ÿWPCî 4# èU:ó %- 0(3w@[4›¯¾ 0”Æ 0DZžnX¦ 0Jþ 0DH 0TŒU.à 0^ 0hl 0rÔ 0|F 0†Â 0H 1uØ 0dM 0@± D3ñ B)$ DCM AQ Æá B§ 0DÄ D/ B7 AMTð¡ ‘v~vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡ ôDõDö÷$eøeù[úûüÓ€Œƒ*#W0BBNt3|x(D(2´¤$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó«<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTTTXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô%ä2¼A`ArialTT2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò++++'ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd* ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd* (Cþÿ << Gÿÿ æÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òOctober€2,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝInterestingly,€Butler€was€not€stricken€from€the€panel€and€served€on€the€jury.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ќـ*ÙÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€/0(A1-j|?ÿ™` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€JACKSONÌÌDECEMBER€1996€SESSIONÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)à àNo.€02„C„01„9602„CC„00056Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAPPELLEE,à àà àà à)à àChester€CountyÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJ.€Franklin€Murchison,€Judgeà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌHALLEY€OððBRIEN€THOMPSON,à àà à)à à(First€Degree€Murder,€Attempt€toÏCommitÌalso€known€as€TONY€OZIER,à àà à)à à€Voluntary€Manslaughter,€andÏPossession€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€of€a€Deadly€Weapon€duringÏCommission€Ìà àà àAPPELLANT.à àà à)à à€of€a€Felony€Offense)€ÌÌÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌòòOn€Appealóó:à àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌC.€Michael€Robbins€€€€€€à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ202€South€Maple,€Suite€Cà àà àà àà à500€Charlotte€AvenueÌCovington,€TN€€38019à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0497ÌÌòòAt€Trialóó:à àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€David€BridgersÌGeorge€Morton€Googeà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌ227€West€Baltimore€Streetà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌJackson,€TN€€38301„6137Ìà àà àà àà à€à àà àà àJames€G.€WoodallÌPamela€J.€Dreweryà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà à225€Martin€Luther€King€DriveÌ227€West€Baltimore€Streetà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€€38302„2825ÌJackson,€TN€€38301„6137à àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDonald€H.€AllenÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à225€Martin€Luther€King€DriveÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€€38302„2825ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€__________________________________ÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€JudgeÌÇØØÙ  Ùò òÓÓÓ  ÓÑ7€Ê”XXdæXXdæ7ÑÔ€¼ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ€XÔó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€appellant,€Halley€OððBrien€Thompson,€also€known€as€Tony€OzierÏ(defendant),€was€convicted€of€first€degree€premeditated€murder,€attempt€to€commitÏvoluntary€manslaughter,€a€Class€D€felony,€and€possession€of€a€deadly€weapon€duringÏthe€commission€of€a€felony€offense,€a€Class€E€felony,€by€a€jury€of€his€peers.€The€trialÏcourt€imposed€the€following€sentences:€life€imprisonment€in€the€Department€ofÏCorrection€for€first€degree€murder;€ò ò€ó ó€four€(4)€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction€forÏattempted€voluntary€manslaughter;€and€two€(2)€years€in€the€Department€of€CorrectionÏfor€possession€of€a€deadly€weapon.€ò ò€ó ó€The€sentences€are€to€be€served€concurrently.Ìà àThe€defendant€presents€five€issues€for€review.€He€contends€the€trial€courtÏcommitted€error€by€(a)€denying€a€request€for€mistrial€after€a€juror€indicated€he€had€seenÏthe€defendant€at€the€courthouse€on€prior€occasions;€(b)€admitting€into€evidence€aÏnewspaper€containing€an€article€on€the€shooting;€(c)€failing€to€ensure€the€defendantÏwas€knowingly€and€intelligently€waiving€his€right€to€testify;€and€(d)€allowing€testimonyÏof€a€witness€on€rebuttal.€The€defendant€also€claims€the€state€withheld€exculpatoryÏinformation€that€the€shooting€victims€were€members€of€a€gang.€€After€a€thorough€reviewÏof€the€record,€the€briefs€submitted€by€the€parties,€and€the€law€governing€the€issuesÏpresented€for€review,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€shouldÏbe€affirmed.€€Ìà àPrior€to€May€29,€1994,€the€defendant€and€one€of€the€victims,€Eric€Blount,€hadÏseveral€angry€confrontations.€€One€involved€Blount's€girlfriend.€€Another€incidentÏinvolved€the€niece€of€Blount's€girlfriend.€€There€were€angry€words€spoken€and€hardÍlooks€at€a€mutual€friend's€parties.€€Most€of€the€witnesses€testified€the€defendant€hadÏstated€he€was€"going€to€get€Eric."€€One€witness€testified€both€the€defendant€and€BlountÏhad€threatened€to€harm€to€each€other.Ìà àOn€Sunday€evening,€May€29,€1994,€the€defendant€and€Byron€Kidd,€a€friend€ofÏthe€defendant,€drove€through€Hillview€Manor,€an€apartment€complex€in€Henderson,€onÏtwo€separate€occasions.€€When€the€automobile€stopped€on€the€second€occasion,ÏBlount€and€one€of€his€friends,€Michael€Bowen,€approached€the€vehicle.€€The€defendantÏand€Blount€had€an€argument.€€When€the€argument€had€run€its€course,€a€personÏreferred€to€as€"Pack"€told€Blount€he€should€take€care€of€his€business€like€a€man.€€OneÏwitness€heard€a€shot€fired€from€beside€an€apartment€building.Ìà àBowen€was€armed€with€a€pistol.€€He€removed€the€pistol€from€his€pocket,€andÏheld€the€weapon€next€to€his€leg.€€The€defendant€told€the€police€Bowen€did€not€threatenÏhim.€€The€defendant€first€shot€Bowen€in€the€leg.€€Bowen€fell€to€the€ground.€€In€theÏprocess,€he€dropped€his€weapon.€€When€he€stood,€the€defendant€shot€him€a€secondÏtime.€€The€second€projectile€struck€Bowen€in€the€stomach.€€Bowen€ran€to€an€apartment.€ÏWhen€the€investigating€officer€examined€Bowen's€weapon,€he€found€the€weaponÏcontained€all€live€rounds.€€There€were€no€spent€bullets.Ìà àThe€defendant€turned€to€Blount€and€shot€him€in€the€chest.€€Blount€then€ranÏaway.€€The€defendant€chased€him.€€He€admitted€firing€four€or€five€times€at€Blount€as€heÏwas€running€through€the€complex.€€When€Blount€returned€to€the€site€where€he€was€firstÏshot,€he€collapsed.€€The€defendant€stood€over€Blount€attempting€to€fire€his€pistol€at€himÏas€he€laid€on€the€ground.€€The€pistol€clicked€as€there€were€no€live€rounds€in€his€pistol.€ÏHe€then€kicked€Blount.€€The€defendant€stated:€€"I€told€you€to€leave€me€alone,€but€youÍwouldn't€do€that."€€The€defendant€fled€on€foot.Ìà àBowen€was€required€to€have€surgery€later€that€night.€€The€projectile€striking€himÏin€the€stomach€damaged€his€colon.€€He€had€to€wear€a€colostomy€bag€for€six€months.€ÏThe€projectile€striking€Blount's€chest€passed€through€both€lungs,€damaged€theÏesophagus,€and€the€aorta.€€A€pathologist€testified€Blount€died€as€a€result€of€internalÏbleeding.Ìà àThe€defendant€admitted€to€a€police€officer€that€he€shot€Blount€and€Bowen.€€HeÏdid€not€see€Blount€with€a€weapon.€€He€admitted€he€chased€Blount€and€shot€at€him€fourÏor€five€times€with€his€.32€caliber€pistol.€€The€defendant€stated€Bowen€was€holding€aÏpistol€next€to€his€leg.€€The€defendant€stated€neither€Bowen€nor€Blount€had€threatenedÏhim€before€he€shot€them.€€€€Ìò òÓ  ÓI.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€defendant€contends€the€court€committed€prejudicial€error€by€denying€hisÏmotion€for€mistrial€after€a€potential€juror€made€a€prejudicial€comment€against€theÏdefendant€during€voir€dire.€€He€also€contends€the€court€should€have€given€individualÏinstructions€to€the€prospective€jurors€regarding€the€prospective€jurorððs€comment.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓA.ó óÌÌÓ  Óà àDuring€voir€dire,€a€prospective€juror,€Richie€Butler,€was€asked€if€he€knew€any€ofÏthe€parties.€€In€front€of€the€entire€panel,€Butler€responded€that€he€knew€the€prosecutorÏand€he€had€seen€the€defendant€before€at€the€courthouse:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àI€have€seen€him.€Twice€my€house€has€been€broken€into,Ïtwice€in€the€last€couple€of€years,€and€you€were€theÏprosecutor€both€times,€and€every€time€I€was€down€here,€heÏwas€sitting€down€here.€I€just€seen€him.ÌÓÓÌDefense€counsel€moved€for€a€mistrial€based€upon€Butlerððs€comment.€€The€trial€court€Ïcalled€Butler€to€the€bench€to€clarify€what€he€meant€by€his€comment.€€Butler€said€he€didÏnot€mean€the€defendant€had€broken€into€his€house;€he€merely€meant€he€had€seen€theÏdefendant€at€the€courthouse€when€he€(Butler)€was€there€on€matters€related€to€the€twoÏburglaries.Ìà àThe€court€told€counsel€he€would€instruct€the€jury€that€the€defendant€had€been€inÏcourt€on€preliminary€matters€related€to€the€murder€case.€€The€court€said€he€would€alsoÏtell€jurors€the€defendant€had€not€been€charged€with€anything€in€his€court€except€thisÏmurder€case.€€The€defense€objected€to€the€instruction€on€the€ground€it€would€not€beÏsufficient€because€Butler€had€said€the€ð ðlast€couple€of€years.ðð€€This€would€include€anÏevent€that€occurred€before€the€murder.€€The€trial€court€told€counsel€that€Butler€ð ðwasÏobviously€mistaken€about€that,ðð€referring€to€the€time€frame.€€The€judge€instructed€theÏjury:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àà àLadies€and€gentlemen,€we€have€to€be€very€careful.€ItÏis€kind€of€like€having€to€do€delicate€surgery€in€these€things€„„Ïto€make€sure€that€nothing€happened€that€prejudices€theÏcases€„„€for€the€State€or€for€the€defendant.€And€the€reason€IÏcalled€Mr.€Butler€over,€I€wanted€„„€he€had€said€that€he€hadÏbeen€here€before€„„€he€had€some€burglaries.€He€had€seen,Ïof€course,€Mr.€Allen,€who€is€the€regular€D.A.€and€then€theÏdefendant.€I€wanted€to€clarify€that,€and€I€asked€Mr.€ButlerÏabout€it.€The€defendant€hasnððt€been€guilty€of€the€burglariesÏheððs€talking€about.€It€just€happened€that€he€came€up€on€theÏburglaries.€Mr.€Thompson€had€nothing€to€do€with€anyÍburglaries.€I€cleared€that€up€with€Mr.€Butler.Ìà8 àà8 àà àAnd€Number€2:€The€defendant€„„€if€he€saw€theÏdefendant€here,€and€I€take€it€that€he€did€„„€Mr.€ThompsonÏwas€here€on€this€very€case€on€other€preliminary€matters.€AsÏyou€know€„„€we€can€always€assume€that€you€have€someÏcommon€sense,€and€when€you€get€up€this€stage,€you€knowÏthere€have€been€preliminary€hearings€and€arraignmentsÏand€things€of€that€sort€in€every€case.€You€are€to€assume€thatÏif€Mr.€Thompson€was€in€this€court,€he€was€here€on€this€case.ÏHe€hasnððt€been€in€this€court€on€anything,€except€this€veryÏcase.Ìà8 àà8 àà àWe€just€wanted€to€clear€that€up€with€you.€Mr.€ButlerÏsaw€him€„„€he€did€see€him.€I€take€his€word€for€it,€but€he€sawÏhim,€and€the€defendant€was€here€on€preliminary€mattersÏrelative€to€this€very€case.€Okay?ÌÓÓÌAfter€the€instruction€was€given,€the€jury€selection€proceeded€and€a€jury€was€chosen.× ƒ1 ××  ×€Ìò òÓ  ÓÌB.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àA€motion€for€the€entry€of€a€mistrial€is€a€procedural€device€which€requests€the€trialÏcourt€to€stop€the€trial,€discharge€the€jury,€and€impanel€another€jury€to€determine€theÏguilt€of€the€accused.€€See€òòClark€v.€Stateóó,€170€Tenn.€494,€496„99,€502,€97€S.W.2d€644,Ï646€(1936);€òòFerguson€v.€Stateóó,€417€So.2d€639,€641€(Fla.€1982).€€The€entry€of€a€mistrialÏis€appropriate€when€the€trial€cannot€continue,€or,€if€the€trial€does€continue,€aÏmiscarriage€of€justice€will€occur.€Ìà àWhether€an€occurrence€during€the€course€of€a€trial€warrants€the€entry€of€aÏmistrial€is€a€matter€which€addresses€itself€to€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court;€andÏthis€Court€will€not€interfere€with€the€exercise€of€this€discretion€absent€clear€abuseÍappearing€on€the€face€of€the€record.€€òòState€v.€McPhersonóó,€882€S.W.2d€365,€370€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Millbrooksóó,€819€S.W.2d€441,€443Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991);€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€733€S.W.2d€517,€522€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.Ïòòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1987);€€òòArnold€v.€Stateóó,€563€S.W.2d€792,€794€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1977),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó(Tenn.€1978).€Ìà àThe€denial€of€the€motion€for€mistrial€was€proper.€€The€trial€court€cured€anyÏpotential€error€by€instructing€the€jury€not€to€consider€the€unsolicited€statement.€€òòState€v.ÏWestóó,€767€S.W.2d€387,€397€(Tenn.€1989),€òòcertóó€òòdeniedóó,€497€U.S.€1010,€110€S.Ct.€3254,Ï111€L.Ed.2d€764€(1990);€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€763€S.W.2d€756,€761€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1988);€òòState€v.€Newsomeóó,€744€S.W.2d€911,€915€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóóÏ(Tenn.€1987);€òòState€v.€Mayoóó,€735€S.W.2d€811,€816„17€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€€A€juryÏis€presumed€to€follow€a€trial€courtððs€curative€instruction.€€òòState€v.€Fosteróó,€755€S.W.2dÏ846,€849€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1988);€òòNewsomeóó,€744€S.W.2d€atÏ915;€òòState€v.€Lawsonóó,€695€S.W.2d€202,€204€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985);€òòState€v.€Bartonóó,Ï626€S.W.2d€296,€298€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1981).€€€Ìà àThis€case€is€analogous€to€òòState€v.€Melvin€Morrisóó,€where€this€Court€held€that€theÏdenial€of€a€mistrial€was€proper€after€a€witness€made€a€nonresponsive€comment€aboutÏthe€defendant.€€òòState€v.€Melvin€Morrisóó,€Madison€County€No.€02„C„01„9404„CC„00077Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€September€28,€1994),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó(Tenn.€January€30,Ï1995).€The€witness€was€asked€if€the€defendant€ever€spent€time€at€the€witnessððs€houseÏto€which€the€witness€replied:€€ð ðYeah,€when€heððs€not€in€jail,€heððs€over€there.ðð€€The€trialÏcourt€denied€the€defendantððs€motion€for€mistrial€and€gave€a€curative€instruction.€€ThisÏCourt€found€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Melvin€Morrisóó,€MadisonÍCounty€No.€02„C„01„9404„CC„00077€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€September€28,Ï1994),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€January€30,€1995);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòLawsonóó,€695€S.W.2d€atÏ204€(jury€presumed€to€follow€instruction€to€disregard€witnessððs€answer€to€the€questionÏð ðHow€long€have€you€known€him?ðð€€„„€ð ðEver€since€he€got€out€of€jail€that€first€time.ðð)Ìà àThis€case€is€distinguishable€from€the€cases€cited€by€the€defendant,€òòState€v.ÏScruggsóó,€589€S.W.2d€899€(Tenn.€1979)€and€òòBlankenship€v.€Stateóó,€410€S.W.2d€159Ï(Tenn.€1966).€€In€òòScruggsóó€a€potential€juror€stated€he€had€supervised€the€defendantÏwhile€on€probation.€€This€clearly€indicated€the€defendant€had€a€prior€conviction.€€WhileÏevidence€of€guilt€was€overwhelming,€the€Supreme€Court€noted€the€jury€imposed€aÏsevere€sentence.€Real€doubt€was€raised€as€to€whether€the€cautionary€instruction€wasÏeffective.€€In€òòBlankenshipóó,€a€witness€testified€he€was€told€the€defendants€were€pleadingÏguilty€to€their€crimes.€€Again,€the€Supreme€Court€said€despite€a€curative€instruction,€theÏcourt€could€not€say€the€comment€did€not€contribute€to€the€verdict€returned€by€the€jury.Ìà àHere,€Butlerððs€comment€was€not€a€definitive€statement€about€prior€crimes€or€aÏplea€of€guilty.€€He€merely€stated€he€had€seen€the€defendant€before€at€the€courthouse.€ÏThe€judge€explained€to€the€prospective€jurors€the€defendantððs€previous€appearancesÏwere€for€preliminary€matters€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó.Ìà à€The€defendant€also€argues€ð ðthere€is€no€way€to€know€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt€that€the€minds€of€the€jurors€who€decided€this€case€were€not€so€influenced.ðð€€TheÏdefendant€cites€òòState€v.€Furloughóó,€797€S.W.2d€631,€645€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€œòòperóó.›€òòappóó.Ïòòdeniedóó€œ(Tenn.›€1990).€€The€issue€in€òòFurloughóó€was€whether€a€jury€should€have€beenÏsequestered.€This€Courtððs€discussion€centered€around€the€problem€of€determining€theÏinfluence€of€comments€and€extraneous€influences€made€upon€jurors€who€were€notÍsequestered.€€The€defendant€also€cites€òòState€v.€Perryóó,€740€S.W.2d€723€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó(Tenn.€1987)€€for€support.€In€òòPerryóóthis€Court€upheld€the€grantÏof€a€new€trial€because€of€communications€about€the€defendant€between€a€juror€and€theÏjurorððs€spouse.€€The€jurorððs€spouse€also€discussed€the€case€with€a€witness€in€the€case.€ÏThis€case€is€distinguishable€from€both€òòFurloughóó€and€òòPerryóóbecause€the€remarks€madeÏoccurred€in€the€presence€of€the€trial€judge€who€was€able€to€determine€the€exact€natureÏof€the€comment€and€its€effect,€if€any,€on€the€prospective€jurors.€€The€comment€wasÏquickly€addressed€by€the€court€with€a€curative€instruction.€€Ìà àThe€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓII.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€defendant€contends€the€trial€court€committed€error€of€prejudicial€dimensionÏby€admitting€a€newspaper€article€which€contained€a€story€about€the€shooting€death€ofÏthe€victim€into€evidence.€The€defendant€argues€it€was€error€to€admit€an€exhibit€that€wasÏnot€properly€authenticated.€€He€predicates€his€argument€on€the€premise€that€it€was€notÏcertain€the€newspaper€found€in€a€cell€occupied€by€the€defendant€was€the€same€paperÏhe€had€in€his€possession€when€he€was€booked€into€the€jail.€The€defendant€also€arguesÏthe€newspaper€was€not€relevant.Ìò òÓ  ÓA.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àPatrolman€David€Russell€of€the€Jackson€Police€Department€arrested€theÏdefendant€about€9:40€p.m.€on€June€1€at€an€apartment€building€in€Jackson.€€When€heÍtook€the€defendant€into€custody,€Russell€found€several€items€on€the€defendantððsÏperson.€€One€of€the€items€was€a€folded€page€from€the€June€1st€edition€of€òòThe€JacksonÏSunóó€in€a€back€pocket.€€The€defendant€was€allowed€to€keep€the€newspaper€for€readingÏmaterial€after€being€booked€at€the€jail.€€This€was€a€routine€practice.Ìà àRussell€said€he€noticed€the€newspaper€contained€an€article€about€the€shooting.€ÏHe€testified€a€newspaper€article€shown€to€him€by€the€assistant€district€attorney€generalÏð ðappearedðð€to€be€the€same€newspaper€article.€€He€remembered€the€headline€about€theÏshooting€was€on€the€right€side€of€the€paper,€and,€although€he€did€not€read€the€article,Ïhe€remembered€it€dealt€with€grief€over€the€victimððs€death.Ìà àRussell€said€the€next€morning€he€thought€the€newspaper€might€be€relevant€soÏhe€decided€to€make€an€effort€to€locate€it.€€Detention€Specialist€Tracy€Chapman€locatedÏthe€paper€in€the€defendantððs€cell.€€It€was€located€under€a€mattress.€€Russell€said€heÏforwarded€the€paper€to€an€investigator.€€The€paper€introduced€in€court€appeared€to€beÏthe€paper€found€in€the€defendantððs€possession€the€night€he€was€taken€into€custody,€theÏone€found€in€his€cell,€and€the€article€he€forwarded€to€an€investigator.Ìà àChapman€told€jurors€the€defendant€was€the€only€one€in€the€cell€when€he€wasÏplaced€there€but€he€was€later€moved.€€She€could€not€say€for€certain€that€no€one€elseÏhad€been€placed€in€the€cell.€Ìà àThe€trial€court€admitted€the€newspaper€into€evidence€but€said€the€article€aboutÏthe€shooting€would€not€be€read€to€the€jury.€€€à àÌÌò òÓ  ÓB.€€€ó óÌÓ  ÓÌ€à àThe€defendant€argues€the€most€the€witnesses€could€say€was€that€the€paperÏð ðappearsðð€to€be€the€one€in€the€defendantððs€possession.€No€one€knew€for€sure€it€was€theÏsame€paper.€€Thus,€the€defendant€claims€the€ð ðchain€of€custodyðð€was€not€established.Ìà àThe€state€is€not€required€to€establish€the€identity€of€a€newspaper€beyond€allÏpossibility€of€doubt.€òòState€v.€Fergusonóó,€741€S.W.2d€125,€127€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.Ïòòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1987).€See€òòRitter€v.€Stateóó,€3€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€372,€378,€462ÏS.W.2d€247,€250€(1970),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1971).€€Nor€is€the€state€required€toÏestablish€facts€that€exclude€every€possibility€of€tampering.€òòFergusonóó,€741€S.W.2d€atÏ127.€€See€òòRitteróó,€3€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€378,€462€S.W.2d€at€250.€€However,€theÏcircumstances€established€by€the€state€must€reasonably€assure€the€identity€of€the€itemÏand€its€integrity.€€òòFergusonóó,€741€S.W.2d€at€127.€€See€òòRitteróó,€3€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€378,Ï462€S.W.2d€at€250.€Ìà àThe€question€of€whether€the€State€established€the€requisite€chain€of€custody€toÏjustify€the€admission€of€the€newspaper€into€evidence€was€a€question€which€addressedÏitself€to€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Beechóó,€744€S.W.2d€585,€587Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1987);€€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€705€S.W.2d€681,Ï684€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1985);€€òòWade€v.€Stateóó,€529€S.W.2dÏ739,€742€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1975);€òòState€v.€Robert€Glen€GrissomÏIIIóó,€Henderson€County€No.€02„C„01„9204„CC„00076€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,ÏMarch€10,€1993)(admission€of€blood€sample);€òòState€v.€Greg€Leeóó,€Anderson€County€No.Ï225€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€January€22,€1991)(admission€of€drug€evidence).€ÏThis€Court€will€not€interfere€with€the€exercise€of€this€discretion€unless€it€clearly€appearsÏon€the€face€of€the€record€that€the€trial€court€abused€it.€€€òòBeechóó,€744€S.W.2d€at€587;ÍòòJohnsonóó,€705€S.W.2d€at€684;€€òòWadeóó,€529€S.W.2d€at€742;€òòRobert€Glen€Grissom€IIIóó,ÏHenderson€County€No.€02„C„01„9204„CC„00076€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€MarchÏ10,€1993)(admission€of€blood€sample);€òòGreg€Leeóó,€Anderson€County€No.€225€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€January€22,€1991)(admission€of€drug€evidence).€€In€the€case€òòsubóóÏòòjudiceóó,€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€admitting€the€newspaper€intoÏevidence.€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓC.Ìó ó€ÌÓ  Óà àThe€defendant€argues€the€newspaper€was€given€an€ð ðaura€of€mysteryðð€since€theÏjurors€were€not€allowed€to€see€it.€The€paper€invited€speculation€and€had€no€relevance.Ìà àThe€defendant€had€the€paper€in€his€pants€pocket€when€he€was€taken€intoÏcustody.€It€was€folded€to€a€story€about€the€shooting.€€As€the€trial€court€noted,€it€showedÏthe€defendant€had€an€interest€in€the€case.€The€fact€that€he€had€the€paper€on€his€personÏwas€relevant.Ìà àÌò òÓ  ÓD.€ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€defendant€also€argues€a€procedural€rule€requiring€that€all€exhibits€be€takenÏto€the€jury€room€was€violated€and€resulted€in€ð ðprejudice€to€the€judicial€process.ðð€As€aÏresult,€reversal€is€warranted.€Ìà àTennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€30.1€requires€that€exhibits€be€taken€toÏthe€jury€room.€The€rule€provides€an€exception€for€good€cause.€€In€this€case,€the€trialÍcourt€admitted€the€paper,€but€the€court€decided€its€contents€would€not€be€related€to€theÏjury€because€ð ðit€would€be€replete€with€all€kinds€of€hearsay€and€possibly€unreliableÏinformation.ðð€€This€certainly€satisfies€the€ð ðgood€causeðð€exception€to€Rule€30.1.Ìà àÌò òÓ  ÓE.Ìó ó€ÌÓ  Óà àThe€defendant€tries€to€raise€for€the€first€time€on€appeal€a€related€issue,€namely,Ïno€exhibits€were€given€to€the€jury€for€their€deliberations€and€thus€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€30.1Ïwas€violated.€€This€issue€was€not€raised€in€the€motion€for€new€trial€and,€therefore,€isÏwaived.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e).€€Furthermore,€the€record€is€silent€as€to€whether€exhibitsÏwere€given€to€the€jury€or€not.Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓÇIII.Ìó óà àÌÓ  Óà àThe€defendant€contends€he€was€deprived€of€his€constitutional€right€to€testify€inÏsupport€of€his€defense.€€The€defendant€argues€he€would€have€testified,€but€he€wasÏdissuaded€because€the€trial€court€said€the€jury€was€ready€to€go€home.€€Additionally,€heÏclaims€a€sheriffððs€deputy€attending€the€jury€made€a€similar€comment.€€The€defendantÏsaid€he€ð ðchose€not€to€testify€based€on€his€perception€that€such€a€choice€by€him€wouldÏsomehow€irritate€the€jury.ðð€Ìò òÓ  ÓA.€ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€trial€court€did€say€before€closing€arguments€began€that€counsel€might€wantÏto€keep€closing€arguments€short€because€the€court€sensed€the€jury€was€becomingÏrestless€as€a€result€of€repetitious€testimony.€But,€as€the€state€points€out€in€its€brief,€theÏcomment€occurred€after€the€proof€was€closed;€and€the€comment€would€not€haveÏimpacted€the€defendantððs€decision€to€testify.€€There€is€nothing€in€the€record€regardingÏany€other€comments€made€by€the€trial€court€or€the€deputy€assigned€to€the€jury.€Ìà àWhen€the€defense€began€its€case€on€the€second€day€of€trial,€defense€counselÏstated€they€would€present€four€witnesses€including€the€defendant.€€The€defense€calledÏone€witness.€€At€the€conclusion€of€that€testimony,€the€record€indicates€defense€counselÏand€the€defendant€conferred.€€Counsel€then€met€with€the€court€to€discuss€juryÏinstructions.€€The€court€indicated€it€would€not€decide€on€whether€to€give€a€self€defenseÏinstruction€requested€by€the€defendant€until€the€proof€was€closed.€€The€defenseÏcounsel€said€they€would€not€close€the€proof€until€they€raised€the€issue€of€self„defense.€ÍA€brief€recess€followed.€€The€defense€then€rested.€€The€defendant€was€not€advised€ofÏhis€right€to€testify€in€a€jury„out€hearing€nor€was€he€questioned€regarding€his€decisionÏnot€to€testify€at€trial.Ìò òÓ  ÓÌB.Ì€ó óÌÓ  Óà àCriminal€defense€attorneys€often€ask€for€a€jury„out€hearing€in€order€to€place€onÏthe€record€the€fact€the€defendant€was€advised€of€his€right€to€testify€and€the€defendantððsÏdecision€not€to€take€the€stand.€€This€was€not€done€in€this€case.€€Moreover,€thisÏprocedure€is€not€required€by€the€law.€€òòState€v.€Danny€L.€Evansóó,€Shelby€County€No.Ï02C01„9205„CR„00109€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€November€10,€1993),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.Ïòòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€March€28,€1994).€€Ìà àThe€trial€court€has€no€obligation€or€duty€to€advise€the€defendant€of€his€right€toÏtestify€nor€establish€for€the€record€that€he€waived€his€right€knowingly,€voluntarily€orÏintelligently.€òò€State€v.€Danny€L.€Evansóó,€Shelby€County€No.€02C01„9205„CR„00109Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€November€10,€1993),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€March€28,Ï1994).€€No€Tennessee€authority€suggests€that€is€the€law.€€The€waiver€of€his€right€isÏpresumed€from€the€defendantððs€failure€to€indicate€his€intention€to€do€so.€€òòEvansóó,€ShelbyÏCounty€No.€02C01„9205„CR„00109€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€November€10,€1993);ÏòòState€v.€Perry€Rileyóó,€Wilson€County€No.€01„C„01„9201„CR„00040€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏNashville,€October€22,€1992),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó(Tenn.€February€1,€1993);€òòState€v.ÏAubreyel€B.€Akbaróó,€Shelby€County€No.€46€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€April€6,€1988),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.Ïòòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€July€25,€1988).Ì€Ìò òÓ  ÓC.€Ìó óà àÌÓ  Óà àThe€defendant€states€ð ðit€is€indisputable€that€the€record€plainly€demonstrates€thatÏthe€defendant€chose€not€to€testifyðð€based€upon€his€perception.€€The€record€of€the€trialÏindicates€no€such€thing.€€There€is€no€mention€in€the€trial€record€of€the€defendantððsÏdecision€regarding€his€testimony.€The€first€mention€of€this€issue€is€made€in€theÏdefendantððs€statement€portion€of€the€presentence€report.€€The€issue€was€discussedÏwhen€the€defendant€was€sentenced€and€also€at€the€motion€for€new€trial.€Ìà àThe€defendant€also€complains€about€the€record€and€lack€of€inquiry€into€thisÏissue.€It€is€the€defendantððs€responsibility€to€prepare€a€record€for€appellate€review.€ÏWhen€an€accused€seeks€appellate€review€of€an€issue€in€this€Court,€it€is€the€duty€of€theÏaccused€to€prepare€a€record€which€conveys€a€fair,€accurate€and€complete€account€ofÏwhat€transpired€with€respect€to€the€issues€which€form€the€basis€of€the€appeal.€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.€24(b);€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€783„84€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.Ïòòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).€Allegations€contained€in€pleadings€are€not€evidence.€€Also,€theÏarguments€of€counsel€and€the€recitation€of€facts€contained€in€a€brief,€or€similarÏpleading,€are€not€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Robertsóó,€755€S.W.2d€833,€836€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Ïòòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1988).€Ìà àThe€record€simply€does€not€support€the€defendantððs€claim.€€Assuming€the€trialÏcourt€did€make€such€a€comment€regarding€a€restless€jury,€the€defendant€has€still€failedÏto€show€how€such€a€comment€impacted€his€decision€not€to€testify€and€how€that€madeÏthe€decision€involuntary.Ìà àThe€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIV.ó óÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€defendant€next€contends€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€€permitting€aÏcase„in„chief€witness€to€testify€as€a€rebuttal€witness.Ìà àThe€defense€called€Sherry€Trice€as€a€witness.€€Trice€said€she€was€drinkingÏð ðquite€a€bitðð€of€alcohol€with€two€friends€on€an€apartment€porch.€Trice€said€she€sensed€aÏfight€between€the€men€and€left€to€get€her€children.€€She€did€not€see€the€defendantÏshoot€the€victims€but€she€heard€gunshots€on€her€way€to€a€nearby€apartment.€€She€saidÏshe€ran€into€Blount€who€was€being€chased€around€the€complex.€€Trice€said€Blount€hadÏa€gun,€and,€when€they€encountered€one€another,€Blount€turned€and€began€chasing€theÏdefendant.Ìà à€The€state€called€Vicki€Carpenter€as€a€rebuttal€witness.€€She€had€been€drinkingÏwith€Trice.€€Before€she€testified,€the€defense€objected.€€Counsel€argued€Carpenter€wasÏa€case„in„chief€witness€and€was€not€a€proper€rebuttal€witness.€€After€the€judge€stressedÏto€the€prosecutor€that€she€could€only€rebut€what€Trice€had€said,€the€questioning€ofÏCarpenter€began.Ìà àCarpenter€told€jurors€that€she€saw€the€first€shot€fired€and€it€was€fired€by€theÏdefendant.€€She€also€said€Blount€did€not€have€a€gun.€€When€these€observations€wereÏmade,€Trice€had€already€left€the€porch€to€get€her€children.€€The€defense€objectedÏagain.€€The€judge€reiterated€that€Carpenter€could€only€testify€as€to€what€she€saw€whenÏshe€was€with€Trice.€€He€then€instructed€the€jury€to€disregard€a€portion€of€her€testimonyÍbecause€it€was€improper€rebuttal€evidence.€Ìà àThe€prosecutor€made€another€attempt€to€use€her€testimony€but€the€examinationÏof€Carpenter€quickly€ended€after€she€said€that€Trice€was€not€with€her€when€any€of€theÏshots€were€fired.Ìò òÓ  ÓA.ó óÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€defendant€claims€a€€reversal€is€required€pursuant€toò ò€òòó óState€v.€Westóó,€825ÏS.W.2d€695€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€The€defendantððs€reliance€on€òòWestóó€is€misplaced.€ÏIn€òòWestóó,€the€state€offered€testimony€from€a€witness€in€rebuttal€who€was€an€eyewitnessÏto€the€shooting.€This€Court€noted€the€ð ðrebuttalðð€witness€was€actually€the€strongestÏwitness€the€state€had€for€its€case€implying€that€the€witness€should€have€been€calledÏduring€the€stateððs€case„in„chief.€€The€state€had€also€failed€to€notify€the€defense€thisÏeyewitness€existed.Ìà àIn€this€case,€the€defendant€does€not€complain€he€was€not€notified€of€CarpenterððsÏexistence.€€In€fact,€Carpenter€was€drinking€with€Trice.€€The€meat€of€the€defenseððsÏcomplaint€is€that€Carpenter€did€not€have€proper€rebuttal€evidence.€Unlike€the€testimonyÏof€the€ð ðrebuttalðð€witness€in€òòWestóó,€Carpenterððs€testimony€was€not€strikingly€different€fromÏother€state€witnesses€who€saw€the€defendant€fire€first€and€who€also€observed€thatÏBlount€did€not€have€a€gun.€€€Ìò òÓ  ÓB.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€phrase€"rebuttal€evidence"€may€be€defined€as€evidence€"which€tends€toÏexplain€or€controvert€evidence€produced€by€an€adverse€party."€€òòCozzolino€v.€Stateóó,€584ÍS.W.2d€765,€768€(Tenn.€1979).€€This€phrase€encompasses€"[a]ny€competent€evidenceÏwhich€explains€or€is€a€direct€reply€to,€or€a€contradiction€of,€material€evidenceÏintroduced"€by€an€adverse€party.€òòNease€v.€Stateóó,€592€S.W.2d€327,€331€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1979).€€Rebuttal€evidence€is€properly€admitted€for€theÏpurpose€of€impeaching€a€witness€through€the€use€of€a€prior€inconsistent€statement.€ÏòòMonts€v.€Stateóó,€218€Tenn.€31,€57„58,€400€S.W.2d€722,€733„34€(1966);€òòGray€v.€Stateóó,Ï194€Tenn.€234,€247„48,€250€S.W.2d€86,€92€(Tenn.€1952);€òòBeasley€v.€Stateóó,€539€S.W.2dÏ820,€824€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€€1976).€See€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€613(b).€Ìà àQuestions€concerning€the€admission€or€rejection€of€rebuttal€evidence€rest€withinÏthe€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court;€and€an€appellate€court€will€not€interfere€with€theÏexercise€of€this€discretion€unless€it€is€clear€on€the€face€of€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÏhas€abused€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Scottóó,€735€S.W.2d€825,€828€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.Ïòòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1987).€€This€Court€agrees€with€the€defendant€that€most€ofÏCarpenterððs€testimony€was€not€proper€rebuttal€evidence.€€The€trial€court,€recognizingÏthis€after€the€witness€testified,€gave€a€curative€instruction€to€the€jury€to€disregard€theÏtestimony.Ìà àThe€trial€court€cured€any€potential€error€by€instructing€the€jury€not€to€consider€theÏimproper€testimony.€€òòState€v.€Westóó,€767€S.W.2d€387,€397€(Tenn.€1989),€òòcertóó€òòdeniedóó,Ï497€U.S.€1010,€110€S.Ct.€3254,€111€L.Ed.2d€764€(1990);€€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€763€S.W.2dÏ756,€761€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€òòState€v.€Newsomeóó,€744€S.W.2d€911,€915€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.1987);€òòState€v.€Mayoóó,€735€S.W.2d€811,€€816„17Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€A€jury€is€presumed€to€follow€a€trial€judgeððs€curativeÏinstruction.€€òòState€v.€Fosteróó,€755€S.W.2d€846,€849€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóóÍ(Tenn.€1988);€òòNewsomeóó,€744€S.W.2d€at€915;€€òòState€v.€Lawsonóó,€695€S.W.2d€202,€204Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985);€òòState€v.€Bartonóó,€626€S.W.2d€296,€298€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.Ïòòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1981).Ìà àThe€defendant€was€not€prejudiced.€€Carpenterððs€testimony€was€repetitious€ofÏearlier€state€witnesses€who€saw€the€shooting€and€said€that€Blount€was€unarmed.€€TheÏdefendant€admitted€to€Investigator€Hearn€that€he€shot€the€victims;€he€also€said€BowenÏhad€a€gun;€he€did€not€indicate€Blount€had€a€gun.€€Carpenterððs€testimony€could€not€haveÏaffected€the€jury€verdict.Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓV.€ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€defendant€next€contends€the€prosecution€withheld€exculpatory€evidence,Ïnamely,€the€victims€belonged€to€a€gang.€The€defendant€argues€that€had€he€beenÏprovided€this€information€and€the€opportunity€to€investigate€it,€it€may€have€led€toÏcompetent€evidence€which€would€have€corroborated€his€claims€of€self„defense.Ìà àAt€the€August€8,€1995€sentencing,€Hal€Armstrong€a€friend€of€both€the€defendantÏand€victim€Blount,€testified€he€told€the€district€attorney€general,€a€police€officer,€and€theÏsheriff€that€the€shooting€was€a€ð ðgang„related€incident.ðð€€The€following€colloquyÏoccurred€during€direct€examination:€ÌÓÓÓ` °„X<À–XÓà8 àà8 àA.à à[T]he€people€that€was€involved€„„€the€young€man€thatÏwas€à àkilled€„„€he€was€a€gang€member.€€And€Mr.ÏMichael€[Bowen]€à à„„€he€was€a€gang€member.€ÌÌ€€à8 àà8 àQ.à àHow€do€you€know€that?ÌÌà8 àà8 àA.à0 àI€have€been€told€that.€I€have€saw€them€in€action€andÏà àà àeverything.ÌÌà8 àà8 àQ.à àDo€you€remember€who€told€you€that?ÌÌà8 àà8 àA.à0 àI€didnððt€have€to€see€it.€There€was€a€member€of€theÏà àà à(inaudible),€and€it€was€well€known€inÏHenderson€that€they€were€members€of€this€gang.€ÌÓÓÌà àAt€the€motion€for€new€trial€on€November€6,€1995,€the€defense€again€complainedÏabout€the€withholding€of€exculpatory€information:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àÌÓ ` °„X<‚îp”X Óà8 àà8 àDefense:à0 àAt€sentencing€Mr.€Hal€Armstrong€brought€up€theÏà àà àfact€that€he€had€told€InvestigatorsÏthat€the€two€alleged€victims€were€in€gangs.€HeÏbelieved€the€gang€to€be€called€the€Vice€Lords.€ÌÌà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à àNow,€wait€a€minute.€Go€back€over€that€now.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àSure.€Mr.€Armstrong€„€„€at€sentencing€„„ÌÌà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à àAt€sentencing?ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à0 àYes,€Sir.€Stated€that€he€had€told€the€ProsecutorsÏ„„€or€had€told€these€investigators€that€theseÏvictims€„„€both€the€deceased€and€the€one€whoÏlived,€were€in€a€gang.€€Of€course,€that€would€beÏreal€helpful€in€defending€such€a€case,€but€weÏhad€no€knowledge€of€that.€€Apparently€,€Mr.ÏArmstrong€said€that€he€told€somebody,€and€weÏbelieve€that€if€we€had€a€new€trial€that€we€couldÏdevelop€that€and€find€out€more€on€this€„„ÌÌÓ  Óà à*€€*€€*€€*€ÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à àThe€two€victims€allegedly€were€in€a€gang?ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à0 àYes€sir,€and€that€they€had€been€active€in€gangÏà àà àactivity.€But€not€knowing€thatÏbefore€hand€„„€you€à àà àknow€„„€I€had€noÍopportunity€to€„„ÌÌà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à àJust€that€they€were€in€a€gang.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àYes,€sir.ÌÌà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à àActive€in€a€gang?ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àYes,€sir.ÌÌà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à àNow€how€would€that€help€you?€That€wouldnððt€beÏa€à àà àdefense?ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àNo€sir,€but€it€could€have€lead€to€more€witnesses.ÏI€à àà àdonððt€know€where€it€could€have€lead.€I€didnððtÏhave€à àà àthat€information.€ÌÌà8 àà8 àThe€Court:à0 àI€mean€„„€you€know€„„€even€if€they€were€in€gang,Ïà àà àyou€canððt€shoot€them?€Okay.€ÌÓÓÌà àThe€defendant€argues€the€state€had€knowledge€about€the€murder€being€gang„related,€but€the€prosecution€never€communicated€the€information€to€the€defendant.€ÏThus,€the€defendant€seeks€a€reversal€of€his€conviction€or,€in€the€alternative,€anÏevidentiary€hearing€to€determine€whether€the€witness€communicated€this€to€authoritiesÏand€whether€there€is€any€recording€of€it.€Ìà àIn€the€landmark€case€of€òòBrady€v.€Marylandóó,€373€U.S.€83,€83€S.Ct.€1194,€10ÏL.Ed.2d€215€(1963),€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€prosecution€has€aÏconstitutional€duty€to€voluntarily€furnish€the€accused€with€any€exculpatory€evidenceÏthat€pertains€to€(a)€the€guilt€or€innocence€of€the€accused€and/or€(b)€the€punishmentÏwhich€may€be€imposed€if€the€accused€is€convicted€of€a€criminal€offense.€The€Court€saidÏin€òòBradyóó€that€"suppression€by€the€prosecution€of€evidence€favorable€to€an€accusedÏupon€request€violates€due€process€where€the€evidence€is€material€either€to€guilt€or€toÍpunishment."€373€U.S.€at€87,€83€S.Ct.€at€1196„97,€10€L.Ed.2d€at€219.€Thus,€forÏevidence€to€fall€within€the€constitutional€duty€of€disclosure,€it€must€be€established€thatÏthe€evidence€is€material€to€the€defense€or€the€sentence€that€may€be€imposed€if€theÏaccused€is€found€guilty.€Ìà àIn€òòUnited€States€v.€Bagleyóó,€473€U.S.€667,€105€S.Ct.€3375,€87€L.Ed.2d€481Ï(1985)€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€set€forth€the€criteria€for€determining€whetherÏevidence€is€exculpatory€in€the€constitutional€sense.€The€Court€said€that€evidence€isÏmaterial€"if€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€had€the€evidence€been€disclosed€toÏthe€defense,€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different."€473€U.S.€at€682,Ï105€S.Ct.€at€3383,€87€L.Ed.2d€at€494.€The€Supreme€Court€reaffirmed€the€òòBagleyóóÏstandard€for€determining€materiality€in€òòKyles€v.€Whitleyóó,€514€U.S.€419,€___,€115€S.Ct.Ï1555,€1566,€131€L.Ed.2d€490,€505„08€(1995).€The€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÏfollowed€òòBagleyóó€andòò€Kylesóó€in€òòState€v.€Edginóó,€902€S.W.2d€387,€390„91€(Tenn.€1995).Ìà àIn€the€recent€case€of€òòKyles€v.€Whitleyóó,€the€United€States€Supreme€CourtÏexplained€more€fully€its€use€of€the€term€ð ðreasonable€probabilityðð€in€the€òòBagleyóóÏstandard:ÌòòÓÓÌà8 àà8 àBagleyððsóó€touchstone€of€materiality€is€a€ð ðreasonableÏprobabilityðð€of€a€different€result,€and€the€adjective€isÏimportant.€The€question€is€not€whether€the€defendant€wouldÏmore€likely€than€not€have€received€a€different€verdict€withÏthe€evidence,€but€whether€in€its€absence€he€received€a€fairÏtrial,€understood€as€a€trial€resulting€in€a€verdict€worthy€ofÏconfidence.€€A€ð ðreasonable€probabilityðð€of€a€different€resultÏis€accordingly€shown€when€the€Governmentððs€evidentiaryÏsuppression€ð ðundermines€confidence€in€the€outcome€of€theÏtrial.ððÌÌ€ÌÓÓ514€U.S.€at€___,€115€S.Ct.€at€1566,€131€L.Ed.2d€at€506€(quoting€òòBagley€v.€UnitedÏStatesóó,€473€U.S.€at€678,€105€S.Ct.€3381,€87€L.Ed.€at€491).Ìà à€Initially€the€defendant€complains€in€his€brief€that€ð ðno€significant€inquiry€of€theÏdetails€of€this€matter€appears€in€the€record.ðð€€As€the€state€points€out€in€its€brief,€theÏdefendant€had€three€months€from€the€time€of€the€sentencing€hearing€when€this€issueÏfirst€came€up€until€the€motion€for€a€new€trial€on€November€6,€1995€to€develop€this€issueÏand€demonstrate€what€information€the€victimsðð€gang€connection€would€have€broughtÏforth.€The€defense€made€no€attempt€to€offer€any€evidence€about€this€issue€at€theÏhearing€on€the€motion€for€a€new€trial.Ìà àThe€defendantððs€claim€of€a€òòBradyóó€violation€must€fail€for€two€reasons.€€First,€theÏstate€did€not€suppress€this€evidence.€The€trial€record€indicates€defense€counsel€wasÏaware€of€the€gang€connection.€€Witness€Candice€Jones€was€a€friend€of€the€victim.€€HerÏaunt€dated€the€victim€Blount.€€During€the€cross„examination€of€Jones€the€following€lineÏof€questioning€occurred:ÌÓÓÓ ` °„X<”•X Óà8 àà8 àDefense:à0 àMr.€Blount€and€you€were€a€member€of€the€sameÏà àà àà àà àgroup€werenððt€you?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à àI€beg€your€pardon.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àWerenððt€yððall€in€a€group€together?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à àYes.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àYes?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à àNo€„„€we€hung€out€together.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à0 àYou€and,€I€believe,€your€sister€were€part€of€thatÏà àà àà àà àgroup?€WasÏMichael€Bowen€a€part€of€that€group?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à àWe€hung€out€together.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à0 àDid€this€group€identify€with€each€other€by€wearingÏà àà àà àà àbandanas?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à àEverybody€wore€bandanas.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àEveryone?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à àPretty€much.ÌÌà8 àà8 àDefense:à àAnd€who€is€everyone?ÌÌà8 àà8 àJones:à0 àPeople€around€town.€People€that€went€to€schoolÏà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àtogether.€Ì€ÌÌÓÓà àIt€is€evident€from€defense€counselððs€questioning€she€knew€or€suspected€theÏvictims€and€others€were€members€of€a€gang.€€It€is€common€knowledge€gang€membersÏwear€bandanas€of€a€particular€color.€€Defense€counsel€could€have€examined€theÏpersonal€effects€of€the€victims€seized€by€the€police€to€determine€if€a€bandana€wasÏpresent.€€Moreover,€Hal€Armstrong€was€a€close,€personal€friend€of€the€defendant.€€HeÏwas€available€to€defense€counsel.Ìà àThe€prosecution€is€not€required€to€furnish€information€which€is€known€to€theÏaccused.€€òòState€v.€Marshallóó,€845€S.W.2d€228,€233€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóóÏ(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Caldwellóó,€656€S.W.2d€894,€896„97€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983);ÏòòBanks€v.€Stateóó,€556€S.W.2d€88,€90€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1977).€ÏFurthermore,€the€prosecution€is€not€required€to€provide€information€which€is€equallyÏavailable€to€both€the€prosecution€and€the€defense.€€òòMarshallóó,€845€S.W.2d€at€233.Ìà àSecond,€the€evidence€was€not€material€in€the€context€of€this€case.€€TheÏdefendant€has€failed€to€prove€that€ð ðthere€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€had€theÍevidence€been€disclosed€to€the€defense,€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€beenÏdifferent.ðð€€As€the€trial€court€noted,€just€because€an€individual€is€a€gang€member€doesÏnot€mean€shooting€him€is€a€legal€homicide.€€Furthermore,€the€defendant€admitted€toÏshooting€the€two€men.€Witnesses€said€the€defendant€was€the€first€aggressor€andÏBlount€did€not€have€a€gun.€Ìà àThe€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€JOE€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ__________________________________Ì€€€€€€JOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ__________________________________Ì€€€€€€€€€JERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGE