ÿWPC— <UNX %¦ 0(¬BÔw@4VU:j¤ 0ˆ³ 0D; 0  0w 0Š– 1m  AQ• 0Jæ 0T0 0^„ 0hâ 0rJ 0|¼ B8 ÆU 0D 0@_ 0DŸ 0†ã D/i 0˜ B( D3E 1ux 0dí U>QU*B)¹DCâ AM%5rª§`Q•±v~FvÓÄ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡c:\wpwin60\template\aopinion.wpt ]CD^C_CD`CHaCbCDcCdCeeCÓ€qC  ƒ‰#ppppBd, øð AZ"Arial Regular3|xqC(8(2§ã$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ4°ÒÒX°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(x¸r$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2$µÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(O¼$µµà0  àÔ2$µÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bËd$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2$µÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à  #$µ37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô'''÷ÿ dxd2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd$& ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d33337Border 1dd "4Cþÿ << Gÿÿ +Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€1ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€2ÔÔ€2ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€2XÔÌÌò òDecember€11,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€2ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó  Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€1ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ôÔÔ€2ÔIn€Tennessee,€felony€murder€is€punishable€by€death.€This€discussion€of€the€felony€murderÏstatute€occurred€in€the€context€of€the€constitutionality€of€this€penalty.Ô€1ÔÔ€1XÔÌ VÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€1ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ôÔÔ€2ÔThis€language€comes€directly€from€òòBrownóó,€in€which€the€court€relied€on€òòDupesóó.Ô€1ÔÔ€1XÔÌ ‹Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€1ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ôÔÔ€2ÔThe€photographs€were€in€the€custody€of€this€court€as€part€of€a€co„defendantððs€record.€TheÏstateððs€argument€in€this€regard€is€misplaced.Ô€1ÔÔ€1XÔÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€1ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÓÓÔ€2ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑòòÔ  ÔÑ7€îiXXdðXXdð7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÙ€ ÙœßR€564A1-j|×` Å `€€@ÿRß›à@ àAT€JACKSONóóÌà@ àMAY€1997€SESSIONÌÌÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à*à àC.C.A.€No.€02C01„9608„CR„00267Ìà àà àà àà àà à*Ìà àAppellee,à àà àà à*à àSHELBY€COUNTYÌà àà àà àà àà à*ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à*à àHon.€Joseph€B.€Brown,€Jr.,€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà à*ÌCARLITO€D.€ADAMS,€à àà à*à à(First€degree€felony€murder„„Two€Counts)Ìœà àà àà àà àà à*Ì›à àAppellant.à àà àà à*ÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellant:à àà àà àà àFor€Appellee:óóÌÌWilliam€D.€Masseyà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€Walkup€Ì3074€East€Streetà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌMemphis,€TN€œ€38128›Ì(on€appeal)à àà àà àà àà àKaren€M.€YacuzzoÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌBrett€Steinà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌ236€Adams€Avenueà àà àà àNashville,€TN€œ€37243„0493›ÌMemphis,€TN€œ€38103›Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€W.€CampbellÌWayne€Chastainà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ147€Jefferson€Avenueà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€Complex,€Ste.€301ÌMemphis,€TN€œ€38103›à àà àà à201€Poplar€StreetÌ(at€trial)à àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€œ€38103›ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:__________________ÌÌÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSED€AND€DISMISSED€IN€PARTÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÇÓÓà@ àò òòòOPINIONó óóóÌà àà àThe€defendant,€Carlito€D.€Adams,€was€convicted€of€two€counts€of€firstÏdegree€felony€murder€and€two€counts€of€attempted€first€degree€felony€murder.€€HeÏreceived€concurrent€life€sentences€for€the€felony€murder€convictions.€œ€The›€trial€courtÏimposed€Range€I,€fifteen€and€twenty„five€year€sentences€for€the€two€attemptedÏfelony€murder€convictions,€to€be€served€consecutively€to€each€other€and€to€his€lifeÏsentences,€for€an€aggregate€sentence€of€life€plus€forty€years.€€ÌÌà àà àIn€this€appeal,€we€have€addressed€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(1)€whether€the€convictions€for€attempted€felony€murderÏqualified€as€plain€error;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(2)€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€theÏconvictions€for€first€degree€murder€during€theÏcommission€of€a€felony;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(3)€whether€the€trial€court€properly€instructed€the€juryÏregarding€felony€murder;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(4)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€admittingÏphotographs€of€the€crime€scene€in€evidence;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(5)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€victimsððÏmothers€to€give€irrelevant€testimony€during€the€guiltÏphase€of€this€capital€trial;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(6)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€permitting€cross„examination€of€a€character€witness€concerning€theÍdefendantððs€juvenile€arrest€and€charge€for€aggravatedÏrape;€andÌÌà8 àà8 à(7)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€imposing€consecutiveÏsentences.ÌÌà8 àà8 àœÓÓÌ›à àà àWe€must€reverse€and€dismiss€the€attempted€felony€murderÏconvictions.€œ€Otherwise›€the€judgment€is€affirmed.€€The€defendant€must€serve€twoÏconcurrent€life€sentences.ÌÌà àà àOn€the€afternoon€of€April€20,€1992,€four€young€men€were€sitting€in€aÏparked€car€on€David€Street€in€Memphis,€smoking€pot€and€drinking€gin.€€Five€or€sixÏmale€assailants€approached€the€car.€€Words€were€exchanged.€€The€victims€wereÏrobbed€at€gunpoint€and€then€shot€repeatedly;€Damond€Dawson€and€Tracy€JohnsonÏdied,€Tommy€Blackman€fled€to€safety,€and€Eric€Thomas€was€seriously€injured€butÏsurvived.€œ€The›€defendant€acknowledged€that€he€was€among€the€group€of€assailantsÏbut€denied€any€involvement€in€the€robbery€or€killings.€ÌÌà àà àBrenda€Hudson,€mother€of€twenty„year„old€victim€Tracy€Johnson,Ïtestified€that€she€last€saw€her€son€alive€on€in€the€morning€of€April€20,€1992€whenÏshe€drove€him€to€see€his€infant€son.€€That€afternoon,€she€saw€her€son€lying€dead€onÍthe€sidewalk€on€David€Street.€€She€buried€her€son€the€next€Saturday€at€NewparkÏCemetery.€€Over€objections€by€the€defense,€the€trial€court€admitted€a€photograph€ofÏJohnson€prior€to€his€death.€œ€Over›€other€objections€and€offers€to€stipulate,€the€trialÏcourt€permitted€the€witness,€openly€tearful,€to€identify€a€photograph€of€her€sonððsÏbody.€ÌÌà àà àJonnie€Dawson,€mother€of€seventeen„year„old€victim€DamondÏDawson,€testified€that€her€son€had€been€an€excellent€football€player€and€all€aroundÏathlete.€€She€last€saw€her€son€alive€on€April€20,€1992,€just€after€football€practice.€ÏLater€that€afternoon€she€learned€that€he€had€been€shot.€€The€trial€court€allowed€theÏadmission€of€a€photograph€of€this€victim€taken€while€attending€church€the€SundayÏbefore€his€death.€Over€renewed€objections€and€offers€to€stipulate,€Ms.€DawsonÏidentified€a€photograph€of€her€sonððs€œbody,›€and€then€informed€the€jury€that€he€hadÏbeen€buried€at€Memorial€Park.€ÌÌà àà àEric€Wayne€Thomas,€who€survived€the€shooting,€testified€that€he€hadÏknown€the€victims€Dawson,€Johnson,€Blackman,€and€the€defendant€all€of€his€life.€ÏOn€the€afternoon€of€the€shooting,€they€were€in€Dawsonððs€car€parked€in€his€drivewayÏusing€marijuana€and€drinking€gin.€€Dawson€sat€in€the€driverððs€seat.€œ€Johnson›€was€inÏthe€front€passengerððs€seat.€œ€Thomas›€sat€directly€behind€Dawson€and€Blackman€wasÍseated€next€to€œThomas.›€€The€defendant€and€three€or€four€other€males€thenÏapproached€the€vehicle.€€The€defendant€ordered€Blackman€to€exit€the€car,€but€heÏrefused.€€Another€male€stood€at€the€front€passenger€door€holding€a€pistol.€œ€When›ÏBlackman€got€out€of€the€car€and€ran€toward€the€house,€the€defendant€said€ð ðGetÏhim!ðð€A€third€male€fired€four€or€five€shots€in€Blackmanððs€direction.€€Thomas€testifiedÏthat€the€defendant€was€holding€a€pistol.€€He€said€that€their€assailants€surroundedÏthe€car,€robbed€them€of€their€jewelry€and€their€money,€and€then€shot€themÏrepeatedly.€Thomas€was€first€shot€in€the€stomach€and€then€the€chest.€œ€The›Ïassailants€started€to€leave€and€then€re„opened€fire€on€the€front€and€rear„seatÏpassengers,€shooting€Thomas€in€the€leg.€€As€he€pretended€to€be€dead,€he€heardÏsomeone€say,€ð ðI€think€we€got€them.ðð€€After€the€shooting,€œJohnson›€managed€to€crossÏthe€street€where€he€collapsed€and€later€died.€œ€Dawson,›€shot€several€times,€wasÏbleeding€badly.€€ÌÌà àà àTommy€Blackman,€a€seventeen„year„old€victim,€testified€that€a€fewÏdays€before€the€shooting,€he€argued€with€the€defendant€over€a€basketball€game.€œÏHe›€had€heard€that€the€defendant€was€looking€for€him.€€He€also€revealed€that€he€andÏthe€other€victims€were€smoking€marijuana€and€drinking€gin€in€Dawsonððs€car€whenÏthe€defendant,€accompanied€by€another€male,€directed€him€to€get€out€of€the€car.€ÏWhen€he€did€not€immediately€respond,€he€saw€the€male€accompanying€theÍdefendant€draw€a€gun.€€Blackman€pushed€his€way€out€of€the€car,€knocking€theÏdefendant€down€in€the€process,€and€fled.€€He€then€heard€someone€say€ð ðheððs€goingÏto€the€house.ðð€€When€he€looked€back,€Blackman€saw€four€or€five€other€malesÏapproach€the€car,€heard€shots€fired,€and€felt€a€bullet€graze€his€arm.€€Later,€he€foundÏJohnson€face€down€across€the€street.€œ€Thomas›€was€in€the€back€seat€of€the€carÏasking€for€help€and€Dawson€was€slumped€over€in€the€front€seat.€€BlackmanÏasserted€that€no€one€in€the€car€was€armed€with€any€type€of€weapon.€ÌÌà àà àEric€Jones,€seventeen€years€old,€lived€across€the€street€from€DamondÏDawson€and€was€returning€home€from€a€friendððs€house€when€the€shooting€incidentÏoccurred.€€He€saw€three€males,€including€the€defendant,€surrounding€DawsonððsÏparked€car.€€Two€of€them€had€guns.€€He€overheard€one€of€the€assailants€say,€ð ðDropÏit€offðð€just€before€the€car€occupants€removed€their€jewelry.€€He€also€saw€BlackmanÏget€out€of€the€car€and€run€toward€the€house.€€An€unidentified€male€crossed€the€yardÏand€shot€at€him€and€Blackman€as€each€ran€inside.€€Jones€could€not€see€whetherÏthe€defendant,€who€was€identified€at€trial,€had€a€weapon.ÌÌà àà àMary€Jones,€Eric€Jonesðð€mother,€lived€directly€across€the€street€fromÏthe€Dawsons€on€David€Street.€€On€the€afternoon€of€the€crimes,€she€heard€someÏgunshots€and€looked€out€her€front€door.€œ€She›€saw€a€truck€in€the€street,€almostÍstopped,€blocking€her€view€of€the€Dawson€œhome.€›€By€the€time€it€passed,€she€sawÏtwo€males€running€along€the€driveway€toward€Dawsonððs€parked€car.€€Both€carriedÏguns€and€began€to€shoot€as€soon€as€they€approached€the€Dawson€vehicle.€€Ms.ÏJones€did€not€see€anyone€leave€the€vehicle€or€run€into€the€house.€€She€did€not€seeÏany€indication€of€a€robbery.€ÌÌà àà àFrederick€Sansom,€of€the€Memphis€Police€Department,€arrived€at€theÏscene€that€day€at€approximately€4:15€p.m.€€He€described€the€scene,€the€locations€ofÏvictims,€spent€shells,€and€blood€evidence.€He€found€no€weapons€in€the€car.€€DuringÏhis€testimony,€numerous€photographs€of€the€crime€scene€and€the€decedents€wereÏintroduced€in€evidence€over€defense€counsel€objections.€ÌÌà àà àDr.€OððBrien€Smith,€assistant€professor€of€pathology€at€the€University€ofÏTennessee€at€Memphis€and€assistant€medical€examiner€of€Shelby€County,Ïperformed€both€autopsies.€€He€testified€that€a€bullet€went€through€Johnsonððs€heart,Ïcausing€his€death.€€Dawson€sustained€five€gunshot€wounds,€and,€although€heÏsurvived€long€enough€to€undergo€surgery,€the€gunshot€wounds€caused€his€death.€€ÌÌà àà àHez€Benny€Buckner,€a€witness€for€the€defense,€testified€that€heÏreceived€a€phone€call€from€the€defendant€on€the€day€of€the€shooting,€during€whichÍthe€defendant€claimed€to€have€had€an€altercation€with€someone;€the€incidentÏapparently€involved€a€gun€and€the€other€person,€who€was€believed€to€beÏBlackman,€supposedly€drove€by€the€Adamsðð€house€slowly,€as€if€to€shoot.€€TheÏdefendant€asked€Buckner€to€pick€up€Kevin€Shaw€and€come€to€his€house.€€AtÏShawððs€residence,€they€were€joined€by€KB,€Big€D,€and€Scoot.€œ€The›€groupÏproceeded€to€Adamsðð€house.€€The€six€of€them€walked€from€the€defendantððs€home€toÏthe€Dawson€residence€on€David€Street€to€talk€to€Blackman.€€On€the€way,€ShawÏhanded€Buckner€a€.25€automatic.€€The€defendant,€walking€ahead,€apparently€didÏnot€see€the€exchange.€€The€defendant€reached€the€Dawson€residence€first,Ïapproached€the€parked€car,€and€opened€the€rear€passenger€door.€€Buckner€did€notÏhear€the€defendant€say€anything€to€Blackman.€€As€the€defendant€opened€the€door,ÏKB€and€Big€D€ran€up€to€the€car€shooting;€they€demanded€gold€chains€and€a€beeper.€ÏBig€D€fired€shots€in€the€back€seat€and€KB€ran€around€to€the€other€side€of€the€car€toÏfire€shots€into€the€front€seat.€€After€the€shooting€began,€the€defendant€ran€pastÏBuckner,€followed€by€Shaw.€œ€At›€that€point,€Buckner€ran€and€was€followed€by€theÏothers.€€When€Buckner€looked€back,€he€saw€one€male€exit€the€vehicle,€run€acrossÏthe€street,€and€collapse.€ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€claimed€that€he€and€Blackman€had€an€altercationÏwhile€playing€basketball€and€that€Blackman€had€pulled€a€gun.€€When€friends€hadÍintervened,€Blackman€left.€€The€defendant€took€a€detour€home€because€he€heardÏBlackman€was€waiting€for€him€on€the€street.€€He€decided€to€go€talk€it€out€withÏBlackman€and€called€Buckner€and€Shaw€to€be€witnesses.€€Several€other€malesÏunknown€to€the€defendant€accompanied€them.€€They€walked€to€the€DawsonÏresidence.€œ€Shaw›€and€the€defendant€approached€the€victims€and€asked€BlackmanÏto€step€outside€so€they€could€talk.€œ€The›€defendant€testified€that€he€had€his€back€toÏthe€street,€when€Blackman,€looking€beyond€the€defendant,€appeared€startled€andÏbegan€to€run.€€A€shot€was€fired.€€The€defendant€turned,€saw€the€three€unknownÏmales€begin€to€shoot,€and€then€ran€home.€€He€insisted€that€his€only€purpose€was€toÏtalk€to€Blackman.€€He€testified€that€he€was€surprised€by€the€shooting,€did€notÏwitness€any€robbery,€and€turned€himself€in€to€police€upon€learning€he€was€beingÏsought.ÌÌà àà àOn€cross„examination,€the€state€impeached€the€defendant€by€use€ofÏhis€unsigned€statement€to€police€on€the€night€of€the€offense.€€The€defendant€hadÏstated€that€several€of€the€men€who€accompanied€him€to€David€Street€had€pistols;Ïhe€reported€then€that€two€men€he€did€not€know€fired€a€lot€of€shots.€€He€told€officersÏthat€he€took€Shaw€and€Buckner€in€case€he€and€Blackman€fought.€œ€He›Ïacknowledged€to€the€investigating€officers€that€he€told€Blackman€to€get€out€of€theÏcar.€€He€claimed€that€Dawson€had€then€tried€to€pull€out€a€pistol€as€his€two€unknownÍcompanions€ran€to€the€car€and€robbed€Dawson.€€When€confronted€with€hisÏstatement,€the€defendant€admitted€that€he€knew€of€the€robbery€and€the€guns€onlyÏbecause€Shaw€had€informed€him€of€that€just€before€he€made€his€comments€to€theÏpolice.ÌÌà àà àThe€defense€asked€to€call€œJoseph›€Terre,€Jr.,€as€a€character€witness.€œÏTerre›€is€a€school€teacher€who€had€taught€the€defendant€history€and€homeroomÏclasses.€€Outside€the€presence€of€the€jury,€defense€counsel€elicited€testimony€thatÏthe€defendant€was€truthful,€honest,€and€peaceful.€€The€state€in€turn,€inquired€as€toÏhis€knowledge€of€the€defendantððs€prior€conviction€for€grand€larceny,€his€juvenileÏadjudication€for€shoplifting,€and€his€arrest€and€charge€for€aggravated€rape.€€AfterÏlengthy€discussions,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€if€the€character€witness€testified,€theÏstate€could€inquire€as€to€the€witnessðð€knowledge€of€these€specific€incidences.€œ€The›Ïdefense€rested€without€calling€the€character€witness.€ÌÌà àà àAfter€the€jury€returned€guilty€verdicts€on€two€counts€of€felony€murderÏand€two€counts€of€attempted€felony€murder,€the€penalty€phase€of€the€trial€wasÏbegun€to€determine€whether€the€defendant€would€be€sentenced€to€death.€€GeorgeÏRichmond,€who€lived€on€David€Street,€said€that€the€killings€had€an€adverse€effectÏon€his€neighborhood,€ð ðEverybody€is€fearful€œnow.ð𛀀Ms.€Hudson,€explained€that€herÍson,€Tracy€Johnson,€had€been€a€ð ðvery€good€young€manðð€who€never€gave€herÏproblems€and€was€respectful€of€others.€€He€had€a€child€of€four€months€at€the€time€ofÏhis€death.€€Ms.€Dawson€discussed€the€plans€her€son€had€made€the€day€before€hisÏdeath,€and€relayed€how€he€had€a€renewed€determination€to€do€well€with€his€life.€ÏShe€testified€that€his€death€was€ð ðthe€end€of€her€life.ðð€€ÌÌà àà àSoloman€Adams,€the€defendantððs€father,€testified€that€the€defendantÏworked€for€him€in€construction€when€not€in€school.€œ€He›€claimed€his€son€was€noÏmore€troublesome€than€any€other€kid,€made€good€grades,€and€attended€college€inÏhopes€of€becoming€an€accountant.€€As€far€as€he€knew,€the€defendant€had€noÏinvolvement€in€gang€activities.€€He€described€his€son€as€ð ðscared€and€just€really€tornÏapartðð€immediately€after€the€shooting€and€asked€the€jury€to€spare€his€life.ÌÌà àà àVanessa€Adams,€the€defendantððs€step„mother,€testified€that€theÏdefendant€was€a€ð ðgood€kidðð€with€high€aspirations.€œ€She›€expressed€her€love€for€him,Ïasked€the€jury€to€spare€his€life,€and€asserted€that€the€defendant€could€beÏrehabilitated.€€Barbara€Beloach,€employed€by€Youth€Service€of€Memphis,€hadÏhelped€the€defendant€become€involved€in€their€summer€work€program.€€SheÏtestified€that€the€defendant€was€a€quiet,€respectful,€and€cooperative€and€could€beÏrehabilitated.€€She€asked€the€jury€not€to€impose€the€death€penalty.€€Loving€DuBose,Íthe€defendantððs€œmother,›€testified€that€her€son€had€worked€to€attend€college€and€thatÏhe€had€always€been€respectful.€œ€She›€also€asked€the€jury€to€spare€his€life.€€JamesÏPatterson,€the€defendantððs€brother,€also€expressed€love€for€the€defendant€andÏasked€the€jury€to€spare€his€life.€ÌÌà àà àOn€the€morning€of€the€final€day€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trialÏcourt€received€a€letter€from€a€juror€who€stated€that€she€had€changed€her€mind€andÏno€longer€wanted€to€vote€guilty€for€murder;€she€favored€a€criminally€negligentÏhomicide€verdict.€€Defense€counsel€sought€a€mistrial.€œ€The›€trial€court€denied€theÏrequest€but€pointed€out€that€the€jury€would€likely€be€favorable€to€the€defendantÏduring€deliberations€as€to€sentence.€€At€that€point,€the€state€sought€a€mistrial€whichÏthe€trial€court€denied.ÌÌà àà àThe€final€witness€for€mitigation€was€Joseph€Terre,€the€former€high„school€teacher€of€the€defendant.€€Terre€testified€that€the€defendant€had€posed€noÏdisciplinary€problems€and€seemed€to€be€liked€and€respected€by€his€peers.€€TheÏdefendant€was€never€disrespectful€and€seemed€to€understand€the€importance€ofÏeducation.€€On€learning€of€the€charges€against€the€defendant,€Terre€wasÏastonished.€He€expressed€the€belief€that€the€death€penalty€would€not€beÏappropriate.ÌÌà@ àIÌà àà àAttempted€felony€murder€is€not€recognized€as€a€crime€in€Tennessee.€ÏThe€state€concedes€that,€even€though€the€defendant€has€failed€to€present€this€issueÏin€this€appeal.ÌÌà àà àPlain€error€may€be€noticed€and€brought€to€the€attention€of€theÏappellate€court€even€though€not€raised€in€the€motion€for€new€trial.€€òòState€v.€Ogleóó,Ï666€S.W.2d€58€(Tenn.€1984).€€The€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€ProcedureÏprovide,€in€part,€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(b)€Plain€Error.„„An€error€which€has€affected€theÏsubstantial€rights€of€an€accused€may€be€noticed€at€anyÏtime,€even€though€not€raised€in€the€motion€for€a€new€trialÏor€assigned€as€error€on€appeal,€in€the€discretion€of€theÏappellate€court€where€necessary€to€do€substantialÏjustice.ÓÓÌTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).€€This€court€is€authorized,€in€its€discretion,€to€consider€issuesÏnot€properly€presented€for€review€ð ð(1)€to€prevent€needless€litigation,€(2)€to€preventÏinjury€to€the€interests€of€the€public,€and€(3)€to€prevent€prejudice€to€the€judicialÏprocess.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€R.€App.€P.€13(b).€€Unless€errors€affect€the€fairness€and€integrity€ofÏthe€trial,€they€are€not€generally€deemed€to€qualify€as€plain.€€òòState€v.€Woodenóó,€658ÏS.W.2d€553,€559€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€A€substantial€right€is€one€of€fundamentalÍproportions€in€the€indictment€process,€a€right€to€the€proof€of€every€element€of€theÏoffense,€and€is€constitutional€in€nature.€€Plain€error€is€imposed€only€to€prevent€aÏmanifest€œinjustice.€›€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Goinsóó,€705€S.W.2d€648,€650€(Tenn.€1986);€òòState€v.ÏBrownóó,€693€S.W.2d€369,€371€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€€In€òòUnited€States€v.€Causeyóó,Ï834€F.2d€1277€(6th€Cir.€1987),€the€court€held€the€plain€error€doctrine€is€limited€toÏerrors€ð ðthat€strike€at€fundamental€fairness,€honesty,€or€public€reputation€of€the€trial.Ï...ðð€òòId.óó€at€1281€(citations€omitted).ÌÌà àà àFundamental€to€our€system€of€criminal€justice€is€the€requirement€thatÏoffenses€be€clearly€defined€by€the€General€Assembly.€€œð ðConduct›€does€not€constituteÏan€offense€unless€it€is€defined€as€an€offense€by€statute,€municipal€ordinance,€or€ruleÏauthorized€by€and€lawfully€adopted€under€a€statute.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„102(a).€€In€1996,€our€stateððs€supreme€court€ruled€that€the€offense€of€attemptedÏfelony€murder€does€not€exist€in€Tennessee.€€òòState€v.€Kimbroughóó,€924€S.W.2d€888Ï(Tenn.€1996).€€Thus,€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€felony€murder€wereÏdismissed:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àConsidering€that€the€legislature€has€alreadyÏenacted€specific€offenses€covering€situations€in€whichÏdeath€or€injury€is€threatened€or€occurs€during€theÏcommission€of€certain€felonies,€we€conclude€that€toÏextend€the€felony„murder€rule€to€cases€in€which€noÏdeath€occurs€would€ððextend€the€scope€of€the€doctrineÍbeyond€the€pale€of€its€statutory€design€and€logicalÏunderpinnings.ðð€[I]t€is€illogical€that€someone€could€intendÏto€cause€someone€elseððs€death€through€negligence€orÏeven€recklessness.€...€We€conclude€that€one€cannotÏintend€to€accomplish€the€unintended.€€Consequently,€theÏoffense€of€attempted€felony„murder€does€not€exist€inÏTennessee.ÌÌÓÓòòId.óó€924€S.W.2d€at€891„92€(citations€omitted).€€We€must,€therefore,€reverse€andÏdismiss€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€felony€murder.ÌÌà@ àIIÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€toÏsupport€the€verdicts€of€felony€murder€because€the€state€failed€to€prove€that€theÏdefendant€planned€and€intended€to€participate€in€a€robbery€and€failed€to€prove€thatÏhe€was€criminally€responsible€for€the€conduct€of€the€other€assailants.€€The€stateÏcounters€that€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€show€that€the€defendant€was€involvedÏin€a€reckless€killing€during€the€perpetration€of€a€robbery.€€ÌÌà àà àOn€appeal,€of€course,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€might€be€drawnÏtherefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€The€credibility€ofÏthe€witnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€the€reconciliation€ofÍconflicts€in€the€proof€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€jury€as€triers€of€fact.€€òòByrge€v.ÏStateóó,€575€S.W.2d€292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€When€the€sufficiency€of€theÏevidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€is€whether,€after€reviewing€theÏevidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€haveÏfound€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).ÌÌà àà àAt€the€time€of€the€offense,€felony€murder€was€defined€under€the€1989ÏAct€as€ð ða€reckless€killing€of€another€committed€in€the€perpetration€of,€or€attempt€toÏperpetrate€any€first€degree€murder,€arson,€rape,€robbery,€burglary,€theft,€kidnappingÏor€aircraft€piracy.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)€(1991).€€Robbery€wasÏdefined€as€ð ðthe€intentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€the€person€of€anotherÏby€violence€or€putting€the€person€in€fear.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„401(a)€(1991).€€ÌÌà àà àIn€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€51€S.W.2d€482,€483„84€(Tenn.€1932),€ourÏsupreme€court€set€forth€how€the€felony€murder€doctrine€operated€to€hold€co„felonsÏliable€for€the€acts€of€the€principal:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[W]hen€men€are€assembled€for€an€illegal€purpose,€theÏcommission€of€an€offense€by€any€one€of€the€party€inÏpursuance€of€that€purpose€is€the€act€of€the€whole.€...€TheÏtest€of€responsibility€of€one€member€of€a€party€for€theÍacts€of€another€member€of€the€party€is€concert€of€actionÏ....€All€who€join€in€a€common€design€to€commit€anÏunlawful€act,€the€natural€and€probable€consequence€ofÏthe€execution€of€which€involves€the€contingency€ofÏtaking€human€life,€are€responsible€for€a€homicideÏcommitted€by€one€of€them€while€acting€in€pursuance€of,Ïor€in€furtherance€of,€the€common€design,€although€notÏspecifically€contemplated€by€the€parties€....òòÓÓÌId.óó€51€S.W.2d€at€483„84€(citations€omitted).€€The€death€ð ðmust€have€had€an€intimateÏrelation€and€close€connection€with€the€felony,€...€and€not€be€separate,€distinct,€andÏindependent€from€œit....ðð€›€òòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€296€S.W.2d€879,€883€(Tenn.€1956).€ÏMoreover,€co„felons€are€responsible€for€the€ð ðnatural€and€probable€consequencesððÏof€the€acts€of€one€another€ð ðcommitted€in€furtherance€of€such€design€even€thoughÏthe€killing€was€not€specifically€œcontemplated.ðð€›€òòDupes€v.€Stateóó,€354€S.W.2d€453,Ï456€(Tenn.€1962).€œ€Thus,›€since€1932,€the€felony€murder€doctrine€has€beenÏinterpreted€to€require€something€more€than€mere€presence€and€participation€in€theÏunderlying€felony;€it€has€required€some€level€of€foreseeability€as€well€as€a€nexusÏbetween€the€felony€and€the€killing.€€On€the€other€hand,€the€felony€murder€doctrineÏhas€never€required€that€the€defendant€ð ðspecifically€contemplate[]ðð€the€œkilling.€›ÏòòWilliamsóó,€51€S.W.2d€at€483.ÌÌà àà àIn€1988,€the€General€Assembly€altered€the€statutory€requirements€ofÏfelony€murder,€reflecting€a€strict€liability€approach:€ð ð[e]very€murder€...€committed€inÍthe€perpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate,€any€[enumerated€felony]€is€murder€inÏthe€first€degree.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„202€(1988).€€In€interpreting€this€statute,Ïhowever,€our€courts€have€retained€portions€of€the€interpretive€language€found€inÏòòFarmeróó,€òòDupesóó,€and€òòWilliamsóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€756€S.W.2d€700€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1988);€òòState€v.€Seversóó,€759€S.W.2d€935€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€œ€To›€render€aÏguilty€verdict€under€the€1988€statute,€the€jury€need€determine€only€that€theÏdefendant€participated€in€the€underlying€enumerated€œfelony.€›€òòBrownóó,€756€S.W.2d€atÏ704;€òòState€v.€Middlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317,€332€(Tenn.€1992).€€In€òòBrownóó,€theÏdefendant€argued€that€in€order€to€be€found€guilty€of€felony€murder,€the€jury€mustÏconclude€that€the€defendant€ð ðintendedðð€to€cause€or€assisted€in€causing€the€victimððsÏdeath.€œ€This›€court,€relying€on€òòDupesóó,€disagreed:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àWhen€one€enters€into€a€scheme€with€another€to€commitÏone€of€the€felonies€enumerated€in€[Tenn.€Code€Ann.]€ðð€Ï39„2„202€and€death€ensues,€both€defendants€areÏresponsible€for€the€death,€regardless€of€who€actuallyÏcommitted€the€murder€and€whether€the€killing€wasÏspecifically€contemplated€by€the€œother.€€...›€[A]s€long€asÏthe€defendant€intended€to€commit€the€underlying€felonyÏ(in€this€case,€robbery)€and€death€resulted€in€theÏperpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate,€the€underlyingÏfelony,€the€defendant€is€responsible€for€the€murder,Ïregardless€of€whether€he€intended€for€the€victim€to€die€orÏparticipated€in€the€act€of€murder.ÌÌÓÓòòBrownóó,€756€S.W.2d€at€704„05€(citations€omitted).€€€The€court€in€òòBrownóó€based€itsÏconclusion€on€òòDupesóó€but€did€not€enunciate€the€ð ðnatural€and€probableÍconsequenceðð€principle€as€it€was€not€directly€implicated€by€the€issues€in€that€case.€œÏOther›€interpretive€rules€of€the€felony€murder€doctrine€were€also€applied€to€theÏstatute.€€To€sustain€a€conviction€for€first€degree€felony€murder,€the€killing€must€haveÏbeen€in€pursuance€of,€rather€than€collateral€to,€the€unlawful€act€described€by€theÏstatute.€€òòSeversóó,€759€S.W.2d€at€938€(citing€òòFarmeróó,€296€S.W.2d€at€883).€ÌÌà àà àIn€1989,€the€General€Assembly€redefined€felony€murder€and€addedÏthe€culpability€requirement€of€reckless:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(a)€First€degree€murder€is:Ìà8 àà8 à€€(2)€A€òòrecklessóó€killing€of€another€committed€in€theÏperpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€any€first€degreeÏmurder,€arson,€rape,€robbery,€burglary,€theft,€kidnapping,Ïaircraft€piracy,€or€the€unlawful€throwing,€placing€orÏdischarging€of€a€destructive€device€or€bomb.ÓÓÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202€(1989)€(emphasis€added).ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àð ðRecklessðð€refers€to€a€person€who€acts€recklessly€withÏrespect€to€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€or€theÏresult€of€the€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€of€butÏconsciously€disregards€a€substantial€and€unjustifiableÏrisk€that€the€circumstances€exist€or€the€result€will€occur.€ÏThe€risk€must€be€of€such€a€nature€and€degree€that€itsÏdisregard€constitutes€a€gross€deviation€from€theÏstandard€of€care€that€an€ordinary€person€would€exerciseÏunder€all€the€circumstances€as€viewed€from€the€accusedÏpersonððs€standpoint.ÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„401(c)€(1989).€€Our€supreme€court€discussed€the€policiesÏthat€prompted€addition€of€the€reckless€mens€rea:× ƒ7 ××  ×ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€number€of€states€allowing€capital€punishment€forÏpure€felony€murder€[where€no€culpability€level€isÏrequired]€...€is€a€distinct€minority.€€Tennessee€moved€outÏof€that€status€in€1989€by€amending€its€first„degreeÏmurder€statute€to€provide€that€first„degree€murder€occursÏonly€where€a€killing€in€the€perpetration€of€one€of€theÏlisted€felonies€is€reckless.ÌÌÓÓòòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317,€337€(Tenn.€1992)€(citations€omitted).€Under€theÏ1989€Act,€the€defendantððs€recklessness€must€be€proved€independently€and€cannotÏbe€ð ðpresum[ed]€from€the€fact€that€the€defendant€was€engaged€in€the€commission€ofÏan€enumerated€offense€when€the€killing€œoccurred.ðð€›€òòState€v.€Frank€Whitmoreóó,€C.C.A.ÏNo.€03C01„9404„CR„00141,€slip€op.€at€20,€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€June€19,Ï1997),€òòperm.€to€app.€filedóó,€(Aug.€20,€1997)€(citing€òòState€v.€Gilliamóó,€901€S.W.2d€385,Ï390€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)).ÌÌà àà àAccomplice€liability€generally€provides€another€basis€for€a€felonyÏmurder€conviction.€€In€1989,€the€General€Assembly€amended€our€accompliceÏliability€statute€to€provide€that€ð ð[a]€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offenseÏcommitted€by€the€conduct€of€another€if€...€(2)€[a]cting€with€intent€to€promote€or€assistÍthe€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefit€in€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,Ïthe€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,€or€attempts€to€aid€another€person€to€commit€theÏoffense[.]ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402.€€An€aider€and€abettor€under€this€statuteÏcan€be€held€criminally€responsible€not€only€for€the€criminal€offense€aided€orÏabetted,€but€also€for€any€other€crime€committed€by€an€accomplice€as€a€ð ðnatural€andÏprobable€consequence€of€the€crime€originally€aided€and€œabetted.ðð€›€òòState€v.€Carsonóó,Ï950€S.W.2d€951,€952€(Tenn.€1997).€œ€In›€describing€a€ð ðnatural€and€probableÏconsequence,ðð€the€court€in€òòCarsonóó€described€that€these€are€ð ðharms€[the€aiders€andÏabettors]€have€naturally,€probably€and€œforeseeably€put€in€motion....€€›A€ððð ðnatural€andÏprobable€consequenceðð€in€the€ð ðordinary€course€of€thingsðð€presupposes€an€outcomeÏwithin€a€reasonably€predictable€œrange.ðððð€›€òòId.óó€at€955€(citations€omitted).€ÌÌà àà àIn€òòCarsonóó,€the€supreme€court€declared€in€dicta€that€the€ð ð[natural€andÏprobable€consequences]€principle€also€òòhas€been€appliedóó€to€accomplices€under€theÏfelony€murder€doctrine:€€ððA€defendant€who€is€a€willing€and€active€participant€in€aÏrobbery€becomes€accountable€for€all€of€the€[natural€and€probable]€consequencesÏflowing€from€the€robbery€and€may€be€convicted€of€first„degree€murder€where€a€co„perpetrator€of€the€felony€is€the€actual€œkiller.ðððð€›€òòId.óó€at€955,€n.5€(emphasis€added)Ï(quoting€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€336;€also€citing€òòDupesóó,€354€S.W.2d€at€456).ÌÌà àà àThus,€the€question€is€whether€the€natural€and€probableÏconsequences€principle€enunciated€in€òòCarsonóó€as€ð ðha[ving]€been€applied€toÏaccomplices€under€the€felony€murder€doctrineðð€also€applies€to€the€1989€felonyÏmurder€statute.€€We€hold€that€it€does.€€For€an€accomplice€who€is€not€the€actual€killerÏto€receive€a€conviction€of€felony€murder€under€the€1989€Act€the€state€must€prove€theÏfollowing:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(a)€the€defendant€recklessly€participated€in€theÏunderlying€felony,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„202€(1989);€ÌÌà8 àà8 à(b)€the€defendant€was€reckless€as€to€the€killing€whichÏoccurred€during€the€underlying€felony,€òòId.óó;€ÌÌà8 àà8 à(c)€that€the€killing€was€not€independent€or€separate€from€Ïthe€underlying€felony,€òòSeversóó,€759€S.W.2d€938;€òòFarmeróó,Ï296€S.W.2d€883;€and,€ÌÌà8 àà8 à(d)€that€the€killing€was€a€natural€and€probableÏconsequence€of€the€underlying€œfelony.€›€òòWilliamsóó,€51ÏS.W.2d€483„84;€òòDupesóó,€354€S.W.2d€456;€òòCarsonóó,€950ÏS.W.2d€at€956.ÓÓÌÌà àà àBasic€principles€of€statutory€construction€require€courts€to€give€effectÏto€legislative€intent€without€restricting€or€expanding€a€statute's€coverage€beyond€itsÏintended€œscope.€›€òòRiggs€v.€Bursonóó,€941€S.W.2d€44,€54€(Tenn.€1997);€òòOwens€v.€Stateóó,Ï908€S.W.2d€923,€926€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€examining€statutory€language,€courts€shouldÏapply€the€ordinary€and€plain€meaning.€€òòId.óó€€In€addition,€courts€presume€that€theÍLegislature€is€aware€of€both€its€prior€enactments€and€the€law€as€it€exists€when€newÏlegislation€is€œpassed.€›€òòWilson€v.€Johnson€Countyóó,€879€S.W.2d€807,€810€(Tenn.Ï1994).€€œÌ›Ìà àà àð ðThe€provisions€of€[the€criminal€code]€shall€be€construed€according€toÏthe€fair€import€of€their€terms,€including€reference€to€judicial€decisions€and€commonÏlaw€interpretations,€to€promote€justice,€and€effect€the€objectives€of€the€criminalÏcode.€[Acts€1989,€ch.€591,€ðð€1.]ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„104.€œ€The›€SentencingÏCommission€Comments€provide€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€commission€intends€the€language€of€the€sectionsÏthemselves€to€be€an€authoritative€statement€of€the€law.€ÏSince€some€of€the€terms€utilized€have€been€clearlyÏdefined€by€judicial€decisions,€those€decisions€andÏcommon€law€interpretations€should€be€consulted€whereÏnecessary.ÌÌÓÓTherefore,€we€rely€on€the€plain€language€of€the€statute,€the€intent€of€the€legislature,Ïand€the€common€law€interpretations€of€the€felony€murder€doctrine.ÌÌà àà àOur€code€dictates€that€ð ð[a]€person€commits€an€offense€who€actsÏintentionally,€knowingly,€recklessly€or€with€criminal€negligence,€òòas€the€definition€ofÏthe€offense€requires,€with€respect€to€each€element€of€the€offenseóó.€œ€Tenn.›€Code€Ann.Ïðð€39„11„301€(emphasis€added).€€Moreover,€an€intent€to€punish€without€theÍrequirement€of€a€culpable€mental€state€must€be€clear€from€the€language€of€theÏstatute€creating€the€œoffense.€›€òòPappas€v.€Stateóó,€188€S.W.€52€(Tenn.€1916).€€Here,€theÏstatute€expressly€requires€a€reckless€mental€state€as€to€every€element.€œ€Tenn.›€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„202€(1989).€€Next,€applying€common€law€interpretations€of€the€statute,Ïthe€state€must€prove€that€the€resulting€death€was€not€independent€from€the€felony.ÏòòSeversóó,€759€S.W.2d€at€938;€òòFarmeróó,€296€S.W.2d€at€883.€And€finally,€the€state€mustÏprove€that€the€killing€was€a€natural€and€probable€consequence€of€the€felony.ÏòòWilliamsóó,€51€S.W.2d€at€483„84;€òòDupesóó,€354€S.W.2d€at€456;€òòCarsonóó,€950€S.W.2d€atÏ956.€ÌÌà àà àWe€conclude€that€the€evidence€here€was€sufficient€to€support€theÏverdict.€œ€The›€defendant€lead€his€accomplices€to€the€Dawson€residence€on€DavidÏStreet.€€He€approached€the€vehicle€first.€€Thomas€testified€that€the€defendant€had€aÏweapon.€€The€defendant€ordered€Blackman€out€of€the€car€and,€when€BlackmanÏbegan€to€run,€the€defendant€yelled€ð ðGet€him!ðð€€Eric€Jones€testified€that€he€saw€theÏdefendant€and€two€others€standing€by€the€car,€€heard€one€say,€ð ðDrop€it€off,ðð€andÏobserved€the€victims€removing€jewelry.€€In€his€statement€to€police,€the€defendantÏacknowledged€that€he€called€his€friends€for€ð ðback€up,ðð€was€aware€that€several€of€hisÏcompanions€had€weapons,€and€knew€that€a€robbery€occurred.€œ€The›€jury€rejectedÏhis€claim€that€he€learned€of€the€information€second€hand€some€time€after€theÍcommission€of€the€crimes.€œ€Thus,›€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€show€that€theÏdefendant€was€reckless€in€his€actions,€knowingly€participated€in€the€robbery,€andÏacted€recklessly€in€regard€to€the€victims.€œ€The›€evidence€is€also€sufficient€to€showÏthat€the€killings€were€not€independent€from€the€robbery€and€were€a€natural€andÏprobable€consequence€arising€from€the€events.€œ€In›€our€view,€a€rational€trier€of€factÏcould€have€found€the€defendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€ÌÌà@ àIIIÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€toÏinstruct€the€jury€on€the€foreseeability€or€proximate€cause€requirement€for€felonyÏmurder.€œ€In›€other€words,€in€order€for€the€jury€to€find€the€defendant€guilty€of€felonyÏmurder,€they€also€must€find€that€the€killings€were€reasonably€foreseeable€to€theÏdefendant,€not€simply€conceivable.€€The€state€argues€that€the€trial€court€is€notÏrequired€to€instruct€the€jury€as€to€foreseeability€or€proximate€cause,€citingÏòòMiddlebrooksóó.€€Rather,€for€a€conviction€of€first„degree€murder€during€theÏcommission€of€a€felony,€the€state€contends€that€the€statute€ð ðonly€requires€that€theÏmurder€be€ððcommitted€in€the€perpetration€ofðð€[the€felony].ðð€(citing€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840ÏS.W.2d€at€332).€œ€The›€state€also€points€out€that€the€defendant€has€waived€this€issueÏby€failing€to€request€special€jury€œinstructions.€›€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Fosteróó,€755€S.W.2d€846,Í848€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€œ€We›€hold€that€the€jury€instructions€here€wereÏincomplete,€but€find€the€error€to€be€harmless.ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€judge€is€under€a€constitutional€obligation€to€"declare€the€law"Ïto€the€jury€in€the€jury€instructions.€€Tenn.€Const.,€art€VI,€ðð€9.€€The€trial€judge€has€aÏduty€to€give€a€complete€charge€of€the€law€applicable€to€the€facts€of€the€case.€€òòStateÏv.€Harbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€314,€319€(Tenn.€1986).€€It€is€presumed€that€the€jury€followsÏthe€instructions€of€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Blackmonóó,€701€S.W.2d€228,€233€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1985);€òòKlaver€v.€Stateóó,€503€S.W.2d€946€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1973).€€ToÏdetermine€if€instructions€are€erroneous,€our€supreme€court€advises€us€to€review€theÏjury€charge€in€its€entirety.€€òòState€v.€Hodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€346,€352€(Tenn.€1997).ÌA€charge€causes€prejudicial€error€ð ðif€it€fails€to€fairly€submit€the€legal€issues€or€if€itÏmisleads€the€jury€as€to€the€applicable€law.ðð€œ€òòId.ó󛀜€In›€òòHodgesóó,€the€court€quoted€theÏadvisory€language€of€the€United€States€Supreme€Court:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àðð[j]urors€do€not€sit€in€solitary€isolation€booths€parsingÏinstructions€for€subtle€shades€of€meaning€in€the€sameÏway€that€lawyers€might.€€Differences€among€them€inÏinterpretation€of€instructions€may€be€thrashed€out€in€theÏdeliberative€process,€with€commonsense€understandingÏof€the€instructions€in€the€light€of€all€that€has€taken€placeÏat€the€trial€likely€to€prevail€over€technical€hairsplitting.ðð€€ÌÌÓÓòòId.óó€(quoting€òòBoyde€v.€Californiaóó,€494€U.S.€370,€œ380„81€(1990));›€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.ÏVan€Tranóó,€864€S.W.2d€465,€479€(Tenn.€1993).€ÌÌà àà àThe€jury€charge€in€this€case€was€lengthy.€€First,€the€trial€courtÏinstructed€as€to€burden€of€proof€and€criminal€responsibility€for€conduct€of€another.ÏThe€instructions€then€covered€the€statutory€elements€of€all€the€offenses€charged,Ïincluding€lesser€offenses;€there€followed€instructions€on€the€presumption€ofÏinnocence,€reasonable€doubt,€credibility€of€and€impeaching€witnesses,€accompliceÏas€a€witness,€direct€or€circumstantial€evidence,€and€the€requirement€of€aÏunanimous€verdict.€€As€to€the€indictment€for€first€degree€felony€murder,€the€jury€wasÏinstructed€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àHomicide:€First€degree€murder€(killing€in€the€perpetrationÏof€other€crimes)Ìà8 àà8 à€€€A€person€who€commits€first€degree€murder€is€guilty€of€aÏfelony.Ìà8 àà8 à€€€For€you€to€find€the€defendant€guilty€of€this€offense,€theÏstate€must€have€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€theÏexistence€of€the€following€essential€elements:€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€€(1)€that€the€alleged€victim€was€unlawfully€killed;€Ìà8 àà8 à€€€(2)€that€the€killing€was€committed€in€the€perpetration€ofÏor€the€attempt€to€perpetrate€the€alleged€robbery;€that€is,Ïthat€the€killing€was€closely€connected€to€the€allegedÏrobbery€and€was€not€a€separate,€distinct€andÏindependent€event;€and€Ìà8 àà8 à€€€(3)€that€the€defendant€intended€to€commit€the€allegedÏrobbery;€and€Ìà8 àà8 à€€€(4)€that€the€killing€was€the€result€of€a€reckless€act€by€theÏperpetrators€of€the€alleged€robbery.Ìà@ à***Ìà8 àà8 àWhen€one€enters€into€a€scheme€with€others€to€commit€aÏrobbery€and€a€killing€ensues,€all€perpetrators€may€beÏheld€responsible€for€the€death,€regardless€of€whoÏactually€committed€the€murder€and€whether€the€killingÏwas€specifically€contemplated€by€the€others.€€As€long€asÏthe€perpetrators€intended€that€the€robbery€be€committedÏand€a€killing€during€the€attempt€to€perpetrate€theÏrobbery,€each€perpetrator€is€responsible€for€the€murder,Ïregardless€of€whether€he€intended€for€the€victim€to€die€orÏparticipated€in€the€act€of€murder.× ƒ8 ××  ×ÌÌÓÓThe€omission€of€the€natural€and€probable€consequences€language€of€òòDupesóó,€aÏlong€standing€articulation€of€the€felony€murder€doctrine€in€Tennessee€and€reliedÏupon€by€our€courts€in€òòBrownóó€and€òòCarsonóó,€was€erroneous.€œ€Because›€we€believe€thatÏthis€instruction€ð ðfairly€submit[s]€the€legal€issuesðð€to€the€jury,€the€error,€in€our€view,€isÏœharmless.Ç›à@ àIVÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admittingÏparticularly€prejudicial€photographs€which€had€little€or€no€probative€value.€€TheÏdefendant€bases€his€argument€on€the€fact€that€he€did€not€contest€that€deaths€or€aÏrobbery€occurred.€€The€state€contends€that€the€issue€is€waived€because€theÏdefendant€failed€to€identify€which€photographs€were€objectionable€and€also€failedÏto€include€the€photographs€in€the€record.× ƒ9 ××  ×€€In€truth,€the€defendant€has€not€identifiedÏwhich€photographic€exhibits€he€opposes.€€None,€however,€are€so€prejudicial€as€toÏwarrant€a€new€trial.ÌÌà àà àThe€photographs€depict€the€victims€Dawson€and€Johnson€prior€toÏtheir€deaths.€œ€The›€crime€scene,€including€the€location€of€the€car€and€the€position€ofÏthe€victim€Johnson€where€he€fell€across€the€street,€appears€among€theÏphotographs.€Photographs€of€the€carððs€exterior€and€interior€and€the€location€ofÏbullets€found€inside€and€outside€the€car€are€also€included.€Ìà àà àÌà àà àThe€admissibility€of€photographs€is€governed€by€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947€(Tenn.€1978).€€"Although€relevant,€evidenceÍmay€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€is€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€ofÏunfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury€...."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.Ï403.€€The€evidence€must€be€relevant€and€its€probative€value€must€outweigh€anyÏprejudicial€effect.€œ€òòBanksóó,›€564€S.W.2d€at€950„51.€€Whether€to€admit€the€photographsÏis€within€the€discretionary€authority€of€the€trial€court€and€will€not€be€reversed€absentÏa€clear€showing€of€an€abuse.€€òòState€v.€Dickersonóó,€885€S.W.2d€90,€92€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1993);€òòState€v.€Allenóó,€692€S.W.2d€651,€654€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€ÏPhotographs€of€homicide€victims,€while€alive,€should€not€be€admitted€at€trial€unlessÏrelevant€to€a€material€issue;€however,€such€an€error€is€almost€always€œharmless.€›ÏòòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Dicksóó,€615€S.W.2d€126€(Tenn.€1981);€òòState€v.€Strouthóó,€620ÏS.W.2d€467€(Tenn.€1981).ÌÌà àà àIn€our€view,€most€of€the€photographs€had€adequate€probative€value€toÏjustify€admission.€€The€photographs€helped€support€the€state's€theory€that€a€robberyÏoccurred€and€that€the€victims€in€the€car€were€unarmed€when€they€were€attacked.ÏNone€of€the€photographs€were€particularly€bloody€or€gruesome.€€As€for€theÏphotographs€of€the€deceased€victims€prior€to€their€deaths,€ð ðit€would€have€beenÏbetter€had€the€ððbeforeðð€picture€of€[the€victim]€been€excluded€since€it€added€little€orÏnothing€to€the€sum€total€of€knowledge€of€the€œjury.ðð€›€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Christopher€S.ÏBeckhamóó,€C.C.A.€#02C01„9406„CR„00107,€slip€op.€at€19„20€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€atÍJackson,€Sept.€27,€1995)€(remanded€for€sentencing)€(quoting€òòDicksóó,€615€S.W.2d€atÏ128)€(alterations€in€œoriginal).›€€In€òòBeckhamóó,€where€photographs€of€the€deceasedÏvictim€prior€to€death€were€admitted,€this€court€recognized€that€the€ð ðevidenceÏappears€to€have€been€offered€by€the€prosecution€for€the€sole€purpose€of€invokingÏthe€sympathy€of€the€œjury.ðð€›€œòòBeckhamóó,›€slip€op.€at€20.€€Nonetheless,€in€context€of€theÏrecord€as€a€whole,€the€error€was€found€to€be€œharmless.€›€òòId.óó€€We€reach€the€sameÏconclusion€here.€€Although€the€photographs€of€the€victims€prior€to€their€deathsÏshould€not€have€been€admitted,€we€cannot€say€that€the€trial€court€so€abused€itsÏdiscretion€by€their€admission€so€as€to€have€affected€the€verdict.ÌÌà@ àVÌà àà àThe€first€witnesses€to€give€testimony€were€the€mothers€of€the€victims.€ÏMs.€Hudson€testified€that€she€last€saw€her€son€alive€as€she€dropped€him€off€at€hisÏinfant€sonððs€home.€€She€also€testified€about€her€sonððs€burial.€€Ms.€Dawson€testifiedÏthat€her€son€excelled€at€sports€and€that€she€had€last€seen€her€son€alive€thatÏmorning€after€his€return€from€football€practice.€€She€implied€that€her€son€hadÏattended€church€on€Easter€Sunday€prior€to€his€death.€€Both€women€were€upset€byÏthese€circumstances.€€The€trial€court,€in€overruling€defense€counselððs€repeatedÏobjections,€observed€that€€ð ð[Ms.€Johnson]ððs€not€giving€a€particularly€graphic€displayÏof€emotion.€Itððs€not€unusual€for€what€weððre€confronted€with€here€today.ðð€œ€ð ð[I]n›€theÍCourtððs€opinion,€[Ms.€Dawson]€is€not€being€any€more€or€less€emotional€than€isÏtypical€under€the€circumstances€for€a€general€corpus€witness€in€a€homicide€case.€...ÏSheððs€not€being€hysterical.ðð€€The€defendant€argues€that€this€testimony€was€totallyÏirrelevant,€was€introduced€solely€to€impassion€the€jury,€and€qualified€as€an€abuse€ofÏthe€trial€courtððs€discretion.€€The€state€contends€that€any€error€was€harmless.€œ€We›Ïmust€agree€with€the€state.ÌÌà àà àUnder€our€rules,€evidence€is€relevant€if€it€has€a€ð ðtendency€to€make€theÏexistence€of€any€fact€that€is€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€moreÏprobable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€R.€Evid.Ï401.€€In€general,€all€relevant€evidence€is€admissible;€however,€evidence,Ïð ð[a]lthough€relevant,€...€may€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€is€substantiallyÏoutweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€orÏmisleading€the€jury,€or€by€considerations€of€undue€delay,€waste€of€time,€or€needlessÏpresentation€of€cumulative€evidence.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€R.€Evid.€402,€403.ÌÌà àà àMs.€Dawsonððs€testimony€about€her€sonððs€athletic€ability,€theÏimplication€that€he€attended€church€the€previous€Sunday€morning,€and€the€locationÏof€his€burial€were€not€relevant€to€any€issue€before€the€court€and€should€have€beenÏexcluded.€€Likewise,€Ms.€Hudsonððs€testimony€regarding€her€grandson,€the€victimððsÍinfant€son,€as€well€as€the€place€of€her€sonððs€internment€were€also€irrelevant€andÏshould€not€have€been€admitted,€particularly€during€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial.€€InÏour€review€of€relevant€case€law,€however,€we€have€found€none€which€mandate€aÏœreversal.€›€ð ðA€final€judgment€from€which€relief€is€available€and€otherwise€appropriateÏshall€not€be€set€aside€unless,€considering€the€whole€record,€error€involving€aÏsubstantial€right€more€probably€than€not€affected€the€judgment€or€would€result€inÏprejudice€to€the€judicial€process.ðð€œ€Tenn.›€R.€App.€P.€36(b).€€Although€the€testimony€ofÏthe€victimsðð€mothers€was€irrelevant,€it€was€harmless€and€did€not€affect€the€judgment.€ÌÌà@ àVIÌà àà àThe€defense€proffered€Joe€Terre,€a€former€teacher€of€the€defendant,Ïas€character€witness.€€After€a€jury€out€hearing,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€if€the€defenseÏasked€Terre€about€the€defendantððs€reputation€for€peace€and€quietude,€cross„examination€would€be€permitted€as€to€his€knowledge€of€the€defendantððs€1986€arrestÏand€charge€for€aggravated€rape.€If€the€defense€inquired€about€the€defendantððsÏreputation€for€honesty,€then€cross„examination€would€be€permitted€as€to€theÏdefendantððs€1985€shoplifting€charge,€and€a€1989€conviction€for€grand€larceny.€œ€The›Ïdefendant€argues€that€the€rape€charge€was€too€remote€and€unsubstantiated€toÏjustify€admitting€it€on€cross€examination.€In€addition,€the€defense€argues€that€theÏprior€arrest€for€aggravated€rape€is€highly€prejudicial.€€€ÌÌà àà àIn€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€746€S.W.2d€191€(Tenn.€1988),€our€supreme€courtÏmade€the€following€observation:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€State€asserts€that€the€cross„examination€of€theÏdefendantððs€character€witnesses€as€to€her€prior€arrests,Ïwhich€did€not€result€in€convictions,€was€proper.€€TheÏgeneral€rule€in€the€majority€of€jurisdictions€supports€thisÏtype€of€questioning€for€this€specific€purpose.€€Our€case€Ïlaw€would€appear€to€permit€such€questions€after€properÏscrutiny,€limitation,€and€instruction€by€the€trial€court.€€òòSeeóóÏòòState€v.€Badgettóó,€[693€S.W.2d€917€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1985)].€€The€potential€for€prejudice€in€allowing€suchÏcross„examination,€however,€is€great;€and€the€ruleÏseems€to€be€regarded€as€[a]€necessary€evil€by€many€ofÏthe€courts€that€follow€it.ÌÌà8 àà8 àSuch€examination€must€be€accompanied€by€anÏappropriate€limiting€instruction€to€the€jury.€œ€The›€arrestÏshould€also€involve€an€act€or€crime€relevant€to€theÏcharacter€trait€at€issue.ÌÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€198.€€€Furthermore,€there€is€no€special€rule€for€juvenile€arrests;€therefore,€onÏcross„examination,€the€state€may€inquire€as€to€the€witnessðð€knowledge€of€anyÏjuvenile€arrests€of€the€defendant€so€long€as€the€arrest€is€relevant€to€the€characterÏtrait.€€òòStepheny€v.€Stateóó,€570€S.W.2d€356,€359€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).ÌÌà àà àAlthough€òòSimsóó€and€òòStephenyóó€predated€the€adoption€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Evidence,€œnothing›€in€the€new€rules€indicates€a€change€in€theÍpolicy€regarding€prior€juvenile€arrests.€€Rule€405,€Tenn.€R.€Evid.,€governs€in€thisÏinstance:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(a)€Reputation€or€Opinion.„„In€all€cases€in€whichÏevidence€of€character€or€a€trait€of€character€of€a€personÏis€admissible,€proof€may€be€made€by€testimony€as€toÏreputation€or€by€testimony€in€the€form€of€an€opinion.€€ÏAfter€application€to€the€court,€inquiry€œon€cross„Ïexamination›€is€allowable€into€relevant€specific€instancesÏof€œconduct.›€€The€conditions€which€must€be€satisfiedÏbefore€allowing€inquiry€on€cross„examination€aboutÏspecific€instances€of€conduct€are:ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outsideÏthe€jury's€presence,ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€(2)€The€court€must€determine€that€a€reasonable€factualÏbasis€exists€for€the€inquiry,€andÌÌà8 àà8 à€€(3)€The€court€must€determine€that€the€probative€value€ofÏa€specific€instance€of€conduct€on€the€character€witnessððÏcredibility€outweighs€its€prejudicial€effect€on€substantiveÏissues.€€ÌÌÓÓThe€Advisory€Commission€Comments€acknowledge€that€the€witness€may€be€askedÏabout€ð ðrumored€arrests€and€charges€concerning€the€defendant.€œ...ð𛀀PotentialÏdanger€of€misuse€by€the€prosecution€is€the€basis€for€the€procedural€guidelines€setÏout€in€Rule€405.€€The€trial€court€here€complied€with€that€procedure.€€The€prior€arrestÏfor€aggravated€rape€was€probative€of€the€defendantððs€character€for€peace€andÏquietude.€€Although€the€arrest€occurred€six€years€before€the€instant€offense,€weÏcannot€say€it€was€too€remote€to€relate€to€the€defendantððs€reputation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.ÍFryóó,€35€S.W.€883€(Tenn.€1896)€(evidence€from€six€years€previous€not€too€remote).€ÏFurthermore,€there€was€no€evidence€here€that€the€arrest€had€been€expunged.€€òòSeeóóÏòòSimsóó,€746€S.W.2d€at€199.€€On€this€record,€we€find€no€error.€ÌÌà@ àVIIÌà àà àThe€defendant€challenges€the€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences.€ÏThe€state€has€conceded€that€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€felonyÏmurder€are€œvoid.›€€As€all€consecutive€sentences€are€disposed,€we€need€not€addressÏthis€issue.€ÌÌà àà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€dismissed€as€to€the€attempted€felonyÏmurder€convictions.€œ€The›€convictions€for€felony€murder€are€œaffirmed.ÇÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJohn€H.€Peay,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ__________________________________ÌThomas€T.€Woodall,€Judge€Ì›