ÿWPC Ï]šÇúth/%PÎi—™½å£RïäôÊð8$¦¬` xtߢ‰Ñ2_Mϱ–T×§ UKÿ!ºn²Ý¯‰Rþk+q‡¶ÿ`õ .\äZQ­?´±+ È9lÉÎíF ¾{ƒËYä#[|õ—î€Íx¶ë‡B² “~ÌVºäì[9.ºtUé~í„z¦‘ ÉEH‹å7ÖÅ÷²ZçÞª>6j–ÚS#’òë@>0Æñ1#QáïŠCòJKG —·%‰G šØˆ 3ÎÂþn¼¸Š™ºUyë3@†ÑÎ$ö®áœ²Œnh­üeš\Y·ñ«È¡ TòðG§¥Zêï@6@ˆÊ÷áÈWÝÀœÌO¬§‚gI6Ò4±rû3Ü!Åñœ6ó¦±KRàÆÆÄU…ï„4­œð¬¿fO!‡^&8n5 Ìd¹JMhä‚¿yBÛådÑiÁ‰ŒD:Ý;ÚNã¡ÈÜÞ¯Ý]ù›ÆJ :ÚJîøtÁ8Š€±:+@Ó€Æ#$%~Ó~òœN"sœµ¼€ðDœ. ]‹_yU2Gäùø‹µXLÈîù¤r<ÉÄÊwa.]Ëé–OÓ¡X—LXˆtmJø–ꦻ@ÒÌ ´  É4¤°*]éDé;0л¡:r*UBL %ŽU.”ÂnXÒ 0P*4z 0DŽ 0³Ò 0c…w@èU:(U:bU:œ'ÖU:ý g7 &ž ž Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä Ä AQÌ Æ 0Dã 0D' Bkk D/ˆˆ B· D3Ô<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|Xw«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Ó©eE%($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(c(2§d$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€XûýXXXÔà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó("ˆ$Ô€ X<=XXXÔòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó cDdeEfghiDjVkDlÓ€g"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XûýXXXÔÔ€XRXXûýÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XûýXXRÔÐ  ÐÌò òOctober€6,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô„îôXXûýÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ]Ý ƒ Ä$ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÔ€XßXXXÔà œ àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôôÞôXXßÔThe€record€contains€a€written€copy€of€the€jury€instructions,€but€not€a€transcription€of€theÐ `  Ðinstructions€as€read€to€the€jury,€which€this€Court€has€repeatedly€admonished€is€generally€necessary€toÏfacilitate€full€appellate€review€of€issues€involving€jury€instructions.€€However,€because€there€is€noÏapparent€dispute€in€the€instant€case€about€what€instructions€were€read€to€the€jury,€we€will€review€theÏissue€presented. Ý ƒ §d$ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÔ€XûýXXXÔà œ àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ô„îôXXûýÔThese€events€apparently€resulted€in€reckless€endangerment€and€assault€charges€in€MonroeÐ `  ÐCounty.!"#&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd$$$$'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýñlñ›ñlñÑ` °ÑÑX°ÑÒPDÒÒŽ¦ÒÑ  ÑÑTR[  AØ'Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  ÓÔ€X¹‹XXXÔÑ7€ ¹‹ XXdðXXdð7Ññlñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eêf ` ttx$"` ð Úrß›ñlñà ¨ àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌà@oo:MàAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌÌÓ  Óà@ll8MàJUNE€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ° àà  àà ` à)ó óÐ Ðp  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)ó óà ¸ àò òC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9707„CR„00305ó óÐ À`  Ðà ¨ àà àAppellee,à ° àò ò€€€€€à  àà ` à)Ð °P  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àBLOUNT€COUNTYó óÐ  @  ÐVS.à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)Ð 0  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àHON.€PHYLLIS€MILLER,Ð €  ÐRICHARD€T.€SMILEY,à ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àJUDGEÐ p Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)Ìà ¨ àà àó óAppellant.ò òà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àó ó(Assault)ò òÐ Pð Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà ° àà  àà ` à€€€€€òòà ¸ àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÐ ° ÐÌÌò òKEVIN€W.€SHEPHERDà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ à€ Ðó ó404€Ellis€Ave.à X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ Ð p ÐMaryville,€TN€37804Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àTODD€R.€KELLEYó óÐ °"P Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAsst.€Attorney€GeneralÌ€€à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJohn€Sevier€Bldg.Ð $0 Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à425€Fifth€Ave.,€Northà ! àà p# à€€€€€€Ð €%  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ìà ¨ àà àÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àò òJERRY€N.€ESTESó óÐ P(ð! Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àDORIS€MATTHEWSó óÐ  +À!$ Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à220€Carson€St.Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àMadisonville,€TN€37354„1130ÌÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÐ p5,/ ÐÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÐ @8à.2 ÐJudgeÌÐ   :À04S ÐÑÜXÑÓ  Óà@™™:Màò òòòÔ‡¼W¼XX¹‹ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ#†X¹‹X¼¼WD#ԈР`  ÐÌÌó óóóÌÓÓà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€was€indicted€for€aggravated€assault.€€A€jury€found€theÏdefendant€guilty€of€simple€assault.€€Following€a€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€courtÏimposed€œan€eleven›€month€and€twenty„nine€day€sentence,€ordering€the€defendant€to€serveÏten€weekend€days€in€jail€with€the€balance€on€probation.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€theÏdefendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€sentenced€him€and€improperly€instructedÏthe€jury.€€Finding€no€merit€to€the€defendantððs€arguments,€we€affirm.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€fifty„four„year„old€defendant€had€worked€with€Teresa€Gourley€as€aÏpainter,€painting€houses,€barns,€and€other€buildings.€€The€defendant€maintained€that€heÏand€Gourley€had€an€ongoing€sexual€affair,€despite€both€of€them€being€married€to€otherÏpeople€for€a€significant€period€of€time.€€œThe€victim,€W.€F.€Bivens,€is€a€truck€driver.€€On›ÏNovember€21,€1995,€œhe›€was€at€a€C€&€G€Market€in€Monroe€County€unloading€fuel€from€hisÏtruck€when€Gourley,€who€was€acting€scared€and€was€crying,€ran€to€his€truck.€€The€victimÏknew€Gourley;€she€had€painted€his€barn€on€a€previous€occasion.€€œGourley›€sought€œrefuge›Ïwith€œhim€because›€œthe€defendant€had€chased€her€and€hit€her€with€his€van,€knocking€herÏto€the€ground.׃×Ý ƒ ˆÝÔ€ XûýXXX¹‹ÔòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  כРf) " ÐÌà ¨ àà àThe€victim€drove€Gourley€to€his€next€delivery€point€in€Blount€County,€whereÏthey€intended€to€call€Gourleyððs€husband.€€However,€the€defendant€followed€them,€blockingÏGourleyððs€access€to€a€telephone€with€his€van.€€The€defendant€also€circled€the€parking€lotÏin€his€van,€taking€pictures€of€the€victim€and€Gourley.€€The€defendant€demanded€threeÏhundred€dollars€($300)€in€return€for€the€photographs€he€had€taken€and€said€he€was€goingÏto€Wal„Mart€to€have€the€film€developed.Ð 6®,0 Їà ¨ àà àThe€victim€testified€œñcñhe›€tapped›€on›€the›€defendantððs›€van›€window›€in›€an›€attempt›€to›€coax›€the›€defendant›€to›€open›€the›€windowñcññdñthat€the€defendant€had€finally€stopped€his€van€at€the€rearÏof€his€(victimððsñdññeññdñ€ñdññeññfñ)€truckñfñ.›€€He€then€walked€to€the€back€of€his€truck,€believing€that€theÏdefendant€wanted€to€talk.€€Instead,€the€defendant€œñgñjumped€out€of€his€vehicle€and€ñgñstabbed›Ïthe€victimððs€left„hand€ring€finger€with€a€knife€and€drove€away.€€After€wrapping€his€fingerÏin€a€rag,€the€victim€retrieved€his€personal€pick„up€truck€to€drive€to€the€hospital.€€On€theÏway€to€the€hospital,€he€stopped€by€Wal„Mart,€where€he€spotted€the€defendantððs€van.€€HeÏreported€the€stabbing€to€a€police€officer€there.€€Later,€the€victim€sought€medical€treatmentÏat€the€hospital,€where€the€injury€to€his€finger€required€surgery€because€an€artery€had€beenÏsevered.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendantððs€version€of€the€events€differ€as€to€where€and€how€theÏstabbing€occurred.€€According€to€the€defendant,€he€had€seen€Gourley€and€the€victimÏtogether€on€a€previous€occasion€and€was€jealous.€€He€admitted€taking€pictures€of€them,Ïbut€claims€that€Gourley€offered€him€three€hundred€dollars€($300)€for€the€film.€€He€toldÏGourley€he€was€going€to€Wal„Mart€to€have€the€film€developed€and€then€left.€€He€drove€toÏWal„Mart,€parked€his€van,€and€went€inside€the€store€to€drop€off€the€film€and€purchaseÏother€items.€€While€he€waited€in€his€van€for€the€film€to€be€developed,€Gourley€and€BivensÏapproached€his€van,€hit€his€window€with€a€pistol,€and€began€threatening€him.€€WhenÏBivens€grabbed€his€window,€the€defendant€became€scared€and€stuck€his€knife€up€to€theÏwindow,€cutting€Bivensðð€hand.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€was€indicted€for€aggravated€assault€by€using€a€deadlyÏweapon€to€knowingly€cause€bodily€injury,€but€after€hearing€the€evidence,€a€jury€found€theÏdefendant€guilty€of€simple€assault€and€fixed€a€fine€of€two€thousand€five€hundred€dollarsÏ($2500).€€A€sentencing€hearing€followed,€at€which€neither€side€presented€additionalÏevidence.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€defendantððs€lack€of€candor€regarding€how€theÏstabbing€occurred€indicated€he€was€a€poor€candidate€for€rehabilitation.€€The€trial€courtÐ 8¸.4 Ðalso€found€that€the€defendant€and€the€public€would€benefit€from€some€form€ofÏincarceration€and€that€a€sentence€without€incarceration€would€depreciate€the€seriousnessÏof€the€offense.€€Further,€the€trial€court€noted€that€the€defendantððs€actions€involved€aÏdeadly€weapon,€affected€more€than€one€victim,€and€created€a€high€risk€to€human€life.€€TheÏtrial€court€also€noted€that€the€defendantððs€lack€of€prior€criminal€conduct€was€a€mitigatingÏfactor.€€Considering€all€of€this,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€eleven€months€andÏtwenty„nine€days,€ordering€the€defendant€to€serve€ten€days€in€county€jail€with€the€balanceÏon€probation.€€The€trial€court€also€imposed€a€fine€of€two€thousand€five€hundred€dollarsÏ($2500)€and€ordered€the€defendant€to€pay€restitution.€€The€defendant€now€appeals.ÌÌÓ  Óò òI.ó óÐ Xø ÐÓ  ÓœñbñÌñbññ^ñ›Ó  Óñ^ñà ¨ àà àIn€his€first€issue€on€appeal,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erredÏin€sentencing€him.€€When€a€defendant€complains€of€his€or€her€sentence,€we€must€conductÏa€de€novo€review€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€ThisÏpresumption,€however,€ð ðis€conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€theÏtrial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€ÏòòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€burden€of€showing€that€theÐ ,&Ì  Ðsentence€is€improper€is€upon€the€defendant,€as€the€appealing€party.€€T.C.A.€œñañÌñañðð›€40„35„401(d)€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.ÌÌà ¨ àà àIn€misdemeanor€sentencing€under€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€trialÏjudges€must€adhere€to€three€principles.€€First,€all€misdemeanor€offenders€must€beÏsentenced€in€accordance€with€the€purposes,€goals,€and€principles€of€the€CriminalÏSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„302(b);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Palmeróó,€902€S.W.2dÐ À2`). Ð391,€393€(Tenn.€1995).€€Second,€while€a€separate€sentencing€hearing€is€not€mandatory,Ïtrial€courts€are€required€to€allow€the€parties€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€be€heard€on€theÏquestion€of€the€length€of€the€sentence€and€the€manner€in€which€it€is€to€be€served.€€T.C.A.Ð $8Ä.4 Ððð€40„35„302(a);€òòseeóó€òòPalmeróó,€902€S.W.2d€at€393.€€Third,€trial€judges€must€set€a€releaseÐ `  Ðeligibility€percentage€not€greater€than€75%,€or€alternatively,€ð ðgrant€probation€immediatelyÏor€after€a€period€of€split€or€continuous€confinement.ðð€€òòId.óó€€In€the€instant€case,€theÐ ø ˜ Ðdefendant€does€not€challenge€the€fact€he€was€provided€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€beÏheard€on€the€length€and€manner€of€service€of€his€sentence.€€Rather,€the€defendant€arguesÏthat€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€adhere€to€the€principles,€goals€and€purposes€of€theÏSentencing€Reform€Act€and€by€failing€to€set€a€release€eligibility€percentage.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€contends€that€he€was€entitled€to€immediate€probation€andÏthat€the€trial€court€failed€to€follow€the€principles€of€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act€by€orderingÏhim€to€serve€ten€days€incarcerated.€€We€disagree.€€Although€he€disputes€the€details€of€theÏstabbing,€the€defendant€admitted€stabbing€the€victim€and€circling€a€parking€lot€severalÏtimes€in€his€van€while€taking€pictures€of€the€victim€and€Gourley.€€Prior€to€this,€theÏdefendant€chased€and€hit€Ms.€Gourley€with€his€van€in€the€parking€lot€of€the€C€&€G€MarketÏin€Monroe€County,€resulting€in€reckless€endangerment€and€assault€charges.€€The€trialÏcourt€specifically€found€that€the€defendant€and€the€public€would€both€be€served€by€someÏform€of€incarceration€and€that€a€sentence€without€incarceration€would€depreciate€theÏseriousness€of€the€offense.€€The€trial€court€also€specifically€found€that€the€defendantÏlacked€candor,€which€is€probative€of€the€defendantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation.€ÏConsidering€all€of€this,€the€defendant€has€not€shown€how€a€ten„day€period€of€incarcerationÏis€improper.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€set€a€releaseÏeligibility€percentage.€€Here,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€eleven€months€andÏtwenty„nine€days,€ordering€the€defendant€to€serve€ten€days€in€confinement€with€theÏbalance€on€probation.€€Because€of€the€trial€court€ordered€probation€following€a€period€ofÏconfinement,€it€did€not€need€to€set€a€release€eligibility€percentage.€€òòSeeóó€òòPalmeróó,€902Ð 8¸.4 ÐS.W.2d€at€393.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€makes€two€other€brief€contentions.€€The€defendant€arguesÏthat€the€trial€court€improperly€considered€his€gender€in€sentencing€him,€thus€violating€theÏsentencing€principle€stated€in€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„102(4)€that€sentencing€must€excludeÏconsideration€of€oneððs€gender.€€After€a€review€of€the€record,€we€find€no€support€for€theÏdefendantððs€contention;€merely€mentioning€a€defendantððs€gender€does€not€equate€withÏconsidering€it€as€a€factor€in€sentencing€the€defendant.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€also€contends€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€following€herÏpreference€ð ðto€start€in€the€mid€range€on€a€misdemeanor€sentence.ðð€€The€defendantÏcontends€that€by€allowing€each€trial€judge€to€follow€his€or€her€preference„„„whether€thatÏbe€to€start€in€the€low„,€mid„,€or€high„range„„„unjustified€disparity€between€offendersððÏsentences€results,€in€violation€of€a€stated€purpose€of€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€€òòSeeóóÐ ¼ \ ÐT.C.A.€ðð€40„35„102(2).€€The€defendantððs€argument€assumes,€however,€that€all€judgesÏprefer€to€start€at€a€different€point€in€the€range.€€There€simply€is€no€evidence€to€prove€thatÏcontention.€€Even€so,€in€the€instant€case,€the€trial€judgeððs€preference€ð ðto€start€in€the€midÏrangeðð€does€not€violate€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€€Unlike€the€felon,€the€misdemeanantÏis€not€entitled€to€the€presumption€of€a€minimum€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó,€885€S.W.2dÐ ¸)X $ Ð829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Moreover,€nowhere€in€the€Sentencing€Reform€ActÏdoes€the€Legislature€specify€where€in€the€appropriate€sentencing€range€a€trial€judgeÏshould€begin€the€sentencing€process€on€a€misdemeanor€charge,€allowing€a€trial€judgeÏcertain€discretion€in€sentencing€€misdemeanor€offenders.€€This€discretion€allows€trialÏjudges€to€begin€anywhere€in€the€appropriate€sentencing€range€they€choose,€withoutÏviolating€the€purpose€stated€in€ðð€40„35„102(2).€€Accordingly,€the€trial€judgeððs€preferenceÏin€the€instant€case€to€begin€in€the€mid„range€of€the€applicable€sentence€was€not€error.ÌÐ 8¸.4 ÐÓ  Óò òII.ó óÐ `  Ðñ_ñÓ  Óœñ_ññ_ñÓ  Óñ_ñà ¨ àà àIn€his€second€issue€on€appeal,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€courtÏimproperly€instructed€the€jury.€€Following€closing€arguments,€the€trial€court€instructed€theÏjury€on€the€offenses€of€knowing€aggravated€assault,€reckless€aggravated€assault,€recklessÏendangerment,€and€simple€assault.œ×ƒ×Ý ƒ ˆÝÔ€ XßXX XßÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€€First,€the€defendant€contends€that€he€is€entitled€toÐ œ< Ða€reversal€because€the€trial€court€failed€to€instruct€the€jury€on€all€definitions€of€simpleÏassault.ÌÌà ¨ àà àSimple€assault,€a€lesser€grade€offense€of€aggravated€assault,€is€committedÏwhen€a€person€"(1)€Intentionally,€knowingly€or€recklessly€causes€bodily€injury€to€another;€Ï(2)€Intentionally€or€knowingly€causes€another€to€reasonably€fear€imminent€bodily€injury;€Ïor€(3)€Intentionally€or€knowingly€causes€physical€contact€with€another€and€a€reasonableÏperson€would€regard€the€contact€as€extremely€offensive€or€provocative."€€T.C.A.€œñ`ñÌñ`ñðð›€39„13„101(a)(1)„(3).€€Simple€assault€committed€by€violating€subsections€(1)€or€(2)€is€aÏClass€A€misdemeanor,€but€assault€committed€by€violating€subsection€(3)€is€a€Class€BÏmisdemeanor.€ðð€39„13„101(b).€€Here,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€as€to€simpleÏassault€under€subsection€(1),€but€did€not€instruct€the€jury€under€subsections€(2)€and€(3),Ïwhich€the€defendant€claims€was€error.€€We€disagree.ÌÌà ¨ àà àDefendants€are€entitled€to€jury€instructions€on€all€lesser€included€offensesÏand€on€all€offenses€which€are€a€lesser€grade€or€class€of€the€charged€offense,€but€only€ifÏthe€evidence€would€support€a€conviction€for€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2dÐ (/È%* Ð305,€311€(Tenn.€1996).€€Here,€it€is€undisputed€that€the€defendant€stabbed€the€victimððsÏhand,€inflicting€bodily€injury€on€the€victim.€€Neither€party€presented€any€evidence€that€theÐ À2`). Ðdefendantððs€actions€caused€the€victim€to€reasonably€fear€bodily€injury€or€that€theÏdefendantððs€contact€with€the€defendant€was€extremely€offensive€or€provocative.€€òòSeeóó€ððÐ , Ì Ð39„13„101(a)(2)„(3).€€Thus,€the€defendant€was€not€entitled€to€instructions€on€theÏdefinitions€of€simple€assault€found€in€ðð€39„13„101(a)(2)„(3).ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€defining€two€termsÏthat€were€not€explicitly€mentioned€in€the€indictment,€specifically,€the€term€ð ðintentionally,ððÏwhich€was€defined€in€conjunction€with€the€charge€on€knowing€aggravated€assault,€and€theÏterm€ð ðserious€bodily€injury,ðð€which€was€defined€in€conjunction€with€the€charge€on€recklessÏendangerment.€€The€defendant€contends€that€giving€these€two€instructions€wereÏmisleading€and€confusing€to€the€jury€and€thus,€a€reversal€is€warranted.€€We€disagree.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€indictment€charges€the€defendant€with€ð ðunlawfully€and€knowinglyÏcaus[ing]€bodily€injury€to€W.F.€Bivens€by€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon,€to„wit:€a€knife,€inÏviolation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated,€Section€39„13„102.ðð€€We€are€convinced€that€theÏindictment€as€written€was€sufficient€to€put€the€defendant€on€notice€of€the€charges€againstÏœhimñhñ.€ñhñ›€œñiñand›€that›€by›€charging›€the›€defendant›€with›€knowingly›€stabbing›€the›€victim,›€the›€defendant›€was›€also›€charged›€with›€intentionally›€stabbing›€the›€victim.›€›€ñiñAs›€such,€we€do€not€find€error€with€the€trial€court€instructing€the€jury€on€the€definitionÏof€ð ðintentionally.ððÌÌà ¨ àà àMoreover,€we€conclude€that€the€instruction€for€ð ðserious€bodily€injuryðð€was€notÏerror€because€the€elements€of€reckless€endangerment,€a€lesser€grade€offense€ofÏaggravated€assault,€may€be€charged€so€long€as€there€is€evidence€to€support€it.€€òòSeeóóÐ /¼%* ÐòòTrustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€311.€€Here,€there€was€evidence€to€support€a€finding€of€seriousÐ è0ˆ', Ðbodily€injury,€which€includes€the€protracted€loss€or€substantial€impairment€of€a€functionÏof€a€bodily€member,€because€the€injury€to€the€victimððs€finger€severed€an€artery€andÏrequired€surgery.€€Even€if€charging€the€jury€on€serious€bodily€injury€was€error,€œweñkññjñÐ  L6ì,2 Ðñjññkñ›Ïconclude€it€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€because€the€defendant€was€notÐ 8¸.4 Ðfound€guilty€of€reckless€endangerment.ÌÌà ¨ àà àIn€sum,€we€find€no€merit€in€the€defendantððs€arguments€on€appeal.€ÏAccordingly,€the€defendantððs€conviction€and€sentence€for€assault€is€affirmed.ÌÌœÓÓÌ›à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à_______________________________Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌœÌÌCONCUR:›ÌœÌÌÌÌ______________________________›ÌJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€Judge