ÿWPC— %UB %XU.^ŒnXœ 0Pô4DX 0”` 0Dôw@8U:x 0J² 0Tü 0^P 0h® 0r 0|ˆ 0† 0Š 1u 0d U6ó v~) vÓ§ Bz<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|XŽ«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Ón~<$(D(3¾Á$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó …P†D‡ˆD‰DŠD‹UŒaUŽU"Arial Regular2 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< Œ 9p`(Courier NewPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{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 Ò dÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÒ P ÒÒ Ž ÒÑ  ÑÑ X Ñ›Ñ7€’XXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ӜԀÔÞ ÞÌÌ›œÌ›à àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌÓ  Óà@ àMAY€1998€SESSIONÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà àò òC.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9709„CR„00358ó óÌà àà àAppellee,à àò ò€€€€€à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSHELBY€COUNTYó óÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€CHRIS€CRAFT,ÌANTONIO€MORROW,à àà àà à)à àJUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óAppellant.ò òà àà àà à)à àœó ó(First„Degree›€Murder)ò òÌó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà àà àà à€€€€€òòà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÌÌÌò òBRETT€B.€STEINà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌó ó236€Adams€Ave.à àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€Reporterò òÌó óMemphis,€TN€38103ò òÌó óà àà àà àà àò òà àà àà àDOUGLAS€D.€HIMESó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€Attorney€GeneralÌ€€à àà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€Sevier€Bldg.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à425€Fifth€Ave.,ÏNorthà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ìà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àò òà àà àà àWILLIAM€L.€GIBBONSó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àò òà àà àà àJERRY€KITCHENó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à201€Poplar€St.,€œSuite›€301Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€38103Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÌÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÌJudgeÌÇÑ  ÑÑ7€ Ù½ XXdðXXdÈ7ÑÓ  Óà@ àò òòòÔ€¼ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ€XÔÌÌÌó óóóÌÓÓà àà àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€œfirst„degree›€murder€and€sentenced€toÏlife€imprisonment.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€he€raises€several€issues:ÌÓÓà8 àà àI.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€State€to€read€theÏindictment€to€the€jury;ÌÌà8 àà àII.€€Whether€the€trial€court€correctly€instructed€the€jury€on€lesser„included€offenses;ÌÌà8 àà àIII.€€Whether€the€trial€court€correctly€instructed€the€jury€as€to€theÏmeaning€of€ð ðreasonable€doubtðð;ÌÌà8 àà àIV.€€Whether€the€trial€court€correctly€instructed€the€jury€regardingÏthe€defense€of€duress;€andÌÌà8 àà àV.€€Whether€the€trial€court€properly€refused€to€instruct€the€jury€onÏthe€defense€of€duress€in€the€absence€of€the€defense€presentingÏevidence;ÌÌÓÓFinding€no€merit€in€the€defendantððs€arguments,€we€affirm.̛̜à àà àOn€the€evening€of€November€25,€1995,€a€group€of€people,€several€ofÏwhom€were€members€of€a€certain€street€gang,€gathered€for€a€party€at€a€friendððsÏhouse.€€During€the€evening,€several€gang€members€were€accused€of€breaking€theÏgangððs€code€of€conduct€and€as€punishment,€were€beaten.€€Among€those€accusedÏwas€Jason€Erby,€who€was€beaten€by€several€male€gang€members,€including€theÏdefendant.€€After€the€beating€ceased,€the€defendant€accompanied€a€group€of€gangÍmembers€that€dragged€Mr.€Erby€from€the€backyard€and€through€an€œalley€leading›€toÏrailroad€tracks.€€Later€that€evening,€the€defendant€returned€to€the€house€and€statedÏœhe›€shot€Mr.€Erby.€€Mr.€Erbyððs€body€was€found€in€the€back€of€a€Ryder€rental€truck,Ïwrapped€in€plastic€bound€with€duct€tape.€€Mr.€Erbyððs€body€had€multiple€blunt€forceÏinjuries€and€two€gunshot€wounds,€including€one€to€the€back€of€the€head,€which€wasÏthe€cause€of€Mr.€Erbyððs€death.€€After€waiving€his€òòMirandaóó€rights,€the€defendantÏconfessed€œto€killing›€Mr.€Erby.€€When€asked€why,€the€defendant€responded,€ð ðI€think€itÏwas€peer€pressure.ððÌÌà àà àAt€trial,€the€defendant€relied€upon€the€defense€of€duress.€€On€the€stand,Ïhe€œadmitted›€being€a€gang€member.€€He€stated€he€attended€the€party€in€œquestion,€but›Ïhe€denied€ever€beating€Mr.€Erby.€€He€admitted€leaving€the€party€with€the€gangÏmembers€œwho›€dragged€Mr.€Erby€to€the€railroad€tracks,€but€he€maintained€that€anotherÏgang€member€forced€him€to€shoot€Mr.€Erby€by€threatening€to€kill€him.€€After€he€shotÏMr.€Erby,€the€defendant€helped€to€wrap€his€body€in€plastic,€seal€it€with€duct€tape,€andÏplace€it€in€the€rental€truck.€€The€defendant€admitted€that€no€one€forced€him€to€go€to€theÏparty€or€remain€there€when€the€beatings€began€and€no€one€prevented€him€fromÏleaving€until€he€was€at€the€railroad€tracks€where€he€shot€Mr.€Erby.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€first€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€StateÍto€read€the€indictment€to€the€jury.€€The€defendant€has€failed€to€include€a€transcriptionÏof€the€reading€of€the€indictment€in€the€record€on€appeal.€€Consequently,€we€cannotÏdetermine€whether€the€State€merely€read€the€indictment€verbatim,€which€is€ð ðanÏappropriate€and€proper€procedure,ðð€òòState€v.€Baneóó,€853€S.W.2d€483,€484€(Tenn.Ï1993),€or€whether€the€State€made€the€sort€of€improper€comments€regarding€anÏindictment€admonished€in€òòState€v.€Onidasóó,€635€S.W.2d€516€(Tenn.€1982).€€As€such,Ïmeaningful€review€of€this€issue€is€precluded.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€instructÏthe€jury€on€the€lesser„included€offenses€of€œvoluntary›€manslaughter€and€criminallyÏnegligent€homicide.€€Where€the€record€clearly€shows€that€the€defendant€was€guilty€ofÏthe€greater€offense€and€is€devoid€of€any€evidence€permitting€an€inference€of€guilt€ofÏthe€lesser€offense,€the€trial€courtððs€failure€to€charge€on€a€lesser€offense€is€not€error.€ÏòòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€550€(Tenn.€1994).€€Here,€the€trial€œcourtÏconcluded,›€and€we€agree,€that€the€record€is€utterly€devoid€of€any€evidence€ofÏprovocation,€an€element€œÌÌessential›€to€voluntary€manslaughter.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€39„13„211(a)(defining€voluntaryÏmanslaughter).€€As€such,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€refusing€to€instruct€the€jury€onÏvoluntary€manslaughter.€€òòStephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€at€550.€€Moreover,€the€recordÍdoes€not€support€an€instruction€for€criminally€negligent€homicide€because€it€wasÏundisputed€that€the€defendant€intentionally,€not€negligently,€shot€the€victim.€€òòId.óó;€òòseeóóÏT.C.A.€39„13„212(a)(defining€criminally€negligent€homicide).€€The€defendantÏsuggests€that,€at€the€very€least,€the€trial€court€should€have€instructed€the€jury€thatÏbeing€in€fear€of€oneððs€life€ð ðwould€reduce€the€charge€of€First€Degree€Murder€to€SecondÏDegree€Murder.ðð€€This€contention€is€treated€as€waived€because€the€defendant€failedÏto€present€it€in€his€motion€for€a€new€trial.€€T.R.A.P.€3(e).ÌÌà àà àNext,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€instructed€theÏjury€on€the€meaning€of€ð ðreasonable€doubt.ðð€€The€jury€instruction€in€question€reads€asÏfollows:ÌÓÓà8 àà àReasonable€doubt€is€that€doubt€engendered€by€an€investigationÏof€all€the€proof€in€the€case€and€an€inability,€after€such€investigation,€to€letÏthe€mind€rest€easily€upon€the€certainty€of€œguilt.›€€Reasonable€doubt€doesÏnot€mean€a€doubt€that€may€arise€from€possibility.€€Absolute€certainty€ofÏguilt€is€not€demanded€by€the€law€to€convict€of€any€criminal€charge,€butÏmoral€certainty€is€required€and€this€certainty€is€required€as€to€everyÏproposition€of€proof€requisite€to€constitute€the€offense.€ÌÌÓÓThis€instruction€tracks€almost€identically€the€language€of€T.P.I.€(Crim.)€2.03€(4th€ed.Ï1997),€the€pattern€jury€instruction€on€reasonable€doubt.€€The€portion€the€defendantÏnow€challenges€is€the€last€sentence.€€However,€we€find€no€indication€in€the€recordÏthat€the€defendant€requested€a€different€instruction€defining€ð ðreasonable€doubtðð€orÏthat€the€defendant€objected€to€the€instruction€as€given.€€ÌœÌà àTennessee›€courts€have€consistently€approved€jury€instructions€patterned€afterÏT.P.I.€(Crim.)€œ2.03.€›€òòE.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Nicholsóó,€877€S.W.2d€722€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.ÏSexton,óó€917€S.W.2d€263€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòPettyjohn€v.€Stateóó,€885€S.W.2dÏ364€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€In€fact,€this€Court€has€encouraged€the€use€of€T.P.I.Ï(Crim.)€2.03€over€the€use€of€the€alternate€pattern€instruction€on€ð ðreasonable€doubtððÏfound€in€T.P.I.€(Crim.)€œ2.03(a).€›€òòE.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Jose€Holmesóó,€02C01„9505„CR„00154,ÏShelby€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€December€10,€1997,€at€Jackson);€òòState€v.ÏDerek€Dentonóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9409„CR„00186,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ïfiled€August€2,€1996,€at€Jackson).€€Moreover,€the€Sixth€Circuit€recently€confirmed€theÏconstitutionality€of€the€exact€language€used€in€the€jury€instruction€in€the€instant€case.€ÏòòAustin€v.€Bellóó,€126€F.2d€843€(6th€Cir.€1997).€€We€continue€to€adhere€to€the€longÏtradition€of€authority€that€has€found€jury€instructions€like€the€one€given€hereÏconstitutionally€sound.€€The€defendantððs€argument€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€next€argues€that€in€its€charge€to€the€jury,€the€trial€courtÏerroneously€explained€the€defense€of€duress,€claiming€that€the€instruction€givenÏð ðmakes€it€virtually€impossible€for€any€defendant€to€ever€raise€the€defense€of€duress.ðð€ÏThe€defendant€also€contends€that€the€instruction€amounted€to€an€impermissibleÏcomment€by€the€trial€court€on€the€facts€of€the€case.€€The€jury€instruction€in€questionÍreads,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà àThis€defense€[the€defense€of€duress]€is€unavailable€to€a€personÏwho€intentionally,€knowingly,€or€recklessly€becomes€involved€in€aÏsituation€in€which€it€was€probable€that€the€person€would€be€subjected€toÏcompulsion.ÌÌÓÓœWe›€find€no€error,€let€alone€plain€error,€because€the€instruction€as€given€is€identical€toÏthe€statutory€language€providing€for€the€defense€of€duress,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€39„11„504(b),€as€well€as€the€pattern€jury€instruction€on€the€defense€of€duress,€òòseeóó€T.P.I.Ï(Crim.)€40„03€(4th€ed.€1997).€€ÌÌà àà àFinally,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€toÏinstruct€the€jury€on€the€defense€of€duress€in€the€absence€of€some€proof€of€duress.€ÏThe€defendant€states€that€the€trial€court€essentially€forced€him€to€testify€by€refusing€toÏinstruct€the€jury€on€the€defense€of€duress€unless€the€defendant€took€the€witnessÏstand,€whereas€the€defendant€maintains€that€the€defense€of€duress€had€beenÏsufficiently€raised€by€defense€counselððs€questioning€of€a€Stateððs€witness€on€cross„examination.ÌÌà àà àFrom€the€outset,€our€review€of€the€record€reveals€that€the€trial€courtÏnever€stated€it€would€withhold€the€jury€instruction€unless€the€defendant€personallyÏtestified€on€his€own€behalf€at€trial.€€Rather,€the€trial€court€reminded€defense€counsel€atÏthe€close€of€the€Stateððs€case€that€no€proof€of€duress€had€been€shown,€and€withoutÍsuch€proof,€the€defendant€was€not€entitled€to€an€instruction€on€duress.€€The€trialÏcourtððs€ruling€in€this€regard€was€imminently€correct,€as€the€defendant€is€not€entitled€toÏa€jury€instruction€on€duress€unless€the€evidence€establishes€and€fairly€raises€allÏelements€of€duress.€€òòState€v.€Kenneth€Culpóó,€C.C.A.€02C01„9509„CC„00260,ÏLauderdale€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€March€7,€1997,€at€Jackson).€€Here,€theÏrecord€shows€that€no€elements€of€duress€were€fairly€raised€during€the€StateððsÏpresentation€of€proof.€€Thus,€had€the€defendant€not€presented€any€proof€(in€anyÏmanner,€not€just€through€his€own€testimony),€he€would€not€have€been€entitled€to€aÏjury€instruction€on€duress.€€òòId.óóÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€argues€that€proof€of€duress€was€presented€to€the€juryÏthrough€a€question€defense€counsel€posed€while€cross„examining€a€Stateððs€witness.€ÏThe€defendantððs€argument€is€disingenuous,€however,€as€it€is€fundamental€thatÏattorneyððs€questions,€comments,€and€arguments€are€not€evidence.€€òòE.g.óó,€òòState€v.ÏDykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€255€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).ÌÌà àà àIn€sum,€we€find€no€merit€to€any€of€the€defendantððs€arguments.€ÏAccordingly,€we€affirm€his€conviction€and€sentence.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌœÌÌCONCUR:›ÌÌœÌÌ______________________________›ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€œJudgeÌ›