ÿWPCéD … 0~V 0xÔ 0kL 0k· 0š" 0~¼ 0Ñ: 0ä 0¦ï 0÷• 0 Œ 0– 01´ 0Cå 0V( 0Ï~ 0¤M 0¤ñ 0Õ 0¼X 0» 0ÙÏ 0£¨ 0£KU:î %( 0z. 0Ù¨ 1 0ä† j 0={ 0F¸ 0Pþ 1“N 0·á„˜ 0C#E_# 0}a# 0xÞ# 0V$ 0Cã$ 0’&% 0J¸% 0T& 0^V& 0h´& 0r' 0|Ž' 0† ( 0( 1· )×)n­ç) B”* 0(±*4Ù* 1uí*U ,b+ 0dŽ+ò+U,ú+w@&,U 6f,U*œ,B)Æ,DCï, AM2---¬.TÇ/[1 0@v2 D3¶2#é2É 4UÕ5*7H8*É9v~ó;vÓq= AODCÆ“C 0DYD D/D BÌDV& ÿÿ8Document[8]Document Styleà0..àà8` ..` àÌVÿÿ8Document[4]Document Styleà..àò òòò.óó€€ó óV ÿÿ8Document[6]Document Styleà8..àÌV ÿÿ8Document[5]Document Styleà0..àÌV/ÿÿ8Document[2]Document StyleÌò òÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ô€òòÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÌó óóóV& ÿÿ8Document[7]Document Styleà0..àà0` ..` àÌzU ÿÿ:Right Par[1]Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersàÐ.. àÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€ˆà°..°àà0..àÌzh ÿÿ:Right Par[2]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..ààÐ` ..øàÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ô€ˆà..àà0` ..` àÌV?ÿÿ8Document[3]Document StyleÌà..àò òÔ2Ô1.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  Ôó óz{ ÿÿ:Right Par[3]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` ààи ..P àÔ2Ô1.Ô3  Ô€ˆà` ..` àà0¸ ..¸ àÌzŽ ÿÿ:Right Par[4]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ ààÐ..¨ àÔ2Ôa.Ô3  Ô€ˆà¸ ..¸ àà0..àÌz¢ ÿÿ:Right Par[5]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààÐh..ˆàÔ2Ô(1)Ô3  Ô€ˆà..àà0h..hàÌzµ ÿÿ:Right Par[6]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààh..hààÐÀ..ààÔ2Ô(a)Ô3  Ô€ˆàh..hàà0À..ÀàÌzÇ ÿÿ:Right Par[7]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààh..hààÀ..ÀààÐ..°àÔ2Ôi)Ô3  Ô€ˆàÀ..Ààà0..àÌzÚ ÿÿ:Right Par[8]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààh..hààÀ..Ààà..ààÐp..àÔ2Ôa)Ô3  Ô€ˆà..àà0p..pàÌVXÿÿ8Document[1]Document StyleÌÔ  Ôà@ì..8àòòò òÔ  ÔÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔˆÌóóó ól2ÿÿ:Technical[5]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÔ2Ô(1)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ól2ÿÿ:Technical[6]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÔ2Ô(a)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ól/%ÿÿ:Technical[2]Technical Document StyleÌò òÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ô€òòÔ  ÔÔ  ÔóóÌà..àó ól,!ÿÿ:Technical[3]Technical Document StyleÌò òÔ2Ô1.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  Ôà..àó ól(!ÿÿ:Technical[4]Technical Document Styleò òÔ2Ôa.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  Ôà..àó ól:0ÿÿ:Technical[1]Technical Document StyleÌòòò òÔ  ÔÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÌóóà..àó ól1ÿÿ:Technical[7]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÔ2Ôi)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ól1ÿÿ:Technical[8]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÔ2Ôa)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ó<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXR& ÿÿ8BibliogrphyBibliographyà0..àà°..°àÌÌjoÿÿ4Tech InitInitialize Technical StyleÓS€   1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 þSÓØØ ÿÿCuy±ÉåTechnicalTechnical Document Style11.11.1.11.1.1.11.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1fpÿÿ2Doc InitInitialize Document StyleÓ€ÓÇÓS€ #    I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)SÓØØ !"(ÿÿ$˜˜Ìà0 àà à(ÿÿ$™™à0 àà0 àà à((ÿÿ$ššà0 àà0 àà0 àà à  ÿÿA_ekqw‡DocumentDocument StyleI.1.A.a.(1)(a)i)a)x?ãt2PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperÓÈÓÑ °ÑÑè°ÑÖ€%ÿÿÖ zÝ ƒ&ÿÿ(ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÖDXXXÔÓÈÓÒX°ÒÒ°°ÒÓÿÿÀ°œXÓß6€;''ü°ø*–d6ßß6€;''°ø*–d6ßÌÌàHHÀà1ˆÌÌàHHÀà2ˆÌÌàHHÀà3ˆÌÌàHHÀà4ˆÌÌàHHÀà5ˆÌÌàHHÀà6ˆÌÌàHHÀà7ˆÌÌàHHÀà8ˆÌÌàHHÀà9ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà10ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà11ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà12ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà13ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà14ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà15ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà16ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà17ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà18ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà19ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà20ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà21ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà22ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà23ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà24ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà25ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà26ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà27ˆÌÌàÐÐÀà28Ô  à.À+Ô(2{$¨¨Ý ƒ<!ÝÝ  Ýpÿÿ4Heading 2Underlined Heading Flush LeftòòòòÌóóóóVÿÿ4Heading 1Centered Headingà@ì..ìàòòò òˆÌÌóóó ób* ÿÿ8Bullet ListIndented Bullet Listà0..àððà0` ..` àÌ(ÿÿ$òòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó(I!2é¿$¤¤Ý ƒ<!ÝÝ  ÝÓÓÓ XÓÓ ÔþÓ€€€€€òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿCƒ‰•›£«±Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)3|x «<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXxþ6X@É“8Ç;X@ d($¡¡à~| Ôô` ÿ/0123467 ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco ÷eøùúDûUüþÓ€ < Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 dVVVV7Border 1dd€`WCþÿ << Gÿÿ #Ý ƒ<!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÔ€UÔÔ€UÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€UXÔÌÌò òApril€10,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€UôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔÓ` °˜XÓAppellant€and€Mrs.€Sanford's€grandson,€Jeffrey,€were€good€friends.Ì JÝ ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔÓ` °˜XÓOwens€lived€across€the€street€from€Sanford.€€Apparently€appellant,€VatonyaÏHollins,€and€their€baby€were€staying€with€Owens.Ì QÝ ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔÓ` °˜XÓAccording€to€the€testimony€of€Hollins€and€Owens,€an€unidentified€manÏhelped€appellant€carry€the€television€set€to€the€crack€house.Ì("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò;;;;'ÿÿdxd Ý ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔÓ` °˜XÓThis€statement€was€not€taped.€€The€officer€summarized€it€in€his€testimony.Ì ¿Ý ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔÓ` °˜XÓDuring€the€jury„out€hearing,€Inspector€Swafford€testified€that€appellant€didÏnot€appear€to€be€drunk€when€he€signed€the€waiver.€€Such€testimony€is€proper€andÏappellant€does€not€contest€its€propriety.€€Adv.€Comm.€Comments,€Tenn.€R.€Evid.Ï701.Ì KÝ ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔÓ` °˜XÓThe€prosecutor€provided€the€defense€with€a€list€of€potential€witnesses€andÏamended€that€list€at€least€once€prior€to€trial.€€Ì Ý ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔThe€record€does€not€support€a€finding€of€the€other€factors€which€supportÏconsecutive€sentences.Ì wÝ ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115€provides€guidelines€for€discretionaryÏconsecutive€sentencing€as€opposed€to€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(a)€which€provides€forÏprocedurally€mandated€consecutive€sentencing.Ì Ý ƒ<!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€CÔÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Ò€€€€€òòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€UÔThe€appellantððs€testimony€at€the€sentencing€hearing€was€in€conflict€with€theÏpresentence€report€in€many€respects,€including€criminal,€educational,€andÏemployment€history.€€Furthermore,€the€appellant,€during€cross„examination,€refusedÏto€answer€questions€involving€the€offense€for€which€he€was€convicted,€invoking€hisÏFifth€Amendment€right€on€advice€of€counsel.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA:Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA:Op Monaco Ò€`‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ<!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€CÔÓ&€RRX„d&ÓÑ#€RRXd#ÑÔ€TÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Ñ7€ßùXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ  ÑÔ€UÔÌÌÙ€€Ùò òœßL€XYW;+'h|­` Å `€€Lß›à@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINALÏAPPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌ€à@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌà@ àSEPTEMBER€SESSION,€1994Ìó óÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)à àNo.€03C01„9404„CR„00153Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àAppellee€à àà àà à)à àHamilton€CountyÌà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Ìv.à àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Russell€C.€Hinson,€Judge€€€€Ïà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌò òLEONARD€LEBRON€ROSSó ó,à à)à à(Especially€Aggravated€Robbery,Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Attempted€Second€Degree€Murder,Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)à à€Burglary)ÌÌà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àòòà àFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌLarry€G.€Roddyà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌAttorney€at€Law€€€€€à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ723€McCallie€Avenue€€€€€€€€à àà àÌChattanooga,€TN€€37403„0016à àà àRebecca€L.€GundtÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€D.€GerbitzÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€H.€Cox,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDavid€W.€Denny€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€AttorneysÌà àà àà àà àà àà à600€Market€Street,€Suite€310Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àChattanooga,€TN€€37402Ìà àà àà àÌà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€__________________________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€ÌÌDavid€G.€HayesÌó óJudgeÌÌÇÌÌÌÌà@ àò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌÓ` °‚X˜XÓÓÓÌÓ ` °¸ ŠXØ'X Óà àOn€October€5,€1993,€a€jury€convicted€appellant,€Leonard€Lebron€Ross,€ofÏespecially€aggravated€robbery,€attempted€second€degree€murder,€and€burglary.€ÏAs€a€Range€I€offender,€appellant€was€sentenced€to€twenty„two€years€forÏespecially€aggravated€robbery,€ten€years€for€attempted€second€degree€murder,Ïand€three€years€for€burglary.€€The€trial€court€ordered€that€the€sentences€beÏserved€consecutively.ÌÌà àIn€addition€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€appellant€raises€four€issuesÏon€appeal:ÌÓÓà à1.à8 àthe€admissibility€of€appellant's€first€statement€to€theÏpolice;ÌÌà à2.à8 àthe€denial€of€defendant's€motion€for€continuanceÏwhen€a€co„defendant€was€added€as€a€witness€on€theÏday€of€trial;ÌÌà à3.à8 àthe€admissibility€of€a€letter€written€by€appellant€to€aÏco„defendant;€andÌÌà à4.à8 àthe€correctness€of€the€sentences€imposed.ÌÌÌÓÓAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àAt€trial,€the€state€presented€evidence€to€prove€that€appellant,€his€aunt,ÏNovella€Owens,€and€Vatonya€Hollins,€his€girlfriend,€had€brutally€beaten€andÍrobbed€an€elderly€woman€of€her€television€set€in€order€to€buy€a€rock€of€crackÏcocaine.€€In€the€early€morning€hours€of€January€4,€1993,€Mrs.€Mary€Sanford,€aÏseventy„nine€year€old€great„grandmother€was€sleeping€in€her€arm€chair€whenÏshe€was€roused€by€crashing€sounds.€€Moments€later,€a€man€appeared€in€theÏkitchen€doorway.€€At€first€the€intruder€called€her€"grandmama,"€€but€when€Mrs.ÏSanford€denied€that€he€was€her€grandson,€the€man€told€her€that€"Jeffrey"€was€inÏthe€kitchen.× ƒZ ××  ×€€Puzzled,€Mrs.€Sanford€called€to€her€grandson€and€then€got€up€toÏsee€where€he€was.€€ÌÌà àWhen€she€entered€the€kitchen,€a€woman€attacked€Mrs.€Sanford€with€aÏhammer,€striking€her€repeatedly€on€the€head.€€Mrs.€Sanford€fought€back€andÏkept€calling€for€help.€€Eventually,€the€woman,€whom€Mrs.€Sanford€later€identifiedÏas€Novella€Owens,€wrestled€her€to€the€floor.× ƒ\ ××  ×€€In€the€struggle,€a€chair€and€a€mopÏpail€were€overturned.€€When€Mrs.€Sanford€continued€to€scream,€OwensÏattempted€to€stifle€her€screams€with€a€pillow.€€Just€before€she€passed€out,€Mrs.ÏSanford€felt€a€man's€hands€between€her€thighs€and€Owens'€hands€squeezingÏher€throat.€She€passed€out€for€some€time€and€when€she€regainedÏconsciousness,€the€intruders€were€gone.€€The€only€missing€item€was€a€19"€colorÏportable€television€set€and€its€remote€control.ÌÌà àMrs.€Sanford€was€in€the€bathroom€attempting€to€wipe€the€blood€off€herÏhead€and€face€when€the€three€intruders€returned.€€Co„defendant€HollinsÏattempted€to€help€Mrs.€Sanford€by€wiping€her€head€with€a€damp€towel.€€TheÏman,€whom€Mrs.€Sanford€was€unable€to€identify,€began€searching€through€herÏdresser€for€money.€€He€told€her€that€if€she€would€give€him€five€dollars€he€wouldÏget€her€a€taxi€or€find€another€way€to€take€her€to€the€hospital.€€€ÌÌà àMrs.€Sanford€refused€to€give€him€anything€and€told€the€three€that€sheÏwould€"just€appreciate€it€if€you„all€would€just€go€on€and€leave€me€alone."€€AfterÏthey€had€gone,€she€called€911.€€Shortly€thereafter,€the€police€located€appellant,ÏHollins,€and€Owens€across€the€street€at€Owens'€apartment.€€ÌÌà àHollins€and€Owens€entered€guilty€pleas€on€the€day€of€trial€and€bothÏtestified€for€the€state.€€According€to€their€testimony,€the€three€co„defendants€hadÏspent€the€night€drinking,€playing€cards,€and€smoking€crack€cocaine.€€When€theyÏran€out€of€crack,€appellant€suggested€they€rob€somebody€to€get€something€toÏtrade€for€drugs.€€The€three€crossed€the€street€where€appellant€used€a€hammer€toÏbreak€open€the€back€door€of€Mrs.€Sanford's€apartment.€€Owens€admitted€thatÏshe€took€the€hammer€and€struck€Mrs.€Sanford€two€or€three€times€on€the€headÏwhile€appellant€was€disconnecting€the€television€set.€€According€to€Owens,Ïwhen€the€victim€continued€to€scream€and€struggle,€appellant€handed€her€a€sofaÏpillow€to€muffle€Mrs.€Sanford's€screams.€€When€she€told€appellant€she€couldn'tÏdo€it,€he€said,€"I'll€calm€her€down,"€and€stuck€his€hand€between€her€thighs.€€€ÌÌà àAppellant€then€carried€the€television€set€from€Mrs.€Sanford's€house€to€aÏcrack€house€a€couple€of€blocks€away€where€he€traded€it€for€a€single€rock€ofÏcocaine€which€he€and€the€two€women€smoked.× ƒ^ ××  ×€€€Once€the€crack€was€gone,€theÏthreesome€returned€to€Sanford's€house.€€However,€nothing€more€was€taken,Ïand€the€three€eventually€left.€ÌÌà àThe€only€physical€evidence€tying€appellant€to€the€scene€was€a€singleÏlatent€fingerprint€found€on€a€plastic€watch€case€sitting€on€Mrs.€Sanford's€dresser.€ÏA€fingerprint€identification€expert€testified€that€the€latent€print€matched€the€inkedÏprint€of€appellant's€right€ring€finger.€€The€police€also€found€bloody€footprintsÏleaving€the€victim's€back€door.€€The€prints€matched€the€shoes€worn€by€HollinsÏand€Owens.€€Traces€of€the€victim's€blood€were€found€on€those€shoes.€ÏAppellant's€shoes,€however,€were€clean.€€€€€ÌÌà àWhen€the€police€found€appellant€at€his€aunt's€apartment,€he€gave€a€falseÏname€and€denied€any€knowledge€of€the€robbery.€€At€the€police€station€he€madeÏa€statement€in€which€he€gave€his€correct€name€but€claimed€that€he€had€takenÏthe€baby€to€school€at€about€6:30€a.m.€and€could€not€have€participated€in€anyÏbreak„in€at€Mrs.€Sanford's.× ƒd ××  ×€€The€next€day€appellant€made€a€second€statementÍin€which€he€said€that€Owens€had€wakened€he€and€Vatonya€from€a€sound€sleepÏand€told€them€that€she€had€robbed€and€beaten€Mrs.€Sanford.€€They€had€thenÏhurried€across€the€street€to€assist€the€victim.€€While€he€was€in€the€victim'sÏbedroom,€he€tried€to€find€some€money€for€cab€fare€to€take€her€to€the€emergencyÏroom.€€Appellant€did€not€testify,€but€the€second€statement€was€read€into€theÏrecord.ÌÌÌà@ àò òSufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óà àÌÌà àWhen€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged€the€standard€forÏreview€by€an€appellate€court€is,€whether€after€considering€the€evidence€in€theÏlight€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€foundÏthe€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.ÏVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.Ï1985);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€ÌÌà àAppellant€was€tried€and€convicted€by€a€jury.€€A€guilty€verdict€from€the€jury,Ïapproved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€state's€witnesses€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,Ï410€(Tenn.€1983);€òòState€v.€Hatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€627,€630€(Tenn.€1978).€€OnÏappeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€andÍall€reasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.ÏCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€836€(Tenn.€1978).ÌÌà àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€should€notÏreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€€òòIdóó.€€Nor€may€this€court€substitute€itsÏinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€the€evidence.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,Ï286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(Tenn.€1956);€òòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€51€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1978).ÌÌà àIn€this€instance,€the€jury€resolved€the€conflicting€evidence€in€favor€of€theÏstate.€€While€it€is€true€that€Mrs.€Sanford€was€unable€to€identify€appellant€as€theÏman€who€stole€her€television,€the€jury€chose€to€accredit€his€co„defendant'sÏconsistent€and€compelling€testimony€rather€than€appellant's€self„serving€andÏincredible€statements.€€Although€appellant's€shoes€did€not€match€the€bloodyÏfootprints€at€the€scene,€his€fingerprint€was€found€on€a€plastic€watch€case€on€theÏvictim's€bedroom€dresser.€€While€appellant€claimed€that€he€was€unable€to€carryÏthe€television€set€for€any€distance€because€of€an€impaired€right€arm,€the€jury,€byÏits€verdict,€rejected€that€argument€and€must€have€concluded€that€appellant€wasÏassisted€by€an€unidentified€third€man.€€The€evidence€presented€at€trial€wasÏsufficient€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€to€conclude€that€appellant€was€guilty€of€theÏcrimes€for€which€he€was€convicted€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€ÌÌÌà@ àò òAdmissibility€of€Appellant's€First€Statementó óÌÌà àAppellant€contends€that€his€so„called€"first"€statement€was€made€toÏInspector€Larry€Swafford€of€the€Chattanooga€Police€Department€while€he€wasÏseriously€intoxicated€and,€therefore,€was€not€the€product€of€a€rational€intellectÏand€free€will.€€òòTownsend€v.€Sainóó,€372€U.S.€293€(1963);€òòVandegriff€v.€Stateóó,€409ÏS.W.2d€370€(Tenn.€1966).€€In€this€untaped€conversation,€appellant€admitted€heÏhad€originally€given€the€police€a€false€name€and€claimed€that€he€had€taken€hisÏbaby€to€school€that€morning€at€about€6:30.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€held€a€jury„out€hearing€to€determine€the€admissibility€ofÏappellant's€statements.€€Inspector€Swafford€conceded€that€appellant€had€beenÏdrinking€at€the€time€of€the€interview,€but€stated€that€appellant€was€not€drunk.€€ÏThe€inspector€read€appellant€his€rights.€€According€to€the€police€officer'sÏtestimony,€appellant€appeared€to€understand€those€rights€and€signed€a€waiver.€€€€ÌÌà àA€waiver€must€be€made€"voluntarily,€knowingly,€and€intelligently"€to€beÏvalid.€€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€444€(1966).€The€state€has€the€burdenÏof€showing€voluntariness€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Kellyóó,Ï603€S.W.2d€726,€728€(Tenn.€1980).€€Further,€waiver€is€to€be€determined€byÏconsidering€the€totality€of€the€circumstances.€€òòState€v.€Bentonóó,€759€S.W.2d€427,Ï431„32€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€ÌÌ€€€€€€€On€appeal,€this€court€is€bound€to€accept€the€trial€court's€factual€findings€withÏreference€to€compliance€with€òòMirandaóó,€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÏagainst€them.€€òòState€v.€Kellyóó,€603€S.W.2d€at€729.€€Intoxication€or€mentalÏunsoundness€does€not€render€a€confession€invalid,€if€the€evidence€shows€thatÏthe€confessor€was€capable€of€understanding€and€waiving€his€or€her€rights.€ÏòòState€v.€Bellóó,€690€S.W.2d€879,€882€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,Ï(Tenn.€1985);€òòState€v.€Greenóó,€613€S.W.2d€229,€233€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980),Ïòòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1981).€€If€a€defendant€understands€his€or€herÏrights€and€is€capable€of€making€a€narrative€of€past€events,€the€use€of€alcoholÏdoes€not€prevent€the€admission€of€the€statement.€€òòState€v.€Michael€Abernathyóó,ÏNo.€03C01„9111„CR„00372,€slip€op.€at€13€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Oct.€2,Ï1992),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1992).€ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€appellant€was€properly€advised€of€his€rights,€had€theÏcapacity€to€understand€those€rights,€and€was€not€coerced.€€The€evidence€doesÏnot€preponderate€against€the€trial€court's€determination€that€appellant€made€aÏknowing,€voluntary,€and€intelligent€waiver€of€his€rights.€Therefore,€this€court€willÏnot€disturb€the€trial€court's€finding€€that€the€statement€was€admissible.ÌÌà àIn€conjunction€with€his€argument€that€the€statement€was€involuntary,Ïappellant€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€Inspector€SwaffordÏto€testify€to€the€ultimate€issue€of€voluntariness€of€the€statement€in€front€of€the€jury.€ÏHowever,€appellant's€brief€does€not€cite€to€any€statement€by€the€officer€in€front€ofÍthe€jury€that€relates€to€the€voluntariness€of€the€first€statement,€and€our€review€ofÏthe€record€has€failed€to€discover€one.× ƒe ××  ×€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌà@ àò òDenial€of€Continuanceó óÌÌà àOn€the€morning€of€trial,€appellant's€two€co„defendants€accepted€pleaÏbargains€offered€by€the€state€in€exchange€for€their€testimony€at€trial.€€During€theÏcourse€of€the€plea€bargaining€session,€defense€counsel€learned€for€the€first€timeÏthat€Novella€Owens€would€testify€that€appellant€had€handed€her€a€pillow€to€stifleÏthe€victim's€screams.€€Because€Owens€had€never€been€identified€by€the€state€asÏa€possible€witness€and€because€of€the€new€information,€defense€counselÏmoved€for€a€continuance.€€Appellant€appeals€the€trial€court's€refusal€to€grant€aÏcontinuance.ÌÌà àThe€state€contends€that€this€issue€has€been€waived€since€appellant€failedÏto€raise€it€in€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€Although€the€fourth€issue€in€the€motion€forÏnew€trial€alludes€to€the€addition€of€witnesses€not€listed€in€the€indictment,€noÏissue€is€raised€respecting€the€trial€court's€denial€of€a€motion€to€continue.€€ÌÌà àAs€a€general€rule,€appellate€review€is€limited€to€issues€that€are€properlyÏpreserved€for€review€in€the€trial€court,€contained€in€a€motion€for€new€trial,€andÏproperly€presented€for€review€in€this€court.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e),€13(b),Ï27(a)(4),€&€36(b).€€However,€this€court€may,€in€the€exercise€of€its€discretionÏconsider€an€issue€that€has€been€waived€or€not€presented€for€review€to€preventÏneedless€litigation,€to€prevent€injury€to€the€interests€of€the€public,€to€preventÏprejudice€to€the€judicial€process,€or€to€do€substantial€justice.€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï13(b);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).€€We€elect€to€address€this€issue€on€it€merits.ÌÌà àThe€granting€of€a€continuance€rests€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trialÏcourt.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€825€S.W.2d€113,€117€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóóÏòòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1992).€€An€appellate€court€may€reverse€only€if€the€denialÏwas€an€abuse€of€discretion,€and€a€different€result€might€reasonably€have€beenÏreached€had€the€continuance€been€granted.€€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,Ï257€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1990).€€In€this€instance,Ïdenying€the€continuance€would€have€been€an€abuse€of€discretion€if€admissionÏof€Owens'€testimony€without€a€continuance€were€error€and€if€appellant€wasÏprejudiced€by€its€admission.ÌÌà àAppellant€contends€that€Tennessee€law€requires€the€district€attorneyÏgeneral€to€list€on€the€indictment€the€names€of€witnesses€who€may€be€called€toÏtestify.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40„17„106€provides€that:ÌÓÓà8 àIt€is€the€duty€of€the€district€attorney€general€to€endorse€on€eachÏindictment€or€presentment,€at€the€term€at€which€the€same€is€found,Ïthe€names€of€such€witnesses€as€he€intends€shall€be€summoned€inÏthe€cause,€and€sign€his€name€thereto.ÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„17„106€(1990€Repl.)ÌÌÌÓÓà àHowever,€it€is€well€settled€in€Tennessee€that€this€provision€is€directive,Ïrather€than€mandatory.€€òòState€v.€Melsonóó,€638€S.W.2d€342€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,Ï459€U.S.€1137€(1982);€òòState€v.€Crabtreeóó,€655€S.W.2d€173€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1983);€òòState€v.€Robersonóó,€644€S.W.2d€696€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóóÏòòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1983);€òòThomas€v.€Stateóó,€465€S.W.2d€887€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1970),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1971).€€The€purpose€of€the€statute€is€to€preventÏsurprise€or€ambush€which€would€effectively€cripple€a€defendant's€ability€to€planÏan€adequate€defense.€€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€634€S.W.2d€639,€643€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Ïòòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1982).€€The€failure€to€list€or€provide€names€ofÏwitnesses€neither€disqualifies€the€witness€nor€entitles€defendant€to€relief,€unlessÏprejudice€can€be€shown.€€òòState€v.€Morrisóó,€750€S.W.2d€746,€749€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1987),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988).€€ÌÌà àWhen€the€state€adds€witnesses€to€the€list€on€the€indictment€andÏdefendant€alleges€an€insufficient€opportunity€to€interview€the€witnesses,€the€trialÏcourt€must€determine€whether€a€continuance€is€required€to€avoid€unfairÏprejudice.€€òòState€v.€Crabtreeóó,€655€S.W.2d€at€177.€€The€decision€to€allow€aÏwitness€to€testify€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€òòMcBee€v.€Stateóó,Ï372€S.W.2d€173,€179€(Tenn.€1963);€òòState€v.€Jackie€Ray€Coffman€and€GeorgeÍJonesóó,€No.€03C01„9203„CR„00065,€slip€op.€at€8„9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,ÏJan.€7,€1993),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1993);€òòState€v.€Carl€Lambertóó,€No.Ï114,€slip€op.€at€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Feb.€13,€1991),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóóÏòòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1991);€òòState€v.€Lavely€Brownóó,€No.€1278,€slip€op.€at€4€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Knoxville,€Aug.€8,€1990),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1990).ÌÌ€€à àWhere€there€is€no€surprise,€prejudice,€or€disadvantage€by€reason€of€theÏdelay€in€identifying€a€witness,€the€trial€court€may€properly€admit€the€testimony€ofÏwitnesses€even€though€their€names€were€omitted€from€the€indictment.€€òòState€v.ÏCraftóó,€743€S.W.2d€203,€204€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.Ï1987);€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€634€S.W.2d€at€643;€òòState€v.€Lawrence€Eugene€Gossóó,€No.Ï54,€slip€op.€at€11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€July€13,€1990),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóóÏòòdeniedóó,€(Tenn€1990).ÌÌà àIn€this€instance,€the€three€defendants€were€indicted€separately;€however,Ïa€single€indictment€bearing€three€names€and€three€docket€numbers€wasÏreturned€on€each€count.€€None€of€the€indictments€contained€a€list€of€potentialÏwitnesses.× ƒf ××  ×€€ÌÌà àOur€review€of€Tennessee€case€law€indicates€that€trial€courts€generallyÏensure€that€defense€counsel€has€the€opportunity€to€interview€and€evaluate€theÍtestimony€of€any€witness€added€on€the€brink€of€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Olen€"Eddie"ÏHutchisonóó,€No.€03S01„9108„CR„00078€(Tenn.,€Knoxville,€June€7,€1994);€òòStateÏv.€Crabtreeóó,€655€S.W.2d€173€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983);€òòState€v.€Gilbertóó,€612ÏS.W.2d€188€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1981);€ÏòòThomas€v€Stateóó,€465€S.W.2d€887€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1970),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.Ï1971);€òòState€v.€Barry€Dewayne€Andersonóó,€No.€01C01„9212„CR„00376€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Nashville,€Sept.€16,€1993),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994);ÏòòState€v.€Burl€Lakinsóó,€No.€32€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€May,€24,€1991);€òòStateÏv.€Eddie€Lee€Curtisóó,€No.€1163€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Oct.€5,€1990),€òòpermóó.Ïòòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990);€òòState€v.€Michael€Leon€Gradyóó,€No.€277€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€June€20,€1990),€€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1990);ÏòòState€v.€James€Edward€Johnson€and€Jerry€Hodgeóó,€No.€1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Mar.Ï23,€1988).ÌÌà àHowever,€when€defense€counsel€was€or€should€have€been€aware€of€theÏpossibility€of€a€witness€testifying€and€when€the€substance€of€the€testimony€wasÏavailable€to€the€defense,€Tennessee€courts€have€not€hesitated€to€admit€theÏtestimony.€€òòState€v.€Morrisóó,€750€S.W.2d€746€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóóÏòòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988)€(witnesses€were€"close€to€the€case"€andÏappearance€was€expected);€òòState€v.€Robersonóó,€644€S.W.2d€696€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1982),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1983)€(defense€aware€of€witnessÏand€his€testimony€at€preliminary€hearing);€òòState€v.€Gilbertóó,€612€S.W.2d€188Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1981)€(testimony€wasÍsubstantially€similar€to€listed€witness);€òòThomas€v.€Stateóó,€465€S.W.2d€887€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1970),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1971)€(defendant€was€well„informed€as€toÏco„defendant's€knowledge€of€the€offense);€òòState€v.€Lawrence€Eugene€Gossóó,€No.Ï54€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€July€13,€1990),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.Ï1990)€(testimony€of€forensic€pathologist€required€by€death€of€medical€examiner);ÏòòState€v.€Patricia€Waltonóó,€No.€03C01„9205„CR„156€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,ÏDec.€17,€1992)€(identification€of€illicit€substance€expected€in€drug€case).ÌÌà àIn€this€instance,€the€state€failed€to€comply€with€the€statute.€€However,Ïdefense€counsel€was€certainly€aware€that,€if€a€plea€bargain€were€reached,ÏNovella€Owens€might€testify€for€the€state.€€Defense€counsel€was€a€party€to€theÏplea€negotiations€and€became€aware€that€Owens€would€testify€at€the€same€timeÏthe€state€knew.€€Pre„trial,€Owens€had€not€been€unavailable€to€the€defense.€€SheÏcould€have€been€interviewed€at€any€time.€€In€fact,€the€prosecutor€pointed€out€thatÏdefense€access€to€Owens€was€better€than€his€had€been.€€Defense€counsel€didÏnot€disagree.€€ÌÌà àNothing€in€the€record€indicates€that€Owens€refused€to€talk€to€appellant'sÏcounsel€or€that€she€had€invented€the€story€about€the€pillow€at€the€last€moment.€€IfÏappellant€was€"surprised"€by€Owens'€testimony€at€trial,€the€surprise€was€of€hisÏown€making.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a).€€Technical€noncompliance€with€theÏdirective€statute,€under€these€circumstances,€did€not€justify€a€continuance€orÏdisqualification€of€the€witness.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Crabtreeóó,€655€S.W.2d€at€177.ÌÌà àMoreover,€we€find€nothing€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€appellant€wasÏunfairly€disadvantaged€at€trial.€€Defense€counsel€had€full€opportunity€to€cross„examine€Owens€rigorously.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Morrisóó,€750€S.W.2d€at€749;€òòThomas€v.ÏStateóó,€465€S.W.2d€at€890.€€Nothing€in€the€record€indicates€that€appellant€couldÏhave€changed€his€defense€strategy€with€earlier€notice€or€that€he€could€haveÏproduced€evidence€to€refute€Owens'€statements.€€Statements€made€by€Mrs.ÏSanford€and€co„defendant€Hollins€corroborated€much€of€Owens'€testimony.€€TheÏrecord€does€not€show€that€appellant€was€placed€in€a€less€favorable€position€byÏthe€late€announcement€than€he€would€have€been€had€Owens'€name€been€listedÏas€a€witness€on€the€indictment€or€had€the€continuance€been€granted.ÌÌà àA€denial€of€a€continuance€is€an€abuse€of€discretion€if€the€"defendant€hasÏbeen€deprived€of€his€[or€her]€rights€and€an€injustice€done."€€òòState€v.€Goodmanóó,Ï643€S.W.2d€375,€378€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1982).€ÏA€reversal€is€required€if€appellant€"did€not€have€a€fair€trial€òòandóó€[if]€a€differentÏresult€would€or€might€reasonably€have€been€reached€had€there€been€a€differentÏdisposition."€€òòIdóó.€(emphasis€in€original).€€Nothing€indicates€that€appellant€did€notÏreceive€a€fair€trial€or€that€the€granting€of€a€continuance€might€reasonably€haveÏresulted€in€a€different€outcome€of€the€case.€€Therefore,€we€find€no€abuse€ofÏdiscretion€in€denying€the€continuance.€€ÌÌÌà@ àò òLay€Witness€Identification€of€Defendant's€Handwritingó óÌÌà àThe€state€introduced€a€letter€received€by€co„defendant€Hollins€to€proveÏthat€appellant€had€instructed€her€to€lie€at€trial.€€On€appeal,€appellant€contendsÏthat€the€letter€was€not€properly€authenticated,€as€there€was€no€showing€thatÏHollins€was€familiar€with€his€handwriting.€€We€respectfully€disagree.ÌÌà àA€lay€witness€must€be€familiar€with€the€signature€and€handwriting€of€theÏmaker€by€personal€experience€in€order€to€identify€the€maker€of€a€handwriting.€ÏTenn.€R.€Evid.€901(b)(2);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€70€(Tenn.€1992).€ÏHollins€had€lived€with€appellant€for€two€years€prior€to€her€arrest.€€She€testifiedÏthat€they€had€written€each€other€numerous€letters€while€in€jail.€€She€positivelyÏidentified€the€handwriting€as€that€of€appellant.€ÌÌà àA€witness'€competency€to€identify€particular€handwriting€is€a€matter€withinÏthe€trial€judge's€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€at€70.€€There€was€noÏabuse€of€discretion€in€allowing€Hollins€to€give€her€opinion€that€the€letter€was€inÏappellant's€handwriting.€€The€letter€was€properly€authenticated€pursuant€to€RuleÏ901(b)(2)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence.ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òConsecutive€Sentencingóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences€inÏhis€case€is€contrary€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115€(1990)€and€results€in€aÏsentence€that€is€disproportionate€to€the€crime,€his€age,€and€his€prior€record.€€TheÏState€concedes€that€the€trial€court€improperly€applied€one€factor,€but€argues€thatÏthe€record€supports€a€finding€that€the€appellant€is€a€dangerous€offender€and€thatÏconfinement€for€thirty„five€years€is€necessary€to€protect€the€public.€€For€theÏreasons€discussed€below,€we€affirm€the€appellant's€consecutive€sentences€ofÏtwenty„two€years€for€especially€aggravated€robbery,€ten€years€for€attemptedÏsecond€degree€murder,€and€three€years€for€simple€burglary.ÌÌà àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range€or€manner€of€service€of€aÏsentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€with€aÏpresumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)(1990).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€upon€theÏaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingÏprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€Sentencing€Commission€CommentsÏprovide€that€the€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€the€impropriety€of€theÏsentence.ÌÌà àOur€review€requires€an€analysis€of€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€atÏthe€trial€and€sentencing€hearing;€€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€ofÏsentencing€and€the€arguments€of€counsel€relative€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)Íthe€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)€any€mitigating€or€enhancingÏfactors;€(6)€any€statements€made€by€a€defendant€on€his€or€her€own€behalf;€andÏ(7)€defendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€&€„210€(1990€&€1994€Supp.);€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,Ï863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€applied€three€enhancement€factors,€presumably€to€eachÏoffense:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)à àprevious€history€of€criminal€behavior€in€addition€toÏthat€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range;€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1)€(1994€Supp.);ÌÌ(2)à àleader€in€the€commission€of€the€offense;€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(2)€(1994€Supp.);€andÌÌ(3)à àvictim€was€particularly€vulnerable€because€of€ageÏand€physical€disability;€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4)Ï(1994€Supp.).ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓEvidence€in€the€record€supports€applicability€of€these€factors.€€The€trial€courtÏfound€no€mitigating€factors,€nor€do€we.€€Based€on€our€review€of€the€entire€record,Ïwe€conclude€that€the€appellant's€sentences€are€justified.ÌÌà àWith€respect€to€consecutive€sentencing,€the€trial€court€found€thatÏconsecutive€sentencing€is€appropriate€since€the€appellant€had€committed€theÏcrime€while€he€was€on€probation€and€since€he€was€a€dangerous€offender€asÏdefined€by€statute.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115€(b)(4)€&€(6).€€The€appellantÍcontends€that€the€resulting€thirty„five€year€sentence€is€disproportionate€and€thatÏthe€multiple€conviction€factors€were€inappropriately€applied.ÌÌà àConsecutive€sentencing€may€be€imposed€in€the€discretion€of€the€trialÏcourt€upon€a€determination€that€one€or€more€of€the€following€criteria€exist:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)à àThe€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€hasÏknowingly€devoted€himself€to€criminal€acts€as€a€majorÏsource€of€livelihood;ÌÌ(2)à àThe€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€ofÏcriminal€activity€is€extensive;ÌÌ(3)€€à àThe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentally€abnormalÏperson€so€declared€by€a€competent€psychiatrist€whoÏconcludes€as€a€result€of€an€investigation€prior€to€sentencingÏthat€the€defendant's€criminal€conduct€has€beenÏcharacterized€by€a€pattern€of€repetitive€or€compulsiveÏbehavior€with€heedless€indifference€to€consequences;ÌÌ(4)à àThe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whoseÏbehavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€and€noÏhesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€toÏhuman€life€is€high;ÌÌ(5)à àThe€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€moreÏstatutory€offenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor€withÏconsideration€of€the€aggravating€circumstances€arising€fromÏthe€relationship€between€the€defendant€and€victim€orÏvictims,€the€time€span€of€defendant's€undetected€sexualÏactivity,€the€nature€and€scope€of€the€sexual€acts€and€theÏextent€of€the€residual,€physical€and€mental€damage€to€theÏvictim€or€victims;ÌÌ(6)à àThe€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offense€committedÏwhile€on€probation;€orÌÌ(7)à àThe€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b).€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32.ÌÌà àThe€State€concedes€and€we€agree€that,€since€the€appellant€was€notÏsentenced€to€probation€until€March€3,€1993,€this€factor€is€inapplicable€inÏsentencing€for€a€crime€committed€prior€to€that€date.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(6).€€We€must€now€determine€whether€consecutive€sentences€are€justifiedÏbecause€the€appellant€is€a€dangerous€offender.× ƒg ××  ×€à àÌÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€enhancing€hisÏsentences€and€ordering€them€to€be€served€based€upon€the€same€criteria.€€ThisÏargument€has€been€rejected€by€this€court€on€several€occasions.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòStateÏv.€Meeksóó,€867€361€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1993).ÌÌà àWe€also€conclude€that€consecutive€sentences€were€proper€in€this€case.€ÏAn€accused€qualifies€as€a€ð ðdangerous€offenderðð€when€his€ð ðbehavior€indicatesÏlittle€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€òòandóó€[he€has]€no€hesitation€about€committing€aÏcrime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(4).€€This€language€is€essentially€a€codification€of€our€supreme€courtððsÏholding€in€òòGray€v.€Stateóó,€538€S.W.2d€391,€393€(Tenn.€1976).€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.ÏWilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€938€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€òòGrayóó,€our€supreme€courtÏqualified€this€classification€by€requiring€the€court€to€find€aggravating€factorsÍpresent€before€a€defendant€may€be€classified€as€a€ð ðdangerous€offender.ðð€€òòGrayóó,Ï538€S.W.2d€at€393.ÌÌà àIn€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€933,€our€supreme€court€reaffirmedÏthese€principles€and€provided€additional€guidelines€for€finding€a€defendant€toÏbe€a€ð ðdangerous€offender.ðð€€The€court€held€that€proof€that€a€defendant€was€aÏð ðdangerous€offender,ðð€standing€alone,€was€not€enough€to€sustain€the€impositionÏof€consecutive€sentences.€€òòIdóó.€at€938.€€Consequently,€under€òòWilkersonóó,€beforeÏthe€sentencing€court€may€discretionarily€impose€consecutive€sentences€for€oneÏclassified€as€a€ð ðdangerous€offender,ðð€the€following€criteria€must€be€met:€€€€ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)€the€defendantððs€ð ðbehavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€forÏhuman€life,€and€[he€has]€no€hesitation€about€committing€aÏcrime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high;ððÌÌ(2)€aggravating€factors€must€be€present;ÌÌ(3)€the€terms€imposed€are€reasonably€related€to€the€severityÏof€the€offenses€committed;ÌÌ(4)€consecutive€sentences€are€necessary€in€order€to€protectÏthe€public€from€further€criminal€acts€by€the€offender;€andÌÌ(5)€€the€sentence€is€in€accordance€with€the€principles€setÏforth€in€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act.ÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓ€òòIdóó.× ƒh ××  ×€ÌÌà àUpon€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€that€the€appellantÏmeets€these€requirements.€€First,€the€appellant€acted€with€ð ðlittle€or€no€regard€forÏhuman€lifeðð€and€he€did€not€hesitate€ð ðabout€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€riskÏto€human€life€is€high.ðð€€The€record€reflects€that€the€appellant€and€his€co„defendants€were€willing€to€trade€the€life€of€an€elderly€woman€for€a€single€rock€ofÏcrack€cocaine.€€Second,€there€are€aggravating€circumstances€present.€€The€trialÏcourt€found€the€appellant€to€be€the€leader€in€the€commission€of€the€offenses.€ÏThe€appellant€and€his€co„defendants€inflicted€multiple€blows€with€a€hammer€toÏthe€head€and€face€of€the€victim,€smothered€her€with€a€pillow,€and€left€her€forÏdead.€€The€victim€of€the€brutal€assault€was€seventy„nine€years€old.€€She€stillÏsuffers€from€dizziness€and€blackouts,€and€requires€surgery€on€her€broken€finger.€ÏShe€has€moved€from€her€residence€for€her€protection.€€These€circumstances€areÏbeyond€those€necessary€to€commit€the€crimes€for€which€the€defendant€wasÏconvicted.€€Additionally,€we€find€that€the€aggregate€length€of€the€sentencesÏreasonably€relates€to€the€severity€of€the€crimes€for€which€the€defendant€standsÏconvicted.€€We€have€previously€concluded€that€the€actions€of€the€appellant€andÏhis€co„defendants€were€brutal€and€vicious.€€ÌÌà àMoreover,€the€aggregate€sentence€imposed€is€necessary€to€protect€theÏpublic€from€further€criminal€acts€by€the€appellant.€€After€a€review€of€the€record,Ïwe€conclude€that€the€appellantððs€history€does€not€suggest€amenability€toÏrehabilitation.€€Although€the€appellant€was€only€twenty€years€old€when€theÏoffense€was€committed,€his€record€indicates€an€extensive€criminal€history€forÍsomeone€his€age.€€The€appellantððs€criminal€history€is€in€dispute€as€to€severalÏconvictions.× ƒi ××  ×€€However,€the€presentence€report€and€the€appellantððs€ownÏadmissions€reflect€adult€convictions€for€felony€theft€of€property,€publicÏintoxication,€theft€of€an€automobile,€and€a€weapons€violation.€€The€appellantÏalso€has€numerous€convictions€as€a€juvenile,€including€grand€larceny€andÏweapons€and€drugs€violations.€€Additionally,€both€of€the€appellantððs€co„defendants€testified€that,€on€the€evening€of€the€offense,€the€appellant€stated€thatÏhe€was€going€to€break€into€someoneððs€house.€€Thirty€minutes€prior€to€theÏoffense,€the€appellant€grabbed€co„defendant€Hollins,€put€a€knife€to€her€throat,Ïand€stated€ð ðB„„„„,€Iððll€kill€you!ðð€€After€their€arrest€on€the€present€charges,€theÏappellant€wrote€to€Hollins€in€an€attempt€to€suborn€perjury€by€fabricating€eventsÏwhich€placed€all€the€blame€upon€the€co„defendant€Owens.€€Thus,€there€is€little,€ifÏanything,€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€the€appellant€could€be€released€intoÏsociety€anytime€in€the€near€future€without€risk€to€society.€€€Finally,€we€concludeÏthat€an€aggregate€sentence€of€thirty„five€years€is€consistent€with€the€principles€ofÏsentencing.€€Based€upon€the€foregoing€and€consistent€with€the€holding€in€ÏòòWilkersonóó,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€imposing€consecutiveÏsentences.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÇÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà à___________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àDavid€G.€Hayes,€Judgeà àÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌœJerry€Scott,€Presiding€Judge›Ì̛̜Ì___________________________________ÌPenny€J.€White,€Judge