ÿWPCG  C{ú‚j]—BÔÁ•µV|w…õ —Ó—¶.ssƒkR–tÕk¢klE¿S‚Û稾°ol“ä%Â4X/Da¡(`ÁßÌïô%"1P—8×R qQÚ…5%¥Á_TÍm¹D‚çÂIx·²¥6<YÈíf/ºÛ¼2rêÆë–$Ya1b±£!ÝYuŒ^Œðœç¡öÜ<¾Ñma}Ê|ùv!û‚¸wɯ41Þ N- ]gžà­AZ¸S®4½•Çt;B;ÅòOÙtÃ<Ò÷¾£*CÄ9ER½—ñ²úœb‡Éðwü} ‹0!)êŸb!¶í,Û¾[41©Ê5ì1÷Ñ;*¥îœ–ÂE®·>;¹¿hÆE9¼#Ÿã¾!ÊTqóí:½*oo\cd rŒÁ­ h;ÿ#:ÇôÆ¿1'Ð\¡Ò`t—¤Å;Ûÿ¼-eâWÏ«ïIÇ”†R‡ME®ß½e宾UÞ±¤w¤ÊqðÕ0A =X'™´SÝÒG-9ºšu•Ê‡¡í‘òy‹vâ7ì\ò¨§Ý‰Á!u÷’×Û¾f{\½E¦Mògé×÷”_v¼jš'C°n„é¸ üOçÛNÔðÏü”áÌ­4N¶‰JÄc·™i_/zNa#!NUNo %½ 0(ÃU:ëb% w- 41 E "T Nv ^ x „ m†  5¥ U:Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú Ú AQ Æe 0D+ 0Do 0D³ ³ D3÷ B* ˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,Ù¹6 AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù-tpO'3|xkidnappingÚƒd'L ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ  +Ý ƒ[¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€X—®XXXÔÔ€'^XX—®ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X—®X'^ÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€21,€1999ÌÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAxÔó ó,Ù¹6 AZ‹"Arial RegularZ[\]_Cþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó````'ÿÿdxd dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€ŠAÒ‹XXÔÔ€Šêƒ‹‹ŠAÒÔÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ8€uQXXdìdÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ_ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌßx€Y_B2.jz€ÿÇ`  `€€@ÿE + ` 8ttxPØd ð Ç xßAT€JACKSONÌÌJUNE€SESSION,€1999ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À àà  à)€€€€€€€€C.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9811„CC„00363Ð p Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àó óÐ r  Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellee,ò òà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€Ð t  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€€TIPTON€COUNTYÌV.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€Ð x  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€€HON.€JOSEPH€H.€WALKER,ÏJUDGEÌMAURICE€SHAW,à h àà À àà0  à)€€€€€€€à p àЀ €%€% Ѐà ` àà0 ¸ àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€€(POSSESSION€OF€COCAINE€ó óЂ"h€%h€% Ѐà ` àà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À àò òà  à)€€€€€€€€WITH€INTENT€TO€DELIVER)€Ð „$ Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à À àà  àòòà p àà È àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð z ÐÌò òJASON€G.€WHITWORTHà À àà  àà p àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS€Ð r! Ðó óHotel€Lindo€Building,€Suite€201à  àà0 p àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐt"p€%p€% Ð114€W.€Liberty€AvenueÌP.O.€Box€846à  àà h àà À àò òà  àà p àPATRICIA€C.€KUSSMANNÐ l$  Ðó óCovington,€TN€38019„0846ò òó óà À àà  àà p àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÐ n% Ðà ` àà0 ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÐ ¸ €%¸ €% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà0 p à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ð p€%p€% Ðà ` àà0 ¸ àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà0Àh€%h€%àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37243Ð À€%À€% ÐÌò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àó óà À àà  àà p àò òELIZABETH€T.€RICE€Ð Z*ú ! Ðó óà0 ` àà0¸ ` €%` €%àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà0Àh€%h€%àò òà  àà p àó óDistrict€Attorney€General€Ð\+ü!"À€%À€% ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àò òà  àó óà h àà À àà  àà p àò òJAMES€W.€FREELAND,€JR.Ð T-ô#$ Ðó óà0 ` àà0¸ ` €%` €%àà0¸ €%¸ €%àà0h€%€%àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÐV.ö$%h€%h€% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à302€Market€StreetÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àSomerville,€TN€38068ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÐ ";Â12 ЇTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEò òó óÐ  `  ÐÔ_ÔÓ  ÓÔ€°YÓ°ˆŠ~ÈÔò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€Š~Ȉ°°YÓÔÐ `  ÐÓ  ÓÌÌÓÓà ` àOn€July€7,€1997,€the€Tipton€County€Grand€Jury€indicted€Appellant€MauriceÐ  ¼ ÐShaw€for€one€count€of€possession€of€cocaine€and€one€count€of€possession€of€.5€orÐ  ¬ Ðmore€grams€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€deliver.€€After€a€jury€trial€on€March€10,€1998,Ð üœ ÐAppellant€was€convicted€of€possession€of€.5€or€more€grams€of€cocaine€with€intent€toÐ ìŒ  Ðdeliver.€€On€May€11,€1998,€the€trial€court€sentenced€Appellant€as€a€Range€I€standardÐ Ü|  Ðoffender€to€a€term€of€nine€years€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction.€Ð Ìl  ÐAppellant€challenges€his€conviction,€raising€the€following€issues:Ð ¼\ ÐÓÓà0 ` à1)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€Appellantððs€conviction;ЬL` €%` €% ÐÌà0 ` à2)€whether€Appellantððs€conviction€was€invalid€because€it€was€based€on€theÐ œ< Ðuncorroborated€testimony€of€an€accomplice;€andД4` €%` €% ÐÌà0 ` à3)€whether€Appellant€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.Є$` €%` €% ÐÌÓ­ÓAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð t! ÐÌà@dd+Dàò òI.€€FACTSó óˆÐ T%ô ÐÌà ` àK.C.€Webb€testified€that€on€February€27,€1997,€Appellant€drove€his€vehicle€toÐ 4)Ô  ÐWebbððs€house.€€Appellant€then€asked€Webb€to€accompany€him€on€a€drive€to€hisÐ $+Ä!" Ðfatherððs€house.€€At€some€point€during€the€drive,€Appellant€told€Webb€that€they€wereÐ -´#$ Ðbeing€followed€by€the€police.€€Appellant€then€pulled€into€the€parking€lot€of€SparkyððsÐ /¤%& ÐExxon.Ð ô0”'( ÐÌà ` àWebb€testified€that€as€Appellant€began€opening€the€door€to€exit€the€vehicle,Ð Ô4t+, Ðâ âAppellant€took€a€bottle€containing€crack€cocaine€out€of€his€pants€pocket€and€heÐ Ä6d-. Ðtossed€it€to€Webb.€€Webb€then€tossed€the€bottle€back€to€Appellant,€but€he€did€notÐ `  Ðactually€see€where€the€bottle€landed.Ð P ð Ðâ âÌà ` àWebb€testified€that€he€was€charged€with€possession€of€cocaine€as€a€result€ofÐ 0Ð Ðthis€incident.€€Webb€also€testified€that€he€made€a€deal€with€the€State€in€which€he€wasÐ  À Ðallowed€to€plead€guilty€to€misdemeanor€possession€in€return€for€his€testimony€at€trial.Ð °  ÐÌà ` àDeputy€Shannon€Beasley€of€the€Tipton€County€Sheriffððs€Department€testifiedÐ ð  Ðthat€while€he€was€in€his€patrol€vehicle€on€February€27,€1997,€he€observed€a€vehicleÐ à€ Ðwith€a€license€plate€number€that€he€had€been€instructed€to€be€on€the€lookout€for.€Ð Ðp ÐShortly€thereafter,€Beasley€learned€that€the€license€plate€was€registered€for€aÐ À` Ðdifferent€vehicle€than€the€one€that€it€was€on.€€After€learning€this€information,€BeasleyÐ °P Ðstopped€the€vehicle€for€a€registration€violation.€€When€Beasley€approached€theÐ   @ Ðvehicle,€he€saw€that€Appellant€was€the€driver€and€Webb€was€the€passenger.Ð "0 ÐÌà ` àBeasley€testified€that€at€this€point,€Appellant€exited€the€vehicle€and€beganÐ p& Ðwalking€toward€a€store.€€Beasley€called€Appellant€back€to€the€vehicle€and€asked€forÐ `(  Ðhis€driverððs€license.€€Beasley€testified€that€Appellant€was€ð ðextremely€nervousðð€andÐ P*ð " Ðð ð[h]is€hand€was€shaking€uncontrollablyðð€when€he€displayed€his€driverððs€license.€Ð @,à"$ ÐAppellant€then€stated€that€the€license€plate€belonged€to€his€van.Ð 0.Ð$& ÐÌà ` àBeasley€testified€that€after€he€returned€Appellantððs€driverððs€license€and€issuedÐ 2°(* Ða€citation,€Appellant€still€appeared€to€be€ð ðreal€nervous.ðð€€Beasley€then€askedÐ 4 *, ÐAppellant€whether€he€had€any€illegal€contraband€in€the€vehicle€such€as€weapons€orÐ ð5,. Ðâ âdrugs€and€Appellant€stated€that€he€did€not.€€Beasley€then€asked€Appellant€whetherÐ à7€.0 Ðhe€could€search€the€vehicle€and€Appellant€said,€ð ðGo€ahead.ðð€€After€obtainingÐ `  Ðconsent,€Beasley€asked€Webb€to€get€out€of€the€vehicle€and€he€began€the€search.Ð P ð Ðâ âÌà ` àBeasley€testified€that€during€the€search€of€the€vehicle,€he€discovered€anÐ 0Ð Ðorange„colored€pill€bottle€under€the€arm€rest€between€the€driverððs€and€passengerððsÐ  À Ðseats.€€When€Beasley€opened€the€bottle,€he€observed€a€substance€that€heÐ °  Ðrecognized€as€twenty„six€rocks€of€crack€cocaine.€€Beasley€also€testified€thatÐ    ÐAppellant€and€Webb€were€subsequently€arrested€and€no€materials€used€for€theÐ ð  Ðconsumption€of€cocaine€were€found€on€either€Appellant€or€Webb.Ð à€ ÐÌà ` àBeasley€testified€that€after€Appellant€was€arrested€and€advised€of€his€rights,Ð À` ÐAppellant€waived€his€rights€and€agreed€to€make€a€statement.€€In€the€statement,Ð °P ÐAppellant€admitted€that€he€owned€the€vehicle€in€which€the€cocaine€was€found,€butÐ   @ Ðhe€denied€that€the€cocaine€belonged€to€him.€€Appellant€also€stated€that€he€did€notÐ "0 Ðknow€where€the€cocaine€had€come€from,€but€he€assumed€that€it€belonged€to€WebbÐ €$  Ðbecause€Webb€had€previously€discovered€some€cocaine€on€the€side€of€the€road.Ð p& ÐÌà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Beasley€testified€that€when€he€stopped€AppellantððsÐ P*ð " Ðvehicle,€he€did€not€see€either€Appellant€or€Webb€throw€anything.Ð @,à"$ ÐÌà ` àChief€Jesse€Poole€of€the€Atoka,€Tennessee€Police€Department€testified€that,Ð  0À&( Ðbased€on€his€training€and€experience,€the€street€value€of€twenty„six€rocks€of€crackÐ 2°(* Ðcocaine€was€approximately€$500.Ð 4 *, ÐÌà ` àLisa€Mays€of€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation€testified€that€the€pill€bottleÐ à7€.0 Ðobtained€during€the€search€contained€5.6€grams€of€cocaine€base.€€Mays€testified€thatÐ Ð9p02 Ðthis€amount€of€cocaine€was€approximately€eleven€times€greater€than€the€amountÐ `  Ðinvolved€in€a€typical€case.Ð P ð ÐÌà@îîDàò òII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óˆÐ 0Ð ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction.€Ð °  ÐWe€disagree.Ð    ÐÌà ` àWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€isÐ à€ Ðobliged€to€review€that€challenge€according€to€certain€well-settled€principles.€€A€verdictÐ Ðp Ðof€guilty€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theÐ À` ÐStateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€Ð °P ÐòòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994).€€Although€an€accused€isÐ   @ Ðoriginally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€of€innocence,€a€jury€verdict€removes€thisÐ "0 Ðpresumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914Ð €$  Ð(Tenn.€1982).€€Hence,€on€appeal,€the€burden€of€proof€rests€with€Appellant€toÐ p& Ðdemonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€òòId.óó€€On€appeal,€ð ðthe€[S]tateÐ `(  Ðis€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonableÐ P*ð " Ðand€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€therefrom.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Where€the€sufficiencyÐ @,à"$ Ðof€the€evidence€is€contested€on€appeal,€the€relevant€question€for€the€reviewing€courtÐ 0.Ð$& Ðis€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€accused€guilty€of€everyÐ  0À&( Ðelement€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.Ð 2°(* Ð307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€In€conducting€our€evaluationÐ 4 *, Ðof€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€is€precluded€from€reweighing€or€reconsideringÐ ð5,. Ðthe€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929€S.W.2d€380,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€Ð à7€.0 ÐMoreover,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€own€inferences€ð ðfor€those€drawn€by€theÐ Ð9p02 Ðtrier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.ðð€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779Ð `  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€Finally,€Rule€13(e)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€AppellateÐ P ð ÐProcedure€provides,€ð ðfindings€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€orÐ @ à Ðjury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trierÐ 0Ð Ðof€fact€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ððÐ  À ÐÌà ` àIn€order€to€establish€that€Appellant€had€committed€the€offense€for€which€heÐ    Ðwas€convicted,€the€State€had€to€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€AppellantÐ ð  Ðpossessed€.5€or€more€grams€of€cocaine€with€the€intent€to€deliver.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð à€ Ððð€39„17„417(a)(4)€(1997).Ð Ðp ÐÌà ` àWe€conclude€that€when€the€evidence€is€viewed€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÐ °P Ðthe€State,€as€it€must€be,€the€evidence€was€clearly€sufficient€to€support€AppellantððsÐ   @ Ðconviction.€€Webb€testified€that€when€Appellant€stopped€the€vehicle€and€beganÐ "0 Ðopening€the€door,€Appellant€took€a€pill€bottle€out€of€his€pocket€and€tossed€it€to€Webb.€Ð €$  ÐWebb€also€testified€that€he€then€threw€the€bottle€back€to€Appellant,€but€he€did€notÐ p& Ðactually€see€where€it€landed.€€Beasley€testified€that€during€the€search€of€AppellantððsÐ `(  Ðvehicle,€he€discovered€a€pill€bottle€that€contained€what€appeared€to€be€twenty„sixÐ P*ð " Ðrocks€of€crack€cocaine.€€Poole€testified€that€the€street€value€of€twenty„six€rocks€ofÐ @,à"$ Ðcrack€cocaine€was€approximately€$500.€€Mays€testified€that€the€pill€bottle€containedÐ 0.Ð$& Ð5.6€grams€of€cocaine.€€Mays€also€testified€that€this€amount€is€approximately€elevenÐ  0À&( Ðtimes€greater€than€the€amount€of€cocaine€in€a€typical€case.Ð 2°(* ÐÌà ` àAppellant€essentially€argues€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€because€theÐ ð5,. Ðonly€proof€that€he€ever€possessed€the€cocaine€came€Ô‡XÑùXˆŠ~ÈÔfromÔ#†Š~ȈXXÑù©;#Ô€the€testimony€of€Webb€andÐ à7€.0 ÐWebb€was€simply€not€credible.€€Specifically,€Appellant€argues€that€no€rational€juryÐ Ð9p02 Ðcould€have€believed€Webbððs€testimony€because€his€version€of€the€facts€was€illogical,Ð `  Ðhe€had€a€motive€to€lie,€his€testimony€was€contradicted€by€the€testimony€of€Beasley,Ð P ð Ðand€his€testimony€contained€inconsistencies.€€However,€ð ð[t]he€credibility€of€theÐ @ à Ðwitnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€the€reconciliation€of€conflictsÐ 0Ð Ðin€the€evidence€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.ðð€Ð  À ÐòòState€v.€Cribbsóó,€967€S.W.2d€773,€793€(Tenn.€1998).€€The€jury€obviously€believedÐ °  ÐWebbððs€testimony€that€Appellant€initially€had€the€bottle€of€crack€cocaine€in€his€pocket.Ð    ÐÌà ` àIn€this€case,€Appellant€essentially€asks€us€to€reconsider€the€evidence€andÐ à€ Ðsubstitute€a€verdict€of€not€guilty€in€place€of€the€verdict€found€by€the€jury.€€That€is€notÐ Ðp Ðour€function.€€Instead,€we€conclude€that€a€rational€jury€could€have€found€beyond€aÐ À` Ðreasonable€doubt€that€Appellant€had€committed€the€offense€of€possessing€.5€or€moreÐ °P Ðgrams€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€deliver.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€Appellant€is€notÐ   @ Ðentitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ð "0 ÐÌà@&&"Dàò òIII.€€ACCOMPLICE€TESTIMONYó óˆÐ p& ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€refused€to€grant€his€motionÐ P*ð " Ðfor€acquittal€because€the€only€evidence€against€him€came€from€the€uncorroboratedÐ @,à"$ Ðtestimony€of€an€accomplice.€€We€disagree.Ð 0.Ð$& ÐÌà ` àIn€Tennessee,€it€is€well„settled€that€a€defendant€cannot€be€convicted€on€theÐ 2°(* Ðuncorroborated€testimony€of€an€accomplice.€€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803Ð 4 *, Ð(Tenn.€1994).€€However,€Ð ð5,. ÐÓÓà0 ` à[t]his€corroborative€evidence€may€be€direct€or€entirely€circumstantial,€and€itÐ à7€.0 Ðneed€not€be€adequate,€in€and€of€itself,€to€support€a€conviction;€it€is€sufficientÐ Ø8x/1 Ðto€meet€the€requirements€of€the€rule€if€it€fairly€and€legitimately€tends€to€connectÐ Ð9p02 Ðthe€defendant€with€the€commission€of€the€crime€charged.€It€is€not€necessaryÐ `  Ðthat€the€corroboration€extend€to€every€part€of€the€accomplice's€evidence.€TheÐ X ø Ðcorroboration€need€not€be€conclusive,€but€it€is€sufficient€if€this€evidence,€ofÐ P ð Ðitself,€tends€to€connect€the€defendant€with€the€commission€of€the€offense,Ð H è Ðalthough€the€evidence€is€slight€and€entitled,€when€standing€alone,€to€but€littleÐ @ à Ðconsideration.€€òòÐ8Ø` €%` €% ÐÌÓ+DÓId.óó€€In€other€words,€ð ðonly€slight€circumstances€are€required€to€corroborate€anÐ (È Ðaccomplice's€testimony.ðð€€òòState€v.€Griffisóó,€964€S.W.2d€577,€589€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ¸  Ð1997).€€Whether€an€accomplice's€testimony€has€been€sufficiently€corroborated€is€aÐ ¨  Ðquestion€for€the€jury.€€òòBigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€at€803.Ð ø˜  ÐÌà ` àWe€conclude€that€the€other€evidence€in€this€case€is€sufficient€to€establish€atÐ Øx Ðleast€the€ð ðslight€circumstancesðð€necessary€to€corroborate€Webbððs€testimony.€Ð Èh ÐBeasley€testified€that€when€he€stopped€Appellantððs€vehicle€and€pulled€in€behind€him,Ð ¸X ÐAppellant€exited€the€vehicle€and€walked€away.€€Beasley€also€testified€that€when€heÐ ¨H Ðasked€Appellant€for€his€driverððs€license,€Appellant€was€ð ðextremely€nervousðð€and€ð ð[h]isÐ ˜!8 Ðhand€was€shaking€uncontrollably.ðð€€In€addition,€Beasley€testified€that€even€after€heÐ ˆ#( Ðreturned€Appellantððs€driverððs€license€and€gave€him€the€citation,€Appellant€was€ð ðstillÐ x% Ðreal€nervous.ðð€€Further,€it€is€undisputed€that€Appellant€was€both€the€owner€and€theÐ h' Ðdriver€of€the€vehicle€in€which€Beasley€found€the€cocaine.€€As€this€Court€hasÐ X)ø! Ðpreviously€noted,€constructive€possession€of€a€controlled€substance€can€be€inferredÐ H+è!# Ðto€the€person€who€had€control€over€the€vehicle€in€which€it€was€found.€€òòState€v.Ð 8-Ø#% ÐBrownóó,€915€S.W.2d€3,€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ð (/È%' ÐÌà ` àWe€conclude€that€while€the€above€evidence€may€not€have€been€adequate,€inÐ 3¨)+ Ðand€of€itself,€to€support€a€conviction,€the€evidence€ð ðfairly€and€legitimately€tends€toÐ ø4˜+- Ðâ âconnect€[Appellant]€with€the€commission€of€the€crime€charged.ðð€€Thus,€WebbððsÐ è6ˆ-/ Ðtestimony€was€sufficiently€corroborated.€€Appellant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€thisÐ `  Ðissue.Ð P ð Ðâ âÌà@êê"Dàò òIV.€€ASSISTANCE€OF€COUNSELó óˆÐ 0Ð ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€his€conviction€should€be€reversed€because€heÐ °  Ðreceived€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€trial.€€We€disagree.Ð    ÐÌà ` àArticle€I,€Section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€provides€"that€in€all€criminalÐ à€ Ðprosecutions,€the€accused€hath€the€right€to€be€heard€by€himself€and€his€counsel."Ð Ðp ÐTenn.€Const.€art€I,€ðð€9.€€Similarly,€the€Sixth€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesÐ À` ÐConstitution€guarantees€that€"[i]n€all€criminal€prosecutions,€the€accused€shall€enjoyÐ °P Ðthe€right€.€.€.€to€have€the€assistance€of€counsel€for€his€defense."€€U.S.€Const.€amend.Ð   @ ÐVI.€€"These€constitutional€provisions€afford€to€the€accused€in€a€criminal€prosecutionÐ "0 Ðthe€right€to€effective€assistance€of€counsel."€€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,€960€S.W.2d€572,€579Ð €$  Ð(Tenn.€1997).Ð p& ÐÌòòóóà ` àIn€order€to€obtain€relief€on€the€basis€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€anÐ P*ð " Ðappellant€ð ðbears€the€burden€of€showing€that€(a)€the€services€rendered€by€trialÐ @,à"$ Ðcounsel€were€deficient€and€(b)€the€deficient€performance€was€prejudicial.ðð€€òòPowersÐ 0.Ð$& Ðv.€Stateóó,€942€S.W.2d€551,€558€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€In€order€to€show€deficientÐ  0À&( Ðperformance,€an€appellant€must€establish€that€the€services€rendered€or€the€adviceÐ 2°(* Ðgiven€was€below€"the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminalÐ 4 *, Ðcases."€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€In€order€to€showÐ ð5,. Ðprejudice,€an€appellant€must€show€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counsel'sÐ à7€.0 Ðineffective€performance,€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€Ð Ð9p02 ÐòòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€694,€104€S.Ct.€2052,€2068,€80€L.Ed.2d€674Ð `  Ð(1984).€ð ðBecause€[an€appellant]€must€establish€both€prongs€of€the€test€to€prevail€onÐ P ð Ða€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€failure€to€prove€either€deficientÐ @ à Ðperformance€or€resulting€prejudice€provides€a€sufficient€basis€to€deny€relief€on€theÐ 0Ð Ðclaim."€€òòHenleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€580.€"Indeed,€a€court€need€not€address€theÐ  À Ðcomponents€in€any€particular€order€or€even€address€both€if€the€defendant€makes€anÐ °  Ðinsufficient€showing€of€one€component."€€òòId.óó€Ð    ÐÌà ` àFirst,€Appellant€contends€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counselÐ à€ Ðbecause€during€defense€counselððs€opening€statement,€he€said€that€Appellant€wasÐ Ðp Ðguilty.€€The€record€indicates€that€during€his€opening€statement,€defense€counselÐ À` Ðstated,Ð °P ÐÓÓà0 ` àThank€you€for€being€here€today.€€I€think€youððve€been€carefully€selected.€€Mr.Ð   @ ÐMaurice€Shaw€is€guilty.€€We€say€heððs€presumedð"ðForgive€me.€€Mr.€MauriceÐ ˜!8 ÐShaw€is€innocent.€€We€say€he€is€presumed€innocent.€€And€this€is€myÐ "0 Ðopportunity€to€talk€about€what€I€expect€the€evidence€will€show€.€.€.€.Ј#(` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓAppellant€has€failed€to€show€that€this€remark€had€any€adverse€effect€on€his€defense.€Ð x% ÐIndeed,€it€is€clear€that€this€comment€was€completely€inadvertent€and€counselÐ h' Ðimmediately€corrected€his€misstatement.€€Nothing€in€the€record€indicates€that€the€juryÐ X)ø! Ðbased€its€verdict€on€this€obviously€inadvertent€remark€rather€than€the€evidence€thatÐ H+è!# Ðwas€presented€during€the€trial.€€Thus,€Appellant€has€failed€to€show€that€he€wasÐ 8-Ø#% Ðprejudiced€by€this€remark.Ð (/È%' ÐÌà ` àSecond,€Appellant€claims€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€Ð 3¨)+ Ðbecause€during€defense€counselððs€closing€argument,€he€made€reference€to€a€storyÐ ø4˜+- Ðabout€a€bull„frog€with€wings€and€also€stated€that€as€Appellantððs€friend,€Webb€wasÐ è6ˆ-/ Ðmore€interested€in€helping€himself€than€he€was€in€helping€Appellant.€€While€theseÐ Ø8x/1 Ðarguments€were€not€particularly€clear,€Appellant€has€failed€to€show€how€he€wasÐ `  Ðprejudiced€by€them.€€Indeed,€the€record€indicates€that€defense€counsel€made€manyÐ P ð Ðof€the€same€arguments€in€his€closing€argument€that€Appellant€makes€on€appeal.€€ForÐ @ à Ðinstance,€counsel€argued€that€Webbððs€version€of€the€events€was€not€logical,€thatÐ 0Ð ÐWebb€was€not€credible,€that€Webb€had€a€motive€to€lie,€and€that€Appellantððs€actionsÐ  À Ðindicated€that€he€was€innocent.€€When€the€closing€argument€is€considered€as€aÐ °  Ðwhole,€it€is€clear€that€Appellant€was€not€prejudiced€by€it.Ð    ÐÌà ` àThird,€Appellant€contends€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counselÐ à€ Ðbecause€in€defense€counselððs€closing€argument,€he€referred€to€the€trial€as€a€ð ðdopeÐ Ðp Ðcaseðð€and€he€used€the€term€ð ðdope€salespersonðð€when€he€attacked€the€logic€of€theÐ À` Ðprosecutorððs€closing€argument.€€However,€Appellant€has€failed€to€show€how€he€wasÐ °P Ðprejudiced€by€these€references€and€nothing€in€the€record€indicates€that€theseÐ   @ Ðcomments€had€any€effect€on€the€outcome€of€the€trial.Ð "0 ÐÌà ` àFinally,€Appellant€claims€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counselÐ p& Ðbecause€defense€counsel€failed€to€obtain€the€prior€criminal€record€of€Webb.€Ð `(  ÐAppellant€argues€that€the€fact€that€his€counsel€failed€to€investigate€Webbððs€criminalÐ P*ð " Ðrecord€is€shown€by€the€following€statement€counsel€made€during€a€bench€conferenceÐ @,à"$ Ðduring€his€cross„examination€of€Webb:Ð 0.Ð$& ÐÓÓà0 ` àWe€have€recently€got€in€touch€with€what€we€think€is€a€prior€record€on€thisÐ  0À&( Ðgentleman.€€Iððd€like€to€ask€for€a€few€moments€to€go€in€the€Clerkððs€office€to€seeÐ 1¸') Ðif€my€office€has€faxed€it€in€here€yet.Ð2°(*` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓContrary€to€Appellantððs€assertions,€this€statement€does€not€clearly€indicate€thatÐ 4 *, Ðdefense€counsel€failed€to€investigate€Webbððs€criminal€record.€€Without€an€evidentiaryÐ ð5,. Ðhearing€on€the€issue,€any€conclusion€about€the€extent€of€defense€counselððs€pretrialÐ à7€.0 Ðpreparation€would€be€mere€speculation.€€More€importantly,€there€is€no€proof€in€theÐ Ð9p02 Ðrecord€that€Webb€actually€had€a€prior€criminal€record.€€Because€there€is€no€proof€thatÐ `  ÐWebb€had€a€prior€criminal€record,€Appellantððs€claim€that€he€was€prejudiced€byÐ P ð Ðdefense€counselððs€failure€to€obtain€the€alleged€criminal€record€is€pure€conjecture.Ð @ à ÐÌà ` àIn€short,€Appellant€has€failed€to€demonstrate€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€any€ofÐ  À Ðthe€alleged€deficiencies€of€his€counsel€at€trial.€€Therefore,€Appellant€has€failed€toÐ °  Ðshow€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€Appellant€is€not€entitled€toÐ    Ðrelief€on€this€issue.Ð ð  ÐÌà ` àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.Ð Ðp ÐÌà ` àÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ð "0 Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÐ ˆ#( ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:Ð h' ÐÌÌÌ___________________________________Ð H+è!# ÐDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JudgeÐ @,à"$ ÐÌÌ___________________________________Ð (/È%' ÐNORMA€McGEE€OGLE,€Judge