ÿWPCŽ´ ,D"K¼™#ßñ89 ¹Àâ?•#ì2KòåßÔ¸_æ5Ci=aã´õõÑžY§mü˜ynׂ//îCoWþþÌ€ÚÒûä}}VÔ˜aî©y+6bvÃÊ„¼cû€6«ö¥‡LÉ›2Fðû[nâ„¥wØ íœ=ÈË ±·A3»ÓžyÔVÓö ŒäµÉ°·åþ\Ý g†Â€ùê‚°%‰§Æ•zxH¢qˆøß A1Ëóý"|,}Ùµl w¼ÓµÈ®äŠ€@¨ BT²CbEvE]„FÝáHy¾Jü7L3OêÐP²ºV 0¤l];^^K_Æ©bkoc”ÚfniÉ „iIMvî–z–z„|Hš~â€MrƒJ ¿ƒw Å€ŽüEA’A’A’A’`”`”Ôe˜e˜ 06ë9›™$œ4½£½£ Bñ¤²¥ 0¤À© D3dª D-—ª 0KĪĪ AS«Æb« 0¤(¬ 0D̬ A«­­­­Ó»­˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Å„‹) (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularõ}|)bk1°'  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x:ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ êÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔNeither€Delois€Anderson€nor€Frederick€Tucker€were€involved€in€the€drug€trade.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman (Mˆ$òòÚ  Ú38Ú  Úóó ‹Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔThey€were€also€each€convicted€of€three€counts€of€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô€and€one€count€of€especiallyÐ ° Ðaggravated€robbery€of€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€Anderson.€€€ zÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔTwoÔ#†ôç¥òòôç¥~#Ô€of€these€aggravating€circumstances€have€been€slightly€amended€since€this€case€was€tried.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ ° ÐAnn.€ðð€39„13„204(i)(7)€and€(12)€(1999€Supp.).€€€ ŒÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔEach€of€the€defendants€was€sentenced€as€a€multiple,€Range€II€offender€to€forty€(40)€years€on€each€of€the€threeÐ ° Ðconvictions€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€and€on€the€especially€aggravated€robbery€conviction.€€The€trial€judgeÐ tÄ Ðordered€that€two€of€the€sentences€for€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô€€run€concurrent€to€the€death€penalty€with€all€otherÐ 8ˆ Ðsentences€running€consecutive€to€the€death€penalty. SÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô"Ô€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔWhenever€the€death€penalty€is€imposed€for€first€degree€murder€and€when€the€judgment€has€become€final€inÐ ° Ðthe€trial€court,€the€defendant€shall€have€the€right€of€direct€appeal€from€the€trial€court€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals.€Ð tÄ ÐThe€affirmance€of€the€conviction€and€the€sentence€of€death€shall€be€automatically€reviewed€by€the€Tennessee€SupremeÐ 8ˆ ÐCourt.€€Upon€the€affirmance€by€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€the€clerk€shall€docket€the€case€in€the€Supreme€Court€andÐ üL Ðthe€case€shall€proceed€in€accordance€with€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„Ð À Ð206(a)(1). ìÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔTennessee€Supreme€Court€Rule€12€provides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:€ð ðPrior€to€the€setting€of€oral€argument,Ð ° Ðthe€Court€shall€review€the€record€and€briefs€and€consider€òòallóó€errors€assigned.€€The€Court€may€enter€an€order€designatingÐ tÄ Ðthose€issues€it€wishes€addressed€at€oral€argument.ðð šÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔÔ_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€had€also€told€the€police€before€trial€that€she€had€been€afraid€for€her€life€and€that€JamesÐ ° ÐMontgomery€had€threatened€her€after€the€investigation€of€this€case€began,€stating€that€if€he€had€to€die€for€something€heÐ tÄ Ðdid€not€do,€then€ð ðall€of€us€needed€to€die.ðð€€At€trial,€on€cross„examination,€she€denied€being€afraid€of€James€MontgomeryÐ 8ˆ Ðand€said€it€was€her€involvement€in€this€case€that€frightened€her. -Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú49Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔContrary€to€Carruthersðð€assertions€on€appeal,€Warden€Bell€gave€sworn€testimony€about€his€conversations€withÐ ° ÐCarruthers.€ ¤Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú46Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔIn€òòZimmermann€v.€Board€of€Professional€Responsibilityóó,€764€S.W.2d€757€(Tenn.€1989)€we€upheldÐ ° ÐDisciplinary€Rule€7„107(B)€and€(E),€which€govern€extrajudicial€statements€made€by€attorneys€in€criminal€cases,€underÐ tÄ Ðthe€Tennessee€and€United€States€Constitutions.€€The€òòZimmermanóó€holding€was,€in€part,€based€on€a€decision€of€the€NewÐ 8ˆ ÐJersey€Supreme€Court€analyzing€the€balance€between€First€Amendment€rights€and€the€need€to€ensure€the€fairÐ üL Ðadministration€of€justice.€€òòZimmermannóó,€764€S.W.2d€at€761€(discussing€òòIn€Re€Ô_ÔRachmielÔ_Ôóó,€90€N.J.€646,€449€A.2d€505Ð À Ð(1982)).€€Both€òòZimmermanóó€and€òòIn€Re€Ô_ÔRachmielÔ_Ôóó,€however,€were€decided€before€òòGentileóó.€€In€light€of€òòGentileóó,€we€haveÐ „Ô Ðreconsidered€the€constitutional€issues€at€stake€under€both€the€Tennessee€and€United€States€Constitutions.€€Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ÖÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú47Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAs€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€recognized,€the€trial€judge€had€the€discretion€to€conduct€the€sentencingÐ ° Ðhearing€at€Riverbend€if€security€was€a€concern€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€16„1„105€(1999€Supp.),€which€provides€Ð tÄ Ðas€follows:Ð 8ˆ Ðà8  à[i]f€for€òòany€causeóó,€in€the€opinion€of€the€court€deemed€sufficient,€it€is€impracticable€or€inconvenient€forÐ üL Ðany€court€to€hold€its€session€at€the€courthouse,€or€place€designated€by€law,€it€shall€be€lawful€for€theÐ À Ðcourt€to€hold€its€session,€or€any€part€of€its€session,€at€any€other€room€within€the€limits€of€the€countyÐ „Ô Ðseat,€òòor€at€any€other€room€open€to€the€public€within€an€institution€of€the€department€of€correctionóó€orÐ H ˜ Ðthe€department€of€childrenððs€services€if€the€court€deems€it€necessary,€and€all€its€proceedings€at€suchÐ  \ Ðplace,€whether€in€civil€or€criminal€cases,€are€as€valid€as€if€done€at€the€courthouse.€ÐÐ Ð Ð  Ð(Emphasis€added.) MÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú41Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€explained€that€Jonathan€Montgomery€ð ðwas€saying€ð!ð€like€if€I€was€telling€you,€Man,€I€had€to€kill€themÐ ° Ðfolks.ðð€ öÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú48Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔThe€record€reflects€that€the€public€was€not€excluded€from€the€hearing€room€at€Riverbend. ¦Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú43Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔThe€statute€has€since€been€amended€and€no€longer€requires€proof€of€deliberation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„Ð ° Ð13„202(a)(1)€(1999€Supp.)€(ð ð(a)€First€degree€murder€is:€(1)€[a]€premeditated€and€intentional€killing€of€another.€.€.€.ðð). bÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€judge€stated€that€Ô‡ôç¥òòôç¥Ôð ðsince€[Carruthers]€has€been€brought€in€the€courtroom,€he€has€in€fact€been€glaringÐ ° Ðat€Mr.€Massey€non„stop.ððÔ#†ôç¥òòô祛#Ô LÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú29Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔOur€holding€that€this€record€does€not€support€Carruthersðð€claim€that€he€was€forced€to€choose€betweenÐ ° Ðineffective€counsel€or€no€counsel€at€all€does€not€preclude€Carruthers€from€asserting€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€inÐ tÄ Ða€petition€for€post€conviction€relief.€€We€have€considered€Carruthersðð€assertion€of€ineffective€counsel€in€this€appeal€asÐ 8ˆ Ða€forfeiture€argument,€and€we€emphasize€that€claims€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€generally€are€more€appropriatelyÐ üL Ðraised€in€a€petition€for€post€conviction€relief.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€835€S.W.2d€600,€606€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1992)Ð À Ð(ð ðRaising€issues€pertaining€to€the€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€for€the€first€time€in€the€appellate€court€is€a€practiceÐ „Ô Ðfraught€with€peril.ðð);€òòcf.óó€òòState€v.€Wilsonóó,€__€S.W.3d€__€(Tenn.€2000)€(holding€that€a€constitutional€challenge€to€theÐ H ˜ Ðvalidity€of€a€guilty€plea€should€be€raised€and€litigated€in€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€rather€than€on€direct€appeal).Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥Ôt€appears€from€the€record€that€Carruthers€was€provided€with€a€copy€of€the€transcription€of€Shawððs€testimonyÐ ° Ðbefore€the€grand€jury.€€Carruthers€had€left€one€copy€in€his€cell€on€the€day€Shaw€testified€and€was€given€another€copy€byÐ tÄ Ðthe€prosecutor€immediately€prior€to€Shawððs€testimony.€€In€addition,€the€trial€court€mentioned€ð ðthe€testimony€in€front€ofÐ 8ˆ Ðthe€grand€juryðð€when€he€was€discussing€the€ð ðthree€or€€four€different€statementsðð€Carruthers€was€using€during€his€directÐ üL Ðexamination€of€Alfredo€Shaw.Ô#†ôç¥òòô祀#Ô  ©Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔJames€Montgomeryððs€younger€brother€Jonathan€Montgomery€was€also€charged€on€all€counts€involved€in€thisÐ ° Ðcase.€€However,€several€months€prior€to€trial,€Jonathan€Montgomery€was€found€hanged€in€his€cell€in€the€Shelby€CountyÐ tÄ Ðjail. *Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú42Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔSince€Jonathan€placed€himself€at€the€scene€of€the€murders,€these€statements€might€have€been€admissible€asÐ ° Ðstatements€against€penal€interest.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€804(3).€€We€note,€however,€that€the€trial€court€was€not€asked€toÐ tÄ Ðadmit€these€statements€under€Rule€804(3)€and€therefore€never€considered€its€applicability.€€ BÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAs€the€trial€court€predicted,€the€record€reflects€that€both€Nance€and€Morton€filed€numerous€pre„trial€motionsÐ ° Ðon€behalf€of€Carruthers,€including€motions€for€discovery,€for€investigative€services,€for€a€mental€examination,€to€excludeÐ tÄ Ðcertain€evidence,€for€individual€voir€dire,€for€impeachment€evidence,€for€a€competency€evaluation€of€prosecutionÐ 8ˆ Ðwitnesses,€for€another€mental€evaluation€of€Carruthers,€to€dismiss€the€indictments,€to€suppress€statements€of€co„defendantÐ üL ÐJonathan€Montgomery,€for€a€severance,€for€expert€services,€and€a€notice€of€an€alibi€defense.Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô ;Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note,€as€did€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€that€in€addition€to€his€motion€for€substitution€of€counsel,Ð ° ÐCarruthers€filed€many€pro€se€motions€throughout€the€time€he€was€represented€by€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€and€Morton.€€Many€of€the€proÐ tÄ Ðse€filings€are€similar€or€identical€to€the€motions€filed€by€counsel€for€Carruthers€or€by€counsel€for€co„defendant€JamesÐ 8ˆ ÐMontgomery. €Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔÔ_ÔForÔ#†ôç¥òòôç¥o#Ô€example,€in€a€letter€dated€November€22,€1995,€Carruthers€said:€ð ðYou€have€violated€the€code€of€ethics€byÐ ° Ðlying€to€me€and€my€co„defendant€James€Montgomery€.€.€.€.ðð žÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔInÔ#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô€a€letter€dated€December€15,€1995,€Carruthers€said,€ð ðI€donððt€know€if€you€are€on€that€COCAINE€again€butÐ ° Ðdonððt€let€the€drug€alter€you€[sic]€ability€to€see€the€truth€and€no€[sic]€the€truth.ðð JÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔÔ_ÔIn€a€letter€dated€December€7,€1995,€Carruthers€said,ð ðAll€I€tell€you€is€to€do€you€[sic]€want€to€do,€and€Iððll€doÐ ° Ðwhat€I€HAVE€TO€DO!€Point€blank!ðð- ù- lÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOne€day€earlier,€when€the€State€mentioned€that€it€might€possibly€be€requesting€a€continuance,€Carruthers€hadÐ ° Ðadamantly€objected€toÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥Ô€any€continuance€and€stated€he€was€ready€to€go€to€trial. SÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú45Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThough€they€are€persuasive€authority€when€interpreting€the€United€States€Constitution,€this€Court€is€not€boundÐ ° Ðby€decisions€of€the€federal€district€and€circuit€courts.€€We€are€bound€only€by€decisions€of€the€United€States€SupremeÐ tÄ ÐCourt.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔStrouthÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€999€S.W.2d€759,€769€n.9€(Tenn.€1999);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔMcKayÔ_Ôóó,€680€S.W.2d€447,€450€(Tenn.€1984). ÓÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú27Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔòòSee,€e.g.óó€òòIllinois€v.€Allenóó,€397€U.€S.€337,€90€S.€Ct.€1057,€25€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€353€(1970)€(holding€that€by€persistingÐ ° Ðin€disruptive€conduct€the€accused€lost€his€constitutional€right€to€be€present€throughout€the€trial).Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô oÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔThe€record€reflects,€however,€that€Alfredo€Shawððs€testimony€at€trial€when€called€as€a€witness€by€defendantÐ ° ÐCarruthers€apparently€was€consistent€with€his€testimony€before€the€grand€jury.€ òÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔRecently€in€òòState€v.€Culbreathóó,€__€S.W.3d€__(Tenn.€2000),€we€held€that€dismissal€of€an€indictment€isÐ ° Ðappropriate€where€a€prosecutorððs€use€of€a€private€attorney€who€received€substantial€compensation€from€a€private,€specialÐ tÄ Ðinterest€group€created€a€conflict€of€interest€and€an€appearance€of€impropriety€and€violated€the€defendantsðð€right€to€dueÐ 8ˆ Ðprocess€under€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€Carruthers€does€not€allege€prosecutorial€misconduct,€and€the€record€in€thisÐ üL Ðcase€would€not€support€such€an€allegation. “Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€an€earlierÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥Ô€aggravated€assault€case€Carruthers€had€been€appointed€four€attorneys€before€the€case€was€finallyÐ ° Ðtried.€€òòSeeóó€òòCarruthers€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9505„CR„00130€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€April€17,€1996).€ àÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú40Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔBecause€Montgomeryððs€convictions€are€being€reversed€and€his€case€remanded€for€a€new€trial,€we€need€notÐ ° Ðaddress€all€his€claims€relating€to€erroneous€admission€and€improper€use€of€evidence€because€it€is€not€likely€these€sameÐ tÄ  Ðalleged€errors€will€reoccur.€€However,€we€emphasize€that€prior€inconsistent€statements€of€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw,€or€any€otherÐ ° Ðwitness,€ordinarily€are€admissible€only€for€purposes€of€impeachment€and,€unless€the€statement€satisfies€another€hearsayÐ tÄ Ðexception,Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥Ô€should€not€be€admitted€to€prove€the€truth€of€the€matter€asserted.€€An€instruction€to€the€jury€so€limiting€itsÐ 8ˆ Ðconsideration€of€any€€prior€inconsistent€statement€ordinarily€is€appropriate.€€If€the€defense€fails€to€object€to€admissionÐ üL Ðof€a€prior€inconsistent€statement€or€fails€to€request€a€limiting€instruction,€the€trial€court€should€consider€whether€a€òòÔ_ÔsuaÔ_ÔÐ À ÐÔ_ÔsponteÔ_Ôóó€instruction€is€warranted€to€foreclose€a€reversal€on€appeal€for€plain€error.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€24€S.W.3d€274,€280Ð „Ô Ð(Tenn.€2000).Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô ¨Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú51Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔInitially€we€note€that€Carruthers€has€not€challenged€the€proportionality€of€his€death€sentences€or€the€sufficiencyÐ ° Ðof€the€evidence€supporting€the€aggravating€circumstances.€€As€a€result,€Carruthers€has€not€briefed€these€issues.€The€CourtÐ tÄ Ðof€Criminal€Appeals€correctly€pointed€out€that:Ð 8ˆ Ðà8  àthe€State€and€the€defendant€in€each€case€must€fully€brief€the€issue€by€specifically€identifying€thoseÐ üL Ðsimilar€cases€relevant€to€the€comparative€proportionality€inquiry.€€When€addressing€proportionalityÐ À Ðreview,€the€briefs€of€the€parties€shall€contain€a€section€setting€forth€the€nature€and€circumstances€ofÐ „Ô Ðthe€crimes€that€are€claimed€to€be€similar€to€that€of€which€the€defendant€has€been€convicted,€includingÐ H ˜ Ðthe€statutory€aggravating€circumstances€found€by€the€jury€and€the€evidence€of€mitigatingÐ  \ Ðcircumstances.€€In€addition,€the€parties€shall€include€in€the€section€a€discussion€of€the€character€andÐ Ð  Ðrecord€of€the€defendants€involved€in€the€crimes,€to€the€extent€ascertainable€from€the€Rule€12€reports,Ð ” ä  Ðappellate€court€decisions,€or€records€of€the€trials€and€sentencing€hearings€in€those€cases.€€ÐX ¨ Ð Ð  Ð958€S.W.2d€at€667€(footnote€omitted).€€The€Tennessee€CD„Rom€death€penalty€database,€mentioned€in€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2dÐ  l  Ðat€667€n.18,€may€be€now€obtained€from€the€Administrative€Office€of€the€Courts.(|3Çv$©©Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€T »»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý 1Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔIn€a€letter€dated€December€5,€1995,€Carruthers€said,€ð ðYou€have€violated€several€ethic€codes€with€your€styleÐ ° Ðand€tactics.ðð TÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú38Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔCarruthers€generically€referred€to€others€when€describing€the€events€to€Alfredo€Shaw.€€For€example,€ShawÐ ° Ðtestified€that€ð ðTony€told€me€they€went€to€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ôðð€motherððs€house,€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô,€and€told€her€„€„€asked€her€where€the€moneyÐ tÄ Ðwas.ðð€€Again,€Shaw€testified€that€ð ðthey€burned€up€the€truck,€burned€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ôðð€truck€up,€to€cover€up€the€fingerprints€upÐ 8ˆ Ðthat€was€€inside€the€truck.€€Tony€Carruthers€then€stated€that€they€drove€the€bodies€back€to€Memphis.€€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€andÐ üL ÐTucker€were€Iððm€assuming€dead.ðð ¼Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Ô€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔR.€App.€P.€10. aÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú44Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔThe€trial€court€also€issued€a€gag€order€preventing€the€media€from€publishing€the€names€of€certain€prosecutionÐ ° Ðwitnesses,€which€was€later€modified€to€prevent€the€publication€of€only€one€prosecution€witness.€€The€Court€of€CriminalÐ tÄ ÐAppeals€vacated€this€order,€holding€that€it€was€a€prior€restraint€in€violation€of€the€First€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesÐ 8ˆ ÐConstitution.€€òòState€v.€Montgomeryóó,€929€S.W.2d€409€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€The€gag€order€prohibiting€the€attorneysÐ üL Ðand€Carruthers€from€talking€to€the€media,€however,€remained€in€place€throughout€trial.Ô#†ôç¥òòô神#Ô ŠÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú28Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAs€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€noted,€this€appears€to€be€the€only€capital€case€in€the€country€in€which€aÐ ° Ðdefendant€has€been€held€to€have€implicitly€waived€or€forfeited€the€right€to€counsel€and€has€been€required€to€representÐ tÄ Ðhimself€at€trial€and€sentencing.€€òòCf.óó€òòWaterhouse€v.€Stateóó,€596€So.2d€1008,€1011„15€(Fla.€1992)€(requiring€the€capitalÐ 8ˆ Ðdefendant€to€make€a€pro€se€argument€at€his€capital€re„sentencing€hearing).€€ Ñ h Ñ ¿ Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔFlewittÔ_Ôóó,€874€F.2d€669,€674€(9th€Cir.€1989)€(ð ðThe€right€to€self„representation€is€not€aÐ ° Ðlicense€to€abuse€the€dignity€of€the€courtroom.ðð);€òòBerry€v.€Ô_ÔLockhartÔ_Ôóó,€873€F.2d€1168,€1171€(8th€Cir.€1989)€(ð ðA€defendantÐ tÄ Ðhas€no€right€to€manipulate€his€right€to€counsel€in€order€to€delay€or€disrupt€the€trial.ðð);€òòGallopóó,€838€F.2d€at€108€(ð ð[Ô_ÔR]ightÔ_ÔÐ 8ˆ Ð[to€counsel]€must€not€obstruct€orderly€judicial€procedure€and€deprive€courts€of€the€exercise€of€their€inherent€power€toÐ üL Ðcontrol€the€administration€of€justice.ðð);òòóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Whiteóó,€529€F.2d€1390,€1393€(8th€Cir.€1976)€(ð ðOf€course,€theÐ À Ðright€to€counsel€is€a€shield,€not€a€sword.€€A€defendant€has€no€right€to€manipulate€his€right€for€the€purpose€of€delaying€andÐ „Ô Ðdisrupting€the€trial.ðð);€òòBrooks€v.€Stateóó,€819€S.W.2d€288,€290€(Ark.€Ct.€App.€1991)€(ð ð[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€constitutional€right€to€counselÐ H ˜ Ðis€a€shield,€not€a€sword,€and€.€.€.€a€defendant€may€not€manipulate€this€right€for€the€purpose€of€delaying€the€trial€or€playingÐ  \ Ðððcat„and„mouseðð€with€the€court.ðð);€òòJonesóó,€449€So.2d€at€258€(ð ðWe€consider€it€implicit€.€.€.€that€the€right€to€appointedÐ Ð  Ðcounsel,€like€the€obverse€right€to€self„representation,€is€not€a€license€to€abuse€the€dignity€of€the€court€or€to€frustrateÐ ” ä  Ðorderly€proceedings.€.€.€.ðð);€òòState€v.€Greenóó,€471€N.W.2d€402,€407€(Neb.€1991)€(ð ðA€defendant€may€not€utilize€his€or€herÐ X ¨  Ðright€to€counsel€to€manipulate€or€obstruct€the€orderly€procedure€in€the€court€or€to€interfere€with€the€fair€administrationÐ  l  Ðof€justice.ðð);€òòState€v.€Montgomeryóó,€530€S.E.2d€66,€69€(N.C.€Ct.€App.€2000)€(ð ð[Ô_ÔA]nÔ_Ô€accused€may€lose€his€constitutionalÐ à 0  Ðright€to€be€represented€by€counsel€of€his€choice€when€he€perverts€that€right€to€a€weapon€for€the€purpose€of€obstructingÐ ¤ô  Ðand€delaying€his€trial.ðð);€òòPainter€v.€Stateóó,€762€P.2d€990,€992€(Okla.€Ct.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€€1992)€(ð ðThe€right€to€assistance€ofÐ h¸  Ðcounsel€may€not€be€put€to€service€as€a€means€of€delaying€or€trifling€with€the€court.ðð);€òòUnited€States€v.€Fowleróó,€605€F.2dÐ ,|  Ð181,€183€(5th€Cir.€1979)€(ð ðThe€right€to€assistance€of€counsel,€cherished€and€fundamental€though€it€be,€may€not€be€putÐ ð@  Ðto€service€as€a€means€of€delaying€or€trifling€with€the€court.ðð);òòóó€òòCf.óó€òòÔ_ÔFarettaÔ_Ô€v.€Californiaóó,€422€U.S.€806,€834€n.46,€95€S.€Ct.Ð ´  Ð2525,€2541€n.46,€45€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€562€(1975)€(ð ðThe€right€of€self„representation€is€not€a€license€to€abuse€the€dignity€of€theÐ xÈ  Ðcourtroom.ðð). ?Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú33Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔSubsection€(c)(1)€provides€for€severance€where€a€co„defendantððs€out„of„court€statement€refers€to€the€defendantÐ ° Ðbut€is€not€admissible€against€the€defendant.€€Subsection€(c)(2)€provides€in€relevant€part€that:Ð tÄ Ðà8  à[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€court,€on€motion€of€the€state€or€on€motion€of€the€defendant€other€than€under€subdivision€(c)(1),Ð 8ˆ Ðshall€grant€a€severance€of€defendants€if:€(Ô_ÔiÔ_Ô)€[Ô_Ôb]eforeÔ_Ô€trial€.€.€.€it€is€deemed€appropriate€to€promote€a€fairÐ üL Ðdetermination€of€the€guilt€or€innocence€of€one€or€more€defendants;€or€(ii)€[Ô_Ôd]uringÔ_Ô€trial,€with€consentÐ À Ðof€the€defendant€to€be€severed,€it€is€deemed€necessary€to€achieve€a€fair€determination€of€the€guilt€orÐ „Ô Ðinnocence€of€one€or€more€defendants.€€€ äÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú35Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔThe€jury€sent€notes€to€the€trial€judge€complaining€about€Carruthers€ð ðscratching€or€pulling€around€his€groinÐ ° Ðwhen€standing€facing€the€jury.€€We€find€this€very€offensive,ðð€and€later€asking€the€trial€judge€why€Carruthers€ð ðwasÐ tÄ Ðconstantly€asking€the€same€question€over€and€over.ðð Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú50Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔBecause€of€the€reversal€and€remand,€we€forego€statutory€review€of€the€proportionality€of€the€death€sentencesÐ ° Ðimposed€against€Montgomery.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔBondurantÔ_Ôóó,€4€S.W.3d€662,€675€(Tenn.€1999);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔBigbeeÔ_Ôóó,€885€S.W.2dÐ tÄ Ð797,€817€(Tenn.€1994). >Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú37Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€example,€in€its€closing€argument,€the€State€reminded€the€jury€that€Carruthers€had€put€on€a€seminar€aboutÐ ° Ðdrug€dealing€in€Shelby€County,€highlighted€Carruthersðð€cross„examination€that€elicited€incriminating€evidence,€andÐ tÄ Ðemphasized€that€Carruthers€had€put€on€proof€through€Alfredo€Shaw€to€show€ð ðwhat€happened€between€11:00€[p.m.]€andÐ 8ˆ Ð5:00€[a.m.]"€the€day€the€killings€occurred.€ †Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú36Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔFor€example,€during€cross„examination€Carruthers€asked€Ô_ÔTerrellÔ_Ô€Adair€if€he€knew€who€had€shot€him€and€whyÐ ° Ðhe€had€been€shot.€€Adair€responded,€ð ðthey€say€you€did€it.ðð€€Again€during€cross„examination,€Carruthers€asked€AndreÐ tÄ ÐJohnson,€ð ðDid€you€tell€me€that€Reginald€Burkes€told€you€that€somebody€was€trying€to€get€you?ðð€€Johnson€responded,Ð 8ˆ Ðð ðYes€sir.€€And€I€told€you€it€was€you,€sir.ðð€ CÝ ƒ7Çv)ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ  Ó @ Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú53Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAlthough€lesser€sentences€have€been€imposed€in€some€similar€first€degree€murder€cases,€many€of€theseÐ ° Ðsentences€resulted€from€plea€agreements€and€therefore€are€not€relevant€for€purposes€of€comparative€proportionalityÐ tÄ  Ðreview.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔTerranceÔ_Ô€B.€Burnettóó,€Lauderdale€County€No.€6484€(in€an€attack€on€a€rival€gang€member,Ð ° Ðdefendant€and€co„defendants€killed€a€woman€and€child,€and€as€the€result€of€a€plea,€received€a€sentence€of€life€withoutÐ tÄ Ðparole);€òòState€v.€Michael€Brian€Cardenasóó,€Chester€County€No.€99„001€(defendant€and€co„defendant€persuaded€victimÐ 8ˆ Ðto€bring€them€narcotics,€then€Ô_ÔkidnappedÔ_Ô€victim,€shot€victim€in€the€face,€and€dumped€the€victimððs€car€and€body€in€the€river,Ð üL Ðbut€received€life€sentence€as€a€result€of€a€plea€agreement).€€In€other€similar€cases,€the€jury€imposed€a€sentence€less€thanÐ À Ðdeath.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó€€òòState€v.€Eric€Chambersóó,€Shelby€County€No.€97„03036„38(defendant€and€three€co„defendants€Ô_ÔkidnappedÔ_ÔÐ „Ô Ðand€murdered€three€victims€after€stealing€drugs€from€them;€state€sought€death€penalty,€but€the€jury€imposed€a€sentenceÐ H ˜ Ðof€life€without€the€possibility€of€parole.);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔDewayneÔ_Ô€Jordanóó€co„defendant€of€Eric€Chambers,€òòsupra.óó€(the€StateÐ  \ Ðsought€the€death€penalty,€but€the€jury€imposed€a€sentence€of€life€without€the€possibility€of€parole);€òòState€v.€Kevin€Wilkinsóó,Ð Ð  ÐShelby€County€No.€97„13179€(€defendant€was€the€leader€in€a€gang€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€torture,€and€execution€of€victim.€€StateÐ ” ä  Ðsought€death€penalty,€but€the€jury€imposed€a€sentence€of€life€without€the€possibility€of€parole.).€€However,€a€sentence€ofÐ X ¨  Ðdeath€is€not€disproportionate€merely€because€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€are€similar€to€those€of€another€offense€forÐ  l  Ðwhich€the€defendant€has€received€a€lesser€sentence€from€a€jury. mÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú30Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAs€previously€stated,€after€the€trial€court€ruled€that€Carruthers€had€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel,€Carruthers€Ð ° Ðoffered€to€testify€that€the€allegations€he€made€about€Massey€were€untrue. »Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú32Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔòòMooreóó,€706€F.2d€at€540. òÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú34Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔMontgomery€first€requested€a€severance€on€December€16,€1994,€again€on€February€16,€1996,€when€it€appearedÐ ° ÐCarruthers€might€be€required€to€proceed€pro€se,€on€April€19,€1996€during€the€course€of€trial€as€a€result€of€Carruthersðð€proÐ tÄ Ðse€representation,€and€again€on€April€24,€1996,€immediately€before€Carruthers€called€Alfredo€Shaw€to€testify€as€a€witness,Ð 8ˆ Ðwhen€it€became€clear€in€a€jury„out€hearing€that€Alfredo€Shaw€would€testify€consistently€with€his€grand€jury€testimonyÐ üL Ðand€implicate€Carruthers€in€the€killings.€ Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAlthoughÔ#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô€the€witness€list€contained€the€names€of€one€hundred€people,€the€State€previously€had€indicated€thatÐ ° Ðit€had€no€intention€of€calling€one€hundred€witnesses€and€was€simply€providing€the€name€of€every€person€that€had€beenÐ tÄ Ðmentioned€in€the€investigation€as€a€means€of€giving€the€defense€discovery. ûÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú31Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔWe€note,€however,€that€a€defendant€retains€the€right€to€complain€of€ineffective€assistance€with€respect€to€anyÐ ° Ðstage€of€the€proceeding€wherein€he€or€she€was€represented€by€counsel.€€òòCf.óó€€òòÔ_ÔDaughtryÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€482€S.E.2d€532,€533€(Ga.Ð tÄ ÐCt.€App.€1997)€(stating€that€a€criminal€defendant€will€not€be€heard€to€assert€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counselÐ 8ˆ Ðwith€respect€to€any€of€the€stages€of€the€proceedings€wherein€he€was€counsel).€€Therefore,€as€previously€stated,€our€holdingÐ üL Ðin€this€appeal€does€not€preclude€Carruthers€from€alleging€in€a€post€conviction€petition€ineffective€assistance€of€counselÐ À Ðwith€respect€to€a€stage€of€the€proceeding€wherein€he€was€represented€by€counsel.€€Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô ÊÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôç¥òòôç¥ÔAlthough€the€jury€did€not€hear€proof€about€why€Jonathan€Montgomery€directed€Detective€Ruby€to€the€grave,Ð ° Ðthe€record€of€pre„trial€and€jury„out€hearings€reflects€that€the€investigation€had€focused€upon€the€Montgomery€brothersÐ tÄ Ðbecause€they€were€seen€with€two€of€the€victims€around€5:00€p.m.€on€the€day€of€the€murders.€€When€the€police€questionedÐ 8ˆ ÐJonathan€Montgomery,€he€gave€conflicting€statements,€but€eventually€directed€Detective€Ruby€to€the€grave€where€theÐ üL Ðbodies€were€buried.(|G2²2$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€T »»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»Ô Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôç¥òòôç¥ÔòòSeeóó€òòBurton€v.€Stateóó,€214€Tenn.€9,€15„18,€377€S.W.2d€900,€902„904€(1964)€(refusing€to€dismiss€an€indictmentÐ ° Ðthat€was€based€upon€inadmissible€hearsay);€€òòState€v.€Dixonóó.€880€S.W.2d€696,€700€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1992)€(refusingÐ tÄ Ðto€dismiss€an€indictment€that€was€based€on€evidence€that€had€been€suppressed€under€the€Fourth€Amendment);€€òòState€v.Ð 8ˆ ÐGonzalesóó,€638€S.W.2d€841,€844„45€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1982)€(refusing€to€dismiss€an€indictment€that€was€based€uponÐ üL Ðunsworn€testimony€to€the€grand€jury);€òòState€v.€Gradyóó,€619€S.W.2d€139,€140€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1979)€(refusing€to€dismissÐ À Ðan€indictment€that€was€based€€upon€inadmissible€hearsay€testimony);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔNorthcuttÔ_Ôóó,€568€S.W.2d€636,€639€(Tenn.Ð „Ô ÐÔ_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1978)€(refusing€to€dismiss€an€indictment€because€of€a€question€asked€of€a€witness€by€the€foreman€of€the€grandÐ H ˜ Ðjury);€òòGammon€v.€Stateóó,€506€S.W.2d€188,€190€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1973)€(refusing€to€dismiss€an€indictment€that€was€basedÐ  \ Ðupon€inadmissible€hearsay€testimony);€òòCasey€v.€Stateóó,€491€S.W.2d€90,€91€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1972)€(same);€òòState€v.Ð Ð  ÐMarksóó,€464€S.W.2d€326,€327€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1970)€(same);€òòÔ_ÔPartonÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€455€S.W.2d€645,€648€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.Ð ” ä  Ð1970)€(same).Ô#†ôç¥òòôç¥#Ô *Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€reflects€that€Carruthers€had€filed€a€complaint€against€Massey€with€the€Board€of€ProfessionalÐ ° ÐResponsibility.€Ô€ôç¥òòôç¥Ô d ¨Ý ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú39Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔEven€though€we€have€concluded€that€a€severance€should€have€been€granted,€we€do€not€agree€withÐ ° ÐMontgomeryððs€assertions€that€much€of€the€evidence€admitted€in€the€joint€trial€will€be€inadmissible€in€a€separate€trial.€Ð tÄ ÐAs€more€fully€explained€in€the€next€section,€hearsay€statements€are€admissible€under€the€co„conspirator€exception€evenÐ 8ˆ Ðif€the€conspirators€are€separately€tried,€and€where€a€conspiracy€exists,€even€if€Montgomery€was€not€yet€a€member,€€heÐ üL Ðis€deemed€to€have€adopted€the€previous€acts€and€declarations€of€his€fellow€conspirators.€€òòSeeóó€òòOwens€v.€Stateóó,€84€Tenn.Ð À Ð1,€4€(1885)€(ð ðAnd€everyone€entering€into€a€conspiracy€is€a€party€to€every€act€which€has€before€been€done€by€the€others,Ð „Ô Ðand€to€every€act€by€the€others€afterward,€in€furtherance€of€the€common€design.ðð);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Brownóó,€943Ð H ˜ ÐF.2d€1246,€1255€(10th€Cir.€1991);€23€C.J.S.2d€òòCriminal€Lawóó€ðð€982€(1989).€(|3Çv$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€T »»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Çv$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€T »»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK ÉÝ ƒR²2$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú52Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€pool€from€which€similar€cases€are€drawn€has€increased€substantially€since€the€capital€punishment€statuteÐ ° Ðwas€enacted€in€1977.€€The€first€decision€to€comprehensively€discuss€comparative€proportionality€review€was€òòState€v.Ð tÄ ÐBarberóó,€753€S.W.2d€659€(Tenn.€1988).€However,€this€Court€had€conscientiously€performed€comparative€proportionalityÐ 8ˆ Ðin€the€fifty„seven€capital€cases€preceding€òòBarberóó.€€Not€only€had€we€considered€those€fifty„seven€capital€cases,€we€alsoÐ üL Ðhad€reviewed€innumerable€cases€in€which€a€sentence€of€life€imprisonment€had€been€imposed€for€first€degree€murder.€Ð À ÐThree€years€ago€in€òòBlandóó,€this€Court€once€again€thoroughly€explained€both€the€role€of€comparative€proportionality€reviewÐ „Ô Ðand€the€method€by€which€this€review€is€performed€in€Tennessee.€€With€the€decision€in€òòBlandóó,€this€Court€had€reviewedÐ H ˜ Ðone€hundred€and€ten€capital€cases,€again,€in€addition€to€the€innumerable€cases€involving€a€sentence€of€life€imprisonmentÐ  \ Ðor€life€imprisonment€without€the€possibility€of€parole.€€The€pool€of€capital€cases€had€almost€doubled€in€the€nine€yearsÐ Ð  Ðfrom€òòBarberóó€to€òòBlandóó.€€Since€òòBlandóó,€this€Court€has€reviewed€approximately€twenty€more€capital€cases.€€If€the€size€of€theÐ ” ä  Ðcomparison€pool€was€ever€a€concern,€it€is€a€concern€no€longer.€€The€pool€from€which€similar€cases€is€drawn€clearly€isÐ X ¨  Ðlarge€enough€to€enable€an€effective€comparative€review,€Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€T »»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼T »»»ÔÑ8€aXXdì»»d8ÑÔ€¼T »»¼T ÔÓ=€T »Ð»dÐd=ÓÑ€=˜$Ñà@™ ™ ìàÔ‡îÅÁT ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼T »îîÅÁy#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€3,€2000€Session€at€NashvilleÐ üL ÐÔ‡XaX»¼T ÔÌò òÔ#†¼T »XXai#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€TONY€V.€CARRUTHERS€&€JAMESÐ úJ ÐMONTGOMERYó óÐ  ^ ÐÌÔ€XaX»¼T Ôà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ 4 „ ÐCriminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ  p Ðà@@øøìàNos.€94„02797„99€and€95„1128„29,€€Joseph€B.€Dailey,€JudgeÐ  \  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ï` AßÐ Ð  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W1997„00097„SC„DDT„DD€„€Filed€December€11,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ Ë  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<¢` AßÐ £ó Ðó óÌÓ  ÓTony€Carruthers€and€James€Montgomery€were€each€convicted€of€three€counts€of€first€degreeÐ žî Ðpremeditated€murder€and€were€sentenced€to€death€on€each€conviction.€€The€Court€of€CriminalÐ ŠÚ ÐAppeals€affirmed€the€convictions€and€sentences€of€both€Carruthers€and€Montgomery.€€Thereafter,Ð vÆ Ðthe€cases€were€docketed€in€this€Court.€After€carefully€reviewing€the€record€and€the€relevant€legalÐ b² Ðauthorities,€we€conclude€that€none€of€the€errors€raised€by€Tony€Carruthers€require€reversal,€that€theÐ Nž Ðevidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€juryððs€findings€of€the€aggravating€circumstances,€and€that€theÐ :Š Ðsentences€of€death€are€not€excessive€or€disproportionate€considering€the€circumstances€of€the€crimesÐ &v Ðand€the€defendant.€€With€respect€to€James€Montgomery,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÐ b Ðdenying€him€a€severance€and€that€the€error€resulted€in€Montgomery€being€deprived€of€a€fair€trial.€Ð þN ÐAccordingly,€we€reverse€Montgomeryððs€convictions€and€sentences€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.Ð ê: ÐÓ^ÓÌò òTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(a)(1)€Automatic€Appeal;€Judgment€of€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ Â ÐAppeals€Affirmed€with€respect€to€Tony€V.€Carruthers;€Judgment€of€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ ®þ ÐAppeals€Reversed€with€respect€to€James€Montgomery€and€Case€Remanded€for€a€New€Trial€ó óÐ š ê ÐÌÓ  ÓòòFrank€F.€Ô_ÔDrowotaÔ_Ô,€III,€Jóó.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòE.€Riley€Anderson,€C.J.,€Ð r"Â! ÐJanice€M.€Holderóó,€and€òòWilliam€M.€Barkeróó,€JJ.,€joined.€€Ô_ÔAòòdolphoÔ_Ôóó€A.€Bòòirchóó,€Jòòróó.,€J.,€filed€aÐ ^#®" Ðconcurring/dissenting€opinion.Ð J$š# ÐÌStephen€R.€Ô_ÔLefflerÔ_Ô€and€Lee€A.€Ô_ÔFildermanÔ_Ô,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Tony€V.Ð "&r!% ÐCarruthers.Ð '^"& ÐÌRobert€C.€Brooks€and€Edward€W.€Chandler,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€JamesÐ æ(6$( ÐMontgomery.Ð Ò)"%) ÐÌMichael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General;€Amy€Ô_ÔTarkingtonÔ_Ô,€Senior€Counsel;€€Phillip€Gerald€Harris;Ð ª+ú&+ ÐAssistant€District€Attorney€General;€and€J.€Robert€Carter,€Jr.,€€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€Ð –,æ', Ðfor€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ‚-Ò(-ý ÐÓU Óò òOPINIONó óÐ ° ÐÓ  ÓÔ_ÔÔ_Ôà@ìì*ìàˆÌà  àThe€defendants,€Tony€V.€Carruthers€and€James€Montgomery,€were€each€convicted€of€firstÐ ˆØ Ðdegree€murder€for€killing€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€ð ðCelloðð€Anderson,€his€mother€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson,€and€FrederickÐ tÄ ÐTucker€in€Memphis€in€February€of€1994.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€All€of€the€victims€disappeared€on€the€night€of€FebruaryÐ `° Ð24,€1994.€€On€March€3,€1994,€their€bodies€were€found€buried€together€in€a€pit€that€had€been€dugÐ L œ Ðbeneath€a€casket€in€a€grave€in€a€Memphis€cemetery.׃'×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р8 ˆ ÐÌà@<<#ìàòòò òThe€Guilt€Phaseóóó óˆÐ  ` Ðà  àThe€proof€introduced€at€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial€showed€that€one€of€the€victims,€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_ÔÐ ü L  ÐAnderson,€was€heavily€involved€in€the€drug€trade,€along€with€two€other€men,€Andre€ð ðBaby€BrotherððÐ è 8  ÐJohnson€and€Ô_ÔTerrellÔ_Ô€Adair.׃ ,×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Anderson€wore€expensive€jewelry,€including€a€large€diamond€ring,Ð Ô$  Ðcarried€large€sums€of€money€on€his€person,€and€kept€a€considerable€amount€of€cash€in€the€attic€of€theÐ À  Ðhome€of€his€mother,€victim€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson.€€When€his€body€was€discovered,€Anderson€was€notÐ ¬ü  Ðwearing€any€jewelry€and€did€not€have€any€cash€on€his€person.€€Anderson€was€acquainted€with€bothÐ ˜è  Ðdefendants,€and€he€considered€Carruthers€to€be€a€trustworthy€friend.€€The€proof€showed€thatÐ „Ô  ÐAndersonððs€trust€was€misplaced.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àIn€the€summer€of€1993€Jimmy€Lee€Maze,€Jr.,€a€convicted€felon,€received€two€letters€fromÐ H˜ ÐCarruthers,€who€was€then€in€prison€on€an€unrelated€conviction.€€In€the€letters,€Carruthers€referred€toÐ 4„ Ðð ða€master€planðð€that€was€ð ða€winner.ðð€€Carruthers€wrote€of€his€intention€to€ð ðmake€those€streets€payÐ  p Ðmeðð€and€announced,€ð ðeverything€I€do€from€now€on€will€be€well€organized€and€extremely€violent.ðð€Ð  \ ÐLater,€in€the€fall€of€1993,€while€incarcerated€at€the€Mark€Ô_ÔLuttrellÔ_Ô€Reception€Center€in€MemphisÐ øH Ðawaiting€his€release,€Carruthers€was€assigned€to€a€work€detail€at€a€local€cemetery,€the€WestÐ ä4 ÐTennessee€Veteransðð€Cemetery.€€At€one€point,€as€he€helped€bury€a€body,€Carruthers€remarked€toÐ Ð  Ðfellow€inmate€Charles€Ray€Smith€ð ðthat€would€be€a€good€way,€you€know,€to€bury€somebody,€if€youððreÐ ¼  Ðgoing€to€kill€them.€.€.€.€[Ô_ÔI]fÔ_Ô€you€ainððt€got€no€body,€you€donððt€have€a€case.ðð€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àSmith€also€testified€that€he€overheard€Carruthers€and€Montgomery,€who€also€was€incarceratedÐ €Ð Ðat€the€Reception€Center,€talking€about€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€Anderson€after€Anderson€had€driven€CarruthersÐ l¼ Ðback€to€the€Reception€Center€from€a€furlough.€According€to€Smith,€when€Montgomery€askedÐ X ¨ ÐCarruthers€about€Anderson,€Carruthers€told€him€that€both€Anderson€and€ð ðBaby€Brotherðð€JohnsonÐ D!” Ðdealt€drugs€and€had€a€lot€of€money.€€Carruthers€said€he€and€Montgomery€could€ð ðrobðð€and€ð ðgetððÐ 0"€  ÐAnderson€and€Johnson€once€they€were€released€from€prison.€€€Ð #l! ÐÐ $X" Ðà  àWhen€Carruthers€was€released€from€the€Department€of€Correction€on€November€15,€1993,Ð ° Ðhe€left€the€Reception€Center€with€Anderson.€€Carruthers€accompanied€Anderson€to€Andre€JohnsonððsÐ œì Ðhouse,€and€received€a€gift€of€$200€cash€from€Anderson,€Johnson,€and€Ô_ÔTerrellÔ_Ô€Adair,€who€was€presentÐ ˆØ Ðat€Johnsonððs€house.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àOne€month€later,€on€December€15,€1993,€Smith€was€released€from€the€Department€ofÐ L œ ÐCorrection.€€Upon€his€release,€Smith€warned€Anderson€and€Johnson€of€Carruthersðð€andÐ 8 ˆ ÐMontgomeryððs€plans€to€ð ðget€them.ðð€€According€to€Smith€and€Johnson,€Anderson€did€not€take€theÐ $ t Ðwarning€or€the€defendantsðð€threats€seriously.€€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àIn€mid„December€1993,€Maze,€his€brother€€and€Carruthers€were€riding€around€MemphisÐ è 8  Ðtogether.€€They€came€upon€Ô_ÔTerrellÔ_Ô€Adairððs€red€Jeep€on€the€street€in€front€of€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Andersonððs€homeÐ Ô$  Ðwhere€a€drive„by€shooting€had€just€occurred.€€Adair€had€been€injured€in€the€shooting€and€was€in€theÐ À  Ðhospital.€€Jonathan€ð ðLuluðð€Montgomery,€James€Montgomeryððs€brother,€was€at€the€scene€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðshooting,€and€he€joined€Carruthers€in€the€back€seat€of€Mazeððs€car.€€According€to€Maze,€CarruthersÐ ˜è  Ðremarked€to€Jonathan€that,€ð ðit€would€be€the€best€time€to€kidnap€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô,ðð€and€Jonathan€asked,Ð „Ô  Ðð ðwhich€one€Baby€Brother€or€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô?ðð€€Carruthers€then€nudged€Montgomery€with€his€elbow€andÐ pÀ Ðsaid€ð ðitðð€was€going€to€take€place€after€James€Montgomery€was€released€from€prison.€€About€twoÐ \¬ Ðweeks€later,€on€December€31,€Maze€saw€Carruthers€loading€three€antifreeze€containers€into€a€car,Ð H˜ Ðand€€Carruthers€indicated€to€Maze€that€the€containers€were€filled€with€gasoline.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àOn€January€11,€1994,€James€Montgomery€was€released€from€prison.€€€After€his€release,Ð  \ ÐMontgomery€told€ð ðBaby€Brotherðð€Johnson€that€he,€not€Johnson,€was€in€charge€of€the€neighborhood.€Ð øH ÐMontgomery€said,€ð ðIt€was€my€neighborhood€before€I€left,€and€now€Iððm€back€and€its€my€neighborhoodÐ ä4 Ðagain.ðð€€Montgomery€asked€Johnson€if€he€wanted€to€ð ðgo€to€war€about€this€neighborhood.ðð€€WhenÐ Ð  ÐJohnson€said,€ð ðno,ðð€Montgomery€replied€ð ðYou€feeling€now€like€Iððm€about€to€blow€your€Ô_ÔmotherfÔ_Ô„„„„„gÐ ¼  Ðbrains€outðð€and€ð ðyou€all€need€to€get€in€line€around€here€or€weððre€going€to€war€about€this.ðð€€Near€theÐ ¨ø Ðend€of€January€or€the€first€of€February€1994,€Johnson€and€Adair€saw€the€defendants€sitting€togetherÐ ”ä Ðin€an€older€model€grey€car€down€the€street€from€Johnsonððs€motherððs€home.€€It€was€late€at€night,Ð €Ð Ðbetween€11€p.m.€and€1€a.m.€€When€the€defendants€approached€Johnson€and€Adair,€MontgomeryÐ l¼ Ðasked€why€they€thought€he€was€trying€to€harm€them.€€Montgomery€told€them,€ð ðLook,€I€told€you,€weÐ X ¨ Ðainððt€got€no€problem€with€nobody€in€this€neighborhood.€€We€already€got€our€man€staked€out.€€If€weÐ D!” Ðwanted€some€trouble€or€something,€we€got€you€right€now.€€Weððd€kill€your€whole€family.ðð€Ð 0"€  ÐConfirming€Montgomeryððs€statement,€Carruthers€told€them,€ð ðWe€already€got€our€man€staked€out.€Ð #l! ÐYou€all€right.€€If€itððs€any€problem,€weððll€deal€with€it€later.ðð€€Montgomery€explained€that€he€intendedÐ $X" Ðto€take€the€ð ðmanððsðð€money€and€drugs,€and€said,€ð ðif€the€police€didnððt€have€no€body,€they€wouldnððtÐ ô$D # Ðhave€no€case.ððÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àOn€February€23,€1994,€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€Anderson€borrowed€a€white€Jeep€Cherokee€from€his€cousin,Ð ¸'#& ÐMichael€Harris.€€Around€4:30€on€the€afternoon€of€February€24,€1994,€witnesses€saw€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_ÔÐ ¤(ô#' ÐAnderson€and€Frederick€Tucker€riding€in€the€Jeep€Cherokee€along€with€James€and€JonathanÐ )à$( ÐMontgomery.€€About€5€p.m.€that€day,€James€and€Jonathan€Montgomery€and€Anderson€and€TuckerÐ |*Ì%) Ðarrived€in€the€Jeep€Cherokee€at€the€house€of€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw,€the€Montgomery€brothersðð€cousin.€Ð h+¸&* ÐÔ_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw,€her€four€children,€and€Benton€West,€also€her€cousin,€were€present€at€the€house€whenÐ ° Ðthey€arrived.Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€four€men€entered€the€house€and€went€downstairs€to€the€basement.€€A€short€time€later,Ð tÄ ÐJames€Montgomery€came€back€upstairs€and€asked€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€if€she€could€leave€for€a€while€so€heÐ `° Ðcould€ð ðtake€care€of€some€business.ðð€€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€told€West€that€she€thought€ð ðtheyðð€were€beingÐ L œ ÐÔ_ÔkidnappedÔ_Ô,€and€then€she€left€the€house€with€West€and€her€children.€€West€agreed€to€care€for€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_ÔÐ 8 ˆ ÐShawððs€children€while€she€attended€a€meeting.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àWhen€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€returned€home€after€the€meeting,€she€saw€only€Carruthers€and€JamesÐ ü L  ÐMontgomery.€€Montgomery€asked€her€to€go€pick€up€her€children€and€to€ð ðstay€gone€a€little€longer.ðð€Ð è 8  ÐÔ_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€returned€home€with€her€children€before€10€p.m.€€The€Jeep€Cherokee€was€gone,€butÐ Ô$  ÐJames€Montgomery€and€Carruthers€were€still€present€at€her€home.€€Montgomery€told€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€ShawÐ À  Ðto€put€her€children€to€bed€upstairs€and€remain€there€until€he€told€her€he€was€leaving.€€Sometime€later,Ð ¬ü  ÐMontgomery€called€out€to€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€that€he€was€leaving.€€She€returned€downstairs€and€sawÐ ˜è  ÐJames€Montgomery,€Carruthers,€and€the€two€victims,€Anderson€and€Tucker,€leave€in€the€JeepÐ „Ô  ÐCherokee.€€Prior€to€trial,€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€told€the€police€that€Andersonððs€and€Tuckerððs€hands€were€tiedÐ pÀ Ðbehind€their€backs€when€they€left€her€house.€While€she€admitted€making€this€statement,€she€testifiedÐ \¬ Ðat€trial€that€the€statement€was€false€and€that€she€had€not€seen€Andersonððs€and€Tuckerððs€hands€tiedÐ H˜ Ðwhen€they€left€her€home.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÐ 4„ ÐÌà  àIn€the€meantime,€around€8€p.m.€on€February€24,€Ô_ÔLaventhiaÔ_Ô€Briggs€telephoned€her€aunt,€victimÐ  \ ÐÔ_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson.€€When€someone€picked€up€the€telephone€but€said€nothing,€Briggs€hung€up.€€BriggsÐ øH Ðcalled€ð ða€couple€of€more€timesðð€but€received€no€answer.€€Briggs€was€living€with€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€AndersonÐ ä4 Ðat€the€time€and€arrived€€at€her€auntððs€home€around€9:00€p.m.€€Although€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson€was€notÐ Ð  Ðhome,€her€purse,€car,€and€keys€were€there.€€Food€left€in€Andersonððs€bedroom€indicated€that€she€hadÐ ¼  Ðbeen€interrupted€while€eating.€€Briggs€went€to€bed,€assuming€her€aunt€would€return€home€soon.€€AÐ ¨ø Ðco„worker,€whom€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson€had€driven€home€around€7:15€p.m.,€was€the€last€person€to€haveÐ ”ä Ðseen€her€alive.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àChris€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô,€who€had€known€the€defendants€since€junior€high€school,€testified€that€aroundÐ X ¨ Ð8:45€p.m.€on€February€24,€1994,€Jonathan€Montgomery€ð ðbeepedðð€him.€€Jonathan€said,€ð ðMan,€a€n„„„„rÐ D!” Ðgot€them€folks.ðð€€When€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€asked,€ð ðWhat€folks?ðð€Jonathan€replied,€ð ðCello€and€themðð€and€saidÐ 0"€  Ðsomething€about€stealing€$200,000.€Jonathan€then€indicated€that€he€could€not€talk€more€on€theÐ #l! Ðtelephone€and€arranged€to€meet€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€in€person.€€Jonathan€arrived€at€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€home€at€about€9:00€p.m.Ð $X" Ðand€told€him,€ð ðMan,€we€got€them€folks€out€at€the€cemetery€on€Elvis€Presley,€and€we€got€$200,000.€Ð ô$D # ÐMan,€a€n„„„„r€had€to€kill€them€folks.ðð€€At€that€point,€James€Montgomery€ð ðbeeped€inðð€and€talked€withÐ à%0!$ ÐJonathan.€€When€the€telephone€call€ended,€Jonathan€asked€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€to€drive€him€to€the€cemetery.€€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_ÔÐ Ì&"% ÐÔ_Ôrefused,€but€he€allowed€Jonathan€to€borrow€his€car,€which€Jonathan€promised€to€return€in€an€hour.€Ð ° ÐWhen€the€car€was€not€returned,€Hines€called€James€Montgomeryððs€cellular€telephone€at€around€11Ð œì Ðp.m.€€James€told€Hines€that€he€did€not€know€where€Jonathan€was,€that€Jonathan€did€not€have€aÐ ˆØ Ðdriverððs€license,€and€that€the€car€should€be€returned€by€4€a.m.€because€Jonathan€was€supposed€toÐ tÄ Ðdrive€James€to€his€girlfriendððs€house.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€Jeep€Cherokee€that€Anderson€had€borrowed€was€found€in€Mississippi€on€February€25Ð 8 ˆ Ðaround€2:40€a.m.€€It€had€been€destroyed€by€fire.€€About€3:30€a.m.,€after€he€was€informed€of€theÐ $ t Ðvehicle€fire€by€law€enforcement€officials,€Harris€telephoned€Delois€Andersonððs€home,€and€LaventhiaÐ  ` ÐBriggs€then€discovered€that€neither€her€aunt€Delois€nor€her€cousin€Marcellos€had€returned€home.€Ð ü L  ÐBriggs€filed€a€missing€person€report€with€the€police€later€that€day.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€Montgomery€brothers€and€Carruthers€did€not€return€Hinesðð€car€until€approximately€8:30Ð À  Ða.m.€on€February€25.€€The€car€was€very€muddy.€€Hines€drove€James€Montgomery€and€Carruthers€toÐ ¬ü  ÐMontgomeryððs€motherððs€home€and€then€drove€away€with€Jonathan€Montgomery.€€That€morningÐ ˜è  ÐJonathan,€whom€Hines€described€as€acting€ð ðparanoidðð€and€ð ðnervous,ðð€repeatedly€told€Hines€thatÐ „Ô  Ðð ðthey€had€to€kill€some€people.ðð€€About€two€hours€later,€James€Montgomery€and€Carruthers€came€toÐ pÀ ÐHinesðð€home€looking€for€Jonathan.€€Hines€advised€Carruthers€and€James€Montgomery€that€he€wasÐ \¬ Ðcelebrating€his€birthday,€and€he€asked€James€Montgomery€to€give€him€a€birthday€present.€€JamesÐ H˜ Ðagreed€to€give€Hines€twenty€dollars€after€he€picked€up€his€paycheck,€and€James€also€agreed€to€haveÐ 4„ ÐHinesðð€car€washed€immediately€as€a€birthday€present.Ð  p ÐÌà  àHines,€the€Montgomery€brothers,€and€Carruthers€drove€to€a€carwash,€and€James€MontgomeryÐ øH Ðpaid€an€unidentified€elderly€man€to€clean€the€car.€€The€man€cleaned€the€interior€of€the€car€and€theÐ ä4 Ðtrunk€of€the€car.€€Neither€Carruthers€nor€James€Montgomery€supervised€the€cleaning€of€the€car.€€AfterÐ Ð  ÐJonathan€Montgomery€abruptly€left€the€carwash,€Carruthers€and€James€Montgomery€asked€HinesÐ ¼  Ðwhat€Jonathan€had€told€him,€but€Hines€did€not€tell€them.€€Several€days€later€James€MontgomeryÐ ¨ø Ðcame€to€Hinesðð€home€and€offered€Hines€an€AK„47€assault€rifle€because€Montgomery€said€he€hadÐ ”ä Ðð ðheard€that€Hines€was€into€it€with€some€people€on€the€street.ðð€€James€Montgomery€told€Hines€theÐ €Ð Ðrifle€had€ð ðblood€on€it.ðð€€Hines€testified€that€he€interpreted€this€statement€to€mean€that€someone€hadÐ l¼ Ðbeen€shot€with€the€weapon.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àOn€March€3,€1994,€about€one€week€after€a€missing€person€report€was€filed€on€Delois€andÐ 0"€  ÐMarcellos€Anderson,€Jonathan€Montgomery€directed€Detective€Jack€Ruby€of€the€Memphis€PoliceÐ #l! ÐDepartment€to€the€grave€of€Dorothy€Daniels€at€the€Rose€Hill€Cemetery€on€Elvis€Presley€Boulevard.׃P×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р$X" ÐDanielsðð€grave€was€located€six€plots€away€from€the€grave€site€of€the€Montgomery€brothersðð€cousin.€Ð ô$D # Ðâ âDaniels€had€been€buried€on€February€25,€1994.€€Pursuant€to€a€court€order,€Danielsðð€casket€wasÐ à%0!$ Ðdisinterred,€and€the€authorities€discovered€the€bodies€of€the€three€victims€buried€beneath€the€casketÐ ° Ðunder€several€inches€of€dirt€and€a€single€piece€of€plywood.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àAn€employee€of€the€cemetery€testified€that€a€pressed€wood€box€or€vault€had€been€placed€inÐ tÄ ÐDanielsðð€grave€during€working€hours€on€February€24€and€that€it€would€have€taken€at€least€two€peopleÐ `° Ðto€remove€the€box.€€€Danielsðð€casket€had€been€placed€in€the€grave€inside€the€box€on€February€25,€and,Ð L œ Ðaccording€to€Dr.€Hugh€Edward€Berryman,€one€of€the€forensic€anthropologists€who€assisted€in€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðremoval€of€the€bodies€from€the€crime€scene,€there€was€no€evidence€to€suggest€that€Danielsðð€casketÐ $ t Ðhad€been€disturbed€after€she€was€buried.€€Thus,€it€can€be€inferred€that€the€bodies€of€the€three€victimsÐ  ` Ðwere€placed€in€the€grave€and€covered€with€dirt€and€a€piece€of€plywood€prior€to€the€casket€beingÐ ü L  Ðplaced€in€the€grave.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àDr.€O.€C.€Smith,€who€helped€remove€the€bodies€from€the€grave€and€who€performed€autopsiesÐ À  Ðon€the€victims,€testified€that,€when€found,€the€body€of€Delois€Anderson€was€lying€at€the€bottom€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€grave€and€the€bodies€of€the€two€male€victims€were€lying€on€top€of€her.€€The€hands€of€all€threeÐ ˜è  Ðvictims€were€bound€behind€their€backs.€€Frederick€Tuckerððs€feet€were€also€bound€and€his€neckÐ „Ô  Ðshowed€signs€of€bruising€caused€by€a€ligature.€€A€red€sock€was€found€around€Delois€AndersonððsÐ pÀ Ðneck.€€Marcellos€Anderson€was€not€wearing€any€jewelry.€€Dr.€Smith€testified€that€Delois€AndersonÐ \¬ Ðdied€from€asphyxia€caused€by€several€factors:€€the€position€of€her€head€against€her€body,€dirt€in€herÐ H˜ Ðmouth€and€nose,€and€trauma€from€weight€on€her€body.€€Frederick€Tucker€had€received€a€gunshotÐ 4„ Ðwound€to€his€chest,€which€would€not€have€been€fatal€had€he€received€medical€care.€€He€had€alsoÐ  p Ðsuffered€injuries€from€blunt€trauma€to€his€abdomen€and€head€resulting€in€broken€ribs,€a€fracturedÐ  \ Ðskull,€and€a€ruptured€liver.€€Dr.€Smith€opined€that€Tucker€was€shot€and€placed€in€the€grave,€whereÐ øH Ðthe€force€of€compression€from€being€buried€produced€the€other€injuries€and,€along€with€the€gunshotÐ ä4 Ðwound,€caused€his€death.€€According€to€Dr.€Smith,€Marcellos€Anderson€had€been€shot€three€times:€Ð Ð  Ða€contact€wound€to€his€forehead€that€was€not€severe€and€two€shots€to€his€neck,€one€of€which€was€alsoÐ ¼  Ðnot€serious.€€However,€the€gunshot€causing€the€other€neck€wound€had€entered€Andersonððs€windpipeÐ ¨ø Ðand€severed€his€spinal€cord,€paralyzing€him€from€the€neck€down.€€This€wound€was€notÐ ”ä Ðinstantaneously€fatal.€€Anderson€had€also€suffered€blunt€trauma€to€his€abdomen€from€compressionÐ €Ð Ðforces.€€Dr.€Smith€opined€that€each€victim€was€alive€when€buried.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àDefendant€James€Montgomery€presented€no€proof.€€Carruthers,€acting€pro€se,€called€severalÐ D!” Ðwitnesses€to€rebut€the€testimony€offered€by€the€State,€primarily€by€attacking€the€credibility€of€theÐ 0"€  ÐStateððs€witnesses.€€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àA€health€administrator€at€the€Mark€Luttrell€Reception€Center€testified€that,€because€of€anÐ ô$D # Ðinjury€to€his€arm,€Carruthers€had€been€given€a€job€change€on€October€6,€1993,€and€had€not€workedÐ à%0!$ Ðat€the€cemetery€after€that€date.€€Another€official€at€the€Reception€Center€testified€that€Carruthers€wasÐ Ì&"% Ðnot€released€on€furlough€after€Montgomery€arrived€at€the€Reception€Center€on€November€4,€1994.€Ð ¸'#& ÐThis€proof€was€offered€to€impeach€Smithððs€testimony€that€Montgomery€and€Carruthers€discussedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrobbing€and€getting€Marcellos€Anderson€after€Anderson€drove€Carruthers€back€to€the€ReceptionÐ )à$( ÐCenter€following€a€furlough.€€An€investigator€appointed€to€assist€Carruthers€with€his€defense€testifiedÐ |*Ì%) Ðthat€he€had€interviewed€Maze,€who€admitted€he€did€not€know€anything€about€the€ð ðmaster€planðð€toÐ h+¸&* Ðwhich€Carruthers€referred€in€the€letters€until€Carruthers€was€released€from€prison.€€On€cross„Ð ° Ðexamination,€the€investigator€admitted€that€Maze€said€that€when€he€was€released€€from€prison,Ð œì ÐCarruthers€had€explained€that€the€master€plan€involved€kidnapping€Marcellos€Anderson.€€CarruthersððÐ ˆØ Ðbrother€and€another€witness€testified€that€Jonathan€Montgomery€was€not€at€the€scene€of€the€drive„byÐ tÄ Ðshooting€involving€Terrell€Adair.€€This€proof€was€offered€to€impeach€Mazeððs€testimony€thatÐ `° ÐCarruthers€and€Jonathan€Montgomery€discussed€kidnapping€Marcellos€on€the€day€that€Terrell€AdairÐ L œ Ðwas€shot.€€Another€witness,€Aldolpho€Antonio€James€testified€that€he€and€Carruthers€had€beenÐ 8 ˆ Ðvisiting€a€friend€between€the€hours€of€1:00€a.m.€and€2:00€a.m.€the€day€before€these€homicides€wereÐ $ t Ðfirst€reported€on€the€news.€€This€testimony€was€offered€to€provide€at€least€a€partial€alibi€forÐ  ` ÐCarruthers€for€the€early€morning€hours€of€February€25,€1994.€€However,€on€cross„examination,€JamesÐ ü L  Ðadmitted€that€he€did€not€know€the€exact€date€he€and€Carruthers€had€been€together.Ð è 8  ÐÔ_ÔÌà  àCarruthers€also€called€Alfredo€Shaw€as€a€witness.€€After€seeing€a€television€news€report€aboutÐ À  Ðthese€killings€in€March€of€1994,€Alfredo€Shaw€had€telephoned€Ô_ÔCrimeStoppersÔ_Ô€and€given€a€statementÐ ¬ü  Ðto€the€police€implicating€Carruthers.€€Alfredo€Shaw€later€testified€before€the€grand€jury€whichÐ ˜è  Ðeventually€returned€the€indictments€against€Carruthers€and€Montgomery.€€Prior€to€trial,€however,Ð „Ô  Ðseveral€press€reports€indicated€that€Alfredo€Shaw€had€recanted€his€grand€jury€testimony,€professedÐ pÀ Ðthat€the€statement€had€been€fabricated,€and€intended€to€formally€recant€his€grand€jury€testimony€whenÐ \¬ Ðcalled€as€a€witness€for€the€defense.€€Therefore,€when€Carruthers€called€Alfredo€Shaw€to€testify,€theÐ H˜ Ðprosecution€announced€that€if€he€took€the€stand€and€recanted€his€prior€sworn€testimony,€he€wouldÐ 4„ Ðbe€charged€with€and€prosecuted€for€two€counts€of€aggravated€perjury.€€In€light€of€the€prosecutionððsÐ  p Ðannouncement,€the€trial€court€summoned€Alfredo€Shawððs€attorney€and€allowed€Alfredo€Shaw€toÐ  \ Ðconfer€privately€with€him.€€Following€that€private€conference,€Alfredo€Shawððs€attorney€advised€theÐ øH Ðtrial€court,€defense€counsel,€including€Carruthers,€and€the€prosecution,€that€Alfredo€Shaw€intendedÐ ä4 Ðto€testify€consistently€with€his€prior€statements€and€grand€jury€testimony€and€that€any€inconsistentÐ Ð  Ðstatements€Alfredo€Shaw€had€made€to€the€press€were€motivated€by€his€fear€of€Carruthers€and€byÐ ¼  Ðthreats€he€had€received€from€him.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àDespite€this€information,€Carruthers€called€Alfredo€Shaw€as€a€witness€and€as€his€attorneyÐ €Ð Ðadvised,€Shaw€provided€testimony€consistent€with€his€initial€statement€to€the€police€and€his€grandÐ l¼ Ðjury€testimony.€€Specifically,€Alfredo€Shaw€testified€that€he€had€been€on€a€three„way€call€withÐ X ¨ ÐCarruthers€and€either€Terry€or€Jerry€Durham,€and€during€this€call,€Carruthers€had€€asked€him€toÐ D!” Ðparticipate€in€these€murders,€saying€he€had€a€ð ðsweet€planðð€and€that€they€would€each€earn€$100,000Ð 0"€  Ðand€a€kilogram€of€cocaine.€€Following€his€arrest€for€these€murders,€Carruthers€was€incarcerated€inÐ #l! Ðthe€Shelby€County€Jail€along€with€Alfredo€Shaw,€who€was€incarcerated€on€unrelated€charges.€Ð $X" ÐCarruthers€and€Alfredo€Shaw€were€in€the€law€library€when€Carruthers€told€Alfredo€Shaw€that€he€andÐ ô$D # Ðsome€other€unidentified€individuals€went€to€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Andersonððs€house€looking€for€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_ÔÐ à%0!$ ÐAnderson€and€his€money.€€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€was€not€there€when€they€arrived,€but€Carruthers€told€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_ÔÐ Ì&"% ÐAnderson€to€call€her€son€and€tell€him€to€come€home,€ð ðitððs€something€important.ðð€€When€AndersonÐ ¸'#& Ðarrived,€the€defendants€forced€Anderson,€Tucker,€who€was€with€Anderson,€and€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson€intoÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€jeep€at€gunpoint€and€drove€them€to€Mississippi,€where€the€defendants€shot€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€AndersonÐ )à$( Ðand€Tucker€and€burned€the€jeep.€€According€to€Alfredo€Shaw,€the€defendants€then€drove€all€threeÐ |*Ì%) Ðvictims€back€to€Memphis€in€a€stolen€vehicle.€€Alfredo€Shaw€testified€that,€after€they€put€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_ÔÐ h+¸&* ÐAnderson€and€Tucker€into€the€grave,€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson€started€screaming€and€one€of€the€defendantsÐ ° Ðtold€her€to€ð ðshut€upðð€or€she€would€die€like€her€son€and€€pushed€her€into€the€grave.€€Carruthers€alsoÐ œì Ðtold€Alfredo€Shaw€that€the€bodies€would€never€have€been€discovered€if€ð ðthe€boy€wouldnððt€have€wentÐ ˆØ Ðand€told€them€folks.ðð€Carruthers€told€Alfredo€Shaw€that€he€was€not€going€to€hire€an€attorney€or€post€Ð tÄ Ðbond€because€the€prosecution€would€then€learn€that€the€murders€had€been€a€ð ðhit.ðð€€Carruthers€toldÐ `° ÐAlfredo€Shaw€that€Johnson€also€was€supposed€to€have€been€ð ðhitðð€and€that€Terry€and€Jerry€DurhamÐ L œ Ðwere€the€ð ðmain€people€behind€having€these€individuals€killed.ðð€€Carruthers€said€that€the€Ô_ÔDurhamsÔ_ÔÐ 8 ˆ Ðwanted€revenge€because€Anderson€and€Johnson€had€previously€stolen€from€them.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àIn€response€to€questioning€by€Carruthers,€Alfredo€Shaw€acknowledged€that€he€had€told€theÐ ü L  Ðpress€that€his€statement€to€police€and€his€grand€jury€testimony€had€been€fabricated,€but€said€he€hadÐ è 8  Ðdone€so€because€Carruthers€had€threatened€him€and€his€family.€€According€to€Alfredo€Shaw,€one€ofÐ Ô$  ÐCarruthersðð€investigators€had€arranged€for€a€news€reporter€to€speak€with€him€about€recanting€hisÐ À  Ðgrand€jury€testimony.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àAs€impeachment€of€his€own€witness,€Carruthers€called€both€Jerry€and€Terry€Durham,€twinÐ „Ô  Ðbrothers,€as€witnesses.€€The€Ô_ÔDurhamsÔ_Ô€denied€knowing€Alfredo€Shaw€and€said€they€had€never€beenÐ pÀ Ðparty€to€a€three„way€telephone€call€involving€Alfredo€Shaw€and€Carruthers.€€Carruthers€also€calledÐ \¬ Ðattorney€AC€Wharton€who€testified€that€he€was€initially€retained€by€Carruthersðð€mother€to€representÐ H˜ Ðher€son€on€these€murder€charges,€but€was€required€to€withdraw€because€of€a€conflict€of€interest.€€ThisÐ 4„ Ðtestimony€was€offered€to€impeach€Alfredo€Shawððs€statement€that€Carruthers€had€said€he€was€notÐ  p Ðgoing€to€hire€an€attorney€or€post€bond.€€Finally,€Carruthers€called€an€administrative€assistant€fromÐ  \ Ðthe€Shelby€County€jail€who€testified€that€jail€records,€indicated€that€Alfredo€Shaw€was€not€in€the€lawÐ øH Ðlibrary€at€the€same€time€as€Carruthers€in€either€February€or€March€of€1994.€€According€to€jail€records,Ð ä4 ÐAlfredo€Shaw€was€in€protective€custody€for€much€of€that€time€and,€as€a€result,€would€have€beenÐ Ð  Ðescorted€at€all€times€by€a€guard.€€However,€on€cross„examination,€this€witness€admitted€that€the€jailÐ ¼  Ðrecords€regarding€the€law€library€were€not€always€complete€or€accurate€and€that€Alfredo€Shaw€hadÐ ¨ø Ðbeen€housed€outside€of€protective€custody€from€mid„March€to€early€April€1994€which€would€haveÐ ”ä Ðafforded€him€the€opportunity€to€interact€with€Carruthers.€€The€record€reflects€that€Alfredo€Shaw€cameÐ €Ð Ðforward€and€provided€a€statement€to€police€on€March€27,€1994€and€that€the€indictments€wereÐ l¼ Ðreturned€on€March€29,€1994.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àBased€upon€this€proof,€the€jury€found€each€defendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€ofÐ 0"€  Ðthree€counts€of€first€degree€murder,€three€counts€of€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€and€one€countÐ #l! Ðof€especially€aggravated€robbery.Ð $X" ÐÌà@GG ìàòòò òThe€Sentencing€Phaseó óóóˆÐ à%0!$ Ðà  àThe€trial€proceeded€to€the€sentencing€€phase.€€The€State€relied€upon€the€proof€presentedÐ Ì&"% Ðduring€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial€and€also€introduced€evidence€to€show€that€Carruthers€had€beenÐ ¸'#& Ðpreviously€convicted€of€aggravated€assault€and€that€James€Montgomery€had€two€previousÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconvictions€for€robbery€with€a€deadly€weapon€and€one€conviction€for€assault€with€intent€to€commitÐ )à$( Ðâ ârobbery€with€a€deadly€weapon.€€The€proof€showed€that€Montgomery€was€only€seventeen€years€oldÐ |*Ì%) Ðat€the€time€he€committed€these€previous€offenses€and€that€all€of€these€previous€convictions€aroseÐ ° Ðfrom€a€single€criminal€episode.€Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€State€also€recalled€Dr.€Smith€who€testified€that€none€of€the€victims€died€instantaneouslyÐ tÄ Ðand€that€all€suffered€as€a€result€of€their€separate€injuries€and€being€buried€alive.€€Although€AndersonÐ `° Ðwas€paralyzed€below€his€chest,€Dr.€Smith€testified€that€he€would€have€felt€some€of€the€effects€of€theÐ L œ Ðtrauma€to€his€airway€and€particularly€his€windpipe,€which€is€according€to€Dr.€Smith,€a€very€painfulÐ 8 ˆ Ðinjury.€€According€to€Dr.€Smith,€the€bullet€wound€to€Andersonððs€head€would€not€have€been€fatal€hadÐ $ t Ðhe€received€proper€medical€attention€and€would€not€necessarily€have€caused€unconsciousness.€€InÐ  ` Ðaddition,€Anderson€would€have€been€able€to€breathe€after€the€spinal€cord€wound,€but€the€woundÐ ü L  Ðwould€have€bled€into€his€airway€and€his€lungs,€making€breathing€very€difficult.€€Dr.€Smith€said€thatÐ è 8  ÐAnderson€literally€would€have€been€ð ðdrowning€on€his€own€blood.ðð€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àWith€respect€to€Frederick€Tucker,€Dr.€Smith€testified€that€the€gunshot€wound€to€his€chestÐ ¬ü  Ðfractured€two€ribs€and€pierced€his€lung,€but€would€not€have€been€fatal€had€he€obtained€medicalÐ ˜è  Ðtreatment.€€Because€the€wound€bled€into€Tuckerððs€lungs€and€abdominal€cavity,€Dr.€Smith€testifiedÐ „Ô  Ðthat€Tucker€also€was€ð ðbreathing€bloodðð€and€ð ðstarving€for€oxygen.ðð€€Tucker€also€had€multiple€internalÐ pÀ Ðinjuries,€according€to€Dr.€Smith,€that€resulted€from€some€weight€being€placed€on€his€body.€€However,Ð \¬ ÐDr.€Smith€opined€that€neither€the€weight€of€Andersonððs€body€alone,€nor€the€weight€of€AndersonððsÐ H˜ Ðbody€combined€with€the€plywood€and€dirt€would€have€produced€the€extensive€internal€injuriesÐ 4„ Ðsustained€by€Tucker€and€that€some€additional€weight€or€force€had€been€applied€to€his€body.Ð  p ÐÌà  àDr.€Smith€testified€that€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson€also€had€sustained€several€injuries,€including€a€scalpÐ øH Ðtear€on€the€back€of€her€head€inflicted€two€to€six€hours€before€her€death,€an€injury€to€her€foreheadÐ ä4 Ðconsistent€with€her€position€in€the€grave,€and€injuries€to€her€neck€consistent€with€manualÐ Ð  Ðstrangulation.€€None€of€these€injuries€would€have€caused€death€had€she€been€afforded€medicalÐ ¼  Ðtreatment.€€Dr.€Smith€testified€that€Ô_ÔDeloisÔ_Ô€Anderson€died€from€asphyxia€caused€by€the€position€ofÐ ¨ø Ðher€head€against€her€body,€dirt€in€her€mouth€and€nose,€and€trauma€from€weight€on€her€body.€€Ð ”ä Ðà  àÌà  àAs€mitigating€evidence€Montgomery€presented€the€testimony€of€his€cousin,€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw,Ð l¼ Ðthat€she€and€Montgomery€had€a€close€relationship€during€their€childhood€and€teenage€years,€that€theyÐ X ¨ Ðhad€attended€elementary€school€together,€that€Montgomery€had€been€her€ð ðbrotherðð€and€ð ðprotector,ððÐ D!” Ðand€that€they€had€continued€their€close€relationship€as€adults.€€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€said€that€MontgomeryÐ 0"€  Ðhas€other€siblings,€including€a€thirty„year„old€sister,€a€twenty„six„year„old€brother,€and€a€fourteen„Ð #l! Ðyear„old€brother.€€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€said€that€she€still€loves€Montgomery€very€much,€and€she€asked€theÐ $X" Ðjury€to€spare€his€life.€€Montgomeryððs€aunt,€Mattie€Calhoun,€also€testified€on€his€behalf.€€Calhoun€saidÐ ô$D # Ðthat€Montgomery€was€an€average€student,€that€he€had€a€very€poor€relationship€with€his€father,€thatÐ à%0!$ Ðanother€man€had€helped€to€rear€Montgomery€when€his€father€abandoned€him€at€age€five€or€six,€andÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€this€individual€had€died€in€1986.€Calhoun€told€the€jury€that€the€prosecution€had€the€ð ðwrongÐ ¸'#& Ðpeopleðð€and€begged€the€jury€to€spare€Montgomeryððs€life.€€Lastly,€Montgomery€testified€on€his€ownÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbehalf€about€how€he€and€his€brothers€and€sisters€were€raised€by€his€mother€in€Memphis€and€aboutÐ )à$( Ðhow€he€last€saw€his€father,€who€was€still€alive,€when€he€was€five€years€old.€€He€testified€that€he€hadÐ |*Ì%) Ðspent€slightly€over€nine€years€in€the€penitentiary€for€previous€convictions,€that€he€had€a€job€when€heÐ h+¸&* Ðwas€released€in€January€1994,€€and€that€at€the€time€of€these€crimes€his€ten„year„old€son€was€livingÐ ° Ðwith€him.€€Montgomery€proclaimed€his€innocence€and€asked€the€jury€to€spare€his€life.Ð œì ÐÌà  àCarruthers€presented€the€testimony€of€Bishop€Richard€L.€Fiddler,€who€had€been€involved€inÐ tÄ Ðprison€ministry€for€twenty€years€and€had€visited€Carruthers€while€he€was€incarcerated€awaiting€trial.€Ð `° ÐFiddler€believed€that€Carruthers€was€honest€and€straightforward,€was€ð ða€person€of€quality€andÐ L œ Ðworth,ðð€and€was€very€upset€about€the€victimsðð€deaths.€€According€to€Fiddler,€Carruthers€viewed€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðtrial€as€his€opportunity€to€be€vindicated.€€Fiddler€asked€the€jury€to€spare€Carruthersðð€life.€€CarruthersððÐ $ t Ðsister,€Ô_ÔTonyaÔ_Ô€Yvette€Miller,€a€counselor€at€the€Shelby€County€adult€offender€center,€testified€thatÐ  ` Ðtheir€mother€raised€four€children€on€her€own€in€one€of€the€worst€housing€projects€in€Memphis€andÐ ü L  Ðthat,€as€the€oldest€son,€Carruthers€was€the€ð ðman€of€the€household.ðð€€Miller€admitted€that€her€brotherÐ è 8  Ðhad€fallen€into€bad€company€and€had€a€hot€temper€but€testified€that€he€never€planned€to€do€anythingÐ Ô$  Ðwrong€but€acted€out€of€ð ðanguish€and€anger.ðð€€She€also€stated€that€her€brother€had€been€raised€to€tellÐ À  Ðthe€truth.€€Miller€told€the€jury€that€if€she€believed€her€brother€had€committed€these€crimes€she€wouldÐ ¬ü  Ðbe€the€first€person€to€say€that€he€deserved€the€death€penalty,€but€Miller€said€that€Carruthers€wasÐ ˜è  Ðinnocent€and€that,€therefore,€he€ð ðdoes€not€deserve€the€death€sentence.ðð€€Testifying€€on€his€own€behalf,Ð „Ô  ÐCarruthers€asserted€that€he€was€innocent€of€the€crimes€and€did€not€deserve€to€die.€€He€said€he€wouldÐ pÀ Ðnot€have€killed€his€friend€because€he€ð ðwasnððt€raised€like€that.ðð€Ð \¬ ÐÌà@––$ìàòòò òJury€Findingsóóó óˆÐ 4„ Ðà  àBased€on€this€proof,€the€jury€found€the€following€aggravating€circumstances€as€to€eachÐ  p Ðdefendant€on€each€of€the€three€murder€convictions:€(1)€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€defendant€was€previously€convictedÐ  \ Ðof€one€(1)€or€more€felonies,€other€than€the€present€charge,€whose€statutory€elements€involve€the€useÐ øH Ðof€violence€to€the€person;ðð€(2)€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€murder€was€especially€heinous,€atrocious€or€cruel€in€that€itÐ ä4 Ðinvolved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€to€produce€death;ðð€(3)€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€murderÐ Ð  Ðwas€committed€while€the€defendant€was€engaged€in€committing,€or€was€an€accomplice€in€theÐ ¼  Ðcommission€of,€or€was€attempting€to€commit,€or€was€fleeing€after€committing€or€attempting€toÐ ¨ø Ðcommit,€any€first€degree€murder,€arson,€rape,€robbery,€burglary,€theft,€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€aircraft€piracy;Ð ”ä Ðor€unlawful€throwing,€placing€or€discharging€of€a€destructive€device€or€bomb;ðð€(4)€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€defendantÐ €Ð Ðcommitted€mass€murder,€which€is€defined€as€the€murder€of€three€(3)€or€more€persons€within€the€stateÐ l¼ Ðof€Tennessee€within€a€period€of€forty„eight€(48)€months,€and€perpetrated€in€a€similar€fashion€in€aÐ X ¨ Ðcommon€scheme€or€plan.ðð€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„204(2),€(5),€(7),€and€(12)€(Supp.€1994).׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РD!” ÐFinding€that€these€aggravating€circumstances€outweighed€mitigating€circumstances€beyond€aÐ 0"€  Ðreasonable€doubt,€the€jury€imposed€the€death€sentence€as€to€each€defendant€for€each€of€the€threeÐ #l! Ðmurder€convictions.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÐ $X" ÐÐ ô$D # Ðà@"ìàòòò òAppellate€Reviewó óóóˆÐ ° Ðà  àOn€direct€appeal€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€the€defendants€challenged€both€theirÐ œì Ðconvictions€of€first€degree€murder€and€their€death€sentences,€raising€numerous€claims€of€error.€€AfterÐ ˆØ Ðfully€considering€the€defendantsðð€claims,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€affirmed€the€convictions€andÐ tÄ Ðsentences.€€Pursuant€to€statute,Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€the€case€was€thereafter€docketed€in€this€Court.€Ð `° ÐÌÓ'€ÐŽXê$ø%X°œX'Óà  àThe€defendants€raised€numerous€issues€in€this€Court,€and€after€carefully€examining€the€entireÐ 8 ˆ Ðrecord€and€the€law,€including€the€thorough€opinion€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€and€the€briefsÐ $ t Ðof€the€defendants€and€the€State,€this€Court€entered€an€order€setting€the€cause€for€oral€argument€andÐ  ` Ðdesignating€ten€issues€for€oral€argument.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€S.€Ct.€R.€12.׃(×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àAfter€carefully€and€fully€reviewing€the€record,€the€briefs€of€counsel,€and€the€relevant€legalÐ Ô$  Ðauthority,€we€conclude€that€none€of€the€assigned€errors€require€reversal€of€defendant€CarruthersððÐ À  Ðconvictions€or€sentences.€€Moreover,€with€respect€to€defendant€Carruthers,€we€have€determined€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€evidence€supports€the€juryððs€findings€as€to€aggravating€and€mitigating€circumstances,€that€theÐ ˜è  Ðsentences€of€death€were€not€imposed€in€an€arbitrary€fashion,€and€that€the€sentences€of€death€are€notÐ „Ô  Ðexcessive€or€disproportionate€to€the€penalty€imposed€in€similar€cases,€considering€both€the€natureÐ pÀ Ðof€the€crimes€and€the€defendant.€€Accordingly,€defendant€Carruthersðð€convictions€for€first€degreeÐ \¬ Ðmurder€and€sentences€of€death€are€affirmed.€€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àHowever,€we€also€have€determined€that€defendant€Montgomery€should€have€been€grantedÐ  p Ða€severance€and€that€the€failure€to€grant€a€severance€in€this€case€resulted€in€prejudicial€error€requiringÐ  \ Ða€new€trial.€€Accordingly,€we€reverse€Montgomeryððs€convictions€and€sentences€and€remand€his€caseÐ øH Ðfor€a€new€trial.Ð ä4 ÐÌà@‚‚&ìàòòò òAnalysisóóó óˆÐ ¼  Ðà@Ê Ê ìàòòò òDismissal€of€the€Murder€Indictmentsó óóóˆÐ ¨ø Ðà  àDefendant€Carruthers€first€contends€that€the€indictments€should€have€been€dismissed€becauseÐ ”ä Ðthey€were€based€upon€what€he€terms€ð ðthe€admittedly€questionableðð€testimony€of€Alfredo€Shaw€beforeÐ €Ð Ðthe€grand€jury.€€Carruthers€also€argues€that€he€was€entitled€to€a€transcript€of€the€grand€juryÐ l¼ Ðproceedings.€€We€disagree.Ð X ¨ Ðâ âÐ D!” Ðà  àIt€has€long€been€the€rule€in€this€State€that€the€sufficiency€and€legality€of€the€evidenceÐ ° Ðâ âconsidered€by€the€grand€jury€is€not€subject€to€judicial€review.׃3×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Where€an€indictment€is€valid€on€itsÐ œì Ðface,€it€is€sufficient€to€require€a€trial€of€the€charge€on€the€merits€to€determine€the€guilt€or€innocenceÐ ˆØ Ðof€the€accused,€regardless€of€the€sufficiency€or€legality€of€the€evidence€considered€by€the€grand€jury.Ô_Ô׃Sd×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àAs€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€recognized€in€òòCostello€v.€United€Statesóó,€350€U.S.€359,Ð L œ Ð361,€76€S.€Ct.€406,€408€100€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.€397€(1956):€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÔ_ÔÔ_Ôà8  àIf€indictments€were€to€be€held€open€to€challenge€on€the€ground€that€there€wasÐ $ t Ðinadequate€or€incompetent€evidence€before€the€grand€jury,€the€resulting€delay€wouldÐ  ` Ðbe€great€indeed.€€The€results€of€such€a€rule€would€be€that€before€trial€on€the€merits€aÐ ü L  Ðdefendant€could€always€insist€on€a€kind€of€preliminary€trial€to€determine€theÐ è 8  Ðcompetency€and€adequacy€of€the€evidence€before€the€grand€jury.€ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌÔ_ÔòòSeeóóÔ_Ô€òòalsoóó€òòBurtonóó,€214€Tenn.€at€16,€377€S.W.2d€at€903€(quoting€òòCostelloóó€with€approval).€€We€declineÐ ¬ü  Ðto€adopt€such€a€rule.€€Carruthersðð€claim€that€the€indictments€must€be€dismissed€because€AlfredoÐ ˜è  ÐShawððs€testimony€before€the€grand€jury€was€not€trustworthy€is€without€merit.׃2˜×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€This€matter€is€notÐ „Ô  Ðsubject€to€judicial€review.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAlso€without€merit€is€Carruthersðð€claim€that€he€was€entitled€to€a€transcript€of€the€grand€juryÐ H˜ Ðproceedings.€€With€certain€limited€exceptions€that€do€not€apply€in€this€case€general€law€mandates€thatÐ 4„ Ðgrand€jury€proceedings€remain€secret.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€6(k)(1)€(stating€that€such€proceedingsÐ  p Ðare€secret);€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€6(k)(2)€(allowing€disclosure€of€grand€jury€proceedings€to€ascertain€ifÐ  \ Ðthe€testimony€of€a€witness€before€the€grand€jury€is€consistent€with€the€testimony€of€the€witness€at€trialÐ øH Ðand€allowing€disclosure€of€grand€jury€testimony€of€any€witness€charged€with€perjury);€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.Ð ä4 ÐP.€16(a)(3)€(requiring€the€state€to€provide€as€discovery€to€the€defendant€any€ð ðrecorded€testimony€ofÐ Ð  Ðthe€defendant€before€a€grand€jury€which€relates€to€the€offense€chargedðð);€òòcf.óó€òòTiller€v.€Stateóó,€600Ð ° ÐS.W.2d€709,€712€(Tenn.€1980)€(discussing€the€secrecy€requirement€that€applies€to€grand€juryÐ œì Ðproceedings).׃%×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ˆØ ÐÌà@XX ìàòòò òForfeiture€of€Counselóóó óˆÐ `° Ðà  àWe€begin€our€analysis€of€this€issue€by€summarizing€the€events€that€culminated€in€CarruthersÐ L œ Ðbeing€required€to€represent€himself€at€trial.€€As€previously€stated,€these€crimes€occurred€on€FebruaryÐ 8 ˆ Ð24€or€25,€1994.€€Carruthersðð€family€initially€retained€AC€Wharton,€Jr.,€to€represent€him.€€WhartonÐ $ t Ðwas€allowed€to€withdraw€on€March€19,€1994,€because€of€a€conflict€of€interest.€€On€May€31,€1994,Ð  ` Ðthe€trial€court€appointed€Larry€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€to€represent€Carruthers.€€The€State€filed€a€notice€of€intent€toÐ ü L  Ðseek€the€death€penalty€on€July€8,€1994.€€At€a€hearing€held€on€July€15,€1994,€the€trial€court€scheduledÐ è 8  Ða€pre„trial€motions€hearing€for€September€30,€1994€and€set€the€case€for€trial€on€February€20,€1995.€Ð Ô$  ÐCarruthers€was€present€at€this€hearing€and€asked€the€trial€court,€ð ðIððd€like€to€know€why€this€is€beingÐ À  Ðdragged€out€like€this.€€€I€asked€Mr.€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€if€we€can€go€forward€with€a€motion€of€discovery€and€heððsÐ ¬ü  Ðasking€for€a€reset.€€And€Iððd€like€to€know€why.ðð€€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€informed€the€court€that€he€was€planning€toÐ ˜è  Ðvisit€the€prosecutorððs€office€later€in€the€week€to€review€the€discoverable€materials€and€evidence.€€TheÐ „Ô  Ðtrial€judge€then€advised€Carruthers€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àà ` à[Ô_ÔG]ivenÔ_Ô€the€fact€that€the€trial€isnððt€until€February,€weððre€setting€the€next€CourtÐ H˜ Ðdate€in€September€for€the€arguing€of€motions.€€Between€now€and€September,€yourÐ 4„ Ðattorney€and€the€attorneys€representing€your€two€co„defendants€can€get€with€theÐ  p Ðprosecutors€and€can€obtain€their€discovery.€€Theyððre€all€excellent€attorneys.€€AndÐ  \ Ðtheyððll€all€do€that.€€And€once€theyððve€obtained€the€discovery,€theyððll€meet€with€theirÐ øH Ðclients€and€theyððll€file€appropriate€motions,€which€will€be€heard€on€September€30th,Ð ä4 Ðwhich€will€still€be€well€in€advance€of€the€trial€date,€which€will€give€everyone€ampleÐ Ð  Ðtime€to€then€evaluate€the€case,€after€the€motions€have€been€heard€and€ruled€on.€€SoÐ ¼  Ðgiven€the€fact€that€we€canððt€get€a€three„defendant€capital€case€thatððs€still€in€theÐ ¨ø Ðarraignment€stage€to€trial€any€earlier€than€February,€thereððs€plenty€of€time€for€yourÐ ”ä Ðattorneys€to€meet€with€the€prosecutors,€get€the€discovery,€meet€with€the€clients,€fileÐ €Ð Ðmotions,€argue€motions.€€Just€because€he€hadnððt€done€it€yesterday,€because€you€wantÐ l¼ Ðhim€to€have€it€done€yesterday,€doesnððt€mean€that€heððs€not€working€on€your€caseÐ X ¨ Ðdiligently€and€properly.€€Heððll€have€everything€done€well€in€advance€of€the€next€CourtÐ D!” Ðdate.€€And€so,€you€know,€he€may€not€do€it€the€very€moment€you€want€it€done,€butÐ 0"€  Ðyouððre€going€to€have€to€work€with€him€on€that€because€thereððs€ample€time€for€him€toÐ #l! Ðget€it€done.€Ð$X"Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ ô$D # ÐÓ' °X€ÐŽXê$ø%X'Óà  àOn€August€12,€1994,€the€trial€court€appointed€Craig€Morton€to€assist€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô.׃)×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€When€the€pre„Ð ° Ðâ âtrial€motions€hearing€convened€on€September€30,€1994,€all€defense€attorneys€involved€€in€the€caseÐ œì Ðrequested€a€continuance€until€November€14,€1994€so€that€additional€pre„trial€motions€could€be€filed.€Ð ˆØ ЀThe€trial€judge€agreed€to€continue€the€hearing€and€also€indicated€that,€where€appropriate,€a€pre„trialÐ tÄ Ðmotion€filed€on€behalf€of€one€defendant€would€be€applied€to€all€defendants€without€a€specificÐ `° Ðrequest.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àBecause€the€trial€judge€had€received€ð ðan€abundance€of€correspondence€from€both€Mr.Ð $ t ÐMontgomery€and€Mr.€Carruthers€expressing€concern€about€the€pretrial€investigation€that€has€beenÐ  ` Ðconducted€by€their€attorneys,ðð€the€defendants€were€brought€into€open€court€and€advised€of€theÐ ü L  Ðcontinuance.€€The€trial€judge€then€asked€the€attorneys€to€ð ðstate,€for€the€record,€the€work€that€theyððveÐ è 8  Ðdone€and€the€work€they€intend€to€continue€doing€on€behalf€of€their€client.ðð€€Each€team€of€defenseÐ Ô$  Ðlawyers€reported€to€the€trial€judge€on€the€work€that€had€been€completed€and€on€the€work€theyÐ À  Ðintended€to€complete€in€the€following€days.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àIn€particular,€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€indicated€that€he€had€inspected€a€majority€of€the€physical€evidence,€filedÐ „Ô  Ðsix€or€seven€motions,€issued€subpoenas€for€approximately€eight€witnesses,€interviewed€several€ofÐ pÀ Ðthe€one„hundred€witnesses€listed€by€the€State,׃Jd×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€met€with€Carruthers€in€lock„up€at€the€courtroom€onÐ \¬ Ðtwo€separate€occasions,€met€with€Carruthersðð€family,€and€spent€approximately€twenty„five€hours€onÐ H˜ Ðthe€case.€€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€admitted€that€ð ðsome€enmityðð€had€developed€between€him€and€Carruthers,€butÐ 4„ Ðindicated€that€he€believed€the€problem€could€be€resolved.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àCarruthers€also€was€allowed€to€voice€his€complaints€about€his€attorneys€on€the€record,€andÐ øH Ðhis€primary€complaint€was€that€his€attorneys€had€not€met€with€him€as€often€as€he€had€expected.€€AfterÐ ä4 Ðhearing€the€comments€of€both€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€and€Carruthers,€the€trial€judge€concluded€as€follows:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àin€my€opinion,€what€has€been€done€thus€far€in€this€case,€given€the€fact€that€there€areÐ ¨ø Ðstill€six€more€weeks€before€the€next€motion€date,€and€then€a€full€three€months€beyondÐ ”ä Ðthat€before€the€trial€date,€is€appropriate€and€well€within€the€standards€of€properÐ €Ð Ðrepresentation.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOn€October€21,€1994,€the€trial€court€approved€payment€for€investigative€services€forÐ D!” Ðâ âCarruthers€and€authorized€competency€evaluations€for€both€defendants.€€Morton€informed€the€trialÐ 0"€  Ðcourt€that€the€investigator,€Arthur€Anderson,€had€attempted€twice€to€meet€with€Carruthers€at€theÐ ° ÐShelby€County€jail€and€that€Carruthers€had€refused€to€meet€with€him€on€both€occasions.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àOn€November€14,€1994,€Carruthers€filed€his€first€motion€for€substitution€of€counsel.€€FourÐ tÄ Ðdays€later,€on€November€18,€Morton€asked€the€trial€court€to€appoint€a€different€investigator€whoÐ `° Ðwould€take€a€more€aggressive€approach.€€The€trial€court€agreed€to€appoint€a€new€investigator€andÐ L œ Ðcontinued€the€hearing€date€on€the€pre„trial€motions€until€December€16,€1994.€€On€November€23,Ð 8 ˆ Ð1994,€Morton€advised€the€trial€court€that€he€had€retained€the€services€of€Premier€Investigation.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àAlthough€the€record€does€not€reflect€that€a€hearing€was€held,€the€trial€court€allowed€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_ÔÐ ü L  Ðto€withdraw€from€representing€Carruthers€on€December€9,€1994.׃*×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€According€to€statements€made€byÐ è 8  Ðthe€trial€court€at€a€later€hearing,€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€was€allowed€to€withdraw€because€of€ð ðpersonal€physicalÐ Ô$  Ðthreatsðð€made€by€Carruthers€that€escalated€to€the€point€that€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€did€not€ð ðfeel€comfortable€or€safe,Ð À  Ðpersonally€safe,€in€continuing€to€represent€Mr.€Tony€Carruthers.ððÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà  àColeman€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€was€appointed€to€replace€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€and€represent€Carruthers€along€withÐ „Ô  ÐMorton.€€The€trial€judge€also€authorized€James€Turner,€a€third€attorney,€to€assist€the€defense€as€anÐ pÀ Ðinvestigator.€€Both€counsel€and€Carruthers€continued€to€file€pre„trial€motions.€€Some€of€these€motionsÐ \¬ Ðwere€heard€on€December€16,€1994,€and€another€hearing€was€scheduled€for€January€30,€1995.€€On€thatÐ H˜ Ðdate,€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€and€Morton€appeared€and€presented€argument€on€over€seventeen€motions.€€At€thisÐ 4„ Ðhearing,€the€trial€judge€agreed€to€reschedule€the€trial€from€February€of€1995€to€September€5,€1995.€Ð  p ÐAt€a€hearing€on€May€1,€1995,€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€and€Morton€presented€argument€on€several€more€pre„trialÐ  \ Ðmotions€including€a€motion€to€dismiss€the€indictments,€a€motion€to€sever,€and€a€request€for€expertÐ øH Ðservices€to€analyze€an€audio„tape€of€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shawððs€statement.€€On€May€5,€investigator/attorneyÐ ä4 ÐJames€Turner€was€allowed€to€withdraw€because€he€was€a€solo€practitioner€and€could€not€maintainÐ Ð  Ðhis€practice€and€effectively€perform€the€investigation€needed€on€the€case.€€However,€the€trial€courtÐ ¼  Ðappointed€another€attorney,€Glenn€Wright,€to€act€as€investigator.€€On€June€2,€1995,€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€againÐ ¨ø Ðargued€that€the€indictments€should€be€dismissed€€due€to€Shawððs€allegedly€false€testimony€before€theÐ ”ä Ðgrand€jury.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àOn€June€23,€1995,€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô,€Morton,€and€Wright€sought€and€were€granted€permission€toÐ X ¨ Ðwithdraw€by€the€trial€court.€€The€record€reflects€that€Carruthers€also€filed€a€motion€for€substitutionÐ D!” Ðof€counsel.€€At€a€hearing€on€July€27,€1995,€the€trial€court€appointed€William€Massey€and€Harry€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_ÔÐ 0"€  Ðto€represent€Carruthers.€€During€this€hearing,€the€trial€judge€commented€as€follows:Ð #l! ÐÌà8  àà ` àAll€right.€€I€understand€that€these€three€defendants€are€on€trial€for€their€livesÐ ô$D # Ðand€that€these€are€the€most€serious€of€charges€and€that€they€are€all€concerned€that€theyÐ à%0!$ Ðare€well€represented€and€properly€represented,€and€itððs€everyoneððs€desire€to€see€to€itÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€they€are€well€represented€and€properly€represented.€€And€toward€that€end,€effortsÐ ° Ðare€being€made€that€they€are€represented€by€attorneys€that€have€enough€experienceÐ œì Ðto€handle€this€type€of€case€and€by€attorneys€that€can€establish€a€rapport€with€theirÐ ˆØ Ðclients€that€would€allow€them€to€represent€their€clients€well.€€ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àWe€have€gone€through€several€attorneys€now€in€an€effort€to€accommodate€theÐ L œ Ðdefendantsðð€requests€in€that€regard,€but€at€some€pointð!ðand€in€my€opinion,€each€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðattorneys€and€each€of€the€investigators€that€has€represented€these€defendants€that€hasÐ $ t Ðbeen€relieved€have€been€eminently€qualified€to€do€the€job,€but€I€have€allowed€themÐ  ` Ðto€be€relieved€for€one€reason€or€another.€€Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àI€want€the€record€to€be€perfectly€clear€at€this€point€because€of€someÐ Ô$  Ðsuggestions€that€have€already€been€raised€by€some€of€the€correspondence€that€I€haveÐ À  Ðreceived€from€Mr.€Carruthers,€and€all€of€it,€by€the€way,€will€be€made€a€part€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðrecord.€€òòBut€Mr.€Carruthers€has€suggested,€in€his€correspondence,€that€some€of€theÐ ˜è  Ðprevious€attorneys€have€been€relieved€because€they€werenððt€capable€or€competent€toÐ „Ô  Ðdo€the€job.€€And€that€is,€in€my€opinion,€at€leastð!ðmy€humble€opinion€as€the€judge€inÐ pÀ Ðthis€caseð!ðabsolutely€and€totally€an€inaccurate€statement.€€The€attorneys€that€have€beenÐ \¬ Ðrelieved€thus€far€have€been€fully€capable€and€fully€competent€and€had€been€doing€anÐ H˜ Ðoutstanding€job,€but€for€a€variety€of€reasons,€Iððve€allowed€them€to€withdraw€from€theÐ 4„ Ðcase.óó€€€€€€€Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ øH ÐÌà8  àà ` àMr.€Carruthers€has€raised,€through€his€correspondence,€and€apparently€Ð Ð  Ðthrough€direct€communication€with€his€previous€attorneys,€certain€matters€that€areÐ ¼  Ðpretty€outrageous€suggestions,€but€because€of€the€nature€of€the€matters€that€heððsÐ ¨ø Ðraised,€the€attorneys€that€represented€him€previously€felt€that€an€irreparable€breachÐ ”ä Ðhad€occurred€between€their€abilityð!ðbetween€Mr.€Carruthers€and€themselvesð!ðeffectingÐ €Ð Ðtheir€ability€to€continue€to€represent€them.€€òòAnd€at€some€pointð!ðand€that€could€wellÐ l¼ Ðhave€been€the€point,€but€it€wasnððt.€€But€at€some€point€these€matters€that€are€raised€byÐ X ¨ Ðthe€defendants€cannot€continue€to€be€used€to€get€new€counsel€because€it€gets€to€be€aÐ D!” Ðpoint€where€theyððreð!ðitððs€already€well€beyond€that€point,€but,€obviously,€at€some€point,Ð 0"€  Ðgets€to€the€point€where€theyððre€manipulating€the€system€and€getting€what€theyÐ #l! Ðwantð!ðMr.€Carruthers,€sit€still,€please,€or€you€can€sit€back€there€ð!ðgets€to€the€pointÐ $X" Ðwhere€theyððre€manipulating€the€system€and€getting€trial€dates€and€representation€thatÐ ô$D # Ðthey€want€and€are€calling€the€shots.óó€€Thatððs€another€matter€thatððs€been€raised€by€Mr.Ð à%0!$ ÐCarruthers€in€some€of€his€correspondence,€that€he€wants€his€attorneys€to€know€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðheððs€the€man€calling€the€shots€in€this€case,€and€heððs€the€man€to€look€to.и'#&Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àWell,€of€course,€again,€itððs€a€free€country,€and€he€can€say€whatever€he€wants,Ð )à$( Ðand€he€can€think€whatever€he€wants,€but€as€far€as€Iððm€concernedð!ðand€this€applies€toÐ |*Ì%) Ðall€three€defendants€and€any€defendants€that€come€through€this€court€that€areÐ h+¸&* Ðrepresented€by€counselð!ðand€this€gets€back€to€what€Mr.€Ô_ÔMcLinÔ_Ô€alluded€to€earlierð!ðtheÐ ° Ðattorneys€are€calling€the€shots€in€this€case.€€They€are€trying€the€case€except€for€certainÐ œì Ðareas€where€the€defendant€has€the€exclusive€and€final€say,€such€as€areas€of€whetherÐ ˆØ Ðhe€wants€to€testify€or€not€and€that€sort€of€thing.€€The€attorneys€are€in€here€representingÐ tÄ Ðthese€clients€and€will€do€so€to€the€best€of€their€ability.€€They€are€the€ones€who€haveÐ `° Ðbeen€to€law€school.€€They€are€the€ones€that€have€been€through€trial€many€timesÐ L œ Ðbefore,€and€theyððre€the€ones€that€are€here€for€a€reason,€and€that€reason€is€to€representÐ 8 ˆ Ðthese€individuals.€€And,€so€you€know,€if€thereððs€a€conflict€between€the€attorney€andÐ $ t Ðclient€with€regard€to€how€to€proceed€in€the€case,€you€all€resolve€it€as€best€you€can,€butÐ  ` Ðultimately€the€attorney€is€trying€the€case.€€And,€you€know,€we€donððt€pull€people€in€offÐ ü L  Ðthe€sidewalk€to€try€these€cases,€and€the€reason€we€donððt€is€because€of€certain€thingsÐ è 8  Ðthat€they€need€to€learn€and€certain€experiences€they€need€to€have€professionallyÐ Ô$  Ðbefore€theyððre€prepared€to€try€these€cases.€€So€theyððre€here€for€that€reason€and€for€thatÐ À  Ðpurpose.€€€Ð¬ü Ð Ð  ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ „Ô  ÐÌà8  àà ` àSo€that€gets€me€to€the€reason€for€our€being€here.€€òòBecause€of€the€mattersÐ \¬ Ðraised€by€Mr.€Carruthers,€I€have€granted€the€request€of€his€previous€two€attorneys€andÐ H˜ Ðinvestigator€reluctantly€because,€in€my€opinion,€they€were€doing€an€outstanding€jobÐ 4„ Ðof€representing€Mr.€Carruthers€and€his€interests.óó€€Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ øH ÐÌà8  àà ` àBecause€of€the€most€recent€rash€of€allegations€raised€by€Mr.€Carruthers€in€hisÐ Ð  Ðmany€letters€that€heððs€sent€með!ðI€assume€heððs€sent€copies€of€the€letters€to€his€counselÐ ¼  Ðand€to€others,€but€Iððve€certainly€got€them,€and€they€will€be€made€a€part€of€the€record.€Ð ¨ø ÐAnd€because€of€the€types€of€things€he€alleged€in€those€letters€and€the€position€that€itÐ ”ä Ðput€his€previous€attorneys€in,€and€their€very,€very€strong€feelings€about€not€continuingÐ €Ð Ðto€represent€Mr.€Carruthers€under€those€circumstances,€I€have€reluctantly€agreed€toÐ l¼ Ðlet€them€withdraw.ÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àAnd€in€an€effort€again€to€get€attorneys€who€Iððm€satisfied€have€the€experienceÐ 0"€  Ðand€the€willingness€to€handle€a€case€of€this€seriousness,€I€have€approached€and€amÐ #l! Ðinclined€to€appoint€Mr.€Harry€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô,€who€is€out€of€town€this€week€and€couldnððt€beÐ $X" Ðhere€today€but€who€indicated€he€would€be€willing€to€take€the€case€on,€and€Mr.€BillÐ ô$D # ÐMassey,€to€represent€Mr.€Carruthers.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà@ÀÀ&ìà*€€*€*€*ˆÐ ¸'#& ÐÌà8  àà ` àòòAnd€as€I€have€stated,€Iððm€running€out€of€patience€with€regard€to€theseÐ )à$( Ðdifferent€issuesð!ðand€I€use€that€word€advisedlyð!ðbeing€raised€by€the€clients€with€regardÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€any€objections€they€have€with€regard€to€their€attorneys.€€And€as€far€as€IððmÐ h+¸&* Ðconcerned,€these€are€the€attorneys€that€will€represent€these€men€at€trial.€€Itððs€going€toÐ ° Ðhave€to€be€one€gigantic€conflictð!ðone€gigantic€and€real€proven,€demonstrated€conflictÐ œì Ðbefore€any€of€these€men€will€be€relieved€from€representation€in€this€case.€€There€willÐ ˆØ Ðbe€no€more€perceived€conflicts,€no€more€unfounded,€wild€allegations€raised€throughÐ tÄ Ðcorrespondence,€no€more€dissatisfaction€with€how€my€attorney€is€handling€my€caseÐ `° Ðfor€anybody€to€be€relieved€in€this€case.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThese€are€the€attorneys,€gentlemen.€€You€either€work€with€them€or€donððt.€€ItððsÐ $ t Ðup€to€you.€€But€theyððre€the€men€that€are€going€to€be€representing€you€at€trial.óóÐ `Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)€€Consistent€with€prior€practice,€the€trial€court€approved€an€initial€$1000Ð è 8  Ðexpenditure€for€investigative€services€for€Carruthersðð€newly€appointed€defense€team€and€conditionedÐ Ô$  Ðfurther€funding€upon€a€specific€showing€of€necessity€by€the€investigator.€€Massey€indicated€that€heÐ À  Ðpreferred€to€use€his€own€investigator€rather€than€an€attorney;€therefore,€Arthur€Anderson,€whoÐ ¬ü  Ðpreviously€had€been€employed€on€the€case,€was€retained.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€approved€additional€funding€for€investigative€services€on€August€11,€AugustÐ pÀ Ð31,€and€again€on€September€27,€1995.€€Also,€due€to€his€recent€appointment€to€the€case,€MasseyÐ \¬ Ðrequested€and€was€afforded€a€trial€continuance€until€January€8,€1996.€€Like€previous€counsel,€MasseyÐ H˜ Ðand€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€filed€many€pre„trial€motions€on€behalf€of€Carruthers.€€By€November€17,€1995,€MasseyÐ 4„ Ðinformed€the€trial€court€that€all€necessary€and€appropriate€pre„trial€motions€had€been€filed.Ð  p ÐÌà  àHowever,€about€a€month€later,€on€December€19,€1995,€Massey€filed€a€motion€requestingÐ øH Ðpermission€to€withdraw€as€counsel.€€As€grounds€for€the€motion,€Massey€stated€that€his€relationshipÐ ä4 Ðwith€Carruthers€had€ð ðdeteriorated€to€such€a€serious€degree€that€[counsel]€can€not€provide€effectiveÐ Ð  Ðassistance€as€required€by€state€and€federal€law.€.€.€.€€Counselððs€professional€judgment€cannot€beÐ ¼  Ðexercised€solely€for€the€benefit€of€Defendant,€as€counsel€fears€for€his€safety€and€those€around€him.ðð€Ð ¨ø ÐAttached€to€the€motion€were€several€letters€Carruthers€had€€sent€to€Massey,€both€at€his€home€and€atÐ ”ä Ðhis€office€in€late€November€and€early€December€of€1995.€€In€the€letters,€Carruthers€accused€MasseyÐ €Ð Ðof€lying,׃+×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€of€being€on€drugs,׃,×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€threatened€counsel,׃-h×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€expressed€overall€dissatisfaction€withÐ l¼ Ðcounselððs€handling€of€the€case.׃8¸×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Massey€made€the€following€statements€to€the€trial€court€at€theÐ X ¨ Ðâ âhearing€on€his€motion€to€withdraw:Ð D!” Ðà8  àI€would€just€say€that€in€15€years€of€practicing€law,€I€have€never€ever€made€a€motionÐ ° Ðâ âof€this€nature.€€I€have€neverð!ðIððve€never€found€it€difficult€to€advocate€on€behalf€of€aÐ œì Ðcase.€€I€wouldnððt€find€it€difficult€to€advocate€on€behalf€of€this€case.€€òòI€do€at€this€point,Ð ˆØ Ðhowever,€find€it€very€difficult€to€advocate€on€behalf€of€Mr.€Carruthers.€€And€that€isÐ tÄ Ðsimply€because€heððs€made€it€that€way.óó€€If€I€were€receiving€letters€that€merely€statedÐ `° ÐI€was€incompetent€and€that€I€wasnððt€handling€his€case€right,€and€those€type€ofÐ L œ Ðlettersð!ðwe€all€get€those€time€to€timeð!ðI€donððt€mind€those.€€Those€donððt€bother€me.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐòòWhen€I€have€letters€that€come€to€me€that€are€threatening,€when€I€have€telephone€callsÐ $ t Ðthat€come€to€my€office€that€are€threatening€the€safety€of€me€and€my€staff€and€thoseÐ  ` Ðaround€me,€I€have€real€problems€with€that.€€Itððs€gotten€so€bad,€your€Honor,€that€myÐ ü L  Ðsecretary€is€having€nightmares.€€The€last€call€Mr.€Carruthers€made€is€Exhibit€E€to€thisÐ è 8  Ðverified€motion.€€She€called€me€in€absolute€tears€crying€uncontrollably,€hystericallyÐ Ô$  Ðcrying€over€his€antics.óó€€Thatððs€the€same€way€heððs€been€doing€me.€€I€just€havenððtÐ À  Ðbroken€down€and€started€crying€about€it.€€But€I€do€have€very,€very€strong,€such€strongÐ ¬ü  Ðpersonal€reservations€as€I€have€never€experienced€before€as€an€advocate.€€Your€honor,Ð ˜è  Ðin€advocating€cases,€particularly€capital€cases,€I€find€the€first€thing€I€have€to€do€to€beÐ „Ô  Ðpersuasive€is€to€believe.€€€I€have€to€believe€and€I€have€to€feel.€€Because€if€I€donððtÐ pÀ Ðbelieve€and€I€donððt€feel€and€Iððm€not€sincere,€I€cannot€impart€that€to€a€jury.€€They€seeÐ \¬ Ðmy€insincerity.€€They€see€just€words,€a€Ô_ÔparrottÔ_Ô„like€proficiency€as€opposed€to€feeling.€Ð H˜ ÐThey€donððt€act€on€that.€€They€shut€that€out.€€Thatððs€been€my€experience.€€And€I€donððtÐ 4„ Ðbelieve€that€Ô_ÔthatÔ_Ô€feeling,€I€know€that€I€canððt€advocate.€€Iððve€lost€my€will€to€advocateÐ  p Ðon€this€case.€€I€donððt€have€any€doubt€about€that€at€this€point.€€I€donððt€have€any€doubt.€Ð  \ ÐIððll€tell€you€as€an€officer€of€this€court.€€I€donððt€have€any€doubt€that€would€be€a€majorÐ øH Ðproblem.€€òòAnd€despite€Mr.€Carruthers€threats€and€antics,€I€care€for€the€integrity€of€theÐ ä4 Ðsystem.€€I€care€that€his€€rights€are€protected€even€when€he€tries€to€destroy€themÐ Ð  Ðhimself€and€impair€them.€€€And€I€donððt€know€what€the€Courtððs€answer€is.€€I€know€thatÐ ¼  Ðthe€Court€is€in€a€very€difficult€position€here.€€Obviously,€itððs€very€clear€what€the€ployÐ ¨ø Ðis.€€Itððs€very€clear€that€weððre€never€going€to€get€to€trial€like€this.óó€€And€if€we€do,€thenÐ ”ä Ðthereððs€going€to€be€a€record€made€for€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€And€theyÐ €Ð Ðbelieve,€Mr.€Carruthers€believes,€that€doing€all€of€these€things€is€going€to€make€himÐ l¼ Ða€record€as€opposed€to€doing€things€from€a€legal€standpoint€in€the€courtroom.€€ThereÐ X ¨ Ðare€motions,€objections€at€trial€and€through€the€proper€avenues€that€the€courts€ofÐ D!” Ðappeals€will€recognize€as€a€legal€basis€for€a€reversal.€€òòBut€weððve€gotten€outside€theÐ 0"€  Ðlegal€area€in€this€case€and€weððve€gone€into€the€area€of€intimidation,€threats.óóÐ#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)€€Despite€Masseyððs€argument,€the€trial€judge€denied€Masseyððs€motion,€stating€asÐ ô$D # Ðfollows:Ð à%0!$ Ðà8  àà ` àWith€regard€to€Mr.€Masseyððs€concerns,€I€certainly€believe€that€everything€Mr.Ð Ì&"% ÐMassey€has€stated€in€his€motion€is€factually€accurate€and€correct.€€I€donððt€have€anyÐ ¸'#& Ðreason€to€doubt€that€his€secretary€received€the€phone€call€that€she€says€she€receivedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðin€the€memo€she€prepared,€or€that€any€of€these€other€things€transpired.€€òòBut€I€do€thinkÐ )à$( Ðâ âand€I€do€agree€with€Mr.€Masseyððs€characterization€that€these€efforts€by€Mr.Ð |*Ì%) ÐCarruthers€are€a€part€of€an€overall€ploy€on€his€part€to€delay€the€case€forever€untilÐ ° Ðsomething€happens€that€prevents€it€from€being€tried.óó€€ÐœìÐ Ð  Ðâ âÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ tÄ Ðà8  àà ` àIn€my€opinion,€to€try€to€make€the€record€reflect€as€clearly€and€accurately€asÐ `° Ðpossible€the€fact€that€the€system€is€doing€everything€it€can€to€make€sure€that€Mr.Ð L œ ÐCarruthers€is€properly€and€thoroughly€represented€in€this€case.€€And€Mr.€CarruthersÐ 8 ˆ Ðmay€step€out€to€the€back.€€òòHe€just€was€pointing€to€Mr.€Massey€with€some€sort€ofÐ $ t Ðthreatening€gesture.óó€€And€heððs€going€to€sit€in€the€back€for€the€remainder€of€thisÐ  ` Ðhearing.€€Put€him€in€the€back€room€and€keep€him€back€there.€€Lock€the€door.€€Mr.Ð ü L  ÐMontgomery,€you€will€join€him€in€a€minute€if€you€choose€to€conduct€yourself€in€thatÐ è 8  Ðmanner€as€well.€€òòThe€system€has€done€all€it€can,€in€my€opinion,€to€make€sure€that€Mr.Ð Ô$  ÐTony€Carruthers€is€well€represented.óó€€And€Iððve€tried€to€be€as€patient€as€I€can€be€inÐ À  Ðlistening€to€the€concerns€of€defense€counsel€and€investigators€in€making€sure€that€noÐ ¬ü  Ðconflict€existed€in€the€representation€of€either€of€these€men.€€The€specific€reasons,€theÐ ˜è  Ðnarrow€specific€reasons€for€the€Ô_ÔexcusalÔ_Ô€of€the€previous€attorneys€and€investigatorsÐ „Ô  Ðdiffer€a€little€bit€from€those€complaints€that€Mr.€Massey€has€raised€today.€€And€soÐ pÀ Ðwhen€Mr.€Massey€says€ðð[Ô_Ôt]hatÔ_Ô€just€because€Iððm€the€4th€or€5th€attorney€in€line€doesnððtÐ \¬ Ðmean€that€I€now€have€to€be€stuck,€in€effect,€in€representing€him€just€because€othersÐ H˜ Ðhave€been€relieved€and€the€Court€is€anxious€to€get€the€case€tried.€€My€complaints€areÐ 4„ Ðas€valid€as€theirs€were.€€And€if€they€were€relieved,€then€I€should€be€relieved€as€well.ðð€Ð  p ÐAnd€I€understand€that€position.€€But€first€of€all€Iððll€respond€to€that€by€saying€theirÐ  \ Ðcomplaints€were€a€little€bit€different,€and€Iððm€not€going€to€go€through€them€on€theÐ øH Ðrecord€now.€€The€record€is€clear€in€those€instances.€€One€envelope€is€sealed€withÐ ä4 Ðseveral€letters€that€will€reveal€what€those€complaints€were€and€the€complaints€fromÐ Ð  Ðattorneys€prior€to€that€were€a€little€bit€different€in€nature.€€Not€to€minimize€theÐ ¼  Ðseriousness€of€Mr.€Masseyððs€complaints,€but€those€complaints€were€a€little€bitÐ ¨ø Ðdifferent.€€And€so€its€not€that€he€just€happens€to€be€the€5th€attorney€in€line,€and€heððsÐ ”ä Ðthe€one€that€is€going€to€quote,€get€stuck,€representing€Mr.€Carruthers.€€TheirÐ €Ð Ðcomplaints€were€a€little€bit€different.€€And€factually€there€are€some€distinctions€thatÐ l¼ Ðcan€be€drawn€between€the€complaints€that€they€had€and€the€complaints€that€youððveÐ X ¨ Ðvoiced.€€€€ÐD!”Ð Ð  Ѐ€€€Ð 0"€  Ð(Emphasis€added.)€€The€trial€court€also€emphasized€that€Carruthersðð€ploy€had€become€more€apparentÐ #l! Ðover€the€course€of€the€proceedings.Ð $X" ÐÌà8  àWith€the€very€first€set€of€attorneys€I€tried€to€give€Mr.€Carruthers€the€benefit€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðdoubt€and€excused€them€for€reasons€similar€to€yours,€but€a€little€bit€different.€€WithÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€second€set€of€attorneys€I€tried€to€give€Mr.€Carruthers€the€benefit€of€the€doubt€andÐ ¸'#& Ðexcuse€them€for€reasons€similar€to€yours,€but€a€little€bit€different.€€Now€that€weððre€inÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€third€set€of€attorneys€,€the€ploy€is€much€more€apparent€than€it€was€with€the€firstÐ )à$( Ðset€€of€attorneys.€€Although,€it€was€somewhat€apparent€to€any€of€us€who€have€beenÐ |*Ì%) Ðin€these€courts€for€many,€many€years€as€we€all€have€been.€€Not€wanting€to€jump€toÐ h+¸&* Ðany€conclusions€or€not€give€him€the€benefit€of€the€doubt,€the€first€and€second€sets€ofÐ ° Ðattorneys€were€excused.€€òòBut€now€that€weððre€into€the€third€set€of€attorneys€the€ployÐ œì Ðis€much€more€apparent€and,€therefore,€Iððm€much€less€receptive€to€these€sorts€ofÐ ˆØ Ðarguments€than€I€was€a€year€ago€when€the€first€set€of€attorneys€came€in€wanting€to€beÐ tÄ Ðrelieved.€óóÐ`°Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àFinally,€in€response€to€counselððs€comment€that€Carruthers€should€just€go€ð ðpro€se,ðð€the€trialÐ  ` Ðcourt€concluded€that€it€should€refuse€ð ðto€force€a€man€to€go€pro€se€in€a€capital€case€if€he€doesnððt€wantððÐ ü L  Ðand€observed€that€Carruthers€had€never€asserted€his€right€of€self„representation.€€Although€MasseyððsÐ è 8  Ðmotion€to€withdraw€was€denied,€the€trial€judge€granted€his€request€for€additional€funds€for€furtherÐ Ô$  Ðinvestigation€and€for€hiring€a€mitigation€specialist.Ð À  ÐÌà  àOn€January€2,€1996,€six€days€before€the€trial€was€scheduled€to€begin,€Massey€renewed€hisÐ ˜è  Ðmotion€to€withdraw.€€Massey€informed€the€trial€court€that€he€had€continued€to€receive€threateningÐ „Ô  Ðletters€at€his€home€and€was€concerned€for€his€daughterððs€safety€because€Carruthers€had€described€theÐ pÀ Ðcar€she€drove.€€Massey€indicated€that€he€cared€more€about€Carruthersðð€right€to€a€fair€trial€than€€did€Ð \¬ ÐCarruthers€himself,€but€given€the€recent€and€ongoing€threats,€Massey€declared,€ð ðI€donððt€want€toÐ H˜ Ðrepresent€this€man.€€I€canððt€represent€him.€€I€wonððt€represent€him.ððÐ 4„ ÐÌà  àAt€this€hearing,€the€prosecution€took€the€position€that€Massey€should€not€be€allowed€toÐ  \ Ðwithdraw€because€the€defendant€was€simply€manipulating€the€system€in€an€attempt€to€delay€his€trial.€Ð øH ÐThe€State€pointed€out€that€the€case€had€been€pending€for€almost€two€years€and€each€time€a€trial€dateÐ ä4 Ðdrew€near€Carruthers€would€increase€his€letters€and€efforts€to€alienate€his€attorneys€either€throughÐ Ð  Ðwritten€or€verbal€personal€attacks€or€threats.€€The€State€urged€the€trial€court€to€deny€the€motion€toÐ ¼  Ðwithdraw€and€proceed€to€trial:Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔI]fÔ_Ô€a€defendant,€Your€Honor,€can€threaten€the€system,€if€he€can€manipulate€theÐ €Ð Ðsystem€by€threats,€by€letters,€Iððm€not€sure€if€thatððs€what€the€makers€of€the€constitutionÐ l¼ Ðmeant€when€they€sat€in€Philadelphia€and€they€said,€look,€letððs€let€every€defendantÐ X ¨ Ðhave€a€fair€trial.€€Letððs€let€him€have€a€lawyer.€€Letððs€let€a€jury€be€over€here.€€Letððs€letÐ D!” Ðhim€have€a€judge;€thatððs€fair.€€Letððs€let€no€man€be€accused€of€a€crime,€will€not€go€toÐ 0"€  Ðtrial,€unless€he€receives€a€fair€trial.€€Let€no€man€be€convictedð!ðbut€the€framers€of€theÐ #l! Ðconstitution,€Your€Honor,€had€not€met€Tony€Carruthers.€€Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAfter€considering€the€comments€of€counsel,€the€trial€judge€briefly€recounted€the€history€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€case€and€again€emphasized€that,€in€his€opinion,€all€of€the€attorneys€appointed€for€the€defendant,Ð Ì&"% Ðincluding€Massey€and€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô,€were€excellent€trial€lawyers€who€had€fully€performed€their€duties€withÐ ¸'#& Ðregard€to€Carruthersðð€defense,€including€filing€all€relevant€motions€and€thoroughly€pursing€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðinvestigation€of€the€case.€€The€trial€court€then€ruled€on€Masseyððs€motion€to€withdraw,€stating€asÐ )à$( Ðâ âfollows:Ð |*Ì%) Ðà8  àà ` àNow,€this€is€the€way€that€the€case€is€going€to€proceed€on€Monday.€€Mr.Ð ° Ðâ âMassey€is€still€on€the€case.€€He€still€represents€Mr.€Carruthers.€€If€between€now€andÐ œì ÐMonday€Mr.€Carruthers€chooses€to€discuss€with€Mr.€Massey€the€case€and€toÐ ˆØ Ðcooperate€with€Mr.€Massey€in€his€preparation€of€the€defense€in€this€case,€then€IððllÐ tÄ Ðlook€to€Mr.€Massey€to€go€forward€in€representing€Mr.€Carruthers.€€There€have€beenÐ `° Ðdisputes€and€conflicts€between€attorney€and€client€before.€€This€is€not€the€first€timeÐ L œ Ðthat€there€has€been€a€problem€between€attorney€and€client,€and€these€types€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðproblems€can€be€repaired€oftentimes.€€And€differences€can€be€patched€up,€andÐ $ t Ðattorneys€can€go€forward.€€And€I€would€hope€that€Ô_ÔthatÔ_Ô€would€be€the€case€in€this€case.€Ð  ` ÐAnd€I€would€hope€that€Mr.€Carruthers€would€between€now€and€Monday,€work€withÐ ü L  ÐMr.€Massey€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€in€preparation€for€a€trial.€€òòIf€Mr.€Carruthers€elects€not€to,Ð è 8  Ðhowever,€he€will€go€forward€representing€himself.óó€€This€was€raised€on€the€19th€whenÐ Ô$  ÐMr.€Massey€filed€his€motion€to€withdraw€and€we€first€heard€it.€€At€that€time,€IÐ À  Ðrejected€the€idea.€€I€was€reluctant€to€because€Iððve€never€required€an€individual€to€goÐ ¬ü  Ðforward€representing€himself€when€he€has€not€requested€that.€€And€I€donððt€like€thatÐ ˜è  Ðidea,€but€Iððve€given€a€lot€of€thought€to€that€suggestion€since€the€19th.€€For€the€record,Ð „Ô  ÐMr.€Massey€called€me€shortly€after€our€hearing€on€the€19th€when€he€received€someÐ pÀ Ðletters€in€the€mail€from€Mr.€Carruthers€that€dealt€furtherð!ðthat€he€felt€furtherÐ \¬ Ðundermined€his€ability€to€represent€him.€€And€I€just€want€that€on€the€record€so€thereÐ H˜ Ðis€no€misunderstanding€about€that.€€But€since€the€19th,€and€after€the€phone€call€fromÐ 4„ ÐMr.€Massey€that€I€received,€after€the€hearing€on€the€19th,€and€after€his€request€today,Ð  p ÐIððve€given€it€a€lot€of€thought€to€what€options€were€left,€what€options€are€still€availableÐ  \ Ðin€this€case.€€òòAnd€in€my€judgment,€the€only€option€that€is€still€available€if€Mr.Ð øH ÐCarruthers€chooses€not€to€work€with€Mr.€Massey€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€in€going€forwardÐ ä4 Ðwith€this€case€next€Monday,€is€for€him€to€represent€himself.€€And€Iððll€provide€himÐ Ð  Ðwith€a€copy€of€the€rules€of€Tennessee€procedure,€the€rules€of€evidence.€€And€he€canÐ ¼  Ðsit€at€counsel€table€and€voir€dire€the€jury,€and€question€witnesses,€and€give€an€openingÐ ¨ø Ðstatement,€as€any€lawyer€would,€and€he€would€be€required€to€comply€with€all€theÐ ”ä Ðrules€as€any€lawyer€would,€if€he€chooses€to€go€forward€on€his€own.€€If€he€chooses€toÐ €Ð Ðsay€nothing,€then€thatððs€his€prerogative,€and€ð!ð€But€thatððs€what€the€situation€will€beÐ l¼ Ðnext€Monday,€Mr.€Carruthers.€€And€the€choice€is€yours.€€Again,€the€choice€is€yours.óó€Ð X ¨ ÐYou€have€for€the€third€time€around€an€outstanding€attorney€representing€you.€€AndÐ D!” Ðheððs€here,€and€heððll€be€available.€€If€you€choose€to€avail€yourself€of€his€services,€heÐ 0"€  Ðwill€represent€you€on€Monday.€€If€you€choose€not€to,€you€can€go€forward€representingÐ #l! Ðyourself.€€If€you€go€forward€representing€yourself,€I€will€require€Mr.€Massey€and€Mr.Ð $X" ÐÔ_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€to€be€available€as€elbow€counsel€so€that€at€any€recess€or€overnight,€you€canÐ ô$D # Ðseek€advice€from€them,€and€they€can€confer€with€you€and€advise€you€in€any€way€thatÐ à%0!$ Ðthey€deem€appropriate.€€So€if€you€elect€not€to€have€him€represent€you€and€you€goÐ Ì&"% Ðforward€representing€yourself,€theyððll€be€in€the€€courtroom€observing,€and€theyððll€beÐ ¸'#& Ðavailable€to€offer€advice€and€counsel€to€you€at€any€recess,€lunch€break,€overnightÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbreak.€€One€of€those€two€scenarios€will€occur€next€Monday.€€òòAnd€again,€itððs€up€to€Mr.Ð )à$( ÐCarruthers€because€weððve€been€through€this€now€for€many,€many€months€and€at€thisÐ |*Ì%) Ðpoint€in€time,€the€case€needs€to€go€forward.óó€€There€is€no€other€reason€for€the€case€toÐ h+¸&* Ðbe€reset,€no€proof€problems€from€one€side€or€the€other,€no€witness€problems€from€oneÐ ° Ðside€or€the€other.€€The€case€is€now€set€for€the€third€time€for€trial.€€There€is€no€extrinsicÐ œì Ðreason€for€an€additional€continuance.€€òòAndð!ðso€Mr.€Carruthers€is€going€to€have€toÐ ˆØ Ðdecide€in€which€manner€he€wishes€to€proceed€on€Monday,€but€the€case€will€goÐ tÄ Ðforward€on€Monday.óó€€And€Iððll€hear€back€from€Mr.€Massey€Monday€morning€withÐ `° Ðregard€to€whether€he€has€been€able€to€confer€with€his€client€and€what€the€progress€ofÐ L œ Ðthat€has€been,€and€whether€he€feels€that€the€progress€has€been€such€that€it€wouldÐ 8 ˆ Ðallow€him€to€go€forward€in€representing€Mr.€Carruthers.Ð$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€record€reflects€that€at€a€hearing€held€the€next€day,€January€3,€1996,€Carruthers€wasÐ Ô$  Ðð ðglaringðð€at€Massey€while€ð ðgritting€his€jaw.ðð׃#×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Upon€observing€Carruthersðð€conduct,€the€trial€courtÐ À  Ðonce€again€cautioned€the€defendant€as€follows:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àòòAnd€again,€as€I€did€yesterday,€I€want€to€remind€Mr.€Carruthers€that€if€it€is€his€decisionÐ „Ô  Ðnot€to€proceed€with€Mr.€Massey€and€to€proceed€pro€seð!ðjust€a€minute.€€Iððll€let€youÐ pÀ Ðspeak€in€a€momentð!ðthen€he€needs€to€understand€that€he€will€be€held€to€the€sameÐ \¬ Ðstandard€that€attorneys€are€held€to€during€a€trial.€€Rules€of€evidence,€rules€ofÐ H˜ Ðprocedure€will€apply.€€And€he€will€need€to€familiarize€himself€as€best€he€can€withÐ 4„ Ðthose€procedures€and€those€rules€between€now€and€trial€date€because€in€proceedingÐ  p Ðpro€se,€he€will€certainly€be€held€to€that€same€standard.€óó€Obviously,€he€realizes€theÐ  \ Ðcharges€that€are€pending€and€the€potential€for€the€imposition€of€the€death€penaltyÐ øH Ðinvolved€in€this€case.€€Weððve€had€numerous€hearings€and€motions€over€the€pastÐ ä4 Ðfifteen€or€eighteen€months,€and€all€of€those€matters€should€be€very€apparent€to€Mr.Ð Ð  ÐCarruthers€at€this€point€in€time.м Ð Ð  ÐÌResponding€to€the€trial€courtððs€admonition,€Carruthers€said€he€did€not€want€Massey€representing€himÐ ”ä Ðbecause€Massey€was€on€cocaine.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àFollowing€this€hearing,€Massey€filed€an€application€for€extraordinary€appeal׃:×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€in€the€CourtÐ X ¨ Ðof€Criminal€Appeals€challenging€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€that€he€remain€on€the€case€either€as€counselÐ D!” Ðor€as€advisory€counsel.€€In€an€order€dated€January€8,€1996,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€held€thatÐ 0"€  ÐMassey€should€be€allowed€to€immediately€withdraw€from€further€representation,€stating:Ð #l! ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€attorney„client€relationship€which€mayÐ ô$D # Ðhave€previously€existed,€has€deteriorated€until€such€a€relationship€does€not€existÐ à%0!$ Ðbetween€Carruthers€and€Mr.€Massey.€€Also€the€circumstances€of€this€case€make€itÐ Ì&"% Ðimpossible€for€Mr.€Massey€to€ethically€represent€Mr.€Carruthers.€€Carruthers€hasÐ ° Ðproclaimed€that€he€will€do€bodily€harm€to€Massey.€€He€has€in€essence€and€in€factÐ œì Ðthreatened€Massey€with€death.€€Carruthers,€who€has€a€history€of€violent€conduct,€isÐ ˆØ Ðapparently€a€member€of€a€gang.€€All€of€his€correspondence€to€Massey€carries€aÐ tÄ Ðdrawing€of€a€lidless€eye€that€watches€from€the€top€of€a€pyramid.€€Moreover,€MasseyððsÐ `° Ðfamily€is€filled€with€fear€and€anxiety€due€to€the€threats€made€to€Massey;€andÐ L œ ÐMasseyððs€secretary,€who€has€had€dealings€with€Carruthers€by€telephone,€likewise€hasÐ 8 ˆ Ðfear€and€anxiety€based€upon€her€conversations€with€Carruthers€and€the€threats€madeÐ $ t Ðagainst€Massey.€€Given€these€circumstances,€Mr.€Massey€had€no€alternative€but€toÐ  ` Ðseek€permission€to€withdraw€as€counsel.€€He€is€supported€in€this€endeavor€by€theÐ ü L  ÐDisciplinary€Counsel€for€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€Office,€which€advisedÐ è 8  ÐMassey€that€he€was€ethically€required€to€withdraw€as€counsel,€and,€if€the€motion€wasÐ Ô$  Ðdenied€he€was€required€to€seek€relief€in€the€appellate€courts.ÐÀ Ð Ð  Ðà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ ¬ü  Ðà8  àà ` àGiven€these€facts€and€circumstances€as€well€as€the€relevant€provisions€of€theÐ ˜è  ÐCode€of€Professional€Conduct,€which€governs€the€conduct€of€lawyers€in€the€State€ofÐ „Ô  ÐTennessee,€Mr.€Massey€was€entitled€to€be€relieved€as€counsel€of€record€for€Mr.Ð pÀ ÐCarruthers.€€òòIf€there€ever€was€an€amicable€attorney„client€relationship,€it€wasÐ \¬ Ðeradicated€by€Mr.€Carruthersðð€conduct€in€writing€the€letters€aforementioned€andÐ H˜ Ðthreatening€to€do€bodily€harm€to€Mr.€Massey€the€first€time€he€saw€him.€óó€Today,€Mr.Ð 4„ ÐMassey€and€Mr.€Carruthers€are€at€odds€and€their€differences€are€irreconcilable.€Ð  p ÐFurthermore,€Mr.€Massey,€who€emphatically€denied€any€misconduct€or€addiction€toÐ  \ Ðdrugs,€must€attempt€to€protect€his€family,€secretary,€and€himself€from€physical€harmÐ øH Ðas€well€as€protect€himself€from€further€disciplinary€complaints.׃T×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Ðä4Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àThe€same€day€this€order€was€filed,€but€before€the€trial€judge€had€received€the€order,€a€hearingÐ ”ä Ðwas€held€in€the€trial€court.€€After€learning€that€Massey€had€received€seven€more€pieces€of€certifiedÐ €Ð Ðmail€at€his€home€since€the€hearing€on€January€2,€and€after€being€advised€by€Massey€that€theÐ l¼ Ðdifficulties€with€Carruthers€had€not€improved,€the€trial€judge€concluded€that€Carruthers,€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà8  àthrough€his€actions,€through€his€accusations,€and€letters,€he€has€forced€himself€intoÐ 0"€  Ða€situation€where€I€have€no€option€but€to€require€that€he€proceed€pro€se.€€And€so€inÐ #l! Ðdeference€to€your€request,€I€will€go€forward€with€my€previous€statement€and€that€isÐ $X" Ðthat€you€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€will€remain€as€elbow€counsel.€€Mr.€Carruthers€will€representÐ ô$D # Ðhimself.€Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€trial€court€then€reiterated,€ð ð[Ô_Ôf]romÔ_Ô€this€point€forward€Iððll€give€Mr.€Carruthers€the€opportunity€toÐ ¸'#& Ðspeak€on€his€own€behalf€at€appropriate€times.€€As€I€indicated€to€him€last€week,€he€will€be€expectedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€comply€with€all€of€the€rules€of€procedure€and€evidence€that€an€attorney€would€be€required€toÐ ° Ðcomply€with.ðð€€€€€€€€€€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àUpon€hearing€the€trial€courtððs€ruling,€Carruthers€claimed€that€he€had€attempted€to€reconcileÐ tÄ Ðwith€Massey€and€complained€that€he€was€not€qualified€to€represent€himself.€€The€trial€judgeÐ `° Ðresponded:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà ` àWell,€those€are€the€perils€in€going€forward€pro€se.€€And€in€my€judgment,€Mr.Ð $ t ÐCarruthers,€as€Iððve€said€on€several€occasions,€and€I€donððt€intend€to€get€back€into€aÐ  ` Ðlengthy€hearing€on€this€issue€at€this€time,€but€weððve€had€two€or€three€hearings€alreadyÐ ü L  Ðon€this.€€In€my€judgment,€and€I€understand€youððre€stating€now€that€you€donððt€feelÐ è 8  Ðcapable€of€going€forward€and€representing€yourself.€€òòBut€you€need€to€understand€thatÐ Ô$  Ðin€my€judgment€you€have€created€this€problem€for€yourself.€€You€are€the€author€ofÐ À  Ðyour€own€predicament€by,€in€my€opinion,€sabotaging€the€representation€of€you€byÐ ¬ü  Ðfour€previous€attorneys.€€These€are€now€your€fifth€and€sixth€attorneys.€€In€myÐ ˜è  Ðjudgment,€because€of€actions€that€youððve€taken€over€the€past€18€months,€because€ofÐ „Ô  Ðactions€that€youððve€taken,€you€are€now€in€this€situation.€€And€so€it€may€well€beÐ pÀ Ðdifficult€for€you€to€go€forward€in€representing€yourself,€but€this€is€the€situation€thatÐ \¬ Ðyouððve€created€and€youððre€going€to€have€to€do€the€best€you€can,€because€there€isÐ H˜ Ðvirtually€no€option€left€at€this€point.€€To€reset€it€again,€history€would€should€wouldÐ 4„ Ðonly€ð!ð€would€be€a€futile€effort,€because€at€the€eleventh€hour€with€the€seventh€andÐ  p Ðeighth€attorneys€representing€you,€there€would€be€some€other€effort,€in€my€opinion,Ð  \ Ðsome€other€manipulation€on€your€part€that€would€then€cause€those€attorneys€to€comeÐ øH Ðin€and€want€to€get€off€your€case.€€And€then€weððd€reset€it€and€appoint€the€ninth€andÐ ä4 Ðtenth€attorneys,€and€the€eleventh€and€twelfth.€€And€Ô_ÔthereððdÔ_Ô€be€no€end€to€it.óóÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ ¨ø Ðà8  àà ` àAnd€so€weððre€going€forward€and€youððre€going€to€represent€yourself.€€IÐ ”ä Ðunderstand€youððre€not€an€experienced€attorney.€€I€understand€you€may€well€haveÐ €Ð Ðnever€gone€through€a€voir€dire€process€before.€€And€thatððs€unfortunate.€€I€wish€youÐ l¼ Ðhad€cooperated€and€gotten€along€with€Mr.€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô€a€year€and€a€half€ago.€€He€was€anÐ X ¨ Ðexcellent€attorney,€has€tried€many,€many€cases€in€these€courts,€serious€difficult€casesÐ D!” Ðand€done€an€excellent€job.€€I€wish€you€had€cooperated€and€gotten€along€with€ColemanÐ 0"€  ÐÔ_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€who,€in€my€opinion,€is€one€of€the€best€trial€attorneys€in€this€entire€state.€€HeððsÐ #l! Ðtried€many€cases€in€this€courtroom€and€defended€individuals€remarkably€well.€€I€wishÐ $X" Ðyou€had€cooperated€and€gotten€along€with€Mr.€Craig€Morton€and€Mr.€Glenn€Wright,Ð ô$D # Ðand€Mr.€Harry€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô,€and€Mr.€William€Massey,€because€I€think€it€wouldððve€been€inÐ à%0!$ Ðyour€best€interest€to€have€done€so.€€But€itððs€been€obvious€that€you€have€not.€€And€soÐ Ì&"% Ðfor€that€reason€weððre€going€forward.и'#&Ð Ð  ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ )à$( Ðà8  àòòà ` àItððs€not€easy€to€make€this€decision.€€Itððs€not€a€decision€that€I€made€lightly€orÐ |*Ì%) Ðtake€lightly.€€But€I€tell€you€what,€if€the€record€isnððt€complete€enough€and€repleteÐ h+¸&* Ðenough€with€evidence€of€manipulative€conduct€and€obstructionism,€then€I€canððtÐ ° Ðimagine€ever€there€being€a€record€for€the€appellate€courts€in€Tennessee€that€wouldÐ œì Ðmeet€that€criteria.óóЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)Ð `° ÐÌà  àAfter€the€trial€court€ruled,€Carruthers€offered€to€waive€any€conflict,€to€allow€Massey€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðcontinue€representing€him,€to€apologize€to€Massey,€and€to€testify€that€the€accusations€he€had€madeÐ $ t Ðagainst€Massey€were€untrue.€€The€trial€court€refused,€finding€that€Carruthers€was€merely€usingÐ  ` Ðanother€tactic€to€delay€the€proceeding.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€next€day,€January€9,€1996,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€entered€an€addendum€to€itsÐ Ô$  Ðprevious€order€and€allowed€Massey€to€be€completely€relieved€from€further€representation€orÐ À  Ðparticipation€in€the€case€including€providing€assistance€as€ð ðelbow€counsel.ðð€€However,€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_ÔÐ ¬ü  Ðcontinued€on€the€case€as€elbow€or€standby€counsel.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àDuring€voir€dire€two€days€later,€January€11,€1996,€the€State€requested€a€continuance€of€theÐ pÀ Ðtrial€due€to€the€hospitalization€of€one€of€its€material€witnesses,€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw.€€The€trial€court€grantedÐ \¬ Ðthe€Stateððs€motion€for€a€continuance€and€rescheduled€the€trial€for€April€15,€1996.€€At€this€point,€inÐ H˜ Ðlight€of€the€continuance,€Carruthers€made€an€oral€motion€for€appointment€of€new€counsel.׃/×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trialÐ 4„ Ðcourt€denied€the€motion,€stating:Ð  p ÐÌà8  àThe€ruling€still€stands.€€The€system€will€not€be€held€hostage€by€Tony€Carruthers,€andÐ øH Ðto€go€through€another€round€of€attorneys€will€be€doing€just€that,€because€historyÐ ä4 Ðsuggests,€as€youððve€done€in€the€past,€that€is€if€new€attorneys€were€appointed€and€spentÐ Ð  Ðthe€time€and€investigated,€the€effort€to€get€ready€on€this€case,€then€at€the€eleventhÐ ¼  Ðhour€something€would€happen,€some€allegations€would€be€made€that€wouldÐ ¨ø Ðundermine€their€ability€to€represent€you,€theyððd€ask€€to€withdraw,€weððd€be€back€in€theÐ ”ä Ðsame€situation€that€we€were€in€with€Mr.€Larry€Ô_ÔNanceÔ_Ô,€with€Mr.€Coleman€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô,€withÐ €Ð ÐMr.€Bill€Massey,€all€three€of€whom€are€outstanding€criminal€defense€attorneys.€€AllÐ l¼ Ðthree€of€whom€were€fully€capable€of€representing€you,€and€all€three€of€whom€had€toÐ X ¨ Ðbe€relieved€because€of€your€actions.€€And€in€my€judgment,€enough€is€enough.€€AndÐ D!” Ðbecause€of€your€actions,€these€attorneys€are€no€longer€representing€you€and,€therefore,Ð 0"€  Ðyou€will€be€representing€yourself.€€You€have€ample€time€to€prepare.€€You€have€accessÐ #l! Ðto€legal€opinion€from€Mr.€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô.€€You€have€the€file.€€You€have€the€rules.€€You€haveÐ $X" Ða€jury€consultant.€€You€have€an€investigator.€€And€this€is€the€manner€in€which€weððreÐ ô$D # Ðgoing€forward.€€€€Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOn€January€16,€1996,€the€trial€court€approved€Carruthersðð€request€for€funds€to€obtain€anÐ ¸'#& Ðinvestigator€to€assist€him€and€authorized€the€investigator€to€contact€the€trial€court€directly€ifÐ ¤(ô#' Ðadditional€funds€were€needed.€€In€February€of€1996,€Carruthers€filed€two€more€written€motions€forÐ ° Ðappointment€of€counsel€which€were€again€denied€by€the€trial€court€for€the€same€reasons€set€outÐ œì Ðabove.€€In€a€hearing€on€February€20,€1996,€the€trial€court€considered€Carruthersðð€pre„trial€requestsÐ ˆØ Ðfor€funding€for€expert€services,€and,€at€this€hearing,€again€recounted€the€events€that€culminated€inÐ tÄ ÐCarruthers€being€required€to€represent€himself.€€The€trial€court€observed€that€ð ðit€will€be€apparent€toÐ `° Ðanyone€who€objectively€views€this€situation€that€Carruthers€is€not€being€denied€the€right€to€counsel.ððÐ L œ ÐÌà  àThroughout€these€pre„trial€proceedings,€the€trial€court€treated€Carruthers€with€respect,Ð $ t Ðpatiently€listened€to€his€arguments€and€requests,€and€afforded€Carruthers€and€his€investigatorÐ  ` Ðconsiderable€latitude€in€scheduling€and€arguing€motions,€even€though€most€of€these€motions€wereÐ ü L  Ðsimilar€or€identical€to€motions€that€had€already€been€filed€and€argued€by€counsel€who€had€previouslyÐ è 8  Ðrepresented€Carruthers.€€When€Carruthers€requested€òòex€parteóó€hearings€to€seek€funding€for€experts,Ð Ô$  Ðthe€prosecution€would€voluntarily€leave€the€court€room.€€The€trial€judge€granted€Carruthersðð€requestÐ À  Ðfor€funding€to€obtain€a€forensic€pathologist,€but€denied€his€request€for€funding€for€an€accidentÐ ¬ü  ÐÔ_ÔreconstructionistÔ_Ô.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àIn€February€of€1996,€the€trial€court€allowed€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€to€withdraw€as€elbow€counsel€becauseÐ pÀ ÐCarruthers€apparently€had€no€confidence€or€trust€in€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€and€because€Carruthers€was€launchingÐ \¬ Ðpersonal,€verbal€attacks€upon€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô.€€When€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€moved€for€permission€to€withdraw€as€elbowÐ H˜ Ðcounsel,€he€stated:Ð 4„ Ðà8  àà ` àHe€has€expressed€the€feeling€that€I€am€not€working€for€him€and€that€I€have€notÐ  p Ðdone€anything€for€him,€Iððm€not€going€to€do€anything€for€him.€€He€suspects€ð!ð€heððsÐ  \ Ðmade€it€clear€that€he€suspects€that€Iððm€working€with€the€state€in€some€capacity.€€AndÐ øH Ðfrankly€none€of€the€advice€I€give€him€is€followed,€and€I€donððt€think€there€is€anyÐ ä4 Ðintention€of€following€it.€€And€frankly€its€just€ð!ð€and€the€abuse€gets€extremelyÐ Ð  Ðpersonal.€€Personal€Ô_ÔvillificationÔ_Ô€over€the€last€couple€of€meetings,€and€I€see€no€basisÐ ¼  Ðfor€being€able€to€continue.€Ð¨øÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThereafter,€Carruthers€twice€made€oral€motions€for€appointment€of€counsel,€first€on€MarchÐ €Ð Ð4,€1996,€and€then€on€April€15,€1996,€the€day€jury€selection€began.€€Again,€the€trial€court€denied€theseÐ l¼ Ðmotions€and€noted€that€this€was€not€the€first€case€in€which€Carruthers€had€employed€such€tactics.׃4×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РX ¨ ÐCarruthers€therefore€represented€himself€at€trial€and€sentencing,€participating€in€voir€dire,€presentingÐ D!” Ðopening€statement,€questioning€witnesses€on€cross„examination,€making€objections,€presentingÐ 0"€  Ðwitnesses€in€his€defense,€and€presenting€closing€argument.€€After€the€jury€returned€its€verdicts€as€toÐ #l! Ðguilt€and€sentencing,€the€trial€court€appointed€counsel€to€represent€Carruthers€on€his€motion€for€newÐ $X" Ðtrial€and€on€appeal.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àIn€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€Carruthers,€by€and€through€counsel,€first€asserted€that€heÐ Ì&"% Ðhad€been€denied€due€process€when€the€trial€court€required€him€to€represent€himself€at€trial€andÐ ¸'#& Ðsentencing€in€this€capital€case.€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€rejected€his€claim€and€held€that,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðunder€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€the€trial€court€was€justified€in€requiring€Carruthers€to€representÐ ° Ðhimself,€reasoning€as€follows:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àà ` àWe€do€not€take€lightly€the€result€that€a€defendant€has€to€proceed€pro€se€in€anyÐ tÄ Ðtrial,€especially€one€involving€a€capital€offense.€€Our€judicial€system€could€notÐ `° Ðsurvive€if€those€accused€of€crimes€were€literally€run€over€ð ðroughshod.ðð€€But€while€theÐ L œ Ðindividual€must€be€protected€by€the€system,€the€judicial€system€must€also€be€protectedÐ 8 ˆ Ðfrom€abuses€by€an€individual.€€A€person€charged€with€criminal€acts€cannot€be€allowedÐ $ t Ðto€subvert€the€judicial€system.Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÌ€à  àIn€this€Court,€counsel€for€Carruthers€again€contend€that€he€was€denied€his€right€to€due€processÐ è 8  Ðwhen€he€was€required€to€represent€himself€during€the€trial€of€this€capital€case.€€Counsel€assert€thatÐ Ô$  ÐCarruthers€did€not€expressly€waive€his€right€to€counsel,€that€any€implicit€waiver€was€invalid€becauseÐ À  Ðthe€trial€court€did€not€advise€Carruthers€of€the€possibility€of€waiver€or€the€dangers€of€self„Ð ¬ü  Ðrepresentation,€and€that€his€conduct€is€not€egregious€enough€to€justify€a€finding€of€forfeiture.€€InÐ ˜è  Ðresponse,€the€State€argues€that€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€correctly€found€that€CarruthersÐ „Ô  Ðforfeited€his€right€to€counsel€because€Carruthers€was€using€this€right€in€order€to€manipulate€theÐ pÀ Ðjudicial€system€and€delay€the€trial.€€In€the€alternative,€the€State€argues€that€the€record€in€this€appealÐ \¬ Ðsupports€a€finding€that€Carruthers€implicitly€waived€his€right€to€counsel€by€his€course€of€conduct€andÐ H˜ Ðthat€the€trial€courtððs€warnings€to€Carruthers€were€sufficient€to€inform€him€that€he€would€be€deemedÐ 4„ Ðto€have€waived€his€right€to€counsel€if€his€conduct€continued€and€of€the€dangers€of€selfÔ_Ô„Ô_ÔÔ_Ôrepresentation.Ô_ÔÐ  p ÐÌà  àBoth€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€Constitutions€guarantee€an€indigent€criminal€defendantÐ øH Ðthe€right€to€assistance€of€appointed€counsel€at€trial.€€òòSeeóó€U.S.€Const.€amend.€VI;€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,Ð ä4 Ððð€9;òòóó€òòMartinez€v.€Court€of€Appeal€of€Californiaóó,€__€U.S.€__,€120€S.€Ct.€684,€686,€145€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€597Ð Ð  Ð(2000);€€òòGideon€v.€Wainwrightóó,€372€U.S.€335,€83€S.€Ct.€792,€9€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€799€(1963);òòóó€€òòState€v.€Smallóó,Ð ¼  Ð988€S.W.2d€671,€673€(Tenn.€1999);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔNorthingtonÔ_Ôóó,€667€S.W.2d€57,€60€(Tenn.€1984);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóóÐ ¨ø ÐTenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€44(a).€€The€right€of€an€accused€to€assistance€of€counsel,€however,€does€not€includeÐ ”ä Ðthe€right€to€appointment€of€counsel€of€choice,€or€to€special€rapport,€confidence,€or€even€a€meaningfulÐ €Ð Ðrelationship€with€appointed€counsel.€€òòSeeóó€òòMorris€v.€Ô_ÔSlappyÔ_Ôóó,€461€U.€S.€1,€13„14,€103€S.€Ct.€1610,Ð l¼ Ð1617„18,€75€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€610€(1983);òòóó€€òòUnited€States€v.€Gallopóó,€838€F.2d€105,€107€(4th€Cir.€1988);€òòÔ_ÔSiersÔ_ÔÐ X ¨ Ðv.€Ryanóó,€773€F.2d€37,€44€(3d€Cir.€1985);€òòState€v.€Moodyóó,€968€P.2d€578,€579€(Ariz.€1998);€òòÔ_ÔSnellÔ_Ô€v.Ð D!” ÐStateóó,€723€So.2d€105,€107€(Ala.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1998);€òòJones€v.€Stateóó,€449€So.2d€253,€258€(Fla.€€1984);Ð 0"€  ÐòòState€v.€Ryanóó,€444€N.W.2d€610,€625€(Neb.€1989).€€The€essential€aim€of€the€Sixth€Amendment€is€toÐ #l! Ðguarantee€an€effective€advocate,€not€counsel€preferred€by€the€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòWheat€v.€United€Statesóó,Ð $X" Ð486€U.S.€153,€159,€108€S.€Ct.€1692,€1697.€100€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€140€(1988).Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  à€Ordinarily,€waiver€of€the€right€to€counsel€must€be€voluntary,€knowing,€and€intelligent.€€òòSeeóóÐ Ì&"% ÐòòJohnson€v.€Ô_ÔZerbstÔ_Ôóó,€304€U.S.€458,€464„65,€58€S.€Ct.€1019,€1023,€82€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.€1461,€1466„67€(1938);Ð ¸'#& ÐòòSmallóó,€988€S.W.2d€at€673.€€Typically,€such€a€waiver€occurs€only€after€the€trial€judge€advises€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdefendant€of€the€dangers€and€disadvantages€of€self„representation€and€determines€that€the€defendantÐ )à$( Ðð ðknows€what€he€is€doing€and€his€choice€is€made€with€eyes€open.ðð€€òòAdams€v.€United€States€ex€rel.Ð |*Ì%) ÐMcCannóó,€317€U.S.€269,€279,€63€S.€Ct.€236,€242,€87€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.€268€(1942);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòSmallóó,€988€S.W.2dÐ h+¸&* Ðat€673;€òòÔ_ÔNorthingtonÔ_Ôóó,€667€S.W.2d€at€61„62.€€Many€courts,€however,€have€recognized€that€the€right€toÐ ° Ðcounsel€is€not€a€license€to€abuse€the€dignity€of€the€court€or€to€frustrate€orderly€proceedings.׃>×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рœì ÐAccordingly,€several€courts€have€acknowledged€that,€like€other€constitutional€rights,Ô_Ô׃1à×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú27Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€the€right€toÐ ˆØ Ðcounsel€can€be€implicitly€waived€or€forfeited€if€a€defendant€manipulates,€abuses,€€or€utilizes€the€rightÐ tÄ Ðto€delay€or€disrupt€a€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔLeggettÔ_Ôóó,€162€F.3d€237,€249€(3rd€Cir.€1998)€(holdingÐ `° Ðthat€defendant€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel€when€he€physically€assaulted€his€attorney);€òòUnited€StatesÐ L œ Ðv.€Goldbergóó,€67€F.3d€1092,€1097„1101€(3rd€€Cir.€1995)€(discussing€the€principles€of€implicit€waiverÐ 8 ˆ Ðby€conduct€and€forfeiture,€but€concluding€that€defendant€had€not€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel);Ð $ t ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔMcLeodÔ_Ôóó,€53€F.3d€322,€326€(11th€Cir.€1995)€(holding€that€defendant€forfeited€hisÐ  ` Ðright€to€counsel€by€exhibiting€abusive,€threatening,€and€coercive€conduct€toward€his€attorney);òòóó€òòUnitedÐ ü L  ÐStates€v.€Ô_ÔFazziniÔ_Ôóó,€871€F.2d€635,€642€(7th€Cir.€1989)€(holding€that€defendant€waived€his€right€toÐ è 8  Ðcounsel€where,€after€being€warned€that€he€could€lose€the€right€if€he€failed€to€cooperate,€defendantÐ Ô$  Ðcontinued€to€refuse€to€cooperate€with€numerous€court„appointed€lawyers);€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔKelmsÔ_Ôóó,Ð À  Ð827€F.2d€1319,€1322€(9th€Cir.€1987)€(holding€that€defendant€implicitly€waived€the€right€to€counselÐ ¬ü  Ðwhere,€to€delay€the€trial,€defendant€refused€to€accept€appointed€counsel€or€hire€his€own€attorney);Ð ˜è  ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Mitchellóó,€777€F.2d€248,€256„57€(5th€Cir.€1985)€(holding€defendant€waived€his€rightÐ „Ô  Ðto€counsel€when,€in€bad€faith€and€for€purpose€of€delay,€he€retained€counsel€known€to€have€a€conflictÐ pÀ Ðof€interest€and€failed€to€retain€other€counsel);€€òòRichardson€v.€Lucasóó,€741€F.2d€753,€756€(5th€Cir.Ð \¬ Ð1984)€(holding€that€defendantððs€refusal€to€allow€any€public€defender,€regardless€of€competence,€toÐ H˜ Ðrepresent€him€constituted€a€waiver€of€the€right€to€counsel);€òòUnited€States€v.€Mooreóó,€706€F.2d€538,Ð 4„ Ð540€(5th€Cir.€1983)€(holding€that€€defendantððs€ð ðpersistent,€unreasonable€demand€for€dismissal€ofÐ  p Ðcounsel€and€appointment€of€new€counsel€.€.€.€is€the€functional€equivalent€of€a€knowing€and€voluntaryÐ  \ Ðwaiver€of€counselðð);€òòUnited€States€v.€Leavittóó,€608€F.2d€1290,€1292€(9th€Cir.€1979);€òòUnited€States€v.Ð øH ÐTraversóó,€996€F.€Supp.€6,€17€(S.D.€Fla.€1998)€(finding€forfeiture€as€a€result€of€the€defendantððsÐ ° Ðð ðpersistently€abusive,€threatening€and€coerciveðð€dealings€with€his€attorney€and€noting€that€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€had€been€repeatedly€warned€that€his€failure€to€cooperate€could€result€in€a€finding€ofÐ ˆØ Ðforfeiture);€òòUnited€States€v.€Jenningsóó,€855€F.€Supp.€1427,€1442€(M.D.€Pa.€1994)€(finding€thatÐ tÄ Ðdefendant€waived€his€right€to€counsel€when€he€physically€assaulted€his€attorney);€òòÔ_ÔSiniardÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,Ð `° Ð491€So.2d€1062,€1063„64€(Ala.€Ct.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1986)€(holding€that€defendant€forfeited€the€right€toÐ L œ Ðcounsel€where€he€was€allowed€eight€months€and€several€continuances€to€retain€counsel€but€failed€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðdo€so);€€òòBrooksóó,€819€S.W.2d€at€290€(recognizing€forfeiture,€but€concluding€that€forfeiture€was€notÐ $ t Ðappropriate€because€the€record€did€not€show€that€the€defendant€used€his€right€to€manipulate€theÐ  ` Ðjudicial€system);€òòPotter€v.€Stateóó,€547€A.2d€595,€602€(Del.€1988)€(stating€that€a€defendantððs€dilatoryÐ ü L  Ðactions€in€retaining€counsel€can€justify€a€forfeiture€€of€the€right€to€counsel);€òòJonesóó,€449€So.2d€at€256Ð è 8  Ð(holding€that€defendant€waived€his€right€to€counsel€by€persistently€demanding€counsel€of€his€choiceÐ Ô$  Ðand€refusing€to€cooperate€with€appointed€counsel);€òòÔ_ÔBrickertÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€673€N.E.2d€493,€496€(Ind.€Ct.Ð À  ÐApp.€1997)€(holding€that€defendant€waived€his€right€to€counsel€by€engaging€in€conduct€designed€toÐ ¬ü  Ðfrustrate€the€judicial€process€and€avoid€or€delay€a€trial);€òòPeople€v.€Sloaneóó,€693€N.Y.S.2d€52,€53€(N.Y.Ð ˜è  ÐApp.€Div.€1999)€(holding€that€defendant€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel€by€his€ð ðpersistent€pattern€ofÐ „Ô  Ðthreatening,€abusive,€obstreperous,€and€uncooperativeðð€behavior€towards€four€successive€appointedÐ pÀ Ðattorneys);€òòPeople€v.€Gilchristóó,€658€N.Y.S.2d€269€(N.Y.€App.€Div.€1997)€(holding€that€defendantÐ \¬ Ðforfeited€his€right€to€counsel€when€he€assaulted€his€fourth€appointed€attorney);€òòMontgomeryóó,€530Ð H˜ ÐS.E.2d€at€69€(holding€that€defendant€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel€when,€over€the€course€of€fifteenÐ 4„ Ðmonths,€he€was€twice€appointed€counsel€and€twice€released€his€appointed€counsel);€òòPainteróó,€762€P.2dÐ  p Ðat€992€(holding€that€defendant€waived€his€right€to€counsel€when€he€failed€to€secure€counsel€or€requestÐ  \ Ðappointed€counsel€so€that€he€could€delay€his€hearing);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔBoykinÔ_Ôóó,€478€S.E.2d€689,€690€(S.C.Ð øH ÐCt.€App.€1996)€(recognizing€that€a€defendant€may€implicitly€waive€the€right€to€counsel€byÐ ä4 Ðmisconduct,€but€finding€no€implicit€waiver€because€no€warnings€had€been€given€the€defendant);€òòCityÐ Ð  Ðof€Tacoma€v.€Bishopóó,€920€P.2d€214,€218€(Wash.€Ct.€App.€1996)€(recognizing€forfeiture€butÐ ¼  Ðconcluding€that€the€defendantððs€misconduct€was€not€sufficiently€egregious€to€support€a€finding€ofÐ ¨ø Ðforfeiture);€òòState€v.€Cummingsóó,€546€N.W.2d€406,€418€(Wis.€1996)€(holding€that€defendant€hadÐ ”ä Ðforfeited€his€right€to€counsel€where€he€consistently€refused€to€cooperate€and€constantly€complainedÐ €Ð Ðabout€counselððs€performance€to€manipulate,€disrupt,€and€delay€the€proceedings);€òòsee€generallyóó€WayneÐ l¼ ÐR.€Ô_ÔLaFaveÔ_Ô,€et€al.,€òòCriminal€Procedureóó,€ðð€11.3(c)€(2nd€€ed.€1999)€(ð ðWhat€these€courts€have€held,€inÐ X ¨ Ðeffect,€is€that€the€stateððs€interest€in€maintaining€an€orderly€trial€schedule€and€the€defendantððsÐ D!” Ðnegligence,€indifference,€or€possibly€purposeful€delaying€tactic,€combined€to€justify€a€forfeiture€ofÐ 0"€  Ðdefendantððs€right€to€counsel€.€.€.€.ðð).Ð #l! ÐÌà  àSome€courts€have€attempted€to€distinguish€the€concepts€of€implicit€waiver€and€forfeiture.€Ð ô$D # ÐòòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòGoldbergóó,€67€F.3d€at€1099„1100;òòóó€òòCity€of€Tacomaóó,€920€P.2d€at€218.€€These€courts€hold€thatÐ à%0!$ Ðan€implicit€waiver€occurs€when,€after€being€warned€by€the€court€that€counsel€will€be€lost€if€dilatory,Ð Ì&"% Ðabusive,€or€uncooperative€misconduct€continues,€a€defendant€persists€in€such€behavior.€€òòId.óó€€InÐ ¸'#& Ðcontrast,€forfeiture€results€regardless€of€the€defendantððs€intent€to€relinquish€the€right€and€irrespectiveÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€the€defendantððs€knowledge€of€the€right.€€òòId.óó€€Accordingly,€where€a€defendant€engages€in€extremelyÐ )à$( Ðâ âserious€misconduct,€a€finding€of€forfeiture€is€appropriate€even€though€the€defendant€was€not€warnedÐ |*Ì%) Ðof€the€potential€consequences€of€his€or€her€actions€or€the€risks€associated€with€self„representation.€Ð ° ÐòòSeeóó€òòGoldbergóó,€67€F.3d€at€1102;€òòCity€of€Tacomaóó,€920€P.2d€at€218.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àHowever,€many€courts€considering€this€issue€do€not€distinguish€between€the€two€conceptsÐ tÄ Ðand€have€used€the€terms€implicit€waiver€and€forfeiture€interchangeably.€€òòSeeóó€òòGoldberg,óó€67€F.3d€atÐ `° Ð1098;€òòCf.óó€òòÔ_ÔFreytagÔ_Ô€v.€Commissioner€of€Internal€Revenue€Serviceóó,€501€U.S.€868,€895€n.2,€111€S.€Ct.Ð L œ Ð2641,€2647€n.2,€115€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€764€(1991)€(Scalia,€J.,€concurring€in€part€and€concurring€in€judgment)Ð 8 ˆ Ð(ð ðThe€Court€uses€the€term€ððwaiveðð€instead€of€ððforfeit.ðð€€The€two€are€really€not€the€same,€although€ourÐ $ t Ðcases€have€so€often€used€them€interchangeably€that€it€may€be€too€late€to€introduce€precision.€€Waiver,Ð  ` Ðthe€intentional€relinquishment€or€abandonment€of€a€known€right€or€privilege,€is€merely€one€meansÐ ü L  Ðby€which€a€forfeiture€may€occur.€€Some€rights€may€be€forfeited€by€means€short€of€waiver.ðð)€(internalÐ è 8  Ðcitations€and€quotations€omitted).Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àAlthough€this€Court€has€never€considered€the€precise€question€presented€in€this€appeal,€whenÐ ¬ü  Ðdiscussing€a€non„indigent€defendant€who€fired€his€attorney€in€open€court€and€thereafter€repeatedlyÐ ˜è  Ðprotested€about€going€to€trial€without€a€lawyer,€we€recognized€that€even€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]houghÔ_Ô€a€defendant€hasÐ „Ô  Ða€right€to€select€his€own€counsel€if€he€acts€expeditiously€to€do€so€.€.€.€he€may€not€use€this€right€to€playÐ pÀ Ða€ððcat€and€mouseðð€game€with€the€court€.€.€.€.ðð€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔChadwickÔ_Ôóó,€224€Tenn.€75,€79,€450€S.W.2d€568,Ð \¬ Ð570€€(1970);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòGlasgow€v.€Stateóó,€224€Tenn.€626,€461€S.W.2d€24€(1970);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔDubrockÔ_Ôóó,€649Ð H˜ ÐS.W.2d€602€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1983)€(holding€that€non„indigent€defendants€waived€the€right€toÐ 4„ Ðcounsel€because€they€refused€to€hire€an€attorney).€€The€idea€that€the€right€to€counsel€may€not€be€usedÐ  p Ðto€manipulate€or€toy€with€the€judicial€system€applies€equally€to€indigent€and€non„indigent€defendants.€Ð  \ ÐAlthough€an€indigent€criminal€defendant€has€a€constitutional€right€to€appointed€counsel,€that€rightÐ øH Ðmay€not€be€used€as€a€license€to€manipulate,€delay,€or€disrupt€a€trial.€€òòSeeóó€footnote€€€26€òòsupraóó,€citingÐ ä4 Ðcases.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€an€indigent€criminal€defendant€may€implicitly€waive€or€forfeitÐ Ð  Ðthe€right€to€counsel€by€utilizing€that€right€to€manipulate,€delay,€or€disrupt€trial€proceedings.€€We€alsoÐ ¼  Ðhold€that€the€distinction€between€these€two€concepts€is€slight€and€that€the€record€in€this€case€supportsÐ ¨ø Ða€finding€of€both€implicit€waiver€and€forfeiture.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àWhen€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€and€Morton€were€allowed€to€withdraw€and€€Massey€and€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€were€appointed,Ð l¼ Ðthe€trial€court€advised€Carruthers€that€Massey€and€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€would€be€the€lawyers€representing€him€atÐ X ¨ Ðtrial€and€that€there€would€be€no€further€withdrawal€and€new€appointments€absent€a€ð ðgiganticÐ D!” Ðconflict.ðð€€Despite€this€admonishment,€Carruthers€once€again€launched€personal€attacks€and€threatsÐ 0"€  Ðagainst€Massey,€threats€that€eventually€extended€to€Masseyððs€office€staff€and€family€members.€€WhenÐ #l! ÐMassey€renewed€his€motion€to€withdraw€on€January€2,€1996,€the€trial€court€specifically€and€clearlyÐ $X" Ðadvised€Carruthers€that€he€had€two€choices€ð!ð€cooperate€with€Massey€or€represent€himself.€€CarruthersÐ ô$D # Ðalso€was€advised€that€if€he€chose€not€to€cooperate€with€Massey€and€to€represent€himself,€he€wouldÐ à%0!$ Ðbe€required€to€comply€with€all€procedural€rules€as€if€he€were€an€attorney.€€The€trial€court€repeatedÐ Ì&"% Ðhis€admonishment€at€a€hearing€on€January€3,€1996.€€Despite€the€trial€courtððs€clear€warnings,€quotedÐ ¸'#& Ðfully€earlier€in€this€opinion,€Carruthers€persisted€with€his€attitude€of€hostility€toward€Massey,€as€isÐ ¤(ô#' Ðevidenced€both€by€his€€ð ðglaringðð€at€Massey€during€the€hearings€and€by€the€letters€Massey€receivedÐ )à$( Ðâ âafter€those€hearings.€€In€our€view,€Carruthers€implicitly€waived€his€right€to€counsel,€because,€afterÐ |*Ì%) Ðbeing€warned€by€the€trial€court€that€he€would€lose€his€attorney€if€his€misconduct€continued,Ð ° ÐCarruthers€persisted€in€his€misconduct.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àIn€so€holding,€we€reject€Carruthersðð€claim€that€the€warnings€given€him€by€the€trial€court€wereÐ tÄ Ðnot€sufficient€to€support€a€finding€of€implied€waiver.€€The€cases€upon€which€Carruthers€relies€inÐ `° Ðsupport€of€this€claim€are€inapposite€because€they€involve€explicit,€voluntary€waiver€cases.€€òòSeeóóÐ L œ ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔMcDowellÔ_Ôóó,€814€F.2d€245,€251„52€(6th€Cir.€1987);€òòÔ_ÔCrandellÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔBunnellÔ_Ôóó,€25€F.3d€754Ð 8 ˆ Ð(9th€Cir.€1994);€òòUnited€States€v.€Silkwoodóó,€893€F.2d€245,€248„49€(10th€Cir.€1989).€€We€decline€toÐ $ t Ðhold€that€a€trial€court€must€provide€extensive€and€detailed€warnings€when€a€defendantððs€conductÐ  ` Ðillustrates€that€he€or€she€understands€the€right€to€counsel€and€is€able€to€use€it€to€manipulate€theÐ ü L  Ðsystem.€€We€conclude€that€an€implicit€waiver€may€appropriately€be€found,€where,€as€here,€the€recordÐ è 8  Ðreflects€that€the€trial€court€advises€the€defendant€the€right€to€counsel€will€be€lost€if€the€misconductÐ Ô$  Ðpersists€and€generally€explains€the€risks€associated€with€self„representation.€€òòCf.óó€€òòÔ_ÔKelmÔ_Ôóó,€827€F.2d€atÐ À  Ð1322€(considering€the€record€as€a€whole€when€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€trial€courtððsÐ ¬ü  Ðadvisements).Ð ˜è  ЀÌà  àEven€assuming€the€warnings€given€Carruthers€were€insufficient€to€support€a€finding€ofÐ pÀ Ðimplicit€waiver,€however,€we€conclude€that€Carruthersðð€conduct€was€sufficiently€egregious€to€supportÐ \¬ Ða€finding€that€he€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel.€€The€circumstances€culminating€in€the€trial€courtððsÐ H˜ Ðruling€have€been€fully€summarized.€€Carruthers€repeatedly€and€unreasonably€demanded€that€hisÐ 4„ Ðappointed€counsel€withdraw€and€that€new€counsel€be€appointed.€€Carruthersðð€demands€escalated€asÐ  p Ðhis€scheduled€trial€dates€drew€near.€€As€the€trial€court€recognized,€the€ð ðployðð€to€delay€the€trial€becameÐ  \ Ðincreasingly€apparent€with€each€new€set€of€attorneys.€In€addition,€Carruthersðð€conduct€degeneratedÐ øH Ðand€his€outrageous€allegations€and€threats€escalated€markedly€with€each€new€set€of€attorneys.€€As€theÐ ä4 Ðtrial€court€emphasized,€Carruthers€was€the€author€of€his€own€predicament€and€sabotaged€hisÐ Ð  Ðrelationship€with€each€successive€attorney€with€the€obvious€goal€of€delaying€and€disrupting€theÐ ¼  Ðorderly€trial€of€the€case.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€trial€court€was€fully€justified€in€concludingÐ ¨ø Ðthat€Carruthers€had€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel.€€Indeed,€in€situations€such€as€this€one,€a€trial€courtÐ ”ä Ðhas€no€other€choice€but€to€find€that€a€defendant€has€forfeited€the€right€to€counsel;€otherwise,€anÐ €Ð Ðintelligent€defendant€ð ðcould€theoretically€go€through€tens€of€court„appointed€attorneys€and€delay€hisÐ l¼ Ðtrial€for€years.ðð€€òòCummingsóó,€546€N.W.2d€at€419.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àAs€did€the€trial€court€and€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€we€have€carefully€considered€theÐ 0"€  Ðramifications€of€holding€that€an€indigent€criminal€defendant€in€a€capital€case€has€implicitly€waivedÐ #l! Ðand€forfeited€his€valuable€right€to€counsel.Ô_Ô׃<×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú28Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€We€are€aware€that€both€implicit€waiver€and€forfeitureÐ $X" Ðare€extreme€sanctions.€€However,€Carruthersðð€conduct€€was€extreme€and€egregious.€€The€sanction€isÐ ô$D # Ðappropriate€under€the€circumstances€and€commensurate€with€Carruthersðð€misconduct.€€We€reiterateÐ à%0!$ Ðthat€a€finding€of€forfeiture€is€appropriate€only€where€a€defendant€egregiously€manipulates€theÐ Ì&"% Ðconstitutional€right€to€counsel€so€as€to€delay,€disrupt,€or€prevent€the€orderly€administration€of€justice.€Ð ° ÐWhere€the€record€demonstrates€such€egregious€manipulation€a€finding€of€forfeiture€should€be€madeÐ œì Ðand€such€a€finding€will€be€sustained,€even€if€the€defendant€is€charged€with€a€capital€offense.€€PersonsÐ ˆØ Ðcharged€with€capital€offenses€should€not€be€afforded€greater€latitude€to€manipulate€and€misuseÐ tÄ Ðvaluable€and€treasured€constitutional€rights.€Ð `° ÐÌà  àCarruthers€also€claims€that€he€was€denied€due€process€because€he€was€forced€to€chooseÐ 8 ˆ Ðbetween€incompetent€counsel€and€no€counsel€at€all,€and€he€asserts€that€the€trial€judge€should€haveÐ $ t Ðheld€a€hearing€to€determine€the€validity€of€his€complaints€about€his€attorneys.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àWe€disagree.€€There€is€simply€no€evidence€indicating€that€any€one€of€the€many€attorneysÐ è 8  Ðappointed€to€represent€Carruthers€was€ineffective.Ô_Ô׃$×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú29Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€€In€fact,€the€record€fully€supports€the€trial€courtððsÐ Ô$  Ðrepeated€findings€that€the€attorneys€were€qualified,€competent,€and€highly€skilled€trial€lawyers.€€TheÐ À  Ðrecord€demonstrates€that€the€trial€court€closely€supervised€the€case,€inquired€about€defense€counselððsÐ ¬ü  Ðprogress,€allowed€Carruthers€to€voice€his€concerns€about€counsel,€and€conscientiously€reviewed€andÐ ˜è  Ðconsidered€letters€from€Carruthers€containing€allegations€about€his€attorneys.€€Based€upon€thisÐ „Ô  Ðinformation,€the€trial€court€repeatedly€found€the€attorneys€representing€Carruthers€to€be€competent.€Ð pÀ ÐMost€of€Carruthersðð€complaints€about€his€attorneys€were€outrageous€personal€attacks€that€had€littleÐ \¬ Ðor€nothing€to€do€with€legal€representation.€€Indeed,€these€allegations€were€so€outrageous€that€theÐ H˜ Ðletters€were€sealed€at€trial€and€remain€a€sealed€exhibit€to€the€record€on€appeal.€€Although€we€haveÐ 4„ Ðreviewed€the€letters,€it€is€not€necessary€to€reveal€the€specific€nature€of€the€offensive€and€unfoundedÐ  p Ðallegations.׃G°×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú30Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Suffice€it€to€say€that,€given€the€nature€of€the€allegations€and€the€trial€courtððs€close€andÐ  \ Ðcareful€supervision€of€the€case,€a€formal€hearing€to€determine€counselððs€competency€was€notÐ øH Ðnecessary.€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àTo€the€extent€€that€Carruthers€is€alleging€that€his€pro€se€representation€was€ineffective,€weÐ ¼  Ðagree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appealsðð€conclusion€that€when€a€defendant€forfeits€or€waives€theÐ ¨ø Ðright€to€counsel,€regardless€of€whether€the€waiver€is€explicit€or€implicit,€he€or€she€also€forfeits€orÐ ”ä Ðwaives€the€right€to€effective€assistance€of€counsel.€€òòSeeóó€òòSmallóó,€988€S.W.2d€at€673;€òòState€v.€Goodwinóó,Ð €Ð Ð909€S.W.2d€35,€45€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1995);€òòCf.óó€òòÔ_ÔFarettaÔ_Ôóó,€422€U.S.€at€835€n.46,€95€S.€Ct.€at€2541Ð l¼ Ðâ ân.46(ð ð[Ô_ÔW]hateverÔ_Ô€else€may€or€may€not€be€open€to€him€on€appeal,€a€defendant€who€elects€to€representÐ X ¨ Ðhimself€cannot€thereafter€complain€that€the€quality€of€his€own€defense€amounted€to€a€denial€ofÐ ° Ðeffective€assistance€of€counsel.ðð).Ô_Ô׃N×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú31Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ԀРœì Ðâ âÌà  àCarruthers€also€argues€that€his€right€to€counsel€was€violated€when€the€trial€court€€allowedÐ tÄ ÐÔ_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€to€withdraw€as€advisory€counsel.€€We€disagree.€€This€Court€recently€held€that€ð ðthere€is€noÐ `° Ðconstitutional€right€to€the€appointment€of€advisory€counsel€where€a€defendant€has€knowingly€andÐ L œ Ðintelligently€waived€the€right€to€counsel.ðð€€òòSmallóó,€988€S.W.2d€at€675.€€We€also€recognized€in€òòSmallóóÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€trial€courts€have€discretion€to€appoint€advisory€counsel,€but€emphasized€that€trial€court€decisionsÐ $ t Ðregarding€appointment€of€advisory€counsel€will€not€be€overturned€on€appeal€absent€a€showing€ofÐ  ` Ðabuse€of€discretion.€€òòId.óó€€Carruthers€has€cited€no€authority€that€would€require€adoption€of€a€differentÐ ü L  Ðrule€in€this€case.€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àAfter€finding€that€Carruthers€had€implicitly€waived€or€forfeited€his€right€to€appointed€counsel,Ð À  Ðthe€trial€court,€consistent€with€preferred€practice,׃H(×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú32Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€appointed€advisory€counsel.€€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€was€allowedÐ ¬ü  Ðto€withdraw€because€Carruthers€leveled€personal€attacks€against€him.€€Given€Carruthersðð€relationshipÐ ˜è  Ðwith€his€five€prior€court„appointed€attorneys,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€itsÐ „Ô  Ðdiscretion€by€permitting€Ô_ÔSayleÔ_Ô€to€withdraw.€€Indeed,€the€trial€courtððs€decision€was€entirely€reasonable.€Ð pÀ ÐòòCf.óó€òòCummingsóó,€546€N.W.2d€at€419€(upholding€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€appoint€standby€counselÐ \¬ Ðbecause€the€defendant€had€totally€refused€to€cooperate€with€his€previous€court„appointed€counsel).€Ð H˜ ÐThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àFinally,€Carruthers€argues€that€the€trial€court€did€not€treat€him€fairly€because€he€was€forcedÐ  \ Ðto€represent€himself.€€Carruthers€recites€an€extensive€list€of€over€thirty€episodes€allegedly€supportingÐ øH Ðhis€allegations€that€his€trial€was€unfair€and€his€treatment€unequal.€€As€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ä4 Ðfound,€most€of€the€restrictions€€about€which€Carruthers€complains€resulted€from€his€status€as€a€proÐ Ð  Ðse€litigant€and€a€prisoner€subject€to€strict€security€measures.€€In€fact,€the€record€reflects€that€the€trialÐ ¼  Ðcourt€was€much€more€lenient€with€Carruthers€than€with€the€other€defense€attorneys€and€went€to€greatÐ ¨ø Ðlengths€to€accommodate€Carruthersðð€requests,€even€issuing€subpoenas€for€witnesses€during€trial.€€TheÐ ”ä Ðtrial€court€also€liberally€approved€funds€for€Carruthers€to€secure€expert€and€investigative€assistance.Ð €Ð ÐThe€trial€court€was€not€required€to€exempt€Carruthers€from€complying€with€the€rules€of€evidence€andÐ l¼ Ðprocedure€or€to€allow€Carruthers€free€reign€in€the€courtroom.€€The€record€reveals€that€Carruthers€wasÐ X ¨ Ðtreated€fairly€by€the€trial€court,€and€this€issue€is€without€merit.Ð D!” ÐÌÌÐ $X" Ðà@- - ìàà@@Õ Õ ìàòòò òDenial€of€Montgomeryððs€Motion€for€Severanceó óóóˆÐ ° Ðà  àMontgomery€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€sever€his€case€from€that€ofÐ œì ÐCarruthers€under€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€14(c)(2).Ô_Ô׃?×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú33Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Montgomery€asked€for€a€severance,€before€trial,Ð ˆØ Ðduring€trial,€and€once€again€in€his€motion€for€new€trial,€arguing€that€the€trial€courtððs€failure€to€grantÐ tÄ Ða€severance€resulted€in€prejudicial€error€mandating€a€new€trial.׃Iì×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú34Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€this€Court,€Montgomery€claimsÐ `° Ðhe€was€unduly€prejudiced€by€a€joint€trial€because€of€the€admission€of€certain€statements€made€byÐ L œ ÐCarruthers€that€would€not€have€been€admissible€at€a€separate€trial€and€because€of€the€ð ðgrosslyÐ 8 ˆ Ðprejudicial€fashionðð€in€which€Carruthers€represented€himself€at€trial.€€The€State€responds€that€the€trialÐ $ t Ðcourt€appropriately€denied€Montgomeryððs€requests€for€a€severance€and€alternatively€contends€thatÐ  ` Ðany€possible€error€in€denying€the€request€€was€harmless.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àWhether€a€severance€should€be€granted€is€a€matter€entrusted€to€the€sound€discretion€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðtrial€court,€and€this€Court€will€not€interfere€with€the€exercise€of€that€discretion€unless€it€results€inÐ À  Ðclear€prejudice€to€the€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔHutchisonÔ_Ôóó,€898€S.W.2d€161,€166€(Tenn.€1994);€òòStateÐ ¬ü  Ðv.€Colemanóó,€619€S.W.2d€112,€116€(Tenn.1981);€òòHunter€v.€Stateóó,€222€Tenn.€672,€681,€440€S.W.2dÐ ˜è  Ð1,€6€(1969);€òòState€v.€Burtonóó,€751€S.W.2d€440,€447€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1988).€€In€òòWoodruff€v.€Stateóó,Ð „Ô  Ð164€Tenn.€530,€538„39,€51€S.W.2d€843,€845€(1932),€this€Court€noted€that:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àThe€state,€as€well€as€the€persons€accused,€is€entitled€to€have€its€rights€protected,€andÐ H˜ Ðwhen€several€persons€are€charged€jointly€with€a€single€crime,€we€think€the€state€isÐ 4„ Ðentitled€to€have€the€fact€of€guilt€determined€and€punishment€assessed€in€a€single€trial,Ð  p Ðòòunless€to€do€so€would€unfairly€prejudice€the€rights€of€the€defendants.óó€Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)€€Reversal€is€required€only€when€the€record€demonstrates€that€ð ðthe€defendant€wasÐ ä4 Ðclearly€prejudiced€to€the€point€that€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€ended€and€the€granting€of€[a]€severanceÐ Ð  Ðbecame€a€judicial€duty.ðð€€òòHunteróó,€222€Tenn.€at€682,€440€S.W.2d€at€6;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòBurtonóó,€751€S.W.2dÐ ¼  Ðat€447.€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àNo€Tennessee€court€has€previously€considered€the€effect€of€one€defendantððs€self„Ð €Ð Ðrepresentation€on€a€co„defendantððs€right€to€a€severance.€€Several€federal€courts€have€held€that,€whileÐ l¼ Ðð ðpregnant€with€the€possibility€of€prejudice,ðð€a€trial€involving€a€pro€se€defendant€and€a€representedÐ X ¨ Ðco„defendant€is€not€prejudicial€per€se.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔVetetoÔ_Ôóó,€701€F.2d€136,€138„39€(11th€Cir.Ð ° Ð1983);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòPerson€v.€Milleróó,€854€F.2d€656,€665€(4th€Cir.€1988);€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔOglesbyÔ_Ôóó,€764Ð œì ÐF.2d€1273,€1275„76€(7th€Cir.€1985);òòóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔSaccoÔ_Ôóó,€563€F.2d€552,€555„56€(2nd€Cir.€1977);Ð ˆØ ÐòòState€v.€Ô_ÔCanedoÔ_Ô„Ô_ÔAstorgaÔ_Ôóó,€903€P.2d€500,€504€(Wash.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€Rather€than€automaticallyÐ tÄ Ðgranting€a€severance€in€such€cases,€these€courts€have€suggested€that€certain€precautionary€measures€Ð `° Ðbe€employed€to€minimize€the€possibility€of€prejudice,€including€Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àappointing€standby€counsel,€warning€the€pro€se€defendant€that€he€will€be€held€to€theÐ $ t Ðrules€of€law€and€evidence€and€that€he€should€refrain€from€speaking€in€the€first€personÐ  ` Ðin€his€comments€on€the€evidence,€and€instructing€the€jury€prior€to€the€closingÐ ü L  Ðremarks,€during€summation€and€in€final€instructions,€that€nothing€the€lawyer€said€isÐ è 8  Ðevidence€in€this€case.€€[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€district€judge€should€also€make€clear€to€the€jury€at€theÐ Ô$  Ðoutset€that€anything€the€pro€se€defendant€says€in€his€ððlawyer€roleðð€is€not€evidence€andÐ À  Ðshould€instruct€the€pro€se€defendant€beforehand€that€he€should€both€avoid€referenceÐ ¬ü  Ðto€co„defendants€in€any€opening€statement€or€summation€without€prior€permissionÐ ˜è  Ðof€the€court€and€refrain€from€commenting€on€matters€not€in€evidence€or€solely€withinÐ „Ô  Ðhis€personal€knowledge€or€belief.€€ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌòòÔ_ÔVetetoÔ_Ôóó,€701€F.2d€at€138„39;€òòÔ_ÔOglesbyÔ_Ôóó,€764€F.2d€at€1275;€òòÔ_ÔSaccoÔ_Ôóó,€563€F.2d€at€556„57;€òòÔ_ÔCanedoÔ_Ô„Ô_ÔAstorgaÔ_Ôóó,Ð H˜ Ð903€P.2d€at€506.€€These€courts€have€emphasized€that€such€precautionary€measures€are€ð ðsuggestions,Ð 4„ Ðnot€requirements,€for€preventing€the€possibility€of€prejudice€from€ripening€into€actualityðð€in€a€trialÐ  p Ðinvolving€a€pro€se€defendant€and€a€represented€co„defendant.€€òòÔ_ÔVetetoÔ_Ôóó,€701€F.2d€at€138.€€We€agree€thatÐ  \ Ðthese€precautionary€measures€should€be€employed€€when€a€pro€se€defendant€and€a€represented€co„Ð øH Ðdefendant€are€tried€jointly.€€However,€in€rare€cases,€such€as€this€one,€even€these€protective€measuresÐ ä4 Ðwill€not€be€sufficient€to€prevent€ð ðthe€possibility€of€prejudice€from€ripening€into€actuality.ðð€€òòId.óó€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAlthough€the€trial€court€required€Carruthers€to€generally€adhere€to€the€rules€of€evidence€andÐ ¨ø Ðprocedure€and€cautioned€him€about€making€statements€to€the€jury,€these€measures€were€not€enoughÐ ”ä Ðto€prevent€his€pro€se€representation€from€prejudicing€Montgomeryððs€right€to€a€fair€trial.€€Indeed,Ð €Ð Ðdespite€the€trial€courtððs€efforts,€the€record€demonstrates€that€Montgomery€was€severely€prejudicedÐ l¼ Ðby€Carruthersðð€self„representation,€specifically,€his€offensive€mannerisms€before€the€jury,׃@×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú35Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€hisÐ X ¨ Ðâ âquestioning€of€witnesses€that€elicited€incriminating€evidence,׃DÜ×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú36Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€and€most€importantly,€his€callingÐ D!” ÐÑ=˜%Ñâ =âÑ hXÑâ =âÑ  ÑAlfredo€Shaw€to€testify€as€a€witness.€€The€prejudice€to€Montgomery€was€compounded€when€the€StateÐ ° Ðused€and€emphasized€the€incriminating€evidence€elicited€by€Carruthers€during€its€closing€argument.׃C×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú37Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àWe€do€not€agree€with€the€Stateððs€assertion€that€any€error€is€harmless€because€the€trial€courtÐ tÄ Ðinstructed€the€jury€ð ðthat€if€evidence€applied€to€one€defendant€they€should€only€apply€it€to€the€oneÐ `° Ðdefendant.ðð€€As€Montgomery€points€out,€despite€this€general€instruction,€at€no€point€did€the€trialÐ L œ Ðcourt€instruct€the€jury€that€any€particular€evidence€applied€only€to€one€defendant€and€not€the€other.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐEven€though€Montgomeryððs€name€was€not€mentioned,€Alfredo€Shawððs€€testimony€clearly€indicatedÐ $ t Ðthat€others€were€involved€with€Carruthers€in€committing€these€crimes,€and€given€the€joint€trial,€theÐ  ` Ðjury€likely€inferred€that€Montgomery€was€one€of€the€others.׃9 ×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú38Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àWe€recognize€that€the€prejudice€resulting€to€Montgomery€from€being€tried€jointly€withÐ Ô$  ÐCarruthers€did€not€become€fully€apparent€until€the€trial€had€concluded.€€Only€at€the€conclusion€of€theÐ À  Ðtrial€was€it€possible€for€the€trial€court€to€comprehend€the€full€effect€of€Carruthersðð€self„€representationÐ ¬ü  Ðupon€Montgomeryððs€right€to€a€fair€trial.€€We€realize€that€the€trial€court€properly€attempted€toÐ ˜è  Ðaccommodate€the€interest€of€judicial€economy,€the€Stateððs€interest€in€having€guilt€determined€andÐ „Ô  Ðpunishment€assessed€in€a€single€trial,€and€the€defendantsðð€right€to€a€fair€trial.€€However,€by€the€timeÐ pÀ Ðthis€issue€was€raised€in€the€motion€for€new€trial,€we€believe€that€the€record€demonstrated€thatÐ \¬ ÐMontgomery€ð ðwas€clearly€prejudiced€to€the€point€that€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€ended€and€theÐ H˜ Ðgranting€of€[a]€severance€became€a€judicial€duty.ðð€€òòHunteróó,€222€Tenn.€at€682,€440€S.W.2d€at€6;€òòseeóóÐ 4„ Ðòòalsoóó€òòBurtonóó,€751€S.W.2d€at€447.€€We€therefore€hold€that€Montgomeryððs€right€to€a€fair€trial€wasÐ  p Ðprejudiced€when€he€was€denied€a€severance€and€was€jointly€tried€with€Carruthers.׃W< ×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú39Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Accordingly,Ð  \ Ðwe€reverse€Montgomeryððs€convictions€and€sentences€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.Ô_Ô׃5$×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú40Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ԀРøH Їà@% % ìàòòò òAdmissibility€of€Jonathan€Montgomeryððs€Statementsó óóóˆÐ ° Ðà  àCarruthers€next€complains€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€Stateððs€witness€ChrisÐ œì ÐÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€to€testify€about€the€statements€of€Jonathan€Montgomery.€€According€to€Carruthers,€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_ÔððÐ ˆØ Ðtestimony€about€Jonathanððs€statements€was€inadmissible€hearsay.€€The€State€argues€that€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_ÔððÐ tÄ Ðtestimony€was€admissible€under€the€co„conspirator€hearsay€exception.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.Ð `° Ð803(1.2)(E).€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àSpecifically,€Carruthers€complains€about€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€testimony€relating€the€€statements€JonathanÐ $ t Ðmade€to€him€about€these€murders€when€Jonathan€borrowed€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€car€the€night€of€the€murders€andÐ  ` Ðwhen€Jonathan€and€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€were€at€the€carwash€the€morning€after€the€murders.€€€The€Court€of€CriminalÐ ü L  ÐAppeals€held€that€Jonathanððs€first€statement€to€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€fell€within€the€co„conspirator€exception€becauseÐ è 8  Ðat€the€time€Jonathan€asked€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€to€take€him€to€the€cemetery,€one€could€infer€that€the€victims€hadÐ Ô$  Ðnot€been€buried€and€Jonathan€was€needed€to€complete€the€robbery,€Ô_ÔkidnappingsÔ_Ô,€and€murders.€€TheÐ À  ÐCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals€also€held€that€Jonathan€Montgomeryððs€statements€to€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€the€nextÐ ¬ü  Ðmorning€while€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€car€was€being€washed€were€not€in€furtherance€of€the€conspiracy€but€were€moreÐ ˜è  Ðakin€to€ð ðcasual€conversationðð€about€past€events€and€thus€inadmissible.€Since€the€second€inadmissibleÐ „Ô  Ðstatement€was€cumulative€of€the€first€admissible€statement,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€found€theÐ pÀ Ðerror€harmless.€€We€agree.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àHearsay€€ð ðis€a€statement,€other€than€one€made€by€the€Ô_ÔdeclarantÔ_Ô€while€testifying€at€the€trial€orÐ 4„ Ðhearing,€offered€in€evidence€to€prove€the€truth€of€the€matter€asserted.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€801(c).€Ð  p ÐHearsay€is€not€admissible€in€evidence€except€as€provided€by€exceptions€Ô_ÔinÔ_Ô€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ  \ ÐEvidence€or€other€applicable€law.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€802.€€One€of€the€exceptions€to€the€hearsay€ruleÐ øH Ðis€a€statement€of€a€co„conspirator.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€803(1.2)(E).€€Under€this€exception,€hearsayÐ ä4 Ðis€admissible€if€it€constitutes€ð ða€statement€by€a€co„conspirator€of€a€party€during€the€course€of€and€inÐ Ð  Ðfurtherance€of€the€conspiracy.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ ¼  Ðà  àÌà  àA€conspiracy€is€defined€as€a€combination€between€two€or€more€persons€to€do€a€criminal€orÐ ”ä Ðunlawful€act€or€a€lawful€act€by€criminal€or€unlawful€means.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Alleyóó,€968€S.W.2d€314,€316Ð €Ð Ð(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1997);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔGaylorÔ_Ôóó,€862€S.W.2d€546,€553€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1992);€òòState€v.Ð l¼ ÐHoustonóó,€688€S.W.2d€838,€841€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1984);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔLequireÔ_Ôóó,€634€S.W.2d€608,€612Ð X ¨ Ð(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1981).€€To€be€admissible€under€the€co„conspirator€hearsay€exception,€a€statementÐ D!” Ðmust€be€made€ð ðduring€the€course€ofðð€a€conspiracy.€€This€means€that€the€conspiracy€must€have€beenÐ 0"€  Ðoccurring€or€ongoing€at€the€time€the€statement€was€made.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Walkeróó,€910€S.W.2d€381,€385Ð #l! Ð(Tenn.€1995);€òòÔ_ÔGaylorÔ_Ôóó,€862€S.W.2d€at€554;€Neil€Cohen€et€al.,€òòTennessee€Law€of€Evidenceóó€ððÐ $X" Ð803(1.2)(6)€(3d€ed.€1995).€€€€If€the€conspiracy€had€not€begun€or€had€already€concluded€when€theÐ ° Ðstatement€was€made,€the€statement€will€not€be€admissible€under€the€co„conspirator€exception.€€òòId.óó€Ð œì ÐThe€exception€also€requires€that€the€statement€be€ð ðin€furtherance€ofðð€the€conspiracy.€€In€short,€theÐ ˆØ Ðstatement€must€be€one€that€will€advance€or€aid€the€conspiracy€in€some€way.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔHeflinÔ_Ôóó,€15Ð tÄ ÐS.W.3d€519,€523€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1999).€€This€has€long€been€the€law€in€Tennessee.€€òòSeeóó€òòOwensóó,Ð `° Ð84€Tenn.€at€4;€òòHarrison€v.€Wisdomóó,€54€Tenn.€99,€107„08€(1872).€Commentators€have€explained€that:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  à[a]€statement€may€be€in€furtherance€of€the€conspiracy€in€countless€ways.€€ExamplesÐ $ t Ðinclude€statements€designed€to€get€the€scheme€started,€develop€plans,€arrange€forÐ  ` Ðthings€to€be€done€to€accomplish€the€goal,€update€other€conspirators€on€the€progress,Ð ü L  Ðdeal€with€arising€problems,€and€provide€information€relevant€to€the€project.€€WhileÐ è 8  Ðsuch€statements€are€ordinarily€made€to€other€conspirators,€Rule€803(1.2)(E)€does€notÐ Ô$  Ðso€require.€€Statements€to€third€parties€may€qualify€if€in€furtherance€of€the€conspiracy.€ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌTennessee€Law€of€Evidence,€ðð€803(1.2).€6,€p.€522.€€Where€a€conspiracy€exists,€ð ðeveryone€enteringÐ ˜è  Ðinto€the€conspiracy€is€a€party€to€every€act€which€has€before€been€done€by€the€others€and€to€every€actÐ „Ô  Ðby€the€others€afterward€in€furtherance€of€the€common€design.ðð€€òòOwensóó,€84€Tenn.€at€4.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àCasual€conversation€between€or€among€co„conspirators€is€not€considered€to€be€in€furtheranceÐ H˜ Ðof€the€conspiracy.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔHutchisonÔ_Ôóó,€898€S.W.2d€at€170.€€In€addition,€where€a€conspirator€isÐ 4„ Ðapprehended€and€ð ðtells€all€to€the€police,€it€is€unlikely€the€confession€is€admissible€as€a€conspiratorÐ  p Ðstatement.ðð€€òòWalkeróó,€910€S.W.2d€at€386.€€Under€those€circumstances,€the€statement€ð ðbecomes€onlyÐ  \ Ða€narrative€statement€of€past€conduct€between€conspirators.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ øH ÐÌà  àApplying€these€principles,€we€agree€that€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€testimony€about€the€statements€JonathanÐ Ð  ÐMontgomery€made€when€asking€to€borrow€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€car€was€properly€admitted€under€the€co„Ð ¼  Ðconspirator€hearsay€exception.€€As€previously€stated,€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€testified€that€Jonathan€MontgomeryÐ ¨ø Ðð ðbeepedðð€him€around€8:45€p.m.€on€February€24,€1994,€and€said,€ð ðMan,€a€n„„„„r€got€them€folks.ðð€Ð ”ä ÐWhen€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€asked,€ð ðWhat€folks?ðð€Jonathan€replied,€ð ðCello€and€themðð€and€said€something€aboutÐ €Ð Ðstealing€$200,000.€€Jonathan€indicated€he€could€not€talk€more€on€the€telephone€and€arranged€to€meetÐ l¼ ÐÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€in€person.€€When€Jonathan€arrived€at€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€home€around€9:00€p.m.,€Jonathan€told€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô,Ð X ¨ Ðð ðman,€we€got€them€folks€out€at€the€cemetery€on€Elvis€Presley,€and€we€got€$200,000.€€Man€a€n„„„„rÐ D!” Ðhad€to€kill€them€folks.ððÔ_Ô׃ ×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú41Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€According€to€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô,€at€this€point€James€Montgomery€ð ðbeeped€inðð€andÐ 0"€  Ðtalked€with€Jonathan,€and€after€this€conversation,€Jonathan€asked€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€to€drive€him€to€the€cemetery.€Ð #l! ÐÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€refused€to€drive€Jonathan€but€allowed€him€to€borrow€his€car.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àThe€record€does€not€support€Carruthersðð€assertion€that€the€conspiracy€had€ended€by€the€timeÐ à%0!$ ÐJonathan€Montgomery€made€these€statements.€€€In€fact,€Ô_ÔNakeitaÔ_Ô€Shaw€testified€that€she€saw€two€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€victims,€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€Anderson€and€Frederick€Tucker,€leave€her€home€alive€around€10€p.m.€withÐ ¸'#& ÐJames€Montgomery€and€Carruthers.€€In€addition,€the€record€demonstrates€that€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_Ô€AndersonððsÐ ¤(ô#' ÐJeep€Cherokee€was€burned€much€later€at€2:40€a.m.€in€Mississippi.€€Clearly,€the€conspiracy€had€notÐ ° Ðended€when€Jonathan€Montgomery€made€these€statements€at€around€8:45€to€9:30€p.m.€€In€addition,Ð œì Ðthe€record€reflects€that€the€statements€were€made€in€furtherance€of€the€conspiracy.€€JonathanÐ ˆØ Ðcontacted€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€and€made€these€statements€to€obtain€transportation€to€the€cemetery€so€he€could€assistÐ tÄ Ðhis€co„conspirators€in€completing€the€conspiracy.€€We€therefore€hold€that€the€testimony€of€ChrisÐ `° ÐÔ_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€about€the€statements€Jonathan€Montgomery€made€to€him€on€the€night€of€the€murders,€FebruaryÐ L œ Ð24,€1994,€was€properly€admitted€pursuant€to€the€co„conspirator€hearsay€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÌà  àHowever,€as€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€held,€the€statements€Jonathan€Montgomery€madeÐ ü L  Ðto€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€at€the€car€wash€on€the€morning€after€the€murders€were€not€admissible€under€the€co„Ð è 8  Ðconspirator€exception.€€As€previously€stated,€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ô€testified€that€Jonathan€repeatedly€told€him€at€theÐ Ô$  Ðcar€wash€that€ð ðthey€had€to€kill€some€people.ðð€€These€statements€were€not€made€while€the€conspiracyÐ À  Ðwas€ongoing,€nor€were€these€statements€in€furtherance€of€the€conspiracy.€€These€statements€are€bestÐ ¬ü  Ðdescribed€as€a€€narrative€ð ðof€past€conduct€between€conspiratorsðð€and€therefore€were€inadmissible.€Ð ˜è  ÐòòSeeóó€òòWalkeróó,€910€S.W.2d€at€386.€€Nonetheless,€we€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€that€theÐ „Ô  Ðerroneous€admission€of€testimony€about€these€statements€is€harmless€error.€€This€testimony€isÐ pÀ Ðconsistent€with€and€merely€cumulative€of€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôðð€testimony€about€Jonathanððs€statements€on€the€nightÐ \¬ Ðof€the€murders€which€were€properly€admitted€under€the€co„conspirator€exception.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àFinally,€we€also€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€that€reversal€is€not€requiredÐ  p Ðbecause€the€trial€court€refused€to€allow€Carruthers€to€question€Detective€Ruby€about€the€content€ofÐ  \ ÐJonathan€Montgomeryððs€statements€to€the€police.€€This€testimony€clearly€was€not€admissible€underÐ øH Ðthe€co„conspirator€hearsay€exception.€€When€a€co„conspirator€ð ðtells€all€to€the€police,€it€is€unlikely€theÐ ä4 Ðconfession€is€admissible€as€a€conspirator€statement.ðð€€òòWalkeróó,€910€S.W.2d€at€386.€€Even€assumingÐ Ð  Ðthe€statement€would€have€been€admissible€under€the€hearsay€exception€for€statements€against€penalÐ ¼  Ðinterest,Ô_Ô׃(×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú42Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€any€error€in€excluding€the€evidence€was€harmless.€€The€statements€Jonathan€MontgomeryÐ ¨ø Ðmade€to€the€police€implicated€Carruthers€and€would€have€been€prejudicial€to€his€defense.€€This€claimÐ ”ä Ðis€without€merit.Ð €Ð ÐÌò òòòà@iiìàSufficiency€of€the€Evidenceóóó óˆÐ X ¨ Ðà  àBoth€Carruthers€and€Montgomery€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€Ð D!” ÐCarruthers€argues€that€the€witnesses€against€him€were€not€credible€and€that€the€State€relied€tooÐ 0"€  Ðheavily€on€the€testimony€of€convicted€felons.€€Montgomery€complains€that€had€he€been€triedÐ #l! Ðseparately,€the€circumstantial€evidence€admissible€against€him€at€a€separate€trial€would€have€beenÐ $X" Ðinsufficient.€€€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€proper€inquiry€for€an€appellate€court€determining€the€sufficiency€of€evidence€to€supportÐ Ì&"% Ða€conviction,€is€whether,€considering€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€anyÐ ¸'#& Ðrational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€Ð ° ÐòòSeeóó€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€61€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€8Ð œì ÐS.W.3d€593,€599€(Tenn.€1999).€€ð ðA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€court,€accreditsÐ ˆØ Ðthe€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€prosecutionððsÐ tÄ Ðtheory.ðð€€òòState€v.€Blandóó,€958€S.W.2d€651,€659€(Tenn.€1997).€€Questions€about€the€credibility€ofÐ `° Ðwitnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€theÐ L œ Ðevidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€and€this€Court€does€not€Ô_ÔreweighÔ_Ô€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐòòId.óó€€Nor€may€this€Court€substitute€its€inferences€drawn€from€circumstantial€evidence€for€those€drawnÐ $ t Ðby€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔLiakasÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(1956).€€TheÐ  ` Ðstandard€for€appellate€review€is€the€same€whether€the€conviction€is€based€upon€direct€orÐ ü L  Ðcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔVannÔ_Ôóó,€976€S.W.2d€93,€111€(Tenn.€1998).€€Ô‡XaXXXaÔA€conviction€mayÐ è 8  Ðbe€based€entirely€on€circumstantial€evidence€where€the€facts€are€"so€clearly€interwoven€andÐ Ô$  Ðconnected€that€the€finger€of€guilt€is€pointed€unerringly€at€the€Defendant€and€the€Defendant€alone."€Ð À  ÐòòState€v.€Smithóó,€868€S.W.2d€561,€569€(Tenn.€1993)€(quotingÔ#†XaXXXaÇ#Ô€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67Ð ¬ü  Ð(Tenn.1985)).€€€A€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replaces€it€with€aÐ ˜è  Ðpresumption€of€guilt,€and€on€appeal€the€defendant€has€the€burden€of€illustrating€why€the€evidenceÐ „Ô  Ðis€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€rendered€by€the€jury.€€òòId.óó;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔTuggleÔ_Ôóó,€639€S.W.2dÐ pÀ Ð913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€In€contrast,€the€State€on€appeal€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€viewÐ \¬ Ðof€the€trial€evidence€and€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€theÐ H˜ Ðevidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòHallóó,€8€S.W.3d€at€599;€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€659.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAt€the€time€this€offense€was€committed,€first€degree€murder€was€defined€as€an€ð ðintentional,Ð  \ Ðpremeditated€and€deliberate€killing€of€another.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1)(1991).׃"×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú43Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Ð øH Ðð ðIntentionalðð€is€defined€as€the€ð ðconscious€objective€or€desire€to€engage€in€the€conduct€or€cause€theÐ ä4 Ðresult.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€39„11„106(a)(18)€(1991).€€Premeditation,€on€the€other€hand,€requiresÐ Ð  Ðð ðthe€exercise€of€reflection€and€judgment.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(b)(2)€(1991).€€Finally,Ð ¼  Ðdeliberation€requires€proof€of€a€ð ðcool€purposeðð€that€includes€some€period€of€reflection€during€whichÐ ¨ø Ðthe€mind€is€free€from€passion€and€excitement.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(b)(1)€(1991).Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€elements€of€premeditation€and€deliberation€are€questions€of€fact€to€be€resolved€by€theÐ l¼ Ðjury.€òòSeeóó€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€660.€€These€elements€may€be€established€by€proof€of€theÐ X ¨ Ðcircumstances€surrounding€the€killing.€€òòId.óó;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530,€539€(Tenn.Ð D!” Ð1992).€€As€we€stated€in€òòBlandóó,€there€are€several€factors€which€tend€to€support€the€existence€of€theseÐ 0"€  Ðelements€including:€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€upon€an€unarmed€victim;€the€particular€cruelty€ofÐ #l! Ðthe€killing;€declarations€by€the€defendant€of€an€intent€to€kill;€€evidence€of€procurement€of€a€weapon;Ð $X" Ðpreparations€before€the€killing€for€concealment€of€the€crime;€and€calmness€immediately€after€theÐ ô$D # Ðkilling.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pikeóó,€978€S.W.2d€904,€914€(Tenn.€1998);€€òòBlandóó,€€958€S.W.2d€at€660;€òòBrownóó,Ð à%0!$ Ð836€S.W.2d€at€541„42;€òòState€v.€Westóó,€844€S.W.2d€144,€148€(Tenn.€1992).Ð Ì&"% Ðâ âÐ ¸'#& Ðà  àHaving€reviewed€the€proof€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€as€we€are€required€to€do,Ð ° Ðâ âwe€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€that€the€evidence€is€legally€sufficient€to€support€theÐ œì Ðjuryððs€verdicts€as€to€each€defendant.€€The€trial€proof€has€been€thoroughly€and€fully€summarized.€Ð ˆØ ÐWith€respect€to€Carruthersðð€challenges€to€the€Stateððs€witnesses,€suffice€it€to€say€that,€through€cross„Ð tÄ Ðexamination,€the€jury€was€made€aware€that€some€of€the€witnesses€had€prior€felony€records,€that€someÐ `° Ðof€the€witnesses€admitted€to€past€drug€dealing,€and€that€some€of€the€witnesses€had€given€inconsistentÐ L œ Ðstatements€to€the€police€regarding€the€events€of€February€24€and€25,€1994.€€However,€the€juryÐ 8 ˆ Ðresolved€these€issues€of€credibility€in€favor€of€the€State,€and€an€appellate€court€may€not€reconsiderÐ $ t Ðthe€juryððs€credibility€assessments.€€Moreover,€while€we€have€already€resolved€the€severance€issueÐ  ` Ðin€favor€of€Montgomery,€we€reject€his€claim€that€the€circumstantial€evidence€was€legally€insufficient.€Ð ü L  ÐIn€our€view,€the€evidence€is€legally€sufficient.€€òòSeeóó€Footnote€37,€òòsupraóó€(discussing€the€applicabilityÐ è 8  Ðof€the€co„conspirator€hearsay€exception).Ð Ô$  ÐÌÌà@## ìàòòò òIssuance€of€Gag€Orderóóó óˆÐ ˜è  ÐÔ‡XaXXXaÔà  àCarruthers€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€error€by€issuing€a€ð ðgag€orderððÐ „Ô  Ðpreventing€him€from€speaking€to€the€media.׃;×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú44Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trial€courtððs€order,€issued€about€a€month€beforeÐ pÀ Ðthe€trial€began,€states:Ð \¬ ÐÌÓ XÓà0  àà ` àThe€Constitutions€of€the€United€States€and€the€State€of€Tennessee€guaranteeÐ 4„ Ðdefendants€in€all€criminal€cases€due€process€of€law€and€the€right€to€a€fair€andÐ  p Ðimpartial€jury.€€It€is€the€duty€of€the€trial€court€to€see€that€every€defendant€is€affordedÐ  \ Ðall€his€constitutional€rights.ÐøHÐ Ð  Ð\Ð ä4 Ðà0  àà ` àIn€order€to€safeguard€those€rights,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€theÐ Ð  Ðfollowing€rule€is€necessary€to€constitutionally€guarantee€an€orderly€and€fair€trial€byÐ ¼  Ðan€impartial€jury.€€Therefore,€this€Court€orders€the€following:ШøÐ Ð  ÐÌà0  àà ` àAll€lawyers€participating€in€this€case,€including€any€defendants€proceedingÐ €Ð Ðpro€se,€the€assistants,€staff,€investigators,€and€employees€of€investigators€areÐ l¼ Ðforbidden€to€take€part€in€interviews€for€publicity€and€from€making€extra„judicialÐ X ¨ Ðstatements€about€this€case€from€this€date€until€such€time€as€a€verdict€is€returned€inÐ D!” Ðthis€case€in€open€court.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌà0  àà0` Ð Ð àBecause€of€the€gravity€of€this€case,€because€of€the€long€history€of€Ð$X"` Ð ` Ð  Ðà0  àconcerns€for€the€personal€safety€of€attorneys,€litigants€and€witnesses€in€this€case,Ð ô$D # Ðbecause€of€the€potential€danger€ð!ð€believed€by€this€Court€to€be€very€real€and€veryÐ à%0!$ Ðpresent€ð!ð€of€undermining€the€integrity€of€the€judicial€system€by€ð ðtrying€the€case€in€theÐ Ì&"% Ðmediaðð€and€of€sullying€the€jury€pool,€this€Court€feels€compelled€to€adopt€thisÐ ° Ðextraordinary€pretrial€measure.ÐœìÐ Ð  ÐÌÌÓ X-–Óà  àCarruthers€challenges€this€order€as€violating€his€right€to€a€fair€trial,€guaranteed€by€the€SixthÐ `° ÐAmendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€Section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€Ð L œ ÐCarruthers€is€correct€to€rely€upon€the€Sixth€Amendment.€€We€note,€however,€that€the€United€StatesÐ 8 ˆ ÐSupreme€Court€has€stated€that€a€ð ðright€to€fair€trialðð€claim€also€implicates€the€Fifth€and€FourteenthÐ $ t ÐAmendment€Due€Process€Clauses.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòÔ_ÔStricklandÔ_Ô€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€684-85,€104Ð  ` ÐS.€Ct.€2052,€2063,€80€LED.2d€674€(1984)€(ð ðThe€Constitution€guarantees€a€fair€trial€through€the€DueÐ ü L  ÐProcess€Clauses,€but€it€defines€the€basic€elements€of€a€fair€trial€largely€through€the€several€provisionsÐ è 8  Ðof€the€Sixth€Amendment.ðð).€€òòóóNonetheless,€numerous€courts€have€referred€simply€to€the€SixthÐ Ô$  ÐAmendment€right€to€a€fair€trial€in€this€context,€and€we€will€do€the€same.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòIn€re€Dow€JonesÐ À  Ð&€Co.,€Inc.óó,€842€F.2d€603,€609€(2d€Cir.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€488€U.S.€946,€109€S.€Ct.€377,€102€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€365Ð ¬ü  Ð(1988);€òòUnited€States€v.€€Fordóó,€830€F.2d€596,€600€(6th€Cir.€1987).Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àCarruthers€also€raises€First€Amendment€concerns,€which€is€understandable€given€that€gagÐ pÀ Ðorders€exhibit€the€characteristics€of€prior€restraints.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Brownóó,€218€F.3d€415,€424Ð \¬ Ð(5th€Cir.€2000).€€òòBut€seeóó€òòDow€Jonesóó,€842€F.2d€at€608€(noting€a€ð ðsubstantial€differenceðð€between€aÐ H˜ Ðrestraint€on€the€press€and€a€restraint€on€trial€participants).€€Yet€the€crux€of€Carruthersðð€argument€onÐ 4„ Ðappeal€is€that€his€defense€was€inhibited€because€he€could€not€respond€to€the€mediaððs€coverage€of€theÐ  p Ðtrial;€he€could€do€nothing€to€alter€the€jurorsðð€preconceptions€about€the€case€gained€from€theirÐ  \ Ðexposure€to€news€reports.€€Carruthers€also€argues€that€his€inability€to€speak€to€the€press€may€haveÐ øH Ðprevented€potential€witnesses€from€coming€forward€to€his€defense.€€Properly€stated,€then,€hisÐ ä4 Ðargument€asserts€that€the€gag€order€interfered€with€his€right€to€a€fair€trial.€€To€the€extent€CarruthersððÐ Ð  Ðbrief€raises€a€First€Amendment€claim,€however,€we€find€it€moot.€€By€its€own€terms,€the€trial€courtððsÐ ¼  Ðorder€ceased€to€exist€upon€the€return€of€the€verdict,€which€occurred€several€years€ago.€€Of€course,Ð ¨ø Ðsince€a€gag€order€is€by€definition€a€restriction€on€speech,€our€review€of€Carruthersðð€Sixth€AmendmentÐ ”ä Ðclaim€demands€consideration€of€First€Amendment€principles.€€As€is€clear€from€the€case€law,Ð €Ð Ðdiscussed€below,€the€proper€standard€governing€the€validity€of€gag€orders€explicitly€incorporatesÐ l¼ Ðthese€principles,€as€do€we€in€our€analysis.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€rejected€Carruthersðð€arguments€and€upheld€the€gag€order€inÐ 0"€  Ðits€entirety.€€As€noted€in€its€opinion,€the€following€circumstances€were€considered€by€the€trial€courtÐ #l! Ðas€reasons€for€issuing€the€gag€order:€€numerous€threats€to€attorneys;€the€death€of€one€of€the€co„Ð $X" Ðdefendants;€the€highly„charged€emotional€climate€of€the€trial€(e.g.,€the€courtroom€was€guarded€byÐ ô$D # ÐÔ_ÔS.W.A.T.Ô_Ô€team€members);€the€gunning€down€of€a€deputy€jailer€in€his€driveway,€which€the€trial€judgeÐ à%0!$ Ðthought€was€related€to€the€case;€the€fleeing€of€one€witness€after€reading€about€the€case€in€theÐ Ì&"% Ðnewspaper;€and€the€statements€of€two€witnesses€who€had€already€testified€that€defendantÐ ¸'#& ÐMontgomery€threatened€to€kill€them€if€they€talked€about€the€case.€€Also,€as€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ ¤(ô#' ÐAppeals€noted,€Alfredo€Shaw€testified€that€Carruthers€threatened€him€and€made€arrangements€toÐ )à$( Ðhave€a€reporter€interview€him€about€recanting€his€story.€€Thus,€the€court€held€that€the€trial€judge€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðproperly€concerned€about€the€mediaððs€influence€on€the€potential€jury€pool€and€the€safety€of€allÐ h+¸&* Ðinvolved€in€the€trial.€€The€court€also€held€that€the€public€was€certainly€aware€of€the€trial€from€theÐ ° Ðmediaððs€coverage€and€that€Carruthersðð€statements€to€the€press€would€not€likely€have€led€to€unknownÐ œì Ðwitnesses€coming€forward.€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appealsðð€judgment€that€under€these€circumstances€a€gagÐ `° Ðorder€was€proper.€€We€hold€however€that€under€the€constitutional€standards€discussed€below,€theÐ L œ Ðscope€of€that€order€was€too€broad.€€Nevertheless,€given€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€the€error€isÐ 8 ˆ Ðharmless.€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àNumerous€courts€have€recognized€that€the€correct€standard€by€which€to€evaluate€theÐ ü L  Ðconstitutionality€of€gag€orders€depends€upon€who€is€being€restrained:€€the€press€or€trial€participants.€Ð è 8  ÐòòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòBrownóó,€842€F.2d€at€425;€òòDow€Jonesóó,€842€F.2d€at€608.€€òòóóIf€the€gag€order€is€directed€to€theÐ Ô$  Ðpress,€the€constitutional€standard€is€very€stringent.€€òòSeeóó€òòMontgomeryóó,€929€S.W.2d€at€414€(discussingÐ À  ÐòòNebraska€Press€Ô_ÔAssððnÔ_Ô€v.€Stuartóó,€427€U.S.€539,€96€S.€Ct.€2791,€49€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€683€(1976)).€€CarruthersððÐ ¬ü  Ðappeal€before€this€Court,€however,€concerns€the€trial€courtððs€gag€order€directed€to€him,€a€defendant,Ð ˜è  Ðrepresenting€himself€at€trial.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAs€the€United€States€Court€of€Appeals€for€the€Fifth€Circuit€has€recently€determined,€theÐ \¬ Ðfederal€circuit€courts€are€split€as€to€the€correct€constitutional€standard€governing€gag€orders€on€trialÐ H˜ Ðparticipants.€€òòSeeóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€425„28.€€For€example,€the€Sixth€Circuit€has€held€that€gag€ordersÐ 4„ Ðon€trial€participants€must€meet€the€exacting€ð ðclear€and€present€dangerðð€test€for€free€speech€casesÐ  p Ðenunciated€in€òòNear€v.€Minnesotaóó,€283€U.S.€697,€51€S.€Ct.€625,€75€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.€1357€(1931).€€òòSeeóó€òòFordóó,€830Ð  \ ÐF.2d€at€598€(ð ðWe€see€no€legitimate€reasons€for€a€lower€standard€for€individuals€[as€compared€to€theÐ øH Ðpress].ðð).€€òòAccordóó€òòChicago€Council€of€Lawyers€v.€Baueróó,€522€F.2d€242,€249€(7th€Cir.€1975),€òòcert.Ð ä4 Ðdeniedóó,€òòóó427€U.S.€912,€96€S.€Ct.€3201,€49€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€1204€(1976)€(applying€a€ð ðserious€and€imminentÐ Ð  Ðthreatðð€test)òòóó;€òòLevine€v.€United€States€District€Courtóó,€764€F.2d€590,€595„96€(9th€Cir.€1985),€òòcert.Ð ¼  Ðdeniedóó,€476€U.S.€1158,€106€S.€Ct.€2276,€90€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€719€(1986)€(same)òòóó.€€In€contrast,€the€Second,Ð ¨ø ÐFourth,€and€Tenth€òòóóCircuits€analyze€the€validity€of€gag€orders€on€trial€participants€under€the€lessÐ ”ä Ðstringent€standard€of€whether€the€participantððs€comments€present€a€ð ðreasonable€likelihoodðð€ofÐ €Ð Ðprejudicing€a€fair€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòDow€Jonesóó,€842€F.2d€at€610;€òòIn€re€Russellóó,€726€F.2d€1007,€1010€(4thÐ l¼ ÐCir.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€469€U.S.€837,€105€S.€Ct.€134,€83€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€74€(1984);€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔTijerinaÔ_Ôóó,€412Ð X ¨ ÐF.2d€661,€666„67€(10th€Cir.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€396€U.S.€990,€90€S.€Ct.€478,€24€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€452€(1969).€€òòSeeÐ D!” Ðalsoóó€òòNews„Journal€Corp.€v.€Ô_ÔFoxmanÔ_Ôóó,€939€F.2d€1499,€1512„15€(11th€Cir.€1991)€(discussing€the€caseÐ 0"€  Ðlaw€authority€for€the€less€stringent€standard).€€Without€deciding€whether€to€adopt€the€ð ðreasonableÐ #l! Ðlikelihoodðð€standard,€the€Fifth€Circuit€determined€that€the€ð ðclear€and€present€dangerðð€test€was€notÐ $X" Ðrequired,€and€analyzed€the€case€before€it€under€a€ð ðsubstantial€likelihoodðð€test.€€òòSeeóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3dÐ ô$D # Ðat€427„28.€€€€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAlthough€this€Court€has€upheld€restraints€on€trial€participants,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Hartmanóó,€703Ð ¸'#& ÐS.W.2d€106€(Tenn.€1985)€(order€restraining€counsel€from€talking€with€the€public€or€media€about€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðfacts€of€the€case),€we€have€never€discussed€the€underlying€constitutional€issues.€€We€therefore€decideÐ )à$( Ðâ âthis€issue€based€on€our€own€interpretation€of€United€States€Supreme€Court€precedent€and€theÐ |*Ì%) ÐTennessee€Constitution€with€guidance€from€the€federal€circuit€courts.׃0×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú45Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€note€that€the€Court€ofÐ ° Ðâ âCriminal€Appealsðð€opinion€emphasizes€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€twist€in€this€case,€however,€is€that€Carruthers€wasÐ œì Ðrepresenting€himself€during€trial.ðð€€Although€this€fact€is€relevant€in€applying€the€constitutionalÐ ˆØ Ðstandard€to€determine€whether€Carruthersðð€right€to€a€fair€trial€was€breached,€our€review€of€the€caseÐ tÄ Ðlaw€indicates€that€the€constitutional€standard€is€the€same€regardless€of€which€trial€participant€isÐ `° Ðrestrained.€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThe€òòBrownóó€courtððs€decision€to€follow€a€ð ðsubstantial€likelihoodðð€test€rather€than€the€ð ðclear€andÐ $ t Ðpresent€dangerðð€test€rests€on€its€interpretation€of€òòGentile€v.€State€Bar€of€Nevadaóó,€501€U.S.€1030,€111Ð  ` ÐS.€Ct.€2720,€115€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€888€(1991).€€The€òòBrownóó€court€determined€that€òòGentileóó€rejected€the€clearÐ ü L  Ðand€present€danger€test€for€trial€participants€and€thatòòóó€òòGentileóó€is€the€Supreme€Courtððs€latest€discussionÐ è 8  Ðof€the€issue.€€òòSeeóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€426„28€(noting€that€the€cases€endorsing€the€more€stringent€testÐ Ô$  Ðpredated€òòGentileóó).€€We€agree€with€the€òòBrownóó€courtððs€holding.òòóóÐ À  ÐÌà  àòòGentileóó€involved€an€attorney€who€held€a€press€conference€the€day€after€his€client€was€indictedÐ ˜è  Ðon€criminal€charges.€€òòSeeóó€òòGentileóó,€501€U.S.€at€1063„65,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2738„40€(discussing€the€facts).€Ð „Ô  ÐThe€attorney€proclaimed€his€clientððs€innocence,€strongly€suggested€that€a€police€detective€was€in€factÐ pÀ Ðthe€perpetrator,€and€stated€that€the€alleged€victims€were€not€credible.€€Although€the€trial€courtÐ \¬ Ðð ðsucceeded€in€empaneling€a€jury€that€had€not€been€affected€by€the€media€coverage€and€[the€client]Ð H˜ Ðwas€acquitted€on€all€charges,€the€[Nevada]€state€bar€disciplined€[the€attorney]€for€his€statements.ðð€Ð 4„ ÐòòId.óó€at€1064,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2739.€€The€Nevada€Supreme€Court€upheld€the€state€barððs€disciplinaryÐ  p Ðaction,€finding€that€the€attorney€ð ðknew€or€reasonably€should€have€known€that€his€comments€had€aÐ  \ Ðsubstantial€likelihood€of€materially€prejudicing€the€adjudication€of€his€clientððs€case.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€1065,Ð øH Ð111€S.€Ct.€at€2739.€€Although€the€Supreme€Court€reversed€this€judgment€because€it€found€the€NevadaÐ ä4 ÐSupreme€Courtððs€construction€of€the€disciplinary€rule€ð ðvoid€for€vagueness,ðð€òòid.óó€at€1048„51,€111€S.Ð Ð  ÐCt.€at€2731„32,€a€majority€of€the€Court€held€that€the€ð ðsubstantial€likelihood€of€prejudiceðð€test€€struckÐ ¼  Ðthe€proper€constitutional€balance€between€an€attorneyððs€First€Amendment€rights€and€the€stateððsÐ ¨ø Ðinterest€in€fair€trials.€€òòId.óó€at€1065„76,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2740„45.׃Ü×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú46Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àIn€so€doing,€the€Court€held€that€the€stringent€standard€governing€restraints€on€the€pressÐ l¼ Ðarticulated€in€òòNebraska€Press€Ô_ÔAssððnÔ_Ô€v.€Stuartóó,€427€U.S.€539,€96€S.€Ct.€2791,€49€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€683€(1976)Ð X ¨ Ðshould€not€apply€to€restraints€on€lawyers€whose€clients€are€parties€to€the€proceeding.€€òòId.óó€at€1074,€111Ð D!” ÐS.€Ct.€at€2744.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòNews„Journal€Corp.óó,€939€F.2d€at€1512„13€(noting€that€the€Supreme€CourtÐ 0"€  Ðhas€suggested€restricting€trial€participants€as€an€òòalternativeóó€to€a€prior€restraint€on€the€media).€€TheÐ ° ÐCourt€quoted€with€approval€from€òòÔ_ÔSheppardÔ_Ô€v.€Maxwellóó,€384€U.S.€333,€86€S.€Ct.€1507,€16€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2dÐ œì Ð600€(1966)€in€which€the€defendantððs€conviction€was€overturned€because€of€prejudicial€publicity€thatÐ ˆØ Ðprevented€him€from€receiving€a€fair€trial:Ð tÄ ÐÓ XÓÌà0  àThe€courts€must€take€such€steps€by€rule€and€regulation€that€will€protect€theirÐ L œ Ðprocesses€from€prejudicial€outside€interferences.€Neither€prosecutors,€counsel€forÐ 8 ˆ Ðdefense,€the€accused,€witnesses,€court€staff€nor€enforcement€officers€coming€underÐ $ t Ðthe€jurisdiction€of€the€court€should€be€permitted€to€frustrate€its€function.€Ð  ` ÐCollaboration€between€counsel€and€the€press€as€to€information€affecting€the€fairnessÐ ü L  Ðof€a€criminal€trial€is€not€only€subject€to€regulation,€but€is€highly€censurable€andÐ è 8  Ðworthy€of€disciplinary€measures.€€384€U.S.€at€363,€86€S.€Ct.€at€1522.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÓ XyÓÓÌId.€at€1072,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2743.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àAs€the€òòBrownóó€court€held,€however,€òòseeóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€426,€the€Court€in€òòGentileóó€did€notÐ „Ô  Ðconclude€that€the€ð ðsubstantial€likelihood€of€prejudiceðð€test€was€required;€it€held€only€that€this€testÐ pÀ Ðcomplies€with€the€First€Amendment.€€òòSeeóó€òòGentileóó,€501€U.S.€at€1075,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2745€(ð ðWe€agreeÐ \¬ Ðwith€the€majority€of€the€States€that€[this€standard]€constitutes€a€constitutionally€permissible€balanceÐ H˜ Ðbetween€the€First€Amendment€rights€of€attorneys€in€pending€cases€and€the€Stateððs€interest€in€fairÐ 4„ Ðtrials.ðð).€€Moreover,€òòGentileóó€involved€a€restraint€on€an€attorneyððs€speech;€in€this€case,€Carruthers€wasÐ  p Ða€party€as€well€as€his€own€attorney.€€It€is€necessary,€therefore,€to€decide€whether€the€òòGentileóó€rationaleÐ  \ Ðapplies€to€parties.à ¸ àÐ øH ÐÌà  àAlthough€unnecessary€to€its€holding,€we€find€significant€evidence€in€the€òòGentileóó€opinion€thatÐ Ð  Ðthe€clear€and€present€danger€test€is€not€required€for€gag€orders€restraining€parties€or€other€trialÐ ¼  Ðparticipants.€€The€Court€emphasized€the€distinction€between€ð ðparticipants€in€the€litigation€andÐ ¨ø Ðstrangers€to€itðð€as€recognized€by€an€earlier€case,€òòSeattle€Times€Co.€v.€Ô_ÔRhinehartÔ_Ôóó,€467€U.S.€20,€104Ð ”ä ÐS.€Ct.€2199,€81€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€17€(1984).€€òòIdóó.€at€1072„73,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2743„44.€€As€characterized€by€theÐ €Ð ÐòòGentileóó€Court,€òòóóthe€Court€in€òòSeattle€Timesóó€ð ðunanimously€held€that€a€newspaper,€which€was€itself€a€Ð l¼ Ðdefendant€in€a€libel€action,€could€be€restrained€from€publishing€material€about€the€plaintiffs€and€theirÐ X ¨ Ðsupporters€to€which€it€had€gained€access€through€court„ordered€discovery.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€1073,€111€S.€Ct.Ð D!” Ðat€2744.€€The€òòGentileóó€Court€then€quoted€from€òòSeattle€Timesóó€as€follows:€ð ð[Ô_Ôa]lthoughÔ_Ô€litigants€do€notÐ 0"€  Ðððsurrender€their€First€Amendment€rights€at€the€courthouse€door,ðð€those€rights€may€be€subordinatedÐ #l! Ðto€other€interests€that€arise€in€this€settingðð€(citation€omitted);€and€further,€ð ðon€several€occasions€[weÐ $X" Ðhave]€approved€restriction€on€the€communications€of€trial€participants€where€necessary€to€ensure€aÐ ô$D # Ðfair€trial€for€a€criminal€defendant.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€The€Court€also€stated€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôf]ewÔ_Ô,€if€any€interests€under€theÐ à%0!$ ÐConstitution€are€more€fundamental€than€the€right€to€a€fair€trial€by€ððimpartialðð€jurors,€and€an€outcomeÐ Ì&"% Ðaffected€by€extrajudicial€statements€would€violate€that€fundamental€right.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€1075,€111€S.€Ct.Ð ¸'#& Ðat€2745€(citing€òòÔ_ÔSheppardÔ_Ôóó,€384€U.S.€at€350„51,€86€S.€Ct.€at€1515„16).€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€the€concerns€raised€in€òòGentileóó€and€òòÔ_ÔSheppardÔ_Ôóó€are€applicable€regardless€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðwhether€a€party€or€his€or€her€attorney€is€being€restrained.€€A€prejudicial€statement€made€to€the€pressÐ h+¸&* Ðby€an€attorney€is€not€somehow€less€prejudicial€if€made€by€a€party.€€In€short,€what€matters€is€òòwhatóó€òòóóisÐ ° Ðbeing€said€and€not€òòwhoóó€is€saying€it.€€òòSeeóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€428€(ð ðAs€the€district€court€pointed€out,Ð œì Ðtrial€participants,€like€attorneys,€are€ððprivy€to€a€wealth€of€information€that,€if€disclosed€to€the€public,Ð ˆØ Ðcould€readily€jeopardize€the€fair€trial€rights€of€all€parties.ðððð).€€If€anything,€as€one€court€has€reasoned,Ð tÄ Ðextrajudicial€comments€made€by€trial€participants€have€the€potential€to€be€more€harmful€thanÐ `° Ðcomments€made€by€attorneys:òòÐ L œ ÐÓ XÓÌà0  àGentileóó€involved€a€state€supreme€court€rule€governing€the€conduct€of€members€of€theÐ $ t Ðbar€of€that€state,€while€we€examine€a€state€trial€courtððs€restrictive€order€entered€in€aÐ  ` Ðparticular€case€and€directed€to€all€trial€participants.€€Because€of€their€legal€training,Ð ü L  Ðattorneys€are€knowledgeable€regarding€which€extrajudicial€communications€are€likelyÐ è 8  Ðto€be€prejudicial.€€The€other€trial€participants€encompassed€by€the€restrictive€order€inÐ Ô$  Ðthis€case€did€not€have€such€legal€discernment€and€expertise.€€Given€the€publicÐ À  Ðattention€generated€by€this€case,€defendants,€witnesses€and€law€enforcementÐ ¬ü  Ðpersonnel€were€eager€to€talk€with€the€press€concerning€their€particular€views.€€WhileÐ ˜è  Ðattorneys€can€be€governed€by€state€supreme€court€or€bar€rules,€other€trial€participantsÐ „Ô  Ðdo€not€have€these€guidelines.€€òòNews„Journal€Corp.óó,€939€F.2d€at€1515€n.18.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌÓ XßæÓThus,€we€conclude€that€for€purposes€of€the€constitutional€right€to€a€fair€trial,€òòGentileóóððs€rationaleÐ H˜ Ðapplies€to€all€trial€participants,€meaning€that€the€more€stringent€clear€and€present€danger€test€is€notÐ 4„ Ðrequired.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àHaving€decided€that€the€clear€and€present€danger€test€is€not€constitutionally€mandated,€weÐ øH Ðmust€now€decide€which€test€to€adopt:€€the€ð ðsubstantial€likelihood€of€prejudiceðð€test€or,€as€some€courtsÐ ä4 Ðhave€employed,€the€ð ðreasonable€likelihoodðð€test.€€As€noted,€òòGentileóó€held€only€that€the€substantialÐ Ð  Ðlikelihood€test€was€constitutional,€not€that€it€was€required.€€òòSeeóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€426„28;€òòNews„Ð ¼  ÐJournal€Corpóó.,€939€F.2d€at€1515€n.18.€€Nonetheless,€we€conclude€under€both€the€state€and€federalÐ ¨ø Ðconstitutions€that€the€substantial€likelihood€test€strikes€a€constitutionally€permissible€balanceÐ ”ä Ðbetween€the€free€speech€rights€of€trial€participants,€the€Sixth€Amendment€right€of€defendants€to€a€fairÐ €Ð Ðtrial,€and€the€Stateððs€interest€in€a€fair€trial.€€òòCfóó.€òòGentileóó,€501€U.S.€at€1070,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2742.€€Ð l¼ ÐAccordingly,€we€hold€that€a€trial€court€may€constitutionally€restrict€extrajudicial€comments€by€trialÐ X ¨ Ðparticipants,€including€lawyers,€parties,€and€witnesses,€when€the€trial€court€determines€that€thoseÐ D!” Ðcomments€pose€a€substantial€likelihood€of€prejudicing€a€fair€trial.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àUnder€this€constitutional€standard,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€was€justified€in€imposing€a€gagÐ $X" Ðorder€on€Carruthers.€€At€trial,€this€case€garnered€a€significant€amount€of€media€coverage,€raising€theÐ ô$D # Ðconcerns€expressed€in€òòÔ_ÔSheppardÔ_Ôóó.€€As€Carruthers€himself€notes€in€his€brief:Ð à%0!$ ÐÓ XÓà0  àThis€trial€was€charged€with€emotion€from€start€to€finish.€€There€were€allegations€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðgang€affiliations€and€testimony€of€large€scale€narcotics€dealings.€€The€courtroom€wasÐ ¸'#& Ðguarded€by€Ô_ÔS.W.A.T.Ô_Ô€team€members€and€by€Sheriffððs€deputies€who€were€authorizedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€search€those€entering€the€courtroom.€€Representatives€of€news€organizations€wereÐ )à$( Ðpresent€daily€to€record€the€proceedings.€Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  ÐÓ XóÓÐ h+¸&* ÐIn€addition€to€its€concerns€about€media€coverage,€the€trial€court€was€presented€with€the€problem€ofÐ ° Ðwitness€intimidation.€€The€trial€judge€found€that€witnesses€who€had€already€testified€stated€thatÐ œì Ðdefendant€Montgomery€threatened€to€kill€them€if€they€talked.€€Moreover,€Alfredo€Shaw€testified€thatÐ ˆØ ÐCarruthers€had€threatened€him€and€made€arrangements€to€have€a€reporter€interview€him€aboutÐ tÄ Ðrecanting€his€story.€€Under€these€unusual€circumstances,€the€trial€court€was€justified€in€employingÐ `° Ðheightened€measures€to€ensure€that€a€proper€jury€could€be€found€and€to€prevent€Carruthers€fromÐ L œ Ðmanipulating€the€media€so€as€to€intimidate€witnesses.€€The€trial€judge€could€not€ignore€these€issues.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐIndeed,€he€had€a€constitutional€duty€under€the€state€and€federal€constitutions€to€ensure€a€fair€trial.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àBefore€a€gag€order€can€be€entered,€however,€the€case€law€suggests€that€a€trial€court€shouldÐ ü L  Ðconsider€reasonable€alternative€measures€that€would€ensure€a€fair€trial€without€restricting€speech.€Ð è 8  ÐIn€the€context€of€restraints€on€the€press,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€specifically€held€thatÐ Ô$  Ða€trial€court€should€consider€such€measures.€€òòSeeóó€òòNebraska€Pressóó,€427€U.S.€at€563„64,€96€S.€Ct.€atÐ À  Ð2804„05.€€These€measures€include:€€a€change€of€trial€venue;€postponement€of€the€trial€to€allow€publicÐ ¬ü  Ðattention€to€subside;€searching€questions€of€prospective€jurors;€and€ð ðemphaticðð€instructions€to€theÐ ˜è  Ðjurors€to€decide€the€case€on€the€evidence.€€òòId.óó€(discussing€òòÔ_ÔSheppardÔ_Ôóó,€384€U.S.€at€357„62,€86€S.€Ct.Ð „Ô  Ðat€1519„22).€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAlthough€it€is€not€clear€whether€the€need€to€consider€alternatives€is€also€necessary€in€theÐ H˜ Ðcontext€of€restraints€on€trial€participants,€some€federal€circuit€courts€have€assumed€so,€òòsee,€e.g.óó,Ð 4„ ÐòòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€430„31;€òòDow€Jonesóó,€842€F.2d€at€611„12,€and€the€trial€judge€considered€severalÐ  p Ðof€the€alternatives.€€The€trial€court€found€that€neither€a€change€of€venue€nor€a€continuance€wasÐ  \ Ðpractical€because€the€case€was€several€years€old€and€one€attempt€to€try€the€case€had€already€beenÐ øH Ðmade.€€The€court€appropriately€gave€careful€attention€to€voir€dire€and€jury€instructions,€butÐ ä4 Ðdetermined€that€these€alternatives€alone€were€insufficient.€€òòóóÐ Ð  ÐòòóóÌà  àGiven€the€extraordinary€nature€of€this€case,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€was€entitled€to€makeÐ ¨ø Ðthis€judgment.€€We€also€note€that€in€addition€to€and€apart€from€the€concerns€about€pretrial€publicityÐ ”ä Ðinterfering€with€the€task€of€finding€an€unbiased€jury,€the€trial€court€was€concerned€about€witnessÐ €Ð Ðintimidation€and€Carruthersðð€potential€manipulation€of€the€press.€€None€of€the€alternatives€mentionedÐ l¼ Ðin€òòNebraska€Pressóó€and€òòÔ_ÔSheppardÔ_Ôóó€would€likely€have€alleviated€these€concerns.€€The€trial€courtÐ X ¨ Ðreasonably€concluded€that€only€a€gag€order€would€be€effective.€€Finally,€we€note€that€the€alternativesÐ D!” Ðmentioned€above€are€not€free€of€cost€to€the€judicial€system.€€As€the€òòGentileóó€Court€wrote:Ð 0"€  ÐÓ XÓÌà0  àEven€if€a€fair€trial€can€ultimately€be€ensured€through€voir€dire,€change€of€venue,€orÐ $X" Ðsome€other€device,€these€measures€entail€serious€costs€to€the€system.€€Extensive€voirÐ ô$D # Ðdire€may€not€be€able€to€filter€out€all€of€the€effects€of€pretrial€publicity,€and€withÐ à%0!$ Ðincreasingly€widespread€media€coverage€of€criminal€trials,€a€change€of€venue€may€notÐ Ì&"% Ðsuffice€to€undo€the€effects€of€statements€such€as€those€made€by€the€petitioner.€Ð ¸'#& ÐòòGentileóó,€501€U.S.€at€1075,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2745.Ф(ô#'Ð Ð  ÐÓ XzÓà  àHaving€decided€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€issuing€the€gag€order,€the€final€issue€toÐ )à$( Ðconsider€is€the€scope€of€the€order.€€As€discussed€above,€Carruthersðð€argument€on€appeal€is€properlyÐ |*Ì%) Ðconstrued€as€a€ð ðright€to€fair€trialðð€claim€rather€than€a€First€Amendment€claim.€€Nevertheless,€a€gagÐ h+¸&* Ðorder€by€definition€restricts€speech.€€In€determining€whether€a€gag€order€is€appropriate,€therefore,€aÐ ° Ðcourt€must€be€mindful€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôg]overnmentÔ_Ô€may€not€regulate€expression€in€such€a€manner€that€aÐ œì Ðsubstantial€portion€of€the€burden€on€speech€does€not€serve€to€advance€its€goals.ðð€€òòWard€v.€RockÐ ˆØ ÐAgainst€Racismóó,€491€U.S.€781,€799,€109€S.€Ct.€2746,€2758,€105€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€661€(1989);€òòsee€alsoóóÐ tÄ ÐòòÔ_ÔProcunierÔ_Ô€v.€Martinezóó,€416€U.S.€396,€413,€94€S.€Ct.€1800,€1811,€40€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2d€224€(1974)€(theÐ `° Ðlimitation€on€speech€ð ðmust€be€no€greater€than€is€necessary€or€essential€to€the€protection€of€theÐ L œ Ðparticular€governmental€interest€involvedðð)€(òòquoted€inóó€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€429).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àOn€its€face,€the€trial€courtððs€order€has€no€exceptions€or€limitations:€€it€prohibits€the€defendantsÐ  ` Ðand€their€attorneys€from€making€òòanyóó€comments€to€the€press€about€the€case.€€This€gag€order€isÐ ü L  Ðconsiderably€broader€than€any€upheld€in€the€cases€discussed€above.€€òòGentileóó,€though€not€a€gag€orderÐ è 8  Ðcase,€involved€a€limitation€on€attorney€speech€which€prohibited€only€statements€ð ðsubstantially€likelyÐ Ô$  Ðto€prejudiceðð€the€adjudication€of€the€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòGentileóó,€501€U.S.€at€1064,€111€S.€Ct.€at€2739.€€òòBrownóó€Ð À  Ðinvolved€an€order€which€ð ðleft€available€to€the€parties€various€avenues€of€expression,€includingÐ ¬ü  Ðassertions€of€innocence,€general€statements€about€the€nature€of€an€allegation€or€defense,€andÐ ˜è  Ðstatements€of€matters€of€public€record.ðð€€òòBrownóó,€218€F.3d€at€429„30.€€The€order€in€òòDow€Jonesóó€wasÐ „Ô  Ðsimilaòòóór.€€òòSeeóó€òòDow€Jonesóó,€842€F.2d€at€606.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àGiven€the€history€of€this€trial,€we€certainly€understand€why€the€trial€court€crafted€such€a€broadÐ H˜ Ðorder.€€Indeed,€in€certain€cases,€as€where€a€defendant€takes€advantage€of€a€limited€gag€order€or€failsÐ 4„ Ðto€comply€with€it,€an€order€of€such€breadth€may€be€justified.€€Nonetheless,€we€hold€that€initial€gagÐ  p Ðorders€on€trial€participants€should€ordinarily€contain€the€exceptions€found€in€the€òòBrownóó€order€andÐ  \ Ðallow€trial€participants€to€make€general€statements€asserting€innocence,€commenting€on€the€natureÐ øH Ðof€an€allegation€or€defense,€and€discussing€matters€of€public€record.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àWe€find€the€trial€courtððs€failure€to€include€these€exceptions€in€the€gag€order€was€harmlessÐ ¼  Ðerror.€€We€fail€to€see€how€limited€statements€made€by€Carruthers€to€the€media€about€his€innocence,Ð ¨ø Ðallegations€or€defenses,€or€matters€in€the€public€record€would€have€altered€the€result€of€the€trial.€€WeÐ ”ä Ðdo€not€think€that€allowing€Carruthers€to€make€such€statements€would€have€furthered€the€goal€ofÐ €Ð Ðfinding€an€impartial€jury,€nor€do€we€think€it€probable€that€any€new€witnesses€would€have€comeÐ l¼ Ðforward.€€We€also€point€out€that€these€crimes€occurred€in€1994,€andÔ#†XaXXXaŽ”#ÔÔ‡XaXXXaÔ€the€gag€order€was€issued€onlyÐ X ¨ Ðone€month€before€trial€in€1996.€€€In€the€two€years€preceding€issuance€of€the€gag€order,€Carruthers€hadÐ D!” Ðaccess€to€the€media.€€The€record€shows€both€that€he€availed€himself€of€that€access€and€that€the€mediaÐ 0"€  Ðresponded€by€actively€covering€the€trial€and€events€leading€up€to€the€trial.€€Under€theseÐ #l! Ðcircumstances,€the€error€below€was€harmless.Ô#†XaXXXa #ÔÐ $X" ÐÌà@FFìàà@@O O ìàòòò òSentencing:€Non„Capital€Offensesóóó óˆÐ à%0!$ Ðà  àCiting€state€and€federal€constitutional€provisions€and€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€ProcedureÐ Ì&"% Ð43,€Carruthers€next€contends€that€his€right€to€be€present€at€a€crucial€stage€of€his€criminal€proceedingÐ ¸'#& Ðwas€violated€when€the€trial€judge€conducted€the€sentencing€hearing€on€his€convictions€for€especiallyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðaggravated€robbery€and€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô€in€his€absence.€€The€State€responds€thatÐ )à$( ÐCarruthers€waived€his€right€to€be€present€because€he€was€voluntarily€absent€from€the€sentencingÐ |*Ì%) Ðhearing.€€We€agree.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àThe€record€reflects€that€immediately€after€the€sentencing€verdict€was€rendered€on€the€capitalÐ ° Ðoffenses,€the€trial€judge€announced€that€the€sentencing€hearing€for€the€non„capital€offenses€wouldÐ œì Ðbe€held€on€May€20,€1996.€€Carruthers€was€present€when€this€announcement€was€made.€€The€trialÐ ˆØ Ðjudge€was€prepared€to€proceed€with€the€sentencing€hearing€on€that€date.€€Because€of€aÐ tÄ Ðmisunderstanding€about€which€law€enforcement€agency€was€responsible€for€transporting€theÐ `° Ðdefendants€from€the€prison€facility€outside€of€Nashville€to€Memphis,€neither€Carruthers€norÐ L œ ÐMontgomery€were€present€in€court.€€The€hearing€was€rescheduled€for€May€28,€1996,€but€the€trialÐ 8 ˆ Ðjudge€announced€that€day€that€because€of€security€concerns€the€hearing€would€be€held€the€next€day,Ð $ t ÐMay€29,€1996,€at€the€Ô_ÔRiverbendÔ_Ô€Maximum€Security€Institution€in€Nashville€where€Carruthers€andÐ  ` ÐMontgomery€were€incarcerated.׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú47Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€defendants€were€not€present€in€court€when€this€announcementÐ ü L  Ðwas€made,€and€the€record€does€not€indicate€that€the€defendants€were€personally€notified€of€the€changeÐ è 8  Ðin€date€and€location€of€the€sentencing€hearing.€€Counsel€for€Montgomery€and€the€attorneys€appointedÐ Ô$  Ðto€represent€Carruthers€on€the€new€trial€motion€and€on€appeal€previously€had€been€advised€at€aÐ À  Ðmeeting€in€chambers€of€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€hold€the€hearing€at€Ô_ÔRiverbendÔ_Ô.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àWhen€the€trial€judge€convened€the€hearing€at€Ô_ÔRiverbendÔ_Ô€the€next€day,€Carruthers€andÐ „Ô  ÐMontgomery€refused€to€attend€or€participate€although€they€were€present€in€a€holding€roomÐ pÀ Ðapproximately€twenty€to€thirty€feet€from€the€hearing€room.€€Warden€Ô_ÔRickyÔ_Ô€Bell€informed€the€trialÐ \¬ Ðcourt€that€defendant€Carruthers€was€refusing€to€participate.€€Counsel€informed€the€trial€judge€thatÐ H˜ Ðdespite€a€lengthy€conference€in€which€he€had€been€advised€to€appear€Montgomery€also€was€refusingÐ 4„ Ðto€appear,€purportedly€because€of€the€presence€of€media€personnel.€€The€trial€judge€recessed€theÐ  p Ðhearing€to€allow€counsel€to€confer€with€Montgomery€and€to€allow€Warden€Bell€to€confer€withÐ  \ ÐCarruthers€and€to€inform€him€that€the€restraints€would€be€removed€if€he€decided€to€participate€in€theÐ øH Ðsentencing€hearing.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àWhen€the€hearing€resumed,€Warden€Bell€announced€that€Carruthers€understood€his€restraintsÐ ¼  Ðwould€be€removed,€but€he€was€still€refusing€to€attend€or€participate€in€the€hearing.€€Carruthers€hadÐ ¨ø Ðprovided€no€explanation€for€his€refusal.€€Counsel€for€Montgomery€reported€that€he€also€was€stillÐ ”ä Ðrefusing€to€attend€or€participate€and€that€he€was€objecting€to€the€hearing€because€it€was€not€beingÐ €Ð Ðheld€in€a€public€place.׃!8 ×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú48Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Warden€Bell€was€sworn€and€testified€about€his€conversation€withÐ l¼ ÐCarruthers,€including€Carruthersðð€refusal€to€attend€despite€assurances€that€his€restraints€would€beÐ X ¨ Ðremoved.€€Following€Warden€Bellððs€testimony,€the€trial€judge€observed€that€he€had€two€options:Ð D!” ÐÓ  ÓÌà8  àto€drag€them€out€here€against€their€will,€kicking€and€screaming,€and€strap€themÐ œì Ðdown€to€a€chair€and€force€them€to€sit€here.€€Or€allow€them€to€remain€in€the€holdingÐ ˆØ Ðroom€and€go€forward€with€the€proceedings€in€their€absence.€€And€I€think€that€theÐ tÄ Ðwiser€course,€the€more€prudent€course,€the€course€that€the€law€would€suggest€beÐ `° Ðtaken€is€the€latter.€€We€are€going€to€proceed€in€their€absence,€since€they€have€bothÐ L œ Ðvoluntarily€elected€to€absent€themselves€from€these€proceedings.€€If€an€individualÐ 8 ˆ Ðwere€allowed€to€delay€or€disrupt€proceedings€simply€by€stating€that€he€did€notÐ $ t Ðwant€to€be€present,€then€the€entire€judicial€system€would€grind€to€a€halt€veryÐ  ` Ðquickly.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÓ¬(ÓÌNoting€that€ð ða€full€and€completeðð€sentencing€hearing€had€already€been€held€in€conjunction€with€theÐ Ô$  Ðmurder€convictions€and€that€any€additional€witnesses€would€likely€be€ð ðcumulative€witnesses€to€whatÐ À  Ðhas€already€been€testified€to€at€the€first€sentencing€hearing,ðð€the€trial€judge€decided€to€proceed€withÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€sentencing€hearing.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àThe€State€called€one€witness,€an€employee€of€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court€ClerkððsÐ pÀ ÐOffice,€who€testified€that€Carruthers€had€pled€guilty€to€two€counts€of€aggravated€assault€in€1990€andÐ \¬ Ðhad€been€sentenced€to€ten€years€and€five€years€on€those€convictions.€€The€State€also€relied€upon€theÐ H˜ Ðevidence€adduced€at€both€the€guilt€and€sentencing€phases€of€trial€and€the€pre„sentence€report€preparedÐ 4„ Ðas€to€each€defendant.Ð  p ÐÌà  àFollowing€the€Stateððs€proof,€the€trial€court€once€again€took€a€recess€to€allow€counsel€to€conferÐ øH Ðwith€Montgomery€to€determine€if€he€had€decided€to€participate€in€the€hearing€and€to€enable€WardenÐ ä4 ÐBell€to€speak€with€Carruthers€and€advise€him€that€he€could€testify€if€he€so€desired.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àCounsel€returned€and€informed€the€trial€judge€that€Montgomery€was€still€refusing€toÐ ¨ø Ðparticipate€or€testify€in€the€hearing.€€They€also€advised€the€trial€court€that€they€did€not€intend€toÐ ”ä Ðpresent€any€proof€and€that€no€proof€would€have€been€presented€had€the€hearing€been€held€inÐ €Ð ÐMemphis.€€Warden€Bell€returned€after€what€was€his€third€conversation€with€Carruthers€and€againÐ l¼ Ðadvised€the€trial€judge€that€he€still€was€refusing€to€attend€or€participate€in€the€hearing.€€FollowingÐ X ¨ Ðargument,€the€trial€judge€imposed€a€forty„year€sentence€on€each€of€the€four€convictions€for€eachÐ D!” Ðdefendant€and€ordered€that€two€of€the€sentences€for€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô€run€concurrentÐ 0"€  Ðto€the€other€sentences€and€to€the€death€penalty,€with€all€other€sentences€running€consecutive€to€eachÐ #l! Ðother€and€to€the€death€penalty.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àInitially€we€acknowledge€that€the€right€of€a€criminal€defendant€to€be€present€at€all€criticalÐ à%0!$ Ðstages€of€a€criminal€proceeding€derives€from€several€sources,€including€both€the€federal€and€stateÐ Ì&"% Ðconstitutions.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔGagnonÔ_Ôóó,€470€U.S.€522,€526,€105€S.€Ct.€1482,€1484,€84€Ô_ÔL.EdÔ_Ô.2dÐ ¸'#& Ð486€(1985)€(ð ðThe€constitutional€right€to€presence€is€rooted€to€a€large€extent€in€the€ConfrontationÐ ¤(ô#' ÐClause€of€the€Sixth€Amendment,€.€.€.€but€we€have€recognized€that€this€right€is€protected€by€the€DueÐ )à$( ÐProcess€Clause€in€some€situations€where€the€defendant€is€not€actually€confronting€witnesses€orÐ |*Ì%) Ðevidence€against€him.ðð);€òòState€v.€Museóó,€967€S.W.2d€764,€766€(Tenn.€1998)€(ð ðArticle€I,€ðð€9€of€theÐ h+¸&* ÐTennessee€Constitution€provides€that€ððthe€accused€hath€the€right€to€be€heard€by€himself€and€hisÐ ° Ðcounsel.ðð€€The€ððright€to€be€heard€by€himselfðð€requires€the€presence€of€the€defendant€during€the€entireÐ œì Ðtrial.ðð).€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àIn€addition€to€constitutional€protection,€the€right€of€a€criminal€defendant€to€be€present€atÐ `° Ðcritical€stages€of€a€criminal€proceeding€also€is€protected€by€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€ProcedureÐ L œ Ð43(a),€which€provides:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà8  àUnless€excused€by€the€court€upon€defendantððs€motion,€the€defendant€shall€be€presentÐ  ` Ðat€arraignment,€at€every€stage€of€the€trial€including€the€impaneling€of€the€jury€and€theÐ ü L  Ðreturn€of€the€verdict,€òòand€at€the€imposition€of€sentenceóó,€except€as€otherwise€providedÐ è 8  Ðby€this€rule.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àLike€many€other€constitutional€and€statutory€rights,€however,€the€right€to€be€present€may€beÐ „Ô  Ðwaived€by€a€criminal€defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòMuseóó,€967€S.W.2d€at€764.€€Voluntary€absence€after€the€trialÐ pÀ Ðhas€commenced€or€disruptive€in„court€behavior€may€constitute€waiver€of€the€right€to€be€present.€€òòId.óóÐ \¬ Ðat€767.€€With€respect€to€waiver€by€voluntary€absence,€€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€43(b)€provides€in€relevantÐ H˜ Ðpart:Ð 4„ Ðà8  à(b)The€further€progress€of€the€trial€to€and€including€the€return€of€the€verdict€òòandÐ  p Ðimposition€of€sentenceóó€shall€not€be€prevented€and€the€defendant€shall€be€consideredÐ  \ Ðto€have€waived€the€right€to€be€present€whenever€a€defendant,€initially€present:ÐøHÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(1)voluntarily€is€absent€after€the€trial€has€commenced€(whether€or€notÐ Ð  Ðhe€or€she€has€been€informed€by€the€court€of€the€obligation€to€remainÐ ¼  Ðduring€the€trial)€.€.€.€.Шø` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2)€.€.€.If€a€trial€proceeds€in€the€voluntary€absence€of€the€defendant€.Ð €Ð Ð.€.€he€or€she€must€be€represented€in€court€by€competent€counsel€.€.€.€.Ðl¼` x` x Ðà  àÌConstruing€subsection€(b)€only€seven€years€after€Rule€43€was€adopted,€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ D!” Ðexplained€that€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà8  à[Ô_Ôa]nÔ_Ô€accused€who€has€notice€of€the€time€and€place€of€the€trial€and€of€his€right€toÐ $X" Ðattend,€and€who€nonetheless€voluntarily€absents€himself,€will€be€deemed€to€haveÐ ô$D # Ðwaived€his€right€to€be€present.€Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€court€should€indulge€every€reasonable€presumption€against€a€waiver.€€CounselÐ ¸'#& Ðshould€be€given€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€locate€his€client,€and€there€should€beÐ ¤(ô#' Ðaffirmative€evidence€that€the€accused€was€informed€of€his€trial€date.€€We€think€it€isÐ )à$( Ðwise€to€take€special€precautions€when€a€defendant€fails€to€appear€on€the€date€set€forÐ |*Ì%) Ðtrial€and€to€require€a€high€standard€of€proof€that€the€defendant€knew€his€trial€date€andÐ h+¸&* Ðthat€his€absence€is€voluntary.€€Trial€in€his€absence€is€not€favored,€and€proceeding€withÐ ° Ðtrial€only€to€find€later€that€defendant€did€not€know€his€trial€date€or€did€not€voluntarilyÐ œì Ðabsent€himself€would€run€counter€to€the€purposes€expressed€in€[Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.]Ð ˆØ Ð2.€€Mere€absence€at€the€time€the€case€is€called€for€trial€is€insufficient€to€show€a€waiverÐ tÄ Ðof€the€right€to€be€present.€€€€€Ð`°Ð Ð  ÐÌòòState€v.€Kirkóó,€699€S.W.2d€814,€819€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1985);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòMuseóó,€967€S.W.2d€at€767Ð 8 ˆ Ð(quoting€and€approving€of€this€analysis€from€òòKirkóó).€€Applying€this€analysis,€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ $ t ÐAppeals€in€òòKirkóó€concluded€that€the€defendant€had€waived€his€right€to€be€present€when€he€escapedÐ  ` Ðfrom€custody€after€he€had€appeared€in€court€and€had€been€advised€of€the€date€on€which€his€trialÐ ü L  Ðwould€begin.€€òòSeeóó€òòKirkóó,€699€S.W.2d€at€819.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àTwo€years€ago€in€òòMuseóó€this€Court€applied€the€òòKirkóó€analysis€in€a€case€in€which€the€defendantòòóóÐ À  Ðdid€not€appear€for€jury€selection€proceedings€because€he€was€not€aware€that€the€trial€judge€hadÐ ¬ü  Ðrescheduled€the€proceedings€at€the€request€of€defense€counsel.€€Concluding€that€Muse€had€beenÐ ˜è  Ðdeprived€of€his€right€to€be€present€at€jury€selection€and€that€the€deprivation€constituted€prejudice€toÐ „Ô  Ðthe€judicial€process,€this€Court€€reversed€his€conviction€and€remanded€for€a€new€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòMuseóó,€967Ð pÀ ÐS.W.2d€at€768.€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àFor€purposes€of€this€appeal,€we€have€accepted€Carruthersðð€contention€that€he€had€both€aÐ 4„ Ðconstitutional€right€to€be€present€and€a€right€to€be€present€under€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€43(a),€and€we€haveÐ  p Ðconcluded€that€Carruthers€waived€those€rights.€€Carruthers€was€aware€a€sentencing€hearing€wouldÐ  \ Ðbe€held,€and€he€was€present€when€the€hearing€initially€was€scheduled.€€While€the€hearing€did€notÐ øH Ðoccur€on€the€date€originally€scheduled,€the€hearing€was€held€on€May€29,€a€delay€of€only€nine€days.€Ð ä4 ÐThe€record€does€not€reflect€exactly€when€Carruthers€became€aware€that€the€hearing€would€be€heldÐ Ð  Ðat€Ô_ÔRiverbendÔ_Ô€on€May€29,€but€there€is€no€doubt€that€he€was€aware€a€hearing€was€about€to€be€heldÐ ¼  Ðwhen€he€was€in€the€€holding€area€near€the€public€hearing€room.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThis€is€not€a€case€where€waiver€was€presumed€from€Carruthersðð€mere€absence€at€the€time€theÐ €Ð Ðsentencing€hearing€convened.€€The€trial€judge€made€every€effort€to€persuade€Carruthers€to€attend€theÐ l¼ Ðhearing.€€On€three€separate€occasions,€the€trial€judge€instructed€Warden€Bell€to€confer€withÐ X ¨ ÐCarruthers€and€attempt€to€persuade€him€to€appear.€€On€each€of€those€occasions,€the€record€reflectsÐ D!” Ðthat€Warden€Bell€assured€Carruthers€his€restraints€would€be€removed€and€emphasized€his€right€toÐ 0"€  Ðmake€a€statement€at€the€hearing.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú49Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€have€no€hesitation€in€concludingÐ #l! Ðthat€Carruthers€waived€his€right€to€be€present€at€sentencing.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àFinally,€pointing€to€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€43(b)(2),€which€provides€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôi]fÔ_Ô€a€trial€proceeds€inÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€voluntary€absence€of€the€defendant,€.€.€.€he€or€she€must€be€represented€in€court€by€competentÐ Ì&"% Ðcounsel,ðð€the€defendant€argues€that€even€if€he€waived€his€right€to€be€present,€he€is€entitled€to€a€newÐ ¸'#& Ðsentencing€hearing€because€the€trial€judge€did€not€appoint€competent€counsel€to€represent€him.Ð ¤(ô#' Їà  àWithout€question,€the€scenario€that€arose€in€this€case€is€uncommon.€€In€most€instances,€aÐ ° Ðvoluntarily€absent€criminal€defendant€will€already€be€represented€by€counsel€and€therefore€willÐ œì Ðcontinue€to€be€represented€by€counsel€in€proceedings€that€occur€in€his€or€her€absence.€€Here,€becauseÐ ˆØ Ðthe€defendant€had€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel,€there€was€no€attorney€present€to€represent€him€in€theÐ tÄ Ðsentencing€hearing.Ð `° ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€decision€of€whether€or€not€to€appoint€counsel€to€represent€a€voluntarilyÐ 8 ˆ Ðabsent€defendant€who€previously€has€forfeited€his€right€to€counsel€€should€be€determined€by€the€trialÐ $ t Ðcourt€on€a€case„by„case€basis.€€The€trial€court€is€most€familiar€with€the€case€and€is€in€the€best€positionÐ  ` Ðto€determine€if€an€attorney€should€be€appointed.€€Appellate€courts€should€defer€to€the€trial€courtððsÐ ü L  Ðdecision€on€this€issue€unless€the€record€demonstrates€a€clear€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòCf.óó€òòSmallóó,€988Ð è 8  ÐS.W.2d€at€674.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€judge€concluded€that€appointment€of€counsel€was€unnecessary.€€The€proof€presentedÐ ¬ü  Ðby€the€State€was,€as€the€trial€judge€found,€largely€cumulative€to€the€proof€already€presented€at€theÐ ˜è  Ðsentencing€hearing€on€the€murder€convictions.€€There€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€suggest€thatÐ „Ô  ÐCarruthers€had€intended€to€offer€any€additional€proof€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€Even€on€appeal,Ð pÀ ÐCarruthersðð€attorneys€have€not€pointed€to€proof€that€would€have€been€presented€had€Carruthers€beenÐ \¬ Ðpresent€or€represented€by€counsel€at€the€hearing.€They€simply€assert€that€ð ðthe€trial€judge€presumedÐ H˜ Ðthat€Carruthers€would€have€offered€the€same€proofðð€as€that€offered€at€the€capital€sentencing€hearingÐ 4„ Ðand€state,€ð ð[Ô_Ôw]hetherÔ_Ô€or€not€this€is€true,€we€will€never€know.ðð€€Given€the€circumstances€of€this€case,Ð  p Ðwe€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€failing€to€appoint€counsel€to€representÐ  \ ÐCarruthers€when€he€was€voluntarily€absent€from€the€sentencing€hearing.Ð øH ÐÌà@ÌÌìàò òòòProportionality€Reviewóóó óÔ_Ô׃B×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú50Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ôò òòòóóó óˆÐ Ð  Ðà  àFinally,€we€consider€whether€Carruthersðð€sentence€of€death€is€comparatively€disproportionateÐ ¼  Ðconsidering€the€nature€of€the€crime€and€the€defendant.Ô_Ô׃6Ü×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú51Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€We€begin,€as€always,€with€the€propositionÐ ¨ø ÐÔ_Ôthat€the€sentence€of€death€is€proportional€to€the€crime€of€first„degree€murder.€€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€958Ð ”ä ÐS.W.2d€679,€699€(Tenn.€1997).€€Comparative€proportionality€review€of€capital€cases€is€designed€toÐ ° Ðinsure€ð ðrationality€and€consistency€in€the€imposition€of€the€death€penalty.ðð€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€atÐ œì Ð665.€€A€death€sentence€will€be€considered€disproportionate€if€the€case,€taken€as€a€whole,€is€ð ðplainlyÐ ˆØ Ðlacking€in€circumstances€consistent€with€those€in€similar€cases€in€which€the€death€penalty€hasÐ tÄ Ðpreviously€been€imposed.ðð€€òòId.óó€€€However,€a€sentence€of€death€is€not€disproportionate€merely€becauseÐ `° Ðthe€circumstances€of€the€offense€are€similar€to€those€of€another€offense€for€which€the€defendant€hasÐ L œ Ðreceived€a€life€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€993€S.W.2d€6,€17€(Tenn.€1999);€òòState€v.€Blantonóó,€975Ð 8 ˆ ÐS.W.2d€269,€281€(Tenn.€1998);€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€665.€€Our€role€in€conducting€proportionalityÐ $ t Ðreview€is€not€to€assure€that€a€sentence€ð ðless€than€death€was€never€imposed€in€a€case€with€similarÐ  ` Ðcharacteristics.ðð€€òòBlantonóó,€975€S.W.2d€at€281;€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€665.€€ð ðððSince€the€proportionalityÐ ü L  Ðrequirement€on€review€is€intended€to€prevent€caprice€in€the€decision€to€inflict€the€[death]€penalty,€theÐ è 8  Ðisolated€decision€of€a€jury€to€afford€mercy€does€not€render€unconstitutional€death€sentences€imposedÐ Ô$  Ðon€defendants€who€were€sentenced€under€a€system€that€does€not€create€a€substantial€risk€ofÐ À  Ðarbitrariness€or€caprice.ðððð€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€665€(quoting€òòGregg€v.€Georgiaóó,€428€U.€S.€153,€203,Ð ¬ü  Ð96€S.€Ct.€2909,€2939,€49€L.Ed.2d€859€(1976)).€€Instead,€our€duty€in€conducting€proportionalityÐ ˜è  Ðreview€ð ðis€to€assure€that€no€aberrant€death€sentence€is€affirmed.ðð€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€665.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àIn€performing€this€duty,€we€do€not€utilize€a€mathematical€formula€€or€scientific€grid.€€The€testÐ \¬ Ðis€not€rigid.€€òòIdóó.€€To€conduct€proportionality€review,€we€select€from€the€pool€of€cases€in€which€aÐ H˜ Ðcapital€sentencing€hearing€was€actually€conducted€to€determine€whether€the€sentence€should€be€lifeÐ 4„ Ðimprisonment,€life€imprisonment€without€the€possibility€of€parole,€or€death.€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€atÐ  p Ð666.€€ð ððð[B]ecause€the€aim€of€proportionality€review€is€to€ascertain€what€other€capital€sentencingÐ  \ Ðauthorities€have€done€with€similar€capital€murder€offenses,€the€only€cases€that€could€be€deemedÐ øH Ðsimilar€.€.€.€are€those€in€which€imposition€of€the€death€penalty€was€properly€before€the€sentencingÐ ä4 Ðauthority€for€determination.ðððð€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€666€(quoting€òòTichnell€v.€Stateóó,€468€A.2d€1,€15„Ð Ð  Ð16€(Md.€1983)).׃e×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú52Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€choosing€and€comparing€similar€cases,€we€consider€many€variables,€some€Ô_ÔofÐ ¼  Ðwhich€include€(1)€the€means€of€death;€(2)€the€manner€of€death;€(3)€the€motivation€for€the€killing;€(4)Ð ¨ø Ðthe€place€of€death;€(5)€the€similarity€of€the€victimððs€circumstances,€including€age,€physical€andÐ ”ä Ðmental€conditions,€and€the€victimsðð€treatment€during€the€killing;€(6)€the€absence€or€presence€ofÐ €Ð Ðpremeditation;€(7)€the€absence€or€presence€of€provocation;€(8)€the€absence€or€presence€ofÐ l¼ Ðjustification;€and€(9)€the€injury€to€and€effects€on€Ô_ÔnondecedentÔ_Ô€victims.€€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€667.€Ð X ¨ ÐWhen€reviewing€the€characteristics€of€the€defendant,€we€consider:€(1)€any€prior€record€or€priorÐ D!” Ðcriminal€activity;€(2)€age,€race,€and€gender;€(3)€mental,€emotional€or€physical€condition;€(4)Ð ° Ðinvolvement€or€role€in€the€murder;€(5)€cooperation€with€authorities;€(6)€remorse;€(7)€knowledge€ofÐ œì Ðthe€helplessness€of€the€victim;€and€(8)€capacity€for€rehabilitation.€€òòIdóó.Ð ˆØ Ðà  àÌà  àConsidering€the€circumstances€of€these€murders€in€light€of€the€relevant€comparative€factors,Ð `° Ðwe€note€that€the€three€victims€were€Ô_ÔkidnappedÔ_Ô,€bound,€shot,€and€buried€alive,€in€a€pit€beneath€anotherÐ L œ Ðpersonððs€grave.€€The€killings€apparently€were€motivated€by€Carruthersðð€desire€to€rob€Ô_ÔMarcellosÔ_ÔÐ 8 ˆ ÐAnderson,€a€successful€and€wealthy€drug€dealer.€€€These€murders€were€committed€in€a€particularlyÐ $ t Ðcruel€manner,€and€the€proof€indicates€that€the€victims€were€maliciously€mistreated€€before€they€wereÐ  ` Ðburied€alive.€€€The€medical€testimony€indicated€that€the€victims€were€bound€and€abused€for€sometimeÐ ü L  Ðbefore€being€shot€and€buried€alive.€€The€murders€clearly€were€premeditated,€and€there€was€noÐ è 8  Ðprovocation€or€justification€for€the€killings.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àCarruthers,€who€was€twenty„six„years€old€when€these€crimes€were€committed,€€had€anÐ ¬ü  Ðextensive€prior€criminal€record.€€There€is€no€evidence€that€Carruthers€was€mentally€or€emotionallyÐ ˜è  Ðimpaired€at€the€time€these€crimes€occurred,€and€the€record€reflects€that€Carruthers€was€instrumentalÐ „Ô  Ðin€planning€these€killings€and€suggesting€a€€location€to€bury€the€bodies.€€Carruthers€did€not€cooperateÐ pÀ Ðwith€the€authorities€at€all,€nor€has€he€shown€any€remorse€for€the€killings.€€In€addition,€given€hisÐ \¬ Ðextensive€criminal€record,€it€is€unlikely€that€Carruthers€has€a€capacity€for€rehabilitation.€€ConsideringÐ H˜ Ðthe€nature€of€these€crimes€and€the€character€of€Carruthers,€we€conclude€that€these€murders€placeÐ 4„ ÐCarruthers€into€the€class€of€defendants€for€whom€the€death€penalty€is€an€appropriate€punishment.€Ð  p ÐBased€upon€our€review,€we€conclude€that€the€following€cases€in€which€the€death€penalty€has€beenÐ  \ Ðimposed€have€many€similarities€with€this€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Farris€Morrisóó,€__€S.W.3d__€(Tenn.Ð øH Ð2000)€€(brutal€killing€of€innocent€family€members€occurred€during€a€robbery€to€obtain€drugs€and€theÐ ä4 Ðjury€found€similar€aggravating€circumstances);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔCribbsÔ_Ôóó,€967€S.W.2d€773€(Tenn.€1998)€(killingÐ Ð  Ðof€woman€in€her€home€by€a€young€male€defendant€who€told€others€the€killing€was€a€ð ðhitððand€the€juryÐ ¼  Ðfound€similar€aggravating€circumstances€)€€òòState€v.€Burnsóó,€979€S.W.2d€276€(Tenn.€1998)€(killing€ofÐ ¨ø Ðother€young€males€during€a€robbery€by€a€young€male€defendant);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€868€S.W.2d€561Ð ”ä Ð(Tenn.€1993)€(brutal€killing€of€three€victims€involving€similar€aggravating€circumstances);€òòState€v.Ð €Ð ÐJonesóó,€789€S.W.2d€545€(Tenn.€1990)€(brutal€drug„related€killing€in€which€the€victim€was€stabbed€toÐ l¼ Ðdeath€after€being€bound,€gagged,€and€blindfolded€with€duct€tape;€similar€aggravating€circumstances);€òòÐ X ¨ ÐState€v.€Ô_ÔZagorskiÔ_Ôóó,€701€S.W.2d€808€(Tenn.€1985)€(killing€in€a€drug€deal€involving€similar€aggravatingÐ D!” Ðcircumstances).€€Other€similar€death€penalty€cases€are€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔHutchisonÔ_Ôóó,€898€S.W.2d€161€(Tenn.Ð 0"€  Ð1994)(murder€of€victim€to€obtain€life€insurance€proceeds€as€part€of€a€conspiracy€among€a€group€ofÐ #l! Ðmen);€òòState€v.€Edward€Leroy€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54€(Tenn.€1992)(double€murder€of€hotel€clerk€andÐ $X" Ðsecurity€guard€during€robbery€involving€multiple€defendants€and€similar€aggravating€circumstances);Ð ô$D # ÐòòState€v.€Ô_ÔGrosecloseÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔRickmanÔ_Ôóó,€615€S.W2d€142€(Tenn.€1981)(murder€resulted€from€an€elaborateÐ à%0!$ Ðplan€to€kill€the€wife€of€one€of€the€defendants€in€a€particularly€cruel€way€and€involved€two€similarÐ Ì&"% Ðaggravating€circumstances).Ô_Ô׃F×Ý ƒMˆÝòòÚ  Ú53Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÐ ¸'#& Їà  àReview€of€the€above€cases,€and€many€others,€reveals€that€the€death€sentences€imposed€by€theÐ ° Ðjury€for€Carruthersðð€first€degree€murder€convictions€are€€proportionate€to€the€penalty€imposed€inÐ œì Ðsimilar€cases.€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àIn€accordance€with€the€mandate€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„206(c)€and€the€principlesÐ `° Ðadopted€in€prior€decisions,€we€have€considered€the€entire€record€and€conclude€that€the€sentences€ofÐ L œ Ðdeath€imposed€for€Carruthersðð€three€convictions€of€first€degree€murder€were€not€imposed€arbitrarily,Ð 8 ˆ Ðthat€the€evidence€supports€the€juryððs€findings€of€the€statutory€aggravatingò ò€ó ócircumstances,€that€theÐ $ t Ðevidence€supports€the€juryððs€finding€that€the€aggravating€circumstances€outweigh€mitigatingÐ  d Ðcircumstances€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€and€that€the€sentence€is€not€excessive€or€disproportionate.€Ð  P  ЀÌà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionóóó óˆÐ Ø(  Ðà  àWith€respect€to€Carruthers,€we€conclude€that€none€of€the€alleged€errors€require€reversal.€Ð Ä  ÐAccordingly,€we€affirm€Carruthersðð€convictions€and€sentences€and€direct€that€the€sentences€of€death€Ð °  Ðbe€carried€out€as€provided€by€law€on€the€11th€day€of€April,€2001,€unless€otherwise€ordered€by€thisÐ œì  ÐCourt€or€proper€authority.Ð ˆØ  ÐÌà  àWith€respect€to€Montgomery,€we€conclude€that€a€severance€should€have€been€granted€whenÐ `° Ðhe€raised€the€issue€in€his€motion€for€new€trial€and€that€the€failure€to€grant€a€severance€in€this€caseÐ Lœ Ðresulted€in€prejudicial€error€requiring€a€new€trial.€€Accordingly,€we€reverse€MontgomeryððsÐ 8ˆ Ðconvictions€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.€€Ð $t ÐÌà  àWith€respect€to€issues€not€addressed€in€this€opinion,€we€affirm€the€decision€of€the€Court€ofÐ üL ÐCriminal€Appeals€authored€by€Judge€Thomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô€and€joined€by€Presiding€Judge€Gary€R.Ð è8 ÐWade€and€Judge€Joseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ô.€€€Relevant€portions€of€that€opinion€are€attached€hereto€as€anÐ Ô$ Ðappendix.Ð À ÐÌà  àCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€State.Ö€EÿÿÖÐ ˜è Ðà  àÌÐ pÀ ЇÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________€Ð œì Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àFRANK€F.€Ô_ÔDROWOTAÔ_Ô,€III,€JUSTICE