ÿWPCB ;UNJ %˜ 0 (žw@Æ4 0†) 0D¯ 0Jó 0T=U.‘ 0^¿ 0@ 0h]Å 0rÍ 0|? 0†» 0A 1uÑ 0dF AQª Æû 0DÁ B 0D" D/f B• D3² U >å B)# DCL AM Ü ‚á Zc.½úëåhúbv~ñvÓo(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ”D•D–D—˜U™šE›Ó€§ªn~<$3|xª(6(2Ä:$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô%ä2¼A`ArialTT2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò26 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 !#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd""""'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd /Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ûÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òAugust€10,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó xÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Nellie€Carter€was€previously€married€to€defendantððs€uncle,€Audieððs€brother.€ÏAlthough€Audie€and€Nellie€were€living€together,€the€couple€was€not€legally€married€at€theÏtime€of€their€deaths.Ì PÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€When€questioned€about€this,€Randy€initially€testified€that€he€did€not€rememberÏwhat,€if€anything,€defendant€told€him€when€defendant€returned€from€his€fatherððs€house.€ÏHowever,€the€prosecution€refreshed€his€memory€with€his€statement€to€law€enforcementÏauthorities.€€Randy€eventually€implicitly€conceded€that€defendant€said,€ð ðthey€[are]€gone.ðð€ÏWe,€therefore,€will€consider€this€statement€substantively.Ì $Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€According€to€the€medical€examiner,€the€victims€were€killed€sometime€prior€toÏmidnight€on€Saturday,€January€27.Ì ðÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Defendant€had€previously€lived€with€his€father€and€Nellie.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€At€that€time,€Randy€was€charged€with€accessory€after€the€fact€to€first€degreeÏmurder.Ì ^Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Prior€to€1995,€first€degree€murder€was€defined€as€the€ð ðintentional,€premeditatedÏand€deliberated€killing€of€another.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1)€(1991).Ì …Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAlthough€the€sheriffððs€secretary€did€not€testify€at€the€suppression€hearing,€at€trial€she€Ïtestified€that€Rhonda€Carter€called€and€asked€that€her€phone€be€blocked€from€calls€from€theÏjail.€€Rhonda€Carter€did€not€testify€at€trial.€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÙ€ ÙÓ  ÓÔ€ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€01/A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌà@ àJUNE€1998€SESSIONÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ó óà@ à)Ìà@ à)à àò òNO.€02C01„9711„CC„00424ó óÌà àAppellee,à@ à)Ìà@ à)à àò òMCNAIRY€COUNTYó óÌò òVS.ó óà@ à)Ìà@ à)à àò òHON.€JON€KERRYÏBLACKWOOD,ÌDON€EDWARD€CARTER,ó óà@ à)à àò òJUDGEó óÌà@ à)Ìà àAppellant.à@ à)à à(First€Degree€Murder)ÌÌÌÌÒ†„èyÒò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:ÌÌGARY€F.€ANTRICAN€(At€Trial)ó óÌDistrict€Public€DefenderÌÌò òJEANIE€A.€KAESS€(At€Trial)ó óÌAssistant€Public€DefenderÌ118€East€Market€StreetÌP.O.€Box€700ÌSomerville,€TN€€38068ÌÌò òC.€MICHAEL€ROBBINS€(OnÏAppeal)Ìó ó3074€East€StreetÌMemphis,€TN€€38128Éò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPó óÌAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌò òMARVIN€E.€CLEMENTS,€JR.ó óÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌ425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌò òELIZABETH€T.€RICEó óÌDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌò òED€NEAL€McDANIELó óÌAssistant€District€AttorneyÏGeneralÌ300€Industrial€Park€DriveÌP.O.€Box€473ÌSelmer,€TN€€38375„0473ÉÒÒÌÌÌÌÌÌò òOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌJOE€G.€RILEY,ÌJUDGEÇÓÓó óÑ7€ÖaXXdìXXdì7Ñà@ àò òòòOPINIONó óóóÌÌà àThe€defendant,€Don€Edward€Carter,€was€convicted€by€a€McNairy€CountyÏjury€of€two€(2)€counts€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder.€€He€receivedÏconcurrent€sentences€of€life€imprisonment.€€On€appeal,€he€claims€that€(1)€theÏevidence€was€insufficient€to€sustain€his€convictions€for€first€degree€murder,€andÏ(2)€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€suppress€his€confession€at€trial.€€After€aÏthorough€review€of€the€record€before€this€Court,€we€find€no€reversible€error.€ÏAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌà@ àò òòòFACTSó óóóÌÌà àOn€January€28,€1996,€the€bodies€of€Audie€and€Nellie€Carter€were€foundÏin€their€home.€€Both€victims€had€been€shot€in€the€neck€while€lying€in€bed.€€LawÏenforcement€authorities€were€summoned,€and€although€they€found€no€evidenceÏof€forced€entry€into€the€home,€the€telephone€wires€had€been€severed.€ÏAccording€to€the€medical€examiner,€the€victims€were€killed€before€midnight€theÏprevious€day.€€The€murder€weapon€was€not€located;€however,€testimony€at€trialÏrevealed€that€the€victimsðð€wounds€were€consistent€with€having€been€inflicted€byÏa€high„powered€rifle.€€The€bullets€recovered€from€the€scene€were€shot€from€theÏsame€gun€and€identified€as€Winchester€30/30€bullets.€€The€gun€belonged€to€theÏvictim,€Audie€Carter.€€Defendantððs€fingerprints€were€found€on€two€boxes€ofÏWinchester€30/30€ammunition€in€the€victimsðð€home.Ìà àThe€victims€were€defendantððs€father€and€his€aunt.× ƒ2 ××  ×€€On€January€27,Ïdefendant€spent€the€day€with€his€brother,€Randy,€and€they€spent€the€eveningÏwith€their€cousin,€Tommy€Carter,€and€his€wife,€Rhonda.€€At€approximately€7:30Ïp.m.,€defendant€left€Tommyððs€house€to€return€a€skill€saw€to€his€fatherððs€home.€ÏWhen€defendant€returned€one€hour€later,€he€told€Randy€that€ð ðthey€[are]€gone.ðð× ƒ3 ××  ×€ÏThe€next€day,€January€28,€defendant€told€his€brother€on€two€(2)€separateÏoccasions€that€he€had€shot€Audie€and€Nellie€Carter.€€He€also€told€Randy€that€heÏdisposed€of€the€gun,€Nellieððs€purse€and€Audieððs€wallet.Ìà àOn€January€30,€defendant€was€receiving€medical€treatment€at€McNairyÏCounty€General€Hospital.€€While€he€was€there,€he€spoke€with€a€ð ðcrisisÏcounselorðð€who€was€called€in€to€assess€defendantððs€mental€condition.€€DuringÏtheir€conversation,€defendant€stated€that€he€could€not€sleep€because€he€had€aÏð ðmental€pictureðð€of€what€he€saw€Saturday€night€that€he€would€never€forget.× ƒ4 ××  ×Ìà àDefendant€spoke€with€the€police€on€several€occasions€and€gave€twoÏwritten€statements.€€In€his€first€statement€taken€on€March€11,€defendant€deniedÏany€involvement€in€the€shootings€of€Audie€and€Nellie€Carter.€€However,€in€theÍsecond€statement€taken€on€March€27,€defendant€confessed€to€killing€Audie€andÏNellie.€€He€stated€that€he€went€to€his€fatherððs€home€and€made€a€phone€call.€€HeÏleft,€but€returned€a€short€time€later.€€He€walked€around€to€the€back€of€the€houseÏand€cut€the€telephone€wires.€€He€used€his€key€to€gain€entry€into€the€home× ƒ5 ××  ×€andÏwalked€into€the€bedroom.€€He€picked€up€a€Winchester€30/30€rifle€that€his€fatherÏkept€beside€the€bed€and€shot€his€father€and€Nellie.€€He€then€took€the€gun,€hisÏfatherððs€wallet€and€Nellieððs€purse€and€returned€to€Tommy€and€Rhondaððs€house.€ÏHe€subsequently€disposed€of€the€gun,€wallet€and€purse€in€the€Tennessee€River.€ÏDefendant€concluded€this€statement€with,€ð ðIððm€sorry€for€what€happened.€€I€wish€IÏcould€make€things€right.ððÌà àAt€trial,€defendant€testified€on€his€own€behalf.€€He€recanted€his€confessionÏand€denied€any€involvement€in€the€shootings.€€He€testified€that€he€went€to€hisÏfatherððs€home€around€8:00€p.m.,€made€a€phone€call€and€returned€to€TommyððsÏhouse.€€He€stated€that€he€did€not€leave€Tommyððs€house€again€that€night.€€HeÏtestified€that€although€he€lived€with€Audie€and€Nellie€previously,€he€did€not€haveÏa€key€to€his€fatherððs€home€at€the€time€of€the€shootings.€€He€stated€that€heÏconfessed€to€the€murders€because€the€police€were€putting€pressure€on€him€toÏmake€a€statement€and€in€hopes€that€the€police€would€drop€criminal€chargesÏagainst€his€brother.× ƒ6 ××  ×Ìà àThe€jury€returned€guilty€verdicts€on€both€counts€of€premeditated€firstÍdegree€murder.€€Defendant€now€brings€this€appeal€as€of€right€pursuant€to€Tenn.ÏR.€App.€P.€3.ÌÌà@ àò òòòSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óóóÌÌà àDefendant€claims€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€juryððsÏfinding€of€guilt€for€first€degree€murder.€€Specifically€he€argues€that€there€isÏinsufficient€evidence€of€premeditation.€€Further,€because€all€homicides€areÏpresumed€to€be€second€degree€murder€in€the€absence€of€proof€ofÏpremeditation,€defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€would€merely€supportÏœconvictions›€for€second€degree€murder.Ìà@ àò òA.€Standard€of€Reviewó óÌò òà àó óIn€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€jury€in€aÏcriminal€trial.€€A€jury€verdict€accredits€the€state's€witnesses€and€resolves€allÏconflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.Ï1994);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€On€appeal,€the€state€isÏentitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonableÏinferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€òòId.óó;€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2dÏ832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Moreover,€a€guilty€verdict€removes€the€presumption€ofÏinnocence€which€the€appellant€enjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guiltÏon€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellantÏhas€the€burden€of€overcoming€this€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óóÌà àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€forÍan€appellate€court€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÏfavorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€theÏessential€elements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61ÏL.Ed.2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Abramsóó,€935€S.W.2d€399,€401€(Tenn.€1996).€TheÏweight€and€credibility€of€the€witnesses'€testimony€are€matters€entrustedÏexclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,Ï547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.€Breweróó,€932€S.W.2d€1,€19€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).Ìà@ àò òB.€Elements€of€Offenseó óÌà àAll€homicides€are€presumed€to€be€murder€in€the€second€degree.€€òòState€v.ÏWestóó,€844€S.W.2d€144,€147€(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530,€543Ï(Tenn.€1992).€€The€state€bears€the€burden€to€prove€premeditation€in€order€toÏelevate€the€offense€to€murder€in€the€first€degree.€€òòIdóó.Ìà àAt€the€time€the€offenses€were€committed,€first€degree€murder€was€definedÏas€the€ð ðpremeditated€and€intentional€killing€of€another.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1)€(Supp.€1995).× ƒ7 ××  ×€€A€premeditated€act€is€one€ð ðdone€after€the€exerciseÏof€reflection€and€judgmentðð€and€requires€a€previously€formed€design€or€intent€toÏkill.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(d)€(Supp.€1995);€òòState€v.€Westóó,€844€S.W.2dÏat€147.Ìà àThe€element€of€premeditation€may€be€established€by€the€circumstancesÏsurrounding€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Bordisóó,€905€S.W.2d€214,€221€(Tenn.€Crim.ÍApp.€1995);€òòState€v.€Gentryóó,€881€S.W.2d€1,€3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€Indeed,Ïin€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€òòsupraóó,€our€Supreme€Court€recognized:€ÌÓÓà8 àthere€may€be€legitimate€first„degree€murder€cases€in€which€there€isÏno€direct€evidence€of€the€perpetrator's€state€of€mind.€Since€thatÏstate€of€mind€is€crucial€to€the€establishment€of€the€elements€of€theÏoffense,€the€cases€have€long€recognized€that€the€necessaryÏelements€of€first„degree€murder€may€be€shown€by€circumstantialÏevidence.€Relevant€circumstances€recognized€by€other€courtsÏaround€the€country€have€included€the€fact€ð ðthat€a€deadly€weaponÏwas€used€upon€an€unarmed€victim;€that€the€homicidal€act€was€partÏof€a€conspiracy€to€kill€persons€of€a€particular€class;€that€the€killingÏwas€particularly€cruel;€that€weapons€with€which€to€commit€theÏhomicide€were€procured;€that€the€defendant€made€declarations€ofÏhis€intent€to€kill€the€victim;€or€that€preparations€were€made€beforeÏthe€homicide€for€concealment€of€the€crime,€as€by€the€digging€of€aÏgrave.ððÌÌÓÓ836€S.W.2d€at€541„42€(quoting€C.€Torcia,€òòWharton's€Criminal€Lawóó€ðð€140€(14thÏed.€1979).Ìà@ àò òC.€Presence€of€Premeditationó óÌà àIn€the€present€case,€defendantððs€statement€reveals€that€he€returned€to€hisÏfatherððs€home€on€the€night€of€January€27.€€He€walked€around€the€back€of€theÏhouse€and€severed€the€telephone€wires.€€He€used€his€key€to€gain€entry€into€theÏhome€and€walked€into€his€fatherððs€bedroom.€€He€then€picked€up€a€rifle€and,Ïwithout€provocation,€shot€Audie€and€Nellie€Carter€while€they€were€lying€in€bed.€ÏHe€then€took€his€fatherððs€wallet€and€Nellieððs€purse€and€left€the€house.€€HeÏeventually€disposed€of€the€murder€weapon.Ìà àWe€conclude€that€there€is€sufficient€evidence€of€premeditation€in€thisÏcase.€€By€his€own€statement,€defendant€admits€cutting€the€telephone€wires€òòprioróóÏto€entering€the€house.€€He€picked€up€a€weapon€and€shot€his€father€and€aunt€asÍthey€lay€helpless€in€their€bed.€€There€is€sufficient€circumstantial€evidence€fromÏwhich€the€jury€could€find€that€defendant€had€a€ð ðpreviously€formed€design€orÏintent€to€kill.ðð€€òòState€v.€Westóó,€844€S.W.2d€at€147.Ìà àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òòòMOTION€TO€SUPPRESSÌÌó óóóà àDefendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€suppress€hisÏconfession.€€Firstly,€defendant€contends€the€confession€was€taken€in€violation€ofÏhis€right€to€counsel.€€Secondly,€defendant€contends€the€confession€was€theÏproduct€of€unlawful€detention€and€an€unnecessary€delay€in€bringing€him€beforeÏa€magistrate.€€We€decline€to€suppress€the€confession.€€€Ìà@ àò òA.€€Factsó óÌà àThe€victims€were€murdered€on€January€27,€1996.€€Defendant€wasÏinterviewed€by€TBI€Agent€Terrill€McLean€on€February€7,€1996.€€DefendantÏdeclined€to€give€a€statement€until€he€ð ðwent€to€Lakeside€[and]€got€everythingÏstraightened€out.ðð€€Defendant€was€again€interviewed€on€March€11€and,€afterÏbeing€advised€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights,€denied€any€involvement€in€the€murders.Ìà àOn€March€22€Robert€Stacey€contacted€the€law€office€of€Steve€Farese.€ÏStacey€was€the€employer€of€Rhonda€Carter€who€was€the€wife€of€defendantððsÏcousin.€€Stacey€had€previously€used€the€professional€services€of€Farese€andÏasked€Farese€to€speak€with€the€defendant.€€Defendant€called€Farese€and€madeÏan€appointment€€to€see€Farese€on€Sunday,€March€24€at€6€p.m.Ìà àShortly€after€midnight€on€Sunday,€March€24,€Sheriff€Paul€Ervin€spokeÏwith€Rhonda€Carter.€€She€testified€that€she€advised€the€sheriff€the€defendant€hadÏtold€her€that€ð ðbefore€this€got€any€farther€„€went€any€œfarther›€and€anybody€else€gotÏinvolved,€that€he€would€just€go€ahead€and€go€and€confess.ðð€€The€sheriff€testifiedÏthat€she€stated€the€defendant€was€going€to€get€a€commercial€driverððs€licenseÏand€was€leaving€the€state.€€Although€Carter€denied€that€she€stated€theÏdefendant€was€going€to€flee,€she€acknowledged€that€she€might€have€advisedÏthe€sheriff€that€the€defendant€intended€to€get€a€commercial€driverððs€license.€€SheÏfurther€acknowledged€that€she€talked€to€the€sheriff€about€the€defendant€goingÏinto€the€Navy.Ìà àBased€upon€this€information,€Sheriff€Ervin€arrested€the€defendant€withoutÏa€warrant€the€same€day€œthe€sheriff€spoke›€with€Rhonda€Carter;€namely,€Sunday,ÏMarch€24.€€Defendant€was€again€advised€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights,€refused€to€makeÏa€statement€and€told€Sheriff€Ervin€that€he€wanted€to€speak€with€an€attorneyÏbefore€making€a€statement.€€In€addition,€the€defendant€advised€Agent€McLeanÏthat€he€did€not€desire€to€make€a€statement.€€The€defendant€was€not€interrogatedÏon€March€24.€€Since€the€defendant€was€arrested€on€March€24,€he€did€not€keepÏhis€appointment€with€Attorney€Farese€at€6:00€p.m.€that€day.Ìà àOn€the€next€day,€Monday,€March€25,€Agent€McLean€obtained€arrestÏwarrants€from€the€General€Sessions€Court€of€McNairy€County€chargingÏdefendant€with€the€first€degree€murder€of€the€two€(2)€victims.€€The€affidavitÏportion€of€the€warrants€stated€that€the€defendant€killed€the€victims,€and€ð ðthis€wasÏa€premeditated€and€intentional€act€and€violation€of€T.€C.€A.€39„13„202.ðð€€TheÍdefendant€remained€incarcerated.Ìà àFrom€March€25€until€March€27,€the€defendant€did€not€give€a€statementÏalthough€the€sheriff€concedes€he€may€have€asked€the€defendant€if€he€wanted€toÏmake€a€statement.Ìà àFrom€the€time€of€his€arrest€on€March€24€until€March€27,€defendantÏremained€incarcerated.€€Defendant€had€previously€been€taking€Prozac€andÏValium€for€€depression€prior€to€his€arrest.€€Although€the€defendant€stated€he€didÏnot€take€this€medication€during€these€three€(3)€days,€at€the€motion€to€suppressÏhe€stated€he€did€not€remember€if€the€medication€was€actually€refused€him€by€theÏjail€authorities.€€During€this€time€defendant€was€allowed€to€visit€with€his€motherÏand€perhaps€other€family€members€even€during€hours€that€visitation€was€notÏnormally€allowed.Ìà àNo€restriction€was€placed€upon€the€defendant€as€to€the€number€of€phoneÏcalls€he€could€make.€€However,€a€phone€block€was€utilized€to€prohibit€calls€toÏRhonda€Carter.€€This€resulted€from€her€conversation€with€the€sheriff€in€which€sheÏstated,€ð ðGod,€when€Pee€Wee€[defendant]€hears€of€this,€heððs€going€to€be€veryÏupset.ðð€€As€to€whether€she€personally€requested€the€block,€she€stated,€ð ðI€donððtÏthink€that€I€did.ðð€€Sheriff€Ervin€testified€that€she€requested€the€block.× ƒ8 ××  ×€€A€blockÏwas€also€placed€on€the€phone€to€her€employer,€Robert€Stacey.€€Sheriff€ErvinÏhad€no€recollection€about€a€block€on€this€phone.€€There€is€no€proof€indicatingÏany€kind€of€block€on€Attorney€Fareseððs€phone.Ìà àOn€Wednesday,€March€27,€at€approximately€8:00€p.m.€defendant€advisedÏthe€jailer€that€he€wished€to€speak€with€Sheriff€Ervin.€€Sheriff€Ervin€was€notifiedÏand,€along€with€Agent€McLean,€met€with€the€defendant.€€The€defendant€wasÏagain€advised€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights€and€signed€a€written€waiver€atÏapproximately€9:20€p.m.€€In€a€two„page€statement€the€defendant€admitted€toÏshooting€both€victims€with€the€30/30€caliber€rifle.Ìà àDefendantððs€initial€appearance€before€the€magistrate€was€the€next€day,ÏThursday,€March€28.Ìà@ àò òB.€€Right€to€Counseló óÌà àDefendant€contends€his€confession€was€unconstitutionally€taken€inÏviolation€of€his€right€to€counsel.€€The€state€argues€that,€even€though€theÏdefendant€had€earlier€requested€counsel,€defendant€initiated€the€conversationÏwhich€led€to€his€confession.€€We€conclude€there€was€no€violation€of€the€right€toÏcounsel.Ìà@ àò ò(1)ó óÌà àThe€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€attaches€when€the€adversarialÏjudicial€process€begins.€€òòMichigan€v.€Jacksonóó,€475€U.S.€625,€629,€106€S.Ct.Ï1404,€1407,€89€L.Ed.2d€631€(1986).€€€€€In€Tennessee,€the€adversarial€judicialÏprocess€begins€upon€the€filing€of€the€formal€charge,€such€as€an€arrest€warrant,Ïindictment,€presentment,€or€preliminary€hearing€in€cases€where€a€warrant€wasÏnot€obtained€prior€to€the€arrest.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€547Ï(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Mitchellóó,€593€S.W.2d€280,€286€(Tenn.€1980).Ìà àThe€Fifth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€is€triggered€whenever€a€suspectÍrequests€that€counsel€be€present€during€custodial€interrogation.€€òòSeeóó€òòMiranda€v.ÏArizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€86€S.Ct.€1602,€16€L.Ed.€2d€694€(1966);€òòState€v.ÏStephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€at€544.€€Ìà àWhen€a€defendant€clearly€requests€an€attorney€during€custodialÏinterrogation,€all€questioning€must€cease€until€an€attorney€is€present,€unless€theÏdefendant€subsequently€initiates€further€conversation€with€the€authorities.€ÏòòEdwards€v.€Arizonaóó,€451€U.S.€477,€101€S.Ct.€1880,€68€L.Ed.€2d€378€(1981).€ÏThis€same€test€is€utilized€under€both€the€Fifth€and€Sixth€Amendment€right€toÏcounsel.€€òòMichigan€v.€Jacksonóó,€475€U.S.€at€636,€106€S.Ct.€at€1411.ÌÌà@ àò ò(2)ó óÌà àIt€appears€that€defendantððs€Fifth€and€Sixth€Amendment€rights€to€counselÏwere€implicated.€€The€defendant€was€arrested€without€a€warrant€on€March€24;Ïthe€arrest€warrant€issued€March€25;€the€defendant€had€refused€to€make€aÏstatement€without€first€consulting€counsel;€and€the€statement€was€taken€onÏMarch€27.€€The€state€concedes€that,€had€the€confession€been€given€after€theÏinvocation€of€the€right€to€counsel€and€prior€to€defendantððs€initiating€theÏconversation€with€authorities,€the€confession€would€have€been€taken€in€violationÏof€the€constitution.€€òòSeeóó€òòEdwards€v.€Arizonaóó,€òòsupraóó;€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€òòsupraóó.€ÏWe€agree.€€Ìà àHowever,€the€defendant€initiated€the€conversation€which€led€to€hisÏconfession.€€At€approximately€8:00€p.m.€on€March€27,€defendant€advised€theÏjailer€that€he€wished€to€speak€with€Sheriff€Ervin.€€Upon€the€appearance€ofÍSheriff€Ervin€and€Agent€McLean,€the€defendant€gave€his€statement.€€The€givingÏof€the€statement€was€preceded€by€òòMirandaóó€rights,€and€the€defendant€waived€hisÏright€to€counsel€in€writing.€€Therefore,€the€confession€was€not€taken€in€violationÏof€his€right€to€counsel€under€either€the€Fifth€or€Sixth€Amendment.€€Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà@ àò òC.€€Unlawful€Detentionó óÌà àDefendant€contends€his€confession€was€the€product€of€an€illegal€arrestÏand€unlawful€detention€in€violation€of€the€Fourth€Amendment€of€the€UnitedÏStates€Constitution.€€The€state,€however,€contends€the€initial€warrantless€arrestÏwas€made€with€probable€cause€and€was€properly€followed€by€an€arrest€warrantÏthe€next€day.€€We€hold€the€defendant€was€properly€in€custody€at€the€time€heÏgave€the€statement.€€à@ àò ò(1)€Warrantless€Arrestó óÌà àAn€officer€may,€without€a€warrant,€arrest€a€person€when€a€felony€hasÏbeen€committed,€and€the€officer€has€reasonable€cause€to€believe€that€theÏperson€arrested€committed€it.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„7„103(a)(3);€òòState€v.ÏMarshallóó,€870€S.W.2d€532,€538€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€Whether€probableÏcause€exists€depends€upon€whether€the€facts€and€circumstances€known€to€theÏofficer€were€sufficient€to€warrant€a€prudent€person€to€believe€that€the€individualÏhad€committed€the€offense.€€òòBeck€v.€Ohioóó,€379€U.S.€89,€91,€85€S.Ct.€223,€225,€13ÏL.€Ed.€2d€142€(1964);€òòState€v.€Downeyóó,€945€S.W.2d€102,€106€(Tenn.€1997).Ìà àBased€on€this€authority€we€conclude€the€warrantless€arrest€of€theÏdefendant€was€with€probable€cause€and,€therefore,€valid.€€In€earlierÏconversations€the€defendant€had€denied€any€involvement€in€the€offense.€ÍAuthorities€œdetermined›€œthat€defendant›€had€made€a€telephone€call€from€theÏvictimsðð€residence€on€the€night€of€the€homicides.€€The€authorities€were€alsoÏaware€of€defendantððs€statement€to€his€counselor€that€he€was€unable€to€forget€theÏmental€picture€of€what€he€saw€on€the€night€of€the€homicides.€€Shortly€afterÏmidnight€on€the€date€of€the€arrest,€Sheriff€Ervin€was€informed€by€Rhonda€CarterÏthat€the€defendant€was€going€to€confess€to€the€homicides.€€Moreover,€the€sheriffÏalso€had€a€reasonable€basis€for€believing€the€defendant€might€leave€the€state.€ÏBased€upon€all€of€this€information,€we€conclude€that€probable€cause€existed€forÏthe€warrantless€arrest€of€the€defendant.€€à àÌà@ àò ò(2)€€ó óà@ àò òFourth€Amendment€Violationó óÌà àDefendant€next€contends€his€detention€was€in€violation€of€the€holdings€in€ÏòòGerstein€v.€Pughóó,€420€U.S.€103,€95€S.Ct.€854,€43€L.Ed.€2d€54€(1975),€andÏòòCounty€of€Riverside€v.€McLaughlinóó,€500€U.S.€44,€111€S.Ct.€1661,€114€L.Ed.€2dÏ49€(1991).€€Defendantððs€reliance€upon€these€cases€is€misplaced.€€Ìà àIn€òòGersteinóó€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€determined€that€the€FourthÏAmendment€required€a€prompt€judicial€determination€of€probable€cause€after€aÏwarrantless€arrest.€€òòGersteinóó,€420€U.S.€at€125,€95€S.Ct.€at€868„69.€€òòMcLaughlinóóÏclarified€its€òòGersteinóó€holding€by€stating€that€judicial€determinations€of€probableÏcause€are€generally€to€be€made€within€48€hours€of€the€arrest.€€òòMcLaughlinóó,€500ÏU.S.€at€56,€111€S.Ct.€at€1670.Ìà àThe€defendant€in€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó€was€not€being€held€pursuant€to€aÏwarrantless€arrest€at€the€time€of€his€confession.€€He€was€properly€arrested€uponÏprobable€cause€without€a€warrant€on€Sunday,€March€24.€€An€arrest€warrant€œwas›œÌÌsecured›€the€next€business€day;€namely,€Monday,€March€25.€€The€confessionÏwas€given€on€Wednesday,€March€27.€€Since€the€defendant€was€being€heldÏpursuant€to€the€arrest€warrant€at€the€time€of€the€confession,€there€is€no€FourthÏAmendment€violation.Ìà@ àò ò(3)€€Rule€5(a)€Violationó óÌà àWe€are€next€confronted€with€the€issue€of€whether€the€defendantððsÏconfession€was€taken€in€violation€of€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€5(a)€since€he€was€notÏtaken€before€a€magistrate€ð ðwithout€unnecessary€delay.ðð€€Although€we€concludeÏthe€defendantððs€confession€was€taken€in€violation€of€Rule€5(a),€the€statementÏwas€voluntarily€given€under€the€totality€of€the€circumstances€and,€therefore,Ïshould€not€be€suppressed.Ìà@ àò ò(a)ó óÌà àTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€5(a)€not€only€provides€that€a€person€arrested€without€aÏwarrant€be€taken€before€a€magistrate€without€unnecessary€delay€as€alsoÏrequired€by€òòGersteinóó€and€òòMcLaughlinóó,€but€also€ð ð[a]ny€person€arrested€exceptÏupon€a€capias€pursuant€to€an€indictment€or€presentment€shall€be€taken€withoutÏunnecessary€delay€before€the€nearest€appropriate€magistrate€of€the€county€fromÏwhich€the€warrant€for€arrest€issued.€.€.ðð€€Thus,€those€arrested€with€a€warrant€mustÏbe€taken€before€a€magistrate€without€unnecessary€delay.Ìà àIn€this€case€the€defendant€was€arrested€without€a€warrant€on€Sunday,ÏMarch€24.€€Although€the€defendant€was€not€taken€before€the€magistrate,€anÏarrest€warrant€was€secured€from€the€General€Sessions€Court€on€Monday,€MarchÍ25.€€The€defendant€was€not€taken€before€a€magistrate€prior€to€his€confession€onÏWednesday,€March€27.€€The€defendant€was€taken€before€a€magistrate€onÏThursday,€March€28.€€à àThe€state€has€advanced€no€reason€for€the€delay€inÏtaking€the€defendant€before€the€magistrate€as€required€by€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€5(a).€ÏThis€could€have€been€done€on€March€25,€26€or€27€prior€to€the€confession.€ÏUnder€all€the€facts€and€circumstances,€we€conclude€the€failure€to€take€theÏdefendant€before€a€magistrate€at€some€time€in€these€three€(3)€business€daysÏwas€an€unnecessary€delay€within€the€meaning€of€Rule€5(a).ÌÌà@ àò ò(b)ó óÌà àHaving€found€a€5(a)€violation,€we€must€now€determine€whether€theÏconfession€should€have€been€excluded€from€evidence.€€A€violation€of€Rule€5(a)Ïdoes€not€necessarily€lead€to€the€suppression€of€the€confession.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.ÏMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317,€327„28€(Tenn.€1992).€€Ìà àWhen€there€is€a€Rule€5(a)€violation,€the€ð ðunreasonable€delayðð€is€but€oneÏfactor€to€be€taken€into€account€in€evaluating€the€voluntariness€of€the€confession;Ïand€if€the€totality€of€the€surrounding€circumstances€indicates€that€a€confessionÏwas€voluntarily€given,€it€shall€not€be€excluded€from€evidence€solely€because€ofÏthe€delay€in€carrying€the€defendant€before€a€magistrate.€€òòState€v.€Huddlestonóó,Ï924€S.W.2d€666,€671€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Readusóó,€764€S.W.2d€770,€774Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€In€determining€voluntariness€the€court€shouldÏconsider€the€defendantððs€age;€education€or€intelligence€level;€previousÏexperience€with€the€police;€the€repeated€and€prolonged€nature€of€theÍinterrogation;€the€length€of€detention€prior€to€the€confession;€the€lack€of€anyÏadvice€as€to€constitutional€rights;€the€unnecessary€delay€in€bringing€theÏdefendant€before€the€magistrate€prior€to€the€confession;€the€defendantððsÏintoxication€or€ill€health€at€the€time€the€confession€was€given;€deprivation€ofÏfood,€sleep€or€medical€attention;€any€physical€abuse;€and€threats€of€abuse.€ÏòòState€v.€Huddlestonóó,€924€S.W.2d€at€671.€€Applying€these€factors,€we€find€theÏconfession€was€voluntarily€given.Ìà àAt€the€time€of€his€confession€the€defendant€was€28€years€of€age€and€hadÏa€high€school€education.€€He€had€no€prior€involvement€with€the€police.€€AlthoughÏthe€defendant€had€declined€to€make€statements€on€most€occasions€prior€to€hisÏconfession,€his€confession€was€not€the€result€of€repeated€and€prolongedÏinterrogation.€€He€had€requested€to€speak€with€the€sheriff€at€approximately€8:00Ïp.m.,€signed€a€written€waiver€at€9:19€p.m.€and€signed€his€sworn€statement€atÏ9:38€p.m.€€In€addition€to€receiving€the€òòMirandaóó€rights€just€prior€to€the€confession,Ïdefendant€had€been€given€the€òòMirandaóó€rights€on€prior€occasions.€€There€is€noÏshowing€the€defendant€did€not€understand€these€rights.€€The€period€of€timeÏbetween€the€issuance€of€the€arrest€warrant€and€the€confession€consisted€ofÏapproximately€three€(3)€days.€€The€defendant€was€not€intoxicated€at€the€time€ofÏthe€confession,€nor€was€he€under€the€influence€of€any€drugs.€€Ìà àDefendant€had€been€treated€for€depression€prior€to€the€homicides€andÏhad€taken€medication.€€Although€he€had€not€taken€this€medication€during€theÏthree€(3)€days€prior€to€the€confession,€there€is€no€proof€that€the€medication€wasÏpurposefully€withheld.€€Nor€has€there€been€an€appropriate€showing€that€theÍdefendant€was€not€competent€to€give€the€statement.€€There€was€no€proof€that€theÏdefendant€had€been€deprived€of€food,€sleep€or€any€other€medical€attention.€€TheÏdefendant€was€not€physically€abused€nor€threatened€with€abuse.€€Ìà àIn€summary,€the€evidence€indicates€that€the€defendant€knowingly€andÏvoluntarily€waived€his€rights€and€gave€his€statement.€€Under€the€totality€of€theÏcircumstances,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€unnecessary€delay€in€bringing€theÏdefendant€before€the€magistrate€rendered€the€defendantððs€signed€statement€toÏhave€been€given€involuntarily.€€Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóÌÌà àThe€evidence€presented€by€the€state€was€sufficient€to€support€the€juryððsÏfinding€that€the€defendant€was€guilty€of€two€(2)€counts€of€premeditated€firstÏdegree€murder.€€Furthermore,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€denying€defendantððsÏmotion€to€suppress€his€statement€to€law€enforcement€authorities.€€Accordingly,Ïthe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÌÓÓœÌÌÌÌÌÌ›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóò òÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEó ó