ÿWPCi- :U:< %v 0 Ü|w@X4˜¬» 0 à 0Dã AQ' 0Dx 0D¼ 0J 0TJ 0^ž 0hü 0rd 0|Ö 0†R 0Ø 1uh 0dÝ BA 0@^ D3ž U*Ñ B)û DC$Æg D/- B\ AMyÌÆ’~—RXg¿@;Ý!v~&vÓ–', øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ ]D^D_`DabcdDeÓ€qäzz!3|xq(Ð(3F˜$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€LŸXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó* -Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1ddƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd* (Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÂÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ "ÝÝ  ÝÔ€%ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€%XÔÌÌò òAprilÏ23,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€%ôÔAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó ûÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀLŸXXdædæ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóJerome€D.€Moss€and€Anthony€J.€Colbert€were€also€named€as€co„defendants€in€theÏindictment.€€The€record€indicates€that,€prior€to€the€appellant's€trial,€Moss€pled€guilty€to€secondÏdegree€murder€and€was€sentenced€to€forty„five€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€NoÏdisposition€is€shown€as€to€Colbert.Ì tÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀoXXdðXXdð7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóIn€his€statement€to€the€police,€Moss€contended€that€"the€gun€was€broke€and€if€you€cockÏthe€gun€without€it€being€on€safety,€it€will€shoot€without€pulling€the€trigger."Ì HÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀoXXdðXXdð7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóDeangelo€Small€testified€that,€on€March€17,€1994€around€9:45€p.m.,€he€observed€fourÏ"guys"€enter€the€Five€Star€Market.€€Shortly€thereafter,€he€heard€a€"pop"€and€saw€the€four€"guys"Ïcome€running€out€of€the€store.€€Anthony€Flake€also€testified€that,€at€10:00€p.m.€that€same€evening,Ïhe€saw€four€guys€run€past€his€security€booth€on€Fourth€Street€heading€toward€the€railroad€tracks.Ì NÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀoXXdðXXdð7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€trial€court€properly€found€the€tape€recording€to€be€admissible€hearsay€pursuant€toÏTenn.€R.€Evid.€803(2),€excited€utterance.Ì wÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀoXXdðXXdð7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAlthough€the€record€reflects€the€tape€was€played€for€the€jury,€the€court€reporterÏapparently€did€not€transcribe€the€statements€being€played€for€inclusion€in€the€record.€Ì “Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀoXXdðXXdð7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAt€the€time€of€his€initial€statement,€the€appellant€was€not€under€arrest.€€However,€on€AprilÏ16,€after€his€two€co„defendants€implicated€him€in€the€crimes,€the€appellant€was€arrested€and€inÏcustody.Ì 1Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€%ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„11„402€(1991)€provides:Ìà8 àA€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offense€committed€by€another€if:Ìà8 à(2)€Acting€with€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€toÏbenefit€in€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,Ïor€attempts€to€aid€another€person€to€commit€the€offense.ÌÌà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„403€(1991),€provides:Ìà8 à(a)€A€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€the€facilitation€of€a€felony€if,€knowing€thatÏanother€intends€to€commit€a€specific€felony,€but€without€the€intent€required€forÏcriminal€responsibility€under€ðð€39„11„402[(2)],€the€person€knowingly€furnishesÏsubstantial€assistance€in€the€commission€of€the€felony.ÓÓÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€%ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýò ò›Þ ÞÌ̜ـ*ÙßR€/0(A1-j|’ ` | `€€@ÿRß›à@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ àJANUARY€SESSION,€1997Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02C01„9606„CR„00188Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àSHELBY€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Bernie€Weinman,€JudgeÌò òJULIUS€E.€PARKERó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(First€Degree€Murder;Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)à àAgg.€Robbery)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌBenjamin€F.€Headà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ147€Jefferson,€Suite€408à àÌMemphis,€TN€38103à àà àà àDeborah€A.€TullisÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€AttorneyÏGeneralà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€W.€PierottiÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àReginald€HendersonÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€ComplexÌà àà àà àà àà àà à201€Poplar€St.,€Suite€301Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Julius€E.€Parker,€appeals€his€jury€convictions€for€theÏcrimes€of€aggravated€robbery€and€felony€murder.€€The€Shelby€County€CriminalÏCourt€sentenced€the€appellant€to€life€imprisonment€for€the€felony€murderÏconviction€and€eight€years€incarceration€for€the€aggravated€robbery€conviction,Ïwith€the€sentences€to€run€concurrently.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€the€appellantÏraises€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà8 àI.€€Whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€sustain€the€appellant'sÏconvictions€and€sentences.ÌÌà8 àII.€€Whether€the€trial€court€properly€admitted€into€evidence€a€tape€ofÏthe€911€call€made€by€the€robbery€victim.ÌÌà8 àIII.€€Whether€the€trial€court€properly€denied€the€appellant's€motionÏto€suppress€the€appellant's€statements€to€the€police.ÌÌà8 àIV.€€Whether€the€trial€court€properly€admitted€photographs€of€theÏvictim€into€evidence.ÌÌà8 àV.€€Whether€the€trial€court€failed€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€lesserÏoffense€of€facilitation€of€felony€murder.ÌÓÓÌAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.̛̜Ìà@ àò òI.€€Backgroundó óÌÌà àOn€October€4,€1994,€a€Shelby€County€Grand€Jury€returned€a€multi„countÏindictment€charging€the€appellant€with€one€count€of€first€degree€murder,€oneÏcount€of€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€a€felony,€and€one€count€of€aggravatedÏrobbery.× ƒ1 ××  ×€ÌÌÌà àAt€the€appellantððs€trial,€the€Stateððs€principal€witness€was€the€co„defendant,€Jerome€Moss.€€Moss€testified€that,€on€March€17,€1994,€he,€theÏappellant,€Anthony€Colbert,€Amos€Wilson,€and€Cecil€Dotson,€planned€to€"rob€theÏdope€man."€€However,€their€criminal€venture€proved€unsuccessful€as€they€wereÏunable€to€find€their€intended€victim.€€Moss€stated€that,€as€the€group€began€theÏwalk€"towards€the€house€.€.€.€[the€appellant]€said€if€we€would€go€in€the€[Five€StarÏGrocery]€with€him€he'd€rob€the€store."€€The€appellant,€Moss,€and€Colbert€enteredÏthe€store.€€The€appellant€and€Colbert€remained€at€the€front€of€the€store,€whileÏMoss€proceeded€to€the€rear.€€Moss€testified€that,€at€this€point,€he€was€not€armedÏwith€a€weapon,€however,€the€appellant€was€in€possession€of€"a€chrome€.380Ïwith€a€black€handle,"€and€Colbert€had€a€".32€automatic."€€The€appellant€andÏColbert€"laid€the€[owner€of€the€store]€out€on€the€floor."€€At€the€same€time,€WilliamÏBowles,€an€employee,€came€toward€Moss.€€Moss€hit€Bowles€on€the€head€with€aÍbottle€of€beer.€€The€appellant€took€the€pistol€to€the€back€of€the€store€and€handedÏit€to€Moss.€€Bowles€attempted€to€rise,€but€Moss€ordered€him€remain€on€the€floor.€ÏMoss€removed€the€safety€from€the€pistol€and€one€shot€was€œfired›€fatally€strikingÏBowles€in€the€head.× ƒ2 ××  ×€€The€three€men€then€ran€out€of€the€store.€€ÌÌà àMoss€stated€that€he,€Colbert€and€the€appellant€were€joined€by€Wilson€andÏDotson,€who€had€been€waiting€outside€the€store.€€All€five€then€ran€down€FourthÏStreet.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€Once€the€group€reached€an€empty€apartment,€the€appellant€divided€theÏmoney€taken€during€the€robbery€and€distributed€the€proceeds€accordingly:ÌÌthe€appellant,€Moss€and€Colbert€receiving€forty„seven€dollars€each,€and€WilsonÏand€Dotson€receiving€forty„one€dollars€each.€€ÌÌà àDuring€the€robbery,€the€owner€of€the€store€placed€two€emergency€911Ïcalls€to€the€police€reporting€the€robbery.€€The€State€introduced€these€tapes€intoÏevidence,€however,€the€tapes€were€neither€transcribed€nor€included€in€theÏrecord€on€appeal.€€Officers€Terry€Landrum€and€Cham€N.€Payne,€Memphis€PoliceÍDepartment,€responded€to€the€robbery€call€at€the€Five€Star€Grocery.€€Upon€hisÏarrival,€Officer€Landrum€located€the€owner€of€the€store€who€reported€the€robberyÏand€advised€him€that€"somebody's€been€shot."€€ÌÌà àBoth€officers€described€the€interior€of€the€store€at€the€time€of€their€arrival.€Ï"On€the€floor€in€front€of€the€counter,€[there€was]€broken€glass.€€On€the€counterÏtop,€[there€was]€a€brown€paper€bag."€€"There€was€a€cash€drawer€laying€on€theÏfloor.€€There€was€change€scattered€behind€the€cash€register."€€"There€was€also€aÏfive€dollar€food€coupon€and€an€empty€food€coupon€booklet."€€"There€was€a€bigÏpool€of€beer€in€the€hallway.€€There€was€a€little€aisle€between€the€merchandiseÏwith.€.€.€glass€from€a€beer€bottle."€€"[There€were]€blood€drippings€[on€the€floor.]"€Ï"And€there€was€a€male€black€subject€in€the€back€that€had€been€shot€in€theÏhead."€€Testimony€of€the€medical€examiner€established€that€the€victimððs€deathÏwas€the€result€of€"a€gun€shot€wound€to€the€head,€with€a€bullet€passing€inside€theÏbrain,€producing€hemorrhage€inside€the€skull€and€small€cuts€to€the€face."ÌÌà àSergeant€Richard€Roleson,€one€of€the€officer's€investigating€the€case,Ïtook€the€appellant's€statement€after€his€arrest.€€The€appellant€signed€a€waiver€ofÏrights€before€giving€the€statement.€€òòSeeóó€òòinfraóó€Section€IV,€Motion€to€Suppress.€€InÏthis€statement,€the€appellant€stated€that,€"in€a€way€[he]€knew,€and€in€a€way€[he]Ïdidn't"€know€about€the€robbery,€however,€he€admitted€that€he€was€supposed€toÏ"snatch€the€money."€€The€appellant's€statement€corroborated€Moss's€testimonyÍregarding€the€facts€leading€up€to€and€following€the€crimes.€€This€concluded€theÏState's€proof.ÌÌà àThe€defense€called€the€co„defendant,€Anthony€Colbert.€€Colbert€testifiedÏthat€only€he€and€Moss€entered€the€Five€Star€Grocery.€€He€maintained€that€theÏappellant€remained€outside€the€store.€€Moreover,€he€testified€that€there€were€noÏplans€to€rob€the€store.€€In€explanation€of€his€prior€statement€which€implicated€theÏappellant,€Colbert€explained€that€he€lied€"[b]ecause€he€had€told€it€on€me,€so€IÏwas€going€to€take€him€with€me."€€However,€Colbert's€prior€statement,€introducedÏduring€cross„examination€for€impeachment€purposes,€supported€Moss'sÏtestimony.€€ÌÌà àNext,€the€appellant€took€the€stand.€€He€confirmed€that€he€was€in€the€storeÏwith€Moss€and€Colbert,€however,€he€did€not€know€about€the€robbery.€€Rather,€heÏmaintained€that€he€entered€the€store€in€order€to€purchase€cigars.€€In€this€regard,Ïhe€testified€that:ÌÓÓà8 à.€.€.€There€was€two€of€us€had€some€money.€€Me€and€Colbert.€€AndÏMoss€come€in,€and€for€him€not€to€have€no€money,€he€wasÏsearching€around€the€store€like€he€had€some,€you€know.€€He€wentÏon€to€the€back€and€picking€up€things,€you€know.€.€.€.€[S]omething'sÏfixin'€to€go€down,€you€know.€€I€looked€at€him€and€I€looked€at€ColbertÏbeside€me€and€Moss€back€there€and€I€kind€of€figured,€I€said,€"Man,Ïsomething's€fixin'€to€happen€or€something.€.€.€.€€I€heard€a€bottleÏburst.€.€.€.Colbert€looked€at€me€real€hard,€and€I€knew€what€that€signÏwas.€€And€I€broke.€€As€I€ran€I€saw€.€.€.€Wayne€Dotson€and€Amos.€ÏAnd€I€said,€"Man,€those€fools€robbing€this€store."ÌÌÓÓà àÌà àThe€defense€also€called€Cecil€Dotson.€€Dotson€testified€that€there€was€noÏplan€to€rob€the€store€and€that€the€appellant€was€not€in€the€store€when€the€shotÏwas€fired.€€Despite€this€testimony,€Dotson€confirmed,€on€cross„examination,€thatÏhe€had€previously€told€the€police€that€the€appellant€was€inside€the€store€and€thatÏhe€had€received€forty„one€dollars€from€the€proceeds.€€Finally,€Pamela€WigginsÏtestified€that€Moss€and€the€appellant€did€not€get€along.€€She€also€stated€that€theÏday€after€the€crimes,€she€observed€the€appellant€buying€clothes€and€shoes.€ÏMoreover,€she€heard€the€appellant€tell€"Cecil's€brother€that€.€.€.€'I€got€bud'sÏmoney,€we€robbed€somebody,'€or€something€of€that€effect.'"̛̜Ìà@ àò òII.€€Sufficiency€of€Evidenceó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€at€trial€was€insufficient€toÏconvict€him€of€felony€murder€and€aggravated€robbery.€€Specifically,€he€arguesÏthat€the€only€evidence€of€his€knowledge€and€participation€in€the€robbery€of€theÏFive€Star€Grocery€was€the€testimony€of€Jerome€Moss.€€He€asserts€that€Moss'Ïtestimony€is€incredible€because€Moss€received€a€deal€from€the€State,€he€andÏthe€appellant€did€not€get€along,€and€the€appellant€had€implicated€Moss€in€theÏcrimes.ÌÌà àA€conviction€by€the€trier€of€fact€removes€the€presumption€of€innocenceÏand€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal€a€convicted€defendant€hasÏthe€burden€of€proving€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639ÏS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€On€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€legitimate€or€reasonable€inferencesÏwhich€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.Ï1992),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€507€U.S.€954,€113€S.Ct.€1368€(1993).€€It€is€the€appellateÏcourt's€duty€to€affirm€the€conviction€if€the€evidence€viewed€under€theseÏstandards€was€sufficient€for€any€rational€trier€of€fact€to€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443ÏU.S.€307,€317,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979);€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,Ï259€(Tenn.€1994),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.€„„,€115€S.Ct.€743€(1995);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï13(e).€€This€rule€is€applicable€to€findings€of€guilt€predicated€upon€directÏevidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€both€direct€andÏcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1990).ÌÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that,€although€Moss'€testimony€implicated€theÏappellant€in€both€the€preparation€and€execution€of€the€robbery,€at€trial,€theÏtestimony€of€Colbert,€Dotson,€and€the€appellant€provided€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.€€The€record€does€not€support€this€allegation.€€Indeed,€the€priorÍstatement€by€the€appellant€introduced€by€the€State€at€trial€not€only€placed€theÏappellant€at€the€scene€of€the€crime,€but€also€confirmed€his€knowledge,Ïpreparation,€and€participation€in€the€robbery.€€Moreover,€matters€concerning€theÏcredibility€of€witnesses€are€determined€by€the€trier€of€fact€and€òònotóó€this€court.€ÏòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€A€guilty€verdict,Ïapproved€by€the€trial€court,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€State's€witnesses€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).ÌÌà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„402(1991)€defines€aggravated€robbery€as€"theÏintentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€the€person€of€another€by€violence€orÏputting€the€person€in€fear,"€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ39„13„401(a)›€œ(1991),€and€theÏrobbery€is€"accomplished›€with€a€deadly€weapon.€.€."€or€"where€the€victim€suffersÏserious€bodily€injury."€€The€evidence€presented€at€trial€clearly€demonstrates€thatÏthe€appellant€actively€participated€in,€if€not€initiated,€the€aggravated€robbery€ofÏthe€Five€Star€Grocery,€that€the€appellant€was€in€possession€of€a€.380€automaticÏweapon,€that€the€appellant€took€the€money€from€the€store,€and€that€the€appellantÏdivided€the€proceeds€between€all€participants.̛̜Ìà àFelony€murder€is€"[a]€reckless€killing€of€another€committed€in€theÏperpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrate€any€.€.€.€robbery€.€.€.€."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Íðð€39„13„202(a)(2)€(1994€Supp.).€€In€the€present€case,€Moss€admitted€that€heÏwas€holding€the€weapon€when€Bowles€was€killed.€€Nonetheless,€"[w]hen€oneÏenters€into€a€scheme€with€another€to€commit€one€of€the€felonies€enumerated€inÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202,€in€this€case€[robbery],€and€death€ensues,€bothÏdefendants€are€responsible€for€the€death,€regardless€of€who€actually€committedÏthe€murder€and€whether€the€killing€was€specifically€contemplated€by€the€other."€ÏòòState€v.€Brownóó,€756€S.W.2d€700,€704€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€The€evidenceÏclearly€establishes€that€the€appellant€actively€participated€in€the€robbery,€and,Ïas€such,€he€became€accountable€for€all€consequences€flowing€from€the€robbery.€ÏòòSeeóó€€òòBrownóó,€756€S.W.2d€at€703.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€his€convictionsÏfor€felony€murder€and€aggravated€robbery€are€amply€supported€by€the€evidenceÏand€that€a€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€bothÏoffenses€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€This€issue€is€without€merit.̛̜Ìà@ àò òIII.€€Tape€of€the€911€Emergency€Calló óÌÌà àNext,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€permitting€theÏintroduction€of€the€audio€tape€of€the€911€emergency€call€made€by€the€robberyÏvictim.€€Specifically,€he€contends€that€the€tape€was€not€properly€authenticatedÏand€that€"the€statements€by€the€dispatcher€are€inaccurate€and€prejudicial."€€ÌÌà àThe€audio€tape€recording€of€the€911€emergency€call€was€introduced€intoÏevidence€as€a€public€record.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€803(8).€€The€tape€was€introducedÏthrough€the€testimony€of€the€supervisor€and€custodian€of€the€records.€€TheÏcustodian€testified€that€he€was€an€employee€of€the€Communications€Bureau€ofÏthe€Memphis€Police€Department.€€He€explained€the€procedure€by€which€recordsÏof€incoming€calls€are€retained.€€Thus,€the€introduction€of€the€tape€recording€toÏsupport€the€fact€that€a€911€emergency€call€was€recorded€on€the€time€and€dateÏspecified,€the€address€the€call€was€placed€from,€and€other€relevant€œð ðdataðð›€wasÏadmissible.€€However,€the€òòcontentóó€of€the€tape€recording,€in€order€to€beÏadmissible,€must€also€satisfy€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule,€because€theÏcitizens€who€place€911€emergency€calls€are€not€under€a€ð ðduty€to€report.ðð€ÌÌà àUnder€certain€circumstances,€such€a€statement€may€qualify€as€anÏ"excited€utterance."€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€803(2).€€To€qualify€as€an€"excitedÏutterance,"€the€statement€must€be€"relating€to€a€startling€event€or€condition€.€.€.Ïwhile€the€declarant€was€under€the€stress€of€excitement€caused€by€the€event€orÏcondition."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€803(2).€€Yet,€even€if€the€statement€satisfies€thisÏhearsay€exception,€as€in€the€present€case,€the€statement€must€still€beÏauthenticated€prior€to€its€admission.× ƒ4 ××  ×€€For€the€purpose€of€authentication,€theÏvoices€on€a€911€tape€recording€must€be€identified€"by€opinion€based€uponÍhearing€the€voice€at€any€time€under€circumstances€connecting€it€with€theÏalleged€speaker."€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€901(b)(5).€€€At€trial,€the€appellant€objected€toÏthe€admissibility€of€the€tape€because€the€alleged€caller€on€the€tape€was€neverÏidentified€as€being€the€robbery€victim€in€this€case.€€In€this€case,€the€custodian€ofÏthe€record€was€unable€to€identify€the€voice€on€the€tape€as€being€the€speaker,Ïi.e.,€the€robbery€victim.€€Accordingly,€the€statements€on€the€tape€of€the€911€callÏwere€not€properly€authenticated,€and,€therefore,€were€improperly€admitted.€€òòCfóó.€ÏòòState€v.€Smithóó,€868€S.W.2d€561,€577€(Tenn.€1993)€(statements€on€tape€ofÏemergency€911€call€properly€admitted€as€"excited€utterance"€after€voiceÏidentification€of€the€caller€by€911€òòoperatoróó€who€received€the€call).ÌÌà àAs€previously€indicated,€neither€the€tape€nor€a€transcription€of€the€tapeÏrecording€was€included€in€the€record.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€Thus,€we€are€precluded€from€reviewingÏthe€appellantððs€allegations€of€the€prejudicial€impact€of€the€tape.€€It€is€incumbentÏupon€the€complaining€party€to€prepare€a€full€and€adequate€account€of€the€recordÏfor€our€review.€€òòState€v.€Ballardóó,€855€S.W.2d€557,€560„61€(Tenn.€1993);€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.24.€€Absent€the€necessary€relevant€material€in€the€record€an€appellateÏcourt€cannot€consider€the€merits€of€an€issue.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(b).€ÌMoreover,€even€in€the€absence€of€the€tape€recording€of€the€emergency€911€call,Ïwe€conclude€that€any€error€in€its€admittance€is€harmless.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Í52(a).€€The€evidence€overwhelmingly€supports€the€jury's€finding€that€theÏappellant€participated€in€the€robbery€of€the€Five€Star€Grocery.€€This€issue€isÏwithout€merit.̛̜Ìà@ àò òIV.€€Motion€to€Suppressó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€suppress€hisÏstatements€given€to€the€police.€€Specifically,€the€appellant€contends€that,Ïbecause€his€rights€were€not€"explained"€and€because€he€was€"coerced,€browÏbeatened€[sic],€threatened€of€not€ever€getting€out€of€jail,€the€death€penalty€andÏwith€promises€that€he€would€be€able€to€go€home,"€his€statements€were€notÏvoluntary.ÌÌà àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€Sergeant€Roleson€testified€that€the€appellantÏgave€two€statements€to€the€police,€one€on€April€15,€1994€at€9:40€a.m.,€and€theÏsecond€on€April€18,€1994€at€1:27€p.m.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€Both€statements€were€taken€at€the€policeÏstation.€€He€added€that,€on€April€15,€the€œappellant›€was€advised€of€his€rights€inÏthe€presence€of€his€mother€and€waived€those€rights€prior€to€making€anyÍstatement.€€In€this€statement,€the€appellant€denied€any€participation€in€theÏcrimes.€€Roleson€further€testified€that,€on€April€18,€1994,€the€appellant€contactedÏhim€from€the€jail€and€informed€him€that€he€wished€to€make€another€statement.€ÏAgain,€the€appellant€was€advised€of€his€rights€and€signed€another€waiver.€€InÏthis€second€statement,€the€appellant€admitted€knowledge€of€the€robbery,€hisÏpresence€in€the€store,€and€his€role€in€"snatch[ing]€the€money."€ÌÌà àThe€appellant,€however,€testified€that€his€statements€were€not€voluntaryÏand€were€the€result€of€coercion€and€threats€by€the€interviewing€officers.€ÏSpecifically,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€officers€did€not€explain€his€rights€toÏhim,€that€the€officers€accused€him€of€lying,€that€the€officers€threatened€that€theÏappellant€would€never€see€his€children€again,€that€the€officers€threatened€to€killÏhis€two€co„defendants,€and€that€the€officers€threatened€to€"send€him€to€aÏpenitentiary."€€To€explain€his€attested€untruthfulness€in€his€statements,€theÏappellant€stated€"they€lied€to€me€so€I€lied€to€them."ÌÌà àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€that€"from€the€totality€ofÏall€the€proof€that€the€defendant€did€freely€and€voluntarily€give€these€statementsÏand€[was]€advised€of€[his]€rights€and€understood€[his]€rights€and€that€[he]€gaveÏthese€statements€without€any€coercion,€and€[that]€they€would€be€admissible€inÏproof€in€the€case."̛̜Ìà àThe€appellant€is€correct€in€his€assertion€that,€to€be€admissible,€aÏdefendant's€statement€must€have€been€made€voluntarily.€€òòJackson€v.€Dennoóó,Ï378€U.S.€368,€376,€84€S.Ct.€1774,€1780€(1964);€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòOregon€v.€Elstadóó,€470ÏU.S.€298,€304„305,€105€S.Ct.€1285,€1290„91€(1985).€€A€trial€court'sÏdetermination,€with€regard€to€the€voluntariness€of€statements€made€by€theÏdefendant€during€custodial€interrogation€and€the€compliance€by€the€police€withÏthe€òòMirandaóó€mandate,€is€presumptively€correct€on€appeal,€unless€the€reviewingÏcourt€finds€that€the€evidence€touching€those€matters€preponderates€against€theÏtrial€court's€findings.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€544€(Tenn.€1994);€ÏòòState€v.€Nakdimenóó,€735€S.W.2d€799,€802€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)€(citationsÏomitted).€€Nothing€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€trial€court'sÏdetermination€that€the€appellant's€statements€were€voluntary€and€not€the€resultÏof€coercion,€threats,€or€lack€of€knowledge€of€his€constitutional€rights.€€This€issueÏis€without€merit.ÌÌÌà@ àò òV.€€Photographs€of€Victimó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€it€was€reversible€error€for€the€trial€court€to€admitÏinto€evidence€a€color€photograph€of€the€victim€as€he€appeared€at€the€crimeÏscene.€€He€asserts€that€"[t]he€fact€that€the€victim€was€deceased€was€shown€by€aÍ[previously€introduced€photograph],"€depicting€the€victim€at€the€morgue.€ÏContinuing,€he€maintains€that€"[the€photograph]€was€not€necessary€becauseÏidentification€and€death€was€established€by€the€medical€examiner."€ÏAccordingly,€the€appellant€concludes€that€the€photograph€is€"unnecessary€andÏinflammatory,"€and,€therefore,€"should€not€have€been€admitted€because€itsÏprejudicial€value€outweighed€its€probative€value€and€its€relevance."̛̜Ìà à"The€admissibility€of€photographs€lies€within€the€discretion€of€the€trialÏcourt."€€òòState€v.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947,€949€(Tenn.€1978).€€The€court's€"ruling,Ïin€this€respect,€will€not€be€overturned€on€appeal€except€upon€a€clear€showing€ofÏan€abuse€of€discretion."€€òòIdóó.€(citations€omitted);€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòStephensonóó,€878ÏS.W.2d€at€542;€òòState€v.€Bordisóó,€905€S.W.2d€214,€226€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.Ïto€appeal€deniedóó.€(Tenn.€1995).€€However,€before€a€photograph€may€beÏadmitted€into€evidence,€it€must€be€relevant€to€an€issue€that€the€jury€must€decideÏand€the€probative€value€of€the€photograph€must€outweigh€any€prejudicial€effectÏthat€it€may€have€upon€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Bradenóó,€867€S.W.2d€750,€758Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1993)€(citation€omitted);€òòseeÏalsoóó€Tenn.R.Evid.€401€and€403.ÌÌà àThe€contested€photograph€establishes€the€location€of€the€victim's€bodyÏwhen€discovered€at€the€crime€scene.€€Photographs€of€a€victim's€body€taken€atÍthe€scene€of€the€incident€are€admissible.€€òòState€v.€Van€Tranóó,€864€S.W.2d€465,Ï477€(Tenn.€1993),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€„„€U.S.„„,€114€S.Ct.€1577€(1994).€€Moreover,€aÏphotograph€used€to€supplement€and€clarify€oral€testimony€describing€the€crimeÏscene€is€likewise€admissible.€€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€69€(Tenn.),€òòcert.Ïdeniedóó,€475€U.S.€1031,€106€S.Ct.€1240€(1985).€€The€photograph€at€issue€isÏneither€gruesome€nor€bloody.€€Nothing€in€the€record€demonstrates€that€the€trialÏcourt€abused€its€discretion€in€admitting€this€photograph.€€Accordingly,€we€findÏthis€issue€to€be€without€merit.̛̜Ìà@ àò òVI.€€Jury€Instructionsó óÌÌà àIn€his€final€issue,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€haveÏcharged€the€jury€on€the€lesser€offense€of€facilitation€of€felony€murder.€WeÏdisagree.€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€relies€upon€òòState€v.€Lewisóó,€919€S.W.2d€62€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1995),€as€authority.€€In€òòLewisóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€67,€a€panel€of€this€court€heldÏthat€"virtually€every€time€one€is€charged€with€a€felony€by€way€of€ò òcriminalÏresponsibilityó ó€for€the€conduct€of€another,€ò òfacilitationó ó€of€the€felony€would€be€aÍlesser€included€offense."€× ƒ7 ××  ×€(Emphasis€in€original).€€"[O]ne€can€be€guilty€of€felonyÏmurder€based€on€that€person's€criminal€responsibility€for€the€conduct€of€anotherÏperson."€€òòIdóó.€€Thus,€if€a€person€can€be€guilty€of€felony€murder€because€thatÏperson€is€responsible€for€the€conduct€of€another,€then€that€person€could€beÏguilty€of€facilitation€of€felony€murder€because€the€two€statutes€deal€with€criminalÏresponsibility.€€òòIdóó.€€ÌÌà àHowever,€the€holding€in€òòLewisóó€"is€not€a€blanket€rule€to€be€applied€inÏevery€felony€murder€case€where€the€defendant€is€not€the€party€who€commits€theÏmurder€during€the€felony."€€òòState€v.€Utleyóó,€928€S.W.2d€448,€452€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996).€€Rather,€a€trial€court€shouldÏinstruct€the€jury€as€to€facilitation€of€felony€murder€òòonlyóó€where€the€facts€couldÏcause€reasonable€minds€to€conclude€that€the€defendant€lacked€the€intent€toÏpromote€or€assist€in,€or€benefit€from,€the€underlying€felony's€commission.€€òòIdóó.Ï(citation€omitted)€(emphasis€added).€ÌÌà àIn€the€case€before€us,€the€Stateððs€proof€established€that€it€was€theÏappellant€who€initiated€the€robbery,€who€furnished€the€murder€weapon,€whoÏbenefited€in€the€proceeds,€and€who€was€present€when€the€murder€occurred.€ÏThe€appellantððs€proof€at€trial€denied€any€participation€or€planning€in€the€robbery.€ÏIn€fact,€the€appellant€testified€that€his€sole€purpose€for€entering€the€store€was€toÏpurchase€cigars.€€Thus,€the€appellant€denied€that€he€ð ðknowingly€furnish[ed]Ïsubstantial€assistance€in€the€commission€of€the€felonyðð€of€first€degree€murder.€ÏWe€conclude€that€these€facts€clearly€distinguish€this€case€from€the€facts€inÏòòLewisóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€62.€ÌœÌ›à àWhile€it€is€generally€error€in€a€homicide€case€for€the€trial€court€not€toÏinstruct€the€jury€on€all€lesser€included€offenses,€òòseeóó€òòJohnson€v.€Stateóó,€531ÏS.W.2d€558,€559€(Tenn.1975),€where€the€record€clearly€shows€that€theÏdefendant€was€guilty€of€the€greater€offense€and€is€devoid€of€any€evidenceÏpermitting€an€inference€of€guilt€of€the€lesser€offense,€it€is€not€error€to€fail€toÏcharge€on€a€lesser€offense.€€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€797€S.W.2d€589,€593€(Tenn.€1990)Ï(citing€òòState€v.€Kingóó,€718€S.W.2d€241,€245€œ(Tenn.1986)).€€We›€conclude€that€theÏtrial€court€was€correct€in€not€instructing€the€jury€on€the€lesser€included€offense€ofÏfacilitation€of€felony€murder.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌà@ àò òVII.€€€ConclusionÌÌà àó óAfter€a€review€of€the€record€and€the€applicable€law,€we€find€no€reversibleÏerror€in€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€Accordingly,€the€judgments€of€convictionÏand€sentences€imposed€are€affirmed.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€Judge