ÿWPC§0 o’zÅžÅM_'Ølòkü)qÄei™@8ß>iÒ@9M”kî7/ðó í@æ©L¾löÀzù/`âuZÿCâߤ‹A÷-p¸’–FpãÕuohæç:ˆi•»M£CôLDç-ê+P·M ÿÿ(_13Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;M ÿÿ(_12Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8M ÿÿ(_11Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5M ÿÿ(_10Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ói) Ý ƒR‡{$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôîÝò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSince€the€defendants€do€not€specify€which€of€these€alleged€improper€statements€they€objected€to€and€whichÐ ° Ðthey€did€not,€we€shall€do€so. Ý ƒR‡{$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôîÝò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€defendantððs€name€is€spelled€ð ðMartiniqueðð€in€the€indictment.€€Although€the€technical€record€contains€aÐ ° Ðmotion€by€the€State€to€amend€the€indictment€to€correct€the€spelling€to€ð ðMartinek,ðð€the€record€does€not€contain€an€orderÐ tÄ Ðgranting€this€motion.€€However,€since€this€spelling€is€utilized€in€the€judgments,€we€utilize€it€in€this€opinion.- ù- ! ÿÿ35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(|G2‡{$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Re»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôîÝò»»Ô d(|3G$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Re»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Re»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK(ÍO$——ÔÿÔòòóóÔÿÔÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Re»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Re»»»ÔÑ8€ IXXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îW”ReÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Re»îîW” #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àApril€9,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X IX»¼ReÔÌò òÔ#†¼Re»XX I#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€JERRY€SIMMONS€and€Ð úJ ÐCATHERINE€MARTINEKÔ‡X IX»¼ReÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Hickman€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNos.€99„5071CRA„I,€99„5071CRB„I€€€€€€Donald€P.€Harris,€JudgeÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„00194„CCA„R3„CD€Ô_Ô„€Filed€October€21,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÔ_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡X IXXX IÔThe€defendants,€Jerry€Simmons€and€Catherine€Martinek,€were€tried€for€four€counts€of€distributionÐ ŒÜ Ðof€obscene€material,€a€Class€A€misdemeanor,€in€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„902.€€EachÐ xÈ Ðwas€convicted€of€all€four€offenses,€sentenced€to€concurrent€suspended€sentences€of€eleven€months,Ð d´ Ðtwenty„nine€days,€and€Simmons€was€ordered€to€pay€a€fine€of€$2500€in€each€count.€€Each€appealed,Ð P  Ðalleging,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€three€of€the€videotapes€were€not€obscene;€that€the€trial€court€improperlyÐ <Œ Ðadmitted€check€receipts€into€evidence;€that€the€prosecutorððs€final€arguments€were€so€improper€as€toÐ (x Ðconstitute€reversible€error;€that€the€court€improperly€instructed€the€jury;€and€that€the€proof€was€notÐ d Ðsufficient€to€sustain€the€convictions.€€Additionally,€Martinek€argued€that€she€was€convicted€of€crimesÐ P Ðfor€which€she€was€not€indicted.€€As€to€Martinek,€we€affirm€the€Ô_ÔconvictionÔ_Ô€as€to€Ô_ÔoneÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€of€the€videotapes,Ð ì< Ðbut€reverse€the€Ô_ÔconvictionsÔ_Ô€as€to€the€Ô_Ôthree€remainingÔ_Ô€Ô_Ôvideotapes,Ô_Ô€the€proof€being€insufficient€as€toÐ Ø( Ðher€having€actual€knowledge€of€Ô_ÔtheirÔ_Ô€obscene€nature.€€Additionally,€we€reverse€all€four€of€theÐ Ä Ðconvictions€as€to€Simmons,€the€proof€being€insufficient€that€he€had€knowledge€of€the€obscene€natureÐ ° Ðof€the€videotapes.€As€to€the€reversed€convictions€of€both€defendants,€we€dismiss€the€indictments.Ô#†X IXXX I#ÔÔ#†¼Re»XX I®#ÔÔ‡X IX»¼ReÔÐ œì ÐÓ ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed€in€Part€andÐ t Ä ÐReversed€and€Dismissed€in€Partó óÐ `!°  ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Re»àX I_ #ÔÔ‡X IX.¼ReÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoe€G.€Rileyóó€and€òòNorma€McGeeÐ 8#ˆ" ÐOgle,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð $$t# ÐÌH.€Louis€Sirkin€and€Jennifer€M.€Kinsley,€Cincinnati,€Ohio;€John€E.€Herbison,€Nashville,€Tennessee,Ð ü%L!% Ðfor€the€appellants,€Jerry€Simmons€and€Catherine€Martinek;€and€Mitchell€B.€Dugan,€Dickson,Ð è&8"& ÐTennessee€(at€trial),€for€appellant€Martinek.Ð Ô'$#' ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Mark€A.€Fulks,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ¬)ü$) ÐRonald€L.€Davis,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Lee€E.€Dryer,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,Ð ˜*è%* Ðfor€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð „+Ô&+ ÐÓO ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Re»XX I~ #ÔÔ‡X IX»¼ReÔÐ \-¬(-ý ЇÔ_Ôò òòòFACTSóóó óÔ_ÔÐ ° ÐòòóóÔ#†¼Re»XX Ià#ÔÓ  ÓÔ_ÔÔ€X IX»¼ReÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÔ_ÔÌà  àThis€appeal€resulted€from€the€prosecution€on€misdemeanor€obscenity€charges€of€JerryÐ ˆØ ÐSimmons,€the€apparent€owner,€and€Catherine€Martinek,׃$×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€a€clerk,€at€I„40€East€Books€and€NoveltiesÐ tÄ Ðin€Hickman€County.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€Stateððs€first€witness€was€Randel€B.€Totty,€the€Hickman€County€Clerk,€who€testified€thatÐ 8 ˆ Ðone€of€the€duties€of€his€office€was€to€issue€business€licenses.€He€said€that€the€business€licenseÐ $ t Ðapplication€for€I„40€East€Books€and€Novelties€had€been€signed€by€Jerry€B.€Simmons.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àJohn€Edward€Brown,€Jr.€testified€that€he€was€employed€by€the€district€attorneyððs€office€forÐ è 8  Ðthe€Twenty„First€Judicial€District€and,€formerly,€had€been€a€police€officer.€€He€said€that€he€had€firstÐ Ô$  Ðvisited€I„40€East€Books€and€Novelties€on€February€12,€1999,€and€described€the€store€and€its€contents:Ð À  ÐÌÓ*°,XƒX× –X°œX*ÓÔ_ÔÔ_Ôà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à × àAnd€tell€us€what€was€in€the€inside€of€the€store,€describe€it€for€us.Иè ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à × àWell,€as€soon€as€you€walk€into€the€store,€to€your€left€thereððsÐ pÀ Ðgoing€to€be€a€counter€that€kind€of€sits€maybe€a€half€a€foot€up€from€theÐ \¬ Ðground€to€the€left,€and€to€the€right€you€would€see€numerous€aisles€ofÐ H˜ Ðbooks,€magazines,€and€on€the€back€wall€youððll€see€ð!ð€in€the€far€corner,Ð 4„ Ðyouððll€just€see€different€types€of€sexual€toys,€games€of€that€nature.€Ð  p ÐBack€behind€the€counter€you€would€find€things€like€whips,€maybe€ð!ðÐ  \ Ðmaybe€handcuffs€and€things€of€that€nature.€Itððs€just€differentÐ øH Ðmagazines€and€videotapes€throughout€the€store.Ðä4` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à × àWhat€were€on€the€covers€of€some€of€the€magazines€andÐ ¼  Ðvideotapes?Шø` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à × àOn€most€of€the€covers€it€depicts€just€sexual€intercourse,€beingÐ €Ð Ðanal,€oral,€and€vaginal€between€multi„cultural€people,€male€andÐ l¼ Ðfemale,€male€on€male,€female€on€female,€things€of€that€natureÐ X ¨ Ðthroughout€the€store.ÐD!”` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à × àWere€there€ever€any€pictures€or€covers€of€these€particular€videosÐ #l! Ðor€magazines€depicting€the€expulsion€of€bodily€fluids€onto€anotherÐ $X" Ðperson?Ðô$D #` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à × àYes.€€You€would€see€on€some€tapes€there€was€semen€depicted,Ð Ì&"% Ðyou€know,€on€females,€that€I€recall.и'#&` x` x Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à × àNow,€were€there€any,€like,€separate€rooms€in€the€bookstore?а` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à × àInitially,€yes,€there€were,€and€on€this€date,€there€were€four€littleÐ ˆØ Ðviewing€booths€to€the€left€of€the€counter,€to€the€far€left€of€the€counter.€Ð tÄ ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ôà  àBrown€testified€that€he€had€purchased€the€videotape€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Partyðð€Ð L œ Ðon€February€12,€1999,€from€the€defendant,€Catherine€Martinek,€who€was€working€as€a€clerk€that€dayÐ 8 ˆ Ðat€I„40€East€Books€and€Novelties.€€The€videotape€was€entered€into€evidence€and€played€for€the€jury.€Ð $ t ÐAdditionally,€the€prosecution€played€for€the€jury€an€audiotape€of€Brownððs€conversation€withÐ  ` ÐMartinek€as€he€was€purchasing€the€videotape.€€He€testified€that€Martinek€allowed€him€to€watch€aÐ ü L  Ðportion€of€the€videotape€before€he€purchased€it.€€Additionally,€Brown€testified€that€on€February€26,Ð è 8  Ð1999,€he€purchased€the€videotape€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€at€the€store€from€the€defendant€Martinek.€HeÐ Ô$  Ðsaid€that€she€advised€him€that€the€section€of€the€store€where€the€tape€was€located€ð ðwas€the€area€whereÐ À  Ðthere€were€men€masters€and€some€women€masters.ðð€€He€had€asked€for€the€tape€by€name,€andÐ ¬ü  ÐMartinek€told€him€that€the€tape€had€come€in.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àBrown€said€that€he€had€next€been€in€the€store€on€August€3,€1999,€to€execute€a€search€warrant.Ð pÀ ÐAmong€the€items€seized€were€checks€bearing€the€signature€ð ðJerry€B.€Simmons.ðð€€Brown€said€that€heÐ \¬ Ðhad€never€seen€the€defendant€Simmons€at€the€store.Ð H˜ Ðà  àÌà  àThe€Stateððs€next€witness€was€Tim€Hawn€who,€also,€was€a€law€enforcement€officer.€€He€saidÐ  p Ðthat€Brown€had€asked€him€to€go€to€I„40€East€Books€and€Novelties,€which€he€did€in€January€1999.€Ð  \ ÐInside€the€store,€he€saw€magazine€and€video€covers€with€ð ðnude€men€and€women,ðð€and€€ð ðin€someÐ øH Ðthere€was€sexual€intercourse€and€in€others€there€was€oral€sex,€and€then€your€nudeness.ðð€€Also€in€theÐ ä4 Ðstore€were€ð ðnovelties,ðð€such€as€ð ðvibrators€and€the€different€whipsðð€and€ð ðsome€handcuffs.ðð€HawnÐ Ð  Ðtestified€that€he€had€purchased€the€videotape€ð ðPregnant€Bondageðð€from€the€defendant€Martinek.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àBilly€Wayne€Beecham€testified€that€he€had€been€hired€by€the€defendant€Simmons€and€hadÐ ”ä Ðworked€as€a€clerk€at€I„40€East€Books€since€August€24,€1998.€€He€said€that€defendant€Martinek€hadÐ €Ð Ðgiven€him€the€employment€application.€€He€said€that€the€defendant€Simmons€visited€the€store€ð ð[n]otÐ l¼ Ðmuch€at€all,ðð€and€that€Tom€Mahonen€did€the€ð ðordering€and€merchandi[s]ing.ðð€€When€asked€ifÐ X ¨ ÐSimmons€was€ð ðable€to€see€what€was€in€the€storeðð€during€his€visits,€Beecham€responded,€ð ðHe€neverÐ D!” Ðwalked€ð!ð€I€never€saw€him€browse,€personally.€€He€always€come€in,€went€to€the€office,€then€he€wouldÐ 0"€  Ðleave.ðð€€Beecham€said€that€ð ðnot€all€ofðð€the€magazines€were€of€a€sexually€explicit€nature.€€He€deniedÐ #l! Ðthat€Simmons€did€ð ðall€the€hiringðð€at€the€store€and€did€not€know€if€Simmons€ð ðinterview[ed]€people.ððÐ $X" ÐAlthough€Simmons€had€hired€him€in€August€1998,€he€had€not€known€Simmons€to€hire€anyone€sinceÐ ô$D # Ðthen.€€He€agreed€that€the€clerks€had€ð ða€limited€knowledge€of€what€was€in€the€contents€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðmerchandise.ððÐ Ì&"% ÐÌà  àBilly€Hudspeth,€Ô_ÔSr.Ô_Ô€testified€that€he€was€an€investigator€for€the€Twenty„Third€Judicial€DistrictÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€had€purchased,€on€December€14,€1998,€the€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€With€Dicksðð€from€theÐ )à$( Ðdefendant€Ô_ÔMartinek.€€He€said€that€he€had€not€viewed€the€tape€before€buying€it.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àJohn€Edward€Brown,€Jr.€was€recalled€by€the€State€and€testified€that€he€had€received€theÐ ° Ðvideotape€from€Hudspeth€and€put€it€into€the€evidence€room.€€He€said€he€was€told€by€Beecham€thatÐ œì Ðthe€defendant€Simmons€came€to€the€store€twice€a€day€on€a€daily€basis€ð ðto€change€the€till€and€makeÐ ˆØ Ðsure€that€the€employees€have€enough€money€to€make€change.ðð€€Additionally,€Beecham€said€thatÐ tÄ ÐSimmons€ð ðalso€orders€magazines€for€the€businesses€.€.€.€more€of€less,€thatððs€ð!ð€he€does€the€orderingÐ `° Ðfor€the€business€as€far€as€the€supplies,€things€of€that€nature.ðð€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àRichard€W.€Ellison,€Jr.€testified€that€he€was€a€United€States€Secret€Service€special€agent.€€HeÐ $ t Ðsaid€that€he€had€come€to€the€store€on€August€3,€1999,€when€the€search€warrant€was€executed€andÐ  ` Ðtaken€custody€of€the€computer.€€Later€he€had€downloaded€from€it€a€list€of€checks,€which€was€enteredÐ ü L  Ðinto€evidence.€€He€said€that€the€computer€had€been€in€a€locked€office€at€the€store.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àFollowing€the€testimony€of€Agent€Ellison,€the€State€rested€its€case€in€chief;€and€theÐ À  Ðdefendants,€without€presenting€proof,€did€likewise.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà@ÙÙ&ìàòòò òANALYSISó óóó€ˆÐ „Ô  ÐÌà@««ìàò òI.€€Martinek€Was€Convicted€of€Offenses€For€Which€She€Was€Not€Indictedó óˆÐ `° Ðà  àÌà  àFirst,€we€will€review€the€indictments,€the€judgments,€and€discrepancies€between€these€twoÐ 8ˆ Ðgroups.Ð $t ÐÌà  àCounts€1„5€of€Indictment€99„5071CRA„I€each€allege€that€Simmons€ð ðunlawfully€andÐ üL Ðknowingly€did€exhibit€obsceneðð€in€December€1998€(counts€1€and€2),€January€1999€(count€3),€andÐ è8 ÐFebruary€1999€(counts€4€and€5).€€Apparently,€one€or€more€words€were€omitted€from€each€of€theseÐ Ô$ Ðindictment€counts,€for€the€clauses€setting€out€the€offenses€end€with€the€word€ð ðobscene,ðð€not€Ð À Ðspecifying€the€nature€of€what€was€exhibited,€other€than€that€it€was€obscene.Ð ¬ü ÐÌà  àCounts€6„10€of€Indictment€99„5071CRA„I,€which€also€are€denominated€as€Indictment€99„Ð „Ô Ð5071CRB„I€counts,€allege€that€Simmons€and€Martinek€committed€the€offense€of€distribution€ofÐ pÀ Ðobscene€material€on€December€9,€1998€(count€6),€December€14,€1998€(count€7),€January€8,€1999Ð \ ¬ Ð(count€8),€February€12,€1999€(count€9),€and€February€26,€1999€(count€10).Ð H!˜ ÐÌà  àWhen€the€jury€was€instructed,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€trial,€as€to€the€applicable€law,€theyÐ  #p! Ðwere€charged€as€to€what€were€called€counts€1„4,€these€counts€detailed€by€the€trial€court€as€follows:€Ð  $\" Ðcount€1€(sale€of€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€with€Dicksðð€on€December€14,€1998);€count€2€(sale€of€Ð ø$H # Ðvideotape€ð ðPregnant€Bondageðð€on€January€8,€1999);€count€3€(sale€of€videotape€ð ðSkye€and€SummerððsÐ ä%4!$ ÐBondage€Partyðð€on€February€12,€1999);€and€count€4€(sale€of€videotape€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€onÐ Ð& "% ÐFebruary€26,€1999).€€Ô#†X IXXX IÃ#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔHowever,€trial€counts€1„4€are€identical€to€indictment€counts€7„10€as€to€theÐ ¼' #& Ðdefendants€named,€the€offenses,€and€the€dates,€but,€as€to€each€of€these€categories,€trial€counts€1„4€areÐ ¨(ø#' Ðdissimilar€to€indictment€counts€1„4.€€Thus,€we€presume€that€for€purposes€of€the€trial€and,€perhaps,Ð ”)ä$( Ðâ âto€keep€the€jury€from€knowing€that€the€defendants€were€named€in€other€indictment€counts,€the€trialÐ €*Ð%) Ðcourt€renamed€indictment€counts€7„10€as€trial€counts€1„4.€However,€further€discrepancies€are€createdÐ ° Ðby€the€judgments.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€judgments€for€Simmons€for€trial€counts€1„4€state€that€he€was€indicted€and€convicted€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€ð ðòòexhibitionóó€of€obscene€material.ðð€€Although€indictment€counts€1„4€charged€that€SimmonsÐ `° Ðð ðunlawfully€and€knowingly€did€exhibit€obscene,ðð€Ô#†X IXXX I÷;#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔ€the€jury€instructions,€as€to€trial€counts€1„4,€statedÐ L œ Ðthat€both€Simmons€and€Martinek€were€named€in€each€count€and€alleged,€as€to€each€count,€the€offenseÐ 8 ˆ Ðas€being€the€ð ðòòdistributionóó€of€obscene€material.ðð€€Additionally,€the€offense€dates€for€the€judgmentsÐ $ t Ðset€out€the€dates€of€their€respective€occurrences€as€being€the€dates€set€out€in€indictment€counts€6„9,Ð  ` Ðwhich€differ€from€the€dates€set€out€in€indictment€counts€7„10,€which€the€jury€was€instructed€as€beingÐ ü L  Ðthe€dates€of€the€occurrences.€€Each€of€the€judgments€as€to€Martinek€states€that€she€was€charged€andÐ è 8  Ðconvicted€for€the€distribution€of€obscene€material,€as€all€of€the€indictment€counts€against€her€alleged.€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àTo€further€complicate€matters,€the€judgments€for€Simmons€as€to€trial€counts€1„4€provide€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðindictment€counts€5„10€were€dismissed,€and€the€judgments€for€Martinek€state€that€indictment€countÐ ˜è  Ð5€was€dismissed.€€However,€she€was€not€charged€in€indictment€count€5,€although€Simmons€was.€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€taking€together€the€indictment€counts,€the€trial€counts,€and€the€judgments,€itÐ \¬ Ðappears,€superficially,€that€Simmons€and€Martinek€were€both€convicted€of€charges€for€which€theyÐ H˜ Ðwere€not€indicted.€€However,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court,€so€that€the€jury€would€not€be€aware€thatÐ 4„ Ðadditional€indictment€counts€existed,€renamed€indictment€counts€7„10€as€trial€counts€1„4.€€AfterÐ  p ÐSimmons€and€Martinek€were€convicted€of€these€counts€and€the€judgment€forms€were€being€prepared,Ð  \ Ðthe€offense€dates€alleged€in€indictment€counts€6„9€mistakenly€were€utilized,€rather€than€those€inÐ øH Ðindictment€counts€7„10,€as€the€jury€had€been€instructed€and€returned€their€verdicts.Ô#†X IXXX Iå?#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ ä4 ÐÌà  àOnly€Martinek€alleges€on€appeal€that€she€was€convicted€of€charges€for€which€she€was€notÐ ¼  Ðindicted.€€We€note€that€her€claim€was€not€raised€following€the€convictions€or€in€the€defendantsððÐ ¨ø Ðmotions€for€new€trial.€€We€decline€to€consider€this€assignment€as€ð ðplain€error,ðð€because€the€recordÐ ”ä Ðis€silent€as€to€why€Martinek€was€indicted€for€certain€counts,€yet€convicted€of€others.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð €Ð ÐAdkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€626,€641-42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)€(the€record€must€clearly€establish€whatÐ l¼ Ðoccurred€in€the€trial€court).€€The€State€suggests€that€the€indictment€counts€7„10,€were€renumberedÐ X ¨ Ðfor€trial€as€counts€1„4;€and,€as€we€have€stated,€this€seems€to€be€a€likely€explanation€for€theÐ D!” Ðdiscrepancy.€€Ô#†X IXXX IÝG#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ 0"€  ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€we€find€this€assignment€was€waived€because€it€was€not€presented€in€the€motionÐ $X" Ðfor€new€trial.Ð ô$D # Ðà  àÌÌÌÌà@  ìàò òII.€€As€a€Matter€of€Law€Three€of€the€Videotapes€Are€Not€Obsceneó óˆÐ )à$( Ðâ âà  àÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àThe€defendants€were€indicted€for€allegedly€violating€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„Ð ° Ðâ â17„902(a),€a€Class€A€misdemeanor,€which€provides€in€pertinent€part:€à  àÐ œì ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àIt€is€unlawful€to€knowingly€produce,€send€or€cause€to€be€sent,€orÐ tÄ Ðbring€or€cause€to€be€brought,€into€this€state€for€sale,€distribution,Ð `° Ðexhibition€or€display,€or€in€this€state€to€prepare€for€distribution,Ð L œ Ðpublish,€print,€exhibit,€distribute,€or€offer€to€distribute,€or€to€possessÐ 8 ˆ Ðwith€intent€to€distribute€or€to€exhibit€or€offer€to€distribute€any€obsceneÐ $ t Ðmatter,€or€to€do€any€of€the€aforementioned€with€any€matter€foundÐ  ` Ðlegally€obscene€that€violates€the€requirements€of€18€U.S.C.€ðð€2257.Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌÓ9°,XƒX× N h•X°,XƒX× –X9Óà  àð ðObsceneðð€is€defined€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„901(10)€as€follows:Ð Ô$  Ðà  àà ` àà × àÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(A)à × àThe€average€person€applying€contemporary€community€standardsÐ ¬ü  Ðwould€find€that€the€work,€taken€as€a€whole,€appeals€to€the€prurientÐ ˜è  Ðinterest;Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(B)à × àThe€average€person€applying€contemporary€community€standardsÐ \¬ Ðwould€find€that€the€work€depicts€or€describes,€in€a€patently€offensiveÐ H˜ Ðway,€sexual€conduct;€andÐ4„` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(C)à × àThe€work,€taken€as€a€whole,€lacks€serious€literary,€artistic,Ð  \ Ðpolitical,€or€scientific€value.ÐøH` x` x ÐÌà  àð ðSexual€conductðð€is€defined€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„901(14)€as:Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àà8 × àà N àÐ × ×  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(A)à × àPatently€offensive€representations€or€descriptions€of€ultimateÐ ¨ø Ðsexual€acts,€normal€or€perverted,€actual€or€simulated.€€A€sexual€act€isÐ ”ä Ðsimulated€when€it€depicts€explicit€sexual€activity€which€gives€theÐ €Ð Ðappearance€of€ultimate€sexual€acts,€anal,€oral€or€genital.€€"UltimateÐ l¼ Ðsexual€acts"€means€sexual€intercourse,€anal€or€otherwise,€fellatio,Ð X ¨ Ðcunnilingus€or€sodomy;€orÐD!”` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(B)à × àPatently€offensive€representations€or€descriptions€ofÐ #l! Ðmasturbation,€excretory€functions,€and€lewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals.Ð$X"` x` x ÐÌà  àIn€their€reply€brief,€the€defendants€argue€that€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„Ð à%0!$ Ð901(14)(B),€one€of€the€two€alternative€definitions€for€ð ðsexual€conduct,ðð€is€to€be€read€in€theÐ Ì&"% Ðconjunctive€rather€than€the€disjunctive:Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAt€the€crux€of€Defendantsðð€claim€is€whether€language€in€the€definitionÐ )à$( Ðof€sexual€conduct€requiring€ð ð[p]atently€offensive€representations€orÐ |*Ì%) Ðdescription€of€masturbation,€excretory€functions,€ò òandó ó€lewd€exhibitionÐ h+¸&* Ðof€the€genitalsðð€should€be€read€in€the€conjunctive€or€the€disjunctive.Ð ° Ð.€.€.€€Although€the€trial€court€read€the€definition€in€the€disjunctive€toÐ œì Ðrequire€only€one€of€the€three€(3)€enumerated€activities,€the€State€hasÐ ˆØ Ðadmitted€that€ð ðthe€second€definition€of€sexual€conduct€requiresÐ tÄ Ðpatently€offensive€representations€or€descriptions€of€all€three€acts,€i.e.Ð `° Ðmasturbation,€excretory€function,€and€lewd€exhibition€of€theÐ L œ Ðgenitals.ðð€€Brief€of€the€State€of€Tennessee,€p.€12.€€As€such,€the€videosÐ 8 ˆ Ðin€question€can€only€be€declared€obscene€as€a€matter€of€law€if€theyÐ $ t Ðdepict€either:€€(1)€ultimate€sexual€acts€as€defined€by€the€statute,€or€(2)Ð  ` Ðmasturbation,€excretory€function,€ò òandó ó€lewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals.Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌà  àUtilizing€this€analysis,€the€defendants€argue€that€their€convictions€based€upon€the€videotapesÐ Ø(  Ðð ðPregnant€Bondage,ðð€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diary,ðð€and€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Partyðð€cannot€stand,Ð Ä  Ðbecause,€by€their€view,€these€tapes€neither€portray€ultimate€sexual€acts€nor€a€combination€ofÐ °  Ðmasturbation,€excretory€functions,€and€lewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals.€€The€State€asserts€that€theÐ œì  Ðtapes€are€obscene.€€To€resolve€these€opposing€claims,€we€will€review€in€detail€the€three€questionedÐ ˆØ  Ðvideotapes.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€State€concurs€with€the€defendants€on€appeal,€as€do€we,€that€this€definition€must€be€readÐ Lœ Ðin€the€conjunctive.€€The€analysis€which€we€utilize€for€this€conclusion€is€explained€in€òòState€v.€Odomóó,Ð 8ˆ Ð64€S.W.3d€370,€372€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2001):Ð $t ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àThe€issue€before€this€Court€is€essentially€one€of€statutoryÐ üL Ðconstruction.€€"The€most€basic€principle€of€statutory€construction€isÐ è8 Ðto€ascertain€and€give€effect€to€the€legislative€intent€without€undulyÐ Ô$ Ðrestricting€or€expanding€a€statute's€coverage€beyond€its€intendedÐ À Ðscope."€€òòOwens€v.€Stateóó,€908€S.W.2d€923,€926€(Tenn.€1995).€€ThisÐ ¬ü ÐCourt€is€to€determine€legislative€intent€"from€the€natural€and€ordinaryÐ ˜è Ðmeaning€of€the€statutory€language€within€the€context€of€the€entireÐ „Ô Ðstatute€without€any€forced€or€subtle€construction€that€would€extend€orÐ pÀ Ðlimit€the€statute's€meaning."€€òòState€v.€Flemmingóó,€19€S.W.3d€195,€197Ð \ ¬ Ð(Tenn.€2000).€€Moreover,€the€legislature€has€provided€that€criminalÐ H!˜ Ðstatutes€are€to€"be€construed€according€to€the€fair€import€of€theirÐ 4"„  Ðterms,€including€reference€to€judicial€decisions€and€common€lawÐ  #p! Ðinterpretations,€to€promote€justice,€and€effect€the€objectives€of€theÐ  $\" Ðcriminal€code."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-11-104;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.Ð ø$H # ÐOwensóó,€20€S.W.3d€634,€640€(Tenn.€2000).€€The€Court€"will€not€applyÐ ä%4!$ Ða€particular€interpretation€to€a€statute€if€that€interpretation€would€yieldÐ Ð& "% Ðan€absurd€result."€€òòFlemmingóó,€19€S.W.3d€at€197.м' #&` x` x ÐÌÌà  àApplying€these€principles€of€statutory€construction€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„Ð €*Ð%) Ð17„901(14)(B),€we€conclude€that€the€phrase€is€to€be€read€in€the€conjunctive,€meaning€thatÐ l+¼&* Ðð ðmasturbation€[and]€excretory€functions€and€lewd€exhibition€of€the€genitalsðð€all€must€be€depictedÐ ° Ðor€described€in€a€patently€offensive€way.€€Thus,€unless€the€videotapes€ð ðPregnant€Bondage,ðð€ð ðSkyeÐ œì Ðand€Summerððs€Bondage€Party,ðð€and€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€contain€representations€of€each,€their€salesÐ ˆØ Ðcannot€result€in€violations€of€the€obscenity€law.€Ð tÄ ÐÔ#†X IXXX I•K#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÌà  àWe€now€will€determine€whether,€as€a€matter€of€law,€these€videotapes€are€obscene.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThe€videotape€ð ðPregnant€Bondageðð€utilizes€two€actresses,€one€the€ð ðmasterðð€and€the€other€theÐ $ t Ðð ðslave.ðð€€The€ð ðmasterðð€lightly€whips€the€ð ðslave,ðð€drips€candle€wax€onto€her€breasts,€spanks€her,Ð  ` Ðplaces€clothespins€on€her€nipples,€and€ties€her€to€the€wall.€€The€ð ðslaveððsðð€genital€area€is€exposed€asÐ ü L  Ðshe€is€sitting€or€standing.€€On€multiple€occasions,€the€ð ðmasterðð€squirts€milk€from€her€breasts€onto€theÐ è 8  Ðð ðslave,ðð€and,€also,€on€multiple€occasions,€touches€or€lightly€taps€the€handle€of€a€whip€to€various€partsÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€ð ðslaveððsðð€body,€including€her€genital€area.€€The€State€argues€on€appeal,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€thisÐ À  Ðvideotape€is€obscene€because€it€contains€ð ðpatently€offensive€representations€of€masturbation,Ð ¬ü  Ðexcretory€functions,€and€lewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals;€and€patently€offensive€representations€ofÐ ˜è  Ðcunnilingus.ððÐ „Ô  Ðà  àÌà  àWe€disagree€with€certain€of€the€Stateððs€assertions€as€to€this€tape.€€First,€breast€milk€is€not€aÐ \¬ Ðð ðwaste€product,ðð€as€the€State,€in€its€brief,€defines€an€ð ðexcretion.ðð€€Rather,€milk€is€a€secretion€and,Ð H˜ Ðtherefore,€is€not€the€product€of€an€ð ðexcretory€functionðð€as€the€phrase€is€utilized€in€the€statute.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€TheÐ 4„ ÐState€also€argues€that€the€videotape€contains€ð ðindecent€and€lustful€exhibitions€of€the€genitals,ðð€notÐ  p Ðutilizing€the€statutory€requirement€that€there€be€a€ð ðlewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals.ðð€€Here,€the€ð ðslaveððÐ  \ Ðis€wearing€panties€pulled€tight€or€sometimes€simply€is€naked,€although€bound€or€in€a€cage,€and€herÐ øH Ðgenital€area,€in€the€latter€situations,€is€displayed€as€normally€would€occur€when€she€stands€or€sits.Ð ä4 ÐThus,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€display€is€ð ðlewd,ðð€as€that€word€is€used€in€the€statute.€€However,Ð Ð  Ðan€act€of€cunnilingus,€either€actual€or€simulated,€and€of€about€five€seconds€duration,€occurs€whileÐ ¼  Ðthe€ð ðslaveðð€is€wearing€brief€panties,€with€the€perspective€from€behind€the€ð ðmaster.ðð€€Because€of€thisÐ ¨ø Ðactual€or€simulated€ð ðultimate€sexual€act,ðð€we€conclude€that€the€videotape€is€obscene,€as€defined€byÐ ”ä ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„901(14)(A).€€However,€since€only€a€few€seconds€of€thisÐ €Ð Ðlengthy€videotape€contain€an€ð ðultimate€sexual€act,ðð€we€further€conclude€that€the€videotape€is€onlyÐ l¼ Ðmarginally€obscene.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€videotape€depicts€a€secretary€as€she€is€disrobed€in€her€office€by€a€manÐ 0"€  Ðand€taken€to€a€cell€where€she€is€blindfolded€and,€later,€tied€to€a€wooden€device.€€There€appears€to€beÐ #l! Ða€very€brief€act€of€actual€or€simulated€cunnilingus,€although€the€lighting€conditions€on€the€videotapeÐ $X" Ðare€very€poor.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€this€videotape€is€obscene,€as€defined€by€TennesseeÐ ô$D # Ðâ âCode€Annotated€section€39„17„901(14)(A),€because€it€depicts€an€actual€or€simulated€ð ðultimate€sexualÐ à%0!$ Ðact.ðð€€We,€likewise,€conclude€that€this€videotape,€while€ð ðobscene,ðð€is€only€marginally€so,€becauseÐ ° Ðthe€brief€ð ðultimate€sexual€actðð€is€only€a€few€seconds€of€a€lengthy€tape.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€videotape€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Partyðð€depicts€two€females,€with€one€drippingÐ tÄ Ðcandle€wax€onto€the€otherððs€breasts,€tickling€her€feet,€feeding€her,€and€then€lightly€whipping€her€withÐ `° Ðwhat€appear€to€be€long€flexible€pieces€of€candy,€pouring€chocolate€syrup€onto€her,€sprinkling€herÐ L œ Ðwith€what€appears€to€be€powdered€sugar,€and,€finally,€wrapping€her€first€in€clear€and€then€in€yellowÐ 8 ˆ Ðplastic€wrap.€€The€videotape€contains€four€acts,€each€approximately€one€second€in€length,€of€actualÐ $ t Ðor€simulated€cunnilingus.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€videotape€is€obscene,€as€defined€byÐ  ` ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„901(14)(A),€because€it€depicts€an€actual€or€simulatedÐ ü L  Ðð ðultimate€sexual€act.ðð€€We€further€conclude,€however,€that€this€videotape€may€only€marginally€beÐ è 8  Ðconsidered€obscene€for,€as€with€the€two€videotapes€we€previously€considered,€the€ð ðultimate€sexualÐ Ô$  Ðactsðð€are€of€only€a€few€seconds€duration€in€a€lengthy€videotape.€€Further,€in€none€of€these€threeÐ À  Ðvideotapes€is€the€ð ðultimate€sexual€actðð€the€dominant€theme.à p àà È àÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà@û û ìàò òIII.€€Admission€of€Check€Register€into€Evidenceó óˆÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€Simmons€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€into€evidence€aÐ \¬ Ðð ðRegister€Reportðð€taken€from€the€hard€drive€of€a€computer€which€had€been€seized€during€theÐ H˜ Ðexecution€of€the€search€warrant€at€I„40€East€Books.€€He€claims€on€appeal€that€ð ðcheck€register€recordsÐ 4„ Ðshould€not€have€been€admitted€into€evidence€because€they€were€not€properly€identified€as€businessÐ  p Ðrecords€by€the€records€custodian€or€other€witness€with€knowledge€of€their€origin,€they€were€notÐ  \ Ðauthenticated,€and€their€prejudice€to€Mr.€Simmons€outweighed€any€probative€value€they€may€haveÐ øH Ðhad€in€this€case.ðð€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àThis€issue€arose€in€the€trial€court€during€the€testimony€of€Richard€W.€Ellison,€Jr.€as€he€wasÐ ¼  Ðtestifying€regarding€the€execution€of€the€search€warrant€at€I„40€East€Books€on€August€3,€1999.€€TheÐ ¨ø Ðdefense€objected€that€records€taken€from€the€hard€drive€of€a€seized€computer€were€not€admissibleÐ ”ä Ðbecause€such€records€were€hearsay€and€irrelevant,€and€there€was€no€proof€of€ð ðwho€put€that€into€theÐ €Ð Ðcomputer€or€who€was€in€charge€of€that€computer.ðð€€The€State€argued€that€the€records€were€admissibleÐ l¼ Ðto€show€that€Simmons€ð ðwas€not€only€the€owner,€but€actually€drawing€a€salaryðð€and€that€the€namesÐ X ¨ Ðof€some€of€the€video€titles€and€of€the€sellers€were€relevant€to€demonstrate€that€items€ð ðof€an€off„colorÐ D!” Ðnature€would€be€sold€in€the€store.ðð€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àAfter€hearing€extended€arguments€on€this€matter,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€the€records,€up€toÐ $X" Ðð ðthe€last€date€that€the€store€was€entered,ðð€would€be€admitted€into€evidence.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€State€has€argued€that€the€defendant€waived€this€issue€because€the€record€on€appeal€doesÐ Ì&"% Ðnot€include€a€stipulation€regarding€this€register.€€However,€defense€counsel€disputed€thisÐ ¸'#& Ðcharacterization€as€the€matter€was€being€argued€in€the€trial€court;€and€the€stipulation€was€neitherÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmade€an€exhibit,€nor,€apparently,€reviewed€by€the€trial€court.€€Further,€the€trial€court€did€not€appearÐ )à$( Ðto€rely€upon€the€stipulation€in€ruling€that€a€portion€of€the€records€was€admissible.€€Accordingly,€weÐ |*Ì%) Ðdo€not€conclude€that€this€issue€was€waived€by€the€defense.€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àTennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€801(c)€provides€that€ð ððð[h]earsayðð€is€a€statement,€other€than€oneÐ ° Ðmade€by€the€declarant€while€testifying€at€the€trial€or€hearing,€offered€in€evidence€to€prove€the€truthÐ œì Ðof€the€matter€asserted.ðð€€Here,€the€records€which€the€State€sought€to€introduce€were€a€list€of€checksÐ ˆØ Ðtaken€from€a€computer€hard€drive€from€I„40€East€Books,€the€list€setting€out€dates,€amounts€andÐ tÄ Ðpayees.€Arguing€that€the€records€were€relevant€to€show€the€length€of€Jerry€Simmonsðð€involvementÐ `° Ðin€the€business,€as€well€as€to€prove€that€he€was€an€employee,€the€State€asserted€at€trial€that€theÐ L œ Ðprobative€value€of€the€records€outweighed€their€prejudicial€value.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àRecords€seized€pursuant€to€a€search€warrant€may€be€admitted€for€purposes€other€than€to€proveÐ  ` Ðthe€truth€of€the€matters€asserted€therein.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Jaramillo„Suarezóó,€950€F.2d€1378,Ð ü L  Ð1382„83€(9th€Cir.€1991)€(ð ðpay/oweðð€sheet€seized€from€apartment€admissible€ð ðfor€the€specific€andÐ è 8  Ðlimited€purpose€of€showing€the€character€and€use€of€the€San€Juan€Capistrano€apartmentðð€that€wasÐ Ô$  Ðobject€of€search€warrant);€òòUnited€States€v.€Wilsonóó,€532€F.2d€641,€645„46€(8th€Cir.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€429Ð À  ÐU.S.€846,€97€S.€Ct.€128,€50€L.€Ed.€2d€117€(1976)€(seized€drug€ledgers€were€admissible€asÐ ¬ü  Ðcircumstantial€evidence€ð ðthat€the€apartment€was€being€used€for€drug€traffickingðð).€òòóó€Here,€seeking€toÐ ˜è  Ðuse€the€contents€of€the€records€as€true,€the€State€argued€that€the€records€were€relevant€to€establish€thatÐ „Ô  ÐSimmons€owned€the€business€and€was€drawing€a€salary.€€For€this€purpose,€the€records€clearly€wereÐ pÀ Ðhearsay€and,€thus,€inadmissible€absent€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule.€Ô#†X IXXX Iój#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€normal€route€for€admission€of€the€check€register€would€be€as€a€business€record€whichÐ 4„ Ðthe€defense€argued,€at€trial€and€on€appeal,€was€not€available€because€the€State€did€not€make€theÐ  p Ðrequired€showing€that€these€were€business€records.€€This€court€explained€in€òòState€v.€Carrollóó,€36Ð  \ ÐS.W.3d€854,€867„68€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999),€the€requisite€showing€for€application€of€the€businessÐ øH Ðrecords€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule:€€€€€€€€€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[T]he€State€was€required€to€establish€the€following€prerequisites€toÐ ¼  Ðapplication€of€the€business€records€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule:€€(1)Ð ¨ø Ðthe€records€"custodian€or€other€qualified€witness"€must€testify;€(2)€theÐ ”ä Ðrecord€must€have€been€made€at€or€near€the€time€of€the€event,€act,€orÐ €Ð Ðcondition;€(3)€a€person€with€personal€knowledge€of€the€recorded€eventÐ l¼ Ðmust€have€transmitted€the€information;€(4)€this€person€must€haveÐ X ¨ Ðpossessed€a€business€duty€to€record€the€information;€and€(5)€theÐ D!” Ðrecord€must€have€been€made€and€kept€in€the€regular€course€ofÐ 0"€  Ðbusiness.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€803(6).€€òòSee€generallyóó€Neil€P.€Cohen,€et€al.,Ð #l! ÐòòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ðð€803(6)€(3d€ed.€1995).€€Ð$X"` x` x ÐÌà  àHere,€no€such€showing€was€made,€although€we€recognize€the€unlikelihood€that€a€businessÐ à%0!$ Ðfrom€which€records€were€seized€by€law€enforcement€officers€subsequently€would€cooperate€so€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðseized€records€could€be€admitted€into€evidence€in€a€Ô_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ôprosecution.Ô_Ô€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àA€determination€by€the€trial€court€whether€evidence€is€hearsay€and,€if€so,€admissible€pursuantÐ )à$( Ðto€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule,€is€subject€to€an€abuse€of€discretion€analysis.€€òòState€v.€Stoutóó,€46Ð |*Ì%) ÐS.W.3d€689,€697€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€__€U.S.€__,€122€S.€Ct.€471,€151€L.€Ed.€2d€386€(2001).€€WeÐ h+¸&* Ðconclude€that€the€ð ðcheck€registerðð€was€hearsay€and€not€admissible€through€an€exception€to€theÐ ° Ðhearsay€rule.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€this€evidence.€à x àÐ œì Ðà  àÌà@ ìàò òIV.€€Waiver€of€Prosecutorial€Misconduct€Claimó óˆÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€presented€their€claim€of€prosecutorial€misconduct,€concentrated€primarily€onÐ L œ Ðthe€Stateððs€closing€arguments,€and€the€State€responded,€on€appeal,€that€the€defendants€had€waivedÐ 8 ˆ Ðthis€argument€by€not€presenting€it€in€their€motion€for€new€trial.€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€filed€separate€motions€for€new€trial€on€August€22,€2000;€and€the€trial€courtÐ ü L  Ðoverruled€these€motions€and€entered€its€written€orders€in€this€regard€on€December€19,€2000.€€NeitherÐ è 8  Ðof€the€orders€denying€the€motions€for€new€trial€acknowledge€the€defendantsðð€respective€amendmentsÐ Ô$  Ðto€the€motions€for€new€trial,€these€amendments€bearing€the€ð ðfiledðð€date€of€December€20,€2000.€€TheÐ À  Ðnotices€of€appeal,€filed€on€January€18,€2001,€recite€that€the€motions€for€new€trial€were€overruled€onÐ ¬ü  ÐDecember€19,€2000.€€Thus,€we€do€not€understand€the€defendantsðð€attempted€refutation€of€the€StateððsÐ ˜è  Ðresponse€that€the€prosecutorial€misconduct€claims€were€untimely.€€In€fact,€it€appears€to€be€withoutÐ „Ô  Ðquestion€that€the€defendants€sought€to€amend€their€motions€for€new€trial€the€day€after€the€trial€courtÐ pÀ Ðhad€overruled€them.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€assert,€on€appeal,€that€even€if€their€prosecutorial€misconduct€claims€wereÐ 4„ Ðuntimely€and,€thus,€waived,€this€court€still€should€consider€them€because€the€alleged€misconduct€wasÐ  p Ðso€egregious€as€to€constitute€ð ðplain€error.ðð׃#×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€specific€claims€consist€of€comments€made€duringÐ  \ Ðthe€Stateððs€opening€statement€and€closing€argument€and€are€set€out€in€the€defendantsðð€brief:Ð øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIn€short,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€this€case€is€about€a€disease,€and€thatÐ Ð  Ðdisease€is€called€obscenity.м ` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€objected€to€this€claim€made€by€the€State€in€its€opening€statement.€€The€trial€courtÐ ”ä Ðsustained€the€objection,€advising€the€jury€that€the€Stateððs€ð ðcharacterizationðð€was€ð ðimproperðð€and€thatÐ €Ð Ðthey€should€disregard€it.Ð l¼ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àNow,€as€to€Defendant€Simmons,€the€owner€of€the€business,€the€personÐ D!” Ðwho€was€behind€what€I€would€submit€to€you€is€a€criminal€enterprise[.]€Ð0"€ ` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€objected€to€this€statement,€and€the€trial€court€overruled€the€objection.Ð $X" ÐÌÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àYou€see,€when€criminal€defense€lawyers€donððt€have€a€case,€they€doÐ Ì&"% Ðone€of€three€things€or€a€combination€of€them.€€First€of€all,€they€waveÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€flag€and€talk€about€the€Constitution€in€America€and€free€choice,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðas€if€the€flag€and€the€Constitution€and€the€laws€of€our€country€onlyÐ ° Ðprotected€criminals,€only€protected€people€who€distributed€obscenity,Ð œì Ðinstead€of€us.€€The€laws€protect€us,€too.ЈØ` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€did€not€object€to€this€argument.Ð `° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThen€when€theyððre€really€desperate,€they€try€to€create€defenses€thatÐ 8 ˆ Ðarenððt€really€defenses.Ð$ t` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€did€not€object€to€this€argument.Ð ü L  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àNow€you€will€hear€the€judge€instruct€that€if€itððs€obscene,€ladies€andÐ Ô$  Ðgentlemen,€it[ððs]€a€crime.€.€.€.€€So€the€only€question€here€is€whether€orÐ À  Ðnot€itððs€obscene.Ьü ` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€did€not€object€to€this€argument.Ô#†X IXXX Iµ‘#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ „Ô  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThey€attack€me€ð!ð€I€guess€thatððs€part€of€the€job€ð!ð€they€attack€the€policeÐ \¬ Ðofficers,€they€attack€everything.€€Now,€I€donððt€blame€Mr.€Dugan€orÐ H˜ ÐMr.€Sirkin€for€doing€that,€it€just€shows€how€desperate€they€are€andÐ 4„ Ðhow€desperate€they€are€to€defend€this€material.Ð p` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€did€not€object€to€this€argument.Ô#†X IXXX Is«#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA€friend€of€mine€once€said€German€shepherds€are€great€dogs€untilÐ Ð  Ðthey€get€a€taste€of€blood,€then€they€go€out€and€hurt€somebody.€€Well,Ð ¼  Ðladies€and€gentlemen,€this€is€the€taste€of€blood,€I€would€submit€to€you,Ð ¨ø Ðperverts€and€deviants€that€would€go€into€this€store€and€buy€materialÐ ”ä Ðlike€this.€€And€I€suppose,€I€suppose,€that€you€could€say€that€ourÐ €Ð Ðcommunity€standards€allow€people€to€go€in€and€buy€stuff€like€this,€getÐ l¼ Ðtheir€hormones€all€charged€up€and€then€walk€out€into€society.€€I€donððtÐ X ¨ Ðthink€youððd€do€that,€I€certainly€hope€you€wonððt.ÐD!”` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€did€not€object€to€this€argument.Ô#†X IXXX I~­#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ #l! ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWhat€this€case€is€about€is€what€the€average€person€applying€theÐ ô$D # Ðcommunity€standards€in€this€community,€our€community,€the€twenty„Ð à%0!$ Ðfirst€judicial€district,€not€Dickson€or€Nashville€[or]€Cincinnati€or€anyÐ Ì&"% Ðother€place€like€that[.]и'#&` x` x ÐÌÌThe€defense€objected€to€this€argument€and€the€trial€court€instructed€the€State,€ð ðPlease€do€not€do€thatÐ |*Ì%) Ðagain.ððÐ h+¸&* Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWell,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€what€matters€is€what€weððre€going€toÐ ° Ðtolerate€and€what€weððre€going€to€accept€in€these€four€counties.€€AndÐ œì Ðif€youððd€like€to€accept€this,€I€suppose€you€can€acquit€them.ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àNow,€what€does€that€tell€you€about€their€case?€€When€[defenseÐ `° Ðcounsel]€try€and€do€all€these€things,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€when€theyÐ L œ Ðtry€and€mislead€us€time€and€time€again€.€.€.€[.]Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌThe€defenseððs€objection€to€this€argument€was€overruled.Ð  ` ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAs€I€said,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€defense€counsel€is€trying€to€misleadÐ è 8  Ðus,€and€I€donððt€blame€them,€I€understand€completely.€€TheyððreÐ Ô$  Ðrepresenting€their€client,€theyððre€representing€the€people€thatÐ À  Ðdistributed€this.€€But€what€does€it€tell€you€when€they€have€to€try€andÐ ¬ü  Ðinvent€defenses€outside€the€law,€when€they€have€to€talk€about€how€theÐ ˜è  ÐConstitution€protects€obscenity€when€they€know€it€doesnððt?Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€objected€to€this€argument,€saying€the€State€had€accused€defense€counsel€of€ð ðdeceivingððÐ \¬ Ðthe€jury.€€The€court€reporter€determined€that€the€prosecutor€had€not€said€ð ðdeceiving,ðð€and€the€trialÐ H˜ Ðcourt€overruled€the€objection€but€instructed€the€State€to€ð ðwatch€that.ððÐ 4„ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAnd€one€other€defense€thatððs€not€a€defense,€I€would€submit€to€you,€isÐ  \ Ðthe€fact€that€it€was€open€and€notorious€to€the€public€as€well.€€YouÐ øH Ðknow,€they€couldnððt€have€intended€to€break€the€law€because€they€hadÐ ä4 Ðthis€stuff€open.€€Well,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€I€would€submit€to€youÐ Ð  Ðthat€thatððs€not€it€at€all,€the€reason€is€they€thought€they€could€get€awayÐ ¼  Ðwith€it.€€They€thought€that€nobody€could€do€anything€about€it,€thatÐ ¨ø Ðnobody€would€prosecute€them,€for€whatever€reason.€€They€thoughtÐ ”ä Ðperhaps€they€could€hide€their€involvement,€just€like€the€checks.€€MostÐ €Ð Ðof€the€checks€were€missing€from€the€office€that€links€them€to€ð!ð€[.]Ðl¼` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€objected€to€this€statement,€and€the€trial€court€sustained€the€objection€and€instructed€theÐ D!” Ðjury€to€ð ðdisregardðð€it,€advising€the€prosecutor€ð ðif€you€do€that€again,€Iððm€going€to€have€you€sit€down.ððÐ 0"€  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAnyway,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€you€will€decide€in€this€case€what€theÐ $X" Ðcommunity€tolerates.€€You€can€decide€that€the€community€accepts€thisÐ ô$D # Ðtype€of€material€and€you€can€acquit€both€of€these€defendants€and,Ð à%0!$ Ðladies€and€gentlemen,€they€will€be€free€to€sell€this,€and€stuff€like€this,Ð Ì&"% Ðfor€as€long€as€they€like.€.€.€.€€I€would€ask€you€for€a€finding€of€guilt€.€.Ð ¸'#& Ð.€and€to€stop€them€from€distributing€materials€like€this€again.Ф(ô#'` x` x ÐÌThe€defense€did€not€object€to€this€argument.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àAs€to€these€statements€by€the€prosecutor,€the€defendants€make€several€assertions.€€They€argueÐ ° Ðthat€the€arguments€were€ð ðegregious,ðð€and€we€agree€that€some€of€them€were.€€Additionally,€they€argueÐ œì Ðthat€the€trial€court€failed€to€take€appropriate€ð ðcurative€measures,ðð€and€that€the€single€instruction€givenÐ ˆØ Ðto€the€jury€regarding€the€prosecutorððs€statements€ð ðmay€have€conveyed€the€impression€to€the€jury€thatÐ tÄ Ðthe€remaining€misconduct€was€in€fact€appropriate€and€permissible.ðð€€With€these€arguments,€weÐ `° Ðrespectfully€disagree.€€The€trial€court€did€not€hesitate€to€rule€on€defense€objections€and€take€curativeÐ L œ Ðaction€when€appropriate.€€If€the€trial€court€made€too€few€admonishments€to€the€State,€that€is€the€faultÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€the€defense€for€sitting€in€silence€during€the€majority€of€the€now„criticized€arguments.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àThe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€do€not€permit€a€defendant€who€fails€to€takeÐ ü L  Ðaction€to€prevent€an€error€then€to€profit€from€that€error:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€Supreme€Court,€Court€of€Appeals,€and€Court€of€CriminalÐ À  ÐAppeals€shall€grant€the€relief€on€the€law€and€facts€to€which€the€partyÐ ¬ü  Ðis€entitled€or€the€proceeding€otherwise€requires€and€may€grant€anyÐ ˜è  Ðrelief,€including€the€giving€of€any€judgment€and€making€of€any€order;€Ð „Ô  Ðprovided,€however,€relief€may€not€be€granted€in€contravention€of€theÐ pÀ Ðprovince€of€the€trier€of€fact.€€Nothing€in€this€rule€shall€be€construedÐ \¬ Ðas€requiring€relief€be€granted€to€a€party€responsible€for€an€error€orÐ H˜ Ðwho€failed€to€take€whatever€action€was€reasonably€available€toÐ 4„ Ðprevent€or€nullify€the€harmful€effect€of€an€error.Ð p` x` x ÐÌTenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a).Ð øH ÐÌà  àThe€problem€with€the€defendantsðð€claim€is€that€it€presupposes€the€trial€court,€òòsua€sponte,Ð Ð  Ðóóshould€have€admonished€the€prosecutor€and,€because€this€did€not€happen,€this€court€should€reverseÐ ¼  Ðthe€convictions.€€We€respectfully€disagree€that€the€trial€court€acted€improperly€with€regard€to€theÐ ¨ø Ðprosecutionððs€arguments.€€As€our€supreme€court€explained€in€òòState€v.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,Ð ”ä Ð578€(Tenn.€2000),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€533€U.S.€953,€121€S.€Ct.€2600,€150€L.€Ed.€2d€757€(2001):Ô#†X IXXX Iì°#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ €Ð ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWhile€the€trial€court€can€intervene€sua€sponte€and€take€curativeÐ X ¨ Ðmeasures€when€the€argument€becomes€blatantly€improper,€òòsee,€e.g.óó,€Ð D!” ÐòòState€v.€Cauthernóó,€967€S.W.2d€726,€737€(Tenn.€1998),€the€trial€courtÐ 0"€  Ðmust€exercise€its€discretion€and€should€not€exert€too€much€controlÐ #l! Ðover€the€arguments.€€The€judge€does€not€serve€as€a€pro€se€defendant'sÐ $X" Ðcounselor€during€trial.€€The€judge€should€intervene€only€whenÐ ô$D # Ðrequested€or€when€the€judge€deems€proper€in€the€interest€of€justice.Ðà%0!$` x` x ÐÌà  àThus,€we€decline€to€ignore€the€fact€that€the€prosecutorððs€arguments€were€not€the€subject€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðcontemporaneous€objections€and€the€issue€was€not€raised€in€the€motions€for€new€trial€and€review€thisÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmatter€as€ð ðplain€error.ðð€€Although€many€of€the€arguments€were€improper,€we€do€not€find€them€to€beÐ )à$( Ðsuch€that€they€affected€the€substantial€rights€of€the€defendants.€€òòSee€State€v.€Marshallóó,€870€S.W.2dÐ |*Ì%) Ð532,€540€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).Ð h+¸&* Їà  àThis€assignment€is€without€merit.Ð ° ÐÌà@»»ìàò òV.€€Improper€Jury€Instructionsó óˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€argue€that€the€trial€court€improperly€instructed€the€jury€(1)€by€failing€toÐ `° Ðinstruct€ð ðthat€the€phrase€ððappeals€to€the€prurient€interestðð€refers€to€the€effect€or€impact€upon€theÐ L œ Ðaverage€personðð;€(2)€by€failing€to€instruct€ð ðthat€community€standards€are€measured€by€what€isÐ 8 ˆ Ðtolerated€in€the€communityðð;€(3)€by€failing€to€instruct€ð ðthat€the€prosecution€bears€the€burden€ofÐ $ t Ðproving€that€an€identifiable€community€standard€exists,€what€it€is,€and€that€the€materials€in€questionÐ  ` Ðviolate€itðð;€(4)€by€failing€to€instruct€ð ðthat€the€defendant€must€have€actual€knowledge€of€the€materialððsÐ ü L  Ðobscenity€at€the€time€of€the€offense€to€be€convictedðð;€and€(5)€by€instructing€ð ðregarding€criminalÐ è 8  Ðresponsibility€for€conduct€of€another.ðð€€The€State€responds€that€these€claims€are€waived€because€theyÐ Ô$  Ðwere€not€raised€in€the€motions€for€new€trial;€and€that,€even€if€the€claims€were€not€waived,€the€trialÐ À  Ðcourt€properly€instructed€the€jury.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àAs€to€the€specific€charge€of€distributing€obscene€material,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€juryÐ „Ô  Ðas€follows:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àAny€person€who€knowingly€distributes€any€obscene€matter€isÐ H˜ Ðguilty€of€a€crime.€€For€you€to€find€the€defendant€guilty€of€this€offense,Ð 4„ Ðthe€state€must€have€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€the€existenceÐ  p Ðof€the€following€essential€elements:€€One,€that€the€defendantÐ  \ Ðdistributed€obscene€material;€and€two,€that€the€defendant€actedÐ øH Ðknowingly€or€intentionally,€that€is[,]€the€defendant€must€either€haveÐ ä4 Ðintended€to€distribute€obscene€material€or€have€actual€knowledge€theÐ Ð  Ðmaterial€distributed€was€obscene.м ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àIn€order€for€you€to€find€the€matter€or€material€obscene,€you€mustÐ ”ä Ðfirst€find€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€each€of€the€following€three€testsÐ €Ð Ðhave€been€met:€€(A)€The€average€person,€applying€contemporaryÐ l¼ Ðcommunity€standards,€would€find€that€the€work,€taken€as€a€whole,Ð X ¨ Ðappeals€to€the€prurient€interest;€and€(B)€The€average€person,€applyingÐ D!” Ðcontemporary€community€standards,€would€find€that€the€work€depictsÐ 0"€  Ðor€describes€sexual€conduct€in€a€patently€offensive€way,€and€à8@H8),€the€àà8@HÐ Ð àà @H à(C)€AÐ #l! Ðreasonable€person€would€find€the€work,€taken€as€a€whole,€lacksÐ $X" Ðserious€literary,€artistic,€political€or€scientific€value.Ðô$D #` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðCommunityðð€means€the€judicial€district,€here,€the€Twenty„firstÐ Ì&"% ÐJudicial€District€composed€of€Hickman,€Lewis,€Perry€and€WilliamsonÐ ¸'#& Ð[C]ounties,€in€which€the€violation€is€alleged€to€have€occurred.Ф(ô#'` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðPrurient€interestðð€means€a€shameful€or€morbid€interest€in€sex.Ð|*Ì%)` x` x ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðPatently€offensiveðð€means€that€which€goes€substantially€beyondÐ ° Ðcustomary€limits€of€candor€in€describing€or€representing€such€matters.Ðœì` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðSexual€conductðð€shall€be€construed€to€mean€patently€offensiveÐ tÄ Ðrepresentation€or€descriptions€of€ultimate€sexual€acts,€actual€orÐ `° Ðsimulated.€€A€sexual€act€is€simulated€when€it€depicts€explicit€sexualÐ L œ Ðactivity€which€gives€the€appearance€of€ultimate€sexual€acts,€anal,€oralÐ 8 ˆ Ðor€genital.€€Ð$ t` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àThe€term€ð ðultimate€sexual€actðð€shall€be€construed€to€mean€sexualÐ ü L  Ðintercourse,€anal€or€otherwise,€fellatio,€cunnilingus,€or€sodomy,€orÐ è 8  Ðpatently€offensive€representations€or€descriptions€of€masturbation,Ð Ô$  Ðexcretory€functions,€and€lewd€exhibitions€of€the€genitals.ÐÀ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðFellatioðð€means€a€sex€act€accomplished€with€the€male€sex€organÐ ˜è  Ðand€the€mouth€of€another.€€Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðCunnilingusðð€means€a€sex€act€accomplished€by€placing€theÐ \¬ Ðmouth€or€tongue€on€or€in€the€vagina€of€another.€€ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðSodomyðð€means€a€sex€act€accomplished€by€anal€intercourse€orÐ  p Ða€sex€act€between€a€person€and€an€animal.Ð \` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðMatter€or€materialðð€means€any€book,€magazine,€newspaper€orÐ ä4 Ðother€printed€or€written€material€or€any€picture,€drawing,€photograph,Ð Ð  Ðmotion€picture,€film,€video€cassette€or€other€pictorial€representationÐ ¼  Ðor€any€statue,€figure,€device,€theatrical€production€or€electricalÐ ¨ø Ðreproduction€or€any€other€article,€equipment,€machine€or€material€thatÐ ”ä Ðis€obscene.ЀÐ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àð ðDistributeðð€means€to€transfer€possession€of,€whether€with€orÐ X ¨ Ðwithout€consideration.€€ð ðConsiderationðð€is€the€inducement€to€aÐ D!” Ðcontract€and€refers€to€something€of€value€given€in€exchange.Ð0"€ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àA€person€acts€intentionally€with€respect€to€the€nature€of€his€or€herÐ $X" Ðconduct€when€it€is€the€personððs€conscious€objective€or€desire€toÐ ô$D # Ðengage€in€the€conduct.€€A€person€acts€knowingly€with€respect€to€hisÐ à%0!$ Ðor€her€conduct,€or€to€circumstances€surrounding€conduct,€when€aÐ Ì&"% Ðperson€is€aware€of€the€nature€of€the€conduct€or€that€the€circumstancesÐ ¸'#& Ðexist.Ф(ô#'` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àUse€of€the€term€ð ðaverage€personðð€means€that€you€are€to€judge€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðmaterials€not€on€the€basis€of€your€individual€taste,€preference€orÐ h+¸&* Ðopinion,€or€on€the€taste,€preference€or€opinion€of€any€other€individualÐ ° Ðperson.€€Rather,€you€must€judge€the€materials€by€the€standard€of€theÐ œì Ðhypothetical€average€adult€person€in€the€community.€€ÐˆØ` x` x ÐÌà  àWe€will€now€consider€each€of€the€assignments€directed€to€allegedly€incorrect€or€inadequateÐ `° Ðjury€instructions.Ð L œ ÐÌà@N N ìàò òA.€€Instruction€as€to€ð ðPrurient€Interestððó óˆÐ $ t ÐÌ€€€€€à0  àAs€to€the€instruction€regarding€ð ðprurient€interest,ðð€the€trial€court€instructed,€in€part,€that€oneÐü L (#(# Ðof€the€tests€for€determining€if€material€was€obscene€was€that€ð ðthe€average€person,€applyingÐ è 8  Ðcontemporary€community€standards,€would€find€that€the€work,€taken€as€a€whole,€appeals€to€theÐ Ô$  Ðprurient€interest.ðð€€Subsequently,€the€trial€court€defined€ð ðprurient€interestðð€as€ð ða€shameful€or€morbidÐ À  Ðinterest€in€sex.ðð€€We€note€that€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€by€using€the€statutory€definition€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðð ðprurient€interestðð€as€set€out€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„901(12).€€The€defendantsÐ ˜è  Ðargue,€on€appeal,€that€the€trial€court€should€have€given€one€of€their€versions€of€a€ð ðprurient€interestððÐ „Ô  Ðinstruction.€€However,€we€have€reviewed€the€authorities€cited€by€the€defendants,€as€well€as€their€twoÐ pÀ Ðproposed€instructions,€and€conclude€that€the€trial€court€correctly€instructed€the€jury€in€this€regard.Ð \¬ ÐÌà@W W ìàò òB.€€Instruction€as€to€ð ðCommunity€Standardsððó óˆÐ 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€instructing€the€jury€that€the€ð ðcommunityððÐ  \ Ðthey€should€consider€in€applying€its€standard€consisted€of€those€counties€comprising€the€Twenty„FirstÐ øH ÐJudicial€District,€these€being€ð ðHickman,€Lewis,€Perry€and€Williamson.ðð€€We€have€reviewed€theÐ ä4 Ðinstruction€given€by€the€trial€court€in€this€regard€and€the€authorities€relied€upon€by€the€defendants.Ð Ð  ÐWe€note€that,€as€to€ð ðcommunity,ðð€the€trial€court€utilized€the€statutory€definition€set€out€in€TennesseeÐ ¼  ÐCode€Annotated€section€39„17„901(2).€€Ô#†X IXXX IÀÊ#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔAccordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€correctlyÐ ¨ø Ðinstructed€the€jury€in€this€regard.Ð ”ä ÐÌà@p p ìàò òC.€€Instruction€as€to€ð ðIdentifiable€Community€Standardððó óˆÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€argue€that€the€trial€court€should€have€instructed€the€jury€as€to€what€they€wereÐ D!” Ðto€do€should€they€not€be€able€to€determine€what€the€community€standards€were.€€We€have€reviewedÐ 0"€  Ðthe€authorities€cited€by€the€defendants,€as€well€as€their€proposed€instructions€in€this€regard.€€WeÐ #l! Ðrespectfully€disagree€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€giving€the€defendantsðð€special€instruction.Ð $X" ÐÌà@÷÷ìàò òD.€€Instruction€as€to€Defendantsðð€Knowledge€of€Obscene€Nature€of€Videotapesó óˆÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€argue€that€the€trial€court€did€not€properly€instruct€the€jury€in€accord€with€theÐ ¸'#& Ðholding€of€this€court€in€òòState€v.€Pendergrassóó,€13€S.W.3d€389,€394€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999),€that€ð ðaÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdefendant€must€have€actual€knowledge€of€not€only€the€contents,€but€also€the€obscenity,€of€theÐ )à$( Ðmaterials€in€question.ðð€€The€State€responds€that€the€trial€court€instructed€properly€in€this€regard€asÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€ð ðknowinglyðð;€and€we€agree.€€The€trial€courtððs€instructions€were€taken€directly€from€TennesseeÐ h+¸&* ÐCode€Annotated€section€39„11„106(a)(20).€€Thus,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€declining€to€utilize€theÐ ° Ðdefendantsðð€proposed€jury€instruction€as€to€ð ðknowledge.ððÐ œì ÐÌà@ ìàò òE.€€Instruction€as€to€Criminal€Responsibilityó óˆÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€defendants€argue€that€ð ð[t]he€Court€in€this€case€improperly€included€what€amounts€inÐ L œ Ðsubstance€to€an€aiding€and€abetting€instructionðð€when€it€instructed€the€jury€as€to€criminalÐ 8 ˆ Ðresponsibility€for€the€conduct€of€another:Ð $ t ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àCriminal€responsibility€for€the€conduct€of€another.€€EachÐ ü L  Ðdefendant€is€criminally€responsible€as€a€party€to€the€offense€ofÐ è 8  Ðdistributing€obscene€material€if€the€offense€was€committed€by€theÐ Ô$  Ðdefendantððs€own€conduct,€by€the€conduct€of€another€for€which€theÐ À  Ðdefendant€is€criminally€responsible,€or€by€both.€€Each€party€to€theÐ ¬ü  Ðoffense€may€be€charged€with€the€commission€of€the€offense.Иè ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àA€defendant€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offense€committedÐ pÀ Ðby€the€conduct€of€another€if,€acting€with€the€intent€to€promote€orÐ \¬ Ðassist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefit€in€the€proceeds€orÐ H˜ Ðresults€of€the€offense,€the€defendant€solicits,€directs,€aids€or€attemptsÐ 4„ Ðto€aid€another€person€to€commit€the€offense.Ð p` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àBefore€you€find€a€defendant€guilty€of€being€criminallyÐ øH Ðresponsible€for€distributing€obscene€material€committed€by€theÐ ä4 Ðconduct€of€another,€you€must€find€that€all€the€essential€elements€ofÐ Ð  Ðsaid€offense€have€been€proven€by€the€state€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€Ð¼ ` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€State€responds€that€ð ð[t]he€trial€courtððs€instruction€required€the€jury€to€find€all€of€theÐ ”ä Ðelements€of€the€offense€before€returning€a€verdict€based€upon€criminal€responsibility.€ThisÐ €Ð Ðnecessarily€included€a€finding€of€knowing€conduct.ðð€€We€agree€with€the€Stateððs€analysis€of€this€issue.€Ð l¼ ÐÔ#†X IXXX I ô#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÌà@ìàò òVI.€€Cumulative€Errorsó óˆÐ D!” ÐÌà  àOur€consideration€of€the€alleged€errors€in€the€aggregate€does€not€affect€our€determinationsÐ #l! Ðin€this€matter.Ð $X" ÐÌà@ˆˆìàò òVII.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óˆÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àBoth€defendants€argue€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€sustain€their€convictions,Ð ¸'#& Ðasserting€that€the€State€did€not€present€sufficient€evidence€of€their€knowledge€that€the€videotapesÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwere€obscene.€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àÔ#†X IXXX Iw#ÔIn€considering€this€issue,€we€apply€the€familiar€rule€that€where€sufficiency€of€the€convictingÐ ° Ðâ âevidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€of€the€reviewing€court€is€€ð ðwhether,€after€viewing€theÐ œì Ðevidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€foundÐ ˆØ Ðthe€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,Ð tÄ Ð319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€560,€573€(1979);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185,Ð `° Ð190„92€(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€835€S.W.2d€600,€604€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)òòóó;€Tenn.€R.Ð L œ ÐApp.€P.€13(e)€(ð ðFindings€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€setÐ 8 ˆ Ðaside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€aÐ $ t Ðreasonable€doubt.ðð).€€All€questions€involving€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€beÐ  ` Ðgiven€the€evidence,€and€all€factual€issues€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,€754Ð ü L  ÐS.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)òòóó.€€ð ðA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,Ð è 8  Ðaccredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theoryÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€State.ðð€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€Our€supreme€court€stated€theÐ À  Ðrationale€for€this€rule:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àThis€well„settled€rule€rests€on€a€sound€foundation.€€The€trialÐ „Ô  Ðjudge€and€the€jury€see€the€witnesses€face€to€face,€hear€their€testimonyÐ pÀ Ðand€observe€their€demeanor€on€the€stand.€€Thus€the€trial€judge€andÐ \¬ Ðjury€are€the€primary€instrumentality€of€justice€to€determine€the€weightÐ H˜ Ðand€credibility€to€be€given€to€the€testimony€of€witnesses.€€In€the€trialÐ 4„ Ðforum€alone€is€there€human€atmosphere€and€the€totality€of€theÐ  p Ðevidence€cannot€be€reproduced€with€a€written€record€in€this€Court.Ð \` x` x ÐÌòòBolin€v.€Stateóó,€219€Tenn.€4,€11,€405€S.W.2d€768,€771€(1966)€(citing€òòCarroll€v.€Stateóó,€212€Tenn.€464,Ð ä4 Ð370€S.W.2d€523€(1963)).€€A€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€aÐ Ð  Ðdefendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal,€a€convictedÐ ¼  Ðdefendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639Ð ¨ø ÐS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€When€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses€was€resolved€by€the€jury€inÐ ”ä Ðfavor€of€the€State,€the€appellate€court€ð ðmay€not€reconsider€the€juryððs€credibility€assessments.ðð€òòStateÐ €Ð Ðv.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,€558€(Tenn.€2000),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€533€U.S.€953,€121€S.€Ct.€2600,€150Ð l¼ ÐL.€Ed.€2d€757€(2001).Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  à€In€our€review€as€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€we€first€note,€as€analyzed€by€this€courtÐ 0"€  Ðin€òòState€v.€Pendergrassóó,€13€S.W.3d€389,€394€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999),€the€requirements€of€theÐ #l! Ðobscenity€statutes€as€to€ð ðknowledgeðð:Ð $X" ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àWe€note€with€interest€that€the€phrase€"actual€or€constructiveÐ à%0!$ Ðknowledge"€appears€only€in€the€definitions€section€of€the€obscenityÐ Ì&"% Ðstatutes.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39-17-901€to€-911.€€Prior€to€theÐ ¸'#& Ð1989€revisions€to€the€Criminal€Code,€section€39-6-1101€defined€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðterm€"knowingly"€for€purposes€of€the€obscenity€statutes€òòto€meanóóÐ )à$( Ð"having€actual€or€constructive€knowledge€of€the€subject€matter.€€AÐ |*Ì%) Ðperson€shall€be€deemed€to€have€constructive€knowledge€of€theÐ h+¸&* Ðcontents€if€he€has€knowledge€of€facts€which€would€put€a€reasonableÐ ° Ðand€prudent€man€on€notice€as€to€the€suspect€nature€of€the€material."€Ð œì ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-6-1101€(1988)€(repealed€1989).€€SectionÐ ˆØ Ð39-6-1104,€which€defined€various€crimes€related€to€obscenity,€madeÐ tÄ Ðit€unlawful€to€"knowingly"€engage€in€certain€conduct.€€Thus,€the€priorÐ `° Ðversion€of€the€statute€incorporated€an€actual€or€constructiveÐ L œ Ðknowledge€definition€into€the€"knowing"€requirement.€€The€1989Ð 8 ˆ ÐCriminal€Code€simultaneously€established€the€sections€39-11-302(b),Ð $ t Ð-106(a)(2)€definition€of€"knowing"€and€deleted€the€special€obscenityÐ  ` Ðdefinition€of€the€term€which€encompassed€constructive€knowledge.€Ð ü L  ÐThe€legislature€declined€to€use€that€phrase€in€proscribing€theÐ è 8  Ðobscenity-related€activities.€€We€are€bound€by€the€legislature's€clearÐ Ô$  Ðand€unambiguous€choice€of€the€word€"knowingly"€in€sectionÐ À  Ð39-17-902(a)€and€the€corresponding€definition€of€"knowing"€inÐ ¬ü  Ðsections€39-11-106(a)(20)€and€-302(b).Иè ` x` x ÐÌà  àThus,€although€the€phrase€ð ðactual€or€constructive€knowledgeðð€is€defined€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ð pÀ Ððð€39„17„901(1),€but€does€not€otherwise€appear€in€the€obscenity€statutes,€the€definition€ofÐ \¬ Ðð ðknowledgeðð€which€appears€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€39„11„106(a)€must€be€utilized.€€As€explained€inÐ H˜ ÐòòPendergrassóó,€a€conviction€under€the€obscenity€statutes€requires€a€showing€of€the€defendantððs€ð ðòòactualÐ 4„ Ðknowledgeóó€of€the€proscribed€conduct.ðð€€òòóó13€S.W.3d€at€394.€€The€Stateððs€proof€in€òòPendergrassóó€did€notÐ  p Ðestablish€that€the€apparent€owner€of€the€business€had€actual€knowledge€that€it€sold€obsceneÐ  \ Ðvideotapes:à ` àÐ øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€degree€of€his€involvement€in€the€business€was€not€established.Ð Ð  ÐThere€was€no€evidence,€for€example,€that€Pendergrass€was€observedÐ ¼  Ðon€the€premises€and/or€engaged€in€activities€such€as€assistingÐ ¨ø Ðcustomers€with€purchases,€stocking€shelves,€receiving€merchandise,Ð ”ä Ðor€ordering€merchandise.ЀÐ` x` x ÐÌòòId.óó€at€395.Ð X ¨ ÐÌÔ‡X IXXX IÔà  àIn€òòPendergrassóó,€the€evidence€presented€showed€only€that€the€defendant€had€obtained€theÐ 0"€  Ðbusiness€license,€that€he€owned€the€video€store€itself€as€well€as€the€property€upon€which€the€businessÐ #l! Ðwas€located,€that€the€store€ð ðstocked€items€of€a€sexual€nature,€and€signage€on€the€building€advertisedÐ $X" Ðsuch€wares.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€394.€€While€this€proof€might€have€shown€that€Pendergrass€had€constructiveÐ ô$D # Ðknowledge€sufficient€to€sustain€a€conviction€for€violation€of€the€obscenity€laws,€it€was€insufficientÐ à%0!$ Ðto€establish€actual€knowledge,€as€required.€€Accordingly,€the€conviction€was€reversed.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àThe€evidence€presented€in€this€matter€against€the€defendant€Simmons€was€similar€to€thatÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwhich€was€determined€to€be€insufficient€in€òòPendergrassóó.€€However,€the€State€argues€in€its€brief€thatÐ )à$( Ðthis€proof€is€sufficient€to€establish€actual€knowledge€by€Simmons€and,€thus,€to€sustain€the€conviction:Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × àThe€proof€in€this€case€established€that€Simmons€applied€for€andÐ ° Ðreceived€a€business€license€to€operate€I„40€East€Books€and€Novelties.Ð œì ÐThe€proof€established€that€Simmons€was€at€least€occasionally€on€theÐ ˆØ Ðpremises,€described€by€an€employee€as€ð ðan€adult€bookstore,ðð€whichÐ tÄ Ðwas€filled€with€adult€videos,€magazines,€and€sexual€paraphernalia,Ð `° Ðincluding€vibrators,€lotions,€sexual€aids,€and€adult€toys.€€The€coversÐ L œ Ðof€the€videos€and€magazines€portrayed€explicit€sexual€conduct.€€TheÐ 8 ˆ Ðproof€also€established€that€Simmons€participated€in€the€hiring€ofÐ $ t Ðemployees,€the€ordering€of€merchandise,€[and]€the€payment€ofÐ  ` Ðinvoices.Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌà  àWhile€the€proof€was€abundant€as€to€the€fact€that€the€store€sold€sexually€oriented€items,€thereÐ Ô$  Ðwas€little€proof€of€the€involvement€of€Simmons€beyond€that€deemed€in€òòPendergrassóó€to€have€beenÐ À  Ðinsufficient€to€sustain€the€conviction.€€For€instance,€although€Billy€Wayne€Beecham€testified€that€heÐ ¬ü  Ðhad€been€hired€on€August€24,€1998,€by€Simmons,€he€did€not€say€whether€this€had€occurred€on€theÐ ˜è  Ðpremises.€€Further,€there€was€no€proof€that€Simmons€had€hired€any€employees€other€than€Beecham,Ð „Ô  Ðwho€had€been€given€the€employment€application€by€Martinek,€rather€than€Simmons.€€Not€specifyingÐ pÀ Ða€time€period€or€a€number€of€occasions,€Beecham€testified€only€that€Simmons€came€to€the€storeÐ \¬ Ðð ð[n]ot€much€at€all,ðð€that€he€ð ð[j]ust€come€[sic]€in€to€do€[the]€shift€change€occasionally,€but€he€wasÐ H˜ Ðhardly€ever€there.ððÐ 4„ ÐÌà  àWhile€the€State€is€correct€that€evidence€showed€that€Simmons€participated€to€some€extentÐ  \ Ðin€the€payment€of€invoices,€the€checks€evidencing€this€provide€little€information€as€to€his€part€in€theÐ øH Ðprocess.€€For€instance,€the€eleven€checks€of€I„40€East€Books€entered€into€evidence€cover€the€periodÐ ä4 Ðfrom€July€21,€1998,€to€August€19,€1998.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€This€period€ends€nearly€four€months€before€the€firstÐ Ð  Ðobscene€videotape€was€purchased€by€officers.€€Of€these€eleven€checks,€in€only€three€do€the€ð ðJerry€B.Ð ¼  ÐSimmonsðð€signature€and€the€name€of€the€payee€appear€to€be€in€the€same€handwriting.€€In€many€ofÐ ¨ø Ðthe€checks,€the€handwriting€as€to€the€date€and€the€payee€appears€to€be€different€from€that€of€theÐ ”ä Ðsignature.€€Further,€one€of€the€checks€was€not€signed€by€Simmons€but€appears€to€bear€the€signatureÐ €Ð Ðof€ð ðJean€Mills.ðð€€Thus,€there€is€no€proof€that€these€checks€were€not€signed€ð ðin€blank,ðð€with€theÐ l¼ Ðremainder€of€the€check€completed€later€by€another,€or€even€that€Simmons€signed€the€checks€whileÐ X ¨ Ðon€the€premises€of€I„40€East€Books.€€Although€some€of€these€checks€do€appear€to€be€for€ð ðtheÐ D!” Ðordering€of€merchandise,ðð€as€the€State€alleges,€there€is€no€proof€that€Simmons€did€other€than€signÐ 0"€  Ðthe€checks€in€blank.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àWhile€the€proof€was€abundant€that€I„40€East€Books€sold€sexually€oriented€items,€theÐ ô$D # Ðconvictions€of€Simmons€can€be€sustained€only€if€the€evidence€showed€that€he€had€actual€knowledgeÐ à%0!$ Ðof€the€contents€of€the€four€videotapes€purchased€by€law€enforcement€officers.€€As€we€have€noted,€theÐ Ì&"% Ðacts€within€the€definition€of€€ð ðobsceneðð€in€the€videotapes€ð ðPregnant€Bondage,ðð€ð ðSkye€and€SummerððsÐ ¸'#& ÐBondage€Party,ðð€and€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€last€only€a€few€seconds€of€otherwise€lengthy€videotapesÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€are€not€the€dominant€themes€of€the€videotapes.€€Thus,€the€trial€evidence€provides€no€basis€forÐ ° Ðour€concluding€that€Simmons€had€actual€knowledge€of€the€brief€ð ðultimate€sexual€actsðð€depicted€inÐ œì Ðthese€three€videotapes.€€Accordingly,€we€reverse€his€convictions€as€to€the€videotapes€ð ðPregnantÐ ˆØ ÐBondage,ðð€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Party,ðð€and€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diary,ðð€and€dismiss€the€countsÐ tÄ Ðof€the€indictment€charging€him€as€to€these.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€with€Dicksðð€is€admitted€to€be€obscene€by€counsel€for€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðdefendants.€€However,€unless€the€evidence€shows€that€Simmons€had€actual€knowledge€of€the€fact€thatÐ $ t Ðit€is€obscene,€his€conviction€for€its€distribution€cannot€be€sustained.€€Our€conclusion€that€the€evidenceÐ  ` Ðdoes€not€make€such€a€showing€is€buttressed€by€the€fact€that€the€other€three€videotapes€which€wereÐ ü L  Ðthe€bases€for€other€counts€of€the€indictment€contained€only€a€few€seconds€of€ð ðultimate€sexual€actsððÐ è 8  Ðin€otherwise€lengthy€videotapes.€€Had€other€of€the€tapes€upon€which€the€State€elected€to€proceed€beenÐ Ô$  Ðclearly€obscene,€we€might€have€concluded€differently€as€to€Simmonsðð€actual€knowledge.€€Thus,€weÐ À  Ðreverse€Simmonsðð€conviction€for€the€distribution€of€the€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€with€Dicksðð€andÐ ¬ü  Ðdismiss€the€count€of€the€indictment€as€to€it.Ô#†X IXXX I´ #ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  àWe€now€will€consider€the€sufficiency€of€the€proof€as€to€Martinek.€€However,€our€ability€toÐ pÀ Ðdo€so€is€handicapped€by€the€fact€that€the€record€on€appeal€does€not€reflect€whether€the€jurors€sawÐ \¬ Ðonly€the€videotapes,€or€both€the€tapes€and€the€boxes€containing€them.€€Each€of€the€boxes€bearsÐ H˜ Ðmultiple€images€from€the€videotape€within.€€We€note€that,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€instructions,€theÐ 4„ Ðtrial€court€advised€the€jurors€that€they€were€being€furnished€the€ð ðinstructions€and€the€documentaryÐ  p Ðexhibits.ðð€€Thus,€it€appears€that€the€jurors€did€not€take€the€boxes€containing€the€videotapes€into€theÐ  \ Ðjury€room€as€they€began€their€deliberations.€€However,€since€the€exhibit€labels€are€attached€to€theÐ øH Ðboxes€rather€than€the€videotapes,€and€the€record€appears€otherwise€to€be€silent€on€this€point,€weÐ ä4 Ðpresume,€for€the€purposes€of€our€review,€that€these€boxes€were€shown€to€the€jury€for€theirÐ Ð  Ðconsideration.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àAs€to€the€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€with€Dicks,ðð€the€defendants€assert€on€appeal€that€ð ðtheÐ ”ä ÐState€produced€no€evidence€whatsoever€to€indicate€that€Ms.€Martinique€had€knowledge€of€the€contentÐ €Ð Ðof€the€video€.€.€.€.€€[She]€neither€sold€nor€rented€the€video,€and€was€never€alleged€to€have€admittedÐ l¼ Ðto€being€aware€of€its€contents€or€existence.ðð€€We€respectfully€disagree€with€this€view€of€the€proof.€Ð X ¨ ÐBilly€Hudspeth€testified€that€he€purchased€the€videotape€from€the€defendant€Martinek€and,€duringÐ D!” Ðhis€testimony,€an€audiotape€was€played€of€his€conversation€with€Martinek€at€the€time€of€the€purchase,Ð 0"€  Ðtheir€conversation€not€including€a€reference€to€the€videotape,€however.€€The€box€cover€for€thisÐ #l! Ðvideotape€consists€of€a€number€of€photographs,€nearly€all€of€which€are€of€ultimate€sexual€acts.€€FromÐ $X" Ðall€of€this,€we€conclude€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€show€that€Martinek€had€actual€knowledge€thatÐ ô$D # Ðthe€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€with€Dicksðð€was€obscene.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAs€to€the€three€remaining€videotapes,€the€State€on€appeal€argues€that€the€proof€as€to€actualÐ ¸'#& Ðknowledge€was€sufficient€because€Martinek€sold€these€three€tapes,€and€their€covers€ð ðcontain€graphicÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdepictions€of€sadomasochistic€abuse,€masturbation,€fellatio,€and€lewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals.ðð€Ð )à$( ÐAdditionally,€the€State€notes€that€Martinek€ð ðwatched€scenes€from€ððSkye€and€Summerððs€BondageÐ |*Ì%) ÐPartyðð€and€ððThe€Dresden€Diary,€Part€Eleven€.€.€.€Endangered€Secretsðð€with€Investigator€Brown€beforeÐ h+¸&* Ðselling€them€to€him.ðð€€We€now€will€review€the€contending€claims€of€the€defendants€and€the€State€asÐ ° Ðto€these€videotapes.Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€cover€for€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Partyðð€includes€some€images€of€lewdÐ tÄ Ðexhibitions€of€the€genitals€and,€perhaps,€masturbation.€€The€cover€for€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€includesÐ `° Ðmultiple€photographs,€one€of€which,€perhaps,€depicts€masturbation.€€The€box€cover€for€ð ðPregnantÐ L œ ÐBondageðð€includes€multiple€photographs€of€a€naked,€pregnant€woman€wearing€panties.€€Of€theseÐ 8 ˆ Ðthree€videotapes,€Investigator€Brown,€by€his€testimony,€viewed€with€Martinek,€before€making€hisÐ $ t Ðpurchase,€ð ða€little€bitðð€of€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Partyðð€and€ð ðsegmentsðð€of€ð ðThe€DresdenÐ  ` ÐDiary.ðð€€However,€as€the€State€sets€out€in€its€brief,€the€obscene€portion€of€ð ðSkye€and€SummerððsÐ ü L  ÐBondage€Partyðð€occurs€at€26€minutes€and€53€seconds€into€the€tape,€and€that€of€ð ðThe€Dresden€DiaryððÐ è 8  Ðbegins€18€minutes€and€25€seconds€into€the€tape.€€There€was€no€proof€presented€that€Brown€andÐ Ô$  ÐMartinek€watched€these€portions€of€either€of€these€two€videotapes.Ð À  ÐÌà  àOur€determination€as€to€whether€Martinek€had€actual€knowledge€that€these€tapes€containedÐ ˜è  Ðobscene€portions€would€have€been€made€easier€if€their€covers€had€depicted€ð ðultimate€sexual€actsððÐ „Ô  Ðor€ð ð[p]atently€offensive€representations€or€descriptions€of€masturbation,€excretory€functions,€andÐ pÀ Ðlewd€exhibition€of€the€genitals.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„901(14)(B).€€However,€this€was€notÐ \¬ Ðthe€case.€While€all€of€the€tapes€obviously€were€ð ðsexually€oriented,ðð€this€does€not€mean€they€wereÐ H˜ Ðobscene:€Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà × à€It€is€important€to€note€that€not€all€materials€of€a€sexual€nature€areÐ  \ Ðobscene.€€While€some€sexually€oriented€matter€may€be€lawfullyÐ øH Ðdistributed€and€possessed€for€the€purpose€of€distribution,€that€whichÐ ä4 Ðis€obscene€is€not€constitutionally€protected€and€may€be€the€subject€ofÐ Ð  Ðstate€criminal€proscriptions.€€òòSee€generallyóó€òòLeech€v.€AmericanÐ ¼  ÐBooksellers€Ass'nóó,€582€S.W.2d€738€(Tenn.€1979).Шø` x` x ÐÌòòPendergrassóó,€13€S.W.3d€at€395€n.1.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àWe€have€reviewed€the€audiotapes€of€the€conversations€between€Martinek€and€InvestigatorÐ X ¨ ÐBrown,€Officer€Hawn,€and€Investigator€Hudspeth,€respectively.€€Collectively,€these€audiotapesÐ D!” Ðdemonstrate€that€she€had€knowledge€of€the€storeððs€inventory€and€the€general€nature€of€certain€of€itsÐ 0"€  Ðvideotapes.€€On€the€February€12,€1999,€audiotape,€made€the€day€that€she€sold€ð ðSkye€and€SummerððsÐ #l! ÐBondage€Partyðð€to€Investigator€Brown,€she€identified€the€location€of€magazines€which€were€ð ðkinkyðð;Ð $X" Ðvideotapes€which€depicted€ð ðbondageðð€and€had€ð ðwhipping€and€stuff€like€thatðð;€and€recommendedÐ ô$D # Ðð ðThe€Dresden€Diaryðð€as€a€disciplinary€videotape€with€ð ðstuff€like€tying€up€and€stuff.ðð€€In€response€toÐ à%0!$ Ða€question€by€Investigator€Brown€as€to€whether€ð ðDresden€Diaryðð€depicted€intercourse,€she€repliedÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€ð ð[t]hey€donððt€do€that€in€these.ðð€€€Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àÌà  àConsidering€all€of€this€evidence,€we€conclude€that€the€proof€was€not€sufficient€to€show€thatÐ )à$( ÐMartinek€had€actual€knowledge€that€the€videotapes€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Party,ðð€ð ðTheÐ |*Ì%) ÐDresden€Diary,ðð€and€ð ðPregnant€Bondageðð€contained,€as€we€previously€have€discussed,€brief€acts€ofÐ h+¸&* Ðactual€or€depicted€ð ðsexual€conductðð€as€defined€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„901(14).Ð ° ÐWhile€the€depictions€of€naked,€bound€women€doubtless€would€be€disturbing€to€most€people,€theseÐ œì Ðlengthy€videotapes€might€be€considered€obscene€only€because€of€ð ðultimate€sexual€actsðð€of€a€fewÐ ˆØ Ðseconds€in€duration.€€Given€the€ð ðactual€knowledgeðð€requirement€of€our€statute,€we€cannot€concludeÐ tÄ Ðthat€simply€because€Martinek€worked€in€a€store€which€sold€sexually€oriented€videotapes,€she€hadÐ `° Ðð ðactualðð€knowledge€that€these€particular€videotapes€depicted€brief,€obscene€acts,€especially€sinceÐ L œ Ðtheir€box€covers€did€not€suggest€that€this€was€the€case.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€proof€wasÐ 8 ˆ Ðinsufficient€as€to€the€convictions€of€Martinek€for€the€sales€of€€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Party,ððÐ $ t Ðð ðPregnant€Bondage,ðð€and€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diary.ðð€€We€reverse€her€convictions€for€these€offenses€andÐ  ` Ðdismiss€the€counts€of€the€indictment€charging€these€offenses.Ð ü L  ÐÌà@FF%ìàòòò òCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ Ô$  ÐÌ€à  àBased€upon€the€foregoing€authorities€and€analysis,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€conviction€asÐ ¬ü  Ðto€Catherine€Martinek€for€sale€of€the€videotape€ð ðAll€New€Dolls€With€Dicks,ðð€but€reverse€herÐ ˜è  Ðconvictions€for€sales€of€the€videotapes€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Party,ðð€ð ðPregnant€Bondage,ðð€Ð „Ô  Ðand€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diary.ðð€€We€remand€for€entry€of€an€amended€judgment,€with€a€corrected€offenseÐ pÀ Ðdate,€reflecting€that€Martinek€was€convicted€of€the€distribution€of€obscene€material€for€the€sale€ofÐ \¬ Ðð ðAll€New€Dolls€with€Dicksðð€on€December€14,€1998,€as€alleged€in€count€1.€€As€to€counts€2,€3,€andÐ H˜ Ð4,€charging€the€sales€of€the€videotapes€ð ðSkye€and€Summerððs€Bondage€Party,ðð€ð ðPregnant€Bondage,ððÐ 4„ Ðand€ð ðThe€Dresden€Diary,ðð€we€reverse€the€convictions€and€dismiss€these€counts.€€The€amendedÐ  p Ðjudgment€for€count€1€should€reflect€that€count€6€is€dismissed.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àAs€to€Jerry€Simmons,€we€reverse€the€convictions€as€to€counts€1„4€and€dismiss€them.€Ô#†X IXXX I[;#ÔÔ‡X IXXX IÔÐ ä4 Ðà  àÌÔ#†X IXXX Im`#ÔÌÌà  àà ` àà × àà N àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àà × àà N àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGE