ÿWPC¬ 1Âã»ngfÓ¡/Ì™ðklf Ó@Oõã}ÿ.ê×@÷œÊ®Pymû<…Š&(ôºŠT4<…~=¯Æ™¦Mw·sÉ8ƒOo>nŒ)ö¯Ðel0¦EBG¤›¹gƺkTð_CÁRGó͉¸ºé&sH[ Jµuuþi‚§¤©“@ÿø6Ö¹9žC×Þn_;]ØÂ©V®?gÑ´íN3‹ø¬ƒ„oÖ¡Æ¡Òóa¥0Ò9Í#’ßeL¾'[…¯ýØÚ/-T; Ü%…RŒ“´„ר¥ ŽtÂŒ¯4¦æzà—[CÒ­?U&˜sÖË"él~tx޹Œn»·E'>*(#Ï   }ªórŸÛäü¼¬«¦sVÎë',8ÓÉs”bû‘IpÈÌÌgKh¿íThEÁ“ÆA/h& ’ÓõºÕ½‡26ý~~©6q§Þ?Ì,‹fÀ–USì,·É\jPHK¾ í¸$Úh²´?å–F=¯ä|I_0€Ïã[šéºGå')Î}®½æÂg{±Íp#Klÿ‰fèY~¬óT™'!š;Á‘û‹ÈNÇaݾl1œ)s;¥xá“=ö•ÀìBש”†{.Σ0O3*~¦ýü¤õŽLöj*ü›µd#ÉxUNA % 0:• UNÏ 1u ^ ’ wž 4¢ ¶ Å mÇ Þ 72æ 0~ 0D– Ú Eð U>ò U@0 (p N˜ bš ¢ Ƹ 0Å~ 0ÑC 0³ 0­Ç 0§t 0¡ 0›¼ 0•WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW 1eììììììììììì BQQQQ 0Vn D5ÄÄÄÄÄ ASùÆL 0V 0Dh˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Ýs‚/Ï yö.sê:i¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ i)(.(3Ä($¤¤Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ñ ° Ñô\  `‹&Times New Roman(Ïô@ Z‹(Times New Roman - ù- Ñ ° ÑLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*AA ÿÿ(_17Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó*GG ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*88 ÿÿ(_15Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó*55 ÿÿ(_14Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó*22 ÿÿ(_13Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó*// ÿÿ(_12Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó*,, ÿÿ(_11Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó*)) ÿÿ(_10Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó ! ÿÿ35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. d(.3½Þ$££Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdxabZc[Eþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(.3½Þ$¢¢Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡î,îXXÔÑ€OYÑÓ  ÓÔ€î,îîî,ÔÑ  ÑÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€ÑÑ8€o%%dÔdÈ8ÑÑ€OYÑà@hhìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†Xz[Xîî,=#ÔÔ‡¼oä»XXz[ÔˆÐ Ï ÐÓ  ÓSeptember€9,€2003€SessionÐ î> ÐÔ#†Xz[X»¼oä¨#ÔÌò òÔ‡î,îXXz[ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€òòóóv.€Ô_ÔDETRICKÔ_Ô€COLEÔ#†Xz[Xîî,>#Ôó óÐ à0 ÐÌò òDirect€ó óà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ å 5 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€01„01221€€€€€€Joseph€B.€Dailey,€JudgeÐ Ë  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<|` AßÐ }Í  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2002„01254„CCA„R3„DD€€„€Filed€November€24,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ÔÐ r  Ðòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ X¨  ÐÌó óÔ‡î,îXXz[ÔÓ  ÓÌÔ#†Xz[Xîî,Í#ÔCapital€defendant€Ô_ÔDetrickÔ_Ô€Cole€appeals€as€of€right€his€sentence€of€death€resulting€from€the€OctoberÐ C“ Ð2000€murder€of€Ô_ÔSanteifeÔ_Ô€Thomas.€€A€Shelby€County€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€premeditatedÐ )y Ðfirst€degree€murder.€€Following€a€separate€sentencing€hearing,€the€jury€unanimously€found€theÐ _ ÐÔ#cdddÔpresence€of€one€statutory€aggravating€circumstance,€òòi.e.óó,€the€defendant€had€previously€been€convictedÐ õE ÐÔ#ddcdÔof€one€or€more€violent€felony€offenses;€determined€that€this€aggravating€circumstance€outweighedÐ Û+ Ðany€mitigating€circumstances;€and€imposed€a€sentence€of€death.€€The€defendant€now€appeals,Ð Á Ðpresenting€for€our€review€the€following€issues:€(1)€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€Ð §÷ Ðpremeditated€first€degree€murder;€(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€permitting€the€state€to€introduceÐ Ý Ða€photograph€of€the€victim€while€he€was€alive;€(3)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€permitting€theÐ sà Ðintroduction€of€post„mortem€photographs€of€the€victim;€(4)€whether€the€fingerprinting€of€theÐ Y© Ðdefendant€in€the€presence€of€the€jury€at€the€penalty€phase€was€constitutional€error;€(5)€whether€theÐ ? Ðtrial€court€erroneously€prohibited€the€defendant€from€introducing€hearsay€evidence€during€theÐ %u Ðpenalty€phase;€(6)€whether€the€trial€courtððs€instructions€to€the€jury€as€to€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravatingÐ  [ Ðcircumstance€were€contrary€to€the€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€holdings€in€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ô€v.€NewÐ ñA ÐJerseyóó€and€òòRing€v.€Arizonaóó;€(7)€whether€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that€the€instruction€onÐ ×' Ðvictim€impact€evidence€coerced€the€death€sentence€from€the€jury;€(8)€whether€the€evidence€isÐ ½  Ðsufficient€to€establish€the€defendant€had€previously€been€convicted€of€one€or€more€violent€felonyÐ £!ó  Ðoffenses;€(9)€whether€the€jury€verdict€form€was€clear€as€to€whether€the€jury€found€the€aggravatingÐ ‰"Ù! Ðcircumstance€relied€upon€by€the€state;€(10)€whether€the€Tennessee€death€penalty€statutory€schemeÐ o#¿" Ðis€constitutional;€and€(11)€whether€the€sentence€of€death€imposed€in€this€case€is€disproportionate.€Ð U$¥# ÐUpon€review,€we€question,€but€need€not€determine,€whether€the€trial€court€in€the€penalty€phase€hadÐ ;%‹ $ Ðthe€authority€under€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó€to€find€the€defendantððs€prior€felony€convictions€were€crimesÐ !&q!% Ðof€violence€and€to€instruct€the€jury€that€these€prior€convictions€were€crimes€of€violenceòòóó;€however,Ð 'W"& Ðwe€conclude€that€if€there€were€error,€any€error€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Thus,€weÐ í'=#' Ðdiscern€no€error€of€law€requiring€reversal.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€defendantððs€conviction€forÐ Ó(#$( Ðfirst€degree€murder€and€the€juryððs€imposition€of€the€sentence€of€death.Ð ¹) %) ÐÓìÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed€ó óÐ …+Õ&+ Ðâ âÐ k,»',± ÐÑOYÑâ âѰ°Ñâ âÑ  ÑÔ_ÔòòÓ  ÓJoe€G.€Riley,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€whichòò€Gary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,óó€andòò€Jerry€L.Ð ° Ðâ âSmith,€J.óó,€joined.Ð –æ ÐÌRobert€Wilson€Jones,€Public€Defender;€William€L.€Johnson€(at€trial),€Dianne€M.€Ô_ÔThackeryÔ_Ô€(at€trial),Ð b² ÐW.€Mark€Ward€(on€appeal),€Tony€N.€Ô_ÔBraytonÔ_Ô€(on€appeal),€and€Garland€Ô_ÔErgudenÔ_Ô€(on€appeal),Ð H˜ ÐAssistant€Public€Defenders,€for€the€appellant,€Ô_ÔDetrickÔ_Ô€Cole.Ð . ~ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Ô_ÔAngeleÔ_Ô€M.€Gregory,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ú J ÐWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Stephen€P.€Jones€and€Jennifer€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô,€AssistantÐ à 0 ÐDistrict€Attorneys€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð Æ   ÐÌò òà@55'ìàOPINIONó óˆÐ ’â  ÐÓ  ÓÌà@ss ìàòòò òGuilt€Phase€Evidenceóóó óˆÐ ^®  ÐÌÓ  Óà  àShortly€after€midnight€on€October€17,€2000,€the€defendant€killed€the€victim€by€shooting€himÐ *z  Ðtwice€in€the€head.€€The€homicide€occurred€in€an€overgrown,€grassy€area€near€an€apartment€complex,Ð ` Ðand€the€victimððs€body€was€not€discovered€until€October€21st.€€Those€facts€are€undisputed.€€TheÐ öF Ðtestimony€at€trial€was€as€follows:Ð Ü, ÐÌà  àBetween€1:00€a.m.€and€2:30€a.m.,€on€October€17,€2000,€Marcus€Ô_ÔPuryearÔ_Ô,€who€lived€near€theÐ ¨ø ÐGarden€Walk€Apartments€in€Memphis,€heard€ð ðtwo€loud€gunshotsðð€while€sitting€in€his€vehicle.€Ð ŽÞ ÐÔ_ÔPuryearÔ_Ô€stated€he€then€observed€a€speeding€car€which€sounded€like€it€had€a€ð ðsmall€four„cylinderÐ tÄ Ðengine.ðð€€After€he€returned€to€his€residence,€he€again€heard€what€sounded€like€the€same€vehicle.€€HeÐ Zª ÐÔ#bdddÔthen€observed€two€males€exit€the€vehicle,€a€late€model€Mitsubishi€Ô_ÔGalant.Ô_Ô€€They€walked€around€Ô#ddbdÔin€theÐ @ Ðbushes€and€weeds€where€he€previously€heard€the€gunshots,€returned€to€their€vehicle€after€three€orÐ &v Ðfour€minutes,€and€left€at€a€high€rate€of€speed.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àFourteen„year„old€Ô_ÔAndropolisÔ_Ô€Wells€testified€that€earlier€that€evening,€he€saw€the€defendantÐ Ø( Ðat€the€Ô_ÔRidgemontÔ_Ô€Apartments.€€Wells€stated€they€stayed€at€the€complex€until€the€victim,€twenty„Ð ¾ Ðseven„year„old€Ô_ÔSanteifeÔ_Ô€Thomas,€arrived€in€his€vehicle.€€Wells€said€another€man,€ð ðE,ðð€asked€theÐ ¤ô Ðvictim€for€a€ride€to€ò òòòó óóóthe€Raleigh€Woods€Apartments€and€he€and€the€defendant€accompanied€them.Ð Š Ú ÐAccording€to€Wells,€ð ðEðð€exited€the€vehicle€at€Raleigh€Woods€and€the€defendant€asked€the€victimÐ p!À  Ðò òòòó óóóto€take€him€to€the€Garden€Walk€Apartments,€where€the€defendant€directed€the€victim€to€the€back€ofÐ V"¦! Ðthe€apartments€near€some€bushes€and€high€grass.€€Wells€testified€the€defendant€left€briefly€and,€uponÐ <#Œ" Ðhis€return,€said€ð ðJerryðð€would€bring€them€some€crack€cocaine.Ð "$r# ÐÌà  àWells€said€he€then€heard€the€defendant€repeatedly€tell€the€victim€to€open€his€mouth€and€sawÐ î%>!% Ðthe€defendant€pointing€a€gun€near€the€victimððs€face.€€Wells€testified€the€victim€did€not€have€a€weaponÐ Ô&$"& Ðand€had€made€no€aggressive€moves€toward€the€defendant.€€Wells€recounted€that€the€victim€told€theÐ º' #' Ðdefendant,€ð ð[Ô_ÔS]topÔ_Ô€playing,€man€„€stop€playingðð€and€backed€up.€€Wells€said€he€then€heard€twoÐ  (ð#( Ðgunshots.€€Wells€stated€the€defendant€ran€from€the€bushes€holding€a€set€of€keys,€but€stated,€ð ðNo,Ð †)Ö$) Ðthese€the€wrong€keys€ð!ð€these€the€wrong€keys.ðð€€The€defendant€then€ran€back€to€the€victimððs€body€andÐ l*¼%* Ðâ âreturned€with€another€set€of€keys.€€Wells€testified€the€defendant€ran€toward€the€victimððs€car€andÐ R+¢&+ ÐÔ_Ôordered€Wells€to€enter€it.€€Wells€stated€the€defendant€then€drove€the€victimððs€car€to€the€RidgemontÐ ° ÐApartments.Ð –æ Ðâ âÌà  àWells€said€that€upon€arriving€at€the€apartment€complex,€the€defendant€removed€two€shellsÐ b² Ðfrom€the€gun€and€threw€them€into€a€garbage€can.€€Wells€testified€the€defendant€then€took€the€gun€toÐ H˜ Ða€man€in€one€of€the€apartments.€€According€to€Wells,€the€defendant€instructed€him€to€return€with€himÐ . ~ Ðto€the€victimððs€car.€€Wells€stated€that€when€they€entered€the€car,€the€defendant€said€he€had€lost€hisÐ  d Ðelectronic€organizer€and€announced€they€must€return€to€the€scene€and€look€for€it.€€Wells€said€theyÐ ú J Ðreturned€to€the€Garden€Walk€Apartments,€where€they€walked€to€the€victimððs€body.€€The€defendantÐ à 0 Ðrolled€the€body€over€while€looking€for€his€organizer.€€Wells€said€the€defendant€expressed€concernÐ Æ   Ðthat€if€he€did€not€find€the€organizer,€he€would€get€caught;€however,€the€search€for€the€organizer€wasÐ ¬ ü  Ðunsuccessful.Ð ’â  ÐÌà  à€According€to€Wells,€the€defendant€said€he€shot€the€victim€because€the€victim€owed€himÐ ^®  Ðfifteen€dollars.€€Wells€then€stated€he€would€have€given€the€defendant€fifteen€dollars;€however,€theÐ D”  Ðdefendant€responded,€€ð ðNig„„„€gonna€start€respecting€me.ððÐ *z  ÐÌà  àRobert€Eric€Adams€testified€he€saw€the€defendant€on€October€18,€2000.€€Adams€stated€theÐ öF Ðdefendant€told€him€the€victim€was€taking€him€to€meet€someone€regarding€a€drug€transaction€whenÐ Ü, Ðhe€asked€the€victim€ò òòòó óóóabout€the€money€the€victim€owed€him.€€Adams€said€that€according€to€theÐ Â Ðdefendant,€the€victim€replied€he€would€pay€the€defendant€on€Friday,€but€the€defendant€felt€the€victimÐ ¨ø Ðwas€lying.€òòò ò€ó óóóAdams€stated€the€defendant€recounted€that€he€asked€the€victim€the€same€question€threeÐ ŽÞ Ðtimes,€and€when€the€victim€failed€to€respond€the€last€time,€he€shot€him€in€the€head.€€Adams€said€theÐ tÄ ÐÔ#cdddÔdefendant€told€him€that€the€victim€fell,€but€he€shot€him€again€because€he€did€not€believe€he€was€dead.€Ð Zª ÐÌÔ#ddcdÔà  àAdams€testified€the€defendant€then€requested€a€ride€to€the€Garden€Walk€Apartments,€€andÐ &v Ðthe€defendant€showed€him€the€victimððs€body.€€Adams€stated€the€defendant€said€he€lost€his€electronicÐ  \ Ðorganizer;€he€began€searching€for€it;€and€they€left€after€the€defendant€found€it.Ð òB ÐÌà  àOfficer€J.€Taylor€testified€that€on€the€morning€of€October€20th,€he€observed€the€defendantÐ ¾ Ðexiting€a€convenience€store.€€Officer€Taylor€stated€that€during€a€routine€check€for€weapons,€he€foundÐ ¤ô Ðthe€defendant€possessed€a€Mitsubishi€ignition€key.€€Officer€Taylor€then€transported€the€defendantÐ Š Ú Ðto€the€homicide€division€for€questioning.€€Officer€Taylor€stated€that€when€he€instructed€the€defendantÐ p!À  Ðto€empty€all€of€his€belongings€onto€a€table,€the€Mitsubishi€ignition€key€was€missing.€€Officers€laterÐ V"¦! Ðsearched€the€room€and€found€the€key€under€a€chair.€€Ð <#Œ" Ðà  àÌà  àSergeant€T.J.€Helldorfer€testified€that€after€the€defendant€was€advised€of€his€rights,€he€saidÐ %X $ Ðhe€found€the€key€at€the€Ridgemont€Apartment€parking€lot€and,€since€he€collected€car€keys,€he€took€Ð î%>!% Ðit.€€The€defendant€said€he€was€aware€that€the€victim€had€been€reported€missing€but€did€not€admit€anyÐ Ô&$"& Ðinvolvement€in€the€victimððs€disappearance.€€Sgt.€Helldorfer€said€the€defendant€admitted€concealingÐ º' #' Ðthe€car€key€under€the€cushion€of€a€chair€in€the€homicide€office€because€ð ðhe€had€second€thoughtsÐ  (ð#( Ðabout€this€keyðð€after€the€officer€questioned€him.€€Sgt.€Helldorfer€stated€the€defendant€was€thenÐ †)Ö$) Ðreleased.€€Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âÔ_ÔÐ R+¢&+ Ðà  àSgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô€testified€the€key€unlocked€the€victimððs€Mitsubishi€car.€€He€stated€the€victimððsÐ ° Ðâ âcar€had€blood€on€the€door€handle,€and€a€piece€of€paper€bearing€the€defendantððs€fingerprint€was€foundÐ –æ Ðinside€the€vehicle.Ð |Ì ÐÌà  àAccording€to€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô,€officers€began€to€search€for€the€defendant€again,€and€when€theyÐ H˜ Ðlocated€him,€he€made€an€obscene€gesture€and€fled.€€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô€said€the€defendant€later€contactedÐ . ~ Ðpolice€and€stated€he€was€going€to€turn€himself€in,€but€he€failed€to€do€so.€€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô€testified€thatÐ  d Ðafter€the€defendant€was€subsequently€arrested€and€again€advised€of€his€rights,€he€admitted€ò òòòó óóóhis€priorÐ ú J Ðstatement€to€the€police€òòóówas€false.€€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô€stated€the€defendant€admitted€killing€the€victimÐ à 0 Ðand€gave€the€following€statement:Ð Æ   ÐÌà8  àOn€the€night€that€[the€victim]€was€murdered,€it€was€me,€[Wells],€and€[the€victim].€Ð ’â  ÐWe€left€the€Ô_ÔRidgemontÔ_Ô€Terrace€Apartments€going€to€the€Garden€Walk€where€[theÐ xÈ  Ðvictim]€told€me€that€he€had€some€money€that€he€owed€me€and€when€we€got€downÐ ^®  Ðthere,€he€stalled€like€telling€me€that€he€was€waiting€on€the€money€but€he€never€didÐ D”  Ðget€it.€€He€told€me€that€he€gave€me€his€key€to€his€car€as€a€partial€payment€[until]€heÐ *z  Ðcould€give€me€the€money€but€when€I€turned€down€the€key,€we€got€into€an€argument,Ð ` Ðand€he€went€on€about€that€he€wasnððt€going€to€pay€me,€and€I€asked€him€why€but€heÐ öF Ðnever€did€say.€€So,€he€came€in€my€face€with€threats€that€he€wasnððt€going€to€pay€me,Ð Ü, Ðand€I€could€take€it€how€I€wanted€to€take€it€and€I€asked€him€why€he€wasnððt€going€toÐ Â Ðpay€me€so€thatððs€when€he€went€to€[putting]€his€hands€in€my€face€and€pushing€me€andÐ ¨ø Ðthen€we€started€into€a€small€argument€of€words€back€and€forth€and€thatððs€when€heÐ ŽÞ Ðtried€to€attack€me.€€I€went€into€my€pocket€and€pulled€out€a€.38,€and€[the€victim]Ð tÄ Ðrushed€at€me,€and€I€shot€him.ÐZªÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àAfter€I€shot€him,€I€looked€at€his€body€and€threw€up.€€I€still€had€his€key€in€my€leftÐ &v Ðhand€and€I€got€in€his€car,€and€I€left€the€crime€scene€with€[Wells],€and€we€went€andÐ  \ Ðparked€the€car€and€we€got€out€at€the€Ô_ÔRidgemontÔ_Ô€Terrace€Apartments.ÐòBÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àI€went€back€to€the€body€because€I€dropped€my€organizer,€and€I€went€to€get€it.€€AndÐ ¾ Ðwhen€I€got€it,€I€left€and€took€his€car€and€parked€it€again€on€Voltaire€Street.ФôÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àSgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô€stated€the€defendant€said€he€committed€the€murder€because€the€victim€triedÐ p!À  Ðto€attack€him,€and€he€needed€the€money€owed€by€the€victim€to€support€himself€and€his€pregnantÐ V"¦! Ðgirlfriend.€€According€to€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô,€the€defendant€said€the€victim€was€coming€toward€him€fromÐ <#Œ" Ða€distance€of€four€to€five€feet€away€when€he€fired€the€shots.€€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHelldorferÔ_Ô€testified€the€defendantÐ "$r# Ðadmitted€returning€to€the€crime€scene€twice€after€the€murder.€€Ð %X $ ЀÌà  àOfficer€Charles€Hawk€testified€that€while€he€was€on€patrol€during€the€week€following€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðvictimððs€disappearance,€he€noticed€the€victimððs€Mitsubishi€Ô_ÔGalantÔ_Ô€parked€at€a€dead„end€street€for€Ð º' #' Ðfour€or€five€days.€€Officer€Hawk€stated€the€rear€tag€of€the€vehicle€had€been€removed,€and€the€vehicleÐ  (ð#( Ðidentification€number€on€the€dash€was€covered.Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌà  àDr.€Craig€Ô_ÔMallakÔ_Ô,€a€forensic€pathologist€who€performed€the€autopsy€on€the€victim,€testifiedÐ R+¢&+ Ðthe€victim€was€shot€above€the€left€eye€and€behind€the€left€ear.€€Dr.€Ô_ÔMallakÔ_Ô€further€determined€theÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ_Ôgunshot€wound€behind€the€victimððs€left€ear€was€inflicted€with€the€gun€ð ðless€than€an€inchðð€from€theÐ ° Ðvictimððs€skin,€and€the€wounds€sustained€by€the€victim€were€consistent€with€being€inflicted€by€a€largeÐ –æ Ðcaliber€bullet.€€He€concluded€either€of€the€two€gunshots€would€have€been€sufficient€to€cause€theÐ |Ì Ðvictimððs€death€and€opined€the€victim€would€have€been€immediately€incapacitated€upon€the€inflictionÐ b² Ðof€the€first€gunshot€wound.€€Both€Dr.€Mallak€and€forensic€anthropologist€Dr.€Steven€Symes,€theÐ H˜ Ðlatter€of€whom€reconstructed€the€victimððs€skull,€concluded€the€frontal€shot€was€inflicted€first.Ð . ~ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€did€not€testify€nor€offer€any€proof€during€the€guilt€phase.€€The€jury€found€theÐ ú J Ðdefendant€guilty€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder.Ð à 0 ÐÌà@ìàò òòòPenalty€Phase€Evidenceóóó óˆÐ ¬ ü  ÐÌà  àDuring€the€penalty€phase,€the€state€presented€proof€that€the€defendant€pled€guilty€in€1997€toÐ xÈ  Ðrobbery,€kidnapping,€felony€reckless€endangerment,€and€attempt€to€commit€rape.€€All€fourÐ ^®  Ðconvictions€related€to€an€incident€which€occurred€in€1995.€€Darrell€Webster,€the€victim€of€thoseÐ D”  Ðoffenses,€testified€at€the€penalty€phase€that€in€November€1995,€the€defendant€and€another€manÐ *z  Ðapproached€him€as€he€was€leaving€an€adult€bookstore.€€Webster€stated€the€other€man€initially€pointedÐ ` Ða€gun€at€him€but€put€away€the€gun€and€apologized;€he€then€asked€Webster€for€money€to€buy€food.Ð öF ÐÌà  àWebster€stated€he€bought€the€men€a€meal€at€a€restaurant€and€agreed€to€give€them€a€ride€toÐ Â Ða€family€memberððs€house.€€He€said€that€as€he€drove,€the€defendant€pulled€out€a€gun€and€forcedÐ ¨ø ÐWebster€into€the€passenger€seat€to€allow€the€other€man€to€drive.€€Webster€testified€that€when€he€pledÐ ŽÞ ÐÔ#bdddÔfor€his€life,€the€defendant€responded,€ð ðDo€you€want€to€go€out€like€a€punk?€€Youððre€crying.€€Go€out€likeÐ tÄ Ða€man.ðð€€Webster€recalled€the€defendant€spun€the€barrel€of€the€gun,€pointed€the€gun€to€Websterððs€head,Ð Zª ÐÔ#ddbdÔand€pulled€the€trigger;€however,€the€gun€did€not€fire.€€Webster€testified€the€defendant€later€forcedÐ @ Ðhim€to€perform€oral€sex.€€The€defendant€and€the€co„perpetrator€also€informed€Webster€that€theyÐ &v Ðintended€to€ð ðbust€a€capðð€in€him€and€dump€his€body.€€After€this€five„hour€ordeal,€Webster€escapedÐ  \ Ðfrom€the€vehicle.€€The€defendant€and€his€co„perpetrator€were€apprehended.Ð òB ÐÌà  àMarcie€Turcios,€the€victimððs€half„sister,€gave€victim€impact€testimony€relating€to€the€effectÐ ¾ Ðof€the€victimððs€death€upon€her€and€other€members€of€the€family.Ð ¤ô ÐÌà  àThe€defense€presented€the€testimony€of€Roy€Cole,€the€defendantððs€father.€€He€stated€theÐ p!À  ÐÔ#cdddÔdefendant,€his€middle€child,€lived€with€him€until€a€few€years€ago.€€He€averred€the€defendant€regularlyÐ V"¦! ÐÔ#ddcdÔattended€church€with€the€family€until€1996,€when€he€left€home.€€He€stated€the€defendant€left€homeÐ <#Œ" Ðbecause€he€would€not€abide€by€the€familyððs€rules.€€The€defendantððs€father€testified€that€the€defendantÐ "$r# Ðloved€his€fourteen„month„old€daughter€and€asked€the€jury€to€allow€his€son€to€live.Ð %X $ ÐÌà  àCathy€Cole,€the€defendantððs€mother,€recalled€that€the€defendant€was€fifteen€years€old€at€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðtime€of€the€offenses€leading€to€his€1997€felony€convictions.€€She€stated€her€son€left€home€at€ageÐ º' #' Ðsixteen,€and€when€he€would€return,€she€ð ðwelcomed€him€home€„€seemed€like€[she€would]€clean€himÐ  (ð#( Ðup,€.€.€.€but€[he€would]€slip€through€[her]€fingers€again.ðð€€She€also€asked€the€jury€to€spare€her€sonððsÐ †)Ö$) Ðlife.Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âÔ_ÔÐ R+¢&+ Ðà  àThe€twenty„two„year„old€defendant€denied€that€all€of€the€facts€alleged€by€the€prosecutionÐ ° Ðâ âwere€true,€but€admitted€he€was€responsible€for€the€victimððs€death.€€The€defendant€expressed€remorse€Ð –æ Ðand€pled€with€the€jury€for€mercy€and€the€sparing€of€his€life.€€Ð |Ì ÐÌà  àAt€the€close€of€the€proof,€the€jury€was€instructed€on€the€following€statutory€aggravatingÐ H˜ Ðcircumstance€and€underlying€convictions:€Ð . ~ ÐÌà8  àThat€the€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies,€other€than€theÐ ú J Ðpresent€charge,€the€statutory€elements€of€which€involved€the€use€of€violence€to€theÐ à 0 Ðperson.€The€state€is€relying€upon€the€crimes€of€Robbery,€Ô_ÔKidnappingÔ_Ô,€RecklessÐ Æ   ÐEndangerment,€and€Attempted€Rape,€which€are€felonies,€the€statutory€elements€ofÐ ¬ ü  Ðwhich€do€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.òòóó€€€€€Ð’â Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€jury€was€also€given€the€following€instruction€on€mitigating€circumstances:€Ð ^®  ÐÌà8  àà ` àTennessee€law€provides€that€in€arriving€at€the€punishment,€the€jury€shallÐ *z  Ðconsider,€as€previously€indicated,€any€mitigating€circumstances€raised€by€theÐ ` Ðevidence€which€shall€include€but€are€not€limited€to€the€following:ÐöFÐ Ð  ÐÌÓ*°,X‚Xʸ —X°œX*Óà8  à1.à0ÊÐ Ð àAny€testimony€that€he€is€remorseful€for€killing€[the€victim].ÐÂÊÐ ÊÐ  Ðà8  à2.à0ÊÐ Ð àAny€testimony€that€he€was€twenty€years€old€at€the€time€of€the€murder.ШøÊÐ ÊÐ  Ðà8  à3.à0ÊÐ Ð àAny€testimony€that€he€was€only€fifteen€years€old€when€he€committed€theÐ ŽÞ Ðoffense€that€is€being€used€as€an€aggravating€circumstance.ÐtÄÊÐ ÊÐ  Ðà8  à4.à0ÊÐ Ð àAny€testimony€that€he€has€a€fourteen„month„old€daughter.ÐZªÊÐ ÊÐ  Ðà8  à5.à0ÊÐ Ð àAny€testimony€that€he€has€a€family€that€loves€and€supports€him.Ð@ÊÐ ÊÐ  Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€[6.]à0 Ê àAny€other€mitigating€factor€which€is€raised€by€the€evidence€produced€by€either€theÐ &v Ðprosecution€or€defense€at€either€the€guilt€or€sentencing€hearing;€that€is,€you€shallÐ  \ Ðconsider€any€aspect€of€the€defendantððs€character€or€record,€or€any€aspect€of€theÐ òB Ðcircumstances€of€the€offense€favorable€to€the€defendant€which€is€supported€by€theÐ Ø( Ðevidence.оÊ(#Ê(# ÐÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÌà  àThe€jury€found€the€state€had€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€aggravating€circumstanceÐ Š Ú Ð(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2),€the€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€violent€felonies€other€than€the€presentÐ p!À  Ðcharge.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2).€€The€jury€further€found€that€the€aggravatingÐ V"¦! Ðcircumstance€outweighed€any€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€The€juryÐ <#Œ" Ðsentenced€the€defendant€to€death.òòò òó ó€€€óóÐ "$r# ÐÌÔ_Ôò òÔ  Ôà@ ìàI.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCE€ˆÐ î%>!% ÐÌó óÔ#cdddÔà  àWhile€the€defendant€concedes€that€he€killed€the€victim€and€some€circumstantial€evidence€€ofÐ º' #' Ðpremeditation€exists,€he€argues€that€the€proof€is€insufficient€to€justify€a€finding€beyond€a€reasonableÐ  (ð#( ÐÔ#ddcdÔdoubt€that€the€killing€was€premeditated.Ð †)Ö$) Ѐ€Ð l*¼%* Ðà  àA€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€a€defendant€is€cloakedÐ R+¢&+ Ðand€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt;€thus,€a€convicted€defendant€on€appeal€has€the€burden€Ô_ÔofÐ 8,ˆ', Ðdemonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔTuggleÔ_Ôóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ð ° ÐIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€does€not€Ô_ÔreweighÔ_Ô€or€reevaluate€theÐ –æ Ðevidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Likewise,€it€is€not€the€duty€of€thisÐ |Ì Ðcourt€on€appeal€to€revisit€questions€of€witness€credibility,€that€function€being€within€the€provinceÐ b² Ðof€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔElkinsÔ_Ôóó,€102€S.W.3d€578,€581€(Tenn.€2003).€€Instead,€the€defendant€mustÐ H˜ Ðestablish€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€was€so€deficient€that€no€reasonable€trier€of€fact€couldÐ . ~ Ðhave€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,Ð  d Ð443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€61€L.€Ed.2d€560€(1979);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€Moreover,€theÐ ú J Ðstate€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€whichÐ à 0 Ðmay€be€drawn€therefrom.€€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€In€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,Ð Æ   Ð805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1990),€this€court€held€these€rules€are€applicable€to€findingsÐ ¬ ü  Ðof€guilt€predicated€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€both€directÐ ’â  Ðand€circumstantial€evidence.Ð xÈ  ÐÌÔ#cdddÔà  àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder.€€First€degree€murder€is€theÐ D”  Ðð ðpremeditated€and€intentional€killing€of€another.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1).€€TennesseeÐ *z  ÐÔ#ddcdÔCode€Annotated€section€39„13„202(d)€defines€premeditation€as€follows:Ð ` ÐÌà8  àAs€used€in€subdivision€(a)(1)€ð ðpremeditationðð€is€an€act€done€after€the€exercise€ofÐ Ü, Ðreflection€and€judgment.€€ð ðPremeditationðð€means€that€the€intent€to€kill€must€haveÐ Â Ðbeen€formed€prior€to€the€act€itself.€€It€is€not€necessary€that€the€purpose€to€kill€pre„Ð ¨ø Ðexist€in€the€mind€of€the€accused€for€any€definite€period€of€time.€€The€mental€state€ofÐ ŽÞ Ðthe€accused€at€the€time€the€accused€allegedly€decided€to€kill€must€be€carefullyÐ tÄ Ðconsidered€in€order€to€determine€whether€the€accused€was€sufficiently€free€fromÐ Zª Ðexcitement€and€passion€as€to€be€capable€of€premeditation.€Ð@Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€element€of€premeditation€is€a€question€of€fact€to€be€resolved€by€the€jury€and€may€beÐ  \ ÐÔ#bdddÔestablished€by€proof€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€killing.€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔSuttlesÔ_Ôóó,€30€S.W.3d€252,€261Ð òB Ð(Tenn.€2000).€Although€there€is€no€strict€standard€governing€what€constitutes€proof€of€premeditation,Ð Ø( ÐÔ#ddbdÔcircumstances€from€which€a€jury€may€infer€premeditation€include€declarations€of€the€intent€to€kill,Ð ¾ Ðprocurement€of€a€weapon,€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€upon€an€unarmed€victim,€the€fact€that€theÐ ¤ô Ðkilling€was€particularly€cruel,€infliction€of€multiple€wounds,€the€making€of€preparations€before€theÐ Š Ú Ðkilling€for€the€purpose€of€concealing€the€crime,€destruction€or€secretion€of€evidence,€and€calmnessÐ p!À  Ðimmediately€after€the€killing.€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ôóó,€24€S.W.3d€297,€302€(Tenn.€2000).Ð V"¦! ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€the€proof€established€that€the€defendant€asked€the€victim€to€go€to€a€grassyÐ "$r# Ðarea€behind€the€apartment€complex.€€Unsatisfied€with€the€victimððs€refusal€to€pay€a€fifteen„dollarÐ %X $ Ðdebt,€the€defendant€pointed€a€gun€at€the€unarmed€victim€and€repeatedly€ordered€him€to€open€hisÐ î%>!% Ðmouth.€€As€the€victim€told€the€defendant€to€ð ðstop€playingðð€and€backed€away,€the€defendant€shot€himÐ Ô&$"& Ðabove€the€left€eye€and€then€shot€him€above€the€left€ear€from€a€distance€of€less€than€an€inch€in€orderÐ º' #' Ðto€ensure€he€was€dead.€€The€proof€showed€the€defendant€retrieved€the€victimððs€car€keys,€left€theÐ  (ð#( Ðvictim€in€the€grassy€field,€used€the€victimððs€car€to€make€his€escape,€and€discarded€the€weapon.€€TheÐ †)Ö$) Ðdefendant€returned€to€the€scene€twice€to€search€for€his€electronic€pocket€organizer.€The€defendantÐ l*¼%* Ðlater€stated€he€wanted€the€victim€to€ð ðstart€respecting€me.ððÐ R+¢&+ ÐÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ_Ôà  àFrom€this€evidence,€there€are€numerous€circumstances€from€which€the€jury€could€concludeÐ ° Ðthat€the€murder€was€premeditated.€€Viewing€the€evidence€and€inferences€therefrom€in€a€light€mostÐ –æ ÐÔ#bdddÔfavorable€to€the€state,€this€court€concludes€a€rational€trier€of€fact€could€find€the€defendant€intentionallyÐ |Ì ÐÔ#ddbdÔand€premeditatedly€killed€the€victim.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð b² ÐÌò òà@q q ìàII.€€PHOTOGRAPH€OF€VICTIM€DURING€LIFETIME€ó óˆÐ . ~ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contests€the€admission€of€a€portrait„style€photograph€of€the€victim€takenÐ ú J Ðduring€his€lifetime,€contending€it€was€irrelevant€and€its€probative€value€was€substantially€outweighedÐ à 0 Ðby€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€and€confusion€of€issues.€€While€the€state€concedes€that€theÐ Æ   Ðphotograph€may€have€added€ð ðlittle€or€nothingðð€to€its€case„in„chief,€it€claims€the€introduction€of€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðphotograph€did€not€result€in€any€prejudice€to€the€defendant.Ð ’â  ÐÌà  àThe€admission€of€photographs€is€generally€discretionary€with€the€trial€court€and,€absent€anÐ ^®  Ðabuse€of€that€discretion,€will€not€result€in€the€grant€of€a€new€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòòòóóState€v.€Banksóóòò,óó€564€S.W.2dÐ D”  Ð947,€949€(Tenn.€1978).€€€A€family€photograph€may€be€relevant€to€establish€the€òòóóvictimððs€identity€asÐ *z  Ðthe€person€killed.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Nesbitóó,€978€S.W.2d€872€app.€at€902€(Tenn.€1998).€€We€conclude€theÐ ` Ðtrial€court€did€not€err€in€admitting€the€photograph€into€evidence.Ð öF ÐÌà  àRegardless,€even€if€the€trial€court€erred,€such€error€was€harmless.€€In€òòState€v.€Dicksóó,€615Ð Â ÐS.W.2d€126,€128€(Tenn.€1981),€the€defendant€claimed€ð ðbefore€and€afterðð€photographs€of€the€victimÐ ¨ø Ðwere€without€relevance€and€were€prejudicial.€€The€court€stated€that€it€found€no€prejudicial€error€inÐ ŽÞ Ðthe€admission,€ð ðthough€it€would€have€been€better€had€the€ððbeforeðð€picture€of€[the€victim]€beenÐ tÄ Ðexcluded€since€it€added€little€or€nothing€to€the€sum€total€of€knowledge€of€the€jury.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Ô‡Xz[XXXz[ÔLikewise,Ð Zª Ðin€the€instant€case,€although€the€photograph€added€little€to€the€other€information€provided€to€the€jury,Ð @ Ðit€did€not€prejudice€the€defendant.€Ô#†Xz[XXXz[̓#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[Ô€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð &v ÐÌò òÔ  Ôà@Ï Ï ìàIII.€€POST„MORTEMÔ#†Xz[XXXz[΄#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[Ô€PHOTOGRAPHS€OF€VICTIMˆÐ òB Ðà  àà Ê àÌà  àó óDuring€the€testimony€of€forensic€pathologist€Dr.€Mallak,€the€state€introduced€two€autopsyÐ ¾ Ðphotographs€depicting€close„ups€of€the€victimððs€scalp.€€Specifically,€the€photographs€revealed€a€grayÐ ¤ô Ðring€of€soot€around€one€wound€indicating€it€was€the€result€of€a€gunshot€fired€at€close€range.€€InÐ Š Ú Ðresponse€to€the€defendantððs€objection€to€the€photographs,€the€state€asserted€they€were€relevant€toÐ p!À  Ðshow€the€distance€between€the€gun€and€the€victim€when€the€gun€was€fired.€€The€trial€court€permittedÐ V"¦! Ðintroduction€of€the€photographs€after€it€determined€them€to€be€relevant€to€the€issue€of€premeditation,Ð <#Œ" Ðand€after€it€cropped€the€photographs€to€show€less€of€the€victimððs€scalp.€€In€this€appeal,€the€defendantÐ "$r# Ðasserts€that€the€close„up€photographs€of€the€victimððs€scalp€should€not€have€been€admitted,€as€theÐ %X $ Ðphotographs€were€especially€gruesome€and€inflammatory.€Ð î%>!% ÐÌà  àTennessee€courts€follow€a€policy€of€liberality€in€the€admission€of€photographs€in€both€civilÐ º' #' Ðand€criminal€cases.€€òòBanksóó,€564€S.W.2d€at€949.€€Accordingly,€ð ðthe€admissibility€of€photographs€liesÐ  (ð#( Ðwithin€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€whose€ruling€.€.€.€will€not€be€overturned€on€appeal€except€uponÐ †)Ö$) Ða€clear€showing€of€an€abuse€of€discretion.ðð€€òòId.óó;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€8€S.W.3d€593,€602€(Tenn.€1999).€Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âHowever,€a€photograph€must€be€found€relevant€to€an€issue€that€the€jury€must€decide€before€it€Ô_ÔmayÐ R+¢&+ Ðbe€admitted€into€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔVannÔ_Ôóó,€976€S.W.2d€93,€102€(Tenn.€1998);€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.Ð ° ÐÔ_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€401.Ð –æ Ðâ âÌà  àPhotographs€of€a€corpse€are€generally€admissible€in€murder€prosecutions€if€they€are€relevantÐ b² Ðto€the€issues€at€trial,€notwithstanding€their€gruesome€character.€€òòState€v.€Carteróó,€114€S.W.3d€895,€902Ð H˜ Ð(Tenn.€2003).€€Conversely,€evidence€which€is€not€relevant€to€prove€some€part€of€the€prosecutionððsÐ . ~ Ðcase€should€not€be€Ô#cdddÔadmitted€solely€to€inflame€the€jury€and€prejudice€the€defendant.€€òòId.€óóat€951.€Ð  d Ðð ð[Ô_ÔP]hotographsÔ_Ô€of€the€victim€Ô#ddcdÔmay€be€admitted€as€evidence€of€the€brutality€of€the€attack€and€the€extentÐ ú J Ðof€force€used€against€the€victim,€from€which€the€jury€could€infer€malice.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔGossÔ_Ôóó,€995€S.W.2dÐ à 0 Ð617,€627€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1998);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€868€S.W.2d€561,€576€(Tenn.€1993)Ð Æ   Ð(holding€photograph€was€relevant€to€show€ð ðpremeditationðð).Ô#†Xz[XXXz[t…#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[Ô€€The€probative€value€of€the€photographÐ ¬ ü  Ðmust€outweigh€any€unfair€prejudicial€effect€that€it€may€have€upon€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòÔ_ÔVannÔ_Ôóó,€976Ð ’â  ÐS.W.2d€at€102;€òòsee€óóTenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€403.Ð xÈ  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€ultimately€determined€that€the€photographs€were€relevant€and€were€notÐ D”  Ðð ðparticularly€graphic.ðð€€In€this€case,€the€state€was€required€to€prove€that€the€killing€was€intentionalÐ *z  Ðand€Ô#bdddÔpremeditated.€òò€Seeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†Xz[XXXz[Ý‘#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[Ôðð€Ô#†Xz[XXXz[Ž”#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[Ô39„13„202(a)(1).€€The€photographs€were€relevant€toÐ ` Ðsupplement€Ô#ddbdÔthe€testimony€of€the€medical€examiner€that€this€wound€was€inflicted€from€contact€range,Ð öF Ðfrom€which€a€jury€could€infer€premeditation,€and€not€from€a€few€feet€away€as€claimed€by€theÐ Ü, Ðdefendant€during€his€statement€to€the€police.€€Additionally,€the€photographs€dispel€the€defendantððsÐ Â Ðclaim€of€self„defense.€€Further,€the€photographs€are€not€particularly€gruesome.Ô#†Xz[XXXz[Õ”#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[Ô€€We€conclude€thatÐ ¨ø Ðthe€probative€value€of€the€photographs€is€not€outweighed€by€their€prejudicial€effect,€and€the€trialÐ ŽÞ Ðcourt€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€allowing€their€admission.€€Further,€it€does€not€affirmativelyÐ tÄ Ðappear€that€the€ð ðadmission€of€the€photographs€has€affected€the€results€of€the€trial.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòBanksóó,€564Ð Zª ÐS.W.2d€at€953.€€The€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ô#†Xz[XXXz[!—#ÔÐ @ ÐÌò òà@ìàIV.€€FINGERPRINTING€OF€DEFENDANT€IN€PRESENCE€OF€JURYˆÐ  \ Ðà@üü ìàDURING€PENALTY€PHASEˆÐ òB ÐÌà  àó óThe€state€sought€the€death€penalty€on€the€basis€that€the€defendant€was€previously€convictedÐ ¾ Ðof€four€felonies€whose€statutory€elements€involved€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.€€òòSee€óóTenn.Ð ¤ô ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2).€€During€the€penalty€phase,€the€stateððs€fingerprint€technician€took€aÐ Š Ú Ðthumb€print€from€the€defendant€in€the€presence€of€the€jury€for€the€purpose€of€identifying€him€as€theÐ p!À  Ðsame€person€ò òòòó óóóconvicted€€in€1997€of€robbery,€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€felony€reckless€endangerment,€and€attemptÐ V"¦! Ðto€commit€rape.€€When€the€defendant€objected,€the€state€offered€to€stipulate€to€the€defendantððsÐ <#Œ" Ðidentity€as€the€person€named€in€the€1997€convictions;€however,€the€defense€refused€to€so€stipulate.€Ð "$r# ÐThe€trial€court€overruled€the€defendantððs€objection,€noting€that,€absent€a€stipulation€from€the€defense,Ð %X $ Ðthe€state€was€entitled€to€prove€that€the€defendant€was€the€person€convicted€of€the€prior€offenses.€€OnÐ î%>!% Ðappeal,€the€defendant€claims€that€fingerprinting€him€in€the€presence€of€the€jury€denied€him€his€rightÐ Ô&$"& Ðto€a€fair€trial€and€subjected€him€to€a€ð ðhumiliating€and€embarrassing€procedure.ðð€€We€do€not€agree.Ð º' #' ÐÌà  àDuring€the€penalty€phase€of€a€capital€case,€the€trial€court€retains€its€role€in€controlling€theÐ †)Ö$) Ðintroduction€of€evidence.€€òòCarteróó,€114€S.W.3d€at€903.€€While€the€trial€court€may€use€the€rules€ofÐ l*¼%* Ðâ âevidence€to€guide€its€decisions€in€this€regard,€those€rules€are€relaxed.€€òòSee€id.€€óóEvidence€may€beÐ R+¢&+ Ðpresented€as€to€any€matter€that€the€court€deems€relevant€to€the€punishment,€including€any€evidenceÐ ° Ðtending€to€establish€or€rebut€any€aggravating€circumstances.€€òòId.óóÐ –æ Ðâ âÌà  àThe€defendant€maintains€it€was€not€necessary€for€the€jury€to€observe€the€technicianÐ b² Ðfingerprint€him€because,€despite€his€refusal€to€stipulate€identity,€he€was€not€contesting€his€identityÐ H˜ Ðas€the€person€named€in€the€four€1997€convictions.€€The€state€had€the€burden€of€proving€beyond€aÐ . ~ Ðreasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€was€indeed€the€same€person€who€was€convicted€of€the€priorÐ  d Ðoffensesòòóó.€€Absent€a€stipulation,€the€state€was€required€to€present€proof€sufficient€to€meet€this€burden.€Ð ú J ÐWe€conclude€the€fingerprint€evidence€presented€by€the€state,€including€a€demonstration€of€theÐ à 0 Ðtechnician€taking€the€defendantððs€thumb€print,€was€highly€relevant€to€the€question€of€whether€theÐ Æ   Ðdefendant€was€the€person€convicted€of€the€prior€offenses.Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌà  àòòò òó óóóThe€defendant€does€not€argue€the€fingerprinting€procedure€violated€his€privilege€against€self„Ð xÈ  Ðincrimination.€€Still,€we€observe€the€courts€have€long€held€that€fingerprinting€is€non„testimonialÐ ^®  Ðevidence€that€is€not€subject€to€the€privilege€against€self„incrimination.€€òòÔ_ÔSchmerberÔ_Ô€v.€Californiaóó,€384Ð D”  ÐU.S.€757,€764,€86€S.€Ct.€1826,€16€L.€Ed.€2d€908€(1966);€òòsee€generally€óóòòState€v.€Ô_ÔFrasierÔ_Ôóó,€914€S.W.2dÐ *z  Ð467,€472€(Tenn.€1996).€€Moreover,€a€number€of€federal€and€state€courts€have€held€that€a€defendantÐ ` Ðmay€be€fingerprinted€in€the€presence€of€the€jury.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòUnited€States€v.€Petersóó,€687€F.2d€1295,Ð öF Ð1297€(10th€Cir.€1982);€òòUnited€States€òòex€relóó€Ô_ÔOððHalloranÔ_Ô€v.€Rundleóó,€384€F.2d€997€(3rd€Cir.€1967),€òòcert.Ð Ü, Ðdenied,óó€393€U.S.€860€(1968);€òòPeople€v.€Ô_ÔMontoyaÔ_Ôóó,€543€P.2d€514,€518€(Colo.€1975);€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔStuardÔ_Ôóó,Ð Â Ð452€P.2d€98,€99€(Ariz.€1969);€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€528€P.2d€1003,€1005€(Wash.€Ct.€App.€1974).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€by€taking€his€thumb€print,€the€state€engaged€in€a€practice€whichÐ tÄ ÐÔ#bdddÔð ðÔ_Ôundermine[dÔ_Ô]€the€presumption€of€innocence.ðð€€Yet,€at€the€time€the€jury€saw€the€technician€fingerprintÐ Zª ÐÔ#ddbdÔthe€defendant,€it€had€already€convicted€him€of€first€degree€murder.€€He€was€no€longer€presumedÐ @ Ðinnocent.Ð &v ÐÌà  àA€defendantððs€right€to€a€fair€trial€may€be€infringed€if€he€is€forced€to€perform€acts€whichÐ òB Ðwould€unjustly€prejudice€him.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔDoremusÔ_Ôóó,€414€F.2d€252,€253„54€(6th€Cir.€1969);Ð Ø( ÐòòState€v.€Ronald€Bradford€Ô_ÔWallerÔ_Ôóó,€No.€E1999„02034„CCA„R3„PC,€2000€Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€LEXISÐ ¾ Ð558,€at€**38„39€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€July€18,€2000,€at€Knoxville),€òòperm.€to€app.€denied€óó(Tenn.€2001).€Ð ¤ô ÐPrejudice€may€arise€in€cases€where€the€requested€performance€or€demonstration€would€unjustlyÐ Š Ú ÐÔ#bdddÔhumiliate€or€degrade€the€defendant,€or€where€such€performance€would€be€damaging€to€the€defendantððsÐ p!À  ÐÔ#ddbdÔimage€and€is€irrelevant€to€an€issue€at€trial.€€òòÔ_ÔDoremusÔ_Ôóó,€414€F.2d€at€254.€Ð V"¦! ÐÌà  àFingerprinting,€unlike€being€handcuffed€or€wearing€an€inmateððs€uniform,€does€not€portrayÐ "$r# Ðthe€defendant€as€a€dangerous€criminal.€€Aòòóós€noted€by€this€court€over€twenty€years€ago,€fingerprintingÐ %X $ Ðis€a€commonplace€practice€which€ð ðsignifies€neither€criminality€nor€saintly€living.ðð€€òòState€v.€Tysonóó,Ð î%>!% Ð603€S.W.2d€€748,€753„54€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1980).€€We€are€not€persuaded€that€fingerprinting€of€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðdefendant€in€the€presence€of€the€jury€was€so€inflammatory€or€prejudicial€as€to€render€the€trialÐ º' #' Ðfundamentally€unfair.€€We€decline€to€grant€relief€on€this€basis.Ð  (ð#( Ðòòò òóóó óÌÌÌÐ 8,ˆ', Ðà@22ìàà@@//ìàò òV.€€EXCLUSION€OF€HEARSAY€EVIDENCE€DURING€PENALTY€PHASEó óˆÐ ° ÐÌÔ#cdddÔà  àDuring€the€penalty€phase,€defense€counsel€asked€the€defendantððs€father€whether€the€defendantÐ |Ì ÐÔ#ddcdÔhad€expressed€any€remorse€about€the€victimððs€death.€€The€trial€court€sustained€the€stateððs€objectionÐ b² Ðbased€upon€hearsay.€€On€appeal,€the€defendant€argues€the€trial€court€erred€in€excluding€the€evidenceÐ H˜ Ðbecause€hearsay€evidence€is€admissible€during€the€penalty€phase€of€a€capital€trial€and€the€defendantððsÐ . ~ Ðremorse€was€a€relevant€consideration€for€the€jury.€€He€acknowledges€he€made€no€offer€of€proof€atÐ  d Ðsentencing€or€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€new€trial;€however,€he€requests€that€this€court€remandÐ ú J Ðthe€matter€to€the€trial€court€to€permit€an€offer€of€proof€on€this€issue.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Goadóó,€707€S.W.2dÐ à 0 Ð846,€852„54€(Tenn.€1986).Ð Æ   ÐÌà  àThe€state€correctly€responds€that€the€defendant€has€waived€this€issue€by€failing€to€make€anÐ ’â  Ðoffer€of€proof€and€for€failing€to€raise€this€issue€in€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ð xÈ  Ð3(e);€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€45€S.W.3d€1,€15€(Tenn.€2001).€€Moreover,€our€supreme€court€in€òòSimsóó€declinedÐ ^®  Ðto€remand€for€a€further€hearing€after€finding€that,€unlike€the€defendant€in€òòGoadóó,€defendant€Sims€didÐ D”  Ðnot€attempt€to€make€an€offer€of€proof.€€45€S.W.3d€at€15.€€Likewise,€in€the€instant€case,€the€defendantÐ *z  Ðdid€not€attempt€to€make€an€offer€of€proof.€€Thus,€we€could€consider€the€issue€waived.€€However,€weÐ ` Ðopt€to€address€the€issue€based€upon€the€record€before€us.Ð öF ÐÌà  àThe€rules€of€evidence€do€not€limit€the€admissibility€of€evidence€in€a€capital€sentencingÐ Â Ðproceeding.€€òòCarteróó,€114€S.W.3d€at€903;€òòState€v.€Stoutóó,€46€S.W.3d€689,€702€(Tenn.€2001).€€òòóóHowever,Ð ¨ø Ðany€error€on€part€of€the€trial€court€in€excluding€the€testimony€of€the€defendantððs€father€was€clearlyÐ ŽÞ Ðharmless.€€The€defendant,€during€his€own€testimony,€expressed€remorse€for€the€victimððs€death.€Ð tÄ ÐAdditionally,€he€made€the€following€statement€to€the€jury:Ð Zª ÐÌà8  àà Ê àLadies€and€gentlemen,€I€know€that€what€I€did€was€wrong,€and€I€know€meÐ &v Ðsaying€that€Iððm€sorry€to€them€and€Iððm€sorry€to€my€family€wonððt€bring€[the€victim]Ð  \ Ðback.€€He€wasnððt€a€bad€person.€€I€was€the€bad€person.€€But€I€ask€you€just€please€haveÐ òB Ðmercy€on€me.€€I€didnððt€mean€for€that€to€happen.€€I€wasnððt€at€home.€€Me€and€myÐ Ø( Ðfamily,€we€wasnððt€together.€€I€was€out€in€the€streets.€€I€didnððt€know€what€to€do.€€IÐ ¾ Ðdidnððt€know€what€was€going€on€in€my€life.€€I€just€needed€help€from€somebody€ð!ð€justÐ ¤ô Ðplease,€please€donððt€kill€me€„€please.€€ÐŠ ÚÐ Ð  ЀÌà  àWe€conclude€the€potential€hearsay€testimony€about€the€defendantððs€expressions€of€remorseÐ V"¦! Ðto€his€father€would€not€have€affected€the€juryððs€verdict.€€The€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€thisÐ <#Œ" Ðclaim.Ð "$r# ÐÌÓ  Óò òVI.€òò€Ô_ÔAPPRENDIÔ_Ôóó/òòRINGóó€ISSUEó óÐ î%>!% ÐÌÓ  Óà  àRelying€upon€the€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€decisions€in€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ô€v.€New€Jerseyóó,€530Ð º' #' ÐU.S.€466,€120€S.€Ct.€2348,€147€L.€Ed.€2d€435€(2000),€and€òòRing€v.€Arizonaóó,€536€U.S.€584,€122€S.€Ct.Ð  (ð#( Ð2428,€153€L.€Ed.€2d€556€(2002),€the€defendant€contends€the€trial€courtððs€factual€finding€andÐ †)Ö$) Ðinstruction€that€the€statutory€elements€of€his€prior€convictions€involved€the€use€of€violence€to€theÐ l*¼%* Ðperson€deprived€the€jury€of€the€opportunity€to€decide€whether€the€prior€offenses€involved€violence.€Ð R+¢&+ ÐIn€defense€of€the€trial€court,€we€preface€our€discussion€by€noting€this€trial€occurred€prior€to€the€òòRingóóÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ_Ôdecision€and€by€further€noting€the€trial€court€followed€the€dictates€of€our€state€supreme€courtððsÐ ° Ðdecision€in€òòSimsóó,€45€S.W.3d€at€11„12,€which€also€was€decided€prior€to€òòRingóó.€Ð –æ ÐÌò òA.€€United€States€Supreme€Court€Decisionsó óÐ b² ÐÌà  àIn€òòAlmendarez„Torres€v.€United€Statesóó,€523€U.S.€224,€226„27,€118€S.€Ct.€1219,€140€L.€Ed.Ð . ~ Ð2d€350€(1998),€a€federal€trial€court€in€a€non„capital€case€increased€the€petitionerððs€maximumÐ  d Ðsentence€for€his€conviction€for€illegally€returning€to€the€United€States€after€deportation€based€uponÐ ú J Ðthe€courtððs€finding€that€the€deportation€was€subsequent€to€an€aggravated€felony€conviction.€€òòSeeóó€8Ð à 0 ÐU.S.C.€ðð€1326(a),€(b)(2).€€The€petitioner€argued€that€application€of€this€provision€to€his€convictionÐ Æ   Ðviolated€the€Fifth€Amendment€because€the€prior€aggravated€felony€convictions€were€not€listed€in€hisÐ ¬ ü  Ðindictment.€€òòAlmendarez„Torresóó,€523€U.S.€at€227;€òòseeóó€U.S.€Const.€amend.€V.€€The€United€StatesÐ ’â  ÐSupreme€Court€concluded€the€provision€did€not€define€a€separate€offense€but,€rather,€was€a€penaltyÐ xÈ  Ðprovision€which€authorized€the€trial€court€to€increase€the€sentence€for€a€recidivist.€€òòAlmendarez„Ð ^®  ÐTorresóó,€523€U.S.€at€226.€€Accordingly,€the€court€held€the€government€was€not€constitutionallyÐ D”  Ðrequired€to€allege€the€petitionerððs€prior€convictions€in€the€indictment.€€òòId.óó€at€226„27.€€Ð *z  ÐÌà  àThe€court€noted€the€subject€matter€of€the€provision€related€to€recidivism€and€priorÐ öF Ðconvictions€are€generally€regarded€as€sentencing€factors.€€òòId.óó€at€230.€€The€court€further€noted€ourÐ Ü, Ðcourts€have€traditionally€relied€upon€recidivism€as€a€basis€for€increasing€a€defendantððs€sentence.€€òòId.óóÐ Â Ðat€243.€€Moreover,€recidivism€ð ðdoes€not€relate€to€the€commission€of€the€offense,€òòbut€goes€to€theÐ ¨ø Ðpunishment€onlyóó,€and€therefore€.€.€.€may€be€subsequently€decided.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€243„44€(òòcitingóó€òòGraham€v.Ð ŽÞ ÐWest€Virginiaóó,€224€U.S.€616,€624,€32€S.€Ct.€583,€56€L.€Ed.€917€(1912))€(emphasis€in€original).Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àIn€òòApprendióó,€the€petitioner€challenged€a€state€trial€courtððs€application€of€a€hate€crimeÐ @ Ðprovision€to€increase€his€sentence€based€upon€his€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€a€jury€trial€andÐ &v ÐFourteenth€Amendment€right€to€due€process.€€530€U.S.€at€476„77;€òòseeóó€U.S.€Const.€amend.€VI,€XIV.€Ð  \ ÐIt€did€not€address€the€Fifth€Amendment€issue€relating€to€the€validity€of€the€indictment,€which€wasÐ òB Ðthe€issue€in€òòAlmendarez„Torresóó.€€òòApprendióó,€530€U.S.€at€477€n.3;€€òòseeóó€U.S.€Const.€amend.€V.òòóó€€InÐ Ø( Ðinvalidating€the€trial€courtððs€application€of€the€hate€crime€provision,€the€court€held€ð ð[o]ther€than€theÐ ¾ Ðòòfact€of€a€prior€convictionóó,€any€òòfactóó€that€increases€the€penalty€for€a€crime€beyond€the€prescribedÐ ¤ô Ðstatutory€maximum€must€be€submitted€to€a€jury,€and€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòApprendióó,Ð Š Ú Ð530€U.S.€at€490€(emphasis€added).€€Furthermore,€in€addressing€the€issue€presented€in€òòApprendióó,€theÐ p!À  Ðcourt€declined€to€address€the€validity€of€its€decision€in€òòAlmendarez„Torresóó.€€òòId.óó€at€489„90.Ð V"¦! ÐÌà  àIn€òòRingóó,€the€court€extended€its€Sixth€and€Fourteenth€Amendments€holding€in€òòApprendióó€toÐ "$r# Ðcapital€cases.€€536€U.S.€at€607.€€The€court€specifically€held€that€the€jury,€and€not€the€trial€judge,€wasÐ %X $ Ðrequired€to€find€the€aggravating€circumstances€necessary€to€impose€the€death€penalty.€€òòId.óó€at€609.€Ð î%>!% ÐHowever,€because€the€aggravating€circumstances€applied€to€the€petitioner€in€òòRingóó€did€not€relate€toÐ Ô&$"& Ðprior€convictions,€the€court€did€not€address€its€holding€in€òòAlmendarez„Torresóó.€€òòId.óó€at€597€n.4.Ð º' #' ÐÌò òB.€€Tennessee€Decisionsó óÐ †)Ö$) ÐÌà  àThe€state€maintains€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€in€òòState€v.€Dellingeróó,€79€S.W.3dÐ R+¢&+ Ð458€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€denied,óó€537€U.S.€1090€(2002),€controls€this€issue.€€In€òòDellingeróó,€our€state€Ô_ÔsupremeÐ 8,ˆ', Ðcourt€declined€to€apply€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€to€Tennesseeððs€capital€sentencing€procedures.€€òòId.óó€at€467.€€First,Ð ° Ðthe€court€noted€that€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€does€not€apply€to€enhancement€factors€based€upon€prior€convictions.€Ð –æ ÐòòId.óó€at€466.€€Second,€the€court€reasoned€that€while€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€only€applies€to€those€enhancementÐ |Ì Ðfactors€which€are€used€to€impose€a€sentence€above€the€statutory€maximum,€the€death€penalty€inÐ b² ÐTennessee€is€ð ðwithin€the€statutory€range€of€punishment€prescribed€by€the€legislature€for€first€degreeÐ H˜ Ðmurder.ðð€€òòId.óó;€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(c)(1).€€Third,€the€court€concluded€the€due€processÐ . ~ Ðand€notice€requirements€are€satisfied€through€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€12.3(b),€whichÐ  d Ðinstructs€district€attorneys€to€notify€capital€defendants€at€least€thirty€days€prior€to€trial€of€theirÐ ú J Ðintention€to€seek€the€death€penalty€and€to€list€the€aggravating€circumstances€upon€which€the€stateÐ à 0 Ðintends€to€rely.€€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó,€79€S.W.3d€at€467.€€Fourth,€the€court€reasoned€that€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€only€appliesÐ Æ   Ðto€sentencing€procedures€which€permit€judges€to€sentence€capital€defendants,€whereas€a€jury€in€ourÐ ¬ ü  Ðstate€must€make€the€necessary€findings€regarding€the€statutory€aggravating€circumstances.€€òòId.óó€Ð ’â  ÐFinally,€the€court€noted€that€in€Tennessee,€the€jury€is€required€to€find€any€statutory€aggravatingÐ xÈ  Ðcircumstance€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€thus,€complying€with€the€ð ðreasonable€doubtðð€standardÐ ^®  Ðarticulated€in€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó.€€òòId.óóÐ D”  ÐÌà  àHowever,€we€note€that:€€(1)€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó€was€decided€prior€to€òòRingóó;€and€(2)€the€issue€inÐ ` ÐòòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó€concerned€the€failure€to€charge€the€applicable€aggravating€circumstances€in€the€indictment.€Ð öF ÐòòSee€id.óó€at€466.€€In€òòCarteróó,€114€S.W.3d€at€910€n.4,€our€state€supreme€court,€citing€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó,€declinedÐ Ü, Ðto€find€error€based€upon€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó.€€However,€like€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó,€the€issue€in€òòCarteróó€involvedÐ Â Ðthe€sufficiency€of€the€indictment.€€òòSee€id.óó€€Moreover,€other€panels€of€this€court€have€concluded€thatÐ ¨ø ÐòòRingóó€did€not€affect€our€supreme€courtððs€holding€in€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Robert€Faulkneróó,€No.Ð ŽÞ ÐW2001„02614„CCA„R3„DD,€2003€Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€LEXIS€836,€at€**87„88€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.Ð tÄ ÐSept.€26,€2003,€at€Jackson);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔGdongalayÔ_Ô€P.€Berryóó,€No.€M2001„02023„CCA„R3„DD,€2003Ð Zª ÐTenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€LEXIS€316,€at€**16„17€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€Apr.€10,€2003,€at€Nashville),€òòappealÐ @ Ðdocketedóó,€No.€M2001„02023„SC„DDT„DD€(Tenn.€2003);€òòState€v.€Richard€Ô_ÔOdomÔ_Ôóó,€No.€W2000„Ð &v Ð02301„CCA„R3„DD,€2002€Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€LEXIS€871,€at€*38€n.1€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€Oct.€15,Ð  \ Ð2002,€at€Jackson),€òòappeal€docketedóó,€No.€W2000„02301„SC„DDT„DD€(Tenn.€2002).€€However,€likeÐ òB ÐòòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó€and€òòPreston€Carteróó,€the€issue€in€these€cases€involved€the€sufficiency€of€the€indictment.€€òòSeeóóÐ Ø( ÐòòRobert€Faulkneróó,€2003€Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€LEXIS€836,€at€*82;€òòÔ_ÔGdongalayÔ_Ô€P.€Berryóó,€2003€Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_ÔÐ ¾ ÐApp.€LEXIS€316,€at€*13;€òòRichard€Ô_ÔOdomÔ_Ôóó,€2002€Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€LEXIS€871,€at€*32.Ð ¤ô ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€in€the€case€at€bar€does€not€challenge€the€failure€to€allege€the€aggravatingÐ p!À  Ðcircumstance€in€the€indictment.€€Rather,€the€defendant€raises€an€issue€involving€the€SixthÐ V"¦! ÐAmendment€right€to€trial€by€jury€and€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€right€to€due€process€of€law,€whichÐ <#Œ" Ðwere€the€same€rights€at€issue€in€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó,€530€U.S.€at€477€n.3;€òòRingóó,€536Ð "$r# ÐU.S.€at€595òòóó.€€Both€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó€involved€state€prosecutions,€and€the€appellants€did€not€assertÐ %X $ Ða€constitutional€claim€based€upon€the€omission€of€the€sentencing€enhancements€or€aggravatingÐ î%>!% Ðcircumstances€in€the€indictment.€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó,€530€U.S.€at€477€n.3;€òòRingóó,€536€U.S.€at€597€n.4òòóó.€€InÐ Ô&$"& ÐòòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€noted€that€the€due€process€clause€of€the€FourteenthÐ º' #' ÐAmendment€had€not€yet€been€construed€to€apply€the€Fifth€Amendment€right€to€indictment€by€a€grandÐ  (ð#( Ðjury€to€the€states.€€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó,€530€U.S.€at€477€n.3€(citations€omitted).Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌÌÐ 8,ˆ', Ðò òC.€€Trial€Courtððs€Instructionó óÐ ° ÐÌà  à€During€the€penalty€phase,€the€trial€court,€after€hearing€the€same€testimony€the€jury€heardÐ |Ì Ðconcerning€the€underlying€facts€of€the€four€prior€felonies,€instructed€the€jury€as€follows:Ð b² ÐÌà8  àà Ê àStatutory€Aggravating€Circumstances:€Tennessee€law€provides€that€no€sentenceÐ . ~ Ðof€death€or€sentence€of€imprisonment€for€life€without€possibility€of€parole€shall€beÐ  d Ðimposed€by€a€jury,€but€upon€a€unanimous€finding€that€the€state€has€proven,€beyondÐ ú J Ða€reasonable€doubt,€the€existence€of€one€or€more€of€the€statutory€aggravatingÐ à 0 Ðcircumstances€which€shall€be€limited€in€this€case€to€the€following:ÐÆ  Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà Ê àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà0  àà Ê àThat€the€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies€other€than€theÐ ’â  Ðpresent€charge,€the€statutory€elements€of€which€involved€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.€Ð xÈ  ÐòòThe€state€is€relying€upon€the€crimes€of€Robbery,€Ô_ÔKidnappingÔ_Ô,€Reckless€Endangerment,€andÐ ^®  ÐAttempted€Rape,€which€are€felonies,€the€statutory€elements€of€which€do€involve€use€ofÐ D”  Ðviolence€to€the€person.Ð*z (#(# ÐóóÌ(Emphasis€added).€€Thus,€the€trial€court€concluded€the€underlying€facts€of€the€prior€convictionsÐ öF Ðinvolved€ð ðviolence€to€the€personðð€and€instructed€the€jury,€as€a€matter€of€law,€that€the€statutoryÐ Ü, Ðelements€of€these€four€offenses€involved€ð ðviolence€to€the€person.ððÐ Â ÐÌò òD.€€Analysisó óÐ ŽÞ ÐÌà  àòòóóòòóóOur€state€supreme€court€held€in€òòSimsóó€that€in€determining€whether€the€statutory€elements€ofÐ Zª Ða€prior€felony€conviction€involved€the€use€of€violence€against€another€for€purposes€of€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)Ð @ ÐÔ_ÔaggravatorÔ_Ô,€ð ðthe€trial€judge€must€necessarily€examine€the€facts€underlying€the€prior€felony€if€theÐ &v Ðstatutory€elements€of€that€felony€may€be€satisfied€either€with€or€without€proof€of€violence.ðð€€45Ð  \ ÐS.W.3d€at€11„12.€€òòSimsóó€found€no€error€in€the€trial€judgeððs€determination€that€the€two€prior€felonyÐ òB Ðconvictions€were€violent€and€in€so€instructing€the€jury.€€òòId.€€óóTherefore,€the€trial€court€in€the€case€atÐ Ø( Ðbar€made€the€determinations€required€òòóóby€òòSimsóó.€€However,€although€òòSimsóó€was€filed€after€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó,Ð ¾ Ðno€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€issue€was€raised€by€the€defendant€in€òòSimsóó,€nor€was€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€discussed€by€our€supremeÐ ¤ô Ðcourt.€€Further,€òòSimsóó€was€decided€prior€to€òòRingóó.Ð Š Ú ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Powersóó,€101€S.W.3d€383,€400„01€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€__€U.S.€__€(2003),€theÐ V"¦! ÐTennessee€Supreme€Court€reaffirmed€the€procedure€provided€in€òòSimsóó.€€In€òòPowersóó,€our€state€supremeÐ <#Œ" Ðcourt€held€that€the€1998€amendment€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„204(c),€whichÐ "$r# Ðexpressly€permits€either€party€to€introduce€evidence€regarding€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€aÐ %X $ Ðdefendantððs€prior€conviction€which€the€jury€may€then€consider€in€weighing€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravatingÐ î%>!% Ðfactor,€was€inapplicable€to€the€case€because€the€capital€offense€was€committed€prior€to€the€effectiveÐ Ô&$"& Ðdate€of€the€amendment.€€òòId.óó€at€400.€€However,€we€note€that€although€òòPowersóó€was€filed€after€bothÐ º' #' ÐòòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó,€no€issue€regarding€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó€was€raised€by€the€defendant€in€òòPowersóó,Ð  (ð#( Ðnor€was€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€or€òòRingóó€discussed€by€our€supreme€court.Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌà  àThe€question€before€this€court€is€whether€the€Sixth€and€Fourteenth€Amendments€require€theÐ R+¢&+ Ðjury,€not€the€trial€judge,€to€make€findings€that€must€go€òòbeyond€the€mere€fact€that€a€prior€convictionÐ 8,ˆ', Ðexistsóó€in€order€to€apply€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravating€circumstanceòòóó.€€As€applicable€to€the€case€at€bar,€it€wasÐ ° Ðnecessary€to€determine€not€only€that€the€prior€convictions€existed,€but€also€that€they€involvedÐ –æ Ðviolence.€€Otherwise,€the€Ô_ÔaggravatorÔ_Ô€could€not€be€applied€and€the€defendant€would€be€ineligible€forÐ |Ì Ðthe€death€penalty.Ð b² ÐÌà  à€Initially,€we€reject€the€stateððs€contention€that€òòÔ_ÔApprendiÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRingóó€are€not€applicable€to€theÐ . ~ Ðpresent€case€because€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€does€not€enhance€the€defendantððs€sentence€forÐ  d Ðhis€first€degree€murder€conviction€beyond€its€statutory€maximum.€€The€United€States€Supreme€CourtÐ ú J Ðexpressly€rejected€this€argument€in€òòRingóó,€concluding€that€the€required€finding€of€an€aggravatingÐ à 0 Ðcircumstance€exposed€the€defendant€to€a€greater€punishment€than€that€authorized€by€the€juryððsÐ Æ   Ðverdict€of€conviction.€€òòRingóó,€536€U.S.€at€603„04.€€Thus,€our€state€supreme€courtððs€reliance€upon€thisÐ ¬ ü  Ðfactor€in€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó,€which€was€decided€prior€to€òòRingóó,€appears€to€have€been€effectively€overruled€byÐ ’â  ÐòòRingóó.€€òòSee€id.óó;€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó,€79€S.W.3d€at€466.Ð xÈ  ÐÌà  àFurthermore,€the€holding€in€òòÔ_ÔDellingerÔ_Ôóó€that€the€due€process€and€notice€requirements€wereÐ D”  Ðsatisfied€through€the€provisions€in€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€12.3(b)€relates€to€theÐ *z  ÐÔ_Ôsufficiency€of€the€indictment,€which€is€not€at€issue€in€this€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòDellingeróó,€79€S.W.3d€at€467.€Ð ` ÐThe€court€in€òòDellingeróó€further€held€that€òòApprendióó€only€applied€to€sentencing€procedures€whichÐ öF Ðpermit€judges€to€sentence€capital€defendants,€thus,€exempting€Tennessee€from€the€requirements€ofÐ Ü, ÐòòApprendióó.€€òòId.óó€€However,€as€previously€noted,€òòDellingeróó€was€decided€prior€to€òòRingóó.€€In€light€of€òòRingóó,Ð Â Ðwe€question€whether€Tennessee€has€a€blanket€exemption€from€the€right€to€trial€by€jury€requirementsÐ ¨ø Ðof€òòApprendióó€and€òòRingóó€based€solely€on€the€fact€that€we€have€jury€sentencing€in€capital€cases.Ð ŽÞ ÐÌà  àA€disparity€of€views€exists€as€to€whether€the€trial€judge€can€decide€issues€which€involve€anÐ Zª Ðexamination€of€the€underlying€facts€of€a€prior€conviction.€€On€remand€from€the€United€Ô#cdddÔStatesÐ @ ÐSupreme€Court,€the€Arizona€Supreme€Court€held€that€any€additional€factual€findings€necessary€Ô#ddcdÔforÐ &v Ðapplication€of€the€prior€violent€felony€aggravator,€ð ðbeyond€the€bare€fact€that€a€prior€convictionÐ  \ Ðexists,ðð€must€be€made€by€a€jury.€€òòArizona€v.€Ringóó,€65€P.3d€915,€939€(Ariz.€2003).€€However,€someÐ òB Ðstates€have€interpreted€the€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€holding€in€òòRingóó€to€allow€a€trial€judge€toÐ Ø( Ðdetermine€factual€issues€relating€to€aggravating€circumstances€which€involve€prior€convictions.€€òòSeeóóÐ ¾ ÐòòBelcher€v.€Stateóó,€851€So.€2d€678,€685€(Fla.€2003)€(concluding€òòRingóó€did€not€disturb€the€holding€inÐ ¤ô ÐòòApprendióó,€which€exempted€prior€convictions€from€facts€required€to€be€submitted€to€a€jury),€òòcert.Ð Š Ú Ðdocketedóó,€No.€03„6522€(U.S.€Sept.€24,€2003);€òòBlackwelder€v.€Stateóó,€851€So.€2d€650,€654€(Fla.€2003)Ð p!À  Ð(noting€the€Florida€Supreme€Court€had€previously€rejected€claims€under€òòApprendióó€and€òòRingóóÐ V"¦! Ðconcerning€the€prior€felony€conviction€aggravator);€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€97€S.W.3d€462,€474€(Mo.)Ð <#Œ" Ð(holding€that€a€trial€judge€may€determine€as€a€matter€of€law€whether€a€defendantððs€prior€convictionÐ "$r# Ðinvolved€ð ðserious€assaultive€behaviorðð€as€an€element€of€an€aggravating€circumstance),€òòcert.€deniedóó,Ð %X $ Ð__€U.S.€__€(2003);€òòWalter€Leroy€Moody,€Jr.€v.€Stateóó,€No.€CR„96„0994,€2003€Ala.€Crim.€App.€LEXISÐ î%>!% Ð90,€at€**182„83€(Ala.€Crim.€App.€Apr.€18,€2003)€(holding€òòApprendióó€and€òòRingóó€did€not€prohibit€a€trialÐ Ô&$"& Ðjudge€from€finding€that€a€defendant€had€a€prior€capital€conviction€or€prior€violent€felony€convictionÐ º' #' Ðas€an€aggravating€circumstance),€òòcert.€filedóó€(Ala.€Apr.€30,€2003);€òòCalvin€L.€Stallworth€v.€Stateóó,€No.Ð  (ð#( ÐCR„98„0366,€2003€Ala.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€21,€at€*21€(Ala.€Crim.€App.€Jan.€31,€2003)€(concludingÐ †)Ö$) Ða€trial€judge€may€determine€whether€a€defendant€was€under€a€sentence€of€imprisonment€when€heÐ l*¼%* Ðcommitted€the€capital€offense),€òòcert.€deniedóó€(Ala.€2003).Ð R+¢&+ ÐÐ 8,ˆ', Ðà  àTo€the€extent€that€any€of€these€holdings€of€our€sister€states€might€indicate€that€a€trial€judgeÐ ° Ðin€a€capital€case€may€make€all€findings€regarding€the€underlying€facts€of€prior€convictions€uponÐ –æ Ðwhich€the€application€of€an€aggravating€circumstance€depends,€we€note€that€issue€has€not€beenÐ |Ì Ðdefinitively€decided€by€the€United€States€Supreme€Court.€€However,€òòApprendióó€requires€that€anyÐ b² Ðð ðòòfactóóðð€which€increases€the€penalty€beyond€the€prescribed€statutory€maximum,€ð ðòòother€than€the€factÐ H˜ Ðof€a€prior€convictionóó,ðð€must€be€submitted€to€a€jury€and€found€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€530€U.S.Ð . ~ Ðat€490€(emphasis€added).€€Further,€òòRingóó€dictates€that€the€death€penalty€is€a€penalty€beyond€theÐ  d Ðprescribed€statutory€maximum.€€536€U.S.€at€603„04.€€In€regard€to€Tennesseeððs€prior€violent€felonyÐ ú J Ðaggravating€circumstance,€òòSimsóó€authorizes€the€examination€of€the€underlying€òòfactsóó€in€order€toÐ à 0 Ðdetermine€whether€the€prior€felonies€were€or€were€not,€in€fact,€òòviolentóó.€€45€S.W.3d€at€11„12.€€WhenÐ Æ   Ða€trial€judge€examines€the€underlying€facts,€factually€determines€that€a€prior€offense€involvedÐ ¬ ü  Ðviolence,€and€then,€based€upon€its€finding€of€fact,€instructs€the€jury€as€a€matter€of€law€that€the€priorÐ ’â  Ðfelony€involved€violence,€it€is€arguable€that€this€usurps€the€role€of€the€jury€as€trier€of€fact.€€Therefore,Ð xÈ  Ðit€is€arguable€the€procedure€outlined€in€òòSimsóó€may€well€be€in€violation€of€òòRingóó.Ð ^®  ÐÌà  àHowever,€we€need€not€rest€our€ultimate€disposition€in€this€case€upon€such€a€holding.€€WeÐ *z  Ðfurther€realize€this€case€will€be€automatically€reviewed€by€our€state€supreme€court.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ ` ÐÔ#cdddÔAnn.€ðð€39„13„206(a)(1).€€Thus,€we€proceed€to€determine€whether€the€trial€courtððs€action€was€harmlessÐ öF ÐÔ#ddcdÔin€the€event€it€was€error.Ð Ü, ÐÌò òE.€€Harmless€Erroró óÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àIn€òòRingóó,€the€court€noted,€but€did€not€reach,€the€issue€of€harmless€error;€rather,€it€remandedÐ tÄ ÐÔ#cdddÔto€the€state€court€to€make€that€determination.€€òòRingóó,€536€U.S.€at€609€n.7.€€In€òòNeder€v.€United€Statesóó,Ð Zª ÐÔ#ddcdÔthe€Supreme€Court€held€that€constitutional€errors€can€be€harmless€except€in€a€very€limited€class€ofÐ @ ÐÔ#cdddÔcases.€€527€U.S.€1,€8,€119€S.€Ct.€1827,€144€L.€Ed.€2d€35€(1999).€€The€court€then€set€forth€the€followingÐ &v Ðexamples€of€Ô#ddcdÔthe€limited€cases€in€which€harmless€error€could€not€be€found:€òòSullivan€v.€Louisianaóó,€508Ð  \ ÐU.S.€275,€113€S.€Ct.€2078,€124€L.€Ed.€2d€182€(1993)€(defective€reasonable€doubt€instruction);Ð òB ÐòòVasquez€v.€Hilleryóó,€474€U.S.€254,€106€S.€Ct.€617,€88€L.€Ed.€2d€598€(1986)€(racial€discrimination€inÐ Ø( Ðselection€of€grand€jury);€òòWaller€v.€Georgiaóó,€467€U.S.€39,€104€S.€Ct.€2210,€81€L.€Ed.€2d€31€(1984)Ð ¾ Ð(denial€of€public€trial);€òòMcKaskle€v.€Wigginsóó,€465€U.S.€168,€104€S.€Ct.€944,€79€L.€Ed.€2d€122€(1984)Ð ¤ô Ð(denial€of€self„representation€at€trial);€òòGideon€v.€Wainwrightóó,€372€U.S.€335,€83€S.€Ct.€792,€9€L.€Ed.Ð Š Ú Ð2d€799€(1963)€(complete€denial€of€counsel);€òòTurney€v.€Ohioóó,€273€U.S.€510,€47€S.€Ct.€437,€71€L.€Ed.Ð p!À  Ð749€(1927)€(biased€trial€judge).€€òòNederóó,€527€U.S.€at€8.€€We€conclude€the€issue€in€the€case€at€bar€isÐ V"¦! Ðsubject€to€Ô#cdddÔharmless€error€analysis€as€implied€in€òòRingóó.€€In€order€to€find€harmless€constitutional€error,Ð <#Œ" Ðharmlessness€Ô#ddcdÔmust€be€shown€ð ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòChapman€v.€Californiaóó,€386€U.S.€18,Ð "$r# Ð24,€87€S.€Ct.€824,€17€L.€Ed.€2d€705€(1967).Ð %X $ ÐÌà  àDuring€the€penalty€phase,€the€jury€heard€the€detailed€and€horrid€testimony€of€the€victim€ofÐ Ô&$"& Ðthe€four€prior€offenses.€€Each€of€the€offenses€involved€the€defendantððs€use€of€a€deadly€weapon,€toÐ º' #' Ðwit:€a€firearm,€which€was€pointed€at€the€victim.€€The€defendant€in€his€testimony€at€the€penalty€phaseÐ  (ð#( Ðconceded€that€the€underlying€facts€of€these€offenses€were€correct.€€Unquestionably,€all€four€offensesÐ †)Ö$) Ðinvolved€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.€€The€jury€expressly€wrote€each€of€the€prior€four€feloniesÐ l*¼%* Ðon€its€verdict€form€and€found€that€this€aggravating€circumstance€outweighed€any€mitigatingÐ R+¢&+ Ðcircumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€We€conclude,€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€that€Ô_ÔanyÐ 8,ˆ', Ðrational€juror€would€have€found€that€the€prior€felonies€involved€violence€to€the€person.€€Accordingly,Ð ° Ðif€there€were€error€in€not€allowing€the€jury€to€make€the€determination€that€these€were€violentÐ –æ Ðfelonies,€it€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ð |Ì ÐÌò òà@. . ìàVII.€€INSTRUCTION€ON€VICTIM€IMPACT€EVIDENCEó óˆÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€penalty€phase,€the€trial€court€provided€an€instruction€to€the€juryÐ  d Ðrelative€to€its€consideration€of€victim€impact€evidence,€which€included€the€following:Ð ú J ÐÌà8  àà Ê àThe€prosecution€has€introduced€what€is€known€as€victim€impact€evidence.€€ThisÐ Æ   Ðevidence€has€been€introduced€to€show€the€financial,€emotional,€psychological,€orÐ ¬ ü  Ðphysical€effects€of€the€victimððs€death€on€the€members€of€the€victimððs€immediateÐ ’â  Ðfamily.€€You€may€consider€this€evidence€in€determining€an€appropriate€punishment.€Ð xÈ  ÐHowever,€your€consideration€must€be€limited€to€a€rational€inquiry€into€the€culpabilityÐ ^®  Ðof€the€defendant,€not€an€emotional€response€to€the€evidence.ÐD” Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà Ê àVictim€impact€evidence€is€not€the€same€as€an€aggravating€circumstance.€€ProofÐ ` Ðof€an€adverse€impact€on€the€victimððs€family€is€not€proof€of€an€aggravatingÐ öF Ðcircumstance.€€Introduction€of€this€victim€impact€evidence€in€no€way€relieves€theÐ Ü, ÐState€of€its€burden€to€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€at€least€one€aggravatingÐ Â Ðcircumstance€which€has€been€alleged.€€You€may€consider€this€victim€impact€evidenceÐ ¨ø Ðin€determining€the€appropriateness€of€the€death€penalty€only€if€you€first€find€that€theÐ ŽÞ Ðexistence€of€one€or€more€aggravating€circumstances€has€been€proven€beyond€aÐ tÄ Ðreasonable€doubt€by€evidence€independent€from€the€victim€impact€evidence,€and€findÐ Zª Ðthat€the€aggravating€circumstance(s)€found€outweigh€the€finding€of€one€or€moreÐ @ Ðmitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ð&vÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€complains€this€instruction€amounts€to€an€undue€intrusion€into€the€exclusiveÐ òB Ðprovince€of€the€jury.€€He€argues€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that€it€coerced€a€death€sentenceÐ Ø( Ðbecause€the€instruction€informed€the€jury€not€to€consider€victim€impact€evidence€unless€it€hadÐ ¾ Ðalready€found€that€death€was€the€appropriate€punishment.Ð ¤ô ÐÌà  àThis€exact€instruction€was€recommended€by€our€supreme€court€in€òòÔ_ÔNesbitÔ_Ôóó,€978€S.W.2d€at€892,€Ð p!À  Ðand€discussed€by€the€high€court€in€òòState€v.€Reidóó,€91€S.W.3d€247,€283€(Tenn.€2002).€€The€high€courtÐ V"¦! Ðspecifically€noted€in€òòReidóó€that€any€contradiction€arising€between€the€instruction€and€the€statuteÐ <#Œ" Ðinured€to€the€benefit€of€the€defendant.€€91€S.W.3d€at€283.€€This€issue€lacks€merit.Ð "$r# ÐÌò òà@NNìàVIII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€AGGRAVATING€à@@{{$ìàCIRCUMSTANCEó óˆà Ð àÐ î%>!% ÐÌà  àIn€seeking€the€death€penalty,€the€state€asserted€only€one€aggravating€circumstance,€that€theÐ º' #' Ðdefendant€ð ðwas€previously€convicted€of€one€(1)€or€more€felonies,€other€than€the€present€charge,Ð  (ð#( Ðwhose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„Ð †)Ö$) Ð204(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2).€€The€proof€at€the€penalty€phase€established€the€defendant€had€prior€convictions€forÐ l*¼%* Ðrobbery,€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€felony€reckless€endangerment,€and€attempted€rape,€all€arising€from€oneÐ R+¢&+ Ðincident€with€a€single€victim.€€The€jury€found€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravatingÐ 8,ˆ', Ðcircumstance€existed€and€that€it€outweighed€any€mitigating€circumstances.€€On€appeal,€the€defendantÐ ° Ðcontends€his€prior€offenses€are€not€crimes€whose€statutory€elements€necessarily€involve€the€use€ofÐ –æ Ðviolence€to€the€person,€and€the€court€may€not€look€at€the€underlying€facts€of€the€prior€convictionsÐ |Ì Ðto€determine€whether€the€felonies€involved€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.€€He€further€contendsÐ b² Ðthat€even€if€the€aggravating€circumstance€was€established,€it€did€not€outweigh€the€mitigatingÐ H˜ Ðcircumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ð . ~ ÐÌò òA.€€òòSimsóó€Holding€and€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€39„13„204(c)ó óÐ ú J ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€our€supreme€court€held€that€when€the€statutory€elements€of€a€prior€felonyÐ Æ   Ðconviction€may€be€satisfied€either€with€or€without€proof€of€violence,€then€an€examination€of€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðunderlying€facts€is€necessary€to€determine€whether€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravating€circumstance€exists.€€45Ð ’â  ÐS.W.3d€at€11„12.€€We€also€note€that€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„204(c)€was€amendedÐ xÈ  Ðin€1998,€is€applicable€to€this€case,€and€provides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð ^®  ÐÌà8  àIn€all€cases€where€the€state€relies€upon€the€aggravating€factor€that€the€defendant€wasÐ *z  Ðpreviously€convicted€of€one€(1)€or€more€felonies,€other€than€the€present€charge,Ð ` Ðwhose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person,€either€party€shallÐ öF Ðbe€permitted€to€introduce€evidence€concerning€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€theÐ Ü, Ðprior€conviction.€Such€evidence€shall€not€be€construed€to€pose€a€danger€of€creatingÐ Â Ðunfair€prejudice,€confusing€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury€and€shall€not€be€subjectÐ ¨ø Ðto€exclusion€on€the€ground€that€the€probative€value€of€such€evidence€is€outweighedÐ ŽÞ Ðby€prejudice€to€either€party.€Such€evidence€shall€be€used€by€the€jury€in€determiningÐ tÄ Ðthe€weight€to€be€accorded€the€aggravating€Ô_Ôfactor.Ô_ÔÐZªÐ Ð  ÐÌòòSeeóó€1998€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts,€ch.€915,€ðð€1.€€€Therefore,€the€defendantððs€argument€that€the€actual€factsÐ &v Ðof€the€prior€felonies€may€not€be€considered€is€without€merit.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àWith€regard€to€these€prior€felonies,€the€indictments€charged€aggravated€robbery,€especiallyÐ Ø( ÐÔ#cdddÔaggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€felony€reckless€endangerment,€and€aggravated€rape.€€The€indictments€allegedÐ ¾ Ðthat€each€of€these€offenses€was€accomplished€by€the€use€of€a€ð ðdeadly€weapon,€to€wit:€a€firearm.ðð€€TheÐ ¤ô ÐÔ#ddcdÔdefendant€pled€guilty€to€simple€robbery,€simple€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€felony€reckless€endangerment,€andÐ Š Ú Ðattempted€rape.Ð p!À  Ðò òÌB.€€Statutory€Elements€of€the€Prior€Offensesó óÐ <#Œ" ÐÔ_ÔÌà  àWe€now€proceed€to€determine€whether€the€four€prior€offenses€qualify€as€crimes€of€violence.Ð %X $ ÐOur€state€supreme€court€has€defined€ð ðviolenceðð€as€ð ðphysical€force€unlawfully€exercised€so€as€toÐ î%>!% Ðinjure,€damage,€or€abuse.ðð€€òòState€v.€Fitzóó,€19€S.W.3d€213,€217€(Tenn.€2000).Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌà  àð ðRobbery€is€the€intentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€the€person€of€another€byÐ  (ð#( Ðviolence€or€placing€the€person€in€fear.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„401(a).€€Kidnapping€is€falseÐ †)Ö$) Ðimprisonment€of€the€victim€under€circumstances€which€expose€the€victim€to€substantial€risk€ofÐ l*¼%* Ðbodily€injury.€€òòId.óó€ðð€39„13„303(a)(1).€€Felony€reckless€endangerment€is€committed€when€oneÐ R+¢&+ Ðrecklessly€places€another€person€in€imminent€danger€of€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€through€Ô_ÔtheÐ 8,ˆ', Ðuse€of€a€deadly€weapon.€€òòId.óó€ðð€39„13„103.€€Attempted€rape€is€the€attempted€unlawful€sexualÐ ° Ðpenetration€of€a€victim€accompanied€by€force€or€coercion.€€òòId.óó€ðððð€39„12„101(a)(3),€„13„503(a)(1).€Ð –æ Ðð ðForceðð€involves€ð ðcompulsion€by€the€use€of€physical€power€or€violence.ðð€€òòId.€óóðð€39„11„106(a)(12).€Ð |Ì ÐWe€conclude€that€the€statutory€elements€of€each€of€the€offenses€to€which€the€defendant€pled€guiltyÐ b² Ðmay€or€may€not€involve€the€use€of€violence,€depending€upon€the€underlying€circumstances.Ð H˜ ÐÌò òC.€€Underlying€Factsó óÐ  d ÐÌà  àDarrell€Webster,€the€victim€of€the€prior€offenses,€testified€that€all€of€the€offenses€wereÐ à 0 Ðaccomplished€through€the€defendantððs€use€of€a€gun.€€According€to€Webster,€the€defendant€pointedÐ Æ   Ða€gun€at€him€when€he€forced€him€to€surrender€control€of€the€car€and€move€from€the€driverððs€seat€toÐ ¬ ü  Ðthe€passengerððs€seat.€€The€defendant€spun€the€barrel€of€the€gun,€pointed€it€at€the€victimððs€head,€andÐ ’â  Ðpulled€the€trigger€in€ð ðRussian€Rouletteðð€fashion.€€At€some€point€during€the€five„hour€encounter,€theÐ xÈ  Ðgun„wielding€defendant€forced€Webster€to€perform€oral€sex€upon€him.€€Additionally,€the€defendantÐ ^®  Ðand€his€accomplice€engaged€in€conversation€indicating€that€they€were€going€to€kill€Webster€andÐ D”  Ðdiscussed€where€they€could€dump€his€body.€€Pointing€a€gun€at€a€victim€is€a€violent€act.€€òòSee€òòóóState€v.Ð *z  ÐAllenóó,€69€S.W.3d€181,€186€(Tenn.€2002).€€In€determining€whether€an€aggravating€circumstance€wasÐ ` Ðestablished€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€we€review€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€state.€Ð öF ÐòòÔ_ÔSuttlesÔ_Ôóó,€30€S.W.3d€at€262.€€Without€question,€Websterððs€testimony€was€sufficient€to€establish€thatÐ Ü, Ðthe€defendant€engaged€in€physical€force€so€as€to€abuse€the€victim€with€regard€to€each€of€theseÐ Â Ðoffenses.€€òòSee€id.óó€€Thus,€the€stateððs€evidence€was€sufficient€to€establish€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravatingÐ ¨ø Ðcircumstance.€€òòSeeóó€Ô‡Xz[XXXz[ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÔ#†Xz[XXXz[ÛQ#Ô€39„13„204(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2).Ð ŽÞ ÐÌò òD.€€Weighing€of€Aggravating€and€Mitigating€Circumstancesó óÐ Zª ÐÌà  àWe€further€reject€the€defendantððs€contention€that€the€aggravating€circumstance€did€notÐ &v Ðoutweigh€the€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€This€was€a€question€for€the€jury,Ð  \ Ðand€we€conclude€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€juryððs€determination.Ð òB ÐÌò òà@QQìàIX.€€VERDICT€FORM€AS€TO€AGGRAVATING€CIRCUMSTANCE€ˆÐ ¾ ÐÌó óà  àThe€jury€was€instructed€on€the€statutory€aggravating€circumstance€as€follows:€Ð Š Ú ÐÌà8  àThat€the€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies,€other€than€theÐ V"¦! Ðpresent€charge,€the€statutory€elements€of€which€involved€the€use€of€violence€to€theÐ <#Œ" Ðperson.€€The€state€is€relying€upon€the€crimes€of€Robbery,€Ô_ÔKidnappingÔ_Ô,€RecklessÐ "$r# ÐEndangerment,€and€Attempted€Rape,€which€are€felonies,€the€statutory€elements€ofÐ %X $ Ðwhich€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.Ðî%>!%Ð Ð  ÐÌòòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2).€€The€verdict€form€returned€by€the€jury€during€the€penaltyÐ º' #' Ðphase€of€the€defendantððs€trial€reads€as€follows:Ð  (ð#( ÐÌÌÌÐ 8,ˆ', Ðà8  ààHàˆà0ÊÐ Ð àà  àà@ee!ìÊÐ ÊÐ àPUNISHMENT€OF€DEATHˆÐ ° ÐÌà8  àà Ê à(1)€We,€the€jury,€unanimously€find€the€following€listed€statutory€aggravatingÐ |Ì Ðcircumstance€or€circumstances:Ðb²Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà Ê à(Here€list€the€statutory€aggravating€circumstance€or€circumstances€so€found,Ð . ~ Ðwhich€òòmust€be€limitedóó€to€those€enumerated€for€your€consideration€by€the€court€inÐ  d Ðthese€instructions.)Ðú JÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Robbery€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÐÆ  Ð Ð  Ðà8  à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô_ÔKidnappingÔ_Ô€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð¬ ü Ð Ð  Ðà8  à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Reckless€endangerment€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð’â Ð Ð  Ðà8  à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Attempted€rape€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÐxÈ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àóó.€.€.ÐD” Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€this€constitutes€an€incomplete€and€erroneous€verdict€becauseÐ ` Ð(1)€none€of€these€four€crimes€are€listed€as€an€aggravating€circumstance,€and€(2)€the€jury€did€not€findÐ öF Ðthat€the€crimes€were€those€whose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.€TheÐ Ü, Ðdefendant€has€waived€his€right€to€challenge€this€issue€on€appeal€as€he€failed€to€object€to€the€juryððsÐ Â Ðverdict€and€failed€to€raise€the€issue€in€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€òòóóòòState€v.€Ô_ÔMcKinneyÔ_Ôóó,€74€S.W.3d€291,Ð ¨ø Ð303€n.5€(Tenn.€2002).€€Regardless,€we€elect€to€address€the€merits€of€this€issue€based€upon€the€recordÐ ŽÞ Ðbefore€us.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  à€The€juryððs€verdict€need€not€be€a€verbatim€statement€of€the€aggravating€circumstance€reliedÐ @ Ðupon€by€the€state.€€òòóóòòState€v.€Jerry€Ray€Davidsonóó,€___€S.W.3d€___,€___,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_Ô€Tenn.€LEXIS€1007,€atÐ &v Ð**43„44€(Tenn.€Oct.€20,€2003).€€A€verdict€is€valid€if€it€clearly€indicates€that€the€jury€found€theÐ  \ Ðelements€of€the€aggravating€circumstance€or€circumstances€relied€upon€by€the€prosecution;€òòóótheÐ òB Ðaggravating€circumstances€found€are€those€clearly€authorized€by€statute;€and€the€verdict€is€sufficientÐ Ø( Ðto€permit€effective€appellate€review€of€the€sentence.€€òòÔ_ÔMcKinneyÔ_Ôóó,€74€S.W.3d€at€òòóó303.òòòòóóóóÐ ¾ ÐÌà  àThe€juryððs€verdict€in€the€case€under€review€is€similar€to€the€verdict€form€returned€by€the€juryÐ Š Ú Ðin€òòÔ_ÔMcKinneyÔ_Ôóó,€where€the€state€also€relied€solely€upon€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravating€circumstance.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.€Ð p!À  ÐóóIn€òòÔ_ÔMcKinneyÔ_Ôóó,€the€verdict€form€read,€in€part,€ð ðWe,€the€jury,€unanimously€find€the€following€listedÐ V"¦! Ðstatutory€aggravating€circumstance€or€circumstances:€aggravated€robbery.ðð€€òòId.€€óóòòóóOur€supreme€courtÐ <#Œ" Ðheld€the€verdict€was€sufficient.€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€instant€case,€like€òòÔ_ÔMcKinneyÔ_Ôóó,€only€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravatingÐ "$r# Ðcircumstance€was€charged€to€the€jury;€the€trial€courtððs€instruction€tracked€the€statutory€language;€andÐ %X $ Ðthe€verdict€specifically€cited€the€prior€offenses€relied€upon€by€the€state€and€instructed€by€the€court.€Ð î%>!% ÐòòóóMoreover,€in€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€trial€court€questioned€the€jury€to€clarify€its€intent,€stating:Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌà8  à€.€.€.[Ô_ÔY]ouÔ_Ô€have€written€in€there:Р(ð#(Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8ÊÐ Ð àð ðRobbery,€Ô_ÔKidnappingÔ_Ô,€Reckless€Endangerment,€and€Attempted€Rape,ððÐ l*¼%* Ðwhich,€for€the€record,€are€the€four€offenses€listed€on€the€charge€as€theÐ R+¢&+ Ðaggravating€circumstance,€although€you€have€not€written€the€entireÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ#adddÔlanguage€as€reflected€on€the€charge,€an€aggravating€circumstance.€€I€assumeÐ ° ÐÔ#ddadÔthat€in€writing€these€four€offenses€on€here€you€have€determined€that€theÐ –æ Ðaggravating€circumstance,€as€written€on€the€charge,€has€been€provenÐ |Ì Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Is€that€correct?Ðb²ÊÊ ÐÌThe€jury€foreman€responded€in€the€affirmative.€€We€conclude€that€the€jury€form€in€this€case€wasÐ . ~ Ðclear€and€unequivocal.€€The€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€claim.Ð  d ÐÌò òà@ää ìàX.€€CONSTITUTIONALITY€OF€THE€TENNESSEE€DEATH€PENALTY€SCHEMEˆÐ à 0 ÐÌó óà  àThe€defendant€argues€Tennesseeððs€death€penalty€statutes€are€unconstitutional€and€the€deathÐ ¬ ü  Ðpenalty€is€imposed€capriciously€and€arbitrarily.€€The€Tennessee€courts€have€repeatedly€upheld€theÐ ’â  Ðconstitutionality€of€our€stateððs€death€penalty€statutes.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.,óó€òòReidóó,€91€S.W.3d€at€312„14;€òòState€v.Ð xÈ  ÐÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ôóó,€919€S.W.2d€573,€582€(Tenn.€1995),€òòcert.€denied,óó€519€U.S.€847€(1996).€€Further,€the€courtsÐ ^®  Ðof€our€state€have€rejected€the€defendantððs€arguments€that€Tennesseeððs€procedures€for€implementingÐ D”  Ðthe€death€penalty€allow€it€to€be€imposed€capriciously€and€arbitrarily.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€óóòòÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ôóó,€919€S.W.2dÐ *z  Ðat€582;€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔBrimmerÔ_Ôóó,€876€S.W.2d€75,€87€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€denied,€óó513€U.S.€1020€(1994);€òòState€v.Ð ` ÐÔ_ÔCazesÔ_Ôóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€268,€270„71€(Tenn.€1994),€òòcert.€denied,€óó513€U.S.€1086€(1995);€òòState€v.Ð öF ÐHarrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€77€(Tenn.€1992),€òòcert.€denied,€óó507€U.S.€954€(1993);€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€768Ð Ü, ÐS.W.2d€239,€250„52€(Tenn.€1989),€òòcert.€denied,€óó497€U.S.€1031€(1990).Ð Â ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€òòóóthe€statutory€aggravating€circumstances€set€forth€in€Tennessee€CodeÐ ŽÞ ÐAnnotated€section€39-2-203(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2),€(5),€(6),€and€(7)€have€been€so€broadly€interpreted€that€they€fail€toÐ tÄ Ðprovide€a€ð ðmeaningful€basisðð€for€narrowing€the€population€of€those€convicted€of€first€degree€murderÐ Zª Ðto€those€eligible€for€the€sentence€of€death.€€However,€factors€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(5),€(6)€and€(7)€do€not€pertain€to€thisÐ @ Ðcase.€€Further,€our€courts€have€previously€concluded€that€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravating€circumstanceÐ &v Ðprovides€a€meaningful€basis€for€narrowing€the€class€of€death€eligible€defendants.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€óóòòState€v.Ð  \ ÐAustinóó,€87€S.W.3d€447€app.€at€487€(Tenn.€2002),€òòcert.€denied,€óó___€U.S.€___€(2003);€òòÔ_ÔVannÔ_Ôóó,€976Ð òB ÐS.W.2d€at€117òòóó;€òòState€v.€Keenóó,€926€S.W.2d€727,€742€(Tenn.€1994).€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€Ð Ø( ÐÌà@ ìàò òXI.€€COMPARATIVE€PROPORTIONALITY€REVIEWó óˆÐ ¤ô Ðà  àÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€his€death€sentence€is€disproportionate€to€the€penalty€imposed€inÐ p!À  Ðsimilar€cases.€€It€is€this€courtððs€statutory€responsibility€to€make€this€proportionality€determination,€Ð V"¦! ÐÔ#bdddÔconsidering€ð ðboth€the€nature€of€the€crime€and€the€defendant.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€òòóóðð€39„13„206(c)(1)(D);Ð <#Œ" ÐòòÔ#ddbdÔState€v.€Ô_ÔGodseyÔ_Ôóó,€60€S.W.3d€759,€781€(Tenn.€2001)òòóó.òòóó€€The€comparative€proportionality€review€isÐ "$r# Ðdesigned€to€identify€aberrant,€arbitrary,€or€capricious€sentencing€by€determining€whether€the€deathÐ %X $ Ðpenalty€in€a€given€case€is€disproportionate€to€the€punishment€imposed€on€others€convicted€of€similarÐ î%>!% Ðcrimes.€€òòState€v.€Blandóó,€958€S.W.2d€651,€665€(Tenn.€1997).€€òòóóA€sentence€is€disproportionate€only€ifÐ Ô&$"& Ðit€is€ð ðplainly€lacking€in€circumstances€consistent€with€those€in€cases€where€the€death€penalty€hasÐ º' #' Ðbeen€imposed.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€668.òòÐ  (ð#( ЀóóòòóóÐ †)Ö$) Ðà  àIn€conducting€our€proportionality€review,€we€compare€the€present€case€with€cases€involvingÐ l*¼%* Ðsimilar€defendants€and€similar€crimes.€€òòTerry€v.€Stateóó,€46€S.W.3d€147,€163„64€(Tenn.€2001).€€WeÐ R+¢&+ Ðselect€only€from€those€cases€in€which€a€capital€sentencing€hearing€was€actually€conducted.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ 8,ˆ', Ðv.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,€570€(Tenn.€2000).òòóóòòóó€€We€begin€with€the€presumption€that€the€sentenceÐ ° Ðof€death€is€proportionate€with€the€crime€of€first€degree€murder.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Powersóó,€101€S.W.3dÐ –æ Ð383,€403€(Tenn.€2003)€(citing€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€976€S.W.2d€121,€135€(Tenn.€1998)).Ð |Ì ÐÌà  àRegarding€the€circumstances€of€the€crime€itself,€numerous€factors€are€considered,€including:Ð H˜ Ð(1)€the€means€of€death;€(2)€the€manner€of€death;€(3)€the€motivation€for€the€killing;€(4)€the€place€ofÐ . ~ Ðdeath;€(5)€the€victimððs€age,€physical€condition,€and€psychological€condition;€(6)€the€absence€orÐ  d Ðpresence€of€provocation;€(7)€the€absence€or€presence€of€premeditation;€(8)€the€absence€or€presenceÐ ú J Ðof€justification;€and€(9)€the€injury€to€and€effect€on€non„decedent€victims.€€òòStoutóó,€46€S.W.3d€at€706.€Ð à 0 ÐWe€also€consider€numerous€factors€regarding€the€defendant,€including:€(1)€prior€criminal€record;€(2)Ð Æ   Ðage,€race,€and€gender;€(3)€mental,€emotional,€and€physical€condition;€(4)€role€in€the€murder;€(5)Ð ¬ ü  Ðcooperation€with€authorities;€(6)€remorse;€(7)€knowledge€of€the€victimððs€helplessness;€and€(8)Ð ’â  Ðpotential€for€rehabilitation.€€òòSeeóó€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€667.€€Ð xÈ  ÐÌà  àIn€completing€our€review,€we€remain€cognizant€of€the€fact€that€ð ðno€two€cases€involveÐ D”  ÐÔ#bdddÔidentical€circumstances.ðð€€òòTerryóó,€46€S.W.3d€at€164.€€Likewise,€a€death€sentence€is€not€disproportionateÐ *z  ÐÔ#ddbdÔmerely€because€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€were€similar€to€those€of€a€crime€for€which€anotherÐ ` Ðdefendant€received€a€life€sentence.€€òòHallóó,€976€S.W.2d€at€135.€€Our€function€is€not€to€limit€ourÐ öF Ðcomparison€to€those€cases€where€a€death€sentence€ð ðis€perfectly€symmetrical,ðð€but€rather,€ourÐ Ü, Ðobjective€is€only€ð ðto€identify€and€to€invalidate€the€aberrant€death€sentence.ðð€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€atÐ Â Ð665.òòóóÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€circumstances€surrounding€the€case€under€review,€in€light€of€the€relevant€comparativeÐ tÄ Ðfactors,€are€that€the€twenty„year„old€defendant€directed€the€twenty„seven„year„old€victim€to€aÐ Zª Ðsecluded,€grassy€area€behind€an€apartment€complex.€€The€defendant,€upset€because€the€victim€hadÐ @ Ðnot€repaid€a€small€debt,€held€a€gun€to€the€victimððs€head€and€told€the€victim€to€open€his€mouth.€€AsÐ &v Ðthe€victim€began€to€back€away,€the€defendant,€without€provocation€or€justification,€Ô_ÔpremeditatedlyÔ_ÔÐ  \ Ðshot€the€unarmed,€helpless,€retreating€victim€in€the€head.€€In€order€to€ensure€the€victim€was€dead,Ð òB Ðthe€defendant€then€Ô#cdddÔplaced€the€gun€within€an€inch€of€the€victimððs€head€and€shot€him€again.€€He€thenÐ Ø( Ðretrieved€the€victimððs€Ô#ddcdÔcar€keys€from€the€victimððs€body€and€escaped€in€the€victimððs€car.€€After€theÐ ¾ Ðmurder,€the€defendant€said€the€victim€owed€him€fifteen€dollars€and€needed€to€ð ðstart€respectingðð€him.€Ð ¤ô ÐSubsequently,€the€defendant€fled€from€officers€and€misrepresented€that€he€would€turn€himself€in.€Ð Š Ú ÐHe€was€later€arrested.€Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àIn€1997,€the€defendant€pled€guilty€to€robbery,€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€felony€reckless€endangerment,€andÐ <#Œ" Ðattempted€rape€for€crimes€he€committed€in€1995€when€he€was€fifteen€years€old.€All€offensesÐ "$r# Ðinvolved€the€use€of€a€firearm€and€arose€from€a€single€incident€during€which€the€defendant€and€anÐ %X $ Ðaccomplice€Ô_ÔkidnappedÔ_Ô€the€victim.€€During€the€episode,€the€defendant€held€a€gun€to€the€victimððs€head,Ð î%>!% Ðspinning€the€chamber€and€pulling€the€trigger€in€Russian€Roulette€fashion.€€The€defendant€discussedÐ Ô&$"& Ðplans€to€ð ðput€a€capðð€in€the€victim€and€discussed€where€the€body€should€be€discarded.€€The€defendant,Ð º' #' Ðwhile€holding€the€gun,€ordered€the€victim€to€perform€oral€sex€upon€him.€€The€ordeal,€which€lastedÐ  (ð#( Ðapproximately€five€hours,€culminated€with€the€victimððs€fortuitous€escape.Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌà  àEvidence€presented€at€the€sentencing€phase€established€the€defendantððs€parents€were€lovingÐ R+¢&+ Ðand€supportive.€€Despite€his€apparently€secure€home€life,€the€defendant€was€unable€to€obey€familyÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ_Ôrules€and€moved€out€of€his€parentsðð€home.€€The€defendant€has€a€small€daughter€who€currently€residesÐ ° Ðwith€his€parents.€€At€sentencing,€the€defendant€expressed€remorse€for€the€murder.Ð –æ ÐÌà  àÔ‡Xz[XXXz[ÔOur€supreme€court€has€upheld€the€death€penalty€in€numerous€cases€where€a€defendant€shotÐ b² Ðan€unarmed€victim€from€close€range€without€provocation.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòMcKinneyóó,€74€S.W.3d€at€299Ð H˜ Ð(defendant€shot€unarmed€victim€in€back€of€neck);€òòStoutóó,€46€S.W.3d€at€707€(defendant€shot€victimÐ . ~ Ðin€head);€Ô#†Xz[XXXz[L#ÔÔ‡Xz[XXXz[ÔòòSimsóó,€45€S.W.3d€at€6€(defendant€shot€unarmed€victim€in€back€of€head);€òòState€v.€Hendersonóó,Ð  d Ð24€S.W.3d€307,€310€(Tenn.€2000)€(defendant€shot€deputy€sheriff€in€back€of€head€at€ð ðpoint„blankÐ ú J Ðrangeðð);€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€670€(defendant€shot€unarmed,€ð ðunresisting,€retreating€victimðð).òòóóÔ#†Xz[XXXz[ý‘#ÔÐ à 0 ÐÌà  àOur€review€of€similar€cases€further€reveals€our€state€courts€have€often€upheld€death€sentencesÐ ¬ ü  Ðbased€solely€on€the€aggravating€circumstance€of€a€prior€violent€felony€conviction€pursuant€toÐ ’â  ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„204(i)(2).€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòMcKinneyóó,€74€S.W.3d€at€301€(oneÐ xÈ  Ðprior€violent€felony€conviction€for€aggravated€robbery);€òòState€v.€Chalmersóó,€28€S.W.3d€913,€916Ð ^®  Ð(Tenn.€2000)€(prior€violent€felony€convictions€for€attempted€especially€aggravated€robbery€andÐ D”  Ðattempted€first€degree€murder);€òòState€v.€Keoughóó,€18€S.W.3d€175,€180€(Tenn.€2000)€(prior€violentÐ *z  Ðfelony€convictions€for€assault€to€commit€voluntary€manslaughter€and€manslaughter);òòóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,Ð ` Ð993€S.W.2d€6,€10€(Tenn.€1999)€(prior€violent€felony€convictions€for€robbery€and€first€degreeÐ öF Ðmurder).€€Moreover,€the€prior€violent€felony€aggravator€is€ð ðmore€qualitatively€persuasive€andÐ Ü, Ðobjectively€reliableðð€than€other€aggravating€circumstances.€€òòMcKinneyóó,€74€S.W.3d€at€313€(quotingÐ Â ÐòòState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€238,€261€(Tenn.€1993)).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€defendantððs€primary€contention€is€that€his€death€sentence€is€disproportionate€becauseÐ tÄ Ðhe€was€a€fifteen„year„old€juvenile€at€the€time€of€his€prior€offenses,€and,€therefore,€the€prior€violentÐ Zª Ðfelony€aggravator€cannot€outweigh€the€mitigating€circumstances.€€In€òòState€v.€Christopher€A.€Davisóó,Ð @ ÐNo.€M2001„01866„CCA„R3„DD,€2003€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€250,€at€*57€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð &v ÐÔ#cdddÔMar.€25,€2003,€at€Nashville),€òòappeal€docketedóó,€No.€M2001„01866„SC„DDT„DD€(Tenn.€2003),€theÐ  \ Ðdefendant€sought€Ô#ddcdÔto€prevent€the€state€from€relying€upon€a€murder€he€committed€at€the€age€ofÐ òB Ðseventeen€in€order€to€establish€the€prior€violent€felony€aggravating€circumstance.€€Davis€argued€thatÐ Ø( Ðjust€as€a€juvenile€transferred€to€criminal€court€is€ineligible€for€the€death€penalty,€an€offenseÐ ¾ Ðcommitted€by€a€juvenile€could€not€support€an€€aggravating€circumstance€in€a€subsequent€capital€case.€Ð ¤ô ÐòòId.óó€€This€court€recognized€that€while€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€37„1„134(a)€renders€aÐ Š Ú Ðjuvenile€transferred€to€criminal€court€and€tried€as€an€adult€ineligible€for€the€sentence€of€death,€it€doesÐ p!À  Ðnot€preclude€a€transferred€juvenileððs€conviction€in€criminal€or€circuit€court€from€forming€the€basisÐ V"¦! Ðfor€an€aggravating€circumstance.€òò€Id.óó€at€*58.€€Additionally,€the€court€noted€that€the€(i)(2)€aggravatorÐ <#Œ" Ðdoes€not€limit€prior€violent€felonies€to€convictions€for€crimes€committed€by€adults.€€òòId.óó€€Accordingly,Ð "$r# Ðthe€fact€that€the€defendant€was€a€juvenile€at€the€time€the€prior€felonies€were€committed€isÐ %X $ Ðinsufficient,€standing€alone,€to€render€his€sentence€of€death€disproportionate.Ð î%>!% Ðà  àÌà  àFurther,€in€addition€to€òòChristopher€A.€Davisóó,€our€state€courts€have€upheld€other€deathÐ º' #' Ðsentences€based€on€the€prior€violent€felony€aggravating€circumstance€supported€by€at€least€oneÐ  (ð#( ÐÔ#bdddÔfelony€committed€when€the€defendant€was€a€juvenile.€€òòSeeóó€òòRichard€Odomóó,€Ô#ddbdÔ2002€Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð †)Ö$) ÐLEXIS€871,€at€*127€òòóó(murder€committed€when€defendant€was€seventeen);€òòState€v.€Colemanóó,€619Ð l*¼%* ÐS.W.2d€112,€115€(Tenn.€1981)€(per€information€on€Rule€12€Database,€defendant€was€sixteen€whenÐ R+¢&+ Ðhe€committed€assault€with€intent€to€commit€robbery€with€a€deadly€weapon).€€The€defendant€in€Ô_ÔtheÐ 8,ˆ', Ðinstant€case€attempts€to€distinguish€his€circumstances€on€the€basis€that€he€was€only€fifteen€years€oldÐ ° Ðand,€therefore,€less€culpable€than€an€older€juvenile,€when€he€committed€the€prior€violent€felonies.€Ð –æ ÐThe€jury€was€instructed€that€the€defendantððs€age€at€the€time€of€the€commission€of€the€prior€offensesÐ |Ì Ðcould€be€considered€a€mitigating€circumstance.€€Nevertheless,€the€jury€concluded€the€aggravatingÐ b² Ðcircumstance€outweighed€the€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€In€conductingÐ H˜ Ðour€review,€we€conclude€the€defendantððs€age€at€the€time€of€the€prior€offenses€does€not€diminish€hisÐ . ~ Ðculpability€to€a€degree€that€his€death€sentence€is€disproportionate.Ð  d ÐÌà  àOur€review€of€similar€cases€and€defendants€reveals€that€the€sentence€of€death€imposed€uponÐ à 0 Ðthe€defendant€is€proportionate€to€the€penalty€imposed€in€those€cases.€€We€have€Ô#cdddÔconsidered€the€entireÐ Æ   Ðrecord€and€conclude€the€sentence€of€death€was€not€imposed€arbitrarily;€Ô#ddcdÔ€the€evidence€supports€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðfinding€of€the€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)(2)€aggravating€circumstance;€the€evidence€supports€the€juryððs€finding€that€theÐ ’â  Ðaggravating€circumstance€outweighs€the€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt;€andÐ xÈ  Ðthe€sentence€is€not€excessive€or€disproportionate.Ð ^®  ÐÌÌà@GG%ìàò òCONCLUSIONó óˆÐ ` ÐÌà  àAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€premeditated€first€degree€murderÐ Ü, Ðconviction€and€the€sentence€of€death.Ð Â ÐÌÌÌà  àà Ê àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð Zª Ðóóà  àà Ê àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGE