ÿWPCd ó«t–àšÅ3¬'9Œ}á5Úx;lÍÄk"ò¡ ¹¼¿W/ùÅÞCîíT ŸÂ‰)Øaä%34MÀ `W e9©Vã!¡æCÉÖv›[ØnW6¯[3ÆààþÓ®d~ÆúxŽ Û½'ÉNJ%“Zk˜UìXA“ÝHNe»Ï ˜Ÿ4Z6ojŠ–pæl,q 1bò‡'¶†^+'£(™]žÄ4d\2ƒTxÚw¼XAñ†:$(ïq·8­lç5LæŠ~ƒ6Ú1ÍM‡×ZÀýØ?•ZvÓ­¦™÷30vïÝ~°Åë ¢™ü"X?ëb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ ‘ Ƨ Æm Æ3 Æù UN¿N U@OEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWbYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY 0ëaaaa BLL 0¤i D3  D-@ 0Kmm AS¸Æ  0¤Ñ 0Du A«¹»Fªg+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0 Ñ ° ÑLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman  - ù-(|G2äL$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¬ ò»»Ô d(|3[$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3[$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€@ÙXXdì»»d8ÑÑ€ OaÑà@ttìàÔ‡î dÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼»îî d#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€25,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡X@ÙX»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XX@Ù/#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€JOSEPH€E.€Ô_ÔSKELTONÔ_Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌÔ€X@ÙX»¼Ôà@@½½ìàò òExtraordinary€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Knox€CountyÐ  p Ðà@@øøìàNo.€68410€€€€€€Ray€L.€Jenkins,€JudgeÐ  \ ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ï` AßÐ Ð  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2000„02255„CCA„R10„COÐ Ë  ÐNovember€7,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ·  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<¢` AßÐ £ó  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓFollowing€Defendantððs€conviction€for€aggravated€assault,€this€Court€granted€his€application€forÐ žî  Ðextraordinary€appeal€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€10€to€determine€whether€a€second€trial€on€theÐ ŠÚ Ðmatter€of€guilt€for€attempted€first€degree€murder,€an€offense€charged€in€Defendantððs€first€trial€butÐ vÆ Ðupon€which€the€jury€could€not€reach€a€unanimous€verdict,€would€violate€principles€of€doubleÐ b² Ðjeopardy.€€After€a€review€of€the€facts€and€relevant€law,€we€dismiss€the€count€of€the€presentmentÐ Nž Ðcharging€attempted€first€degree€murder€and€remand€this€case€for€sentencing€on€his€conviction€forÐ :Š Ðaggravated€assault.Ð &v ÐÓðÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€10€Appeal€by€Permission;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Reversed;Ð þN ÐRemanded€for€Sentencing€for€Conviction€of€Aggravated€Assault.ó óÐ ê: ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ‡X@ÙXàX@ÙÔThomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,óóÐ Â Ðand€òòRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ôóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð ®þ ÐÔ#†X@ÙXXX@ÙÂ#ÔÔ‡X@ÙXXX@ÙÔÌMark€E.€Stephens,€District€Public€Defender;€David€Gall,€Assistant€Public€Defender;€and€Paula€R.Ð †Ö ÐVoss,€Assistant€Public€Defender,€for€the€appellant,€Joseph€E.€Ô_ÔSkeltonÔ_Ô.Ð r  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Patricia€C.€Ô_ÔKussmannÔ_Ô,€Assistant€AttorneyÐ J"š! ÐGeneral;€Randall€E.€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Robert€L.€Ô_ÔJolleyÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€Assistant€DistrictÐ 6#†" ÐAttorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð "$r# ÐÔ#†X@ÙXXX@Ù> #ÔÌÓ¶ÓÓ  Óà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óˆÐ ú%J!% ÐÌà  àIn€a€presentment,€the€Knox€County€grand€jury€charged€the€defendant,€Joseph€E.€Ô_ÔSkeltonÔ_Ô,€withÐ Ò'"#' Ðattempted€first€degree€murder€and€aggravated€assault€in€separate€counts.€€The€matter€went€to€trial€onÐ ¾($( ÐNovember€8,€1999.€€At€the€conclusion€of€proof,€the€jury€unanimously€found€Defendant€guilty€ofÐ ª)ú$) Ðaggravated€assault,€based€on€his€plea€of€guilt€for€this€offense,€but€was€unable€to€reach€a€unanimousÐ –*æ%* Ðverdict€on€the€attempted€first€degree€murder€charge€or€the€lesser„included€offenses€of€attemptedÐ ‚+Ò&+ Ðsecond€degree€murder€and€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter.€€Upon€hearing€this€report,€the€trialÐ n,¾', Ðcourt€summarily€dismissed€the€jury€without€further€inquiry.€€After€the€jury€had€retired€from€theÐ Z-ª(-ýŽ ÐÔ_Ôcourtroom,€the€State€announced€its€intention€to€retry€Defendant€on€the€attempted€first€degree€murderÐ ° Ðcharge,€and€the€trial€court€set€the€date€for€the€second€trial€for€March€7,€2000.Ð œì ÐÌà  àOn€February€15,€2000,€Defendant€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€the€charge€of€attempted€firstÐ tÄ Ðdegree€murder€on€the€ground€that€a€second€trial€would€violate€state€and€federal€constitutionalÐ `° Ðsafeguards€against€double€jeopardy.€€The€trial€court€denied€Defendantððs€motion€to€dismiss,€as€wellÐ L œ Ðas€his€later€motion€for€interlocutory€appeal€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€9.€€On€October€13,€2000,Ð 8 ˆ Ðthis€Court€granted€Defendantððs€application€for€extraordinary€appeal€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€10,Ð $ t Ðwhich€is€the€matter€presently€before€this€Court.€€Ð  ` ÐÌò òà@!ìàFactual€Backgroundó óˆÐ è 8  ÐÌà  àOn€December€23,€1996,€the€defendant,€Joseph€E.€Skelton,€assaulted€Joseph€Sexton€with€aÐ À  Ðhammer€and€fractured€his€skull.€€Sexton€was€in€the€business€of€selling€mobile€homes,€one€of€whichÐ ¬ü  ÐDefendant€had€recently€purchased.€€The€assault€was€the€result€of€an€altercation€which€had€eruptedÐ ˜è  Ðover€Defendantððs€dissatisfaction€with€his€purchase.€€Because€Defendant€believed€that€Sexton€did€notÐ „Ô  Ðhonor€his€agreement€concerning€the€sale,€he€went€to€Sextonððs€place€of€business€to€discuss€hisÐ pÀ Ðgrievances.€€When€the€discussion€became€heated,€Sexton€decided€to€telephone€the€police€departmentÐ \¬ Ðto€request€assistance€in€removing€Defendant€from€his€premises.€€Sexton€began€walking€toward€theÐ H˜ Ðoffice€of€a€water€treatment€company€located€nearby.€€He€frequently€borrowed€that€companyððsÐ 4„ Ðtelephone€since€he€did€not€have€one€at€his€business.€€Defendant€followed€him.€€Sexton€and€DefendantÐ  p Ðwere€still€arguing€loudly€as€Sexton€entered€the€water€treatment€office.€€Defendant€entered€the€officeÐ  \ Ðbehind€Sexton€and€hit€him€on€the€head€with€a€hammer€while€he€was€using€the€telephone.Ð øH ÐÌà  àThe€persons€present€during€the€assault€immediately€pulled€Defendant€away€from€Sexton€andÐ Ð  Ðordered€Defendant€to€get€off€the€premises.€€Sextonððs€head€was€bleeding€profusely,€but€he€remainedÐ ¼  Ðstanding.€€€William€Eaton,€the€owner€of€the€water€treatment€business,€spoke€with€Defendant€brieflyÐ ¨ø Ðand€watched€him€leave.€€Defendant€walked€to€the€mobile€home€lot,€threw€the€hammer€onto€the€stepsÐ ”ä Ðof€one€of€the€homes,€and€then€drove€away€in€a€vehicle.€€The€police€stopped€Defendant€shortlyÐ €Ð Ðthereafter.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àEaton€testified€that€Defendant€hit€the€victim€once€and€did€not€attempt€to€injure€anyone€else.€Ð D!” ÐWhen€Eaton€asked€Defendant€to€leave,€Defendant€looked€ð ðpanickyðð€and€did€not€argue€with€him.€Ð 0"€  ÐInstead,€Defendant€told€Eaton€that€they€should€call€the€police,€and€Eaton€replied€that€this€had€beenÐ #l! Ðdone.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Defendant€wandered€back€to€his€car€and€drove€away.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àAt€trial,€Defendant€testified€that€he€had€numerous€problems€with€the€trailer€Sexton€had€soldÐ à%0!$ Ðhim€and€that€Sexton€had€not€fulfilled€his€obligations€to€Defendant€concerning€the€sale.€€As€a€result,Ð Ì&"% ÐDefendant€and€his€family€were€without€a€place€to€live€and€did€not€have€the€money€to€find€otherÐ ¸'#& Ðaccommodations.€€Defendant€testified€that€he€visited€Sextonððs€place€of€business€on€December€23,Ð ¤(ô#' Ð1999,€hoping€to€come€to€some€type€of€agreement.€€He€pleaded€with€Sexton€for€assistance,€but€SextonÐ )à$( Ðrefused€to€help€him€and€would€not€refund€his€money.€€Sexton€told€Defendant€that€he€was€ð ðscrewedððÐ |*Ì%) Ðand€there€was€ð ðnothing€he€could€do€about€it.ððÐ h+¸&* Їà  à€Upon€hearing€this€statement€from€Sexton,€Defendant€lost€his€temper.€€He€grabbed€SextonÐ ° Ðand€a€hammer€sitting€nearby.€€Sexton€pushed€Defendant€back€and€walked€away.€€Defendant€claimedÐ œì Ðthat€he€ð ðkinda€blacked€outðð€at€that€point.€€He€recalled€following€Sexton,€but€many€of€the€subsequentÐ ˆØ Ðevents€were€unclear.€€For€instance,€Defendant€did€not€recall€walking€into€the€water€treatment€officeÐ tÄ Ðor€swinging€the€hammer€at€Sextonððs€head.€€Defendant€recalled€leaving€the€scene€to€take€his€childrenÐ `° Ðto€be€with€his€wife€and€stopping€at€a€pay€telephone€to€dial€911.€€At€that€time,€a€police€car€drove€byÐ L œ Ðand€Defendant€flagged€him€down.€€The€police€officer€stopped.€€After€Defendant€explained€to€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðofficer€what€had€happened,€the€officer€arrested€him.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àDefendant€further€testified€that€he€never€intended€to€harm€Sexton;€he€merely€wanted€theÐ ü L  Ðthings€Sexton€had€promised€him.€€Defendant€conceded€that€he€ð ðlost€itðð€when€Sexton€refused€hisÐ è 8  Ðrequests,€and€he€expressed€great€remorse€for€his€conduct.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àDr.€Blaine€Enderson,€a€surgeon€at€the€University€of€Tennessee€Medical€Center€trauma€center,Ð ¬ü  Ðtestified€that€Sexton€suffered€a€ð ðdepressed€skull€fracture€with€underlying€brain€injuryðð€as€a€result€ofÐ ˜è  Ðthe€blow€from€the€hammer.€€Some€hemorrhaging€was€also€present.€€Dr.€Enderson€testified€that€thisÐ „Ô  Ðtype€of€injury€may€be€classified€as€ð ðlife„threateningðð€and€that€permanent€brain€damage€was€possible.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAt€the€conclusion€of€proof,€the€trial€court€informed€the€jury€that€Defendant€had€pled€ð ðguiltyððÐ H˜ Ðto€the€charge€of€aggravated€assault€and€ð ðnot€guiltyðð€to€the€charge€of€attempted€first€degree€murder.€Ð 4„ ÐAfter€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€on€these€offenses,€as€well€as€the€lesser„included€offenses€ofÐ  p Ðattempted€second€degree€murder€and€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter,€the€jury€began€itsÐ  \ Ðdeliberation.€€Later€that€same€day,€the€jury€reported€that€it€found€Defendant€guilty€of€aggravatedÐ øH Ðassault,€ð ðsince€he€confessed,ðð€but€failed€to€reach€a€unanimous€verdict€on€attempted€first€degreeÐ ä4 Ðmurder€or€the€lesser„included€offenses€to€that€charge.€€Specifically,€the€record€reveals€that€theÐ Ð  Ðfollowing€colloquy€occurred:Ð ¼  ÐÒ°ÒÒ°ÒÌCourt:€à0 ¸ àAll€right.€€Who€is€the€foreman?€€Mrs.€Morris?Ð”ä¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐForelady:€à0 ¸ àYes.Ѐи Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:€à0 ¸ àAll€right.€€Have€you€reached€a€verdict?Ðl¼¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐForelady:€à0 ¸ àNo.€€We„„ÐX ¨¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:€à0 ¸ àPardon?ÐD!”¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐForelady:€à0 ¸ àNo,€we€havenððt.€€We€cannot€come€to€a€conclusion.€€We€have€notÐ 0"€  Ðreached€a€verdict.Ð#l!¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:€à0 ¸ àOh,€all€right.€€We,€donððt€tell€me€which€way„„Ð$X"¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐForelady:€à0 ¸ àOkay.Ðô$D #¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:€à0 ¸ à„„but€tell€me€the€numerical€division.Ðà%0!$¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐForelady:€à0 ¸ àOkay.€€On€the€first€is€11€to€1;€second,€it€was€10€to€2;€voluntary,€it€wasÐ Ì&"% Ð10€to€2;€and€aggravated€assault,€of€course,€it€was€12€to€0,€since€heÐ ¸'#& Ðconfessed„„Ф(ô#'¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:à0 ` àà0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àOh,€you€find€him€guilty€of€the€agg„„Ð)à$(¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðâ âForelady:à0 ¸ àYes.Ð|*Ì%)¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:à0 ` àà0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àOkay.€€All€right.€€All€right.€€Well,€this„„this€happens.€€We€appreciateÐ ° Ðâ âyour€service€and€your€help€and€youððre€free€to€go.€€Thank€you.Ðœì¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌ(The€jury€was€excused€by€the€Court€and€retired€from€open€court,€after€which€theÐ tÄ Ðfurther€following€proceedings€were€had:)Ð `° ÐÌCourt:à0 ` àà0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àWe€can€do€that€count€on€December€the€15th,€if€youððll€waive€the€45„Ð 8 ˆ Ðday€„„„Ð$ t¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐState:à0 ` àà0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àYour€Honor,€weððd€ask€the€Court€not€to€accept€an€aggravated€assaultÐ  ` Ðon€a€hung€jury€on€the€other€counts,€because€I€donððt€believe€under€theÐ ü L  Ðstate€of€the€law€that€both€of€them€can€be€accepted,€and€we€intend€toÐ è 8  Ðretry€Mr.€Skelton.ÐÔ$ ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐCourt:à0 ` àà0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àAll€right.€€All€right.€€Give€me€a€trial€date.ÐÀ ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÒ°ÒÒ°Òà  àThereafter,€a€date€was€set€for€a€second€trial.€€On€February€15,€2000,€Defendant€filed€a€motionÐ ˜è  Ðto€dismiss€the€count€of€the€presentment€charging€attempted€first€degree€murder.€€He€also€moved€forÐ „Ô  Ða€judgment€of€acquittal€on€the€grounds€that€a€second€trial€would€violate€principles€of€double€jeopardyÐ pÀ Ðand€the€results€of€the€first€trial€did€not€provide€proper€grounds€for€declaring€a€mistrial.€€The€trialÐ \¬ Ðcourt€denied€Defendantððs€motions.€€Defendant€then€filed€a€motion€for€interlocutory€appeal€pursuantÐ H˜ Ðto€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€9.€€This€motion€was€also€denied.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àOn€September€18,€2000,€Defendant€filed€an€application€to€this€Court€for€extraordinary€appealÐ  \ Ðpursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€10.€€Our€review€of€the€record€revealed€the€following:€Defendant€wasÐ øH Ðcharged€with€attempted€first€degree€murder€and€aggravated€assault€based€on€one€underlying€offense;Ð ä4 Ðthe€trial€court€accepted€the€juryððs€verdict€of€guilt€on€the€aggravated€assault€charge€prior€to€dismissingÐ Ð  Ðthe€jury;€the€trial€court€never€declared€a€mistrial;€and,€since€Defendant€stands€convicted€forÐ ¼  Ðaggravated€assault,€a€retrial€on€the€attempted€first€degree€murder€charge€would€result€in€a€secondÐ ¨ø Ðprosecution€for€the€same€offense.€€In€an€order€dated€October€13,€2000,€we€granted€Defendantððs€RuleÐ ”ä Ð10€application,€concluding€that€an€immediate€review€by€this€court€was€ð ðnecessary€to€ensure€that€theÐ €Ð Ðdefendantððs€constitutional€protections€against€double€jeopardy€are€safeguarded.ððÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àThe€State€subsequently€responded€with€a€motion€to€dismiss€Defendantððs€Rule€10€appeal€onÐ D!” Ðthe€ground€that€it€was€improvidently€granted.€€The€State€pointed€out€that€we€granted€DefendantððsÐ 0"€  Ðapplication€based€on€findings€which€were€inconsistent€with€the€trial€courtððs€minutes€dated€NovemberÐ #l! Ð8,€2000,€which€contain€the€following€comments€regarding€the€verdict€in€Defendantððs€case:Ð $X" ÐÒ°ÒÒ°ÒÌUpon€their€oaths€the€jurors€say:€that€they€can€never€agree€upon€a€verdict€as€to€the€1stÐ à%0!$ ÐCount€and€by€consent€a€ð ðMISTRIALðð€is€entered;€further,€the€jury€says€that€they€findÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€defendant€guilty€of€Aggravated€Assault,€as€charged€in€the€2nd€Count.€€However,Ð ¸'#& Ðupon€the€motion€of€the€Attorney€General,€the€Court€does€not€accept€the€juryððs€verdictÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€this€case€is€reset€for€trial€on€March€7,€2000.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) ÐÒ°ÒÒ°Òà  àThe€State€argued€that,€according€to€the€above€minute€entry,€the€trial€court€did€not€accept€theÐ ° Ðâ âjuryððs€verdict€and,€by€consent,€it€had€also€declared€a€ð ðmistrialðð€which€permitted€the€State€to€retryÐ œì ÐDefendant.€€This€Court€agreed€that€Defendantððs€application€to€appeal€was€granted€on€the€premise€thatÐ ˆØ Ðthe€trial€court€had€accepted€the€juryððs€verdict€as€to€aggravated€assault€and€dismissed€the€jury€withoutÐ tÄ Ðdeclaring€a€ð ðmistrial.ðð€€Because€the€trial€court€minutes€called€this€premise€into€question€byÐ `° Ðcontradicting€the€verbatim€transcript,€we€concluded€that€the€Rule€10€appeal€should€further€embraceÐ L œ Ðthe€issues€of€(1)€whether€the€transcript€or€the€minute€entry€controls€in€circumstances€such€as€these,Ð 8 ˆ Ðand€(2)€the€scope€and€effect€thereof.€€On€February€28,€2001,€Defendant€and€the€State€were€orderedÐ $ t Ðto€supplement€their€briefs€accordingly.€€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àTherefore,€the€instant€appeal€presents€the€following€issues:€(1)€whether€the€verbatimÐ è 8  Ðtranscript€of€the€trial€court€proceedings€or€the€minute€entry€filed€by€the€court€controls€in€the€eventÐ Ô$  Ðthere€is€a€conflict€€between€the€two€documents;€and€(2)€whether€a€jury€verdict€of€guilty€concerningÐ À  Ðthe€offense€of€aggravated€assault€precludes€a€second€trial€on€the€attempted€first€degree€murder€countÐ ¬ü  Ðbased€on€double€jeopardy€principles€under€the€circumstances€presented€here.€€After€a€review€of€theÐ ˜è  Ðrecord€and€applicable€law,€we€find€(1)€that€the€transcript€controls€in€cases€where€a€conflict€existsÐ „Ô  Ðbetween€the€verbatim€transcript€and€the€trial€courtððs€minutes€and€(2)€that€a€second€prosecution€ofÐ pÀ ÐDefendant€for€attempted€first€degree€murder€is€prohibited€by€principles€of€double€jeopardy.€€WeÐ \¬ Ðtherefore€dismiss€with€prejudice€the€count€charging€attempted€first€degree€murder€and€remand€thisÐ H˜ Ðmatter€to€the€trial€court€for€sentencing€on€his€conviction€of€aggravated€assault.Ð 4„ ÐÌò òà@‚‚&ìàAnalysisó óˆÐ  \ ÐÌò òI.€€Discrepancies€in€the€Recordó óÐ ä4 ÐÌà  àWe€first€address€the€issue€whether€the€transcript€or€the€minute€entry€controls€the€questionsÐ ¼  Ðpresented€in€this€appeal.€€Defendant€contends€that€a€verbatim€transcript€controls€when€a€discrepancyÐ ¨ø Ðarises€between€the€facts€as€presented€by€the€transcript€of€the€trial€courtððs€proceedings€and€thoseÐ ”ä Ðprovided€by€the€minute€entry€filed€by€the€trial€court.€€The€State€agrees€with€Defendant€that€theÐ €Ð Ðverbatim€transcript€controls,€citing€our€decisions€in€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€814€S.W.2d€381€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð l¼ ÐApp.€1991),€and€òòState€v.€Zylaóó,€628€S.W.2d€39€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981),€to€support€its€contention.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€transcript€controls€the€questions€presented€on€appeal.€€As€noted€by€the€State,€this€CourtÐ 0"€  Ðhas€previously€held€that,€ð ðwhen€there€is€a€conflict€between€the€court€minutes€and€the€transcript€ofÐ #l! Ðthe€proceeding,€the€transcript€controls.ðð€€òòMooreóó,€814€S.W.2d€at€383€(citing€òòState€v.€Zylaóó,€628€S.W.2dÐ $X" Ð39,€42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981);€òòseeóó€òòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€50€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).Ð ô$D # ÐÌò òII.€€Double€Jeopardyó óÐ Ì&"% ÐÌà  àDefendant€contends€that€subjecting€him€to€a€second€trial€for€attempted€first€degree€murder,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðòòafter€the€jury€found€him€guilty€of€aggravated€assaultóó,€would€constitute€a€second€prosecution€for€theÐ )à$( Ðsame€offense,€thereby€violating€state€and€federal€constitutional€safeguards€against€double€jeopardy.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐThe€State€concedes€that€aggravated€assault€and€attempted€first€degree€murder€are€the€ð ðsameðð€offenseÐ h+¸&* Ðfor€purposes€of€double€jeopardy€analysis€and€that,€òòbecause€Defendant€was€convicted€of€aggravatedÐ ° Ðassaultóó,€a€retrial€on€the€indictment€for€attempted€first€degree€murder€is€prohibited.Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€double€jeopardy€clause€of€the€Fifth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€ConstitutionÐ tÄ Ðprovides€that€no€person€shall€ð ðbe€subject€for€the€same€offense€to€be€twice€put€in€jeopardy€of€life€orÐ `° Ðlimb€.€.€.€.ðð.€€Article€1,€sec.€10€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€contains€a€similar€provision.€€As€ourÐ L œ Ðsupreme€court€has€noted€many€times,€the€three€fundamental€principles€underlying€double€jeopardyÐ 8 ˆ Ðprovide€protections€against€(1)€a€second€prosecution€after€an€acquittal;€(2)€a€second€prosecution€afterÐ $ t Ðconviction;€and€(3)€multiple€punishments€for€the€same€offense.€€òòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373,Ð  ` Ð378€(Tenn.€1996).€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àWhile€we€agree€that€a€second€prosecution€for€attempted€first€degree€murder€would€violateÐ Ô$  Ðconstitutional€prohibitions€against€double€jeopardy,€the€rationale€for€our€conclusion€varies€from€thatÐ À  Ðused€by€the€State€and€Defendant,€because€both€arguments€rely€on€Defendantððs€aggravated€assaultÐ ¬ü  Ðconviction.€€This€reliance€is€misplaced.€€Defendantððs€conviction€for€aggravated€assault€has€nothingÐ ˜è  Ðto€do€with€proper€resolution€of€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó.€€Instead,€this€case€requires€us€to€address,€inÐ „Ô  Ðessence,€the€first€fundamental€principle€underlying€double€jeopardy;€specifically,€whether€it€wouldÐ pÀ Ðbe€proper€to€subject€Defendant€to€a€second€prosecution€after€an€acquittal.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThus,€the€proper€issue€is€whether€it€is€permissible€to€subject€Defendant€to€a€secondÐ 4„ Ðprosecution€of€attempted€first€degree€murder€after€termination€of€the€trial€in€this€case.€€Granted,€theÐ  p Ðjury€did€not€find€Defendant€ð ðnot€guilty.ðð€€However,€the€termination€of€trial€proceedings,€without€aÐ  \ Ðfinding€that€a€manifest€necessity€existed€to€do€so,€and€without€the€defendantððs€request€or€consent,Ð øH Ðwas€improper,€and€we€find€it€operates€as€an€ð ðacquittalðð€for€purposes€of€double€jeopardy€analysis€inÐ ä4 Ðthis€case€for€the€reasons€stated€herein.€€òòSeeóó€òòJones€v.€Stateóó,€403€S.W.2d€750,€754€(Tenn.€1966)€(ð ðtheÐ Ð  Ðrule€can€be€stated€in€Tennessee€that€once€a€jury€has€been€sworn€to€try€the€issues,€a€juror,€or€jurors,Ð ¼  Ðor€the€whole€panel,€cannot€be€discharged€and€a€mistrial€declared€without€discharging€the€defendant,Ð ¨ø Ðexcept€in€cases€of€manifest€necessityðð);€òòMahala€v.€Stateóó,€18€Tenn.€532€(Tenn.€1837)€(where€dischargeÐ ”ä Ðof€jury€was€an€improper€exercise€of€the€power€of€the€court,€the€judgment€must€be€reversed€andÐ €Ð Ðdefendant€discharged)òòóó;€òòState€v.€Waterhouseóó,€8€Tenn.€278€(Tenn.€1827)€(where€discretion€of€the€judgeÐ l¼ Ðin€discharging€the€jury€was€improperly€exercised,€discharge€of€the€jury€was€tantamount€to€anÐ X ¨ Ðacquittal).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àA€brief€review€of€the€relevant€facts€is€appropriate:€after€some€deliberation€at€the€conclusionÐ #l! Ðof€trial,€the€jury€returned€to€the€courtroom€and€the€trial€judge€asked€the€jury€foreperson€whether€theÐ $X" Ðjury€had€reached€a€verdict€and€the€foreperson€responded,€ð ðno.ðð€€The€trial€judge€then€inquired€as€toÐ ô$D # Ðthe€numerical€division€of€the€vote.€€The€foreperson€reported€the€division€and€that€the€jury€had€foundÐ à%0!$ ÐDefendant€guilty€of€aggravated€assault,€ð ðsince€he€confessed.ðð€€€At€this€point,€the€trial€judge€dismissedÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€jury.€€After€the€jury€had€retired€from€open€court,€the€trial€judge€appeared€to€question€the€partiesÐ ¸'#& Ðregarding€an€appropriate€date€for€sentencing€on€the€aggravated€assault€conviction.€€The€StateÐ ¤(ô#' Ðresponded€by€requesting€that€the€trial€court€not€accept€the€verdict€because€it€intended€to€retryÐ )à$( ÐDefendant,€and€the€trial€judge€set€a€second€trial€date.€€Since€we€have€concluded€that€the€facts€givenÐ |*Ì%) Ðin€the€verbatim€transcript€control,€we€note€that€the€premise€upon€which€we€granted€DefendantððsÐ h+¸&* Ðapplication€to€appeal€is€not€in€dispute;€to€wit,€that€the€trial€court€had€accepted€the€juryððs€verdict€ofÐ ° Ðguilt€as€to€the€charge€of€aggravated€assault€and€dismissed€the€jury€without€declaring€a€mistrial€as€toÐ œì Ðthe€count€charging€attempted€first€degree€murder.€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€first€error€occurred€when€the€trial€judge€directed€the€foreperson€to€ð ðtell€meÐ `° Ðthe€numerical€division,ðð€and€the€foreperson€responded,€ð ðOkay.€€On€the€first€is€11€to€1;€second,€it€wasÐ L œ Ð10€to€2;€voluntary,€it€was€10€to€2;€and€aggravated€assault,€of€course,€it€was€12€to€0,€since€heÐ 8 ˆ Ðconfessed.ðð€€€This€was€an€improper€request€on€the€part€of€the€trial€court.€€Where€a€jury€is€unable€toÐ $ t Ðreach€a€verdict,€our€supreme€court€has€held€that€the€trial€judge€must€follow€the€procedure€set€forthÐ  ` Ðin€òòKersey€v.€Stateóó,€525€S.W.2d€139€(Tenn.€1975).€€Specifically,€when€a€jury€reports€its€inability€toÐ ü L  Ðcome€to€a€unanimous€decision,€òòKerseyóó€directs€the€trial€judge€to€ð ðadmonish€the€jury,€at€the€veryÐ è 8  Ðoutset,€òònot€to€disclose€their€divisionóó€or€whether€they€have€entertained€a€prevailing€view.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€141Ð Ô$  Ð(emphasis€added).€€òòKerseyóó€is€quite€explicit€on€this€point.€€In€fact,€ð ð[t]he€òòonlyóó€permissive€inquiry€[aÐ À  Ðtrial€judge€may€make]€is€as€to€progress€and€the€jury€may€be€asked€whether€it€believes€it€might€reachÐ ¬ü  Ða€verdict€after€further€deliberations.ðð€€òòId.óó€(emphasis€added).€€Thereafter,€a€trial€judge€may€giveÐ ˜è  Ðsupplemental€instructions€in€accordance€with€specific€guidelines€provided€in€òòKerseyóó€if€the€court€feelsÐ „Ô  Ðthat€further€deliberations€might€be€productive.€€òòSee€id.óó€€We€emphasize€that€òòuntil€the€jury€reaches€aÐ pÀ Ðverdictóó,€ð ðno€one--not€even€the€trial€judge--has€any€right,€reason€or€power€to€question€the€specificsÐ \¬ Ðof€its€deliberative€efforts.€.€.€.€[S]uch€inquiry€is€error.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòBrasfield€v.€United€Statesóó,€272€U.S.Ð H˜ Ð448,€47€S.Ct.€135,€71€L.Ed.€345€(1926)).€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€also€erred€by€failing€to€adhere€to€established€legal€procedures€concerning€theÐ  \ Ðdeclaration€of€a€mistrial.€€These€procedures€are€important,€for€exceptions€to€the€prohibition€againstÐ øH Ðdouble€jeopardy€permit€a€retrial€of€a€defendant€where€a€ð ðmanifest€necessityðð€exists€for€the€mistrial.€Ð ä4 ÐòòState€v.€Mounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€319,€321„22€(Tenn.€1993).€€Great€caution€must€be€exercised€whenÐ Ð  Ðdeclaring€a€mistrial€based€on€manifest€necessity€because,€ð ðwhere€the€ruling€is€mistaken€or€abused,Ð ¼  Ðthe€defendant€may€not€be€reprosecuted.ðð€€David€Louis€Raybin,€Tennessee€Practice,€ðð€16.114€(1984)Ð ¨ø Ð(citing€òòState€v.€Waterhouseóó,€8€Tenn.€278€(1827));€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€810€S.W.2d€155,€158€(Tenn.Ð ”ä ÐCrim.€App.€1991)€(where€problems€arising€during€trial€were€matters€which€could€have€been€resolvedÐ €Ð Ðat€the€original€trial,€necessity€for€a€mistrial€did€not€exist;€defendantððs€convictions€subsequent€toÐ l¼ Ðretrial€were€therefore€reversed€and€the€charges€dismissed).€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àOne€example€of€ð ðmanifest€necessityðð€long€recognized€as€a€sufficient€reason€for€declaring€aÐ 0"€  Ðmistrial€is€the€inability€of€a€jury€to€reach€a€unanimous€verdict.€€òòMounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€322€;€òòStateÐ #l! Ðv.€Wittóó,€572€S.W.2d€913,€915€(Tenn.€1978);€òòState€v.€Freemanóó,€669€S.W.2d€688€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð $X" Ð1983).€€Since€unanimity€is€required,€when€a€jury€returns€with€a€vote€which€is€split,€the€trial€court€hasÐ ô$D # Ðthe€power€and€the€duty€to€return€the€jury€to€the€jury€room€with€instructions€that€their€verdict€mustÐ à%0!$ Ðbe€unanimous.€€òòGwinn€v.€Stateóó,€595€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1979).€€A€permissibleÐ Ì&"% Ðalternative€is€to€question€the€jury€as€to€whether€it€believes€a€verdict€might€be€possible€after€furtherÐ ¸'#& Ðdeliberations.€€òòMounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€322;€òòseeóó€òòKerseyóó,€525€S.W.2d€at€141.€€€For€ð ð[i]t€is€only€whenÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthere€is€no€feasible€and€just€alternative€to€halting€the€proceedings€that€a€manifest€necessity€is€shown.ðð€Ð )à$( Ðâ âòòMounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€322€(citing€òòState€v.€Knightóó,€616€S.W.2d€593,€596€(Tenn.€1981));€òòseeóó€òòStateÐ |*Ì%) Ðv.€Smithóó,€810€S.W.2d€155€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(where€mistrial€erroneously€granted€based€onÐ ° Ðissues€which€could€have€been€resolved€during€the€first€trial,€retrial€should€have€been€prohibited).Ð œì Ðâ âà  àÌà  àUpon€hearing€that€the€juryððs€vote€was€split€on€the€issue€of€guilt€for€the€charge€of€attemptedÐ tÄ Ðfirst€degree€murder,€the€trial€court€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó€summarily€dismissed€the€jury€withoutÐ `° Ðmaking€any€inquiries€as€to€whether€a€valid€verdict€might€be€obtained€or€if€the€jury€was€hopelesslyÐ L œ Ðdeadlockedòòóó.€€Under€òòMounceóó,€where€a€trial€judge€declines€to€exercise€the€preferred€alternative€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðinstructing€the€jury€further€and/or€request€that€it€continue€to€deliberate€for€the€purpose€of€returningÐ $ t Ða€consistent€verdict,€a€finding€of€manifest€necessity€to€summarily€conclude€the€trial€is€precluded.€€òòSeeóóÐ  ` ÐòòMounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€322.€€Because€manifest€necessity€was€not€proven€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó,Ð ü L  Ðdeclaring€a€mistrial€would€not€have€been€proper.€€Even€if€a€mistrial€was€òòintendedóó,€it€would€notÐ è 8  Ðprovide€an€exception€to€double€jeopardy€because€the€record€fails€to€show€that€manifest€necessityÐ Ô$  Ðexisted€and€a€ð ðmistrialðð€was€never€actually€declared.€€òòSeeóó€òòMounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€321„22;€òòKnightóó,Ð À  Ð616€S.W.2d€at€596;€òòWaterhouseóó,€8€Tenn.€278;€òòSmithóó,€810€S.W.2d€at€157.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àLastly,€we€note€that€a€defendant€should€be€mindful€of€his€duty€to€object€whenever€the€trialÐ „Ô  Ðcourt€declares€a€mistrial€or€the€state€indicates€an€intention€to€retry€him€without€his€consent.€€AnÐ pÀ Ðobjection€in€the€record€may€be€crucial€because€a€retrial€is€not€barred€by€double€jeopardy€where€aÐ \¬ Ðdefendant€consents€to€the€termination€of€the€trial,€notwithstanding€the€lack€of€a€manifest€necessityÐ H˜ Ðfor€doing€so.€€òòMounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€322€(citing€òòKnightóó,€616€S.W.2d€at€596).€€In€Tennessee,€aÐ 4„ Ðdefendant€who€stands€silent€at€a€time€when€he€could€have€objected€to€the€action€taken€by€the€trialÐ  p Ðcourt€may€often€be€considered€to€have€acquiesced€in€that€particular€course€of€action.€€òòId.óó€at€322„23.€Ð  \ ÐThis€rule€prohibits€a€party€from€standing€silent€while€the€trial€court€commits€an€error€in€procedure,Ð øH Ðand€then€rely€on€that€error€to€his€or€her€own€advantage€at€a€later€time.€€òòId.óó€€It€follows€that€ð ðif€anÐ ä4 Ðaccused€fails€to€object€to€the€jury's€discharge€upon€a€defective€verdict,€he€is€viewed€as€having€waivedÐ Ð  Ðthe€right€not€to€be€put€on€trial€again.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citations€omitted).€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Mounceóó,€859€S.W.2d€319€(Tenn.€1993),€our€supreme€court€considered€an€issueÐ ”ä Ðsimilar€to€the€case€at€bar„„whether€a€defendantððs€failure€to€object€when€the€trial€court€declared€aÐ €Ð Ðmistrial€should€result€in€a€default€of€his€constitutional€right€against€double€jeopardy„„and€held€thatÐ l¼ Ðð ðwhen€a€defendant€òòchoosesóó€not€to€object€to€the€mistrial€and€give€the€trial€court€an€opportunity€toÐ X ¨ Ðcorrect€the€error,€consent€may€be€inferred€and,€therefore,€double€jeopardy€will€not€bar€a€subsequentÐ D!” Ðprosecution.ðð€€òòId.óó€(emphasis€added).€€Although€it€was€undisputed€that€the€defendant€in€òòMounceóó€failedÐ 0"€  Ðto€object,€the€supreme€court€ultimately€dismissed€the€defendantððs€prosecution.€€The€supreme€courtÐ #l! Ðconcluded€that€a€defendant€must€have€a€realistic€opportunity€to€object,€prior€to€a€trial€courtððs€òòsuaóóÐ $X" Ðòòsponteóó€declaration€of€a€€mistrial.€€òòId.óó€€Since€the€appellate€record€in€òòMounceóó€could€not€provide€anÐ ô$D # Ðanswer€to€this€question,€the€court€declined€to€indulge€in€the€assumption€that€the€defendant€had€suchÐ à%0!$ Ðan€opportunity€and€failed€to€take€advantage€of€it.€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àContrary€to€the€circumstances€in€òòMounceóó€(where€the€record€was€unclear€whether€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdefendant€ever€had€an€òòopportunityóó€to€object),€the€record€in€the€instant€case€indicates€that€DefendantÐ )à$( Ðhad€virtually€nothing€to€object€to.€€Upon€receiving€notice€that€the€juryððs€vote€was€split,€the€trial€judgeÐ |*Ì%) Ðthanked€the€jurors€for€their€service,€told€them€they€were€free€to€leave,€and€the€jury€then€left€theÐ h+¸&* ÐÑ Oa Ñâ  âÑ°°Ñâ  âÑ  Ñcourtroom.€€Once€a€jury€is€discharged€and€physically€separated€from€the€courtroom,€it€may€not€beÐ ° Ðreconvened€for€the€taking€of€any€action€whatever€involving€the€fate€of€the€accused.€€òòState€v.€Greenóó,Ð œì Ð995€S.W.2d€591,€612€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998)€(citing€òòClark€v.€Stateóó,€170€Tenn.€494,€97€S.W.2d€644Ð ˆØ Ð(1936)).€€As€previously€observed,€the€word€ð ðmistrialðð€is€found€nowhere€in€the€transcript.€€It€isÐ tÄ Ðapparent€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€trial€terminated€with€a€conviction€for€aggravated€assault.€Ð `° Ð(Further,€it€can€be€readily€inferred€that€Defendant€felt€the€same;€the€State€did€nothing€to€contradictÐ L œ Ðthis€assumption€until€òòafteróó€the€jury€had€been€discharged.)€€We€hold€that€Defendantððs€failure€to€objectÐ 8 ˆ Ðdoes€not€interfere€with€his€constitutional€rights€against€double€jeopardy€under€circumstances€suchÐ $ t Ðas€these.€€Because€the€facts€in€the€record€do€not€show€that€Defendant€had€an€opportunity€to€objectÐ  ` Ðprior€to€the€trial€courtððs€òòsuaóó€òòsponteóó€order€terminating€the€proceedings,€we€cannot€find€that€he€waivedÐ ü L  Ðhis€double€jeopardy€protections.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àHere,€we€find€that€(1)€the€trial€judge€improperly€terminated€Defendantððs€trial€proceedingsÐ À  Ðwithout€any€attempt€to€obtain€a€valid€verdict€on€the€charge€of€attempted€first€degree€murder€orÐ ¬ü  Ðinquire€into€the€likelihood€of€obtaining€same;€(2)€the€record€is€devoid€of€any€indication€that€aÐ ˜è  Ðmanifest€necessity€existed;€(3)€the€State€failed€in€its€duty€to€demonstrate€that€a€mistrial€would€beÐ „Ô  Ðjustified,€or€that€any€other€circumstances€provided€proper€grounds€for€a€second€trial;€(4)€the€transcriptÐ pÀ Ðreveals€that€no€ð ðmistrialðð€was€ever€declared;€and€(5),€under€òòMounceóó,€Defendant€cannot€be€heldÐ \¬ Ðresponsible€for€failing€to€object€where,€since€no€mistrial€was€declared€and€the€jury€was€summarilyÐ H˜ Ðdismissed€without€discussion,€he€was€without€opportunity€to€object.€€Based€on€these€findings,€weÐ 4„ Ðconclude€that€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€jury€and€termination€of€the€trial€act€as€an€acquittal€ofÐ  p ÐDefendant€on€the€charges€of€attempted€first€degree€murder€for€purposes€of€double€jeopardy€analysis.€Ð  \ ÐòòSeeóó€òòJones€v.€Stateóó,€403€S.W.2d€750,€754€(Tenn.€1966)€(ð ðonce€a€jury€has€been€sworn€to€try€the€issues,Ð øH Ða€juror,€or€jurors,€or€the€whole€panel,€cannot€be€discharged€and€a€mistrial€declared€withoutÐ ä4 Ðdischarging€the€defendant,€except€in€cases€of€manifest€necessityðð);€òòMahalaóó,€18€Tenn.€532€(improperÐ Ð  Ðor€illegal€discharge€of€the€jury€generally€operates€as€an€acquittal);€òòWaterhouseóó,€8€Tenn.€278€(whereÐ ¼  Ðdiscretion€of€the€judge€in€discharging€the€jury€was€improperly€exercised,€discharge€of€the€jury€wasÐ ¨ø Ðtantamount€to€an€acquittal).€€Accordingly,€a€second€prosecution€of€Defendant€on€this€charge€is€barredÐ ”ä Ðby€our€state€and€federal€constitutions.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373,€378€(Tenn.€1996).€€Ð €Ð ÐÌò òà@  %ìàConclusionó óˆÐ X ¨ ÐÌà  à€Under€the€circumstances€presented€in€this€case,€subjecting€Defendant€to€a€second€trial€forÐ 0"€  Ðattempted€first€degree€murder€would€violate€constitutional€guarantees€against€double€jeopardy€andÐ #l! Ðis,€therefore,€prohibited.€€The€count€charging€attempted€first€degree€murder€is€dismissed,€and€thisÐ $X" Ðcase€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€sentencing€of€Defendant€on€his€conviction€for€aggravatedÐ ô$D # Ðassault.€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGE