ÿWPC²0 øH_rk¢î¾Ò'FHÃÏþ\·×:Üš×ÂuÕ¼‰oõÕ¹¿§Ó€™ëcóÆÔWHºÎ¾ÄÎ4+w*çìQR‹’ß}Áü+KâØ)m`g_zMÞפ ÇÕÍņõŒ˜·©«[éã°§üD¢+[Ü ì˜7º¨™/¯ ÷$âÃCÅí!*(:vÕMÙ/¾!T/ßõº9dß°ˆa  yÀñ·~ŽNã'%Z„=¨!Tµèî®PÅZ8'ÎÍJÌ£'ÂùÚF¡Ÿ~xdtºAûÛÚï€ÃOAd˜[5™ˆèì³Ê§¶©A ØxŠ8TÕ^þ‹ðGÈZëý¹vüuIAî¬+dÙøz¤ªpDPd0ÑêÚmÅGì%›I–TJö…QMb9„æ"agh)¥†Ù™-¡,¼Û·õ¶A¬ÃB˜‘B=ëågÖµvÏ?¢t¾]­7¨óùæ¬u3Ùc±z?ý‹BõC¥îJnG·R1`æíéUÎQaÝQxá#èW¸O,cÕ–b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U2N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz U"N‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1 0D÷N;=ŽSEá†ãÝiYFŸ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+Ÿ+b§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+§+ 0ë¯+¯+¯+¯+ Bš,š, 0¤·, D3[- D-Ž- 0K»-»- AS.ÆY. 0¤/ 0DÃ/ A«0˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»No+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularYo†)bk1¬¹¤ ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ñ Ø' Ñ „Ý ƒRQö$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÍò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔContrary€to€Mr.€Jacksonððs€brief,€Mr.€Taylorððs€testimony€did€not€indicate€that€he€was€present€when€Mr.Ð ° ÐThompson€planned€the€murder.€€Furthermore,€although€Mr.€Taylor€testified€that€he€acted€as€ð ðsecurityðð€for€Mr.€ThompsonÐ tÄ Ðwhen€Mr.€Thompson€phoned€Mr.€Jackson,€Mr.€Taylor€merely€Ô_Ôoverheard€Mr.€Thompson€order€Mr.€JacksonÔ_Ô€to€killÐ 8ˆ ÐSergeant€Taylor.€Standing€alone,€this€evidence€does€not€clearly€indicate€that€Mr.€Taylor€was€an€accomplice.€€AnÐ üL Ðaccomplice€is€defined€as€a€person€who€knowingly,€voluntarily€and€with€common€intent€unites€with€the€principal€offenderÐ À Ðin€the€commission€of€the€crime.€€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€985€S.W.2d€9,€16€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€"A€common€test€isÐ „Ô Ðwhether€the€alleged€accomplice€could€have€been€indicted€for€the€offense."€€òòState€v.€Perkinsonóó,€867€S.W.2d€1,€7€(Tenn.Ð H ˜ ÐCrim.€App.€1992).€€òòóóIn€this€case,€there€was€no€evidence€that€Mr.€Taylor€knew€about€the€murder€until€after€Mr.€ThompsonÐ  \ Ðhad€ordered€it.€€Nor€was€there€any€testimony€that€Mr.€Taylor€provided€security€in€order€to€proceed€with€the€plot€to€killÐ Ð  ÐSergeant€Taylor.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ladonte€Montez€Smith,€Joe€Davis€Martin,€and€Shaun€Fly€Smithóó,Ð ” ä  ÐNo.M199700087CCAR3CD,€1999€WL€1210813,€*9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Ô_ÔatÔ_Ô€Nashville,€Dec.€17,€1999).Ð X ¨  ЀÌòòóó |Ý ƒRQö$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÍò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€also€note€that€Mr.€Thompsonððs€fear,€i.e.,€that€if€Mr.€Jackson€testified€then€the€jury€would€believe€that€Mr.Ð ° ÐThompsonððs€refusal€to€testify€implied€that€he€was€hiding€something,€was€moot,€because€Mr.€Jackson€did€not€testify.€€ ÓÝ ƒRQö$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÍò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€In€fact,€it€appears€from€the€record€that€only€three€defense€witnesses€were€shackled. OÝ ƒRQö$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÍò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€court€gave€the€following€curative€instruction:€Ð ° ÐÌà8  àAll€right.€Ladies€and€gentlemen,€we€have€a€situation€here€where€you€need€to€understand€Iððm€going€toÐ 8ˆ Ðgo€ask€you€to€use€this€particular€evidence€only€for€a€certain€thing.€€This€witness€is€being€put€on€in€anÐ üL Ðattempt€by€the€state€to€show€the€nature€of€the€Vice€Lords€and€Charles€Thompsonððs€position€in€it.€€AndÐ À Ðwe€voir€dired€you€all€about€gangs€and€what€you€thought€about€gangs€and€whether€or€not€they€wereÐ „Ô Ðcriminal€organizations€or€social€organizations.€€Things€like€that.€€This€witness€is€only€to€be€used€forÐ H ˜ Ðtestimony€about€vice€lords€and€about€whether€or€not€Mr.€Thompson€has€a€position€in€it.€€ApparentlyÐ  \ ÐMr.€Verico€Jackson€is€not€implicated€at€all€in€this€because€he€doesnððt€understand€or€doesnððt€knowÐ Ð  Ðanything€about€Mr.€Verico€Jackson.Д ä Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àSo€this€testimony,€first,€is€only€to€be€used€as€to€Mr.€Thompson.€€Secondly,€it€may€be€that€youÐ X ¨  Ðwill€get€the€implication€from€this€testimony€that€if€a€gang€commits€a€crime,€and€Mr.€Thompson€wasÐ  l  ; Ðin€charge€of€that€gang,€that€Mr.€Thompson€committed€other€crimes,€other€than€are€on€trial€here.€€NowÐ ° Ðyou€shouldnððt€make€that€inference.€€If€you€did€make€that€inference,€in€no€way€could€you€use€that€toÐ tÄ Ðshow€that€Mr.€Thompson€probably€committed€this€crime,€because€he€had€committed€another€crime.€Ð 8ˆ ÐDoes€everybody€understand€that?ÐüLÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àFor€instance,€if€we€were€trying€a€case€of€shoplifting€and€somebody€put€on€proof€that€twoÐ À Ðmonths€ago€this€same€defendant€committed€Ô_Ôa€shopliftingÔ_Ô€somewhere€else,€you€couldnððt€use€that€toÐ „Ô Ðshow€that€he€committed€this€crime.€€Otherwise€the€police€would€go€out€and€if€they€found€somebodyÐ H ˜ Ðcommitted€a€crime,€letððs€say€a€house€burglary,€and€then€there€were€several€more€burglaries,€they€couldÐ  \ Ðjust€arrest€that€person€for€all€the€burglaries€and€charge€him€with€all€of€them€and€tell€the€jurors€heÐ Ð  Ðcommitted€one,€and€he€would€be€convicted€even€though€there€was€no€proof.€€Do€you€all€understandÐ ” ä  Ðthat?ÐX ¨ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àSo€for€that€reason,€if€there€is€testimony€which€would€make€you€think€there€might€be€anÐ  l  Ðinference€that€Mr.€Thompson€committed€other€crimes,€you€have€to€completely€exclude€that€from€yourÐ à 0  Ðmind.€€And€Iððm€going€to€have€a€charge€at€the€end€of€my€trial€that€ððs€going€to€say€that€if€you€find€aÐ ¤ô  Ðdefendant€has€committed€another€crime€or€crimes,€you€cannot€use€that€against€that€defendant€for€anyÐ h¸  Ðreason€in€this€trial€to€show€they€committed€the€crime€that€is€on€trial€today.€€Does€everybody€understandÐ ,|  Ðthat?Ðð@ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àWhen€we€have€trials€involving€gangs,€thereððs€always€going€to€be€some€kind€of€inference€thatÐ ´  Ða€gang€is,€as€we€talked€about€on€voir€dire,€some€people€think€that€gangs€are€crooked€or€they€commitÐ xÈ  Ðcrimes€or€they€sell€drugs€or€whatever€is€going€on.€€And€itððs€necessary€Ô_ÔforÔ_Ô€the€state€to€be€allowed,€if€theyÐ <Œ Ðcan,€as€part€of€their€theory,€to€prove,€to€try€to€prove€to€you€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€Mr.Ð P ÐThompson€was€a€high€official€in€this€gang,€to€show€their€theory.ÐÄÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àTo€the€same€extent,€though,€if€they€did€prove€that€to€you,€you€canððt€use€that€to€say,€well,€Mr.Ð ˆØ ÐThompson€committed€other€crimes€as€head€of€a€gang,€because€gangs€commit€crimes,€and€so€weððreÐ Lœ Ðgoing€to€convict,€not€because€the€state€has€proved€heððs€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Weððve€onlyÐ ` Ðconvicted€him€because€he€probably€did€it,€because€he€did€other€things.ÐÔ$Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àDo€you€see€how€that€could€be€unfair€to€Mr.€Thompson?€€So€you€need€to€understand€that€evenÐ ˜è Ðthough€this€witness€is€testifying€to€gang€activity€and€heððs€testifying€or€may€testify€that€Mr.€ThompsonÐ \¬ Ðheld€a€high€position€in€the€gang,€you€canððt€use€any€other€crimes€that€the€gang€may€have€committedÐ  p Ðagainst€Mr.€Thompson.€€In€other€words,€thatððs€not€an€element€of€the€offense€and€canððt€be€used€againstÐ ä4 Ðhim.€€Can€you€all€do€that?€€All€right. - ù-(|G2Qö$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^õ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÍò»»Ô d(|3G–$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^õ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G–$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^õ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^õ»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼^õ»»»ÔÑ8€IXXdì»»d8ÑÑ€¨Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îGT^õÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼^õ»îîGT#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àMay€9,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XIX»¼^õÔÌò òÔ#†¼^õ»XXI #ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€CHARLES€THOMPSON€and€VERICOÐ úJ ÐJACKSONòòóóÔ‡XIX»¼^õÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€96„11968,€97„05622€€€€€€Chris€Craft,€JudgeÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W1998„00351„CCA„R10„CD€€Ô_Ô„Ô_Ô€Filed€August€9,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ XIXXXIÔOn€October€31,€1996,€a€Shelby€County€Grand€Jury€indicted€Charles€Thompson€and€Verico€JacksonÐ ŒÜ Ðfor€first„degree€murder.€€Later,€the€defendants€were€also€indicted€for€conspiracy€to€commit€murder.€Ð xÈ ÐFollowing€a€jury€trial,€the€defendants€were€convicted€on€both€counts.€€The€trial€court€dismissed€theÐ d´ Ðconspiracy€charges,€and,€following€a€sentencing€hearing,€sentenced€Charles€Thompson€to€life€withoutÐ P  Ðparole€and€sentenced€Verico€Jackson€to€life.€€On€appeal,€both€defendants€claim€(1)€that€€the€evidenceÐ <Œ Ðwas€insufficient€to€sustain€the€verdicts;€(2)€that€the€trial€court€should€have€severed€the€defendantsððÐ (x Ðtrials;€(3)€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€shackling€defense€witnesses€and/or€providing€extra€security€inÐ d Ðthe€courtroom;€(4)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€excluded€the€victimððs€ð ðdying€declarationðð;€(5)€thatÐ P Ðthe€trial€court€erroneously€excluded€evidence€that€people€other€than€the€defendants€had€recentlyÐ ì< Ðthreatened€the€victim;€and€(6)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€overruled€a€motion€for€mistrial€afterÐ Ø( Ða€witness€testified€that€Defendant€Thompson€had€previously€ordered€other€murders.€€Additionally,Ð Ä ÐDefendant€Thompson€claims€Ô#†XIXX XI#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔ(1)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€allowed€the€state€to€use€exhibits€thatÐ ° Ðhad€been€used€in€a€previous€trial€of€a€codefendant;€(2)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€overruled€aÐ œì Ðmotion€for€mistrial€after€an€attorney€mentioned€the€trial€of€a€codefendant€in€violation€of€a€courtÐ ˆØ Ðorder;€(3)€that€Defendant€Jacksonððs€attorney€had€a€conflict€of€interest€that€prejudiced€DefendantÐ t Ä ÐThompson;€(4)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€excluded€the€prior€inconsistent€statements€of€aÐ `!°  Ðwitness;€(5)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€excluded€evidence€of€a€witnessððs€reputation€forÐ L"œ! Ðtruthfulness;€(6)€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€denied€Defendant€Thompsonððs€request€for€a€specialÐ 8#ˆ" Ðjury€instruction;€and€(7)€that,€at€sentencing,€the€trial€court€erroneously€allowed€the€state€to€introduceÐ $$t# Ðprejudicial€evidence€of€prior€bad€acts.Ð %` $ Ðà  àFinding€no€reversible€error,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€€€Ô#†XIXX XI­ #ÔÔ#†¼^õ»XXI¿#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼^õÔÐ ü%L!% ÐÓ ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ Ô'$#' ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼^õ»àXIP#ÔÔ‡XIX.¼^õÔJerry€L.€Smith,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJames€Curwood€Witt,€Jr.óó€andÐ ¬)ü$) ÐòòRobert€W.€Wedemeyer,€JJóó,€joined.Ð ˜*è%* ÐÌÔ#†¼^õ»XXI5#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼^õÔÌÐ \-¬(-ý ÐPaula€Skahan€and€Gerald€Skahan,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€appellant,€Charles€ThompsonÐ ° ÐÌJames€Ball€and€Joseph€Ozment,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€appellant,€Verico€Jackson.Ð ˆØ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€J.€Ross€Dyer,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€WilliamÐ `° ÐL.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€Jerry€Harris;€Jerry€Kitchen,€Assistant€District€Attorneys;€forÐ L œ Ðappellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ô#†¼^õ»XXI-#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼^õÔÐ 8 ˆ ÐÓÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼^õ»XXIc#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼^õÔÐ  ` ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼^õ»XXIê#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XIX»¼^õÔà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÌò òòòÔ‡ XIXXXIÔÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIÔà@!ìàÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.á#ÔFactual€BackgroundóóˆÐ Ô$  ÐÌó óà  àIn€1996,€Charles€Thompson€and€Verico€Jackson€were€both€high„ranking€members€of€a€gangÔ#†XIXX XIÂ#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔÐ ¬ü  Ðcalled€the€ð ðTraveling€Vice€Lords.ððÔ#†XIXX XIè#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔò ò€€ó óÔ#†XIXX XIg#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔOn€April€19,€1996,Ô#†XIXX XI±#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔ€Charles€Thompson€was€incarcerated€in€theÐ ˜è  ÐShelby€County€Justice€Center€where€he€had€a€verbal€altercation€with€a€Sergeant€Dedrick€Taylor,€aÐ ˆØ  ÐJustice€Center€employee.€€Ô#†XIXX XI#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔFollowing€that€altercation,€Charles€Thompson€telephoned€Verico€JacksonÐ tÄ Ðat€a€local€apartment€and€told€Jackson€that€he€wanted€€Sergeant€Taylor€killed€and€that€he€wanted€toÐ `° Ðsee€news€of€the€killing€on€television€the€next€morning.€Ô#†XIXX XI#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔò ò€ó óÔ#†XIXX XI`#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔ€Jackson€then€related€that€conversation€toÐ Lœ Ðother€members€of€the€gang€who€were€present€in€the€apartment.€€ò òó óÔ#†XIXX XI©#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔJackson€and€the€other€members€ofÐ <Œ Ðthe€gang€armed€themselves€and€left€the€apartment.€€ò òó óÔ#†XIXX XIn#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔThey€walked€toward€the€street€on€which€SergeantÐ (x ÐTaylor€and€his€wife€lived.€€ò òó óÔ#†XIXX XI#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔJackson€then€told€the€other€gang€members€to€kill€Sergeant€Taylor.€ò òó ó€Ð d ÐShortly€thereafter€Sergeant€Taylor€pulled€into€his€driveway€where€he€was€shot€several€times.€ò ò€€ó óHisÐ P Ðwife€heard€gunshots,€but€did€not€see€who€shot€Sergeant€Taylor.€ò òó óÔ#†XIXX XIÆ#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔ€Sergeant€Taylor€died€from€theÐ ð@ Ðgunshot€wounds.€ò ò€ó óÔ#†XIXX XI(#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIԀРÜ, Ðà  àMargaretta€Dotson,€a€woman€who€was€with€the€gang€members€earlier€in€the€evening,€heardÐ Ì Ðgunshots€coming€from€the€area€of€Sergeant€Taylorððs€house.ò òó óÔ#†XIXX XI´#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔ€€€Immediately€after€hearing€the€shots,€sheÐ ¸ Ðsaw€all€of€the€gang€members€run€and€jump€into€a€car€and€drive€away.ò ò€ó óÔ#†XIXX XIÅ#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔ€She€then€returned€to€theÐ ¤ô Ðapartment€that€Charles€Thompson€had€phoned€earlier;€there€she€found€Jackson€and€the€other€gangÐ ”ä Ðmembers.€€ò òó óÔ#†XIXX XI‘#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔThey€all€watched€the€local€news,€and€saw€a€report€about€the€shooting€of€Sergeant€Taylor.€Ð €Ð Ðò òó óÔ#†XIXX XI„ #ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔWhen€the€news€report€aired,€Jackson€and€the€other€gang€members€celebrated€and€made€ð ðgang„signsððÐ l ¼ Ðto€one€another.€Ô#†XIXX XI:!#ÔÔ‡ XIXXXIÔò òó óÐ X!¨ Ðà  àThe€defendants€were€charged€with€first„degree€murder€and€conspiracy€to€commit€first„degreeÐ D"”  Ðmurder.€€ò òó óFollowing€a€jury€trial,€both€defendants€were€convicted€on€both€counts.ò òó ó€€The€court€dismissedÐ 0#€! Ðthe€conspiracy€charges€on€double€jeopardy€grounds.€€After€a€sentencing€hearing,€DefendantÐ $l" ÐThompson€was€sentenced€to€life€without€the€possibility€of€parole€and€Defendant€Jackson€wasÐ %X # Ðsentenced€to€life.€€Ð ô%D!$ ÐÌòòò òÓ  ÓSufficiencyóóó óÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIÔÐ Ì'#& ÐÓM$Óà  àÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.j$#ÔFirst,€both€appellants€claim€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€their€convictions.€Ð ¸($' ÐWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€is€obliged€to€review€thatÐ ¤)ô$( Ðchallenge€according€to€certain€well-settled€principles.€€A€verdict€of€guilty€by€the€jury,€approved€byÐ *à%) Ðthe€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€State's€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€theÐ |+Ì&* Ðtestimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994).€€Although€anÐ ° Ðaccused€is€originally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€of€innocence,€a€jury€verdict€removes€thisÐ œì Ðpresumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€Ð ˆØ ÐHence,€on€appeal,€the€burden€of€proof€rests€with€the€appellant€to€demonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€theÐ tÄ Ðconvicting€evidence.€òò€Id.óóÐ `° Ðà  àOn€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€allÐ L œ Ðreasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2dÐ 8 ˆ Ð832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Where€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€contested,€the€relevant€question€forÐ $ t Ðthe€reviewing€court€is€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€accused€guilty€of€everyÐ  ` Ðelement€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992);Ð ü L  ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€In€conducting€our€evaluation€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€isÐ è 8  Ðprecluded€from€reweighing€or€reconsidering€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929€S.W.2d€380,€383Ð Ô$  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Moreover,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€own€inferences€"for€thoseÐ À  Ðdrawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence."€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779Ð ¬ü  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).Ð ˜è  Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€defendants€were€found€guilty€of€being€criminally€responsible€for€the€first„Ð „Ô  Ðdegree€murder€of€Dedrick€Taylor.€€"A€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offense€committed€byÐ pÀ Ðthe€conduct€of€another€if€.€.€.€[a]cting€with€intent€to€promote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,Ð \¬ Ðor€to€benefit€in€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,€directs,€aids,€or€attemptsÐ H˜ Ðto€aid€another€person€to€commit€the€offense."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402(2).€€€First€degreeÐ 4„ Ðmurder€is€"[a]€premeditated€and€intentional€killing€of€another."€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€39-13-202(a)(1).€Ð  p Ðà  àThe€evidence€in€this€case€was€sufficient€to€support€an€inference€that€Charles€ThompsonÐ  \ Ðordered€Verico€Jackson€to€kill€Sergeant€Taylor€and€that€Verico€Jackson€carried€out€that€order€throughÐ øH Ðsubordinate€members€of€the€Traveling€Vice€Lords.€€Charles€Taylor,€an€inmate,€testified€that€SergeantÐ ä4 ÐTaylor€and€Charles€Thompson€had€a€verbal€altercation.€€He€further€testified€that€he€heard€ThompsonÐ Ð  Ðtelephone€someone€and€ask€for€Verico€Jackson.€€Mr.€Taylor€overheard€Charles€Thompson€say€thatÐ ¼  Ðhe€wanted€Sergeant€Taylor€killed€and€that€he€(Charles€Thompson)€wanted€to€see€evidence€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðkilling€on€the€news€the€next€morning.€€Margaretta€Dotson€testified€that€she€was€visiting€an€apartmentÐ ”ä Ðwhere€Verico€Jackson€was€on€April€19,€1996€and€that€Jackson€got€a€phone€call€between€7:00€andÐ €Ð Ð7:30€that€evening.€€Jackson€took€the€phone€in€another€room€to€take€the€call.€After€Jackson€got€off€theÐ l¼ Ðphone,€he€and€several€other€gang€members€in€the€apartment€began€loading€weapons.€€Robert€Meyer,Ð X ¨ Ða€specialist€in€charge€of€the€inmate€telephone€system,€testified€that€a€phone€call€was€made€fromÐ D!” Ðprison€ð ðpodðð€4„f€to€the€apartment€in€question€at€7:32€p.m.€€Charles€Golden,€a€member€of€theÐ 0"€  ÐTraveling€Vice€Lords,€testified€that€he€was€at€the€apartment€with€Jackson€the€night€of€the€crime.€€HeÐ #l! Ðsaid€that€Jackson€told€him€(Golden)€about€the€altercation€between€Thompson€and€the€victim€and€thatÐ $X" Ðð ðno€one€could€do€that€to€his€chief.ðð€€Golden€said€that€when€the€other€gang€members€said€that€theyÐ ô$D # Ðshould€kill€the€victim,€Jackson€replied€ð ð[Ô_ÔT]hatÔ_Ôððs€what€we€gonna€do.ðð€€Golden,€Jackson,€and€two€otherÐ à%0!$ Ðmen€walked€to€a€local€night€club€nearby.€€Jackson€stayed€in€the€club,€while€Golden€and€the€two€otherÐ Ì&"% Ðmen€found€and€fatally€shot€Sergeant€Taylor.€€Mr.€Golden€testified€that€he€shot€a€.38€caliber€that€night.€Ð ¸'#& ÐAlphonso€Fleming€testified€that,€approximately€April€25th€or€26th,€Charles€Golden€asked€him€toÐ ¤(ô#' Ðhold€a€.38€caliber€gun.€€Mr.€Fleming€hid€the€gun€in€a€closet€until€police€came€and€confiscated€it.€Ð )à$( ÐTommy€Heflin,€a€TBI€firearms€identification€expert,€testified€that€all€nineteen€shell€casings€recoveredÐ |*Ì%) Ðat€the€scene€of€the€murder€were€fired€from€the€weapon€discovered€in€Mr.€Flemingððs€closet€and€thatÐ h+¸&* Ðseveral€bullet€fragments€could€have€been€fired€from€that€gun.€€Finally,€Marcus€Daniels,€another€gangÐ ° Ðmember,€testified€that€Charles€Thompson€was€a€ruling€member€of€the€gang,€and€that€others€had€toÐ œì Ðabide€by€his€orders.€€The€evidence€was€clearly€sufficient€to€support€the€juryððs€verdict.Ð ˆØ ÐÓ  ÓÓ  Óà  àJackson€also€claims,€however,€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€because€all€of€the€evidenceÐ tÄ Ðagainst€Jackson€was€uncorroborated€accomplice€testimony.€€Specifically,€he€claims€that€CharlesÐ `° ÐGolden€and€Charles€Taylor€were€both€accomplices€and€that€neitherððs€testimony€was€corroborated€inÐ L œ Ðcrucial€respects.€€ð ðIn€Tennessee,€it€is€well-settled€that€a€defendant€cannot€be€convicted€on€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðuncorroborated€testimony€of€an€accomplice.ðð€€òòState€v.€Heflinóó,€15€S.W.3d€519,€524€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð $ t Ð1999)(citing€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994)).€€As€the€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÐ  ` Ðhas€noted,€however,Ð ü L  Ðà8  à[Ô_Ôt]hisÔ_Ô€corroborative€evidence€may€be€direct€or€entirely€circumstantial,€and€it€need€notÐ è 8  Ðbe€adequate,€in€and€of€itself,€to€support€a€conviction;€€it€is€sufficient€to€meet€theÐ Ô$  Ðrequirements€of€the€rule€if€it€fairly€and€legitimately€tends€to€connect€the€defendantÐ À  Ðwith€the€commission€of€the€crime€charged.€€It€is€not€necessary€that€the€corroborationÐ ¬ü  Ðextend€to€every€part€of€the€accomplice's€evidence.€€The€corroboration€need€not€beÐ ˜è  Ðconclusive,€but€it€is€sufficient€if€this€evidence,€of€itself,€tends€to€connect€theÐ „Ô  Ðdefendant€with€the€commission€of€the€offense,€although€the€evidence€is€slight€andÐ pÀ Ðentitled,€when€standing€alone,€to€but€little€consideration.€€Ð\¬Ð Ð  ÐÌòòÔ_ÔBigbeeÔ_Ôóó,€885€S.W.2d€at€803.€€Thus,€"only€slight€circumstances€are€required€to€corroborate€anÐ 4„ Ðaccomplice's€testimony."€€òòState€v.€Griffisóó,€964€S.W.2d€577,€589€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997);€òòseeóó€òòalsoÐ  p ÐHeflinóó,€15€S.W.3d€at€524.€€Whether€an€accomplice's€testimony€has€been€sufficiently€corroborated€isÐ  \ Ða€jury€question.€€òòBigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€at€803.Ð øH Ðà  àInitially,€we€are€not€convinced€that€Charles€Taylor€was€an€accomplice.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€any€event,€we€findÐ ä4 Ðthat€the€testimony€of€Mr.€Taylor€and€Mr.€Golden€was€sufficiently€corroborated€by€the€testimony€ofÐ Ð  ÐMargaretta€Dodson,€Robert€Meyer€and€Tom€Maupin.€€Ms.€Dodson€testified€that€she€was€with€Mr.Ð ¼  ÐJackson,€Charles€Golden,€Thomas€Cummings,€Rory€Haywood€and€Hubert€Bond€on€April€19,€1996.€Ð ¨ø ÐAt€approximately€7:00€p.m.€or€7:30€p.m.,€Mr.€Jackson€received€a€phone€call.€€He€took€the€phone€intoÐ ”ä Ða€bedroom€in€the€apartment€and€motioned€for€Mr.€Golden,€Mr.€Cummings€and€Mr.€Haywood€to€joinÐ €Ð Ðhim€in€the€bedroom.€€Ms.€Dodson€testified€that€she€and€Mr.€Bond€stepped€outside€for€a€moment.€Ð l¼ ÐWhen€she€stepped€back€inside,€the€four€other€men€were€loading€weapons.€€After€that,€Ms.€Dodson,Ð X ¨ ÐMr.€Bonds,€and€the€others€left€the€apartment.€€Ms.€Dodson€told€the€jury€that€she€overheard€Mr.Ð ° ÐJackson€tell€Mr.€Golden€that€they€were€ð ðfixing€to€go€over€here€and€take€care€of€their€business.ðð€Ð œì ÐVerico€Jackson€went€into€a€local€bar,€but€the€others€remained€outside.€€At€some€point,€RoryÐ ˆØ ÐHaywood€told€Ms.€Dodson€to€tell€them€when€it€was€10:00€p.m.€€Before€Ms.€Dodson€could€tell€themÐ tÄ Ðit€was€10:00,€however,€Mr.€Golden,€Mr.€Cummings€and€Mr.€Haywood€left€on€foot€toward€theÐ `° Ðvictimððs€house.€€Mr.€Bonds€also€left,€but€he€went€in€another€direction.€€After€that,€Ms.€Dodson€startedÐ L œ Ðwalking€toward€her€friendððs€house€when€she€heard€several€gunshots.€€Following€the€gunshots,€Ms.Ð 8 ˆ ÐDodson€saw€Mr.€Golden,€Mr.€Cummings€and€Mr.€Haywood€all€running€from€the€direction€of€theÐ $ t Ðshots.€€They€all€jumped€in€Mr.€Cummings€car,€and€Verico€Jackson€jumped€in€with€them.€€The€fourÐ  ` Ðmen€drove€back€to€the€apartment,€while€Ms.€Dodson€and€Mr.€Bonds€walked€back€to€the€apartment.€Ð ü L  ÐSome€time€after€they€all€returned€to€the€apartment,€the€local€television€news€reported€that€SergeantÐ è 8  ÐTaylor€had€been€shot.€€Ms.€Dodson€testified€that€when€the€men€in€the€apartment€heard€the€news,€theyÐ Ô$  Ðall€began€to€celebrate,€and€Mr.€Jackson€told€Mr.€Golden,€Mr.€Cummings€and€Mr.€Haywood€that€theyÐ À  Ðð ðtook€care€of€business.ðð€€€Ð ¬ü  Ðà  àRobert€Meyer€and€Tom€Maupin€also€corroborated€the€testimony€of€Charles€Golden€andÐ ˜è  ÐCharles€Taylor.€€Robert€Meyer,€a€telecommunications€consultant€working€for€Shelby€County,€Ð „Ô  Ðtestified€that€several€telephone€calls€were€made€from€Charles€Thompsonððs€prison€pod€to€a€certainÐ pÀ Ðtelephone€number€in€Shelby€County€on€the€day€of€the€murder,€including€a€fifteen„minute€call€madeÐ \¬ Ðat€7:32€p.m.€€Tom€Maupin,€a€Bell€South€employee,€verified€that€the€telephone€number€that€Mr.Ð H˜ ÐMaupin€referred€to€was€the€apartment€that€Ms.€Dodson€and€Mr.€Golden€had€testified€about,€andÐ 4„ Ðwhere€Verico€Jackson€took€the€call.€€In€sum,€the€testimony€of€Charles€Golden€and€Charles€TaylorÐ  p Ðwas€well„corroborated€by€other€testimony€in€this€case.Ð  \ ÐÓ<ÓÓ  Óà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð øH ÐÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIÔò òòòà@<<&ìàÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.5R#ÔSeveranceóóó óÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIԈРä4 Ðà  àÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.žR#ÔNext,€both€defendants€claim€that€the€trial€court€should€have€tried€each€defendant€separately.€Ð Ð  ÐJackson€has€waived€this€issue,€because€he€did€not€raise€the€issue€prior€to€trial€or€base€his€motion€onÐ ¼  Ða€ground€not€previously€known.€€Rule€14€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€provides,Ð ¨ø Ðin€pertinent€part,€ð ð[A]€defendant's€motion€for€severance€of€offenses€or€defendants€must€be€madeÐ ”ä Ðbefore€trial,€except€that€a€motion€for€severance€may€be€made€before€or€at€the€close€of€all€evidenceÐ €Ð Ðif€based€upon€a€ground€not€previously€known.€€òòSeverance€is€waived€if€the€motion€is€not€made€at€theÐ l¼ Ðappropriate€time.óóðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€14(a)(emphasis€added).Ð X ¨ Ðà  àBecause€Thompson€raised€the€issue€at€the€appropriate€time,€we€will€address€the€merits€of€hisÐ D!” Ðclaim.€€At€a€pre„trial€hearing,€Thompson€claimed€that€severance€was€necessary€because€heÐ 0"€  Ðanticipated€that€the€two€defendantsðð€theories€of€the€case€were€different€and€that€a€joint€trial€wouldÐ #l! Ðforce€Thompson€to€defend€against€both€the€stateððs€theory€and€Jacksonððs€theory.€€Thompson€alsoÐ $X" Ðfeared€that€if€Jackson€testified€and€Thompson€did€not,€the€jury€would€likely€infer€that€Thompson€wasÐ ô$D # Ðbeing€evasive.€€Finally,€Thompson€was€fearful€that€evidence€presented€by€Jackson€might€incriminateÐ à%0!$ ÐThompson.€€Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àWhether€a€severance€should€be€granted€is€a€matter€entrusted€to€the€sound€discretion€of€theÐ ¸'#& Ðtrial€court,€and€a€reviewing€court€may€not€disturb€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€absent€an€abuse€of€discretionÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthat€resulted€in€clear€prejudice€to€the€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hutchisonóó,€898€S.W.2d€161,€166€(Tenn.Ð )à$( Ðâ â1994).€€Indeed,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€recently€reminded€us€that€Ð |*Ì%) Ðà8  à[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€state,€as€well€as€the€persons€accused,€is€entitled€to€have€its€rights€protected,€andÐ ° Ðâ âwhen€several€persons€are€charged€jointly€with€a€single€crime,€we€think€the€state€isÐ œì Ðentitled€to€have€the€fact€of€guilt€determined€and€the€punishment€assessed€in€a€singleÐ ˆØ Ðtrial,€unless€to€do€so€would€unfairly€prejudice€the€rights€of€the€defendants.€€€ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌòòState€v.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,€552„53€(Tenn.€2000)(quoting€òòWoodruff€v.€Stateóó,€164€Tenn.€530,Ð L œ Ð538„39,€51€S.W.2d€843,€845€(1932)).Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àWe€find€no€such€prejudice€here.€€According€to€Thompsonððs€brief,€his€theory€was€that€he€neverÐ $ t Ðintended€to€convey€to€Jackson€that€he€wanted€the€victim€killed,€while€Jacksonððs€theory€was€that€heÐ  ` Ðonly€intended€to€frighten€the€victim€to€impress€Thompson.€€Although€the€defendantsðð€respectiveÐ ü L  Ðtheories€of€the€case€were€different,€Thompson€has€not€shown€how€this€resulted€in€a€vitiation€of€hisÐ è 8  Ðrights.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ensleyóó,€956€S.W.2d€502,€509€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Furthermore,€aÐ Ô$  Ðseverance€need€not€be€granted€where€the€evidence€which€was€introduced€could€have€been€admittedÐ À  Ðagainst€him€in€a€separate€trial.€€òòState€v.€Littleóó,€854€S.W.2d€643,€648€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€In€thisÐ ¬ü  Ðcase,€the€stateððs€theory€was€that€Thompson€and€Jackson€engaged€in€a€conspiracy€to€murder€theÐ ˜è  Ðvictim,€so€the€evidence€would€have€been€essentially€the€same€whether€the€defendants€were€triedÐ „Ô  Ðseparately€or€together.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€òòCarruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€at€554€n.39€(Tenn.€2000).Ð pÀ Ðà  àThompson€also€complains€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€Jacksonððs€attorney€during€trial.€€In€a€pre„Ð \¬ Ðtrial€order,€the€trial€court€prohibited€any€inquiries€about€Charles€Goldenððs€trial.€€When€Charles€TaylorÐ H˜ Ðtestified,€Jacksonððs€attorney€asked€him€about€his€testimony€at€Charles€Goldenððs€trial.€€€Because€thisÐ 4„ Ðwas€in€violation€of€a€court€order,€Thompson€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€refused€to€severÐ  p Ðthe€trials€or€grant€a€mistrial.Ð  \ Ðà  àAgain,€we€find€no€prejudice€to€Mr.€Thompson.€€As€Jacksonððs€attorney€was€cross„examiningÐ øH ÐCharles€Taylor,€the€following€colloquy€occurred:Ð ä4 Ðà8  àÔ_ÔMRÔ_Ô.€BALL€(Jacksonððs€Attorney):€Okay.€€Now€you€testified€on€March€18,€1997€in€theÐ Ð  Ðtrial€of€Charles€Golden€in€this€very€courtroom,€didnððt€you?м Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àCHARLES€TAYLOR:€Yes,€I€did.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€We€had€a€hearing,€Mr.€Ball,€about€Mr.€Golden.€€Heððs€testified€before,Ð l¼ Ðbut€we€donððt€need€to€get€into€what€all€that€was€about.ÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐÌThompson€then€moved€for€severance€or€a€mistrial,€and€the€trial€court€denied€the€request:Ð 0"€  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€All€right.€€Mr.€Ball€has€not€asked€anything€as€far€as€whatððs€happenedÐ $X" Ðwith€your€client€that€the€state€didnððt€or€couldnððt€ask.€€As€far€as€Mr.€Goldenððs€trial,€theÐ ô$D # Ðfact€that€he€was€tried€or€not€has€nothing€ð!ð€is€not€prejudicial€in€the€least.€€We€havenððtÐ à%0!$ Ðtalked€about€any€verdicts€or€conclusions.€€And€so€Iððm€going€to€overrule€your€motionÐ Ì&"% Ðfor€a€mistrial€at€this€time.€€Also€overrule€your€motion€for€severance.€€€Ð¸'#&Ð Ð  ÐÐ ¤(ô#' Ðà  àWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€no€prejudice€resulted€from€the€mention€of€Mr.€GoldenððsÐ ° Ðtrial,€and€that€a€severance€was€unnecessary.€€For€the€same€reasons,€we€find€that€the€question€did€notÐ œì Ðcreate€a€ð ðmanifest€necessityðð€requiring€a€mistrial.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€15€S.W.3d€880,€893€(Tenn.Ð ˆØ ÐCrim.€App.€1999)(citations€omitted).€à À àÐ tÄ Ðà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€òòóóÐ `° Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àÌÌÓ  Óòòò òCourtroom€Securityó óóóÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIÔÐ $ t ÐÓŽlÓà  àÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.¸l#ÔNext,€defendant€Thompson€complains€that€he€was€denied€a€fair€trial€because€the€trial€courtÐ  ` Ðemployed€extraordinary€security€measures€during€the€trial.€€Those€measures€apparently€includedÐ ü L  Ðposting€a€metal€detector€outside€the€courtroom,€posting€signs€that€stated€that€certain€items€would€notÐ è 8  Ðbe€allowed€in€the€courtroom,€and€marking€the€entrance€to€the€courtroom€with€ð ðpolice€tape.ðð€Ð Ô$  ÐThompson€argues€that€these€extraordinary€measures€must€have€created€an€unfair€impression€in€theÐ À  Ðjurorsðð€minds€that€the€defendant€was€dangerous.€Additionally,€both€defendants€complain€that€the€trialÐ ¬ü  Ðcourt€erred€by€allowing€several€defense€witnesses€to€appear€before€the€jury€in€shackles,€while€theÐ ˜è  Ðstateððs€witnesses€appeared€without€shackles.€€Finally,€Thompson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÐ „Ô  Ðforcing€the€defense€witnesses€to€enter€the€courtroom€through€a€door€that€led€to€the€jail,€while€theÐ pÀ Ðstateððs€witnesses€were€allowed€to€enter€the€courtroom€through€the€public€entrance.€€Ð \¬ Ѐà  àIt€is€well€settled€that€the€trial€court€has€broad€discretion€in€controlling€the€course€and€conductÐ H˜ Ðof€the€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòPique€v.€Stateóó,€480€S.W.2d€546,€550-551€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1971).€€The€trial€courtÐ 4„ Ðdid€not€abuse€its€discretion€by€providing€extraordinary€security€measures€in€this€case,€because€it€wasÐ  p Ða€reasonable€response€to€the€situation€that€did€not€prejudice€the€defendant.€€The€jury€knew€thatÐ  \ Ðseveral€of€the€witnesses€were€prison€inmates,€and€several€of€the€witnesses€admitted€to€having€beenÐ øH Ðin€gangs.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Suttonóó,€761€S.W.2d€763,€769€(Tenn.€1988)(holding€that€guardððs€reaction€inÐ ä4 Ðreaching€for€weapons€in€response€to€placement€of€suspected€murder€weapon,€a€homemade€knife,€onÐ Ð  Ðdefense€table€within€reach€of€defendant€did€not€deprive€defendant€of€physical€indicia€of€innocenceÐ ¼  Ðwhere€jury€knew€defendant,€along€with€coperpetrators,€were€all€inmates€incarcerated€in€prison).€WeÐ ¨ø Ðfind€no€evidence€that€the€security€measures€prejudiced€Defendant€Thompson.€Ð ”ä Ðòòóóà  àWe€are€also€unconvinced€that€the€trial€courtððs€shackling€of€some€defense€witnesses€prejudicedÐ €Ð Ðeither€defendant.€€Although€both€defendants€rely€on€both€federal€and€state€case€law,€all€of€theÐ l¼ ÐTennessee€cases€involve€situations€in€which€the€defendant€was€shackled,€not€the€defense€witnesses.€Ð X ¨ ÐBecause€shackling€a€defendant€may€adversely€affect€the€presumption€of€the€defendantððs€innocence,Ð D!” Ðthe€use€of€restraints€on€defendants€can€only€be€justified€as€a€necessary€measure€(1)€to€prevent€escape,Ð 0"€  Ð(2)€to€protect€those€present€in€the€courtroom,€and€(3)€to€maintain€order€during€the€trial.€€òòState€v.Ð #l! ÐThompsonóó,€832€S.W.2d€577,€580€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)(citations€omitted).€€òòóóUnlike€a€shackledÐ $X" Ðdefendant,€shackled€witnesses€do€not€directly€affect€the€defendantððs€presumption€of€innocence.€€òòSeeóóÐ ô$D # ÐòòKennedy€v.€Cardwellóó,€487€F.2d€101,€n.5€(6th€Cir.€1973).€€However,€because€shackling€a€defenseÐ à%0!$ Ðwitness€may€affect€the€juryððs€determination€of€the€witnessððs€credibility€and€thus€prejudice€theÐ Ì&"% Ðdefendant,€most€courts,€including€federal€courts,€use€the€same€standard€of€review€in€both€defendantÐ ¸'#& Ðshackling€and€witness€shackling€cases.€€òòKennedyóó,€487€F.2d€at€105;€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€629€P.2d€54Ð ¤(ô#' Ð(Alaska€1981);€òòPeople€v.€Duranóó,€16€Cal.€3d€282,€127€Cal.€Rptr.€618,€621€n.€4,€545€P.2d€1322,€1325Ð )à$( Ðn.€4€(1976);€€òòState€v.€Jacksonóó,€698€So.2d€1299,€1303€(Fla.€Ct.€App.€1997);€òòParker€v.€Stateóó,€567Ð |*Ì%) ÐN.E.2d€105€(Ind.€Ct.€App.€1991);€òòState€v.€Coursolleóó,€255€Minn.€384,€97€N.W.2d€472,€476€(1959);òòóóÐ h+¸&* ÐòòState€v.€Simmonsóó,€26€Wash.€App.€917,€614€P.2d€1316€(1980);€R.€P.€Davis,€Annotation,€Right€ofÐ ° ÐAccused€to€Have€His€Witnesses€Free€from€Handcuffs,€Manacles,€Shackles,€or€the€Like,€75€A.L.R.2dÐ œì Ð762€(1961).€Thus,€we€hold€that€the€decision€whether€to€restrain€a€defense€witness€is€left€to€the€soundÐ ˆØ Ðdiscretion€of€the€trial€court,€subject€to€the€same€considerations€that€would€apply€to€the€physicalÐ tÄ Ðrestraint€of€a€defendant.€Ð `° Ðà  àThe€trial€courtððs€recognition€of€the€potential€prejudice€is€evident€in€the€following€colloquy:Ð L œ Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€Okay.€€I€think€weððre€all€agreed.€€We€need€ð!ð€we€need€some€guidanceÐ 8 ˆ Ðfrom€all€six€attorneys.€€Weððre€going€to€bring€this€witness€around€through€ð!ð€fromÐ $ t ÐDivision€I€around€the€back.€€When€we€handle€inmates,€I€donððt€want,€if€Mr.Ð  ` ÐMontgomery€and€Mr.€Carruthers€are€here,€I€would€like€to€have€them€shackled,€andÐ ü L  Ðif€theyððre€going€to€be€defense€witnesses€ð!ð€if€itððs€all€right€with€you€all,€weððll€justÐ è 8  Ðshackle€all€our€inmates.€€Every€single€one€of€them.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àMR.€HARRIS€(prosecutor):€Your€Honor,€we€would€respectfully,€and€Iððm€notÐ ¬ü  Ðobjecting.€€I€donððt€a€big€ð!ð€Iððm€not€arguing€with€the€Court,€but€I€respectfully€submitÐ ˜è  Ðto€the€Court€this:€Mr.€Charles€Taylor€has€been€exceptionally€cooperative€with€us€andÐ „Ô  Ðwith€his€attorney.€€He€even€met€with€the€others€and€all€of€that.€€To€shackle€him€whenÐ pÀ Ðhe€has€done€nothing€and€when€he€puts€in€an€appearance,€he€shouldnððt€be€taken€downÐ \¬ Ðand€be€treated€like€James€Montgomery€and€Tony€Carruthers.ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Yes,€sir.Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àMR.€HARRIS:€Heððs€not€ð!ð€itððs€not€fair€to€him.€€And€itððs€also€not€fair€to€the€state.€€AndÐ øH ÐI€say€that€in€a€legal€way€and€I€think€the€Court€„„Ðä4Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€I€understand.€€And€the€only€problem€I€have€is€that€ð!ð€and€I€understandÐ ¼  Ðthat€is€that€I€canððt€have€an€appearance€that€the€defense€witnesses€are€untrustworthyÐ ¨ø Ðand€on€death€row€and€the€stateððs€witnesses€arenððt.€€You€know€thatððs€the€problem€thatÐ ”ä ÐI€have,€the€perceptual.ЀÐÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àMR.€HARRIS:€But€my€point,€Your€Honor,€very€simply€.€.€.€is€this.€€Charles€TaylorÐ X ¨ Ðhasnððt€done€anything€to€be€shackled.€€I€mean€he€didnððt€ð!ð€I€mean€itððs€ð!ð€he€hasnððt€doneÐ D!” Ðanything€and€it€puts€an€aura€there€that€is€unfair€to€him.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Yes,€sir.€€But€Iððm€going€to€tell€the€jury€before€we€call€anybody€thatÐ $X" Ðevery€time€we€bring€an€inmate€in,€weððre€going€to€shackle€them€and€it€says€nothingÐ ô$D # Ðabout€the€inmate.€€Itððs€just€the€rule€of€criminal€court.€€That€we€have€this€rule.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN€(Thompsonððs€attorney):€Just€for€the€record,€Judge.€€I€mean,€of€course,Ð ¸'#& Ðman€has€escaped.€€But€for€the€record,€we€donððt€object€to€him€coming€in€withoutÐ ¤(ô#' Ðshackles.€€And€if€your€Honor€sees€fit€to€only€shackle€Carruthers€and€Montgomery,€weÐ )à$( Ðdonððt€have€a€problem€with€that.Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€Maybe€Mr.€Mc€ð!ð€whatever€his€name€is.€McGlowan?аРР ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€Sydney€McGlowan?ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Can€we€let€them€shackle€whoever€they€want€to€as€long€as€we€donððtÐ `° Ðshackle€your€ð!ðÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€As€long€as€itððs€not€only€our€defense€witnesses.€€Because€I€donððt€thinkÐ $ t Ðall€of€them€need€to€be€shackled.Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Okay.€€All€right.€€So€at€this€point,€itððs€not€an€issue.€€All€right.€€If€itÐ è 8  Ðbecomes€an€issue,€let€me€know€it€and€weððll€start€shackling€people.€€€€ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àAfter€the€state€had€finished€its€case„in„chief,€Thompsonððs€attorney€raised€the€issue€ofЬü Ð Ð  ÐÌshackled€witnesses€again:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€Judge,€if€I€could€address€you€about,€I€think€a€very€important€matter.€Ð \¬ ÐI€just€went€back€and€talked€with€our€first€two€witnesses,€who€are€inmates.€€They€areÐ H˜ Ðin€on€nonviolent€offenses.€€They€are€shackled.Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Yes,€maððam.Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€And€the€stateððs€witnesses,€one€person€convicted€of€murder€in€the€firstÐ ä4 Ðdegree€and€serving€a€life€without€parole€sentence,€came€in€here€without€shackles.€Ð Ð  ÐAnd€another€man€who€is€facing€murder€in€the€first„degree€and€numerous€otherÐ ¼  Ðcharges,€who€has,€in€fact,€escaped,€was€not€brought€in€here€in€shackles.€€And€thatððsÐ ¨ø Ða€huge€difference.€€The€juryððs€going€to€think€our€witnesses€are€these€dangerous€peopleÐ ”ä Ðtestifying€for€the€defense,€and€obviously€we€canððt€trust€them€to€behave€in€theÐ €Ð Ðcourtroom.€€And€I€object€to€that.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Okay.€€Now€we€had€a€discussion€of€this€a€few€days€ago,€and€I€broughtÐ D!” Ðit€up€voluntarily.€€And€at€that€time€you€said€you€didnððt€care.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€I€said€either€everyone€shackled€or€no€one€shackled.Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Okay.€That€wasnððt€the€discussion.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€Judge,€I€did€not€say€I€donððt€care.€€We€were€discussing€eitherÐ ¸'#& Ðshackling€everybody€I€thought€or€no€one.€Ð¤(ô#'Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ )à$( Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€Well,€and€then€everyone€said€it€didnððt€make€a€difference€to€them.€€AndÐ ° ÐI€believe€you€stated€on€the€record€you€didnððt€care€whether€or€not€the€stateððs€witnessesÐ œì Ðwere€shackled.ЈØÐ Ð  Ðâ âÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€What€I€didnððt€care€about€was€whether€Tony€Carruthers€and€JamesÐ `° ÐMontgomery€were€shackled.€€I€thought€that€would€be€a€good€idea.€€And€thatððs€whatÐ L œ ÐI€recall€if€I€said€I€donððt€care.€€And€I€think€I€did,€was€about€Tony€Carruthers€and€JamesÐ 8 ˆ ÐMontgomery.Ð$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Okay.€€Okay.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€That€they€probably€need€to€be€shackled.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Mr.€Harris?Ьü Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMR.€HARRIS:€Your€Honor,€the€Courtððs€memory€is,€of€course,€a€lot€better€than€mine.€Ð „Ô  ÐBut€if€I€remember€right,€Your€Honor,€the€concern€that€the€Court€initially€had€wasÐ pÀ Ðbecause€of€threats€to€disrupt€the€proceedings€of€the€Court€that€had€been€transmitted.€Ð \¬ ÐThese€came€from€certain€witnesses.€€And€I€think€we€get€to€a€point,€Your€Honor,Ð H˜ Ðwhere€who€ð!ð€the€question€then€becomes,€who€is€in€charge€of€security?€€And€I€knowÐ 4„ Ðthe€state€is€not.€€But€all€Iððm€saying€is€this,€is€this€when€these€people€are€being€broughtÐ  p Ðin,€the€Sheriffððs€Department€and€the€Sheriffððs€Deputies,€they€have€a€responsibility.€Ð  \ ÐAnd€I€think€thatððs€what€theyððre€trying€to€do€is€to€exercise€that€responsibility€in€a€goodÐ øH Ðway,€and€in€a€way€that€will€not€endanger€anyone.€€And€I€submit€to€you€that€itððs€betterÐ ä4 Ðto€err€on€the€side€of€safety€than€to€be€flippant€and€let€things€happen.€€And€theseÐ Ð  Ðpeople€are€acting€because€of€things€ð!ð€theyððre€not€saying€arbitrarily€all€the€defenseÐ ¼  Ðwitnesses€will€be€shackled.€€What€theyððre€doing€is€theyððre€reacting€to€a€situation€thatÐ ¨ø Ðhas€occurred.€€Itððs€well€documented.€€It€began€when€these€people€were€subpoenaed.€Ð ”ä ÐIt€began€when€they€appeared€in€the€jail.€€It€began€ð!ð€and€itððs€gone€on€through,€andÐ €Ð Ðstatements€that€theyððve€made,€and€I€donððt€think€thereððs€any€use€in€me€rehashing€allÐ l¼ Ðof€that.€€But€I€think€that€that€is€a€very€real€interest,€and€a€very€real€responsibility€forÐ X ¨ Ðthe€Sheriffððs€Department€to€carry€these€things€out.€€And€I€think€they€should€beÐ D!” Ðallowed€to€do€their€job.€€The€Court€can€enter€a€curative€instruction€to€tell€the€jury€toÐ 0"€  Ðdisregard€it.€€And€you€can€handle€it.€€Itððs€been€done€in€other€cases.€€Iððve€triedÐ #l! Ðdefendants€Your€Honor€that€ð!ð€I€tried€defendants€who€have€been€shackled€because€ofÐ $X" Ðtheir€own€„„Ðô$D #Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Sure.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMR.€HARRIS:€And€thatððs€„„Ф(ô#'Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ )à$( Ðà8  àTHE€COURT:€Well,€the€reason€I€brought€it€up€ahead€of€time€is€I€was€going€toÐ ° Ðshackle€all€the€witnesses.€€And€I€was€told€nobody€cared.€€So€I€didnððt€shackle€theÐ œì ÐStateððs€witnesses.€€And€now€thatððs€causing€problems.€€Yes€sir?ЈØÐ Ð  Ðâ âÌà8  àMR.€OZMENT:€(Jacksonððs€attorney):€If€I€may,€Your€Honor,€I€think€itððs€clear€as€farÐ `° Ðas€the€defense€is€concerned,€our€concern€was€certainly,€we€didnððt€care€if€CarruthersÐ L œ Ðand€Montgomery€were€shackled.€€I€donððt€think€thereððs€any€doubt€about€those€twoÐ 8 ˆ Ðindividuals,€the€dangerousness,€the€whole€fiasco€in€Division€Five€in€that€trial.€€I€donððtÐ $ t Ðthink€thereððs€any€question€about€that.€€And€I€think€thatððs€what€we€ð!ð€we€have€noÐ  ` Ðproblem€with€that.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€All€right.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMR.€OZMENT:€Your€Honor,€the€concern€is€that€here€we€are,€the€Stateððs€witnessesÐ ¬ü  Ðdonððt€have€to€be€shackled€no€matter€what€theyððre€convicted€of,€yet€the€defenseÐ ˜è  Ðwitnesses€do.€€If€these€people€are€in€on€non„violent€offenses,€Your€Honor,€and€thingÐ „Ô  Ðof€that€nature,€there€is€no€reason€for€them€to€be€shackled.€€And€Your€Honor,€theÐ pÀ Ðstateððs€ð!ð€I€think€what€the€state€considers€a€threat€or€something€like€that,€Your€Honor,Ð \¬ ÐI€think€is€evidenced€by€whatððs€on€those€tapes€that€you€listened€to€yesterday,€YourÐ H˜ ÐHonor.€€And€if€they€have€some€proof€„„Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€Mr.€Ozment,€what€I€consider€a€threat€is€weððve€had€statements€madeÐ  \ Ðover€the€telephone€by€inmates.€€Just€wait.€€Iððm€going€to€make€Division€Eight€anÐ øH Ðabsolute€circus€when€we€go€to€trial.€€Now€some€of€the€witnesses€that€wereÐ ä4 Ðsubpoenaed€in€this€case,€Mr.€McGlowan€is€going€to€be€shackled.€€No€question.€Ð Ð  ÐCarruthers€and€Montgomery€are€going€to€be€shackled.€€And€if€thereððs€anybody€elseÐ ¼  Ðthe€Sheriffððs€Department€thinks€needs€to€be€shackled,€we€can.€€The€problem€that€IÐ ¨ø Ðhave€is€that€in€order,€because€we€wanted€a€lot€of€these€people€shackled,€thatððs€whyÐ ”ä Ðon€the€front€end€I€said,€all€right,€weððll€shackle€everybody.€€And€I€was€told,€basically,Ð €Ð Ðitððs€a€nonissue.€€We€donððt€care.€€So€hereððs€what€weððll€do€then.€€We€will€shackle€Mr.Ð l¼ ÐCarruthers€and€Montgomery€if€theyððre€called.€€Weððll€shackle€Mr.€McGlowan.€Ð X ¨ ÐWhatever€his€name€is.€€€The€one€starting€with€ð ðM„C.ððÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN.€€Sydney€McGlowan.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àTHE€COURT:€And€if€there€is€anyone€else€that€the€Sheriffððs€Department€feels€needsÐ ô$D # Ðto€be€shackled€for€different€reasons,€let€me€know,€and€we€will€have€a€hearing€on€it.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMS.€SKAHAN:€Sure.€€Sure.€€Thatððs€fine.€€Thank€you,€Judge.€€Ð¸'#&Ð Ð  Ѐ€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐFollowing€that€colloquy,€the€court€informed€the€jury€that€some€witnesses€would€appear€in€shacklesÐ )à$( Ðâ âand€instructed€the€jury€that€any€restraints€should€not€bear€on€the€witnessesððs€credibility.Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€court€was€justifiably€concerned€about€maintaining€order€and€about€theÐ ° Ðâ âsecurity€of€those€present€in€the€courtroom,€because€the€record€indicates€that€inmates€had€made€threatsÐ œì Ðto€disrupt€the€trial.€€The€court€held€two€hearings€out€of€the€presence€of€the€jury€before€allowing€theÐ ˆØ ÐSheriffððs€Department€to€shackle€any€witnesses.€€Furthermore,€although€Thompsonððs€brief€states€thatÐ tÄ Ðð ðultimately,€most€of€the€defense€witnesses€were€shackled,ðð€the€record€is€unclear€which€witnessesÐ `° Ðwere€actually€shackled.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Finally,€we€are€satisfied€that€any€prejudice€was€cured€by€the€courtððsÐ L œ Ðextensive€curative€instruction.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Larry€David€Reeves€and€George€Edwin€Hardinóó,€CCA€No.Ð 8 ˆ Ð3,€Lauderdale€County,€1989€WL€€73005,€*5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Jul.€5,€1989).€€AlthoughÐ $ t Ðthe€trial€judge€remarked€that€it€would€ð ðleave€security€up€to€the€security€people,ðð€the€comment€wasÐ  ` Ðmade€during€the€curative€instruction€and€simply€implied€that€the€presence€or€absence€of€shackles€wasÐ ü L  Ðnot€a€comment€on€the€witnessesðð€character€by€the€court.Ð è 8  Ðà  àFinally,€Thompson€has€failed€to€demonstrate€how€he€has€been€prejudiced€by€the€courtððs€orderÐ Ô$  Ðthat€the€defense€witnesses€enter€through€a€different€door€than€the€stateððs€witnesses.€€The€recordÐ À  Ðindicates€that€the€courtððs€ruling€was€an€effort€to€maintain€security€while€complying€with€defenseÐ ¬ü  Ðrequests€to€minimize€that€securityððs€impact€on€the€jury.€€Indeed,€in€denying€Thompsonððs€request€thatÐ ˜è  Ðthe€defense€witnesses€be€brought€through€the€same€door€as€the€stateððs€witnesses,€the€court€remarkedÐ „Ô  Ðas€follows€(out€of€the€presence€of€the€jury):Ð pÀ Ðà8  àJust€so€everybody€else€will€know,€also€one€of€the€reasons€that€we€brought€the€stateððsÐ \¬ Ðwitnesses€through€the€back€door€is€because€we€did€not€want€to€bring€them€in€front€ofÐ H˜ Ðthe€two€defendants€in€this€case,€because€of€fears€of€threats€or€intimidation,€whetherÐ 4„ Ðor€not€true.€€And€we€have,€when€they€come€in€the€courtroom,€we€have€a€lot€of€backÐ  p Ðup€in€the€halls€that€we€didnððt€want€the€jury€to€see€because€the€defense€doesnððt€wantÐ  \ Ðthe€jury€to€see€a€lot€of€security€and€be€scared.€€For€the€same€reason,€we€have€a€lot€ofÐ øH ÐDRT€teams€bringing€up€the€defendants.€€We€donððt€allow€the€jury€to€see€them.€€SoÐ ä4 Ðwhat€weððre€trying€to€do€is€just€keep€anybody€from€being€killed€or€hurt.€€And€allÐ Ð  Ðanybody€has€to€do€is€just€create€a€big€disturbance,€and€I€know€ð!ð€I€know€everybody€ð!ðÐ ¼  Ðthat€the€defense€will€be€asking€for€a€mistrial,€and€Iððm€just€not€going€to€allow€it€toÐ ¨ø Ðhappen.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌMoreover,€while€the€record€indicates€that€the€defense€witnesses€entered€through€a€different€door€thanÐ l¼ Ðthe€stateððs€witnesses,€nothing€in€the€record€verifies€Thompsonððs€assertion€that€he€suffered€anyÐ X ¨ Ðprejudice€as€a€result.Ð D!” Ðà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð 0"€  ÐÌò òòòÓ  ÓPrior€Threatsóóó óÐ $X" ÐÓÀ¾Ó€à  àBoth€defendants€assert€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€allow€Sandra€Taylor€to€testifyÐ ô$D # Ðthat€her€husband€had€been€threatened€by€two€other€inmates,€Tony€Carruthers€and€JamesÐ à%0!$ ÐMontgomery,€shortly€before€he€was€killed.€€Prior€to€trial,€the€court€held€that€the€offered€testimonyÐ Ì&"% Ðwas€inadmissible€hearsay.Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àð ðððHearsayðð€is€a€statement,€other€than€one€made€by€the€declarant€while€testifying€at€the€trialÐ ¤(ô#' Ðor€hearing,€offered€in€evidence€to€prove€the€truth€of€the€matter€asserted.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€801(c).€Ð )à$( ÐSimilarly,€testimony€by€the€victimððs€wife€that€the€victim€told€her€that€someone€threatened€him€wouldÐ ° Ðhave€been€hearsay€if€offered€to€prove€the€truth€of€the€statement.€€Thus,€the€victimððs€wifeððs€testimonyÐ œì Ðthat€the€victim€told€her€that€he€received€other€threats€is€hearsay€without€an€exception.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.Ð ˆØ ÐEvid.€805.Ð tÄ Ðà  àWe€also€note€that€this€ruling€did€not€prohibit€the€defense€from€offering€evidence€that€theÐ `° Ðvictim€had€previously€been€threatened€by€other€inmates.€€Several€witnesses,€including€JamesÐ L œ ÐMontgomery€himself,€testified€that€Mr.€Montgomery€had€threatened€the€victim€in€the€past,€but€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðjury€apparently€assigned€little€weight€to€that€evidence.Ð $ t Ðà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€Ð  ` ÐÌò òÓ  ÓòòDying€Declarationsóóó óÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIÔÐ è 8  ÐÓ  Óà  àÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.lÅ#ÔSimilarly,€both€defendants€claim€the€trial€court€erred€by€excluding€declarations€made€by€theÐ Ô$  Ðdeceased€shortly€before€his€death.€€Specifically,€the€defendants€claim€that€Officer€Joseph€Poindexter,Ð À  Ðwho€arrived€at€the€murder€scene€shortly€after€Sergeant€Taylor€was€shot,€heard€Sergeant€Taylor€repeatÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€name€ð ðCarruthersðð€several€times.€€The€defendants€argue€that€the€statements€constituted€a€dyingÐ ˜è  Ðdeclaration,€and€as€such€they€should€have€been€admissible€as€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule€underÐ „Ô  ÐTenn.€R.€Evid.€804(b)(2).Ð pÀ Ðà  àWe€need€not€decide€whether€the€requirements€of€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€804(b)(2)€have€been€met,Ð \¬ Ðhowever,€because€Officer€Poindexter€never€understood€what€Sergeant€Taylor€said.€€At€a€jury„outÐ H˜ Ðhearing,€Officer€Poindexter€testified€that€he€was€the€first€officer€to€arrive€at€the€scene.€€He€told€theÐ 4„ Ðcourt€that€he€heard€Sergeant€Taylor€mumble€something€but€was€unable€to€understand€the€mumbling.€Ð  p ÐHe€testified€that€Sandra€Taylor€then€told€him€that€Sergeant€Taylor€had€said€the€name€ð ðCarruthers.ðð€Ð  \ ÐMrs.€Taylorððs€interpretation€of€her€husbandððs€statement,€repeated€by€Officer€Poindexter,€was€hearsayÐ øH Ðwithout€an€exception.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€805.Ð ä4 Ðà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð Ð  ÐÌò òòòÓ  ÓPreviously€Marked€Exhibitsóóó óÔ‡ „Ô. „X XIÔÐ ¨ø ÐÓÉËÓà  àÔ#† XIX „ „Ô.õË#ÔNext,€Thompson€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€introduction€of€exhibits€thatÐ ”ä Ðhad€been€previously€used€in€the€trial€of€Charles€Golden.€€He€claims€that€the€exhibits€were€prejudicialÐ €Ð Ðbecause€they€still€contained€exhibit€stickers€from€the€previous€trial€and€thus€allowed€jurors€toÐ l¼ Ðð ðwonder€what€the€previous€hearing€concerned.ððÐ X ¨ Ðà  àOther€than€physical€evidence€and€a€crime€scene€diagram,€only€four€photographs,€of€fiftyÐ D!” Ðintroduced,€were€used€in€a€previous€trial.€€Tags€indicating€that€the€photographs€had€previously€beenÐ 0"€  Ðexhibits€were€attached€to€those€photographs.€€However,€no€other€information€is€provided€on€theÐ #l! Ðexhibit€tags.€€Thus,€the€jury€did€not€know€where€or€how€the€exhibits€were€used€previously,€the€nameÐ $X" Ðof€any€other€defendant,€or€the€outcome€of€any€hearing.€€In€short,€even€if€any€€prejudice€resulted€fromÐ ô$D # Ðthe€use€of€the€exhibits,€such€prejudice€was€slight€and€did€not€substantially€outweigh€the€probativeÐ à%0!$ Ðvalue€of€the€photographs.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌÓ  Óòòò òConflict€of€InterestÐ ¤(ô#' Ðó óóóÓ  Óà  àThompson€next€asserts€that€James€Ball,€one€of€Verico€Jacksonððs€attorneys,€had€a€conflict€ofÐ )à$( Ðinterest€that€prejudiced€Defendant€Thompson.€€Mr.€Ball€had€previously€represented€Marcus€Daniels,Ð |*Ì%) Ða€state€rebuttal€witness,€in€a€criminal€trial;€Mr.€Daniels€was€convicted€and€received€a€life€sentence.€Ð h+¸&* ÐThompson€claims€that€Mr.€Daniels€may€have€been€angry€at€Mr.€Ball€and€implies€that€Mr.€DanielsððÐ ° Ðtestimony€may€have€been€changed€as€a€result€of€that€anger.€€Defendant€Thompson€also€claims€thatÐ œì Ðthe€state€disingenuously€claimed€that€Marcus€Daniels€would€not€be€called€and€then€called€Mr.Ð ˆØ ÐDaniels€to€testify€on€rebuttal.Ð tÄ Ðà  àPrior€to€trial,€Mr.€Ball€informed€the€court€of€the€potential€conflict,€and€Defendant€JacksonÐ `° Ðwaived€any€objection.€€While€it€is€true€that,€regarding€an€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim,Ð L œ Ðprejudice€is€presumed€if€an€attorney€actively€represents€conflicting€interests,€òòCuyler€v.€Sullivanóó,€446Ð 8 ˆ ÐU.S.€335,€349„50,€100€S.€Ct.€1708,€1716-19,€64€L.€Ed.€2d€333€(1980);€€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€768Ð $ t ÐS.W.2d€239,€245€(Tenn.€1989),€the€conflict€in€this€case€concerned€Jackson,€not€Thompson.€Ð  ` ÐFurthermore,€Thompsonððs€allegations€that€Mr.€Danielsðð€testimony€may€have€been€tainted€are€notÐ ü L  Ðsupported€by€the€record.€€Any€allegation€that€Mr.€Danielsðð€testimony€was€influenced€by€anger€at€Mr.Ð è 8  ÐBall€is€pure€speculation€and€cannot€form€the€basis€for€the€grant€of€a€new€trial€to€DefendantÐ Ô$  ÐThompson.€€€Ð À  Ðà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.à h àà À àà  àÐ ¬ü  ÐÓ  Óòòò òMistrialó óóóÐ ˜è  ÐÓ  Óà  àNext,€both€defendants€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€declare€a€mistrial€afterÐ „Ô  ÐMarcus€Daniels€testified.€€Before€the€state€called€Mr.€Daniels€as€a€rebuttal€witness,€the€court€held€aÐ pÀ Ðjury„out€hearing€to€determine€the€substance€of€Mr.€Danielsðð€testimony.€€During€the€hearing,€it€becameÐ \¬ Ðclear€that€Mr.€Daniels€was€aware€of€several€specific€crimes€that€Defendant€Thompson€had€ordered.€Ð H˜ ÐFollowing€the€hearing,€the€court€ruled€that€the€state€could€elicit€testimony€about€DefendantÐ 4„ ÐThompsonððs€rank€within€the€gang€and€whether€he€gave€orders€to€commit€ð ðgang€activity,ðð€but€thatÐ  p Ðthe€witness€could€not€testify€about€specific€crimes€that€Defendant€Thompson€had€ordered€orÐ  \ Ðcommitted.€€However,€Mr.€Daniels€violated€the€courtððs€order€during€his€direct€testimony:Ð øH Ðà8  àÔ_ÔMRÔ_Ô.€KITCHEN€(Assistant€District€Attorney):€And€did€the€defendant,€CharlesÐ ä4 ÐThompson,€give€out€orders€to€commit€gang€activity?ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àMR.€DANIELS:€As€far€as€murders,€etc.,€yes€sir.ШøÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àÌÓ  ÓÓ  ÓFollowing€that€colloquy,€both€defendants€immediately€moved€for€a€mistrial.€€The€trial€court€deniedÐ €Ð Ðthe€motions€but€immediately€gave€the€jury€an€extensive€curative€instruction€and€polled€each€jurorÐ l¼ Ðto€insure€that€each€juror€understood€the€instruction.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð X ¨ Їà  àThe€purpose€of€a€mistrial€is€to€correct€the€damage€done€to€the€judicial€process€when€someÐ ° Ðevent€has€occurred€which€would€preclude€an€impartial€verdict.€€òòArnold€v.€Stateóó,€563€S.W.2d€792,€794Ð œì Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€€The€decision€whether€to€grant€a€mistrial€is€within€the€trial€court'sÐ ˆØ Ðdiscretion€and€will€not€be€disturbed€absent€an€abuse€of€that€discretion.€€òòState€v.€McPhersonóó,€882Ð tÄ ÐS.W.2d€365,€370€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€Millbrooksóó,€819€S.W.2d€441,€443€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð `° ÐApp.€1991).€€"Generally€a€mistrial€will€be€declared€in€a€criminal€case€only€when€there€is€a€'manifestÐ L œ Ðnecessity'€requiring€such€by€the€trial€judge."€€òòMillbrooksóó,€819€S.W.2d€at€443òòóó;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòJonesóó,€15Ð 8 ˆ ÐS.W.3d€at€893.€€We€find€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€here,€especially€given€that€theÐ $ t Ðtrial€court€took€immediate€steps€to€prevent€undue€prejudice€to€the€defendant.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Adkinsóó,Ð  ` Ð786€S.W.2d€642,€644€(Tenn.€1990)(holding€that€a€mistrial€was€not€required€following€a€witnessððsÐ ü L  Ðoutburst€where€the€trial€court€took€immediate€action€to€dispel€prejudice);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Mathisóó,Ð è 8  Ð969€S.W.2d€418,€422€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)(holding€that€ð ð[i]n€light€of€the€limited€nature€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðoffending€testimony€and€the€trial€court's€prompt€curative€instruction,€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€itsÐ À  Ðdiscretion€in€refusing€to€grant€a€mistrialðð).€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ¬ü  ÐÐ ˜è  ÐÓ\ÞÓò òòòÓ  ÓExtrinsic€Evidence€of€Prior€Inconsistent€Statementsóóó óÐ ° ÐÓâæÓÓÞÓà  àThompson€claims€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€excluded€extrinsic€evidence€of€CharlesÐ œì ÐTaylorððs€prior€inconsistent€statements.€€On€cross„examination,€Charles€Taylor€was€asked€whetherÐ ˆØ Ðhe€had€ever€told€other€inmates€that€he€must€ð ðfind€some€way€to€get€out€of€this€time€youððre€facing.ðð€Ð tÄ ÐMr.€Taylor€denied€ever€making€a€statement€to€that€effect.€€However,€later,€during€a€jury„out€hearing,Ð `° ÐMr.€Wilkinson€offered€to€testify€as€follows:Ð L œ Ðà8  àBecause€he€[Charles€Taylor]€would€always€come€to€cry€about€his€time€like,€man,€IÐ 8 ˆ Ðhope€they€donððt€give€me€this€or€I€hope€they€donððt€give€me€that€or€I€hope€they€donððtÐ $ t Ðgive€me€life€or€whatever.€€If€I€can€get€me€a,€you€know,€if€I€can€get€up€out€of€here,€IÐ  ` Ðwill€take€the€first€train€going.€€Things€like€that€or€he€wish€they€would€give€him€aÐ ü L  Ðfifteen„year€sentence€or€things€like€that.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÌAfter€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€held€that€Mr.€Wilkinson€could€not€be€asked€about€Mr.€TaylorððsÐ À  Ðstatements,€because€they€were€not€inconsistent€with€Taylorððs€answer€to€the€question€he€had€beenÐ ¬ü  Ðasked€and€therefore€were€not€prior€inconsistent€statements:Ð ˜è  Ðà8  àYou€can€ask€him€whether€or€not€Charles€Taylor€made€statements€to€him€about,€youÐ „Ô  Ðknow,€how€he€would€like€to€get€out€of€his€charges,€but€you€ð!ð€we€canððt€go€into€theÐ pÀ Ðsubstance€of€those€statements.€€Mr.€Taylor€said€on€cross„examination,€when€heÐ \¬ Ðtestified,€that€.€.€.€he€was€asked€.€.€.€havenððt€you€told€inmates€you€would€do€anythingÐ H˜ Ðto€get€out€of€these€charges.€€I€havenððt€heard€that€from€this€witness.€€And€so€we€canððtÐ 4„ Ðask€him€that.€Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àRule€613€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€€Evidence€provides,€in€relevant€part,€ð ð[e]xtrinsic€evidenceÐ øH Ðof€a€prior€inconsistent€statement€by€a€witness€is€not€admissible€unless€the€witness€is€afforded€anÐ ä4 Ðopportunity€to€explain€or€deny€the€same€and€the€opposite€party€is€afforded€an€opportunity€toÐ Ð  Ðinterrogate€the€witness€thereon,€or€the€interests€of€justice€otherwise€require.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€613(b).€Ð ¼  ÐFurthermore,€the€trial€courtððs€assessment€of€whether€a€statement€is€inconsistent€will€only€beÐ ¨ø Ðoverturned€if€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion.€€òòDavis€v.€Hallóó,€920€S.W.2d€213,€217€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ”ä ÐApp.€1995).€€Ð €Ð Ðà  àThe€statements€made€by€Taylor€on€cross„examination€and€those€about€which€WilkinsonÐ l¼ Ðtestified€above€are€not€inconsistent.€Although€a€statement€need€not€directly€contradict€a€propositionÐ X ¨ Ðin€order€to€be€inconsistent,€the€extrinsic€evidence€must€have€a€tendency€to€discredit€the€testimonyÐ D!” Ðof€the€witness.€€òòSeeóó€òògenerallyóó,€Neil€P.€Cohen,€et€al.,€Tennessee€Law€of€Evidence€ðð€613.3€(4th€ed.Ð 0"€  Ð2000).€€While€Mr.€Taylor€denied€telling€other€inmates€that€he€would€find€a€way€to€reduce€or€evadeÐ #l! Ðhis€sentence,€Mr.€Wilkinsonððs€testimony€merely€indicated€that€Mr.€Taylor€had€complained€about€theÐ $X" Ðsentence€he€was€facing€and€hoped€for€as€little€time€as€possible.€€It€is€noteworthy€that,€following€theÐ ô$D # Ðcourtððs€ruling,€Thompsonððs€defense€attorney€remarked€ð ð[w]e€have€other€witnesses.€€Thatððs€fine.ðð€Ð à%0!$ ÐHowever,€no€other€witness€ever€contradicted€Mr.€Taylorððs€testimony.€€We€find€no€abuse€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðdiscretion.€€€€Ð ¸'#& Ѐà0  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ф(ô#'(#(# ÐÌÌÓLçÓòòóóÐ h+¸&* ÐÓ  Óòòò òOpinion€and€Reputation€Evidence€of€Characteró óóóÐ ° ÐÓòöÓÓ  Óà  àNext,€Thompson€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€excluding€evidence€that€state€witnessÐ œì ÐCharles€Taylor€had€a€reputation€for€being€untruthful.€€Out€of€the€presence€of€the€jury,€witness€MarkÐ ˆØ ÐWilkinson€offered€to€testify€that€state€witness€Charles€Taylor€had€a€reputation€within€prison€pod€4„fÐ tÄ Ðfor€untruthfulness.€€The€court€held€that€Mr.€Wilkinson€and€subsequent€witnesses€from€prison€pod€4„fÐ `° Ðcould€testify€as€to€their€opinions€of€Charles€Taylorððs€character€for€truthfulness,€but€that€they€couldÐ L œ Ðnot€testify€as€to€Charles€Taylorððs€reputation€for€truthfulness€because€the€prison€pod€was€ð ðnot€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðrepresentation€of€our€community.ððÐ $ t Ðà  àWe€disagree€with€the€trial€court€that€a€prison€pod€may€not€be€considered€a€ð ðcommunityðð€forÐ  ` Ðpurposes€of€reputation€evidence.€€Rule€608(a)€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€ð ð[t]he€credibility€of€aÐ ü L  Ðwitness€may€be€attacked€or€supported€by€evidence€in€the€form€of€opinion€or€reputation,€but€subjectÐ è 8  Ðto€these€limitations:€(1)€the€evidence€may€refer€only€to€character€for€truthfulness€or€untruthfulnessÐ Ô$  Ð.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€608(a).€€ð ðAlthough€the€rule€does€not€specifically€speak€to€the€issue,€testimonialÐ À  Ðcharacter€evidence€pertaining€to€another€witness's€character€for€truthfulness€is€admissible€only€if€aÐ ¬ü  Ðproper€foundation€is€established.ðð€òòState€v.€Duttonóó,€896€S.W.2d€114,€118€(Tenn.€1995)(citationsÐ ˜è  Ðomitted).€ð ð[I]t€is€necessary€to€qualify€the€reputation€witness€ððthrough€a€showing€of€such€acquaintanceÐ „Ô  Ðwith€the€[person€under€attack],€the€community€in€which€he€has€lived€and€the€circles€in€which€he€hasÐ pÀ Ðmoved,€as€to€speak€with€authority€of€the€terms€in€which€generally€he€is€regarded.ðððð€òòIdóó.€(quotingÐ \¬ ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Watsonóó,€669€F.2d€1374,€1381€(11th€Cir.€1982)).€€In€other€words€the€offering€partyÐ H˜ Ðneed€only€show€that€the€witness€has€the€necessary€knowledge€of€the€personððs€reputation,€based€onÐ 4„ Ðsufficient€experience€with€the€person€in€that€personððs€community.€€Ð  p Ðà  àA€community€is€defined€as€ð ða€body€of€people€living€in€the€same€place€under€the€same€laws.ðð€Ð  \ ÐThe€Merriam€Webster€Dictionary,€1994.€€That€community€need€not,€as€the€trial€court€suggested,€beÐ øH Ðrepresentative€of€society€as€a€whole€or€even€of€the€community€in€which€the€person€normally€lived.€Ð ä4 ÐOf€course,€membership€in€a€common€community€alone€might€not€satisfy€the€foundation€requirement.€Ð Ð  ÐAs€noted€above,€the€witness€must€also€demonstrate€that€he€was€acquainted€with€the€personððsÐ ¼  Ðreputation€within€the€community.€€Ð ¨ø Ðà  àAccordingly,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtððs€limitation€on€the€Ô_ÔwitnesseÔ_Ôððs€testimony€wasÐ ”ä Ðerroneous.€€However,€the€error€was€harmless,€because€the€court€did€allow€other€witnesses€who€hadÐ €Ð Ðbeen€in€pod€4„f€to€testify€as€to€their€opinions€of€Charles€Taylorððs€character€for€truthfulness,€and€thoseÐ l¼ Ðopinions€were€unfavorable.€€Thus,€Thompson€suffered€no€prejudice€because€Charles€TaylorððsÐ X ¨ Ðreputation€for€truthfulness€within€the€community€of€prison€pod€4„f€was€apparent€to€the€jury€despiteÐ D!” Ðthe€courtððs€ruling€as€to€Wilkinson.€€€€Ð 0"€  ÐÓ  Óà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð #l! ÐÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓJury€Instructionsóóó óÐ à%0!$ ÐÓ‡ÓÓ  Óà  àNext,€Thompson€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€his€request€for€a€special€juryÐ Ì&"% Ðinstruction.€€Thompson€requested€that€the€court€instruct€the€jury€that€ð ðthe€facts€must€exclude€everyÐ ¸'#& Ðother€reasonable€theory€hypothesis€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€except€the€guilt€of€the€defendant.ðð€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐInstead,€the€trial€court€charged€the€jury€as€follows:Ð )à$( Ðà8  àYou€must€find€all€the€essential€facts€are€consistent€with€the€hypothesis€of€guilt,€as€thatÐ |*Ì%) Ðis€to€be€compared€with€all€the€facts€proved.€€The€facts€must€exclude€every€otherÐ h+¸&* Ðreasonable€theory€or€hypothesis€except€that€of€guilt.€€And€the€facts€must€establishÐ ° Ðsuch€a€certainty€of€guilt€of€the€defendants€or€either€of€them,€as€to€convince€the€mindÐ œì Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€or€either€of€them€are€the€ones€whoÐ ˆØ Ðcommitted€the€offense.€€ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌÓÏÓÓ  ÓThese€instructions€were€taken€from€the€Tennessee€Criminal€Pattern€Jury€Instructions,€42.03,€and€areÐ L œ Ðaccurate€statements€of€the€law€regarding€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòMarable€v.€Stateóó,€203€Tenn.€440,Ð 8 ˆ Ð313€S.W.2d€451,€456-57€(1958).€€Where€the€trial€court's€instructions€on€a€matter€are€proper,€its€denialÐ $ t Ðof€a€special€request€is€not€error.€òòState€v.€Vannóó,€976€S.W.2d€93,€114€òòóó(Tenn.€1998).€€€€Ð  ` Ðà  àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ü L  ÐÓô ÓÌò òòòÓ  ÓSentencingóóó óÐ Ô$  ÐÓ= ÓÓ  Óà  àFinally,€Thompson€claims€that€he€was€prejudiced€at€sentencing€because€the€trial€courtÐ À  Ðallowed€the€state€to€introduce€ð ðmore€proof€than€was€necessary€to€prove€his€prior€convictions€forÐ ¬ü  Ðviolence.ðð€€At€sentencing,€Thompson€moved€the€trial€court€to€limit€the€stateððs€proof€to€a€listing€ofÐ ˜è  Ðthe€elements€of€the€prior€crimes€and€objected€to€the€introduction€of€the€indictments€for€ThompsonððsÐ „Ô  Ðprior€crimes€because€other€names€were€listed€on€the€indictments.€€Alternatively,€Thompson€offeredÐ pÀ Ðto€stipulate€that€the€prior€crimes€were€violent.€€The€trial€court€ruled€that€the€state€could€introduce€theÐ \¬ Ðindictments€(redacted€to€eliminate€othersðð€names)€to€prove€that€the€prior€crimes€for€which€ThompsonÐ H˜ Ðhad€been€convicted€had€elements€of€violence€to€the€person,€but€ordered€the€state€not€to€inquire€intoÐ 4„ Ðthe€specific€facts€of€the€crimes.€€Thompson€now€claims€that€the€indictments€had€little€probative€valueÐ  p Ðand€were€highly€prejudicial€at€sentencing.Ð  \ Ðà  àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(i)€provides€Ð øH Ðà8  àNo€death€penalty€or€sentence€of€imprisonment€for€life€without€possibility€of€paroleÐ ä4 Ðshall€be€imposed€but€upon€a€unanimous€finding€that€the€state€has€proven€beyond€aÐ Ð  Ðreasonable€doubt€the€existence€of€one€(1)€or€more€of€the€statutory€aggravatingÐ ¼  Ðcircumstances,€which€are€limited€to€the€following:ШøÐ Ð  Ðà8  à.€.€.€.€Ð”äÐ Ð  Ðà8  à(2)€the€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies,€other€than€theÐ €Ð Ðpresent€charge,€whose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌThus,€the€state€was€required€to€prove€that€the€defendant€had€committed€one€or€more€prior€violentÐ D!” Ðfelonies.€€Because€the€indictments€in€this€case€did€little€more€than€recite€the€statutory€elements€alongÐ 0"€  Ðwith€the€defendantððs€and€the€victimððs€names,€we€find€that€Thompson€was€not€prejudiced€by€theirÐ #l! Ðintroduction.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð $X" Ðà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.à  à€€€€€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àÔ#†XIXX XI"#ÔÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð )à$( Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGE