WPCx )K -5XY"Qy3̊Όu?Z81iW[h9H?6%rǦ( ojaq!l(Bu\.o sakK6#'ޛip!FXon8!CH'+NH~A@_Ը\qnv)>O`Y58+qhtZ|^Pc$dRp^&^H}Ndbu̜-uO]6ć6LLb>=ZfzFTJ U"de4˜XRy# &a` @' qlC0w3$[*qQ92 ڂ'|#W$X{ ETX}ʗD68=ڔ)FQRpfHtbQha0ROs&т9mNk>9ߪ};")(Ni27Tx&'Hb %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m # UN   s99NEbr      0} 0Dhh B`` 0} D3! D-T 0K AS 0 0D Aͬq/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularlk.^ D3|x 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.wptUHP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6V,,,,V0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- - h R$      1    _Inordertoprotecttheidentityofminorvictimsofsexualabuse,itisthepolicyofthiscourttorefertothe  victimsbytheirinitials.Statev.Schimpf,782S.W.2d186,188n.1(Tenn.Crim.App.1989).(|G2$ !.8dd8         0  (#$  0    R$      2    _Thevictimsfathertestifiedthatitwasonly fiftyorsixtydegreesoutside.However,therewasevidencethat  itwasverywarminsidethemobilehome,anditwascustomaryfortheindividualsintheresidencetowearminimal q articlesofclothing. d(|3+$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3+$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _   8XXdd8@hh:INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @gg$ATNASHVILLE#: #Ԉ #    @  @` AssignedonBriefsAugust13,2003 F XX #XX #STATEOFTENNESSEEv.MITCHELLWAYNE_HILES_XX  ? @@ AppealfromtheCircuitCourtforMontgomeryCounty  9 @@No.40100514MichaelR.Jones,Judge  # @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200202973CCAR3CDFiledNovember13,_2003_   AV) ` dE<]` A ^      XMXXXTheAppellant,MitchellWayne_Hiles_,wasconvictedofonecountofaggravatedsexualbattery,a V  classBfelony,followingajurytrial.Thetrialcourtsentenced_Hiles_Ԁtoaneightyearsentencein ? theDepartmentofCorrection.Onappeal,_Hiles_Ԁraisesthesingleissueofwhethertheevidencewas (x sufficienttosupporttheverdict.Afterreviewoftherecord,weaffirmtheconviction. a #XXX XM##XX#XX Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmed.  3   #X#XX.DavidG.Hayes,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichGaryR.Wade,_P.J._,andJerry  L.Smith,J.,joined.  RogerEricNell,DistrictPublicDefender;_Russel_ԀA.Church,AssistantPublicDefender,Clarksville, q Tennessee,fortheAppellant,MitchellWayne_Hiles_. Z PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelMoore,SolicitorGeneral;KathyD. ,| _Aslinger_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;JohnWesley_Carney_,Jr.,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;and e ArthurF._Bieber_,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. N #XX@#XX@@OO& OPINION #XX #XX " "  FactualBackground  $$ #XXv #  XX XMXXX  OnMarch17,2001,theAppellantwastakingcareofthevictim,nineyearoldA.H.,M S#  1      ׀and _&!& herbrothersincetheirmotherwasnotathome.TheAppellantwastheboyfriendofthechildrens H'"' mother,andhehadbeenlivinginthefamilysresidencefor morethanamonth.Thechildren 1(#( wereexpectingtheirfathertopickthemupforweekendvisitationat5:30p.m. )j$)  *S%* _  Accordingtothevictim,herlegmuscleswerehurtingthatday,whichisnotanunusual  occurrencebecauseshedoesnot getenoughcalcium.ThevictimtoldtheAppellantaboutherleg  cramps,andhetoldhertotakeawarmbath.Aftertakingabath,thevictimslegsstillhurt,sothe  Appellantsuggestedthathemassageherlegs.TheAppellantwassittingonthecouch,andthe k victimwas halfwaylayingdownandsittinguponthecouch.Thevictimwasonlywearingashirt T andpanties,andtheAppellantwaswearingpantsbutdidnothaveashirton. =  Ѐ & v   TheAppellant told[her]tospread[her]legsapart,andshecomplied.TheAppellantbegan  _ tomassageherrightthigh.Shelookedattheclockandnoticedthatitwas fivetwentysomething,  H almosttimeforherfathertoarrive.TheAppellantcontinuedtomassagethevictimsleg,moving  1  upwardsonherleg.Accordingtothevictim,hetouchedherunderneathherpanties rightwhere    yougopee.Attrial,thevictimtestifiedthattheAppellanttouchedher onpurposeand it   seemedlikehemeanttobecauseitwasntabrieftouching.     At5:25p.m.,thevictimsfatherarrived,andthemassageceased.Thevictimwenttoget n  dressed,andtheAppellantranoutsidetospeakwiththevictimsfather.Thevictimsfatherstated W  thathe justhadaninstinctthattherewassomethingwrong,baseduponthesurprisedlookon[the @ Appellants]facetosee[him]and[theAppellant]withnoshirtonU S#  2      ׀andjusthisgeneralattitude. )y Afterthechildrenwerebothinthecar,theyproceededtotheirfathershome.Uponarrivingattheir K fathershouse,hetookthevictimintohisbedroomandaskedherifanythingwaswrong.Thevictim 4 toldherfatherthattheAppellant,whilemassagingherlegs,touchedherin hercrotcharea.The  victimsfatherthenphonedthepolice.Thevictimalsotestifiedthatshethoughtabouttellingher  fatherbecauseshebelievedtheAppellant haddonesomethinghe[was]notsupposedtodo.  Ѐ    TheAppellantwassubsequentlyindictedonMay7,2001,foronecountofaggravatedsexual q battery.OnMarch26,2002,hewasconvictedafteratrialbyjury.Thetrialcourtlatersentenced Z theAppellanttoaneightyearsentenceintheDepartmentofCorrection.TheAppellantfileda C motionfornewtrial,whichwasdenied,andthistimelyappealfollowed.  ,|   ANALYSIS  O   Ajuryconvictionremovesthepresumptionofinnocencewithwhichadefendantiscloaked !"  andreplacesitwithoneofguilt,sothatonappeal,aconvicteddefendanthastheburdenof " ! demonstratingthattheevidenceisinsufficient.Statev.Tuggle,639S.W.2d913,914(Tenn.1982). #" Indeterminingthesufficiencyoftheevidence,thiscourtdoesnotreweighorreevaluatethe $# evidence.Statev.Cabbage,571S.W.2d832,835(Tenn.1978).Likewise,itisnotthedutyofthis v% $ courttorevisitquestionsofwitnesscredibilityonappeal,thatfunctionbeingwithintheprovince _&!% ofthetrieroffact.Statev.Holder,15S.W.3d905,911(Tenn.1999);Statev.Burlison,868S.W.2d H'"& 713,719(Tenn.Crim.App.1993).Instead,theAppellantmustestablishthattheevidencepresented 1(#' attrialwassodeficientthatnoreasonabletrieroffactcouldhavefoundtheessentialelementsof  theoffensebeyondareasonabledoubt.Tenn.R.App.P.13(e);Jacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,  319,99S.Ct.2781,2789(1979);Statev.Cazes,875S.W.2d253,259(Tenn.1994).Moreover,the  Stateisentitledtothestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidenceandallreasonableinferenceswhich k maybedrawntherefrom.Statev.Harris,839S.W.2d54,75(Tenn.1992).Theserulesare T applicabletofindingsofguiltpredicatedupondirectevidence,circumstantialevidence,ora =  combinationofbothdirectandcircumstantialevidence.Statev.Matthews,805S.W.2d776,779 & v (Tenn.Crim.App.1990).  _   Aschargedintheinstantindictment,aggravatedsexualbatteryisdefinedas"unlawfulsexual  1  contact"betweenadefendantandavictimwhoislessthanthirteenyearsofage.Tenn.CodeAnn.    3913504(a)(4)(1997)."Sexualcontact"isdefinedas:   8  Theintentionaltouchingofthevictim's,thedefendant's,oranyotherperson's   intimateparts,ortheintentionaltouchingoftheclothingcoveringtheimmediate n  areaofthevictim's,thedefendant's,oranyotherperson'sintimateparts,ifthat W  intentionaltouchingcanbereasonablyconstruedasbeingforthepurposeofsexual @ arousalorgratification.)y   Tenn.CodeAnn.3913501(6)(1997).The"intimateparts"include"theprimarygenitalarea, K groin,innerthigh,buttockorbreastofahumanbeing."Tenn.CodeAnn.3913501(2). 4   TheAppellantarguesthattheevidenceisinsufficienttoshowthatheintentionallytouched  anintimatepartofthevictimforthepurposeofsexualarousalorgratificationasisrequiredforany  sexualbattery.Theevidenceattrialestablishedthatthevictimsmotherwasnotpresentinthe  residenceatthetimeoftheallegedincident.BoththeAppellantandthevictimwereminimally q clothed.ThevictimtestifiedthattheAppellanttouchedher whereyougopeeandthatshe Z believedthetouchingwasintentional.Shealsotoldherfatheroftheincident,whobelievedthat C somethingimproperhadoccurred. ,|   Intentinsexualbatterycasesisoftenprovedbycircumstantialevidence,including N conditionsunderwhichthetouchingoccurred.Statev.Hayes,899S.W.2d175,180(Tenn.Crim.  7 App.1995).Onefactorfromwhichthejurycouldinferthatthetouchingwasforthepurposeofthe !   Appellantssexualgratificationwasthetimeandplaceoftheincident,whennootheradultswere " ! inthehouse.Seeid.Fromtheevidencepresented,thejurycouldhavefoundbeyondareasonable #" doubtthattheAppellantintentionallytouchedthevictim'sintimateparts.Moreover,thejurycould $# havereasonablyconstruedthatthetouchingwasforthepurposeofsexualarousalorgratification. t% $ AverdictofguiltyaccreditsthetestimonyoftheState'switnessesandresolvesallconflictsinthe ]&!% testimonyinfavoroftheState.Cazes,875S.W.2dat259;Statev.Harris,839S.W.2d54,75 F'"& (Tenn.1992).TheAppellanthashadhisdayincourtandthiscourtwillnotandcannotsubstitute /(#' itsjudgmentforthatofthefinderoffactandarbiterofcredibility.Cabbage,571S.W.2dat835. )h$( Accordingly,thisissueiswithoutmerit. *Q%)   CONCLUSION  +#'+ Ї(0  Basedupontheforegoing,weconcludethattheevidenceislegallysufficienttosupportthe  Appellant'sconvictionforaggravatedsexualbattery.Accordingly,thejudgmentoftheMontgomery  CountyCircuitCourtisaffirmed.#XXX XM- #     `     h     ___________________________________  _    `     h     DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE