ÿWPCa [ÀWØwرƒ5…c¡düŠŠ/bµ«ÂÇB’V§GÄæ_ÂEt3ù¯Ò+ÿ_BTçöRÞ¨_Q¯[NzËP¶švˆ}èÿ#˜.ãŒôöL´Â¯¿ r7ÁªDoÖhVN UXKVgæˆñØàúOäšÉ/‚”FLè–àz0ػټÕ̜ôv×äCÌJk}ŒÙs°á”ꮹcŽ*å‘6'1¤ Óež n¿ú G‚}»ÕjwX‡÷m`ÞÂŽØüv—6L;psÇ&P¨jŸÎgÌöZIŒÃcNDºÃ“ÇŒ¾¾—ÀXÀ>µ/ÛmäÉñ‰+>ƒ›ËN;#[äÀ+ì’}®• nÌœŽ–Vµº³£ëxCK×;ˆ&ÙÓø!.Þ}Ðy‰¹{•Îuö¤ðc=à¾å¦ÿïØ[ ë‹ TO‘Ç0ÛC¢OùM·c5q…ª4Ût–ÓfIïCµƒ¥DOÎu×S†B`òúZa[¾(,Êì±i¶"âóÛT¿g,Ú3¦œ1ýâde†&ýíã —îDä¤ÒiÓîz=Fqú´ôW*sí¼$Ì¿HŸ#¸&Ê—Hèt‚LÊ„æ .o!õ-P"…UNF %” 0(š U: w@ü 4< P 0ˆ_ Cç 0D* -n é› „ U:Œ žÆ U:dŠžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžž B(((( D3EEE 0Dxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx AO¼Æ   0DÑ D/ BD(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular )E*P+P,E-.E/0E12Ó€uM%3|x;(8(2¢…$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÓ XÓÓ XÓà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó 9Ý ƒ¢…$ÝÓ XÓÓ XÓà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€The€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€premeditated€first€degree€murderÐ ° Ðand€felony€murder.€€The€trial€court€vacated€the€premeditated€first€degree€murderÏconviction,€finding€the€evidence€insufficient.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó #Ñ#€Xÿÿd#Ñ ßÔ€XɶXXXÔÔ€(KXXɶÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XɶX(KÔÐ  ÐÌNovember€19,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó, øð AZ"Arial Regular ”Ý ƒ¢…$ÝÓ XÓÓ XÓà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€Raymond€D.€Wilson€was€the€operator€on€duty€at€a€lock€and€dam€eightÐ ° Ð(8)€miles€from€the€location€where€the€defendant€claims€to€have€spent€the€eveningÏafter€leaving€the€Murphy€home.€€Wilson€reported€no€river€traffic€in€the€time€frameÏthe€defendant€claimed€to€have€seen€the€three€(3)€barges.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular €Ý ƒ¢…$ÝÓ XÓÓ XÓà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€The€defendant€called€as€one€of€his€witnesses€the€prosecuting€attorneyÐ ° Ðwho€investigated€the€Walton€shootings.€€The€prosecutor€confirmed€the€grand€juryÏdetermination€that€the€homicides€were€justifiable,€and€that€this€determinationÏð ðreaffirmed€[his]€own€thoughts.ðð d&&&&'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ2ñ›ñ2ñÒ°ÒÔ€XɶXXXÔÓ  ÓÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€5cXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  Ññ2ñßr€ *<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` 8ttxP°ð  rß›ñ2ñà@˜ ˜ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° ÐÌà@FF'àAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌà@ŸŸ$àAUGUST€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ó óà@÷÷-à)ˆÐ  ` Ðà@÷÷-à)ˆà p àò òNO.€01C01„9707„CC„00256ó óÐ ü L  Ðà ` àAppellee,à@÷÷-à)ˆÐ è 8  Ðà@÷÷-à)ˆà p àò òDICKSON€COUNTYó óÐ Î  Ðò òVS.ó óà@÷÷-à)ˆÐ º  Ðà@÷÷-à)ˆà p àò òHON.€ALLEN€W.€WALLACE,Ð ¦ö  ÐDENNIS€R.€GILLILAND,ó óà@÷÷-à)ˆà p àò òJUDGEó óÐ ’â  Ðà@÷÷-à)ˆÌà ` àAppellant.à@÷÷-à)ˆà p à(Felony€Murder)Ð d´ ÐÌÌÌÒ(ä „¸ @(#(#(Òò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:Ð üL ÐÌGUY€T.€WILKINSONÌó óDistrict€Public€DefenderÐ À Ð24th€Judicial€DistrictÌ117€North€Forrest€AvenueÌP.O.€Box€663ÌCamden,€Tennessee€38320ÌÌò òVICKI€S.€SNYDERÐ $t Ðó óAssistant€Dist.€Public€DefenderÐ  ` Ð24th€Judicial€DistrictÌÐ Ü!,  Ðò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð üL  ÐÌJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPó óÐ Ô$" ÐAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌò òJOHN€P.€CAULEYó óÐ ŒÜ% ÐAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌ425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌò òDAN€M.€ALSOBROOKSó óÐ ö F+ ÐDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌò òJAKE€LOCKERTÐ ®#þ. ÐSUZANNE€M.€LOCKERTó óÐ š$ê/ ÐAssistant€Dist.€Attorneys€GeneralÌCourt€Square,€P.O.€Box€580ÌCharlotte,€TN€37036„0580Ð R'¢"2 ÐÒ(ä „¸ @ìì(ÒÌÌÌÌÌÌò òOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ ‚.Ò)8 ÐÌÌÌCONVICTION€AFFIRMED;ÌREMANDED€FOR€RESENTENCINGÌÌÌÌJOE€G.€RILEY,ÌJUDGEÐ  º7 3B ÐÓ  ÓÓÓÑ€ úÑOPINIONÌÓ  Óó óÌà ` àThe€defendant,€Dennis€R.€Gilliland,€appeals€as€of€right€his€conviction€forÏfelony€murder€by€a€Dickson€County€jury.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€received€a€sentence€of€life€withoutÐ  p Ðthe€possibility€of€parole.€€The€defendant€raises€the€following€issues€on€appeal:ÌÓÓÌÓ °ÓÓ °Ó(1)€€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€testimonyÏregarding€the€defendant's€involvement€in€two€(2)Ïhomicides€three€(3)€weeks€before€the€instant€offense;ÌÌ(2)€€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€into€evidenceÏcurrency€found€outside€the€Dickson€County€policeÏstation;ÌÌ(3)€€the€defendant€was€unfairly€prejudiced€when€heÏappeared€before€the€jury€in€handcuffs;ÌÌ(4)€€the€state€did€not€prove€venue€by€a€preponderanceÏof€the€evidence;ÌÌ(5)€€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€into€evidenceÏcertain€personal€effects€of€the€victim€without€requiringÏa€proper€chain€of€custody;ÌÌ(6)€€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€justify€the€guiltyÏverdict;ÌÌ(7)€€the€trial€court€erred€by€ruling€that€the€state'sÏwithdrawal€of€its€intent€to€seek€the€death€penalty€didÏnot€include€a€withdrawal€of€its€intent€to€seek€lifeÏwithout€parole;ÌÌ(8)€€the€trial€court€considered€improper€factors€inÏsentencing€the€defendant€to€life€without€parole;€andÌÌ(9)€€newly€discovered€evidence€warrants€a€new€trial.ÌÓÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÌThe€defendantððs€conviction€is€affirmed,€but€the€case€is€remanded€forÏresentencing.ÌÓ  Óò òòòI.Ð ö.F*/ Ðó óóóÓ  ÓÌà ` àOn€July€19,€1995,€the€defendant€asked€his€mother€for€gas€money.€€SheÏfirst€offered€$10,€but€the€defendant€replied€he€needed€more€so€she€gave€himÐ f4¶/5 ÐÑ úÑÑ7€5cXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  Ññ2ñÑ úÑÑ7€5cXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  ÑÑ úÑÑ7€5cXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  ÑÑ úÑÑ7€5cXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  ÑÑ úÑÑ7€uDXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  Ññ2ñ$20.€€The€defendant€arrived€at€a€local€bar€called€ð ðDaisy€Dukesðð€at€approximatelyÐ ° Ð9:30€p.m.€that€evening.€€There€he€joined€Ronnie€Murphy.ÌÌà ` àAfter€spending€approximately€three€(3)€hours€in€the€bar,€the€defendantÏand€Murphy€left.€€Murphy€testified€that€the€defendant€encountered€Eddie€ChristyÏin€the€parking€lot€of€the€bar.€€The€defendant€told€Christy€about€a€shooting€severalÏweeks€earlier€wherein€the€defendant€fired€.20€gauge€shotgun€slugs€at€two€(2)Ïbrothers€named€Walton.€€Both€brothers€were€killed.€€The€grand€jury€declined€toÏindict€the€defendant,€concluding€the€homicides€were€justifiable.€€Murphy€testifiedÏthat€the€defendant€produced€a€.20€gauge€single„shot€shotgun€from€his€truck€toÏshow€Christy€.€€Murphy€observed€a€box€of€slug€ammunition€on€the€front€seat€ofÏthe€defendantððs€truck€at€that€time.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€followed€Murphy€to€Murphyððs€house€where€Murphy€left€hisÏtruck.€€They€proceeded€in€the€defendantððs€truck€to€a€convenience€store€to€buyÏbeer,€arriving€sometime€after€midnight.€€There€was€a€discussion€as€to€whetherÏthey€had€enough€money€to€purchase€the€beer.€€The€beer€was€ultimatelyÏpurchased€on€the€credit€ticket€of€the€defendantððs€father.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€and€Ronnie€Murphy€drove€to€Donnie€Murphyððs€house.€ÏDonnie€Murphy€was€not€at€home.€€Ronnie€Murphy€and€the€defendant€went€to€theÏbasement€to€play€pool€and€drink€beer.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Donnie€Murphy€andÏthe€victim,€Bobby€Bush,€arrived€at€the€house.ÌÌà ` àDonnie€and€Ronnie€Murphy,€the€defendant,€the€victim€and€a€personÏnamed€Michael€Heath€played€pool€and€drank€beer€in€the€basement.€€RonnieÏMurphy€and€Michael€Heath€eventually€left,€leaving€the€defendant€with€DonnieÏMurphy€and€the€victim.€€The€victim€began€discussing€the€prior€shootings€with€theÏdefendant.€€Donnie€Murphy€testified€that€the€victim€did€not€believe€theÏdefendantððs€statement€that€he€shot€the€Walton€brothers€with€.20€gauge€shotgunÐ Ì84: Ðslugs€from€a€distance€of€seventy„five€(75)€yards.€€The€defendant€then€retrieved€aÏ.20€gauge€shotgun€from€his€truck.€€When€the€defendant€opened€the€breech,€aÏ.20€gauge€slug€shell€was€ejected€onto€the€floor.ÌÌà ` àThe€victim€then€pulled€from€his€pocket€at€least€two€(2)€$100€bills€andÏseveral€other€bills,€stating€that€he€would€bet€all€of€the€money€that€he€too€wouldÏhave€shot€the€brothers€if€faced€with€the€same€situation.€€The€defendant€looked€atÏthe€victimððs€money€and€stated€that€he€was€not€impressed.€€The€victim€respondedÏthat€he€was€not€attempting€to€impress€the€defendant.ÌÌà ` àAround€3:20€a.m.,€the€victim€said€he€was€going€to€drive€home.€€DonnieÏMurphy€attempted€to€dissuade€the€victim€from€doing€so,€as€he€had€consumedÏnumerous€beers€and€had€a€previous€DUI€conviction.€€The€victim€persisted€andÏdeparted,€stating€that€he€planned€to€travel€home€by€a€route€not€frequented€by€theÏpolice.€€The€defendant€left€shortly€after€the€victim,€stating€he€would€drive€by€theÏvictimððs€house€to€make€sure€that€he€arrived€safely.€€He€took€a€cooler€containingÏthe€groupððs€remaining€beer.ÌÌà ` àBeverly€Sue€Heath€was€a€neighbor€of€the€victim.€€At€approximately€4:10Ïa.m.€on€the€morning€in€question€she€saw€a€vehicle€driving€down€the€road€in€frontÏof€her€house€ð ðthrowing€sparksðð€and€sounding€as€if€it€had€a€flat€tire.ÌÌà ` àVera€Bush,€the€victimððs€mother,€testified€that€she€awoke€briefly€at€3:00Ïa.m.€that€morning€and€noticed€her€son€was€not€at€home.€€She€woke€again€at€4:45Ïand€noticed€her€sonððs€wrecked€truck€parked€in€an€unusual€place.€€The€victim€hadÏan€elaborate€method€of€parking€his€truck€as€it€did€not€have€an€operable€reverseÏgear.€€The€victim€was€neither€in€the€truck€nor€the€house.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€ran€out€of€gas€that€morning€around€5:30.€€He€approachedÏOda€Lovinsðð€house€and€asked€him€for€a€ride€to€a€gas€station.€€The€defendantÐ Ì84: Ðpumped€$5€worth€of€gas€in€a€can€and€offered€to€tip€Lovins€$10€for€his€effort.€ÏLovins€observed€a€ð ðfairly€good€wad€of€billsðð€in€the€defendantððs€billfold.€€AfterÏfueling€his€truck€from€the€can,€the€defendant€drove€back€to€the€station€andÏpurchased€gasoline€for€which€he€paid€$21€in€cash.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€then€drove€to€the€farm€of€Bill€Freeman.€€Freeman€statedÏthat€he€had€known€the€defendant€for€only€eighteen€(18)€months€and€was€not€sureÏwhy€the€defendant€came€by€his€house€that€morning.€€The€defendant€beganÏtalking€about€the€Walton€homicides.€€Later€that€day€Freeman€discovered€a€coolerÏof€beer€on€his€truck,€and€a€farmhand€related€that€he€saw€a€truck€similar€to€theÏdefendantððs€driving€away€from€the€farm.ÌÌà ` àFrom€the€Freeman€farm,€the€defendant€proceeded€to€Greenððs€MarketÏwhere€he€purchased€a€case€of€beer€with€$20€cash.€€He€then€drove€to€ClarksvilleÏwhere€he€ate€breakfast€at€a€pancake€restaurant€and€rented€a€room€at€the€QualityÏInn.€€The€defendant€paid€$44€in€cash€for€the€room,€rented€a€movie€for€$7,€andÏtipped€the€maid€$5€for€delivering€the€movie€to€the€room.ÌÌà ` àA€mail€carrier€discovered€the€victimððs€body€lying€along€a€road€in€ruralÏHouston€County€around€10:30€that€morning.€€The€victim,€who€had€a€large€sum€ofÏcurrency€the€previous€evening,€had€only€change€in€his€pocket€when€found.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€whereabouts€for€the€rest€of€the€day€are€disputed.€€TheÏdefendant€claimed€to€have€visited€a€riverfront€park€after€leaving€the€pancakeÏrestaurant,€then€to€have€traveled€back€to€the€ð ðold€Lock€B€bottomsðð€where€heÏremained€until€that€evening€when€he€presented€himself€at€the€Dickson€CountyÏSheriffððs€office.€€The€state€presented€evidence€of€the€defendantððs€stay€at€theÏQuality€Inn€in€Clarksville.ÌÌà ` àLieutenant€Randy€Starkey€with€the€Dickson€County€Sheriffððs€OfficeÐ Ì84: Ðtestified€that€he€was€at€the€Sheriffððs€Station€No.€2€on€the€evening€of€July€20,Ï1995,€when€the€defendant€arrived€at€the€station€and€engaged€him€inÏconversation.€€Starkey€stated€that€the€defendant€had€been€to€the€station€severalÏtimes€as€a€result€of€the€investigation€of€the€Walton€homicides.€€Thus,€when€theÏdefendant€mentioned€drinking€beer€with€the€victim€at€the€Murphy€residence€theÏprevious€night,€€Starkey€became€interested.€€He€asked€the€defendant€what€theÏdefendant€knew€about€the€victim.€€The€defendant€asked€if€the€victim€had€gottenÏinto€some€trouble.€€Starkey€then€related€the€story€of€the€victim€being€foundÏmurdered€that€morning.ÌÌà ` àInvestigator€Ted€Tarpley€and€TBI€Agent€Steve€Watkins€testified€that€theyÏwere€advised€by€the€victimððs€family€shortly€after€beginning€their€investigation€thatÏthe€defendant€should€be€considered€as€a€potential€suspect.€€They€soon€learnedÏthe€defendant€was€already€at€the€Sheriffððs€Station€No.€2.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€related€his€version€of€the€previous€eveningððs€events€to€theÏofficers.€€The€defendant€neglected€to€tell€the€officers€about€running€out€of€gas,Ïbuying€beer€and€renting€a€motel€room€that€morning.€€The€defendant€told€theÏofficers€he€spent€the€night€watching€three€(3)€barges€at€the€river€bottoms.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€TheÐ %X $ Ðdefendant€related€that€he€had€only€$5€in€his€possession€at€that€time.€€The€factÏthat€the€defendant€was€carrying€a€shotgun€was€discovered€in€normalÏconversation.€€Agent€Watkins€went€to€the€defendantððs€truck€and€seized€aÏbreeched,€unloaded€.20€gauge€shotgun.€€Watkins€also€noticed€that€the€interior€ofÏthe€truck€appeared€to€have€been€washed€recently.€€Water€was€pooled€in€theÏfloorboard,€and€the€truck€appeared€cleaner€than€would€be€expected€after€drivingÏon€gravel€roads.€€The€bed€was€noticeably€dirtier€than€the€rest€of€the€truck.ÌÐ h3¸.4 Ðà ` àDuring€initial€questioning€of€the€defendant,€Agent€Watkins€received€aÏtelephone€call€that€he€should€investigate€the€Liberty€Church€Cemetery€as€aÏsource€of€possible€leads€in€the€victimððs€death.€€The€defendant€was€asked€toÏremain€voluntarily€at€the€station€while€officers€investigated€the€cemetery.€€OfficerÏC.J.€Butts€testified€that€during€this€time€the€defendant€walked€freely€in€and€out€ofÏthe€station;€and,€although€he€was€usually€accompanied,€the€defendant€did€haveÏan€opportunity€to€be€alone€outside€of€the€station€that€evening.€ÌÌà ` àEarlier€in€the€day,€Liberty€Church€Cemetery€was€reported€to€authorities€asÏa€site€of€vandalism.€€The€cemetery€is€located€in€Dickson€County,€a€short€distanceÏfrom€the€victimððs€residence.€€Closer€inspection€revealed€a€vehicle€had€driven€intoÏthe€cemetery€and€knocked€over€four€or€five€headstones.€€It€was€later€determinedÏthat€the€victimððs€truck€had€knocked€the€stones€over,€coming€to€rest€on€one€ofÏthem.€€A€wider€set€of€tracks€was€also€detected€at€the€scene.€€It€was€theorized€byÏthe€state€that€a€larger€vehicle€pulled€the€smaller€vehicle€out€of€the€cemetery.€ÏSubsequently,€TBI€agents€were€able€to€show€paint€on€the€bumper€of€theÏdefendantððs€truck€consistent€with€paint€from€the€victimððs€truck.ÌÌà ` àWhen€the€officers€returned€to€the€station,€the€defendant€was€read€hisÏrights€and€his€truck€was€formally€seized.€€The€defendant€maintained€his€versionÏof€events€as€previously€related€to€the€officers.€€During€questioning,€the€defendantÏstated€that€he€had€never€been€inside€the€victimððs€truck,€nor€had€the€victim€been€inÏhis.€€The€defendant€was€arrested€for€the€victimððs€murder.ÌÌà ` àThe€next€day€two€sets€of€currency€were€found€on€the€grounds€of€SheriffððsÏStation€No.€2.€€The€first,€$35,€was€folded€and€wet€and€found€near€a€downspout.€ÏThe€second€set,€$120,€was€found€shortly€thereafter€and€was€dry.ÌÌà ` àAt€trial,€the€state€presented€forensic€evidence€that€the€victim€died€as€aÏresult€of€a€.20€gauge€shotgun€slug€being€fired€into€his€head€from€a€distance€ofÐ Ì84: Ðless€than€thirty„six€(36)€inches.€€TBI€agents€testified€as€experts€about€bloodÏtraces€removed€from€the€defendantððs€truck.€€A€forensic€scientist,€established€asÏan€expert€in€DNA€testing,€found€the€blood€to€be€consistent€with€the€victimððs€blood.€ÏThe€probability€of€randomly€selecting€another€Caucasian,€unrelated€to€the€victimÏand€having€the€same€DNA€profile€as€the€blood€found€in€the€defendantððs€truck,Ïwas€one€in€286,000.ÌÌÓ  Óò òòòII.Ð D”  ÐÓ  Óó óóóÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€first€issue€alleges€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€the€juryÏbeing€allowed€to€hear€that€he€was€involved€in€two€homicides€in€the€weeks€prior€toÏthe€victimððs€death.€€The€defendant€specifically€alleges€the€stateððs€sole€purpose€ofÏintroducing€evidence€of€these€homicides€was€to€show€the€jury€that€he€had€aÏpropensity€to€kill.ÌÌà ` àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€regarding€the€admission€of€this€evidence€isÏgoverned€firstly€by€the€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€401.€€Rule€401€definesÏrelevant€evidence€as€evidence€having€ð ðany€tendency€to€make€the€existence€ofÏany€fact€that€is€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probableÏor€less€probable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence.ððÌÌà ` àTennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€403€provides€that€evidence,€althoughÏrelevant,€may€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€is€substantially€outweighed€byÏthe€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.ÌÌà ` àThe€admissibility€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€may€not€be€admitted€toÏshow€the€character€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€with€theÏcharacter€trait.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b).€€In€other€words,€the€state€could€notÏintroduce€the€prior€homicides€for€the€purpose€of€showing€the€defendant€had€aÏpredisposition€to€kill.€€Evidence€is€admissible€under€Rule€404(b)€under€theÐ Ø8(4: Ðfollowing€conditions:ÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓÓÌ(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearingÏoutside€the€juryððs€presence;ÌÌ(2)€The€court€must€determine€that€a€material€issueÏexists€other€than€the€conduct€conforming€with€aÏcharacter€trait€and€must€upon€request€state€on€theÏrecord€the€material€issue,€the€ruling,€and€the€reasonsÏfor€admitting€the€evidence;€andÌÌ(3)€The€court€must€exclude€the€evidence€if€itsÏprobative€value€is€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfairÏprejudice.ÌÌÓÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓTenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b)(1)„(3).ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€conducted€a€pre„trial€hearing€and€concluded€the€priorÏhomicides€were€material€to€giving€the€jury€a€complete€picture€of€the€interactionÏbetween€the€defendant€and€the€victim€shortly€before€the€victimððs€death.€€The€trialÏcourt€further€ruled€that€there€was€little,€if€any,€unfair€prejudice€to€the€defendant€byÏadmitting€the€evidenceÌÌà ` àOnly€in€an€exceptional€case€will€evidence€of€another€crime,€wrong€or€badÏact€be€relevant€to€any€issue€other€than€the€defendantððs€character.€€òòState€v.Ð <#Œ" ÐDrinkardóó,€909€S.W.2d€13,€16€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€The€evidence€may€beÐ %X $ Ðadmissible€to€prove€issues€such€as€motive,€intent,€knowledge,€absence€ofÏmistake€or€accident,€common€scheme€or€plan,€identity,€completion€of€the€story,Ïopportunity€and€preparation.€€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ððÐ l*¼%* Ð404.6€(3d€ed.€1995).ÌÌà ` àThe€homicides€related€the€reason€for€the€confrontation€between€theÏdefendant€and€the€victim€in€the€basement€of€the€Murphy€residence.€€The€victimÏscoffed€at€the€defendantððs€claim€to€have€shot€two€(2)€men€at€a€distance€ofÏseventy„five€(75)€yards€with€a€.20€gauge€slugs.€€The€victim€flashed€a€largeÏamount€of€cash€and€bet€that€he€would€have€done€the€same€thing.€€From€otherÏwitnesses,€the€jury€was€apprised€of€the€defendantððs€obsession€with€the€priorÐ Ð8 4: Ðhomicides.€€The€evidence€was€not€admitted€to€show€a€character€trait€of€theÏdefendant€or€to€prove€conduct€in€conformity€with€a€character€trait.€€Furthermore,Ïthere€was€never€an€attempt€by€the€state€to€show€that€the€prior€shootings€wereÏcrimes€or€wrongs.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€the€crucial€inquiry€becomes€whether€the€probativeÐ  d Ðvalue€of€this€evidence€is€outweighed€by€its€prejudicial€effect.ÌÌà ` àWe€concede€that,€under€normal€circumstances,€evidence€of€priorÏhomicides€would€be€inadmissible.€€However,€the€facts€of€this€case€are€unique.€ÏThe€defendantððs€repeated€references€to€the€Walton€homicides€before€and€afterÏthis€murder€were€necessary€to€explain€the€complete€story€of€the€subjectÏhomicide.€€Furthermore,€the€victim€and€the€Walton€brothers€were€all€killed€withÏ.20€gauge€slugs.€€Moreover,€the€jury€was€aware€the€prior€homicides€were€ruledÏjustifiable.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€emphasized€to€the€jury€that€the€evidence€was€to€be€usedÏonly€for€the€limited€purpose€of€ð ðpaint[ing]€a€picture.ðð€€The€jury€is€presumed€toÏhave€followed€the€trial€courtððs€instructions.€€òòState€v.€Butleróó,€880€S.W.2d€395,€399Ð p!À  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).ÌÌà ` àThe€probative€value€of€this€evidence€was€not€outweighed€by€its€prejudicialÏeffect.€€We€further€conclude€that€even€if€the€admission€of€evidence€of€the€priorÏhomicides€was€error,€it€was€harmless€in€light€of€the€other€evidence€against€theÏdefendant.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b).ÌÌà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÐ h3¸.4 ЇÓ  Óò òòòIII.Ð ° Ðóóó óÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€second€issue€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€admittingÏevidence€of€the€$155€found€on€the€grounds€of€the€Sheriffððs€department€the€dayÏafter€the€defendant€was€arrested.€€Officers€initially€found€$35€lying€on€the€groundÏnear€a€downspout.€€The€bills€were€damp€and€folded.€€Soon€thereafter,€$120€wasÏfound€a€short€distance€from€the€initial€discovery.€€Those€bills€were€dry€andÏunfolded.€€The€state€theorized€the€money€was€the€victimððs,€and€the€defendantÏdiscarded€it€while€outside€the€station€between€interviews.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€pointed€out€that€the€station€grounds€were€open€to€theÏpublic,€and€the€money€could€have€been€lost€by€any€number€of€people.€€TheÏresulting€nexus,€he€claims,€is€so€remote€as€to€constitute€unfair€prejudice.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€held€a€hearing€outside€the€presence€of€the€jury€to€determineÏthe€admissibility€of€the€evidence.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€evidence€wasÏrelevant€and€not€unfairly€prejudicial.€€The€standard€of€review€for€a€trial€courtððsÏdecision€of€relevancy€is€an€abuse€of€discretion€standard.€€òòState€v.€DuBoseóó,€953Ð H#˜" ÐS.W.2d€649,€652€(Tenn.€1997).€€We€conclude€there€was€no€abuse€of€discretionÏby€the€trial€court€in€admitting€this€evidence.€€It€was€for€the€jury€to€determine€theÏamount€of€weight€to€be€given€the€evidence.Ì€Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÓ  Óò òòòIV.Ð Ü/,+0 Ðó óóóÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€third€issue€for€appeal€alleges€that€he€suffered€prejudiceÏby€appearing€before€the€jury€on€three€occasions€while€handcuffed.€€The€incidentsÏapparently€occurred€in€the€basement€when€the€defendant€and€the€jury€wereÏbeing€brought€into€the€building€at€the€same€time.€€The€defendantððs€counselÐ ä844: Ðcomplained€to€the€trial€court€twice€in€chambers,€then€objected€on€the€record€toÏthe€occurrences.ÌÌà ` àCriminal€defendants€are€required€to€be€afforded€the€physical€indicia€ofÏinnocence.€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€639€S.W.2d€677,€681€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982).€€ThisÐ à 0 Ðprecludes€a€criminal€defendant€appearing€before€the€jury€in€shackles.€€òòId.óó€Ð ¬ ü  ÐInadvertent€viewing€of€a€criminal€defendant€in€restraints€can,€however,€be€curedÏby€instructions€and€inquiries€of€the€trial€court.€€òòId.óóÐ D”  ÐÌà ` àThis€Court€is€unable€to€review€the€first€two€alleged€incidents.€€The€recordÏonly€reflects€that€defense€counsel€had€an€in„chambers€conference€with€the€trialÏjudge.€€This€conference€is€not€in€the€record.ÌÌà ` àNevertheless,€the€trial€court€admonished€a€deputy€present€to€tell€theÏSheriff€that€the€practice€must€stop.€€It€apparently€did.€€The€trial€courtÏsubsequently€instructed€the€jury€to€disregard€any€glimpses€of€the€defendant€inÏrestraints€in€their€determinations€of€guilt€or€innocence.€€The€jury€was€polled€as€toÏtheir€ability€to€abide€by€the€trial€courtððs€instruction.€€All€jurors€respondedÏaffirmatively.€€Jurors€are€presumed€to€follow€the€instructions€of€the€trial€court.€ÏòòButleróó,€880€S.W.2d€at€399.Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÓ  Óò òòòV.Ð .T). Ðó óóóÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€fourth€issue€alleges€that€the€state€failed€to€sufficientlyÏprove€venue.€€The€defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€shows€the€victim€wasÏkilled€where€the€body€was€discovered€in€Houston€County.€€The€defendant€furtherÏcontends€that€intent€to€rob€the€victim€was€not€proven,€thereby€removing€aÏnecessary€element€of€felony€murder.Ð Ø8(4: Їà ` àà ¸ àAn€accused€is€entitled€to€a€trial€in€the€county€in€which€the€offenseÏwas€committed.€€òòState€v.€Marburyóó,€908€S.W.2d€405,€407€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð |Ì Ð1995);€òòState€v.€Bloodsawóó,€746€S.W.2d€722,€723€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€TheÐ H˜ Ðburden€is€on€the€state€to€prove€that€the€offense€was€committed€in€the€countyÏspecified€in€the€indictment.€€òòMarburyóó,€908€S.W.2d€at€407;€òòBloodsawóó,746€S.W.2dÐ à 0 Ðat€724.€€If€one€or€more€elements€of€an€offense€are€committed€in€one€county€andÏone€or€more€elements€in€another,€the€offense€may€be€prosecuted€in€eitherÏcounty.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€18(b).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€39„11„201(e)€provides€thatÏthe€state€must€prove€venue€"by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence."€€The€factualÏinformation€must€be€sufficient€to€cause€the€fact€finder€to€believe€that€anÏallegation€is€probably€true.€€For€the€evidence€to€preponderate,€it€must€have€theÏgreater€convincing€effect€in€the€fact€finders'€belief.€€òòSee€óóòòMarburyóó,€908€S.W.2d€atÐ tÄ Ð408.€€Venue€may€be€shown€by€either€direct€or€circumstantial€evidence.€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ D” Ðv.€Hutchersonóó,€790€S.W.2d€532,€533€(Tenn.€1990).€€A€jury€is€entitled€to€draw€aÐ d Ðreasonable€inference€as€to€venue€from€proven€facts.€€òòState€v.€Reedóó,€845€S.W.2dÐ à0 Ð234,€238€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).ÌÌà ` àThe€state€proved€that€the€victimððs€truck€was€wrecked€in€Dickson€CountyÏand€driven€to€his€motherððs€house.€€The€victimððs€crushed€watch,€a€lighter,€and€aÏpack€of€cigarettes€were€found€in€the€Liberty€Church€Cemetery€.€€The€jury€couldÏreasonably€infer€that€the€robbery€took€place€there.€€The€murdered€victim€wasÏfound€in€Houston€County€missing€a€large€sum€of€cash€he€had€the€night€before.€ÏThe€state€presented€sufficient€circumstantial€evidence€that€the€victim€wasÏrobbed,€an€element€of€the€felony€murder,€in€Dickson€County,€making€venueÏproper€in€that€county.ÌÌà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÓ  Óò òòòÌÌÐ ì8<4: ÐVI.Ìóóó óÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€fifth€issue€asserts€the€trial€court€erred€in€admittingÏevidence€consisting€of€a€cap,€change,€keys,€and€a€pack€of€cigarettes€withoutÏestablishing€a€proper€chain€of€custody.€€The€defendant€contends€the€state€did€notÏcall€the€officer€responsible€for€the€collection€and€storage€of€the€evidence.ÌÌà ` àIn€order€to€admit€physical€evidence,€the€party€offering€the€evidence€mustÏeither€introduce€a€witness€who€is€able€to€identify€the€evidence€or€must€establishÏan€unbroken€chain€of€custody.€€òòState€v.€Hollomanóó,€835€S.W.2d€42,€46€(Tenn.Ð è8 ÐCrim.€App.€1992).€€Whether€the€required€chain€of€custody€has€been€sufficientlyÏestablished€to€justify€the€admission€of€evidence€is€a€matter€committed€to€theÏsound€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€and€the€court's€determination€will€not€beÏoverturned€in€the€absence€of€a€clearly€mistaken€exercise€of€that€discretion.€€òòId.óó€Ð h ÐThe€identity€of€tangible€evidence€need€not€be€proven€beyond€all€possibility€ofÏdoubt,€and€all€possibility€of€tampering€need€not€be€excluded.€€The€circumstancesÏmust€establish€a€reasonable€assurance€of€the€identity€of€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.Ð |!Ì  ÐKilburnóó,€782€S.W.2d€199,€203€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989).Ð H#˜" ÐÌà ` àThe€trial€court€found,€after€a€hearing€out€of€the€presence€of€the€jury,€thatÏAgent€Watkins€was€sufficiently€able€to€identify€the€evidence€for€its€admission.€ÏThe€defendant€makes€no€argument€to€the€contrary.€€The€identity€of€the€evidenceÏwas€sufficiently€established.ÌÌà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÓ  Óò òòòVII.Ð t3Ä.4 Ðó óóóÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendantððs€next€issue€is€a€challenge€to€the€sufficiency€of€theÏevidence.€€He€alleges€the€state€failed€to€prove€his€identity€as€the€perpetrator€andÐ ä844: Ðfailed€to€prove€the€underlying€felony€of€robbery€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ÌÌÔ‡XÉšXXXÉšÔà ` àIn€Tennessee,€whether€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€for€acquittal€purposesÐ H˜ Ðis€being€considered€by€the€trial€court€upon€motion€or€by€an€appellate€court€uponÏreview,€the€standard€to€apply€is€the€same.€€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€916€S.W.2d€471,€473Ð à 0 Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€That€standard€is€"whether,€after€viewing€the€evidenceÏin€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€haveÏfound€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòJacksonÐ D”  Ðv.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979).€€This€means€that€weÐ ` Ðmay€not€reweigh€the€evidence,€but€must€presume€that€the€jury€has€resolved€allÏconflicts€in€the€testimony€and€drawn€all€reasonable€inferences€from€the€evidenceÏin€favor€of€the€state.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.1984);Ð tÄ ÐòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.1978).Ô#†XÉšXXXÉšOj#Ôà  àÐ D” ÐÌà ` àAlthough€the€evidence€of€the€defendantððs€guilt€is€circumstantial€in€nature,Ïcircumstantial€evidence€alone€may€be€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction.€€òòState€v.Ð ¨ø ÐTharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€896,€899„900€(Tenn.€1987);€€òòState€v.€Gregoryóó,€862€S.W.2dÐ t!Ä  Ð574,€577€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€òòState€v.€Buttreyóó,€756€S.W.2d€718,€721€(Tenn.Ð @#" ÐCrim.€App.€1988).€€However,€in€order€for€this€to€occur,€the€circumstantialÏevidence€must€be€not€only€consistent€with€the€guilt€of€the€accused€but€it€mustÏalso€be€inconsistent€with€innocence€and€must€exclude€every€other€reasonableÏtheory€or€hypothesis€except€that€of€guilt.€€òòTharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€at€900.€€€InÐ p*À%* Ðaddition,€ð ðit€must€establish€such€a€certainty€of€guilt€of€the€accused€as€to€convinceÏthe€mind€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€[the€defendant]€is€the€one€whoÏcommitted€the€crime.ðð€€òòTharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€at€900€(quoting€òòPruitt€v.€Stateóó,€460Ð Ô/$+0 ÐS.W.2d€385,€391€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1970)).ÌÌà ` àWhile€following€the€above€guidelines,€this€Court€must€remember€that€theÏjury€decides€the€weight€to€be€given€to€circumstantial€evidence€and€that€ð ð[t]heÏinferences€to€be€drawn€from€such€evidence,€and€the€extent€to€which€theÐ Ð8 4: Ðcircumstances€are€consistent€with€guilt€and€inconsistent€with€innocence€areÏquestions€primarily€for€the€jury.ðð€€òòMarable€v.€Stateóó,€313€S.W.2d€451,€457€(Tenn.Ð |Ì Ð1958);€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòState€v.€Gregoryóó,€862€S.W.2d€574,€577€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð H˜ Ð1993);€òòState€v.€Couryóó,€697€S.W.2d€373,€377€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985);€òòPruitt€v.Ð  h ÐStateóó,€460€S.W.2d€at€391.Ô‡XÉšXXXÉšÔà h àÔ#†XÉšXXXÉš[u#ÔÔ‡XÉšXXXÉšÔÐ ä 4 ÐÌà ` àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€felony€murder.€€Felony€murder€requires€aÏjury€to€find€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€killed€the€victim€in€theÏperpetration€of€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€a€robbery.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„¼202(a)(2).€€Robbery€is€the€intentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€theÏperson€of€another€by€violence€or€putting€the€person€in€fear.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ39„13„401.ÌÌà ` àThe€state€presented€evidence€showing€the€defendant€had€little€money€onÏthe€night€of€July€19,€1995;€while€the€victim€had€a€great€deal€of€money.€€SeveralÏhours€later,€the€defendant€had€an€abundance€of€cash,€while€the€victim€was€foundÏdead€with€only€some€change€on€him.€€The€state€presented€evidence€that€theÏvictimððs€blood€was€found€in€the€defendantððs€truck€after€the€defendant€stated€theÏvictim€had€never€been€in€his€truck.€€Paint€consistent€with€paint€samples€takenÏfrom€the€victimððs€truck€was€found€on€the€defendantððs€bumper.€€The€stateÏpresented€evidence€that€the€defendant€was€killed€with€a€.20€gauge€shotgun€slug.€ÏThe€defendant€was€known€to€have€had€a€.20€gauge€shotgun€and€slugÏammunition€in€his€possession€prior€to,€and€after,€the€murder.€€The€defendant€wasÏuntruthful€as€to€his€whereabouts€at€the€time€immediately€following€the€victimððsÏmurder.€€Taken€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€the€evidence€is€sufficient€forÏa€jury€to€find€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€killed€the€victim€inÏthe€perpetration€of€a€robbery.ÌÌà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÐ Ð8 4: ÐÓ  Óò òòòVIII.Ð ° Ðó óóóÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendant€contends€in€his€seventh€issue€that€when€the€state€gaveÏnotice€it€was€withdrawing€its€election€to€pursue€the€death€penalty,€the€election€toÏseek€life€without€parole€was€also€withdrawn€by€implication.ÌÌà ` à€Ô#†XÉšXXXÉš©u#ÔÔ‡XÉšXXXÉšÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„208€provides€that€written€notice€of€intent€toÐ „Ô  Ðseek€the€death€penalty€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€12.3(b)€also€constitutesÏnotice€of€intent€to€seek€life€imprisonment€without€the€possibility€of€parole.€€ThisÏnotice€must€be€filed€thirty€(30)€days€prior€to€trial.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„¼208(b).€€Failure€to€timely€file€notice€shall,€by€motion€of€the€defendant,€result€in€aÏreasonable€continuance.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„208(b).€€Failure€to€file€noticeÏresults€in€the€defendant€being€sentenced€by€the€trial€court€to€life€imprisonment€ifÏthe€defendant€is€found€guilty€of€first€degree€murder.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„¼208(c).€ÌÌà ` àThe€state€filed€a€formal€notice€on€March€25,€1996,€that€it€intended€to€seekÏthe€death€penalty.€€On€June€24,€1996,€the€state€notified€the€defendant€by€letterÏthat€it€was€ð ðelecting€not€to€pursue€the€death€penalty.ðð€€When€the€sentencingÏphase€of€the€trial€began,€the€state€reaffirmed€its€intention€to€seek€lifeÏimprisonment€without€the€possibility€of€parole.€€The€defendant€objected,€arguingÏthat€because€notice€of€intent€to€seek€the€death€penalty€was€withdrawn,€theÏimplied€notice€to€seek€life€without€parole€was€withdrawn€as€well.€€The€defendantÏcontends€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€allow€the€state€to€pursue€a€sentence€of€lifeÏwithout€parole€forced€him€to€waive€his€right€to€jury€sentencing€in€order€to€be€ableÏto€introduce€mitigation€evidence.€€Approximately€three€months€after€the€guiltyÏverdict€was€returned,€the€trial€court€conducted€a€sentencing€hearing.ÌÌà ` àThe€notice€of€intent€to€seek€the€death€penalty,€by€statute,€constitutedÏnotice€of€an€intent€to€seek€a€sentence€of€life€imprisonment€without€the€possibilityÐ Ø8(4: Ðof€parole.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„208(b).€€We€cannot,€however,€say€that€aÏletter€from€the€District€Attorney€General€to€defense€counsel€advising€that€theÏstate€would€no€longer€seek€the€death€penalty€operated€as€an€implied€withdrawalÏof€the€notice€of€intent€to€seek€life€without€the€possibility€of€parole€as€a€matter€ofÏlaw.ÌÌà ` àRegardless,€we€need€not€address€this€issue€further.€€For€other€reasons€asÏwill€be€explained€òòinfraóó,€the€defendantððs€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€whereÐ D”  Ðthe€defendant€will€have€the€opportunity€to€seek€jury€sentencing.ÌÌÔ#†XÉšXXXÉš@}#ÔÓ  Óò òòòIX.Ð ¬ü Ðóóó óÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€defendant€next€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€aÏsentence€of€life€imprisonment€without€the€possibility€of€parole.€€Specifically,€heÏalleges€the€trial€court€considered€non„statutory€aggravating€factors€to€arrive€at€aÏsentence€of€life€without€parole.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€at€a€separate€sentencing€hearing€found€the€felony€murderÏaggravating€circumstance€applicable€and€sentenced€the€defendant€to€life€withoutÏparole.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(7).€€The€defendant€claims€the€trial€courtÏdid€not€actually€rely€on€the€aggravating€factor€stated,€but€used€the€priorÏhomicides€the€defendant€committed€to€enhance€his€sentence.ÌÌà ` àAs€the€defendant€waived€jury€sentencing,€the€trial€court€determined€theÏapplication€of€aggravating€and€mitigating€factors.€€òòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„Ð à/0+0 Ð205(c).€€The€state€submitted€the€following€aggravating€factor€for€the€trial€courtððsÏconsideration:ÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓÓÌThe€murder€was€knowingly€committed,€solicited,Ïdirected,€or€aided€by€the€defendant,€while€theÏdefendant€had€a€substantial€role€in€committing€orÏattempting€to€commit,€or€was€fleeing€after€having€aÏsubstantial€role€in€committing€or€attempting€to€commit,Ð Æ95; Ðany€first€degree€murder,€arson,€rape,€robbery,Ïburglary,€theft,€kidnapping,€aircraft€piracy,€or€unlawfulÏthrowing,€placing€or€discharging€of€a€destructiveÏdevice€or€bomb.ÌÓÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ39„13„204(i)(7)(effective›€July€1,€1995).ÌÌà ` àIn€determining€the€sentence,€the€trial€court€made€extensive€oral€findings.€ÏAlthough€the€sole€aggravating€factor€submitted€by€the€state€was€felony€murder,Ïthe€trial€court€made€extensive€findings€about€the€prior€criminal€history€of€theÏdefendant.€€The€trial€court€first€noted€several€charges€relating€to€violence€forÏwhich€there€were€no€convictions.€€Furthermore,€the€court€noted€a€vandalismÏcharge€and€two€(2)€simple€assault€charges€that€had€been€dismissed;€a€vandalismÏconviction€and€three€(3)€aggravated€assault€charges€which€were€reduced€toÏsimple€assault;€and€two€(2)€misdemeanor€firearm€convictions.€€Based€upon€theÏforegoing,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€the€defendant€had€a€ð ðbackground€ofÏviolence.ðð€€The€court€then€stated€this€was€not€being€considered€as€anÏenhancement€factor,€but€that€it€shows€the€ð ðpersonality€that€we€have€of€Mr.ÏGilliland.€€He€was€a€violent€man€according€to€his€record.ðð€Ì€Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€then€went€on€to€state€that€the€defendantððs€involvement€inÏthe€two€(2)€justifiable€homicides€was€not€to€be€considered€at€the€hearing.€ÏNevertheless,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€the€defendantððs€ð ðattitudeðð€about€theÏhomicides€is€one€that€ð ðthis€Court€is€scared€of.ðð€€The€court€further€found,€basedÏupon€this€information,€that€the€defendant€had€a€ð ðframe€of€mind€thatððs€a€killer.ðð€€ÌÌà ` àThe€court€concluded€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 ` à€€€€€There€is€no€smoking€gun€to€point€to€knowingly€doing€it,€but€if€youÏput€all€the€pieces€together,€òòincluding€the€personality€of€theÐ ‚2Ò-3 Ðdefendant€that€Iððve€considered€in€this€caseóó,€when€you€put€all€thatÐ h3¸.4 Ðtogether€bit€by€bit,€I€conclude€that€it€was€a€knowing€killing;€that€theÏaggravating€circumstances€exist,€and€I€think€Mr.€Dennis€GillilandÏshould€be€sentenced€to€life€without€the€possibility€of€parole,€and€IÏso€order€it€(emphasis€added).Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ѐ€€ÌÌÓÓà ` àOur€analysis€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings€is€guided€by€the€well„establishedÐ ²95; Ðprinciple€that€evidence€is€admissible€at€a€first€degree€murder€sentencing€hearingÏonly€if€relevant€to€an€aggravating€circumstance€or€a€mitigating€factor€raised€byÏthe€defendant.€€òòState€v.€Batesóó,€804€S.W.2d€868,€882€(Tenn.€1991);€òòCozzolino€v.Ð H˜ ÐStateóó,€584€S.W.2d€765,€768€(Tenn.€1979)€(both€cases€involving€the€deathÐ  d Ðpenalty).€€The€first€degree€murder€sentencing€statute€specifically€provides€thatÏlife€without€the€possibility€of€parole€may€be€imposed€only€when€a€statutoryÏaggravating€circumstance€has€been€proven€by€the€state€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(f)(1),€(2).€€Consideration€of€extraneousÏmatters€is€improper.ÌÌà ` àThe€only€aggravating€factor€before€the€trial€court€was€the€felony€murderÏaggravator€which€required€the€state€to€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€theÏdefendant€ð ðknowinglyðð€committed€the€murder€while€committing€or€attempting€toÏcommit€the€robbery.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(7).€€Although€the€trial€courtÏspecifically€mentioned€numerous€prior€charges€without€convictions,€numerousÏmisdemeanor€convictions€and€the€defendantððs€commission€of€the€two€(2)Ïjustifiable€homicides,€the€trial€judge€indicated€he€was€not€considering€theseÏmatters.€€Nevertheless,€the€trial€judge€stated€these€matters€related€to€theÏð ðpersonalityðð€of€the€defendant.€€In€sentencing€the€defendant€to€life€without€theÏpossibility€of€parole,€the€trial€court€specifically€stated€that€considering€all€theÏevidence,€ð ðincluding€the€personality€of€the€defendant,ðð€this€was€a€ð ðknowingððÏfelony€murder.€€Thus,€we€can€only€conclude€that€the€trial€court€indeed€consideredÏthese€matters€in€sentencing.ÌÌà ` àHad€the€jury€sentenced€the€defendant,€these€matters€certainly€would€notÏhave€been€brought€to€their€attention€and€could€not€have€been€relied€upon€toÏarrive€at€a€sentence€of€life€without€parole.€€The€trial€judge,€just€as€a€jury,€can€onlyÏrely€upon€proper€evidence€to€establish€an€aggravating€circumstance.€€Since€the€ÌÌtrial€judge€relied€upon€improper€evidence,€the€sentence€must€be€vacated€and€theÐ Ì84: Ðdefendant€resentenced.ÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓX.óóó óÐ H˜ ÐÌÓ  Óà ` àIn€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€alleges€that€newly€discovered€evidenceÏwarrants€a€new€trial€in€this€case.€€Officer€C.J.€Butts€testified€at€the€hearing€on€theÏdefendantððs€motion€for€new€trial€that€he€inspected€the€defendantððs€truck€on€theÏnight€of€his€arrest€with€a€ð ðblue€lightðð€and€was€not€able€to€detect€any€traces€ofÏblood.€€Subsequently,€TBI€agents€detected€traces€of€the€victimððs€blood€in€theÏdefendantððs€truck.€€The€defendant€claims€Officer€Buttsðð€findings€were€notÏavailable€to€him€at€trial;€the€guilty€verdict€should€be€reversed;€and€the€caseÏshould€be€remanded€for€a€new€trial.ÌÌà ` àIn€seeking€a€new€trial€based€on€newly€discovered€evidence,€there€must€beÏa€showing€that€defendant€and€his€counsel€exercised€reasonable€diligence€inÏattempting€to€discover€the€evidence,€and€that€neither€the€defendant€nor€hisÏcounsel€had€knowledge€of€the€alleged€newly€discovered€evidence€prior€to€trial.€ÏòòState€v.€Nicholsóó,€877€S.W.2d€722,€737€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Singletonóó,€853Ð H#˜" ÐS.W.2d€490,€496€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€addition,€there€must€be€a€showing€of€theÏmateriality€of€the€testimony,€and€the€trial€court€must€determine€whether€the€resultÏof€the€trial€would€likely€be€changed€if€the€evidence€were€produced.€€òòNicholsóó,€877Ð ¬(ü#( ÐS.W.2d€at€737;€òòSingletonóó,€853€S.W.2d€at€496.€€The€granting€or€refusal€of€a€newÐ x*È%* Ðtrial€on€the€basis€of€newly€discovered€evidence€rests€within€the€sound€discretionÏof€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Walkeróó,€910€S.W.2d€381,€395€(Tenn.€1995);€òòState€v.Ð .`). ÐGoswickóó,€656€S.W.2d€355,€358€(Tenn.€1983).Ð Ü/,+0 ÐÌà ` àThe€trial€court€considered€the€alleged€newly€discovered€evidence€at€theÏdefendantððs€hearing€on€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€Officer€Butts€was€admittedlyÏuntrained€in€the€use€of€the€ð ðblue€light.ðð€€The€TBI€agent€who€recovered€the€bloodÏtraces€from€defendantððs€truck€testified€as€an€expert€in€collecting€blood€samples.€Ð Ø8(4: ÐThe€trial€court€found€there€was€no€showing€by€the€defendant€that€the€evidenceÏwas€newly€discovered€or€would€likely€have€changed€the€outcome€of€the€trial.€€WeÏagree.ÌÌà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÓ  Óò òòòCONCLUSIONóóó óÐ xÈ  ÐÓ  ÓÌà ` àFor€the€reasons€stated€above,€the€conviction€for€felony€murder€is€affirmed.€ÏThe€sentence€of€life€without€parole€is€vacated€and€this€cause€remanded€forÏresentencing.€€Upon€remand,€the€defendant€shall€have€the€right€to€request€juryÏsentencing€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(k).€€ÌÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò ò________________________Ð ä4 Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌœCONCUR:ñ'ññ&ñ€ñ&ññ'ññ&ñ€(ñ&ññ(ñBut€in€accordÌñ(ññ*ñà ` àñ*ññ(ññ(ññ*ñ€€€€€€€€€with€Judge€Tiptonððsñ*ññ(ñà  àñ(ññ)ññ(ñà ¸ àñ(ññ)ñ›Ìœñ+ñà ` àñ+ñ›œñ,ññ+ñà ¸ àñ+ñ›ñ+ñà  àñ+ññ,ññ-ñ€€€€€€€€€€concurring€opiniñ-ññ.ññ-ñ0onñ-ññ.ññ0ññ/ñ0nñ/ññ0ññ1ñon)ñ1ñ›ÌÌÌÌ__________________________ÌœJOHN€H.€PEAY,›€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌñ*ñœñ*ñÌœòò(See€concurring€opinion)€€€€€€€€óó›Ð |.Ì). МJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,›€JUDGEó ó