ÿWPC[ …UBV %˜U.žÌnXÜ 044 4h | 1m„ 0dñ w@U 0J• 0Tß 0^3 0h‘ 0rù 0|k 0†ç 0m 1uý 0drU6ÖB) DC5 AMx BÅâv~ôvÓr D3E 0@x 0¸ 0ŠG 0 Ñ 0´q 0Ç% 0Ûì 0ïÇ AO¶Æ 0DË D/ B><þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|XÔ«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP( ¤T$¡¡Ó  ÓÔ¡¨  tuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  à ÁDÂÃDÄÅÆDÇÈDÉËÓ€2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌSeptember€30,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÑ X ÑÑ7€¢XXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ ` ÑÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€ÔÙ€€ÙßR€$&#A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÓ  Óà@ àJULY€1997€SESSIONÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà àò òC.C.A.€NO.€ó ó€ò ò01C01„9607„CR„00312ó óÌà àà àAppellee,à àò ò€€€€€à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àDAVIDSON€COUNTYó óÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€SETH€NORMAN,ÌJAMES€EDWARD€GATES,à àà à)à àJUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ó óÌà àà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)ó óà à(Especially€aggravated€robbery)ÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà àà àà à€€€€€òòà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÌÌÌœò òKARL€DEAN›à àà àà àà àœà àJOHN›€KNOX€œWALKUPó óÌPublic€Defenderà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌÌò òJEFFERY€DeVASHERà àà àà àà àPETER€M.€COUGHLANó óÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àAsst.€Attorney€GeneralÌ1202€Stahlman€Bldg.à àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€Pkwy.ÌNashville,€TN€37201à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493Ì€€€€€(On€Appeal)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òVICTOR€S.€JOHNSON,€IIIó óÌò òWENDY€S.€TUCKERà àà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà à„and„Ìò òJOAN€A.€LAWSONó óÌAsst.€Public€Defendersà àà àà àà àò òKYMBERLY€HAASó óÌ12th€Floor€Stahlman€Bldg.à àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌNashville,€TN€37201à àà àà àà àWashington€Square€Bldg.,€Suite€500Ì€€€€€(At€Trial)à àà àà àà àà àà à222€Second€Ave.,€NorthÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37201ÌÌÌÌÌ›ÌÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌœò òAFFIRMEDó ó›ÌÌÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,ÌJudgeÑ Ü ÑÓ  Óà@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óóóÌÌ̛̜ÓÓà àà àThe€defendant€was€indicted€in€œFebruary›€1995€for€especially€aggravatedÏrobbery.€€A€jury€convicted€him€of€this€offense€and€after€a€hearing,€he€was€sentencedÏto€nineteen€years€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction.€€In€this€appeal€as€ofÏright,€the€defendant€raises€the€following€issues:ÌÒ D ÒÒ \ ÒÒ ô ÒÒ \ ÒœÓÓ1.›€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€the€defendantððsÏmotion€to€suppress€statements€made€by€the€defendant€toÏpolice€officers.ÌÌ2.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€grant€aÏmistrial€after€the€State€allowed€the€jury€to€hear€a€portion€ofÏthe€defendantððs€tape€recorded€statement€that€should€haveÏbeen€redacted.ÌÌœ3.›€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€the€defendantððsÍrequest€for€a€special€jury€instruction€regarding€theÏapplicable€range€of€punishment€and€further€erred€inÏinstructing€the€jury€on€the€number€of€years€the€defendantÏwould€have€to€serve€before€becoming€eligible€for€parole.ÌÌÒ D ÒÒ \ ÒÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒAfter€a€review€of€the€record€and€applicable€law,€we€find€that€œthese€issues€are€without€ÌÌmerit.€€Thus,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€court€below.›Ì̛̜ÓÓà àà àThe€facts€of€the€case€are€as€follows.€€On€September€2,€1994,€œAnne›ÏDeol,€of€1220€Second€Avenue€South€in€Nashville,€returned€to€her€home€shortly€afterÏœ9:00›€p.m.€She€drove€into€her€driveway€and€parked€her€car€near€the€steps€to€her€backÏporch.€€When€she€stepped€onto€the€second€step,€she€heard€voices€under€the€stairs.€ÏSuddenly,€a€young€œman›€ran€around€the€stairs,€grabbed€her€purse,€and€fled€throughÏthe€back€yard.€€While€Ms.€Deol€stood€watching€the€young€man€run€away,€she€wasÏshot€in€the€back.€€She€managed€to€find€her€way€into€her€home€and€œcalled›€911.€ÏOfficers€and€emergency€personnel€arrived€shortly€thereafter.ÌÌà àà àAt€the€defendantððs€trial,€Ms.€Deol,€who€was€seventy„three€years€old€atÏthe€time€of€the€robbery,€œtestified›€that€her€back€porch€lights€had€not€been€œilluminated›Ïœand,›€therefore,€she€was€unable€to€identify€her€attackers.€€She€testified€that€she€didÏsee€three€black€œmales›€but€that€she€could€identify€none€of€them.ÌÌà àà àShortly€after€the€robbery,€Detective€œRicky›€Rolls€of€the€MetropolitanÏPolice€Department,€received€a€call€from€a€woman€named€Sherry€Reed.€€Ms.€ReedÏtold€Rolls€that€she€had€discovered€a€gun€in€the€room€of€a€young€man,€Leslie€Jones,Ïwho€was€staying€at€her€house.€€Rolls€picked€up€the€gun€and€passed€it€along€toÏDetective€Dan€Whitehurst€who€was€investigating€the€robbery€of€Ms.€Deol.€€With€theÏdiscovery€of€the€gun€and€other€information,€Whitehurst€then€formed€a€list€of€threeÏpossible€suspects:€€the€defendant,€œDwjuan›€ð ðœJuaney›ðð€Bradford,€and€James€ð ðœJ.T.›ððÏJordan.ÌÌà àà àOn€September€14,€1994,€Whitehurst€went€to€see€the€defendantððsÏmother€at€her€place€of€employment.€€The€defendantððs€mother€agreed€to€takeÏWhitehurst€to€her€home€to€talk€to€her€son.€€When€Whitehurst€and€a€fellow€detectiveÏarrived€at€the€home,€Bradford€and€the€defendant€were€present.€€The€defendant,€in€theÏpresence€of€his€mother,€gave€the€officers€a€tape€recorded€statement€in€which€heÏadmitted€to€his€role€in€the€robbery.€€The€defendant€had€not€been€read€his€òòMirandaóóÏrights€prior€to€giving€the€statement.€€After€the€defendant€gave€his€statement,€theÏdetectives€left.ÌÌà àà àThe€following€day,€the€defendant€called€Whitehurst€and€said€that€heÏand€the€other€two€suspects,€Bradford€and€Jordan,€were€at€the€defendantððs€houseÍwaiting€to€be€picked€up€by€the€police.€€Whitehurst€returned€to€the€defendantððs€homeÏand€arrested€all€three€young€men.€€The€defendant€was€taken€to€the€policeÏdepartment€and€was€read€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€He€then€gave€a€statement€on€videoÏtape€œthat€was€similar€in€sum€and€substance€to›€the€earlier€statement.ÌÌà àà àIn€his€first€issue,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÏrefusing€to€grant€his€motion€to€suppress€both€statements€made€to€DetectiveÏWhitehurst.€€At€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€suppress,€Whitehurst€testified€that€theÏdefendant€œhad€been›€a€suspect€at€the€time€the€first€statement€was€taken.€€He€furtherÏtestified€that€he€had€not€gone€to€the€defendantððs€home€with€the€intention€of€arrestingÏhim€because€he€did€not€yet€have€enough€evidence.€€He€said€that€he€had€interviewedÏthe€defendant€with€the€hopes€of€building€a€stronger€case.€€Whitehurst€stated€that€heÏdid€not€display€handcuffs€or€weapons€and€that€the€defendant€was€never€threatened.€ÏHe€testified€that€the€defendant€œhad€been›€free€to€leave€at€any€point.ÌÌà àà àThe€tape€recording€of€the€defendantððs€statement€reflects€that€WhitehurstÏtold€the€defendant€that€he€knew€who€had€robbed€Ms.€Deol€and€that€he€had€known€forÏweeks.€€To€this€the€defendant€responded,€ð ðSo€I€can€go€to€juvenile€right€now?ðð€ÏWhitehurst€told€him€that€he€could€and€that€in€fact,€all€three€young€men€were€going€toÏjuvenile.€€Whitehurst€told€the€defendant,€ð ðœJuaney›€[Bradford]€is€gonna€go€tonight.€.€.€.ÍYes,€trust€me.€€Everybody€gets€to€go.ðð€€At€this€point,€the€defendant€told€Whitehurst€toÏhandcuff€him.€€Whitehurst€refused,€saying€he€just€wanted€the€defendant€to€tell€him€theÏtruth.€€œThe›€defendant€œthen€confessed›€to€being€the€one€that€shot€Ms.€Deol.€€ÌÌà àà àAfter€he€confessed,€the€defendant€was€asked€if€he€wanted€to€talk€toÏBradford,€who€was€waiting€outside€the€house.€€The€defendant€agreed€and€toldÏWhitehurst,€ð ðI€œainððt›€gonna€run.€€I€œ[have]›€no€shoes.ðð€€Whitehurst€replied,€ð ðI€donððt€thinkÏyouððre€gonna€run.ðð€€At€that€point,€Whitehurst€stepped€away€so€that€the€defendant€andÏBradford€could€speak€confidentially.€€Whitehurst€left€shortly€thereafter€without€makingÏany€arrests.Ìà àà àÌà àà àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€above€statement€should€have€beenÏsuppressed€because€the€statement€was€made€during€a€custodial€interrogation€andÏthe€defendant€had€not€been€advised€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€ð ðCustodial€interrogationððÏhas€been€defined€as€ð ðquestioning€initiated€by€law€enforcement€officers€after€a€personÏhas€been€taken€into€custody€or€otherwise€deprived€of€his€freedom€of€action€in€anyÏsignificant€way.ðð€€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€444€(1966).ÌÌà àà àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€recently€addressed€this€issue€in€itsÏopinion€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€937€S.W.2d€851€(Tenn.€1996).€€Inòò€Andersonóó,€the€courtÍstated€œthatÌÒ D ÒÒ \ ÒÒ ô ÒÒ \ ÒÓÓin›€determining€whether€an€individual€is€ððin€custodyðð€andÏentitled€to€òòMirandaóó€warnings,€the€relevant€inquiry€isÏwhether,€under€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€aÏreasonable€person€in€the€suspectððs€position€wouldÏconsider€himself€or€herself€deprived€of€freedom€ofÏmovement€to€a€degree€associated€with€a€formal€arrest.€ÏThe€test€is€objective€from€the€viewpoint€of€the€suspect,€andÏthe€unarticulated,€subjective€view€of€law€enforcementÏofficials€that€the€individual€being€questioned€is€or€is€not€aÏsuspect€does€not€bear€upon€the€œquestion.›à àœÌÒ D ÒÒ \ ÒÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÓÓÓÓÌòòAndersonóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€852.ÌÌ›ÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€court€also€listed€some€factors€which€may€be€relevant€to€the€totalityÏof€the€circumstances€inquiry.€€They€include:ÌÓÓÒ ô ÒÒ ¦ ÒÒ ô ÒÒ D Ò€the€time€and€location€of€the€interrogation;€the€duration€andÏcharacter€of€the€questioning;€the€officerððs€tone€of€voice€andÏgeneral€demeanor;€the€suspectððs€method€of€transportationÏto€the€place€of€questioning;€the€number€of€police€officersÏpresent;€any€limitation€on€movement€or€other€form€ofÏrestraint€imposed€on€the€suspect€during€the€interrogation;Ïany€interactions€between€the€officer€and€the€suspect,Ïincluding€the€words€spoken€by€the€officer€to€the€suspect,Ïand€the€suspectððs€verbal€or€nonverbal€responses;€theÏextent€to€which€the€suspect€is€confronted€with€the€lawÏenforcement€officerððs€suspicions€of€guilt€or€evidence€ofÏguilt;€and€finally,€the€extent€to€which€the€suspect€is€madeÏaware€that€he€or€she€is€free€to€refrain€from€answeringÏquestions€or€to€end€the€interview€at€will.ÌÌÒ D ÒÒ D ÒÒ D ÒÒ ¦ Ò€òòAndersonóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€œ855€(citations›€omitted).ÌœÌÌ›ÌÓÓà àà àIn€his€order€denying€the€motion€to€suppress,€the€trial€judge€found€noÏindication€of€custodial€interrogation.€€He€noted€that€the€defendant€was€questioned€œat›Ïhis€home€with€his€mother€present€and€that€there€had€been€no€proof€that€theÏdefendant€was€not€free€to€leave€or€that€he€had€ever€felt€uncomfortable.€€This€Court€isÏbound€by€the€trial€court's€determination€that€the€defendant€was€not€in€custody€at€theÏtime€of€questioning€unless€it€"clearly€œappear[s›]€that€there€œha[s›]€been€an€abuse€ofÏdiscretion€and€a€violation€of€the€rights€of€the€accused."€€òòœChilds›€v.€Stateóó,€584€S.W.2dÏ783,€788€(Tenn.1979);€€òòState€v.€Furloughóó,€797€S.W.2d€631,€639Ï(œTenn.Crim.App.1990);€òòState›€v.€œNakdimen›óó,€735€S.W.2d€799,€802Ï(œTenn.Crim.App›.1987).€€€€€ÌÌà àà àIn€applying€the€òòAndersonóó€factors€to€the€case€now€before€us,€we€find€thatÏthe€trial€judge€did€not€abuse€his€discretion€in€determining€that€the€defendant€was€notÏin€custody.€€The€defendant€was€questioned€in€his€home€around€nine€in€the€evening.€ÏThe€officers€entered€the€home€with€the€defendantððs€motherððs€permission.€€TheÏinterview€lasted€approximately€œten›€minutes€and€was€non„controversial€in€nature.€€TheÏofficerððs€tone€of€voice€was€that€expected€in€a€normal€conversation.€€He€was€not€harshÏin€speaking€to€the€defendant.€€Detective€Whitehurst€was€accompanied€by€one€otherÍœdetective,›€and€they€arrived€at€the€defendantððs€home€in€plain€clothes€and€in€anÏunmarked€car.€€Obviously,€the€defendant€was€not€transported€anywhere€forÏquestioning;€he€was€at€home€when€the€officers€arrived.€€Next,€the€defendant€was€inÏno€way€limited€in€movement.€€Whitehurst€testified€that€no€handcuffs€or€weapons€œhadÏbeen›€displayed.€€He€further€testified€that€no€threats€œhad€been›€made€to€the€defendant.€€ÌÌà àà àWhitehurst€testified€that€he€œhad›€œconfronted›€the€defendant€with€evidenceÏof€the€defendantððs€guilt€by€telling€the€defendant€that€he€knew€the€defendant€hadÏcommitted€the€crime.€€However,€when€the€defendant€said,€ð ðHandcuff€me€now,ððÏWhitehurst€refused,€telling€the€defendant€that€he€was€not€his€enemy.€€Whitehurst€didÏnot€specifically€tell€the€defendant€that€he€was€free€to€leave€the€room€or€free€to€refuseÏto€answer€any€questions.€€Nor€did€Whitehurst€specifically€tell€the€defendant€that€heÏwas€not€under€arrest.€€Near€the€end€of€the€interview,€the€other€detective€suggestedÏthat€the€defendant€speak€to€one€of€the€other€suspects,€Bradford,€who€was€waitingÏoutside.€€At€that€point,€the€defendant€agreed€to€speak€to€Bradford€and€told€the€officersÏthat€he€ð ðœainððt›€gonna€run.ðð€€Whitehurst€responded€that€he€had€not€thought€theÏdefendant€would€run.€€The€detectives€then€left€the€defendantððs€home€without€makingÏany€arrests.Ìà àà àÌà àà àThus,€under€these€circumstances,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€reachedÍthe€correct€conclusion.€€A€reasonable€person€in€this€defendantððs€situation€would€notÏhave€thought€he€was€in€custody.€€The€defendant€was€at€his€home,€with€his€mother,Ïand€had€not€been€restrained€or€threatened€in€any€way.€€Furthermore,€the€detectivesÏtold€the€defendant€they€would€not€handcuff€him.€€The€detectives€also€told€theÏdefendant€that€they€had€œalready€spoken›€to€Bradford€and€Jordan,€and€the€defendantÏwas€aware€that€those€two€had€not€been€arrested.€€The€defendantððs€statement€wasÏproperly€admitted€as€evidence.ÌÌà àà àHaving€made€this€determination,€the€defendantððs€contention€that€hisÏsecond€statement€was€inadmissible€because€it€was€ð ðtaintedðð€by€the€alleged€ill„obtained€first€statement€is€without€merit.€€The€defendant€gave€his€second€statement€toÏthe€police€after€he€was€arrested€and€read€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€As€the€first€statementÏwas€admissible,€it€could€in€no€way€ð ðtaintðð€the€second€statement.€€Both€statementsÏwere€properly€admitted.ÌÌà àà àAs€his€second€issue,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erredÏwhen€it€refused€to€grant€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€mistrial€after€the€jury€heard€aÏportion€of€the€defendantððs€taped€statement€that€the€State€had€previously€œagreed€to›€Ïœredact.›€€At€trial,€the€State€told€the€court€it€planned€to€œplay›€the€audio€tape€of€theÏstatement€the€defendant€had€made€at€his€house€to€Detective€Whitehurst.€€One€of€theÍprosecutors€explained€to€the€court€that€it€had€been€agreed€that€a€portion€of€the€tapeÏwould€not€be€played€because€it€was€irrelevant€to€the€issues€before€the€court.€€TheÏprosecutor€informed€the€court€that€she€would€have€to€stop€and€start€the€tape€herselfÏbut€that€she€had€ð ðdone€the€counter€thing.ðð€€However,€at€trial,€the€portion€that€was€to€beÏomitted€was€played€for€the€jury.€€The€defendant€immediately€objected€and€asked€for€aÏmistrial.€€The€prosecutor€explained€that€she€had€pushed€the€stop€button€on€theÏrecorder€but€that€it€did€not€stop.ÌÌà àà àWhat€the€jury€heard€œwas€a€question›€from€Detective€Whitehurst€to€theÏdefendant€while€at€the€defendantððs€house.€€Whitehurst€œasked›€œthe›€defendant,€ð ðœJuaney›Ï[Bradford]€has€got€you€in€trouble€œbefore,€ainððt›€he?ðð€€The€volume€on€the€recorder€wasÏturned€down€œimmediately€after›€this€so€that€the€jury€only€œheard€this›€œquestion€and›€notÏthe€defendantððs€reply.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€mistrialÏstating€that€ð ðððin€troubleðð€doesnððt€mean€anything€significant.€€Thereððs€nothing€about€anyÏkind€of€conviction€or€anything€of€that€nature.€€It€just€is€ððin€troubleðð€which€could€mean€atÏschool€or€anywhere€else.ðð€€€€à à€€€Ìà àà àÌà àà àWhether€to€grant€a€mistrial€is€a€decision€within€the€sound€discretion€ofÏthe€trial€judge,€and€absent€an€abuse€of€that€discretion,€such€action€will€not€beÏdisturbed€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€667€S.W.2d€507,€510€(œTenn.Crim.App›.1983).€€ÍGenerally,€a€mistrial€will€be€declared€in€a€criminal€case€only€when€there€is€aÏ"manifest€necessity"€requiring€such€action€by€the€trial€judge.€€òòArnold€v.€Stateóó,€563ÏS.W.2d€792,€794€(œTenn.Crim.App›.1977).ÌÌà àà àIn€this€case,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€juryððs€hearing€WhitehurstððsÏquestion€was€a€ð ðmanifest€necessityðð€requiring€a€mistrial.€€We€find€that€the€trial€œjudge›Ïdid€not€abuse€his€discretion€in€refusing€to€grant€a€mistrial.€€However,€we€note€that€inÏthe€future,€the€œbetter€practice€would€be€to›€actually€have€the€tape€redacted€rather€thanÏrelying€on€a€tape€counter€and€a€possibly€malfunctioning€tape€recorder.ÌÌà àà àAs€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€whenÏit€denied€his€request€for€a€special€jury€instruction€concerning€the€applicable€range€ofÏpunishment€and€further€erred€when€it€instructed€the€jury€on€the€minimum€number€ofÏyears€the€defendant€would€serve€before€becoming€eligible€for€parole.€€Prior€to€trial,Ïthe€defendant€requested,€as€is€provided€for€under€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„201(b)(1),€that€theÏjury€be€instructed€on€the€possible€penalties€for€the€offense€charged€and€all€lesserÏincluded€offenses.€€The€defendant€requested€that€the€jury€be€told€that€having€beenÏcharged€with€a€Class€A€felony,€the€defendant,€if€convicted,€could€receive€a€sentenceÏof€not€less€than€fifteen€years€and€not€more€than€sixty€years.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„111(b)(1).€€The€defendant€also€requested€that€the€jury€not€be€instructed€as€to€theÍdefendantððs€possible€parole€eligibility.€€The€trial€judge€denied€the€defendantððsÏrequest€and€informed€the€jury€that€if€convicted,€the€defendant€would€receive€aÏsentence€between€fifteen€and€twenty„five€years€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender.€€òòSeeóóÏT.C.A.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(1).€€He€also€informed€the€jury€about€the€defendantððs€eligibilityÏœfor›€parole€as€provided€in€T.C.A.€œÌðð›€40„35„201(b)(2)(A).€€The€defendant€now€contends€that€the€trial€judge€erred€by€notÏgranting€his€request€for€the€special€instructions€to€the€jury.€€We€find€no€merit€to€thisÏcontention€as€the€trial€court€was€simply€following€the€mandate€of€the€statute.€ÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€œðð€40„35„201(b)›€provides:ÌÒ D ÒÒ \ ÒÒ ô ÒÒ \ ÒÓÓ(b)(1)€In€all€contested€criminal€cases,€except€for€capitalÏcrimes€which€are€governed€by€the€procedures€containedÏin€ðððð€39„13„204€and€39„13„205,€upon€the€motion€of€eitherÏparty,€filed€with€the€court€prior€to€the€selection€of€the€jury,Ïthe€court€shall€charge€the€possible€penalties€for€theÏoffense€charged€and€all€lesser€included€offenses.€€ÌÌ(2)(A)(œi›)€When€a€charge€as€to€possible€penalties€has€beenÏrequested€pursuant€to€subdivision€(b)(1),€the€judge€òòshallÏalso€includeóó€in€the€instructions€for€the€jury€to€weigh€andÏconsider€the€meaning€of€a€sentence€of€imprisonment€forÏthe€offense€charged€and€any€lesser€included€offenses.€ÏSuch€instruction€shall€include€an€approximate€calculationÏof€the€minimum€number€of€years€a€person€sentenced€toÏimprisonment€for€the€offense€charged€and€lesser€includedÏoffenses€must€serve€before€reaching€such€person'sÏearliest€release€eligibility€date.€€Such€calculation€shallÏinclude€such€factors€as€the€release€eligibility€percentageÏestablished€by€ðð€40„35„501,€maximum€and€minimumÏsentence€reduction€credits€authorized€by€ðð€41„21„236€andÍthe€governor's€power€to€reduce€prison€overcrowdingÏpursuant€to€title€41,€chapter€1,€part€5,€if€applicable.Ï(emphasis€added).€ÌÒ D ÒÒ \ ÒÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÓÓÌà àà àThe€trial€court€did€not€err€in€refusing€to€instruct€the€jury€as€the€defendantÏhad€requested.€€The€trial€court€followed€the€statute€as€to€how€to€instruct€the€jury€onÏpossible€punishment€for€the€œdefendant.›€€Therefore,€we€find€no€merit€to€this€argument.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„201(b)€isÏunconstitutional.€€He€specifically€claims€that€the€statute€is€unconstitutionally€vague,€isÏviolative€of€due€process,€and€is€an€unconstitutional€attempt€by€the€legislature€toÏexercise€judicial€power.€€This€Court€recently€addressed€these€very€œissues›€in€òòState€v.ÏHoward€E.€Kingóó,€No.€œ02C01›„9601„CR„00032,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filedÏOct.€22,€1996,€at€œJackson)(òòperm.€to€app.€grantedóó›€March€10,€1997).€€In€finding€theÏstatute€constitutional,€this€Court€determined€that€the€statute€is€not€impermissiblyÏvague,€that€none€of€the€defendantððs€constitutional€rights€œwas›€violated,€and€that€theÏstatute€is€not€a€legislative€attempt€to€exercise€judicial€power.€€This€Court€also€rejectedÏthe€defendantððs€reliance€on€òòFarris€v.€Stateóó,€535€S.W.2d€608€(Tenn.€1976)€for€theÏproposition€that€the€statute€is€unconstitutional.€€As€œthe€Courtððs›€analysis€in€òòKingóó€isÏquite€comprehensive,€we€œfind€it€unnecessary€to›€œagain€explain€the›€reasoning€behindÏthese€œconclusions.›€€Thus,€we€find€no€merit€to€the€defendantððs€challenge€that€T.C.A.€ððÍ40„35„201(b)€is€unconstitutional.ÌÌà àà àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€find€no€merit€to€the€defendantððs€appealÏand€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€court€below.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌœÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________€€€ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€Judge€€€€€€Ì›