WPC  auo&aIsNmp6چyF72uXmt =`=cC#d5t,9?mS߭g^l%Y|M I%C"koVJUh{r_k!;TbpGeY&h w-Q)\yϒzoXkN*$eװ"L:D;>uk`NohwxnmB' Sn4JD}!D{KQx)tP;U%[vR&/'R >(ckUׁ^P2(GB2dRuw.uߟg`$J <{_2u _Fq+'z5SO)# >U NI % 0(4U):U":"b\Edw@ 0D*5U:_ 0l 0D *I U:s s s s s s s s s s s s AQ  0D B 0D% % D/i i B D3 HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($n~<$ @ d3|x.D,cAZ"Arial Regular,rAZ"Arial Regular- - ;  #Xd#   DDDDDEDDDDӀ+D.D(3$ !    !"  XoXXX5XXo   Ad FILEDXoX5   September25,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr.XXoAppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular((3$ !      0  (#$  0    !"  XoXXX5XXo   Ad FILEDXoX5   September21,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr.XXoAppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular ! #%C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !   d($$   1  ''' dxdP Pd""""'dxd !  ݛ4XoXXXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T H   DD+DDr(<,(j 8` `@E` ttx$, rD+D.D+Dr(<,(j 8` `@E` ttx$, r+D.D.D.DDDINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE*,XXXX*.Dt(>.*jx` `@Eu` ttx$ tߛ.D @  @  @< ATJACKSON @  @  @< MAY1998SESSION  `  * 4,XXX* 474STATEOFTENNESSEE#XfmXXXo8#XoXXXfm, 7 )    4 747  7 )C.C.A.No.02C019801CC00009 Appellee, 7 )     7 )HenryCountyV. 7 ) n    7 )HonorableC.CreedMcGinley,Judge  7 ) ROBERTEMMETDUNLAP,JR.,#XfmXXXo#XoXXXfm  7 )(SaleofCocaine3counts)  p   7 ) Appellant. 7 ) B 4c4 #XfmXXXo#XoXXXfmFORTHE#XfmXXXo#XoXXXfmԀAPPELLANT:#XfmXXXo#XoXXXfm c FORTHEAPPELLEE:#XfmXXXoL#XoXXXfm p MatthewM.Maddox c JohnKnoxWalkup < #XfmXXXo#XoXXXfmMaddox,Maddox&Maddox c AttorneyGeneral&Reporter "r 19695EastMainStreetP.O.Box430 c ElizabethT.Ryan > Huntingdon,TN38344 c AssistantAttorneyGeneral $  c 425FifthAvenueNorth c Nashville,TN372430493 c Robert GusRadford c DistrictAttorneyGeneral c JohnW.Overton,Jr. c AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral c P.O.Box686 c Huntingdon,TN38344OPINIONFILED:___________________ AFFIRMEDINPART;REMANDED  4.).  PAULG.SUMMERS, 0V+0  Judge 0B,1 #XfmXXXoE # XoXXXfm   4 D4c QDD/D 4/5  D H  7fmXXdXXd7    H  #Xd#    D Q(DOPINION  ;:7=  H  7fmXXdXXd7   D H  76XXdXXd7   D Theappellant,RobertEmmetDunlap,Jr.,wasconvictedbyajuryofthreecountsofthesaleofcocaineintheHenryCountyCircuitCourt.Thecourtimposedconcurrentsentencesoftenyearsforeachconviction.Thecourtdeniedtheappellantsmotionforanewtrialandthisappealfollowed.Theappellantpresentsthefollowingissuesforourreview:4 4  I.Whetherthetrialcourterredindenyinghismotiontosubpoenajurorstodetermineifthejuryreceivedandrelieduponextrajudicialinformationinreachingtheirverdict.̀II.Whetherthetrialcourterredinrefusingtoorderthestatetoprovidehimwiththecriminalrecordoftheconfidentialinformantwhotestifiedagainsthim.III.Whetherthetrialcourterredindenyinghismotionforajudgmentofacquittaloncountfiveoftheindictment.4 4 TheappellantsoldcocainetoaconfidentialinformantonMay8,16,and25,1995.GaryAzbill,aspecialagentwiththeTennesseeBureauofInvestigation(DDDDTBIDDDD),testifiedthataconfidentialinformant,XoXXXoDanGrooms,#XoXXXo&#Ԁsetup  thepurchasesofcocainefromtheappellant.AgentAzbillandGroomsdrovetotheappellantshouseonthethreeoccasions.AgentAzbillsearchedGroomsandgavehimmoneytobuythecocaine.AgentAzbillgaveGroomsaDDDDmicrocassetteDDDDrecordertorecordthetransactions.AgentAzbillwaitedinthecarwhileGroomspurchasedthecocaine.Arecordingofeachtransactionwasintroducedintoevidence.Theappellantsvoicewasidentifiedonthetape.ForensicscientistswiththeTBIlabdeterminedthatthesubstancepurchasedfromtheappellantwascocaineintheamountof3.3grams,3.3grams,and6.7grams,respectively. GroomstestifiedthatheworkedasaconfidentialinformantbecausehewasfacinglifeinprisonifhedidnotcooperatewiththeTBI.Groomshadpreviouslysoldaquarterofapoundofmarijuanatoanundercoveragent.Hehasapriorcriminalrecord.Groomswaspaid$100foreachbuy. 95;  XoXXXoTheappellantarguesthatthecourterredindenyinghismotionto  subpoenajurorstodeterminewhetherextrajudicialinformationwasintroducedtothejuryandaffectedthejurysdeliberations.Insupportofthemotion,theappellantattachedtheaffidavitofhiscounselssecretary,JenniferMcMackin.Ms.McMackinstatedthatajuror, Mrs.Riley,toldherthatanotherofthejurorsmentionedduringjurydeliberationsthattheappellanthadapriordrugcaseforwhichhewasnotpunished.Mrs.Rileyrefusedtosubmitanaffidavit,sayingthatshecouldnotrememberwhethertheappellantspriordrugcasewasmentionedduringorafterjurydeliberations.#XXXX#XXXXMs.McMackinfurtherstatedthatshe ` contactedanotherjuror,JeffreyAllen,whotoldherthatherememberedadiscussionabouttheappellantspriordrugcase,butsaidthatitdidnotaffecthisdecisiontoconvicttheappellant.Ms.McMackin#XXXX#XXXXԀstatedthatMr.Allenrefusedto t signanaffidavitunlessallthejurorswerecalledintocourt. Thetrialcourtwasclearlyconcernedabouttheappellantsrighttoafairtrialaswellaspreservingtheverdictofthejuryfromspeculativeallegationsofmisconduct.Thetrialcourtdeniedtheappellantsmotiontosubpoenathejurors,statingthatanappellantmustofferanaffidavitofajurorshowingjurormisconductbeforethecourtwillissueasubpoenaforanyjurymember.#XXXX#XXXXMany %X $ reportedandunreportedTennesseecasesaddresstheissueofwhethertheinformationinajurorsaffidavitortestimonyisadmissibleorsufficienttomeritanewtrial.See,e.g.,Statev.Coker,746S.W.2d167(Tenn.1987);StateV. l*%* Blackwell,664S.W.2d686(Tenn.1984);Statev.Dozier,No. 8,', DDDD02C01DDDD-9610-CC-00357(Tenn.DDDDCrimDDDD.DDDDAppDDDD.filedatJackson,#XXXXn#XXXXNov.4,1997);#XXXX#XXXXԀPatton .T). v.Rose,892S.W.2d410(Tenn.Ct.App.1994);#XXXXB#XXXXԀCaldararov.VanderbiltUniv., / +0 794S.W.2d738(Tenn.Ct.App.1990);Statev.Hailey,658S.W.2d547(Tenn. 1,2 Crim.App.1983).#XXXX#XXXXԀSeegenerallyNeilP.Cohenetal.,TennesseeLawof h3.4 Evidence606.1.2,at32836(3ded.1995).#XXXX #XXXXԀ#XXXX!#XXXXԀ#XXXX!#XXXXWewereunabletofindany 4506  Tennesseedecisionsaddressingwhatevidencemustbepresentedtomerit 7P28 questioningjurorsaboutnarrowlydrawnissuesofjurymisconduct,asdistinquishedfromevidencewarrantinganewtrial.  Webeginouranalysisbyreviewingwhatevidenceisadmissibletoimpeachajuryverdictatamotionfornewtrial.TennesseeRuleofEvidence606(b)provides:#XXXX"#XXXX4 4  InquiryIntoValidityofVerdictorIndictment.Uponaninquiry D  intothevalidityofaverdictorindictment,ajurormaynottestifyastoanymatterorstatementoccurringduringthecourseofthejury'sdeliberationsortotheeffectofanythinguponanyjuror'smindoremotionasinfluencingthatjurortoassenttoordissentfromtheverdictorindictmentorconcerningthejuror'smentalprocesses,exceptthatajurormaytestifyonthequestionofwhetherextraneousprejudicialinformationwas  improperlybroughttothejury'sattention,whetheranyoutsideinfluencewasimproperlybroughttobearuponanyjuror,orwhetherthejurorsagreedinadvancetobeboundbyaquotientorgamblingverdictwithoutfurtherdiscussion;normayajuror'saffidavitorevidenceofanystatementbythejurorconcerningamatteraboutwhichthejurorwouldbeprecludedfromtestifyingbereceivedforthesepurposes.p$4 P$4B$#XXXX#$#^$XXXXId.(emphasisadded).QDD/D   Extraneousinformationincludesajurorspersonalknowledgeofanaccusedspriorcriminalrecordorarrest.SeeCohen,supra,606.2at333.d. %X $ 1995).#XXXX(#XXXXԀTheinformationwouldbeprejudicialifitinfluencedthejurysverdict.See &$"& Pattonv.Rose,892S.W.2d410(Tenn.Ct.App.1994).Ofcourse,ajurors (#( personalknowledgewouldhavetobedivulgedtoinfluencethejurysverdict#XXXX*#XXXX. l*%* Thepriorconvictionorarrestwouldbepersonalinformationdirectlyinvolvedintheprosecutionoftheaccused,butnotinevidence.SeeCaldararov.Vanderbilt .T). Univ.,794S.W.2d738,744(Tenn.Ct.App.1990). / +0  Havingdeterminedthatajurorsrevelationofanaccusedspriorarrestorconvictionnotinevidencetoothermembersofthejuryisextraneousinformationaboutwhichjurorsmaytestify,wemustnextdeterminewhetherMs.DDDDMcMaDcDkinDDDDsaffidavitissufficientevidencetoverifyfurtherinvestigationbythetrialcourt.Ms. 84: DDDDMcMaDcDkinDDDDsstatementsaboutwhatthetwojurorstoldherishearsayandwouldbeinsufficientevidencetojustifyanewtrial.Thenatureoftheadmissibleevidence,thattheappellantwasarrestedinapriordrugcaseandnotpunished,ispotentiallysubstantiallyprejudicial.Twojurorsadmittedthattheinformationwasdiscussed,albeitonejurorequivocallystatedso.Neitherjurorwouldgivetheappellantanaffidavit.Onejurorrefusedtogiveanaffidavitunlesstheentirejurywasquestioned.Requiringadefenseattorneytopresentajurorsaffidavitofprejudicialmisconducttohavethetrialcourtquestionjurorsaboutthemisconductplacesthedefenseinadifficultsituation.Jurorsmayadmitthattheyreceivedextraneousinformationbutrefusetogiveanaffidavitforfearofthereactionoftheotherjurorsorthecommunity.Indeed,ifthedefensecouldproduceanaffidavit,thenitmayhavesimultaneouslyprovenitsrighttoanewtrial. Wearemindfulofthediscretionofthetrialcourtandtheinviolatenatureofjuryverdicts.However,whereashere,thedefensehascomeforwardwithevidenceofpotentiallyprejudicialextraneousinformation,thetrialjudgeshouldinvestigatethematterfurthertoensurethatthedefendanthasreceivedafairtrial.4 4  3Atrialjudgeisgenerallyinthebestpositiontoevaluatethecriticalquestionofwhetherthejurysexposuretoextrarecordevidenceprejudicedthedefendant.Thus,whenthereisanissuewithregardtotheproprietyofajurysconduct,itistheresponsibilityofthetrialjudgetoinsurethatthejurysverdictisinnowaytaintedbyimproperoutsideinfluences;asarule,ineverycasewherethetrialcourtlearnsthatamemberormembersofthejurymayhavereceivedextrarecordinformationwithapotentialforsubstantialprejudice,thetrialcourtmustdeterminewhetherthemembersofthejuryhavebeenprejudiced,and,havingbecomeawarethatextrinsicinfluenceorinformationmayhavebeenbroughttobearuponthejury,mustinvestigatetheallegedwrongdoing.Thetrialcourthaswidediscretionindecidinghowtopursueaninquiryintothenatureandeffectofextrarecordinformationthatcomestoajuror.Thejudgesbroaddiscretioninthisregardextendstothedecisionwhethertosummonandinvestigatejurorsduetoallegedexposuretoprejudicialinformationorimproper outsideinfluence.Potentiallysuspiciouscircumstancesdo 84: notjustifysuchaninquiry.Somethingmorethanunverifiedconjecturemustbeshown. 4 3433DDDD75BDDDDAm.Jur.2dTrial1640(1992). b  Thiscasedoesnotauthorizefishingexhibitionsintojurydeliberations.WeareawarethatMs.DDDDMcMackinDDDD#XXXXl+#XXXXsaffidavitcontainslittleevidenceofthe    prejudice.Wearealsoawarethattheevidenceofguiltinthiscaseissubstantial.Wearenot,however,willingtoendorsearulethatrequiresadefendanttoproducetheaffidavitofajurorjusttohavethecourtinquireintotheverdictwhere,ashere,theallegedinformationisextraneousandthefactthatitwasrevealedduringdeliberationswasstatedbytwojurorstotheaffiant.Therefore,weremandthiscasetothetrialjudgetoinvestigatethefollowingquestionsinthemannerthatthejudgeseesfit:(1)didthejuryreceiveinformationfromajurorabouttheappellantspastcriminalhistory,and(2)didtheinformationinfluenceajurorsverdict.Iftheanswertobothofthesequestionsisintheaffirmative,thentheDtrialDjudgeDsDDDaDDDhallorderanewtrialDDDDmayevaluatetheappellantsmotionforanewtrialinlightoftheeffectoftheextraneousinformationandtheevidenceofguiltproducedattrialD.#XXXX:# Theappellantarguesthatthetrialcourterredbyfailingtoorderthestate V"! todisclosethepriorcriminalrecordofXXXXconfidentialinformant#XXXX?#ԀGrooms.The "$r# appellantadmitsthatthestateisnotrequiredtoprovideadefendantwiththecriminalrecordsofthestateswitnesses.SeeStatev.King,718S.W.2d241 ' #' (Tenn.1986);Statev.Workman,667S.W.2d44(Tenn.1984).Theappellant )$) contendsthatXXXXthestatesfailuretoprovideGroomscriminalrecord#XXXXtA#XXXXԀviolateshis R+&+ righttodueprocessunderBradyv.Maryland,373U.S.83(1963).#XXXXA#Ԁ -n(-  ApanelofthisCourtrecentlyaddressedthisissueinXXXXStatev.Copeland, 0,1 No.DDDD01C01DDDD9703CR00085(Tenn.Crim.App.filedatNashville,Apr.3,1998).#XXXXB#Ԁ 2-3 InCopeland,theappellantscontendedthatthestatesfailuretoinformthemofa N4/5 confidentialinformantsrecordviolatedtheirrightstodueprocessunderBrady, 6j17 meritinganewtrial.TheCourtstated: 95; 4 4  InBrady,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthat   suppressionbytheprosecutionofevidencefavorabletoanaccuseduponrequestviolatesdueprocesswheretheevidenceismaterialeithertoguiltortopunishment,irrespectiveofthegoodfaithorbadfaithoftheprosecution.373U.S.at87.Evidencefavorabletoanaccusedincludesthatwhichmaybeusedtoimpeachtheprosecution'switnesses.Gigliov.UnitedStates,405U.S.150,92S.Ct.763,  31L.Ed.2d104(1972).However, Theevidenceismaterialonlyifthereisareasonableprobabilitythat,hadtheevidencebeendisclosedtothedefense,theresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.A'reasonableprobability'isaprobabilitysufficienttoundermineconfidenceintheoutcome.4 D4D 44UnitedStatesv.Bagley,473U.S.667,682,105S.Ct.3375,  p 87DDDDL.EdDDDD.DDDD2dDDDD481(1985).D4 4DDDDDCopelandDDDD,No.DDDD01C01DDDD9703CR00085(Tenn.DDDDCrimDDDD.DDDDAppDDDD.filedatNashville, @ Apr.3,1998). TheCourtinCopelandfoundnomerittotheappellantsissuebecause $" theconfidentialinformantsXyvXXXyvcriminalrecord#XyvXXXyvJ#Ԁwasnotmaterialtotheoutcomeof p&!$ thetrial.TheCourtnotedthatthedefenseestablishedtheconfidentialinformantasapaid snitch.TheCourtalsonotedthatthetestimonyoftheofficerwhoaccompaniedtheinformantonthedrugbuywasthesameastheinformantstestimony.Inotherwords,theappellantsfailedtoestablishareasonableprobabilitythatXyvXXXyvtheresultsofthetrialwouldhavebeendifferent#XyvXXXyvL#Ԁiftheyhadbeen / +. providedthecriminalrecordoftheinformant. Likewise,inthecaseatbar,Groomscriminalrecordwasnotmaterialtotheoutcomeofthecase.XyvXXXyvOncrossexamination,Groomstestifiedthathehada P726 priorfelonyconvictionforaggravatedassault.Whenaskedwhetherhehadany 0948 otherfelonyconvictions,Groomsreplied,DD YouDDDDwouldhavetocheckonmyrecords.IjustdontDDknow.DDGroomsDDDDclearlyadmittedthathehadotherconvictions.#XyvXXXyvN#ԀGroomsadmittedthathewasapaid snitch.Groomsadmittedthat p hewascooperatingwiththeTBItoavoidlifeinprison.InadditiontoGroomstestimony,theDDDDmicrocassetteDDDDtapesandtheXyvXXXyvtestimonyofAgentAzbill#XyvXXXyvP#Ԁare 0  evidenceofthetransactions.WedonotbelievethattheresultsoftheappellantstrialwouldhavebeendifferenthadheprovidedthecompletecriminalrecordofGroomstotheappellant.Thisissueiswithoutmerit. XyvXXXyvTheappellantstatesinhislastissuethatthetrialcourterredindenying  hismotionforajudgmentofacquittaloncountthreeoftheindictment.CountthreeoftheindictmentchargestheappellantwithsellingcocaineonMay16,1995.Theappellants argumentdiscussescountfiveoftheindictmentwhichchargestheappellantwithsellingcocaineonMay25,1995.Theevidenceissufficienttosupporttheconvictionsforbothcounts.Wewilladdresstheappellants argument.TheappellantarguesthatthereisnoevidencethatGroomspurchasedcocainefromtheappellantonMay25th,otherthan apoorqualityaudiotapewhichdoesnotindicateonitsfacethatGroomspurchasedcocainefromtheappellant. Whenthetrialcourtispresentedwithamotionforjudgmentofacquittal,theonlyconcernisthelegalsufficiency,asopposedtotheweight,oftheevidence.SeeStatev.Campbell,904S.W.2d608(Tenn.DDDDCrimDDDD.DDDDAppDDDD.1995).To -@), determinewhethertheevidenceisinsufficienttosustaintheconviction,thetrialcourtmustDDconsiderDDDDDDDDDDDDD DD"DtheDDDDevidenceintroducedbybothparties,disregardanyevidenceintroducedbytheaccusedthatconflictswiththeevidenceadducedbytheState,andaffordtheStatethestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidence, includingallreasonableinferenceswhichmaybedrawnfromtheevidence.DDDDDDUDDDDDDId.DD P726 (citing#XyvXXXyv^R#XyvXXXyvStatev.DDDDBlantonDDDD#XyvXXXyvY#XyvXXXyv,926DDDDS.W.2dDDDD953,95758(Tenn.DDDDCrimDDDD.DDDDAppDDDD.1996);#XyvXXXyvZ#XyvXXXyvԀState  v.Hall,656S.W.2d60,61(Tenn.Crim.DDDDAppDDDD.1983))#XyvXXXyv [#XyvXXXyv.    TheevidenceissufficienttosupporttheappellantsconvictionforthesaleofcocainetoGroomsonMay25,1995.AgentAzbilltestifiedthatheandGroomswenttotheappellantsresidencetopurchasecocaineonMayDDDD25thDDDD.AgentAzbilltestifiedthathesearchedGroomsandgavehimaDDDDmicrocassetteDDDDrecorder#XyvXXXyv[#XyvXXXyvԀandmoneytobuythecocaine.Groomsreturnedwithtwo DDDDbaggiesDDDDof   cocaineandtherecorder.Thetapeofthetransactionwasintroducedintoevidence.AgentDDDDAzbillDDDDidentifiedthevoicesonthetapeasthoseoftheappellant,theappellantswife,Grooms,andtwounidentifiedvoicesofpersonswholeftbeforethetransaction.Thesubstancepurchasedwasidentifiedascocaine.Althoughthetransactionisunclearonthetape,AgentDDDDAzbillDDDDstestimony,alongwiththatofGrooms,issufficientevidencetosupporttheconviction.GroomstestifiedthatononeoccasionhepurchasedaquarterofanounceofcocainewhichwaspackagedintwoplasticDDDDbaggiesDDDDfromtheappellant.#XyvXXXyv]#XyvXXXyvGroomstestifiedthattwopeoplewereleavingtheappellantshouseontheday "  thathepurchasedthetwo DDDDbaggiesDDDDofcocainefromtheappellant.#XyvXXXyva#XyvXXXyvԀThisissueis $" withoutmerit. Thiscaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.Asidefromtheissueonremand,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmedinallrespects.  0948 Ї 4 p4 D  p _____________________________  p PAULG.SUMMERS,JudgeCONCUR:_________________________JOHNH.DDDDPEAYDDDD,Judge_________________________THOMAST.DDDDWOODALLDDDD,Judge  p  #XyvXXXyvb#