ÿWPC¯ ¸ ™‘IFha—gg ^§h—h<ƒœÌÆ–~cžëÑò4ü ±]ÉŒkwi¦=_,ˆO%C":'5®ÂÅ–wâVÚanñ ¢0’£UPêè:‰Ÿ•ál …e´®±…_WD!¨=q¡'Dõ$²Kf„>ºÂKrY{Ÿ’¸ 6¤Éuoí¡óÿžÞ Å=g(ý5íKðb£Ï/ˆ¯óü!Ûó°!šá ‘¹¢¬4é¶dwŒ½W¥Ð+ ÐYQ,¡Ó$‹g!Š$´â®Ù+´q*å!Ê+À~·ßÍf‘(¢™îfîõËàL¬Œ#®™â3©QË2õZ»VY©2˜‡ã–¹p«†i |ø 9©¾nünùÊž$Ôʳ0;}Tƒ“øR¥ÄiÝY>ÝzZùü…,-…>y§IùÃesØŒBPl~Ü7XæHÅ‚ÙÞÒ‘u2û¡ñ¬uîgyjô(óõg4™vV<‘6^y!ƒOT}R?‰AÊÅxÔÌdLÇ0u°HJ¿ý*›ð(®<ô¹ÒÎ eE1_ËüŠîDJOÝô¢QÅ`3ö‘Ò’7’ 9XÍ&HÆ®íU2ºB,îÖì*cRþxšÒ‚@ú¤G ¦Ü´ÅâL³t…dÏ=­j)# >UNI %— 0(LÅU:bKw@S4“§ 0D¶ 0ÐúU@Êé ™óU:Œ AQÆ ( U:? ? y y y y y y y y y y B Æž 0Dd 0D¨ 0Dì ì D/00 B_ D3|˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT,“í|AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- EF{GHEIJEKLÓ€XYn~<$3|xY(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(‡!2Ì$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X8 XXXÔÔ€ô¦ôXX8 ÔÓÓ€€€€€òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó*Ͼ¦ `(CG TimesScalable ßÝ ƒ Ì$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X؇XXXÔÔ€ô'¸ôXX؇ÔÓÓ€€€€€òòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€Appellant€and€his€co„defendant€were€tried€separately. Ý ƒ K$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X^ XXXÔÔ€ôàôXX^ ÔÓÓ€€€€€òòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€In€1995,€the€General€Assembly€amended€the€definition€of€felony€murder€by€dispensing€with€theÐ `  Ðrequirement€that€the€prosecution€prove€that€the€killing€was€reckless.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)Ï(1997).€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X؇XXXÔÔ€+D XX؇ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X؇X +DÔÐ  ÐÌò òOctober€14,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô'¸ôXX؇ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñLñ›ñLñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€ŠªŠXXÔÔ€Š0yŠŠŠªÔÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€æJXXdìXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñYññLñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` ttx$,` ð ÚrßñLññYññYññYññYññLñ›ñLññYññYññYññYñ›ñYññYñ›ñYñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌñYññYñÌñYñœßt€(>.*jx%` `€€@Ea ` ttx$Q` [ Õtß›ñYñAT€JACKSONÌÌAUGUST€SESSION,€1997ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À à)à  àC.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9601„CR„00019Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó ó)Ð ` Ðà ` àAppellee,à  àà h àà À àò ò)Ð Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àSHELBY€COUNTYÐ Xø  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHON.€JOHN€P.€COLTON,€JR.ó óÐ Xø  Ðò òTAURYS€K.€WALLS,ó óà h àà À àò ò)à  àJUDGEó óÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ Xø Ðà ` àAppellant.à  àà h àà À àò ò)à  à(Direct€œAppeal€„€Felony€Murder)›Ð Xø Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð 8Ø ÐÌGERALD€SKAHANà h àà À àà  àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ ( È Ð140€North€Third€Streetà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ  !À ÐMemphis,€TN€38103à h àà À àÐ "¸ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€DAVID€BRIDGERSÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€L.€GIBBONSÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJ.€ROBERT€CARTER,€JR.Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à201€Poplar€Avenue,€Third€FloorÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àMemphis,€TN€38103ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÐ  €4 +,9 ÐÓ  Óò òòòÔ‡„Óó„ŠŠ0yÔOPINIONóóó óÔ#†Š0yŠ„„Óó» #ÔÐ `  ÐÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓÑ7€ /œ XXdðXXdì7Ñà ` àAppellant€Taurys€K.€Walls€was€convicted€in€the€Shelby€County€CriminalÐ ´ T ÐCourt€on€November€3,€1995€of€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€a€felony,€to€wit:€Ïrobbery.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€Appellant€to€life€imprisonment€with€theÏTennessee€Department€of€Correction€and€imposed€a€$50.00€fine€to€be€paid€to€theÏCriminal€Injuries€Compensation€Fund.€€Appellant€presents€the€following€issuesÏfor€our€consideration€on€this€direct€appeal:€€(1)€whether€the€evidence€wasÏsufficient€to€sustain€Appellant's€conviction€for€felony€murder;€(2)€whether€the€trialÏcourt€erred€in€overruling€Appellant's€motion€to€suppress€his€statement€given€toÏpolice€respecting€his€involvement€in€the€murder€of€Melvin€Charles€Ferguson;€(3)Ïwhether€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€prohibiting€defense€counsel€fromÏquestioning€the€victim's€brother€about€a€lawsuit€that€the€brother€had€filed€inÏconnection€with€Ferguson's€death;€and€(4)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusingÏAppellant's€request€for€a€supplemental€jury€instruction€to€the€effect€that€allÏhomicides€are€presumed€to€be€second€degree€murder.Ìà ` àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà@  #®àò òI.€€FACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óˆÐ ´+T"# Ðà ` àThe€proof€shows€that€on€June€11,€1993,€Appellant€and€his€co„defendant,ÏMaurice€Banks,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€fatally€shot€Melvin€Charles€Ferguson€after€Ferguson€thwartedÐ ¤/D&' Ðtheir€attempts€to€rob€him.€€The€murder€and€robbery€took€place€at€the€Scottish€InnÏMotel€in€Memphis,€Tennessee.Ìà ` àAt€trial,€the€victim's€brother,€Mr.€Joe€Ferguson,€explained€that€at€the€timeÏof€the€murder,€the€victim€had€recently€retired€from€the€United€States€Army€andÐ d7./ Ðwas€seeking€employment€in€the€Memphis€area.€€Although€Melvin€Ferguson€hadÏbeen€alternating€between€his€brother's€house€and€his€mother's€residence€in€FortÏSmith,€Arkansas,€the€victim€moved€to€the€Scottish€Inn€Motel€a€few€days€prior€toÏhis€death€in€order€to€afford€some€privacy€to€Joe€Ferguson€and€his€wife.€€Mr.€JoeÏFerguson€further€testified€that€as€his€brother€was€unemployed,€both€Joe€and€hisÏmother€occasionally€gave€the€victim€money.€€However,€unknown€to€either€JoeÏFerguson€or€his€mother,€the€victim€used€some€of€this€money€to€purchase€cocaineÏfrom€various€local€drug€dealers,€including€Jeffrey€Davis.Ìà ` àA€few€hours€before€Ferguson's€death,€Jeffrey€Davis€accompanied€MauriceÏBanks€to€the€victim's€room€at€the€Scottish€Inn€Motel€and€sold€Ferguson€$50.00Ïworth€of€cocaine.€€Mr.€Davis€testified€that€after€completing€the€drug€transaction,ÏMaurice€Banks€dropped€Davis€at€Davis'€apartment€and€drove€away.€ÏApproximately€thirty€minutes€later,€Mr.€Banks€returned€to€Davis'€apartmentÏaccompanied€by€Appellant,€who€carried€a€.38€caliber€pistol.€€According€to€Mr.ÏDavis'€testimony,€Maurice€Banks€borrowed€Davis'€.380€semi„automatic€pistol.€ÏBanks€and€Appellant€then€departed.€€Upon€returning€to€Mr.€Davis'€apartment€one„¼half€hour€later,€Appellant€informed€Jeffrey€Davis€that€he€had€shot€someone€at€theÏScottish€Inn.Ìà ` àOn€June€16,€1993,€Appellant€was€arrested€as€a€suspect€in€the€FergusonÏmurder.€€Three€days€later,€on€June€19,€Appellant€gave€a€statement€in€which€heÏadmitted€his€involvement€in€Melvin€Ferguson's€death.€€In€his€confession,ÏAppellant€said€that€on€the€night€of€the€incident,€an€individual€who€he€identified€asÏ"Bull"€(Maurice€Banks)€picked€him€up€in€the€parking€lot€of€a€Memphis€apartmentÏcomplex€and€stated€that€he€knew€someone€that€the€two€of€them€could€rob.€ÏAppellant€told€the€police€that€he€carried€a€.38€caliber€handgun€and€that€BullÏarmed€himself€with€a€.380€pistol.€€The€two€men€drove€to€the€Scottish€Inn€MotelÐ Ð9p02 Ðand€walked€to€a€room€on€the€second€floor.€€After€knocking€on€the€door,€AppellantÏand€Mr.€Banks€were€admitted€by€a€woman.€€The€victim€was€in€the€motel€roomÏwith€the€woman.Ìà ` àAccording€to€Appellant's€statement,€after€approximately€five€minutes,ÏMelvin€Ferguson€asked€Appellant€and€Bull€which€one€of€them€"was€straight,"€aÏcolloquialism€meaning€which€person€had€drugs.€€Appellant€replied€that€Bull€was,Ïand€Mr.€Banks€and€the€victim€both€moved€toward€the€restroom.€€Bull€drew€hisÏpistol€and€apparently€demanded€that€Ferguson€give€him€money.€€Mr.€FergusonÏhanded€Bull€$300.00,€went€into€the€bathroom,€and€closed€the€door.€€Once€inside,Ïthe€victim€flushed€the€toilet€and€stated€that€he€was€going€to€flush€the€remainderÏof€the€money.Ìà ` àMr.€Ferguson€emerged€from€the€restroom€approximately€one€minute€later,Ïand€when€Bull€asked€him€the€location€of€the€rest€of€the€money,€Ferguson€repliedÏthat€he€did€not€know.€€Bull€hit€the€victim€in€the€head€with€his€pistol.€€Mr.€FergusonÏblocked€the€motel€room€door€with€his€body€and€stated€that€neither€Appellant€norÏBull€could€leave€the€room€until€they€returned€his€money.€€After€trying€for€severalÏminutes€to€persuade€Mr.€Ferguson€to€step€away€from€the€door,€Bull€asked€theÏwoman€where€the€victim€had€put€the€rest€of€his€money.€€The€woman€informed€BullÏthat€the€money€was€underneath€a€bush€planted€outside€the€motel.Ìà ` àUpon€learning€the€location€of€the€remainder€of€the€money,€Bull€again€askedÏFerguson€to€move€away€from€the€door.€€When€Ferguson€refused,€Bull€fired€hisÏpistol€at€the€victim's€leg,€and€Appellant€also€shot€at€him.€€Appellant€told€the€policeÐ  :À00 Ðthat€Ferguson€attempted€to€run€down€the€hallway€and€away€from€his€assailants.€ÏHowever,€Bull€shot€at€the€victim€a€few€more€times,€and€Appellant€fired€two€moreÏshots€at€Ferguson.€€Appellant€and€Bull€then€ran€from€the€building€and€fled€theÏscene€in€Bull's€car.€€Finally,€Bull€dropped€off€Appellant€at€the€same€apartmentÏcomplex€where€the€two€had€met€before€the€incident.Ìà ` àDr.€O'Brian€Cleary€Smith,€an€Assistant€Medical€Examiner€for€ShelbyÏCounty,€testified€that€the€victim€sustained€five€bullets€and€died€of€multiple€gunshotÏwounds.€€Dr.€Smith€testified€that€he€recovered€only€one€bullet€from€the€victim'sÏbody.€€He€stated€that€this€bullet€was€located€in€Mr.€Ferguson's€abdomen€andÏidentified€the€bullet€as€being€fired€from€a€.38€caliber€pistol.€€Dr.€Smith€opined€thatÏthe€wound€from€this€bullet€alone€would€have€been€sufficient€to€cause€Mr.ÏFerguson's€death.Ìà ` àAppellant€testified€on€his€own€behalf€at€his€trial.€€Though€AppellantÏconceded€his€involvement€in€the€incident,€Appellant€testified€that€he€shot€Mr.ÏFerguson€in€self„defense.€€According€to€Appellant's€trial€testimony,€on€the€nightÏof€the€incident,€he€accompanied€Maurice€Banks€to€the€Scottish€Inn€Motel€so€thatÏMr.€Banks€could€sell€drugs€to€someone€residing€there.€€Appellant€denied€that€heÏand€Mr.€Banks€ever€discussed€the€possibility€of€robbing€anyone.€€Instead,ÏAppellant€stated€that€when€he€and€Mr.€Banks€arrived€at€Mr.€Ferguson's€room,€theÏroom€smelled€as€though€Ferguson€and€his€female€companion€had€been€smokingÏ"crack"€cocaine.€€Moreover,€both€the€woman€and€Mr.€Ferguson€appeared€to€beÏhigh.€€Appellant€further€testified€that€the€victim€asked€who€"was€straight."ÌÌâ âà@XX®àò òII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óˆÐ 8¸.. Ðà ` àAppellant's€first€contention€is€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€sustainÏâ âhis€conviction€for€murder€during€the€perpetration€of€a€robbery€because€there€is€noÏevidence€to€demonstrate€that€Appellant€robbed€Melvin€Ferguson.€€He€furtherÏalleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€overruling€his€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal.€ÏWe€disagree.Ìà ` àòòTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.óó€29(a)€provides€in€pertinent€part,€"The€court€on€motion€ofÐ ˆ(  Ða€defendant.€.€.€shall€order€the€entry€of€judgment€of€acquittal€of€one€or€moreÏoffenses€charged€in€the€indictment€or€information.€.€.€if€the€evidence€is€insufficientÏto€sustain€a€conviction€of€such€offense€or€offenses."€€òòId.óó€€When€presented€with€aÐ  @ Ðmotion€for€judgment€of€acquittal,€the€trial€court's€only€consideration€is€the€legalÏsufficiency€of€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Blantonóó,€926€S.W.2d€953€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð °P Ð1996).€€Sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€the€appropriate€standard€by€which€both€trialÏand€appellate€courts€evaluate€the€adequacy€of€the€evidence.€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,Ð À!` Ð571€S.W.2d€832,€836€(Tenn.€1978).Ìà ` àThis€Court€is€obliged€to€review€challenges€to€the€sufficiency€of€theÏconvicting€evidence€according€to€certain€well„settled€principles.€€A€verdict€of€guiltyÏby€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€State'sÏwitnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòStateÐ è+ˆ"" Ðv.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75Ð ð-$$ Ð(Tenn.€1992).€€Although€an€accused€is€originally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€ofÏinnocence,€a€jury€verdict€removes€this€presumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€ofÏguilt.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€Hence,€on€appeal,€theÐ 4¨** Ðburden€of€proof€rests€with€Appellant€to€demonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€theÏconvicting€evidence.€€òòId.óó€€On€appeal,€"the€[S]tate€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÐ 8¸.. Ðlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimateÐ  :À00 Ðinferences€that€may€be€drawn€therefrom."€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571Ð `  ÐS.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978)).€€Where€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€isÏcontested€on€appeal,€the€relevant€question€for€the€reviewing€court€is€whether€anyÏrational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€accused€guilty€of€every€element€of€theÏoffense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòHarrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75;€òòJackson€v.Ð €  ÐVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€InÐ ˆ(  Ðconducting€our€evaluation€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€is€precluded€fromÏreweighing€or€reconsidering€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929€S.W.2d€380,€383Ð ˜8 Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð  @ ÐApp.€1990).€€Moreover,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€own€inferences€"for€thoseÏdrawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence."€€òòMatthewsóó,€805€S.W.2dÐ °P Ð776,€779.€€Finally,€òòTenn.€R.€App.€P.óó€13(e)€provides,€"Findings€of€guilt€in€criminalÐ ¸X Ðactions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt."€€òòSee€also€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€780.Ð Ð%p Ðà ` àAt€the€time€of€this€offense,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)€provided€inÏpertinent€part:€€"First€degree€murder€is:€€.€.€.€(2)€a€reckless€killing€of€anotherÏcommitted€in€the€perpetration€of.€.€.€robbery."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)Ï(1991,€Repl.).׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ39„11„302ñBññ@ñððñ@ññBññCñ(c)ñCñ›€provides:ÓÓÐ ð-$$ ÐÌà8 ` àà0¸ ` ü!` ü!àœñDññ@ñððñ@ññDññEñ(ñEññFññEñcñEññFññHññFñCñFññGñ)ñGññHññJññIñC)ñIññJññKñc)ñKñ›€"Reckless"€refers€to€a€person€who€acts€recklessly€withÏrespect€to€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€or€theÏresult€of€the€conduct€when€the€person€is€aware€of€butÏconsciously€disregards€a€substantial€and€unjustifiable€risk€thatÏthe€circumstances€exist€or€the€result€will€occur.€€The€risk€mustÏbe€of€such€a€nature€and€degree€that€its€disregard€constitutesÏa€gross€deviation€from€the€standard€of€care€that€an€ordinaryÐ 6°,, Ðperson€would€exercise€under€all€the€circumstances€as€viewedÏfrom€the€accused€person's€standpoint.Ð ¸ ü!¸ ü! ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„302(c).ÓÓÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„401€defines€"robbery"€as€"the€intentional€or€knowingÏtheft€of€property€from€the€person€of€another€by€violence€or€putting€the€person€inÏfear."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„401(a).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402€states€inÏpart:ÓÓÌÌà8 ` àà0¸ ` ü!` ü!àA€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€an€offense€committedÏby€the€conduct€of€another€if:€€.€.€.€(2)€Acting€with€intent€toÏpromote€or€assist€the€commission€of€the€offense,€or€to€benefitÏin€the€proceeds€or€results€of€the€offense,€the€person€solicits,Ïdirects,€aids,€or€attempts€to€aid€another€person€to€commit€theÏoffense.Ð ¸ ü!¸ ü! ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„402(2).ÓÓÌThe€State€is€required€to€prove€each€and€every€element€of€the€charged€offense.Ìà ` àAppellant€asserts€that€there€is€no€evidence€to€prove€that€he€robbed€theÏvictim€because€Melvin€Ferguson's€wallet€and€over€$20.00€were€recovered€at€theÏscene.€€The€proof€at€trial€demonstrated€that€both€Appellant€and€his€co„defendant,ÏMr.€Banks,€armed€themselves€with€pistols€before€going€to€the€victim's€motelÏroom.€€Moreover,€in€his€confession,€Appellant€told€the€police€that€when€MauriceÏBanks€picked€him€up,€he€told€Appellant€that€he€knew€someone€that€they€couldÏrob.€€Shortly€after€entering€Ferguson's€room,€Banks€drew€his€pistol€and€asked€theÏvictim€for€money.€€The€victim€handed€Banks€$300.00€and€then€went€into€theÏrestroom.€€After€Ferguson€emerged€from€the€bathroom,€Mr.€Banks€demanded€toÏknow€the€location€of€the€remainder€of€the€money.€€When€Ferguson€refused€toÏdisclose€the€location€of€the€money,€Banks€hit€the€victim€in€the€head€with€his€pistol.€ÏThe€victim€then€blocked€the€door€to€the€motel€room€and€announced€that€no€oneÏcould€leave€until€they€returned€his€money.€€Banks€again€asked€where€the€victimÏhad€concealed€the€money,€and€Ferguson's€female€companion€disclosed€that€theÐ  :À00 Ðmoney€was€hidden€beneath€a€bush€planted€outside€the€motel.€€Mr.€Banks€askedÏFerguson€to€move€away€from€the€door,€but€the€victim€declined€to€do€so.€€WhenÏthe€victim€refused€to€move,€both€Appellant€and€Banks€began€shooting€their€pistolsÏat€the€victim.€€Although€the€victim€attempted€to€escape€by€running€down€theÏhallway€and€away€from€his€assailants,€Appellant€and€Banks€fired€more€shots€atÏhim.€€An€autopsy€revealed€that€Ferguson€died€of€multiple€gunshot€wounds,€atÏleast€one€of€which€was€inflicted€by€a€.38€caliber€pistol.€€In€his€confession,ÏAppellant€admitted€firing€a€.38€caliber€handgun€at€Melvin€Ferguson.€€Ð Ð9p02 Ðà ` àFrom€this€evidence,€a€rational€trier€of€fact€could€conclude€that€Appellant,Ïand€his€co„defendant,€murdered€Melvin€Ferguson€during€the€course€of€robbingÏhim.€€Additionally,€the€jury€also€could€find€that€in€so€doing,€Appellant€disregardedÏa€substantial€and€unjustifiable€risk€that€Ferguson€would€die.€€Accordingly,€theÏevidence€presented€at€Appellant's€trial€was€sufficient€to€sustain€his€conviction€forÏfelony€murder.ÌÌà@ˆ ˆ ®àò òIII.€€SUPPRESSION€OF€APPELLANT'S€STATEMENTó óˆÐ ð  Ðà ` àAppellant€next€complains€that€the€trial€court€improperly€denied€his€motionÏto€suppress€his€statement€to€police€because€the€statement€was€taken€in€violationÏof€the€Fifth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€as€well€as€Article€I,€ðð€9Ïof€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€Appellant€further€asserts€that€his€statement€wasÏinvoluntarily€given.€€The€record€affords€no€support€for€Appellant's€assertions.Ìà ` àIt€is€well„settled€that€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€in€a€suppressionÏhearing€are€conclusive€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€againstÏthem.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878Ð €&  ÐS.W.2d€530,€544€(Tenn.€1994).€€Our€review€of€the€record€in€this€case€convincesÏus€that€the€trial€court's€findings€are€amply€supported€by€the€evidence.Ìà ` àThe€Fifth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€guarantees€thatÏ"No€person.€.€.€shall€be€compelled€in€any€criminal€case€to€be€a€witness€againstÏhimself."€€U.S.€Const.€amend.€5.€€The€Fifth€Amendment€privilege€against€self„¼incrimination€is€applicable€to€the€states€through€the€Fourteenth€Amendment.€ÏòòMalloy€v.€Hoganóó,€378€U.S.1,€84€S.Ct.€1489,€1492,€12€L.Ed.€653€(1964).€€ArticleÐ 4°*, ÐI,€ðð€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€guarantees€"That€in€all€criminal€prosecutions,Ïthe€accused.€.€.€shall€not€be€compelled€to€give€evidence€against€himself."€€Tenn.ÏConst.€art.€I,€ðð€9.€€The€court€in€òòStephensonóó€observed€that€though€the€federal€andÐ à9€02 Ðstate€constitutional€provisions€are€not€identical,€"the€most€significant€differenceÏbetween€the€provisions€is€that€the€test€of€voluntariness€for€confessions€underÏArticle€I,€ðð€9€is€broader€and€more€protective€of€individual€rights€than€the€test€ofÏvoluntariness€under€the€Fifth€Amendment."€€878€S.W.2d€530,€544.Ìà ` àIn€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€held,€"TheÐ  À Ðprosecution€may€not€use€statements,€whether€exculpatory€or€inculpatory,Ïstemming€from€custodial€interrogation€of€the€defendant€unless€it€demonstratesÏthe€use€of€procedural€safeguards€effective€to€secure€the€privilege€against€self„¼incrimination."€€384€U.S.€436,€86€S.Ct.€1602,€1612,€16€L.Ed.2d€694€(1966).€ÏThese€procedural€safeguards€must€be€undertaken€prior€to€the€initiation€of€anyÏquestioning€by€law€enforcement€officials€and€include€the€administration€of€theÏòòMirandaóó€rights€to€the€accused.€€òòId.óó€€An€accused€may€waive€these€rights,€providedÐ °P Ðthat€the€waiver€is€knowingly,€intelligently,€and€voluntarily€made.€€òòMirandaóó,€86€S.Ct.Ð   @ Ð1602,€1612.€€The€government€bears€the€"heavy€burden"€of€proving€that€theÏdefendant€knowingly€and€intelligently€waived€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€òòId.óó€at€1628.€€AÐ €$  Ðvalid€waiver€will€not€be€presumed€simply€from€the€accused's€silence€afterÏwarnings€are€administered€or€from€the€fact€that€officers€eventually€elicited€aÏconfession.€€òòLee€v.€Stateóó,€560€S.W.2d€82,€84€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€€However,Ð P*ð " Ðboth€our€state€and€federal€courts€have€held€that€absent€an€explicit€written€waiver,Ïa€waiver€may€be€implied€from€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€a€case.€€òòState€v.Ð 0.Ð$& ÐElrodóó,€721€S.W.2d€820,€823€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1986);€òòNorth€Carolina€v.€Butleróó,Ð  0À&( Ð441€U.S.€369,€99€S.Ct.€1755,€1757,€60€L.Ed.2d€286€(1979).Ìà ` àAt€the€hearing€on€Appellant's€motion€to€suppress€his€statement,€SergeantÏRonald€Wilkinson€of€the€Memphis€Police€Department€testified€that€Appellant€wasÏarrested€on€the€afternoon€of€June€16,€1993.€€Sergeant€Wilkinson€further€testifiedÏthat€he€acted€as€the€arresting€officer€on€that€day€because€Sergeant€SamuelÐ Ð9p02 ÐWilliams,€the€lead€officer€on€the€Ferguson€case,€was€not€on€duty.€WilkinsonÏstated€that€on€June€16,€he€did€not€attempt€to€question€Appellant€respecting€theÏincident.€€Additionally,€Sergeant€Wilkinson€averred€that€if€an€arrestee€requestedÏan€attorney,€this€would€be€noted€in€the€arrestee's€case€file.€€Finally,€he€stated€thatÏno€such€notation€existed€in€Appellant's€file.€à p àSergeant€Samuel€Williams€testifiedÐ  À Ðthat€on€June€19,€1993,€Williams€had€Appellant€brought€to€his€office.€€Williams€saidÏthat€he€was€"sure"€that€he€administered€Appellant€his€òòMirandaóó€rights€beforeÐ    Ðspeaking€with€him.€€Sergeant€Williams€then€engaged€Appellant€in€an€informalÏdiscussion€concerning€the€events€surrounding€Melvin€Ferguson's€death.€€Finally,Ïwhen€Appellant€"decided€he'd€tell"€Sergeant€Williams€what€Williams€"felt€was€theÏtruth,"€Williams€asked€Appellant€if€he€would€be€willing€to€give€a€formal€statement.€ÏWhen€Appellant€affirmed€his€willingness€to€give€a€statement,€Williams€againÏadvised€Appellant€of€his€òòMirandaóó€rights.€€A€typist€transcribed€Sergeant€Williams'Ð   @ Ðquestions€and€Appellant's€responses.€€After€being€read€his€rights,€AppellantÏacknowledged€that€he€understood€those€rights.€€When€Sergeant€Williams€hadÏcompleted€Appellant's€interrogation,€he€asked€Appellant€to€read€over€theÏstatement€to€ensure€its€correctness,€to€initial€every€page,€and€to€sign€and€date€theÏlast€page.€€Appellant€incorrectly€dated€his€statement€"6/20/93."€Ìà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Sergeant€Williams€acknowledged€that€on€the€dayÏthat€Appellant€was€arrested,€Appellant€informed€a€member€of€the€policeÏdepartment€that€he€did€not€wish€to€give€a€statement€and€that€he€knew€nothingÏabout€Mr.€Ferguson's€death.€€Sergeant€Williams€also€stated€that€he€did€not€knowÏwhether€or€not€Appellant€had€requested€an€attorney;€however,€he€also€explainedÏthat€if€an€arrestee€made€such€a€request,€this€would€be€noted€in€that€person's€caseÏâ âfile€and€that€police€would€cease€all€questioning.€Ð à7€.0 Ðà ` àIn€òòState€v.€Crumpóó,€the€defendant€made€remarks€similar€to€Appellant's.€€834Ð `  Ðâ âS.W.2d€265,€266€(Tenn.€1992).€€There,€law€enforcement€officials€administeredÏòòMirandaóó€warnings€to€the€defendant.€€òòId.óó€at€269.€€A€detective€testified€that€CrumpÐ @ à Ðresponded€by€saying€either€"I€don't€have€anything€to€say€right€now,"€or€"I€don'tÏhave€anything€to€say."€€òòId.óó€at€266.€€After€being€informed€that€he€was€a€suspect€inÐ  À Ðanother€crime€different€from€the€one€for€which€he€was€arrested,€Crump€replied,Ï"I€don't€know€anything€about€that."€€òòId.óó€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€held€thatÐ    ÐCrump's€statement,€"I€don't€have€anything€to€say,"€constituted€an€unequivocalÏinvocation€of€his€right€to€remain€silent€and€that€police€officers€were€obliged€toÏscrupulously€honor€this€right.€€òòId.óó€at€269„70.€€The€facts€of€this€case€areÐ Ðp Ðdistinguishable€from€those€in€òòCrumpóó.€€òòCrumpóó€concerned€the€situation€whereÐ À` Ðpolice€persisted€in€attempting€to€question€the€accused€after€he€had€invoked€hisÏright€to€remain€silent.€€Here,€however,€three€days€elapsed€before€police€againÏattempted€to€interrogate€Appellant,€thereby€scrupulously€honoring€his€right€toÏremain€silent.€€An€accused's€invocation€of€the€right€to€remain€silent€does€notÏcompletely€preclude€all€future€attempts€to€reinterrogate€the€suspect.€€òòsee,€e.g.,Ð p& ÐMichigan€v.€Mosleyóó,€423€U.S.€96,€96€S.Ct.€321,€36€L.Ed.2d€313€(1975)€(holdingÐ `(  Ðthat€police€scrupulously€honored€accused's€right€to€remain€silent€by€attemptingÏto€reinterrogate€him€only€after€a€two„hour€interval€and€the€administration€of€freshÐ @,à"$ ÐòòMirandaóó€warnings).Ð 0.Ð$& Ðà ` àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€Appellant€testified€that€he€informed€police€ofÏhis€whereabouts€so€that€he€could€be€picked€up€because€an€officer€hadÏtelephoned€his€grandmother€and€stated€that€the€police€wanted€to€interrogateÏAppellant€regarding€a€hit„and„run€incident.€According€to€Appellant's€testimony,Ïofficers€transported€him€to€the€homicide€office€and€then€held€him€in€an€interviewÏroom€for€two€to€three€hours.€€At€some€point,€an€officer€asked€Appellant€whetherÐ Ð9p02 Ðhe€wished€to€give€a€statement,€and€Appellant€replied€that€he€would€not€do€so€untilÏhe€had€spoken€with€a€lawyer.€Ìà ` àAppellant€further€testified€that€he€was€again€brought€to€the€homicide€officeÏthree€days€later€and€that€he€once€more€refused€to€give€a€statement€without€anÏattorney.€€Despite€this€refusal,€when€another€officer€inquired€whether€AppellantÏwished€to€give€a€statement,€he€agreed€to€do€so.€€According€to€Appellant,€after€heÏgave€his€statement,€he€was€shackled€to€a€bench€for€approximately€twentyÏminutes.€€An€officer€brought€Appellant€a€statement€and€directed€him€to€initial€eachÏpage€and€to€sign€the€last€page.€€Appellant€alleged€that€the€statement€containedÏnumerous€inaccuracies€but€acknowledged€that€the€signature€on€the€statementÏwas€his€own.€€Finally,€Appellant€denied€that€he€was€ever€advised€of€hisÏconstitutional€rights€before€giving€his€statement.€Ìà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Appellant€conceded€that€he€had€been€arrested€onÏburglary€and€theft€charges€only€one€month€before€being€apprehended€inÏconnection€with€the€Ferguson€homicide.€€Appellant€further€admitted€that€uponÏbeing€arrested€concerning€these€earlier€charges,€he€gave€a€statement€afterÏofficers€administered€Miranda€rights€to€him.Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€found,€as€a€matter€of€fact,€that€"no€coercion,€no€violence,€andÏno€threats€were€given€or€made€to€the€defendant."€€As€the€evidence€does€notÏpreponderate€against€the€trial€court's€factual€findings,€we€decline€to€disturb€themÏon€appeal.€€Although€Appellant€signed€no€explicit€written€waiver,€a€waiver€properlyÏmay€be€inferred€from€the€fact€that€Appellant€acknowledged€understanding€hisÏrights€and€then€gave€a€statement€which€he€both€initialed€and€signed.€€òòState€v.Ð 4 *, ÐElrodóó,€721€S.W.2d€820,€823€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1986).€€The€trial€court€properlyÐ ð5,. Ðdenied€Appellant's€motion€to€suppress€his€confession.ÌÐ Ð9p02 Ðà@®àò òIV.€€CROSS„EXAMINATION€OF€A€WITNESS€TO€DEMONSTRATE€BIASó óˆÐ `  Ðà ` àAppellant's€third€assignment€of€error€is€that€the€trial€court€improperlyÏexcluded€evidence€of€possible€bias€of€a€prosecution€witness,€namely,€Mr.€JoeÏFerguson.€€We€disagree.Ìà ` àAt€trial,€defense€counsel€sought€to€ask€the€victim's€brother€about€a€pendingÏcivil€suit€which€the€victim's€family€had€filed€against€the€Scottish€Inn€Motel€arisingÏout€of€the€same€facts€being€litigated€in€the€criminal€prosecution.€€Apparently,€theÏlawsuit€concerned€whether€or€not€the€Scottish€Inn€neglected€to€afford€adequateÏsecurity.€€ò ò€ó óDefense€counsel€argued€that€the€purpose€of€the€inquiry€was€toÐ ð Ðdemonstrate€the€possible€prejudice€of€Mr.€Joe€Ferguson€against€AppellantÏbecause€of€Ferguson's€financial€interest€in€the€civil€suit.€€However,€the€trial€courtÏruled€that€this€testimony€was€irrelevant€to€the€trier€of€fact€and€excluded€it.Ìà ` àòòTenn.€R.€Evid.óó€401€provides,€"`Relevant€evidence'€means€evidence€havingÐ À ` Ðany€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€fact€that€is€of€consequence€to€theÏdetermination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€beÏwithout€the€evidence."€€òòId.óó€€òòTenn.€R.€Evid.óó€616€provides,€"A€party€may€offerÐ &0 Ðevidence€by€cross„examination,€extrinsic€evidence,€or€both,€that€a€witness€isÏbiased€in€favor€of€or€prejudiced€against€a€party€or€another€witness."€€òòId.óó€€ThisÐ p*!" ÐCourt€is€aware€of€cases€holding€that€the€trial€court€improperly€prohibited€defenseÏcounsel€from€questioning€the€victim€in€a€criminal€case€as€to€whether€he€hadÏbrought€a€civil€suit€against€òòthe€accusedóó€based€upon€the€acts€at€issue€in€theÐ @0à&( Ðcriminal€case.€€òòState€v.€Horneóó,€652€S.W.2d€916,€919€(Tenn.€1983).€€In€so€holding,Ð 02Ð(* Ðthe€òòHorneóó€court€observed€that€"great€latitude€is€allowed€on€cross„examination,Ð  4À*, Ðparticularly€cross„examination€showing€the€witness'€interest€or€bias."€€òòId.óó€at€918.€Ð 6°,. ÐAdditionally,€"The€text€writers€seem€to€be€in€accord€that€for€the€purpose€ofÏshowing€interest,€or€bias,€a€witness€for€the€prosecution€in€a€criminal€case€may€beÐ ð902 Ðquestioned€as€to€whether€he€has€brought€an€action€against€the€accused,€basedÏon€the€acts€involved€in€the€criminal€case."€€òòId.óó€at€919€(citing€C.J.S.,€vol.€98,Ð P ð ÐWitnesses,€Sec.€560;€Wharton's€Criminal€Evidence,€13th€Edition,€Torcia,€Sec.Ï436;€McCormick's€Law€of€Evidence,€Chapter€5,€Sec.€40.).€€òòSee€also€State€v.Ð 0Ð ÐRobert€E.€Smithóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9203„CR„00067,€Hamilton€County€(Tenn.Ð  À ÐCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€April€15,€1993)€(holding€that€the€trial€court€abused€itsÏdiscretion€in€prohibiting€defense€counsel€in€a€criminal€case€from€questioning€theÏvictim€as€to€whether€or€not€she€had€filed€a€civil€suit€against€the€accusedÏpredicated€upon€the€facts€being€litigated€in€the€criminal€prosecution).Ìà ` àThe€above„cited€cases€are€distinguishable€from€the€present€case.€€Here,Ïdefense€counsel€sought€to€prove€Joe€Ferguson's€possible€bias€by€questioning€theÏwitness€regarding€a€civil€suit€which€Ferguson's€family€had€filed€against€a€thirdÏparty„„the€Scottish€Inn.€€Since€it€is€undisputed€that€the€victim€in€the€case€at€barÏwas€the€victim€of€a€homicide€perpetrated€by€someone,€we€fail€to€see€how€cross„¼examining€Joe€Ferguson€about€this€lawsuit€would€demonstrate€the€witness'Ïpossible€bias.ÌÌà@Þ Þ ®àò òV.€€DENIAL€OF€REQUESTED€JURY€CHARGEó óˆÐ P*ð " Ðà ` àFinally€Appellant€alleges€that€the€trial€court€improperly€refused€to€chargeÏthe€jury€that€"The€law€in€Tennessee€has€long€recognized€that€once€the€homicideÏhas€been€established,€it€is€presumed€to€be€murder€in€the€second€degree."€€òòSeeÐ 00Ð&( ÐState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530,€543€(Tenn.€1992).€€We€disagree.Ð  2À(* Ðà ` àIn€òòState€v.€Phippsóó,€we€explained,€"`[A]€defendant€has€a€constitutional€rightÐ 4°*, Ðto€a€correct€and€complete€charge€of€the€law.'"€€883€S.W.2d€138,€142€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1994)€(quoting€òòState€v.€Teelóó,€793€S.W.2d€236,€249€(Tenn.€1990)).€€It€is€notÐ ð7.0 Ðerror€for€the€trial€court€to€refuse€to€give€a€specially€requested€jury€instruction€soÐ à9€02 Ðlong€as€the€court's€instructions€"correctly,€fully,€and€fairly€set€forth€the€applicableÏlaw"€in€the€case.€€òòId.óó€€òòSee€also€State€v.€Kellyóó,€683€S.W.2d€1,€6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð P ð Ð1984).€€On€appeal,€this€Court€must€"review€the€entire€charge€and€only€invalidateÏit€if,€when€read€as€a€whole,€it€fails€to€fairly€submit€the€legal€issues€or€misleads€theÏjury€as€to€the€applicable€law."Ìà ` àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€Appellant€was€charged€with€the€offenses€of€murderÐ °  Ðin€the€perpetration€of€a€robbery€and€with€premeditated€first€degree€murder.€ÏHowever,€Appellant€was€acquitted€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder€andÏconvicted€of€murder€in€the€perpetration€of€a€robbery.€€The€trial€court€gaveÏinstructions€for€all€of€the€charged€offenses€as€well€as€each€of€their€lesser€includedÏoffenses.€ò ò€€ó óThese€instructions€closely€followed€the€jury€instructions€contained€inÐ À` ÐT.P.I.„„CRIM.€(4th€ed.)€ðð€7.01€òòet€seq.óó€in€charging€the€jury€as€to€first€degreeÐ À` Ðmurder€and€all€its€lesser€included€offenses.€€In€explaining€its€refusal€to€giveÏAppellant's€specially€requested€jury€instruction,€the€trial€court€acknowledged€itsÏfamiliarity€with€the€òòBrownóó€decision€and€reasoned€that€"the€charge€that€the€courtÐ $0 Ðwill€give€will€adequately€cover€all€degrees€of€homicide,€and€the€court€believes€thatÏif€it€gave€this€[requested€jury€instruction]€as€is€that€it€would€confuse€the€trier€ofÏfact.€.€.€."€Ìà ` àIn€òòState€v.€Guadalupe€S.€Mendezóó,€this€Court€explained:ÓÓÐ P,ð"$ ÐÌà8 ` àà0¸ ` ü!` ü!àWe€do€not€read€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530€(Tenn.Ð @.à$& Ð1992),€as€requiring€the€invalidation€of€every€first„degreeÏmurder€case€involving€the€standard€T.P.I.€jury€instructions€onÏfirst„degree€murder.€€The€holding€in€òòBrownóó€was€based€on€aÐ (1È') Ðsufficiency€of€the€evidence€question;€our€Supreme€Court'sÏdirective€on€the€jury€instruction€was€directory€in€nature.Ð ¸ ü!¸ ü! ÐC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9206„CC„00186,€slip€op.€at€7,€Montgomery€County€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Nashville,€April€15,€1993).ÓÓÌAlthough€Appellant's€requested€jury€charge€is€an€accurate€statement€ofÏTennessee€law,€the€charge€given€in€this€case€fully€and€fairly€set€forth€theÐ è8ˆ/1 Ðelements€of€first€degree€murder€and€all€the€lesser€degrees€of€homicide.€€òòSeeÐ `  ÐState€v.€Erica€Nelmsóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9604„CR„00116,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.Ð P ð ÐCrim.€App.,€Jackson,€May€23,€1997)€(holding€that€because€Appellant€wasÏacquitted€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder€and€convicted€of€felony€murder,€itÏwas€not€error€for€the€trial€court€to€refuse€to€charge€the€jury€that€once€a€homicideÏhas€been€established,€it€is€presumed€to€be€murder€in€the€second€degree).€€òòSeeÐ °  Ðalso€State€v.€Glenn€Mannóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9502„CC„00046,€Dyer€CountyÐ    Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€August€16,€1996).€€Moreover,€like€the€Appellant€inÏthe€òòNelmsóó€decision,€òòsupraóó,€Appellant€was€convicted€of€first€degree€felony€murderÐ à€ Ðand€acquitted€of€premeditated€first€degree€murder.€€Thus,€the€trial€court€properlyÏrefused€to€give€the€requested€charge.€€òòcf.€State€v.€Charles€Montagueóó,€C.C.A.€No.Ð À` Ð03C01„9306„CR„00192,€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€November€21,€1994)Ï(holding€that€any€error€resulting€from€the€trial€court's€failure€to€give€the€requestedÏinstruction€that€a€homicide€is€presumed€to€be€second€degree€murder€wasÏharmless).Ìà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ñ9ññ;ññ9ñÔ#†X`=X X X…h°#Ôñ9ññ;ññ<ññ9ñÔ#†Š`ŠXX`= #Ôñ9ññ<ñÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÌÌÌÌÓ  Óà ` àÌÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àñ6ñJERRY€L.€SMITHñ6ññ6ñDAVID€H.€WELLESñ6ñ,€JUDGEÌÐ Ð9p02 ЇÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________Ìñ7ñDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGEñ7ñÌÌÌ___________________________________Ìñ8ñTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEñ8ñ