ÿWPC¡ ìŸ@³Ù™M^®Iïžû²È=©di_“k•‡¹Æ¯ŠH^G{aÇOes„í*7 IvÇ!^Û‹2ü¾Ë†ocoJÔµ\TWåâ@”ÄEìyGt+B‹eqÔ<§Å@Üú[sKI©:>~âáº*[÷ö£°É›÷TÙQªRè W…ð ’ ­Dð”!0ƒà/GbšR¡G#„IpEÊ’üipQ1½ú¢W-·g«Mþ6TuÙÈ~iÑ_°^—LTQìbú¯É§,Kƒdû…°Ãu žö’Ø¿Çi\VN§?Ôžö&Ƴb>ayëýQù­ì·#;H· â)6.ªÛm‰àWb†ŽF)(Ó¶?áâ˜æ:×°/Ͳd]gk‡-˜@#–´~Ƹ«;.40Õð H# ‡™ÍÁZ…bÄRü8xç™+Dš,·È©Ýðâ„wq¡ a•»ß­ŸAm— ƒNìdÄ?x;xQƒ€‘èšã|&ú;<kuâ»Ò‹LŨ˜ 9 1¯c…Ó²Ù¾’ÍÍdDÈ3P¥ñSPšÿE4ŸxÞ— ŠjtøœO5ѹB›ji85g Ý`ÍÙa—uý”ÒÃdBó;A2ÎìçÏÈ  ¶C@ý)ëÍçb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 U.N¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ Z™ Æó ƹÆÆE 0D NOuQUNÆE~b”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””” 0뜜œœ B‡‡ 0¤¤ D5H D-} 0Kªª ASõÆH 0¤ 0D² A«ö˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»u´†1Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular ~‰/ê:i¢×+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ PÝ ƒR«ª$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¸äò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFrom€the€statements€of€counsel€and€the€trial€court,€it€appears€that€the€codefendant,€Darius€Jones,€was€triedÐ ° Ðseparately€and€convicted,€òòinter€aliaóó,€of€first€degree€felony€murder.€òòóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó kÝ ƒR«ª$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¸äò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Although€this€witness€was€called€to€the€stand€by€the€name€ð ðEnrique€Diaz€Castello,ðð€he€testified€that€ð ðCastelloððÐ ° Ðwas€his€motherððs€maiden€name€and€that€he€went€by€ð ðDiaz,ðð€his€fatherððs€last€name.(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular Colton P.J.ChildressFitzpatrickTweetyArmondoAlvardaoRickyPappasBolina]ctingLemacksSimerlySheltonRucker W]eforeseeablyHenningHuddlestonhad hadZerbstWooddale VannNesbitAdkissonAshby CmtsIngramv]eryAlvaradoj]ustPonceBecerra- ù-(|G2«ª$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€–!»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¸äò»»Ô d(|3¿ $££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€–!»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿ $¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€–!»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€–!»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼–!»»»ÔÑ8€ÉXXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡îi–!ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼–!»îîi #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€September€14,€2004Ð öF ÐÔ‡XÉX»¼–!ÔÌò òÔ#†¼–!»XXÉ!#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€SPENCER€PETERSONÔ‡XÉX»¼–!Ôó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNos.€01„04380„04392€€€€€€John€P.€Colton,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„02939„CCA„R3„CD€€„€Filed€December€6,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓBased€on€his€participation€in€a€home€invasion€and€robbery€that€resulted€in€the€death€of€a€victim,€theÐ V¦  Ðdefendant,€Spencer€Peterson,€was€charged€by€the€Shelby€County€Grand€Jury€in€thirteen€separateÐ ? Ðindictments€with€one€count€of€first€degree€premeditated€murder;€two€counts€of€first€degree€felonyÐ (x Ðmurder;€two€counts€of€attempted€first€degree€murder;€eight€counts€of€aggravated€robbery;€one€countÐ a Ðof€aggravated€burglary;€three€counts€of€attempted€especially€aggravated€robbery;€and€two€counts€ofÐ úJ Ðattempted€aggravated€robbery.€€The€indictments€were€consolidated€for€trial,€at€the€conclusion€ofÐ ã3 Ðwhich€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€all€counts€as€charged€with€the€exception€of€the€first€degreeÐ Ì Ðmurder€and€attempted€first€degree€murder€counts,€in€which€he€was€convicted,€respectively,€of€theÐ µ Ðlesser„included€offenses€of€second€degree€murder,€a€Class€A€felony;€and€attempted€second€degreeÐ žî Ðmurder,€a€Class€B€felony.€€After€merging€the€three€second€degree€murder€convictions€and€theÐ ‡× Ðseparate€convictions€of€aggravated€robbery€involving€the€same€victim,€the€trial€court€sentenced€theÐ pÀ Ðdefendant€as€a€Range€I€offender€to€consecutive€terms€of€twenty€years€for€the€second€degree€murderÐ Y© Ðconviction€and€eight€years€for€each€of€the€four€aggravated€robbery€convictions.€€The€trial€courtÐ B’ Ðordered€concurrent€sentences€for€the€remaining€convictions,€for€an€effective€sentence€of€fifty„twoÐ +{ Ðyears€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€On€appeal,€the€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€theÐ d Ðevidence€for€his€second€degree€murder€conviction;€the€denial€of€his€motion€to€suppress€his€statementÐ ýM Ðto€police;€the€admission€at€trial€of€photographs€of€the€victim;€the€propriety€of€the€jurors€having€beenÐ æ 6  Ðallowed€to€directly€question€trial€witnesses;€and€the€consecutive€sentencing€imposed.€€We€affirm€theÐ Ï!! Ðjudgments€of€the€trial€court€but€remand€for€entry€of€corrected€judgments€as€to€certain€of€the€offensesÐ ¸"" Ðand€for€the€trial€court€to€set€out€its€basis€for€consecutive€sentencing.Ô#†¼–!»XXÉ“#ÔÔ‡XÉX»¼–!ÔÐ ¡#ñ# ÐÌÓÀÓò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgments€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed€andÐ s%à % ÐRemandedó óÐ ]&­!& ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼–!»àXÉ#ÔÔ‡XÉX.¼–!ÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòGary€R.€Wade,€P.J.,óó€and€òòNormaÐ 0(€#( ÐMcGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€joined.Ð )i$) ÐÌKevin€E.€Childress,€Memphis,€Tennessee€(on€appeal),€and€Brett€Stein,€Memphis,€Tennessee€(atÐ ë*;&+ Ðtrial),€for€the€appellant,€Spencer€Peterson.Ð Ô+$', Ðâ âÐ ½, (-ým ÐÔ_ÔPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Michael€Markham,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ° Ðâ âWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Paul€Thomas€Hoover,€Jr.,€and€Michael€S.€Davis,Ð ™é ÐAssistant€District€Attorneys€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ô#†¼–!»XXÉ#ÔÔ‡XÉX»¼–!ԀР‚Ò ÐÓÙÓÌÓÓà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼–!»XXÉ#ÔÔ‡XÉX»¼–!ÔÐ T¤ ÐòòÔ#†¼–!»àXɲ#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÉX.¼–!Ôóóà@¥¥(ìàò òòòFACTSóóó óˆÐ ( x ÐÓÓà  àAt€approximately€8:00€p.m.€on€September€29,€2000,€nine€Hispanic€men€were€in€a€MemphisÐ ü L Ðapartment€when€two€masked€African„American€men€entered€through€the€cracked€door.€€One€wasÐ å 5  Ðarmed€with€a€pistol€and€demanded€money,€while€the€second€remained€by€the€door€to€prevent€anyoneÐ Î   Ðfrom€leaving.€€During€the€course€of€the€robbery,€the€gunman€shot€one€victim€in€the€leg,€a€secondÐ ·  Ðvictim€in€the€arm,€and€a€third€victim€in€the€chest,€causing€his€death.€€Acting€on€a€tip,€the€policeÐ  ð  Ðarrested€the€defendant€two€days€later€and€brought€him€to€the€homicide€office,€where€he€admittedÐ ‰Ù  Ðparticipating€in€the€robbery€and€sharing€in€the€proceeds,€but€denied€that€he€shot€anyone€or€had€anyÐ r  Ðprior€knowledge€of€his€accompliceððs€intention€to€fire€his€weapon.€€Ð [«  ÐÌà  àPrior€to€trial,€the€defendant€filed€a€motion€to€suppress€his€statement,€arguing,€among€otherÐ -} Ðthings,€that€it€was€the€product€of€an€unlawful€detention€and€was€neither€knowingly€nor€voluntarilyÐ f Ðgiven.€€The€sole€witness€at€the€November€29,€2001,€suppression€hearing€was€Sergeant€James€L.Ð ÿO ÐFitzpatrick,€one€of€two€Memphis€police€officers€who€participated€in€recording€the€statement.€Ð è8 ÐSergeant€Fitzpatrick€identified€the€defendantððs€signed€waiver€of€rights€and€his€statement,€which€wereÐ Ñ! Ðadmitted€as€exhibits€to€the€hearing.€€He€testified€that€police€investigators€who€ð ðsaturated€the€areaððÐ º  Ðimmediately€after€the€crime€located€three€or€four€separate€witnesses€who,€based€on€details€theÐ £ó Ðdefendant€had€leaked€in€conversation,€identified€the€defendant€and€his€codefendant€as€theÐ ŒÜ Ðperpetrators€of€the€crime.€€As€a€result€of€that€information,€police€officers€were€actively€searching€forÐ uÅ Ðthe€defendant€for€at€least€two€days€prior€to€his€arrest.€Ð ^® ÐÌà  àSergeant€Fitzpatrick€testified€the€defendant€was€arrested€on€October€2,€2000,€atÐ 0€ Ðapproximately€6:00€p.m.€and€brought€to€the€homicide€office€at€about€6:30€p.m.€€He€said€he€andÐ i ÐSergeant€Sheffield€read€the€defendant€his€rights€at€8:43€p.m.,€obtained€his€signed€waiver€of€rightsÐ  R Ðat€8:45€p.m.,€began€taking€his€formal€statement€at€9:33€p.m.,€and€completed€the€written€statement,Ð ë ; Ðinitialed€and€signed€by€the€defendant,€at€10:36€p.m.€€The€defendant€was€under€arrest€at€the€time€theÐ Ô!$  Ðstatement€was€taken,€but€was€not€formally€charged€until€shortly€thereafter.€€Sergeant€FitzpatrickÐ ½" ! Ðstated€that€the€purpose€of€the€interview€was€to€give€the€defendant€a€chance€to€either€confirm€or€refuteÐ ¦#ö" Ðthe€information€the€police€had€obtained€from€their€witnesses.€€He€agreed€there€was€sufficientÐ $ß# Ðprobable€cause€for€the€defendantððs€arrest€and€testified€that€the€defendant€would€have€been€chargedÐ x%È $ Ðregardless€of€whether€or€not€he€gave€a€statement.€€Ð a&±!% ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€subsequently€overruled€the€motion€to€suppress,€and€the€defendant€was€triedÐ 3(ƒ#' Ðbefore€a€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court€jury€from€May€12„15,€2003.€€Memphis€Police€OfficerÐ )l$( ÐAdrienne€Dobbins€testified€she€was€patrolling€with€her€partner€in€the€Hickory€Hill€area€of€MemphisÐ *U%) Ðbetween€8:00€and€8:30€p.m.€on€September€29,€2000,€when€she€received€a€report€of€a€home€invasionÐ î*>&* Ðrobbery€with€three€gunshot€victims€at€the€Marina€Cove€Apartments.€€Upon€entering€the€apartment,Ð ×+''+ Ðshe€observed€blood€spattered€on€the€carpet,€the€three€gunshot€victims,€and€several€other€individuals.€Ð ° ÐOfficer€Dobbins€testified€that€one€of€those€individuals€who€spoke€English€related€that€he€and€theÐ ™é Ðothers€had€been€inside€the€apartment€when€two€masked€African„American€men€entered€with€a€pistol,Ð ‚Ò Ðdemanded€money€from€everyone,€shot€three€victims,€and€fled.€€Ð k» ÐÌà  àIn€a€reiteration€of€his€suppression€hearing€testimony,€Sergeant€Fitzpatrick€testified€that€theÐ =  Ðdefendant€was€arrested€at€approximately€6:00€p.m.€on€October€2,€2000,€and€brought€to€the€homicideÐ & v Ðoffice,€where€Sergeant€Fitzpatrick€was€asked€to€participate€in€his€interview.€€After€first€familiarizingÐ  _ Ðhimself€with€the€case,€he€advised€the€defendant€of€his€rights€and€obtained€a€written€waiver€at€8:45Ð ø H Ðp.m.,€began€taking€the€defendantððs€statement€at€9:30€p.m.,€and€completed€the€written€statement€atÐ á 1  Ð10:36€p.m.,€which€the€defendant€signed€and€initialed€in€his€presence.€€On€cross„examination,Ð Ê   ÐSergeant€Fitzpatrick€acknowledged€that€the€defendant€turned€eighteen€on€October€1,€2000,€the€dayÐ ³  Ðbefore€his€October€2€statement€was€taken,€and€had€therefore€still€been€a€juvenile€on€September€29,Ð œì  Ð2000,€when€the€crimes€were€committed.€Ð …Õ  ÐÌà  àIn€the€statement,€which€Sergeant€Fitzpatrick€read€aloud€for€the€jury€and€which€was€admittedÐ W§  Ðas€a€trial€exhibit,€the€defendant€said€that€he€and€ð ðTweetyðð׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€had€decided€to€rob€someone€two€or€threeÐ @ Ðdays€before€the€incident€occurred€and€that€Tweety€had€obtained€a€gun€from€ð ðTwin.ðð€€He€stated€thatÐ )y Ðthey€chose€the€victimsðð€apartment€because€the€door€was€cracked€open,€that€they€entered€together,Ð b Ðand€that€Tweety€demanded€money€while€displaying€the€gun.€€According€to€the€defendant,€TweetyÐ ûK Ðreacted€with€violence€when€the€victims€were€initially€slow€to€produce€their€money:Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àHe€shot€at€one€of€the€guyððs€leg,€and€I€didnððt€know€that€he€hadÐ ¶ Ðshot€him€at€first€until€I€saw€him€grab€his€leg.€€I€was€standing€by€theÐ Ÿï Ðdoor.€€I€did€not€leave€the€door,€but€I€saw€after€the€guy€got€shot€in€theÐ ˆØ Ðleg,€they€put€the€money€on€the€table.ÐqÁ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àI€seen€[sic]€the€second€one€get€shot,€but€I€donððt€know€if€it€wasÐ C“ Ðbefore€or€after€the€money€was€put€on€the€table.€€I€saw€the€second€oneÐ ,| Ðgo€down€holding€his€arm€after€the€shot.Ðe` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTweety€got€the€money€off€the€table€went€in€another€room,€andÐ ç 7 ÐI€couldnððt€see€him.€€I€heard€more€gunshots,€either€one€or€two,€andÐ Ð!   Ðthen€Tweety€came€back€from€the€other€room,€and€we€ran€out€the€door.й" !` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àWe€ran€by€the€pool€and€dropped€our€clothes,€and€we€had€someÐ ‹$Û# Ðclothes€up€under€the€clothes€that€we€dropped.€€After€that,€we€wentÐ t%Ä $ Ðback€up€front€of€the€apartment€complex€by€Twinððs€house€and€actedÐ ]&­!% Ðlike€we€didnððt€know€what€happened.€ÐF'–"&` x` x Ðâ âÐ /(#' ÐThe€defendant€stated€that€he€received€half€of€the€$500€robbery€proceeds.€€He€said€he€was€not€armed,Ð ° Ðâ âdid€not€know€that€Tweety€was€going€to€shoot€anyone,€and€had€thought€that€all€Tweety€intended€toÐ ™é Ðdo€was€to€ð ðshow€the€gun€and€get€the€money.ððÐ ‚Ò ÐÌà  àThe€Stateððs€next€witness,€Hector€Moreno,€testified€through€an€interpreter€that€he€and€threeÐ T¤ Ðfriends€were€talking€and€playing€cards€in€the€living€room€when€two€masked€African„American€menÐ =  Ðdressed€in€black€entered€the€apartment.€€He€said€that€the€taller€of€the€two€was€armed€with€a€gun€andÐ & v Ðdemanded€their€money,€while€the€shorter€man€remained€by€the€door€to€prevent€anyone€from€leaving.€Ð  _ ÐThe€gunman€took€the€money€from€the€table€where€Moreno€and€his€friends€had€been€playing€cards,Ð ø H Ðand€shot€Moreno€in€the€right€hand€as€he€was€reaching€for€his€wallet.€€Moreno€testified€that€theÐ á 1  Ðgunman€shot€ð ðPabloðð€in€the€leg€a€few€minutes€later.€€He€said€that€the€gunman€went€into€the€kitchenÐ Ê   Ðand€he€could€hear€him€asking€for€money€from€the€men€there,€but€he€did€not€hear€any€gunshots.€Ð ³  ÐWhile€the€gunman€was€in€the€kitchen,€the€masked€man€who€remained€in€the€living€room€beside€theÐ œì  Ðdoor€ordered€Moreno,€in€a€ð ð[v]ery€madðð€tone€of€voice,€to€take€off€his€shoes€so€he€could€see€if€he€hadÐ …Õ  Ðany€money€hidden€inside€them.€€Moreno€testified€that€before€leaving,€the€gunman€shot€ð ðArmondoððÐ n¾  Ðin€the€chest,€and€Armondo€later€died€from€his€injury.€€He€acknowledged€that€the€man€who€remainedÐ W§  Ðbeside€the€door€did€not€have€a€gun.€€However,€he€testified€that€the€man€was€still€waiting€at€the€doorÐ @ Ðfor€his€accomplice€at€the€time€Armondo€was€shot€and€that€the€two€men€appeared€to€flee€theÐ )y Ðapartment€together.€€Moreno€identified€a€photograph€of€Armondo€Becerra€while€he€was€alive,€whichÐ b Ðwas€admitted€as€a€trial€exhibit€over€defense€counselððs€objection,€and€another€ð ðmorgue€photographððÐ ûK Ðof€Becerra,€which€was€admitted€for€identification€only.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àEnrique€Diaz׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€testified€through€an€interpreter€that€five€men€were€in€the€kitchen€and€he€andÐ ¶ Ðthree€others€were€playing€cards€in€the€living€room€when€two€masked€African„American€men,€oneÐ Ÿï Ðarmed€with€a€gun,€rushed€in.€€While€the€shorter€man€remained€by€the€front€door€to€block€anyoneÐ ˆØ Ðfrom€leaving,€the€gunman€took€their€money€from€the€card€table;€demanded€more€money€from€HectorÐ qÁ ÐMoreno€and€shot€him€when€he€said€he€did€not€have€any;€took€the€$400€Diaz€had€in€his€wallet;€shotÐ Zª ÐPablo€Alvarado€in€the€leg€when€he€and€Armondo€Becerra€said€they€did€not€have€any€more€money;Ð C“ Ðwent€into€the€kitchen€pointing€his€gun;€came€back€from€the€kitchen;€started€out€the€apartment€doorÐ ,| Ðafter€the€second€man;€turned€and€shot€Armondo€Becerra;€and€then€left€the€apartment,€closing€theÐ e Ðdoor€as€he€left.€€Diaz€estimated€that€the€gunman€left€twenty€seconds€after€his€companion,€or€ð ð[j]ustÐ þN Ðthe€time€that€he€shoot€somebody€else[.]ðð€€He€said€that€the€second€man€who€blocked€the€door€did€notÐ ç 7 Ðmake€any€statements€or€threatening€motions,€but€that€he€was€afraid€of€him.€€He€acknowledged€heÐ Ð!   Ðhad€speculated€in€his€statement€to€police€that€the€second€man€ð ðmust€have€been€the€lookout.ððÐ ¹" ! ÐÌà  àThe€Stateððs€next€two€witnesses,€Carlos€Diaz€Ponce€and€Hector€Martinez,€were€among€theÐ ‹$Û# Ðgroup€of€five€men€in€the€kitchen.€€Ponce€testified€through€an€interpreter€that€he€started€toward€theÐ t%Ä $ Ðliving€room€from€the€kitchen,€saw€the€gunman,€and€returned€to€the€kitchen€to€inform€his€friends.€€HeÐ ]&­!% Ðsaid€that€the€men€in€the€kitchen€were€attempting€to€hide€their€wallets€in€the€trash€and€in€theÐ F'–"& Ðrefrigerator€when€they€heard€two€gunshots€from€the€living€room.€€The€gunman€then€entered€theÐ /(#' Ðkitchen€and€took€money€from€three€of€them,€excluding€Ponce€and€Martinez€because€neither€had€anyÐ )h$( Ðmoney.€€Ponce€said€he€heard€a€third€and€final€shot€after€the€gunman€had€left€the€kitchen.€€Martinez,Ð ° Ðwho€also€testified€through€an€interpreter,€corroborated€Ponceððs€account,€testifying€that€he€heard€twoÐ ™é Ðgunshots€from€the€living€room€before€a€masked€gunman€came€into€the€kitchen€and€demanded€moneyÐ ‚Ò Ðfrom€the€five€men€there,€took€money€from€the€three€that€had€money,€and€then€left.€€Martinez€alsoÐ k» Ðheard€a€third€gunshot€from€the€living€room€just€before€the€gunman€left€the€apartment.€€From€theirÐ T¤ Ðpositions€in€the€kitchen,€neither€Ponce€nor€Martinez€was€able€to€see€the€shootings€or€the€man€whoÐ =  Ðstood€guard€at€the€front€door.€Ð & v ÐÌà  àDr.€Teresa€Allen€Campbell,€the€Shelby€County€medical€examiner€who€performed€the€autopsyÐ ø H Ðof€Armondo€Becerraððs€body,€testified€that€he€died€as€the€result€of€a€gunshot€wound€to€the€left€lowerÐ á 1  Ðchest€in€which€the€bullet€entered€the€abdomen€and€lacerated€the€liver,€causing€him€to€bleed€to€death.Ð Ê   ÐShe€identified€the€morgue€photograph€of€Becerra€as€the€man€on€whom€she€had€performed€theÐ ³  Ðautopsy,€which€was€then€admitted€as€a€trial€exhibit.€€Ð œì  ÐÌà  àAlfonso€Enrique€Becerra,€Armondo€Becerraððs€brother,€testified€through€an€interpreter€thatÐ n¾  Ðhe€was€between€the€kitchen€and€the€living€room€when€the€two€intruders€entered.€€He€said€that€theÐ W§  Ðone€with€the€gun€demanded€and€took€money€from€the€men€in€the€living€room,€shot€two€people,€cameÐ @ Ðinto€the€kitchen€and€took€money€from€two€or€three€men,€returned€to€the€living€room€and,€just€beforeÐ )y Ðleaving€the€apartment,€shot€his€brother,€who€was€sitting€on€a€couch€beside€the€door.€€The€witnessÐ b Ðtestified€that€the€second€man€remained€beside€the€door€and€that€both€men€departed€together€after€theÐ ûK Ðgunman€shot€his€brother.€€He€acknowledged€that€the€second€man€was€unarmed€and€that€he€neverÐ ä4 Ðheard€him€say€anything.€€Ð Í ÐÌà  àThe€Stateððs€final€witness€was€Memphis€Police€Officer€Ricky€Davison€of€the€Crime€ResponseÐ Ÿï ÐUnit,€who€identified€several€photographs€of€the€apartment€and€a€sketch€he€had€drawn€of€the€floorÐ ˆØ Ðplan,€which€showed€that€the€apartmentððs€front€door€was€visible€from€the€kitchen€doorway.€Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€elected€not€to€testify€and€rested€his€case€without€presenting€any€proof.€€Ð C“ ÐÌà@ôô&ìàò òòòANALYSISóóó óˆÐ e ÐÌà@  ìàò òI.€€Sufficiency€of€Evidence€for€Second€Degree€Murder€ConvictionˆÐ è 8 ÐÌó óà  àAs€his€first€issue,€the€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€in€support€of€hisÐ ¼" ! Ðconviction€for€second€degree€murder.€€When€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence€isÐ ¥#õ" Ðchallenged,€the€relevant€question€of€the€reviewing€court€is€ð ðwhether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€inÐ Ž$Þ# Ðthe€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÐ w%Ç $ Ðelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ð `&°!% ÐCt.€2781,€2789,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€560,€573€(1979);€òòsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e)€(ð ðFindings€of€guiltÐ I'™"& Ðin€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficientÐ 2(‚#' Ðto€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð);€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838Ð )k$( ÐS.W.2d€185,€190„92€(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€835€S.W.2d€600,€604€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð *T%) Ð1992)òòóó.€€All€questions€involving€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€theÐ í*=&* Ðevidence,€and€all€factual€issues€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,€754€S.W.2dÐ Ö+&'+ Ð620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)òòóó.€€ð ðA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,Ð ° Ðaccredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theoryÐ ™é Ðof€the€State.ðð€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€Our€supreme€court€stated€theÐ ‚Ò Ðrationale€for€this€rule:Ð k» ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThis€well„settled€rule€rests€on€a€sound€foundation.€€The€trialÐ =  Ðjudge€and€the€jury€see€the€witnesses€face€to€face,€hear€their€testimonyÐ & v Ðand€observe€their€demeanor€on€the€stand.€€Thus€the€trial€judge€andÐ  _ Ðjury€are€the€primary€instrumentality€of€justice€to€determine€the€weightÐ ø H Ðand€credibility€to€be€given€to€the€testimony€of€witnesses.€€In€the€trialÐ á 1  Ðforum€alone€is€there€human€atmosphere€and€the€totality€of€theÐ Ê   Ðevidence€cannot€be€reproduced€with€a€written€record€in€this€Court.г ` x` x ÐòòÌBolin€v.€Stateóó,€219€Tenn.€4,€11,€405€S.W.2d€768,€771€(1966)€(citing€òòCarroll€v.€Stateóó,€212€Tenn.€464,Ð …Õ  Ð370€S.W.2d€523€(1963)).€€A€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€aÐ n¾  Ðdefendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal,€a€convictedÐ W§  Ðdefendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639Ð @ ÐS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ô‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔÐ )y ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€second€degree€murder€under€a€theory€of€criminalÐ ûK Ðresponsibility.€€Second€degree€murder€is€defined€as€ð ð[a]€knowing€killing€of€another.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÐ ä4 ÐAnn.€ðð€39-13-210(a)€(1997€&€2003).€€ð ðððKnowingðð€refers€to€a€person€who€acts€knowingly€withÐ Í Ðrespect€to€the€conduct€or€to€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€of€theÐ ¶ Ðnature€of€the€conduct€or€that€the€circumstances€exist.€€A€person€acts€knowingly€with€respect€to€aÐ Ÿï Ðresult€of€the€personððs€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€that€the€conduct€is€reasonably€certain€toÐ ˆØ Ðcause€the€result[.]ðð€òòId.óó€ðð€39-11-106(20).€€A€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€the€conduct€ofÐ qÁ Ðanother€if,€ð ð[a]cting€with€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefit€inÐ Zª Ðthe€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,€or€attempts€to€aid€anotherÐ C“ Ðperson€to€commit€the€offense.ðð€òòId.óó€ðð€39-11-402(2).€€Criminal€responsibility€is€not€a€separate€crimeÐ ,| Ðbut€ð ðis€solely€a€theory€by€which€the€State€may€prove€the€defendantððs€guilt€of€the€alleged€offense€.Ð e Ð.€.€based€upon€the€conduct€of€another€person.ðð€€òòState€v.€Lemacksóó,€996€S.W.2d€166,€170€(Tenn.€1999).€Ð þN ÐÌÌà  àRelying€on€òòState€v.€Howardóó,€30€S.W.3d€271€(Tenn.€2000),€the€defendant€argues€that€Ô#†XÉX XX¿ÓêX#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔthe€StateÐ ¹" ! Ðfailed€to€prove€him€guilty€of€second€degree€murder€under€a€theory€of€criminal€responsibility€becauseÐ ¢#ò" Ðit€failed€to€show€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€victimððs€death€was€the€natural€and€probableÐ ‹$Û# Ðconsequence€of€the€aggravated€robberies€or€aggravated€burglary.€€In€support,€he€cites€the€testimonyÐ t%Ä $ Ðthat€he€did€not€possess€a€gun€and€left€the€apartment€before€the€shooting€occurred,€as€well€as€hisÐ ]&­!% Ðstatement€to€police,€in€which€he€disavowed€any€prior€knowledge€of€his€accompliceððs€intention€to€useÐ F'–"& Ðhis€weapon.Ð /(#' ÐÌà  àIn€òòHowardóó,€our€supreme€court€set€forth€òòóówhat€the€State€€must€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubtÐ *Q%) Ðin€order€to€impose€criminal€liability€based€on€the€natural€and€probable€consequences€rule:€ð ð(1)€theÐ ê*:&* Ðelements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€that€accompanied€the€target€crime;€(2)€that€the€defendant€wasÐ Ó+#'+ Ðcriminally€responsible€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39-11-402;€and€(3)€that€theÐ ° Ðother€crimes€that€were€committed€were€natural€and€probable€consequences€of€the€target€crime.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ ™é Ðat€276.€€The€defendant€in€òòHowardóó€was€convicted€of€premeditated€murder€based€on€a€killingÐ ‚Ò Ðcommitted€by€a€codefendant€during€a€robbery.€€Here,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€one€count€ofÐ k» Ðsecond€degree€murder€as€a€lesser„included€offense€of€premeditated€murder€and€two€counts€of€secondÐ T¤ Ðdegree€murder€as€lesser„included€offenses€of€felony€murder,€with€the€three€separate€counts€mergedÐ =  Ðinto€a€single€conviction€following€the€juryððs€verdicts.€€This€court€has€previously€concluded€that€whenÐ & v Ða€defendantððs€conviction€occurs€under€a€theory€of€criminal€responsibility€for€felony€murder,€theÐ  _ Ðnatural€and€probable€consequences€rule€is€not€implicated.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Robert€Simerlyóó,€No.€E2002„Ð ø H Ð02626„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WL€443294,€at€*11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Mar.€11,€2004),€òòperm.€to€appealÐ á 1  Ðdeniedóó€(Tenn.€Oct.€4,€2004)€(ð ðThus,€the€evidence€that€places€the€defendant€squarely€in€the€robberyÐ Ê   Ðenterprise€inculpates€him€through€complicity€in€the€felony€murder.ðð)€(citing€òòState€v.€Wintersóó,€137Ð ³  ÐS.W.3d€641,€658„59€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2003),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2004));€òòState€v.€GeneÐ œì  ÐShelton€Rucker,€Jr.óó,€No.€E2002„02101„CCA„R3„CD,€2003€WL€22999411,€at€*€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð …Õ  ÐDec.€22,€2003)€(ð ð[W]e€adhere€to€the€.€.€.€view€.€.€.€that€the€natural€and€probable€consequencesÐ n¾  Ðinstruction€is€not€required€in€conjunction€with€a€charge€of€felony€murder.ðð).Ð W§  ÐÌà  àThe€òòWintersóó€court€provided€the€rationale€for€this€determination:€Ð )y ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€question€whether€the€natural€and€probable€consequencesÐ ûK Ðinstruction€was€required€for€the€felony€murder€count€is€an€intriguingÐ ä4 Ðone.€€ð ðThe€[natural€and€probable€consequences]€rule€underlies€theÐ Í Ðdoctrine€of€criminal€responsibility€and€is€based€on€the€recognitionÐ ¶ Ðthat€aiders€and€abettors€should€be€responsible€for€the€criminal€harmsÐ Ÿï Ðthey€have€naturally,€probably€and€foreseeably€put€into€motion.ððÐ ˆØ ÐòòHowardóó,€30€S.W.3d€at€276.€€In€contrast,€the€felony€murder€statute,Ð qÁ Ðboth€as€it€existed€at€the€time€of€the€crime€and€today,€does€not€requireÐ Zª Ðthat€a€homicide€committed€during€the€course€of€one€of€theÐ C“ Ðenumerated€felonies€be€foreseeable.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ,| Ð39-13-202(a)(2)€(1997€&€2003);€€òòState€v.€Hintonóó,€42€S.W.3d€113,€119Ð e Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000),€òòperm.€app.€denied€óó€(Tenn.€2001).€€ð ðWhenÐ þN Ðone€enters€into€a€scheme€with€another€to€commit€one€of€the€feloniesÐ ç 7 Ðenumerated€in€the€felony€murder€statutes,€and€death€ensues,€bothÐ Ð!   Ðdefendants€are€responsible€for€the€death€regardless€of€who€actuallyÐ ¹" ! Ðcommitted€the€murder€and€whether€the€killing€was€specificallyÐ ¢#ò" Ðcontemplated€by€the€other.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€756€S.W.2dÐ ‹$Û# Ð700,€704€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988)).€€Thus,€the€defendant€in€the€caseÐ t%Ä $ Ðbefore€us€was€statutorily€responsible€for€òòall€homicidesóó€committedÐ ]&­!% Ðduring€the€course€of€the€robbery,€whether€or€not€the€homicide€wasÐ F'–"& Ðforeseeable.€€As€such,€despite€the€stateððs€concession€that€theÐ /(#' Ðinstruction€should€have€been€given,€the€trial€court€was€not€requiredÐ )h$( Ðto€give€the€natural€and€probable€consequences€instruction€for€theÐ *Q%) Ðfelony€murder€count.Ðê*:&*` x` x ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðòòóó137€S.W.3d€at€659€(emphasis€in€original)Ô#†XÉX XX¿Óq_#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ.€€Therefore,€the€State€was€not€required€in€this€case€to€showÐ ° Ðthat€the€murder€was€a€natural€and€probable€consequence€of€the€aggravated€robberies€or€aggravatedÐ ™é Ðburglary€in€order€to€prove€the€defendantððs€guilt€of€second€degree€murder€under€the€two€felonyÐ ‚Ò Ðmurder€counts€of€the€indictment.€€Ð k» ÐÌà  àViewed€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€the€evidence€at€trial€was€more€than€sufficientÐ =  Ðto€sustain€the€defendantððs€second€degree€murder€conviction€under€a€theory€of€criminal€responsibility.Ð & v ÐUnder€the€theory€of€criminal€responsibility,€presence€and€companionship€with€the€perpetrator€of€aÐ  _ Ðfelony€before€and€after€the€commission€of€the€crime€are€circumstances€from€which€an€individualððsÐ ø H Ðparticipation€may€be€inferred.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ballóó,€973€S.W.2d€288,€293€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€Ð á 1  ÐNo€particular€act€need€be€shown,€and€the€defendant€need€not€have€taken€a€physical€part€in€the€crime.€Ð Ê   ÐòòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Ó9t#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔAccording€to€the€defendantððs€own€statement,€he€and€his€accomplice€formulated€the€plan€forÐ ³  Ðthe€robbery€at€least€two€days€prior€to€carrying€it€out,€and€his€accomplice€obtained€a€gun€for€thatÐ œì  Ðpurpose.€€The€defendant€also€said€that€he€entered€the€apartment€with€his€accomplice,€remainedÐ …Õ  Ðbeside€the€front€door€during€the€robbery€and€fled€the€apartment€with€his€accomplice€after€theÐ n¾  Ðgunshots€had€been€fired.€€In€addition,€he€admitted€sharing€equally€in€the€robbery€proceeds.€€Two€outÐ W§  Ðof€three€victims€who€saw€the€defendant€described€his€actions€in€standing€beside€the€door€as€blockingÐ @ Ðanyoneððs€escape.€€Two€of€these€three€witnesses€also€testified€that€he€fled€the€apartment€with€hisÐ )y Ðaccomplice€after€Armondo€Becerra€had€been€shot.€€Finally,€one€of€the€victims€described€theÐ b Ðdefendantððs€ordering€him€to€remove€his€shoes€so€that€he€could€see€if€any€money€was€concealedÐ ûK Ðinside€them,€while€the€gunman€was€robbing€the€victims€in€the€kitchen.€€From€this€evidence,€the€juryÐ ä4 Ðcould€reasonably€have€concluded€that€the€defendant€shared€in€his€accompliceððs€intent€to€commit€theÐ Í Ðburglary€and€robberies€and€assisted€him€in€the€commission€of€the€offenses.€€€Ð ¶ Ðà  àÌà@« « ìàò òII.€€Denial€of€Motion€to€Suppress€StatementˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌó óà  àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€his€motion€to€suppress€hisÐ \¬ Ðstatement.€€The€findings€of€fact€made€by€a€trial€court€on€a€motion€to€suppress€are€binding€on€thisÐ E• Ðcourt€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€them.€€òòState€v.€Waltonóó,€41€S.W.3d€75,€81€(Tenn.Ð .~ Ð2001),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€534€U.S.€948,€122€S.€Ct.€341,€151€L.€Ed.€2d€258€(2001)Ô#†XÉX XX¿Óêx#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ.€€However,€the€trialÐ g Ðcourtððs€application€of€the€law€to€the€facts€is€reviewed€òòde€novoóó.€€òòId.óó€€òòóóÐ  P ÐÌà  àAt€the€outset,€we€note€that€the€record€contains€neither€the€oral€nor€written€findings€of€fact€andÐ Ò!"  Ðconclusions€of€law€of€the€trial€court€on€the€suppression€issue.€€Thus,€although€certain€findings€andÐ »" ! Ðconclusions€are€implicit€in€the€trial€courtððs€overruling€of€the€motion,€we€must€review€this€issueÐ ¤#ô" Ðwithout€benefit€of€the€specific€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€€In€so€doing,€we€note€thatÔ#†XÉX XX¿ÓÀ€#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ€theÐ $Ý# Ðprevailing€party,€in€this€case,€the€State,€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidenceÐ v%Æ $ Ðand€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€from€it.€€òòState€v.€Hicksóó,€55€S.W.3dÐ _&¯!% Ð515,€521€(Tenn.€2001)Ô#†XÉX XX¿Óuƒ#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ.€€Additionally,€this€court€may€òòóóconsider€the€proof€at€trial,€as€well€as€at€theÐ H'˜"& Ðsuppression€hearing,€when€considering€the€appropriateness€of€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€on€a€pretrialÐ 1(#' Ðmotion€to€suppress.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Henningóó,€975€S.W.2d€290,€299€(Tenn.€1998)€(holding€that€becauseÐ )j$( Ðthe€rules€of€appellate€procedure€ð ðcontemplate€that€allegations€of€error€should€be€evaluated€in€lightÐ *S%) Ðof€the€entire€record,ðð€an€appellate€court€ð ðmay€consider€the€proof€adduced€both€at€the€suppressionÐ ì*<&* Ðhearing€and€at€trialðð).€Ð Õ+%'+ Їà  àThe€defendant€first€cites€òòState€v.€HuddlestonÔ#†XÉX XX¿ÓÞ„#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔóó,€924€S.W.2d€666,€674€(Tenn.€1996),€to€argueÐ ° Ðthat€his€statement€should€be€suppressed€under€the€ð ðfruit€of€the€poisonous€treeðð€doctrine€as€theÐ ™é Ðproduct€of€an€unlawful€detention,€asserting€that€he€was€unlawfully€ð ðheld€in€custody€for€the€sole€andÐ ‚Ò Ðexpress€purpose€of€securing€a€confession[.]ðð€€The€State€argues€that€òòHuddlestonóó€is€readilyÐ k» Ðdistinguishable€on€its€facts€and€that€no€Fourth€Amendment€violation€occurred€in€the€case€at€bar.€€WeÐ T¤ Ðagree€with€the€State.€Ð =  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€in€òòHuddlestonóó€was€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Óë‡#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔarrested€without€a€warrant€on€a€Friday€afternoon€and€heldÐ  _ Ðwithout€a€judicial€determination€of€probable€cause€before€issuing€a€confession,€preceded€by€òòMirandaóóÐ ø H Ðwarnings€and€a€signed€waiver€of€rights,€on€the€following€Monday€afternoon.€€924€S.W.2d€òòóóat€668.€Ô#†XÉX XX¿ÓµŠ#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔÐ á 1  ÐThe€next€day,€relying€solely€on€the€defendantððs€confession,€a€police€detective€obtained€a€probableÐ Ê   Ðcause€warrant€from€a€magistrate.€€òòId.óó€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Ó(Œ#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ€The€State€conceded€that€the€more€than€seventy„two„hourÐ ³  Ðdetention€€preceding€the€judicial€probable€cause€determination€constituted€an€unreasonable€delayÐ œì  Ðand€hence€a€Fourth€Amendment€violation,€but€argued€that€suppression€of€the€confession€was€not€theÐ …Õ  Ðproper€remedy€for€the€constitutional€violation.€€òòId.óó€at€672.€€In€its€determination€of€that€issue,€ourÐ n¾  Ðsupreme€court€adopted€the€ð ðfruit€of€the€poisonous€treeðð€analysis,€in€which€the€ð ðfocus€is€on€whetherÐ W§  Ðthe€evidence€was€obtained€by€exploitation€of€the€Fourth€Amendment€illegality.ðð€€òòId.óó€atòòóó€674.€€Ð @ ÐÌà  àUnlike€the€defendant€in€òòHuddlestonóó,€the€defendant€in€the€case€at€bar€was€detained€a€mere€fourÐ b Ðhours€before€being€formally€charged.€€As€the€òòHuddlestonóó€court€noted,€a€judicial€determination€ofÐ ûK Ðprobable€cause€that€occurs€within€forty„eight€hours€of€a€defendantððs€arrest€is€generally€sufficient€toÐ ä4 Ðsatisfy€the€Fourth€Amendment,€unless€there€is€evidence€that€the€probable€cause€determination€wasÐ Í Ðunreasonably€delayed€for€the€purpose€of€gathering€additional€information€to€justify€an€arrest,€wasÐ ¶ Ðmotivated€by€ill€will€toward€the€defendant,€or€constituted€a€ð ðððdelay€for€delayððs€sake.ðððð€€òòId.óó€at€672Ð Ÿï Ð(quotingÔ#†XÉX XX¿Ó%#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ€òòCounty€of€Riverside€v.€McLaughlinóó,€500€U.S.€44,€56,€111€S.€Ct.€1661,€1670,€114€L.€Ed.€2dÐ ˆØ Ð49,€63€(1991)).€€Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àAlthough€the€defendant€asserts€in€his€brief€that€the€police€ð ðlacked€sufficient€probable€causeÐ C“ Ðto€detain€him,ðð€the€evidence€presented€at€the€suppression€hearing€established€otherwise.€€SergeantÐ ,| ÐFitzpatrick€testified€that€at€least€three€individuals€had€identified€the€defendant€as€one€of€theÐ e Ðperpetrators,€based€on€information€the€defendant€had€provided€to€them€in€conversation;€that€theÐ þN Ðpurpose€of€the€interview€was€merely€to€give€the€defendant€a€chance€to€either€refute€or€admit€thatÐ ç 7 Ðinformation;€and€that€the€defendant€was€going€to€be€charged€regardless€of€the€outcome€of€theÐ Ð!   Ðinterview.€€His€testimony€further€established€that€the€defendant€executed€his€waiver€of€rights€at€8:45Ð ¹" ! Ðp.m.,€less€than€three€hours€after€his€arrest,€began€his€formal€statement€at€9:33€p.m.,€and€signed€theÐ ¢#ò" Ðwritten€statement€at€10:36€p.m.€€Moreover,€Sergeant€Fitzpatrick€provided€a€partial€explanation€forÐ ‹$Û# Ðthe€delay€between€the€defendantððs€6:30€p.m.€arrival€at€the€homicide€office€and€the€8:43€p.m.Ð t%Ä $ Ðinitiation€of€his€interview.€€He€explained€at€trial€that€he€was€asked€to€participate€in€the€interview,Ð ]&­!% Ðeven€though€he€had€not€been€involved€in€the€investigation€of€the€crime,€because€of€the€timing€of€theÐ F'–"& Ðdefendantððs€arrest€and€arrival€at€the€homicide€office.€€As€a€result,€he€had€had€to€take€some€time€toÐ /(#' Ðfamiliarize€himself€with€the€case€before€beginning€the€interview.€€In€sum,€there€is€nothing€in€theÐ )h$( Ðrecord€to€suggest€that€the€police€lacked€probable€cause€to€arrest€the€defendant€or€detained€himÐ *Q%) Ðâ âwithout€probable€cause€for€the€sole€purpose€of€extracting€his€confession.€€We€conclude,€therefore,Ð ê*:&* Ðthat€there€is€no€Fourth€Amendment€violation€in€this€case€that€requires€suppression€of€the€defendantððsÐ ° Ðstatement.€€Ð ™é Ðâ âà  àThe€defendant€additionally€argues€that€his€statement€should€have€been€suppressed€becauseÐ ‚Ò Ðit€was€not€knowingly€and€voluntarily€made€under€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€in€which€he€hadÐ k» Ðjust€turned€eighteen,€was€detained€for€four€hours€without€being€charged,€and€was€interviewedÐ T¤ Ðwithout€the€presence€of€his€parent€or€a€lawyer.€€The€State€responds€by€noting€that€the€defendant€wasÐ =  Ðan€adult,€was€held€for€only€a€little€over€two€hours€before€being€advised€of€his€rights€and€signing€aÐ & v Ðwaiver€of€rights€form,€and€presented€no€evidence€at€the€suppression€hearing€to€show€he€was€unableÐ  _ Ðto€make€a€knowing€and€intelligent€waiver€of€his€right€to€remain€silent€or€to€have€counsel€presentÐ ø H Ðduring€questioning.€€The€State€argues,€therefore,€that€the€evidence€preponderates€in€favor€of€the€trialÐ á 1  Ðcourtððs€denial€of€the€defendantððs€motion€to€suppress.€Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àIn€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€471-75,€86€S.€Ct.€1602,€1626-28,€16€L.€Ed.€2d€694Ð œì  Ð(1966),€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€held€that€a€defendantððs€statements€made€during€a€custodialÐ …Õ  Ðinterrogation€are€inadmissible€at€trial€unless€the€State€establishes€that€the€defendant€was€informedÐ n¾  Ðof€his€right€to€remain€silent€and€his€right€to€counsel€and€that€he€knowingly€and€voluntarily€waivedÐ W§  Ðthose€rights.€€Whether€the€defendant€made€a€voluntary,€knowing,€and€intelligent€waiver€of€thoseÐ @ Ðrights€depends€ð ðððupon€the€particular€facts€and€circumstances€surrounding€that€case,€including€theÐ )y Ðbackground,€experience,€and€conduct€of€the€accused.ðððð€€òòEdwards€v.€Arizonaóó,€451€U.S.€477,€482,€101Ð b ÐS.€Ct.€1880,€1884,€68€L.€Ed.€2d€378€(1981)€(quoting€òòJohnson€v.€Zerbstóó,€304€U.S.€458,€464,€58€S.€Ct.Ð ûK Ð1019,€1023,€82€L.€Ed.€1461€(1938)).€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€State€that€there€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€support€the€defendantððsÐ ¶ Ðcontention€that€his€confession€was€unknowing€and€involuntary.€€The€evidence€established€that€heÐ Ÿï Ðwas€legally€an€adult€at€the€time€of€the€statement,€was€detained€for€less€than€three€hours€before€theÐ ˆØ Ðinterview€began,€and€was€given€òòMirandaóó€warnings€in€the€waiver€of€rights€and€again€before€makingÐ qÁ Ðhis€statement.€€The€waiver€of€rights€form€and€the€statement€show€that€he€signed€the€waiver€of€rightsÐ Zª Ðand€initialed€the€statement€to€indicate€he€understood€his€rights€and€wished€to€talk€to€the€investigatorsÐ C“ Ðwithout€the€presence€of€an€attorney,€and€also€signed€his€name€to€the€end€of€the€statement€and€placedÐ ,| Ðhis€initials€at€the€bottom€of€each€page.€€Moreover,€the€biographical€information€provided€at€the€topÐ e Ðof€the€statement,€which€we€presume€was€supplied€by€the€defendant,€lists€his€ð ðemploymentðð€as€anÐ þN Ðeleventh€grade€student€at€Wooddale€High€School.€€As€such,€the€evidence€preponderates€in€favor€ofÐ ç 7 Ða€finding€that€his€statement€was€knowing€and€voluntary.€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€the€trial€courtÐ Ð!   Ðdid€not€err€in€overruling€the€defendantððs€motion€to€suppress€his€statement.€€Ð ¹" ! ÐÌà@~ ~ ìàò òIII.€€Admission€of€Photographs€of€the€Victimó óˆÐ ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àAs€his€next€issue,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€theÐ ^&®!% Ðphotographs€showing€the€victim€alive€and€deceased.€€He€argues€that€neither€photograph€was€relevantÐ G'—"& Ðto€any€disputed€issue€at€trial€and,€further,€that€any€probative€value€the€photographs€carried€wasÐ 0(€#' Ðsubstantially€outweighed€by€their€prejudicial€effect.€€The€State€argues€that€the€trial€court€acted€withinÐ )i$( Ðits€discretion€in€admitting€both€photographs.€€We€again€agree€with€the€State.€Ð *R%) Ðâ âÐ ë*;&* Ðà  àWhen€the€State€sought€to€introduce€the€photographs€at€trial,€defense€counsel€objected,Ð ° Ðâ âoffering€to€stipulate€to€the€victimððs€identity€and€manner€of€death€and€arguing€that€the€photographsÐ ™é Ðwere€inflammatory€and€would€have€a€devastating€effect€on€the€jury.€€The€trial€court€overruled€theÐ ‚Ò Ðobjections,€finding€that€the€photograph€of€the€victim€alive€was€not€prejudicial€to€the€defendant€andÐ k» Ðthat€the€photograph€of€the€victim€deceased€was€neither€gruesome€nor€inflammatory€and€its€probativeÐ T¤ Ðvalue€outweighed€its€prejudicial€effect.€Ð =  ÐÌà  àThe€admissibility€of€photographs€generally€lies€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court,Ð  _ Ðand€will€not€be€overturned€on€appeal€absent€a€showing€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion.€€òòStateÐ ø H Ðv.€Banksóó,€564€S.W.2d€947,€949€(Tenn.€1978).€€ð ðTennessee€courts€follow€a€policy€of€liberality€in€theÐ á 1  Ðadmission€of€photographs€in€both€civil€and€criminal€cases.ðð€€òòState€v.€Morrisóó,€24€S.W.3d€788,€810Ð Ê   Ð(Tenn.€2000),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€€531€U.S.€1082,€121€S.€Ct.€786,€148€L.€Ed.€2d€682€(2001).€€In€determiningÐ ³  Ðwhether€a€photograph€is€admissible,€the€trial€court€must€first€determine€whether€it€is€relevant€to€aÐ œì  Ðmatter€at€issue€in€the€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòóóTenn.€R.€Evid.€401;€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Ó “#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔòòState€v.€Vannóó,€976€S.W.2d€93,€102€(Tenn.€1998),Ð …Õ  Ðòòcert.€deniedóó,€526€U.S.€1071,€119€S.€Ct.€1467,€143€L.€Ed.€2d€551€(1999);€òòBanksóó,€564€S.W.2d€at€949.€Ð n¾  ÐThe€court€must€next€consider€whether€the€probative€value€of€the€photograph€is€ð ðsubstantiallyÐ W§  Ðoutweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury.€.€.€.ððÐ @ ÐTenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€€Ð )y ÐÌà  àNotwithstanding€defense€counselððs€offered€stipulation,€we€agree€with€the€State€that€theÐ ûK Ðphotographs€were€relevant€to€prove€the€identity€of€the€victim€as€the€man€who€was€killed.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ ä4 Ðv.€Robinsonóó,€146€S.W.3d€469,€491€(Tenn.€2004)€(concluding€that€trial€court€did€not€err€in€allowingÐ Í Ðmedical€examiner€to€display€victimððs€skull€during€his€testimony,€in€spite€of€defense€counselððsÐ ¶ Ðobjection€that€it€was€not€relevant€to€any€disputed€issue€at€trial)€(ð ðIn€a€jury„out€hearing€the€trial€courtÐ Ÿï Ðcarefully€considered€the€defense€objections,€correctly€summarized€governing€law€regarding€theÐ ˆØ Ðprosecutionððs€right€to€prove€its€case,€and€accurately€concluded€that€this€right€may€not€be€foreclosedÐ qÁ Ðby€a€defendantððs€characterization€of€the€proof€as€undisputed€or€by€a€defendantððs€offer€to€stipulateÐ Zª Ðor€concede€certain€factual€issues.ðð);€òòState€v.€Nesbitóó,€978€S.W.2d€872,€902€(Tenn.€1998)€(appendix)Ð C“ Ð(adopting€this€courtððs€conclusion€that€family€photograph€of€victim€was€relevant€to€establish€hisÐ ,| Ðidentity€as€murder€victim).€€We€further€agree€that€the€probative€value€of€the€photographs€outweighsÐ e Ðany€prejudicial€effect.€€As€the€trial€court€noted€in€its€ruling,€the€photograph€of€the€victim€alive€merelyÐ þN Ðshows€him€standing€outside€with€another€man,€while€the€morgue€photograph,€a€black€and€white€headÐ ç 7 Ðshot€of€the€victim€with€his€eyes€closed,€appears€to€show€a€man€either€dead€or€merely€asleep.€€WeÐ Ð!   Ðconclude,€therefore,€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€allowing€these€photographs€toÐ ¹" ! Ðbe€introduced€into€evidence€at€trial.€Ð ¢#ò" ÐÌà@ã ã ìàò òIV.€€Questioning€of€Witnesses€by€Members€of€the€JuryˆÐ t%Ä $ Ðà  àó óÌà  àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€jurors€to€ask€directÐ G'—"& Ðquestions€of€trial€witnesses.Ô#†XÉX XX¿Óx²#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔ€€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Ó½#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔBeginning€with€the€first€Spanish€speaking€witness€and€continuingÐ 0(€#' Ðthrough€the€initial€testimony€of€the€second,€the€trial€court€allowed€several€jurors€to€ask€directÐ )i$( Ðquestions€through€the€interpreter€in€order€to€clarify€confusing€portions€of€the€testimony.€€We€noteÐ *R%) Ðthat€the€difficulty€in€understanding€the€translated€testimony€was€compounded€by€counselððsÐ ë*;&* Ðapparently€directing€questions€to€the€interpreter€rather€than€the€witness.Ð Ô+$'+ Ðà  àÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that€by€allowing€the€jurors€to€ask€direct€questions€of€the€trial€witnesses,Ð ™é Ðthe€trial€court€violated€the€procedure€mandated€by€Tennessee€Ô#†XÉX XX¿ÓZ½#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔRule€of€Criminal€Procedure€24.1(c),€Ð ‚Ò Ðlessened€the€Stateððs€burden€of€proof,€and€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€his€trial.€€Recognizing€thatÐ k» Ðtimely€objections€were€not€made€at€trial,€the€defendant€requests€that€this€court€address€the€issue€asÐ T¤ Ðplain€error.€€The€State€argues€that€the€defendant€waived€the€issue€by€failing€to€object€at€trial,€that€theÐ =  Ðtrial€courtððs€failure€to€comply€with€Rule€24.1(c)€cannot€be€considered€plain€error€because€the€ruleÐ & v Ðdid€not€take€effect€until€after€the€defendantððs€trial,€and€that€the€trial€court€handled€the€matter€in€anÐ  _ Ðappropriate€manner€under€the€circumstances,€in€which€the€Spanish€speaking€witnessesðð€testimonyÐ ø H Ðcreated€an€inordinate€amount€of€confusion€for€the€jurors.Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àA€partyððs€failure€to€make€a€contemporaneous€objection€to€testimony€at€trial€will€generallyÐ ³  Ðresult€in€a€waiver€of€the€issue€on€appeal.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€36Ð œì  ÐS.W.3d€102,€108€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000).€€However,€where€necessary€to€do€substantial€justice,€anÐ …Õ  Ðappellate€court€may€take€notice€of€a€ð ðplain€errorðð€not€raised€at€trial€if€it€affected€a€substantial€rightÐ n¾  Ðof€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€24€S.W.3d€274,€282€(Tenn.€2000).€€TheÐ W§  Ðfollowing€five€factors€are€to€be€considered€when€deciding€whether€an€error€constitutes€ð ðplain€errorðð:Ð @ Ð(a)€the€record€must€clearly€establish€what€occurred€in€the€trial€court;€(b)€a€clear€and€unequivocal€ruleÐ )y Ðof€law€must€have€been€breached;€(c)€a€substantial€right€of€the€accused€must€have€been€adverselyÐ b Ðaffected;€(d)€the€accused€did€not€waive€the€issue€for€tactical€reasons;€and€(e)€consideration€of€theÐ ûK Ðerror€is€ð ðnecessary€to€do€substantial€justice.ðð€€òòState€v.€Adkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€626,€641-42€(Tenn.Ð ä4 ÐCrim.€App.€1994).€€€Ð Í ÐÌà  àTennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€24.1,Ô#†XÉX XX¿ÓzÀ#Ô€which€took€effect€on€July€1,€2003,€€provides€inÐ Ÿï Ðpertinent€part:€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àJuror€Questions€of€Witnesses.€ð!ð€In€the€courtððs€discretion,€aÐ Zª Ðjuror€desiring€to€propound€a€question€to€a€witness€may€be€permittedÐ C“ Ðto€do€so.€€The€juror€must€put€the€question€in€written€form€and€submitÐ ,| Ðit€to€the€judge€through€a€court€officer€at€the€end€of€a€witnessððÐ e Ðtestimony.€€The€judge€shall€review€all€such€questions€and,€outside€theÐ þN Ðhearing€of€the€jury,€shall€consult€the€parties€about€whether€theÐ ç 7 Ðquestion€should€be€propounded.€€The€judge,€in€his€or€her€discretion,Ð Ð!   Ðmay€ask€the€jurorððs€question€in€whole€or€part€and€may€change€theÐ ¹" ! Ðwording€of€the€jurorððs€question€before€propounding€it€to€the€witness.Ð ¢#ò" Ð.€.€.€Ô‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔЋ$Û#` x` x ÐÌTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€24.1(c).€Ð ]&­!% ÐÌÌà  àAs€the€State€points€out,€the€rule€did€not€become€effective€until€after€the€defendantððs€MayÐ )h$( Ð2003€trial.€€Thus,€the€fact€that€the€trial€court€did€not€comply€with€the€procedure€set€forth€above€doesÐ *Q%) Ðnot€constitute€a€violation€of€a€ð ðclear€and€unequivocal€rule€of€law.ðð€€Furthermore,€there€is€nothing€toÐ ê*:&* Ðindicate€that€the€defendant€was€prejudiced€by€the€jurorsðð€direct€questions€of€the€witnesses.€€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Ó$Í#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔThe€trialÐ Ó+#'+ Ðcourt€first€began€allowing€questions€after€the€first€juror,€announcing€his€confusion,€soughtÐ ° Ðclarification€from€the€court€on€which€defendant€Moreno€was€referring€to€in€a€portion€of€hisÐ ™é Ðtestimony.€€After€directing€the€interpreter€to€ask€the€witness€the€jurorððs€question,€the€trial€courtÐ ‚Ò Ðinstructed€the€jury€to€feel€free€to€seek€further€clarification€from€the€interpreter€with€respect€to€theÐ k» Ðð ðdifficultðð€testimony.€€The€jurors€responded€by€asking€only€a€few€questions,€most€of€which€simplyÐ T¤ Ðsought€needed€clarification€on€confusing€points€in€the€testimony.€€When€the€prosecutor€expressedÐ =  Ðconcern€with€the€practice€during€the€second€Spanish€speaking€witnessððs€testimony,€the€trial€courtÐ & v Ðimmediately€modified€the€procedure,€requiring€the€jurors€from€that€point€forward€to€submit€theirÐ  _ Ðquestions€in€writing€to€the€court€at€the€conclusion€of€each€witnessððs€testimony.€Ô#†XÉX XX¿Ó”Ï#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉԀРø H ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€specifically€complains€about€one€jurorððs€having€been€allowed€to€ask€MorenoÐ Ê   Ðwhat€tone€of€voice€the€defendant€used€when€ordering€him€to€remove€his€shoes.€€He€points€out€thatÐ ³  Ðthe€prosecutor€had€not€asked€the€question€up€to€that€point,€asserts€he€might€never€have€asked€theÐ œì  Ðquestion,€and€contends€that,€had€it€not€been€asked,€the€defendantððs€culpable€mental€state€ð ðmay€notÐ …Õ  Ðhave€been€proven.ðð€€However,€the€critical€information€showing€the€defendantððs€participation€in€theÐ n¾  Ðrobbery,€including€the€testimony€about€his€having€ordered€Moreno€to€remove€his€shoes€so€he€couldÐ W§  Ðsee€if€Moreno€had€any€concealed€money€inside€them,€had€already€been€elicited€by€the€prosecutor.€Ð @ ÐMoreover,€the€jurorððs€question€occurred€at€the€end€of€cross„examination,€before€the€prosecutor€hadÐ )y Ðeven€begun€his€redirect€examination.€€We,€therefore,€have€no€hesitation€in€concluding€that€any€errorÐ b Ðin€the€jurorððs€having€elicited€the€information€rather€than€the€prosecutor€was€harmless.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.Ð ûK ÐCrim.€P.€52(a).€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà@hhìàò òV.€€Consecutive€SentencingˆÐ ¶ ÐÌà  àó óAs€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€challenges€the€consecutive€sentencing€imposed€by€the€trialÐ ŠÚ Ðcourt.€€He€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€issue€any€findings€in€support€of€its€sentencingÐ sà Ðdetermination€and€contends€that,€given€his€youth€and€limited€role€in€the€crimes,€the€record€does€notÐ \¬ Ðsupport€consecutive€sentencing.€€The€State€concedes€that€the€trial€court€did€not€make€findings€inÐ E• Ðsupport€of€consecutive€sentencing,€but€argues€that€the€defendantððs€extensive€criminal€history,€basedÐ .~ Ðon€the€convictions€in€the€case€at€bar,€supports€the€imposition€of€consecutive€sentencing.€€€Ð g ÐÌà  àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length€and€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€the€dutyÐ é 9 Ðof€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€on€the€record€with€a€presumption€that€ð ðthe€determinationsÐ Ò!"  Ðmade€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d).Ð »" ! ÐThis€presumption€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÐ ¤#ô" Ðconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Ð $Ý# ÐS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€party€challenging€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€hasÐ v%Æ $ Ðthe€burden€of€establishing€that€the€sentence€is€erroneous.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401,€SentencingÐ _&¯!% ÐCommission€Cmts.;€òòAshbyóó€823€S.W.2d€at€169.€€In€this€case,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€ofÐ H'˜"& Ðillustrating€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€erroneous.€€Ð 1(#' ÐÌà  àThe€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€reveals€that€the€trial€court€considered€both€theÐ *S%) Ðdefendantððs€presentence€report€and€the€facts€of€the€case€before€imposing€the€statutory€presumptiveÐ ì*<&* Ðsentence€for€each€offense,€with€consecutive€sentencing€ordered€for€the€second€degree€murder€andÐ Õ+%'+ Ðaggravated€robbery€convictions.€€However,€the€trial€court€did€not€make€any€specific€findings€on€theÐ ° Ðrecord€in€support€of€its€imposition€of€consecutive€sentencing.€Ð ™é ÐÌà  àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„115€provides€that€a€trial€court€may€in€its€discretionÐ k» Ðimpose€consecutive€sentencing€when€it€finds€any€one€of€the€following€factors€by€a€preponderance€Ð T¤ Ðof€the€evidence:Ð =  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(1)€The€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€has€knowinglyÐ  _ Ðdevoted€such€defendant's€life€to€criminal€acts€as€a€major€source€ofÐ ø H Ðlivelihood;à8` x` xàà8hÈÈàÐá 1 hphp Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2)€The€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€of€criminal€activity€isÐ ³  Ðextensive;Мì ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(3)€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentally€abnormal€person€soÐ n¾  Ðdeclared€by€a€competent€psychiatrist€who€concludes€as€a€result€of€anÐ W§  Ðinvestigation€prior€to€sentencing€that€the€defendant's€criminal€conductÐ @ Ðhas€been€characterized€by€a€pattern€of€repetitive€or€compulsiveÐ )y Ðbehavior€with€heedless€indifference€to€consequences;Ðb` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(4)€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whose€behavior€indicatesÐ ä4 Ðlittle€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€and€no€hesitation€about€committingÐ Í Ða€crime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high;ж` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(5)€The€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€more€statutory€offensesÐ ˆØ Ðinvolving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor€with€consideration€of€theÐ qÁ Ðaggravating€circumstances€arising€from€the€relationship€between€theÐ Zª Ðdefendant€and€victim€or€victims,€the€time€span€of€defendant'sÐ C“ Ðundetected€sexual€activity,€the€nature€and€scope€of€the€sexual€acts€andÐ ,| Ðthe€extent€of€the€residual,€physical€and€mental€damage€to€the€victimÐ e Ðor€victims;ÐþN` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(6)€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offense€committed€while€onÐ Ð!   Ðprobation;€orй" !` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(7)€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.Ћ$Û#` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-115(b)€(2003).Ð ]&­!% ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€State€has€argued€that€the€magnitude€of€the€defendantððs€crimes€in€the€presentÐ /(#' Ðappeal€justifies€his€receiving€consecutive€sentences.€€This€court€has€held€that€consecutive€sentencingÐ )h$( Ðmay€be€ordered€on€this€basis.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Daryl€Adrian€Benjamin€Ingramóó,€No.€W2002„00936„CCA„Ð *Q%) ÐR3„CD,€2003€WL€721704,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Feb.€26,€2003)€(ð ðA€court€may€consider€theÐ ê*:&* Ðoffenses€for€which€a€defendant€is€being€sentenced€in€determining€whether€the€defendant€has€anÐ Ó+#'+ Ðextensive€record€of€criminal€activity.ðð),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€Sept.€2,€2003).€€However,Ð ° Ðsince€the€record€does€not€reflect€that€the€trial€court€applied€these€holdings€in€determining€that€theÐ ™é Ðdefendantððs€sentences€should€be€served€consecutively,€or€did€so€for€other€reasons,€we€remand€forÐ ‚Ò Ðthe€court€to€set€out€its€reasons€for€consecutive€sentencing.€€Ð k» ÐÔ#†XÉX XX¿ÓÔ#ÔÔ‡X¿Ó XXXÉÔÌà@GG%ìàò òòòCONCLUSIONóóˆÐ =  ÐÌà  àó óBased€on€the€foregoing€authorities€and€reasoning,€we€affirm€the€judgments€of€the€trial€courtÐ  a Ðbut€remand€for€entry€of€corrected€judgments€as€to€Indictment€No.€01„04380,€which€does€not€identifyÐ ú J Ðthe€code€section€of€the€offense€of€which€the€defendant€was€convicted;€as€to€Indictment€Nos.€01„Ð ã 3  Ð04383€and€01„04384,€which€do€not€identify€the€offense€of€which€the€defendant€was€convicted;€asÐ Ì   Ðto€Indictment€Nos.€01„04385€and€01„04386,€which€erroneously€reflect€the€indicted€offenses€as€firstÐ µ  Ðdegree€murder€rather€than€attempted€first€degree€murder;€and€as€to€Indictment€No.€01„04389,€whichÐ žî  Ðlists€neither€the€code€section€nor€the€offense€of€which€the€defendant€was€convicted.€€Additionally,Ð ‡×  Ðwe€direct€that€the€trial€court€set€out€its€reasons€for€consecutive€sentencing.Ð pÀ  ÐÌÔ#†XÉX XX¿Ó/ñ#ÔÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð +{ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGE