,€the€court€must€determineÐ  ø  Ðwhether€the€probative€value€of€the€evidence€is€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€As€weÏmentioned€above,€the€trial€court€did€not€specifically€rule€on€the€conditions€under€Rule€404(b)€because€theÏappellant€did€not€raise€that€objection€at€trial.€€€€€ LÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThere€are€three€categories€of€ð ðcommon€scheme€or€planðð€evidence:€(1)€distinctive€designs€orÐ  Ðsignature€crimes;€(2)€a€continuing€plan€or€conspiracy;€and€(3)€the€same€transaction.€€òòState€v.€Hoytóó,€928Рƾ ÐS.W.2d€935,€943€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(citing€N.€Cohen,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€ðð€404.11€(2ndÐ „| Ðed.€1990)).€€The€rape€offenses€in€appellantððs€case€fall€into€the€first€category.€€ Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔThis€Court€has€previously€held€that€trial€courts€are€required€to€conduct€pre„trial€hearings€whenÐ  Ðaddressing€severance€issues€under€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€14(b)(1).€€òòHoytóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€944.€€Although€aРƾ Ðhearing€was€held€in€this€case€on€the€appellantððs€motion€to€sever,€we€find€that€it€complied€minimally€atÏbest€with€the€requirements€set€forth€in€Rule€14(b)(1).€€The€trial€court€heard€arguments€from€counsel€onÏthe€common€scheme€or€plan€between€the€rape€offenses€and€the€relevancy€of€the€evidence€pertaining€toÏthose€offenses,€i.e.,€to€demonstrate€the€appellantððs€identity,€knowledge,€and€fraudulent€intent.€€However,Ïthe€trial€courtððs€findings€and€conclusions€in€that€regard€were€not€stated€in€the€record.€€Instead€ofÏremanding€the€case€for€a€new€hearing,€we€shall€complete€the€Rule€14(b)(1)€analysis€based€upon€theÏevidence€of€the€rape€offenses€in€the€record.€€€€€ ÝÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔM.J.€did€not€report€her€experience€to€the€police€until€three€years€after€she€was€victimized.€€ ÜÔ€!XjýXXXÔÔ€!é)X!XjýÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€!XjýX!é)ÔÐ  ÐÌAugust€3,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó Ñ  Ñ d ëÝ ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔAt€trial,€the€appellant€objected€to€the€admission€of€the€photographs€on€the€basis€of€relevancyÐ  Ðand€unfair€prejudice.€€He€did€not€raise€an€objection€to€the€photographs€under€Rule€404(b)€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€until€this€appeal.€€The€trial€court,€therefore,€was€never€afforded€anÏopportunity€to€rule€on€the€merits€under€Rule€404(b).€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ­Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôEßôXXÔThe€appellant€apparently€learned€of€K.N.€and€her€then€fianc,€Mr.€Kivilaan,€through€anÐ  Ðengagement€announcement€that€appeared€in€the€Sunday€òòTennesseanóó.€€The€announcement€was€printedРƾ Ðin€the€newspaper€the€day€before€appellant€placed€the€telephone€call€to€K.N.€ ÛÔ€%XjýXXXÔÔ€%é)X%XjýÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€%XjýX%é)ÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€30,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEÏôXXÔThe€appellant€raises€this€first€issue€both€in€his€certified€appeal€from€the€plea€agreement€and€inÐ  Ðhis€appeal€from€the€convictions€he€received€in€the€jury€trial.€€The€remaining€issues€to€be€addressed€inÏthis€case€are€raised€solely€in€the€appeal€from€the€jury€trial.€€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular'ÿÿdxd Ý ƒ Åå$ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°Òà Ø àòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôEßôXXÔMs.€Cooley€testified€that€she€received€a€telephone€call€from€a€person€who€spoke€to€her€in€aÐ  Ðwhispering€voice€about€his€desire€to€have€sexual€intercourse€with€her€at€her€apartment.€€The€telephoneÏcall€took€place€while€Ms.€Cooley€and€C.S.€were€still€living€together,€approximately€three€months€afterÏC.S.€reported€her€rape€to€the€police€€The€caller€never€identified€himself€to€Ms.€Cooley,€but€instead€askedÏher€if€she€knew€who€he€was.€€She€testified€that€she€initially€thought€the€caller€was€her€boyfriend,€Pat.€ÏHowever,€remembering€C.S.ððs€experience,€she€suspected€that€the€caller€was€the€same€person€who€hadÏpreviously€called€C.S.€€Ms.€Cooley€kept€the€mystery€caller€on€the€telephone€for€approximately€twentyÏminutes€and€convinced€him€to€call€her€back€that€same€evening.€€During€their€conversations,€the€callerÏtold€Ms.€Cooley€that€he€loved€her€and€that€he€wanted€to€have€sex€with€her.€€€€€€(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒñÄ!ÝÒ€°ÒÒX°ÒÝ  Ýñ "ñ›ñ "ññ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñѰÑÑ€°ÑÑ  ÑÑ7€jýXXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ P¨ÑÑ€`¨Ññ"ñœñ"ññ"ññ"ñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@E  ` 8ttxPXð  rßñ"ññ"ññ"ñßr€#*<,(j 8` `€€@E  ` 8ttxPXð  rßñ"ññ"ñ›ñ"ñà@ €àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌÌà@»»*€àAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌà@ŠŠ&€àFEBRUARY€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9612„CR„00502Ð   Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(consolidated€with)Ð ü  Ðà Ø àAppellee,à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9702„CR„00057Ð êâ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìv.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àDAVIDSON€COUNTYÐ ¶®  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)ÌRAYMOND€MITCHELL,€IIIà 8 àà  à)à è àHon.€Ann.€Lacy€Johns,€JudgeÐ ‚z  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(Presiding€at€trial)Ð h` Ðà Ø àAppellant.à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ NF Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àHon.€Seth€Norman,€JudgeÐ 4, Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(Presiding€at€guilty€plea€hearing)Ð  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(Rape;€Attempted€Rape)Ð æÞ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)€ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð d\ ÐÌC.€Edward€Fowlkes€&à à àà 8 àà  àà è àJohn€Knox€WalkupÐ 0 ( ÐThomas€L.€Whitesideà à àà 8 àà  àà è àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ ! Ð172€Second€Avenue€North,€Ste.€214ÌNashville,€TN.€37201à à àà 8 àà  àà è àDaryl€J.€BrandÐ â"Ú Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àNashville,€TN.€37243ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àVictor€S.€Johnson,€IIIÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àThomas€Thurman€&Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àDiane€S.€Lanceà ð àÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralsÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àWashington€Square€Building,€Ste.€500Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è à222€Second€Avenue€NorthÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àNashville,€TN.€37201ÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:_______________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÐ r8j17§ Їà@ÙÙ-€àò òOPINIONó óˆÐ  ÐÌÓÓà Ø àThe€appellant,€Raymond€Mitchell,€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€convictions€heÏreceived€in€the€Criminal€Court€of€Davidson€County.€€The€appellant€was€indicted€onÏthree€counts€of€rape€accomplished€by€fraud€and€one€count€of€attempted€rape€by€fraud.€ÏBefore€trial,€one€of€the€rape€charges€was€severed€by€the€prosecution€and€set€to€beÏadjudicated€separately.€€The€remaining€two€counts€of€rape€by€fraud€and€the€count€ofÏattempted€rape€by€fraud€were€tried€together.Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€was€tried€by€a€jury€in€the€joint€proceeding€and€was€convicted€asÏcharged€on€the€two€counts€of€rape€and€the€single€count€of€attempted€rape.€€The€trialÏcourt€sentenced€him€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender€to€ten€years€for€each€convictionÏof€rape€and€to€five€years€for€the€conviction€of€attempted€rape.€€The€ten„year€sentencesÏwere€ordered€to€run€concurrently€to€each€other€and€consecutively€to€the€five„yearÏsentence,€for€a€total€effective€sentence€of€fifteen€years.Ìà Ø àOn€the€severed€count€of€rape€by€fraud,€the€appellant€entered€a€plea€of€òònoloÐ jb Ðcontendereóó€to€the€lesser€offense€of€sexual€battery.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€theÐ : 2 Ðappellant€to€two€years€on€that€conviction,€to€run€concurrently€to€the€above€fifteen„yearÏsentence.€€The€appellant€reserved€a€certified€issue€for€appeal€from€the€pleaÏagreement.€€His€appeal€in€that€case€has€been€consolidated€with€his€direct€appeal€fromÏthe€jury€trial.€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€raises€the€following€issues€in€this€consolidated€appeal:ÌÓ$Óà Ø à(1)€Whether€the€offense€of€rape€by€fraud,€as€provided€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€¼à Ø à39„13„503(a)(3)€(1991),׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€is€unconstitutionally€vague€as€applied€in€this€case׃$ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×;Ð ì+ä$) ÐÌà Ø à(2)€Whether€the€indictment€was€invalid€for€failing€to€include€a€factual€basis€to€¼à Ø àsupport€the€element€of€fraud€in€the€charged€offenses;ÌÌà Ø à(3)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€pre„trial€motion€for€a€bill€of€à  # àÐ j0b). Ðà Ø àparticulars;Ð P1H*/ Їà Ø à(4)€Whether€the€indictment€was€constitutionally€deficient€in€failing€to€allege€the€òòÐ  Ðà Ø àmens€reaóó€with€respect€to€the€charges€of€rape;Ð îæ ÐÌà Ø à(5)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€into€evidence€testimony€and€à  # àÐ ¼ ´ Ðà Ø àphotographs€showing€the€contents€of€appellantððs€vehicle€at€the€time€of€his€¼à Ø àarrest;ÌÌà Ø à(6)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€appellantððs€motion€to€sever€the€¼à Ø àmultiple€count€indictment;ÌÌà Ø à(7)€Whether€the€prosecution€issued€a€peremptory€challenge€to€a€prospective€¼à Ø àjuror€in€violation€of€òòBatson€v.€Kentuckyóó;Ð ìä  ÐÌà Ø à(8)€Whether€the€trial€court€improperly€instructed€the€jury€on€the€statutory€à  # àÐ ¸°  Ðà Ø àdefinitions€of€ð ðdeceptionðð€and€ð ðcoercionðð;€andÌÌà Ø à(9)€Whether€the€evidence€is€legally€sufficient€to€sustain€his€convictions€of€rape€¼à Ø àby€fraud€and€attempted€rape€by€fraud?ÌÓ]ÓÌà Ø àAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record,€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€ñ"ñœñ"ñtheÏappellantððs€convictions.ñ"ñ›ñ"ñà à àÐ ÎÆ Ðà@§§+€àò òBACKGROUNDó óˆÐ š’ Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€came€to€be€known€as€the€ð ðFantasy€Manðð€in€Davidson€CountyÏbased€upon€a€pattern€of€late„night€telephone€calls€he€made€to€several€young€femalesÏin€the€Nashville€area.€€He€first€contacted€victim€K.N.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€during€the€early€morning€hours€ofÐ  " ÐAugust€24,€1992.€€In€a€whisper,€he€addressed€K.N.€by€her€first€name€and€initiated€aÏconversation.€€When€K.N.€asked€the€appellant€to€identify€himself,€he€responded€in€aÏwhisper,€ð ð[t]his€is€Chris,ðð€and€ð ðthis€is€your€Fantasy€Man.ðð€Ìà Ø àK.N.€testified€that€she€believed€the€caller€to€be€her€then€fianc,€KristanÏKivilaan.׃"N×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Pretending€to€be€ð ðChris,ðð€the€appellant€began€talking€to€K.N.€about€theÐ +þ#( Ðupcoming€wedding€plans€and€the€honeymoon.€€He€told€K.N.€that€he€loved€her€and€thatÏhe€wanted€her€to€do€a€special€favor€for€him.€€He€stated€that€he€had€a€special€fantasyÏfrom€the€movie,€òòNine€and€ðð€Weeksóó,€and€that€he€wanted€her€to€act€out€a€scene€fromÐ j0b). Ðthe€movie€with€him.€€The€fantasy€involved€K.N.€traveling€to€a€nearby€hotel€where€sheÐ 62.+0 Ðwas€to€check€into€a€room€and€wait€for€his€arrival.€€The€appellant€told€her€to€take€aÏblindfold€and€to€place€it€over€her€eyes€while€waiting€for€him€in€the€room.€€He€told€herÏthat€when€he€arrived,€they€would€act€out€his€fantasy€and€have€sexual€intercourse€atÏthe€hotel.Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€discussed€his€fantasy€with€K.N.€for€approximately€thirty€minutesÏbefore€she€finally€agreed€to€meet€him€at€a€nearby€Days€Inn€Hotel.€€K.N.€checked€into€aÏfirst€floor€room€and€sat€on€the€bed€to€wait€for€ð ðChris.ðð€€After€several€minutes,€theÏappellant€called€K.N.ððs€room€and€gave€her€further€instructions.€€Still€whispering,€he€toldÏher€to€remove€her€clothing€and€to€lie€down€on€the€bed€with€the€blindfold€over€her€eyes.€ÏHe€told€her€to€masturbate€on€the€bed€and€that€if€the€window€shades€were€open€andÏthe€door€were€unlocked,€he€would€enter€her€room€and€act€out€the€fantasy.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ø Ѐ€€à Ø àK.N.€insisted€on€the€telephone€that€she€and€ð ðChrisðð€have€a€face„to„face€talkÐ ÌÄ Ðbecause€the€whispering€and€surepticious€behavior€were€beginning€to€frighten€her.€€TheÏappellant€reminded€her€that€he€loved€her€and€that€if€she€loved€him,€she€would€do€thisÏspecial€favor.€€K.N.,€however,€did€not€fully€comply€with€the€appellantððs€instructions.€ÏShe€opened€the€window€curtains€and€sat€down€on€the€bed,€but€she€did€not€remove€herÏclothing€or€unlock€the€door.€€Moments€later€a€strange€man,€later€identified€as€theÏappellant,€walked€past€K.N.ððs€window.€€K.N.€testified€that€she€was€frightened€by€theÏsudden€appearance€of€the€strange€man.€€Ìà Ø àK.N.€stayed€in€the€room€and€soon€received€another€telephone€call€from€theÏappellant.€€She€testified€that€the€caller€expressed€anger€because€she€had€not€followedÏhis€instructions.€€She€told€the€caller€that€she€did€not€feel€comfortable€with€theÏcircumstances€and€asked€if€they€could€talk€in€person.€€The€appellant€again€gave€herÏthe€instructions€and€promised€her€that€if€she€followed€along,€they€would€have€a€goodÏâ âtime€and€would€talk€later.€€Ð (2 +0 Ðà Ø àK.N.€finally€agreed€to€take€off€her€clothes€and€to€lie€on€the€bed€with€the€windowÏâ âcurtains€open€and€the€door€unlocked.€€While€lying€down,€she€placed€a€hand€towel€overÏher€eyes€as€a€blindfold.€€She€positioned€the€towel€so€that€she€could€still€see€under€it.€ÏSoon€thereafter,€she€saw€a€strange€man€move€in€front€of€her€window€and€beginÏmasturbating.€€She€testified€that€she€immediately€got€up€from€the€bed€to€close€theÏcurtains€and€to€lock€the€door.€€She€then€contacted€her€next„door€neighbor,€JimÏUnderwood,€who€is€a€Nashville€Metro€police€officer.€Ìà Ø àK.N.€testified€that€she€truly€believed€the€caller€was€her€then€fianc€Mr.€Kivilaan,Ïeven€though€she€and€Mr.€Kivilaan€had€never€ñ"ñœñ"ñdiscussedñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€sexually€explicit€matters€on€theÏtelephone.€€She€stated€that€the€man€outside€her€hotel€window€was€not€Mr.€Kivilaan.€ÏShe€identified€the€person€in€the€window€as€a€black€male,€wearing€a€royal€blueÏsweatshirt,€khakis,€and€a€dark€rolled„up€stocking€cap.Ìà Ø àIn€a€taped€interview€with€Detective€Stan€Marlar,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€appellant€stated€that€heÐ ˜ Ðwas€the€man€who€called€K.N.€by€telephone€and€asked€her€to€act€out€his€fantasy€at€theÏDays€Inn€Hotel.׃Ê×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€stated€that€he€walked€by€her€hotel€window,€the€first€time,€andÐ 0 ( Ðnoticed€that€she€was€not€wearing€a€blindfold.€€After€a€follow„up€telephone€call,€heÏwalked€by€the€window€a€second€time.€€He€admitted€to€Detective€Marlar€that€heÏintended€to€have€sexual€intercourse€with€K.N.€ð ð[i]f€she€had€gone€along€with€that.ððÌà Ø àThe€appellant€told€Detective€Marlar€that€he€contacted€other€young€femalesÏabout€his€sexual€fantasy.€€He€called€victim€C.S.€during€the€early€morning€hours€of€JulyÏ19,€1994.€€In€a€whisper,€the€appellant€asked€C.S.€what€she€was€doing,€to€which€sheÏâ âreplied€that€she€had€been€sleeping.€€The€appellant€then€asked€her€if€she€knew€who€heÐ Ä,¼%* Ðwas,€to€which€she€replied,€ð ðYes,€Jeff.ðð€€C.S.€testified€that€the€caller€confirmed€that€heÏwas€Jeff.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ÔÌ Ðâ âà Ø àAccording€to€C.S.,€she€and€Jeff€had€spent€nights€together€in€the€past€and€hadÏengaged€in€sexual€intercourse.€€She€testified€that€it€was€not€unusual€for€Jeff€to€call€her€Ïlate€at€night€and€ask€her€to€come€over.€€She,€therefore,€willingly€talked€to€theÏwhispering€caller,€whom€she€believed€to€be€Jeff.€€They€talked€about€prior€relationshipsÏand€the€appellant€told€C.S.€that€he€loved€her€and€wanted€to€marry€her.€€C.S.€testifiedÏthat€as€they€talked,€the€caller€told€her€that€he€was€masturbating.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àStill€pretending€to€be€ñ"ñœñ"ñð ðJeff,ððñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€the€appellant€asked€C.S.€if€she€had€ever€seen€theÏmovie,€òòNine€and€ðð€Weeksóó.€€When€she€said€ð ðno,ðð€the€appellant€described€a€scene€fromÐ 4, Ðthe€movie€where€a€guy€mysteriously€enters€a€room€and€has€sexual€intercourse€with€aÏblindfolded€woman.€€The€appellant€asked€C.S.€to€act€out€the€movie€scene€with€him€byÏremoving€her€clothes,€opening€the€window€blinds,€and€waiting€for€him€on€her€bed.€€HeÏinstructed€her€to€unlock€the€door€and€to€put€her€dog€in€its€cage€before€his€arrival.€€AtÏthat€point,€she€was€to€put€on€a€blindfold€and€lay€silent€on€her€bed.Ìà Ø àC.S.€testified€that€she€believed€the€caller€was€her€friend,€Jeff.€€Knowing€that€JeffÏhad€never€been€to€her€apartment€before,€she€willingly€gave€the€caller€directions€to€herÏapartment.€€She€then€waited€for€ð ðJeffðð€to€arrive,€but€did€not€unlock€her€door€or€removeÏher€clothing.€€Ìà Ø àC.S.€testified€that€she€stayed€in€bed€while€waiting€for€ð ðJeffðð€to€arrive.€€After€a€fewÏminutes,€she€heard€a€knock€at€her€window€and€then€received€another€telephone€call.ÏThe€whispering€caller€told€her€that€she€was€not€performing€her€role€correctly.€€HeÏrepeated€the€instructions€and€asked€her€to€cooperate.€€C.S.€testified€that€she€finallyÏâ âagreed€to€act€out€the€callerððs€fantasy€only€because€she€believed€the€caller€was€Jeff.Ð \0T). Ðà Ø àC.S.€opened€her€apartment€door,€undressed,€and€laid€down€with€a€blindfoldÏâ âover€her€eyes.€€Moments€later,€she€heard€another€knock€at€the€window€and€heardÏsomeone€enter€her€bedroom.€€C.S.€asked€if€the€person€was€Jeff,€and€the€appellantÏwhispered,€ð ðYes,€donððt€talk.ðð€€He€then€began€to€lick€her€toes€and€to€touch€her€thighs€asÏhe€made€his€way€onto€the€bed.€€C.S.€testified€that€she€said,€ð ðJeff,€tell€me€somethingÏthat€only€you€and€I€know,ðð€but€she€heard€no€answer.€€The€appellant€continued€theÏfantasy€by€penetrating€C.S.ððs€vagina€with€his€tongue€and€also€with€his€penis.€€At€thatÏpoint,€C.S.€realized€that€the€man€was€not€Jeff.€€She€testified€that€she€was€horrified€byÏthe€event,€but€remained€still€because€she€feared€that€the€man€had€a€weapon.€€SheÏstated€that€she€also€felt€physically€vulnerable€because€of€a€recent€surgery€on€herÏankle.€€The€appellant€continued€the€sexual€intercourse€with€C.S.€until€ejaculation€andÏthen€immediately€left€the€apartment.Ìà Ø àC.S.ððs€roommate,€Shannon€Cooley,€arrived€at€the€apartment€around€6:00€a.m.Ïthat€same€morning€and€found€C.S.€crying€and€upset.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€After€contacting€the€police€toÐ d\ Ðreport€a€rape,€both€C.S.€and€Ms.€Cooley€met€with€Detective€Marlar€to€give€a€fullÏstatement.€€Ìà Ø àDetective€Marlar€was€assigned€to€investigate€the€related€cases€involving€theÏalleged€ð ðfantasyðð€rapist.€€Based€upon€statements€and€evidence€from€C.S.€and€K.N.,ÏDetective€Marlar€began€patrolling€several€public€phone€booths€in€the€Nashville€area.׃N×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р`'X $ ÐDetective€Marlar€testified€that€the€appellant€became€a€suspect€after€he€and€otherÏofficers€observed€the€appellant€making€routine€late„night€telephone€calls€at€severalÏphone€booths€under€police€surveillance.€€Detective€Marlar€brought€the€appellant€in€forÏâ âthe€tape€recorded€interview€on€January€19,€1995.€€€€€€Ð .ˆ', Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€told€the€detective€that€he€spoke€to€C.S.€at€her€apartment€complexÏâ âbefore€he€called€her€on€the€telephone.€€He€stated€that€during€their€telephoneÏconversation€he€told€her€that€he€loved€her€and€that€they€should€get€married€someday.€ÏHe€also€stated€that€C.S.€was€blindfolded€when€he€had€oral€sex€and€intercourse€withÏher.€€However,€he€contended€that€he€never€told€her€or€gave€any€indication€that€he€wasÏsomebody€other€than€himself.€€He€stated€that€although€C.S.€may€have€thought€he€wasÏanother€person,€she€never€asked€him€about€his€identity€and€he€never€told€her.€€Ìà Ø àFollowing€the€taped€interview,€the€appellant€was€indicted€by€the€DavidsonÏCounty€Grand€Jury€and€was€arrested€on€the€charges€of€rape€and€attempted€rapeÏaccomplished€by€fraud.€€When€reports€of€the€appellantððs€arrest€were€made€public,€aÏthird€woman,€M.J.,€came€forward€with€statements€that€she€too€had€been€victimized€byÏa€whispering€ð ðfantasyðð€caller.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€M.J.€identified€the€appellant€from€a€photographic€lineÐ ÌÄ Ðup€as€the€culprit.€€Based€upon€her€statements€and€the€identification€evidence,€anÏadditional€count€of€rape€by€fraud€was€added€to€appellantððs€indictment.€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€entered€a€plea€agreement€on€that€count€after€it€was€severed€fromÏthe€indictment.€€At€the€guilty€plea€hearing,€the€State€offered€proof€that€M.J.€was€livingÏin€an€apartment€in€Nashville€when€she€received€a€telephone€call€from€a€man€whomÏshe€thought€to€be€her€then€boyfriend,€Greg.€€The€caller€assumed€the€identity€of€GregÏand€talked€to€M.J.€about€a€sexual€fantasy.€€Following€the€callerððs€instructions,€M.J.Ïagreed€to€open€her€apartment€window,€blindfold€herself,€and€lie€on€her€bed€completelyÏnude.€€A€man,€thereafter,€entered€her€apartment€through€the€window€and€sexuallyÏpenetrated€her.€€When€M.J.€realized€that€the€man€was€not€Greg,€she€began€to€panicÏand€scream.€€The€culprit€fled€through€the€opened€window.€€€€€€Ìà Ø àBased€upon€the€above€evidence,€the€appellant€was€convicted€on€two€counts€ofÏrape,€one€count€of€attempted€rape,€and€a€separate€pleaded€count€of€sexual€battery.€ÏWe€affirm.€Ð ô3ì,2 Ðà Ø àà@+€àò òDISCUSSIONó óˆÐ  Ðà@HH/€àò òI.ó óˆÐ àØ Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€first€contends€that€the€offenses€of€rape€by€fraud,€as€provided€inÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„503(a)(3)€(1991),€were€unconstitutionally€vague€as€chargedÏin€this€case€because€they€did€not€define€the€proscribed€fraudulent€conduct.Ìà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€was€indicted€on€three€counts€of€rape€accomplished€by€fraud€andÏone€count€of€attempted€rape€accomplished€by€fraud.€€At€the€time€of€the€offenses€in€thisÏcase,€the€crime€of€rape€was€defined€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„503(a)€as€theÏð ðunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€of€the€defendant€by€aÏvictim€accompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances:€€€.€.€.€(3)€The€sexualÏpenetration€is€accomplished€by€fraud.ðð€€The€Tennessee€Code€defines€ð ðfraudðð€as€ð ðtheÏterm€is€used€in€normal€parlance€and€includes,€but€is€not€limited€to,€deceit,€trickery,Ïmisrepresentation€and€subterfuge,€and€shall€be€broadly€construed€to€accomplish€theÏpurposes€of€this€title.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(13)€(1991).€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€insists€that€the€rape€statute€is€unconstitutionally€vague€as€appliedÏin€this€case€because€it€failed€to€specify€the€proscribed€conduct€that€constituted€fraud.€ÏHe€claims€that€the€statute€did€not€give€reasonable€notice€of€the€prohibited€fraudulentÏconduct€because€the€alleged€fraud€in€this€case€was€peripheral€to€the€sexualÏpenetration.Ìà Ø àUnder€the€principles€of€due€process,€states€are€prohibited€from€holding€anÏindividual€criminally€liable€for€conduct€which€a€person€of€common€intelligence€ð ðcouldÏnot€reasonably€understand€to€be€proscribedðð€by€a€statute.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Harrisóó,€347Ð ¨. ', ÐU.S.€612,€617,€74€S.Ct.€808,€812,€98€L.Ed.€989€(1954);€òòState€v.€Wilkinsóó,€655€S.W.2dÐ t0l). Ð914,€915€(Tenn.€1983).€€This€fair€warning€requirement,€however:ÌÓ’Óà8 Ø àdoes€not€invalidate€every€statute€which€a€reviewing€court€believes€couldÏhave€been€drafted€with€greater€precision.€€Many€statutes€will€have€someÏinherent€vagueness€for€ðð[i]n€most€English€words€and€phrases€there€lurkÏuncertainties.€.€.€.€€Even€trained€lawyers€may€find€it€necessary€to€consultÐ ¾6¶/5 Ðlegal€dictionaries,€treatises,€and€judicial€opinions€before€they€may€sayÏwith€certainty€what€statutes€may€compel€or€forbid.Ó#Ó€€€€€€€€à ð à€€à H! à€€ÐîæØ (#Ø (# ÐòòWilkinsóó,€655€S.W.2d€at€915„16€(quoting€òòRose€v.€Lockeóó,€423€U.S.€48,€50,€96€S.Ct.€243,Ð º ² Ð244,€46€L.Ed.2d€185€(1975)).Ìà Ø àTo€determine€whether€a€statute€comports€with€the€notice€requirement,€we€lookÏto€the€statutory€language€and€definitions€provided€by€the€General€Assembly,€and€alsoÏto€the€judicial€interpretation€given€to€the€statute.€€òòWilkinsóó,€655€S.W.2d€at€916;€òòState€v.Ð êâ  ÐHayesóó,€899€S.W.2d€175,€181€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€As€stated€above,€our€GeneralÐ ¶®  ÐAssembly€has€defined€ð ðfraudðð€for€the€purposes€of€Title€39€of€the€Tennessee€Code,€ð ðasÏthe€term€is€used€in€normal€parlance€and€includes,€but€is€not€limited€to,€deceit,€trickery,Ïmisrepresentation€and€subterfuge,€and€shall€be€broadly€construed€to€accomplish€theÏpurposes€of€this€title.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(13).€€Moreover,€theÏTennessee€Supreme€Court€has€set€forth€its€interpretation€of€the€term€ð ðfraudðð€by€statingÏthat,€ð ð[a]€person€acts€fraudulently€when€(1)€the€person€intentionally€misrepresents€anÏexisting,€material€fact€or€produces€a€false€impression,€in€order€to€mislead€another€or€toÏobtain€an€undue€advantage,€and€(2)€another€is€injured€because€of€reasonable€relianceÏupon€that€representation.ðð€€òòHodges€v.€S.C.€Toof€&€Co.óó,€833€S.W.2d€896,€901€(Tenn.Ð â"Ú Ð1992).׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à ˆ à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ®$¦! Ðà Ø àRelying€upon€those€definitions,€we€have€no€doubt€that€the€appellant€was€put€onÏnotice€of€the€proscribed€fraudulent€conduct€at€issue€in€this€case.€€The€rape€statute€isÏclear€on€its€face€that€a€person€commits€a€Class€B€felony€when€he€or€she€engages€inÏsexual€penetration€that€is€accomplished€by€fraud.€€The€fraudulent€conduct€could€haveÏâ âincluded€trickery,€subterfuge,€or€some€other€misrepresentation€by€the€appellant€thatÐ ª-¢&+ Ðgave€the€victims€a€false€impression€and€allowed€or€aided€him€in€the€accomplishment€ofÏthe€sexual€penetration.€€Ìâ âà Ø àContrary€to€the€appellantððs€argument,€the€fraudulent€conduct€did€not€have€to€beÏthe€actual€sexual€penetration€itself.€€To€read€Tennesseeððs€rape€statute€that€narrowlyÏwould€substantially€undermine€its€general€meaning€and€purpose.€€There€is€no€questionÏthat€the€statute€is€intended€to€punish€those€who€engage€in€sexual€penetration€with€aÏñ "ñœñ "ñpersonñ"ñ,ñ"ññ "ñ›ñ "ñ€without€the€personððs€consent.€€The€common„law€offense€of€rape,€as€adoptedÏby€our€General€Assembly,€included€the€elements€of€carnal€knowledge,€force,€andÏcommission€of€the€sexual€penetration€without€the€consent€or€against€the€will€of€theÏvictim.€€òòWilkinsóó,€655€S.W.2d€at€916€(citing€C.J.S.€ðð€8,€p.471;€65€Am.Jur.2d,€òòRapeóó,€ðð€2,Ð 4, Ðpp.€762„63).Ìà Ø àIn€most€rape€cases,€the€ð ðlack€of€consentðð€element€is€associated€with€the€victimÏbeing€forced€or€coerced€into€the€sexual€acts.€€In€Tennessee,€however,€our€GeneralÏAssembly€has€provided€that€a€victimððs€consent€may€also€be€ineffective€or€lacking€dueÏto€fraudulent€conduct€committed€by€the€prepetrator.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„Ð 4 , Ð106(a)(9);€òòState€v.€Tizardóó,€897€S.W.2d€732,€742€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€The€fraudÐ "ø Ðmay€go€directly€to€the€sexual€penetration€itself,€or€may€relate€to€the€inducement€of€theÏsexual€act.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(9)(A);€òòTizardóó,€897€S.W.2d€at€741„42.€€€€€€€€Ð ˜%" Ðà Ø àHaving€reviewed€the€statutes€pertaining€to€rape,€fraud,€and€effective€consent,Ïwe€uphold€the€rape€statute€as€giving€the€appellant€sufficient€notice€of€the€proscribedÏfraudulent€conduct.€€As€his€case€pertained€to€fraud€in€the€inducement,€which€is€definedÏboth€by€case€law€and€by€statute,€he€cannot€now€be€heard€to€complain€that€he€wasÏuninformed€of€the€law.Ìà@,,/€àò òII.ó óˆÐ `0X). Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€multiple€counts€of€rape€in€his€indictmentÏâ âwere€invalid€because€they€failed€to€state€sufficient€facts€to€support€the€elements€ofÐ 4ü,2 Ðfraud.€€He€argues€that€the€indictment€ran€afoul€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„202Ï(1991),€and€should€have€been€dismissed.€€Ìâ âà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€€Ìà Ø àIt€is€a€well„known€principle€of€law€that€a€criminal€indictment€must€include€aÏsufficient€description€of€the€charged€offense€to€insure€that€the€accused€understandsÏthe€special€nature€of€the€charge€he€is€called€upon€to€answer.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443Ð ü  ÐU.S.€307,€314,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2786,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„¼13„202€provides€guidance€as€to€this€requirement:ÌÓ XÓà8 Ø àThe€indictment€must€state€the€facts€constituting€the€offense€in€ordinaryÏand€concise€language,€without€prolixity€or€repetition,€in€such€a€manner€asÏto€enable€a€person€of€common€understanding€to€know€what€is€intended,Ïand€with€that€degree€of€certainty€which€will€enable€the€court,€onÏconviction,€to€pronounce€the€proper€judgment,€and€in€no€case€are€suchÏwords€as€ð ðforce€and€armsðð€or€ð ðcontrary€to€the€form€of€the€statuteððÏnecessary.Ð Ø (#Ø (# ÐÓ‘TÓÌà Ø àWhile€the€indictment€must€contain€a€sufficient€description€of€the€chargedÏoffense,€ð ðit€is€not€necessary€to€amplify€and€encumber€the€charge€by€circumstantialÏdetail€and€minute€description.ðð€€òòState€v.€Griffisóó,€964€S.W.2d€577,€591€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ! ÐApp.€1997),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1997).€€The€basic€requirements€are:€€(1)€toÐ â"Ú Ðprovide€notice€to€the€accused€of€the€offense€with€which€he€is€charged;€(2)€to€notify€theÏtrial€court€of€the€charge€so€that€it€can€enter€an€appropriate€judgment€and€sentence;Ïand€(3)€to€describe€the€offense€so€as€to€protect€the€accused€against€double€jeopardy.€ÏòòState€v.€Byrdóó,€820€S.W.2d€739,€741€(Tenn.€1991);€òòGriffisóó,€964€S.W.2d€at€590„91.€€Ð *#' Ðà Ø àIn€appellantððs€case,€the€indictment€included€three€counts€of€rape€by€fraud€andÏone€count€of€attempted€rape€by€fraud.€€Each€count€was€virtually€identical€in€listing€theÏcriminal€charge,€the€victim€of€the€alleged€offense,€the€date€and€county€were€theÏoffense€allegedly€occurred,€and€the€statutory€provision€involved.€€The€counts€of€rapeÏby€fraud€stated€in€pertinent€part:ÌÓmÓà8 Ø à[O]n€the€19th€day€of€Juy,€1994,€in€Davidson€County,€Tennessee€andÏbefore€the€finding€of€this€indictment,€[the€appellant]€did€engage€inÏunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€[the€victim],€and€the€sexual€penetrationÐ ª6¢/5 Ðwas€accomplished€by€fraud,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ððÏ39„13„503,€and€against€the€peace€and€dignity€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.€Ð Ø (#Ø (# ÐÌÓ‘TÓThe€count€of€attempted€rape€by€fraud€stated:ÌÓ\sÓà8 Ø à[O]n€the€24th€day€of€August,€1992,€in€Davidson€County,€Tennessee€andÏbefore€the€finding€of€this€indictment,€[the€appellant]€did€attempt€toÏengage€in€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€[K.N.],€and€the€sexualÏpenetration€was€to€be€accomplished€by€fraud,€in€violation€of€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€ðð€39„12„101,€and€against€the€peace€and€dignity€of€theÏState€of€Tennessee.Ð Ø (#Ø (# ÐÌÓÓà Ø àWe€conclude€that€the€indictment€satisfied€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„202,€andÏthe€requirements€espoused€by€our€Supreme€Court€in€òòByrdóó.€€Each€count€tracked€theÐ œ”  Ðlanguage€of€the€rape€statute€and€provided€sufficient€detail€to€apprise€the€appellant€ofÏthe€charges€and€to€give€the€trial€court€a€basis€for€entering€a€proper€judgment.€€InÏaddition,€we€are€confident€that€appellant€would€be€able€to€defend€against€doubleÏjeopardy€if€he€were€to€be€indicted€on€the€same€offenses€in€a€subsequent€case.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï€€€ÓFuÓÓãnÓà@.€àò òIII.ó óˆà è à€€Ð ˜ Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€hisÏsupplemental€motion€for€a€bill€of€particulars.€€Before€trial,€the€State€responded€toÏappellantððs€first€motion€for€a€bill€of€particulars,€providing€the€exact€times,€dates,€andÏlocations€of€the€alleged€offenses,€as€well€as€the€victimsðð€names€listed€in€the€indictment.€ÏThe€trial€court€determined€that€the€information€provided€by€the€State€was€sufficient€andÏdenied€the€appellantððs€motion€for€a€supplemental€bill€of€particulars.€€The€appellantÏargues€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€under€Rule€7(c)€of€the€TennesseeÏRules€of€Criminal€Procedure€and€prevented€him€from€preparing€an€adequate€defense.€Ïà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€Ìà Ø àRule€7(c)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€states€that,€ð ð[u[ponÏmotion€of€the€defendant,€the€court€may€direct€the€filing€of€a€bill€of€particulars€so€as€toÏadequately€identify€the€offense€charged.ðð€€The€trial€court€has€discretion€in€requiring€theÏState€to€file€a€bill€of€particulars.€€However,€the€court€must€adhere€to€the€generalÏpurpose€of€providing€the€defendant€with€enough€information€so€that€he€or€she€may€(1)Ð Ì5Ä.4 Ðprepare€a€defense,€(2)€avoid€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial,€and€(3)€protect€against€doubleÏjeopardy.€€òòByrdóó,€820€S.W.2d€at€741;€òòState€v.€Hicksóó,€666€S.W.2d€54,€56€(Tenn.€1984).€Ð ÔÌ ÐRule€7(c)€is€not€meant€to€be€used€for€broad€discovery׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€is€generally€satisfied€whenÐ   ˜ Ðthe€State€provides€the€defendant€with€information€concerning€the€time€and€place€of€theÏalleged€offense€and€the€names€of€the€victims€involved.€€òòSeeóó€òòHicksóó,€666€S.W.2d€at€56;Ð 80 ÐòòState€v.€Andersonóó,€748€S.W.2d€201,€204€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóóÐ ü  Ð(Tenn.€1985).€€€à ˆ à€€€€€€€Ð ÔÌ  Ðà Ø àIn€this€case,€there€is€no€question€that€the€appellant€was€sufficiently€informed€ofÏthe€charged€offenses€and€the€exact€times,€dates,€and€locations€where€those€offensesÏoccurred.€€Also,€from€information€provided€in€the€indictment,€the€appellant€had€specificÏnotice€of€the€victims€involved€in€each€offense.׃N×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Based€upon€that€information,€the€trialÐ ü Ðcourt€concluded€that€the€State€had€complied€with€Rule€7(c)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÏCriminal€Procedure.€€We€agree.Ìà Ø àThe€basis€of€appellantððs€complaint€is€that€he€was€not€sufficiently€apprised€of€theÏfraudulent€conduct€associated€with€the€charges€of€rape€and€attempted€rape.€€As€theÏState€points€out,€the€appellant€was€essentially€trying€to€ascertain€the€Stateððs€theoryÏunderlying€the€rape€charges.€€Our€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€a€bill€of€particulars€isÏnot€intended€to€be€a€means€of€learning€the€Stateððs€evidence€and€theories,€ð ðalthough,Ïto€the€extent€the€information€sought€is€necessary,€it€will€be€required,€even€if€to€do€soÏdiscloses€the€Stateððs€evidence€or€theories.ðð€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,Ð 0)("& Ð539€(Tenn.€1994).€€Because€the€State€provided€the€appellant€with€the€time,€dates,Ïlocations,€and€the€victimsðð€names€pertaining€to€each€offense,€we€conclude€that€the€trialÏcourt€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€denying€the€motion€for€a€supplemental€bill€ofÏparticulars.€€€ÌÐ ,2$+0 Ѐ€€€€€à@/€àò òIV.ó óˆÐ  Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€indictment€is€fatally€deficient€because€itÏfailed€to€allege€a€specific€culpable€mental€state€for€the€offenses€of€rape€and€attemptedÏrape.€€Ìà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà Ø àShortly€after€the€appeal€was€filed€in€this€case,€our€Supreme€Court€rendered€itsÏdecision€in€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.2d€725€(Tenn.€1997).€€In€òòHillóó,€the€Court€held€that€anÐ ÜÔ  Ðindictment€is€valid€where€its€language€satisfies€the€constitutional€requirement€of€noticeÏto€the€accused,€its€form€meets€the€requirements€set€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„¼202,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€the€requisite€mental€state€can€be€logically€inferred€from€the€alleged€criminalÐ @8 Ðconduct.€€òòId.óó€at€726„27.€€We€determined€above€that€the€appellantððs€indictmentÐ   Ðprovided€sufficient€notice€of€the€charged€offenses€and€conformed€to€the€statutoryÏrequirements€under€section€40„13„202.€€We€must€now€address€whether€the€requisiteÏmental€state€for€the€rape€offenses€can€be€logically€inferred€from€the€charges€in€theÏindictment.Ìà Ø àThe€three€counts€of€rape€state€that€the€appellant€engaged€in€ð ðunlawful€sexualÏpenetration€of€[the€victims],€and€the€sexual€penetration€was€accomplished€by€fraud,€inÏviolation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„13„503.ðð׃Ê×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€count€of€attempted€rapeÐ  %˜" Ðstates€that€the€appellant€attempted€to€engage€in€ð ðunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€K.N.,Ïand€the€sexual€penetration€was€to€be€accomplished€by€fraud,€in€violation€ofÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„12„101.ðð€€€€€€€Ì€à Ø àThe€above€counts€are€similar€to€the€indictment€in€òòHillóó,€where€the€accused€wasÐ Ð,È%* Ðcharged€with€the€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€less€than€thirteen€(13)€yearsÏof€age,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„13„502.€€òòSeeóó€òòHillóó,€954€S.W.2dÐ h0`). Ðat€727.€€The€Court€in€òòHillóó€concluded€that€the€required€mental€state€could€be€logicallyÐ  Ðinferred€from€the€alleged€criminal€conduct€in€that€case€because€the€unlawful€sexualÏpenetration€of€a€person€under€thirteen€(13)€is€committable€only€if€the€defendant€actsÏintentionally,€knowingly,€or€recklessly.€€òòId.óó€at€729.€€Ð l d Ðà Ø àFollowing€that€decision,€we€conclude€that€the€requisite€mental€state€for€the€rapeÏcharges€in€appellantððs€case€can€be€logically€inferred€from€the€language€in€theÏindictment.€€The€indictment€described€the€unlawful€nature€of€the€alleged€sexual€actsÏwith€specific€references€to€the€criminal€statutes€at€issue.€€As€similar€language€hasÏbeen€upheld€in€òòHillóó€and€cases€thereafter,€we€conclude€that€the€appellantððs€indictmentÐ h` Ðwas€valid.€€òòHillóó,€954€S.W.2d€at€729;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Barneyóó,€986€S.W.2d€545,€547Ð 4, Ð(Tenn.€1999);€òòState€v.€Stokesóó,€954€S.W.2d€729,€730€(Tenn.€1997).€€€€€€€€€Ð ø Ðà@!!/€àò òV.ó óˆÐ ÌÄ Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€admissionÏinto€evidence€of€testimony€and€photographs€depicting€the€contents€of€his€vehicle€at€theÏtime€of€his€arrest.€€He€argues€that€the€evidence€was€not€relevant€and€that€anyÏprobative€value€was€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€HeÏfurther€argues€that€the€evidence€depicted€a€bad€act€or€crime€that€was€inadmissibleÏunder€Rule€404(b)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence.Ìà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€was€arrested€at€approximately€12:25€a.m.€on€May€24,€1995,€at€aÏpublic€telephone€within€the€Fairlane€Square€shopping€center€in€Nashville.€ÏPhotographs€taken€at€the€arrest€scene€show€the€appellant,€his€vehicle€parked€next€toÏthe€public€phone,€and€various€angles€of€the€interior€and€contents€of€the€vehicle.€€TheÏState€placed€particular€emphasis€on€the€photographs€revealing€a€stocking€cap,Ïâ âcondoms,€quarters,€and€several€phone€books€found€inside€the€vehicle.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€à H! à€€€€€€€€€€Ð 42,+0 Ðà Ø àWe€shall€first€address€appellantððs€contention€that€the€photographs€were€notÏâ ârelevant€to€the€charges€of€rape€and€attempted€rape.€€As€the€State€argues€in€its€brief,Ïthere€is€no€question€that€the€photographs€depict€the€appellant€engaged€in€some€typeÏof€late„night€activity€involving€telephone€calls.€€The€photographs€reflect€time,€location,Ïand€circumstances€that€are€remarkably€similar€to€the€descriptions€provided€by€eachÏvictim.€€Moreover,€the€photograph€of€the€stocking€cap€corroborates€the€statement€Ïgiven€by€victim€K.N.€€€€€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€argues,€however,€that€any€probative€value€of€the€photographsÏwas€minimal€because€his€identity€as€the€ñ "ñœñ "ñð ðñ"ñfñ"ññ"ñFñ"ñantasyñ "ñ›ñ "ññ "ññ "ñ€ñ "ñœñ "ññ "ñmñ "ññ "ñMñ "ñanððñ "ñ›ñ "ññ "ññ "ñ€was€not€in€dispute.€€HeÏcontends€that€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€outweighed€that€low€probative€value€andÏthat€the€photographs€were€otherwise€inadmissible€under€Rule€404(b)€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Evidence.€€We€disagree.Ìà Ø àThe€trial€court€reviewed€the€evidentiary€value€of€the€photographs€and€allowedÏthem€into€evidence€over€the€appellantððs€objection.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€afford€considerable€deferenceÐ d\ Ðto€the€trial€courtððs€determination€and€decline€to€interfere€without€a€showing€that€the€trialÏcourt€abused€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Bradenóó,€867€S.W.2d€750,€758€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ü!ô Ð1993),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1993).€€Moreover,€we€conclude€from€our€independentÐ È#À  Ðreview€that€the€photographs€were€sufficiently€probative€of€the€rape€offenses€and€wereÏproperly€submitted€for€the€juryððs€consideration.€€€€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àRule€404(b)€incorporates€the€traditional€exclusionary€rule€prohibiting€theÏadmission€into€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€that€are€offered€to€prove€theÏcharacter€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€therewith.€€Photographs€doÏnot€necessarily€fall€under€the€exclusionary€rule.€€However,€the€appellant€argues€thatÏâ âthe€photographs€in€this€case€depict€acts€of€a€nature€that€implicate€him€as€a€possibleÐ `0X). Ðsex€offender€and€were€inadmissible€under€Rule€404(b)€to€prove€that€he€committed€theÏrape€offenses.Ìâ âà Ø àAssuming€that€the€photographs€represent€ð ðactsðð€as€argued€by€the€appellant,€theÏphotographs€were€nevertheless€admissible€under€the€limited€exception€to€Rule€404(b).€ÏRule€404(b)€permits€the€introduction€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€when€theÏevidence€is€not€being€offered€to€prove€character€or€conforming€conduct.€€ExamplesÏinclude€evidence€to€show€motive,€intent,€knowledge,€identity,€absence€of€mistake,€andÏa€common€scheme€or€plan€for€the€commission€of€two€or€more€crimes€so€related€toÏeach€other€that€the€proof€of€one€tends€to€establish€the€other.€€òòState€v.€Hallockóó,€875Ð h` ÐS.W.2d€285,€292€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(citing€òòCollard€v.€Stateóó,€526€S.W.2d€112,Ð 4, Ð114€(Tenn.€1975)).€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àBased€upon€the€unusual€facts€in€this€case,€we€conclude€that€the€photographsÏwere€probative€of€a€unique,€signature€scheme€used€by€the€appellant€to€prepetrate€theÏsexual€acts€against€the€victims.€€While€the€photographs€alone€do€not€show€theÏappellant€engaged€in€a€deceptive€telephone€scheme,€they€reveal€his€presence€late€atÏnight€at€a€public€telephone€in€close€proximity€to€where€the€original€ð ðfantasyðð€calls€wereÏplaced.€€Various€items€depicted€in€the€photographs,€including€the€telephone€books,€theÏquarters,€and€the€condoms,€are€probative€of€an€intent€to€make€multiple€telephone€callsÏand€a€possible€intent€to€engage€in€sexual€intercourse.€€When€viewed€collectively,€theÏphotographs€corroborate€both€the€appellantððs€and€the€victimsðð€stories€describing€lateÏnight€telephone€calls€in€which€the€whispering€caller€expressed€his€desire€to€act€out€aÏspecific€sexual€fantasy.€€Ìà Ø àThe€trial€court€assessed€the€relevancy€of€the€photographs,€with€arguments€ofÏcounsel€conducted€away€from€the€jury,€and€concluded€that€the€risk€of€unfair€prejudiceÏfrom€the€photographs€did€not€outweigh€their€probative€value.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€find€no€evidence€toÐ (2 +0 Ðdisturb€that€conclusion€and€uphold€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€admit€the€photographsÏinto€evidence.€€€€€€€Ìà@/€àò òVI.ó óˆÐ   ˜ Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€toÏsever€the€multiple€count€indictment.€€He€argues€that€the€counts€of€rape€pertaining€toÏthe€victim€C.S.€should€have€been€severed€and€tried€separately€from€those€pertainingÏto€K.N.Ìà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà Ø àAs€previously€mentioned,€the€indictment€contained€two€counts€of€rape€of€victimÏC.S.,€one€count€of€attempted€rape€of€K.N.,€and€one€count€of€rape€of€M.J.€€Before€trial,Ïthe€prosecution€voluntarily€severed€the€count€of€rape€pertaining€to€victim€M.J.€from€theÏthree€counts€involving€C.S.€and€K.N.€€The€appellant,€thereafter,€filed€a€motion€to€severÏthe€rape€counts€between€C.S.€and€K.N.€€The€trial€court€conducted€a€pre„trial€hearingÏon€the€motion€and€concluded€that€the€three€counts€could€be€tried€together.€€Ìà Ø àOur€review€of€this€issue€is€governed€by€Rule€8€and€Rule€14€of€the€TennesseeÏRules€of€Criminal€Procedure.€€We€must€first€determine,€as€a€matter€of€law,€whether€theÏjoinder€of€the€rape€counts€was€proper€under€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€8(b).€€Rule€8(b)€permitsÏtwo€or€more€offenses€to€be€joined€in€the€same€indictment€in€separate€counts€if€theÏoffenses€ð ðconstitute€parts€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan€or€if€they€are€of€the€same€orÏsimilar€character.ðð€€However,€under€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€14(b)(1),€a€defendant€is€entitledÏâ âto€a€severance€of€two€or€more€offenses€that€have€been€joined€for€trial€unless:€€theÐ +ü#( Ðoffenses€are€part€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€the€evidence€of€one€would€beÐ  Ðadmissible€in€the€trial€of€the€other.׃Š×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ÔÌ Ðâ âà Ø àThere€is€no€question€that€the€rape€offenses€in€this€case€are€virtually€identical€inÏnature€and€design,€sharing€a€common€scheme€or€plan€against€the€female€victims.€€ForÏapproximately€two€years,€the€appellant€engaged€in€a€repetitious€pattern€of€placing€late„¼night€telephone€calls€to€young€women€in€the€Nashville€area,€during€which,€he€wouldÏdiscuss€the€same€sexual€fantasy€and€would€suggest€that€he€was€someone€other€thanÏhimself.€€These€similarities,€as€evidenced€by€the€statements€of€both€C.S.€and€K.N.,€areÏsufficient€to€establish€a€distinctive€òòmodus€operandióó,€thus€satisfying€the€ð ðcommonÐ h` Ðscheme€or€planðð€requirement€under€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€14(b)(1).€€€€à ð à€€€€€€€€€€Ð 80 Ðà Ø àWe€must€next€address€whether€the€evidence€of€the€attempted€rape€offenseÏagainst€K.N.€would€have€been€admissible€in€a€trial€involving€the€two€rape€offensesÏagainst€C.S.€€To€answer€this€question,€we€look€to€the€procedural€requirements€in€RuleÏ404(b)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence.€€Generally,€evidence€of€another€crime€orÏbad€act€is€inadmissible€in€the€trial€of€a€ñ "ñœñ "ñseparateñ "ñ,ñ "ññ "ñ›ñ "ññ "ññ "ñ€other€crime€because€the€evidenceÏinvites€the€trier€of€fact€to€infer€guilt€from€propensity€and€character.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.Ï404(b).€€However,€when€the€evidence€of€another€crime€or€bad€act€is€relevant€forÏreasons€other€than€the€character€of€the€accused,€it€is€admissible€so€long€as€itsÏprobative€value€is€not€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€AsÏwe€previously€stated,€those€other€grounds€of€relevancy€include:€€(1)€motive;€(2)€intent;Ï(3)€guilty€knowledge;€(4)€identity€of€the€defendant;€(5)€absence€of€mistake€or€accident;Ð ü*ô#( Ðor€(6)€a€common€scheme€or€plan€for€the€commission€of€two€or€more€crimes€so€relatedÏto€each€other€that€proof€of€one€tends€to€establish€the€other.€€òòCollardóó,€526€S.W.2d€atÐ ÔÌ Ð114.€€€€Ìà Ø àHaving€carefully€reviewed€the€evidence€in€this€case,€we€agree€with€the€StateÏthat€the€evidence€of€each€rape€offense€was€relevant€to€show€the€appellantððs€identity,Ïintent,€and€the€common€scheme€or€plan€that€linked€the€offenses€together.€€The€basisÏof€the€appellantððs€defense€at€trial€was€that,€although€he€intended€to€have€sexualÏintercourse€with€both€K.N.€and€C.S.,€he€never€intended€nor€did€he€actually€trick€theÏyoung€women€into€believing€that€he€was€someone€other€than€himself.€€Under€thoseÏcircumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€of€each€rape€offense€was€highlyÏprobative€of€the€appellantððs€unique€òòmodus€operandióó€and€his€intent€to€deceive€theÐ ø Ðvictims.€€Ìà Ø àMoreover,€we€cannot€say€that€the€probative€value€was€substantially€outweighedÏby€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€The€evidence€of€each€rape€offense€was€prejudicialÏon€the€ultimate€question€of€guilt;€however,€the€resulting€prejudice€was€no€greater€thanÏthe€prejudice€which€naturally€flows€from€reliable€evidence€used€by€the€prosecution€toÏpersuade€the€trier€of€fact.€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€the€evidence€of€each€rapeÏoffense€would€have€been€admissible€in€the€trial€of€the€other€offenses.€€The€joinder€ofÏthose€offenses€was€not€error.€€€Ìà@AA+€àò òVII.ó ó€€€€€€ˆÐ 0)("& Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€prosecution€issued€a€peremptoryÏchallenge€to€a€prospective€juror€in€violation€of€òòBatson€v.€Kentuckyóó,€476€U.S.€79,€106Ð Ô,Ì%* ÐS.Ct.€1712,€90€L.Ed.2d€69€(1986).€€He€argues€that€the€prosecutionððs€challengeÏimpermissibly€targeted€a€prospective€jurorððs€physical€disability€or€handicap.€€Ìà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà Ø àDuring€the€voir€dire€stage€of€trial,€the€prosecution€used€a€peremptory€challengeÏto€remove€a€prospective€juror,€Ms.€P.,€from€the€jury€venire.€€The€appellant€objected€toÐ Ð5È.4 Ðthe€challenge€and€requested€the€prosecution€to€offer€a€race„neutral€reason€for€theÏremoval.€€The€trial€court€overruled€the€appellantððs€objection€noting€that€on€theÏchallenge€slip,€the€prosecution€had€apparently€offered€a€race„neutral€justification€forÏthe€challenge.Ì€€à Ø àThere€is€some€question€as€to€the€precise€reason€given€by€the€prosecution€forÐ 80 Ðthe€peremptory€challenge€of€Ms.€P.€€The€challenge€slips€were€not€included€in€theÏrecord€on€appeal€and€the€discussions€of€counsel€during€voir€dire€do€not€reveal€theÏbasis€for€the€prosecutionððs€challenge.€€The€only€evidence€to€support€appellantððsÏcontention€is€the€transcript€of€the€jury€selection€process€which€indicates€that€Ms.€P.Ïhas€arthritis,€walks€with€a€cane,€and€has€trouble€walking€or€standing€for€long€periods€ofÏtime.Ìà Ø àWe€agree€with€the€State€that€the€above€evidence€alone€is€insufficient€to€proveÏthat€the€prosecution€challenged€Ms.€P.€solely€based€upon€her€apparent€disability.€ÏFrom€evidence€in€the€record,€it€is€entirely€possible€that€the€peremptory€challenge€wasÏbased€upon€the€prosecutionððs€belief€that€Ms.€P.€would€somehow€be€unfavorable€orÏunsympathetic€to€its€case.€€Peremptory€challenges€under€those€circumstances€areÏpermitted€as€part€of€allowing€the€litigants€to€select€a€ð ðfairðð€jury.€€òòState€v.€Turneróó,€879Ð È#À  ÐS.W.2d€819,€821€(Tenn.€1994).€€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àñ"ñœñ"ñItñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€is€generally€understood€that€a€peremptory€challenge€may€be€exercised€for€anyÏreason€unless€that€reason€is€specifically€prohibited€by€legislation€or€by€judicialÏdecision.€€òòId.óó€€While€ñ"ñœñ"ñthe€law€does€not€condoneñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€the€use€of€peremptory€challenges€toÐ ø*ð#( Ðtarget€prospective€jurors€ñ"ñœñ"ñwith€physicalñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€ñ"ñœñ"ñdisabilities,€theñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€appellant€has€failed€to€ñ"ñœñ"ñprove€thatÏthe€prosecution€discriminated€on€that€basis.€€His€contention,€therefore,ñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€is€without€merit.€Ï€€€€€€€à@ÍÍ.€àò òVIII.ó óˆÐ \0T). Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€improperly€instructed€the€jury€onÏâ âthe€statutory€definitions€of€ð ðdeceptionðð€and€ð ðcoercion.ðð€€He€argues€that€the€trial€courtÐ 4ø,2 Ðimproperly€omitted€a€portion€of€the€definition€of€deception€and€that€the€court€should€notÏhave€instructed€the€jury€on€the€definition€of€coercion.€€Ìâ âà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà Ø àUpon€request€by€the€prosecution,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€on€a€portionÏof€the€definition€of€deception€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(6)(A).€€TheÏinstruction€read:€€€Ìà Ø àDeception€occurs€when€a€person€knowingly:ÌÓŽwÓà8 Ø à(1)€creates€or€reinforces€a€false€impression€by€words€or€conduct,Ïincluding€false€impressions€of€fact,€law,€value,€or€intention,€or€other€stateÏof€mind€that€the€person€does€not€believe€to€be€true;Ð Ø (#Ø (# ÐÌà8 Ø à(2)€prevents€another€from€acquiring€information€which€would€likely€affectÏthe€otherððs€judgment€in€the€transaction;Ð Ø (#Ø (# ÐÌà8 Ø à(3)€fails€to€correct€a€false€impression€of€law€or€fact€that€the€person€knowsÏto€be€false,€andÐ Ø (#Ø (# ÐÌà Ø àà8 0 à(a)€the€person€created,€orÐ 0 (#0 (# ÐÓçuÓà Ø àà8 0 à(b)€knows€is€likely€to€influence€another.Ð 0 (#0 (# ÐÓ–ËÓà8 Ø àDeception€does€not€include€puffing€by€statements€unlikely€to€deceiveÏordinary€persons€in€the€group€addressed.Ð Ø (#Ø (# ÐÌÓƒÊÓà Ø àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€omitting€a€part€of€the€definitionÏwhich€states:€€ð ðððDeceptionðð€does€not€include€falsity€as€to€matters€having€no€pecuniaryÏsignificance€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(6)(B).€€According€to€the€appellant,Ïthe€trial€courtððs€omission€allowed€the€jury€to€consider€the€element€of€deception€moreÏbroadly€than€provided€in€the€statute.€€In€addition,€he€contends€that€the€evidence€didÏnot€support€the€jury€charge€on€deception.€€Ìà Ø àFrom€the€record,€it€appears€that€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€on€deceptionÏbased€upon€the€language€contained€in€the€statute€and€the€jury€charge€on€effectiveÏconsent.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(9).€€The€jury€instruction€stated€that,Ïð ððð[e]ffective€consentðð€means€assent€in€fact,€whether€express€or€apparent,€includingÏassent€by€one€legally€authorized€to€act€for€another.€€Consent€is€not€effective€whenÏâ âinduced€by€deception€or€coercion.ðð€€€€Ð À5¸.4 Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€correctly€states€that€the€trial€judge€had€an€affirmative€duty€to€giveÏâ âa€complete€jury€charge€of€the€law€as€fairly€raised€by€the€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð ÔÌ ÐHarbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€314,€319€(Tenn.€1986).€€We€find€no€problem€with€the€trialÐ   ˜ Ðcourtððs€decision€to€instruct€the€jury€on€deception,€as€the€evidence€tended€to€show€thatÏthe€appellant€used€spoken€words€to€create€and€reinforce€a€false€impression.€€TheÏinstruction,€however,€should€have€included€the€entire€definition€of€deception€asÏprovided€in€the€statute.Ìà Ø àThe€State€concedes€that€the€omission€by€the€trial€court€was€error,€but€arguesÏthat€the€error€was€harmless€because€the€entire€instruction€on€deception€wasÏsurplusage.€€We€agree€that€the€error€was€harmless€in€this€case.€€The€trial€court€fullyÏinstructed€the€jury€on€the€offenses€of€rape€by€fraud€and€attempted€rape€by€fraud,€andÏthe€statutory€definitions€of€fraud€and€effective€consent.€€The€jury€was€informed€of€theÏlaw€and€the€definitions€pertinent€to€the€appellantððs€case€and€we€fail€to€see€how€theÏverdict€would€have€been€any€different€had€the€trial€court€included€or€omitted€the€entireÏdefinition€of€deception.€€Therefore,€we€are€confident€that€the€jury€charge€on€deceptionÏwas€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€also€contends€that€the€instruction€on€coercion€was€error€becauseÏcoercion€is€not€an€element€of€the€charged€offenses€and€was€not€supported€by€theÏevidence.€€After€instructing€the€jury€on€the€offenses€of€rape€and€attempted€rape€byÏfraud,€the€trial€court€included€an€instruction€on€the€definition€of€coercion€as€follows:€Ïð ðCoercion€means€threat€of€kidnapping,€extortion,€force€or€violence€to€be€performedÏimmediately€or€in€the€future,€or€the€use€of€parental,€custodial,€or€official€authority€overÏa€child€less€than€fifteen€(15)€years€of€age.ððÌà Ø àThe€basis€of€appellantððs€argument€is€that€the€instruction€on€coercion€may€haveÏinfluenced€the€jury€to€consider€the€rape€offenses€as€crimes€of€physical€force€ratherÏthan€crimes€involving€fraud.€€The€appellant€emphasizes€this€point€in€connection€withÏthe€testimony€of€C.S.€in€which€she€stated€that€she€froze€with€fear€when€the€€appellantÏtouched€her€leg.Ð Œ7„06 Ðà Ø àThis€argument,€however,€overlooks€specific€instances€in€the€record€where€bothÏthe€prosecution€and€the€trial€court€informed€the€jury€that€the€rape€charges€against€theÏappellant€involved€the€use€of€fraud,€not€force.€€Both€the€indictment€and€the€juryÏinstruction€on€the€charged€offenses€clearly€describe€the€offenses€as€rape€by€fraud€andÏattempted€rape€by€fraud.€€Moreover,€in€the€closing€argument,€the€prosecution€informedÏthe€jury€about€the€different€types€of€rape€proscribed€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„503.€ÏThe€assistant€prosecutor€explained€in€pertinent€part:€€ð ðThe€first€is€that€force€or€coercionÏwas€used€to€accomplish€the€act.€€[The€appellant]€is€not€being€charged€with€using€forceÏor€coercion.€€He€is€being€charge€with€using€fraud.ðð€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àHaving€carefully€reviewed€the€instruction,€we€are€confident€that€the€jury€wasÏproperly€informed€on€the€specific€offenses€to€be€considered€in€the€deliberation.€€TheÏmere€inclusion€of€the€definition€of€coercion€did€not€amount€to€an€improper€charge€onÏthe€offense€of€rape€by€force.€€Instead,€it€appears€that€the€trial€court€included€theÏdefinition€of€coercion€based€upon€the€use€of€that€term€in€the€definition€of€effectiveÏconsent.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(9)(A).€€We€find€no€error€in€theÐ 0 ( Ðinstruction.€€€€€€à ˆ à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ü!ô Ðà@/€àò òIX.ó óˆÐ È#À  Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€lastly€contends€that€the€evidence€was€legally€insufficient€toÏsustain€his€convictions€of€rape€and€attempted€rape.€€€Ìà Ø àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà Ø àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€weÏmust€review€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€State€to€determine€whether€aÏrational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€offenses€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61Ð h0`). ÐL.Ed.2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.€1985).€€We€do€notÐ 42,+0 Ðreweigh€the€evidence€and€are€required€to€afford€the€State€with€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€proof€contained€in€the€record€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimateÐ Ì5Ä.4 Ðinferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ð  Ð(Tenn.€1978).Ìà Ø àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€toÏbe€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€at€835.€€We€will€notÐ 80 Ðdisturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€for€a€lack€of€sufficient€evidence€unless€the€facts€contained€inÏthe€record€and€any€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€facts€are€insufficient,€as€aÏmatter€of€law,€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€the€appellant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ð h` Ðà Ø àThe€appellant€first€argues€that€he€was€entitled€to€a€judgment€of€acquittal€on€theÏcharge€of€attempted€rape,€involving€K.N.,€because€the€evidence€failed€to€show€that€heÏtook€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€rape€by€fraud.€€The€term€ð ðsubstantialÏstepðð€is€described€in€the€criminal€attempt€statute€as€follows:€€ð ðConduct€does€notÏconstitute€a€substantial€step€under€subdivision€(a)(3)€unless€the€personððs€entire€courseÏof€action€is€corroborative€of€the€intent€to€commit€the€offense.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„¼12„101(b).€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà Ø àOur€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€in€òòState€v.€Reevesóó,€916€S.W.2d€909,€912€(Tenn.Ð È#À  Ð1996),€provides€guidance€as€to€when€a€personððs€conduct€constitutes€a€substantial€stepÏtowards€the€commission€of€an€offense.€€The€Court€recognized€significant€problemsÏwith€the€traditional€rule€from€òòDupuy€v.€Stateóó,€204€Tenn.€624,€325€S.W.2d€238€(1959),Ð ,)$"& Ðwhich€required€courts€to€distinguish€between€ð ðmere€preparationðð€to€commit€the€offenseÏand€the€ð ðact€itself.ðð€€òòReevesóó,€916€S.W.2d€at€913.€€Under€the€òòDupuyóó€approach,€conductÐ Ä,¼%* Ðdid€not€constitute€a€substantial€step€towards€the€commission€of€a€crime€unless€thereÏwas€some€overt€act€that€went€beyond€the€preparation€to€commit€the€offense€at€issue.€Ï325€S.W.2d€at€240.Ìà Ø àThe€Court€in€òòReevesóó€abandoned€the€òòDupuyóó€rule€based€upon€a€finding€that€theÐ ô3ì,2 Ðrule€was€difficult€to€apply€and€because€the€rule€did€not€fulfill€the€legislatureððs€objectiveÏof€preventing€inchoate€crimes€from€becoming€full„blown€crimes.€€òòReevesóó,€916€S.W.2dÐ Œ7„06 Ðat€914.€€While€not€creating€or€defining€a€new€rule€under€the€ð ðsubstantial€stepðð€analysis,Ïthe€òòReevesóó€Court€focused€on€the€language€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„101(b)€toÐ ÔÌ Ðconclude€that€the€defendantððs€conduct€in€that€case€was€a€substantial€step€towards€theÏcommission€of€second€degree€murder€where€the€defendant€possessed€materials€to€beÏused€in€the€commission€of€the€crime€at€or€near€the€crime€scene,€and€the€possession€ofÏthose€materials€served€no€lawful€purpose.€€òòId.óó€€€€€Ð ü  Ðà Ø àRelying€both€on€the€attempt€statute€and€the€analysis€in€òòReevesóó,€we€concludeÐ ÐÈ  Ðthat€the€evidence€in€this€case€was€sufficient€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€that€theÏappellantððs€conduct€towards€K.N.€constituted€a€substantial€step€in€the€commission€ofÏrape€by€fraud.€€There€was€evidence€that€the€appellant€talked€to€K.N.€several€times€byÏtelephone,€during€which€he€convinced€her€that€he€was€her€fianc€and€that€the€twoÏshould€meet€and€have€sexual€intercourse€at€a€nearby€hotel.€€The€appellant€describedÏhis€sexual€fantasy€to€K.N.€and€expressed€a€specific€intent€to€fulfill€that€fantasy€with€her.€ÏK.N.€complied€with€the€appellantððs€wishes,€in€part,€by€checking€into€the€hotel€and€byÏremoving€her€clothes€while€she€waited€on€his€arrival.€€During€that€time,€the€appellantÏmade€two€attempts€to€act€out€his€fantasy,€each€time€walking€by€the€hotel€room,€whereÏthe€door€was€to€be€unlocked.€€The€evidence€reflects€that€his€sexual€fantasy€wasÏinterrupted€only€by€K.N.€noticing€through€the€window€that€the€appellant€was€not€herÏfianc.€€The€appellantððs€conduct€in€that€respect€is€sufficiently€corroborative€of€an€intentÏto€commit€the€rape€offense€against€K.N.€€Therefore,€the€jury€properly€found€that€hisÏconduct€was€a€substantial€step€in€the€commission€of€rape.€€Ìà Ø àThe€appellant€also€challenges€the€evidence€as€it€pertains€to€the€element€ofÏfraud€in€the€convictions€of€rape€and€attempted€rape.€€He€argues€that€K.N.€and€C.S.Ïconsented€to€sexual€intercourse€and€that€he€never€told€them€he€was€anyone€otherÏthan€himself.€€In€this€contention,€the€appellant€disputes€the€testimony€of€both€K.N.€andÏC.S.€and€essentially€requests€this€Court€to€reweigh€the€evidence.€€He€further€arguesÏâ âthat€even€if€we€accept€the€victimsðð€testimony,€the€evidence€is€nevertheless€insufficientÐ À5¸.4 Ðas€a€matter€of€law€because€there€was€no€showing€that€the€sexual€penetration€or€theÏattempted€sexual€penetration€was€accomplished€by€fraud.€€Ìâ âà Ø àInitially,€we€emphasize€that€the€victimsðð€testimony€was€fully€accredited€by€theÏjuryððs€verdict€of€guilt.€€We€will€not€reweigh€that€evidence€because€to€do€so€wouldÏinvade€the€province€of€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€835.€€Moreover,Ð 80 Ðhaving€reviewed€the€record€in€this€case,€we€conclude€that€there€was€sufficient€proof€forÏthe€jury€to€find€that€the€offenses€committed€against€K.N.€and€C.S.€were€accomplishedÏby€fraud.€€Ìà Ø àBoth€K.N.€and€C.S.€testified€at€trial€that€they€agreed€to€participate€in€the€sexualÏfantasy,€knowing€that€the€fantasy€involved€intercourse€and€other€carnal€activities.€€TheÏappellant€relies€upon€that€testimony€as€it€shows€that€the€victims€consented€to€theÏsexual€acts.€€However,€the€appellant€overlooks€critical€evidence€considered€by€the€juryÏwhich€reflects€that€any€consent€given€by€the€victims€was€conditioned€solely€upon€theirÏmistaken€belief€that€the€appellant€was€someone€else.€€Based€upon€the€testimony€ofÏK.N.,€C.S.,€and€C.S.ððs€roommate,€Shannon€Cooley,׃+×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€appellant€concealed€his€trueÐ 0 ( Ðidentity€and€pretended€to€be€some€other€person€in€order€to€obtain€their€acquiescenceÏin€the€fantasy.€Ìà Ø àThe€jury€evaluated€the€testimony€together€with€other€evidence€in€the€record€andÏdetermined€that€the€appellant€was€guilty€of€rape€by€fraud€and€attempted€rape€by€fraud.€ÏWe€find€no€basis€to€disturb€the€juryððs€verdict€and€accordingly€affirm€the€convictions.€€€€€€€Ìñ"ñœñ"ñÌÌÐ .ˆ', ÐÑ`¨ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ññ"ñ›ñ"ñ€€€€€€€€€à@àà+€àò òCONCLUSIONó óˆÐ  Ðà Ø àHaving€found€no€reversible€error€in€this€case,€we€uphold€the€appellantððsÏconvictions€on€all€counts.€€The€ñ"ñœñ"ñjudgmentsñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€of€the€trial€court€ñ"ñœñ"ñareñ"ñ›ñ"ñ€ñ"ñœñ"ñaffirmed€with€costsÏtaxed€to€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ìñ"ñ›ñ"ñÌñ"ñœñ"ññ"ññý!ñÌñý!ññ"ñÓ«ÌÓñ"ñ›ñ"ññ"ñà Ø àñ"ññ"ñ›ñ"ñà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è à_______________________________¼à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€Special€Judge€ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ____________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌ____________________________ÌCURWOOD€WITT,€œJUDGEñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›œñ"ñÌñ"ñ›ñ"ñÌÑ P¨ÑÑ R ÑÑ  Ññ"ñœñ "ñà@ €àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌÌà@»»*€àAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌà@ŠŠ&€àFEBRUARY€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9612„CR„00502Ð 80 Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(consolidated€with)Ð   Ðà Ø àAppellee,à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9702„CR„00057Ð ü  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìv.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àDAVIDSON€ñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñCOUNTYÐ ÐÈ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€95„B„1222,€Below€€à H! àñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñÐ ¶®  Ðñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñRAYMOND€MITCHELL,€IIIà 8 àñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñà  àñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñ)ñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñÐ œ”  Ðñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñà  à)à è àHon.€Ann.€Lacy€Johns,€JudgeÐ ‚z  Ðñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñà Ø àAppellant.ñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(Presiding€at€trial)Ð h` Ðà Ø àñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñà 0 àñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ NF Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àHon.€Seth€Norman,€JudgeÐ 4, Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à(Presiding€at€guilty€plea€hearing)Ð  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñÐ æÞ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAFFIRMEDñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñÐ ÌÄ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)€ÌÌÌà@TT,€àòòJUDGMENTóóˆÐ d\ ÐÌÓÓà Ø àCame€the€appellant,€Raymond€Mitchell,€by€and€through€ñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñcounsel,ñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñ€and€also€cameÏthe€Attorney€General€on€behalf€of€the€State,€and€this€matter€was€heard€on€the€ñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñrecordÏin€this€consolidated€appealñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñ€from€the€Criminal€Court€of€Davidson€County;€and€inÏconsideration€thereof,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€there€is€no€reversible€error€in€theÏñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñjudgmentsñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñ€of€the€trial€court.Ìà Ø àIn€accordance€with€the€opinion€filed€herein,€it€is,€therefore,€ordered€andÏadjudged€that€the€appellantððs€convictions€are€affirmed€and€the€cases€are€remanded€toÏthe€Criminal€Court€of€Davidson€County€for€the€execution€of€the€judgment€of€this€CourtÏand€for€the€collection€of€costs€accrued€below.Ìà Ø àñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñIt€appearing€from€the€record€that€the€appellant€is€indigent,€costsñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñ€of€this€appealÏshall€be€paid€by€ñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñthe€State€of€Tennessee.ÌÓ~ÓÌñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ññ "ñÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àWilliam€M.€Barker,€Special€JudgeÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àGary€R.€Wade,€Presiding€JudgeÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àCurwood€Witt,€ñ "ññ"ñœñ"ññ "ñJudgeñ "ññ"ñ›ñ"ñ›