ÿWPC¶I =a{´ÅðÓÙMNu긒IÏðÑÙZ˜jîdåùö±EÌÿä‘›Iù-YqBË{Mý¤rw&¦7üN³<‰¹O~úppp‹†§óçî0Œ ª×ÐÌué%ƒC;ªMÏž:ñÒ÷ÕGù”!¨àDŒeºÙ9µÏxßmãᱨ½/§|8@oÓœéPú]ÖãIRHÞì 0O_JæJöòš/Áµ¼z8¸ºBäŽ jƹ­ïí\¸Ó¿ƒ°½zÑ00zÚaãzç‹Ð鄱OÈiHs4ö³îI£" ã¤Þ^ž蜡 X»ÕQ=~ã·Œ¼(Ír·SÏ™¥”ÊE ÑBT콈P»\½›å4Õ83×ýç0ã`"]X#’°Ÿ·2!:§HFÈ÷YëJJÑ!IEƒ~ %äU6ê 0ˆ U#N¨ U >ö U*4 ½^ z Ò• #Ég ß0UNç]ÆDÆ ÆÐÆ–:\N–}˜fE{{^ }w‰4¡° m²²²²²²²²²²²² 0DÉÉÉ 0U bb 0éj 0æS 0ã9! 0à" 0Ýü" 0ÚÙ# 0׳$ 0ÔŠ% 0C^& 0ס& 0Ôx' 0ÑL( 0Î) 0Ëë) 0ȶ* 0Å~+ 0ÀC, 0@- 0ÔC- 0Ñ. 0Îè. 0˶/ 0È0 0ÅI1 0Â2 0½Ð2 003 0<½3 0¾ù3 0>·4 0võ4 0`k5 0`Ë5 0`+6 0`‹6 0ëë6 0`Ö7 0868 0Òn8 B@9 02]9 0¤9 D33: D-f: 0K“: 0üÞ: ASÚ;Æ-< 0¤ó< 0D—= A«Û= 0:†> 0YÀ> 0_? 0 x? 0j‚@ 0„ìA B*pC D/šC 0„ÉC D/ME 0Î|E 06JF 0€F 0:ˆG 0^ÂG 0< H 1e\H 0NÁHÁHÁHÁHÁHÁHÁHÁHÁH 1uI 72„I»<þ6X9`(‹Courier New(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularô\  `‹&Times New Roman%ä2¼A`‹Arial ³Ý ƒRx:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€order,€dated€September€26,€2002,€apparently€contained€a€typographical€error€in€its€reference€to€the€statute.€Ð ° ÐWe€note€that€the€trial€court€did€have€proper€authority€to€grant€a€delayed€Motion€for€New€Trial€pursuant€to€TennesseeÐ qÁ ÐCode€Annotated€ðð€40„30„113(a)(3).€€ ˜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˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6ÒV,,,,ÒV0 ÕÝ ƒRx:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðIn€an€appeal€as€of€right€to€theÔ_Ô.€.€.Ô_ÔCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals,€the€notice€of€appeal€required€by€Rule€3€shall€beÐ ° Ðfiled€with€and€received€by€the€clerk€of€the€trial€court€within€30€days€after€the€date€of€entry€of€the€judgment€appealedÐ qÁ Ðfrom.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a).€€(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ÝÝ ƒRx:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðIt€may€be€inferred€from€the€amount€of€a€controlled€substance€or€substances€possessed€by€an€offender,€alongÐ ° Ðwith€other€relevant€facts€surrounding€the€arrest,€that€the€controlled€substance€or€substances€were€possessed€with€theÐ qÁ Ðpurpose€of€selling€or€otherwise€dispensing.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„419.€€Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 0Ý ƒRx:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðIssues€which€are€not€supported€by€argument,€citation€to€authorities,€or€appropriate€references€to€the€recordÐ ° Ðwill€be€treated€as€waived€in€this€court.ðð€ sÝ ƒRx:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ð[The€brief€of€the€appellant€shall€contain]€[Ô_Ôa]nÔ_Ô€argument,€which€may€be€preceded€by€a€summary€of€argument,Ð ° Ðsetting€forth€the€contentions€of€the€appellant€with€respect€to€the€issues€presented,€and€the€reasons€therefor,€including€theÐ qÁ Ðreasons€why€the€contentions€require€appellate€relief,€with€citations€to€the€authorities€and€appropriate€references€to€theÐ 2‚ Ðrecord(which€may€be€quoted€verbatim)€relied€on.ðð€ \Ý ƒRx:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðRule€24.€€Ô_ÔContent€and€PreparationÔ_Ô€of€the€Record.€€.€.€.€(Ô_ÔbÔ_Ô)€Transcript€of€Stenographic€or€Other€SubstantiallyÐ ° ÐVerbatim€Recording€of€Evidence€or€Proceedings.„„€If€a€stenographic€report€or€other€contemporaneously€receded,Ð qÁ Ðsubstantially€verbatim€recital€of€the€evidence€or€proceedings€is€available,€the€appellant€shall€have€prepared€a€transcriptÐ 2‚ Ðof€such€part€of€the€evidence€or€proceedings€as€is€necessary€to€convey€a€fair,€accurate€and€complete€account€of€whatÐ óC Ðtranspired€with€respect€to€those€issues€that€are€the€bases€of€appeal.ðð€Ô_ÔTennÔ_Ô€R.€App.€P.€24.€€œ©H1Ï h_B0‚3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó*+ ÿÿ(_26Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôà..à- ù-*G+M ÿÿ(_25Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*D+M ÿÿ(_24Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*A+M ÿÿ(_23Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*>+M ÿÿ(_22Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;+M ÿÿ(_21Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8+M ÿÿ(_20Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5+M ÿÿ(_19Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*2+M ÿÿ(_18Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó* ÿÿ(_17Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô€*GM ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*DM ÿÿ(_15Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*AM ÿÿ(_14Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*>M ÿÿ(_13Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;M ÿÿ(_12Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8M ÿÿ(_11Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5M ÿÿ(_10Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(2M ÿÿ&_9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó( ÿÿ&_8Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô(GM ÿÿ&_7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(DM ÿÿ&_6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(AM ÿÿ&_5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(>M ÿÿ&_4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(;M ÿÿ&_3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(8M ÿÿ&_2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(5M ÿÿ&_1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó&2M ÿÿ$_Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó0ÿÿ.Normal<ÿÿ:Definition T<AAÿÿ:Definition LÓ , ÓÓ5+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Ó8ÿÿ6Definitionòòóó(''ÿÿ&H1ò òÔ  ÔÔ‡°°°ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÔ  Ô(ÿÿ&H2ò òÔ‡„„„ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó ó(ÿÿ&H3ò òÔ‡¼¼¼ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó ó(ÿÿ&H4ò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔó ó(ÿÿ&H5ò òÔ‡ôôôÔó óÔ‡ôôôÔ(|G2x:$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ø™»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó ò»»Ô(ÿÿ&H6ò òÔ‡ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó ó2ÿÿ0Addressòòóó8MMÿÿ6BlockquoteÓ , ÓÓ , ÓÓ5+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5Ó d,ÿÿ*CITEòòóó(|37#$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ø™»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó,dlÿÿ*CODEÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|37#$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ø™»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK4ÿÿ2Emphasisòòóó6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ €€ ÔóóÔ  Ô4goÿÿ2Keyboardò òÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔó ó<“›ÿÿ:PreformattedÓ/%° °Ïî ,KkŠ©È %#/ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ/%° °Ïî ,KkŠ©È %#/Ó<š®ÿÿ:z©Bottom of Ó7€i(€X7ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡ÔÔ?‡%ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ7€Z(€X7Ó&ÿÿ  d dh)1dxd<š®ÿÿ:z©Top of ForÓ7€k(€X7ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡ÔÔ?‡%ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ7€Z(€X7Óh)2dxd0KSÿÿ.SampleÔK‡<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ0ÿÿ.Strongò òó ó8dlÿÿ6TypewriterÔ‡ôôôÔÔK‡<þ6X9`(‹Courier NewKÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔ4ÿÿ2Variableòòóó: ÿÿ8HTML MarkupÔB  ÔÔ ÿ ÔÔ  Ô2 ÿÿ0CommentÔB  Ô789:;<=> ÿÿ35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(ÍO$——ÔÿÔòòóóÔÿÔ3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)|i)Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ø™»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ø™»»»ÔÑ8€ƒGXXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡î+öؙÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@gg$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Ø™»îî+ö #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€August€11,€2004Ð öF ÐÔ‡XƒGX»¼Ø™ÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ø™»XXƒG #ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€WILLIAM€MARTIN€FREY,€JR.Ô‡XƒGX»¼Ø™Ôó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„C„2059€€€€€€Walter€Kurtz,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2003„01996„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€October€6,€2004Ð ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓFollowing€a€jury€trial,€the€Defendant€was€convicted€of€five€burglary,€three€theft€and€five€drugÐ V¦  Ðoffenses.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant,€William€M.€Frey,€Jr.,€to€50€years€as€a€persistentÐ ? Ðoffender.€€The€Defendant€argues€six€issues€on€appeal:€(1)€there€was€insufficient€evidence€to€find€theÐ (x ÐDefendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€(2)€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€severing€the€DefendantððsÐ a Ðcharges€at€trial,€(3)€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€prior€statements€made€by€the€DefendantÐ úJ Ðpertaining€to€his€criminal€record,€(4)€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€at€trial€the€DefendantððsÐ ã3 Ðstatements€concerning€his€drug€use,€(5)€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€adequately€consider€theÐ Ì ÐDefendantððs€diminished€mental€capacity€as€a€mitigating€factor€during€sentencing,€and€(6)€the€trialÐ µ Ðcourt€erred€in€ordering€the€Defendant's€sentences€to€be€served€consecutively.€€We€affirm€theÐ žî Ðjudgments€of€the€trial€court.Ð ‡× ÐÓšÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgments€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ Y© ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ø™»àXƒG”#ÔÔ‡XƒGX.¼Ø™ÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòNorma€McGee€Ogleóó€andÐ ,| ÐòòRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð e ÐÌÔ_ÔLeannÔ_Ô€Smith,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€William€Martin€Frey,€Jr.Ð ç 7  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Helena€Walton€Ô_ÔYarbroughÔ_Ô,€Assistant€AttorneyÐ ¹" " ÐGeneral;€Victor€S.€Johnson,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Bret€Gunn,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ ¢#ò# ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ‹$Û$ ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ø™»XXƒG¼ #ÔòòóóÔ‡XƒGX»¼Ø™ÔÐ ]&­!& ÐÌÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ø™»XXƒGÒ #ÔÔ€XƒGX»¼Ø™Ôòòóóà  àWe€must€note€at€the€outset€that€this€case€has€followed€a€troubling€procedural€path€to€reachÐ 0(€#( Ðthis€Court€on€direct€appeal.€€The€Defendantððs€appeal€as€of€right€was€initially€delayed€nearly€threeÐ )i$) Ðyears€because€the€Defendantððs€attorney€never€pursued€an€appeal€even€though€his€incarcerated€clientÐ *R%* Ðassumed€he€had.€€A€post„conviction€proceeding€was€eventually€initiated,€which€resulted€in€an€orderÐ ë*;&+ Ðgranting€a€delayed€appeal.€€Although€the€State€argues€that€this€appeal€should€be€dismissed€becauseÐ Ô+$', Ðnotice€of€appeal€was€not€timely€filed,€we€may€waive€the€timely€filing€of€notice€of€appeal€and€haveÐ ½, (- Ðdone€so.€€In€addition,€the€appellantððs€brief€was€not€timely€filed,€but€this€Court€granted€a€motion€toÐ ¦-ö(.ýú ÐÔ_Ôaccept€the€late„filed€brief.€€Finally,€for€reasons€stated€in€the€opinion,€several€issues€presented€onÐ ° Ðappeal€must€be€deemed€waived€for€failure€to€comply€with€procedural€rules.€€Ð ™é ÐÌÓ  Óò òFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óÐ k» ÐÓÓà  àThe€Defendantððs€thirteen€convictions€stem€from€six€separate€incidents€that€occurred€in€andÐ U¥ Ðaround€Nashville€between€the€months€of€July€and€December€of€1997.€€The€first€incident€occurredÐ > Ž Ðduring€the€early€morning€hours€of€July€17,€1997,€in€the€home€of€Ms.€Ann€Graham.€€At€the€time€ofÐ ' w Ðthe€incident€Ms.€Graham€was€in€the€process€of€refurbishing€and€settling€in€to€her€recently€purchasedÐ  ` Ðhome.€€The€Defendant€was€her€neighbor,€whom€she€had€seen€on€several€prior€occasions€sinceÐ ù I Ðpurchasing€the€house.€€On€the€night€of€the€incident,€Ms.€Graham€went€to€bed€quite€late.€€As€was€herÐ â 2  Ðhabit,€she€placed€her€purse€on€a€shelf€in€the€kitchen€and€her€jewelry€on€a€bedroom€night€stand€beforeÐ Ë   Ðgoing€to€bed.€€She€awoke€from€her€sleep€to€sounds€of€movement€in€her€home.€€€She€opened€herÐ ´  Ðbedroom€door€to€investigate€and€was€startled€to€see€the€Defendant€standing€directly€in€front€of€herÐ í  Ðholding€her€purse.€€The€Defendant€stated€he€was€trying€to€protect€her€from€an€intruder€he€saw€enterÐ †Ö  Ðher€house,€then€dropped€the€purse€and€walked€out€the€front€door.€€A€small€amount€of€cash,€someÐ o¿  Ðsilver€and€jewelry€were€discovered€missing.€€The€Defendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€burglaryÐ X¨  Ðand€theft€in€connection€with€this€incident.Ð A‘ ÐÌà  àThe€second€incident€occurred€shortly€after€11:00€p.m.€on€November€16,€1997.€€OfficerÐ c ÐWatson€of€the€Nashville€Police€Department€saw€a€black€pickup€truck€with€several€people€standingÐ üL Ðaround€it€parked€on€the€side€of€the€street€he€was€patrolling.€€As€he€approached,€the€truck€drove€awayÐ å5 Ðand€sped€off.€€Officer€Watson€noticed€the€pickup€did€not€have€functioning€taillights,€but€he€was€Ð Î Ðunable€to€catch€up€with€the€vehicle€at€that€time.€€Not€long€thereafter€Officer€Watson€again€passedÐ · Ðthe€same€pickup,€still€without€taillights,€but€this€time€was€able€to€pull€the€pickup€over.€€As€he€wasÐ  ð Ðmaking€the€stop,€Officer€Watson€saw€two€people€in€the€vehicle,€and€also€observed€a€small€blackÐ ‰Ù Ðcontainer€thrown€out€the€passenger€side€window,€although€he€could€not€determine€which€personÐ r Ðthrew€the€container.€€Upon€approaching€the€pickup€Officer€Watson€observed€a€large€amount€of€cashÐ [« Ðin€the€cab.€€The€Defendant,€who€was€the€driver€of€the€pickup,€consented€to€a€search.€€In€addition€toÐ D” Ðthe€cash,€Officer€Watson€discovered€a€white€powdery€substance€and€small€yellowish€bits€of€rockÐ -} Ðsubstance€that€appeared€to€be€crack€cocaine€on€the€center€console.€€Ð f ÐÌà  àOfficer€Watson€€retrieved€the€container€he€had€observed€thrown€from€the€pickup.€€The€35mmÐ è 8 Ðfilm€canister€contained€seven€large€rocks€and€several€smaller€pieces€of€a€yellow€substance€that€alsoÐ Ñ!!  Ðappeared€to€be€crack€cocaine.€€Subsequent€laboratory€tests€determined€it€was€indeed€1.8€grams€ofÐ º" ! Ðcocaine.€€The€Defendant€and€his€passenger€were€arrested.€€The€Defendant€was€convicted€ofÐ £#ó" Ðpossession€with€intent€to€sell€or€deliver€over€.5€grams€of€cocaine.€Ð Œ$Ü# ЀÌà  àThe€third€incident€occurred€on€December€4,€1997,€around€7:00€in€the€evening€when€the€sameÐ ^&®!% Ðblack€pickup€was€witnessed€by€Officers€Woods€and€Robinson€traveling€down€an€alley€with€no€lightsÐ G'—"& Ðon.€€The€officers€stopped€the€truck,€again€driven€by€the€Defendant,€who€was€accompanied€by€aÐ 0(€#' Ðpassenger.€€During€the€stop,€the€officers€observed€what€they€believed€to€be€crack€cocaine€on€theÐ )i$( Ðcenter€console€of€the€pickup.€€The€officers€arrested€the€Defendant€and€his€passenger.€€During€theÐ *R%) Ðsearch€incident€to€arrest,€additional€drug€paraphernalia€in€the€form€of€a€crack€pipe€was€found€on€theÐ ë*;&* ÐDefendant.€€€Tests€later€concluded€that€the€substance€observed€in€the€center€console€of€the€pickupÐ Ô+$'+ Ðwas€cocaine.€€€The€Defendant€was€convicted€of€possession€of€cocaine€and€possession€of€drugÐ ° Ðparaphernalia€in€connection€with€this€incident.€Ð ™é ÐÌà  àThe€fourth€incident€occurred€less€than€a€week€later€on€the€afternoon€of€December€10,€1997.Ð k» ÐMr.€William€Vanderpool€noticed€a€burgundy€Corvette€parked€on€a€trail€in€the€woods€behind€hisÐ T¤ Ðhouse€in€the€Hermitage/Donnelson€area.€€€Mr.€Vanderpool€decided€to€investigate.€€As€he€approached,Ð =  Ðhe€saw€a€man€walking€out€of€the€woods€toward€the€car.€€The€man€came€from€the€direction€of€hisÐ & v Ðneighborððs,€the€Vonhopffgartens.€€€Mr.€Vanderpool€asked€the€man€what€he€was€doing,€to€which€theÐ  _ Ðman€replied€he€was€taking€a€ð ðnature€walk.ðð€€Mr.€Vanderpool€informed€the€man€he€was€on€privateÐ ø H Ðproperty€and€must€leave.€€The€man€left,€but€Mr.€Vanderpool€was€suspicious€and€wrote€down€theÐ á 1  Ðlicense€number€of€the€Corvette.€€Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àMr.€Vanderpool€decided€to€check€his€property€and€discovered€a€basket€filled€with€householdÐ œì  Ðelectronic€items€next€to€his€shed,€which€was€directly€behind€the€Vonhopffgartenððs€house.€€Later€thatÐ …Õ  Ðsame€evening€when€Mrs.€Vonhopffgarten€arrived€home€she€discovered€her€basement€door€wasÐ n¾  Ðkicked€in€and€her€house€€burglarized.€€€Various€electronic€equipment€items€and€jewelry€were€takenÐ W§  Ðfrom€the€Vonhopffgarten€home.€€The€items€found€by€Mr.€Vanderpool€were€later€determined€to€beÐ @ Ðpart€of€the€property€taken€from€the€Vonhopffgarten€residence.€€€Mr.€Vanderpool€could€€identify€theÐ )y Ðman€he€confronted€only€as€a€white€male€in€his€mid„thirties€weighing€between€150€and€170€pounds.€Ð b ÐAt€trial,€Mr.€Vanderpool€could€not€positively€identify€the€man€he€saw,€and€admitted€he€did€notÐ ûK Ðwitness€any€stolen€property€in€the€Corvette€or€in€the€hands€of€the€man€he€confronted.€€It€was€laterÐ ä4 Ðdetermined€that€the€Corvette€belonged€to€Ms.€Barbara€Bottoms,€a€friend€of€the€Defendant.€€€TheÐ Í ÐDefendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€burglary€and€theft€in€connection€with€this€incident.Ð ¶ ÐÌà  àThe€fifth€incident€occurred€four€days€later,€the€morning€of€December€14,€1997,€in€the€parkingÐ ˆØ Ðlot€of€the€International€House€of€Pancakes€(IHOP)€near€Harding€Mall.€€Mr.€Ross€Alderman,€anÐ qÁ ÐAttorney€with€the€Public€Defenderððs€Office,€was€leaving€IHOP€and€walking€toward€his€car€when€heÐ Zª Ðheard€the€sound€of€breaking€glass.€€He€looked€in€the€direction€of€the€sound€and€saw€a€man€duckÐ C“ Ðbehind€some€parked€cars.€€He€walked€directly€to€the€place€where€he€observed€the€suspicious€activityÐ ,| Ðand€discovered€the€Defendant€sitting€in€a€parked€burgundy€Corvette.€€The€Defendant€was€the€onlyÐ e Ðperson€in€the€area€at€the€time.€€Mr.€Alderman€confronted€the€Defendant€who€denied€breaking€intoÐ þN Ðthe€Corvette,€produced€the€keys€and€drove€off.€€However,€after€the€Defendant€drove€off,€Mr.Ð ç 7 ÐAlderman€noticed€that€the€car€immediately€next€to€where€the€Corvette€had€been€parked€had€a€brokenÐ Ð!   Ðwindow.€€Ð ¹" ! ÐÌà  àMr.€Alderman€wrote€down€the€licence€plate€number€of€the€Corvette,€which€was€laterÐ ‹$Û# Ðdetermined€to€be€the€same€car€involved€in€two€other€burglary€incidents€and€owned€by€theÐ t%Ä $ ÐDefendantððs€friend,€Ms.€Barbara€Bottoms.€€Mr.€Alderman€€identified€the€Defendant€in€aÐ ]&­!% Ðphotographic€lineup€as€the€man€he€saw€drive€off€in€the€Corvette,€but€could€not€be€sure€it€was€theÐ F'–"& Ðsame€man€he€saw€duck€behind€the€cars.€€The€owner€of€the€automobile€with€the€broken€window,€Ms.Ð /(#' ÐCarol€Swearingen,€€testified€that€items€of€clothing€and€cash€were€stolen€from€her€car.€The€DefendantÐ )h$( Ðwas€indicted€for€one€count€of€burglary€of€an€automobile€and€one€count€of€theft,€but€was€convictedÐ *Q%) Ðonly€on€the€burglary€charge.€Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà  àThe€sixth€and€final€incident€relevant€to€the€Defendantððs€convictions€occurred€in€the€earlyÐ ° Ðmorning€hours€of€December€19,€1997.€€Mr.€Jerry€Dale,€owner€of€the€Crystal€Clean€carpet€business,Ð ™é Ðreceived€a€call€sometime€after€2:00€a.m.€from€his€security€system€monitoring€company€reporting€aÐ ‚Ò Ðbreak„in€at€his€business.€€Upon€inspection,€Mr.€Dale€discovered€that€his€office€and€one€of€his€workÐ k» Ðvans€had€been€burglarized€and€several€items€stolen.€€€About€€this€€time€Officer€Weaver€was€patrollingÐ T¤ Ðin€the€general€area€of€the€Crystal€Clean€burglary€when€he€received€a€call€about€an€abandoned€vehicleÐ =  Ðin€an€alley.€€Officer€Weaver€found€the€vehicle,€a€burgundy€Corvette,€and€walked€up€to€it.€€Inside€theÐ & v ÐCorvette€Officer€Weaver€observed€a€hand€buffer,€cell€phone,€ceramic€heater€and€other€tools.€€TheÐ  _ ÐDefendant€approached€Officer€Weaver€and€claimed€that€the€items€in€the€car€belonged€to€him€and€hisÐ ø H Ðgirlfriend.€€Upon€further€questioning,€the€Defendant€stated€that€he€just€bought€the€items€from€a€blackÐ á 1  Ðman€in€front€of€a€Krispy€Kreme€doughnut€shop.€€Officer€Weaver€knew€about€the€Crystal€CleanÐ Ê   Ðburglary€through€the€police€radio,€and€informed€the€officers€investigating€the€burglary€of€his€find.€Ð ³  ÐMr.€Dale€was€driven€by€the€police€to€the€alley€where€the€Corvette€was€parked€and€identified€theÐ œì  Ðitems€found€in€the€car€as€his€property.€€The€Defendant€was€arrested€for€burglary,€and€a€searchÐ …Õ  Ðincident€to€the€arrest€turned€up€what€appeared€to€be€marijuana,€and€drug€paraphernalia€in€the€vehicle.€Ð n¾  ÐThe€substance€later€tested€positive€for€marijuana.€€The€Defendant€was€convicted€of€burglary€of€aÐ W§  Ðbuilding,€burglary€of€an€automobile,€possession€of€marijuana€and€possession€of€drug€paraphernaliaÐ @ Ðin€connection€with€this€incident.€€€€€Ð )y ÐÌà  àAll€fourteen€counts€from€the€six€separate€incidents€were€tried€together€at€one€trial€held€overÐ ûK Ðtwo€days,€April€26€and€27,€1999.€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€trial,€the€jury€returned€a€verdict€of€guiltyÐ ä4 Ðon€all€but€one€theft€charge,€€resulting€in€convictions€of€two€counts€of€aggravated€burglary,€twoÐ Í Ðcounts€of€burglary€of€an€automobile,€one€count€of€burglary€of€a€building,€three€counts€of€theft,€fourÐ ¶ Ðcounts€of€simple€possession€of€a€controlled€substance€or€drug€paraphernalia,€and€one€count€ofÐ Ÿï Ðpossession€with€intent€to€sell.€€A€sentencing€hearing€was€held€on€August€19,€1999,€and€theÐ ˆØ ÐDefendant€was€sentenced€as€a€persistent€offender€to€50€years.€€€Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àDefendant€wrote€a€òòproóó€òòseóó€letter€to€the€Tennessee€Appellate€Court€Clerkððs€office€in€FebruaryÐ C“ Ðof€2002,€inquiring€about€the€status€of€his€appeal.€€The€clerkððs€office€informed€him€that€a€Notice€ofÐ ,| ÐAppeal€was€never€filed€for€his€case.€€The€Defendant€filed€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€on€MayÐ e Ð6,€2002,€alleging,€òòinteróó€òòaliaóó,€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€Defendant€claimed€his€attorney€ð ðledÐ þN Ð[him]€to€thinkðð€his€direct€appeal€as€of€right€had€been€timely€filed€nearly€three€years€prior.€€TheÐ ç 7 ÐDefendant€was€appointed€new€counsel,€and€several€amended€petitions€for€post„conviction€relief€wereÐ Ð!   Ðfiled.€€A€post„conviction€hearing€was€conducted€on€September€26,€2002,€and€the€court€ordered€that,Ð ¹" ! Ðin€the€interest€of€justice,€the€Defendant€should€be€allowed€to€file€a€delayed€motion€for€a€new€trialÐ ¢#ò" Ðð ðpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„32„213(a)(3).ðð׃×Ý ƒ*#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€The€Defendant€timely€filed€a€Motion€for€a€NewÐ ‹$Û# ÐTrial€and€two€amended€motions,€the€last€of€which€preserved€all€six€issues€now€on€appeal.€€A€hearingÐ t%Ä $ Ðon€the€Motion€for€a€New€Trial€was€held€on€July€1,€2003€and€the€motion€was€denied.€€The€DefendantÐ ]&­!% Ðfiled€a€Notice€of€Appeal€on€August€4,€2003.€€Ð F'–"& ÐÐ /(#' ÐÓ  Óò òANALYSISó óÐ ° ÐÓ—DÓò òI.€€Notice€of€Appeal€Filed€Lateó óÐ šê Ðà  àThe€State€mentions€in€a€footnote€that€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€file€a€timely€Notice€ofÐ „Ô ÐAppeal€as€required€by€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€The€State€acknowledges€thatÐ m½ Ðthis€Court€has€the€discretion€to€waive€the€requirement€of€timely€filing€in€the€interest€of€justice,€butÐ V¦ Ðnevertheless€asserts€that€because€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€even€address€the€issue€we€shouldÐ ?  Ðdismiss€the€appeal.€€We€first€point€out€that€a€proper€request€for€dismissal€of€an€appeal€is€not€madeÐ ( x Ðthrough€a€footnote€in€the€Appelleeððs€Brief.Ð  a ÐÌà  àIn€order€to€be€timely€filed,€a€Notice€of€Appeal€must€be€filed€within€30€days€of€the€entry€ofÐ ã 3  Ðthe€trial€court€judgment.€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a).׃ ×Ý ƒ*#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€However,€ð ð[n]otwithstanding€any€otherÐ Ì   Ðprovision€of€law€or€rule€of€court€to€the€contrary,€in€all€criminal€cases€the€ððnotice€of€appealðð€documentÐ µ  Ðis€not€jurisdictional€and€the€filing€of€such€document€may€be€waived€in€the€interests€of€justice.ðð€Ð žî  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„1„123;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a).€€€The€proper€procedure€would€haveÐ ‡×  Ðbeen€for€the€appellant€to€file€a€motion€with€this€Court€requesting€the€timely€filing€of€a€notice€ofÐ pÀ  Ðappeal€be€waived€in€the€interest€of€justice.€€òòState€v.€Dodsonóó,€780€S.W.2d€778,€780€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð Y©  Ð1989).€€In€any€event,€once€the€State€has€requested€that€the€appeal€be€dismissed,€it€would€behooveÐ B’ Ðthe€Appellant€to€respond€and€request€a€waiver.€€€Nonetheless,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€that€theÐ +{ Ðnotice€of€appeal€requirement€should€be€waived€in€the€interest€of€justice.€€€We€now€so€hold.€Ð d ÐÌò òII.€€Insufficient€Evidenceó óÐ æ6 Ðà  àÔ‡ Xñ% XXXƒGÔThe€Defendantððs€first€issue€on€appeal€is€whether€there€was€sufficient€evidence€for€anyÐ Ð  Ðreasonable€trier€of€fact€to€find€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€Defendant€was€guilty€of€theÐ ¹  Ðthirteen€crimes€for€which€he€was€convicted.€€The€Defendant€maintains€that€while€the€evidenceÐ ¢ò Ðpresented€at€trial€placed€the€Defendant€near€the€scene€of€several€crimes,€such€evidence€wasÐ ‹Û Ðcircumstantial€and€fails€to€support€the€burglary€and€theft€convictions€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€Ð tÄ ÐDefendant€further€argues€that€the€State€failed€to€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€it€was€theÐ ]­ ÐDefendant€who€possessed€the€drugs€that€led€to€several€of€his€drug€convictions.€€We€disagree.Ð F– Ѐ€Ô#†XƒGX X Xñ%M#ÔÐ / Ðà  àÔ‡ Xñ% XXXƒGÔTennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€13(e)€prescribes€that€ð ð[f]indings€of€guilt€in€criminalÐ h Ðactions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€supportÐ  Q Ðthe€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€A€convicted€criminal€defendantÐ ê : Ðwho€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€on€appeal€bears€the€burden€of€demonstrating€why€theÐ Ó!#  Ðevidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict,€because€a€verdict€of€guilt€destroys€the€presumptionÐ ¼" ! Ðof€innocence€and€imposes€a€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€108€S.W.3d€231,€237€(Tenn.Ð ¥#õ" Ð2003);€òòState€v.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,€557„58€(Tenn.€2000);€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,Ð Ž$Þ# Ð914€(Tenn.€1982).€€This€Court€must€reject€a€convicted€criminal€defendantððs€challenge€to€theÐ w%Ç $ Ðsufficiency€of€the€evidence€if,€after€considering€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€theÐ `&°!% Ðâ âprosecution,€we€determine€that€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÐ I'™"& Ðthe€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóó€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979);€òòState€v.Ð ° ÐHallóó,€8€S.W.3d€593,€599€(Tenn.€1999).Ð ™é Ðâ âÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€allÐ k» Ðreasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòSeeóó€òòCarruthersóó,€35€S.W.3dÐ T¤ Ðat€558;€òòHallóó,€8€S.W.3d€at€599.€€A€guilty€verdict€by€the€trier€of€fact€accredits€the€testimony€of€theÐ =  ÐStateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€prosecutionððs€theory.€€òòSeeóóÐ & v ÐòòState€v.€Blandóó,€958€S.W.2d€651,€659€(Tenn.€1997).€€Questions€about€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€theÐ  _ Ðweight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolvedÐ ø H Ðby€the€trier€of€fact,€and€this€Court€will€not€re„weigh€or€re„evaluate€the€evidence.€€òòSeeóóòòEvansóó,€108Ð á 1  ÐS.W.3d€at€236;€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€659.€€Nor€will€this€Court€substitute€its€own€inferences€drawnÐ Ê   Ðfrom€circumstantial€evidence€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòEvansóó,€108€S.W.3d€at€236„37;Ð ³  ÐòòCarruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€at€557.Ô#†XƒGX X Xñ%P#ÔÐ œì  ÐÌà  àAs€a€preliminary€matter€we€must€note€that€it€is€unclear€from€the€Defendantððs€brief€preciselyÐ n¾  Ðwhich€of€the€thirteen€convictions€he€wishes€to€challenge€on€the€grounds€of€insufficient€evidence.€Ð W§  ÐThe€Defendant€concludes€his€analysis€of€€this€issue€by€stating€ð ðthe€weight€of€evidence€in€this€caseÐ @ Ðis€clearly€insufficient€to€support€the€juryððs€verdicts€as€to€counts€three,€six,€eight,€and€thirteen,ðð€butÐ )y Ðthe€brief€only€addresses€evidence€pertaining€to€the€Defendantððs€conviction€on€counts€three€and€eight.€Ð b ÐAdditionally,€the€Defendant€did€make€an€argument€for€insufficient€evidence€pertaining€to€the€firstÐ ûK Ðincident€which€led€to€his€conviction€of€aggravated€burglary€under€count€one,€even€though€theÐ ä4 ÐDefendant€never€expressly€alleged€in€his€appellate€brief€that€his€conviction€under€count€one€shouldÐ Í Ðbe€reversed.€€We€further€note€that€the€Defendant€also€makes€the€umbrella€request€that€hisÐ ¶ Ðð ðconvictions.€.€.be€reversed€and€the€case€dismissed,ðð€which€could€plausibly€be€interpreted€as€anÐ Ÿï Ðargument€that€all€thirteen€convictions€fail€due€to€insufficient€evidence.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWhen€bringing€an€appeal€before€this€Court,€the€Defendant€is€required€to€make€appropriateÐ Zª Ðreferences€to€the€record€in€his€brief€and€cite€to€relevant€authority.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Ct.€Crim.€App.€R.Ð C“ Ð10(b).€€Failure€to€do€so€will€ordinarily€constitute€a€waiver€of€the€issue.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Schaller,óó€975Ð ,| ÐS.W.2d€313,€318€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€€Accordingly,€we€will€address€the€DefendantððsÐ e Ðinsufficiency€of€evidence€claim€as€to€the€convictions€of€counts€one,€three€and€eight,€and€consider€anyÐ þN Ðsufficiency€of€evidence€claims€as€to€the€other€ten€counts€lacking€reference€to€the€record€to€beÐ ç 7 Ðwaived.€€Ð Ð!   ÐÌà  àò òA.€€Count€One:€Aggravated€Burglary€ó óÐ ¢#ò" Ðà  àThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€burglary€in€count€one.€€Tennessee€statutes€defineÐ Œ$Ü# Ðburglary,€in€relevant€part,€as€follows:€Ð u%Å $ ÐÌà  à(a)€A€person€commits€burglary€who,€without€the€effective€consent€of€the€property€owner:€Ð G'—"& Ðà0  à(1)€Enters€a€building€other€than€a€habitation€(or€any€portion€thereof)€not€open€to€the€public,Ð 0(€#' Ðwith€the€intent€to€commit€a€felony,€theft€or€assault;€€.€.€.€Ð)i$((#(# Ðà0  à(4)€Enters€any€freight€or€passenger€car,€automobile,€truck,€trailer,€boat,€airplane€or€otherÐ *R%) Ðmotor€vehicle€with€intent€to€commit€a€felony,€theft€or€assault€or€commits€or€attempts€toÐ ë*;&* Ðcommit€a€felony,€theft€or€assault.€€òòóó€ÐÔ+$'+(#(# ЇTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„402.€€Aggravated€Burglary€is€€the€burglary€of€a€habitation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð ° ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„14„403.€€€Ð ™é ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€claims€there€was€insufficient€proof€that€he€intended€to€enter€the€home€of€Ms.Ð k» ÐGraham€with€the€intent€to€commit€theft€therein.€€The€Defendant€further€argues€the€evidence€againstÐ T¤ Ðhim€is€largely€circumstantial€and€fails€to€meet€the€intent€requirement€of€the€aggravated€burglaryÐ =  Ðstatute.€€We€disagree.€€Ð & v Ðà  à¹Ó€ r789:;<=>(ÿÿ03|ÓÔ‡Xñ% XXXƒGÔà  àIt€is€well€established€that€ð ð[i]ntent€is€rarely€proven€by€direct€evidence,€and€the€trier€of€factÐ ø H Ðmay€deduce€or€Ô#†XƒGX XXñ% i#ÔÔ‡Xñ% XXXƒGÔinfer€intent€from€the€character€and€nature€of€the€offense€and€the€circumstancesÐ á 1  Ðsurrounding€the€offense.ðð€€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€No.€E2003„01565„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WL€1541309,€at€*8,Ð Ê   Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€July€9,€2004)€(citing€òòState€v.€Inlowóó,€52€S.W.3d€101,104„105€(Tenn.Ð ³  ÐCrim.€App.€2000);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Loweryóó,€667€S.W.2d€52,€57€(Tenn.€1984).€€Furthermore,Ð œì  Ðcircumstantial€evidence€alone€may€be€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction.€€òòState€v.€Tharpeóó,€726Ð …Õ  ÐS.W.2d€896,€899„900€(Tenn.€1987).€€€However,€the€circumstantial€evidence€must€be€consistent€withÐ n¾  Ðthe€guilt€of€the€accused,€inconsistent€with€innocence,€and€must€exclude€every€other€reasonableÐ W§  Ðtheory€except€that€of€guilt.€€òòTharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€at€900.€€€Moreover,€if€a€conviction€is€based€entirelyÐ @ Ðon€circumstantial€evidence,€the€facts€must€be€ð ðso€clearly€interwoven€and€connected€that€the€fingerÐ )y Ðof€guilt€is€pointed€unerringly€at€the€Defendant€and€the€Defendant€alone.ðð€€òòState€v.€Reidóó,€91€S.W.3dÐ b Ð247,€277€(Tenn.€2002)€(òòquotingóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€868€S.W.2d€561,€569€(Tenn.€1993)).€€DeferenceÐ ûK Ðclearly€lies€with€the€jury,€as€the€weight€of€circumstantial€evidence€is€a€matter€for€the€jury€toÐ ä4 Ðdetermine.€€òòState€v.€Couryóó,€697€S.W.2d€373,€377€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€€Additionally,€whetherÐ Í Ðall€other€reasonable€theories€have€been€excluded€by€the€evidence€is€also€a€question€of€fact€for€theÐ ¶ Ðjury.€€òòPruitt€v.€Stateóó,€460€S.W.2d€385,€390„91€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1970).€€€Ð Ÿï ÐÌà  àThe€evidence€at€trial€established€that€in€the€early€morning€hours€of€July€18,€1997,€Ms.Ð qÁ ÐGraham€was€awoken€by€the€sounds€of€movement€in€her€home.€€Ms.€Graham€found€the€DefendantÐ Zª Ðin€her€house,€holding€her€purse.€€The€Defendant€did€not€have€consent€to€enter€Ms.€Grahamððs€house.€Ð C“ ÐImmediately€after€the€Defendant€left€the€house€Ms.€Graham€discovered€that€cash,€silver€and€jewelryÐ ,| Ðwere€missing.€€The€Defendant€stated€that€he€entered€the€house€to€protect€Ms.€Greene€from€anÐ e Ðintruder,€but€no€corroborating€evidence€for€this€claim€was€ever€admitted€to€the€record.€€In€short,€theÐ þN ÐDefendant€was€caught€ð ðred„handedðð€by€the€victim€of€the€burglary€in€the€victimððs€own€house,€andÐ ç 7 Ðhas€presented€no€reasonable€alternative€theory€other€than€guilt.€€We€conclude€that€the€proofÐ Ð!   Ðpertaining€to€this€charge,€viewed€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€was€sufficient€to€convictÐ ¹" ! Ðthe€Defendant€of€aggravated€burglary.€This€issue€has€no€merit.Ð ¢#ò" Ðà  àÌà  àò òB.€ó ó€ò òÔ#†XƒGX XXñ%tj#ÔCount€Eight:€Burglary€of€an€Automobile.ó óÔ‡Xñ% XXXƒGԀРt%Ä $ Ðà  àThe€Defendantððs€argument€that€his€burglary€of€an€automobile€conviction€should€be€reversedÐ `&°!% Ðdue€to€insufficient€evidence€also€fails.€€The€Defendant€claims€there€was€no€proof€that€he€was€theÐ I'™"& Ðperson€who€committed€the€burglary€of€the€automobile€in€the€International€House€of€PancakesÐ 2(‚#' ÐRestaurant€parking€lot.€€The€Defendant€stresses€the€Stateððs€failure€to€produce€a€witness€to€the€actualÐ )k$( Ðcrime,€and€lack€of€scientific€evidence€such€as€fingerprints€linking€the€Defendant€to€the€car€burglary.€Ð *T%) ÐThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€was€wholly€circumstantial€and€insufficientÐ í*=&* Ðto€support€a€guilty€conviction.€€We€disagree.Ð Ö+&'+ Ðà  àÌà  àThe€evidence€on€record€established€that€while€walking€to€his€own€car€in€the€IHOP€parkingÐ ™é Ðlot,€Mr.€Alderman€heard€the€sound€of€glass€breaking€and€saw€a€man€quickly€duck€behind€a€parkedÐ ‚Ò Ðcar.€€He€immediately€walked€to€where€he€saw€the€man€hide€and€discovered€the€Defendant,€sittingÐ k» Ðin€a€parked€burgundy€Corvette.€€Mr.€Alderman€confronted€the€Defendant,€who€quickly€drove€away.€Ð T¤ ÐMr.€Alderman€observed€that€a€window€of€the€car€directly€facing€where€the€Corvette€had€been€parkedÐ =  Ðwas€broken.€€The€owner€of€the€car€with€the€broken€window€testified€that€personal€items€had€beenÐ & v Ðstolen.€€Mr.€Alderman€was€able€to€write€down€the€licence€plate€number€of€the€CorvetteÔ#†XƒGX XXñ%‚v#ÔÔ‡Xñ% XXXƒGÔ.€€Mr.Ð  _ ÐAlderman€identified€the€Defendant€in€a€photographic€line€up€as€the€man€he€saw€drive€off€in€theÐ ø H ÐCorvette.€€Mr.€Alderman€testified€that€at€the€time€he€heard€the€glass€break€and€confronted€theÐ á 1  ÐDefendant,€no€one€else€was€in€the€parking€lot€area.€€Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àViewed€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€the€evidence€at€trial€supports€the€juryÐ œì  Ðconviction€for€burglary€of€an€automobile.€Ô#†XƒGX XXñ%}#ÔÔ‡Xñ% XXXƒGÔ€No€scientific€evidence€was€presented,€and€the€eye„witnessÐ …Õ  Ðtestimony€only€places€the€Defendant€near€the€location€of€the€crime,€not€actually€committing€it.€Ð n¾  ÐHowever,€the€circumstantial€evidence€on€record€supports€the€juryððs€conviction.€€Mr.€Alderman€andÐ W§  Ðthe€Defendant€were€the€only€persons€in€the€vicinity€when€the€crime€took€place.€€Mr.€Alderman€sawÐ @ Ðthe€Defendant€sitting€within€feet€of€the€broken€window.€€When€confronted,€the€Defendant€fled€theÐ )y Ðscene€of€the€crime€in€the€same€car€ultimately€linked€to€two€other€burglaries€in€less€than€a€month.€Ð b ÐThe€Defendant€failed€to€present€any€evidence€in€the€record€that€would€support€an€alternative€theoryÐ ûK Ðto€his€presence€at€the€scene€of€the€crime€other€than€guilt.€Taken€together,€the€circumstances€wereÐ ä4 Ðsufficient€for€a€rational€jury€to€find€the€Defendant€guilty€of€burglary€of€an€automobile.€€This€issueÐ Í Ðhas€no€merit.Ð ¶ ÐÌà  àò òC.€€Count€Three:€Drug€Possession€with€Intent€To€Selló óÐ ˆØ Ðà  àThe€Defendant€was€convicted€in€count€three€of€possession€with€intent€to€sell€or€deliver€aÐ r Ðcontrolled€substance.€€The€Defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€theÐ [« Ðconclusion€that€the€Defendant€was€in€possession€of€the€film€canister€filled€with€crack€cocaine€andÐ D” Ðthrown€out€the€passengerððs€side€window€of€the€Defendantððs€pickup€while€the€Defendant€was€on€theÐ -} Ðdriverððs€side.€€We€disagree.€€€It€is€unclear€whether€the€Defendant€challenges€the€juryððs€conclusionÐ f Ðthat,€if€indeed€the€Defendant€was€in€possession€of€the€controlled€substance,€he€intended€it€for€saleÐ ÿO Ðas€opposed€to€simple€possession.€€However,€we€will€address€this€issue€as€well.Ð è 8 ÐÌà  à€€Pursuant€to€the€Tennessee€criminal€statutes,€ð ð[i]t€is€an€offense€for€a€defendant€to€knowingly:€Ð º" ! Ð.€.€.€(4)€Possess€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliver€or€sell€such€controlledÐ £#ó" Ðsubstance.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„417(a)(4).€Ô#†XƒGX XXñ%A#ÔÔ‡Xñ% XXXƒGÔ€€Tennessee€courts€have€recognized€that€possessionÐ Œ$Ü# Ðmay€be€actual€or€constructive.€€òòState€v.€Shawóó,€37€S.W.3d€900,€903€(Tenn.€2001)€(citing€òòState€v.Ð u%Å $ ÐPattersonóó€966€S.W.2d€435,€444„45€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)).€€The€effect€of€finding€constructiveÐ ^&®!% Ðpossession€is€essentially€ð ðthe€ability€to€reduce€an€object€to€actual€possession.ðð€€òòState€v.€Cooperóó,€736Ð G'—"& ÐS.W.2d€125,€129€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€Constructive€possession€occurs€when€a€person€has€ð ðtheÐ 0(€#' Ðpower€and€intention€at€a€given€time€to€exercise€dominion€and€control€over€[the€drugs]€either€directlyÐ )i$( Ðor€through€others.ðð€€òòShawóó,€37€S.W.3d€at€903€(quoting€òòPattersonóó,€966€S.W.2d€at€445).€€However,Ð *R%) Ðð ð[o]neððs€mere€presence€in€an€area€where€drugs€are€discovered,€or€oneððs€mere€association€with€aÐ ë*;&* Ðperson€who€is€in€possession€of€drugs,€is€not€alone€sufficient€to€support€a€finding€of€constructiveÐ Ô+$'+ Ðpossession.ðð€€òòShawóó,€37€S.W.3d€at€903€(citing€òòPattersonóó,€966€S.W.2d€at€445;€òòCooperóó,€736€S.W.2d€atÐ ° Ð129);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Bigsbyóó,€40€S.W.3d€87,€90€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000).€€€€Ð ™é ÐÌà  àIn€determining€whether€the€possession€of€a€controlled€substance€was€intended€for€sale,€thisÐ k» Ðcourt€looks€to€the€entirety€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€arrest.€€We€have€previouslyÐ T¤ Ðdetermined€that€a€large€amount€of€cash€found€in€conjunction€with€cocaine€may€be€sufficient€evidenceÐ =  Ðof€intent€to€sell.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Loganóó,€973€S.W.2d€279,€281€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€€We€have€alsoÐ & v Ðfound€that€possession€of€a€large€amount€of€drugs€and€the€absence€of€any€drug€paraphernalia€orÐ  _ Ðapparatus€indicative€of€personal€use€may€also€be€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€possessionÐ ø H Ðof€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€to€sell€or€deliver.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Chearisóó,€995€S.W.2d€641,€645Ð á 1  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999)€(holding€that€1.7€grams€of€crack€cocaine€was€a€sufficiently€large€amountÐ Ê   Ðto€infer€intent€to€sell).€€€Moreover,€the€law€expressly€allows€a€jury€to€infer€intent€to€sell€based€on€theÐ ³  Ðamount€of€the€controlled€substance€possessed.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„419.׃ ×Ý ƒ*#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€€€Ð œì  ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€was€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€forÐ n¾  Ðpossession€of€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€to€deliver.€€Ô#†XƒGX XXñ%sˆ#Ô€Officer€Watson€observed€theÐ W§  ÐDefendantððs€black€pickup€parked€on€the€side€of€the€street€with€several€people€standing€around€it€atÐ @ Ð11:00€at€night.€€When€he€approached,€the€Defendant€sped€off.€€€As€Officer€Watson€later€pulled€overÐ )y Ðthe€pickup,€he€witnessed€a€small€black€container€thrown€out€the€passenger€side€window,€which€Ð b ÐOfficer€Watson€€retrieved€a€few€feet€from€the€pickup.€€The€contents€of€this€container€were€laterÐ ûK Ðshown€to€be€1.8€grams€of€crack€cocaine.€€€Officer€Watson€also€found€a€stack€of€cash€in€the€cab€butÐ ä4 Ðno€drug€paraphernalia.€€The€Defendant€was€the€driver€of€the€pickup.Ð Í ÐÌà  àThe€jury,€as€the€trier€of€fact,€could€well€determine€that€the€Defendant€had€constructiveÐ Ÿï Ðpossession€of€the€drugs€based€on€the€fact€that€the€Defendant€not€only€occupied€the€small€pickup€cabÐ ˆØ Ðwhere€the€controlled€substance€originated,€but€also€exercised€control€over€the€vehicle€as€the€driver.€Ð qÁ ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Yarbroóó,€618€S.W.2d€521,€525€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981)€(holding€the€driver€of€anÐ Zª Ðautomobile€was€in€constructive€possession€of€drugs€found€under€the€dashboard€even€though€a€thirdÐ C“ Ðparty€admitted€to€placing€the€drugs€there€without€the€driverððs€knowledge).€€It€matters€not€that€theÐ ,| Ðarresting€officer€saw€the€drugs€thrown€from€the€pickup€as€opposed€to€finding€them€inside€the€pickup.€Ð e ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€875€S.W.2d€278,€285€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(evidence€was€sufficient€to€convictÐ þN Ðof€possession€with€intent€to€sell€where€defendant€was€observed€throwing€something€while€runningÐ ç 7 Ðfrom€the€scene€of€the€crime,€and€the€retrieved€objects€included€a€paper€bag€containing€crackÐ Ð!   Ðcocaine).€€€€Additionally,€the€arresting€officer€found€a€stack€of€cash,€ð ðmostly€twenties,ðð€and€crackÐ ¹" ! Ðcocaine,€but€no€drug€paraphernalia€or€individual€drug„use€apparatus,€circumstances€which€clearlyÐ ¢#ò" Ðwould€allow€a€reasonable€jury€to€infer€intent€to€sell.€€Ô‡ Xñ% XXXƒGÔWe€conclude€that€the€Defendant€has€failed€toÐ ‹$Û# Ðdemonstrate€that€the€jury€was€presented€insufficient€evidence€at€trial€for€any€rational€trier€of€fact€toÐ t%Ä $ Ðfind€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€Defendant€was€guilty€of€possession€of€a€controlled€substanceÐ ]&­!% Ðwith€intent€to€sell€or€deliver.€€Thus,€this€issue€has€no€merit.Ô#†XƒGX X Xñ%dœ#ԀРF'–"& ÐÐ /(#' Ðò òIII.€€Severing€Chargesó óÐ ° Ðà  àThe€Defendant€next€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€severing€the€charges€at€theÐ šê Ðdefendantððs€trial.€€Because€the€Defendant€failed€to€include€any€citations€to€the€record€or€legalÐ ƒÓ Ðauthority€in€support€of€his€argument,€we€cannot€address€the€merits€of€this€issue€and€consider€itÐ l¼ Ðwaived.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Ct.€Crim.€App.€R.€10(b).Ð U¥ ÐÌà  àThis€Court€requires€that€the€Defendant€on€appeal€present€an€argument,€make€appropriateÐ ' w Ðreferences€to€the€record,€and€cite€relevant€legal€authority€in€support€of€his€argument.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Ct.Ð  ` ÐCrim.€App.€R.€10(b).׃×Ý ƒ*#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Additionally,€all€Tennessee€appellate€courts€require€the€appellantððs€brief€toÐ ù I Ðcontain€an€argument,€citations€to€authorities,€and€appropriate€references€to€the€record.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð â 2  ÐR.€App.€P.€27(a)(7).׃×Ý ƒ*#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Failure€to€comply€with€these€basic€rules€will€ordinarily€constitute€a€waiver€ofÐ Ë   Ðthe€issue.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Ct.€Crim.€App.€R.€10(b);€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€36€S.W.3d€102,€108€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ´  ÐApp.€2000).€€€€Ð í  ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€the€Defendantððs€entire€argument€consists€of€a€three„sentence€conclusoryÐ o¿  Ðstatement€asserting€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€severing€the€Defendantððs€charges€at€trial.€TheÐ X¨  ÐDefendant€makes€no€reference€to€the€record€and€cites€no€legal€authority€in€support€of€his€argument.€Ð A‘ ЀIf€a€motion€for€severance€was€made€in€the€trial€court,€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€cite€to€the€recordÐ *z Ðfor€the€location€of€the€motion.€€A€severance€issue€is€waived€if€a€motion€for€a€severance€is€not€made.€Ð c ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€14(a).€€Upon€this€record,€we€choose€not€to€review€this€issue€as€presented€andÐ üL Ðdeem€it€waived.€€Ð å5 ÐÌò òIV.€€Evidentiary€Issuesó óÐ · Ðà  àThe€Defendant€raises€two€issues€pertaining€to€the€trial€courtððs€admission€of€evidence.€€First,Ð ¡ñ Ðthe€Defendant€asserts€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€statements€about€the€Defendantððs€prior€recordÐ ŠÚ Ðmade€both€by€the€court€and€the€Defendant€himself.€€€Second,€the€Defendant€claims€the€trial€courtÐ sà Ðerred€by€admitting€the€Defendantððs€statement€concerning€his€prior€drug€use,€which€he€made€at€anÐ \¬ Ðearlier€bond€hearing.€€We€find€both€issues€waived.Ð E• ÐÌà  àThe€Defendantððs€appellate€brief€combines€the€two€evidentiary€issues,€presenting€oneÐ g Ðargument€for€both.€€Unfortunately,€the€ð ðargumentðð€consists€of€three€brief€sentences.€€€Combined,€theÐ  P Ðthree€sentences€fail€to€state€the€contentions€of€the€Defendant€with€respect€to€the€issue€presented€andÐ é 9 Ðtherefore€fall€short€of€constituting€an€argument€as€required€by€our€rules€of€procedure.€€Additionally,Ð Ò!"  Ðno€citations€to€any€legal€authority€or€references€to€the€record€were€presented€to€support€the€claimsÐ »" ! Ðof€error.€€€Accordingly,€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€Rule€10(b)€and€TennesseeÐ ¤#ô" ÐRule€of€Appellate€Procedure€27(a)(7)€we€hold€the€Defendant€has€waived€both€issues.€€Ð $Ý# Їà  àò òV.€€Sentencing€Issues.ó óÐ ° Ðà  àThe€Defendant€raises€two€issues€with€regard€to€sentencing.€€First,€the€Defendant€argues€theÐ šê Ðtrial€court€erred€by€failing€to€apply€proper€weight€to€the€mitigating€factor€of€the€DefendantððsÐ ƒÓ Ðdiminished€mental€capacity€at€sentencing.€€Second,€the€Defendant€claims€the€trial€court€erred€byÐ l¼ Ðordering€the€Defendantððs€sentences€to€be€served€consecutively.€€Because€the€Defendant€failed€toÐ U¥ Ðprepare€an€adequate€record€on€appeal€pertaining€to€sentencing€we€are€precluded€from€determiningÐ > Ž Ðthese€issues€on€their€merits.€€Ð ' w ÐÌà  àWhen€a€party€seeks€appellate€review€he€is€charged€with€the€ð ðduty€to€prepare€a€record€whichÐ ù I Ðconveys€a€fair,€accurate€and€complete€account€of€what€transpired€with€respect€to€the€issues€formingÐ â 2  Ðthe€basis€of€the€appeal.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ballardóó,€855€S.W.2d€557,€560€(Tenn.€1993)€(citing€òòState€v.€Bunchóó,Ð Ë   Ð646€S.W.2d€158,€160€(Tenn.€1983));€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(b).׃×Ý ƒ*#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€It€is€well€established€that€ð ðanÐ ´  Ðappellate€court€is€precluded€from€considering€an€issue€when€the€record€does€not€contain€a€transcriptÐ í  Ðor€statement€of€what€transpired€in€the€trial€court€with€respect€to€the€issue.ðð€€òòState€v.€Draperóó,€800Ð †Ö  ÐS.W.2d€489,€493€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòBallardóó,€855€S.W.2d€at€560„61€(Tenn.€1993).€Ð o¿  ÐMoreover,€ð ðthe€appellate€court€must€conclusively€presume€that€the€ruling€of€the€trial€judge€wasÐ X¨  Ðcorrect,€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€defendantððs€conviction,€or€the€defendant€receivedÐ A‘ Ða€fair€and€impartial€trial.ðð€€òòDraperóó,€800€S.W.2d€at€493;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Oodyóó,€823€S.W.2d€554,€559Ð *z Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Accordingly,€an€appellantððs€failure€to€include€a€complete€transcript€of€theÐ c Ðproceedings€forming€the€basis€of€an€appeal€results€in€the€waiver€of€any€challenge€to€the€lower€courtððsÐ üL Ðruling€on€the€issue.€€òòSeeóó€òòBallardóó,€S.W.2d€at€560„61;€òòDraperóó,€800€S.W.2d€at€493.€€Ð å5 ÐÌà  àIt€appears€from€the€technical€record€that€a€sentencing€hearing€for€the€Defendant€took€placeÐ · Ðon€August€19,€1999.€€Also€submitted€to€this€Court€in€the€technical€record€is€an€order€from€JudgeÐ  ð ÐWalter€Kurtz€dated€January€2,€2003,€requiring€the€court€clerk€to€ð ðproperly€prepareðð€and€giveÐ ‰Ù ÐDefendant€access€to€both€ð ðthe€trial€and€sentencing€hearing€transcripts.ðð€€The€Defendant€did€notÐ r Ðinclude€in€the€appellate€record€submitted€to€this€Court€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing.€Ð [« ÐBecause€the€Defendant€failed€to€prepare€an€adequate€record€on€appeal€by€omitting€the€sentencingÐ D” Ðhearing€transcript,€any€claim€of€error€pertaining€to€sentencing€cannot€be€addressed€by€this€Court.€Ð -} ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Adleróó,€No.€W2001„00951„CCA„R3„CD,€2002€WL€1482704,€at€*7,€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð f ÐJackson,€Feb.€19,€2002)€(holding€that€the€defendant€waived€consideration€of€whether€sentence€wasÐ ÿO Ðexcessive€by€failing€to€provide€the€appellate€court€with€a€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing).€Ð è 8 ÐAccordingly,€we€deem€both€issues€raised€in€this€appeal€pertaining€to€the€Defendantððs€sentencing€toÐ Ñ!!  Ðbe€waived.Ð º" ! ÐÌà  àBased€on€the€foregoing€analysis,€we€find€that€all€issues€raised€on€appeal€are€either€withoutÐ Œ$Ü# Ðmerit€or€have€been€waived.€€The€judgments€of€the€trial€court€are€affirmed.€€Ð u%Å $ ÐÐ ^&®!% ЇÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð ™é Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE