ÿWPCÅ$ 1U:¾ %ø 0Üþw@Ú4.= 0 = 0D] 0J¡ 0Të 0^? 0h 0r 0|w 0†ó 0y 1u 0d~ U *â B 0@) D3i B)œ DCÅ AM ÎU Ó#üö—ò AQ‰ÆÚ 0D  0Dä D/( BWv~tvÓò,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ \D]D^_E`aDbcUdÓ€pŒƒ*#3|xp(Ð(3ý˜$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€©œXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò'ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd* #Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÄÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òOcto…berÏ9,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ôÔAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó ÉÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7À©œXXdædæ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóIn€February,€1992,€after€an€evening€at€a€friend's€house€of€partying€which€involved€the€useÏof€alcohol€and€drugs,€the€appellant,€the€victim,€and€€Kevin€Craig€relocated€to€Craig's€house€toÏcontinue€their€socializing.€€Apparently,€each€member€of€the€group€was€intoxicated,€and€CraigÏeventually€"passed€out."€€The€appellant€began€"touching"€the€victim,€whose€pleas€for€help€fromÏthe€"passed„out"€Craig€were€fruitless.€€At€this€point,€Craig's€sister,€Kelli€Maczalla€arrived€at€theÏresidence.€€Still€angered€from€a€previous€incident,€Maczalla€hit€the€victim€twice€with€a€board€and€theÏtwo€struggled.€€The€appellant€held€the€victim's€hands€while€Maczalla€brutally€hit€her€in€the€face€andÏhead€with€a€wrench.€The€appellant€then€disrobed€the€victim€and€penetrated€her€vaginally.€ÏThroughout€the€rape,€Maczalla€stood€overhead€threatening€the€victim€with€more€physical€harm.€€InÏa€joint€indictment,€the€appellant€was€charged€with€the€aggravated€rape€of€the€victim€resulting€inÏbodily€injury,€while€his€co„defendant,€Maczalla,€was€charged€with€aggravated€assault.€€However,Ïtheir€€trials€were€severed€with€Maczalla€ultimately€pleading€guilty€to€aggravated€assault.€€At€theÏappellant's€trial,€the€appellant€relied€upon€the€defense€of€consent€and€called€Maczalla€to€supportÏthis€position.€Ì òÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAlthough€we€affirm€the€trial€court's€denial€of€relief€on€other€grounds,€we€accredit€theÏState's€position€that€the€appellant€has€waived€his€claims€due€to€his€failure€to€include€appropriateÏreferences€to€the€record€in€his€argument.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27(g);€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòState€v.ÏKillebrewóó,€760€S.W.2d€228€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóSpecifically,€this€court€found€that€Dr.€Apple's€testimony€that€the€victim€was€bruised€in€theÏthigh€and€vulva€areas€established€"bodily€injury,"€as€defined€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(2).€€òòSeeóó€€òòTiptonóó,€No.€02C01„9305„CC„00099.Ì*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ ° Òò òÒ 4 ÒÒ  ÒÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÙ€*ÙßR€$%#A1-j|…º` e `€€@ÿRßà@ àAUGUST€SESSION,€1997ÌÌÌÌÌCHRIS€KENDAL€TIPTON,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02C01„9607„CC„00240Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHENRY€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€JULIAN€P.€GUINN,€JudgeÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction)Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)ÌÌó óÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌò òVICTORIA€L.€DiBONAVENTURAó óà àò òCHARLES€W.€BURSONó óÌP.€O.€Box€1231à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌParis,€TN€€38242à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òDEBORAH€A.€TULLISó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€AttorneyÏGeneralà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òROBERT€"GUS"€RADFORDó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPost€Office€Box€686Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHuntington,€TN€€38344Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Chris€Kendal€Tipton,€appeals€the€Henry€County€CircuitÏCourt's€dismissal€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€On€November€18,Ï1992,€a€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€one€count€of€aggravated€rape.× ƒ& ××  ×€ÏFollowing€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€twentyÏyears€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€His€conviction€and€sentence€wereÏaffirmed€by€this€court€on€direct€appeal.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Tiptonóó,€No.€02C01„9305„CC„00099€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€May€4,€1994),€òòperm.€to€appealÏdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€Sept.€12,€1994).€€An€amended€petition€for€post„conviction€reliefÏwas€filed€on€November€27,€1995.€€Subsequently,€an€evidentiary€hearing€wasÏheld€and,€on€April€16,€1996,€the€post„conviction€court€dismissed€the€petitionÏfinding€that€the€appellant's€claims€were€previously€determined€by€this€court€onÏdirect€appeal€and€that€the€record€is€void€of€an€abridgement€of€anyÍconstitutional€right.€€In€this€appeal,€the€appellant€alleges€that€he€was€deniedÏhis€constitutional€right€to€the€effective€assistance€of€trial€counsel.€€As€evidenceÏof€his€claim,€the€appellant€specifically€contends€that:ÌÓÓà8 àI.€€Counsel€failed€to€inspect€the€State's€evidence€until€the€dayÏprior€to€the€trial;ÌÌà8 àII.€€Counsel€failed€to€file€pretrial€motions€in€compliance€with€localÏcourt€rules;ÌÌà8 àIII.€€Counsel€failed€to€object€to€testimony€relating€to€theÏaggravated€assault€upon€the€victim;ÌÌà8 àIV.€€Counsel€failed€to€move€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal€at€theÏclose€of€the€State's€case€in€chief;€andÌÌà8 àV.€€Counsel€failed€to€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€indictmentÏon€the€grounds€that€it€failed€to€allege€a€òòmens€reaóó€and€is€devoid€ofÏany€factual€allegation.ÌÓÓÌà àFollowing€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€trial€court'sÏdismissal€of€the€appellant's€petition.× ƒ' ××  ×ÌÌà à€Ìà@ àò òI.€€Analysisó óÌÌà àIn€post„conviction€proceedings,€the€appellant€bears€the€burden€ofÍproving€the€allegations€in€his€petition€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€ÏòòDavis€v.€Stateóó,€912€S.W.2d€689,€697€(Tenn.€1995).€€Moreover,€this€court€isÏbound€by€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÏagainst€those€findings.€€òòIdóó.€€ÌÌà àWhen€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€is€raised,€theÏappellant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€that€the€services€rendered€by€trialÏcounsel€were€deficient,€i.e.,€whether€counsel's€performance€was€within€theÏrange€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases,€òòBaxter€v.ÏRoseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975),€and€that€the€deficient€performanceÏwas€prejudicial.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687,€104€S.Ct.€2052,Ï2064€(1984);€òòButler€v.€Stateóó,€789€S.W.2d€898,€899€(Tenn.€1990).ÌÌÌà@ àò òA.€€Failure€to€Inspect€Evidenceó óÌà àÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failure€toÏinspect€evidence€of€photographs€of€the€victim€until€the€day€prior€to€trial.€€€WeÏnote€that€the€appellant€has€waived€review€of€this€issue€because€he€has€failedÏto€make€any€argument€regarding€this€claim€in€his€brief.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï27(a)(7).€€Notwithstanding€waiver,€however,€the€appellant€concedes€that€theseÏpictures€were€unavailable€to€counsel€until€the€day€prior€to€the€trial.€€Indeed,€theÍappellant€admits€that€the€late€inspection€of€these€photographs€was€not€due€toÏneglect€of€trial€counsel.€€Thus,€there€is€no€merit€to€this€claim.ÌÌà@ àò òB.€€Late€Filing€of€Motion€in€Limineó óÌà àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€forÏwaiting€until€the€day€of€trial€to€file€pretrial€motions.€€At€the€post„convictionÏevidentiary€hearing,€trial€counsel€testified€that€he€waited€to€file€his€motion€toÏexclude€all€photographs€depicting€the€victim's€injuries€until€the€day€of€the€trialÏin€order€to€protect€his€defense€strategy.€€Specifically,€he€stated€that€the€StateÏhad€charged€the€appellant€"with€aggravated€rape€and€not€aggravated€assaultÏand€the€photographs€depicted€the€injuries€that€[the€victim]€had€to€her€face€andÏother€parts€of€her€body."€The€trial€court€denied€this€motion€on€the€ground€that€itÏwas€late€filed€in€violation€of€local€court€rules.€€However,€during€the€trial,Ïcounsel€did€object€to€the€introduction€of€each€photograph€on€the€ground€thatÏthese€photographs€were€"irrelevan[t]€to€the€charge."€€His€objections€wereÏoverruled.€€On€direct€appeal,€a€panel€of€this€court€upheld€the€admission€ofÏthese€photographs.€€òòSeeóó€€òòTiptonóóòò,€óóNo.€02C01„9305„CC„00099.€€This€court€willÏnot€relitigate€claims€of€error€raised€and€determined€previously€by€a€court€ofÏcompetent€jurisdiction€although€now€couched€in€terms€of€ineffectiveÏassistance€of€counsel.€€òòSeeóó€€òòSwanson€v.€Stateóó,€749€S.W.2d€731,€833€(Tenn.Ï1988);€òòState€v.€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2d€268,€272€(Tenn.€1987);€òòsee€alsoóó€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(h)€(1995€Supp.).€€Accordingly,€this€issue€isÍwithout€merit.ÌÌÌÓÓà@ àò òC.€Failure€to€Object€to€Testimony€Regarding€the€Assaultó ó€ò òandÏFailure€to€à@ à€€€€€€€à@ à€Move€for€Judgment€of€Acquittal€ó óÌÓÓÌà à€The€appellant€asserts€that€trial€counsel€erroneously€interpreted€theÏcourt's€ruling€denying€his€pretrial€motion,€òòsupraóó,€as€"effectively"€amending€theÏindictment€to€include€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„502(a)(3),€that€the€appellantÏwas€"aided€or€abetted€by€another,"€and€that€counsel€proceeded€to€trial€basedÏupon€this€misinterpretation.€€Specifically,€he€contends€that,€due€to€thisÏmisconception,€trial€counsel€failed€to€object€to€testimony€of€the€aggravatedÏassault,€which€established€that€a€weapon€was€used€by€the€co„defendant,ÏMaczalla.€€Thus,€he€argues,€that€had€counsel€objected€to€this€testimony,Ïcounsel€could€have€moved€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal€at€the€close€of€theÏState's€case„in„chief€based€upon€the€State's€failure€to€prove€that€a€weaponÏwas€used€by€the€appellant€as€required€by€the€indictment.€€This€argument€isÏflawed€because€the€use€of€a€weapon€is€not€an€element€of€the€indicted€offense.€€ÌÌà àInitially,€we€note€that€comprehension€of€the€appellant's€alreadyÏcircuitous€argument€is€compounded€by€the€fact€that€apparently€both€trialÏcounsel€and€post„conviction€counsel€erroneously€share€the€belief€that€theÍState€was€required€to€prove€òòbothóó€(1)€force€and€a€deadly€weapon€òòandóó€(2)Ïbodily€injury€to€the€victim€in€order€to€secure€a€conviction€for€aggravated€rape.€ÏòòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„502(a)(1),€„502(a)(2).€€The€òòwordingóó€of€theÏindictment,€however,€clearly€shows€the€State's€prosecution€for€aggravatedÏrape€was€based€upon€the€element€of€"bodily€injury"€to€the€victim.€€TheÏindictment€charging€the€appellant€with€aggravated€rape€reads:ÌÓÓà8 à.€.€.€Chris€Kendal€Tipton.€.€.commit€aggravated€rape€by€havingÏunlawful€sexual€penetration€by€force€or€coercion€of€one,€TrinaÏBlazer,€causing€bodily€injury,€in€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ39„13„502(a)(1)òò€andóó€(2).€ÌÓÓÌ(emphasis€added).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„13„502€(1990)€defines€aggravatedÏrape€as€the:ÌÓÓ.€.€.unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant.€.€.€accompaniedÏby€òòanyóó€of€the€following€circumstances:Ìà8 à(1)€€Force€or€coercion€is€used€to€accomplish€the€act€and€theÏdefendant€is€armed€with€a€weapon.€.€.;ÌÌà8 à(2)€€The€defendant€causes€bodily€injury€to€the€victim;ÌÌà8 à(3)€The€defendant€is€aided€or€abetted€by€one€or€more€otherÏpersons.€.€.€.€€ÌÌÓÓ(emphasis€added).€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€the€language€of€the€indictmentÏwas€sufficient€to€give€the€appellant€notice€of€the€crime€with€which€he€wasÏcharged.€€€Moreover,€the€recitation€of€a€code€section€in€a€charging€instrumentÏis€mere€surplusage€and€not€fatal€thereto.€€òòState€v.€Bowersóó,€673€S.W.2d€887,Ï888€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).€€€The€State,€in€order€to€elevate€the€offense€fromÍrape€to€aggravated€rape,€was€only€required€to€show€that€the€victim€sufferedÏbodily€injury.€€Accordingly,€the€appellant's€interpretation€of€the€chargingÏinstrument€is€unfounded.€€ÌÌà àAdditionally,€this€court€has€previously€addressed€trial€counsel'sÏmisinterpretation€of€the€trial€court's€pretrial€ruling.€€€òòSeeóó€€òòTiptonóó,€No.€02C01„9305„CC„00099.€€On€direct€appeal,€this€court€concluded€that€the€court's€rulingÏdid€not€"effectively"€amend€the€indictment.€€òòIdóó.€€Moreover,€this€court€determinedÏthat,€even€absent€any€evidence€of€the€aggravated€assault,€the€proof€wasÏsufficient€to€find€the€appellant€guilty€of€aggravated€assault€as€charged€in€theÏindictment.× ƒ( ××  ×€€òòTiptonóó,€No.€02C01„9305„CC„00099.€€Accordingly,€we€are€unableÏto€conclude€that€the€appellant€was€prejudiced€by€trial€counsel's€misconstruedÏinterpretation€of€the€trial€court's€pretrial€ruling.€€€ÌÌà àFinally,€a€motion€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal€at€the€conclusion€of€theÏState's€case€is€waived€when€the€defendant€chooses€to€offer€proof€in€his€ownÏbehalf.€€€òòMathis€v.€Stateóó,€590€S.W.2d€449,€453€(Tenn.1979).€€Trial€counselÏtestified€that€the€appellant€insisted€that€his€co„defendant,€Maczalla,€testify€toÏsupport€his€contention€that€the€penetration€was€consensual,€and,€in€fact,€thisÍwitness€was€subpoenaed€by€defense€counsel.€€Notwithstanding€this€waiver,Ïwhen€a€trial€court€is€presented€with€a€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal,€the€onlyÏconcern€is€the€legal€sufficiency,€as€opposed€to€the€weight€of€the€evidence.€ÏòòState€v.€Blantonóó,€926€S.W.2d€953,€957€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996)€(citationÏomitted).€€Again,€on€direct€appeal,€this€court€determined€that€the€evidence€wasÏsufficient€to€sustain€a€conviction€for€aggravated€rape.€€òòSeeóó€€òòTiptonóó,€No.€02C01„9305„CC„00099.€€This€issue€has€been€previously€determined€and€is€withoutÏmerit.€€òòSeeóó€òòSwansonóó,€òòsupraóó.à àÌÌÌà@ àò òE.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Indictmentó óÌÌà àFinally,€the€appellant€contends€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€forÏfailing€to€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€indictment,€€based€upon€theÏindictments€failure€to€allege€a€òòmens€reaóó.€€In€order€for€an€indictment€to€satisfyÏboth€constitutional€and€statutory€guidelines,€it€must€contain€the€materialÏelements€of€the€offense€and€must€sufficiently€apprise€the€accused€of€theÏoffense€he€is€called€upon€to€defend.€€òòState€v.€Tateóó,€912€S.W.2d€785,€789Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòsee€alsoóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„202€(1990).€€AsÏapplicable€to€the€present€case,€aggravated€rape€is€defined€as€the€"unlawfulÏsexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant"€and€the€victim€suffers€bodilyÏinjury€therefrom.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„502(a)(2).€€No€requisite€mentalÍstate€is€included€in€the€definition€of€the€offense.€€When€the€legislature€fails€toÏdefine€a€specific€mental€state€in€the€definition€of€an€offense,€proof€of€eitherÏintent,€knowledge,€or€recklessness€suffices€to€establish€the€culpable€mentalÏstate.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„301(c)(1991).€€Accordingly,€the€accused'sÏmental€state€is€not€a€òòmaterialóó€element€of€the€offense€and€need€not€be€includedÏin€the€indictment.€€òòState€v.€Disonóó,€No.€03C01„9602„CC„00051€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€at€Knoxville,€Jan.€31,€1997).€€Other€panels€of€this€court€have€upheld€theÏvalidity€of€indictments€under€similar€challenges.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòSlagle€v.€Stateóó,€No.Ï03C01„9704„CR„00145€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€June€25,€1997);€òòStateÏv.€Vannóó,€No.€03C01„9602„CC„00066€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€June€10,Ï1997);€òòState€v.€Jamesóó,€No.€01C01„9601„CR„00016€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville,€Mar.€27,€1997);€òòState€v.€Burrellóó,€No.€03C01„9404„CR„00157€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Feb.€11,€1997).€€Contrary€to€the€appellant's€assertions,Ïthe€allegations€in€the€indictment€sufficiently€apprise€the€accused€of€the€offenseÏof€aggravated€rape€by€bodily€injury.€€The€indictment€is€valid,€and,Ïconsequently,€trial€counsel€was€not€ineffective€for€not€challenging€its€validity.€ÏThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Conclusionó óÌÌà àThe€burden€rests€with€the€appellant€to€prove€his€allegations€by€aÍpreponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòTayloróó,€875€S.W.2d€at€686.€€The€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€appellant€failed€to€carry€his€burden€of€proof€andÏthat€the€issues€had€previously€been€determined€on€direct€appeal.€€InÏconsideration€of€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€we€conclude€thatÏthe€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€court's€findings€whichÏresulted€in€a€denial€of€relief.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€court's€orderÏdenying€the€appellant€post„conviction€relief.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à___________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JudgeÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌ