ÿWPCÚ 8¥¹ùQ=^ÀŒ>é0.Q&ÒºwpSÂ7Ö#“9úè Ž©PØô~›³$“'0 $%0WKdÄ×xß~,Qʼn;}ãcȻָ g°RŽȳ™²«ÍFPÿ™öy˜2ïOZÜÉÈG[$ Ýlv­1DB2a3Ï“Q`* ƒÕ ÐNS€^ëÄ6d^goc¤“ší´ïBÕR2¢j]ÍÛ²5e¢èÙÞLò¯<& €êP;ìæ?KÇ,GsÌ¢ _NŒùäo ã´¦qojA–‡0çâod|ˆƒ¹©IÚØ©D\ü‹³Ý<:H¥ØÈÐp4ó”w(m¦]a^\ |£8“Ÿ }[­•o…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ U:Í w@ 4G [ Sj 0ˆ½ 0DE U:‰ U:à ¸ý kµU> ^f mhèU:ggggggggggggggggg B¡¡¡¡ D3¾¾¾ 0Dññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññ AO5Æ„„ 0DJ D/Ž B½˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial Regular åDæVçDèVéDêUëDìDíUîÓ€uM% ú, úÿÿ3|x÷ IÝ ƒ ¨$ÝÒ4°ÒÒX°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ô ôXXÔÔ€ ôJËôôô Ô"There€shall€be€no€release€eligibility€for€a€person€committing€[second€degree€murder]€on€orÐ `  Ðafter€July€1,€1995."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„501(i›)(2).(8(2¨$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ4°ÒÒX°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó, øð AZ"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ®Ý ƒ ¨$ÝÒ4°ÒÒX°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ô(¦ôXXÔÔ‡ô\©ôôô(¦Ô"[T]he€jury€shall€have€the€right€to€determine€the€law€and€the€facts,€under€the€direction€of€theÐ `  Ðcourt,€as€in€other€criminal€cases."€€Tenn.€Const.€Art.€I€ðð€19.€€òòSeeóó€òòMcGowan€v.€Stateóó,€17€Tenn.€184Ð  ¾ Ð(1836)€and€its€progeny. aÝ ƒ ¨$ÝÒ4°ÒÒX°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡XêÛXXXÔÔ‡òU¤òXXêÛÔÔ#†ò(¥òòòU¤_#ÔÔ‡òU¤òòò(¥ÔThe€first€four€criteria€are€found€in€òòGrayóó.€€A€fifth€category€in€òòGrayóó,€based€on€a€specific€numberÐ `  Ðof€prior€felony€convictions,€may€enhance€the€sentence€range€but€is€no€longer€a€listed€criterion.€€òòSeeóóÐ  ¾ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115,€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.Ô#†ò(¥òòòU¤À#ÔÔ‡òOø òòò(¥Ô<@ˆÐ9Z &Courier RegularÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ÞÔ€XEÚXXXÔÔ€­XXEÚÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XEÚX­ÔÐ  ÐÌDecember€9,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d&&&&'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñîñ›ñîñÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€X¬<XXXÔòòÔ‡ XEÚXXX¬<ÔÓ  Óñîñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@E f ` 8ttxPX` ð  rß›ñîñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÐ `  Ðà@@ÚÚ0ÚàòòÌAT€NASHVILLEóóÐ , Ì ÐÌMAY€1998€SESSIONÌÓóÓÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ” àà ì à*à D àC.C.A.€NO.€¢01C01£„9704„CC„00122€Ð 0 ÐÌà Œ àAPPELLEE,à < àà ” àà ì à*à D àMAURY€COUNTYÐ \ü  Ðà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D à(Transferred€from€Giles€County)Ì¢VS£.à Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à*à D àHon.€William€B.€Cain,€JudgeÐ (È  ÐÌSTEPHEN€JOHN€ABBOTT,à ì à*à D à(Second€Degree€Murder€(Two€Counts);€à T$ àÐ ô”  Ðà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àAttempted€First€Degree€Murder;€and€€à T$ àÐ Úz  Ðà Œ àAPPELLANT.à ” àà ì à*Ô#†X¬<XX XEÚÔ#ÔÔ‡ XEÚXXX¬<Ôà D àAttempted€Second€Degree€Murder)à T$ àÐ À` Ðà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àÔ#†X¬<XX XEÚ.#ÔÔ‡ XEÚXXX¬<Ôà ô àÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D à€Ìà Œ àà ä àÌòòÌÌFor€Appellant:óóà < àà ” àà ì àà D àòòFor€Appellee:óóÐ $Ä ÐÌ¢Hershell£€D.€¢Koger£à < àà ” àà ì àà D àJohn€Knox€¢Walkup£Ð ð Ð135€N.€First€Streetà < àà ” àà ì àà D àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ Öv ÐP.O.€Box€1148à < àà ” àà ì àà D à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÐ ¼ \ ТPulaski£,€TN€€38478à < àà ” àà ì àà D àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ð ¢!B ÐÌLarry€L.€Robertsà < àà ” àà ì àà D àKaren€M.€¢Yacuzzo£Ð n# Ð627€Second€Avenue€Southà ì àà D àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÐ T$ô ÐNashville,€TN€€37210à ” àà ì àà D àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÐ :%Ú Ðà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àMike€BottomsÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àP.O.€Box€459Ìà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D à¢Lawrenceburg£,€TN€€38464à ¤ àà ü! à€Ð „+$"& ÐÌÌà Œ àà ä àà < àÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€____________________ÌÌÌÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDED€FOR€NEW€TRIALÌÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÔ#†X¬<XX XEÚ#ÔÔ‡ XEÚXXX¬<ÔÐ þ8ž/5 ÐÔ#†X¬<XX XEÚ#ÔÐ  ä9„06 ÐÓÓÓ  Óòòò òÑ7€¬<XXdðXXdð7ÑOPINIONó óóóÐ `  ÐÓ“Óà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant,€Stephen€John€Abbott,€was€indicted€in€Giles€County€forÏtwo€counts€of€first€degree€murder€and€two€counts€of€attempted€first€degree€murder.€ÏAfter€a€change€of€venue€to€Maury€County,€he€was€convicted€of€second€degreeÏmurder€for€the€deaths€of€Carolyn€Foster€and€Diane€Collins€(counts€1€and€2),€theÏattempted€second€degree€murder€of€Carol€Yancy€(count€3),€and€the€attempted€firstÏdegree€murder€of€Ron€Shirey€(count€4).€€The€trial€court€imposed€sentence€asÏfollows:ÌÒ°XÒÒŒ 4Òcount€1à < àsecond€degree€murderà œ àà ô àà L àtwenty€yearsÐ ` Ðcount€2à < àsecond€degree€murderà œ àà ô àà L àtwenty€yearsÐ @à Ðcount€3à < àattempted€second€degree€murderà L àten€yearsÐ  À Ðcount€4à < àattempted€first€degree€murderà ô àà L àtwenty€yearsÐ   ÐÒ4Œ ÒÒX°ÒThe€two€second€degree€murder€sentences€are€to€be€served€consecutively€withÏrelease€eligibility€after€service€of€at€least€eighty„five€percent€of€the€forty„year€term.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð À!` ÐÌà Œ àà ä àIn€this€appeal€of€right,€the€defendant€presents€the€following€issues€forÏreview:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓ(1)€€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€theÏverdicts€of€guilt€for€all€four€offenses;ÌÌ(2)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€grant€theÏdefendant's€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal€at€the€closeÏof€the€state's€proof;ÌÌ(3)€€whether€the€indictment€sufficiently€charges€eachÏoffense;€ÌÌ(4)€€whether€the€juvenile€court€erred€by€transferring€theÏdefendant€to€circuit€court€to€be€tried€as€an€adult;ÌÌ(5)€€whether€the€juvenile€court€erred€by€consolidating€theÐ p5,/ Ðdefendant's€transfer€hearing€with€that€of€his€co„¼defendant;Ð r5,1 Ї(6)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€overruling€theÏdefendant's€motion€to€suppress€his€oral€statements;€ÌÌ(7)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€strikeÏcertain€potential€jurors€for€cause;ÌÌ(8)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€grant€theÏdefendant's€motion€for€a€change€of€venire;ÌÌ(9)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€evidence€thatÏthe€defendant€and€co„defendant€were€wearing€blackÏclothing€at€the€time€the€crimes€were€committed;ÌÌ(10)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€charge€theÏlesser€offense€of€facilitation€of€a€felony;€andÌÌ(11)€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€imposing€anÏexcessive€sentence.ÌÌÌÌÒ4ä ÒÒX ÒÓ(Óà Œ àà ä àWe€must€reverse€and€remand€for€a€new€trial€due€to€the€failure€toÏcharge€the€lesser€offense€of€facilitation€of€a€felony.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àOn€November€15,€1995,€Deputy€Kyle€Helton€of€the€Giles€CountyÏSheriff's€Department€drove€to€Richland€High€School€to€teach€a€class€about€theÏimportance€of€avoiding€drugs€and€violence.€€Upon€his€arrival€at€7:55€A.M.,€heÏlearned€that€someone€had€just€been€shot.€€When€he€saw€blood€on€the€floor€andÏ"people€laying€in€the€hallway,"€he€contacted€the€sheriff's€department,€seekingÏadditional€help.€€He€then€determined€that€Carolyn€Foster€and€Carol€Yancy,€bothÏteachers,€had€suffered€gunshot€wounds€to€the€head€area€and€that€a€student,€DianeÏCollins,€had€been€shot€in€the€neck.€€The€weapon€used€was€a€.22€rifle.€€Officer€HeltonÏtook€Jamie€Rouse€into€custody;€the€defendant€was€not€"anywhere€around€...."€€Ì€€Ìà Œ àà ä àAgent€Wayne€Wesson,€of€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation,Ïinterviewed€the€defendant€twice€on€the€day€of€the€shootings.€€On€each€occasion,€theÏdefendant€provided€a€signed,€written€statement.€€At€about€1:30€P.M.,€the€defendantÏtold€Agent€Wesson€that€he€had€known€Rouse€for€about€one€and€one„half€years€andÐ þ8ž/5 Ðthat€they€had€been€good€friends.€€He€revealed€that€Rouse€liked€heavy€metal€musicÏand€was€rumored€to€be€a€Satan€worshiper.€€The€defendant€stated€that€Rouse€hadÏcarved€an€inverted€cross€on€his€forehead€once€before,€always€wore€black,€and€hadÏpreviously€shaved€his€head.€€The€defendant€recalled€that€the€evening€before€theÏshootings,€Rouse€had€said€that€he€was€tired€of€school€and€wanted€to€quit.€€He€toldÏAgent€Wesson€that€on€the€day€of€the€shooting,€Rouse€called€the€defendant€andÏinformed€him€he€would€pick€him€up€for€school€early.€€They€arrived€at€school€atÏapproximately€7:55€A.M.€and€Rouse€left€his€truck€armed€with€a€.22€rifle.€€TheÏdefendant€claimed€that€he€called€out€to€Rouse,€who€did€not€respond€but€proceeded€Ïinto€the€school.€€The€defendant€stated€that€Rouse€attempted€to€fire€his€weapon€atÏMs.€Foster,€but€the€safety€was€in€place.€€He€recalled€that€Rouse€lowered€the€gun,Ïdisabled€the€safety,€and€fired€at€Ms.€Foster€again€and€then€fired€at€Ms.€Yancy.€€TheÏdefendant€claimed€that€he€then€left€the€area€and€heard€one€or€two€more€shots.€€HeÏasserted€that€he€knew€nothing€about€Rouse's€intentions€and€had€not€noticed€the€rifleÏin€the€vehicle.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€a€second€statement,€provided€at€6:15€P.M.€on€the€day€of€theÏmurders,€the€defendant€revealed€that€he€and€Rouse€wanted€to€quit€school€becauseÏthey€did€not€"fit€in."€€He€acknowledged€that€on€the€night€before€the€shooting,€RouseÏtalked€about€killing€a€trooper€who€had€given€him€a€ticket€and€killing€Tina€Mueller,Ïsomeone€with€whom€he€had€argued.€€He€told€Agent€Wesson€that€when€RouseÏasked€if€he€wanted€to€help,€he€responded,€"I€don't€know."€€The€defendant€alsoÏrecalled€Rouse€saying€"he€was€going€to€take€care€of€Shirey€and€Hobbs."€€WhenÏRouse€asked€if€he€would€help,€the€defendant€"laughed€and€said,€yeah."€€TheÏdefendant€explained€that€he€did€not€really€believe€Rouse€would€follow€through€on€theÏthreats.€€The€defendant€acknowledged€that€he€saw€the€rifle€when€he€got€into€theÏtruck.€€He€recalled€Rouse,€who€had€a€"brick€of€shells,"€said,€"it's€going€to€happenÐ 8¸.4 Ðtoday."€€He€remembered€that€on€the€way€to€school,€Rouse€threatened€to€shootÏ"anyone€who€gets€in€my€way"€and€that€Rouse€stopped€at€the€residence€of€StephenÏRay,€showed€him€the€gun€and€shells,€and€claimed,€"It's€going€to€happen€today."€ÏWhen€Ray€responded,€"You're€crazy,"€the€defendant€contended€that€he€indicatedÏagreement.€€After€leaving€the€Ray€residence€and€upon€arriving€at€the€high€school,ÏRouse€asked,€"Are€you€ready?"€€The€defendant€recalled€that€Rouse€then€took€theÏweapon€and€left.€€The€defendant€emphasized€to€Agent€Wesson€that€he€did€notÏbelieve€Rouse€would€shoot€anyone€and€that€he€"was€shocked"€by€what€hadÏoccurred.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àMichael€Chapman,€chief€investigator€for€the€Giles€County€Sheriff'sÏDepartment,€interviewed€the€defendant€a€day€later.€€He€stated€that€the€defendantÏadmitted€to€driving€the€truck€to€school.€€Officer€Chapman€testified€that€the€defendantÏhad€stated€that€Rouse€did€not€mention€shooting€a€trooper€until€after€the€defendantÏstarted€driving€Rouse's€truck.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àSheriff€Eddie€Bass€testified€that€he€was€called€to€the€scene€of€theÏshootings€immediately.€€When€he€located€the€defendant,€the€defendant€was€wearingÏ"[b]lack€from€head„to„toe.€€Shirt,€pants,€boots.€€I€believe€a€black€coat,€also."€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àRebecca€Lee€Giles,€who€arrived€at€Richland€High€at€about€7:30€on€theÏmorning€of€the€shootings,€saw€Jamie€Rouse€come€through€a€doorway€at€about€7:55ÏA.M.€€Rouse,€who€carried€a€gun€at€his€side,€shot€Ms.€Yancy€and€Ms.€Foster.€€Ms.ÏGiles,€who€immediately€fled€to€the€parking€lot,€testified€at€trial€that€the€defendant€wasÏnot€present€and€that€Rouse€appeared€to€be€acting€alone.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àCarol€Yancy,€a€teacher€at€the€school,€testified€that€on€the€morning€ofÐ 8¸.4 Ðthe€shootings,€she€and€Carolyn€Foster€were€standing€in€the€doorway€to€Ms.€Foster'sÏclassroom€when€Rouse€approached€them€with€a€rifle.€€She€had€no€other€recollectionÏuntil€she€regained€consciousness€on€the€way€to€the€hospital.€€A€gunshot€wound€toÏher€head€required€hospitalization€for€several€days.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àTeacher€Ralph€Johnson€recalled€hearing€a€noise€that€sounded€"likeÏtwo€firecrackers,"€looking€into€the€hallway,€and€seeing€Ms.€Yancy€and€Ms.€Foster€onÏthe€floor.€€When€he€heard€another€shot€a€few€seconds€later,€he€ran€toward€theÏshooting€and€helped€take€the€murder€weapon€away.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àRon€Shirey,€a€teacher€and€coach€who€was€responsible€for€much€of€theÏdiscipline€at€the€school,€was€to€monitor€the€halls€until€classes€began.€€He€heard€aÏloud€pop,€saw€Ms.€Collins€"holding€her€neck€or€throat"€and€bleeding€profusely,€andÏthen€saw€Rouse€armed€with€a€rifle.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àRachel€Warren€Harmon,€who€grew€up€with€and€rode€the€bus€with€theÏdefendant€and€Rouse,€worked€with€them€at€Delta€Express,€a€truck€stop.€€SheÏtestified€that€on€the€evening€before€the€shootings,€she€noticed€Rouse€and€theÏdefendant€engaged€in€conversation€outside€the€business.€€She€remembered€thatÏthey€stopped€their€conversation€when€she€approached€them€and€the€defendantÏstated,€"We'll€just€discuss€it€later."€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àJim€Matthews,€a€criminal€investigator€for€the€District€Attorney's€office,Ïfound€a€black€jacket,€several€compact€discs€and€a€CD€case,€and€433€.22€long€rifle,Ïhigh€velocity€cartridges€in€Rouse's€truck.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àDr.€Ann€Bucholtz,€who€had€performed€an€autopsy€on€fourteen„year„oldÐ 8¸.4 ÐDiane€Collins,€determined€that€a€gunshot€wound€to€the€neck€had€caused€her€death.€ÏDr.€Charles€Warren€Harlan,€who€performed€an€autopsy€on€Carolyn€Foster,Ïdetermined€that€gunshot€wounds€to€the€head€and€the€neck€had€caused€her€death.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àBilly€Rogers,€a€student€at€Richland€High€School,€also€worked€at€DeltaÏExpress.€€He€recalled€the€defendant€saying€that€he€might€lose€"a€couple€of€friendsÏtomorrow";€when€he€asked€their€identity,€the€defendant€responded,€"If€there€was€aÏLord,€he€better€make€it€snow,€so€we€ain't€got€school€tomorrow."€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àDanielle€Robinson,€a€student€at€the€high€school,€remembered€passingÏRouse€in€the€hallway€and€seeing€the€gun.€€She€then€saw€the€defendant,€eight€or€tenÏfeet€away,€and€told€him€Rouse€had€a€gun.€€She€recalled€his€response,€"He€does?"€ÏShe€testified€that€she€saw€the€defendant€later€in€the€day€and€that€he€was€"in€a€daze,"Ïpale,€and€unresponsive.€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àStudent€Beth€Rogers,€a€cousin€to€Rouse,€testified€that€when€Ms.ÏCollins€was€shot,€her€boyfriend€grabbed€her€and€shoved€her€into€the€bathroom.€ÏImmediately€after€the€shooting,€she€saw€the€defendant,€pale€and€crying,€in€theÏparking€lot.€€When€she€asked€the€defendant€whether€the€rifle€was€in€the€front€of€theÏtruck,€the€defendant€responded,€"No,€it€must€have€been€in€the€back."€€Ms.€RogersÏalso€recalled€that€Rouse€had€previously€threatened€to€kill€people,€but€that€she€didÏnot€take€him€seriously.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àStephen€Ray€testified€that€on€the€morning€of€the€shootings,€theÏdefendant€and€Rouse€had€stopped€at€his€residence€on€their€way€to€school.€€HeÏrecalled€that€Rouse€was€driving€the€truck€and€that€a€rifle€was€on€the€seat€in€plainÏview.€€Ray€testified€that€Rouse€acknowledged€that€the€weapon€was€his.€€When€heÐ 8¸.4 Ðasked€Rouse,€"Who€are€you€going€after,"€either€Rouse€or€the€defendant€repliedÏ"Hobbs€[the€school€principal]€and€whoever€gets€in€the€way."€€Ray,€who€was€uncertainÏwhich€of€the€two€responded,€then€saw€a€box€of€ammunition€and€a€gun€clip€in€theÏtruck.€€He€could€not€recall€whether€Rouse€or€the€defendant€warned€him€to€stay€in€theÏparking€lot€at€school,€"because€they€didn't€want€me€hit€by€any€stray€bullets."€€RayÏremembered€that€the€defendant€moved€into€the€driver's€seat€before€driving€awayÏand€that€Rouse€was€in€the€passenger€seat.€€Ray€testified€that€he€did€not€think€RouseÏwas€serious€about€actually€shooting€anyone.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àWhen€Ray€arrived€outside€the€school,€he€saw€Rouse€walking€towardÏthe€door€carrying€a€rifle€in€his€left€hand.€€Ray€then€recalled€gunshots:€"two€somewhatÏclose€together,€and€a€slight€pause,€and€then€a€third."€€Afterward,€Ray€saw€theÏdefendant€walking€in€the€parking€lot;€he€described€the€defendant€on€the€"verge€ofÏtears,€pale,€[t]rembling,€[j]ust€general€shock."€€Ray€recalled€the€defendant€said€heÏcould€not€"believe€he€done€it."€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà Œ àÌà Œ àà ä àSeveral€witnesses€testified€for€the€defense.€€Thomas€Ray,€StephenÏRay's€father,€was€a€character€witness€for€the€defendant.€€He€described€theÏdefendant€as€"[e]ven„tempered€...€[an€a]verage€teen„ager€and€a€good€boy."€€RickÏPitts,€the€defendant's€supervisor€at€the€Delta€Express,€described€the€defendant€asÏan€above€average€employee€and€recalled€that€the€defendant€was€very€upset€overÏthe€shootings,€a€"nervous€wreck."€€He€remembered€that€the€defendant€was€unableÏto€control€his€emotions€and€had€"held€his€head€down€between€his€hands,€and€stoodÏthere€and€shook."ÌÌà Œ àà ä àJames€Nichols,€an€agricultural€education€instructor€at€Richland€High,Ïtestified€at€the€Juvenile€Transfer€Hearing.€€He€remembered€seeing€Rouse€fire€hisÐ 8¸.4 Ðrifle€toward€Coach€Shirey€and€grabbing€the€barrel€of€the€rifle€in€an€effort€to€take€itÏaway€from€Rouse.€€During€the€struggle,€a€shot€was€accidentally€fired€into€the€ceiling.€ÏWhen€Nichols€ordered€Rouse€to€surrender€the€gun,€Rouse€responded,€"I€can't.€€I'veÏwent€too€far."€€Nichols€and€several€others€were€able€to€take€the€gun€from€Rouse.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant,€who€was€seventeen€years€old€when€the€shootingsÏoccurred,€was€a€senior€at€the€school€and€worked€at€Delta€Express.€€He€had€plannedÏto€enlist€in€the€Navy€after€school€and€had€scored€in€the€upper€ten€percent€on€theÏArmed€Service€Vocational€Aptitude€Battery€Test.€€He€testified€that€he€had€befriendedÏRouse€in€his€sophomore€year€and€had€often€heard€Rouse€threaten€to€kill€people€butÏhad€never€before€known€him€to€carry€out€any€of€the€threats€or€violence€againstÏanyone.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àHe€recalled€that€on€the€evening€before€the€shooting,€Rouse,€who€wasÏnot€on€duty€at€the€time,€stopped€by€Delta€Express€to€exchange€a€compact€discÏplayer.€€He€remembered€that€Rouse€had€threatened€to€kill€Tina€Mueller€and€hadÏsought€his€help.€€The€defendant€claimed€that€he€responded,€"I€don't€know"€and€thenÏlaughed€because€he€did€not€think€Rouse€was€serious.€€The€defendantÏacknowledged€telling€Billy€Rogers,€"If€there€is€a€God,€I€hope€it€snows€tomorrow."€ÏWhile€conceding€that€he€had€said€to€Rogers€that€he€was€going€to€lose€a€couple€ofÏfriends,€he€did€not€think€anyone€was€going€to€get€killed€but€only€that€some€type€ofÏfight€would€occur.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àHe€testified€that€on€the€morning€of€the€shooting,€Rouse€had€called€toÏsay€that€he€would€pick€him€up€a€little€early.€€When€he€got€in€Rouse's€truck,€theÏdefendant€saw€the€gun€and€shells€in€the€seat.€€He€testified€that€he€asked€about€theÏweapon€and€Rouse€responded,€"It's€going€to€happen€today."€€Along€the€way,€RouseÐ 8¸.4 Ðstopped€to€purchase€a€drink€and€a€candy€bar€and€then€drove€to€Steve€Ray's€home.€ÏRay€came€to€the€truck€and€asked€about€the€weapon;€Rouse€responded€it€was€forÏ"Hobbs,€and€whoever€gets€in€the€way."€€The€defendant€testified€that€he€agreed€withÏRay,€who€said,€"You're€crazy."€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€testified€that€he€then€agreed€to€Rouse's€request€that€heÏdrive.€€He€described€the€request€as€not€unusual€because€he€had€driven€the€truckÏseveral€times€previously.€€He€explained€that€he€agreed€to€drive€because€he€had€notÏdriven€in€a€while,€as€his€own€truck€was€"broke€down."€€The€defendant€recalled€thatÏRouse€placed€the€weapon€in€his€lap€and€said,€"now€he€can€shoot€the€cop€in€front€ofÏthe€school."€€The€defendant€explained€that€he€thought€Rouse€was€joking,€butÏconceded€that€he€was€a€little€worried€about€Rouse's€behavior.€€He€testified€thatÏwhen€he€parked€the€truck,€Rouse€got€out€fast€and€walked€toward€the€school€withoutÏwaiting.€€The€defendant€yelled€three€or€four€times€at€Rouse,€who€did€not€respond.€ÏThe€defendant,€who€had€no€recollection€of€Rouse€loading€the€rifle,€recalled€thatÏRouse€fired€at€Ms.€Foster€and€Ms.€Yancy€and€continued€to€walk€down€the€hall.€€TheÏdefendant,€who€insisted€he€did€not€help€plan€the€shootings€and€had€no€intent€ñÚñœñÚñtoÌharmñÚñ›ñÚñ€anybody,€stated€that€he€left€the€school€grounds€with€Ray.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àPerry€Gammons€testified€for€the€state€in€rebuttal.€€He€claimed€that€theÏmorning€of€the€shootings,€he€had€seen€the€defendant€and€Rouse€talk€near€the€frontÏof€Rouse's€truck€and€then€walk€side€by€side€toward€the€school.€Ì€€€€€€€€€€¹Ó  Ó(1)ÌÓgOÓà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€first€argues€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€theÏverdicts€of€guilty€for€all€four€offenses.€€He€argues€the€state's€case€is€based€onÏ"speculation€and€conjecture."€€Ð 8¸.4 ЇÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔà Œ àà ä àOn€appeal,€of€course,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÐ `  Ðview€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€might€be€drawn€therefrom.€ÏòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€The€credibility€of€theÐ ø ˜ Ðwitnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€the€reconciliation€of€conflictsÏin€the€proof€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€jury€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòByrge€v.€Stateóó,€575Ð 0 ÐS.W.2d€292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€When€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€isÏchallenged,€the€relevant€question€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€lightÏmost€favorable€to€the€state,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2dÐ À` Ð405,€410€(Tenn.€1983);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€may€be€found€criminally€responsible€for€Rouse'sÏconduct€if€"[a]cting€with€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€orÏto€benefit€in€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€[he]€solicits,€directs,€aids,€orÏattempts€to€aid€another€person€to€commit€the€offense."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„¼402(2).€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä à"[I]t€is€evident€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402(2)€...€is€derived€fromÏcommon€law."€€òòState€v.€Carsonóó,€950€S.W.2d€951,€954€(Tenn.€1997).€€Even€under€theÐ ¸)X $ Ðtheory€of€criminal€responsibility€for€the€acts€of€another,€mere€presence€during€theÏcommission€of€the€crime€is€not€enough€to€convict.€€òòSeeóó€òòFlippen€v.€Stateóó,€365€S.W.2dÐ P-ð#( Ð895,€899€(Tenn.€1963);€òòAnglin€v.€Stateóó,€553€S.W.2d€616,€619€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð /¼%* Ð1977).€€Presence€and€companionship€with€the€perpetrator€of€a€felony€before€andÏafter€the€commission€of€the€offense€are€circumstances€from€which€one'sÏparticipation€in€the€crime€may€be€inferred.€€No€particular€act€need€be€shown.€€It€is€notÏnecessary€for€one€to€take€a€physical€part€in€the€crime.€€Mere€encouragement€of€theÏprincipal€is€sufficient.€€òòState€v.€McBeeóó,€644€S.W.2d€428€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982).€€œñÛñà Œ à›à Œ àñÛñÔ#†XêÛXX XêÛmP#ԛР8¸.4 Ðà Œ àà ä àWhile€the€defendant€"'must€knowingly,€voluntarily,€and€with€commonÏintent€unite€with€the€principal€offenders€in€the€commission€of€the€crime,'"€theÏ"'common€purpose€need€not€be€to€commit€the€particular€crime€which€is€committed.'"€ÏòòCarsonóó,€950€S.W.2d€at€954€(quoting€òòState€v.€Fosteróó,€755€S.W.2d€846,€848€(Tenn.Ð Äd ÐCrim.€App.€1988)).€€In€òòCarsonóó,€our€supreme€court€reaffirmed€the€"natural€andÐ 0 Ðprobable€consequences"€rule:ÌÓÓÌÒXÒÒä 4Ò"[I]f€two€persons€join€in€a€purpose€to€commit€a€crime,Ïeach€of€them,€if€actually€or€constructively€present,€is€notÏonly€guilty€as€a€principal,€if€the€other€commits€thatÏparticular€crime,€òòbut€he€is€also€guilty€of€any€other€crimeÐ À` Ðcommitted€by€the€other€in€pursuance€of€the€commonÏpurpose,€or€as€a€natural€or€probable€consequenceÏthereofóó."Ól[ÓÐ r ÐÒ4ä [ÒÒX[Ò950€S.W.2d€at€954€(quoting€òòKey€v.€Stateóó,€563€S.W.2d€184,€186€(Tenn.€ñÚñœñÚñ1978))ñÚñ›ñÚñÐ >Þ Ð(emphasis€in€original).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àUnder€these€guidelines,€we€ñÚñœñÚñmust€conclude,€despite€the€closeness€ofÏthe€factual€issue,€that€theñÚñ›ñÚñ€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€all€of€the€defendant'sÏconvictions.€€Ô‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔAt€the€time€of€the€offenses,€second€degree€murder€was€defined€as€aÐ :%Ú Ð"knowing€killing€of€another."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210(a).€€Our€code€definesÏ"knowing"€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓ"Knowing"€refers€to€a€person€who€acts€knowingly€withÏrespect€to€the€conduct€or€to€circumstances€surroundingÏthe€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€of€the€nature€ofÏthe€conduct€or€that€the€circumstances€exist.€€A€personÏacts€knowingly€with€respect€to€a€result€of€the€person'sÏconduct€when€the€person€is€aware€that€the€conduct€isÏreasonably€certain€to€cause€the€result.€€œñÝññÝññÞñÌñÞññÝñÌñÝññÞñ›ñÞñÒ4ä ª_ÒÒXœ_ÒÓ¸_ÓñÜñÌñÜñTenn.›€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„302(b).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àFirst€degree€murder€is€defined€as€a€"premeditated€and€intentionalÏkilling€of€another."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€ñÚñœñÚñ39„13„202(a)(1).ñÚñ›ñÚñ€€"'Premeditation'€is€an€actÏdone€after€the€exercise€of€reflection€and€judgment"€and€requires€that€the€"intent€toÐ þ8ž/5 Ðkill€must€have€been€formed€prior€to€the€act€itself."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„302(d).ÌÌÓÓà Œ àà ä àCriminal€attempt€is€defined€as€follows:ÌÌÒXÒÒä 4Ò(a)€A€person€commits€criminal€attempt€who,€acting€withÏthe€kind€of€culpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense:Ì(1)€Intentionally€engages€in€action€or€causes€a€result€thatÏwould€constitute€an€offense€if€the€circumstancesÏsurrounding€the€conduct€were€as€the€person€believesÏthem€to€be;Ì(2)€Acts€with€intent€to€cause€a€result€that€is€an€element€ofÏthe€offense,€and€believes€the€conduct€will€cause€theÏresult€without€further€conduct€on€the€person's€part;€orÌ(3)€Acts€with€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€orÏcause€a€result€that€would€constitute€the€offense,€underÏthe€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€as€theÏperson€believes€them€to€be,€and€the€conduct€constitutesÏa€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€the€offense.Ì(b)€Conduct€does€not€constitute€a€substantial€step€underÏsubdivision€(a)(3)€unless€the€person's€entire€course€ofÏaction€is€corroborative€of€the€intent€to€commit€theÏoffense.Ì(c)€It€is€no€defense€to€prosecution€for€criminal€attemptÏthat€the€offense€attempted€was€actually€committed.ÌÒ4ä »cÒÒX­cÒÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„101.ÌÌÓZcÓÌà Œ àà ä àWith€the€view€that€the€verdict€accredited€the€witnesses€for€the€stateÏand€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€position€of€the€state,€the€evidence€is€ñÚñœñÚññÕñadequateÏto€support€the€verdict€of€ñÕññÖñ›€for›€ñÖñsecondñÚñ›ñÚñ€degree€murder.€€ñÚñœñÚññ×ñOn€appeal€of€the€guilty€verdict,€theÏpresumption€is€one€of€guilt€rather€than€one€of€innocence.€€ñ×ñTheñÚñ›ñÚñ€night€before€theÏshootings,€the€defendant€and€Rouse€discussed€going€to€school€and€killing€an€officer,Ïa€student€with€whom€Rouse€ñÚñœñÚññÚñœñÚñhad€hadñÚñ›ñÚññÚñ›ñÚñ€a€verbal€altercation,€a€teacher,€and€a€principal.€ÏWhen€Rouse€asked€the€defendant€if€he€wanted€to€help,€the€defendant€responded,Ï"Yeah."€€On€the€next€day,€the€defendant€drove€Rouse€to€the€school.€€He€admittedÏseeing€the€murder€weapon€and€ammunition€in€the€truck.€€There€was€ñÚñœñÚññØñsome€ñØñevidenceñÚñ›ñÚñÏthe€defendant€walked€with€Rouse€into€the€school€before€Rouse€shot€and€killed€Ms.ÏFoster€and€Ms.€Collins€and€severely€injured€Ms.€Yancy.€€By€doing€so,€RouseÏcommitted€two€murders€and€an€attempt€to€murder.€€By€aiming€his€weapon€and€firingÐ þ8ž/5 Ðat€Shirey,€a€teacher€Rouse€advised€the€defendant€that€he€would€kill,€RouseÏcommitted€attempted€first€degree€murder.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThat€Rouse€and€the€defendant€did€not€specifically€plan€or€discuss€theirÏintended€crimes€against€the€particular€victims€does€not€serve€to€excuse€or€mitigateÏguilt.€€Under€the€ruling€in€òòCarsonóó,€the€defendant€is€liable€for€all€crimes€which€are€theÐ \ü  Ðnatural€and€foreseeable€consequences€of€the€plan.€€That€persons€at€the€schoolÏother€than€those€specifically€discussed€would€be€injured€or€killed€during€this€plan€ñÚñœñÚñisñÙñ,Ïin€our€view,€reasonablyñÙññÚñ›ñÚñ€foreseeable.€€òòCarsonóó,€950€S.W.2d€at€955.Ð À` Ѐ€€€€€€€€ÌÔ#†XêÛXX XêÛ¼^#ÔÓ  Ó(2)à @Œ àÐ Xø ÐÓ—oÓà Œ àà ä àIn€a€related€argument,€the€defendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÏrefusing€to€grant€his€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal.€€Rule€29,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.,Ïempowers€the€trial€judge€to€direct€a€judgment€of€acquittal€when€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient€to€warrant€a€conviction€either€at€the€time€the€state€rests€or€at€theÏconclusion€of€all€the€evidence.€€òòOverturf€v.€Stateóó,€571€S.W.2d€837€(Tenn.€1978).€€AtÐ T$ô Ðthe€point€the€motion€is€made,€the€trial€court€must€favor€the€opponent€of€the€motionÏwith€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence,€including€all€reasonableÏinferences,€and€discard€any€countervailing€evidence.€€òòHill€v.€Stateóó,€470€S.W.2d€853Ð ¸)X $ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1971).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€standard€by€which€the€trial€court€determines€a€motion€for€judgmentÏof€acquittal€at€that€time€is,€in€essence,€the€same€standard€which€applies€on€appeal€inÏdetermining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€after€a€conviction.€€That€is,€"whether,Ïafter€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€anyÏrational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt."€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307Ð 8¸.4 Ð(1979).€€We€have€previously€concluded€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€theÏconvictions;€accordingly,€this€issue€is€without€merit.Ì€€ÌÓ  Ó(3)à @Œ àÌÓjuÓà Œ àà ä àThe€next€issue€is€whether€the€indictment€sufficiently€charges€eachÏoffense.€€€The€defendant€argues€that€the€count€charging€first€degree€premeditatedÏmurder€fails€to€allege€the€element€of€"deliberate";€the€count€charging€felony€murder,Ïfor€which€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€second€degree€murder,€fails€to€allege€theÏelement€of€"reckless"€as€well€as€"deliberate"€with€respect€to€the€underlying€felony;Ïand€the€counts€charging€attempted€first€degree€murder€fail€to€allege€"deliberate."€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àGenerally,€an€indictment€must€set€forth€the€elements€of€the€offense.€ÏòòState€v.€Perkinsonóó,€867€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€It€is€settled€law€thatÐ ð Ð"[w]hen€the€indictment€or€presentment€fails€to€fully€state€the€crime,€all€subsequentÏproceedings€are€void."€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€598€S.W.2d€796,€797€(Tenn.Ð ˆ"( ÐCrim.€App.€1979)).€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àProvisions€of€the€state€and€federal€constitutions€guarantee€theÏcriminally€accused€knowledge€of€"the€nature€and€cause€of€the€accusation."€€U.S.ÏConst.€amend.€VI;€Tenn.€Const.€art€I,€ðð€9.€€"Fair€and€reasonable€notice€of€theÏcharges€against€an€accused€is€a€fundamental€constitutional€requirement."€€òòState€v.Ð P-ð#( ÐTrustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€305,€309€(Tenn.€1996).€€To€be€sufficient,€an€indictment€mustÐ /¼%* Ð"inform€the€defendant€of€the€precise€charges;€...€must€enable€the€trial€court€uponÏconviction€to€enter€an€appropriate€judgment;€...€and€must€protect€[the]€defendantÏagainst€double€jeopardy."€€òòId.óó€€As€a€matter€of€fairness,€the€constitutional€requirementÐ €4 +0 Ðis€designed€to€afford€the€criminally€accused€with€an€adequate€opportunity€to€prepareÏany€defense€before€the€trial.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòPope€v.€Stateóó,€258€S.W.€775€(Tenn.€1924);Ð 8¸.4 ÐòòDaniel€v.€Stateóó,€50€Tenn.€257€(1871).€€Ð `  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àIn€òòPerkinsonóó,€our€court€explained€the€rationale€for€requiring€theÐ ø ˜ Ðindictment€to€charge€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense:ÌÒä 4ÒÒXÒÓÓTo€allow€a€prosecutor€or€court€to€make€a€subsequentÏguess€as€to€what€was€in€the€minds€of€the€grand€jury€atÏthe€time€they€returned€the€indictment€would€deprive€theÏdefendant€of€a€basic€protection€that€the€grand€jury€wasÏdesigned€to€secure,€because€a€defendant€could€then€beÏconvicted€on€the€basis€of€facts€not€found€by,€and€perhapsÏnot€even€presented€to,€the€grand€jury€that€indicted€him.ÌÌÒ4ä ã}ÒÒXñ}ÒÓÿ}Ó867€S.W.2d€at€5€(quoting€òòUnited€State€v.€Cecilóó,€608€F.2d€1294,€1297€(9th€Cir.Ð À` Ð1979)).€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€our€view,€the€indictments€are€sufficient.€€Count€one€alleges€asÏfollows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓ[the€defendant]€did€unlawfully€commit€First€DegreeÏMurder€by€being€criminally€responsible€for€...€the€conductÏof€James€Ellison€Rouse€...€in€that€the€[defendant]€actingÏwith€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€saidÏoffense,€or€to€benefit€in€the€proceeds€or€results€of€saidÏoffense,€did€intentionally,€knowingly,€wilfully€andÏunlawfully€solicit,€direct,€aid€or€attempt€to€aid€the€saidÏJames€Ellison€Rouse€to€unlawfully,€knowingly,Ïintentionally€and€with€premeditation€kill€Carolyn€FosterÏwith€a€.22€rifle€....ÌÌÒ4ä ´€ÒÒX¦€ÒÓ€ÓAt€the€time€the€offense€was€committed,€in€November€1995,€first€degree€murder€wasÏdefined€as€a€"premeditated€and€intentional€killing€of€another."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ39„13„202.€€It€is€unnecessary€that€the€indictment€allege€the€killing€was€deliberate.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Michael€K.€Christianóó,€No.€03C01„9609„CR„00336,€slip€op.€at€10€(Tenn.Ð 0¢&+ ÐCrim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€Mar.€23,€1998),€òòapp.€filedóó,€May€26,€1998.Ð Î1n(- ÐÌà Œ àà ä àCount€two€alleges€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓ[The€defendant€did€aid€and€abet€Rouse]€to€unlawfully€andÏknowingly€kill€Dianne€Collins€with€a€.22€rifle,€in€attemptingÏto€perpetrate€First€Degree€Murder,€to„wit:€while€[Rouse]Ð þ8ž/5 Ðdid€unlawfully,€ñÚñœñÚñknowingly,ñÚñ›ñÚñ€intentionally€and€withÏpremeditation€attempt€to€kill€Ron€Shirey.€€ÌÌÒ4ä '…ÒÒX…ÒÓ5…ÓThe€defendant€complains€that€the€indictment€should€have€alleged€the€killing€of€Ms.ÏCollins€was€reckless€and€that€the€attempted€first€degree€murder€of€Shirey€was€doneÏdeliberately.€€At€the€time€of€the€offense,€our€law€defined€felony€murder€as€a€"killing€ofÏanother€committed€in€the€perpetration€of€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€any€first€degreeÏmurder€...."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€ñÚñœñÚñ39„13„202(a)(2).ñÚñ›ñÚñ€€"No€culpable€mental€state€isÏrequired€for€conviction€under€subdivision€(a)(2)."€€òòId.óó€€Accordingly,€there€is€noÐ ®  Ðrequirement€that€the€indictment€allege€the€killing€was€reckless.€€Also,€as€notedÏpreviously,€a€premeditated€first€degree€murder€does€not€require€a€deliberate€killing.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àCounts€three€and€four€charge€the€defendant€with€aiding€and€abettingÏRouse€"to€unlawfully,€knowingly,€intentionally€and€with€premeditation€attempt€to€killÏ[the€victim]."€€The€defendant€complains€the€counts€should€have€alleged€theÏattempted€murders€were€deliberate.€€At€the€time€the€offenses€were€committed,Ïhowever,€deliberation€was€not€a€requisite€element€and,€in€consequence,€did€notÏneed€to€be€alleged.€€òòChristianóó,€slip€op.€at€10.Ð :%Ú ÐÌÓ  Ó(4)à @Œ àÌÓm‹Óà Œ àà ä àNext,€the€defendant€claims€that€the€juvenile€court€erred€by€transferringÏhim€to€circuit€court€to€be€tried€as€an€adult.€€He€argues€that€he€had€the€ability€andÏpredisposition€to€benefit€from€rehabilitation€and€did€not€require€such€a€transfer.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àMuch€of€the€proof€at€the€transfer€hearing€mirrored€the€proof€at€trial.€ÏThe€night€before€the€shootings,€the€defendant€and€Rouse€abruptly€ended€a€privateÏdiscussion€when€co„worker€Rachel€Warren€approached€them.€€The€defendant€toldÏRouse€they€would€discuss€the€matter€later.€€The€defendant€told€the€police€thatÏRouse€had€discussed€shooting€Tina€Mueller,€a€student,€Shirey,€a€teacher,€andÐ þ8ž/5 ÐPrincipal€Hobbs.€€When€asked€if€he€wanted€to€help,€the€defendant€responded€in€theÏaffirmative.€€On€the€day€before€the€shootings,€the€defendant€informed€Billy€RogersÏthat€he€was€about€to€lose€a€couple€of€friends.€€The€defendant€drove€the€truck€toÏschool.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä à€The€defendant€presented€several€witnesses€on€his€behalf.€€Dr.ÏKenneth€Anchor,€a€clinical€psychologist,€testified€that€he€examined€the€defendantÏand€found€he€"did€not€demonstrate€the€typical€juvenile€delinquent€or€juvenileÏoffender€profile."€€Dr.€Anchorððs€overall€interpretation€of€various€psychological€testsÏ¢£was€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓThis€is€a€young€man€who€is€not€confident.€€He€does€notÏenjoy€good€self„esteem.€€He€has€a€great€deal€ofÏproblems€living;€problems€in€relationships.€...€€And€theÏbottom€line,€here€is€this€is€somebody€who€is€very€much€inÏneed€of€¢mental€health£€resources€or€services.ÌÌÒ4ä ÅÒÒX·ÒÓÓÓIt€was€Dr.€Anchor's€opinion€that€the€defendant€would€benefit€greatly€from€treatment:Ï"I€believe€he€has€sufficient€intellect€to€benefit€from€it.€€I€believe€he€would€beÏcooperative€and€motivated€...€to€restore€himself€...€€I€think€the€prognosis€isÏfavorable."ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant's€mother,€Donna€Abbott,€testified€that€her€son€hadÏnever€caused€the€family€any€difficulties,€always€having€helped€with€householdÏchores.€€She€testified€that€he€also€helped€financially,€having€worked€the€past€oneÏand€one„half€years.€€Because€the€defendant's€father€was€disabled,€the€family€relied,Ïin€part,€on€the€defendant's€income.€€Ms.€Abbott€described€her€son€as€active€inÏschool.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant's€father,€Don€Abbott,€testified€that€the€defendant€hadÏbeen€working€with€him€and€another€son€to€start€a€pallet€recycling€business.€€HeÐ 8¸.4 Ðstated€that€he€and€his€sons€had€begun€construction€of€a€building,€collected€pallets,Ïand€had€purchased€a€truck€and€office€equipment.€€He€described€the€defendant€asÏhaving€a€strong€interest€and€ability€in€mechanics€and€electronics.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àMorris€Mitchell,€a€counselor€at€Richland€High€School,€testified€that€theÏdefendant€scored€well€above€average€on€various€proficiency€tests€and€collegeÏadmission€tests.€€He€stated€that€the€defendant€also€scored€well€on€the€ArmedÏService€Vocational€Aptitude€Battery.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àSection€37„1„134,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.,€provides€for€a€transfer€fromÏjuvenile€court€to€circuit€court€under€the€following€circumstances:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓThe€disposition€of€the€child€shall€be€as€if€the€child€wereÏan€adult€if:ÌÌÓ  Ó***ÌÓ±˜ÓÌ(4)€The€court€finds€that€there€are€reasonable€grounds€toÏbelieve€that:ÌÌ(A)€The€child€committed€the€delinquent€act€as€alleged;Ì(B)€The€child€is€not€committable€to€an€institution€for€theÏmentally€retarded€or€mentally€ill;€andÌ(C)€The€interests€of€the€community€require€that€the€childÏbe€put€under€legal€restraint€or€discipline.ÌÌ(b)€In€making€the€determination€required€by€subsectionÏ(a),€the€court€shall€consider,€among€other€matters:ÌÌ(1)€The€extent€and€nature€of€the€child's€prior€delinquencyÏrecords;Ì(2)€The€nature€of€past€treatment€efforts€and€the€nature€ofÏthe€child's€response€thereto;Ì(3)€Whether€the€offense€was€against€person€or€property,Ïwith€greater€weight€in€favor€of€transfer€given€to€offensesÏagainst€the€person;Ì(4)€Whether€the€offense€was€committed€in€an€aggressiveÏand€premeditated€manner;€andÌ(5)€The€possible€rehabilitation€of€the€child€by€use€ofÏprocedures,€services€and€facilities€currently€available€toÏthe€court€in€this€state.ÌÌÒ4ä H˜ÒÒX:˜ÒÓV˜ÓÐ 8¸.4 Ѐ€à Œ àà ä àIn€ordering€the€transfer€to€circuit€court,€the€judge€ruled€from€the€benchÐ `  Ðas€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓà < àThere€is€an€area€here€concerning€Mr.€Abbott€thatÏneeds€looking€into€by€a€jury€of€his€peers.€€I've€listened€asÏopen„mindedly€as€I€can,€with€his€young€man's€wholeÏproblem€in€mind.€€But€I€think€that€there€is€enoughÏinvolvement€here€that€it€should€be€dealt€with€in€a€differentÏsetting.Ìà < àThere€certainly€was€time€to€reflect,€and€to€do€otherÏthings,€than€what€transpired€this€morning€of€this€tragicÏevent.€€And€all€of€the€activities,€leading€up€to€it€that'sÏbeen€testified€to€by€these€other€witnesses,€leave€me€withÏa€real€bad€feeling€about€this€situation€involving€this€youngÏman;€that€he€had€the€opportunity€to€have€disengagedÏhimself€from€this€entire€scenario,€but€he€didn't€do€it.Ìà < àSo€I'm€going€to€transfer€him,€also.ÌÌÒ4ä kÒÒX]ÒÓyÓÌà Œ àà ä àAbout€a€week€later,€the€court€entered€a€written€order€ruling€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓà < àThe€juvenile€concerned,€Stephen€John€Abbott,Ïhas€been€charged€with€crimes€involving€the€loss€ofÏhuman€life,€and€the€Court€has€found€that€there€areÏreasonable€grounds€to€believe€that€he€committed€theseÏacts.€€The€evidence€shows€that€the€acts€were€committedÏin€an€aggressive€and€premeditated€manner.€€The€juvenileÏis€17€years€of€age,€and€he€will€be€18€in€a€few€weeks.€€AsÏthis€Court€has€means€of€dealing€with€a€child€only€up€toÏhis€nineteenth€birthday,€the€possibility€of€rehabilitation€inÏa€case€of€this€seriousness€is€not€good.ÌÌÒ4ä $¡ÒÒX¡ÒÓ2¡Óà Œ àà ä àÌà Œ àà ä àAt€the€time€of€the€transfer,€there€were€reasonable€grounds€to€believeÏthe€defendant€had€committed€the€alleged€acts.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„Ð „+$"& Ð134(4).€€The€state€presented€proof€which€would€allow€the€trial€judge€to€conclude€theÏdefendant€discussed€the€shootings€with€Rouse€the€night€before€and€then€drove€theÏtruck€to€the€school€the€next€day€to€execute€the€plan.€€There€is€also€a€reasonableÏbasis€to€believe€the€defendant€is€not€committable€to€an€institution€for€the€mentallyÏretarded€or€mentally€ill.€€òòId.óó€€Finally,€given€the€gravity€of€the€offenses,€there€is€aÐ €4 +0 Ðreasonable€basis€for€concluding€the€defendant€needed€to€be€"put€under€legalÏrestraint."€€òòId.óó€€Ð 8¸.4 Їà Œ àà ä àThat€the€defendant€did€not€have€a€prior€criminal€background€weighs€inÏhis€favor.€€The€offenses€involved,€however,€were€"against€the€person"€and€wereÏ"committed€in€an€aggressive€and€premeditated€manner."€€òòId.óó€€While€the€defendantÐ ø ˜ Ðoffered€persuasive€evidence€that€the€acts€were€out€of€character€and€that€he€couldÏbenefit€from€psychological€treatment,€the€transfer,€in€our€view,€was€appropriate.ÌÌÓ  Ó(5)à @Œ àÌÓn¨Óà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€also€claims€the€juvenile€court€erred€in€consolidating€hisÏtransfer€hearing€with€that€of€his€co„defendant€Rouse.€€He€asserts€that€the€"veryÏnature€of€a€transfer€hearing€[requires]€individual€attention"€and€complains€that€theÏconsolidation€of€his€transfer€hearing€with€Rouse€violated€due€process€principles.€ÏThe€state€argues€that€the€defendant€has€failed€to€show€prejudice€by€virtue€ofÏconsolidation€of€the€cases.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àWe€agree€with€the€state.€€The€defendant€has€not€explained€how€hisÏdue€process€rights€have€been€violated,€other€than€the€complaint€that€he€has€notÏreceived€individualized€treatment.€€Yet€the€record€does€not€support€his€claim€that€heÏwas€deprived€of€individual€attention.€€The€orders€indicate€consideration€of€theÏcircumstances€of€each€juvenile.€€Both€were€afforded€the€opportunity€to€cross„¼examine€the€state's€witnesses€and€to€put€on€their€own€evidence.€€Rule€1(d),€Tenn.€R.ÏJuv.€P.,€provides€that€where€"no€specific€procedure€is€prescribed€by€the€rules,€theÏcourt€may€proceed€in€any€lawful€manner,€in€accordance€with€written€local€rules€ofÏcourt,€which€shall€not€be€inconsistent€with€these€rules€or€with€any€other€applicableÏlaw."€€Obviously€the€trial€judge€complied€with€the€statutory€requirement€that€theÏdefendant€be€afforded€a€hearing€to€determine€the€appropriateness€of€the€transfer.€ÏòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„134.€€A€consolidation,€when€the€crimes€and€the€factsÐ L6ì,2 Ðand€circumstances€arise€out€of€the€same€incident,€is€not€"inconsistent"€with€theÐ 8¸.4 Ðstatute.Ì€€ÌÓ  Ó(6)à @Œ àÌÓÑ®Óà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€also€claims€the€trial€court€erred€by€overruling€his€motionÏto€suppress€a€statement€he€gave€while€in€custody€because€he€had€not€been€advisedÏof€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€On€the€date€of€the€shootings,€the€defendant€provided€twoÐ \ü  Ðsigned€statements€which€were€admitted€into€evidence€through€the€testimony€ofÏOfficer€Chapman;€neither€has€been€challenged€in€this€appeal.€€The€following€day,ÏOfficer€Chapman€asked€the€defendant€if€he€knew€about€Rouse's€plan€to€shoot€theÏofficer€who€directed€traffic€in€the€front€of€the€school.€€The€defendant€responded€thatÏhe€learned€about€the€plan€only€after€he€undertook€to€drive€the€truck€to€school.€ÏBased€on€this€response,€Officer€Chapman€provided€òòMirandaóó€warnings€and€turned€onÐ $Ä Ðthe€tape€recorder.€€The€defendant€then€gave€a€fourth€lengthy€statement.€€The€trialÏcourt€suppressed€the€fourth€statement€because€the€defendant€requested€anÏattorney€after€the€warning€was€given€but€officers€continued€to€take€the€statement.€ÏThe€statement€at€issue€is€the€third€statement€the€defendant€made€before€anyÏòòMirandaóó€warnings€were€given.€€€€Ð  &À  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àOfficer€Chapman€testified€that€after€the€shootings,€he€learned€fromÏother€sources€that€the€defendant€drove€the€truck€to€the€school€and€that€there€hadÏbeen€a€plan€to€shoot€the€officer€who€worked€in€front€of€the€school.€€The€day€after€theÏshootings,€he€called€the€defendant's€mother€and€told€her€he€had€"two€questions"€heÏwanted€to€ask.€€When€the€defendant's€parents€brought€him€to€the€station,€OfficerÏChapman€did€not€give€any€òòMirandaóó€warnings.€€Instead,€explained€that€he€wanted€toÐ ´2T). Ðtalk€about€two€issues:€first,€whether€there€was€a€plan€to€shoot€the€police€officer€thatÏworks€in€front€of€the€school;€and,€second,€whether€the€defendant€was€driving.€€TheÏdefendant€responded€by€saying€he€did€not€learn€about€the€plan€to€shoot€the€officerÐ 8¸.4 Ðuntil€after€he€took€the€steering€wheel€of€Rouse's€truck.€€It€was€at€this€point€that€theÏofficer€turned€on€the€tape€recorder€and€gave€òòMirandaóó€warnings.€€Ð , Ì ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€officer€insisted€that€the€defendant€was€not€in€custody€at€that€time,Ïwas€not€under€any€restraint,€and€had€been€brought€to€the€station€by€his€parents€on€aÏvoluntary€basis.€€When€asked€whether€the€officer€intended€to€let€the€defendantÏleave,€the€officer€answered,€"After€these€statements€were€completed,€I€had€to€callÏthe€District€Attorney's€office€to€see€where€we€were€as€far€as€any€kind€of€charges.€ÏThat€took€some€time.€€It€was€my€intention€that€they€be€allowed€to€go....€€The€SheriffÏoverruled€that."€€When€asked€whether€he€told€the€defendant€and€his€parents€theyÏwere€free€to€leave,€the€officer€responded,€"Yes.€€I€told€them€they€could€go.€€TheyÏwanted€to€stay€until€they€heard€the€results€of€what€the€District€Attorney's€officeÏdecided,€as€to€whether€there€would€be€any€criminal€charges€or€not."€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€court€denied€the€motion€to€suppress,€ruling€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓà < àTo€take€òòMirandaóó€to€the€extreme,€everybody€whoÐ T$ô Ðwas€interrogated€would€have€to€be€mirandized.Ìà < àThe€question€„„€and€it€is€a€thin„line€question,€here€„¼„€is€whether€or€not€Mr.€Abbott€had€become€the€focus€ofÏthe€investigation.€...Ìà < àAt€what€point€did€he€independently€become€theÏfocus€of€a€criminal€investigation€involving€him?€€That€isÏthe€question€that€has€to€be€answered€in€order€to€make€aÏdetermination€of€whether€statement€number€three,€...Ïwhich€is€the€oral€statement€immediately€preceding€theÏtaped€statement,€is€to€be€suppressed.Ìà < àI€do€not€think€the€evidence€justifies€suppression€ofÏthe€statement€made€at€that€time.€...Ìà < àThe€motion€to€suppress€the€oral€statement€will€beÏdenied.ÌÌÒ4ä »ÒÒX»ÒÓ »ÓÌà Œ àà ä àIn€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€444€(1966),€the€United€StatesÐ €4 +0 ÐSupreme€Court€ruled€that€prior€to€custodial€interrogation,€the€police€must€inform€theÏindividual€being€questioned€that€he€has€the€right€to€remain€silent,€that€anyÐ 8¸.4 Ðstatements€made€may€be€used€against€him,€that€he€has€the€right€to€an€attorney,€andÏthat€if€he€can€not€afford€an€attorney,€one€will€be€appointed€for€him€prior€toÏquestioning.€€"Custodial€interrogation"€was€defined€as€"questioning€initiated€by€lawÏenforcement€officers€after€a€person€has€been€taken€into€custody€or€otherwiseÏdeprived€of€his€freedom€of€action€in€any€significant€way."€€òòId.óó€Ð 0 ÐÌà Œ àà ä àBecause€warnings€were€not€given€prior€to€the€statements,€the€crucialÏissue€is€whether€the€defendant€was€"in€custody."€€In€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€937€S.W.2dÐ ô”  Ð851,€851„52€(Tenn.€1996),€our€supreme€court€"clarif[ied]€standards€by€which€courtsÏdetermine€whether€a€person€being€questioned€by€law€enforcement€officers€is€'inÏcustody,'€and€therefore€entitled€to"€òòMirandaóó€warnings.€€The€court€acknowledged€thatÐ Xø Ðin€òòState€v.€Morrisóó,€456€S.W.2d€840€(Tenn.€1970),€it€held€that€the€focus€of€theÐ $Ä Ðinvestigation€test€was€the€appropriate€standard.€€òòAndersonóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€853.€€OurÐ ð Ðsupreme€court€ruled,€however,€that€the€holding€in€òòMorrisóó€was€inconsistent€withÐ ¼ \ Ðseveral€opinions€by€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€and€determined€that€theÏ"focus€or€progress€of€the€investigation€is€not€relevant€to€determine€whether€a€personÏis€in€custody."€€òòId.óó€€Instead,€the€court€set€forth€the€following€rule:€"whether,€under€theÐ  &À  Ðtotality€of€the€circumstances,€a€reasonable€person€in€the€suspect's€position€wouldÏconsider€himself€or€herself€deprived€of€freedom€of€movement€to€a€degree€associatedÏwith€a€formal€arrest."€€òòId.óó€at€855.Ð „+$"& ÐÌà Œ àà ä àSeveral€factors€are€relevant€in€determining€whether€the€suspect€is€inÏcustody:€ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓ(1)€€the€time€and€location€of€the€interrogation;€ÌÌ(2)€€the€duration€and€character€of€the€questioning;€ÌÌ(3)€€the€officer's€tone€of€voice€and€general€demeanor;€ÌÌ(4)€€the€suspect's€method€of€transportation€to€the€place€ofÏquestioning;€Ð þ8ž/5 Ї(5)€€the€number€of€police€officers€present;€ÌÌ(6)€€any€limitation€on€movement€or€other€forms€ofÏrestraint€imposed€on€the€suspect€during€the€interrogation;ÌÌ(7)€€€any€interactions€between€the€officer€and€theÏsuspect,€including€the€words€spoken€by€the€officer€to€theÏsuspect,€and€the€suspect's€verbal€and€nonverbalÏresponses;ÌÌ(8)€€the€extent€to€which€the€suspect€is€confronted€with€theÏlaw€enforcement€officer's€suspicions€of€guilt€or€evidenceÏof€guilt;€ÌÌ(9)€€and€finally,€the€extent€to€which€the€suspect€is€madeÏaware€that€he€or€she€is€free€to€refrain€from€answeringÏquestions€or€to€end€the€interview€at€will.ÌÌÒ4ä ÁÆÒÒX³ÆÒÓÏÆÓòòId.óó€at€855.Ð Œ, ÐÌà Œ àà ä àGenerally,€a€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€at€a€motion€to€suppress€areÏbinding€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,Ð ð Ð928€S.W.2d€18,€22€(Tenn.€1996).€€In€this€instance,€however,€the€trial€court's€findingÏand€ruling€focused€on€whether€the€investigation€had€moved€to€the€accusatory€stage;Ïthe€trial€court€did€not€address€whether,€"under€the€circumstances,€a€reasonableÏperson"€would€have€"considered€himself€...€deprived€of€freedom€of€movement€to€aÏdegree€associated€with€a€formal€arrest."€€òòAndersonóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€855.€€BecauseÐ ì'Œ" ÐòòAndersonóó€was€filed€several€months€after€the€suppression€hearing€in€this€case,€theÐ ¸)X $ Ðtrial€court€did€not€have€the€benefit€of€the€opinion€at€the€time€of€the€ruling.€€For€aÏdifferent€reason€than€that€articulated€by€the€trial€court,€we€conclude€the€defendantÏwas€not€in€custody€and€thus€not€entitled€to€òòMirandaóó€warnings.€€Ð /¼%* ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€questioning€occurred€at€the€police€station,€but€was€brief.€€There€isÏno€indication€that€the€method€of€inquiry€was€overly€confrontational.€€There€is€noÏproof€as€to€the€officer's€tone€of€voice€or€his€general€demeanor.€€The€defendant€andÏhis€parents€voluntarily€traveled€to€the€station.€€There€were€few€officers€present,€noÐ 8¸.4 Ðrestraint€on€the€defendant's€movement€during€questioning,€and,€most€significantly,Ïthe€defendant€and€his€parents€were€informed€that€they€were€free€to€leave.€€TheÏdefendant's€parents€chose€to€stay€to€learn€whether€the€District€Attorney's€officeÏintended€to€prosecute.€€In€our€assessment,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€overrulingÏthe€motion€to€suppress.ÌÌÓ  Ó(7)à @Œ àÌÓhÑÓà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€argues€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€strike€certain€Ïprospective€jurors€for€cause.€€He€specifically€complains€about€prospective€jurorsÏThomas€Gatlin,€Lisa€Edwards,€and€William€Davis.€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€complains€that€prospective€juror€Thomas€Gatlin€shouldÏhave€been€excused€for€cause€because€he€indicated€he€would€like€to€see€theÏdefendant€testify.€€Gatlin€indicated€that€he€had€heard€about€the€case€and€"had€anÏopinion."€€The€trial€court€asked€if€he€could€"overcome€that€opinion€and€follow€theÏcharge€of€the€judge€and€follow€the€evidence€in€the€case."€€Gatlin€respondedÏaffirmatively.€€Defense€counsel€asked€if€it€would€be€necessary€for€the€defendant€toÏtestify€in€order€for€him€"to€decide€this€case."€€Gatlin€responded,€"After€hearing€whatÏthey€say,€yes,€I€would€have€to€hear€it";€but€he€also€indicated€that€if€the€defendant€didÏnot€testify,€he€would€not€hold€it€"against€him."€€When€defense€counsel€moved€toÏstrike€Gatlin€for€cause,€the€trial€court€responded€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓCounsel,€you€are€assuming€that€the€prospective€jurorÏknows€the€law€in€phrasing€the€question€that€way.€€AÏdefendant€does€not€have€to€testify,€as€a€matter€of€law.€ÏHe€has€a€perfectly€valid€right€not€to€testify,€and€the€CourtÏwill€instruct€you€in€the€law€that€if€he€does€choose€not€toÏtestify,€neither€the€Judge€nor€the€jury€can€draw€anyÏinference€against€him€simply€because€he€did€not€testify.€ÏNow,€that€is€not€a€matter€of€fact.€€That€is€...€a€matter€ofÏlaw,€which€the€court€will€charge€to€you€at€the€end€of€theÏcase.€€Challenge€for€cause€is€denied.ÌÌÒ4ä µÕÒÒX§ÕÒÓÃÕÓThe€defendant€used€a€peremptory€challenge€to€remove€Gatlin€from€the€jury.€€Ð þ8ž/5 Мñßñà Œ àñßñ›‡à Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€also€complains€about€prospective€juror€Lisa€Edwards.ÏWhen€defense€counsel€asked€if€any€of€the€prospective€jurors€thought€the€defendantÏwas€"probably€guilty€of€something,€or€he€wouldn't€be€sitting€[there],"€Ms.€EdwardsÏresponded€affirmatively.€€Ms.€Edwards€explained€that€she€based€that€opinion€onÏwhat€she€had€heard€and€read€in€the€media.€€Ms.€Edwards€related€that€she€"[thought]Ïhe€was€involved€in€it."€€The€defendant€moved€to€strike€Ms.€Edwards€for€cause.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€court€asked€Ms.€Edwards€if€she€could€"set€that€[the€newsÏmedia]€aside€and€try€this€lawsuit€on€the€real€evidence€in€the€case?"€€Ms.€EdwardsÏresponded€that€she€could€and€the€she€realized€the€defendant€"is€innocent€until€theÏstate€proves€him€guilty."€€No€further€attempt€was€made€by€the€defendant€toÏchallenge€Ms.€Edwards€for€cause,€although€he€later€used€a€peremptory€challenge€toÏremove€her€from€the€jury.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€also€complains€about€prospective€alternate€jurorÏWilliam€Davis,€who€attended€the€same€church€as€Assistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÏSanders€and€had€known€Sanders€for€four€or€five€years.€€They€are€on€a€first„nameÏbasis€and€had€served€on€a€governing€body€of€the€church€together.€€They€have€neverÏvisited€each€other€in€their€homes.€€Davis€asserted€that€the€relationship€would€notÏaffect€his€decision€as€a€juror€and€that€if€he€had€a€reasonable€doubt€about€theÏdefendant's€guilt,€he€would€find€him€innocent.€€After€the€trial€court€denied€ñÚñœñÚñhisñÚñ›ñÚñ€motionÏto€challenge€for€cause,€ñÚñœñÚñtheñÚñ›ñÚñ€ñÚñœñÚñdefendant€usedñÚñ›ñÚñ€a€peremptory€challenge€to€removeÏDavis.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àPrior€to€the€jury€being€finally€selected,€the€defendant,€who€had€used€allÏof€his€peremptory€challenges,€again€objected€to€the€court's€refusal€to€remove€Gatlin,ÏEdwards,€and€Davis€for€cause.€€He€also€represented€to€the€trial€judge€that€if€he€hadÐ 8¸.4 Ðnot€used€his€peremptory€challenges€on€those€three€prospective€jurors,€he€wouldÏhave€used€them€on€juror€Marilyn€Roderick€and€juror€Donnie€McNealy,€who€were€inÏthe€first€group€of€prospective€jurors€to€be€seated.€€Brief€questioning€of€McNealyÏrevealed€that€he€worked€at€Union€Carbide€and€has€two€teenage€children.€€He€hadÏheard€abut€the€shootings€through€the€media.€€The€record€shows€that€no€questionsÏwere€submitted€to€Ms.€Roderick.€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àArticle€I,€section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€assures€the€accusedÏin€a€criminal€prosecution€"the€right,€among€other€rights,€to€a€speedy€public€trial€...Ï[by]€an€impartial€jury."€€"[T]he€challenge€for€cause€was€designed€to€exclude€from€theÏjury€triers€whose€bias€or€prejudice€rendered€them€unfit...."€€òòManning€v.€Stateóó,€292Ð Xø ÐS.W.€451,€455€(Tenn.€1927).€€"The€qualification€of€a€juror€is€within€the€trial€judge'sÏdiscretion€and€his€finding€a€juror€to€be€qualified€will€not€be€disturbed€on€reviewÏexcept€on€the€clear€showing€of€an€abuse€of€discretion."€€òòBurns€v.€Stateóó,€591€S.W.2dÐ ¼ \ Ð780,€782€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1979).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àRule€24,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.,€provides€in€part:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓAny€party€may€challenge€a€prospective€juror€for€cause€if:ÌÌÓ  Ó*€*€*ÌÓyåÓÌ(2)€The€prospective€juror's€exposure€to€potentiallyÏprejudicial€information€makes€the€person€unacceptableÏas€a€juror.€...€€A€prospective€juror€who€states€that€he€orÏshe€will€be€unable€to€overcome€preconceptions€shall€beÏsubject€to€challenge€for€cause€no€matter€how€slight€theÏexposure.€€If€the€prospective€juror€has€seen€or€heard€andÏremembers€information€that€will€be€developed€in€theÏcourse€of€trial,€or€that€may€be€inadmissible€but€is€not€soÏprejudicial€as€to€create€a€substantial€risk€that€his€ñÚñœñÚñor€herñÚñ›œñÚñ€ñÚñ›ñÚñÏjudgment€will€be€affected,€the€prospective€juror'sÏacceptability€shall€depend€on€whether€the€testimony€as€toÏimpartiality€is€believed.€€òòIf€the€prospective€juror€admits€toÐ f5,1 Ðhaving€formed€an€opinion,€he€or€she€shall€be€subject€toÏchallenge€for€cause€unless€the€examination€showsÏunequivocally€that€the€prospective€juror€can€be€impartialóó.Ð 8¸.4 ÐÐ þ8ž/5 ÐÒ4ä åÒÒXåÒÓ,åÓ(Emphasis€added).€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àWhile€juror€Gatlin€initially€indicated€he€would€need€to€hear€theÏdefendant€testify,€he€then€asserted€he€would€not€hold€it€against€the€defendant€if€heÏdid€not€testify.€€The€state€argues€there€was€no€error€because€the€trial€courtÏrehabilitated€the€juror.€€Yet€"[e]xtreme€care€should€be€taken€in€trying€to€rehabilitate€aÏprospective€juror€into€vocalizing€impartiality."€€òòState€v.€Strouthóó,€620€S.W.2d€467,€471Ð (È  Ð(Tenn.€1981)€(discussing€with€approval€the€Advisory€Commission€Comments€to€RuleÏ24,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.).€€The€Advisory€Commission€"disapproves€of€questionsÏtending€to€lead€the€prospective€juror€or€suggest€partiality€in€the€first€instance,€andÏalso€disapproves€of€that€procedure€in€'rehabilitating'€the€prospective€juror€intoÏvocalizing€impartiality."€€Advisory€Commission€Comments€to€Rule€24,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.ÏP.€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€judge€made€a€lengthy€statement€to€the€juror€about€theÏdefendant's€right€not€to€testify€ñÚñœñÚñand€thenñÚñ›ñÚñ€concluded,€"Now,€that€is€not€a€matter€of€fact.€ÏThat€is€...€a€matter€of€law,€which€the€Court€will€charge€to€you€at€the€end€of€the€case."€ÏIn€our€view,€the€pronouncement€by€the€trial€court€did€not€meet€the€guidelinesÏestablished€by€the€rule.€€This€is€especially€so€because€no€follow€up€questionsÏoccurred€and€the€juror€did€not€"unequivocal[ly]"€assert€he€would€not€require€theÏdefendant€to€testify€before€finding€reasonable€doubt.€€Advisory€CommissionÏComments€to€Rule€24,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àGatlin's€comments€indicated€that€he€could€not€find€the€defendant€notÏguilty€unless€he€testified.€€While€the€record€establishes€that€he€was€not€rehabilitated,Ïthe€resolution€of€this€issue€"depends€not€so€much€on€the€trial€court's€rulingÏconcerning€[Gatlin]€as€it€does€upon€the€examination€and€qualifications€of€[Ms.Ð 8¸.4 ÐRoderick€and€McNealy],€the€juror[s]€the€defendant€was€'forced'€to€accept."€€òòState€v.Ð `  ÐGrayóó,€960€S.W.2d€598,€608€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€"[A]ny€error€in€refusing€toÐ , Ì Ðexcuse€[a€juror]€for€cause€...€does€not€entitle€the€defendant€to€a€new€trial€unless€theÏjury€that€ultimately€heard€the€case€was€not€fair€and€impartial."€€òòState€v.€Howellóó,€868Ð Äd ÐS.W.2d€238,€249€(Tenn.€1993)€(citations€omitted).€€Because€the€voir€dire€of€Ms.ÏRoderick€and€McNealy€contains€no€hint€of€bias€or€prejudice,€the€defendant'sÏcomplaint€about€the€excused€juror€Gatlin€is€without€merit.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€complains€about€juror€Edwards'€exposure€to€pretrialÏpublicity€and€her€acknowledgment€that€she€thought€the€defendant€may€have€beenÏinvolved€in€some€way.€€She€did,€however,€"unequivocally"€assert€she€could€followÏthe€law€and€accept€the€proposition€that€the€defendant€was€presumed€innocent.€Ï"Jurors€need€not€be€totally€ignorant€of€the€facts€of€the€case€on€which€they€sit€[andÏeven]€the€formation€of€an€opinion€on€the€merits€will€not€disqualify€a€juror€if€[he]€canÏlay€aside€[his]€opinion€and€render€a€verdict€based€on€the€evidence€presented€inÏcourt."€€òòHowellóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€249€(internal€quotation€marks€omitted).€€The€trialÐ T$ô Ðcourt€did€not€err€by€refusing€to€remove€Ms.€Edwards€for€cause.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant's€complaint€about€prospective€alternate€juror€Davis€isÏalso€without€merit.€€When€the€defendant€used€a€peremptory€strike€to€remove€Davis,Ïthe€replacement€was€Kerry€Pennings.€€None€of€the€three€alternate€jurors€participatedÏin€the€deliberations.€€The€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€a€new€trial€unless€he€carries€theÏheavy€burden€of€demonstrating€that€"the€jury€that€ultimately€heard€the€case€was€notÏfair€and€impartial."€€òòGrayóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€608.€€Ð ´2T). ÐÌÓ  Ó(8)à @Œ àÌÓLøÓà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€also€claims€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€grant€hisÐ 8¸.4 Ðmotion€for€a€change€of€venire.€€The€defendant€had€filed€a€pretrial€motion€seekingÏeither€a€change€of€venire€or,€alternatively,€a€change€of€venue.€€After€a€lengthyÏhearing,€the€trial€court€granted€a€change€of€venue€from€Giles€County€to€MauryÏCounty.€€The€defendant€now€complains€that€a€change€of€venire€should€have€beenÏgranted€instead.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àSection€20„4„201,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.,€governs€change€of€venire:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓCases€in€which€venue€changeable.„„In€all€civil€cases€atÏlaw€where€the€issue€is€to€be€tried€by€jury,€and€in€all€casesÏof€issues€in€courts€of€equity€directed€to€be€tried€by€jury,Ïeither€in€the€circuit€or€chancery€court,€in€all€civil€casesÏbefore€a€judge€of€the€court€of€general€sessions,€and€in€allÏcriminal€cases:Ì(1)€The€venue€may€be€changed,€at€any€time€before€trial,Ïupon€good€cause€shown,€as€prescribed€in€this€part;€orÌ(2)€A€court€may€issue€an€order€for€a€special€venire€ofÏjurors€from€another€county€if€in€its€discretion€it€determinesÏthe€action€to€be€necessary€to€ensure€a€fair€trial.ÌÌÒ4ä ¡úÒÒX“úÒÓ¯úÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€20„4„201.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àPrior€to€1995,€the€statute€only€authorized€a€change€of€venire€in€civilÏcases.€€Effective€May€30,€1995,€however,€the€statute€was€amended€to€allow€for€aÏchange€of€venire€in€criminal€cases.€€In€òòState€v.€Nicholsóó,€877€S.W.2d€722€(Tenn.Ð ì'Œ" Ð1994),€the€defendant€filed€a€motion€for€a€change€of€venue.€€Rather€than€moving€theÏsitus€of€the€trial,€the€trial€court€ordered€that€the€jury€be€chosen€from€residents€of€aÏdifferent€county.€€òòId.óó€at€727.€€The€defendant€appealed,€arguing€that€there€was€noÐ P-ð#( Ðauthority€for€the€procedure€used€by€the€trial€judge.€€The€supreme€court€found€thatÏthe€filing€of€the€motion€for€a€change€of€venue€constituted€a€waiver€of€the€right€toÏhave€the€jury€drawn€from€the€county€where€the€indictment€originated;€in€so€doing,Ïthe€court€observed€that€a€statute€allowing€for€"summoning€juries€from€anotherÏcounty"€would€"ensure€uniformity€and€fairness€across€the€state€and€avoid€error€fromÏexcessive€experimentation."€€òòId.óó€at€729.€€The€amendment€was€the€legislativeÐ 8¸.4 Ðresponse€to€the€suggestion.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àWhen€there€is€excessive€pretrial€publicity,€either€a€change€of€venire€orÏa€change€of€venue€is€an€appropriate€remedy.€€òòId.óó€€The€issue€is€discretionary€for€theÐ Äd Ðtrial€court€and€will€not€be€overturned€unless€there€is€an€abuse€of€that€discretion.€€òòSeeóóÐ 0 ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€20„4„201(1).€€Here,€the€trial€judge€sent€questionnaires€to€everyÏpotential€juror,€allowed€extensive€voir€dire,€and€excused€several€jurors€who€indicatedÏthey€could€not€be€impartial€because€of€the€pretrial€publicity.€€He€also€excusedÏpotential€jurors€who€knew€the€victims€or€had€significant€knowledge€about€the€traumaÏthe€victims'€families€had€suffered.€€This€record€does€not€indicate€that€the€jury€wasÏunfair€or€biased.€€Ì€ÌÓ  Ó(9)à @Œ àÌÓºÓà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€next€claims€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€evidenceÏthat€he€and€his€co„defendant€were€wearing€black€clothing€at€the€time€the€crime€wasÏcommitted.€€He€argues€that€the€evidence€was€irrelevant€and€unduly€inflammatoryÏand€had€a€prejudicial€effect€on€the€trial.€€€€€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àSheriff€Eddie€Bass€testified€that€the€defendant€wore€a€black€shirt,€blackÏpants,€and€black€boots€on€the€day€of€the€shooting.€€There€was€also€evidence€thatÏRouse€wore€black€on€the€day€of€the€shootings.€€In€closing,€the€state€argued,€"It's€notÏenough€to€convict,€...€but€why€are€these€buddies€wearing€black€on€this€day?"ÌÌà Œ àà ä àAdmission€of€this€evidence€is€governed€by€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403,€whichÏprovides€as€follows:ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓExclusion€of€Relevant€Evidence€on€Grounds€of€Prejudice,ÏConfusion,€or€Waste€of€Time.€€Although€relevant,Ïevidence€may€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€isÏsubstantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfairÐ þ8ž/5 Ðprejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury,Ïor€by€considerations€of€undue€delay,€waste€of€time,€orÏneedless€presentation€of€cumulative€evidence.ÌÌÒ4ä ðÒÒXâÒÓþÓÌà Œ àà ä àThe€term€"unfair€prejudice"€has€been€defined€as€"[a]n€undue€tendencyÏto€suggest€decision€on€an€improper€basis,€commonly€...€an€emotional€one."€€òòState€v.Ð 0 ÐBanksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947,€951€(Tenn.€1978)€(quoting€Advisory€Committee€Note€toÐ \ü  ÐFed.€R.€Evid.€403).€€One€authority€characterizes€evidence€that€is€unfairly€prejudicialÏas€that€designed€to€appeal€to€the€sympathy,€sense€of€horror,€or€instinct€to€punish.€€J.ÏWeinstein€and€M.€Burger,€Weinstein's€Evidence€Manual€6-20€to€6-21€(Student€ed.Ï1987).ÌÌÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔà Œ àà ä àWhether€to€admit€evidence€under€Rule€403€is€within€the€discretionaryÐ $Ä Ðauthority€of€the€trial€court€and€will€not€be€reversed€absent€a€clear€showing€of€anÏabuse.€€òòState€v.€Dickersonóó,€885€S.W.2d€90,€92€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€òòState€v.Ð ¼ \ ÐAllenóó,€692€S.W.2d€651,€654€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛÿ #ÔÐ ˆ"( ÐÌà Œ àà ä àIn€our€view,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€allowing€the€testimony.€€TheÏdefendant's€theory€at€trial€was€that€he€had€no€idea€Rouse€was€actually€going€toÏshoot€the€victims.€€That€the€defendant€and€Rouse€were€dressed€similarly€or€wore€theÏsame€color€of€clothing€on€the€day€of€the€shootings€lends€support€to€the€state's€theoryÏthat€the€two€acted€in€concert.€€Accordingly,€the€evidence€had€some€"probativeÏvalue."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€€Because€the€testimony€about€the€defendant's€clothingÏwas€brief€and€not€overly€emphasized€in€the€context€of€the€entire€trial,€the€trial€courtÏproperly€admitted€the€evidence.€€It€did€not,€therefore,€qualify€as€"unfairly€prejudicial."€ÏTenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€€ÌœñàñÐ  L6ì,2 Ðñàññáñ›Ìñáñ›Ó  Ó(10)à @Œ àÌÓ³Óà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€argues€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€charge€theÏlesser€offense€of€facilitation€of€a€felony€as€to€all€counts.€€The€defendant€was€indictedÏfor€two€counts€of€first€degree€murder€and€two€counts€of€attempted€first€degreeÏmurder.€€The€offenses€of€second€degree€murder€and€voluntary€manslaughter€wereÏcharged€as€lesser€offenses€of€first€degree€murder.€€Attempted€second€degreeÏmurder€and€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter€were€charged€as€lesser€offenses€ofÏattempted€first€degree€murder.€€Although€all€of€the€charges€were€based€on€theÏdefendant's€being€criminally€responsible€for€Rouse's€conduct,€facilitation€of€a€felonyÏwas€not€charged.€€ÌÌÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€judge€has€a€duty€to€give€a€complete€charge€of€the€lawÐ $Ä Ðapplicable€to€the€facts€of€the€case.€€òòState€v.€¢Harbison£óó,€704€¢S.W.2d£€314,€319€(Tenn.€Ð ð Ð1986).€€Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛ†#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔThere€is€an€obligation€"to€charge€the€jury€as€to€all€of€the€law€of€each€offenseÐ ¼ \ Ðincluded€in€the€indictment,€without€any€request€on€the€part€of€the€defendant€to€doÏso."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„18„110(a).€€¢£¢£"Pursuant€to€our€statute,€rule,€and€case€lawÏinterpretations,€defendants€are€entitled€to€jury€instructions€on€all€[lesser€offenses],€ifÏthe€evidence€would€support€a€conviction€for€the€offense."€€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919Ð ì'Œ" ÐS.W.2d€305,€311€(Tenn.€1996).€€Such€a€charge€"allows€the€jury€to€consider€allÏrelevant€offenses€in€determining€the€appropriate€offense,€if€any,€for€conviction"€andÏ"more€evenly€balances€the€rights€of€the€defendant€and€the€prosecution€and€servesÏthe€interests€of€justice."€€òòId.óó€€It€is€only€when€the€record€is€devoid€of€evidence€toÐ /¼%* Ðsupport€an€inference€of€guilt€of€the€lesser€offense€that€the€trial€court€is€relieved€of€theÏresponsibility€to€charge€the€lesser€crime.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€¢S.W.2d£€530,Ð ´2T). Ð549„50€(Tenn.€1994);€€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€797€¢S.W.2d£€589,€593€(Tenn.€1990).Ð €4 +0 МñâñÐ  L6ì,2 Ðñâññãñ›Ìñãñ›à Œ àà ä àIn€òòTrustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€310,€our€supreme€court€ruled€as€follows:€€Ð `  ÐÓÓà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#àTennessee€law€recognizes€two€types€of€lesser€offensesÏthat€may€be€included€in€the€offense€charged€in€theÏindictment:€offenses€necessarily€included€in€theÏindictment€and€offenses€that€are€lesser€grades€of€theÏcharged€offense.€€An€offense€is€"necessarily€included€inÏthe€indictment€...€only€if€the€elements€of€the€includedÏoffense€are€a€subset€of€the€elements€of€the€chargedÏoffense€and€only€if€the€greater€offense€cannot€beÏcommitted€without€also€committing€the€lesser€offense."€Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌœñëñ€ñëñòòId.ó󛀀œñíñÐ (È  Ðñíñ›ÌÌÌÓÓœñìññêñÌñêññìñ›à Œ àà ä àÔ#†XêÛXX XêÛ¯#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔOur€supreme€court€also€provided€guidance€on€how€to€determineÐ À` Ðwhether€an€offense€is€a€lesser€grade€or€class€of€the€offense€charged:€€"[o]ne€needÏonly€look€to€the€statutes€to€determine€whether€a€given€offense€is€a€lesser€grade€orÏclass€of€the€crime€charged."€€òòId.óó€at€310.€€By€way€of€example,€the€court€observed€thatÐ $Ä Ðthe€legislature€has€divided€criminal€homicide€"into€the€grades€of€first„degree€murder,Ïsecond„degree€murder,€voluntary€manslaughter,€criminally€negligent€homicide,€andÏvehicular€homicide."€€òòId.óó€Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛ #ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔÐ ˆ"( ÐÌÔ#†XêÛXX XêÛ#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔà Œ àà ä àHere,€the€defendant€was€found€criminally€responsible€for€Rouse'sÐ  &À  Ðconduct.€€The€controlling€statute€provides€that€"a€person€is€criminally€responsible€forÏan€offense€committed€by€the€conduct€of€another€if:€(2)€[a]cting€with€the€intent€toÏpromote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefit€in€the€proceeds€orÏresults€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,€or€attempts€to€aid€anotherÏperson€to€commit€the€offense."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402(2).€€Facilitation€of€aÏfelony€occurs€when€a€person€"knowing€that€another€intends€to€commit€a€specificÏfelony,€but€without€the€intent€required€for€criminal€responsibility€under€39„11„402(2),Ï...€knowingly€furnishes€substantial€assistance€in€the€commission€of€the€felony."€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„403.ÌœñäñÐ  8¸.4 Ðñäññåñ›Ìñåñ›à Œ àà ä àFacilitation€is€a€lesser€grade€of€criminal€responsibility€for€the€conduct€ofÏanother.€€òòState€v.€Utleyóó,€928€S.W.2d€448,€952€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€In€òòUtleyóó,Ð , Ì Ðthis€court€ruled€that€facilitation€should€only€be€charged€"where€the€facts€could€causeÏreasonable€minds€to€conclude€that€the€defendant€lacked€the€intent€to€promote€orÏassist€in€or€benefit€from€the€felony's€commission."€€òòUtleyóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€452.€€In€ourÐ 0 Ðview,€there€was€sufficient€evidence€for€"reasonable€minds"€to€have€concluded€theÏdefendant€had€facilitated€the€felonies€and,€at€the€same€time,€had€lacked€the€"intentÏto€promote€or€assist€in€or€benefit€from"€their€commission.€Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛj#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔÐ ô”  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant's€statements€to€Rogers€about€there€being€no€school€onÏthe€day€of€the€shootings€and€that€Rogers€might€lose€"a€couple€of€friends"€suggestÏthe€defendant€knew€something€about€Rouse's€desire€to€shoot€one€or€more€personsÏat€the€school.€€That€the€defendant€undertook€the€responsibility€of€driving€Rouse'sÏtruck€qualifies€as€"furnish[ing]€substantial€assistance."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„¼403.€€Finally,€the€defendant's€pretrial€statements,€while€self„serving,€and€his€behaviorÏafter€the€shootings€were€evidence€in€support€of€the€defense€theory,€i.e.,€that€heÏlacked€the€intent€to€promote,€assist€in,€or€benefit€from€the€shootings.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€claimed€that€the€first€time€Rouse€asked€for€his€help,€heÏprovided€an€equivocal€answer.€€He€stated€that€on€the€second€occasion€Rouse€askedÏfor€help,€he€responded,€"Yeah,"€and€laughed„„implying€that€he€did€not€take€theÏquestion€seriously.€€That€the€defendant€responded€"yeah"€and€laughed€could€meanÏhe€earnestly€desired€to€assist€in€the€crimes.€€It€could€be€interpreted€as€a€refusal€toÏaccept€the€request€as€seriously€made.€€The€jury€must€be€given€the€option€ofÏdetermining€which€interpretation€to€attach.€€The€first€interpretation€would€support€theÏconvictions.€€The€second€would€have€supported€an€instruction€on€the€lesser€offense.€ÌÐ 8¸.4 Ðà Œ àà ä àOf€more€significance€is€that€several€state€witnesses€testified€to€theÏdefendant's€demeanor€immediately€after€the€shootings.€€Ray€testified€that€theÏdefendant€was€on€the€"verge€of€tears,€pale.€€Trembling,€[j]ust€general€shock."€€Pitts,Ïthe€defendant's€supervisor€at€the€Delta€Express,€described€the€defendant€as€visiblyÏdistraught€over€the€shootings,€"a€nervous€wreck,€...€€and€[shaking]."€€As€argued€byÏthe€defense,€this€behavior€lent€some€support€to€the€claim€that€the€defendant€lackedÏthe€intent€to€promote€or€benefit€from€the€felonies.€€One€witness€testified€that€after€theÏfirst€set€of€shootings,€Rouse€grinned.€€When€Nichols€tried€to€stop€Rouse,€RouseÏresisted.€€Several€individuals€had€to€wrestle€Rouse€to€the€ground€to€stop€him.€€ThatÏbehavior€contrasts€significantly€with€the€descriptions€witnesses€gave€of€theÏdefendant.€€The€proof€suggests€that€Rouse€originated€the€plan,€armed€himself,€andÏcollected€the€necessary€ammunition€entirely€on€his€own.€€Rouse€committed€theÏcrimes.€€Several€witnesses€testified€that€the€defendant€was€not€present€when€theÏshootings€occurred.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àBecause€there€was€some€evidence,€circumstantial€and€direct,€that€theÏdefendant€only€facilitated€the€shootings,€that€lesser€offense€should€have€beenÏcharged€to€the€jury.€€In€our€view,€the€failure€to€charge€the€lesser€offenses€qualifies€asÏreversible€error.€€In€òòState€v.€Willie€Williams,€Jr.,óó,€No.€03S01„9706„CR„00060,€slip€op.Ð ¸)X $ Ðat€8„9€(Tenn.,€at€Knoxville,€Sept.€21,€1998)€(for€publication),€our€supreme€courtÏoverruled€several€prior€cases€and,€by€a€three€to€two€majority,€held€that€the€right€toÏinstructions€on€lesser€offenses€is€a€statutory€right,€rather€than€one€founded€in€theÏTennessee€Constitution׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€that,€in€consequence,€the€error€is€subject€to€aÐ è0ˆ', Ðharmless€error€analysis:€€ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓReversal€is€required€if€the€error€affirmatively€appears€toÏhave€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€the€merits,€or€inÐ f5,1 Ðother€words,€reversal€is€required€if€the€error€moreÏprobably€than€not€affected€the€judgment€to€theÏdefendant's€prejudice.ÌÒ4ä 3ÒÒXó2ÒÓ3ÓÌ(citing€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(a);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b)),€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€proof€of€the€greater€offense€was€not€overwhelming.€€There€wasÏsubstantial,€credible€evidence€that€the€defendant€merely€facilitated€the€shootings.€ÏDuring€deliberations,€the€jury€posed€the€following€question€for€the€trial€court:€€"If€weÏfind€the€act€to€have€been€committed€to€have€been€first€degree€murder€or€attemptedÏmurder€by€Mr.€Rouse,€does€that€imply€that€we€can€only€imply€the€same€result€for€Mr.ÏAbbott,€if€we€find€that€he€attempted€to€help€or€did€help€Mr.€Rouse,€or€can€Mr.€AbbottÏbe€found€for€a€lesser€crime€of€second€degree€or€voluntary€manslaughter."€€From€this,Ïthe€jury€very€clearly€considered€the€defendant's€level€of€participation€and€culpability.€ÏIt€is€also€apparent€that€the€jury€considered€making€a€distinction€between€the€level€ofÏRouse's€culpability€and€that€of€the€defendant.€€In€our€view,€the€failure€to€charge€theÏlesser€offenses€affirmatively€appears€to€have€affected€the€verdict€to€the€prejudice€ofÏthe€defendant.€€ÌÔ#†XêÛXX XêÛÙ%#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔÌà Œ àà ä àThe€state€contends€that€if€the€"proof€establishes€guilt€of€the€greaterÏoffense€and€the€defendant€claims€he€was€unaware€of€the€principal€actor's€intentions,Ïthe€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€an€instruction€on€facilitation,"€pointing€out€that€theÏ"defendant€argued€that€he€did€not€know€Rouse€intended€to€commit€a€crime€and€thatÏhe€did€not€assist€him."€€Yet€some€of€the€proof€submitted€by€the€state€tended€toÏsupport€facilitation€rather€than€the€greater€offense.€€Also,€it€is€a€well„established€ruleÏof€law€that€the€defendant's€protestation€of€innocence€at€trial€does€not€relieve€the€trialÏcourt€of€the€duty€to€instruct€on€offenses€which€are€lesser€than€the€one€the€stateÏcharges,€when€they€are€genuinely€raised€by€the€evidence.ÌÐ þ8ž/5 Ðà Œ àà ä àIn€òòTempleton€v.€Stateóó,€240€S.W.€789€(Tenn.€1922),€our€supreme€courtÐ `  Ðreversed€a€murder€conviction€for€failure€to€charge€manslaughter.€€The€state€arguedÏthe€defendant€was€not€prejudiced€by€the€omission€because€"counsel€insisted€...€thatÏhe€was€not€guilty€of€any€offense€at€all€while€the€state€insisted€he€was€guilty€ofÏmurder,€not€manslaughter."€€òòId.óó€at€791.€€In€reversing€the€conviction,€our€high€courtÐ 0 Ðruled€that€"it€is€[the€court's]€duty€to€tell€the€jury€what€the€law€is€applicable€to€anyÏphase€whatever€of€offenses€charged€against€a€defendant.€€He€cannot€be€excusedÏfrom€doing€so€upon€the€ground€merely€that€the€defendant€insists€he€is€not€guilty€ofÏanything€and€the€state€that€he€is€guilty€of€a€higher€offense."€€òòId.óó€Ð À` ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€state€also€points€to€several€cases€where€this€court€has€found€noÏreversible€error€for€failure€to€charge€facilitation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Spadafinaóó,€952€S.W.2dÐ $Ä Ð444€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòUtleyóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€453;€òòState€v.€Julius€E.€Parkeróó,Ð ð ÐNo.€02C01„9606„CR„00188€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Jackson,€Apr.€23,€1997).€€InÏòòSpadafinaóó,€a€panel€of€this€court€ruled€that€"[f]acilitation€of€first€degree€murder€wasÐ ˆ"( Ðnot€raised€by€the€proof€of€the€State€or€the€defendant[;]€...€[n]either€the€State's€proofÏnor€the€defendant's€proof€raises€sufficient€evidence€upon€which€reasonable€mindsÏcould€convict€the€defendant€of€facilitation€of€murder."€€952€S.W.2d€at€14.€€In€òòUtleyóó,Ð ì'Œ" Ðthis€court€found€that€"no€evidence€existed€in€this€case€to€support€a€lesser€includedÏoffense€of€facilitation€of€felony€murder."€€928€S.W.2d€at€453.€€In€òòParkeróó,€the€stateÐ „+$"& Ðshowed€the€defendant€initiated€the€robbery,€furnished€the€murder€weapon,€benefitedÏin€the€proceeds,€and€was€present€when€the€murder€occurred.€€slip€op.€at€15.€€TheÏdefendant,€however,€denied€any€participation€or€planning€in€the€robbery.€€Neither€theÏstate's€proof€nor€the€defendant's€proof€supported€an€inference€of€guilt€of€facilitation.€ÏThe€panel€in€òòParkeróó€correctly€concluded€that€the€record€was€"devoid€of€any€evidenceÐ €4 +0 Ðpermitting€an€inference€of€guilty€of€the€lesser€offense."€€òòId.óó,€slip€op.€at€15.€€In€thisÐ L6ì,2 Ðcase,€however,€some€of€the€state's€proof€supported€an€inference€of€facilitation€of€theÐ 8¸.4 Ðcrimes.€€Clearly,€òòParkeróó,€òòUtleyóó,€and€òòSpadafinaóó€do€not€serve€as€precedent€for€theÐ `  Ðstate's€claim.€€The€failure€to€instruct€on€lesser€offenses€which€were€legitimatelyÏraised€by€the€evidence€presented€does€not€qualify€as€harmless€error€in€this€case;€theÏcause€must€be€remanded€for€a€new€trial.Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛ[8#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔÐ Äd Ѐ€€€€€ÌÔ#†XêÛXX XêÛ¡F#ÔÓ  Ó(11)Ð \ü  ÐÓÿFÓà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant's€final€argument€is€that€the€trial€court€imposed€anÏexcessive€sentence.€€He€complains€about€the€length€of€the€individual€sentences€asÏwell€as€their€consecutive€nature.€€The€defendant€was€sentenced€as€follows:ÌÒ°XÒÒŒ 4Òcount€1à < àsecond€degree€murderà œ àà ô àà L àtwenty€yearsÐ Œ, Ðcount€2à < àsecond€degree€murderà œ àà ô àà L àtwenty€yearsÐ Xø Ðcount€3à < àattempted€second€degree€murderà L àten€yearsÐ $Ä Ðcount€4à < àattempted€first€degree€murderà ô àà L àtwenty€yearsÐ ð ÐÒ4Œ 9HÒÒX°+HÒCounts€one€and€two€are€to€be€served€consecutively€with€release€eligibility€afterÏservice€of€eighty„five€to€one„hundred€percent€of€the€forty„year€term.€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€ofÏa€sentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€with€aÐ ì'Œ" Ðpresumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showingÏin€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevantÏfacts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991);€òòseeóóÐ /¼%* ÐòòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€Sentencing€CommissionÐ è0ˆ', ÐComments€provide€that€the€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€the€impropriety€ofÏthe€sentence.€€ÌœñæñÐ  L6ì,2 Ðñæññçñ›Ìñçñ›à Œ àà ä 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)€theÏnature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)€any€mitigating€or€enhancing€factors;€(6)Ïany€statements€made€by€the€defendant€in€his€own€behalf;€and€(7)€the€defendant'sÏpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€and€„¼210;€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€Ð (È  ÐÌÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔà Œ àà ä àAt€the€time€of€these€offenses,€the€presumptive€sentence€for€a€Class€AÐ À` Ðfelony€was€the€midpoint€in€the€range.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€Should€theÏtrial€court€find€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€it€must€start€at€the€presumptiveÏminimum€in€the€range€and€enhance€the€sentence€based€upon€any€applicableÏenhancement€factors,€then€reduce€the€sentence€based€upon€any€appropriateÏmitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(e).€€The€weight€given€to€eachÏfactor€is€within€the€trial€court's€discretion€provided€that€the€record€supports€itsÏfindings€and€it€complies€with€the€Sentencing€Act.€€òòSeeóó€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.€Ð T$ô ÐThe€trial€court,€however,€should€make€specific€findings€on€the€record€which€indicateÏits€application€of€the€sentencing€principles.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„209€and€„¼210.€Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛ=P#ÔÐ ¸)X $ ÐÌà Œ àà ä àDallas€Foster,€victim€Foster's€husband,€testified€that€Ms.€Foster€hadÏbeen€a€school€teacher€for€about€twenty„one€years€and€was€fifty„eight€years€old€whenÏshe€lost€her€life.€€Her€death€had€been€"extremely€hard"€on€him€and€their€children.€ÏJoyce€Ramsey,€Ms.€Foster's€sister,€testified€that€she€had€a€close€relationship€withÏher€sister.€€Ron€Shirey,€the€victim€of€the€attempted€first€degree€murder,€testified€thatÏhe€would€never€forget€the€shootings.€€ÌÐ 8¸.4 Ðà Œ àà ä àJudy€McKenna€testified€for€the€defendant€that€she€was€a€family€friendÏof€the€Abbott's.€€The€defendant€worked€for€a€time€with€her€husband€at€a€truck€stopÏand€was€never€paid€for€his€help.€€The€defendant€was€trustworthy,€polite,€and€a€hardÏworker.€€E.N.€Bentley€testified€that€he€was€the€manager€at€the€Delta€Express€whenÏthe€defendant€worked€there.€€He€was€an€above€average€worker€and€always€receivedÏa€very€positive€rating€on€his€performance€appraisal.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àDonna€Abbott,€the€defendant's€mother,€testified€that€the€defendant€wasÏin€his€senior€year€of€high€school€when€the€shootings€occurred.€€Because€herÏhusband€is€disabled,€the€family€is€on€a€limited€income.€€The€defendant€helped€"makeÏends€meet"€by€contributing€financially€to€the€family.€€The€defendant€also€helped€outÏaround€the€home.€€The€defendant€is€very€close€to€his€brothers€and€they€had€all€beenÏworking€together€to€start€a€pallet€business.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€testified€that€he€was€sorry€the€shootings€had€occurred.€ÏHe€contended€that€if€he€had€believed€Rouse,€he€would€have€"stopped€himÏsomehow."€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€testimony€at€the€juvenile€transfer€hearing€concerning€theÏdefendant's€above€average€academic€record€and€his€potential€for€rehabilitationÏthrough€psychological€treatment€was€entered€into€evidence€at€the€sentencingÏhearing.€€€€€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€court€applied€the€following€enhancement€factors:€€ÌÒXÒÒä 4ÒÓÓ(1)€€offense€involved€more€than€one€victim€(Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(3));ÌÌ(2)€€personal€injuries€inflicted€on€the€victims€were€greatÏ(not€applied€to€the€attempted€first€degree€murder€ofÏShirey)€(Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(6));Ð þ8ž/5 Ї(3)€€the€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€aÏcrime€when€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high€(Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(10));ÌÌ(4)€€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€whereÏthe€potential€for€bodily€injury€was€great€(Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„114(16));€andÌÌ(5)€€the€offense€was€committed€on€school€property€(Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(17)).ÌÌÒ4ä Í[ÒÒX¿[ÒÓÛ[ÓThe€trial€court€refused€to€find€any€mitigating€circumstances.€€à ¤ àà ü! àÐ Bâ  ÐÌà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€court€imposed€twenty€year€sentences€for€the€two€secondÏdegree€murders€and€the€attempted€first€degree€murder.€€All€Class€A€felonies,€theÏRange€I€sentence€for€those€offenses€is€fifteen€to€twenty„five€years.€€Thus,€the€trialÏcourt€imposed€the€presumptive€minimum€sentence€for€each€of€those€offenses.€€ForÏthe€attempted€second€degree€murder,€a€Class€B€felony,€the€Range€I€sentence€isÏeight€to€twelve€years.€€The€trial€court€imposed€the€mid„range€sentence€of€ten€years.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àEven€though€the€trial€court€found€several€enhancement€factors€andÏdeclined€to€find€any€mitigating€circumstances,€it€still€imposed€the€presumptiveÏminimum€sentence€for€the€three€Class€A€felonies.€€It€was€within€the€trial€court'sÏdiscretion€to€find€the€several€enhancement€factors€but€afford€them€no€weight,€as€theÏstatute€provides€if€"there€[are]€enhancement€but€no€mitigating€factors,€...€the€courtÏòòmayóó€set€the€sentence€above€the€minimum."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(d)Ð j, #' Ð(emphasis€added).€€The€ten„year€sentence€for€attempted€second€degree€murderÏmay€be€considered€an€enhanced€sentence,€as€the€presumptive€minimum€for€thatÏoffense€is€eight€years.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€complains€about€the€trial€court's€finding€theÏenhancement€factors€that€the€personal€injuries€inflicted€upon€the€victims€were€great;Ïthat€he€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€the€crime€when€the€risk€to€human€lifeÐ þ8ž/5 Ðwas€high;€and€that€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€where€theÏpotential€for€bodily€injury€was€high.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114€(6),€(10),€(16).€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThat€the€personal€injuries€were€great€could€not€enhance€the€secondÏdegree€murder€sentences;€it€is€inherent€in€those€offenses.€€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883Ð 0 ÐS.W.2d€597€(Tenn.€1994).€€That€enhancement€factor€could,€however,€be€applied€toÏthe€attempted€second€degree€murder€of€the€victim€Yancy.€€"Particularly€great€injuriesÏare€not€essential€to€the€commission€of€[attempted€murder],€but€prove€greaterÏculpability."€€òòState€v.€Nixóó,€922€S.W.2d€894,€903€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€The€trialÐ À` Ðcourt€did€not€apply€the€factor€to€the€sentence€for€the€attempted€first€degree€murderÏof€Shirey.€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThat€the€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€whenÏthe€risk€to€human€life€was€high€and€that€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€wasÏgreat€are€both€applicable.€€It€is€true€that€this€court€has€held€that€factor€(10),€noÏhesitation€about€committing€the€crime,€should€not€apply€when€"the€only€personÏsubject€to€being€injured€is€the€victim."€€òòState€v.€Makokaóó,€885€S.W.2d€366,€373€(Tenn.Ð  &À  ÐCrim.€App.€1994).€€Factors€(10)€and€(16),€however,€may€be€applied€where€"peopleÏother€than€the€victim[s]"€are€present€and€"are€subject€to€injury."€€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€909Ð ¸)X $ ÐS.W.2d€46,€50€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Here,€there€were€several€other€studentsÏand€teachers€in€the€vicinity€of€the€shootings.€€Application€of€these€factors€isÏappropriate€to€all€of€the€shootings.€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àThe€defendant€also€complains€the€court€erred€by€refusing€to€findÏcertain€mitigating€factors.€€The€defendant€had€argued€the€applicability€of€theÏfollowing:ÌÒä 4ÒÒXÒÓÓ€(1)€€he€acted€under€strong€provocation;ÌÐ þ8ž/5 Ѐ(2)€€he€played€a€minor€role;ÌÌ(3)€€he€lacked€substantial€judgment€in€committing€theÏoffenses€due€to€his€youth;ÌÌ(4)€€he€committed€the€crimes€under€such€unusualÏcircumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€a€sustained€intent€toÏviolate€the€law€motivated€his€conduct;ÌÌ(5)€€he€acted€under€the€duress€or€domination€of€anotherÏperson;ÌÌ(6)€€he€had€no€history€of€prior€criminal€conduct;ÌÌ(7)€€the€crimes€were€contrary€to€his€character;€andÌÌ(8)€€he€is€amenable€to€rehabilitation.ÌÌÒ4ä lÒÒX,lÒÓ:lÓòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113€(2),€(4),€(6),€(11),€(12),€and€(13).€The€trial€judgeÐ Œ, Ðrejected€all€of€these.€€The€latter€three€mitigating€factors€were€offered€under€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(13),€which€allows€consideration€of€any€"factor€consistentÏwith€the€purposes€of€this€chapter."€€The€trial€court€found€they€were€not€mitigatingÏcircumstances.€€€€ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€our€view,€the€trial€court€correctly€ruled€that€there€is€no€proof€that€theÏdefendant€acted€under€strong€provocation.€€We€also€agree€there€was€no€proof€theÏdefendant€played€a€"minor€role."€€If€the€defendant€drove€Rouse€to€school€to€assist€inÏthe€shootings,€that€conduct€would€not€qualify€as€a€minor€role.€€The€trial€court€ruledÏthat€there€was€no€proof€that€the€defendant€lacked€substantial€judgment€due€to€hisÏyouth.€€While€seventeen€years€of€age,€the€defendant€qualifies€as€youthful,€but€thereÏwas€much€positive€testimony€about€his€level€of€maturity€and€his€degree€ofÏresponsibility.€€There€was€no€proof€he€lacked€substantial€judgment.€€We€furtherÏagree€that€there€was€no€proof€that€the€defendant€did€not€possess€a€sustained€intentÏto€violate€the€law.€€The€crimes€were€discussed€the€night€before.€€The€next€day€theyÏwere€executed.€€These€facts€suggest€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€law.€€ThereÏwas€also€no€proof€that€the€defendant€acted€under€the€duress€or€domination€ofÐ 8¸.4 Ðanother€person.€€While€there€was€proof€that€Rouse€developed€the€plan,€there€is€noÏevidence€he€coerced€the€participation€of€the€defendant.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€our€view,€the€three€nonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€areÏentitled€to€some€weight.€€Balanced€against€the€weight€of€the€enhancement€factors,Ïhowever,€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€would€remain€unchanged.€€TheÏsentences€are€appropriate,€given€the€weight€of€the€enhancement€factors.€€TheÏsentence€for€attempted€second€degree€murder€was€enhanced€by€two€years.€€In€ourÏview,€however,€the€enhancement€was€warranted,€if€for€no€other€reason,€because€theÏcrime€was€committed€on€school€property.ÌÌ€à Œ àà ä àWe€now€turn€to€the€appropriateness€of€ordering€two€of€the€twenty„yearÐ $Ä Ðsentences€to€be€served€consecutively€for€an€effective€forty„year€term.€€Prior€to€theÏenactment€of€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€the€limited€classificationsÏfor€the€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences€were€set€out€in€òòGray€v.€Stateóó,€538Ð ˆ"( ÐS.W.2d€391,€393€(Tenn.€1976).€€In€that€case€our€supreme€court€ruled€thatÏaggravating€circumstances€must€be€present€before€placement€in€any€one€of€theÏclassifications.€€Later,€in€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€739€S.W.2d€227€(Tenn.€1987),€the€courtÐ ì'Œ" Ðestablished€an€additional€category€for€those€defendants€convicted€of€two€or€moreÏstatutory€offenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€minors.€€There€were,€however,Ïadditional€words€of€caution:€€"[C]onsecutive€sentences€should€not€routinely€beÏimposed€.€.€.€and€.€.€.€the€aggregate€maximum€of€consecutive€terms€must€beÏreasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offenses€involved."€€òòTayloróó,€739€S.W.2d€atÐ è0ˆ', Ð230.€€The€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€adopted€the€cautionary€language.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115.€€The€1989€Act€is,€in€essence,€the€codification€of€theÏholdings€in€òòGrayóó€and€òòTayloróó;€consecutive€sentences€may€be€imposed€in€theÐ L6ì,2 Ðdiscretion€of€the€trial€court€only€upon€a€determination€that€one€or€more€of€theÐ 8¸.4 Ðfollowing€criteria׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€exist:Ð `  ÐÓÓà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(1)€€The€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€hasÏknowingly€devoted€himself€to€criminal€acts€as€a€majorÏsource€of€livelihood;Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(2)€€The€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€ofÏcriminal€activity€is€extensive;Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(3)€€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentally€abnormalÏperson€so€declared€by€a€competent€psychiatrist€whoÏconcludes€as€a€result€of€an€investigation€prior€toÏsentencing€that€the€defendant's€criminal€conduct€hasÏbeen€characterized€by€a€pattern€of€repetitive€orÏcompulsive€behavior€with€heedless€indifference€toÏconsequences;Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(4)€€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whoseÏbehavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€andÏno€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€riskÏto€human€life€is€high;€€€€à D à€€€€ÐXøä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(5)€€The€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€moreÏstatutory€offenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor€withÏconsideration€of€the€aggravating€circumstances€arisingÏfrom€the€relationship€between€the€defendant€and€victimÏor€victims,€the€time€span€of€defendant's€undetectedÏsexual€activity,€the€nature€and€scope€of€the€sexual€actsÏand€the€extent€of€the€residual,€physical€and€mentalÏdamage€to€the€victim€or€victims;Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(6)€€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offenseÏcommitted€while€on€probation;Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 Œ àà8ä Œ (#Œ (#à(7)€€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌÓÉ|ÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b).ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€òòGrayóó,€our€supreme€court€ruled€that€before€consecutive€sentencingÐ P-ð#( Ðcould€be€imposed€upon€the€dangerous€offender,€as€now€defined€by€subsectionÏ(b)(4)€in€the€statute,€other€conditions€must€be€present:€€(a)€that€the€crimes€involvedÏaggravating€circumstances;€(b)€that€consecutive€sentences€are€a€necessary€meansÏto€protect€the€public€from€the€defendant;€and€(c)€that€the€term€reasonably€relates€toÐ €4 +0 Ðthe€severity€of€the€offenses.ÌÌà Œ àà ä àIn€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€938€(Tenn.€1995),€our€highÐ ø ˜ Ðcourt€reaffirmed€those€principles,€holding€that€consecutive€sentences€cannot€beÏrequired€of€the€dangerous€offender€"unless€the€terms€reasonably€relate[]€to€theÏseverity€of€the€offenses€committed€and€are€necessary€in€order€to€protect€the€publicÏ(society)€from€further€criminal€acts€by€those€persons€who€resort€to€aggravatedÏcriminal€conduct."€€The€òòWilkersonóó€decision,€which€modified€somewhat€the€strictÐ ô”  Ðfactual€guidelines€for€consecutive€sentencing€adopted€in€òòState€v.€Woodsóó,€814Ð À` ÐS.W.2d€378,€380€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991),€described€sentencing€as€a€"humanÏprocess€that€neither€can€nor€should€be€reduced€to€a€set€of€fixed€and€mechanicalÏrules."€€òòWilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€938.€€The€record€must€show€that€the€sentencingÐ $Ä Ðprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances€were€considered€before€theÏpresumption€of€correctness€applies.€€€€Ô‡XšS XXXêÛÔÐ ¼ \ ÐÌÔ#†XêÛX XXšS–‰#ÔÔ‡ XêÛXXXêÛÔà Œ àà ä àThe€trial€court€found€consecutive€sentences€were€appropriate€becauseÐ $¸ Ðthe€defendant€was€a€dangerous€offender.€€We€agree.€€Assistance€the€defendantÏprovided€Rouse€indicates€a€lack€of€regard€for€human€life.€€The€plan€posed€a€graveÏdanger,€not€only€to€the€intended€victims€but€also€to€all€of€the€others€at€the€school.€€InÏour€view,€an€aggregate€forty„year€term€would€have€not€been€excessive€had€theÏconvictions€been€upheld.€€€Because,€however,€the€trial€court€must€under€our€lawÏinstruct€the€jury€on€not€only€the€crime€charged€but€also€all€lesser€offenses€raised€byÏthe€evidence,€the€convictions€must€be€reversed.€€All€possible€alternatives€must€beÏprovided€in€the€instructions.€€The€cause€is,€therefore,€remanded€Ô#†XêÛXX XêÛî‰#Ôfor€a€new€trial.Ð x2). ÐÌÓÓà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D à__________________________________Ìà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àGary€R.€Wade,€Presiding€œJudgeñèñÐ  ö6–-3 Ðñèññéñ›Ì›ÌñéñCONCUR:›ÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌDavid€G.€Hayes,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌJerry€L.€Smith,€Judge