ÿWPCx €{ßMyý~ÁüE)ÀüÉšîÔœÀ þN± fŽ)"£/\åiZ= hÈLW×Aù6¹¥Õ)(®X4z½8σ¬Ÿæ(HÎV.­·Vv¼è–¬êI>!ÚîXÀ,Ž””Ê’ájož‘Ð0Ð,½Ì²_wü™XY¿"‚ê`­òéHܰ,"¬1¥, åIë ïë»åÕ] HÐ>+v¹¹žS1]QÕÔMý¦ƒ× „Fþ 5E>=c1 9m) ôê ¥e þñ5Ó›Ð_Va§çz~­×š'x@Íò«aÆpËý,LfM…š5vuß!›Giùç[‰ÑwøQ±¾WŽšO˜zJNœÝš˜ÞŠDƒv¯áñöwC4¨úÒZ-ÞÂët©ÕóE-D*N5¯XW<ÅõÐWN5w¤f%9N½r I Ç*Ânñµ—Ë:=õÔe[ÐUáAv»ÉäÝé` ³ïH4½¾šWu¶åÕH†eÚ Ä,ïѶ 4áz‚óÀå°„ìd)•anšH¾åÒ?S±ac,ƒÖ ¢û̧y¨SG‘™ûªƒó¶âìaTÿ£OæôIË>†­Žu-êYŠNR“×Ô,ç0ZÂá]uÇæ'ù½b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz U@‘ ÆÑ Æ— Æ] Æ#éNñUNó(AEiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiibkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk 0ëssss B^^ 0¤{ D5 D-T 0K ASÌÆ 0¤å 0D‰ A«Í˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»¬Š-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularüPH,bk1¥ª ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 (ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular- ù-(|G2_$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ph»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôßýò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ph»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ph»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ph»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ph»»»ÔÑ8€Š:XXdæ»»d 8ÑÑ  ÑÔ  Ôà@hhìàÔ‡îÌuPhÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@gg$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Ph»îîÌu#ÔˆÐ Ï ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€November€20,€2002Ð î> ÐÔ‡XŠ:X»¼PhÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ph»XXŠ:#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€TIMOTHY€MAURICE€REYNOLDSÔ‡XŠ:X»¼PhÔó óÐ à0 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Giles€CountyÐ Ò " Ðà@@øøìàNo.€8369€€€€€€€Jim€T.€Hamilton,€JudgeÐ ¸  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<i` AßÐ jº  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„00900„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€December€6,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ _¯  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<*` AßÐ +{  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓA€Giles€County€jury€convicted€the€defendant,€Timothy€Maurice€Reynolds,€of€aggravated€robbery,Ð  p  Ðand€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€twenty€years€as€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€€OnÐ V Ðdirect€appeal,€the€defendant€raises€the€following€issues:€(1)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€toÐ ì< Ðsupport€the€conviction€for€aggravated€robbery;€(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€prohibitingÐ Ò" Ðdefense€counsel,€during€cross„examination€and€closing€arguments,€Ô#†¼Ph»XXŠ:#ÔÔ‡XŠ:X»¼PhÔfrom€referring€to€the€UnitedÐ ¸ ÐStates€Attorney€Generalððs€comments€on€eyewitness€identification;€and€(3)€whether€the€trial€courtÐ žî Ðerred€in€finding€the€defendant€to€be€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€€We€affirm€the€conviction;Ð „Ô Ðhowever,€because€essential€exhibits€relating€to€sentencing€are€missing€from€the€record€without€faultÐ jº Ðof€the€parties,€we€remand€for€resentencing.Ð P  ÐÓ±ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Conviction€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed;Ð l ÐRemanded€for€Resentencingó óÐ R ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ph»àXŠ:õ#ÔÔ‡XŠ:X.¼PhÔJoe€G.€Riley,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€H.€Wellesóó€and€òòAlan€E.Ð Î ÐGlennóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð ´ ÐÌGregory€D.€Smith,€Clarksville,€Tennessee€(on€appeal);€Claudia€S.€Jack,€District€Public€Defender;Ð € Ð  ÐandÔ#†¼Ph»XXŠ:Å #ÔÔ‡XŠ:X»¼PhÔ€Robert€H.€Stovall,€Jr.,€Assistant€District€Public€Defender,€for€the€appellant,€Timothy€MauriceÐ f!¶! ÐReynolds.Ð L"œ" ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Elizabeth€B.€Marney,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð $h$ ÐMike€Bottoms,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Richard€H.€Dunavant€and€Patrick€S.€Butler,€AssistantÐ þ$N % ÐDistrict€Attorneys€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ä%4!& ÐÓ– ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ph»XXŠ:& #ÔÔ‡XŠ:X»¼PhÔÐ °'#( ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Ph»XXŠ:Z #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XŠ:X»¼PhÔà  àOn€August€31,€1998,€a€Giles€County€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€aggravated€robbery,€andÐ |)Ì$* Ðthe€trial€court€imposed€a€Range€I€sentence€of€twelve€years.€òòóó€€On€direct€appeal,€this€court€reversed€theÐ b*²%+ Ðconviction€based€upon€a€violation€of€the€defendantððs€right€to€counsel€and€failure€to€charge€the€juryÐ H+˜&, Ðon€lesser„included€offenses,€and€the€defendant€was€granted€a€new€trial.€€òòSee€óóòòState€v.€Timothy€M.Ð .,~'- ÐReynoldsóó,€No.€M1998„00059„CCA„R3„CD,€2000€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€15,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð -d(. ÐApp.€Jan.€7,€2000,€at€Nashville).òòóóÐ ú-J)/ý Їà  àDuring€the€retrial,€the€victim,€Howard€Edward€Roberts,€testified€that€on€June€22,€1997,€atÐ ° Ðapproximately€9:00€p.m.,€he€stopped€to€get€fuel€at€Scot€Market,€a€convenience€store€in€Pulaski,Ð –æ ÐTennessee.€€Several€young€people€were€in€the€parking€lot.€€When€Roberts€got€out€of€his€vehicle€andÐ |Ì Ðbegan€to€pump€fuel,€he€saw€the€defendant€leave€the€area€where€the€young€people€were€standing€andÐ b² Ðapproach€the€far€side€of€his€vehicle.€€The€defendant€approached€Roberts€and€offered€to€wash€hisÐ H˜ Ðwindshield.€€Roberts€declined€his€offer,€and€the€defendant€walked€away.€Ð . ~ ÐÌà  àRoberts€testified€the€defendant€then€approached€his€vehicle€from€the€opposite€side€andÐ ú J Ðlooked€inside€the€vehicle.€€The€defendant€approached€Roberts€and€said,€ð ðHey€man,€I€need€someÐ à 0 Ðmoney.ðð€Roberts€ignored€the€defendant,€and€the€defendant€started€walking€toward€Roberts€and€said,Ð Æ   Ðð ðHand€over€your€wallet€or€Iððm€going€to€kill€you.ðð€€The€defendant€then€exposed€an€object€in€hisÐ ¬ ü  Ðpocket,€which€Roberts€thought€was€the€handle€of€a€pistol.€€Roberts€described€the€object€as€metallicÐ ’â  Ðwith€a€plastic€decor€similar€to€those€found€on€.38€specials.€€Roberts€stated€he€had€previously€seenÐ xÈ  Ðhandles€on€both€pistols€and€knives€resembling€the€object€in€the€defendantððs€pocket.€Roberts€gaveÐ ^®  Ðthe€defendant€his€wallet,€and€the€defendant€rejoined€the€group€of€young€people.€€Roberts€went€intoÐ D”  Ðthe€store€and€called€the€police.€€At€trial,€Roberts€identified€the€defendant€as€the€perpetrator€of€theÐ *z  Ðoffense.€Ð ` ÐÌà  àRoberts€testified€the€wallet€contained€a€$650€check,€a€$200€check,€a€$100€check,€and€$700Ð Ü, Ðto€$800€in€cash.€€The€wallet€also€contained€a€credit€card,€which€had€$2,400€charged€against€it€a€fewÐ Â Ðdays€after€Roberts€reported€it€stolen.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àOfficer€Kyle€Helton€of€the€Pulaski€Police€Department€testified€he€took€Roberts€to€the€policeÐ tÄ Ðstation€where€Roberts€reviewed€mug€books.€€Even€though€one€of€the€books€contained€a€photographÐ Zª Ðof€the€defendant,€Roberts€was€unable€to€make€an€identification.€Ð @ ÐÌà  àTwo€to€three€days€after€the€incident,€Officer€Helton€and€Investigator€John€Dickey€constructedÐ  \ Ðanother€line„up€using€digital€photographs€from€the€Giles€County€Sheriffððs€Department.€€The€line„upÐ òB Ðconsisted€of€photographs€of€eight€individuals.€€Both€Officer€Helton€and€Investigator€Dickey€testifiedÐ Ø( ÐRoberts€immediately€identified€the€defendant.€Ð ¾ ÐÌà  àDefense€witness€Donna€Willingham€stated€she€was€with€the€defendant€on€the€night€of€JuneÐ Š Ú Ð22,€1997,€at€the€Victoria€Apartments,€approximately€two€blocks€away€from€Scot€Market.€Ð p!À  ÐWillingham€conceded€the€defendant€may€have€left€the€apartments€around€9:00€p.m.€or€10:00€p.m.€Ð V"¦! ÐÌà  àShelia€Smith€and€Jennifer€Reynolds€testified€they€saw€the€defendant€at€the€VictoriaÐ "$r# ÐApartments€at€approximately€7:00€p.m.€€The€defendant€drank€for€several€hours€and€left€with€themÐ %X $ Ðaround€9:30€p.m.€€Smith,€Reynolds,€and€the€defendant€then€went€to€Lisa€Dalyððs€house€because€theÐ î%>!% Ðdefendant€stated€he€needed€to€borrow€money.€Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌà  à€Lisa€Daly€testified€that€at€around€10:00€p.m.,€the€defendant€came€to€her€house,€which€wasÐ  (ð#( Ðlocated€three€to€four€blocks€from€Scot€Market.€€When€the€defendant€asked€to€borrow€money,€DalyÐ †)Ö$) Ðgave€him€$10,€and€he€left€after€fifteen€to€twenty€minutes.€€Reynolds€testified€that€when€they€leftÐ l*¼%* ÐDalyððs€house,€they€returned€to€the€Victoria€Apartments;€she€stated€the€defendant€never€left€her€sightÐ R+¢&+ Ðbetween€7:30€p.m.€and€midnight.€Ð 8,ˆ', Їà  àThe€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€aggravated€robbery.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€theÐ ° Ðdefendant€to€twenty€years€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction€as€a€Range€II€multipleÐ –æ Ðoffender.€€The€trial€court€also€ordered€the€sentence€to€run€consecutively€to€an€unrelated€federalÐ |Ì Ðsentence.€€This€appeal€ensued.Ð b² ÐÌÓ  Óò òSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óÐ . ~ ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€contends€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction€forÐ ú J Ðaggravated€robbery.€€We€disagree.Ð à 0 ÐÌÔ‡ XŠ:XXXŠ:Ôà  àIn€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€jury€in€a€criminal€trial.€€AÐ ¬ ü  Ðjury€verdict€accredits€the€state's€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€€òòState€v.Ð ’â  ÐBigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÐ xÈ  Ðlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€òòId.óó;Ð ^®  ÐòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Moreover,€a€guilty€verdict€removes€theÐ D”  Ðpresumption€of€innocence€which€the€appellant€enjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€onÐ *z  Ðappeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€ofÐ ` Ðovercoming€this€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óóÐ öF ÐÌà  àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€for€an€appellate€courtÐ Â Ðis€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rationalÐ ¨ø Ðtrier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonableÐ ŽÞ Ðdoubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ð tÄ ÐEd.€2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Abramsóó,€935€S.W.2d€399,€401€(Tenn.€1996).€The€weight€and€credibilityÐ Zª Ðof€the€witnesses'€testimony€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòStateÐ @ Ðv.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.€Breweróó,€932€S.W.2d€1,€19€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð &v ÐApp.€1996).Ô#†XŠ:XX XŠ:U##ÔÐ  \ ÐÌà  àAggravated€robbery,€as€applicable€to€the€case€at€bar,€is€defined€as€robbery€ð ð[a]ccomplishedÐ Ø( Ðwith€a€deadly€weapon€or€by€display€of€any€article€used€or€fashioned€to€lead€the€victim€to€reasonablyÐ ¾ Ðbelieve€it€to€be€a€deadly€weapon.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„402(a)(1).€€Robbery€is€defined€asÐ ¤ô Ðð ðthe€intentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€the€person€of€another€by€violence€or€putting€theÐ Š Ú Ðperson€in€fear.ðð€€òòId.óó€ðð€39„13„401(a).Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€there€was€no€evidence€that€the€perpetrator€used€a€gun€or€any€otherÐ <#Œ" Ðweapon€to€accomplish€the€robbery.€€However,€the€actual€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€is€not€a€requiredÐ "$r# Ðelement€of€aggravated€robbery.€€òòSee€id.óó€ðð€39„13„402(a)(1).€€Rather,€a€defendant€may€be€convictedÐ %X $ Ðof€aggravated€robbery€when€he€or€she€accomplishes€a€robbery€by€displaying€an€object€in€a€fashionÐ î%>!% Ðthat€ð ðlead[s]€the€victim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€a€deadly€weapon.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌà  àRoberts€testified€the€defendant€approached€him€and€exposed€an€object€in€his€pocket,€whichÐ  (ð#( ÐRoberts€believed€to€be€the€handle€of€a€pistol.€€The€defendant€then€demanded€his€wallet€andÐ †)Ö$) Ðthreatened€to€kill€him.€€Upon€seeing€the€object€and€hearing€the€defendantððs€threats,€Roberts€gave€himÐ l*¼%* Ðthe€wallet.€Ð R+¢&+ ÐÐ 8,ˆ', Ðà  àRoberts€further€testified€that€on€prior€occasions,€he€had€observed€handles€on€pistols€andÐ ° Ðknives€which€resembled€the€object€in€the€defendantððs€pocket.€€He€stated€the€object€was€metallic€withÐ –æ Ða€plastic€decor€similar€to€a€.38€special.€€Roberts€could€have€reasonably€believed€the€object€was€aÐ |Ì Ðdeadly€weapon.€€Whether€the€object€in€the€defendantððs€pocket€was,€in€fact,€a€deadly€weapon€is€notÐ b² Ðdispositive€of€the€issue.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€it€was€within€the€jury's€prerogative€to€reject€defendant's€alibi€defense.€€òòSeeÐ  d ÐóóòòState€v.€Ô_ÔCateÔ_Ôóó,€746€S.W.2d€727,€729€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)€(noting€the€defense€of€alibi€and€theÐ ú J Ðquestion€of€identification€are€determinable€by€the€jury€as€the€exclusive€judges€of€the€credibility€ofÐ à 0 Ðthe€witnesses).€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€aggravatedÐ Æ   Ðrobbery€conviction.Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌÓ  Óò òEVIDENCE€OF€IDENTIFICATIONó óÐ xÈ  ÐÌÓ  Óà  àDuring€the€cross„examination€of€Investigator€John€Dickey€of€the€Pulaski€Police€Department,Ð D”  Ðdefense€counsel€questioned€him€regarding€the€second€lineup€in€which€Roberts€identified€theÐ *z  Ðdefendant.€Defense€counsel€attempted€to€question€Investigator€Dickey€regarding€the€standards€onÐ ` Ðphotographic€lineup€identification€procedures€promulgated€by€the€United€States€Department€ofÐ öF ÐJustice.€€Specifically,€defense€counsel€requested€the€trial€court€permit€him€to€read€the€introductionÐ Ü, Ðby€then€United€States€Attorney€General€Janet€Reno€during€both€cross„examination€and€closingÐ Â Ðarguments.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àIn€her€introduction,€Attorney€General€Reno€stated€the€following:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àRecent€cases€in€which€DNA€evidence€has€been€used€to€exonerateÐ @ Ðindividuals€convicted€primarily€on€the€basis€of€eyewitness€testimonyÐ &v Ðhave€shown€us€that€eyewitness€evidence€is€not€infallible.€€Even€theÐ  \ Ðmost€honest€and€objective€people€can€make€mistakes€in€recalling€andÐ òB Ðinterpreting€a€witnessed€event.€€It€is€the€nature€of€human€memory.€Ð Ø( ÐThis€issue€has€been€at€the€heart€of€a€growing€body€of€research€in€theÐ ¾ Ðfield€of€eyewitness€identification€in€the€past€decade.Фô` x` x ÐÌThe€trial€court€denied€defense€counselððs€request,€stating€that€defense€counsel€could€argue€eyewitnessÐ p!À  Ðidentification€is€not€infallible,€but€could€not€quote€Attorney€General€Reno.€€The€defendant€contendsÐ V"¦! Ðthe€trial€court€erred€in€denying€the€request.€€We€disagree.Ð <#Œ" ÐÌÔ‡ XŠ:XXXŠ:Ôà  àThe€propriety,€scope,€manner€and€control€of€the€examination€of€witnesses€is€within€the€soundÐ %X $ Ðdiscretion€of€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Humphreysóó,€70€S.W.3d€752,€766„67€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2001).€Ð î%>!% ÐAbsent€an€abuse€of€discretion,€we€will€not€interfere€with€such€rulings.€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2dÐ Ô&$"& Ð54,€72€(Tenn.€1992).€€Ô#†XŠ:XX XŠ:s<#ÔÐ º' #' ÐÌà  àExpert€testimony€regarding€the€reliability€of€eyewitness€testimony,€which€does€notÐ †)Ö$) Ðspecifically€address€the€testimony€of€the€witness€at€issue,€is€inadmissible€òòper€seóó€under€TennesseeÐ l*¼%* ÐRule€of€Evidence€702€because€this€type€of€expert€testimony€does€not€substantially€assist€the€trier€ofÐ R+¢&+ Ðfact.€€òòState€v.€Coleyóó,€32€S.W.3d€831,€838€(Tenn.€2000);€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€702.€€Expert€testimonyÐ 8,ˆ', Ðregarding€eyewitness€identification€ð ðððsolicits€the€danger€of€undue€prejudice€or€confusing€the€issuesÐ ° Ðor€misleading€the€jury.€.€.€.ðððð€òòIdóó.€at€835€(quoting€òòState€v.€Ballardóó,€855€S.W.2d€557,€561€(Tenn.Ð –æ Ð1993)).€òòóóÐ |Ì ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€at€bar,€defense€counsel€did€not€attempt€to€introduce€an€expert€witness€to€testifyÐ H˜ Ðto€the€unreliability€of€eyewitness€testimony.€€Instead,€defense€counsel€attempted€to€introduce€aÐ . ~ Ðgeneral€and€unparticularized€statement€made€by€then€Attorney€General€Reno€concerning€the€lackÐ  d Ðof€reliability€of€eyewitness€identifications.€€Even€if€the€statement€qualifies€as€an€exception€to€theÐ ú J Ðhearsay€rule,€this€statement€is€not€specific€to€either€Robertsðð€testimony€regarding€his€identificationÐ à 0 Ðof€the€defendant€or€Investigator€Dickeyððs€testimony€regarding€the€particular€procedures€employedÐ Æ   Ðin€constructing€the€second€photographic€lineup.€€Like€expert€testimony€on€eyewitness€identification,Ð ¬ ü  Ðthis€statement€solicits€the€danger€of€misleading€the€jury,€who€must€make€its€own€determination€ofÐ ’â  Ðcredibility.€€òòSeeóó€òòColeyóó,€32€S.W.3d€at€835.Ð xÈ  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€permitted€defense€counsel€to€argue€in€his€closing€that€eyewitnessÐ D”  Ðidentification€is€not€infallible.€€In€addition,€defense€counsel€questioned€Investigator€DickeyÐ *z  Ðextensively€during€cross„examination€concerning€the€flaws€in€the€second€photographic€lineup.€€WeÐ ` Ðconclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€denying€defense€counselððs€request€to€read€AttorneyÐ öF ÐGeneral€Renoððs€statement€to€the€jury.Ð Ü, ÐÌÓ  Óò òSENTENCINGó óÐ ¨ø ÐÔ  ÔÌÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€him€to€be€a€Range€II€multipleÐ tÄ Ðoffender.€€Ô‡XŠ:XXXŠ:ÔAs€applicable€to€the€case€at€bar,€a€ð ðmultiple€offenderðð€is€a€defendant€who€has€received€ð ð[a]Ð Zª Ðminimum€of€two€(2)€but€not€more€than€four€(4)€prior€felony€convictions€within€the€conviction€class,Ð @ Ða€higher€class,€or€within€the€next€two€(2)€lower€felony€classes.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð &v Ð106(a)(1).€€The€trial€court€must€find€the€defendant€to€be€a€multiple€offender€beyond€a€reasonableÐ  \ Ðdoubt.€€òòId.óó€at€(c).Ð òB ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€robbery,€a€Class€B€felony.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ¾ Ððð€39„13„402(b).€€Therefore,€in€order€to€be€sentenced€as€a€multiple€offender,€the€defendant€must€haveÐ ¤ô Ðat€least€two€prior€felony€convictions€falling€within€the€range€of€Classes€A€through€D.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð Š Ú ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„106(a)(1).Ð p!À  ÐÌà  àIn€its€sentencing€order,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€twenty€years€for€aggravatedÐ <#Œ" Ðrobbery€as€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€€However,€the€trial€court€failed€to€list€the€felonies€uponÐ "$r# Ðwhich€its€decision€was€based.€€In€order€to€allow€meaningful€appellate€review,€the€trial€court€mustÐ %X $ Ðplace€its€reasons€for€arriving€at€the€final€sentencing€decision€on€the€record.€€òòÔ#†XŠ:XXXŠ:PH#ÔÔ‡ XŠ:XXXŠ:ÔState€v.€Pooleóó,€945Ð î%>!% ÐS.W.2d€93,€96€(Tenn.€1997).Ô#†XŠ:XX XŠ:N#ÔÔ‡XŠ:XXXŠ:ÔÐ Ô&$"& ÐÌà  àThe€presentence€report€lists€four€felony€convictions,€while€the€parties€addressed€five€felonyÐ  (ð#( Ðconvictions€during€the€sentencing€hearing.€€Although€certified€copies€of€the€convictions€wereÐ †)Ö$) Ðadmitted,€they€are€missing€from€the€appellate€record.€€Defense€counsel€averred€in€an€affidavit€thatÐ l*¼%* Ðhis€efforts€to€procure€the€copies€were€unsuccessful€because€the€stateððs€only€copies€were€introducedÐ R+¢&+ Ðat€the€hearing.€€We€will€address€each€felony€conviction€based€upon€the€record€presented€to€us.Ð 8,ˆ', Їà  àThe€first€felony€conviction€listed€in€the€presentence€report€is€a€federal€conviction€for€bankÐ ° Ðrobbery€by€force€or€violence,€in€which€the€defendant€was€convicted€on€January€16,€1998,€andÐ –æ Ðsentenced€to€80€months€of€incarceration.€€For€purposes€of€determining€multiple€offender€status,€aÐ |Ì Ðð ðprior€convictionðð€is€defined€as€a€ð ðconviction€that€has€been€adjudicated€prior€to€the€commission€ofÐ b² Ðthe€more€recent€offense€for€which€sentence€is€to€be€imposed.ðð€€òòState€v.€Blouvettóó,€904€S.W.2d€111,Ð H˜ Ð113€(Tenn.€1995);€òòsee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„106(b)(1).€€The€offense€at€issue,€aggravatedÐ . ~ Ðrobbery,€occurred€on€June€22,€1997,€prior€to€the€bank€robbery€conviction.€€Therefore,€the€convictionÐ  d Ðfor€bank€robbery€does€not€qualify€as€a€ð ðprior€convictionðð€and€may€not€be€used€in€determining€theÐ ú J Ðdefendantððs€status€as€a€multiple€offender.Ð à 0 ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€also€convicted€of€burglary€on€August€22,€1990,€in€Arizona€and€sentencedÐ ¬ ü  Ðto€eight€years€of€incarceration.€€During€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€defendant€conceded€that€theÐ ’â  Ðburglary€conviction€qualified€as€a€prior€felony€conviction,€which€could€be€used€in€determiningÐ xÈ  Ðmultiple€offender€status.€Ð ^®  ÐÌà  àThe€third€felony€conviction€listed€in€the€presentence€report€is€ð ðattempt€to€commit€felony,ððÐ *z  Ðin€which€the€defendant€was€convicted€on€July€1,€1990,€in€Arizona€and€sentenced€to€three€yearsÐ ` Ðprobation.€€During€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€prosecutor€stated€the€defendant€was€convicted€ofÐ öF Ðattempted€third€degree€burglary€and€attempted€possession€of€narcotic€drugs.€€Certified€copies€ofÐ Ü, Ðthese€convictions€are€missing€from€the€record.€€Based€on€the€record€before€us,€we€are€unable€toÐ Â Ðconclude€these€convictions€qualify€as€Class€D€or€higher€felonies.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€last€felony€conviction€listed€in€the€presentence€report€is€assault€with€a€deadly€weapon.€Ð tÄ ÐThe€defendant€pled€òònolo€contentreóó€on€November€8,€1988,€in€California€and€received€a€sentence€ofÐ Zª Ð90€days€of€incarceration€and€24€months€probation.€€The€presentence€report€also€states€that€theÐ @ Ðdefendant€was€convicted€under€the€alias€ð ðKeith€Bryant.ðð€€The€certified€copy€of€the€conviction€isÐ &v Ðmissing€from€the€record.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àDuring€the€sentencing€hearing,€Linda€Lipham,€who€prepared€the€defendantððs€Ô_ÔpresentenceÔ_ÔÐ Ø( Ðreport,€testified€she€could€not€recall€where€she€found€the€alias€ð ðKeith€Bryant.ðð€€She€stated€she€couldÐ ¾ Ðnot€remember€whether€the€defendant€provided€her€with€the€name,€but€that€she€could€have€gotten€itÐ ¤ô Ðfrom€either€clerksðð€offices,€probation€reports,€or€the€National€Crime€Information€Computer€(NCIC).€Ð Š Ú ÐÌà  àDuring€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€defendant€testified€he€did€not€go€by€the€name€ð ðKeithÐ V"¦! ÐBryantðð€while€he€was€living€in€California.€€He€further€denied€telling€Lipham€that€his€alias€was€KeithÐ <#Œ" ÐBryant.€Ð "$r# ÐÌà  àIn€the€sentencing€order,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€defendant€and€Keith€Bryant€were€theÐ î%>!% Ðsame€person.€€However,€the€trial€court€failed€to€state€the€factual€basis€for€its€finding.€€Because€the€Ð Ô&$"& Ðexhibits€are€missing,€we€are€unable€to€conclude€whether€or€not€the€felony€conviction€for€assault€withÐ º' #' Ða€deadly€weapon€may€be€used€in€determining€multiple€offender€status.€€If€we€had€the€missingÐ  (ð#( Ðexhibits,€we€might€be€able€to€resolve€the€issue€by€comparing€social€security€numbers€or€otherÐ †)Ö$) Ðinformation.Ð l*¼%* Ðâ âÐ R+¢&+ Ðà  àIn€light€of€these€circumstances,€we€are€in€a€quandary€as€to€the€disposition€of€this€issue.€Ð ° Ðâ âAlthough€the€appellant€has€the€responsibility€of€providing€this€court€with€an€adequate€record,€òòseeóóÐ –æ ÐòòState€v.€Tayloróó,€992€S.W.2d€941,€944€(Tenn.€1999),€we€are€unable€to€fault€him€for€the€missingÐ |Ì Ðexhibits.€€Likewise,€we€are€unable€to€fault€the€state.€€Accordingly,€we€remand€to€the€trial€court€forÐ b² Ðanother€sentencing€hearing.Ð H˜ ÐÌÓ  Óò òCONCLUSIONó óÐ  d ÐÌÓ  Óà  àIn€summary,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€conviction€forÐ à 0 Ðaggravated€robbery.€€We€further€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€refusing€to€allow€€defenseÐ Æ   Ðcounsel€to€quote€Attorney€General€Renoððs€statement€regarding€eyewitness€identification€duringÐ ¬ ü  Ðcross„examination€and€closing€arguments.€€However,€because€the€missing€exhibits€are€essential€toÐ ’â  Ðthe€sentencing€issue,€we€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€a€new€sentencing€hearing.Ð xÈ  ÐÔ#†XŠ:XXXŠ:œN#ÔÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð öF Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGE