ÿWPC JØy^7*ý=ë#=dS9U[*ïÍ4õ#Ï2jS`žøY®t!c(–Z™¤4×Åt}k#-ÓŽ™«)®Å;лlL+ƒhŽc·_SFeµ}î$ðžÆ qÉF°Ò|£rÑ6‚×´ ¦)ï” g´9&`²é®ÇöˆçxèŽaù…ig„ëddúÞ ~9‹Ù:ø÷¹¿MûZýŠ4Yñ­*"ñD†1¤‚¼^Nšã;àH%Šº¥úÈ©ï€ô5soþ¶{‡òL¿‘̲Ï(‘íC§¦¹‡Ó™s$¸¦aˆìÿ‘+g´örÍ·sžÍƒŒùìÁ#«#šˆ7±T÷;†ËÓ š… ¶»*¼úLJéwé k\Ç…¨mï…9/©FD-kaÕ9b‡?S×xm¦÷·0аX„›>€'Pb,äš³öÐÊuè=\½j‚M‡ Õs1oà&¾lðp]¡Ç@5‘å’é²F®â¨"ÕNŸ@&=ê •ð:dym°›mÅ*H@þ™²[ OÏäIsÝ }á¢â Yô²÷{%z|³ZSbê4g0ELzäÔ¶ëˆ6í×#,Ÿ0 03ö²|þ›sØà¨šµTŽn¿’x»âzèù¹‰—Ò6ÂfÊñÞùb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ 6™ ÆÏ Æ•Æ[Æ!çNfUNh¶EÌbÎjÒ<D!Y-zì§§§§§§§§-““““““ 0DÀÀÀb 0í     Bùù 0¤ D5º D-ï 0K ASgƺ 0¤€ 0D$ A«h˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»´˜“/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularqdj/ê:i¢×+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ,Ý ƒR½0$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôðò»»Ô€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔOfficer€Aaron€Thomas€testified€that€Inositol€is€used€as€a€ð ðcutting€agentðð€to€mix€with€cocaine,€thereby€creatingÐ ° Ðgreater€quantity€with€less€purity.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 uÝ ƒR½0$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôðò»»Ô€€Ý  ÝÔ_Ôð ðSimple€possessionðð€is€defined€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„418(a)€(1997)€as€the€knowingÐ ° Ðpossession€or€casual€exchange€of€a€controlled€substance.€€With€few€exceptions,€this€offense€is€a€Class€A€misdemeanor.(ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular Ñ ° Ñ ù `Ý ƒR½0$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôðò»»Ô€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„417(a)€(1997)€provides:€ð ðIt€is€an€offense€for€a€defendant€toÐ ° Ðknowingly:€(1)€Manufacture€a€controlled€substance;€(2)€Deliver€a€controlled€substance;€(3)€Sell€a€controlled€substance;Ð tÄ Ðor€(4)€Possess€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliver€or€sell€such€controlled€substance.ðð€€PossessionÐ 8ˆ Ðunder€this€section€of€26€or€more€grams€of€cocaine€is€a€Class€B€felony.€€  Ñ  Ñ Ñ  ÑÑ ° Ñ #Ý ƒR½0$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôðò»»Ô€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔBecause€Carter€was€acquitted€on€the€counts€of€money€laundering€and€possession€of€a€weapon,€the€questionÐ ° Ðof€notice€as€to€those€offenses€is€moot. âÝ ƒR½0$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôðò»»Ô€€Ý  ÝÔ_ÔWe€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€prosecution€to€amendÐ ° Ðthis€count€of€the€defendantððs€indictment€after€the€close€of€proof€and€over€the€defendantððs€objection.€€Tennessee€Rule€ofÐ tÄ ÐCriminal€Procedure€7(b)€only€allows€for€an€indictment€to€be€amended€without€consent€of€the€defendant€if€it€is€done€beforeÐ 8ˆ Ðjeopardy€attaches.€€However,€because€we€find€that€the€indictment€was€sufficient€prior€to€its€amendment€and€no€new€orÐ üL Ðdifferent€offense€was€charged,€the€error€was€harmless.€€ #Ñ  ÑÑ ° ÑÑ ° Ñ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|I2½0$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôó%ò»»Ô€€ d(|3t$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3t$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Tå»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRXì3Ø'Avery 25371 Laser Bus. CaXà3Ø' Letter3Ø'Avery 5160 Addressus. CañÑe°Ñññÿ3Ø'LetterTÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Tå»»»ÔÑ8€ ™XXdì»»d8ÑÑ€.ÑÑ ý ÑÑ€OYÑÑ€@¸ÑÑ€ÔlÑà@™ ™ ìàÔ‡îZìTåÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Tå»îîZì¯#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X ™X»¼TåÔÌÔ#†¼Tå»XX ™‘#Ôò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€€v.€€CLARENCE€W.€CARTER€ó óÔ‡X ™X»¼TåÔÐ úJ ÐÔ#†¼Tå»XX ™#ÔÔ‡X ™X»¼TåÔÌò òAppeal€by€permission€from€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ú J ЀÔ#†¼Tå»XX ™\#ÔÔ‡X ™X»¼TåÔCriminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ æ 6 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99„C„1975€€€€€€Hon.€Steve€Dozier,€JudgeÐ Ò " ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<•` AßÐ –æ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„02230„SC„R11„CDÔ#†¼Tå»XX ™ï#ÔÔ‡X ™X»¼TåÔ€„€Filed€December€19,€2003Ð ‘á  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<h` AßÐ i¹  Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Tå»XX ™P#ÔÓ=€Tå»Ð»dÐd=ÓÔ€X ™X»¼TåÔà  àThe€defendant,€Clarence€W.€Carter,€was€tried€and€convicted€of€conspiracy€to€sell€cocaine€andÐ P  Ðpossession€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliver€or€sell,€and€the€defendant€was€sentencedÐ <Œ Ðas€a€Range€Two€multiple€offender€to€consecutive€sentences€of€thirty„six€and€sixteen€years.€€TheÐ (x ÐCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals€affirmed€both€the€convictions€and€sentences.€€Although€there€are€severalÐ d Ðissues€in€this€case,€we€granted€permission€to€appeal€primarily€to€determine€whether€the€trial€courtÐ P Ðcommitted€reversible€error€in€sentencing€the€defendant€as€a€Range€Two€multiple€offender€when€theÐ ì< Ðonly€notice€of€intent€to€seek€enhanced€punishment€filed€by€the€State€was€in€relation€to€an€indictmentÐ Ø( Ðthat€was€superseded€by€the€indictment€upon€which€the€defendant€was€tried.€€Additionally,€theÐ Ä Ðdefendant€argues€on€appeal€that€the€indictment€for€possession€with€intent€to€deliver€was€insufficientÐ ° Ðto€charge€anything€more€than€simple€possession€because€it€failed€to€contain€the€language€that€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€possessed€the€cocaine€ð ðwith€intent€to€deliver.ðð€€Upon€review,€we€conclude€that€the€noticeÐ ˆØ Ðof€intent€to€seek€enhanced€sentencing€was€sufficient€as€to€the€possession€charge,€but€was€notÐ tÄ Ðsufficient€as€to€the€conspiracy€charge€because€conspiracy€was€not€charged€in€the€original€indictmentÐ `° Ðfor€which€notice€was€given.€€We€also€hold€that€the€indictment€was€sufficient€to€charge€the€offenseÐ L œ Ðof€possession€with€intent€to€deliver.€€Finally,€we€hold€that€the€defendantððs€remaining€argumentsÐ 8!ˆ  Ðregarding€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€and€length€of€sentence€are€without€merit.€€The€case€isÐ $"t! Ðtherefore€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€re„sentencing€on€the€conviction€for€conspiracy€to€sellÐ #`" Ðcocaine.Ð ü#L# ÐÓúÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€Appeal€by€Permission;€Ð Ô%$!% ÐJudgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€Affirmed€in€Part€and€Reversed€in€Part;€Ð À&"& ÐCase€Remandedó óÐ ¬'ü"' ÐÌòòÓ  ÓWilliam€M.€Barker,€Jóó.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€whichòò€Frank€F.€Drowota,€III,€C.J.,Ð „)Ô$) Ðóóandòò€E.€Riley€Anderson,€Ô_ÔAdolphoÔ_Ô€A.€Birchóó,€Jr.,€and€òòJanice€M.€Holderóó,€JJ.€joined.Ð p*À%* ÐÐ \+¬&+ ÐÔ_ÔC.€Edward€Fowlkes€and€John€E.€Herbison,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Clarence€W.Ð ° ÐCarter.Ð œì ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Michael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General;€Elizabeth€B.Ð tÄ ÐMarney,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€John€Zimmermann,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€and€AnaÐ `° ÐEscobar,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð L œ ÐÓmÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÐ $ t ÐÌò òÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓ=€Tå»Ð»d»Ð»d=ÓBACKGROUNDó óÐ ü L  ÐÌÓÏÓà  àAfter€months€of€police€surveillance,€the€defendant,€Clarence€Carter,€and€his€acquaintance,Ð Ô$  ÐReginald€Hutchinson,€were€arrested€on€November€19,€1998.€€Prior€to€the€arrest,€the€investigatingÐ À  Ðofficers€conducted€several€ð ðtrash€pullsðð€at€Hutchinsonððs€residence€on€Fifteenth€Avenue€in€NashvilleÐ ¬ü  Ðand€at€the€defendantððs€residence€on€Bess€Court,€likewise€in€Nashville.€€In€the€trash€pulled€fromÐ ˜è  ÐHutchinsonððs€residence,€the€officers€found€several€small€baggies€with€a€white€residue€on€them,€aÐ „Ô  Ðlarger€bag€that€contained€a€white€residue,€latex€gloves€and€a€bottle€of€Inositol.׃ ×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€police€drug€dogÐ pÀ Ðindicated€by€behavior€that€cocaine€was€present€on€the€bags€found.€€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àA€search€warrant€was€obtained€for€Hutchinsonððs€residence€and€was€carried€out€on€NovemberÐ 4„ Ð19,€1998.€€When€officers€entered€the€residence,€both€Hutchinson€and€the€defendant€were€present.€Ð  p ÐThe€defendant€was€in€the€area€of€the€couch€in€the€living€room,€and€upon€the€entrance€of€the€officers,Ð  \ Ðthrew€white€powder€off€the€table€and€into€the€air.€€Found€near€the€defendant€were€a€set€of€smallÐ øH Ðelectronic€scales€and€a€bag€containing€plastic€baggies,€latex/rubber€gloves,€and€another€set€of€scales.€Ð ä4 ÐOfficers€discovered€several€bags€of€white€powder€throughout€the€room€along€with€an€unaccounted„Ð Ð  Ðfor€amount€of€powder€loose€on€the€floor.€€The€powder€was€sent€to€the€Tennessee€Bureau€ofÐ ¼  ÐInvestigation€(TBI)€for€analysis.€€A€forensic€scientist€from€the€TBI€testified€that€the€aggregate€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðpowder€sent€for€testing€constituted€294€grams€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€State€also€produced€evidence€regarding€the€defendantððs€finances.€€The€defendant€had€aÐ l¼ Ðlicense€for€a€business€enterprise€called€Special€Occasions,€the€gross€sales€for€which€in€1997€and€1998Ð X ¨ Ðamounted€to€approximately€$3,600€each€year.€€Anita€Jackson,€with€whom€the€defendant€had€beenÐ D!” Ðliving€when€arrested,€testified€as€to€money€deposited€into€and€withdrawn€from€her€bank€account.€Ð 0"€  ÐAn€apparent€discrepancy€of€tens€of€thousands€of€dollars€existed€between€what€Ms.€Jackson€and€theÐ #l! Ðdefendant€earned€and€the€money€flowing€through€Ms.€Jacksonððs€bank€account.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àA€two„count€indictment€in€case€99„A„689€was€returned€on€March€16,€1999,€charging€in€theÐ à%0!$ Ðfirst€count€that:Ð Ì&"% Ðâ âÐ ¸'#& ÐÑ@¸Ñâ âÑ  Ñâ âÑ  Ñà8  àCLARENCE€W.€CARTER€and€REGINALD€L.€HUTCHINSON€on€the€19th€day€ofÐ ° Ðâ âNovember,€1998,€in€Davidson€County,€Tennessee€.€.€.€knowingly€did€possess€withÐ œì Ðintent€to€deliver€300€grams€or€more€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine,€a€Schedule€IIÐ ˆØ Ðcontrolled€substance€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð[€]39„17„417€.€.€.€.€ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌCount€two€charged€that:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àCLARENCE€W.€CARTER€on€the€19th€day€of€November,€1998,€in€Davidson€County,Ð $ t ÐTennessee€.€.€.€with€the€intent€to€go€armed,€did€intentionally€or€knowingly€carry€aÐ  ` Ðfirearm,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð[€]39„17„1307€.€.€.€.à8@bÐ Ð àÐ ü L  ÐÌShortly€thereafter,€the€State€filed€a€notice€to€seek€enhanced€punishment€as€to€that€indictment.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àOn€September€3,€1999,€the€defendant€was€charged€in€a€superseding€four„count€indictmentÐ ¬ü  Ðin€case€99„C„1975.€€The€first€count€charged€that€the€defendant:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà8  àon€divers€days€between€the€___€day€of€March,€1998€and€the€___€day€of€November,Ð pÀ Ð1998,€in€Davidson€County,€Tennessee€.€.€.€did€knowingly€agree€with€ReginaldÐ \¬ ÐHutchison€[sic]€and€with€others,€known€and€unknown€to€the€Grand€Jury,€that€one€ofÐ H˜ Ðmore€of€them€would€engage€in€conduct€that€constitutes€the€offense€of€the€sale€of€300Ð 4„ Ðgrams€or€more€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine,€.€.€.€and€in€furtherance€of€theÐ  p Ðconspiracy€did€engage€in€one€or€more€of€the€following€overt€acts:Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà0` Ð Ð à1.€€Reginald€Hutchison€[sic]€maintained€a€house€at€1218€15th€Avenue€SouthÐ ä4 Ðwith€the€purpose€of€storing,€repackaging,€and€safekeeping€cocaine;€ÐÐ ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  àà0` Ð Ð à2.€€The€Defendant€Clarence€William€Carter€did€possess,€on€November€19,Ð ¨ø Ð1998,€over€26€grams€of€cocaine€.€.€.€.à8@Â` Ð ` Ð àÐ ”ä ÐÌThe€second€count€charged€that€the€defendant:Ð l¼ ÐÌà8  àknowingly€did€possess€26€grams€or€more€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine,€aÐ D!” ÐSchedule€II€controlled€substance€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð[€]39„Ð 0"€  Ð17„417€.€.€.€.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€third€count€charged€that€the€defendant:Ð ô$D # ÐÌà8  àwith€the€intent€to€go€armed,€did€intentionally€or€knowingly€carry€a€firearm,€inÐ Ì&"% Ðviolation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð[€]39„17„1307€.€.€.€.и'#&Ð Ð  ÐÌFinally,€the€fourth€count€of€the€indictment€charged€that€the€defendant:Ð )à$( ÐÌà8  àon€or€about€the€25th€day€of€October,€1998,€in€Davidson€County,€Tennessee€.€.€.€didÐ h+¸&* Ðknowingly€use€proceeds€derived€directly€or€indirectly€from€a€specified€criminalÐ ° Ðactivity€to€conduct€a€financial€transaction,€or€make€other€disposition,€to€wit:€theÐ œì Ðpurchase€of€a€1984€Honda€Prelude€automobile€and€registered€in€the€name€of€ReginaldÐ ˆØ ÐHutchison€[sic],€with€the€intent€to€conceal€or€disguise€the€nature,€location,€source,Ð tÄ Ðownership,€or€control€of€the€criminally€derived€proceeds,€in€violation€of€TennesseeÐ `° ÐCode€Annotated€ðð[€]39„14„901€.€.€.€.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌOn€February€7,€2000,€the€original€indictment€was€dismissed.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àAt€the€close€of€the€defendantððs€proof€and€prior€to€the€beginning€of€the€Stateððs€rebuttal€proof,Ð ü L  Ðthe€defendant€objected€to€the€wording€of€the€count€in€the€indictment€charging€the€feloniousÐ è 8  Ðpossession.€€The€defendant€argued€that€because€it€did€not€include€the€language€that€the€defendantÐ Ô$  Ðknowingly€manufactured,€delivered,€sold€or€possessed€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€toÐ À  Ðmanufacture,€deliver€or€sell€a€controlled€substance,€the€indictment€was€insufficient€to€chargeÐ ¬ü  Ðanything€more€than€simple€possession.€€The€State€orally€moved€to€amend€the€indictment€so€that€itÐ ˜è  Ðincluded€the€language€ð ðpossess€with€intent€to€deliver,ðð€and€the€trial€court€orally€granted€the€motion.€Ð „Ô  ÐNo€written€motion€or€order€appears€in€the€record.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àA€jury€found€defendant€guilty€of€conspiracy€to€sell€300€grams€or€more€of€cocaine€andÐ H˜ Ðpossession€of€twenty„six€grams€or€more€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€deliver;€the€jury€acquitted€him€ofÐ 4„ Ðcarrying€a€firearm€and€money€laundering.€€Over€the€defendantððs€objections,€the€State€was€allowedÐ  p Ðto€introduce€evidence€of€prior€crimes€to€enhance€sentencing€to€that€of€a€Range€Two€multiple€offenderÐ  \ Ðon€both€convictions.€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€filed€a€motion€for€new€trial,€followed€by€an€appeal€to€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ Ð  ÐAppeals.€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€upheld€the€convictions€and€sentences,€finding€that€the€StateÐ ¼  Ðdid€provide€adequate€notice€of€its€intent€to€seek€enhanced€punishment€and€that€while€the€trial€courtÐ ¨ø Ðerred€in€allowing€the€State€to€amend€the€possession€count€in€the€second€indictment,€the€existingÐ ”ä Ðlanguage€of€the€indictment€was€sufficient€to€charge€possession€with€intent€to€deliver.€€On€theÐ €Ð Ðdefendantððs€remaining€issues,€the€court€found€that€the€conspiracy€count,€as€worded€in€the€indictment,Ð l¼ Ðwas€valid;€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€conviction€for€conspiracy;€and€the€sentencingÐ X ¨ Ðwas€not€excessive.€€We€granted€review€to€determine,€among€other€things,€whether€the€notice€ofÐ D!” Ðenhancement€that€was€filed€with€respect€to€the€first€indictment€carried€over€to€the€subsequentÐ 0"€  Ðindictment.€€Ð #l! ÐÓ  Óò òÌANALYSISó óÐ ô$D # ÐÓÏ7Óò òó óÌÓ  ÓòòÑ€%ÑNotice€of€Intent€to€Seek€Enhanced€PunishmentóóÐ Ì&"% ÐÌÓ8Óà  àThe€defendant€alleges€on€appeal€that€the€State€provided€insufficient€notice€of€its€intention€toÐ ¤(ô#' Ðseek€sentencing€as€a€Range€Two€multiple€offender€because€the€notice€was€filed€in€reference€to€theÐ )à$( Ðfirst€indictment,€which€was€dismissed,€and€no€notice€was€filed€on€the€second€indictment.€€BecauseÐ |*Ì%) Ðthis€is€a€question€of€law,€our€review€is€de€novo.€€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€940€S.W.2d€558,€561€(Tenn.€1997).Ð h+¸&* Їà  àIn€Tennessee,€a€criminal€defendant€has€the€right€to€receive€notice€when€the€State€intends€toÐ ° Ðseek€enhanced€punishment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„202(a)€(2003).€€The€statute€provides:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àIf€the€district€attorney€general€believes€that€a€defendant€should€be€sentenced€as€aÐ tÄ Ðmultiple,€persistent€or€career€offender,€the€district€attorney€general€shall€file€aÐ `° Ðstatement€thereof€with€the€court€and€defense€counsel€not€less€than€ten€(10)€daysÐ L œ Ðbefore€trial€or€acceptance€of€a€guilty€plea€.€.€.€.€€Such€statement,€which€shall€not€beÐ 8 ˆ Ðmade€known€to€the€jury€determining€the€guilt€or€innocence€of€the€defendant€on€theÐ $ t Ðprimary€offense,€must€set€forth€the€nature€of€the€prior€felony€convictions,€the€datesÐ  ` Ðof€the€convictions€and€the€identity€of€the€courts€of€the€convictions.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„202(a)€(2003).€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àThe€district€attorney€has€the€discretion€to€seek€enhanced€sentencing,€and€it€is€the€districtÐ ¬ü  Ðattorneyððs€responsibility€to€provide€notice€to€the€court€and€the€defendant€pursuant€to€statute.€€òòSeeóóÐ ˜è  ÐòòState€v.€Adamsóó,€788€S.W.2d€557,€559€(Tenn.€1990).€€The€purpose€of€the€notice€is€to€facilitate€plea„Ð „Ô  Ðbargaining,€to€inform€decisions€regarding€the€entering€of€pleas,€and€to€aid€in€trial€strategy.€€òòId.ó󀀀РpÀ ÐÌà  àGenerally,€if€notice€is€filed€late€or€is€filed€timely€but€is€otherwise€defective,€the€defendantÐ H˜ Ðmust€show€prejudice€before€the€notice€will€be€rendered€ineffective.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,Ð 4„ Ð752€S.W.2d€80,€81€(Tenn.€1988)€(finding€that€notice€filed€the€day€trial€began€was€not€ineffectiveÐ  p Ðbecause€the€defendant€failed€to€show€prejudice€or€request€a€continuance);€òòState€v.€Debroóó,€787€S.W.2dÐ  \ Ð932,€933„34€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989)€(finding€that€the€notice€was€not€ineffective€despite€a€technicalÐ øH Ðerror€therein€because€the€defect€was€a€mere€clerical€error€of€which€the€defendant€had€knowledge)òòóó.€Ð ä4 ÐOn€the€other€hand,€failure€to€file€any€notice€of€sentencing€status€is€grounds€for€re„sentencing.€€òòSeeóóÐ Ð  ÐòòState€v.€Penderóó,€687€S.W.2d€714,€719„20€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).€€The€question€in€this€case€is€notÐ ¼  Ðone€of€late„filed€notice€or€defective€notice,€but€rather€whether€any€notice€was€filed€with€respect€toÐ ¨ø Ðthe€indictment€on€which€the€defendant€went€to€trial.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àAbout€a€year€before€trial,€the€State€filed€notice€of€enhanced€punishment€in€case€number€99„A„Ð l¼ Ð689,€the€original€indictment€under€which€the€defendant€was€charged.€€That€indictment€only€chargedÐ X ¨ Ðtwo€offenses:€possession€with€intent€to€deliver€300€grams€or€more€of€a€substance€containing€cocaineÐ D!” Ðand€carrying€a€firearm.€€After€further€investigation€of€the€case,€the€State€returned€to€the€grand€juryÐ 0"€  Ðand€obtained€a€second€indictment,€case€number€99„C„1975,€lowering€the€amount€of€cocaineÐ #l! Ðpossessed€to€twenty„six€or€more€grams€and€adding€additional€charges€of€conspiracy€and€moneyÐ $X" Ðlaundering.€€The€first€indictment€was€then€dismissed.€€The€State€did€not€file€any€notice€ofÐ ô$D # Ðenhancement€with€respect€to€this€second€case.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€decided€that€99„C„1975€superseded€99„A„689€and€that€the€notice€given€underÐ ¸'#& Ð99„A„689€sufficed€for€sentencing€on€convictions€arising€out€of€99„C„1975.€€The€court€stated€that€allÐ ¤(ô#' Ðparties€involved€were€aware€that€the€defendant€ð ðhad€been€given€notice€[as€to€his€status€as]€a€RangeÐ )à$( ÐTwo€offender€on€the€indictments€that€stem€from€the€trial.ðð€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€agreedÐ |*Ì%) Ðthat€the€notice€was€sufficient€because€one€of€the€offenses€charged€in€the€second€indictment€wasÐ h+¸&* ÐÑ OY%Ñâ âѰ°Ñâ %âÑ  ÑѰ°ÑѰ°Ñâ %âÑ  Ñidentical€to€one€charged€in€the€first€indictment,€all€of€the€charges€arose€out€of€the€same€series€ofÐ ° Ðevents€during€the€same€time€frame,€and€the€defendant€and€his€counsel€were€on€notice€of€the€potentialÐ œì Ðfor€sentence€enhancement.€€In€making€its€decision,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€relied€on€òòState€v.Ð ˆØ ÐChaseóó,€873€S.W.2d€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€and€òòState€v.€Sawyeróó,€No.€W2001„01923„CCA„R3„Ð tÄ ÐCD,€2002€WL€31259485€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Aug.€27,€2002).Ð `° ÐÌà  àòòóóIn€òòState€v.€Chaseóó,€there€were€two€indictments€with€a€notice€to€seek€enhanced€punishmentÐ 8 ˆ Ðfiled€only€as€to€the€first€indictment.€€The€court€found€that€the€notice€of€enhanced€punishment€appliedÐ $ t Ðequally€to€the€second€indictment€because€the€second€indictment€was€a€re„indictment€for€the€sameÐ  ` Ðoffense€as€charged€in€the€first€indictment.€€òòChaseóó,€873€S.W.2d€at€9.Ð ü L  ÐÌà8  à[T]he€notice€filed€in€the€first€indictment€gave€the€defendant€fair€warning€that€the€StateÐ Ô$  Ðintended€to€seek€an€enhanced€punishment€for€that€crime.€€Since€the€defendant€wasÐ À  Ðwell€aware€of€the€existence€of€both€indictments€and€since€both€indictments€chargedÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€same€crime,€there€was€no€reason€to€believe€enhanced€sentencing€would€not€applyÐ ˜è  Ðto€a€conviction€under€either€indictment.€€The€purposes€of€the€act€as€set€out€in€òòAdamsóóÐ „Ô  Ðwere€accomplished.€€The€defendant€was€in€no€way€misled€or€surprised.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌòòId.óóÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€in€the€case€under€submission€contends€that€the€notice€under€the€firstÐ  p Ðindictment€was€insufficient,€arguing€that€any€filings€under€that€indictment€did€not€ð ðsurviveðð€itsÐ  \ Ðdismissal.€€He€also€argues€that€the€notice€was€insufficient€because€the€second€indictment€did€notÐ øH Ðcharge€the€same€offenses€as€the€first.€€It€is€this€latter€point€that€we€find€persuasive€with€regard€to€theÐ ä4 Ðconspiracy€count€of€the€second€indictment.׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РР ÐÌà  àIn€both€cases€relied€upon€by€the€lower€court,€the€second€indictment€charged€exactly€the€sameÐ ¨ø Ðoffenses€as€the€first€indictment,€whereas€in€this€case,€the€second€indictment€also€contains€two€entirelyÐ ”ä Ðnew€offenses€in€addition€to€the€earlier€indicted€offenses.€€Thus€the€second€indictment€is€not€simplyÐ €Ð Ða€re„indictment€for€the€same€crimes.€€Because€of€this,€we€find€that€at€least€as€to€the€conspiracyÐ l¼ Ðcharge,€Carter€was€not€provided€sufficient€notice€of€the€Stateððs€intent€to€seek€enhanced€sentencing.€Ð X ¨ ÐÌÌà  àAt€the€same€time,€however,€we€agree€with€the€rationale€in€òòState€v.€Chaseóó€that€where€bothÐ #l! Ðindictments€charge€the€same€crime,€the€defendant€has€no€reason€to€believe€enhanced€sentencingÐ $X" Ðwould€not€apply€to€a€conviction€under€either€indictment.€€Therefore,€because€Carter€was€charged€withÐ ô$D # Ðfelony€possession€of€cocaine€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„417€in€bothÐ à%0!$ Ðindictments,€the€notice€was€sufficient€as€to€the€conviction€for€possession€with€the€intent€toÐ Ì&"% Ðmanufacture,€deliver€or€sell.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÑÔlÑâ âÑ  ÑѰ°Ñâ âÑ  ÑòòÓ  ÓÌSufficiency€of€the€IndictmentóóÐ œì ÐÓùYÓÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€reduced€the€conviction€for€felonyÐ tÄ Ðpossession€of€cocaine€to€misdemeanor€possession€because€the€indictment€failed€to€contain€sufficientÐ `° Ðlanguage€to€charge€felony€possession.€€Again,€because€this€is€a€question€of€law,€our€review€is€òòdeÐ L œ Ðnovoóó.€€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€940€S.W.2d€558,€561€(Tenn.€1997).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àThe€possession€count€on€which€the€jury€tried€the€defendant€provided€as€follows:Ð  ` Ðò òÌà8  àó óCLARENCE€WILLIAM€CARTER€on€the€19th€day€of€November,€1998,€in€DavidsonÐ è 8  ÐCounty,€Tennessee€and€before€the€finding€of€this€indictment,€knowingly€did€possessÐ Ô$  Ð26€grams€or€more€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine,€a€Schedule€II€controlledÐ À  Ðsubstance€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð[€]39„17„417,€and€against€theÐ ¬ü  Ðpeace€and€dignity€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.Иè Ð Ð  ÐÌAt€the€close€of€proof,€the€defense€alleged€that€the€possession€count€failed€to€charge€any€crime,Ð pÀ Ðexplaining€that€although€the€count€cited€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„417,€the€remainingÐ \¬ Ðlanguage€of€the€count€at€best€charged€simple€possession׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€because€it€did€not€allege€that€the€defendantÐ H˜ Ðpossessed€the€cocaine€with€the€intent€to€manufacture,€deliver€or€sell.׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€The€trial€court€ruled€that€theÐ 4„ Ðcount€was€not€void€because€the€count€cited€the€statute,€the€substance€that€the€defendant€was€chargedÐ  p Ðwith€possessing,€the€amount€of€substance€involved,€and€the€date€on€which€the€offense€allegedlyÐ  \ Ðoccurred.€€While€the€defendant€did€not€raise€the€issue€of€notice,€the€court€also€ruled€that€the€languageÐ øH Ðused€in€the€indictment€was€sufficient€to€satisfy€notice€requirements.€€The€State€orally€moved€toÐ ä4 Ðamend€the€indictment€to€include€the€language€ð ðpossess€with€intent€to€deliver,ðð€and€the€trial€courtÐ Ð  Ðgranted€that€motion.׃ð×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àUnder€both€the€United€States€and€the€Tennessee€Constitutions,€a€charging€instrument,€suchÐ ”ä Ðas€an€indictment,€must€inform€the€accused€of€ð ðthe€nature€and€cause€of€the€accusation.ðð€€òòSeeóó€U.S.Ð €Ð ÐCòòonstóó.€amend.€VI;€Tòòennóó.€Còòonstóó.€art.€I,€ðð€9.€€In€addition€to€these€constitutional€guarantees,€the€formÐ l¼ Ðof€an€indictment€in€Tennessee€is€prescribed€by€statute:€Ð X ¨ Їà8  àThe€indictment€must€state€the€facts€constituting€the€offense€in€ordinary€and€conciseÐ ° Ðlanguage,€without€prolixity€or€repetition,€in€such€a€manner€as€to€enable€a€person€ofÐ œì Ðcommon€understanding€to€know€what€is€intended,€and€with€that€degree€of€certaintyÐ ˆØ Ðwhich€will€enable€the€court,€on€conviction,€to€pronounce€the€proper€judgment€.€.€.€.ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„202€(1997).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àIndictments€need€not€conform€to€strict€pleading€requirements.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.2dÐ $ t Ð725,€727€(Tenn.€1997).€€Historically,€strict€pleading€in€indictments€was€required€because€offensesÐ  ` Ðexisted€at€common€law€and€did€not€have€elements€that€were€easily€ascertainable€by€reference€to€aÐ ü L  Ðstatute.€€òòId.óó€at€728.€€Because€such€common€law€offenses€no€longer€exist,€to€hold€on€to€strict€pleadingÐ è 8  Ðrequirements€would€be€ð ðembracing€technicalities€that€are€empty€and€without€reason.ðð€€òòId.óó€(quotingÐ Ô$  ÐòòState€v.€Cornellisonóó,€59€S.W.2d€514,€515€(Tenn.€1933));€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Hammondsóó,€30€S.W.3dÐ À  Ð294,€299€(Tenn.€2000).€€Therefore,€we€have€held€that€an€indictment€is€valid€if€it€provides€sufficientÐ ¬ü  Ðinformation€(1)€to€enable€the€accused€to€know€the€accusation€to€which€answer€is€required;€(2)€toÐ ˜è  Ðfurnish€the€trial€court€an€adequate€basis€for€entry€of€a€proper€judgment;€and€(3)€to€protect€the€accusedÐ „Ô  Ðfrom€a€subsequent€prosecution€for€the€same€offense.€€òòHillóó,€954€S.W.2d€at€727.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àRelaxation€of€the€strict€pleading€requirements€is€apparent€in€the€many€decisions€followingÐ H˜ ÐòòHillóó.€€We€have€held€that€an€indictment€which€references€the€statute€defining€the€offense€is€sufficientÐ 4„ Ðand€satisfies€the€constitutional€and€statutory€requirements€of€òòHillóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sledgeóó,€15€S.W.3dÐ  p Ð93,€95€(Tenn.€2000)€(holding€an€indictment€alleging€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€kill€[theÐ  \ Ðvictim]€during€the€perpetration€of€Aggravated€Robbery,€in€violation€of€T.C.A.€39„13„202ðð€sufficientÐ øH Ðbecause€it€contained€a€specific€reference€to€the€statute€which€was€ð ðsufficient€to€place€the€accused€onÐ ä4 Ðnotice€of€the€charged€offenseðð);€òòState€v.€Carteróó,€988€S.W.2d€145,€148€(Tenn.€1999)€(holding€thatÐ Ð  Ðreference€to€the€appropriate€statute€was€sufficient€in€felony€murder€indictments€alleging€that€theÐ ¼  Ðdefendant€did€ð ðunlawfully€kill€[the€victims]€during€the€perpetration€of€Aggravated€Robbery,€inÐ ¨ø Ðviolation€of€T.C.A.€39„13„202ðð);€òòRuff€v.€Stateóó,€978€S.W.2d€95,€100€(Tenn.€1998)€(holding€that€ð ðanÐ ”ä Ðindictment€which€cites€the€pertinent€statute€and€uses€its€language€will€be€sufficient€to€support€aÐ €Ð Ðconvictionðð).Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€we€have€held€that€an€indictment€need€not€allege€the€specific€theory€or€meansÐ D!” Ðby€which€the€State€intends€to€prove€each€element€of€an€offense€to€achieve€the€overriding€purpose€ofÐ 0"€  Ðnotice€to€the€accused.€€òòSeeóó€òòHammondsóó,€30€S.W.3d€at€302€(holding€that€an€indictment€for€aggravatedÐ #l! Ðassault€was€sufficient€because€it€alleged€the€appropriate€òòmens€reaóó,€the€assault€and€the€use€of€aÐ $X" Ðweapon,€even€though€the€indictment€failed€to€indicate€whether€the€State€intended€to€prove€theÐ ô$D # Ðunderlying€assault€was€committed€by€bodily€injury,€reasonable€fear€of€imminent€bodily€injury,€orÐ à%0!$ Ðoffensive€physical€conduct);€òòWyatt€v.€Stateóó,€24€S.W.3d€319,€324€(Tenn.€2000)€(upholding€theÐ Ì&"% Ðvalidity€of€an€indictment€involving€attempt€which€cited€the€relevant€statute€but€made€ð ðno€referenceÐ ¸'#& Ðto€the€attempt€statuteððs€numbered€subsections€nor€[did]€it€specify€a€specific€act€or€course€of€conductÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconstituting€the€ððattempt€to€killðððð);€òòState€v.€Lemacksóó,€996€S.W.2d€166,€172€(Tenn.€1999)€(holdingÐ )à$( Ðthat€the€indictment€for€driving€under€the€influence€provided€sufficient€notice€and€that€ð ð[t]he€theoriesÐ |*Ì%) Ðavailable€to€support€a€conviction€of€that€offense€were€not€required€to€be€included€in€the€indictmentðð).òòóóÐ h+¸&* Їà  àApplying€òòHillóó€and€its€progeny,€we€find€that€the€language€of€the€indictment,€along€with€theÐ ° Ðspecific€reference€to€the€statute€allegedly€violated,€provided€the€defendant€with€ample€notice€of€theÐ œì Ðoffense€charged.€€The€indictment€did€not€state€a€mere€result€or€conclusion,€but€rather€included€theÐ ˆØ Ðfacts€constituting€the€offense,€including€the€name€of€the€defendant,€the€date€of€the€alleged€offense,Ð tÄ Ðthe€amount€and€type€of€substance€possessed,€and€the€statute€violated.€€Furthermore,€because€theÐ `° Ðindictment€used€the€word€ð ðpossessedðð€in€reference€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„Ð L œ Ð417(a),€the€defendant€was€on€notice€regarding€which€subsection€of€the€statute€he€was€charged€withÐ 8 ˆ Ðviolating.€€And€while€the€indictment€did€not€indicate€whether€the€State€was€going€to€prove€theÐ $ t Ðoffense€as€possession€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliver,€or€sell,€the€State€is€not€required€to€allegeÐ  ` Ðthe€specific€theory€or€means€by€which€the€State€intends€to€prove€each€element€of€an€offense.€€òòSeeóóÐ ü L  ÐòòHammondsóó,€30€S.W.3d€at€300„01.€€For€these€same€reasons,€the€indictment€also€provided€an€adequateÐ è 8  Ðbasis€for€entry€of€judgment€and€protection€from€re„prosecution€for€the€same€offense.€Ð Ô$  ÐÌòòÓ  ÓSufficiency€of€the€EvidenceóóÐ ¬ü  ÐÓV}ÓÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€was€not€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€forÐ „Ô  Ðconspiracy€because€there€was€no€evidence€of€any€agreement€between€Hutchinson€and€himself,€anÐ pÀ Ðovert€act,€or€of€the€300€grams€of€cocaine.€€We€agree€with€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€that€theÐ \¬ Ðproof€presented€at€trial€supports€each€of€the€elements€necessary€for€a€conviction.€€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àAlthough€an€accused€is€originally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€of€innocence,€a€jury€verdictÐ  p Ðof€guilty€removes€that€presumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€shifting€the€burden€of€proof€toÐ  \ Ðthe€defendant€to€demonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Dellingeróó,€79Ð øH ÐS.W.3d€458,€489€(Tenn.€2002);€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€On€appeal,€weÐ ä4 Ðmust€determine€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€accused€guilty€of€everyÐ Ð  Ðelement€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839Ð ¼  ÐS.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€In€making€this€decision,€we€are€to€accord€the€State€ð ðthe€strongestÐ ¨ø Ðlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawnÐ ”ä Ðtherefrom.ðð€€òòTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914.€€As€such,€we€are€precluded€from€re„weighing€orÐ €Ð Ðreconsidering€the€evidence,€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929€S.W.2d€380,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996),€norÐ l¼ Ðmay€we€substitute€our€own€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantialÐ X ¨ Ðevidence,€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àTo€sustain€a€conviction€for€conspiracy,€the€State€is€required€to€prove€thatÐ #l! ÐÌà8  àtwo€(2)€or€more€people,€each€having€the€culpable€mental€state€required€for€the€offenseÐ ô$D # Ðwhich€is€the€object€of€the€conspiracy€and€each€acting€for€the€purpose€of€promotingÐ à%0!$ Ðor€facilitating€commission€of€an€offense,€agree€that€one€(1)€or€more€of€them€willÐ Ì&"% Ðengage€in€conduct€which€constitutes€such€offense.и'#&Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„103(a)€(2003).€€ð ðNo€person€may€be€convicted€of€conspiracy€to€commit€anÐ )à$( Ðoffense€unless€an€overt€act€in€pursuance€of€such€conspiracy€is€alleged€and€proved€to€have€been€doneÐ |*Ì%) Ðby€the€person€or€by€another€with€whom€the€person€conspired.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„103(d)Ð h+¸&* Ð(2003).€€The€offense€alleged€to€have€been€the€object€of€the€conspiracy€was€ð ðthe€sale€of€300€gramsÐ ° Ðor€more€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine€.€.€.€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð[€]39„17„Ð œì Ð417.ððÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€accurately€summarized€the€evidence€that€supportsÐ `° Ðthe€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àThe€sharing€of€vehicles€and€financial€responsibility€therefor€between€these€twoÐ $ t Ðindividuals€suggest€involvement€in€each€otherððs€affairs.€€In€addition,€the€trash€pullsÐ  ` Ð.€.€.€revealed€mail€belonging€to€the€defendant€and€to€Hutchinson€intermingled€in€eachÐ ü L  Ðotherððs€garbage.€€These€pulls€also€led€to€the€discovery€of€an€empty€box€of€baggies€.Ð è 8  Ð.€.€;€latex€gloves€.€.€.€;€Inositol€.€.€.€;€and,€in€some€of€the€otherwise€empty€bags,€cocaineÐ Ô$  Ðresidue.€€Beyond€this,€the€police€discovered€the€defendant€essentially€surrounded€byÐ À  Ðevidence€of€drug€dealing€upon€executing€a€search€warrant€at€Hutchinsonððs€residence.€Ð ¬ü  ÐBaggies€of€cocaine€were€in€plain€sight€throughout€the€room;€electric€scales€.€.€.€wereÐ ˜è  Ðdiscovered€near€the€defendant;€a€box€of€rubber€gloves€and€hundreds€of€dollars€wereÐ „Ô  Ðalso€located€in€his€vicinity;€etc.€Moreover,€two€officers€testified€that,€upon€entering,Ð pÀ Ðthey€saw€loose€cocaine€flying€through€the€air€coming€from€the€defendantððs€direction.€Ð \¬ ÐIn€fact,€one€officer€stated€that€he€had€seen€the€defendant€throw€the€bag€of€cocaine.€Ð H˜ ÐAccording€to€yet€another€officer€the€defendant€stated,€while€being€booked,€that€heÐ 4„ Ðhad€been€trying€to€knock€cocaine€off€of€the€table€when€the€officers€came€into€theÐ  p Ðhome.€€As€previously€noted,€testing€revealed€that€two€hundred€ninety„four€grams€ofÐ  \ Ðcocaine€had€been€seized€at€the€scene.€€Officer€Danny€Eddingsðð€testimony€indicatedÐ øH Ðthat€ð ðquite€a€bitðð€of€the€cocaine€spilled€on€the€carpet€had€not€been€recovered.€€TheÐ ä4 Ðperiod€of€time€involved€in€the€indictment€would€have€also€included€the€residueÐ Ð  Ðabove„referenced,€cocaine€involved€in€one€or€two€sales€Hutchinson€acknowledgedÐ ¼  Ðmaking€earlier€on€the€day€of€the€arrest,€etc.ШøÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€only€act€he€was€charged€with€engaging€in€was€possession,Ð €Ð Ðand€that€this€was€not€an€overt€act€in€furtherance€of€the€conspiracy.€€The€acts€of€maintaining€aÐ l¼ Ðstructure€for€the€storing,€repackaging,€and€safekeeping€of€cocaine€and€possessing€more€than€twenty„Ð X ¨ Ðsix€grams€of€cocaine€were€both€alleged€in€the€indictment,€and€constitute€actions€committed€inÐ D!” Ðfurtherance€of€the€alleged€conspiracy.€€Even€if€it€were€Hutchinson€alone€who€maintained€theÐ 0"€  Ðstructure,€this€is€not€fatal€to€the€Stateððs€case,€because€the€conspiracy€statute€provides€that€the€requisiteÐ #l! Ðovert€act€may€be€done€by€the€applicable€defendant€ð ðor€by€another€with€whom€the€person€conspired.ðð€Ð $X" ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„103(d)€(2003).€€The€record€contains€sufficient€proof€supporting€bothÐ ô$D # Ðalleged€overt€acts.€€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAs€to€whether€there€was€an€agreement€between€the€parties,€our€courts€have€long€held:Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà8  àTo€prove€a€conspiracy,€it€is€not€necessary€that€the€State€show€a€formal€agreementÐ )à$( Ðbetween€the€parties€to€do€the€unlawful€act,€but€a€mutual€implied€understanding€isÐ |*Ì%) Ðsufficient,€although€not€manifested€by€any€formal€words,€or€by€a€written€agreement.€Ð h+¸&* ÐThe€unlawful€confederation€may€be€established€by€circumstantial€evidence€and€theÐ ° Ðconduct€of€the€parties€in€the€execution€of€the€criminal€enterprise.МìÐ Ð  ÐÌòòRandolph€v.€Stateóó,€570€S.W.2d€869,€871€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Pikeóó,€978Ð tÄ ÐS.W.2d€904,€915„16€(Tenn.€1998).€€Viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,Ð `° Ðwe€conclude€that€the€jury€could€reasonably€infer€from€the€aforementioned€facts€the€existence€of€anÐ L œ Ðagreement€between€Hutchinson€and€the€defendant€to€sell€cocaine.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àFinally,€as€to€the€amount€of€cocaine€that€the€State€alleges€the€defendant€conspired€to€sell,€itÐ  ` Ðis€true€that€the€total€amount€of€substance€tested€by€TBI€was€294€grams.€€However,€the€recordÐ ü L  Ðcontains€evidence€regarding€one€or€two€cocaine€sales€made€by€Hutchinson€on€the€morning€of€theÐ è 8  Ðarrest,€cocaine€residue€found€in€the€trash€pulls,€and€ð ðquite€a€bitðð€of€loose€cocaine€left€on€the€floorÐ Ô$  Ðresulting€from€the€tossing€of€a€bag€of€cocaine€as€the€search€began.€€From€such€proof,€the€jury€couldÐ À  Ðreasonably€infer€that€the€defendant€and€Hutchinson€had€conspired€to€sell€three€hundred€grams€orÐ ¬ü  Ðmore€of€cocaine€during€the€months€covered€by€the€indictment€on€which€the€defendant€was€tried.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àThus€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€and€resolving€all€conflicts€in€theÐ pÀ Ðfavor€of€the€State,€we€find€sufficient€proof€to€support€each€element€of€the€conspiracy.Ð \¬ ÐÌÓ  ÓòòConsecutive€SentencingóóÐ 4„ ÐÓ¼žÓÌà  àAs€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€impose€consecutiveÐ  \ Ðsentences,€arguing€that€the€acquittal€on€the€money€laundering€charge€precluded€a€finding€that€theÐ øH Ðdefendant€had€deposited€illicit€funds€into€Ms.€Jacksonððs€bank€account.€€From€this€premise,€theÐ ä4 Ðdefendant€concludes€that€the€trial€court€should€not€have€relied€upon€the€testimony€of€Ms.€JacksonÐ Ð  Ðto€find€that€the€defendant€was€a€ð ðprofessional€criminalðð€within€the€meaning€of€Tennessee€CodeÐ ¼  ÐAnnotated€section€40„35„115(b)(1)€(2003).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àð ðWhen€reviewing€sentencing€issues€.€.€.€the€appellate€court€shall€conduct€a€de€novo€reviewÐ €Ð Ðon€the€record€of€such€issues.€€Such€review€shall€be€conducted€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ l¼ Ðdeterminations€made€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ X ¨ Ð40„35„401(d)€(2003).€€This€presumption€of€correctness€ð ðis€conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showingÐ D!” Ðin€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€andÐ 0"€  Ðcircumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€defendant€bears€the€burdenÐ #l! Ðof€demonstrating€that€the€sentence€was€improper.€€òòId.óó€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àIn€finding€that€the€defendant€was€a€professional€criminal€within€the€meaning€of€TennesseeÐ à%0!$ ÐCode€Annotated€section€40„35„115(b)(1),€the€trial€court€relied€in€part€on€the€testimony€of€Ms.Ð Ì&"% ÐJackson€regarding€the€defendantððs€money€deposited€in€her€bank€account.€€Considering€the€amountÐ ¸'#& Ðof€money€deposited€in€relation€to€the€amount€of€money€the€defendant€listed€as€business€income€onÐ ¤(ô#' Ðhis€tax€return,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€the€defendant€was€not€earning€a€living€ð ðon€flowers€andÐ )à$( Ðballoons€but€illegal€endeavors€with€Mr.€Hutchinson.ðð€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àThe€defendantððs€contention€that€the€trial€court€could€not€consider€this€evidence€based€on€hisÐ ° Ðacquittal€for€money€laundering€is€erroneous.€€The€indictment€for€money€laundering€focused€on€theÐ œì Ðpurchase€of€a€1984€Honda€Prelude€and€did€not€even€mention€the€money€deposited€in€Ms.€JacksonððsÐ ˆØ Ðbank€account.€€Moreover,€the€defendant€takes€the€courtððs€comments€out€of€context.€€The€paragraphsÐ tÄ Ðpreceding€those€quoted€by€the€defendant€clarify€the€courtððs€reasoning:Ð `° ÐÌà8  àBut€what€Iððm€saying€is,€thereððs€been€other€proof€in€the€record€that€confirms€thatÐ 8 ˆ Ðparticular€finding€that€this€type€activity€„„€although€the€police€did€not€catch€them€inÐ $ t Ðthe€act,€like€they€did€this€time€„„€there€are€indications€that€there€are€other€activitiesÐ  ` Ðongoing,€illegal€drug€activities€ongoing,€that€would€lead€the€Court€to€believe€that€Mr.Ð ü L  ÐCarter€was€involved€in€the€trafficking€in€large€quantities€of€cocaine.€.€.€.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThatððs€why€I€mentioned€the€trash€pulls.€€Hadnððt€even€gotten€to€the€money€yet,Ð À  Ðwhere€he€makes€thirty„six„hundred€dollars,€according€to€the€tax€business€records€andÐ ¬ü  Ðsomehow€ends€up€with€deposits€in€the€amount€of€one„hundred„and„eight„thousandÐ ˜è  Ðdollars;€eleven€thousand€this€month,€ninety€three€hundred€one€month,€ninety„four€oneÐ „Ô  Ðmonth,€eighty„one,€ninety„one,€eighty„seven.€€ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àFurthermore,€the€court€found€an€additional€reason€for€imposing€consecutive€sentences€ð!ð€theÐ H˜ Ðdefendant€had€committed€the€crimes€for€which€he€was€convicted€while€on€probation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð 4„ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(6)€(2003).€€The€defendant€was€sentenced€on€January€10,€1994,€to€serveÐ  p Ðsix€years€on€supervised€probation€for€a€Class€C€felony€conviction€of€conspiracy€to€sell€cocaine€andÐ  \ Ða€concurrent€eight€years€on€supervised€probation€for€a€Class€B€felony€conviction€for€the€sale€ofÐ øH Ðcocaine.€€Also,€on€January€13,€1994,€the€defendant€received€another€eight„year€sentence€to€be€servedÐ ä4 Ðon€probation€subject€to€a€list€of€conditions.€€After€being€afforded€these€opportunities€to€cease€hisÐ Ð  Ðinvolvement€with€selling€cocaine,€the€defendant€committed€the€offenses€in€this€case€during€1998,Ð ¼  Ðwell€within€his€eight„year€probationary€period.€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àBecause€the€defendant€was€found€to€be€a€professional€criminal€and€because€he€had€committedÐ €Ð Ðhis€crimes€while€on€probation€for€similar€drug€offenses,€the€trial€court€properly€imposed€sentencesÐ l¼ Ðto€be€served€consecutively.Ð X ¨ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓCONCLUSIONó óÐ 0"€  ÐÓ$³ÓÌà  àIn€summary,€we€hold€that€the€notice€of€intent€to€seek€enhanced€sentencing€was€sufficient€asÐ $X" Ðto€the€possession€charge,€but€was€not€sufficient€as€to€the€conspiracy€charge€because€conspiracy€wasÐ ô$D # Ðnot€charged€in€the€original€indictment€for€which€notice€was€given.€€We€also€hold€that€the€indictmentÐ à%0!$ Ðwas€sufficient€to€charge€the€offense€of€possession€with€intent€to€deliver.€€Finally,€we€conclude€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€defendantððs€remaining€arguments€regarding€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€and€length€of€sentenceÐ ¸'#& Ðare€without€merit.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€except€with€respect€to€sentencing€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdefendant€as€a€Range€Two€offender€for€the€conspiracy€conviction,€for€which€the€case€is€remandedÐ )à$( Ðfor€re„sentencing.€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àBecause€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€defendant,€Clarence€W.€Carter,€is€indigent,€the€entireÐ ° Ðcosts€of€the€appeal€will€be€paid€by€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ð œì ÐÔ‡X ™XXX ™ÔÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_____________________________Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUSTICEÔ#†X ™XXX ™Â·#Ô