ÿWPCÌ ØpwÙ WÒ,K” r[VΠÃÌq/è@þ4 ûçŸwþÕÄ”òs+w(2ˆ¢x èç²ïOˆkÉ9³±¯š²³âvWdî‰6+í çÏEÛ‰VẊàHNuåðzˆd0ÏÛqc¡‰‹¼Íd°¦Q+oC±ÍOÛ ¶ÆÅá»X\Š@ùñO‚1Ê¢qrõæ“àaƒ÷ß®WëìúóN‡³ò&€oaÙöoh“"–ˆXSƒÃãÑÕ­g®`õ‚oök\Í[ÔÎP²Aê#J[Dì¡ g«Ÿ+„¤0îg?l"â„âý¤Mc`謣o¾(‹HWâÿ´¬bgÍ–WhÐLlèK½»Þ@7ZÔgšŸKÍ#ŸŽÑ”cPm1Ù÷³9 íÌ93† ¢ÈDM¯Ø;–ÄuwÄý<¥­åcÌÑ,z¥¤ÉÚ||×!ú}±ÕjzÙ.ÍІ7/µ w\I—kÅjFcÅÔk&Ÿc&h¢ê¶ÔùÖ kv€¦ßsá\ùÂVøÁ>‰ÑT”)Ú¾wMBµ–ßý 2/¢2€I*ÆÄ—e4<Žþ¹TZ—åèpbN\ %^ 0ˆdUNì z:Ò´^ † z’ Ò wÞ 4â ö  Æ ÆÍ Æ“ ÆY mN6#Á8ùEzÒ| 0DNN/’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’bÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ 0ëÉÉÉÉ B´´ 0¤Ñ D3u D-¨ 0KÕÕ AS Æs 0¤9 0DÝ A«!»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular˜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.wpt7®i)  ˜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.wptÖJ~'”§8?¤3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0 wÝ ƒRÇ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôrò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Additionally,€the€appellant€never€claims€that€he€made€any€discovery€requests€at€all;€the€appellantððs€onlyÐ ° Ðargument€is€that€Gregoryððs€statement€is€obviously€exculpatory€and€therefore€should€have€been€disclosed€by€the€State. ÈÝ ƒRÇ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôrò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€appellant€claims€that€the€following€written€statement€given€by€Richard€Gregory€to€the€police€wasÐ ° Ðexculpatory€and€should€have€been€disclosed€by€the€State€prior€to€trial:Ð n¾ Ðà8  àI€was€filling€the€beer€cooler€when€[Ô_ÔTalbertÔ_Ô]€and€a€light€skin€man€came€over€to€the€cooler€and€[Ô_ÔTalbertÔ_Ô]Ð ,| Ðasked€if€I€had€a€Colt€.45€beer.€€I€saw€the€back€of€his€head€and€the€side€of€his€face.€€Then€[Ô_ÔTalbertÔ_Ô]Ð ê: Ðcame€in€the€cooler€about€2€minutes€later€and€said€that€he€had€just€been€robbed€and€the€robber€told€himÐ ¨ø Ðto€stay€in€there€for€5€minutes.€€He€was€short€and€thin€with€short€little€curly€hair,€and€what€looked€likeÐ f¶ Ða€real€thin€[moustache].€€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó %Ý ƒRÇ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôrò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€In€its€brief,€the€State€concedes€that€the€appellantððs€theft€convictions€cannot€stand€because€they€violate€doubleÐ ° Ðjeopardy.Ð n¾ Ð- ù-(|G2Ç$$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôrò»»Ô d(|3Na$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Na$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€|XXdæ»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î3ÓÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼»îî3Ó #ԈРР ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€19,€2000€Ð ð@ ÐÔ‡X|X»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XX|#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€MICHAEL€N.€GREYÔ‡X|X»¼Ôó óÐ ä4 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€as€of€Right€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔDicksonÔ_Ô€CountyÐ Ø ( Ðà@@øøìàNo.€CR„3927€€€€€€Allen€W.€Wallace,€JudgeÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<o` AßÐ pÀ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„01428„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€9,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ eµ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<0` AßÐ 1  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€appellant,€Michael€N.€Grey,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€in€the€Ô_ÔDicksonÔ_Ô€County€Circuit€Court€of€twoÐ &v  Ðcounts€of€aggravated€robbery,€a€class€B€felony,€and€two€counts€of€theft€under€$500,€a€class€AÐ  \ Ðmisdemeanor.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€ten€years€incarceration€in€the€TennesseeÐ òB ÐDepartment€of€Correction€for€the€aggravated€robbery€convictions.€€The€trial€court€also€sentenced€theÐ Ø( Ðappellant€to€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€incarceration€in€the€Ô_ÔDicksonÔ_Ô€County€Jail€for€theÐ ¾ Ðtheft€Ô_Ôconvictions.TheÔ_Ô€trial€court€further€ordered€that€the€appellantððs€sentences€be€served€concurrently.€Ð ¤ô ÐThe€appellant€raises€the€following€issue€for€review:€whether€the€appellant€was€denied€due€processÐ ŠÚ Ðbecause€the€State€failed€to€provide€him€with€proper€pre„trial€exculpatory€evidence.€€Upon€review€ofÐ pÀ Ðthe€record€and€the€partiesðð€briefs,€we€affirm€in€part€and€reverse€in€part€the€judgments€of€the€trialÐ V¦ Ðcourt.Ð <Œ ÐÓÝÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgments€of€the€Circuit€Court€are€Affirmed€inÐ X ÐPart€and€Reversed€in€Part.ó óÐ î> ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼»àX|#ÔÔ‡X|X.¼ÔNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayes,óó€and€òòThomasÐ º  ÐT.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð  ð ÐÌMichael€J.€Love,€Clarksville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Michael€N.€Grey.Ð l!¼! ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€Lucian€D.€Ô_ÔGeiseÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General,Ð 8#ˆ# ÐSuzanne€Ô_ÔLockertÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $n$ ÐÓP ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼»XX| #ÔÔ‡X|X»¼ÔÐ ê%:!& ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼»XX|: #ÔÔ‡X|X»¼ÔÓ  Óà@'' ìàòòò òI.€Factual€Backgroundóóó óˆÐ ¶'#( Ðà  àà ` àOn€December€29,€1997,€the€appellant€entered€West€Meade€Market€in€Ô_ÔDicksonÔ_Ô€CountyÐ œ(ì#) Ðand€asked€the€cashier,€Steve€Ô_ÔTalbertÔ_Ô,€for€a€Colt€.45€beer.€€Ô_ÔTalbertÔ_Ô€ascertained€from€Richard€Gregory,Ð ‚)Ò$* Ðwho€was€stocking€the€cooler,€that€the€store€was€out€of€that€particular€brand€of€beer.€€The€appellantÐ h*¸%+ Ðthen€chose€a€Budweiser€beer€and€approached€the€front€counter.€€Ô_ÔTalbertÔ_Ô€was€in€the€process€ofÐ N+ž&, Ðcompleting€the€sale€when€the€appellant€raised€his€jacket,€partially€removed€a€pistol€from€hisÐ 4,„'- Ðwaistband,€and€told€the€cashier€ð ðto€be€coolðð€and€turn€over€the€money.Ð -j(.ý ÐÔ_Ô‡à  àà ` àTalbert€gave€the€appellant€the€three€hundred€and€forty„eight€dollars€and€twenty„fiveÐ ° Ðcents€($348.25)€that€was€in€the€cash€register.€€The€appellant€then€instructed€Talbert€to€get€into€theÐ –æ Ðcooler.€€Talbert€did€so,€and€told€Gregory€when€he€entered€the€cooler€that€the€market€had€just€beenÐ |Ì Ðrobbed.€€After€remaining€in€the€cooler€for€approximately€40€seconds,€Talbert€left€the€cooler€andÐ b² Ðreported€the€robbery€to€the€police.€€Talbert€described€the€robber€as€being€a€very€light„skinned€blackÐ H˜ Ðmale,€possibly€of€mixed€race,€in€his€late€twenties€or€early€thirties,€with€a€small€pencil€moustacheÔ#†¼»XX|˜ #ÔÔ‡X|X»¼Ô,Ð . ~ Ðstanding€approximately€5'8"€tall,€and€weighing€145„150€pounds.€€Ð  d ÐÌà  àà ` àA€few€days€later,€on€January€1,€1998,€the€appellant€entered€a€ParMart€convenienceÐ à 0 Ðstore€and€requested€cigarettes€from€the€cashier,€Don€Wood.€€After€Wood€had€gotten€cigarettes€forÐ Æ   Ðthe€appellant,€the€appellant€told€Wood,€ð ðLook€here.ðð€€The€appellant€then€lifted€his€shirt€and€displayedÐ ¬ ü  Ða€pistol€that€was€located€in€his€waistband.€€The€appellant€told€Wood,€ð ðYouððre€going€to€be€shot.€€ThisÐ ’â  Ðis€a€robbery.ðð€€The€appellant€instructed€Wood€to€put€the€money€from€the€cash€register€in€a€paper€bag.€Ð xÈ  ÐWood€complied€and€gave€the€appellant€sixty„eight€dollars€($68).€€The€appellant€complained€aboutÐ ^®  Ðthe€amount,€but€Wood€assured€him€that€there€was€no€more€money.€€The€appellant€ordered€Wood€toÐ D”  Ðlay€down€on€the€floor€in€the€kitchen.€€After€the€appellant€left€the€store,Ô#†¼»XX|:#ÔÔ‡X|X»¼Ô€Wood€called€the€police.€Ð *z  ÐWood€described€the€robber€as€being€a€very€light„skinned€black€male€in€his€early€thirties,€standingÐ ` Ðaround€5'7"€or€5'8"€tall,€weighing€about€150€pounds,€having€short,€dark€hair€and€a€moustache,Ð öF Ðpossibly€with€a€mole€on€either€side€of€his€face,€and€with€a€possible€pierced€nose.€€Additionally,Ð Ü, ÐParMartððs€surveillance€camera€had€recorded€the€robbery.Ð Â ÐÌà  àà ` àA€jury€in€the€Dickson€County€Circuit€Court€convicted€the€appellant€of€two€counts€ofÐ ŽÞ Ðaggravated€robbery,€a€class€B€felony,€and€two€counts€of€theft€under€$500,€a€class€A€misdemeanor.€Ð tÄ ÐThe€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€ten€years€incarceration€in€the€Tennessee€Department€ofÐ Zª ÐCorrection€for€the€aggravated€robbery€convictions.€€The€trial€court€also€sentenced€the€appellant€toÐ @ Ðeleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€incarceration€in€the€Dickson€County€Jail€for€the€theftÐ &v Ðconvictions.€€The€trial€court€further€ordered€the€appellantððs€sentences€to€run€concurrently.€€TheÐ  \ Ðappellant€appeals€his€convictions€and€raises€the€following€issue€for€review:€whether€the€appellantÐ òB Ðwas€denied€due€process€because€the€State€failed€to€provide€him€with€proper€pre„trial€exculpatoryÐ Ø( Ðevidence.Ô#†¼»XX|‹#ԀР¾ ÐòòóóÌÔ€X|X»¼Ôà@$ìàòòò òII.€Analysisóóó óˆÐ Ú * Ðà@!ìàA.€òòBradyóó€violationˆÐ À!  Ðà  àà ` àThe€appellant€claims€that€he€was€denied€his€right€to€due€process€when€the€State€failedÐ ¦"ö! Ðto€disclose€a€statement€Gregory€made€to€the€police€regarding€the€description€of€the€robber,€whichÐ Œ#Ü" Ðthe€appellant€argues€is€exculpatory.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€United€States€Supreme€Court,€in€òòBrady€v.€Marylandóó,€373Ð r$Â# ÐU.S.€83,€87,€83€S.€Ct.€1194,1196„97€(1963),€held€that€the€State€has€a€constitutional€duty€to€furnishÐ X%¨ $ Ðthe€accused€with€exculpatory€evidence€pertaining€to€either€the€accusedððs€guilt€or€innocence€and€theÐ ° Ðpotential€punishment€that€may€be€imposed.€€Failure€to€reveal€exculpatory€evidence€violates€dueÐ –æ Ðprocess€where€the€evidence€is€material€to€either€guilt€or€punishment€irrespective€of€the€good€faithÐ |Ì Ðor€bad€faith€of€the€prosecution.€€òòIdóó.€€Furthermore,€the€prosecution€must€disclose€evidence€which€mayÐ b² Ðbe€used€by€the€appellant€to€impeach€a€witness.€€òòGiglio€v.€United€Statesóó,€405€U.S.€150,€154„55,€92Ð H˜ ÐS.€Ct.€763,€766€(1972).Ð . ~ ÐÌà  àà ` àAll€of€the€following€elements€must€be€present€before€this€court€can€find€a€òòBradyóóÐ ú J Ðviolation:€Ð à 0 Ðà8  à(1)€the€appellant€must€have€requested€the€information€(unless€the€evidence€isÐ Æ   Ðobviously€exculpatory,€in€which€case€the€State€is€bound€to€release€the€informationÐ ¬ ü  Ðwhether€requested€or€not);€Ð’â Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(2)€the€State€must€have€suppressed€the€information;€ÐxÈ Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(3)€the€information€must€have€been€favorable€to€the€appellant;€and,€Ð^® Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(4)€the€information€must€have€been€material.€ÐD” Ð Ð  ЀòòState€v.€Edginóó,€902€S.W.2d€387,€390€(Tenn.€1995);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Hamlinóó,€No.€01C01„9604„CC„Ð *z  Ð00174,€1999€WL€77853,€at€*5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€February€19,€1999).€€Moreover,€theÐ ` Ðappellant€bears€the€burden€of€establishing€a€òòBradyóó€violation€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòId.óó€Ð öF ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€can€find€no€evidence€in€the€record€of€any€discovery€request(s)€made€by€theÐ Â Ðappellant.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Accordingly,€òòBradyóó€would€apply€only€if€Gregoryððs€statement€is€obviously€exculpatory.€Ð ¨ø ÐòòState€v.€Belcheróó,€No.€03C01„9608„CC„00299,€1997€WL€749392,€at€*7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÐ ŽÞ ÐKnoxville,€November€26,€1997).€€We€conclude€that€it€is€not.€€The€description€given€by€Gregory€inÐ tÄ Ðhis€statement€is€substantially€similar€to€the€descriptions€given€by€both€Wood€and€Talbert€to€theÐ Zª Ðpolice.€€Moreover,€the€description€does€not€suggest€that€the€appellant€did€not€commit€the€crimes€ofÐ @ Ðwhich€he€is€accused.€€Accordingly,€the€appellant€could€have€only€used€Gregoryððs€statement€forÐ &v Ðimpeachment€purposes.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àAdditionally,€ð ðthe€prosecution€is€not€required€to€disclose€information€that€the€accusedÐ Ø( Ðalready€possesses€or€is€able€to€obtain....ðð€òòWorkman€v.€Stateóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€709.€€Gregory€testifiedÐ ¾ Ðfor€the€defense.€€The€appellant€had€the€opportunity€to€question€him€regarding€his€description€of€theÐ ¤ô Ðrobber,€and€could€have€asked€if€Gregory€had€made€any€statements€to€the€police.€€This€informationÐ Š Ú Ðwas€equally€available€to€both€sides.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ewingóó,€No.€01C01„9612„CR„00531,€1998€WLÐ p!À  Ð321932,€at€*9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€June€19,€1998).Ð V"¦! ÐÌà  àà ` àFurthermore,€even€if€Gregoryððs€statement€was€exculpatory,€it€was€not€material€to€theÐ "$r# Ðappellantððs€defense.€€This€court€has€stated€that:Ð %X $ Ðà8  à[t]he€evidence€is€material€only€if€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€had€theÐ î%>!% Ðevidence€been€disclosed€to€the€defense,€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€beenÐ Ô&$"& Ðdifferent.€€A€ððreasonable€probabilityðð€is€a€probability€sufficient€to€undermineÐ º' #' Ðconfidence€in€the€outcome.Р(ð#(Ð Ð  ÐòòWorkmanóó,€868€S.W.2d€705,€710€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)(òòcitingóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Bagleyóó,€473€U.S.Ð ° Ð667,€681„682,€105€S.€Ct.€3375,€3383€(1985).€€Ð –æ ÐÌà  àà ` àGregory€testified€for€the€defense€regarding€his€description€of€the€robber.€€Moreover,Ð b² Ðthe€State€cross„examined€Gregory€concerning€the€contents€of€the€statement€and€then€introduced€theÐ H˜ Ðstatement€into€evidence.€Therefore,€because€the€information€contained€in€the€statement€was€presentedÐ . ~ Ðto€the€jury,€the€materiality€test€has€not€been€met.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€No.€01C01„9710„CC„00503,Ð  d Ð1999€WL€34782,€at€*11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€January€28,€1999),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó,€(JulyÐ ú J Ð12,€1999)(stating€that€because€the€witness€testified€at€trial€to€essentially€the€same€information€thatÐ à 0 Ðwas€contained€in€her€statement,€the€materiality€test€was€not€met).€€The€jury€had€Gregoryððs€descriptionÐ Æ   Ðof€the€appellant,€as€well€as€the€descriptions€given€by€Talbert€and€Wood,€and€simply€chose€to€creditÐ ¬ ü  Ðthe€testimony€of€the€Stateððs€witnesses.€€Nothing€in€the€record€indicates€that€the€result€of€theÐ ’â  Ðproceeding€would€have€been€different.Ð xÈ  ÐÌà  àà ` àFurthermore,€because€the€State€produced€Gregoryððs€statement€during€their€cross„Ð D”  Ðexamination€of€Gregory,€this€was€a€delayed€disclosure€of€evidence,€not€a€complete€non„disclosureÐ *z  Ðof€evidence.€€We€have€previously€found€that€ð ðif€there€is€only€a€delayed€disclosure€of€information,Ð ` Ðin€contrast€to€a€complete€failure€to€disclose€exculpatory€information,€òòBradyóó€normally€does€not€apply,Ð öF Ðunless€the€delay€itself€causes€prejudice.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hallóó,1999€WL€34782,€at€*9òòóó.€€Accordingly,€aÐ Ü, Ðdelayed€disclosure€requires€an€inquiry€into€whether€the€delay€prevented€the€defense€from€using€theÐ Â Ðdisclosed€material€effectively€in€preparing€and€presenting€the€appellantððs€case.€€òòState€v.Caughron,Ð ¨ø Ðóó855€S.W.2d€526,€548€(Tenn.€1993)(citing€òòUnited€States€v.€Ingraldióó,€793€F.2d€408€(1st€Cir.€1986)).€òòóóÐ ŽÞ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€appellant€claims€that€if€he€had€possessed€Gregoryððs€statement€prior€to€trial€thenÐ Zª Ðhe€could€have€used€it€to€impeach€Talbertððs€testimony€regarding€the€description€of€the€robber.€Ð @ ÐSpecifically,€the€appellant€alleges€that€he€could€have€used€the€Gregory€statement€to€ð ðpry€TalbertððsÐ &v Ðremaining€fingers€[loose]€from€his€stubborn€refusal€to€admit€that€[the€appellant]€did€not€rob€him.ðð€Ð  \ ÐThe€appellantððs€argument€is€misplaced;€Gregoryððs€statement€could€not€have€been€used€to€impeachÐ òB ÐTalbertððs€testimony.€€òòTaylor€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9809„CC„00384,€2000€WL€641148,€at€*7€(Tenn.Ð Ø( ÐCrim.€App.€at€Nashville,€May€19,€2000);€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€613€(discussing€the€impeachmentÐ ¾ Ðof€a€witness€by€witnessðð€own€prior€statement€and€not€the€statement€of€a€third€party).€€Ð ¤ô ÐÌà  àà ` àMoreover,€even€if€the€appellant€had€possessed€Gregoryððs€statement€prior€to€trial,€itÐ p!À  Ðis€unclear€how€the€appellantððs€cross„examination€of€Talbert€would€have€differed.€€The€appellantÐ V"¦! Ðquestioned€Talbert€at€length€regarding€his€identification€of€the€appellant€as€the€robber.€€The€Ð <#Œ" Ðappellant€has€failed€to€show€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€the€delayed€disclosure€of€the€GregoryÐ "$r# Ðstatement,€particularly€in€light€of€the€fact€that€the€jury€heard€Gregory€testify€to€his€description€of€theÐ %X $ Ðrobber€and€to€his€belief€that€the€appellant€did€not€rob€the€store.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð î%>!% ÐÌà  àà@¾¾#ìàB.€Plain€ErrorˆÐ º' #' Ðà  àà ` àAlthough€not€raised€by€the€appellant,€we€find,€as€plain€error,€that€the€appellantððsÐ  (ð#( Ðconvictions€for€both€aggravated€robbery€and€theft€violate€the€principles€of€double€jeopardy.€€òòSeeóóÐ †)Ö$) ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b),€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€103(d),€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Eppsóó,€989Ð l*¼%* ÐS.W.2d€742,€745€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€€Therefore,€the€appellantððs€convictions€for€theft€must€beÐ R+¢&+ Ðreversed€and€vacated.Ð 8,ˆ', Їà  àà ` àThe€double€jeopardy€clauses€of€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€constitutions€protectÐ ° Ðan€accused€from:€(1)€a€second€prosecution€following€an€acquittal;€(2)€a€second€prosecution€followingÐ –æ Ðconviction;€and€(3)€multiple€punishments€for€the€same€offense.€€òòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373,Ð |Ì Ð378€(Tenn.€1996).€€The€present€case€involves€the€third€category.€€In€Tennessee,€whether€two€offensesÐ b² Ðare€the€ððsameðð€for€double€jeopardy€purposes€depends€upon€a€close€and€careful€analysis€of€theÐ H˜ Ðoffenses€involved,€the€statutory€definitions€of€the€crimes,€the€legislative€intent€and€the€particular€factsÐ . ~ Ðand€circumstances.€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€524€S.W.2d.913,€919€(Tenn.€1975).€This€analysis€is€guided€in€partÐ  d Ðby€the€application€of€the€test€announced€in€òòBlockburger€v.€United€Statesóó:Ð ú J Ðà0  à€Where€the€same€act€or€transaction€constitutes€a€violation€of€two€distinct€statutory€provisions,Ð à 0 Ðthe€test€to€be€applied€to€determine€whether€there€are€two€offenses€or€only€one€is€whether€eachÐ Æ   Ðprovision€requires€proof€of€an€additional€fact€which€the€other€does€not.Ь ü (#(# ÐòòBlackóó,€524€S.W.2d€at€919€(quoting€òòBlockburger€v.€United€Statesóó,€284€U.S.€299,€304,€52€S.Ct.Ð ’â  Ð180,182€(1932)).€€In€order€to€determine€if€double€jeopardy€attaches,€our€supreme€court€devised€aÐ xÈ  Ðfour„part€test:Ð ^®  Ðà8  à(1)€a€òòBlockburgeróó€analysis€of€the€statutory€offenses;ÐD” Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(2)€an€analysis,€guided€by€the€principles€of€òòDuchacóó,€of€the€evidence€used€to€prove€theÐ *z  Ðoffenses;Ð`Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(3)€a€consideration€of€whether€there€were€multiple€victims€or€discrete€acts;€and€ÐöFÐ Ð  Ðà8  à(4)€a€comparison€of€the€purposes€of€the€respective€statutes.ÐÜ,Ð Ð  ÐòòDentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€381..€€However,€ð ðif€the€offenses€are€the€ððsameðð€under€Blockburger,€theÐ Â Ðfederal€constitutional€double€jeopardy€protections€have€been€violated€and€the€inquiry€may€end.ðð€Ð ¨ø ÐòòState€v.€Hayesóó,€7€S.W.3d€52,€55€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999).€€For€example,€a€lesser„included€offenseÐ ŽÞ Ðdoes€not€require€proof€of€an€additional€fact€and€is€therefore€considered€to€be€the€same€offense€as€theÐ tÄ Ðgreater,€with€double€jeopardy€barring€conviction€for€both.€€òòId.óó€€€Furthermore,€this€court€hasÐ Zª Ðpreviously€found€that,€because€theft€is€an€element€of€aggravated€robbery,€theft€is€therefore€a€lesser„Ð @ Ðincluded€offense€of€aggravated€robbery.€€òòId.óó€at€56.€€Thus,€an€individual€may€not€be€convicted€of€bothÐ &v Ðtheft€and€aggravated€robbery€when€the€same€facts€establish€the€offenses.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€appellant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€robbery€of€the€West€Meade€Market€andÐ Ø( Ðof€the€theft€of€$368.25€from€West€Meade€Market.€€Additionally,€the€appellant€was€convicted€of€theÐ ¾ Ðaggravated€robbery€of€the€ParMart€and€of€the€theft€of€$68€from€the€ParMart.€€The€same€facts€andÐ ¤ô Ðcircumstances€leading€to€the€aggravated€robbery€convictions€were€used€to€sustain€the€theftÐ Š Ú Ðconvictions.€òòSeeóó€òòEppsóó,€989€S.W.2d€at€746.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€convictions€for€aggravatedÐ p!À  Ðrobbery€and€reverse€both€of€the€appellantððs€theft€convictions.Ð V"¦! ÐÌà@ff#ìàòòò òIII.€Conclusionó óóóˆÐ "$r# Ðà  àà ` àBased€upon€the€foregoing,€we€affirm€the€judgments€of€the€trial€court€as€to€theÐ %X $ Ðaggravated€robbery€convictions,€but€reverse€the€appellantððs€theft€convictions.Ð î%>!% ÐÌÐ º' #' ЇÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð –æ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNORMA€McGEE€OGLE,€JUDGEÐ |Ì ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È à