ÿWPC¶ ’vÞfÛCQòŸ… ,³Z_0©ÂÝ2ÎN‡D+¿óÇñÁÏlgcÏ?²¶Mb/¦XªüUi}ª‹äŒ.DBÌÝø((CíF@p­8]Ô»üü$ÍÓýc!L/^–l;ïê%ù(Òì‹¿¸Á4œüã)2c‚B…aýúEÓï1p—N‡{aJ®)( DvG}6ø§"ËfåCs>öOfC!ok¶F€v!n¬¹˜ ®Îã2ú2 ¨®nÉaL÷3 U'DhF‡7sŒŒ«‘Žì5ÔZЗs‘®bÜCӬƸ›0áLÛEñ+ÃÃÝ(€ÿ%RË­fÁke0Ì3®4¶UG N6§ëÔ ¿pè|äÍ–#Ö^•>Òé½Ðžô,šv¬sÞÑN}8i·š{åÄ©~ÌÕòòq-É>—>bœº»èY ¶±öÚÔþ+w[¦*>yõ,ßÀÆ Þâ99MÊmÑÏœb+õ& XAÄTÈ™ø38P›ÐŠ.Ðà” XoúTÒ,×½ãJ`Ü‚2iwµ,´zª‚¶oTpÌpÏEàÝ̵%؉£m`-ÇlÞVÉJ¤@˜kÖ->ê D‡ü¯«²ØýÁ[¯t™üxÞHûø§þ²é«È|’ÔÜb#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% UN­ ­ 0Dû z? Ò¹ z‹ Ò ^ × wã Æç Æ­ ÆsÆ94ÿN$E& m(d?£££££££££££££££££££££b«««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««« 0ë³³³³ Bžž 0¤» D3_ D-’ 0K¿¿ AS Æ] 0¤# 0DÇ A« ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ˜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.wpt ˜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.wpt+”œ)â Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5•jW)Ì£3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ZÝ ƒR‡n$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôîuò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€judgment€form€completed€by€the€trial€court€contains€a€typographical€error€to€the€extent€that€it€indicatesÐ ° Ðthat€the€defendant€was€indicted€for€and€convicted€of€the€sale€of€over€.5€grams€of€cocaine. - ù-(|G2‡n$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F}»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôîuò»»Ô d(|3G$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F}»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F}»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F}»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼F}»»»ÔÑ8€ñXXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îH\F}ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼F}»îîH\ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€November€22,€2000Ð üL ÐÔ‡XñX»¼F}ÔÌò òÔ#†¼F}»XXñ"#ÔòòSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEóó€v.€òòóóAMOS€PHILLIPSÔ‡XñX»¼F}Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€S41,666€€€€€€Phyllis€H.€Miller,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„02776„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¥õ  ÐDecember€28,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant,€Amos€Phillips,€was€convicted€of€the€sale€of€less€than€.5€grams€of€cocaine,€òòseeóó€Tenn.Ð xÈ  ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„17„417.€€The€trial€court€imposed€a€Range€II€sentence€of€nine€years€in€the€DepartmentÐ d´ Ðof€Correction.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€andÐ P  Ðthat€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€jury,€after€it€had€begun€deliberations,€to€review€the€testimonyÐ <Œ Ðof€state€witness€Detective€David€Street.€€Because€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€convictionÐ (x Ðand€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€granting€the€jury's€request€to€rehear€Detective€Street's€testimony,€theÐ d Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð P ÐÓÍÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼F}»àXñ—#ÔÔ‡XñX.¼F}ÔGary€R.€Wade,€P.J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoe€G.€Rileyóó€and€òòThomas€T.Ð ° ÐWoodall,€JJ.,óó€joined.Ð œì ÐÌThomas€R.€Bandy,€III,€Kingsport,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Amos€Phillips.Ð tÄ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Russell€S.€Baldwin,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð L œ Ðand€Barry€P.€Staubus,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÓnÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼F}»XXñ#ÔÐ #`" ÐÌÔ€XñX»¼F}ÔÓ  Óà  àIn€May€of€1998,€Joe€Graham,€a€vice€detective€with€the€Kingsport€Police€Department,€wasÐ %^ $ Ðinvolved€in€an€undercover€narcotics€investigation€in€the€Riverview€area€of€Kingsport.€€On€May€18,€Ð ú%J!% ÐDetective€Graham€arranged€for€Susan€Stickel,€a€confidential€informant€employed€by€the€policeÐ æ&6"& Ðdepartment,€to€make€a€purchase€of€illegal€drugs.€€Prior€to€her€departure,€police€searched€Ms.€StickelÐ Ò'"#' Ðand€her€vehicle€for€contraband.€€They€also€equipped€her€vehicle€with€a€hidden€video€camera.€€InÐ ¾($( Ðaccordance€with€plan,€Ms.€Stickel€made€an€initial€drug€purchase,€unrelated€to€the€defendant,€and€thenÐ ª)ú$) Ðreported€back€to€the€officers€involved€in€the€investigation.€€At€that€point,€the€officers€conductedÐ –*æ%* Ðanother€search€of€her€vehicle€and€furnished€the€informant€with€a€one„hundred„dollar€bill.€€AtÐ ‚+Ò&+ Ðapproximately€5:45€p.m.,€Ms.€Stickel€acquired€what€she€believed€to€be€cocaine€from€an€individualÐ n,¾', Ðlater€identified€as€Jermaine€Talford.€€Detective€Graham€did€not€see€the€purchase€but€was€able€toÐ Z-ª(-ý Ðlisten€to€the€transaction€through€a€body€wire€worn€by€Ms.€Stickel.€€Afterwards,€Ms.€Stickel€metÐ ° ÐDetective€Graham€and€provided€him€with€a€small€baggie€containing€white€powder.€€When€DetectiveÐ œì ÐGraham€administered€a€field€test,€the€substance€indicated€positive€for€cocaine.€€On€cross„Ð ˆØ Ðexamination,€Detective€Graham€acknowledged€that€he€neither€observed€the€defendant€on€theÐ tÄ Ðvideotape€of€the€transaction€nor€heard€his€voice€over€the€wire€worn€by€Ms.€Stickel.Ð `° ÐÌà  àAt€trial,€Susan€Stickel€testified€that€she€received€a€small€baggie€of€cocaine€from€JermaineÐ 8 ˆ ÐTalford.€€She€confirmed€that€police€had€searched€her€and€her€vehicle€prior€to€the€buy.€€She€recalledÐ $ t Ðthat€she€wore€a€wire€that€allowed€audio€monitoring,€that€she€was€furnished€a€one„hundred„dollar€billÐ  ` Ðto€complete€the€transaction,€and€that€her€vehicle€was€equipped€with€a€hidden€video€camera.€€Ms.Ð ü L  ÐStickel€remembered€that€shortly€before€6:00€p.m.,€as€she€was€driving€near€Riverview€Apartments,Ð è 8  ÐTalford€asked€€her€to€pull€over;€when€she€did€so,€Talford€approached€her€vehicle€and€asked€her€whatÐ Ô$  Ðshe€was€"looking€for."€€Ms.€Stickel€replied,€"a€gram"€and€watched€while€Talford€first€walked€behindÐ À  Ðher€vehicle€and€then€returned€on€a€bicycle.€€She€testified€that€at€that€point€Talford€directed€her€to€waitÐ ¬ü  Ðand,€a€short€while€later,€returned€on€foot€and€tried€to€enter€her€vehicle€on€the€passenger's€side.€Ð ˜è  ÐBecause€Ms.€Stickel€kept€that€door€locked€to€avoid€the€possible€discovery€of€the€hidden€camera,€sheÐ „Ô  Ðexplained€to€Talford€that€the€door€was€broken.€€Talford€instructed€Ms.€Stickel€to€drive€around€theÐ pÀ Ðblock.€€During€their€conversation,€Ms.€Stickel€noticed€a€heavy„set€black€male,€later€identified€as€theÐ \¬ Ðdefendant,€riding€a€bike€"around€in€small€circles€.€.€.€[and]€just€look[ing]€at€[her]."€€After€she€hadÐ H˜ Ðdriven€around€the€block,€Talford€motioned€her€into€the€parking€lot€of€Sarge's,€a€nearby€bar.€€TalfordÐ 4„ Ðthen€delivered€the€cocaine€in€exchange€for€the€hundred„dollar€bill.€€Ms.€Stickel€admitted€that€the€onlyÐ  p Ðperson€she€dealt€with€directly€during€the€transaction€was€Jermaine€Talford.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àDetective€David€Street,€who€is€assigned€to€the€vice€and€drug€unit€of€the€Kingsport€PoliceÐ ä4 ÐDepartment,€testified€that€he€first€saw€the€defendant€on€May€18€at€a€location€between€the€two€drugÐ Ð  Ðpurchases€made€by€Ms.€Stickel.€€Detective€Street€recalled€that€he€drove€through€the€Riverview€areaÐ ¼  Ðafter€the€first€purchase€to€"see€what€kind€of€traffic€was€up."€€He€observed€the€defendant,€dressed€inÐ ¨ø Ða€white€shirt€and€shorts,€riding€a€bicycle.€€Detective€Street€then€returned€to€the€operation's€designatedÐ ”ä Ðmeeting€place,€where€Detective€Graham€was€taking€a€statement€from€Ms.€Stickel€regarding€her€firstÐ €Ð Ðdrug€purchase.€€During€that€time,€Detective€Street€searched€Ms.€Stickel's€vehicle€to€ensure€that€thereÐ l¼ Ðwas€no€contraband€and€re„set€the€video€surveillance€system.€€Afterwards,€he€went€to€his€surveillanceÐ X ¨ Ðlocation€on€the€General€Shale€tower€at€the€end€of€Lincoln€Street,€where€he€was€equipped€withÐ D!” Ðbinoculars,€a€camera,€and€a€portable€police€radio.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àDetective€Street€recalled€that€informant€Stickel€stopped€her€vehicle€on€Lincoln€Street€afterÐ $X" Ða€black€male€that€he€identified€as€Jermaine€Talford€yelled€at€her.€€He€testified€that€he€saw€TalfordÐ ô$D # Ðapproach€Ms.€Stickel's€vehicle€and€that€he€heard€Talford€take€"her€order"€over€the€body€wire.€Ð à%0!$ ÐDetective€Street€then€observed€Talford€walk€back€across€the€street,€get€on€a€bicycle,€ride€over€to€Ms.Ð Ì&"% ÐStickel,€and€direct€her€to€move€her€vehicle€over€to€the€curb.€€He€testified€that€Talford€rode€his€bicycleÐ ¸'#& Ðdown€the€street€to€Sarge's€bar,€where€he€went€inside,€and,€upon€returning€to€his€bicycle€a€little€moreÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthan€a€minute€later,€rode€back€to€a€point€directly€across€the€street€from€Ms.€Stickel's€vehicle.€Ð )à$( ÐDetective€Street€stated€that€he€saw€Talford€attempt€to€enter€the€passenger€door€of€Ms.€Stickel'sÐ |*Ì%) Ðvehicle,€then€approach€the€driver's€side.€€He€recalled€hearing€Talford€explain€that€he€was€waiting€forÐ h+¸&* Ð"his€guy"€to€retrieve€the€drugs.€€Detective€Street€then€saw€informant€Stickel€drive€away€and€saw€theÐ ° Ðdefendant,€who€was€on€his€bicycle,€stop€in€response€to€Talford's€communication.€€ThroughÐ œì Ðbinoculars,€Detective€Street€observed€the€defendant€hand€"something"€to€Talford.€€He€testified€thatÐ ˆØ Ðthe€defendant€continued€to€ride€his€bicycle€and€that€when€Ms.€Stickel€returned€to€the€area,€TalfordÐ tÄ Ðhanded€her€the€same€package€that€he€had€received€from€the€defendant.€€Detective€Street€confirmedÐ `° Ðthat€the€package€had€continuously€remained€in€his€view€in€Talford's€hand€until€given€to€theÐ L œ Ðinformant.€€After€the€transaction,€Detective€Street€observed€€Ms.€Stickel€drive€away€from€the€areaÐ 8 ˆ Ðand€Talford€return€to€the€defendant.€€On€cross„€examination,€Detective€Street€acknowledged€that€heÐ $ t Ðdid€not€take€any€photographs€of€the€exchange€between€Talford€and€the€defendant€and€that€he€couldÐ  ` Ðnot€conclusively€say€that€what€the€defendant€had€handed€to€Talford€was€an€illegal€drug.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àOfficer€Tim€Horne,€who€was€assigned€by€the€Kingsport€Police€Department€to€patrolÐ Ô$  ÐKingsport€Housing€Authority€property,€was€not€involved€in€the€undercover€drug€investigation€butÐ À  Ðhad€knowledge€that€a€confidential€informant€would€be€working€in€the€area€on€the€afternoon€inÐ ¬ü  Ðquestion.€€Officer€Horne€testified€that€he€saw€Ms.€Stickel€drive€onto€Lincoln€Street€and€recalledÐ ˜è  Ðseeing€Jermaine€Talford€approach€her€vehicle.€€Officer€Horne€then€saw€Talford€direct€Ms.€StickelÐ „Ô  Ðinto€the€parking€lot€next€to€Sarge's€and,€through€his€binoculars,€observed€Talford€hand€a€plasticÐ pÀ Ðbaggie€containing€a€white€substance€to€Ms.€Stickel.€€The€officer€recalled€that€Ms.€Stickel€handedÐ \¬ ÐTalford€some€currency€and€left€the€area€and€that,€immediately€afterward,€Talford€walked€across€theÐ H˜ Ðstreet€and€got€on€a€bicycle.€€Officer€Horne€testified€that€the€defendant€then€rode€his€bicycle€towardÐ 4„ ÐÔ_ÔTalfordÔ_Ô,€who€handed€him€the€same€money€that€he€had€just€obtained€from€Ms.€Stickel.€€Officer€HorneÐ  p Ðrecalled€that€when€he€saw€the€defendant€place€the€money€in€one€of€his€socks,€he€stopped€andÐ  \ Ðquestioned€the€defendant,€who€denied€having€any€illegal€drugs.€€The€defendant€allowed€OfficerÐ øH ÐHorne€to€search€him€and€then€pulled€his€shoes€and€socks€off,€explaining,€"[t]he€only€thing€I've€gotÐ ä4 Ðis€a€hundred[„]dollar€bill."€€Officer€Horne€testified€that€he€did€not€confiscate€the€money€due€to€theÐ Ð  Ðongoing€drug€investigation.€€He€acknowledged€that€he€did€not€write€down€the€serial€number,Ð ¼  Ðexplaining€that€it€might€have€made€the€defendant€suspicious.€€Detective€Horne€also€acknowledgedÐ ¨ø Ðthat€he€had€seen€Talford€with€the€defendant€before€and€that€it€was€not€unusual€for€them€to€be€talkingÐ ”ä Ðto€one€another.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àCeleste€White,€a€drug€chemist€employed€by€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation,€testifiedÐ X ¨ Ðthat€the€substance€Ms.€Stickel€purchased€from€Talford€weighed€.2€grams€and€contained€cocaine.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àJermaine€Talford€testified€as€a€defense€witness.€€According€to€Talford,€informant€StickelÐ #l! Ðasked€him€for€drugs.€€He€testified€that€he€directed€Ms.€Stickel€to€drive€around€the€block€and€that,€asÐ $X" Ðshe€did€so,€he€went€inside€Sarge's€and€prepared€a€baggie€containing€baking€soda€and€cocaine.€Ð ô$D # ÐTalford€claimed€that€he€sold€the€baggie€to€Ms.€Stickel,€in€exchange€for€a€one„hundred„dollar€bill.€Ð à%0!$ ÐTalford€stated€that€after€the€transaction,€he€needed€change,€and€offered€to€exchange€the€one„hundred„Ð Ì&"% Ðdollar€bill€for€five€twenty„dollar€bills.€€Talford€maintained€that€the€defendant€was€not€involved€in€anyÐ ¸'#& Ðway€with€the€drug€sale€to€informant€Stickel.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àDuring€cross„examination,€Talford€admitted€that€he€had€several€prior€convictions,€includingÐ |*Ì%) Ða€1994€conviction€for€theft€under€$500,€a€1994€conviction€for€sale€of€less€than€.5€grams€of€crackÐ h+¸&* Ðcocaine,€a€1999€conviction€for€sale€of€cocaine,€and€a€1999€conviction€for€sale€of€counterfeit€drugs.€Ð ° ÐTalford€testified€that€prior€to€the€drug€sale€to€Ms.€Stickel,€he€had€been€dropped€off€in€the€RiverviewÐ œì Ðarea.€€While€acknowledging€that€he€was€riding€a€bicycle€at€the€time€of€the€sale,€he€could€not€recallÐ ˆØ Ðwhere€he€had€gotten€it.€€Talford€maintained€that€he€could€not€remember€such€details€because€he€wasÐ tÄ Ðunder€the€influence€of€cocaine€at€the€time,€but€explained€that€the€cocaine€had€worn€off€by€the€timeÐ `° Ðthat€he€was€approached€by€informant€Stickel.Ð L œ ÐÌà@ÍÍ*ìàIˆÐ $ t Ðà  àInitially,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction.€Ð  ` ÐThe€state€contends€otherwise.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€allÐ Ô$  Ðinferences€which€might€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€Ð À  ÐThe€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€the€reconciliation€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðconflicts€in€the€evidence€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòByrge€v.Ð ˜è  ÐStateóó,€575€S.W.2d€292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€The€relevant€question€is€whether,€afterÐ „Ô  Ðreviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€haveÐ pÀ Ðfound€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòStateÐ \¬ Ðv.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983).€€This€court€may€neither€reweigh€nor€reevaluate€theÐ H˜ Ðevidence;€nor€may€this€court€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòLiakas€v.Ð 4„ ÐStateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(1956).€€The€evidence€is€sufficient€when€a€rational€trierÐ  p Ðof€fact€could€conclude€that€the€defendant€is€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,Ð  \ Ð443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979).€€The€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€notÐ øH Ðsufficient€when€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2dÐ ä4 Ð913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€applicable€statute€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  àà ` à(a)€It€is€an€offense€for€a€defendant€to€knowingly:ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(1)€Manufacture€a€controlled€substance;Ðl¼Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(2)€Deliver€a€controlled€substance;ÐX ¨Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(3)€Sell€a€controlled€substance;€orÐD!”Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(4)€Possess€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliverÐ 0"€  Ðor€sell€such€controlled€substance.Ð#l!` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„417(a).Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€asserts€that€because€neither€his€voice€nor€his€image€was€captured€by€the€policeÐ Ì&"% Ðrecording€equipment€and€because€Talford€denied€that€he€was€involved€in€the€drug€sale€to€informantÐ ¸'#& ÐStickel,€no€reasonable€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€him€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€WeÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdisagree.€€Although€the€police€did€not€photograph€the€defendant€or€record€him€on€either€audio€orÐ )à$( Ðvideo€tape,€the€testimony€of€Detective€Street€and€Officer€Horne€qualified€as€direct€evidence€of€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðdefendant's€involvement€in€Talford's€sale€of€the€drugs€to€Ms.€Stickel.€€Detective€Street,€who€observedÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€transaction€through€binoculars€and€overheard€the€conversation€over€the€radio,€testified€that€afterÐ ° ÐTalford€instructed€Ms.€Stickel€to€drive€around€the€block,€Talford€hailed€the€defendant,€who€wasÐ œì Ðriding€his€bike,€and€obtained€a€small€package€from€him.€€When€Ms.€Stickel€returned,€Talford€handedÐ ˆØ Ðher€the€package€in€exchange€for€$100.€€Detective€Street€testified€that€he€was€certain€that€the€packageÐ tÄ Ðtransferred€to€Ms.€Stickel€by€Talford€was€the€same€one€that€Talford€had€received€from€the€defendantÐ `° Ðbecause€it€had€remained€in€his€view€until€Talford€transferred€it€to€Ms.€Stickel.€€The€jury€accreditedÐ L œ ÐDetective€Street's€account.€€The€package€was€later€determined€by€the€TBI€laboratory€to€containÐ 8 ˆ Ðcocaine.€€Detective€Street€also€contended€that€after€Talford€completed€his€transaction€with€informantÐ $ t ÐStickel,€he€returned€to€the€defendant€and€gave€him€the€money€used€by€Stickel€to€pay€for€the€drugs.€Ð  ` ÐHis€testimony€was€corroborated€by€Officer€Horne,€who€witnessed€Talford€hand€the€defendant€theÐ ü L  Ðmoney€and,€shortly€thereafter,€stopped€the€defendant€and€found€a€one€hundred„dollar€bill€in€his€sock.€Ð è 8  ÐIn€our€view,€this€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€defendant's€conviction€for€sale€of€less€than€.5Ð Ô$  Ðgrams€cocaine.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð À  ÐÌà  àAs€to€Talford's€denial€of€the€defendant's€involvement€in€the€transaction€with€informantÐ ˜è  ÐStickel,€it€has€long€been€held€that€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses€and€the€reconciliation€of€conflictsÐ „Ô  Ðin€the€proof€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,Ð pÀ Ð676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984).€€As€was€its€prerogative,€the€jury€in€this€case€clearly€credited€theÐ \¬ Ðtestimony€of€Detective€Street€and€Officer€Horne€and€discounted€the€testimony€of€Jermaine€Talford.€Ð H˜ ÐIndeed,€it€comes€as€no€surprise€that€the€jury€afforded€Talford's€testimony€such€little,€if€any,€weightÐ 4„ Ðin€light€of€his€self„confessed€cocaine€usage€prior€to€his€transaction€with€informant€Stickel.€Ð  p ÐAccordingly,€the€defendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ð  \ ÐÌà@®®)ìàIIˆÐ ä4 Ðà  àNext,€the€defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€granting€the€jury's€request€to€rehearÐ Ð  Ðthe€trial€testimony€of€Detective€David€Street€after€deliberations€had€already€begun.€€Initially,€becauseÐ ¼  Ðthe€defendant€failed€to€include€this€issue€in€a€motion€for€new€trial,€the€issue€has€been€waived.€€òòSeeóóÐ ¨ø ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e),€36(a).€€Even€if€this€issue€were€not€waived,€however,€the€defendant€would€notÐ ”ä Ðbe€entitled€to€relief.€€In€our€view,€the€trial€court€acted€within€its€discretion€in€granting€the€jury'sÐ €Ð Ðrequest.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Jenkinsóó,€845€S.W.2d€787,€793€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992),€a€panel€of€this€court,Ð D!” Ðrejecting€earlier€dicta€to€the€contrary,€held€that€the€decision€as€to€whether€a€jury€should€be€allowedÐ 0"€  Ðto€review€trial€testimony€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€In€doing€so,€the€court€noted€that€Ð #l! ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[Ô_Ôj]uriesÔ_Ô€apply€emphasis€to€evidence€which€is€before€them.€€Obviously,Ð ô$D # Ðif€they€are€allowed€to€rehear€particular€testimony€at€their€request,Ð à%0!$ Ðthere€is€benefit€to€be€gained€in€assisting€the€jurors€to€decide€issuesÐ Ì&"% Ðbased€upon€an€accurate€recollection€of€the€evidence.и'#&` x` x ÐÐ ¤(ô#' ÐòòId.óóat€792.€€The€court€adopted€Standard€15„4.2€of€the€ABA€Standards€Relating€to€the€AdministrationÐ ° Ðof€Criminal€Justice€as€the€standard€to€be€applied€by€a€trial€court€responding€to€a€jury's€requests€toÐ œì Ðrehear€trial€testimony:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(a)€If€the€jury,€after€retiring€for€deliberation,€requests€a€review€ofÐ `° Ðcertain€testimony€or€other€evidence,€they€shall€be€conducted€to€theÐ L œ Ðcourtroom.€€Whenever€the€jury's€request€is€reasonable,€the€court,€afterÐ 8 ˆ Ðnotice€to€the€prosecutor€and€counsel€for€the€defense,€shall€have€theÐ $ t Ðrequested€parts€of€the€testimony€read€to€the€jury€and€shall€permit€theÐ  ` Ðjury€to€reexamine€the€requested€materials€admitted€into€evidence.€€Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(b)€The€court€need€not€submit€evidence€to€the€jury€for€review€beyondÐ Ô$  Ðthat€specifically€requested€by€the€jury,€but€in€its€discretion€the€courtÐ À  Ðmay€also€have€the€jury€review€other€evidence€relating€to€the€sameÐ ¬ü  Ðfactual€issue€so€as€not€to€give€undue€prominence€to€the€evidenceÐ ˜è  Ðrequested.Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌòòId.óó€at€793.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€properly€allowed€the€jury€to€rehear€the€trial€testimony€of€DetectiveÐ 4„ ÐStreet.€€After€retiring€to€deliberate,€the€jury€requested€that€it€be€allowed€to€hear€merely€that€portionÐ  p Ðof€Detective€Street's€testimony€relating€to€the€package€exchanged€between€the€defendant€andÐ  \ ÐJermaine€Talford.€€Because€the€trial€court€was€of€the€opinion€that€replaying€solely€that€portion€ofÐ øH ÐDetective€Street's€testimony€would€place€undue€emphasis€thereon,€it€denied€the€jury's€request.€€AfterÐ ä4 Ðagain€retiring€to€deliberate,€the€jury€came€back€with€a€second€request€for€Detective€Street's€testimony,Ð Ð  Ðthis€time€seeking€to€have€it€played€in€its€entirety.€€The€trial€court€determined€the€request€to€beÐ ¼  Ðreasonable€and€replayed€Detective€Street's€testimony€for€the€jury€in€open€court.€€The€ABA€standardÐ ¨ø Ðadopted€in€òòJenkinsóó€directs€trial€courts€to€permit€the€requested€testimony€to€be€reheard€if€the€requestÐ ”ä Ðis€reasonable.€€òòState€v.€William€Jason€McMahanóó,€No.€03C01„9707„CR„00262€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð €Ð Ðat€Knoxville,€March€31,€1999).€€Detective€Street,€who€was€only€one€of€the€several€witnesses€thatÐ l¼ Ðtestified€on€behalf€of€the€state,€gave€perhaps€the€most€critical€testimony.€€Under€that€circumstance,Ð X ¨ Ðthe€jury's€request€was€reasonable.€€The€trial€court€acted€well€within€its€discretion.Ð D!” Ðà  àÌà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð #l! ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGE