ÿWPC¡ û†ŸbFj¸­Jäm" RNŸ‡`M¥l’RéŒ ËÊ=¾J°E¤§OÛ®kЬcÂãJ'uîåf+ÛéïnsL!˜ûê&õ¼4,´S*õW Òïôé·—EÐX‚MEÒJå,Â…¼„¯ä@x.î@ z@(´wQ`Å´ìñdLY;ýzî­V-¨ôXѯ úäDAÜ#Jƒ¯´ŸS*6|Ï‚ÊêÜ:‡V¶3j>3èê¨Qô$b ʼnŸ«,H85…Kã͆ÝgíAdÝø«Yn¹å&* 9:.+|MF¢21à@ž>ýf؉Q@SÔ¤Ž¤ÞZÖ8ùË#S<ÑÉ8‡]›ÜÐrž¸2É0âqa•f}Öÿ§Q¬O'ˆ‰[š¿,ÖéXû·Kœ6Æ¿ìïéRÄ Ÿ}z !€n\ˆ/žù£ÁWË8ëX£üÃrçP†g8¯#º>æÑž4“ÕÖú#’eëfטq›G"f4Ô$Ä‘Ñ é'ÿäÚü»¦ÎŸr¸Føíˆi=¿Ž%!Ò¼ÓæØ‘öNØ=>µõTª8'âUÑ WÔ¡whè™fxLj„ûMZ!hØ#bnÜN‡[ó $—7 CÄü^o¬—rSfBýi.&oêÂXOyFBÄb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz 0D‘ ÆÕ Æ› Æa Æ'NíNïfñU@WE—^™[÷U:RRRRŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒb”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””” 0뜜œœ B‡‡ 0¤¤ D5H D-} 0Kªª ASõÆH 0¤ 0D² A«ö˜\\IB27S11T\stats1ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»t-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÛMï,˜C 'Ìœprogra ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 \Ñ\R3Ø' Letter\Ñ(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman  TÝ ƒR‹Š$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôïí ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThere€is€no€evidence€that€the€defendant€and€his€associates€had€any€grievance€with,€or€even€knew,€the€victim.€Ð ° ÐIt€appears€that€the€victim€was,€unfortunately,€in€the€wrong€place€at€the€wrong€time. QÝ ƒR‹Š$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôïí ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAgent€Arney€did€not€perform€the€gunshot€residue€analysis.€€However,€she€was€permitted€to€testify€about€theÐ ° Ðresults€via€stipulation€of€the€parties€due€to€the€testing€agentððs€unavailability., øð AZ‹"Arial Regular - ù-(|G2‹Š$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€W»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôîUò»»Ô d(|3‡‰$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€W»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡‰$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€W»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€SM»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼SM»»»ÔÑ8€‘XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îHLSMÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼SM»îîHL #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€April€9,€2002Ð üL ÐÔ‡X‘X»¼SMÔÌò òÔ#†¼SM»XX‘#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€WILSON€Ô_ÔNEELYÔ_ÔòòóóÔ‡X‘X»¼SMÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„10092€€€€€€Chris€Craft,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2001„01327„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€August€23,€2002Ð ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡X‘XXX‘ÔConvicted€at€a€jury€trial€of€first„degree,€premeditated€murder€and€presently€serving€a€life€sentence,Ð xÈ  ÐWilson€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€appeals€from€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court.€€He€claims€that€his€conviction€isÐ d´ Ðimproperly€based€upon€uncorroborated€and€insufficient€testimony€of€accomplices.€€Because€weÐ P  Ðdisagree,€we€affirm.Ô#†X‘XXX‘·#ÔÔ#†¼SM»XX‘°#ÔÔ‡X‘X»¼SMÔÐ <Œ ÐÓ«ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼SM»àX‘¬#ÔÔ‡X‘X.¼SMÔJames€Curwood€Witt,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€H.€Wellesóó€andÐ ì< ÐòòDavid€G.€Hayes,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð Ø( ÐÌMarvin€E.€Ballin,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Wilson€Neely.Ð ° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Elizabeth€B.€Marney,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ˆØ ÐWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Lee€Coffee,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,Ð tÄ Ðfor€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð `° ÐÓLÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼SM»XX‘{#ÔòòóóÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÓ  ÓÔ€X‘X»¼SMÔÑ€³/ ÑÔ‡X‘XXX‘Ôà@ìì*ìàˆÌà  àà ` àThis€case€arises€from€the€shooting€of€Billy€Ray€Brown.€€It€appears€from€the€recordÐ #`" Ðthat€the€intended€target€of€the€crime€was€Bertram€Johnson;€however,€Mr.€Brown€became€theÐ ü#L# Ðunintended€victim.€€The€issue€presented€in€this€case€pertains€to€accomplice€testimony.€€Thus,€it€isÐ è$8 $ Ðessential€to€understand€which€components€of€the€stateððs€case€were€provided€by€the€various€witnesses.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌà  àà ` àKaren€Seymour,€who€by€all€accounts€was€not€involved€in€the€crime€in€question,Ð ¬'ü"' Ðtestified€that€on€the€evening€of€October€29,€1997,€she€visited€Bertram€Johnson€at€a€ð ðdope€houseðð€atÐ ˜(è#( Ð1010€Cella€Street€in€Memphis.€€Although€Mr.€Johnson€did€not€reside€at€1010€Cella,€he€spent€timeÐ „)Ô$) Ðthere.€€Mr.€Johnson€is€the€father€of€Ms.€Seymourððs€daughter.€€Mr.€Johnson€became€upset€that€Ms.Ð p*À%* ÐSeymour€was€accompanied€by€a€male€friend.€€Mr.€Johnson€became€verbally€abusive€and€took€$50Ð \+¬&+ Ðfrom€her.€€When€she€demanded€that€he€return€the€money,€he€refused€and€brandished€a€weapon.€€Ð H,˜', ÐÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôà  àà ` àMs.€Seymour€went€to€the€home€she€shared€with€her€mother€and€her€brother,€RobertÐ ° ÐSeymour.€€She€told€her€brother,€who€was€a€member€of€the€Gangster€Disciples,€what€had€happened.€Ð œì ÐDuring€the€evening,€other€members€of€the€Gangster€Disciples€arrived€at€the€Seymour€residence.€€Ms.Ð ˆØ ÐSeymour€identified€these€individuals€as€Albert€Wilson,€Ira€Farris,€Kevin€Porter,€and€the€defendantÐ tÄ ÐWilson€Neely.€€These€gentlemen€all€left€together,€and€Robert€Seymour€returned€30€minutes€to€anÐ `° Ðhour€later.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àKevin€Porter,€who€denied€any€affiliation€with€the€Gangster€Disciples,€testified€thatÐ $ t Ðhe,€Albert€Wilson,€and€Ira€Farris€went€to€the€Seymour€residence€on€the€date€in€question.€€KarenÐ  ` ÐSeymour,€Robert€Seymour,€Brian€Bison,€and€the€defendant€Wilson€Neely€were€also€present€thatÐ ü L  Ðevening.€€Porter€claimed€that€he€was€in€the€back€room€with€Karen€Seymour€most€of€the€time.€Ð è 8  ÐHowever,€he€was€aware€that€there€was€a€conversation€going€on€in€the€living€room€among€RobertÐ Ô$  ÐWilson,€Ira€Farris,€Brian€Bison€and€the€defendant.€€Porter€went€into€the€living€room€from€time€toÐ À  Ðtime€and€heard€bits€of€the€conversation.€€According€to€Porter,€Robert€Seymour€said€that€he€neededÐ ¬ü  Ðto€ð ðride€on€this€n„„„„„€and€see€whatððs€up.ðð€€Porter€was€present€when€the€defendant€was€involved€inÐ ˜è  Ðtelephone€conversations€in€which€the€defendant€was€attempting€to€locate€Bertram€Johnson.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àPorter€claimed€that€as€the€group€of€men€left€the€Seymour€home,€he€believed€they€wereÐ \¬ Ðgoing€to€a€nightclub.€€Porter,€Al€Wilson,€Robert€Seymour€and€Ira€Farris€rode€in€Porterððs€PontiacÐ H˜ ÐParisienne,€and€the€defendant,€Brian€Bison€and€an€individual€whom€Porter€did€not€know€were€in€aÐ 4„ Ðsmall,€green€car.€€During€the€ride,€one€of€the€passengers€in€Porterððs€vehicle€suggested€that€they€goÐ  p Ðto€Cella€Street.€€Porter€testified€that€he€thought€the€purpose€of€going€to€Cella€Street€was€to€get€someÐ  \ Ðð ðweed.ðð€€As€they€were€approaching€Cella€Street,€Porter€heard€a€click€and€looked€into€the€back€seat.€Ð øH ÐHe€saw€that€Robert€Seymour€had€a€Tec€9€or€Uzi€firearm.€€He€then€noticed€that€Ira€Farris€had€a€small,Ð ä4 Ðnine€millimeter€weapon,€and€Al€Wilson€had€a€laser„site€Beretta.€€Porter€claimed€that€he€had€not€seenÐ Ð  Ðany€weapons€prior€to€this€point€in€the€evening.€€Porter€testified€that€he€thought€his€passengers,€whomÐ ¼  Ðhe€claimed€not€to€know€well,€might€be€about€to€carjack€him.€€He€claimed€to€have€inquired€what€wasÐ ¨ø Ðgoing€on,€but€one€of€the€passengers€told€him€it€was€ð ðnothingðð€and€to€continue€on€his€course.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àAccording€to€Porter,€the€defendant€was€already€parked€on€Cella€Street€as€heÐ l¼ Ðapproached.€€The€defendant€was€out€of€his€vehicle€and€in€the€yard€of€1010€Cella.€€As€Porter€startedÐ X ¨ Ðto€pull€over,€the€defendant€gave€some€type€of€hand€signal,€and€Albert€Wilson€jumped€out€of€PorterððsÐ D!” Ðcar€before€it€was€fully€stopped.€€Gunfire€erupted.€€Farris€and€Seymour€exited€Porterððs€car,€and€PorterÐ 0"€  Ðclaimed€that€he€ducked€down€into€the€seat.€€Porter€claimed€that€he€was€afraid€to€drive€away€becauseÐ #l! Ðhe€knew€that€if€he€fled,€he€would€have€to€face€the€other€men€later€and€justify€having€left€them.€€PorterÐ $X" Ðheard€at€least€25€shots,€a€pause,€and€then€five€or€six€more€shots.€€He€heard€someone€yell,€ð ðHold€up,Ð ô$D # Ðman.€€Damn,€whatððs€up€Wilson?ðð€€Porter€looked€into€his€rear„view€mirror,€and€about€twenty€feetÐ à%0!$ Ðaway,€he€saw€the€victimððs€legs€extending€from€behind€the€small,€green€car.€€Porter€testified€that€theÐ Ì&"% Ðâ âdefendant€walked€to€the€victim,€who€was€on€the€ground,€and€stood€over€him.€€With€a€larger€handgun,Ð ¸'#& Ðthe€defendant€shot€the€victim€five€or€six€times.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€occupants€of€both€cars€then€fled€in€the€vehiclesÐ ° Ðâ âin€which€they€had€arrived.€€Porter€maintained€that€he€was€afraid€he€would€be€shot,€so€he€drove€away.€Ð œì ÐAs€they€neared€an€intersection€on€Cella,€the€police€began€following€them.€€Porter€claimed€to€beÐ ˆØ Ðconcerned€that€his€passengers€would€begin€shooting€at€the€police.€He€fled€for€short€distance,€hit€aÐ tÄ Ðtree,€and€fled€on€foot.€€He€claimed€that€he€intentionally€hit€the€tree€because€he€was€flustered€and€wasÐ `° Ðconcerned€that€he€would€be€killed€in€the€course€of€a€chase.€€Porter€hid€in€some€bushes,€and€he€wasÐ L œ Ðapprehended€shortly€thereafter.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€trial,€Porter€acknowledged€that€he€had€given€an€initial€statement€in€which€he€wasÐ  ` Ðnot€entirely€forthcoming.€€He€explained€that€he€was€afraid€of€retaliation.€€Later,€however,€he€gaveÐ ü L  Ða€more€detailed€statement.€€Porter€maintained€at€trial€that€he€had€no€advance€knowledge€that€theÐ è 8  Ðpurpose€of€going€to€Cella€Street€was€to€cause€harm€to€anyone.€€He€also€maintained€that€he€did€notÐ Ô$  Ðhave€a€weapon€with€him€and€that€he€did€not€fire€a€weapon€during€the€shooting.€€At€the€time€of€theÐ À  Ðdefendantððs€trial,€Porter€was€under€indictment€for€facilitation€of€first„degree€murder.€€He€denied€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðhe€had€any€sort€of€plea€bargain€arrangement€with€the€state€in€exchange€for€his€testimony.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àTravis€Sugars€testified€that€he€was€present€at€1010€Cella€and€saw€Karen€Seymour€andÐ pÀ ÐBertram€Johnson€talking.€€Later€that€same€evening,€Sugars€was€present€when€Robert€Seymour€cameÐ \¬ Ðto€1010€Cella€to€leave€a€threat€for€Bertram€Johnson.€€Although€Johnson€was€not€present€at€the€time,Ð H˜ Ðhe€returned€after€Mr.€Seymour€departed.€€Sugars€observed€Johnson€receive€a€call€on€his€cellularÐ 4„ Ðtelephone€and€become€involved€in€an€argument.Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àIra€Farris€testified€that€like€the€defendant,€he€is€under€indictment€for€first„degreeÐ øH Ðmurder€relative€to€the€shooting.€€For€the€most€part,€his€testimony€was€consistent€with€that€given€byÐ ä4 ÐKevin€Porter.€€It€differed,€however,€in€certain€significant€respects.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àFarris€identified€himself,€Porter,€the€defendant,€Brian€Bison,€Robert€Walker,€AlbertÐ ¨ø ÐWilson,€Robert€Seymour,€and€an€individual€named€Andre€as€additional€members€of€the€GangsterÐ ”ä ÐDisciples.€€He€admitted€that€there€was€a€conversation€about€the€earlier€incident€between€KarenÐ €Ð ÐSeymour€and€Bertram€Johnson€and€that€it€was€decided€that€the€group€needed€to€straighten€the€matterÐ l¼ Ðout.€€He€specifically€identified€the€defendant€as€being€present€during€this€conversation.€€Contrary€toÐ X ¨ ÐPorterððs€testimony,€Farris€said€that€Bison€was€not€present€for€the€conversation,€although€he€said€thatÐ D!” ÐBison€joined€the€group€outside€the€Seymour€residence€and€traveled€with€them€to€Cella€Street.€€FarrisÐ 0"€  Ðtestified€that€none€of€this€conversation€specifically€pertained€to€killing€or€using€weapons.€€FarrisÐ #l! Ðidentified€Robert€Walker€and€Andre€as€being€present€later€in€the€evening€at€the€Seymour€residence.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àFarris€described€the€criminal€episode€much€as€had€Porter,€and€he€provided€additionalÐ à%0!$ Ðdetails.€€He€recalled€seeing€the€defendant€in€a€heated€conversation€with€Bertram€Johnson€before€theÐ Ì&"% Ðshooting€began.€€Farris€did€not€see€Johnson€with€a€gun,€although€he€thought€from€JohnsonððsÐ ¸'#& Ðmovements€that€he€had€a€gun.€€According€to€Farris,€there€were€about€six€people€on€the€lawn€of€1010Ð ¤(ô#' ÐCella,€all€of€whom€ð ðhit€the€groundðð€when€the€shots€began.€€Farris€contradicted€Porterððs€testimonyÐ ° Ðthat€gunfire€began€immediately€as€they€arrived.€€After€most€of€the€shooting€was€over,€Farris€saw€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€backing€up.€€The€defendant€and€the€victim€bumped€into€each€other;€the€defendant€turnedÐ ˆØ Ðaround€and€fired€more€shots.€€The€victim€fell€to€the€ground€almost€immediately.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àLaw€enforcement€witnesses€provided€additional€evidence.€€A€Memphis€PoliceÐ L œ ÐDepartment€officer€testified€about€various€weaponry€and€other€physical€evidence€found€at€the€scene.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐAn€agent€from€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation€testified€as€an€expert€in€firearms€identification.€Ð $ t ÐShe€identified€the€weapons€and€ammunition€recovered€from€the€scene€and€identified€the€weaponsÐ  ` Ðfrom€which€certain€items€of€ammunition€had€been€fired.€€Additionally,€she€testified€that€gunshotÐ ü L  Ðresidue€samples€taken€from€Kevin€Porter€and€Travis€Sugars€were€inconclusive,€while€the€sampleÐ è 8  Ðfrom€Andre€Jackson€was€negative€and€from€Ira€Farris€was€positive.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€countyððs€assistant€medical€examiner€testified€about€the€autopsy€she€performedÐ ¬ü  Ðon€the€victim.€€She€identified€the€gunshot€wounds€he€sustained,€and€she€opined€that€he€was€shot€fromÐ ˜è  Ðmore€than€two€feet€due€to€the€absence€of€stippling€from€gunpowder.€€Further,€she€testified€thatÐ „Ô  Ðfragments€of€asphalt€found€in€a€ground€wound€were€consistent€with€the€victim€having€been€shot€asÐ pÀ Ðhe€was€lying€on€the€ground.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€first„degree€murder,€and€this€appeal€followed.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àà ` àNow,€the€defendant€raises€two€appellate€issues.€€First,€he€challenges€the€trial€courtððsÐ  \ Ðruling€that€the€question€whether€Kevin€Porter€was€an€accomplice€was€one€of€fact€to€be€resolved€byÐ øH Ðthe€jury,€rather€than€a€question€of€law€for€the€courtððs€determination.€€Second,€he€claims€that€theÐ ä4 Ðaccomplice€testimony€was€insufficiently€corroborated.€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€Tennessee,€a€conviction€may€not€be€based€upon€the€uncorroborated€testimony€ofÐ ¨ø Ðan€accomplice.€€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994).€€ð ðWhere€there€is€testimony€ofÐ ”ä Ðmultiple€accomplices,€there€must€still€be€corroboration€since€accomplices€cannot€corroborate€eachÐ €Ð Ðother.ðð€€òòState€v.€Allenóó,€976€S.W.2d€661,€666€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€An€accomplice€is€anÐ l¼ Ðindividual€who€knowingly,€voluntarily€and€with€common€intent€participates€with€the€principalÐ X ¨ Ðoffender€in€the€commission€of€an€offense.€€òòState€v.€Lawsonóó,€794€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð D!” Ð1990).€€When€the€facts€are€undisputed€regarding€a€witnessððs€participation€in€the€crime,€whether€heÐ 0"€  Ðis€an€accomplice€is€a€question€of€law€for€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Perkinsonóó,€867€S.W.2d€1,€7€(Tenn.Ð #l! ÐCrim.€App.€1992).€€However,€when€the€facts€are€disputed€or€susceptible€to€different€inferences,€it€isÐ $X" Ða€question€for€the€jury.€€òòConner€v.€Stateóó,€531€S.W.2d€119,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1975).€€The€juryÐ ô$D # Ðdetermines€whether€an€accompliceððs€testimony€has€been€sufficiently€corroborated.€€òòPennington€v.Ð à%0!$ ÐStateóó,€478€S.W.2d€892,€898€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1971).€€The€general€rule€is€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðà8  àthere€must€be€some€fact€testified€to,€entirely€independent€of€the€accompliceððsÐ ¸'#& Ðtestimony,€which,€taken€by€itself,€leads€to€the€inference,€not€only€that€a€crime€hasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbeen€committed,€but€also€that€the€defendant€is€implicated€in€it;€and€this€independentÐ ° Ðcorroborative€testimony€must€also€include€some€fact€establishing€the€defendantððsÐ œì Ðidentity.€€This€corroborative€evidence€may€be€direct€or€entirely€circumstantial,€andÐ ˆØ Ðit€need€not€be€adequate,€in€and€of€itself,€to€support€a€conviction;€it€is€sufficient€toÐ tÄ Ðmeet€the€requirements€of€the€rule€if€it€fairly€and€legitimately€tends€to€connect€theÐ `° Ðdefendant€with€the€commission€of€the€crime€charged.€€It€is€not€necessary€that€theÐ L œ Ðcorroboration€extend€to€every€part€of€the€accompliceððs€evidence.€€The€corroborationÐ 8 ˆ Ðneed€not€be€conclusive,€but€it€is€sufficient€if€this€evidence,€of€itself,€tends€to€connectÐ $ t Ðthe€defendant€with€the€commission€of€the€offense,€although€the€evidence€be€slightÐ  ` Ðand€entitled,€when€standing€alone,€to€but€little€consideration.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌòòHawkins€v.€Stateóó,€4€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€121,€133,€469€S.W.2d€515,€520€(1971)€(citations€omitted).€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àThere€can€be€no€real€question€that€Kevin€Porter€is€potentially€an€accomplice.€€Thus,Ð ¬ü  Ðthe€first€question€before€us€is€whether€Kevin€Porter€is€an€accomplice€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Like€theÐ ˜è  Ðtrial€court,€we€hold€that€he€is€not.€€Taken€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€Porter€testified€thatÐ „Ô  Ðhe€was€not€a€Gangster€Disciple€and€did€not€know€well€his€companions€on€the€evening€of€October€29,Ð pÀ Ð1997.€€He€claimed€to€have€believed€that€he€and€his€companions€were€going€to€a€nightclub€when€theyÐ \¬ Ðleft€the€Seymour€residence.€€He€further€claimed€to€have€believed€that€while€en€route,€they€were€goingÐ H˜ Ðto€Cella€Street€to€obtain€marijuana,€and€when€he€saw€weapons€as€they€turned€onto€Cella€Street,€thatÐ 4„ Ðhe€was€fearful€he€was€being€carjacked.€€He€portrayed€himself€as€a€victim€who€cowered€in€his€car€asÐ  p Ðhis€companions€opened€fire€at€1010€Cella.€€Further,€he€claimed€that€he€fled€the€scene€with€his€threeÐ  \ Ðpassengers€out€of€fear,€and€this€fear€also€caused€him€to€wreck€his€car€in€order€to€end€the€police€chase.€Ð øH ÐHowever€incredible€some€aspects€of€Porterððs€testimony€may€seem€if€other,€conflicting€evidence€isÐ ä4 Ðaccredited,€one€possible€inference€that€may€be€drawn€from€it€is€that€Porter€was€an€unknowing€actorÐ Ð  Ðwhen€he€drove€his€companions€to€Cella€Street€and€that€he€was€compelled€by€fear€to€flee€the€sceneÐ ¼  Ðafter€his€companionsðð€crime.€€Thus,€the€question€of€his€status€as€an€accomplice€is€one€of€fact.€€TheÐ ¨ø Ðtrial€court€did€not€err€in€submitting€the€issue€of€Porterððs€accomplice€status€to€the€jury.€€€òòCf.€State€v.Ð ”ä ÐPressley€Calvin€Farleyóó,€No.€22€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Sept.€10,€1990)€(order€on€petition€toÐ €Ð Ðrehear)€(it€does€not€matter€whether€trial€court€instructed€jury€that€witness€was€an€accomplice€as€aÐ l¼ Ðmatter€of€law€or€submitted€accomplice€status€as€a€factual€matter€for€jury€to€determine€whereÐ X ¨ Ðtestimony€of€witness€is€sufficiently€corroborated€to€sustain€the€conviction).òòóóÐ D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€next€question€raised€by€the€defense€ð!ð€whether€Porterððs€and€Farrisðð€testimony€wasÐ #l! Ðadequately€corroborated€ð!ð€presupposes€that€Porter€was€an€accomplice.€€We€choose€to€view€thisÐ $X" Ðquestion€through€the€more€general€inquiry€of€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€with€the€corroborationÐ ô$D # Ðissues€in€mind.€€òòSee€State€v.€Willifordóó,€824€S.W.2d€553,€554€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(question€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðsufficiency€of€accomplice€corroboration€is€one€of€sufficiency€of€the€evidence).Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àà ` àÔ#†X‘XXX‘x #ÔWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€courtÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmust€review€the€record€to€determine€if€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€is€sufficient€ð ðto€support€theÐ )à$( Ðfinding€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€This€ruleÐ |*Ì%) Ðis€applicable€to€findings€of€guilt€based€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€aÐ h+¸&* Ðcombination€of€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€253€(Tenn.Ð ° ÐCrim.€App.€1990).Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€court€does€not€re„weighÐ tÄ Ðor€re„evaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€NorÐ `° Ðmay€this€court€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantialÐ L œ Ðevidence.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(1956).€€To€the€contrary,€thisÐ 8 ˆ Ðcourt€is€required€to€afford€the€state€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€contained€in€theÐ $ t Ðrecord€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€Ð  ` ÐòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€beÐ Ô$  Ðgiven€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€ofÐ À  Ðfact,€not€this€court.€€òòIdóó.€at€835.€€In€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973),€our€supremeÐ ¬ü  Ðcourt€said:€ð ðA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theÐ ˜è  Ðwitnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€state.ððÐ „Ô  Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àBecause€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replaces€it€withÐ \¬ Ða€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused,€as€the€appellant,€has€the€burden€in€this€court€of€illustrating€whyÐ H˜ Ðthe€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdicts€returned€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639Ð 4„ ÐS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€This€court€will€not€disturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€due€to€the€sufficiencyÐ  p Ðof€the€evidence€unless€the€facts€contained€in€the€record€are€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€for€aÐ  \ Ðrational€trier€of€fact€to€find€that€the€accused€is€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòIdóó.€at€914.Ð øH ÐÌà  àà ` àIt€is€impossible€for€us€to€know€whether€the€jury€accredited€Porterððs€testimony€relativeÐ Ð  Ðto€his€lack€of€culpability€for€the€crime€and€found€that€he€was€not€an€accomplice€or€whether€itÐ ¼  Ðdetermined€that€he€was€an€accomplice€but€that€his€testimony€was€adequately€corroborated.€òòóó€Ð ¨ø ÐHowever,€the€records€supports€a€sufficient€evidence€finding€in€either€case.Ô‡XÛ• XXX‘ÔÐ ”ä ÐÔ#†X‘X XXÛ•b]#ÔÔ‡XÛ• XXX‘ÔÌÔ#†X‘X XXÛ•¹]#ÔÔ‡X‘XXX‘Ôà  àà ` àIf€the€jury€found€that€Porter€was€not€an€accomplice,€Porterððs€testimony€viewed€bothÐ f¶ Ðin€its€own€right€and€as€corroborative€testimony€of€Ira€Farris€supports€a€conclusion€that€the€defendantÐ R ¢ Ðand€his€Gangster€Disciple€associates€planned€the€murder€of€Bertram€Johnson€in€retaliation€forÐ >!Ž ÐJohnsonððs€actions€toward€Karen€Seymour,€although€in€the€course€of€executing€the€murder,€theÐ *"z  Ðdefendant€killed€Billy€Ray€Brown.€€Ð #f! ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€the€other€hand,€if€the€jury€found€that€Porter€was€an€accomplice€to€the€defendantððsÐ î$> # Ðmurder€of€Billy€Ray€Brown,€there€is€adequate€corroborative€evidence€to€sustain€the€conviction.€€BothÐ Ú%*!$ ÐFarris€and€Porter€gave€eyewitness€testimony€that€the€defendant€was€the€individual€who€shot€Brown.€Ð Æ&"% ÐThus,€if€their€testimony€is€corroborated€in€some€respect,€it€will€provide€sufficient€identificationÐ ²'#& Ðevidence€to€support€the€defendantððs€conviction.€€In€that€regard,€Karen€Seymour€testified€about€aÐ ž(î#' Ðdisagreement€she€had€with€Bertram€Johnson€on€the€night€in€question.€€She€recalled€having€discussedÐ Š)Ú$( Ðthis€with€her€brother,€Robert€Seymour.€€Karen€Seymour€also€testified€that€several€of€her€brotherððsÐ v*Æ%) Ðassociates,€including€the€defendant,€congregated€at€her€house€on€the€evening€of€the€crime.€€FarrisÐ b+²&* Ðtestified€that€the€disagreement€between€Karen€Seymour€and€Johnson€was€a€topic€of€discussion€at€theÐ ° ÐSeymour€residence,€that€a€decision€was€made€to€go€to€Cella€Street€to€ð ðstraighten€it€out,ðð€and€that€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€was€present€during€this€discussion.€According€to€Karen€Seymour,€Farris,€and€Porter,€theÐ ˆØ Ðmen€left€in€two€vehicles€following€the€discussions.€€All€three€witnesses€described€the€vehiclesÐ tÄ Ðsimilarly.€€Physical€evidence€corroborated€the€testimony€given€by€Porter€and€Farris.€€Both€testifiedÐ `° Ðthat€Albert€Wilson€had€a€nine€millimeter€Beretta€handgun,€and€this€type€of€weapon€was€recoveredÐ L œ Ðfrom€the€front€seat€of€Porterððs€wrecked€car€where€Albert€Wilson€had€been€seated.€€€Expert€testimonyÐ 8 ˆ Ðestablished€that€several€of€the€shell€casings€recovered€from€the€scene€had€been€fired€from€the€Beretta.€Ð $ t ÐPorter€testified€that€Robert€Seymour€had€a€weapon€inside€a€purple€Crown€Royal€liquor€bag,€and€aÐ  ` Ðbag€of€this€type€was€recovered€at€the€scene.€€Other€expert€testimony€established€that€the€victim€wasÐ ü L  Ðshot€while€lying€down,€which€is€consistent€with€the€eyewitness€accounts€of€the€shooting.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àà ` àThis€evidence€meets€the€quantum€necessary€to€corroborate€the€testimony€of€Porter€andÐ À  ÐFarris.€€Having€been€corroborated,€Porterððs€and€Farrisðð€testimony€may€be€considered€in€evaluatingÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€sufficiency€of€the€evidence.€€As€stated€above,€the€testimony€of€these€two€witnesses€along€withÐ ˜è  Ðthe€balance€of€the€stateððs€evidence€sufficiently€supports€the€juryððs€finding€that€Wilson€Neely€and€hisÐ „Ô  Ðassociates€committed€the€premeditated€murder€of€Billy€Ray€Brown.€€The€evidence€ð ðfairly€andÐ pÀ Ðlegitimately€tends€to€connect€the€defendant€with€the€commission€of€the€crime,ðð€òòHawkinsóó,€4€Tenn.Ð \¬ ÐCrim.€App.€at€133,€469€S.W.2d€at€520,€and€evidence€independent€of€Porterððs€and€Farrisðð€testimonyÐ H˜ Ðestablishes€the€defendantððs€identity€as€one€of€the€group€of€men€who€discussed€retaliation€againstÐ 4„ ÐBertram€Johnson€and€then€engaged€in€the€criminal€episode€which€culminated€in€the€killing€of€BillyÐ  p ÐRay€Brown.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€133,€469€S.W.2d€at€520.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àThus,€we€affirm€the€defendantððs€first„degree€murder€conviction.Ð ä4 ÐÌÔ#†X‘XXX‘ü]#ÔÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE