’WPCp Gb€Ió™<“Ē¶k’Ÿ8Ęśųd³†HµƒWFč¼MKꆮō4×ŖŠ6C¢„ąÜX˜–zxąi$K•“FµŗPš[»°n²GJĒwz‰čOņØ„›Q¶JŠ}ioAĖ3€2Š1ƤF*ś›"P£SA_d[æ Ul¹'zt3¼ĻW{°G¾n“ŸaģJ°)hN›bg›:üL&äYŗš1€Lč.Ʌa(’(ņćŃC8³Jš‹”‡Œ·7ĆUt×ē›lå; ĻQ:3§ŒĮ‡ōųü«F,3n*‰ŚcķD/äї a§‚eRp“ŪŖ {Šäb…°ö}q£„įfbłĢˆŠ$GLŚĆøŪ0xö7Äpq•§ –­$ H¹˜›©VtįXYz[¢¦ļł’ąuÅČ²pÉ4½õņVĻ8ŗ•ŒłĮt9Ā÷&WvıTóĢk”„åŌuŲ„³šØ7r÷Ź}ļ_‹ŒÕŒå{H.ĢaQ›??ķ÷[)!EKtń~Ć1£»fļ·62ĪjEř|T–#īL‡q)‹ ŲŲŪy*Č4Šę~°KŸĆx±ņälžÉmņ@O/’rĶąŻ“ÕĒ’ąek%`čŒYP œXb#Į\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ņ— i x mz UN‘ Ęß Ę„ Ęk Ę1N÷NłūE 0Dbcccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc 0ėkkkk BVV 0¤s D5 D-L 0Kyy ASÄĘ 0¤Ż 0D A«Å˜HP LaserJet 4050ČČČČČČČČ0»œ-ā (`£Ŗ$””Ń€.ŃŃ8€½­»»d»»d8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  Ó(ķ€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*ȇŸ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x’U‹’ĄĄĄ(ÖĆ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 Ń ° Ń  śŻ ƒRłē$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōņ]ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_Ōš šDispositionšš€in€this€context,€as€in€ņņStephenyóó,€ņņid.óó,€refers€to€the€nature€of€the€charges€in€juvenile€court.(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó- ł-(|G2łē$¤¤Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€N•»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōņ]ņ»»Ō d(|3G†$££Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€N•»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻVVVV)’’!dxdx)!ČČČČdxdx( ±ž$’’ņ ņFigure€Ś  Ś1Ś  Śó ó^_X`YEž’<<C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G†$¢¢Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€N•»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8’’’’’’’’’’C’’ HKKKKŻ ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€N•»»ddČ8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻŌ_ŌŃ  ŃŃ  ŃŌ€¼N•»»»ŌŃ8€)XXdģ»»d8Ńą@ttģąŌ‡ī[¤ī»¼N•ŌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆŠ ° Šą@WW$ģąAT€KNOXVILLEŌ#†¼N•»īī[¤ #ŌˆŠ Ö& ŠÓ  Óą @ ąą @` ąAssigned€on€Briefs€July€25,€2001Š üL ŠŌ‡X)X»¼N•ŌĢņ ņŌ#†¼N•»XX)#ŌņņSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEóó€v.€ņņóóTIMOTHY€KEN€SEXTONŌ‡X)X»¼N•Ōó óŠ śJ ŠĢą@@½½ģąņ ņDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Hamilton€CountyŠ ś J Šą@@ųųģąNo.€222890€€€€€€Douglas€A.€Meyer,€JudgeŠ ę 6 ŠĢĢą@@ģģ*ģąßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` Aߊ Ŗś  ŠĢą@@TTģąNo.€E2000„01779„CCA„R3„CD€Š „õ  ŠAugust€2,€Ō_Ō2002Ō_ŌŠ ‘į  ŠßA€V) °°` dE<|` Aߊ }Ķ  Šó óĢÓ  ÓŌ‡ X)XXX)ŌThe€Hamilton€County€Grand€Jury€indicted€the€fifteen„year„old€Defendant,€charging€him€with€secondŠ xČ  Šdegree€murder.€€Following€a€transfer€hearing,€the€Defendant€was€tried€as€an€adult.€A€HamiltonŠ d“ ŠCounty€jury€found€the€Defendant€guilty€of€the€indicted€charge,€and€the€trial€court€sentenced€him€toŠ P  Štwenty€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€The€Defendant€now€appeals,€arguing€the€following:€Š <Œ Š(1)€that€there€was€insufficient€evidence€to€convict€the€Defendant€of€second€degree€murder,€(2)€thatŠ (x Šthe€juvenile€court€erred€by€transferring€the€Defendant€to€be€tried€as€an€adult,€(3)€that€the€trial€courtŠ d Šerred€by€denying€the€Defendantššs€motion€to€suppress€his€statement,€(4)€that€the€trial€court€erred€byŠ P Šallowing€the€State€to€cross„examine€two€character€witnesses€for€the€defense€about€their€knowledgeŠ ģ< Šof€the€Defendantššs€juvenile€record,€and€(5)€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€sentencing€the€Defendant€toŠ Ų( Štwenty€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Concluding€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€theŠ Ä ŠState€to€introduce€evidence€of€the€Defendantššs€prior€juvenile€record€during€the€cross„examinationŠ ° Šof€character€witnesses€for€the€Defendant,€we€reverse€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.Š œģ ŠŌ#†X)XX X)Ö#ŌŌ#†¼N•»XX)˜#ŌŌ‡X)X»¼N•ŌĢÓŹÓņ ņTenn.€R.€Ō_ŌCrimŌ_Ō.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Reversed€andŠ tÄ ŠRemandedó óŠ `° ŠĢņņÓ  ÓŌ#†¼N•»ąX)Ė #ŌŌ‡X)X.¼N•ŌRobert€W.€Ō_ŌWedemeyerŌ_Ō,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€ņņThomas€T.€Ō_ŌWoodallŌ_Ōóó€andŠ 8!ˆ  ŠņņJames€Ō_ŌCurwoodŌ_Ō€Ō_ŌWittŌ_Ō,€Jr.,€JJ.óó,€joined.Š $"t! ŠĢDonna€Robinson€Miller,€Chattanooga,€Tennessee€(on€appeal),€and€Michael€Ō_ŌAcuffŌ_Ō,€Chattanooga,Š ü#L# ŠTennessee€(at€trial),€for€the€Appellant,€Timothy€Ken€Sexton.Š č$8 $ ŠĢPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Patricia€C.€Ō_ŌKussmannŌ_Ō,€Assistant€AttorneyŠ Ą&"& ŠGeneral;€William€H.€Cox,€III,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Rodney€C.€Strong,€Assistant€DistrictŠ ¬'ü"' ŠAttorney€General,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Š ˜(č#( ŠÓŖ ÓĢą@@OO&ģąņ ņOPINIONó óŌ#†¼N•»XX)Ł #ŌŌ‡X)X»¼N•ŌŠ p*Ą%* ŠņņóóŌ#†¼N•»XX)µ#ŌÓ  ÓŌ€X)X»¼N•ŌŃ€OaŃą@ģģ*ģąˆĢą  ąA€Hamilton€County€jury€found€the€Defendant€guilty€of€second€degree€murder€for€the€shootingŠ H,˜', Šdeath€of€victim€Larry€Jones.€€The€facts€underlying€the€conviction€were€presented€at€trial€as€follows:€Š 4-„(-żĀ ŠŌ_ŌOfficer€Chad€Sullivan€of€the€Chattanooga€Police€Department€testified€that€around€12:30€a.m.€on€MayŠ ° Š16,€1998,€he€responded€to€a€dispatch€for€a€shooting€at€a€carwash.€€When€he€arrived€at€the€scene,Š œģ ŠSullivan€observed€Kenneth€Sexton,€the€Defendantššs€father,€standing€on€the€lot€where€the€carwashŠ ˆŲ Šwas€located,€holding€a€can€of€beer€in€a€bag.€€Sullivan€asked€Kenneth€Sexton€if€he€was€injured€or€ifŠ tÄ Šhe€knew€of€anyone€who€was€injured,€and€he€replied€in€the€negative.€€Sullivan€testified€that€there€wasŠ `° Šalso€a€trailer€on€the€lot.€€Sullivan€walked€towards€the€trailer€and€heard€moaning€from€inside.€€SullivanŠ L œ Šentered€the€trailer€and€found€the€victim€slumped€over€the€kitchen€table.€€Sullivan€testified€that€heŠ 8 ˆ Šnoticed€that€the€victim€was€bleeding€from€his€side€and€appeared€to€be€very€faint.€€Sullivan€stated€thatŠ $ t Šhe€asked€the€victim€if€he€had€been€robbed€or€if€someone€had€broken€into€the€trailer,€and€the€victimŠ  ` Šresponded€no€to€each€question.€€Sullivan€testified€that€when€he€asked€the€victim€if€he€knew€who€shotŠ ü L  Šhim,€the€victim€said,€š šnošš€and€then€began€mumbling.€€Sullivan€testified€that€the€weapon€used€in€theŠ č 8  Šshooting€was€never€recovered.€€Š Ō$  ŠĢą  ąSullivan€recalled€that€he€left€the€scene€to€go€to€the€hospital,€and€when€he€returned,€he€noticedŠ ¬ü  Šthat€a€window€was€open€on€the€trailer.€€Sullivan€also€noticed€that€the€screen€to€the€window€was€off.€Š ˜č  ŠSullivan€testified€that€he€went€inside€the€trailer€and€found€Kenneth€Sexton€asleep€and€apparentlyŠ „Ō  Šintoxicated.€€Officers€began€to€search€the€area€and€noticed€a€nearby€storage€building.€€Patrick€PhillipsŠ pĄ Šowned€the€building,€as€well€as€the€carwash€and€the€trailer.€€The€officers€waited€for€Patrick€PhillipsŠ \¬ Što€arrive€because€there€was€a€fence€surrounding€the€building€for€which€they€did€not€have€keys.€Š H˜ ŠSullivan€stated€that€Phillips€arrived€at€the€scene€and€climbed€onto€the€roof€of€the€storage€building.€Š 4„ ŠSoon€thereafter,€he€asked€the€officers€to€come€up€also.€€Sullivan€testified€that€the€officers€found€theŠ  p ŠDefendant€on€the€roof,€and€it€appeared€that€he€had€urinated€on€himself.€€Š  \ ŠĢą  ąDetective€Bill€Phillips€of€the€Chattanooga€Police€Department€testified€that€he€received€aŠ ä4 Šdispatch€around€12:50€a.m.,€but€because€he€was€on€another€call,€he€was€not€able€to€get€to€the€sceneŠ Š  Šuntil€around€3:20€a.m.€€Phillips€recalled€that€the€Defendant€was€found€on€the€roof€around€5:00€a.m.€Š ¼  ŠPhillips€stated€that€the€owner€of€the€property€unlocked€the€fence,€put€up€the€dogs€and€let€the€policeŠ Øų Šonto€the€roof.€€Phillips€testified€that€when€they€found€the€Defendant,€he€said,€š šOh,€thank€God!€€DidŠ ”ä Šyššall€find€the€person€that€was€shooting?€€Me€and€dad€and€Larry€were€down€there€and€somebody€justŠ €Š Šstarted€shooting.šš€€Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€Phillips,€the€Defendant€was€transported€to€a€juvenile€detention€facility,€and€aŠ D!” Š.45„caliber€spent€shell€casing€was€found€in€the€Defendantššs€pocket.€Phillips€took€the€DefendantššsŠ 0"€  Šstatement€at€8:20€a.m.€on€the€morning€after€the€offense.€€In€the€statement,€which€was€introduced€intoŠ #l! Ševidence,€the€Defendant€admitted€that€he€shot€the€victim€but€claimed€that€it€was€an€accident.€€PhillipsŠ $X" Štestified€that€the€Defendant€told€him€that€the€gun€used€to€shoot€the€victim€€was€at€his€fatherššs€house;Š ō$D # Šhowever,€police€officers€searched€the€house€and€did€not€find€a€gun.€€Phillips€testified€that€theŠ ą%0!$ ŠDefendantššs€weight€as€listed€on€an€arrest€report€was€one€hundred€and€twenty€pounds.€€The€autopsyŠ Ģ&"% Šreport€revealed€the€victimššs€weight€at€death€to€be€two€hundred€and€seventy„six€pounds.€€Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendant€sent€a€letter€to€the€trial€court€which€was€introduced€into€the€record.€€In€theŠ )ą$( Šletter,€the€Defendant€begged€the€court€for€mercy€and€stated€that€he€cried€every€night€because€theŠ |*Ģ%) Švictim€was€dead.€€The€Defendant€stated,€š š[The€victim]€was€my€best€friend.šš€€According€to€theŠ h+ø&* ŠDefendant,€he€did€not€know€what€happened€that€night;€he€claimed€that€the€victim€š šcame€out€of€hisŠ ° Štrailer€talking€about€[how]€he€was€going€to€kill€[the€Defendant]šš€and€that€š š[the€victim]€scared€[theŠ œģ ŠDefendant]€so€bad€that€[he]€feared€for€[his]€life.šš€€The€Defendant€stated€that€š š[he]€didnššt€really€meanŠ ˆŲ Što€shoot€[the€victim],šš€but€the€š šgun€just€went€off.šš€€The€Defendant€also€stated€he€blacked€out€afterŠ tÄ Šhe€shot€the€victim.€€The€Defendant€stated€that€he€was€guilty€of€being€š šyoung€and€dumb€and€beingŠ `° Šdrunk€at€the€time€that€it€happened.šš€€The€Defendant€further€testified€that€when€he€made€his€statementŠ L œ Što€police,€Detective€Phillips€š štook€advantagešš€of€the€fact€that€the€Defendant€was€young€andŠ 8 ˆ Šintoxicated.€€According€to€the€Defendant,€when€he€made€the€statement,€€Detective€Phillips€told€theŠ $ t ŠDefendant€that€he€was€lying,€made€fun€of€him€for€being€drunk,€and€said€that€the€Defendant€shouldŠ  ` Šnot€show€any€remorse€during€the€interview.ą Ą ąŠ ü L  Šą  ąĢą  ąLaura€Hodge,€a€special€forensic€scientist€for€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation€(TBI),Š Ō$  Štestified€that€she€performed€gunshot€residue€analyses€on€the€Defendant€and€Kenneth€Sexton.€€HodgeŠ Ą  Štestified€that€both€men€testified€positive,€meaning€that€each€of€them€š šfired,€handled€or€was€near€a€gunŠ ¬ü  Šwhen€it€was€fired.šš€€Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąDonald€Carmen,€a€special€forensic€firearms€scientist€with€the€TBI,€testified€that€he€examinedŠ pĄ Ša€live€cartridge€round€and€two€spent€cartridge€casings€found€at€the€scene.€€He€stated€that€all€threeŠ \¬ Šitems€would€operate€in€a€.45„caliber€semi„automatic€pistol.€€Carmen€explained€that€a€person€mustŠ H˜ Špull€the€trigger€to€shoot€the€gun€and€stated€that€š š[f]or€one€pull€of€the€trigger,€you€will€get€one€shotŠ 4„ Šuntil€the€magazine€is€empty.šš€€Carmen€testified€that€the€two€spent€casings€had€been€fired€from€theŠ  p Šsame€weapon.€€Carmen€testified€that€the€firing€pin€mark€on€the€shell€could€be€indicative€of€a€problemŠ  \ Šwith€the€firing€of€the€weapon.€€Carmen€testified€that€he€also€examined€the€victimššs€shirt€to€determineŠ ųH Šš šmuzzle€to€garment€distance.šš€€Carmen€determined€that€the€residue€on€the€shirt€indicated€a€š šveryŠ ä4 Šclose€range€gunshot€wound.šš€€According€to€Carmen,€this€means€that€the€shot€could€have€been€š šjustŠ Š  Šoff€the€surface,€or€it€could€be€out€to€approximately€one€foot.šš€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąDr.€Frank€King,€the€Hamilton€County€Medical€Examiner,€testified€that€the€victim€diedŠ ”ä Šapproximately€four€days€after€being€shot€and€stated€that€he€performed€an€autopsy€on€the€victim.€Š €Š ŠKing€determined€that€the€cause€of€death€was€a€gunshot€wound€to€the€abdomen€and€that€the€gun€usedŠ l¼ Što€kill€the€victim€€was€fired€from€a€distance€of€two€feet€or€more€from€the€victim.€€However,€King€didŠ X Ø Šnote€that€š šsometimes€the€emergency€medical€treatment€or€subsequent€hospital€treatment€of€a€woundŠ D!” Šdoes€alter€its€appearance.šš€€King€also€testified€that€he€did€not€see€any€of€the€clothing€that€the€victimŠ 0"€  Šwas€wearing€when€he€was€shot.€€A€copy€of€the€victimššs€blood€alcohol€report€at€the€time€he€wasŠ #l! Šbrought€into€the€hospital€was€admitted€into€evidence.€€The€report€indicated€that€the€victim€had€aŠ $X" Šblood€alcohol€level€of€.152€percent.€€Š ō$D # ŠĢą  ąJames€Brazil€testified€that€he€lived€with€the€Defendant€and€Kenneth€Sexton€and€that€he€alsoŠ Ģ&"% Šknew€the€victim€in€this€case.€€Brazil€testified€that€around€10:00€p.m.€on€May€16,€1998,€KennethŠ ø'#& ŠSexton€went€to€a€carwash€and€met€the€victim.€€The€Defendant€was€with€Brazil€at€the€time.€€BrazilŠ ¤(ō#' Šrecalled€that€he€and€the€Defendant€had€not€eaten€all€day,€so€later€that€evening€the€Defendant€calledŠ )ą$( Šhis€father,€Kenneth€Sexton,€who€had€just€received€a€paycheck,€to€obtain€money€to€buy€food.€Š |*Ģ%) ŠAccording€to€Brazil,€Kenneth€Sexton€was€planning€on€spending€all€of€his€money€on€alcohol€andŠ h+ø&* Šprostitutes,€so€the€Defendant€went€to€the€carwash€to€get€some€of€the€money€before€Kenneth€SextonŠ ° Šspent€all€of€it.Š œģ ŠĢą  ąBrazil€testified€that€he€and€the€victim€did€not€get€along€with€each€other,€so€he€waited€acrossŠ tÄ Šthe€street€from€the€carwash€for€the€Defendant€to€get€the€money.€€Brazil€described€the€victim€asŠ `° Šš šornery€and€hatefulšš€and€stated€that€the€victim€š šjust€didnššt€care€too€much€about€folks.šš€€He€testifiedŠ L œ Šthat€the€Defendant€š šdoesnššt€really€care€that€much€about€violencešš€and€maintained€that€š šif€[theŠ 8 ˆ ŠDefendant]€could€get€away€from€it,€heššd€walk€away€from€it.šš€€Brazil€recalled€waiting€about€thirtyŠ $ t Šminutes€for€the€Defendant€and€then€š šfigured€[that€the€Defendantššs]€dad€was€going€to€make€[theŠ  ` ŠDefendant]€stay€up€there€with€him,šš€so€Brazil€therefore€returned€to€the€Defendantššs€house,€where€heŠ ü L  Šš šhung€outšš€with€a€man€named€Bruce.€€Brazil€testified€that€approximately€an€hour€after€he€last€sawŠ č 8  Šthe€Defendant,€the€Defendant€returned€home.€€Brazil€described€the€Defendant€as€š šscaredšš€and€š šinŠ Ō$  Ša€panic.šš€€According€to€Brazil,€the€Defendant€said€that€he€shot€the€victim.€€Brazil€testified€that€heŠ Ą  Šasked€the€Defendant€if€the€victim€was€dead,€and€the€Defendant€responded€that€he€did€not€know.€Š ¬ü  ŠWhen€he€asked€the€Defendant€why€he€shot€the€victim,€the€Defendant€said,€š šHe€should€never€haveŠ ˜č  Šput€his€hands€on€me.šš€€Brazil€testified€that€he€was€aware€that€the€Defendant€carried€a€gun€and€thatŠ „Ō  Šhe€had€it€the€night€that€the€victim€was€shot.€€Brazil€testified€that€after€the€Defendant€returned€home,Š pĄ ŠBrazil€walked€to€the€market€to€get€some€food,€and€when€he€came€back,€the€Defendant€was€gone.€€Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąSheila€Ann€Real€testified€that€she€and€her€former€fianc,€James€Brazil,€lived€with€theŠ 4„ ŠDefendant€and€Kenneth€Sexton€for€almost€a€year.€€Real€testified€that€the€Defendant€š šdidnššt€have€aŠ  p Šviolent€bone€in€his€body.šš€€Real€testified€that€the€Defendant€carried€a€.44„magnum€pistol€with€himŠ  \ Šat€all€times€š š[j]ust€to€be€big.šš€€Real€also€testified€that€she€dated€the€victim€for€five€or€six€years,€andŠ ųH Šshe€stated€that€the€victim€would€become€violent€when€he€drank.€€However,€the€victimššs€formerŠ ä4 Šfianc,€Roxanne€Marie€Shaw€Woods,€testified€that€she€had€known€the€victim€between€four€and€sixŠ Š  Šyears€and€had€never€known€him€to€be€violent.€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąTed€Millsaps,€a€guidance€counselor€at€Loftis€Middle€School,€testified€that€the€Defendant€wasŠ ”ä Ša€foster€child€when€he€began€Loftis€Middle€School€on€November€18,€1996.€€Millsaps€stated€that€heŠ €Š Štook€a€special€interest€in€the€Defendant€because€of€the€Defendantššs€troubled€background.€€BecauseŠ l¼ Šthe€Defendant€ranked€above€average€on€his€standardized€scores,€he€was€placed€in€the€seventh€grade.€Š X Ø ŠMillsaps€testified€that€he€saw€the€Defendant€everyday€and€stated€that€he€had€š šnever€seen€a€studentŠ D!” Šthat€was€as€happy,€that€tried€as€hard,€wanted€to€please€the€teachers€as€[the€Defendant]€did.šš€€MillsapsŠ 0"€  Šdid€not€recall€the€Defendant€ever€showing€any€signs€of€violence€while€at€Loftis€Middle€School.€€TheŠ #l! ŠDefendant€was€removed€from€Loftis€Middle€School€during€spring€break€in€1997€and€returned€to€hisŠ $X" Šfamily.€€Š ō$D # ŠĢą  ąAllan€Jackson€testified€that€he€is€a€trauma€nurse€specialist€for€the€Erlanger€Medical€CenterŠ Ģ&"% Štrauma€team.€€Jackson€testified€that€he€was€involved€in€the€preparation€of€physical€and€trauma€historyŠ ø'#& Šdocuments€concerning€the€victim€on€the€night€of€the€shooting.€€According€to€the€records,€the€victimššsŠ ¤(ō#' Šgunshot€wound€was€self„inflicted.€€Jackson€testified€that€this€information€came€from€š šthe€emergencyŠ )ą$( Šmedical€service,€paramedics,€first€responders€[or]€firemen€.€.€.€.šš€€He€explained€that€š šsomeone€in€thatŠ |*Ģ%) Šgroup€would€have€stated€that€either€on€the€radio€or€on€the€report.ššą Č ąŠ h+ø&* Š‡ĢĢĢą@† † ģąI.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEˆŠ tÄ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendant€argues€that€insufficient€evidence€was€presented€at€trial€to€convict€him€ofŠ L œ Šsecond€degree€murder.€€When€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€an€appellateŠ 8 ˆ Šcourtššs€standard€of€review€is€whether,€after€considering€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€toŠ $ t Šthe€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyondŠ  ` Ša€reasonable€doubt.€€ņņJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€324€(1979);€ņņState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2dŠ ü L  Š63,€67€(Tenn.€1985);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€This€rule€applies€to€findings€of€guilt€based€upon€directŠ č 8  Ševidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€both€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€Š Ō$  ŠņņState€v.€Pendergrassóó,€13€S.W.3d€389,€392„93€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000).Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€should€not€re„weigh€or€re„evaluateŠ ˜č  Šthe€evidence.€€ņņState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€Nor€may€thisŠ „Ō  ŠCourt€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€the€evidence.€€ņņLiakas€v.€Stateóó,Š pĄ Š286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(Tenn.€1956);€ņņState€v.€Buggsóó,€995€S.W.2d€102,€105€(Tenn.€1999).€€QuestionsŠ \¬ Šconcerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€well€as€allŠ H˜ Šfactual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€ņņLiakasóó,€286€S.W.2d€at€859.ņņóó€Š 4„ ŠņņóóThis€Court€must€afford€the€State€of€Tennessee€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidenceŠ  p Šcontained€in€the€record,€as€well€as€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€Š  \ ŠņņState€v.€Evansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185,€191€(Tenn.€1992).€€Because€a€verdict€of€guilt€against€a€defendantŠ ųH Šremoves€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€convicted€criminalŠ ä4 Šdefendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€that€the€evidence€was€legally€insufficient€to€sustain€a€guiltyŠ Š  Šverdict.€€ņņId.óó€ą ` ąą ø ąŠ ¼  ŠĢą  ąŌ‡ X)XXX)ŌThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€second€degree€murder,€which€is€defined,€in€pertinent€part,Š ”ä Šas€š š[a]€knowing€killing€of€another.šš€€Tenn€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„210(a)(1).€€š šššKnowingšš€refers€to€aŠ €Š Šperson€who€acts€knowingly€with€respect€to€the€conduct€or€to€circumstances€surrounding€the€conductŠ l¼ Šwhen€the€person€is€aware€of€the€nature€of€the€conduct€or€that€the€circumstances€exist.€€A€person€actsŠ X Ø Šknowingly€with€respect€to€a€result€of€the€personššs€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€that€the€conductŠ D!” Šis€reasonably€certain€to€cause€the€result€.€.€.€.šššš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€39„11„106(a)(20).Ō#†X)XX X)9P#Ō€€Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąViewing€the€facts€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€sufficient€evidence€was€presentedŠ $X" Šfrom€which€a€properly€instructed€jury€could€convict€the€Defendant€of€second€degree€murder.€€TheŠ ō$D # ŠDefendant€does€not€argue€that€he€did€not€shoot€the€victim;€he€instead€argues€that€the€act€was€eitherŠ ą%0!$ Šthe€result€of€provocation€or€an€act€of€self„defense.€€Hamilton€County€Medical€Examiner€Frank€KingŠ Ģ&"% Štestified€that€there€was€no€indication€that€the€shot€that€killed€the€victim€was€fired€any€closer€thanŠ ø'#& Šfrom€a€distance€of€two€feet.€€In€addition,€the€Defendant€gave€conflicting€stories€of€the€incident.€€InŠ ¤(ō#' Šhis€statement,€the€Defendant€told€police€that€he€shot€the€victim€because€the€victim€was€choking€him.€Š )ą$( ŠHowever,€in€a€letter€to€the€trial€court,€which€was€admitted€into€evidence,€the€Defendant€stated€thatŠ |*Ģ%) Šthe€victim€was€trying€to€grab€the€gun€from€the€Defendantššs€pocket,€but€the€Defendant€was€able€toŠ h+ø&* Šgrab€the€gun€first€and€point€it€at€the€victimššs€thigh,€after€which€the€gun€went€off.€€Finally,€JamesŠ ° ŠBrazil€testified€that€he€asked€the€Defendant€why€he€shot€the€victim,€and€the€Defendant€replied,€š šHeŠ œģ Šshould€never€have€put€his€hands€on€me.šš€€Had€the€jury€been€properly€instructed,€this€evidence€isŠ ˆŲ Šsufficient€to€convict€the€Defendant€of€second€degree€murder.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąPursuant€to€Rule€27(d)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure,€the€Defendant€arguesŠ L œ Šthat€the€trial€court€improperly€instructed€the€jury€as€to€the€definition€of€š šknowing.šš€€We€note€that€thisŠ 8 ˆ Šissue€was€not€raised€in€the€Defendantššs€motion€for€new€trial.€€Generally,€a€challenge€to€juryŠ $ t Šinstructions€that€is€not€raised€in€a€defendantššs€motion€for€new€trial€is€waived.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P€3(e);Š  ` Šņņseeóó€ņņalsoóó€ņņState€v.€Kendricksóó,€947€S.W.2d€875,€885€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Additionally,€the€RuleŠ ü L  Š27(d)€letter€dated€May€3,€2002,€does€not€indicate€that€the€State€was€notified€of€the€DefendantššsŠ č 8  Šsubmission€of€supplemental€authority.€€However,€we€do€note€that€in€this€case,€the€jury€instructionsŠ Ō$  Špertaining€to€the€definition€of€š šknowingšš€were€erroneous.€€Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąAt€the€conclusion€of€the€evidence,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€as€follows:€š šA€person€actsŠ ˜č  Šknowingly€or€with€knowledge€if€that€person€acts€with€an€awareness€either€that,€one,€his€or€herŠ „Ō  Šconduct€is€of€a€particular€nature;€or€two,€a€particular€circumstance€exists.€€The€requirement€ofŠ pĄ Šknowing€is€also€established€if€it€is€shown€the€defendant€acted€intentionally.šš€€Thus,€the€juryŠ \¬ Šinstruction€utilized€in€this€case,€stating€that€the€š šknowingšš€mental€state€could€be€established€byŠ H˜ Šshowing€that€the€Defendant€was€aware€that€his€conduct€was€of€a€particular€nature€or€that€particularŠ 4„ Šcircumstances€existed,€was€improper€for€the€offense€of€second€degree€murder€and€placed€a€lesserŠ  p Šburden€on€the€state€than€required€for€this€š šresult„of„conduct€offense.šš€€ņņState€v.€Keith€T.€Dupreeóó,€No.Š  \ ŠW1999„01019„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€65,€at€*11„12.€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Š ųH ŠJackson,€Jan.€30,€2001).€€Upon€retrial,€we€direct€the€trial€court€to€this€Courtššs€recent€opinion€in€ņņStateŠ ä4 Šv.€James€Noble€Pageóó,€No.€M2001„01853„CCA„R3„CD,€2002€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€332,€(Tenn.Š Š  ŠCrim.€App.,€Nashville,€Apr.€16,€2002)€for€guidance€in€properly€instructing€the€jury€as€to€theŠ ¼  Šdefinition€of€š šknowingšš€in€the€offense€of€second€degree€murder.Š Øų ŠĢą@„„ ģąII.€TRANSFER€HEARINGˆŠ €Š ŠÓ  ÓĢÓKcÓą  ąThe€Defendant,€who€was€fifteen€years€old€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€was€indicted€by€theŠ X Ø ŠHamilton€County€Grand€Jury€for€second€degree€murder€for€the€shooting€death€of€Larry€Jones.€€TheŠ D!” Šjuvenile€court€held€a€transfer€hearing,€after€which€the€Defendant€was€transferred€to€criminal€courtŠ 0"€  Što€be€tried€as€an€adult.€€The€Defendant€now€argues€that€the€juvenile€court€erred€in€transferring€himŠ #l! Što€criminal€court.Š $X" ŠĢą@ééģąA.€€Facts€from€Transfer€HearingˆŠ ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąThe€evidence€presented€at€the€transfer€hearing€pertaining€to€the€shooting€of€the€victim€andŠ ø'#& Šthe€Defendantššs€involvement€in€the€crime€was€similar€to€the€evidence€later€presented€at€trial.€Š ¤(ō#' ŠHowever,€because€the€issue€at€the€transfer€hearing€was€the€propriety€of€transferring€the€DefendantŠ )ą$( Što€the€Hamilton€County€Criminal€Court€to€stand€trial€as€an€adult,€additional€evidence€pertaining€toŠ |*Ģ%) Šthat€issue€was€also€presented.€€The€additional€evidence€is€summarized€as€follows:Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąThe€State€read€into€the€record€the€Defendantššs€prior€criminal€history,€which€includedŠ ° Šconvictions€for€two€thefts€over€$500€and€a€burglary€of€an€automobile€conviction.€€The€Defendant€wasŠ œģ Šdeclared€delinquent€on€those€charges.€€The€Defendantššs€criminal€record€also€included€the€following:€Š ˆŲ ŠOn€June€21,€1996,€the€Defendant€returned€to€court€on€charges€of€criminal€trespass€and€theft€overŠ tÄ Š$500.€€On€August€2,€1996,€a€probation€for€violation€of€probation€was€filed.€€The€Defendant€was€laterŠ `° Šfound€delinquent€on€those€charges€as€well.€€The€Defendant€remained€on€probation,€but€was€placedŠ L œ Šin€the€Department€of€Childrenššs€Services€due€to€his€dependency€and€neglect.€€On€October€7,€1996,Š 8 ˆ Šanother€petition€was€filed€for€violation€of€probation.€€The€Defendant€then€failed€to€appear€on€theŠ $ t Šsettlement€date€for€this€petition.€€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąTed€Millsaps,€a€guidance€counselor€at€Loftis€Middle€School,€testified€that€prior€to€the€offense,Š č 8  Šthe€Defendant€was€placed€in€his€school€by€the€Department€of€Human€Services.€€Millsaps€testifiedŠ Ō$  Šthat€during€the€Defendantššs€time€at€Loftis,€he€š šdid€excellentšš€and€that€Millsaps€and€the€teachersŠ Ą  Šš šwere€very,€very€pleased€with€[the€Defendant].šš€€However,€Millsaps€also€stated€that€the€DefendantŠ ¬ü  Šleft€the€school€after€seventy€days.€€Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąTonya€Cunningham,€an€employee€of€Hamilton€County,€testified€that€approximately€two€yearsŠ pĄ Šprior€to€the€trial,€she€was€assigned€to€perform€a€non„custodial€assessment€of€the€Defendant.€Š \¬ ŠAccording€to€Cunningham,€the€Defendantššs€home€did€not€have€running€water€or€electricity.€€InŠ H˜ Šaddition,€Cunningham€testified€that€the€Defendantššs€parents€had€a€lot€of€personal€conflicts,€and€theŠ 4„ ŠDefendant€seemed€to€be€š šin€the€middle€of€the€situation.šš€€Cunningham€testified€that€the€DefendantŠ  p Šhad€been€truant€from€school€for€almost€two€years,€and€the€Defendantššs€mother€claimed€that€theŠ  \ ŠDefendantššs€father€hindered€him€from€attending€school.€€Cunningham€testified€that€she€did€notŠ ųH Šbelieve€that€the€Defendant€was€capable€of€a€violent€act.€€Š ä4 ŠĢą@%ģąB.€AnalysisˆŠ ¼  ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€juvenile€court€erred€in€transferring€him€to€criminal€court€to€beŠ ”ä Štried€as€an€adult.€€The€juvenile€court€may€transfer€a€child€under€age€sixteen€who€is€charged€withŠ €Š Šsecond€degree€murder€to€the€criminal€court€to€be€dealt€with€as€an€adult€if€the€court€finds€thatŠ l¼ Šreasonable€grounds€exist€to€believe€that:€Š X Ø Šą8  ą(A)€[t]he€child€committed€the€delinquent€act€as€alleged;ŠD!”Š Š  Šą8  ą(B)€[t]he€child€is€not€committable€to€an€institution€for€the€mentally€retarded€or€theŠ 0"€  Šmentally€ill;€and€Š#l!Š Š  Šą8  ą(C)€[t]he€interests€of€the€community€require€that€the€child€be€put€under€legal€restraintŠ $X" Šor€discipline.Šō$D #Š Š  ŠTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€37„1„134(a)(4)(A)„(C).€€In€making€this€determination,€the€trial€court€shallŠ ą%0!$ Šconsider€the€following:Š Ģ&"% Šą8  ą(1)€The€extent€and€nature€of€the€childššs€prior€delinquency€records;Šø'#&Š Š  Šą8  ą(2)€The€nature€of€past€treatment€efforts€and€the€nature€of€the€childššs€response€thereto;Š¤(ō#'Š Š  Šą8  ą(3)€Whether€the€offense€was€against€person€or€property,€with€greater€weight€in€favorŠ )ą$( Šof€transfer€given€to€offenses€against€the€person;Š|*Ģ%)Š Š  Šą8  ą(4)€Whether€the€offense€was€committed€in€an€aggressive€and€premeditated€manner;Šh+ø&*Š Š  Šą8  ą(5)€The€possible€rehabilitation€of€the€child€by€use€of€procedures,€services€andŠ ° Šfacilities€currently€available€to€the€court€in€this€state;€and€ŠœģŠ Š  Šą8  ą(6)€Whether€the€childššs€conduct€would€be€a€criminal€gang€offense,€as€defined€in€šš€40„Š ˆŲ Š35„121,€if€committed€by€an€adult.ŠtÄŠ Š  ŠņņId.ó󀚚€37„1„134(b)(1)„(6).€€Consideration€of€these€factors€is€mandatory.€€ņņRoger€Lee€Sawyers€v.€Stateóó,Š `° ŠNo.€03C01„9607„CC„00255,€1997€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€704,€at€*6€n.5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Š L œ ŠKnoxville,€July€25,€1997);€ņņseeóó€ņņalsoóó€ņņState€v.€Shawnda€Jamesóó,€No.€01C01„9803„CC„00093,€1999Š 8 ˆ ŠTenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€865,€at€*7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Aug.€11,€1999);€ņņState€v.€StevenŠ $ t ŠLamar€Ayersóó,€No.€87„302„III,€1989€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€173,€at€*7„8€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Š  ` ŠNashville,€Mar.€10,€1989).€Š ü L  ŠĢą  ą€On€appeal,€our€Court€must€determine€whether€there€were€reasonable€grounds€for€the€juvenileŠ Ō$  Šcourt€to€believe€that€the€three€criteria€listed€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€šš€37„1„134(a)(4)€wereŠ Ą  Špresent€in€this€case.€€ņņState€v.€Cecil€L.€Groomesóó,€No.€M1998„00122„CCA„R3„CD,€2000€Tenn.€Crim.Š ¬ü  ŠApp.€LEXIS€618,€at€*23€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Aug.€10,€2000)ņņóó.€€The€juvenile€court€in€thisŠ ˜č  Šcase€first€found€that€there€was€š šreasonable€cause€to€believe€that€this€crime€has€been€committed.šš€Š „Ō  ŠņņóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€37„1„134(a)(4)(A).€€Kenneth€Sexton€testified€that€he€saw€his€son,€the€Defendant,Š pĄ Šshoot€the€victim.€€Detective€Phillips€testified€that€several€hours€after€the€offense,€he€found€theŠ \¬ ŠDefendant€on€a€nearby€roof.€€According€to€Phillips,€the€Defendant€told€him€that€he€had€scratches€onŠ H˜ Šhis€neck€which€he€had€received€during€a€struggle.€€The€State€introduced€into€evidence€theŠ 4„ ŠDefendantššs€statement€in€which€he€admitted€that€he€shot€the€victim,€but€claimed€that€the€gun€wentŠ  p Šoff€š šaccidentally.šš€€ņņóóWe€agree€with€the€juvenile€court€that€there€were€reasonable€grounds€to€believeŠ  \ Šthat€the€Defendant€committed€the€offense.€Š ųH ŠĢą  ąThe€juvenile€court€did€not€make€specific€findings€regarding€the€Defendantššs€mental€health.Š Š  ŠHowever,€there€is€a€reasonable€basis€from€the€record€to€believe€that€the€Defendant€was€notŠ ¼  Šcommittable€to€an€institution€for€either€the€mentally€retarded€or€the€mentally€ill.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€37„1„Š Øų Š134(a)(4)(B).€€No€evidence€was€presented€to€support€such€a€commitment.€€The€Defendantššs€guidanceŠ ”ä Šcounselor€testified€that€the€Defendant€š šfit€right€inšš€and€š šdid€excellentšš€while€he€attended€LoftisŠ €Š ŠMiddle€School.€€In€addition,€the€State€presented€a€report€indicating€that€the€Defendant€is€notŠ l¼ Šcommittable€to€an€institution€for€either€the€mentally€retarded€or€mentally€ill.€Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąFinally,€the€juvenile€court€determined€that€if€the€Defendant€was€found€guilty€of€the€chargedŠ 0"€  Šoffense,€the€interests€of€the€community€would€be€best€served€by€some€type€of€legal€restraint.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.óóŠ #l! Ššš€37„1„134(a)(4)(C).€€In€making€its€determination,€the€juvenile€court€noted€that€although€theŠ $X" ŠDefendant€did€not€have€a€history€of€violent€crimes,€he€was€charged€with€š šthe€most€serious€crime,ššŠ ō$D # Šwhich€the€court€defined€as€the€š štaking€of€another€human€being[ššs]€life.šš€The€juvenile€court€stated€thatŠ ą%0!$ Šit€was€clear€that€the€Defendant€had€š šhad€a€lot€of€problems€at€home.šš€€The€court€stated,€however,€thatŠ Ģ&"% Šthe€Defendant€had€been€given€opportunities€š što€do€better€on€[his]€own,šš€but€failed€to€š štakeŠ ø'#& Šadvantagešš€of€those€opportunities.€€The€juvenile€court€noted€that€š šif€[the€Defendant€is]€found€guiltyŠ ¤(ō#' Šof€this€offense€then€it€will€be€necessary€for€the€state€to€provide€for€[him]€as€a€juvenile€until€such€timeŠ )ą$( Šas€[he€becomes]€eighteen.šš€€Moreover,€the€court€noted€that€the€state€š šstill€[has]€the€ability€to€see€thatŠ |*Ģ%) Š[he€does]€not€go€back€into€the€streets€and€.€.€.€pose€this€kind€of€threat€to€someone€else€.€.€.€.šš€€TheŠ h+ø&* Šjuvenile€court€stated€that€transferring€the€Defendant€to€criminal€court€was€also€in€the€DefendantššsŠ ° Šinterest€because€š šthe€juvenile€system€has€nothing€else€for€him.šš€€In€our€view,€the€juvenile€courtŠ œģ Šproperly€found€that€the€interests€of€the€community€would€be€best€served€by€some€type€of€legalŠ ˆŲ Šrestraint.€€Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąAlthough€the€juvenile€court€found€that€Defendant€should€be€transferred€to€criminal€court€toŠ L œ Šbe€tried€as€an€adult€because€all€three€of€the€factors€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€šš€37„1„134(a)(4)Š 8 ˆ Šapplied,€the€Defendant€argues€that€only€two€of€the€six€considerations€listed€under€Tennessee€CodeŠ $ t ŠAnnotatedņņó󀚚€37„1„134(b)€apply€in€his€case,€specifically,€the€nature€of€his€prior€delinquency€recordŠ  ` Šand€the€fact€that€the€offense€was€committed€against€a€person.€€š šThese€factors€relate€to€the€interestsŠ ü L  Šof€the€community€and€whether€the€juvenile€is€amenable€to€treatment€or€rehabilitation€throughŠ č 8  Šjuvenile€court€rather€than€restraint€or€punishment€meted€out€through€the€adult€court€.€.€.€.šš€€ņņGroomesóó,Š Ō$  Š2000€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€618,€at€*22.€€Although€all€six€factors€were€not€explicitly€listed€in€theŠ Ą  Šjuvenile€courtššs€findings,€we€conclude€that€there€was€sufficient€evidence€in€the€record€to€support€theŠ ¬ü  Šcourtššs€ruling.€€Moreover,€š š[c]onstitutional€due€process€does€not€require€that€evidence€be€discussedŠ ˜č  Šin€judgments€or€that€the€criteria€specified€in€[Tennessee€Code€Annotated]€šš€37„1„134(b)€be€discussedŠ „Ō  Šin€judgments.šš€€ņņJim€Hunter€v.€Stateóó,€No.€944,€1986€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€2649,€at€*3€(Tenn.Š pĄ ŠCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Apr.€4,€1986).Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąThe€proof€adduced€at€the€transfer€hearing€was€more€than€sufficient€for€the€court€to€haveŠ 4„ Šš šreasonable€grounds€to€believešš€that€the€Defendant€had€committed€the€murder,€that€he€was€notŠ  p Šcommittable,€and€that€the€communityššs€interests€required€him€to€be€put€under€legal€restraint€orŠ  \ Šdiscipline.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Š ųH ŠĢ€ą@  ģąIII.€€MOTION€TO€SUPPRESSˆŠ Š  ŠĢą  ąAfter€his€arrest,€the€Defendant€made€a€statement€to€police€in€which€he€admitted€that€he€shotŠ Øų Šthe€victim,€but€maintained€that€it€was€an€accident.€€Prior€to€trial,€the€Defendant€filed€a€motion€toŠ ”ä Šsuppress€his€statement.€€A€hearing€was€conducted€on€the€motion,€and€the€trial€court€denied€theŠ €Š Šmotion.€€The€Defendant€now€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€State€to€introduce€theŠ l¼ ŠDefendantššs€statement€into€evidence.€€Š X Ø ŠĢą@QQģąA.€€Facts€from€Suppression€HearingˆŠ 0"€  ŠĢą  ąPatrick€Scott€Phillips€testified€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€suppress€that€he€works€forŠ $X" ŠWilliams€Heating€and€Air€Conditioning€in€Chattanooga.€€Phillips€testified€that€his€employer€alsoŠ ō$D # Šowns€a€mini„storage€business€and€a€carwash.€€The€victim€was€employed€at€the€carwash€and€lived€inŠ ą%0!$ Ša€trailer€located€on€the€ownerššs€property.€€According€to€Phillips,€he€was€called€to€the€scene€by€policeŠ Ģ&"% Šaround€1:00€a.m€on€May€16,€1998.€€€Phillips€stated€that€sometime€between€3:00€a.m.€and€5:00€a.m.,Š ø'#& Šhe€found€the€Defendant€asleep€on€the€roof€of€the€storage€building.€€After€finding€the€Defendant,Š ¤(ō#' ŠPhillips€went€downstairs€and€signaled€to€the€police€that€someone€was€on€the€roof.€€According€toŠ )ą$( ŠPhillips,€when€officers€brought€the€Defendant€down€from€the€roof,€he€appeared€to€be€intoxicatedŠ |*Ģ%) Šš šbecause€he€was€smiling€and€happy,€and€.€.€.€he€had€two€officers€with€guns€drawn€directly€on€him,Š h+ø&* Šand€he€was€just€happy.šš€€Phillips€also€testified€that€the€Defendant€was€š šnot€himselfšš€and€that€he€š šwasŠ ° Šhollering€at€everybody.šš€€However,€Phillips€stated€that€he€was€never€close€enough€to€the€DefendantŠ œģ Što€smell€any€alcohol.€€€€€€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąOfficer€Chad€Sullivan€responded€to€the€shooting€and€testified€that€he€was€involved€in€gettingŠ `° Šthe€Defendant€down€from€the€roof€of€the€carwash,€where€he€found€the€Defendant€lying€in€a€fetalŠ L œ Šposition.€€According€to€Sullivan,€the€Defendant€appeared€š švery€scared,€trying€not€to€be€seen.šš€Š 8 ˆ ŠSullivan€could€not€tell€whether€the€Defendant€was€asleep€when€he€first€approached;€however,€heŠ $ t Šsoon€noticed€that€the€Defendant€had€urinated€on€himself€and€that€the€urine€was€running€down€theŠ  ` Šroof.€€Sullivan€testified€that€the€Defendant€did€not€appear€to€be€intoxicated.€€Š ü L  ŠĢą  ąDetective€Bill€Phillips€testified€that€he€interviewed€the€Defendant€on€the€morning€after€theŠ Ō$  Šshooting.€€Phillips€testified€that€neither€of€the€Defendantššs€parents€was€present€during€the€interview.€Š Ą  ŠAccording€to€Phillips,€he€separated€the€Defendant€from€Kenneth€Sexton,€the€Defendantššs€father,Š ¬ü  Šbecause€they€were€both€suspects€in€the€shooting.€€Phillips€testified€that€at€first,€Kenneth€SextonŠ ˜č  Šdenied€having€any€knowledge€about€the€shooting€and€then€later€changed€his€story,€stating€that€it€wasŠ „Ō  Šthe€Defendant€who€shot€the€victim.€€Phillips€maintained€that€he€did€not€know€where€to€find€theŠ pĄ ŠDefendantššs€mother.€€Phillips€testified€that€the€Defendant€told€him€that€he€did€not€have€much€contactŠ \¬ Šwith€his€mother€because€she€lived€far€away.€€Phillips€also€stated€that€he€was€š špretty€sure€[that€theŠ H˜ ŠDefendant]€told€[him]€that€she€did€not€have€a€phone.šš€€Phillips€testified€that€he€advised€theŠ 4„ ŠDefendant€of€his€rights€and€stated€that€he€had€a€certified€copy€of€the€waiver€signed€by€the€Defendant.€Š  p ŠPhillips€recalled€that€he€obtained€some€basic€information€from€the€Defendant,€read€him€the€waiverŠ  \ Šform€verbatim,€and€asked€the€Defendant€if€he€understood€his€rights.€€The€Defendant€replied€that€heŠ ųH Šunderstood€and€signed€the€form.€€Phillips€testified€that€the€Defendant€did€not€appear€to€be€intoxicatedŠ ä4 Šand€that€he€did€not€believe€that€the€Defendant€was€intoxicated€when€he€was€found€on€the€roof.€Š Š  ŠPhillips€taped€the€Defendantššs€statement,€and€a€copy€of€the€tape€was€introduced€into€evidence.€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąKenneth€Nickerson,€a€psychologist€at€Moccasin€Bend€Mental€Health€Institute€and€JosephŠ ”ä ŠJohnson€Mental€Health€Center,€evaluated€the€Defendantššs€competency€to€stand€trial€and€his€mentalŠ €Š Šcondition€at€the€time€of€the€offense.€€Nickerson€determined€that€the€Defendant€was€competent€toŠ l¼ Šstand€trial€and€that€there€was€no€basis€for€a€defense€of€insanity.€€In€the€mental€status€evaluation,Š X Ø ŠNickerson€stated€that€the€Defendantššs€š š[i]ntellectual€functioning€was€judged€to€be€grossly€withinŠ D!” Šaverage€range€and€not€cognitively€deficient.šš€€Nickerson€testified€that€the€Defendant€had€been€atŠ 0"€  ŠMoccasin€Bend€in€August€1998,€and€at€the€time€of€admission,€the€Defendant€was€seen€for€anŠ #l! Šadjustment€disorder€and€conduct€disorder€with€alcohol€and€cannibis€abuse.€€However,€at€the€time€ofŠ $X" Šdischarge,€the€Defendant€was€also€diagnosed€with€a€brief€psychotic€disorder€with€marked€stressors.€Š ō$D # ŠAccording€to€Nickerson,€š šmarked€stressorsšš€means€that€stress€can€cause€or€intensify€a€psychoticŠ ą%0!$ Šepisode€in€which€the€person€is€out€of€touch€with€reality.€€Nickerson€testified€that€the€Defendant€toldŠ Ģ&"% Šhim€that€he€had€two€beers€on€the€night€of€the€incident€but€that€he€could€not€remember€the€rest€of€theŠ ø'#& Šnight€until€the€police€caught€him.€€Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendantššs€mother,€Nellie€Sue€Sexton,€testified€that€the€Defendant€was€born€on€JanuaryŠ |*Ģ%) Š1,€1983€and€that€in€May€1998,€the€Defendant€was€fourteen€years€old.€€Ms.€Sexton€testified€that€theŠ h+ø&* ŠDefendant€missed€quite€a€bit€of€school.€€Ms.€Sexton€also€stated€that€she€moved€the€Defendant€toŠ ° ŠGeorgia€in€May€1998€to€keep€him€out€of€the€custody€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.€€Ms.€Sexton€testifiedŠ œģ Šthat€the€Defendant€had€called€her€on€the€night€of€the€offense,€both€before€and€after€the€shooting.€Š ˆŲ ŠAccording€to€Ms.€Sexton,€the€Defendant€told€her€that€he€thought€he€shot€the€victim€in€the€hand.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąBecause€Kenneth€Sexton€was€charged€as€an€accessory€after€the€fact,€he€chose€to€invoke€hisŠ L œ ŠFifth€Amendment€right€against€self„incrimination€and€not€testify€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€toŠ 8 ˆ Šsuppress.€€However,€his€testimony€from€the€transfer€hearing€was€entered€into€evidence€as€an€exhibit.€Š $ t ŠĢą@$ģąB.€€AnalysisˆŠ ü L  Š€Ģą  ąThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€to€suppress€hisŠ Ō$  Šstatement€to€police.€€When€an€evidentiary€hearing€is€held€on€the€merits€of€a€motion€to€suppress,€theŠ Ą  ŠState€must€demonstrate€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€the€Defendantššs€statements€wereŠ ¬ü  Švoluntary,€knowing€and€intelligent.€€ņņState€v.€Andrade€Bruce€Williams,€Jr.óó,€No.€01C01„9803„CR„Š ˜č  Š00104,€1999€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€329,€at€*8€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Apr.€8,€1999)€(citingŠ „Ō  ŠņņState€v.€Kellyóó,€603€S.W.2d€726,€728€(Tenn.€1980)).€€The€trial€court,€as€the€trier€of€fact,€is€entrustedŠ pĄ Šwith€determining€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€as€well€as€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidenceŠ \¬ Špresented.€€ņņState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23€(Tenn.€1996).€€In€determining€the€admissibility€of€aŠ H˜ Šconfession,€the€totality€of€the€circumstances€must€be€examined.€€ņņState€v.€Smithóó,€933€S.W.2d€450,€455Š 4„ Š(Tenn.€1996).€€The€confession€š šššmust€not€be€extracted€by€any€sort€of€threats€or€violence,€nor€obtainedŠ  p Šby€any€direct€or€implied€promises,€however€slight,€nor€by€the€exertion€of€any€improper€influence€.Š  \ Š.€.€.šššš€€ņņId.óó€(quoting€ņņBram€v.€United€Statesóó,€168€U.S.€532,€542„43€(1897)).€€€The€standard€to€beŠ ųH Šfollowed€is€whether€š šššthe€behavior€of€the€stateššs€law€enforcement€officials€was€such€as€to€overbearŠ ä4 Špetitionerššs€will€to€resist€and€bring€about€confessions€not€freely€self„determined€.€.€.€.šššš€€ņņKellyóó,€603Š Š  ŠS.W.2d€at€728€(quoting€ņņRogers€v.€Richmondóó,€365€U.S.€534,€544€(1961)).€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąThe€same€criteria€used€to€determine€the€admissibility€of€an€adultššs€statement€are€used€toŠ ”ä Šdetermine€the€admissibility€of€a€juvenileššs€statement.€€ņņState€v.€David€Honey€and€Melissa€Barnettóó,€No.Š €Š Š03„C„01„9202„CR„00042,€1993€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€83,€at€*18„19€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Š l¼ ŠKnoxville,€Feb.€17,€1993).€€Accordingly,€our€supreme€court€has€heldŠ X Ø Šą8  ąthat€juvenile€waivers€shall€be€analyzed€under€a€totality„of„the„circumstances€test€thatŠ D!” Šrequires€consideration€of€the€following€factors:€Š0"€ Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą(1)€consideration€of€all€circumstances€surrounding€the€interrogation€including€theŠ $X" Šjuvenileššs€age,€experience,€education,€and€intelligence;€Šō$D #Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą(2)€the€juvenileššs€capacity€to€understand€the€Miranda€warnings€and€the€consequencesŠ Ģ&"% Šof€the€waiver;€Šø'#&Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą(3)€the€juvenileššs€familiarity€with€Miranda€warnings€or€the€ability€to€read€and€writeŠ )ą$( Šin€the€language€used€to€give€the€warnings;€Š|*Ģ%)Š Š  ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą8  ą(4)€any€intoxication;€Š°Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą(5)€any€mental€disease,€disorder,€or€retardation;€and€ŠˆŲŠ Š  Šą  ąĢą  ą(6)€the€presence€of€a€parent,€guardian,€or€interested€adult.€€Š `° ŠņņState€v.€Callahanóó,€979€S.W.2d€577,€583€(Tenn.€1998).€€Absent€police€coercive€activity,€no€singleŠ L œ Šfactor€should€by€itself€render€a€juvenileššs€confession€unconstitutional.€€ņņId.ó󀀹 šThus,€the€admissibilityŠ 8 ˆ Šof€a€juvenileššs€confession€is€not€dependent€upon€the€presence€of€his€parents€at€the€interrogation.šš€Š $ t ŠņņState€v.€Carrollóó,€36€S.W.3d€854,€864€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999).€€š šAs€a€general€rule,€a€statement€madeŠ  ` Šby€a€juvenile€is€admissible€as€evidence€if€the€juvenile€was€given€the€Miranda€warnings,€these€rightsŠ ü L  Šwere€understood€by€the€juvenile,€and€the€juvenile€freely€and€voluntarily€waived€the€rights€beforeŠ č 8  Šmaking€the€statement.šš€€ņņDavid€Honey€and€Melissa€Barnettóó,€1993€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€83,€atŠ Ō$  Š*19.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąA€trial€courtššs€determination€at€a€suppression€hearing€is€presumptively€correct€on€appeal.Š ˜č  ŠņņState€v.€Harbisonóó,€704€S.W.2d€314,€318€(Tenn.€1986).€€The€reviewing€court€is€bound€by€the€trialŠ „Ō  Šcourtššs€findings€of€fact€unless€the€evidence€found€in€the€record€preponderates€against€these€findings.€Š pĄ ŠņņOdomóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€23.€€On€review,€the€prevailing€party€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€viewŠ \¬ Šof€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€therefrom.€€ņņId.óó€€However,€this€Court€is€not€bound€byŠ H˜ Šthe€trial€courtššs€conclusions€of€law.€€ņņState€v.€Simpsonóó,€968€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€1998).Š 4„ Šą  ąĢą  ąThe€Defendant€argues€that€at€the€time€of€his€statement,€he€had€been€up€all€night€and€had€notŠ  \ Šeaten€in€two€days.€€The€Defendant€also€argues€that€there€was€š šno€showing€of€any€familiarity€on€[the]Š ųH ŠDefendantššs€part€with€Miranda€warningsšš€and€that€he€was€š šdevelopmentally€delayed€andŠ ä4 Šintellectually€immature.šš€€In€addition,€the€Defendant€argues€that€he€had€been€drinking€on€the€nightŠ Š  Šof€the€offense.€€The€Defendant€maintains€that€police€questioned€him€without€his€parents€present€andŠ ¼  Šafter€he€had€been€in€custody€for€three€hours.€€Š Øų ŠĢą  ąThe€State€argues€that€the€Defendant€was€fully€informed€of€his€rights€and€gave€a€knowing,Š €Š Šintelligent€and€voluntary€statement€to€the€police€on€the€day€of€his€arrest.€€Detective€PhillipsŠ l¼ Šinterviewed€the€Defendant€on€the€morning€after€the€offense.€€Phillips€testified€that€he€advised€theŠ X Ø ŠDefendant€of€his€rights,€obtained€some€basic€information€from€the€Defendant,€read€the€waiver€formŠ D!” Što€the€Defendant€verbatim,€and€then€asked€the€Defendant€if€he€understood€his€rights.€€The€DefendantŠ 0"€  Šreplied€that€he€understood€and€signed€the€waiver.€€€Phillips€stated€that€he€did€not€believe€that€theŠ #l! ŠDefendant€was€intoxicated€or€otherwise€unable€to€understand€what€was€happening.€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąKenneth€Nickerson€testified€that€he€performed€a€mental€evaluation€of€the€Defendant€andŠ ą%0!$ Šfound€the€Defendant€competent€to€stand€trial.€€He€stated€that€he€found€no€evidence€to€support€aŠ Ģ&"% Šdefense€of€insanity.€€Nickerson€reported€that€there€was€š šno€apparent€dysfunction€that€would€renderŠ ø'#& Š[the€Defendant]€incapable€of€understanding€what€he€was€being€told.šš€€Although€the€Defendant€arguesŠ ¤(ō#' Šthat€he€had€not€slept€or€eaten€at€the€time€of€the€interrogation,€there€is€no€indication€that€he€was€notŠ )ą$( Šā āable€to€understand€what€was€being€asked€of€him.€€In€denying€the€motion,€the€trial€judge€stated,€Š |*Ģ%) Šą8  ąMy€impression€of€listening€to€the€tape€[of€the€Defendantššs€statement]€was€that€[theŠ ° Šā āDefendantššs]€mind€was€working€very€well.€€He€was€very€careful€in€what€he€said.€€NoŠ œģ Šindication€of€intoxication€as€far€as€I€could€see€from€listening€to€the€transcript.ŠˆŲŠ Š  ŠThe€trial€court€further€noted€that€there€was€no€showing€of€coercive€police€activity.€€The€trial€courtŠ tÄ Šfound€that€it€was€a€valid€waiver€and€stated,€š šIššm€not€even€so€sure€that€the€statement€hurts€him€all€thatŠ `° Šmuch.€€I€mean,€he€testifies€quite€a€bit,€there€to,€to€make€it€out€to€be€self„defense.šš€€Š L œ ŠĢą  ąFinally,€the€absence€of€the€Defendantššs€parents€from€the€interrogation€does€not€render€theŠ $ t Šwaiver€invalid.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņCarrollóó,€36€S.W.3d€at€864.€€Detective€Phillips€testified€that€the€DefendantššsŠ  ` Šfather€could€not€be€in€the€room€because€he€was€also€a€suspect,€and€the€Defendantššs€mother€wasŠ ü L  Šunavailable.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€there€is€not€sufficient€evidence€to€preponderate€against€the€trialŠ č 8  Šcourtššs€finding€that€the€waiver€was€valid.Š Ō$  ŠĢą@1 1 ģąŌ‡ X)XXX)ŌIV.€INTRODUCTION€OF€JUVENILE€RECORDˆŠ ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąPrior€to€trial,€defense€counsel€filed€a€Motion€in€Limine€to€prevent€the€State€from€elicitingŠ „Ō  Štestimony€regarding€the€Defendantššs€juvenile€record.€€The€trial€court€granted€the€Defendantššs€motion.€Š pĄ ŠThe€Defendant€now€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€State€to€introduce€evidence€ofŠ \¬ Šthe€Defendantššs€prior€juvenile€record€to€impeach€a€witness€who€testified€about€the€DefendantššsŠ H˜ Šcharacter.€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąAt€trial,€defense€counsel€questioned€Ted€Millsaps,€a€counselor€at€Loftis€Middle€School,Š  \ Šregarding€the€Defendantššs€reputation€for€violence€and€Millsapsšš€personal€opinion€as€to€whether€orŠ ųH Šnot€the€Defendant€is€a€violent€person.€€Millsaps€testified€that€the€Defendantššs€reputation€was€š šgoodššŠ ä4 Šand€that€there€š šwas€never€a€sign€of€violence€whatsoever.šš€€Following€this€line€of€questioning,€theŠ Š  ŠState€asked,€š šObviously€by€introducing€character,€may€I€ask€about€his€juvenile€record?šš€€The€trialŠ ¼  Šcourt€responded€that€the€State€could€question€Millsaps€about€the€Defendantššs€juvenile€record.€TheŠ Øų ŠState€then€asked€the€witness€if€he€was€aware€that€the€Defendant€had€been€convicted€of€burglary€ofŠ ”ä Šan€automobile,€criminal€trespass,€violation€of€probation,€and€three€counts€of€theftŌ#†X)XX X)Ń#ŌŌ‡ X)XXX)Ō.€€The€DefendantŠ €Š Šdid€not€object€to€the€introduction€of€his€juvenile€record.€€Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendant€now€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€State€to€question€TedŠ D!” ŠMillsaps€about€the€Defendantššs€prior€juvenile€record.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€šš€37„1„133Š 0"€  Šprovides€thatŠ #l! Šą8  ą[t]he€disposition€of€a€child€and€evidence€adduced€in€a€hearing€in€juvenile€court€mayŠ $X" Šnot€be€used€against€such€child€in€any€proceeding€in€any€court€other€than€juvenileŠ ō$D # Šcourt,€whether€before€or€after€reaching€majority,€except€in€dispositional€proceedingsŠ ą%0!$ Šafter€conviction€of€a€felony€for€the€purposes€of€a€pre„sentence€investigation€andŠ Ģ&"% Šreport.€€Šø'#&Š Š  ŠTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€37„1„133(b).€€Thus,€the€juvenile€record€of€a€criminal€defendant€is€not€generallyŠ ¤(ō#' Šadmissible€in€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial.€€ņņState€v.€Davisóó,€741€S.W.2d€120,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Š )ą$( Š1987).ą  ą€Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąHowever,€this€Court€has€upheld€a€trial€courtššs€ruling€that€the€credibility€of€a€character€witnessŠ ° Šfor€the€Defendant€can€be€properly€impeached€by€cross„examining€the€witness€about€his€knowledgeŠ œģ Šthat€the€Defendant€had€been€charged€with€various€offenses€in€juvenile€court.€€ņņStepheny€v.€Stateóó,€570Š ˆŲ ŠS.W.2d€356,€359€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€ņ ņó ó€In€ņņStephenyóó,€a€character€witness€for€the€defendant€wasŠ tÄ Šcross„examined€about€his€knowledge€that€the€defendant€had€been€charged€with€various€offenses€inŠ `° Šjuvenile€court.€€ņņId.óó€€However,€the€court€in€ņņStephenyóó€noted€that€the€questions€did€not€relate€to€š štheŠ L œ Šdisposition€of€the€juvenile€or€of€evidence€adduced€against€him,šš€ņņid.óó,€and€that€the€trial€court€instructedŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€jury€contemporaneously€with€the€testimony€and€at€the€conclusion€of€the€case€that€it€could€onlyŠ $ t Šconsider€the€evidence€as€it€affected€the€credibility€of€the€witness.€€ņņId.óó€€The€ņņStephenyóó€court€pointedŠ  ` Šout€that€š šit€would€not€be€in€harmony€with€the€primary€function€of€a€trial€as€a€truth€finding€expeditionŠ ü L  Što€allow€the€appellant€to€present€to€a€jury€through€character€witnesses€an€unchallenged€cloak€ofŠ č 8  Šrespectability€and€standing€in€the€community€when€in€fact€that€was€not€true.šš€€ņņId.óó€€Our€Court€laterŠ Ō$  Šrelied€on€ņņStephenyóó€to€conclude€that€š šthe€state€may€inquire€as€to€the€witnessšš€knowledge€of€anyŠ Ą  Šjuvenile€arrests€of€the€defendant€so€long€as€the€arrest€is€relevant€to€the€character€trait.šš€€ņņState€v.Š ¬ü  ŠCarlito€D.€Adamsóó,€No.€CCA„02C01„9608„CR„00267,€1997€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€1247,€at€*38„Š ˜č  Š39€(Tenn.€Crim€App.,€Jackson,€Dec.€11,€1997).Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąIn€this€case,€the€jury€heard€evidence€that€related€to€the€disposition׃ׯ ƒ#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀of€the€juvenile€Defendant,Š \¬ Šbut€did€not€hear€any€evidence€adduced€against€him.€€The€trial€court€charged€the€jury€following€TedŠ H˜ ŠMillsapsšš€testimony€as€follows:Š 4„ Šą8  ąą ` ą[J]urors,€let€me€advise€you€that€the€questions€put€to€the€last€witnessŠ  p Šconcerning€his€knowledge€of€the€prior€bad€acts€are€not€substantive€evidence€of€theŠ  \ Šdefendantššs€good€or€bad€character.€€Thatššs€merely€meant€to€question€the€witnessššsŠ ųH Šability€to€know€what€his€reputation€was,€but€you€cannot€accept€it€for€the€truthfulnessŠ ä4 Šof€it.ŠŠ Š Š  ŠNo€additional€instruction€pertaining€to€this€testimony€was€given€to€the€jury€as€part€of€the€concludingŠ ¼  Šinstructions.Š Øų ŠĢą  ąRule€404(a)(1)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€allows€the€introduction€of€š š[e]videnceŠ €Š Šof€a€pertinent€character€trait€offered€by€the€accused€or€by€the€prosecution€to€rebut€the€same.šš€€RuleŠ l¼ Š405€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence€deals€with€methods€of€proving€character€and€allows€proofŠ X Ø Što€be€presented€by€š štestimony€as€to€reputation€or€by€testimony€in€the€form€of€an€opinion.šš€€Tenn.€R.Š D!” ŠEvid.€405(a).€€Rule€405€contemplates€that€a€character€witness€can€be€cross„examined€about€š šrelevantŠ 0"€  Šspecific€instances€of€conductšš€on€the€part€of€the€person€whose€character€is€in€issue.€€ņņId.óó€€Rule€405Š #l! Šcontemplates€a€jury„out€hearing,€if€requested,€after€which€the€court€must€determine€that€a€reasonableŠ $X" Šfactual€basis€exists€for€the€inquiry€and€that€the€probative€value€of€a€specific€instance€of€conduct€onŠ ō$D # Šthe€character€witnessššs€credibility€outweighs€its€prejudicial€effect€on€substantive€issues.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.Š ą%0!$ ŠR.€Evid.€405(a)(1)„(3).Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąIn€the€present€case,€the€š šapplication€to€the€court,šš€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€405(a),€contemplated€byŠ ¤(ō#' ŠRule€405€consisted€of€the€prosecuting€attorney€simply€stating€to€the€court:€š šObviously€by€introducingŠ )ą$( Šcharacter,€may€I€ask€about€his€juvenile€record?šš€€The€trial€court€responded€affirmatively,€and€noŠ ° Šrequest€was€made€by€defense€counsel€for€a€jury„out€hearing.€€Thus,€no€determination€was€made€byŠ œģ Šthe€trial€court€that€a€reasonable€factual€basis€for€the€inquiry€existed,€and€perhaps€more€importantly,Š ˆŲ Šthat€the€probative€value€of€the€conduct€on€the€character€witnessššs€credibility€outweighed€itsŠ tÄ Šprejudicial€effect€on€substantive€issues.€€Š `° ŠĢą  ąWe€find€that€a€portion€of€the€Advisory€Commission€Comments€to€Rule€405€is€particularlyŠ 8 ˆ Špertinent€to€the€situation€in€this€case:Š $ t Šą8  ąą ` ąThe€indirect€effect€of€such€a€cross„examination€may€be€the€more€damagingŠ  ` Što€the€accused.€€While€the€jury€will€be€instructed€to€consider€the€rumors€only€asŠ ü L  Šaffecting€the€character€witnessššs€credibility,€the€practical€danger€is€that€such€rumors€„Š č 8  Ševen€if€untrue€„€place€the€defendantššs€character€in€a€bad€light€with€the€jurors.€€In€anŠ Ō$  Šeffort€to€alleviate€the€problem,€the€proposed€rule€sets€out€detailed€proceduralŠ Ą  Šsafeguards.€€The€cross„examiner€must€apply€to€the€court€for€permission€to€inquireŠ ¬ü  Šinto€specific€instances€of€conduct,€the€jury€must€be€excused,€and€the€court€mustŠ ˜č  Šdetermine€both€that€a€factual€basis€exists€and€that€probative€value€for€impeachmentŠ „Ō  Šoutweighs€prejudicial€effect€on€the€accusedššs€character.ŠpĄŠ Š  ŠTenn.€R.€Evid.€405€advisory€commššn€cmts.Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąIn€the€present€case,€the€Defendant€was€attempting€to€show€through€character€witnesses€thatŠ 4„ Šhe€is€not€a€violent€person.€€Therefore,€the€š š[e]vidence€of€a€pertinent€character€traitšš€contemplated€byŠ  p ŠRule€404(a)(1)€in€this€case€is€the€trait€of€being€non„violent.€€It€is€important€to€note€that€in€cross„Š  \ Šexamining€a€character€witness€about€specific€acts€of€the€accused,€the€specific€act€must€be€relevantŠ ųH Što€the€character€trait€about€which€the€witness€has€testified.€€ņņState€v.€Nesbitóó,€978€S.W.2d€872,€881Š ä4 Š(Tenn.€1998).€€In€the€present€case,€the€character€witness€was€cross„examined€about€his€awareness€ofŠ Š  Šthe€Defendantššs€juvenile€arrests€for€theft,€burglary€of€an€automobile,€criminal€trespass,€and€aŠ ¼  Šviolation€of€probation,€none€of€which€pertain€to€the€character€trait€of€violence.Š Øų ŠĢą  ąIn€the€present€case,€a€second€character€witness,€Sheila€Real,€was€also€cross„examined€aboutŠ €Š Šthe€Defendantššs€juvenile€convictions€for€thefts€and€burglaries.€€Again,€Ms.€Real€had€testified€onŠ l¼ Šdirect€that€the€Defendant€was€not€a€violent€person.€€The€trial€court€gave€no€contemporaneous€juryŠ X Ø Šinstruction€pertaining€to€the€cross„examination€of€Ms.€Real.€€Further,€no€such€instruction€was€givenŠ D!” Šby€the€court€as€part€of€the€jury€instructions€at€the€conclusion€of€the€evidence.Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąWhile€we€agree€that€a€character€witness€is€š šfair€gamešš€for€a€rigorous€cross„examination,€weŠ $X" Šdo€not€believe€that€the€juvenile€court€convictions€utilized€by€the€State€to€cross„examine€theŠ ō$D # ŠDefendantššs€character€witnesses€were€relevant€to€the€character€trait€about€which€those€witnessesŠ ą%0!$ Štestified.€€We€have€concluded€that€the€present€case€is€distinguishable€from€ņņStephenyóó.€€First,€inŠ Ģ&"% ŠņņStephenyóó,€the€questions€utilized€by€the€State€during€cross„examination€did€not€relate€to€š štheŠ ø'#& Šdisposition€of€the€juvenile€or€of€evidence€adduced€against€[the€defendant].šš€€ņņStephenyóó,€570€S.W.2dŠ ¤(ō#' Šat€359.€€In€this€case,€the€questions€did€relate€to€the€disposition€of€the€juvenile.€€In€ņņStephenyóó,€the€trialŠ )ą$( Šcourt€charged€the€jury€to€only€consider€this€evidence€as€affecting€the€credibility€of€the€witness.€€ņņId.óó€Š |*Ģ%) ŠThis€charge€was€given€to€the€jury€contemporaneously€with€the€testimony€and€at€the€conclusion€ofŠ h+ø&* Šall€the€evidence.€€In€the€present€case,€one€contemporaneous€instruction€was€given€following€theŠ ° Štestimony€of€Millsaps,€none€was€given€following€the€testimony€of€Real,€and€none€was€given€as€partŠ œģ Šof€the€concluding€instructions€after€the€evidence€was€presented.€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąIn€this€case,€the€record€indicates€that€the€Defendant€failed€to€object€to€the€Stateššs€request€toŠ `° Šcross„examine€the€Defendantššs€character€witnesses€about€the€Defendantššs€juvenile€record,€andŠ L œ Šdefense€counsel€made€no€request€for€a€jury„out€hearing€on€this€issue.€€Generally,€if€a€party€fails€toŠ 8 ˆ Šmake€a€contemporaneous€objection€to€testimony€presented€at€trial,€the€issue€will€be€waived€onŠ $ t Šappeal.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a);€ņņseeóó€ņņalsoóó€ņņState€v.€Thompsonóó,€36€S.W.3d€102,€108€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Š  ` Š2000).€€However,€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€36(b),€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€103(d),Š ü L  Šand€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€52(b)€allow€this€Court€to€take€notice€of€š šplain€errorsšš€thatŠ č 8  Šwere€not€raised€in€the€proceedings€below.€€ņņState€v.€Smithóó,€24€S.W.3d€274,€282€(Tenn.€2000).€€TheŠ Ō$  Šissue€of€š šššwhether€or€not€an€appellate€court€should€recognize€the€error€and€grant€relief€in€the€absenceŠ Ą  Šof€an€objection€in€the€trial€court€must€depend€on€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€particular€case.ššššŠ ¬ü  ŠņņId.óó€(quoting€ņņState€v.€Ogleóó,€666€S.W.2d€58,€61€(Tenn.€1984)).€€This€Court€has€set€forth€five€factorsŠ ˜č  Što€be€considered€when€deciding€whether€an€error€constitutes€š šplain€erroršš€in€the€absence€of€anŠ „Ō  Šobjection€at€trial:€Š pĄ Šą8  ą(a)€the€record€must€clearly€establish€what€occurred€in€the€trial€court;€(b)€a€clear€andŠ \¬ Šunequivocal€rule€of€law€must€have€been€breached;€(c)€a€substantial€right€of€theŠ H˜ Šaccused€must€have€been€adversely€affected;€(d)€the€accused€did€not€waive€the€issueŠ 4„ Šfor€tactical€reasons;€and€(e)€consideration€of€the€error€is€š šnecessary€to€do€substantialŠ  p Šjustice.ššŠ \Š Š  ŠņņState€v.€Adkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€626,€641„42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€The€ņņAdkissonóó€test€has€beenŠ ųH Šformally€adopted€by€our€supreme€court€as€the€test€to€be€utilized€when€reviewing€a€record€for€plainŠ ä4 Šerror.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņSmithóó,€24€S.W.3d€at€283.€€In€our€view,€each€of€the€five€factors€cited€above€is€present€isŠ Š  Šthis€case.€€The€record€clearly€establishes€what€occurred€in€the€trial€court,€a€clear€and€unequivocal€ruleŠ ¼  Šof€law€was€breached,€a€substantial€right€of€the€accused€was€adversely€affected,€there€is€no€indicationŠ Øų Šthat€the€accused€waived€the€issue€for€tactical€reasons,€and€consideration€of€the€error€is€necessary€toŠ ”ä Šdo€substantial€justice€in€this€caseŌ#†X)XX X)Y×#ŌŌ‡ X)XXX)Ō.€€The€degree€of€homicide,€if€any,€and€the€Defendantššs€mental€stateŠ €Š Šat€the€time€he€shot€the€victim€were€critical,€contested€issues€in€this€case.€€Accordingly,€we€mustŠ l¼ Šreverse€the€Defendantššs€conviction€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.Š X Ø ŠĢŌ#†X)XX X)¹ #ŌŌ‡ X)XXX)Ōą@$ģąŌ#†X)XX X)$ #ŌŌ‡ X)XXX)Ōņņóóą@@$ģąV.€SENTENCINGˆŠ 0"€  ŠĢą  ąAfter€the€Defendant€was€convicted€of€second€degree€murder,€a€Class€A€felony,€the€trial€courtŠ $X" Šheld€a€sentencing€hearing.€€At€the€hearing,€the€records€regarding€the€Defendant€from€the€DepartmentŠ ō$D # Šof€Childrenššs€Services€were€introduced.€€Ō#†X)XX X)x #ŌŌ‡ X)XXX)ŌThe€sentencing€report€prepared€by€Anne„Marie€Malone,€asŠ ą%0!$ Šwell€as€the€presentence€report,€were€entered€into€evidence.€€These€reports€revealed€that€the€DefendantŠ Ģ&"% Šcame€from€a€very€dysfunctional€family.€€Dr.€Kenneth€Nickerson€testified€that€he€performed€a€forensicŠ ø'#& Ševaluation€on€the€Defendant€at€Joseph€Johnson€Mental€Health€Center€in€October€1998.€€NickersonŠ ¤(ō#' Šfound€the€Defendant€competent€to€stand€trial€and€did€not€find€any€evidence€that€would€support€anŠ )ą$( Šā āinsanity€defense.€€Nickerson€testified€that€the€Defendant€had€a€troubled€childhood€and€that€theŠ |*Ģ%) ŠŃOaŃā āŃ°°Ńā āŃ  ŃDefendant€was€exposed€to€alcohol€and€cannabis€at€a€very€young€age,€which€led€to€his€subsequentŠ ° Šcriminal€behavior.€€Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąMary€Palmer€testified€that€she€was€a€foster€parent€to€the€Defendant€from€October€1996€toŠ tÄ ŠApril€1997.€€Palmer€testified€that€although€a€bit€quiet€and€shy,€the€Defendant€was€š šjust€a€wonderfulŠ `° Šlittle€boy.šš€€Palmer€testified€that€the€Defendant€would€go€home€to€visit€his€parents€on€the€weekendsŠ L œ Šand€come€back€wearing€the€same€clothes€he€was€wearing€when€he€left.€€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąTed€Millsaps,€a€guidance€counselor€at€Loftis€Middle€School,€testified€that€when€theŠ  ` ŠDefendant€first€came€to€his€school,€he€was€shy€and€afraid.€€After€taking€a€standardized€test,€theŠ ü L  ŠDefendant€was€placed€in€the€seventh€grade.€€Millsaps€testified€that€the€Defendant€was€behind€at€first,Š č 8  Šbut€with€help€from€the€teachers,€the€Defendant€improved.€€Millsaps€testified€that€he€had€š šnever€seenŠ Ō$  Ša€young€person€try€harder€than€[the€Defendant]€did.šš€€Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąKenneth€Sexton,€the€Defendantššs€father,€testified€that€about€a€month€prior€to€the€shooting,Š ˜č  Šhe€and€the€Defendant€were€walking€down€the€street,€and€several€men€followed€them.€€SextonŠ „Ō  Šreported€that€one€of€the€men€cut€Sextonššs€throat,€knocked€him€down,€and€took€all€his€money.€€€Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąJames€Davis,€the€Defendantššs€half„brother,€recalled€that€he€moved€in€with€the€Defendant€andŠ H˜ Šthe€Defendantššs€parents€when€the€Defendant€was€three€or€four€years€old€and€lived€with€them€forŠ 4„ Šabout€three€years.€€Davis€testified€that€he€continued€to€visit€the€Defendant€after€he€moved€out.€€DavisŠ  p Štestified€that€sometimes€the€lights€and€water€would€be€off€at€the€Defendantššs€house€for€two€or€threeŠ  \ Šmonths€at€a€time.€€Davis€stated€that€when€the€Defendant€was€nine€years€old,€he€would€refuse€to€goŠ ųH Što€school,€despite€his€familyššs€efforts€to€get€him€to€go.€€Š ä4 ŠĢą  ąLouise€Nelson,€a€GED€teacher€at€the€Hamilton€County€jail,€testified€that€she€taught€theŠ ¼  ŠDefendant€twice€a€week€for€two€hours.€€Nelson€testified€that€the€Defendant€had€done€extremely€wellŠ Øų Šin€his€studies€and€that€he€is€eager€to€learn.€€Nelson€testified€that€the€Defendant€is€very€respectful€andŠ ”ä Šcooperative.€€Š €Š ŠĢą  ąShields€Cortner,€the€victimššs€half„brother,€testified€that€the€victim€was€not€a€violent€man,€butŠ X Ø Šrather€that€he€was€a€š švery,€very€big„hearted€man.šš€€Cortner€testified€that€the€victim€š štook€in€KennyŠ D!” ŠSexton€more€than€once€because€he€wasnššt€working,šš€and€he€š štried€to€help€out€[the€Defendant].šš€Š 0"€  ŠCortner€testified€that€the€victimššs€death€was€š šdevastatingšš€because€the€victim€was€his€š šlastŠ #l! Šimmediate€family.šš€€Cortner€maintained€that€the€Defendant€š šshould€be€strapped€down€and€executed.šš€Š $X" ŠCortner€stated€that€the€victim€had€expressed€concerns€that€the€Defendant€was€not€in€an€appropriateŠ ō$D # Šenvironment.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€application€of€mitigating€factors€and€inŠ ø'#& Šsentencing€the€Defendant€to€twenty€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€When€a€criminalŠ ¤(ō#' Šdefendant€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€the€reviewing€court€mustŠ )ą$( Šconduct€a€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€review€of€the€sentence€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€theŠ |*Ģ%) Štrial€court€are€correct.€€ņņóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption,€however,€š šisŠ h+ø&* Šconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingŠ ° Šprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.šš€€ņņState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.Š œģ Š1991).€€In€the€event€that€the€record€fails€to€show€such€consideration,€the€review€of€the€sentence€isŠ ˆŲ Špurely€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó.€€ņņState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąIn€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencingŠ L œ Šhearing,€determines€the€range€of€sentence€and€then€determines€the€specific€sentence€and€the€proprietyŠ 8 ˆ Šof€sentencing€alternatives€by€considering€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€theŠ $ t Šsentencing€hearing,€(2)€the€presentence€report,€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€toŠ  ` Šsentencing€alternatives,€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved,€(5)Š ü L  Ševidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€(6)€anyŠ č 8  Šstatements€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€the€defendant's€behalf€about€sentencing,€and€(7)€theŠ Ō$  Špotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€ņņóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€40„35„210(a),€(b),€„103(5);€ņņState€v.Š Ą  ŠWilliamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€258€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Š ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€second€degree€murder,€a€Class€A€felony.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeŠ „Ō  ŠAnn.€šš€39„13„210(b).€€Because€the€Defendant€was€sentenced€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender,€theŠ pĄ Šappropriate€range€for€his€sentence€was€fifteen€to€twenty„five€years.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„112(a)(1).€€TheŠ \¬ Špresumptive€sentence€for€a€Class€A€felony€is€the€midpoint€of€the€sentencing€range€unless€there€areŠ H˜ Šenhancement€or€mitigating€factors€present.€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„210(c).€€If€there€are€enhancement€orŠ 4„ Šmitigating€factors,€the€court€must€start€at€the€presumptive€sentence,€enhance€the€sentence€asŠ  p Šappropriate€for€the€enhancement€factors,€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€in€the€range€as€appropriate€forŠ  \ Šthe€mitigating€factors.€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„210(e).€€The€weight€to€be€given€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretionŠ ųH Šof€the€trial€judge.€€ņņSheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€at€123.€€However,€the€sentence€must€be€adequately€supportedŠ ä4 Šby€the€record€and€comply€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€Š Š  ŠņņState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€237€(Tenn.€1986).Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąWhen€imposing€a€sentence,€the€trial€court€must€make€specific€findings€of€fact€on€the€recordŠ ”ä Šsupporting€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„209(c).€€The€record€should€also€include€anyŠ €Š Šenhancement€or€mitigating€factors€applied€by€the€trial€court.€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„210(f).€€Thus,€if€the€trialŠ l¼ Šcourt€wishes€to€enhance€a€sentence,€the€court€must€state€its€reasons€on€the€record.€€The€purpose€ofŠ X Ø Šrecording€the€courtššs€reasoning€is€to€guarantee€the€preparation€of€a€proper€record€for€appellateŠ D!” Šreview.€€ņņState€v.€Ervinóó,€939€S.W.2d€581,€584€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Because€the€record€in€thisŠ 0"€  Šcase€indicates€that€the€trial€court€adequately€considered€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€asŠ #l! Šwell€as€the€underlying€facts,€our€review€is€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.Š $X" ŠĢą  ąIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencing€procedure,€that€theŠ ą%0!$ Šcourt€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€and€proper€weight€to€theŠ Ģ&"% Šfactors€and€principles€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€courtššs€findings€of€fact€areŠ ø'#& Šadequately€supported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€"even€if€we€would€haveŠ ¤(ō#' Špreferred€a€different€result."€€ņņState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€TheŠ )ą$( Šdefendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence€imposed.€€ņņAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2dŠ |*Ģ%) Šat€169.ņņóóŠ h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąIn€sentencing€the€Defendant,€the€trial€court€applied€the€following€enhancement€factors:€(1)Š ° Šthat€š š[t]he€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€additionŠ œģ Što€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range,šš€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(1);€€(2)€thatŠ ˆŲ Šš š[t]he€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm€.€.€.€during€the€commission€of€the€offense,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚Š tÄ Š40„35„114(9);€and€(3)€that€š š[t]he€defendant€was€adjudicated€to€have€committed€a€delinquent€act€orŠ `° Šacts€as€a€juvenile€that€would€constitute€a€felony€if€committed€by€an€adult€.€.€.€.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„114(20).€Š L œ ŠThe€record€supports€the€trial€courtššs€application€of€these€enhancement€factors.€€€€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąThe€trial€court€applied€the€following€mitigating€factors:€(1)€€that€š š[t]he€defendant€acted€underŠ  ` Šstrong€provocation,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(2);€(2)€that€š š[s]ubstantial€grounds€exist€tending€to€excuse€orŠ ü L  Šjustify€the€defendantššs€criminal€conduct,€though€failing€to€establish€a€defense,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(3);Š č 8  Š(3)€that€š š[t]he€defendant,€because€of€youth€.€.€.€,€lacked€substantial€judgment€in€committing€theŠ Ō$  Šoffense,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(6);€(4)€that€š š[t]he€defendant€was€suffering€from€a€mental€or€physicalŠ Ą  Šcondition€that€significantly€reduced€the€defendantššs€culpability€for€the€offense,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(8);Š ¬ü  Š(5)€that€š š[t]he€defendant€assisted€the€authorities€in€locating€or€recovering€any€property€.€.€.€involvedŠ ˜č  Šin€the€crime,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(10);€(6)€that€š š[t]he€defendant,€although€guilty€of€the€crime,€committedŠ „Ō  Šthe€offense€under€such€unusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€theŠ pĄ Šlaw€motivated€the€criminal€conduct,šš€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(11);€and€(7)€that€the€Defendant€continued€hisŠ \¬ Šeducation€by€getting€his€GED,€that€the€Defendant€had€a€troubled€childhood,€and€that€the€DefendantŠ H˜ Šhas€remorse.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(13).€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąRegarding€the€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€court€stated€that€it€gave€very€little€weight€to€the€factŠ  \ Šthat€the€Defendant€acted€under€provocation,€ņņseeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(2),€or€that€substantial€groundsŠ ųH Šexisted€to€excuse€or€justify€the€Defendantššs€conduct.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(3).€€The€trial€court,Š ä4 Šhowever,€did€give€weight€to€the€Defendantššs€age€and€to€its€finding€that€he€lacked€substantialŠ Š  Šjudgment€in€committing€the€offense.€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(6).€€The€trial€court€gave€little€weight€to€theŠ ¼  Šfactor€that€the€Defendant€was€suffering€from€a€mental€condition€because€the€evidence€presented€onlyŠ Øų Šshowed€that€the€Defendant€had€depression€with€psychotic€symptoms.€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(8).€€TheŠ ”ä Štrial€court€gave€little€weight€to€the€fact€that€the€Defendant€helped€police€locate€the€gun,€as€the€courtŠ €Š Šnoted€that€it€probably€would€have€been€found€anyway.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(10).€€The€trial€court€gaveŠ l¼ Šsome€weight€to€the€factor€that€the€Defendant,€although€guilty€of€the€crime,€committed€the€offenseŠ X Ø Šunder€unusual€circumstances.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(11).€€In€sentencing€the€Defendant,€the€trial€courtŠ D!” Šalso€considered€the€fact€that€the€Defendant€had€obtained€his€GED,€and€it€considered€the€DefendantššsŠ 0"€  Šapparent€remorse€for€having€committed€the€crime.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„113(13).€€The€trial€court€rejectedŠ #l! Šall€other€mitigating€factors€proposed€by€the€defense.€Š $X" ŠĢą  ą€€The€trial€court€stated€that€the€Defendant€š šobviously€is€from€a€dysfunctional€familyšš€and€thatŠ ą%0!$ ŠKenneth€Sexton,€Defendantššs€father,€is€a€š šsorry€human€being.šš€€The€trial€court€also€stated€that€theŠ Ģ&"% ŠDefendantššs€mother€is€unfit€and€š ša€sorry€specimen€of€human€life.šš€€The€trial€court€noted€that€theŠ ø'#& ŠDefendant€was€a€š švictim€for€15€years€of€his€life€by€his€family.šš€€However,€the€trial€court€stated€thatŠ ¤(ō#' Šalthough€the€Defendant€š šnever€really€had€a€chance€.€.€.€he€is€responsible€for€his€acts.šš€€As€such,€theŠ )ą$( ŠDefendant€was€sentenced€to€twenty€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€€€ą x ąŠ |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€applied€three€enhancement€factors€and€seven€mitigating€factors.€Š ° ŠAfter€weighing€the€different€factors,€the€trial€court€ultimately€determined€that€the€sentence€shouldŠ œģ Šbe€twenty€years,€which€is€the€midpoint€of€the€sentencing€range,€and€the€presumptive€sentence€in€theŠ ˆŲ Šabsence€of€enhancing€or€mitigating€factors.€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„210(C).€€Although€the€court€applied€onlyŠ tÄ Šthree€enhancement€factors,€it€weighed€those€more€heavily€than€the€mitigating€factors.€€The€trial€courtŠ `° Šnoted€that€it€put€little€weight€on€many€of€the€mitigating€factors.€€As€previously€stated,€the€weight€toŠ L œ Šbe€given€each€factor€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.€€ņņSheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€at€123.€€WeŠ 8 ˆ Šconclude€that€the€evidence€in€the€record€supports€the€trial€courtššs€findings€and€that€twenty€years€isŠ $ t Šan€appropriate€sentence€in€this€case.€€Š  ` ŠĢĢĢĢĢą@rr#ģąVI.€€ConclusionˆŠ ˜č  ŠĢą  ąBecause€we€have€concluded€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€error€by€improperlyŠ pĄ Šallowing€evidence€to€be€introduced€at€trial€regarding€the€Defendantššs€juvenile€record,€we€REVERSEŠ \¬ Šthe€Defendantššs€conviction€and€REMAND€for€a€new€trial.Š H˜ ŠĢŌ#†X)XX X)#ŌĢĢĢą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ą___________________________________€Š ä4 Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ąROBERT€W.€WEDEMEYER,€JUDGE