WPCx? YE'_gV"gL>x O&{{N|Lfv: M{{V7aJ2W΋`qK\[Wo0pay^h#wx܅lk%ZWV!(ҤoJTڑ66pÓLiAFqav *ɍ:K̍_*t0*a* R;tr>]4.~ (79$R Y 2KT˴?n~PF!\Ux<􊾢a6dVΌcoO>fVE5TDeIʿtu +*oKY}~B5<qTa2^J㙊";$RV~~P[5FA|RlXB.`NͮNi-HR#N|JTaƨB΢u.%71 N=0B!\1e %N 0UNU@d z z j ^ < wH 4L ` o 5   N mEw 0Dy#~ 0U 0 0 0 0 0 0_ 09 0 0C 0' 0 0 0 0q 0< 0 0 0@ 0 b! 0! 0v" 0D# 0$ 0$ 0% 0^& 00' 0<K' 0' 0>E( 0v( 0`( 0`Y) 0`) 0`* 0`y* 08* 0+ 02+ 0, 0:- 0YK- 0_- 0 . 0j / 0w0 B*1 D/%2 0T2 D/3 04 064 0 5 0:6 0M6 0^87 0<7 0N7 B 8U6=8 0s8 D59 D-L9 0Ky9U>9 AS:U: 0; 0D; A<U*<U(N<R&=c(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z(Times New Roman C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptxpS+ K+:i+003|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 U R-$      1  cU$ c  _ԀThiscourtusesonlyinitialstoidentifyminorvictimsofsexualoffenses.(#$  0  HP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0  R-$      2  cU$ c  _ԀFromthedefendantsbrief,itdoesnotappearthathecontestshisconvictionofcasualexchangeorthe  resultingsentence.*+ (_2623  ..*G+M (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *D+M (_24   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *A+M (_23  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *>+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_1723  Ԁ*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  - -(DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  &2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      (&H2  (&H3  (&H4 XXX (&H5  (&H6  20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKW<6X9`(Courier NewKS\\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard KW<6X9`(Courier NewKS\\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/KW<6X9`(Courier NewKS\\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7K(X7  ?b%2A`Arial?  S\\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7&  d dJ)1dxd<:zTop of For7M(X7  ?b%2A`Arial?  S\\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7J)2dxd0KS.SampleKW<6X9`(Courier NewKS\\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKW<6X9`(Courier NewKS\\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable(|G2-$ !.8td d 8         0  gh: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  (O$ d<6X9`(Courier New(|3$ !.8td d 8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  \  `&Times New Roman^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8td d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK%2A`Arial(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular H R-$      3  cU$ c  _ԀAlthoughthisstatementseemstoindicatethatthetrialjudgeonlymergedtheaggravatedsexualbattery  convictionswitheachother,thecourtsearlierstatement,thejudgmentsofconviction,andthecompletetranscriptof t thesentencinghearingreflectthatthetrialcourtmergedthedefendantsconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbatteryinto 8 therapeofachildconvictiononcounttwo. !.8 d d8     _   cc8d4XXdd 8@ttc-cINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#cc- #Ԉ &    @  @` May15,2001Session L cX Xc #cXcX #STATEOFTENNESSEEv.RANDALLRAYMILLScX Xc  J @@ AppealasofRightfromtheCircuitCourtforMarshallCounty  J @@No.14007CharlesLee,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200001065CCAR3CDFiledOctober17,_2001_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Thedefendant,RandallRayMills,wasconvictedintheMarshallCountyCircuitCourtofonecount x  ofrapeofachild,threecountsofaggravatedsexualbattery,andonecountofcasualexchange.At d thesentencinghearing,thetrialcourtmergedallofthedefendantsconvictionsofaggravatedsexual P batteryintotheconvictionofrapeofachildandsentencedthedefendanttoatotaleffectivesentence < oftwentyyearsincarcerationintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection.Onappeal,thedefendant (x challengesthesufficiencyoftheevidencesupportinghisconvictions.Additionally,theState d challengesthetrialcourtsmergeroftheaggravatedsexualbatteryconvictionsintotherapeofa P childconvictionandfurthercontendsthatthetrialcourterredinsentencingthedefendant.Upon < reviewoftherecordandthepartiesbriefs,weaffirminpartandreverseinpartthejudgmentofthe ( trialcourtandremandfor_resentencing_.   Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentsoftheCircuitCourtareAffirmedin  Part,ReversedinPart,andRemanded.     #ccX #cX X.cNormaMcGeeOgle,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJerryL.SmithandJohn ` EverettWilliams,JJ.,joined. L  AndrewJackson_Dearing_,III,_Lewisburg_,Tennessee,andGregoryD.Smith,Clarksville,Tennessee, $"t! fortheappellant/crossappellee,RandallRayMills. #`" PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;JenniferL.Smith,AssistantAttorneyGeneral; $8 $ W.Michael_McCown_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;and_Weakley_ԀE.Barnard,AssistantDistrict %$!% AttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee/crossappellant,StateofTennessee. &"& # @@OO& OPINION #cXcX R #cX Xc (#(  #cXcX #cX Xc  @ I.FactualBackground #cXcX Y#cX XcԈ p*%*8 _   ` OnMarch15,1999,thevictim,twelveyearoldC.M., #  1      ׀livedinaduplexapartment   inLewisburgwithhermother,PennyMartin,andhersister,JenniferHastings.Thevictims  residencewasononesideoftheduplex,andthedefendantlivedwithhistwosonsontheotherside  oftheduplex.Onthedayinquestion,MartinwasvisitingherfatheratSt.ThomasHospitalin t NashvilleandhadleftHastingsinchargeofC.M.Duringtheafternoon,C.M.hadspenttimetalking ` withthedefendantssons, LittleRandyMillsandDaleMills. L     ` Atapproximately4:00p.m.,whileC.M.wassittingintheyardoutsidetheduplex, $ t thefortythreeyearolddefendant, BigRandyMills,approachedher.ThedefendanttoldC.M.that  `  hehaddopeoverathishouseandtocomeoverlater.C.M.understoodthatthedefendantwas  L  offeringtosmokemarijuanawithher.C.M.returnedtoherhomewhereshelistenedtotheradioand  8  watchedtelevisionwithHastingsandHastingsboyfriend,RobertHodge.Atapproximately8:45 $  p.m.,HastingstoldC.M.thatsheneededtogotobedinordertoberestedforschoolthenextday.   C.M.chosetosleepinthelivingroombecauseshewasafraidtosleepinherownbedroomwhile   hermotherwasoutoftown.HastingsandHodgewenttoHastingsroomtolistentotheradio.      ` Soonthereafter,C.M.slippedoutoftheresidenceandwentnextdoortothe p defendantsresidence.Afterthedefendantansweredherknockonthedoor,C.M.followedthe \ defendantintohislivingroomwherehewaswatchingtelevisionandironingclothes.Bothofthe H defendantssonswereintheirbedrooms.Afterapproximatelyfiveminutes,thedefendanttoldC.M. 4 that itwasinhisroom,andC.M.andthedefendantwentintothedefendantsbedroomwherethe  p defendantlockedthedoor.C.M.notedthattheroomwaslitbythreecandles,andthebedroom  \ windowwascompletelyopen. H    ` C.M.satonthebedwithherfeettouchingthefloor.Thedefendantpulleda   marijuanacigarettefromhisshirtpocketandlitit.He tookapuffandpassedthemarijuana   cigarettetoC.M.whoalsosmokedit.AfterC.M.hadtakenthree puffsfromthemarijuana  cigarette,shedidnotwanttosmokeanymore.Shetossedtheremainderofthemarijuanacigarette  outthebedroomwindow.Thedefendantthenpulledasecond,shortermarijuanacigarettefromhis  shirtpocketandsmokedthatcigarettehimself.C.M.testifiedthatthemarijuanamadeherfeel l  dizzyandlightheaded.Icouldntseeorfeeloranything. X     ` C.M.relatedthat,whileherheadwasspinningfromtheeffectsofthemarijuana,the 0"  defendantpushedherbackontohisbed.Withhishand,thedefendantrubbedC.M.svaginathrough #l! herbluejeans.ThedefendantthenslippedahandinsideC.M.sshirt,unclaspedherbra,andfondled $X" herbarerightbreast.Thedefendantremovedhishandfromherbreastand,usingbothhands,pulled $D # herbluejeansandherpantiesdowntoherankles.Atthispoint,thedefendantkneeledinfrontof %0!$ C.M.,puthismouthoverhervagina,andlickedher.Thedefendantproceededtorepeatedly &"% penetratethevictimsvaginawithhisfinger.C.M.estimatedthatthisactioncontinuedfor '#& approximatelyfiveminutes.C.M.knewthedefendanthadpenetratedherwithhisfinger [b]ecause (#' ithurt.Thedefendantthenvaginallypenetratedthevictimwithhispenis.C.M.knewthe )$( defendanthadpenetratedherwithhispenis becauseithurtworsethanthedigitalpenetration.  C.M.assertedthatshewas highthroughouttheincidentand,althoughshetriedtotellthe  defendanttostop,shewasunabletospeak.     ` Hastings,whohadheardC.M.leavetheduplex,begantosearchforC.M.Whenshe ` wasunabletolocateC.M.inthebackyard,sheaskedHodgetojointhesearch.Theygotinto L  Hodgescaranddrovearoundtheareaforapproximatelyfiveminutes,searchingforC.M.When 8  heheardHodgescarstart,thedefendantstoppedhisactions,andC.M.immediatelydressed.As $ t C.M.leftthedefendantsresidence,heputatwentydollarbillinC.M.sbluejeanspocketandsaid,  `  Hereis$20,thanks.ThedefendantfurthertoldC.M., IfyoutellanybodyIamjustgoingtodeny  L  it.C.M.estimatedthattheeventsoccurredduringaonehourperiodoftime.  8     ` C.M.leftthedefendantsresidenceandimmediatelyreturnedhome.C.M.saidshe   wasso highonherwayhomethat, IcouldnthardlywalkandIfellwhenIwentoutofhisdoor.   C.M.hadtowaitonthefrontporchofherapartmentuntilHastingsandHodgereturnedtothe   residencebecausethefrontdooroftheduplexwaslockedandshedidnothaveakey.Afraidof   gettingintotrouble,C.M.initiallytoldHastingsthatshehadbeeninthebackyard.WhenHastings p revealedthatshehadlookedforC.M.inthebackyard,C.M.confessedthatshehadbeenatthe \ defendantshomeandtoldHastingswhathadoccurred.C.M.gaveHastingsthetwentydollarbill H thedefendanthadplacedinherjeans.Thetriothenwenttothedefendantsresidence,andHastings 4 knockedonthedoor,whichwasansweredbyoneofthedefendantssons.Hastingsenteredthe  p residenceand,findingthedefendantcomingoutofthebathroom,loudlyconfrontedhimaboutthe  \ incident.Hastingsthrewthemoneyatthedefendant,returnedhome,andcalledthepolice. H    ` Thepolicearrivedandbegantheirinvestigation.Theywereunabletolocatethe   defendantforseveraldays.Laterthatnight,Hastings,Hodge,andC.M.decidedtodrivetoNashville   topickupMartinbut,duetocartrouble,hadtowaitforMartinsreturnthenextmorning.When  Martinarrived,shetookC.M.totheemergencyroomattheMarshallMedicalCenterwhereDr.  PhillipRobertsperformeda rapekitonC.M.,sendingtherapekitandC.M.spantiestothe  TennesseeBureauofInvestigation(TBI)laboratoryfortesting.Althoughnosemenorspermwas l foundonthevaginalswabsperformedonC.M.,bothsubstanceswerefoundinthecrotchareaand X  neartherearwaistbandofthevictimspanties. D!    ` Thedefendantwasindictedonthefollowingcounts: #l! 8  8`   countone:rapeofachildbydigitalpenetration;$X"` x` x 8  8`   counttwo:rapeofachildbypenilepenetration;$D #` x` x 8  8`   0 ` x` x ` countthree:aggravatedsexualbatterybythedefendantsmouthon %0!$ thevictimsvagina;&"% x x 8  8`   0 ` x` x ` countfour:aggravatedsexualbatterybythedefendantshandonthe '#& victimsvagina;(#' x x 8  8`   0 ` x` x ` countfive:aggravatedsexualbatterybythedefendantshandonthe )$( victimsbreast;and,|*%) x x 8  8`   countsix:casualexchange.h+&*` x` x Aftertrial,ajuryintheMarshallCountyCircuitCourtfoundthedefendantnotguiltyofrapeofa  childbutguiltyofaggravatedsexualbatteryoncountone;guiltyoncounttwo;notguiltyoncount  three;guiltyoncountfour;guiltyoncountfive;andguiltyoncountsix.Atthesentencinghearing,  thetrialcourtmergedallofthedefendantsconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbatteryintothe t convictionofrapeofachild,sentencedtheappellanttotwentyyearsincarcerationintheTennessee ` DepartmentofCorrection,andorderedserviceofonehundredpercent(100%)ofthedefendants L  sentence.ThetrialcourtalsosentencedtheappellantasaRangeIIoffendertotwoyears 8  incarcerationforthecasualexchangeconvictionandorderedthatsentenceservedconcurrentlywith $ t thesentenceforrapeofachild,resultinginatotaleffectivesentenceoftwentyyears.Wenowturn  ` totheissuesbeforeusonappeal.  L  @$ II.Analysis $  @ A.SufficiencyoftheEvidence       `  Webeginbyaddressingthedefendantschallengetothesufficiencyoftheevidence   sustaininghisconvictionsofrapeofachildandaggravatedsexualbattery. #  2      ׀X XXcX Onappeal,#cX XXX 8#X XXcX Ԁconsiderable   weightisaccordedtotheverdictofajuryinacriminaltrial.Statev.Tuggle,639S.W.2d913,914   (Tenn.1982).Thisdeferenceisgivenbecausethejury,asthetrieroffact,mustresolveallquestions p concerningthecredibilityofwitnessesandtheweightandvaluetobegiventheevidence,aswell \ asallfactualissuesraisedbytheevidence.Statev.Pruett,788S.W.2d559,561(Tenn.1990).#cX XXX M8#X XXcX  H Accordingly,#cX XXX :#X XXcX astheprevailingpartyinthetrialcourt,theStateisentitledtothestrongestlegitimate 4 viewoftheevidenceandallreasonableinferenceswhichmaybedrawntherefrom.Statev.  p Williams,657S.W.2d405,410(Tenn.1983).#cX XXX :#X XXcX Therefore,ajuryconvictionessentiallyremovesthe  \ presumptionoftheappellantsinnocenceandreplacesitwithapresumptionofguilt#cX XXX F<#X XXcX ,#cX XXX (=#X XXcX Ԁrequiringthe H appellanttocarrytheburdenofdemonstratingtothiscourtwhytheevidencewillnotsupportthe 4 jurysfindings#cX XXX k=#X XXcX .#cX XXX Y>#X XXcX Tuggle,639S.W.2dat914.#cX XXX >#X XXcX Tothisend,#cX XXX ?#X XXcX Ԁtheappellantmustestablishthatno   reasonabletrieroffactcouldhavefoundtheessentialelementsoftheoffenseinquestionbeyonda   reasonabledoubt.Jacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,319,99S.Ct.2781,2789(1979);Tenn.R.  App.P.13(e).#cX XXX V?#X XXcX Ԁ#cX XXX @#X XXcX Ԁ#cX XXX A#      ` Wewillfirstexaminethedefendantsconvictionofchildrapeasallegedincounttwo l oftheindictment.X XXcX Tenn.CodeAnn.3913522(a)(1997)providesthat [r]apeofachildisthe X  unlawfulsexualpenetrationofavictimbythedefendant...,ifsuchvictimislessthanthirteen(13) D! yearsofage.#cX XXX B#ԀSexualpenetrationisdefinedas sexualintercourse...oranyotherintrusion, 0"  howeverslight,ofanypartofapersonsbodyorofanyobjectintothegenitaloranalopeningsof #l! thevictims...body,butemissionofsemenisnotrequired.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913501(7) $X" (1997). $D #    ` Specifically,thedefendantwasconvictedoftherapeofC.M.by penilepenetration. &"% Thetestimonyofthevictim,C.M.,constitutedthebulkoftheevidenceagainstthedefendantattrial. '#& C.M.testifiedattrialthatthedefendantpushedherbackontothebed,removedherbluejeansand (#' panties,andinsertedhispenisintohervagina.Sheknewthatthedefendanthadinsertedhispenis   becauseithurtworsethanthedigitalpenetration.Additionally,C.M.assertedthatshewastwelve  yearsoldatthetimeoftheoffense.ThejurycouldaccreditC.M.stestimonyregardingthesefacts.  AscorroborationforC.M.stestimony,SharonJenkins,aqualityassurancemanagerfortheTBI t laboratory,testifiedthat,whileC.M.svaginalswabsdidnotcontainsemenorsperm,bothsemen ` andspermwerepresentonC.M.spanties.Moreover,C.M.testifiedthatthedefendantgaveher L  twentydollarsaftertheoffense.BothHastingsandHodgesconfirmedthat,whentheyreturnedto 8  C.M.shouseaftersearchingforher,shetoldthemaboutthedefendantsactionsandshowedthem $ t thetwentydollarshehadgivenher.Accordingly,theproofadducedattrialissufficienttosustain  ` thedefendantsconvictionofrapeofachild.SeeStatev.StevenOtisNicely,No.03C019805CR  L  00174,1999WL826029,at*5(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,October18,1999);X XXcX seealso#cX XXX tK#ԀState  8  v.BobbyB.Barrett,No.W199902002CCAR3CD,2000WL1840073,at*8(Tenn.Crim.App. $  atJackson,December12,2000),X XXcX perm.toappealdenied,#cX XXX sL#Ԁ(Tenn.2001).      ` Wenowturntothedefendantsconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbattery.    Aggravatedsexualbatteryisunlawfulsexualcontactwithavictimbythedefendant...[and][t]he   victimislessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913504(a)(4)(1997). Sexual p contactincludestheintentionaltouchingofthevictims...intimateparts,ortheintentional \ touchingoftheclothingcoveringtheimmediateareaofthevictims...intimateparts,ifthat H intentionaltouchingcanbereasonablyconstruedasbeingforthepurposeofsexualarousalor 4 gratification.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913501(6).Additionally,wenotethat, [i]ntimateparts  p includestheprimarygenitalarea,groin,innerthigh,buttockorbreastofahumanbeing.Id.at(2).  \ Wewilladdresseachofthedefendantsconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbatteryseparately. H    ` First,thejuryfoundthedefendantguiltyoncountoneoftheindictmentofthe   aggravatedsexualbatteryofC.M.by digitalpenetration.C.M.testifiedthat,duringthecourseof   theevening,thedefendantinsertedhisfingerintohervaginaand pusheditinandout...[for]  aboutfiveminutes.Additionally,asweearlierstated,C.M.testifiedthatshewastwelveyearsold  atthetimeofthisoffense.Thisevidencesupportsthejurysfindingthatthedefendantintentionally  touchedoneofC.M.s intimatepartsanddidso forthepurposeofsexualarousalor l gratification.SeeStatev.AlfredLeeMiddleton,No.W199600022CCAR3CD,1999WL X  1531759,at*5(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,December17,1999);cf.Statev.AndersonD.Curry, D! No.02C019711CR00452,1998WL376353,at*3(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,July8,1998). 0"     ` Oncountfouroftheindictment,thejuryfoundthedefendantguiltyofaggravated $X" sexualbatterybyplacinghishandonC.M.svaginaoverherbluejeans.C.M.testifiedthat,after $D # sheandthedefendanthadsmokedmarijuana,thedefendantpushedherbackontothebedandhe %0!$  rub[bed]myprivate.Specifically,thefollowingtestimonyoccurred: &"% 8  8`   State:...Hetookhishandandplaceditwhere?'#&` x` x 8  8`   C.M.:Onmyvagina.(#'` x` x 8  8`   State:Betweenyourlegs?)$(` x` x 8  8`   C.M.:Yes,sir.|*%)` x` x 8  8`   State:Wereyourclothesatthatpointonoroff?h+&*` x` x 8  8`   C.M.:Theywereon.` x` x 8  8`   State:Thisisoveryourclothing.Thisisgoingtobeoveryourblue  jeans;right?` x` x 8  8`   C.M.:Yes,sir.t` x` x Asnotedearlier, thejurycouldreasonablyconstruethatthedefendantintentionallytouchedthe ` victims[vagina]forthepurposeofsexualarousalorgratification.Statev.MichaelA.Miller,No. L  E200000930CCAR3CD,2001WL483410,at*6(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,May8,2001). 8  Therefore,thistestimonyissufficienttosustaintheappellantsconvictionofaggravatedsexual $ t batteryoncountfouroftheindictment.SeeStatev.DavidCalloway,No.03C019808CR00324,  ` 1999WL1059712,at*3(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,November23,1999).  L     ` Finally,thedefendantcontestshisconvictionofaggravatedsexualbatteryoncount $  fiveoftheindictment,whichallegedthatthedefendant plac[ed]hishandonthevictimsbreast.   C.M.testifiedthat,afterthedefendanttouchedhergenitalsoverherbluejeans,hethenunsnapped   herbraandbeganrubbingherrightbreast.Asthiscourthaspreviouslynoted, thejurycouldhave   drawnoncommonknowledgetoreasonablyinferthatthedefendantrubbedthevictimsbreast[]for   thepurposeofsexualarousalorgratification.Statev.JackWarrenEmert,Jr.,No.03C019802 p CC00074,1999WL512029,at*2(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,July21,1999).Thistestimony \ issufficienttosustainthedefendantsconvictiononcountfive.SeeStatev.Smith,42S.W.3d101, H 106(Tenn.Crim.App.2000),X XXcX perm.toappealdenied,#cX XXX a#Ԁ(Tenn.2001). 4    ` Thedefendantspecificallyarguesthatthejuryshouldnothavebelievedthetestimony  \ ofC.M.becausesheis anadmittedliar.ThedefendantallegesthattheStatesattorneyinterrupted H C.M.stestimonybecausehe knew[C.M.]wascommittingperjuryinthiscase.However,from 4 ourexaminationoftherecord,wefindnoindicationthatC.M.wascommittingperjurywhenthe   State,whileconductingthedirectexaminationofC.M.,emphasizedtohertheimportanceoftelling   thetruthwhiletestifying.     ` Thedefendantalsoarguesthat,becauseC.M.relatedacontradictoryversionofevents  toOfficerBethRhotenoftheLewisburgCityPoliceDepartment,theruleofcancellationapplies; l accordingly,thedefendantarguesthatC.M.stestimonymustbestrickenand,asaresult,thereis X  insufficientcircumstantialevidenceremainingtosustainhisconvictions.However,thedefendant D! misconstruestheruleofcancellation.  InTennessee, contradictorystatementsbyawitnessin 0"  connectionwiththesamefactcanceleachother.Statev.Matthews,888S.W.2d446,449(Tenn. #l! Crim.App.1993).Nevertheless, [t]hisruleofcancellationappliesonlywheninconsistencyina $X" witnesstestimonyisunexplainedandwhenneitherversionof[her]testimonyiscorroboratedby $D # otherevidence.Id.(citingTaylorv.NashvilleBannerPub.Co.,573S.W.2d476,483(Tenn.App. %0!$ 1978)). &"%    ` C.M.toldOfficerRhotenthatthedefendantforciblyheldherdownandkepthishand (#' overhermouthduringtheincident.Shealsostatedthatshehadkickedatthedefendantduringthe )$( offense.C.M.explainedattrialthatshetoldthisversionofeventsbecauseshewasafraidofgetting |*%) intotroubleifhersisterrealizedthatshehadgonetothedefendantshome.Additionally,C.M. h+&* testifiedthattheinformationshegaveOfficerRhotenregardingthemannerinwhichthedefendant  touchedherduringtheincidentwasaccurate.Thedefendantarguesthatthistestimonyis  contradictoryandsubjecttocancellation.However,thereasonfortheinconsistencyinC.M.s  statementswasobviouslyexplainedbyC.M.stestimonythatshewasafraidofgettingintotrouble. t SeeStatev.MelvinLewisPeacock,No.01C019704CR00118,1998WL380006,at**56(Tenn. ` Crim.App.AtNashville,July9,1998).Additionally,thestatementsC.M.madetoOfficerRhoten L  arenotsworntestimony.Statev.MichaelDwayneEdwards,No.W199900591CCAR3CD,2000 8  WL674671,at*3(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,May16,2000),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn. $ t 2000).Priorinconsistentstatementsbyawitnessthatarenotsworntestimonymerelyraise  ` credibilityissuesforthetrieroffacttoresolve.SeeStatev.AnandFranklin,No.01C019807CR  L  00282,1999WL482399,at*4(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,July9,1999);cf.Statev.Banes,874  8  S.W.2d73,7879(Tenn.Crim.App.1993).Moreover,additionalevidenceintheformofsperm $  andsemenfoundonherpantiescorroboratedC.M.stestimonythatshewassexuallyassaultedby   thedefendant.ThejurywasfreetoaccreditC.M.stestimonyandfindthedefendantguiltyofthe   chargedoffenses.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.   @;;%B.Merger p    ` Atthesentencinghearing,thetrialcourtfoundthat [a]llaggravatedsexualbatteries \ willmergeintotherapeofachild.Onappeal,theStatearguesthatthetrialcourterredinmerging H thedefendantsconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbatteryintotherapeofachildconviction.The 4 defendantcontendsthatthetrialcourtdidnoterrinmerginghisconvictions.  p    ` Thetrialcourtstatedthat [a]llofthesexualbatter[ies]under[Statev.Anthony,817 H S.W.2d299(Tenn.1991)],theCourtfindsthatthosechargeswouldmergeonewiththeother.d #  3      ׀It 4 appearsfromtherecordthatthetrialcourtconcludedthatmergerwasrequiredbecausethe   aggravatedsexualbatterieswere essentiallyincidentaltotherapeofachild.Anthony,817S.W.2d   at307.However,oursupremecourthasspecificallyheldthat  8  8`   the essentiallyincidentaltest,asdevelopedinAnthonyandits  progeny,isnothelpfulinthecontextofsexualoffensesbecauseeach  separatesexualact iscapableofproducingitsownattendantfear, l humiliation,pain,anddamagetothevictim.X ` x` x Statev.Barney,986S.W.2d545,548(Tenn.1999)(quotingStatev.Phillips,924S.W.2d662,665 D! (Tenn.1996).TheBarneycourtwentontoadoptthetestarticulatedinPeoplev.Madera,282 0"  Cal.Rptr.674,680(Cal.Ct.App.1991).Specifically,thecourtexplainedthat, #l! 8  8`   iftheactinquestiondirectlyfacilitatesorismerelyincidentaltothe $X" accompanyingsexualconduct(suchas,forexample,applying $D # lubricanttotheareaofintendedcopulation),convictionsforbothacts %0!$ wouldbebarred.If,however,theactinquestionis preparatory &"% onlyinthesensethatitisintendedtosexuallyarouseeitherthe  victimortheperpetrator,separateconvictionsarenotbarred.  @  ` x` x Barney,986S.W.2dat548(citationomitted).Thecourtfurtherdetailedthatseveralfactorsare  relevantindeterminingwhetheranactis directlyfacilitativeor merelypreparatory,namely: t  temporalproximity, spatialproximity, occurrenceofaninterveningevent, sequenceofthe ` acts,and thedefendantsintentasevidencedbyconductandstatements.Id.at548549.In L  applyingthistest,theBarneycourtfoundnodueprocessviolationinlettingseparateconvictions 8  standwherethedefendantrubbedthevictimspenis(aggravatedsexualbattery)andthedefendant $ t performedfellatiouponthevictim(rapeofachild).Id.at549.    `    ` Intheinstantcase,wemustconcludethatthetrialcourtimproperlymergedthe  8  defendantsconvictionofaggravatedsexualbatterybydigitallypenetratingthevictimintohis $  convictionofrapeofachild.C.M.relatedthat,afterremovingherbluejeansandpanties,the   defendantdigitallypenetratedherforapproximatelyfiveminutes.Attheconclusionofthedigital   penetration,thedefendanttoldC.M. Imgoingtogetalittledirtynow.Thedefendantthenpulled   downhispantsandinsertedhispenisintohervagina.Thisactionindicatesthatthedefendant   formedanewintenttoviolatethevictimanddidsobydifferingformsofpenetration.SeeBarney, p 986S.W.2dat548549.AsoursupremecourtstatedinPhillips, eachoftheabovedescribedacts \ is...adiscretetypeofsexualpenetration...requir[ing]apurposefulactonthepartofthe H perpetrator.924S.W.2dat664665. 4    ` Wealsoconcludethatthetrialcourtshouldnothavemergedthedefendants  \ convictionsofaggravatedsexualbatterybyfondlingthevictimsbreastandbytouchingthevictims H genitalsthroughherbluejeansintothedefendantsconvictionofrapeofachild.Thedefendant 4 contendsthatalloftheactionswere foreplayleadingtosexandtherefore allpreviousactionsby   [thedefendant]weredesignedtoleadtosexualintercourse,makingtheincidentonecontinuous   offense.However,asthesupremecourtnotedinBarney,separateconvictionsarenotprohibited  whentheactisonly intendedtosexuallyarouseeitherthevictimortheperpetrator.986S.W.2d  at548.Moreover, the[defendant]couldhaveaccomplishedthe[rapeofachild]withouttouching  thevictimsbreast.Statev.Binion,947S.W.2d867,872(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Therefore,we l findthatthetrialcourtimpermissiblymergedtheseconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbatteryintothe X  convictionofrapeofachild. D!    ` However,inlightofthesupremecourtsrecentdecisioninStatev.RobertDerrick #l! Johnson,No.M199800546SCR11CD,2001WL949978(Tenn.atNashville,August22,2001) $X" (publicationpending),weconcludethatthetrialcourtshouldhavemergedthedefendants $D # convictionsofaggravatedsexualbatterybyfondlingthevictimsbreastandbytouchinghergenitals %0!$ throughherbluejeansintohisconvictionofaggravatedsexualbatterybydigitalpenetration.In &"% Johnson,afterexaminingtwoseparateconvictionsofaggravatedsexualbattery,JusticeDrowota '#& explainedthat theelement sexualcontactwasproven...bythevictimstestimonythatthe (#' defendantintentionallytouchedherbreastandhergroinareaforthepurposeofsexualarousalor )$( gratification.Id.at*4(emphasisinoriginal).Indecidingthataggravatedsexualbatterymay |*%) consistoftouchingmorethanoneofthevictims intimateparts,thecourtfoundthattheevidence h+&* supportedonlyoneconvictionofaggravatedsexualbattery.Id.Thecourtconcludedthat, [i]fthe  entireinstanceofsexualcontactoccursquicklyandvirtuallysimultaneously,thenonlyoneoffense  hasoccurred,evenifmorethanonetouchinghasoccurred.Id.IndistinguishingJohnsonfrom  Phillips,thecourtemphasizedthat [t]henatureoftheactistouching...,whereastheproofin t Phillipsshowedseparateactsofpenetration.Johnson,No.M199800546SCR11CD,2001WL ` 949978,at*5.Moreover,asthecourtnotedinJohnson, [i]tisapparentfromtheevidencethat L  allthishappenedquicklyandvirtuallysimultaneously.Id.at*3.Accordingly,wefindthatthe 8  trialcourtshouldhavemergedthedefendantsconvictionsoncountsone,four,andfiveintoone $ t convictionofaggravatedsexualbatterybutshouldnothavemergedthemwiththedefendants  ` convictionofrapeofachildoncounttwo.  L     ` @qq"C.Sentencing p      x   $     ` Initiallywenotethat,becausethedefendantsconvictionswereimproperlymerged,   wemustremandtothetrialcourtforresentencing.However,asguidancetothetrialcourt,wewill   brieflyaddressthefollowingissuesraisedbytheState.      ` TheStatearguesthattheconvictionformssubmittedbythejuryclearlyindicatethat p oncountoneoftheindictment,whilethedefendantwasfoundnotguiltyofrapeofachild,thejury \ nonethelessfoundthedefendantguiltyofthelesserincludedoffenseofaggravatedsexualbattery H bythedefendantsdigitalpenetrationofthevictim.However,thejudgmentformincludedinthe 4 recordbeforethiscourtsimplyindicatesthatthedefendantwasfoundnotguiltyofanycrimeon  p countone.Onremand,weinstructthetrialcourttocorrectthejudgmentoncountonetoreflectthe  \ convictionofaggravatedsexualbattery. H    ` Additionally,theStatecomplainsthatthejudgmentformoncounttworecordingthe   convictionofrapeofachildclassifiesthedefendantasa violentoffenderandnotasa child   rapist.TheStatecontendsthatthiserrorcouldpotentiallyimpactthepercentageofthesentence  thedefendantmustserve.Aviolentoffendermustserveonehundredpercent(100%)ofhis  sentence,butmayearngoodtimecredits,whichcouldreducehissentenceuptofifteenpercent  (15%).Tenn.CodeAnn.4035501(i)(3)(1997).Incontrast,achildrapistmustserveone l hundredpercent(100%)ofhissentencewithnopotentialforearninggoodtimecredits.Tenn.Code X  Ann.3915523(c)and(d)(1997).Asthestatutemandatesthatachildrapistmustserveone D! hundredpercent(100%)ofhissentencewithnopotentialsentencereduction,weinstructthetrial 0"  courtonremandtocorrectthiserrorinthejudgment.SeeLloydPaulHillv.State,No.M2000 #l! 01428CCAR3PC,2001WL1006050,at**45,(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,August30,2001); $X" Statev.DelbertLeeHarris,No.M199901239CCAR3CD,2000WL804669,at*3(Tenn.Crim. $D # App.atNashville,June23,2000). %0!$    ` TheStatealsoarguesthatthetrialcourterredinfailingtoconsiderthestatutorily '#& mandatedenhancementfactorsetforthinTenn.CodeAnn.3913522(c)insentencingthe (#' defendantfortherapeofachildconviction.X XXcX Thiscourtreviewschallengestothelength,range,or )$( mannerofserviceofasentencedenovo.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035402(d)(1997).Moreover,ifthe |*%) recordrevealsthatthetrialcourtproperlyconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfacts h+&* andcircumstances,thiscourtwillreviewthetrialcourtsdeterminationswithapresumptionof  correctness.Id.;Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166,#cX XXX Ğ#X XXcX 169(Tenn.1991).#cX XXX #X XXcX ԀRegardless,theburdenison  theStateastheappealingpartytodemonstratetheimproprietyofthedefendantssentences.Tenn.  CodeAnn.4035402,SentencingCommissionComments.#cX XXX R#X XXcX  t    ` Inconductingitsdenovoreview,thiscourtconsidersthefollowingfactors:(1)the L  evidence,ifany,receivedatthetrialandthesentencinghearing;(2)thepresentencereport;(3)the 8  principlesofsentencingandargumentsastosentencingalternatives;(4)thenatureand $ t characteristicsofthecriminalconductinvolved;(5)evidenceandinformationofferedbytheparties  ` onenhancementandmitigatingfactors;(6)anystatementbythedefendantinhisownbehalf;and  L  (7)thedefendantspotentialforrehabilitationortreatment.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035102and103  8  (1997),210(2000Supp.);seealsoAshby,823S.W.2dat168.#cX XXX |#Ԁ $     ` TheStatearguesthatthetrialcourtwasrequiredtoconsider,asanenhancement   factor,that thedefendantcausedthevictimtobementallyincapacitatedorphysicallyhelplessby   useofacontrolledsubstance.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913522(c).Conversely,thedefendantargues   thatthetrialcourtdidconsiderthisenhancementfactorbutgaveitlittleweight.Therecorddoesnot p reflectthatthetrialcourtconsideredthisenhancementfactor;therefore,onremand,thetrialcourt \ mustconsiderthisenhancementfactorinsentencingthedefendant. H    ` Inafootnote,theStatementionsthatthetrialcourtshouldhavealsoconsideredthat  p theoffensesofrapeofachildandaggravatedsexualbatteryinvolvedavictimandwerecommitted  \ togratifythedefendantsdesireforpleasureorexcitementandthatthedefendantabusedaposition H ofprivatetrustinthecommissionoftheoffenses.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(7)and(15).While 4 thiscourtdoesnotencouragetheraisingofissuesinafootnote,wewillnonethelessbrieflyexamine   theseissues.      ` Firstweaddresswhetherthedefendant abusedapositionofpublicorprivatetrust  inthecommissionoftheoffenses.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(15).Thiscourthaspreviously  observedthat, [t]heexistenceofapositionoftrustdoesnotdependonthelengthortheformality l oftherelationship.Instead,thecourtshouldlooktoseewhethertheoffenderformallyand X  informallystoodinarelationshiptothevictimthatpromotedconfidence,reliability,orfaith.State D! v.Griffis,964S.W.2d577,603(Tenn.Crim.App.1997)(quotingStatev.Kissinger,922S.W.2d 0"  482,488(Tenn.1996)).Theevidenceshowsthat,althoughthedefendantwasaneighborofthe #l! victimandhadoccasionallyvisitedinthehome,hewasnotaclosefriendofthevictimorherfamily. $X" Thereisnothingintherecordfromwhichwecanconcludethatthedefendantoccupiedaposition $D # thatinspired confidence,reliability,orfaith.Id.Accordingly,weconcludethatthetrialcourt %0!$ correctlyrefusedtoapplythisenhancementfactor. &"%    ` TheStatealsosuggeststhatthetrialcourtshouldhavefoundthat [t]heoffense[s] (#' involvedavictimand[were]committedtogratifythedefendantsdesireforpleasureorexcitement. )$( Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(7).Generally,inordertosustainadefendantsconvictionfor |*%) aggravatedsexualbattery,theStatemustprovethatatouchingwas forthepurposeofsexual h+&* arousalorgratification;therefore,enhancementfactor(7)maynotbeappliedtoanaggravated  sexualbatteryconviction.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913501(6);X XXcX seealso#cX XXX k#ԀKissinger,922S.W.2dat489.  Accordingly,weconcludethat,onremand,thetrialcourtmaynotapplyenhancementfactor(7)to  thedefendantsconvictionofaggravatedsexualbattery.However,oursupremecourthaspreviously t statedthat enhancementfactor(7),thoughessentialtoafindingofsexualbatteryoraggravated ` sexualbattery,isnotanelementofrapeoraggravatedrapeand,therefore,maybeusedasan L  enhancementfactorinappropriatecases.Kissinger,922S.W.2dat489.Intheinstantcasethe 8  evidenceshowsthat,afterfondlingthevictimatsomelengthandpriortopenetratinghervaginawith $ t hispenis,thedefendantwarnedthevictim, Imgoingtogetalittledirtynow.Additionally,after  ` theact,thedefendantgavethevictimtwentydollarsandtoldher thanks.Weconcludethatthere  L  issufficientevidenceintherecordtowarranttheapplicationofthisenhancementfactortoenhance  8  thedefendantssentenceforrapeofachild.SeeGriffis,964S.W.2dat602;Statev.DavidL. $  McClure,No.01C019505CR00145,1997WL211254,at*9(Tenn.Crim.App.AtNashville,   April30,1997).   @MM" III.Conclusion       ` Basedupontheforegoing,weconcludethattheconvictiononcountoneof p aggravatedsexualbatteryandoncounttwoofrapeofachildshouldnothavemerged;however,the \ convictionsoncountsone,four,andfiveshouldhavemergedwitheachotherbutremained H independentoftheconvictiononcounttwo.Inshort,thereshouldbeoneconvictionofaggravated 4 sexualbatteryandoneconvictionofrapeofachild.Accordingly,weremandthiscasetothetrial  p courtforresentencingandforcorrectionofthejudgmentsassetforthinthisopinion.  \    `       `     h     ___________________________________      `     h     NORMAMcGEEOGLE,JUDGE