ÿWPC«  ÐÑeÕèníÂÿè ŸLÚt˜bΉn$0´4¿ kޱ'övغF$¶põ»é¾ ²r7曬ñd*=EñÍs Ù:“ÿ«½ñ"8¥¨%¤°':›púF÷ÉðL¹7I:‰ cÚtÌÑÐJ¾ý¸”™ÍØ/f2Ö¹—wç鉪¨NV1ãŒSQK{ŽE‚Ÿž—`W˜‘”ûOê†S,^JnáÌL õÈ8b\br+áàN=bJYìz¯æ©Ë 'âÄp¼†ÿ'MDlq?"™b䪼UˆGѹNx0+QCð„,²ßý“ƒö2µÞ”-nU.dlC¾ÛVºÝÞ„3ØÿbY;H!¤ _Ð>ϱ9•$™!U!„É.~¿¹œÄ§Ã «W½=_ÅÂäZh#ÄY!Â׿Ìçz,cÿÜXCr’-6MœÏxÏùúË̤h`‘´J5Ùàÿð±e‘³Ggv/À+δ9®ˆµå1íªÏJ7O: ÁtóéÞ÷ýtÑì*õJ«€t¦Eulô©5æëðN Šƒºk'˜ºõÄÌïc¾~Ã’VßOFØâá¦Séþ)Ϻ^ü¯»/Å׎Þã@øŸ¶mqüÑ–#k…U.F %t bz Ð~ ¡N åï Ô n­ä ‘ 0(™U :Áw¸û4³# Ç 0™Ò 0DkU :¯U:éN#^ %å1 m 1m/ 0dœU:U::::: Btttttttt D3‘‘‘ 0DÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ 0 0Š— 0 ! 0´Á 0Çu 0Û< 0ï AOÆUU 0D D/_ BŽ<þ6X9`(CourierX ù ÆÝ ƒ1d$ÝÒ°ÒÔ€XɨXXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€facts€are€recited€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state.€ò òó ó —Ý ƒä$ÝÒ°ÒÔ€XYXXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€partially€granted€the€defendant's€motion€for€judgment€ofÐ `  Ðacquittal€on€count€two.€€The€court€ruled€that€the€state€failed€to€prove€aggravatedÏchild€abuse,€child€abuse,€aggravated€assault€or€reckless€aggravated€assault€withÏrespect€to€the€injury€that€formed€the€basis€of€count€two.€€However,€the€courtÏfound€that€the€state€had€presented€evidence€from€which€the€jury€could€find€theÏdefendant€guilty€of€assault€and€allowed€the€jury€to€receive€the€question€of€assaultÐ Þ ~ H Ðon€count€two. ÛÔ€XɨXXXÔÔ€*rXXɨÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XɨX*rÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€16,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó3|xôX«<þ6X9`(CourierXôxþ6X@ɹ`7ûX@($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial RegularÌXDÍXDÎXÏXDÐXUÑXDÒXUÓXIeÔXEÕXÖXE×XØXEÙXÚXEÛXUÜXEÝXÞXEßXàXEáXâXEãXäXEåXæXEçXèXÓ€òXuM%˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(I(21d$¤¤Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÔ€XɨXXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularèÐ&‰ ÛÔ€XɨXXXÔÔ€*rXXɨÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XɨX*rÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€15,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó óÿU‹ÿÀÀÀtuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  à,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular d""""'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  Ý(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ !ÝÝ  ÝñÓXñ›ñÓXñÔ_ÔÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÓ  ÓÔ€ X²;XXXÔÑ7€ ²; XXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑñÓXñ›ñÓXñÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑñèXñœñèXññòXññèXñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@EÈf ` 8ttxP` ð  rßñèXññòXññòXñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@EÈf ` 8ttxP` ð  rßñòXññèXñ›ñèXñ€Ð `  ÐÑ€Ñò òà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ P ð ÐÌ€à@@@'àAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ 0 Ð ÐÌà@$àAPRIL€1999€SESSIONó óˆÐ ° ÐÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€à À àà  àó ó)Ð Ðp  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àÐ À`  Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellee,à h àà À àà  à)à p àC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9805„CR„00203Ð °P  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àDavidson€Countyà x àÐ 0  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìò òSCOTTY€EUGENE€WALKER,à À àó óà  à)à p àHon.€Thomas€Shriver,€Judge€ò òÐ p Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àà È à(at€trial)Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À àà  à)à p àHon.€Steve€R.€Dozier,€JudgeÐ Pð Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àà È à(at€motion€for€new€trialÐ @à Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àand€motion€for€judgment€ofÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àœacquittal)ñÛXñÌñÛXññÛXñÌñÛXññÛXñ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ñÛXññÜXññÛXñ€ñÛXññÜXññÝXñ(Aggravated€ñÝXññÞXññÝXñhñÝXññÞXññßXñCñßXññàXññßXñuñßXññàXññâXññáXñghñáXññâXññãXñhild€AbuseñãXññäXññãXñ_ñãXññäXññæXññåXñ_ñåXññæXññçXñ)ñçXñ›ÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à h àà À àà  àà p àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:Ð à€ ÐÌò òJEFFREY€A.€Ô_ÔDeVASHERÔ_Ôà h àó ó(on€appeal)ò òà  àà p àPAUL€G.€SUMMERSÐ À!` ÐLAURA€C.€DYKESó ó€(at€trial)à À àà  àà p àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ °"P Ðò òJAMES€HOLT€WALKERó ó€(at€trial)Ð  #@ ÐAsst.€District€Public€Defendersà À àà  àà p àò òELIZABETH€B.€Ô_ÔMARNEYÔ_Ôó óÐ $0 Ð1202€Ô_ÔStahlmanÔ_Ô€Bldg.à h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÐ €%  ÐNashville,€TN€€37201ò òà h àà À àà  àà p àó ó425€Fifth€Ave.€N.,€2d€Floorò òÐ p& Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ð `'  ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òVICTOR€S.€JOHNSON,€IIIó óÐ @)à" Ðò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÐ 0*Ð # Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òDIANE€LANCEÐ ,°"% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€REEDÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àó óAsst.€District€Attorneys€GeneralÐ ð-$' Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à222€Second€Ave.€North,€Ste.€500Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37201„1649ÌÌÌò òÌOPINION€FILED:________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJAMES€Ô_ÔCURWOODÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWITTÔ_Ô,€JR.,€JUDGEó óÐ P7ð-1 ÐÐ  @8à.2ÿ ÐÔ_Ôà@qq*àò òòòOPINIONó óóóˆÐ `  ÐÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant,€Scotty€Eugene€Walker,€appeals€from€the€convictionÏof€aggravated€child€abuse€he€received€at€the€conclusion€of€a€jury€trial€in€theÏDavidson€County€Criminal€Court.€€He€is€presently€serving€a€ñÓXñœñÓXñnineteen€yearñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€sentenceÏin€the€Department€of€Correction€for€this€Class€A€felony.€€In€this€appeal,€WalkerÏraises€several€issues€for€our€review:ÌÓÓà8 ` à1.à0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€Walker's€motion€toÐ  @  Ðsuppress€his€statements.Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà8 ` à2.à0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWhether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€a€finding€ofÐ €  ÐWalker's€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà8 ` à3.à0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€properly€admitted€photographs€of€theÐ ` Ðvictim€depicting€her€injuries.Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà8 ` à4.à0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€properly€denied€Walker's€request€for€aÐ @à Ðmistrial€when€an€expert€witness€changed€her€opinion€duringÏthe€trial€regarding€aging€of€the€victim's€bruising.Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà8 ` à5.à0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€properly€sentenced€Walker.а¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà8 ` à6.à0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWhether€a€new€trial€should€have€been€granted€based€uponÐ   Ðnewly€discovered€evidence€of€the€victim's€and€her€twin'sÏrecurrent€nightmares€between€2:00€and€2:30€a.m.Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓHaving€reviewed€the€record,€the€briefs€of€the€parties,€and€the€applicable€law,€weÏaffirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThis€case€arises€from€a€devastating€closed„head€injury€suffered€byÏBrittany€Ô_ÔDeShelesÔ_Ô,€a€two„year„old€child.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Brittany€and€her€twin€sister€Ô_ÔKaylaÔ_Ô€are€theÐ @)à" Ðchildren€of€Tina€Hunt.€€In€March€1995,€the€children€lived€with€Ms.€Hunt€and€herÏroommate,€Shannon€Hendrix,€in€a€rental€duplex.€€Ms.€Hendrix€had€a€toddler€son€whoÏlived€in€the€home,€as€well.€€The€defendant€was€Ms.€Hunt's€boyfriend,€and€Ms.ÏHendrix€was€romantically€involved€with€Jesse€Hall.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAround€8:00€to€9:00€p.m.€on€March€20,€1995,€the€defendant€went€toÏthe€Hunt/Hendrix€home.€€When€he€arrived,€Hunt€and€her€children,€Hendrix€and€herÐ `6-0 Ðchild,€and€Hall€were€present.€€The€adults€drank€beer€and€took€drugs.€€The€defendantÏconsumed€a€quart€of€beer€and€Soma,€Ô_ÔKlonopinÔ_Ô€and€Valium€pills.€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àEventually,€Hendrix€and€Hall€left€the€home€with€a€friend.€€TheyÏreturned€about€ñÓXñœñÓXñ10:30€p.m.ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€€They€found€the€defendant€and€Hunt€holding€the€victimÏand€putting€ice€on€a€large€knot€on€the€victim's€head.€€This€was€the€only€injury€visibleÏon€the€victim.€€Hunt€talked€by€telephone€to€a€physician€at€Vanderbilt€HospitalÏemergency€room€about€the€victim's€injury.€€After€the€victim€fell€asleep,€the€defendantÏand€Hunt€left€with€Melissa€Jones€and€Mark€Johnson.€€Hunt€asked€Hendrix€to€watchÏthe€victim€and€her€twin€sister€while€she€was€gone.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAround€1:30€or€2:00€a.m.,€Andy€Champion€arrived€and€Hall€departedÏwith€him.€€Hall€checked€on€the€victim,€and€he€observed€her€only€injuries€were€a€knotÏand€a€bruise.€€Hendrix€also€checked€on€the€victim,€who€was€asleep€in€Hunt'sÏbedroom,€then€locked€herself€in€her€bedroom€and€went€to€sleep.€€After€ChampionÏand€Hall€departed,€Hendrix€was€the€only€adult€left€in€the€home.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant€and€Hunt€returned€to€the€house€sometime€around€4:00Ïto€4:45€a.m.€€Hall€returned€to€the€Hunt/Hendrix€home€around€4:15€to€4:30€a.m.€ÏWhen€he€arrived,€the€defendant€was€in€the€bathroom€with€the€water€running.€€HallÏheard€the€defendant€yell€for€Hunt.€€He€saw€the€defendant€cross€the€hall€with€theÏvictim€in€his€arms,€and€he€heard€Hunt€begin€screaming.€€He€then€saw€Hunt€holdingÏthe€victim,€who€had€a€badly€bruised€face,€a€cut€on€her€chin€and€difficulty€crying.€€HallÏcalled€Mark€Johnson's€home€to€have€someone€come€to€take€the€victim€to€the€doctor.€ÏWhen€he€returned€to€the€area€of€the€home€where€the€defendant€and€Hunt€had€theÏvictim,€he€observed€thick,€dark€blood€coming€from€the€victim's€nose.€€Hall€then€calledÏ9„1„1.Ð  :À04 Їà ` àà ¸ àMichael€Ô_ÔCayllÔ_Ô,€a€paramedic,€received€a€call€at€4:45€a.m.€to€respond€toÏthe€Hunt/Hendrix€home.€€He€arrived€at€ñÓXñœñÓXñthe€residence€at€4:47€a.m.ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€€Firefighters€wereÏalready€administering€oxygen€to€the€victim,€who€was€having€seizures.€€The€victim'sÏphysical€symptoms€were€indicative€of€a€serious€head€injury.€€Ô_ÔCayllÔ_Ô€recalled€a€maleÏand€a€female€present€on€the€scene€whose€demeanor€did€not€correspond€with€theÏgravity€of€the€situation.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAround€5:00€a.m.,€Hendrix€was€awakened€by€Hall€and€a€police€officerÏbeating€on€her€bedroom€door.€€Hendrix€had€been€asleep€in€her€room€since€Hall'sÏdeparture€from€the€home€several€hours€earlier.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant€was€taken€to€the€criminal€justice€center,€where€he€wasÏquestioned.€€The€then„eighteen„year„old€defendant,€who€dropped€out€of€school€inÏthe€tenth€grade€and€who€had€not€slept€all€night,€waived€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€He€wasÐ À!` Ðinterviewed€off€and€on€over€the€course€of€the€next€several€hours.€€At€first,€theÏdefendant€claimed€the€victim€had€fallen€out€of€his€arms€while€he€was€rearranging€herÏbed€covers€and€hit€her€head€on€a€bed€rail€and€the€floor.€€He€claimed€this€occurredÏearlier€in€the€evening€before€he,€Hunt€and€Jones€left€the€house.€€Later,€he€admittedÏthat€he€became€frustrated€with€the€victim's€fighting,€biting,€scratching€and€screamingÏwhile€he€was€trying€to€get€her€to€sleep.€€The€defendant€said€he€hit€the€victim€on€theÏback€of€the€head.€€He€said€he€hit€her€"a€couple€of€times"€but€later€that€it€was€"onlyÏonce."€€The€defendant's€admission€that€he€hit€the€victim€came€after€an€exchange€inÏthe€interview€in€which€he€indicated€his€desire€to€take€the€blame€for€the€victim'sÏinjuries€so€that€the€Department€of€Human€Services€would€not€remove€the€victim€andÏher€twin€from€Tina€Hunt's€custody.€€When€the€defendant€was€confronted€withÏinformation€that€medical€personnel€had€opined€the€victim's€head€injury€was€causedÏby€greater€trauma€than€that€he€had€described,€he€denied€shaking€the€victim€andÐ  :À04 Ðsaid€he€had€hit€her€only€once€with€his€fist.€€Throughout€his€statement,€he€deniedÏknowledge€of€a€cut€on€the€victim's€chin.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àDoctor€Rachel€Mace€examined€the€victim€at€Vanderbilt€Hospital€onÏMarch€21,€1995.€€The€victim€had€extensive€facial€bruising,€a€fresh€cut€on€her€chinÏand€a€head€injury.€€The€victim€was€in€a€coma€and€having€seizures.€€She€hadÏsignificant€brain€swelling,€bleeding€inside€the€head,€and€a€skull€fracture.€€Her€injuriesÏwere€life€threatening,€and€the€victim€probably€would€have€died€without€medicalÏintervention.€€Doctor€Mace€opined€that€the€victim€most€likely€would€have€œbegñÔXñañÔXññÕXñuñÕXñn›Ïhaving€seizures€or€become€unconscious€immediately€upon€receiving€such€a€severeÏinjury.€€The€victim€also€had€retinal€Ô_ÔhemorrhagesÔ_Ô,€which€were€consistent€with€shakenÏbaby€syndrome.€€Doctor€Mace€opined€that€the€victim's€injuries€were€not€accidentalÏin€nature€and€had€been€inflicted€by€severe€trauma.€€Further,€according€to€Dr.€MaceÏthe€victim's€injuries€were€the€result€of€more€than€one€impact.€€Doctor€Mace€opinedÏthat€the€victim€had€been€a€victim€of€child€abuse.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àDoctor€Leonard€Steinberg,€the€victim's€pediatrician€from€FebruaryÏ1994€until€June€1996,€and€Ô_ÔVickieÔ_Ô€Allen,€the€victim's€great€aunt,€testified€about€theÏeffect€of€the€injuries€on€the€victim€and€the€extent€of€her€disability.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€trial€court€submitted€count€one,€aggravated€child€abuse,€basedÏupon€the€head€injury€and€Ô_ÔintercranialÔ_Ô€bleeding,€and€count€two,€assault,€based€uponÏbruises€to€the€left€side€of€the€head€and€the€forehead,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€to€the€jury.€€The€jury€found€theÐ  2@), Ðdefendant€guilty€of€aggravated€child€abuse€on€count€one€and€not€guilty€of€assaultÏon€count€two.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAgainst€this€factual€backdrop,€the€defendant€has€filed€this€appeal.€ÌÌà@üü-àò òIó óˆÐ À`  Ðà ` àà ¸ àIn€his€first€issue,€Walker€alleges€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€hisÏmotion€to€suppress€the€statements€œñÖXñWalkerñÖXññØXññ×Xñneñ×XññØXññÙXñheñÙXñ›€gave€to€law€enforcement€officials€on€MarchÏ21,€1995.€€Specifically,€Walker€claims€his€statements€were€involuntarily€madeÏbecause€they€"were€the€product€of€ñÓXñœñÓXñÔ_ÔDetectiveÔ_ÔñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€Meek's€threat€to€him€that€Tina€HuntÏwould€lose€custody€of€her€children€unless€the€defendant€provided€Meek€with€anÏexplanation€consistent€with€the€victim's€injuries."ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àA€trial€court's€determination€that€a€confession€has€been€freely€andÏvoluntarily€given€is€not€subject€to€reversal€on€appeal€unless€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€to€the€contrary.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔOdomÔ_Ôóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€ñÓXñœñÓXñ23„24ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€(Tenn.Ð €%  ÐñÓXñœñÓXñ1996).ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€€Thus,€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€andÏresolution€of€conflicts€in€the€evidence€are€within€the€province€of€the€trial€court€as€theÏtrier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€ñÓXñœñÓXñòòÔ_ÔÔ_Ôidóó.€On€appeal,€the€appellant€must€shoulder€the€burden€ofÐ  +À!$ Ðdemonstrating€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€court's€findings.€ÏòòState€v.€Kevin€Tateóó,€No.€02C01„9605„CR„00164,€slip€op.€at€16€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.,Ð à.€%( ÐJackson,€Dec.€3,€1997)€(citation€omitted),€òòperm€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1998).Ð À0`'* ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant€was€interviewed€at€the€criminal€justice€center€over€theÏcourse€of€several€hours€on€March€21,€1995.€€The€first€interview€commenced€atÐ `6-0 Ðapproximately€7:00€a.m.€€The€last€interview€ceased€around€1:00€or€2:00€p.m.,€atÏwhich€time€the€defendant€was€arrested€and€booked€into€the€jail.€€There€were€threeÏinterviews,€which€Ô_ÔtotaledÔ_Ô€approximately€one€and€one„half€hours'€time.€€Initially,€theÏdefendant€persisted€in€explaining€the€victim's€injuries€as€the€result€of€an€accidentalÏfall.€€Later,€he€acknowledged€that€his€previous€representations€had€been€false€andÏexplained€he€had€lied€in€order€to€keep€the€Department€of€Human€Services€fromÏremoving€the€victim€and€her€sister€from€Tina€Hunt's€custody.€€On€multiple€occasions,Ïhe€expressed€his€concern€that€Hunt€would€lose€custody€of€her€children.€€During€theÏsecond€interview,€Walker€asked€the€detective€what€was€going€to€happen.€€TheÏdetective€responded,€ÌÓÓà8 ` àMore€than€likely€you're€going€to€get€arrested€for€aggravated€childÏabuse€.€.€.€if€she€lives.€€If€she€dies,€you're€looking€at€murder€charges.Ï.€.€.€And€if€you€don't€tell€me€the€whole€truth,€the€kids€are€going€to€beÏtaken€away€from€Tina.€€If€you€tell€me€the€whole€truth,€she€may€evenÏbe€able€to€keep€the€children.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌÓÓAlmost€immediately€thereafter,€the€defendant€responded,€"Well€just€f„„„€it.€€I'll€takeÏthe€blame€.€.€.€all€of€it.€€Lock€me€up€for€the€rest€of€my€f„„„„„„€life."€€The€detectiveÏmaintained€he€just€wanted€the€truth€and€reminded€Walker€that€the€victim€was€nearÏdeath.€€Walker€responded,€"I€know,€but€I€did€not€do€that!€€The€death€.€.€.€the€deathÏ.€.€.€the€near€death€could€be€caused€from€where€she€hit€her€head€on€the€bed€notÏfrom€where€somebody€hit€her€or€beat€her€up."€€The€interview€continued€with€WalkerÏdetailing€his€having€hit€the€victim€and€Hunt's€lack€of€knowledge€of€his€actions.€ÏShortly€before€the€second€interview€terminated,€the€detective€said,€"Now,€I€just€wantÏto€make€it€clear,€I€haven't€forced€you€to€say€this?"€€Walker€responded,€"No,€youÏhaven't.€€You've€been€real€nice€and€I€appreciate€it."€€In€the€third€and€final€interview,Ïthere€was€no€mention€of€the€possibility€that€Hunt€might€lose€custody€of€her€children.ÌÌñÚXñÝ ‚3Á ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚3ÁAÝÔ29eÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝñÚXñà ` àà ¸ àThe€record€on€appeal€does€not€contain€a€transcription€of€the€trialÏcourt's€findings€on€the€motion€to€suppress.€€Rather,€the€record€reflects€only€that€theÐ  :À04 Ðmotion€was€denied.€€This€court€is€reluctant€to€place€a€trial€court€in€error€where€theÏparty€seeking€relief€has€failed€to€provide€us€with€a€record€that€reflects€the€trial€court'sÏbasis€for€its€ruling.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(b)€(appellant's€duty€to€provide€a€recordÐ  À Ðthat€conveys€a€fair,€accurate€and€complete€account€of€what€transpired€in€the€trialÏcourt€with€respect€to€the€issues€on€appeal).€€In€any€event,€despite€the€deficiency,€theÏfacts€of€the€case€do€not€demonstrate€a€basis€for€disturbing€the€trial€court's€ruling.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant€argues€that€his€confession€should€be€suppressed€asÏinvoluntary€because€he€would€have€said€anything,€including€making€inculpatoryÏadmissions,€in€order€to€keep€DHS€from€removing€Tina€Hunt's€children€from€herÏcustody.€€He€relies€upon€òòLymumn€v.€Illinoisóó,€372€S.W.2d€528,€83€S.€Ct.€917€(1963),Ð  À Ðin€which€the€Supreme€Court€held€a€mother's€confession€involuntary€where€she€wasÏthreatened€with€loss€of€custody€of€her€children€and€of€welfare€benefits.€€We€find€theÏfacts€of€this€case€distinguishable€in€degree€from€those€in€òòLymumnóó.Ð À!` ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€this€case,€the€child€custody€situation€did€not€involve€children€withÏwhom€Walker€himself€had€a€parental,€or€even€official€custodial,€relationship.€€TheÏdetective€emphasized€to€Walker€that€he€wanted€him€to€tell€the€truth.€€After€Walker's€Ï"I€did€it"€outburst,€he€and€the€detective€talked€in€detail€about€what€Walker€hadÏactually€done,€and€Walker€denied€the€most€serious€injury.€€When€€Walker€wasÏspecifically€asked€whether€he€felt€coerced,€he€indicated€he€did€not€and€thanked€theÏdetective€for€being€nice.€€Finally,€Walker€gave€another€statement€later€the€same€dayÏin€which€he€did€not€recant€his€admission€of€wrongdoing.€€Thus,€the€record€providesÏa€basis€for€upholding€the€trial€court's€denial€of€the€motion€to€suppress.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ €4 +. Ðv.€Carolyn€Wallenóó,€No.€03C01„9210„CR„00345€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€JulyÐ `6-0 Ð13,€1993)€(mother€who€was€told€while€she€was€in€custody€for€two€and€one„half€hoursÏthat€her€child€was€with€a€babysitter,€that€she€could€lose€custody€of€her€child€as€theÐ  :À04 Ðresult€of€her€participation€in€two€aggravated€robberies,€and€who€was€asked€toÏcooperate€for€the€welfare€of€her€child€did€not€give€involuntary€confession).ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà@àà,àò òIIó óˆÐ   Ðà ` àà ¸ àWalker€claims€his€conviction€is€infirm€because€the€evidence€does€notÏsupport€his€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Specifically,€Walker€contends€that€theÏproof€does€not€exclude€every€reasonable€hypothesis€other€than€his€guilt€becauseÏShannon€Hendrix€could€have€inflicted€the€victim's€head€injury€during€the€earlyÏmorning€hours€when€Hendrix€was€the€only€adult€present€in€the€home€with€theÏchildren.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWÔ‡XYXX X"oÔhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€anÐ   Ðappellate€courtððs€standard€of€review€is€whether,€after€considering€the€evidence€in€theÏlight€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€theÐ °!P Ðessential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,Ð €#  Ð443€U.S.€307,€324,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2791„92€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2dÐ L%ì Ð63,€67€(Tenn.€1985);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€This€rule€applies€to€findings€of€guiltÏbased€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€andÏcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€253€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.Ð °*P!$ Ð1990).€€€Ô#† X"oXXXYIN#ÔÐ |,#& ÐÌÔ‡XYXX X"oÔà ` àà ¸ àMoreover,€Ô#† X"oXXXYÐQ#Ôa€criminal€offense€may€be€established€exclusively€byÐ (0È&* Ðcircumstantial€evidence.€€€€òòÔ_ÔDuchacÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€505€S.W.2d€237€(Tenn.€1973);€òòState€v.Ð  2¬(, ÐJonesóó,€901€Ô‡XYXX X"oÔS.W.2dÔ#† X"oXXXYS#ÔÔ‡XYXX X"oÔ€393,€396€Ô#† X"oXXXYcS#ÔÔ‡XYXX X"oÔ(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€19Ô#† X"oXXXY¯S#ÔÔ‡XYXX X"oÔ95);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔLequireÔ_Ôóó,€634€S.W.2dÐ ì3Œ*. Ð608€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1987).€However,€before€an€accused€may€be€convicted€of€aÏcriminal€offense€based€upon€circumstantial€evidence€alone,€the€facts€andÏcircumstances€"must€be€so€strong€and€cogent€as€to€exclude€every€other€reasonableÐ h904 Ðhypothesis€save€the€guilt€of€the€defendant."€€òòState€v.€Crawfordóó,€225€Tenn.€478,€470Ð `  ÐS.W.2d€610€(1971);€òòJonesóó,€901€Ô#† X"oXXXY%T#ÔÔ‡XYXX X"oÔS.W.2dÔ#† X"oXXXYqV#ÔÔ‡XYXX X"oÔ€at€396.€€€€In€other€words,€"[a]€web€of€guiltÐ , Ì Ðmust€be€woven€around€the€defendant€from€which€he€cannot€escape€and€from€whichÏfacts€and€circumstances€the€jury€could€draw€no€other€reasonable€inference€save€theÏguilt€of€the€defendant€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòCrawfordóó,€470€S.W.2d€at€613;Ð 0 ÐòòState€v.€Ô_ÔMcAfeeÔ_Ôóó,€737€S.W.2d€304,€305€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1987).Ð \ü  ÐÔ#† X"oXXXY¹V#ÔÌÔ‡XYXX X"oÔà ` àà ¸ àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€should€notÐ ¨  ÐÔ_ÔreweighÔ_Ô€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779Ð Ôt Ð(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1990).€€Questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€theÏweight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€theÏevidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ð 8Ø Ð(Tenn.€1978).€€Nor€may€this€court€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€theÏtrier€of€fact€from€the€evidence.€€òòÔ_ÔLiakasÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286€S.W.2dÐ Ð p Ð856,€859€(1956);€€òòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€51€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1978).€€OnÐ œ"< Ðthe€contrary,€this€court€must€afford€the€State€of€Tennessee€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimateÏinferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€835.Ð ( " ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€the€evidence€supports€the€guiltÏof€the€defendant€and€no€one€else€as€the€perpetrator€of€the€crime.€€Doctor€MaceÏopined€that€given€the€severity€of€the€victim's€skull€fracture€and€internal€head€injury,Ïthe€injuries€were€sustained€within€a€few€hours€of€the€victim's€presentation€at€theÏhospital,€and€the€likelihood€increased€closer€in€time€to€presentation€as€contrastedÏwith€the€earlier€hours€in€the€evening.€€The€defendant€admitted€striking€the€victim,Ïalthough€he€denied€more€than€one€or€two€blows€or€shaking€the€victim.€€ThroughoutÏhis€statements,€he€consistently€maintained€that€Tina€Hunt€had€nothing€to€do€with€theÏvictim's€injuries.€€Despite€his€efforts€at€trial€to€cast€the€shadow€of€guilt€upon€ShannonÐ ø9˜06 ÐHendrix,€the€state's€evidence€demonstrated€that€the€victim€had€no€massive€injuryÏwhen€Hendrix€went€to€bed€around€1:30€to€2:00€a.m.€€€Hendrix€remained€locked€inÏher€bedroom€asleep€for€the€rest€of€the€night€and€did€not€awaken€until€Hall€and€aÏpolice€officer€pounded€on€her€door€the€following€morning.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€finding€the€evidence€sufficient,€we€have€distinguished€òòState€v.€Hixóó,Ð \ü  Ð696€S.W.2d€22€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984),€òòoverruled€on€other€grdsóó.,€òòState€v.Ð (È  ÐMessamoreóó,€937€S.W.2d€916,€919€n.3€(Tenn.€1996),€upon€which€the€defendantÐ ô”  Ðrelies.€€In€òòHixóó,€the€victim's€mother€and€father€were€both€found€guilty€of€child€abuse.€Ð À` ÐòòIdóó.€at€23.€€This€court€found€the€evidence€insufficient€to€support€their€convictionsÐ Œ, Ðwhere€the€evidence€showed€that€the€child€was€in€the€custody€of€both€parents€at€theÏtime€of€his€injuries.€€òòIdóó.€at€25.€€Although€the€parents€offered€various€explanations€forÐ $Ä Ðhow€the€victim's€injuries€could€have€occurred,€they€made€no€significantly€inculpatoryÏstatements.€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€present€case,€however,€the€state's€evidence€demonstratedÐ ¼ \ Ðthat€the€defendant€inflicted€the€victim's€injuries€during€the€hours€in€which€ShannonÏHendrix€was€locked€in€her€room€asleep.€€The€defendant€offered€no€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.€€Moreover,€the€defendant€admitted€harming€the€victim,€although€he€deniedÏinflicting€the€most€severe€of€the€injuries.€€He€repeatedly€denied€that€Tina€Hunt€hadÏany€knowledge€of€or€involvement€in€the€abuse.ÌÔ#† X"oXXXYâX#ÔÌà ` àà ¸ àThus,€the€evidence€sufficiently€supports€the€defendant's€conviction.ÌÌà@ÄÄ,àò òIIIó óˆÐ $1Ä', Ðà ` àà ¸ àNext,€the€defendant€complains€of€error€in€the€admission€of€fiveÏphotographs€of€the€victim€which€depict€her€injuries.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€determining€whether€photographs€should€be€admitted,€the€trial€courtÐ ¤8D/4 Ðmust€determine,€first,€whether€the€photograph€is€relevant.€€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564Ð `  ÐS.W.2d€947,€949€(Tenn.€1978);€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€401.€ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXñPhotographsñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€are€notÏnecessarily€rendered€inadmissible€because€they€are€cumulative€of€other€evidenceÏor€because€descriptive€words€could€be€used.ñÓXñœ›ñÓXñ€€òòCollins€v.€Stateóó,€506€S.W.2d€179,€185Ð   Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1973);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Terrence€L.€Davisóó,€No.€02C01„9512„CR„Ð à€ Ð00343,€slip€op.€at€ñÓXñœñÓXñ14ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€June€2,€1997),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóóÐ À`  Ð(Tenn.€1998).€€ñÓXñœñÓXñPhotographs€must€be€relevant€to€prove€some€part€of€theÏprosecution's€case€and€must€not€be€admitted€solely€to€inflame€the€jury€and€prejudiceÏthem€against€the€jury.€€òòBanksóó,€564€S.W.2d€at€951;€òòseeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403€(relevantÐ ` Ðevidence€may€be€admitted€if€its€probative€value€is€not€"substantially€outweighed€byÏthe€danger€of€unfair€prejudice").€€Prejudice€becomes€unfair€when€the€òòprimaryóóÐ  À Ðpurpose€of€the€evidence€at€issue€is€to€elicit€emotions€of€"bias,€sympathy,€hatred,Ïcontempt,€retribution,€or€horror."€€M.€Graham,€Handbook€of€Federal€Evidence€182„¼83€(2d€ed.€1986).ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àOnñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€appeal,€a€trial€court's€decision€to€admit€a€photographic€exhibit€isÏÔ_ÔreviewableÔ_Ô€for€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòIdóó.€at€949.Ð `'  ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€five€photographs€in€question€are€of€the€victim's€head€and€face€atÏvarious€angles.€€There€is€one€photograph€each€of€the€left€and€right€sides€of€theÏvictim's€head,€the€victim's€face€from€above,€the€victim's€face€from€the€left€side,€andÏthe€victim's€face€from€below.€€The€photographs€depict€significant€bruising€in€diffuseÏareas€of€the€victim's€forehead€and€face,€as€well€as€a€sutured€chin€laceration.€€TheÏdefendant€specifically€attacks€three€of€the€photographs,€which€depict€bruises€to€theÏright€side€of€the€face€and€the€eyes,€and€the€chin€cut,€because€he€was€not€chargedÏwith€inflicting€these€injuries.ÌÐ  :À04 Ðà ` àà ¸ àThe€trial€court€significantly€curtailed€the€quantity€of€photographicÏevidence€the€state€was€allowed€to€introduce.€€It€did€not€allow€the€state€to€use€anÏoverhead€projector€to€display€the€images€to€the€jury€because€the€projectorÏ"change[d]€the€colors€.€.€.€in€an€impermissible€way."€€The€photographs€the€courtÏallowed€of€the€victim's€external€facial€and€head€injuries€were€relevant€to€the€victim'sÏinternal€skull€fracture€and€intercranial€bleeding€as€charged€in€count€one,€as€well€asÏthe€bruises€that€were€the€subject€of€the€second€count€of€the€indictment.€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àUpon€review,€we€find€the€photographs€relevant€and€ñÓXñœñÓXñlackingñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€danger€ofÏunfair€prejudice.€€Doctor€Mace€opined€that€the€skull€fracture€and€the€intercranialÏbleeding€had€not€necessarily€resulted€from€the€same€blow.€€Moreover,€she€opinedÏthat€the€victim's€internal€head€injuries€were€the€result€of€non„accidental,€severe,Ïinflicted€trauma.€€Doctor€Mace€testified€that€the€various€bruises€on€the€victim's€faceÏand€head€and€the€chin€cut€were€indicative€that€acts€of€child€abuse€had€beenÏinflicted,€rather€than€a€simple€fall€or€one€blow.€€Although€the€defendant€was€notÏcharged€with€a€separate€count€for€each€individual€injury,€the€victim's€overall€physicalÏcondition€was€relevant€to€cast€doubt€upon€his€statements€that€the€victim€had€fallenÏand€he€had€hit€her€only€one€or€two€times.€€We€believe€the€photographs€wereÏproperly€received€for€this€purpose.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAlternatively,€the€defendant€argues€that€even€if€probative,€theÏphotographs€were€too€prejudicial€to€be€admitted.€€€We€acknowledge€that€the€fiveÏchallenged€photographs€are€disturbing€in€that€they€depict€a€badly€injured€youngÏchild€attached€to€medical€tubes€and€wires.€€However,€they€are€not€gruesome€or€soÏgraphic€that€they€should€have€been€excluded.€€Unlike€the€photographs€of€which€thisÏcourt€disapproved€in€the€cases€cited€by€the€defendant,€the€photographs€in€the€caseÏat€bar€were€not€autopsy€photographs.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€ñÓXñœñÓXñCollinsóó,ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXñ986€S.W.2d€13,€19„22Ð  :À04 Ð(Tenn.ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€Crim.€ñÓXñœñÓXñApp.)ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXñ(photographs€of€newborn€baby€taken€at€autopsy€wereÏerroneously€admitted€because€of€inherent€prejudice€and€lack€of€probative€value€toÏfacts€in€issue),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1998);ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€òòState€v.€Cynthia€Robersonóó,€No.Ð  À Ð02C01„9503„CC„00059€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Dec.€28,€1995)€ñÓXñœñÓXñ(fiveÏphotographs€showing€child€abuse€victim's€injuries€were€properly€admitted€but€oneÏautopsy€photographñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXñdepicting€victim'sñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXñhead€afterñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€dissection€and€exposure€of€internalÏñÓXñœñÓXñfeatures€improperly€admitted)ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€(Summers,€J.,€dissenting);€òòGladson€v.€Stateóó,€577Ð  @  ÐS.W.2d€686€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978)€(autopsy€photos€showing€decedent's€cranialÏbone€and€brain).€€€€Moreover,€it€is€noteworthy€that€the€defendant€was€charged€inÏcount€two€with€assault€based€upon€the€bruises€on€the€left€side€of€the€victim's€face.€ÏDespite€receiving€the€photographs€of€these€bruises,€the€jury€chose€to€acquit€theÏdefendant€on€that€count.€€This€tends€to€indicate€that€the€jury€did€not€misuse€orÏotherwise€become€inflamed€by€these€photographs.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWe€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€in€the€admission€of€the€photographs.ÌÌà@¹¹,àò òIVó óˆÐ `'  Ðà ` àà ¸ àWalker€also€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€forÏa€mistrial.€€Prior€to€trial,€the€defense€interviewed€Dr.€Rachel€Mace,€a€pediatricianÏwho€examined€the€victim€during€her€hospitalization€and€determined€that€ñÓXñœñÓXñherñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€injuriesÏwere€the€result€of€non„accidental€child€abuse.€€During€pretrial€interviews€with€theÏdefense,€Dr.€Mace€indicated€that€the€victim€had€bruises€of€various€ages€on€her€body.€ÏBased€upon€this€information,€the€defense€apparently€planned€to€cast€doubt€upon€theÏstateððs€theory€that€the€defendant€inflicted€the€charged€injuries€on€the€victim€byÏshowing€that€he€was€not€present€in€the€victimððs€home€when€earlier€injuries€had€beenÏinflicted.ÌÐ  :À04 Ðà ` àà ¸ àAfter€the€state€had€commenced€its€case„in„chief,€the€court€held€a€jury„¼out€hearing€regarding€the€admissibility€of€photographs€at€which€Dr.€Mace€testified.€ÏDuring€this€testimony,€she€testified€that€she€was€unable€to€give€opinions€regardingÏthe€ages€of€the€victimððs€various€bruises.€€Doctor€Mace€said€she€had€changed€herÏmind€that€morning€about€the€accuracy€of€gauging€the€age€of€bruises€by€color€afterÏreading€an€article€in€the€journal€òòPediatricsóó.€€The€defense€registered€a€vociferousÐ À`  Ðobjection€and€asked€the€court€to€declare€a€mistrial.€€After€an€òòex€parteóó,€in„chambers,Ð  @  Ðand€off„the„record€hearing€was€conducted€with€the€defense€and€over€the€objectionÏof€the€state,€the€court€declined€to€grant€a€mistrial.€€However,€the€court€adjournedÏcourt€for€the€day€so€that€the€defense€would€have€time€to€prepare€for€cross„¼examination€of€Dr.€Mace.€€The€court€acknowledged€ð ða€fairly€serious€discoveryÏproblemðð€and€indicated€its€willingness€to€give€the€defense€as€much€time€as€it€neededÏto€prepare.€€When€defense€counsel€was€specifically€asked€when€she€would€like€toÏreturn,€she€indicated€she€would€be€ready€to€proceed€at€10:30€the€following€morning.€ÏWhen€court€resumed€the€following€morning,€the€defense€did€not€indicate€a€lack€ofÏpreparedness€or€ability€to€proceed.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€entry€of€a€mistrial€is€appropriate€when€the€trial€cannot€continue€forÏsome€reason,€or€if€the€trial€does€continue,€a€miscarriage€of€justice€will€occur.€€òòStateÐ  +À!$ Ðv.€McPhersonóó,€882€S.W.2d€365,€ñÓXñœñÓXñ370ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1994).€€The€decision€to€grantÐ - #& Ða€mistrial€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€and€this€court€will€notÏdisturb€the€trial€court's€determination€unless€a€clear€abuse€of€discretion€appears€onÏthe€record.€€òòIdóó.€€Ð  2@), ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àOn€appeal,€Walker€claims€that€he€was€forced€by€this€change€of€opinionÏto€defend€against€a€theory€of€the€case€that€had€not€been€advanced€by€the€state€priorÏto€Dr.€Mace€taking€the€stand.€€Further,€he€claims€the€denial€of€a€mistrial€made€itÐ  :À04 Ðimpossible€for€him€to€obtain€an€expert€witness.€€Finally,€he€cites€to€the€Ô_ÔcaselawÔ_Ô€ofÏthis€court€and€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€which€condemns€ð ðtrial€by€ñÓXñœñÓXñambush.ððñÓXñ›ñÓXñÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€weakness€in€Walkerððs€argument€is€that€the€trial€court€indicated€itsÏwillingness€to€provide€the€defense€with€as€much€time€as€it€needed€to€prepare,€ratherÏthan€granting€a€mistrial.€€In€the€wake€of€the€denial€of€the€motion€for€mistrial,€theÏdefense€indicated€it€could€be€prepared€the€following€morning€and€registered€noÏrequest€for€additional€time€when€court€reconvened.€€The€defense€did€not€indicateÏto€the€trial€court€that€it€needed€more€time€to€obtain€an€expert€witness.€€It€appearsÏfrom€the€record€that€the€trial€court€would€have€been€as€accommodating€of€theÏdefense€as€the€situation€warranted.€€We€fail€to€see€how€the€procedure€followed€inÏlieu€of€the€grant€of€a€mistrial€resulted€in€a€miscarriage€of€justice€to€the€defendantððsÏdetriment.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.€€As€such,€we€see€no€abuse€of€discretion€in€the€trial€courtððs€denialÐ à€ Ðof€the€motion€for€mistrial.ÌÌà@ÕÕ-àò òVó óˆÐ €%  Ðà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant's€next€issue€is€whether€he€received€an€excessiveÏsentence.€€Ô‡XYXX X"oÔWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€ofÐ @)à" Ða€sentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record€withÐ $+Ä!$ Ða€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð40„35„401(d)€(1997).€€This€presumption€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€theÏaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingÏprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔAshbyÔ_Ôóó,€823€S.W.2dÐ X2ø(, Ð166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€ð ðThe€burden€of€showing€that€the€sentence€is€improper€isÏupon€the€appellant.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€event€the€record€fails€to€demonstrate€the€requiredÐ ð5,0 Ðconsideration€by€the€trial€court,€review€of€the€sentence€is€purely€òòde€novoóó.€€òòIdóó.€€IfÐ ¼7\.2 Ðappellate€review€reflects€the€trial€court€properly€considered€all€relevant€factors€andÐ Œ9,04 Ðits€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record,€this€court€must€affirm€theÏsentence,€ð ðeven€if€we€would€have€preferred€a€different€result.ðð€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805Ð , Ì ÐS.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1991).ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court,€at€theÏconclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€determines€the€range€of€sentence€and€thenÏdetermines€the€specific€sentence€and€the€propriety€of€sentencing€alternatives€byÏconsidering€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,Ï(2)€the€Ô_ÔpresentenceÔ_Ô€report,€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€toÏsentencing€alternatives,€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conductÏinvolved,€(5)€evidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€the€enhancementÏand€mitigating€factors,€(6)€any€statements€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€theÏdefendantððs€behalf€about€sentencing,€and€(7)€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€orÏtreatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„210(a),€(b)€(1997);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„¼103(5)€(1997);€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1993).Ð ˆ"( ÐÔ#† X"oXXXYs#ÔÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant's€first€specific€complaint€about€the€length€of€hisÏsentence€is€that€the€trial€court€did€not€apply€as€a€mitigating€factor€the€defendant'sÏñÓXñœñÓXñlackñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€of€a€prior€criminal€record.€€This€court€has,€indeed,€held€that€this€is€a€properÏmitigating€factor€under€Code€section€40„35„113(13).€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,Ð Ô+t"& Ð910€S.W.2d€448,€453€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€In€the€present€case,€however,€theÏdefendant€had€a€history€of€illicit€drug€use€and€underage€alcohol€consumption.€€WeÏsee€no€error€in€the€trial€court's€failure€to€reward€him€with€a€mitigating€factor€becauseÏhe€was€fortunate€or€surreptitious€enough€to€avoid€prosecution€for€his€illegal€activity.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€261€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(trial€courtÐ 45Ô+0 Ðmay,€but€is€not€required€to,€consider€lack€of€prior€criminal€record€as€a€mitigatingÏfactor).Ð ô8”/4 Їà ` àà ¸ àThe€defendant€also€complains€about€the€trial€court's€enhancement€ofÏthe€defendant's€sentence€by€two€years€for€each€enhancement€factor€and€reductionÏby€one€year€for€each€mitigating€factor.€In€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€467€(TennÐ  À ÐCrim.€App.€1996),€this€court€observedÌÓÓà8 ` àThe€appellant's€sentence€is€not€determined€by€the€mathematicalÏñÓXñœñÓXñprocessñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€of€adding€the€sum€total€of€enhancing€factors€present€thenÏsubtracting€from€this€figure€the€mitigating€factors€present€for€a€netÏnumber€of€years.€€Rather,€the€weight€to€be€afforded€an€existing€factorÏis€left€to€the€trial€court's€discretion€so€long€as€the€court€complies€withÏthe€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€Sentencing€Act€and€itsÏfindings€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record.€.€.€.€'The€Legislature€Ïhas€provided€for€only€ranges€within€which€a€determinate€sentence€willÏbe€imposed€and€has€not€chosen€to€assign€any€controlling€value€toÏthese€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors€in€how€they€are€weighed€Ïin€determining€where€within€the€appropriate€range€a€particularÏdefendant's€sentence€should€fall.'Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌÓÓòòIdóó.€at€475„76€(quoting€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€237€(Tenn.€1986))€(otherÐ ° Ðcitations€omitted).€€Neither€òòBoggsóó,€òòMossóó,€nor€any€other€authority€cited€by€theÐ ð Ðdefendant€stands€for€the€proposition€that€a€trial€court€may€not€assign€specific€valuesÏto€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€based€upon€the€facts€of€the€ñÓXñœñÓXñcaseñ½Xñ;€to€be€sure,Ïthat€is€exactly€what€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€intendedñ½Xñ.ñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð °"P ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210,€Sentencing€Comm'n€Comments€(1997).€€Upon€a€completeÏreview€of€the€sentencing€proceedings,€it€is€apparent€that€ñÓXñœñÓXññ¾Xñthis›€is›€what›€ñ¾XñtheñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€trial€ñÓXñœñÓXñcourtñ¿Xñ€did.€ÏAccordingly,€this€issue€is€without€merit.ñ¿XññÀXñ€proceededÏaccording€to€the€prñÀXññÁXññÀXñeinñÀXññÁXññÂXñinciples€and€ñÂXññÃXññÂXñwithout€the€ñÂXññÃXññÄXñwithin€the€guidelinñÄXññÅXññÄXñsñÄXññÅXññÆXñes€of€the€sentencing€law.ñÆXññÓXñ›ñÓXñÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWe€find€no€merit€in€the€sentencing€issues€raised€by€the€defendant.ÌÌà@¹¹,àò òVIó óˆÐ Ð/p&) Ðà ` àà ¸ àFinally,€Walker€alleges€he€should€have€been€granted€a€new€trial€basedÏupon€newly€discovered€evidence.€€At€the€motion€for€new€trial,€the€court€receivedÏevidence€that€the€victim€and€her€sister€experienced€recurrent€nightmares€betweenÏ2:00€and€2:30€a.m.€€Walker€alleges€this€information€casts€doubt€on€his€convictionÏbecause€the€nightmares€may€be€indicative€of€the€time€of€night€Brittany€was€abused.€Ð 09Ð/3 ÐBy€all€accounts,€the€only€adult€present€in€the€Hunt/Hendrix€home€at€2:00€or€2:30Ïa.m.€on€March€21,€1995€was€Shannon€Hendrix.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIt€is€within€the€trial€court's€discretion€to€grant€a€motion€for€new€trial€onÏthe€basis€of€newly€discovered€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Goswickóó,€656€S.W.2d€355,€358Ð à€ Ð(Tenn.€1983).€€In€order€to€prevail€on€such€a€motion,€the€defendant€must€demonstrateÏreasonable€diligence,€materiality€and€likelihood€of€a€different€result€if€the€evidenceÏis€produced€and€accepted€by€the€jury.€€òòIdóó.€at€358„59.Ð €  ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€weakness€in€the€defendantððs€argument€is€that€he€failed€to€carryÏhis€burden€of€proof€at€the€motion€for€new€trial.€€Although€there€is€evidence€of€theÏvictim's€and€her€sister's€nightmares€in€the€record,€the€defendant€has€failed€toÏestablish€the€relevance€of€this€evidence€ñÓXñœñÓXñtoñÆXñ›ñÆXñ€añÓXñ›ñÓXñ€defense€that€Hendrix€committed€theÏcrime.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThat€the€victimððs€and€her€sisterððs€nightmares€have€any€relevance€to€theÏtime€of€the€victimððs€injuries€can€be€no€more€than€conjecture€without€some€evidenceÏlinking€the€nightmares€to€the€time€of€the€injuries.€€The€defense€proof€at€the€motionÏfor€new€trial€was€notably€absent€of€any€expert€testimony€that€children€may€haveÏsleep€disturbances€at€the€same€time€of€night€when€they€have€suffered€or€ñÓXñœñÓXñwitnesseñÆXñ›ñÆXñdñÓXñ›ñÓXñÏa€traumatic€ñÓXñœñÓXñeventñÊXñ.ñÊXññÓXñ›œñÓXññËXñ.€€ñËXññÌXñ›€ñÌXññÓXñ›œñÓXññÌXññÉXñ€ñÉXññÌXññÉXñ›ñÉXññÇXñ€Without€evidence€from€which€the€trier€of€fact€could€find€theÏexistence€of€the€defendantððs€guilt€more€or€less€probable€based€upon€the€victimððs€andÏher€sisterððs€recurrent€nightmares€at€2:00€or€2:30€a.m.,›€tñÇXññÈXñTñÈXñhereñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXññÍXñhñÍXññÎXñwñÎXñasñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€ñÓXñœñÓXññÏXñbeen›€ñÏXñnoñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€showing€of€materiality€of€this€evidence€or€theÏlikelihood€of€a€different€result.€€Thus,€there€was€no€error€in€denying€the€defendantÏa€new€trial.ÌñÓXñœñÓXññÐXñÌñÐXññÒXñ›ñÒXññÑXññÐXñÌñÐXñ›ñÐXñÌñÐXñ›ÌñÑXññÓXñ›ñÓXñà ` àà ¸ àIn€sum,€we€find€no€error€of€law€requiring€reversal.€€The€judgment€of€the€ñÓXñœñÓXññÒXñÌÌÐ  :À04 ÐñÒXñtrialñÓXñ›ñÓXñ€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÔ€X"oXX X"oÔÓÓÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€Ô_ÔCURWOODÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWITTÔ_Ô,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJOHN€H.€Ô_ÔPEAYÔ_Ô,€JUDGEÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌ