ÿWPC:@ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU:Ýw@ 4W k 0Dz 0J¾ 1m 0du 0TÙ 0^- 0h‹ 0ró e 0|m 0†é 0o U<ÿ 1u; 0d° B D31U>d 0@¢U#*âU* B)6b_ 0 ÆgDC- AMp½–ËÞa?£G5êZ‡y"Â$‘Ø%Ài()/v~F2vÓÄ3 0—9 0Š&: 0 °: 0´P; 0Ç< 0ÛË< 0ï¦= AO•>Æä> 0Dª? D/î? B@˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÈÚØÚÚØÈÚ0nLHÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ÞHßHbàHbáHDâHDãHDäHUåHÓ€ïHðHDÒ #3|xðH(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôtuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  à2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d$$$$'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò< Œ 9p`(Arial< Œ 9p`(Times% Line 7 d- ù-(v(22†$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÔ€X­XXXÔÔ€ô"¾ôXX­Ôà Ø àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó00007Border 1dd€-3Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌApril€28,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ŒÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defendant€pleaded€guilty€to€both€premeditated€and€felony€first„degree€murder.€€TheÏtrial€court€merged€the€pleas€and€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€premeditated€first„degree€murder.Ì ÔÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAlthough€not€pertinent€to€this€appeal,€the€trial€court€found€the€defendant€to€be€a€multipleÏand€dangerous€offender€and€imposed€a€forty€year€sentence€for€the€conviction€of€especiallyÏaggravated€robbery€which€is€to€be€served€consecutive€to€the€death€penalty.Ì þÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý"Whenever€the€death€penalty€is€imposed€for€first€degree€murder€and€when€the€judgmentÏhas€become€final€in€the€trial€court,€the€defendant€shall€have€the€right€of€direct€appeal€from€the€trialÏcourt€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals.€€The€affirmance€of€the€conviction€and€the€sentence€of€deathÏshall€be€automatically€reviewed€by€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court.€€Upon€the€affirmance€by€theÏCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals,€the€clerk€shall€docket€the€case€in€the€Supreme€Court€and€the€case€shallÏproceed€in€accordance€with€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.ððÌ ™Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€case€was€originally€argued€before€this€Court€with€Justice€Penny€J.€White€participating.€ÏReview€was€limited€and€the€case€reargued€before€this€Court€with€Justice€Janice€H.€HolderÏparticipating.Ì +Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTennessee€Supreme€Court€Rule€12€provides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:€ð ðPrior€to€theÏsetting€of€oral€argument,€the€Court€shall€review€the€record€and€briefs€and€consider€all€errorsÏassigned.€€The€Court€may€enter€an€order€designating€those€issues€it€will€review.€€Selection€of€suchÏissues€will€be€based€on€the€criteria€of€T.R.A.P.›€11(a).ððÌ PÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defendant€testified€only€about€his€personal€history,€particularly€his€alleged€sexualÏabuse€at€age€twelve.€€In€this€pre„òòCazes›óó€proceeding,€the€trial€court€correctly€limited€the€State€toÏquestions€œconcerning›€personal€history€and€did€not€allow€cross„examination€on€the€circumstances€ofÏthe€offense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€œCazes›óó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€264„267€(Tenn.€1994).Ì }Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€jury€was€instructed€to€consider€the€following€mitigating€circumstances:Ì(1)€History€of€childhood.Ì(2)€Victim€of€child€sex€abuse.Ì(3)€Mental€illness€or€mental€or€emotional€disturbance.Ì(4)€Dominance€by€another€person€and/or€immaturity.Ì(5)€Drug€abuse.Ì(6)€Any€other€aspect€of€the€defendantððs€background€or€character€or€the€circumstances€of€theÏoffense€which€you€believe€reduces€the€defendantððs€blame„worthiness.€€€€€Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThat€statute€provides€as€follows:€ð ð(a)€No€person€may€be€convicted€of€an€òòoffenseóó€unlessÏeach€of€the€following€is€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€(3)€The€negation€of€any€defense€to€anÏòòoffenseóó€defined€in€this€title€if€admissible€evidence€is€introduced€supporting€the€defense.ðð€Ï(Emphasis€added.)Ì ¸Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThat€statute€provides€as€follows:€ð ð(d)€If€the€issue€of€the€existence€of€a€defense€is€submittedÏto€the€jury,€the€court€shall€instruct€the€jury€that€any€reasonable€doubt€on€the€issue€requires€theÏdefendant€to€be€acquitted.ðð€Ì ‡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€pertinent€portion€of€that€pattern€instruction€provides€as€follows:€ð ðThe€defendant€doesÏnot€have€the€burden€of€proving€a€mitigating€circumstance.€€òòIf€there€is€some€evidence€that€aÏmitigating€circumstance€exists,€then€the€burden€of€proof€is€upon€the€state€to€prove,€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt€that€the€mitigating€circumstance€does€not€exist.óóðð€€7€T.P.I.›„œCrim›.€ðð€7.04(d)€(WestÏœ4th›€ed.€1995)€(emphasis€added).òòÌóó€Ì ¶Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€statutory€mitigating€circumstances€are€codified€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„13„204(j(1)„(9)€(1991€Repl.€&€1996€Supp.),€which€provides€as€follows:Ìà8 à(1)€The€defendant€has€no€significant€history€of€prior€criminal€activity;Ìà8 à(2)€The€murder€was€committed€while€the€defendant€was€under€the€influence€ofÏextreme€mental€or€emotional€disturbance;Ìà8 à(3)€The€victim€was€a€participant€in€the€defendantððs€conduct€or€consented€to€the€act;Ìà8 à(4)€The€murder€was€committed€under€circumstances€which€the€defendantÏreasonably€believed€to€provide€a€moral€justification€for€the€defendantððs€conduct.Ìà8 à(5)€The€defendant€was€an€accomplice€in€the€murder€committed€by€another€personÏand€the€defendantððs€participation€was€relatively€minor;Ìà8 à(6)€The€defendant€acted€under€extreme€duress€or€under€the€substantialÏdomination€of€another€person;Ìà8 à(7)€The€youth€or€advanced€age€of€the€defendant€at€the€time€of€the€crime;Ìà8 à(8)€The€capacity€of€the€defendant€to€appreciate€the€wrongfulness€of€theÏdefendantððs€conduct€or€to€conform€the€defendantðð€conduct€to€the€requirements€ofÏthe€law€was€substantially€impaired€as€a€result€of€mental€disease€or€defect€orÏintoxication€which€was€insufficient€to€establish€a€defense€to€the€crime€but€whichÏsubstantially€affected€the€defendantððs€judgment;€andÌà8 à(9)€Any€other€mitigating€factor€which€is€raised€by€the€evidence€produced€by€eitherÏthe€prosecution€or€defense€at€either€the€guilt€or€sentencing€hearing.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ2$ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÔ€.ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€State€in€this€case€specifically€relied€only€upon€the€torture€aspect€of€the€aggravatingÏcircumstance.€€Prior€to€the€sentencing€hearing€in€response€to€a€defense€motion€to€strike€theÏaggravating€circrumstance,€General€Thurman€stated€as€follows:€ð ðIððm€not€saying€it€was€physicalÏdamage€beyond€that€necessary€to€cause€death.€€The€State€is€relying,€as€I€said€in€my€brief,€on€theÏtorture€aspect.ðð€€€Transcript€Volume€12€of€18€at€page€1632.€€Furthermore,€the€State€argued€only€theÏtorture€prong€of€the€aggravating€circumstance€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€,ÔÝ  Ý›Ò € ÒÒ ° ÒÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÔ€.ÔÑ€1ÑÑ7€&8XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑØ ØÓ&€//X°d&Óœ›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEó óÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòòFOR€PUBLICATIONóóÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)à àœò òFiled:ó ó€April€28,€1997›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellee,à àà àà àà à)à àDAVIDSON€COUNTY€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Walter€C.€œKurtz›,Ìœ›à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJudgeÌHENRY€EUGENE€œHODGES›,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellant.à àà àà àà à)à àSupreme€CourtÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€01„œS01›„9505„CR„00080̜ـ€ÙßR€453A1-j|»S` ç `€€@ÿRß›ÌÌòòÌÌÌFOR€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àà àòòà àFOR€APPELLEE:óóÌÌBrock€œMehler›à àà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€œBurson›ÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌDonald€Dawsonà àà àà àà àà àKathy€œMorante›ÌBruce,€Weathers,€œCorley›,€œDougman›€&€Lyleà àDeputy€Attorney€GeneralÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌMichael€E.€Terryà àà àà àà àà àVictor€S.€Johnson,€IIIÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€General€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àThomas€B.€œThurman›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àRenee€R.€œErb›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÔ€.„Ôà@ àà àÌÌÌà@ àò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÔ€.XÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌœÌTRIAL›€COURT€ANDÌCOURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€AFFIRMED.à àà àDROWOTA,€J.€œÇÑ ` ÑÑ , ÑÓÓ›à àIn€this€capital€case,€the€trial€court€accepted€pleas€of€guilty€entered€by€theÏdefendant,€Henry€Eugene€œHodges›,€to€first„degree€premeditated€murder€× ƒ6 ××  ×€andÏespecially€aggravated€robbery.× ƒ7 ××  ×€€The€trial€court€conducted€a€capital€sentencingÏhearing€to€determine€the€sentence€on€the€conviction€for€premeditated€murder€inÏaccordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(1991€Repl.€&€Supp.€1996).€€In€theÏsentencing€hearing,€the€jury€found€three€aggravating€circumstances:€(1)€ð ð[œt]he›Ïdefendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies,€other€than€theÏpresent€charge€whose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€theÏperson;ðð€(2)€ð ð[œt]he›€murder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious€or€cruel€in€that€itÏinvolved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produceÏdeath;ðð€and€(3)€ð ð[œt]he›€murder€was€committed€while€the€defendant€was€engaged€inÏcommitting,€or€was€an€accomplice€in€the€commission€of,€or€attempting€to€commit,Ïor€fleeing€after€committing€a€robbery.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(I)(2),€(I)(5)Íand€(I)(7)€(1991€Repl.).€€Finding€that€the€three€aggravating€circumstancesÏoutweighed€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€the€juryÏsentenced€the€defendant€to€death€by€electrocution.ÌÌà àOn€direct€appeal€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€the€defendantÏchallenged€the€sentence€of€death€raising€sixteen€claims€of€error,€each€withÏnumerous€œsubparts›.€€After€fully€considering€defendantððs€claims,€the€Court€ofÏCriminal€Appeals€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.€€Thereafter,€pursuant€toÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(a)(1)€(1996€Supp.),× ƒ8 ××  ×€the€case€was€docketed€in€thisÏCourt.€ÌÌÓ` °ŽXÊ&Ø'XÓà àThe€defendant€raised€numerous€issues€in€this€Court,€but€after€carefullyÏexamining€the€entire€record€and€the€law,€including€the€thorough€opinion€of€theÏCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals€and€the€briefs€of€the€defendant€and€the€State,€thisÍCourt,€on€November€21,€1996,€entered€an€Order€limiting€review€and€setting€theÏcause€for€oral€argument× ƒ9 ××  ×€at€the€February€1997€term€of€Court€in€Nashville.€€òòSeeóóÏTenn.€S.€Ct.€R.€12.× ƒ: ××  ×€€ÌÌà àFor€the€reasons€explained€below,€we€have€determined€that€none€of€theÏalleged€errors€affirmatively€appear€to€have€affected€the€sentence€imposed.€ÏMoreover,€the€evidence€supports€the€juryððs€findings€as€to€aggravating€andÏmitigating€circumstances,€and€the€sentence€of€death€is€not€disproportionate€orÏarbitrary.€€Accordingly,€the€defendantððs€sentence€of€death€by€electrocution€isÏaffirmed.€€ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDÌóóó óà àThe€defendant,€Henry€Eugene€Hodges,€€entered€a€guilty€plea€and€wasÏconvicted€of€premeditated€first„degree€murder.€€Thereafter,€the€penalty€phase€ofÏthe€trial€commenced.€€The€State€presented€proof€of€the€circumstances€of€theÏoffense€through€the€testimony€of€Trina€Brown,€the€defendant's€fifteen„year„oldÏgirlfriend.€€Brown€testified€that€one€week€before€the€murder€she€and€the€twenty„four„year„old€defendant,€who€were€living€with€the€defendant's€brother€in€Smyrna,ÏTennessee,€decided€to€move€to€Florida.€€To€get€money€for€the€move,€Hodges,€aÏmale€homosexual€prostitute,€told€Brown€that€he€would€rob€and€kill€the€nextÏperson€who€propositioned€him.€€Hodges€discussed€with€Brown€how€the€œcrimes›Ïwould€be€carried€out.€€Hodges€repeated€these€œstatements›€on€May€14,€1990,€theÏday€of€this€murder.ÌÌà àOn€the€œnight€of›€May€14,€Brown€and€Hodges€went€to€Centennial€Park€inÏNashville.€€When€the€victim,€Ronald€Bassett,€approached,€Hodges€talked€withÏhim,€and€they€left€together€in€the€victimððs€œvehicle€and€went€to€the€victimððsÏresidence€at€3133A,€Parthenon€Avenue,€across€from€Centennial€Park.›€€Ten€orÍfifteen€minutes€later,€Hodges€returned€œto€the€park€on€foot,€and€along€with€Brown,Ïdrove€back€to€the€victimððs€residence€in€his€own€car.€€Hodges€told€Brown€to€lieÏdown€in€the€backseat€of€the€car€so€no€one€could€see€her.€€When€they€arrived€atÏthe€victimððs€residence,€Hodges€told€Brown€to€wait€in€the€car.€€After€an€unspecifiedÏperiod€of€time,€Hodges€returned€to€the€car,€wearing€gloves,€and€asked€Brown€toÏcome€into€the€house.€€Brown€testified€that€when€she€arrived,€Bassett€was€lyingÏface€down€on€the€bed€in€his€bedroom€with€a€pillow€over€his€head.€€Hodges€hadÏbound€his€feet€together€with€duct€tape€and€had€handcuffed€his€hands.€€WhileÌBassett€lay€helplessly,›€Brown€and€the€defendant€ransacked€the€house€searchingÏfor€items€of€value.€€After€obtaining€œthe›€personal€identification€number€for€œtheÏvictimððs›€automatic€teller€card,€Brown€and€the€defendant€"took€a€break,"€drank€aÏcoke,€and€discussed€whether€to€kill€Bassett.€€Brown€testified€that€she€told€HodgesÏto€kill€Bassett€to€prevent€œtheir€arrest.€€Hodges€then€went€into€the€bedroom€and,Ïignoring€the€victim's€pleas€not€to€kill€him,€strangled€Bassett€to€death€with€a€nylonÏrope.€€Brown€testified€that€she€heard€Bassett€moan€and€make€a€choking€soundÏand€that€it€took€about€five€minutes€for€Bassett€to€die.ÌÌà àIn€an€attempt€to€remove€any€fingerprints,€the€defendant€wiped€off€variousÏitems€in€the€residence.€€After€turning€the€air€conditioner€in€Bassettððs€bedroom€onÏhigh€to€prevent€discovery€of€the€body,€Hodges€and€Brown€left€the€victim'sÏresidence,€taking€the€victim's€automobile€and€several€items€of€personal€property,Ïincluding€jewelry,€a€gun,€and€a€VCR.€€After€using€Bassett's€automatic€teller€card€toÏwithdraw€the€twenty„four„hour€maximum€of€four€hundred€dollars€from€his€account,Ïthe€pair€returned€to€the€house€of€the€defendant's€brother€and€went€to€bed.€€TheÏnext€day,€having€learned€that€the€victim's€body€had€been€discovered,€Brown€andÏthe€defendant€abandoned€the€victim's€car€in€rural€Rutherford€County€and€drove€toÏGeorgia€in€their€own€car.€€They€were€eventually€arrested€in€North€Carolina.€€ItemsÏof€the€victim's€personal€property€were€found€in€their€possession€at€this€time.€€Also,Ïthe€defendantððs€fingerprints€were€found€on€items€inside€Bassettððs€home,€andÏBrown€had€been€photographed€withdrawing€money€with€Bassettððs€automaticÏteller€card.ÌÌà àTestifying€for€the€State€at€the€sentencing€hearing,€Dr.€Charles€Harlan,€theÏchief€medical€examiner€for€Metropolitan€Nashville€and€Davidson€County,Íconfirmed€that€Bassett€had€died€from€ligature€strangulation.€€Dr.€Harlan€opinedÏthat€Bassett€would€have€remained€alive€and€conscious€for€at€least€three€andÏperhaps€as€long€as€five€minutes€during€the€strangulation.€€Harlan€also€foundÏabrasions€on€the€victim's€wrists€consistent€with€handcuffs.ÌÌà àThe€State€proved€that€the€defendant€had€been€convicted€of€armedÏrobbery,€attempted€kidnaping€and€robbery€in€Hamilton€County€in€1984.€€TheÏState€also€established€that€the€defendant€had€been€convicted€of€murder€in€Fulton›ÏCounty,€Georgia,€in€July€1990.€€The€record€reveals€that€the€Georgia€killingÏoccurred€when€the€defendant€and€Brown€arrived€in€Atlanta€after€murderingÏBassett.€€Hodges€made€arrangements€with€a€man€to€engage€in€homosexual€actsÏfor€an€agreed€price.€€Hodges€accompanied€the€man€to€his€motel€room,€but€whenÏthe€man€was€unable€to€pay€the€agreed€price,€Hodges€murdered€him.ÌÌà àIn€mitigation,€the€defendant€testifiedœ× ƒ; ××  ×›€and€also€presented€the€testimony€ofÍhis€mother,€his€brothers€and€Dr.€Barry€Nurcombe,€a€child€psychiatrist.€€This€proofÏshowed€that€the€defendant€was€the€next€to€youngest€of€his€mother's€five€sons.€ÏHis€mother€and€father€were€not€married.€€His€father€was€actually€married€toÏanother€woman,€but€engaged€in€what€one€of€the€witnesses€described€as€anÏ"irregular€union"€with€the€defendantððs€mother€for€eighteen€years.€€The€defendant'sÏfather€abused€œthe€defendantððs›€mother€and€was€strict€with€œthe€defendantððsÏbrothers,€three€of€whom€were€the€children€of€another€man.€€The€defendant,Ïhowever,€was€his€father's€favorite€and€was€spoiled.€€Financial€difficulties€forcedÏthe€family€to€move€about€frequently,€and€defendant's€father€supported€the€familyÏonly€sporadically.ÌÌà àThe€defense€introduced€proof€to€show€that€Hodges€seemed€normal€untilÏhe€was€twelve€years€old.€€At€that€time,€he€began€to€associate€with€older€boys,€sniffÏglue€and€gasoline,€be€truant€from€school,€and€run€away€from€home.€€He€alsoÏengaged€in€sexual€activities€with€his€younger€brother€and€attempted€sexualÏactivities€with€a€female€cousin.€€He€became€involved€with€the€juvenile€authoritiesÍand€was€confined€to€a€juvenile€facility€in€Chattanooga.€€ÌÌà àThrough€his€mitigation€proof,€the€defendant€attempted€to€establish€that€aÏcatalyst€and€major€contributing€cause€of€his€delinquent€and€later€criminalÏbehavior€was€his€rape€and€sexual€abuse€by€a€stranger€when€he€was€twelveÏyears€old.€€According€to€the€defendant,€he€accepted€a€strangerððs€offer€of€a€rideÏhome€when€he€was€playing€a€short€distance€from€his€home€on€Fessler›ððs€Lane€inÏNashville.€€Rather€than€driving€Hodges€home,€the€stranger€drove€Hodges€to€hisÏhome€and€œraped›€him.€€Fearing€rejection€by€his€homophobic€father€and€driven€byÏguilt,€the€defendant€told€no€one€of€this€incident€until€he€was€arrested€in€1990.ÌÌà àDr.€Nurcombe€testified€that,€while€the€defendant€suffered€from€an€antisocialÏpersonality€disorder,€low€self„esteem,€and€substance€(marijuana)€abuse,€theÏkilling€was€motivated€by€a€subconscious€desire€for€revenge€for€the€sexual€abuseÏinflicted€on€him€when€he€was€twelve,€coupled€with€Hodgesðð€fear€that€his€familyÏmight€discover€that€he€was€engaged€in€homosexual€œprostitution€since›€Brown€hadÏtold€œHodge›'s€sister„in„law€shortly€before€the€killing€that€he€was€a€homosexualÍprostitute.€€The€defense€also€introduced€testimony€that€Brown€dominated€andÏmanipulated€the€defendant.ÌÌà àIn€rebuttal€the€State€called€Dr.€James€œKyser›,€a€forensic€psychiatrist,€and€Dr.ÏLeonard€Morgan,€a€clinical€psychologist.€€Both€had€examined€the€defendant€andÏconcluded€that€he€suffered€from€an€antisocial€personality€disorder.€€TheyÏdescribed€persons€with€this€disorder€as€having€ð ðno€conscience,ðð€being€ð ðselfÏcentered,ðð€€being€ð ðnotoriously€dishonest€and€untruthful,ðð€and€having€ð ðvery€littleÏregard€for€the€feelings€of€others€and€œ.€.€.€willing›€to€use€any€means€to€get€what€theyÏwant,€no€matter€who€it€hurts.ðð€€While€acknowledging€the€complicated€factorsÏinvolved€in€antisocial€personality€disorders,€the€Stateððs€experts€discounted€theÏsingular€importance€of€the€one€incident€of€alleged€sexual€abuse€in€causing€theÏdefendant's€actions.€€Dr.€Morgan€concluded€that€the€defendant€"was€in€completeÏcontrol€of€his€behavior"€and€not€suffering€from€mental€illness€or€emotionalÏdisturbance.ò òòòÌÌóóó óà àBased€on€the€evidence€presented,€the€jury€determined€that€the€State€hadÍproven€the€existence€of€three€aggravating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonableÏœdoubt:€(1)›€ð ð[t]he€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies,Ïother€than€the€present€charge€whose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€ofÏviolence€to€the€person;ðð€(2)€ð ð[t]he€murder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious€orÏcruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyond€that€necessaryÏto€produce€death;ðð€and€(3)€ð ð[t]he€murder€was€committed€while€the€defendant€wasÏengaged€in€committing,€or€was€an€accomplice€in€the€commission€of,€or€attemptingÏto€commit,€or€fleeing€after€committing€a€robbery.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(I)(2);€(I)(5)€and€(I)(7)€(1991€Repl.).€€€In€addition,€the€jury€found€that€theÏaggravating€circumstances€outweighed€the€mitigating€circumstances× ƒ< ××  ×€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt€and,€as€a€result,€sentenced€the€defendant€to€death€byÏelectrocution.€€The€trial€court€entered€a€judgment€in€accordance€with€the€juryððsÏverdict€and€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€affirmed.€€After€reviewing€the€recordÍand€considering€the€errors€alleged€by€the€defendant,€we€affirm€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court€and€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals.ò òòòÌó óóóÌà@ àò òÔ€ ÔÔ€ ¼ÔI.ó óÔ€.ÔÔ€.XÔÌà@ àòòò òJURY€INSTRUCTIONS€„€MITIGATIONó óóóÌà àIn€this€case,€the€defendant€contends€that€he€is€entitled€to€a€new€sentencingÏhearing€because€the€trial€courtððs€instructions€on€mitigating€circumstances:Ì€(1)€erroneously€informed€the€jury€that€their€duty€to€consider€mitigatingÏcircumstances€was€discretionary€and€conditional€upon€their€being€proven;€Ì(2)€failed€to€adequately€state€defendantððs€requested€mitigating€circumstances;Ïand€(3)€inappropriately€distinguished€between€statutory€and€nonstatutoryÏmitigating€circumstances€in€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(e).€€TheÏState€responds€that€any€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€charge€was€harmless.€€ÌÌœà àWe€emphasize€at€the€outset,€however,€that€none€of€the€alleged€errors€areÏof€constitutional€magnitude.€€This€Court€previously€has€held€that€jury€instructionsÏon€specific€non„statutory€mitigating€circumstances€are€not€constitutionallyÍmandated.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.w.2d€18,€30€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Hutchisonóó,Ï899€S.W.2d€161,€173„74€(Tenn.€1994).€€Therefore,€the€right€to€such€instructions,Ïas€well€as€the€form€and€content€of€the€instructions,€derives€solely€from€the€statute.€ÏSecond,€it€is€not€violative€of€the€federal€constitution€to€require€a€defendant€toÏprove€mitigating€circumstances€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòWalton€v.ÏArizonaóó,€497€U.S.€639,€649„51,€110€S.Ct.€3047,€3055„56,€111€L.Ed.2d€511Ï(1990).€€Thus,€assuming€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€instructing€the€jury€toÏconsider€those€ð ðprovenðð€mitigating€circumstances,€the€error€is€statutory€only.€ÏTherefore,€the€question€for€consideration€in€this€case€as€to€each€allegation€ofÏerror€is€whether€the€trial€courtððs€failure€to€strictly€adhere€to€the€statute€constitutesÏerror€which€affirmatively€appears€to€have€affected€the€verdict.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Ï52(a).Ì›Ìà àœTo€resolve€that€question,€we€must€scrutinize€the€statute€and€our€recentÏdecision€in€€òòOdomóó€which€interpreted€the€statute.€We€begin€our€analysis€withÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(e)(1)€(1991€Repl.€&€1996€Supp.),€which,€asÏamended€in€1989,€provides€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àAfter€closing€arguments€in€the€sentencing€hearing,€theÏtrial€judge€shall€include€in€the€instructions€for€the€juryÏto€weigh€and€consider€any€of€the€statutory€aggravatingÏcircumstances€set€forth€in€subsection€(i)€which€may€beÏraised€by€the€evidence€at€either€the€guilt€or€sentencingÏhearing,€or€both.€€The€trial€judge€shall€also€include€inÏthe€instructions€for€the€jury€to€weigh€and€consider€anyÏmitigating€circumstances€òòraised€by€the€evidenceóó€atÏeither€the€guilt€or€sentencing€hearing€or€both€whichÏshall€include,€but€not€be€limited€to,€thoseÏcircumstances€set€forth€in€subsection€(j).€€NoÏdistinction€shall€be€made€between€mitigatingÏcircumstances€as€set€forth€in€subsection€(j)€and€thoseÏotherwise€raised€by€the€evidence€which€areÏspecifically€requested€by€either€the€state€or€theÏdefense€to€be€instructed€to€the€jury.€€These€instructionsÏand€the€manner€of€arriving€at€a€sentence€shall€beÏgiven€in€the€oral€charge€and€in€writing€to€the€jury€for€itsÏdeliberations.€ÌÓÓÌ(Emphasis€added.)ÌÌà àRecently,€in€òòOdomóó,€òòsupraóó,€this€Court€interpreted€that€statute€to€require€juryÏinstructions€on€non„statutory€mitigating€circumstances€raised€by€the€evidenceÏand€proffered€by€a€defendant€as€having€mitigating€value.€€In€addition,€we€statedÏthat€instructions€on€nonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€must€not€be€factÍspecific€and€imply€to€the€jury€that€the€judge€had€made€a€finding€of€fact.€€Instead,Ïwe€stated€that€instructions€on€nonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€must€beÏð ðdrafted€so€that€when€they€are€considered€by€the€jury,€the€statutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances€are€indistinguishable€from€the€non„statutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€32.€€Finally,€in€òòOdomóó,€we€interpreted€the€ð ðno€distinctionððÏportion€of€the€statute€as€precluding€the€trial€judge€from€revealing€to€the€jury€that€aÏrequest€was€made€and€from€identifying€the€party€making€the€request.€€òòIdóó.Ì›Ìà àœGenerally,€in›€determining€whether€instructions€are€erroneous,€this€CourtÏmust€review€the€charge€in€its€entirety€and€read€it€as€a€whole.€€òòState€v.ÏœStephenson›óó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€555€(Tenn.€1994).€€A€charge€should€beÏconsidered€prejudicially€erroneous€if€it€fails€to€fairly€submit€the€legal€issues€or€if€itÏmisleads€the€jury€as€to€the€applicable€law.€€òòState€v.€Forbesóó,€918€S.W.2d€431,€447Ï(Tenn.€œCrim›.€App.€1995);€òòGraham€v.€Stateóó,€547€S.W.2d€531€(Tenn.€1977).€€€TheÏUnited€States€Supreme€Court€has€observed€that€in€evaluating€claims€of€error€inÏjury€instructions,€courts€must€remember€thatÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[œj]urors›€do€not€sit€in€solitary€isolation€booths€parsingÏinstructions€for€subtle€shades€of€meaning€in€the€sameÍway€that€lawyers€might.€€Differences€among€them€inÏinterpretation€of€instructions€may€be€thrashed€out€inÏthe€deliberative€process,€with€œcommonsense›Ïunderstanding€of€the€instructions€in€the€light€of€all€thatÏhas€taken€place€at€the€trial€likely€to€prevail€overÏtechnical€hairsplitting.€ÌÓÓÌòòœBoyde›€v.€Californiaóó,€494€U.S.€370,€€380„81,€110€S.Ct.€1190,€1198,€108€L.Ed.2dÏ316€(1990);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€œv.€Van›€œTran›óó,€864€S.W.2d€465,€479€(Tenn.€1993).€ÏApplying€that€standard€to€the€instructions€in€this€case,€œa€majority€of€this€Court€hasÏconcluded€that€none›€of€the€assigned€errors€affirmatively€appear€to€have€affectedÏthe€verdict.ÌÌà@ àò òA.€Erroneous€Burden€of€Proofó óÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€Judge€œKurtz›€charged€the€jury,Ïin€pertinent€part,€as€follows:€Ìà@ à*€*€*ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àThe€evidence€and€arguments€in€this€hearingÏhave€been€completed,€and€it€is€my€duty€now€to€instructÏyou€as€to€the€law,€the€law€applicable€to€this€case€asÏstated€in€these€instructions;€and€it€is€your€duty€toÏcarefully€consider€all€of€them.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€à àThe€order€in€which€these€instructions€are€givenÏis€no€indication€of€their€relative€importance.€€YouÏshould€not€single€out€one€or€more€of€them€to€theÏexclusion€of€another€or€others,€but€should€considerÏeach€one€in€light€of€and€in€harmony€with€the€others.€ÌÌà@ à*€*€*ÌÌà0 àà0 àà àIn€arriving€at€the€punishment,€you,€the€jury,€shall€consider,€asÏheretofore€indicated,€any€òòprovenóó€mitigating€circumstances,€whichÏshall€include€the€following:ÌÌà0 àà0 àà àAny€mitigating€factor€which€is€òòraised€by€the€evidenceóóÏproduced€by€either€the€prosecution€or€the€defense€at€the€sentencingÏhearing;€that€is,€you€shall€consider€any€aspect€of€the€DefendantððsÏcharacter€or€record€or€any€aspect€of€the€circumstances€of€theÏoffense€favorable€to€the€Defendant,€òòwhich€is€supported€by€theÏevidence.óóÌÌà0 àà0 àà àIn€determining€mitigating€factors,€you€are€to€consider€theÏabove.€€In€addition,€òòthe€defense€has€submittedóó€the€following€issuesÏfor€your€consideration.€€They€are€to€be€considered,€if€you€believeÏthey€have€been€òòprovenóó€and€are€mitigating€or€favorable€to€theÏDefendant€or€reduce€his€blameworthiness.€ÌÌà0 àà0 àà à(1)€€History€of€childhood;ÌÌà0 àà0 àà0 à(2)€€Victim€of€child€sex€abuse;Ìà0 àà0 àà0 àÌà0 àà0 àà0 à(3)€€Mental€illness€or€mental€or€emotional€disturbance;ÌÌà0 àà0 àà0 à(4)€€Dominance€by€another€person€and/or€immaturity;ÌÌà0 àà0 àà0 à(5)€€Drug€abuse;ÌÌà0 àà0 àà0 à(6)€€Any€other€aspect€of€the€Defendantððs€background€orÏcharacter€or€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€which€youÏbelieve€reduces€the€Defendantððs€blameworthiness.ÌÌà0 àà0 àà àAs€to€a€determination€of€mitigating€circumstances,€you€mayÏdeliberate€as€a€„„€€as€a€body€about€mitigating€circumstances;€òòbutÏyou€are€not€required€to€reach€a€unanimous€verdict€as€to€theirÏexistence€or€weight,€nor€are€you€to€gauge€whether€their€existence€isÏshown€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.óóÌÌà0 àà0 àà àInstead,€when€you€consider€mitigating€circumstances,€eachÏof€you€must€decide€for€yourself€whether€mitigating€circumstancesÏmay€exist€and,€if€so,€how€much€weight€each€deserves.€€òòIf€youÏconclude€that€any€evidence€supports€a€mitigating€circumstance,Ïthen€you€should€consider€that€€mitigating€circumstance€to€beÏestablished€and€then€determine€the€weight€to€which€it€is€entitled.óóà àÌÌà0 àà0 àà àIn€considering€aggravating€and€mitigating€circumstances,Ïyou€must€not€weigh€the€two€in€a€mechanical€fashion.€€Do€not€merelyÏcompare€the€number€of€circumstances€in€aggravation€to€the€numberÏin€mitigation,€or€arbitrarily€assign€different€weights€to€be€given€theÏfactors.€€Instead,€you€should€personally€determine€the€convincingÏforce€of€each€circumstance.Ìà0 àà0 àÌÌà0 àà0 àà àYou€may€find€that€the€State€has€proved€multiple€aggravatingÏcircumstances,€and€that€only€one€mitigating€circumstances€„„Ïcircumstance€exists,€and€still€find€that€life€is€appropriate,€due€to€theÍconvincing€force€of€the€single€mitigating€circumstance.ÌÓÓà0 àÌ(Emphasis€added.)ÌÌà àThe€defendant€first€asserts€that€the€instruction€is€erroneous€because€itÏcharges€the€jury€to€consider€only€ð ðprovenðð€mitigating€circumstances.€€WhileÏacknowledging€that€the€trial€courtððs€use€of€the€term€ð ðprovenðð€was€not€appropriateÏunder€the€statute,€the€State,€nonetheless,€argues€that€the€error€was€harmless.ÌÌà àWe€agree€with€the€defendantððs€contention€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÏincluding€the€term€ð ðprovenðð€in€the€jury€charge.€€The€statute€requires€jurors€toÏconsider€those€statutory€or€nonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€which€haveÏbeen€ð ðraised€by€the€evidence.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„13„204(e)(1)€(1991€Repl.€&ÏSupp.€1996).€€The€statute€does€not€impose€a€burden€of€proof€as€to€mitigatingÏcircumstances.€€Therefore,€to€comply€precisely€with€the€statute,€the€trial€courtÏshould€have€only€instructed€the€jury€to€consider€those€statutory€and€nonstatutoryÏmitigating€circumstances€which€had€been€ð ðraised€by€the€evidence.ððÌÌà àNevertheless,€read€in€context€and€as€a€whole,€it€is€clear€that€the€juryÏcharge€given€in€this€case€fairly€informed€the€jury€of€the€legal€issues€and€theÏapplicable€law.€The€erroneous€term€ð ðprovenðð€was€clarified€by€the€trial€courtððsÏsubsequent€instructions€to€the€jury€advising€it€to€consider€as€mitigating€anyÏcircumstance€ð ðraisedðð€or€ð ðsupportedðð€by€the€evidence.€€In€addition,€the€trial€courtÏadvised€the€jury€that€ð ð[œi]f›€you€conclude€that€òòanyóó€òòevidenceóó€supports€a€mitigatingÏcircumstance,€then€you€should€consider€that€mitigating€circumstance€to€beÏestablished.€.€.€.ðð€€Further€clarification€of€the€term€€was€provided€when€the€trialÏcourt€told€the€jury€that€as€to€mitigating€circumstances,€it€was€ð ðnot€required€to€reachÏa€unanimous€verdict.€.€.nor€are€you€to€gauge€whether€their€existence€is€shownÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€€œÌÌà àThough›€the€term€ð ðprovenðð€should€not€be€used€because€the€statute€containsÏno€burden€of€proof€and€because€the€term€is€potentially€misleading,€in€this€case,Ïthe€trial€courtððs€further€explanations€eliminated€any€potential€confusion,€and€theÏerror€does€not€affirmatively€appear€to€have€affected€the€verdict.€€We€do€not€agreeÏwith€the€defense€contention€that€the€error€can€not€be€harmless€because€theÍcharge€is€contradictory.€€Though€œwe€agree€with€the€dissent€that€the›€trial€courtððsÏuse€of€the€term€ð ðprovenðð€was€not€appropriate,€it€was€given€contextual€meaning€byÏthe€subsequent€explanatory€instructions€which€fairly€informed€the€jury€to€considerÏany€mitigating€circumstances€ð ðraised€by€the€evidence.ðð€€Therefore,€œthe€error€wasÏharmless€and€this›€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àRelying€upon€the€Tennessee€Pattern€Jury€Instructions€and€certain€generalÏstatutory€provisions,€the€defense,€during€oral€argument€before€this€Court,Ïasserted€that€the€trial€court€should€have€instructed€the€jury€that€the€State€has€theÏburden€to€òòdisproveóó€any€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€ÏFirst€of€œall,›€Tenn€Code€Ann.€€ðð€39„11„201(a)(3)€(1991€Repl.)× ƒ= ××  ×€and€ðð€39„11„203(d)Ï(1991€Repl.)× ƒ> ××  ×€do€not€support€the€defendantððs€claim.€€These€are€general€statutesÍwhich€govern€the€prosecution€of€criminal€offenses.€€They€have€no€application€inÏthe€context€of€a€capital€sentencing€proceeding€which€is€œcontrolled€by›€Tenn.€Code.ÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„204€(1991€Repl).€€It€is€an€elementary€principle€of€statutoryÏconstruction€that€a€specific€statute€on€a€particular€subject€will€prevail€over€aÏgeneral€statute.€€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€897€S.W.2d€680,€683€(Tenn.€1995).€€There€is€noÏprovision€in€the€capital€sentencing€scheme€to€support€the€defendantððs€claim€thatÏthe€State€must€disprove€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€ÏIndeed,€it€is€difficult€to€imagine€how€the€State€could€meet€such€a€burden.€€JurorsÏindividually€consider€mitigating€circumstances€and€need€not€unanimously€agreeÏto€any€certain€one.€€Accepting€the€defendantððs€argument€would€impose€upon€theÏState€the€untenable€task€of€disproving€the€existence€of€each€mitigatingÏcircumstance€to€twelve€different€individuals.€€This€duty€has€not€been€imposed€byÏstatute€and€we€refuse€to€judicially€impose€it.€ÌÌà àMoreover,€the€defendantððs€reliance€upon€ðð7.04(d)€of€the€TennesseeÏPattern€Jury€Instructions€is€misplaced.€€As€we€have€previously€stated,€pattern€juryÏinstructions€are€not€officially€approved€by€this€Court€or€by€the€General€AssemblyÍand€should€be€used€only€after€careful€analysis.€€They€are€merely€patterns€orÏsuggestions.€While€previously€printed€forms€may€be€convenient,€they€must€beÏrevised€or€supplemented€if€necessary€in€order€to€fully€and€accurately€conform€toÏapplicable€law.€€€òòState€v.€œMartinóó,€›702€S.W.2d€560,€n.€4€(Tenn.€1985).€€To€theÏextent€that€€ðð7.04(d)œ× ƒ? ××  ×›€purports€to€require€that€the€jury€be€instructed€that€the€StateÏmust€disprove€mitigating€circumstances,€it€does€not€conform€to€applicable€lawÏand€is€hereby€expressly€disapproved.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òB.€Specificity€of€Instructionsó óÌà àAt€€an€appropriate€time€in€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€defendant€submittedÏthe€following€proposed€jury€instructions€with€respect€to€nonstatutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances.ÌÓÓà8 à1.€€The€defendant€had€a€disturbed€childhood€due€to€the€irregularÏnature€of€the€relationship€of€his€parents,€the€conflicts€that€existedÏbetween€them,€and€the€financial€hardships€experienced€by€theÍfamily.ÌÌà8 à2.€€The€defendantððs€psychological€and€social€development€wasÏseverely€impacted€by€the€trauma€of€being€abducted€andÏhomosexually€raped€at€the€age€of€12,€an€experience€which€he€wasÏafraid€to€reveal€to€others€for€fear€that€he€would€be€blamed€andÏrejected;ÌÌà8 à3.€€The€after€effects€of€the€trauma,€in€combination€with€a€geneticÏpredisposition€to€alcoholism,€led€to€the€defendantððs€becoming€drugÏand€alcohol„dependent€during€his€adolescence;ÌÌà8 à4.€€The€defendantððs€drug€and€alcohol€dependency,€in€combinationÏwith€the€psychological€impairments€resulting€from€his€disturbedÏchildhood€and€preadolescent€sexual€abuse,€contributed€to€theÏdefendantððs€becoming€truant€from€school€and€to€his€delinquent,€andÏlater€criminal,€behavior;€€€ÌÌà8 à5.€€As€a€result€of€his€disturbed€childhood€and€preadolescent€sexualÏabuse,€the€defendant€developed€a€severe€conflict€regarding€hisÏsexual€identity€which€he€felt€compelled€to€keep€secret€from€hisÏfamily;ÌÌà8 à6.€€When€the€defendantððs€sexual€conflicts€were€revealed€to€hisÏfamily€he€suffered€a€mental€and€emotional€disturbance.ÌÌà8 à7.€€The€intent€to€commit€murder€was€formed€while€the€defendantÏwas€under€the€influence€of€this€mental€and€emotional€disturbance.ÌÌà8 à8.€€The€defendant€did€not€wish€to€kill€the€victim€and€was€persuadedÏto€commit€the€murder€by€his€juvenile€accomplice,€Trina€Brown,€whoÏwas€permitted€to€plead€guilty€and€receive€a€sentence€ofÍincarceration€in€a€juvenile€correctional€institution€until€she€is€twenty„one€years€of€age;ÌÌà8 à9.€€The€defendant€was€an€immature€and€emotionally€dependentÏperson€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€and€his€judgment€was€impaired€byÏalcohol€and€drugs;€andÌÌà8 à10.€€€The€murder€of€the€victim€in€this€case€added€to€the€mental€andÏemotional€disturbance€the€defendant€was€experiencing€andÏcontributed€to€the€commission€of€the€homicide€in€Atlanta€which€hasÏbeen€listed€as€one€of€the€statutory€aggravating€factors.ÌÌÓÓ€Ìà àThe€trial€court€refused€to€give€the€instructions€requested€by€the€defenseÏand€instead,€instructed€the€jury€as€to€six€general€categories€of€nonstatutoryÏmitigating€circumstances,€as€follows€(1)€history€of€childhood;€(2)€victim€of€childÏsex€abuse;€(3)€mental€illness€or€mental€or€emotional€disturbance;€(4)€dominanceÏby€another€person€and/or€immaturity;€(5)€drug€abuse;€(6)€any€other€aspect€of€theÏdefendantððs€background€or€character€or€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€whichÏyou€believe€reduces€the€defendantððs€blameworthiness.€€In€this€Court,€theÏdefendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€give€his€requestedÏinstructions€and€he€contends€that€the€instructions€given€were€erroneous€becauseÏthey€lacked€specificity€and€failed€to€convey€the€defendantððs€theories€of€mitigationÍto€the€jury.€€The€State€responds€that€the€trial€court€fully€complied€with€this€CourtððsÏdecision€in€òòOdomóó,€which€was€rendered€òòafteróó€the€trial€of€this€case.€€We€agree.ÌÌà àIn€òòOdomóó,€òòsupraóó,€the€defendant€claimed€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusingÏto€submit€to€the€jury€his€requested€fact€specific€instructions€on€nonstatutoryÏmitigating€circumstances.€€We€rejected€that€claim,€concluding€that€the€fact€specificÏinstructions€advocated€by€the€defense€implied€to€the€jury€that€the€judge€had€madeÏfindings€of€fact€in€contravention€of€Article€VI,€ðð€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€ÏòòIdóó.,€928€S.W.2d€at€32.€€We€held€that€specificity€in€the€charge€on€nonstatutoryÏmitigating€circumstances€is€inappropriate€and€cautioned€that€instructions€must€beÏdrafted€ð ðso€that€when€they€are€considered€by€the€jury,€the€statutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances€are€indistinguishable€from€the€non„statutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Though€not€explicitly€stated€in€òòOdomóó,€the€clear€implication€isÏthat€instructions€on€nonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€must€be€phrased€inÏgeneral€categories€similar€to€the€statutory€mitigating€circumstances.× ƒ@ ××  ×€Finally,€weÍemphasized€œin›€òòOdomóó,€that€under€the€statute,€a€trial€court€has€no€duty,€absent€aÏtimely€and€proper€request€from€the€defense,€to€include€instructions€onÏnonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances.€€òòId.óó,€928€S.W.2d€at€31.€€However,€whenÏthe€defense€proffers€a€requested€instruction€which€is€overly€specific,€it€isÏincumbent€upon€the€trial€court€to€revise€and€generalize€the€instruction€to€conformÏto€the€evidence€and€the€law.€€€òòIdóó.€€ÌÌà àApplying€those€principles€to€the€facts€in€this€case,€it€is€clear€that€the€trialÏcourt€appropriately€denied€the€defendantððs€requested€instruction.€A€fair€reading€ofÍthe€defendantððs€requested€instructions€leaves€the€distinct€impression€that€the€trialÏjudge€has€made€findings€of€fact€which€is€impermissible€under€the€TennesseeÏConstitution.€€Moreover,€by€their€specificity,€the€requested€instructions€onÏnonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€were€clearly€distinguishable€from€theÏstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€which€is€not€permissible€under€the€statute€andÏour€decision€in€òòOdomóó.€€Therefore,€the€trial€court€correctly€refused€to€give€theÏdefendantððs€proffered€instructions.ÌÌà àThe€defense€claims€also€that€the€revised€instructions€given€by€the€trialÏcourt,€by€their€lack€of€specificity,€defeated€the€purpose€of€the€instructions€and€didÏnot€convey€to€the€jury€a€fair€picture€of€the€mitigation€proof.€€We€do€not€œagree.€€AsÏwas€previously€recognized,€unlike€lawyers,€jurors€do€not€parse€jury€instructions€inÏan€attempt€to€find€subtle€shades€of€meaning.€€Jurors€interpret€the€instructions€in€aÏcommonsense€manner€and€in€light€of€the€evidence€presented€at€the€trial.€€òòBoyde›óó,Ï494€U.S.€at€€380„81,€110€S.Ct.€at€1198.€€The€defense€assertion€ignores€the€realityÏthat€these€jurors€had€heard€specific€evidence€during€the€sentencing€hearingÏabout€the€defendantððs€childhood,€his€immaturity,€alleged€sexual€abuse,€drugÍabuse,€mental€illness€and€emotional€disturbance,€as€well€as€the€dominance€byÏTrina€Brown.€€By€their€breadth,€the€instructions€on€nonstatutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances€encompassed€all€the€evidence€presented€by€the€defense€at€theÏsentencing€hearing.€€Under€this€Courtððs€decision€in€òòOdomóó,€trial€courts€have€a€dutyÏto€modify€proffered€instructions€to€remove€factual€specificity.€€The€trial€court€in€thisÏcase€fulfilled€that€responsibility€long€before€the€òòOdomóó€decision€was€rendered.€€ÏFor€that€he€deserves€commendation,€and€the€defendantððs€claim€of€error€is€withoutÏmerit.ÌÌà@ àò òC.€Distinction€Between€Statutory€„€Nonstatutory€Mitigationó óÌà àFinally,€the€defendant€claims€that€the€trial€court€improperly€distinguishedÏbetween€statutory€and€nonstatutory€mitigating€circumstances€in€violation€of€theÏstatute€and€our€decision€in€òòOdomóó.€€The€only€distinction€error€alleged€is€the€trialÏcourtððs€preface€of€the€charge€on€non„statutory€mitigating€circumstances€with€theÏphrase,€ð ðthe€defense€has€submitted€the€following€issues€for€your€consideration.ðð€ÏWithout€question,€the€phrase€was€improper€under€this€Courtððs€òòsubsequentóóÏinterpretation€of€the€statute€in€òòOdomóó,€òòsupraóó,€in€which€we€stated€that€a€ð ðtrial€court€isÍprohibited€from€revealing€to€the€jury€that€a€request€was€made€and€from€identifyingÏthe€parties€making€the€request.€€òòIdóó.,€928€S.W.2d€at€32.€€However,€in€this€case,€theÏerror€does€not€affirmatively€appear€to€have€affected€the€verdict€in€light€of€the€trialÏcourtððs€prior€instruction€cautioning€the€jury€thatÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[t]he€order€in€which€these€instructions€are€given€is€noÏindication€of€their€relative€importance.€€òòYou€should€notÏsingle€out€one€or€more€of€them€to€the€exclusion€ofÏanother€or€others,€but€should€consider€each€one€inÏlight€of€and€in€harmony€with€the€others.óó€ÌÓÓà àÌ(Emphasis€added.)€€Therefore,€the€defendantððs€claim€that€this€error€wasÏprejudicial€requiring€a€new€sentencing€hearing€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òÔ€ ÔÔ€ ¼ÔII.ó óÔ€.ÔÔ€.XÔÌò òòòà@ àSUFFICIENCY€OF€EVIDENCE€„€AGGRAVATING€CIRCUMSTANCESóóó óÌà àPursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(c)(1)(B)€(1991€Repl.),€we€haveÏexamined€the€evidence€to€determine€whether€it€is€sufficient€to€support€the€threeÏaggravating€circumstances€found€by€the€jury.€€We€conclude€that€the€evidence€isÏclearly€sufficient€to€support€these€findings.ÌÌà àThe€State€introduced€proof€to€establish€that€the€defendant€had€beenÏpreviously€convicted€of€armed€robbery,€attempted€kidnaping€and€robbery€inÏHamilton€County€in€1984.€€In€addition,€the€State€established€that€the€defendantÏhad€been€convicted€of€murder€in€œFulton›€County,€Georgia€in€July€of€1990.€€ThisÏevidence€is€clearly€sufficient€to€support€the€juryððs€finding€that€the€ð ð[t]he€defendantÏwas€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies,€other€than€the€present€chargeÏwhose€statutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„204(I)(2)€(1991€Repl.).€€Moreover,€we€do€not€agree€with€theÏdefendantððs€claim€that€the€Georgia€conviction€for€murder€should€not€have€beenÏadmitted€to€establish€this€aggravating€circumstance€because€the€killing€in€thatÏcase€occurred€after€the€offense€in€this€case.€€We€have€previously€held€onÏnumerous€occasions€that€so€long€as€a€defendant€is€òòconvictedóó€of€a€violent€felonyÏòòprioróó€to€the€sentencing€hearing€at€which€the€previous€conviction€is€introduced,Ïthis€aggravating€circumstance€is€applicable.€€òòState€v.€œNichols›óó,€877€S.W.2d€722,Ï736€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Caldwellóó,€671€S.W.2d€459,€€464„65€(Tenn.€1984).€WeÏdecline€the€defendantððs€invitation€to€overrule€this€precedent;€therefore,€this€issueÍis€without€merit.ÌÌà àNext,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€presented€by€the€StateÏwas€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€to€support€the€juryððs€finding€that€ð ð[t]he€murderÏwas€especially€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€seriousÏphysical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produce€death.ðð€€We€disagree.€€The€trialÏcourt€correctly€instructed€the€jury€as€to€the€definitions€of€the€terms€ð ðheinous,ððÏð ðatrocious,ðð€and€ð ðcruelðð€in€accordance€with€this€Courtððs€decision€in€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsóó,€690€S.W.2d€517,€529€(Tenn.€œ1985);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòOdomóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€26.€ÏAlso›€in€Ñ p Ñœaccordance›€with€òòWilliamsóó,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€that€ð ðtortureððÏmeans€ð ðthe€infliction€of€severe€physical€or€mental€pain€upon€the€victim€while€he€orÏshe€remains€alive€or€conscious.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€The€proof€introduced€by€the€State€during€theÏtrial€clearly€established€torture.œ× ƒA ××  ×›ÌÌà àœHodges›€handcuffed€the€victim,€bound€his€feet€with€duct€tape€and€left€theÏvictim€lying€on€the€bed€with€a€pillow€over€his€œhead.€€No€doubt,€the€victim€sufferedÏconsiderable€mental€pain€as€the€defendant,€along€with€Trina€Brown,€ransackedÏhis€home,€looking€for€valuable€property€and€money.€€The€helpless€victimððs€mentalÏpain,€no€doubt,€increased€when€the€defendant€and€Brown,€took€a€break,€and€overÏa€coke,€discussed€whether€or€not€they€should€kill€the€victim.€The€evidenceÏsurrounding€the€murder€itself€shows€that€the€victim€pleaded€with€Hodges€for€hisÏlife.€€Dr.€Harlan€testified€that€the€killing€would€have€taken€between€three€to€fiveÏminutes€to€accomplish€and€that€victim€would€have€been€conscious€during€most€ofÏthis€period.€€Brown€testified€that€she€heard€the€victim€moaning€and€making€aÏchoking€sound.€€The€facts€and€circumstances€surrounding€this€murder,€includingÏthe€strangulation,€are€clearly€sufficient€to€establish€torture€as€that€term€has€beenÏdefined€in€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€òòsupraóó,€and€to€support€the€juryððs€finding€that›€thisÏmurder€was€heinous,€atrocious,€or€cruel,€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€seriousÏphysical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produce€death.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204€(I)(5)€(1991€Repl.).ÌÑ ` Ñœ›à àFinally,€the€juryððs€finding€that€ð ð[t]he€murder€was€committed€while€theÍdefendant€was€engaged€in€committing,€or€was€an€accomplice€in€the€commissionÏof,€or€attempting€to€commit,€or€fleeing€after€committing€a€robberyðð,€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„204€(I)(7)€(1991€Repl.),€is€clearly€supported€by€the€evidence.€€TheÏdefendant€entered€a€guilty€plea€to€one€count€of€especially€aggravated€robbery.€€InÏaddition,€the€State€introduced€proof€during€the€sentencing€hearing€to€establishÏthat€the€defendant€had€several€items€of€personal€property€belonging€to€the€victimÏin€his€possession€at€the€time€he€was€arrested.€€The€evidence€is€clearly€sufficientÏto€support€this€aggravating€circumstance.̛̜̜›à àà@ àÔ€ Ôò òÔ€ ¼ÔIII.Ô€ XÔó óÔ€.ÔÌà@ àà@ àòòò òPROPORTIONALITY€REVIEWóóó óÌà àIn€accordance€with€the€mandate€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(c)(1)(1991€Repl.),€we€have€considered€the€entire€record€in€this€cause€andÏfind€that€the€sentence€of€death€was€not€imposed€in€any€arbitrary€fashion;€that€theÏevidence€supports,€as€previously€discussed,€the€juryððs€findings€of€the€statutoryÏaggravating€circumstances;€and€the€juryððs€finding€that€the€aggravatingÍcircumstances€outweigh€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(c)(1)(A)„(C)(1991€Repl.).€€Finally,€comparativeÏproportionality€review€convinces€us€that€the€sentence€of€death€is€neitherÏexcessive€nor€disproportionate€to€the€penalty€imposed€in€similar€casesÏconsidering€the€nature€of€the€crime€and€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(c)(1)(D)€(1991€Repl.).ÌÌà àOur€1977€statute€created€a€comparative€proportionality€review€to€serve€asÏan€additional€safeguard€against€arbitrary€or€capricious€sentencing.€€Such€reviewÏof€death€cases€insures€rationality€and€consistency€in€the€imposition€of€the€deathÏpenalty.€€We€have€studied,€compared,€and€analyzed€cases€and€conducted€aÏmeaningful€proportionality€review€as€outlined€in€€òòState€v.€Barberóó,€753€S.W.2dÏ659,€663„68€(Tenn.€1988).€€We€have€reviewed€Rule€12€reports€from€trial€judgesÏsubmitted€over€the€past€eighteen€years€in€all€criminal€trials€for€first€degree€murderÏin€which€life€imprisonment€or€a€sentence€of€death€has€been€imposed.€€We€haveÏmade€an€independent,€conscientious€and€thorough€review€of€this€case,€as€weÏhave€in€every€other€capital€case€that€has€come€before€this€Court.€€As€a€result€ofÍthat€review,€we€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€calculated€and€premeditated€killing€ofÏthis€victim€warrants€imposition€of€the€death€penalty.€€The€defendant€rendered€theÏvictim€helpless€by€binding€his€feet€and€hands€and€then€proceeded€to€ransack€theÏvictimððs€home,€while€the€œterrified€victim›€œpondered›€his€own€fate.€€The€defendantÏignored€the€victimððs€pleas€for€mercy€and€proceeded€to€strangle€the€victim€toÏdeath.€€The€victim€remained€alive€and€conscious€for€most€of€the€three€to€fiveÏminutes€required€for€the€defendant€to€accomplish€this€task.€€This€murder€placesÏthe€defendant€Hodges€into€the€class€of€defendants€deserving€capital€punishmentÏand€is€not€disproportionate€to€the€sentences€imposed€in€similar€cases.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÏv.€œBrimmer›óó,€876€S.W.2d€75€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54€(Tenn.Ï1992);€òòState€v.€œCaughron›óó,€855€S.W.2d€526€(Tenn.€1993);€òòState€v.€Westóó,€767ÏS.W.2d€387€(Tenn.€1989);€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€768€S.W.2d€239€(Tenn.€1989);ÏòòState€v.€Poeóó,€755€S.W.2d€41€(Tenn.€1988);€òòState€v.€Houseóó,€743€S.W.2d€141Ï(Tenn.€1987).€€ÌÌà@ àòòò òCONCLUSIONóóó óÌà àWe€have€considered€the€defendantððs€assignments€of€error€and€determinedÍthat€none€affirmatively€appear€to€have€affected€the€sentence€imposed.€€WithÏrespect€to€issues€not€specifically€addressed€herein,€we€affirm€the€decision€of€theÏCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals,€authored€by€Judge€Joe€B.€Jones€and€€joined€in€byÏJudge€Gary€Wade.€€The€defendantððs€sentence€of€death€by€electrocution€isÏaffirmed.€€The€sentence€of€death€will€be€carried€out€as€provided€by€law€on€the€œ28›Ïday€of€œJuly,›€1997,€unless€otherwise€ordered€by€this€Court,€or€other€properÏauthorities.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€adjudged€against€the€defendant.€€à ààHH!H!GH!àÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àFrank€F.€Drowota,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àJusticeÌÌÌœò òConcur:ó óÌÌAnderson,€Holder,€JJ.ÌÌBirch,€C.€J.,€„€separate€dissenting€opinion.ÌReid,€J.€„€separate€dissenting€opinion.