ÿWPCU+ cÆÚÛ„igx¡>f /HäEoæoÏõï¼2•(ºa%z3ñ¢I ×à“³wCðŒTL1> V…lt6Ý^¯YÍg@aw ƒ`onÁúD Æbsùb7ÔùÕ5>â,/CÓPW:n|ˆ¨z7Kx#žãàÏ>¿òð®q'³¨ï_>bÐTòJ5°¾ëRX¬3ߘk¸}ü´Î\rFeí,VQ¯ˆb(ßÆäcd>‹Ì[~›eŒð:æ¹"ô« Ï¡ý6™Ä#ð¡,U³{·Øõ¤!`ƒˆÇÕ§2O–;ýU·%¨‹zç“Î]Å­pòÛL©}¨ —µÆœï);a¦ §íÀ©a†‚}=2B¨EíÚ ¸ ”éðçjs‰%0ÖsלžúÙ^JÅ~ç vÿšè–YÓqe^íö*¥ý­C„¦b#Á\ % UN# 0ˆq U)Nù 0DG î‹ zy Òó ÁÅ g†çíçÔÆ»ÆÆGÆ "ÓNõë÷âEçué^ß{ªZZ^ !ê!¯ú"a©$w &4&"&1& m3&3&3&3&3&3&3&3&3&3&bJ&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J&J& 0ëR&R&R&R& B='=' 0¤Z' D3þ' D-1( 0K^(^( AS©(Æü( 0¤Â) 0Df* A«ª*˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó äÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€defendant€did€not€mention€this€exchange€in€his€statement€to€the€police.ò òó ó€Additionally,€in€the€defendantððsÐ ° Ðstatement€the€defendant€claimed€to€have€had€Gordonððs€gun€for€two€months,€while€at€trial€the€defendant€stated€that€GordonÐ tÄ Ðhad€given€him€the€gun€during€this€conversation€at€Skinny€Millerððs.ò òó ó ˜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.wpt ·Ý ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€defendant€and€victim€were€related€by€marriage.ò òó ó ]Ý ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Wendy€Ô_ÔIngramÔ_Ô€stated€that€the€defendant€had€held€his€weapon€in€the€air€and€made€a€remark€after€the€shootingÐ ° Ðthough€she€did€not€testify€concerning€what€had€been€said.ò òó ó ÝÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Additional€relevant€factual€details€will€be€provided€within€the€analysis€of€individual€issues. ÝÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Admittedly,€Frazier€was€also€occasionally€dating€the€victim€at€the€time€of€the€offense.€ò òó óLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 Ý ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€defense€asserted€at€trial€that€the€weapon€could€have€been€taken€by€someone€in€the€confusion€immediatelyÐ ° Ðafter€the€shooting.ò òó ó áÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€defendant€denied€involvement€with€either€the€ð ðEast€Sideðð€or€the€ð ðWest€Side.ððò òó ó ûÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€In€Frazierððs€statement€to€the€police,€she€said€that€the€only€weapon€she€had€seen€that€night€was€the€defendantððs.ò òó ó kÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€During€cross„examination€of€the€defendant,€the€prosecution€produced€a€tech„nine.€Since€the€defendantÐ ° Ðclaimed€to€have€seen€the€handle€of€a€weapon€in€the€victimððs€pants,€the€State€asked€the€defendant€to€place€the€tech„nineÐ tÄ Ðinto€his€pants€and€to€draw€the€weapon.ò òó ó€Through€this€exchange€the€defense€raised€no€objection.ò òó ó€Nevertheless,€when€theÐ 8ˆ ÐState€asked€that€the€weapon€be€passed€to€the€jury,€the€defense€objected€because€the€defendant€himself€had€not€specificallyÐ üL Ðclaimed€that€a€tech„nine€was€involved.ò ò€ó ó€Later€the€defense€objected€once€more,€this€time€contesting€the€size€of€a€clipÐ À Ðmentioned€by€the€State.ò ò€ó óThough€the€trial€court€overruled€both€objections,€it€did€so€in€the€latter€instance€ð ðwith€theÐ †Ö Ðinstruction€to€the€jury€that€this€is€not€alleged€to€be€the€gun€that€was€there.€Weððre€merely€talking€about€a€type€of€weapon.ððò òó óÐ L œ Ð Ý ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€At€this€juncture€defense€counsel€objected,€but€on€a€basis€not€pursued€in€this€appeal;€thus,€we€need€not€addressÐ ° Ðit€here.ò òó ó€ ÕÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Though€the€defendant€cited€Rules€701€and€702,€he€provided€no€case€law€related€to€this€portion€of€the€claim.Ð ° ÐFurthermore,€the€State€did€not€respond€to€this€portion€of€the€issue.€Nevertheless,€from€our€review€we€find€the€casesÐ tÄ Ðdealing€with€lay€opinion€distinguishable€from€the€situation€presented€here.€  Ý ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Though€defense€counsel€should€have€stated€the€basis€of€his€objection,€the€Stateððs€response€made€clear€byÐ ° Ðinference€that€it€believed€the€evidence€admissible€under€Rule€608.€Furthermore,€the€defense€thereafter€requested€a€jury„Ð tÄ Ðout€hearing.ò òó ó€Õ¤“+â  àÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€The€defendant€does€not€contest€that€he€used€a€firearm€in€committing€the€offense,€and€utilization€of€a€firearmÐ ° Ðis€not€an€element€of€the€offense€of€second€degree€murder.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-13-210.€€Thus,€this€enhancementÐ tÄ Ðfactor€may€appropriately€be€applied€here.Ð 8ˆ ÐÌà  à€ ¥Ý ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€While€the€trial€court€could€have€more€clearly€set€out€any€mitigating€factors€it€found€applicable,€this€statementÐ ° Ðreflects€that€the€trial€court€did,€in€fact,€consider€mitigating€factors€but€concluded€that€they€should€be€afforded€little€weightÐ tÄ Ðhere.ò òó ó WÝ ƒR´Â$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€As€additional€proof,€Frazier€and€two€other€defense€witnesses€indicated€that,€prior€to€the€shooting,€the€victimÐ ° Ðhad€issued€individual€warnings€for€certain€people€to€leave€Skinny€Millerððs.€ò òó óyG*”çª3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ- ù-(|G2´Â$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€]%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»Ô d(|3|$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€]%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3|$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€]%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€]%»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼]%»»»ÔÑ8€éXXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îFT]%ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼]%»îîFT #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àMarch€20,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XéX»¼]%ÔÌò òÔ#†¼]%»XXé#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€TORREY€Ô_ÔLYONELÔ_Ô€FRAZIERòòóóÔ‡XéX»¼]%Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Ô_ÔRoaneÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€11903€€€€€€E.€Eugene€Ô_ÔEblenÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2000„01364„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¥õ  ÐDecember€Ô_Ô19,Ô_Ô€2001Ð ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡XéXXXéÔà  àA€Ô_ÔRoaneÔ_Ô€County€grand€jury€indicted€the€defendant€on€one€count€of€first€degree€premeditated€Ð xÈ  Ðmurder.€ò òó ó€Following€a€jury€trial,€he€stood€convicted€of€second€degree€murder.ò ò€ó ó€For€this€offense€heÐ d´ Ðreceived€a€twenty„two€year€sentence€as€a€violent€offender.ò ò€ó ó€After€unsuccessfully€pursuing€a€motionÐ T¤ Ðfor€a€new€trial,€the€defendant€brings€the€present€appeal€to€this€Court€raising€four€issues.€ò òó óMoreÐ D” Ðspecifically,€he€avers€that€(1)€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction;€(2)€the€trial€courtÐ 0€ Ðerred€in€admitting€into€evidence€a€tech„nine€weapon€not€associated€with€the€offense;€(3)€the€trialÐ l Ðcourt€erred€in€permitting€the€State€to€question€a€defense€witness€concerning€a€pending€statutory€rapeÐ X Ðcharge;€and€(4)€the€trial€court€erred€by€sentencing€the€defendant€to€twenty„two€years.€Upon€reviewÐ ôD Ðof€these€issues,€we€find€that€all€lack€merit€or€constitute€harmless€error.€We,€thus,€affirm€theÐ à0 Ðconviction€and€sentence.Ô#†XéXXXé,#ÔÔ#†¼]%»XXé±#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼]%ÔÐ Ì ÐÓ ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ ¤ô ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼]%»àXé #ÔÔ‡XéX.¼]%ÔJerry€L.€Smith,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoe€G.€Rileyóó€and€òòAlan€E.€Glenn,Ð |Ì ÐJJ.óó,€joined.Ð h¸ ÐÌCharles€B.€Hill,€II,€and€Spence€Ô_ÔBrunerÔ_Ô,€Kingston,€Tennessee,€for€appellant,€Torrey€L.€Frazier.Ð @!  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Glen€C.€Watson,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€J.Ð #h" ÐScott€Ô_ÔMcCluenÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Frank€A.€Harvey,€Assistant€District€Attorney,€forÐ $T# Ðappellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ð$@ $ ÐÓÑ ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ <-Œ(-ýÿ ÐÔ_Ô‡à@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼]%»XXé #ÔÔ‡XéX»¼]%ÔÐ ° ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼]%»XXé#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼]%ÔÓ  Óò òòòÔ‡XéXXXéÔÓÓà@cc!ìàFactual€Backgroundó óóó׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׈Ð ˆØ ÐÓÓà  àThe€undisputed€proof€reflects€that€the€defendant€shot€the€victim,€Anthony€Eugene€Thomas,Ð `° Ðmultiple€times€and,€thereby,€ended€the€victimððs€life.€ò ò€ó óThis€incident€occurred€at€around€1:00€a.m.€onÐ L œ ÐDecember€28,€1997,€at€an€establishment€referred€to€as€ð ðSkinny€Millerððs.ððò ò€ó ó€While€the€defendant€doesÐ < Œ Ðnot€deny€shooting€the€victim,€he€claimed€and€maintains€that€he€acted€in€self„defense.€ò òó óÐ , | ÐÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓSufficiencyó óóóÐ ð @  ÐÌÓsÓà  àAs€aforementioned,€the€defendant€asserts€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€is€insufficientÐ È  Ðto€support€his€conviction€for€second€degree€murder.€Rather,€he€avers€that€the€proof€supported€hisÐ ´  Ðcontention€that€the€circumstances€justified€his€use€of€deadly€force.Ð  ð  Ðòòóóò òó óà  àWhen€a€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€is€obliged€to€reviewÐ ŒÜ  Ðthat€claim€according€to€certain€well-settled€principles.€A€verdict€of€guilty,€rendered€by€a€jury€andÐ xÈ Ðð ðapproved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theðð€State's€witnesses€and€resolves€allÐ d´ Ðconflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);€Ð P  ÐòòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€Thus,€although€the€accused€is€originally€cloakedÐ <Œ Ðwith€a€presumption€of€innocence,€the€jury€verdict€of€guilty€removes€this€presumption€ð ðand€replacesÐ (x Ðit€with€one€of€guilt.ðð€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€Hence,€on€appeal,€theÐ d Ðburden€of€proof€rests€with€the€defendant€to€demonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€Ð P ÐòòId.óó€The€relevant€question€the€reviewing€court€must€answer€is€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€couldÐ ì< Ðhave€found€the€accused€guilty€of€every€element€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð Ø( ÐR.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòHarrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€at€75.€In€making€this€decision,€we€are€to€accord€the€State€ð ðtheÐ Ä Ðstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€mayÐ ° Ðbe€drawn€therefrom.ðð€òòSeeóó€òòTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914.€As€such,€this€Court€is€precluded€from€re„Ð œì Ðweighing€or€reconsidering€the€evidence€in€evaluating€the€convicting€proof.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929Ð ˆØ ÐS.W.2d€380,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð tÄ ÐApp.€1990).€€Moreover,€we€may€not€substitute€our€own€ð ðinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€ofÐ ` ° Ðfact€from€circumstantial€evidence."€€òòMatthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€at€779.Ð L!œ Ðà  àTo€establish€second€degree€murder€here,€the€State€must€have€proven€beyond€a€reasonableÐ 8"ˆ  Ðdoubt€that€the€defendant€knowingly€killed€the€victim.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-13-210(a)(1).Ð $#t! ÐFurthermore,€according€to€our€code€"[a]€person€acts€knowingly€with€respect€to€a€result€of€the€person'sÐ $`" Ðconduct€when€the€person€is€aware€that€the€conduct€is€reasonably€certain€to€cause€the€result."€€€Tenn.Ð ü$L # ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39-11-302(b).Ð è%8!$ Ðà  àThe€defendant€admits€that€he€drew€a€weapon€from€his€right€rear€pocket€and€shot€the€victimÐ Ô&$"% Ðmultiple€times€within€very€close€range.ò ò€ó ó€The€autopsy€report€revealed€that€one€of€the€bullets€enteredÐ À'#& Ðthe€victimððs€chest€penetrating€his€stomach,€right€lung,€and€aorta.€ò ò€ó óAccording€to€Dr.€Charles€Harlan,Ð °($' Ðthe€forensic€examiner,€this€shot€was€the€primary€cause€of€the€victimððs€death.ò ò€ó ó€From€this€and€otherÐ  )ð$( Ðproof,€the€jury€could€have€concluded€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€acted€with€anÐ ° Ðawareness€that€his€conduct€was€reasonably€certain€to€result€in€the€victimððs€death.Ð œì Ðà  àNevertheless,€the€defendant€averred€at€trial€and€re„asserts€through€this€appeal€that€he€actedÐ ˆØ Ðin€self„defense.€Tennessee€defines€self-defense€as€follows:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àA€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€force€against€another€person€when€andÐ L œ Ðto€the€degree€the€person€reasonably€believes€the€force€is€immediately€necessary€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðprotect€against€the€other's€use€or€attempted€use€of€unlawful€force.€€The€person€mustÐ $ t Ðhave€a€reasonable€belief€that€there€is€an€imminent€danger€of€death€or€serious€bodilyÐ  ` Ðinjury.€€The€danger€creating€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€serious€bodily€injuryÐ ü L  Ðmust€be€real,€or€honestly€believed€to€be€real€at€the€time,€and€must€be€founded€uponÐ è 8  Ðreasonable€grounds.€€ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-11-611(a);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Wilsonóó,€556€S.W.2d€232,€234€(Tenn.€1977).€€OnceÐ ¬ü  Ðproperly€raised,€the€State€bears€the€burden€of€negating€a€claim€that€the€accused€acted€in€self-defense.€Ð ˜è  ÐòòóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-11-201(a)(3);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó,€òòe.góó.,€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€45€S.W.3d€1,€10€(Tenn.€2001).€YetÐ „Ô  Ðas€with€other€factual€determinations,€the€decision€concerning€whether€the€defendant€acted€inÐ pÀ Ðself-defense€is€one€to€be€made€by€the€jury.€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Goodeóó,€956€S.W.2d€521,€527€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð \¬ ÐApp.€1997);€òòState€v.€Ivyóó,€868€S.W.2d€724,€727€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€€Ð H˜ Ðà  àIn€the€instant€case€the€defendant€presented€alleged€proof€that€he€and€Quincy€Willis,€anÐ 4„ Ðassociate€of€the€victim,€had€been€in€an€altercation€in€front€of€the€defendantððs€grandmotherððs€houseÐ  p Ðabout€one€week€before€the€offense€involved€here.ò ò€ó ó€According€to€the€defendant€he€did€not€originallyÐ  \ Ðhave€a€gun€on€him€when€Willis€approached€him,€but€he€noticed€that€Willis€had€one.ò ò€ó ó€The€defendant,Ð üL Ðtherefore,€acknowledged€that€when€Willis€left€to€go€next€door,€the€defendant€went€into€theÐ ì< Ðaforementioned€home,€armed€himself,€and€then€returned€to€his€car.€ò ò€ó óAt€some€point€thereafter€WillisÐ Ø( Ðfired€at€him,€and€he,€in€turn,€fired€at€Willis.ò ò€€ó óThe€defendant€further€asserted€that€he€had€heard€of€theÐ È Ðvictimððs€threatening€to€ð ðshoot€.€.€.€upðð€the€defendantððs€grandmotherððs€house.ò òó óÐ ¸ Ðà  àAccording€to€the€defendantððs€account€concerning€the€night€of€the€victimððs€death,€TerrellÐ ¤ô ÐGordon€told€the€defendant€that€the€victim€and€Willis€were€armed€and€that€the€defendant€should€watchÐ à Ðthe€defendantððs€back.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò ò€ó ó€The€defendant€further€claimed€that€the€victim€had€then€asked€to€talk€with€him.Ð |Ì Ðò òó óAccording€to€the€defendantððs€statement€the€following€exchange€took€place:Ð l ¼ ÐÌà8  àHe€[the€defendant]€said,€ð ðYou€know€Iððm€West€Side[.]ðð€I€said[,€ð ð]I€didnððt€know€youÐ D"”  Ðwas€[sic]€nothing[.ðð]€Then€he€said[,€ð ð]I€am[.ðð]€I€said[,€ð ðYour€[sic]€letting€that€stupidÐ 0#€! Ðass€shit€come€between€family[.ðð]׃ Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€He€said[,€ð ð]€Hell€yes[.ðð]ò òó ó€Ð$l"Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ %X # ÐThe€defendant€added€that€the€victim€had,€thereafter,€pushed€him;€the€defendant€had€pushed€back;€theÐ ° Ðâ âvictim€had€seemed€to€reach€for€a€gun;€and€fearing€the€victim,€the€defendant€had€pulled€a€gun€himselfÐ œì Ðand€shot€the€victim.ò òó óÐ ˆØ Ðà  àOn€cross„examination,€the€defendant€explained€that€ð ðEast€Sideðð€and€ð ðWest€Sideðð€could€referÐ tÄ Ðto€the€gangs,€the€Bloods€and€the€Crips€respectively.ò ò€ó ó€He€further€explained€that€the€Bloodsðð€color€wasÐ `° Ðred,€while€the€Cripsðð€color€was€blue.ò òó ó€The€proof€reveals€that€on€the€night€of€the€victimððs€death,€theÐ P   Ðvictim€was€wearing€a€blue€shirt.€ò òó ó€On€one€day€of€the€trial,€the€defendant€wore€a€red€shirt€and€redÐ < Œ Ðshoes.ò òó ó€When€he€was€arrested,€he€had€been€wearing€a€bright€red€coat.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò ò€ó ó€In€addition,€on€the€night€of€theÐ ( x Ðoffense,€the€victim€had€told€Alice€Hanks,€ð ðThey€donððt€like€my€color.ððò òó ó€This€witness€added€that€afterÐ  h Ðthe€victim€had€been€lying€on€the€floor,€the€defendant€had€said€something€like,€ð ð[T]hese€MF€ainððt€[sic]Ð  T  Ðgoing€to€come€in€my€territory.ðð׃ T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó óÐ ð @  Ðà  àNumerous€witnesses€indicated€that€earlier€in€the€night€the€defendant€and€the€victim€hadÐ Ü,  Ðinitially€appeared€to€get€along€with€one€another.ò ò€ó ó€However,€later€on,€the€defendant€and€the€victimÐ È  Ðbegan€to€argue.ò ò€ó ó€According€to€Wendy€Ingram,€the€defendant€then€pushed€the€victim,€pulled€aÐ ¸  Ðweapon,€and€shot€the€victim.ò ò€ó ó€She€added€that€the€victimððs€hands€had€been€up€as€if€they€were€goingÐ ¨ø  Ðto€fight,€and€she€did€not€recall€the€victimððs€making€any€movement€toward€his€clothing€prior€to€theÐ ˜è  Ðshots€being€fired.ò òó óÐ „Ô Ðà  àWith€regard€to€the€whether€the€victim€had€been€armed,€no€witness€ð!ð€including€the€defendantÐ pÀ Ðð!ð€claimed€to€have€seen€the€victim€draw€a€weapon€prior€to€being€shot.€Nevertheless,€the€defendantÐ \¬ Ðdid€assert€that€he€had€seen€a€black€handle€in€the€victimððs€pants€on€the€night€in€question.ò ò€ó ó€Furthermore,Ð H˜ ÐNacie€Frazier€stated€that€she€had€seen€something€black€with€a€square€shape€in€the€front€of€theÐ 8ˆ Ðvictimððs€pants€when€earlier€he€had€raised€his€shirt€to€her€in€a€manner€reflecting€that€he€was€armed.׃¤×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð $t Ðò òó óGordon€also€testified€that€he€had€observed€Willis€giving€the€victim€a€weapon€outside€of€SkinnyÐ ` ÐMillerððs.ò ò€ó ó€Gordon€believed€this€weapon€to€be€a€tech„nine.€ò òó ó€However,€the€State€later€admitted€a€tech„Ð üL Ðnine€into€evidence€to€show€this€type€of€weaponððs€size,€thereby€allowing€the€jury€to€decide€whetherÐ ì< Ðthe€victim€had€tucked€a€weapon€this€large€into€his€pants.€ò ò€ó óIn€addition,€the€above„referenced€Ingram,Ð Ø( Ða€licensed€practical€nurse€who€had€performed€CPR€on€the€victim€shortly€after€the€shooting,ò òó ó€statedÐ È Ðthat€she€had€noticed€no€weapon€when€loosening€the€victimððs€clothes€in€an€attempt€to€save€his€life.Ð ´ Ðò òó óMoreover,€we€observe€that€no€weapon€was€found€on€the€victim€or€at€the€scene.׃0×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó óÐ  ð Ðà  àThough€we€recognize€that€the€defendant€did€present€proof€supporting€his€theory€of€self„Ð ŒÜ Ðdefense,׃€×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€we€are€to€review€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State.€To€that€end€we€notÐ x È Ðonly€note€the€aforementioned€evidence€in€conflict€with€the€defendantððs€claim€but€also€facts€that€theÐ d!´ Ðjury€may€have€considered€in€weighing€the€credibility€of€some€of€the€witnesses€called.€For€example,Ð ° Ðno€proof€was€offered€suggesting€that€either€Ingram€or€Hanks,€both€called€by€the€State,€had€close€orÐ œì Ðfamilial€ties€to€the€defendant€or€the€victim.ò òó ó€€However,€among€the€defendantððs€witnesses€were€GordonÐ ˆØ ÐGillespie,€his€uncle;€Frazier,׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€his€cousin;€and€Lisa€Patterson,€the€mother€of€one€of€his€children.ò òó óÐ tÄ ÐFurthermore,€Frazier€admitted€that€she€had€been€very€intoxicated€at€the€time€she€had€given€herÐ `° Ðstatement€on€the€night€of€the€offense.ò òó ó€Gillespie€acknowledged€that€he€had€taken€the€defendant€fromÐ L œ Ðthe€scene€of€the€crime€and€had€been€with€the€defendant€at€the€time€of€the€defendantððs€arrest€the€dayÐ 8 ˆ Ðafter€the€offense.€ò òó óOn€the€latter€occasion€Gillespie€was€also€armed.ò ò€ó ó€In€addition,€the€defendant€calledÐ $ t ÐGordon,€who€was€not€only€his€cousin€but€whose€testimony€was€also€riddled€with€additional€mattersÐ  d Ðpotentially€calling€into€question€Gordonððs€veracity.ò òó óÐ  P  Ðà  àFaced€with€the€record€presented,€we,€therefore,€find€that€the€juryððs€verdict€is€supported€by€theÐ ì <  Ðevidence.€As€such,€this€issue€lacks€merit.Ð Ø(  ÐÌÌòòÓ  Óò òAdmission€of€a€Weapon€Not€Specifically€Part€of€the€Offenseó óóóÐ œì  Ðòòò òand€of€Officer€Charles€Mooreððs€Testimony€Related€to€This€Weaponó óóóÐ ˆØ  ÐÌÓŸDÓà  àThrough€his€second€issue€the€defendant€avers€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€theÐ `° Ðadmission€of€a€tech„nine€offered€by€the€State€and€in€permitting€the€investigating€officer€to€provideÐ Lœ Ðtestimony€related€to€the€weapon.€To€support€this€contention,€the€defendant€states€that€this€evidenceÐ 8ˆ Ðshould€have€been€excluded€under€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€402,€403,€701,€and/or€702.€Rules€402Ð $t Ðand€403€deal€with€relevance€considerations,€while€701€and€702€pertain€to€lay€opinion€and€expertÐ ` Ðtestimony€respectively.Ð üL Ðà  àTurning€first€to€the€question€of€relevance,€we€acknowledge€that€evidence€must€be€relevantÐ è8 Ðand€probative€to€an€issue€at€trial€in€order€to€be€admissible.€òòState€v.€McCaryóó,€922€S.W.2d€511,€515Ð Ô$ Ð(Tenn.€1996);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402.€€Evidence€is€relevant€if€it€has€"any€tendency€to€make€theÐ À Ðexistence€of€any€fact€that€is€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€lessÐ ¬ü Ðprobable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401.€However,€relevant€evidenceÐ ˜è Ðmay€be€excluded€at€trial€if€the€probative€value€of€that€evidence€ð ðis€substantially€outweighed€by€theÐ „Ô Ðdanger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury€.€.€.€."€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€Ð pÀ ÐThe€determination€of€relevancy€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€and€this€Court€will€notÐ \ ¬ Ðoverturn€a€trial€court's€determination€in€this€regard€in€the€absence€of€an€abuse€of€discretion.€òòState€v.Ð H!˜ ÐWilliamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€78-79€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€€òòState€v.€Forbesóó,€918€S.W.2d€431,€449Ð 4"„  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ð  #p! Ðà  àIn€the€instant€case€Gordon,€the€defendantððs€first€witness,€alleged€that€Willis€had€handed€theÐ  $\" Ðvictim€a€weapon€outside€of€Skinny€Millerððs.ò ò€ó ó€Gordon€added€that€the€weapon€had€looked€ð ðlike€a€tech„Ð ø$H # Ðnine€or€something.ðð€ò òó óDefense€counsel€then€began€asking€questions€about€the€size€of€a€tech„nine€andÐ è%8!$ Ðwhether€the€victimððs€coat€had€been€large€enough€to€conceal€a€weapon€of€this€type.ò òó ó€Furthermore,Ð Ô&$"% Ðdefense€counsel€returned€to€this€topic€on€re„direct€eliciting€more€specific€testimony€concerning€theÐ À'#& Ðvictimððs€hiding€of€the€weapon.€€According€to€Gordon€he€saw€the€victim€place€the€weapon€in€the€backÐ ¬(ü#' Ðof€the€victimððs€pants€under€the€aforementioned€jacket.ò ò€ó ó€This€witness€added€that€a€tech„nine€was€notÐ ˜)è$( Ðtoo€big€to€carry€in€that€manner.ò ò€ó ó€In€view€of€this€line€of€questioning,€the€defendant€opened€the€doorÐ ° Ðand€made€the€tech„nine€relevant;€thus,€this€contention€lacks€merit.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð  ð Ðà  àHowever,€as€above„noted,€the€defendant€also€alleges€that€the€trial€court€did€not€comply€withÐ ŒÜ ÐTennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€701€and€702€by€admitting€additional€proof€related€to€the€tech„nine.€Ð xÈ ÐRule€701€essentially€addresses€the€admissibility€of€opinion€testimony€offered€by€non-experts.€€TheÐ d´ Ðrule€provides,€in€relevant€part:Ð P   ÐÌà8  à(a)€.€.€.€If€a€witness€is€not€testifying€as€an€expert,€the€witness's€testimony€in€the€formÐ ( x Ðof€opinions€or€inferences€is€limited€to€those€opinions€or€inferences€which€areÐ dÐ Ð  Ðà8  à(1)€rationally€based€on€the€perception€of€the€witness€andÐ P Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(2)€helpful€to€a€clear€understanding€of€the€witness's€testimony€or€the€determinationÐ ì <  Ðof€a€fact€in€issue.€€à  àÐØ( Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€R.€Evid.€701(a).€Furthermore,€the€admission€of€expert€testimony€is€governed€by€theÐ °  Ðaforementioned€Rule€702,€which€states€that€ð ð[i]f€scientific,€technical,€or€other€specialized€knowledgeÐ œì  Ðwill€substantially€assist€the€trier€of€fact€to€understand€the€evidence€or€to€determine€a€fact€in€issue,€aÐ ˆØ  Ðwitness€qualified€as€an€expert€by€knowledge,€skill,€experience,€training,€or€education€may€testify€inÐ tÄ Ðthe€form€of€an€opinion€or€otherwise.ðð€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€702.€Caselaw€has€also€clarified€that€evidenceÐ `° Ðis€ð ðððscientific,€technical,€or€other€specialized€knowledgeðð€if€it€concerns€a€matter€that€ððthe€averageÐ Lœ Ðjuror€would€not€know,€as€a€matter€of€course€.€.€.€.ðððð€òòState€v.€Murphyóó,€953€S.W.2d€200,€203€(Tenn.Ð 8ˆ Ð1997)€(quoting€€òòState€v.€Bolinóó,€922€S.W.2d€870,€874€(Tenn.€1996)).Ð $t Ðà  àReturning€to€the€relevant€facts€of€the€instant€case,€the€contested€testimony€came€as€rebuttalÐ ` Ðproof€from€Investigator€Moore.ò ò€ó ó€ò òó óThis€witness€was€shown€the€weapon€and€asked€if€he€could€recognizeÐ üL Ðthe€type.ò òó ó€Moore€responded€that€it€was€a€tech„nine€and€subsequently€affirmed€that€he€was€ð ðgenerallyÐ ì< Ðfamiliar€with€thisðð€weapon.׃´×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó ó€The€following€exchange€then€transpired:Ð Ø( ÐÌà8  àQ€[Prosecutor]€à0Ð Ð àThe€pistol€you€just€had€in€your€hand€there,€the€clip,€let€me€askÐ ° Ðyou€about€the€clip.€Can€you€get€different€length€clips€for€thisÐ œì Ðweapon?ЈØÐ Ð  Ðà8  àA€[Moore]€à0¸ Ð Ð àà0¸ Ð ¸ Ð àYes.ÐtÄÐ Ð  Ðà8  àQ€[Prosecution]à0Ð Ð àAnd€is€the€clip€thatððs€in€there€now€a€particularity€[sic]€largeÐ ` ° Ðâ âclip€or€a€small€clip?ÐL!œÐ Ð  Ðà8  àA€[Moore]€à0¸ Ð Ð àà0¸ Ð ¸ Ð àThis€is€a€small€clip.€This€is€probably€the€smallest€one€IððveÐ ° Ðâ âseen€for€this€type€of€weapon.ÐœìÐ Ð  Ðà8  à[Defense€counsel]à0Ð Ð àYour€honor,€I€object€at€this€time.€There€is€no€testimony€thatÐ ˆØ Ðthis€person€is€an€expert€on€the€tech[„]nine,€that€he€is€aÐ tÄ Ðmanufacturer.€And€I€object€to€this€line€of€€testimony.Ð`°Ð Ð  Ðà8  à[Trial€court]à0¸ Ð Ð àà0¸ Ð ¸ Ð àOverruled.ÐL œÐ Ð  Ðà8  à[Prosecution]€à0¸ Ð Ð àà0¸ Ð ¸ Ð àNothing€further.ò òó óÐ8 ˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€the€outset€we€observe€that€the€State€neither€claimed€nor€did€the€trial€court€find€that€MooreÐ  ` Ðwas€testifying€as€an€expert€witness.€Furthermore,€the€defendant€did€not€object€when€the€witnessÐ ü L  Ðbegan€discussing€different€size€clips€but€only€did€so€after€Moore€stated€that€the€clip€before€him€wasÐ è 8  Ðthe€smallest€that€he€had€seen€for€a€tech„nine.€To€offer€this€type€of€proof,€a€witness€need€not€beÐ Ô$  Ðcharacterized€as€an€expert.€As€such,€its€admission€did€not€run€afoul€of€Rule€702.€Ð À  Ðà  àIn€addition,€we€note€that€defense€counsel€did€not€object€to€Mooreððs€testimony€as€beingÐ ¬ü  Ðimproper€lay€opinion€testimony.€€It€is€well-settled€that€an€appellant€cannot€change€grounds€forÐ ˜è  Ðobjections€from€the€trial€court€to€the€appellate€court.€€Such€action€constitutes€waiver€of€the€issue.Ð „Ô  ÐòòState€v.€Breweróó,€932€S.W.2d€1,€9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòMatthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€at€781;€òòState€v.Ð pÀ ÐAucoinóó,€756€S.W.2d€705,€715€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€Moreover,€we€do€not€see€that€MooreððsÐ \¬ Ðstatements€constituted€lay€opinion€testimony;׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€thus,€Rule€701€does€not€bar€the€admission€of€thisÐ H˜ Ðevidence€either.€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€this€issue€merits€no€relief.Ð 4„ ÐÌÌÓ  Óòòò òUse€of€Pending€Charge€for€Impeachment€Purposesó óóóÐ øH ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€permitting€the€prosecution€to€cross„Ð Ð  Ðexamine€Gordon€concerning€a€pending€charge€of€statutory€rape.€In€support€of€this€position,€theÐ ¼  Ðdefendant€cites€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€608.Ð ¨ø ÐÌÓ  Óà  àSubpart€(b)€of€this€rule€provides,€in€pertinent€part:Ð €Ð ÐÌÓ  Óà8  àSpecific€instances€of€conduct€of€a€witness€for€the€purpose€of€attacking€or€supportingÐ X ¨ Ðthe€witness's€credibility,€other€than€convictions€of€crime€as€provided€in€Rule€609,Ð D!” Ðmay€not€be€proved€by€extrinsic€evidence.€€They€may,€however,€if€probative€ofÐ 0"€  Ðtruthfulness€or€untruthfulness€and€under€the€following€conditions,€be€inquired€intoÐ #l! Ðon€cross-examination€of€the€witness€concerning€the€witness's€character€forÐ $X" Ðtruthfulness€or€untruthfulness€or€concerning€the€character€for€truthfulness€orÐ ô$D # Ðuntruthfulness€of€another€witness€as€to€which€the€character€witness€beingÐ à%0!$ Ðcross-examined€has€testified.€€ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÐ ¸'#& ÐTenn.€R.€Evid.€608(b).€In€addition,€prior€to€admitting€such€proof,€other€procedural€steps€must€beÐ ° Ðtaken€and€determinations€made.€For€example,€ð ð[t]he€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outsideÐ œì Ðthe€jury's€presence€and€must€determine€that€the€alleged€conduct€has€probative€value€and€that€aÐ ˆØ Ðreasonable€factual€basis€exists€for€the€inquiry.ðð€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€608(b)(1).Ð tÄ Ðà  àIn€this€case,€Gordon€attempted€to€explain€that€he€could€not€assuredly€state€when€theÐ `° Ðaforementioned€prior€altercation€had€occurred€because€he€had€ð ðproblems€of€[his]€own.ððò òó ó€Thereafter,Ð L œ Ðthe€prosecution€inquired€whether€any€of€these€problems€involved€ð ðthe€law.ððò òó ó€After€the€defendantÐ 8 ˆ Ðreplied,€ð ðYeah,€quite€a€few€of€them,ðð€the€defense€interposed€a€general€objection.ò òó ó€The€prosecutionÐ $ t Ðresponded€that€it€could€ask€about€bad€acts€if€it€had€a€ð ðreasonable€basis€on€which€to€do€so,ðð€and€theÐ  ` Ðtrial€court€overruled€the€objection.ò òó ó€The€prosecution€then€asked€if€the€witnessðð€difficultiesÐ ü L  Ðð ð[i]nclud[ed]€a€possible€problem€with€a€statutory€rape?ððò òó ó€After€noting€that€there€had€been€noÐ è 8  Ðconviction,€the€defense€requested€a€jury„out€hearing.ò òó ó€Yet€again,€the€trial€court€allowed€theÐ Ô$  Ðprosecution€to€proceed€with€this€line€of€questioning.ò ò€ó ó€No€jury„out€hearing€was€conducted.ò òó óÐ À  Ðà  àThrough€its€brief€the€State€concedes€that€the€trial€courtððs€actions€constituted€error.€In€viewÐ °  Ðof€these€facts€and€the€above€guidelines,€we€agree.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€The€trial€court€did€not€conduct€the€required€jury„Ð œì  Ðout€hearing.€Furthermore,€the€conduct€inquired€about€here€is€not€probative€of€truthfulness€or€the€lackÐ ˆØ  Ðthereof.€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Leon€Hurdóó,€No.€E1999-01341-CCA-R3-CD,€2001€WL€348871,€at€*14Ð tÄ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€April€10,€2001).Ð `° Ðà  àNevertheless,€we€also€concur€with€the€Stateððs€assessment€that€this€erroneous€admission€wasÐ Lœ Ðharmless€in€this€case€because€Gordon€provided€the€jurors€with€additional€reasons€to€question€hisÐ 8ˆ Ðtestimony.ò òó ó€For€example,€the€witness€admitted€that€he€did€not€have€a€permit€to€carry€the€gun€he€hadÐ $t Ðprovided€to€the€defendant€nor€had€he€ever€had€a€permit€to€carry€a€concealed€weapon.ò ò€ó ó€In€response€toÐ ` Ðthe€prosecutorððs€asking€what€kind€of€weapons€the€witness€had€in€his€car€that€night,€GordonÐ P Ðresponded,€ð ðWhat€kind€you€[sic]€want?€I€have€a€lot€of€them.ðð€ò òó óGordon€exuded€this€combative€attitudeÐ ì< Ðat€various€times€throughout€his€testimony.ò ò€ó ó€Additionally,€this€witness€affirmed€that€he€had€no€useÐ Ø( Ðð ðwhatsoeverðð€for€anyone€in€law€enforcement€and€acknowledged€that€he€had€told€the€police€that€heÐ È Ðdid€not€know€anything€about€the€prior€altercation€between€the€defendant€and€Willis€though€he€hadÐ ´ Ðsuch€knowledge€and€testified€at€trial€concerning€this€event.€ò ò€ó ó€With€respect€to€the€latter,€he€claimedÐ  ð Ðthat€he€ð ðwasnððt€under€oath,€so€it€doesnððt€matter.€[He]€could€say€whatever.ððò òó ó€We€also€observe€thatÐ à ÐGordonððs€testimony€conflicted€at€times€with€even€the€defendantððs€pre„trial€statement€€that€had€beenÐ |Ì Ðsubmitted€as€evidence.€ò òó óIn€view€of€these€concerns€and€the€remainder€of€the€proof€against€theÐ h ¸ Ðdefendant,€we€do€not€find€that€the€error€involved€here€merits€a€reversal.Ð T!¤ ÐÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òòòSentencingóóó óÐ ð%@!$ Ðâ âÐ Ü&,"% ÐÓ  Óà  àFinally,€the€defendant€avers€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€sentencing€him€to€serve€twenty„twoÐ ° Ðâ âyears.€In€asserting€that€the€sentence€received€was€too€harsh,€the€defendant€contends€that€ð ðhis€age€...Ð œì Ðand€the€circumstances€of€the€shootingðð€should€lead€to€a€shorter€period€of€confinement.Ð ˆØ Ðòòóóà  àð ðWhen€reviewing€sentencing€issues€...,€the€appellate€court€shall€conduct€a€de€novo€review€onÐ tÄ Ðthe€record€of€such€issues.€€Such€review€shall€be€conducted€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ `° Ðdeterminations€made€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ L œ Ð40-35-401(d).€€"However,€the€presumption€of€correctness€which€accompanies€the€trial€court's€actionÐ 8 ˆ Ðis€conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€theÐ $ t Ðsentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,Ð  ` Ð169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€conducting€our€review,€we€must€consider€the€defendant's€potential€forÐ ü L  Ðrehabilitation,€the€trial€and€sentencing€hearing€evidence,€the€pre„sentence€report,€the€sentencingÐ è 8  Ðprinciples,€sentencing€alternative€arguments,€the€nature€and€character€of€the€offense,€the€enhancingÐ Ô$  Ðand€mitigating€factors,€and€the€defendant's€statements.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40-35-103(5),€-210(b);€Ð À  ÐòòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.€€We€are€to€also€recognize€that€the€defendant€bears€ð ðthe€burden€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðdemonstrating€that€the€sentence€is€improper."€òòId.óóÐ ˜è  Ðà  àTurning€more€specifically€to€the€facts€of€this€case,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€secondÐ „Ô  Ðdegree€murder.ò òó ó€Since€this€is€an€A€felony,€the€starting€point€for€sentencing€determinations€is€theÐ pÀ Ðmiddle€of€the€range.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(c).€Undisputably,€this€defendant€was€a€RangeÐ \¬ ÐI€offender;€thus,€twenty€years€was€the€mid„point€against€which€the€trial€court€was€to€balance€anyÐ H˜ Ðmitigating€and€enhancement€factors.Ð 4„ Ðà  àIn€balancing€these€concerns,€a€trial€court€should€start€at€the€presumptive€sentence,€enhanceÐ  p Ðthe€sentence€within€the€range€for€existing€enhancement€factors,€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€withinÐ  \ Ðthe€range€for€existing€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(e).€€No€particular€weightÐ øH Ðfor€each€factor€is€prescribed€by€the€statute.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€116,€125€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ä4 ÐApp.€1995).€The€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€as€itÐ Ð  Ðcomports€with€the€sentencing€principles€and€purposes€of€our€code€and€as€long€as€its€findings€areÐ ¼  Ðsupported€by€the€record.òòóó€òòId.óóÐ ¨ø Ðà  àFrom€reviewing€the€record,€we€observe€that€the€lower€court€stated€that€it€did€ð ðnot€find€theÐ ”ä Ðmitigating€factors€to€outweigh€anything€in€this€particular€case.ðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó ó€In€contrast,€the€defendant€firstÐ €Ð Ðargues€that€his€age€should€have€contributed€to€his€receiving€a€shorter€sentence.€This€relates€toÐ l¼ ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„113(6),€which€states€that€ð ð[t]he€defendant,€because€ofÐ X ¨ Ðyouth€or€old€age,€lacked€substantial€judgment€in€committing€the€offense.ðð€òòId.óó€Ð D!” Ðà  àHowever,€a€defendant's€chronological€age€is€not€determinative€with€regard€to€this€mitigatingÐ 0"€  Ðfactor.€To€determine€whether€this€factor€should€be€utilized,€courts€are€to€"consider€the€concept€ofÐ #l! Ðyouth€in€context,€i.e.,€the€defendant's€age,€education,€maturity,€experience,€mental€capacity€orÐ $X" Ðdevelopment,€and€any€other€pertinent€circumstance€tending€to€demonstrate€the€defendant's€abilityÐ ô$D # Ðor€inability€to€appreciate€the€nature€of€his€conduct."€òòState€v.€Robert€D.€Merritt,€Jróó.,€No.Ð à%0!$ Ðâ â01C01-9709-CR-00396,€1999€WL€298311,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€May€13,€1999).Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àòòóóThe€record€before€us€notes€no€problem€with€this€defendantððs€mental€development€or€capacityÐ ° Ðâ âand€affirmatively€indicates€that€he€attended€school€into€the€eleventh€grade.ò òó ó€The€defendant€had€alsoÐ œì Ðfathered€three€children,€was€well-acquainted€with€the€criminal€justice€system,€etc.ò òó ó€While€he€wasÐ ˆØ Ðtwenty„years„of„age€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€our€supreme€court€has€previously€held€that€theÐ tÄ Ðapplication€of€this€factor€to€a€particular€twenty-year-old€defendant€would€not€be€warranted.€òòId.óó€FacedÐ `° Ðwith€these€considerations,€we€agree€that€this€factor€should€not€result€in€a€shorter€sentence€for€theÐ L œ Ðdefendant€than€that€received.Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àAs€noted€above,€the€defendant€also€argues€that€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€should€haveÐ $ t Ðdecreased€the€penalty€he€received.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(11).€However,€he€cites€thisÐ  ` ÐCourt€to€no€analogous€situation€in€which€this€factor€was€applied,€and€we€do€not€find€this€allegationÐ ü L  Ðpersuasive.Ð è 8  Ðà  àWith€regard€to€enhancement€factors,€the€trial€court€found€two€applicable.€ò ò€ó óThe€lower€courtÐ Ô$  Ðfirst€pointed€to€the€fact€that€the€defendant€was€out€on€bond€at€the€time€of€the€offense.€ò òó óThisÐ Ä  Ðdetermination€clearly€refers€to€the€enhancement€factor€found€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sectionÐ °  Ð40„35„114(13)(A)€and€is€uncontested€in€the€defendantððs€brief.€However,€this€factor€only€applies€whenÐ œì  Ðthe€defendant€is€on€bond€from€a€prior€felony€charge€and€is€ultimately€convicted€of€the€prior€felony.Ð ˆØ  ÐòòSeeóó€òòid.óó€From€our€reading€of€the€record,€the€defendant€had€made€bond€on€a€misdemeanor;€thus,€thisÐ tÄ Ðwould€not€apply.€ò òó óNevertheless,€the€trial€court€also€found€it€appropriate€to€apply€Tennessee€CodeÐ `° ÐAnnotated€section€40„35„114(1)€as€an€enhancing€factor€since€the€court€pointed€to€the€defendantððsÐ Lœ Ðprior€cocaine€and€numerous€misdemeanor€convictions.ò òó ó€Beyond€this,€the€trial€court€could€haveÐ 8ˆ Ðapplied€the€enhancement€factor€dealing€with€the€defendantððs€ð ðpossess[ing]€or€employ[ing]€a€firearmÐ $t Ð...€during€the€commission€of€the€offense.ðð€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€40„35„114(9).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ` Ðà  àIn€view€of€these€considerations€and€the€fact€that€the€trial€court€only€enhanced€the€defendantððsÐ üL Ðsentence€by€two€years,€we€find€that€the€defendant€has€failed€to€prove€that€the€sentence€imposed€isÐ è8 Ðimproper.€This€issue,€therefore,€also€lacks€merit.€Ð Ô$ ÐÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓConclusionÔ#†¼]%»XXér#ÔÐ ˜è ÐÌó óóóÔ‡XéX»¼]%ÔÓ˜Óà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons€we€find€that€none€of€the€issues€raised€merit€relief.€Accordingly,€theÐ ˜è Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.Ð „ Ô Ðà  à€Ô#†XéXXXé£#ÔÔ#†¼]%»XXét˜#ÔÔ€XéX»¼]%ÔÐ p!À Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð H#˜! Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGE