ÿWPC%  SJK.>pI¤~XóOÕÍpº¸ï\ Ð­x¾íGÄCx·má }üä\{øÏÂéüMe³ ãÔ\Ûù?pÛo Ï°QYz~¢$f·¶¤æÞûÐÎLÜÜã­<‹7I×ê0wÉÈíÜy«/«òÕq’$}yeÛ‚Áy¿¼­ñjì°k㘱”g7E·áŽíãR>kM“,7>И÷–kÕ¾’ö”hlôÔ­8ÓéWÄH+3 ‡ŒtÁ–u†þh<#òºèQ’95\^´`°Œ¨Ú2¦qBIàÀú‰÷ßåÙñ¨ÆÀASMYþàqc,F‹èr‹Ç cë]µV±¥]2žˆ¦p┹ƸΩ˜ÔPN¹³eËà,¢rŽœäqí ” Ýk7ÍÚ±ýèà‹sToÀ{)ТQÑ)è³d›~)º¡_ 7ÈíK铧CǪ†:Þ(¯Ú3aÊ^£†ßϺ^'ÊÎöÇB1xh²¸cQèËÉìHG$xú‹æø°£IOKÁ`‡6;ýVxqò«°Þç×+cC€m·Pžã¡Ó,ž_êÀ… ®³_j˜`nÓè–3ܼÛAÿb×E–&p·nëYæö*DÖV–pÀvVp¬‘:ˆ0¬®, Ÿ]G†“7a#!NUNo %½ 0(ÃU:ëb% w- 41 E "T Nv ^ x „ m† U AQò ÆC 0D 0DM 0D‘ ‘ D3Õ B ˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,Ù¹6 AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù-tpO'3|xkidnapping{­M' ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ KÝ ƒ[¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XæšXXXÔÔ€VXXæšÔÓ  ÓÔ_Ôò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XæšXVÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€13,€1999ÌÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€Ô_ÔClerkÔdAxÔó óÔ_ÔZ[\]_Cþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó````'ÿÿdxd dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Š¡ì‹XXÔÔ€ŠJŽ‹‹Š¡ìÔÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ8€•!XXdìdÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ_Ôßv€Y_@0,j:úÿ`  `€€@ÿEa ` 8ttxPR` ð  vßÔ_ÔÔ_ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌJULY€SESSION,€1999ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À àà  à)à0 p àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9809„CR„00362Ðpp€%p€% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àó óÐ r  Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellee,ò òà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€Ð t  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à0 p àDAVIDSON€COUNTYÐv p€%p€% ÐV.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€Ð x  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à0 p àHON.€J.€RANDALL€WYATT,€JR.Ð|p€%p€% ÐDONALD€K.€MOORE,€JR.à À àà0  à)€€€€€€€à p àÐ~€%€% Ѐà ` àà0 ¸ àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€€ó óЀ h€%h€% Ѐà ` àà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À àò òà  à)à0 p à(SECOND€DEGREE€MURDER)Ђ"p€%p€% Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à À àà  àòòà p àà È àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð x ÐÌò òMONTE€D.€WATKINSà0 h àà0Àh€%h€%àà  àà p àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS€Ðp À€%À€% Ðó ó1510€Parkway€Towersà h àà0 À àà0À€%À€%àà0p€%€%àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐr!p€%p€% ÐNashville,€TN€37219Ìò òó óà ` àò òà ¸ àà0  àà0h€%€%àà0Àh€%h€%àà0À€%À€%àà p àLUCIAN€D.€GEISE€Ðj# €%€% Ðó óà0 ` àà0¸ ` €%` €%àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àò òó óà À àà  àà p àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÐl$ h€%h€% Ðà ` àà0 ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÐ ¸ €%¸ €% Ðò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àó óà h àà À àà  àà0 p à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ðd&p€%p€% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà0 À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37243Ð À€%À€% ÐÌò òà0 ` àó óà ¸ àà  àà0h` €%` €%àà0Àh€%h€%àà0À€%À€%àà p àò òVICTOR€S.€JOHNSON,€III€ÐX)ø €%€% Ðó óà0 ` àà0¸ ` €%` €%àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà0Àh€%h€%àò òà  àà p àó óDistrict€Attorney€General€ÐZ*ú !À€%À€% Ðà ` àà ¸ àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òKATRIN€NOVAK€MILLERÐ R,ò"# Ðó óà0 ` àà0¸ ` €%` €%àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÐT-ô#$h€%h€% ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òDERRICK€SCRECHENó óÐ L/ì%& Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWashington€Square€„€Suite€500Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à222€Second€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€37201„1649ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÐ ";Â12 ÐTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEò òó óÐ  `  ÐÓ  ÓÔ€°/¸°‹ŠJŽÔò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€ŠJŽ‹°°/¸ÔÐ `  ÐÓ  ÓÌÓÓÌà ` àOn€July€29,€1996,€the€Davidson€County€Grand€Jury€indicted€DefendantÏDonald€K.€Moore,€Jr.,€for€one€count€of€first€degree€murder€and€one€count€of€felonyÏmurder.€€Following€a€jury€trial€on€May€11ð!ð12,€1998,€Defendant€was€convicted€of€oneÏcount€of€second€degree€murder.€€After€a€sentencing€hearing€on€June€15,€1998,€theÏtrial€court€sentenced€Defendant€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender€to€a€term€of€twenty„¼one€years€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction.€€In€addition,€the€trial€courtÏordered€this€sentence€to€run€consecutively€to€sentences€that€had€previously€beenÏimposed€in€another€case.€€Defendant€challenges€both€his€conviction€and€hisÏsentence,€raising€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà0 ` à1)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€his€conviction;€andÐ ` €%` €% ÐÌà0 ` à2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€ordered€his€sentence€to€runÏconsecutively€to€other€sentences€that€were€previously€imposed€in€anotherÏcase.Ð ` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà@dd+Dàò òI.€€FACTSó óˆÐ º)Z  ÐÌà ` àOfficer€William€Stokes€of€the€Metropolitan€Nashville€Police€DepartmentÏtestified€that€at€approximately€11:30€p.m.€on€February€12,€1996,€he€received€a€callÏto€investigate€a€body€that€was€found€in€the€Hadley€Park€area€of€Nashville.€€WhenÏStokes€arrived,€he€observed€the€body€of€a€white€male€that€had€a€bullet€wound€onÏthe€left€side€of€the€neck.€€Stokes€also€observed€a€trail€of€blood€between€the€bodyÏand€a€pavilion€in€the€park€that€was€approximately€100€yards€away.€€When€StokesÏapproached€the€pavilion,€he€observed€a€shell€casing€and€a€pool€of€blood.€€OfficerÐ †9&00 ÐWayne€Hughes€of€the€Metro€Police€Department€testified€that€the€shell€casing€wasÏfrom€a€.380€automatic.ÌÌà ` àYakuo€Murphy€testified€that€sometime€during€or€after€February€of€1996,€heÏhad€a€conversation€with€Defendant€about€the€murder€that€occurred€in€Hadley€Park.€ÏMurphy€testified€that€Defendant€stated€that€he€had€gone€to€Hadley€Park€and€seenÏa€white€man€sitting€on€a€park€bench.€€Defendant€then€stated€that€the€man€said€thatÏhe€was€looking€for€a€prostitute€and€Defendant€asked€him€how€much€money€he€had.€ÏDefendant€stated€that€when€the€man€said€that€he€did€not€have€any€money,ÏDefendant€asked€the€man,€ð ðHave€you€ever€danced€with€the€Devil?ðð€€Defendant€alsoÏstated€that€at€this€point,€he€pulled€out€a€.380€and€shot€the€man€in€the€head.€ÏDefendant€further€stated€that€the€man€started€to€run€and€Defendant€ð ðshot€him€up.ððÌÌà ` àAntonio€Cartwright€testified€that€he€was€with€Defendant€and€Gdongalay€BerryÏon€February€12,€1996.€€After€Defendant€parted€company€with€Cartwright€and€BerryÏat€approximately€10:30€to€11:00€p.m.,€Cartwright€went€to€a€residence€about€two€orÏthree€blocks€from€Hadley€Park.€€Approximately€one€hour€later,€Defendant€came€toÏthe€residence€and€told€Cartwright€that€he€had€shot€a€white€man€in€Hadley€Park.€ÏDefendant€also€stated€that€he€shot€the€man€in€the€head€because€he€ð ðwouldnððt€giveÏit€up.ðð€€In€addition,€Defendant€stated€that€when€the€man€started€to€run,€DefendantÏattempted€to€shoot€him€again,€but€the€gun€jammed€and€would€not€fire.€€CartwrightÏalso€testified€that€earlier€that€evening,€he€saw€Berry€give€a€.380€automatic€toÏDefendant.Ìâ âÐ ¨6H-. Ðà ` àDr.€Bruce€Levy€testified€that€the€autopsy€report€in€this€case€indicated€that€theÏâ âfatal€gunshot€had€been€fired€from€a€distance€of€only€two€to€three€feet€from€theÏvictim.€€Ìà@ÚÚDàò òII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óˆÐ Hè ÐÌà ` àDefendant€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€hisÏconviction.€€We€disagree.ÌÌà ` àWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€isÏobliged€to€review€that€challenge€according€to€certain€well-settled€principles.€€AÏverdict€of€guilty€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€ofÏthe€Stateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€ÏòòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994).€€Although€an€accused€isÐ  !¬ Ðoriginally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€of€innocence,€a€jury€verdict€removes€thisÏpresumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914Ð ü$œ Ð(Tenn.€1982).€€Hence,€on€appeal,€the€burden€of€proof€rests€with€Defendant€toÏdemonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€òòId.óó€€On€appeal,€ð ðtheÐ ì(Œ  Ð[S]tate€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€allÏreasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€therefrom.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Where€theÐ Ü,|#$ Ðsufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€contested€on€appeal,€the€relevant€question€for€theÏreviewing€court€is€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€accusedÏguilty€of€every€element€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.Ð Ä2d)* ÐVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€InÐ ¼4\+, Ðconducting€our€evaluation€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€is€precluded€fromÏreweighing€or€reconsidering€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929€S.W.2d€380,€383Ð ¬8L/0 Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Moreover,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€ownÏinferences€ð ðfor€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.ðð€€òòStateÐ X ø Ðv.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€Finally,€Rule€13(e)€ofÐ P ð Ðthe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€provides,€ð ðfindings€of€guilt€in€criminalÏactions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ððÌÌà ` àIn€order€to€establish€that€Defendant€had€committed€second€degree€murder,Ïthe€State€had€to€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€Defendant€knowingly€killedÏthe€victim.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210(a)(1)€(1997).Ð ¸ ÐÌà ` àWe€conclude€that€when€the€evidence€in€this€case€is€viewed€in€the€light€mostÏfavorable€to€the€State,€as€it€must€be,€the€evidence€was€sufficient€for€a€rational€juryÏto€find€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€Defendant€committed€the€offense€of€secondÏdegree€murder.€€The€evidence€in€this€case€established€that€the€victim€was€shot€inÏthe€neck€from€a€distance€of€two€to€three€feet€on€February€12,€1996.€€The€evidenceÏalso€established€that€a€.380€shell€casing€was€discovered€in€the€area€of€Hadley€ParkÏwhere€the€victim€was€shot.€€In€addition,€Cartwright€testified€that€he€saw€DefendantÏwith€a€.380€automatic€on€February€12,€1996.€€Cartwright€also€testified€that€on€thatÏsame€date,€Defendant€stated€that€he€had€shot€a€white€man€in€the€head€because€theÏman€ð ðwouldnððt€give€it€upðð€and€he€tried€to€shoot€the€man€again€while€the€man€ranÏaway,€but€the€gun€would€not€fire.€€Similarly,€Murphy€testified€that€Defendant€statedÏthat€he€had€shot€a€white€man€in€Hadley€Park€after€the€man€indicated€that€he€did€notÏhave€any€money.€€ÌÐ  8@/0 Ðà ` àDefendant€essentially€argues€that€the€evidence€in€this€case€was€insufficientÏbecause€the€only€evidence€that€connected€him€to€the€killing€in€Hadley€Park€cameÏfrom€Cartwright€and€Murphy€and€these€two€witnesses€were€simply€not€credible.ÏHowever,€ð ð[t]he€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,Ïand€the€reconciliation€of€conflicts€in€the€evidence€are€matters€entrusted€exclusivelyÏto€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.ðð€€òòState€v.€Cribbsóó,€967€S.W.2d€773,€793€(Tenn.€1998).€Ð 8Ø  ÐThe€jury€obviously€believed€the€testimony€of€Cartwright€and€Murphy.ÌÌà ` àIn€this€case,€Defendant€essentially€asks€us€to€reconsider€the€evidence€andÏsubstitute€a€verdict€of€not€guilty€in€place€of€the€verdict€found€by€the€jury.€€That€is€notÏour€function.€€Instead,€we€conclude€that€a€rational€jury€could€have€found€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt€that€Defendant€had€committed€the€offense€of€second€degreeÏmurder.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€Defendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€thisÐ !  Ðissue.ÌÌà@‘‘!Dàò òIII.€€CONSECUTIVE€SENTENCINGó óˆÐ è&ˆ ÐÌà ` àDefendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€ordered€the€sentenceÏin€this€case€to€run€consecutively€to€sentences€previously€imposed€in€another€case.€ÏWe€disagree.ÌÌà ` àConsecutive€sentencing€is€governed€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sectionÏ40-35-115.€€The€trial€court€has€the€discretion€to€order€consecutive€sentencing€if€itÏfinds€that€one€or€more€of€the€required€statutory€criteria€exist.€€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€924Ð ´6T-. ÐS.W.2d€912,€917€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Further,€the€court€is€required€toÐ ¬8L/0 Ðdetermine€whether€the€consecutive€sentences€(1)€are€reasonably€related€to€theÏseverity€of€the€offenses€committed;€€(2)€serve€to€protect€the€public€from€furtherÏcriminal€conduct€by€the€offender;€€and€(3)€are€congruent€with€general€principles€ofÏsentencing.€€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€939€(Tenn.€1995).Ð Hè ÐÌà ` àThe€record€indicates€that€before€he€was€convicted€and€sentenced€for€theÏoffense€in€this€case,€Defendant€was€convicted€of€felony€murder€and€especiallyÏaggravated€robbery€in€another€case.€€In€addition,€Defendant€received€consecutiveÏsentences€of€life€and€twenty€years€for€his€two€convictions€in€the€other€case.€€ÌÌà ` àInitially,€Defendant€contends€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€improperÏbecause€the€offenses€in€the€previous€case€were€committed€after€he€committed€theÏoffense€in€this€case.€€Specifically,€Defendant€argues€that€a€trial€court€does€not€haveÏthe€authority€to€order€a€sentence€to€run€consecutively€to€a€sentence€for€an€offenseÏthat€was€committed€later€in€time.€€This€Court€has€previously€rejected€this€argument.€ÏIn€òòState€v.€Blantonóó,€926€S.W.2d€953,€961€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996),€this€Court€heldÐ è&ˆ Ðthat€for€purposes€of€consecutive€sentencing,€it€is€irrelevant€that€the€conviction€andÏsentencing€for€the€prior€offense€occurred€after€the€conviction€and€sentencing€for€theÏlater€offense.€€ð ðIn€other€words,€it€is€immaterial€whether€sentence€one€is€consecutiveÏto€sentence€two,€or€vice€versa,€as€the€sentences€are€consecutive€in€either€case.ðð€Ð È.h%& ÐòòId.óó€€Thus,€the€trial€court€was€not€prohibited€from€ordering€the€sentence€in€this€caseÐ À0`'( Ðto€run€consecutively€to€the€sentences€previously€imposed,€even€though€thoseÏsentences€were€for€offenses€committed€after€the€offense€in€this€case.Ìâ âÐ ¨6H-. Ðà ` àDefendant€also€contends€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€improper€becauseÏâ âthe€requirements€of€section€40„35„115€and€òòWilkersonóó€have€not€been€satisfied.Ð X ø ÐÌà ` àIn€determining€that€the€sentence€in€this€case€should€run€consecutively€to€theÏsentences€in€the€previous€case,€the€trial€court€found€that€Defendant€was€aÏdangerous€offender€whose€behavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life€andÏwho€has€no€hesitation€in€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high.€ÏòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(4)€(1997).€€We€agree.€€Indeed,€the€evidenceÐ (È  Ðindicates€that€after€Defendant€approached€the€victim€and€the€victim€stated€that€heÏdid€not€have€any€money,€Defendant€taunted€the€victim€by€asking€ð ðHave€you€everÏdanced€with€the€Devil?ðð€and€the€Defendant€then€shot€the€victim€in€the€neck€at€closeÏrange.€€In€addition,€the€evidence€indicates€that€while€the€victim€was€running€awayÏfrom€the€park,€Defendant€attempted€to€shoot€him€again€and€was€prevented€fromÏdoing€so€only€by€the€fact€that€the€gun€jammed€and€would€not€fire.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€made€no€express€finding€that€the€òòWilkersonóó€test€was€satisfiedÐ è&ˆ Ðin€this€case,€however€we€conclude€in€our€de€novo€review€that€it€was.€€First,Ïconsecutive€sentencing€is€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offenses.€ÏIndeed,€Defendant€was€convicted€of€three€serious€violent€felonies.€€In€addition,ÏDefendant€committed€the€offense€in€this€case€by€taunting€and€then€shooting€theÏvictim€at€close€range€for€no€apparent€reason€at€all.€€Second,€consecutive€sentencingÏwill€serve€to€protect€the€public€from€future€criminal€conduct€by€Defendant.€ÏDefendant€clearly€poses€a€great€risk€to€the€safety€of€the€public.€€Although€the€recordÏdoes€not€indicate€the€exact€date,€Defendant€apparently€committed€the€felonyÏmurder€and€especially€aggravated€robbery€only€a€short€time€after€he€committed€theÐ  8@/0 Ðbrutal€and€senseless€killing€in€this€case.€€Finally,€consecutive€sentencing€is€clearlyÏcongruent€with€general€principles€of€sentencing.€€Defendant€is€not€entitled€to€reliefÏon€this€issue.ÌÌà ` àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.ÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌNORMA€McGEE€OGLE,€Judge