’WPC 0ń.IaP•Ī&YNŪ:ŹĶBÓxö©ķ™Ys’©tŒų”ĀĻ~ŲIśüB‡É’M ’y€ $ż…ĒĄAIéxµĆ)®·żÜŽŁ°Dźķ%%0øP_NGBŻ‘3›˜]֎8¶Xmćī¶ hirĖÄQ—ŗs8™ßŖšļ{ż~ŗģ Å]Į+łW߇¤htųH·Ģ]Š_÷ö›ŒŪwģ"’³=’C±U”‘“Ž‹E'ńg†ŗšÄ¢•‡­9-¦Ō B·}“aœ”ƒUę}ż-t„;ķ…¶V­Ķ}Ōūƒ «‰Ž$šž·œńĒ'ܾŃ(ŠŚTä½e֐‰š*•ŻP‰%‹vRBT­iøSqāLä’3gį˜Ę }^Ŗp›}f×0³,_T½ˆuļköä ’›čź® LJ $“zž•vG2m§8ēS~ŗoĒ‘oC( Ž…tEEUB@Mā5·h{Ļ Užūõ…Ž…#ürH‡Ū/ˆ‚G£ł°4䀷 ~•?–„­Xw±$Ō„f¼‹LŠ,芇éJU|É%‘€·WcIfrģ‡UĖŌ™ÄkÅMÓōQż–œ„–h8–Ky"I:…yÉšrkxIƒiĶI6WZč ōuČ&Ib#Į\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ņ— i x mz 0D‘ ĘÕ ʛ Ęa Ę'UNķN;Ų=U@EUčW???²GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGbłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłłł 0ė Bģģ 0¤  D3­ D-ą 0K   ASXĘ« 0¤q 0D A«Y˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSŲŚŲŚŚŲŲŚ0»aA+ā (`£Ŗ$””Ń€.ŃŃ8€½­»»d»»d8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  Ó(ķ€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularņK+   ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ’U‹’ĄĄĄ(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ČhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ĪŻ ƒR“P$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōĪp ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌBecause€of€the€nature€of€the€crime,€we€will€identify€the€victim€by€her€initials.(ČhH  Z‹(Times New Roman  ŽŻ ƒR“P$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōĪp ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌWe€have€been€unable€to€find€a€reference€in€the€record€regarding€injuries€to€the€victimššs€hip.  ØŻ ƒR“P$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōĪp ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌIn€ņņState€v.€Ō_ŌLaricoŌ_Ō€S.€Ō_ŌFicklinŌ_Ōóó,€No.€W2000„01534„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€WL€1011470€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Aug.Š ° Š27,€2001),€the€defendant€had€been€arrested€without€probable€cause,€and€held€without€a€subsequent€judicial€determinationŠ tÄ Šof€probable€cause.€€His€confession,€given€fifty„three€hours€after€his€initial€detention,€was€determined€by€this€court€to€beŠ 8ˆ Šthe€product€of€his€illegal€seizure€and€detention.€€There,€unlike€in€this€matter,€the€additional€evidence€against€the€defendantŠ üL Šwas€š šcircumstantial€and€certainly€not€overwhelming,šš€resulting€in€the€courtššs€reversing€the€conviction€and€remandingŠ Ą Šthe€matter€for€a€new€trial.€€ņņId.óó€at€*10.- ł-(|G2“P$¤¤Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€W»»d d 8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō,šņ»»Ō d(|3Mł$££Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€W»»d d 8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻVVVV'’’dxd)!ČČČČdxdx( ±ž$’’ņ ņFigure€Ś  Ś1Ś  Śó ó^_X`YEž’<<C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Mł$¢¢Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€W»»d d 8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8’’’’’’’’’’C’’ HKKKKŻ ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€H¤»»d dČ8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻŌ_ŌŃ  ŃŃ  ŃŌ€¼bø»»»ŌŃ8€&TXXdź»»d 8Ńą@ttģąŌ‡īi)bøŌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆŠ ° Šą@õõ%ģąAT€JACKSONŌ#†¼bø»īīi) #ԈŠ Ö& ŠÓ  Óą @ ąą @` ąJuly€10,€2001€SessionŠ üL ŠŌ‡X3„X»¼bøŌĢņ ņŌ#†¼bø»XX3„#ŌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEņņóó€v.€ANTHONY€H.€DEANŌ‡X3„X»¼bøŌó óŠ śJ ŠĢą@@½½ģąņ ņDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyŠ ś J Šą@@ųųģąNo.€98„14047€€€€€€James€C.€Beasley,€Jr.,€JudgeŠ ę 6 ŠĢĢą@@ģģ*ģąßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` Aߊ Ŗś  ŠĢą@@TTģąNo.€W2000„01156„CCA„R3„CD€€„€Filed€September€28,€2001Š „õ  ŠĢßA€V) °°` dE<|` Aߊ }Ķ  Šó óĢÓ  Óņ ņó óThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€rape€and€sentenced€to€forty€years€as€a€violent€offender.Š xČ  ŠHe€timely€appealed,€alleging,€ņņinter€aliaóó,€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€suppressing€a€confessionŠ d“ Šobtained,€following€his€warrantless€arrest,€after€he€had€been€jailed€for€five€days€without€aŠ P  Šdetermination€of€probable€cause;€in€allowing€DNA€results€into€evidence;€and€in€permitting€a€forensicŠ <Œ Šnurse€examiner€to€testify€as€a€keeper€of€the€sexual€assault€resource€center€records.€€Based€upon€ourŠ (x Šreview,€we€conclude€that€testimony€regarding€the€records€of€the€Memphis€Sexual€Assault€ResourceŠ d ŠCenter€was€properly€admitted€as€business€records€testimony€and€that€the€DNA€evidence€was€properlyŠ P Šadmitted,€as€well.€€We€conclude€that€the€defendantššs€confinement€violated€his€Fourth€AmendmentŠ ģ< Šrights€and€that€his€confession€should€have€been€suppressed.€€Ō#†¼bø»XX3„‚#ŌŌ‡X3„X»¼bøŌHowever,€this€error€was€harmless€inŠ Ų( Šlight€of€the€other€evidence.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€conviction.Š Ä ŠÓ’ÓĢņ ņTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óŠ œģ ŠĢņņÓ  ÓŌ#†¼bø»ąX3„½#ŌŌ‡X3„X.¼bøŌAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€ņņDavid€G.€Hayesóó€and€ņņJerry€L.Š tÄ ŠSmith,€JJ.óó,€joined.Š `° ŠĢA€C€Wharton,€Jr.,€Shelby€County€Public€Defender;€and€W.€Mark€Ward,€Assistant€Public€Defender,Š 8!ˆ  Šfor€the€appellant,€Anthony€H.€Dean.Š $"t! ŠĢPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€J.€Ross€Dyer,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Š ü#L# ŠWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€J.€Robert€Carter,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General;Š č$8 $ Šand€Paula€Wulff,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Š Ō%$!% ŠÓė ÓĢą@@OO&ģąņ ņOPINIONó óŌ#†¼bø»XX3„ #ŌŌ‡X3„X»¼bøŌŠ ¬'ü"' ŠĢÓ*°,XƒX× –X°œX*ÓņņóóŌ#†¼bø»XX3„7 #ŌÓ  ÓŌ€X3„X»¼bøŌą  ąThe€defendant,€Anthony€H.€Dean,€was€convicted€in€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court€ofŠ „)Ō$) Šaggravated€rape€and€sentenced€to€forty€years€imprisonment€as€a€violent€offender.€€In€his€appeal,€heŠ p*Ą%* Špresents€the€following€issues:Š \+¬&+ Šā āŠ H,˜',ż’ Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ąI.ą0× ` x` xąThe€evidence€of€appellantššs€identity€as€the€culprit€is€insufficientŠ ° Šā āto€support€the€verdict€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Šœģ× x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąII.ą0× ` x` xąThe€trial€judge€erred€in€failing€to€suppress€appellantššs€confessionŠ tÄ Šand€DNA€evidence€that€was€the€š šfruit€of€the€poisonous€treešš€ofŠ `° Šhis€illegal€detention€without€prompt€presentation€before€aŠ L œ Šmagistrate€as€required€by€the€Fourth€Amendment€of€the€U.S.Š 8 ˆ ŠConstitution€and€Article€I,€Section€7€of€the€TennesseeŠ $ t ŠConstitution.Š `× x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąIII.ą0× ` x` xąThe€trial€judge€erred€in€allowing€into€evidence€the€businessŠ č 8  Šrecords€of€the€Sexual€Assault€Resource€Center€as€businessŠ Ō$  Šrecords€when€they€were€made€for€the€sole€purpose€of€litigation.ŠĄ × x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąIV.ą0× ` x` xąThe€trial€judge€erred€in€refusing€to€strike€the€testimonyŠ ˜č  Šconcerning€the€DNA€testing€of€the€appellant€when€the€StateŠ „Ō  Šfailed€to€satisfy€the€š šchain€of€evidencešš€requirement€forŠ pĄ Šadmissibility€of€such€evidence.Š\¬× x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąV.ą0× ` x` xąThe€errors€which€allowed€into€evidence€both€the€allegedŠ 4„ Šconfession€and€the€DNA€testimony€were€such€that€theirŠ  p Šcumulative€effect€cannot€be€considered€harmless€error.Š \× x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąVI.ą0× ` x` xąThe€trial€judge€misapplied€the€enhancement€factors€in€sentencingŠ ä4 Šappellant€to€the€maximum€sentence€of€40€years.ŠŠ × x× x ŠĢņ ņą  ąó óWe€conclude€that€the€defendantššs€confession,€taken€on€the€fifth€day€of€his€confinement,Š Øų Šfollowing€his€warrantless€arrest,€without€a€determination€of€probable€cause,€was€in€violation€of€hisŠ ”ä ŠFourth€Amendment€rights€although€his€rights€were€not€violated€by€the€taking€of€a€DNA€sample€fromŠ €Š Šhim,€pursuant€to€a€search€warrant,€while€he€was€incarcerated.€€Accordingly,€it€was€error€to€admit€theŠ l¼ Šconfession€during€the€trial€but€not€the€DNA€evidence.€€We€further€conclude€that€there€was€aŠ X Ø Šsufficient€showing€as€to€the€chain€of€custody€of€the€defendantššs€blood€sample€resulting€in€testimonyŠ D!” Šthat€the€defendantššs€DNA€matched€the€semen€sample€from€the€victim.€€As€a€result,€we€find€that€theŠ 0"€  Šadmission€of€the€confession€was€harmless.€€Although€the€trial€court€relied€upon€two€inapplicableŠ #l! Šenhancement€factors,€the€remaining€factors€justify€the€imposition€of€the€sentence.€€Accordingly,€weŠ $X" Šaffirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ņ ņŠ ō$D # ŠĢÓ  ÓņņŠ  Ģ&"% ŠDISCUSSIONó óóóŠ ° ŠÓ.ÓĢą  ąThe€victim,€R.G.,׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀who€was€92€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial,€testified€that€as€of€the€day€of€theŠ ˆŲ Šcrime,€August€1,€1998,€she€was€89€years€old,€turning€90€about€two€weeks€later.€€She€said€that€she€wasŠ tÄ Šawakened€at€about€4€a.m.€after€a€man€had€come€into€her€apartment€through€her€balcony€glass€door.€Š `° ŠAs€she€tried€to€rise€from€the€bed,€the€intruder€grabbed€her€throat€and€pushed€her€back.€€He€tried€toŠ L œ Špenetrate€both€her€vagina€and€her€anus,€but€was€unsuccessful€at€first.€€However,€on€a€second€attempt,Š 8 ˆ Šhe€did€penetrate€her€vagina.€€As€a€result€of€the€attack,€the€victim€sustained€tears€and€a€laceration€inŠ $ t Šher€vagina€and€still€had€stiffness€in€her€neck€and€pain€in€both€her€arm€and€shoulder€at€the€time€of€theŠ  ` Štrial.€€Also,€because€of€the€position€she€was€forced€into€during€the€rape,€she€had€to€begin€using€a€caneŠ ü L  Šor€a€walker,€and€was€still€doing€so€at€the€time€of€trial.Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąShe€testified€that€she€recognized€the€intruder€because€he€had€been€in€her€apartment€the€dayŠ Ą  Šbefore€the€attack.€€She€had€noticed€him€near€her€apartment€door,€and€he€said€that€he€lived€in€a€nearbyŠ ¬ü  Šapartment€and€had€not€seen€one€like€hers.€€She€invited€him€in€and,€during€their€conversation,€said€thatŠ ˜č  Šshe€needed€to€have€her€hair€cut.€€He€told€her€that€he€was€a€barber€and€could€cut€her€hair.€€He€left€butŠ „Ō  Šreturned€later€that€day,€coming€into€her€apartment€without€an€invitation€and€telling€the€victim€thatŠ pĄ Šhe€had€come€to€cut€her€hair.€€She€told€him€that€she€did€not€want€her€hair€to€be€cut€then,€and€he€leftŠ \¬ Šagain.€€While€he€was€in€her€apartment,€she€told€him€that€she€kept€her€balcony€door€open€during€theŠ H˜ Šnight€while€she€was€sleeping.€€She€said€that,€during€one€of€her€conversations€with€the€defendant€priorŠ 4„ Što€the€rape,€he€told€her€that€he€lived€in€apartment€1011€with€another€person.€€Subsequently,€when€firstŠ  p Šinterviewed,€the€defendant€was€in€apartment€1011.€€The€victim€lived€in€apartment€1001.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąDuring€direct€examination,€the€victim€testified€that€she€had€picked€out€a€photograph€of€theŠ ä4 Šman€who€attacked€her,€first€saying,€š šThatššs€the€one€I€picked€out€and€signed€my€name€under€it,šš€andŠ Š  Šthen€explaining€that€she€š š[m]ight€not€have€been€positive€but€thatššs€the€one€I€picked€out.šš€€WhenŠ ¼  Šasked,€during€her€trial€testimony,€whether€the€man€who€raped€her€was€in€the€courtroom,€sheŠ Øų Šidentified€the€defendant,€saying,€š šHeššs€sitting€over€there.€€I€saw€him€when€he€came€in.šš€€She€alsoŠ ”ä Šidentified€the€defendantššs€black€and€white€tennis€shoes€as€being€like€those€worn€by€her€attacker.€Š €Š ŠDuring€cross„examination,€the€victim€was€asked€if,€apparently€during€the€preliminary€hearing,€sheŠ l¼ Šhad€identified€another€man€in€the€General€Sessions€courtroom€as€her€attacker€and€appeared€to€denyŠ X Ø Šthat€she€had€done€so.€€However,€Judge€Tim€Dwyer,€of€the€Shelby€County€General€Sessions€CriminalŠ D!” ŠCourt,€testifying€as€a€defense€witness,€recalled€that€the€victim,€in€her€wheelchair,€had€testified€duringŠ 0"€  Šthe€preliminary€hearing€and€had€identified€another€man€as€her€attacker.Š #l! ŠĢą  ąMichael€Carl€Davis,€who€was€the€janitor€and€also€a€resident€of€the€same€apartment€buildingŠ ō$D # Šwhere€the€victim€lived,€testified€that€he€lived€in€apartment€1101,€which€was€directly€above€theŠ ą%0!$ Švictimššs€apartment.€€He€said€that€on€the€morning€the€victim€was€attacked,€he€was€awakened€justŠ Ģ&"% Šbefore€4€a.m.€when€a€man,€whom€he€identified€as€the€defendant,€came€into€his€apartment.€€WhenŠ ø'#& ŠDavis€asked€the€defendant€why€he€was€there,€the€defendant€replied,€š šI€was€just€hollering€at€you.šš€Š ¤(ō#' ŠDavis€recognized€the€defendant€as€having€been€in€the€building€on€previous€occasions€trying€to€getŠ )ą$( Šresidents€to€let€him€cut€their€hair.€€He€said€that€he€was€shown€a€series€of€photographs€either€later€thatŠ ° Šday€or€the€following€day,€and€identified€the€photograph€of€the€defendant€as€the€man€who€had€earlierŠ œģ Šasked€to€cut€his€hair€and€who€had€entered€his€apartment€the€morning€of€the€rape.€€Additionally,€heŠ ˆŲ Šidentified€the€defendant€in€the€courtroom€as€the€same€man.€Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąSandra€K.€Anderson,€a€sexual€assault€nurse€examiner€with€the€Memphis€Sexual€AssaultŠ L œ ŠResource€Center€(š šMSARCšš),€testified€that€she€had€met€with€the€victim€at€the€hospital€on€the€dayŠ 8 ˆ Šof€the€rape€and€collected€evidence€consisting€of€vaginal€and€oral€swabs,€a€blood€standard€for€DNAŠ $ t Šanalysis,€and€pubic€hairs.€€She€described€the€injuries,€which€she€observed€to€the€victim,€and€said€thatŠ  ` Šshe€had€placed€the€rape€kit€in€a€locked€storage€area€of€the€MSARC.Š ü L  ŠĢą  ąSergeant€Donald€Ray€Dickerson,€a€sex€crimes€investigator€with€the€Memphis€PoliceŠ Ō$  ŠDepartment,€testified€that€he€had€met€with€the€victim€on€the€day€of€the€rape€at€the€Regional€MedicalŠ Ą  ŠCenter€in€Memphis.€€After€she€gave€him€a€description€of€the€man€who€had€raped€her,€he€then€beganŠ ¬ü  Štalking€with€residents€of€the€apartment€building€to€see€if€any€of€them€recognized€the€man€from€theŠ ˜č  Šdescription.€€He€was€told€that€a€man€meeting€the€description€š šfrequent[ed]šš€an€apartment€which€wasŠ „Ō  Šon€the€same€floor€and€a€few€units€away€from€that€of€the€victim.€€After€several€visits€with€no€responseŠ pĄ Što€apartment€1011,€the€door€was€opened€by€a€man,€whom€Dickerson€later€identified€as€the€defendant.€Š \¬ ŠDickerson€observed€that€the€defendant€matched€the€description€given€by€the€victim€of€her€attacker.€Š H˜ ŠDuring€this€visit€to€the€apartment,€Dickerson€saw€a€pair€of€tennis€shoes€matching€the€victimššsŠ 4„ Šdescription€of€the€shoes€worn€by€her€attacker.€€The€defendant€said€that€his€name€was€š šTony€AdamsššŠ  p Šand€gave€several€different€dates€of€birth.€€He€also€gave€Dickerson€his€motherššs€name€and€telephoneŠ  \ Šnumber€but,€after€talking€with€her,€Dickerson€determined€that€the€man€with€whom€he€had€spokenŠ ųH Šwas€not€Tony€Adams€but€was€the€defendant,€Anthony€Harold€Dean.€€With€this€information,Š ä4 ŠDickerson€obtained€a€photograph€of€the€defendant€and€showed€it,€along€with€photographs€of€others,Š Š  Što€Michael€Carl€Davis.€€From€this€group,€Davis€identified€that€of€the€defendant€as€being€the€man€whoŠ ¼  Šhad€come€into€his€apartment€on€the€morning€of€the€rape.€€He€also€showed€the€photospread€to€theŠ Øų Švictim,€and€she€identified€and€signed€her€name€to€a€photograph€of€the€defendant.Š ”ä ŠĢą  ąDickerson€then€distributed€a€photograph€of€the€defendant€to€other€police€officers€because€heŠ l¼ Šwanted€to€question€the€defendant.€€He€was€notified€on€August€5,€1998,€that€the€defendant€had€beenŠ X Ø Štaken€into€custody.€€Taken€from€the€defendant€at€that€time€were€the€tennis€shoes€he€was€wearing€andŠ D!” Šan€entry€card€for€the€apartment€building.€€Dickerson€interviewed€the€defendant,€who€denied€the€rapeŠ 0"€  Šor€that€he€had€been€in€the€building€when€it€occurred.€€The€defendant€remained€in€jail,€and,€on€AugustŠ #l! Š10,€Dickerson€obtained€and€served€on€the€defendant€a€search€warrant€to€take€hair€and€blood€samples,Š $X" Šafter€the€defendant€had€refused€to€voluntarily€provide€them.€€When€the€search€warrant€was€servedŠ ō$D # Šon€the€defendant,€he€told€Dickerson€that€he€wanted€to€talk€about€the€case.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąIn€the€interview€room,€the€defendant€again€was€advised€of€his€rights€and€gave€a€statement,Š ø'#& Šwhich€was€read€to€the€jury,€admitting€that€he€had€entered€the€victimššs€apartment€and€raped€her.€€AfterŠ ¤(ō#' Šthe€statement€was€completed,€blood€and€hair€samples€were€obtained€from€the€defendant€by€anŠ )ą$( Šemployee€of€the€MSARC,€who€also€photographed€the€defendant€and€took€his€thumbprint.€Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąDickerson€said€that,€at€the€preliminary€hearing,€the€victim€had€identified€another€man€as€theŠ ° Šperson€who€had€raped€her.€€In€redirect€examination,€Dickerson€said€that€the€victim€was€in€aŠ œģ Šwheelchair€during€the€preliminary€hearing€and€that€the€defendant€was€standing€in€a€group€of€nine€orŠ ˆŲ Šten€black€males,€all€dressed€in€jail„issued€clothing,€when€the€victim€identified€another€as€herŠ tÄ Šassailant.€€He€described€the€person€whom€she€identified€as€having€š ša€lot€of€similaritiesšš€with€theŠ `° Šdefendant,€meaning€they€š šhad€the€approximate€height,€same€height,€same€stature,€build€andŠ L œ Šsomewhat€complexion„wisešš€and€the€same€š šhairstyle.ššŠ 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąSally€DiScenza,€a€forensic€nurse€examiner€with€the€MSARC,€testified€as€to€the€records€of€theŠ  ` ŠCenter,€consisting€of€samples€taken€from€the€victim€following€the€rape€and€blood€drawn€from€theŠ ü L  Šdefendant€for€DNA€analysis.€€This€evidence€was€provided€to€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€InvestigationŠ č 8  Š(š šTBIšš)€for€examination€and€comparison.Š Ō$  ŠĢą  ąSteven€M.€Wiechman,€who€at€the€time€of€the€trial€was€employed€by€the€Ohio€Bureau€ofŠ ¬ü  ŠCriminal€Identification€and€Investigation€and€a€former€employee€of€the€TBI€Crime€Laboratory€inŠ ˜č  ŠJackson,€Tennessee,€testified€that€while€he€was€with€the€TBI,€as€a€special€agent€forensic€scientist,Š „Ō  Šhe€had€received€and€performed€tests€on€the€rape€kit€in€this€matter.€€He€determined€that€spermatozoaŠ pĄ Šand€semen€were€present€on€the€vaginal€swabs€and€slide€taken€from€the€victim.€€He€then€sent€theŠ \¬ Švaginal€swabs€and€blood€standard€from€the€victim,€as€well€as€a€second€kit€which€contained€a€bloodŠ H˜ Šstandard€from€the€defendant,€to€the€TBI€Laboratory€in€Nashville€for€DNA€analysis.Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąRaymond€DePriest,€a€special€agent€forensic€scientist€with€the€TBI€in€Nashville,€testified€thatŠ  \ Šhe€received€and€performed€tests€on€the€swabs€from€the€victim€and€the€blood€sample€from€theŠ ųH Šdefendant.€€Utilizing€DNA€profiling,€he€determined€that€the€sperm€fraction€of€both€the€vaginal€andŠ ä4 Švulvar€swabs€from€the€victim€matched€the€blood€sample€taken€from€the€defendant.€€He€testified€thatŠ Š  Šthe€š šstatistical€probability€of€someone€else€being€a€contributor€[of€the€sperm€samples]€is€1€in€6Š ¼  Šbillion.šš€€During€cross„examination,€he€explained€that€this€estimate€actually€was€conservative€andŠ Øų Šthat€the€probability€that€a€person€other€than€the€defendant€had€contributed€the€sperm€recovered€fromŠ ”ä Šthe€victim€was€one€in€forty„one€quadrillion.€€Following€the€testimony€of€Agent€DePriest,€the€StateŠ €Š Šrested€its€case.Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąKenneth€Robinson,€testifying€as€a€defense€witness,€said€that€he€was€the€building€engineer€forŠ D!” Šthe€apartment€building€in€which€the€victim€lived.€€He€said€that€the€apartments,€including€that€inŠ 0"€  Šwhich€the€victim€resided,€had€balconies€approximately€three€feet€wide€which€extended€to€theŠ #l! Šstairwells.€A€photograph€identified€by€the€victim€of€the€building€showed€that€a€horizontal,€concreteŠ $X" Šledge€ran€alongside€each€of€the€balconies€and€extended€beyond€them.€€Robinson€testified€that€byŠ ō$D # Šstanding€on€this€ledge€and€holding€onto€balcony€railings,€a€person€could€go€from€balcony€to€balcony.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą@ņņ&ģąņ ņņņANALYSISó óóóˆŠ ø'#& ŠĢą  ąBecause€of€the€relationship€of€the€issues€presented€by€the€defendant,€we€will€consider€themŠ )ą$( Šin€an€order€different€from€that€set€out€by€the€parties.Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą@Ź Ź ģąņ ņI.€€Suppression€of€Confession€and€DNA€EvidenceˆŠ ° ŠĢą  ąó óThe€defendant€argues€that€both€his€confession€and€DNA€evidence€resulting€from€the€searchŠ ˆŲ Šwarrant€should€have€been€suppressed€because€he€was€not€taken€timely€before€a€magistrate.€€The€StateŠ tÄ Šagrees€that€his€appearance€was€not€timely€but€argues€that€this€fact€does€not€require€suppression€ofŠ `° Šthe€confession€or€DNA€evidence.€€Š L œ ŠĢą  ąRelevant€to€our€consideration€is€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€5(a),€which€provides:Š $ t ŠĢÓ  ÓÓ  Óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąAny€person€arrested€except€upon€a€capias€pursuant€to€an€indictmentŠ ü L  Šor€presentment€shall€be€taken€without€unnecessary€delay€before€theŠ č 8  Šnearest€appropriate€magistrate€of€the€county€from€which€the€warrantŠ Ō$  Šfor€arrest€issued,€or€the€county€in€which€the€alleged€offense€occurredŠ Ą  Šif€the€arrest€was€made€without€a€warrant€unless€a€citation€is€issuedŠ ¬ü  Špursuant€to€Rule€3.5.€€If€a€person€arrested€without€a€warrant€isŠ ˜č  Šbrought€before€a€magistrate,€an€affidavit€of€complaint€shall€be€filedŠ „Ō  Šforthwith.€€When€an€arrested€person€appears€initially€before€aŠ pĄ Šmagistrate,€the€magistrate€shall€proceed€in€accordance€with€this€rule.Š\¬` x` x ŠĢą  ąOur€supreme€court€explained,€in€ņņState€v.€Carteróó,€16€S.W.3d€762,€765„66€(Tenn.€2000),€theŠ 4„ Šbasis€for€the€rule€limiting€the€period€of€time€an€arrestee€can€be€held€in€jail€without€a€finding€ofŠ  p Šprobable€cause:Š  \ ŠĢÓ:PÓÓ  Óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąThe€Fourth€Amendment€requires€a€prompt€judicial€determinationŠ ä4 Šof€probable€cause€as€a€prerequisite€to€the€extended€detention€of€anŠ Š  Šindividual€after€a€warrantless€arrest.€€ņņGerstein€v.€Pughóó,€420€U.S.€103,Š ¼  Š114,€125,€95€S.€Ct.€854,€863,€869,€43€L.€Ed.€2d€54,€65,€72€(1975).€Š Øų ŠAbsent€a€bona€fide€emergency€or€extraordinary€circumstance,€aŠ ”ä Šjudicial€determination€of€probable€cause€is€š špromptšš€if€it€occursŠ €Š Šwithin€48€hours.€€ņņRiverside€v.€McLaughlinóó,€500€U.S.€44,€56-7,€111€S.Š l¼ ŠCt.€1661,€1670,€114€L.€Ed.€2d€49,€63€(1991).€€In€making€a€judicialŠ X Ø Šdetermination€of€probable€cause,€a€full,€adversarial€proceeding€isŠ D!” Šunnecessary.€€ņņGersteinóó,€420€U.S.€at€118-22,€95€S.€Ct.€at€865-67,€43€L.Š 0"€  ŠEd.€2d€at€68-70.€€€This€is€so€because€the€standard€for€probable€causeŠ #l! Šfor€prolonged€detention€is€the€same€as€the€standard€for€determiningŠ $X" Šprobable€cause€for€arrest--a€standard€š štraditionally€decided€.€.€.€by€aŠ ō$D # Šmagistrate€in€a€nonadversary€proceeding€on€hearsay€and€writtenŠ ą%0!$ Štestimony.€.€.€.šš€€ņņGersteinóó,€420€U.S.€at€120,€95€S.€Ct.€at€866,€43€L.€Ed.Š Ģ&"% Š2d€at€69.Šø'#&` x` x ŠĢÓ“TÓÓ  Óą  ąThe€parties€agree€that€the€defendant€was€not€taken€before€a€magistrate€without€š šunnecessaryŠ )ą$( Šdelay,šš€that€a€blood€sample€was€taken€from€him€pursuant€to€a€search€warrant,€the€validity€of€whichŠ |*Ģ%) Šis€not€challenged,€during€his€fifth€day€of€incarceration,€and€that€he€gave€a€confession€to€the€chargesŠ h+ø&* Šalso€on€the€fifth€day.€€We€will€now€consider€whether,€as€urged€by€the€defense,€either€or€both€of€theseŠ ° Šitems€of€evidence€must€be€suppressed.Š œģ ŠĢą  ąThe€chronology,€upon€which€we€base€our€analysis,€begins€with€the€defendantššs€warrantlessŠ tÄ Šarrest€on€August€5,€1998,€at€8:15€p.m.€and€continuing€incarceration.€€The€record€on€appeal€containsŠ `° Šan€affidavit€of€complaint,€executed€by€Sergeant€Dickerson€on€August€9,€1998,€before€the€ShelbyŠ L œ ŠCounty€General€Sessions€Court€Clerk€but€not€an€arrest€warrant.€€Although€the€State€referred€to€theŠ 8 ˆ ŠAugust€9€document€as€the€š šaffidavit€of€complaint,€the€State€arrest€warrant,šš€this€is€not€the€case.€€ItŠ $ t Šappears€to€be€a€recitation€of€alleged€probable€cause€for€the€arrest€of€the€defendant,€as€set€out€inŠ  ` ŠTennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€3.€€However,€the€document€does€not€reflect€that,€based€uponŠ ü L  Šthe€allegations,€a€finding€of€probable€cause€was€made.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€4.€€Apparently,€he€wasŠ č 8  Šfirst€taken€before€a€general€sessions€judge€on€August€11.€€Because€of€the€lack€of€clarity€in€the€record,Š Ō$  Šwe€are€not€presuming€that€an€arrest€warrant€was€issued€on€August€9,€as€the€State€asserts.Š Ą  ŠĢÓpZÓņ ņÓ  ÓA.€€Confessionó óŠ ˜č  ŠÓpaÓÓXÓĢą  ąThe€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€mistakenly€combined€the€factors€in€determiningŠ pĄ Šwhether€the€defendantššs€confession€must€be€suppressed€because€of€the€Rule€5(a),€Tennessee€RulesŠ \¬ Šof€Criminal€Procedure,€violation€with€those€used€to€ascertain€whether€it€should€be€suppressedŠ H˜ Šbecause€of€the€Fourth€Amendment€violation.€€We€agree€with€the€defendantššs€analysis€that€theseŠ 4„ Šdeterminations,€having€different€considerations,€must€be€made€separately.Š  p ŠĢą  ąFirst,€we€will€consider€the€effect€of€the€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€5(a)€violation.Š ųH ŠIn€making€this€determination,€we€will€apply€the€factors€set€out€in€ņņPeople€v.€Ciprianoóó,€429€N.W.2dŠ ä4 Š781€(Mich.€1988),€which€were€adopted€by€our€supreme€court€in€ņņState€v.€Huddlestonóó,€924€S.W.2dŠ Š  Š666,€671€(Tenn.€1996).€€To€ascertain€whether€the€defendantššs€confession€must€be€suppressed€becauseŠ ¼  Šof€the€admitted€Rule€5(a)€violation,€we€must€consider:Š Øų ŠĢÓ²aÓÓ  Óą8  ąą8` Š Š ą[T]he€age€of€the€accused;€€his€lack€of€education€or€his€intelligenceŠ €Š Šlevel;€the€extent€of€his€previous€experience€with€the€police;€theŠ l¼ Šrepeated€and€prolonged€nature€of€the€questioning;€the€length€of€theŠ X Ø Šdetention€of€the€accused€before€he€gave€the€statement€in€question;€theŠ D!” Šlack€of€any€advice€to€the€accused€of€his€constitutional€rights;€ņņwhetherŠ 0"€  Šthere€was€an€unnecessary€delay€in€bringing€him€before€a€magistrateŠ #l! Šbefore€he€gave€the€confessionóó;€whether€the€accused€was€injured,Š $X" Šintoxicated€or€drugged,€or€in€ill€health€when€he€gave€the€statement;€Š ō$D # Šwhether€the€accused€was€deprived€of€food,€sleep€or€medical€attention;€Š ą%0!$ Šwhether€the€accused€was€physically€abused;€and€whether€the€suspectŠ Ģ&"% Šwas€threatened€with€abuse.Šø'#&` x` x ŠĢņņId.óó€(quoting€ņņCiprianoóó,€429€N.W.2d€at€790).Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą  ąWe€will€now€review€the€applicable€considerations.€€According€to€the€presentence€report,€theŠ ° Šā ādefendant€was€37€years€of€age€at€the€time€of€his€arrest.€€He€was€a€high€school€graduate€and€said€thatŠ œģ Šhe€had€attended€State€Technical€Institute€at€Memphis,€although€his€attendance€could€not€be€verified.€Š ˆŲ ŠHis€first€arrest€shown€on€the€presentence€report€was€in€1984,€and,€between€that€time€and€his€arrestŠ tÄ Šon€the€rape€charge,€he€had€been€arrested€at€least€twenty€times.€€These€arrests€had€resulted€inŠ `° Šconvictions€for€two€Class€C€felonies,€robbery€and€aggravated€burglary,€and€two€Class€E€felonies,Š L œ Šescape€and€attempted€felony.€€In€addition,€he€had€approximately€ten€misdemeanor€convictions€andŠ 8 ˆ Šhad€been€charged€with€being€a€parole€violator.€€From€all€of€this,€it€appears€that€the€defendant€is€atŠ $ t Šleast€of€average€intelligence€and€is€very€experienced€with€the€criminal€process.Š  ` ŠĢą  ąWhile€incarcerated,€the€defendant€was€questioned€twice€about€the€incident,€and€both€of€hisŠ č 8  Šstatements,€the€first€a€denial€and€the€second€a€confession,€were€typed€and€contained€his€ņņMirandaóóŠ Ō$  Šrights.€€According€to€Sergeant€Dickerson,€the€second€statement,€which€the€defendant€signed,€wasŠ Ą  Šspontaneous,€initiated€by€the€defendant€as€a€search€warrant€was€being€executed€for€the€taking€ofŠ ¬ü  Šsamples€of€bodily€fluids€from€him€for€DNA€analysis.€€Although€the€defendant€was€detained€forŠ ˜č  Šnearly€five€days€before€giving€a€confession,€no€proof€was€presented€that€the€defendant€sufferedŠ „Ō  Šdeprivation€during€this€period,€other€than€that€resulting€from€confinement€and€from€not€beingŠ pĄ Šallowed€to€contact€a€relative€or€an€attorney.€€There€was€no€proof€that€he€was€injured,€drugged,€or€inŠ \¬ Šill€health€at€the€time€he€confessed,€or€that€he€was€threatened€or€abused€to€give€the€confession.Š H˜ ŠĢą  ąBased€upon€these€factors,€we€conclude€that€the€defendantššs€confession€need€not€beŠ  p Šsuppressed€despite€the€Rule€5(a)€violation.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąWe€will€next€consider€whether€the€Fourth€Amendment€requires€suppression€of€theŠ ä4 Šconfession.€€The€factors€in€this€consideration€were€outlined€in€ņņCarteróó,€16€S.W.3d€at€766:Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąIn€ņņState€v.€Huddlestonóó,€this€Court€determined€that€when€a€personŠ Øų Šconfesses€after€having€been€detained€for€more€than€48€hoursŠ ”ä Šfollowing€an€arrest€without€a€warrant€and€without€a€judicialŠ €Š Šdetermination€of€probable€cause,€the€confession€should€be€excludedŠ l¼ Šunless€the€prosecution€establishes€that€the€confession€š šššwasŠ X Ø Šsufficiently€an€act€of€free€will€to€purge€the€primary€taint€of€theŠ D!” Šunlawful€invasion.šššš€€924€S.W.2d€666€(Tenn.€1996)€(quoting€ņņBrownŠ 0"€  Šv.€Illinoisóó,€422€U.S.€590,€599,€95€S.€Ct.€2254,€2261,€45€L.€Ed.€2d€416,Š #l! Š424€(1975)).€€Four€factors€guide€the€issue€of€admissibility:€€š š(1)€theŠ $X" Špresence€or€absence€of€ņņMirandaóó€warnings;€€(2)€the€temporal€proximityŠ ō$D # Šof€the€arrest€and€the€confession;€(3)€the€presence€of€interveningŠ ą%0!$ Šcircumstances;€€and€finally,€of€particular€significance,€(4)€the€purposeŠ Ģ&"% Šand€flagrancy€of€the€official€misconduct.šš€€ņņHuddlestonóó,€924€S.W.2dŠ ø'#& Šat€674-75€(citing€ņņBrownóó,€422€U.S.€at€603-04,€95€S.€Ct.€at€2261-62,€45Š ¤(ō#' ŠL.€Ed.€2d€at€427).€€The€burden€is€on€the€State€to€prove€by€aŠ )ą$( Špreponderance€of€the€evidence€the€admissibility€of€a€confessionŠ |*Ģ%) Šobtained€under€the€circumstances€here€presented.€€ņņId.óó€at€675.Šh+ø&*` x` x Š‡Ģą  ąWe€first€note€that€the€defendant€was€advised€of€his€ņņMirandaóó€rights€prior€to€his€first€statementŠ œģ Šon€August€5€and,€again,€before€his€statement€was€taken€on€August€10.€€Accordingly,€this€factorŠ ˆŲ Šfavors€admission€of€the€statement.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąNext,€we€consider€the€š štemporal€proximity€of€the€arrest€and€the€confession.šš€€Here,€theŠ L œ Šdefendant€was€held€in€the€Shelby€County€Jail€for€approximately€five€days€before€confessing€to€theŠ 8 ˆ Šrape.€€This€factor€weighs€in€favor€of€suppression€of€the€confession.Š $ t ŠĢą  ąThe€record€does€not€reveal€any€attenuating€circumstances€such€as€visits€or€telephone€callsŠ ü L  Šwith€relatives,€as€occurred€in€ņņCarteróó,€which€might€have€purged€or€attenuated€the€illegal€detention.€Š č 8  ŠIn€fact,€the€defendant€did€not€speak€with€his€mother€until€after€he€had€made€the€confession.€Š Ō$  ŠAccordingly,€this€factor€weighs€in€favor€of€suppression€of€the€confession.€Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąAs€for€why€the€defendant€was€arrested€and€held€for€nearly€five€days€before€being€charged,Š ˜č  ŠSergeant€Dickerson€testified€that€he€had€š šconferred€with€an€AG€about€the€case,€and€we€had€otherŠ „Ō  Šwitnesses€that€we€had€to€obtain€statements€from.šš€€Later€in€his€testimony,€he€amplified€hisŠ pĄ Šexplanation€by€saying€that,€after€the€rape,€the€victim€had€been€taken€to€a€hospital€and€then€to€aŠ \¬ Šnursing€home,€and€he€had€trouble€locating€her€and€two€other€witnesses.€€Š H˜ ŠĢą  ąIn€this€regard,€we€note€that€according€to€the€handwritten€signatures€and€dates€on€theŠ  p Šdefendantššs€photograph,€he€was€identified€by€the€victim€on€August€4,€1998,€at€2:30€p.m.,€and€by€theŠ  \ Švictimššs€neighbor,€Michael€C.€Davis,€on€August€8,€1998,€at€1:20€p.m.€€Thus,€the€defendant€havingŠ ųH Šbeen€identified€by€the€victim€prior€to€his€being€arrested,€it€would€appear€that€probable€cause€existedŠ ä4 Šfor€the€arrest,€although€the€strength€of€the€photograph€identification€may€have€been€questionable,Š Š  Šgiven€the€victimššs€explanation€at€trial.Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąIn€weighing€the€applicable€factors,€we€will€review€the€manners€in€which€our€supreme€courtŠ ”ä Šperformed€the€same€task€in€the€similar€cases€of€ņņHuddlestonóó€and€ņņCarteróó.Š €Š ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņHuddlestonóó,€the€only€factor€favoring€admission€of€the€defendantššs€statement€was€the€factŠ X Ø Šthat€he€had€been€advised€of€his€rights€prior€to€the€interview.€€Favoring€suppression€of€the€statementŠ D!” Šwere€the€facts€that€the€statement€was€given€approximately€seventy„two€hours€after€the€arrest,€theŠ 0"€  Šabsence€of€attenuating€circumstances,€and€that€the€arresting€officer,€believing€that€he€did€not€haveŠ #l! Šsufficient€evidence€to€obtain€a€warrant,€elected€to€hold€the€defendant€in€jail€in€order€to€furtherŠ $X" Šinvestigate€the€matter.€€Weighing€these€factors,€the€court€determined€that€the€confession€was€obtainedŠ ō$D # Šin€violation€of€the€defendantššs€Fourth€Amendment€rights€and€should€be€suppressed.€€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņCarteróó,€weighing€against€suppression€were€the€facts€that€the€defendant€had€been€advisedŠ ø'#& Šof€his€rights€both€when€he€was€arrested€and€prior€to€giving€the€confession;€had€both€met€in€jail€withŠ ¤(ō#' Šrelatives€and€been€allowed€unrestricted€telephone€calls€prior€to€giving€the€statement;€and€probableŠ )ą$( Šcause€existed€for€the€initial€warrantless€arrest,€with€no€indication€that€the€detention€was€for€theŠ |*Ģ%) Špurpose€of€additional€investigation.€The€only€factor€favoring€suppression€was€the€fact€that€theŠ h+ø&* Šconfession€was€obtained€after€seventy„two€hours€of€detention,€probable€cause€for€the€arrest€notŠ ° Šhaving€been€determined€by€a€magistrate.€€Considering€these€factors,€our€supreme€court€determinedŠ œģ Šthat€although€the€defendant€was€held€in€violation€of€the€Fourth€Amendment,€the€confession€was€notŠ ˆŲ Šthe€product€of€an€unlawful€detention.€Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąIn€the€instant€case,€the€only€factor€which€clearly€would€favor€admission€of€the€statement€isŠ L œ Šthat€the€defendant€was€advised€of€his€rights€both€prior€to€his€initial€statement€of€denial€and€to€hisŠ 8 ˆ Šconfession.€€We€also€note€that,€arguably,€probable€cause€would€have€existed€for€the€arrest,€basedŠ $ t Šupon€the€victimššs€identification€of€a€photograph€of€the€defendant,€although€the€strength€of€thatŠ  ` Šidentification€is€challenged€by€the€defense.€€Although€the€defendant,€himself,€initiated€the€confessionŠ ü L  Šas€a€search€warrant€was€being€served€on€him€for€the€taking€of€bodily€fluids€for€DNA€analysis,€thisŠ č 8  Šis€not€one€of€the€enumerated€factors€in€determining€whether€a€confession€must€be€suppressed€becauseŠ Ō$  Šof€a€Fourth€Amendment€violation.€€Thus,€making€an€analysis€like€those€in€ņņHuddlestonóó€and€ņņCarteróó,Š Ą  Šwe€conclude€that€the€defendantššs€confession€should€have€been€suppressed€by€the€trial€court.€€We€willŠ ¬ü  Šreview€the€additional€claims€of€error€by€the€defendant€before€determining€whether€the€error€inŠ ˜č  Šallowing€the€jury€to€hear€the€defendantššs€confession€must€result€in€reversal€of€the€conviction.Š „Ō  ŠĢņ ņÓ  ÓB.€€Hair€and€Bodily€Fluid€Samples€from€DefendantŠ \¬ ŠĢÓ‘Óą  ąó óThe€defendant€also€argues€that€because€of€his€being€jailed€in€violation€of€his€FourthŠ 4„ ŠAmendment€rights,€the€taking€of€hair€and€bodily€fluids€from€him€pursuant€to€a€search€warrant€wasŠ  p Šillegal,€and€the€results€should€have€been€suppressed.€€He€does€not€dispute€that€the€search€warrantŠ  \ Šestablished€probable€cause€for€the€taking€of€such€samples€from€him.€€Citing€ņņDavis€v.€Mississippióó,Š ųH Š394€U.S.€721,€89€S.€Ct.€1394,€22€L.€Ed.€2d€676€(1969),€the€defendant€argues€that€the€DNA€evidenceŠ ä4 Šwas€a€š šfruitšš€of€his€illegal€detention.€€However,€in€ņņDavisóó,€the€defendant€had€objected€to€hisŠ Š  Šfingerprints€being€matched€to€latent€fingerprints€left€at€the€crime€scene€when€he€and€approximatelyŠ ¼  Štwenty„three€others€had€been€taken€into€custody,€without€probable€cause,€where€they€wereŠ Øų Šfingerprinted€and€briefly€questioned.€€Those€circumstances€differ€greatly€from€the€chronology€in€thisŠ ”ä Šmatter.Š €Š ŠĢą  ąIn€the€instant€case,€the€victim€had€identified€the€defendant,€according€to€the€date€on€hisŠ X Ø Šphotograph,€the€day€before€he€was€taken€into€custody.€€After€he€had€refused€to€provide,€voluntarily,Š D!” Šsamples€of€his€bodily€fluids,€police€obtained€a€search€warrant,€the€validity€of€which€is€not€questioned,Š 0"€  Šthe€warrant€not€appearing€to€rely€upon€anything€that€had€occurred€during€the€unlawful€detention€toŠ #l! Šestablish€probable€cause.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€although€there€was€a€temporal€relationshipŠ $X" Šbetween€the€illegal€arrest€and€the€execution€of€the€search€warrant€for€bodily€fluids,€the€connection,Š ō$D # Šif€any,€between€the€detention€and€the€probable€cause€for€the€search€warrant€was€š šso€attenuated€as€toŠ ą%0!$ Šdissipate€the€taint.šš€€ņņSegura€v.€United€Statesóó,€468€U.S.€796,€805,€104€S.€Ct.€3380,€3385,€82€L.€Ed.Š Ģ&"% Š2d€599€(1984)€(quoting€ņņNardone€v.€United€Statesóó,€308€U.S.€338,€341,€60€S.€Ct.€266,€268,€84€L.€Ed.Š ø'#& Š307€(1939));€ņņsee€alsoóó€ņņUnited€States€v.€Ponceóó,€947€F.2d€646,€651€(2nd€Cir.€1991)€(š š[A]pparentlyŠ ¤(ō#' Šillegal€detention€of€defendants€did€not€taint€the€subsequent€search€because€the€police€later€obtainedŠ )ą$( Ša€valid€search€warrant.šš).Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąThus,€we€conclude€that€the€obtaining€of€the€defendantššs€bodily€fluids€pursuant€to€a€validŠ ° Šsearch€warrant€was€neither€the€š šfruitšš€of,€nor€tainted€by,€the€illegal€detention.€€Accordingly,€we€findŠ œģ Šno€error€in€admission€of€the€DNA€evidence.Š ˆŲ ŠĢņ ņÓ  ÓII.€€Admissibility€of€MSARC€Recordsó ó€ņ ņas€Business€Recordsó óŠ `° ŠÓžœÓĢą  ąThe€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€admission€of€records€of€theŠ < Œ ŠMSARC€as€business€records.€€We€will€now€consider€that€claim.Š ( x ŠĢą  ąRule€803(6)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€provides:Š  P  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąRecords€of€Regularly€Conducted€Activity.€„€€A€memorandum,€report,Š Ų(  Šrecord,€or€data€compilation€in€any€form€of€acts,€events,€conditions,Š Ä  Šopinions,€or€diagnoses€made€at€or€near€the€time€by€or€fromŠ °  Šinformation€transmitted€by€a€person€with€knowledge€and€a€businessŠ œģ  Šduty€to€record€or€transmit€if€kept€in€the€course€of€a€regularlyŠ ˆŲ  Šconducted€business€activity€and€if€it€was€the€regular€practice€of€thatŠ tÄ Šbusiness€activity€to€make€the€memorandum,€report,€record,€or€dataŠ `° Šcompilation,€all€as€shown€by€the€testimony€of€the€custodian€or€otherŠ Lœ Šqualified€witness,€unless€the€source€of€information€or€the€method€orŠ 8ˆ Šcircumstances€of€preparation€indicate€lack€of€trustworthiness.€€TheŠ $t Šterm€š šbusinessšš€as€used€on€this€paragraph€includes€every€kind€ofŠ ` Šbusiness,€institution,€association,€profession,€occupation,€and€calling,Š üL Šwhether€or€not€conducted€for€profit.Šč8` x` x ŠĢą  ąTwo€objections€were€presented€by€the€defendant€to€the€entry€of€MSARC€records€as€businessŠ Ą Šrecords.€The€first€was€that€Forensic€Nurse€Examiner€Sally€DiScenza€was€not€the€š škeeperšš€of€theŠ ¬ü Šrecords.€€However,€Rule€803(6)€does€not€impose€that€requirement,€as€explained€by€Neil€P.€CohenŠ ˜č Šet€al.,€ņņTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€šš€8.11[11]€(4th€ed.€2000)€(footnotes€omitted),€in€pertinent€part:Š „Ō ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąRule€803(6)€simply€provides€that€the€witness€be€the€recordsŠ \ ¬ Šš šcustodian€or€other€qualified€witness.šš€€Typically€that€witness€will€beŠ H!˜ Šin€charge€of€maintaining€records€of€the€particular€business,€but€otherŠ 4"„  Šemployees€or€officers€or€appropriately€informed€witnesses€could€beŠ  #p! Šused€as€well.€€The€key€is€that€the€witness€have€knowledge€of€theŠ  $\" Šmethod€of€preparing€and€preserving€the€records.€€If€no€witness€isŠ ų$H # Šavailable€to€testify,€the€records€cannot€be€authenticated€as€businessŠ ä%4!$ Šrecords,€unless€the€parties€stipulate€to€authentication.ŠŠ& "%` x` x ŠĢBased€upon€Ms.€DiScenzaššs€duties€and€experience,€we€conclude€that€she€was€a€š šcustodian€or€otherŠ Ø(ų#' Šqualified€witnessšš€and,€as€such,€qualified€to€testify€as€to€the€business€records.Š ”)ä$( Šā āŠ €*Š%) Šą  ąAdditionally,€the€defendant€contends€that€even€if€the€MSARC€records€are€š šbusiness€records,ššŠ ° Šā āthey€cannot€come€within€the€Rule€803(6)€hearsay€exception€because€they€were€prepared€for€theŠ œģ Špurpose€of€litigation.€€We€disagree€with€this€argument.€€The€distinction€between€records€preparedŠ ˆŲ Šin€the€normal€course€of€business,€as€were€the€MSARC€records€about€which€testimony€was€given,€andŠ tÄ Šrecords€used€only€incidentally€in€litigation,€as€opposed€to€being€prepared€for€it,€was€explained€byŠ `° ŠNeil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€ņņTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€šš€8.11[6]€(4th€ed.€2000):Š L œ ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąIn€order€to€have€sufficient€indicia€of€trustworthiness€to€qualify€as€aŠ $ t Šbusiness€record€under€Rule€803(6),€the€record€must€have€been€madeŠ  ` Šin€the€š šregular€practice€of€that€business€activity,šš€and€it€must€haveŠ ü L  Šbeen€š škept€in€the€course€of€a€regularly€conducted€business€activity.šš€Š č 8  ŠAn€extraordinary€report€prepared€for€an€irregular€purpose,€particularlyŠ Ō$  Šwhen€prepared€with€litigation€in€mind,€may€not€be€made€in€the€regularŠ Ą  Šcourse€of€business€and€may€be€inadmissible€as€a€business€recordŠ ¬ü  Šunder€Rule€803(6).€€On€the€other€hand,€an€investigative€accidentŠ ˜č  Šreport€compiled€by€a€business€as€a€routine€matter€should€not€beŠ „Ō  Šexcluded€solely€because€litigation€sometimes€ensues€following€anŠ pĄ Šaccident.€€Š\¬` x` x ŠĢą  ąThe€testimony€established€that€MSARC€records€were€made€in€the€regular€course€of€theŠ 4„ ŠCenterššs€business,€although,€obviously,€such€records€might€be€used€in€legal€proceedings.€€However,Š  p Šthat€possibility€did€not€mean€that€the€records€were€š šdripping€with€motivations€to€misrepresent,šš€Š  \ ŠņņHoffman€v.€Palmeróó,€129€F.2d€976,€991€(2nd€Cir.€1942),€as€might€have€been€the€case€had€they€beenŠ ųH Šprepared€specifically€for€use€in€litigation.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€MSARC€records€wereŠ ä4 Šadmissible€as€business€records.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Goldstonóó,€29€S.W.3d€537,€540„42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Š Š  Š1999)€(holding€that€records€of€Bradley€Memorial€Hospital€and€Erlanger€Medical€Center€ofŠ ¼  Šdefendantššs€blood€tests€were€admissible€as€business€records€for€prosecution€of€defendant€for€DUI).€Š Øų ŠĢą@@ @ ģąņ ņIII.€€Chain€of€Custody€of€DNA€Evidenceó óˆŠ €Š ŠĢą  ąWe€will€next€examine€the€defendantššs€claim€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€establishŠ X Ø Šthe€chain€of€custody€to€permit€admission€of€the€DNA€evidence.€€Our€supreme€court€explained€theŠ D!” Šnecessity€and€purpose€of€such€proof:Š 0"€  Šą  ąĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąAs€required€by€Rule€of€Evidence€901(a),€it€is€š šwell-establishedŠ $X" Šthat€as€a€condition€precedent€to€the€introduction€of€tangible€evidence,Š ō$D # Ša€witness€must€be€able€to€identify€the€evidence€or€establish€anŠ ą%0!$ Šunbroken€chain€of€custody.šš€€ņņState€v.€Holbrooksóó,€983€S.W.2d€697,Š Ģ&"% Š701€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998);€ņņsee€also,€e.g.óó,€ņņState€v.€Cameronóó,€909Š ø'#& ŠS.W.2d€836,€850€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€The€purpose€of€the€chainŠ ¤(ō#' Šof€custody€requirement€is€š što€demonstrate€that€there€has€been€noŠ )ą$( Štampering,€loss,€substitution,€or€mistake€with€respect€to€the€evidence.šš€Š |*Ģ%) ŠņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Bradenóó,€867€S.W.2d€750,€759€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€Š h+ø&* ŠThe€identity€of€tangible€evidence,€however,€need€not€be€provenŠ ° Šbeyond€all€possibility€of€doubt,€ņņseeóó€ņņState€v.€Hollomanóó,€835€S.W.2dŠ œģ Š42,€46€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992),€and€the€State€is€not€required€toŠ ˆŲ Šestablish€facts€which€exclude€every€possibility€of€tampering,€ņņseeóó€ņņStateŠ tÄ Šv.€Fergusonóó,€741€S.W.2d€125,€127€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€TheŠ `° Ševidence€may€be€admitted€when€the€circumstances€surrounding€theŠ L œ Ševidence€reasonably€establish€the€identity€of€the€evidence€and€itsŠ 8 ˆ Šintegrity.€€€ņņHollomanóó,€835€S.W.2d€at€46.€€€Absent€sufficient€proof€ofŠ $ t Šthe€chain€of€custody,€however,€the€š ševidence€should€not€be€admittedŠ  ` Š.€.€.€unless€both€identity€and€integrity€can€be€demonstrated€by€otherŠ ü L  Šappropriate€means.šš€€Neil€P.€Cohen,€et€al.,€ņņTennessee€Law€ofŠ č 8  ŠEvidenceó󀚚€901.12,€at€624€(3d€ed.€1995).ŠŌ$ ` x` x Šą  ąĢņņState€v.€Scottóó,€33€S.W.3d€746,€760€(Tenn.€2000).Š ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąTo€assess€the€defendantššs€claim,€we€will€review€the€evidence€from€the€taking€of€samples€fromŠ „Ō  Šthe€victim€and€the€drawing€of€blood€samples€from€the€defendant€to€the€testing€of€the€samples€at€theŠ pĄ ŠTBI€Laboratory€in€Nashville,€which€was€the€final€destination€in€the€chain.€€Sandra€Anderson,€aŠ \¬ Šsexual€assault€nurse€examiner€with€the€MSARC,€testified€that€she€had€collected€vaginal€and€oralŠ H˜ Šswabs,€a€blood€standard,€and€pubic€hairs€from€the€victim,€which€she€put€in€a€rape€kit€and€placed€inŠ 4„ Ša€locked€storage€area€at€the€MSARC.Š  p ŠĢą  ąSergeant€Dickerson€testified€that€he€was€present€when€samples€of€blood€were€drawn€fromŠ ųH Šthe€defendant€and€placed€into€one€or€two€vials€by€an€employee€from€the€MSARC.€€The€person€whoŠ ä4 Šdrew€the€samples€did€not€testify.€€Dickerson€said€that€the€employee€who€took€the€samples€from€theŠ Š  Šdefendant€also€took€his€photograph€and€thumbprint,€and€placed€on€the€vial(s)€an€adhesive€label€withŠ ¼  Šš šthe€necessary€information.šš€Š Øų ŠĢą  ąSally€DiScenza,€a€forensic€nurse€examiner€with€the€MSARC,€testified€that€her€office€keepsŠ €Š Šrecords€regarding€the€drawing€of€blood€samples€from€suspects,€the€Center€being€under€a€duty€to€doŠ l¼ Šso,€and€the€records€being€made€near€the€time€the€blood€is€drawn.€€According€to€their€records,€theŠ X Ø Šblood€samples€from€the€defendant€were€drawn€by€their€former€employee,€Jo€Jones,€who€had€sinceŠ D!” Šretired,€and€were€received€at€the€Center€ņ ņó óby€€š šL.€Henderson,šš€who€was€not€called€to€testify.€€Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąDiScenza€testified€that€the€Centerššs€standard€procedure,€when€asked€to€draw€blood€from€aŠ $X" Šsuspect,€was€to€use€a€vacutainer,€which€would€automatically€move€the€blood€from€the€sterile€needleŠ ō$D # Šin€the€suspectššs€arm€into€a€sterile€tube.€€A€sterile€needle€would€then€be€used€to€withdraw€blood€fromŠ ą%0!$ Šthe€tube€and€put€it€onto€a€blood€standard.€€She€said€that€samples€are€put€into€envelopes,€upon€whichŠ Ģ&"% Šare€written€the€suspectššs€name,€the€date€and€time€the€blood€was€collected,€and€the€signature€of€theŠ ø'#& Šnurse„clinician€who€performed€the€tasks.€€As€an€additional€safeguard,€at€the€time€the€samples€areŠ ¤(ō#' Šdrawn,€a€photograph€is€taken€of€the€suspect,€and€he€is€fingerprinted.Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą  ąDiScenza€was€familiar€with€and€identified€the€signature€of€Jones,€but€was€unable€to€identifyŠ ° Šā āthat€of€Henderson,€with€which€she€was€not€familiar.€€The€file€contained€a€photograph€bearing€theŠ œģ Šinitials€š šJ.J.šš€and€the€date€August€10,€1998.€€The€photograph€bore€the€name€š šA.€Dean,šš€the€numberŠ ˆŲ Š98„0030,€and€two€fingerprints,€one€in€red€and€the€other€one€in€black.€€Although€not€made€an€exhibit,Š tÄ Šthe€photograph€was€shown€to€the€jury.€€On€the€same€page€as€the€photograph,€the€file€bore€theŠ `° ŠMSARC€number€98„0030,€a€notation€that€the€sample€was€collected€on€August€10,€1998,€at€2:00€p.m.,Š L œ Šand€the€suspectššs€name,€Anthony€Dean,€age€37,€date€of€birth€September€25,€1959,€as€well€asŠ 8 ˆ ŠMemphis€Police€Department€number€980800107.€€The€Centerššs€records€showed€that€the€samplesŠ $ t Šfrom€the€defendant,€consisting€of€š š[a]€dried€blood€standard,€a€pubic€hair€combing,€and€head€hairŠ  ` Šsample,€as€well€as€a€saliva€standardšš€were€sent€to€the€TBI€Laboratory€in€Nashville.€€The€victimššsŠ ü L  Švaginal€swabs€and€blood€standard€were€sent€to€the€TBI€Laboratory€in€Jackson.€€Until€shipment,Š č 8  Šspecimens€from€the€defendant€were€kept€in€a€locked€evidence€room.€€She€said€that€the€samples€wereŠ Ō$  Škept€under€case€number€980800107.€Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąDiScenza€testified€that€the€Centerššs€procedure€did€not€permit€any€items€to€be€removed€fromŠ ˜č  Ša€file,€or€for€files€to€be€checked€out.€€She€said€that€all€of€their€files€contain€exactly€the€same€sort€ofŠ „Ō  Šinformation€and€have€the€same€number€of€pages.€€The€defendantššs€file,€about€which€she€wasŠ pĄ Štestifying,€contained€the€standard€contents.€€Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąSteven€Wiechman€testified€that€he€received€MSARC€sealed€sample€kit€980800107€which,Š 4„ Šafter€testing,€was€delivered€to€the€TBI€Laboratory€in€Nashville€under€the€same€number€as€receivedŠ  p Šin€Jackson.€€He€testified€that€š šthere€was€also€a€second€kit€from€the€subject€that€contained€a€bloodŠ  \ Šstandard€in€that,šš€and€he€sent€this€kit€as€well€to€the€TBI€Laboratory€in€Nashville.€€He€said€that€LorenŠ ųH ŠHenderson€had€brought€the€evidence€from€Memphis€to€Jackson.€Š ä4 ŠĢą  ąAgent€Raymond€DePriest,€of€the€Nashville€TBI€Laboratory,€testified€that€he€received€a€sealedŠ ¼  Šenvelope€from€the€TBI€evidence€vault€on€October€20,€1998,€and€began€DNA€profiling€on€theŠ Øų Šcontents€on€November€19,€1998.€€He€stated€that€he€had€received€a€š šswatch,šš€which€consisted€of€aŠ ”ä Šš špiece€of€sterile€cottonšš€with€a€bloodstain€from€the€victim,€as€well€as€a€swatch€with€a€blood€standardŠ €Š Šfrom€the€defendant.€€Additionally,€he€received€vaginal€and€vulvar€swab€samples€from€the€victim.Š l¼ ŠAccording€to€the€witness,€the€DNA€profile€of€the€blood€swatch€of€the€defendant€matched€the€DNAŠ X Ø Šprofile€of€the€sperm€fraction€of€the€vaginal€swab€from€the€victim.€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąBecause€the€need€for€our€ascertaining€the€sufficiency€of€the€chain€of€custody€proof€is€affectedŠ #l! Šby€whether€the€defendant€made€a€timely€objection€to€such€evidence,€we€will€first€consider€theŠ $X" Šprocedural€issue,€that€is,€whether€the€defendantššs€chain€of€custody€objection€was€timely.€€To€put€theŠ ō$D # Šdefendantššs€objection€into€the€proper€context,€we€will€review€its€timing.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąAgent€DePriest€testified€as€the€Stateššs€final€witness€on€Wednesday,€February€2,€2000.€€TheŠ ø'#& Šfollowing€morning,€before€the€State€had€rested,€the€defense€argued€that€the€State€had€made€anŠ ¤(ō#' Šinsufficient€showing€as€to€the€chain€of€custody,€and€asked€that€the€court€instruct€the€jury€to€disregardŠ )ą$( Šā āthe€DNA€proof.€€After€the€trial€court€declined€to€do€so,€the€defense€then€asked€that€a€mistrial€beŠ |*Ģ%) Šdeclared,€which€the€trial€court€also€declined€to€do.€€The€trial€court€later€concluded€that€the€defendantŠ ° Šhad€waived€his€right€to€object€to€the€chain€of€custody€by€not€objecting€timely:€Š œģ Šā āĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąOkay.€€The€analysis€that€Iššm€making€is,€had€there€been€anŠ tÄ Šobjection,€and€I€donššt€know€what€my€ruling€wouldššve€been,€but€Iššll€beŠ `° Šhonest€with€you,€with€all€due€respect€to€[the€prosecutorššs]€analysis,Š L œ ŠIššm€not€a€hundred€percent€satisfied€the€chain€of€custody€was€proven.€Š 8 ˆ ŠBut€there€was€no€objection.€€The€testimony€was€that€these€things€wereŠ $ t Šdone.€€The€testimony€was€that€these€witnesses€received€them,€and€thatŠ  ` Šthey€conducted€their€tests€on€them.€€Thatššs€whatššs€in€front€of€the€jury.Šü L ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąAnd€itššs€my€position€that€Iššm€not€going€to€come€along€after€theŠ Ō$  Šfact€and€say,€well,€there€was€no€objection€to€it,€and€after€the€fact€IššmŠ Ą  Šgoing€to€rule€that€itššs€not€admissible€evidence.€€Itššs€already€admitted,Š ¬ü  Šitššs€already€in€front€[of]€the€jury,€itššs€already€evidence.€€And€as€far€asŠ ˜č  ŠIššm€concerned€itššs€proper€evidence€to€be€considered€by€the€jury€at€thisŠ „Ō  Špoint.ŠpĄ` x` x ŠĢą  ąAlthough€not€denominated€as€such,€in€arguing€that€the€Stateššs€chain€of€custody€proof€wasŠ H˜ Šdeficient,€defense€counsel,€in€effect,€was€presenting€a€motion€to€strike,€the€function€and€purpose€ofŠ 4„ Šwhich€is€explained€in€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€ņņTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€šš€1.03[4][c]€(4th€ed.€2000):Š  p ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąAlthough€on€most€occasions€an€objection€rather€than€a€motion€toŠ ųH Šstrike€is€used,€Rule€103(a)(1)€sometimes€dictates€the€latter€procedure.€Š ä4 ŠA€motion€to€strike,€which€is€essentially€a€delayed€objection,€is€usedŠ Š  Šfrequently€when€evidence€has€been€conditionally€admitted,€and€theŠ ¼  Šcondition€is€not€later€fulfilled.€€This€motion€should€be€made€byŠ Øų Šcounsel€opposing€the€evidence.€€A€motion€to€strike€is€also€appropriateŠ ”ä Šany€time€inadmissible€evidence€has€been€heard€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€ItŠ €Š Šmay€be€accompanied€by€a€request€for€a€jury€instruction€to€ignore€theŠ l¼ Ševidence.ŠX Ø` x` x ŠĢą  ąThat€š ša€motion€to€strike€may€properly€be€made€at€any€time€prior€to€the€formal€closing€of€theŠ 0"€  Ševidentiary€record€and€the€final€resting€of€the€case€by€all€partiesšš€was€explained€in€ņņState€v.€Pilkeyóó,Š #l! Š776€S.W.2d€943,€952€(Tenn.€1989),€which€further€stated:Š $X" ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąNothing€in€either€the€rules€of€civil€or€criminal€procedure€wasŠ ą%0!$ Šever€intended€to€eliminate€the€trial€motion€to€strike€evidence€from€theŠ Ģ&"% Šrecord€or€to€withdraw€it€from€consideration€by€a€jury.€€Sometimes€itŠ ø'#& Šcan€serve€as€a€late€objection€or€a€renewed€objection,€or€it€can€serve€toŠ ¤(ō#' Šstrike€evidence€which€had€previously€been€conditionally€admittedŠ )ą$( Šā āwhen€the€condition€has€not€later€been€met.€€The€motion€is€expresslyŠ |*Ģ%) Šretained€and€recognized€in€the€new€rules€of€evidence,€T.R.E.€103(a),Š ° Šas€follows:Šœģ` x` x Šā āĢÓ9°,XƒX×  h•X°,XƒX× –X9Óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą8× ` x` xąą  ąEffect€of€erroneous€ruling--Error€may€not€be€predicatedŠ tÄ Šupon€a€ruling€which€admits€or€excludes€evidence€unless€aŠ `° Šsubstantial€right€of€a€party€is€affected,€andŠL œ× ×  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą8× ` x` xąą  ą(1)€Objection.--In€case€the€ruling€is€one€admittingŠ $ t Ševidence,€a€timely€objection€or€motion€to€strike€appears€ofŠ  ` Šrecord,€stating€the€specific€ground€of€objection€if€theŠ ü L  Šspecific€ground€was€not€apparent€from€the€context€.€.€.Šč 8 × ×  Šą8  ąŠ Š Š  Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąAlthough€counsel€did€not€characterize€her€objection€in€theŠ Ą  Špresent€case€as€a€motion€to€strike,€it€had€the€same€effect,€and€the€issueŠ ¬ü  Šwas€not€waived€simply€because€the€motion€was€made€after€theŠ ˜č  Ševidence€had€been€introduced.Š„Ō ` x` x ŠĢņņId.óó€at€953.Š \¬ ŠĢņņóóą  ąBased€upon€these€authorities,€we€conclude€that€the€defendant€made€a€timely€objection€to€theŠ 4„ ŠStateššs€chain€of€custody€proof.€€Š  p ŠĢą  ąSergeant€Dickerson€testified€that€he€observed€Jo€Jones€of€the€MSARC€draw€blood€from€theŠ ųH Šdefendant,€placing€the€blood€into€one€or€two€vials.€€Jones€then€placed€labels€on€which€she€had€writtenŠ ä4 Šcertain€information€onto€the€vial(s).€€Š Š  ŠĢą  ąAdditionally,€although€the€record€is€not€completely€clear,€DiScenza€said€that€the€items€fromŠ Øų Šthe€defendant,€including€the€dried€blood€standard,€were€sent€from€the€Center€to€the€TBI€LaboratoryŠ ”ä Šin€Nashville.€€TBI€Agent€DePriest€from€the€Nashville€Laboratory€testified€that€the€card,€ostensiblyŠ €Š Šwith€a€sample€of€the€defendantššs€dried€blood,€had€the€initials€š šSRW,šš€these€being€the€initials€ofŠ l¼ ŠSteven€Wiechman€of€the€Jackson€TBI€Laboratory,€who€testified€that€his€laboratory€had€received€theŠ X Ø Šsealed€MSARC€package€containing€samples€from€the€victim€and€the€defendant.€€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąAgent€DePriest€said€that€he€had€received€the€evidence€in€a€sealed€envelope,€bearing€agencyŠ #l! Šnumber€980800107.€€It€was€then€given€TBI€number€98112128.€€Regarding€the€effect€on€his€testingŠ $X" Šif€the€samples€had€been€contaminated,€he€said€that€it€would€have€resulted€in€no€DNA€being€present.€Š ō$D # ŠFurther,€he€said€that€if€the€samples€had€been€š štreated€inappropriately,šš€he€would€not€have€been€ableŠ ą%0!$ Što€get€a€DNA€profile.€Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąThe€nature€of€the€proof€needed€to€establish€the€chain€of€custody€as€to€a€sensitive€sample€wasŠ ¤(ō#' Šexplained€in€ņņState€v.€Scottóó,€33€S.W.3d€746,€760€(Tenn.€2000):Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) ŠÓ  ÓÓ  Óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąThe€appellant€maintains€that€the€State€failed€to€properly€establishŠ ° Šā āthe€chain€of€custody€of€the€hairs€removed€from€the€victim€because€theŠ œģ ŠState€could€introduce€no€proof€of€how€the€hairs€were€mounted€on€theŠ ˆŲ Šglass€slides€for€examination.€€At€trial,€the€State€introduced€evidenceŠ tÄ Šestablishing€most€of€the€links€in€the€chain€of€custody.€€For€example,Š `° Šthe€nurse€practitioner€who€examined€the€victim€testified€that€sheŠ L œ Šplaced€all€of€these€hairs€collected€from€the€victim€into€a€singleŠ 8 ˆ Šenvelope.€€A€police€detective,€Steve€Kleek,€then€testified€that€he€tookŠ $ t Šthe€victimššs€rape€kit€with€the€hairs€to€the€Tennessee€Bureau€ofŠ  ` ŠInvestigation€for€analysis€and€that€he€later€regained€custody€of€theŠ ü L  Šhairs€from€the€TBI.Šč 8 ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąDetective€Kleek€also€testified€that€he€was€responsible€for€sendingŠ Ą  Šthe€hairs€to€the€FBI€for€DNA€analysis,€and€prior€to€sending€the€hairsŠ ¬ü  Što€the€FBI,€the€detective€noted€that€only€two€hairs€were€contained€inŠ ˜č  Šthe€envelope.€€When€the€FBI€returned€the€hairs€to€detective€Kleek,Š „Ō  Šhowever,€he€noted€that€two€hairs€were€now€mounted€on€glass€slidesŠ pĄ Šfor€use€in€a€microscope.€€The€detective€testified€that€he€then€sent€theŠ \¬ Šmounted€hairs€for€analysis€to€LabCorp,€who€confirmed€that€the€hairsŠ H˜ Šwere€already€mounted€on€slides€when€they€were€received.Š4„` x` x ŠĢÓņÓÓ  Óą  ąOur€supreme€court,€in€ņņScottóó,€concluded€that€the€State€had€failed€to€prove€the€chain€of€custody,Š  \ Šexplaining€the€deficiencies€in€the€proof:Š ųH ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąThe€hairs€were€not€identified€by€a€witness€with€knowledge€that€theŠ Š  Šmounted€hair€samples€were€the€same€hairs€as€the€ones€originally€takenŠ ¼  Šfrom€the€victim.€€Further,€we€can€find€no€evidence€whatsoever€toŠ Øų Šshow€how€the€hairs€came€to€be€mounted€on€the€slides.€€We€also€canŠ ”ä Šfind€no€evidence€to€show€who€mounted€the€hairs€on€the€slides€orŠ €Š Šwhether€the€hairs€were€mounted€in€a€manner€sufficiently€free€ofŠ l¼ Šcontamination€or€alteration.€€Although€the€hairs€were€apparentlyŠ X Ø Šmounted€on€glass€slides€by€someone€with€the€FBI,€no€one€was€able€toŠ D!” Šestablish€this€important€š šlinkšš€in€the€chain€of€custody.€€Without€thisŠ 0"€  Šknowledge,€it€is€impossible€to€know€whether€anyone€tampered€withŠ #l! Šthe€evidence,€or€whether€anyone€had€the€opportunity€to€š šconfuse,Š $X" Šmisplace,€damage,€substitute,€lose,€[or]€replacešš€the€hairs€at€issue.€€ņņCf.óóŠ ō$D # ŠCohen,€et€al.,€ņņTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€at€623-24.€€BecauseŠ ą%0!$ Šreasonable€people€cannot€disagree€that€the€State€failed€to€establishŠ Ģ&"% Šthis€important€š šlinkšš€in€the€chain,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€inŠ ø'#& Šadmitting€the€analysis€of€the€hair€samples€without€reasonablyŠ ¤(ō#' Šestablishing€their€identity€and€integrity.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€901(a).А)ą$(` x` x ŠĢņņóó33€S.W.3d€at€761€(footnote€omitted).Š h+ø&* Їą  ąIn€the€instant€case,€the€MSARC€procedure€was€for€Jo€Jones,€who€drew€the€defendantššs€blood,Š ° Što€prepare€the€sample€on€the€sterile€gauze,€which€was€contained€within€the€MSARC€file.€€She€didŠ œģ Šnot€testify.€€However,€there€was€no€proof€that€the€preparation€of€the€dried€sample€of€the€defendantššsŠ ˆŲ Šblood€was€as€sensitive€a€procedure€as€was€the€making€of€the€slide€in€ņņScottóó,€where€a€mitochondrialŠ tÄ ŠDNA€analysis€had€been€made.€€According€to€ņņScottóó,€š šmtDNA€samples€are€hypersensitive€toŠ `° Šcontamination,€and€the€particular€method€of€storing€and€mounting€the€hairs€could€very€wellŠ L œ Šcompromise€the€test€results.šš€€ņņId.óó€at€761€n.13.€€Thus,€with€this€distinction,€and€based€upon€the€proofŠ 8 ˆ Špresented,€we€conclude€that€the€š šcircumstances€surrounding€the€evidence€reasonably€establish€theŠ $ t Šidentity€of€the€evidence€and€its€integrity.šš€€ņņId.óó€at€760€(citing€ņņState€v.€Hollomanóó,€835€S.W.2d€42,€46Š  ` Š(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)).€€Although€the€defendant€stressed€at€trial€and€on€appeal€possibilities€ofŠ ü L  Štampering€and€contamination,€there€was€no€showing€that€this€occurred.€€Rather,€the€State€presentedŠ č 8  Šminimal€but€adequate€š šproof€that€the€evidence€was€handled€according€to€normal€procedures€and€thatŠ Ō$  Šthere€[was]€no€indicia€of€tampering.šš€€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€ņņTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€šš€901[13][f]Š Ą  Š(4th€ed.€2000).€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€State€proved€the€chain€of€custody€and€that,€as€aŠ ¬ü  Šresult,€admission€of€the€DNA€results€was€not€error.Š ˜č  ŠĢą@œ œ ģąņ ņIV.€€€Effect€of€Erroneousó ó€ņ ņAdmission€of€Confessionó óˆŠ pĄ ŠĢą  ąAs€an€issue€on€appeal,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€cumulative€effect€of€the€erroneousŠ Lœ Šadmission€of€his€confession€and€of€the€DNA€evidence€requires€reversal€of€the€conviction.€€However,Š 8ˆ Šhaving€concluded€that€only€the€confession€was€admitted€in€error,€we€will€now€determine€whether,Š $t Šin€light€of€that,€the€conviction€can€stand.Š ` ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņMomon€v.€Stateóó,€18€S.W.3d€152,€163„65€(Tenn.€1999),€our€supreme€court€explained€theŠ č8 Šapplication€of€the€harmless€error€doctrine€to€constitutional€violations€occurring€during€a€criminalŠ Ō$ Štrial:€Š Ą Šą  ą¹Ó  ÓÓ  Óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąIn€ņņChapman€v.€Californiaóó,€386€U.S.€18,€87€S.€Ct.€824,€17€L.€Ed.Š ˜č Š2d€705€(1967),€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€rejected€theŠ „Ō Šproposition€that€all€federal€constitutional€errors€that€occur€in€theŠ pĄ Šcourse€of€a€criminal€trial€require€reversal.€€The€ņņChapmanóó€Court€heldŠ \ ¬ Šthat€the€Fifth€Amendment€violation€of€prosecutorial€comment€uponŠ H!˜ Šthe€defendantššs€failure€to€testify€would€not€require€reversal€of€aŠ 4"„  Šconviction€if€the€State€could€show€š šbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt€thatŠ  #p! Šthe€error€complained€of€did€not€contribute€to€the€verdict€obtained.šš€Š  $\" ŠņņId.óó€at€24,€87€S.€Ct.€at€828.€€€The€ņņChapmanóó€standard€recognizes€thatŠ ų$H # Šš šcertain€constitutional€errors,€no€less€than€other€errors,€may€have€beenŠ ä%4!$ Šššharmlessšš€in€terms€of€their€effect€on€the€factfinding€process€at€trial.šš€Š Š& "% ŠņņDelaware€v.€Van€Arsdallóó,€475€U.S.€673,€681,€106€S.€Ct.€1431,€1436,Š ¼' #& Š89€L.€Ed.€2d€674€(1986).ŠØ(ų#'` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąSince€ņņChapmanóó,€the€Court€has€š šrepeatedly€reaffirmed€theŠ €*Š%) Šprinciple€that€an€otherwise€valid€conviction€should€not€be€set€aside€ifŠ l+¼&* Šthe€reviewing€court€may€confidently€say,€on€the€whole€record,€that€theŠ ° Šconstitutional€error€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.šš€€ņņId.ó󀀩œģ` x` x ŠĢÓQ ÓÓ  Óą  ąIn€this€case,€there€was€substantial€evidence,€in€addition€to€the€defendantššs€confession,€uponŠ tÄ Šwhich€the€jury€could€find€the€defendant€was€guilty.€€He€was€identified,€as€has€been€set€out,€by€bothŠ `° Šthe€victim€and€her€neighbor,€Michael€Carl€Davis,€the€victim€saying€that€the€defendant€was€the€manŠ L œ Šwho€had€raped€her,€and€detailing€her€previous€experience€when€he€had€come€into€her€apartmentŠ 8 ˆ Šasking€to€cut€her€hair.€€Davis,€who€lived€directly€above€the€victim,€testified€that,€during€the€earlyŠ $ t Šmorning€hours€shortly€before€the€victim€was€raped,€the€defendant€had€come€into€his€apartmentŠ  ` Šwithout€permission.€€The€DNA€evidence€established€that€there€was€a€one€in€forty„one€quadrillionŠ ü L  Šchance€that€a€person€other€than€the€defendant€had€deposited€the€semen€found€on€the€vaginal€swabsŠ č 8  Šfrom€the€victim€following€the€rape.€€From€all€of€this,€we€conclude€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€thatŠ Ō$  Šthe€erroneous€admission€of€the€defendantššs€confession€did€not€affect€the€verdict.׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀Š Ą  ŠĢņ ņÓ  ÓV.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óŠ ˜č  ŠÓæÓĢą  ąņ ņó óThe€defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€was€insufficient€to€convict€him€of€theŠ pĄ Šaggravated€rape€of€the€victim.€€Recognizing€the€standards€by€which€we€measure€the€sufficiency€ofŠ \¬ Šthe€evidence,€he€contends€that€a€careful€analysis€will€show€the€insufficiency€of€the€proof€ofŠ H˜ Šidentification€of€him€as€the€perpetrator.Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąIn€assessing€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€we€apply€the€rule€that€where€sufficiency€of€theŠ  \ Šconvicting€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€of€the€reviewing€court€is€š šwhether,€afterŠ ųH Šviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€ņņanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€couldŠ ä4 Šhave€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense€charged€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.šš€€ņņJackson€v.Š Š  ŠVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€560€(1979).€€ņņSeeóó€ņņalsoóó€ņņState€v.€Evansóó,Š ¼  Š838€S.W.2d€185,€190„92€(Tenn.€1992);€ņņState€v.€Andersonóó,€835€S.W.2d€600,€604€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Š Øų Š1992)ņņóó;€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e)€(š šFindings€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€orŠ ”ä Šjury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guiltŠ €Š Šbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.šš).€€All€questions€involving€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€andŠ l¼ Švalue€to€be€given€the€evidence,€and€all€factual€issues€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.Š X Ø ŠPappasóó,€754€S.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)ņņóó.€€š šA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€byŠ D!” Šthe€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favorŠ 0"€  Šof€the€theory€of€the€State.šš€€ņņState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€Our€supreme€courtŠ #l! Šstated€the€rationale€for€this€rule:Š $X" Šā āŠ ō$D # Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ąThis€well„settled€rule€rests€on€a€sound€foundation.€€The€trial€judge€andŠ ° Šā āthe€jury€see€the€witnesses€face€to€face,€hear€their€testimony€andŠ œģ Šobserve€their€demeanor€on€the€stand.€€Thus€the€trial€judge€and€jury€areŠ ˆŲ Šthe€primary€instrumentality€of€justice€to€determine€the€weight€andŠ tÄ Šcredibility€to€be€given€to€the€testimony€of€witnesses.€€In€the€trialŠ `° Šforum€alone€is€there€human€atmosphere€and€the€totality€of€theŠ L œ Ševidence€cannot€be€reproduced€with€a€written€record€in€this€Court.Š8 ˆ` x` x ŠĢņņBolin€v.€Stateóó,€219€Tenn.€4,€11,€405€S.W.2d€768,€771€(1966)€(citing€ņņCarroll€v.€Stateóó,€212€Tenn.€464,Š  ` Š370€S.W.2d€523€(1963)).€€A€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€aŠ ü L  Šdefendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal,€a€convictedŠ č 8  Šdefendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639Š Ō$  ŠS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąAs€set€out€in€the€recitation€of€the€testimony,€evidence€was€presented€showing€that€theŠ ˜č  Šdefendant€was€living,€apparently€on€a€temporary€basis,€in€the€same€high„rise€apartment€building€asŠ „Ō  Šthe€victim.€€An€entry€card,€which€the€defendant€had,€was€necessary€to€enter€the€building.€€By€utilizingŠ pĄ Ša€common€ledge€which€protruded€from€the€balconies€of€the€apartments,€a€person€could€enter€theŠ \¬ Švictimššs€bedroom€door,€which€the€intruder€used,€from€the€stairwell.€€Michael€Carl€Davis€testified€thatŠ H˜ Šthe€defendant€had€entered€his€apartment,€nearby€that€of€the€victim,€shortly€before€the€victim€wasŠ 4„ Šraped.€€He€further€testified€that€the€defendant€had€earlier€come€to€his€apartment€asking€to€cut€his€hair.€Š  p ŠThe€victim€testified€that€the€man€who€had€raped€her€was€the€same€man€who€had€previously€come€toŠ  \ Šher€apartment€asking€to€cut€her€hair.€Additional€testimony€was€that€the€blood€drawn€from€theŠ ųH Šdefendant€matched€the€semen€sample€taken€from€the€victim.€€The€victim€identified€the€defendant€inŠ ä4 Šthe€courtroom€as€the€man€who€had€raped€her,€and€was€questioned€in€detail€about€her€earlierŠ Š  Šidentifying€a€photograph€of€the€defendant€and€her€identifying€a€person€other€than€the€defendant€atŠ ¼  Šthe€preliminary€hearing.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€there€was€sufficient€proof€as€to€identity,€ņņseeóó€ņņStateŠ Øų Šv.€Hillóó,€987€S.W.2d€867,€870€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998),€and€that€the€evidence€was€sufficient€toŠ ”ä Šsupport€the€conviction.€€Š €Š ŠĢą@__#ģąņ ņVI.€€Sentencingó óˆŠ X Ø ŠĢą  ąAs€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€argues€that€in€sentencing€him€to€the€maximum€sentence€ofŠ 0"€  Šforty€years,€the€trial€court€misapplied€enhancement€factors.€€Because€the€parties€disagree€as€to€whichŠ #l! Šfactors€were€applied€by€the€trial€court,€we€will€set€out€the€statement€of€the€trial€court€in€sentencingŠ $X" Šthe€defendant.Š ō$D # ŠĢą  ąIn€sentencing€the€defendant,€the€trial€court€stated:Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąTHE€COURT:€€All€right.€€This€is€indictment€98„14047,€State€versusŠ ¤(ō#' ŠAnthony€Dean.€€Mr.€Dean€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€the€offense€ofŠ )ą$( Šaggravated€rape,€which€is€a€Class€A€felony.€€Based€upon€the€proofŠ |*Ģ%) Šthatššs€been€presented€to€the€court€via€the€presentence€report,€the€courtŠ h+ø&* Šfinds€that€Mr.€Dean€has€previously€been€convicted€of€two€prior€ClassŠ ° ŠC€felonies.€€One€indictment€number€92„11129€for€the€offense€ofŠ œģ Šrobbery.€€The€other€in€indictment€number€92„11113.€€He€wasŠ ˆŲ Šconvicted€of€the€offense€of€aggravated€burglary.€€Both€of€thoseŠ tÄ Šoffenses€are€a€Class€C€felony.€€A€Class€C€felony€being€two€grades€lessŠ `° Šthan€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape,€which€is€a€Class€A€felony.€€TheŠ L œ Šdefendant,€therefore,€would€qualify€as€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€Š 8 ˆ ŠWith€regard€to€the€š!š€so€heššs€not€a€š!š€itššs€a€Range€II€multiple€offenderŠ $ t Šfor€purposes€of€sentencing.€€Itššs€a€violent€offense.€€So€thereššs€noŠ  ` Šrelease€eligibility€or€parole€involved€in€this€offense.Šü L ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąWith€regard€to€the€enhancement€factors€found€in€40„35„114,Š Ō$  Šfactor€number€one,€that€the€defendant€has€a€previous€history€ofŠ Ą  Šcriminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thoseŠ ¬ü  Šnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€Range.€€The€court€finds€that€thatŠ ˜č  Šis€an€enhancement€factor€to€be€considered.€€Again,€the€presentenceŠ „Ō  Šreport€speaks€for€itself€and€will€be€a€part€of€the€record.€€But€the€courtŠ pĄ Šnotes€one,€two,€three,€four,€five,€six,€seven,€eight,€nine,€at€least€nineŠ \¬ Šprior€misdemeanor€convictions.€€Two€prior€Class€E€feloniesŠ H˜ Šconvictions€in€addition€to€the€two€felony€convictions€which€haveŠ 4„ Šcaused€Mr.€Dean€to€be€a€Range€II€offender.Š p` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąFurther,€the€court€finds€that€based€on€the€proof€in€this€case,€Mr.Š ųH ŠDean€was€identified€as€having€committed€as,€the€best€description,€anŠ ä4 Šaggravated€burglary€into€the€house€or€the€apartment€of,€I€believe€itŠ Š  Šwas€a€Mr.€Davis,€Michael€Davis€on€the€same€night€in€question.€€TheŠ ¼  Štestimony€from€Mr.€Davis€was€that€he€was€awakened€in€the€middle€ofŠ Øų Šthe€night€by€Mr.€Dean€being€in€his€apartment.Š”ä` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąThe€criminal€behavior,€I€donššt€know€that€I€could€classify€thatŠ l¼ Štestimony€enough€to€call€that€an€aggravated€burglary.€€Thereššs€noŠ X Ø Šproof€of€any€felony€to€be€committed€or€intent€to€commit.€€Because€IŠ D!” Šdonššt€recall€Mr.€Davis€testifying€that€he€was€missing€anything€orŠ 0"€  Šanything€had€occurred.€€Simply€that€Mr.€Dean€awakened€him€in€theŠ #l! Šmiddle€of€the€night€in€his€apartment.€€But€that€would€constitute€in€myŠ $X" Šmind€criminal€behavior.€€So,€based€upon€the€record€thatššs€beenŠ ō$D # Špresented€to€the€court€and€the€testimony€thatššs€been€presented€in€theŠ ą%0!$ Štrial,€the€court€finds€and€will€put€a€great€deal€of€emphasis€on€the€factŠ Ģ&"% Šthat€Mr.€Dean€has€a€long€history€of€criminal€behavior€and€criminalŠ ø'#& Šconvictions€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriateŠ ¤(ō#' ŠRange.А)ą$(` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąI€find€factor[s]€two€and€three€are€not€applicable€in€this€case.Šh+ø&*` x` x Їą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąFactor€number€four,€that€the€victim€of€the€offense€wasŠ ° Šparticularly€vulnerable€because€of€her€age€or€physical€or€mentalŠ œģ Šdisability.€€I€donššt€find€any€physical€or€mental€disability€in€this€lady.€Š ˆŲ ŠQuite€to€the€contrary.€€I€find€that€š!š€I€think€it€was€[the€victim].€€FromŠ tÄ Ša€mental€standpoint€I€find€this€lady€to,€frankly,€when€she€testified€sheŠ `° Šwas€93€years€old.€€I€only€hope€that€my€mental€faculties€are€as€good€asŠ L œ Šherššs€[sic]€are€when€Iššm€93€years€old.€€But€I€will€add€and€I€will€stateŠ 8 ˆ Šfor€the€record€that€her€physical€appearance€was€that€of€a,€obviously,Š $ t Ša€93€year€old€lady€when€she€testified.€€She€was€small€in€stature.€€TheŠ  ` Šcourt€would€estimate€five€feet€to€five€feet€two€inches,€possibly.€€FrailŠ ü L  Šfor€her€age.€€Or€I€wonššt€say€for€her€age,€but€a€frail€lady.€€And€becauseŠ č 8  Šof€that,€I€think€there€are€factors€to€be€considered.€€And€I€think€theŠ Ō$  Šlegislature€spelled€out€when€they€set€this€š!š€I€donššt€think€that€the€factŠ Ą  Šthat€she€has€a€sharp€mind€or€that€sheššs€capable€of€crying€outŠ ¬ü  Šnecessarily€excludes€this.€€Just€as€if€the€fact€that€the€courts€discussedŠ ˜č  Šwhen€they€discussed€the€age€of€a€child.€€Obviously,€a€two€or€threeŠ „Ō  Šyear€old€child€doesnššt€have€that€capability€to€cry€out€or€to€š!š€I€guess,Š pĄ Šthey€could€cry€out€š!š€but€to€summon€help€or€to€make€identifications€orŠ \¬ Štestify.€€I€think€the€court€and€the€legislature€was€looking€at€those.€€ButŠ H˜ ŠI€donššt€think€thatššs€the€only€thing€that€the€legislature€was€looking€at.€Š 4„ ŠAnd€I€donššt€think€thatššs€the€only€thing€the€courts€look€at.€€Based€onŠ  p Šthe€testimony€that€this€court€heard€in€this€trial,€Mr.€Dean€went€in€[theŠ  \ Švictimššs]€apartment€earlier€that€same€day.€€So€it€was€obvious€this€wasŠ ųH Šnot€a€random€selection€of€[the€victimššs]€apartment€and€[the€victim]€asŠ ä4 Ša€victim€in€this€case.€€Mr.€Dean€had€been€in€her€apartment€that€day,Š Š  Šhad€talked€with€her,€had€visited€with€her.€€So€Mr.€Dean€was€obviouslyŠ ¼  Šaware€of€her€physical€size,€her€physical€ability,€her€age.€€And€I€donšštŠ Øų Šthink€thereššs€anything€in€this€record€to€indicate€that€Mr.€Dean€hadŠ ”ä Šanything€other€than€rape€on€his€mind.€€The€testimony€that€the€courtŠ €Š Šheard€was€that€he€came€in,€dragged€her€and€threw€her€back€in€the€bed,Š l¼ Šsearched€the€room€for€some€kind€of€lubricant€and€finally€wound€upŠ X Ø Šusing€some€kind€of€hair€creme€or€hair€tonic€as€a€lubricant€to€penetrateŠ D!” Šthis€lady.Š0"€ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąSo€in€the€courtššs€mind€based€on€the€proof€that€was€presented,€Mr.Š $X" ŠDean€went€there€with€the€intent€to€rape€her.€€And€I€canššt€help€but€lookŠ ō$D # Šat€her€size,€the€frail€nature€of€her€size,€her€age,€obviously,€and€say€thatŠ ą%0!$ ŠMr.€Dean€was€just€as€aware€of€her€age€and€her€susceptibility€to€beingŠ Ģ&"% Šmanhandled€and€controlled€by€him.€€So€I€do€find,€based€on€the€proofŠ ø'#& Šthatššs€presented€in€this€case,€that€[the€victim]€was€particularlyŠ ¤(ō#' Švulnerable€because€of€her€age.€€And€her€physical€or€her€lack€of€abilityŠ )ą$( Što€fight€off€an€individual€such€as€Mr.€Dean€at€her€age€and€in€theŠ |*Ģ%) Šcondition€that€she€was€in.€€I€do€find€and€I€do€think€the€courts€and€theŠ h+ø&* Šlegislature€had€in€mind€that€š!š€not€simply€because€of€age,€but€becauseŠ ° Šof€the€overall€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€case,€that€she€wasŠ œģ Šparticularly€vulnerable.€€She€lived€alone.€€She€was€elderly.€€And€IŠ ˆŲ Šthink€Mr.€Dean€knew€that€and€used€that€as€a€factor€in€picking€hisŠ tÄ Švictim€out.€€And€I€think€the€courts€or€the€legislature€thinks€that€thatššsŠ `° Ša€factor€that€the€courts€should€use€in€sentencing,€above€and€beyondŠ L œ Šand€not€to€belittle€in€any€way€any€rape€victim.€€But€above€and€beyondŠ 8 ˆ Šš!š€and€I€donššt€know€that€you€can€use€the€term€a€normal€rape€victim.€Š $ t ŠI€donššt€think€that€š!š€thatššs€probably€a€poor€choice€of€words.€€But€I€feelŠ  ` Šthat€this€is€a€proper€case€where€the€enhancement€factor€based€on€theŠ ü L  Švictimššs€age€and€physical€characteristics€because€of€her€age,€shouldŠ č 8  Šbe€considered€by€the€court.€€And€I€intend€to€use€that€as€anŠ Ō$  Šenhancement€factor.ŠĄ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąFactor€number€five€that€the€victim€was€treated€with€exceptionalŠ ˜č  Šcruelty€during€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€The€court€accepts€theŠ „Ō  Šfact€that€there€has€to€be€some€proof€of€bodily€injury.€€And€that€kindŠ pĄ Šof€flows€into€number€six€as€well.€€The€personal€injuries€inflicted€onŠ \¬ Šthe€victim€were€particularly€great.€€Those€two€in€my€mind€in€thisŠ H˜ Šparticular€case€have€to€flow€together€somewhat.€€The€testimony,€as€IŠ 4„ Šrecall€it€š!š€and,€again,€the€record€will€speak€for€itself€š!š€the€testimony,Š  p Šas€I€recall€it,€was€that€[the€victim]€was€grabbed€by€her€hair€and€by€oneŠ  \ Šof€her€legs€and€tossed€back€onto€the€bed€by€Mr.€Dean.€€And,€again,Š ųH Šthat€reiterates€her€size€and€her€physical€ability€to€fight€off€anŠ ä4 Šindividual€by€the€presentence€report.€€Mr.€Dean€is€approximately€sixŠ Š  Šfeet€one€inches€[sic]€tall€and€weighs€160€pounds.€€I€donššt€even€haveŠ ¼  Šan€estimate€of€[the€victimššs]€weight.€€But€I€dare€say€that€it€would€notŠ Øų Šexceed€100€or€110€pounds.€€But€that,€again,€thatššs€my€observation.€Š ”ä ŠThat€she€was€tossed€š!š€and€I€donššt€recall€if€that€was€her€testimony€orŠ €Š Šher€choice€of€words€or€my€choice€of€words€š!š€but€back€onto€the€bedŠ l¼ Šafter€she€attempted€to€get€up.€€That€Mr.€Dean,€as€delicately€as€I€knowŠ X Ø Šhow€to€place€this,€my€recollection€of€[the€victimššs]€testimony€was€thatŠ D!” ŠMr.€Dean€is€an€extremely€well„endowed€man.€€[The€victimššs]Š 0"€  Štestimony,€and€I€believe€I€recall€her€testimony€that€sheššs€a€retiredŠ #l! Šnurse,€was€that€she€doesnššt€think€sheššs€ever€seen€anybody€with€theŠ $X" Šphysical€characteristics€of€Mr.€Dean.€€And€that,€again,€he€was€unableŠ ō$D # Što€penetrate€her.€€He€looked€around€the€room€to€find€a€lubricant€to€tryŠ ą%0!$ Što€assist€him.€€He€attempted€to€penetrate€her€anally.€€That€when€he€didŠ Ģ&"% Špenetrate€her€vaginally,€because€of€his€size,€according€to€[the€victim],Š ø'#& Šshe€felt€like€she€was€exploding€inside.€€It€completely€tore€up€herŠ ¤(ō#' Šwomb.€€But,€further,€she€indicated€that€in€order€to€penetrate€her€it€wasŠ )ą$( Šnecessary€for€Mr.€Dean€to€take€her€leg,€a€leg€of€a€90€year€old€woman,Š |*Ģ%) Šput€it€up€over€his€shoulder€and€in€an€extremely€awkward€position€forŠ h+ø&* Šthis€lady€in€order€to€penetrate€her.€€And€as€a€result,€she€suffered€someŠ ° Špermanent€injuries€to€her€hip.׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€That€she€was€not,€in€fact,€having€thoseŠ œģ Štypes€of€problems€before€this.€€That€she€remained€in€the€hospital€forŠ ˆŲ Šseveral€days€after€this€rape€occurred.ŠtÄ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąBecause€of€the€way€in€which€she€was€treated,€this€court€finds€thatŠ L œ Šshe€was€treated€with€exceptional€cruelty€by€Mr.€Dean.€€And,€again,€itŠ 8 ˆ Šgoes€back€to€my€interpretation€of€the€facts€as€I€saw€them.€€And€that€isŠ $ t Šthat€there€was€nothing€else€on€Mr.€Deanššs€mind€other€than€sexualŠ  ` Šgratification.€€He€went€to€this€apartment€with€one€thing€on€his€mind,Š ü L  Šthatššs€apparent€to€the€court,€and€he€accomplished€that€one€thing.€€AndŠ č 8  Š[the€victim],€who€he€had€previously€met€and€seen,€was€unable€toŠ Ō$  Šfending€[sic]€him€off€in€any€form€or€fashion.€€And€Mr.€Dean€knewŠ Ą  Šthat€when€he€went€in€that€apartment.Ьü ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąI€do€find€that€the€injuries€that€were€inflicted€to€her€wereŠ „Ō  Šparticularly€great.€€However,€I€am€not€going€to€š!š€I€find€that€that€is€anŠ pĄ Šenhancement€factor€thatššs€present,€but€Iššm€not€going€to€put€a€greatŠ \¬ Šdeal€of€emphasis€on€factor€number€six.€€I€am€going€to€put€someŠ H˜ Šemphasis,€not€as€much€as€some€of€the€others,€but€on€the€fact€that€sheŠ 4„ Šwas€treated€with€exceptional€cruelty.Š p` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąI€find€factor€number€seven€not€to€be€appropriate€in€this€case.€€I€doŠ ųH Šnot€find€that€thereššs€anything€to€indicate€that€Mr.€Dean€had€anythingŠ ä4 Šon€his€mind€other€than€sex.€€And,€obviously,€the€desire€for€pleasureŠ Š  Šor€excitement€the€courts€have€told€us€can€be,€and€thereššs€nothing€toŠ ¼  Šindicate€to€me€anything€to€the€contrary,€are€a€part€of€the€offense€ofŠ Øų Šaggravated€rape.€€So€I€find€that€thereššs€nothing€that€the€court€can€relyŠ ”ä Šon€to€show€that€factor€number€seven€is€appropriate.€€So€I€find€that€thatŠ €Š Šis€not€an€appropriate€factor.Šl¼` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąMr.€Dean€has€a€previous€history€of€unwillingness€to€comply€withŠ D!” Šthe€condition€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€the€community.€Š 0"€  ŠAgain,€as€evidenced€by€Exhibit€one,€the€presentence€report,€he€hasŠ #l! Šbeen€charged€with€parole€violation€back€in€1994.€€So€the€answer€toŠ $X" Šthat€factor€would€be€yes.Šō$D #` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąFactor€number€nine€is€not€appropriate€in€this€case.€€TheŠ Ģ&"% Šdefendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€riskŠ ø'#& Što€human€life€was€high.€€Normally€I€would€say€that€thatššs€not€anŠ ¤(ō#' Šappropriate€factor€for€an€aggravated€rape€case.€€Because€I€think€thatŠ )ą$( Šthe€potential€for€š!š€obviously€you€must€have€bodily€injury€in€order€toŠ ° Šhave€an€aggravated€rape.€€And,€therefore,€incorporated€in€bodilyŠ œģ Šinjury€I€think€the€court€could€conclude€that€there€has€to€be€a€risk€toŠ ˆŲ Šhuman€life€involved.€€And€I€think€the€general€nature€of€aggravatedŠ tÄ Šrape€would€lend€itself€to€that€allegation.€€However,€again,€this€caseŠ `° Šbeing€unique€simply€because€of€the€fact€that€this€was€not€a€random€actŠ L œ Šby€Mr.€Dean.€€This€was€a€thought„out,€planned€assault€on€this€lady.€Š 8 ˆ ŠAgain,€Mr.€Dean€was€aware€of€her€age,€her€frailty,€the€fact€that€sheŠ $ t Šlived€alone.€€And,€obviously,€he€had€no€hesitation€about€committingŠ  ` Šthis€crime€knowing€that€an€assault€and€an€attack€on€a€90€year€oldŠ ü L  Šwoman€could€run€the€risk€of€costing€her€her€life€or€some€seriousŠ č 8  Šinjury.ŠŌ$ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąI€just€think€that€the€unique€facts€of€this€case€because€of€theŠ ¬ü  Švictimššs€age,€this€has€to€be€a€factor€to€be€considered.€€Iššm€not€exactlyŠ ˜č  Šsure€of€the€interpretation€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€or€theŠ „Ō  ŠSupreme€Court€with€regard€to€this€element.€€I€find€itššs€apparent€andŠ pĄ Šappropriate€in€this€case,€but€Iššm€not€going€to€put€a€great€deal€ofŠ \¬ Šemphasis€on€it€simply€because€there€is€some€question€as€to€whetherŠ H˜ Šor€not€itššs€merged€with€the€allegations€of€aggravated€rape.Š4„` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąI€find€that€none€of€the€other€factors€listed€under€40„35„114€wereŠ  \ Šappropriate.€€I€donššt€find€that€the€crime€was€committed€underŠ ųH Šcircumstances€under€which€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€theŠ ä4 Švictim€was€great.€€Obviously€you€must€have€bodily€injury€to€have€anŠ Š  Šaggravated€rape.€€So€that€factor€is€included.м ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąAs€to€any€mitigating€factors,€the€court€finds€none.€€Based€on€theŠ ”ä Špresentence€report,€based€on€the€testimony€that€Iššve€heard,€I€find€noŠ €Š Šfactors€to€mitigate€this.€€This€is€not€a€crime€that€involves€probation.€Š l¼ ŠSo€probation€is€not€a€factor€to€be€considered.€€This€presentence€reportŠ X Ø Šwas€requested.€€Itššs€required€by€law.€€Iššve€read€my€reasons€into€theŠ D!” Šrecord€or€the€enhancement€factors€that€Iššve€found.€€Iššve€given€Mr.Š 0"€  ŠDean€an€opportunity€to€speak.€€He€has€waived€that€right.Š#l!` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąTherefore,€the€court€feels€under€the€guidelines€that€have€been€setŠ ō$D # Šout,€this€is€a€Class€A€felony,€which€is€a€violent€offense,€itššs€non„Š ą%0!$ Šparolable.€€The€presumptive€beginning€Range€for€purposes€ofŠ Ģ&"% Šsentencing€as€a€Range€II€offender€for€a€Class€A€felony,€the€Range€isŠ ø'#& Š25€to€40€years.€€The€presumptive€beginning€place€for€a€violent€offenseŠ ¤(ō#' Šand€a€Class€A€offense€is€the€mid„Range€within€that.€€So€that€I€assumeŠ )ą$( Šit€would€be€approximately€32,€32€šš€years.€€The€starting€point€underŠ |*Ģ%) Šthe€law,€the€court€is€to€enhance€using€enhancement€factors€to€increaseŠ h+ø&* Šthe€punishment€and€then€any€mitigators€to€reduce€it€back€down.€Š ° ŠSince€the€court€finds€there€are€no€mitigators€in€this€case,€the€court€isŠ œģ Šgoing€to€put€a€great€deal€of€emphasis€on€Mr.€Deanššs€history€ofŠ ˆŲ Šcriminal€convictions€and€criminal€behavior.€€The€vulnerability€of€theŠ tÄ Švictim€in€this€case,€the€fact€that€she€was€treated€with€exceptionalŠ `° Šcruelty€and€the€fact€that€Mr.€Dean€has€previously€been€on€parole€andŠ L œ Šhas€violated€that€parole.€€Those€are€the€factors€the€court€is€going€toŠ 8 ˆ Šconsider€with€a€great€deal€of€emphasis€on€his€record€and€theŠ $ t Švulnerability€of€[the€victim].€€Based€on€Mr.€Deanššs€scoping€out€theŠ  ` Šscene€and€selecting€her€intentionally€as€his€victim€in€this€case.Šü L ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąThe€court,€therefore,€is€going€to€impose€a€sentence€of€40€years€asŠ Ō$  Ša€Range€II€offender,€a€violent€offender€with€no€parole.ŠĄ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąMR.€WHARTON:€€Thank€you,€Your€Honor.€€Could€we€get€a€date€forŠ ˜č  Šour€new€trial€motion?Š„Ō ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąTHE€COURT:€€Yes,€sir.€€Let€me€add,€again,€for€the€record€because€IŠ \¬ Šintended€to€do€this€earlier€when€we€were€discussing€the€definitions€ofŠ H˜ Šbodily€injury.€€Bodily€injury€is€required€by€the€aggravated€rape€statute.€Š 4„ ŠIt€calls€for€a€cut€š!š€or€includes€a€cut,€abrasions,€bruise,€burn€orŠ  p Šdisfigurement,€physical€pain€or€temporary€illness€or€impairment€of€theŠ  \ Šfunction€of€a€bodily€member.€€The€distinction€there€being€temporary.€Š ųH ŠSerious€bodily€injury€calls€for€a€substantial€risk€of€death,€protractedŠ ä4 Šunconsciousness,€extreme€physical€pain,€protracted€or€obviousŠ Š  Šdisfigurement€or€protracted€loss€or€substantial€impairment€of€aŠ ¼  Šfunction€of€a€bodily€member€or€mental€faculties.€€With€regard€to€theŠ Øų Šinjuries€that€[the€victim]€sustained,€this€court€finds€the€distinctionŠ ”ä Šbetween€bodily€injury€and€serious€injury€is€found€in€this€case.€€I€donšštŠ €Š Šfind€that€the€injuries€inflicted€upon€[the€victim]€were€simply€bodilyŠ l¼ Šinjury.€€I€think€they€were€serious€bodily€injury€above€that€necessaryŠ X Ø Što€cause€an€aggravated€rape,€that€the€injuries€that€she€suffered€wereŠ D!” Šabove€and€beyond€that€that€was€needed€to€constitute€Mr.€Deanššs€actsŠ 0"€  Šupon€her.€€And€for€those€reasons,€again,€I€reiterate€the€courtššs€findingsŠ #l! Šwith€regard€to€the€fact€that€she€was€treated€with€exceptional€crueltyŠ $X" Šand€that€the€injuries€inflicted€upon€her€were€particularly€great.€Š ō$D # ŠBecause€I€think€that€they€amounted€to€serious€bodily€injury€not€simplyŠ ą%0!$ Šbodily€injury€as€called€for€by€the€statute.ŠĢ&"%` x` x ŠĢŌ‡X3„XXX3„Ōą  ąBased€upon€these€statements€by€the€trial€court,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€courtŠ ¤(ō#' Šapplied€enhancement€factors€(1),€(4),€(5),€(6),€(8),€and€(10).€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(1),Š )ą$( Š(4),€(5),€(6),€(8),€&€(10).€€The€State€responds€that,€of€these€factors,€the€trial€court€did€not€apply€(6)Š |*Ģ%) Šand€(10).€€Based€upon€our€review€of€the€sentencing,€we€conclude€that€the€defendantššs€interpretationŠ h+ø&* Šis€correct€as€to€the€factors€applied,€although€little€weight€was€given€to€factors€(6)€and€(10).€€TheŠ ° Šdefendant€contends€that€only€factor€(1)€was€applicable,€while€the€State€argues€that€the€trial€court€wasŠ œģ Šcorrect€in€applying€the€factors€which€it€did.€€In€view€of€this€dispute,€we€will€review€the€sentenceŠ ˆŲ Šimposed€by€the€trial€court.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length€and€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€the€duty€ofŠ L œ Šthis€court€to€conduct€a€ņņóóņņde€novoóó€review€on€the€record€with€a€presumption€that€š šthe€determinationsŠ 8 ˆ Šmade€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„401(d).€Š $ t ŠThis€presumption€is€š šconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtŠ  ` Šconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.šš€€ņņState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Š ü L  ŠS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€presumption€does€not€apply€to€the€legal€conclusions€reachedŠ č 8  Šby€the€trial€court€in€sentencing€the€accused€or€to€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€which€areŠ Ō$  Špredicated€upon€uncontroverted€facts.€€ņņState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2d€305,€311€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Š Ą  Š1994);€ņņState€v.€Smithóó,€891€S.W.2d€922,€929€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)ņņóó;€ņņState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2dŠ ¬ü  Š163,€166€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€However,€this€court€is€required€to€give€great€weight€to€the€trialŠ ˜č  Šcourtššs€determination€of€controverted€facts€as€the€trial€courtššs€determination€of€these€facts€isŠ „Ō  Špredicated€upon€the€witnessesšš€demeanor€and€appearance€when€testifying.Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąIn€conducting€a€ņņóóņņde€novoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€court€must€consider€(a)€any€evidenceŠ H˜ Šreceived€at€the€trial€and/or€sentencing€hearing,€(b)€the€presentence€report,€(c)€the€principles€ofŠ 4„ Šsentencing,€(d)€the€arguments€of€counsel€relative€to€sentencing€alternatives,€(e)€the€nature€andŠ  p Šcharacteristics€of€the€offense,€(f)€any€mitigating€or€enhancing€factors,€(g)€any€statements€made€by€theŠ  \ Šaccused€in€his€own€behalf,€and€(h)€the€accusedššs€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€orŠ ųH Štreatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€40„35„103€and€„210;€€ņņState€v.€Scottóó,€735€S.W.2d€825,€829€(Tenn.Š ä4 ŠCrim.€App.€1987).Š Š  ŠĢą  ąThe€party€challenging€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court€has€the€burden€of€establishingŠ Øų Šthat€the€sentences€are€erroneous.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„401,€Sentencing€Commission€Cmts.;€Š ”ä ŠņņAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169ņņóó.€€In€this€case,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€of€illustrating€the€sentencesŠ €Š Šimposed€by€the€trial€court€are€erroneous.€€Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąConcluding€that€the€trial€court€š šconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€andŠ D!” Šcircumstances,šš€we€will€now€determine€whether€the€enhancement€factors€upon€which€the€trial€courtŠ 0"€  Šrelied€were€applicable.Š #l! ŠĢŌ#†X3„XXX3„S#Ōą@NNģąņ ņA.€€Enhancement€Factor€(1)ó óˆą Č ąŠ ō$D # ŠĢą  ąThe€parties€agree€that€the€trial€court€was€correct€in€applying€factor€(1),€that€the€defendant€hadŠ Ģ&"% Ša€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(1).€Š ø'#& ŠHe€had€previous€convictions€for€robbery€and€aggravated€burglary,€both€Class€C€felonies.€Š ¤(ō#' ŠAdditionally,€he€had€two€Class€E€felony€convictions€and€approximately€ten€misdemeanorŠ )ą$( Šconvictions.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€factor€(1),€to€which€the€trial€court€gave€great€weight,€wasŠ |*Ģ%) Šapplicable.Š h+ø&* Їņ ņÓ  ÓB.€€Enhancement€Factor€(4)ó óŠ ° ŠÓ‘“ÓĢą  ąThe€trial€court€applied€factor€(4),€that€the€victim,€who€was€nearly€90€years€old€at€the€time€ofŠ ˆŲ Šthe€rape,€was€particularly€vulnerable,€ņņseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(4),€because€she€was€small,Š tÄ Šfrail,€lived€alone,€and€the€defendant€had€selected€her€as€his€victim€for€these€reasons.€€The€defendantŠ `° Šargues€that€this€factor€was€not€applicable€because€the€State€did€not€prove€that€the€victimššs€age€orŠ L œ Šphysical€or€mental€limitations€affected€her€ability€to€resist€the€crime,€to€summon€help,€testify€in€court,Š 8 ˆ Šor€that€her€vulnerability€was€a€factor€in€the€offense.€Š $ t Šą  ąą ` ąą × ąĢą  ąEnhancement€factor€(4)€may€be€applied€when€the€facts€show€that€the€š švictim€of€the€offenseŠ ü L  Šwas€particularly€vulnerable€because€of€age€or€physical€or€mental€disability,€€.€.€.€.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Š č 8  Ššš€40-35-114(4)€(1997).€€Our€supreme€court,€in€ņņState€v.€Adamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€31,€35€(Tenn.€1993),Š Ō$  Šconcluded€that€enhancement€factor€(4)€š šrelates€more€to€the€natural€physical€and€mental€limitationsŠ Ą  Šof€the€victim€than€merely€to€the€victimššs€age.šš€€ņņId.óó€€Thus,€the€ņņAdamsóó€court€found€that€factor€(4)€couldŠ ¬ü  Šbe€used€in€an€aggravated€rape€case€of€a€child€under€the€age€of€thirteen,€even€though€the€age€of€theŠ ˜č  Šchild€is€an€essential€element€of€the€crime,€š šif€the€circumstances€show€that€the€victim,€because€of€hisŠ „Ō  Šage€or€physical€or€mental€condition,€was€in€fact€ššparticularly€vulnerable,šš€i.e.,€incapable€of€resisting,Š pĄ Šsummoning€help,€or€testifying€against€the€perpetrator.šš€€ņņId.óó€Š \¬ ŠĢņņą  ąóóIn€ņņState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€96„97€(Tenn.€1997),€our€supreme€court€explained€theŠ 4„ Šapplication€of€this€factor:Š  p Šą  ąĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąIn€determining€whether€the€State€has€met€its€burden,€the€trialŠ ųH Šcourt€must€consider€a€number€of€factors€and€must€make€factualŠ ä4 Šfindings.€€It€should€consider€whether€evidence€in€the€record€withŠ Š  Šregard€to€the€victimššs€age€or€physical€and€mental€attributesŠ ¼  Šdemonstrated€an€inability€to€resist€the€crime,€summon€help,€or€testifyŠ Øų Šat€a€later€date.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņe.g.óó,€ņņState€v.€Claboóó,€905€S.W.2d€197€(Tenn.€Crim.Š ”ä ŠApp.€1995)€(factor€properly€applied€where€child€victim€of€sexualŠ €Š Šoffense€suffered€from€learning€disability);€ņņState€v.€Buckmeiróó,€902Š l¼ ŠS.W.2d€418€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(factor€proper€where€defendantŠ X Ø Šknew€victim€had€š špassed€outšš€from€drinking€and€was€unable€to€resistŠ D!” Šthe€commission€of€a€sexual€offense);€ņņState€v.€McKnightóó,€900€S.W.2dŠ 0"€  Š36€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)€(factor€properly€applied€where€victimsŠ #l! Šof€sexual€acts€were€very€young,€lacked€family€support,€and€looked€toŠ $X" Šdefendant€for€friendship€and€approval).€.€.€.€€The€evidence€need€not€beŠ ō$D # Šextensive€and€additional€weight€may€be€given€to€the€age€of€the€victimŠ ą%0!$ Šin€those€cases€where€a€victim€is€extremely€young€or€old.€€Nonetheless,Š Ģ&"% Šthe€State€must€prove€the€factor€is€applicable€and€there€must€beŠ ø'#& Ševidence€in€the€record€in€addition€to€the€victimššs€age.Ф(ō#'` x` x ŠĢą  ąHere,€the€proof€showed€that€the€victim,€who€lived€alone,€was€within€two€weeks€of€herŠ |*Ģ%) Šninetieth€birthday€at€the€time€of€the€rape.€€She€had€an€artificial€knee,€and€was€in€a€wheelchair€at€theŠ h+ø&* Štime€of€the€preliminary€hearing.€€At€time€of€trial,€she€was€ninety„two€and€one„half€years€old€and€saidŠ ° Šthat€she€was€š šweakšš€and€that€her€body€was€š šgiving€out.šš€€Based€upon€this,€we€cannot€conclude€thatŠ œģ Šthe€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€the€victim€was€particularly€vulnerable.Š ˆŲ ŠĢą@ß ß ģąņ ņC.€€Enhancement€Factors€(5)€and€(6)ˆŠ `° ŠĢą  ąó óBecause€of€the€relationship€between€factor€(5),€that€the€victim€was€treated€with€exceptionalŠ 8 ˆ Šcruelty,€and€factor€(6),€that€the€injuries€to€the€victim€were€particularly€great,€ņņseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Š $ t Ššš€40„35„114(5)€&€(6),€we€will€consider€these€factors€together,€especially€for€the€purpose€of€settingŠ  ` Šout€applicable€testimony.€€The€victim€testified€as€to€the€details€of€the€attack:Š ü L  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąQ.ą0× ` x` xąSo€this€person€came€in€and€grabbed€you€by€the€neck[?]ŠŌ$ × x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąA.ą × ąGrabbed€me€by€the€neck€and€never€turned€my€neck€aloose€[sic]Š ¬ü  Šuntil€they€couldnššt€do€what€they€came€in€to€do.€€And€they€wereŠ ˜č  Šhunting€for€some€medication€to€put€on€their€body€to€make€their€bodyŠ „Ō  Šuseful.€€And€I€got€off€the€bed,€and€went€to€the€front,€and€went€aroundŠ pĄ Šin€the€kitchen€to€get€me€some€water€in€a€cup.€€And€the€cup€was€sittingŠ \¬ Šthere€in€the€bathroom€when€the€police€came.ŠH˜` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąAnd€when€I€turned€around,€he€was€right€at€my€shoulder,Š  p Šfollowing€me€around.€€And€I€š!š€and€pulled€me€on€back€to€the€bedroom.€Š  \ ŠAnd€caught€me€by€the€ball€of€hair€and€by€this€leg.€€See€this€leg€has€anŠ ųH Šartificial€knee€in€it€and€this€leg,€caught€me€by€this€leg€and€threw€meŠ ä4 Šup€over€the€foot,€straight€up€to€the€pillow€on€my€bed.ŠŠ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąQ.ą × ąAll€right.€€And€Iššm€sorry€again€to€have€to€go€through€this€withŠ Øų Šyou€but€what€did€he€do€then?Š”ä` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąA.ą × ąAnd€went€to€š!š€went€back€to€attempting€to€rape€me,€to€haveŠ l¼ Šwhatever€pleasure€they€thought€theyššd€get€out€of€it.€€Took€this€leg€andŠ X Ø Špulled€it€up€over€his€shoulder€and€put€his€arm€on€it€so€I€couldnššt€getŠ D!” Šit€down,€like€you€see€the€people€on€the€stage€doing€the€splits.€€ThatššsŠ 0"€  Šthe€way€my€leg€was.€€This€leg€was€straight€out€and€I€was€on€the€sideŠ #l! Šbut€this€leg€was€up€over€his€shoulder.€€And€š!š€and€he€had€his€armŠ $X" Šunder€there€so€I€couldnššt€get€it€down.€€So€it€was€nothing€I€could€do.Šō$D #` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąAnd€he€kept€doing€what€š!š€he€tried€both€entrances,€my€rectum,€myŠ Ģ&"% Švagina.€€And€I€still€have€a€little€slight€protrusion€of€š!š€you€know€whatŠ ø'#& Šyou€have€when€your€rectum€comes€out,€but€I€have€always€been€theŠ ¤(ō#' Štype€of€nursing€service,€I€keep€my€rectum€in€with€the€treatments€thatŠ )ą$( ŠI€know€to€use.€€But€thereššs€always€a€little€part€that€still€sticks€out.Š|*Ģ%)` x` x ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą8  ąą8` Š Š ąQ.ą0× ` x` xąAll€right.Š°× x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąA.ą × ąAnd€then€finally,€I€donššt€know€if€he€tore€it€open€or€whatŠ ˆŲ Šhappened,€but€he€finally€got€that€š!š€that€was€the€largest€organ€on€a€manŠ tÄ ŠIššve€ever€seen€or€heard€of€in€all€of€my€90€years.€€Finally€with€my€backŠ `° Što€him,€got€it€into€my€stomach€š!š€this€š!š€my€womb€now,€my€fracturedŠ L œ Šribs,€and€my€š!š€I€have€a€rib€up€here€that€we€thought€was€broken,€got€toŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€hospital,€but€all€of€these€ribs€were€wounded€on€that€side.Š$ t` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąI€was€so€roughly€handled,€they€said€when€I€got€to€the€hospital€IŠ ü L  Šwouldnššt€live.€€But€my€doctor€knew€me€and€I€told€him€I€would€live.€Š č 8  ŠSo€they€went€on€and€worked€on€me.ŠŌ$ ` x` x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąQ.ą0× ` x` xąAll€right.Ьü × x× x ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąA.ą × ąThis€arm€and€this€shoulder,€when€I€touch€that€right€now€like€that,Š „Ō  Šit€hurts€as€if€though€it€was€right€now€happening.€€This€whole€side€thatŠ pĄ Šhelped€me€to€get€around€with€this€artificial€knee€that€had€been€plantedŠ \¬ Šin€šš91,€now€I€have€to€have€a€walker€or€a€walking€stick€to€get€around.€Š H˜ ŠIššve€done€pretty€good€coming€out€of€it€but€I€havenššt€got€[sic]€over€it.Š4„` x` x ŠĢņ ņą  ąó óThe€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factor€(5),€finding€that€the€victim€was€treated€withŠ  \ Šexceptional€cruelty€because,€in€order€to€penetrate€her€vagina,€the€defendant€put€one€of€her€legs€overŠ ųH Šhis€shoulder,€and€that,€because€of€this,€she€had€permanent€hip€injuries.€€The€court€did€not€state€howŠ ä4 Šmuch€weight€it€was€ascribing€to€this€factor.€€Š Š  ŠĢą  ąThe€proper€application€of€factor€(5)€was€explained€by€this€court€in€ņņState€v.€Sprattóó,€31€S.W.3dŠ Øų Š587,€607€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000):Š ”ä ŠĢņ ņó óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąą × ąDefendant€challenges€the€application€of€enhancement€factor€(5),Š l¼ Šthat€Defendant€treated€the€victim€with€exceptional€cruelty€during€theŠ X Ø Šcommission€of€the€offense.€€We€conclude€that€factor€(5)€was€properlyŠ D!” Šapplied.€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€stated€that€before€thisŠ 0"€  Šfactor€may€be€applied,€the€facts€in€the€case€must€š šsupport€a€finding€ofŠ #l! Šššexceptional€crueltyšš€that€ššdemonstrates€a€culpability€distinct€fromŠ $X" Šand€appreciably€greater€than€that€incident€tošššš€the€crime.€€ņņState€v.Š ō$D # ŠPooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€98€(Tenn.€1997)€(citation€omitted).€€ņņSeeóó€ņņalsoóó€Š ą%0!$ ŠņņState€v.€Embryóó,€915€S.W.2d€451,€456€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)Š Ģ&"% Š(holding€that€application€of€enhancement€factor€(5)€š šrequires€aŠ ø'#& Šfinding€of€cruelty€over€and€above€that€inherently€attendant€to€theŠ ¤(ō#' Šcrimešš).€€We€conclude€that€Defendant's€actions€of€striking€the€victimŠ )ą$( Šon€the€head€with€a€beer€bottle€with€such€force€to€cause€the€bottle€toŠ |*Ģ%) Šshatter€and€then€dragging€the€victim€around€the€office€by€her€hairŠ h+ø&* Šrepresents€a€culpability€distinct€from€and€appreciably€greater€than€thatŠ ° Šincident€to€the€offense.Šœģ` x` x ŠĢņņóóņ ņó óą  ąAdditionally,€the€trial€court€also€applied€factor€(6),€that€the€injuries€to€the€victim€wereŠ tÄ Šparticularly€great,€although€it€did€not€give€great€weight€to€this€factor.€€ņņóóŠ `° ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņState€v.€Caricoóó,€968€S.W.2d€280,€286€(Tenn.€1998),€our€supreme€court€explained€that€thisŠ 8 ˆ Šfactor€cannot€be€applied€in€sentencing€following€a€conviction€for€aggravated€rape€unless€the€victimŠ $ t Šš šsustained€appreciable€personal€injuries€beyond€those€incidental€to€the€crime€.€.€.€.šš€€ņ ņó óHere,€the€victimŠ  ` Štestified€that€the€defendant€held€her€by€her€hair€and€her€leg€and€pulled€her€back€into€the€bedroom.Š ü L  ŠAttempting€to€penetrate€her,€he€raised€one€of€her€legs€and€put€it€on€his€shoulder,€holding€it€there€withŠ č 8  Šhis€arm.€€The€victim€likened€it€to€being€forced€to€do€the€splits.€At€the€time€of€trial,€approximately€twoŠ Ō$  Šand€one„half€years€following€the€rape,€she€said€that€her€arm€and€shoulder€still€š šhurt[]€as€if€though€itŠ Ą  Šwas€right€now€happening.šš€€Additionally,€she€said€that€an€artificial€knee€had€been€implanted€into€herŠ ¬ü  Šin€1991,€and€that€since€the€rape,€she€had€to€use€a€walker€or€cane€to€get€around.€€In€view€of€the€factsŠ ˜č  Šof€the€rape€and€the€resulting€disability€of€the€elderly€victim€two€years€after€it,€we€cannot€concludeŠ „Ō  Šthat€the€trial€court€erred€in€applying€enhancement€factors€(5)€and€(6).€€ņ ņŠ pĄ ŠĢą@NNģąD.€€Enhancement€Factor€(8)ˆŠ H˜ ŠĢą  ąó óThis€enhancement€factor€is€applicable€when€š š[t]he€defendant€has€a€previous€history€ofŠ  p Šunwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€the€community.ššŠ  \ ŠTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(8).€€The€defendant€argues€that€this€factor€should€not€have€been€appliedŠ ųH Šbecause€the€presentence€report€showed€only€that,€in€1994,€he€had€been€arrested€for€an€alleged€paroleŠ ä4 Šviolation,€but€that€no€disposition€was€shown.€€We€agree.€€The€applicable€entry€on€the€presentenceŠ Š  Šreport€for€September€27,€1994,€states€š šviolation€of€parole€š!š€held€for€parole€board.ššņ ņ€ó ó€Since€noņ ņŠ ¼  Šó ódisposition€was€shown€for€this€charge,€we€conclude€that€it€should€not€have€been€applied.ņ ņŠ ¬ü ŠĢą@!!ģąE.€€Enhancement€Factor€(10)ˆŠ „Ō ŠĢą  ąó óThis€factor€is€applied€when€the€proof€shows€that€š š[t]he€defendant€had€no€hesitation€aboutŠ \ ¬ Šcommitting€a€crime€when€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(10).Š H!˜ ŠAlthough€this€factor€was€applied€by€the€trial€court,€little€emphasis€was€placed€on€it.€€The€limits€ofŠ 4"„  Šthis€enhancement€factor€were€explained€in€ņņState€v.€Kelleyóó,€34€S.W.3d€471,€480€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Š  #p! Šņņperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2000):ņ ņŠ  $\" ŠĢó óą8  ąą8` Š Š ąņņóó[T]he€trial€court€may€consider€this€factor€when€the€defendantŠ ä%4!$ Šendangers€the€lives€of€people€other€than€the€victim.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.Š Š& "% ŠRuaneóó,€912€S.W.2d€766,€784€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€ņņState€v.Š ¼' #& ŠJohnsonóó,€909€S.W.2d€461,€464€n.€1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€ņņseeóó€ņņalsoóóŠ Ø(ų#' ŠņņState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2d€305,€314€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)Š ”)ä$( Š(holding€that€factor€(10)€should€not€be€applied€when€the€victim€is€theŠ €*Š%) Šonly€one€at€risk).€€In€this€case,€the€defendant€fired€three€shots€into€aŠ l+¼&* Šcar€containing€two€people.€€The€passenger,€Chasity€McGuire,€testifiedŠ ° Šthat€she€ducked€when€she€saw€the€explosion€from€the€gun.€€TheŠ œģ Šdefendant€put€Ms.€McGuire's€life€at€risk,€and€thus,€factor€(10)€applies.ŠˆŲ` x` x ŠĢą  ąSince€only€the€victim€was€put€at€risk€during€the€rape,€enhancement€factor€(10)€was€notŠ `° Šapplicable.Š L œ ŠĢą  ąThus,€in€sentencing€the€defendant,€the€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factors€(1),€(4),€(5),Š $ t Š(6),€(8),€and€(10),€with€the€latter€two€being€applied€erroneously.€€In€ascertaining€the€effect,€if€any,€ofŠ  ` Šthe€erroneous€application€of€the€two€factors€on€the€defendantššs€sentence,€we€note€that€of€theseŠ ü L  Šfactors,€the€trial€court€stated€that€it€was€giving€great€emphasis€only€to€factor€(1),€the€application€ofŠ č 8  Šwhich€the€defendant€does€not€dispute.€€We€have€concluded€that€the€applicable€enhancement€factorsŠ Ō$  Šare€(1),€(4),€(5),€and€(6).€€Based€upon€the€applicability€of€these€enhancement€factors€and€the€fact€thatŠ Ą  Šthere€were€no€mitigating€factors,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€theŠ ¬ü  Šmaximum€sentence€of€forty€years.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņLavender€v.€Stateóó,€967€S.W.2d€803,€809€(Tenn.€1998)Š ˜č  Š(holding€that€elimination€of€enhancement€factor€does€not€automatically€require€reduction€ofŠ „Ō  Šsentence);€ņņState€v.€Freemanóó,€943€S.W.2d€25,€32€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996)€(concluding€that€trialŠ pĄ Šcourtššs€improper€application€of€enhancement€factors€did€not€require€sentence€reduction,€when€otherŠ \¬ Šenhancement€factors,€but€no€mitigating€factors,€remained).Š H˜ ŠĢą@FF%ģąņ ņņņCONCLUSIONó óóóˆŠ  p ŠĢą  ąBased€upon€the€foregoing€reasoning€and€authorities,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€Š ųH ŠĢĢĢĢą  ąą ` ąą × ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ą___________________________________€Š ”ä Šą  ąą ` ąą × ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ąALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGE