ÿWPC¸ hu^LÏy}Gø§…V]ÐSxñ((@€{hÚ±bcøonÖ’4ñ×-øÎ²Eшh…ÄÍã^æÅE‚ðŽ w¾ìv>gêá°ßiKM2hHíÕØrÙlß›úŽ@Èߦ#ö=}~9]‘Tr¾©€T¨“º)Ñ…©O]n¹Ón¥„a*Œ™ºV2pú<œƒðmlìÞ/¼)sF„BVæb÷ë~Çûb×I†É¹@­Å»ø‡Žó›äp²×æ·‚É©I¾ë6ð¬óêñ€#ÊeÔ–FRÐXÍæ[]9iOÒ‰PUY/M>‡7ŸÛB/w\ÿ;÷Ù}m[þ6ß ÆÍdÝ(É1j̹@Êã>8bf; ö@8H„ªî;Ñ“g‚-Xì÷p´Ve:‡©§“îPy¿G`F”'¤…“R)O”šža•ÖWóÂCGá ©7—¾#wZõßqÄHïë­AM‹v ÕÎ{Y©YsDÚJFyŸI4ñmòa³SŸ©–÷D§ø¾Gkš¯•òR1è2`•KÌÝcyQÍdSP0 Ø éª¨ˆFÍœðç&Œ4ÿéôÖ ÐôpŸ%¦Âðf+hÜXªù]©i¤~画QÓ‘YeQü¥Ç¶û©Š¿4b %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ Ð Æ‘ ÆW Æ Æã ã N©©©E««««««««««««««««««««««««b­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ 0ëµµµµ B   0¤½ D3a D-” 0KÁÁ AS Æ_ 0¤% 0DÉ A« »‡®i) (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÖJ~'ÀáÀáÀáÀá¸J¥3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2Ħ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôrò»»Ô d(|3N\$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3N\$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€|¬XXdæ»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î&£î»¼ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼»îî&£ #ԈРР ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€19,€2000€Ð ð@ ÐÔ‡X|¬X»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XX|¬#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€JAMES€E.€Ô_ÔMATHISÔ_ÔòòóóÔ‡X|¬X»¼Ôó óÐ ä4 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€€Circuit€Court€for€Williamson€CountyÐ Ø ( Ðà@@øøìàNo.€II„1098„328„C€€€€€€Timothy€L.€Easter,€JudgeÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<o` AßÐ pÀ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„00316„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€9,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ eµ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<0` AßÐ 1  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓDefendant€James€E.€Ô_ÔMathisÔ_Ô€was€convicted€by€a€Williamson€County€jury€of€possession€of€contrabandÐ &v  Ðin€a€penal€institution€and€sentenced€to€eight€(8)€years€incarceration€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€Ð  \ ÐIn€this€appeal€as€of€right€Defendant€raises€one€issue€for€appellate€review:€whether€the€trial€court€erredÐ òB Ðwhen€it€refused€to€suppress€incriminating€statements€made€by€Defendant€to€the€corrections€officers.€Ð Ø( ÐDefendant€contends€that€his€conviction€must€be€reversed€and€a€new€trial€ordered.€€After€a€review€ofÐ ¾ Ðthe€entire€record€and€applicable€law€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÐ ¤ô Ðcourt.Ð ŠÚ ÐÔ#†¼»XX|¬¶#ÔÔ‡X|¬X»¼ÔÓáÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó ó.Ð V¦ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼»àX|¬$#ÔÔ‡X|¬X.¼ÔThomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayes,€J.,óó€andÐ "r ÐòòNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€joined.Ð X ÐÌM.€Wallace€Coleman,€Jr.,€Ô_ÔLawrenceburgÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€James€E.€Ô_ÔMathisÔ_Ô.Ð Ô$ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Elizabeth€B.€Ô_ÔMarneyÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð  ð ÐDerek€K.€Smith,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð † Ö  ÐÓÁÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼»XX|¬ð#ÔÔ‡X|¬X»¼ÔÐ R"¢" ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼»XX|¬ã #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X|¬X»¼Ôà  àDefendant€James€E.€Ô_ÔMathisÔ_Ô€was€convicted€by€a€Williamson€County€jury€of€possession€ofÐ $n$ Ðcontraband€in€a€penal€institution,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„201,€and€sentenced€to€eight€(8)€yearsÐ %T % Ðincarceration€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right€Defendant€raises€one€issueÐ ê%:!& Ðfor€our€review:€whether€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€denied€Defendantððs€motion€to€suppressÐ Ð& "' Ðincriminating€statements€made€by€Defendant€to€the€corrections€officers.€€Defendant€contends€thatÐ ¶'#( Ðhis€conviction€must€be€reversed€and€a€new€trial€ordered.€€After€a€review€of€the€entire€record€andÐ œ(ì#) Ðapplicable€law€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð ‚)Ò$* ÐÌà  àBefore€turning€to€Defendant's€issue€on€the€merits€we€address€several€deficiencies€in€DefenseÐ N+ž&, Ðcounsel's€preparation€of€this€matter.€€There€is€no€motion€for€new€trial€filed€in€the€record.€€The€recordÐ 4,„'- Ðof€proceedings€in€this€case€is€on€audio„visual€tapes€and€not€in€written€transcripts.€€In€his€brief,Ð -j(.ý ÐÔ_ÔDefendant€claims€that€his€counsel€made€an€oral€motion€for€a€new€trial€at€the€conclusion€of€his€trial.€Ð ° ÐUnfortunately,€Defendantððs€brief€does€not€include€a€citation€to€the€video€record€regarding€the€motion.€Ð –æ ÐIn€fact,€there€are€no€time„specific€citations€in€Defendantððs€entire€brief.€€Although€we€have€viewedÐ |Ì Ðthe€audio„visual€tapes€of€the€motion€to€suppress,€the€trial,€and€the€sentencing€hearing,€we€are€unableÐ b² Ðto€locate€any€hearing€on€a€motion€for€new€trial.€€Even€if€Defense€counsel€did€make€an€oral€€motionÐ H˜ Ðfor€a€new€trial,€he€did€not€reduce€the€oral€motion€to€writing€within€thirty€days€as€required€byÐ . ~ ÐTennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€33(b).€€Hence,€there€is€no€record,€oral€or€written,€of€a€motionÐ  d Ðfor€new€trial€in€Defendantððs€case.Ð ú J ÐÌà  àOrdinarily,€a€partyððs€failure€to€provide€citations€to€the€record€in€a€brief,€as€required€byÐ Æ   ÐTennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€27(g),€€results€in€waiver€of€the€issue€before€this€Court.€€Tenn.Ð ¬ ü  ÐCt.€Crim.€App.€R.€10(b);€òòState€v.€Killebrewóó,€760€S.W.2d€228,€231€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€EquallyÐ ’â  Ðimportant€regarding€evidentiary€issues,€failure€to€make€a€motion€for€a€new€trial€within€thirty€(30)Ð xÈ  Ðdays€of€judgment,€as€well€as€failure€to€reduce€an€oral€motion€for€a€new€trial€to€writing€within€thirtyÐ ^®  Ð(30)€days,€customarily€results€in€a€waiver€of€the€defendantððs€right€to€argue€the€issue€on€appeal.€Ð D”  ÐTenn.R.App.P.€3(e);€Tenn.R.Crim.P.€33(b);€òòState€v.€Givhanóó,€616€S.W.2d€612,€613€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð *z  Ð1980).€€Nevertheless,€we€elect€to€address€Defendantððs€issue€on€the€merits.€€Ð ` ÐÌà@¤¤(ìàò òòòFACTSó óóóˆÐ Ü, ÐÌà  àOfficer€Thomas€Justus,€Captain€John€Jordan,€and€Defendant€testified€at€the€suppressionÐ ¨ø Ðhearing.€€Officer€Justus,€a€corrections€officer€at€the€John€I.€Easley€Criminal€Justice€Center€inÐ ŽÞ ÐWilliamson€County,€testified€that€he€was€on€duty€September€11,€1998€when€the€incident€involvingÐ tÄ ÐDefendant€occurred.€€Justus€testified€that€when€he€entered€the€ð ð364"€dormitoryð!ða€large€room€thatÐ Zª Ðhouses€several€inmates„„he€observed€three€inmates€quickly€exit€a€freestanding€shower€located€in€theÐ @ Ðcorner€of€the€room.€€The€rapid€departure€made€Justus€suspicious,€so€he€investigated.€€ApproachingÐ &v Ðthe€shower€he€smelled€marijuana.€€When€Justus€pulled€the€shower€curtain€back,€approximately€eightÐ  \ Ðor€nine€marijuana€cigarettes€fell€from€the€space€between€the€shower€curtain€and€the€rod€onto€theÐ òB Ðfloor.€€Justus€confiscated€the€marijuana,€then€he€and€another€officer€found€and€detained€the€threeÐ Ø( Ðinmates€who€had€run€off.€€Defendant€was€among€them.€€Ð ¾ ÐÌà  àJustus€testified€that€he€brought€one€of€the€three€inmates€immediately€to€the€supervisorððs€officeÐ Š Ú Ðfor€questioning;€he€does€not€remember€who€was€first.€€Shortly€thereafter,€the€remaining€two€wereÐ p!À  Ðalso€questioned.€€In€addition€to€Justus,€the€officers€present€during€questioning€were€shift€supervisorÐ V"¦! ÐSergeant€McCullough€and€Corrections€Officer€Weathers.€€The€focus€of€their€questions€concernedÐ <#Œ" Ðownership€of€the€marijuana.€€Justus€testified€that,€although€all€three€inmates€admitted€to€smokingÐ "$r# Ðmarijuana€in€the€shower€before€Justus€arrived,€each€denied€ownership€of€the€marijuana€as€well€as€anyÐ %X $ Ðknowledge€regarding€the€hidden€cigarettes.€€(At€trial,€Justus€testified€that€he€did€not€rememberÐ î%>!% Ðwhether€Defendant€stated€that€he€was€ð ðsmoking€òòmarijuanaóóðð€or€merely€ð ðsmoking.ðð)€€Justus€testifiedÐ Ô&$"& Ðthat€neither€he€nor€the€other€officers€€read€the€inmates€òòMirandaóó€warnings€before€they€questionedÐ º' #' Ðthem,€but€that€all€statements€were€voluntary.€€Justus€testified€further€that€the€questioning€took€placeÐ  (ð#( Ðin€a€ð ðregular€officeðð€with€glass€windows,€and€the€doors€were€unlocked.Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌà  àCaptain€John€Jordan,€supervisor€of€the€Easley€Criminal€Justice€Center,€testified€at€theÐ R+¢&+ Ðsuppression€hearing€that€he€arrived€at€the€Center€in€the€evening€hours€of€September€11,€1998.€€AtÐ 8,ˆ', Ðthat€time,€Jordan€learned€that€marijuana€had€been€confiscated.€€Jordan€was€also€informed€that€theÐ ° Ðthree€inmates€involved€had€been€questioned€and€that€one€of€them,€Michael€Taylor,€wanted€to€speakÐ –æ Ðwith€him€regarding€the€incident.€€Jordan€first€talked€to€Taylor.€€Later,€Defendant€also€came€toÐ |Ì ÐJordanððs€office€to€speak€with€him.€€Detective€Hagen€was€present€when€Defendant€arrived.€€JordanÐ b² Ðtestified€that€before€his€interview€with€Defendant,€Hagen€read€Defendant€his€òòMirandaóó€rights€fromÐ H˜ Ða€card€provided€by€Jordan.€€Defendant€understood€his€rights.€€Jordan€said€that€Defendant€admittedÐ . ~ Ðhe€had€been€smoking€marijuana€with€the€other€inmates€but€denied€ownership€of€the€contraband.€Ð  d ÐJordan€testified€that€Defendant€did€not€ask€for€an€attorney€or€request€to€leave€his€office€at€any€timeÐ ú J Ðduring€their€discussion.€€Furthermore,€neither€inmateððs€presence€in€the€office€was€mandatory€and€theÐ à 0 Ðstatements€were€voluntary.Ð Æ   ÐÌà  àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€Defendant€testified€that€he€admitted€to€Officer€Justus€he€had€beenÐ ’â  Ðsmoking€marijuana.€€Defendant€said€that€later€that€same€evening,€Defendant€was€summoned€by€aÐ xÈ  Ðcorrections€officer€to€speak€with€Captain€Jordan€and€Detective€Hagen€in€Jordanððs€office.€€DefendantÐ ^®  Ðstated€that€he€was€not€Mirandized€before€he€was€questioned€by€them€and,€in€fact,€that€he€had€neverÐ D”  Ðbeen€read€òòMirandaóó€warnings€during€his€incarceration€at€the€Center.€€Defendant€testified€that€JordanÐ *z  Ðasked€him€whether€he€wanted€to€ð ðtell€them€what€was€going€on,ðð€and€Defendant€responded,€ð ðnotÐ ` Ðreally.ðð€€Jordan€claimed€to€already€possess€a€statement€from€Defendant€in€which€Defendant€admittedÐ öF Ðhis€guilt.€€Defendant€claimed€that€he€made€no€statements€to€Jordan€except€to€confirm€JordanððsÐ Ü, Ðstatements€to€him€regarding€the€identity€of€the€person€responsible€for€bringing€contraband€into€theÐ Â ÐCenter€by€responding,€ð ðyouððre€good.ðð€€Defendant€testified€that€he€denied€ownership€of€the€marijuanaÐ ¨ø Ðat€all€times€but€that€the€statements€he€did€make€were€voluntary€and€uncoerced.Ð ŽÞ ÐÌà  àFrom€the€facts€presented€at€the€suppression€hearing,€the€trial€court€determined€that€theÐ Zª ÐDefendant€was€read€his€òòMirandaóó€warnings€by€Detective€Hagan€and€in€the€presence€of€Captain€JordanÐ @ Ðbefore€being€questioned€by€either€of€them.€€The€trial€court€further€found€that€Defendant€understoodÐ &v Ðthe€warnings€and€subsequently€waived€them€before€making€any€statements.€€For€purposes€ofÐ  \ Ðanalyzing€his€first€statements€to€Officer€Justus€under€òòMirandaóó,€the€trial€court€decided€that€DefendantÐ òB Ðwas€not€ð ðin€custodyðð€when€he€made€his€statements€to€Justus€immediately€following€the€discoveryÐ Ø( Ðof€marijuana€in€the€shower:€neither€the€language€used€by€Justus€to€summon€Defendant€to€theÐ ¾ Ðsupervisorððs€office,€the€Defendantððs€physical€surroundings€during€interrogation,€nor€the€extent€toÐ ¤ô Ðwhich€Defendant€was€confronted€with€evidence€of€his€guilt€rendered€Defendant€ð ðin€custodyðð€forÐ Š Ú ÐòòMirandaóó€purposes.€€Lastly,€the€trial€court€found€that€there€was€no€additional€imposition€onÐ p!À  ÐDefendantððs€freedom€of€movement€when€questioned€by€Justus.Ð V"¦! ÐÌà@òò&ìàò òòòANALYSISó óóóˆÐ "$r# ÐÌà  àDefendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€admitted€into€evidence€his€statementsÐ î%>!% Ðto€Officer€Justus€and€Captain€Jordan€to€the€effect€that€he€was€smoking€marijuana.€€He€asserts€thatÐ Ô&$"& Ðhe€was€ð ðin€custodyðð€for€òòMirandaóó€purposes€and€that€the€incriminating€statements€to€Justus€shouldÐ º' #' Ðhave€been€suppressed€because€they€were€made€before€Miranda€warnings€were€given.€€DefendantÐ  (ð#( Ðdenies€making€any€statement€to€Jordan€but€if€a€statement€is€nevertheless€found€to€have€been€made,Ð †)Ö$) ÐDefendant€argues€that€it€was€tainted€and,€therefore,€inadmissible€as€a€confession€subsequent€to€anÐ l*¼%* Ðillegally€obtained€statement.Ð R+¢&+ ÐÐ 8,ˆ', Ðà  àThe€Fifth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€provides€in€part€that€ð ðno€person€...€Ð ° Ðshall€be€compelled€in€any€criminal€case€to€be€a€witness€against€himself.ðð€€U.S.€Const.€amend.€V.€Ð –æ ÐSimilarly,€Article€I,€Section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€states€that€ð ðin€all€criminal€prosecutions,Ð |Ì Ðthe€accused€.€.€.€shall€not€be€compelled€to€give€evidence€against€himself.ðð€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€9.€Ð b² ÐThe€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€the€protections€afforded€by€the€Fifth€Amendment€require€thatÐ H˜ Ðprecautions€be€taken€before€statements€obtained€through€custodial€interrogation€are€allowed€asÐ . ~ Ðevidence€against€an€accused.€€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€479,€86€S.Ct.€1602,€1630,€16Ð  d ÐL.Ed.2d€694€(1964).€€Generally,€when€statements€made€by€an€accused€are€the€product€of€a€custodialÐ ú J Ðinterrogation€by€law€enforcement€officers,€the€statements€may€not€be€admitted€into€evidence€unlessÐ à 0 Ðthe€accused€isÐ Æ   ÐÌÒ°ÒÒ°Òwarned€prior€to€any€questioning€that€he€has€the€right€to€remain€silent,€that€anythingÐ ’â  Ðhe€says€can€be€used€against€him€in€a€court€of€law,€that€he€has€the€right€to€the€presenceÐ xÈ  Ðof€an€attorney,€and€that€if€he€cannot€afford€an€attorney€one€will€be€appointed€for€himÐ ^®  Ðprior€to€any€questioning€if€he€so€desires.Ð D”  ЀÐ *z  ÐÒ°«9ÒÒ°9ÒòòId.óó€€Only€when€the€suspect€is€informed€of€his€rights€via€the€ð ðòòMirandaóóðð€warnings€may€a€suspect€beÐ ` Ðdeemed€to€knowingly€and€intelligently€waive€the€right€to€remain€silent€and€the€right€to€an€attorney.€Ð öF ÐòòId.óó€€Moreover,€any€statement€obtained€after€a€waiver€of€this€right€must€be€voluntary,€and€not€beÐ Ü, Ðextracted€by€ð ðany€sort€of€threats€or€violence,€nor€obtained€by€any€direct€or€implied€promises,Ð Â Ðhowever€slight,€nor€by€the€exertion€of€any€improper€influence.ðð€€òòBram€v.€United€Statesóó,€168€U.S.Ð ¨ø Ð532,€542„43,€18€S.Ct.€183,€187,€42€L.Ed.€568€(1897).Ð ŽÞ ÐÌà  àòòMirandaóó€warnings€are€required€only€when€a€person€is€subject€to€custodial€interrogation€byÐ Zª Ðlaw€enforcement.€€ð ðCustodialðð€means€that€the€subject€of€questioning€is€in€ð ðcustody€or€otherwiseÐ @ Ðdeprived€of€his€freedom€by€the€authorities€in€any€significant€way.ðð€€òòMirandaóó,€384€U.S.€at€479,€86Ð &v ÐS.Ct.€at€1630.€€ð ðInterrogationðð€has€been€interpreted€to€refer€to€questions€that€law€enforcement€officersÐ  \ Ðshould€know€are€reasonably€likely€to€elicit€an€incriminating€response.€€òòRhode€Island€v.€Innisóó,€446Ð òB ÐU.S.€291,€301,€100€S.Ct.€1682,€1689,€64€L.Ed.2d€297€(1980).€€In€order€for€òòMirandaóó€to€apply,€theÐ Ø( Ðsuspectððs€statements€must€be€in€response€to€interrogation€by€law€enforcement€personnel.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ ¾ Ðv.€Brownóó,€664€S.W.2d€318,€321€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€Moreover,€the€suspect€must€also€knowÐ ¤ô Ðthat€he€is€being€interrogated€by€an€agent€of€the€State.€€òòSeeóó€òòIllinois€v.€Perkinsóó,€496€U.S.€292,€€296„97,Ð Š Ú Ð110€S.Ct.€2394,€2397,€110€L.Ed.2d€243€(1990).€€Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àThese€standards€are€modified,€however,€when€the€suspect€subjected€to€questioning€is€alreadyÐ <#Œ" Ðin€custody€because€he€is€incarcerated.€€In€Tennessee,€the€standard€to€determine€whether€òòMirandaóóÐ "$r# Ðwarnings€must€precede€questioning€in€a€prison€setting€were€set€out€in€òòState€v.€Gossóó,€995€S.W.2d€617,Ð %X $ Ð629€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€€In€òòGossóó,€this€Court€held€that€a€prisoner€is€not€automatically€ð ðinÐ î%>!% Ðcustodyðð€within€the€meaning€of€òòMirandaóó;€there€must€be€an€additional€imposition€on€the€inmateððsÐ Ô&$"& Ðfreedom€of€movement.€òòóó€€òòId.óó€€Relevant€to€this€determination€is€(1)€the€language€used€to€summon€theÐ º' #' Ðinmate,€(2)€the€physical€surroundings€of€the€interrogation,€(3)€the€extent€to€which€the€inmate€isÐ  (ð#( Ðconfronted€with€evidence€of€his€guilt,€and€(4)€the€additional€pressure€exerted€to€detain€the€inmate.€Ð †)Ö$) ЀòòId.ó󀀀Рl*¼%* Ðâ âÐ R+¢&+ Ðà  àThis€Court€must€uphold€a€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€in€a€suppression€hearing€unless€theÐ ° Ðâ âevidence€preponderates€against€them.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23€(Tenn.€1996).€€InÐ –æ Ðevaluating€the€correctness€of€a€trial€court's€ruling€on€a€pretrial€motion€to€suppress,€appellate€courtsÐ |Ì Ðmay€consider€the€proof€adduced€both€at€the€suppression€hearing€and€at€trial.€€òòState€v.€Henningóó,€975Ð b² ÐS.W.2d€290,€299€(Tenn.€1998).€€The€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€demonstrate€that€the€evidenceÐ H˜ Ðpreponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings.€€òòState€v.€Hartsóó,€7€S.W.3d€78,€84€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð . ~ Ð1999).€€Questions€of€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€and€resolutionÐ  d Ðof€conflicts€in€the€evidence€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€trial€judge€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòOdomóó,€928Ð ú J ÐS.W.2d€at€23.€€The€application€of€the€law€to€the€facts,€however,€is€a€question€of€law€which€isÐ à 0 Ðreviewed€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€on€appeal.€€òòHartsóó,€7€S.W.3d€at€84.Ð Æ   ÐÌà  àThe€testimony€that€Officer€Justus€and€Captain€Jordan€gave€at€trial€was€essentially€the€sameÐ ’â  Ðas€the€testimony€that€they€gave€at€Defendantððs€suppression€hearing.€€The€only€difference€is€foundÐ xÈ  Ðin€the€testimony€of€Justus:€at€trial€he€testified€that€he€did€not€remember€whether€Defendant€stated€thatÐ ^®  Ðhe€was€ð ðsmoking€òòmarijuanaóóðð€or€merely€that€he€was€ð ðsmoking.ðð€At€the€suppression€hearing,€however,Ð D”  ÐJustus€testified€that€Defendant€admitted€to€smoking€marijuana.€€This€discrepancy€does€not€affect€theÐ *z  Ðadmissibility€of€Defendantððs€statement,€however.€€Ð ` ÐÌà  àAfter€a€review€of€both€the€trial€and€suppression€hearing€records,€we€believe€that€theÐ Ü, Ðcircumstances€of€the€questioning€in€this€case€did€not€require€òòMirandaóó€warnings€before€DefendantÐ Â Ðmade€his€statement€to€Officer€Justus.€€Defendant€relies,€in€part,€on€our€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€inÐ ¨ø ÐòòState€v.€Andersonóó,€937€S.W.2d€851€(Tenn.€1996),€to€support€the€argument€that€Defendant€was€ð ðinÐ ŽÞ Ðcustodyðð€for€purposes€of€òòMirandaóó€warnings€when€he€spoke€to€€Officer€Justus.€€This€reliance€isÐ tÄ Ðmisplaced.€€The€defendant€in€òòAndersonóó€was€not€incarcerated€at€the€time€the€statements€were€made.€Ð Zª ÐThe€objective€assessment€factors€that€theòòóó€Court€considered€relevant€to€determine€whether€theÐ @ Ðdefendant€in€òòAndersonóó€was€ð ðin€custodyðð€are€thus€not€analogous€to€Defendantððs€circumstances.€Ð &v ÐDefendantððs€brief€cites€numerous€conditions€of€prison€life€to€bolster€his€contention€that€he€was€ð ðinÐ  \ Ðcustodyðð€(i.e.,€Defendant€was€told€what€to€do€on€a€daily€basis,€he€was€instructed€regarding€what€timeÐ òB Ðto€arise€and€to€sleep,€he€had€no€choice€regarding€what€he€would€eat€or€wear,€etc.).€€There€is€noÐ Ø( Ðdispute€regarding€the€fact€that€Defendant€was€in€custody€in€the€literal€sense€of€the€word.€€As€weÐ ¾ Ðdiscussed€above,€however,€an€inmate€is€not€in€custody€for€òòMirandaóó€purposes€unless€there€is€an€òòaddedóóÐ ¤ô Ðimposition€on€the€inmateððs€freedom€of€movement.€€òòGossóó,€995€S.W.2d€at€629€(emphasis€added).€Ð Š Ú ÐMere€prisoner€status€is€not€sufficient.€€òòId.óó€€Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àIn€òòGossóó,€our€Court€held€that€factors€relevant€to€deciding€whether€there€was€additionalÐ <#Œ" Ðimposition€on€an€inmateððs€freedom€of€movement€were€(1)€the€language€used€to€summon€the€inmate,Ð "$r# Ð(2)€the€physical€surroundings€of€the€interrogation,€(3)€the€extent€to€which€the€inmate€is€confrontedÐ %X $ Ðwith€evidence€of€his€guilt,€and€(4)€the€additional€pressure,€if€any,€exerted€to€detain€the€inmate.€€òòId.óó€Ð î%>!% ÐThe€trial€court€found,€specifically,€that€neither€the€language€used€by€Justus€to€summon€DefendantÐ Ô&$"& Ðto€the€supervisorððs€office,€the€Defendantððs€physical€surroundings€during€interrogation,€nor€the€extentÐ º' #' Ðto€which€Defendant€was€confronted€with€evidence€of€his€guilt€rendered€Defendant€ð ðin€custodyðð€forÐ  (ð#( ÐòòMirandaóó€purposesòòóó.€€In€addition,€the€trial€court€found€that€Justus€exerted€no€additional€pressure€onÐ †)Ö$) ÐDefendant€when€he€detained€him€for€questioning.€€Under€our€holding€in€òòGossóó,€the€trial€courtððsÐ l*¼%* Ðâ âfindings€are€sufficient€to€conclude€that€Defendant€was€not€ð ðin€custodyðð€for€òòMirandaóó€purposes€at€theÐ R+¢&+ Ðtime€he€was€questioned€by€Officer€Justus.€€Consequently,€Defendantððs€constitutional€rights€asÐ ° Ðdefined€in€òòMirandaóó€were€not€violated,€and€his€statements€were€properly€admitted.Ð –æ Ðâ âÌà  àThe€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings€that€Defendant€wasÐ b² ÐMirandized€before€the€questioning€by€Captain€Jordan€and€Detective€Hagen€began.€€Also,€the€proofÐ H˜ Ðsupports€the€trial€courtððs€findings€that€Defendant€understood€the€warnings€given€him€and€that€heÐ . ~ Ðwaived€them€before€making€his€statements.€€Defendantððs€brief€cites€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€834€S.W.2d€915Ð  d Ð(Tenn.€1992),€for€the€proposition€that€Defendantððs€statements€to€Jordan€were€tainted€by€the€fact€thatÐ ú J Ðhis€earlier€statements€were€unconstitutionally€extracted€in€violation€of€òòMirandaóó.€€But€we€have€alreadyÐ à 0 Ðdecided€that€Defendantððs€previous€statements€were€indeed€admissible.€€Defendant€is€not€entitled€toÐ Æ   Ðrelief€on€this€issue.€€Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌà@FF%ìàòòò òCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ xÈ  ÐÌà  àIn€conclusion,€we€find€that€Defendant€has€failed€to€satisfy€his€burden€of€showing€that€theÐ D”  Ðevidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings.€€Accordingly,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtÐ *z  Ðdid€not€err€when€it€denied€Defendantððs€motion€to€suppress.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isÐ ` ÐAFFIRMED.Ð öF ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ŽÞ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGE