ÿWPCñ  =# fUNq %¿ 0(Å4íb 0ª 0DÂw$B 0JJ 0T” 0@è D/(W B_ 0^|U:Ú 0h D3| 0r¯ 0|! B 0†º 0@ 1uÐ 0dE AQ© Æú 0DÀ 0DU>HU *†B)°DCÙ AMiuqºæv~ vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡Œƒ*#½¬ @ d3|xì - ù-(Z(2º±$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ4°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€XXXXÔòòà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó0  D¡ ¢ £ D¤ ¶ · D¸ ¹ Dº » D¼ +½ +¾ (e¿ DÀ UÁ D Uà Ä {Å Æ EÇ È EÉ Ê eË r‚Ì r‚Í EÎ Ï Ð EÑ Ò DÓ UÔ Õ T× TØ TÙ EÚ PÛ DÜ UÝ EÞ ß Uà Ó€ì 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$$$$'ÿÿdxd2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô d2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô"#%& ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ*+,Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d55557Border 1dd*6Cþÿ << Gÿÿ þÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€3ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€4ÔÔ€4ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€4XÔÌÌò òSeptember€15,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€4ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó kÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€3ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€4Ôòòà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€4ôÔThe€appellant€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€instructed€the€jury€on€the€issue€of€causation.€€In€the€judge'sÏcharge€to€the€jury€she€stated€that€the€appellant€could€be€convicted€if€the€jury€found€that€he€had€"unlawfully€contributed€to€the€deathÏof€the€deceased."€€In€òòState€v.€Ruane›óó,€912€S.W.2d€766€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€this€Court€cautioned€lower€courts€about€using€suchÏlanguage€in€a€jury€charge.€€We€stated€that€such€language€might€tend€to€mislead€and€confuse€the€jury.€Sinceòò€œRuane›óó,€we€have€againÏaddressed€this€issue€in€òòState€v.€œBondurant›óó,€No.€œ01C01›„9501„CC„00023€(Tenn.€œCrim›.€œApp›.€at€Nashville,€May€24,€1996).€€InÏòòœBondurant›óó,€we€acknowledged€our€disapproval€of€such€an€instruction,€but€found€that€while€such€an€instruction€based€upon€T.P.I.ÏCrim.€37.11€is€not€favored€today,€it€does€not€rise€to€the€level€of€constitutional€deprivation.€€€€Ô€4XÔÌ °Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€3ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€4Ôòòà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€4ôÔAs€common€sense€would€suggest,€the€perimeters€of€legal€causation€are€more€closely€drawn€when€the€interveningÏcause€is€a€matter€of€coincidence.€€For€example,€coincidence€is€where€A€shoots€at€B,€B€changes€his€route€in€an€attempt€to€escapeÏharm€and€is€struck€by€a€car€driven€by€C.€€This€would€be€a€coincidence€and€not€subject€A€to€liability€for€homicide.€€There€is€lessÏreason€to€hold€the€defendant€liable€for€the€bad€result€when€he€has€merely€caused€the€victim€to€be€at€a€particular€place€at€aÏparticular€time,€than€when€he€has€brought€other€agencies€into€play€in€response€to€a€danger€or€injury€he€directly€inflicted.€ÏTherefore,€in€order€to€warrant€a€conviction€for€homicide,€the€death€must€be€the€natural€and€probable€consequence€of€the€unlawfulÏact.€€If€an€independent€intervening€agency€also€contributes€to€the€victim's€death,€the€defendant€will€still€be€held€liable€so€long€as€theÏintervening€agency€was€a€foreseeable€response€to€his€or€her€initial€injury.€€€€€Ô€4XÔÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€3ÔÝ  Ý›Ò 4 ÒÒ ° ÒÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ќԀ4ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Þ ÞÌà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌ̜ـ*ÙÓ ` ܆XDp”X ÓßR€786A1-j|þ` Å `€€@ÿRß›à àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€à à€€€€àQ àAT€JACKSONÌÌÓ` °‡XDp”XÓà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à ààQ àà àJUNE€1997€SESSIONó óÌÌÌÌÌà àÓ ` ®DÓò òÌÓ` cÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àó ó)€ÌÓ ` ¸ cÓà àà à)€C.C.A.€No.€€02C01„9609„CR„00310€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àAppellee,à à)Ìà àà à)€Shelby€CountyÌV.€€€€€€€à à)Ìà àà à)€Honorable€Carolyn€Wade€Blackett,€JudgeÌò òà àó óà à)ò òÌCECIL€C.€GROSE,ó óà à)€(First€Degree€Murder)€à àà à)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àAppellant.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌÓ` ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌWilliam€D.€Masseyà àCharles€W.€BursonÌAttorney€at€Lawà àAttorney€General€&€Reporter€Ì3634€Austin€Peay€HighwayÌMemphis,€TN€38125à àKathy€MoranteÌà àDeputy€Attorney€GeneralÌà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àWilliam€L.€GibbonsÌà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àJames€J.€ChallenÌà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àCriminal€Justice€ComplexÌà à201€Poplar€Avenue,€Suite€301Ìà àMemphis,€TN€38103Ìà àÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€___________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌó óÌÌò òPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,ó óÌJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌœò òÔ  ÔÓ ` ¸ pÓÔ  ÔÌÌÑ  ÑÑ7€ZXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ Ñà àà ààH'càO›€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌÓÓÌÓ ` °§XÓà àThe€appellant,€Cecil€C.€Grose,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€first€degreeÏmurder.€€He€was€sentenced€to€life€in€prison.€€He€appeals€his€conviction€raisingÏthe€following€issues€for€our€review:ÌÌÓÓà8 à1.€€Whether€the€state€proved€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€theÏdeath€of€the€victim€was€the€natural€and€probable€result€of€theÏappellant's€actions;ÌÌà8 à2.€€Whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€his€conviction;Ïand€ÌÌà8 à3.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€charge€the€jury€on€theÏdefense€of€diminished€capacity.ÌÌÓÓUpon€review,€we€affirm€the€appellant's€conviction.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓFACTS€ó óÌò òÓ  ÓÌà àó óThe€appellant€and€the€victim€in€this€case,€Jamie€Forbes,€€wereÏromantically€acquainted.€€However,€prior€to€the€homicide€their€relationship€hadÏdeteriorated.€€Forbes€instituted€stalking€and€harassment€charges€against€theÏappellant.€€The€day€before€the€scheduled€hearing€on€these€charges,€theÏappellant€stated€to€a€friend,€William€Carter,€that€he€was€going€to€kill€Forbes.€€HeÏshowed€Carter€the€rifle€he€planned€to€use.€€The€appellant€explained€that€he€wasÏgoing€to€have€to€do€"a€year€anyway"€on€the€stalking€charges,€so€he€figured€thatÏhe€would€kill€Forbes€and€"they€would€just€think€he€was€crazy€and€he€could€getÏoff€on€insanity."€€€The€appellant€took€the€rifle€and€left.€€Carter,€convinced€theÏappellant€was€seriously€planning€to€kill€Forbes,€drove€to€a€phone€and€called€theÏMillington€police.€€Unfortunately,€the€appellant€found€Forbes€driving€down€theÏroad€before€the€police€could€prevent€the€homicide.€€The€appellant€pulled€upÏbehind€her€car€and€shot€her€with€a€high„powered€rifle.€€The€appellant€spedÏaway€Ìin€his€vehicle.€€Forbes€suffered€tremendous€trauma€and€was€in€the€hospital€forÏseveral€weeks.€€At€the€time€of€her€release,€she€was€a€quadriplegic.€€ÌÌà àApproximately€two€weeks€after€Forbes'€release€from€the€hospital,€herÏfever€became€extremely€high,€and€she€was€readmitted€to€the€hospital.€€SheÏquickly€fell€into€a€coma.€€After€suffering€this€condition€for€almost€eight€days,€herÏfamily€decided€that€she€should€not€be€resuscitated€in€the€event€of€cardiac€orÏpulmonary€arrest.€€She€died€soon€thereafter.€€€€€€ÌÌà àThe€pathologist€testified€that€the€cause€of€death€was€gunshot€wounds.€ÏThe€pathologist€further€testified€that€there€were€two€entry€wounds,€two€exitÏwounds€and€two€re„entry€wounds.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIÌÓ  Óó óÌà àIn€his€first€issue€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏoverruling€his€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal.€€He€claims€the€state€failed€toÏprove€he€caused€Forbes'€death.× ƒ9 ××  ×€€Specifically,€he€argues€that€the€victim'sÏimmediate€cause€of€death€was€the€decision€of€her€family€to€instruct€medicalÏpersonnel€not€to€resuscitate€the€victim€in€the€event€of€cardiac€or€pulmonaryÏarrest.€€In€support€of€this€contention,€the€appellant€relies€primarily€on€òòState€v.ÏRuaneóó,€912€S.W.2d€766€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€In€òòRuaneóó,€this€Court€held€thatÏthe€decision€of€a€competent€victim€to€refuse€medical€care€is€not€a€superveningÏcause€that€removes€a€criminal€defendant's€responsibility.€€òòId.óó€at€776.€€TheÏrationale€behind€this€decision€was€the€fact€that€a€victim's€conscious€decision€toÏremove€artificial€life„support,€while€an€act€of€intervention,€only€carries€out€theÏnatural€result€of€the€defendant's€wrongful€act.€€òòId.óó€€The€appellant€argues€thatÏbecause€Forbes€did€not€participate€in€the€decision€to€refuse€further€medicalÍtreatment,€€her€family's€action€was€a€wholly€unexpected€and€unforeseeableÏsupervening€event€which€was€the€cause€of€her€death.€€ÌÌà àIn€order€for€this€Court€to€sustain€a€criminal€conviction€for€homicide,€theÏevidence€must€establish€that€the€appellant's€actions€caused€the€harm.€€This€isÏgenerally€established€by€showing€that€the€victim's€death€was€the€natural€andÏprobable€result€of€the€defendant's€unlawful€act.× ƒ: ××  ×€€òòState€v.€Barnesóó,€703€S.W.2dÏ611€(Tenn.€1985).€€Our€Supreme€Court€has€established€a€general€rule€on€theÏissue€of€causation:ÌÓÓà8 àOne€who€unlawfully€inflicts€a€dangerous€wound€upon€another€isÏheld€for€the€consequences€flowing€from€such€injury,€whether€theÏsequence€be€direct€or€through€the€operation€of€intermediateÏagencies€dependent€upon€and€arising€out€of€the€original€cause.ÌÌÓÓòòOdeneal€v.€Stateóó,€157€S.W.€419,€421€(Tenn.€1913).€€ÌÌà àBasically,€the€appellant€asks€this€Court€for€largess€because€his€actionsÏonly€put€Forbes€in€a€vegetative€coma€from€which€she€could€not€exercise€herÏright€to€participate€in€her€own€medical€decisions.€€We€find€that€such€a€holdingÏwould€be€illogical.€€Offenders€failing€to€kill€their€victims€immediately,€merelyÏleaving€them€in€a€vegetative€state,€could€escape€punishment€for€homicide€if€theÏœfamily€›€œchooses›€to€end€the€victim's€suffering.€€In€the€instant€case,€we€find€thatÍForbes'€œfamily›€acted€as€her€agent€in€making€the€decision€not€to€resuscitate€herÏin€the€event€of€cardiac€or€pulmonary€arrest.€€€In€so€finding,€we€are€merelyÏextending€òòRuaneóó.€€We€hold€that€when€a€person,€acting€in€the€best€interest€of€theÏvictim,€issues€a€œnonresuscitation›€order,€and€such€order€is€accepted€by€theÏattending€medical€personnel,€that€person€is€acting€only€as€an€agent€for€theÏvictim€and€is€not€a€supervening€cause€that€releases€the€offender€from€criminalÏresponsibility.€€€The€attending€physicians€and€the€family€of€the€victim€owe€noÏduty€to€the€accused€to€treat€the€victim€so€as€to€mitigate€his€or€her€potentialÏcriminal€liability.€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€shot€his€victim€œwith›€a€high„powered€rifle.€€The€state€offeredÏproof€at€trial€that€the€victim€would€have€died€within€hours€after€the€initial€gunshotÏwounds€had€she€not€been€administered€emergency€medical€treatment.€€TheÏdecision€to€end€Forbes'€suffering€and€allow€her€to€die€with€dignity€was€theÏnatural€and€probable€result€of€the€appellant's€gunshot€wounds.€€He€began€aÏchain€of€events€which€in€their€natural€and€probable€sequence€caused€theÏvictim's€death.€€The€decision€to€abstain€from€providing€extraordinary€or€heroicÏmedical€intervention€merely€allowed€the€natural€and€probable€result€of€theÏappellant's€actions€to€come€to€fruition.€€The€jury€resolved€the€factual€question€ofÏcausation€in€favor€of€the€state.€€The€record€supports€the€jury's€finding€on€theÏissue€of€causation€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€This€issue€is€overruled.€€€€ÌÌò òÓ  Óà à€€€IIÌÌÓ  Óó óà àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€wasÏinsufficient€as€a€matter€of€law€to€sustain€his€first€degree€murder€conviction.€ÏSpecifically,€he€claims€that€the€state€failed€to€prove€he€possessed€the€requisiteÏmental€state€for€first€degree€murder.€€In€support€of€this€claim,€the€appellantÏargues€that€he€presented€proof€that€he€had€consumed€alcohol€and€severalÏValium€tablets€prior€to€the€shooting.€€He€claims€that€these€actions€impaired€hisÏjudgment€and€his€ability€to€reason.€€We€disagree.€ÌÌà àGreat€weight€is€afforded€a€verdict€reached€by€a€jury€in€a€criminal€trial.€€AÏjury€verdict€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€stateððs€witnesses€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€œ405,Ï410›€(Tenn.€1983).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawnÏtherefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Moreover,€aÏguilty€verdict€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€which€the€appellantÏenjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcomingÏthis€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óó€€€ÌÌà àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€forÏthis€Court€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÏthe€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÍelements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.ÏVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.Ï1985);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€The€weight€and€credibility€of€the€witnessesððÏtestimony€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòStateÏv.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòByrge€v.€Stateóó,€575€S.W.2dÏ292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).ÌÌà àThe€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€appellantððs€conviction.€€TheÏstate€presented€evidence€that€prior€to€the€shooting€the€appellant€told€a€friendÏthat€he€intended€to€kill€Forbes€and€then€flee€to€Mexico.€€He€showed€his€friendÏthe€weapon€he€planned€to€use.€€The€appellant€did€present€evidence€that€he€hadÏbeen€drinking€and€using€Valium€and€that€his€reasoning€and€judgment€wereÏimpaired.€€The€jury,€however,€chose€to€discredit€this€testimony€and€to€credit€theÏstate's€witnesses.€€A€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found,€and€indeed€did€find,Ïthat€the€appellant€had€committed€first€degree€murder.€€This€issue€is€overruled.€€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIIIÌÌÓ  Óó óà àIn€his€final€issue€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€notÏinstructing€the€jury€on€the€defense€of€diminished€capacity.€€At€trial,€the€appellantÏpresented€evidence€that€his€cognitive€abilities€were€impaired€due€to€temporalÏlobe€syndrome.€€Also,€he€presented€evidence€that€he€had€ingested€alcohol€andÏValium€prior€to€the€shooting.€€Therefore,€he€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÍrefusing€to€instruct€the€jury€that€these€conditions€could€have€diminished€hisÏcapacity€to€form€the€necessary€mental€intent€to€commit€first€degree€murder.€€ÌÌà àIn€support€of€his€assertion€the€appellant€relies€primarily€uponòò€State€v.ÏPhippsóó,€883€S.W.2d€138€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€We€find€the€appellant'sÏinterpretation€of€òòPhippsóó€misguided.€€In€òòPhippsóó,€the€defendant€contended€he€wasÏsuffering€from€post„traumatic€stress€disorder€and€major€depression.€€BasedÏupon€his€condition,€he€attempted€to€defend€against€a€first€degree€murderÏcharge.€€He€requested€that€the€jury€be€instructed€that€it€could€consider€hisÏmental€condition€in€determining€whether€or€not€he€possessed€the€necessaryÏmental€intent€to€commit€first€degree€murder.€€The€trial€judge€refused€to€give€hisÏrequested€instruction.€€However,€he€did€instruct€the€jury€that€post„traumaticÏstress€disorder€and€major€depression€were€not€defenses€to€a€criminal€charge.€ÏThis€Court€reversed€the€defendant's€conviction€holding€that€this€jury€instructionÏcreated€the€impression€that€the€jury€could€not€consider€the€mental€conditions€ofÏthe€defendant€in€determining€whether€or€not€he€possessed€the€requisite€mentalÏintent€for€first€degree€murder.€€ÌÌà àIt€is€well€settled€that€diminished€capacity€is€not€a€defense€capable€ofÏexcusing€or€defeating€a€criminal€charge€in€Tennessee.€€Both€the€state€and€theÏappellant€concede€this€point.€€Diminished€capacity€can,€however,€be€introducedÏto€lessen€an€offense€when€it€serves€to€negate€òòmens€reaóó.€€òòPhippsóó,€883€S.W.2d€atÏ148.€€Evidence€of€an€accused's€mental€state,€at€the€time€of€the€commission€ofÍthe€crime,€is€admissible€to€negate€elements€of€specific€intent,€includingÏpremeditation€and€deliberation€in€a€first€degree€murder€case.€€òòId.óó€at€149.€€€€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€judge€was€under€a€duty€to€instruct€theÏjury€that€the€appellant's€diminished€capacity€could€be€considered€in€determining€œÌÌwhether›€he€was€capable€of€forming€the€necessary€mental€intent€for€first€degreeÏmurder.€€€We€disagree.€€The€appellant€was€entitled€to€introduce€evidence€of€hisÏdiminished€mental€abilities.€€He€did€this€through€both€expert€and€nonexpertÏwitnesses.€€The€jury€was€instructed€on€the€proper€òòmens€reaóó€necessary€to€findÏthe€appellant€guilty€of€first€degree€murder.€€In€making€this€determination€the€juryÏcould€and€should€have€considered€the€appellant's€evidence€concerning€hisÏinability€to€form€the€necessary€òòmens€reaóó.€€The€jury€apparently€discredited€thisÏevidence€and€found€that€the€appellant€possessed€the€requisite€òòmens€reaóó€for€firstÏdegree€murder.€€This€issue€is€overruled.ÌÌAFFIRMED.ÌÓÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌJOE€G.€RILEY,€Judgeà àÌà à€ÌÌà àà àà àà àà à