ÿWPCñ Ѷ.)l?»î05ÍÙ€‘Ÿ`Zð+qYžºRô vÓ¹qê Zn$¶7 ªð4éfÊÈ·>ž$Ýûû”¢uÖ²Ûi.›XÆ–ÝÔ.¿o;>Ø=$iùÊ|5$!üâ‰.î=†­Ä¯M%?Äžî¤ÖS0—¤­Þ{û …{üü]œ'&$®¾éu´ÑUºzg0ˆrÙà»^gÔobüO‡Mw¾o¯\·ƒ¸ómî‹€DñÑøúÒ‘‡FY«ž¼‚²gXàì1olêŽyúÉVûí+'‘ã³ÕmÓ*Á Gþ¯nןž aø­Ji}ÒæÞkQ6–^<­oÒ®ªZÃpv2ZGª\nƒ=ÀÉÆîõb§j@¼úYóß©3WBTPøkjýjçžaÖ*Á}bùDÆÆ~TmYÓ¤þ5âÖ‹êØ–3ñ¦›YÚ5Y™jït¯odO¼vÛ¨ ömLë3ôË1ã'NfúÓΤàN͘ðjâ{šRÅi§¥ŒÊ¢gÁk¢Ëâ±*Ó_x¼vÒkh5Í$cçÆ•°-7‹@L÷Š,Þ_µ# 7HÕkf·¬ëã¦éûzÖŒÕÀWŒ"F@W´`*æÑú*ÖF-s-½Ðwÿd1*z ~ÓæÙ˜œ*# LU:W %‘ 0(—w@¿4ÿ"*Ë@ 0l  0Dw AQ») U:5 (o o ,— — — — — — — — — — — — — — BÃÆà 0D¦ 0Dê 0D.. D/rr B¡ D3¾˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLàÏ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡ D P DPDPDDÓ€Ìqæ$àrR op3|x Ñ X Ñ ÁÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ` àWe€note€that€the€words€typed€on€the€face€of€True€Bill€are€ð ðConspiracy€to€Ð X Ðà  àCommit€Especially€Aggravated€Robberyðð.€€A€review€of€the€reverse€page€indicatesÏà  àthat€the€instrument€actually€charges€the€elements€of€conspiracy€to€commit€¼à  àaggravated€robbery.€€No€issue€about€this€variance€has€been€raised.ÌÓ  Ó2((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó!"#$&Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ Ý ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XþXXXÔÔ€XXþÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XþXÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€9,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô8ÄôXXþÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ` àDefendantððs€one„paragraph€argument€does€contain€a€reference€to€Tenn.€Ð X Ðà  àCode€à ` àAnn.€ðð39„11„201(d),€which€provides€ð ðEvidence€produced€at€trial,€whether€Ð >æ Ðà  àpresented€on€direct€or€cross„examination€of€state€or€defense€witness,€may€be€¼à  àutilized€by€either€party.ðð€€In€our€view,€however,€this€code€section€is€not€relevant€toÏà  àthe€issue€being€argued.ÌÓ  ÓÌ8 "Ý ƒ þÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ` àDefendantððs€one„paragraph€argument€does€contain€a€reference€to€Tenn.€Ð X Ðà  àCode€à ` àAnn.€ðð39„11„201(d),€which€provides€ð ðEvidence€produced€at€trial,€whether€Ð Hð Ðà  àpresented€on€direct€or€cross„examination€of€state€or€defense€witness,€may€be€¼à  àutilized€by€either€party.ðð€€In€our€view,€however,€this€code€section€is€not€relevant€toÏà  àthe€issue€being€argued.ÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌ dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ݛҼ°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  ÓÑ€ /NÑññœßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrß›ññIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ ° ÐÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌMARCH€1998€SESSIONÌÓ~ÓÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à  àà t àà Ì à)€€C.C.A.€03C01„9706„CR„00202Ð à 0 Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€HAMILTON€COUNTYÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)Ìà  àà l àAppellee,à  àà t àà Ì à)€€Hon.€Steven€Bevil,€Judge€Ð ’â  Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)Ìvs.à  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€€(First€Degree€Murder€andÐ ^®  Ðà  àà l àà Ä à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€€€Conspiracy€to€Commit€AggravatedÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€€€€Robbery)Ìà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€€No.€202670€&€202672ÌMILTON€LEE€COOPER,à  àà t àà Ì à)Ð öF Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)Ìà  àà l àAppellant.à  àà t àà Ì à)Ð Â ÐÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à  àà t àà Ì àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð Zª ÐÌROBERT€N.€MEEKSà  àà t àà Ì àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ &v ÐP.O.€Box€8086à Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ  \ ÐChattanooga,€TN€37414à  àà t àà Ì àà $ àà | àà Ô àÐ òB Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àMICHAEL€J.€FAHEY,€IIÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àNashville,€TN€37243„0493Ìà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àà $ àÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àWILLIAM€H.€COX,€IIIÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àDAVID€W.€DENNYÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à600€Market€Street€„€Courts€Bldg.Ìà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àChattanooga,€TN€37402Ìà  àÌà  àÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àà $ àÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:_______________ÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌCORNELIA€A.€CLARKÌSpecial€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌññÑ /NÑÑX°ÑÑ  ÑÑ /NÑÑ X ÑÑ  ÑññÓ  ÓòòOPINIONÐ ~;Î6= ÐÑ /NÑÑX°ÑÑ  ÑññÑ /NÑÑX°ÑÑ  ÑññóóÓ  ÓÌÓÓà  àDefendant€appeals€as€of€right€his€convictions€for€first€degree€felonyÏmurder€and€conspiracy€to€commit€aggravated€robbery.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€raises€eight€issuesÐ  ² Ðon€appeal:€(1)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€members€of€theÏtelevision€media€to€broadcast€video€of€the€defendant€trying€on€a€jacketÏallegedly€used€in€the€robbery,€and€in€failing€thereafter€to€sequester€the€juryÏwhen€requested€to€do€so;€(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€theÏprosecution€to€initiate€a€new€line€of€questioning€of€a€prosecution€witness€onÏredirect€examination;€(3)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€theÏprosecution€to€lead€its€witnesses€and€refresh€their€memories€as€to€eventsÏcritical€to€the€prosecutionððs€case;€(4)€whether€the€trial€court€improperlyÏinstructed€the€jury€as€to€confessions;€(5)€whether€the€indictment€for€conspiracyÏis€void;€(6)€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€defendantððs€convictionÏof€felony€murder;€(7)€whether€there€was€improper€contact€between€a€memberÏof€the€jury€and€other€individuals€sufficient€to€taint€the€proceedings;€and€(8)Ïwhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€introduction€of€evidence€of€theÏdefendantððs€alleged€involvement€in€theft€or€attempted€theft€earlier€on€the€sameÏday€as€the€robbery.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìà  àShortly€before€11:00€p.m.€on€April€13,€1994,€Edward€Ray€Horner€wasÏworking€as€a€clerk€at€the€Golden€Gallon€convenience€store€in€Red€Bank.€€TwoÏmen€entered€the€store.€€One€man€wore€an€athletic€starter€jacket€and€white€cap.ÏThe€other€man,€wearing€a€bulky€jacket€and€a€ski€mask,€engaged€in€a€struggleÏwith€Mr.€Horner€which€resulted€in€his€receiving€a€shotgun€wound€to€hisÏabdomen.€€€He€died€a€short€time€later.€€The€crime€was€captured€in€part€onÏsurveillance€cameras,€which€showed€that€a€number€of€items€on€the€front€salesÏcounter€were€disarranged€and/or€had€fallen€onto€the€floor.€€The€shooting€alsoÏwas€witnessed€by€a€customer,€but€he€was€unable€to€provide€a€description€ofÏthe€shooter.à l à€Ð ö1ž/5 Ðà  àAs€a€result€of€the€publicity€received€after€the€shooting,€an€individualÏcame€forward€and€provided€the€police€with€information€about€her€niece,€EmilyÐ Ž5639 ÐNealy,€and€Nealyððs€boyfriend,€Senneca€Harris.€€Further€interviews€led€police€toÏother€persons€ultimately€identified€as€being€involved€in€the€murder,€includingÏthe€defendant,€Milton€Lee€Cooper.Ìà  àThree€individuals€involved€in€the€events€testified€against€the€defendantÏat€his€trial:€Emily€Nealy,€Timothy€Gamble,€and€Odis€Lawson,€Jr.€€At€the€time€ofÏtrial€Gamble€had€already€entered€a€plea€of€guilty€to€being€an€accessory€afterÏthe€fact€and€Odis€Lawson€had€pled€guilty€to€criminal€responsibility€forÏfacilitation€of€first€degree€murder.€€€Nealy,€a€juvenile,€had€neither€been€chargedÏnor€reached€any€agreement€with€the€state€when€she€testified.€€The€two€menÏhad€prior€criminal€convictions,€and€Emily€Nealy€had€a€prior€juvenile€record.€€Ìà  àAccording€to€the€testimony€of€these€three€individuals,€they€all€lived€in€orÏaround€the€Westside€projects€in€Hamilton€County,€Tennessee.€€Early€on€AprilÏ13,€1994,€defendant€Milton€Lee€Cooper,€Timothy€Gamble,€and€Senneca€HarrisÏdecided€to€go€to€Hamilton€Place€Mall€and€snatch€a€purse.€€They€used€a€carÏbelonging€to€the€defendantððs€girlfriend,€Felicia€Tremell.€€They€asked€EmilyÏNealy,€Harrisðð€girlfriend,€to€follow€them€in€her€automobile€and€act€as€aÏdistraction€so€that€they€could€more€easily€rob€their€victims.€€Nealy€followed€theÏthree€men€in€a€separate€car.€€On€the€way€to€the€mall€she€changed€her€mindÏand€returned€to€the€Westside€projects.€The€three€men€continued,€however,€andÏdid€rob€an€elderly€woman€of€her€purse.€€During€this€incident€Timothy€GambleÏdrove€the€car€and€Senneca€Harris€snatched€the€purse.€€Defendant€remained€inÏthe€back€seat€of€the€car.€€The€three€then€returned€to€Westside€and€parked€theÏcar€by€a€dumpster€several€blocks€from€the€projects.Ìà  àBecause€Cooper€had€used€her€car€in€the€robbery,€he€told€his€girlfriend,ÏFelicia€Tremell,€that€her€car€had€been€stolen.€€She€called€and€reported€that€factÏto€the€police.€€While€Tremell€waited€to€speak€to€officers,€the€other€individuals€ÌÓ  Ó3ÌÌÓ  Óleft€the€vicinity.Ìà  àLater€that€evening€defendant€Cooper,€Nealy,€Harris,€Gamble€andÏLawson€congregated€again€in€Nealyððs€Mazda€in€a€parking€lot€near€the€projects.€ÏThey€drank€beer,€smoked€marijuana,€and€began€discussing€whether€to€commitÏarmed€robberies.€€Harris€had€with€him€a€black€athletic€starter€jacket.€€At€oneÐ Ø;€9@ Ðpoint€defendant€went€to€his€house€and€returned€to€the€car€with€a€jacket€and€aÏsawed„off€shotgun.€€Ìà  àThe€group€then€traveled€toward€Hixson.€€They€went€to€a€Conoco€gasÏstation€on€Main€Street€and€purchased€more€beer.€€They€proceeded€to€drive€byÏother€gas€stations€as€well,€and€Lawson€went€into€one€store.€€However,€theyÏobserved€no€potential€robbery€victims.€€At€some€point€Nealy€again€decided€thatÏshe€did€not€wish€to€be€involved€in€the€plan€and€was€let€out€of€her€car€near€theÏriver.€€She€washed€off€in€the€river€and€then€walked€around€and€waited€on€theÏriverbank€for€the€group€to€return€and€pick€her€up.€Ìà  àAt€about€10:15€p.m.€a€black€male€wearing€a€black€Raiders€starter€jacketÏand€ball€cap€entered€a€Golden€Gallon€convenience€store€where€Sandra€WhiteÏworked€as€a€clerk.€€Lawson€testified€that€he€was€the€man€and€that€he€borrowedÏthe€jacket€from€Harris€because€his€own€jacket€had€a€distinctive€symbol€on€it.€ÏWhite€testified€at€trial€and€identified€a€photograph€of€Lawson.€€She€stated€thatÏLawson€looked€around€the€store,€informed€her€that€he€could€find€no€Red€BullÏbeer,€and€asked€her€to€check€the€cooler.€€White,€being€scared€and€suspicious,Ïmotioned€toward€a€van€just€entering€the€parking€lot€and€told€Lawson€that€herÏð ðfriendsðð€were€coming.€€Lawson€asked€her€about€what€market€might€stock€RedÏBull€beer,€and€she€immediately€gave€him€directions€to€another€Golden€GallonÏstore.€€Ìà  àThe€individuals€then€drove€to€the€Golden€Gallon€store€at€which€EdwardÏRay€Horner€was€working.€€They€parked€the€car€and€Odis€Lawson€went€towardÏthe€store.€€Shortly€thereafter€he€returned€to€the€car€and€indicated€that€thereÏwere€few€people€inside€and€no€police€in€the€vicinity.€€At€that€point€defendantÏCooper,€carrying€his€sawed„off€shotgun,€exited€the€car€with€Senneca€Harris€ÌÓ  Ó4ÌÓ  Óand€headed€toward€the€store.€€Cooper€also€took€his€jacket,€which€he€normallyÏwore€inside„out.€€Harris€was€wearing€his€own€starter€athletic€jacket€and€a€white€Ìcap.€Defendant€and€Harris€entered€the€Golden€Gallon€store.€€One€eyewitnessÏsaw€the€shooting€but€could€not€identify€the€shooter.€€Surveillance€cameraÏphotographs€showed€a€male€in€a€ski€mask€and€a€jacket€later€identified€asÏdefendantððs.€€That€male€engaged€in€a€struggle€with€Horner€and€shot€him.€ÏOfficers€who€arrived€on€the€scene€later€found€that€items€on€the€front€salesÐ Ø;€9@ Ðcounter€were€moved€around€and€knocked€to€the€floor.€€Ìà  àDefendant,€still€holding€the€shotgun,€ran€with€Harris€back€to€the€car€andÏtold€Gamble€and€Lawson€to€hurry.€€According€to€Gamble€and€Lawson,€bothÏmen€seemed€nervous.€€Gamble€testified€that€Harris€asked€defendant€ð ðWhy€didÏyou€shoot€him?ðð.€€Lawson€drove€the€car€away.€€The€group€then€picked€upÏNealy€at€the€river,€and€returned€to€the€Westside€projects.€€According€toÏLawson,€the€defendant€pulled€the€gun€and€his€jacket€out€of€the€car,€left,€andÏthen€returned€without€the€two€items.€€The€group€then€dispersed.ÌÓ  ÓI.ÌÓ–+Óà  àDefendant€first€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€televisionÏcoverage€of€the€trial€and€particularly€a€broadcast€of€the€defendant,€outside€theÏpresence€of€the€jury,€trying€on€the€jacket€allegedly€worn€during€the€murder€andÏrobbery.€€€€Ìà  àPrior€to€trial€defendant€through€counsel€agreed€to€waive€theÏsequestration€of€the€jury.€After€the€jury€was€sworn€defense€counsel€learnedÏthat€local€television€stations€had€requested€the€right€to€have€cameras€presentÏin€the€courtroom.€€At€the€beginning€of€trial€the€next€morning€the€defendantÏobjected€to€the€presence€of€television€cameras€in€the€courtroom.€The€trial€courtÏheld€that€lack€of€sequestration€was€not€a€sufficient€reason€to€deny€videoÏaccessÔ‡ôà»ôXXÔò ò€ó óÔ#†XXôô໋.#Ôunder€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€Rule€30.€€The€judge€allowed€theÐ |$$"& Ðcameras€to€record€the€proceedings.€€He€also€provided€specific€instructions€toÏthe€jury€about€not€watching€local€television€news€broadcasts.€€The€instructionsÏwere€repeated€at€the€close€of€each€dayððs€proceedings.ÌÓ  Ó5ÌÓ  Óà  àDuring€a€later€€jury„out€period€in€the€courtroom,€defendant€and€hisÏattorney€were€having€a€conference.€Defendant,€without€his€counselððs€priorÌÓ 0ÓÓ  Óknowledge,€picked€up€and€put€on€the€jacket€previously€introduced€as€an€exhibitÏand€allegedly€used€in€the€attempted€robbery.€€At€the€time€the€defendant€tookÏthis€action€the€television€cameras€were€running.€€When€counsel€realized€whatÏhad€transpired,€he€moved€to€suppress€the€video,€or,€in€the€alternative,€toÏsequester€the€jury€in€order€to€ensure€that€this€action€by€the€defendant€could€notÏbe€observed€by€jurors.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion€to€suppress€and€theÏmotion€to€sequester.€€At€the€end€of€that€day€the€judge€again€instructed€jurorsÐ Ø;€9@ Ðnot€to€watch€local€newscasts€or€read€local€newspapers.Ìà  àWhen€the€jury€returned€the€following€morning,€the€trial€judge€inquired€ofÏthe€jurors€if€anything€had€occurred€overnight€that€might€influence€their€verdict.€ÏAll€jurors€responded€negatively.€€The€judge€also€asked€the€jury€as€a€group€ifÏanyone€had€seen€anything€on€television€or€read€anything€regarding€the€case.€ÏAll€jurors€again€responded€negatively.€€No€contemporaneous€request€wasÏmade€by€defendant€to€question€the€jurors€individually.€€No€allegation€was€madeÏby€defendant€that€the€incident€actually€had€been€broadcast.Ìà  àIn€his€motion€for€new€trial€defendant€asserted€that€ÌÓÓà  àà l àa€tape€of€defendant€wearing€the€jacket€linked€to€the€shooting€wasÏà  àplayed€on€the€local€news.€€Defendant€had€moved€that€the€news€media€¼à  àbe€ordered€not€to€play€the€said€tape€during€the€trial.€€Defendant€believesÏà  àthat€the€tape€influenced€the€jury,€resulted€in€an€adverse€jury€verdict€and€¼à  àultimately€resulted€in€unconstitutionally€denying€defendant€of€a€fair€trial.ÌÌÌÓÓDuring€oral€argument€on€this€portion€of€the€motion€for€new€trial€the€followingÏexchange€occurred:ÌÓÓà  àà l àMR.€DUVAL:€Yes,€sir,€but€there€are€two€items€on€that€motion,€I€¼à  àguess,€that€we€need€to€discuss€today.€One€is€Item€6,€where€we€allege€¼à  àthat€the€trial€Court€erred€in€allowing€the€„€„€or€ordering€the€media€not€to€¼à  àplay€a€tape€on€television€of€the€defendant€trying€on€the€jacket,€which€¼à  àwas€in€evidence.€€As€Your€Honor€might€remember,€the€media€continued€¼à  àto€run€its€cameras€during€a€recess,€and€I€think€I€was€out€in€the€hall,€but€¼à  àMr.€Meeks€was€in€the€courtroom€and€during€the€recess€Mr.€Cooper€¼à  àapparently,€according€to€Mr.€Meeks,€had€œñ ñÌ›à | àñ ñtried›€on€the€jacket,€which€was€œññ¼à  àññin›€evidence,€and€this€was€captured€on€œññà $ àññcamera›€and€then€apparently€œññ¼à  àññplayed›€on€the€evening€news.ÌÌà  àà l àTHE€COURT:€€Now,€when€you€say€apparently,€is€there€anyÌà  àindication€that€it€was€played?€€I€saw€the€evening€news,€I€never€saw€Ìà  àit.ÌÓ  Ó6ÌÓ  Óà  àà l àMR.€DUVAL:€€€Well,€thatððs€„„ÌÌà  àà l àTHE€COURT:€So€we€canððt€assume€that€it€was€played€on€the€¼à  àevening€news.ÌÌà  àà l àMR.€DUVAL:€All€right.€€I€understand.€€And€thatððs€something€that€¼à  àwe€could€confirm.ÌÌà  àà l àTHE€COURT:€I€just€donððt€„„€I€donððt€„„€I€saw€one€of€the€evening€¼à  ànews,à l àI€forgot€which€one€it€was,€but€they€did€not€play€it.€€Now,€whether€Ð ö1ž/5 Ðà  àthey€played€it€on€any€of€the€others,€I€donððt€know.ÌÌà  àà l àMR.€DUVAL:€Well,€that€would€be€„„€if€Your€Honor€were€to€permitÌà  àus€to€confer€with€jurors€as€to€whether€or€not€they€had€seen€it,€we€wouldÌà  àconfirm€first€with€the€media€that€it€was€in€fact€played,€but€we€just€had€aÌà  àconference€at€the€bench€a€minute€ago€wherein€we€„„ÌÌà  àà l àTHE€COURT:€Right.ÌÌà  àà l àMR.€DUVAL:€€„„€requested€of€the€Court€for€us€to€have€permissionÌà  àto€discuss€this€matter€with€jurors,€and€for€purposes€of€this€motion,€I€Ð Ø;€9@ Ðà  àguess€we€need€to€put€this€on€the€record.ÌÌà  àà l àTHE€COURT:€All€right.€€With€a€request€to€talking€to€the€jurorsÌà  àabout€their€verdict,€unless€there€is€„„€unless€there€is€some€indication€thatÌà  àthere€was€some€outside€influence€on€the€juryððs€verdict€or€it€was€a€à „! àÐ ð˜ Ðà  àquotient€verdict,€did€the€jury€consider€anything€other€than€the€evidenceÌà  àand€the€law,€Iððm€not€going€to€allow€that.à $ àÐ ¼d Ðà  àà l àFirst€of€all,€even€if€they€had€seen€it,€there€is€nothing€„„€the„„€they€¼à  àindicated€to€me€that€they€did€to€watch€any€TV,€that€they€were€not€à „! àœÐ ˆ 0 Ðà  àwatching›€the€news€reports,€and€that€is€what€I€have€to€go€on.€That€is€the€¼à  àtype€of€thing€that,€of€course,€the€State€could€have€brought€in€evidence€inÏà  àtheir€case,€anybody€that€had€seen€Mr.€„„€been€in€the€courtroom€and€¼à  àseen€Mr.€Cooper€trying€on€that€jacket,€and€they€could€put€on€evidence€inÏà  àthat€regard,€and€it€would€have€been€legitimate€evidence€presented€at€¼à  àthe€trial.€€Ìà  àà l àWithout€some€indication€to€the€Court€that€the€jurors€saw€à „! àÐ Òz  Ðà  àsomething€on€TV€in€that€regard,€ad€considered€it€in€their€verdict,€Iððm€notÌà  àgoing€to€allow€the€„„€you€know,€disturbing€the€sanctity€of€the€jury.€€IfÌà  àthereððs€some€reason€under€the€law€to€do€that,€I€will€allow€it,€but€withoutÌà  àany,€just€speculation€or€just€as€a€fishing€expedition€to€talk€to€the€jurorsÌà  àto€ask€them€if€they€considered€anything€else,€I€am€not€„„€Iððm€going€toÌà  àdeny€your€request.ÌÌÓÓà  àDefendantððs€argument€on€this€issue€must€fail€for€two€reasons.€€First,€byÏconsenting€initially€to€jury€separation,€defendant€waived€his€right€toÏsequestration€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„18„116.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Rickey€LeeÐ šB ÐNelsonóó,€Shelby€County,€No.€02„C„01„9103„CR„00050€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð f ÐJackson,€October€2,€1991).€Second,€defendant€has€not€shown€either€actualÏimpropriety€or€any€prejudice.€€There€is€no€proof€in€this€record€that€the€videotapeÏof€the€defendantððs€action€was€ever€broadcast€publicly.€Statements€of€anÏattorney€do€not€constitute€testimony,€and€no€independent€proof€of€broadcast€ÌÓ  Ó7ÌÓ  Ówas€offered.€€Additionally,€the€judge€properly€questioned€the€jurors€aboutÏmedia€exposure€as€soon€as€the€issue€was€raised€at€trial.€€He€received€a€Ìnegative€response€from€each€juror.€€€He€instructed€them€properly€about€theirÏobligations.€€Absent€evidence€to€the€contrary,€a€jury€is€presumed€to€haveÏfollowed€the€judgeððs€instructions.€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€893€S.W.€2d€908,€914€(Tenn.Ð ^.,1 Ð1994).Ìà  àDefendant€complains€that€he€was€not€allowed,€post„trial,€to€interviewÌ€individual€jurors€to€determine€if€there€was€outside€improper€influence€on€theÏverdict.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Thomasóó,€813€S.W.€2d€395,€396€(Tenn.€1991).€€However,Ð Ž5639 Ðdefendant€never€produced€evidence€that€the€videotaped€proceedings€were€Ïbroadcast,€seen€by€a€juror,€or€considered€during€deliberations.€€òòSeeóó€òòPatton€v.Ð &9Î6= ÐRoseóó,€892€S.W.€2d€410,€414€(Tenn.€App.€1994).€€€The€trial€court€did€not€abuseÐ ò:š8? Ðits€discretion€in€failing€to€permit€individual€questioning€of€the€jurors.€€This€issueÏis€without€merit.ÌÓ  ÓII.ÌÓ  Óà  àDefendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€permitting€theÏdistrict€attorney,€on€redirect€examination€of€Emily€Nealy,€to€inquire€into€newÏmatters€not€covered€on€direct€examination€and€not€opened€by€the€defense€onÏcross„examination.€€Specifically,€Ms.€Nealy€was€handed€the€jacket€introducedÏas€Exhibit€8€and€asked€to€identify€it.€€She€responded,€ð ðIððve€seen€Milton€CooperÏwear€that€jacket€before.ðð€€Ìà  àDefendant€has€waived€this€issue€by€failing€to€include€any€citation€ofÏauthority€in€his€brief.œññ׃×ññññ׃×ññÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27€(a)(7);€Ct.€of€Crim.€App.€Rule€10€(b).€Ð Pø ÐMoreover,€the€trial€court€has€considerable€discretion€in€œcontrolling€theññÌññññññ€presentationññ€presentation€ññpresentation€of€evidence.€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€611€(a).€The€trial€judge€determinedÏthat€the€questions€properly€related€to€an€attempt€by€the€defendant€duringÏcross„examination€to€challenge€the€witnessððs€memory.€€This€issue€is€ñ ñÌñ ñwithoutÏmerit.€ÌÓ  ÓIII.ÌÓ  Óà  àDefendant€also€objects€to€the€courtððs€permitting€the€assistant€districtÏattorney€to€ask€leading€questions€of€a€co„conspirator€during€direct€examination.€ÏSpecifically,€the€exchange€occurred€as€follows:ÌÓÓà  àà l àQ€(By€Mr.€Denny)€Now,€Mr.€Lawson,€Iððm€going€to€direct€yourÌà  àattention€back€to€the€night€of€April€the€13th€of€1994,€and€also,€I€guess,€¼à  àearlier€that€same€day.€€Itððs€been€almost€two€years.€€I€want€you€to€tellÌà  àthe€jury€what€happened€to€you€that€day€beginning€with€a€trip€out€toÌà  àHamilton€Place€Mall€or€the€„„€at€least€begin€with€your€meeting€up€withÌà  àthis€defendant,€a€party€named€Tim€Gamble,€another€party€named€Ìà  àSenneca€Harris,€another€party€named€Emily€Nealy.ÌÌà  àà l àMR.€MEEKS:€I€object€to€the€leading,€Your€Honor.ÌÌà  àà l àTHE€COURT:€Well,€I€think€heððs€just€„„€I€think€this€is€by€way€ofÌà  àbackground€to€„„€for€him€to€testify.€€Go€ahead.€€I€will€allow€it€in€this€case.ÌÌà  àà l àQ€(By€Mr.€Denny):€So€if€you€would€just€tell€the€jury€did€you€meet€¼à  àup€with€these€individuals€back€on€that€day?Ìà  àà l àÐ Â3j17 Ðà  àà l àA:€That€evening€I€did.ÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà  àà l àQ:€All€right.€€I€want€you€to€tell€the€jury€how€you€came€to€meet€upÌà  àwith€them€and€what€you€saw€happen€that€night.Ìà  àà l àÌÓÓà  àIt€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€judge€whether€to€allow€a€partyÏto€examine€a€witness€by€leading€questions.€€òòWilkerson€v.€Altizeróó,€845€S.W.€2dÐ ¢J Ð744,€747€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Under€Tennessee€law,€unless€a€question€is€notÏonly€clearly€leading€but€clearly€prejudicial,€an€appellate€court€will€not€interfereÏwith€a€trial€courtððs€ruling.€òòHale€v.€Stateóó,€198€Tenn.€461,€476,€281€S.W.€2d€51,Ð ®  Ð58€(1955);€òòMothershed€v.€Stateóó,€578€S.W.€2d€96,99€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€Ð Òz  ÐThe€record€reflects€that€although€the€court€apparently€overruled€the€objection,Ïthe€prosecutor€rephrased€the€question€anyway.€€As€posed,€it€is€not€clearlyÏleading.€€Further,€ÓÓno€prejudice€has€been€shown.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÓž[ÓÓ  Óà @ àIV.ÌÓ\Óà  àDefendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€instructing€the€juryÏabout€confessions€when€he€had€not€made€a€confession.€€The€actual€instructionÏgiven€by€the€trial€court€was€as€follows:à Ì àà $ àà | àÐ €( ÐÓÓà  àà l àConfession€and/or€admission€against€interest.€€Evidence€has€¼à  àbeen€introduced€in€this€trial€of€a€statement€or€statements€by€the€Ìà  àdefendant€made€outside€the€trial€to€show€a€confession€or€admissionÌà  àagainst€interest.€€A€confession€is€the€statement€by€the€defendant€thatÌà  àhe€committed€the€crime€charged.€€An€admission€against€interest€is€a€ÌÓ  Óà @ à9ÌÓ  Óà  àstatement€by€the€defendant€which€acknowledges€the€existence€orÌà  àtruth€of€some€fact€necessary€to€be€proven€to€establish€the€guilt€of€theÌà  àdefendant€or€which€tends€to€show€guilt€of€the€defendant€or€is€evidenceÌà  àof€some€material€fact,€but€not€amounting€to€a€confession.ÌÌà  àà l àEvidence€of€such€statements€should€be€received€by€the€juryÌà  àwith€caution.€€While€this€evidence€has€been€received,€it€remains€yourÌà  àduty€to€decide€if€in€fact€such€statement€was€ever€made.€€If€you€believeÌà  àa€statement€was€not€made€by€the€defendant,€you€should€not€consider€it.Ìà  àIf€you€decide€the€statement€was€made€by€the€defendant,€you€must€à „! àÐ Æ*n(- Ðà  àjudge€the€truth€of€the€fact€stated.Ìà  àà l àIn€so€determining€consider€the€circumstances€under€which€theÌà  àstatement€was€made.€€Also€consider€whether€any€of€the€other€evidenceÌà  àbefore€you€tends€to€contradict€the€statement€in€whole€or€in€part.€€You€¼à  àmust€not,€however,€arbitrarily€disregard€any€part€of€any€statement,€butÌà  àrather€should€consider€all€of€any€statement€you€believe€was€made€andÌà  àis€true.Ìà  àà l àYou€are€the€sole€judge€of€what€weight€should€be€given€suchÌà  àstatement.€€If€you€decide€a€statement€was€made€you€should€considerÌà  àit€with€all€the€other€evidence€in€the€case€in€determining€the€defendantððsÌà  àguilt€or€innocence.ÌÌÓÓà  àTo€constitute€a€confession,€a€defendant€must€admit€all€the€elements€ofÏthe€crime€with€which€he€is€charged.€€òòState€v.€Leeóó,€631€S.W.€2d€453€(Tenn.Ð @8è5< ÐCrim.€App.€1982).€€An€admission€is€an€acknowledgment€by€the€accused€ofÏcertain€facts€that€tend,€along€with€other€facts,€to€establish€guilt.€€In€òòHelton€v.Ð Ø;€9@ ÐStateóó,€547€S.W.€2d€564,€567€(Tenn.€1977),€the€Supreme€Court€said€in€thisÐ X Ðregard:€€ÌÓÓà  àThe€distinction€between€an€admission€and€a€confession€is€blurred.Ìà  àGenerally,€however,€ð ða€ððconfessionðð€is€a€statement€by€the€accusedÌà  àthat€he€engaged€in€conduct€which€constitutes€a€crime€.€.€.€anÌà  àadmission€is€an€acknowledgment€by€the€accused€of€certain€factsÌà  àwhich€tend€together€with€other€facts,€to€establish€his€guilt;€while€aÌà  àconfession€is€an€acknowledgment€of€guilt€itself.€€An€admission,Ìà  àthen,€is€something€less€than€a€confession€and,€unlike€a€Ìà  àconfession,€...€an€admission€is€not€sufficient€in€itself€to€support€a€Ìà  àconviction.€€Ìà  àÌÓÓà  àThe€evidence€demonstrates€that€when€the€defendant€and€SeneccaÏHarris€came€running€back€to€their€car€from€the€Golden€Gallon€where€HornerÏwas€shot,€Senecca€Harris€looked€at€the€defendant€and€asked€him€why€he€shotÏ[the€clerk].€€Defendant€responded€by€telling€Harris€to€keep€quiet,€and€thatÏLawson€and€Gamble€did€not€need€to€know€what€was€going€on.€€This€exchangeÏcould€be€deemed€an€admission.€The€trial€court€correctly€charged€the€differenceÏbetween€an€admission€and€a€confession.€€The€court€did€not€attempt€toÏdetermine€or€define€for€the€jury€which€statement,€if€either,€existed€in€this€case.€€ÌÓ  Ó10ÌÓ  ÓThe€court€further€instructed€the€jury€to€receive€any€evidence€about€admissionsÏor€confessions€with€caution.€€Under€these€circumstances,€any€error€in€the€Ìcourtððs€instruction€was€at€worst€harmless.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Phillipsóó,€728€S.W.€2dÐ °"X $ Ð21,€27€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1986);€Tenn.€R.€App.€36(b).€€This€issue€is€withoutÏmerit.ÌÓ  ÓV.ÌÓimÓà  àDefendant€next€contends€that€his€indictment€for€conspiracy€to€commitÏaggravated€robbery€is€void€because€it€does€not€properly€allege€that€each€of€theÏco„conspirators€conspired€to€commit€aggravated€robbery,€nor€that€each€hadÏthe€requisite€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€for€the€offense.€€Ð D/ì,2 Ðà  àThe€indictment€charges,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:ÌÓÓà  àThat€Milton€Lee€Cooper€and€Odis€Lee€Lawson,€Jr.€and€others€unknownÌà  àto€the€Grand€Jury...on€April€13,€1994...did€unlawfully€conspire€toÌà  àcommit€aggravated€robbery,€and€in€furtherance€of€this€conspiracyÌà  àthe€following€overt€acts...were€committed:Ìà  à(1)...the€defendants€and€others€drove€around...with€a€sawed„offÌà  àshotgun€in€their€vehicle€and€planned€to€rob€a€place€of€business.Ìà  à(2)...the€defendants€and€others€went€to€the€Golden€Gallon€in€RedÌà  àBank...the€Conoco€Station€on€Hixson€Pike...and€the€Smile€StationÌà  àon€Highway€153...for€the€purpose€of€deciding€which€business€toÌà  àrob.Ìà  à(3)...the€defendants€and€others€returned€to€the€Golden€Gallon€inÐ Ü;„9@ Ðà  àRed€Bank...at€which€time€two€of€the€persons€took€the€sawed„offÌà  àshotgun€into€the€store€with€the€intent€to€rob€the€clerk...and€in€theÌà  àprocess€of€robbing€him€they€shot€and€killed€him...ÌÌÓÓIn€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.€2d€725€(Tenn.€1997),€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€Ð ð˜ Ðheld€that€an€indictment€is€constitutionally€valid€if€it€provides€sufficientÏinformation€to€enable€an€accused€to€know€the€accusation€to€which€an€answerÏis€required,€to€furnish€the€court€an€adequate€basis€for€the€entry€of€the€properÏjudgment,€and€to€protect€the€accused€from€double€jeopardy.€The€indictment€inÏthis€case€does€adequately€charge€that€each€co„conspirator€had€the€requisiteÏòòmens€reaóó€for€the€underlying€offense.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Perkinsonóó,€867€S.W.€2d€1Ð ¸` Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€The€defendant€is€clearly€placed€on€notice€as€to€theÏcharge€against€which€he€must€defend.€€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÓ  ÓVI.ÌÓúuÓà  àDefendant€next€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€supportÏhis€conviction€of€felony€murder.€€At€the€time€of€the€killing,€first€degree€felonyÌÓ  Ó11ÌÓ  Ómurder€was€defined€as€ð ð[a]€reckless€killing€of€another€committed€in€theÏperpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€any€...€robbery€...ðð.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð39„13„202€(a)(2)€(1991).€Defendant€was€charged€with€committing€a€reckless¹ÓÍvÓÓ  Ókilling€in€the€attempt€to€perpetrate€an€especially€aggravated€robbery,€that€is,€aÏrobbery€accomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon€where€the€victim€suffers€seriousÏbodily€injury.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð39„13„403(a)(1)„(2);€òòState€v.€Lewisóó,€919€S.W.Ð L&ô#( Ð2d€62,€65€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Robbery€itself€is€the€ð ðintentional€orÏknowing€theft€of€property€from€the€person€of€another€by€violence€or€putting€theÏperson€in€fear.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„13„401.€€Theft€is€knowingly€obtaining€orÏexercising€control€over€property€without€the€ownerððs€effective€consent,€with€theÏintent€to€deprive€the€owner€of€the€property.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„14„103.€ÏUnder€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„12„101,€a€person€commits€criminal€attempt€who,ÓÓ€ÌÌacting€with€the€kind€of€culpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense:ÌÌà  àà l à(1)à Ä àIntentionally€engages€in€action€or€causes€a€resultÐ ¬4T28 Ðà  àwhat€would€constitute€an€offense€if€the€circumstances€surroundingÌà  àthe€conduct€were€as€the€person€believes€them€to€be;Ìà  àà l à(2)à Ä àActs€with€intent€to€cause€a€result€that€is€an€elementÐ ^75; Ðà  àof€the€offense,€and€believes€the€conduct€will€cause€the€result€withoutÌà  àfurther€conduct€on€the€personððs€part;€orÌà  àà l à(3)à Ä àActs€with€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€or€causeÐ :¸7> Ðà  àa€result€that€would€constitute€the€offense,€under€the€circumstancesÌà  àsurrounding€the€conduct€as€the€person€believes€them€to€be,€and€theÐ Ü;„9@ Ðà  àconduct€constitutes€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€theÌà  àoffenses.Ìà  àÌÓÓà  àDefendant€does€not€question€the€sufficiency€of€the€proof€of€his€use€of€aÏdeadly€weapon€or€the€infliction€of€serious€bodily€injury€on€the€victim.€€HeÏcontends€primarily€that€no€evidence€was€presented€to€the€jury€that€he€tookÏanything.€€Ìà  àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,Ïthe€standard€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÏfavorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€theÏessential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.Ð žF ÐVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€QuestionsÐ j Ðconcerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€Ìthe€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence,€are€resolved€ÌÓ  Ó12ÌÓ  Óby€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€court.€€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,€754€S.W.2d€620,€623Ð šB Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€Nor€may€this€court€reweigh€or€reevaluate€theÏevidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€A€verdict€of€Ð 2Ú Ðguilty€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theÏstateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€theÏstate.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Catesóó,€875€S.W.€2d€253,259€(Tenn.€1994).Ð –#>!% Ðà  àTaken€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€the€jury€could€rationallyÏdetermine€that€the€defendant€entered€the€convenience€store€with€a€sawed„offÏshotgun€and€shot€the€clerk,€causing€serious€bodily€injury€and€ultimately€hisÏdeath.€€Surveillance€and€crime€scene€photographs€confirm€that€items€wereÏdisrupted€or€moved€on€the€sales€counter.€€The€cash€register€was€manipulatedÏand€there€were€empty€wrappers€of€food€items€found€in€front€of€the€coolers€andÏthe€snack€stands.€€The€photographs€also€show€the€defendant€reaching€overÏand€around€the€sales€counter.€€A€rational€jury€could€therefore€also€haveÏconcluded€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€committed€theft€fromÏthe€victim€during€the€perpetration€the€crime.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€ÌÓ  ÓVII.ÌÓ  Óà  àDefendant€next€contends€that€a€new€trial€should€be€ordered€because€ofÏimproper€contact€between€the€jury€and€other€individuals,€including€the€Ð ò:š8? Ðdefendant,€during€trial.€€When€such€an€allegation€is€made,€the€burden€is€on€theÏdefendant€to€show€that€as€a€result€of€the€jurorððs€contact€with€a€third€person,Ïsome€extraneous€prejudicial€information,€fact,€or€opinion€was€brought€to€bearÏon€the€juror.€€òòState€v.€Blackwellóó,€664€S.W.€2d€686,€688€(Tenn.€1984).Ð ¼d Ðà  àThis€issue€was€not€raised€until€the€verdict€had€been€rendered.€€At€thatÏtime€the€defendant€made€claims€in€open€court€that€a€black€male€juror€had€seenÏand€talked€to€the€defendant€in€the€elevator€on€the€previous€morning.€€TheÏdefendant€told€the€trial€judge€that,€at€that€earlier€time,€the€juror€informed€himÏthat€he€was€voting€ð ðnot€guilty.ðð€€The€defendant€also€asserted€that€he€later€saw€aÏrepresentative€from€the€district€attorneyððs€office€hand€a€letter€to€the€same€blackÏmale€juror.€€Counsel€for€defendant€expressed€particular€concernÌÓ  Ó13ÌÓ  Óbecause€he€felt€the€juror€had€hesitated€when€being€polled€about€his€guiltyÏverdict.Ìà  àThe€trial€court€judge€asked€the€bailiffs€if€any€person€had€made€any€Ìcontact€with€the€jurors€during€the€course€of€trial.€€The€bailiffs€responded€in€the€Ìnegative.€€The€court€then€brought€the€entire€jury€panel€into€the€courtroom€andÏconducted€individual€questioning.€€The€particular€juror€in€question€responded€Ïand€advised€that€he€had€seen€the€defendant€in€the€elevator€early€one€morningÏbefore€court€opened.€€The€juror€stated€that€he€said€ð ðhey,ðð€but€nothing€more,€toÏthe€defendant.€€He€specifically€denied€indicating€to€the€defendant€any€opinionÏas€to€his€guilt€or€innocence.€€He€also€reaffirmed€his€agreement€with€ññtññhe€verdictÏof€guilty.Ìà  àDefendant€has€not€carried€his€burden€under€òòBlackwellóó€to€show€improperÐ ¬+T). Ðoutside€influence€on€this€juror.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÓ  ÓVIII.ÌÓ0Óà  àDefendant€finally€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€juryÌ€to€hear€evidence€about€defendantððs€alleged€involvement€in€a€theft€orÏattempted€theft€which€occurred€earlier€the€same€day.€€Co„conspirators€in€theÏcase€testified€that€earlier€on€the€same€day€as€the€murder,€the€defendant€andÏtwo€other€persons€committed€a€purse€snatching€at€Hamilton€Place€Mall.€€TheyÏdrove€a€car€belonging€to€the€defendantððs€girlfriend.€€The€defendant€then€parkedÏthe€vehicle€two€blocks€from€his€house€and€had€his€girlfriend€report€it€as€stolen,Ð Ø;€9@ Ðsince€it€may€have€been€identified€in€connection€with€the€purse€snatching.€€TheÏdefendant€and€his€co„conspirators€then€vacated€the€area€to€avoid€an€encounterÏwith€police€officers€coming€to€obtain€information€about€the€stolen€car.€€TheÏgroup,€utilizing€Emily€Nealyððs€car,€met€near€the€bus€station€and€continued€toÏsearch€for€robbery€victims.€€€The€trial€court€found€that€this€testimony€of€earlierÏactivity€was€relevant€concerning€overt€acts€alleged€as€part€of€the€offense€ofÏconspiracy.Ìà  àThe€admission€and€exclusion€of€evidence€are€within€the€soundÏdiscretion€of€the€trial€judge.€€òòState€v.€Bakeróó,€785€S.W.€2d€132€(Tenn.€Crim.€Ð ¸` ÐÓ  Ó14ÌÓ  ÓApp.€1989).€€This€discretion€will€not€be€disturbed€unless€it€is€arbitrarilyÏexercised.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404€(b)€contains€an€exception€to€the€inadmissibilityÏof€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€to€prove€the€character€of€theÌ€person.€€The€rule€states:€ð ðIt€may,€however,€be€admissible€for€other€purposes.ððÌThe€evidence€introduced€in€this€case€was€admissible€pursuant€to€the€co„Ìconspirator€exception€to€the€hearsay€ruleññ,€and€it€was€admissibleññ€to€establish€the€acts€committed€inÏfurtherance€of€the€conspiracy€that€existed€between€the€co„conspirators.€€òòSeeóóÐ À  ÐòòState€v.€Shropshireóó,€874€S.W.€2d€634,€641€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€Tenn.€R.Ð ä Œ" ÐEvid.€803€(1.2).€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà  àFor€the€reasons€set€forth€above,€we€conclude€that€defendantððs€issues€onÏappeal€all€lack€merit.€€We€therefore€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ò òÓÓà „! àÐ H&ð#( Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àà $ àà | àà Ô àà , àà „! à¼à  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àà $ àà | àà Ô àà , àà „! à¼à  àñ ñà l àà Ä àà  àñ ñ____________________________________Ìó óà  àà l àà Ä àà  àCORNELIA€A.€CLARKÐ ò)š', Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àSPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌ________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAYÌJUDGEÌÌÌ________________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERSÌJUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÐ ê;’9@ ЇÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  Ó15ÌÓëšÓÐ ˆ;09= ЇÓ  ÓIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌMARCH€1998€SESSIONÌÓ ›ÓÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à  àà t àà Ì à)€€C.C.A.€03C01„9706„CR„00202Ð Ø € Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€HAMILTON€COUNTYÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)Ìà  àà l àAppellee,à  àà t àà Ì à)€€Hon.€Steven€Bevil,€Judge€Ð ¨ P  Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)Ìvs.à  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€€(First€Degree€Murder€andÐ ˆ0  Ðà  àà l àà Ä à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€€€Conspiracy€to€Commit€AggravatedÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€€€€Robbery)Ìà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)€€No.€202670€&€202672ÌMILTON€LEE€COOPER,à  àà t àà Ì à)Ð Hð Ðà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì à)Ìà  àà l àAppellant.à  àà t àà Ì à)Ð (Ð ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓJUDGMENTÐ ¸` ÐÓóŸÓÌó óà  àóóCame€the€appellant,€Milton€Cooper,€by€counsel€and€also€came€theÐ ˜@ Ðattorney€general€on€behalf€of€the€State,€and€this€case€was€heard€on€the€recordÏon€appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€of€Hamilton€County;€and€upon€considerationÏthereof,€this€court€is€of€the€opinion€that€there€is€no€reversible€error€in€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà  àOur€opinion€is€hereby€incorporated€in€this€judgment€as€if€set€outÏverbatim.ÌÌà  àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€and€adjudged€by€this€court€that€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED,€and€the€case€is€remanded€to€the€Criminal€Court€ofÏHamilton€County€for€execution€of€the€judgment€of€that€court€and€for€collectionÏof€costs€accrued€below.ÌÌà  àCosts€of€this€appeal€will€be€paid€by€the€appellant€Milton€Cooper€forÏwhich€let€execution€issue.ÌÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àò òPER€CURIAMó óÐ ˆ,0*- ÐÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àJohn€H.€Peay,€JudgeÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àPaul€G.€Summers,€JudgeÌà  àà l àà Ä àà  àà t àà Ì àCornelia€A.€Clark,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌ