WPC # VUFa % 0(4 0l 0Dd 0J  0T 0^F w 0h 0r" 0| 0 0 1u& U, 0d U,+U6WB)DC AM BFU*cwv~ D3 v@ 0@ AOS 0Dh D/ BHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0<Q 9Z .Courier New RegularX($Gav 3|xb((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  TӀ^_26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd-"C << G d<  9p`(Arial !   %%   YYY FILED%XMarchl11,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   m !   $       T.C.A.392203(i)(5)(1982)providedthatthedeath  penaltycouldbeimposedwhere"themurderwasespecially heinous,atrocious,orcruelinthatitinvolvedtortureor depravityofmind."  !#d#   $       ThetrialcourtinstructedthejuryinaccordwithWilliams that"torture"means"theinflictionofseverephysicalor mentalpainuponthevictimwhileheorsheremainsaliveor conscious."PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@$$$$'dxdStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA:Op Monaco  BA:Op Monaco ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &Xd&#Xd#      ,   \RA'\  INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE    ATNASHVILLESTATEOFTENNESSEE,   ) FORPUBLICATION      ) FILED:__________ Appellee,    )       )      )VS.      ) CheathamCriminal      )      )ANTHONYDARRELLDUGARDHINES, ) No.01S019303CC00052L#&";+'h|`  `L      )    Appellant.)   OPINIONONPETITIONTOREHEAR X   Apetitiontorehearhasbeenfiledonbehalfofthedefendantappellant,AnthonyDarrellDugardHines.Afterconsiderationofthesame,amajorityoftheCourtisoftheopinionthatthepetitionshouldbegrantedtoaddress  thefirstissuepresented.   InIssueOne,thedefendantcontendsthatthetrialcourt'sinstructiontothejuryregardingtheaggravatingcircumstanceinT.C.A.392203(i)(1982) '   ׀wasunconstitutionalandthatthetrialcourtcommittedconstitutionalerrorinitsdefinitionoftheterm"depravity".Thedefendantfirstassertsthatfederalcourtshaverecently7XXdXXd7heldthatinstructionsgivenbythetrialcourtsofthisstateregardingcircumstance(i)(5)violatetheEighthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitution.Wenote,however,thatinthetwocasescitedbythedefendant,Houstonv.Dutton,50F.3d381(6thCir.1995),andRickmanv.Dutton,854F.Supp.1305(M.D.Tenn.1994),thetrialswereconductedpriortothereleaseofStatev.Williams,690S.W.2d517(Tenn.1985),andthesentencingjurieswerethereforeinstructedinthebarelanguageofthestatutewithoutthelimitingdefinitionsadoptedbythisCourtinWilliams.Inthepresentcasethetrialcourt  instructedthejuryinaccordwithWilliams.   Thedefendantnextcontendsthattheinstructionsgivenregarding"depravity"wereconstitutionallyinsufficient.HenotesJusticeStevens'opiniononthedenialofthewritofcertiorariinBarberv.Tennessee,____U.S._______,115S.Ct.1177,130L.Ed.2d1129(1995),statingthatthedefinitionof"depravity"as"wickedormorallycorrupt"inthatcasewas"plainlyimpermissible"underGodfreyv.Georgia,446U.S.420,100S.Ct.1759,64L.Ed.2d398(1980),andMaynardv.Cartwright,486U.S.356,108S.Ct.l853,100L.Ed.2d372(1988).Inthedefendant'scasethetrialcourtinstructedthejurythat"depravitymeansmoralcorruption;  wickedorperverseact."   Whilewecontinuetoabidebyouroriginalholdingthatthisaggravatingcircumstancehasbeenconstitutionallyappliedunderthecircumstancesofthiscaseandisnotunconstitutionallyvague,wewritetoclarifythat,eveniftheinstructionsgivenbythetrialjudgewereunconstitutionalunderGodfreyandMaynard,thefailuretogiveaconstitutionallyproperinstructionondepravitywasharmlesserrorbeyondareasonabledoubt.Inourearlieropinioninthiscase,wenotedthatunderWilliams,690S.W.2dat529,"torture"means"theinflictionofseverephysicalormentalpainuponthevictimwhileheorsheremainsaliveandconscious."Likewise,"depravity"isinherentinthestateofmindofamurdererwhowillfullyinflictssuchseverephysicalormentalpainonavictimpriortodeathoratatimeveryclosetothatofthevictim'sdeath.Id.Thefactsofthiscasefullysatisfythesedefinitionsof"torture"and"depravity".Baseduponourearlieranalysisofthefactsrelevanttothisaggravatingcircumstance,seeOpinionpp.1415,wefindbeyondareasonabledoubtthat,iftherewasconstitutionalerrorintheinstructionondepravityinthiscase,theresultwouldhavebeenthesamehadthisaggravatingcircumstancebeenproperlyinstructedundertheabovedefinitionsfromWilliams.SeeClemmonsv.Mississippi,494U.S.738,754,110S.Ct.1441,1451,108L.Ed.2d725(1990).Furthermore,itisclearthatanyunconstitutionalvaguenessintheinstructionconcerning"depravity"washarmlessbeyondareasonabledoubtbecause,asreviewoftherecordestablishes,thisaggravatingcircumstancewassufficientlyprovedbyevidenceoftorture (   independentofdepravity.SeeOpinionpp.1415CompareStatev.VanTran,864S.W.2d465,478480(Tenn.1993).Wearethereforeconvincedbeyondareasonabledoubtthatremovalofdepravityasabasisforestablishingaggravatingcircumstance(i)(5)wouldhavemadenodifferenceinthe  defendant'ssentence.   Last,thedefendantarguesthatthefailureofthetrialcourttodefinetortureastheintentionalinflictionofunnecessarypainandsufferingviolatedtheEighthAmendment.HereliesuponthecaseofWadev.Calderon,29F.3d1312,1320(9thCir.1994),cert.denied,____U.S.____,115S.Ct.923,130L.Ed.2d802(1995).Withoutacceptingthedefendant'sargumentthatsuchaninstructionisconstitutionallymandated,wenotethatinouropinioninthiscaseweheldthat"evidenceofthestabwoundtothevaginawassufficienttosupportafindingthatthewoundswereintentionallyinflicted,"Opinionp.15,sothat,ifitwaserrornottoinstructthejurythattorturemustbeintentionallyinflicted,sucherrorwasharmlessbeyonda  reasonabledoubtintheinstantcase.   Accordingly,wefindwithoutmeritthechallengespresentedindefendant'spetitiontorehearregardingtheconstitutionalityoftheapplicationofaggravatingcircumstance(i)(5)inthiscase.Thepetitiontorehear  isdenied.    Thesentenceofdeath,havingbeenheretoforestayed,willbecarriedoutasprovidedbylawonthefirstdayofJune,1996,unlessotherwiseorderedbythisCourt,orotherproperauthorities.Costsonthisappealareadjudged  againstdefendant.                    _________________________________     CHARLESH.O'BRIEN,SPECIALJUDGEConcur:Anderson,C.J.Drowota,J.Dissent:Reid,J.̀̀