ÿWPC4% ]t 4aƒ‚óÚ)¤?ÌÉó‡ÚQ^B^¯VõP¾ kKuöÒŽ[îKôY"uò;Ê£ú÷Þ
*'³J}/ƒT]ÔŒ-üEÙåáÓŒÍy)€‘ã<ŸUíâ5UyUAó@º°´6ñ/õá©àæêÎv§¶8`·uó±ù´šeqVÁ[ŽKl|Q€3&C~´)åø"]€kóô½r~Ãö—ïôE€óóªöÊn†xŒ¢€ SL—Aþá[þx€¶SC„z€Íçö1#¶èxjí7*Òa£ikZ ù`gQÈñÇï|À©Í¸Óª•Ø$tifõ´ö«¶²¯É&²ÍÝ$Y2€ä¤]Zú¦9þH½ÔË`8$^ª‰KY ¿¥žL&Œ›ZDª_œ1[ö;bÄ8d¢“ì—©ywëjCÚyúŸ 7j.¾ýVfÍ(¥£Î&\IÙc½{Ʀdwùÿ)c.-(8¼™ÑBû»é'0VKÆP‰Á<xˆ.cZ²ŒãךU–ÈÖ^ú0â´!¸ršÊrîé·ß«Åhàóóoœ·¡·–¹Ý¿óG … U B F % ˆ U . Ž Ê ¼ 0 ` † 0 X æ £ > 0 á X n 0 C Æ < 7 E 0 ¶ | 2 n Y B 0 r › å U : ò U : , U : f ä U : „ „ „ 7 ¾ U B õ! w @ 7" 4 w" U . ‹" U : ¹" ¹" ¹" ¹" B ó" # # # # # # # D 3 # # # 0 D K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# K# A O # Æ Þ# Þ# 0 D ¤$ D / è$ B % ô\ ` * T i m e s N e w R o m a n T T ô% ä2¼ A ` A r i a l T T ' I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E N . A O C , S T A T E O F T E N N > 0 A D M I N I S T R A T I V E O F F I C E / C T S . h † r ÿÿ: D e f a u l t P a r a D e f a u l t P a r a g r a p h F o n t Ô € X XX ÔÔW € ô\ ` * T i m e s N e w R o m a n T T W ÔÔ ÔÔ ÔÔ ÔÔ ÔÔ € X XX ÔÔC € % ä2¼ A ` A r i a l T T C Ô ` † r ÿÿ: f o o t n o t e r e f f o o t n o t e r e f e r e n c e Ô € X XX ÔÔW € ô\ ` * T i m e s N e w R o m a n T T W ÔÔ ÔÔ ÔÔ ÔÔ ÔÔ € X XX ÔÔC € % ä2¼ A ` A r i a l T T C Ô ™ Ý ƒ Î) ÝÔ € XOà X ô ô ÔÔ € X9ì X X XOà ÔÓ ÓÝ ÝÒ 4° ÒÒ X° ÒÓ ÓÔ Ô ( e 2Î$ © © Ý ƒ ‚! ÝÔ € XOà X ô ô ÔÔ € X9ì X X XOà ÔÓ ÓÝ Ý N Ý ƒ /$ ÝÔ € X¿„ X ô ô ÔÔ € XY« X X X¿„ ÔÓ Óà àòòÚ Ú3Ú ÚóóÝ ÝContrary€to€the€appellantððs€assertion€in€his€brief,€the€record€is€devoid€of€evidenceÐ ` Ðthat€the€officers€in€this€case€ð ðhad€a€private€agenda€to€convict€the€Defendant.ðð ( ÿÿ$ òòÚ ÚÚ Úóó 2 Ý ƒ ‚! ÝÔ € X¿„ X ô ô ÔÔ € XY« X X X¿„ ÔÓ ÓÝ ÝÔ € X¿„ X X XY« ÔÒ 4° ÒÒ X° ÒÔ € X X¿„ Ô1.€Ô € X¿„ X ÔThe€record€does€not€include€the€jury€instructions.€€However,€in€responding€to€a€question€by€theÐ ` Ðjurors€during€the€course€of€their€deliberations,€the€judge€re„read€portions€of€€the€jury€instructions,Ïincluding€an€instruction€on€the€theory€of€criminal€responsibility€for€the€conduct€of€another.€€WeÏfurther€note€that,€although€the€record€does€not€reflect€whether€or€not€the€State€proceeded€solelyÏupon€the€theory€of€criminal€responsibility€for€the€conduct€of€another,€there€was€no€danger€in€thisÏcase€of€a€ð ðpatchwork€verdictðð€regarding€the€facts€of€the€offense.ðð€òòContrastóó€òòState€v.€Prudeóó,€No.Ð ° Ð02C01„9711„CR„00425,€1998€WL€467096,€at€*€4„5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€August€12,Ï1998).€At€trial,€the€jury€was€presented€with€only€one€set€of€facts€upon€which€it€could€base€aÏfinding€of€guilt. - Ý ƒ /$ ÝÔ € X¿„ X ô ô ÔÔ € XY« X X X¿„ ÔÓ Óà àòòÚ Ú2Ú ÚóóÝ ÝThe€Appellant€argues€that,€at€most,€he€was€guilty€of€criminal€responsibility€forÐ ` Ðfacilitation€of€a€felony€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„11„403€(1995).€However,€thisÏstatue€applies€if€the€State€is€unable€to€establish€the€intent€required€for€criminalÏresponsibility.€òòIdóó.€at€(a).€Again,€the€State€adduced€sufficient€evidence€at€trial€to€establishÐ 0Ð Ðthe€requisite€intent. ( f ( 3åÜ$ ¤ ¤ Ý ƒ ‚! ÝÔ € XOà X ô ô ÔÔ € X9ì X X XOà ÔÓ ÓÝ Ýà àòòÚ Ú0Ú Úóó3| x « ô\ ` * T i m e s N e w R o m a n T T ôôC ô\ PŽ 6QôP% ä2¼ A ` A r i a l T T o m a n T T XXX ä2¼ P± ŠQXP ô\ ` * T i m e s N e w R o m a n T T XXP ô\ PŽ 6QXP<