WPC CӠ?ΐ: DCT̿K+dh/uRSBHO8=k5M4ʴM$Ot}tQ;K;&،EsgznկSN^DbDcיi,d)@/^8rd6sPZ@| zsՑˡ4 >5N39FK# F U>Q % 0 UB 4  n U: f 4 "< w@^  U::U:t 0DU: D3 01HHH 0Dyy B AO)) 0D D/3 BbHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh<( 9Z &Courier RegularX($  7'CXXdXXd7    iUX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXi<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiuM%3|x/<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@,rAZ"Arial Regular \\RA' Legal\    DD !"{#$E%E&Ӏ XXI$XXXXXI$ -} @ 7XXd XXd7 @    iUX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXi   1    ݀TherewasoneoccasioninwhichthestateelicitedfromBillFreemanthatwhilethe  defendantwasathisfarm,thedefendantbegantalkingabouttheWaltonshooting,statingthattherewasjustcause.However,therewasnoobjectiontothistestimony.,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular(3$ !   X XXXDXX    Ad FILEDX XD  November19,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular2222'dxd((3,4$ !  7kXXdd7    iUX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXi   `   0  (#$  0   dC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !  7kXXdd7    iUX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXi  ݛXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T † : X XXX7   XXdXXd7&r*<,(j 8` `@E  ` 8ttxPX  rߛ&8 @ D x xINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @#DATNASHVILLE@@66-R   AUGUST1998SESSIONSTATEOFTENNESSEE,)   80 Ѐ    h   )    Appellee, h   )  No.01C019707CC00256       h   )       h   )  DicksonCounty   v.    h   )       h   )  %%HonorableAllenW.Wallace,Judge       h   )DENNISR.GILLILAND, h   )  (FelonyMurder) h`     h   ) Appellant. h   ) 4, @&D CONCURRINGOPINION @@DD/D   Iconcurwiththeresultsandmostofthereasoningintheleadopinion.However,Iquestionitsrelianceuponcompletionofthestorytoallowforevidenceofthedefendantsinvolvementintwodeathsonlyweeksbeforethevictimsdeath. Atthemotioninlimineonthisissue,thestatearguedthatevidenceoftheWaltonkillingshadtobepresentedinordertoshowthatthedefendantpossesseda.20gaugeshotgunloadedwitha.20gaugeslugandthathehadthemotivetokillthevictimforhismoney.Theproofrelatedtothefactthatwhilethedefendant,victimandothersplayedpoolanddrankbeerinthebasementofDonnieMurphyshouse,thedefendantandvictimbegandiscussingtheWaltonkillings. DonnieMurphytestifiedthatthevictimindicateddisbeliefaboutthedefendanthittingsomethingatseventyfiveyardsandaskedaboutthegunthedefendantwasusing.Thedefendantretrievedasingleshot,.20gaugeshotgunfromthetrunkofhiscar.Heopeneditandalive.20gaugeshellwasejected.Thevictimlookedattheslugandtheshotgun.Thedefendantandthevictimcontinuedtalking d9\28 abouttheshootingandthevictimsaidthathewouldhavedonethesamethingunderthecircumstances,thatis,ifsomeoneshotathim,hewouldshootback.Thevictimthensaidthathewouldbetthedefendanteverythinginthevictimspocketthathewoulddothesamething.Thevictimwithdrewawadofmoney,whichincluded,accordingtoDonnieMurphy,twoonehundreddollarbills.Thedefendantlookedatthemoneyandsaidthathewasnotimpressed. ThestatearguedthattheevidenceofthepriorkillingswassointertwinedwiththeproofregardingtheshotgunandthevictimsmoneythatitwasnecessarytoϜunderstand&&whythedefendantwasshowinghisshotgunandthevictimwasdisplayinghismoney.Italsoarguedthattherewasnoprejudicetothedefendantbecauseitwasevidentthatthedefendantactedinselfdefenseinthepriorshootings.Inadmittingthequestionedevidence,thetrialcourtstatedthatitwasrelevantintermsof paintingapictureregardingthedefendantdisplayinghisshotgunandseeingthevictimsmoney.Itacknowledgedthattheevidencewouldbeprejudicial,butdidnotbelievethatitwouldbeunfairlyso.Duringthetrial,thetrialcourtinstructedthejurythatitcouldnotconsiderevidenceoftheWaltonshootingforanypurposeotherthanitsusetopaintapictureofthedefendantbeinginpossessionofthegunandthedisclosureofthemoney. TheleadopinionstatesthatthereferencestotheWaltonkillings werenecessarytoexplainthecompletestoryofthesubjecthomicide,citingNeilP.Cohen,etal,TennesseeLawofEvidence,404.6,at169(3ded.1995).However,Idonot .', believethatthistreatisesupportstheadmissionofthepriorkillingsintoevidenceinthiscase. First,InotethatCohenacknowledgesthatthe fullstoryconceptissometimescalled resgestae,allowingfor proofofactsoccurringbeforeandafterthe 706 eventinissue.Cohen,404.11at184.Asanexample,thetreatisecitesStatev.  Gann,733S.W.2d113(Tenn.Crim.App.1987),inwhichpriorsexualrelations  betweentheadultdefendantandminorvictimwereintroducedto explainthecircumstancessurroundingtheactschargedintheindictment.Id.at115. l d  However,thecaseuponwhichGannisbased,Sandersonv.State,548   S.W.2d337(Tenn.Crim.App.1976),wasexpresslyoverruledinStatev.Rickman,876   S.W.2d824,829n.7(Tenn.1994).Asimportantly,though,theconceptofresgestaehasbeenthoroughlydiscreditedasaseparateexceptiontotherulethatotherbadactsoroffensesareinadmissible.SeeGibbsv.State,201Tenn.491,497___,300S.W.2d 4, 890,892(1957).Thisisbecausetheconcepthasbeenviewedasvagueandimprecise.EvenCohenhasoccasiontocriticizetheconcept. Lawyersandjudgesshouldneverstooptoutterthetermresgestae.Thetermdefiesdefinition,causesconfusion,andthwartseffortsatseriousanalysis.Cohen,803(2).1at532.    h    Iviewtheconceptofthe fullstory,particularlyasusedinthepresentcase,tosufferfromthesameproblemsrelativetoresgestae.Cohenexpressesasimilarconcern:  8   Theeasyelasticityofthislabelinvariablyseemstoswallowtheruleprohibitingothercrimesevidencesoastoshowcriminalpropensity.Crimesintroducedtotellthe completestorywillrarelybeprobativeofafactinissueinthetrialofthecrimechargedand,therefore,rarelyjustifytheprejudicecreatedbytheiradmission.Forthisreason,crimesadmittedaspartofthe sametransactionshouldbelimitedtothosesoinextricablyconnectedintime,place,ormannerthatthejurywouldbeunabletocomprehendtheessentialnatureofthechargedcrimewithouthearingevidenceofthe othercrime.  x x   ӜCohen,TennesseeLawofEvidence  "!ss!"!!""!!#404.11#,  at184.Abidingbysuchalimitation,theevidenceoftheWalton 3,1 killingswasunnecessaryforthejurysunderstandingoftheessentialnatureofthechargedoffense.Moreover,therelevanceofthedefendantpossessingagunandammunitionsimilartothoseusedinthemurderandofthedefendantseeing :   :   :   :   :   :  the :   :   :  victim r8j17  :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :   :  in# :  # :   :   :   :   :  possessionofa# :  #" :  "  :    :   :   :  substantialamountofcashwouldnotdiminishintheleastbyexcludingtheWaltonkillingsfromtheevidence.Thatis,itwouldmakenodifferenceiftheevidencerelatedtothevictimanddefendanttalkingabouthittingatargetfromseventyfiveyardsinsteadoftokillingaperson. Ultimately,though,Idonotbelievethattheadmissionoftheevidencemoreprobablythannotaffectedtheresult.SeeT.R.A.P.36(b).Thereferencestothe   killingswereminimalinrelationtotheotherproofinthefivedaysofevidencepresentedattrial.Thejurywasadvisedbytheprosecutorintheopeningstatementthattheshootingwasinselfdefense.TherearefewreferencestotheWaltonshooting$$$incident$intheevidenceand,incontext,thefocuswasonthedefendantsdisplayofhisshotgunandshotgunslugs. 0%  1      כThetrialcourtinstructedthejuryduringthetrialthattheincidentcould  onlybeconsideredrelativetotheweaponandthevictimsmoney.Also,theevidenceagainstthedefendantissufficientlystrongthatIamconfidentthattheWaltonshootingevidencewasimmaterialtothejurysverdict.Therefore,Iagreethattheconvictionshouldbeaffirmed.    h      p _____________________________    h      p JosephM.Tipton,Judge