ÿWPCi 4# èUNó %A 0(Gw@o4¯Ã 0†Ò 0DXœ 0J¤ 0Tî 0^B 0h  0r 0|z 0†ö 0| 1u 0d 0@å D3% BX U>u B)³ DCÜ U* AQI Æš 0D` 0D¤ D/è B AM4  ‘‡v~vÓ–˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ FGHEIJEKLDMNÓ€ZB\J#3|xZ(6(2Ä$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd< Œ 9p`(Arial*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd* 'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ üÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€(ÔÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€(XÔÌÌò òOctober€14,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€(ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ‡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€aggravated€assault€count€stemmed€from€an€incident€with€the€arresting€officer.€ÏDefendant€was€convicted€of€the€lesser€offense€of€simple€assault.€€This€conviction€is€notÏcontested€by€the€defendant€on€appeal.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÙ€*ÙÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€(ÔßR€/0'A1-j|_1` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌà@ àSEPTEMBER€1997€SESSIONÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ó óà@ à)à àò òNO.€02C01„9610„CC„00364ó óÌà@ à)Ìà àAppellee,à@ à)à àò òLAUDERDALE€COUNTYó óÌà@ à)ò òÌVS.ó óà@ à)à àò òHON.€JOSEPH€H.€WALKER,ÏIII,ó óÌà@ à)à àò òJUDGEÌSONNY€M.€PORTER,ó óà@ à)Ìà@ à)à à(Aggravated€Kidnapping,€AssaultÌà àAppellant.à@ à)à àand€Aggravated€CriminalÏTrespass)ÌÌÌÌò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌGARY€F.€ANTRICANà àà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPó óÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌò òJULIE€K.€PILLOWà àà àà àà àà àSARAH€M.€BRANCHó óÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌP.O.€Box€700à àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌSomerville,€TN€38068à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òELIZABETH€T.€RICEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òMARK€DAVIDSONó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€AttorneyÏGeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à302€E€Market€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TN€38068ÌÌÌÌÌÌò òOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌJOE€G.€RILEY,ÌJUDGEÇÑ7€uXXdìXXdì7ÑÓÓà@ àòòOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€defendant,€Sonny€M.€Porter,€was€convicted€by€a€Lauderdale€CountyÏjury€of€aggravated€kidnapping,€aggravated€criminal€trespass€and€two€(2)€countsÏof€œsimple€assault.€€For€the€offense€of€aggravated€kidnapping,€he›€was€sentencedÏas€a€repeat€violent€offender€to€life€imprisonment€without€parole.€€On€appeal,€heÏpresents€the€following€issues€for€our€review:€(1)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdenying€defendantððs€motion€to€compel€the€state€to€elect€which€offenses€it€wouldÏproceed€upon;€and€(2)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€theÏaggravated€kidnapping€conviction.€€We€find€no€error€and€affirm€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court.ÌÌà@ àò òòòFACTSó óóóÌÌà àLate€in€the€evening€on€July€6,€1995,€Galelyn€Bates€heard€someoneÏtapping€on€the€door€of€her€home.€€She€opened€the€door€on€the€side€of€herÏhome,€but€did€not€see€anyone.€€Thinking€that€her€son€might€be€coming€home€forÏthe€night,€she€left€the€side€door€cracked.€€She€then€checked€the€front€door.€ÏSuddenly,€she€realized€that€there€was€someone€in€her€house.€€At€trial,€BatesÏidentified€the€man€in€her€home€as€the€defendant.Ìà àBates€screamed€for€help.€€œDefendant,›€who€was€carrying€a€knife,€told€herÏthat€€he€would€kill€œher€if€she€screamed€again.›€€Defendant€told€Bates€to€take€offÏher€clothes,€and€they€began€struggling.€€During€the€struggle,€defendant€cutÍBatesðð€hand€and€the€back€of€her€neck.Ìà àAt€the€same€time,€Batesðð€neighbor,€Linda€Treadway,€ran€across€the€streetÏto€check€on€Bates.€€She€looked€into€the€window€and€saw€Bates€and€defendant.€ÏShe€began€knocking€on€the€window€and€calling€out€to€Bates.Ìà àDefendant€asked€Bates€if€she€had€a€back€door.€€He€grabbed€Bates€by€theÏclothes€and€took€her€with€him€out€of€the€back€of€the€house.€€They€went€acrossÏher€back€yard,€and€defendant€forced€Bates€to€climb€over€her€fence.€€Once€sheÏhad€climbed€over€the€fence,€Bates€ran€away€from€the€œdefendant.€€Defendant›Ïœwas€subsequently›€apprehended€by€a€Henning€police€officer.Ìà àDefendant€was€œindicted€in€Count€One€for€attempted€aggravated€rape,›ÏœCount›€Two€for€aggravated€œburglary,›€œCount€Three€for€especially€aggravatedÏkidnapping€and›€œCount€Four€for€aggravated›€assault.œ× ƒ1 ××  ×›€€The€jury€returned€guiltyÏverdicts€for€œlesser›€œoffenses€on€all€counts;€to€wit:›€œsimple€assault€in€Count€One,Ïaggravated€criminal€trespass€in€Count€Two,€aggravated€kidnapping€in€CountÏThree€and€simple€assault€in€Count€Four.€€The€trial€judge€sentenced€defendantÏas€a€repeat€violent€offender€to€life€imprisonment€without€parole€for€theÏaggravated€kidnapping€conviction.€€Defendant€was€sentenced€to€concurrentÏsentences€of€eleven€(11)€months€and€twenty€nine€(29)€days€for€the€otherÏoffenses.€€From€these€convictions€and€sentences,€defendant€brings€this€appeal.ÌÌà@ àò òòòELECTION€OF€OFFENSESó óóóÌÌà àIn€his€first€assignment€of€error,€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€denying€a€motion€to€compel€the€state€to€elect€which€offenses€it€wouldÏproceed€upon.€€Relying€on€òòState€v.€Anthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1991),Ïdefendant€argues€that€the€proof€did€not€support€the€charges€for€both€attemptedÏaggravated€rape€in€Count€One€and€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€in€CountÏThree.€€He€alleges€that€requiring€the€state€to€elect€between€the€rape€andÏkidnapping€charges€at€the€conclusion€of€the€stateððs€proof€would€have€obviatedÏthe€òòAnthonyóóissue.€€Therefore,€he€claims€that€òòAnthonyóórequires€an€election€byÏthe€state.Ìà àIn€òòState€v.€Anthonyóó,€our€Supreme€Court€addressed€the€issue€of€whetherÏdual€convictions€of€armed€robbery€and€aggravated€kidnapping€arising€out€of€theÏsame€criminal€episode€could€constitutionally€stand€as€a€matter€of€due€process.€ÏThe€Court€held€that€when€kidnapping€is€ð ðessentially€incidentalðð€to€anotherÏoffense,€due€process€prohibits€a€conviction€for€kidnapping.€€òòIdóó.€at€306„307.€€TheÏtest€to€be€applied€is€whether,€under€the€facts€of€each€case,€ð ðthe€confinement,Ïmovement€or€detention€is€essentially€incidental€to€the€accompanying€felony€andÏis€not,€therefore,€sufficient€to€support€a€separate€conviction€for€kidnapping,€orÏwhether€it€is€significant€enough,€in€and€of€itself,€to€warrant€independentÏprosecution€and€is,€therefore,€sufficient€to€support€such€a€conviction.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€306.€ÏThe€determination€of€whether€the€convictions€for€kidnapping€and€the€linkedÏfelony€can€stand€is€fact€specific,€as€there€is€no€prohibition€against€convictions€forÏboth€offenses€ð ðsimply€because€they€arise€out€of€the€same€criminal€episode.ðð€€òòIdóó.Íat€307.Ìà àHowever,€nothing€in€our€Supreme€Courtððs€holding€in€òòAnthonyóó€requiresÏthat€the€state€elect€between€the€kidnapping€charge€and€the€accompanyingÏcharge€before€the€jury€deliberates.€€òòAnthonyóó€applies€only€when€a€defendant€isÏòòconvictedóó€of€both€kidnapping€and€a€felony€that€would€inherently€involve€aÏkidnapping.€€òòSeeóóòòState€v.€Martin€Thomas€Terrellóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9701„CC„00001€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€August€15,€1997,€at€Jackson).Ìà àIn€various€contexts,€due€process€requires€that€the€state€elect€at€the€closeÏof€its€proof€the€particular€offense€for€which€it€seeks€a€conviction.€€òòVanArsdall€v.ÏStateóó,€919€S.W.2d€626,€633€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€This€requirement€isÏbased€on€three€concerns:€to€enable€the€defendant€to€prepare€his€defense€for€aÏspecific€charge,€to€protect€the€defendant€from€the€dangers€of€double€jeopardy,Ïand€to€ensure€that€the€juryððs€verdict€is€unanimous.€€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€851€S.W.2dÏ134,€137€(Tenn.€1993).€€The€third€rationale€is€considered€to€be€the€mostÏsignificant,€as€it€is€based€on€the€fundamental€right€to€a€unanimous€jury€verdictÏbefore€the€imposition€of€a€criminal€conviction.€€òòIdóó.€€None€of€these€concerns€isÏinvolved€in€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó.€€There€was€no€requirement€for€the€state€to€makeÏan€election.Ìà àAlthough€the€defendant€may€demand€that€the€state€elect€between€factualÏoccurrences€in€an€indictment,€the€state€is€not€required€to€elect€between€separateÏcharges€in€the€same€indictment.€€òòState€v.€Henleyóó,€774€S.W.2d€908,€916€(Tenn.Ï1989);€òòsee€alsoóóRaybin,€òòCriminal€Practice€and€Procedureóó,€ðð€26.82€(1985).€€TheÏtrial€court€properly€denied€defendantððs€motion.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òòòSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óóóÌÌà àDefendant€maintains€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€theÏconviction€for€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Pursuant€to€òòState€v.€Anthonyóó,€defendantÏasserts€that€the€kidnapping€was€merely€incidental€to€the€attempted€aggravatedÏrape.€€As€a€result,€he€argues€that€due€process€requires€that€the€aggravatedÏkidnapping€conviction€be€dismissed.Ìà@ àò òA.ó óÌà àWe€begin€our€analysis€with€a€determination€of€whether€the€evidence€isÏsufficient€to€support€the€aggravated€kidnapping€conviction.€€When€an€accusedÏchallenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€our€standard€of€review€isÏwhether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€theÏprosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÏthe€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,Ï99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€Questions€concerning€theÏcredibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence€asÏwell€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence,€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,Ïnot€this€court.€€òòState€v.€Tuttleóó,€914€S.W.2d€926,€932€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€ÏNor€may€this€Court€reweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571ÏS.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€inferences€therefrom.€€òòIdóó.€€Because€aÏverdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replaces€it€with€aÍpresumption€of€guilt,€the€accused€has€the€burden€in€this€Court€of€illustrating€whyÏthe€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€returned€by€the€trier€of€fact.€ÏòòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ìà@ àò òB.ó óÌà àA€person€commits€the€offense€of€aggravated€kidnapping€who€knowinglyÏremoves€or€confines€another€unlawfully€so€as€to€interfere€substantially€with€theÏother's€liberty€while€in€possession€of€a€deadly€weapon€or€threatens€the€use€of€aÏdeadly€weapon.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„302,€39„13„304(a)(5).Ìà@ àò òC.ó óÌà àDefendant,€while€carrying€a€knife€and€threatening€to€kill€Bates,€grabbedÏher€and€forced€her€out€of€the€back€door€of€her€home.€€He€pushed€her€across€herÏback€yard€and€made€her€climb€the€fence.€€Only€then€was€she€able€to€escape.€ÏDefendant€substantially€interfered€with€Batesðð€liberty€while€carrying€a€knife.€€WeÏfind€this€evidence€to€be€sufficient€to€support€the€conviction€for€aggravatedÏkidnapping.Ìà@ àò òD.ó óÌà àFurthermore,€under€the€principles€outlined€in€òòAnthonyóó,€we€find€that€theÏseparate€conviction€of€aggravated€kidnapping€should€stand.€€The€kidnappingÏcharge€is€not€merely€incidental€to€the€assault€on€the€victim.€€The€initial€assaultÏwas€interrupted€when€Batesðð€neighbor€began€knocking€on€the€window,€at€whichÏpoint€the€defendant€took€another€course€of€action€by€forcing€the€victim€out€of€herÏhome.€€By€doing€so,€he€ð ðsubstantially€increased€the€risk€of€harm€over€and€aboveÏthat€necessarily€presentðð€in€the€assault.€€òòState€v.€Anthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€at€306Í(quoting€òòState€v.€Rollinsóó,€605€S.W.2d€828,€830€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980)).Ìà@ àò òE.ó óÌà àMoreover,€double€jeopardy€principles€as€delineated€by€our€SupremeÏCourtððs€holding€in€òòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373€(Tenn.€1996),€are€notÏviolated€by€defendantððs€convictions€for€simple€assault€and€aggravatedÏkidnapping.€€In€òòDentonóó,€the€Court€held€that€the€determination€of€the€doubleÏjeopardy€issue€rests€on€an€analysis€of€the€following:€€(1)€an€analysis€of€theÏstatutory€offenses;€(2)€an€analysis€of€the€evidence€used€to€prove€the€offenses;Ï(3)€a€consideration€of€whether€there€were€multiple€victims€or€discrete€acts;€andÏ(4)€a€comparison€of€the€purposes€of€the€respective€statutes.€€938€S.W.2d€at€381.Ìà àAn€analysis€under€òòDentonóó€reveals€that€double€jeopardy€principles€are€notÏoffended€by€defendantððs€convictions€for€simple€assault€and€aggravatedÏkidnapping.€€A€conviction€of€aggravated€kidnapping€requires€proof€that€theÏaccused€substantially€interfered€with€another€personððs€liberty,€while€assaultÏdoes€not.€€Likewise,€the€evidence€used€to€prove€assault€was€distinct€from€thatÏused€to€prove€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Furthermore,€defendant€committedÏdiscrete€acts€in€(1)€committing€the€initial€assault€on€the€victim,€and€(2)€forcing€theÏvictim€out€of€her€home€at€knife€point.€€Finally,€the€evil€at€which€each€offense€isÏdirected€is€different.€€Kidnapping€punishes€those€who€interfere€with€another'sÏliberty,€while€assault€punishes€those€who€cause€bodily€injury€or€fear€of€bodilyÏinjury.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„101,€39„13„302.€€The€conviction€forÏaggravated€kidnapping€is€constitutionally€permissible,€as€well€as€supported€byÏsufficient€evidence.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà@ àò òF.ó óÌà àWe€must€also€note€that€defendant€was€not€convicted€of€attemptedÏaggravated€rape€as€was€charged€in€Count€One€of€the€indictment.€€DefendantÏwas€convicted€of€the€lesser€offense€of€simple€assault.€€In€essence,€defendantÏargues€that€the€Class€B€felony€of€aggravated€kidnapping€is€merely€incidental€toÏthe€Class€A€misdemeanor€of€simple€assault.€€In€other€words,€defendant€isÏcontending€the€felony€of€aggravated€kidnapping€merges€into€the€misdemeanorÏof€simple€assault.€€Even€if€only€one€conviction€could€stand,€certainly€it€would€beÏthe€aggravated€kidnapping€and€not€the€simple€assault.ÌÌà@ àò òòòSENTENCINGó óóóÌÌà àAlthough€not€raised€as€an€issue€for€our€review,€defendant€makes€the€bareÏallegation€that€his€sentence€of€life€imprisonment€is€unjust.€€In€its€entirety,Ïdefendantððs€argument€is€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà àIn€addition,€it€appears€to€the€appellant€that€it€is€unjust€toÏrequire€him€to€serve€a€sentence€of€Life€without€Parole€on€theÏAggravated€Kidnapping€conviction€in€light€of€the€juryððs€overallÏdetermination€of€the€facts€of€this€case.€€Had€the€State€beenÏrequired€to€elect,€it€is€quite€possible€that€the€State€would€haveÏelected€to€pursue€the€Attempted€Aggravated€Rape€and€dismissedÏthe€Kidnapping€charge.€€If€that€had€occurred,€[defendant]€wouldÏnow€be€serving€an€11€month€29€day€sentence€instead€of€LifeÏwithout€Parole.ÌÌÓÓà àWe€do€not€find€this€conclusory€statement€to€be€sufficient€to€raise€aÏsentencing€issue.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27(a)(7);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòCone€v.€Stateóó,€927ÏS.W.2d€579,€581€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Nevertheless,€because€defendantððsÍaggravated€kidnapping€conviction€is€affirmed,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€properlyÏsentenced€defendant€as€a€repeat€violent€offender€to€life€without€parole€pursuantÏto€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„120(g).€€Defendant€has€a€previous€conviction€forÏfirst€degree€murder.€€òòSeeóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„120(a),€(d).€€This€issue€isÏwithout€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóÌÌà àThe€trial€court€did€not€err€in€denying€defendantððs€motion€to€compel€theÏstate€to€elect€offenses.€€Furthermore,€defendantððs€aggravated€kidnappingÏconviction€is€supported€by€sufficient€evidence.€€As€such,€defendantððs€convictionÏand€sentence€of€life€imprisonment€without€parole€is€proper.€€Accordingly,€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòòò ò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌJOE€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEó ó