ÿWPCS' £”ðv1p&Nœ¦»Ô’TB°mˆ·ÑL›‹øI_y Ïí–~sÇIc||âZÊÒ/ãd³Éƒ´‘˜(XÕTáN®¡moÇ9]Õeðid¥ªµSߘæey)Zpð xC€Š¿š_½vý”Y>zý/hçfb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Ƨ Æm Æ3 Æù ¡¿N` 0 Db¦E¿NÁÃU@ËÊ NÕÑ×®¨òVþHF F F F F F îX!X!X!X!X!X!X!X!bF"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F"F" 0 ëN"N"N"N" B9#9# 0¤V# D5ú# D-/$ 0K\$\$ AS§$Æú$ 0¤À% 0Dd& A«¨&˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»ƒ~l-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularYo†)ê:i¢Ø+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Ñ ° ÑLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 —Ý ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€judgment€for€count€four€in€which€the€twenty„year€sentence€was€imposed€specifies€that€the€convictionÐ ° Ðoffense€is€a€Class€A€felony€and€refers€to€the€victim€being€under€six€years€of€age.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„15„402(b)Ð tÄ Ð(1997).€€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔHowever,€medical€evidence€in€the€case€established€her€birthday€as€March€3,€1993,€which€would€make€herÐ ° Ðalmost€eight€years€old. (ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman  ÀÝ ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBy€reason€of€the€convictions€in€this€case€being€of€aggravated€child€abuse,€any€aggregate€sentence€in€this€caseÐ ° Ðmust€be€actually€served€at€a€minimum€of€85€percent€pursuant€to€Code€section€Ô_Ô40„35„501(h).Ô_Ô€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð tÄ Ð501(h)€(Supp.€2001). ÇÝ ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMs.€Owens€admits€in€her€brief€that€she€withdrew€the€motion€to€sequester.€ ¤Ý ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€contains€an€order€overruling€the€motion€for€new€trial.€€The€order€is€styled€ð ðState€of€Tennessee€v.Ð ° ÐSarah€Owens.ðð€€The€record€contains€no€corresponding€written€order€overruling€òòper€seóó€Johnny€Owensðð€motion€for€newÐ tÄ Ðtrial;€however,€the€transcript€of€the€hearing€on€his€motion€for€new€trial€clearly€reflects€that€the€trial€court€overruled€hisÐ 8ˆ Ðmotion.€€In€this€situation,€we€will€deem€the€single€written€order€overruling€the€motion€for€new€trial€as€embracing€theÐ üL Ðmotions€for€new€trial€filed€by€both€defendants,€thus€affording€this€court€jurisdiction€to€hear€Johnny€Owensðð€appeal.€€òòSeeÐ À ÐóóTenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(b).€€However,€in€the€case€of€multiple€defendants€tried€jointly,€the€better€practice€is€for€the€trial€courtÐ „Ô Ðto€enter€a€separate€order€for€each€defendant,€or€alternatively,€one€order€captioned€such€that€it€clearly€encompasses€allÐ H ˜ Ðdefendants€and€addresses€all€issues€raised€by€all€defendants. èÝ ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIt€appears€that€some€enhancement€factors€may€have€been€applicable.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð ° Ð114(2)€(leader€in€the€commission€of€the€offense),€(4)€(particular€vulnerability€(of€cerebral€palsy)€victims€(L.B.„1€andÐ tÄ ÐL.B.„2)),€(5)€(exceptional€cruelty),€(15)€(abuse€of€position€of€public€or€private€trust). ôÝ ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTennessee€Code€Annotated€sections€40„17„201€through€„212€constitute€Tennesseeððs€€enactment€of€the€UniformÐ ° ÐLaw€to€Secure€the€Attendance€of€Witnesses€from€Within€or€Without€a€State€in€Criminal€Proceedings.€€As€such,€the€ActÐ tÄ Ðspecifies€a€hearing€and€fact„finding€procedure€to€be€carried€out€in€a€responding€state€when€a€court€exercising€criminalÐ 8ˆ Ðjurisdiction€in€an€initiating€state€seeks€the€attendance€of€a€witness€who€is€located€in€the€responding€state.€€òòSee€óóTenn.€CodeÐ üL ÐAnn.€ðððð€40„17„203,€„204,€„207€(1997).€€The€evidence€of€record€in€the€present€case€does€not€establish€whether€the€absentÐ À Ðvictims€were€located€outside€Tennessee,€or€if€so,€whether€the€state€proceeded€via€Code€section€40„17„207€to€initiateÐ „Ô Ðproceedings€to€effectuate€summons€via€the€Uniform€Act,€whether€Indiana€or€any€other€responding€state€participates€inÐ H ˜ Ðthe€Uniform€Act,€or€if€so,€whether€that€stateððs€procedures€corresponding€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„17„203Ð  \ Ðand€„204€were€pursued.€ Ý ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€judge€is€a€Senior€Judge€who€was€designated€to€try€the€case€and€who€does€not€regularly€sit€in€HaywoodÐ ° ÐCounty. äÝ ƒR…’$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔEvidence€in€the€record€shows€that€at€least€S.J.€and€L.B.„1€referred€to€Sarah€Owens€as€ð ðmomma.ðð€€- ù-(|G2…’$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ce»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôú}ò»»Ô d(|3‡}$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ce»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡}$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ce»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ce»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ce»»»ÔÑ8€‰XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îXÔCeÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼Ce»îîXÔ#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€June€5,€2002Ð üL ÐÔ‡X‰X»¼CeÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ce»XX‰+#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEòòóóE€v.€JOHNNY€OWENS€and€SARAH€OWENSòòóóÔ‡X‰X»¼CeÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔHaywoodÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€4436A€&€B€€€€€€Terry€Ô_ÔLaffertyÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2001„01397„CCA„R3„CD€€Ô_Ô„Ô_Ô€Filed€November€8,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendants,€Johnny€Owens€and€Sarah€Owens,€who€are€husband€and€wife,€were€convicted€ofÐ xÈ  Ðaggravated€child€abuse€by€a€Ô_ÔHaywoodÔ_Ô€County€Circuit€Court€jury.€€Johnny€Owens€was€convicted€onÐ d´ Ðone€count€only,€and€Sarah€Owens€was€convicted€on€five€counts.€€Because€Johnny€Owensðð€motionÐ P  Ðfor€a€new€trial€raised€only€issues€of€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€we€review€only€that€issue€in€hisÐ <Œ Ðappeal.€€Sarah€Owens€raises€evidentiary€issues€and€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€toÐ (x Ðinstruct€the€jury€on€the€ð ðmissing€witnessðð€rule,€in€conditioning€the€defendantsðð€release€from€custodyÐ d Ðduring€trial€upon€Ms.€Owensðð€withdrawal€of€her€motion€to€sequester€the€jury,€and€in€imposing€anÐ P Ðexcessive€sentence.€We€affirm€all€convictions€and€sentences;€however,€we€order€Sarah€OwensððÐ ì< Ðsentences€to€be€served€concurrently.Ð Ø( ÐÔ#†¼Ce»XX‰¯#ÔÔ‡X‰X»¼CeÔÓ0ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Affirmed€as€Modified.ó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ce»àX‰k #ÔÔ‡X‰X.¼CeÔJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€andÐ ˆØ ÐòòJerry€L.€Smith,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌÔ_ÔRamsdaleÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔOððDeNealÔ_Ô,€Jr.€(for€Johnny€Owens),€Jackson,€Tennessee;€and€Marcus€M.€Reaves€(for€SarahÐ L œ ÐOwens),€Jackson,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellants.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Elizabeth€B.€Ô_ÔMarneyÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð #`" ÐGarry€G.€Brown,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Ô_ÔClayburnÔ_Ô€L.€Ô_ÔPeeplesÔ_Ô,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ ü#L# ÐGeneral,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð è$8 $ ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ce»XX‰3 #ÔÔ‡X‰X»¼CeÔÐ À&"& ÐòòóóÔ#†¼Ce»XX‰>#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X‰X»¼CeÔà0  àÑ€ OYÑÐ (#(# Ðà  àà ` àOn€December€6,€1999,€a€kindergarten€teacher€at€the€Anderson€Early€Childhood€CenterÐ ˜(è#( Ð(Ô_ÔAECCÔ_Ô)€in€Brownsville€noticed€that€one€of€her€students,€Ô_ÔK.J.Ô_Ô,€showed€signs€of€having€a€sore€back.€Ð „)Ô$) ÐThe€teacher€testified€at€trial€that,€upon€examining€Ô_ÔK.J.Ô_Ô,€she€discovered€a€number€of€ð ðlong,€thinÐ p*À%* Ðmarksðð€on€Ô_ÔK.J.Ô_Ôððs€back,€some€of€which€had€bled€and€had€resulted€in€scabs.€€The€assistant€principalÐ \+¬&+ Ðat€Ô_ÔAECCÔ_Ô€testified€that€some€of€the€marks€were€recent.€€Ð H,˜', ÐÐ 4-„(-ý  ÐÔ_Ôà  àà ` àThe€next€day,€December€7,€1999,€after€receiving€a€call€from€AECC,€Renae€Pullen,Ð ° Ða€representative€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services,€went€to€AECC€to€investigateÐ œì Ðthe€suspected€child€abuse.€€She€observed€the€ð ðlinear€injuriesðð€on€K.J.ððs€back€and€called€theÐ ˆØ ÐBrowsville€Police€Department.€€Ms.€Pullen€learned€that€K.J.€was€a€foster€child€who,€along€with€fiveÐ tÄ Ðother€foster€children,€resided€in€the€defendantsðð€home.€€There€were€two€brothers,€L.B.„1€and€L.B.„2,Ð `° Ðand€three€siblings€of€K.J.,€J.J.,€M.J.,€and€S.J.€€S.J.€had€been€adopted€by€the€defendants.€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€a€police€officer€requested€that€the€defendant€Sarah€Owens€go€to€AECC,€Ms.Ð $ t ÐOwens€arrived€at€about€11:00€a.m.€on€December€7.€€Ms.€Pullen€testified€that€Ms.€Owens€said€she€wasÐ  ` Ðunaware€of€the€injuries€to€K.J.€and€had€no€explanation€for€the€injuries.€€Ms.€Owens€told€Ms.€PullenÐ ü L  Ðthat€the€children€were€never€in€the€care€of€anyone€other€than€herself,€the€defendant€Johnny€Owens,Ð è 8  Ðor€Ms.€Owensðð€mother.€€Ms.€Pullen€testified€that€Ms.€Owens€was€very€calm.€€ð ðThere€was€really€noÐ Ô$  Ðexpression,ðð€and€Ms.€Owens€did€not€react€when€Ms.€Pullen€informed€her€that€Ms.€Pullen€was€goingÐ À  Ðto€take€K.J.€to€the€hospital.€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€Ms.€Pullen€transported€K.J.€to€the€hospital€and€while€she€waited€there,€she€wasÐ „Ô  Ðcontacted€by€the€middle„school€resource€officer,€who€indicated€that€L.B.„2€had€been€injured.€€Ms.Ð pÀ ÐPullen€instructed€the€officer€to€bring€L.B.„2€to€the€hospital€and€to€have€L.B.„1,€who€was€a€high€schoolÐ \¬ Ðstudent,€checked€for€injuries.€€Ms.€Pullen€testified€that€both€L.B.„1€and€L.B.„2€had€cerebral€palsy.€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€L.B.„2€arrived€at€the€hospital,€Ms.€Pullen€discovered€linear€marks€on€his€backÐ  p Ðsimilar€to€those€found€on€K.J.,€except€that€L.B.„2's€marks€seemed€more€severe.€€They€were€bleedingÐ  \ Ðand€oozing,€resulting€in€his€shirt€sticking€to€his€back.€€Ms.€Pullen€characterized€the€marks€as€ð ðfreshððÐ øH Ðinjuries.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àà ` àLater€L.B.„2's€older€brother,€L.B.„1,€was€brought€to€the€hospital.€€L.B.„1€had€injuriesÐ ¼  Ðsimilar€to€those€of€his€brother.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àUltimately,€K.J.ððs€siblings,€S.J.€and€J.J.,€were€brought€to€the€hospital.€€According€toÐ €Ð ÐMs.€Pullen,€S.J.€had€ð ðlittle€round€marksðð€on€her€body€and€large€patches€of€bruising€on€her€side,€lowerÐ l¼ Ðback,€and€around€her€neck.€€J.J.€had€some€scars€and€a€fresh€burn€in€his€groin€area.€€€Through€Ms.Ð X ¨ ÐPullen,€the€state€introduced€photographs€of€the€childrenððs€various€injuries€and€scars.€Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àBrownsville€Police€Officer€Joel€Parker€was€dispatched€on€December€7,€1999€to€theÐ #l! Ðdefendantsðð€business,€Owens€Clothing€Store,€to€instruct€Sarah€Owens€to€go€to€AECC€because€of€aÐ $X" Ðð ðsituationðð€with€K.J.€€Ms.€Owens€did€not€noticeably€react€to€the€request€and€drove€her€own€vehicleÐ ô$D # Ðto€AECC.€€Officer€Parker€followed.€€At€AECC,€Ms.€Owens€ð ðnever€showed€any€expressionðð€or€ð ðsignÐ à%0!$ Ðof€emotion.ðð€€Officer€Parker€discerned€no€ð ðsurprise€or€concernðð€in€her€demeanor.€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àà ` àBrownsville€Police€Investigator€Shawn€Williams€was€present€when€Sarah€OwensÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcame€to€AECC.€€He€described€her€demeanor€as€ð ðunconcernedðð€and€testified€that€Ms.€Owens€said€thatÐ )à$( Ðð ðthe€children€were€always€either€with€her€or€her€husband€or€at€the€school€or€sometimes€with€herÐ |*Ì%) Ðmother.ðð€€Ms.€Owens€stated€in€Officer€Williamsðð€presence€that€she€was€unaware€of€any€injuries€toÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€children.€€Officer€Williams€agreed€that€Mr.€Owens€treated€the€child€abuse€allegations€as€a€ð ðbigÐ ° Ðjoke.ðð€Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àAs€a€result€of€the€injuries€to€the€children€discovered€on€December€7,€Assistant€PoliceÐ tÄ ÐChief€Johnny€Blackburn€arrested€defendant€Johnny€Owens€when€he€came€to€AECC€that€afternoon.Ð `° ÐAccompanying€Mr.€Owens€was€M.J.,€a€toddler,€who€was€in€a€child€restraint€seat€in€Mr.€Owensðð€car.€Ð L œ ÐChief€Blackburn€testified€that€Mr.€Owens€denied€knowing€about€any€injuries€to€the€children€and€thatÐ 8 ˆ ÐMr.€Owens€showed€little€concern€about€the€children.€€Mr.€Owens€laughed€about€the€allegations€andÐ $ t Ðappeared€not€to€take€them€seriously.€€€Brownsville€Police€Officer€Mike€Smothers,€who€was€presentÐ  ` Ðwhen€Mr.€Owens€was€arrested,€agreed€that€Mr.€Owens€was€relaxed€and€unconcerned.€€OfficerÐ ü L  ÐSmothers€testified€that€Mr.€Owens€showed€no€remorse€and€treated€the€arrest€ð ðlike€a€big€joke.ðð€€€TheÐ è 8  Ðofficers€noticed€no€sign€of€physical€abuse€on€M.J.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€the€defendants€were€arrested€and€while€they€were€in€custody,€the€police€obtainedÐ ¬ü  Ða€warrant€to€search€the€defendantsðð€residence.€€Inside€the€home,€officers€found€a€stick€wrapped€inÐ ˜è  Ðduct€tape,€an€electric€cord€wrapped€in€duct€tape,€a€metal€rod€affixed€to€a€wooden€handle€with€a€metalÐ „Ô  Ðnut€on€the€rodððs€end,€a€broken€broom€handle,€and€a€rope€with€a€handle€on€each€end€and€a€pulley€inÐ pÀ Ðthe€middle.€€The€metal€rod€and€the€rope€with€the€pulley€were€found€in€the€defendantsðð€bedroom.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àOfficer€Williams€testified€that€some€of€the€wounds€on€the€children€were€linear,€withÐ 4„ Ðthe€marks€ending€in€an€indentation.€These€wounds€were€especially€discernible€on€L.B.„1.€€OfficerÐ  p ÐWilliams€opined€that€these€wounds€were€consistent€with€having€been€inflicted€by€the€metal€rod.€€OnÐ  \ Ðcross„examination,€however,€he€admitted€that€the€indentations€at€the€end€of€linear€marks€were€notÐ øH Ðdiscernible€on€the€photographs€of€L.B.„1.€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àà ` àS.J.€testified€at€trial€(February€28€through€March€2,€2001)€that€she€was€six€years€old.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р¼  ЀShe€testified€that€she€once€lived€with€the€defendants,€along€with€K.J.,€J.J.,€M.J.,€L.B.„1,€and€L.B.„2.€Ð ¨ø ÐShe€testified€that,€on€the€day€she€went€from€school€to€the€hospital,€she€had€ð ð[s]ome€cigarette€burnsÐ ”ä Ðand€some€bruises.ðð€€When€asked€how€she€received€her€injuries,€she€testified€that€ð ðJohnnyðð€andÐ €Ð Ðð ðSarahðð€had€whipped€her€with€a€wooden€paddle€and€a€cord€wrapped€in€duct€tape.€€She€identified€theÐ l¼ Ðtape„wrapped€cord€that€had€been€retrieved€from€the€defendantsðð€home€and€that€had€been€introducedÐ X ¨ Ðinto€evidence€as€the€appliance€that€the€defendants€had€used€to€whip€her.€€€She€testified€that€she€wasÐ D!” Ðin€the€same€room€when€K.J.€was€whipped€and€was€in€the€house€when€ð ðthe€boysðð€were€whipped.€€SheÐ 0"€  Ðheard€them€crying€and€screaming.€€€S.J.€testified€that€she€was€whipped€ten€or€twelve€times€and€thatÐ #l! Ðthe€defendants€would€strip€her€and€the€other€victims€of€their€clothes€before€whipping€them.€€€SheÐ $X" Ðtestified€that€both€the€defendants€whipped€her.€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Joseph€B.€Pierce€testified€by€video€deposition€that€he€was€director€of€theÐ Ì&"% Ðhospital€emergency€room€to€which€the€children€were€brought€in€December€1999.€€Doctor€PierceÐ ¸'#& Ðexamined€each€of€the€children.€€He€testified€that€L.B.„1€had€cerebral€palsy€and,€although€this€child'sÐ ¤(ô#' Ðverbal€communication€was€limited,€he€gave€a€history€of€ð ðmom€beating€him.ðð€€He€exhibited€multipleÐ ° Ðscars€in€the€scalp€that€were€old€and€well€healed,€as€well€as€old€scars€and€new€contusions€on€his€chest.€Ð œì ÐSome€of€the€marks€were€three€to€five€days€old.€€L.B.„1's€back€had€scars€ð ðtoo€numerous€to€count.ððÐ ˆØ ÐSome€were€old,€but€some€appeared€to€be€less€than€a€week€old.€€On€L.B.„1's€legs,€Dr.€Pierce€foundÐ tÄ Ðð ðscars€on€top€of€scars.ðð€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Pierce€testified€that€L.B.„2€,€born€January€26,€1986,€also€had€cerebral€palsy.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐL.B€„2€stated€that€his€ð ðmomðð€had€beaten€him.€€Doctor€Pierce€found€three€areas€of€swelling€on€L.B.„Ð $ t Ð2's€head€and€lacerations€ð ðtoo€numerous€to€countðð€on€his€back.€€His€buttocks€had€multiple€wounds,Ð  ` Ðand€his€lower€left€leg€had€two€linear€marks,€one€old€and€one€ð ðvery€new.ððÐ ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Pierceððs€examination€of€K.J.,€age€seven,€revealed€old€and€new€wounds€on€herÐ Ô$  Ðchest€and€lacerations€on€her€back€that€were€ð ðtoo€numerous€to€count,ðð€with€both€old€and€new€scarÐ À  Ðformation.€€Most€of€the€lacerations€appeared€to€be€72€hours€old.€€She€also€had€old€and€new€scarringÐ ¬ü  Ðon€the€backs€of€her€legs.€€K.J.€told€Dr.€Pierce€that€both€the€defendants€had€beaten€her€on€the€previousÐ ˜è  ÐSunday,€three€or€four€days€before€the€examination.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Pierce€testified€that€S.J.,€who€was€six€years€old,€had€old€scars€ð ðtoo€numerousÐ \¬ Ðto€countðð€on€her€back.€€Some€appeared€to€be€seven€to€ten€days€old.€€Doctor€Pierce€found€round€scarsÐ H˜ Ðon€her€abdomen€and€back€that€appeared€to€be€consistent€with€cigarette€burns.€€€She€had€scars€on€herÐ 4„ Ðlegs.€€He€found€bruising€that€appeared€to€be€seven€to€ten€days€old.€€Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Pierce€testified€that€J.J.€was€four€years€old,€born€July€3,€1995.€€J.J.ððsÐ øH Ðexamination€revealed€that€he€had€numerous€old€scars€on€his€upper€chest€and€back.€€Some€of€the€scarsÐ ä4 Ðon€his€back€appeared€to€be€ten€to€fourteen€days€old.€€His€buttocks€and€the€backs€of€his€thighs€boreÐ Ð  Ðnumerous€scars€and€two€welts€that€appeared€to€be€seven€to€ten€days€old.€€Doctor€Pierce€found€aÐ ¼  Ðwound€lateral€to€the€testes€that€appeared€to€be€a€cigarette€burn.€€The€wound€was€ð ðweeping€and€veryÐ ¨ø Ðfresh.ðð€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Pierce€examined€M.J.,€who€was€two€years€old€and€was€the€youngest€of€theÐ l¼ Ðchildren.€€He€found€no€indication€that€M.J.€had€been€beaten€or€injured.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Pierce€testified€that€he€saw€injuries€on€all€the€children€except€M.J.€which€wereÐ 0"€  Ðconsistent€with€injuries€that€could€result€from€use€of€the€tape„wrapped€electric€cord€and€the€metalÐ #l! Ðrod.€€He€opined€that€the€rope€with€the€pulley€was€an€Ð $X" ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òinstrument€that€is€used€to€basically€take€a€childððs€hands€and€wrapÐ à%0!$ Ðthem€in€such€a€way€that€they€can[]€be€.€.€.€restrained€and€then€they€areÐ Ì&"% Ðusually€pulled€up€either€on€an€instrument€such€as€.€.€.€a€door€so€thatÐ ¸'#& Ðthey€can€be€extended€in€a€complete€fashion€so€that€they€can€be€betterÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbeaten€and€also€unable€to€fight€back.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àWhen€asked€whether€the€injuries€that€he€found€on€five€of€the€children€would€haveÐ ° Ðâ âcaused€ð ðextreme€pain,ðð€Dr.€Pierce€responded,€ð ðAbsolutely.ðð€€Doctor€Pierce€further€opined€that€theÐ œì Ðfive€children€who€bore€scars€and€bruises€had€been€systematically€beaten€over€a€period€of€severalÐ ˆØ Ðmonths.€€He€testified€that,€despite€having€seen€ð ðseveral€hundredðð€cases€of€child€abuse,€€the€victimsððÐ tÄ Ðinjuries€represented€the€worst€child€abuse€he€had€ever€seen.€Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Dr.€Pierce€testified€that€none€of€the€victims€had€any€brokenÐ 8 ˆ Ðbones,€and€he€noticed€no€marks€on€any€of€the€victimsðð€hands.€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€her€defense,€Sarah€Owens€called€as€witnesses€some€of€her€relatives€and€other€long„Ð ü L  Ðstanding€acquaintances.€€These€witnesses€testified€generally€that€they€visited€regularly€in€the€OwensÐ è 8  Ðresidence,€knew€the€victims,€and€observed€that€both€the€victims€and€Ms.€Owens€behaved€in€a€normalÐ Ô$  Ðfashion.€€The€victims€appeared€to€be€happy€and€did€not€appear€to€be€afraid€of€either€of€theÐ À  Ðdefendants.€€Some€of€the€witnesses€opined€that€Ms.€Owens€loved€the€children.€€Ms.€Owensðð€brotherÐ ¬ü  Ðtestified€that€the€victims€minded€Ms.€Owens€well€and€that€she€ð ðhad€them€under€control.ðð€€€Ms.Ð ˜è  ÐOwensðð€sister„in„law€opined€that€the€victims€were€ð ðcrazy€aboutðð€Ms.€Owens.€€€Ms.€Owensðð€sister,Ð „Ô  Ðwho€had€spent€the€weekends€in€the€Owens€house,€testified€that€the€children€played€well€together€andÐ pÀ Ðreacted€to€Ms.€Owens€ð ðlike€a€mother.ðð€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àSarah€Owens€testified€that,€in€1993,€€she€and€Johnny€Owens€completed€foster€parentÐ 4„ Ðpreparation€classes€sanctioned€by€the€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services.€€€In€the€classes,€theyÐ  p Ðlearned€how€to€discipline€foster€children€by€using€ð ðtime€out.ðð€€€She€testified,€ð ðWe€donððt€whip.€€ThatÐ  \ Ðwas€the€no.€1€priority€that€we€went€through€in€the€training.€€The€Department€told€us€not€to€whip€anyÐ øH Ðof€the€children.€€We€werenððt€to€whip€them€no€matter€what€they€did.ðð€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€testified€that€she€and€her€husband€received€L.B.„1€and€L.B.„2€into€theirÐ ¼  Ðhouse€on€June€5,€1995.€€The€boys€already€had€scars,€and€L.B.„2€had€a€print€left€by€a€clothes€iron.€€Ð ¨ø ÐThe€Owens€received€S.J.€in€August€1996€and€ultimately€adopted€her.€€They€received€J.J.,€M.J.,€andÐ ”ä ÐK.J.€in€May€1998.€€J.J.€and€K.J.€had€marks€on€them€when€they€came€to€the€Owens.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€testified€that€L.B.„1€would€bite€himself€when€he€became€frustrated€andÐ X ¨ Ðwould€bite€and€hit€his€brother,€L.B.„2.€€Referring€to€photographs€that€had€been€placed€in€evidence,Ð D!” ÐMs.€Owens€testified€that€all€of€the€marks€on€L.B.„1€were€there€when€he€came€to€the€Owens,€exceptÐ 0"€  Ðfor€marks€on€his€hip€which€he€had€received€when€he€accidentally€fell€into€the€air€conditioning€ventÐ #l! Ðafter€Ms.€Owens€had€removed€the€cover€to€service€the€system.€€She€testified€that€L.B.„1€had€alsoÐ $X" Ðbeen€scratched€while€playing€in€a€pile€of€leaves€and€sticks€around€Thanksgiving€1999.€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€denied€knowing€anything€about€the€broom€handle€or€the€tape„wrappedÐ Ì&"% Ðcord.€€She€denied€using€either€instrument€to€discipline€the€victims€and€denied€seeing€anyone€else€useÐ ¸'#& Ðthem.€€€She€identified€the€rope„pulley€device€as€an€exercise„therapy€device€that€was€medicallyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðprescribed€for€her€use€following€a€car€accident€that€had€temporarily€and€partially€paralyzed€her.€€SheÐ )à$( Ðtestified€that€she€used€the€device€twice€a€day€to€keep€her€ð ðjoint[s]€active.ðð€€She€denied€that€she€everÐ |*Ì%) Ðused€the€device€to€restrain€the€victims.€Ð h+¸&* ÐÑ OYÑâ  âÑ°°Ñâ  âÑ  ÑÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€explained€that€J.J.€was€bruised€as€a€result€of€his€penchant€for€jumpingÐ œì Ðfrom€the€school€bus€when€he€was€let€out€at€home€in€the€afternoons.€€After€jumping€from€the€bus,€heÐ ˆØ Ðwould€roll€down€the€hill.€€She€denied€causing€any€of€the€bruises€on€J.J.€or€seeing€anyone€else€do€so.€Ð tÄ ЀÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€testified€that€she€does€not€smoke€and€has€never€smoked.€€She€opined€thatÐ L œ Ðthe€round€marks€on€S.J.€that€were€identified€by€Dr.€Pierce€as€cigarette€burns€were€actually€scars€leftÐ 8 ˆ Ðfrom€S.J.ððs€previous€ringworm€infection.€€Ms.€Owens€testified€that€she€had€S.J.€treated€for€theÐ $ t Ðinfection.€€Ms.€Owens€also€took€S.J.€to€the€doctor€twice€a€year€to€monitor€her€heart€murmur.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€testified€that€both€S.J.€and€K.J.€had€marks€on€them€when€they€came€to€theÐ è 8  ÐOwens€house.€€Ms.€Owens€admitted€that€K.J.€suffered€a€burn€on€her€back€on€Thanksgiving€Day€1999Ð Ô$  Ðwhen€Ms.€Owens,€who€was€attending€to€K.J.ððs€hair,€accidentally€dropped€a€hot€curling€iron€downÐ À  ÐK.J.ððs€back,€inside€her€robe.€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Ms.€Owens€again€denied€that€she€had€ever€seen€the€tape„Ð „Ô  Ðwrapped€cord€and€opined€that€the€police€had€planted€it€in€her€house€during€the€execution€of€theÐ pÀ Ðsearch€warrant,€which€was€carried€out€while€the€Owens€were€in€jail.€€Ms.€Owens€testified€that€theÐ \¬ Ðschool€principal€was€lying€when€she€said€that€she€asked€Ms.€Owens€how€K.J.€had€received€herÐ H˜ Ðinjuries€and€that€S.J.€was€lying€when€she€said€that€Ms.€Owens€stripped€her€and€whipped€her.€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àà ` àDefendant€Johnny€Owens€called€as€a€witness€Dr.€Gerald€White,€an€experiencedÐ  \ Ðphysician€who€had€treated€the€victims€in€the€past.€€He€treated€S.J.€for€bronchitis€and€noted€a€heartÐ øH Ðmurmur€that€was€probably€congenital.€€In€all,€he€saw€S.J.€34€or€35€times€and€observed€no€injuries€orÐ ä4 Ðany€other€indicia€of€child€abuse.€€On€May€28,€1999,€Dr.€White€treated€L.B.„2€for€bronchitis€and€sawÐ Ð  Ðno€scars€or€other€indicia€of€child€abuse.€€€L.B.„2€had€regular€and€normal€visits€to€Dr.€Whiteððs€office.€Ð ¼  ÐL.B.„1€was€seen€in€Dr.€Whiteððs€office€over€a€span€of€four€years€and€was€last€seen€in€April€1999.€Ð ¨ø ÐDoctor€White€saw€no€bruises€or€other€indicia€of€abuse.€€Doctor€White€also€saw€J.J.,€the€last€time€onÐ ”ä ÐSeptember€20,€1999.€€His€notes€reflected€no€evidence€of€abuse.€€€On€July€1,€1999,€Dr.€WhiteÐ €Ð Ðperformed€a€school€physical€examination€on€K.J.€€€He€found€no€marks€or€other€indicia€of€child€abuse.€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àJohnny€Owens€testified€that€he€was€70€years€of€age€and€had€been€married€to€SarahÐ D!” ÐOwens€for€eight€years.€He€and€Sarah€Owens€underwent€twelve€weeks€of€training€to€become€certifiedÐ 0"€  Ðfoster€parents.€€He€testified€that€S.J.,€K.J.,€M.J.,€and€J.J.€were€ð ðblood€kinðð€to€him.€€He€testified€thatÐ #l! Ðhe€typically€went€to€work€at€3:30€p.m.,€before€the€victims€came€home€from€school,€and€that€theyÐ $X" Ðwould€be€asleep€when€he€returned€from€work.€€He€testified,€ð ðI€didnððt€have€anything€to€do€with€theÐ ô$D # Ðchildren.ðð€€€He€testified€he€had€never€seen€his€wife€whip€the€children.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àHe€identified€the€metal€rod€as€the€handle€of€a€broken€camp€skillet.€€The€Owens€hungÐ ¸'#& Ðit€behind€their€bedroom€door€to€keep€it€away€from€the€children.€€€The€rope„pulley€device€was€onlyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðused€by€Ms.€Owens€to€perform€her€exercises.€€Mr.€Owens€testified€that,€after€his€wife€had€beenÐ )à$( Ðsummoned€to€AECC€on€December€7,€he€went€home.€€He€did€not€dispose€of€any€items€before€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðpolice€searched€the€home.€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àà ` àMr.€Owens€testified,€ð ðI€never€hit€none€of€those€kids€in€that€house.ðð€€€He€deniedÐ ° Ðmaking€any€marks€on€any€of€the€victims€and€denied€burning€any€of€them€with€cigarettes.€€AlthoughÐ œì Ðhe€claimed€that€he€and€his€wife€did€not€allow€smoking€inside€the€house,€he€admitted€that€he€smokes.€Ð ˆØ ÐHe€denied€seeing€anyone€abuse€the€victims.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€cross„examination,€the€state€asked€Mr.€Owens€ð ðabout€how€thereððve€been€eightÐ L œ Ðreferrals€of€you€and€your€wife€since€the€20òòthóó€of€May€of€1996€for€abusing€children?ðð€€Mr.€OwensÐ 8 ˆ Ðreplied€that€the€referrals€related€to€other€foster€children,€not€the€victims€in€the€instant€case.€€Mr.Ð $ t ÐOwens€confirmed€that,€in€response€to€the€referrals,€the€Owensðð€foster€care€privileges€were€suspendedÐ  ` Ðuntil€they€attended€parenting€classes.€€€He€added,€ð ðWe€went€to€see€the€nut€doctor,€too.ðð€€Mr.€OwensÐ ü L  Ðcharacterized€the€requirements€of€classes€and€counseling€as€the€Department€of€Childrenððs€ServicesððÐ è 8  Ðoverreaction€to€a€Department€representative€erroneously€believing€that€a€foster€child€in€the€OwensððÐ Ô$  Ðcare€had€ð ðswitchðð€marks.€€Mr.€Owens€attributed€the€overreaction€to€an€unrelated,€publicized€incidentÐ À  Ðinvolving€a€ð ðdumpster€baby.ððÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€hearing€the€evidence,€the€jury€convicted€Sarah€Owens€of€five€separate€countsÐ „Ô  Ðof€aggravated€child€abuse,€one€count€for€each€of€the€victims,€€L.B.„1,€L.B.„2,€J.J.,€S.J.,€and€K.J.€€TheÐ pÀ Ðjury€acquitted€her€on€the€count€alleging€aggravated€child€abuse€of€M.J.€€The€trial€court€imposedÐ \¬ Ðeight„year,€Class€B€felony,€Department€of€Correction€sentences€on€all€counts,€except€for€the€countÐ H˜ Ðinvolving€J.J.,€on€which€it€imposed€a€twenty„year,€Class€A€sentence€in€the€Department€ofÐ 4„ ÐCorrection.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€ò òó ó€€Two€eight„year€sentences€run€consecutively€to€the€twenty„year€sentence,€and€the€otherÐ  p Ðsentences€run€concurrently€to€the€twenty„year€sentence,€yielding€an€effective€incarcerative€sentenceÐ  \ Ðof€36€years.€Ð øH ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€jury€convicted€Johnny€Owens€only€of€the€aggravated€child€abuse€of€€S.J.€€The€trialÐ Ð  Ðcourt€imposed€an€incarcerative€sentence€of€eight€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àò òI.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidence.Ð ”ä Ðó óÌà  àà ` àBoth€defendants€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence€and€the€failureÐ l¼ Ðof€the€trial€judge€to€grant€a€judgment€of€acquittal.€€€We€group€these€two€appellate€claims€togetherÐ X ¨ Ðbecause€we€apply€the€same€standard€in€reviewing€both€the€denial€of€a€judgment€of€acquittal€and€theÐ D!” Ðsufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€òòSee€State€v.€Priceóó,€46€S.W.3d€785,€818€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð 0"€  Ð2000),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2001).Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àA€criminal€conviction€may€be€set€aside€only€when€the€appellate€court€finds€that€theÐ ô$D # Ðð ðevidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€finding€by€the€trier€of€fact€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€Tenn.Ð à%0!$ ÐR.€App.€P.€13(e).€€ð ðA€jury€verdict,€approved€by€the€trial€court,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theÐ Ì&"% Ðwitnesses€for€the€state€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€stateððs€theory.ðð€òò€Price,€óó46€S.W.3d€atÐ ¸'#& Ð818;€òòsee€State€v.€Hatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€627,€630€(Tenn.€1978).€€Following€the€conviction,€€theÐ ° Ðappellate€court€reviews€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state€and€affords€the€state€theÐ œì Ðbenefit€of€all€inferences€that€may€be€reasonably€drawn€from€the€evidence.€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571Ð ˆØ ÐS.W.2d€832,€836€(Tenn.€1978).€€€This€means€that€issues€of€the€credibility€of€witnesses€and€the€weightÐ tÄ Ðto€be€ascribed€to€their€testimony€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€trier€of€fact€and€are€not€issues€forÐ `° Ðappellate€analysis.€€òòPriceóó,€46€S.W.3d€at€785.Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌà  àà ` àIt€is€well€established€that€a€jury€verdict,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€theÐ $ t Ðtestimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€state€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€state.€Ð  ` ÐòòHatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€at€630;€òòState€v.€Townsendóó,€525€S.W.2d€842,€843€(Tenn.€1975).€€On€appeal,€theÐ ü L  Ðstate€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€or€legitimateÐ è 8  Ðinferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€836.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àMoreover,€a€verdict€against€the€defendant€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€andÐ ¬ü  Ðraises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal,€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973);€òòAnglinòòóóÐ ˜è  Ðóóòòv.€Stateóó,€553€S.W.2d€616,€620€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977),€which€the€defendant€has€the€burden€ofÐ „Ô  Ðovercoming,€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€551€S.W.2d€329,€331€(Tenn.€1977).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àMost€significantly,€when€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevantÐ H˜ Ðquestion€for€an€appellate€court€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÐ 4„ Ðto€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crimeÐ  p Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòóóTenn.€R.€App.€P.€13òò;€Jackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,Ð  \ Ð2782€(1979);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405€(Tenn.€1983).€€This€rule€applies€to€findingsÐ øH Ðbased€on€both€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Thomasóó,€755€S.W.2d€838,€842€(Tenn.Ð ä4 ÐCrim.€App.€1988).€€Circumstantial€evidence€alone€may€be€sufficient€to€convict€one€of€a€crime.€€òòStateÐ Ð  Ðv.€Bolingóó,€840€S.W.2d€944,€947€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àAs€charged€in€the€indictments€in€the€present€case,€aggravated€child€abuse€isÐ ”ä Ðcommitted€by€one€who,€ð ðother€than€by€accidental€means,€treats€a€child€under€eighteen€(18)€years€ofÐ €Ð Ðage€in€such€a€manner€as€to€inflict€injury,ðð€and€ð ðthe€act€of€abuse€.€.€.€results€in€serious€bodily€injuryÐ l¼ Ðto€the€child.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„15„401(a)€(1997)€(proscription€and€definition€of€child€abuse),Ð X ¨ Є402(a)€(1997)€(proscription€and€definition€of€aggravated€child€abuse).€€Aggravated€child€abuseÐ D!” Ðpursuant€to€Code€section€39„15„401(a)€is€a€Class€B€felony,€ð ðprovided,€that,€if€the€abused€.€.€.€childÐ 0"€  Ðis€six€(6)€years€of€age€or€less,€the€penalty€is€a€Class€A€felony.ðð€€òòId.óó€ðð€39„15„402(b)€(1997).€€Our€CodeÐ #l! Ðdefines€ð ðserious€bodily€injuryðð€as€ð ðbodily€injury€which€involves:€(A)€A€substantial€risk€of€death;€(B)Ð $X" ÐProtracted€unconsciousness;€(C)€Extreme€physical€pain;€(D)€Protracted€or€obvious€disfigurement;Ð ô$D # Ðor€(E)€Protracted€loss€or€substantial€impairment€of€a€function€of€a€bodily€member,€organ€or€mentalÐ à%0!$ Ðfaculty.ðð€€òòId.€óóðð€39„11„106(a)(34)€(1997).Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àà ` àEssentially,€the€defendants€support€their€arguments€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€Ð ¤(ô#' Ðby€pointing€to€their€own€testimony€that€they€did€not€whip€or€otherwise€abuse€the€victims,€to€expertÐ )à$( Ðtestimony€that€conflicted€with€the€stateððs€expert,€and€to€circumstances€which,€they€maintain,€supportÐ |*Ì%) Ðinferences€of€an€exculpative€nature.€€For€purposes€of€our€review,€we€analyze€the€sufficiency€of€theÐ h+¸&* Ðevidence€supporting€the€Class€B€felony€convictions€of€both€defendants€separately€from€Sarah€OwensððÐ ° ÐClass€A€felony€conviction€on€count€four.€Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€evidence€presented€to€the€jury€in€this€case€illustrates€that€L.B.„1,€L.B.„2,€S.J.,€€andÐ tÄ ÐK.J.€received€serious€bodily€injuries€in€the€form€of€extremely€painful€physical€injuries.€€TheseÐ `° Ðinjuries€were€the€result€of€beatings€administered€by€one€or€both€of€the€defendants,€as€found€by€theÐ L œ Ðjury.€€With€respect€to€these€victims,€the€elements€of€aggravated€child€abuse€were€established€by€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðevidence.€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€note€that€the€jury,€not€the€appellate€court,€has€the€prerogative€of€choosing€thoseÐ ü L  Ðwitnesses€to€believe€and€of€determining€the€weight€to€be€assigned€to€their€testimony.€€The€jury,€notÐ è 8  Ðthe€appellate€court,€has€the€prerogative€of€drawing€inferences€from€the€evidence.€€As€an€appellateÐ Ô$  Ðcourt,€we€merely€look€at€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€indulging€the€state€theÐ À  Ðbenefit€of€all€reasonable€inferences,€to€determine€whether€any€reasonable€jury€could€have€found€theÐ ¬ü  Ðdefendants€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€After€making€this€examination€as€to€the€Class€BÐ ˜è  Ðfelonies,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€is€sufficient€with€respect€to€both€defendants€to€support€theÐ „Ô  Ðrespective€convictions.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€now€review€Sarah€Owensðð€Class€A€felony€conviction€on€count€four,€which€allegedÐ H˜ Ðher€aggravated€child€abuse€of€J.J.€€The€record€contains€no€direct€evidence€that€Sarah€Owens€activelyÐ 4„ Ðabused€J.J.€€S.J.€testified€that€both€defendants€whipped€her€and€that€she€witnessed€them€whippingÐ  p ÐK.J.€€Also,€K.J.€gave€Dr.€Pierce€a€medical€history€that€included€her€statement€that,€on€the€SundayÐ  \ Ðbefore€the€medical€examination,€both€defendants€had€beaten€her.€€€Additionally,€both€L.B.„1€andÐ øH ÐL.B.„2€gave€Doctor€Pierce€medical€histories€that€reflected€that€their€ð ðmomðð€had€beaten€them.׃&×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€J.J.Ð ä4 Ðprovided€the€doctor€with€no€medical€history€about€the€origin€of€his€injuries.€€The€proof,€€however,Ð Ð  Ðshowed€that,€although€S.J.€had€not€seen€the€ð ðboysðð€being€whipped,€she€had€been€in€the€house€whenÐ ¼  Ðshe€heard€them€crying€and€screaming.€€She€explained€that€the€ð ðboysðð€included€J.J.,€and€she€heardÐ ¨ø ÐSarah€Owens€order€the€boys€to€remove€their€clothes€prior€to€the€whipping.€€Doctor€Pierce€testifiedÐ ”ä Ðthat€the€marks€on€all€five€injured€children€were€similar€and€were€consistent€with€the€instrumentalitiesÐ €Ð Ðseized€from€the€Owens€house.€€Although€the€evidence€on€count€four€is€weaker€than€that€on€the€otherÐ l¼ Ðcounts,€it€does€establish€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€ò òòòóóó óSarah€Owens€committed€the€aggravatedÐ X ¨ Ðabuse€of€J.J.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àThus,€the€convictions€on€all€counts€and€for€both€defendants€are€supported€byÐ #l! Ðsufficient€evidence.ò òÐ $X" Ðó óÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€ò òII.€€Remaining€Issues.ó óÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àBoth€parties€raise€additional€issues,€whetherÐ ¼' #& Ðâ âÐ ¨(ø#' ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ àà  àA.€€The€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€state€toÐ ° Ðâ âexamine€Sarah€Owens€about€her€income;Ð œì ÐÌà ¸ àà  àB.€€The€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€state€toÐ tÄ Ðquestion€Johnny€Owens€about€prior€allegations€of€the€defendantsðð€Ð `° Ðabuse€of€children€who€were€not€the€subject€of€the€instantÐ L œ Ðprosecutions;Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà ¸ àà  àC.€€The€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€instruct€the€juryÐ  ` Ðon€the€ð ðmissing€witnessðð€rule;€andÐ ü L  ÐÌà ¸ àà  àD.€€The€defendants€were€denied€a€fair€trial€because€ofÐ Ô$  Ðcumulative€errors.Ð À  ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒIn€addition€to€these€issues,€€Sarah€Owens€complains€that€Ð ˜è  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ àà  àE.€The€trial€court€erred€in€causing€Sarah€Owens€toÐ pÀ Ðabandon€her€request€to€sequester€the€jury;€andÐ \¬ ÐÌà ¸ àà  àF.€Her€sentence€is€excessive.Ð 4„ ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àà ` àWe€will€consider€in€turn€these€issues€raised€by€defendant€Sarah€Owens,€but€we€areÐ  \ Ðconstrained€to€treat€as€waived€the€appellate€issues€raised€by€defendant€Johnny€Owens.€€His€motionÐ øH Ðfor€new€trial€raised€only€evidence€sufficiency€issues€and€did€not€contain€any€of€the€other€issues€listedÐ ä4 Ðabove.€€It€is€well€settled€that,€following€a€jury€trial,€evidentiary€issues€and€other€ð ðground[s]€uponÐ Ð  Ðwhich€a€new€trial€is€soughtðð€are€waived€unless€they€are€ð ðspecifically€stated€in€a€motion€for€a€newÐ ¼  Ðtrial.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e).€€Because€Johnny€Owens€has€failed€to€include€any€of€the€issues€except€Ð ¨ø Ðsufficiency€of€the€evidence€in€his€motion€for€new€trial,€we€will€not€review€them€in€his€appeal.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€WeÐ ”ä Ðnow€address€the€additional€issues€raised€by€defendant€Sarah€Owens.Ð €Ð ÐÌÓ  Óà @ àà @` à€€€€òòA.€€Admission€of€Evidence€of€Sarah€Owensðð€Income.óó€Ð X ¨ ÐÓkšÓÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€Sarah€Owens€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€state€toÐ 0"€  Ðcross„examine€her€about€her€income€derived€from€providing€foster€care€services.€€The€defendantððsÐ #l! Ðbases€for€excluding€the€evidence€are€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€401€and€402.€òò€Seeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.Ð $X" Ð401€(defining€relevant€evidence€as€ð ðevidence€having€any€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€anyÐ ° Ð[material]€fact€€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidenceðð);€Tenn.€R.Ð œì ÐEvid.€402€(declaring€that€ð ðall€relevant€evidence€is€admissible,ðð€except€as€otherwise€mandated€by€theÐ ˆØ Ðstate€or€federal€constitution€or€other€controlling€law,€and€that€irrelevant€evidence€is€not€admissible).€Ð tÄ ÐEssentially,€she€argues€that€the€evidence€is€not€relevant,€and€she€additionally€posits,€without€citationÐ `° Ðto€authority,€that€the€evidence€was€unfairly€prejudicial.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403€(relevant€evidenceÐ L œ Ðð ðmay€be€excluded€if€its€probative€value€is€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,Ð 8 ˆ Ðconfusion€of€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€juryðð).€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àà ` àDuring€the€stateððs€cross„examination€of€Ms.€Owens,€the€following€exchange€occurred:Ð ü L  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒQ€à0 ¸ àMrs.€Owens,€you€didnððt€just€take€care€of€these€foster€childrenÐ Ô$  Ðout€of€the€goodness€of€your€heart,€did€you,€maððam?ÐÀ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àYes.€€I€did.Ð˜è ¸ x¸ x ÐÌQà0 ¸ àOh,€you€did.€€You€didnððt€receive€anything€from€the€State€ofÐ pÀ ÐTennessee?Ð\¬¸ x¸ x ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` à[Ms.€Owensðð€counsel]:€€Iððm€objecting,€Your€Honor.€.€.€.€€à  àÐ 4„ ÐIrrelevant.Ð p¸ x¸ x ÐÌThe€Court:€€And€what€would€be€relevant?Ð øH ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` à[The€prosecutor]:€€Your€Honor,€in€Counselððs€opening€statement,Ð Ð  ÐCounsel€said€that€her€client€had€to€use€home€remedies€becauseÐ ¼  Ðthey€didnððt€have€much€money.€€And€the€fact€of€the€matter€is,Ð ¨ø Ðthey€had€lots€of€money€and€ð!ðÐ”ä¸ x¸ x ÐÌ[Ms.€Owensðð€counsel]:€Opening€statement€is€not€evidence.Ð l¼ ÐÌThe€Court:€I€know€that.€€I€overrule€the€objection.Ð D!” ÐÌQà0 ¸ àLetððs€just€get€right€to€it,€maððam.€€How€much€money€a€monthÐ #l! Ðdid€you€get€from€the€State€of€Tennessee€while€you€had€theseÐ $X" Ðfive€children€in€your€home?Ðô$D #¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àI€ainððt€even€added€it€up.ÐÌ&"%¸ x¸ x ÐÌQà0 ¸ àOh,€how€about€something€like€$3,300.00€a€month?Ф(ô#'¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àI€really€couldnððt€ð!ðÐ|*Ì%)¸ x¸ x ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà ¸ à.€.€.€.Ð ° ÐÌQà0 ¸ àOh,€you€really€couldnððt.Јظ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àI€really€couldnððt€say.Ð`°¸ x¸ x ÐÌà ¸ à.€.€.€.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌQà0 ¸ àFact€of€the€matter€is,€maððam,€you€.€.€.€lived€pretty€high€offÐ  ` Ðthese€kids,€didnððt€you?Ðü L ¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àNo.ÐÔ$ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌQà0 ¸ àNo.€Tell€me€maððam.€€Just€how€many€inches€wide€is€that€bigÐ ¬ü  Ðscreen€TV€in€your€house?Ð˜è ¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àMy€television€is€60€inches.ÐpÀ¸ x¸ x ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àà ` àThe€decision€to€admit€or€exclude€evidence€lies€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trialÐ H˜ Ðcourt.€€òòState€v.€Edisonóó,€9€S.W.3d€75,€77€(Tenn.€1999);€òòState€v.€Jacksonóó,€52€S.W.3d€661,€669€(Tenn.Ð 4„ ÐCrim.€App.€2001);€òòState€v.€Carrollóó,€36€S.W.3d€854,€867€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999),€òò€perm.€app.Ð  p Ðdeniedóó€(Tenn.€2000).€€Ms.€Owensðð€counsel€stated€in€her€opening€remarks€to€the€jury€that,€althoughÐ  \ ÐMs.€Owens€regularly€took€the€children€to€the€doctor,€ð ðthose€of€you€who€have€children€[know]€youÐ øH Ðuse€home€remedies.€€You€canððt€afford€to€go€to€the€doctor€every€minute€[with]€any€kind€of€injury€youÐ ä4 Ðcan€take€care€of€at€home.ðð€€Regardless€whether€ò òó óthe€defendant€ð ðopened€the€doorðð€by€making€theseÐ Ð  Ðremarks,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€was€within€its€discretion€in€allowing€the€cross„examinationÐ ¼  Ðbecause€it€was€relevant€to€a€material€issue.€€Ms.€Owens€had€presented€proof€that€she€loved€theÐ ¨ø Ðvictims.€€The€stateððs€line€of€questioning€strikes€at€Ms.€Owensðð€altruistic€motives€in€accepting€theÐ ”ä Ðchildren€into€her€home.€€Ultimately,€whether€her€concern€for€the€victimsðð€welfare€was€genuine€wouldÐ €Ð Ðmake€it€more€probable€or€less€probable€that€Ms.€Owens€physically€abused€the€victims.€€Thus,€weÐ l¼ Ðreject€Ms.€Owensðð€claim€that€the€line€of€cross„examination€was€irrelevant.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401,Ð X ¨ Ð402.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àFinally,€we€conclude€that€the€record€supports€a€finding€that€the€probative€value€of€theÐ #l! Ðevidence€is€not€ð ðsubstantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.Ð $X" Ð403.Ð ô$D # Ðà  àà ` à¹Ó  Óà @ à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òòB.€€Admission€of€Evidence€of€AllegationsÐ Ì&"% Ðóó€€€€€€€€€òòà @ àóó€€€€€€€€òòthat€the€Defendants€Abused€Children€Other€Than€the€Victims.óóÐ ¸'#& ÐÓ-±ÓÌà  àà ` àOver€the€defendantsðð€objections,€the€state€cross„examined€Johnny€Owens€about€eightÐ )à$( Ðprevious€allegations€of€child€abuse€that€had€been€received€by€the€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐDuring€the€stateððs€cross„examination€of€Johnny€Owens,€the€following€exchange€occurred:Ð h+¸&* ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌQà0 ¸ àHow€come€it€is€if€[you€never€whipped€the€children],€sir,€thatÐ œì Ðthere€had€been€eight€referrals€to€the€Department€of€ChildrenððsÐ ˆØ ÐServices€ð!ðÐtĸ x¸ x ÐÌ[Ms.€Owensðð€counsel]:€Iððm€going€to€object,€Your€Honor.Ð L œ ÐÌ[The€prosecutor]:€And€could€we€be€graced€with€the€reason€€€Ð $ t Ðà ¸ àfor€this€objection,€Your€Honor?Ð  ` ÐÌ[Court€excuses€the€jury.]Ð è 8  ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` à[The€prosecutor]:€My€question€is,€could€he€explain€why€there€€haveÐ À  Ðbeen€eight€referrals€of€himself€and€Sarah€for€inappropriateÐ ¬ü  Ðdiscipline€òòon€the€five€children€that€were€seen€at€the€hospitalóóÐ ˜è  Ðand€have€ð!ðÐ„Ô ¸ x¸ x ÐÌThe€Court:€Prior€to€December€7,€1999?Ð \¬ ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` à[The€prosecutor]:€Yes,€sir.€.€.€.€[T]hese€people€were€ordered€as€aÐ 4„ Ðresult€of€this€to€attend€parenting€classes€.€.€.€in€March€of€1998Ð  p Ðfor€doing€these€things€to€these€children.Ð \¸ x¸ x ÐÌà ¸ à.€.€.€.Ð ä4 ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` à[Ms.€Owensðð€counsel]:€€He€doesnððt€know€why€anybody€referredÐ ¼  Ðanything.€€Thereððs€no€saying€that€these€were€all€foundedÐ ¨ø Ðallegations.€€These€are€alleged€past€acts€where€DCS€may€haveÐ ”ä Ðgotten€a€call€in€from€somebody.€€[T]here€is€no€probative€valueÐ €Ð Ðon€this€case.Ðl¼¸ x¸ x ÐÌ[Mr.€Owensðð€counsel]:€I€concur.Ð D!” ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` àThe€Court:€All€right.€€Now,€everybody€in€this€courtroomððs€heardÐ #l! Ðabout€the€loving€attention€they€gave€to€òòthese€childrenóó.€€TheyÐ $X" Ðwould€never€whip€them.€.€.€.€[N]obodyððs€ever€touched€thoseÐ ô$D # Ðchildren.€.€.€.€[T]he€state€has€evidence€.€.€.€to€impeach€hi[s]Ð à%0!$ Ðcredibility;€that€[the€state]€has€legitimate€complaints€by€theÐ Ì&"% ÐDepartment€of€[Childrenððs]€Services€where€he€or€his€wife€mayÐ ¸'#& Ðhave€mistreated€òòthese€childrenóó€before€December€7,€1999?Ф(ô#'¸ x¸ x ÐÌ[The€prosecutor]:€Yes,€Your€Honor.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* ÐThe€Court:€Okay,€you€have€evidence€to€that€extent?Ð ° ÐÌ[The€prosecutor]:€In€my€hand,€Your€Honor.€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà ¸ à.€.€.€.Ð `° ÐÌà0 ¸ àà ` àà0¸ ¸ x¸ xàà ` àThe€Court:€€ð!ð€evidence€that€they€may€have€been€referred€on€pastÐ 8 ˆ Ðdisciplinary€problems€of€òòthe€childrenóó,€the€jury€is€entitled€toÐ $ t Ðhear€it.€€So,€Iððll€overrule€the€objection.€€€.€.€.€€€Youððre€welcomeÐ  ` Ðto€see€it.€€Ðü L ¸ x¸ x ÐÌ[Counsel€for€both€defendants€review€the€stateððs€documents,€which€areÐ Ô$  Ðnot€made€exhibits.€€The€jury€returns,€and€the€cross„examination€ofÐ À  ÐMr.€Owens€continues.]Ð ¬ü  ÐÌQ€à0 ¸ àDo€you€want€to€explain€about€how€thereððve€been€eightÐ „Ô  Ðreferrals€of€you€and€your€wife€since€the€20òòthóó€day€of€May€ofÐ pÀ Ð1996€for€abusing€children?Ð\¬¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àI€canððt€explain,€but€it€wasnððt€from€abusing€those€children.Ð4„¸ x¸ x ÐÌà ¸ àÌà ¸ à.€.€.€.Ð øH ÐÌQà0 ¸ àWho€is€B[]€Jackson?ÐÐ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àThat€was€some€kids€we€had€before€them.Шø¸ x¸ x ÐÌQà0 ¸ àThatððs€one€of€the€ones€you€abused€back€then,€wasnððt€it?Ѐи x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àOh,€no.€€No.€We€ð!ðÐX ¨¸ x¸ x ÐÌQà0 ¸ àOh,€no.€€It€wasnððt€him.€€How€about€J[]€Jackson?€Was€he€oneÐ 0"€  Ðof€the€ones€you€abused?Ð#l!¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àNo.€€I€never€ð!ðÐô$D #¸ x¸ x ÐÌ[Mr.€Owensðð€counsel]:€I€object€to€.€.€.€the€line€of€questioning€Ð Ì&"% Ðà ¸ àas€being€argumentative.€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌThe€Court:€[A]sk€specific€questions€and€give€Mr.€Owens€an€Ð )à$( Ðà ¸ àopportunity€to€answer€them€.€.€.€.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* ÐQà0 ¸ àWhen€B[]€Jackson€.€.€.€had€switch€marks€on€his€back,€how€didÐ ° Ðyou€manage€to€explain€that€one€away?Ðœì¸ x¸ x ÐÌAà0 ¸ àHe€didnððt€have€ððem€on€there€by€me.€Ðtĸ x¸ x ÐÌQà ¸ àOkay,€so€if€the€reports€of€the€CPS€[sic]€say€that€he€had€Ð L œ Ðà ¸ àswitch€marks€on€his€back,€thatððs€another€lie€in€this€Ð 8 ˆ Ðà ¸ àmassive€conspiracy€against€you.Ð $ t ÐÌAà0 ¸ àEvidently€it€was€.€.€.€.Ðü L ¸ x¸ x ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)Ð Ô$  ÐÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àÌà  àInitially,€we€note€that€the€stateððs€purpose€in€proposing€the€cross„examination€was€to€impeachÐ ¬ü  ÐMr.€Owensðð€claims€that€he€had€not€whipped€the€victims.€€It€is€obvious€from€the€transcript€excerptÐ ˜è  Ðthat,€during€the€cross„examination€of€Mr.€Owens,€the€state€jumped€track€and€began€to€inquire€aboutÐ „Ô  Ðthe€abuse€of€children€other€than€the€victims€in€the€present€case.€€Although€Ms.€Owens€objected€toÐ pÀ Ðthe€use€of€the€eight€referrals€that€were€described€by€the€prosecutor€as€showing€abuse€of€the€victimsÐ \¬ Ðin€the€present€case,€she€did€not€object€to€the€shift€in€questioning€that€elicited€answers€from€Mr.Ð H˜ ÐOwens€about€the€abuse€of€the€Jackson€children.€€However,€in€her€motion€for€new€trial€and€in€herÐ 4„ Ðappellate€brief,€Ms.€Owens€complains€only€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€this€latter€line€ofÐ  p Ðquestioning.€€She€relies€in€her€appellate€brief€upon€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€608,€which€providesÐ  \ Ðin€part:Ð øH ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ àà  à(a)€Opinion€and€Reputation€Evidence€of€Character.€Ð Ð  ÐThe€credibility€of€a€witness€may€be€attacked€or€supported€by€evidenceÐ ¼  Ðin€the€form€of€opinion€or€reputation,€but€subject€to€these€limitations:Ð ¨ø Ð(1)€the€evidence€may€refer€only€to€character€for€truthfulness€orÐ ”ä Ðuntruthfulness,€and€(2)€the€evidence€of€truthful€character€is€admissibleÐ €Ð Ðonly€after€the€character€of€the€witness€for€truthfulness€has€beenÐ l¼ Ðattacked.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà ¸ àà  à(b)€Specific€Instances€of€Conduct.€€Specific€instancesÐ 0"€  Ðof€conduct€of€a€witness€for€the€purpose€of€attacking€or€supporting€theÐ #l! Ðwitnessððs€credibility,€other€than€convictions€of€crime€as€provided€inÐ $X" ÐRule€609,€may€not€be€proved€by€extrinsic€evidence.€€They€may,Ð ô$D # Ðhowever,€if€probative€of€truthfulness€or€untruthfulness€and€under€theÐ à%0!$ Ðfollowing€conditions,€be€inquired€into€on€cross„examination€of€theÐ Ì&"% Ðwitness€concerning€the€witnessððs€character€for€truthfulness€orÐ ¸'#& Ðuntruthfulness€or€concerning€the€character€for€truthfulness€orÐ ¤(ô#' Ðuntruthfulness€of€another€witness€as€to€which€the€character€witnessÐ )à$( Ðâ âbeing€cross„examined€has€testified.€€The€conditions€which€must€beÐ |*Ì%) Ðsatisfied€before€allowing€inquiry€on€cross„examination€òòabout€suchÐ ° Ðconduct€probative€solely€of€truthfulness€or€untruthfulnessóó€are:Ð œì Ðâ âÌà ¸ à(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outside€theÐ tÄ Ðjuryððs€presence€and€must€determine€that€the€alleged€conduct€hasÐ `° Ðprobative€value€and€that€a€reasonable€factual€basis€exists€for€theÐ L œ Ðinquiry;Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà ¸ à.€.€.€.€Ð  ` ÐÌà ¸ à(3)€If€the€witness€to€be€impeached€is€the€accused€in€a€criminalÐ è 8  Ðprosecution,€the€State€must€give€the€accused€reasonable€written€noticeÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€impeaching€conduct€before€trial,€and€the€court€upon€requestÐ À  Ðmust€determine€that€the€conductððs€probative€value€on€credibilityÐ ¬ü  Ðoutweighs€its€unfair€prejudicial€effect€on€the€substantive€issues.€€TheÐ ˜è  Ðcourt€may€rule€on€the€admissibility€of€such€proof€prior€to€the€trial€butÐ „Ô  Ðin€any€event€shall€rule€prior€to€the€testimony€of€the€accused.€€If€theÐ pÀ Ðcourt€makes€a€final€determination€that€such€proof€is€admissible€forÐ \¬ Ðimpeachment€purposes,€the€accused€need€not€actually€testify€at€theÐ H˜ Ðtrial€to€later€challenge€the€propriety€of€the€determination.Ð 4„ ÐÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒÌTenn.€R.€Evid.€608€(emphasis€added).€Ð  \ ÐÌò òó óà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€complains€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€comply€with€the€requirements€ofÐ ä4 ÐRule€608(b)(3).€€We€conclude,€however,€that€the€defendantððs€reliance€upon€Rule€of€Evidence€608Ð Ð  Ðis€misplaced.€€To€be€sure,€the€state€initially€offered€the€evidence€of€the€child€abuse€referrals€as€aÐ ¼  Ðmeans€of€impeaching€Johnny€Owens,€but€the€evidence€relating€to€possible€acts€of€child€abuse€is€not,Ð ¨ø Ðas€such,€ð ðprobative€solely€of€truthfulness€or€untruthfulness,ðð€as€required€by€Rule€608(b)€as€a€meansÐ ”ä Ðof€using€specific€instances€of€conduct€to€impeach€a€witness.€€òòSee€óóTenn.€R.€Evid.€608(b).€€In€otherÐ €Ð Ðwords,€the€specific€instances€of€the€defendant„witnessððs€conduct€are€not€suggestive€of€credibility€asÐ l¼ Ðwould€be€the€case€had€a€witness,€for€instance,€previously€lied€on€an€employment€application€orÐ X ¨ Ðmisrepresented€a€loss€on€an€insurance€proof„of„loss€form.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€the€proceduralÐ D!” Ðrequirements€of€Rule€608€were€not€implicated.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àà ` àRather,€the€true€nature€of€the€stateððs€use€of€the€child€abuse€referrals€was€to€impeachÐ $X" ÐJohnny€Owens€through€fact€contradiction,€a€device€that€is€recognized€by€our€courts.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€StateÐ ô$D # Ðv.€McKinneyóó,€74€S.W.3d€291,€317€(Tenn.€2002)€(appendix).€€Through€fact€contradiction,€a€cross„Ð à%0!$ Ðexamining€party€inquires€about€facts€that€conflict€with€the€witnessððs€testimony€to€show€indirectly€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€witness€is€untruthful.€€Neil€P.€Cohen€òòetóó€òòal.óó,€Tennessee€Law€of€Evidence€ðð€6.07€[4][b]€(4òòthóó€ed.Ð ¸'#& Ð2000).€€In€the€present€case,€the€state€proposed€to€use€the€evidence€of€the€child€abuse€referrals€as€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmeans€of€contradicting€the€witnessððs€assertions€that€he€and€his€wife€loved€the€victims€and€did€notÐ )à$( Ðwhip€them.€€Obviously,€based€upon€his€comments,€the€trial€judge€accepted€the€stateððs€fact„Ð |*Ì%) Ðcontradiction€rationale€for€impeaching€the€witness.€€Ð h+¸&* Ðòòóóò òÓ  Óó óÌÓ  Óà  àà ` àThat€said,€Ms.€Owens€on€appeal€does€not€challenge€the€propriety€of€allowing€the€stateÐ œì Ðto€cross„examine€Mr.€Owens€about€the€prior€allegations€of€abuse€of€the€victims€in€the€present€case.€Ð ˆØ ÐRather,€she€challenges€only€the€stateððs€cross„examination€of€Johnny€Owens€about€the€defendantsððÐ tÄ Ðalleged€abuse€of€B[]€and€J[]€€Jackson.€€Because€the€premise€of€the€impeachment€was€described€byÐ `° Ðthe€state€as€contradicting€Mr.€Owensðð€claim€that€he€loved€the€victims€and€that€he€did€not€whip€them,Ð L œ Ðit€can€hardly€be€said€that€allegations€that€he€had€whipped€either€or€both€of€the€Jackson€childrenÐ 8 ˆ Ðcontradicts€the€witnessððs€claims€of€affinity€for€the€victims€in€the€present€case.€€The€upshot€is€that€theÐ $ t Ðallegations€concerning€the€Jackson€children€served€no€impeachment€purpose€at€all.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àThus,€impeachment€is€not€an€apt€basis€for€using€the€evidence€of€the€abuse€of€theÐ è 8  ÐJackson€children.€€Although€we€agree€with€Ms.€Owensðð€position€that€the€evidence€was€not€admissibleÐ Ô$  Ðas€impeachment€evidence,€it€behooves€Ms.€Owens€as€the€opponent€of€the€evidence€and€the€appellantÐ À  Ðbefore€this€court€to€illustrate€why€the€evidence€is€òòotherwise€inadmissibleóó.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€Kim€v.€Boucheróó,Ð ¬ü  Ð55€S.W.3d€551,€555€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001)€(trial€court€has€wide€discretion€in€admitting€or€rejectingÐ ˜è  Ðevidence€and€ð ðwill€be€reversed€òòon€appeal€only€when€there€is€a€showing€óóof€an€abuse€of€discretionðð)Ð „Ô  Ð(emphasis€added).€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€this€vein,€we€recognize€that€the€questions€concerning€the€Jackson€children€elicitÐ H˜ Ðevidence€of€prior€bad€acts€that€tend€to€show€the€actorððs€propensity€on€a€specific€occasion.€€We€knowÐ 4„ Ðthat€our€Rule€of€Evidence€404(b)€generally€prohibits€the€use€of€such€propensity€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð  p ÐR.€Evid.€404(b);€òòsee€also€State€v.€McCaryóó,€922€S.W.2d€511,€514€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Rickmanóó,€876Ð  \ ÐS.W.2d€824,€828€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€problem€with€employing€a€Rule€404(b)€analysis€at€this€junctureÐ øH Ðis€that€neither€defendant€objected€to€the€ð ðJacksonðð€line€of€cross„examination,€and€Ms.€Owensðð€earlierÐ ä4 Ðobjection€was€not€on€the€grounds€of€Rule€404(b).€òò€See,€e.g.,€óóTenn.€R.€Evid.€103(a)€(error€may€not€beÐ Ð  Ðpredicated€upon€an€evidentiary€ruling€without€a€timely€objection€that€specifically€states€the€groundÐ ¼  Ðof€objection);€òòState€v.€Korsakovóó,€34€S.W.3d€534,€545€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000)€(defendant€may€notÐ ¨ø Ðbase€an€objection€to€the€admission€of€evidence€on€one€ground€at€trial€and€ð ðthen€base€his€argumentÐ ”ä Ðon€another€ground,€such€as€the€violation€of€Rule€404(b),€Tenn.€R.€Evid.,€on€appealðð).€€Thus,€theÐ €Ð Ðpossible€error€in€allowing€the€line€of€cross„examination€will€not€be€noticed€by€this€court€unless€itÐ l¼ Ðqualifies€as€plain€error.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€consider€several€factors€to€determine€when€to€notice€plain€error:Ð 0"€  ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌ(a)€[T]he€record€must€clearly€establish€what€occurred€in€the€trialÐ $X" Ðcourt;Ð ô$D # ÐÌ(b)€a€clear€and€unequivocal€rule€of€law€must€have€been€breached;€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌ(c)€a€substantial€right€of€the€accused€must€have€been€adverselyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðaffected;Ð )à$( ÐÌ(d)€the€accused€did€not€waive€the€issue€for€tactical€reasons;€andÐ h+¸&* Ї(e)€consideration€of€the€error€is€ð ðnecessary€to€do€substantial€justice.ððÐ ° ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòState€v.€Smithóó,€24€S.W.3d€274,€282€(Tenn.€2000)€(approving€factors€set€forth€in€òòState€v.€Adkissonóó,Ð ˆØ Ð899€S.W.2d€626,€641„42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)).€€Our€supreme€court€emphasizes€that€ð ðall€fiveÐ tÄ Ðfactors€must€be€established€by€the€record€before€[the€supreme€court]€will€recognize€the€existence€ofÐ `° Ðplain€error.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€283.€€Moreover,€ð ðcomplete€consideration€of€all€the€factors€is€not€necessary€whenÐ L œ Ðit€is€clear€from€the€record€that€at€least€one€of€the€factors€cannot€be€established.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€conclude€that€we€are€not€presented€with€a€case€in€which€we€are€compelled€toÐ  ` Ðnotice€plain€error.€€Because€Ms.€Owens€did€not€base€an€objection€on€Rule€404(b)€and€did€not€requestÐ ü L  Ða€hearing€on€that€basis,€òòseeóóTenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b)(1),€the€trial€court€did€not€ð ðdetermine€[whether]€aÐ è 8  Ðmaterial€issue€exist[ed]€other€than€conduct€conforming€with€a€character€traitðð€that€would€haveÐ Ô$  Ðsupported€the€use€of€the€evidence,€and€if€so,€it€did€not€determine€whether€the€probative€value€of€theÐ À  Ðevidence€was€outweighed€by€the€ð ðdanger€of€unfair€prejudice.ðð€€òòSee€óóTenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b)(2),€(3).€Ð ¬ü  ÐMoreover,€not€only€did€the€state€not€have€an€opportunity€to€argue€or€show€that€the€evidence€wasÐ ˜è  Ðadmissible€for€ð ðother€purposesðð€than€propensity,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b),€it€was€not€called€uponÐ „Ô  Ðto€address€the€issue€in€its€appellate€brief.€€Furthermore,€we€cannot€tell€whether,€as€a€condition€toÐ pÀ Ðadmissibility,€the€state€could€have€shown€that€ð ða€reasonable€factual€basisðð€existed€for€making€theÐ \¬ Ðinquiry€about€the€abuse€of€the€Jackson€children.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Rule€Evid.€405(a)(2).€The€stateððsÐ H˜ Ðdocuments,€which€may€have€been€the€basis€for€the€inquiry,€were€not€proffered€for€record€purposes,Ð 4„ Ðdespite€being€reviewed€by€counsel€for€the€defendants.€€Thus,€we€are€hampered€by€the€recordððs€failureÐ  p Ðto€clearly€establish€what€occurred€in€the€trial€court€and€by€the€inability€to€discern€that€a€clear€andÐ  \ Ðunequivocal€rule€of€law€was€necessarily€breached.€€òòSee€Smithóó,€24€S.W.3d€at€282.Ð øH ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€conclusion,€we€find€no€plain€error€with€respect€to€the€stateððs€cross„examination€ofÐ Ð  ÐJohnny€Owens.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€her€brief€under€the€heading€that€the€trial€court€committed€error€in€admittingÐ ”ä Ðevidence€of€allegations€of€the€abuse€of€the€Jackson€children,€Ms.€Owens€argued€that€the€prosecutorÐ €Ð Ðwas€guilty€of€misconduct€in€asking€Mr.€Owens€about€the€Jackson€children.€€We€have€not€consideredÐ l¼ Ðthis€issue;€it€was€not€raised€in€Ms.€Owensðð€motion€for€new€trial.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e)Ð X ¨ Ð(providing€for€the€waiver€of€certain€issues€not€presented€in€a€motion€for€new€trial).Ð D!” ÐÌÓ  ÓòòC.€€The€Trial€Courtððs€Failure€to€Instruct€the€Jury€on€theÐ #l! Ðð ðMissing€Witnessðð€Rule.Ð $X" ÐÌÓ  Óóóà0  àà ` àThe€defendant€Sarah€Owens€is€aggrieved€that€the€trial€court,€in€response€to€herÐà%0!$(#(# Ðmotion,€declined€to€instruct€the€jury€that€the€failure€of€L.B.„1,€L.B.„2,€K.J.,€and€J.J.€to€testify€at€trialÐ Ì&"% Ðwarranted€invocation€of€the€ð ðmissing€witnessðð€rule.Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àà ` àÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒUnder€the€missing€witness€rule,€a€party€is€entitled€to€argue,€and€haveÐ )à$( Ðthe€jury€instructed,€that€if€the€other€party€has€it€peculiarly€within€hisÐ |*Ì%) Ðpower€to€produce€a€witness€whose€testimony€would€naturally€beÐ h+¸&* Ðfavorable€to€him,€the€failure€to€call€that€witness€creates€an€adverseÐ ° Ðinference€that€the€testimony€would€not€favor€his€contentions.€Ð œì ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòState€v.€Middlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€317,€334€(Tenn.€1992)€(citòòóóation€omitted).€€The€rule€does€notÐ tÄ Ðapply€unless€the€evidence€shows€that€ð ðthe€witness€had€knowledge€of€material€facts,€that€aÐ `° Ðrelationship€exists€between€the€witness€and€the€party€that€would€naturally€incline€the€witness€to€favorÐ L œ Ðthe€party€and€that€the€missing€witness€was€available€to€the€process€of€the€Court€for€trial.ðð€€òòId.Ð 8 ˆ Ðóó(quoting€òòDelk€v.€Stateóó,€590€S.W.2d€435,€449€(Tenn.€1979)).€€The€missing€witness€rule€is€predicatedÐ $ t Ðupon€the€idea€that€the€missing€witness,€ð ðif€produced,€would€have€made€an€intelligent€statement€aboutÐ  ` Ðwhat€was€observed.ðð€€òòDickey€v.€McCordóó,€63€S.W.3d€714,€722€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001)€(quoting€òòStateÐ ü L  Ðv.€Francisóó,€669€S.W.2d€85,€89€(Tenn.€1984)).€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€requirement€of€unavailability€of€the€missing€witness€means€not€only€that€the€Ð À  Ðwitness€was€ð ðnot€within€the€subpoena€power€of€the€trial€court,ðð€òòState€v.€Philpottóó,€882€S.W.2d€394,Ð ¬ü  Ð407€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994),€but€also€that€the€witness€ð ðmust€not€have€been€equally€available€to€bothÐ ˜è  Ðparties.ðð€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€867€S.W.2d€330,€337€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)€(police€officer€being€ð ðunderÐ „Ô  Ðthe€control€of€the€prosecutionðð€deemed€insufficient€to€qualify€the€absent€officer€as€a€missing€witnessÐ pÀ Ðin€the€absence€of€evidence€(1)€that€the€state€attempted€to€conceal€his€existence,€(2)€that€defenseÐ \¬ Ðcounsel€sought€to€interview€the€officer,€and€(3)€that€the€officer€would€have€refused€to€be€interviewedÐ H˜ Ðby€defense€counsel€had€he€been€approached).€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  à€à0 ` àBefore€the€missing€witness€rule€may€be€invoked,€not€only€must€the€missing€witness€Ð \` (#` (# Ðhave€been€peculiarly€available€to€the€claiming€party,€but€also€the€witness€must€have€ð ðpeculiarÐ øH Ðknowledge€of€material€facts.ðð€€òòBoydóó,€867€S.W.2d€at€337;€òòsee€also€State€v.€Eldridgeóó,€749€S.W.2d€756,Ð ä4 Ð758€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€ð ðððNo€[]€inference€arises€where€the€only€object€of€calling€such€witnessÐ Ð  Ðwould€be€to€produce€corroborative,€cumulative,€or€possibly€unnecessary€evidence€.€.€.€.ðððð€€òòDickeyóó,Ð ¼  Ð63€S.W.3d€at€721€(quoting€òòStevens€v.€Mooreóó,€24€Tenn.€App.€61,€139€S.W.2d€710,€717€(1940)).€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€burden€to€establish€the€aptness€of€the€missing€witness€jury€instruction€lies€withÐ €Ð Ðthe€claimant.€€òòSee€State€v.€Thompsonóó,€768€S.W.2d€239,€250€(Tenn.€1989).€€Our€courts€have€stressedÐ l¼ Ðthat,€when€a€claimant€establishes€entitlement€to€the€missing€witness€jury€instruction,€the€result€is€notÐ X ¨ Ða€presumption€that€the€missing€witness€would€have€testified€favorably€to€the€claimant;€rather,€aÐ D!” Ðpermissive€inference€to€that€effect€is€created.€€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€334.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€moved€the€court€to€instruct€the€jury€via€Tennessee€Pattern€Instruction€„€Ð $X" ÐCriminal€42.16,€which€provides:Ð ô$D # ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒWhen€it€is€within€the€power€of€the€state€or€the€defendant€to€produceÐ Ì&"% Ða€witness€who€possesses€peculiar€knowledge€concerning€factsÐ ¸'#& Ðessential€to€that€partyððs€contentions€and€who€is€available€to€one€sideÐ ¤(ô#' Ðat€the€exclusion€of€the€other,€and€the€party€to€whom€the€witness€isÐ )à$( Ðavailable€fails€to€call€such€witness,€an€inference€arises€that€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðtestimony€of€such€witness€would€have€been€unfavorable€to€the€sideÐ h+¸&* Ðthat€should€have€called€or€produced€such€witness.€€Whether€there€wasÐ ° Ðsuch€a€witness€and€whether€such€an€inference€has€arisen€is€for€you€toÐ œì Ðdecide€and€if€so,€you€are€to€determine€what€weight€it€shall€be€given.Ð ˆØ ÐÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒÌCommittee€on€Pattern€Jury€Instruction€(Criminal),€Tennessee€Pattern€Jury€Instructions€„€CriminalÐ `° Ð42.16€(6òòthóó€ed.€2001).€€Although€the€prosecutor€responded€to€the€motion€by€orally€informing€the€trialÐ L œ Ðcourt€that€the€absent€victims€had€been€placed€in€Indiana€and€that€the€State€of€Indiana€had€refused€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðhonor€the€trial€courtððs€subpoenas€to€have€those€victims€appear€at€trial,€no€evidence€was€introducedÐ $ t Ðto€show€the€whereabouts€of€the€absent€victims€or€to€corroborate€the€prosecutorððs€claim€that€IndianaÐ  ` Ðwould€not€honor€the€trial€courtððs€subpoenas.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€perceive€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€give€Pattern€Instruction€42.16.€€TheÐ Ô$  Ðburden€rested€upon€Ms.€Owens€to€establish€the€threshold€requirements€for€invoking€the€missingÐ À  Ðwitness€rule.€€One€of€the€requirements€is€that€the€missing€witnesses€must€be€available€by€beingÐ ¬ü  Ðsubject€to€the€service€of€process.€€òòMiddlebrooksóó,€840€S.W.2d€at€334.€€Ms.€Owens€failed€to€establishÐ ˜è  Ðthe€availability€of€the€absent€victims.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Thus,€her€claim€of€entitlement€to€the€missing€witnessÐ „Ô  Ðinstruction€fails.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓD.€€Denial€of€Fair€Trial€Through€Cumulative€Error.Ð H˜ ÐÌóóÓ  Óà0  àà0` (#(#àThe€defendant€Sarah€Owens€argues€that€the€cumulative€effect€of€trial€court€errors€Ð p` (#` (# Ðdeprived€her€of€a€fair€trial;€however,€we€have€identified€no€error.€€Therefore,€we€find€no€errors€whichÐ  \ Ðcan€be€considered€cumulative.Ð øH ÐÌÓ  ÓòòE.€€Trial€Courtððs€Error€in€Causing€Sarah€Owens€to€Abandon€HerÐ Ð  ÐRequest€to€Sequester€the€Jury.Ð ¼  ÐÌóóÓ  Óà0  àà ` àPrior€to€trial,€Sarah€Owens€moved€the€trial€court€to€sequester€the€trial€jury.€€The€trialДä(#(# Ðjudge€responded€by€informing€Ms.€Owensðð€counsel€of€his€practice€governing€a€motion€to€sequester€Ð €Ð Ðmade€by€a€defendant€who€is€free€upon€bail€during€trial.׃ t×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Essentially,€the€court€told€counsel€that€itÐ l¼ Ðwould€grant€the€motion€to€sequester€the€jury€only€if€the€defendants€are€confined€during€the€pendencyÐ X ¨ Ðof€the€trial.€€The€trial€judge€said,€ð ðOver€my€years€of€sitting€on€the€bench€jurors€donððt€like€to€beÐ D!” Ðsequestered€and€watch€defendants€walk€out€of€the€courtroom.€€It€can€have€a€devastating€effect€onÐ ° Ðwhether€or€not€an€individual€gets€a€fair€trial.ðð€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€did€not€òòper€seóódeny€theÐ œì Ðmotion.€€Following€the€trial€judgeððs€explanation€of€his€practice,€her€counsel€objected€that€the€courtððsÐ ˆØ Ðtactics€were€unconstitutional.€€Nonetheless,€Ms.€Owens€withdrew€her€motion,€albeit€under€protest.€Ð tÄ ЀShe€now€raises€the€issue€on€appeal.Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àSequestration€of€a€trial€jury€in€a€criminal€case€has€been€recognized€as€a€right€of€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðcriminal€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Furloughóó,€797€S.W.2d€631,€644€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990)Ð $ t Ð(ð ðHistorically,€both€the€state€and€federal€constitutions€required€sequestration€of€juries.ðð);€òòseeÐ  ` ÐalsoóóTenn.€Const.€art€I,€ðððð€6,€8,€9;€òòLong€v.€Stateóó,€132€Tenn.€649,€179€S.W.€315€(1915).€€€ð ð[T]heÐ ü L  Ðpurpose€of€the€rule€ð!ð€to€preserve€a€defendantððs€right€to€a€fair€trial€and€impartial€jury€by€protectingÐ è 8  Ðjurors€from€outside€influences€so€that€the€verdict€will€be€based€only€upon€evidence€developed€at€trialÐ Ô$  Ðð!ð€is€perhaps€more€important€in€the€modern€age,€considering€the€pervasiveness€of€media€coverage€andÐ À  Ðpublicity.ðð€€òòState€v.€Bondurantóó,€4€S.W.3d€662,€671€(Tenn.€1999).Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` à€€òòóóThis€court€has€held€that,€when€the€defendant€did€not€waive€his€right€to€a€sequesteredÐ „Ô  Ðjury€and€the€trial€court€nevertheless€refused€to€sequester€the€jury,€an€ð ðaffirmative€burdenðð€rested€uponÐ pÀ Ðthe€state€to€show€that€ð ðno€prejudice€actually€occurred€in€order€to€permit€harmless€error€analysis.ðð€Ð \¬ ÐòòFurloughóó,€797€S.W.2dòò.óó€at€645;€€òòsee€alsoóó€òòGonzales€v.€Stateóó,€593€S.W.2d€288,€291€(Tenn.€1980).€€InÐ H˜ ÐòòFurloughóó,€the€court€relied€upon€a€statute€which€provided€for€the€waiver€of€the€right:Ð 4„ ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒIn€all€criminal€prosecutions€except€those€in€which€a€death€sentenceÐ  \ Ðmay€be€rendered,€the€judge€of€the€criminal€court€may,€in€hisÐ øH Ðdiscretion,€with€the€consent€of€the€defendant,€and€with€the€consent€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€district€attorney€general,€permit€the€jurors€to€separate€at€timesÐ Ð  Ðwhen€they€are€not€engaged€upon€the€actual€trial€or€deliberation€of€theÐ ¼  Ðcase.Ð ¨ø ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„18„116€(1990)€(amended€Acts€1995,€ch.€43,€ðð€1).€€In€1995,€however,€theÐ €Ð Ðlegislature€modified€this€statute€to€read€as€follows:Ð l¼ ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒIn€all€criminal€prosecutions,€except€those€in€which€a€death€sentenceÐ D!” Ðmay€be€rendered,€jurors€òòshall€only€be€sequestered€on€the€judgeððsÐ 0"€  Ðmotion€or€on€the€motion€of€the€counsel€for€the€defendant€or€theÐ #l! Ðdistrict€attorney€generalóó,€which€shall€prohibit€the€jurors€fromÐ $X" Ðseparating€at€times€when€they€are€not€engaged€upon€the€actual€trial€orÐ ô$D # Ðdeliberation€of€the€case.€€The€party€making€the€motion€to€sequesterÐ à%0!$ Ðshall€be€unknown€to€the€jury.€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòId.€óóðð€40„18„116€(1997)€(emphasis€added).€€Although€the€new€statute€does€not€òòper€seóó€alter€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdefendantððs€right€to€have€the€jury€sequestered,€it€clearly€rearranges€the€burden€of€putting€forward€anÐ )à$( Ðobjection.€€òò€See€Kenneth€MacArthur€Johnson€v.€Stateóó,€No.€E2001„00068„CCA„R3„PC,€slip€op.€at€15„Ð |*Ì%) Ð16€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Dec.€18,€2001)€(1995€statute€ð ðreflects€a€right€to€a€sequesteredÐ h+¸&* Ðjury,ðð€but€right€may€be€ð ðwaived€by€the€defendant€who€fails€to€move€for€sequestrationðð),€òòperm.€app.Ð ° Ðdeniedóó€(Tenn.€2002).€€In€actuality,€our€court€has€ruled€that,€even€under€the€previous€statute,€aÐ œì Ðdefendant€waives€the€right€to€sequestration€when€he€or€she€fails€to€raise€the€issue€ð ðat€trial€when€anyÐ ˆØ Ðprejudicial€effect€of€the€error€could€have€been€prevented.ðð€€òòState€v.€Tony€G.€Smithóó,€No.€01C01„9603„Ð tÄ ÐCR„00202,€slip€op.€at€9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€May€16,€1997);€òòsee€also€Jones€v.€Stateóó,€915Ð `° ÐS.W.2d€1,€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àWith€these€principles€in€mind,€we€turn€to€the€issue€at€hand.€€Clearly,€Ms.€OwensÐ $ t Ðmoved€the€trial€court€to€sequester€the€jury.€€After€the€trial€judge€informed€her€of€his€ð ðpractice,ðð€Ms.€Ð  ` ÐOwens,€through€her€counsel,€abandoned€the€motion€to€sequester,€and€the€trial€court€did€not€deny€theÐ ü L  Ðmotion.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€ò òó óThus,€in€the€absence€of€a€motion€that€would€trigger€Code€section€40„18„116,€theÐ è 8  Ðsequestration€issue€was€waived.€€òòSee€State€v.€Milton€Lee€Cooperóó,€No.€03C01„9706„CR„00202,€slipÐ Ô$  Ðop.€at€7„8€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Sept.€9,€1998)€(commenting€that€defendant€who€initiallyÐ À  Ðconsented€to€no€sequestration€had€burden€to€show€prejudice),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1999).€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€now€posits€that€she€was€intimidated€into€abandoning€her€motion€toÐ „Ô  Ðsequester€the€jury€by€the€trial€courtððs€threat€to€deprive€her€of€one€constitutional€right€ð!ð€that€of€bailÐ pÀ Ðð!ð€unless€she€surrendered€another€constitutional€right€ð!ð€the€right€to€be€tried€by€a€sequestered€jury.€Ð \¬ ÐEssentially,€she€argues€that€she€should€not€be€required€to€pay€the€penalty€of€waiver.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àIndeed,€our€constitution€ensures€the€right€to€bail€to€all€criminal€defendants,€exceptÐ  p Ðthose€in€capital€cases€ð ðwhere€the€proof€is€evident,€or€the€presumption€great.ðð€€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ððÐ  \ Ð15;€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„11„102€(1997).€€The€constitutional€guarantee€of€bail€is€not€lostÐ øH Ðuntil€the€defendant€is€convicted.€€€òòState€ex€rel.€Brown€v.€Newellóó,€216€Tenn.€284,€290,€391€S.W.2dÐ ä4 Ð667,€670€(1965);€òòseeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(d)€(providing€that€trial€courts€review€bail€in€felony€casesÐ Ð  Ðð ðafter€the€verdict€of€guilty€has€been€returnedðð).Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€our€view,€however,€Ms.€Owens€was€afforded€a€remedy€that€allowed€her€to€pursueÐ ”ä Ðand€protect€both€constitutional€interests.€€Our€law€provides€that€ð ð[b]efore€or€after€conviction€.€.€.€theÐ €Ð Ðdefendant€may€obtain€review€of€an€order€entered€by€a€trial€court€from€which€an€appeal€lies€to€theÐ l¼ ÐSupreme€Court€or€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€.€.€.€denying,€setting€or€altering€conditions€ofÐ X ¨ Ðdefendantððs€release.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€8(a);€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„11„144(a)€(1997).€€TheÐ D!” Ðreview€ð ðmay€be€had€at€any€time€before€an€appeal€of€[the]€conviction€by€filing€a€motion€for€reviewððÐ 0"€  Ðin€the€appropriate€appellate€court.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€8(a).€€Rule€8's€purpose€is€to€ensure€ð ðtheÐ #l! Ðexpeditious€review€of€release€orders.ðð€€òòId.,óó€Advisory€Commððn€Comments.€Not€only€is€Rule€8Ð $X" Ðdesigned€to€expedite€review€of€release€orders,€but€our€supreme€court€has€said€that€it€also€is€the€ð ðonlyÐ ô$D # Ðòòeffectiveóó€remedyðð€for€addressing€unsatisfactory€release€orders,€and€an€ð ðappeal€of€[the€bail]€issue€[afterÐ à%0!$ Ðconviction€was]€of€no€practical€effect€or€benefit€to€the€defendant.ðð€€òòState€v.€Melson,€óó638€S.W.2d€342,Ð Ì&"% Ð358€(Tenn.€1982)€(emphasis€in€original).Ð ¸'#& Ðâ âÐ ¤(ô#' Ðà  àà ` àWe€note€that€Ms.€Owens€initially€presented€her€motion€to€the€court,€and€the€trial€judgeÐ ° Ðâ âfirst€explained€his€ð ðpractice,ðð€a€week€before€the€commencement€of€trial.€€She€had€an€ampleÐ œì Ðopportunity€not€only€to€exercise€her€rights€pursuant€to€Rule€8,€but€also€to€do€so€before€anyÐ ˆØ Ðconfinement€orders€would€have€been€effective.€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àThus,€Ms.€Owens€could€have€secured€her€right€to€a€sequestered€jury€by€prosecutingÐ L œ Ðher€motion.€€If€indeed€she€could€have€demonstrated€a€right€to€pre„verdict€release€upon€a€Rule€8Ð 8 ˆ Ðreview,€despite€winning€a€sequestered€jury,€she€could€have€also€secured€the€right€to€pre„verdictÐ $ t Ðrelease€by€prosecuting€her€motion€and€pursuing€a€Rule€8€review€of€any€confinement€order.€€ByÐ  ` Ðwithdrawing€the€motion€to€sequester€and€foreclosing€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€on€the€motion,€Ms.Ð ü L  ÐOwens€forfeited€the€opportunity€to€secure€sequestration€of€the€jury€and€to€obtain€an€order€denyingÐ è 8  Ðor€altering€the€conditions€of€her€pre„verdict€release,€which€she€could€(and€should)€have€appealedÐ Ô$  Ðpursuant€to€Rule€8.€€ò òó óAs€it€is,€we€can€neither€review€a€denial€of€jury€sequestration,€which€neverÐ À  Ðoccurred,€nor€can€we€effectively€review€the€denial€or€modification€of€conditions€of€pre„verdictÐ ¬ü  Ðrelease,€which€also€never€occurred.€€òòSee€State€v.€Rogersóó,€703€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ˜è  Ð1985)€(appellate€court€will€not€ð ðpass€on€[issues]€when€there€is€no€justiciable€controversy€presentedðð).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àTherefore,€under€the€circumstances,€we€are€unpersuaded€that€Ms.€Owens€should€beÐ \¬ Ðexcused€from€her€waiver€of€the€sequestration€issue.€€We€hold€that€her€failure€to€pursue€theÐ H˜ Ðsequestration€motion€and€a€Rule€8€review,€if€such€had€been€necessary,€forecloses€our€review€at€thisÐ 4„ Ðjuncture.€€Ð  p Ѐ€òòÐ  \ ÐÓ  ÓF.€€Excessive€Sentence.Ð øH ÐÌóóÓ  Óà0  àà ` àIn€her€final€issue,€Ms.€Owens€complains€that€the€sentences€she€received€were€tooÐÐ (#(# Ðlengthy.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àÔ‡X‰XXX‰ÔWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€itÐ ”ä Ðis€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ €Ð Ðdeterminations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1997).€€ThisÐ l¼ Ðpresumption€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÐ X ¨ Ðconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Ð D!” ÐS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€ð ðThe€burden€of€showing€that€the€sentence€is€improper€is€upon€theÐ 0"€  Ðappellant.ðð€€òòId.óó€€In€the€event€the€record€fails€to€demonstrate€the€required€consideration€by€the€trialÐ #l! Ðcourt,€review€of€the€sentence€is€purely€òòde€novoóó.€€òòId.óó€€If€appellate€review€reflects€the€trial€courtÐ $X" Ðproperly€considered€all€relevant€factors€and€its€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€theÐ ô$D # Ðrecord,€this€court€must€affirm€the€sentence,€ð ðeven€if€we€would€have€preferred€a€different€result.ðð€Ð à%0!$ ÐòòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court,€at€the€conclusion€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsentencing€hearing,€determines€the€range€of€sentence€and€then€determines€the€specific€sentence€andÐ )à$( Ðthe€propriety€of€sentencing€alternatives€by€considering€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trialÐ |*Ì%) Ðand€the€sentencing€hearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€argumentsÐ h+¸&* Ðas€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved;€(5)Ð ° Ðevidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors;€(6)€anyÐ œì Ðstatements€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€the€defendantððs€behalf€about€sentencing;€and€(7)€theÐ ˆØ Ðpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(a),€(b)€(1997);€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„Ð tÄ Ð103(5)(1997);€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€received€a€sentence€of€twenty€years€for€the€Class€A€felony€of€€aggravatedÐ 8 ˆ Ðchild€abuse€of€J.J.€€This€sentence€is€at€the€midpoint€of€the€sentencing€range€for€Range€I€offenders.€Ð $ t ÐòòSeeóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(1)€(1997)€(establishing€range€of€fifteen€to€25€years€for€RangeÐ  ` ÐI).€€She€received€a€sentence€of€eight€years€for€each€of€the€other€four€convictions,€all€Class€B€felonies.€Ð ü L  ÐThis€is€the€minimum€sentence€within€the€sentencing€range€for€Range€I€offenders.€€òòSee€idóó.€ðð€40„35„Ð è 8  Ð112(a)(2)€(establishing€range€of€eight€to€twelve€years€for€Range€I€offenders).€€The€sentences€imposedÐ Ô$  Ðwere€the€presumptive€sentences€in€the€applicable€ranges,€when€there€are€no€enhancement€orÐ À  Ðmitigating€factors.€€òòSee€idóó.€ðð€40„35„210(c)€(1997).Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àMs.€Owens€does€not€argue€in€her€brief€that€any€mitigating€factors€were€applicable.€Ð „Ô  ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113€(1997).€€The€trial€court€applied€none€and€applied€no€enhancementÐ pÀ Ðfactors.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ô#†X‰XXX‰ñE#ÔTherefore,€the€defendant€has€demonstrated€no€basis€for€modifying€the€trial€courtððsÐ \¬ Ðimposition€of€the€presumptive€sentences.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àBecause€Ms.€Owens€has€failed€to€demonstrate€the€impropriety€of€the€length€of€theÐ  p Ðsentences€and€has€made€no€other€challenge€to€her€sentences,€we€decline€to€shorten€her€sentences.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€has€not€claimed€on€appeal€that€the€consecutive€alignment€of€theÐ ä4 Ðsentences€was€erroneous;€however,€in€keeping€with€our€charge€to€review€sentences€òòde€novoóó,€we€haveÐ Ð  Ðlooked€at€the€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1997).€Ð ¼  ÐConsecutive€service€of€multiple€sentences€must€be€predicated€upon€the€defendant€falling€within€oneÐ ¨ø Ðof€the€rubrics€set€forth€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„115(b).€€òòSee€State€v.€Scott€M.Ð ”ä ÐCraigóó,€No.€E2001„01528„CCA„R3„CD,€slip€op.€at€12€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Aug.€27,€2002Ð €Ð Ð(trial€courtððs€observation€that€ð ðif€all€of€this€had€to€run€concurrently,€then€there€would€be€noÐ l¼ Ðpunishment€for€kidnappingðð€did€not€supply€a€statutory€basis€for€consecutive€sentencing,€leaving€theÐ X ¨ Ðconsecutive€sentencing€order€unsupported€in€the€trial€courtððs€findings).€€Generally,€these€rubrics€areÐ D!” Ðthat€the€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal,€an€experienced€criminal,€a€dangerous€mentallyÐ 0"€  Ðabnormal€person,€a€dangerous€offender,€a€sexual€abuser€of€minors,€a€person€who€offends€while€onÐ #l! Ðprobation,€or€a€person€convicted€of€criminal€contempt.€€òòSee€óóðð€40„35„115(b)(1)„€(7)€(1997).Ð $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€ruling€on€the€alignment€of€the€multiple€sentences,€the€trial€judge€said:Ð à%0!$ Ðâ âÐ Ì&"% ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒNow,€it€developed€during€the€course€of€the€trial€that€the€childrenÐ ° Ðâ âwhose€age[s]€run€from€about€maybe€fifteen€down€to€a€matter€ofÐ œì Ðmonths€were€severely€abused.€€There€was€[sic]€many,€many€evidencesÐ ˆØ Ðof€scarring€of€the€children€as€evidenced€by€the€doctor,€so,€I€do€thinkÐ tÄ Ðthat€it€would€call€for€some€consecutive€sentence,€so,€therefore,€itððs€myÐ `° Ðbest€judgment€that€these€are€horrendous€offenses;€they€are€shocking,Ð L œ Ðreprehensible.€€The€treatment€of€these€children€based€under€your€totalÐ 8 ˆ Ðcare€as€a€foster€parent,€I€think€it€calls€out€for€consecutive€sentences,Ð $ t Ðso,€itððs€the€judgment€of€the€Court€that€Iððm€going€to€run€counts€TwoÐ  ` Ðand€Six€consecutively€to€the€minimum€sentence€of€twenty€years,Ð ü L  Ðwhich€calls€for€a€total€sentence€of€thirty€six€years.€Ð è 8  ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒThese€remarks€are€devoid€of€any€reference€to€Code€section€40„35„115,€and€moreover,€the€remarksÐ À  Ðare€not€readily€linked€to€any€of€section€40„35„115(b)ððs€predicates€for€consecutive€sentencing.€€Ð ¬ü  ÐAccordingly,€we€look€at€the€consecutive€sentencing€order€òòde€novo€óóunaccompanied€by€a€presumptionÐ ˜è  Ðof€correctness.€€òòSee€State€v.€Laneóó,€3€S.W.3d€456,€460€(Tenn.€1999)€(rejecting€the€presumption€ofÐ „Ô  Ðcorrectness€on€the€issue€of€consecutive€sentencing);òò€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àSimply€put,€we€find€no€predicate€in€Code€section€40„35„115(b)€which€supportsÐ H˜ Ðconsecutive€service€of€sentences€in€the€present€case.€€€Sarah€Owens€was€a€47„year„old€woman€whoÐ 4„ Ðhad€no€prior€criminal€record.€€She€is€categorically€excluded€from€consecutive€sentencing€through€anyÐ  p Ðof€the€rubrics€of€subsection€(b)(1)€through€(b)(7),€except€that€she€is€ostensibly€eligible€forÐ  \ Ðconsecutive€sentencing€as€a€ð ðdangerous€offender€whose€behavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€forÐ øH Ðhuman€life,€and€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high.ðð€€òòSeeÐ ä4 ÐóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(4)€(1997).€€To€utilize€a€dangerous€offender€predicate€forÐ Ð  Ðconsecutive€sentencing,€however,€the€trial€court€must€not€only€find€that€the€elements€of€that€predicateÐ ¼  Ðare€present,€but€it€must€also€find€that€consecutive€sentencing€ð ðreasonably€relate[s]€to€the€severity€ofÐ ¨ø Ðthe€offensesðð€and€is€necessary€to€protect€society€ð ðfrom€further€.€.€.€aggravated€criminal€conduct.ðð€Ð ”ä ÐòòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€938€(Tenn.€1995).Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€dictates€of€òòWilkersonóó€cannot€be€met€in€this€case.€€Even€if€we€were€able€to€findÐ X ¨ Ðthat€the€defendantððs€deplorable€conduct€involved€a€lack€of€regard€or€hesitation€about€committing€aÐ D!” Ðcrime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high,€we€cannot€determine€that€a€sentence€extended€to€thirty„Ð 0"€  Ðsix€years€is€necessary€to€protect€the€public€from€further€offenses€by€this€defendant.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò ò€ó ó€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àTherefore,€we€modify€Sarah€Owensðð€sentences€by€imposing€them€to€run€concurrently,Ð ø$H # Ðan€alignment€that€yields€an€effective€sentence€of€twenty€years.€Ð ä%4!$ Ðò òÓ  ÓÌÐ ¼' #& Їà @ àà @` àà @¸ à€€III.€€Conclusion.Ð ° ÐÓýjÓÌà  àà ` àó óWe€affirm€all€convictions€for€both€defendants€and€affirm€Sarah€Owensðð€sentences,Ð ˆØ Ðas€modified.€€ò òó óà ` àÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE