ÿWPCÔ ›Àì>"?Ö%óÝ=¥æþú`"´ J™éþ’]¡ïsÊÖ?,øeŠúr ÷"W'ËVD¿ÄÔþˆow/éšhó6ÑÑ­h §—äå8°òq½0»)/æ»È"WޤQœ‚i䔚ÿýíÏvÚp…>¤ qñ3ÚD2UpÙrz7íH§%—Sλø}89må4ÔF’³Ý{­LòìBáâ6WïÚNŽ08zÔC¦ÍKÁÁ市Å,T.F¤™JÏí“ÌëpwÃ/â¶Éá¬â«A T“ÐfêÖK¸¶CÚAÑj|µ-ˆÛÔב *¹ ßKA„*®T×í¿k<(†°K?E©öÖÁ¡-¡œW;Þ[ë`wQ##æ+ð+ª*¢ìƒèJÀ×p¸~\nËPd­ö½;™ùVþ·¶¦É|íìòµŽ:) ¥gqSD@ÁoýÚï^¢òy~}ºwÐÖfÚ¾¦)"iD´‡~¸#€š´—=2v¬>KDt1¾~m¾ #‡x˜2Vl6RQÅy™¸0Rh”?fv°.=ù’eUj®ÉšåZ.«$¾E•ˆïãО‘ÃF wyù°‹EÉx›Ëz.¸”zU¨Ð¨ža—ÆK1MG$žò,Dý @ `#!@U>a %Ÿ 0í¥UB’ 4Ô è n­÷ U:¤ fÞ D "L wn U :r N¬ Ì® 02z 0D¬^ ðü mþþþþþþþþþþþþþ B AQ2ƃ 0 I 0 S 0D]] D3¡˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0<èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX(ÅÕÐ$¡¡Ñ  ÑÑ7€'CXXdÈXXdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓ<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpi{Z='3|x«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ Ñ Ü ÑÑ  Ñ, øð AZ"Arial Regular ÂÝ ƒ[[ "ÝÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  ÝÔ€ XLóXXXÔÔ€ üX XLóÔÓ  ÓÔ_Ôò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XLóX üÔÐ  ÐÌSeptember€10,€1999ÌÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€Ô_ÔClerkÔdAíÔó óÔ_Ô(â(3„{$¤¤Ý ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ8€XWXXdêdê8ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó¶¦*' ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ dZ[\]_Cþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(â3[ $¢¢Ý ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ8€XWXXdêdê8ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  Ý(â3[ $££Ý ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ8€XWXXdêdê8ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó""""'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ8€XWXXdêdÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔѰÑÑܰÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÑ€ †ÑÑ€ í:ÑÔ€ XLóXXXÔÑ8€ Ló XXdæXXdê8ÑÔ_Ôßv€Y_@0,j:úÿÈ`  `€€@ÿEÐ` 8ttxPRð È vßÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€à8 ¸ àà@Ñ Ñ D¸ Ð ¸ Ð àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@ƒƒ%DàAT€NASHVILLEà@@66-Rà€€€€€€€€€ˆÌà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€JULY€1999€SESSIONÌÌÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à h àà À à)à  àÐ 80 Ѐà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð   Ðà ¸ àAppellee,€à h àà À à)à  àNo.€01C01„9805„CR„00209Ð ü  Ðà ¸ à€€€€€à  àà h à€€à À à)Ð êâ  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àDavidson€CountyÐ ÐÈ  Ðv.à ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€€€€€€€€€Ð ¶®  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHonorable€Frank€G.€Clement,€Jr.,€Judge€€€€€Ð œ”  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ÌSHAWN€ROBERT€COTTON€€à À à)à  à(Vehicular€homicide€by€intoxication)Ð h` Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€€€€€€€€Ìà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À à)Ð 4, ÐÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð ÌÄ ÐÌRobert€P.€Ballingerà  àà h àà À àà  àPaul€G.€Summersà  àà x àÐ ˜ Ð601€Woodland€Streetà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€of€TennesseeÐ ~v ÐNashville,€TN€37206à h àà À àà  àà p àandÐ d\ Ð(AT€TRIAL€AND€ON€APPEAL)à À àà  àDaryl€J.€BrandÐ JB Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€General€of€Tennessee€¼à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à450€James€Robertson€Parkwayà Ð àà (# àÐ ! ÐJohn€G.€Olivaà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493Ð ü!ô Ð601€Woodland€StreetÌNashville,€TN€37206à h àà À àà  àVictor€S.€Johnson,€IIIÐ È#À  Ð(ON€APPEAL)à  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÐ ®$¦! Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àandÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àBernie€McEvoyÌ€€€€à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÐ `'X $ Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWashington€Square,€Suite€500Ìà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à222€2nd€Avenue€NorthÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37201„1649ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJoseph€M.€TiptonÌJudgeÌÐ >:639 ЇÌÓÓà@õõ)Dàòòò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óóóˆà0 È àÐîæÈ€%È€% Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant,€Shawn€Robert€Cotton,€appeals€as€of€right€his€convictionÐ º ² Ðby€a€jury€in€the€Davidson€County€Criminal€Court€for€vehicular€homicide€by€intoxication,€aÐ † ~ ÐClass€B€felony.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€serve€twelve€years€in€theÐ R J ÐDepartment€of€Correction€as€a€Range€I,€standard€offender.€€The€defendant€contendsÐ   Ðthat:Ð êâ  ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ à(1)€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction,ж® ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à(2)€the€trial€court€erred€during€voir€dire€by€impliedly€threateningÐ ‚z  Ðto€hold€the€jurors€in€contempt€for€perjury€if€they€failed€to€returnÐ h` Ða€verdict,ÐNF¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à(3)€the€state€improperly€struck€African„American€female€jurorsÐ  Ðfrom€the€panel€based€upon€their€race€and€gender,Ðø¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à(4)€the€state€improperly€commented€upon€the€defendantððsÐ ÌÄ Ðsilence€and€improperly€appealed€to€the€juryððs€sympathy€duringÐ ²ª Ðargument,€andИ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à(5)€the€cumulative€effect€of€the€errors€violates€the€defendantððsÐ d\ Ðright€to€a€fair€trial.ÐJB¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€of€conviction.Ð ! ÐÌÓ  Óà ¸ àDetective€Rickey€Ollis€testified€that€on€April€2,€1996,€at€3:15€a.m.,€he€wasÐ ®$¦! Ðresponding€to€another€dispatch€when€he€heard€tires€screech€and€a€crash.€€He€said€thatÐ z&r# Ðin€less€than€thirty€seconds,€he€came€upon€a€red€Camaro€embedded€in€an€embankmentÐ F(>!% Ðacross€from€a€ð ðTðð€intersection.€€He€stated€that€on€the€driverððs€side,€he€saw€anÐ * #' Ðunconscious€male€seated€behind€the€steering€wheel.€€He€said€the€man€had€long,€darkÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðhair€and€was€of€average€build.€€He€identified€this€man€as€the€defendant.€€He€said€heÐ ª-¢&+ Ðsaw€a€female€slumped€down€in€the€passenger€seat€with€her€chin€on€her€chest.€€He€saidÐ v/n(- Ðher€feet€were€bent€underneath€the€passengerððs€bucket€seat,€and€her€back€was€againstÐ B1:*/ Ðthe€bottom€of€the€seat€as€if€she€were€sliding€out€of€it.€€He€stated€that€the€driverððs€doorÐ 3,1 Ðwas€jammed,€and€he€tapped€on€the€driverððs€window€two€or€three€times€until€theÐ Ú4Ò-3 Ðdefendant€started€to€move.€€He€said€the€passengerððs€door€was€also€jammed,€but€heÐ ¦6ž/5 Ðcould€see€the€passengerððs€chest€rising€and€falling.€€He€stated€that€he€radioed€for€anÐ r8j17 Ðambulance€and€an€extrication€unit.€€He€said€that€he€then€saw€a€third€person€rise€up€inÐ  Ðthe€back€seat.Ð ÔÌ ÐÌà ¸ àDetective€Ollis€testified€that€the€fire€department€arrived€within€five€minutesÐ l d Ðand€that€he€directed€them€to€the€passengerððs€side,€believing€the€female€had€the€mostÐ 80 Ðserious€injuries.€€He€said€that€once€they€cut€and€pried€the€passengerððs€door€open,€theÐ ü  Ðdefendant€immediately€crawled€out€over€the€female.€€He€said€that€a€large€gear€shiftÐ ÐÈ  Ðseparated€the€carððs€bucket€seats.€€He€said€that€considering€the€distance€between€theÐ œ”  Ðseats€and€the€dashboard,€it€would€not€have€been€possible€for€two€adults€to€changeÐ h` Ðplaces€in€the€car€during€the€accident.Ð 4, ÐÌà ¸ àMetro€Police€Officer€Donald€Davidson€testified€that€he€went€to€theÐ ÌÄ Ðaccident€scene.€€He€said€that€the€front€of€the€1968€red€Camaro€was€compacted€but€thatÐ ˜ Ðthe€damage€did€not€extend€through€to€the€passengerððs€compartment.€€He€said€theÐ d\ Ðoccupants€were€still€inside€the€car€when€he€arrived,€and€he€saw€a€male€with€shoulder„Ð 0 ( Ðlength€hair€in€the€driverððs€seat.€€He€said€that€the€man,€whom€he€identified€as€theÐ ü!ô Ðdefendant,€was€looking€around.€€He€said€he€saw€an€unconscious€female€in€theÐ È#À  Ðpassengerððs€seat€with€her€body€mostly€down€on€the€floorboard.€€He€said€this€womanÐ ”%Œ" Ðwas€eventually€identified€as€the€victim,€Helen€Hollis.Ð `'X $ ÐÌà ¸ àOfficer€Davidson€testified€that€he€asked€the€defendant€what€happenedÐ ø*ð#( Ðand€that€the€defendant€told€him€that€he€thought€the€police€were€chasing€them.€€He€saidÐ Ä,¼%* Ðthe€defendant€appeared€dazed.€€He€said€he€went€to€the€passengerððs€side€a€fewÐ .ˆ', Ðseconds€before€the€door€was€pried€open.€€He€said€the€defendant€crawled€over€theÐ \0T). Ðvictim€and€out€the€passengerððs€door.€€He€said€the€backseat€passenger,€who€was€laterÐ (2 +0 Ðidentified€as€Chad€Jumps,€crawled€between€the€seats,€over€the€victim€and€out€theÐ ô3ì,2 Ðâ âpassengerððs€door.€€Ð À5¸.4 ÐÑ í:Ñâ  âÑÜÜÑÑÑâ  âÑ  Ñà ¸ àOfficer€Davidson€testified€that€he€led€the€defendant€away€from€the€car,Ð  Ðâ âobserved€that€the€defendantððs€eyes€were€red,€and€noticed€the€odor€of€alcohol€on€theÐ ÔÌ Ðdefendantððs€breath.€€He€said€that€he€asked€the€defendant€what€happened,€and€theÐ   ˜ Ðdefendant€first€responded€that€the€victim€was€driving.€€He€said€the€defendant€admittedÐ l d Ðthat€he€had€been€drinking,€stated€that€the€victim€was€driving,€and€said€that€a€car€pulledÐ 80 Ðout€in€front€of€them.€€Officer€Davidson€said€that€when€he€told€the€defendant€that€he€sawÐ ü  Ðthe€defendant€in€the€driverððs€seat,€the€defendant€said€that€the€defendant€had€made€aÐ ÐÈ  Ðmistake,€that€he€meant€to€say€that€he€was€driving,€and€that€he€was€trying€to€help€theÐ œ”  Ðvictim€because€she€had€been€drinking€that€night.€€Officer€Davidson€said€that€heÐ h` Ðexplained€the€implied€consent€law€to€the€defendant€and€requested€that€the€defendantÐ 4, Ðsubmit€to€a€blood€alcohol€test.€€He€said€the€defendant€replied,€ð ðIððll€give€you€any€f***ingÐ ø Ðthing€you€want€because€I€wasnððt€driving.ððÐ ÌÄ ÐÌà ¸ àOfficer€Davidson€testified€that€about€three€hours€after€the€wreck,€heÐ d\ Ðarrested€the€defendant€and€advised€him€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€He€said€that€theÐ 0 ( Ðdefendant€nodded€his€head€to€indicate€that€he€did€understand€his€rights.€€He€said€heÐ ü!ô Ðthen€asked€if€the€defendant€could€tell€him€what€happened,€and€the€defendant€shook€hisÐ È#À  Ðhead€to€indicate€ð ðno.ðð€€Officer€Davidson€said€that€he€again€asked€the€defendant€if€heÐ ”%Œ" Ðcould€tell€them€who€was€driving€or€what€happened,€and€the€defendant€again€shook€hisÐ `'X $ Ðhead€to€indicate€ð ðno.ððÐ ,)$"& ÐÌà ¸ àOfficer€Davidson€testified€that€the€inside€of€the€car€was€damaged€from€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðoccupants€striking€the€dashboard€and€that€the€glove€box€was€heavily€dented€in€the€areaÐ .ˆ', Ðof€the€victimððs€knees.€€He€admitted€that€the€dents€in€the€glove€box€did€not€reveal€theÐ \0T). Ðidentity€of€the€passenger.€€He€stated€that€the€cracks€that€extended€across€the€carððsÐ (2 +0 Ðwindshield€resulted€from€the€front€of€the€car€compacting€upon€impact€and€were€notÐ ô3ì,2 Ðconsistent€with€a€personððs€head€striking€the€windshield.€€He€said€that€the€steering€wheelÐ À5¸.4 Ðwas€bent€from€impact€with€an€occupant.€€He€stated€that€based€upon€the€physicalÐ Œ7„06 Ðevidence,€the€car€hit€the€embankment€straight€on€and€that€nothing€indicated€that€the€carÐ  Ðhad€spun€or€rolled.Ð ÔÌ ÐÌà ¸ àSandra€Fielder,€an€emergency€room€nurse,€testified€that€she€treated€theÐ l d Ðdefendant€on€April€2,€1996.€€She€said€that€the€defendant€had€two€lacerations€on€his€chinÐ 80 Ðand€abrasions€on€his€left€hand€and€right€elbow.€€She€said€that€she€did€not€see€anyÐ ü  Ðinjuries€to€his€chest.€€She€stated€that€he€smelled€strongly€of€alcohol.€€She€said€that€heÐ ÐÈ  Ðinitially€refused€to€submit€to€a€blood€alcohol€test,€claiming€that€he€did€not€like€needles.€Ð œ”  ÐShe€said€that€she€laughed€because€the€defendantððs€chest€was€covered€with€blueÐ h` Ðtattoos,€and€she€told€him€she€thought€that€he€could€stand€the€test€if€he€had€been€able€toÐ 4, Ðstand€the€tattoos.€€She€said€that€the€defendant€later€agreed€to€the€test.€€She€said€thatÐ ø Ðher€notes€from€that€day€indicate€that€the€defendant€denied€being€the€driver€of€the€car.Ð ÌÄ ÐÌà ¸ àOfficer€David€Kitchens€testified€that€he€worked€in€the€accidentÐ d\ Ðinvestigation€division€of€the€Metro€Police€Department.€€He€said€that€he€was€called€to€anÐ 0 ( Ðaccident€scene€after€3:15€a.m.€on€April€2,€1996.€€He€said€that€he€saw€a€female€in€theÐ ü!ô Ðpassengerððs€seat€with€her€feet€tucked€underneath€her.€€He€said€that€the€defendant€hadÐ È#À  Ðjust€left€the€car€and€that€the€odor€of€alcohol€from€the€defendantððs€mouth€was€obvious€toÐ ”%Œ" Ðextreme.€€He€said€that€he€saw€no€evidence€that€the€car€had€flipped€or€spun.€€He€saidÐ `'X $ Ðthe€damage€to€the€steering€wheel€stood€out€in€his€mind.Ð ,)$"& ÐÌà ¸ àOfficer€Kitchens€testified€that€he€followed€the€defendant€to€the€hospitalÐ Ä,¼%* Ðwhere€the€defendant€was€loud,€boisterous,€profane€and€refused€to€stay€on€the€bed.€€HeÐ .ˆ', Ðsaid€he€read€the€implied€consent€law€to€the€defendant€again€and€asked€him€to€submit€toÐ \0T). Ða€blood€alcohol€test.€€He€said€that€the€defendant€refused€the€test.€€He€said€he€informedÐ (2 +0 Ðthe€defendant€that€the€officers€would€force€him€to€submit€to€the€test,€and€the€defendantÐ ô3ì,2 Ðagreed€to€the€test€after€speaking€with€another€officer.€€He€said€that€while€at€the€hospitalÐ À5¸.4 Ðwith€the€defendant,€he€saw€a€red,€half„moon€shaped€mark€across€the€defendantððs€chest.Ð Œ7„06 Їà ¸ àMetro€Police€Officer€Jim€Reed€testified€that€he€was€at€the€hospital€with€theÐ  Ðdefendant€when€the€defendant€refused€to€submit€to€a€blood€alcohol€test€because€heÐ ÔÌ Ðwas€afraid€of€needles.€€He€said€that€he€told€the€defendant€that€his€fear€of€needles€wasÐ   ˜ Ðillogical€given€the€fact€that€the€defendant€was€covered€with€tattoos.€€He€said€that€heÐ l d Ðnoticed€an€obvious€reddish,€semi„circular€mark€on€the€defendantððs€chest€similar€to€aÐ 80 Ðmark€that€would€be€left€upon€colliding€with€a€steering€wheel.Ð ü  ÐÌà ¸ àSpecial€Agent€John€Harrison€of€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€InvestigationÐ œ”  Ð(TBI)€testified€that€he€worked€as€a€toxicologist€at€the€state€crime€laboratory.€€He€saidÐ h` Ðthat€the€defendantððs€blood€sample€revealed€a€blood€alcohol€content€of€.17€percent.Ð 4, ÐÌà ¸ àDr.€Bruce€Levy,€the€Davidson€County€Medical€Examiner,€testified€as€anÐ ÌÄ Ðexpert€in€forensic€pathology.€€He€said€that€he€had€reviewed€the€autopsy€report€on€theÐ ˜ Ðvictim.€€He€said€that€the€report€revealed€that€she€suffered€a€broken€jaw;€chinÐ d\ Ðlacerations;€a€broken€neck;€a€crushed€larynx€and€trachea;€multiple€broken€ribs;€tears€inÐ 0 ( Ðher€liver;€a€broken€spine;€a€broken€right€arm;€two€broken€ankles;€bruising€to€her€knees,Ð ü!ô Ðthe€front€of€her€legs,€and€the€right€side€of€her€chest;€and€bleeding€on€the€back€of€herÐ È#À  Ðscalp.€€He€said€that€she€died€as€a€result€of€the€blunt€force€injuries€that€she€received€inÐ ”%Œ" Ðthe€accident.€€He€said€that€the€injuries€were€consistent€with€her€sitting€in€theÐ `'X $ Ðpassengerððs€seat€of€a€car€involved€in€a€front€end€collision.€€He€said€that€while€it€wouldÐ ,)$"& Ðbe€possible€for€her€to€have€received€the€injuries€while€in€the€driverððs€seat,€her€mostÐ ø*ð#( Ðserious€injuries€were€to€her€head€and€neck;€whereas,€had€she€been€behind€the€steeringÐ Ä,¼%* Ðwheel,€the€most€serious€injuries€would€have€been€to€the€chest€area.€€He€noted€that€sheÐ .ˆ', Ðdid€not€have€a€steering€wheel€imprint.Ð \0T). ÐÌà ¸ àJoe€Farmer€testified€that€on€April€2,€1996,€he€was€working€for€Browning„Ð ô3ì,2 ÐFerris€Industries€relocating€dumpsters€from€1€a.m.€to€1€p.m.€€He€said€that€he€likes€carsÐ À5¸.4 Ðand€that€between€2:40€and€2:50€a.m.,€he€noticed€a€red€Camaro€across€from€him€at€anÐ Œ7„06 ÐÑ †Ñâ  âÑTR[ì AØ'ÿ Legal[ì AØ'ÿ Legal  AØ'ÿ Legal  AØ'ÿ LegalTÑâ  âÑ  Ñintersection.€€He€said€that€an€attractive,€dark„haired€young€woman€was€driving,€and€sheÐ  Ðhad€two€male€passengers.€€Although€he€admitted€that€his€truck€sits€very€high€up€fromÐ ÔÌ Ðthe€ground,€he€said€that€he€was€positive€about€the€gender€of€the€driver.€€He€said€thatÐ   ˜ Ðlater€that€morning,€another€driver€told€him€about€an€accident€involving€a€red€Camaro,€inÐ l d Ðwhich€a€young€woman€was€killed.Ð 80 ÐÌà ¸ àChad€Jumps€testified€that€he€is€an€acquaintance€of€the€defendant.€€HeÐ ÐÈ  Ðsaid€that€in€early€April€1996,€he€was€in€Tennessee€helping€the€defendant€move€back€toÐ œ”  ÐIllinois.€€He€said€that€he€and€the€defendant€went€to€a€bar€and€spoke€with€the€bartender,Ð h` Ðwho€offered€to€show€them€another€night€spot€called€the€Mix€Factory€when€her€shiftÐ 4, Ðended.€€He€said€that€he€thought€the€bartenderððs€name€was€Christina€Hollis.€€He€saidÐ ø Ðthat€she€drove€them€to€the€Mix€Factory,€and€they€stayed€until€it€closed€around€3:00€a.m.€Ð ÌÄ ÐHe€stated€that€when€they€left€the€Mix€Factory,€Ms.€Hollis€drove,€the€defendant€sat€in€theÐ ˜ Ðpassengerððs€seat,€and€he€sat€in€the€backseat€behind€the€defendant.€€He€said€theyÐ d\ Ðstopped€at€a€gas€station€and€bought€a€twelve€pack€of€beer.€€He€said€that€Ms.€Hollis€wasÐ 0 ( Ðdriving€when€they€left€the€gas€station€and€that€he€does€not€remember€anything€fromÐ ü!ô Ðthen€until€he€awoke€in€the€hospital€about€eight€hours€later.Ð È#À  ÐÌà ¸ àDr.€Charles€Harlan€testified€that€he€previously€served€as€the€chief€medicalÐ `'X $ Ðexaminer€for€the€state€of€Tennessee,€and€in€addition€to€his€private€practice,€he€currentlyÐ ,)$"& Ðserved€on€a€contract€basis€as€the€county€medical€examiner€for€seven€counties€in€middleÐ ø*ð#( ÐTennessee.€€He€stated€that€he€reviewed€the€victimððs€medical€records,€including€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðautopsy€report€and€photographs€of€the€damage€to€the€car,€and€he€concluded€that€theÐ .ˆ', Ðvictim€was€driving€the€car€at€the€time€of€the€accident.€€He€stated€that€the€victimððs€brokenÐ \0T). Ðankles€were€consistent€with€the€victim€bracing€her€feet€against€the€brake€pedal,€theÐ (2 +0 Ðaccelerator€pedal,€or€the€floorboard€of€the€car.€€He€said€that€her€liver€injuries€could€haveÐ ô3ì,2 Ðbeen€caused€by€impact€with€the€bottom€of€the€steering€wheel.€€He€said€that€her€brokenÐ À5¸.4 Ðribs€were€consistent€with€her€chest€hitting€the€sides€of€the€steering€wheel.€€He€statedÐ Œ7„06 Ðthat€her€broken€arm€could€have€resulted€from€gripping€or€bracing€against€the€steeringÐ  Ðwheel€or€dashboard€at€the€time€of€impact.€€He€said€that€he€believed€her€neck€injuriesÐ ÔÌ Ðwere€caused€by€the€impact€with€the€dashboard€over€the€steering€wheel.€€He€admittedÐ   ˜ Ðthat€the€injuries€to€the€victimððs€neck€could€have€been€caused€by€striking€the€dashboardÐ l d Ðon€either€side€of€the€car,€but€he€said€that€the€victimððs€injuries€were€caused€by€multipleÐ 80 Ðpoints€of€impact.€€He€stated€that€if€the€victim€were€in€the€passengerððs€seat€when€theÐ ü  Ðaccident€occurred,€sufficient€points€of€impact€would€not€have€been€present€to€explain€allÐ ÐÈ  Ðof€her€injuries.€€Ð œ”  ÐÌà ¸ àDr.€Harlan€testified€that€he€had€also€reviewed€the€defendantððs€emergencyÐ 4, Ðroom€records€and€Metro€Fire€Department€EMS€records€from€the€time€of€the€accident.€Ð ø ÐHe€stated€that€the€EMS€records€note€that€the€defendant€had€negative€trauma€to€hisÐ ÌÄ Ðchest.€€He€said€that€the€emergency€room€records€reveal€that€the€doctor€noted€noÐ ˜ Ðbruising€on€the€defendantððs€chest€in€an€office€visit€two€days€after€the€accident.€€HeÐ d\ Ðconcluded€that€if€the€defendant€had€exhibited€a€red€semi„circle€on€his€chest€on€April€2,Ð 0 ( Ðthis€injury€would€have€also€been€apparent€two€days€later.€€He€noted€that€the€defendantÐ ü!ô Ðhad€pooling€of€blood€and€abrasions€in€the€knee€area.€€He€stated€that€the€defendantððsÐ È#À  Ðinjuries€were€not€consistent€with€him€being€the€driver.Ð ”%Œ" ÐÌà ¸ àBased€upon€the€foregoing€evidence,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€ofÐ ,)$"& Ðvehicular€homicide€by€intoxication€and€vehicular€homicide€by€reckless€endangerment.€Ð ø*ð#( ÐThe€trial€court€merged€the€two€convictions€into€the€vehicular€homicide€by€intoxicationÐ Ä,¼%* Ðcount€because€the€charges€stemmed€from€a€single€death.Ð .ˆ', ÐÌÌà@’’ Dàò òI.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óˆÐ ô3ì,2 Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€prove€beyondÐ À5¸.4 Ða€reasonable€doubt€that€he€was€driving€the€car€at€the€time€of€the€accident.€€He€arguesÐ Œ7„06 Ðthat€because€Dr.€Harlan€concluded€that€the€victim€was€the€driver€based€upon€herÐ  Ðinjuries€and€because€Joe€Farmer€saw€the€victim€driving€the€car€shortly€before€theÐ ÔÌ Ðaccident,€the€state€has€failed€to€disprove€all€reasonable€alternatives€to€theÐ   ˜ Ðcircumstantial€evidence€placing€him€in€the€driverððs€seat.€€The€state€contends€that€theÐ l d Ðevidence€is€sufficient.Ð 80 ÐÌà ¸ àOur€standard€of€review€when€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€questionedÐ ÐÈ  Ðon€appeal€is€"whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÐ œ”  Ðprosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€theÐ h` Ðcrime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.Ð 4, Ð2781,€2789€(1979).€€This€means€that€we€may€not€reweigh€the€evidence,€but€mustÐ ø Ðpresume€that€the€jury€has€resolved€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€and€drawn€allÐ ÌÄ Ðreasonable€inferences€from€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,Ð ˜ Ð676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.Ð d\ Ð1978).€€For€circumstantial€evidence€to€provide€the€sole€basis€for€the€conviction,€the€factsÐ 0 ( Ðmust€be€ð ðso€closely€interwoven€and€connected€that€the€finger€of€guilt€is€pointedÐ ü!ô Ðunerringly€at€the€defendant€and€the€defendant€alone.ðð€€òòState€v.€Crawfordóó,€225€Tenn.Ð È#À  Ð478,€484,€470€S.W.2d€610,€613€(1971).€€The€evidence€must€be€both€consistent€with€theÐ ”%Œ" Ðdefendantððs€guilt€and€inconsistent€with€the€defendantððs€innocence,€exclude€all€otherÐ `'X $ Ðreasonable€theories€except€that€of€guilt,€and€establish€the€defendantððs€guilt€so€as€toÐ ,)$"& Ðconvince€the€mind€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€he€or€she€committed€the€crime.€Ð ø*ð#( ÐòòPatterson€v.€Stateóó,€4€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€657,€661,€475€S.W.2d€201,€203€(1971).€€WhetherÐ Ä,¼%* Ðother€reasonable€inferences€are€excluded€by€the€circumstantial€evidence€is€also€aÐ .ˆ', Ðquestion€for€the€jury.Ð \0T). ÐÌà ¸ àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„213(a)(2)€defines€vehicular€homicide€as€ð ðtheÐ ô3ì,2 Ðreckless€killing€of€another€by€the€operation€of€an€automobile,€.€.€.€[a]s€the€proximateÐ À5¸.4 Ðresult€of€the€driverððs€intoxication€as€set€forth€in€ðð€55„10„401.ðð€€Viewing€the€evidence€inÐ Œ7„06 Ðthe€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€Dr.€Levy€testified€that€the€victim€died€as€a€result€ofÐ  Ðthe€injuries€she€sustained€in€the€accident.€€Special€Agent€Harrison€testified€that€theÐ ÔÌ Ðdefendantððs€blood€alcohol€content€was€.17€percent€on€the€morning€of€the€accident.€Ð   ˜ ÐBased€upon€this€percentage,€the€defendant€is€presumed€to€be€under€the€influence€of€anÐ l d Ðintoxicant€and€his€ability€to€drive€thereby€impaired.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„Ð 80 Ð408(b).Ð ü  ÐÌà ¸ àThe€circumstantial€evidence€points€to€the€defendant€as€the€driver€of€theÐ œ”  ÐCamaro€at€the€time€of€the€accident.€€Officer€Ollis€testified€that€he€found€the€defendantÐ h` Ðunconscious€in€the€driverððs€seat€thirty€seconds€after€he€heard€the€crash.€€Officers€Ollis,Ð 4, ÐDavidson€and€Kitchens€all€testified€that€the€victim€was€on€the€passengerððs€side€with€herÐ ø Ðfeet€bent€beneath€her€seat.€€Officers€Kitchens€and€Reed€reported€seeing€a€red€semi„Ð ÌÄ Ðcircular€mark€on€the€defendantððs€chest€shortly€after€the€accident.€€Testimony€andÐ ˜ Ðphotographs€introduced€at€the€trial€revealed€that€the€Camaro€had€bucket€seatsÐ d\ Ðseparated€by€a€tall€gear€shift.€€Both€Officers€Davidson€and€Kitchens€found€no€evidenceÐ 0 ( Ðthat€the€car€had€spun€or€rolled.€€Dr.€Levy€and€Dr.€Harlan€both€admitted€that€the€victimððsÐ ü!ô Ðinjuries€could€have€been€sustained€in€either€the€driverððs€seat€or€the€passengerððs€seat,Ð È#À  Ðwith€each€providing€a€different€explanation€of€how€the€victimððs€injuries€indicated€aÐ ”%Œ" Ðparticular€position.€€The€jury€obviously€accredited€the€explanation€provided€by€Dr.€Levy.€Ð `'X $ ÐAlthough€Mr.€Farmer€testified€that€he€saw€a€woman€driving€the€Camaro€between€2:40Ð ,)$"& Ðand€2:50€p.m.,€he€did€not€know€who€was€driving€the€car€at€the€time€of€the€accidentÐ ø*ð#( Ðabout€twenty„five€minutes€later.€€Furthermore,€Mr.€Farmer€or€any€other€witness€failed€toÐ Ä,¼%* Ðgive€any€reasonable€explanation€of€how€the€defendant€came€to€be€located€in€theÐ .ˆ', Ðdriverððs€seat€thirty€seconds€after€the€accident€occurred.€€Thus,€the€evidence€taken€in€theÐ \0T). Ðlight€most€favorable€to€the€state€excludes€all€reasonable€theories€except€that€of€theÐ (2 +0 Ðdefendant€as€the€driver.Ð ô3ì,2 ÐÌà@ò ò Dàò òII.€€TRIAL€COURTððS€STATEMENT€TO€THE€JURY€VENIREó óˆÐ Œ7„06 Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€errorÐ  Ðwhen€it€told€the€jurors€during€voir€dire€that€they€would€be€held€in€contempt€for€perjury€ifÐ ÔÌ Ðthey€failed€to€return€a€verdict€consistent€with€the€trial€courtððs€instruction€on€the€law.€€TheÐ   ˜ Ðdefendant€admits€that€he€failed€to€object€contemporaneously€to€the€trial€courtððsÐ l d Ðstatement.€€However,€he€asks€that€we€find€plain€error€because€the€trial€courtððs€statementÐ 80 Ðprejudiced€the€judicial€process,€thereby€requiring€a€new€trial€even€if€the€misconduct€didÐ ü  Ðnot€influence€the€verdict.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Perryóó,€740€S.W.2d€723,€726€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ÐÈ  Ð1987)€(holding€that€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process€resulting€from€a€jurorððs€exposure€toÐ œ”  Ðextraneous€information€required€a€new€trial€even€though€the€error€probably€had€noÐ h` Ðeffect€on€the€trialððs€outcome);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).Ð 4, ÐÌà ¸ àThe€statement€in€question€came€during€the€trial€courtððs€explanation€of€theÐ ÌÄ Ðpurpose€of€voir€dire€to€the€jury€pool.€€The€trial€court€told€the€potential€jurors€that€theyÐ ˜ Ðneed€not€disregard€their€individual€life€experiences€and€their€common€sense€whenÐ d\ Ðdeliberating.€€The€trial€court€then€stated€as€follows:Ð 0 ( ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àà  àIt€is€important€however,€that€your€life€experiences€andÐ ü!ô Ðyour€beliefs€not€interfere€with€your€responsibilities.Ðâ"Ú¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àThe€most€important€thing€that€I€may€say€today€is€that€forÐ ®$¦! Ðyou€to€be€a€juror,€you€must€be€able€to€be€fair,€impartial,€andÐ ”%Œ" Ðunbiased;€fair,€impartial,€and€unbiased.€€And€the€reason€I€sayÐ z&r# Ðthat€is,€think€of€it€this€way:€€If€you€knew€of€someone€who€had€aÐ `'X $ Ðmatter€that€needed€to€go€to€court€and€needed€to€be€ruled€uponÐ F(>!% Ðby€jurors,€wouldnððt€it€be€terribly€unfair€if€one€or€more€membersÐ ,)$"& Ðof€the€jury€had€their€minds€made€up€before€they€ever€heard€theÐ * #' Ðevidence,€before€they€ever€heard€a€witness€testify,€and€beforeÐ ø*ð#( Ðthey€ever€heard€what€the€law€was?€€That€wouldnððt€be€fair.€€AndÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðyou€donððt€want€to€be€in€that€position€and€I€sure€donððt.ÐÄ,¼%*¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÌà8 ¸ àà  àòòAnd€I€promise€you,€if€you€serve€on€the€jury,€and€thisÐ v/n(- Ðcase€may€take€two€or€three€days€to€try.€€If€you€serve€on€theÐ \0T). Ðjury,€this€jury,€and€if€during€those€deliberations,€two€or€threeÐ B1:*/ Ðdays€later€you€say,€Iððm€sorry,€I€just€canððt€apply€the€law€thatÐ (2 +0 ÐJudge€Clement€read€to€us,€Iððve€just€got€real€strong€feelingsÐ 3,1 Ðabout€this€and€I€donððt€care€what€the€law€is,€this€is€the€way€I€seeÐ ô3ì,2 Ðit€and€Iððm€going€to€rule€this€way.€€Well,€you€will€have€wastedÐ Ú4Ò-3 Ðeverybodyððs€time.€€You€will€have€offended€at€least€[eleven]Ð À5¸.4 Ðpeople€in€the€jury€room.€€And€I€may€hold€you€in€contempt€forÐ ¦6ž/5 Ðhaving€committed€perjury.€So€donððt€put€yourself€or€the€othersÐ Œ7„06 Ðin€that€position.óóÐr8j17¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Їà8 ¸ àà  àBe€honest€with€yourself,€be€honest€with€me,€be€honestÐ  Ðwith€your€fellow€jurors€when€we€ask€you€if€you€have€lifeÐ îæ Ðexperiences€or€if€you€have€opinions€on€the€subject.€€Just€shareÐ ÔÌ Ðit€with€us.€€Itððs€best€to€get€it€out€early.к ²¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àAnd€what€can€I€do,€Iððll€visit€with€you€and€say,€well,€canÐ † ~ Ðyou€put€that€aside€and€make€a€decision€based€solely€uponÐ l d Ðwhat€the€witness€testified€to€and€what€the€law€is?€€And€if€youÐ R J Ðcan€answer€that€in€good€faith,€then€youððll€be€a€great€juror.Ð80¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àAnd€if€you€say,€Iððm€sorry,€but€my€belief€on€this€issue,€orÐ ü  Ðmy€life€experience€was€so€personal€and€so€heartfelt€that€I€justÐ êâ  Ðcanððt€put€that€aside.€€And€then€what€Iððll€say€is,€thank€you€veryÐ ÐÈ  Ðmuch€for€your€honesty,€youððve€done€what€you€should€do.€€IÐ ¶®  Ðwould€excuse€you€not€from€the€whole€jury€panel€but€just€fromÐ œ”  Ðthis€case,€because€it€may€be€this€type€of€case€might€not€be€theÐ ‚z  Ðbest€case€for€you.Ðh`¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓThe€defendant€challenges€the€underlined€portion.€€Ð 4, ÐÌÓ  Óà ¸ à"The€ultimate€goal€of€voir€dire€is€to€insure€that€jurors€are€competent,Ð ÌÄ Ðunbiased€and€impartial,€and€the€decision€of€how€to€conduct€voir€dire€of€prospectiveÐ ˜ Ðjurors€rests€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court."€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2dÐ d\ Ð530,€540€(Tenn.€1994).€€Rule€24(f),€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.,€directs€that€the€trial€court€ð ðgiveÐ 0 ( Ðthe€prospective€jurors€appropriate€admonitions€regarding€their€conduct€during€theÐ ü!ô Ðselection€process.ðð€€The€trial€courtððs€statement,€when€viewed€in€the€context€of€theÐ È#À  Ðcourtððs€explanation€of€the€potential€jurorsðð€responsibilities,€was€merely€an€admonition€toÐ ”%Œ" Ðthe€potential€jurors€to€respond€truthfully€during€voir€dire.€€Given€this€context,€we€do€notÐ `'X $ Ðbelieve€it€to€be€clear€error€that€adversely€affected€a€substantial€right€of€the€defendant€asÐ ,)$"& Ðis€required€for€a€determination€of€plain€error.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Adkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€626,Ð ø*ð#( Ð641„42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ð Ä,¼%* ÐÌà@ˆˆ%Dàò òIII.€òòBATSONóó€CHALLENGEó óˆÐ \0T). Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€state€used€its€peremptory€challenges€toÐ (2 +0 Ðstrike€African„American€females€from€the€jury€on€the€basis€of€their€race€and€gender€inÐ ô3ì,2 Ðviolation€of€òòBatson€v.€Kentuckyóó,€476€U.S.€79,€106€S.€Ct.€1712€(1986).€€He€argues€thatÐ À5¸.4 Ðthe€stateððs€alleged€reason€for€striking€these€potential€jurors€was€pretextual.€€The€stateÐ Œ7„06 Ðcontends€that€the€trial€court€properly€determined€that€the€state€challenged€theseÐ  Ðpotential€jurors€based€upon€a€valid,€race„neutral€reason.Ð ÔÌ ÐÌà ¸ àÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔThe€state€questioned€the€jury€panel€about€their€views€on€circumstantialÐ l d Ðevidence€using€several€hypothetical€scenarios.€€Ms.€Cage€said€that€she€would€not€wantÐ 80 Ðto€find€the€defendant€guilty€if€the€evidence€against€him€were€circumstantial.€€Ms.€Lee€didÐ ü  Ðnot€believe€the€circumstantial€evidence€in€the€prosecutorððs€hypothetical€was€goodÐ ÐÈ  Ðstrong€evidence€and€even€stated€that€the€prosecutor€had€provided€no€evidence€in€hisÐ œ”  Ðhypothetical.€€Ms.€Taylor€stated€that€she€wanted€more€proof€beyond€the€circumstantialÐ h` Ðevidence€presented€in€the€hypothetical.€€In€response€to€a€hypothetical€burglary€with€aÐ 4, Ðquestionable€eyewitness€naming€one€perpetrator€and€circumstantial€evidence€pointingÐ ø Ðto€a€second€perpetrator,€Ms.€Akins€said€that€she€was€not€sure€which€individual€was€theÐ ÌÄ Ðperpetrator.€€The€prosecutor€asked€for€a€show€of€hands€from€the€jury€panel€of€thoseÐ ˜ Ðwho€thought€the€circumstantial€evidence€in€his€hypothetical€was€good€strong€evidence.€Ð d\ ÐSubsequent€questioning€reveals€that€Ms.€Lee€and€Ms.€Cage€did€not€raise€their€hands,Ð 0 ( Ðbut€the€record€does€not€reveal€whether€Ms.€Taylor€or€Ms.€Akins€raised€their€hands.Ð ü!ô ÐÌà ¸ àThe€trial€court€denied€the€stateððs€motion€to€strike€Ms.€Cage€for€cause,Ð ”%Œ" Ðnoting€that€although€it€was€a€close€issue,€she€had€not€received€the€jury€charge€definingÐ `'X $ Ðdirect€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€The€state€then€used€its€peremptory€challenges€toÐ ,)$"& Ðstrike€Ms.€Cage,€Ms.€Lee,€Ms.€Taylor,€and€Ms.€Akins.€€The€defendant€objected,€and€theÐ ø*ð#( Ðtrial€court€held€a€hearing€in€chambers.€€The€state€noted€that€although€it€had€struck€fourÐ Ä,¼%* ÐAfrican„American€women,€three€of€the€four€replacements€were€African„AmericanÐ .ˆ', Ðwomen.€€The€state€said€that€it€struck€the€women€because€they€did€not€like€circumstantialÐ \0T). Ðevidence.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€record€fully€supported€the€stateððs€reason,€notingÐ (2 +0 Ðthat€the€responses€of€the€stricken€jurors€indicated€that€they€ð ðdid€not€much€care€forÐ ô3ì,2 Ðcircumstantial€evidence,€to€say€the€very€least.ðð€€€€€€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³Cˆ#ÔÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔÐ À5¸.4 Ðà ¸ àÐ Œ7„06 Ðà ¸ àIn€òòBatson€v.€Kentuckyóó,€476€U.S.€79,€106€S.€Ct.€1712€(1986),€the€UnitedÐ  ÐStates€Supreme€Court€held€that€a€stateððs€use€of€peremptory€challenges€to€exclude€Ð ÔÌ Ðintentionally€jurors€of€the€defendantððs€race€violates€the€defendantððs€FourteenthÐ   ˜ ÐAmendment€right€to€equal€protection.€€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³Ö‘#ÔÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔThe€Court€upheld€this€principle€in€òòPowers€v.Ð l d ÐOhioóó,€499€U.S.€400,€111€S.€Ct.€1364€(1991),€but€eliminated€the€requirement€that€theÐ 80 Ðdefendant€and€the€potential€juror€share€the€same€race.€€The€Court€held€that€race€wasÐ ü  Ðð ðirrelevant€to€a€defendantððs€standing€to€object€to€the€discriminatory€use€of€peremptoryÐ ÐÈ  Ðchallenges.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€416,€111€S.€Ct.€at€1373.€€The€Court€subsequently€held€thatÐ œ”  Ðperemptory€strikes€based€solely€on€gender€are€also€constitutionally€impermissible.€Ð h` ÐòòJ.E.B.€v.€Alabama€ex.€rel€T.B.óó,€511€U.S.€127,€140,€114€S.€Ct.€1419,€1427„28€(1994);€òòseeóóÐ 4, ÐòòState€v.€Turneróó,€879€S.W.2d€819,€821„23€(Tenn.€1994).€€€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³µ“#ÔÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔÐ ø ÐÌà ¸ àA€defendant€seeking€to€raise€a€òòBatsonóó€claim€has€the€initial€burden€ofÐ ˜ Ðmaking€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóó€showing€of€purposeful€discrimination€against€a€prospective€juror.òòÐ d\ ÐBatsonóó€476€U.S.€at€93„94,€106€S.€Ct.€at€1721;€òòState€v.€Ellisonóó,€841€S.W.2d€824,€826Ð 0 ( Ð(Tenn.€1992).Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³ —#ÔÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³Ô€€Our€supreme€court€has€held€that€in€order€to€establish€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóó€case,Ð ü!ô Ða€defendant€ð ðmust€establish€that€a€consideration€of€all€the€relevant€circumstances€raisesÐ È#À  Ðan€inference€of€purposeful€discrimination.ðð€€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³È˜#ÔÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔòòWoodson€v.€Porter€Brown€Limestone€Co.óó,Ð ”%Œ" Ð916€S.W.2d€896,€902„03€(Tenn.€1996).€€Once€the€defendant€establishes€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóóÐ `'X $ Ðshowing€of€purposeful€discrimination,€the€burden€shifts€to€the€state€to€articulate€a€race„Ð ,)$"& Ðneutral€reason€for€the€challenge.€€òòBatsonóó,€476€U.S.€at€97,€106€S.€Ct.€at€1723.€€TheÐ ø*ð#( Ðstateððs€explanation€ð ðmust€be€based€on€more€than€stereotypical€assumptions,€but€it€needÐ Ä,¼%* Ðnot€rise€to€the€level€required€to€justify€the€exercise€of€a€challenge€for€cause.ðð€òòEllisonóó,Ð .ˆ', Ð841€S.W.2d€at€826;€òòBatsonóó,€476€U.S.€at€97,€106€S.€Ct.€at€1723.Ð \0T). ÐÌà ¸ àIn€ruling€on€an€objection€to€the€discriminatory€use€of€a€peremptoryÐ ô3ì,2 Ðchallenge,€the€trial€court€must€articulate€specific€reasons€for€each€of€its€factual€findings.€Ð À5¸.4 ÐòòWoodsonóó,€916€S.W.2d€at€906.€€First,€the€court€should€explain€why€the€objecting€partyÐ Œ7„06 Ðhas€or€has€not€established€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóó€showing€of€purposeful€discrimination.€€Then,€ifÐ  Ðthe€defendant€has€made€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóó€showing,€the€court€must€determine€whether€theÐ ÔÌ Ðstate€gave€a€race„neutral€explanation€for€the€challenge€and€whether€it€finds,€based€onÐ   ˜ Ðthe€totality€of€the€circumstances,€that€the€challenge€was€the€result€of€purposefulÐ l d Ðdiscrimination.€€òòId.óó€€ð ðThe€trial€courtððs€factual€findings€are€imperative€in€this€context.€€OnÐ 80 Ðappeal,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€are€to€be€accorded€great€deference€and€not€set€asideÐ ü  Ðunless€clearly€erroneous.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ ÐÈ  ÐÌà ¸ àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€did€not€explicitly€state€whether€the€defendantÐ h` Ðmade€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóó€showing€of€discrimination.€€In€òòWoodsonóó,€our€supreme€courtÐ 4, Ðconcluded€that€the€trial€court€had€found€that€the€objecting€party€made€a€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóóÐ ø Ðshowing€of€purposeful€discrimination,€reasoning€that€if€the€objecting€party€had€not€madeÐ ÌÄ Ða€òòprimaóó€òòfacieóó€showing,€the€trial€court€would€not€have€required€an€explanation€for€theÐ ˜ Ðchallenge.€€òòId.óó€at€905.€€In€any€event,€the€trial€court€in€the€present€case€concluded€thatÐ d\ Ðthe€stateððs€reason€for€challenging€the€prospective€jurors€was€not€discriminatory.€€TheÐ 0 ( Ðdefendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€only€found€that€the€stateððs€challenges€were€notÐ ü!ô Ðdiscriminatory€with€regard€to€race€but€made€no€finding€concerning€gender.€€We€noteÐ È#À  Ðthat€the€trial€court€stated€that€peremptory€challenges€could€not€be€used€to€discriminateÐ ”%Œ" Ðon€the€basis€of€race€or€gender.€€€Although€the€court€did€point€out€that€the€state€did€notÐ `'X $ Ðstrike€the€African„Americans€who€replaced€the€potential€jurors€in€question,€we€believeÐ ,)$"& Ðthe€record€reveals€that€the€trial€courtððs€finding€of€no€discrimination€applies€to€both€raceÐ ø*ð#( Ðand€gender.Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³š#ÔÔ‡XQ³XX XQ³Ô€€The€court€accredited€the€prosecutorððs€response€that€he€challenged€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðjurors€based€upon€their€lack€of€confidence€in€circumstantial€evidence.Ð .ˆ', ÐÌà ¸ à€€The€defendant€contends€that€the€stateððs€reason€was€pretextual€becauseÐ (2 +0 Ðmany€jurors€who€were€not€stricken€expressed€similar€reservations€about€circumstantialÐ ô3ì,2 Ðevidence.€€The€defendant€downplays€the€four€womenððs€distrust€of€circumstantialÐ À5¸.4 Ðevidence.€€Ms.€Lee€and€Ms.€Cage€could€not€accept€that€circumstantial€evidence€couldÐ Œ7„06 Ðbe€good€evidence.€€Ms.€Taylor€stated€that€she€would€need€proof€beyond€circumstantialÐ  Ðevidence.€€Ms.€Akins€declined€to€choose€circumstantial€evidence€over€questionableÐ ÔÌ Ðdirect€evidence.€€Although€some€potential€jurors€indicated€that€they€would€have€toÐ   ˜ Ðcarefully€weigh€the€circumstantial€evidence,€the€remaining€members€of€the€venireÐ l d Ðindicated€that€circumstantial€evidence€could€be€good€evidence.€€The€one€remainingÐ 80 Ðpotential€juror€who€stated€that€direct€evidence€was€better€than€circumstantial€evidenceÐ ü  Ðalso€said€that€he€could€believe€circumstantial€evidence.€€Based€upon€a€carefulÐ ÐÈ  Ðexamination€of€the€record€before€us,€we€cannot€say€that€the€trial€courtððs€finding€is€clearlyÐ œ”  Ðerroneous.Ð h` ÐÌÔ#† XQ³XXXQ³§#Ôà@$Dàò òIV.€€IMPROPER€ARGUMENTó óˆÐ ø Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€state€improperly€commented€upon€theÐ ÌÄ Ðdefendantððs€silence€during€its€opening€statement,€its€case„in„chief€and€its€closingÐ ˜ Ðargument.€€The€defendant€also€argues€that€the€state€improperly€appealed€to€the€juryððsÐ d\ Ðsympathy€during€closing€argument.€€The€state€contends€that€the€defendantÐ 0 ( Ðmischaracterizes€the€prosecutorððs€analysis€of€the€evidence€as€commenting€upon€theÐ ü!ô Ðdefendantððs€silence.€€The€state€also€asserts€that€even€if€the€prosecutorððs€reference€toÐ È#À  Ðthe€victimððs€family€could€be€considered€a€victim€impact€argument,€it€is€harmless€error€atÐ ”%Œ" Ðmost.Ð `'X $ ÐÌà ¸ àThe€state€initially€contends€that€the€defendant€has€waived€these€issues€byÐ ø*ð#( Ðfailing€to€object€contemporaneously€or€to€raise€the€issues€in€his€motion€for€a€new€trial.€€Ð Ä,¼%* ÐThe€defendant€argues€that€because€his€right€against€self„incrimination€under€the€FifthÐ .ˆ', ÐAmendment€is€a€fundamental€right,€the€failure€to€make€a€contemporaneous€objectionÐ \0T). Ðdoes€not€bar€this€courtððs€consideration€of€the€issue€of€whether€the€state€improperlyÐ (2 +0 Ðcommented€upon€the€defendantððs€silence.€€With€regard€to€the€prosecutorððs€allegedÐ ô3ì,2 Ðappeal€to€the€juryððs€sympathy,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€has€a€duty€toÐ À5¸.4 Ðinsure€òòsuaóó€òòsponteóó€that€closing€arguments€are€appropriate,€and€the€improper€argumentÐ Œ7„06 Ðconstitutes€plain€error.€€Failure€to€object€contemporaneously€to€improper€argumentÐ  Ðconstitutes€a€waiver€pursuant€to€Rule€36(a),€T.R.A.P.€€Furthermore,€errors€related€to€theÐ ÔÌ Ðmisconduct€of€counsel€must€be€presented€in€the€motion€for€a€new€trial€to€be€preservedÐ   ˜ Ðfor€our€review.€€T.R.A.P.€3(e).€€This€court€has€previously€held€that€the€issue€of€whetherÐ l d Ðthe€state€improperly€commented€upon€a€defendantððs€failure€to€testify€was€waived€whenÐ 80 Ðit€was€not€included€in€the€motion€for€a€new€trial.€€òòState€v.€Hixóó,€696€S.W.2d€22,€26€(Tenn.Ð ü  ÐCrim.€App.€1984).€€Thus,€we€will€review€these€issues€to€determine€if€plain€error€exists.€Ð ÐÈ  ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).Ð œ”  ÐÌà@« « Dàò òA.€COMMENTS€UPON€THE€DEFENDANTððS€SILENCEó óˆÐ 4, Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€cites€four€points€in€the€record€in€which€he€characterizes€theÐ ø Ðprosecutorððs€remarks€or€the€testimony€solicited€as€a€comment€upon€the€defendantððsÐ ÌÄ Ðrefusal€to€answer€questions€from€the€investigating€officer€after€the€òòMirandaóó€warningsÐ ˜ Ðwere€given.€€Ô‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔWhen€a€defendant€elects€not€to€testify€at€trial,€a€prosecutor€may€notÐ d\ Ðcomment€upon€the€defendantððs€failure€to€make€a€statement€to€the€police€because€thisÐ 0 ( Ðwould€punish€the€defendant€for€exercising€his€or€her€constitutional€right€to€remain€silent.€Ð ü!ô ÐòòBraden€v.€Stateóó,€534€S.W.2d€657,€659„60€(Tenn.€1976).€€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³ª¸#ÔThe€United€States€SupremeÐ È#À  ÐCourt€has€held€that€it€is€ð ðimpermissible€to€penalize€an€individual€for€exercising€his€FifthÐ ”%Œ" ÐAmendment€privilege€when€he€is€under€police€custodial€interrogation.€€The€prosecutionÐ `'X $ Ðmay€not,€therefore,€use€at€trial€the€fact€that€[a€defendant]€stood€mute€or€claimed€hisÐ ,)$"& Ðprivilege€in€the€face€of€accusation.ðð€€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€468,€86€S.€Ct.Ð ø*ð#( Ð1602,€1625€(1966).Ô‡XQ³XX XQ³Ô€€A€prosecutor€may€comment€upon€the€defendantððs€veracity€whenÐ Ä,¼%* Ðthe€comment€is€supported€by€evidence€in€the€record.€€òòState€v.€Westóó,€767€S.W.2d€387,Ð .ˆ', Ð394€(Tenn.€1989);€òòState€v.€Beasleyóó,€536€S.W.2d€328,€330€(Tenn.€1976).Ð \0T). ÐÌà ¸ àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€prosecutor€commented€upon€theÐ ô3ì,2 Ðdefendantððs€silence€when€the€prosecutor€related€in€the€opening€statement€that€theÐ À5¸.4 Ðdefendant€admitted€driving€but€did€not€know€how€the€accident€occurred:Ð Œ7„06 ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àà  àDuring€the€course€of€the€evening,€police€officers€spokeÐ  Ðto€the€defendant€a€number€of€times.€€And€each€time,€he€toldÐ îæ Ðthem€a€very,€very€different€story.€€The€first€time€officers€spokeÐ ÔÌ Ðto€the€defendant€at€the€scene,€the€defendant€said,€police€wereÐ º ² Ðchasing€us,€we€were€running€from€the€police€and€crashed.€Ð   ˜ ÐThat€wasnððt€true.І ~¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àHe€spoke€with€the€police€a€second€time,€he€said€a€carÐ R J Ðpulled€out€in€front€of€us,€and€he€pulled€out€of€a€gas€station,€itÐ 80 Ðran€us€off€the€road.€€That€wasnððt€true.Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àHe€spoke€to€the€police€a€third€time,€he€said€yes,€[I]€haveÐ êâ  Ðbeen€drinking,€but€it€doesnððt€matter,€I€wasnððt€driving.€She€wasÐ ÐÈ  Ðdriving.€€Helen€Hollis€was€driving.€€That€wasnððt€true.ж® ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àòòFinally,€the€defendant€told€the€truth.€€He€said€to€theÐ ‚z  Ðofficers,€he€was€driving.€€He€said,€he€didnððt€remember€how€theÐ h` Ðcrash€occurred.€€Thatððs€what€happened.ÐNF¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌóóÓÓÓ  ÓThe€defendant€claims€the€underlined€section€is€a€comment€on€his€silence.€€We€do€notÐ  Ðview€the€statement€that€the€defendant€admitted€driving€to€relate€to€the€defendantððsÐ æÞ Ðfailure€to€give€a€statement€to€the€police.€€Instead,€the€prosecutor€simply€pointed€out€toÐ ²ª Ðthe€jury€which€of€defendantððs€statements€to€the€police€should€be€believed.€€This€portionÐ ~v Ðof€the€statement€was€proper.€€Ð JB ÐÌà ¸ àThe€reference€to€the€defendant€not€remembering€how€the€crash€occurredÐ â"Ú Ðrelates€to€the€responses€that€the€defendant€gave€Officer€Davidson€after€the€officerÐ ®$¦! Ðadvised€the€defendant€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€The€defendant€also€challenges€this€portionÐ z&r# Ðof€Officer€Davidsonððs€testimony,€which€was€as€follows:Ð F(>!% ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àà  àPROSECUTOR:€[About€three€hours€after€the€wreck,]Ð * #' Ðyou€once€again€questioned€the€defendant€about€the€collision?Ðø*ð#(¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àDAVIDSON:€Yes€sir.€€At€that€time,€I€advised€him€of€hisÐ Ä,¼%* Ðconstitutional€rights€and€I€asked€him€if€he€could€tell€me€whatÐ ª-¢&+ Ðhappened„„well,€I€asked€him,€did€he€understand€his€rights?€€HeÐ .ˆ', Ðshook€his€head,€yes,€that€he€did.Ðv/n(-¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ àà  àI€asked€him,€could€he€tell€me€what€happened€in€theÐ B1:*/ Ðcollision?€€He€shook€his€head,€no.€€I€said,€can€you€tell€me€whoÐ (2 +0 Ðwas€driving€or€what€happened?€€And€he€again,€shook€his€head,Ð 3,1 Ðno.Ðô3ì,2¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓThe€defendant€characterizes€the€negative€head€shake€as€a€refusal€to€make€aÐ À5¸.4 Ðstatement.€€The€state€contends€that€the€defendantððs€responses€were€not€a€refusal€toÐ Œ7„06 Ðanswer€but€rather€were€voluntary€answers€to€the€officerððs€questions€made€after€theÐ  Ðdefendant€had€been€informed€of€his€constitutional€rights€and€had€indicated€that€heÐ ÔÌ Ðunderstood€those€rights.€€When€a€defendant€voluntarily€makes€a€statement€after€beingÐ   ˜ Ðinformed€of€his€or€her€constitutional€rights,€the€state€may€comment€upon€the€scope€ofÐ l d Ðthat€statement.€€òòSeeóó€òòWare€v.€Stateóó,€565€S.W.2d€906,€908€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€It€isÐ 80 Ðunclear€whether€the€defendantððs€responses€to€Officer€Davidsonððs€questions€constitutedÐ ü  Ðanswers€to€those€questions€or€a€refusal€to€answer.€€In€any€event,€even€if€the€responsesÐ ÐÈ  Ðwere€a€refusal€to€make€a€statement,€thereby€making€Officer€Davidsonððs€testimony€andÐ œ”  Ðthe€prosecutorððs€reference€to€that€testimony€comments€upon€the€defendantððs€silence,Ð h` Ðwe€believe€this€error€to€be€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€in€light€of€the€remaining€Ð 4, Ðevidence€supporting€the€defendantððs€guilt.Ð ø ÐÌà ¸ àThe€defendant€also€contends€that€the€following€statement€made€by€theÐ ˜ Ðstate€during€its€closing€argument€constitutes€a€comment€upon€the€defendantððs€silence:Ð d\ ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àà  àHas€the€defense€given€you€any€reasonable€explanationÐ 0 ( Ð[about]€how€the€defendant€ended€up€in€the€driverððs€seat€andÐ ! ÐHelen€Hollis€ended€up€in€the€passengerððs€seat€seconds€afterÐ ü!ô Ða€viable,€(sic)€high€impact€front„end€collision?€€They€havenððt.Ðâ"Ú¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓThis€court€has€held€that€comments€indicating€that€the€stateððs€proof€remainsÐ ®$¦! Ðuncontradicted€do€not€implicate€the€defendantððs€choice€not€to€testify.€€òòThompson€v.Ð z&r# ÐStateóó,€958€S.W.2d€156,€168€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)€(reviewing€the€failure€to€object€toÐ F(>!% Ðthe€stateððs€argument€that€the€defendant€had€offered€no€defense€to€the€crime);€òòState€v.Ð * #' ÐThomasóó,€818€S.W.2d€350,€364€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(analyzing€the€stateððs€commentÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðthat€ð ðthereððs€no€other€reasonable€explanation,€none€givenðð);€òòState€v.€Blackmonóó,€701Ð ª-¢&+ ÐS.W.2d€228,€233€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985)€(analyzing€the€stateððs€argument€that€theÐ v/n(- Ðdefendant€had€offered€no€ð ðexcuse€or€justificationðð€for€his€escape);€òòState€v.€Couryóó,€697Ð B1:*/ ÐS.W.2d€373,€378€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€€The€stateððs€argument€that€the€defendantÐ 3,1 Ðfailed€to€explain€his€and€the€victimððs€positions€immediately€after€the€accident€is€of€thisÐ Ú4Ò-3 Ðnature.€€It€was€proper€argument.Ð ¦6ž/5 ÐÐ r8j17 Ðà ¸ àFinally,€the€defendant€asserts€that€the€state€commented€upon€his€silenceÐ  Ðduring€its€rebuttal€argument€by€referring€to€his€lack€of€remorse:Ð ÔÌ ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àà  àThe€medical€personnel€finally€get€there.€They€have€toÐ   ˜ Ðuse€the€jaws€of€life€to€pry€the€car€open.€€What€€is€the€first€thingÐ † ~ ÐShawn€Cotton€does?€€Is€he€wondering€how€this€person€hereÐ l d Ð[that]€is€just€barely€hanging€on€to€her€life€[is]€doing?€€Does€heÐ R J Ðsee€if€she€needs€help?€€No.€€He€climbs€from€the€driverððs€seatÐ 80 Ðover€her€body€to€the€passengerððs€seat€to€get€out.€€No€remorseÐ   Ðwhatsoever€for€a€person€laying€next€to€him€dying.Ðü ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à.€.€.€.ÐÐÈ ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ЀÌà8 ¸ àà  àLetððs€talk€about€the€defendant€on€April€2,€1996.€€We€doÐ œ”  Ðknow€that€from€the€get„go€there€was€one€statement,€he€deniedÐ ‚z  Ðdriving.€€We€do€know€that€he€asked€numerous€times€about€hisÐ h` Ðcar.€€He€was€very€upset€that€his€car€was€totaled€out.€€Did€weÐ NF Ðhear€any€statements€that€he€made€concerning€the€welfare€ofÐ 4, Ðthe€passengers€in€the€car?€€Nothing.€€All€we€heard€[were]€hisÐ  Ðconcerns€about€his€car€trying€to€shift€the€burden€.€.€.€away€fromÐ ø Ðhimself.ÐæÞ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓThe€state€contends€that€these€were€comments€about€the€defendantððs€demeanor€andÐ ²ª Ðconduct€shortly€after€the€accident,€and€they€are€relevant€to€the€defendantððs€intoxication,Ð ~v Ðan€element€of€the€crime.€€A€prosecutor€may€properly€base€his€or€her€argument€uponÐ JB Ðinferences€supported€by€evidence€in€the€record.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530,Ð ! Ð552€(Tenn.€1992).€€We€view€these€remarks€to€be€an€evaluation€of€the€defendantððsÐ â"Ú Ðdemeanor€based€upon€evidence€in€the€record.Ð ®$¦! ÐÌà@||)Dàò òB.€€SYMPATHYó óˆÐ F(>!% Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€state€appealed€to€the€juryððs€sympathy€byÐ * #' Ðreferring€to€the€presence€of€the€victimððs€family€during€its€closing€argument.€€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³\¼#ÔOurÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðsupreme€court€has€recognized€that€closing€argument€is€a€valuable€privilege€for€both€theÐ ª-¢&+ Ðstate€and€the€defense€and€that€counsel€is€afforded€wide€latitude€in€presenting€finalÐ v/n(- Ðargument€to€the€jury.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cribbsóó,€967€S.W.2d€773,€783€(Tenn.€1998);€òòState€v.Ð B1:*/ ÐConeóó,€665€S.W.2d€87,€94€(Tenn.€1984).€€When€a€prosecutorððs€argument€goes€beyondÐ 3,1 Ðthe€latitude€afforded,€the€test€for€determining€if€reversal€is€required€is€whether€theÐ Ú4Ò-3 Ðâ âimpropriety€ð ðaffected€the€verdict€to€the€prejudice€of€the€defendant.ðð€€òòHarrington€v.€Stateóó,Ð ¦6ž/5 Ð215€Tenn.€338,€340,€385€S.W.2d€758,€759€(1965).€€Factors€relevant€to€thatÐ  Ðdetermination€include:Ð ÔÌ Ðâ âÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ à1.€€The€conduct€complained€of€viewed€in€context€and€in€light€ofÐ   ˜ Ðthe€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€case.І ~¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à2.€€The€curative€measures€undertaken€by€the€court€and€theÐ R J Ðprosecution.Ð80¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à3.€€The€intent€of€the€prosecutor€in€making€the€improperÐ ü  Ðstatement.Ðêâ ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à4.€€The€cumulative€effect€of€the€improper€conduct€and€anyÐ ¶®  Ðother€errors€in€the€record.М” ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ¸ à5.€€The€relative€strength€or€weakness€of€the€case.Ðh`¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌòòÓÓJudge€v.€Stateóó,€539€S.W.2d€340,€344€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1976).Ô‡XQ³XX XQ³ÔÐ 4, ÐÌÓ  ÓÌà0 ¸ àThe€prosecutor€concluded€his€closing€argument€as€follows:И¸ €%¸ €% ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àà  àWe€donððt€know€much€about€Helen€Hollis.€€We€donððtÐ d\ Ðknow€what€sort€of€daughter€she€was€to€her€parents.€€We€donððtÐ JB Ðknow€what€sort€of€friend€she€was€to€the€people€she€workedÐ 0 ( Ðwith.€€We€donððt€know€what€sort€of€mother€she€was€to€her€son.€Ð ! ÐBut€we€do€know€this,€there€were€people€who€loved€her,€theyððreÐ ü!ô Ðhere€in€the€courtroom€today,€her€mother€and€her€step„father.€Ð â"Ú ÐAnd€theyððve€been€present€for€every€moment,€theyððve€heardÐ È#À  Ðevery€word€that€was€uttered.€€And€for€them,€this€is€the€mostÐ ®$¦! Ðimportant€criminal€case€in€the€world.€€And€I€know€you€will€giveÐ ”%Œ" Ðit€the€consideration€it€deserves.Ðz&r#¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓWhile€we€view€the€reference€to€the€importance€of€the€case€to€the€victimððs€parents€to€beÐ F(>!% Ðinappropriate,€we€conclude€that€it€did€not€affect€the€verdict€to€the€defendantððs€prejudice.€Ð * #' ÐThe€context€of€the€statement€indicates€that€it€was€made€to€impress€upon€the€jury€theÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðimportance€of€their€deliberations.€€Considering€the€trial€courtððs€instruction€to€the€jury€thatÐ ª-¢&+ Ðthe€attorneysðð€arguments€were€not€Ô#† XQ³XXXQ³ç#Ôevidence€and€the€strength€of€the€evidence€againstÐ v/n(- Ðthe€defendant,€we€hold€that€the€statement€did€not€affect€the€verdict€to€the€defendantððsÐ B1:*/ Ðprejudice.Ð 3,1 ÐÌâ âà@QQ Dàò òV.€€CUMULATIVE€EFFECT€OF€ERRORó óˆÐ ¦6ž/5 Ðà ¸ àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€cumulative€effect€of€the€foregoing€errorsÐ  Ðâ âdeprived€him€of€a€fair€trial.€€We€believe€that€the€trial€courtððs€errors€are€of€such€anÐ ÔÌ Ðinconsequential€nature€that€no€cumulative€error€exists.Ð   ˜ ÐÌà ¸ àIn€consideration€of€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€we€affirm€theÐ 80 Ðjudgment€of€conviction.Ð ü  ÐÌÓÓà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ œ”  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÐ ‚z  ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:Ð ~v ÐÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 0 ( ÐJames€Curwood€Witt,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ ! ÐÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ È#À  ÐJohn€Everett€Williams,€Judge€€