ÿWPC†+ …U .V %„bŠ 0JŽØn­è• 0(U:Åw¸ÿ4· 0TË 0 ™ 0D¸ U:ü 6 0^> œ 0h¤ 0r 0|~ 0†ú 0€ 1u 0d… BéU*B)0 D3YDCŒ AMÏ 0@ \hïoï^öMBC±…·6ííÀÚöšv~"vÓ$ AOá)Æ0* 0Dö* D/:+ Bi+<þ6X9`(CourierX ù2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô3|x5«<þ6X9`(CourierXôxþ6X@ɹ`7ûX@($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial RegularD{DDDDDDDDUEU Xe!D"D#$D% &U'D(D)U*D+D,Ó€³†;$x2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô(I(23$¤¤Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÔ€X©õXXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""'ÿÿdxd))))7Border 1dd€-+Cþÿ << Gÿÿ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌJune€9,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ýÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(2)€(Supp.€1994)€(amended€1995).Ì åÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„403€(1997).Ì åÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„103€(1997).Ì ìÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„303€(a)(1)€(1997).Ì 8Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAt€trial,€only€portions€of€the€tapes€were€played.€€The€entire€tapes€haveÏbeen€preserved€in€the€record.€€However,€we€have€not€been€provided€with€anyÏindication€of€which€portions€of€the€tapes€were€played,€other€than€some€obliqueÏreferences€via€the€testimony€of€Detective€Charvis.€€The€court€has€reviewed€theÏentirety€of€the€tapes€in€order€to€identify€those€portions€to€which€DetectiveÏCharvis€referred€in€his€testimony.€€In€the€future,€parties€whose€evidence€containsÏexcerpted€portions€of€audio€or€video€recordings€may€wish€to€make€someÏprovision€for€appellate€review€of€only€that€portion€of€the€recording€heard€orÏviewed€by€the€jury.Ì §Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€appears€the€defendant€was€suspicious€of€Lunceford.€€On€one€of€theÏtapes,€the€defendant€is€heard€asking€Lunceford€to€raise€his€shirt€and€turnÏaround.€€Lunceford€testified€the€defendant€searched€him€but€failed€to€discoverÏthe€wire.Ì ­Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝNelson€admitted€convictions€of€larceny€from€a€person,€grand€larcenyÏand€escape.€€At€the€time€of€his€testimony,€he€was€facing€breach€of€trust€chargesÏfor€failing€to€return€to€the€Nashville€Community€Service€Center€after€havingÏmade€parole.Ì ãÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€trial€took€place€in€August€1996.Ì ¶Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝLyle€admitted€past€convictions€of€worthless€checks,€theft€of€property,Ïthird€degree€burglary,€grand€larceny,€larceny,€and€receiving€stolen€property.€ÏAdditionally,€he€had€violated€his€parole€and€had€an€additional€federal€convictionÏfor€mail€fraud.Ì ìÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€'Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAppellate€defense€counsel,€in€his€representation€of€another€defendant,Ïhas€previously€raised€this€issue€in€this€court.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Franklinóó,€919€S.W.2dÏ362€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€In€òòFranklinóó,€we€found€the€defendant,€who€pleadedÏguilty€without€reserving€a€certified€question,€had€waived€consideration€ofÏwhether€his€multiple€forgery€offenses€should€be€merged€into€a€single€offenseÏbased€upon€his€alleged€continuing€motivation€to€support€his€drug€habit.€ÏHowever,€on€the€issue€of€whether€separate€convictions€merge€for€sentencingÏpurposes,€we€commented€that€a€defendant€who€receives€a€number€ofÏconvictions€will€receive€a€like€number€of€sentences.€€"Although€those€.€.€.Ïsentences€may€run€concurrently,€in€no€sense€do€they€'merge€for€sentencingÏpurposes.'"€€òòFranklinóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€368.ÌPtPtHHØ(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  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ !ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  ÓÑ ` ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€'Ô›Ñ7€ ’ XXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ќـ€ÙßR€,.+A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌ€Ìò òÑ€Ñà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌ€à@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌà@ àFEBRUARY€1998€SESSIONó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€à àà àó ó)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAppellee,à àà àà à)à àC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9703„CC„00099Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àMontgomery€Countyà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìò òDONALD€GENE€BROOKS,à àó óà à)à àHon.€John€H.€Gasaway,€Judge€ò òÌó óà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àAppellant.à àà àà à)à à(First€œDegree›€Murder,€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àEspecially€Aggravated€Robbery,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTheft,€Setting€Fire€to€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPersonal€Property)ÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌò òGREGORY€D.€SMITH€(on€appeal)à àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌó óAttorney€At€Lawà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌOne€Public€Sq.,€Ste.€321ÌClarksville,€TN€€37040à àà àà àà àò òJANIS€L.€TURNERà àó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCounsel€for€the€StateÌò òEDWARD€E.€DEWERFF€(at€trial)à àà àó ó425€Fifth€Ave.€N.,€2d€Floorò òÌó óAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ì103€S.€Third€St.ÌClarksville,€TN€€37040à àà àà àà àò òJOHN€W.€CARNEY,€JR.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òARTHUR€BIEBERó óÌà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à204€Franklin€St.,€Ste.€200Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àClarksville,€TN€37040ÌÌÌÌò òÌOPINION€FILED:________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌCURWOOD€WITT,€JUDGEó óÌÇà@ àò òòòOPINIONó óóóÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€defendant,€Donald€Gene€Brooks,€stands€convicted€of€firstÏdegree€felony€murder,× ƒ/ ××  ×€especially€aggravated€robbery,× ƒ0 ××  ×€theft€of€property€valuedÏover€$1,000,× ƒ1 ××  ×€and€setting€fire€to€personal€property,× ƒ2 ××  ×€all€related€to€the€robberyÏand€killing€of€Joseph€J.€Wisniewski.€€He€received€his€convictions€following€a€juryÏtrial€in€the€Montgomery€County€Criminal€Court.€€Brooks€is€incarcerated€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction€serving€his€effective€sentence€of€life€plus€27€years.€€InÏthis€direct€appeal,€Brooks€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidenceÏand€the€length€of€sentence€imposed.€€Having€reviewed€the€record€and€the€briefsÏof€the€parties,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àà àAt€trial,€the€state's€first€witness€was€Floyd€Byrd,€who€testified€thatÏhe€was€working€as€a€truck€driver€on€October€28,€1994.€€That€afternoon,€he€wasÏtransporting€a€load€of€grain€to€Hopkinsville€Elevator€Company.€€As€he€traveledÏon€Barge€Point€Road,€he€noticed€a€man€lying€on€the€side€of€the€road€and€sawÍthe€man€move€his€head.€€When€he€reached€Hopkinsville€Elevator,€he€told€twoÏemployees€to€call€911.ÌÌà àà àRobert€Kitht€was€one€of€the€men€whom€Floyd€œByrd›€told€about€theÏvictim€lying€on€the€side€of€the€road.€€Kitht€jumped€in€his€van€and€went€to€theÏvictim,€whom€he€found€with€a€bleeding€neck€wound.€€He€went€to€tell€his€boss€toÏcall€911,€then€returned€to€try€to€assist€the€victim.€€Kitht€tried€to€apply€pressure€toÏstop€the€bleeding,€but€discontinued€his€efforts€when€the€victim€began€choking.€ÏKitht€said€this€occurred€around€4:00€p.m.€€Kitht€recalled€telling€the€investigatingÏauthorities€that€he€and€Jason€Brown€had€seen€a€car€load€of€people€drivingÏerratically€that€day.€€At€trial,€Kitht€could€not€recall€how€many€people€were€in€thatÏcar.ÌÌà àà àShelly€Hogue,€a€secretary€at€Hopkinsville€Elevator,€got€off€workÏaround€4€p.m.€on€October€18.€€She€recalled€seeing€a€cream€color€car€speedingÏup€Barge€Point€Road.€€A€white€man€with€shoulder€length,€dark€hair€was€in€theÏcar.Ìà àà àÌà àà àDennis€Minnick,€an€emergency€medical€technician,€responded€toÏthe€scene.€€When€he€found€the€victim,€there€was€nothing€he€was€able€to€do€forÍMr.€Wisniewski.ÌÌà àà àAdeline€Wisniewski,€the€victim's€wife,€left€home€for€work€about€8:30Ïa.m.€on€the€date€of€her€husband's€murder.€€The€victim€was€going€groceryÏshopping€€and€had€approximately€$200€in€cash€on€his€person.€€The€victimÏowned€a€light€beige€1985€Chrysler€New€Yorker€with€a€handicap€license€plate.€ÏThe€car€was€valued€at€$3,000€to€$3,500.€€ÌÌà àà àEdwin€Nelson€Lunceford,€an€inmate€in€the€Montgomery€CountyÏJail,€testified€under€a€conditional€grant€of€immunity€from€prosecution.€ÏLunceford's€immunity€was€conditioned€upon€his€testifying€truthfully,€assisting€inÏthe€investigation€of€the€victim's€murder€by€wearing€a€"wire"€around€theÏdefendant,€and€not€having€been€the€person€who€actually€killed€the€victim.€€ÌÌà àà àLunceford€met€the€defendant€at€a€bar€called€the€Pickle€Factory€onÏOctober€28,€1994.€€He€talked€and€drank€with€other€patrons,€including€theÏdefendant,€Randy€Heardman,€Rosemary€Devito€and€the€victim.€€During€theÏafternoon,€the€victim€offered€Heardman€a€ride€home.€€In€Lunceford's€opinion,€theÏvictim€was€too€drunk€to€drive,€and€Lunceford€convinced€the€victim€to€let€himÏdrive.€€The€defendant,€Heardman,€Lunceford€and€the€victim€left€in€the€victim'sÍcar.€€After€stopping€for€a€twelve„pack€of€Bud€Light€and€dropping€Heardman€off€atÏhis€home,€Lunceford,€the€defendant€and€the€victim€stopped€on€Barge€PointÏRoad€to€relieve€themselves.€€Lunceford,€who€was€driving,€got€out€of€the€car€andÏrelieved€himself.€€When€he€finished,€he€turned€around€and€saw€the€defendantÏholding€the€victim€by€his€head€with€a€knife€to€his€throat.€€The€victim's€wallet€wasÏon€the€trunk€of€the€car,€and€the€defendant€ordered€Lunceford€to€get€the€wallet.€ÏLunceford€admitted€he€punched€the€victim€in€the€jaw.€€He€claimed€he€wanted€toÏknock€the€victim€out€so€the€victim€would€be€unable€to€identify€him.€€He€wasÏconcerned€about€being€identified€because€he€was€on€probation.€€LuncefordÏdenied,€however,€that€he€and€the€defendant€had€any€prior€plan€to€rob€the€victim.€ÏThe€defendant€cut€the€victim's€throat€with€a€Buck€knife.ÌÌà àà àWith€the€defendant€driving,€Lunceford€and€the€defendant€left€theÏvictim€on€the€side€of€Barge€Point€Road.€€They€went€to€"The€Cut,"€where€theÏdefendant€bought€crack€cocaine.€€Then,€they€went€to€Ft.€Defiance€and€smokedÏcrack€in€the€woods.€€After€leaving€Ft.€Defiance,€Lunceford€and€the€DefendantÏwent€to€Cooper€Creek,€where€the€defendant€threw€the€knife,€the€victim's€wallet,Ïand€some€of€the€wallet's€contents€by€the€creek€bank.€€The€men€inspected€theÏtrunk€of€the€victim's€car€and€found€four€half€gallon€containers€of€whiskey,€twoÏcartons€of€cigarettes,€a€tool€box,€an€air€pump,€carburetor€cleaner,€oil,€and€otherÍcontents.€€The€defendant€gave€Lunceford€about€$40€from€the€wallet€as€theyÏwere€leaving.€€Thereafter,€they€took€a€ferry€to€Cumberland€City,€rode€around,Ïdrank€whiskey€and€went€to€Danville€Bottoms.€Lunceford€asked€the€defendantÏwhy€he€had€killed€the€victim,€and€the€defendant€said€the€victim€could€not€identifyÏthem€now.€€The€defendant€also€talked€about€getting€rid€of€the€victim's€car.ÌÌà àà àSome€time€later,€Lunceford€and€the€defendant€returned€toÏClarksville.€€They€went€to€the€home€of€Connie€Gonzalez,€the€defendant'sÏgirlfriend.€€They€parked€the€victim's€car€under€a€breezeway€of€a€church€building,ÏPraise€Center,€near€Ms.€Gonzalez's€home,€doused€the€car€in€charcoal€lighter,Ïand€set€it€on€fire.€€Lunceford€and€the€defendant€drank€alcohol€and€smoked€crackÏthroughout€the€night€in€an€upstairs€room€at€Ms.€Gonzalez's€home.€€TheÏdefendant€hid€the€victim's€keys€inside€a€stuffed€animal€in€the€room.ÌÌà àà àLunceford€did€not€initially€report€the€crimes€to€law€enforcementÏbecause€he€was€afraid€of€the€defendant.€€He€claimed€the€defendant€threatenedÏhim€and€his€family€with€harm€if€he€said€anything.ÌÌà àà àShortly€after€October€28,€the€defendant€came€to€Lunceford's€homeÏthree€to€four€times.€€He€wanted€to€"work€up€a€story"€about€the€crimes.€€LuncefordÍtold€the€defendant€that€the€two€needed€to€say€they€were€not€around€each€other.€€ÌÌà àà àLater,€after€Lunceford€came€forward,€he€initiated€conversationsÏwith€the€defendant€while€wearing€a€"wire"€which€allowed€transmission€and€tapeÏrecording€of€the€conversations.€€During€the€first€such€conversation,€theÏdefendant€admitted€killing€the€victim;€however,€the€wire€did€not€work.€€InÏsubsequent€conversations,€the€defendant€made€statements€such€as€"loose€lipsÏsink€ships"€and€"I€don't€know€nothing."ÌÌà àà àAt€the€time€of€the€defendant's€trial,€Lunceford€was€serving€time€forÏfelony€convictions€of€robbery€and€forgery,€and€he€admitted€to€numerous€pastÏoffenses€of€driving€under€the€influence,€driving€on€a€revoked€license,€andÏ"simple€assaults€or€domestic€disputes."€€Additionally,€he€denied€talking€withÏDavid€Mitchell,€a€former€cellmate,€about€the€case.€€He€denied€having€receivedÏany€money€from€law€enforcement€for€his€assistance€in€the€investigation.ÌÌà àà àConnie€Gonzalez,€the€defendant's€girlfriend€on€October€28,Ïrecalled€Lunceford€and€Brooks€coming€to€her€home€the€night€of€the€fire€at€theÏchurch€near€her€house.€€The€men€were€already€in€the€house€when€the€churchÏstarted€burning.€€They€had€come€in€her€back€door,€which€was€30€to€40€yardsÍfrom€the€church,€and€they€had€beer€and€two€half€gallons€of€whiskey€with€them.€ÏThey€left€and€then€returned€about€ten€minutes€later.€€They€were€"happy"€and€"aÏlittle€bit"€in€a€hurry.€€€The€defendant€told€Gonzalez€that€if€anyone€came€lookingÏfor€him€and€Lunceford,€she€should€say€they€had€already€left.€€The€men€spent€theÏnight€in€a€room€upstairs,€where€they€drank€and€smoked€crack.€€ÌÌà àà àGonzalez€recalled€having€telephoned€the€Pickle€Factory€on€theÏafternoon€of€October€28€and€asked€the€defendant€to€come€to€her€house.€€He€toldÏher€"they"€were€going€to€drink€a€couple€more€beers,€drop€Heardman€off€at€hisÏhouse,€and€then€they€would€be€over.€€Later,€she€called€Heardman's€house,€andÏhe€told€her€that€"they"€had€just€left€and€should€be€at€her€house€at€any€minute.€ÏThe€defendant€and€Lunceford€arrived€an€hour€and€a€half€to€two€hours€later.€€ÌÌà àà àFinally,€Gonzalez€recalled€Brooks€and€Lunceford€first€pulling€up€inÏthe€church€parking€lot€behind€her€house€in€a€car€she€thought€might€have€beenÏred.€€When€they€came€back€the€second€time,€they€did€not€have€the€car.€ÌÌà àà àDetective€Gary€Hodges€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department€wasÏin€the€vicinity€of€Ft.€Defiance€on€October€28.€€He€saw€a€large€cream€or€whiteÏvehicle€occupied€by€two€white€males.€€The€car€had€a€handicap€license€tag.ÌÌà àà àDetective€Alan€Charvis€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department€wasÏassigned€to€investigate€the€victim's€homicide.€€He€had€no€suspect€until€anotherÏofficer,€Marty€Watson,€brought€Edwin€Lunceford€to€him€in€April€1995.€€LuncefordÏdemanded€immunity€from€prosecution€and€the€presence€of€a€representative€ofÏthe€district€attorney€general's€office€as€prerequisites€to€making€a€statement.€ÏAfter€the€conditional€immunity€was€granted,€Lunceford€led€Charvis€first€toÏDanville€Bottoms,€where€nothing€was€found.€€Later,€Lunceford€told€Charvis€thatÏthe€location€where€the€knife,€victim's€wallet€and€wallet€contents€had€beenÏdiscarded€was€Cooper€Creek.€€Nothing€was€found€at€Cooper€Creek;€however,Ïthere€had€been€high€waters€since€the€victim's€killing€in€October.€€Lunceford€alsoÏtold€Charvis€about€a€tool€box€taken€from€the€victim's€car,€which€Lunceford€hadÏtaken€home€and€enlisted€the€help€of€a€neighbor€in€pawning.€€Charvis€recoveredÏthe€tool€box€from€the€pawn€shop.€€Lunceford€also€gave€Charvis€informationÏwhich€led€to€the€discovery€of€Connie€Gonzalez€and€Gary€Heardman,€both€ofÏwhom€were€interviewed.€ÌÌà àà àLunceford€agreed€to€wear€a€wire€around€the€defendant.€€CharvisÍplayed€portions€of€three€of€the€taped€conversations€from€the€wire€for€the€jury.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€InÏthem,€the€defendant€variously€denies€having€killed€the€victim€and€knowingÏanything€about€the€crime.€€Some€of€his€protestations€of€ignorance€areÏaccompanied€by€laughter.€€At€one€point,€Lunceford€says€he€is€just€as€guilty€asÏthe€defendant€and€that€the€defendant€is€in€denial.€€The€defendant€repeats,€"I'mÏin€denial,"€and€laughs.€€At€another€point,€following€Lunceford's€profession€ofÏconcern€because€his€probation€officer€has€been€by€his€house€to€notify€him€thatÏthe€police€want€to€talk€to€him€about€the€victim's€murder,€the€defendant€reassuresÏLunceford€that€there€is€nothing€to€worry€about€and€he€should€simply€follow€aÏplan€they€talked€about€the€previous€day.× ƒ4 ××  ×€ÌÌà àà àCharvis€also€testified€that€the€call€for€assistance€for€the€victim€atÍBarge€Point€Road€came€at€4:16€p.m.,€and€the€call€for€the€fire€at€Praise€CenterÏcame€at€7:48€p.m.ÌÌà àà àLorena€Parr,€an€employee€of€The€Money€Tree€pawn€shop,€verifiedÏthat€a€tool€box€pawned€on€December€22,€1994€was€later€recovered€by€DetectiveÏCharvis.€€The€identity€of€the€person€who€pawned€the€tool€box€was€consistentÏwith€the€information€Lunceford€gave€Detective€Charvis.ÌÌà àà àDetective€Scott€Cutler€of€the€Clarksville€Police€DepartmentÏassisted€in€processing€evidence€at€Barge€Point€Road.€€Two€beer€cans€wereÏrecovered€at€this€scene.€€The€photographic€exhibits€offered€in€conjunction€withÏDetective€Cutler's€testimony€show€two€Bud€Light€cans.ÌÌà àà àDoctor€Charles€Harlan,€assistant€county€medical€examiner€andÏconsulting€forensic€pathologist€for€Montgomery€County,€conducted€an€autopsyÏof€the€victim.€€Among€the€victim's€injuries€was€a€6.60€inch€incision€of€the€neckÏand€trachea,€which€caused€the€victim's€death€as€he€lost€blood€and€his€lungsÏfilled€with€blood.€€Doctor€Harlan€estimated€that€the€victim's€death€occurredÏbetween€5€and€15€minutes€after€the€incision€was€inflicted.€€He€opined€that€theÏincision€was€consistent€with€one€made€with€a€Buck€knife.€€The€victim€also€hadÍbilateral€fractures€of€the€mandible,€or€jaw€bone,€and€lacerations€to€the€lips,Ïwhich€were€inflicted€at€or€near€the€time€of€death.€€The€mandible€fractures€wereÏconsistent€with€the€victim€having€been€struck€with€a€fist.ÌÌà àà àSpecial€Agent€Hoyt€Phillips€of€the€Tennessee€Bureau€ofÏInvestigation€processed€the€Bud€Light€cans€for€latent€fingerprints€andÏdetermined€that€the€prints€obtained€from€the€cans€matched€an€existing€record€ofÏthe€defendant's€fingerprints.ÌÌà àà àSpecial€Agent€Anthony€Clark€of€the€Tennessee€Bureau€ofÏInvestigation,€formerly€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department,€searched€ConnieÏGonzalez's€home€with€other€officers.€€They€discovered€a€Spuds€McKenzieÏstuffed€animal€which€had€been€torn€or€cut.€€A€key€ring€and€keys€belonging€to€theÏvictim€were€found€inside€the€stuffed€animal.ÌÌà àà àMike€Nelson,€a€convicted€felon€incarcerated€in€the€Department€ofÏCorrection,× ƒ5 ××  ×€testified€he€was€in€the€Montgomery€County€Jail€on€June€7,€1996.€ÍHe€€and€the€defendant€shared€a€cell.€€The€defendant€told€Nelson€he€might€beÏgoing€to€prison€because€he€had€killed€a€man.€€The€defendant€said€he€had€cutÏthe€victim's€throat€while€another€man€held€the€victim.€€The€defendant€and€hisÏcompanion€took€the€victim's€car,€and€later€they€burned€it€at€a€church.€€TheyÏstashed€the€victim's€car€keys€in€a€stuffed€animal€at€a€girl's€house.€€Nelson€alsoÏtestified€that€the€defendant€told€him€the€only€evidence€against€the€defendantÏwas€his€companion€at€the€time€of€the€crime.€€He€identified€this€man€as€"Tony"€orÏ"Eddie"€or€something€similar.€€The€defendant€said€"Tony"€or€"Eddie"€had€beenÏwired€by€law€enforcement,€so€the€defendant€had€not€talked€to€him€about€theÏcrime.€€The€defendant€wished€he€had€killed€his€companion,€as€well.ÌÌà àà àIn€support€of€his€defense,€Brooks€presented€the€testimony€ofÏMelissa€Ann€Springfield€Conner.€€She€testified€that€she€had€gotten€to€knowÏEdwin€Lunceford€about€a€year€and€a€half€earlier.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€Lunceford€told€the€witnessÏand€two€of€her€co„workers€that€he€was€involved€in€a€murder€trial.€€The€policeÏwired€him€and€gave€him€money€and€drugs€to€go€into€a€bar,€where€he€was€toÏ"party"€with€a€man€and€get€him€sufficiently€"messed€up"€to€confess.€€LuncefordÏsaid€the€other€person€had€committed€the€crimes,€and€he€had€only€gone€alongÏwith€him.€€Specifically,€Lunceford€told€the€witness€that€the€other€man€had€cut€theÍvictim's€throat.€€He€also€admitted€that€they€had€burned€a€car€at€a€church.€€TheÏwitness€believed€there€was€more€to€the€story€than€Lunceford€told€her.ÌÌà àà àJason€Brown,€an€employee€of€Hopkinsville€Elevator€Company,Ïrecalled€that€shortly€before€the€victim€was€discovered€on€Barge€Point€Road€heÏhad€seen€an€older€model,€light,€yellowish€car€come€down€the€hill,€turn€around,Ïand€go€back€up€the€hill€"kind€of€fast."€€There€were€more€than€two€people€in€theÏcar,€but€he€could€not€say€how€many.ÌÌà àà àDebbie€O'Bryan,€a€former€bartender€and€manager€of€the€PickleÏFactory,€recalled€the€defendant,€Lunceford,€the€victim€and€others€being€at€theÏPickle€Factory€on€October€28.€€However,€she€did€not€recall€Heardman€beingÏthere€that€day.€€Lunceford€was€in€and€out€all€day.€€The€defendant€left€at€times,Ïbut€was€never€gone€for€more€than€5€to€10€minutes.€€O'Bryan€left€around€2:00Ïp.m.€to€get€cigarettes€and€chewing€gum€for€the€bar.€€She€was€goneÏapproximately€45€minutes.€€The€defendant€€was€at€the€bar€when€she€left€andÏwas€there€when€she€returned.€€O'Bryan€conceded€Ìit€was€difficult€to€separate€the€events€of€one€day€from€those€of€another€as€farÏback€as€the€day€of€the€victim's€death.ÌÌà àà àFred€Lunceford,€Edwin€Lunceford's€brother,€recalled€aÏconversation€he€had€with€his€brother€about€the€victim's€death.€€Edwin€LuncefordÏtold€Fred€Lunceford€that€he€and€the€defendant€had€taken€a€man€out€to€BargeÏPoint€Road.€€The€defendant€had€gotten€the€man€around€the€neck€and€held€aÏknife€on€him.€€The€defendant€instructed€Edwin€Lunceford€to€get€the€man's€wallet,Ïand€Lunceford€complied.€€Edwin€Lunceford€hit€the€man€twice€because€heÏthought€that€the€defendant€would€not€kill€the€man€if€he€was€unconscious.€€EdwinÏLunceford€told€his€brother€that€a€woman€had€been€with€them€at€the€time€of€theÏmurder.€€After€the€murder,€they€took€the€victim's€car€to€town€and€burned€it.ÌÌà àà àDorothy€Suggs€was€a€part€time€employee€of€the€Pickle€Factory€onÏOctober€28,€1994.€€She€did€not€learn€of€the€victim's€death€until€a€long€timeÏafterwards.€€When€she€heard€of€it,€she€asked€Debbie€O'Bryan€whether€the€deathÏoccurred€the€same€day€that€Suggs€sat€at€a€table€with€the€victim€and€others€at€theÏPickle€Factory,€which€O'Bryan€confirmed.€€On€that€day,€the€victim€bought€beersÏfor€a€large€group€of€people,€including€the€defendant€and€Lunceford.€€At€someÏpoint,€the€victim€expressed€his€desire€to€go€to€another€bar.€€A€patron€nicknamedÏ"Boston€Rick"€picked€up€the€victim's€keys€and€said€he€would€take€the€victim.€ÏLunceford€said€he€would€go€as€well,€and€the€three€men€left.€€A€female€patronÏmay€have€accompanied€the€men.€€The€witness€admitted€that€she€and€theÍdefendant€are€good€friends,€and€the€defendant€has€spent€the€night€in€her€homeÏwhen€he€has€been€too€drunk€to€go€home.ÌÌà àà àRobert€Lyle,€a€convicted€felon€awaiting€transfer€from€theÏMontgomery€County€Jail€to€the€Department€of€Correction,× ƒ7 ××  ×€testified€that€he€hadÏtalked€to€Lunceford€in€jail.€€Lunceford€told€conflicting€versions€of€the€crimes,Ïalthough€the€defendant€was€involved€in€some€degree€in€both€versions.€€LyleÏalso€talked€to€the€defendant€in€jail€and€admonished€him€not€to€show€hisÏ"paperwork"€to€other€inmates.ÌÌà àà àJohnathan€Mitchell,€a€pre„trial€detainee€in€the€Montgomery€CountyÏJail,€was€Lunceford's€œcellmate›€for€ten€months.€€Lunceford€told€Mitchell€about€theÏdefendant's€case.€Later,€Mitchell€overheard€Lunceford€talking€to€another€inmateÏabout€the€crime.€€The€story€Lunceford€told€this€inmate€was€different€from€the€oneÏhe€€told€Mitchell.€€Lunceford€was€consistent€in€his€admission€that€he€had€brokenÏthe€victim's€jaw€and€his€claim€the€defendant€had€cut€the€victim's€throat.ÌÌà àà àLieutenant€Douglas€Tackett€testified€he€had€known€MichaelÏNelson€for€about€fifteen€years€and€did€not€believe€him€to€be€truthful.ÌÌà àà àIn€rebuttal,€the€state€recalled€Agent€Clark,€who€claimed€thatÏDebbie€O'Bryan€told€him€nothing€during€his€interview€of€her€about€whatÏhappened€at€the€Pickle€Factory€on€October€28,€1994.ÌÌà àà àOn€this€evidence,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€first€degreeÏfelony€murder,€especially€aggravated€robbery,€theft€of€property€valued€overÏ$1,000,€and€setting€fire€to€personal€property.ÌÌà@ àò òIó óÌà àà àIn€his€first€issue,€the€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€theÏconvicting€evidence.€€Specifically,€he€claims€the€evidence€via€the€testimony€ofÏEdwin€Lunceford€is€incredible.€€When€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€ofÏthe€evidence,€an€appellate€courtððs€standard€of€review€is€whether,€afterÏconsidering€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóóÏrational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyondÏa€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€324,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,Ï2791„92€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.€1985);€Tenn.€R.ÍApp.€P.€13(e).€€This€rule€applies€to€findings€of€guilt€based€upon€direct€evidence,Ïcircumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€ÏòòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€253€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€€ÌÌà àà àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€should€notÏreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€Questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,Ïthe€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€theÏevidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,Ï835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Nor€may€this€court€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawnÏby€the€trier€of€fact€from€the€evidence.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286ÏS.W.2d€856,€859€(1956);€€òòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€51€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1978).€€On€the€contrary,€this€court€must€afford€the€State€of€Tennessee€theÏstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€as€well€as€allÏreasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€ÏòòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€835.€€Ìà àà àThe€defendant€challenges€Lunceford's€credibility,€and€the€recordÏreflects€that€defense€counsel€ably€and€vigorously€cross„examined€LuncefordÏand€assailed€his€credibility€through€other€witnesses.€€Additionally,€the€state'sÏevidence€at€trial€supported€its€theory€of€the€defendant's€guilt€of€each€of€the€fourÍcrimes€of€which€he€was€ultimately€convicted,€although€the€defendant€broughtÏforward€some€evidence€of€an€alibi.€€Thus,€the€jury€had€before€it€evidence€whichÏwould€allow€it,€on€one€hand,€to€convict€the€defendant,€or€on€the€other,€to€acquitÏhim.€€The€decision€was€one€which€hinged€on€the€jury's€assessment€of€theÏcredibility€of€the€witnesses,€particularly€Edwin€Lunceford,€and€the€weight€andÏvalue€which€should€be€afforded€the€evidence.€€The€decision€was€wholly€one€forÏthe€jury€to€make€as€trier€of€fact.€€Unfortunately€for€the€defendant,€the€jury'sÏdischarge€of€its€function€resulted€in€€accreditation€of€Lunceford's€testimony€andÏweighing€and€evaluating€the€state's€evidence€over€that€brought€forward€by€theÏdefense.€€Clearly,€a€rational€trier€of€fact,€such€as€the€jury€at€the€defendant's€trial,Ïcould€find€the€defendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€of€each€of€the€fourÏcrimes€on€the€evidence€presented.ÌÌà àà àà@ àò òIIó óÌà àà àThe€defendant's€second€issue€challenges€the€length€of€theÏsentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court.€€The€sentences€are€life€for€first€degreeÏfelony€murder,€25€years€for€especially€aggravated€robbery,€four€years€for€theft€ofÏproperty,€and€two€years€for€setting€fire€to€personal€property.€€The€court€orderedÏthe€murder,€robbery€and€setting€fire€convictions€to€be€served€consecutively€andÏthe€theft€conviction€to€be€served€concurrently.€€The€effective€sentence€is€life€plusÍ27€years.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant's€precise€appellate€issue€alleges,€"The€sentenceÏgiven€to€Defendant/Appellant€was€excessive€because€said€crimes€shouldÏmerge€into€a€single€conviction."€€The€state€defends€the€defendant's€sentence€byÏarguing€that€the€defendant€is€an€appropriate€candidate€for€consecutiveÏsentencing.€€First,€we€find€€the€defendant's€crimes€should€not€be€merged,€andÏsecond,€we€are€unable€to€review€the€issue€of€consecutive€sentencing€due€toÏdeficiency€of€the€record.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant's€argument€is€that€all€of€his€acts€which€constituteÏthe€four€crimes€of€which€he€stands€convicted€occurred€as€part€of€a€single€courseÏof€conduct.€€The€theft,€robbery€and€murder€all€occurred€simultaneously,€whileÏthe€burning€of€personal€property€took€place€a€few€hours€later€as€a€means€ofÏdestroying€evidence€of€the€earlier€crimes.€€As€part€of€a€continuous€course€ofÏconduct,€the€defendant€contends,€the€issues€"are€so€closely€associated€in€bothÏfact€and€legal€detail€that€all€counts€should€merge€into€a€single€conviction."€€AtÏanother€point€in€his€brief,€he€limits€his€merger€argument€to€merger€"forÏsentencing€purposes."€€ÌÌà àà àIn€support€of€these€novel€arguments,€Brooks€cites€òòNelson€v.€Stateóó,Ï208€Tenn.€179,€344€S.W.2d€540€(1960),€€òòState€v.€Banesóó,€874€S.W.2d€73€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1993)€and€òòState€v.€Bilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€71€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€ÏWe€disagree€that€the€cases€relied€on€by€the€defendant€mandate€the€result€heÏseeks,€whether€it€is€true€merger€of€his€convictions€or€"merger€for€sentencingÏpurposes."ÌÌà àà àIn€òòNelsonóó,€officers€of€a€labor€union€were€prosecuted€for€fraudulentÏbreach€of€trust€based€upon€their€ongoing€scheme€to€"reimburse"€themselvesÏwith€union€funds€for€"expenses"€incurred€in€pursuit€of€union€business€which€theyÏhad€not€actually€incurred.€€òòNelsonóó,€208€Tenn.€at€180„82,€344€S.W.2d€at€541„42.€ÏThe€supreme€court€held€that€the€officers'€conviction€of€fraudulent€breach€of€trustÏbased€upon€an€ongoing€scheme€to€cash€checks€signed€by€both€officers€andÏdrawn€on€the€union's€funds€was€proper,€as€opposed€to€separate€larcenyÏconvictions€for€each€check.€€òòNelsonóó,€208€Tenn.€at€182„87,€344€S.W.2d€at€542„44.ÌÌà àà àIn€òòBanesóó,€the€defendant€was€indicted€with€aggravated€rape€andÏthe€lesser€included€offense€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€òòBanesóó,€874€S.W.2d€atÏ76.€€At€trial,€the€court€allowed€the€jury€to€consider€both€issues€and€report€aÍverdict€on€both€offenses,€rather€than€submitting€aggravated€sexual€battery€as€aÏlesser€included€offense€to€be€considered€only€if€the€jury€found€the€defendant€notÏguilty€of€aggravated€rape.€€òòBanesóó,€874€S.W.2d€at€76.€€The€jury€returned€a€guiltyÏverdict€of€both€offenses,€even€though€such€a€verdict€was€possible€only€if€theÏsame€facts€were€used€to€support€both€offenses.€€òòBanesóó,€874€S.W.2d€at€77.€€InÏother€words,€there€were€not€two€separate€sexual€acts€supporting€verdicts€onÏboth€crimes.€€On€appeal,€this€court€held€that€the€defendant€could€only€beÏconvicted€of€one€crime,€and€the€lesser€offense€merged€into€the€greater€offense.€ÏòòBanesóó,€874€S.W.2d€at€79„81.ÌÌà àà àIn€òòBilbreyóó,€the€defendant€was€indicted€on€22€counts€of€fraudulentÏbreach€of€trust€based€upon€a€scheme€he€devised€in€his€employment€as€a€truckÏdispatcher€whereby€he€used€money€which€came€into€his€possession€by€virtue€ofÏhis€position€for€his€own€use,€rather€than€accounting€to€his€employer€for€it.€ÏòòBilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€73.€€Each€count€of€the€indictment€covered€one€month€ofÏthis€activity.€€òòBilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€74.€€He€entered€nolo€contendere€pleas€toÏfive€counts€of€fraudulent€breach€of€trust,€and€the€court€imposed€consecutiveÏsentences.€€òòBilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€74.€€On€appeal,€he€argued€that€òòNelsonóóÏrequired€merger€of€four€of€the€convictions€into€the€one€remaining€convictionÏbecause€his€criminal€activity€constituted€a€single€larcenous€scheme,€rather€thanÍseparate€takings.€€òòBilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€75.€€This€court€held€that€the€defendantÏwaived€appellate€consideration€of€the€propriety€of€separate€convictions€by€virtueÏof€his€plea€agreement,€in€which€he€did€not€reserve€the€question€for€appellateÏreview.€€òòBilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€75„76.ÌÌà àà àWe€find€no€support€for€the€defendant's€argument€in€these€cases.€€ÏFirst,€none€of€these€cases€support€any€argument€that€the€defendant'sÏconvictions€should€be€merged€into€one€conviction.€€In€contrast€to€òòBanesóó,€BrooksÏhas€not€been€convicted€of€both€lesser€included€and€greater€offenses€basedÏupon€the€same€set€of€facts.€€Brooks€committed€four€separate€crimes,€eachÏhaving€elemental€differences€with€each€other.€€None€of€the€crimes€is€a€statutoryÏlesser€included€offense€of€any€other.€€òòSee€generallyóó€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2dÏ305€(Tenn.€1996).€€Likewise,€òòNelsonóó€is€not€instructive.€€Unlike€the€òòNelsonóóÏdefendants,€Brooks's€convictions€do€not€stem€from€an€ongoing€scheme€toÏrepeat€the€same€act€on€different€occasions,€thereby€warranting€a€conviction€of€aÏcontinuous€conduct€crime,€rather€than€separate€but€similar€offenses€for€each€act.€ÏFor€the€same€reason,€òòBilbreyóó€is€inapposite,€as€well.ÌÌà àà àMoreover,€we€find€no€support€for€the€argument€the€convictionsÏshould€be€"merged€for€purposes€of€sentencing."€€The€trial€court€imposed€theÍmurder,€robbery€and€burning€of€personal€property€sentences€consecutive€toÏeach€other,€and€concurrent€to€the€theft€sentence.€€We€find€no€authority€whichÏrequires€a€"merger"€of€convictions€for€sentencing€purposes,€that€is,€aÏrequirement€of€concurrent€sentencing€where€multiple€crimes€are€committedÏduring€a€continuing€course€of€criminal€conduct.× ƒ8 ××  ×€€The€law€allows€otherwise€inÏcertain€situations.€€òòSee€generallyóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115€andÏSentencing€Comm'n€Comments€(1997).ÌÌà àà àAlthough€we€do€not€view€the€defendant's€argument€as€a€directÏattack€on€the€propriety€of€consecutive€sentencing,€the€state€has€concludedÏotherwise€and€argues€that€the€defendant's€sentence€is€proper€because€he€hasÏan€extensive€history€of€criminal€activity,€is€a€dangerous€offender,€and€was€onÏprobation€at€the€time€he€committed€these€offenses.€€òòSee€generallyóó€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(2),€(4),€(6)€(1997).€€We€express€no€view€in€that€regard,€asÍwe€are€unable€to€review€the€propriety€of€the€court's€imposition€of€consecutiveÏsentencing€on€three€of€the€four€convictions€because€the€record€on€appeal€doesÏnot€contain€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing.€€Thus,€we€are€unaware€ofÏthe€evidence€which€was€before€the€trial€court€when€it€made€its€sentencingÏdetermination€and€thereby€precluded€from€appellate€review.€œÌ›Ìà àà àTherefore,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ìœ›œÌÓÓ›à àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCURWOOD€WITT,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌœ_____________________________›ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€œJUDGE›ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGEÌ