WPC  Bֽ&&'ɪAOˋ ù7z&-~mYTcqX2K L&jݴNr!S mvQM^<.jK3kC3h|âG)S9ގl]w`X2eD`?z.w(3Ϸt$T,w)zRW6(4yQg:Pv8dX(T&{P?W rN|K d7sqFWSf2 kF$oR4TQ.>wz^ S@TChgb#\ % ^ # 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz   _ %  NEb 0 B 0 D5i D- 0K ASi 0/ 0D AHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e,,,,09+ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularJ~'d C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xU Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- -(|G2~$ !.8^dd8         0  m d(|3G$ !.8^dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G$ !.8^dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8^dd8     _    ^8 XXdd8@ttP^INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE &   AssignedonBriefsAugust15,2001#^P # L X X^ #^XX #STATEOFTENNESSEEv.GRADYPAUL_GATLIN_X X.^   ^  AppealfromtheCircuitCourtforMarshallCounty  ^ @@**"No.14186  J @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@No.M200002356CCAR3CDF0 @ _iled_ԀSeptember25,_2001_   AV) ` dE<` A    #^X #X X.^@@*    James_Curwood_Ԁ_Witt_,Jr.,J.,concurringanddissenting. d    #^X #X X.^   ` Imustrespectfullydepartfromtheleadopinioninthiscase.Icannotconcludethat (x themisdemeanoroffenseofcasuallyexchangingacontrolledsubstanceisalesserincludedoffense d offelonypossessionwiththeintenttosellordeliver.CompareTenn.CodeAnn.3917417(a)(4) P (1997)withTenn.CodeAnn.3917418(a)(1997). <    ` Becausemanyofourproscriptivestatutesestablishalternativemodesforcommitting  crimes,andbecausethedeterminationoflesserincludedoffensesinvolvesastatutoryelements  analysis,Statev.Burns6S.W.3d453,466(Tenn.1999),analysisoflesserincludedoffenseshas  oftenentailedthecomparisonofaspecificmodeofthegreateroffensewithaspecific,relatedmode  ofthelesseroffense.See,e.g.,Statev.DavidWayne_Salley_,No.E199900203CCAR3CD(Tenn. t _Crim_.App.,Knoxville,Oct.11,2000)(comparingthebodilyinjurymodeofrapewithsimilarmode `  ofaggravatedassault);Statev.RobbieJames,No.M200000304CCARMCD,slipop.at6(Tenn. L!  _Crim_.App.,Nashville,Mar.20,2000)(childvictimmodeofaggravatedsexualbatteryislesser 8"! includedoffenseofchildrape);Statev.GaryJ.Greer,No.01C019808CR00337,slipop.at1113 $#t" (Tenn._Crim_.App.,Nashville,Mar.17,2000),pet.forperm.app.filed(Tenn.2000)#^XX #X X^;#^XX / #X X^Statev.Reed, $`# 689S.W.2d190,193(Tenn._Crim_.App.1984)(aggravatedassaultfoundtobelesserincluded $L $ offenseofaggravatedrapebaseduponcommonalityof weaponmode). %8!%    ` Anexaminationofthestatutesdefiningdrugoffensesreflectsthattheyareorganized '#' intomodesofconduct.Apersoncommitsafelonywhoeithermanufactures,deliversorsellsa (#( controlledsubstance;alternatively,hewhopossessesthecontrolledsubstancewithintentto )$) manufacture,deliverorsellalsocommitsafelony.Tenn.CodeAnn.3917417(a)(1997).Some *%* ofthemodesthatdefinethisoffensedescribemerepossession,althoughothersdescribeatransfer p+&+ ofthecontrolledsubstance.Likewise,themisdemeanordrugstatuteproscribespossessionasamode \,', ofconduct,andalternativelyitproscribes casualexchange!thatis,conductinvolvingatransfer H-(- _ofthecontrolledsubstance.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.3917418(a)(establishinganoffense fora  persontoknowinglypossessorcasuallyexchangeacontrolledsubstance)(emphasisadded).     ` Inthepresentcase,eachdrugoffensewasafelonythatwasallegedintheindictment t aspossessionwithintenttosell.Inmyview,onlythepossessionmodeofthemisdemeanorwould ` bealesserincludedoffense.SeeBurns,6S.W.3dat46667.Therequirementofanexchangeisnot L  anelementofthechargedfelonyoffenseofpossession.JudgeWellesmakesaninfluentialargument 8  thatcasualexchangewouldconstitutealesserincludedoffenseoffelonypossessionpursuanttothe $ t  (b)prongoftheBurnstest,butrespectfullyIremainunconvinced.Idobelievethatthepossession  ` modeofcommittingthemisdemeanorwouldbealesserincludedoffenseofanymodeofcommitting  L  thefelony,forthesimplereasonthatpossessionisanecessaryconditionofanymanufacture,  8  deliveryorsale,butitseemstomethatthecasualexchangemodelinesupwithonlythetransfer $  modesofthefelonyoffense!thatis,deliveryandsale.      ` Therefore,Iconcludethatthetrialjudgeadvisedlyandcorrectly(1)chargedthejury   thatmisdemeanorpossessionisincludedwithinthechargedoffenseofpossessionand(2)omitted   casualexchangeasalesserincludedoffenseoption.Ibelievetheanalysisthatsupportsthis p conclusionutilizesandadvancesamethodologyfordetermininglesserincludedoffensesthat \ facilitatesthistaskthroughoutthebroadrangeofcriminaloffenses. H    ` Thatsaid,Iconcludethatthetrialcourtneverthelesserredinfailingtochargethejury  p astotheseparate casualexchangeinferencesetforthinCodesection3917419.Thatsection  \ provides, H ` ` Itmaybeinferredfromtheamountofacontrolledsubstanceor   substancespossessedbyanoffender,alongwithotherrelevantfacts   surroundingthearrest,thatthecontrolledsubstanceorsubstances  werepossessedwiththepurposeofsellingorotherwisedispensing.  Itmaybeinferredfromcircumstancesindicatingacasualexchange  amongindividualsofasmallamountofacontrolledsubstanceor l substancesthatthecontrolledsubstanceorsubstancessoexchanged X  werepossessednotwiththepurposeofsellingorotherwise D! dispensinginviolationoftheprovisionsof3917417(a).Such 0"  inferencesshallbetransmittedtothejurybythetrialjudgescharge, #l! andthejurywillconsidersuchinferencesalongwiththenatureofthe $X" substancepossessedwhenaffixingthepenalty. $D # ` ` Tenn.CodeAnn.3917419(1997).Thesecondclause,orthe casualexchangeportion,ofthis &"% statuteisameliorativetothedefendant.Itshouldhavebeenchargedtothejuryeventhoughthe '#&  casualexchangeoffensewasnotchargedintheindictment. (#'    ` Therationaleforgivingthesection3917419chargedespitetheabsenceof casual |*%) exchangeasamodeofcommittingthemisdemeanoroffenseisthattheinferencesmandatedinthat h+&* sectionimplicateissuesofevidence,notstatutoryelements.Achargedoffenseoffelonypossession  withintenttosellmaybeproventhroughevidencethatshowsatransferorsaleofthecontrolled  substance,aswasdoneinthepresentcase.Inthatsituation,thejurymustbeinformedofthe  evidentiaryeffectofthisevidence;itmustbeacquaintedwiththestatutorilymandatedinferencethat t proofofthedefendantstransferofacontrolledsubstancesmightnotindicateafelonypossession, ` basedupon circumstancesindicatingacasualexchangeamongindividualsofasmallamountofa L  controlledsubstance. 8     ` Inmyview,thisinstructionalissuewasfairlyraisedbytheevidenceandwas  `  fundamentaltothedefenseandessentialtoafairtrial.SeePoev.State,212Tenn.413,420,370  L  S.W.2d488,491(1963).Thus,thedefendantwasentitledtotheinstruction,despitehisfailureto  8  requestitortoobjecttoitsomission.Compareid.withTenn.R.Crim.P.30(a)andStatev. $  Cravens,764S.W.2d754(Tenn.1989).      ` Acloserquestioniswhetherthefailuretoraisetheissueinthedefendantsmotion   fornewtrialconstitutesawaiverorwhethertheerrorshouldbenoticedasplainerror.Iconclude   thattheerrorhasaffectedthesubstantialrightsofthedefendantandconstitutesplainerror.See p Tenn.R.Crim.P.52(b).Inthepresentcase,thedefendantmaintainedthathispossessionofdrugs \ wastoservehispersonaldrughabitandthatanytransferstootherpersonswereincidentalorcasual H andnotactsoffelonydeliveryorsale.Significantly,therewasnoevidenceofa buyfrom 4 someoneinlawenforcement.Theevidenceoffelonypossessionresteduponthetestimony!and  p credibility!ofsomeoftherecipientsofthecontrolledsubstancesorwitnessestothetransfers.  \ Underthesecircumstances,itseemsvitalthatthejurybeinformedofthelegislativelymandated H inferenceaboutcasualexchange. 4    ` Thus,Iconcurintheleadopinionsresult.Iwouldreversetheconvictionspremised   uponpossessionofcontrolledsubstancesandremandforanewtrial.#^XX r #X X^     `     h     ___________________________________     `     h     JamesCurwoodWitt,Jr.,Judge l #^X t,#X X.^#^X -#X X.^