ÿWPC CÙÀÐ[)XFËL¼  (DÊѤ:{úÞví[ÔB¾Æ£ÑÊà™½ßf0¥åÍaÜRþHÇÏ™BÄNEÃïßo:šDç6îÞSË—ø‹u=f<&ÎEÃì ÿ¿Ç!ÿëàsçÉ{,öªô]×WXfBT’ÏÌ¿Z«•öæ;lÄÜwyÿc¡XN;M@|ƒ‰&²VÀ ™áô)w?û‡ê w¤°ž{æ²ÊŠ¸xÆ¿ÙûW±1D‘jBjD«€]y œdSÚã3ZšSʶæÞ©^ÚÉÌÅ×j2ªÛfvLE‰í Š^º)=ÅI{Ô’ØÀãâ*Ò»ý«-ål¨Óô8a0Çõ]á³AÊN ÝPW8&}ˆÊE^Ü3ÓÁAöàˆ~¾0¤ÛÀýu¦4e+bùŸ_x©ï*¢Ícåc¸®ßùÖ=YOláZÄZ•H'ž%£"Ÿ%7v®…¯9S(//©ì€Š@*UIV}‘¿©àeðēʲnwß¹u`|ª¼ÀZö͇½°§ÞÝéç})OÌÈHóÈEÊã îÇEÝ'ð Kh¢MG,Tp-ã³ÚÀœI/˜Ka©@®eÏ£pR”Õá”¶Ê E ­° ´×~XÕ³G,Ulk:< ¦ý(Ü bb %\U@b 0Ÿ¢UNAUNÝl zl Òæ ^ ¸ wÄ 4È Ü Æë Ʊ ÆwÆ=N m#ÁEßßß“áááááááááááááááááá 0Dtttb¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸ 0ÀÀÀÀ B 0»ß D3š D-Í 0Kúú ASEƘ 0»^ 0D A«]»(ÎáA Z‹(Times New Roman (w×¹$¡¡Ô  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€..ÑÑ8€m»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ýý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular …Ý ƒR $ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôx„ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€transcript€attributes€these€statements€to€ð ðTHE€COURT,ðð€but€from€the€context€and€the€statements€inÐ ° Ðthe€briefs€of€both€the€State€and€the€Defendant,€we€conclude€that€the€statements€were€actually€made€by€defense€counsel. öÝ ƒR $ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôx„ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Defendant€had€testified€that€she€had€been€a€law€enforcement€officer€for€three€and€half€years€in€Oklahoma. ˜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.wptصv) ÖJ~'¬  ìÇ«3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0 ‰Ý ƒR $ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôx„ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAlthough€we€address€this€issue€on€the€merits,€we€also€find€that€the€Defendant€waived€consideration€of€thisÐ ° Ðissue€on€appeal€by€her€failure€to€request€a€mistrial€or€otherwise€object€to€the€juror€contact.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a).(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(“G2 $¤¤Ý ƒ×¹!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€P»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôx„ò»»Ô d(“3U$££Ý ƒ×¹!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€P»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(“3U$¢¢Ý ƒ×¹!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€P»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ×¹!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€P»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼P»»»ÔÑ8€qXXdæ»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î+#PÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼P»îî+##ԈРР ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àSeptember€19,€2000€SessionÐ ð@ ÐÔ‡XqX»¼PÔÌò òÔ#†¼P»XXq##ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€LORI€A.€LITTLEÔ‡XqX»¼PÔó óÐ ä4 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ Ø ( Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„A„196€€€€€€Walter€Kurtz,€JudgeÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<o` AßÐ pÀ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„0858„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€22,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ eµ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<0` AßÐ 1  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€Defendant,€Lori€A.€Little,€was€convicted€of€two€counts€of€forgery,€both€Class€E€felonies.€€In€thisÐ &v  Ðappeal€as€of€right,€she€argues€(1)€that€the€trial€court€improperly€denied€her€the€courtððs€subpoenaÐ  \ Ðpower€prior€to€trial;€(2)€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€her€convictions;€(3)€that€the€trialÐ òB Ðcourt€improperly€instructed€the€jury€regarding€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ôððs€obligations€under€the€UniformÐ Ø( ÐCommercial€Code€to€reimburse€customers€for€forgeries€paid€out€of€customersðð€accounts;€(4)€€that€theÐ ¾ Ðtrial€court€improperly€limited€cross„examination€of€a€prosecution€witness€regarding€his€bias;€(5)€thatÐ ¤ô Ðthe€jury€was€improperly€tainted€or€biased€by€contact€between€a€witness€and€a€juror€who€wereÐ ŠÚ Ðacquaintances;€and€(6)€that€the€trial€court€intimidated€the€Defendant€in€a€jury„out€hearing€during€herÐ pÀ Ðdirect€examination€at€trial.€€We€find€no€reversible€error;€thus,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÐ V¦ Ðcourt.€€Ð <Œ ÐÓ­ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ X ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼P»àXq#ÔÔ‡XqX.¼PÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoe€G.€Rileyóó€and€òòNorma€McGeeÐ Ô$ ÐOgle,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð º  ÐÌW.€Casey€Reed,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Lori€A.€Little.Ð † Ö  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Marvin€E.€Clements,€Jr.,€Assistant€AttorneyÐ R"¢" ÐGeneral;€Victor€S.€Johnson,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Grady€Moore,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ 8#ˆ# ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $n$ ÐÓ£ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼P»XXqÒ #ÔÔ‡XqX»¼PÔÐ ê%:!& ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼P»XXqv #ÔÔ‡XqX»¼PÔÓ  Óà  àIn€March€of€1997,€the€Defendant€worked€as€a€teller€for€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô.€€She€lived€two€housesÐ ¶'#( Ðdown€from€Vernon€Allen,€who€had€a€checking€account€and€a€savings€account€at€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô.€€Mr.Ð œ(ì#) ÐAllen€testified€that€about€three€or€four€months€prior€to€March€of€1997,€his€youngest€son,€Cary€Allen,Ð ‚)Ò$* Ðsued€the€Defendant€for€damage€caused€by€the€Defendantððs€horses€and€received€a€judgment€forÐ h*¸%+ Ð$145.00€against€the€Defendant.€€After€Cary€Allen€received€the€judgment€against€the€Defendant,€theÐ N+ž&, ÐDefendantððs€horses€again€ð ðgot€outðð€while€the€Defendant€was€out€of€town,€and€Cary€Allen€attemptedÐ 4,„'- Ðto€have€one€of€the€horses€removed€from€the€property.€€The€Defendant€subsequently€initiated€chargesÐ -j(.ý Ðagainst€Cary€Allen€for€stealing€her€horse,€but€the€charges€were€dismissed€when€proof€established€thatÐ ° Ðthe€Defendant€was€not€the€true€owner€of€the€horse.Ð –æ ÐÌà  àMr.€Allen€testified€that€when€his€wife€was€balancing€the€checkbook€at€the€end€of€MarchÐ b² Ð1997,€she€discovered€that€a€counter€check€had€been€written€for€$200.00.€€The€counter€check€was€notÐ H˜ Ðin€Mr.€Allenððs€handwriting.€€The€bank€statement€also€showed€that€there€was€a€service€charge€on€theÐ . ~ Ðchecking€account,€indicating€that€the€balance€in€his€savings€account€had€fallen€below€the€$2,000.00Ð  d Ðminimum€deposit.Ð ú J ÐÌà  àThe€following€Monday,€Mr.€and€Ms.€Allen€went€to€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€and€spoke€to€Nancy€Mott,Ð Æ   Ðwho€recognized€that€the€counter€check€was€not€written€in€Mr.€Allenððs€handwriting.€€Ms.€Mott€alsoÐ ¬ ü  Ðinformed€Mr.€Allen€of€his€savings€account€balance,€which€Mr.€Allen€said€was€$900.00€to€$1,000.00Ð ’â  Ðshort.€€Ms.€Mott€then€sent€the€Allens€to€talk€to€Scott€Perkins,€an€investigator€for€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô.€€Ð xÈ  ÐÌà  àDuring€the€Allensðð€meeting€with€Scott€Perkins,€Mr.€Perkins€retrieved€a€savings€accountÐ D”  Ðwithdrawal€slip€in€the€amount€of€$970.00,€which€was€written€in€the€same€handwriting€as€the€counterÐ *z  Ðcheck€and€which€withdrew€money€from€Mr.€Allenððs€savings€account.€€Both€the€counter€check€andÐ ` Ðthe€savings€account€withdrawal€slip€had€a€nine€digit€number€for€ð ðidentification,ðð€which€wasÐ öF Ðidentified€on€the€documents€as€a€Tennessee€driverððs€license€number€by€the€notation€ð ðÔ_ÔTDLÔ_Ô.ðð€Ð Ü, ÐHowever,€the€number€did€not€match€Mr.€Allenððs€driverððs€license€number,€and€the€number€containedÐ Â Ðone€digit€too€many€to€be€a€Tennessee€driverððs€license€number.€€Both€documents€were€signed€ð ðVernonÐ ¨ø ÐAllen,ðð€but€Mr.€Allen€testified€that€it€was€not€his€signature.€€Mr.€Allen€executed€two€affidavitsÐ ŽÞ Ðaffirming€that€he€did€not€write€the€two€documents,€authorize€the€writing€of€the€two€documents,€orÐ tÄ Ðreceive€any€benefit€from€the€documents.Ð Zª ÐÌà  àThe€back€of€each€of€the€documents€contained€numbers€which€identified€the€bank€in€whichÐ &v Ðthe€documents€were€processed,€the€teller€who€processed€the€documents,€the€date€the€documents€wereÐ  \ Ðprocessed,€and€the€teller€transaction€journal€number.€€From€these€numbers€and€the€teller€transactionÐ òB Ðjournal,€Mr.€Perkins€determined€that€the€documents€Ô#†¼P»XXqÔ #ÔÔ€XqX»¼PÔwere€processed€back„to„back€at€the€InglewoodÐ Ø( Ðbranch€of€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€at€9:08€a.m.€on€March€7,€1997.€€The€teller€who€processed€the€documents€wasÐ ¾ Ðthe€Defendant,€Lori€Little.€€The€documents€used€to€withdraw€money€from€Mr.€Allenððs€account€wereÐ ¤ô Ðblank€documents€available€at€the€teller€windows.Ð Š Ú ÐÌà  àAs€a€result€of€this€information,€Mr.€Perkins€ordered€the€videotape€from€that€branch€ofÐ V"¦! ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€for€March€7,€1997.€€The€relevant€portions€of€the€tape€were€played€for€the€jury.€€TheÐ <#Œ" Ðbank€uses€several€cameras€which€cycle€through€the€multiple€teller€windows,€recording€each€tellerÐ "$r# Ðfor€approximately€three€or€four€seconds€at€intervals€of€approximately€forty€seconds.€€The€time€shownÐ %X $ Ðon€the€tape€was€approximately€four€minutes€ð ðoff,ðð€but€Mr.€Perkins€was€able€to€match€up€theÐ î%>!% Ðtransactions€on€the€video€with€transactions€recorded€in€the€Defendantððs€teller€log.€€The€video€tapeÐ Ô&$"& Ðshowed€a€customer€at€the€Defendantððs€window€which€Mr.€Perkins€said€matched€up€to€transactionÐ º' #' Ðnumber€357€in€the€Defendantððs€teller€log,€and€the€tape€showed€another€customer€at€the€DefendantððsÐ  (ð#( Ðwindow€which€Mr.€Perkins€said€matched€up€to€transaction€number€362€in€the€teller€log.€€The€tapeÐ †)Ö$) Ðdid€not€reveal€any€customers€at€the€Defendantððs€teller€window€during€the€time€transaction€numbersÐ l*¼%* Ð358€through€361€were€processed.€€Transaction€numbers€358€and€359€were€the€counter€check€and€theÐ R+¢&+ Ðsavings€account€withdrawal€slip€involving€Mr.€Allenððs€accounts,€and€transaction€numbers€360€andÐ 8,ˆ', Ð361€were€ð ðmiscellaneous€cash€proof,ðð€meaning€that€they€merely€documented€that€cash€was€removedÐ ° Ðfrom€the€Defendantððs€teller€drawer.€€The€ð ðcash€proofsðð€were€for€the€same€amounts€as€the€counterÐ –æ Ðcheck€and€withdrawal€slip.€€Mr.€Perkins€testified€that€he€determined€from€this€information€that€ð ðMr.Ð |Ì ÐAllen€was€not€at€this€window€making€these€transactions.ðð€€He€did,€however,€admit€that€it€would€beÐ b² Ðpossible€for€a€quick€transaction€to€be€completed€during€the€forty€second€cycle€of€the€camera.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€testified€on€her€own€behalf.€€She€denied€forging€the€documents€or€takingÐ  d Ðmoney€from€Mr.€Allenððs€accounts.€€She€also€denied€knowing€that€Mr.€Allen€had€any€accounts€atÐ ú J ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô.€€When€asked€whether€she€recalled€anything€unusual€about€March€7,€1997,€theÐ à 0 ÐDefendant€testified€that€a€woman€had€come€into€the€bank€and€gone€to€another€personððs€teller€windowÐ Æ   Ðto€make€a€transaction,€but€left€to€go€check€on€a€child€in€her€car.€€The€other€teller€asked€the€Defendant€Ð ¬ ü  Ðto€process€the€transaction€and€told€the€Defendant€that€the€woman€would€be€back€in€a€moment.€€TheÐ ’â  ÐDefendant€said€that€she€waited€until€she€saw€a€woman€approaching€the€door,€and€then€she€startedÐ xÈ  Ðprocessing€the€documents.€€However,€the€woman€never€came€to€the€window.€€The€Defendant€saidÐ ^®  Ða€woman€called€the€bank€shortly€thereafter€and€told€the€Defendant€that€she€left€because€her€child€wasÐ D”  Ðsick€and€asked€the€Defendant€if€her€father€could€pick€up€her€money€later€that€day.€€The€DefendantÐ *z  Ðagreed€and€placed€the€processed€documents€and€the€money€in€an€envelope.€€She€claimed€that€laterÐ ` Ðthat€day,€Vernon€Allen€came€and€picked€up€the€money€from€another€teller.€€The€Defendant€testifiedÐ öF Ðthat€at€the€time,€she€did€not€notice€that€the€name€on€the€documents€was€Vernon€Allen,€and€she€didÐ Ü, Ðnot€notice€Vernon€Allen€enter€the€bank.€€However,€after€reviewing€the€video€tape,€she€saw€Mr.€AllenÐ Â Ðon€the€tape€at€the€bank€that€day€picking€up€the€documents.€€€€€€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà@@@ìàDENIAL€OF€SUBPOENA€POWERˆÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€first€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€denied€her€the€right€to€use€theÐ @ Ðcourtððs€subpoena€power.€€On€November€12,€1998,€the€Defendant€filed€a€motion€for€a€pretrialÐ &v Ðsubpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó,€asking€the€trial€court€to€issue€a€subpoena€for€the€production€of€certainÐ  \ Ðdocuments€in€the€custody€of€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€€€After€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€the€DefendantððsÐ òB Ðrequest,€finding€that€most€of€the€items€on€the€Defendantððs€list€were€matters€for€discovery,€not€aÐ Ø( Ðsubpoena,€and€that€the€motion€was€ð ðpremature.ððÐ ¾ ÐÌà  àThe€production€of€documents€pursuant€to€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€is€governed€by€Rule€17(c)Ð Š Ú Ðof€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure,€which€provides€as€follows:€Ð p!À  ÐÌà8  àA€subpoena€may€also€command€a€person€to€whom€it€is€directed€to€produce€the€books,Ð <#Œ" Ðpapers,€documents,€or€tangible€things€designated€therein.€€The€court,€upon€motionÐ "$r# Ðmade€promptly€and€in€any€event€by€the€time€specified€in€the€subpoena€for€complianceÐ %X $ Ðtherewith,€may€quash€or€modify€the€subpoena€if€compliance€would€be€unreasonableÐ î%>!% Ðor€oppressive.€.€.€.€The€court€may€direct€that€books,€papers,€documents€or€tangibleÐ Ô&$"& Ðthings€designated€in€the€subpoena€be€produced€before€the€court€at€a€time€prior€to€theÐ º' #' Ðtrial€or€prior€to€the€time€when€they€are€to€be€offered€in€evidence€and€may€upon€theirÐ  (ð#( Ðproduction€permit€them€to€be€inspected€by€the€parties€and€their€attorneys.І)Ö$)Ð Ð  ÐÌThis€rule€is€essentially€identical€to€the€federal€counterpart€in€the€Federal€Rules€of€CriminalÐ R+¢&+ ÐProcedure.€€òòSeeóó€Fed.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€17(c).€€The€United€States€Supreme€Court,€in€addressing€the€federalÐ 8,ˆ', Ðrule,€has€recognized€two€fundamental€characteristics€of€the€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€in€criminal€cases:€Ð ° Ðð ð(1)€it€was€not€intended€to€provide€a€means€of€discovery€for€criminal€cases,€[and]€(2)€its€chiefÐ –æ Ðinnovation€was€to€expedite€the€trial€by€providing€a€time€and€place€before€trial€for€the€inspection€ofÐ |Ì Ðsubpoenaed€materials.ðð€€òòUnited€States€v.€Nixonóó,€418€U.S.€683,€698„99€(1974)€(citing€òòBowman€DairyÐ b² ÐCo.€v.€United€Statesóó,€341€U.S.€214,€220€(1951)).€€Further,€in€order€to€require€production€ofÐ H˜ Ðdocuments€prior€to€trial,€the€party€requesting€the€subpoena€must€show:Ð . ~ ÐÌà8  à(1)€that€the€documents€are€evidentiary€and€relevant;€(2)€that€they€are€not€otherwiseÐ ú J Ðprocurable€reasonably€in€advance€of€trial€by€exercise€of€due€diligence;€(3)€that€theÐ à 0 Ðparty€cannot€properly€prepare€for€trial€without€such€production€and€inspection€inÐ Æ   Ðadvance€of€trial€and€that€the€failure€to€obtain€such€inspection€may€tend€unreasonablyÐ ¬ ü  Ðto€delay€the€trial;€and€(4)€that€the€application€is€made€in€good€faith€and€is€notÐ ’â  Ðintended€as€a€general€ð ðfishing€expedition.ððÐxÈ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòId.óó€at€699„700.€€We€see€no€reason€for€the€requirements€for€the€issuance€of€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóóÐ D”  Ðto€be€different€under€our€rule.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Quinton€Cageóó,€No.€01C01„9605„CC„00179,€1999€WLÐ *z  Ð30595,€at€*8„9€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.,€Nashville,€Jan.€26,€1999);€òòState€v.€Woody€Hutchinsonóó,€No.€887,Ð ` Ð1990€WL€99386,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.,€Knoxville,€July€19,€1990).€Ð öF ÐòòóóÌà  àIn€her€motion,€the€Defendant€requested€the€production€of€the€following€items€from€theÐ Â Ðcustody€of€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô:Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  à1.€€Names,€addresses€and€telephone€numbers€of€the€coworkers€present€on€the€dateÐ tÄ Ðwhen€and€at€that€branch€of€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€where€the€offenses€are€alleged€to€haveÐ Zª Ðoccurred.Ð@Ð Ð  Ðà8  à2.€€Copies€of€all€bank€statements€of€any€and€all€accounts€of€Lori€Little,€and€allÐ &v Ðcorrespondence€between€the€bank€and€Lori€Little,€or€between€the€bank€and€any€otherÐ  \ Ðparty€concerning€Lori€Little€or€her€accounts,€during€and€including€the€dates€of€LoriÐ òB ÐLittleððs€employment€at€the€bank.ÐØ(Ð Ð  Ðà8  à3.€€Copies€of€all€transactions€from€all€other€teller€and€drive€through€windows€on€theÐ ¾ Ðdate€in€question€from€opening€until€12:00€p.m.,€in€summary€form,€similar€to€thatÐ ¤ô Ðpreviously€provided€regarding€Lori€Littleððs€transactions.Њ ÚÐ Ð  Ðà8  à4.€€Copies€of€all€wire€transfers€to€and/or€from€any€and€all€of€Lori€Littleððs€accounts€orÐ p!À  Ðfor€her€benefit€during€the€dates€and€duration€of€her€employment.ÐV"¦!Ð Ð  Ðà8  à5.€€Copies€of€any€and€all€transactions€between€the€bank€and€members€of€the€VernonÐ <#Œ" ÐAllen€family,€including€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Vernon€Allen€and€Greg€Allen€and€Kerry€€Allen,Ð "$r# Ðon€the€date€in€question,€March€7,€1997.Ð%X $Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOn€November€20,€1998,€during€a€hearing€on€the€Defendantððs€motion,€the€trial€court€statedÐ Ô&$"& Ðthat€the€Defendantððs€first€item,€the€names€and€addresses€of€the€coworkers€present€that€day,€was€aÐ º' #' Ðmatter€for€discovery€or€a€bill€or€particulars€and€not€a€matter€for€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó.€€The€courtÐ  (ð#( Ðfurther€stated€that€the€proper€remedy€if€the€State€failed€to€supply€the€information€would€be€for€theÐ †)Ö$) ÐDefendant€to€file€a€motion€to€compel€discovery.€€Regarding€the€Defendantððs€item€number€2€and€itemÐ l*¼%* Ðnumber€4,€involving€bank€records€pertaining€to€the€Defendant,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€these€wereÐ R+¢&+ Ðitems€the€Defendant€could€obtain€from€the€bank€herself€and€that€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€was€notÐ 8,ˆ', Ðappropriate.€€With€respect€to€item€number€3,€copies€of€all€transactions€from€all€other€tellers€fromÐ ° Ðopening€until€noon,€the€trial€court€expressed€concern€about€issuing€a€subpoena€for€bank€recordsÐ –æ Ðdealing€with€other€bank€customers€and€their€account€information€and€noted€that€federal€guidelinesÐ |Ì Ðmust€be€followed€when€ordering€a€bank€to€produce€such€documents.€€The€court€asked€for€informationÐ b² Ðabout€why€the€records€were€needed,€and€defense€counsel€responded€that€he€wanted€the€documentsÐ H˜ Ðto€attempt€to€track€the€dollar€amounts€to€determine€whether€the€transactions€in€question€originatedÐ . ~ Ðfrom€another€teller€window.€€The€State€responded€that€its€proof€would€show€that€the€transactionsÐ  d Ðwere€processed€on€the€Defendantððs€machine€at€her€teller€window.€€The€trial€court€then€maintained,Ð ú J ÐÌà8  àWell,€okay,€there€is€no€way€Iððm€going€to€grant€this€motion€absent€some€proof€fromÐ Æ   Ðsomebody€in€charge€at€the€bank€that€can€tell€us€how€the€bank€operates€and€alsoÐ ¬ ü  Ðbecause,€.€.€.€you€have€to€understand€there€are€some€very€strict,€and€you€need€to€getÐ ’â  Ðinto€the€banking€provisions€about€how€I€can€order€information€released€about€bankÐ xÈ  Ðcustomers,€so€that€we€canððt€just€willy„nilly€do€that€without€some€specific€findingÐ ^®  Ðabout€things€.€.€.€.€€I€mean,€this€is€something€that€Iððm€not€going€to€issue€a€subpoenaÐ D”  Ðduces€tecum€without€some€proof€or€showing€that€you,€you€know,€it€sounds€like€[you]Ð *z  Ðare€just€a€little€bit€premature€with€this.€€Ð`Ð Ð  ÐÌFinally,€regarding€the€Defendantððs€item€number€5,€copies€of€bank€statements€of€Vernon€Allen,€hisÐ Ü, Ðwife,€and€his€two€sons,€the€trial€court€noted€that€this€was€also€a€matter€for€discovery.€€In€response€toÐ Â Ðthe€Defendantððs€assertion€that€she€needed€the€records€to€determine€whether€any€amounts€wereÐ ¨ø Ðredeposited€into€any€of€the€Allensðð€accounts€on€that€day,€the€trial€court€stated€that€the€prosecutorÐ ŽÞ Ðcould€find€out€whether€any€other€transactions€occurred€that€day€involving€the€Allens€without€theÐ tÄ Ðcourt€ordering€a€subpoena,€and€if€any€other€transactions€did€occur,€ð ðthen€we€might€cross€that€bridge.ðð€Ð Zª ÐThe€court€concluded,€ð ð[Ô_ÔM]ostÔ_Ô€of€the€subject€of€this€has€to€do€with€discovery€or€a€bill€or€particulars.€Ð @ ÐItððs€really€not€the€subject,€at€this€point,€of€a€subpoena€duces€tecum.€€We€are€just€a€little€premature,Ð &v Ðand€it€sounds€like€you€all€need€a€little€further€discussion.ððÐ  \ ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€Defendant€does€not€challenge€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€regarding€the€names€ofÐ Ø( Ðthe€other€tellers;€she€concedes€that€she€was€able€to€get€her€own€bank€records€through€other€means;Ð ¾ Ðand€she€ð ðadmitsðð€that€the€trial€court€ð ðappeared€to€ððleave€the€door€openðððð€for€a€hearing€regarding€theÐ ¤ô Ðtransactions€records€of€the€other€tellers.€€However,€she€asserts€that€the€trial€court€improperly€refusedÐ Š Ú Ðto€subpoena€the€bank€records€of€the€Allen€family.€€òòóóWe€disagree.Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àDuring€the€hearing€on€the€Defendantððs€motion,€the€trial€court€never€ruled€that€the€DefendantÐ <#Œ" Ðcould€not€have€access€to€the€Allensðð€bank€statements.€€Instead,€the€trial€court€stated€that€this€was€aÐ "$r# Ðdiscovery€matter€and€that€the€prosecutor€could€find€out€information€about€the€Allensðð€accounts€andÐ %X $ Ðinform€the€Defendant€of€any€deposits.€€The€trial€court€stated€that€the€motion€for€a€subpoena€wasÐ î%>!% Ðð ðpremature,ðð€not€that€the€Defendant€was€not€entitled€to€the€records€if€they€were€relevant.€€Had€theÐ Ô&$"& ÐDefendant€attempted€to€glean€the€desired€information€through€the€discovery€process€and€beenÐ º' #' Ðunsuccessful,€she€could€have€filed€a€motion€to€compel€discovery.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€16(a)(1)(C),Ð  (ð#( Ð(d)(2).€€If€that€did€not€produce€the€information,€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€could€then€have€beenÐ †)Ö$) Ðordered.€€There€was€no€evidence€that€the€Defendant€exhausted€these€other€routes€prior€to€requestingÐ l*¼%* Ðthe€subpoena.€€The€Defendant,€by€failing€to€show€that€the€Allensðð€bank€statements€were€ð ðnotÐ R+¢&+ Ðotherwise€procurable€reasonably€in€advance€of€trial€by€exercise€of€due€diligence,ðð€failed€to€show€thatÐ 8,ˆ', Ða€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€was€proper.€€òòSeeóó€òòNixonóó,€418€U.S.€at€699.€€Thus,€the€trial€court€did€not€errÐ ° Ðby€refusing€to€issue€the€subpoena.Ð –æ ÐÌà@ç ç ìàSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEˆÐ b² ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€next€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€Ô‡XqXXXqÔTennessee€RuleÐ . ~ Ðof€Appellate€Procedure€13(e)€prescribes€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôf]indingsÔ_Ô€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€theÐ  d Ðtrial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trierÐ ú J Ðof€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€Evidence€is€sufficient€if,€after€reviewing€the€evidenceÐ à 0 Ðin€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÐ Æ   Ðelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979).€Ð ¬ ü  ÐIn€addition,€because€conviction€by€a€trier€of€fact€destroys€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€imposesÐ ’â  Ða€presumption€of€guilt,€a€convicted€criminal€defendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€that€the€evidenceÐ xÈ  Ðwas€insufficient.€€òòÔ_ÔMcBeeÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€372€S.W.2d€173,€176€(Tenn.€1963);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838Ð ^®  ÐS.W.2d€185,€191€(Tenn.€1992)€(citing€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1976),€and€òòStateÐ D”  Ðv.€Brownóó,€551€S.W.2d€329,€331€(Tenn.€1977));€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔTuggleÔ_Ôóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982);Ð *z  ÐòòHolt€v.€Stateóó,€357€S.W.2d€57,€61€(Tenn.€1962).Ð ` ÐÌà  àIn€its€review€of€the€evidence,€an€appellate€court€must€afford€the€State€ð ðthe€strongestÐ Ü, Ðlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawnÐ Â Ðtherefrom.ðð€€òòÔ_ÔTuggleÔ_Ôóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914€(citing€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.Ð ¨ø Ð1978)).€€The€court€may€not€ð ðre„weigh€or€re„evaluate€the€evidenceðð€in€the€record€below.€€òòEvansóó,€838Ð ŽÞ ÐS.W.2d€at€191€(citing€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€836).€€Likewise,€should€the€reviewing€court€findÐ tÄ Ðparticular€conflicts€in€the€trial€testimony,€the€court€must€resolve€them€in€favor€of€the€jury€verdict€orÐ Zª Ðtrial€court€judgment.€€òòÔ_ÔTuggleÔ_Ôóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914.€€All€questions€involving€the€credibility€ofÐ @ Ðwitnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence,€and€all€factual€issues€are€resolved€by€theÐ &v Ðtrier€of€fact,€not€the€appellate€courts.€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔPappasÔ_Ôóó,€754€S.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.Ð  \ Ð1987).Ô#†XqXXXq?Z#Ô€€€Ð òB ЀÌÔ‡XqXXXqÔà  àòòóóÔ#†XqXXXq-e#ÔThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€two€counts€of€forgery.€€A€person€commits€the€offense€ofÐ ¾ Ðforgery€when€that€person€ð ðforges€a€writing€with€intent€to€defraud€or€harm€another.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÐ ¤ô ÐAnn.€ðð€39„14„114(a).€€ð ðForgeðð€means€to€ð ð[Ô_Ôa]lterÔ_Ô,€make,€complete,€execute€or€authenticate€any€writingÐ Š Ú Ðso€that€it€purports€to€.€.€.€[Ô_Ôb]eÔ_Ô€the€act€of€another€who€did€not€authorize€that€act.ðð€€òòId.óó€ðð€39„14„114(b).€Ð p!À  ÐThe€proof€at€trial€showed€that€the€Defendant€was€working€as€a€teller€at€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô,€and€sheÐ V"¦! Ðprocessed€two€documents€which€took€money€out€of€Vernon€Allenððs€accounts.€€One€document€wasÐ <#Œ" Ða€counter€check€for€$200.00,€and€the€other€document€was€a€savings€withdrawal€slip€in€the€amountÐ "$r# Ðof€$970.00.€€Both€blank€documents€were€available€to€bank€tellers.€€The€bank€video€did€not€reveal€anyÐ %X $ Ðcustomers€at€the€Defendantððs€teller€window€when€the€transactions€were€processed.€€Vernon€AllenÐ î%>!% Ðtestified€that€he€did€not€withdraw€the€money€or€authorize€the€withdrawal€of€the€money€from€hisÐ Ô&$"& Ðaccounts.€€He€further€testified€that€the€counter€check€and€the€savings€account€withdrawal€slip€wereÐ º' #' Ðnot€written€in€his€handwriting.€€From€this€information,€a€rational€jury€could€have€concluded€that€theÐ  (ð#( ÐDefendant€forged€the€two€documents€with€the€intent€to€defraud€or€harm€another.€€Thus,€the€evidenceÐ †)Ö$) Ðwas€sufficient€to€support€the€convictions.€€Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âÐ R+¢&+ Ðà  àIn€her€brief,€the€Defendant€does€not€appear€to€truly€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence.€Ð ° Ðâ âInstead,€she€argues€that€while€the€proof€may€have€established€that€she€forged€the€documents€with€theÐ –æ Ðintent€to€harm€Vernon€Allen,€the€proof€did€not€establish€that€she€forged€the€documents€with€the€intentÐ |Ì Ðto€harm€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô,€as€charged€in€the€indictment.€€Thus,€the€Defendant€essentially€argues€that€thereÐ b² Ðwas€a€material€variance€between€the€indictment€and€the€proof€at€trial€which€requires€reversal.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€662€S.W.2d€590€(Tenn.€1984),€our€supreme€court€set€forth€the€test€to€beÐ  d Ðused€in€determining€whether€a€variance€between€the€facts€alleged€in€the€indictment€and€the€proofÐ ú J Ðestablished€at€trial€requires€reversal.€€The€court€stated,Ð à 0 ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔB]eforeÔ_Ô€a€variance€will€be€held€to€be€fatal€it€must€be€deemed€to€be€material€andÐ ¬ ü  Ðprejudicial.€€A€variance€between€an€indictment€and€the€proof€in€a€criminal€case€is€notÐ ’â  Ðmaterial€where€the€allegations€and€proof€substantially€correspond,€the€variance€is€notÐ xÈ  Ðof€a€character€which€could€have€misled€the€defendant€at€trial€and€is€not€such€as€toÐ ^®  Ðdeprive€the€accused€of€his€right€to€be€protected€against€another€prosecution€for€theÐ D”  Ðsame€offense.Ð*z Ð Ð  ÐÌòòId.óó€at€592.€€ð ðA€material€variance€occurs€only€if€the€prosecutor€has€attempted€to€rely€at€the€trial€uponÐ öF Ðtheories€and€evidence€that€were€not€fairly€embraced€in€the€allegations€made€in€the€indictment.ðð€€òòStateÐ Ü, Ðv.€Ô_ÔMayesÔ_Ôóó,€854€S.W.2d€638,€640€(Tenn.€1993).€€€Ð  ÐÌà  àCount€1€of€the€indictment€charged€that€the€Defendant€Ð ŽÞ Ðà8  àon€the€7th€day€of€March,€1997,€in€Davidson€County,€Tennessee€and€before€theÐ tÄ Ðfinding€of€this€indictment,€did€intentionally€or€knowingly€forge€a€writing€describedÐ Zª Ðor€depicted€as€follows:€€one€(1)€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€counter€check€on€the€account€of€bankÐ @ Ðcustomer€Vernon€Allen€of€the€value€of€$500€or€less,€with€the€intent€to€defraud€orÐ &v Ðharm€anther,€to€wit:€€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„Ð  \ Ð14„114,€and€against€the€peace€and€dignity€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.ÐòBÐ Ð  ÐÌCount€2€of€the€indictment€was€substantially€the€same,€except€that€it€described€the€writing€as€ð ðone€(1)Ð ¾ ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€savings€withdrawal€ticket€on€the€account€of€bank€customer€Vernon€Allen€of€the€valueÐ ¤ô Ðof€more€than€$500€but€less€than€$1000.ðð€€The€proof€at€trial€established€that€the€Defendant€used€herÐ Š Ú Ðposition€as€a€teller€at€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€to€forge€two€documents€withdrawing€money€from€Vernon€AllenððsÐ p!À  Ðaccounts.€€Although€the€proof€did€not€establish€that€the€Defendant€had€a€conflict€with€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô,Ð V"¦! Ðthe€proof€did€establish€that€the€Defendant€had€a€conflict€with€Vernon€Allenððs€son.Ð <#Œ" ÐÌà  àContrary€to€the€position€taken€by€the€Defendant,€we€are€not€convinced€that€there€was€aÐ %X $ Ðvariance€between€the€proof€at€trial€and€the€indictment.€€The€Defendant€was€an€employee€ofÐ î%>!% ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€who€used€that€position€to€obtain€the€documents€which€she€then€used€to€withdrawÐ Ô&$"& Ðmoney€out€of€Mr.€Allenððs€accounts.€€She€took€money€out€of€the€bankððs€cash€drawer.€€We€believe€thatÐ º' #' Ða€rational€jury€could€have€concluded€from€the€proof€that€the€Defendant€intended€to€defraud€or€harmÐ  (ð#( ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€as€well€as€Mr.€Allen.€€Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌà  àNotwithstanding,€assuming€that€there€was€a€variance,€we€do€not€think€it€is€material.€€TheÐ R+¢&+ ÐDefendant€was€informed€through€the€indictment€that€she€was€charged€with€two€counts€of€forgery€forÐ 8,ˆ', Ðforging€two€documents€on€Vernon€Allenððs€bank€accounts.€€She€was€informed€of€the€date€of€theÐ ° Ðalleged€transactions€and€the€approximate€monetary€value.€€She€was€informed€that€the€transactionsÐ –æ Ðinvolved€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô.€€Thus,€she€was€sufficiently€informed€of€the€charges€against€her€such€that€sheÐ |Ì Ðcould€prepare€her€defense€and€not€be€surprised€at€trial,€and€there€is€no€danger€that€she€could€beÐ b² Ðprosecuted€a€second€time€for€the€same€offense.Ð H˜ ÐÌà@¯¯ìàJURY€INSTRUCTION€ON€UCCˆÐ  d ÐÌà  àNext,€the€Defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€instructing€the€jury€that€under€theÐ à 0 ÐUniform€Commercial€Code€(UCC),€ð ðthe€bank€is€normally€required€to€replace€the€funds€in€aÐ Æ   Ðcustomerððs€account€which€were€withdrawn€by€the€use€of€a€forged€instrument.ðð€€After€the€proof€hadÐ ¬ ü  Ðbeen€presented,€the€Defendant€renewed€her€motion€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal,€arguing€that€the€proofÐ ’â  Ðdid€not€show€that€the€Defendant€intended€to€defraud€or€harm€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô,€as€charged€in€theÐ xÈ  Ðindictment.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion,€but€the€motion€initiated€a€discussion€between€theÐ ^®  Ðattorneys€and€the€judge€regarding€the€liability€of€a€bank€due€to€forged€documents.€€The€trial€courtÐ D”  Ðdetermined€that€it€should€instruct€the€jury€that€as€a€matter€of€law,€the€bank€is€liable€to€the€customerÐ *z  Ðfor€a€forgery.€€Neither€the€State€nor€the€Defendant€objected€to€the€instruction.€€In€fact,€defenseÐ ` Ðcounsel€specifically€stated,€ð ðI€have€no€objection€to€that.ðð€€On€appeal,€the€Defendant€does€not€argueÐ öF Ðthat€the€jury€instruction€was€an€inaccurate€statement€of€the€law,€but€she€asserts€that€the€instructionÐ Ü, Ðð ðin€effect€lowered€the€bar€for€the€stateððs€proof,€essentially€instructing€the€jury€to€ignore€the€stateððsÐ Â Ðfailure€to€prove€that€the€defendant€had€intended€to€harm€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€as€charged€in€the€indictment,Ð ¨ø Ðand€to€take€the€defendantððs€ððprovenðð€intent€to€defraud€Vernon€Allen€as€adequate€proof€that€theÐ ŽÞ Ðdefendant€intended€to€harm€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€because€the€Ô_ÔU.C.C.Ô_Ô€operates€in€that€fashion.ððÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àWe€see€no€reason€to€embroil€ourselves€in€an€analysis€of€whether€the€trial€court€erred€byÐ @ Ðcharging€the€jury€on€the€Uniform€Commercial€Code,€because€even€if€error,€the€instruction€wasÐ &v Ðharmless.€€The€party€who€ultimately€suffered€monetary€loss€by€the€Defendantððs€actions€is€irrelevant.€Ð  \ ÐThe€statute€requires€that€the€State€prove€the€Defendant€forged€a€document€with€the€intent€to€harmÐ òB Ðor€defraud€another.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„114(a).€€The€statute€does€not€require€any€monetaryÐ Ø( Ðloss,€or€even€any€actual€harm.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€Thus,€it€is€the€Defendantððs€intent€which€is€material,€not€whoÐ ¾ Ðwas€actually€harmed.€€The€jury€was€properly€instructed€on€the€elements€of€the€offense.€€We€haveÐ ¤ô Ðalready€determined€that€the€jury€could€have€reasonably€found€that€the€Defendant€intended€to€harmÐ Š Ú Ðor€defraud€both€Ô_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€and€Vernon€Allen.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€that€any€error€in€theÐ p!À  Ðinstruction€was€harmless.€Ð V"¦! ÐÌà@Ë Ë ìàLIMITATION€OF€CROSS„EXAMINATIONˆÐ "$r# ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€improperly€limited€her€cross„examination€of€ScottÐ î%>!% ÐPerkins€regarding€his€bias€and€hostility€towards€her.€€Scott€Perkins€was€the€investigator€forÐ Ô&$"& ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€who€testified€for€the€State.€€During€cross„examination,€defense€counsel€questioned€Mr.Ð º' #' ÐPerkins€about€any€possible€deficiencies€in€his€investigation.€€Mr.€Perkins€was€asked€whether€he€hadÐ  (ð#( Ðmade€any€further€inquiries€into€the€matter€after€he€had€decided€that€the€Defendant€was€the€personÐ †)Ö$) Ðwho€committed€the€forgeries,€and€he€said€that€he€did€not.€€Defense€counsel€then€asked€Mr.€Perkins,Ð l*¼%* Ðð ðDo€you€want€to€see€Ms.€Little€convicted?ðð€€Mr.€Perkins€replied,€ð ðI€donððt€have€anything€against€her.ðð€Ð R+¢&+ ÐDefense€counsel€then€again€asked€the€same€question,€at€which€point€the€State€objected€to€theÐ 8,ˆ', Ðrelevancy€of€the€question,€and€the€trial€court€sustained€the€objection.€€This€was€the€only€limitationÐ ° Ðof€the€Defendantððs€cross„examination,€but€she€argues€that€the€question€should€have€been€allowed€toÐ –æ Ðshow€Mr.€Perkinsðð€bias€against€the€Defendant.Ð |Ì ÐÌà  àThe€admissibility€of€evidence€is€a€matter€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€andÐ H˜ Ðthis€Court€will€not€disturb€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€absent€a€clear€showing€of€an€abuse€of€thatÐ . ~ Ðdiscretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔCauthernÔ_Ôóó,€967€S.W.2d€726,€743€(Tenn.€1998);€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2dÐ  d Ð947,€949€(Tenn.€1978).€€We€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€by€the€trial€court€in€sustaining€the€objectionÐ ú J Ðto€the€question€of€whether€Mr.€Perkins€wanted€to€see€the€Defendant€convicted.€€The€trial€court€didÐ à 0 Ðnot€foreclose€the€opportunity€for€the€Defendant€to€ask€questions€concerning€any€bias€on€the€part€ofÐ Æ   ÐMr.€Perkins;€it€just€prevented€one€question€which€it€found€to€be€irrelevant.€€This€issue€has€no€merit.€Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌà@¡¡!ìàCONTACT€WITH€JURORˆÐ xÈ  ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€a€mistrial€because€of€contactÐ D”  Ðbetween€a€witness€and€a€juror.€€On€the€morning€of€the€second€day€of€the€trial,€outside€the€presenceÐ *z  Ðof€the€jury,€defense€counsel€announced€to€the€court€that€a€witness,€Maria€Harris,€was€in€the€hall.€Ð ` ÐDefense€counsel€then€continued:Ð öF ÐÌà8  àShe€was€apparently€originally€subpoenaed€by€the€State.€€I€have€asked€her€to€be€hereÐ Â Ðto€testify€should€we€call€her€today.€€She€was€on,€I€guess,€on€call.€€And€she€didnððtÐ ¨ø Ðmake€it€in€until€yesterday€until€after€the€jury€was€seated.€€Sheððs€apparently€a€friendÐ ŽÞ Ðof€Carol€Welch,€juror€number€6.€€And€they€spoke€in€the€hall€yesterday€when€Ms.Ð tÄ ÐHarris€arrived€during€a€break.ÐZªÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àNow€Ms.€Harris€said€they€didnððt€speak€about€the€case,€and€as€well,€she€evenÐ &v Ðthought€she€was€in€the€courtroom€across€the€hall.€€I€just€bring€this€to€the€CourtððsÐ  \ Ðattention.€€I€donððt€think€we€have€an€issue€with€it.€€I€just€bring€it€to€the€CourtððsÐ òB Ðattention.׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€ÐØ(Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€trial€court€acknowledged€defense€counselððs€statements€and€then€moved€on€to€other€issues.€Ð ¤ô ÐApparently,€none€of€the€involved€parties€felt€that€the€juror€contact€was€a€problem€at€the€time.€Ð Š Ú ÐHowever,€the€Defendant€now€argues€that€the€contact€necessitated€a€mistrial.׃ ×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àThe€decision€of€whether€to€grant€a€mistrial€is€a€matter€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court,Ð <#Œ" Ðand€we€will€not€disturb€the€trial€courtððs€action€on€appeal€absent€an€abuse€of€that€discretion.€€òòState€v.Ð "$r# ÐÔ_ÔMillbrooksÔ_Ôóó,€819€S.W.2d€441,€443€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1991).€€Generally,€a€mistrial€will€only€beÐ %X $ Ðâ âdeclared€ð ðif€there€is€a€manifest€necessity€requiring€such€action€by€the€trial€judge.ðð€€òòArnold€v.€Stateóó,Ð î%>!% Ð563€S.W.2d€792,€794€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1977).€€ð ðIf€it€appears€that€some€matter€has€occurred€whichÐ ° Ðwould€prevent€an€impartial€verdict€from€being€reached,€a€mistrial€may€be€declared.ðð€€òòId.óó€€€€€€Ð –æ Ðâ âÌà  àWe€find€no€ð ðmanifest€necessityðð€for€a€mistrial€in€this€case.€€There€is€no€evidence€that€Ms.Ð b² ÐHarrisðð€alleged€contact€with€a€juror€influenced€or€prejudiced€the€jury€in€any€way.€€The€Defendant€wasÐ H˜ Ðthe€one€to€bring€the€contact€to€the€courtððs€attention,€and€her€attorneyððs€comments€indicated€that€theÐ . ~ Ðcontact€did€not€prejudice€the€jury.€€Thus,€we€find€no€error€in€failing€to€grant€a€mistrial.Ð  d ÐÌà@$$ìàINTIMIDATION€OF€DEFENDANTˆÐ à 0 ÐÌà  àFinally,€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€intimidated€her€during€directÐ ¬ ü  Ðexamination.€€She€asserts€that€the€trial€court€interrupted€her€ð ðessentially€in€Ô_ÔmidsentenceÔ_Ô€and€excusedÐ ’â  Ðthe€jury€with€both€startling€and€stunning€effect,ðð€that€the€trial€court€threatened€her,€and€that€theÐ xÈ  Ðð ðentire€sequence,€the€trial€courtððs€interruption,€the€removal€of€the€jury,€the€threat€to€the€defendant,Ð ^®  Ðthe€return€of€the€jury,€and€her€following€testimony€in€a€meeker€tone€surely€alerted€the€jury€to€the€trialÐ D”  Ðcourtððs€prejudice€and€shaded€their€opinion€of€the€defendant.ðð€€Ð *z  ÐÌà  àWhile€testifying€about€how€she€was€not€ð ðtrying€to€condemn€the€Allens,ðð€the€DefendantÐ öF Ðadded,€ð ðIððm€very€concerned€about€getting€a€fair€trial€and€Iððve€made€that€very€clear€all€along.€€I€haveÐ Ü, Ðnot€been€able€to€obtain€certain€information.€€Things€have€been€kept€out€of€my€hands€„„.ðð€€The€trialÐ Â Ðcourt€sustained€the€Stateððs€objection€to€the€Defendantððs€statements.€€Later,€while€defense€counsel€wasÐ ¨ø Ðattempting€to€authenticate€a€copy€of€the€video€from€the€bank€which€the€defense€wanted€to€play€forÐ ŽÞ Ðthe€jury,€the€Defendant€said,€Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àIððve€gone€to€see€Mr.€Ô_ÔRoarkÔ_Ô€before€with€copies€that€have€been€given€to€us€byÐ @ ÐÔ_ÔNationsBankÔ_Ô€.€.€.€,€those€copies€have€been€corrupt.€€They€were€not€readable€copies.€Ð &v ÐMr.€Ô_ÔRoarkÔ_Ô€has€determined€that€they€were€either€copied€on€a€machine€that€had€a€badÐ  \ Ðhead€or€that€the€original€had€been€corrupted€prior€to€handing€us€over€a€copy.€€ThatÐ òB Ðhappened€twice.€€We€first€requested€a€copy€a€year€ago.ÐØ(Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€trial€court€interrupted,€ð ðExcuse€me,€Mr.€Reed€[defense€counsel].€€This€is€not€responsive€to€yourÐ ¤ô Ðquestion.€€I€take€it€youððre€trying€to€lay€a€foundation€for€this.€.€.€.€Letððs€do€that.ðð€€After€more€of€aÐ Š Ú Ðfoundation€had€been€laid,€the€State€objected€to€the€use€of€the€Defendantððs€video€because€the€originalÐ p!À  Ðhad€already€been€introduced€into€evidence€and€played€for€the€jury.€€The€Defendant€volunteered,€ð ðHeÐ V"¦! Ðwould€like€to€keep€this€out€of€evidence€because€there€is€no€machine€to€play€it€[the€Stateððs€exhibit]Ð <#Œ" Ðon.ðð€€At€this€point,€the€trial€court€òòÔ_ÔsuaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔsponteÔ_Ôóó€excused€the€jury,€and€the€following€colloquy€occurred:Ð "$r# ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€€Now,€Ms.€Little,€youððve€testified€under€oath€that€you€were€a€lawÐ î%>!% Ðenforcement€officer.׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Have€you€ever€testified€in€court€before?ÐÔ&$"&Ð Ð  Ðâ âà8  àTHE€WITNESS:€€Yes,€sir,€I€have€many€times.к' #'Ð Ð  Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€€Well,€I€donððt€know€what€they€do€in€Oklahoma,€but€you€go€off€hereÐ ° Ðand€youððre€going€to€find€yourself€in€a€strange€irony€where€youððre€going€to€end€upÐ –æ Ðdoing€more€time€for€€contempt€than€if€you€got€convicted€for€these€underlying€crimes.Ð|ÌÐ Ð  Ðâ âà8  àà ` àSo€you€answer€the€questions€that€your€lawyer€asks.€€And€if€you€are€actuallyÐ b² Ða€law€enforcement€officer,€you€know€better€than€to€try€to€put€these€little€Ô_ÔzingersÔ_Ô€in.ÐH˜Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àHow€long€were€you€a€law€enforcement€officer?Ð. ~Ð Ð  Ðà8  àTHE€WITNESS:€€Three€and€a€half€years,€sir.Ð dÐ Ð  Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€€Youððre€telling€me€that€those€Oklahoma€judges€let€you€put€in€theseÐ ú J Ðlittle€Ô_ÔzingersÔ_Ô€when€you€testify€in€front€of€a€jury€in€Oklahoma?Ðà 0Ð Ð  Ðà8  àTHE€WITNESS:€€I€had€no€need€to,€sir.ÐÆ  Ð Ð  Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€€Well,€then€forget€the€Ô_ÔzingersÔ_Ô€here€and€letððs€just€stick€to€the€facts.Ь ü Ð Ð  ÐThe€court€then€brought€the€jury€back€in€and€resumed€the€trial.€Ð ’â  ÐÌà  àð ðððThe€propriety,€scope,€manner,€and€control€of€the€examination€of€witnesses€is€a€matterÐ ^®  Ðwithin€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge,€which€will€not€be€interfered€with€in€the€absence€of€an€abuseÐ D”  Ðthereof.ðððð€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔMeeksÔ_Ôóó,€876€S.W.2d€121,€128€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1993)€(quoting€òòCoffee€v.€Stateóó,Ð *z  Ð216€S.W.2d€702,€703€(Tenn.€1948));€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€611.€€We€find€no€abuse€of€discretionÐ ` Ðon€the€part€of€the€trial€judge€by€his€admonitions€to€the€Defendant.€€On€three€occasions,€the€DefendantÐ öF Ðmade€comments€that€were€either€unresponsive€to€questions€asked€or€inappropriate.€€She€wasÐ Ü, Ðpurposefully€expressing€her€displeasure€with€the€proceedings€against€her.€€Informing€the€witness€toÐ Â Ðanswer€the€questions€asked€was€a€proper€exercise€of€the€courtððs€power€to€control€the€examinationÐ ¨ø Ðof€witnesses.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€Had€the€trial€court€made€his€admonitions€in€the€presence€of€the€jury,€hisÐ ŽÞ Ðcomments€could€have€prejudiced€the€jury€against€the€Defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Eavesóó,€959€S.W.2dÐ tÄ Ð601,€604„05€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1997)€(holding€statements€of€trial€judge€in€presence€of€jury€warningÐ Zª Ðthe€defendant€of€the€potential€for€an€aggravated€perjury€charge€constituted€reversible€error).€Ð @ ÐHowever,€the€trial€judge€in€this€case€excused€the€jury€before€warning€the€Defendant€to€control€herÐ &v Ðð ðÔ_ÔzingersÔ_Ô.ðð€€Also,€the€record€does€not€support€the€Defendantððs€assertion€that€her€answers€to€questionsÐ  \ Ðafter€the€admonition€were€ð ðmeeker.ðð€€Granted,€we€are€relying€only€on€a€written€record€for€ourÐ òB Ðinterpretation,€but€we€can€find€no€evidence€that€the€Defendantððs€demeanor€significantly€changed.€Ð Ø( ÐWhile€she€may€have€refrained€from€inserting€as€many€ð ðÔ_ÔzingersÔ_Ôðð€in€her€testimony,€the€DefendantððsÐ ¾ Ðanswers€to€questions€asked€were€long€and€detailed.€€She€did€not€hesitate€to€contradict€the€assertionsÐ ¤ô Ðmade€by€the€State€on€cross„examination€and€to€supply€her€own€explanation€of€events.€€Her€answersÐ Š Ú Ðwere€still€assertive.€€We€find€nothing€in€the€record€which€evinces€prejudice€to€the€Defendant€due€toÐ p!À  Ðthe€trial€courtððs€admonition.€€This€issue€has€no€merit.Ð V"¦! ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€€€Ð "$r# ÐÌà8  àÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð º' #' Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE