ÿWPCó Œu•}}šÑ¯¯a­ˆŽ_Xvÿ—ÄrSì§,bÞŠöô*|Â_¡øÏè]Ït]"Ôuš‘•ˆ¿D’£PxþHá„ɺÆhÒ&…íº C ‚2Ƙoð€ø´¸?û÷ªÕ¹¢°˜ì Cäý—v¨Y?Q½@¹Vx#/ï=š½ejš4chNÁR«éÞ Xc‹á~–H>Ò¼ßß³f]Mz2Ñ ¶4Q¨ ‹ÈØ' /±rä¨%^ûd¢JJÑÌôb°¤Éñ‡M38'Xì ;CA/y+Ѽ;²Ò\¼Uº1ÏRÿ_\¾Ç;ÀÖ\`Ÿ¯—I‚©¤Ë9â¼] <8˜ZeäÒ•££9)8hØùʬ]0ëâ-DK÷«pÛ"ò_d"ÓaÓ£K)E ¥Vatfý`î1Ýëg{r,‘8UÖÏÙ<f«b6a&SŽž0UŽÔ&zcÝ›¢ºdü³–ù­ 迵·43¨ë<Ÿx·G7qžn2xª :ü=õæšê–Ú-16Ô=s8Ö¦òŒ§b…÷¡nFDÐðržUà´¨&ß„_('Âû½á™†îý/ó(˜A¸[ÏlÞ¸™„žTF°½g,D6³óÆPÙe³þÑOŽ… i|u¿.t;z#!^t‹b#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% UN­ ðû 0Dë z/ Ò© z{ Òõ ^ Ç wÓ Æ× ÆÆcÆ)4ïNE m /UNÏ 1‡ 72¤ 1uÖ 72K 0c}àààààààààààààààbèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèèè 0ëðððð BÛÛ 0¤ø D3œ D-Ï 0Küü ASGÆš 0¤` 0D A«H˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular æÝ ƒR—‰$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô´š ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIt€is€the€policy€of€this€court€not€to€reveal€the€name€of€a€minor€who€has€been€the€victim€of€a€sex€crime.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÆsŒ)â Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5"q~) ¤3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ –Ý ƒR—‰$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô´š ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€victim€could€not€recall€the€exact€date;€however,€he€recalled€that€his€father€had€taken€the€family€dog€to€theÐ ° Ðveterinarian€on€that€day.€€His€mother,€Melinda€Lawson,€testified€that€her€husband€took€the€dog€to€the€veterinarian€on€Ð tÄ ÐJune€15.(ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(нCEKQW]cioAutoList1A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à - ù-(|G2—‰$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ud»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô<˜ò»»Ô d(|3Î$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ud»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Î$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ud»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OL»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ8€?\XXdê»»d 8ÑÔ€îSî»»Ôà@ttìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° ÐÔ€¼2»îîSÔà@''%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ Ö& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àSeptember€12,€2000€SessionÐ è8 ÐÔ‡XUÞX»¼2ÔÌò òÔ#†¼2»XXUÞó#ÔòòSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEóó€v.€òòóóJOHN€LEE€HAMPTONÔ‡XUÞX»¼2Ôó óÐ æ6 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔHardemanÔ_Ô€CountyÐ æ 6 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€6278€€€€€€Jon€Kerry€Blackwood,€JudgeÐ Ò " ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<•` AßÐ –æ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W1999„00983„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€December€6,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<h` AßÐ i¹  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant,€John€Lee€Hampton,€who€was€charged€with€two€counts€of€rape,€was€convicted€of€twoÐ d´  Ðcounts€of€statutory€rape.€€The€trial€court€imposed€two€concurrent€one„year€sentences,€with€all€butÐ P  Ðsixty€days€suspended.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€the€defendant€asserts€that€the€evidence€wasÐ <Œ Ðinsufficient.€€He€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€certain€photographs€into€evidence,Ð (x Ðby€rehabilitating€a€juror,€by€denying€his€motion€in€Ô_ÔlimineÔ_Ô€to€exclude€evidence€of€uncharged€sexualÐ d Ðoffenses€involving€the€victim,€by€permitting€the€victim€to€testify€in€rebuttal€regarding€an€unchargedÐ P Ðsexual€offense,€and€by€refusing€to€suspend€his€entire€sentence.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÐ ì< Ðcourt.Ð Ø( ÐÓ³ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼2»àXUÞk#ÔÔ‡XUÞX.¼2ÔGary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayesóó€and€òòThomas€T.Ð ˆØ ÐÔ_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌJeannie€Ô_ÔKaessÔ_Ô,€Bolivar,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€John€Lee€Hampton.Ð Lœ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter,€Mark€E.€Davidson,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€andÐ $!t  ÐJames€W.€Ô_ÔFreelandÔ_Ô,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð "`! ÐÓ§ÓÌÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼2»XXUÞÖ#ÔÔ‡XUÞX»¼2ÔÐ Ô$$ $ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼2»XXUÞ¸ #ÔÔ‡XUÞX»¼2ÔÓ  Óà  àThe€victim's׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€mother,€Ô_ÔMalindaÔ_Ô€Lawson,€who€acknowledged€that€the€defendant€had€been€aÐ ¬&ü!& Ðclose€friend€of€her€family€for€Ô#†¼2»XXUÞ #ÔÔ€XUÞX»¼2Ôapproximately€eight€years,€testified€at€trial€that€the€defendant€hadÐ ˜'è"' Ðvisited€her€family's€home€in€Bolivar€and€had€watched€television€and€eaten€supper€with€her€family.€Ð „(Ô#( ÐAt€some€point,€the€victim,€a€14„year„old€male,€expressed€an€interest€in€singing€at€his€sister's€danceÐ p)À$) Ðrecital€at€the€end€of€April€or€the€beginning€of€May€in€1998.€€Because€she€knew€that€the€victim€wouldÐ \*¬%* Ðbe€nervous€on€stage,€Ms.€Lawson€asked€the€defendant€to€sing€with€him.€€After€the€recital,€theÐ H+˜&+ýX ÐÔ_Ôdefendant€informed€Ms.€Lawson€that€he€was€a€choir€director€at€a€church€in€Savannah€and€that€heÐ ° Ðwould€like€the€victim€to€be€involved€with€his€choir.€€Ms.€Lawson€agreed.€€During€the€month€of€June,€Ð œì Ðthe€defendant€drove€the€victim€to€choir€practice€in€Savannah€six€to€eight€times.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àMs.€Lawson€recalled€that€when€she€returned€home€from€work€on€June€26,€1998,€she€receivedÐ `° Ða€call€from€a€co„worker€advising€her€that€the€victim€was€trying€to€find€her.€€Immediately€thereafter,Ð L œ Ðshe€received€a€call€from€the€victim,€whom€she€described€as€hysterical€and€screaming.€€The€victimÐ 8 ˆ Ðasked€for€transportation€home.€€Ms.€Lawson€directed€her€eldest€son€and€two€of€his€friends€to€driveÐ $ t Ðto€the€defendant's€residence€to€find€the€victim.€€When€the€victim€was€returned€to€her€home,€Ms.Ð  ` ÐLawson€observed€that€he€was€crying,€shaking,€and€very€upset.€€That€evening,€Ms.€Lawson€took€theÐ ü L  Ðvictim€to€the€hospital.€€While€there,€she€heard€him€mention€the€city€park€in€Bolivar€and€a€"yellowish"Ð è 8  Ðcondom€thrown€down€at€the€edge€of€the€woods.€€On€the€next€afternoon,€Ms.€Lawson€and€the€victimÐ Ô$  Ðdrove€to€the€city€park€and€found€the€yellow€condom€in€the€area€described€by€the€victim.€€The€police,Ð À  Ðwho€were€called€to€the€scene,€took€possession€of€the€condom.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€victim€testified€that€during€May€of€1998,€he€and€the€defendant€sang€at€his€sister's€danceÐ „Ô  Ðrecital.€€The€victim€recalled€that€he€had€rehearsed€with€the€defendant€at€the€dance€stages€in€Bolivar.€Ð pÀ ÐAfter€the€recital,€the€defendant€asked€the€victim€to€join€the€Savannah€choir€for€a€concert.€€The€victimÐ \¬ Ðagreed€to€participate€and€accompanied€the€defendant€on€his€trips€to€and€from€Savannah€for€rehearsal.€Ð H˜ ÐThe€defendant€usually€picked€up€the€victim€at€5:00€or€6:00€p.m.€and€returned€him€to€his€home€atÐ 4„ Ð10:00€or€11:00€p.m.€€The€victim€estimated€that€they€made€between€five€and€ten€trips€together.€Ð  p ÐOccasionally,€their€return€from€Savannah€was€so€late€at€night€that€the€victim€chose€to€spend€the€nightÐ  \ Ðat€the€defendant's€residence€rather€than€return€to€his€own€home.€€The€victim€confirmed€the€testimonyÐ øH Ðof€his€mother,€Ms.€Lawson,€regarding€his€telephone€call€from€the€defendant's€home€and€theÐ ä4 Ðsubsequent€developments.€€He€recalled€that€while€at€the€hospital,€he€related€the€details€of€hisÐ Ð  Ðencounters€with€the€defendant.€€The€next€day,€he€accompanied€his€mother€to€the€Bolivar€city€park.€Ð ¼  ÐThe€victim€directed€his€mother€to€a€condom€located€at€the€edge€of€the€woods€near€the€picnic€tables.€Ð ¨ø ÐThe€victim€testified€that€the€condom€had€been€left€in€the€park€by€the€defendant€on€June€15,€1998.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р”ä ÐHe€recalled€that€during€the€early€afternoon€on€that€date,€he€was€alone€when€the€defendant€arrived€atÐ €Ð Ðhis€residence.€€The€victim€and€the€defendant€were€watching€television€when€the€victim's€fatherÐ l¼ Ðarrived€to€take€the€family€dog€to€the€veterinarian.€€Before€leaving,€Mr.€Lawson€instructed€the€victimÐ X ¨ Ðto€clean€the€house.€€While€the€victim€was€cleaning€the€living€room,€the€defendant,€who€was€sittingÐ D!” Ðon€the€couch,€"told€[the€victim]€to€sit€down€because€[the€victim]€was€starting€to€look€good€to€himÐ 0"€  Ðand€.€.€.€was€making€him€horny."€€The€victim€testified€that€he€was€sitting€on€the€opposite€end€of€theÐ #l! Ðcouch€when€the€defendant€pulled€him€by€his€shirt€and€instructed€him€to€sit€on€his€lap.€€The€victimÐ $X" Ðrelated€that€the€defendant€then€lowered€the€victim's€pants€and€placed€his€mouth€on€the€victim's€penis.€Ð ô$D # ÐThree€or€four€minutes€later,€a€neighbor€knocked€on€the€door€and€the€victim€jumped€up,€pulled€up€hisÐ à%0!$ Ðpants,€and€ran€to€his€room.€€When€he€looked€out€the€window€and€did€not€see€any€vehicles€in€theÐ Ì&"% Ðdriveway,€the€victim€returned€to€the€living€room.€€The€defendant,€who€answered€the€door,€allowedÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€neighbor€into€the€house.€€After€the€neighbor€had€used€the€phone€and€left,€the€victim€returned€toÐ ° Ðhis€room€to€dress€for€choir€practice,€during€which€time€both€his€mother€and€father€returned€to€theÐ œì Ðhouse.€€The€victim€then€left€with€the€defendant€for€choir€practice€in€Savannah.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àOn€their€return€to€Bolivar€after€choir€practice,€the€defendant€stopped€at€a€Sonic€restaurant€inÐ `° ÐSelmer.€€According€to€the€victim,€the€defendant€purchased€their€food.€€Afterward,€the€defendantÐ L œ Ðstopped€at€a€convenience€market€and€purchased€beer,€which€he€gave€to€the€victim.€€The€victimÐ 8 ˆ Ðtestified€that€he€"took€like€two€drinks"€before€the€defendant€drove€to€the€Bolivar€city€park.€€AfterÐ $ t Ðstopping€the€van,€the€defendant€stepped€out€and€stood€at€the€rear€of€the€vehicle.€€When€the€victimÐ  ` Ðwalked€over€to€the€defendant,€the€defendant€pulled€the€victim€over€to€a€picnic€table,€lowered€theÐ ü L  Ðvictim's€pants,€and€placed€his€mouth€on€the€victim's€penis.€€The€victim€testified€that€after€two€or€threeÐ è 8  Ðminutes,€he€pushed€the€defendant's€head€up€and€the€defendant€responded€by€removing€a€condomÐ Ô$  Ðfrom€his€pocket,€placing€it€on€his€penis,€and€attempting€anal€penetration€of€the€victim.€Ð À  ÐNotwithstanding€an€earlier,€contrary€statement€to€police€officers,€the€victim€testified€that€theÐ ¬ü  Ðdefendant's€penis€actually€penetrated€his€rectum.€€The€victim€testified€that€he€directed€the€defendantÐ ˜è  Ðto€stop€because€of€the€pain.€€The€victim€recalled€that€the€defendant€then€removed€the€condom,Ð „Ô  Ðwalked€to€the€edge€of€the€woods,€and€threw€the€condom€to€the€ground.€€The€victim€explained€thatÐ pÀ Ðhe€did€not€immediately€reveal€the€June€15€incidents€involving€the€defendant€because€he€"was€scaredÐ \¬ Ðof€what€was€going€to€happen€if€the€police€got€involved."€€The€victim€also€recalled€being€embarrassedÐ H˜ Ðabout€the€events€and€nervous€regarding€statements€by€the€defendant€to€the€effect€that€"[the€defendant]Ð 4„ Ðthought€he€was€falling€in€love€with€[him],€and€whenever€love€was€broken,€it€could€cause€death."Ð  p ÐÌà  àOn€cross„examination,€the€victim€acknowledged€that€he€told€neither€the€neighbor€who€cameÐ øH Ðto€his€house€to€use€the€telephone€nor€his€father€about€the€oral€sex€incident€that€had€occurred€prior€toÐ ä4 Ðchoir€practice€on€June€15.€€He€further€acknowledged€that€he€willingly€traveled€with€the€defendantÐ Ð  Ðto€Savannah€even€after€the€oral€sex€incident.€€Finally,€he€conceded€that€after€the€defendant€had€beenÐ ¼  Ðcharged€with€the€crimes,€he€telephoned€the€defendant€to€apologize.€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àLawrence€Sain,€a€friend€of€the€defendant,€was€called€as€a€witness€for€the€state€to€testify€as€toÐ €Ð Ða€conversation€he€had€with€the€defendant€shortly€after€his€arrest.€€Sain€recalled€that€the€defendantÐ l¼ Ðadmitted€that€he€had€been€accused€of€rape,€but€contended€"[t]hat€it€was€willing;€that€it€wasn't€rape."€Ð X ¨ ÐHe€also€recalled€that€the€defendant€had€suggested€that€the€victim€had€accused€him€of€rape€becauseÐ D!” Ðhe€had€planned€to€move€from€the€area.€€Crystal€Barrett,€who€accompanied€Sain€to€the€defendant'sÐ 0"€  Ðresidence,€was€also€called€as€a€state€witness.€€Ms.€Barrett€recalled€that€the€defendant€denied€guiltÐ #l! Ðbecause€€the€sexual€encounters€had€been€consensual.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àCaptain€Bill€Irons,€who€investigated€the€crimes€for€the€Bolivar€Police€Department,€testifiedÐ à%0!$ Ðthat,€as€part€of€his€investigation,€he€instructed€the€victim€to€call€the€defendant€and€apologize€in€hopesÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€the€defendant€would€implicate€himself€during€the€conversation.€€Captain€Irons€tape€recorded€theÐ ¸'#& Ðconversation,€but€the€tape€contained€nothing€useful€to€the€police.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àSergeant€Mike€Jones€of€the€Bolivar€Police€Department€testified€that€he€recovered€a€condomÐ |*Ì%) Ðat€the€edge€of€the€woods€in€the€Bolivar€city€park€on€June€27,€1998.€€The€condom€was€sealed€in€anÐ h+¸&* Ðevidence€envelope€and€sent€to€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation€laboratory€for€analysis.€€ChadÐ ° ÐJohnson,€a€forensic€scientist€with€the€T.B.I.,€testified€that€there€was€no€semen€detected€on€theÐ œì Ðcondom€recovered€by€Sergeant€Jones.€€T.B.I.€laboratory€technicians€attempted€to€extract€DNA€fromÐ ˆØ Ðpossible€human€cells€present€on€the€condom,€but€were€unsuccessful€in€their€efforts.€€Special€AgentÐ tÄ ÐJohnson€described€the€condom€as€being€brittle,€having€debris€such€as€grass€and€dirt€on€it.€€AccordingÐ `° Ðto€Special€Agent€Johnson,€that€was€consistent€with€the€condom's€having€been€exposed€to€theÐ L œ Ðelements€for€several€days.€€Under€those€circumstances,€he€was€not€surprised€at€the€lack€of€evidenceÐ 8 ˆ Ðon€the€condom.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àAfter€the€state€rested€and€the€defendant's€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal€was€denied,€theÐ ü L  Ðdefense€called€Camille€Wooden.€€Ms.€Wooden,€married€to€the€pastor€of€the€church€in€Savannah,Ð è 8  Ðtestified€that€she€had€seen€the€victim€at€choir€practice€with€the€defendant€on€only€two€or€threeÐ Ô$  Ðoccasions.€€She€recalled€that€choir€practice€started€in€May€of€1998,€but€that€the€victim€did€not€beginÐ À  Ðattending€until€June.€€While€acknowledging€that€there€were€no€attendance€records,€she€stated€that€theÐ ¬ü  Ðvictim's€presence€was€evident€because€the€victim€was€white€and€the€other€participants€were€black.€Ð ˜è  ÐAccording€to€Ms.€Wooden,€the€defendant€explained€that€the€victim€was€participating€only€becauseÐ „Ô  Ðthey€had€been€rehearsing€for€a€concert€or€a€talent€show€and€there€was€no€one€else€at€the€victim'sÐ pÀ Ðresidence€during€choir€practice.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àAgainst€the€advice€of€his€counsel,€the€defendant,€who€was€28€years€of€age€at€the€time€of€trial,Ð 4„ Ðtestified€on€his€own€behalf.€€He€stated€that€he€began€working€on€voice€lessons€with€the€victim€at€theÐ  p Ðbeginning€of€May€of€1998,€when€the€victim€and€his€mother€asked€for€his€assistance€in€preparing€theÐ  \ Ðvictim€for€a€singing€performance€at€a€dance€recital.€€The€defendant€testified€that€he€generally€had€twoÐ øH Ðdays€per€week€off€from€work€and€that€he€usually€spent€one€of€those€days€rehearsing€for€the€recitalÐ ä4 Ðwith€the€victim.€€The€defendant€maintained€that€on€June€15,€he€arrived€at€the€victim's€home€at€5:00Ð Ð  Ðp.m.€to€pick€up€the€victim€for€choir€practice€in€Savannah.€€He€claimed€that€the€victim,€who€wasÐ ¼  Ðwatching€television,€stated€that€he€had€just€spoken€by€telephone€with€his€father,€who€was€on€the€wayÐ ¨ø Ðhome.€€The€defendant€recalled€that€at€that€point,€a€neighbor€knocked€on€the€door,€asked€to€use€theÐ ”ä Ðtelephone,€completed€her€call,€spoke€briefly€with€the€defendant€and€the€victim,€and€then€left.€Ð €Ð ÐAccording€to€the€defendant,€the€victim's€father€arrived€at€the€house€immediately€following€theÐ l¼ Ðneighbor's€departure.€€The€defendant€testified€that€while€he€was€speaking€with€the€victim's€father,€theÐ X ¨ Ðvictim€remarked,€"Come€on.€€We're€going€to€be€late."€€The€defendant€claimed€that€when€he€and€theÐ D!” Ðvictim€returned€to€Bolivar€after€choir€practice,€the€victim€did€not€"feel€like€going€home€becauseÐ 0"€  Ðthere's€nothing€to€do."€€The€defendant€contended€that€he€nevertheless€transported€the€victim€directlyÐ #l! Ðto€his€residence€and€then€went€inside€to€speak€to€the€victim's€parents,€as€was€his€custom.€€TheÐ $X" Ðdefendant€explained€that€the€victim€received€little€attention€from€his€parents.€€He€specifically€deniedÐ ô$D # Ðany€sexual€contact€with€the€victim.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àOn€cross„examination,€the€defendant,€who€said€that€he€considered€himself€an€"older€brother"Ð ¸'#& Ðto€the€victim,€admitted€that€he€had€been€to€the€city€park€with€the€victim€on€one€occasion€sometimeÐ ¤(ô#' Ðat€the€end€of€May€or€the€beginning€of€June,€1998.€€He€further€acknowledged€that€he€was€aware€thatÐ )à$( Ðthe€victim€was€14€years€of€age€at€the€time.€€The€defendant€contended,€however,€that€on€June€26,Ð |*Ì%) Ðwhen€he€called€his€mother€to€pick€him€up,€the€victim€was€distraught€because€he€"had€grown€attachedÐ h+¸&* Ðto€[the€defendant]€.€.€.€[a]nd€he€knew€that€the€defendant€was€getting€ready€to€leave."€€The€defendantÐ ° Ðtestified€that€the€victim€had€wanted€to€spend€the€night€at€his€house.€€He€contended€that€when€theÐ œì Ðvictim€learned€that€the€defendant€had€already€called€his€father€to€tell€him€that€they€were€on€their€wayÐ ˆØ Ðto€the€Lawson€residence,€the€victim€became€"upset€and€started€cursing€[the€defendant]€out."€€TheÐ tÄ Ðdefendant€insisted€that€when€he€again€called€the€victim's€father€and€informed€him€of€the€victim'sÐ `° Ðbehavior,€Mr.€Lawson€responded€that€he€would€call€him€back.€€Later,€the€victim€was€still€"cursingÐ L œ Ð[the€defendant]€out,"€and€went€for€a€walk;€when€he€returned,€he€placed€two€telephone€calls€and€thenÐ 8 ˆ Ðsat€down€outside.€€The€defendant€informed€the€victim€that€his€brother€was€coming€to€give€him€a€ride.€Ð $ t ÐThe€defendant€claimed€that€he€then€asked€the€victim€what€was€wrong€and€the€victim€responded,Ð  ` Ð"Well,€I€am€having€some€problems€at€home,€but€I€don't€want€to€talk€about€it€right€now,"€thenÐ ü L  Ðcontinued€to€curse€at€him.€€When€the€victim's€brother€arrived,€the€defendant€followed€their€vehicleÐ è 8  Ðback€to€the€Lawson€residence.€€The€defendant€claimed€that€when€he€inquired€as€to€whether€the€victimÐ Ô$  Ðwas€okay,€he€learned€of€the€rape€accusations€and€immediately€demanded€that€the€victim€be€taken€toÐ À  Ðthe€hospital.€€During€his€examination€at€trial,€the€defendant€denied€ever€having€told€Lawrence€SainÐ ¬ü  Ðor€Crystal€Barrett€that€he€and€the€victim€had€been€involved€in€a€consensual€sexual€relationship.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àBecause€the€defendant€denied€having€made€a€statement€to€Captain€Bill€Irons€after€his€arrest,Ð pÀ ÐCaptain€Irons€was€called€as€a€rebuttal€witness€by€the€state.€€Captain€Irons€testified€that€after€heÐ \¬ Ðarrested€the€defendant€and€read€him€his€rights,€the€defendant€stated€that€he€had€taken€the€victim€toÐ H˜ Ðchoir€practice€in€Savannah€approximately€8€to€10€times.€€The€officer€recalled€that€the€defendantÐ 4„ Ðadmitted€that€on€one€occasion,€he€had€taken€the€victim€to€the€city€park€in€Bolivar€rather€than€drivingÐ  p Ðhim€directly€to€his€residence.€€He€explained€that€on€that€night,€the€victim€"wanted€to€ride€around"Ð  \ Ðrather€than€go€home.€€The€defendant€told€Captain€Irons€that€he€had€stopped€his€vehicle€near€theÐ øH Ðpicnic€tables€in€the€park.€€According€to€Captain€Irons,€the€defendant€claimed€that€the€victim€hadÐ ä4 Ðmerely€stepped€outside€the€car€to€urinate.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€state€also€called€the€victim€as€a€rebuttal€witness€relative€to€the€June€26€events.€€TheÐ ¨ø Ðvictim€testified€that€on€that€date,€he€was€upset€not€because€the€defendant€had€refused€to€allow€himÐ ”ä Ðspend€the€night,€but€because€the€defendant€had€forced€a€sexual€encounter.€€According€to€the€victim,Ð €Ð Ðhe€was€forced€to€perform€oral€sex€on€the€defendant.Ð l¼ ÐÌà@ÍÍ*ìàIˆÐ D!” ÐÌà  àInitially,€the€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence.€€On€appeal,€the€state€isÐ #l! Ðentitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€inferences€which€might€be€drawnÐ $X" Ðtherefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€836€(Tenn.€1978).€€The€credibility€of€the€witnesses,Ð ô$D # Ðthe€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€the€reconciliation€of€conflicts€in€the€evidence€are€mattersÐ à%0!$ Ðentrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòByrge€v.€Stateóó,€575€S.W.2d€292,€295€(Tenn.Ð Ì&"% ÐCrim.€App.€1978).€€The€relevant€question€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÐ ¸'#& Ðfavorable€to€the€state,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crimeÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.Ð )à$( Ð1983).€€This€court€may€neither€reweigh€nor€reevaluate€the€evidence;€nor€may€this€court€substitute€itsÐ |*Ì%) Ðinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859Ð h+¸&* Ð(Tenn.€1956).€€The€evidence€is€sufficient€when€a€rational€trier€of€fact€could€conclude€that€theÐ ° Ðdefendant€is€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307€(1979).€€WhenÐ œì Ðthere€is€a€challenge€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstratingÐ ˆØ Ðthat€the€evidence€is€not€sufficient.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€elements€of€statutory€rape€are€contained€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„506,€whichÐ L œ Ðprovides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àStatutory€rape€is€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€ofÐ  ` Ðthe€defendant€by€the€victim€when€the€victim€is€at€least€thirteen€(13)Ð ü L  Ðbut€less€than€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age€and€the€defendant€is€at€leastÐ è 8  Ðfour€(4)€years€older€than€the€victim.ÐÔ$ ` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„506(a).Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€victim€testified€that€on€July€15,€1998,€when€he€was€14€years€old,€the€defendant,€who€wasÐ „Ô  Ð27€years€old€at€the€time,€forced€him€to€engage€in€two€separate€sexual€encounters:€one€in€which€theÐ pÀ Ðdefendant€performed€oral€sex€on€the€victim€at€the€victim's€home,€and€one€in€which€the€defendantÐ \¬ Ðperformed€oral€sex€on€the€victim€and€then€attempted€to€penetrate€the€victim€anally€in€the€Bolivar€cityÐ H˜ Ðpark.€€The€victim's€testimony€that€the€two€had€sexual€encounters€was€corroborated,€in€part,€by€theÐ 4„ Ðweathered€condom€found€by€the€police€in€the€park€and€by€the€defendant's€admissions€to€LawrenceÐ  p ÐSain€and€Crystal€Barrett€that€he€had€engaged€in€consensual€sex€with€the€victim.€€There€was€sufficientÐ  \ Ðevidence,€in€our€view,€to€support€the€jury's€determination€of€guilt€for€two€statutory€rapes.€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àParenthetically,€statutory€rape€is€not€a€lesser€included€offense€of€rape.€€òòState€v.€Stokesóó,€24Ð Ð  ÐS.W.3d€303€(Tenn.€2000).€€While€the€defendant€was€originally€charged€only€with€two€counts€of€rape,Ð ¼  Ðthe€indictment€was€subsequently€amended€by€agreement€to€include€alternative€allegations€of€statutoryÐ ¨ø Ðrape.Ð ”ä ÐÌà@®®)ìàIIˆÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€into€evidence€twoÐ D!” Ðphotographs€which,€notwithstanding€an€order€allowing€discovery,€were€not€shown€to€defense€counselÐ 0"€  Ðprior€to€trial.€€The€defendant€did€not€raise€this€issue€in€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€As€such,€it€is€waivedÐ #l! Ðfor€purposes€of€appeal.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e),€36(a).€€Nevertheless,€we€would€not€have€foundÐ $X" Ðerror€even€if€the€issue€had€been€properly€preserved.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àRule€16(a)(1)(C)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€provides€that€the€defendantÐ Ì&"% Ðis€entitled€to€discover€and€inspect€"books€.€.€.€[and]€photographs€.€.€.€which€are€within€the€possession,Ð ¸'#& Ðcustody€or€control€of€the€state,€and€which€are€material€to€the€preparation€of€the€defendant's€defenseÐ ¤(ô#' Ðor€are€intended€for€use€by€the€state€as€evidence€in€chief€at€the€trial€.€.€.€."€€Rule€16€goes€on€to€provideÐ )à$( Ðâ âthat€if€"a€party€discovers€additional€evidence€or€material€previously€requested€or€ordered,€which€isÐ |*Ì%) Ðsubject€to€discovery€or€inspection,"€that€party€must€"promptly€notify€the€other€party€.€.€.€of€theÐ ° Ðexistence€of€the€additional€evidence€or€material."€€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€16(c).Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àNearly€five€months€prior€to€trial,€the€trial€court€entered€a€pre„trial€order€which€provided€thatÐ tÄ Ðthe€defendant€was€granted€discovery€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€16.€€During€trial,€the€stateÐ `° Ðattempted€to€introduce€two€Polaroid€photographs:€The€first€photograph€shows€Sergeant€Jones€in€theÐ L œ ÐBolivar€city€park€at€the€edge€of€the€woods€where€the€condom€was€found,€and€the€second€photographÐ 8 ˆ Ðis€of€the€condom€itself.€€Defense€counsel€objected€on€the€ground€that€although€the€assistant€districtÐ $ t Ðattorney€had€advised€her€of€the€existence€of€the€photographs€prior€to€trial,€he€had€not€shown€themÐ  ` Ðto€her.€€The€trial€court€overruled€the€objection€and€admitted€the€photographs.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€record€contains€defense€counsel's€objection€to€the€admission€of€the€photographs€and€theÐ Ô$  Ðstate's€argument€in€response€thereto.€€Otherwise,€the€record€contains€no€information€about€the€natureÐ À  Ðand€timing€of€defense€counsel's€discovery„related€communications€with€the€assistant€district€attorney.€Ð ¬ü  ÐThe€defense€brief€provides€that€"defense€counsel€met€the€district€attorney€three€or€four€days€beforeÐ ˜è  Ðtrial€to€obtain€last„minute€discovery.€€The€district€attorney€informed€her€that€there€were€photographs,Ð „Ô  Ðbut€he€did€not€provide€them."€€In€our€view,€the€state€did€not€violate€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€16.€€The€state'sÐ pÀ Ðduty€under€Rule€16(a)(1)(C)€is€to€permit€the€defendant€to€inspect€and€copy€photographs.€€TheÐ \¬ Ðassistant€district€attorney€advised€defense€counsel€that€the€state€anticipated€introducing€photographsÐ H˜ Ðat€trial.€€Nothing€in€this€record€suggests€that€defense€counsel€wanted€to€inspect€or€copy€theÐ 4„ Ðphotographs€in€advance€of€trial.€€Because€the€record€is€devoid€of€any€suggestion€that€the€stateÐ  p Ðattempted€to€conceal€or€otherwise€withhold€the€photographs€from€the€defendant,€the€photographsÐ  \ Ðwere€properly€admitted.€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àEven€if€there€had€been€a€violation€of€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€16,€the€defendant€would€not€beÐ Ð  Ðentitled€to€relief.€€When€there€has€been€a€failure€to€produce€discoverable€material€within€the€allottedÐ ¼  Ðtime,€the€trial€court€has€the€discretion€to€fashion€an€appropriate€remedy,€such€as€a€continuance.€Ð ¨ø ÐTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€16(d)(2).€€Whether€the€defendant€has€been€prejudiced€by€the€failure€to€disclose€isÐ ”ä Ðalways€a€significant€factor.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Bakeróó,€751€S.W.2d€154,€160€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€Ð €Ð ÐExclusion€of€the€evidence€is€a€drastic€remedy€and€should€not€be€implemented€unless€there€is€no€otherÐ l¼ Ðreasonable€alternative.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Houseóó,€743€S.W.2d€141,€146€(Tenn.€1987).€The€defendantÐ X ¨ Ðhas€failed€to€explain€how€he€was€prejudiced€by€the€trial€court's€admission€of€the€photographs.€€TheÐ D!” Ðphotographs,€which€were€in€no€way€inflammatory,€were€merely€illustrative€of€the€testimony€providedÐ 0"€  Ðby€Captain€Irons€and€Sergeant€Jones.€Ð #l! ÐÌà@)ìàIIIˆÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€next€complains€that€the€trial€court€erred€during€the€voir€dire€of€prospective€Ð Ì&"% ÐJuror€Daniel,€who€was€ultimately€challenged€peremptorily,€presumably€by€the€defense,€and€who€didÐ ¸'#& Ðnot,€of€course,€participate€in€the€trial.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àDefense€counsel€moved€to€strike€Juror€Daniel€after€the€following€series€of€questions€andÐ |*Ì%) Ðanswers:Ð h+¸&* Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[DEFENSE€COUNSEL]:€Now,€Ms.€Daniel,€let€me€ask€you€this.€€InÐ ° Ðyour€church,€have€they€talked€at€all€about€whether€they€think€aÐ œì Ðhomosexual€act€is€a€sin?ЈØ` x` x Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€Yes.ÐtÄÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à[DEFENSE€COUNSEL]:€Okay.€€Tell€us.€€I€know€you€know€the€answer.Ð`°Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€The€Bible.ÐL œÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[DEFENSE€COUNSEL]:€Okay.€€And€let€me€ask€you€this.€€In€thisÐ 8 ˆ Ðtrial,€would€you€agree€that€it's€going€to€be€hard€for€you€to€find€thatÐ $ t Ðsomebody€is€not€guilty€when€you€think€that€they're€committing€a€sin?Ð `` x` x Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€I€think€it€to€be€a€sin,€yes.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌAfter€defense€counsel's€motion€to€strike,€the€trial€court€asked€Juror€Daniel€non„leading€questionsÐ Ô$  Ðabout€any€possible€conflict€between€her€religious€beliefs€and€her€ability€to€impartially€review€theÐ À  Ðevidence€and€render€a€verdict:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€You€understand€ð!ð€Let€me€ask€you€this€question.€€DoÐ „Ô  Ðyou€understand€that€.€.€.€according€to€your€religious€beliefs,€somethingÐ pÀ Ðcan€be€a€sin€and€can€also€be€against€the€law?€€Do€you€understand€that?Ð\¬` x` x Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€Yes,€sir.ÐH˜Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€Do€you€also€understand€that€something€can€be€a€sinÐ 4„ Ðand€not€be€against€the€law?€€Do€you€understand€that?€€Or€somethingÐ  p Ðcan€be€against€the€law€and€not€be€a€sin.€€Do€you€understand€that,Ð  \ Ðaccording€to€your€religious€belief?ÐøH` x` x Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€Yes,€sir.Ðä4Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€Do€you€understand€here€today€that€if€ð!ð€you€are€toÐ Ð  Ðjudge€this€case€only€on€the€question€of€whether€or€not€these€acts€areÐ ¼  Ðagainst€man's€law?Шø` x` x Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€Yes.ДäÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Would€you€be€able€to€do€that?ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àMS.€DANIEL:€Yes.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌIn€response€to€the€questions,€Juror€Daniel€demonstrated€her€impartiality€as€to€the€guilt€or€innocenceÐ D!” Ðof€the€defendant.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àGenerally,€the€control€of€voir€dire€rests€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.€€òòStateÐ $X" Ðv.€Jeffersonóó,€529€S.W.2d€674,€682€(Tenn.€1975);€òòState€v.€Oodyóó,€823€S.W.2d€554,€563€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ô$D # ÐApp.€1991);€òòsee€alsoóóTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€24.€€In€òòState€v.€Irickóó,€our€supreme€court€held€as€follows:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIt€is€the€duty€of€the€trial€judge€to€participate€in€the€examination€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðprospective€jurors.€.€.€.€€His€actions€in€the€conduct€of€voir€direÐ ¤(ô#' Ðexamination€will€not€be€disturbed€unless€there€is€an€abuse€of€thatÐ )à$( Ðdiscretion.Ð|*Ì%)` x` x ÐÐ h+¸&* Ð762€S.W.2d€121,€125€(Tenn.€1988).Ð ° ÐÌà  àA€prospective€juror€who€indicates€that€he€has€formed€an€opinion€about€the€case€"shall€beÐ ˆØ Ðsubject€to€challenge€for€cause€unless€the€examination€shows€unequivocally€that€the€prospective€jurorÐ tÄ Ðcan€be€impartial."€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€24(b)(2).€€Such€a€prospective€juror€may€be€rehabilitated€butÐ `° Ðshould€not€be€led€into€vocalizing€impartiality:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€[Advisory]€Commission€disapproves€of€questions€tending€to€leadÐ $ t Ðthe€prospective€juror€or€suggest€partiality€in€the€first€instance,€andÐ  ` Ðalso€disapproves€of€that€procedure€in€"rehabilitating"€the€prospectiveÐ ü L  Ðjuror€into€vocalizing€impartiality.€€Such€a€prospective€juror€shall€beÐ è 8  Ðheld€to€be€qualified€only€upon€a€truly€unequivocal€showing€ofÐ Ô$  Ðimpartiality.ÐÀ ` x` x ÐÌTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€24,€Advisory€Commission€Comments.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€trial€court's€questions€to€Juror€Daniel€were€proper.€€Moreover,€there€is€noÐ pÀ Ðproof€that€the€defense€had€exercised€all€of€its€other€peremptory€challenges.€€In€òòState€v.€Kilburnóó,€thisÐ \¬ Ðcourt€ruled€that€in€the€absence€of€proof€of€the€exhaustion€of€all€peremptory€challenges,€the€defendantÐ H˜ Ðmust€show€actual€prejudice€or€bias€in€order€to€obtain€relief:Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAs€a€preliminary€matter€it€should€be€noted€there€is€no€proof€in€thisÐ  \ Ðrecord€regarding€the€use€of€peremptory€challenges€by€the€defendant.€Ð øH ÐThe€record€shows€which€jurors€were€excluded,€but€does€not€revealÐ ä4 Ðwhether€the€challenge€was€made€by€the€defendant€or€the€state.€€OnlyÐ Ð  Ðwhen€a€defendant€exhausts€all€his€peremptory€challenges€and€isÐ ¼  Ðforced€to€later€accept€an€incompetent€juror€.€.€.€can€he€complain€aboutÐ ¨ø Ðthe€jury€composition.€€Absent€proof€on€the€use€of€peremptoryÐ ”ä Ðchallenges€it€is€necessary€for€the€defendant€to€show€actual€prejudiceÐ €Ð Ðor€bias€.€.€.€in€order€to€prevail€on€his€jury€complaints.Ðl¼` x` x ÐÌ782€S.W.2d€199,€202€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989)€(citations€omitted).€€As€the€state€points€out,€theÐ D!” Ðprospective€juror€about€which€the€defendant€complains€was€peremptorily€excused.€€The€defendantÐ 0"€  Ðdoes€not€allege€that€any€other€member€of€the€jury€was€in€any€way€prejudiced,€biased,€or€otherwiseÐ #l! Ðincompetent€to€serve.€€In€consequence,€the€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€ground.Ð $X" ÐÌà@……)ìàIVˆÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àNext,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€his€motion€in€limine€toÐ ¸'#& Ðprohibit€the€state€from€presenting€any€testimony€regarding€the€events€of€June€26.€€While€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdefendant's€motion€in€limine€should€have€been€granted,€it€is€our€view€that€the€trial€court's€error€wasÐ )à$( Ðharmless€in€the€context€of€the€entire€trial.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àRule€404€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence,€which€governs€the€admissibility€of€evidenceÐ ° Ðof€other€bad€acts,€provides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àò ò(b)€Other€Crimes,€Wrongs,€or€Acts.ó ó€€Evidence€of€otherÐ tÄ Ðcrimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€is€not€admissible€to€prove€the€character€of€aÐ d´ Ðperson€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€with€the€character€trait.€Ð P   ÐIt€may,€however,€be€admissible€for€other€purposes.€€The€conditionsÐ < Œ Ðwhich€must€be€satisfied€before€allowing€such€evidence€are:Ð( x` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outside€theÐ  d Ðjury's€presence;Ð P ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(2)€The€court€must€determine€that€a€material€issue€exists€otherÐ ì <  Ðthan€conduct€conforming€with€a€character€trait€and€must€upon€requestÐ Ø(  Ðstate€on€the€record€the€material€issue,€the€ruling,€and€the€reasons€forÐ Ä  Ðadmitting€the€evidence;€€andа ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(3)€The€court€must€exclude€the€evidence€if€its€probative€valueÐ œì  Ðis€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.ÐˆØ ` x` x ÐÌTenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b).Ð `° ÐÌà  àWhile€there€are€exceptions,€this€rule€is€generally€one€of€exclusion€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Partonóó,€694Ð 8ˆ ÐS.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1985);€òòBunch€v.€Stateóó,€605€S.W.2d€227€(Tenn.€1980);€òòCarroll€v.€Stateóó,€212€Tenn.Ð $t Ð464,€370€S.W.2d€523€(1963);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Rickmanóó,€876€S.W.2d€824€(Tenn.€1994).€€MostÐ ` Ðauthorities€suggest€that€trial€courts€take€a€"restrictive€approach€[to]€Rule€404(b)€.€.€.€because€'otherÐ üL Ðact'€evidence€carries€a€significant€potential€for€unfairly€influencing€a€jury."€€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,Ð è8 ÐòòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ðð€404.7,€at€172€(3d€ed.€1995).€€The€exceptions€to€the€rule€include€otherÐ Ô$ Ðbad€acts€that€are€offered€to€prove€motive,€identity,€intent,€absence€of€mistake,€opportunity,€or€aÐ À Ðcommon€scheme€or€plan.€€òòBunchóó,€605€S.W.2d€at€229.€€Our€supreme€court€has€stated€the€followingÐ ¬ü Ðwith€regard€to€determining€the€admissibility€of€evidence€of€other€wrongs:Ð ˜è ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[I]f€evidence€that€the€defendant€has€committed€a€crime€separate€andÐ pÀ Ðdistinct€from€the€one€on€trial€is€relevant€to€some€matter€actually€inÐ \ ¬ Ðissue€in€the€case€on€trial,€and€if€its€probative€value€as€evidence€is€notÐ H!˜ Ðoutweighed€by€its€prejudicial€effect€upon€the€defendant,€then€suchÐ 4"„  Ðevidence€may€be€properly€admitted.Ð #p!` x` x ÐÌòòState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€238,€254€(Tenn.€1993).€€€When€the€trial€court€substantially€compliesÐ ø$H # Ðwith€the€requirements€of€Rule€404(b),€review€of€the€trial€court's€ultimate€determination€to€admit€theÐ ä%4!$ Ðevidence€is€on€an€abuse„of„discretion€basis.€€òòState€v.€DuBoseóó,€953€S.W.2d€649,€652€(Tenn.€1997).Ð Ð& "% ÐÌà  àPrior€to€trial,€the€defendant€moved€to€exclude€any€testimony€regarding€the€events€of€June€26Ð ¨(ø#' Ðon€the€grounds€that€the€evidence€was€irrelevant€and€that€its€probative€value€was€outweighed€by€theÐ ”)ä$( Ðdanger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€The€state,€characterizing€the€events€of€the€26òòthóó€as€"fairly€disgusting,"Ð €*Ð%) Ðargued€thatòòóó€the€evidence€was€relevant€to€explain€why€the€incidents€that€occurred€on€June€15€were€notÐ l+¼&* Ðreported€until€the€26òòthóó.€€The€trial€court,€after€hearing€the€arguments€of€counsel,€made€the€followingÐ ° Ðruling:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[W]ith€regard€to€the€June€26òòthóó€event,€the€Court€will€allow€the€State€toÐ tÄ Ðbriefly€go€into€that€incident€as€explanatory€of€how€this€matter€cameÐ `° Ðto€the€attention€of€law€enforcement,€how€it€came€to€the€attention€ofÐ L œ Ðthe€mother,€and€brought€this€whole€matter€to€this€court€here€today,Ð 8 ˆ Ðfinding€that€the€probative€value€outweighs€the€stains€of€unfairÐ $ t Ðprejudice.Ð `` x` x ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€testimony€regarding€the€events€of€June€26.€€TheÐ è 8  Ðproof€qualified€as€evidence€of€an€"other€wrong"€within€the€meaning€of€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b).€€AsÐ Ô$  Ðsuch,€the€trial€court€had€a€duty€to€take€a€more€restrictive€approach.€€That€the€victim€had€failed€toÐ À  Ðpromptly€notify€authorities€of€the€June€15€incidents€was€not€an€issue€presented€by€the€defense;€inÐ ¬ü  Ðfact,€the€state,€by€introducing€proof€of€the€victim's€failure€to€report€the€June€15€incidents€until€theÐ ˜è  Ð26òòthóó,€initially€raised€the€question.€€Moreover,€the€testimony€that€the€state€elicited€about€the€26òòthóó€òòóóhadÐ „Ô  Ðlittle€to€do€with€a€belated€notification€of€authorities.€€Upon€questioning€by€the€state,€the€victim'sÐ pÀ Ðmother€testified€that€"something€disturbing"€had€happened€on€the€26òòthóó,€that€the€victim€had€called€herÐ \¬ Ð"hysterical"€and€"screaming,"€and€that€she€had€taken€the€victim€to€the€hospital.€€Likewise,€the€victimÐ H˜ Ðtestified€that€he€was€"[r]eal€upset"€on€the€26òòthóó,€that€he€called€his€mother,€and€that€he€went€to€theÐ 4„ Ðhospital.€€In€our€assessment,€the€testimony€served€to€engender€speculation€by€the€jury€as€to€the€eventsÐ  p Ðof€the€26òòthóó€and€offered€little€on€the€events€of€June€15.òòóó€€Because€its€probative€value€was€outweighedÐ  \ Ðby€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€the€testimony€should€have€been€excluded.€€òòCf.óó€òòState€v.€Gillilandóó,Ð øH Ð22€S.W.3d€266€(Tenn.€2000)€(holding€that€contextual€background€evidence€containing€proof€of€otherÐ ä4 Ðcrimes€may€be€offered€as€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b)€"other€purpose"€evidence€when€exclusion€of€thatÐ Ð  Ðevidence€would€create€a€chronological€or€conceptual€void€in€presentation€likely€to€result€inÐ ¼  Ðsignificant€jury€confusion€concerning€material€issues€or€evidence).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àOur€conclusion€is€underscored€by€the€fact€that€the€victim€provided€direct€testimony€regardingÐ €Ð Ðhis€delay€in€reporting€the€incidents€of€June€15:Ð l¼ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à ¸ à[I]f€this€event€happened€a€week€or€better€before€you€told€yourÐ D!” Ðmama,€why€didn't€you€immediately€report€it?€€Why€didn't€you€tellÐ 0"€  Ðyour€mama€when€you€got€home€that€next€morning€or€whenever€aboutÐ #l! Ðwhat€[the€defendant]€had€done€with€you€at€your€house€and€at€the€cityÐ $X" Ðpark?Ðô$D #` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à ¸ àBecause€I€was€scared€of€what€was€going€to€happen€if€theÐ à%0!$ Ðpolice€got€involved.€€I€didn't€know€what€he€was€going€to€do€if€I€wouldÐ Ì&"% Ðhave€told€somebody€and€I€was€like€embarrassed€and€everything.и'#&` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à ¸ àHad€[the€defendant]€said€anything€to€you€that€caused€youÐ ¤(ô#' Ðnervousness?Ð)à$(` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à ¸ àHe€was€talking€about€that€he€thought€he€was€falling€in€loveÐ |*Ì%) Ðwith€me,€and€whenever€love€was€broken,€it€could€cause€death.Ðh+¸&*` x` x ЇWithout€any€reference€to€the€26òòthóó,€this€testimony€by€the€victim€conveyed€the€victim's€reasons€for€notÐ ° Ðimmediately€reporting€the€incidents€of€June€15.€€Nevertheless,€none€of€the€testimony€òòóópresented€byÐ œì Ðthe€state€about€the€June€26€incidentòòóó€made€reference€to€any€type€of€sexual€contact€between€theÐ ˆØ Ðdefendant€and€the€victim.€€As€such,€no€evidence€of€other€bad€acts€was€put€before€the€jury€as€a€resultÐ tÄ Ðof€the€trial€court's€ruling.€€Moreover,€there€was€substantial€evidence€of€the€defendant's€guilt.€€TheÐ `° Ðvictim's€testimony€was€corroborated€by€both€the€condom€in€the€park€and€the€defendant's€ownÐ L œ Ðadmissions€to€Lawrence€Sain€and€Crystal€Barrett.€€In€our€view,€any€error€by€the€admission€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðtestimony€was€harmless.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b).Ð $ t ÐÐ   ` ÐÓ  ÓVÐ ° ÐÌÓL±Óà  àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€victim€to€testify€inÐ ˆØ Ðrebuttal€about€the€events€of€June€26òòthóó.€€We€disagree.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àRelevant€evidence€is€that€"having€any€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€fact€that€is€ofÐ L œ Ðconsequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable"€than€it€otherwiseÐ 8 ˆ Ðwould€be.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401.€€Generally,€all€relevant€evidence€is€admissible.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402.€Ð $ t ÐRelevant€evidence€may€be€excluded,€however,€if€it€presents€a€danger€of€unfair€prejudice:Ð  ` ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAlthough€relevant,€evidence€may€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€isÐ è 8  Ðsubstantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusionÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury,€or€by€considerations€of€undueÐ À  Ðdelay,€waste€of€time,€or€needless€presentation€of€cumulative€evidence.Ьü ` x` x ÐÌTenn.€R.€Evid.€403.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAgainst€the€advice€of€his€counsel,€the€defendant€testified€on€his€own€behalf€at€trial.€€DuringÐ \¬ Ðcross„examination,€the€defendant,€who€contended€that€he€had€never€had€any€sexual€contact€with€theÐ H˜ Ðvictim,€was€questioned€about€the€victim's€motivation€for€lying.€€The€defendant€responded€that€theÐ 4„ Ðvictim€had€not€expressed€his€motivation,€but€that€he€had€started€to€do€so€on€the€26òòthóó,€"the€FridayÐ  p Ðevening€that€he€was€at€my€house€that€he€supposedly€been€upset."€€The€assistant€district€attorney€thenÐ  \ Ðasked€whether€the€victim€was€actually€upset€on€the€26òòthóó.€€In€response,€the€defendant€testified€as€toÐ øH Ðhis€version€of€the€events€of€the€26òòthóó.€€Thereafter,€the€trial€court€allowed€the€state€to€call€the€victim€toÐ ä4 Ðrebut€the€testimony€of€the€defendant€with€regard€to€the€June€26òòthóó€incident.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€victim's€rebuttal€testimony€was€properly€allowed.€€The€state€did€not€askÐ ¨ø Ðimproper€cross„examination€questions€concerning€June€26.€€Instead,€the€defendant€òòóópresented€theÐ ”ä Ðissue€during€cross„examination,€characterizing€the€victim€as€"supposedly€.€.€.€upset."€€When€theÐ €Ð Ðassistant€district€attorney€asked€follow„up€questions,€the€defendant€spontaneously€recited€his€versionÐ l¼ Ðof€the€events€of€the€26òòthóó,€thereby€opening€the€door€to€rebuttal€testimony.€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àAlthough€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€govern€evidentiary€rulings€in€all€trial€courts,€theÐ 0"€  Ðrules€do€not€deal€to€any€extent€with€the€issue€of€rebuttal€witnesses€and/or€rebuttal€proof.€€Neil€P.Ð #l! ÐCohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ðð€611.9,€at€399€(3dòòóó€ed.€1995).€€Rule€611(a),€whichÐ $X" Ðindicates€that€trial€courts€shall€exercise€appropriate€control€over€the€presentation€of€evidence€andÐ ô$D # Ðconduct€of€the€trial€when€necessary€to€avoid€abuse€by€counsel,€has€been€interpreted€to€liberally€allowÐ à%0!$ Ðrebuttal€proof.€€òòId.óó€€Tennessee€case€law€establishes€that€trial€courts€have€considerable€discretion€in€Ð Ì&"% Ðwhether€to€admit€rebuttal€witnesses.€€òòId.óó€€Courts€in€this€state€have€consistently€held€that€anyÐ ¸'#& Ðcompetent€evidence€that€explains,€directly€replies€to,€or€contradicts€material€evidence€introduced€byÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€defense,€or€which€is€brought€out€on€the€defendant's€cross„examination,€is€admissible€in€rebuttal.€Ð )à$( ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€831,€835€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);€òòState€v.€James€Morrowóó,€No.Ð |*Ì%) ÐW1998„0583„CCA„R3„CD€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Jackson,€Dec.€29,€1999);€€òòState€v.€Tommy€Nunleyóó,Ð h+¸&* ÐNo.€02C01„9804„CR„00114€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Jackson,€Mar.€12,€1999);€òòState€v.€Allan€Brooksóó,Ð ° ÐNo.01C01„9510„CC„00„00324€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Nashville,€Oct.€29,€1998).€€Because€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€recited€the€events€of€the€26òòthóó€in€explanation€of€the€accusations€made€by€the€victim,€theÐ ˆØ Ðprosecution€was€properly€allowed€to€present€rebuttal€evidence.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€notwithstanding€the€graphic€nature€of€the€victim's€rebuttal€testimony,€itsÐ L œ Ðprobative€value€outweighed€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€The€defendant's€testimony€regarding€JuneÐ 8 ˆ Ð26€was€extraordinarily€detailed€and€completely€exculpatory.€€The€state€was€entitled€to€call€the€victimÐ $ t Ðto€impeach€that€testimony.€€Moreover,€the€trial€court€gave€an€appropriate€limiting€instruction€that€theÐ  ` Ðvictim's€rebuttal€could€be€considered€only€for€impeachment€purposes.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ü L  ÐÌà@……)ìàVIˆÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àFinally,€the€defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€suspend€the€entireÐ ¬ü  Ðsentence.€€It€is€our€conclusion€that€the€defendant's€sentence€was€proper.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àWhen€a€challenge€is€made€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€theÐ pÀ Ðduty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€"de€novo€review€.€.€.€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€madeÐ \¬ Ðby€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d);€òòsee€alsoóóÐ H˜ ÐòòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€provide€thatÐ 4„ Ðthe€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence.Ð  p ÐÌà  àOur€review€requires€an€analysis€of€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencingÐ øH Ðhearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€the€arguments€of€counselÐ ä4 Ðrelative€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)€any€mitigatingÐ Ð  Ðor€enhancing€factors;€(6)€any€statements€made€by€the€defendant€in€his€own€behalf;€and€(7)€theÐ ¼  Ðdefendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40-35-102,€-103,€-210.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àEspecially€mitigated€or€standard€offenders€convicted€of€Class€C,€D,€or€E€felonies€are,€ofÐ €Ð Ðcourse,€presumed€to€be€favorable€candidates€"for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€the€absence€ofÐ l¼ Ðevidence€to€the€contrary."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-102(6).€€With€certain€statutory€exceptions,€noneÐ X ¨ Ðof€which€apply€here,€probation€must€be€automatically€considered€by€the€trial€court€if€the€sentenceÐ D!” Ðimposed€is€eight€years€or€less.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-303(b).€€Among€the€factors€applicable€toÐ 0"€  Ðprobation€consideration€are€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€defendant's€criminal€record,€socialÐ #l! Ðhistory,€and€present€condition,€and€the€deterrent€effect€upon€and€best€interest€of€the€defendant€andÐ $X" Ðthe€public.€€òòState€v.€Grearóó,€568€S.W.2d€285,€286€(Tenn.€1978).Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àA€sentence€of€split€confinement€involves€the€grant€of€probation€after€the€partial€service€of€aÐ Ì&"% Ðsentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-306.€€It€may€include€a€jail€or€workhouse€sentence€of€up€to€oneÐ ¸'#& Ðyear€with€the€probationary€term€to€extend€for€any€period€thereafter€up€to€the€statutory€maximum€forÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€offense.€€òòId.óóÐ )à$( ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€denied€the€defendant's€request€for€probation:Ð h+¸&* Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€having€recognized€the€presumption€that€you€areÐ ° Ðentitled€to€ð!ð€presumption€that€you€are€a€favorable€candidate€forÐ œì Ðalternative€sentencing,€the€Court€hereby€denies€same,€based€on€theÐ ˆØ Ðfact€that€alternative€sentencing€or€probation€in€this€case€wouldÐ tÄ Ð[depreciate]€the€seriousness€of€this€offense.€€The€seriousness€of€thisÐ `° Ðoffense€being€not€only€the€abuse€of€a€position€of€trust€the€Court€findsÐ L œ Ðin€this€case,€but€also€the€.€.€.€psychological€damage€that's€been€doneÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€the€child€involved€in€this€case,€as€well€as€the€family€.€.€.€.Ð$ t` x` x ÐÌThe€trial€court€then€sentenced€the€defendant€to€the€statutory€minimum€of€one€year,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ ü L  ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„111(b)(5),€on€each€of€his€statutory€rape€convictions€and€ordered€that€the€sentences€runÐ è 8  Ðconcurrently.€€Upon€the€defendant's€completion€of€the€sex€offender€evaluation€program,€the€trialÐ Ô$  Ðcourt€modified€the€sentences€to€require€sixty€days€in€the€county€jail,€with€the€remainder€of€the€one„Ð À  Ðyear€concurrent€terms€to€be€completed€on€supervised€probation.€€The€trial€court€denied€theÐ ¬ü  Ðdefendant's€request€to€serve€his€entire€sentence€on€probation:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€Court€will€require€the€defendant€to€serve€60€days€in€the€countyÐ pÀ Ðjail,€after€which€he'll€be€transferred€to€Corrections€ManagementÐ \¬ ÐCorporation€to€serve€the€remainder€of€his€sentence,€and€undergoÐ H˜ Ðsexual€offender€program.€€The€Court€denies€that€ð!ð€the€probation€inÐ 4„ Ðthis€case€because€the€defendant€abused€a€position€of€trust€in€this€case.€Ð  p ÐIt€would€[depreciate]€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,€and€as€a€generalÐ  \ Ðdeterrent€to€others.ÐøH` x` x ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€record€supports€the€trial€court's€denial€of€the€defendant's€request€for€totalÐ Ð  Ðprobation.€€Before€a€trial€court€can€deny€alternative€sentencing€on€the€basis€of€deterrence,€there€mustÐ ¼  Ðbe€sufficient€evidence€in€the€record€such€that€a€reasonable€person€could€conclude€that€"(1)€a€need€toÐ ¨ø Ðdeter€similar€crimes€is€present€in€the€particular€community,€jurisdiction,€or€in€the€state€as€a€whole,Ð ”ä Ðand€(2)€incarceration€of€the€defendant€may€rationally€serve€as€a€deterrent€to€others€similarly€situatedÐ €Ð Ðand€likely€to€commit€similar€crimes."€€òòState€v.€Hooperóó,€___€S.W.3d€___,€No.€M1997„00031„SC„R11„Ð l¼ ÐCD,€2000€WL€1357520€(Tenn.€Sept.€21,€2000).€€No€such€evidence€is€present€in€the€record.€€Thus,Ð X ¨ Ðgeneral€deterrence€was€not€a€proper€ground.€€Nevertheless,€the€remaining€two€factors€considered€byÐ D!” Ðthe€trial€court,€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€and€the€need€to€avoid€depreciating€the€gravity€of€theÐ 0"€  Ðoffense,€were€proper€factors€for€the€trial€court's€consideration.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð #l! Ð103(1)(B);€òòGrearóó,€568€S.W.2d€at€286.€€Confinement€is€often€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€theÐ $X" Ðseriousness€of€an€offense.€€For€the€denial€of€an€alternative€sentence€on€that€basis,€"the€nature€of€theÐ ô$D # Ðoffense€must€generally€outweigh€all€factors€favoring€a€sentence€other€than€confinement."€€òòState€v.Ð à%0!$ ÐBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€454€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€The€record€here€supports€the€trial€court'sÐ Ì&"% Ðconclusion€that€confinement€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€defendant'sÐ ¸'#& Ðoffense.€€The€defendant€took€advantage€of€the€mentor€role€that€he€played€with€regard€to€the€victim.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐIn€doing€so,€he€not€only€abused€the€trust€of€the€victim,€but€that€of€the€victim's€family€as€well.€Ð )à$( ÐMoreover,€his€confessions€to€Lawrence€Sain€and€Crystal€Barrett€notwithstanding,€he€has€continuedÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€deny€having€had€any€sexual€encounters€with€the€victim.€€Thus,€his€candor€was€at€issue.€€Based€onÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€defendant's€continuing€failure€to€accept€responsibility€for€his€crimes,€the€trial€court€properlyÐ ° Ðfound€that€confinement€was€necessary.Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€also€maintains€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€hear€the€testimony€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€victim's€ten„year„old€neighbor,€who€would€have€testified€that€the€victim€had€made€homosexualÐ `° Ðadvances€toward€him.€€The€defendant€attempted€to€call€the€neighbor€to€rebut€the€victim's€mother'sÐ L œ Ðtestimony€that€the€victim€had€been€ridiculed€and€called€a€"fag"€at€school€as€a€result€of€the€defendant'sÐ 8 ˆ Ðabuse.€€The€defendant€contended€that€the€victim€was€responsible€for€the€ridicule.€€In€our€view,€theÐ $ t Ðsentence€was€proper€regardless€of€whether€the€ridicule€was€due€to€the€behavior€of€the€defendant€orÐ  ` Ðthat€of€the€victim.€€Even€if€the€witness€had€testified€favorably€for€the€defense€and€his€testimony€hadÐ ü L  Ðbeen€accredited€by€the€trial€court,€the€acts€of€the€defendant€warranted€the€sentence€imposed.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð À  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð pÀ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGE