ÿWPC9 Æ5³˜pº2Çâ®\‹736¹IuT°ä¶–4!Ç箄5HÃÖá[­ñ°ìÙÙ; ÄQhCî0}`<ÆO¶ÎŒŠÇ…ˆ~Õ‰"Ë_nS­ ”+°Ú¹Û{QJ¾ãéø×¨±10”³‘U<< s¦ñÖ÷†s…¢ëƒ£ÄûÙÑ:ÑÛ`pÿK j<]Ýù8ý®N^’¿BÅphcyHƒ,,’Î"ýØéZ¨`;åеÓÀ‚°{ÃÒéú6šÕÐc¨:)³gÙͧC/¯ ð/ö]ÈjïK'vØ·lP0z³ÂüNyYxd;ݦ´Ghá×á1¶oV)hƒdÓ-ƒ;ÆØ{0GöŸ»S"ñn`G[âÙžœî°Ì`ö»YеÆz§ÑX 8´pˆ›».ÉvMׂ‘Êš?ájå’$1¤®ˆ(Ô…+z_j7H·i°xìc²MöÓ7Ƴ¢ßý² ¾~O,"òK‘ùóü_g—¡é+X-øº*Êè;¾×¡Ž6÷Œ`’cÿ ýïG[5˜#sõóô†#ÉÒ %› N¡ 0ˆ£ U?N+ U@y UN¹ zÒ zSÒÍNŸU>¡ÆßÆ¥ÆkÆ1L÷NC zEÒ¿N‘‘‘ z“Ò  EßNááá zãÒ]N/// z1Ò«N}}}} zÒùNËbÍÍÍ zÕÒON! ! ! z# Ò No!o!o! zq!Òë!N½"½"½" z¿"Ò9#N $ $ $ z $Ò‡$NY%Y%Y% z[%ÒÕ%N§&§&§& z©&Ò#'Nõ' 0ë÷'÷'÷' zâ( B\)Òy) 0¤K* D5ï* D-$+ 0KQ+Nœ+ ASž+Æñ+ 0¤·, 0D[- A«Ÿ-Ÿ-Ÿ- zJ.ÒÄ.N–/–/–/ z˜/Ò0Nä0ä0ä0 zæ0Ò`1N222222 z42Ò®2N€3€3€3 z‚3Òü3NÎ4Î4Î4 zÐ4ÒJ5N666 z6Ò˜6Nj7j7j7 zl7Òæ7^ ¸8wÄ84È8Ü8ë8 mí8˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman (ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times 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.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.wptô\  `‹&Times New RomanLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 SchollSkahanFindleyWeirichWoodhollowLoreceDeloisMathisNedraMcGowenKendraRoyerTyshalTurnmireSulcer RobytransacationRandleEchols TBIHelsonClearyWalgreenDonyelByrgeLiakasGoodeW]hiledemandable i]t EvidDuBosePartonAdkissonBordisGillilandZagorskiBraggs TeelHarbisonAlmonrode BultShropshireNevens a]ny SiskBlakelyt]hey'reEmbryLebronApprendiWalgreens P.J.Woodall CrimAshbySheltonpresentence˜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.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.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.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.wpt- ù-2˜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˜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.wptA˜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.wptF˜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.wptK˜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.wptP˜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(|G2¶4$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ž»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô½$ò»»ÔW˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPT dC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt(|3Ÿ$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ž»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Ÿ$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ž»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKe˜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.wptj˜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.wpto˜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.wptt˜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.wpty˜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.wptƒ˜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.wptˆ˜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.wptÇžY1Ï  ~‰/Y2ê:i¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ž»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ž»»»ÔÑ8€Æ÷XXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡îf–ŽÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼Ž»îîf–#ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€August€3,€2004Ð öF ÐÔ‡XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ž»XXÆ÷-#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€JAMES€JOHNSONòòóóÔ‡XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€00„03451€€€€€€Chris€Craft,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„02009„CCA„R3„CD€€„€Filed€October€20,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant,€James€Johnson,€originally€charged€with€first€degree€murder,€was€convicted€of€secondÐ V¦  Ðdegree€murder.€€The€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€twenty„three€years.€€In€this€appeal,€theÐ ? Ðdefendant€asserts€that€(1)€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction;€(2)€the€trial€courtÐ (x Ðerred€by€denying€his€motion€for€a€preliminary€hearing;€(3)€the€trial€court€erred€by€permittingÐ a Ðevidence€of€a€California€police€chase€involving€the€defendant;€(4)€the€trial€court€erred€in€itsÐ úJ Ðinstructions€to€the€jury;€(5)€the€cumulative€effect€of€the€errors€at€trial€require€reversalÔ#†¼Ž»XXÆ÷¢#ÔÔ‡XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔ;€and€(6)€theÐ ã3 Ðsentence€is€excessiveÔ#†¼Ž»XXÆ÷–#ÔÔ‡XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔ.€€Because€the€trial€court€misapplied€certain€of€the€enhancement€factors,€theÐ Ì Ðsentence€is€modified€to€twenty„one€years.€€Otherwise,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð µ ÐÓÀÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmed€as€Modifiedó óÐ ‡× ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ž»àXÆ÷#ÔÔ‡XÆ÷X.¼ŽÔGary€R.€Wade,€P.J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€joinedÐ Zª ÐandÔ#†¼Ž»XXÆ÷ª #ÔÔ‡XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔ€òòThomas€T.€Woodallóó,€J.,€filed€a€separate€opinion,€concurring€in€part€and€dissenting€in€part..Ð C“ ÐÌMichael€E.€Scholl€(at€trial€and€on€appeal)€and€Gerald€Skahan€(at€trial),€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ e Ðappellant,€James€Johnson.Ð þN ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€David€H.€Findley,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€andÐ Ð! ! ÐJerry€Harris€and€Amy€Weirich,€Assistant€District€Attorneys€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€ofÐ ¹" " ÐTennessee.Ð ¢#ò# ÐÓ{ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ž»XXÆ÷j #ÔÔ‡XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔÐ t%Ä % ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Ž»XXÆ÷ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÆ÷X»¼ŽÔà  àThe€victim,€Carolyn€Payne,€was€last€seen€alive€when€she€left€her€place€of€employment€at€6:38Ð G'—"' Ðp.m.€on€March€14,€2000.€€Two€days€later,€members€of€her€family€asked€Officer€Clyde€Jefferson€ofÐ 0(€#( Ðthe€Memphis€Police€Department€to€go€to€a€residence€at€3334€Woodhollow,€a€rental€property€ownedÐ )i$) Ðby€the€victim,€to€look€for€her.€€Officer€Jefferson,€who€entered€the€residence€with€two€of€the€victim'sÐ *R%* Ðsisters€and€her€cousin,€found€the€victim's€body€wrapped€in€a€blood„spattered€blanket€inside€a€closet.€Ð ë*;&+ ÐOfficer€Jefferson€observed€boxes€inside€the€residence€which€suggested€that€the€occupants€were€inÐ Ô+$', Ðthe€process€of€moving.Ð ½, (- ÐÐ ¦-ö(.ý ÐÔ_Ôà  àLorece€Delois€Gunn,€the€victim's€cousin,€accompanied€two€of€the€victim's€sisters€to€theÐ ° ÐWoodhollow€residence,€where€they€met€Officer€Jefferson.€€Ms.€Gunn€broke€the€glass€of€the€backÐ ™é Ðdoor,€entered€the€residence,€and,€with€the€assistance€of€the€officer,€discovered€the€body.€€A€ring€theÐ ‚Ò Ðvictim€usually€wore€on€her€right€hand€was€missing.Ð k» ÐÌà  àKendra€Wells,€who€had€rented€a€room€in€the€Woodhollow€residence,€moved€at€the€victim'sÐ =  Ðrequest€one€week€before€the€murder.€€The€defendant€rented€a€separate€room€in€the€residence.€Ð & v ÐJennifer€Royer,€another€tenant€in€the€Woodhollow€residence,€had€moved€approximately€one€weekÐ  _ Ðprior€to€the€murder.€€According€to€Ms.€Royer,€the€defendant,€whom€she€had€seen€argue€with€theÐ ø H Ðvictim€on€an€earlier€occasion,€was€the€only€tenant€remaining€when€she€moved€out.Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àOn€the€day€after€the€victim's€disappearance,€the€defendant€paid€cash€for€a€room€at€a€Red€RoofÐ ³  ÐInn€in€Memphis.€€Tyshal€Boone,€who€had€known€the€defendant€for€approximately€three€weeks,€metÐ œì  Ðhim€there.€€The€two€had€sex€and€the€defendant€paid€her€$50.€€Ms.€Boone€noticed€that€the€defendantÐ …Õ  Ðhad€a€cut€on€his€forearm.€€On€the€following€day,€she€saw€a€news€broadcast€about€the€murder€whichÐ n¾  Ðshowed€the€murder€scene.€€Recognizing€the€location€as€the€defendant's€residence,€Ms.€Boone€wentÐ W§  Ðto€the€scene€and,€while€there,€provided€a€statement€to€the€police.€€At€trial,€she€testified€that€theÐ @ Ðdefendant€did€not€call€her€on€the€day€she€talked€to€the€police,€even€though€he€had€promised€to€do€so.Ð )y ÐÌà  àAccording€to€Roby€Martin,€a€pawnbroker€in€East€Memphis,€the€defendant€pawned€a€woman'sÐ ûK Ðdiamond€cluster€ring€for€$100€on€the€day€after€the€victim's€disappearance.€€Ms.€Martin€rememberedÐ ä4 Ðthe€transaction€because€she€had€tried€on€the€ring€and€it€was€a€perfect€fit.€€The€defendant€appearedÐ Í Ð"shaky"€and€"nervous"€and€"kept€looking€behind€him"€during€the€transacation.Ð ¶ ÐÌà  àPatricia€Turnmire,€an€investigator€with€the€Memphis€Police€Department€Crime€Scene€Unit,Ð ˆØ Ðfound€several€boxes€and€a€large€amount€of€blood€on€the€living€room€floor€of€the€WoodhollowÐ qÁ Ðresidence.€€There€was€a€broken€chair€in€the€living€room,€suggesting€that€a€struggle€had€taken€place.€Ð Zª ÐWhile€in€the€kitchen,€officers€discovered€a€household€cleaning€solution€which€contained€bleach€thatÐ C“ Ðhad€apparently€been€used€to€clean€the€blood€stains.€€A€doctor€from€the€medical€examiner's€officeÐ ,| Ðdiscovered€a€knife€partially€wrapped€in€masking€tape€inside€one€of€the€boxes€in€the€living€room.€Ð e ÐJeans€and€a€newspaper€found€in€a€separate€box€were€covered€in€blood.€€A€receipt€discovered€in€oneÐ þN Ðof€the€upstairs€bedrooms€indicated€that€the€defendant€had€pawned€a€woman's€diamond€cluster€ringÐ ç 7 Ðon€the€day€after€the€victim€was€last€seen€alive.€€A€used€condom€was€on€the€night€stand€in€that€sameÐ Ð!   Ðbedroom.€€Officers€found€a€bloody€t„shirt€in€a€garbage€can€in€the€downstairs€bedroom.€€The€victim'sÐ ¹" ! Ðpurse€was€underneath€a€dresser.Ð ¢#ò" ÐÌà  àShirley€Echols,€who€was€dating€the€defendant€at€the€time€of€the€murder,€was€at€theÐ t%Ä $ ÐWoodhollow€residence€on€the€date€the€victim€was€last€seen€alive.€€She€was€aware€that€the€defendantÐ ]&­!% Ðwas€in€the€process€of€moving€because€the€property€was€to€be€sold.€€After€work€that€day,€theÐ F'–"& Ðdefendant€would€not€let€her€inside€the€residence,€explaining€that€the€door€to€his€bedroom€was€locked.€Ð /(#' ÐWhile€Ms.€Echols€waited€outside,€the€defendant€entered€the€residence,€took€possession€of€a€cordlessÐ )h$( Ðtelephone,€and€returned€to€her€vehicle.€€She€stated€that€the€defendant€was€"acting€kind€of€like€in€aÐ *Q%) Ðhurry."Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà  àOfficer€Angelo€Stewart€of€the€Los€Angeles€Police€Department€saw€the€defendant€two€weeksÐ ° Ðafter€the€murder.€€A€check€of€his€license€plate€indicated€that€the€defendant€was€wanted€on€a€felonyÐ ™é Ðcharge.€€When€the€officer€attempted€a€traffic€stop,€the€defendant€accelerated.€€Just€inside€San€Diego,Ð ‚Ò Ðapproximately€eighty€miles€from€the€origin€of€the€pursuit,€the€California€Highway€Patrol€placedÐ k» Ðspike€strips€in€the€roadway€to€stop€the€defendant.€€According€to€Officer€Stewart,€the€defendant€"hitÐ T¤ Ðthe€spike€strips€.€.€.€[and€his]€car€just€.€.€.€veered€to€the€right€and€suddenly€hit€a€dirt€embankment."€Ð =  ÐWhen€the€dust€from€the€crash€settled,€the€defendant€was€sitting€in€the€passenger€seat€with€the€doorÐ & v Ðopen,€refusing€to€get€out€of€the€car.€€After€the€officers€sent€a€police€dog€to€"extract"€the€defendantÐ  _ Ðfrom€his€vehicle,€he€ran€in€the€direction€of€the€officers.€€A€San€Diego€police€officer€fired€four€"beanÐ ø H Ðbag€shots"€at€the€defendant,€who€then€fell€to€the€ground.€€The€defendant€struggled€with€the€officersÐ á 1  Ðas€they€handcuffed€him€and€he€was€eventually€taken€to€the€hospital.€€Officer€Stewart's€partner,Ð Ê   ÐOfficer€Joe€Cruz,€testified€that€as€the€defendant€ran€toward€the€officers,€he€shouted,€"shoot€me,€shootÐ ³  Ðme."Ð œì  ÐÌà  àOfficer€Jamie€Luna€of€the€Los€Angeles€Police€Department,€who€stood€guard€over€theÐ n¾  Ðdefendant€during€his€hospitalization,€testified€that€the€defendant€explained€that€he€had€tried€to€killÐ W§  Ðhimself€by€wrecking€the€car€because€"no€one€[was]€going€to€believe€that€[the€victim]€pulled€the€knifeÐ @ Ðon€me€first€and€stabbed€me€on€my€arm."€€The€defendant€claimed€to€the€officer€that€he€had€beenÐ )y Ðdating€the€victim€and€that€"she€got€mad"€and€evicted€him.Ð b ÐÌà  àTBI€Forensic€Scientist€Kevin€Helson€conducted€DNA€testing€on€the€knife,€the€used€condom,Ð ä4 Ðand€the€clothing€found€in€the€Woodhollow€residence.€€Four€areas€of€blood€on€the€defendant's€jeansÐ Í Ðmatched€the€defendant€while€two€areas€of€blood€on€the€same€jeans€were€from€the€victim.€€All€of€theÐ ¶ Ðbloodstains€on€the€shirt€matched€the€defendant.€€None€of€the€genetic€material€on€the€condomÐ Ÿï Ðbelonged€to€either€the€defendant€or€the€victim.€€"[A]€lot"€of€the€victim's€blood€and€"very€little"€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðdefendant's€blood€was€on€the€blade€and€the€handle€of€the€knife.Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àAn€autopsy€established€that€multiple€stab€wounds€caused€the€victim's€death.€€The€victimÐ C“ Ðsuffered€a€total€of€thirty„five€separate€wounds€to€her€face,€chest,€abdomen,€back,€and€upperÐ ,| Ðextremities.€€There€were€nine€significant€wounds,€17€light€wounds,€and€eight€defensive€wounds.€Ð e ÐAccording€to€Dr.€O'Brien€Cleary€Smith,€who€conducted€the€autopsy,€three€of€the€wounds€wereÐ þN Ðsevere€enough€to€have€caused€the€victim's€death.€€It€was€his€opinion€that,€in€a€murder€of€this€nature,Ð ç 7 Ðit€would€not€be€uncommon€for€the€assailant€to€suffer€self„inflicted€wounds.€€Pressure€blanching€onÐ Ð!   Ðthe€victim's€right€ring€finger€indicated€that€she€had€worn€a€ring€before€her€death.€€Dr.€Smith€couldÐ ¹" ! Ðnot€say€with€certainty,€however,€that€she€was€wearing€the€ring€at€the€time€of€her€death.€€DuringÐ ¢#ò" Ðcross„examination,€he€acknowledged€that€there€was€no€indication€that€a€ring€had€been€forciblyÐ ‹$Û# Ðremoved€from€the€victim's€finger.€€He€acknowledged€that€the€autopsy€did€not€rule€out€the€possibilityÐ t%Ä $ Ðthat€the€victim€was€the€initial€aggressor.€€Dr.€Smith€confirmed€that€the€wound€to€the€defendant's€armÐ ]&­!% Ðcould€have€been€caused€by€a€knife€and€could€have€occurred€at€the€time€of€the€victim's€death.Ð F'–"& ÐÌà  àThe€defendant,€who€met€the€victim€in€1996€when€they€both€worked€for€a€company€calledÐ )h$( ÐFriction€Masters,€claimed€he€had€a€romantic€relationship€with€her€which€continued€until€her€death.€Ð *Q%) Ðâ âHe€claimed€that€the€victim€often€spent€the€weekends€with€him€at€the€residence€he€rented€from€her.€Ð ê*:&* ÐThe€defendant€contended€that€the€two€traveled€to€a€casino€in€Mississippi€on€several€occasions€andÐ ° Ðthat€on€one€such€occasion,€the€victim€stabbed€him€when€he€called€her€by€another€woman's€name.Ð ™é Ðâ âÌà  àAccording€to€the€defendant,€the€victim€encountered€financial€difficulty€in€the€months€beforeÐ k» Ðher€death€and€had€asked€him€to€help€with€her€income€by€"running€drugs."€€He€stated€that€on€twoÐ T¤ Ðdifferent€occasions,€the€victim€provided€him€with€a€rental€car€that€he€then€drove€to€various€locationsÐ =  Ðto€pick€up€drugs.€€In€return,€the€victim€paid€the€defendant€$1,500€on€one€occasion€and€$1,000€onÐ & v Ðanother.€€He€claimed€that€the€victim€failed€to€pay€him€after€he€drove€to€Nashville€to€pick€up€drugsÐ  _ Ðfour€days€before€the€victim's€death.Ð ø H ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contended€that€he€had€to€use€the€knife€to€forcefully€enter€his€bedroom€insideÐ Ê   Ðthe€Woodhollow€residence€on€the€date€of€his€altercation€with€the€victim€because€the€door€was€lockedÐ ³  Ðand€he€had€no€key.€€The€defendant€testified€that€the€victim€telephoned€him€at€approximately€5:30Ð œì  Ðp.m.,€explaining€that€she€had€not€paid€him€for€his€latest€trip€because€"something€came€up."€€He€statedÐ …Õ  Ðthat€he€terminated€the€conversation€when€she€asked€him€to€travel€to€Jackson,€Mississippi,€to€pick€upÐ n¾  Ðmore€drugs.Ð W§  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€claimed€that€later,€the€victim€came€into€the€bathroom€where€he€had€showered,Ð )y Ðand€the€two€had€"quick€sex"€twice,€once€in€an€upstairs€bedroom€and€once€in€his€bedroom.€€HeÐ b Ðtestified€that€when€the€victim€again€asked€him€to€travel€to€Mississippi€on€her€behalf,€he€refused,Ð ûK Ðexplaining€that€she€had€not€paid€him€for€the€previous€trip.€€The€defendant€contended€that€when€heÐ ä4 Ðasked€the€victim€about€a€ring€he€had€loaned€her€three€years€earlier,€she€became€angry,€informed€himÐ Í Ðthat€she€had€sold€the€ring,€and€then€threw€a€ring€at€him€that€she€had€taken€from€her€finger.€€HeÐ ¶ Ðclaimed€that€when€he€demanded€$1,000€for€his€Nashville€trip€and€threatened€to€tell€her€employer€thatÐ Ÿï Ðshe€was€"running€drugs€through€Fed€Ex,"€the€victim€spit€in€his€face€and€he€then€slapped€her.€€TheÐ ˆØ Ðdefendant€testified€that€the€victim€then€grabbed€the€knife€off€of€the€table,€shouting,€"I'm€going€to€killÐ qÁ Ðyou,"€as€she€stabbed€him€twice€on€the€right€arm€and€once€in€the€stomach.€€According€to€theÐ Zª Ðdefendant,€the€two€struggled€and€fell€to€the€ground,€where€he€was€able€to€gain€control€of€the€knifeÐ C“ Ðand€stab€the€victim.€€The€defendant€testified€that€after€the€altercation,€the€victim€asked€for€a€drinkÐ ,| Ðof€water€from€the€kitchen€and€when€he€returned,€she€was€dead.Ð e ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€testified€that€he€wrapped€a€shirt€around€his€bleeding€arm€and€stayed€in€or€nearÐ ç 7 Ðthe€residence€until€the€next€afternoon,€when€he€took€a€cab€first€to€a€Walgreens€pharmacy€and€thenÐ Ð!   Ðto€a€pawn€shop,€where€he€pawned€the€ring.€€He€admitted€that€when€he€returned€to€the€WoodhollowÐ ¹" ! Ðresidence,€he€concealed€the€body€in€the€closet€and€then€drove€the€victim's€car€to€a€Red€Roof€Inn€forÐ ¢#ò" Ðthe€night.€€The€defendant€maintained€that€when€he€returned€to€the€Woodhollow€residence€on€theÐ ‹$Û# Ðfollowing€day,€he€saw€police€cars€at€the€residence€and€fled.€€He€acknowledged€that€he€did€not€informÐ t%Ä $ Ðthe€police€of€the€stabbing,€explaining,€"I€knew€I€had€waited€too€late,€and€they€had€discovered€her€andÐ ]&­!% ÐI€knew€they€wasn't€going€to€believe€what€I€said."Ð F'–"& ÐÌà  àDonyel€Johnson,€who€met€the€defendant€in€1998€when€they€worked€together,€testified€thatÐ )h$( Ðhe€later€rented€a€room€in€the€Woodhollow€residence.€€He€claimed€that€the€defendant€and€the€victimÐ *Q%) Ðwere€romantically€involved€at€the€time€and€that€he€moved€out€of€the€residence€approximately€oneÐ ê*:&* Ðyear€before€the€victim€was€killed.Ð Ó+#'+ Їà  àOfficer€Alan€Little,€who€appeared€as€a€defense€witness,€testified€that€when€the€defendant€wasÐ ° Ðphotographed€at€the€hospital€after€the€wreck,€he€informed€officers€that€he€had€received€a€stab€woundÐ ™é Ðtwo€weeks€before€the€wreck€during€a€fight€with€his€girlfriend.Ð ‚Ò ÐÌÓ  ÓIÐ T¤ ÐÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€first€asserts€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction.€€HeÐ =  Ðcontends€that€the€state€failed€to€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€he€did€not€kill€the€victim€inÐ & v Ðself„defense.€€Alternatively,€he€claims€that€the€state€failed€to€prove€that€he€did€not€kill€the€victim€asÐ  _ Ða€result€of€passion€produced€by€adequate€provocation€and,€as€a€result,€the€conviction€should€beÐ ø H Ðmodified€to€voluntary€manslaughter.Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔOn€appeal,€of€course,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€andÐ ³  Ðall€reasonable€inferences€which€might€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ð œì  Ð(Tenn.€1978).€€The€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€theÐ …Õ  Ðreconciliation€of€conflicts€in€the€proof€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€jury€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòByrge€v.Ð n¾  ÐStateóó,€575€S.W.2d€292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€When€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€isÐ W§  Ðchallenged,€the€relevant€question€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÐ @ Ðto€the€state,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyondÐ )y Ða€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983).€Ð b ÐQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€wellÐ ûK Ðas€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199Ð ä4 ÐTenn.€298,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(1956).€€Because€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€ofÐ Í Ðinnocence€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€convicted€criminal€defendant€bears€the€burden€ofÐ ¶ Ðshowing€that€the€evidence€was€legally€insufficient€to€sustain€a€guilty€verdict.€€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838Ð Ÿï ÐS.W.2d€185,€191€(Tenn.€1992).Ð ˆØ ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX o¢G#ÔÌÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôà  àSecond€degree€murder€is€"a€knowing€killing€of€another."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210(a).€Ð Zª ÐVoluntary€manslaughter€is€defined€as€"the€intentional€or€knowing€killing€of€another€in€a€state€ofÐ C“ Ðpassion€produced€by€adequate€provocation€sufficient€to€lead€a€reasonable€person€to€act€in€anÐ ,| Ðirrational€manner."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„211(a).€€Both€offenses€require€at€least€a€knowingÐ e Ðmental€state.€€With€regard€to€these€offenses,€"[a]€person€acts€knowingly€with€respect€to€a€result€ofÐ þN Ðthe€person's€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€that€the€conduct€is€reasonably€certain€to€cause€theÐ ç 7 Ðresult[.]"€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(20).€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„11„611Ð Ð!   Ðprovides,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:Ð ¹" ! ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oCN#ÔÌà8  àà ` àA€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€force€against€another€personÐ ‹$Û# Ðwhen€and€to€the€degree€the€person€reasonably€believes€the€force€is€immediatelyÐ t%Ä $ Ðnecessary€to€protect€against€the€other's€use€or€attempted€use€of€unlawful€force.€TheÐ ]&­!% Ðperson€must€have€a€reasonable€belief€that€there€is€an€imminent€danger€of€death€orÐ F'–"& Ðserious€bodily€injury.€The€danger€creating€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€seriousÐ /(#' Ðbodily€injury€must€be€real,€or€honestly€believed€to€be€real€at€the€time,€and€must€beÐ )h$( Ðfounded€upon€reasonable€grounds.€There€is€no€duty€to€retreat€before€a€personÐ *Q%) Ðthreatens€or€uses€force.Ðê*:&*Ð Ð  ÐÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔÐ Ó+#'+ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611(a).Ð ° ÐÌà  àHere,€the€defendant€admitted€that€he€killed€the€victim€but€claimed€that€he€did€so€in€self„Ð ‚Ò Ðdefense.€€He€contended€that€the€victim€was€the€first€aggressor,€that€she€threatened€to€kill€him,€andÐ k» Ðthat€he€retaliated€only€after€she€stabbed€him€twice€in€the€arm€and€once€in€the€abdomen.€€The€victimÐ T¤ Ðsuffered€a€total€of€thirty„five€separate€wounds,€three€of€which€would€have€been€sufficient€to€causeÐ =  Ðher€death.€€While€the€defendant€claimed€that€he€did€not€intend€to€kill€the€victim,€he€admitted€that€heÐ & v Ðdid€not€report€the€altercation€and€did€not€seek€medical€treatment€for€the€victim.€€On€the€dayÐ  _ Ðfollowing€her€death,€the€defendant€hid€the€victim's€body€in€a€closet,€pawned€her€ring,€and€fled€theÐ ø H Ðstate€in€her€car.€€When€identified€in€California,€the€defendant€led€officers€on€a€high€speed€chase€thatÐ á 1  Ðended€only€after€the€defendant€wrecked.€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oU#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€The€victim's€wallet€and€other€possessions€were€found€inÐ Ê   Ðthe€stolen€vehicle.€€The€trial€court€provided€jury€instructions€on€both€self„defense€and€voluntaryÐ ³  Ðmanslaughter.€€The€jury,€as€was€their€prerogative,€accredited€the€testimony€of€the€stateÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oŒY#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô's€witnessesÐ œì  Ðand€rejected€the€defendant's€claim€that€he€killed€the€victim€either€in€self„defense€or€after€adequateÐ …Õ  Ðprovocation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Goodeóó,€956€S.W.2d€521,€527€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)€("It€is€well€settledÐ n¾  Ðthat€whether€an€individual€acted€in€self-defense€is€a€factual€determination€to€be€made€by€the€jury€asÐ W§  Ðthe€sole€trier€of€fact.").€€In€our€view,€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€conviction.Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oêZ#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔÐ @ ÐÌÓ  ÓIIÐ b ÐÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€his€motion€to€dismiss€theÐ ûK Ðindictment€and€remand€the€case€to€the€General€Sessions€Court€for€a€preliminary€hearing.€€The€stateÐ ä4 Ðsubmits€that€the€defendant€had€no€right€to€a€preliminary€hearing€because€he€was€not€arrested€priorÐ Í Ðto€being€indicted.Ð ¶ ÐÌà  à"[W]hile€a€preliminary€hearing€is€not€constitutionally€required,€it€is€a€critical€stage€of€aÐ ˆØ Ðcriminal€prosecution€mandated€by€statutory€law,€and€is€an€adversary€proceeding€at€which€the€usualÐ qÁ Ðrules€of€evidence€apply."€€òòMoore€v.€Stateóó,€578€S.W.2d€78,€80€(Tenn.€1979).€€In€òòMooreóó,€our€supremeÐ Zª Ðcourt€held€that€"a€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX o#]#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôpreliminary€hearing€is€mandated€only€in€those€cases€wherein€the€defendant€hasÐ C“ Ðbeen€arrested€--€with€or€without€a€warrant€--€and€is€not€a€demandable€right€where€the€prosecutionÐ ,| Ðoriginated€by€presentment€or€indictment."€€òòId.óó€€Our€high€court€stated€that€"[i]t€is€the€prerogative€ofÐ e Ðthe€District€Attorney€General€and€law€enforcement€personnel€to€omit€the€arrest€procedure€and€takeÐ þN Ðprosecutions€directly€to€the€grand€jury."€€òòId.óó€€This€court€has€held€that€the€defendant€is€not€entitledÐ ç 7 Ðto€a€"post-indictment€determination€of€probable€cause€by€a€magistrate,€a€determination€already€madeÐ Ð!   Ðby€the€grand€jury."€€òòState€v.€Lawsonóó,€794€S.W.2d€363,€366€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990)Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oÄ`#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô.€€Because€theÐ ¹" ! Ðprosecution€began€with€an€indictment€rather€than€an€arrest,€the€defendant€was€not€entitled€to€aÐ ¢#ò" Ðpreliminary€hearing.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€refusing€to€dismissÐ ‹$Û# Ðthe€indictment€and€remand€the€case€for€a€preliminary€hearing.Ð t%Ä $ ÐÌÌÓ  ÓIIIÐ /(#' ÐÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€testimony€about€his€arrest€inÐ )h$( ÐCalifornia€and€his€fraudulent€use€of€a€company€credit€card€while€he€was€on€the€lam.€€He€claims€thatÐ *Q%) Ðthe€evidence€was€irrelevant,€that€it€was€improper€propensity€evidence,€and€that€it€was€moreÐ ê*:&* Ðprejudicial€than€probative.€€The€state€submits€that€evidence€concerning€the€defendant's€flight€to€andÐ Ó+#'+ Ðsubsequent€arrest€in€California€was€relevant€to€show€intent€and€guilty€knowledge.€€The€state€furtherÐ ° Ðsubmits€that€evidence€regarding€the€use€of€the€credit€card€was€relevant€to€show€how€the€defendantÐ ™é Ðfinanced€his€cross„country€trip€and€that€the€defendant€was€not€prejudiced€by€its€admission.Ð ‚Ò ÐÌÔ#†XÆ÷X XX o%d#Ôà  àÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔThe€admission€of€this€evidence€is€governed€by€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€404.€€That€ruleÐ T¤ ÐprovidesÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oDi#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð =  ÐÌà8  àà ` àOther€Crimes,€Wrongs,€or€Acts.€Evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€isÐ  _ Ðnot€admissible€to€prove€the€character€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€inÐ ø H Ðconformity€with€the€character€trait.€It€may,€however,€be€admissible€for€otherÐ á 1  Ðpurposes.€The€conditions€which€must€be€satisfied€before€allowing€inquiry€onÐ Ê   Ðcross-examination€about€specific€instances€of€conduct€are:г Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outside€the€jury's€presence;Мì Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(2)€The€court€must€determine€that€a€material€issue€exists€other€than€conductÐ …Õ  Ðconforming€with€a€character€trait€and€must€upon€request€state€on€the€record€theÐ n¾  Ðmaterial€issue,€the€€ruling,€and€the€reasons€for€admitting€the€evidence;€andÐW§ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(3)€The€court€must€exclude€the€evidence€if€its€probative€value€is€outweighedÐ @ Ðby€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.Ð)yÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b).€€A€fourth€prerequisite€to€admissibility€is€that€the€trial€court€find€by€clear€andÐ ûK Ðconvincing€evidence€that€the€defendant€committed€the€other€crimes€or€bad€acts.€€òòState€v.€DuBoseóó,Ð ä4 Ð953€S.W.2d€649,€654€(Tenn.€1997).€€Rule€404€was€patterned€in€great€measure€on€òòState€v.€Partonóó,€694Ð Í ÐS.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1985),€wherein€our€supreme€court€ruled€that€evidence€of€other€crimes€isÐ ¶ Ðgenerally€inadmissible.€€The€terms€of€this€rule€establish€that€character€evidence€cannot€be€used€toÐ Ÿï Ðprove€that€a€person€has€a€propensity€to€commit€a€crime.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b);€òòState€v.€Adkissonóó,Ð ˆØ Ð899€S.W.2d€626€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Most€authorities€suggest€that€trial€courts€take€aÐ qÁ Ðð ðrestrictive€approach€of€404(b)€.€.€.€because€ððother€actðð€evidence€carries€a€significant€potential€forÐ Zª Ðunfairly€influencing€a€jury.ðð€€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ðð€4.04[8][e]€(4th€ed.Ð C“ Ð2000).€€That€perhaps€best€explains€the€traditional€posture€of€the€courts€that€any€testimony€of€otherÐ ,| Ðbad€acts€by€a€defendant€is€not€usually€admissibleÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oûi#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€when€used€as€substantive€evidence€of€guilt€of€theÐ e Ðcrime€on€trial.€€òòPartonóó,€694€S.W.2d€at€302-03.€€In€those€instances€where€the€other€conduct€or€acts€areÐ þN Ðsimilar€to€the€crimes€on€trial,€the€potential€for€a€prejudicial€result€increases.€€òòState€v.€Bordisóó,€905Ð ç 7 ÐS.W.2d€214,€232€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ð Ð!   ÐÌà  àÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oäs#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔUnlike€the€Federal€rule€barring€such€evidence,€our€rule€does€not€specifically€enumerate€theÐ ¢#ò" Ðpurposes€for€which€such€evidence€may€be€offered.€€òòState€v.€Gillilandóó,€22€S.W.3d€266,€271€(Tenn.Ð ‹$Û# Ð2000).€€The€€Advisory€CommissionÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oºu#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€specifically€omitted€such€a€list€so€that€lawyers€and€judges€wouldÐ t%Ä $ Ð"'use€care€in€identifying€the€issues€to€be€addressed€by€the€Rule€404(b)€evidence.'"€òòId.óó€(quoting€NeilÐ ]&­!% ÐP.€Cohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ðð€404.6,€at€169€n.457€(3d€ed.€1995)).€€Therefore,€inÐ F'–"& Ðevery€case€in€which€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€is€offered,€the€trial€court€shouldÐ /(#' Ðcarefully€scrutinize€the€relevance€of€the€evidence€and€the€reasons€for€which€it€is€being€offered.€€€òòId.óóÐ )h$( ÐòòóóAlthough€Rule€404(b)€does€not€explicitly€list€these€exceptions,€our€courts€have€held€that€evidenceÐ *Q%) Ðof€other€crimes€may€be€admissible€to€show€motive,€intent,€guilty€knowledge,€identity€of€theÐ ê*:&* Ðdefendant,€absence€of€mistake,€and€the€existence€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòCollardÐ Ó+#'+ Ðv.€Stateóó,€526€S.W.2d€112,€114€(Tenn.€1975);€òòsee€alsoóó€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€ofÐ ° ÐEvidenceóó€ðð€4.04[8]€(4th€ed.€2000).Ô#†XÆ÷X XX ow#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX o¢{#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔEven€if€the€challenged€evidence€is€relevant€to€an€issue€other€thanÐ ™é Ðcharacter,€it€must€be€excluded€if€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€outweighs€the€probative€value€of€theÐ ‚Ò Ðother€crime€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€238,€254€(Tenn.€1993);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.Ð k» ÐZagorskióó,€701€S.W.2d€808€(Tenn.€1985);€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€669€S.W.2d€694€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€Ð T¤ ÐBecause€the€trial€court€substantially€complied€with€the€requirements€of€Rule€404(b),€this€court€willÐ =  Ðreview€the€trial€courtððs€determination€for€an€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòDuBoseóó,€953€S.W.2d€at€652.Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oæ{#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔÐ & v ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oà~#ÔÌà  àAt€trial,€the€defendant€claimed€that€he€killed€the€victim€in€self„defense.€€He€also€testified,Ð ø H Ðhowever,€that€after€stabbing€the€victim,€he€concealed€her€body,€pawned€her€jewelry,€and€fled,Ð á 1  Ðeventually€driving€to€California.€€The€California€authorities€testified€that€when€the€defendant€wasÐ Ê   Ðconfronted,€he€led€them€on€a€high€speed€chase,€frantically€attempting€to€avoid€capture.€€In€our€view,Ð ³  Ðthis€testimony€was€relevant€to€show€the€defendant's€knowledge€of€his€own€guilt,€a€permissibleÐ œì  Ðpurpose€under€the€rule.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Braggsóó,€604€S.W.2d€883,€886€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980)€("AÐ …Õ  Ðdefendant's€flight€or€attempt€to€conceal€himself€after€the€commission€of€a€crime€may€be€shown€asÐ n¾  Ða€circumstance€tending€to€indicate€guilt.").€€That€the€defendant€concealed€the€body,€fled€to€CaliforniaÐ W§  Ðand€tried€to€escape€from€the€police€tends€to€discredit€the€claim€that€he€acted€in€self„defense.€€òòSeeóóÐ @ ÐòòState€v.€Stoutóó,€46€S.W.3d€689,€718€(Tenn.€2001)€(holding€that€other€crimes€evidence€was€admissibleÐ )y Ðto€show€the€defendant's€guilty€knowledge€when€proof€of€the€other€crime€tended€to€negate€theÐ b Ðdefendant's€"protestations€of€innocent€presence").€€In€addition,€the€prejudicial€effect€of€this€evidence,Ð ûK Ðif€any,€was€outweighed€by€its€probative€value.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€trial€court€did€not€errÐ ä4 Ðby€admitting€the€evidence.Ð Í ÐÌà  àWith€regard€to€the€testimony€concerning€the€defendant's€fraudulent€use€of€his€company€creditÐ Ÿï Ðcard,€the€state€elicited€the€testimony€to€establish€how€the€defendant€financed€his€trip€to€California.€Ð ˆØ ÐBecause€it€was€a€part€of€the€evidence€of€the€defendant's€concealment€of€his€crime€and€his€flight€fromÐ qÁ Ðthis€jurisdiction,€this€testimony€was€relevant€and€admissible€as€an€exception€to€Rule€404(b).€€In€ourÐ Zª Ðview,€the€probative€value€of€the€evidence€was€not€outweighed€by€the€prejudicial€effect.Ð C“ ÐÌÓ  ÓIVÐ e ÐÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€the€jury€instruction€as€to€the€issue€of€self„Ð þN Ðdefense.€€He€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€provided€an€instruction€on€subsection€(b)€of€theÐ ç 7 Ðself„defense€statute,€which€provides€as€follows:Ð Ð!   ÐÌà8  àà ` àAny€person€using€force€intended€or€likely€to€cause€death€or€serious€bodilyÐ ¢#ò" Ðinjury€within€the€person's€own€residence€is€presumed€to€have€held€a€reasonable€fearÐ ‹$Û# Ðof€imminent€peril€of€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€to€self,€family€or€a€member€of€theÐ t%Ä $ Ðhousehold€when€that€force€is€used€against€another€person,€not€a€member€of€the€familyÐ ]&­!% Ðor€household,€who€unlawfully€and€forcibly€enters€or€has€unlawfully€and€forciblyÐ F'–"& Ðentered€the€residence,€and€the€person€using€the€force€knew€or€had€reason€to€believeÐ /(#' Ðthat€an€unlawful€and€forcible€entry€occurred.Ð)h$(Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611(b).€€The€state€submits€that€the€instructions,€as€provided,€were€proper.Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà  àÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔUnder€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€Constitutions,€a€defendant€has€a€constitutional€rightÐ ° Ðto€trial€by€jury,€which€dictates€that€all€issues€of€fact€be€tried€and€determined€by€twelve€jurors.€€U.S.Ð ™é ÐConst.€amend€VI;€Tenn.€Const.€art.€1,€ðð€6;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Boboóó,€814€S.W.2d€353,€356€(Tenn.€1991);Ð ‚Ò ÐòòWillard€v.€Stateóó,€174€Tenn.€642,€130€S.W.2d€99€(1939).Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oÅŒ#ÔÔ‡ X o XXXÆ÷Ô€€This€right€encompasses€Ô#†XÆ÷X X X o³Ž#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôthe€defendantððsÐ k» Ðright€to€a€correct€and€complete€charge€of€the€law.€€òòState€v.€Teelóó,€793€S.W.2d€236,€249€(Tenn.€1990).Ô#†XÆ÷X XX o#ÔÔ‡ X o XXXÆ÷ԀРT¤ ÐIn€consequence,€Ô#†XÆ÷X X X oá#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôthe€trial€court€has€a€duty€ð ðto€give€a€complete€charge€of€the€law€applicable€to€theÐ =  Ðfacts€of€a€case.ðð€€òòState€v.€Harbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€314,€319€(Tenn.€1986);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Forbesóó,€793Ð & v ÐS.W.2d€236,€249€(Tenn.€1990);€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€30.Ð  _ ÐÌà  àOur€law€requires€that€all€of€the€elements€of€each€offense€be€described€and€defined€inÐ á 1  Ðconnection€with€that€offense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cravensóó,€764€S.W.2d€754,€756€(Tenn.€1989).€€When€theÐ Ê   Ðevidence€in€the€record€fairly€raises€or€supports€the€existence€of€a€defense,€the€trial€court€is€compelledÐ ³  Ðto€instruct€the€jury€on€the€issue.€€òòManning€v.€Stateóó,€500€S.W.2d€913,€915„16€(Tenn.€1973);€òòsee€alsoóóÐ œì  ÐòòAlmonrode€v.€Stateóó,€567€S.W.2d€184,€187€(Tenn.€1978).€€As€part€of€its€instruction,€the€trial€courtÐ …Õ  Ðmust€inform€the€jury€that€any€reasonable€doubt€on€the€existence€of€the€defense€requires€acquittal.€Ð n¾  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-11-203(c);€òòState€v.€Bultóó,€989€S.W.2d€730,€733€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998);€òòStateÐ W§  Ðv.€Shropshireóó,€874€S.W.2d€634,€639€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€This€court€has€added€that€ð ðdueÐ @ Ðprocess€requires€that€a€criminal€defendant€be€afforded€a€meaningful€opportunity€to€present€aÐ )y Ðcomplete€defense,€which€includes€the€right€to€have€the€jury€instructed€regarding€fundamentalÐ b Ðdefenses€raised€by€the€evidence.ðð€€òòState€v.€Michael€S.€Nevensóó,€No.€M2000„00815„CCA„R3„CDÐ ûK Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Nashville,€April€27,€2001);€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„203(c),€(d).Ð ä4 ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oI#ÔÌÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôà  àWhether€the€evidence€has€raised€a€defense€and,€therefore,€requires€a€jury€instruction€dependsÐ ¶ Ðupon€an€examination€of€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€defendant.€€òòBultóó,€989€S.W.2dÐ Ÿï Ðat€733.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„11„611€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:Ð ˆØ ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX o“—#ÔÌà8  àà ` àA€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€force€against€another€personÐ Zª Ðwhen€and€to€the€degree€the€person€reasonably€believes€the€force€is€immediatelyÐ C“ Ðnecessary€to€protect€against€the€other's€use€or€attempted€use€of€unlawful€force.€TheÐ ,| Ðperson€must€have€a€reasonable€belief€that€there€is€an€imminent€danger€of€death€orÐ e Ðserious€bodily€injury.€The€danger€creating€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€seriousÐ þN Ðbodily€injury€must€be€real,€or€honestly€believed€to€be€real€at€the€time,€and€must€beÐ ç 7 Ðfounded€upon€reasonable€grounds.€There€is€no€duty€to€retreat€before€a€personÐ Ð!   Ðthreatens€or€uses€force.й" !Ð Ð  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611(a).Ô‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€€Here,€the€evidence€raised€the€issue€of€self„defense.€€Thus,€the€trialÐ ¢#ò" Ðcourt€was€required€to,€and€did,€charge€the€jury€on€self„defense.€€The€trial€court€instructed€the€juryÐ ‹$Û# Ðas€follows:Ð t%Ä $ ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX ovœ#ÔÌà8  àà ` àIncluded€in€the€defendant's€plea€of€not€guilty€is€his€plea€of€self„defense.ÐF'–"&Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àWhen€a€person€is€assaulted,€by€the€use€of€force,€in€such€a€way€as€to€create€inÐ /(#' Ðhis€mind€a€reasonable€belief€that€he€is€in€imminent€and€actual€danger€of€death€orÐ )h$( Ðserious€bodily€injury,€he€will€be€justified€in€using€force€to€defend€himself€even€to€theÐ *Q%) Ðextent€of€killing€another€human€being.€€The€use€of€force€can€only€be€to€the€degreeÐ ê*:&* Ðreasonably€believed€to€be€immediately€necessary€to€protect€against€the€other's€use€ofÐ Ó+#'+ Ðunlawful€force.€€The€danger€creating€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€serious€bodilyÐ ° Ðinjury€must€be€real,€or€honestly€believed€to€be€real€at€the€time,€and€must€be€foundedÐ ™é Ðupon€reasonable€grounds.ЂÒÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àA€person€may€have€been€mistaken,€based€on€his€perception€of€theÐ T¤ Ðcircumstances,€as€to€the€extent€of€the€actual€danger,€but€if€he€acts€in€self„defenseÐ =  Ðfrom€honest,€even€though€mistaken,€convictions€as€to€the€extent€of€danger€he€will€notÐ & v Ðbe€held€criminally€liable€for€his€action.Ð _Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€determining€whether€the€defendant's€use€of€force€in€defending€himself€wasÐ á 1  Ðreasonable,€you€may€consider€not€only€his€use€of€force€but€also€all€the€facts€andÐ Ê   Ðcircumstances€surrounding€and€leading€up€to€it.€€Factors€to€consider€in€decidingÐ ³  Ðwhether€there€were€reasonable€grounds€for€the€defendant€to€fear€death€or€seriousÐ œì  Ðbodily€injury€from€the€deceased€include€but€are€not€limited€to€any€previous€threatsÐ …Õ  Ðof€the€deceased€made€known€to€the€defendant;€the€character€of€the€deceased€forÐ n¾  Ðviolence,€when€known€to€the€defendant;€the€animosity€of€the€deceased€for€theÐ W§  Ðdefendant,€as€revealed€to€the€defendant€by€previous€acts€and€words€of€the€deceasedÐ @ Ðand€the€manner€in€which€the€parties€were€armed€and€their€relative€strengths€andÐ )y Ðsizes.ÐbÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIf€you€find€that€the€defendant's€fears€of€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€wereÐ ä4 Ðgenuine€and€reasonable€under€the€circumstances,€then€he€would€have€had€the€rightÐ Í Ðto€use€as€much€force€as€was€apparently€necessary€in€his€own€self„defense.€€If,€on€theÐ ¶ Ðother€hand,€you€find€that€the€defendant€was€not€genuinely€or€reasonably€fearful€ofÐ Ÿï Ðdeath€or€serious€bodily€injury,€or€that€he€used€force€going€beyond€the€real€or€apparentÐ ˆØ Ðnecessity€for€his€own€defense,€then€his€use€of€force€would€not€have€been€justified.ÐqÁÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThere€is€no€duty€to€retreat€before€a€person€uses€force.ÐC“Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€use€of€force€against€another€is€not€justified€if€the€defendant€provoked€theÐ e Ðdeceased's€use€of€unlawful€force,€unless€the€defendant€abandoned€the€encounter€orÐ þN Ðclearly€communicated€to€the€deceased€the€intent€to€do€so,€and€the€deceasedÐ ç 7 Ðnevertheless€continued€to€use€unlawful€force€against€the€defendant.ÐÐ!  Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àIf€the€deceased€had€become€disarmed€or€helpless,€or€all€danger€to€theÐ ¹" ! Ðdefendant€had€disappeared,€then€the€defendant's€right€to€self„defense€would€notÐ ¢#ò" Ðjustify€his€conduct.Ћ$Û#Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€defendant€asked€the€trial€court€to€include€in€its€instructions€that€portion€of€the€statute€which€saysÐ ]&­!% Ðthat€"[a]ny€person€using€force€intended€or€likely€to€cause€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€within€hisÐ F'–"& Ðor€her€residence€is€presumed€to€have€held€reasonable€fear€of€imminent€peril."€€The€trial€courtÐ /(#' Ðrefused,€observing€that€"if€[the€defendant€has]€had€sex€with€[the€victim]€twice€.€.€.€she€probably€hasÐ )h$( Ðpermission€to€be€there."€€Ð *Q%) Ðâ âÐ ê*:&* Ðà  àThe€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„11„611(b)Ð ° Ðâ ânote€that€the€subsection€"is€a€restatement€of€a€prior€Tennessee€statute€which€created€a€presumptionÐ ™é Ðthat€a€person€using€force€against€òòan€intruderóó€in€the€residence€held€a€reasonable€fear€of€imminentÐ ‚Ò Ðdeath€or€serious€injury."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611(b),€Sentencing€Commission€CommentsÐ k» Ð(emphasis€added).€€This€court€has€held€that€where€there€is€no€proof€that€the€victim€entered€theÐ T¤ Ðdefendant's€residence€"unlawfully€and€forcibly,"€the€instruction€is€not€required.€€òòState€v.€Billy€JoeÐ =  ÐSiskóó,€No.€03C01-9410-CR-00367€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€Jan.€17,€1997).€€In€òòSiskóó,€theÐ & v Ðdefendant€shot€the€victim€after€the€victim€intervened€in€a€confrontation€between€the€defendant€andÐ  _ Ðhis€ex„wife.€€This€court€ruled€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€refusing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€theÐ ø H Ðpresumption€because€"nothing€suggests€that€the€victim,€defendant's€longtime€friend€and€landlord,Ð á 1  Ðforcibly€and€unlawfully€entered€the€defendant's€house."€€òòId.óó,€slip€op.€at€11.Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àWhile€there€was€some€proof€that€the€victim€had€not€been€invited€into€the€WoodhollowÐ œì  Ðresidence€by€the€defendant€on€the€day€of€the€offense,€there€was€no€proof€that€she€entered€theÐ …Õ  Ðresidence€"unlawfully€and€forcibly,"€as€required€before€an€instruction€should€be€given.€€The€proofÐ n¾  Ðestablished€that€she€had€asked€all€the€tenants,€including€the€defendant,€to€vacate€the€residence€so€thatÐ W§  Ðshe€could€sell€it.€€The€defendant€admitted€that€he€was€preparing€to€move€and€officers€observed€boxesÐ @ Ðfilled€with€the€defendant's€belongings€in€the€residence.€€Further,€the€defendant€claimed€that€he€andÐ )y Ðthe€victim€had€dated€for€years€and€that€she€often€visited€the€residence.€€That€the€defendant€and€theÐ b Ðvictim€engaged€in€sexual€intercourse€twice€before€the€altercation€establishes€that€the€victim's€entryÐ ûK Ðinto€the€residence€was€neither€unlawful€nor€forcible.€€At€the€very€least,€the€defendant€acquiesced€toÐ ä4 Ðthe€entry.€€In€addition,€the€defendant€conceded€that€he€had€no€fear€of€the€victim€until€she€picked€upÐ Í Ðthe€knife€during€their€argument€in€the€living€room.€€Under€these€circumstances,€it€is€our€view€thatÐ ¶ Ðthe€trial€court€did€not€err€by€refusing€to€provide€the€requested€instruction.€€Moreover,€even€if€thereÐ Ÿï Ðwas€error€by€the€trial€court's€failure€to€instruct€the€jury€as€requested,€such€error,€by€our€assessment,Ð ˆØ Ðwas€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€There€were€extensive€instructions€on€self„defense.€€TheÐ qÁ Ðnumber€and€extent€of€the€knife€wounds€the€defendant€admittedly€inflicted,€his€concealment€of€theÐ Zª Ðbody,€his€theft€of€the€car,€his€flight€from€the€jurisdiction,€and€his€attempt€to€evade€arrest€in€CaliforniaÐ C“ Ðconstitute€overwhelming€evidence€of€guilt,€far€more€evidence€than€necessary€to€overcome€anyÐ ,| Ðpresumption€of€self„defense.Ð e ÐÌÌÌÓ  ÓVÐ ¹" ! ÐÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€cumulative€effect€of€the€errors€at€trial€denied€him€the€right€toÐ ¢#ò" Ða€fair€trial.€€Because€there€was€no€accumulation€of€errors€during€the€course€of€the€trial€and€becauseÐ ‹$Û# Ðany€error,€under€these€circumstances,€can€be€classified€as€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€theÐ t%Ä $ Ðdefendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€the€basis€of€that€claim.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€James€Clayton€Youngóó,Ð ]&­!% ÐNo.€01C01-9605-CC-00208€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Nashville,€May€22,€1998).Ð F'–"& ÐÌÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔÓ  ÓVIÐ )h$( ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX o\¾#ÔÓ  Óà  àFinally,€the€defendant€asserts€that€the€twenty„three„year€sentence€is€excessive.€€He€contendsÐ *Q%) Ðthat€the€trial€court€erred€by€applying€two€enhancement€factors€based€upon€his€conduct€during€theÐ ê*:&* Ðpolice€chase€in€California.€€The€state€submits€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€impose€theÐ Ó+#'+ Ðmaximum€sentence€of€twenty„five€years.€€In€addition,€the€defendant€has€asked€this€court€to€considerÐ ° Ðthe€impact€of€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€decision€in€òòBlakely€v.€Washingtonóó,€Ô‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô542€U.S.€____,Ð ™é Ð124€S.€Ct.€2531€(2004)Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oÁ#Ô.Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà  àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€theÐ T¤ Ðduty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€de€novo€review€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€byÐ =  Ðthe€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€ð ðconditioned€uponÐ & v Ðthe€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€andÐ  _ Ðall€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991);€òòseeóó€òòStateÐ ø H Ðv.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€600€(Tenn.€1994).€€ð ðIf€the€trial€court€applies€inappropriate€factors€orÐ á 1  Ðotherwise€fails€to€follow€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€the€presumption€of€correctness€falls.ðð€€òòState€v.Ð Ê   ÐSheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€The€Sentencing€Commission€CommentsÐ ³  Ðprovide€that€the€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ œì  ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„401,€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.Ð …Õ  ÐÌà  àOur€review€requires€an€analysis€of€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€andÐ W§  Ðsentencing€hearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€the€argumentsÐ @ Ðof€counsel€relative€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)Ð )y Ðany€mitigating€or€enhancing€factors;€(6)€any€statements€made€by€the€defendant€in€his€own€behalf;Ð b Ðand€(7)€the€defendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„Ð ûK Ð103,€„210;€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€Ð ä4 ÐÌÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôà  àÔ#†XÆ÷X XX o÷È#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔIn€calculating€the€sentence€for€a€Class€A€felony€conviction,€the€presumptive€sentence€is€theÐ ¶ Ðmidpoint€within€the€range€if€there€are€no€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ Ÿï Ð40-35-210(c).€€If€there€are€enhancement€factors€but€no€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€court€shall€set€theÐ ˆØ Ðsentence€at€or€above€the€midpoint.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(d).€€If€there€are€mitigating€factorsÐ qÁ Ðbut€no€enhancement€factors,€the€trial€court€shall€set€the€sentence€at€or€below€the€midpoint.€€òòId.óó€€AÐ Zª Ðsentence€involving€both€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€requires€an€assignment€of€relativeÐ C“ Ðweight€for€the€enhancement€factors€as€a€means€of€increasing€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ,| Ð40-35-210(e).€€The€sentence€should€then€be€reduced€within€the€range€by€any€weight€assigned€to€theÐ e Ðmitigating€factors€present.€€òòId.óóÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oEÉ#ÔÐ þN ÐÌà  àIn€arriving€at€the€twenty„three„year€sentence,€the€trial€court€applied€the€followingÐ Ð!   Ðenhancement€factors:Ð ¹" ! Ðà8  à(2)à ` àThe€defendant€has€a€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€inÐ ¢#ò" Ðaddition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range;Ћ$Û#Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(6)€à ` àthe€defendant€treated€the€victim€with€exceptional€cruelty€during€theÐ t%Ä $ Ðcommission€of€the€offense;Ð]&­!%Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(10)à ` àthe€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€deadly€weapon€during€the€commissionÐ F'–"& Ðof€the€offense;Ð/(#'Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(11)à ` àthe€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€risk€toÐ )h$( Ðhuman€life€was€high;€and€Ð*Q%)Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(17)à ` àthe€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€under€which€the€potential€forÐ ê*:&* Ðbodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great.ÐÓ+#'+Ð Ð  ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(2),€(6),€(10),€(11),€(17)€(2003).€€The€trial€court€found€noÐ ° Ðmitigating€factors.Ð ™é ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€applying€enhancement€factor€(11),€that€theÐ k» Ðdefendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high,€andÐ T¤ Ðenhancement€factor€(17),€that€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€under€which€theÐ =  Ðpotential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great.€€The€state€concedes€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÐ & v Ðapplying€those€factors,€but€asserts€that€any€weight€given€to€them€should€be€reassigned€toÐ  _ Ðenhancement€factor€(2)€so€that€the€sentence€would€remain€the€same€despite€the€error.Ð ø H ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€applied€both€enhancement€factor€(11)€and€(17)€based€upon€the€defendant'sÐ Ê   Ðconduct€during€the€California€police€chase:Ð ³  Ðà8  àà ` àI€also€find€factor€Number€11,€that€the€defendant€had€no€hesitation€aboutÐ œì  Ðcommitting€a€crime€when€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high.€€Now,€in€this€case€that'sÐ …Õ  Ðan€element€of€the€offense€as€to€the€victim.€€However,€my€concern€is€as€to€all€the€otherÐ n¾  Ðpeople€he€endangered€while€running€from€the€police.ÐW§ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à*à0hÐ Ð àà0ÀhÐ hÐ àà0ÀÐ ÀÐ à*à0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ àà0 ÈÐ ÈÐ à*Ð@ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àLooking€at€factor€Number€17€as€well,€same€as€factor€Number€11,€the€crime€wasÐ )y Ðcommitted€under€circumstances€under€which€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€theÐ b Ðvictim€was€great.€€And€this€is€the€chase.€€Obviously€I€can't€use€that€in€the€murderÐ ûK Ðsecond€conviction€as€an€element€of€the€offense,€but€he€endangered€other€people€whenÐ ä4 Ðhe€was€running€from€the€police.ÐÍÐ Ð  ÐÌThe€court€gave€"a€fair€amount€of€weight"€to€these€factors,€finding€that€"[t]hey're€worth€two€years.€Ð Ÿï ÐAnd€if€those€are€proper€factors€he€gets€two€extra€years€for€doing€that."€€The€trial€court€noted€that€hadÐ ˆØ Ðenhancement€factors€(11)€and€(17)€not€been€applied,€he€would€have€imposed€a€sentence€of€twenty„Ð qÁ Ðone€years,€one€year€above€the€presumptive€midpoint.Ð Zª ÐÌà  àAs€conceded€by€the€state,€neither€of€these€factors€is€applicable€to€the€defendant's€convictionÐ ,| Ðfor€second€degree€murder.€€As€the€trial€court€noted,€factor€(17)€is€inherent€in€the€offense€of€secondÐ e Ðdegree€murder.€€In€any€homicide€case,€there€is€not€only€the€risk€but€also€the€realization€of€bodilyÐ þN Ðinjury€to€the€victim.€€Further,€the€events€which€occurred€in€California€some€two€weeks€after€theÐ ç 7 Ðmurder€could€not€serve€as€the€basis€for€the€application€of€this€factor€because€the€factor€only€appliesÐ Ð!   Ðto€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim.€€None€of€the€people€endangered€during€the€police€chaseÐ ¹" ! Ðqualifies€as€a€victim.€€The€crimes€in€that€jurisdiction€were€separate.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€courtÐ ¢#ò" Ðerred€by€applying€enhancement€factor€(17).Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àWith€regard€to€factor€(11),€this€court€has€held€that€this€factor€may€be€applied€to€a€secondÐ ]&­!% Ðdegree€murder€conviction€when€there€is€proof€that€the€defendant€endangered€the€lives€of€personsÐ F'–"& Ðother€than€the€victim.€€òòÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔSeeóó€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ô#†XÆ÷X XX o_à#Ô€€In€this€case,Ð /(#' Ðhowever,€there€was€simply€no€proof€that€the€defendant€endangered€the€life€of€anyone€other€than€theÐ )h$( Ðvictim€during€the€commission€of€the€murder.€€In€consequence,€the€trial€court€erred€by€applyingÐ *Q%) Ðenhancement€factor€(11).Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà  àÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€application€of€enhancement€factor€(6),€that€theÐ ° Ðdefendant€treated€the€victim€with€exceptional€cruelty,€is€not€supported€by€the€record.€€ApplicationÐ ™é Ðof€this€factor€requires€a€finding€of€cruelty€over€and€above€that€inherently€attendant€to€the€crime€forÐ ‚Ò Ðwhich€the€defendant€is€convicted.€€òòState€v.€Embryóó,€915€S.W.2d€451,€456€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€Ð k» ÐIn€other€words,€such€evidence€must€ð ðdenote[]€the€infliction€of€pain€or€suffering€for€its€own€sake€orÐ T¤ Ðfrom€the€gratification€derived€therefrom,€and€not€merely€pain€or€suffering€inflicted€as€the€means€ofÐ =  Ðaccomplishing€the€crime€charged.ðð€€òòState€v.€Kelly€Haynesóó,€No.€W1999-01485-CCA-R3-CD€(Tenn.Ð & v ÐCrim.€App.,€at€Jackson,€Mar.€14,€2000).€€Enhancement€factor€(6)€has€typically€been€applied€inÐ  _ Ðsituations€where€the€victim€was€tortured€or€abused.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€825€S.W.2d€109,€113€(Tenn.Ð ø H ÐCrim.€App.€1991).€€This€court€has€upheld€the€application€of€this€factor€based€on€proof€of€extensiveÐ á 1  Ðphysical€abuse€or€torture,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€259€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995),€asÐ Ê   Ðwell€as€proof€of€psychological€abuse€or€torture,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Thomas€Lebron€Mills€and€Carl€Franklin€Ð ³  ÐMillsóó,€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€Dec.€19,€1985)€(holding€that€acts€of€mental€cruelty,€byÐ œì  Ðthemselves,€can€be€as€vicious€and€scarring€as€acts€of€physical€cruelty).Ð …Õ  ÐÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oCâ#ÔÌÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôà  àHere,€the€trial€court€applied€this€factor€based€upon€the€defendant's€actions€after€stabbing€theÐ W§  Ðvictim.€€The€defendant€chose€not€to€summon€medical€help,€concealed€the€crime,€and,€on€theÐ @ Ðfollowing€day,€pawned€the€victim's€ring€and€fled€to€California€in€the€victim's€car.€€Although€she€hadÐ )y Ðbeen€stabbed€some€thirty„five€times,€the€victim,€according€to€the€defendant,€was€alive€and€asked€forÐ b Ða€glass€of€water.€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oé#Ô€Ô‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔEight€of€the€victim's€wounds€were€defensive€in€nature.€€It€is€our€view€that€theÐ ûK Ðdefendant€demonstrated€a€culpability€greater€than€that€necessary€to€commit€the€crime€itself.€€The€trialÐ ä4 Ðcourt€did€not€err€by€applying€this€factor.Ð Í ÐÌà  àIn€summary,€the€trial€court,€under€the€terms€of€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX oFë#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôshould€not€haveÐ Ÿï Ðapplied€enhancement€factor€(11),€that€the€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crimeÐ ˆØ Ðwhen€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high,€or€(17),€that€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstancesÐ qÁ Ðunder€which€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great.€€The€trial€court€appropriatelyÐ Zª Ðapplied€enhancement€factors€(2),€that€the€defendant€has€a€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminalÐ C“ Ðbehavior€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range,€(6),€that€the€defendantÐ ,| Ðtreated€the€victim€with€exceptional€cruelty€during€the€commission€of€the€crime,€and€(10),€that€theÐ e Ðdefendant€employed€a€deadly€weapon€during€the€commission€of€the€crime.€€The€trial€court€noted€thatÐ þN Ðenhancement€factor€(6)€was€entitled€to€"little€weight."€€It€is€our€view€that€despite€the€brutality€of€theÐ ç 7 Ðcrime,€the€misapplication€of€two€enhancement€factors€would€require€a€modification€of€the€sentenceÐ Ð!   Ðfrom€twenty„three€years€to€twenty„two€years.Ð ¹" ! ÐÌà  àThe€United€States€Supreme€Court's€recent€opinion€in€òòBlakely€v.€Washingtonóó,€542€U.S.€____,Ð ‹$Û# Ð124€S.€Ct.€2531€(2004),€however,€calls€into€question€the€continuing€validity€of€our€currentÐ t%Ä $ Ðsentencing€scheme.€€In€that€case,€the€Court,€applying€the€rule€in€òòApprendi€v.€New€Jerseyóó,€566€U.S.Ð ]&­!% Ð466,€490€(2000),€struck€down€a€provision€of€the€Washington€sentencing€guidelines€that€permittedÐ F'–"& Ða€trial€judge€to€impose€an€"exceptional€sentence"€upon€the€finding€of€certain€statutorily€enumeratedÐ /(#' Ðenhancement€factors.€€The€Court€observed€that€"the€'statutory€maximum'€for€òòApprendióó€purposes€isÐ )h$( Ðthe€maximum€sentence€a€judge€may€impose€òòsolely€on€the€basis€of€the€facts€reflected€in€the€juryÐ *Q%) Ðâ âverdict€or€admitted€by€the€defendantóó."€€òòId.óó€at€2537€(emphasis€in€original).€€Finally,€the€CourtÐ ê*:&* Ðconcluded€that€"every€defendant€has€a€òòrightóó€to€insist€that€the€prosecutor€prove€to€a€jury€[beyond€aÐ ° Ðreasonable€doubt]€all€facts€legally€essential€to€the€punishment."€€òòId.óó€at€2543€(emphasis€in€original).Ð ™é Ðâ âÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oýì#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷ÔÌà  àUnder€the€rule€established€in€òòBlakelyóó,€the€defendant's€prior€convictions€may€be€used€toÐ k» Ðenhance€the€sentences.€€The€trial€court€in€this€instance€gave€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX o°ö#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô"a€fair€amount€of€weight"€to€a€priorÐ T¤ Ðconviction€involving€an€assault€on€a€police€officer.€€The€trial€court€stated€that€it€was€"not€concerned"Ð =  Ðabout€a€prior€conviction€for€driving€on€a€revoked€licence.€€Factors€(6)€and€(10),€neither€of€which€areÐ & v Ðbased€upon€the€defendant's€prior€convictions,€were€not€admitted€by€the€defendant.€€In€consequence,Ð  _ Ðthe€holding€in€òòBlakelyóó€would€preclude€their€application.€Ô#†XÆ÷X XX o¯÷#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô€Under€the€rationale€of€òòBlakelyóóÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oØù#ÔÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ô,€whichÐ ø H Ðcontrols,€a€sentence€of€twenty„one€years,€one€year€above€the€presumptive€sentence,€is€warrantedòòóó.Ð á 1  ÐÌÔ#†XÆ÷X XX o?ú#ÔÌÔ‡X o XXXÆ÷Ôà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€as€modified.Ð œì  ÐÌÔ#†XÆ÷X XX oû#ÔÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð W§  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGE