ÿWPC÷ 2# ÌUN× %% 0(+4Sgbv~w@† 0JÆ 0T 0^d 0h 0r* 0|œ 0† 0ž 1u. 0d£ AQ ÆX 0D 0@b 0D¢ D/æ B B2 D3O U>‚ U*À B)ê DC AMV £ v~¦ vÓ$˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLàÏ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡¸LË$ @ d3|x- ù- { U|D} ~D€VD‚ƒ„Ó€2 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("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d,,,,7Border 1dd!#-Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ùÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€*ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌò òJune€26,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€+ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{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  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€*ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÙ€!ÙÔ€+ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œßR€./-A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌÌÓ  Óò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÓ ` ܆XDp”X Óà àà àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÓ` °‡XDp”XÓà àà àMARCH€1998€SESSIONó óÌÓ  ÓÌÌà àÓ ` ®DÓò òÌÓ` cÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àó ó)€ÌÓ ` ¸ cÓà àà à)€C.C.A.€No.€œ03C01›„9705„CR„00165à àAppellee,à à)Ìà àà à)€œMcMinn›€CountyÌV.€€€€€€€à à)Ìà àà à)€Honorable€Carroll€L.€Ross,€JudgeÌò òJ.€C.€MEYER,ó óà à)ò òÌó óà àà à)€(Rape€of€a€Child€„€Two€Counts)à àAppellant.à à)€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌÌÌÓ` ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌCharles€M.€Cornà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àAttorney€General€&€Reporter€ÌP.O.€Box€1453à àÌCleveland,€TN€37364„1453à àElizabeth€B.€œMarney›Ìà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àJerry€N.€œEstes›Ìà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àRichard€NewmanÌà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àP.O.€Box€647Ìà àAthens,€TN€37303„0647ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€___________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌó óÌÌò òPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,ó óÌœJudgeÇÑ  ÑÑ7€Ö#XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ Ñò òÔ  Ô›Ó ` ¸ pÓÓÓà ààQ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó ó€ÌÓ` ¸ Óà àJ.€C.€Meyer,€the€appellant,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€two€counts€of€rapeÏof€a€child.€€The€criminal€court€denied€the€appellantððs€motion€for€a€new€trial,€andÏhe€appealed.€€He€raises€several€issues€for€our€review:€(1)€whether€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€denying€the€appellantððs€motion€to€sever€the€two€counts€of€theÏindictment;€(2)€whether€the€court€erred€in€failing€to€order€the€state€to€file€anÏadditional€bill€of€particulars;€(3)€whether€the€court€erred€in€allowing€the€state€toÏintroduce€into€evidence€three€œincidents›€of€sexual€penetration€when€theÏappellant€was€only€charged€with€two€counts;€(4)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏinstructing€the€jury€that€the€appellantððs€earliest€release€date€would€be€afterÏserving€5.73€years€in€prison;€and€(5)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€toÏsupport€the€convictions.ÌÌÓ  Óò òPROCEDURAL€BACKGROUNDó óÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ¸ ÍÓà àIn€March€1996,€the€appellant€was€indicted€on€four€counts€of€the€rape€of€aÏchild.€€The€first€two€counts€were€dismissed€in€August€1996.€€The€third€and€fourthÏcounts€alleged€that€the€rapes€occurred€on€or€between€January€1995€and€MayÏ1995.€€In€July€1996,€the€appellant€filed€a€motion€for€a€bill€of€particulars,€askingÏthe€court€to€order€the€state€to€provide€the€date,€time,€and€place€of€each€rape,€theÏmanner€of€the€rape,€and€any€known€witnesses.€€The€state€filed€a€bill€ofÏparticulars€specifying€that€between€January€and€May€1995,€while€living€onÏCircle€Drive€in€Etowa,€Tennessee,€the€appellant€raped€the€victim,€a€child€lessÏthan€thirteen€years€of€age.€€The€penetration€was€orally€and€vaginally.€€The€stateÍfurther€informed€the€appellant€that€the€appellantððs€daughter,€a€minor,€and€theÏvictimððs€brother,€a€minor,€may€have€been€present€when€the€alleged€rapesÏoccurred€and€that€they€might€be€called€as€witnesses.€€ÌÌà àOn€September€13,€1996,€the€appellant€filed€a€motion€for€a€more€completeÏbill€of€particulars,€requesting€a€specific€description€of€when€the€crimes€occurred.€€ÏThe€appellant€also€filed€a€motion€to€sever€the€two€counts€of€rape€for€trial.€ÌÌà àOn€September€30,€1996,€the€court€held€a€hearing€on€the€appellantððsÏmotion€to€sever€and€his€motion€for€a€more€complete€bill€of€particulars.€€The€courtÏdenied€the€appellantððs€motion€to€sever€the€counts€in€the€indictment,€in€partÏbecause€the€counts€involved€the€same€victim.€€On€October€1,€1996,€the€stateÏamended€the€indictment€to€allege€that€the€two€counts€of€rape€occurred€on,€orÏbetween,€November€1994€and€March€1,€1995.€€The€appellant€filed€a€motionÏrequesting€the€court€to€charge€the€jury€on€the€applicable€range€of€punishments.€ÏThe€appellant€also€filed€a€motion€to€exclude€all€evidence€of€sexual€conductÏother€than€evidence€of€the€two€acts€of€sexual€penetration€alleged€in€theÏindictment.€ÌÌÓ  Óò òEVIDENCEó óÌÓ  Óà àAt€trial,€the€victim,€an€eight„year„old€female,€testified€that€from€NovemberÏ1994€through€February€1995,€she€lived€with€her€mother,€brother,€and€herÏmotherððs€boyfriend,€the€appellant.€€They€lived€in€a€three„bedroom€apartment€onÍCircle€Drive€in€McMinn€County.€€The€victim€testified€that€sometime€nearÏChristmas€of€1994,€she€was€lying€in€her€motherððs€bed.€€Her€mother€was€asleepÏin€another€room.€€The€victim€testified€that€the€appellant€came€into€the€room,Ïlocked€the€door,€took€off€his€shorts,€kissed€her,€and€lay€on€top€of€her.€€The€victimÏtestified€that€the€appellant€rubbed€the€ð ðprivate€place€ð ð€between€her€legs€with€hisÏhands.€€She€testified€that€the€appellant€ð ðstuck€his€private€in€mine.ðð€€The€victimÏtestified€that€she€told€the€appellant€to€get€off€of€her,€and€he€did.ÌÌà àThe€victim€testified€that€the€appellant€approached€her€on€a€secondÏoccasion€and€ð ðdid€the€same€thing,€except€when€I€told€him€to€stop€he€didnððt€stop.ðð€ÏShe€testified€that€this€occurred€in€her€motherððs€bedroom.€€She€testified€that€theÏappellant€placed€his€ð ðprivateðð€in€her€ð ðprivate.ðð€€She€testified€that€€the€appellantÏalso€stuck€his€ð ðprivateðð€in€her€mouth.€€The€victim€said€that€it€hurt€when€theÏappellant€stuck€his€ð ðprivateðð€in€her€ð ðprivate.ðð€€She€stated€that€she€noticed€bloodÏon€the€bed.€€The€victim€testified€that€the€appellant€told€her€not€to€tell€anyone€orÏhe€would€go€to€jail,€and,€that€he€would€beat€her€mother.€€The€victim€testified€thatÏshe€told€her€mother€what€€the€appellant€had€done€to€her,€but€that€her€mother€toldÏher€to€say€that€her€brother€or€Uncle€Terry€abused€her.€€The€victim€testified€thatÏno€one€else€had€ever€sexually€abused€her.€€She€stated€that€the€sexual€contactÏoccurred€once€or€twice€when€there€was€a€Christmas€tree€in€the€apartment.€€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€and€the€victimððs€mother€were€evicted€from€Circle€Drive€inÏFebruary€1995€and€went€to€Florida€in€May€or€June€of€1995.€€During€part€of€thisÍtime,€the€victim€lived€with€her€maternal€grandmother,€Shirley€Patton.€€ShortlyÏafter€moving€to€Florida,€the€victimððs€mother€returned€to€Tennessee€to€bring€theÏvictim€and€the€victimððs€brother€to€Florida.€€The€appellantððs€daughter,€MelissaÏMeyer,€and€the€victimððs€uncle,€Terry€Thompson,€also€lived€with€them€at€variousÏtimes€in€Florida.€€In€October€1995,€the€victimððs€grandmother€brought€the€victimÏand€her€brother€back€to€Tennessee.€€The€parties€stipulated€that€if€RickyÏThompson,€the€victimððs€uncle,€were€present€that€he€would€testify€that€on€OctoberÏ24,€1995,€the€day€after€the€victim€returned€from€Florida,€she€told€Ricky€that€theÏappellant€had€hurt€her€in€her€privates.€€Ricky€told€the€victimððs€grandmother€andÏPatty€œDeBoard›€who€took€her€to€Dr.€Iris€œSnyder›€the€next€morning.€€ÌÌà àDr.€Snyder,€a€pediatrician€and€the€victimððs€doctor,€examined€the€victim.€ÏDr.€œSnyder›€testified€that€the€examination€showed€positive€findings€of€sexualÏabuse,€including€an€enlarged€hymenal€opening,€small€tears€in€the€hymen,€and€aÏthin€hymen.€€Dr.€Snyder€testified€that€these€findings€were€consistent€with€pastÏsexual€abuse.€€Dr.€Snyder€testified€that€she€could€not€determine€exactly€whenÏthe€abuse€occurred,€but€that€the€injuries€were€at€least€a€month€old.Ìà àÌà àThe€victim€made€a€statement€to€a€Department€of€Human€ServicesÏemployee.€€Both€the€state€and€the€appellant€had€access€to€this€statement€beforeÏtrial,€and€it€was€introduced€into€evidence.€€The€defense€brought€out€theÏinconsistencies€in€the€statement€and€the€victimððs€trial€testimony.€€The€victim€saidÏin€her€statement€that€abuse€occurred€while€her€mother€was€at€work€at€the€WaffleÍHouse€both€in€Tennessee€and€Florida.€€At€trial,€the€victim€testified€that€herÏmother€only€worked€at€the€Waffle€House€in€Florida.€€The€victimððs€mother€testifiedÏthat€she€worked€at€the€Waffle€House€in€Florida,€but€not€in€Tennessee.€€€€Next,€theÏvictim€stated€that€the€appellantððs€daughter€was€present€when€a€rape€occurred.€ÏThe€victim€said€in€her€statement€and€at€trial€that€the€appellantððs€daughter€visitedÏthe€appellant€in€Florida,€but€that€she€had€never€been€to€Tennessee.€€TheÏvictimððs€mother€testified€that€the€appellantððs€daughter€had€never€been€to€theÏCircle€Drive€apartment€in€Tennessee.€€Lastly,€the€defense€introduced€lettersÏwritten€by€the€victim€to€the€appellant€while€the€appellant€was€in€jail.€€In€theÏletters,€the€victim€said€that€she€missed€the€appellant,€that€he€was€the€best€dadÏthat€she€had€ever€had,€that€she€loved€him€and€wanted€to€see€him.€€The€victimÏtestified€that€she€wrote€the€letters€before€the€rapes€occurred.€€The€victimððsÏmother€testified€that€she€mailed€the€letters€after€the€rapes€occurred,€implying€thatÏthe€letters€were€written€after€the€rapes.Ìà àÌà àAt€the€close€of€the€stateððs€proof,€the€state€elected€to€proceed€on€one€countÏof€vaginal€rape€and€one€count€of€oral€rape.€€The€court€denied€the€appellantððsÏmotion€for€judgment€of€acquittal.€€The€victimððs€mother,€Donna,€and€the€appellantÏtestified€for€the€defense.€€The€victimððs€mother€testified€that€she€had€never€seenÏthe€appellant€act€negatively€in€any€way€toward€the€victim.€€She€testified€that€sheÏmade€Terry€Thompson,€her€brother,€leave€the€Florida€residence€because€heÏwould€not€leave€the€victim€alone,€implying€that€he€had€sexually€abused€theÏvictim.€€She€testified€that€Terry€had€sexually€abused€her€during€their€childhood.€ÍDonnaððs€mother€testified€that€she€did€not€believe€that€Terry€abused€DonnaÏbecause€Donna€never€told€her€about€it.€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€denied€that€he€raped€the€victim.€€On€direct€examination,€theÏappellant€testified€that€he€has€convictions€for€robbery€with€a€firearm,€two€countsÏof€conspiracy€to€commit€robbery,€common€law€robbery,€aggravated€burglary,Ïand€theft.€€He€testified€that€he€left€Tennessee€while€on€bond€for€the€aggravatedÏburglary€because€his€mother€was€dying.€€The€appellant€was€extradited€back€toÏTennessee.€€He€testified€that€Donnaððs€mother€hated€him.€The€appellant€testifiedÏthat€he€never€locked€the€victimððs€brother€out€of€the€house.€€On€rebuttal,€theÏvictimððs€brother€testified€that€on€one€or€two€occasions€the€victim€and€theÏappellant€were€in€the€house€alone€and€that€sometimes€the€appellant€would€notÏlet€the€victim€play€outside.€€The€victimððs€brother€testified€that€he€could€not€get€inÏthe€house€on€occasion,€but€that€he€thought€that€the€door€locked€automatically.ÌÓ  Óò òÌMOTION€TO€SEVERó óà àÌÓ  Óà àThe€court€denied€the€appellantððs€motion€to€sever€the€counts€in€theÏindictment.€€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€8(b)€provides€that€the€stateÏmay€join€two€or€more€offenses€in€the€same€indictment€if€the€offenses€constituteÏparts€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan€or€if€they€are€of€the€same€or€similarÏcharacter.€€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€14(b),€however,€provides€thatÏthe€defendant€shall€have€a€severance€of€the€offenses€unless€the€offenses€areÍpart€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan€and€the€evidence€of€one€would€be€admissibleÏupon€the€trial€of€the€others.€Ìà àÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€two€alleged€acts€of€rape€were€not€part€of€aÏcommon€scheme€or€plan€because€the€acts€were€substantially€disconnected€inÏtime€and€were€not€part€of€the€same€criminal€episode.€€We€disagree.€€There€areÏthree€categories€of€common€scheme€or€plan€evidence:€(1)€distinctive€designs,€orÏsignature€crimes;€(2)€a€larger€continuing€plan€or€conspiracy;€and€(3)€the€sameÏtransaction.€€òòState€v.€Hoytóó,€928€S.W.2d€935,€943€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€InÏòòHoytóó,€the€Court€said:ÌÒ Œ ÒÒ 4 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ¸ ¤ÓÓÓTo€fall€within€the€first€category€of€ððdistinctive€design€orÏsignature,ðð€similar€crimes€committed€by€the€defendant€ððareÏadmissible€to€show€the€defendant's€òòmodus€operandióó€fromÏwhich€it€may€be€inferred€that€the€defendant€probablyÏcommitted€the€nearly€identical€crime€for€which€he€or€she€isÏon€trial.ðð€€However,€the€òòmodus€operandióó€must€be€so€uniqueÏand€distinctive€as€to€be€like€a€signature,€i.e.,€it€must€beÏprobative€of€the€defendant's€identity.€€To€determine€whetherÏcertain€crimes€fit€into€this€category,€ððthe€test€is€not€whetherÏthere€was€evidence€that€a€defendant€committed€bothÏcrimes,€but€whether€there€was€a€unique€method€used€inÏcommitting€the€crimes.ðð€ÌÌÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒòòœHoyt›óó,€928€S.W.2d€€at€943€(citations€omitted).ÌÌÌÌÒ Œ ÒÒ 4 ÒIn€order€to€be€'parts€of€a€common€scheme€or€plan'€asÏcontemplated€by€Rules€8(b)€and€14(b)(1),€two€or€more€setsÏof€offenses€must€be€so€similar€in€òòmodus€operandióó€and€occurÏwithin€such€a€relatively€close€proximity€of€time€and€locationÏto€each€other€that€there€can€be€little€doubt€that€the€offensesÏwere€committed€by€the€same€person(s).ÌÌÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒòòState€v.€Peacockóó,€638€S.W.2d€837,€840€(Tenn.€œCrim›.€œApp›.€1982).ÌÌÌÓ  ÓÌÓ ` ¸ ÍÓÓÓà àThe€similarities€between€the€offenses€alleged€in€counts€three€and€fourÏare€€sufficient€to€establish€a€distinctive€design.€€The€victim€is€the€same€in€eachÏoffense.€€The€offenses€occurred€within€a€relatively€short€period€of€time,€fourÏmonths.€€The€circumstances€surrounding€the€offenses€are€similar.€€Both€offensesÏoccurred€in€the€same€room€and€in€the€same€house.€€Both€rapes€occurred€whenÏthe€appellant€had€the€opportunity€to€be€alone€with€the€victim.€ÌÌà àNext,€we€must€determine€the€admissibility€of€evidence€of€one€crime€in€theÏtrial€of€the€other.€€In€determining€admissibility,€€the€trial€court€must€comply€withÏthe€procedural€requirements€of€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€404(b).€€RuleÏ404(b)€provides€that€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€is€not€admissibleÏto€prove€the€character€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€with€theÏcharacter€trait.€€Such€evidence,€however,€may€be€admissible€for€other€purposesÏif€its€probative€value€is€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€EvidenceÏof€other€crimes€is€admissible€to€show€a€common€scheme€œor€plan›€for€theÏcommission€of€two€or€more€crimes€so€related€to€each€other€that€proof€of€oneÏtends€to€establish€the€other.€€òòœHoyt›óó,€928€S.W.2d€at€944.€€Therefore,€the€evidenceÏof€the€offense€in€count€three€would€be€admissible€in€the€trial€on€count€four€andÏvice€versa.€€Ìà àÌà à€Lastly,€we€must€determine€whether€the€probative€value€of€the€offense€isÏoutweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€to€the€appellant.€€The€similarity€ofÏthe€acts€makes€the€probative€value€of€the€evidence€particularly€significant.€€òòœHoyt›óó,Ï928€S.W.2d€at€944€(quoting€òòState€v.€McKnightóó,€900€S.W.2d€36,€51€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1994)).€€The€appellant€made€no€showing€of€unfair€prejudice.€€The€dangerÏof€unfair€prejudice€does€not€outweigh€the€probative€value€of€the€evidence€ofÏeach€alleged€rape.€€Once€again,€the€victim€is€the€same,€the€time€period€isÏrelatively€short,€the€location€of€the€rapes€is€the€same,€and€the€nature€of€the€rapesÏis€the€same.€€The€trial€court€properly€denied€the€appellantððs€motion€to€sever.ÌÌÓ  Óò òBILL€OF€PARTICULARSó óÌÓ  Óà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€for€aÏmore€complete€bill€of€particulars.€€The€purpose€of€the€bill€of€particulars€is€toÏprovide€information€about€the€details€of€the€charge€when€necessary€for€aÏdefendant€to€prepare€his€or€her€defense,€to€avoid€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial,Ïand€to€enable€the€defendant€to€preserve€a€plea€of€double€jeopardy.€€InformationÏthat€may€be€required€in€the€bill€of€particulars€includes,€but€is€not€limited€to,Ïdetails€as€to€the€nature,€time,€date,€or€location€of€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Speckóó,Ï944€S.W.2d€598,€600€(Tenn.€1997).€€Ìà à€à àÌà àGenerally,€only€after€a€trial,€will€the€court€be€able€to€determine€whetherÏdeficiencies€in€the€bill€of€particulars€prevented€the€defendant€from€preparing€anÏadequate€defense,€caused€undue€and€prejudicial€surprise,€or€made€untenableÍa€later€plea€of€double€jeopardy.€€ð ðIn€other€words,€the€trial€court€cannot€determineÏwhether€or€not€the€defendant€has€been€hampered€in€his€defense€until€the€courtÏknows€what€proof€the€state€will€offer€as€to€time€and€place€of€the€offense,€andÏhow€this€evidence€relates€to€the€actual€theory€of€defense.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€600„01(quotingÏòòState€v.€Byrdóó,€820€S.W.2d€739,€741€(Tenn.€1991)).€€Although€a€court€shouldÏmake€every€effort€to€see€that€the€prosecution€supplies€the€necessary€informationÏin€the€bill€of€particulars,€in€cases€involving€child€sexual€abuse,€the€prosecutionÏmay€be€unable€to€supply€all€the€specifics€requested€by€the€defense€simplyÏbecause€of€the€age€of€the€child.€€òòId.óó€at€600.Ìà àÌà à€At€the€hearing,€the€appellant€was€concerned€that€the€state€limit€its€proofÏso€it€did€not€unduly€surprise€the€appellant€at€trial.€€The€court€informed€bothÏparties€that€they€could€review€the€Department€of€Human€Services€file.€€TheÏassistant€district€attorney€informed€the€appellant€at€the€hearing€that€the€twoÏcounts€of€rape€involved€both€vaginal€and€oral€penetration€on€both€occasions.€ÏThe€appellantððs€attorney€responded€that€he€believed€that€he€had€everything€heÏneeded€to€try€the€case,€but€asked€the€state€to€put€the€new€information€in€writing.€€ÏAlthough€the€state€did€not€file€a€second€bill€of€particulars,€it€is€clear€from€theÏrecord€that€the€state€gave€the€appellant€all€the€information€that€was€available€onÏthe€alleged€offenses.€ÌÌà à€On€appeal,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€information€supplied€by€theÏstate€did€not€describe€the€number€of€penetrations€or€whether€there€were€singleÍor€multiple€criminal€episodes.€€As€argued€by€the€state,€the€appellant€has€failed€toÏarticulate€how€the€lack€of€information,€if€this€information€was€lacking,€preventedÏthe€appellant€from€preparing€his€defense,€surprised€him€at€trial,€or€subjected€himÏto€double€jeopardy.€€The€appellant€has€not€offered€a€defense€that€would€haveÏbeen€available€if€the€state€could€have€offered€greater€specificity.€€TheÏinformation€provided€by€the€state€was€sufficient€to€allow€the€appellant€to€prepareÏhis€defense€and€to€protect€him€from€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial.€€The€stateÏprovided€the€appellant€with€a€four„month€time€span,€the€location,€and€the€natureÏof€the€rapes.€€The€state€gave€the€appellant€all€the€information€that€it€had.€€WeÏfind€no€merit€to€this€issue.€ÌÌÓ  Óò òEVIDENTIARY€ISSUEó óÌÓ  Óà àNext,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€state€toÏintroduce€evidence€of€three€sexual€penetrations€when€the€appellant€was€onlyÏcharged€with€two€counts€of€rape€of€a€child.€€He€cites€òòState€v.€Rickmanóó,€876ÏS.W.2d€824€(Tenn.€1994),€but€does€not€explain€how€the€case€supports€hisÏargument.€€In€òòRickmanóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€refused€to€adopt€a€broadÏsex€crimes€exception€to€Rule€404(b)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence.€€ThatÏrule€provides€that€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs€or€acts€are€not€admissible€toÏprove€the€character€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€with€theÏcharacter€trait€on€a€particular€occasion.€€The€Court,€however,€reaffirmed€theÏspecial€rule€of€ð ðadmitting€evidence€of€other€sex€crimes€when€an€indictment€is€notÏtime€specific€and€when€the€evidence€relates€to€sex€crimes€that€allegedlyÍoccurred€during€the€time€as€charged€in€the€indictment.€ð ð€€òòœRickman›óó,€876€S.W.2dÏat€829.€€The€Court€said€that€ð ð[œI]n›€such€cases,€the€State€must€elect€at€the€close€ofÏits€proof„in„chief€as€to€the€particular€incident€€for€which€a€conviction€is€beingÏsought.ðð€€òòId.óó€€ð ðUnlike€evidence€of€prior€crimes€excluded€by€òòBunchóó€and€Tenn.€R.ÏœEvid›.€404(a)€&€(b),€evidence€of€a€prior€sex€crime€that€is€necessarily€includedÏwithin€the€charge€of€the€indictment€is€also€necessarily€relevant€to€the€issuesÏbeing€tried€and,€therefore,€is€admissible.ðð€€òòId.óóÌÌà àWe€find€no€merit€to€the€appellantððs€argument.€€The€state€producedÏevidence€of€one€oral€and€two€vaginal€penetrations.€€All€three€acts€occurredÏduring€the€time€period€alleged€in€the€indictment.€€At€the€close€of€its€proof„in„chief,€the€state€elected€to€seek€convictions€for€one€oral€and€one€vaginalÏpenetration.€The€facts€of€this€case€fit€within€the€special€rule€enunciated€by€theÏCourt€in€òòRickman.óó€ÌÌÓ  Óà àò òJURY€INSTRUCTIONSó óÌÓ  Óà àThe€appellant€next€argues€that€the€court€erred€in€charging€the€jury€thatÏthe€appellantððs€earliest€release€date,€if€convicted€of€the€rape€of€a€child,€would€beÏafter€serving€5.73€years€in€prison,€requiring€a€reversal€of€the€juryððs€verdict.€ÏPursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðððð€40„35„201(b)(1)€&€(2)(A)(I)€(œSupp›.Ï1995),€the€appellant€requested€the€court€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€possibleÏpenalties€for€the€offense€charged€and€all€lesser€included€offenses.€€When€aÏcharge€including€possible€penalties€has€been€requested€pursuant€toÍsubdivision€(b)(1),€the€judge€shall€also€include€in€the€instructions€anÏapproximate€calculation€of€the€minimum€number€of€years€a€person€sentenced€toÏimprisonment€for€the€offense€charged€and€lesser€included€offenses€must€serveÏbefore€reaching€such€person's€earliest€release€eligibility€date.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„201(2)(A)(I).€ÌÌà à€The€court€instructed€the€jury€that€the€range€of€punishment€for€the€offenseÏof€rape€of€a€child€was€twenty„five€to€forty€years€in€the€state€penitentiary.€€TheÏcourt€erroneously€instructed€the€jury€that€the€minimum€number€of€years€that€aÏperson€sentenced€to€imprisonment€for€the€rape€of€a€child€would€have€to€serveÏbefore€reaching€the€earliest€release€eligibility€date€was€5.73€years.€€A€personÏconvicted€of€the€rape€of€a€child€must€serve€the€entire€sentence€imposed€by€theÏcourt€undiminished€by€any€sentence€reduction€credits.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„501(I)(3)(œSupp›.€1995),€39„13„523(b)(œSupp›.€1995).€ÌÌà àAlthough€the€courtððs€instruction€was€incorrect,€the€error€was€harmless;€itÏdoes€not€require€reversal.€€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€36(b)Ïprovides€that€no€judgment€of€conviction€shall€be€reversed€on€appeal€except€forÏerrors€that€affirmatively€appear€to€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€theÏmerits.€€The€appellant€does€not€explain€how€the€erroneous€jury€instructionÏaffected€the€result€of€his€trial.€The€court€instructed€the€jury€on€the€elements€ofÏrape€of€a€child€and€the€lesser€included€offense€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€€ÏAggravated€sexual€battery€is€unlawful€sexual€contact.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„504€(œSupp›.€1995).€€The€evidence€of€penetration€was€œsubstantial.€€We€findÏthat€the€error€does€not€mandate€reversal.›€ÌÌÓ  Óà àò òSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óÌÓ  Ó€€à àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€juryððsÏverdict€for€several€reasons:€(1)€the€medical€evidence€did€not€establish€when€theÏalleged€abuse€occurred;€(2)€the€victim€testified€that€the€event€was€painful,€butÏdid€not€complain€of€pain€when€she€had€a€chance€to€do€so;€(3)€the€child€was€notÏtaken€to€a€doctor€until€approximately€seven€months€after€the€alleged€event;€(4)Ïat€the€time€of€the€complaint,€the€child€was€in€the€custody€of€an€individual€whoÏwas€hostile€to€the€appellant;€(5)€the€conviction€was€based€upon€the€testimony€ofÏa€child€who€had€been€overly€coached,€after€the€ð ðincidentsðð;€(6)€the€victim€wroteÏletters€expressing€affection€for€the€appellant;€and€(7)€the€state€did€not€proveÏvenue.ÌÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,Ïwe€must€review€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution€inÏdetermining€whether€"any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443ÏU.S.€307,€319€(1979).€€We€do€not€reweigh€or€re„evaluate€the€evidence€and€areÏrequired€to€afford€the€state€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€proof€containedÏin€the€record€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€beÏdrawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).ÌÌà àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€toÏbe€given€to€the€evidence,€as€well€as€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€òòId.óó€€€A€guilty€verdict€rendered€by€theÏjury€and€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€forÏthe€state,€and€a€presumption€of€guilt€replaces€the€presumption€of€innocence.€ÏòòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€It€is€the€appellant's€burdenÏto€illustrate€to€this€Court€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€guiltyÏverdict€in€favor€of€his€or€her€innocence.€€òòId.óóÌÌÓ ` ¸ ÓÔ  Ôà àThe€issues€raised€by€the€appellant€were€for€the€jury€to€decide.€€Both€theÏstate€and€the€defense€did€a€fine€job€of€raising€and€addressing€the€issues€in€thisÏcase.€€The€testimonies€of€the€victim€and€her€treating€physician€were€accreditedÏby€the€jury€and€are€sufficient€evidence€to€support€the€juryððs€verdict.€€This€CourtÏfinds€the€evidence€to€be€legally€sufficient€to€sustain€the€verdict€of€the€jury.€€€ÌÌÓ  Óò òCONCLUSIONó óÌÓ  Óà àThis€Court€affirms€the€judgment€of€conviction€on€all€counts.ÌœÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ›ÌÓÓà àà à__________________________Ìà àà àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCORNELIA€A.€CLARK,€Special€Judge