ÿWPCQy €“šwº›z™”xü£iQÌ´øŒí1tøZä3hlá *QP ^àQfÉÂ΢ ¾Q{Hº_ðYdÍõû—×Ë=ñ\é1ÜðÏÔêB?C[YãÎÔZF%èÔA|ôh|Ž”Ë"àç7í6TPP!kšAÃÚÖvÍ5R/èVÚï¿ðq)@Y@ˆìÖ X=‰zE0€WTà’ÑpÍC#½ZøJñR¿;o‚i*ÅeÙ¥ÙI´¬Ï·ùÈê“¥á% QF˜09v)3tÊ«ƒmÒãèƒjþ3Ä›úJu‰ðº4†§žqªÛÇ>8Q\d¤%yúi$ èDb¥ä\Âäªh ú¢–n+ŠâŠEI ´znY›¡«eHØfÆ•@×B~¯K,o¶“?/…Ç¤:So¼çZ 5åeKšôÉTŒ«ßbÁx˜ëro¿3ÆQ% ðþUÜdîv6 `E40ÂJõ¡ù§ÒµR¬r$雳Ñ&ÃrÀûëT`B ÖpÊ'—I(ùªß‰ªˆ™(i§›ãK:$­ñí«tÛt·:FW„*õò¹çÞA`Q~«óNOzWJñ0®D˜ÙŪè¹?Þ Ü¡KLYÊ×5/ŠÝy# žU N© %÷ 0Dý w@A UH bÉ DÑ 0` fu 0*ÆÛ 0D¡ 4å ù + Ë3Úþ 1mØE"X 0czÝó U$: 0wY+ÐûDbGDOð“fƒ¥é·Ž!UNE#U:“#Í#Xã#f;&"¡&Ã&Ù& Bï& '"'+8'Pc( AQ³)U%:*ï>*Ì--ù1¦ 5Y³8f ;U%:r;UN¬;™ú;G“>“Ú?dmAÅÑB–DþšHN˜P5æRÇTÆâU«¨VÙSXÜ,YÔZUNÜ]UN*^ 0Dx^ 0D¼^ 0D_ D/D_ Bs__ D3“`U:Æ`UNa·NaNaNaNaïcUNôeU:BfÆ|fUNBhU:h+ÊhUNõiU:Cjd}jUNákU:/l·ilUN nU:nnŨnUNmpUN»pU: q+CqUNnrU:¼rdörUNZtU:¨t·âtUN™vU:çvD!wdewUNÉxU:y˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(óf$¡¡Ò€°ÒÒÀ°Ò gœDhœiœDjœkœ +lœmœnœUoœÓ€yœ<à09Z 0Courier (WT) Regular- ù- :Ý ƒ ‚ª)ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  ÝÌÌÌ(83‚ª$©©Ý ƒóf!ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  Ý \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ(8f2m¤$¤¤Ý ƒóf!ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  Ýà Ø àÔ€ôúÄôXXÔÔ€2ôµ½ôôôúÄÔòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÖ~-&Ôô3|xyœ !Ý ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÜôXXÔÔ€2ôˆôôôÊÜÔòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€is€the€policy€of€this€Court€to€refrain€from€using€the€name€of€a€minor€who€has€been€theÐ ,  Ðvictim€of€a€sex€crime. ÁÝ ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÏôXXÔÔ€2ô…ûôôôÊÏÔòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝUnder€this€statute,€ð ð[a]€person€commits€criminal€attempt€who,€acting€with€the€kind€ofÐ 4 Ðculpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense:€(1)€Intentionally€engages€in€action€or€causes€a€resultÏthat€would€constitute€an€offense€if€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€were€as€the€personÏbelieves€them€to€be;€(2)€Acts€with€intent€to€cause€a€result€that€is€an€element€of€the€offense,€andÏbelieves€the€conduct€will€cause€the€result€without€further€conduct€on€the€personððs€part;€or€(3)€ActsÏwith€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€or€cause€a€result€that€would€constitute€the€offense,€underÏthe€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€as€the€person€believes€them€to€be,€and€the€conductÏconstitutes€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€(b)€Conduct€does€notÏconstitute€a€substantial€step€under€subdivision€(a)(3)€unless€the€personððs€entire€course€of€action€isÏcorroborative€of€the€to€commit€the€offense.€€(c)€It€is€no€defense€to€prosecution€for€criminal€attemptÏthat€the€offense€attempted€was€actually€committed.ððÌ ÐÝ ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÏôXXÔÔ€2ô…ûôôôÊÏÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝBecause€we€have€reversed€and€remanded€for€a€new€trial,€we€need€not€address€the€Ð 4 Ðdefendantððs€following€claims:€(1)€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€convictions€forÏattempted€rape,€attempted€incest;€(2)€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€a€new€trial€because€of€anÏalleged€relationship€with€the€victimððs€mother€and€a€juror€and€because€a€friend€of€the€victimððs€familyÏreported€the€testimony€of€other€witnesses€to€the€victimððs€mother€who€later€testified€in€the€case;€andÏ(3)€the€trial€court€imposed€an€excessive€sentence.€Ì#;å37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) Ý ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÏôXXÔÔ€2ô…ûôôôÊÏÔòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝRape€is€defined€as€the€ð ðunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€of€theÐ 4 Ðdefendant€by€a€victim€accompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances:€(1)€Force€or€coercion€isÏused€to€accomplish€the€act;€(2)€The€sexual€penetration€is€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€theÏvictim€and€the€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€at€the€time€of€the€penetration€that€the€victimÏdid€not€consent;€(3)€The€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€that€the€victim€is€mentallyÏdefective,€mentally€incapacitated€or€physically€helpless;€or€(4)The€sexual€penetration€isÏaccomplished€by€fraud.ðð€€€ Ñ ` ÑÑ , Ñ(;3â$´´Ô2;åÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à Ñ  Ñ Ñ ` Ñ Ñ ° Ñ, øð AZ"Arial Regular(O(<$µµà0  àÔ2;åÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à !Ý ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€$ôÊÜôXXÔÔ€%ôˆôôôÊÜÔòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€is€the€policy€of€this€Court€to€refrain€from€using€the€name€of€a€minor€who€has€been€theÐ ,  Ðvictim€of€a€sex€crime. :Ý ƒ ‚ª)ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  ÝÌÌÌ- ù- :Ý ƒ ‚ª)ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  ÝÌÌÌ æÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòMooney€v.€Holohanóó,€294€U.S.€103,€79€L.Ed€791,€55€S.Ct.€340€(1935).€ \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ ›Ý ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÏôXXÔÔ€2ô…ûôôôÊÏÔòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝSexual€battery€is€defined€as€the€ð ðunlawful€sexual€contact€with€a€victim€by€the€defendant€orÐ 4 Ðthe€defendant€by€a€victim€accompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances:€(1)€Force€or€coercionÏis€used€to€accomplish€the€act;€(2)€The€sexual€contact€is€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€theÏvictim€and€the€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€at€the€time€of€the€contact€that€the€victim€didÏnot€consent;€(3)€The€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€that€the€victim€is€mentally€defective,Ïmentally€incapacitated€or€physically€helpless;€or€(4)€The€sexual€contact€is€accomplished€by€fraud.€Ï(b)€As€used€in€this€section,€ððcoercionðð€means€the€threat€of€kidnapping,€extortion,€force€or€violence€toÏbe€performed€immediately€or€in€the€future.ðð€ ­Ý ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÜôXXÔÔ€2ôˆôôôÊÜÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝErrors€of€law€were€reviewed€by€higher€courts€through€the€common€law€writ€of€error€whichÐ ,  Ðwas€substantially€analogous€to€the€modern€appeal.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€3;€òòPeople€v.Ð ê ¾ ÐReidóó,€232€P.€457,€460€(Cal.€1924).€€€€(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ñ ° Ñ NÝ ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôÊÏôXXÔÔ€2ô…ûôôôÊÏÔòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝSexual€contact€is€defined€as€ð ðthe€intentional€touching€of€the€victimððs,€the€defendantððs€or€anyÐ 4 Ðother€personððs€intimate€parts,€or€the€intentional€touching€of€the€clothing€covering€the€immediate€areaÏof€the€victimððs,€the€defendantððs,€or€any€other€personððs€intimate€parts,€if€that€intentional€touching€canÏbe€reasonably€construed€as€being€for€the€purpose€of€sexual€arousal€or€gratification.ðð€ \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ Ñ ` ÑÑ , Ñ Ñ 4 Ñ Ñ  Ñ d Ñ 4 Ñ Ñ ` Ñ !Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€is€the€policy€of€this€Court€to€refrain€from€using€the€name€of€a€minor€who€has€been€theÐ ,  Ðvictim€of€a€sex€crime. FÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝCoram€nobis€was€abolished€by€statute€in€Great€Britain€in€civil€cases€in€1852€and€in€criminalÐ ,  Ðcases€in€1907.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€2€n.20.ELMNOCþÿ<< Cÿÿ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular åÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝBecause€we€have€reversed€and€remanded€for€a€new€trial,€we€need€not€address€the€Ð 4 Ðdefendantððs€following€claims:€(1)€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€convictions€forÏattempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery;€(2)€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€a€newÏtrial€because€of€an€alleged€relationship€with€the€victimððs€mother€and€a€juror€and€because€a€friend€ofÏthe€victimððs€family€reported€the€testimony€of€other€witnesses€to€the€victimððs€mother€who€laterÏtestified€in€the€case;€and€(3)€the€trial€court€imposed€an€excessive€sentence.€Ì ÂÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝUnder€this€statute,€ð ð[a]€person€commits€criminal€attempt€who,€acting€with€the€kind€ofÐ 4 Ðculpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense:€(1)€Intentionally€engages€in€action€or€causes€a€resultÏthat€would€constitute€an€offense€if€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€were€as€the€personÏbelieves€them€to€be;€(2)€Acts€with€intent€to€cause€a€result€that€is€an€element€of€the€offense,€andÏbelieves€the€conduct€will€cause€the€result€without€further€conduct€on€the€personððs€part;€or€(3)€ActsÏwith€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€or€cause€a€result€that€would€constitute€the€offense,€underÏthe€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€as€the€person€believes€them€to€be,€and€the€conductÏconstitutes€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€(b)€Conduct€does€notÏconstitute€a€substantial€step€under€subdivision€(a)(3)€unless€the€personððs€entire€course€of€action€isÏcorroborative€of€the€to€commit€the€offense.€€(c)€It€is€no€defense€to€prosecution€for€criminal€attemptÏthat€the€offense€attempted€was€actually€committed.ððÌ Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝRape€is€defined€as€the€ð ðunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€of€theÐ 4 Ðdefendant€by€a€victim€accompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances:€(1)€Force€or€coercion€isÏused€to€accomplish€the€act;€(2)€The€sexual€penetration€is€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€theÏvictim€and€the€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€at€the€time€of€the€penetration€that€the€victimÏdid€not€consent;€(3)€The€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€that€the€victim€is€mentallyÏdefective,€mentally€incapacitated€or€physically€helpless;€or€(4)The€sexual€penetration€isÏaccomplished€by€fraud.ðð€€€ œÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝSexual€battery€is€defined€as€the€ð ðunlawful€sexual€contact€with€a€victim€by€the€defendant€orÐ 4 Ðthe€defendant€by€a€victim€accompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances:€(1)€Force€or€coercionÏis€used€to€accomplish€the€act;€(2)€The€sexual€contact€is€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€theÏvictim€and€the€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€at€the€time€of€the€contact€that€the€victim€didÏnot€consent;€(3)€The€defendant€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€that€the€victim€is€mentally€defective,Ïmentally€incapacitated€or€physically€helpless;€or€(4)€The€sexual€contact€is€accomplished€by€fraud.€Ï(b)€As€used€in€this€section,€ððcoercionðð€means€the€threat€of€kidnapping,€extortion,€force€or€violence€toÏbe€performed€immediately€or€in€the€future.ðð€ OÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝSexual€contact€is€defined€as€ð ðthe€intentional€touching€of€the€victimððs,€the€defendantððs€orÐ 4 Ðany€other€personððs€intimate€parts,€or€the€intentional€touching€of€the€clothing€covering€the€immediateÏarea€of€the€victimððs,€the€defendantððs,€or€any€other€personððs€intimate€parts,€if€that€intentional€touchingÏcan€be€reasonably€construed€as€being€for€the€purpose€of€sexual€arousal€or€gratification.ðð€ \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ, øð AZ"Arial Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòCfóó.€òòPynes€v.€Stateóó,€66€So.2d€277€(Fla.€1953);€òòEx€Parte€Wellesóó,€53€So.2d€at€710€(in€theÐ 4 Ðabsence€of€a€specific€time€limitation,€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€must€be€filed€within€theÏtime€prescribed€for€filing€an€appeal€as€of€right).€€To€the€extent€that€òòEdwards€v.€Stateóó,€491€S.W.2d€87Ð ° | Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1972),€holds€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€may€not€be€filed€while€anÏappeal€is€pending,€it€is€overruled. =Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝTo€the€extent€that€òòTeague€v.€Stateóó,€772€S.W.2d€915€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988),€isÐ 4 Ðinconsistent€with€our€holding,€it€is€hereby€overruled. ‰Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€majority€opinion€was€authored€by€Judge€Smith,€with€Judge€Jones€(deceased)Ð ,  Ðconcurring.€€Judge€Tipton€dissented.€€In€his€dissent,€Judge€Tipton€›addressed€only€those€issuesÏraised€by€Mixon€in€his€appeal€as€of€right. ZÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝMixon€has€not€challenged€his€convictions€for€public€intoxication€and€evading€arrest;Ð ,  Ðtherefore,€those€convictions€are€in€no€way€affected€by€our€decision€in€this€appeal.€ »Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€new€trial€is€granted€with€respect€to€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€rape,Ð ,  Ðattempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery.€€Mixon›€has€not€challenged€in€this€Court€his€convictions€ofÏpublic€intoxication€and€evading€arrest,€and€those€convictions€remain€intact. úÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€held€that€a€new€trial€should€be€granted€upon€the€basis€ofÐ 4 Ðnewly€discovered€recanted€testimony€only€if:€(1)€the€trial€court€is€reasonably€well€satisfied€that€theÏtestimony€given€by€the€material€witness€was€false€and€the€new€testimony€is€true;€(2)€the€defendantÏwas€reasonably€diligent€in€discovering€the€new€evidence,€or€was€surprised€by€the€false€testimony,€orÏwas€unable€to€know€of€the€falsity€of€the€testimony€until€after€the€trial;€and€(3)€the€jury€might€haveÏreached€a€different€conclusion€had€the€truth€been€told.€€òòLarrison€v.€United€Statesóó,€24€F.2d€82,€87„88Ð ê ¶ Ð(7th€Cir.€1928);€òòCole€v.€Stateóó,€589€S.W.2d€941€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1979);€òòCooke€v.€Stateóó,€464Ð ¨ t ÐS.W.2d€324€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1970);€òòGuy€v.€Stateóó,€443€S.W.2d€520€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1969). ôÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôòôô2ô£ÔAs€enacted€in€1955,€the€criminal€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€statute€generally€did€notÐ 4 Ðencompass€claims€based€upon€newly€discovered€evidence.€€In€Ô#†2ô£ôôôòž#ÔÔ‡ôòôô2ô£ÔòòRowe€v.€Stateóó,€498€S.W.2d€322,Ð üÈ Ð325„26€(Tenn.€1973),€this€Court€specifically€held€that€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€would€not€lie€forÏrecanted€testimony€because€it€related€to€a€matter€that€had€been€litigated€at€the€original€trial.€€TheÏholding€in€òòRoweóó€was€superseded€five€years€later,€however,€when€the€General€Assembly€amendedÐ T  Ðthe€statute€to€specifically€provide€thatÌÌÔ#†2ô£ôôôò„#ÔÔ‡ôòôô2ô£Ôà8 Ø à[u]pon€a€showing€by€the€defendant€that€the€defendant€was€without€fault€in€failing€toÐ ¬ x Ðpresent€certain€evidence€at€the€proper€time,€a€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€will€lie€forÏsubsequently€or€newly€discovered€evidence€relating€to€matters€which€were€litigatedÏat€the€trial€if€the€judge€determines€that€such€evidence€may€have€resulted€in€aÏdifferent€judgment€had€it€been€presented€at€the€trial.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÔ#†2ô£ôôôòl#ÔÔ‡ôòôô2ô£ÔÌ1978€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts€738×ÃB×× C ×.€€Ô#†2ô£ôôôòh#ÔÔ‡%ô£ôô2ô£ÔThe€amendment€was€clearly€intended€to€encompass€recantedÐ \(  Ðtestimony.€€In€fact,€the€sponsor€of€the€proposed€legislation€stated€on€the€Senate€Floor€that€theÏamendment€would€permit€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€if€ð ðafter€the€time€for€filing€a€motionÏfor€new€trial€a€person€wrongly€convicted€discovers€that€a€witness€lied.ðð€€90th€General€Assembly,ÏRemarks€of€Senator€Victor€Ashe,€Senate€Floor€Session,€March€22,€1978,€Tape€#€S„124.Ô#†2ô£ôô%ô£â#Ô DÝ ƒ Gž$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ‡ôê¼ôXXÔÔ‡%ô2Îôôôê¼ÔòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€amendment€was€clearly€intended€to€encompass€recanted€testimony.€€In€fact,€SenatorÐ 4 ÐAshe€stated€on€the€floor€of€the€Senate€that€the€proposed€legislation€would€permit€a€petition€for€writÏof€error€coram€nobis,€if€ð ðafter€the€time€for€filing€a€motion€for€new€trial€a€person€wrongly€convictedÏdiscovers€that€a€witness€lied.ðð€€90th€General€Assembly,€Senate€Floor€Session,€March€22,€1978ÏTape€#€S„124.€ +Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€1€Advisory€Commission€Comments€(The€Rules€of€Civil€ProcedureÐ 4 Ðbecame€effective€January€1,€1971). ½Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòÔ‡ôòôô2ô£ÔSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€60.02€Advisory€Commission€Comments€(ð ðThis€Rule€ÑC*JÑÑ C ÑsupersedesÐ 4 Ðchapter€7€of€Title€27,€T.C.A.,€dealing€with€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€.€.€.€.ðð)Ô#†2ô£ôôôò #Ô.ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ¡Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33€(new€trial);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€37€&€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(b)€(appeal);Ð 4 ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„30„201€et€seq.€(1997€Repl.)€(post„conviction);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€29„21„¼101€et€seq.€(habeas€corpus)€(1980€Repl.).€€ ÏÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„202(b)(2)(1997€Repl.). ÒÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„27„101€et€seq.€(1997€Repl.). ÊÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝGroundÔ‡ôòôô2ô£Ôs€to€deny€the€motion€may€exist€if€release€of€the€appellate€courtððs€decision€isÐ 4 Ðimminent€and€the€decision€grants€the€petitioner€a€new€trial,€or€the€appellate€court€is€able€toÏdetermine€that€the€petition€is€clearly€time„barred,€or€the€allegations€of€the€petition€clearly€areÏinsufficient€in€legal€effect€to€support€coram€nobis€relief.Ô#†2ô£ôôôò¤#Ô€€òòSeeóó€18€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòCoram€Nobis€and€AlliedÐ Ž Z ÐStatutory€Remediesóó€ðð€32€(1985)(€explaining€a€similar€rule€which€requires€petitioners€to€apply€to€theÐ X $ Ðappellate€court€before€filing€a€petition€in€the€trial€court€and€stating€that€an€appellate€court€may€denyÏthe€application€if€the€facts€alleged€legally€do€not€support€coram€nobis€relief).(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óPP'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd ùÝ ƒL¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€SXT: XXXÔÔ€S‹z  XSXT:ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€SXT: X S‹zÔÐ  ÐÌJanuary€19,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,,,,'ÿÿdxd,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular ­Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ôƒôXXÔÔ€2ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝErrors€of€law€were€reviewed€by€higher€courts€through€the€common€law€writ€of€error€whichÐ ,  Ðwas€substantially€analogous€to€the€modern€appeal.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€3;€òòPeople€v.Ð ê ¾ ÐReidóó,€232€P.€457,€460€(Cal.€1924).€€€€ åÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ZôƒôXXÔÔ€[ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝBecause€we€have€reversed€and€remanded€for€a€new€trial,€we€need€not€address€the€Ð 4 Ðdefendantððs€following€claims:€(1)€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€convictions€forÏattempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery;€(2)€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€a€newÏtrial€because€of€an€alleged€relationship€with€the€victimððs€mother€and€a€juror€and€because€a€friend€ofÏthe€victimððs€family€reported€the€testimony€of€other€witnesses€to€the€victimððs€mother€who€laterÏtestified€in€the€case;€and€(3)€the€trial€court€imposed€an€excessive€sentence.€Ì(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ¼Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€]ôƒôXXÔÔ€^ô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€new€trial€is€granted€with€respect€to€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€rape,Ð ,  Ðattempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery.€€œMixon›€has€not€challenged€in€this€Court€his€convictions€ofÏpublic€intoxication€and€evading€arrest,€and€those€convictions€remain€intact.(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€`ôƒôXXÔÔ€aô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€is€the€policy€of€this€Court€to€refrain€from€using€the€name€of€a€minor€who€has€been€theÐ ,  Ðvictim€of€a€sex€crime.(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ZÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€côƒôXXÔÔ€dô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝMixon€has€not€challenged€his€convictions€for€public€intoxication€and€evading€arrest;Ð ,  Ðtherefore,€those€convictions€are€in€no€way€affected€by€our€decision€in€this€appeal.€(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ­Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€fôƒôXXÔÔ€gô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝErrors€of€law€were€reviewed€by€higher€courts€through€the€common€law€writ€of€error€whichÐ ,  Ðwas€substantially€analogous€to€the€modern€appeal.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€3;€òòPeople€v.Ð ê ¾ ÐReidóó,€232€P.€457,€460€(Cal.€1924).€€€€(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular »Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€iôƒôXXÔÔ€kô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€new€trial€is€granted€with€respect€to€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€rape,Ð ,  Ðattempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery.€€Mixon›€has€not€challenged€in€this€Court€his€convictions€ofÏpublic€intoxication€and€evading€arrest,€and€those€convictions€remain€intact.(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€môƒôXXÔÔ€nô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€is€the€policy€of€this€Court€to€refrain€from€using€the€name€of€a€minor€who€has€been€theÐ ,  Ðvictim€of€a€sex€crime.(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ZÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€pôƒôXXÔÔ€qô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝMixon€has€not€challenged€his€convictions€for€public€intoxication€and€evading€arrest;Ð ,  Ðtherefore,€those€convictions€are€in€no€way€affected€by€our€decision€in€this€appeal.€(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ­Ý ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€sôƒôXXÔÔ€tô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝErrors€of€law€were€reviewed€by€higher€courts€through€the€common€law€writ€of€error€whichÐ ,  Ðwas€substantially€analogous€to€the€modern€appeal.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€3;€òòPeople€v.Ð ê ¾ ÐReidóó,€232€P.€457,€460€(Cal.€1924).€€€€(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular :Ý ƒ ‚ª)ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  ÝÌÌÌ ZÝ ƒ •$ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€wôƒôXXÔÔ€xô£ôôôƒÔòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝMixon€has€not€challenged€his€convictions€for€public€intoxication€and€evading€arrest;Ð ,  Ðtherefore,€those€convictions€are€in€no€way€affected€by€our€decision€in€this€appeal.€(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularÝ ƒóf!ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°ÒÝ  ݛѰÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€cXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑñlœñÖ€ÿÿÖñlœññlœñÖ€uÿÿÖñlœñÑ€!†ÑÑ€&OaÑÑ€(†ÑÑ€)©>ÑÑ€*JÑÑ 0XÑÑ  Ñò òÑ€+LÑÑ€.ŸW ÑÔ€9XàpXXXÔÓ=€XÐXdÐd=Óœñyœññyœññyœññoœñœñoœñßr€1QR<,(j 8` `€€@E» ` 8ttxPóð  rßñyœññoœññoœññyœññyœñ›à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà@Ø Ø ÌàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌñyœñœßt€1QR>.*jx–ÿP` `€€@ENH` 8ttxP†øð P tß›ñyœñà@BB)ÌàAT€JACKSONó óˆÐ øð ÐÌÌÌÓ'€Ð‚XN ˆ—X°œX'ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à à àà 8 àà  à(à è àòòò òFOR€PUBLICATIONóóà H! àó óÐ ¸ ° Ðà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(Ì€€€€€Appellee,à N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(à è àò òFiled:ó ó€ò òJanuary€19,€1999ó óÐ ˜  Ðà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(€€à è àÐ ˆ€ Ðà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(Ìv.à N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(à è àChester€CriminalÐ h`  Ðà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(Ìà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(€€à è àHon.€John€Franklin€Murchison,Ð H@  ÐVAUGHN€MIXON,à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(à è àJudge€€à ˜ àÐ 80  Ðà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(Ì€€€€€Appellant.à N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à(à è àNo.€02S01„9804„CC„00034Ð  ÐÌòòÌÌÌò òFor€State„Appelleeóó:à à àà 8 àà  àà è àòòFor€Defendant„Appellantó óóó:Ð ÈÀ ÐÌJohn€Knox€Walkupà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àGeorge€Morton€Googe,Ð ¨  ÐAttorney€General€&€Reporterà 8 àà  àà è àDistrict€Public€Defender€Ð ˜ Ðà N àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è à26th€Judicial€DistrictÌMichael€E.€Mooreà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àJackson,€TennesseeÐ xp ÐSolicitor€GeneralÌÌElizabeth€T.€RyanÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌNashville,€TennesseeÌÌJames€G.€WoodallÌDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌTwenty„Sixth€Judicial€DistrictÌJackson,€TennesseeÌÌDon€AllenÌAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌJackson,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌÌÌà@(Ìàòòò òÔ‡9¼¾» ¼X9XàpÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ#†9XàpX ¼9¼¾» #Ôóóó óˆÐ 810*- ÐÌÌÌÌREVERSED€IN€PART;ÌñoœñÑ)©>ÑÑ` °ÑÑ, ÑÑ  ÑÑ)©>ÑÑ ` ÑÑ , ÑÑ  ÑñoœñAND€REMANDED.à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àDROWOTA,€J.Ð  þ6ö/39 ÐÑ)©>ÑÑ` °ÑÑ, ÑÑ  ÑÓÓÓ0°,X‚X¸ —X€Ð‚XN ˆ—X0Óà Ø àWe€granted€this€appeal€to€determine:€(1)€when€a€judgment€becomes€ð ðfinalððÏand€triggers€the€one„year€coram€nobis€statute€of€limitations;€and€(2)€Ô‡XàpXX9XàpÔwhether€aÐ  à Ðpetition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€may€be€filed€in€the€trial€court€during€theÏpendency€of€an€appeal€as€of€right€from€a€conviction.€€€Ô#†9XàpXXXàp¨#ÔÐ Ì  ÐÌà Ø àWe€conclude€that€a€judgment€becomes€final,€and€the€one„year€coram€nobisÏstatute€of€limitations€begins€to€run,€thirty€days€after€entry€of€the€judgment€in€theÏtrial€court€if€no€post„trial€motion€is€filed,€or€upon€entry€of€an€order€disposing€of€aÏtimely€filed€post„trial€motion.€€As€a€result,€in€most€instances,€to€be€timely,€a€petitionÏfor€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€generally€will€be€filed€during€the€pendency€of€anÏappeal€as€of€right.ÌÌà Ø àTherefore,€to€promote€judicial€economy,€when€a€convicted€defendant€files€aÏpetition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€in€the€trial€court,€he€or€she€mustÏsimultaneously€file€a€motion€in€the€appellate€court€to€stay€the€appeal€as€of€rightÏuntil€conclusion€of€the€coram€nobis€proceeding€in€the€trial€court.€€The€motion€toÏstay€will€generally€be€granted€by€the€appellate€court.€€If,€as€in€this€case,€an€appealÏis€taken€from€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€the€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€itÏwill€be€consolidated€with€the€appeal€as€of€right.€€Because€coram€nobis€is€anÏextraordinary€remedy€to€which€resort€should€be€had€only€if€no€other€remedy€isÏavailable,€upon€review,€the€appellate€court€must€first€address€the€issues€raised€inÏthe€defendantððs€appeal€as€of€right.€€If€none€of€those€issues€are€meritorious,€theÐ Œ1`'* Ðappellate€court€must€then€address€the€issues€raised€in€the€defendantððs€coramÏnobis€appeal.ÌÌà Ø àIn€this€case,€a€majority€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals׃=×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€failed€to€addressÐ Ì  Ðthe€issues€raised€by€the€defendant€in€his€appeal€as€of€right.€€Having€consideredÏthose€issues€to€prevent€needless€litigation,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erredÏby€allowing€the€State€to€impeach€the€defendantððs€testimony€with€a€prior€sexualÏbattery€conviction,€and€the€error€is€not€harmless.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€theÏCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals,€which€remanded€this€case€to€the€trial€court€for€furtherÏfindings€on€the€coram€nobis€claim,€is€reversed.€€The€defendantððs€convictions€ofÏattempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery€are€vacated€and€the€case€isÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€new€trial.Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔñfœññkœñ׃?Ê×ñkœññkœñ׃hÊ×ñkœññfœññfœñ׃\Ê×ñfœñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z£#Ô€€Because€of€the€double€jeopardyÐ Ì  Ðprohibition€against€multiple€punishments€for€the€same€offense,€the€defendant,Ïupon€retrial,€may€not€be€convicted€of€both€attempted€rape€and€sexual€battery.ÌÌÌÌâ âÐ  *à" ÐÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑñmœñÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑñmœññlœñÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑñlœññkœñÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑñkœññfœñÑ(†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññfœñà@}}-ÌàÔ‡jX$Ê XX9X€ZÔò òÔ‡j¼̉ ¼ XjX$ÊÔIó óÔ#†9¼ž¹¼ ¼j¼̉º##Ô.Ô#†9X€ZX¼9¼ž¹Ü##ԈР,  Ðâ âà@ýý%Ìàò òòòFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDóóó óˆÐ p D Ðà Ø àFollowing€a€jury€trial€the€defendant,€Vaughn€Mixon,€was€convicted€ofÏattempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€sexual€battery,€public€intoxication,€and€evadingÏarrest.€€The€proof€at€trial€consisted€of€the€testimony€of€the€victim,€A.M.,ñfœññkœñ׃/×ñkœññkœñ׃l×ñkœññfœññfœñ׃_×ñfœñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€theÐ ä Ðdefendantððs€thirteen„year„old€daughter.€€The€victim€testified€that€on€April€16,€1994,Ïshe€drove€her€father€to€visit€one€of€his€friends.€€Her€father€was€unable€to€driveÏbecause€he€had€consumed€approximately€eighteen€cans€of€beer€and€wasÏintoxicated.ÌÌà Ø àAfter€Mixon€visited€awhile€with€his€friend,€he€and€A.M.€began€the€drive€backÏhome.€€The€incident€at€issue€in€this€appeal€allegedly€occurred€on€the€return€tripÏwhen€the€defendant€instructed€the€victim€to€drive€down€a€dirt€road€and€stop€theÏtruck.€€The€victim€drove€approximately€one„half€mile€down€the€road€and€stoppedÏthe€truck.€€The€victim€said€the€defendant€had€previously€asked€her€if€she€had€everÏseen€him€naked,€and€once€the€truck€was€stopped,€the€victim€said€the€defendantÏreached€over,€turned€the€key€back€on€so€the€radio€would€play,€placed€his€hand€onÏher€inner€thigh,€and€commented€that€he€ð ðwanted€a€piece€of€pussy.ðð€€The€victimÏsaid€she€thought€her€father€intended€to€rape€her€so€she€opened€the€truck€door€andÏjumped€from€the€truck.€€As€she€was€leaving€the€truck,€the€defendant€grabbed€herÐ 0.$& Ðclothing€and€said€he€was€only€joking.€€The€victim€did€not€believe€the€defendantÏwas€joking,€so€she€left€the€truck€and€ran€down€the€dirt€road€and€onto€the€mainÏhighway.ÌÌà Ø àThe€victim€ran€approximately€one„half€mile€down€the€main€highway€beforeÏshe€encountered€another€car€driven€by€Keith€Middleton,€a€reserve€deputy€with€theÏChester€County€Sheriffððs€Office.€€Middleton€was€driving€an€unmarked€car€and€wasÏnot€in€uniform€at€the€time€of€this€incident.€€Middleton€testified€that€he€saw€theÏvictim€running€ð ðas€fast€as€she€could€goðð€down€the€side€of€the€highway.€€By€the€timeÏMiddleton€turned€his€vehicle€around€and€returned€to€offer€assistance,€theÏdefendant€was€driving€along€beside€the€victim.€€When€Middleton€parked€his€car,Ïthe€victim€ran€toward€him€crying€and€hysterically€pleading€for€help.€€A.M.€askedÏMiddleton€not€to€leave€her€alone€with€the€defendant.€€Although€MiddletonÏrepeatedly€inquired€as€to€the€problem,€neither€the€victim€nor€the€defendantÏresponded€to€his€inquiries.€€The€defendant€told€Middleton€to€mind€his€ownÏbusiness,€and€eventually,€Middleton€returned€to€his€car.€€As€he€drove€away,ÏMiddleton€observed€the€defendant€grab€the€victim€by€the€arm€and€throw€her€intoÏthe€truck.€€The€victim€testified€that€once€the€defendant€had€forced€her€back€into€theÏtruck€he€warned€her€not€to€ð ðnarc€on€him.ðð€€ÌÌà Ø àWhen€Middleton€called€the€Sheriffððs€Department€to€report€the€incident€andÏto€give€a€description€of€the€vehicle,€he€was€dispatched€to€the€Mixon€home€onÐ Œ1`'* ÐCarroll€Road€to€investigate€a€possible€rape.€€When€Middleton€arrived,€two€otherÏdeputies€were€already€at€the€scene.€€The€victim€was€also€at€the€residence€and€toldÏthe€deputies€that€the€defendant€had€attempted€to€rape€her.€€When€the€defendantÏheard€these€charges,€he€fled.€€Middleton€and€another€deputy€located€him€in€aÏdrainage€ditch€about€200€yards€from€his€home.€€He€ran€again,€but€wasÏapprehended€at€a€nearby€outbuilding.€€€When€apprehended,€the€defendantððsÏspeech€was€slurred€and€he€smelled€of€alcohol.€€The€defendant€violently€kicked€theÏdoors€and€windows€of€the€patrol€car€and€was€eventually€sprayed€with€mace.€ÌÌà Ø àMixon€testified€in€his€own€behalf€and€denied€both€that€he€had€touched€hisÏdaughter€and€that€he€had€made€sexually€explicit€comments€to€her.€€MixonÏadmitted€that€he€was€intoxicated€on€the€day€of€the€incident.€€He€also€admitted€thatÏhe€had€asked€the€victim€to€stop€the€truck€on€the€dirt€road€on€the€trip€home,€butÏsaid€he€had€done€so€only€because€he€needed€to€again€relieve€himself.€€WhenÏquestioned€about€the€victimððs€hysterical€behavior,€Mixon€said€they€had€beenÏarguing€about€an€incident€which€occurred€in€Mississippi€and€about€the€victimÏdating€an€eighteen„year„old€man.€€Mixon€said€A.M.€made€the€allegations€againstÏhim€because€he€had€intended€to€remove€her€from€public€school€and€enroll€her€in€aÏprivate€Christian€academy€to€stop€the€relationship.ÌÌà Ø àMixon€admitted€that€he€had€fled€from€the€deputies€when€the€victim€toldÏthem€that€he€had€attempted€to€rape€her,€but€said€he€had€done€so€only€because€heÐ Œ1`'* Ðhad€not€wanted€to€be€arrested€for€a€crime€he€had€not€committed.€€The€defendantÏexplained€that€he€previously€had€been€arrested€when€the€victim€had€falselyÏaccused€him€of€physically€abusing€her.€€Mixon€said€he€had€been€injured€when€heÏfled,€and€attributed€his€violent€behavior€in€the€patrol€car€to€the€pain€from€hisÏinjuries€and€to€being€intoxicated.€€In€response€to€a€question€by€the€State€on€cross„¼examination,€the€defendant€acknowledged€that€he€had€been€previously€convictedÏof€sexual€battery€in€Mississippi€in€1986.€€Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔThe€defendant€admitted€being€guilty€ofÐ l@  Ðpublic€intoxication€and€evading€arrest.€€Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z¶8#ÔHowever,€the€defendant€stronglyÐ L  Ðmaintained€that€he€was€not€guilty€of€the€sexual€assault€crimes€with€which€he€hadÏbeen€charged.ÌÌà Ø àBased€upon€this€proof,€the€jury,€on€November€16,€1994,€found€theÏdefendant€guilty€of€attempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€sexual€battery,€publicÏintoxication,€and€evading€arrest.€€On€March€20,€1995,€the€trial€court€imposedÏsentences€for€each€of€the€convictions€and€denied€the€defendantððs€previously€filedÏmotion€for€a€new€trial.€€On€April€18,€1995,€the€defendant€filed€a€notice€of€appeal.€ÏThe€case€was€scheduled€to€be€heard€by€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€on€JanuaryÏ3,€1996,€in€Jackson.ÌÌà Ø àHowever,€on€December€22,€1995,€the€defendant€filed€in€the€trial€court€aÏpetition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis.€€The€petition€was€accompanied€by€a€swornÏaffidavit€from€the€victim€in€which€she€recanted€her€trial€testimony,€and€stated€asÐ Œ1`'* Ðfollows:ÌÓÓà8 Ø à1.€€My€name€is€[A.M.].€€I€am€fifteen€(15)€years€old,€and€I€know€theÏdifference€between€telling€the€truth€and€telling€a€lie.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à2.€€I€am€the€alleged€victim€of€Vaughn€Mixon,€my€father,€whose€trialÏwas€held€on€November€16,€1994€and€is€on€appeal.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à3.€€No€one€has€promised€me€anything€or€threatened€me€in€anyway€toÏmake€this€oath.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à4.€€I€testified€at€trial€that€my€father€said€he€ð ðwanted€a€piece€of€pussy.ðð€ÏHe€did€say€that,€but€he€was€talking€about€his€girlfriend,€not€me.€€IÏknew€that€when€he€said€it.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à5.€€The€only€time€he€touched€my€leg€that€day€was€when€he€wasÏtrying€to€reach€for€the€keys€from€the€ignition.€€I€did€not€think€he€wasÏtrying€to€feel€my€legs€in€a€sexual€way.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à6.€€When€I€was€running€away€from€the€truck,€it€was€because€we€hadÏbeen€arguing€about€my€boyfriend€at€the€time.€€He€was€older€andÏDaddy€didnððt€want€me€going€out€with€him.€€Daddy€had€put€me€in€aÏprivate€school€to€keep€me€away€from€the€high€school€boys.€€I€wasÏangry€and€showing€out€by€acting€like€I€was€walking€home.€€I€was€notÏscared€of€him.€€€€I€did€not€think€he€was€trying€to€rape€me.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à7.€€When€we€got€started€back€home€and€he€said€ð ðdonððt€narc€on€me,ððÏhe€was€asking€me€not€to€tell€mama€about€his€girlfriend.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à8.€€I€made€up€the€part€about€his€trying€to€rape€me€because€MamaÏhad€asked€me€to.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à9.€€Mama€&€Daddy€were€getting€a€divorce€and€she€didnððt€want€him€toÏhave€the€trailer€and€land€in€Mississippi.€€She€wanted€him€out€of€theÏway.Ð Ø À!Ø À! Ðà8 Ø à10.€€I€knew€Mama€would€let€me€do€what€I€wanted€to€do,€so€I€helpedÏher€out.€€Daddy€was€too€strict€about€boys€and€what€I€did,€so€I€didnððtÏwant€to€live€with€him€anymore.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÓü<ÓÌà Ø àOn€the€same€day€Mixon€filed€the€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€in€theÏtrial€court,€he€also€requested,€and€was€granted,€a€continuance€of€the€oralÏargument€in€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€until€March€of€1996.€€In€February,ÏMixon€requested€a€second€continuance€until€May€of€1996,€which€the€Court€ofÏCriminal€Appeals€again€granted€after€observing€that€the€petition€for€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis€ð ðmight€be€determinative€of€this€appeal.ððÐ Œ1`'* ÐÑ+L ÑÑ` ÑÑ  Ñà Ø àOn€March€27,€1996,€the€trial€court€held€a€hearing€on€the€coram€nobisÏpetition€at€which€the€victim€testified€consistently€with€her€affidavit.€€At€theÏconclusion€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€the€petition€on€the€basis€thatÏrecanted€testimony€does€not€constitute€newly€discovered€evidence€which€canÏsupport€issuance€of€a€writ€of€error€coram€nobis.€€The€trial€court€noted,€however,Ïthat€if€the€victim€had€not€testified€at€the€initial€trial€ð ðit€would€have€affected€theÏoutcome€of€the€trialðð€and€ð ðprobably€would€have€resulted€in€a€dismissalðð€of€theÏprosecution.ÌÌà Ø àIn€April€of€1996,€Mixon€filed€a€notice€of€appeal€from€the€trial€courtððs€denial€ofÏthe€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis.€€Mixon€also€filed€a€motion€requesting€thatÏthe€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€consolidate€his€appeal€as€of€right€with€the€coramÏnobis€appeal.€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€granted€the€motion€to€stay€oralÏargument€and€consolidated€the€coram€nobis€appeal€with€Mixonððs€pending€appealÏas€of€right€from€his€conviction.ÌÌà Ø àUpon€consideration€of€the€consolidated€appeal,€a€majority€of€the€Court€ofÏCriminal€Appeals€addressed€only€the€issues€related€to€Mixonððs€appeal€from€theÏdenial€of€the€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis.€€Although€stating€that€theÏpetition€had€not€been€timely€filed€within€one€year€of€the€judgment€becoming€final,Ïthe€majority€concluded€that€the€issue€had€been€waived€because€the€State€hadÏfailed€to€plead€the€statute€of€limitations€as€a€bar.€€With€respect€to€the€merits€of€theÏpetition,€the€majority€concluded€that€the€trial€court€had€erred€in€holding€thatÐ l3@), ÐÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  ÑñmœñÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  ÑÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  ÑñmœññlœñÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  ÑÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  ÑñlœññkœñÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  ÑñkœññfœñÑ.ŸW ÑÑ` ÑÑ  Ññfœñrecanted€testimony€will€never€support€issuance€of€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis.€ÏThe€majority€opined€thatÌÓÓà8 Ø à[t]he€test€for€granting€a€new€trial€in€cases€involving€recantedÏtestimony€is€as€follows:€(1)€the€trial€judge€is€reasonably€well€satisfiedÏthat€the€testimony€given€by€a€material€witness€was€false€and€that€theÏnew€testimony€is€true;€2)€the€defendant€was€reasonably€diligent€inÏdiscovering€the€new€evidence€or€surprised€by€false€testimony,€orÏunable€to€know€of€the€falsity€until€after€the€trial;€and€3)€the€jury€mightÏhave€reached€a€different€conclusion€had€the€truth€been€told.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÓÏNÓÌSince€the€trial€court€had€concluded,€as€a€matter€of€law,€that€recanted€testimonyÏdoes€not€constitute€newly€discovered€evidence€which€will€support€issuance€of€theÏpetition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€the€trial€court€had€not€applied€the€test.ÏAccordingly,€the€majority€reversed€and€remanded€the€case€to€the€trial€court€forÏapplication€of€the€three„pronged€test.€€The€majority€did€not€consider€the€issuesÏraised€by€Mixon€in€his€appeal€as€of€right.ÌÌà Ø àOne€judge€dissented€from€the€remand.€€The€dissenting€judge€stated€thatÏthe€one„year€coram€nobis€statute€of€limitations€does€not€begin€to€run€until€theÏconclusion€of€appellate€proceedings€and€a€petition€filed€during€the€pendency€of€anÏappeal€as€of€right€must€be€dismissed€as€premature.€€Accordingly,€the€dissentingÏjudge€opined€that€the€majority€had€no€jurisdiction€to€address€the€issues€raised€inÏthe€coram€nobis€appeal€and€should€have€only€addressed€the€issues€raised€inÏMixonððs€appeal€as€of€right.€€Considering€those€issues€on€the€merits,€the€dissentingÏjudge€would€have€reversed€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€rape,Ïattempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery€and€remanded€for€a€new€trial€because€of€aÐ |2P(+ Ðdouble€jeopardy€violation€and€because€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€State€toÏimpeach€the€defendantððs€testimony€with€his€prior€conviction€for€sexual€battery.ÌÌà Ø àWe€granted€Mixonððs€application€for€permission€to€appeal,€and€for€theÏreasons€that€follow,€now€reverse€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€rape,Ïattempted€incest,€and€sexual€battery€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.ñfœññkœññmœñ׃>×ñmœññmœñ׃v×ñmœññkœññkœñ׃o×ñkœññfœññfœñ׃b×ñfœñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Œ`  ÐÌÌà@SS-Ìàò òÔ‡:X$Ê XX9X€ZÔÔ‡:¼̉ ¼ X:X$ÊÔII.ˆÐ , ÐÔ#†:X$Ê X ¼:¼̉CX#ÔÔ#†9X€ZX X:X$Ê$X#Ôó óà@³³"Ìàòòò òWRIT€OF€ERROR€CORAM€NOBISˆÐ X, Ðóóó óà@@@$Ìàò òA.€Historical€OriginˆÐ 8  Ðó óà Ø àThe€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€is€an€extraordinary€remedy€known€more€for€itsÐ ì Ðdenial€than€its€approval.€€òòPenn€v.€Stateóó,€670€S.W.2d€426,€428€(Ark.€1984).€The€writÐ ø Ì Ðwas€developed€by€the€judiciary€in€England€during€the€Sixteenth€century.€€18€Am.ÏJur.€2d€òòCoram€Nobis€and€Allied€Statutory€Remediesóó€ðð€1€(1985).€€Since€neither€theÐ ¸$Œ Ðright€to€move€for€a€new€trial€nor€the€right€to€appeal€were€recognized€at€commonÏlaw,€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€was€developed€as€a€procedural€mechanism€toÏallow€courts€to€provide€relief€under€limited€circumstances.ñfœññkœñ׃U ×ñkœññkœñ׃r ×ñkœññfœññfœñ׃e ×ñfœñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Morgan€Prickett,€òòWritÐ X*, " Ðof€Error€Coram€Nobis€in€Californiaóó,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€1,€3€(1990).€Ð 8, "$ ÐEssentially,€the€common€law€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€allowed€a€trial€court€toÏreopen€and€correct€its€judgment€upon€discovery€of€a€substantial€factual€error€notÏappearing€in€the€record€which,€if€known€at€the€time€of€judgment,€would€haveÏprevented€the€judgment€from€being€pronounced.€€John€S.€Gillig,€òòKentucky€Post„Ð Ì  ÐConviction€Remedies€and€the€Judicial€Development€of€Kentucky€Rule€of€CriminalÏProcedure€11.42óó,€83€Ky.€L.J.€265,€320€(1994„95).€€Literally,€ð ðcoram€nobisðð€meansÐ Œ`  Ðð ðour€court,ðð€or€ð ðbefore€us.ðð€€òòBlackððs€Law€Dictionaryóó€304€(5th€ed.€1979).€€Therefore,Ð l@  Ðthe€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€was€addressed€to€the€very€court€which€had€renderedÏthe€judgment€rather€than€to€an€appellate€or€other€reviewing€court.€€òòIdóó.Ð , ÐÓÓÌà8 Ø àThe€writ€was€thus€distinctive€in€that€it€required€the€reconsideration€ofÏa€judgment€by€a€court€which€had€already€made€a€final€disposition€ofÏthe€cause;€but€it€cast€no€aspersions€on€the€competency€or€finding€ofÏthe€court€in€its€first€judgment,€for€it€lay€only€to€call€up€facts€whichÏwere€unknown€to€the€court€at€the€time€of€judgment€and€which€wereÏnot€inconsistent€with€the€record.€Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÓ1`ÓÌNote,€òòThe€Writ€of€Error€Coram€Nobisóó,€37€Harv.€L.€Rev.€744€(1924).€€As€such,€theÐ |#P Ðcommon€law€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€did€not€encompass€complaints€about€errorsÏor€mistakes€in€the€judgment,€but€instead€alleged€that€because€of€something€thatÏnever€came€before€the€court,€ð ðit€was€a€mistake€to€proceed€to€judgment€at€all.ðð€ÏPrickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€œñgœñP#›€nñgœññhœñ6€nñhœñ.ñiœñ›€1ñiœññjœñ1ñjœñ3.›€€Though€more€frequently€employed€inÏcivil€cases,€coram€nobis€relief€was€available€in€criminal€proceedings€under€EnglishÏcommon€law.׃0×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€6„9.€€Generally€at€common€lawÐ ¼.$' Ðthe€only€time€limitation€upon€the€filing€of€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€was€theÏrequirement€that€a€petitioner€show€that€he€or€she€had€exercised€due€diligence€inÏadvancing€the€claim€and€seeking€the€remedy.€€18€Am.Jur.2d€òòCoram€Nobis€andÐ ì À ÐAllied€Statutory€Remediesóó€ðð€31€(1985);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Morganóó,€346Ð Ì  ÐU.S.€502,€507,€74€S.Ct.€247,€250,€98€L.Ed.€248€(1954);€òòPennóó,€670€S.W.2d€at€574.Ð ¬€ ÐÌà Ø àThe€common€law€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€was€brought€over€from€EnglandÏto€the€thirteen€colonies€and€later€incorporated€into€the€jurisprudence€of€the€UnitedÏStates.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€7.€€The€writ€was€not€often€utilized€inÏcriminal€cases€and,€with€the€advent€of€the€right€to€seek€a€new€trial€and€the€right€toÏappeal,€use€of€the€writ€in€both€civil€and€criminal€cases€declined€well€into€theÏTwentieth€century.€€Gillig,€83€Ky.€L.J.€at€321;€18€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòCoram€Nobis€andÐ Ì  ÐAllied€Statutory€Remediesóó€ðð€1€(1985).Ð ¬ € ÐÌà Ø àThere€was€a€revival€of€the€use€of€the€writ€in€criminal€proceedings€following€aÏ1935€United€States€Supreme€Court€decision׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€in€which€the€Court€pointed€out€thatÐ L&  Ðstates€should€have€post„conviction€procedures€broad€enough€to€encompassÏdeprivations€of€federal€constitutional€rights.€€Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔGillig,€83€Ky.€L.J.€at€321;€18€Am.€Jur.Ð  *à" Ð2d€òòCoram€Nobis€and€Allied€Statutory€Remediesóó€ðð€1€(1985).Ô#†9X€ZXXX€ZŸj#Ô€€Through€the€1940'sÐ ì+À!$ Ðand€50's€many€states€utilized€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€as€a€post„convictionÏremedy,€but€when€states€thereafter€adopted€more€modern€and€comprehensiveÐ ¬/€%( Ðpost„conviction€remedies,€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€again€sank€into€obscurityÏand€largely€remains€there€today.€€Prickett,€30€Santa€Clara€L.€Rev.€at€2.ÌÌà Ø àWhile€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€was€recognized€and€utilized€under€theÏcommon€law€in€Tennessee,€the€General€Assembly€in€1858€enacted€a€statuteÏwhich€codified€the€procedure€for€seeking€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€expandedÏthe€grounds€upon€which€a€claim€for€relief€under€the€writ€could€be€based,€andÏplaced€a€time€limitation€upon€its€filings€which€provided€that€ð ð[t]he€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis€may€be€had€within€one€year€from€the€rendition€of€the€judgment.€.€.€.ðð€ÏCode€1858,€ðð€3111;€òòJones€v.€Pearceóó,€59€Tenn.€281,€286€(1868).€€Both€at€commonÐ  à Ðlaw€and€under€the€1858€statutory€enactment,€however,€the€writ€of€error€coramÏnobis€was€limited€in€scope€to€civil€proceedings.€€òòGreen€v.€Stateóó,€216€S.W.2d€305Ð Ì  Ð(Tenn.€1948).€à ˆ àÐ ¬ € Ðà@ÌÌ.ÌàˆÌà Ø àIn€1955€the€General€Assembly€extended€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€toÏcriminal€proceedings.€€1955€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts€166.€€The€relief€available€extendedÏonly€to€ð ðerrors€dehors€the€record€and€to€matters€that€were€not€or€could€not€haveÏbeen€litigated€on€the€trial€of€the€case,€on€a€motion€for€a€new€trial,€on€appeal€in€theÏnature€of€a€writ€of€error,€on€writ€of€error,€or€in€a€habeas€corpus€proceeding.ðð€€òòIdóó.€Ð ì+À!$ ÐWith€respect€to€procedure,€the€statute€provided€only€that€criminal€coram€nobisÏproceedings€were€ð ðto€be€governed€by€the€same€rules€and€procedure€applicable€toÏthe€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€in€civil€cases,€except€in€so€far€as€inconsistentÐ Œ1`'* ÐÑ*JÑÑ4, ÑÑ  ÑñmœñÑ*JÑÑ4, ÑÑ  ÑÑ*JÑÑ4, ÑÑ  Ññmœñherewith.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ð 4 ÐÌà Ø àThough€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€in€civil€cases€was€superseded׃D×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€whenÐ ô À ÐRule€60€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€became€effective€in€1971,׃C"×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€theÐ Ô   Ðadoption€of€Rule€60€did€not€diminish€or€supersede€the€statute€which€extended€theÏwrit€as€an€available€remedy€in€criminal€proceedings.€€Indeed,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„26„105€(1997€Repl.)€currently€provides€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 Ø àThere€is€hereby€made€available€to€convicted€defendants€in€criminalÏcases€a€proceeding€in€the€nature€of€a€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€òòto€beÐ D Ðgoverned€by€the€same€rules€and€procedure€applicable€to€the€writ€ofÏerror€coram€nobis€in€civil€cases,€except€insofar€as€inconsistentÏherewith.óó€€Notice€of€the€suing€out€of€the€writ€shall€be€served€on€theÐ à Ðdistrict€attorney€general.€€No€judge€shall€have€authority€to€order€theÏwrit€to€operate€as€a€supersedeas.€€The€court€shall€have€authority€toÏorder€the€person€having€custody€of€the€petitioner€to€produce€theÏpetitioner€in€court€for€the€hearing€on€the€proceeding.€€The€reliefÏobtainable€by€this€proceeding€shall€be€confined€to€errors€dehors€theÏrecord€and€to€matters€that€were€not€or€could€not€have€been€litigatedÏon€the€trial€of€the€case,€on€the€motion€for€a€new€trial,€on€appeal€in€theÏnature€of€a€writ€of€error,€on€writ€of€error,€or€in€a€habeas€corpusÏproceeding.€€Upon€a€showing€by€the€defendant€that€the€defendantÏwas€without€fault€in€failing€to€present€certain€evidence€at€the€properÏtime,€a€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€will€lie€for€subsequently€or€newlyÏdiscovered€evidence€relating€to€matters€which€were€litigated€at€theÏtrial€if€the€judge€determines€that€such€evidence€may€have€resulted€inÏa€different€judgment,€had€it€been€presented€at€the€trial.€€The€issueÏshall€be€tried€by€the€court€without€the€intervention€of€a€jury,€and€if€theÏdecision€be€in€favor€of€the€petitioner,€the€judgment€complained€ofÏshall€be€set€aside€and€the€defendant€shall€be€granted€a€new€trial€inÏthat€cause.€€In€the€event€a€new€trial€is€granted,€the€court€may,€in€itsÏdiscretion,€admit€the€petitioner€to€bail;€provided€that€the€offense€isÏbailable.€€If€not€admitted€to€bail,€the€petitioner€shall€be€confined€in€theÏcounty€jail€to€await€trial.€€The€petitioner€or€the€state€may€pray€anÐ Ä,$' Ðappeal€in€the€nature€of€a€writ€of€error€to€the€supreme€court€from€theÏfinal€judgment€in€this€proceeding.€€€€€€€€€Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÓvÓÌ(Emphasis€added.)ÌÌà Ø àThe€anomalous€result€is€that€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€continues€to€beÏan€available€remedy€in€criminal€actions,€but€the€procedure€governing€the€remedyÏis€based€upon€the€civil€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€which€has€been€abolished€forÏalmost€28€years.€€In€this€appeal,€therefore,€we€must€clarify€several€proceduralÏissues€which€have€arisen€relating€to€the€operation€of€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobisÏin€criminal€proceedings.ÌÌà@MM"Ìàò òB.€Statute€of€Limitationsó óˆÐ Ô  Ðà Ø àInitially,€we€must€determine€when€the€one„year€coram€nobis€statute€ofÏlimitations€begins€to€run.€€The€statute€currently€provides€that€ð ð[t]he€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis€may€be€had€within€one€(1)€year€after€the€judgment€becomes€final.€.€.Ï.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„7„103€(1980€Repl.).Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z8t#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€€Relying€upon€a€footnote€in€òòTeagueÐ T$  Ðv.€Stateóó,€772€S.W.2d€915,€920€n.2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988),€the€State€asserts€thatÐ 4&  Ða€judgment€does€not€become€final€for€purposes€of€this€statute€until€the€conclusionÏof€the€appeal€as€of€right€proceedings.€€In€addition,€the€State€contends€that€aÏpetition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€which€is€filed€before€the€conclusion€ofÏappellate€proceedings€must€be€dismissed€as€premature.€€Since€the€petition€in€thisÏcase€was€filed€during€the€pendency€of€Mixonððs€appeal,€the€State€argues€that€itÏshould€be€dismissed,€without€prejudice,€as€premature.Ð t1@), Їà Ø àMixon€agrees€with€the€State€that€the€coram€nobis€statute€of€limitations€doesÏnot€expire€until€one€year€after€the€conclusion€of€appellate€proceedings.€€However,ÏMixon€argues€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€may€be€filed€at€any€pointÏafter€a€final€judgment€is€entered€in€the€trial€court€until€one€year€after€conclusion€ofÏappellate€proceedings.€€Thus,€Mixon€argues€that€a€petition€may€be€filed€in€the€trialÏcourt€during€the€pendency€of€an€appeal.Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Zh#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔÐ ”`  ÐÌà Ø àWe€begin€our€analysis€of€this€issue€of€statutory€construction€with€a€briefÏhistorical€review.€€As€originally€enacted€in€1858,€the€one„year€coram€nobis€statuteÏof€limitations€provided€that€ð ð[t]he€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€may€be€had€within€oneÏyear€òòfrom€the€rendition€of€the€judgmentóó,€by€petition€presented€to€the€judge€atÐ ôÀ Ðchambers€or€in€open€court.€.€.€.ððÔ#†9X€ZXXX€Z†#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€Code€1858,€ðð€3111Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Zê‡#Ô.€€€In€1940,€fifteen€years€beforeÐ Ô  Ðthe€General€Assembly€extended€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€and€its€attendantÏprocedures€to€criminal€proceedings,€this€Court€in€òòCates€v.€City€of€McKenzieóó,€176Ð ” ` ÐTenn.€313,€141€S.W.2d€471€(1940),€held€the€ð ðððrenditionðð€[of€the€judgment]€is€theÏtime€of€announcement,€ððin€a€conclusive€manner€and€with€decisive€effect,ðð€of€aÏjudgment,€as€distinguished€from€entry€thereof,€which€may€be€a€later€date.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€InÐ 4&  Ðother€words,€in€òòCatesóó€this€Court€held€that€the€one„year€coram€nobis€statute€ofÐ (à" Ðlimitations€begins€to€run€from€the€time€a€judgment€is€announced€in€the€trial€court€inÏa€conclusive€manner,€rather€than€from€the€time€a€judgment€is€formally€filed€orÏentered.€€In€òòCatesóó,€the€trial€court€ordered€the€sale€of€land€in€February€of€1937,€butÐ ´-€%( Ðdid€not€enter€the€final€decree€confirming€the€report€of€the€sale€until€August€of€1938.€ÏUnder€those€circumstances,€this€Court€held€that€the€statute€of€limitations€began€toÐ t1@), ÐÑ!†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑñmœñÑ!†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑÑ!†ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññmœñrun€in€February€of€1937,€and€the€petition,€filed€more€than€one€year€later€inÐ 4 ÐDecember€of€1938,€was€time„barred.ÌÌà Ø àIn€òòJohnson€v.€Russellóó,€404€S.W.2d€471€(Tenn.€1966),€a€criminal€caseÐ Ô   Ðinvolving€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€this€Court€again€held€that€the€petition€wasÏtime„barred€because€it€had€been€filed€more€than€one€year€after€the€judgment€hadÏbeen€rendered€in€the€trial€court.€€The€òòJohnsonóó€court€held€that€the€trial€court€couldÐ t@  Ðtake€judicial€notice€of€the€date€that€the€judgments€were€rendered€since€the€petitionÏwas€before€the€ð ðsame€trial€judge€who€tried€the€man€on€the€original€threeÏconvictions.ðð€€404€S.W.2d€at€473.ÌÌà Ø àIn€an€apparent€response€to€the€decision€in€òòJohnsonóó,€the€General€AssemblyÐ Ô  Ðin€1967€amended€the€coram€nobis€statute€of€limitation€by€deleting€the€words,€ð ðfromÏrendition€of€judgment,ðð€and€by€substituting€instead,€ð ðafter€the€judgment€becomesÏfinal.ðð€€The€1967€revision€is€the€only€amendment€to€the€coram€nobis€statute€ofÏlimitations€since€its€enactment€in€1858.€€The€sponsor€of€the€proposed€legislationÏtold€the€full€Senate€that€the€amendment€would€extend€the€time€for€filing€a€writ€ofÏerror€coram€nobis€ð ðby€thirty€days.ðð€€85th€General€Assembly,€Remarks€of€SenatorÏThomas€A.€Harris,€Senate€Floor€Session,€March€23,€1967,€Tape€#€S„212.€ÏSimilarly,€the€House€sponsor€explained€that€under€the€proposed€amendment€aÏperson€would€be€able€to€file€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€for€up€to€oneÏyear€after€his€or€her€ð ðappeal€has€been€perfected.ðð€€85th€General€Assembly,ÏRemarks€of€Representative€Charles€D.€Galbreath,€House€Floor€Session,€May€16,Ð t1@), Ð1967,€Tape€#€H„336.ÌÌà Ø àIt€is€well„established€that€the€fundamental€role€of€this€Court€in€construingÏstatutes€is€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€to€legislative€intent.€€òòState€v.€Sligeróó,€846Ð Ô   ÐS.W.2d€262,€263€(Tenn.€1993).€€Moreover,€the€Legislature€is€presumed€to€knowÏthe€state€of€the€law€at€the€time€it€passes€legislation.€€òòWilson€v.€Johnson€Countyóó,Ð ”`  Ð879€S.W.2d€807,€810€(Tenn.€1994).€€Applying€these€general€rules€of€statutoryÏconstruction€and€considering€the€historical€context,€we€conclude€from€theÏlanguage€of€the€amendment€and€the€comments€of€the€sponsors€that€the€1967Ïamendment€was€intended€to€overrule€this€Courtððs€prior€decisions€in€òòCatesóó€andÐ à ÐòòJohnsonóó€to€the€extent€those€decisions€had€held€that€the€statute€of€limitationsÐ ôÀ Ðbegins€to€run€from€the€time€a€judgment€is€pronounced€rather€than€from€the€time€aÏjudgment€is€formally€entered.€€In€our€view,€by€adoption€of€the€amendment,€theÏGeneral€Assembly€intended€to€change€the€trigger€of€the€statute€of€limitations€fromÏpronouncement€of€judgment€in€the€trial€court€to€final€judgment€in€the€trial€court.€€AÏjudgment€becomes€final€in€the€trial€court€thirty€days€after€its€entry€if€no€post„trialÏmotions€are€filed.€€If€a€post„trial€motion€is€timely€filed,€the€judgment€becomes€finalÏupon€entry€of€an€order€disposing€of€the€post„trial€motion.€€òòÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ð (à" Ð4(c);Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z.#Ô€òòState€v.€Pendergrassóó,€937€S.W.2d€834,€837€(Tenn.€1996).€€Accordingly,€weÐ ô)À!$ Ðhold€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€must€be€dismissed€as€untimelyÏunless€it€is€filed€within€one€year€of€the€date€on€which€the€judgment€of€convictionÏbecame€final€in€the€trial€court.ÌÐ t1@), Ðà Ø àIn€so€holding,€we€reject€the€contention€of€both€Mixon€and€the€State€that€theÏstatute€does€not€begin€to€run€until€the€conclusion€of€the€appeal€as€of€rightÏproceedings.€€€The€statute€on€its€face€does€not€lend€itself€to€the€suggestedÏinterpretation.€€Had€the€General€Assembly€intended€for€the€statute€of€limitations€toÏbegin€only€after€the€conclusion€of€appellate€proceedings,€it€certainly€could€haveÏemployed€clear€language€to€accomplish€that€intent.€€In€fact,€the€General€AssemblyÏhas€used€such€clear€language€in€the€post„conviction€relief€context€where€a€petitionÏmust€be€filed€ð ðwithin€one€(1)€year€of€the€date€òòof€the€final€action€of€the€highest€stateÐ T  Ðappellate€court€to€which€an€appealóó€is€taken€.€.€.€.€ð ð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„Ð 4 Ð202(a)€(1997€Repl.)€(emphasis€added).ÌÌà Ø àIn€addition,€the€assertion€that€the€statute€does€not€begin€until€appellateÏproceedings€are€concluded€is€also€inconsistent€with€the€longstanding€rule€thatÏpersons€seeking€relief€under€the€writ€must€exercise€due€diligence€in€presenting€theÏclaim.€€18€Am.€Jur.€2d,€òòCoram€Nobis€and€Allied€Statutory€Remediesóó€ðð€31€(1985).Ð t"@ ÐThe€assertion€also€overlooks€the€fact€that€with€the€passage€of€time,€evidenceÏgrows€stale,€witnesses€disperse,€and€memories€erode.€€òòSeeóó€òòHerrera€v.€Collinsóó,Ð 4&  Ð506€U.S.€390,€403„04,€113€S.Ct.€853,€862,€122€L.Ed.2d€203€(1992).€€A€claim€ofÏnewly€discovered€evidence€which€is€not€asserted€until€appellate€proceedings€areÏconcluded,€likely€years€after€a€person€has€been€tried€and€convicted,€is€inherentlyÏsuspect.€€òòIdóó.€at€417„18,€113€S.Ct.€at€869.€€Also,€as€a€practical€matter,€Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔwere€we€toÐ ´-€%( Ðapply€such€an€interpretation,€oftentimes€the€original€trial€judge€would€not€beÏÔ#†9X€ZXXX€Z‡¥#Ôavailable€to€make€the€statutory€determination€of€whether€the€newly€discoveredÐ t1@), Ðevidence€ð ðmay€have€resulted€in€a€different€judgment€had€it€been€presented€at€theÏtrial.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„26„105€(1997€Repl.).€€We€acknowledge€that€it€isÏneither€practically€possible€nor€legally€required€that€the€original€trial€judge€makeÏthis€determination€in€every€case.€€However,€having€the€original€trial€judge€makeÏthe€determination€as€soon€as€possible€after€a€judgment€has€become€final€in€theÏtrial€court€is€certainly€preferable.€€òòSeeóó€òòPennóó,€670€S.W.2d€at€429€(stating€thatÐ ”`  Ðbecause€petition€filed€while€case€was€between€trial€and€appeal€can€easily€provideÏfor€an€early€hearing€before€the€court€that€just€heard€the€case);€òòcfóó.€òòState€v.€Moatsóó,Ð T  Ð906€S.W.2d€431,€435€(Tenn.€1995)€(discussing€comparable€problems€associatedÏwith€a€trial€judge€making€a€thirteenth€juror€determination€upon€remand€from€anÏappellate€court€long€after€the€trial€was€concluded).ÌÌà Ø àIn€addition,€finality€concerns€militate€against€applying€the€interpretationÏadvanced€by€Mixon€and€the€State.€€Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔð ð[T]he€administration€of€justice€and€the€integrityÐ ” ` Ðof€our€court€system€demand,€in€addition€to€fair€treatment€under€the€law,€a€certainÏdegree€of€finality€to€criminal€judgments.ðð€€òòHarrison€v.€Stateóó,€Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z¸ª#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ394€S.W.2d€713,€717„Ð T$  Ð18€(Tenn.€1964).Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Zß«#Ô€€Since€a€convicted€defendant€had€no€other€avenue€for€seekingÐ 4&  Ðrelief€at€common€law,€it€was€entirely€appropriate€for€due€diligence€to€be€the€onlyÏtime€limitation€on€the€writ;€however,€criminal€procedure€has€drastically€changed€inÏthe€past€thirty€years.€€òòSeeóó€òòCity€of€White€House€v.€Whitleyóó,€__€S.W.2d€__,€__Ð Ô+ #& Ð(Tenn.€1998).€€Convicted€defendants€now€have€the€right€to€move€for€a€new€trial,Ïâ âthe€right€to€appeal,€the€right€to€seek€post„conviction€relief,€and€the€right€to€fileÐ ”/`'* Ðhabeas€corpus€petitions.׃F×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€post„conviction€statute€now€provides€a€method€byÐ 4 Ðâ âwhich€courts€may€address€claims€of€actual€innocence€which€are€based€upon€newlyÏdiscovered€scientific€evidence.׃GÊ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Finally,€convicted€defendants€who€discover€newÐ ô À Ðnon„scientific€evidence€of€actual€innocence€too€late€to€file€a€motion€for€new€trial€orÏpetition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€may€always€seek€executive€clemency.׃HP×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р´€ ÐClearly,€in€this€modern€procedural€regime,€the€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€is€noÏlonger€a€convicted€defendantððs€only€hope€for€relief.€€òòSeeóó€òòPennóó,€670€S.W.2d€atÐ t@  Ð573„74€(describing€the€writ€as€filling€a€gap€in€the€legal€system);€òòÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔEx€Parte€Wellesóó,Ð T  Ð53€So.2d€708,€711€(Fla.€1951)€(stating€that€the€writ€supplements€but€does€notÏsupersede€the€motion€for€new€trial€or€the€right€of€appeal).Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z\²#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔÐ à ÐÌà Ø àIn€light€of€the€aforementioned€many€procedural€protections,€there€is€noÏneed€to€reinterpret€the€statute€of€limitations€which€has€been€in€effect€in€this€StateÏin€basically€the€same€form€since€1858.€€Extending€the€time€for€filing€a€petition€forÏwrit€of€error€coram€nobis€until€one€year€after€appellate€proceedings€haveÏconcluded€wouldÔ#†9X€ZXXX€ZO³#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€unnecessarily€compromise€societyððs€interest€in€finality.Ð T$  ÐÌà Ø àThe€State€would€also€have€us€hold€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coramÏnobis€may€not€be€filed€until€the€end€of€appellate€proceedings.€€At€the€very€least,Ïthis€approach€would€delay€justice€and€perhaps€entirely€deny€justice.€€For€example,Ð Ô+ #& Ða€defendant€who€discovers€new€evidence€establishing€actual€innocence€only€òòoneóóÐ 4 Ðday€after€a€notice€of€appeal€is€filed€would€be€required€to€wait€until€the€appellateÏprocess€is€concluded,€perhaps€years€later,€before€filing€a€petition€for€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis.€€We€decline€to€adopt€such€a€rule.€€To€summarize€and€borrow€from€aÏstatement€made€by€the€Florida€Supreme€Court€when€urged€to€adopt€a€similar€rule,Ïif€rules€of€procedure€have€become€so€inflexible€that€courts€are€unable€to€provideÏtimely€relief€to€an€innocent€person€wrongly€convicted€then€ð ðwe€have€lost€theÏcreative€faculty€that€we€have€always€thought€to€be€resident€in€the€judiciary.ðð€€òòExÐ T  ÐParte€Wellesóó,€53€So.2d€at€710.Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Zÿ´#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔÐ 4 ÐÌà Ø àAs€previously€stated,€we€hold€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobisÏmust€be€filed€within€one€year€of€the€time€judgment€becomes€final€in€the€trialÏcourt.Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z„¹#Ô׃<×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€this€case€the€judgment€became€final€in€the€trial€court€on€March€20,Ð ´€ Ð1995€when€Mixonððs€motion€for€new€trial€was€denied.€Accordingly,€the€petition€forÏwrit€of€error€coram€nobis€filed€less€than€one€year€later€on€December€22,€1995€wasÏtimely.ÌÌà@\\(Ìàò òC.€Procedureó óˆÐ (à" Ðà Ø àIn€light€of€our€conclusion€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€isÏuntimely€unless€filed€within€one€year€of€the€time€a€judgment€becomes€final€in€theÏâ âtrial€court,€it€is€clear€that€a€timely€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€will€almostÐ ´-€%( Ðalways€be€filed€while€an€appeal€is€pending.׃;×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Pendency€of€the€appeal€does€notÐ 4 Ðâ âdivest€the€trial€court€of€jurisdiction€to€consider€the€petition€for€writ€of€error€coramÏnobis€since€a€suit€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€is€a€new€action.€€òòMoore€v.€Mooreóó,Ð ô À Ð431€S.W.2d€754,€755€(Tenn.€1968).€€Nonetheless,€the€coram€nobis€petition€andÏthe€appeal€both€relate€to€the€same€conviction;€therefore,€we€hereby€adopt€aÏprocedure€which€applies€when€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€is€filed€in€theÏtrial€court€during€the€pendency€of€an€appeal.€€The€procedure€is€designed€both€toÏaccommodate€a€convicted€defendantððs€ability€to€seek€coram€nobis€relief€and€toÏpromote€judicial€economy€and€conserve€judicial€resources.€€€ÌÌà Ø àOn€the€same€day€that€a€petition€for€writ€of€error€coram€nobis€is€filed€in€theÏtrial€court,€the€petitioner€should€also€file€in€the€appellate€court€a€motion€requestingÏthat€the€appellate€proceedings€be€stayed€pending€the€trial€courtððs€decision€on€theÏwrit€of€error€coram€nobis.€€A€copy€of€the€petition€should€be€attached€to€the€motion.€ÏUnder€most€circumstances,€the€motion€to€stay€should€be€granted.Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ׃IF×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z4Â#Ô€€òòÔ‡%X}ŸXX9X€ZÔEx€ParteÐ t"@ ÐWellesóó,€53€So.2d€at€710€(ð ðif€appeal€has€been€taken€to€this€Court€the€applicationÐ X$$ Ðmay€be€made€here€for€permission€to€apply€to€the€trial€court€at€any€time€before€theÐ $&ð  Ðcase€is€decided.€.€.€.ðð);Ô#†9X€ZXX%X}ŸÏÂ#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€òòcfóó.€òòSpence€v.€Allstate€Ins.€Co.óó,€883€S.W.2d€586,€596€(Tenn.Ð 4 Ð1994)€(stating€that€a€party€who€seeks€relief€in€the€trial€court€during€the€pendency€ofÏan€appeal€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€60.02,€which€superseded€the€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis€in€civil€proceedings,€must€apply€to€the€appellate€court€for€an€order€ofÏremand).Ô#†9X€ZXXX€ZÄ#Ô€€Any€appeal€from€the€trial€courtððs€decision€on€the€petition€for€writ€of€errorÐ ¸„ Ðcoram€nobis€is€to€be€consolidated€with€the€defendantððs€pending€appeal€as€of€right.€ÏTenn.€R.€App.€P.€16(b)€(ð ðappeals€involving€a€common€question€of€law€or€commonÏfacts€.€.€.€may€be€consolidated€by€order€of€the€appellate€court€on€its€own€motion€orÏon€motion€of€a€partyðð).Ô‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔÐ 8 ÐÌà Ø àIÔ#†9X€ZXXX€Z<Ç#Ôf€the€trial€court€has€granted€a€new€trial€on€the€petition€for€writ€of€error€coramÐ øÄ Ðnobis€and€the€State€is€appealing€that€decision,€the€appellate€court€should€firstÏconsider€the€issues€relating€to€the€coram€nobis€proceeding.€€If€the€trial€courtððsÏcoram€nobis€decision€to€grant€a€new€trial€is€affirmed,€the€issues€raised€in€theÏdefendantððs€appeal€as€of€right€become€moot€and€need€not€be€addressed€by€theÏappellate€court.€€However,€if€the€trial€court€denied€the€petition€for€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis€and€the€defendant€is€the€appellant,€theÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€appellate€court€should€firstÐ 8&  Ðaddress€the€issues€raised€in€the€defendantððs€appeal€as€of€right.€€If€the€appellateÏcourt€determines€that€a€new€trial€is€required€as€a€result€of€one€or€more€of€thoseÏissues,€then€the€appellate€court€need€not€address€the€issues€raised€in€the€coramÏnobis€appeal.Ô#†9X€ZXXX€ZÓÉ#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔ€€This€rule€recognizes€that€coram€nobis€is€an€òòextraordinaryóóÐ ¸-„%( Ðprocedural€remedy€in€this€modern€regime.€€It€fills€only€a€slight€gap€into€which€fewÏcases€fall.€€òòPennóó,€670€S.W.2d€at€573„74.€€It€is€appropriate,€therefore,€that€anÐ x1D), Ðappellate€court€consider€whether€relief€is€available€pursuant€to€the€writ€only€after€itÏhas€determined€that€none€of€the€issues€raised€in€a€defendantððs€appeal€as€of€rightÏwarrant€a€new€trial.Ô#†9X€ZXXX€ZMË#ÔÐ ô À ÐÌà Ø àIn€this€case,€Mixon€properly€filed€the€motion€for€stay€in€the€appellate€court,Ïthe€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€properly€stayed€the€appeal€as€of€right€and€laterÏproperly€consolidated€Mixonððs€appeal€as€of€right€and€coram€nobis€appeal.€€TheÏdecision€by€the€majority€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€however,€addressedÏonly€the€issues€raised€in€Mixonððs€coram€nobis€appeal€and€did€not€address€theÏissues€raised€in€Mixonððs€appeal€as€of€right.€ÌÌà Ø àWe€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€that€the€trial€court€erred€whenÏit€held,€as€a€matter€of€law,€that€recanted€testimony€does€not€constitute€newlyÏdiscovered€evidence.׃A×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€also€agree€that€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ” ` Ðenunciated€the€correct€standard€which€should€be€applied€by€trial€courts€inÐ t"@ Ðdetermining€whether€a€new€trial€should€be€granted€upon€the€basis€of€newlyÏdiscovered€recanted€testimony.׃@×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€However,€because€of€the€extraordinary€nature€ofÐ  à Ðthe€writ€of€error€coram€nobis,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€should€haveÏaddressed€those€issues€only€if€it€had€first€determined€that€Mixon€was€not€entitledÏto€relief€upon€the€issues€raised€in€his€appeal€as€of€right.€€This€is€particularly€true€inÏlight€of€the€fact€that€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€could€not€reach€the€merits€of€theÏcoram€nobis€claim€because€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€was€legally€erroneous.ÌÌà Ø àWhile€the€State€urges€us€to€remand€this€case€to€the€Court€of€CriminalÏAppeals€for€resolution€of€the€issues€raised€by€the€defendant€in€his€appeal€as€ofÏright,€we€decline.€€We€exercise€our€discretion€in€order€to€prevent€needless€litigationÏand€to€promote€judicial€economy€and€hereafter€address€the€issues€raised€by€theÏdefendant€in€his€appeal€as€of€right€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.Ð ´€ ÐApp.€P.€13(b)€(ð ð[t]he€appellate€court€.€.€.€may€in€its€discretion€consider€other€issuesÏin€order,€among€other€reasons:€(1)€to€prevent€needless€litigation,€(2)€to€preventÏinjury€to€the€interests€of€the€public,€and€(3)€to€prevent€prejudice€to€the€judicialÏprocess.ðð)€€We€conclude€that€Mixon€is€entitled€to€a€new€trial€because€the€trial€courtÏerroneously€allowed€the€State€to€use€the€defendantððs€prior€conviction€of€sexualÏbattery€to€impeach€his€testimony.€€As€a€result,€we€need€not€address€the€merits€ofÐ ô)À!$ ÐÑ&OaÑѰ` ÑÑ  ÑñmœñÑ&OaÑѰ` ÑÑ  ÑÑ&OaÑѰ` ÑÑ  ÑñmœñMixonððs€claim€that€he€is€entitled€to€relief€pursuant€to€the€extraordinary€remedy€ofÏwrit€of€error€coram€nobis.ÌÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔÌà@&&,Ìàò òÔ#†9X€ZXXX€ZXØ#ÔÔ‡TX$Ê XX9X€ZÔÔ‡T¼̉ ¼ XTX$ÊÔIIIÔ#†TX$Ê X ¼T¼Ì‰ÏØ#ÔÔ#†9X€ZX XTX$ʰØ#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔó ó.ˆÐ Ô   Ðà@TTÌàòòò òIMPEACHMENT€BY€PRIOR€CONVICTIONóóó óˆÐ Ì Ðà Ø àMixon€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€State€to€impeach€hisÏtestimony€by€inquiring€on€cross„examination€about€his€1986€conviction€of€sexualÏbattery€because€the€probative€value€of€the€previous€conviction€on€credibility€didÏnot€outweigh€its€unfair€prejudicial€effect€on€the€substantive€issues€involved€in€theÏtrial.€€In€response,€the€State€contends€that€because€the€prior€conviction€for€sexualÏbattery€was€a€serious€offense,€resulting€in€a€ten€year€sentence,€the€trial€court€didÏnot€abuse€its€discretion€by€permitting€the€question.€€Alternatively,€the€StateÏcontends€that€any€error€was€harmless€because€the€error€does€not€ð ðaffirmativelyÏappear€to€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€the€merits.ðð€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Ï52(a).ÌÌà Ø àWe€begin€our€analysis€of€this€issue€with€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609€which€providesÏin€pertinent€part€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 Ø à(a)€For€the€purpose€of€attacking€the€credibility€of€a€witness,€evidenceÏthat€the€witness€has€been€convicted€of€a€crime€may€be€admitted€ifÏthe€following€procedures€and€conditions€are€satisfied:Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌà@ÜÜ+Ìà*€*€*€*ˆÌÌà8 Ø à(2)€The€crime€must€be€punishable€by€death€or€imprisonment€inÏexcess€of€one€year€under€the€law€under€which€the€witness€wasÏconvicted,€or€if€not€so€punishable,€the€crime€must€have€involvedÏdishonesty€or€false€statement.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌà8 Ø à(3)€If€the€witness€to€be€impeached€is€the€accused€in€a€criminalÏprosecution€the€State€must€give€the€accused€reasonable€writtenÏnotice€of€the€impeaching€conviction€before€trial,€and€the€court€uponÏrequest€must€determine€that€the€convictionððs€probative€value€onÐ `7,/2 Ðcredibility€outweighs€its€unfair€prejudicial€effect€on€the€substantiveÏissues.€€The€court€may€rule€on€the€admissibility€of€such€proof€prior€toÏthe€trial€but€in€any€event€shall€rule€prior€to€the€testimony€of€theÏaccused.€€If€the€court€makes€a€final€determination€that€such€proof€isÏadmissible€for€impeachment€purposes,€the€accused€need€notÏactually€testify€at€the€trial€to€later€challenge€the€propriety€of€theÏdetermination.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌà8 Ø à(b)€Evidence€of€a€conviction€under€this€rule€is€not€admissible€if€aÏperiod€of€more€than€ten€years€has€elapsed€between€the€date€ofÏrelease€from€confinement€and€commencement€of€the€action€orÏprosecution;€if€the€witness€was€not€confined,€the€ten„year€period€isÏmeasured€from€the€date€of€conviction€rather€than€release.€.€.€.Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÓ0ÝÓ€àH¸¸¸àˆà8 Ø àà8ˆØ À!Ø À!àÐd0 ˆˆ Ðà Ø àAccordingly,€under€Rule€609€the€State€may€use€a€conviction€to€impeach€theÏtestimony€of€an€accused€in€a€criminal€prosecution€if€the€following€four€conditionsÏare€satisfied:€(a)€the€conviction€is€for€a€crime€punishable€by€death€or€imprisonmentÏin€excess€of€one€year,€or€the€conviction€is€for€a€misdemeanor€which€involvedÏdishonesty€or€false€statement;€(b)€less€than€ten€years€has€elapsed€between€theÏdate€the€accused€was€released€from€confinement€and€the€commencement€of€theÏsubject€prosecution;€(c)€the€State€gives€reasonable€pretrial€written€notice€of€theÏparticular€conviction€or€convictions€it€intends€to€use€as€impeachment;€and€(d)€theÏtrial€court€concludes€that€the€probative€value€of€the€prior€conviction€on€the€issue€ofÏcredibility€outweighs€its€unfair€prejudicial€effect€on€the€substantive€issues.€€It€is€theÏlast€condition€which€is€at€issue€in€this€appeal€„„€whether€the€probative€value€of€theÏsexual€battery€conviction€on€the€defendantððs€credibility€outweighed€its€prejudicialÏeffect€upon€the€substantive€issues€presented€at€trial.€ÌÌà Ø àIn€determining€whether€the€probative€value€of€a€conviction€on€the€issue€ofÏcredibility€outweighs€its€unfair€prejudicial€effect€upon€the€substantive€issues,€two€Ïcriteria€are€especially€relevant.€€A€trial€court€should€first€analyze€the€relevance€theÏimpeaching€conviction€has€to€the€issue€of€credibility.€€Cohen,€Sheppeard,€Paine,Ð $6ð-1 ÐòòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ðð€609.9€at€376€(3d€ed.€1995).€€Trial€courts€shouldÐ 4 Ðexplain€on€the€record€how€the€impeaching€conviction€is€relevant€to€the€defendantððsÏcredibility.€€If€the€conviction€is€probative€of€the€defendantððs€credibility,€the€trial€courtÏshould€secondly€ð ðassess€the€similarity€between€the€crime€on€trial€and€the€crimeÏunderlying€the€impeaching€conviction.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€When€an€impeaching€conviction€isÐ ´€ Ðsubstantially€similar€to€the€crime€for€which€the€defendant€is€being€tried,€there€is€aÏdanger€that€€jurors€will€erroneously€utilize€the€impeaching€conviction€as€propensityÏevidence€of€guilt€and€conclude€that€since€the€defendant€committed€a€similarÏoffense,€he€or€she€is€probably€guilty€of€the€offense€charged.€€òòState€v.€Barnardòòóó,€óó899Ð 4 ÐS.W.2d€617,€622€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€Farmeróó,€841€S.W.2d€837,€839„Ð à Ð40€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992);€òòLong€v.€Stateóó,€607€S.W.2d€482€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ôÀ Ð1980).€€Accordingly,€the€unfairly€prejudicial€effect€of€an€impeaching€conviction€onÏthe€substantive€issues€greatly€increases€if€the€impeaching€conviction€isÏsubstantially€similar€to€the€crime€for€which€the€defendant€is€being€tried.€€Therefore,Ïtrial€courts€should€carefully€balance€the€probative€value€of€the€impeachingÏconviction€on€credibility€against€its€unfairly€prejudicial€effect€on€substantive€issues.ÌÌà Ø à€The€trial€court€in€this€case€did€not€purport€to€determine€whether€the€sexualÏbattery€convictionððs€probative€value€on€credibility€outweighed€its€unfair€prejudicialÏeffect€on€the€substantive€issues.€€The€trial€court€interpreted€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€609€asÏpermitting€impeachment€by€any€and€all€felony€convictions€and€did€not€explain€theÏrelevance€of€the€sexual€battery€to€Mixonððs€credibility.€€In€this€Court,€the€State€doesÏnot€explain€how€the€sexual€battery€conviction€is€probative€of€the€defendantððsÏcredibility,€but€says€only€that€it€was€a€serious€offense.€€The€relevance€of€theÏconviction€to€credibility€certainly€is€not€apparent€from€the€record.€€However,€theÏimpeaching€conviction€is€identical€to€one€of€the€crimes€for€which€Mixon€was€triedÐ 7à.2 Ðand€substantially€similar€to€the€other€charged€offenses.€€As€previously€explained,Ïunder€such€circumstances,€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€is€great.€€Accordingly,Ïwe€conclude€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€allowing€the€State€toÏimpeach€the€defendantððs€testimony€with€the€prior€sexual€battery€conviction.ÌÌà Ø àMoreover,€we€do€not€agree€with€the€Stateððs€assertion€that€the€error€isÏharmless.€This€trial€was€strictly€a€credibility€contest.€€The€only€proof€that€a€crimeÏoccurred€was€the€testimony€of€A.M.€€While€admitting€before€the€jury€that€he€wasÏguilty€of€public€intoxication€and€evading€arrest,€Mixon€testified€unequivocally€thatÏhe€had€not€touched€A.M.€nor€made€inappropriate€comments€to€her.€€TheÏdefendant€instead€said€that€he€had€argued€with€A.M.€about€her€involvement€withÏan€eighteen„year„old€male.€€While€there€is€testimony€in€the€record€that€A.M.€hadÏbeen€crying€and€hysterical,€this€testimony€certainly€is€not€contradictory€of€MixonððsÏaccount€of€the€incident.€€Obviously,€because€of€the€nature€of€the€alleged€touching,Ïthere€is€no€medical€proof€in€the€record€to€corroborate€A.M.ððs€testimony.€€DuringÏclosing€argument,€the€State€repeatedly€emphasized€the€prior€sexual€batteryÏconviction.€€After€acknowledging€that,€ð ðthis€case€comes€down€to€a€question€ofÏcredibility,ðð€the€State€reminded€the€jury:ÌÓÓœñnœñÌñnœñ›à8 Ø à[y]ou€know€about€his€credibility.€€You€know€about€his€past.€€TheÏCourt€will€tell€you€about€impeachment.€€And€I€submit€that€theÏconviction€of€this€defendant€for€the€crimes€in€Mississippi€of€sexualÏbattery,€should€be€used€to€impeach€his€testimony€„„€impeach€hisÏtestimony.€€He€is€not€to€be€believed.€€He€is€not€to€be€believed.€€SoÏyou€have€to€decide€who€you€want€to€believe€„„€him€or€her?€Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÓ‚÷ÓÌà Ø àUnlike€other€situations€in€which€the€improper€use€of€an€impeachingÏconviction€has€been€held€to€constitute€harmless€error,€the€evidence€of€guilt€in€thisÏcase€is€not€overwhelming€and€the€State€emphasized€the€conviction€to€the€jurorsÐ $6ð-1 Ðwhen€urging€them€to€find€the€defendant€guilty.€€Under€these€circumstances€weÏconclude€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€State€to€use€the€sexual€batteryÏconviction€to€impeach€the€defendantððs€testimony,€and€the€error€is€prejudicialÏbecause€it€affirmatively€appears€to€have€affected€the€verdict.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Ï52(a);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b)€(reversal€is€appropriate€if€error€involving€aÐ Ô   Ðsubstantial€right€more€probably€than€not€affected€the€judgment).€€Accordingly,€weÏreverse€the€defendantððs€convictions€for€attempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€andÏsexual€battery€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.ñdœñ׃3×ñdœññdœñ׃Y×ñdœñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Because€the€issue€may€again€ariseÐ t@  Ðupon€retrial,€we€will€next€address€the€defendantððs€claim€that€his€double€jeopardyÏright€not€to€be€punished€twice€for€the€same€offense€was€violated€when€the€juryÏconvicted€him€of€both€attempted€rape€and€sexual€battery.€€€ÌÌà@..-ÌàÔ#†9X€ZXXX€Z7Ù#ÔÔ‡JX$Ê XX9X€ZÔÔ‡J¼̉ ¼ XJX$ÊÔò òIVÔ#†JX$Ê X ¼J¼̉Åþ#ÔÔ#†9X€ZX XJX$ʦþ#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔó ó.ˆÐ Ô  Ðà@ãã'Ìàòòò òDOUBLE€JEOPARDYóóó óˆÐ Ì Ðà Ø àThe€double€jeopardy€clause€of€the€Fifth€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesÏConstitution€provides€that€no€person€shall€ð ðbe€subject€to€the€same€offense€to€beÏtwice€put€in€jeopardy€of€life€or€limb.€.€.€.ðð€€Similarly,€Article€I,€Section€10€of€theÏTennessee€Constitution€provides€that€ð ðno€person€shall,€for€the€same€offence,€beÏtwice€put€in€jeopardy€of€life€or€limb.ðð€€As€we€have€stated€often€and€most€recently€inÏòòStuart€v.€State€Dep't€of€Safetyóó,€963€S.W.2d€28,€32€(Tenn.€1998),€threeÐ @* "$ Ðfundamental€principles€are€encompassed€within€the€federal€and€stateÏconstitutional€protection€against€double€jeopardy:€(1)€protection€against€a€secondÏprosecution€after€an€acquittal;€(2)€protection€against€a€second€prosecution€afterÐ à/¬'* Ðconviction;€and€(3)€protection€against€multiple€punishments€for€the€same€offense.€ÏIt€is€the€third€principle€which€the€defendant€claims€was€violated€by€his€dualÏconvictions€for€attempted€rape€and€sexual€battery.ÌÌà Ø àIn€òòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373€(Tenn.€1996),€we€held€that€in€order€toÐ ´€ Ðdetermine€whether€multiple€convictions€for€a€single€criminal€action€areÏconstitutionally€permissible,€courts€must€apply€the€following€four„prong€inquiry:ÌÓÓÌà8 Ø à(1)€a€òòBlockburger€v.€United€States,óó€284€U.S.€299,€52€S.Ct.€180,€76Ð D ÐL.Ed.€306€(1932)€analysis€of€the€statutory€offenses;€(2)€an€analysis,Ïguided€by€the€principles€of€òòDuchac€v.€Stateóó,€505€S.W.2d€237€(Tenn.Ð $ð Ð1973)€of€the€evidence€used€to€prove€the€offenses;€(3)€aÏconsideration€of€whether€there€were€multiple€victims€or€discrete€acts;Ïand€(4)€a€comparison€of€the€purposes€of€the€respective€statutes.€€Ð Ø À!Ø À! ÐÌÌÓ•ÓòòDentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€381.€€As€we€explained€in€òòDentonóó,€no€single€factor€isÐ Ä Ðdeterminative;€rather,€the€results€of€each€must€be€weighed€and€considered.€€òòIdóó.€€à  # àÐ ¤p ÐÌà Ø àWe€begin€with€the€òòBlockburgeróó€test€which€involves€a€comparison€of€theÐ d#0 Ðstatutory€elements€of€the€offenses.€€Attempted€rape€requires€proof€both€that€theÏdefendant€attempted€to€sexually€penetrate€the€victim€and€that€the€defendantððsÏâ âactions€constituted€a€substantial€step€toward€penetration.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„Ð )Ð # Ð12„101׃4×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€ðð€39„13„503׃5x ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€(1997€Repl.).€€Sexual€battery€requires€proof€that€theÐ 4 Ðâ âdefendant€touched€one€of€the€victimððs€intimate€parts€or€the€clothing€surrounding€anÏintimate€part€and€that€the€touching€can€be€reasonably€construed€as€being€for€theÏpurpose€of€sexual€arousal€or€gratification.€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„505׃6r×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€ððÐ Ô   Ð39„13„501׃7*×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€(1997€Repl.).€€Clearly,€the€offenses€involve€different€elements.€€SexualÐ ´€ Ðbattery€requires€proof€that€the€sexual€contact€was€for€the€purpose€of€sexualÏarousal€or€gratification;€whereas€attempted€rape€does€not.€€Attempted€rapeÏrequires€proof€of€an€attempted€sexual€penetration;€whereas€sexual€battery€onlyÏrequires€proof€of€sexual€contact€as€defined€in€the€statute.€€Application€of€theÏòòBlockburgeróó€test€indicates€that€the€offenses€are€not€the€ð ðsameðð€for€double€jeopardyÐ à Ðpurposes;€however,€our€analysis€does€not€end€here.Ð ôÀ Їà Ø àWe€must€next€consider€the€evidence€upon€which€the€convictions€wereÏbased.€€In€this€case,€as€in€òòDentonóó,€A.M.ððs€testimony€that€the€defendant€placed€hisÐ  à Ðhand€on€her€inner€thigh€and€made€a€statement€of€desire€was€the€essentialÏevidence€used€to€establish€both€offenses.€€Moreover,€this€case€involved€only€oneÏvictim€and€one€discrete€act€of€touching.€€Finally,€both€the€attempted€rape€andÏsexual€battery€statutes€are€intended€and€designed€to€deter€and€punish€sexuallyÏassaultive€conduct.ÌÌà Ø àNotwithstanding€the€application€of€òòBlockburgeróó,€therefore,€based€upon€theÐ 4 Ðparticular€facts€giving€rise€to€Mixonððs€convictions€and€the€common€purpose€servedÏby€the€two€criminal€statutes,€we€conclude€that€attempted€rape€and€sexual€batteryÏin€this€case€are€the€ð ðsameðð€offense€under€the€double€jeopardy€clause€of€our€stateÏconstitution.€€Accordingly,€upon€retrial,€the€defendant€may€not€be€convicted€of€bothÏattempted€rape€and€sexual€battery.€ÌÌÌà@[[-ÌàÔ#†9X€ZXXX€Z/ÿ#ÔÔ‡KX$Ê XX9X€ZÔò òÔ‡K¼̉ ¼ XKX$ÊÔV.Ô#†KX$Ê X ¼K¼̉#Ôó óÔ#†9X€ZX XKX$Ê]#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZԈР4&  Ðà@,,)Ìàò òòòCONCLUSIONóóó óˆÐ `(, " Ðà Ø àWe€have€concluded€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€the€State€toÏimpeach€the€defendantððs€testimony€with€a€prior€sexual€battery€conviction€and€thatÏthe€error€is€not€harmless.€€We€therefore€need€not€address€the€merits€of€theÏdefendantððs€claim€for€relief€pursuant€to€the€extraordinary€remedy€of€writ€of€errorÏcoram€nobis.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€whichÏremanded€this€case€to€the€trial€court€for€further€findings€on€the€coram€nobis€claimÏis€reversed.€€The€defendantððs€convictions€of€attempted€rape,€attempted€incest,€andÏsexual€battery€are€vacated,€and€the€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€newÐ `7,/2 Ðtrial.€€Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Zé#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔBecause€of€the€double€jeopardy€prohibition€against€multiple€punishments€forÐ 4 Ðthe€same€offense,€the€defendant,€upon€retrial,€may€not€be€convicted€of€bothÏattempted€rape€and€sexual€battery.Ô#†9X€ZXXX€Z/#ÔÔ‡X€ZXX9X€ZÔÐ ô À ÐÌÌÓÓà Ø àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à______________________________Ìà Ø àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àFRANK€F.€DROWOTA,€III,Ìà Ø àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àJUSTICEÌÌò òConcur:ó óÐ T  ÐAnderson,€C.J.,ÌBirch,€Holder,€Barker,€JJ.ÌÌÔ#†9X€ZXXX€Z?#ÔÌ