WPCK 0dA"ajҾ\V,o&U*EG~>k1QNû_-MBHθ0)7LEw$~{wgG]\v;NxO|Zjs&urzH}v$Ӌk&he.B "m-  %F w@L 0 U :h 4  U :   H 0 B 0 DbU:PU:K U:c$U:$$~(U:%,p_,g.U:60&p07U:`9U:9 B9g9U:X;U:;;U:=U:=5$>U:YEU:EpEU:=HU:wHH 0DI D3IU:JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ AOJJJJ 0D_K D/K BKX eDEDDӀ(`$TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7GXXdXXd7  ,cAZ"Arial RegularuM%3|x,  AZ"Arial Regular    `   1     sXXs# sp#sTheappellantsconvictionstemsfromthe overwhelmingevidenceintheNovember  1981abductionandrapeofBettyHoover.Heandhiscodefendant,WilliamD.Buford,wereϜsentencedtotwoconcurrentlifesentences.TheirconvictionswereaffirmedonappealtothisϜcourt.SeeStatev.Buford,No.83113III,(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Feb.29,1984),perm.󀀀 ` X Мtoappealdenied,(Tenn.April30,1984).Thiscourtalsodeniedtheappellantspostconviction (  Мrelief.SeeStatev.King,No.02C019510CC00327(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Sept.30,   М1996).# s߲#ԛ >sXX   `   2    sWenotevariouspanelsofthiscourthaveheldthesufficiencyoftheindictmentcannotbe  reviewedinhabeascorpusproceedingsunderHaggardv.State,475S.W.2d186,18788(Tenn.  Crim.App.1971)andBrownv.State,445S.W.2d669,674(Tenn.Crim.App.1969),cert.denied,  (Tenn.1969).However,HaggardandBrowndidnotinvolvechallengesregardingthecourts ` X subjectmatterjurisdictionorwhethertheindictmentfailedtostateanoffense.Otherchallengesrelatedtoformandnotsubstanceintheindictmentarewaivedunlessraisedpriortotrial.Tenn.R.Crim.P.12(b)(2);seeStatev.Nixon,No.02C019612CC00484(Tenn.Crim.App.at   Jackson,Dec.3,1997),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1998);Tenn.CodeAnn.4013203,  x 207,208(1990).((3ʗ$ `!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7 XXdd7    `   0  (#$  0  ,cAZ"Arial Regular sXXs   `   4    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.401702(1975)( WhereverinthisCodeindictmentisused,the  sameshallbetakentoincludepresentmentwheneverthecontextsorequiresorwillpermit.);see  alsoTenn.CodeAnn.4013101(b)(1995). sXX   `   6    sWenotethattheoffenseinthepresentcaseisaggravatedrapeandnotrape.Our  supremecourthasrecognizedthattheoffenseofaggravatedrapeisbutanaggravatedformofthecommonlawoffenseofrape.Wilkins,655S.W.2dat916.#sp#s F  ʗ@T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7 XXdd7 @  `   1    XXqTheappellantsconvictionstemsfromthe overwhelmingevidenceintheNovember  1981abductionandrapeofBettyHoover.Heandhiscodefendant,WilliamD.Buford,weresentencedtotwoconcurrentlifesentences.Theirconvictionswereaffirmedonappealtothiscourt.SeeStatev.Buford,No.83113III,(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Feb.29,1984),perm.󀀀 ` X toappealdenied,(Tenn.April30,1984).Thiscourtalsodeniedtheappellantspostconviction (  relief.SeeStatev.King,No.02C019510CC00327(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Sept.30,   1996).#q$#,  AZ"Arial Regular AsXX   `   2    sWenotevariouspanelsofthiscourthaveheldthesufficiencyoftheindictmentcannotbe  reviewedinhabeascorpusproceedingsunderHaggardv.State,475S.W.2d186,18788(Tenn.  МCrim.App.1971)andBrownv.State,445S.W.2d669,674(Tenn.Crim.App.1969),cert.denied,  (Tenn.1969).However,HaggardandBrowndidnotinvolvechallengesregardingthecourts ` X subjectmatterjurisdictionorwhethertheindictmentfailedtostateanoffense.Otherchallengesrelatedtoformandnotsubstanceintheindictmentarewaivedunlessraisedpriortotrial.Tenn.R.Crim.P.12(b)(2);seeStatev.Nixon,No.02C019612CC00484(Tenn.Crim.App.at   Jackson,Dec.3,1997),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1998);Tenn.CodeAnn.4013203,  x 207,208(1990).,cAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular *,XXm XX*sXX   `   3    sAlthoughHillisnotcontrollingauthorityforpre1989offenses,itsprinciplesare  applicable.Apost1989indictmentissufficientif:(a)thelanguagesatisfiestheconstitutionalrequirementofnoticetotheaccused,(b)itsformmeetstherequirementsetforthinTenn.CodeAnn.4013202(Supp.1996),and(c)therequisitementalstatecanbelogicallyinferredfromtheallegedconduct.Hill,954S.W.2dat72627.Ifthestatutecreatesanoffense,theindictment (  mustchargethefactsandcircumstanceswhichconstitutetheoffensementionedinthestatute.Hill,954S.W.2dat729;seealsoCampbellv.State,491S.W.2d359,361(Tenn.1973). *,XXm XX*sXX   `   3    sAlthoughHillisnotcontrollingauthorityforpre1989offenses,itsprinciplesare  applicable.Apost1989indictmentissufficientif:(a)thelanguagesatisfiestheconstitutionalrequirementofnoticetotheaccused,(b)itsformmeetstherequirementsetforthinTenn.CodeAnn.4013202(Supp.1996),and(c)therequisitementalstatecanbelogicallyinferredfromtheallegedconduct.Hill,954S.W.2dat72627.Ifthestatutecreatesanoffense,theindictment (  mustchargethefactsandcircumstanceswhichconstitutetheoffensementionedinthestatute.Hill,954S.W.2dat729;seealsoCampbellv.State,491S.W.2d359,361(Tenn.1973).,cAZ"Arial Regular f  $    8      sXX   `   8    sAlthoughatrialcourtisallowedtoentertainapetitionofhabeascorpusasoneforpost  convictionrelief,thetrialcourtsdismissalremainedappropriate.Postconvictionreliefmustbefiledinthecountyoftheappellantsconviction,WilliamsonCounty,andnotDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4030204,205(c). ]sXX   `   5    sSeeMorissette,342U.S.at263,72S.Ct.at251;UnitedStatesv.GypsumCo.,438U.S.  422,437,98S.Ct.2864,2873(1978).#sp#,  AZ"Arial Regular sXX   `   7    sTheappellantsrelianceuponRickmanv.Dutton,864F.Supp.686,707(M.D.Tenn.  1994),ismisplaced;thiscourtisnotboundbyfederaldistrictcourtrulings.Moreover,inAustinv.  Bell,126F.3d843,84647(6thCir.1997),thecourtfoundthereasonabledoubtinstructionvalid.  Regardless,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtdidnotfindtheuseof moralcertaintyconstitutionallyinvalid.Victorv.Nebraska,511U.S.1,114S.Ct.1239(1994).TheCourtwas (  primarilyconcernedwiththeterms graveuncertaintyand actualsubstantialdoubtusedinconjunctionwiththe moralcertaintyprovision.Cagev.Louisiana,498U.S.39,41,111S.Ct.   328,32930(1991).Thejuryinstructionpresentlyinquestiondidnotcontaintheparticulartermsofconcern.Moreover,theTennesseeSupremeCourthasupheldasimilarinstructionusingthephrase moralcertainty,Statev.Nichols,877S.W.2d722,734(Tenn.1994),cert.denied,513   U.S.1114,115S.Ct.909(1995),andthiscourthasalsoupheldsimilarinstructions.Pettyjohnv.   State,885S.W.2d364,36566(Tenn.Crim.App.1994),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1994);   Statev.Hallock,875S.W.2d285,294(Tenn.Crim.App.1993),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn. h`  1994).Weareboundtofollowprecedentofourstatessupremecourt.Bargerv.Brock,535 0(  S.W.2d337,341(Tenn.1976). sXXs   `   4    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.401702(1975)( WhereverinthisCodeindictmentisused,the  sameshallbetakentoincludepresentmentwheneverthecontextsorequiresorwillpermit.);see  alsoTenn.CodeAnn.4013101(b)(1995).,cAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular d ]!sXX   `   5    "sSeeMorissette,342U.S.at263,72S.Ct.at251;UnitedStatesv.GypsumCo.,438U.S.  422,437,98S.Ct.2864,2873(1978).#!sp#,cAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular $sXX   `   6    %sWenotethattheoffenseinthepresentcaseisaggravatedrapeandnotrape.Our  supremecourthasrecognizedthattheoffenseofaggravatedrapeisbutanaggravatedformofthecommonlawoffenseofrape.Wilkins,655S.W.2dat916.#$sp#%s,cAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular +'sXX   `   7    (sTheappellantsrelianceuponRickmanv.Dutton,864F.Supp.686,707(M.D.Tenn.  1994),ismisplaced;thiscourtisnotboundbyfederaldistrictcourtrulings.Moreover,inAustinv.  Bell,126F.3d843,84647(6thCir.1997),thecourtfoundthereasonabledoubtinstructionvalid.  Regardless,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtdidnotfindtheuseof moralcertaintyconstitutionallyinvalid.Victorv.Nebraska,511U.S.1,114S.Ct.1239(1994).TheCourtwas (  primarilyconcernedwiththeterms graveuncertaintyand actualsubstantialdoubtusedinconjunctionwiththe moralcertaintyprovision.Cagev.Louisiana,498U.S.39,41,111S.Ct.   328,32930(1991).Thejuryinstructionpresentlyinquestiondidnotcontaintheparticulartermsofconcern.Moreover,theTennesseeSupremeCourthasupheldasimilarinstructionusingthephrase moralcertainty,Statev.Nichols,877S.W.2d722,734(Tenn.1994),cert.denied,513   U.S.1114,115S.Ct.909(1995),andthiscourthasalsoupheldsimilarinstructions.Pettyjohnv.   State,885S.W.2d364,36566(Tenn.Crim.App.1994),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1994);   Statev.Hallock,875S.W.2d285,294(Tenn.Crim.App.1993),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn. h`  1994).Weareboundtofollowprecedentofourstatessupremecourt.Bargerv.Brock,535 0(  S.W.2d337,341(Tenn.1976).,cAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular f  $    8      *sXX   `   8    +sAlthoughatrialcourtisallowedtoentertainapetitionofhabeascorpusasoneforpost  convictionrelief,thetrialcourtsdismissalremainedappropriate.Postconvictionreliefmustbefiledinthecountyoftheappellantsconviction,WilliamsonCounty,andnotDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4030204,205(c).,cAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular /X XXX/ge X/X    Ad FILED/X X /ge  October13,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM (3$ !  'dxd,cAZ"Arial Regular-C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd `!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7 XXdd7     r,.<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxP  rߛ@. . INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @(ATNASHVILLE@%JULYSESSION,1998̜DANNYVIDR.KING,   h   ) | t  `     h   )  No.01C019710CR00487 h`  ` Appellant   h   ) TL   `     h   )  DAVIDSONCOUNTY @8  vs. `     h   ) ,$   `     h   )  Hon.ThomasH.Shriver,Judge   STATEOFTENNESSEE, h   )    `     h   )  (WritofHabeasCorpus)    ` Appellee   h   )    FortheAppellant:   h     FortheAppellee: x  DwightE.Scott    h     JohnKnoxWalkup  LD 4024ColoradoAvenue h     AttorneyGeneralandReporter 80 Nashville,TN37209 h    `     h     LisaA.Naylor    `     h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral  (#    `     h     CriminalJusticeDivision `     h     425FifthAvenueNorth `     h     2dFloor,CordellHullBuilding `     h     Nashville,TN372430493 x   (#  ! OPINIONFILED:򀀀 ' $ AFFIRMED DavidG.Hayes  .'+ Judge  /(, X^{XXX@+ OPINION    ` Theappellant,DannyR.King,appealstheDavidsonCountyCriminalCourtsdismissalofhispetitionforwritofhabeascorpus.TheappellantwasoriginallyindictedbytheWilliamsonCountyGrandJuryforaggravatedrapeandaggravatedkidnapping.OnDecember20,1982,hewasconvictedofbothcountsandreceivedtwoconcurrentlifesentences.   #  1      ׀Hefiledaprosepetitionforwritofhabeascorpusin (  January1997,whichwassubsequentlyamendedaftercounselwasappointed.Thereafter,appellantscounselfiledasecondamendedpetition.ThetrialcourtdismissedtheappellantspetitionfindingthechallengestotheindictmentwerewaivedunderTenn.R.Crim.P.12(b)(2)and(f)andpre1989offenseswerenotdeterminedaccordingtoStatev.Hill,No.01C019508CC00267(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,June20,1996)954s.w.2S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997)..񛀀Thetrialcourt  alsofoundthejuryinstructionwasstillvalidlawinTennessee.Theappellantpresentsfourissuesforourreview:8 ` 1)whetherhewaivedhisrighttoobjecttothesufficiencyoftheindictmentpursuanttoRule12,Tenn.R.Crim.P.; ` !` ! 8 ` 2)whethertheindictmentwasfatallydefectiveforfailuretoallegethe @f! requisitemensreadeprivingthesentencingcourtofjurisdiction;&"` !` ! 8 ` 3)whethertheindictmentwasfatallydefectiveinthatitwas x   @  (!$ unconstitutionallyvagueanddidnotadequatelyapprisetheappellantofhischargesagainstwhichhehadtodefend; ` !` ! 8 ` 4)whetherthejurychargeconcerningreasonabledoubtwasconstitutionallydefectiveinasmuchasitrequiredalowerburdenofproofthanwhatisconstitutionallyrequired. ` !` !   (2 +. Ї@*ANALYSIS@I.GroundsforHabeasCorpusRelief  ` Thetrialcourtfoundtheappellanthadwaivedhisrighttochallengethe  sufficiencyoftheindictmentpursuanttoRule12,Tenn.R.Crim.P.Wedisagree.Tennesseelawiswellestablishedthathabeascorpusreliefisonlyavailablewhenaconvictionisvoidbecausetheconvictingcourtwaswithoutjurisdictionorauthoritytosentenceadefendant,orthatadefendantssentencehasexpiredandthepetitionerisbeingillegallyrestrained.Archerv.State,851S.W.2d157,164(Tenn.  1993);Passarellav.State,891S.W.2d619,626(Tenn.Crim.App.1994).InOrren  v.State,No.03C019704CR00141(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,Feb.13,1998),  thiscourtheld,inahabeascorpusproceeding,thevalidityofanindictmentmaybechallengedifitfailstoproperlychargeanoffenseortheconvictingcourtwaswithoutjurisdiction.   #  2      ׀Thetrialcourtlacksthejurisdictionnecessarytoproceedwhenmens H!@ reaisanessentialelementtoanoffenseandtherequisitemensreacannotbefairly (#  importedfromthelanguageofthecharginginstrument.SeeStatev.Hill,954 %  S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997);Statev.Marshall,870S.W.2d532,537(Tenn.Crim. &" App.),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1993).Therefore,sincetheappellant (!$ challengestheindictmentforfailuretostatetherequisitemensreaandfailureto *#& properlychargeanoffense,wewilladdresseachinturn. H0@), @ II.SufficiencyoftheIndictment    ` Thefirststepindeterminingwhetheranindictmentfailstochargeanoffense  becauseoftheomissionoftherequiredmentalstateistoestablishwhetherthecrimeoccurredbeforeoraftertheadoptionofthenewcriminalcode,i.e.,November   1,1989.ThoseoffensesoccurringaftertheenactmentofthecurrentcodearegovernedbyHill,954S.W.2dat725.  #  3      ׀ThoseoffensesoccurringpriortoNovember h`  1,1989,requireadifferentanalysisthanthatsuggestedbytheappellant.Underthepre1989CriminalCode,therequiredmensreaofthecrimewasoftenincludedin (  thestatutorydefinitionoftheparticularoffense;however,numerousstatutoryoffensescontainednodefinedmentalstate.Therefore,thecourtmustreviewtheindictmenttodeterminewhetherthechallengedindictmenttracksthelanguageofthestatutoryoffensecharged. Recitationofthestatutorylanguagegivesrisetothepresumptionthattheindictmentsufficientlyapprisesthedefendantofthementalstaterequired.Orren,No.03C019704CR00141(citingCampbellv.State,491 h` S.W.2d359,361(Tenn.1973)).Evenifthelanguageofthestatuteisnotstrictlypursued,theindictmentremainssufficientifwordsofequivalentimportormorecomprehensiveimportareused.Campbell,491S.W.2dat361. %   @%A.AggravatedRape  (!$  ` Thepresentment  #  4      ׀inthecaseatbarforcountonechargedthattheappellant: *#&  ` 8 unlawfullyandfeloniouslydidaccomplishandaidandabetin ,%( theaccomplishmentofunlawfulsexualpenetration,asdefinedinTennesseeCodeAnnotated,393702,ofanother,Mrs.BettyHoover,accompaniedbythefollowingcircumstances.The X/P(+ defendantscausedpersonalinjurytothevictim;thedefendantswereaidedandabettedbyeachotherandforceorcoercionwasusedtoaccomplishtheact...  ! !  ` Atthetimeoftheoffenseinthiscase,aggravatedrapewasdefinedas unlawfulsexualpenetrationofanotheraccompaniedbyanyofthefollowingcircumstancesincludingcausingpersonalinjurytothevictimandaidingandabettingbyoneormorepersonswhenforceisusedtoaccomplishtheact.Tenn.CodeAnn.393703(a)(2)(3)(A)(Supp.1981). ` InMorissettev.UnitedStates,342U.S.246,263,72S.Ct.240,251(1952),  theSupremeCourtappliedcommonlawmensreatostatutorycrimes.Forthose  crimesoriginatingatcommonlaw,aninterpretivepresumptionexiststhatamens  reaisrequired.Id.Hence,statutorycrimesoriginatingfromcommonlawthat  expresslyomitscienterintheirdefinitionapplythemensreafortheoffensethatexistedundercommonlaw.   #  5      ׀Thestatutoryoffenseofaggravatedrapeisacrime X P originatingfromcommonlaw.SeeStatev.Wilkins,655S.W.2d914,916(Tenn. 8"0 1983)(definingcommonlawrapeas theunlawfulcarnalknowledgeofawomanovertheageoftenyearsforciblyandwithoutherconsent,or,asotherwiseexpressed,byforce,orforciblyandagainstherwill,orsuchknowledgeofafemalechildundertheageoftenyearseitherwithorwithoutherconsent.). #   #  6      ׀Rapewasa )"% generalintentcrimeatcommonlaw.See75CJSRape9(1952).Accordingly,no +$' intentisrequiredotherthanthatevidencedbythedoingoftheactsconstitutingtheoffense.Id.;seealsoOrrenNo.03C019704CR00141;Wilkins,655S.W.2dat X/P(+ 916. 3,/  ` Therefore,forthepresentmenttobesufficientinthepresentcount,itneedonlychargetheaccusedunlawfullysexuallypenetratedavictimandforceorcoercionisusedtoaccomplishtheactandthedefendantisaidedandabettedbyoneotherperson.Weconcludethelanguageofcountoneofthechallengedpresentmenttracksthelanguageofthestatuteandsufficientlyinformedtheaccusedofthechargeagainsthim. 8 ` @"` !` !B.AggravatedKidnapping  (   ` Requiringasomewhatdifferentanalysis,weturntothepresentmentoncounttwowhichincludestherequiredmensreaunderthelawatthetimechargingthe  appellant:8 ` unlawfullyandfeloniouslydidseize,confine,abduct,conceal,andkidnapanother,Mrs.BettyHoover,withthefeloniousintenttodetainheragainstherwillwhenthepersonsecretlyconfinedandunlawfullydetainedwasthevictimofafelony,AggravatedRape,oranylesserincludedfelonythereofcommittedonherpersonduringandsecretconfinementandunlawfuldetention.... ` !` !  ` Ontherelevantdate,aggravatedkidnappingwasdefinedinpertinentpartasfollows:8 ` (a)Anypersonwhounlawfullyseizes,confines,inveigles,entices,decoys,abducts,conceals,kidnapsorcarriesawayanotherwiththefeloniousintentto:(1)Causetheothertobesecretlyconfinedagainsthiswill;or(2)Detaintheotheragainsthiswill;...shallbeguiltyofaggravatedkidnapingwhenoneormoreofthefollowingcircumstancesarepresent:(C)Theperson...[u]nlawfullydetained...isthevictimofanyfelonycommittedonhispersonduringthe...unlawfuldetention...Tenn.CodeAnn.392603(Supp.1981). ` !` ! Ѐ ` Thelanguagewassufficientunderthelawasitexistedatthetimepursuanttothestatutoryrequirementsforanindictmentwhichprovided:8 ` Theindictmentmuststatethefactsconstitutingtheoffenseinordinaryandconciselanguage,withoutprolixityorrepetition,insuchamannerastoenableapersonofcommonunderstandingtoknowwhatisintended,andwiththatdegreeofcertaintywhichwillenablethecourt,onconviction,topronouncetheproperjudgment.Tenn.CodeAnn.401802(1975)(nowTenn.CodeAnn.4012202). ` !` !  926  ` Additionally,inCampbell,491S.W.2dat361,thecourtstated, [I]tisclear,  however,thathadtheindictmentusedthewordsfeloniouslyorunlawfully,itwouldhavebeensufficient.Byincorporatingthewordsfoundinthelanguageofthestatute,i.e.,unlawfullyandfeloniously,thepresentmentsufficientlyapprisedofthe   requisitemensreaunderthelawatthetimeforcounttwo,aggravatedkidnapping.   @III.FailuretoProperlyCharge  H@   ` Theappellantaversthepresentmentwasfatallydefectiveinitsfailuretoapprisehimoftheoffensestodefend.Specifically,hearguesthepresentmentallegestheappellantonlyviolatedastatutorydefinitionandnotanindictableoffense.Healsoarguescountonedidnotcontainthewords AggravatedRapenordiditrefertoTenn.CodeAnn.393703,theaggravatedrapestatute.Furthermore,hepresentsthesameargumentforcounttwonotusingthewords AggravatedKidnappingnorreferringtotheappropriatecodesection.SeeTenn. h` CodeAnn.392603.Alternatively,theStaterespondsthatthepresentmentwassufficientcitingStatev.JohnHawsBurrell,No.03C019404CR00157(Tenn.Crim. (#  App.atKnoxville,Feb.11,1997),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1997),andTenn. %  CodeAnn.4013202.Thestatearguesthereversesideofeachcountofthepresentmentcontainsthelistedoffenses. ` Thebodyofthepresentmentitselfwassufficienttoapprisetheappellantofthechargetowhichhewastodefend.Itsetsforth unlawfulsexualpenetrationofthevictimincountoneand abducts,...,kidnapsorcarriesawayanotherincounttwoalongwiththeotheressentialelementsofthecrime.SeePopev.State,149 (2 +. Tenn.176,258S.W.775(1924);Bishopv.State,122Tenn.729,127S.W.698 4-0 (1910);Hallv.State,43Tenn.125,(3Cold.)125(1866)(holdingindictment 5.2 sufficientifitinformsdefendantofoffensetoanswer,informscourtofoffenseand 926 appropriatejudgment,andprotectsdefendantfromfutureprosecutionforsamecrime). ` Thecodesectionreferredtoincountonewasmerelytodefine unlawfulsexualpenetrationnottodefinetheactualcharge.Moreover,referencetotheparticularcodesectionisnotrequired;thestatuteportionreferredtoismeresurplusage.Colev.State,512S.W.2d598(Tenn.Crim.App.),cert.denied,(Tenn. H@  1974)(findingmistakensubsectionofstatuteasmeresurplusage);McCrackenv. (  State,489S.W.2d48,51(Tenn.Crim.App.1972),cert.denied,(Tenn.1972)  (findingreferencetoincorrectstatuteassurplusage);Harrisv.State,82Tenn.485  (1884)(holdingwhereindictmentchargesanoffenseinlanguageofstatute,otherandadditionalavermentsnotrequiredbystatuteshouldbedisregardedassurplusage). ` Nevertheless,weholdthereversesideofeachcountoftheindictmentmaybeconsideredindeterminingwhethertheindictmentsufficientlyapprisestheappellantthathewaschargedwithaggravatedrapeandaggravatedkidnapping.Thereversesideisacceptedby incorporationbyreference.SeeStatev.Nixon, &" No.02C019612CC00484(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,Dec.3.,1997)(citingPeoplev.Jeffrey,94Ill.App.3d455,49Ill.Dec.860,418N.E.2d880,887(Ill.App. *#& 1981);Statev.Nelson,514S.W.2d581,584(Mo.1974);Statev.Hurley,251 ,%( S.W.2d617,619(Mo.1952);Statev.Johnson,77N.C.App.583,335S.E.2d770, h.`'* 771(N.C.1985);Hillv.State,523P.2d1114,1116(Okla.Crim.App.1974)).Since H0@), thoserequisiteoffenseswerestatedonthereversesideofthepresentment,wethinkthatitisclearthattheappellantwasapprisedofthechargeshewastodefend,andthepresentmentisthereforevalid. 926  @$IV.JuryInstruction    ` Thefourthchallengebytheappellantistheconstitutionalityofthereasonabledoubtjuryinstruction.Weagreewiththetrialcourt&  #  7      ׀thatthejuryinstructionisvalid   inTennessee,however,thiscourthasrepeatedlyheldthatachallengetoajuryinstructiondoesnotpresentaclaimforwritofhabeascorpusrelief.SeeHallv.Mills,  No.01C019510CV00339(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Aug.1,1996),perm.to h`  appealdenied,(Tenn.1996);Vossv.Raney,No.02C019501CC00022(Tenn. H@  Crim.App.atJackson,Aug.2,1995),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1995).The (  appellantssentencehasnotexpiredastherecordclearlyindicates,norwouldthisissuerenderhisjudgmentvoid.Thisissueraisedbytheappellant,evenifitwerevalid,wouldonlyrenderhisjudgmentvoidable,makingitanissuetoberaisedinapostconvictionpetitionH )H   #  8      ׀notapetitionforwritofhabeascorpus.   ` Basedupontheabovereasons,thejudgementofthetrialcourtdenyingtheappellantspetitionforwritofhabeascorpusisaffirmed. &"  `     h   ____________________________________ `     h   DAVIDG.HAYES,JudgeCONCUR:__________________________________PAULG.SUMMERS,Judge___________________________JERRYL.SMITH,Judge#XXXXM #