WPC@ ϗY \GI&a6sw}dIRKPm,g܂ζ`\ATmrݛ.#tЈoJPm@a]+g+h;Dj@_54n)+?;TJdXꑍOy˽\Xr͉s2g}@w*\#fA5s<)@}.g쏼bі]ckqS쥿x2Z''TsqxrDkR3aUoNAa7RauUs(|pOt ~0 Q e΋NghSdTرB]9UgHmӿxIf(58'3gSG%F"-(d~@&V}\5{i[A>9 rA#En"h0 .\W:[LW5z -(,smcpkRsE[D]ll1M# 6UNA % 0(U:w 4 + U:: 0t 0DX b  0D7 e {  U:U:U:U:SHCU:U:zU:U:(0 BU:U:^HU:U:U:!U:!"U:'%U:a%^%U:&U:3'm'U:)U:+*Se*U:-U:-,.U:/U:0S;0U:3U:34U:5U:56U:8U: 9HF9U:<U:< AQ=S= 0D> 0D]> 0D> D/> B?1? D34@U:g@HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($,  AZ"Arial RegularZ    [ E  E   P E E [    [ E  E e  E  E  E  E   E   P    Ye    E  E     {  [  U     D  E  U U [! " # E$ % & ' * / [0 1 U2 U3 [4 U5 U6 U7 U8 P9 R: D; U< D= De> ӀH %s&3|xH ,  AZ"Arial Regular((2,$ !  =Xdd= X LXXXX `   0  (#$  0  - - )  .H8G:\TSC1\OPINIONS\BROWNJA.OPNHG:\TSC1\OPINIONS\BROWNJA.OPN/  (3$ !      %$=Xdd=XTXXXX `   2    =XXdXd=XTXX XTIXXTԀTheCourtspolicyistorefertovictimsofsexualabusebytheirinitials.   %$=Xdd= XTXXXX `   2    =XXdXd=XTXX XTIXXTԀTheCourtspolicyistorefertovictimsofsexualabusebytheirinitials.,  AZ"Arial Regular,rAZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular   %$=Xdd=XTXXXX `   3    =XXdXd=XTXX XTIXXTԀSimilarly,eventhoughthevictimdescribedonlyonetypeofactandthedefendantwas  convictedofonecountchargingthattypeofact,theerroneoustimeframealsoprecludesafindingthatthefailuretoelectwasharmless.Cf.Shelton,851S.W.2dat138(findingfailuretoelectharmlessasto ,| oneofthevictims). >  %$=Xdd= XTXXXX `   1    =XXdXd=XTXX XTIXXTԀTheappealwasalsograntedtodeterminewhethertheindictment,whichstatedinpartthatthe  defendant didunlawfullysexuallypenetrate[thevictim],achildlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage,inviolationofTenn.CodeAnn.3913522wasdefectiveforfailingtostatetherequiredmensrea.The ,| defendantnowconcedes,however,thatthisissuewasresolvedbyourdecisioninStatev.Hill,954 : S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997).,  AZ"Arial Regular   %$=Xdd= XTXXXX `   3    =XXdXd=XTXX XTIXXTԀSimilarly,eventhoughthevictimdescribedonlyonetypeofactandthedefendantwas  convictedofonecountchargingthattypeofact,theerroneoustimeframealsoprecludesafindingthatthefailuretoelectwasharmless.Cf.Shelton,851S.W.2dat138(findingfailuretoelectharmlessasto ,| oneofthevictims).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular }  .$=Xdd= XlXXXX `   3    !XlXX Xl!ފXXl Similarly,eventhoughthevictimdescribedonlyonetypeofactandthedefendantwas  convictedofonecountchargingthattypeofact,theerroneoustimeframealsoprecludesafindingthatthefailuretoelectwasharmless.CompareShelton,851S.W.2dat138(findingfailuretoelectharmless @ astooneofthevictims). d,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular T  .$=Xdd=#XlXXXX `   2    $XlXX Xl$ފXXl TheCourtspolicyistorefertovictimsofsexualabusebytheirinitials.,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular y  .$=Xdd=&XlXXXX `   3    'XlXX Xl'ފXXl Similarly,eventhoughthevictimdescribedonlyonetypeofactandthedefendantwas  convictedofonecountchargingthattypeofact,theerroneoustimeframealsoprecludesafindingthatthefailuretoelectwasharmless.Cf.Shelton,851S.W.2dat138(findingfailuretoelectharmlessasto @ oneofthevictims).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular   .$=Xdd=)XlXXXX `   1    *XlXX Xl*ފXXl Theappealwasalsograntedtodeterminewhethertheindictment,whichstatedinpart  thatthedefendant didunlawfullysexuallypenetrate[thevictim],achildlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage,inviolationofTenn.CodeAnn.3913522wasdefectiveforfailingtostatetherequiredmensrea. @ Thedefendantnowconcedes,however,thatthisissuewasresolvedbyourdecisioninStatev.Hill,954 X S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular T  .$=Xdd=,XlXXXX `   2    -XlXX Xl-ފXXl TheCourtspolicyistorefertovictimsofsexualabusebytheirinitials.,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular z  .$=Xdd=/XlXXXX `   3    0XlXX Xl0ފXXl Similarly,eventhoughthevictimdescribedonlyonetypeofactandthedefendantwas  convictedofonecountchargingthattypeofact,theerroneoustimeframealsoprecludesafindingthatthefailuretoelectwasharmless.Cf.Shelton,851S.W.2dat138(findingfailuretoelectharmlessasto @ oneofthevictims).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular I  %$=Xdd=2XTXXXX `   1    =XXdXd=3XTXX XT3IXXT Theappealwasalsograntedtodeterminewhethertheindictment,whichstatedinpart  thatthedefendant didunlawfullysexuallypenetrate[thevictim],achildlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage,inviolationofTenn.CodeAnn.3913522wasdefectiveforfailingtostatetherequiredmensrea. ,| Thedefendantnowconcedes,however,thatthisissuewasresolvedbyourdecisioninStatev.Hill,954 : S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular   %$=Xdd=5XTXXXX `   2    =XXdXd=6XTXX XT6IXXT TheCourtspolicyistorefertovictimsofsexualabusebytheirinitials.,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular I  %$=Xdd=8XTXXXX `   1    =XXdXd=9XTXX XT9IXXT Theappealwasalsograntedtodeterminewhethertheindictment,whichstatedinpart  thatthedefendant didunlawfullysexuallypenetrate[thevictim],achildlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage,inviolationofTenn.CodeAnn.3913522wasdefectiveforfailingtostatetherequiredmensrea. ,| Thedefendantnowconcedes,however,thatthisissuewasresolvedbyourdecisioninStatev.Hill,954 : S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular   %$=Xdd=;XTXXXX `   2    =XXdXd=<XTXX XT<IXXT TheCourtspolicyistorefertovictimsofsexualabusebytheirinitials.,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular   %$=Xdd=>XTXXXX `   3    =XXdXd=?XTXX XT?IXXT Similarly,eventhoughthevictimdescribedonlyonetypeofactandthedefendantwas  convictedofonecountchargingthattypeofact,theerroneoustimeframealsoprecludesafindingthatthefailuretoelectwasharmless.Cf.Shelton,851S.W.2dat138(findingfailuretoelectharmlessasto H oneofthevictims).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular >  %$=Xdd=AXTXXXX `   1    =XXdXd=BXTXX XTBIXXTԀTheappealwasalsograntedtodeterminewhethertheindictment,whichstatedinpartthatthe  defendant didunlawfullysexuallypenetrate[thevictim],achildlessthanthirteen(13)yearsofage,inviolationofTenn.CodeAnn.3913522wasdefectiveforfailingtostatetherequiredmensrea.The ,| defendantnowconcedes,however,thatthisissuewasresolvedbyourdecisioninStatev.Hill,954 : S.W.2d725(Tenn.1997).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial RegularDEFGHC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  II' dxdP Pd E"  LX;SXXXLTXLX;S   Ad FILEDLX;SXLT  April19,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh 'dxd,cAZ"Arial Regular !  = = =   =     XTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TX LXXX  7 LXXdXXd7    =XXdd=   =XXdd=Ӝ H H H > > rCJK<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxPX  rH > > @@PPDINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEEH H @@zz)DATJACKSON= =  (HEARDATKNOXVILLE) = = ! ! H tCJK>.*jxP` `@Ep` 8ttxP tߛH ! (! # " h" # $ HEARDATKNOXVILLE)$ = =    `     h      p = =  񀀀 FOR= = PUBLICATION P   `     h      p = =     FILED: ___________     April   April    19,1999 = =    0   STATEOFTENNESSEE, h     ) P   `     h     ) p = =  񀀀 SHELBY= = = = C OUNTY  cri   RIMINAL = =  @   `  Appellee, h     ) 0   `     h     )Vs. `     h     ) p HON.L.TERRY    =   = LAFFERTY=   =     ,   `     h     ) p = =  񀀀 JUDGE= =   JAMESA.BROWN, h     )   `     h     ) `  Appellant. h     ) p = =   No.= =     =   = O2=   =     S019710CR00085   ForAppellant:    h      p  ForAppellee: 0  ScottG.Kirk    h      p JohnKnoxWalkup `     =   = HARDEE=   =     ,MARTIN&    =   = JAYNES=   =          p AttorneyGeneral&Reporter P Jackson,Tennessee `     h      p MichaelE.Moore `     h      p SolicitorGeneral `     h      p ElizabethT.Ryan `     h      p AssistantAttorneyGeneral `     h      p Nashville,Tennessee= =   = =  `     h      p AtTrial: `'"%  `     h      p  `     h      p JohnW.    =   = Pierotti=   =      @)$'  `     h      p DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h      p Memphis,Tennessee   +p&)  `     h    `     h      p KarenCook -P(+  `     h      p AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h      p Memphis,Tennessee   (#  .0*-  `     h   @55)D  XX LOPINIONX LX  Ԉ 3.2  COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS   p      p:59 REVERSED;REMANDEDFORA  `;6:9  =XXdXXd=NEWTRIAL.   h      p     ANDERSON,C.J.    =XXdXXd=   =XXdXXd= 0   0 0   0  ` Wegrantedthisappealtodeterminewhetherattheconclusionoftheevidence  theprosecutionelectedtheparticularoffensechargedintheindictmentuponwhichitsoughtaconviction.Suchanelectionisrequiredtopreservethedefendantsconstitutionalrighttoaunanimousjuryverdict. % = ' ' = ' = = = @= ' ' 7' % % 1%   (  #  1      = =   d  ` Thedefendantwasindictedandconvictedofonecountofrapeofachild.TheCourtofCriminalAppealsaffirmed.Afterourreviewoftherecordandapplicablelaw,however,weconcludeandtheStateconcedesthatattheendoftheproof,theprosecutordidnotelectaspecificoffensechargedintheindictmentuponwhichitsoughtaconviction.Suchan  election,  ifmadeasrequiredby  law,  wouldenablealljurorstodeliberateoverandrenderaverdictbasedonthesameoffense.Theprosecutorsfailureviolatedthedefendantsconstitutionalrighttoaunanimousjuryverdict.Thejudgmentis,therefore,reversedandthecaseisremandedforanewtrial.@hh*D/ / BACKGROUND/ /  (   ` Thevictim,M.T.,      & = * * = * = F= = F= * * :F* & & 4F&   +x   "x  #  2      = =   whowassixyearsofageatthetimeoftrial,livedacrossthe  streetfromthedefendant,JamesA.Brown.Shefirsttestifiedthattwoyearsearlier,whenshewasfouryearsofage,thedefendantpulledupherdress,pulleddownherunderwear,and puthisfingerdowninherprivatepart.M.T.testifiedthattheactoccurredinBrownstrailer.Shecouldnotrecalltheexactdatethishappened,onlythatitwasaFridayandthatitwaswarmoutside.  (#(  ` Thevictimstestimonyastothenumberofactscommittedvaried.SheinitiallytestifiedthatBrownpenetratedherprivatepartwithhisfingerfivetimesonthesameoccasion.Shelatersaidthatithappenedfivedifferenttimes,ondifferentdays.She alsoacknowledgedthatshehadtoldthepolicethatithappenedonlytwice.Shealso 1,2 testifiedthatonalateroccasion,aftertheallegedactsofpenetration,Browntooktwophotographsofherwithherdresspulledupandherunderwearvisible.  ` ThevictimsmothertestifiedthatsometimepriortoEasterinApril1993,thevictimshowed  her  thephotographthatthedefendanthadtaken.Althoughthevictimsmothersaidthephotographmadeherangry,shedidnotconfrontthedefendantbecause hewouldhavejustdeniedit.Shealsotestifiedthatsometimeafterthephotographincident,possiblyaslongasoneyear,thevictimtoldhermotherthatthedefendanthad messedwithherprivates.ThevictimsmothersaidthatM.T.initiallymadetheassertionbutclaimedtobelyingorjoking.Approximatelyoneweeklater,thevictimagainmadetheclaimaboutthedefendantsconduct,andsaidthatshewasnotlyingorjoking.Althoughtheassertion cameoutoftheblue,thevictimsmothertestifiedthatM.T.hadbeenhavingnightmaresandhadbeenwettingthebedforseveralmonths. ` Boththemotherandthevictimstatedthat  M.T.  visitedthedefendantinhistraileronseveraloccasionsbothbeforeandaftertheallegedactsofpenetration. ` Anursetestifiedthatanexaminationrevealedan abnormalnotchinthevictimshymen.Shetestifiedthatsuchanabnormalitywasnotusuallycausedbyfallingorthechildscratchingherselfandconcludedthatitwas consistentwithdigitalpenetration. ` ThedefensepresentednumerouswitnessesfromtheneighborhoodwhoknewBrownandthevictim.Thesewitnessesindicatedthatthevictimwasunsupervisedonnumerousoccasionsandoftenwentinandoutofneighborstrailers.Eachwitnessalsotestifiedthatthevictimsreputationfortruthfulnesswaspoorandthatshewasknowntomakeuntruestatements. ` Attheconclusionoftheevidence,thetrialcourtrequiredthestatetoelectwhichoffenseallegedinthevictimstestimonyitreliedupontoseektheconviction.TheState 84: didnotelectaspecificoffense,butrather,narrowedthetimeframefromthatallegedintheindictment.Thus,thetrialcourtinstructedthejuryasfollows:= = 1 1 = = 8 ` TheindictmentallegesthatthisoffenseoccurredduringtheperiodoftimebetweenMarch1,1993,andSeptember30,1993.TheStatehasmade  d anelectionthattheallegedincidentoccurredbetweenEaster,April11,1993,andJune30,1993. 0` (#` (# = = 2 2 = = (Emphasisadded). ` ThejuryconvictedBrownoftheoffenseofrapeofachild.AftertheCourtofCriminalAppealsaffirmedtheconviction,wegrantedthisappeal.@kk%D3 3 ELECTIONOFOFFENSES3 3     ` ThisCourthasconsistentlyheldthatwhentheevidenceindicatesthedefendant Z hascommittedmultipleoffensesagainstavictim,theprosecutionmustelecttheparticularoffenseaschargedintheindictmentforwhichtheconvictionissought.See B Statev.Tidwell,922S.W.2d497(Tenn.1996);Statev.Shelton,851S.W.2d134  (Tenn.1993);Statev.Burlison,501S.W.2d801(Tenn.1973);Statev.Brown762   S.W.2d135(Tenn.1988). ` Therequirementofelectionservesnumerousinterests:itenablesthedefendanttoprepareforthespecificcharge;itprotectsadefendantagainstdoublejeopardy;itenablesthetrialjudgetoreviewtheweightoftheevidenceinitsroleasthirteenthjuror;anditenablesanappellatecourttoreviewthelegalsufficiencyoftheevidence.See R+&+ Tidwell,922S.W.2dat  50001;  Burlison,501S.W.2dat803.Themostimportant -n(- interestservedbyelection,however,istoensurethatthejurorsdeliberateoverandrenderaverdictbasedonthesameoffense:= = 4 4 = = 8 ` [T]hereshouldbenoquestionthattheunanimityoftwelvejurorsisrequiredincriminalcasesunderourstateconstitution.Adefendantsrighttoaunanimousjurybeforeconvictionrequiresthetrialcourttotakeprecautionstoensurethatthejurydeliberatesovertheparticularchargedoffense,insteadofcreatinga    patchwork    verdict        basedondifferentoffensesin  evidence.   ` (#` (# Shelton,851S.W.2dat  137 (citationomitted) ;     see       Tidwell,  922S.W.2dat501. 95; ЇXTXXXT ` Ineachofourpreviouscasesdecidedoverthelast  25  twentyfive   years,i.e.,  Burlisonin1973,Brownin1988,Sheltonin1993,andTidwellin1996,whichhave | consistentlyrequiredtheprosecutortoelectaspecificoffense,wehaverecognizedthepracticaldifficultiespresentinapplyingtheelectionrequirementtovictimsofchildsexualabuse.Wearesensitivetothefactthatyoungchildrenwhoarevictimsofchildabusemaynotbeabletotestifythatabuseoccurredonaspecificdate,orprovideextensivedetailsinthisregard.WehavethereforeemphasizedinSheltonthatelection x  maybe  satisfi  accompli  sh ed  inmultipleways:= = 5 5 = = 8 `      If,  forexample,theevidenceindicatesvarioustypesofabuse,theprosecutionmayidentifyaparticulartypeofabuseandelectthat  offense.    [Citationomitted ] .    , Moreover,whenrecallinganassault,achildmaybeabletodescribeuniquesurroundingsorcircumstancesthathelptoidentifyanincident.  Thechildmaybeabletoidentifyanassaultwithreferencetoameaningful  eventinhisorherlife,suchasthebeginningofschool,abirthday,ora t relatives= = visit.6  ` (#` (# 6 = = Id  .  at138(emphasis  added) (citationomitted) .  Thesebroadguidelinesaccommodate  \ thepracticaldifficultiesincasesinvolvingchildvictimswhilealsoimplementingtheprotectionsservedbytheelectionrequirement.Inshort,  #XTXXXT4#XTXXXT  [ =   = a ] ny=   =   descriptionthatwill  identifytheprosecutedoffenseforthejuryissufficient.Id  .#XTXXXT<#   p!  ̀ ` DespitethebreadthofalternativessuggestedinShelton,theelectioninthiscase %X $ wasagaininsufficient.ThevictiminitiallytestifiedthatBrownputhisfingerinherprivatepartfivetimesduringonevisitinhistrailer.ThisabuseoccurredonaFriday,whenitwaswarmoutside.Shealsotestified,however,thatactsofdigitalpenetrationbyBrownoccurredfivetimesondifferentdays.Onanotheroccasion,thevictimtoldpolicethatabusehadoccurredtwice. ` Theprosecutiondidnotattempttoclarifythevictimstestimony,orclarifytheconflictsinthetestimony,eitherbyelicitingadditionaldetailsorbyrelatingthetimingoftheabusetosomeotheroccasioninthevictimslife.Moreover,insteadofrelyinguponthefewdetailsthatwereelicited,  e.g.  forexample ,  anincidentthatoccurredonaFridaywhenitwaswarm,tomaketheelection,theprosecutiondidnotelectaspecificoffense 84: butsimplynarrowedthe  time       frame  ofthechargedoffensefromtheperiodallegedintheindictment  ( e.g., March  1,1993,toSeptember30,1993)toanoffenseoccurringbetweenEaster,April11,1993,andJune30,1993.This  time    frame  limitationwasnotanelectionandfailedtoensurethatthejurywouldfocusonasingleoffense. ` Moreover,astheStatenowconcedesonappeal,thedeficiencyintheelectionattrialwasfurthercompoundedbythefactthatthetimeframechosenbytheprosecutorwassimplyinaccurate.AclosereadingofthetestimonyrevealsthatthevictimtestifiedthatactsofdigitalpenetrationwerecommittedbyBrowninBrownstrailerpriortothe ` occasiononwhichBrowntookthephotographsofthevictim.ThevictimsmothertestifiedthatshesawthephotographofthevictimpriortoEaster,April11,1993.TheStatenonetheless electedanoffensebetweenApril11,1993andJune30,1993aperiodforwhichthevictimdescribednospecificoffenses.Accordingly,evenhadtheelectedoffensebeensufficientlydetailed,theevidencedidnotsupportthe  time    frame  selectedbytheState.     =   =   * = = = = * * =*   .   %    #  3      = =    (  ` TheStatefurtherconcedesonappealthattheevidenceislegallyinsufficientinthisregard.Withthiscontentionwecannotagree.TheStateisnotrequiredtoprovethatanoffensewascommittedonaspecificdateunlessthedateisanelementofthecrimeoressentialtoprovingtheoffense.Statev.Byrd,  82 9   0   S.W.2d  739 ,74142    &$"& (Tenn.1991).TheelectiondoctrineonlyrequirestheStatetoselectwhichofmultipleoffensesinevidenceitreliesupontoseektheconvictiontoensurethatthejuryfocusesonandisunanimouswithrespecttothatconviction.Therefore,theremedyforthe  s  S tates  failuretosatisfytheelectionrequirementisanewtrialandnotadismissalduetoinsufficientevidence.  1,2  ` Therequirementofelectionis fundamental,immediatelytouchingontheconstitutionalrightsofanaccused.Burlison,501S.W.2dat804.Asweobservedin | Shelton: H  8 ` = =   7  ` (#` (# 7 < < 9 8 ` 9 = =    =   = : 8   8 : We  = = appreciatethedifficultiesinvolvedinprosecutingcasesofsexual  abuse co  mmitted   againstsmallchildren.Insuchcases,therulesofevidenceandtherulesofprocedurehavebeenrelaxedtosomeextenttoaccommodateveryyoungwitnesses.Nevertheless,theconstitutionalprotectionsguaranteedacriminaldefendant,whoispresumedbylawtobeinnocentuntilprovenguilty,cannotbesuspendedaltogetherbecauseofthevictimsageorrelativeinabilitytotestify.Incasessuchasthisone, ^  thestatemusteitherlimitthetestimonyofprosecutingwitnessestoasingleevent,orpreparethecasesothatanelectioncanbemadebeforethematterissubmittedtothejuryto= = decide.; `` (#` (# ; = = 851S.W.2dat  139 (emphasisadded) .  Accordingly,thiscasemustberemandedtothetrialcourtforanewtrialinaccordancewiththeprinciplesdiscussedinthisopinion.@*D  CONCLUSION   &v   ` Afterourreviewoftherecordandapplicableauthority,wehaveconcluded,and B theStateconcedes,thattheprosecutorfailedtoproperlyelecttheoffenseuponwhichitsoughttobasethedefendantsconviction.WethereforereversethejudgmentoftheCourtofCriminalAppealsandremandthecasetothetrialcourtforanewtrial.CostsofappealaretaxedtotheState. `     h      p ______________________________ `     h      p RileyAnderson,ChiefJustice= =   = = = =  PANEL   c   CONCUR := =  R+&+ = =   Drowota,= = Birch,HolderandBarker,JJ.= = <  < = = = =