ÿWPCH ¢g"n‘® ìÑÒc›»9ãè¶ ‹Á´1ß°ù ¥ˆwÏü ö›­QÇ—¶ýŽ‹)AîT‡jOï ÎŒ#Ø¢8W¾âÒ„ÌFõ’¶aFy ’«›Ñ|(˯8cIÛ¹ñ>p[—‘ÙÕVðHÏW‡,{ ‚ìÕЦŠ7õž5€þY¾(û‡úBeh­ŸÉlC©^•q–½ŠÍ*lDFN¡’oüöª ÆcŽO¾R-÷ŒÕÈa£•:- 3QÌŸÈO$Ñ›43R+jâ¿–ÓŸëJó?¨,xõêDãÚp[ss¤ô«‰0%4Ô ú$Š:m’›ÔIaÖc4ºJ©†ti¼i–#DÁ%K¥kì²àžv’íÞ5D§y/Äq &ðêáçfÓ*"·¢! ó$´Óø þW+–ð$j§Åìä%Å{Á^(\ö*ƒš{jQMwÞéIJÓ+§¿ç,ËB†8Øl›;4‹lÒA3ÈVxš¯w *±3-U@ä.¿$/~ã1›a4wü7Ys<(Ì>Ì>Ì>Ì>ôBôB CbCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 0ëCCCC BDD 0¤"D D5ÆD D-ûD 0K(E(E ASsEÆÆE 0¤ŒF 0D0G A«tG˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0»›Žò(˜ (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularq\;'¢Ø+00 ˜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|x'ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3*$§§Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µä»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ݘC:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt !Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€procedural€background€of€this€case€includes€a€remand€for€further€findings€of€fact€andÐ ° Ðconclusions€of€law€based€on€this€courtððs€initial€review€of€the€post„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€post„Ð  ð Ðconviction€relief.€€òòSeeóó€òòRonald€Bradford€Waller€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9702„CR„00054,€1998€WLÐ à Ð743654€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Oct.€15,€1998).€€We€did€not€reach€the€merits€of€petitionerððsÐ €Ð Ðclaims.€€Subsequent€to€that€remand,€the€post„conviction€court,€in€a€ten„page€document,€denied€theÐ pÀ Ðpetition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€It€is€this€denial€that€we€now€review. ¢Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBecause€this€petition€was€filed€on€May€10,€1996,€it€is€governed€by€the€provisions€of€theÐ ° Ð1995€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€which€applies€to€all€petitions€filed€after€May€10,€1995.€€òòSeeóóÐ  ð ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210,€Compilerððs€Notes€(1997). ” Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€indictment€for€first€degree€murder€stated€the€following:Ð ° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€GRAND€JURORS€for€the€State€aforesaid,€being€dulyÐ à Ðsummoned,€elected,€impaneled,€sworn€and€charged€to€inquire€for€theÐ €Ð Ðbody€of€the€County€aforesaid,€upon€their€oaths€present:ÐpÀ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThat€Ronald€Bradford€Waller€heretofore€on€January€10,€1991,Ð ` ° Ðin€the€County€aforesaid,€did€unlawfully,€intentionally,€deliberatelyÐ P   Ðand€with€premeditation€kill€Howard€C.€Jewell,€in€violation€ofÐ @  ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€39„3„202,€against€the€peace€and€dignityÐ 0 € Ðof€the€State.Ð p ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àSECOND€COUNT:Ð` ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTHE€GRAND€JURORS€for€the€State€aforesaid,€being€dulyÐ P  Ðsummoned,€elected,€impaneled,€sworn€and€charged€to€inquire€for€theÐ ð@  Ðbody€of€the€County€aforesaid,€upon€their€oaths€further€present:Ð#à0 ` x` x < #Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThat€Ronald€Bradford€Waller€heretofore€on€January€10,€1991,Ð ° Ðin€the€County€aforesaid,€did€unlawfully€and€recklessly€kill€Howard€C.Ð  ð ÐJewell€during€the€perpetration€of€Especially€Aggravated€Robbery,Ð à ÐEspecially€Aggravated€Burglary€and€Theft€of€Property,€in€violationÐ €Ð Ðof€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€39„13„202,€against€the€peace€andÐ pÀ Ðdignity€of€the€State.Ð` °` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€applicable€version€of€ðð€39„13„€202€stated:Ð @  ÐÌÓ*°,X„X/ h•X°œX*Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð àò òFirst€Degree€murder.ó óð"ð€(a)€First€degree€murder€is:Ð p ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€à ¸ à(1)€à8/ ` x` xàAn€intentional,€premeditated€and€deliberateÐ P  Ðkilling€of€another;€orÐð@ / ©/ © Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(2)€à8/ ` x` xàA€reckless€killing€of€another€committed€inÐ à0  Ðthe€perpetration€of,€or€attempt€to€perpetrateÐ Ð  Ðany€first€degree€murder,€arson,€rape,Ð À Ðrobbery,€burglary,€theft,€kidnapping€orÐ ° Ðaircraft€piracy;€orРð/ ©/ © Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(3)€à8/ ` x` xàA€reckless€killing€of€another€committed€asÐ à Ðthe€result€of€the€unlawful€throwing,€placingÐ €Ð Ðor€discharging€of€a€destructive€device€orÐ pÀ Ðbomb.Ð`°/ ©/ © Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(b)€à8/ ` x` xàA€person€convicted€of€first€degree€murderÐ P  Ðshall€be€punished€by€death€or€imprisonmentÐ @ Ðfor€life.Ð0€/ ©/ © ÐÌà  àThe€State€dismissed€pretrial€the€charge€of€especially€aggravated€burglary. ÁÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔPetitioner€claims€a€violation€of€his€rights€under€ð ðArticle€I,€ðððð€4,€6,€8,€9,€and€10€of€theÐ ° ÐConstitution€of€Tennessee,€and€the€Fifth,€Sixth,€and€Fourteenth€Amendments€of€the€Constitution€ofÐ  ð Ðthe€United€States.ðð€€Article€I,€Section€4€of€the€Constitution€of€Tennessee€states€that€no€political€orÐ à Ðreligious€test€shall€be€required€as€qualification€to€any€office€or€public€trust€under€this€State;€therefore,Ð €Ð Ðthis€basis€for€constitutional€violation€is€not€applicable€in€the€petitionerððs€case. íÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔStirone€was€indicted€and€convicted€in€a€federal€court€for€unlawfully€interfering€withÐ ° Ðinterstate€commerce€in€violation€of€the€Hobbs€Act.€€Tòòóóhe€defendant€was€charged€specifically€withÐ  ð Ðinterference€of€interstate€importation€of€sand.€In€reversing€the€conviction,€the€Supreme€Court€heldÐ à Ðthat€ð ðwhen€only€one€particular€kind€of€commerce€is€charged€to€have€been€burdened€a€convictionÐ €Ð Ðmust€rest€on€that€charge.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€218.€€In€òòStironeóó,€the€government€was€permitted,€over€objection€ofÐ pÀ Ðthe€defense,€to€offer€evidence€of€an€interference€with€steel€shipments,€and€the€trial€court€charged€theÐ ` ° Ðjury€based€on€this€evidence.€€Here,€the€State€offered€no€proof€of€kidnapping,€and€the€trial€court€didÐ P   Ðnot€instruct€as€to€that€offense. Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€presume€that€jurors€follow€the€instructions€of€the€trial€court.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cribbsóó,€967Ð ° ÐS.W.2d€773,€784€(Tenn.€1998).€€ ëÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó,€òòe.góó.,€òòUnited€States€v.€Doremusóó,€414€F.2d€252,€253„54€(6th€Cir.€1969);€òòZiegler€v.€UnitedÐ ° ÐStatesóó,€174€F.2d€439€(9th€Cir.€1949);€òòNeely€v.€United€Statesóó,€2€F.2d€849€(4th€Cir.€1924);€òòState€v.Ð  ð ÐTayloróó,€407€P.2d€59€(Ariz.€1965);€òòCoats€v.€Stateóó,€45€So.2d€35€(Ala.€1950);€òòFox€v.€Commonwealthóó,Ð à Ð185€S.W.2d€394€(Ky.€1945);€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€62€P.2d€44€(Wash.€1936);€òò€State€v.€Heaveneróó,€143€Ô_ÔS.E.Ô_ÔÐ €Ð Ð674€(S.C.€1928);€òòState€v.€Oschoaóó,€242€P.€582€(Nev.€1926).€ §Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó,€òòe.góó.,€òòLong€v.€Stateóó,€607€S.W.2d€482,€485€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980)€(ð ðCross„examinationÐ ° Ðis€not€limited€in€Tennessee€to€subject€matter€dealt€with€on€direct€examination,€but€rather€it€extendsÐ  ð Ðto€any€matters€material€to€the€lawsuit.ðð)(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman  µÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAt€his€post„conviction€hearing,€petitioner€stated€that,€had€he€been€able€to€keep€co„counselÐ ° Ðappointed€to€his€case€at€the€time€the€death€penalty€was€being€sought,€ð ð[t]hey€knowed€I€would€haveÐ  ð Ðwalked€out€that€front€door€with€Leroy€Phillips€if€heððd€walked€in€that€courtroom€with€me.ðð€€This€mayÐ à Ðbe€the€standard€petitioner€wishes€to€apply€in€measuring€the€effectiveness€of€counselð"ðwalking€ð ðoutÐ €Ð Ðthat€front€doorððð"ð,€but€it€is€not€the€standard€compelled€by€the€Constitution.€€ tÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔCounsel€filed€a€motion€to€withdraw€with€this€court€prior€to€direct€appeal€based€on€ð ðanÐ ° Ðintolerable€situation,ðð€which€we€denied,€stating€that€ð ð[a]lthough€the€relationship€is€unsatisfactory,Ð  ð Ðthe€appellant€is€not€entitled€to€the€counsel€of€his€choice.€€Moreover,€it€would€be€disadvantageous€forÐ à Ðnew€counsel,€without€the€benefit€of€trying€the€case,€to€attempt€to€file€a€satisfactory€brief€by€FebruaryÐ €Ð Ð15.ðð€€€€€€€€ ‘Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡!X®sXXX®sÔCounsel€representing€petitioner€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€stated€to€the€trial€court€thatÐ ° Ðð ðhe€[petitioner]€calls€probably€„„€and€he€does€this€on€my€voice€mail€as€well€„„€calls,€like,€every€fiveÐ  ð Ðminutes€all€day€pretty€much,€you€know,€or€at€least€for€an€hour€at€a€time.€€Heððll€just€continually€call,Ð à Ðand€if€Iððm€not€there,€the€other€attorneys€wonððt€accept€the€collect€calls.ððÔ#†X®sXX!X®s#Ô€We€note€that€petitioner€alsoÐ €Ð Ðsought€to€fire€his€post„conviction€counsel,€stating€at€the€continued€hearing€on€post„conviction€reliefÐ pÀ Ðthat€ð ð[s]heððs€lied€to€me.€€I€donððt€want€her€representing€me.€€I€canððt€trust€her.ðð mÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔPetitioner€also€asserts€in€his€original€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€that€counsel€failedÐ ° Ðto€investigate€petitionerððs€prior€psychiatric€treatment€while€in€San€Francisco.€€Petitioner€alleges€thatÐ  ð Ðthis€failure€to€investigate€denied€petitioner€a€defense,€apparently€of€mental€incompetence.€€BecauseÐ à Ðat€the€continued€hearing€on€his€petition,€petitioner€stated€that€he€did€not€want€counsel€to€proceed€withÐ €Ð Ðthat€theory€and€because€this€allegation€is€not€included€in€the€òòpro€seóó€brief€filed€with€this€court,€weÐ pÀ Ðconsider€it€waived.€€We€note€also€that€the€record€shows€that€petitioner€underwent€psychiatricÐ ` ° Ðevaluation€at€the€Johnson€Mental€Health€Center€in€Chattanooga€prior€to€trial€and€was€foundÐ P   Ðcompetent€to€stand€trial.€€Examining€physicians€also€determined€that€a€defense€of€insanity€at€the€timeÐ @  Ðof€the€offense€could€not€be€supported.€€ OÝ ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðWhere€the€same€act€or€transaction€constitutes€a€violation€of€two€distinct€statutoryÐ ° Ðprovisions,€the€test€to€be€applied€to€determine€whether€there€are€two€offenses€or€only€one€is€whetherÐ  ð Ðeach€provision€requires€proof€of€an€additional€fact€which€the€other€does€not.ðð€€òòÔ_ÔBlockburgerÔ_Ô€v.€UnitedÐ à ÐStatesóó,€284€U.S.€299,€304,€52€S.€Ct.€180,€182,€76€L.€Ed.€306€(1932).€€€ Ý ƒR5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòBlakeóó€dealt€with€a€Tennessee€murder€indictment€stated€in€common€law€form€and€upheldÐ ° Ðappellantððs€conviction.€òòSeeóó€òòBlakeóó,€563€F.2d€at€252.€òòPryoróó€dealt€with€an€earlier€version€of€TennesseeððsÐ  ð Ðfirst€degree€murder€statute,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„2402€and€held€that€where€there€was€aÐ à Ðvariance€between€the€indictment€and€the€jury€instructions,€the€appellant€was€subjected€to€doubleÐ €Ð Ðjeopardy.€òòSeeóó€òòPryoróó,€724€F.2d€at€531.€€Neither€case€supports€petitionerððs€arguments€here,€andÐ pÀ Ðpetitionerððs€assertion€that€these€cases€have€established€federal€law€which€prohibits€merger€ofÐ ` ° Ðconvictions€for€premeditated€murder€and€felony€murder€into€one€conviction€for€first€degree€murderÐ P   Ðunder€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„13„202€is€without€legal€basis. Ñ ° Ñ - ù-(|G25$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µä»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®sX»»Ô d(|3*$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µä»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3*$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µä»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µä»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼µä»»»ÔÑ8€®sXXdð»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@HHìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@””$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEˆÐ È ÐÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔÌò òÔ#†¼µä»XX®sw#ÔÓ  ÓRONALD€BRADFORD€Ô_ÔWAòòóóLLERÔ_Ô€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔó óÐ Ð  ÐÓ½ÓÌà@¼ ¼ ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Hamilton€CountyˆÐ Ø ( Ðà@A A ìàNo.€210655€€€€€€€Douglas€A.€Meyer,€Trial€JudgeˆÐ È  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<— ` A߈Ð ˜ è  ÐÌà@Ô Ô ìàNo.€E1999„02034„CCA„R3„PC€€„€Decided€July€18,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ԈР—ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<v` AßÐ wÇ  Ðó óÌò òó óThe€petitioner€was€convicted€in€the€Hamilton€County€Criminal€Court€in€1992€of€first€degree€murder,Ð vÆ  Ðespecially€aggravated€robbery,€and€theft€over€$1,000,€receiving€an€effective€sentence€of€life€plusÐ f¶  Ðtwenty„three€years.€€The€convictions€and€sentences€were€affirmed€on€direct€appeal€in€1993;€and€theÐ V¦ Ðpetitioner€subsequently€filed€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,€presenting€as€issues,€whether€thereÐ F– Ðwas€a€variance€between€the€indictment€and€the€proof,€whether€he€was€improperly€compelled€toÐ 6† Ðparticipate€in€a€courtroom€demonstration,€whether€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€atÐ &v Ðtrial€and€on€direct€appeal,€whether€his€convictions€constitute€double€jeopardy,€whether€the€trial€courtÐ f Ðerred€in€evidentiary€rulings,€whether€he€was€improperly€convicted€because€of€prosecutorialÐ V Ðmisconduct€or€cumulative€errors€at€the€trial,€and€whether€his€convictions€amount€to€a€miscarriageÐ öF Ðof€justice.€€Finding€no€error,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€denying€the€petition€for€post„Ð æ6 Ðconviction€relief.Ð Ö& ÐÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ ¶ ÐÌòòÔ#†¼µä»àX®s!#ÔÔ‡X®sX.¼µäÔGlenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHayes,€J.,óó€and€òòWalker,€Ô_ÔSp.J.Ô_Ôóó,€joined.Ð –æ ÐÌRonald€Bradford€Ô_ÔWallerÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔPikevilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€Pro€Se.Ð v Æ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€Ellen€H.€Pollack,€Assistant€Attorney€General,Ð V"¦! ÐWilliam€H.€Cox,€III,€District€Attorney€General,€and€C.€Leland€Davis,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ F#–" ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð 6$†# ÐÌà@55'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼µä»XX®sÌ #ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäԈР&f!% ÐÔ#†¼µä»XX®s… #ÔÌÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔà  àThe€petitioner,€Ronald€Bradford€Ô_ÔWallerÔ_Ô,€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€Hamilton€CountyÐ (n#' ÐCriminal€Courtððs€denial€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€after€an€evidentiary€hearing.€€TheÐ )^$( Ðpetitioner€was€convicted€in€1992€of€first€degree€murder€on€counts€alleging€both€premeditation€andÐ þ)N%) Ðfelony€murder;€especially€aggravated€robbery;€and€theft€of€property€valued€at€more€than€$1,000.€€TheÐ î*>&* Ðpetitioner€received€a€life€sentence€on€the€first€degree€murder€charge;€twenty€years€as€a€Range€IÐ Þ+.'+ Ðoffender€on€the€especially€aggravated€robbery€charge,€a€Class€A€felony;€and€three€years€as€a€RangeÐ Î,(, ÐI€offender€on€the€theft€charge,€a€Class€D€felony.€€The€latter€two€sentences€were€ordered€to€be€servedÐ ¾-)-ý' Ðconcurrently€with€each€other€and€consecutively€to€the€life€sentence€for€an€effective€sentence€of€lifeÐ ° Ðplus€twenty„three€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Ð  ð ÐÌà  àOn€direct€appeal,€the€petitioner€raised€four€issues:€(1)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficientÐ €Ð Ðto€support€the€verdicts;€(2)€whether€the€petitioner€was€prejudiced€by€the€delayed€admission€of€allegedÐ pÀ Ðhomosexual€conduct€on€the€part€of€the€victim;€(3)€whether€the€petitionerððs€convictions€of€first€degreeÐ ` ° Ðmurder€and€especially€aggravated€robbery€could€both€stand;€and€(4)€whether€consecutive€sentencingÐ P   Ðwas€proper.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ronald€B.€Ô_ÔWallerÔ_Ôóó,€No.€03C01„9212„CR„00429,€1993€WL€398452,€at€*1Ð @  Ð(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.,€Knoxville,€Oct.€6,€1993),€òòpermóó.òòóó€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€Feb.€7,€1994).€€This€courtÐ 0 € Ðfound€no€merit€to€these€issues€and€affirmed€the€judgments.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.€€Ð  p  ÐÌÓ*°,XƒXm –X°œX*Óà  àOn€May€10,€1996,€the€petitioner€filed€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€with€the€HamiltonÐ P  ÐCounty€Criminal€Court.€€After€a€full€evidentiary€hearing,€petitionerððs€application€for€post„convictionÐ ð@  Ðrelief€was€denied.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòóóIn€the€present€appeal,€the€petitioner€alleges€a€substantial€number€of€grounds€forÐ à0  Ðrelief,€which€we€organize€in€the€following€manner:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àI.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€an€unconstitutional€variance€to€the€indictedÐ ° Ðoffense€of€felony€murder€occurred€during€the€trial;Рðm km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àII.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€petitioner€was€improperly€compelled€toÐ €Ð Ðparticipate€in€a€demonstration€during€trial€and€in€theÐ pÀ Ðpresence€of€the€jury;Ð`°m km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIII.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€petitioner€was€denied€effective€assistance€ofÐ @ Ðcounsel€both€at€trial€and€on€direct€appeal;Ð0€m km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIV.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€petitionerððs€convictions€violated€principles€ofÐ ` Ðdouble€jeopardy;ÐPm km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àV.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€the€trial€courtððs€evidentiary€rulings€involvingÐ à0 Ðphotographs,€a€writing,€and€expert€testimony€amountedÐ Ð  Ðto€reversible€error;ÐÀ!m km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àVI.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€alleged€improper€comments,€arguments,€andÐ  #ð! Ðparticipation€in€a€demonstration€resulted€inÐ $à" ÐÔ_Ôprosecutorial€misconduct€amounting€to€reversible€error;аm km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àVII.€à8m ` x` xàWhether€cumulative€errors€resulted€in€a€trial€that€wasÐ à Ðfundamentally€unfair;€andЀÐm km k ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àVIII.à8m ` x` xàWhether€petitionerððs€convictions€were€the€result€of€aÐ ` ° Ðfundamental€miscarriage€of€justice.€ÐP  m km k ÐÌà  àAfter€a€painstaking€examination€of€the€voluminous€record€and€a€thorough€consideration€ofÐ 0 € Ðthe€issues€presented,€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€therefore€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtððsÐ  p  Ðorder€denying€the€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.Ð `  ÐÌà@¤¤(ìàò òFACTSˆÐ ð@  ÐÌà  àó óThe€facts€of€this€case€have€been€set€out€fully€in€our€opinion€on€direct€appeal.€€The€petitionerÐ Ð  Ðtestified€at€trial€that€he€left€San€Francisco,€California,€on€December€26,€1990,€to€hitchhike€to€hisÐ À Ðmotherððs€home€in€Port€Richie,€Florida.€€He€was€twenty„two€years€old€at€the€time,€and€was€6'1"€tall.€Ð ° ÐOn€New€Yearððs€Eve,€he€arrived€in€Cleveland,€Tennessee,€where€he€spent€a€few€days€visiting€friends.€Ð  ð ÐOn€January€9,€1991,€the€petitioner€was€back€on€the€highway,€hitchhiking€to€Florida.€€His€first€rideÐ à Ðtook€him€as€far€as€the€interchange€of€Interstates€24€and€75.€€He€walked€to€a€spot€where€he€could€catchÐ €Ð Ða€ride€headed€south€on€Interstate€75€towards€Atlanta.€€Two€cars€stopped,€and€he€accepted€a€ride€fromÐ pÀ Ðthe€victim,€Harold€Jewell,€in€his€red,€1975€Chevrolet€Impala.Ð `° ÐÌà  àSissy€Holloway,€the€night€clerk€at€the€Quality€Inn€located€at€Interstate€75€and€Ringgold€Road,Ð @ Ðjust€outside€Chattanooga,€testified€that€she€checked€the€victim€into€a€room€at€11:30€p.m.€€JewellÐ 0€ Ðsigned€the€registration€card€with€the€name€Howard€Johnson€and€gave€an€Atlanta€address.€€Jewell€wasÐ  p Ðaccompanied€by€a€neat„looking€young€man€in€his€early€twenties.€€The€petitioner€admitted€that€he€wasÐ ` Ðthe€individual€with€Jewell.€Ð P ÐÌà  àFloyd€Fuller,€the€Director€of€Corrections€for€Hamilton€County,€who€also€lived€at€the€BeaverÐ à0 ÐCreek€Apartments,€testified€that€in€the€early€morning€hours€of€January€10,€1991,€he€was€awakenedÐ Ð  Ðby€€loud€screams€for€help.€€He€looked€out€his€window€in€the€direction€of€the€screams€and€saw€twoÐ À! Ðmales€outside€in€the€backyard€area€behind€the€building€next€to€his.€€€The€taller€of€the€two€was€pullingÐ °"  Ðthe€other€back€towards€the€neighboring€building.€€€Fuller€jumped€into€sweat€pants€and€ran€outsideÐ  #ð! Ðwhile€his€wife€called€the€police.€€The€police€arrived€at€the€apartment€complex€at€approximately€2:00Ð $à" Ða.m.€and,€after€surveying€the€area€using€flashlights,€found€nothing€amiss.Ð €%Ð # ÐÌà  àIris€Anderson€testified€that€she€cleaned€the€victimððs€apartment€regularly€and,€on€January€10,Ð `'°"% Ðshe€arrived€at€about€9:30€a.m.€€She€noticed€that€the€victimððs€car€was€gone,€so€she€used€her€key€toÐ P( #& Ðenter€the€apartment.€€Inside€she€was€surprised€to€find€lights€on€since€she€assumed€that€Jewell€was€notÐ @)$' Ðat€home.€€She€called€out€to€him€and€then€turned€to€the€living€room€area€where€she€saw€his€body€lyingÐ 0*€%( Ðin€a€pool€of€blood.Ð  +p&) ÐÐ ,`'* Ðà  àThe€petitioner€testified€that€Jewell€had€offered€to€let€him€stay€at€the€motel€and€then€drive€onÐ ° Ðto€Atlanta€with€him€the€next€day.€€The€petitioner€only€wanted€to€shower€and€then€be€on€his€way.€Ð  ð ÐOnce€in€the€motel€room,€according€to€the€petitioner,€the€victim,€while€pretending€to€retrieve€someÐ à Ðitems€from€the€bathroom,€watched€the€petitioner€shower€through€a€clear€shower€curtain€and€then,Ð €Ð Ðonce€the€petitioner€emerged€from€the€bathroom,€propositioned€the€petitioner€to€take€part€in€sexualÐ pÀ Ðactivity.€€The€petitioner€testified€that€€Jewell€was€lying€naked€on€the€motel€bed.€€The€petitionerÐ ` ° Ðfurther€testified€that€he€refused,€and€the€victim€then€forced€him€at€gunpoint€to€ride€to€the€victimððsÐ P   Ðhome€which€was€not€in€Atlanta€but€at€the€Beaver€Creek€Apartments,€some€ten„minutesðð€drive€away.€Ð @  ÐÌ€Ô#†¼µä»XX®sÞ #ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔà  àThe€petitioner€testified€that€when€he€and€the€victim€reached€the€apartment€in€the€early€hoursÐ  p  Ðof€January€10,€the€victim,€still€holding€a€gun€on€him,€told€him€to€get€undressed.€€The€petitioner€thenÐ `  Ðdescribed€a€struggle€that€included€his€reaching€for€a€knife€in€his€pants€pocket;€somehow€flipping€itÐ P  Ðopen€and€knocking€the€gun€out€of€Jewellððs€hand.€€In€the€struggle,€Jewell€partially€folded€the€knifeÐ ð@  Ðback€over€the€petitionerððs€finger,€cutting€it.€€The€petitioner€testified€that€he€pushed€the€victim€downÐ à0  Ðand€then,€with€his€jeans€still€halfway€down,€opened€the€patio€door€and€hobbled€into€the€grass€whereÐ Ð  Ðhe€fell€down.€€The€victim€followed€him;€they€both€cried€for€help€and€continued€the€struggle.€€Finally,Ð À ÐJewell€told€the€petitioner€he€could€collect€his€belongings€and€leave.€€The€petitionerððs€belongingsÐ ° Ðconsisted€of€a€small€daypack€with€a€sleeping€bag€attached€to€the€bottom;€a€jacket;€and€a€shoulder€bag€Ð  ð Ðin€which€the€petitioner€testified€he€kept€a€road€map,€his€money,€an€address€book,€and€a€.25€caliberÐ à Ðautomatic€pistol.€€The€pistol,€one€shell,€and€the€clip€were€in€a€smaller€tan€pouch€inside€the€shoulderÐ €Ð Ðbag.€€At€one€point,€the€petitioner€testified€that€all€of€his€belongings€were€locked€in€the€car.€Later,€inÐ pÀ Ðexplaining€why€he€went€back€into€the€apartment€with€Jewell€after€the€fight,€the€petitioner€testifiedÐ `° Ðthat€the€jacket€and€shoulder€pouch€with€the€gun€were€inside€the€apartment.€€Wherever€thoseÐ P  Ðbelongings€were,€the€knife,€which€the€petitioner€testified€had€sentimental€value,€was€apparently€inÐ @ Ðthe€apartment€on€the€floor.€€Ð 0€ ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€further€testified€that,€once€back€inside€the€apartment,€a€new€fight€ensued,€withÐ ` Ðthe€victim€reaching€for€the€gun€and€the€petitioner€trying€to€stop€him.€At€this€point,€the€petitionerÐ P Ðgrabbed€a€knife€with€a€porcelain€handle€that€was€lying€on€a€cabinet.€€According€to€the€petitioner,Ð ð@ ÐJewell€grabbed€the€petitionerððs€arm,€bit€the€petitionerððs€finger,€and€continued€to€struggle€to€reach€theÐ à0 Ðgun€that€was€on€the€floor.€€The€petitioner€testified€that€the€two€were€standing€up,€and€he€cut€theÐ Ð  Ðvictim€until€the€victim€stopped€as€both€fell€to€the€floor.Ð À! ÐÌà  àWhen€he€saw€the€police€arrive,€the€petitioner€testified€he€ran€out€of€the€apartment€and€hid€inÐ  #ð! Ðsome€bushes€because€he€was€frightened.€€He€took€off€his€socks,€shoes,€and€pants,€thinking€they€wereÐ $à" Ðbloody,€and€hid€them€beside€an€air€conditioning€unit.€€Ð €%Ð # ÐÌà  àOnce€the€police€left,€the€petitioner€returned€to€the€apartment€where€he€began€to€search€forÐ `'°"% Ðsomething€to€wrap€around€his€bleeding€hand.€In€the€victimððs€bedroom,€he€found€a€bandana€in€aÐ P( #& Ðdresser€drawer.€€An€empty€gun€holster€fell€out€onto€the€floor.€€He€looked€in€the€victimððs€closet€forÐ @)$' Ðpants€to€wear€and€broke€into€the€victimððs€briefcase€to€get€his€car€keys.€€He€also€took€a€jar€of€changeÐ 0*€%( Ðthat€he€found€in€a€closet€and€some€Xanax€pills€that€were€in€one€of€four€bottles€of€pills€in€the€victimððsÐ  +p&) Ðbriefcase.€€He€got€in€the€victimððs€car€and€first€drove€back€to€the€Quality€Inn€to€think€through€whatÐ ,`'* Ðhe€should€do,€but€the€room€was€locked.€€He€then€drove€to€Florida,€arriving€on€the€same€day,€JanuaryÐ ° Ð10.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àOn€January€12,€Officer€Longworth€of€the€Port€Richie€Police€Department€was€on€patrol€andÐ €Ð Ðnoticed€the€red€Chevrolet€parked€at€the€petitionerððs€motherððs€residence.€€Longworth€checked€the€tagÐ pÀ Ðnumber€through€a€computer€system€and€discovered€that€the€car€was€stolen€in€the€course€of€aÐ ` ° Ðhomicide.€€He€called€for€assistance€and,€at€about€2:15€a.m.€on€January€12,€knocked€on€the€door€ofÐ P   Ðthe€petitionerððs€mother.€€The€petitioner€came€to€the€door€and€was€immediately€taken€into€custody.Ð @  ÐÌà  àThe€Stateððs€proof€included€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Frank€King,€medical€examiner€for€HamiltonÐ  p  ÐCounty.€€He€noted€that€the€victim€was€a€fifty„one„year„old€male,€5'6"€tall,€weighing€150€pounds.€€TheÐ `  Ðvictimððs€personal€physician€described€Jewell€as€having€decreased€pulmonary€function€compatibleÐ P  Ðwith€emphysema.€€Jewell€was€a€heavy€smoker.Ð ð@  ÐÌÓ6°,XƒXŒ –X°,XƒXm –X6Óà  àDr.€King€testified€that€he€found€multiple,€blunt€trauma€injuries€to€the€victimððs€face,€includingÐ Ð  Ðboth€eyes,€his€forehead,€the€side€of€his€nose,€and€both€corners€of€the€mouth.€€Dr.€King€testified€thatÐ À Ðthese€wounds€were€potentially€fatal€and€could€not€have€been€caused€by€a€fall€but€by€multiple€blows,Ð ° Ðpossibly€by€a€fist.€€Dr.€King€testified€further€as€to€bruising€injuries€on€the€victimððs€hands€and€arms:€Ð  ð ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàIn€your€opinion,€what€do€they€indicate€or€are€they€indicativeÐ €Ð Ðof,€the€bruising€to€the€hands?ÐpÀŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàThe€contusions€„„€the€pattern€of€injury€of€these€contusions€onÐ P  Ðthe€hand€is€consistent€with€whatððs€called€defensive€wounds.€Ð @ ÐIf€a€person€is€in€a€fight,€they€are€defending€themselves€againstÐ 0€ Ðblows€from€a€blunt€object,€they€tend€to€block€those€blowsÐ  p Ðwith€the€backs€of€the€arms€or€hands.€€Sometimes€you€see€oneÐ ` Ðor€both€hands€and€arms€involved.€€In€this€particular€case,€Mr.Ð P ÐJewell€being€an€older€gentleman,€less€physically€able€to€fight,Ð ð@ Ðthis€pattern€of€injury€fits€the€expected€defensive€posture€ofÐ à0 Ðsomeone€of€his€age,€size€and€so€on€and€that€is€simply€to€coverÐ Ð  Ðup€with€his€hands,€exposing€the€backs€of€his€hands€and€armsÐ À! Ðto€blunt€trauma€blows.€€These€injuries€would€not€be€expectedÐ °"  Ðin€this€pattern€had€the€decedent€made€a€fist€and€struck€thingsÐ  #ð! Ðwith€his€fist.€€In€that€case€you€would€tend€to€see€injuries€overÐ $à" Ðthe€bony€prominences,€the€knuckles€of€the€fingers€and€handsÐ €%Ð # Ðand€so€on.€€I€would€say€these€are€consistent€with€a€defensiveÐ p&À!$ Ðaction€or€posture€by€the€decedent.€.€.€.Ð`'°"%Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàAll€right,€tell€us€about€the€injury€to€the€neck€and€throat€area,Ð @)$' ÐDoctor.Ð0*€%(Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàThe€injury€to€the€front€of€the€neck€consisted€of€multipleÐ ,`'* Ðincisional€wounds€applied€from€side€to€side€across€the€neck,Ð ° Ðthe€full€width€of€the€neck€from€side€to€side.€€This€incisionalÐ  ð Ðwound€actually€consisted€of€multiple€separate€passes€of€aÐ à Ðsharp€instrument€across€the€neck€because€the€different€cutsÐ €Ð Ðoverlap€going€through€the€same€open€injury€in€the€neck.€€IÐ pÀ Ðcanððt€say€exactly€how€many€times€a€sharp€edge€was€passedÐ ` ° Ðacross€the€neck.€€I€can€only€estimate€about€ten€or€fifteen.ÐP  Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàTen€or€fifteen?Ð0 €Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes,€separate€forceful€incisions€across€the€neck.€€ThisÐ `  Ðincisional€wound€was€quite€deep€and€extended€completelyÐ P  Ðthrough€the€airway€to€the€thyroid€gland,€to€the€left€side€of€theÐ ð@  Ðhyoid€bone,€which€is€a€small€bone€in€the€neck,€alsoÐ à0  Ðcompletely€through€the€esophagus€which€is€the€foodÐ Ð  Ðswallowing€tube€from€your€mouth€to€your€stomach€and€alsoÐ À Ðsevered€both€carotid€arteries€which€supply€blood€to€the€faceÐ ° Ðand€brain€and€also€both€jugular€veins€which€take€blood€fromÐ  ð Ðthe€head€back€down€through€the€neck€to€the€chest.€€An€injuryÐ à Ðof€this€sort€is€obviously€fatal€and€[I]€would€not€expect€theÐ €Ð Ðdecedent€to€survive€very€long€after€receiving€that€injury.ÐpÀŒ LŒ L ÐÌà  àDr.€King€testified€that€one€part€of€his€investigation€involves€relating€the€body€to€the€findingsÐ P  Ðat€the€scene.€€This€investigation€includes€the€review€of€pictures€and€evidence€from€the€scene.€€Dr.Ð @ ÐKing€testified€that:Ð 0€ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIn€this€case,€the€scene€photographs€show€the€decedent€face€down€onÐ ` Ðthe€floor€with€his€left€arm€under€his€head€and€his€right€arm€sort€ofÐ P Ðunder€his€body€also.€€The€blood€present€on€him€as€he€is€on€the€floorÐ ð@ Ðis€coming€almost€all€from€his€neck€and€goes€straight€down€onto€theÐ à0 Ðfloor€and€actually€goes€over€this€left€arm€down€onto€the€floor.€€TheÐ Ð  Ðblood€at€the€scene€was€immediately€under€his€face,€neck€and€chestÐ À! Ðarea€in€a€big€pool.а" ` x` x ÐÌà  àJoseph€Errera,€a€special€agent€with€the€FBI,€testified€as€a€serology€expert.€€Based€on€knownÐ $à" Ðblood€samples€from€both€the€petitioner€and€the€victim,€Errera€testified€that€blood€samples€from€theÐ €%Ð # Ðliving€room€carpet€and€the€utility€room€area€of€the€victimððs€apartment,€from€the€gun€at€the€scene,€andÐ p&À!$ Ðfrom€the€back€of€the€T„shirt€found€underneath€the€victim€all€came€from€petitioner.€€Errera€testifiedÐ `'°"% Ðthat€blood€on€the€inside€and€outside€surfaces€of€the€rear€patio€door€and€on€the€porcelain„handledÐ P( #& Ðknife€came€from€the€victim.€€He€testified€further€that€he€did€not€attempt€to€determine€the€source€ofÐ @)$' Ðblood€on€the€inside€doorknob€to€the€patio€door€because€he€was€able€to€visually€identify€fingerprintÐ 0*€%( Ðridges€and€did€not€want€to€disturb€those€prints.€€He€only€identified€this€as€human€blood.Ð  +p&) ÐÐ ,`'* Ðà  àMax€Jarrell,€a€special€agent€with€the€FBI,€testified€as€a€fingerprint€expert.€€His€testimony€asÐ ° Ðto€the€prints€found€on€the€outside€and€inside€doorknobs€of€the€rear€patio€door€indicated€that€oneÐ  ð Ðfingerprint€and€one€palm€print€on€the€outside€doorknob€belonged€to€petitioner;€and€one€palm€printÐ à Ðpresent€on€the€inside€doorknob€belonged€to€petitioner.€€€€€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà@òò&ìàò òANALYSISˆÐ ` ° ÐÌà  àó óAt€a€post„conviction€evidentiary€hearing,€the€burden€is€on€the€petitioner€to€prove€theÐ @  Ðallegations€of€fact€entitling€him€to€relief€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð 0 € Ððð€40„30„210(f)€(1997).€€ð ðEvidence€is€clear€and€convincing€when€there€is€no€serious€or€substantialÐ  p  Ðdoubt€about€the€correctness€of€the€conclusions€drawn€from€the€evidence.ðð€€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€983Ð `  ÐS.W.2d€240,€245€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1998)€(citing€òòHodges€v.€S.C.€ToofÐ P  Ð&€Co.óó,€833€S.W.2d€896,€901,€n.3€(Tenn.€1992)).€€On€appeal,€we€are€bound€by€the€trial€courtððsÐ ð@  Ðfindings€of€fact€unless€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€against€thoseÐ à0  Ðfindings.€€òòSeeóó€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòÔ#†¼µä»XX®s.#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.Ô#†¼µä»XX®s´^#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔÐ Ð  Ð1990).Ð À ÐÌÑ€+OYÑà@öö$ìàò òI.€€VarianceˆÐ  ð ÐÌà  àó óThe€petitioner€argues€that€the€prosecution€developed€a€case€throughout€the€trial€of€felonyÐ €Ð Ðmurder€based€on€kidnapping,€a€fatal€variance€from€the€indicted€offense€of€felony€murder€based€onÐ pÀ Ðespecially€aggravated€robbery€and€theft€of€property.׃`×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€This€course€of€action,€according€to€theÐ `° Ðpetitioner,€resulted€in€a€fatal€variance€and€a€violation€of€petitionerððs€constitutional€rights.׃Ð×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€StateÐ ° Ðcontends€that€the€prosecution€merely€described€the€preamble€to€the€crimes€and€that,€since€theÐ  ð Ðpetitioner€was€convicted€of€premeditated€and€deliberate€murder€as€well€as€felony€murder,€the€allegedÐ à Ðvariance€did€not€affect€the€petitionerððs€substantial€rights.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€the€State€argues€that€this€issue€has€been€waived€because€the€petitioner€couldÐ ` ° Ðhave€raised€it€on€direct€appeal€and€did€not€do€so.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(g).€€€€On€theÐ P   ÐÑ+OY Ñâ +âѰ°Ñâ +âÑ  Ñother€hand,€the€post„conviction€court,€following€remand€from€this€court€for€findings€of€fact€andÐ ° Ðconclusions€of€law,€concluded€that€this€issue€of€fatal€variance€between€proof€and€pleadings€wasÐ  ð Ðpredetermined€on€direct€appeal.€€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(h).Ô#†¼µä»XX®s_#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€€Ô#†¼µä»XX®sf#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäԀРà ÐÌà  àThe€record€indicates€that€this€issue€was€not€addressed€on€direct€appeal,€so€it€is€not€subject€toÐ pÀ Ðwaiver€as€predetermined.€€The€issue€was€raised€in€€petitionerððs€original€post„conviction€relief€petitionÐ ` ° Ðin€which€he€argued€that€defense€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing,€among€other€shortcomings,€toÐ P   Ðraise€the€issue€on€direct€appeal€after€the€petitioner€said€that€he€wanted€the€issue€raised.€€We€concludeÐ @  Ðthat€the€issue€has€not€been€waived€for€failure€to€raise€it€on€direct€appeal€and€will€consider€petitionerððsÐ 0 € Ðvariance€issue€on€the€merits.€€Ð  p  ÐÌà  àA€variance€arises€when€the€proof€presented€at€trial€departs€from€the€allegations€in€theÐ P  Ðindictment.€€òòState€v.€Keelóó,€882€S.W.2d€410,€416€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.òòóó€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó,€(Tenn.Ð ð@  Ð1994)Ô#†¼µä»XX®saf#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ.€€The€most€often€cited€analysis€of€the€law€governing€variances€is€found€in€òòBerger€v.€UnitedÐ à0  ÐStatesóó,€295€U.S.€78,€55€S.€Ct.€629,€79€L.€Ed.€1314€(1935).€€The€òòBergeróó€Court€stated:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€general€rule€that€allegations€and€proof€must€correspond€is€basedÐ ° Ðupon€the€obvious€requirements€(1)€that€the€accused€shall€be€definitelyÐ  ð Ðinformed€as€to€the€charges€against€him,€so€that€he€may€be€enabled€toÐ à Ðpresent€his€defense€and€not€be€taken€by€surprise€by€the€evidenceÐ €Ð Ðoffered€at€the€trial;€and€(2)€that€he€may€be€protected€against€anotherÐ pÀ Ðprosecution€for€the€same€offense.Ð`°` x` x ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€82,€55€S.€Ct.€at€630€(citations€omitted).€€The€general€rule,€nevertheless,€is€not€to€be€applied€soÐ @ Ðrigidly€that€the€mere€finding€of€error€presumes€prejudice.€€The€Court€noted€that€ð ðif,€upon€anÐ 0€ Ðexamination€of€the€entire€record,€substantial€prejudice€does€not€appear,€the€error€must€be€regardedÐ  p Ðas€harmless.ðð€€€òòIdóó.€at€82,€55€S.€Ct.€at€631.€€The€Court€held€that,€in€the€circumstances€of€the€case€atÐ ` Ðbar,€ð ðthe€variance€was€not€prejudicial€and€hence€not€fatal.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€84,€55€S.€Ct.€at€631.Ð P ÐÌà  àOur€supreme€court€set€out€the€policy€on€variance€to€be€followed€in€this€state€in€òòState€v.€Mossóó,Ð à0 Ð662€S.W.2d€590€(Tenn.€1984).€€This€test,€like€the€test€in€òòBergeróó,€looks€to€the€substance€of€theÐ Ð  Ðvariance€rather€than€to€any€rigid€rules€of€form.€€The€òòMossóó€court€stated:Ð À! ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€policy€now€followed€in€this€and€in€most€other€jurisdictions€is€thatÐ  #ð! Ðbefore€a€variance€will€be€held€to€be€fatal€it€must€be€deemed€to€beÐ $à" Ðò òmaterialó ó€and€ò òprejudicialó ó.€€A€variance€between€an€indictment€and€theÐ €%Ð # Ðproof€in€a€criminal€case€is€not€material€where€the€allegations€andÐ p&À!$ Ðproof€substantially€correspond,€the€variance€is€not€of€a€characterÐ `'°"% Ðwhich€could€have€misled€the€defendant€at€trial€and€is€not€such€as€toÐ P( #& Ðdeprive€the€accused€of€his€right€to€be€protected€against€anotherÐ @)$' Ðprosecution€for€the€same€offense.€€€€€€€€€Ð0*€%(` x` x ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€592€(emphasis€added).òòóó€€Ð ,`'* Їà  àOur€supreme€court€applied€this€two„prong€test€of€whether€a€variance€is€material€andÐ ° Ðprejudicial€in€òòState€v.€Mayesóó,€854€S.W.2d€638€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€that€case,€the€defendant€wasÐ  ð Ðconvicted€of€selling€a€controlled€substance.€€The€issue€before€the€court€was€whether€the€varianceÐ à Ðbetween€the€named€buyer€in€the€indictment€and€the€buyer€identified€through€proof€at€trial€was€fatal.€Ð €Ð ÐThe€court€determined€first€that€the€variance€was€not€material€because€the€indictment€and€proofÐ pÀ Ðsubstantially€corresponded.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.€at€640€(citing€òòBergeróó,€295€U.S.€at€82„84,€55€S.€Ct.€at€631).€€TheÐ ` ° Ðindictment€and€proof€depart€and€a€material€variance€occurs€ð ðonly€if€the€prosecutor€has€attempted€toÐ P   Ðrely€at€the€trial€upon€theories€and€evidence€that€were€not€fairly€embraced€in€the€allegations€made€inÐ @  Ðthe€indictment.ðð€€òòIdóó.€(citing€òòRussell€v.€United€Statesóó,€369€U.S.€749,€763,€82€S.€Ct.€1038,€1046„47,Ð 0 € Ð8€L.€Ed.€2d€240€(1962)).€€The€òòMayesóó€court€concluded€that€the€identity€of€the€buyer€was€not€anÐ  p  Ðelement€€which€was€alleged€in€the€indictment€or€proven€at€trial€to€support€a€conviction€under€the€drugÐ `  Ðstatute,€and€the€variance€was,€therefore,€not€material.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€642.€€Ð P  ÐÌà  àThe€òòMayesóó€court€also€determined€that€the€defendant€had€suffered€no€prejudice€from€beingÐ à0  Ðmisled€or€deprived€of€his€right€to€be€protected€against€further€prosecution€for€the€same€offense.Ð Ð  ÐMisleading€the€defendant€occurs€if€the€indictment€does€not€sufficiently€inform€the€defendant€of€theÐ À Ðcharges€against€him€so€that€he€may€prepare€his€defense.€€òòSeeóó€òòMossóó,€662€S.W.2d€at€592.€The€courtÐ ° Ðconcluded€that€the€identity€of€the€actual€purchaser€of€the€drug€served€only€to€describe€the€offenseÐ  ð Ðcharged€and€formed€no€part€of€its€required€substance.€€The€indictment€ð ðcorrectly€identified€theÐ à ÐDefendant,€the€crime€alleged,€the€type€of€drug€sold,€and€the€date€and€place€of€the€sale.€€TheÐ €Ð ÐDefendant€knew€he€was€defending€the€charge€of€an€unlawful€sale€under€T.C.A.€ðð€39„6„417(a)€of€aÐ pÀ Ðspecified€drug€at€the€time€and€place€in€question.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€As€to€the€issue€of€double€jeopardy,€ourÐ `° Ðsupreme€court€concluded€that€the€defendant€ð ðcan€rely€upon€the€entire€record€in€the€event€that€futureÐ P  Ðproceedings€are€taken€against€him€for€the€same€offense.€€The€record€leaves€no€doubt€that€theÐ @ ÐDefendant€has€been€once€placed€in€jeopardy€for€the€sale€of€the€drug€at€the€time€and€place€set€forthÐ 0€ Ðin€the€indictment.ðð€òòIdóó.Ð  p ÐÌà  àBased€on€these€legal€authorities,€we€review€petitionerððs€charge€of€fatal€variance€under€theÐ P Ðtwo„prong€test€of€òòMossóó€as€follows:Ð ð@ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(1)à Œ àIs€the€variance€material?ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌÓ9°,XƒXŒ  h•X°,XƒXŒ –X9Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà Œ à(a)€à8 ` x` xàDo€the€allegations€in€the€indictment€and€proof€fail€toÐ °"  Ðsubstantially€correspond?Р#ð! Õ Õ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0Œ ` x` xà(b)€à8 Œ xŒ xàDid€the€prosecutor€rely€at€the€trial€upon€theories€andÐ €%Ð # Ðevidence€that€were€not€fairly€embraced€in€theÐ p&À!$ Ðallegations€in€the€indictment?Ð`'°"%   ЀÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2)à Œ àIs€the€variance€prejudicial€to€the€defendantððs€substantial€rights?Ð@)$'` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà Œ à(a)€à8 ` x` xàIs€the€variance€such€as€to€mislead€the€defendant€byÐ  +p&) Ðfailing€to€sufficiently€inform€the€defendant€of€theÐ ,`'* Ðcharges€levied€against€him€so€that€he€cannotÐ ° Ðadequately€prepare€for€trial?Рð Õ Õ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0Œ ` x` xà(b)€à8 Œ xŒ xàIs€the€variance€such€that€the€defendant€is€leftÐ €Ð Ðunprotected€from€subsequent€prosecution€on€grounds€ofÐ pÀ Ðdouble€jeopardy?Ð` °   ÐÌà  àFirst,€we€set€out€the€specific€statements€made€during€the€course€of€his€trial,€which€petitionerÐ @  Ðargues,€together,€constitute€fatal€variance€of€the€felony€murder€charge:€Ð 0 € ÐÌà  à(1)€€In€his€opening€remarks,€the€prosecutor€presented€the€following€theory€of€the€case:Ð `  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà Œ àWhat€happened€on€that€night€is€that€Mr.€Waller,€an€opportunist,Ð ð@  Ða€drifter,€found€an€easy€mark€in€Mr.€Jewell.€After€he€got€him€to€theÐ à0  ÐQuality€Inn€he€attempted€to€rob€him.€€He€learned€that€Mr.€Jewell€livedÐ Ð  Ðhere€in€Chattanooga€at€the€Beaver€Creek€Apartments.€€He€determinedÐ À Ðthat€he€could€possibly€obtain€more€money€by€going€to€the€BeaverÐ ° ÐCreek€Apartments.€€He€took€Mr.€Jewell€there.€€He€killed€him€there.€Ð  ð ÐHe€stole€his€property€there.€€He€went€through€Mr.€Jewellððs€thingsÐ à Ðthere.€€He€took€Mr.€Jewellððs€car.€€He€fled€this€jurisdiction.€€He€hidÐ €Ð Ðfrom€the€police€and€was€finally€caught€in€Florida.ÐpÀ` x` x Ѐ€Ð `° Ðà  à(2)€Following€the€admission€of€the€victimððs€briefcase€as€evidence,€the€prosecution€questionedÐ P  ÐDetective€Tim€Carroll€of€the€Chattanooga€Police€Department,€who€was€the€homicide€investigatorÐ @ Ðfor€this€case,€concerning€the€contents€of€the€victimððs€briefcase,€which€the€petitioner€testified€had€beenÐ 0€ Ðin€the€victimððs€possession€at€the€Quality€Inn€and€taken€back€to€the€victimððs€apartment:Ð  p ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàInside€the€briefcase,€just€tell€the€jury€what€kind€of€items€thatÐ P Ðyou€found.Ðð@Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàGot€a€glasses€case€contains€some€glasses.ÐÐ Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàLet€me€ask€you.€€Did€you€find€a€wallet?а" Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes.Ð$à"Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàDid€you€find€items€that€normally€go€in€a€wallet?Ðp&À!$Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes,€they€were€outside€of€the€wallet.ÐP( #&Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàWhat€kind€of€items€are€those?Ð0*€%(Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàSocial€security€cards,€apparently€some€phone€numbers€onÐ ,`'* Ðplastic€cards,€business€cards.€€Some€kind€of€card€entry.аŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàA€parking€card€ð!ð€I€mean€[a]€gate€card?ÐàŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes,€that€would€be€it.€€Another€glass€holder,€pocket€holder.€Ð pÀ ÐFour€audio€cassettes,€music€tapes,€a€book€of€matches,€comb,Ð ` ° Ðpack€of€Lucky€Strikes.€€Looks€like€family€photographs€of€aÐ P   Ðchild.€€Sunglasses,€empty€or€torn€Camel€pack.Ð@ Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàTorn€Camel€pack?Ð p Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes,€sir.€€Dupont€Credit€Union€card.ÐP Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàDid€you€also€find€Mr.€Jewellððs€driverððs€license?Ðà0 Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes,€I€did.ÐÀŒ LŒ L ÐÌà  àLater,€while€cross„examining€the€petitioner,€the€prosecutor€asked€the€following€question:Ð  ð ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàIf€perhaps€you€had€seen€Mr.€Jewellððs€driverððs€license€whileÐ €Ð Ðyou€were€at€the€Quality€Inn€and€if€perhaps€you€had€seen€theÐ pÀ Ðaddress€of€Mr.€Jewell€which€was€Beaver€Creek€apartments,Ð `° Ðwould€that€have€been€anything€to€you?ÐP Œ LŒ L ÐÌà  à(3)€During€closing€argument,€Assistant€District€Attorney€Stern€argued€as€follows:Ð 0€ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àSo€you€will€have€the€option€of€deciding€based€on€the€facts€whetherÐ ` Ðeither€of€these€two€first€degree€or€youððll€be€able€to€choose€what€youÐ P Ðbelieve€happened€in€this€case,€whether€it€was€an€intentional,Ð ð@ Ðpremeditated€and€deliberate€killing€of€another€or€was€a€recklessÐ à0 Ðkilling€committed€in€the€perpetration€of,€and€in€this€case,€robbery€andÐ Ð  Ðkidnapping.€€Now,€I€believe€that€the€facts€in€this€case€and€the€factsÐ À! Ðthat€you€heard€during€this€and€all€of€the€evidence€that€have€come€in,Ð °"  Ðcould€support€either€of€these.€Ð #ð!` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à.€.€.€.Ѐ%Ð #` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àI€think€that€really,€ladies€and€gentlemen,€that€all€of€this€evidence€inÐ `'°"% Ðthis€case€shows€you€that€at€some€point€the€defendant€intended€to€lureÐ P( #& ÐMr.€Jewell€back€to€his€apartment.€€He€probably€somehow€found€outÐ @)$' Ðthat€he€lived€in€the€Chattanooga€area.€€Perhaps€he€looked€at€his€wallet,Ð 0*€%( Ðperhaps€he€was€going€to€rob€Mr.€Jewell.€€Pulls€out€his€billfold€to€robÐ  +p&) Ðhim€or€when€he€pulls€out€his€billfold€to€rob€him,€he€sees€he€lives€atÐ ,`'* ÐBeaver€Creek€Apartments.€€And€he€thinks,€whoa.€€I€know€whereÐ ° ÐBeaver€Creek€Apartments€is,€Iððm€from€the€Hixson€area,€Iððm€from€theÐ  ð ÐChattanooga€area,€weððre€going€for€a€ride.€€He€makes€Mr.€Jewell€getÐ à Ðin€the€car,€he€forces€Mr.€Jewell€at€gunpoint€to€the€Beaver€CreekÐ €Ð ÐApartments.€€He€forces€Mr.€Jewell€into€the€house.ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌà  àPetitioner€also€cites€additional€statements€from€closing€arguments€of€the€prosecutor€includingÐ P   Ðð ð[W]hat€really€happened€in€this€case€is€the€defendant€was€robbing€or€intending€to€rob€Mr.€Jewell,Ð @  Ðforce€him€to€his€home;ðð€and€ð ð[Appellant]€forced€him€to€his€home€when€he€found€out€where€heÐ 0 € Ðlived;ðð€and€ð ðHe€took€Mr.€Jewell€to€his€apartment,€thatððs€obvious;ðð€and€ð ðThere€was€a€traveling€fromÐ  p  Ðone€point€to€the€other€at€gunpoint,€he€had€the€gun.ððÐ `  ÐÌà  àWhile€we€agree€with€petitioner€that€the€prosecutor€misspoke€when€she€said€that€the€jurorsÐ ð@  Ðwould€be€able€to€choose€whether€the€felony€murder€charge€was€committed€in€the€perpetration€ofÐ à0  Ðrobbery€and€kidnapping€rather€than€robbery€and€theft,€this€does€not€amount€to€a€material€varianceÐ Ð  Ðbetween€the€charges€and€the€proof€at€trial.€€The€prosecution€clearly€did€not€rely€on€a€kidnappingÐ À Ðtheory€to€build€its€case€of€felony€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€robbery€and€theft.€€The€contents€ofÐ ° Ðthe€victimððs€briefcase€were€appropriately€in€evidence,€and€the€State€appropriately€questioned€theÐ  ð Ðpetitioner€concerning€the€possibility€that€he€gained€valuable€information€about€the€victim€fromÐ à Ðseeing€the€victimððs€driverððs€license.€How€that€information€might€have€been€used€was€not€critical€toÐ €Ð Ðthe€Stateððs€case.€€€In€fact,€in€the€quotations€the€from€closing€argument€selected€by€the€petitioner,€theÐ pÀ ÐState€argued€alternatively€that€the€petitioner€ð ðluredðð€the€victim€back€to€the€Beaver€Creek€ApartmentsÐ `° Ðand€that€he€ð ðforcedðð€him€back.€€Additionally,€during€closing€argument,€the€prosecutor€stated:Ð P  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àNow,€the€defense€of€course€wants€you€to€assume€this€is€forÐ 0€ Ðhomosexual€activity.€€That€may€be€an€inference€you€can€draw.€€ButÐ  p ÐI€donððt€think€thereððs€anybody€whoððs€come€in€and€testified€exactlyÐ ` Ðwhat€happened.€€So€you€can€use€your€common€sense,€you€can€makeÐ P Ða€decision€about€that€but€what€we€really€know€is€that€somehow€theyÐ ð@ Ðcame€together€and€they€checked€into€this€motel€and€then€they€wentÐ à0 Ðaround€the€corner€and€no€one€saw€them€after€that€until€they€gotÐ Ð  Ðsomehow€to€the€Beaver€Creek€Apartments.€.€.[.]€€€ÐÀ!` x` x ÐÌà  àOur€supreme€court€has€stated:€€ð ðThe€purpose€of€summation€is€to€allow€each€side€ððto€assist€theÐ  #ð! Ðjury€in€analyzing,€evaluating,€and€applying€the€evidenceðð€and€it€ððincludes€counselððs€right€to€state€hisÐ $à" Ðcontention€as€to€the€conclusion€that€the€jury€should€draw€from€the€evidence.ðððð€òòState€v.€Clevelandóó,Ð €%Ð # Ð959€S.W.2d€548,€551€(Tenn.€1997)€(quoting€òòUnited€States€v.€Garzaóó,€608€F.2d€659,€662€(5th€Cir.Ð p&À!$ Ð1979)).€€Closing€argument€is€a€privilege€afforded€to€the€State€and€the€defense,€and€courts€haveÐ `'°"% Ðgenerally€permitted€wide€latitude€to€counsel€in€arguing€their€cases€to€the€jury.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,Ð P( #& Ð885€S.W.2d€797,€809€(Tenn.€1994).€€Defense,€in€closing,€noted€that€there€were€no€witnesses€to€theÐ @)$' Ðpetitioner€and€victimððs€departure€from€the€motel.€€Defense€also€characterized€the€prosecutorððs€closingÐ 0*€%( Ðargument€to€the€jury€in€the€following€way:Ð  +p&) ÐÐ ,`'* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[I]f€Ms.€Stern€were€the€Judge,€she€would€give€you€two€options€in€thisÐ ° Ðcase.€€You€can€either€find€him€guilty€of€premeditated€murder€or€youÐ  ð Ðcan€find€him€guilty€of€whatððs€commonly€called€felony€murder€orÐ à Ðmurder€in€the€perpetration€of€a€different€crime.€.€.€.€€But€there€is€theÐ €Ð Ðone€option€she€forgot€to€mention€to€you,€another€option,€and€that€isÐ pÀ Ðyou€donððt€have€to€find€[him]€guilty€of€either€one€of€those.€Ð` °` x` x ÐÌHow€the€appellant€and€the€victim€got€to€the€Beaver€Creek€Apartments€was€a€question€placed€inÐ @  Ðcontroversy.€€Each€side€argued€its€theory.€€But,€kidnapping€was€not€an€element€of€the€chargedÐ 0 € Ðoffense€of€felony€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€robbery,€and€theft€and€was€not€legally€essential€to€theÐ  p  Ðcharge.€€Furthermore,€the€State€did€not€rely€on€a€theory€of€kidnapping€to€any€significant€degreeÐ `  Ðduring€the€presentation€of€its€case.Ô#†¼µä»XX®srj#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€€We€conclude€that€no€material€variance€occurred.€à Ð àÐ P  ÐÌà  àAs€to€the€second€prong€of€the€òòMossóó€test,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€that€his€substantialÐ à0  Ðrights€have€been€prejudiced.€€The€indictment,€set€out€in€footnote€three,€clearly€put€the€petitioner€onÐ Ð  Ðnotice€that€he€would€be€called€upon€to€defend€himself€on€the€charge€of€felony€murder€based€onÐ À Ðrobbery€and€theft€and€the€petitioner€was€therefore€able€to€prepare€a€defense€without€any€surprise€atÐ ° Ðtrial.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Claboóó,€905€S.W.2d€197€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòÔ#†¼µä»XX®s<±#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.Ô#†¼µä»XX®s ´#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€1995)Ð  ð Ð(concluding€that€where€defendant€knew€of€time€period€under€scrutiny€when€the€State€proceeded€onÐ à Ðtheory€that€acts€of€sexual€abuse€occurred€on€February€20€and€the€young€victims€recalled€that€the€actsÐ €Ð Ðtook€place€around€Valentineððs€Day,€defendant€was€not€surprised€and€was€able€to€prepare€an€adequateÐ pÀ Ðdefense).€Here,€the€petitioner€was€not€misled€such€that€he€was€not€able€to€adequately€prepare€hisÐ `° Ðdefense.€€The€petitioner€fully€presented€his€defense,€claiming€to€have€been€the€one€kidnapped,€whoÐ P  Ðthen€killed€in€self„defense.€€It€was€the€juryððs€prerogative€to€disbelieve€him.Ð @ ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€is€also€protected€from€being€placed€twice€in€jeopardy€for€the€same€offense.€Ð  p ÐIt€is€well€settled€that€jeopardy€attaches€when€the€accused€is€put€on€trial€before€a€court€of€competentÐ ` Ðjurisdiction,€upon€an€indictment€sufficient€in€form€and€substance€to€sustain€a€conviction€and€the€juryÐ P Ðhas€been€impaneled€and€sworn.€€òòSeeóó€òòóó€òòEtter€v.€Stateóó,€205€S.W.2d€1,€3€(Tenn.€1947).€€The€record€showsÐ ð@ Ðthat€the€petitioner€has€been€placed€in€jeopardy€on€the€theory€of€felony€murder.€€Mandatory€joinderÐ à0 Ðrequires€the€prosecuting€official€to€join€offenses€based€on€the€same€criminal€episode€if€ð ðsuch€offensesÐ Ð  Ðare€known€to€the€appropriate€prosecuting€official€at€the€time€of€the€return€of€the€indictment€.€.€.€andÐ À! Ðif€they€are€within€the€jurisdiction€of€a€single€court.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€8(a).€€Accordingly,€chargesÐ °"  Ðbased€on€the€same€criminal€episode€are€ð ð€barred€from€future€prosecution€if€known€to€the€appropriateÐ  #ð! Ðprosecuting€official€at€the€time€that€the€other€prosecution€is€commenced,€but€deliberately€notÐ $à" Ðpresented€to€a€grand€jury.ðð€€òòIdóó.,€Advisory€Commission€Comments.€€The€petitioner,€therefore,€wouldÐ €%Ð # Ðbe€protected€from€re„prosecution€for€felony€murder€of€Howard€Jewell.€€Ð p&À!$ ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€€no€material€or€prejudicial€variance€occurred,€but,€even€if€the€prosecutorððsÐ P( #& Ðinadvertent€misstatement€during€closing€statement€could€be€construed€as€material€and€prejudicialÐ @)$' Ðvariance€in€that€her€statement€referred€to€robbery€and€kidnapping€as€the€underlying€felonies€insteadÐ 0*€%( Ðof€robbery€and€theft,€it€would€be€harmless€error€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,Ð  +p&) Ð977€S.W.2d€101,€106€(Tenn.€1998).€€òòóóThe€weight€of€proof€in€this€case€has€already€been€determinedÐ ,`'* Ðby€this€court€to€be€legally€sufficient€to€convict€the€petitioner€of€first€degree€premeditated€andÐ ° Ðdeliberate€murder€as€well€as€felony€murder€based€on€the€underlying€felonies€of€robbery€and€theft.€Ð  ð ÐòòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Ronald€B.€Walleróó,€No.€03C01„9212„CR„00429,€1993€WL€398452€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð à ÐKnoxville,€Oct.€6,€1993),€òòpermóó.òòóó€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€Feb.€7,€1994);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€859Ð €Ð ÐS.W.2d€359,€363€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1993)€(concluding€thatÐ pÀ Ðimproper€consolidation,€although€error,€did€not€require€a€new€trial€because€the€evidence€of€guiltÐ ` ° Ðadduced€against€defendant€was€abundant€and€legally€sufficient).€€Considering€the€record€as€a€whole,Ð P   Ðany€error€in€closing€argument€of€the€prosecutor€ð ðmore€probably€than€notðð€did€not€affect€the€resultÐ @  Ðof€this€case.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòChapman€v.€Californiaóó,€386€U.S.€18,€22,€87€S.€Ct.Ð 0 € Ð824,€827,€17€L.€Ed.€2d€705€(1967).€€Ô#†¼µä»XX®st´#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€€€€€€€Ô#†¼µä»XX®sUÄ#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€€Ð  p  ÐÌà  àPetitioner€argues€alternatively€that€the€statements€of€the€prosecution€at€trial,€which€we€set€outÐ P  Ðabove,€have,€in€effect,€so€altered€the€charging€terms€of€the€indictment€that€a€constructive€amendmentÐ ð@  Ðof€the€indictment€has€occurred€that€is€prejudicial€per€se€and€precludes€application€of€the€harmlessÐ à0  Ðerror€rule.€€òòSeeóó€òòStirone€v.€United€Statesóó,€361€U.S.€212,€217,€80€S.€Ct.€270,€273,€4€L.€Ed.€2d€252Ð Ð  Ð(1960)€(stating€that€ð ða€court€cannot€permit€a€defendant€to€be€tried€on€charges€that€are€not€made€in€theÐ À Ðindictment€against€himðð).׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Petitioner€relies€on€òòWatson€v.€Jagoóó,€558€F.2d€330€(6th€Cir.€1977)Ô#†¼µä»XX®sžÄ#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ,€toÐ ° Ðsupport€his€argument€of€constructive€amendment.€€But€in€òòJagoóó,€unlike€this€case,€the€defendant€wasÐ  ð Ðforced€to€defend€against€a€charge€of€felony€murder,€which€was€not€contained€in€the€indictment€at€all.€Ð à ÐòòIdóó.€at€331.€€The€prosecutor€argued€in€òòJagoóó€that€ð ðpremeditated€murder€and€felony„murder€were€bothÐ €Ð Ðfirst€degree€murder€and€that€the€indictment,€by€charging€first€degree€murder,€did€not€have€to€includeÐ pÀ Ða€statement€that€the€indictment€was€for€felony„murder€for€a€defendant€to€be€prosecuted€on€thatÐ `° Ðcharge.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€332.€€The€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€held€that€ð ð[t]o€allow€the€prosecution€toÐ P  Ðamend€the€indictment€at€trial€so€as€to€enable€the€prosecution€to€seek€a€conviction€on€a€charge€notÐ @ Ðbrought€by€the€grand€jury€unquestionably€constituted€a€denial€of€due€process€by€not€giving€appellantÐ 0€ Ðfair€notice€of€criminal€charges€to€be€brought€against€him.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€339.€€No€such€amendment€occurredÐ  p Ðhere.Ð ` ÐÌà  àContinuing€his€contention€that€a€constructive€amendment€occurred,€petitioner€additionallyÐ ð@ Ðâ âargues€that,€although€the€trial€court€properly€instructed€the€jury€as€to€felony€murder€based€solely€onÐ à0 Ðrobbery€and€theft,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€arguments€of€the€State€opened€up€a€new€charge€of€felony€murder€based€onÐ ° Ðâ âkidnapping,€and€the€trial€court€failed€to€instruct€the€jury€concerning€the€weight€to€be€given€suchÐ  ð Ðstatements€of€counsel.€€We€disagree.€€Prior€to€closing€statements,€the€trial€court€instructed€as€follows:Ð à ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAt€this€time€the€attorneys€have€an€opportunity€to€make€their€closingÐ pÀ Ðstatements€to€you.€€Their€statements€are€typically€what€the€attorneysÐ ` ° Ðrecall€that€the€evidence€is€or€was€or€what€reasonable€inferences€andÐ P   Ðconclusions€they€would€have€you€draw€from€that€evidence.€€You€areÐ @  Ðthe€judges€of€the€evidence.€€If€for€any€reason,€inadvertent€orÐ 0 € Ðotherwise,€there€should€be€any€difference€or€discrepancy€between€theÐ  p  Ðstatements€of€the€attorneys€and€the€evidence€itself,€you€must€in€allÐ `  Ðevents€rely€on€the€evidence€itself.ÐP ` x` x ÐÌThis€instruction€was€in€addition€to€one€made€by€the€trial€court€at€the€beginning€of€the€trial€when€itÐ à0  Ðstated€to€the€jury,€ð ðAll€right,€as€I€indicated€to€you€earlier,€the€statements€of€attorneys€are€not€the€sameÐ Ð  Ðas€evidence.€€You€will€rely€on€the€evidence€itself.ððÐ À ÐÌà  àHaving€determined€that€neither€a€fatal€variance€nor€constructive€amendment€occurred€in€thisÐ  ð Ðcase,€we€conclude€that€this€issue€is€without€merit.Ð à ÐÌà@UUìàò òII.€€Re„Enactment€Demonstrationó óˆÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àPetitioner€asserts€that€his€constitutional€rights€were€violated€when€the€State,€during€cross„Ð P  Ðexamination€of€the€petitioner,€compelled€the€petitioner€to€step€down€to€the€courtroom€floor€toÐ @ Ðdemonstrate€how€he€pushed€the€victim,€with€the€prosecutor€taking€the€role€of€the€victim.€€AlthoughÐ 0€ Ðhe€never€actually€touched€the€prosecutor,€the€petitioner€argues€that€he€was€denied€a€fair€trial€in€thatÐ  p Ðhe€was€asked€to€perform€physical€acts€that€unjustly€or€improperly€prejudiced€him.€€The€StateÐ ` Ðcontends€that€the€request€for€demonstration€on€cross„examination,€based€on€petitionerððs€testimony,Ð P Ðwas€proper.€€The€post„conviction€court€found€that€it€was€proper€cross„examination€for€the€prosecutorÐ ð@ Ðto€ask€petitioner€to€physically€demonstrate€his€version€of€the€crime.€€Ð à0 ÐÌà  àOnce€the€petitioner€voluntarily€chose€to€take€the€witness€stand,€he€waived€his€right€againstÐ À! Ðself„incrimination€and€became€subject€to€rigorous€cross„examination.€€òòSeeóó€òòBrown€v.€United€Statesóó,Ð °"  Ð356€U.S.€148,€154„56,€78€S.€Ct.€622,€2€L.€Ed.€2d€589€(1958);€òòGray€v.€Stateóó,€250€S.W.2d€86,€92Ð  #ð! Ð(Tenn.€1952)€(ð ðIt€is€well€settled€that€when€a€defendant€takes€the€witness€stand€in€his€own€behalf€heÐ $à" Ðis€subject€to€the€same€methods€of€cross„examination€as€an€ordinary€witness.ðð);€òòBass€v.€Stateóó,€231Ð €%Ð # ÐS.W.2d€707,€713€(Tenn.€1950)€(stating€that€when€a€defendant€takes€the€stand,€ð ðall€questionÐ p&À!$ Ðconcerning€his€right€to€protect€himself€against€compulsory€inculpation€in€connection€with€the€crimeÐ `'°"% Ðunder€investigation€is€waivedðð);€òòBrooks€v.€Stateóó,€213€S.W.2d€7,€10€(Tenn.€1948)€(concluding€thatÐ P( #& Ðwhen€a€defendant€elects€to€testify,€ð ðhe€subjects€himself€to€all€the€rules€and€tests€of€credibility,€andÐ ° Ðmay€be€impeached€in€the€same€manner€as€any€other€witnessðð).€€Ð  ð ÐÌà  àThe€majority€of€jurisdictions€in€this€country€hold€that€when€a€defendant€voluntarily€becomesÐ €Ð Ða€witness,€he€may€also€be€properly€required€to€participate€in€specific€physical€acts€or€exhibitions€ifÐ pÀ Ðrelevant€to€the€case.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Nevertheless,€when€a€criminal€defendant€chooses€to€testify,€he€is€stillÐ ` ° Ðguaranteed€a€fair€andòòóó€impartial€trial€according€to€both€the€Sixth€Amendment€of€the€U.S.€ConstitutionÐ P   Ðand€Article€I,€Section€9€of€the€Constitution€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.€€A€defendant€who€has€takenÐ @  Ðthe€witness€stand€should€not€be€compelled€to€perform€acts€which€will€improperly€prejudice€him€andÐ 0 € Ðthus,€as€petitioner€claims€here,€deprive€him€of€a€fair€trial.€€The€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€hasÐ  p  Ðconcluded€that€ð ða€criminal€defendantððs€right€to€a€fair€trial€may€be€violated€if,€after€taking€the€stand,Ð `  Ðhe€is€forced€to€perform€acts€which€would€unjustly€prejudice€him.ðð€€òòUnited€States€v.€Doremusóó,€414Ð P  ÐF.2d€252,€253„54€(6th€Cir.€1969)€(citingòòóó€òòÔ#†¼µä»XX®s&È#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔState€v.€Tayloróó,€407€P.2d€59,€64€(Ariz.€1965)€(holding€thatÐ ð@  Ðdefendant€was€not€humiliated€or€disgraced€by€being€required€to€try€on€hat€as€€means€of€impeachingÐ à0  Ðprior€testimony€of€defendant€that€hat€did€not€belong€to€him).€€A€defendant€would€be€unjustlyÐ Ð  Ðprejudiced€where€ð ðthe€requested€performance€or€demonstration€would€unjustly€humiliate€or€degradeÐ À Ðthe€defendant€or€in€a€case€in€which€such€performance€would€be€damaging€to€the€defendantððs€imageÐ ° Ðand€irrelevant€to€the€issue€on€trial.ðð€€òòDoremusóó,€414€F.2d€at€254€(citing€òòState€v.€Thorneóó,€117€P.€58,Ð  ð Ð67€(Utah€1911)).€Ð à ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€the€petitioner€voluntarily€chose€to€become€a€witness€in€his€own€behalf€andÐ pÀ Ðthereby€waived€his€privilege€against€self„incrimination.€€Having€done€so,€he€ð ðmust€respond€to€allÐ `° Ðinquiries€pertinent€to€the€issue€on€trial.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€253.€€Petitionerððs€offer€of€personal€testimony,€deemedÐ P  Ðby€him€competent€and€material€to€the€issue€of€self„defense,€left€him€open€to€be€cross„examined€asÐ @ Ðto€any€matter€material€to€the€case.׃ @×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð 0€ ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€had€testified€on€direct€examination€that€the€victim€had€produced€a€pistol,Ð ` Ðpointed€it€at€the€petitioner,€and,€utilizing€the€weapon,€forced€the€petitioner€to€accompany€him€to€theÐ P Ðvictimððs€apartment.€€After€they€entered€the€apartment,€he€said€that€the€victim,€still€with€the€pistol,Ð ð@ Ðtold€him€to€get€undressed.€€The€petitioner€said€that€as€his€pants€were€halfway€to€his€knees,€he€pulledÐ à0 Ðout€his€pocketknife€and€raised€up€quickly.€€He€opened€the€knife€and€knocked€the€pistol€out€of€theÐ Ð  Ðvictimððs€hands.€€As€he€then€advanced,€holding€the€knife,€toward€the€victim,€the€victim€grabbed€theÐ À! Ðpetitionerððs€hand,€folding€the€blade€onto€the€victimððs€finger€and€cutting€it.€€Subsequently,€duringÐ ° Ðcross„examination,€the€petitioner€was€questioned€in€detail€about€this€confrontation.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àThe€demonstration€that€petitioner€alleges€was€unfairly€prejudicial€to€him€occurred€duringÐ €Ð Ðcross„examination€concerning€the€petitionerððs€explanation€of€what€transpired€as€the€petitioner€andÐ pÀ Ðthe€victim€were€inside€the€victimððs€apartment,€and€the€victim€held€a€gun€on€the€petitioner:Ð ` ° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàSo€then€you€get€in€the€apartment€and€he€again€says€I€just€wantÐ @  Ðsomeone€to€talk€to€and€then€does€he€change€his€demeanor€orÐ 0 € Ðsomething€and€say€take€your€clothes€off?Ð p Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàHe€told€me€I€needed€to€get€undressed.ÐP Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€All€right,€you€need€to€get€undressed.€€Was€he€undressed?Ðà0 ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€No,€sir.ÐÀ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàOkay.€€Where€were€you€standing€when€he€tells€you€that€youÐ  ð Ðneed€to€get€undressed?ÐàŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàIn€front€of€him€„„€I€donððt€know,€the€set€up€of€this€„„€he€wasÐ pÀ Ðbetween€me€and€the€door,€I€remember€that.Ð`°Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàYou€do€what,€get€undressed?Ð@Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€No,€sir.Ð p` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàPull€your€pants€down€or€something,€is€that€what€you€testifiedÐ P Ðto?Ðð@Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€Partially€to€my€knees.ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàAnd€then€what,€you€reach€into€your€pocket?а" Œ LŒ L ЀÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàYes,€sir.Ð$à"Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàIf€you€would,€could€you€just€step€down€and€demonstrate€ifÐ p&À!$ Ðyou€will,€how€close,€you€know,€were€you€to€each€other€whenÐ `'°"% Ðyou€were€doing€this,€sort€of€demonstrate€to€the€jury€ð!ð€ÐP( #&Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€COX:€Your€Honor,€if€I€could€have€this€cleared€again.€€Itððs€notÐ 0*€%( Ðloaded.€€Iððm€going€to€be€Mr.€Jewell.Ð +p&)` x` x ЀÐ ,`'* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàNow,€was€it€cocked?аŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàNot€to€my€knowledge.ÐàŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàWere€you€looking€at€it€through,€I€mean€you€were€this€close€toÐ pÀ Ðit,€werenððt€you?Ð` °Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€I€was€pretty€close.Ð@ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàNow,€was€he€holding€it€like€that?Ð p Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€Yes,€sir.ÐP ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€He€says€get€undressedòòóó.€€Now€what€did€you€do?Ðà0 ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàI€pulled€my€pants€down€halfway€to€my€knees.€€I€slipped€myÐ À Ðhand€in€my€pocket,€pulled€my€knife€out€and€I€come€up€andÐ ° Ðknocked€it€out€of€his€hand.РðŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€Well,€youððre€going€to€have€to€come€this€way.ЀÐ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàKnocked€it€out€of€his€hands.€€Iððm€now€sure€which€way,€it€fellÐ `° Ðto€the€floor.ÐP Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€You€knocked€it€with€your€right€hand?Ð0€` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€Yes,€sir.Ð`` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€With€the€same€hand€that€you€had€a€knife€in?Ðð@` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€I€believe.ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€Then€what€did€you€do?а" ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€I€pushed€him€back.Ð$à"` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€How€did€you€push€him,€just€demonstrate€on€me€what€you€did.Ðp&À!$` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€I€canððt€remember€exactly.ÐP( #&` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€€Well,€try.Ð0*€%(` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€€Well,€I€canððt.€€Iððm€sorry.Ð,`'*` x` x ЇAfter€the€petitionerððs€refusal€to€demonstrate€by€pushing€the€prosecutor,€defense€counsel€objected,Ð ° Ðand€a€bench€conference€was€held€out€of€the€hearing€of€the€jury:Ð  ð ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€HILL:€Heððs€trying€to€get€Mr.€Waller€to€assault€him€and€thatððsÐ €Ð Ðjust€inappropriate.ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€COX:€Judge,€Iððm€trying€to€get€him€to€demonstrate€whatÐ P   Ðhappened,€thatððs€all.€€As€the€Court€can€see,€heððs€been€totallyÐ @  Ðuncooperative.Ð0 €` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€HILL:€Heððs€cooperated€as€he€possibly€can.Ð` ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€COX:€The€jury€can€decide€that.Ðð@ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€HILL:€Mr.€Cox€wants€him€to€apparently€physically€assault€Mr.Ð Ð  ÐCox€so€as€to€inflame€the€jury€a€little€more€I€guess,€I€donððt€know.ÐÀ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€No,€heððs€not€going€to€assault.€€He€can€demonstrate€orÐ  ð Ðshow.€€I€think€itððs€in€line,€the€demonstration€is€all€right.Ðà` x` x ÐÌThe€record€shows€that€the€petitioner€continued€to€voice€strong€objection€to€participating€in€theÐ pÀ Ðdemonstration,€and€the€prosecutor€moved€on€to€another€area€of€questioning.€€However,€the€petitionerÐ `° Ðcontends€that€by€allowing€the€prosecutor€to€ask€petitioner€to€participate€in€such€a€demonstration,€theÐ P  Ðtrial€court€committed€prejudicial€error.Ð @ ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€also€complains€of€a€second€ð ðdemonstrationðð€which,€in€fact,€was€simply€cross„Ð  p Ðexamination€as€to€how€he€opened€the€knife€while€the€victim€was€pointing€a€pistol€at€him:Ð ` ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàDid€you€open€it€with€one€hand€or€did€you€open€it€with€twoÐ ð@ Ðhands?Ðà0Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàI€believe€two€hands.ÐÀ!Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàLike€this?Р#ð!Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàI€was€bent€over€him.Ѐ%Ð #Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàLike€this?€€You€could€demonstrate.Ð`'°"%Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàI€donððt€recall€if€I€opened€it€with€one€hand€or€two€hands,€okay?Ð@)$'Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàCan€you€open€it€with€one€hand?Ð +p&)Œ LŒ L ÐÐ ,`'* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàIt€can€be€done.аŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàCan€you€do€it?ÐàŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à Œ àItððs€been€a€long€time.ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàWell,€has€it€been€before€January€the€9th,€1991?ÐP  Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàI€guess€if€you€donððt€do€it,€itððs€not€that€easy€to€do.Ð0 €Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàNo,€it€doesnððt€appear€to€be€that€easy.€€Itððs€not€that€easy€for€meÐ `  Ðto€do.ÐP Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàItððs€something€ð!ðÐà0 Œ LŒ L ÐÌà  àà ` àQ.à Œ àHuh?Ð À ÐÌà  àà ` àA.à Œ àIt€takes€practice.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àà ` àQ.à Œ àHad€you€been€practicing?Ð €Ð ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàItððs€like€cutting€a€deck€of€cards€with€one€hand.€€Can€you€doÐ `° Ðthat?ÐP Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàIððll€tell€you€what€letððs€do.€€Iððll€ask€the€questions€and€youÐ 0€ Ðanswer€them€if€you€can.€€Did€you€open€it€with€one€hand€or€didÐ  p Ðyou€open€it€with€two?Ð`Œ LŒ L ÐÌà  àà ` àA.à Œ àTo€the€best€of€ð!ðÐ ð@ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMR.€HILL:€Your€Honor,€heððs€already€testified,€I€think€three€or€fourÐ Ð  Ðtimes,€he€doesnððt€recall€how€he€opened€it.ÐÀ!` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Weððll€move€along.Ð  #ð! ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàI€think€he€does€recall.€€He€said€two€hands,€didnððt€he?Ѐ%Ð #Œ LŒ L ÐÌà  àà ` àA.à Œ àTo€the€best€of€my€knowledge.Ð `'°"% ÐÌà  àà ` àQ.à Œ àNow,€did€Mr.€Jewell€shoot€you?Ð @)$' ÐÌà  àà ` àA.à Œ àDo€I€appear€to€be€shot?Ð  +p&) ÐÐ ,`'* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàDid€Mr.€Jewell€shoot€you€when€you€opened€this€knife€withÐ ° Ðtwo€hands.РðŒ LŒ L ÐÌà  àà ` àA.à Œ àNo,€sir,€he€didnððt.Ð €Ð Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àIt€is€well€within€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€to€permit€a€physical€demonstration€in€theÐ ` ° Ðcourtroom.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Underwoodóó,€669€S.W.2d€700,€704€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).€DemonstrativeÐ P   Ðevidence€is€admissible€only€if€relevant€under€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€401.€€DemonstrativeÐ @  Ðevidence€is€presented€to€assist€the€trier€of€fact€in€understanding€and€evaluating€the€other€evidenceÐ 0 € Ðoffered€at€trial.€€òòSeeóó€Cohen,€Sheppeard,€and€Paine,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó,€ðð€401.10€(3d€ed.Ð  p  Ð1995).€Demonstrative€evidence€is€most€often€attacked,€as€petitioner€does€here,€on€grounds€that€it€isÐ `  Ðtoo€prejudicial€under€Rule€403.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.Ô#†¼µä»XX®sâ#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€For€evidence€to€be€excluded€on€the€grounds€of€prejudice,€itsÐ P  Ðprobative€value€must€be€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.Ð ð@  ÐEvid.€403.€€Ð à0  ÐÌà  àAn€in„court,€re„enactment€demonstration€has€been€challenged€and€found€appropriate€evidenceÐ À Ðin€a€number€of€jurisdictions.€€In€òòState€v.€Thorntonóó,€498€N.W.2d€670€(Iowa€1993),€the€defendant€wasÐ ° Ðaccused€of€first€degree€murder€and€claimed€self„defense.€€On€cross„examination,€the€prosecutor€askedÐ  ð Ðthe€defendant€to€step€down€and€show€the€jury€how€the€ð ðwhole€incident€happened,ðð€with€theÐ à Ðprosecutor€acting€as€the€victim.€€òòIdóó.€at€674.€€The€defendant€resisted€the€demonstration,€claiming€thatÐ €Ð Ðit€ð ðoccurred€so€quickly€he€could€not€remember€exactly€how€it€happened.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Over€defenseððsÐ pÀ Ðobjection,€the€trial€court€allowed€the€demonstration.€The€prosecutor€asked€the€defendant€specifics,Ð `° Ðsuch€as€where€the€victim€was€standing€in€relation€to€the€defendant;€in€which€hand€the€victim€heldÐ P  Ðthe€knife;€and€where€the€victimððs€hand€and€the€knife€where€when€the€defendant€fired€the€gun.€€TheÐ @ Ðdefendant€answered€that€he€could€not€remember€or€did€not€know.€€The€trial€court€ordered€theÐ 0€ Ðdefendant€to€sit€down,€and€the€prosecutor€continued€with€cross„examination.€€òòIdóó.€€The€Iowa€SupremeÐ  p ÐCourt€concluded€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€allowing€the€demonstration.€€SinceÐ ` Ðthe€entire€case€turned€on€the€defendantððs€claim€of€self„defense,€the€actions€of€the€defendant€and€theÐ P Ðvictim€during€the€confrontation€were€vitally€important€to€both€the€defense€and€the€stateððs€case.€Ð ð@ ÐAdditionally,€the€demonstration€bore€upon€the€defendantððs€credibility.€€òòIdóó.€at€674„75.Ð à0 ÐÌà  àIn€òòSipress€v.€Stateóó,€562€N.E.2d€758,€763€(Ind.€1990),€the€defendant,€having€testified,€wasÐ À! Ðappropriately€compelled€to€demonstrate€how€he€spilled€a€scalding€kettle€of€water€onto€his€three„Ð °"  Ðmonth„old€daughter.€€Ô#†¼µä»XX®sä#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔThe€fact€that€the€defendant€was€unwilling€to€participate€or€uncertain€as€to€whatÐ  #ð! Ðhappened€went€to€his€credibility€as€a€witness.€€òòIdóó.€at€763.€€In€òòPrice€v.€Stateóó,€570€A.2d€887€(Md.€Ð $à" Ð1990),€the€defendant,€having€testified€that€he€shot€and€killed€both€his€wife€and€her€fifteen„year„oldÐ €%Ð # Ðdaughter,€argued€that€he€was€unfairly€prejudiced€when€the€trial€court€allowed€an€in„courtÐ p&À!$ Ðdemonstration€in€which€the€defendant€was€compelled€to€hold€the€gun€as€he€did€during€the€shootings.€Ð `'°"% ÐDefendant€claimed€to€have€been€in€a€ð ðdream„like€stateðð€before€getting€the€gun;€therefore,€theÐ P( #& Ðdefendantððs€ability€to€recall€how€he€held€the€gun€was€relevant.€€The€trial€court€did€not€abuse€itsÐ @)$' Ðdiscretion€in€ordering€the€defendant€to€demonstrate€how€he€held€the€rifle.€€òòIdóó.€at€894.€€In€òòState€v.€Gilóó,Ð 0*€%( Ð543€A.2d€1296€(R.I.€1988),€during€cross„examination,€the€defendant€was€required€to€ð ðstep€downÐ  +p&) Ðfrom€the€witness€stand,€take€hold€of€his€gun,€and€demonstrate€how€the€shooting€had€occurred,ðð€withÐ ,`'* Ðthe€prosecutor€playing€the€part€of€the€victim.€€òòIdóó.€at€1299.€€The€prosecutor€asked€the€defendant€toÐ ° Ðshow€how€he€removed€the€gun€from€his€car€when€the€victim€approached€him;€and€how€he€held€theÐ  ð Ðgun€when€he€fired€the€warning€shots.€The€defendant€responded€that€he€did€not€remember.€€DefendantÐ à Ðargued€on€appeal€that€he€was€improperly€prejudiced€by€being€forced€to€continue€the€demonstrationÐ €Ð Ðover€his€repeated€claims€of€lack€of€memory.€€The€issue€in€òòGilóó€was€the€defendantððs€claim€of€self„Ð pÀ Ðdefense;€therefore,€ð ðthe€sequence€of€events€surrounding€the€shooting€was€of€extreme€importance.ðð€Ð ` ° ÐòòIdóó.€at€1300.€€The€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€allowing€the€demonstration.Ð P   ÐÌà  àHere,€the€prosecution€sought€to€discredit€the€petitionerððs€assertion€that€he€killed€the€victimÐ 0 € Ðin€self„defense€to€fend€off€a€homosexual€attack.€In€order€to€be€relevant,€ð ðevidence€must€tend€to€proveÐ  p  Ða€material€issue.ðð€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401,€Advisory€Commission€Comments.€€A€demonstration€thatÐ `  Ðwould€show€the€sequence€of€events€that€led€to€the€victimððs€death€was€relevant€under€Rule€401.Ô#†¼µä»XX®sA #ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäԀРP  ÐAlthough€the€petitioner€never€touched€the€prosecutor,€petitioner€contends€that€asking€that€he€touchÐ ð@  Ðthe€prosecutor€was€unfairly€prejudicial€to€him€because€he€was€faced€with€an€unfair€dilemma:€€ð ðHadÐ à0  Ðthe€Appellant€exhorted€[sic]€force€on€the€District€Attorney,€such€display€would€have€been€inherentlyÐ Ð  Ðsuggestive€thereby€arousing€the€feelings€of€horror€and€indignation€in€the€jury.€€However,€and€becauseÐ À Ðthe€appellant€refused,€the€State€was€able€to€effectively€argue€an€inference€of€guilt€on€those€[sic]Ð ° Ðbasis.ðð€€Petitioner€describes€this€as€a€ð ðfoul€blowðð€on€the€part€of€the€prosecutor.€€We€disagree.€€OnceÐ  ð Ðthe€petitioner€had€become€a€witness€and€thereby€waived€the€shelter€of€constitutional€protectionÐ à Ðagainst€self„incrimination,€he€could€not€choose€only€to€give€testimony€favorable€to€him;€he€wasÐ €Ð Ðobliged€to€answer€all€pertinent€inquiry.€€We€cannot€say€that€the€probative€value€of€demonstrationsÐ pÀ Ðas€to€how€the€petitioner€defended€himself€or€opened€the€knife€were€substantially€outweighed€by€theÐ `° Ðdanger€of€prejudice€to€him.Ô#†¼µä»XX®sQ*#ÔÔ‡X®sX»¼µäÔ€€This€issue€has€no€merit.Ð P  ÐÌà0  àà ° àà@¹ ¹ ì(#(#àò òIII.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€CounselˆÐ 0€ ÐÌà  àó óPetitioner€argues€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€during€trial€and€on€directÐ ` Ðappeal.€€The€State€asserts€that,€regardless€of€the€list€of€alleged€instances€of€defective€performanceÐ P Ðby€defense€counsel,€petitioner€has€not€shown€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that,€were€it€notÐ ð@ Ðfor€these€errors,€the€result€of€the€trial€would€have€been€different.€€The€State€points€to€theÐ à0 Ðoverwhelming€evidence€of€the€petitionerððs€guilt.€€The€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€ð ðservicesÐ Ð  Ðrendered€by€trial€counsel€were€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminalÐ À! Ðcases.ðð€€During€the€January€27,€1997,€continued€hearing€on€this€post„conviction€petition,€the€post„Ð °"  Ðconviction€court€stated:Ð  #ð! ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àHank€Hill€is€a€very€able€trial€lawyer.€€Whether€he€likes€the€defendantÐ €%Ð # Ðor€not€doesnððt€make€any€difference.€€Mr.€Hill€wants€to€win.€€Mr.€HillÐ p&À!$ Ðdoes€everything€he€can€to€win€a€case.€€In€fact,€Mr.€Hill€will€skirt€asÐ `'°"% Ðclose€to€the€line€as€he€can€in€the€defense€of€any€defendant,€which€heððsÐ P( #& Ðsupposed€to€do.€€He€doesnððt€get€over€the€line€but€he€goes€right€up€toÐ @)$' Ðit,€because€he€uses€all€of€his€knowledge,€training€and€experience€toÐ 0*€%( Ðseek€the€acquittal€of€his€client.Ð +p&)` x` x ÐÐ ,`'* ЇThe€post„conviction€court€also€concluded€that,€even€if€services€of€counsel€were€beneath€this€range,Ð ° Ðpetitioner€failed€to€show€how€the€outcome€would€have€been€different€given€the€overwhelming€proofÐ  ð Ðof€petitionerððs€guilt.€€Ð à ÐÌà  àÔ‡!X®sXXX®sÔò òÔ#†!¼µä»X!X®sz/#Ôòòóóó óÔ‡!X®sX»!¼µäÔIn€order€to€determine€the€competence€of€counsel,€Tennessee€courts€have€applied€standardsÐ pÀ Ðdeveloped€in€federal€case€law.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€968€S.W.2d€900,€905€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997),Ð ` ° Ðòòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1998)€(noting€that€the€same€standard€for€determining€ineffective€assistanceÐ P   Ðof€counsel€that€is€applied€in€federal€cases€also€applies€in€Tennessee).€€The€U.S.€Supreme€CourtÐ @  Ðarticulated€the€standard€in€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€80€L.€Ed.€2dÐ 0 € Ð674€(1984),€which€is€widely€accepted€as€the€appropriate€standard€for€all€claims€of€a€convictedÐ  p  Ðpetitioner€that€counselððs€assistance€was€defective.€€The€standard€is€firmly€grounded€in€the€belief€thatÐ `  Ðcounsel€plays€a€role€that€is€ð ðcritical€to€the€ability€of€the€adversarial€system€to€produce€just€results.ðð€Ð P  ÐòòIdóó.€at€685,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2063.€The€òòStricklandóó€standard€is€a€two„prong€test:Ð ð@  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àFirst,€the€defendant€must€show€that€counselððs€performance€wasÐ Ð  Ðdeficient.€€This€requires€showing€that€counsel€made€errors€so€seriousÐ À Ðthat€counsel€was€not€functioning€as€the€ð ðcounselðð€guaranteed€theÐ ° Ðdefendant€by€the€Sixth€Amendment.€€Second,€the€defendant€mustÐ  ð Ðshow€that€the€deficient€performance€prejudiced€the€defense.€€ThisÐ à Ðrequires€showing€that€counselððs€errors€were€so€serious€as€to€depriveÐ €Ð Ðthe€defendant€of€a€fair€trial€whose€result€is€reliable.ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€687,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2064.€€The€òòStricklandóó€Court€further€explained€the€meaning€of€ð ðdeficientÐ P  Ðperformanceðð€in€the€first€prong€of€the€test€in€the€following€way:Ð @ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIn€any€case€presenting€an€ineffectiveness€claim,€the€performanceÐ  p Ðinquiry€must€be€whether€counselððs€assistance€was€reasonableÐ ` Ðconsidering€all€the€circumstances.€.€.€.€No€particular€set€of€detailedÐ P Ðrules€for€counselððs€conduct€can€satisfactorily€take€account€of€theÐ ð@ Ðvariety€of€circumstances€faced€by€defense€counsel€or€the€range€ofÐ à0 Ðlegitimate€decisions€regarding€how€best€to€represent€a€criminalÐ Ð  Ðdefendant.ÐÀ!` x` x ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€688„89,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2065.€€Petitioner€must€therefore,€establish€that€ð ðthe€advice€given€or€theÐ  #ð! Ðservice€rendered€was€not€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases[.]ðð€Ð $à" ÐòòBankston€v.€Stateóó,€815€S.W.2d€213,€215€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ð €%Ð # ÐÌà  à€As€for€the€prejudice€prong€of€the€test,€the€òòStricklandóó€Court€stated:€ð ðThe€petitioner€must€showÐ `'°"% Ðthat€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counselððs€unprofessional€errors,€the€result€of€theÐ P( #& Ðproceeding€would€have€been€different.€€A€reasonable€probability€is€a€probability€sufficient€toÐ @)$' Ðundermine€confidence€in€the€outcome.ðð€€òòóó466€U.S.€at€694,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2068;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòOverton€v.Ð 0*€%( ÐStateóó,€874€S.W.2d€6,€11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(holding€that€petitioner€failed€to€establish€thatÐ  +p&) Ðð ðthere€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counselððs€unprofessional€errors,€the€outcome€of€theÐ ,`'* Ðproceeding€would€have€been€differentðð).Ð ° ÐÌà  àòòóóCourts€need€not€approach€the€òòStricklandóó€test€in€a€specific€order€or€even€ð ðaddress€bothÐ à Ðcomponents€of€the€inquiry€if€the€petitioner€makes€an€insufficient€showing€on€one.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€697,€104Ð €Ð ÐS.€Ct.€at€2069;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€370€(Tenn.€1996)€(stating€that€ð ðfailure€toÐ pÀ Ðprove€either€deficiency€or€prejudice€provides€a€sufficient€basis€to€deny€relief€on€the€ineffectiveÐ ` ° Ðassistance€claimðð).Ð P   ÐÌà  àBy€statute€in€Tennessee,€the€petitioner€at€a€post„conviction€relief€hearing€has€the€burden€ofÐ 0 € Ðproving€the€allegations€of€fact€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„Ð  p  Ð210(f)€(1997).€€A€petition€based€on€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€is€a€single€ground€for€relief,Ð `  Ðtherefore€all€factual€allegations€must€be€presented€in€one€claim.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„Ð P  Ð206(d)€(1997).€Ð ð@  ÐÌà  àWe€note€that€when€post„conviction€proceedings€have€included€a€full€evidentiary€hearing,€asÐ Ð  Ðwas€true€in€this€case,€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€given€the€effect€andÐ À Ðweight€of€a€jury€verdict,€and€this€court€is€ð ðbound€by€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€of€fact€unless€weÐ ° Ðconclude€that€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€judgment€entered€in€theÐ  ð Ðcause.ðð€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).€Ð à ÐThe€reviewing€court€must€indulge€a€strong€presumption€that€the€conduct€of€counsel€falls€withing€theÐ €Ð Ðrange€of€reasonable€professional€assistance,€òòseeóó€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€690,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2066,€andÐ pÀ Ðmay€not€second„guess€the€tactical€and€strategic€choices€made€by€trial€counsel€unless€those€choicesÐ `° Ðwere€uninformed€because€of€inadequate€preparation.€€òòSeeóó€òòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.Ð P  Ð1982).€€The€fact€that€a€strategy€or€tactic€failed€or€hurt€the€defense€does€not€alone€support€the€claimÐ @ Ðof€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€òòSeeóó€òòThompson€v.€Stateóó,€958€S.W.2d€156,€165€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð 0€ ÐApp.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.1997).Ð  p ÐÌà  àFinally,€a€person€charged€with€a€criminal€offense€is€not€entitled€to€perfect€representation.€€òòSeeóóÐ P ÐòòDenton€v.€Stateóó,€945€S.W.2d€793,€796€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1997).׃"×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рð@ ÐThis€court€has€noted€that€ð ð[i]n€order€to€pass€constitutional€muster,€counsel€need€not€discover€everyÐ à0 Ðpossible€item€of€information€before€trial,€make€every€possible€objection€during€trial,€or€use€everyÐ Ð  Ðtrial€tactic€which€petitioner€would,€in€retrospect,€now€require.ðð€òòAllen€v.€Stateóó,€No.€960,€1991€WLÐ À! Ð154520,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Aug.€14,€1991),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€Jan.€6,€1992).Ð °"  ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€alleges€some€forty„six€instances€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€in€hisÐ $à" Ðoriginal€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€Some€of€these€are€restated€and€elaborated€on€in€hisÐ €%Ð # Ðpresent€appeal.€€We€have€painstakingly€reviewed€each€factual€allegation,€as€well€as€the€June€4,€1999,Ð ° ÐFindings€of€Fact€and€Conclusions€of€Law€submitted€by€the€post„conviction€court€on€remand€fromÐ  ð Ðthis€court.€We€note€that€this€court€should€not€examine€every€allegedly€deficient€act€or€omission€inÐ à Ðisolation,€but€rather€in€the€context€of€the€case€as€a€whole.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Mitchellóó,€753€S.W.2d€148,Ð €Ð Ð149€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1988).€€The€primary€concern€of€the€court€shouldÐ pÀ Ðbe€the€fundamental€fairness€of€the€challenged€proceeding.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.€€€In€an€effort€to€thoroughly€addressÐ ` ° Ðeach€of€his€allegations,€€we€have€organized€them€into€general€categories€of€alleged€offenses,€and,Ð P   Ðwith€the€principles€outlined€above€to€guide€us,€we€proceed€next€to€address€petitionerððs€claim€ofÐ @  Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel.Ð 0 € ÐÌà@··ìàò òA.€€Lawyer„Client€RelationshipˆÐ `  ÐÌà  àó óPetitioner€asserts€that€counsel€should€have€withdrawn€because€of€the€failure€of€their€lawyer„Ð ð@  Ðclient€relationship.€€Specifically,€petitioner€points€to€counselððs€alleged€failure€to€contact€petitionerÐ à0  Ðprior€to€trial,€personal€conflicts€between€the€parties,€and€counselððs€excessive€workload.€€PetitionerÐ Ð  Ðclaims€that€counsel€failed€to€respond€to€his€calls,€and€when€counsel€did€respond€he€was€abusive,Ð À Ðð ðcussing€outðð€the€petitioner€and€hanging€up€on€him.€€This€led€to€what€petitioner€characterizes€asÐ ° Ðð ðmajor€differencesðð€between€him€and€his€appointed€counsel.€€Ð  ð ÐÌà  àCounsel€testified€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€that€he€never€refused€to€consult€withÐ €Ð Ðpetitioner€and€never€ð ðcussed€him€out.ðð€€Counsel€noted€that€petitioner€was€difficult€to€work€with,€butÐ pÀ Ðcounsel€also€testified€that€petitioner€always€wanted€him€back€on€the€case€ð ðonce€he€realized€what€hisÐ `° Ðoptions€were.ðð׃#×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€post„conviction€court€also€stated€that,€ð ðjust€from€firsthand€knowledge€obtainedÐ P  Ðhere€today,€I€realize€the€difficulty€any€lawyer€would€have€in€representing€Mr.€Waller.ðð׃$@×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€PetitionerÐ @ Ðalso€asserts€that€counsel€was€faced€with€an€overwhelming€workload€and€lack€of€experience,Ð 0€ Ðconditions€which€we€assume€caused€the€petitioner€to€lose€faith€in€his€counsel.€€The€post„convictionÐ  p Ðcourt€specifically€noted€defense€counselððs€skill€and€ability,€and€nothing€in€the€record€indicates€thatÐ ` Ðcounsel€was€anything€but€fully€prepared€for€trial.€€Further,€petitioner€admitted€to€the€post„convictionÐ P Ðcourt€that€he€did€not€object€to€appointed€counsel€on€the€day€his€trial€began.€€Although€we€agree€withÐ ð@ Ðpetitioner€that€his€relationship€with€counsel€was€far€from€harmonious,€petitioner€has€failed€to€showÐ ° Ðany€instances€where€the€lawyer„client€relationship€precluded€his€being€effectively€represented.€€Ð  ð ÐÌà@ZZìàò òB.€€Investigation€and€PreparationˆÐ €Ð ÐÌó óà0  àPetitioner€asserts€that€counsel€failed€to€consult€with€him€in€time€to€locate€witnesses€helpfulÐ` °(#(# Ðto€his€case.€€Petitioner€points€to€two€individuals€whose€testimony€would€have€shown€that€theÐ P   Ðpetitioner€did€in€fact€earn€$150€working€on€a€roofing€job€during€the€time€he€stayed€in€ClevelandÐ @  Ðbefore€leaving€for€Florida.€€Petitioner€claims€that€this€testimony€would€have€refuted€the€StateððsÐ 0 € Ðtheory€of€robbery€and€theft.€Petitioner€also€claims€that€counsel€failed€to€locate€witnesses€in€FloridaÐ  p  Ðwhose€testimony€would€have€been€helpful,€although€petitioner€does€not€state€in€what€way.€€CounselÐ `  Ðtestified€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€to€the€following:Ð P  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàBoth€I€and€the€other€„„€and€various€investigators,€specificallyÐ à0  ÐAllan€Miller,€talked€to€virtually€everybody.€€Well,€I€did€talkÐ Ð  Ðto€everybody€that€testified€at€the€trial.€.€.€.€€I€talked€toÐ À Ðeverybody€involved€in€the€case;€as€a€matter€of€fact,€evenÐ ° Ðdrove€down€to€Port€St.€Richey,€Florida,€to€meet€with€Mr.Ð  ð ÐWallerððs€mother€and€I€believe€sister;€talked€to€the€detectivesÐ à Ðdown€there€who€had€„€„€heððd€stolen€Mr.€Jewellððs€car€after€heÐ €Ð Ðkilled€him,€and€drove€that€car€down€to€Florida€where€it€wasÐ pÀ Ðrecovered€at€his€motherððs€house.€.€.€.ò òÐ`°Œ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àó óQ.€à8Œ ` x` xàWhen€you€got€to€Florida,€were€there€some€witnesses€that€wereÐ @ Ðmissing€by€that€time,€some€witnesses€that€you€werenððt€able€toÐ 0€ Ðfind?Ð pŒ LŒ L ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.€à8Œ ` x` xàNot€that€Iððm€aware€of.€.€.€.€The€murder€took€place€inÐ P ÐTennessee.€€The€only€issues€in€Florida€were€maybe€forÐ ð@ Ðmitigation€purposes€or€in€an€effort€to€perhaps€suppress€someÐ à0 Ðof€the€evidence€that€was€recovered€down€there.ÐÐ Œ LŒ L ÐÌà  àThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€petitionerððs€testimony€concerning€the€money€he€earnedÐ °"  Ðwhile€in€Cleveland€was€corroborated€by€the€testimony€of€Carlena€Stephenson,€the€friend€with€whomÐ  #ð! Ðhe€stayed,€and€was€not€a€disputed€fact,€making€other€testimony€concerning€the€job€cumulative.€€TheÐ $à" Ðpost„conviction€court€further€found€that€testimony€of€witnesses€from€Florida,€for€example,€a€manÐ €%Ð # Ðwith€whom€petitioner€had€gone€to€a€bar,€was€not€helpful€to€his€theory€of€self„defense.€Petitioner€alsoÐ p&À!$ Ðargues€that€the€Coca€Cola€truck€driver€with€whom€the€petitioner€rode€from€the€first€Cleveland€exitÐ `'°"% Ðto€where€the€victim€picked€him€up€should€have€been€called€to€corroborate€petitionerððs€testimony,Ð P( #& Ðlending€him€credibility,€and€to€show€that€petitioner€made€ð ðno€attempts€to€rob€him,€or€murder€him.ððÐ @)$' ÐThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€testimony€concerning€the€petitionerððs€ride€before€encounteringÐ 0*€%( Ðthe€victim€would€not€have€added€helpful€information.€We€agree€and€conclude€that€counselððsÐ  +p&) Ðdecisions€concerning€these€witnesses€were€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneysÐ ,`'* Ðin€criminal€cases.€€Ð ° ÐÌà  àPetitioner€also€argues€that€counsel€failed€to€file€a€motion€seeking€a€speedy€trial,€and€that€heÐ à Ðfailed€to€consult€the€petitioner€before€putting€off€the€trial.€€Petitionerððs€trial€began€withinÐ €Ð Ðapproximately€sixteen€months€of€his€indictment.€€The€post„conviction€court€found€that€this€periodÐ pÀ Ðof€time€was€not€necessarily€a€denial€of€a€speedy€trial€and€stated€the€following:Ð ` ° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àEven€though€today€a€case€is€supposed€to€be€tried€within€one€year,Ð @  Ðsupposed€to€go€to€trial€within€six€months,€but€also€you€have€toÐ 0 € Ðremember€that€the€State€gave€notice€that€they€were€seeking€the€deathÐ  p  Ðpenalty.€€Death€penalty€cases€are€different€from€all€other€cases,€andÐ `  Ðyou€have€certain€rights€in€a€death€penalty€case€that€defendants€do€notÐ P  Ðhave€in€any€other€cases.€€You€were€entitled€to€have€two€attorneys,€youÐ ð@  Ðwere€entitled€to€have€expert€witnesses€and€all€paid€for€at€the€expenseÐ à0  Ðof€the€State.€Your€attorneys€have€to€spend€more€time€preparing€andÐ Ð  Ðit€takes€them€longer€to€prepare.€ÐÀ` x` x ÐÌCounsel€testified€that€the€case€proceeded€to€trial€as€quickly€as€it€was€ready€to€be€tried.€€To€have€goneÐ  ð Ðto€trial€unprepared€would€have€been€unreasonable.€Here,€counsel€acted€within€the€range€ofÐ à Ðcompetence€required.€The€petitioner€has€utilized€the€phrase€ð ðspeedy€trialðð€to€make€a€complaintÐ €Ð Ðagainst€his€trial€counsel€without€even€attempting€to€provide€an€appropriate€analysis€of€the€matter.€Ð pÀ ÐòòState€v.€Bishopóó,€493€S.W.2d€81€(Tenn.€1973).Ð `° ÐÌà  àPetitioner€further€argues€that€counsel€was€ineffective€in€failing€to€investigate€a€relationshipÐ @ Ðbetween€the€victim€and€Central€Baptist€Church,€a€church€where€the€preacher€and€deacons,€accordingÐ 0€ Ðto€petitioner,€had€been€convicted€of€child€molestation.€€Testimony€establishing€this€relationship,Ð  p Ðaccording€to€petitioner,€would€have€supported€petitionerððs€theory€that€the€killing€of€the€victimÐ ` Ðhappened€while€the€petitioner€was€resisting€a€homosexual€attack.׃%×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Such€testimony€would€not€haveÐ P Ðbeen€relevant,€and€counsel€acted€reasonably€and€ethically€in€not€knowingly€seeking€to€introduceÐ ð@ Ðinadmissible€evidence.Ð à0 ÐÌÐ  À! Ðà@– – ìàò òC.€Control€and€Direction€of€LitigationˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àó óPetitioner€next€asserts€that€counsel€advised€petitioner€that€he€did€not€have€any€right€not€toÐ à Ðtake€the€stand,€that€he€had€to€take€the€stand€and€testify.€€Counsel€testified€at€the€post„convictionÐ €Ð Ðhearing€to€the€following:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àMr.€Waller€was€well€aware€of€his€rights€to€or€to€not€take€the€stand.€Ð P   ÐAs€a€matter€of€fact,€Donna€Miller€from€the€public€defenderððs€officeÐ @  Ðspent€two€or€three€hours€with€him,€I€spent€a€couple€hours€with€himÐ 0 € Ðexplaining€exactly€what€his€options€were.€€Mr.€Waller€was€adamantÐ  p  Ðthat€he€wanted€to€testify,€and€Ms.€Millerððs€role€in€that€was€to€prepareÐ `  Ðhim€to€testify.€€€€€€€€€€€ÐP ` x` x ÐÌThe€post„conviction€court€found€petitionerððs€assertion€in€this€regard€to€be€unbelievable.€€We€acceptÐ à0  Ðthe€determination€in€this€regard€of€the€post„conviction€court.€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755Ð Ð  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).Ð À ÐÌà@66"ìàò òD.€€Trial€TacticsˆÐ  ð ÐÌó óà  àThe€majority€of€the€allegations€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€by€petitioner€fall€withinÐ €Ð Ðthe€broad€category€of€trial€tactics.€€ð ðStrategic€choices€made€after€thorough€investigation€of€law€andÐ pÀ Ðfacts€relevant€to€plausible€options€are€virtually€unchallengeable€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòBurger€v.€Kempóó,€483€U.S.Ð `° Ð776,€794,€107€S.€Ct.€3114,€3126,€97€L.€Ed.€2d€638€(1987).€€Petitioner€points€to€each€of€the€followingÐ P  Ðas€instances€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel:€€Ð @ ÐÌÓ<°,XƒX"  h•X°,XƒXŒ  h•X<Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€1.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€move€for€election€of€offenses;Ð p" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€2.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€dismiss€a€female€juror;Ð`" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€3.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€request€jury€sequestration;ÐP" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€4.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€object€to€prosecutionððs€opening€statement;Ðð@" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€5.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€object€to€the€demonstration;Ðà0" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à€€6.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€object€to€constructive€amendment€of€indictment€as€toÐ Ð  Ðburglary,€kidnapping,€felony€murder€committed€in€perpetrationÐ À! Ðof€kidnapping,€and€tampering€with€and€fabricating€evidence;а" " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€7.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€object€to€mandatory€rebuttable€presumptions;Р#ð!" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€8.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€object€to€hearsay€evidence€of€victimððs€doctor;Ð$à"" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€€9.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€object€to€ð ðcrime€sceneðð€and€ð ðvictimðð€language;Ѐ%Ð #" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à10.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€object€to€prosecutorial€misconduct;Ðp&À!$" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à11.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€object€to€the€testimony€of€Patrolman€Longworth€ofÐ `'°"% Ðthe€Port€Richie€Police€Department€and€Dr.€Allen,€the€victimððsÐ P( #& Ðpersonal€physician;Ð@)$'" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à12.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€put€on€evidence€of€petitionerððs€good€character;Ð0*€%(" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à13.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€impeach€Dr.€Allen,€the€victimððs€family€physician;Ð +p&)" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à14.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€call€a€security€guard€at€the€Quality€Inn€Motel€as€aÐ ,`'* Ðwitness€and€to€call€a€Motel€employee€to€testify€concerning€theÐ ° Ðbathroom€setup;Рð" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à15.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€pursue€defense€of€how€victim€would€act€withoutÐ à ÐProzac;ЀÐ" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à16.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€call€an€identity€expert€to€discredit€the€testimony€ofÐ pÀ ÐFloyd€Fuller;Ð` °" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à17.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€challenge€admission€of€photographs,€video€of€crimeÐ P   Ðscene,€and€charts€of€crime€scene€as€unfairly€prejudicial;Ð@ " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à18.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€request€that€the€trial€court€admonish€the€juryÐ 0 € Ðconcerning€statement€by€prosecutor€that€the€victimððs€ð ðhead€hadÐ  p  Ðbeen€cut€offðð€in€a€photograph€of€the€victimððs€arms€and€hands;Ð `  Ða€statement€by€Dr.€King€that€the€victimððs€wound€was€aÐ P  Ðð ðfinishing„off€typeðð;€and€a€statement€by€the€prosecutorÐ ð@  Ðrequesting€that€the€testimony€of€Carlena€Stephenson€be€struck.Ðà0 " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à19.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€challenge€grand€jury€proceedings;ÐÐ " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à20.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€challenge€ð ðdouble€jeopardyðð€where€indictment€wasÐ À Ðfor€both€premeditated€and€felony€murder;а" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à21.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€cross„examine€the€victimððs€daughter€concerning€herÐ  ð Ðtestimony€as€to€the€value€of€the€victimððs€car€and€concerning€herÐ à Ðopinion€about€why€her€father€went€to€motels;ЀÐ" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à22.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€create€reasonable€doubt€concerning€the€money€andÐ pÀ Ðjewelry€that€petitioner€left€behind€at€the€victimððs€apartment;Ð`°" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à23.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€cross„examine€the€medical€examiner€concerning€theÐ P  Ðpossibility€that€some€of€the€victimððs€wounds€might€have€beenÐ @ Ðcaused€by€a€fall€or€scraping€against€the€rug;Ð0€" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à24.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€call€Robert€Thompson,€the€roofing€job€employer;€€theÐ  p ÐCoca€Cola€truck€driver,€and€the€victimððs€psychiatrist;Ð`" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à25.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€pursue€issue€of€whether€petitioner€should€have€beenÐ P Ðcharged€with€one€offense€against€property€instead€of€two,€i.e.,€Ð ð@ Ðrobbery€and€theft€of€car;Ðà0" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à26.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€point€out€to€the€jury€what€constituted€reasonableÐ Ð  Ðdoubt;ÐÀ!" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à27.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€request€instruction€on€proper€use€of€prior€convictionsÐ °"  Ðtestimony€and€the€nonevidentiary€nature€of€attorneysððÐ  #ð! Ðstatements;Ð$à"" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à28.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€take€the€initiative€and€make€a€proper€motion€orÐ €%Ð # Ðdirected€acquittal€on€the€basis€that€the€overwhelming€evidenceÐ p&À!$ Ðwas€that€the€victim€was€the€true€perpetrator;Ð`'°"%" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à29.€€à0" " x" xàActing€as€a€third€prosecutor€by€providing€evidentiary€links€toÐ P( #& Ðthe€Stateððs€theory;Ð@)$'" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à30.€€à0" ` x` xàBringing€out€petitionerððs€prior€convictions€on€directÐ 0*€%( Ðexamination;€andÐ +p&)" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à31.€€à0" " x" xàAgreeing€to€stipulate€that€no€Prozac€was€detected€in€theÐ ,`'* Ðvictimððs€body€and€then€arguing€the€possible€side€effects€ofÐ ° ÐProzac€on€the€victim.Рð" x" x ÐÌÓÓPetitioner€also€alleges€instances€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€during€the€direct€appeal€process:€Ð €Ð ÐÓÓà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à32.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€appeal€the€admissibility€of€the€letter€to€CarlenaÐ ` ° ÐStephenson€written€from€Florida€by€the€petitioner;Ô#†X®sXX!X®s…7#ÔÔ‡!X®sXXX®sÔÐP  " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à33.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€appeal€the€trial€courtððs€instructions€on€flight€andÐ @  Ðreasonable€doubt;Ð0 €" x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à34.€€à0" ` x` xàFailure€to€raise€all€issues€on€appeal€that€the€defendantÐ  p  Ðrequested;€andÐ` " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0" ` x` xàà ` à35.€€à0" " x" xàFailure€to€raise€cumulative€error,€cumulative€reasonable€doubt,Ð P  Ðand€contamination€of€the€scene€on€appeal.Ðð@ " x" x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÔ#†X®sXX!X®sŽ #ÔÔ‡!X®sXXX®sÔÐ ` x` x Ðà  àAs€to€item€1,€election€of€offenses,€that€issue€has€been€resolved€adversely€in€this€opinion€toÐ Ð  Ðthe€petitioner.€€As€to€items€2€and€3,€regarding€complaints€as€to€the€jury,€the€post„conviction€courtÐ À Ðfound€neither€allegation€rose€to€the€level€of€ineffective€assistance.€We€agree.€€As€to€item€4€regardingÐ ° Ðthe€prosecutorððs€opening€statement,€we€deal€with€prosecutorial€misconduct€in€Issue€VI,€but€note€hereÐ  ð Ðthat€we€agree€with€trial€counsel€who€testified€that€he€did€not€think€it€improper€for€the€state€to€outlineÐ à Ðits€theory€of€the€case€in€opening€statements€and€there€was€nothing€for€counsel€to€object€to.€€As€toÐ €Ð Ðitem€5€regarding€the€demonstration,€we€have€dealt€with€that€allegation€in€Issue€II€herein.€€As€to€itemÐ pÀ Ð6,€we€have€dealt€with€that€allegation€in€Issue€I.€€In€both€cases,€we€found€no€error€to€which€defenseÐ `° Ðcounsel€could€object.€€Ð P  ÐÌà  àAs€to€item€7,€the€post„conviction€court€found€no€mandatory€rebuttable€presumptions€to€whichÐ 0€ Ðdefense€counsel€could€object.€€We€note€that€the€constitutional€mandate€that€the€State€prove€everyÐ  p Ðelement€of€a€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€has€been€interpreted€to€mean€that€the€State€may€notÐ ` Ðrely€on€an€evidentiary€presumption€as€a€way€to€relieve€it€from€this€mandate.€€òòSeeóó€òòe.góó.€òòSandstrom€v.Ð P ÐMontanaóó,€442€U.S.€510,€520„24,€99€S.€Ct.€2450,€2458„59,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€39€(1979);€òòState€v.€Sensingóó,Ð ð@ Ð843€S.W.2d€412,€417€(Tenn.€1992)€(cautioning€that€due€process€clause€of€the€Fourteenth€AmendmentÐ à0 Ðð ðprotects€an€accused€against€conviction€except€upon€proof€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€of€every€factÐ Ð  Ðnecessary€to€constitute€the€crime€with€which€he€is€chargedðð).€This€fundamental€principle€ð ðprohibitsÐ À! Ðthe€State€from€using€evidentiary€presumptions€in€a€jury€charge€that€have€the€effect€of€relieving€theÐ °"  ÐState€of€its€burden€of€persuasion€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€of€every€essential€element€of€the€crime.ðð€Ð  #ð! ÐòòSensingóó,€843€S.W.2d€at€417.€€Here,€petitioner€points€to€instances€that€he€labels€ð ðmandatory€rebuttableÐ $à" Ðpresumptions.ðð€€Those€are:€(1)€the€demonstration€using€a€man€the€height€of€the€victim€to€stand€nextÐ €%Ð # Ðto€the€petitioner;€(2)€the€testimony€of€the€victimððs€daughter€that€her€father€ð ðusuallyðð€wore€a€diamondÐ p&À!$ Ðring€and€a€six„year„old€photograph€showing€the€victim€wearing€a€diamond€ring,€which€was€missingÐ `'°"% Ðat€the€crime€scene;€(3)€the€testimony€concerning€seven€missing€Prozac€pills;€and€(4)€testimonyÐ P( #& Ðconcerning€Xanax€pills€found€with€the€petitioner€in€his€motherððs€Florida€home.€We€agree€with€theÐ @)$' Ðpost„conviction€court€that€there€were€no€ð ðmandatory€rebuttable€presumptionsðð€in€this€case.€€ThereÐ 0*€%( Ðwere€no€jury€instructions€as€to€either€ð ðpresumptionsððð"ða€term€disfavored€in€criminal€cases,€otherÐ  +p&) Ðthan€the€ð ðpresumptionðð€of€innocenceð"ð€or€ð ðpermissive€inferences.ðð€€Furthermore,€this€court€hasÐ ,`'* Ðalready€determined€that€the€State€proved€every€element€of€the€crimes€with€which€the€petitioner€wasÐ ° Ðcharged,€including€especially€aggravated€robbery.€€Thus,€Item€7€is€without€merit.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àItems€8€through€18€all€represent€tactical€decisions€made€by€counsel€during€the€trial.€€We€willÐ €Ð Ðnot€second€guess€those€decisions.€€We€also€find€nothing€among€these€allegations€that€rises€to€theÐ pÀ Ðlevel€of€ineffectiveness.€€As€the€post„conviction€court€noted,€Ô#†X®sXX!X®s–£#ÔÔ‡!X®sXXX®sÔ€ð ð[t]rial€counsel€presented€the€best€caseÐ ` ° Ðhe€could,€going€along€with€petitionerððs€insistence€that€he€killed€the€victim€while€defending€himselfÐ P   Ðfrom€a€homosexual€rage.ððÐ @  ÐÌà  àItem€19,€regarding€grand€jury,€was€determined€by€the€post„conviction€court€to€be€withoutÐ  p  Ðmerit.€€We€agree€that€there€were€no€grounds€for€challenging€the€grand€jury€proceedings.€€Item€20,Ð `  Ðthe€claim€of€double€jeopardy,€is€addressed€in€Issue€IV€where€we€find€no€error€to€which€defenseÐ P  Ðcounsel€could€object.€€Items€21€through€23€fall€within€the€area€of€strategic€and€tactical€trial€decisionsÐ ð@  Ðmade€by€defense€counsel,€in€consultation€with€the€client€where€feasible.