ÿWPCÍ  Ð\4éÝ-m&,'踮Ø]nOð;³±$ž¢½0.¿œ»—þÃéTE( øàC¸C*Ì‘'æI‹&·—ò®tñ"@¡Ìׯ÷ü ¥ óY…¬l]«2N®–|¬Þ”ÚeõgîÆC&<ª¤ìAó‘½ÔǤ?i‡’*é¯5ôV‰oxS²ÌO÷±ð¿;qe‘áNJ%)g]©>ˆ+…$K¨‰w`㢃}³î;‰áSg Fõ Ø+Ò*poÝ1˜£õÀÌJ® ‹£M™_ޏ•kB¨•Ìü¸p¾ÉtwŸ6Qñ›úVWÌUÿj –e6ƒF_¨HèüßÔ j*‚ŠÁÿ¢ÁûêAeÕ±ÞF=hfÈáƒáy¹ÛÍfàvˆí©ÒJ¡ÏSpw¶±/NYÄ(\-Z‡w~um£dhguQhÃL¹ŠÊ»ØÛ^‘KÜyüWOG­€×)Oœ×©ñuå(ƒÁü¶hh\ŽºÁƒ©(ý,  4è w}ñãC”ž@¸µš¢º÷õ²æ6$ѵ©%T˜23É@ %€U .†´nXÄ 0P4l€ 0³ˆ 0c;w@žU:ÞU:U:R'ŒU:³ 'í U:             AQN ÆŸ 0De 0D© 0Dí B1 D/N N B} D3š <þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|X{«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Ón~<$(c(2nä$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€X+ÙXXXÔà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó("ˆ$Ô€ X<=XXXÔòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó eEf[ghiEjEkPlÓ€x{g"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X—eXXXÔÔ€¨'XX—eÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X—eX¨'ÔÐ  ÐÌò òOctober€7,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô§¡ôXX—eÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XZ¬XXXÔÔ€*XXZ¬ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XZ¬X*ÔÐ  ÐÌò òOctober€2,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô%ßôXXZ¬ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !"#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó d'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd$$$$'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýñlñ›ñlñÑ` °ÑÑX°ÑÒPDÒÒŽ¦ÒÑ  ÑÑTR[  AØ'Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  ÓÔ€XÙìXXXÔÑ7€ Ùì XXdðXXdð7Ññxññlñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eêf ` ttx$"` ð Úrßñlññxññ{ññxñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eêf ` ttx$"` ð Úrßñxññ{ññlñ›ñlñà ¨ àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  Ðñ{ñœßt€(>.*jxdþ` `€€@ENP ` ttx$†P ð Ôtß›ñ{ñÌà@ÃÃ;MàAT€JACKSONˆÌÌÓ  Óà@™™8MàMAY€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ° àà  àà ` à)ó óÐ Ðp  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)ó óà ¸ àò òC.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9708„CC„00296ó óÐ À`  Ðà ¨ àà àAppellee,à ° àò ò€€€€€à  àà ` à)Ð °P  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àHENRY€COUNTYó óÐ  @  ÐVS.à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)Ð 0  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àHON.€JULIAN€P.€GUINN,Ð €  ÐSARA€LEIGHANE€WISDOM,à  àà ` à)à ¸ àJUDGEÐ p Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)Ìà ¨ àà àó óAppellant.ò òà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àó ó(Aggravated€œBurglary€and€TheftÐ Pð Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)ñjñà ¸ àñjññkñà ¸ àñkñ€ñiññcñà  àñcññiññeññdñ(ñdññeññfñó óñfññgñ(ñgññfññ_ñó óñ_ññfñover€$1,000)ñhñ)ñhñò ò›Ð @à Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà ° àà  àà ` à€€€€€òòà ¸ àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÐ   ÐÌÌò òVICKI€H.€HOOVERà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ Ð p Ðó ó123€N.€Poplar€St.,€Suite€Aà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ À!` ÐParis,€TN€€39242Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àMARVIN€E.€CLEMENTSó óÐ  #@ Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAsst.€Attorney€GeneralÌ€€à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJohn€Sevier€Bldg.Ð €%  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à425€Fifth€Ave.,€Northà ! àà p# à€€€€€€Ð p& Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ìà ¨ àà àÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àROBERT€ð ðGUSðð€RADFORDó óÐ @)à" Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àò òTODD€A.€ROSEó óÐ ,°"% Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àP.O.€Box€686Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àHuntingdon,€TN€€38344Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àÌÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDà àó óÐ @8à.2 ÐÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÐ ;°15 ÐJudgeÌÐ  ð<37¼ ÐѰXÑÓ  Óà@™™:Màò òòòÔ‡¼ç9¼XXéùÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ#†XéùX¼¼ç9ã#ԈР`  ÐÌÌó óóóÌÓÓà ¨ àà àFollowing€a€jury€trial€in€March€1997,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€oneÏcount€of€aggravated€burglary,€which€is€a€Class€C€felony,€and€one€count€of€theft€ofÏproperty€over€one€thousand€dollars€($1,000),€which€is€a€Class€D€felony.€€The€juryÏassessed€a€fine€of€five€thousand€dollars€($5,000)€for€the€burglary€conviction€and€a€fine€ofÏthree€thousand€dollars€($3,000)€for€the€theft€conviction.€The€trial€court€sentenced€theÏdefendant€to€three€years€for€the€aggravated€burglary€conviction,€one€year€in€confinementÏand€the€balance€on€Community€Corrections.€€For€the€theft€conviction,€the€defendant€wasÏsentenced€to€two€years,€one€year€in€continuous€confinement€and€the€balance€onÏCommunity€Corrections.€€The€sentences€were€ordered€to€run€concurrently€with€oneÏanother.ÌÌà ¨ àà àOn€appeal,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€ordering€herÏto€serve€an€excessive€sentence;€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€a€sentenceÏalternative€to€confinement;€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€district€attorney€toÏquestion€her€about€a€past€misdemeanor€record€she€claims€has€been€expunged;€and€thatÏthe€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€grant€her€a€judgment€of€acquittal.€€After€a€careful€reviewÏof€the€record,€we€affirm€the€defendantððs€convictions€and€sentences.ÌÌà ¨ àà àRoy€Futrell€returned€home€from€work€on€June€21,€1996,€to€discover€thatÏsomeone€had€broken€into€his€residence€and€stolen€many€of€his€personal€belongings,Ïprimarily€his€guns.€€Mr.€Futrell€called€the€Henry€County€Sheriffððs€Department€and€WilliamÏVandiver,€an€investigator€with€that€department,€came€to€his€home€where€he€gaveÏVandiver€an€inventory€of€the€items€taken.ÌÌà ¨ àà àSteven€Wisdom,€the€defendantððs€husband€at€the€time,€and€Glen€Axley,Ð F:æ04 ÐSteven€Wisdomððs€friend,€discussed€before€the€burglary€how€they€needed€extra€money,Ïso€they€decided€to€break€into€the€Futrell€home.€€Steven€Wisdom€had€dated€Mr.€FutrellððsÐ :¾06 Ðstepdaughter€and€had€ñSñœñSñpreviously€beenñSñ›ñSñ€inside€the€ñSñœñSñhomeñSñ›œñSñ.ñSñ›ñSñ€€The€defendant€had€worked€withÏMr.€Futrell€and€had€known€his€stepdaughter€as€well.€€Consequently,€they€knew€that€thereÏwere€guns€inside€the€home€and€what€hours€Mr.€Futrell€worked.€ÌÌà ¨ àà àAs€her€husband€and€Axley€went€inside€the€home€to€get€the€belongings,€theÏdefendant€drove€the€car€and€parked€it€out€of€the€sight€of€passersby.€€When€the€two€hadÏgotten€the€property,€the€defendant€pulled€up€to€the€residence€to€pick€them€up€and€thenÏdrove€to€outside€Paris,€Tennessee.€€Mr.€Wisdom€then€drove€the€car€to€their€home€inÏHenry€County.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€two€men€decided€to€pawn€the€guns.€€According€to€the€testimony€of€oneÏof€the€pawn€shop€owners,€the€defendant€and€her€husband€came€to€his€pawn€shop€inÏMartin,€Tennessee,€and€pawned€two€guns.€€€The€three€split€the€money,€but€Mr.€WisdomÏtestified€that€he€kept€the€defendantððs€share€of€the€money.€€€They€then€went€to€Dover,ÏTennessee,€where€ñSñœñSñAxleyñSñ›ñSñ€pawned€another€gun€and€split€the€ñSñœñSñproceeds€with€the€defendantÏand€her€husband.ñSñ›ñSñ€€They€then€traveled€to€Clarksville,€Tennessee,€where€they€went€out€toÏeat€with€the€money,€and€the€defendant€and€her€husband€each€used€some€of€the€moneyÏto€get€tattoos.€€The€guns€ñSñœñSñthat€wereñSñ›ñSñ€pawned€in€Martin€and€Dover€were€later€recovered.€€ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€voluntarily€spoke€with€the€Benton€County€SheriffððsÏDepartment,€confessed€her€role€in€the€crimes,€and€implicated€her€codefendants€in€theÏcrimes.€€At€trial,€the€defendant€testified€that€she€was€forced€by€her€husband€to€participateÏin€the€crimes.€€She€also€testified€that€she€was€afraid€of€her€husband€and€that€he€had€beenÏviolent€with€her€in€the€past.ÌÌà ¨ àà àBefore€addressing€the€issues€before€us,€we€are€compelled€to€address€whatÏwe€consider€an€inadequate€brief€from€œñWñthe›€ñWññSñœñSñdefense›€counsel.ñSñ›ñSñ€€€The€defendantððs€one„€and€one„¼half„page€brief€is€almost€identical€to€another€brief€filed€in€this€Court€by€ñSñœñSñdefense€counsel.ñSñ›ñSñ€Ð ä9„06 ÐThis€probably€explains€why€œñXñthe›€ñXññSñœñSñdefense›€counselñSñ›ñSñ€was€incorrect€in€her€assertion€in€the€caseÏòòsub€judiceóó€that€the€sentencing€of€the€defendant€occurred€immediately€after€the€trial:€ñSñœñSñthatñSñ›ñSñÐ , Ì Ðwas€correct€in€the€other€case€in€which€counsel€filed€a€brief€with€this€Court.€€In€the€instantÏcase,€the€record€reflects€the€trial€was€held€on€March€24,€1997,€and€the€sentencing€hearingÏon€April€9,€1997,€ñSñœñSñsixteenñSñ›ñSñ€days€later.€€Moreover,€the€defendantððs€ñSñœñSñbriefñSñ›ñSñ€states€that€there€areÏfour€issues€on€ñSñœñSñappeal,€but€then€lumps€theseñSñ›ñSñ€four€issues€ñSñœñSñintoñSñ›ñSñ€two€scant€sections,€withoutÏany€reference€to€the€record,€hardly€any€citations€to€authority,€and€an€incorrect€statementÏregarding€sentencing.€€Although€we€have€held€that€a€defendantððs€failure€to€adequatelyÏbrief€issues€resulted€in€waiver€of€those€issues,€we€will,€in€this€case,€address€the€issuesÏbefore€us.€€However,€we€admonish€ñSñœñSñdefenseñSñ›ñSñ€counsel€for€the€inadequate€brief€filed€in€thisÏCourt.ÌÌà ¨ àà àBecause€the€defendantððs€first€two€issues€relate€to€sentencing,€we€willÏaddress€those€together.€€The€defendant€contends€that€her€sentence€is€excessive€and€thatÏthe€trial€court€erred€by€not€considering€an€alternative€sentence€such€as€probation.€€€SheÏalso€claims€that€the€trial€court€ð ðrefused€to€allow€counsel€to€prepare€for€a€sentencingÏhearing,€which€the€Trial€Judge€conducted€immediately€after€the€conclusion€of€the€trial.ððÌÌà ¨ àà àÔ‡ X¿XXX¿ÔWhen€a€defendant€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€aÐ ¸)X $ Ðsentence,€this€Court€conducts€a€de€novo€review€with€a€presumption€that€theÏdeterminations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€Ô#†X¿XX X¿å&#ÔÔ‡ X¿XXX¿ÔHowever,€thisÐ P-ð#( Ðpresumption€is€conditioned€on€an€affirmative€indication€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÏconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.€€òòState€v.Ð è0ˆ', ÐAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€Ð ´2T). ÐÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€that€the€sentence€wasÏimproper.€€òòId.óó€€€In€determining€whether€the€defendant€has€met€this€burden,€this€Court€mustÐ 8¸.4 Ðconsider€(a)€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing;€(b)€theÐ ä9„06 Ðpresentence€report;€(c)€the€principles€of€sentencing;€(d)€the€arguments€of€counsel;€(e)€theÏnature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€and€(f)€the€defendantððs€potential€or€lack€ofÏpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€T.C.A.€ðððð€40„35„103(5),€40„35„210(b).ÌÔ#†X¿XX X¿(#ÔÔ‡ X¿XXX¿ÔÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€insists€that€she€should€have€received€probation.€€However,Ïwe€note€that€although€the€trial€court€found€the€defendant€to€be€entitled€to€the€presumptionÏof€alternative€sentencing,€she,€not€the€State,€has€the€burden€of€establishing€suitability€forÏfull€probation.€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„303(b).€€To€meet€this€burden,€the€defendant€must€illustrateÏhow€probation€will€ð ðsubserve€the€ends€of€justice€and€the€best€interest€of€both€the€publicÏand€the€defendant.ðð€€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€456€(quoting€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803Ð Œ, ÐS.W.2d€250,€259€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990)).ÌÔ#†X¿XX X¿Ð+#ÔÌà ¨ àà àThe€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€the€minimum€sentence€for€bothÏthe€aggravated€burglary€conviction€and€the€theft€conviction.€€Although€the€trial€courtÏrecognized€that€the€defendant€was€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternativeÏsentencing,€it€concluded€that€split€confinement€would€be€in€the€best€interest€of€not€onlyÏthe€public€but€also€the€defendant.€€The€trial€court€based€its€decision€to€impose€splitÏconfinement€on€several€factors,€including€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€theÏdefendantððs€willingness€to€lie,€and€her€failure€to€accept€responsibility€for€her€actions.€€TheÏtrial€courtððs€decision€to€impose€split€confinement€was€also€based€on€its€desire€to€provideÏa€deterrence€and€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€crimes€committed.ÌÌà ¨ àà àFor€a€trial€court€to€deny€an€alternative€sentence€based€on€the€seriousnessÏof€the€offense,€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€ð ðððmust€be€especially€violent,€horrifying,Ïshocking,€reprehensible,€offensive,€or€otherwise€of€an€excessive€or€exaggerated€degree,ððÏand€the€nature€of€the€offense€must€outweigh€all€factors€favoring€a€sentence€other€thanÏconfinement.ðð€€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€454€(quoting€òòState€v.€Hartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€370,Ð 8¸.4 Ð374„75€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)).€€The€trial€courtððs€denial€of€an€alternative€sentenceÐ ä9„06 Ðbased€on€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€under€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B),€can€only€beÏupheld€if€the€òòHartleyóó€conditions€are€in€the€record.€€Here,€the€trial€court€reasoned€that€theÐ , Ì Ðoffense€in€this€case€was€serious€because€guns€were€stolen.€€Although€we€agree€that€theÏtheft€of€guns€is€serious,€the€record€does€not€indicate€that€the€òòHartleyóó€conditions€are€metÐ Äd Ðin€this€case.Ìà ¨ àÌà ¨ àà àThe€other€factors€relied€upon€ñSñœñSñby€theñSñ›ñSñ€trial€court,€however,€fully€support€theÏsentences€imposed€in€this€case.€€The€trial€court€observed€that€the€defendant€ð ðexhibit[ed]Ïan€arrogant€willingness€to€tell€anything€any€way€which€seem[ed]€to€best€benefit€her€at€theÏmoment,ðð€referring€to€the€confusion€regarding€the€defendantððs€theft€conviction€in€BentonÏCounty,€which€the€defendant€contends€had€been€expunged.€€As€the€district€attorney€andÏthe€trial€court€noted,€however,€nothing€in€the€record€indicated€that€the€conviction€hadÏactually€been€expunged.€€The€trial€court€relied€even€more€heavily€on€the€fact€that€theÏdefendant€remained€unable€to€take€responsibility€for€her€actions€in€committing€the€instantÏcrimes.€€This€finding,€which€is€supported€by€the€record,€has€bearing€on€the€rehabilitativeÏpotential€of€the€defendant.€€Moreover,€under€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€we€agreeÏwith€the€trial€court€that€the€theft€of€guns€is€a€serious€offense,€that€confinement€wouldÏprovide€a€deterrence,€and€that€some€period€of€confinement€is€necessary€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offenses€committed€by€the€defendant.€€Accordingly,Ïthe€ñSñœñSñdefendantððsñSñ›ñSñ€sentences€are€affirmed.ÌÔ‡ X¿XXX¿ÔÌÔ#†X¿XX X¿¦:#Ôà ¨ àà àNext,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€districtÐ /¼%* Ðattorney€to€question€her€about€her€prior€criminal€history.€€She€argues€that€her€pastÏmisdemeanor€record€had€been€expunged€so€the€district€attorney€should€not€haveÏquestioned€her€during€trial€about€that€prior€conviction.€€She€further€insists€that€the€trialÏcourtððs€manner€toward€her€was€prejudicial€and€ñSñœñSñharshñSñ›œñSñ.ñSñ›ñSñÌÌÔ‡ X¿XXX¿Ôà ¨ àà àThe€record€indicates€that€approximately€a€month€before€the€trial,€the€districtÐ ä9„06 Ðattorney€filed€notice€of€his€intent€to€use€the€Benton€County€theft€conviction€to€impeach€theÏdefendant€should€she€testify.€€The€record€also€indicates€that€defense€counsel€referred€toÏthe€Benton€County€theft€conviction€herself€during€her€opening€statement€to€the€jury:Ïð ð[W]hile€she€[the€defendant]€was€in€jail,€awaiting€a€hearing€in€Benton€County,€which€youððllÏalso€hear€testimony€of€that,€she€was€later„„her€charge€was€dismissed€and€her€record€wasÏexpunged€in€Benton€County.ðð€€Furthermore,€counsel€refers€to€the€defendantððs€prior€chargeÏin€Benton€County€at€several€other€times€during€her€examination€of€witnesses.€€TheÏdefendant€ñSñœñSñð ðopenedñSñ›ñSñ€the€ñSñœñSñdoorððñSñ›ñSñ€regarding€the€theft€conviction€in€Benton€County,€so€sheÏcannot€now€complain€that€the€State€questioned€her€about€that€conviction.€€Moreover,€theÏrecord€is€devoid€of€evidence€that€the€trial€court€treated€her€in€a€harsh€ñSñœñSñor€prejudicialÏmanner.ñSñ›ñSñ€€The€defendantððs€arguments€on€this€point€lack€merit.Ô#†X¿XX X¿¿<#ÔÐ Xø ÐÌà ¨ àà àOur€last€issue€for€review€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€herÏmotion€for€a€judgment€of€acquittal.€€A€person€commits€aggravated€burglary€by€enteringÏa€habitation€without€the€consent€of€the€property€owner,€but€with€the€intent€of€committingÏa€felony,€theft,€or€assault.€€T.C.A.€ðððð€39„14„402(a)(1),€39„14„403(a).€€A€person€commitsÏtheft€of€property€if€he€or€she€knowingly€obtains€or€exercises€Ô‡ X¿XXX¿Ôcontrol€over€the€propertyÐ  &À  Ðwithout€the€ownerððs€effective€consentÔ#†X¿XX X¿CC#Ô,€but€with€the€intent€to€deprive€the€owner€of€property.€Ð ì'Œ" ÐT.C.A.€ðð€39„14„103.Ô‡ X¿XXX¿ÔÐ ¸)X $ ÐÔ#†X¿XX X¿>D#ÔÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€argued€at€trial€that€she€waited€in€the€car€and€ñSñœñSñneverñSñ›ñSñ€enteredÏMr.€Futrellððs€home.€€In€the€indictment,€the€defendant€was€charged€as€a€codefendant.€ÏLater,€the€district€attorney€filed€notice€for€a€jury€instruction€to€be€given€for€criminalÏresponsibility€for€conduct€of€another.€€Sufficient€notice€of€criminal€liability€based€upon€theÏconduct€of€another€was€satisfied.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Barnesóó,€954€S.W.2d€760€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð €4 +0 ÐApp.€1997).ÌÌà ¨ àà àMoreover,€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€indicates€that€the€defendant€droveÐ ä9„06 Ðher€codefendants€to€Mr.€Futrellððs€home€and€waited,€out€of€sight,€while€they€removed€Mr.ÏFutrellððs€possessions€from€his€home€without€his€permission.€€ñSñœñSñTheñSñ›ñSñ€defendant€then€droveÏthem€from€the€ñSñœñSñsceneñSñ›œñSñ,ñPñ›€›€The›€defendantñPññSñ›ñSñ€accompanied€her€two€codefendants€to€at€least€one€pawn€ñSñœñSñshopñQñ,ñQññSñ›ñSñ€andÏñSñœñSññRñobtainedñRññRñ›receivedñRññSñ›ñSñ€a€one„third€share€of€the€money€received€for€the€stolen€goods,€which€she€usedÏto€treat€herself€to€a€dinner€and€a€tattoo.€€€This€evidence,€when€viewed€in€the€light€mostÏfavorable€to€the€State,€is€sufficient€to€affirm€the€defendantððs€convictions.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòStateÐ \ü  Ðv.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983);€òòState€v.€Banesóó,€874€S.W.2d€73,€78Ð (È  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).ÌÌà ¨ àà àAccordingly,€the€defendantððs€convictions€and€sentences€are€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à______________________________Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€œJudgeñZññUñÐ  ð ÐñUññZññ[ñÌÌÌÌñ[ññVñ›Ì›Ì›Ì›ÌñVñCONCURÔ‡ X¿XXX¿Ô:›Ð ˆ"( ÐÌÌÌ______________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÔ#†X¿XX X¿L#Ô