ÿWPCãÍ %"\P¨E-j5Ê»× ¹0)jûÓ-B}ƒ:z;(ŽÎc'ÎÄêï_H¦¡­þi5Ô‹¡Ýº’Q–ÜÊà®Añr˜ôô_àìçcõ­úßÁt÷±Ü±êU/IçBb‡ùP/ªæ&5u(:)µ7 ÒÇú*zÄÖ}Ž¢®Õ×µR¾!ßãî§_q’ˆÃ:Ô“‡J°Ç[þ´×&iqy@–Ê[Á¯¯ë½žloÌTf‰ûvýg>± ®ÆÀp‚£³ŠF}+ ÖȕҠà|:`úì„ãdÍ@–àNÂÿ Pi0Ôw@2ŸRêZ“½[Ç;â:©5§.ŽÇ˜Çi%;އNE=¼Ø-6¢e,ÆÉÖ€!UøóKñßðo!H²8ðPÉS: ³Â"g;òŸ„-¬Ð„ Ûàb˜Š¹(¥ŒÔÒhw‘;ñDÂOÅJ™.zÚ¯Ùn@iÕm”%“„Êà?Êcc L+Á¬ˆZ:“ا ͼcõÕu˜ÒuK5_†ƒ»]“p¡í̃íæ†ûU¥0 “¸‡CèVSbç9Ia å¢á—žÌŽÖÂ×GZÿ?n“L˜¨ÿ[2P½ryb¡g *AÁA޾´3,GåûX %Ðw@Ö 0ÜU0:ò4, @ U):O g‰ UNð -> 0!!k 0DŒU:ÐU: €DU:ÄU:þV8ôŽU:‚"¼"U:Á'bû'U:]+U:—+b Ñ+U:38ëm8:X<g’@ BùC€DU:–Ib ÐI2VU:Q^V‹^U:ác0dKlU:_oì™oU:…s¿s^Þ{<dP‚U:´…bî…"P‰U:r‘쬑U:˜•U:Ò•Í –^Ù¢U:7¦U:q¦ë«¦U:–ªU:Ъ «-«U:?¯U:y¯³¯U:¸´U:ò´ô,µU: ¸U:Z¸Í ”¸U:aÅ AQ›ÅÆìÅ 0ù²Æ 0ù«È 0D¤Ê D/èÊ BË4Ë D3:ÌU:mÌ#!§ÌNÈÍÊÍ mÌÍX (U)<e*++U,D-U./D0Ó€:(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular{Z='pppz83|x:, øð AZ"Arial Regular ]Ô€ ô³ÇôXXÔÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defendant€in€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó€remained€in€the€getaway€car€while€one€of€his€twoÐ  Ðcodefendants€robbed€and€killed€an€elderly€couple.€€The€defendant€was€convicted€of€felony€murderÏand€sentenced€to€death.€€òòSeeóó€òòEnmundóó,€458€U.S.€at€784„785,€102€S.Ct.€at€3370.€€(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular #Ò°ÒÔ€ô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ô„ôôô„ÔAgain,€the€appellantððs€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€was€filed€on€February€28,€1991.€Ð  ÐBecause€it€was€filed€prior€to€May€10,€1995,€it€is€governed€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„101€et€seq.Ï(repealed€1995),€rather€than€the€revised€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„¼30„210€et€seq.€(1997).€€Under€the€current€statute,€the€standard€is€ð ðclear€and€convincing€evidence.ðð€Ð ` X ï ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210(f).€€(Ñ(3‡$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€¬ŠXXdædæ8ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular vÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔRicky€and€Raymond€Tison,€the€two€defendants€in€òòTison€v.€Arizonaóó,€accompanied€by€theirÐ  Ðbrother€Donald€broke€their€father,€Gary,€and€his€cellmate€out€of€the€Arizona€State€Prison.€€TheÏfugitives€flagged€down€a€passing€car€occupied€by€the€Lyons€family.€€This€family€was€overtaken,Ïdriven€into€the€desert,€ordered€out€of€their€car,€and€forced€to€stand€in€front€of€the€headlights.€€GaryÏTison€instructed€his€sons€to€retrieve€some€water€for€the€Lyons€from€the€trunk€of€the€vehicle.€ÏThereafter,€Gary€and€his€prisonmate€brutally€executed€the€entire€Lyons€family.€€òòSeeóó€òòTison€v.Ð ð è ÐArizonaóó,€481€U.S.€at€139„141,€107€S.Ct.€at€1678„1679.€€Notwithstanding€the€fact€that€neitherÐ ¸ ° Ðbrother€was€the€triggerman,€the€Supreme€Court€affirmed€both€sentences€of€death.€€òòId.óó€€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular LÒ°ÒÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔWe€note€that€the€Supreme€Court€did€grant€review€of€the€Arizona€Supreme€Courtððs€denialÐ  Ðof€post„conviction€relief€in€the€case€of€Ricky€Wayne€and€Raymond€Curtis€Tison.€€òòSeeóó€òòTisonóó,€481Ð ÐÈ ÐU.S.€at€137,€107€S.Ct.€at€1676.€€A€post„conviction€petition€was€filed€by€the€Tison€brothers€inÏArizona€alleging€that€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó,€which€had€been€decided€in€the€interim,€required€reversalÐ ` X Ðof€the€death€penalty.€€A€divided€Arizona€Supreme€Court€interpreted€Enmund€to€require€a€finding€ofÏintent€to€kill,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Tisonóó,€690€P.2d€747€(Ariz.€1984).€€In€granting€certiorari,€the€SupremeÐ ð è ÐCourt€limited€its€review€solely€to€the€Arizona€courtððs€interpretation€of€òòEnmundóó.€€€ êÔ€ô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ô„ôôô„ÔOriginally,€Wayne€Emmons€and€James€Marty€were€appointed€to€the€appellantððs€case;Ð  Ðhowever,€Emmons€withdrew€in€December€of€1985€and€was€replaced€by€Brett€Stein.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ûÒ°ÒÔ€ô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ô„ôôô„ÔIn€other€sections€of€her€brief,€the€appellant€claims€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€forÐ  Ðfailure€(1)€to€object€to€the€murder€for€hire€aggravating€circumstance,€(i)(4),€as€doubleÏenhancement;€(2)€to€object€to€the€vicarious€application€of€the€heinous,€atrocious,€and€cruelÏaggravating€factor;€and€(3)€to€request€a€clarifying€instruction€regarding€intent€to€inflict€seriousÏphysical€abuse€in€the€(i)(5)€aggravating€circumstance.€€òòSeeóó€òòinfraóó,€Section€IV,€ð ðVicariousÐ (  ÐApplication€of€the€Heinous,€Atrocious,€and€Cruel€Aggravatorðð€and€Section€V,€ð ðUnconstitutionalÏDuplication€of€the€Remuneration€Aggravatorðð€for€review€of€these€issues.€€€€, øð AZ"Arial Regular XÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔThe€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€been€presented€the€issue€of€vicarious€applicationÐ  Ðof€a€statutory€aggravating€circumstance€on€other€occasions€and€has€denied€review.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,Ð ÐÈ ÐòòHerrera€v.€Arizonaóó,€510€U.S.€951,€114€S.Ct.€398€(1993).€€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular X Ô€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡!ôAÐôôô³ÇÔThis€court€has€also€addressed€similar€issues.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Stacy€Dewayne€Ramseyóó,Ð  ÐNo.€01C01„9412„CC„00408€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€May€19,€1998),€òòperm.€to€appealÐ ÐÈ Ðdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€Jan.€25,€1999)€(life€without€parole€upheld€distinguished€from€principle€announced€inÐ ˜ ÐòòOmelusóó€because€of€defendantððs€active€participation€in€planning€and€nature€of€killing);€òòJeffreyÐ ` X ÐStuart€Dicks€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9606„CC„00231€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Mar.€17,€1998),Ð (  Ðòòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóó,€(Tenn.€Sept.€21,€1998),€òòcertiorari€dismissed€as€mootóó,€(Tenn.€June€21,Ð ð è Ð1999)€(recognizing€principle€stated€in€òòOmelusóó€but€distinguished€because€defendant€present€atÐ ¸ ° Ðcrime€scene);€òòWilliam€E.€Groseclose€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9407„CR„00145€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÐ € x ÐJackson,€Aug.€23,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996)€(distinguished€from€holding€inÐ H @ ÐòòOmelusóó€because€defendant€actively€involved€in€planning€of€murder€or€knew€how€contract€killerÐ   Ðwas€going€to€commit€murder).Ìà ` àOther€federal€and€state€courts€have€also€addressed€this€issue.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòWhite€v.Ð  ˜  ÐWainwrightóó,€809€F.2d€1478,€1485€(11th€Cir.€1987)€(death€penalty€upheld€based€upon€vicariousÐ h`  Ðapplication€of€heinous,€atrocious€cruel€factor€since€defendant€was€armed€and€on€scene€as€activeÏparticipant€in€robbery);€òòEx€parte€Bankheadóó,€585€So.€2d€112,€125€(Ala.€1991)€(ððheinous€atrociousÐ øð  Ðcruelðð€aggravating€circumstance€upheld€based€on€manner€of€killing€and€not€on€defendantððs€actualÏparticipation);€òòHaney€v.€Stateóó,€603€So.€2d€368,€380„381,€385„387€(Ala.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(appellantÐ ˆ€  Ðadmitted€paying€co„defendant€to€kill€her€husband€and€giving€him€instructions€on€how€to€approachÏher€home€without€being€observed);€òòFox€v.€Stateóó,€779€P.2d€562,€578€(Okla.€Crim.€App.€1989),€òòcert.Ð  Ðdeniedóó,€494€U.S.€1060,€110€S.Ct.€1538€(1990)€(death€penalty€supported€by€evidence€thatÐ àØ Ðdefendant€armed€himself€with€shotgun€and€shells€before€robbing€grocery€store€with€codefendantÏwhere€three€people€were€killed).€€òòBut€seeóó€òòOmelusóó,€584€So.€2d€at€563€(defendant€who€hiredÐ ph Ðcontract€killer€cannot€be€held€vicariously€responsible€under€ððheinous€atrocious€cruelðð€factor).ÌÔ#†ô³ÇôôôAÐ#Ô,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular áÒ°ÒÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔWithin€this€issue€the€appellant€challenges€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„3„203(i)(2),€(i)(5),€(i)(6),Ð  Ðand€(i)(7).€€In€this€case,€the€State€only€relied€upon€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„3„203(i)(4)€and€(i)(5).€ÏTherefore,€the€appellant€is€without€standing€to€challenge€(i)(2),€(i)(6),€and€(i)(7).€€TheÏconstitutionality€of€(i)(5)€is€addressed€previously€in€this€opinion.Ô#†ô³ÇôôôAÐ%#Ô 0Ô€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔIn€òòGregg€v.€Georgiaóó,€428€U.S.€153,€96€S.Ct.€2909€(1976),€the€Supreme€Court€interpretedÐ  Ðthe€Eighth€Amendment€to€require€sentencers€to€individualize€defendants€through€consideration€ofÏmitigation€evidence.€€In€capital€sentencing€decisions,€the€States€were€required€to€allow€theÏsentencers€to€make€a€determination€based€upon€€ð ðthe€circumstances€of€each€individual€homicideÏand€individual€defendant.ðð€€òòProffit€v.€Floridaóó,€428€U.S.€242,€258,€96€S.Ct.€2960,€2969€(1976).€€€€€ ]Ô€ô³ÇôXXÔÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defendant€in€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó€remained€in€the€getaway€car€while€one€of€his€twoÐ  Ðcodefendants€robbed€and€killed€an€elderly€couple.€€The€defendant€was€convicted€of€felony€murderÏand€sentenced€to€death.€€òòSeeóó€òòEnmundóó,€458€U.S.€at€784„785,€102€S.Ct.€at€3370.€€ d vÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔRicky€and€Raymond€Tison,€the€two€defendants€in€òòTison€v.€Arizonaóó,€accompanied€by€theirÐ  Ðbrother€Donald€broke€their€father,€Gary,€and€his€cellmate€out€of€the€Arizona€State€Prison.€€TheÏfugitives€flagged€down€a€passing€car€occupied€by€the€Lyons€family.€€This€family€was€overtaken,Ïdriven€into€the€desert,€ordered€out€of€their€car,€and€forced€to€stand€in€front€of€the€headlights.€€GaryÏTison€instructed€his€sons€to€retrieve€some€water€for€the€Lyons€from€the€trunk€of€the€vehicle.€ÏThereafter,€Gary€and€his€prisonmate€brutally€executed€the€entire€Lyons€family.€€òòSeeóó€òòTison€v.Ð ð è ÐArizonaóó,€481€U.S.€at€139„141,€107€S.Ct.€at€1678„1679.€€Notwithstanding€the€fact€that€neitherÐ ¸ ° Ðbrother€was€the€triggerman,€the€Supreme€Court€affirmed€both€sentences€of€death.€€òòId.óó€€€, øð AZ"Arial Regular X Ô€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔThis€court€has€also€addressed€similar€issues.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Stacy€Dewayne€Ramseyóó,Ð  ÐNo.€01C01„9412„CC„00408€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€May€19,€1998),€òòperm.€to€appealÐ ÐÈ Ðdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€Jan.€25,€1999)€(life€without€parole€upheld€distinguished€from€principle€announced€inÐ ˜ ÐòòOmelusóó€because€of€defendantððs€active€participation€in€planning€and€nature€of€killing);€òòJeffreyÐ ` X ÐStuart€Dicks€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9606„CC„00231€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Mar.€17,€1998),Ð (  Ðòòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóó,€(Tenn.€Sept.€21,€1998),€òòcertiorari€dismissed€as€mootóó,€(Tenn.€June€21,Ð ð è Ð1999)€(recognizing€principle€stated€in€òòOmelusóó€but€distinguished€because€defendant€present€atÐ ¸ ° Ðcrime€scene);€òòWilliam€E.€Groseclose€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9407„CR„00145€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÐ € x ÐJackson,€Aug.€23,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996)€(distinguished€from€holding€inÐ H @ ÐòòOmelusóó€because€defendant€actively€involved€in€planning€of€murder€or€knew€how€contract€killerÐ   Ðwas€going€to€commit€murder).Ìà ` àOther€federal€and€state€courts€have€also€addressed€this€issue.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòWhite€v.Ð  ˜  ÐWainwrightóó,€809€F.2d€1478,€1485€(11th€Cir.€1987)€(death€penalty€upheld€based€upon€vicariousÐ h`  Ðapplication€of€heinous,€atrocious€cruel€factor€since€defendant€was€armed€and€on€scene€as€activeÏparticipant€in€robbery);€òòEx€parte€Bankheadóó,€585€So.€2d€112,€125€(Ala.€1991)€(ððheinous€atrociousÐ øð  Ðcruelðð€aggravating€circumstance€upheld€based€on€manner€of€killing€and€not€on€defendantððs€actualÏparticipation);€òòHaney€v.€Stateóó,€603€So.€2d€368,€380„381,€385„387€(Ala.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(appellantÐ ˆ€  Ðadmitted€paying€co„defendant€to€kill€her€husband€and€giving€him€instructions€on€how€to€approachÏher€home€without€being€observed);€òòFox€v.€Stateóó,€779€P.2d€562,€578€(Okla.€Crim.€App.€1989),€òòcert.Ð  Ðdeniedóó,€494€U.S.€1060,€110€S.Ct.€1538€(1990)€(death€penalty€supported€by€evidence€thatÐ àØ Ðdefendant€armed€himself€with€shotgun€and€shells€before€robbing€grocery€store€with€codefendantÏwhere€three€people€were€killed).€€òòBut€seeóó€òòOmelusóó,€584€So.€2d€at€563€(defendant€who€hiredÐ ph Ðcontract€killer€cannot€be€held€vicariously€responsible€under€ððheinous€atrocious€cruelðð€factor).ÌÔ#†ô³ÇôôôAÐ#Ô Ô€$ô³ÇôXXÔÒ°ÒÔ‡&ôAÐôôô³ÇÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€holding€does€not€conflict€with€the€decision€of€our€supreme€court€in€òòMiddlebrooksóó,Ð  Ð840€S.W.2d€at€317,€which€addressed€the€use€of€aggravating€circumstances€to€narrow€the€death„¼eligible€class€to€those€defendants€for€whom€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€is€most€appropriate.€€InÏòòMiddlebrooksóó,€the€court€held€that€because€the€felony€murder€aggravating€circumstance,€Tenn.Ð ` X ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(i)(7),€essentially€duplicated€the€elements€of€the€offense€of€first€degreeÏmurder,€it€failed€to€narrow€the€population€of€death„eligible€felony€murder€defendants€as€required€byÏArticle€1,€Section€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€Thus,€by€eliminating€felony€murder€as€anÏaggravating€circumstance€in€first€degree€felony€murder€convictions,€òòMiddlebrooksóó€hasÐ € x Ðaccomplished€two€results.€€First,€it€created€a€new€category€of€defendants€who€are€immune€fromÏthe€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€in€cases€where€the€defendant€is€charged€with€felony€murderÏand€the€only€aggravating€circumstance€is€the€underlying€felony.€€òòSeeóó€òòHowellóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€267Ð ØÐ  Ð(Reid,€C.J.,€concurring),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€510€U.S.€1215,€114€S.Ct.€1339€(1994).€€Second,€itÐ  ˜  Ðeliminates€felony€murder€as€an€aggravating€circumstance€in€selecting€those€death€eligibleÏdefendants€who€are€most€deserving€of€the€sentence€of€death€in€those€cases€where€otherÏaggravating€circumstances€are€present.€€òòId.óó€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular LÒ°ÒÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔWe€note€that€the€Supreme€Court€did€grant€review€of€the€Arizona€Supreme€Courtððs€denialÐ  Ðof€post„conviction€relief€in€the€case€of€Ricky€Wayne€and€Raymond€Curtis€Tison.€€òòSeeóó€òòTisonóó,€481Ð ÐÈ ÐU.S.€at€137,€107€S.Ct.€at€1676.€€A€post„conviction€petition€was€filed€by€the€Tison€brothers€inÏArizona€alleging€that€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó,€which€had€been€decided€in€the€interim,€required€reversalÐ ` X Ðof€the€death€penalty.€€A€divided€Arizona€Supreme€Court€interpreted€Enmund€to€require€a€finding€ofÏintent€to€kill,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Tisonóó,€690€P.2d€747€(Ariz.€1984).€€In€granting€certiorari,€the€SupremeÐ ð è ÐCourt€limited€its€review€solely€to€the€Arizona€courtððs€interpretation€of€òòEnmundóó.€€€, øð AZ"Arial Regular &Ò°ÒÔ€)ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡+ôAÐôôô³ÇÔCertain€aggravators€focus€clearly€on€the€defendantððs€òòown€actions€or€intentóó€andÐ  Ðcontemplates€considerations€on€the€defendantððs€òòindividualóó€actions€in€determining€the€mostÐ ÐÈ Ðculpable€capital€defendants.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(i)(2)€(defendant€history€of€violentÐ ˜ Ðfelonies);€„203(i)(3)€(defendant€created€risk€of€death€to€others);€„203(i)(4)€(defendant€committedÏmurder€for€remuneration);€„203(i)(12)€(defendant€committed€mass€murder).€€Alternatively,€otherÏstatutory€aggravators,€by€their€plain€language,€clearly€encompass€consideration€of€the€òònature€andÐ ð è Ðcircumstances€of€the€crime€itselfóó,€permitting€vicarious€application.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†)ô³ÇôôôAÐ%#ÔÔ‡+ôAÐôôô³ÇÔððÔ#†)ô³ÇôôôAÐf#ÔÔ‡+ôAÐôôô³ÇÔððÔ#†)ô³ÇôôôAЬ#Ô€39„2„Ð ¸ ° Ð203(i)(1)€(murder€committed€against€person€under€12);€„203(i)(5)€(murder€was€especially€heinous,Ïatrocious,€or€cruel);€„203(i)(6)€(murder€committed€for€purpose€of€avoiding€arrest€or€prosecution);€„¼203(i)(7)€(murder€committed€while€defendant€was€engaged€in€enumerated€felony);€„203(i)(8)Ï(murder€committed€while€in€custody€or€during€escape€therefrom);€„203(i)(9)€(murder€committedÏagainst€law€enforcement€officer);€„203(i)(10)€(murder€committed€against€judge/district€attorney);€„¼203(i)(11)€(murder€committed€against€elected€official).€ Ò°ÒÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔ"The€defendant€committed€the€murder€for€remuneration€or€the€promise€of€remuneration,Ð  Ðor€employed€another€to€commit€the€murder€for€remuneration€or€the€promise€of€remuneration.ðð,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular âÒ°ÒÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔA€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offense€committed€by€the€conduct€of€another€if:Ð  Ðà8 ` àActing€with€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefitÏin€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,€orÏattempts€to€aid€another€person€to€commit€the€offense.€.€.€.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ` X Ððð€39„11„402(2)., øð AZ"Arial Regular Ô€ô³ÇôXXÔÒ°ÒÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€holding€does€not€conflict€with€the€decision€of€our€supreme€court€in€òòMiddlebrooksóó,Ð  Ð840€S.W.2d€at€317,€which€addressed€the€use€of€aggravating€circumstances€to€narrow€the€death„¼eligible€class€to€those€defendants€for€whom€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€is€most€appropriate.€€InÏòòMiddlebrooksóó,€the€court€held€that€because€the€felony€murder€aggravating€circumstance,€Tenn.Ð ` X ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(i)(7),€essentially€duplicated€the€elements€of€the€offense€of€first€degreeÏmurder,€it€failed€to€narrow€the€population€of€death„eligible€felony€murder€defendants€as€required€byÏArticle€1,€Section€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€Thus,€by€eliminating€felony€murder€as€anÏaggravating€circumstance€in€first€degree€felony€murder€convictions,€òòMiddlebrooksóó€hasÐ € x Ðaccomplished€two€results.€€First,€it€created€a€new€category€of€defendants€who€are€immune€fromÏthe€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€in€cases€where€the€defendant€is€charged€with€felony€murderÏand€the€only€aggravating€circumstance€is€the€underlying€felony.€€òòSeeóó€òòHowellóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€267Ð ØÐ  Ð(Reid,€C.J.,€concurring),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€510€U.S.€1215,€114€S.Ct.€1339€(1994).€€Second,€itÐ  ˜  Ðeliminates€felony€murder€as€an€aggravating€circumstance€in€selecting€those€death€eligibleÏdefendants€who€are€most€deserving€of€the€sentence€of€death€in€those€cases€where€otherÏaggravating€circumstances€are€present.€€òòId.óó€€ TÒ°ÒÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔExisting€at€the€date€of€this€offense,€an€accessory€before€the€fact€was€deemed€a€principalÐ  Ðoffender€and€punished€as€such.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„1„302€(1982)(repealed€1989).€€Ô#†ô³ÇôôôAÐ%#ÔÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔ Ò°ÒÔ€0ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡3ôAÐôôô³ÇÔ"The€defendant€committed€the€murder€for€remuneration€or€the€promise€of€remuneration,Ð  Ðor€employed€another€to€commit€the€murder€for€remuneration€or€the€promise€of€remuneration.ðð ZÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔThis€provision€has€been€replaced€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(5)€(1997€&€1998Ð  ÐSupp.),€which€provides,€ð ð[t]hat€the€murder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€in€that€itÏinvolved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produce€death.ðð,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular XÔ€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔThe€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€been€presented€the€issue€of€vicarious€applicationÐ  Ðof€a€statutory€aggravating€circumstance€on€other€occasions€and€has€denied€review.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,Ð ÐÈ ÐòòHerrera€v.€Arizonaóó,€510€U.S.€951,€114€S.Ct.€398€(1993).€€€ Ô€ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔCertain€aggravators€focus€clearly€on€the€defendantððs€òòown€actions€or€intentóó€andÐ  Ðcontemplates€considerations€on€the€defendantððs€òòindividualóó€actions€in€determining€the€mostÐ ÐÈ Ðculpable€capital€defendants.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(i)(2)€(defendant€history€of€violentÐ ˜ Ðfelonies);€„203(i)(3)€(defendant€created€risk€of€death€to€others);€„203(i)(4)€(defendant€committedÏmurder€for€remuneration);€„203(i)(12)€(defendant€committed€mass€murder).€€Alternatively,€otherÏstatutory€aggravators,€by€their€plain€language,€clearly€encompass€consideration€of€the€òònature€andÐ ð è Ðcircumstances€of€the€crime€itselfóó,€permitting€vicarious€application.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†ô³ÇôôôAÐ#ÔÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔððÔ#†ô³ÇôôôAÐX#ÔÔ‡ôAÐôôô³ÇÔððÔ#†ô³ÇôôôAО#Ô€39„2„Ð ¸ ° Ð203(i)(1)€(murder€committed€against€person€under€12);€„203(i)(5)€(murder€was€especially€heinous,Ïatrocious,€or€cruel);€„203(i)(6)€(murder€committed€for€purpose€of€avoiding€arrest€or€prosecution);€„¼203(i)(7)€(murder€committed€while€defendant€was€engaged€in€enumerated€felony);€„203(i)(8)Ï(murder€committed€while€in€custody€or€during€escape€therefrom);€„203(i)(9)€(murder€committedÏagainst€law€enforcement€officer);€„203(i)(10)€(murder€committed€against€judge/district€attorney);€„¼203(i)(11)€(murder€committed€against€elected€official).€, øð AZ"Arial Regular âÒ°ÒÔ€5ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡6ôAÐôôô³ÇÔA€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offense€committed€by€the€conduct€of€another€if:Ð  Ðà8 ` àActing€with€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefitÏin€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,€orÏattempts€to€aid€another€person€to€commit€the€offense.€.€.€.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ` X Ððð€39„11„402(2).,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular à Ô€ô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€trial€court€provided€a€concise€summary€of€this€witnessðð€qualifications€in€its€writtenÐ  Ðfinding€of€facts:Ìà8 ` àà ¸ àAlthough€[Gentry]€was€unlicensed€in€any€discipline,€he€held€a€Masters€inÏCounseling,€and€at€one€time€had€been€licensed€in€West€Virginia€in€Social€Work.€ÏHe€had€many€ð ðcertifications,ðð€many€of€which€were€irrelevant€to€the€psychologicalÏassessment€of€the€petitioner,€such€as€Art€Therapy,€Biofeedback,€Eye€MovementÏDesensitization,€etc.,€and€many€of€which€were€the€result€of€weekend€trainingÏseminars.€€He€was€tendered€to€the€Court€as€an€expert€in€Traumatology,€which€heÏexplained€as€a€study€ofÐ ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` Ð ` Ð àtraumatic€experiences,€the€effects€of€traumatic€experiences,€andÏwhat€effects€they€have€on€a€person€whoððs€experienced€them€bothÏfrom€a€point€of€view€of€a€clinical€point€of€view€and€from€a€disasterÏpoint€of€view.€€I€specialize€with€„„€with€the€clinical€aspect€of€that,Ïworking€with€survivors€of€trauma.Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ` àHe€had€not€published,€but€had€an€article€accepted€for€publication€on€ð ðcompassionÏfatigue,ðð€a€study€of€emergency€workers€and€their€problems.€€He€also€had€anotherÏwork€accepted€as€a€chapter€in€a€book€on€how€to€work€with€trauma€survivors,Ïwhich€had€not€yet€been€published.€€His€practical€experience€consisted€of€workingÏone€year€in€an€adolescent€shelter,€1€ðð€years€as€a€counselor€for€a€communityÏagency,€one€year€as€a€sex€abuse€counselor,€one€year€working€with€homelessÏchildren,€one€year€as€an€addiction€counselor€at€a€ð ðwilderness€school,ðð€and€fourÏyears€working€for€a€psychiatrist€as€a€therapist,€gradually€concentrating€onÏsurvivors€of€trauma.€€He€had€no€training€or€experience€in€forensic€psychology.€€AtÏthe€time€of€his€testimony,€he€was€a€student€at€Florida€State€University€studyingÏmarriage€and€family€therapy€and€psychotraumatology›.€€He€claimed€no€expertise€inÏanything€other€than€his€special€area,€and€testified€that€ð ðI€consider€myself€anÏexpert€in€working€with€survivors€of€trauma.€€Thatððs€the€only€thing€„„€claiming€anyÏexpertise€in€here€as€I€sit€in€this€chair€right€now.ðð€€He€stated€he€had€never€beforeÏtestified€as€an€expert,€and€would€never€testify€as€one€again,€after€this€hearing,Ïbecause€it€was€too€hard.€.€.€.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àWhen€the€witness€was€tendered€as€an€expert€in€the€field€of€Traumatology,Ïthis€Court€had€serious€reservations€about€his€expertise,€and€asked€the€witnessÏwhat€he€had€been€doing€immediately€before€beginning€his€present€studies€atÏFlorida€State.€€Mr.€Gentry€answered€that€he€had€spent€those€last€seven€monthsÏprior€to€his€current€studies€hiking€the€Appalachian€Trail.€Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌ TÒ°ÒÔ€9ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡:ôAÐôôô³ÇÔExisting€at€the€date€of€this€offense,€an€accessory€before€the€fact€was€deemed€a€principalÐ  Ðoffender€and€punished€as€such.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„1„302€(1982)(repealed€1989).€€Ô#†9ô³ÇôôôAÐ%#ÔÔ‡:ôAÐôôô³ÇÔ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular áÒ°ÒÔ€<ô³ÇôXXÔÝ ƒ ²˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À\ëXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡=ôAÐôôô³ÇÔWithin€this€issue€the€appellant€challenges€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„3„203(i)(2),€(i)(5),€(i)(6),Ð  Ðand€(i)(7).€€In€this€case,€the€State€only€relied€upon€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„3„203(i)(4)€and€(i)(5).€ÏTherefore,€the€appellant€is€without€standing€to€challenge€(i)(2),€(i)(6),€and€(i)(7).€€TheÏconstitutionality€of€(i)(5)€is€addressed€previously€in€this€opinion.Ô#†<ô³ÇôôôAÐ%#Ô,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular #Ò°ÒÔ€@ô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡Aô„ôôô„ÔAgain,€the€appellantððs€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€was€filed€on€February€28,€1991.€Ð  ÐBecause€it€was€filed€prior€to€May€10,€1995,€it€is€governed€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„101€et€seq.Ï(repealed€1995),€rather€than€the€revised€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„¼30„210€et€seq.€(1997).€€Under€the€current€statute,€the€standard€is€ð ðclear€and€convincing€evidence.ðð€Ð ` X g ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210(f).€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular ûÒ°ÒÔ€Cô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡Dô„ôôô„ÔIn€other€sections€of€her€brief,€the€appellant€claims€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€forÐ  Ðfailure€(1)€to€object€to€the€murder€for€hire€aggravating€circumstance,€(i)(4),€as€doubleÏenhancement;€(2)€to€object€to€the€vicarious€application€of€the€heinous,€atrocious,€and€cruelÏaggravating€factor;€and€(3)€to€request€a€clarifying€instruction€regarding€intent€to€inflict€seriousÏphysical€abuse€in€the€(i)(5)€aggravating€circumstance.€€òòSeeóó€òòinfraóó,€Section€IV,€ð ðVicariousÐ Ö Î ÐApplication€of€the€Heinous,€Atrocious,€and€Cruel€Aggravatorðð€and€Section€V,€ð ðUnconstitutionalÏDuplication€of€the€Remuneration€Aggravatorðð€for€review€of€these€issues.€€€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular êÔ€Fô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡Gô„ôôô„ÔOriginally,€Wayne€Emmons€and€James€Marty€were€appointed€to€the€appellantððs€case;Ð  Ðhowever,€Emmons€withdrew€in€December€of€1985€and€was€replaced€by€Brett€Stein.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular à Ô€Iô„ôXXÔÝ ƒ ˆMÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7Àú{XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€trial€court€provided€a€concise€summary€of€this€witnessðð€qualifications€in€its€writtenÐ  Ðfinding€of€facts:Ìà8 ` àà ¸ àAlthough€[Gentry]€was€unlicensed€in€any€discipline,€he€held€a€Masters€inÏCounseling,€and€at€one€time€had€been€licensed€in€West€Virginia€in€Social€Work.€ÏHe€had€many€ð ðcertifications,ðð€many€of€which€were€irrelevant€to€the€psychologicalÏassessment€of€the€petitioner,€such€as€Art€Therapy,€Biofeedback,€Eye€MovementÏDesensitization,€etc.,€and€many€of€which€were€the€result€of€weekend€trainingÏseminars.€€He€was€tendered€to€the€Court€as€an€expert€in€Traumatology,€which€heÏexplained€as€a€study€ofÐ ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` Ð ` Ð àtraumatic€experiences,€the€effects€of€traumatic€experiences,€andÏwhat€effects€they€have€on€a€person€whoððs€experienced€them€bothÏfrom€a€point€of€view€of€a€clinical€point€of€view€and€from€a€disasterÏpoint€of€view.€€I€specialize€with€„„€with€the€clinical€aspect€of€that,Ïworking€with€survivors€of€trauma.Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ` àHe€had€not€published,€but€had€an€article€accepted€for€publication€on€ð ðcompassionÏfatigue,ðð€a€study€of€emergency€workers€and€their€problems.€€He€also€had€anotherÏwork€accepted€as€a€chapter€in€a€book€on€how€to€work€with€trauma€survivors,Ïwhich€had€not€yet€been€published.€€His€practical€experience€consisted€of€workingÏone€year€in€an€adolescent€shelter,€1€ðð€years€as€a€counselor€for€a€communityÏagency,€one€year€as€a€sex€abuse€counselor,€one€year€working€with€homelessÏchildren,€one€year€as€an€addiction€counselor€at€a€ð ðwilderness€school,ðð€and€fourÏyears€working€for€a€psychiatrist€as€a€therapist,€gradually€concentrating€onÏsurvivors€of€trauma.€€He€had€no€training€or€experience€in€forensic€psychology.€€AtÏthe€time€of€his€testimony,€he€was€a€student€at€Florida€State€University€studyingÏmarriage€and€family€therapy€and€psychotraumatology›.€€He€claimed€no€expertise€inÏanything€other€than€his€special€area,€and€testified€that€ð ðI€consider€myself€anÏexpert€in€working€with€survivors€of€trauma.€€Thatððs€the€only€thing€„„€claiming€anyÏexpertise€in€here€as€I€sit€in€this€chair€right€now.ðð€€He€stated€he€had€never€beforeÏtestified€as€an€expert,€and€would€never€testify€as€one€again,€after€this€hearing,Ïbecause€it€was€too€hard.€.€.€.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àWhen€the€witness€was€tendered€as€an€expert€in€the€field€of€Traumatology,Ïthis€Court€had€serious€reservations€about€his€expertise,€and€asked€the€witnessÏwhat€he€had€been€doing€immediately€before€beginning€his€present€studies€atÏFlorida€State.€€Mr.€Gentry€answered€that€he€had€spent€those€last€seven€monthsÏprior€to€his€current€studies€hiking€the€Appalachian€Trail.€Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularKLMNRCþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(Ñ3a$¢¢Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€¬ŠXXdædæ8ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ý(Ñ3a$££Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€¬ŠXXdædæ8ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óPP'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd üÝ ƒLa"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€SX¬ŠXXXÔÔ€S¥ÂXSX¬ŠÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€SX¬ŠXS¥ÂÔÐ  ÐÌSeptember€1,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó'ÿÿdxd,–ûyAZ‹"Arial Regular˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€¬ŠXXdædÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýñ)ñ›ñ)ñÓ ÔþÓò òñ:ññ0ñœñ0ñßr€JQR<,(j 8` `€€@EÈ ` ttx0ð árßñ:ñÔ_Ôà@. . ®àòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðóóñ:ñßt€JQR>.*jx ` `€€@EÙ` 8ttxPôð tßñ:ñÌà@**)®àòòAT€JACKSONˆÐ àØ ÐóóÌà@±±%®àJUNE€SESSION,€1999ˆÌÌÌÌÌGAILE€K.€OWENS,à  àà h àà À à)Ð TL  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àNo.€02C01„9806„CR„00182Ð @8  Ðà ` àAppellant,à  àà h àà À à)Ð ,$  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àSHELBY€COUNTYÐ   Ðvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð ü  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHon.€Chris€Craft€,€JudgeÐ ðè  ÐSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à h àà À à)Ð ÜÔ  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  à(Post„Conviction,€Capital€Case)Ð ÈÀ Ðà ` àAppellee.à  àà h àà À à)Ð ´¬ Ðó óÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð RJ ÐÌò òPaul€J.€Morrow,€Jr.ó óà h àà À àò òà  àPaul€G.€Summersó óÐ  ÐStaff€Attorneyà  àà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ   ÐPost„Conviction€Defenderà h àÐ ðè Ð460€James€Robertson€Parkwayà À àà  àò òMichael€E.€Mooreó óÐ ÖÎ Ð2nd€Floorà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àSolicitor€GeneralРº ÐNashville,€TN€€37243„0505Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àò òà À àà  àAlice€B.€Lustreó óÐ Ž!† Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà Ð àà (# àÐ z"r Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à2d€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à x àà Ð àà (# àÐ & " Ðà ` àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ /(, ÐÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó ó,€JudgeÐ  r4j-2 ÐÓÓÔ‡XNÜXXXÔà@+®àòòò òOPINIONˆÐ  ÐÌóóó óà ` àIn€this€capital€case,€the€appellant,€Gaile€K.€Owens,€appeals€as€of€right€theÐ   ˜ Ðjudgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€of€Shelby€County€denying€her€petition€for€post„¼conviction€relief.€€In€1986,€the€appellant€was€convicted€of€accessory€before€the€factÏto€first€degree€murder.€€In€a€joint€trial,€the€appellantððs€co„defendant,€SidneyÏPorterfield,€was€also€convicted€of€first€degree€murder€and€following€a€separateÏsentencing€hearing,€both€were€sentenced€to€death€by€electrocution.€€The€appellantððsÏconviction€and€sentence€were€affirmed€on€direct€appeal€by€the€Tennessee€SupremeÏCourt.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Porterfieldóó,€746€S.W.2d€441€(Tenn.),€òòrehððg€deniedóó,€(1988),€òòcert.Ð 4, Ðdeniedóó,€486€U.S.€1017,€108€S.Ct.€1756€(1988).€€Ð ø ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant€filed€the€instant€petition€on€February€28,€1991.€€The€post„¼conviction€court€denied€the€appellantððs€ex€parte€request€for€expert€services.€ÏThrough€an€interlocutory€appeal€to€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court,€the€appellantÏwas€granted€the€funds€for€expert€services.€€òòSeeóó€òòOwens€v.€Stateóó,€908€S.W.2d€923Ð ü!ô Ð(Tenn.€1995).€€An€amended€petition€was€filed€on€August€15,€1996.€€A€hearing€wasÏheld€on€September€22,€1997.€€On€May€4,€1998,€the€post„conviction€court€entered€anÏorder€denying€the€appellant€post„conviction€relief.ÌÌà ` àOn€appeal,€the€appellant€raises€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà8 ` àI.€€Whether€the€appellant€received€the€effective€assistance€of€counselÏat€trial;Ð ` ü!` ü! ЀÌà8 ` àII.€€Whether€the€judge€at€the€post„conviction€proceeding,€formerly€anÏassistant€district€attorney€who€worked€in€the€office€which€tried€theÏappellant,€should€have€recused€himself;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àIII.€€Whether€the€appellant€was€denied€her€constitutional€rights€duringÏthe€guilt€and€sentencing€phases€by€the€prosecutionððs€failure€to€provideÏthe€defense€exculpatory€evidence;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÌÌà8 ` àIV.€€Whether€the€heinous,€atrocious,€and€cruel€aggravator€wasÏappropriately€applied€vicariously€to€the€appellant€and€whether€the€trialÏcourt€should€have€instructed€that€the€appellant€intended€to€inflict€theÐ >:639 Ðheinous,€atrocious,€and€cruel€act;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àV.€€Whether€the€murder€for€remuneration€aggravating€circumstanceÏsufficiently€narrows€the€class€of€death€eligible€offenders;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àVI.€€Whether€the€reasonable€doubt€jury€instructions€given€at€bothÏstages€of€the€trial€were€constitutional;€andÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àVII.€€Whether€Tennesseeððs€death€penalty€statutes€are€constitutional.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓà ` àAfter€reviewing€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€post„convictionÏcourt.€€ÌÌà@ff)®àò òBackgroundˆÐ ØÐ Ðó óà ` àThe€proof,€as€set€forth€in€the€supreme€courtððs€decision,€òòState€v.€Porterfieldóó,Ð ¸° Ð746€S.W.2d€at€443„445,€established€the€following€pertinent€facts:€€ÌÓÓà8 ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{ #ÔThe€evidence€shows€that€over€a€period€of€months,€Mrs.€OwensÐ xp Ðsolicited€several€men€to€kill€her€husband.€One€of€these€men€wasÏSidney€Porterfield.€She€met€with€him€on€at€least€three€occasions,€theÏlast€being€at€2:30€p.m.€on€Sunday,€February€17,€1985.€At€that€time,Ïshe€told€him€that€her€husband€would€either€be€home€alone€that€night€orÏwould€be€at€the€church€playing€basketball.€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àThat€evening€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Owens€and€their€two€sons€attendedÏevening€church€services.€Afterwards,€when€Mr.€Owens€remained€atÏchurch€to€play€basketball,€the€boys€asked,€as€they€usually€did,€to€stayÏwith€their€father.€Mrs.€Owens€refused€their€request€and€took€them€to€aÏrestaurant€for€dinner€and€then€to€the€home€of€Mrs.€Owens'€sister,Ïwhere€they€stayed€until€approximately€10:30€p.m.€When€they€arrivedÏhome€at€about€11:00€p.m.€Mr.€Owens'€automobile€was€in€the€driveway.ÏThe€doors€were€open,€the€interior€light€was€on€and€Mr.€Owens'€coatÏand€tie€were€on€the€seat.€They€found€the€back€door€to€the€houseÏpartially€open,€and€the€keys€in€the€lock.€There€were€signs€of€a€struggleÏin€the€kitchen€and€blood€was€splattered€on€the€wall€and€floor.€Mr.ÏOwens€was€found€in€the€den€unconscious,€his€head€covered€withÏblood.€Mr.€Owens€died€some€six€hours€later€from€multiple€blows€to€hisÏhead.€€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àThe€autopsy€revealed€that€Mr.€Owens€had€been€struck€at€leastÏtwenty-one€times€with€a€blunt€instrument,€described€by€the€forensicÏpathologist€as€a€long,€striated€cylinder€such€as€a€tire€iron.€The€blowsÏhad€driven€his€face€into€the€floor,€crushed€his€skull€and€driven€boneÏfragments€into€his€brain.€Mr.€Owens€also€had€sustained€extensiveÏinjuries€to€his€hands€and€strands€of€hair€between€his€fingers€indicatedÏhe€had€been€covering€his€head€with€his€hands€when€he€was€beaten.€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÐ ¨9 26 Ðà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àAfter€the€killing,€George€James,€one€of€the€men€solicited€by€Mrs.ÏOwens€to€kill€her€husband,€contacted€the€police€and€told€them€of€Mrs.ÏOwens'€offer.€James€then€assisted€the€police€by€permitting€them€toÏrecord€telephone€conversations€he€had€with€Mrs.€Owens.€After€one€ofÏthe€calls,€James€met€Mrs.€Owens€in€the€Raleigh€Springs€Mall€inÏMemphis.€James€was€wearing€a€hidden€body€microphone,€which€wasÏbeing€monitored€by€police€in€a€nearby€automobile.€Mrs.€Owens€paidÏJames€sixty€dollars€to€keep€quiet,€telling€him€that€it€was€all€the€moneyÏshe€had.€She€also€stated€that€she€ñ)ñœñ)ññ)ñœñ)ñhad€hadñ)ñ›ñ)ññ)ñ›ñ)ñ€her€husband€killed€becauseÏof€"bad€marital€problems."€Mrs.€Owens€was€placed€under€arrest€at€theÏconclusion€of€her€meeting€with€Mr.€James.€€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àAt€first,€Mrs.€Owens€claimed€that€she€only€had€hired€people€toÏfollow€her€husband€and€"to€rough€him€up."€She€did€admit€paying€outÏsome€$€4,000€to€$€5,000€to€various€men€for€expenses.€Later€sheÏconfessed€to€offering€three€men€$€5,000€to€$€10,000€to€kill€herÏhusband€and€to€talking€with€a€man€known€as€"little€Johnny"€at€2:30Ïp.m.€on€the€day€of€the€murder€about€killing€her€husband.€She€hadÏpromised€to€pay€him€three€or€four€days€after€the€murder.€When€askedÏwhy,€Mrs.€Owens€stated,€"We've€just€had€a€bad€marriage€over€theÏyears,€and€I€just€felt€like€he€had,€mentally€I€just€felt€like€he€had€beenÏcruel€to€me.€There€was€very€little€physical€violence."€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àThe€man€who€met€Mrs.€Owens€on€Sunday€afternoon€wasÏidentified€by€witnesses€as€Sidney€Porterfield.€A€witness€also€placedÏMr.€Porterfield€in€the€vicinity€of€the€Owens'€house€a€week€before€theÏkilling.€€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ àMr.€Porterfield€also€made€a€statement€to€the€police€which€wasÏentered€into€evidence.€According€to€Mr.€Porterfield,€he€met€with€Mrs.ÏOwens€on€three€occasions€to€discuss€plans€for€the€killing€of€Mr.ÏOwens,€the€last€being€at€2:30€p.m.€on€Sunday,€February€17,€1985.€HeÏstated€that€Mrs.€Owens€offered€him€$€17,000€to€kill€her€husband,€andÏthat€he€told€her€he€would€have€to€check€out€the€situation.€(Shortly€afterÏher€husband's€funeral€Mrs.€Owens€had€asked€her€father-in€law€for€$Ï17,000€"to€pay€some€bills.")€He€further€stated€that€he€went€to€theÏOwens'€house€that€evening€at€about€9:00€p.m.€On€leaving€hisÏautomobile,€he€put€a€tire€iron€in€his€pocket€in€case€he€encountered€aÏdog.€Porterfield€stated€he€was€walking€in€the€back€yard€of€the€Owens'Ïhouse€when€Mr.€Owens€came€home;€that€Mr.€Owens€would€not€acceptÏhis€explanation€that€he€was€looking€for€a€house,€but€informed€him€heÏwas€going€to€hold€him€until€the€police€arrived;€that€Mr.€Owens€grabbedÏhim€by€the€arm€and€attempted€to€pull€him€into€the€house.€According€toÏPorterfield,€Mr.€Owens€had€a€brief€case€in€one€hand€and€was€graspingÏPorterfield€with€the€other.€(No€attempt€was€made€to€explain€how€Mr.ÏOwens,€with€his€hands€thus€occupied,€unlocked€the€door€to€the€house.)ÏPorterfield€said€he€tried€to€break€away€and,€when€he€wasÏunsuccessful,€struck€Mr.€Owens€with€the€tire€iron.€The€men€were€thenÏin€the€kitchen.€Mr.€Owens€threw€his€hand€up€for€protection,€but€wouldÏnot€release€Mr.€Porterfield.€Porterfield€then€continued€to€strike€Mr.ÏOwens€with€the€tire€iron,€with€the€result€that€he€did€extensive€damageÏto€both€of€Mr.€Owens'€hands€and€to€his€head.€On€leaving€the€Owens'Ïhouse,€Mr.€Porterfield€threw€the€tire€iron€and€the€gloves€he€wasÏwearing€into€a€dumpster.€They€were€never€recovered.€€Ð¨9 26` ü!` ü! Їà8 ` àà ¸ àDefendant€Porterfield€offered€no€evidence€in€his€defense.€Mrs.ÏOwens€presented€the€testimony€of€a€neighbor,€who€testified€that€Mrs.ÏOwens€was€almost€hysterical€after€her€husband€was€found.€A€funeralÏhome€employee€also€testified.€He€stated€that€a€large€balance€wasÏowing€on€Mr.€Owens'€funeral€bill,€presumably€to€show€that€Mrs.€OwensÏdid€have€large€debts€to€pay€after€her€husband's€death€as€she€hadÏrepresented€to€her€father-in-law€in€attempting€to€secure€a€loan.€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà ` à.€.€.€ÌÌà8 ` àà ¸ àIn€the€bifurcated€sentencing€hearing,€the€forensic€pathologistÏagain€testified€for€the€state€concerning€the€circumstances€of€Mr.ÏOwensðð€death,€such€as€blood€being€inhaled,€bone€fragments€beingÏdriven€into€his€brain,€and€the€fact€that€Mr.€Owens€had€lived€six€hoursÏafter€the€beating.€€Two€photographs€showing€the€head€woundsÏsuffered€by€Mr.€Owens€also€were€introduced.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àIn€addition,€the€state€presented€proof€that€Mr.€Porterfield€hadÏbeen€convicted€of€robbery€with€a€deadly€weapon€in€1968€and€of€simpleÏrobbery€twice€in€1971.€€The€state€also€relied€on€the€circumstances€ofÏthe€killing€as€shown€by€evidence€in€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial.€€€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àIn€mitigation,€the€defendant€Owens€presented€evidence€that€sheÏhad€been€treated€by€a€psychiatrist€on€one€occasion€in€1978€for€severeÏbehavioral€problems.€She€also€called€two€jail€employees€who€testifiedÏthat€Mrs.€Owens€was€a€good€prisoner€who€caused€no€problems,Ïvolunteered€to€work,€and€attended€Bible€study€classes.€Mr.€PorterfieldÏpresented€no€evidence€in€mitigation.€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àIn€imposing€the€sentence€of€death,€the€jury€found€threeÏaggravating€circumstances€with€respect€to€Porterfield,€and€two€withÏrespect€to€Mrs.€Owens.€No€mitigating€circumstances€were€found.ÏSpecifically,€the€jury€found€that€Mr.€Porterfield€(1)€had€been€previouslyÏconvicted€of€one€or€more€felonies€involving€the€use€or€threat€ofÏviolence€to€the€person;€(2)€that€he€committed€the€murder€forÏremuneration€or€the€promise€of€remuneration,€or€employed€another€toÏcommit€the€murder€for€remuneration,€or€the€promise€of€remuneration;Ïand€(3)€that€the€murder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€inÏthat€it€involved€torture€or€depravity€of€mind.€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ððððÐ ¨* #& Ð39-2-203(i)(2),€(4)€and€(5).€The€jury€found€the€same€aggravatingÏcircumstances€in€sentencing€Mrs.€Owens,€except€for€the€finding€ofÏprevious€conviction€of€a€felony€involving€the€use€or€threat€of€violence€toÏthe€person.€€€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ô€€€Ð H0@), ÐÓÓà@#®àò òPost„Conviction€HearingˆÐ 810*- Ðà ` àó óIn€post„conviction€proceedings,€the€appellant€must€prove€the€allegationsÐ 3,/ Ðcontained€in€her€petition€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.ñ*ñ׃ ×ñ*ññ*ñ׃?×ñ*ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòState€v.€Kerleyóó,€820Ð ø4ð-1 ÐS.W.2d€753,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1991).€Ð  ÐFindings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€made€by€the€post„conviction€court€are€givenÏthe€weight€of€a€jury€verdict,€and,€this€court€is€bound€by€those€findings€unless€theÏevidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€otherwise.€€òòButler€v.€Stateóó,€789Ð ¨   ÐS.W.2d€898,€899€(Tenn.€1990).€€This€court€may€not€reweigh€or€reevaluate€theÏevidence€or€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€post„conviction€court.€ÏQuestions€concerning€credibility€of€witnesses€and€the€weight€and€value€to€be€givenÏtheir€testimony€are€for€resolution€by€the€post„conviction€court.€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794Ð (  ÐS.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€ò òÐ  ÐÌà@ÿÿ®àI.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€CounselˆÌà ` àó óThe€appellant€contends€that€she€was€denied€effective€representation€ofÐ ¨  Ðcounsel€at€trial€due€to€counselððs€failure€to:€(1)€adequately€investigate€a€death€penaltyÏcase;€(2)€properly€request€expert€services;€3)€request€investigative€assistance;€(4)Ïappropriately€manage€the€trial€testimony€of€Dr.€West;€and€(5)€request€a€continuance,Ïwhich€would€have€been€automatic,€when€the€State€failed€to€comply€with€the€noticeÏprovisions€regarding€aggravating€circumstances.ñ*ñ׃X×ñ*ññ*ñ׃BX×ñ*ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€Ð %  ÐÌÔ#†Xú{XXXú{t9#Ôà@ ®àò òA.€€Standard€for€Determining€Ineffective€Assistance€of€Counseló óˆÐ È(À!$ Ðà ` àWhen€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€is€raised,€the€burden€isÏupon€the€appellant€to€show€(1)€that€counsel's€performance€was€deficient€and€(2)€thatÏthe€deficient€performance€prejudiced€the€defense.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466Ð h.`'* ÐU.S.€668,€687,€104€S.Ct.€2052,€2064€(1984).€€Thus,€the€appellant€must€prove€thatÐ H0@), Ðcounsel€"made€errors€so€serious€that€counsel€was€not€functioning€as€the€'counsel'Ïguaranteed€the€defendant€by€the€Sixth€Amendment,"€and€the€appellant€mustÏdemonstrate€that€counsel's€errors€"were€so€serious€as€to€deprive€the€defendant€of€aÏfair€trial,€a€trial€whose€result€is€reliable."€òòId.óó€The€appellant€must€establish€bothÐ ¨   Ðdeficient€performance€and€prejudice€in€order€to€prevail.€€òòId.óó€€A€reviewing€court€needÐ ˆ€ Ðnot€consider€the€two€prongs€of€€òòStricklandóó€in€any€particular€order.€€òòStrickland€v.Ð h`  ÐWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€697,€€104€S.Ct.€at€2069.€€Moreover,€if€the€appellant€fails€toÐ H@  Ðestablish€one€prong,€a€reviewing€court€need€not€consider€the€other.€€òòIdóó.Ð (  ÐÌà ` àWith€respect€to€deficient€performance,€the€proper€measure€of€attorneyÏperformance€is€reasonableness€under€prevailing€professional€norms.€€òòStrickland€v.Ð ÈÀ ÐWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€688,€€104€S.Ct.€at€2065.€€In€other€words,€the€attorney'sÐ ¨  Ðperformance€must€be€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€inÏcriminal€cases.€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.1975).€€This€courtÐ h` Ð"must€indulge€a€strong€presumption€that€counsel's€conduct€falls€within€the€wideÏrange€of€reasonable€professional€assistance;€€that€is,€the€defendant€must€overcomeÏthe€presumption€that,€under€the€circumstances,€the€challenged€action€'might€beÏconsidered€sound€trial€strategy.'€"€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€689,€104Ð è&à" ÐS.Ct.€at€2065.€€€We€should€defer€to€trial€strategy€or€tactical€choices€if€they€areÏinformed€ones€based€upon€adequate€preparation.€€òòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9Ð ¨* #& Ð(Tenn.1982).€€Additionally,€this€court€should€avoid€the€"distorting€effects€of€hindsight"Ïand€"judge€the€reasonableness€of€counsel's€challenged€conduct€on€the€facts€of€theÏparticular€case,€viewed€as€of€the€time€of€counsel's€conduct."€€òòStrickland€v.Ð H0@), ÐWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€689-690,€104€S.Ct.€at€2065-2066.€€Moreover,€we€note€thatÐ (2 +. Ðdefendants€are€not€entitled€to€perfect€representation,€only€constitutionally€adequateÏrepresentation.€€òòHarries€v.€Stateóó,€No.€833€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€August€29,Ð è5à.2 Ð1990),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.1991).€€However,€we€recognize€that€ð ðour€dutyÐ È7À04 Ðto€search€for€constitutional€[deficiencies]€with€painstaking€care€is€never€moreÐ ¨9 26 Ðexacting€than€it€is€in€a€capital€case.ðð€€òòBurger€v.€Kempóó,€483€U.S.€776,€785,€107€S.Ct.Ð  Ð3114,€3121€(1987).ÌÌÌà ` àTo€establish€the€prejudice€prong€of€òòStricklandóó,€the€appellant€must€show€thatÐ ˆ€ Ðthere€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counsel's€deficient€performance,€theÏresult€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466Ð H@  ÐU.S.€at€694,€104€S.Ct.€at€2068.€€€A€reasonable€probability€is€one€sufficient€toÏundermine€confidence€in€the€outcome.€€òòIdóó.€€€Moreover,€when€challenging€a€deathÐ  Ðsentence,€the€appellant€must€show€that€ð ðthere€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,Ïabsent€the€errors,€the€ñ)ñœñ)ñsentencerñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€.€.€.€would€have€concluded€that€the€balance€of€theÏaggravating€and€mitigating€circumstances€did€not€warrant€death.ðð€€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,Ð ¨  Ð960€S.W.2d€572,€579„580€(Tenn.€1997),€òòrehððg€deniedóó,€(1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„Ð ˆ€ Ð,€119€S.Ct.€82€(1998)€(citing€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€695,€104€S.Ct.€atÐ h` Ð2069).ÌÌÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ôà@J J ®àò òB.€€Testimony€at€the€Post„Conviction€HearingòòˆÐ %  Ðó óóóÔ#†Xú{XXXú{ãQ#ÔÔ‡ XàXXXú{Ôà ` àÔ#†Xú{XX Xà…R#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔAt€trial,€the€appellant€was€represented€by€James€Marty€and€Brett€Stein.ñ*ñ׃×ñ*ññ*ñ׃E×ñ*ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рè&à" ÐMarty€testified€that€he€was€admitted€to€the€practice€of€law€in€1971€and,€at€the€time€ofÏthe€instant€case,€his€practice€was€ninety„percent€criminal.€€Prior€to€the€appellantððsÏcase,€he€had€served€as€lead€counsel€in€three€or€four€capital€trials.€€From€theÏbeginning€of€the€case,€Marty€was€aware€that€the€State€was€seeking€the€deathÏpenalty.€€It€was€evident€that€Marty€had€great€difficulty€recalling€his€work€on€the€case.€ÏHe€was€appointed€in€May€of€1985€and€the€trial€commenced€in€January€of€1986.€€ÌÌà ` àMarty€stated€that€they€had€interviewed€numerous€witnesses;€however,€he€didÐ è5à.2 Ðnot€remember€their€names€nor€the€subject€matter€of€their€conversation.€€He€relatedÏthat€his€records€probably€did€not€indicate€all€of€the€witnesses€he€interviewed.€ÏHowever,€he€recalled€that€the€appellant€did€not€want€him€to€interview€her€childrenÏnor€were€they€to€be€involved€with€the€trial.€€He€stated€that€he€did€not€always€writeÏeverything€down€on€appointed€cases,€just€what€he€remembered€at€the€time.€€HeÏtestified€that€the€time€sheets€were€always€ð ðway€short€of€the€timeðð€he€actually€spentÏworking€on€the€cases.€€€Counsel€did€not€request€any€school,€employment,€or€militaryÏrecords€of€the€victim€because€he€believed€they€were€irrelevant€to€the€case.€€ÌÌà ` àMarty€testified€that€the€appellant€was€evaluated€in€1978,€by€Dr.€Max€West,€aÏpsychiatrist,€as€a€result€of€a€pending€embezzlement€charge.€€Dr.€West€was€called€atÏthe€sentencing€phase€for€the€purpose€of€offering€mitigation€proof.€€Marty€testifiedÏthat€the€defense€team€requested€funds€from€the€trial€court€which€would€haveÏpermitted€private€mental€health€evaluations;€however,€this€request€was€denied.€€TheÏcourt€did€grant€authorization€for€the€appellant€to€be€evaluated€by€Midtown€MentalÏHealth€Center,€a€state€funded€facility.€€Members€of€the€Midtown€staff€attempted€toÏconduct€a€competency/sanity€evaluation€of€the€appellant€on€three€separateÏoccasions.€€However,€any€evaluation€was€hindered€because,€on€each€occasion,€theÏappellant€refused€to€speak€with€them,€except€for€providing€family€history€information,Ïuntil€she€had€conferred€with€counsel.€€Marty€further€testified€that€counsel€neverÏadvised€the€appellant€not€to€talk€to€any€mental€health€expert;€ñ)ñœñ)ñexplainingñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€ð ðIððm€sure€IÏtold€her€to€cooperate€with€them€because€we€needed€the€mental€evaluation,€and€weÏdidnððt€get€it.ðð€€€ÌÌà ` à€Marty€further€testified€that€at€trial€the€defense€theory€was€that€the€appellantÏhad€withdrawn€her€solicitations€to€kill€her€husband€and€that€knowing€this,€PorterfieldÏmurdered€the€victim€in€a€burglary€attempt€on€their€house.€€Believing€the€appellantððsÏtestimony€was€critical€to€their€defense,€counsel€stated€that€he€tried€upon€severalÐ ¨9 26 Ðoccasions€to€get€the€appellant€to€testify€at€her€ñ)ñœñ)ñtrial.€€The€appellant€repeatedlyÏrefused.Ô#†Xú{XXXú{ÓR#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ôñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€€He€explained€that€her€testimony€was€crucial€to€support€her€defense€andÐ èà Ðalso€to€establish€her€mental€ñ)ñœñ)ñstate.ñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€ñ)ñœ›ñ)ñ€€In€an€attempt€to€bring€into€question€her€mentalÏstate,€he€advanced€the€argument€that€no€sane€white€lady€ñ)ñœñ)ñwouldñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€venture€into€an€ñ)ñœñ)ñÌÌunfamiliar,ñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€all€black€neighborhood€and€openly€solicit€men€on€the€street€to€kill€herÏhusband.€ÌÌà ` àBrett€Stein,€defense€co„counsel,€testified€that€he€has€practiced€law€sinceÏ1963,€engaging€primarily€in€criminal€practice.€€He€was€appointed€to€the€appellantððsÏcase€in€December€of€1985,€some€thirty€days€prior€to€trial,€replacing€Emmons.€€SteinÏstated€that€Marty€remained€lead€counsel€deciding€the€strategy€decisions.€€HeÏtestified€that€he€was€aware€of€the€death€penalty€aggravating€circumstances€thatÏwould€be€used€against€the€appellant€long€before€the€trial€even€though€the€State€filedÏtheir€notice€the€day€preceding€the€trial.€€Stein€related€that€his€file€of€this€case€wasÏburned€in€an€office€fire.€€He€stated€that€this€case€was€his€first€bifurcated€capital€trial.€ÏStein€was€also€unable€to€remember€much€of€his€participation€in€the€case€occurringÏover€ten€years€ago.€€He€testified€that€he€did€not€independently€obtain€the€appellantððsÏmedical,€educational€or€employment€history.€€Ì€Ì€Ô#†Xú{XXXú{_#ÔÔ‡ XàXXXú{Ôà ` àÔ#†Xú{XX Xà£d#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔWayne€Emmons,€an€appointed€attorney€for€the€appellantððs€trial,€testified€thatÐ ˆ,€%( Ðhis€first€involvement€in€the€case€was€in€May€of€1985€and€he€withdrew€from€the€caseÏin€December€of€1985,€because€of€commitments€in€other€cases.€€Emmons€testifiedÏthat€he€filed€the€motion€for€the€services€of€mental€health€experts.€€Since€the€motionÏwas€not€filed€ex€parte,€he€did€not€specify€the€reasons€for€the€request€or€any€otherÏspecifics€for€the€evaluation,€i.e.,€costs,€venue,€or€doctor.€ÌÌà ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{ñd#ÔAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€Eric€Gentry€was€called€by€the€appellant€toÐ ¨9 26 Ðtestify€as€an€expert€in€the€field€of€€traumatology.ñ*ñ׃7×ñ*ññ*ñ׃H×ñ*ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Gentryððs€testimony€andÐ  Ðñ)ñœñ)ñð ðpsychosocialñ)ñ›œñ)ñððñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€assessment€(a€social€history€combined€with€Gentryððs€impressionsÏthereof)€was€essentially€offered€to€show€what€additional€mitigation€evidence€wasÏavailable€for€defense€counsel€during€the€penalty€phase€of€the€trial.€€Ó€ÓÓ€ÓGentry€relatedÏthat€the€appellant€grew€up€in€a€poor,€filthy€household.€€He€stated€that€the€appellantÏapparently€spent€considerable€time€during€her€developmental€years€with€her€auntÏand€uncle,€which€she€apparently€enjoyed€more€than€living€at€home€with€her€parents.€ÏHe€testified€that€the€appellantððs€father€was€prone€to€drinking€spells€and€wouldÏsometimes€beat€his€wife€and€children.€€The€appellant€also€informed€Gentry€that€herÏmother€would€beat€her€as€well.Ð èà Їà ` àThe€appellant€told€Gentry€that€she€was€sodomized€by€her€husband€on€severalÏoccasions€and€was€forced€to€have€sex€the€night€before€the€birth€of€her€second€child,Ïwhich€apparently€caused€severe€bleeding.€€The€appellant€also€told€Gentry€that€herÏhusband€was€upset€when€she€became€pregnant€with€their€first€child,€because€sheÏhad€forgotten€to€take€her€birth€control€pills€and€he€did€not€think€they€could€afford€theÏexpense€of€a€child.€€The€appellant€was€charged€with€embezzlement€shortly€after€theÏbirth€of€their€first€child€and€again€after€the€birth€of€her€second€child.€€GentryÏexplained€that€the€appellant€probably€felt€the€need€to€alleviate€the€financial€strain€onÏthe€marriage.€€It€was€Gentryððs€opinion€that€the€appellant€has€ð ðvery€poor€problem„¼solving€and€conflict€resolution€skillsðð€and€ð ðoften€will€acquiesce€to€the€needs€andÏdemands€of€others€in€order€to€avoid€social€conflict.ðð€€€Also,€according€to€Gentry,Ïgiven€the€appellantððs€upbringing€she€probably€thought€any€abuse€suffered€at€theÏhands€of€her€husband€was€ð ðexpected.ðð€€Gentry€further€testified:ÌÓ€ŒiÓÓ€Óà8 ` àà ¸ àAs€Iððve€previously€talked€about€from€my€point€of€view€is€thatÏthere€was€nothing€more€important€to€Gaile€than€the€approval€and€loveÏof€Ron.€€And€that€turning€him€in,€giving€up€that€relationship,€divorcingÏhim,€would€have€been€for€her€to€give€up€her€whole€identity,€her€reasonÏfor€living,€the€thing€inside€of€her€that€meant€the€most€to€her.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓIn€assessing€the€value€of€the€proffered€mitigation€evidence€of€Gentry,€the€post„¼conviction€court€entered€the€following€findings:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà ¸ àIn€addition€to€Mr.€Gentryððs€lack€of€training€and€experience,€thisÏCourt€finds€many€of€his€sources€of€information€appear€highly€suspectÏor€biased.€€His€primary€source€for€petitionerððs€social€history€wasÏpetitioner€herself,€who€admittedly€has€a€serious€problem€withÏtruthfulness.€€Much€of€the€history€she€reported€was€contradicted€by€herÏfamily€members,€and€all€of€the€ð ðsexual€traumaðð€she€reported€was€totallyÏunsupported€by€any€other€witnesses€or€medical€records.€.€.€.€€€€All€ofÏthe€ð ðtraumaðð€experienced€by€petitioner,€on€which€Mr.€Gentry€based€hisÏopinions,€such€as€sexual€brutality€performed€on€the€victim€by€herÏhusband,€was€totally€unverified.€€As€an€example,€petitioner€claimedÏthat€her€husband€once€raped€her€with€a€wine€bottle,€breaking€the€neckÏof€the€bottle€off€in€her€vagina.€€According€to€petitioner,€she€did€not€seekÏmedical€treatment,€however.€€There€is€no€proof€in€the€record€that€sheÏever€related€any€of€this€alleged€sex€abuse€or€violence€to€anyone€duringÏher€entire€marriage,€or€for€the€first€five€months€of€her€attorneysððÏrepresentation.€€She€apparently€first€related€this€information€to€herÏattorneys€the€week€of€the€hearing€on€her€pretrial€motions.€€WhenÏasked€if€her€children€were€ever€exposed€to€any€of€this,€Mr.€GentryÏresponded€that€petitioner€told€him€ð ðthat€Gaile€and€Ron€were€veryÐ ¨9 26 Ðcareful€to€not€let€the€kids€see€any€of€the€fights€between€them€that€theyÏhadðð€so€they€would€send€the€kids€out€to€play€first.€€Her€family€membersÏand€friends€denied€that€anything€seemed€wrong.€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! Ðà ` à.€.€.€ÌÌà8 ` àà ¸ àNot€only€was€most€of€the€history€petitioner€related€to€Mr.€GentryÏunverified€by€independent€sources,€but€much€of€it€was€contradicted€byÏher€family€and€other€prior€statements€of€petitioner€herself.€€AsÏexamples€of€this,€petitioner€related€to€Mr.€Gentry€that€her€uncleÏsexually€abused€her,€and€that€she€had€talked€to€her€mother€about€it.€ÏHer€mother€denied€it.€€Petitioner€apparently€never€told€anyone€aboutÏthis€molestation€until€preparing€for€the€hearing€on€this€petition.€€SheÏsaid€she€wanted€to€have€children€and€the€victim€did€not,€and€was€angryÏwith€her€for€getting€pregnant,€so€she€committed€the€embezzlements€toÏeliminate€the€financial€strain€of€her€pregnancies.€€This€flies€in€the€faceÏof€all€the€evidence€that€pointed€to€his€loving€his€two€sons,€and€herÏreporting€to€Dr.€West€that€she€stole€because€she€wanted€extra€thingsÏfor€herself€and€her€family.€€She€also€stated€to€Mr.€Gentry€that€inÏDecember€1985,€she€caught€her€husband€and€Gala€Scott€coming€backÏtogether€to€his€office€early€one€morning,€and€when€he€got€angry€at€herÏfor€spying€he€slammed€her€into€his€car€and€called€her€a€ð ðbitch.ðð€€SheÏstated€she€decided€at€that€time,€while€driving€out€of€the€parking€lot,€toÏcommit€suicide,€and€headed€to€the€Mississippi€bridge,€but€instead,Ïapparently€on€impulse,€asked€a€group€of€men€she€saw€if€they€would€killÏher€husband.€€She€claims€to€have€done€this€for€only€three€days,€andÏthen€stopped€and€began€trying€to€recover€the€photographs€andÏdiagrams€she€had€given€the€men.€€This€unsupported€allegation€flies€inÏthe€face€of€trial€testimony€that€she€repeatedly€solicited€her€husbandððsÏdeath€over€a€period€of€weeks€and€months.€€She€also€explained€to€Mr.ÏGentry€that€she€was€physically€abused,€but€explained€that€she€had€toldÏthe€police€and€Dr.€West€that€she€had€never€been€physically€abusedÏbecause€she€didnððt€think€things€like€being€beaten€with€a€belt€wasÏphysical€abuse.€€However,€in€her€confession€to€the€police€she€statedÏshe€had€her€husband€killed€because€ð ðWeððve€just€had€a€bad€marriageÏover€the€years,€and€I€just€felt€like€he€had€...€mentally€I€just€felt€like€heÏhad€been€cruel€to€me.€€There€was€very€little€physical€violence.ððÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à.€.€.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà ¸ àIn€summary,€the€best€person€to€have€testified€to€all€this€abuseÏduring€trial€would€have€been€petitioner,€if€this€story€of€continued€sexualÏabuse€and€physical€abuse€were€true.€€If€her€trial€attorneys€had€calledÏMr.€Gentry€as€a€witness,€or€someone€else€in€1986€with€the€same€lackÏof€qualifications,€his€testimony€would€have€been€given€little€or€noÏweight€by€the€jury.€€.€.€.€€The€state€could€have€called€petitionerððs€familyÏmembers€in€rebuttal€to€deny€the€social€history€related€by€petitioner.€ÏFinally,€testimony€of€petitionerððs€suffering€from€ð ðdependent€personalityÏdisorderðð€would€have€òònegatedóó€a€mitigating€reason€for€her€to€haveÐ 4-0 Ðcaused€her€husbandððs€death.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔÓÓÌà ` àDr.€West,€a€psychiatrist€called€at€the€sentencing€phase€of€the€trial€by€the€Ìdefense€and€also€called€at€the€post„conviction€hearing,€testified€that€he€examinedÐ ¨9 26 Ðthe€appellant€for€an€hour€in€1978€because€of€the€appellantððs€pending€embezzlementÏcharge.€€From€his€evaluation,€he€determined€that€the€appellant€exhibited€noÏsymptoms€of€a€psychotic€process,€nor€was€there€any€history€of€psychotic€disordersÏin€her€family.€€He€concluded€that,€due€to€her€developmental€experiences€at€home,Ïthe€appellant€suffered€from€a€personality€disorder€and€some€depression.€€During€theÏinterview,€the€appellant€told€Dr.€West€that€she€needed€help,€she€had€a€difficult€timeÏbeing€truthful€with€her€husband€and€other€people,€and€she€had€stolen€at€other€timesÏwhen€she€was€younger.€€She€admitted€to€problems€with€sex€early€in€her€marriageÏwhich€decreased€following€the€birth€of€her€first€child.€€Following€his€evaluation,€Dr.ÏWest€informed€appellantððs€counsel,€Marty,€that€ð ðitððs€extremely€difficult€if€notÏimpossible€to€make€a€prediction€in€regards€to€possible€future€changes€inÏpsychopathology€which€[appellant]€has€demonstrated.ðð€€ÌÌà ` àIn€reviewing€the€impressions€of€Eric€Gentry€at€the€post„conviction€hearing,€Dr.ÏWest€testified€that€those€impressions€were€consistent€with€and€were€a€logicalÏextension€of€his€observation€of€the€appellant€from€the€one€hour€interview€nineteenÏyears€previous.€€Ô#†Xú{XXXú{5„#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔDr.€West€opined€that€ð ð[t]here€would€be€many€factors€that€wouldÐ %  Ðsuggest€she€was€ideally€situated€to€be€sexually€abusedðð€as€a€teenager,€but€that€inÏthe€brief€time€he€saw€her,€the€appellant€stated€that€ð ðeverything€was€fine€with€herÏhusband.ðð€€The€appellant€related€to€Dr.€West€that€the€sexual€adjustment€in€herÏmarriage€was€satisfactory€and€that€she€had€no€problems€with€her€pregnancies.€€HeÏtestified€that€his€first€contact€with€the€appellantððs€capital€trial€attorneys€was€through€aÏletter€dated€December€26,€1985.Ì€€à ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{Š#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔÐ (2 +. ÐÔ#†Xú{XXXú{‘Œ#Ôà ` àÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔThe€State€called€Carolyn€Hensley,€the€appellantððs€sister.€€At€trial,€Mrs.Ð 4-0 ÐHensley€also€testified€for€the€State.€€She€has€retained€custody€of€the€appellantððsÏchildren€since€the€appellantððs€arrest.€€Hensley€related€that€the€appellant€had€told€herÏtrial€attorneys€not€to€contact€any€of€her€family€for€trial€purposes.€€Furthermore,€sheÐ ¨9 26 Ðstated€that€despite€her€sisterððs€insistence€about€leaving€the€family€out€of€the€trial,€sheÏwould€not€have€testified€on€behalf€of€her€sister€for€mitigation.€€She€stated,€ð ðI€think€IÏwould€have€hurt€her€if€theyððd€have€asked€me€much€more.€.€.€in€my€mind€I€felt€like€thatÏit€was€a€matter€of€taking€a€life.€€And€pretty€much€felt€that€whatever€the€jury€decidedÏand€the€judge€ñ)ñœñ)ññ)ñœñ)ñthat€thatñ)ñ›ñ)ññ)ñ›ñ)ñ€was€how€it€was€going€to€be.ðð€€€According€to€Hensley,€herÏparents€were€very€distraught€over€the€murder€and€would€not€have€testified€either.€€InÏfact,€Hensley€stated€that€no€one€in€her€family€wanted€to€testify€for€the€appellant;€ð ðnoÏone€wanted€to€change€the€sentence€if€thatððs€what€youððre€asking€me.ððÌÌà ` àHensley€further€testified€that€she€was€interviewed€by€Gentry€before€the€post„¼conviction€proceeding.€€Moreover,€she€had€reviewed€his€report.€€She€testified€thatÏshe€did€not€agree€with€some€of€the€facts€delineated€in€Gentryððs€report.€€For€example,Ïshe€testified€that€the€appellant€never€had€meningitis€and€was€never€sexually€abusedÏby€her€uncle.€€However,€she€admitted€that€her€father€was€abusive€toward€hisÏchildren.€€ÌÌà ` àMs.€Hensley€related€that€she€frequently€had€social€contact€with€the€appellantÏand€the€victim.€€She€never€witnessed€the€victim€abuse€the€appellant€nor€did€sheÏnotice€anything€unusual€about€his€behavior.€€Hensley€testified€that€she€talked€withÏher€sister€daily,€however,€she€never€mentioned€any€physical€or€sexual€abuse.€€SheÏstated€that€the€appellant€ð ðspent€money€like€crazy.ðð€€The€appellantððs€parentsÏreimbursed€some€of€the€money€the€appellant€embezzled€from€her€employers.€ÏHensley€testified€that€the€appellant€lied€chronically€and€ð ð[i]t€wouldnððt€have€to€beÏanything€even€really€serious.ðð€€€€€€€€€ò òÐ (2 +. ÐÌà@ŠŠ®àC.€€Analysis€of€Ineffective€ClaimsˆÌà@ ®à1.€€Various€Claims€of€Inadequate€InvestigationˆÌà ` àó óFirst,€the€appellant€contends€counsel€were€ineffective€in€preparing€andÐ ¨9 26 Ðinvestigating€this€case.€€To€support€this€contention,€she€relies€upon€trial€counselððsÏtime€sheets€which€were€submitted€for€compensation;€in€essence,€she€argues€thatÏcounsel€did€not€log€enough€hours€in€this€death€penalty€case.€€At€the€post„convictionÏhearing,€each€of€appellantððs€counsel€exhibited€extreme€difficulty€remembering€theirÏinvolvement€in€this€case€that€occurred€nearly€ten€years€before€this€hearing.€€SinceÏthe€original€trial,€one€of€the€attorneys€lost€his€case€file€in€an€office€fire.€€Additionally,ÏMarty€testified€that€the€time€recorded€on€his€time€sheets€was€ð ðway€shortðð€of€theÏactual€time€he€spent€working€on€the€case.€€As€the€State€argues,€the€entire€record€ofÏthe€trial€proceedings€must€be€examined€to€determine€whether€the€appellant€receivedÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€òòSee€e.g.óó,€òòHopkinson€v.€Shillingeróó,€866€F.2d€1185,Ð èà Ð1217€(10th€Cir.€1989),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€497€U.S.€1010,€110€S.Ct.€3256€(1990),€òòoverruledÐ ÈÀ Ðon€other€grounds€byóó€òòSawyer€v.€Smithóó,€497€U.S.€226,€110€S.Ct.€2822€(1990)Ð ¨  Ð(defendant€must€show€specific€errors,€not€solely€based€upon€amount€of€timeÏafforded€to€attorney€to€prepare€defense)€(citing€òòUnited€States€v.€Cronicóó,€466€U.S.Ð h` Ð648,€654,€104€S.Ct.€2039,€2043€(1984)€and€òòUnited€States€v.€Pearsonóó,€798€F.2d€385,Ð H!@ Ð388€(10th€Cir.€1986)).€€Therefore,€the€appellantððs€insistence€that€the€length€of€timeÏcounsel€spent€on€the€case€is€not€dispositive€of€the€issue.ÌÌà ` àThe€appellant€argues€that€counsel€failed€to€investigate€ð ðthe€background€andÏpersonal€medical€and€mental€history€of€the€appellant.ðð€€Specifically,€she€argues€thatÏcounsel€failed€to€obtain€(1)€school€records;€(2)€birth€records€of€her€children;€(3)€theÏfile€of€Dr.€Max€West;€and€(4)€Midtown€Mental€Health€Records.€€She€contends€that,€ifÏthese€records€had€been€obtained€and€properly€utilized€at€trial,€they€would€haveÏprovided€the€jury€with€the€ð ðpsychodynamics€of€Ms.€Owenððs€background€and€whyÏcertain€building€blocks€of€her€personality€never€developed.ðð€€In€sum,€she€argues€thatÏthese€records€would€demonstrate€a€ð ðdependent€personality€disorderðð€and€anÏabusive€childhood€followed€by€an€abusive€marriage.€€ÌÐ ¨9 26 Ðà ` àIn€reference€to€these€allegations,€the€post„conviction€court€found:ÌÓÓà8 ` àNo€other€witnesses€support€any€of€her€alleged€medical€problems,€orÏtheir€causes,€which€are€also€unsupported€by€any€documentation.€ÏPetitioner€has€failed€to€show€her€attorneys€ineffective€in€failing€toÏinvestigate€her€medical€history,€as€there€is€nothing€her€attorneys€couldÏhave€discovered€other€than€the€unsupported€statements€of€petitioner,Ïwho€has€been€described€as€a€chronic€liar€by€her€psychiatrist,€herÏð ðtraumatologist,ðð€and€her€sister.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓà ` àMoreover,€the€post„conviction€court€concluded,ÌÓÓà8 ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{ôŒ#Ôthat€even€assuming€the€performance€of€her€trial€attorneys€wasÐ H@  Ðdeficient,€that€deficiency€caused€no€prejudice€to€petitioner.€€First,€theÏnature€and€extent€of€the€mitigating€evidence€that€has€been€suggestedÏshould€have€been€offered€has€little€credibility€or€relevance.€€Second,Ïalthough€similar€mitigating€evidence€was€not€presented,€if€it€had€beenÏpresented€it€would€have€opened€the€door€to€damaging€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.Ô‡Xú{XXXú{ÔÐèà` ü!` ü! Ѐ€€ÌÌÓÓà ` àAgain,€the€post„conviction€courtððs€findings€are€presumed€correct€unless€theÏevidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€We€agree€with€these€findings.€€This€issue€isÏwithout€merit.€€ÌÌà ` àNext,€the€appellant€claims€the€victimððs€records€and€investigation€into€hisÏbackground€€were€essential€to€support€her€case€that€she€was€abused€by€the€victimÏphysically,€sexually,€and€mentally.€€She€asserts€that€these€records,€especially€hisÏmilitary€records€and€employment€records,€demonstrate€that€the€victim€perpetuated€aÏfacade€of€a€happy€and€normal€home€life€while€concealing€the€lies€and€the€abusiveÏside€of€his€marriage.€This,€she€contends,€would€have€allowed€her€claims€of€abuse€toÏbe€better€received.€Ô#†Xú{XXXú{,¤#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔThe€State€cites€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€698€S.W.2d€631,€634€(Tenn.Ð x-p&) Ð1985),€in€which€the€court€held€that€victimððs€character€traits€are€irrelevant€forÏmitigation€in€a€capital€sentencing€hearing.€€As€the€post„conviction€court€observed,Ïthe€claims€of€abuse€were€just€that,€claims,€without€any€other€corroborating€evidenceÏto€support€them.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Teagueóó,€680€S.W.2d€785,€788€(1984)€(victimððsÐ ø4ð-1 Ðtraits€are€irrelevant€to€mitigation€evidence).€€Finding€no€evidence€to€preponderateÏagainst€the€trial€courtððs€findings,€this€issue€is€without€merit.€€€€Ð ¸8°15 Їà@~~®àò ò2.€€òòEx€Parteóó€Motion€for€Expert€Servicesó óˆÐ  Ðà ` àThe€appellant€also€argues€that€counsel€were€ineffective€by€failing€to€file€an€òòexÐ èà Ðparteóó€motion€for€state€paid€expert€assistance€prior€to€trial.€€Before€trial,€counsel€filedÐ È À Ða€motion,€not€òòex€parteóó,€requesting€funds€for€an€independent€mental€evaluation.€Ð ¨   ÐAlthough€the€trial€court€denied€the€request€for€an€independent€examination,€theÏappellant€was€ordered€to€be€examined€for€competency€and€sanity€by€the€MidtownÏMental€Health€Center.€€The€appellant€asserts€that€counsel€should€have€sought€funds€ÌÌin€an€òòex€parteóó€hearing€enabling€counsel€to€provide€better€argument€in€support€of€theÐ  Ðmotion.€ÌÌà ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{l§#ÔThe€appellant€has€not€demonstrated€how€she€was€harmed€by€counselððsÐ ¨  Ðfailure€to€request€the€services€of€an€independent€expert€by€an€òòex€parteóó€motion.€€òòSeeóóÐ ˆ€ ÐòòÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€757€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).Ô#†Xú{XXXú{®#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ô€€ð ðThe€defendant€mustÐ h` Ðshow€that€a€substantial€need€exists€requiring€the€assistance€of€state€paid€supportingÏservices€and€that€this€defense€cannot€be€fully€developed€without€such€professionalÏassistance.ðð€€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185,€192€(Tenn.€1992),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€510Ð %  ÐU.S.€1064,€114€S.Ct.€740€(1994).€€Notwithstanding€the€testimony€of€theÏtraumatologist,€we€conclude€that€the€proof€did€not€establish€that€a€ð ðòòsubstantialóó€needððÐ È(À!$ Ðexisted€for€state€paid€expert€assistance.€€Finding€no€prejudice,€this€issue€is€withoutÏmerit.Ô#†Xú{XXXú{®#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ô€€€€€Ð ˆ,€%( ÐÌà ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{E±#Ôà@J J ®àò ò3.€€Failure€to€Request€Investigative€Servicesó 󀀈à x àÐ H0@), Ðà ` àThe€appellant€contends€counsel€was€deficient€by€failing€to€requestÏinvestigative€services€or€to€file€a€continuance€motion€due€to€a€lack€of€investigation.€€€ÏFor€purposes€of€proving€an€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim,€proof€of€deficientÏrepresentation€by€omission€requires€more€than€a€speculative€showing€of€a€lostÏpotential€benefit.€€The€appellant€failed€to€produce€any€evidence€at€the€post„Ð ¨9 26 Ðconviction€hearing€indicating€that€an€investigator€would€have€discovered€any€Ìinformation€favorable€to€her€case.€€Accordingly,€this€allegation€of€deficientÏperformance€fails€both€prongs€of€òòStricklandóó€and€is€without€merit.Ð È À ÐÌà@"®àò ò4.€€Testimony€of€Dr.€Westó óˆÐ ˆ€ Ðà ` àThe€appellant€alleges€that€counsel€were€ineffective€in€failing€to€properlyÏinterview€Dr.€West€pre„trial€and€failing€to€manage€his€testimony€at€trial.€€TheÏappellant€contends€that€her€attorneys€should€have€questioned€the€trial€courtððsÏhearsay€ruling€that€prevented€Dr.€West€from€testifying€to€the€information€that€theÏappellant€related€about€her€social€history.€€In€a€capital€sentencing€hearing,€anyÏrelevant€mitigating€evidence€is€allowed€regardless€of€the€rules€of€evidence.€€òòSeeóóÐ ÈÀ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(c)€(repealed€1991,€replaced€by€39„13„204€(1991)).€ÏThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€limited€questioning€of€Dr.€West€was€aÏtactical,€strategical€decision€by€her€attorneys,€that€would€not€be€second€guessed.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòHellardóó,€629€S.W.2d€at€9.€€Additionally,€the€court€found€that€the€appellant€failedÐ H!@ Ðto€establish€prejudice€because€if€Dr.€West€testified€to€her€social€history,€he€wouldÏhave€revealed,€ð ðdamaging€admissions€by€petitioner€that€she€had€no€problems€withÏher€marriage,€and€that€she€had€a€long€term€problem€with€lying€and€stealing,€wouldÏnot€have€helped€her€gain€sympathy€with€the€jury.ðð€€The€record€does€notÏpreponderate€against€these€findings.ÌÌà@êê®àò ò5.€€Failure€to€Request€a€Continuanceó óˆÐ h.`'* ÐÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ôà ` àThe€appellant€complains€that€counsel€were€ineffective€because€they€failed€toÐ H0@), Ðfile€a€motion€for€a€continuance€prior€to€trial,€which€would€have€been€ñ)ñœñ)ñð ðautomatic,ñ)ñ›œñ)ñððñ)ñ›ñ)ñ€dueÏto€the€Stateððs€failure€to€comply€with€the€notice€requirements€of€the€aggravatingÏcircumstances€sought€in€this€capital€case.€€At€the€post„conviction€proceeding,Ïcounsel€testified€that€they€were€aware€from€the€beginning€of€the€case€that€the€StateÏwas€seeking€the€death€penalty.€€Counsel€felt€it€was€obvious€which€aggravatingÐ ¨9 26 Ðfactors€the€prosecution€would€use€at€the€sentencing€phase€and€therefore€did€notÏmove€for€a€continuance.€€In€this€regard,€the€supreme€court€in€the€direct€appealÏnoted,€ð ðthere€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€indicate€either€that€the€defendants€wereÏsurprised€when€the€state€announced€the€aggravating€circumstances€it€intended€toÏprove,€or€that€the€defendants€were€prejudiced€in€any€way€by€the€timing€of€theÏnotice.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòPorterfieldóó,€746€S.W.2d€at€450.€€The€appellant€also€failed€at€the€post„Ð h`  Ðconviction€hearing€to€demonstrate€any€surprise€on€the€part€of€the€appellant,€to€ÌÌdemonstrate€how€this€motion€would€have€impacted€her€trial,€or€that€€prejudiceÏresulted.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÔ#†Xú{XXXú{8º#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔÌ€€€€€€ò òà@ÉÉ®àII.€€Recusal€of€Post„Conviction€JudgeˆÐ ¨  Ðà ` àó óSecond,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€post„conviction€judge€abused€hisÐ ˆ€ Ðdiscretion€in€failing€to€recuse€himself€from€these€proceedings€because€(1)€theÏimpartiality€of€the€trial€judge€might€reasonably€be€questioned€because€of€hisÏemployment€in€the€district€attorneyððs€office€that€tried€the€case€and€(2)€the€trial€judgeÏð ðdemonstrated€actual€bias€[in€numerous€areas]€in€favor€of€the€prosecutionðð€duringÏthe€hearing€and€in€the€written€order€denying€relief.€€She€supports€her€argument€byÏciting€Supreme€Court€Rule€10,€Code€of€Judicial€Conduct,€Canon€3(E)€in€that,€ð ð[a]Ïjudge€shall€disqualify€himself.€.€.€[where]€a€lawyer€with€whom€the€judge€previouslyÏpracticed€law€served€during€such€association€as€a€lawyer€concerning€the€matterððÏand€that€the€courtððs€ð ðimpartiality€might€reasonably€be€questioned.ðð€ÌÌà ` àIn€this€case,€the€post„conviction€judge€was€employed€as€a€Shelby€CountyÏAssistant€District€Attorney€during€the€period€that€the€Shelby€County€DistrictÏAttorneyððs€Office€prosecuted€the€appellant.€€The€proof€established€that€the€judgeÏwas€òòone€of€nearly€seventy€attorneysóó€employed€by€the€District€Attorneyððs€Office.€€HeÐ È7À04 Ðwas€never€assigned€to€prosecute€or€assist€in€the€prosecution€of€this€case.€€HeÐ ¨9 26 Ðrelated€that€he€knew€nothing€about€the€facts€of€this€case,€other€than€readingÏadvance€sheets€regarding€the€supreme€courtððs€opinion€in€the€direct€appeal€and€theirÏinterlocutory€appeal€opinion€regarding€expert€services€for€post„convictionÏdefendants,€nor€did€he€know€the€attorneys€involved.ÌÌà ` àA€motion€to€recuse€is€addressed€to€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court€andÏwill€not€be€reversed€unless€the€face€of€the€record€reveals€ð ðclear€abuse.ðð€€€òòState€v.Ð H@  ÐHinesóó,€919€S.W.2d€573,€578€(Tenn.€1995),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€519€U.S.€847,€117€S.Ct.€œñ+ñÐ (  Ðñ+ññ/ññ+ñÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌñ+ññ/ññ,ññ+ñÐ ¨9 26 ÐÐ ¨9 26 Ðñ+ññ,ññ/ññ-ñÌñ-ññ/ñ133›€(1996)€(citation€omitted).€Ìà ` àTenn.€Sup.€Ct.€Rule€10,€Canon€3(E)€provides,€ÌÓÓÌà8 ` àA€judge€shall€disqualify€himself.€.€.€in€a€proceeding€in€which€the€judgeððsÏimpartiality€might€reasonably€be€questioned,€including€but€not€limited€toÏinstances€where:Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à(a)€the€judge€has€a€personal€bias€or€prejudice€concerning€a€party€or€aÏpartyððs€lawyer,€or€œpersonñ.ñalñ.ñ›€knowledge€of€disputed€evidentiary€factsÏconcerning€the€proceeding;Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à(b)€the€judge€served€as€a€lawyer€in€the€matter€in€controversy,€or€aÏlawyer€with€whom€the€judge€previously€practiced€law€served€duringÏsuch€association€as€a€lawyer€concerning€the€matter,€or€the€judge€hasÏbeen€a€material€witness€concerning€it.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌWe€note€that€the€commentary€to€this€section€includes,€Ìà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à[a]€lawyer€in€a€government€agency€does€not€ordinarily€have€anÏassociation€with€other€lawyers€employed€by€that€agency€within€theÏmeaning€of€Section€E(1)(b);€a€judge€formerly€employed€by€aÏgovernment€agency,€however,€should€disqualify€himself€.€.€.€in€aÏproceeding€if€the€judgeððs€impartiality€might€reasonably€be€questionedÏbecause€of€such€association.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓNothing€in€the€record€before€us€suggests€that€the€judgeððs€impartiality€should€beÏquestioned.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€judge€did€not€abuse€his€discretionÏin€denying€the€recusal€motion.€€ÌÌà ` àSecond,€the€appellant€complains€that€the€post„conviction€judgeððs€conduct€atÏthe€post„conviction€hearing€demonstrated€bias€in€favor€of€the€prosecution€asÏexemplified€by€his€written€order€denying€relief.€€She€claims€bias€of€the€post„Ð ¸8°15 Ðconviction€judge€in€the€following€areas:€(1)€dismissing€the€appellantððs€claims€andÏproof€of€sexual€abuse;€(2)€assessing€potential€expert€proof;€(3)€evaluating€theÏtestimony€of€Dr.€West;€(4)€dismissing€a€ð ðlegitimate€psychological€disciplineðð€i.e.,Ïtraumatology,€thereby€besmirching€the€expert€testimony€offered€by€the€Ô#†Xú{XXXú{•¿#Ôappellant.€Ð 810*- ÐÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ôò òÌà ` àó óInitially,€we€note,€as€the€appellant€acknowledges,€that€adverse€rulings€by€aÐ ø4ð-1 Ðcourt€are€not€usually€sufficient€grounds€to€establish€bias.€€òòAlley€v.€Stateóó,€882€S.W.2dÐ Ø6Ð/3 Ð810,€820€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Ô#†Xú{XXXú{lÐ#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔMoreover,€ð ð[t]he€issue€to€be€determined€is€notÐ ¸8°15 Ðthe€propriety€of€the€judicial€conduct€of€the€judge,€but€whether€he€committed€an€errorÏwhich€resulted€in€an€unjust€disposition.€.€.€.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hurleyóó,€876€S.W.2d€57,€64€Ð èà Ð(Tenn.€1993).€€The€appellant€asserts€that€the€trial€courtððs€conduct€in€this€case€wentÏfar€beyond€an€adverse€ruling.€€ÌÌÔ#†Xú{XXXú{·Ñ#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{Ôà ` àÔ#†Xú{XXXú{Ó#ÔÔ‡Xú{XXXú{ÔFrom€our€review€of€the€record,€the€post„conviction€court€conducted€anÐ h`  Ðextremely€fair€hearing€exercising€great€leniency€for€each€side€in€managing€theirÏwitnesses,€€offering€assistance€in€clarification€of€questions€and€responses,€and€didÏnot€exclude€any€testimony€or€evidence.€€Moreover,€the€court€rarely€sustained€anÏobjection€for€the€prosecution.€€Within€the€trial€courtððs€written€order€lies€the€appellantððsÏgreatest€complaint.€€òòSeeóó€òòsupraóó.€The€appellant€asserts€in€her€brief€that€the€courtÐ ÈÀ Ðfailed€to€consider€the€traumatologistððs€testimony€or€psychosocial€report,€which€weÏacknowledge€was€within€the€trial€courtððs€bounds€not€to€accredit€as€the€trier€of€fact.€ÏFollowing€the€trial€courtððs€review€of€the€trial€record€and€the€evidence€introduced€atÏthe€post„conviction€proceeding,€the€court€filed€a€comprehensive€written€order,Ïaddressing€specifically€each€of€the€appellantððs€allegations.€€The€record€is€void€of€anyÏsuggestion€that€the€court€demonstrated€direct€antagonism€against€the€appellant€orÏexpressed€any€opinion€about€the€merits€of€the€proceeding€prior€to€the€hearing.€€òòSeeóóÐ è&à" ÐòòAlleyóó,€882€S.W.2d€at€821„822.Ð È(À!$ ÐÌà ` àWe€conclude€that€neither€the€judgeððs€remarks€and€actions€at€the€post„¼conviction€hearing€nor€his€written€order€were€inappropriate€and€did€not€diminish€theÏoverall€fairness€of€the€proceeding,€even€applying€the€heightened€standards€of€dueÏprocess€applicable€in€a€capital€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€260Ð (2 +. Ð(Tenn.€1994),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€513€U.S.€1086,€115€S.Ct.€743€(1995).€€Accordingly,€thisÐ 4-0 Ðissue€is€without€merit.€€€€€€€€€ò òÐ è5à.2 ÐÌÐ ¨9 26 Ðà@ii®àIII.€€à@@OOìàAlleged€Brady€ViolationsˆÌà ` àó óThe€appellant€asserts€that€the€State€withheld€exculpatory€evidence€therebyÐ èà Ðviolating€òòBrady€v.€Marylandóó,€373€U.S.€83,€83€S.Ct.€1194€(1963).€€Specifically,€theÐ È À Ðappellant€argues€that€the€State€failed€to€relinquish€ð ðlove€lettersðð€regardingÏextramarital€affairs€of€the€victim€found€in€the€victimððs€office€after€his€death€whichÏwere€material€and€relevant€to€the€appellantððs€state€of€mind€and€the€victimððs€treatmentÏof€the€appellant.€€Thus,€she€contends€the€letters€should€have€been€revealed€prior€toÏtrial€to€demonstrate€proof€of€a€ð ðcontinuing€extramarital€affair.ðð€€Ô#†XŒçXXXn[DÓ#Ôò òÔ‡Xn[XXXŒçÔÐ (  ÐÌà ` àó óIn€òòBradyóó,€373€U.S.€at€83,€83€S.Ct.€at€1194,€the€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€Ð èà Ðprosecution€has€a€duty€to€furnish€the€defendant€with€òòexculpatoryóó€evidence€relatingÐ ÈÀ Ðeither€to€the€defendantððs€guilt€or€innocence€or€to€the€potential€punishment€that€mayÏbe€imposed.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòRoger€Morris€Bell€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9210„CR„00364Ð ˆ€ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Mar.€15,1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€Aug.Ð h` Ð28,€1995).€ÌÌà ` àThe€proof€establishes€that€the€appellant€discovered€the€victimððs€affair€withÏGala€ñ)ñœñ)ñScottñ)ñ›ñ)ññ)ññ)ñ€several€months€prior€to€the€murder.€€This€discovery€led€the€appellant€toÏconsider€suicide€and€subsequently€solicit€her€husbandððs€murder.€€Moreover,€theÏappellantððs€attorneys€were€aware€of€extramarital€affairs€of€the€victim€through€theirÏconversations€with€the€appellant€as€evidenced€by€their€request€for€information€inÏtheir€exculpatory€motion.€€The€duty€upon€the€State€under€òòBradyóó€does€not€extend€toÐ h.`'* Ðinformation€already€in€the€possession€of€the€defense€or€that€they€are€Ìable€to€obtain€or€to€information€not€in€possession€or€control€of€the€prosecution.€ÏòòBanks€v.€Stateóó,€556€S.W.2d€88,€90€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€Ð 4-0 ÐÌà ` àMore€importantly,€however,€is€the€requirement€that€the€informationÏsuppressed€must€have€been€exculpatory,€i.e.,€favorable€to€the€appellant.€€WeÐ ¨9 26 Ðconclude€that€this€evidence€was€not€favorable€and,€accordingly,€no€òòBradyóó€violation€isÐ  Ðfound.€€In€this€regard,€we€would€not€disagree€with€trial€counselððs€testimony€thatÏintroduction€of€this€evidence€may€have€provided€the€appellant€with€a€motive€to€killÏher€husband.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€€ÌÌà ` àà@ää ®àò òIV.€€Vicarious€Application€of€the€Heinous,€Atrocious,€and€Cruel€AggravatorˆÐ h`  Ðà ` àó óNext,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€vicarious€application€of€the€(i)(5)Ð H@  Ðaggravating€circumstance,€i.e.,€ð ð[t]he€murder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€orÏcruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€depravity€of€mind,ðð€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„Ð  Ð203(i)(5)€(1982)€(repealed€1989),׃/×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€was€improper.€€Her€argument€is€premised€uponÐ èà ÐUnited€States€Supreme€Court€decisions€which€hold€that€in€order€for€a€death€penaltyÏto€pass€Eighth€Amendment€constitutional€muster,€the€sentence€must€represent€anÏindividualized€sentence€rather€than€one€which€ð ðcan€be€called€capricious€orÏarbitrary.ðð׃è×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€she€argues€that€constitutional€restraints€on€the€imposition€ofÐ h` Ðcapital€punishment€prevent€the€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€based€upon€theÏconduct€of€an€accomplice.€€Moreover,€she€contends€there€is€no€proof€in€the€record€toÏindicate€that€she€directed€Porterfield,€her€co„defendant,€€to€kill€the€victim€byÏbludgeoning€him€with€a€tire€iron€and,€consequently,€the€acts€of€Porterfield€cannot€beÏattributed€to€her.€€To€support€her€contention,€the€appellant€asks€this€court€to€adoptÏthe€holdings€of€òòOmelus€v.€Stateóó,€584€So.€2d€563€(Fla.€1991)€and€òòState€v.€Isaóó,€850Ð ¨* #& ÐS.W.2d€876€(Mo.€1993),€both€of€which€held€that€a€convicted€murderer€who€did€notÏactually€kill€the€victim€cannot€be€held€responsible€for€the€nature€of€the€killing.€€InÏòòOmelusóó,€584€So.€2d€at€563,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€contracting€the€murderÐ H0@), Ðof€another.€€The€proof€did€not€establish€that€the€defendant€was€actively€involved€inÏthe€planning€of€the€murder€or€knew€how€the€third€person€would€commit€the€killing.€ÏòòId.óó€€The€Florida€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€aggravating€circumstance€that€theÐ È À Ðmurder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€could€not€be€applied€to€theÏdefendant.€€òòId.óó€€Ð ˆ€ ÐÌ€à ` àThe€State€argues,€first,€that€this€issue€was€raised€by€the€appellant€on€directÐ H@  Ðappeal,€in€that,€in€essence,€it€is€a€claim€supporting€the€sufficiency€of€the€aggravatingÏfactor.€€Moreover,€the€State€claims€that€the€expansion€of€the€argument€regarding€thisÏaggravating€factor€to€its€vicarious€application€is€waived€for€failure€to€make€anÏobjection€at€trial€or€raise€the€specific€issue€on€direct€appeal.€€Third,€the€StateÏcontends€that€the€aggravator€is€supported€based€upon€the€appellantððs€ð ðdepravity€ofÏmind.ðð€€In€the€alternative,€the€State€argues€that,€if€the€aggravator€was€erroneouslyÏapplied,€it€constitutes€harmless€error€under€òòState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€238€(Tenn.€Ð h` Ð1993),€in€light€of€the€substantial€proof€of€the€other€aggravator€and€the€minimalÏmitigation.€€ÌÌà ` àWe€reject€the€Stateððs€argument€that€this€issue€was€previously€determined€byÏthe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court.€€òòBut€seeóó€òòState€v.€Blantonóó,€975€S.W.2d€269,€280Ð È(À!$ Ð(Tenn.),€òòrehððg€deniedóó,€(1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„€,€119€S.Ct.€1118€(1999)Ð ¨* #& Ð(appellant€argued€no€evidence€to€determine€whether€he€shot€and€stabbed€victim;Ïcourt€addressed€issue€under€sufficiency€of€evidence€review€holding€evidence€ofÏaggravator€was€clearly€sufficient€in€direct€appeal).€€In€the€direct€appeal,€only€theÏdefendant€Porterfield€challenged€the€application€of€the€(i)(5)€aggravator.€ñ)ñœñ)ñ€€BecauseÏthis€issue€was€not€raised€in€the€appellantððs€direct€appeal,€it€is€waived.ñ)ñ›ñ)ññ)ññ)ñ€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð 4-0 ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„30„112(1)€and€(2)€(1990).Ìñ)ñœñ)ññ%ñÌñ%ññ)ñ›ñ)ññ)ññ)ñÐ ¨9 26 Ðà ` àNevertheless,€we€address€the€issue€of€vicarious€application€of€the€(i)(5)Ïaggravating€factor€on€the€merits.€€ñ)ñœñ)ñAlthough,€under€the€premise€of€vicariousñ%ñ›ñ%ñÏapplication,€concerns€arise€regarding€the€constitutional€standardñ#ñsñ#ñ€governingÏindividualized€sentencing,€we€conclude€that€the€vicarious€application€of€anÏaggravating€circumstance,€where€statutorily€permissible,€does€not€trespass€upon€theÏmandates€of€either€the€Eighth€Amendment€of€the€United€States€Constitution€orÏArticle€1,€Section€16€oñ ñññ€ftheñññ ññ!ñf€the€Tennessee€Constitution.ñ!ññ"ñ›€application€of€aggravatingÏcircumstances€cannot€be€separated€from€the€constitutional€standards€governingÏindividualized€sentencing.€€We€conclude€that€the€vicarious€application€of€anÏaggravating€circumstance,€where€statutorily€permissible,€does€not€trespass€upon€theÏmandates€of€either€the€Eighth€Amendment€of€the€United€States€Constitution€orÏArticle€1,€Section€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.ñ"ñÌÌà ` àThe€United€States€Supreme€Court€addressed€a€similar€€issue€in€òòEnmund€v.Ð  ÐFloridaóó,€458€U.S.€781,€798,€102€S.Ct.€3368,€3377€(1982),ñ)ñ׃×ñ)ññ)ñ׃×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€where€the€Courtððs€holdingÐ èà Ðprohibited€the€institution€of€the€death€penalty€on€a€non„participating€accomplice,€inÏother€words,€a€non„triggerman€could€not€receive€the€death€penalty.€€Specifically,€theÏCourt€held,€ð ðthe€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€on€one€such€as€Enmund€who.€.€.Ïdoes€not€himself€kill,€attempt€to€kill,€or€intend€that€a€killing€take€place€or€that€lethalÏforce€will€be€employedðð€is€constitutionally€prohibited.€€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó,€458€U.S.€atÐ H!@ Ð797,€102€S.Ct.€at€3376.€€The€opinion€further€held,€ð ð[t]he€focus€must€be€on€[theÏdefendantððs€personal]€culpability,€not€on€that€of€those€who€committed€the€robberyÏand€shot€the€victims,€for€we€insist€on€ððindividualized€consideration€as€a€constitutionalÏrequirement€in€imposing€the€death€sentence.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòLockett€v.€Ohioóó,€438€U.S.Ð È(À!$ Ð586,€605,€98€S.Ct.€2954,€2965€(1978)).€€ÌÌà ` àFive€years€later,€the€Court€in€òòTison€v.€Arizonaóó,€481€U.S.€137,€107€S.Ct.€1676Ð h.`'* Ð(1987),€another€felony€murder€case€based€upon€accomplice€liability,€explainedÏòòEnmundóó€to€mean€that€Enmundððs€conduct€was€too€tangential€and€attenuated€withoutÐ (2 +. Ðproof€of€intent.€The€Court€dramatically€refined€the€òòEnmundóó€intent€rule€and€held€thatÐ 4-0 Ðð ðmajor€participation€in€the€felony€committed,€combined€with€reckless€indifference€toÐ è5à.2 Ðhuman€lifeðð€demonstrated€culpability€sufficient€for€execution.€€òòTison€v.€Arizonaóó,€481Ð  ÐU.S.€at€158,€107€S.Ct.€at€1688.ñ)ñ׃ ×ñ)ññ)ñ׃×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€after€òòTisonóó,€nearly€all€defendants€convictedÐ èà Ðof€felony€murder,€both€killers€and€non„triggermen,€became€death€eligible.€€Indeed,ÌÓÓà8 ` àa€death€penalty€sentence€may€be€imposed€where€a€defendant€kills,Ïattempts€to€kill,€intends€that€a€killing€take€place,€or€that€lethal€force€willÏbe€imposed,€or€where€a€defendantððs€personal€involvement€in€theÏunderlying€felony€is€substantial€and€who€exhibits€a€reckless€disregardÏor€indifference€to€the€value€of€human€life.€€Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€817€(Tenn.€1994)€(Reid,€J.,€concurring)€(citingÐ H@  ÐòòTison€v.€Arizonaóó,€481€U.S.€at€137,€107€S.Ct.€at€1676;€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó,€458€U.S.€at€Ð (  Ð797,€192€S.Ct.€at€3377;€òòState€v.€Brannamóó,€855€S.W.2d€563,€570„571€(Tenn.€1993);Ð  ÐòòState€v.€Middlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317,€338€(Tenn.€1992)).€€Ð èà ÐÌà ` àNotwithstanding€its€expansion€of€the€òòEnmundóó€holding,€òòTisonóó€did€not€relax€theÐ ¨  Ðconstitutional€mandate€against€the€arbitrary€administration€of€the€death€penalty€and,Ïparticularly,€did€not€address€the€vicarious€application€of€aggravating€circumstances.€ÏòòBut€seeóó€òòState€v.€Tisonóó,€633€P.2d€335,€354€(Ariz.€1981),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€459€U.S.€882,Ð H!@ Ð103€S.Ct.€180€(1982)€(death€penalty€affirmed€to€nontriggerman€where€ððheinousÏatrocious€cruelðð€and€pecuniary€gain€aggravating€circumstances€applied€vicariously).ñ)ñ׃%Ð×ñ)ññ)ñ׃Ð×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р%  ÐEven€though€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€demonstrated€apparentÏreluctance€to€review€the€issue€of€vicarious€application,ñ)ñ׃1×ñ)ññ)ñ׃×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€it€has€repeatedlyÐ È(À!$ Ðemphasized€that,€to€justify€imposition€of€the€death€penalty,€capital€sentencingÏdecisions€must€be€ð ðan€òòindividualizedóó€determination€on€the€basis€of€the€òòcharacter€ofÐ èà Ðthe€individual€ò òandó ó€the€circumstances€of€the€crimeóó.ðð€€òòZant€v.€Stephensóó,€462€U.S.€862,Ð È À Ð879„880,€103€S.Ct.€2733,€2743„2744€(1983)€(first€emphasis€in€original)€(secondÏemphasis€added).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòEddings€v.€Oklahomaóó,€455€U.S.€104,€110„112,€102Ð ˆ€ ÐS.Ct.€869,€874€(1982);€€òòEnmund€v.€Floridaóó,€458€U.S.€at€798,€102€S.Ct.€at€3377;Ð h`  ÐòòLockett€v.€Ohioóó,€438€U.S.€at€601„605,€98€S.Ct.€at€2963„2965€(plurality€opinion);Ð H@  ÐòòWoodson€v.€North€Carolinaóó,€428€U.S.€280,€303„304,€96€S.Ct.€2978,€2990„2991Ð (  Ð(1976)€(plurality€opinion);€òòProffit€v.€Floridaóó,€428€U.S.€242,€258,€96€S.Ct.€2960,€2969Ð  Ð(1976).€€€The€òòEdmund„Tisonóó€holding€addresses€òòonlyóó€whether€a€non„triggerman€mayÐ èà Ðbe€sentenced€to€death;€it€does€not€address€whether€the€conduct€of€the€triggermanÏmay€be€used€to€aggravate€the€sentence€of€the€non„triggerman.€€Thus,€our€inquiryÏmust€necessarily€begin€where€òòEdmund„Tisonóó€ends.Ð ˆ€ ÐÌ€€à ` àAlthough€a€defendant€may€be€death€eligible€following€a€determination€ofÐ H!@ Ðð ðmajor€participation€combined€with€reckless€indifference€to€human€lifeðð€underÏòòEnmund„Tisonóó,€the€question€remains€whether€an€aggravating€factor€may€be€appliedÐ %  Ðvicariously€to€a€defendant€if€he€was€not€the€actor€responsible€for€the€particularÏaggravating€circumstance.€€In€this€regard,€there€is€no€Tennessee€case€that€hasÏdecided€the€issue€of€whether€a€convicted€murderer,€who€took€no€part€in€the€killingÏitself€and€was€unaware€as€to€how€it€was€to€be€accomplished,€can€be€sentenced€toÏdeath€based€upon€the€ð ðheinous,€atrocious,€and€cruelðð€aggravating€circumstance.€€InÏthe€felony€murder€context,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€impliedly€upheld€theÏvicarious€application€of€the€heinous,€atrocious,€and€cruel€aggravator.€€òòSeeóó€òòBlantonóó,Ð (2 +. Ð975€S.W.2d€at€279„280€(ððheinous€atrocious€cruelðð€factor€upheld€as€applied€toÏòòpremeditated€murderóó€convictions€based€on€sufficiency€of€evidence€despite€noÐ è5à.2 Ðevidence€that€defendant€was€perpetrator€who€inflicted€fatal€blows);€òòState€v.€Westóó,Ð È7À04 Ð767€S.W.2d€387,€389,€396„397€(Tenn.€1989),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€497€U.S.€1010,€110€S.Ct.Ð ¨9 26 Ð3254€(1990)€(aggravating€circumstances,€(i)(5),€(i)(6),€and€(i)(7),€applied€toÏdefendant€in€capital€case€based€upon€finding€of€major€participation€and€recklessÏindifference).ñ)ñ׃"×ñ)ññ)ñ׃×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€conclude€that€a€non„triggerman€defendant€can€be€heldÐ È À Ðvicariously€liable€for€an€aggravating€circumstance€following€an€òòEnmund„TisonóóÐ ¨   Ðdetermination.ÌÌà ` àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€appellant€is€death€eligible€under€òòEnmund„Tisonóó.€Ð H@  ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€762€S.W.2d€110,€120€(Tenn.€1988),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€489€U.S.Ð (  Ð1091,€109€S.Ct.€1559€(1989)€(finding€that€Eighth€Amendment€does€not€prohibitÏdeath€penalty€in€case€of€defendant€whose€participation€in€felony€resulting€in€murderÏis€major€and€whose€mental€state€is€one€of€reckless€indifference).€€The€appellantÏwillingly€and€knowingly€associated€herself€with€others€for€the€purpose€of€effecting€aÏpremeditated€murder€upon€her€husband€resulting€in€his€heinous,€atrocious,€andÏcruel€death.€€The€proof€gleaned€from€her€confession€and€testimony€of€eyewitnessesÏdemonstrated€that€she€ñ$ñcarelessly€and€ñ$ñrepeatedly€gave€several€men€large€sums€of€money€toÏeffectuate€that€criminal€purpose.€€She€supplied€these€men€with€photographs€of€herÏhusband,€his€car,€and€their€home,€as€well€as€a€diagram€of€his€parking€space€at€work.€Ð %  ÐMoreover,€she€personally€drove€her€codefendant€by€her€home€and€her€churchÏordering€him€to€make€the€crime€appear€to€be€a€burglary/robbery.€€She€gave€herÏcodefendant€a€key€to€her€house,€met€with€him€the€afternoon€of€the€murder,€and€wentÏto€church€with€her€husband€that€evening.€€The€appellant€refused€to€allow€herÏchildren€to€remain€at€church€with€their€father€to€play€basketball€that€evening;€sheÏtook€them€to€her€sisterððs€home€and€played€games€in€order€for€the€murder€to€occur.€ÏUpon€her€later€arrival€at€her€home,€despite€obvious€signs€of€the€crime,€she€allowedÏher€children€to€enter€into€the€house€to€find€their€murdered€father.€€€This€proof€evincesÏthe€appellantððs€participation€combined€with€reckless€indifference.€€Accordingly,€theÏappellant€is€death€eligible€under€òòEnmund„Tisonóó.€€Ð èà Ѐ̀à ` àEligibility€for€capital€punishment€via€vicarious€liability,€however,€is€notÐ ¨  Ðabsolute;€rather,€it€is€subject€to€statutory€limitations.€€Tennessee€has€chosen€toÏconstitutionally€narrow€the€class€of€death€eligible€defendants€by€statutorilyÏenumerating€a€number€of€specific€aggravating€circumstances€and€expresslyÏrequiring€the€finding€of€at€least€one€aggravating€circumstance€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt€before€the€death€penalty€can€be€imposed.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„Ð %  Ð203(g)€(1982);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€344.ñ)ñ׃,×ñ)ññ)ñ׃#×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€In€the€present€case,Ð è&à" Ðthe€State€must€prove€that€ð ð[t]he€òòmurderóó€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€inÐ È(À!$ Ðthat€it€involved€torture€or€depravity€of€mind.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(i)(5)Ï(emphasis€added),€in€order€to€establish€the€presence€of€the€aggravatingÐ ˆ,€%( Ðcircumstance€at€issue.€€The€plain€language€of€this€provision,€ð ðread€in€context€of€theÏentire€statute,€without€any€forced€or€subtle€construction€which€would€extend€or€limitÏits€meaning,ðð€òòsee€generallyóó€òòState€v.€Cauthernóó,€967€S.W.2d€726,€735€(Tenn.€1998),Ð È À Ðòòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„,€119€S.Ct.€414€(1998);€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€970€S.W.2d€500,Ð ¨   Ð505€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1997),€clearly€focusesÐ ˆ€ Ðòòon€the€murder€itselfóó€and€òònot€the€€defendantððs€own€actions€or€intentóó.€€òòCf.óó€òòState€v.€Hallóó,Ð h`  Ð976€S.W.2d€121,€134€(Tenn.€1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„,€119€S.Ct.€1501€(1999)Ð H@  Ð(plain€language€of€(i)(8)€aggravator,€during€defendantððs€escape€from€lawful€custody,Ïadhered€to€in€construing€legislative€intent).€€After€examination€of€this€issue,€weÏconclude€that€it€was€the€legislatureððs€intent€that€the€(i)(5)€aggravator€impute€liabilityÏupon€a€defendant€for€conduct€for€which€he€or€she€is€criminally€responsible.€€ThisÏaggravator,€by€its€plain€language,€clearly€encompasses€consideration€of€the€òònatureÐ ¨  Ðand€circumstances€of€the€crime€itselfóó,€which€would€permit€such€a€vicariousÐ ˆ€ Ðapplication.ñ)ñ׃2×ñ)ññ)ñ׃'×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòCf.óó€òòEx€parte€Bankheadóó,€585€So.€2d€at€125€(ððheinous€atrocious€cruelððÐ h` Ðaggravating€circumstance€upheld€based€on€the€manner€of€killing€and€not€onÏdefendantððs€actual€participation).€€The€emphasis€in€the€(i)(5)€aggravator€is€on€theÏòòmanner€of€killingóó,€not€on€the€defendantððs€actual€participation.€€When€the€defendantÐ %  Ðcontracts€for€another€to€commit€murder€and€that€murder€is€committed€in€a€heinous,Ïatrocious,€and€cruel€manner,€we€conclude€that€this€aggravator€may€appropriately€beÏapplied€in€imposing€a€sentence€of€death.€€We€hold€that€the€factual€application€of€the€Ìñ&ñÌñ&ñheinous,€atrocious,€and€cruel€aggravating€circumstance€is€supported€by€the€proof€inÏthis€case.€€€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€€€Ð h.`'* Їà ` àWithin€this€challenge,€the€appellant€citing€òòWade€v.€Calderonóó,€29€F.3d€1312,Ð  Ð1320€(9th€Cir.€1994),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€513€U.S.€923,€115€S.Ct.€923€(1995),€contendsÐ èà Ðthat€the€(i)(5)€aggravator€is€unconstitutionally€vague€because€it€failed€to€instruct€thatÏthe€appellant€intended€to€inflict€serious€physical€abuse.€€€First,€we€note€that€the€(i)(5)Ïaggravator€at€issue€in€this€case€does€not€contain€any€reference€to€serious€physicalÏabuse€but€is€related€to€torture€and€depravity€of€mind.€€òòCompareóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ h`  Ð39„13„204(i)(5)€(1997€&€Supp.€1998)€and€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„203(i)(5)€(1982)Ï(repealed€1989).€€Moreover,€we€are€not€bound€by€the€decisions€of€the€federal€circuitÏcourts€but€only€by€decisions€of€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€Supreme€Courts.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Middlebrooksóó,€No.€01S01„9802„CR„00017€(Tenn.€July€6,€1999)€(forÐ èà Ðpublication)€(citing€òòState€v.€McKayóó,€680€S.W.2d€447,€450€(Tenn.€1984));€òòState€v.Ð ÈÀ ÐStrouthóó,€No.€03S01„9707„CC„00079€(Tenn.€Jun.€28,€1999)€(for€publication).€Ð ¨  ÐNevertheless,€the€supreme€court€of€this€state€has€repeatedly€upheld€€the€validity€ofÏthe€(i)(5)€aggravating€circumstance€when€challenged€for€vagueness.€€òòSee€e.,g.óó,Ð h` ÐòòStrouthóó,€No.€03S01„9707„CC„00079;€òòBlantonóó,€975€S.W.2d€at€280;€òòHartman€v.€Stateóó,Ð H!@ Ð896€S.W.2d€94,€105€(Tenn.€1995);€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€815€S.W.2d€166,€181€(Tenn.Ð (#  Ð1991);€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€768€S.W.2d€239,€252€(Tenn.€1989);€òòState€v.€Barberóó,€753Ð %  ÐS.W.2d€659,€670€(Tenn.€1988).€€Additionally,€the€supreme€court€has€held€that€intentÏis€irrelevant€in€the€(i)(5)€aggravating€circumstance€because€the€focus€remains€on€the€Ìcircumstances€of€the€killing.€€òòState€v.€Carteróó,€988€S.W.2d€145,€150€(Tenn.€1999)Ð ¨* #& Ð(citing€òòBlantonóó,€975€S.W.2d€at€269).€€Accordingly,€this€issue€is€without€merit.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ˆ,€%( Ðò òñ'ñÌÌÌñ'ñÌà@ª ª ®àV.€€Unconstitutional€Duplication€of€the€Remuneration€AggravatorˆÌà ` àó óThe€appellant€argues€that€the€evidence€used€to€convict€her€as€an€accessoryÐ (2 +. Ðbefore€the€fact€to€first„degree€murder€duplicated€that€used€to€support€the€(i)(4)Ïâ âaggravating€circumstance.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„2„203(i)(4)€(1982)€(repealedÐ è5à.2 Ð1989).ñ)ñ׃(×ñ)ññ)ñ׃.×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€She€argues€that€this€duplication€of€facts€to€support€both€the€conviction€andÐ  Ðâ âthe€sentence€does€not€sufficiently€narrow€the€class€of€death€eligible€defendants€inÏviolation€of€the€8th€and€14th€Amendments€to€the€United€States€Constitution€andÏArticle€I,€ðððð€8€and€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€She€contends€that€the€(i)(4)Ïaggravating€factor€falls€under€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€317,€as€duplicating€theÐ ˆ€ Ðoffense€for€which€she€was€found€guilty.€€The€appellantððs€argument€is€misplaced€andÏfails€because€this€is€simply€not€a€òòMiddlebrooksóó€issue€as€was€stated€by€the€supremeÐ H@  Ðcourt€in€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€557€(Tenn.€1994).€€Ð (  ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant€attempts€to€distinguish€her€case€from€òòStephensonóó€on€the€basisÐ èà Ðthat€the€defendantððs€conviction€was€based€upon€only€the€elements€of€first€degreeÏmurder€and€the€(i)(4)€aggravating€circumstance€narrowed€the€class€of€death€eligibleÏdefendants€in€that€case€because€at€the€sentencing€phase€the€prosecution€had€toÏadditionally€prove€that€the€defendant€hired€someone€to€kill€her€husband.€€òòId.óó€€HerÐ h` Ðcase,€she€argues,€found€her€guilty€of€hiring€a€codefendant€to€kill€her€husband€andÏthen€was€sentenced€on€the€same€basis€without€the€prosecution€having€to€proveÏanything€else.€€However,€the€appellant€ignores€the€fact€that€not€only€wasÏStephenson€convicted€of€first€degree€murder,€his€conviction€was€also€based€uponÏthe€criminal€responsibility€statutes.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402(2).ñ)ñ׃* ×ñ)ññ)ñ׃4 ×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð È(À!$ ÐÌà ` àIn€òòStephensonóó,€the€supreme€court€held€that€the€(i)(4)€aggravator€sufficientlyÐ ˆ,€%( Ðnarrowed€those€death€eligible€defendants€because€it€provides€a€ð ðprincipled€way€inÏwhich€to€distinguish€the€cases€in€which€the€death€penalty€is€imposed€from€the€many€ñ(ñÌÐ (2 +. Ðñ(ñcases€in€which€it€is€not.€.€.€.ðð€€òòStephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€at€557.€€The€court€furtherÐ  Ðreasoned:ÌÓÓà8 ` àThe€aggravating€circumstance€„€the€defendant€employed€another€toÏcommit€the€murder€for€remuneration€or€the€promise€of€remuneration„Ïdoes€not€duplicate€the€elements€of€the€offense,€even€incorporating€theÏcriminal€responsibility€statutes.€€Constitutional€narrowing€isÏaccomplished€because€at€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€State€wasÏrequired€to€prove€that€this€defendant€hired€someone€to€kill€his€wife.€ÏòòObviously,€not€every€defendant€who€is€guilty€of€first„degree€murderÐ h`  Ðpursuant€to€the€criminal€responsibility€statutes€has€also€hired€anotherÏor€promised€to€pay€another€to€commit€the€murder.óó€€Thus,€theÐ H@  Ðaggravating€circumstance€found€by€the€jury€in€this€case€narrows€theÏclass€of€death„eligible€defendants€as€required€by€òòState€v.Ð (  ÐMiddlebrooks,€supraóó.Ð` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€557€(emphasis€added).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòRichard€H.€Austin€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9310„Ð øð ÐCR„00238€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€May€3,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,Ð ØÐ Ð(Tenn.€Nov.€6,€1995).ÌÌà ` àThe€appellant€was€convicted€of€accessory€before€the€fact€to€first„degreeÏmurder.€€Accessory€before€the€fact€was€defined€as€ð ðany€person€who€shall€feloniouslyÏmove,€incite,€counsel,€hire,€command,€or€procure€any€other€person€to€commit€aÏfelony,€is€an€accessory€before€the€fact.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„1„301€(1982)Ï(repealed€1989).ñ)ñ׃-×ñ)ññ)ñ׃8×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€This€definition€was€replaced€by€the€criminal€responsibilityÐ ø%ð! Ðprovisions€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402(2).€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€we€areÏbound€by€the€supreme€courtððs€decision€in€òòStephensonóó€that€the€(i)(4)€aggravatorÐ ¸)°"% Ðachieves€the€constitutionally€required€narrowing€of€the€death€eligible€defendantsÏeven€where€the€conviction€is€predicated€on€a€criminal€responsibility€theory.€ÏAccordingly,€this€issue€is€without€merit.€€€€€€€€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ à€€ò òà@CC®àVI.€€Reasonable€Doubt€Jury€InstructionsˆÐ 3,/ Ðà ` àó óNext,€the€appellant€challenges€the€constitutionality€of€the€reasonable€doubtÐ ø4ð-1 Ðjury€instruction€given€at€both€stages€of€the€trial€including€the€language€ð ðmoralÐ Ø6Ð/3 Ðcertaintyðð€which€he€contends€falls€below€the€requirements€of€the€Due€ProcessÏClause.€€This€argument€had€been€rejected€on€numerous€occasions.€€òòState€v.Ð èà ÐNicholsóó,€877€S.W.2d€722,€734€(Tenn.€1994),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€513€U.S.€1114,€115€S.Ct.Ð È À Ð909€(1995);€€òòPettyjohn€v.€Stateóó,€885€S.W.2d€364,€365„66€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.Ð ¨   Ðto€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Hallockóó,€875€S.W.2d€285,€294€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ˆ€ ÐApp.€1993),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòAustin€v.€Bellóó,€126€F.3dÐ h`  Ð843,€846„47€(6th€Cir.€1997),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„,€118€S.Ct.€1526€(1998).Ð H@  Ðò òÌà@Ï Ï ®àVII.€€à@@Ü Ü ìàConstitutionality€of€the€Death€Penalty€ˆÌà ` àó óThe€appellant€concedes€that€the€constitutionality€of€the€death€penalty€hasÐ èà Ðbeen€upheld€by€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court,€however,€she€raises€the€followingÏissues€in€order€to€preserve€them€for€later€review.€€The€appellant€contends€that€(1)Ïthe€death€penalty€statute€fails€to€meaningfully€narrow€the€class€of€eligibleÏdefendantsñ)ñ׃×ñ)ññ)ñ׃;×ñ)ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×;€(2)€the€prosecution€has€unlimited€discretion€in€seeking€the€deathÐ h` Ðpenalty;€(3)€the€death€penalty€is€imposed€in€a€discriminatory€manner€based€uponÏeconomics,€race,€and€geography;€(4)€there€are€no€uniform€standards€for€juryÏselection;€(5)€juries€tend€to€be€prone€to€returning€guilty€verdicts;€(6)€the€defendant€isÏdenied€the€opportunity€to€address€the€juryððs€popular€misconceptions€about€paroleÏeligibility,€cost€of€incarceration,€deterrence,€and€method€of€execution;€(7)€the€jury€isÏinstructed€it€must€unanimously€agree€to€a€life€sentence,€and€is€prevented€from€beingÏtold€the€effect€of€a€non„unanimous€verdict;€(8)€courts€fail€to€instruct€the€juries€on€theÏmeaning€and€function€of€mitigating€circumstances;€(9)€the€jury€is€deprived€of€makingÏthe€final€decision€about€the€death€penalty;€and€(10)€electrocution€is€cruel€andÏunusual€punishment.€ÌÐ 4-0 Ðà ` àThese€issues€have€repeatedly€been€rejected€by€our€supreme€court.€€òòSeeóóÐ  ÐòòState€v.€Smithóó,€893€S.W.2d€908€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Brimmeróó,€876€S.W.2d€75Ð èà Ð(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€857Ð È À ÐS.W.2d€1€(Tenn.€1993);€òòBlackóó,€815€S.W.2d€at€188„190;€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€797€S.W.2dÐ ¨   Ð589€(Tenn.€1990);€òòState€v.€Teelóó,€793€S.W.2d€236€(Tenn.€1990);€òòThompsonóó,€768Ð ˆ€ ÐS.W.2d€at€252„253.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Keenóó,€926€S.W.2d€727€(Tenn.€1994).Ð h`  ÐÌà@¢¢&®àò òVIII.€€ConclusionˆÐ (  Ðó óà ` àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€Shelby€CountyÐ  ÐCriminal€Court€denying€post„conviction€relief.ÌÌà ` àIT€IS€ORDERED€that€the€appellantððs€sentence€of€death€by€electrocution€shallÏbe€carried€out€in€the€manner€provided€by€law€on€December€10,€1999,€unlessÏotherwise€stayed€by€an€appropriate€order.ÌÓÓÌÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ________________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ________________________________________ÌNORMA€MCGEE€OGLE,€Judge€€€€Ô#†XŒçXXXn[GÝ#Ô