ÿWPCÑ 5# öUN %O 0(U4}‘b ¨w@° 0@ð 0l0 0Dœ 0Jà 0T* 0^~ 0hÜ 0rD 0|¶ 0†2 0¸ 1uH 0d½ AQ! Ær 0D8 B| 0D™ D/Ý B D3) U>\ U*š B)Ä DCí AM0 } v~€vÓþ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡n~<$ @ d3|x¬8- ù- –8—8D˜8™8Dš8D›8Deœ8U8Ó€©8¬8("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ ! #%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd""""'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d////7Border 1dd 0Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ùÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌò òJuly€24,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€.ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€.ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œ›Þ ÞÌà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÙ€ ÙÓ ` ܆XDp”X ÓœßR€120A1-j|¾þ` Å `€€@ÿRß›à àà àà àà àà ààQ àAT€JACKSONÌÌà àà àà àà àà ààQ àMAY€1998€SESSIONó óÌÌÌÌÌà àÓ ` ®DÓò òÌÓ` cÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àó ó)€ÌÓ ` ¸ cÓà àà à)€C.C.A.€No.€œ02C01›„9709„CC„00354€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àAppellee,à à)Ìà àà à)€Henry€CountyÌV.€€€€€€€à à)Ìà àà à)€Honorable€Julian€P.€œGuinn›,€JudgeÌà àà à)Ìò òFRED€BRYAN€œLINGENFELTER›,à àó ó)ò ò€ó ó(Rape,€Sexual€Battery,€Incest€(3€counts))ò ò€Ìó ó€à àà à)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àAppellant.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌÓ` Ó€FOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌGuy€T.€œWilkinson›à àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àAttorney€General€&€Reporter€ÌÌW.€Jeffery€œFagan›à àElizabeth€T.€RyanÌAssistant€District€Attorney€Generalà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ117€North€œForrest›€Avenueà à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌP.O.€Box€663à àœ2d›€Floor,€œCordell›€Hull€BuildingÌCamden,€TN€38320à àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àRobert€ð ðGusðð€œRadford›Ìà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà à111€Church€StreetÌà àP.O.€Box€686Ìà àHuntingdon,€TN€38344„0686Ìà àÌà àTodd€RoseÌà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àParis,€TN€38242ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€___________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÌÌò òPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,ó óÌJudgeÌÌÌÓ ` ¸ pÓÓÓò òÔ  Ôà ààQ àÌÌÌà ààQ àÌÑ  ÑÑ7€öXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ Ñà ààQ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó ó€Ìò òÌó óà àThe€appellant,€Fred€B.€Lingenfelter,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€threeÏcounts€of€incest,€one€count€of€sexual€battery,€and€one€count€of€rape.€€He€wasÏsentenced€concurrently€to€three€years€for€each€count€of€incest,€one€year€forÏsexual€battery,€and€ten€years€for€rape.€€He€appeals,€challenging€the€sufficiencyÏof€the€evidence€and€the€propriety€of€certain€evidentiary€rulings.€€We€affirm€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court.€ÌÌà àThe€victim€is€the€appellantððs€stepdaughter.€€She€was€eighteen€years€oldÏwhen€the€appellant€committed€the€offenses€against€her.€€The€victim€testified€thatÏin€October€of€1995,€the€appellant€entered€her€bedroom,€pulled€back€her€bedÏcovers,€and€began€to€undress€her.€€The€appellant€told€her€that€he€wanted€toÏshow€her€how€much€he€loved€her.€€When€the€victim€said€ððNo,ðð€the€appellantÍbecame€angry.€€He€went€to€his€room€and€retrieved€a€gun.€€He€returned€naked.€ÏHe€placed€the€gun€to€the€victimððs€vagina€and€threatened€to€shoot€her€if€she€didÏnot€ð ðshow€him€that€she€loved€him.ðð€€The€appellant€vaginally€penetrated€theÏvictim.ÌÌà à€The€victim€testified€that€the€appellant€forced€her€to€have€sex€in€DecemberÏ1995.€€After€this€incident,€the€victim€tried€to€move€out€of€her€parentððs€home.€ÏWhen€the€victim€discussed€the€move€with€the€appellant,€he€put€a€gun€to€herÏchest.€€The€appellant€told€the€victim€if€she€was€going€to€mess€up€her€life,€then€heÏwas€going€to€kill€her.€€The€victim€testified€that€the€appellant€told€her€to€make€theÏright€decision€and€stay€with€him.€€The€victim€testified€that€she€stayed€with€theÏappellant€and€her€mother€so€that€the€appellant€would€not€shoot€her.€€Ì€Ìà àIn€January€1996,€the€appellant€threatened€the€victim€with€a€knife,€statingÏthat€she€did€not€respect€her€body.€€The€victim€testified€that€the€appellant€placedÏthe€knife€close€to€her€breast€and€vagina.€€The€appellant€was€angry€because€theÏvictim€had€been€dating€a€fourteen„year„old€boy.€€The€victim€testified€that€theÏappellant€did€not€want€her€to€date€ð ðat€all.ðð€ÌÌà à€In€late€January,€the€appellant€awoke€the€victim€and€told€her€that€he€wasÏgoing€to€take€pictures€of€her.€€The€appellant€took€pictures€of€the€victim€nakedÏand€pictures€depicting€the€appellant€vaginally€penetrating€the€victim.€€TheÏappellant€threatened€to€show€the€pictures€to€the€victimððs€family€if€she€toldÍanyone€about€them.€€The€appellant€had€sexual€intercourse€with€the€victimÏwithout€her€consent€on€three€occasions€in€January€1996.ÌÌà àIn€March€1996,€the€victim€moved€out€of€her€parentððs€house.€€She€went€toÏlive€with€her€boyfriend,€Mike.€€Shortly€thereafter,€the€victim€and€her€boyfriendÏmoved€to€the€victimððs€parents€home€because€they€had€no€place€to€go.€€TheyÏshared€the€same€bed.€€The€appellant€did€not€like€Mike€because€he€was€married,Ïused€drugs,€and€ð ðthe€law€was€hunting€him.ðð€€The€appellant,€however,€foundÏMike€employment.€€In€April,€the€victim€reported€the€alleged€rapes€to€theÏauthorities€and€sought€a€protective€order€against€him.€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€€testified€at€trial.€€He€admitted€that€he€was€the€only€fatherÏthat€the€victim€had€ever€known.€€He€admitted€that€he€and€the€victim€had€sexualÏintercourse,€but€he€claimed€that€it€was€consensual.€€The€appellant€denied€thatÏhe€had€sexual€intercourse€with€the€victim€in€October,€€but€admitted€that€they€hadÏð ðforeplay.ðð€€The€appellant€admitted€having€sex€with€the€victim€in€December,€butÏhe€claimed€that€it€was€consensual.€€He€admitted€that€he€had€sexual€intercourseÏwith€the€victim€on€three€separate€occasions€in€January.€€The€appellant€testifiedÏthat€his€sexual€relationship€with€the€victim€grew€out€of€a€very€close€friendship.€ÏHe€testified€that€the€victim€was€ð ðstarting€to€look€into€sexual€activity.€€And€sheÏmade€the€comment€a€couple€of€times€about€me€being€handsome€and€that€sheÏwished€she€could€find€a€boy€that€was€at€least€active€and€strong€and€not€just€aÍpot„bellied€piece€of€mush,€which€Iððm€not.ðð€€He€testified€that€he€was€proud€that€aÏyoung€lady€could€look€upon€him€as€desirable.ÌÌà à€€€€The€appellant€testified€that€the€victim€asked€him€if€she€was€alwaysÏgoing€to€be€a€ð ðfat,€pudgy€little€kid.ðð€€He€testified€that€he€took€photographs€of€theÏvictim€nude€to€show€her€how€beautiful€she€was,€and€that€things€just€ð ðgot€out€ofÏhand.ðð€€He€testified€that€he€hid€the€pictures€from€his€wife€because€ð ðhe€was€notÏreally€proud€of€them.ðð€€€ÌÌà àInvestigator€William€Gary€Vandiver€took€a€statement€from€the€appellant.€ÏInvestigator€Vandiver€testified€that€the€appellant€stated€that€ð ðthings€were€doneÏthat€were€not€right,ðð€that€things€started€ð ðout€of€curiosity€on€her€part,ðð€and€that€heÏwas€ð ðtrying€to€be€a€good€father€and€show€her€how€things€were€done.ðð€€TheÏappellant€stated€that€the€victim€consented€to€ð ðeverything€that€was€done.ðð€Ìà àÌà àThe€victimððs€mother€testified€that€she€and€the€appellant€had€been€marriedÏthirteen€years.€€She€testified€that€the€appellant€expressed€an€unusual€interest€inÏbeing€in€the€bathroom€when€the€victim€took€a€shower.€€Mrs.€Lingenfelter€testifiedÏthat€she€caught€the€appellant€masturbating€at€the€foot€of€the€victimððs€bed€whileÏthe€victim€slept.€€She€told€the€appellant€that€the€pictures€that€he€took€of€the€victimÏlooked€like€pornography,€ð ðphotos€that€someone€would€take€and€look€at€later.ðð€ÏShe€testified€that€the€appellant€responded€ð ðNo,€sir,€thatððs€not€why€they€wereÏtaken.ðð€€€He€said€that€he€had€a€good€reason,€but€never€explained€it€to€his€wife.€€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence.€€He€alsoÏargues€that€€the€court€should€have€granted€his€motion€for€a€judgment€of€acquittalÏat€the€conclusion€of€the€stateððs€case.€€These€issues€are€without€merit.€€In€aÏsufficiency€of€the€evidence€challenge,€the€relevant€question€on€appellate€reviewÏis€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÏprosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÏthe€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.Ï307€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63€(Tenn.€1985);€€T.R.A.P.€13(e).ÌÌà àIn€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€jury€in€aÏcriminal€trial.€€A€jury€verdict€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€state's€witnesses€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405Ï(Tenn.€1983).€€Moreover,€a€guilty€verdict€replaces€the€presumption€of€innocenceÏenjoyed€at€trial€with€the€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€474€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€theÏpresumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óó€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€beÏdrawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832€(Tenn.€1978).Ì€€€€€Ìà àThe€appellant€essentially€argues€that€the€jury€should€have€believed€thatÏhis€sexual€relationship€with€the€victim€was€consensual.€€The€appellant€contendsÏthat€the€jury€should€have€discredited€the€testimony€of€the€victim€because€it€isÍunbelievable€that€the€victim€would€go€shopping€and€bowling€with€the€appellantÏduring€the€period€of€time€that€he€was€allegedly€raping€her.€€Whether€or€not€theÏvictim€consented€to€the€sexual€encounters€with€the€appellant€was€a€credibilityÏissue€for€the€jury€to€decide.€€The€jury€chose€to€believe€the€victim.€€The€stateÏpresented€evidence€to€establish€each€conviction€during€its€case€in€chief.ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€photographs€ofÏthe€victim.€€He€argues€that€the€probative€value€of€the€photographs€isÏsubstantially€outweighed€by€the€prejudicial€effect€because€ð ðthe€victim€testifiedÏherself.ðð€€To€be€admissible,€the€court€must€determine€if€the€evidence€is€relevant.€ÏThe€evidence€must€make€the€existence€of€a€fact€€that€is€of€consequence€to€theÏdetermination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€beÏwithout€the€evidence.€Tenn.€Rule€Evid.€401;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€McCaryóó,€922€S.W.2dÏ511,€515€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947€(Tenn.€1978).€€IfÏrelevant,€the€court€must€determine€whether€the€probative€value€of€theÏphotographs€is€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.ÏTenn.€Rule€Evid.€403;€òòMcCaryóó,€922€S.W.2d€at€515.€€These€determinations€andÏthe€admissibility€of€photographs€rest€in€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.€ÏòòMcCaryóó,€922€S.W.2d€at€515.€€We€will€not€interfere€with€the€discretion€of€the€trialÏcourt€unless€it€appears€on€the€face€of€the€record€that€the€court€abused€itsÏdiscretion.€€òòId.óó€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€filed€a€motion€òòinóó€òòlimineóó€to€prevent€the€state€fromÏintroducing€the€photographs€into€evidence.€€The€court€allowed€the€photographs,Ïfinding€that€they€were€ð ðpertinentðð€to€proving€the€issues€in€the€case.€€The€stateÏargues€that€€the€appellant€waived€this€issue€by€failing€to€object€when€theÏphotographs€were€introduced€into€evidence€and€because€the€appellant€failed€toÏinclude€a€transcript€of€€the€hearing€on€his€motion.€€We€disagree.€€The€record€isÏsufficient€for€us€to€address€the€issue.€€Ìà àÌà àThe€pictures€are€relevant€to€the€victimððs€credibility€which€was€a€primaryÏissue€at€€trial.€€The€pictures€corroborate€the€victimððs€testimony€that€she€and€theÏappellant€had€sexual€intercourse.€€To€an€extent,€the€photographs€are€prejudicialÏto€the€appellant.€€Unfair€prejudice€means€an€undue€tendency€to€suggest€aÏdecision€on€an€improper€€basis.€€Neil€P.€Cohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€ofÏEvidenceóó€ðð€403.5,€at€153€(œ3d›€ed.€1995).€€The€term€includes€evidence€that€Ïappeals€to€a€juryððs€sympathies,€sense€of€horror,€or€instinct€to€punish.€€òòId.óó€€ItÏincludes€evidence€that€is€sensational,€shocking,€or€repulsive.€€òòId.óó€€The€jury€mightÏbe€inclined€to€punish€the€appellant€for€taking€such€lewd€photographs€of€hisÏyoung€stepdaughter.€€We€cannot€conclude,€however,€that€the€probative€value€ofÏthe€photographs€is€òòsubstantially€outweighedóó€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€ÏWe€find€no€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Leathóó,€No.€01C01„9511„CC„00393Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Feb.€10,€1998).€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€appellantððsÏwife€to€testify€that€she€ð ðcaughtðð€the€appellant€masturbating€at€the€foot€of€theÏvictimððs€bed€while€the€victim€was€asleep.€€He€argues€that€any€probative€value€isÏsubstantially€outweighed€by€the€unfair€prejudice€of€the€evidence.€€On€cross„examination,€the€appellantððs€wife€testified€that€the€appellant€and€the€victim€had€aÏnormal€relationship.€€The€state€sought€to€introduce€Mrs.€Lingenfelterððs€testimonyÏto€show€that€she€knew€of€an€incident€that€would€suggest€that€the€appellantððsÏrelationship€with€his€stepdaughter€was€abnormal.€€The€court€allowed€theÏevidence.€€Relevant€evidence€may€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€isÏsubstantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€Tenn.€Rule€Evid.€Ï403.€€Mrs.€Lingenfelterððs€testimony€is€relevant€to€issues€of€credibility,€whetherÏthe€appellant€had€sexual€intercourse€or€sexual€contact€with€his€stepdaughter,Ïand€whether€the€intercourse€was€consensual.€€The€evidence€is€prejudicial,€butÏits€probative€value€is€not€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfairÏprejudice.€€ÌWe€find€no€abuse€of€discretion.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€ÌÌ̛̜œÌ›ÌÌÌÌÌÓ ` ¸ pœÓÓÓà ààQ àà à_____________________________Ìà ààQ àà àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌJOHN€H.€œPEAY›,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€œWOODALL›,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ