ÿWPC0 …# V %a 0 ¯g4 * 0J9 0 óƒ 0Dv 0Tº 0^ U>l ª w@² 0hò 0rZ 0|Ì 0†H 0Î 1u^U ,Ó 0dÿU,cU 6U.Å Bó D3B)CDCl 0@¯ AMïU*<Šf’ð%‚¤§žK?é;(Gc sª$v~'vÓ›( AOn.ƽ. 0Dƒ/ D/Ç/ Bö/˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0  X(‡,˜$¡¡ÑŒ °ÑѰÑÒ°ÒÒà°ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ7€¥XXdìXXdì7ÑDÒ P 3|xÂ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô(£(3Ûå$¤¤Ý ƒ,˜!ÝÑŒ °ÑѰÑÒ°ÒÒà°ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ7€¡XXdÈdÈ7ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô<èÀ( 9Z &Courier Regular ®¯°D±²³´µÓ€¿À26 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  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Courier d))))'ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-,Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial €Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÔ€/ÔÔ€/ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€/XÔÌÌMayÏ13,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏW.ÏCrowsonÌAppellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó ó ˆÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€also€claimed€that€his€trial€counsel€wasÏineffective€for€the€following€reasons:€(1)€failure€to€file€a€motionÏto€suppress€evidence€seized€during€a€search€of€his€house;€(2)Ïfailure€to€object€to€the€prosecutorððs€alleged€references€toÏappellantððs€failure€to€testify;€(3)€failure€to€make€a€closingÏargument;€(4)€failure€to€call€ð ðcharacterðð€witnesses;€(5)€failure€toÏobject€to€trial€judge€questioning€the€victim;€and€(6)€commenting€toÏthe€trial€judge€during€a€jury„out€hearing€that€some€convictionsÏwere€expected.€€We€find€that€trial€counsel€was€not€ineffective€onÏthese€grounds,€and€the€issues€are€without€merit.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€one€presentment€and€one€indictment,€the€grand€jury€chargedÏTidwell€with€monthly€sexual€encounters€with€the€victim€over€aÏfourteen„month€period€between€December€1985€and€January€1987.€€EachÏencounter€produced€four€counts:€rape,€statutory€rape,€incest,€andÏcontributing€to€the€delinquency€of€a€minor.€€Presentment€numberÏ16273€covers€January€1986€to€January€1987€and€contains€fifty„twoÏcounts.€€Indictment€number€16274€covers€the€December€1985€incidentÏand€contains€four€counts.€€Hereafter,€we€refer€to€both€chargingÏinstruments€as€ð ðindictments.ððÌà àAs€enumerated,€the€indictments€consisted€of€a€total€of€fifty„six€counts.€€However,€the€trial€judge€properly€instructed€the€juryÏthat€a€single€act€of€intercourse€could€constitute€rape€or€statutoryÏrape,€but€not€both.Ì šÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„2„604€(1982)(repealed€1989).€€The€currentÏrape€statute€is€codified€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„503€(Supp.Ï1995).Ì ”Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„4„306€(1982)(repealed€1989).€€ThisÏprovision€is€currently€codified€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„15„302Ï(1991).Ì 5Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„156€(1984).Ì 1Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€òòsupraóó€footnote€2.Ì =Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€trial€judgeððs€review€of€the€evidence€on€a€motion€for€a€newÏtrial€is€much€more€stringent€than€an€appellate€courtððs€review.€€OnÏa€motion€for€a€new€trial,€the€trial€court€must€act€as€a€ð ðthirteenthÏjurorðð€to€determine€whether€the€verdict€is€supported€by€theÏevidence;€that€is,€whether€guilt€was€established€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33(f);€òòState€v.€Moatsóó,€906ÏS.W.2d€431€(Tenn.€1995);€òòCurran›€v.€Stateóó,€4€S.W.2d€957,€958€(Tenn.Ï1928);€òòManning€v.€Stateóó,€292€œS.W.›€451,€457€(Tenn.€1927).€€Thus,Ïœð ðððthe›€trial€judge€and€jury€are€the€primary€instrumentality€ofÏjustice€to€determine€the€weight€and€credibility€to€be€given€to€theÏtestimony€of€œwitnesses.ððð𛀀òòMoatsóó,€906€S.W.2d€at€435€(quoting€òòœBolin›Ïv.€Stateóó,€405€S.W.2d€768,€771€(Tenn.€1966).Ì iÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝOn€presentment€number€16273,€the€testimony€was€sufficient€toÏsupport€a€conviction€on€counts€13,€14,€and€16€for€the€April€1986Ïoffense€and€counts€49,€51,€and€52€for€the€January€1987€offense.€ÏThe€testimony€was€also€sufficient€to€convict€appellant€onÏindictment€16274,€which€covers€the€December€1985€offense.€€WeÏaffirm€these€specific€convictions.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€&&X„d&ÓÑ#€&&Xd#ÑÔ€'ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€((Xd#ÑÑ#€((Xd#ÑÝ  ÝÓ` °‚X˜XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€XXdÈXXdÈ7ÑÑ  Ñ›ÌÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌœJESSE›€S.€TIDWELL,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à à)€€€FORÏPUBLICATIONÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€œFILED:€€MAY€13,Ï1996›Ìà àAppellantà àà àà àà à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€DICKSON€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€HON.€Leonard€W.ÏMartin,ÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà àà à)à à€€ÏJUDGEÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà à)Ì€€€€€à àAppelleeà àà à€€€€€€€à à)€€€NO.€01„S„01„9503„CC„00035ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellantóó:òòà àà àà àà àà àForÏAppelleeóó:ÌÌœJesse›€Spence€Tidwell€€€€€€à àà àCharles€W.ÏBursonÌPro€seà àà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€GeneralÏand€ReporterÌÌÙ€€ÙœßL€.0,;+'h|¯é` ‚- `€€Lß›à àà àà àà àà àà àMichael€E.€MooreÌà àà àà àà àà àà àSolicitor€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àGordon€W.€SmithÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssociate€SolicitorÏGeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDaniel€W.€CookÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCharlotte,€TNÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌÌóóÌÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSED€IN€PART;€€à àà àà àà àBIRCH,€J.ÌREMANDED€TO€THE€TRIAL€COURT.ÌÓÓà àThe€appellant,€œJesse›€S.€Tidwell,€appeals€the€trialÏcourtððs€denial€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€AtÏissue€is€whether€his€trial€counsel's€failure€to€require€theÏprosecutor€to€elect€the€particular€offenses€upon€which€convictionsÏwould€be€sought€deprived€him€of€his€constitutional€right€to€theÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel.× ƒ1 ××  ×€€We€have€carefully€examined€theÏtrial€and€post„conviction€transcripts€and€have€thoroughlyÍconsidered€the€contentions€of€both€parties.€€For€the€reasonsÏdiscussed€below,€we€find€that€counsel's€performance€failed€toÏsatisfy€the€criteria€established€in€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930Ï(Tenn.€1975)€and€in€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€558€(1984).€ÏThe€appellant€has€made€the€requisite€showing€of€prejudice€for€allÏbut€the€incidents€on€which€the€testimony€at€the€original€trial€wasÏdetailed€and€specific.ÌÌà àOn€October€7,€1987,€a€jury€convicted€Tidwell€of€forty„twoÏoffenses:× ƒ2 ××  ×€€fourteen€counts€each€of€rape,× ƒ3 ××  ×€incest,× ƒ4 ××  ×€and€contributingÏto€the€delinquency€of€a€minor.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€The€appellant€is€currentlyÏincarcerated€under€a€sentence€which€was€reduced€by€the€Court€ofÏCriminal€Appeals€on€direct€appeal€to€an€effective€sentence€ofÏseventy„five€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.Ìà àÑ7€P°XXdðXXdð7Ñà àIn€light€of€our€resolution€of€this€cause,€we€willÏrecount€only€those€facts€necessary€for€understanding€the€issue€andÍits€analysis.€€The€record€shows€that€sexual€activity€between€theÏappellant€and€his€daughter,€born€April€1,€1972,€began€in€DicksonÏCounty€in€December€1985.€€This€activity,€which€includedÏcunnilingus,€fellatio,€and€vaginal€intercourse,€continued€forÏfourteen€months„„ending€January€1987.€ÌÌà àThe€victim€testified€that€this€sexual€activity€with€herÏfather€occurred€approximately€once€a€week.€She€was€unable,€in€theÏmain,€to€ascribe€a€particular€act€to€a€specific€time,€whether€byÏdate€or€other€reference.€€There€were,€however,€two€discreteÏincidents€that€the€victim€identified€with€particularity.€€SheÏspecifically€recalled€having€engaged€in€vaginal€intercourse€withÏthe€appellant€in€late€December€1985€shortly€after€the€family€hadÏmoved€to€Dickson€County.€€She€remembered€that€this€incidentÏoccurred€while€she€was€out€of€school€on€Christmas€break.€€SheÏrecalled€also€having€engaged€in€vaginal€intercourse€with€theÏappellant€in€April€1986.€€She€testified€that€this€œincident›€occurredÏone€evening€after€the€appellant€had€taken€the€victim's€mother€toÏthe€œhouse€of€the€victim's›€œgrandfather.›€€She€recalled€that€theÏappellant€had€drunk€vodka€and€had€shown€pornographic€films€to€herÏon€that€occasion.ÌÌà àIn€a€confession€introduced€into€evidence€at€trial,€theÏappellant€admitted€having€engaged€in€sexual€intercourse€with€theÏvictim,€and€he€told€investigators€that€the€last€such€incidentÏoccurred€in€January€1987,€three€days€before€his€arrest€on€theseÏcharges.€€The€appellant€offered€no€proof.€€ÌÌà àAs€stated,€the€issue€before€us€concerns€the€effectiveÏassistance€of€counsel.€€The€appellant€contends€that€his€trialÏcounsel€failed€to€request€the€trial€court€to€order€the€prosecutorÏto€elect€the€offenses€upon€which€he€would€rely€for€convictions.€ÏThat€failure,€the€appellant€insists,€deprived€him€of€the€effectiveÏassistance€of€counsel€as€guaranteed€by€our€state€and€federalÏconstitutions.€€ÌÌà àAt€the€hearing€on€the€post„conviction€petition,Ïappellant's€trial€counsel€was€questioned€about€his€reason€for€notÏrequesting€the€State€to€elect€offenses.€€He€gave€the€followingÏresponse:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àThe€two€indictments€and€all€theÏmulti„counts€against€him€were€notÏdate„specific€nor€were€they€place„specific.€€They€alleged€blank€day€ofÏa€certain€month€and€in€œDickson›ÏCounty.€€Upon€cross„examination€ofÏhis€daughter,€of€the€young€girl,€IÏasked€for€specifics€in€eachÏparticular€month.€€My€recollection€isÏshe€could€only€give€specifics€on€oneÏparticular€month,€at€which€time€IÏthought€it€would€be€best,€at€thatÏtime,€to€leave€it€as€such€rather€thanÏeven€attempt€to€ask€for€an€election.€ÏIn€hindsight€that€was€probably€wrong.ÌÓÓÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€proof,€the€post„conviction€courtÏdenied€relief€without€filing€written€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law;€€the€court€did,€however,€comment€on€the€record.€ÏOne€such€comment€is€reproduced€below:€€€ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àNow€then,€.€.€.€I€see€a€witness€onÏthe€witness€€stand,€Mr.€Tidwell,€whoÏI€have€observed€and€listened€to€veryÏcarefully.€€As€they€say,€I€haveÏobserved€his€manner€and€demeanor€onÏthe€witness€stand.€€I€specificallyÏfind,€and€I€so€state€for€theÏappellate€record€that€I€do€notÏbelieve€Mr.€Tidwell€is€a€credibleÏwitness.€€I€don't€believe€him.ÌÓÓà àÌà àInitially,€our€standard€of€review€is€dictated€by€severalÏwell„established€legal€principles.€€In€Tennessee,€effectiveÏassistance€of€counsel€is€determined€by€the€criteria€established€inÏòòBaxter€v.€Roseóó.€€This€Courtððs€holding€in€òòBaxteróó€requires€that€theÍadvice€given,€or€the€services€rendered€by€the€attorney,€be€withinÏthe€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€Ï523€S.W.2d€at€936.€€The€federal€rule,€enunciated€by€the€UnitedÏStates€Supreme€Court€in€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€provides€asÏfollows:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àFirst,€the€defendant€must€show€thatÏcounsel's€performance€was€deficient.€ÏThis€requires€showing€that€counselÏmade€errors€so€serious€that€counselÏwas€not€functioning€as€the€"counsel"Ïguaranteed€the€defendant€by€the€SixthÏAmendment.€€Second,€the€defendantÏmust€show€that€the€deficientÏperformance€prejudiced€the€defense.€ÏThis€requires€showing€that€counsel'sÏerrors€were€so€serious€as€to€depriveÏthe€defendant€of€a€fair€trial,€aÏtrial€whose€result€is€reliable.€ÏUnless€a€defendant€makes€bothÏshowings,€it€cannot€be€said€that€theÏconviction€or€[€]€sentence€resultedÏfrom€a€breakdown€in€the€adversaryÏprocess€that€renders€the€resultÏunreliable.ÌÓÓÌ466€U.S.€at€687.ÌÌà àAdditionally,€in€post„conviction€proceedings,€theÏdefendant€has€the€burden€of€proving€the€claims€raised€in€theÏpetition€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòWade€v.€Stateóó,€914ÍS.W.2d€97,€101€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòBratton€v.€Stateóó,€477ÏS.W.2d€754€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1971).€Findings€of€fact€made€by€theÏtrial€court€are€conclusive€on€appeal€unless€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€against€the€judgment.€€òòCooper€v.€Stateóó,€849€S.W.2dÏ744,€746€(Tenn.€1993);€òòButler€v.€Stateóó,€789€S.W.2d€898,€899€(Tenn.Ï1990).€€Accordingly,€we€are€bound€to€affirm€the€judgment€unless€theÏevidence€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€trial€court'sÏfindings.€€òòSeeóó€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1990).ÌÌà àAs€we€stated€earlier,€the€allegations€of€ineffectiveÏassistance€of€counsel€are€based€upon€counsel's€failure€to€seek€fromÏthe€trial€court€an€order€requiring€the€prosecutor€to€elect€theÏsexual€acts€upon€which€the€State€would€rely€for€convictions.€€TheÏappellant€argues€œthat›€there€was€no€assurance€of€jury€unanimity€inÏthe€sense€that€each€juror€agreed€upon€a€single,€discrete,Ïidentifiable€act€to€correspond€to€each€count€beyond€a€reasonableÏœdoubt€because€the€victim€testified€to€numerous€sexual€encounters,Ïabsent€an€election.›€€ÌÌà àIn€òòBurlison€v.€Stateóó,€501€S.W.2d€801,€804€(Tenn.€1973),Ïwe€held€that€it€is€"the€duty€of€the€trial€judge€to€require€theÏState,€at€the€close€of€its€proof„in„chief,€to€elect€the€particularÏoffense€of€carnal€knowledge€upon€which€it€would€rely€forÏconviction,€and€to€properly€instruct€the€jury€so€that€the€verdictÏof€every€juror€would€be€united€on€the€one€offense."€€òòBurlisonóóÏenumerated€three€fundamental€reasons€for€requiring€election€inÏcases€œin€which›€there€is€evidence€of€numerous€instances€of€unlawfulÏsexual€conduct:€€(1)€to€enable€the€defendant€to€prepare€for€andÏdefend€against€the€specific€œcharge[s›];€(2)€to€protect€the€defendantÏfrom€double„jeopardy€by€individualization€of€the€issue;€and€(3)€œto›Ïensure€unanimity€of€œverdict›€so€that€the€jury's€verdict€may€not€be€aÏmatter€of€choice€between€offenses„„some€jurors€convicting€of€oneÏoffense€and€others€of€another€offense„„all€within€the€same€count.€Ï501€S.W.2d€at€803.ÌÌà àIn€our€view,€the€first€reason,€to€enable€the€defendant€toÏprepare€for€and€defend€against€the€specific€œcharge[s›],€could€haveÏbeen€resolved€with€a€request€for€a€bill€of€particulars.€€Tenn.€R.ÏCrim.€P.€7(c).€€Here,€however,€the€post„conviction€court€wasÍsatisfied€that€trial€counsel€had€obtained€sufficient€discovery,Ïalbeit€by€other€means.ÌÌà àThe€second€reason,€to€protect€the€defendant€from€double„jeopardy€by€individualization€of€the€issue,€has€no€application€hereÏbecause€the€appellant€is€already€protected.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hardinóó,Ï691€S.W.2d€578,€580„81€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985)("[œT]he›€indictmentsÏand€proof€are€sufficient€to€protect€[the€defendant]€from€furtherÏprosecution€for€acts€of€this€nature€committed€against€this€victimÏwithin€the€times€alleged€in€the€indictments.").ÌÌà àThe€third€reason€is€the€one€that€troubles€us€in€thisÏcase.€€The€indictments€as€returned€contain€fifty„six€counts„„fourteen€each€of€aggravated€rape,€statutory€rape,€incest,€andÏcontributing€to€the€delinquency€of€a€minor.œ× ƒ6 ××  ×›€€Each€count€charges€theÏcommission€of€a€specific€offense€on€the€"_____"€day€of€a€namedÏmonth.€€Thus,€it€is€quite€evident€that€there€is€no€apparent€meansÏto€differentiate€among€various€counts€of€the€same€offense.€ÏAdditionally,€the€indictments€provide€no€means€to€enable€a€fact„finder€to€match€a€specific€conduct€to€œa€specific›€count.ÌÌà àWe€have€recognized€the€third€òòBurlisonóó€reason€as€the€mostÏsignificant€of€the€three€because€its€purpose€is€to€ensure€aÏunanimous€œverdict.€€òòState›€v.€Sheltonóó,€851€S.W.2d€134,€137€(Tenn.Ï1993).€€The€indictment€in€this€case,€drafted€as€we€have€described,Ïputs€unanimity€at€serious€risk.€€In€òòSheltonóó,€we€stated:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 à[œI]n›€òòJamisonóó€the€Court€carefullyÏacknowledged€that€"each€unlawful€actÏof€carnal€knowledge€is€a€separate,Ïsubstantive€offense,"€rather€than€aÏcontinuous€offense.€€Thus,€to€avoidÏthe€prosecution€of€uncharged€crimesÏin€cases€involving€age€of€consentÏlaws€and€other€sexual€crimes,€theÏstate€is€required€to€"elect€theÏspecific€offense€upon€which€a€verdictÏof€guilty€would€be€demanded."ÌÓÓÌ851€S.W.2d€at€137€(citations€omitted).€€Thus,€a€defendant's€rightÏto€a€unanimous€verdict€before€imposition€of€conviction€requires€theÏtrial€court€to€take€precautions€to€ensure€that€the€jury€deliberatesÏover€the€particular€charged€offense,€instead€of€assembling€aÏ"patchwork€verdict"€based€on€the€different€offenses€in€evidence.€ÏòòId.óó€(citing€òòUnited€States€v.€Duncanóó,€850€F.2d€1104,€1110€(6th€Cir.Ï1988)).€€We€adhere€to€the€òòSheltonóó€rationale.ÌÌà àWhen,€as€here,€a€jury€is€permitted€to€select€for€itselfÏthe€offenses€on€which€it€will€convict,€the€court€cannot€be€assuredÏof€jury€unanimity.€€Hence,€when€asked€to€function€as€"thirteenthÏjuror"€and€assess€the€weight€of€the€evidence€to€support€the€jury'sÏverdict,€the€trial€court€cannot€be€certain€which€evidence€wasÏmatched€by€the€jury€to€which€count.€€Moreover,€absent€an€election,Ïan€appellate€court€reviewing€the€legal€sufficiency€of€the€evidenceÏcan€hardly€be€confident€that€it€has€discharged€its€functionÏproperly.€€òòSheltonóó,€851€S.W.2d€at€137.ÌÌà àThe€State€makes€an€intriguing€argument.€€As€a€predicate,Ïit€states:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àFor€twelve€of€the€fourteen€months,Ïthe€victim€was€unable€to€recount€òòanyóóÏspecifics€about€the€offenses,€exceptÏthat€the€petitioner€had€engaged€herÏin€sexual€intercourse.€€For€the€otherÏtwo€months€she€was€able€to€provideÏsome€details€about€single€offenses,Ïrespectively.€€While€the€victimÏacknowledged€that€the€petitioner€hadÏpenetrated€her€at€least€once€a€weekÏduring€the€time€period€[involved],Ïher€testimony€did€not€distinguish€oneÏevent€in€a€given€month€from€anyÏother.ÌÓÓÌBased€on€these€circumstances,€the€State€suggests€that€(1)€the€juryÏhad€no€separate€offenses€from€which€to€œchoose;›€(2)€non„unanimityÏwas€œimpossible;›€and€(3)€the€State€was€not€required,€under€òòBurlisonóó,Ïto€elect€offenses.€€The€State€apparently€concludes€that€"juryÏunanimity€is€attained€in€such€cases€because,€although€the€jury€mayÏnot€be€able€to€distinguish€between€the€various€acts,€it€isÏcertainly€capable€of€unanimously€agreeing€that€they€took€place€inÏthe€number€and€manner€described."ÌÌà àThis€approach,€in€our€view,€is€akin€to€a€"grab„bag"Ïtheory€of€justice.€€To€illustrate€the€operation€of€this€theory,€inÏany€given€case€the€State€could€present€proof€on€as€many€offensesÏwithin€the€alleged€period€as€it€œchose.›€€Because€all€such€offensesÏwill€have€been€ð ðproven,ðð€the€jury€may,€in€effect,€reach€into€theÏbrimming€bag€of€offenses€and€pull€out€one€for€each€count.€€EvenÏwhen€done€by€this€method,€the€argument€goes,€each€offense€will€haveÏbeen€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€We€acknowledge€that€theÏillustration€is€an€extreme€one,€but€we€think€it€makes€the€point:€Ïsuch€an€approach€is€contrary€to€our€law.ÌÌà àIn€òòSheltonóó,€we€said:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àWe€appreciate€the€difficultiesÏinvolved€in€prosecuting€cases€ofÏsexual€abuse€committed€against€smallÏchildren.€In€such€cases,€the€rules€ofÏevidence€and€the€rules€of€procedureÏhave€been€relaxed€to€some€extent€toÏaccommodate€very€young€witnesses.€ÏNevertheless,€the€constitutionalÏprotections€guaranteed€a€criminalÏdefendant,€who€is€presumed€by€law€toÏbe€innocent€until€proven€guilty,Ïcannot€be€suspended€altogetherÏbecause€of€the€victim's€age€orÏrelative€inability€to€testify.€€InÏcases€such€as€this€one,€the€stateÏmust€either€limit€the€testimony€ofÏprosecuting€witnesses€to€a€singleÏevent,€or€prepare€the€case€so€that€anÏelection€can€be€made€before€theÏmatter€is€submitted€to€the€jury€toÏdecide.€€ÌÓÓÌ851€S.W.2d€at€139.€€As€stated,€we€continue€to€adhere€to€thisÏimperative.€€Accordingly,€we€find€that€the€trial€court's€failure€toÏorder€the€State€to€elect€the€incidents€upon€which€it€soughtÏconviction€violated€the€essence€of€the€òòBurlisonóó€and€òòSheltonóóÏholdings.€€ÌÌà àBecause€the€issue€before€us€was€raised€in€the€post„conviction€context€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€ourÏremaining€task€is€to€determine€whether€the€appellant€has€carriedÍthe€burden€of€demonstrating€the€quantum€of€prejudice€necessary€forÏrelief.€€Under€the€òòStricklandóó€criteria,€the€appellant€mustÏdemonstrate€that€counsel's€performance€was€deficient€and€that€theÏdeficiency€resulted€in€his€prejudice,€thereby€depriving€him€of€aÏfair€trial€whose€result€is€reliable.€€468€U.S.€at€687.ÌÌà àWe€are€not€comfortable€with€the€reliability€of€the€resultÏreached€in€this€trial.€€One€reason€is€that€the€State€would€probablyÏhave€been€unable€to€match€occurrences€to€those€counts€for€which€theÏtestimony€was€non„specific.€€This€inability€is€exacerbated€by€theÏabsence€of€varying€surroundings,€events,€or€circumstances€thatÏcould€have€lent€a€singular€identity€to€each€incident.€€As€weÏobserved€in€òòSheltonóó,€€"If€the€prosecution€cannot€identify€an€eventÏfor€which€to€ask€a€conviction,€then€the€court€cannot€be€assured€ofÏa€unanimous€decision."€€851€S.W.2d€at€138.ÌÌà àAnother€source€of€discomfort€may€be€found€within€theÏprocess€of€appellate€review.€€Where€an€appellate€court€may€find€theÏproof€sufficient€to€support€the€jury's€verdict€on€any€offenseÏproven,€its€standard€of€review€is€much€less€stringent€than€that€ofÍa€jury€or€a€trial€court€on€œa€motion›€for€new€trial.œ× ƒ7 ××  ×›€€Twelve€jurorsÏmust€unanimously€find€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt;€an€appellateÏcourt€need€only€find€that€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€a€lightÏmost€favorable€to€the€State,€any€rational€trier„of„fact€could€findÏthe€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€ÏTherefore,€an€appellate€court's€finding€of€evidentiary€sufficiencyÏð ðis€an€inadequate€substitute€for€a€jury's€deliberation€overÏidentified€offenses.ðð€€òòSheltonóó,€851€S.W.2d€at€138.ÌÌà àFor€the€reasons€above„stated,€we€find€that€trialÏcounsel's€performance€fell€below€the€òòBaxteróó€and€òòStricklandóóÏstandards€for€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€However,€for€three€ofÏthe€fourteen€incidents€upon€which€he€was€convicted„„December€1985,ÏApril€1986,€and€January€1987„„the€appellant€has€failed€toÍdemonstrate€the€prejudice€necessary€for€reversal;€accordingly,€weÏaffirm€those€convictions€and€their€respective€sentences.€€As€to€theÏremaining€incidents,€the€appellant€has€clearly€demonstratedÏprejudice€to€a€degree€that€requires€reversal.€€The€judgments€ofÏconviction€based€on€those€incidents€are€reversed;€the€respectiveÏsentences€are€vacated.ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€CriminalÏAppeals€is€reversed€in€part€and€affirmed€in€part.× ƒ8 ××  ×€€The€cause€isÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€for€trial€or€other€disposition€as€toÏthe€remaining€counts.ÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àADOLPHO€A.€BIRCH,€JR.,€JusticeÌÌÌÌœÌCONCUR:›€œÌAnderson,›€C.J.ÌDrowota,€œReid,›€JJ.ÌœÌWhite,›€J,€œnot›€œparticipating›Ì