WPC j_O)~& =8۶3?#{1,|݂&![9T˂K[_VH焫^.4qSZvAi/c@N!x*=|N3mCH+5[%_5pVşt @)\/ Ⓢq6RwnX|60 Ͼ(̔ٓ)a+_ MH5>P_Q%# >0%H!.;Y ǙLUFAV.yKh] H1 1OrӦMJNEuoܚ*؆rw\̷F0>85T/> v^x1U+95n? }hڴcVa@S"] qyh:Wtip5 쀣p"+{ +=-՜8f}*".^fNMD*# LUNW % 0(U:U: wG4t  0 0DF  c U:_e U:U:tU:U: U: U: BK AQh 0D 0D 0D D/KK Bz D3HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS0nLl(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial RegularH[[H[[EHD D D Ӏօ#% 3|x j  6S$4XXXXXX   1    TheStatearguedinitspetitiontorehearthatitwasneverprovidedtheopportunityto  briefandarguetheapplicationofaggravatingcircumstanceTenn.CodeAnn.392203(i)(8).(v(26S$ !  4XXXXXX   0  (#$  0     $4XlXXXXXl   2    Theapparentinitialmotivationfortheattackonthe78yearoldvictimwasthatthe  defendantwantedtostealherpurse.AsnotedbythedissentinOdom,thedefendantaccosted  the78yearoldvictimandforcedherintohercarduringtherobberyattempt.   $4X{ XXX$XX{ =XXdd=   2    Theapparentinitialmotivationfortheattackonthe78yearoldvictimwasthatthe  defendantwantedtostealherpurse.AsnotedbythedissentinOdom,thedefendantaccosted  the78yearoldvictimandforcedherintohercarduringtherobberyattempt. Thevictimpleaded  withthedefendanttostopandinherpleareferredtothedefendantas"son."Thedefendantthenstated"I'llgiveyouason"andrapedherinapparentretaliationbeforekillingher. ,  AZ"Arial Regular ,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular j  $4XlXXXXXl   1    TheStatearguedinitspetitiontorehearthatitwasneverprovidedtheopportunityto  briefandarguetheapplicationofaggravatingcircumstanceTenn.CodeAnn.392203(i)(8).,  AZ"Arial Regular   $4XlXXXXXl   2    Theapparentinitialmotivationfortheattackonthe78yearoldvictimwasthatthe  defendantwantedtostealherpurse.AsnotedbythedissentinOdom,thedefendantaccosted  the78yearoldvictimandforcedherintohercarduringtherobberyattempt. Thevictimpleaded  withthedefendanttostopandinherpleareferredtothedefendantas"son."Thedefendantthenstated"I'llgiveyouason"andrapedherinapparentretaliationbeforekillingher.    $4XlXXXXXl   3    ThedissentinOdomindicatesOdom'scompletedisregardforthelawandwelfareof  others.ThedissentnotedthatvictimpleadedwithOdom,duringtheattack,tostopandinherpleareferredtothedefendantas"son."Thedefendantthenstated"I'llgiveyouason"andrapedherinapparentretaliationbeforekillingher.,  AZ"Arial Regular   $4XlXXXXXl   3    ThedissentinOdomindicatesOdom'scompletedisregardforthelawandwelfareof  others.ThedissentnotedthatvictimpleadedwithOdom,duringtheattack,tostopandinherpleareferredtothedefendantas"son."Thedefendantthenstated"I'llgiveyouason"andrapedherinapparentretaliationbeforekillingher. ,  AZ"Arial Regular ""  XXXXW XX   Ad FILEDXX W  September21,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAh ,cAZ"Arial Regular d!"#$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  ((' dxdP Pd'dxd !  XXXX4TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T    7|XXdXXd7   =lXXdd= XX"*US \\ (:!&)*  9\15\1998(4:21pm)!  :.hXG:\IB013S2\OPINION\QUINTERO.048\HALLWILL.C&DhG:\IB013S2\OPINION\QUINTERO.048\HALLWILL.C&D/  #XX#XXXX   TR[A'Legal Red3'A' Legal3'Tќr )<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxP,  r@PPDINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@rr)DATNASHVILLE STATEOFTENNESSEE,@##/D)   @##/D) APPELLEE,@##/D)  HUMPHREYSCOUNTY ^ V @##/D)v.@##/D)  Hon.AllenW.Wallace *"  @##/D)WILLIAME.HALLAND@##/D)  No.01S019703CC00068   t )>.*jx` `@Ey` 8ttxP tߛDERRICKD.QUINTERO,@##/D)   @##/D) APPELLANT.@##/D)#XXXX#XXXX    /XX@ DCONCURRINGANDDISSENTINGOPINION#XX/? #  RJ  Iconcurinthemajority'sconclusionthatthedefendants'convictionsandsentencesofdeathshouldbeaffirmed.IwriteseparatelybecauseIdisagreewiththemajority'sanalysisofaggravatingcircumstanceTenn.CodeAnn.39-2-203(i)(8)#XXXX #XXXXԀinthiscaseandinStatev.Odom,928S.W.2d18(Tenn.1996).#XXXX #XXXXԀ | t IwouldreverseOdomontheissueof(i)(8)andholdthataggravating H"@ circumstance(i)(8)isapplicablewhenadefendantcommitsmurderduringhisorherescapefromlawfulconfinement.Iwouldholdthatthephrase"duringanescapefromlawfulconfinement"denotesthetimeframebeginningwiththeprisoner'sunauthorizeddeparturefromtheprisongroundsandcontinuinguntiltheprisonerisreturnedtolawfulcustody.Thisholdingwould:(1)removeanyarbitrarinessandambiguityinthecircumstance'sapplication;(2)preservetheplainmeaningofthestatute'sclearlanguage;and(3)preventthethirdprongof(i)(8)fromduplicating(i)(6)sothatnopartof(i)(8)willbeinoperative,superfluous,voidorinsignificant.#XXXX #XXXX t2l+0  Theaggravatingcircumstance#XXXX#XbXXXԀinTenn.CodeAnn.392203(i)(8)  6/4 providesthatasentenceofdeathmaybeimposeduponafindingthat theϜmurderwascommittedbythedefendantwhilethedefendantwasinlawful 928 custodyorinaplaceoflawfulconfinementorduringthedefendantsescape  fromlawfulcustodyorfromaplaceoflawfulconfinement(emphasisadded).TheleadingcaseregardingtheapplicationofthisaggravatingcircumstanceisStatev.Odom,928S.W.2d18(Tenn.1996).InOdom,thedefendantmurdered   anelderlywomanwhilestealingherpurseduringhisescapefromaMississippijailwherehewasservingalifesentenceforapreviousmurderconviction.Onappeal,neitherthedefendantnorthestatechallengedthejury'sfindingthat(i)(8)wasapplicable. InOdom,theCourt,withoutthebenefitofargumentfromeitherpartyand  withoutthedevelopmentoffactssupportingthecircumstance'sapplication,#XXXXb#XbXXX  raisedthe(i)(8)issuesuasponte       #  1      ׀andheldthatthejuryerredinapplying(i)(8).  TheCourtreasoned:8   ! ! 8 Ourrationaleissimple"during"asusedinthestatutemeans"throughoutthecontinuanceof."Theendoftheescapemarksthe 8"0 beginningofone'sstatusasan"escapee."AlthoughOdomwas, (#  assuredly,an"escapee,"bynostretchcanwesaythatthemurderoccurredduringthedefendant'sescapefromlawfulconfinementorduringthedefendant'sescapefromlawfulcustodyorfromaplaceoflawfulconfinement.Whenhecommittedthemurder,Odom'sescapewasanaccomplishedfactafaitaccompli.' # ! ! Statev.Odom,928S.W.2dat27(emphasisadded).#XXXXb7#XbXXXԀThelogicalinterpretation +$' ofOdomontheissueof(i)(8)isthattheprisoner'sescapewasanaccomplished x-p&) factoncehehadlefttheconfinesoftheprisonfacility.hisescapewasanaccomplishedfact.Intheabsenceofanydevelopmentoranalysisofthefactsontheissue,thisistheonlyreasonableinterpretationofOdom. 3,/  4-1    Themajority'slogicimpliesthat(i)(8)wasinapplicableinOdombecause  themurderforwhichOdom   wassentencedtodeathinTennesseewasunconnectedwithanddidnotfurtherhisescape#XlXXXl#XlXXXl.This   񛀜logic   isinaccurate.In   Odom,themajoritynotedthat:   8 thedefendantsaidthathisinitialintentionwastoaccostJohnsonand"snatch"herpurseafterhavingseenherintheparkinggaragebesidehercar.|  ! ! Id.at22.Thejurycouldhaveeasilymadeasoundandlogicalinferencethat  Odom,afterescapingfromprison,neededmoneyandkilledthevictimwhilestealingherpursetoobtainmoneytocontinueorfurtherhisescape.      #  2      כ  Accordingly,thejurycouldhavefoundthatOdom'sactionsfurtheredhisescapejustasthemajorityconcludesthatHallandQuintero'sactionsfurtheredtheirescape.BecausethisCourtraisedtheissue,however,wasraisedsuaspontebythisCourtanddecided h` withouteitherdevelopmentoffactsorargumentbyeitherparty,thisCourtmerelysupplantedthejury'sfindingswithafindingofitsownonthe(i)(8)aggravator.̜    Themajority'sanalysisinthiscaseappearstodistinguishOdomontwo &" Мbases:(1)time#XlXXXl#XlXXXl;and(2)thefactthatthedefendants'actsfurtheredtheirescape (!$ М(were"simplyasteptowardaccomplishingtheend").Employingtimeasthesoledistinguishingfactorcreatesanambiguousandarbitrarystandard.Isanescapeaccomplishedafteraweek,twoweeks,orperhapsaftersixmonths?Anescape,inmyview,issimplyongoinguntilanescapeeisreturnedtolawfulconfinement.Attemptingtoutilizetimeasadistinguishingfactoronanadhoc (2 +. basisprovidesabsolutelynoguidance.Accordingly,themajorityinthiscase, 4-0 Мunlikein񛀜inOdom,nowfocusesonwhetherthemurderalsofurtheredtheescape,  i.e.whetherthe"murdersweresimplyasteptowardaccomplishingthisend."      Ibelievethatthefocusin(i)(8)shouldnotbeonwhetherthemurder   furtheredtheescape   .#XlXXXl#XlXXXlԛWhetheramurderwascommittedtofurtheranescapeor  toavoidanarrestisspecificallyaddressedbyTenn.CodeAnn.3913204(i)(6).Thefocusin(i)(8),however,isonthedefendant'sstatuswhenthemurderwascommitted.Ibelievethatcircumstance(i)(8)wascodifiedtoprovideprotectiontosocietyfromescapedconvictswhoarelesslikelytobedeterredbytheprospectoffurtherconfinementfromcommittingadditionalcrimes.ThedangerOdomposedtosocietyasadesperateescapedconvictneedingmoneyistheprecisedangerthat(i)(8)wasdesignedtodeter.Obviously,thethreatofpossiblefurtherconfinementdidnotdeterOdom,alreadysentencedtolifeimprisonmentformurder,fromrobbingthevictim,brutallyrapingherandstabbinghermultipletimes.      #  3      #XlXXXl"#XlXXXl H!@  Aggravatingcircumstance(i)(8)#XlXXXl&#XlXXXlmaybebrokenintothreeprongs:(1) %  murderwhileinlawfulconfinement;(2)murderwhileinlawfulcustody;or(3)murderduringescapefromlawfulcustodyorconfinement.Asappliedtothefactsofthiscase,thefirstprongwouldapplytoanykillingthatoccurredwhilethedefendantswereontheprisonfacility'spremises.Thesecondwouldapplyifthe ,%( defendantshadcontinuedtobeinlawfulcustodywhentheymurderedthevictims.SeeBurnsv.State,584S.W.2d827,829(Tenn.Crim.App.1979) H0@), (holdinginmateinconstructivecustodyofcorrectionalcenteralthoughunguardedwhilereceivingtrainingoncollegecampus;unauthorizedleave 4-0 constitutedanescapefromlawfulcustody).Neitheroftheseprongsisapplicabletothiscase. Thethirdprongencompassesamurderthatoccurs"duringescapefromlawfulcustodyorconfinement."SeeStatev.Workman,667S.W.2d44,49  (Tenn.1984)(holding(i)(8)applicablewhenafleeingdefendantkilledofficerwhohadarrestedandescorteddefendantfromaWendy'srestaurant).Ifthislanguageisconstruedonlytoencompassamurderoccurringonthepremisesofaprison,theconstructionwillduplicatethefirstprongtherebyrenderingthethirdprongsuperfluous.ThisCourt,however,mustconstrueastatutesothatnopartofitwillbeinoperative,superfluous,voidorinsignificant.Tidwellv.Collins,522  S.W.2d674,676(Tenn.1975).Thethirdprong,therefore,shouldapplywhenadefendantcommitsmurderoffthepremisesoftheprisonfacilityandduringan  unauthorizedleavefromconfinementorcustody.SeegenerallyStatev. h` Gundlah,702A.2d52,58(Vt.1997)(interpreting"murdercommittedwhile...in H!@ custodyunderasentenceofconfinement"toapplytoescapedprisoners"who (#  haveshownbytheirpreviousconductthatadditionaldeterrencemayberequired")(citingModelPenalCode210.6(3)(a),commentaryat136). Thelegislature'schoiceofwordsinthestatutealsosupportsthisconclusion.Thelegislatureusedtheword"escape"in(i)(8)asanoun,indicatinganaccomplishedfact.Hadthelegislatureintendedthelanguage"duringthedefendant'sescapefromlawfulcustodyorfromaplaceoflawfulconfinement"tobelimitedonlytotheactualactofleavingtheprisonfacilitygrounds,thelegislatureshouldhaveusedescapeasaverb,i.e.,"whilethedefendantwasescapingfromlawfulcustody."Alternatively,thelegislaturecouldhavelimitedthefactorto"hotpursuit,"asahandfulofstateshavedone,byexplicitlylimiting 704 thecircumstance'sapplicationonlytomurderscommittedto"effect,perfectorduringanattempttoperfect"anescapefromlawfulcustodyorconfinement.See  generallyCal.PenalCode190.2(5)("Themurderwascommittedforthe   purposeofavoidingorpreventingalawfularrest,orperfectingorattemptingtoperfect,anescapefromlawfulcustody.");Nev.Rev.Stat.200.033(5)("Themurderwascommittedtoavoidorpreventalawfularrestortoeffectanescapefromcustody.");UtahCodeAnn.765202(1)(e)("homicidewascommitted...forthepurposeofeffecting...escape"). Thephrase"duringescape"impliesthatthecircumstanceappliestoamurdercommittedbyadefendantwhileonescapestatusfromasentenceofimprisonment.Adefendantwhohasunlawfullydepartedfromconfinementorcustodyandtemporarilyregainedhislibertyison"escapestatus"untilreturnedtolawfulcustody.SeegenerallyPeoplev.Davis,400N.Y.S.2d735,741(N.Y. h` 1977)("escapedfromsuchconfinementorcustodyandhadnotyetbeenreturned").Extending(i)(8)tomurdersoccurringofftheprisonpremiseswhileadefendantisonescapestatusfulfillssociety'sneedforprotectionfromescapedconvictswhoarelesslikelytobedeterredfromcommittinghomicidemerelybytheprospectofpossiblefurtherconfinement.SeegenerallyPeoplev.Davis, (!$ 794P.2d159,18182(Colo.1990)("providingadditionaldeterrencetopersonswithlittletoloseincommittingcriminalacts").Accordingly,Ibelievethatthelegislatureintendedthethirdscenarioof(i)(8)toapplywhenanescapedconvictcommitsmurderwhileonescapestatusorduringanunauthorizedleavefromcustodyorconfinement. Inthecasenowbeforeus,theevidenceestablishesthatthedefendantsmurderedthevictimsduringtheirescapefromthestatepenitentiaryinEddyville, 704 Kentucky,justasOdommurderedhisvictimduringhisescapefromlawfulconfinementwherehewasservingalifesentenceforapriormurder.Themajoritydistinguishesthepresentcaseonthebasisthatthesedefendantsstoleacartofurthertheirescape.Thiscontingency,however,iscoveredbyaggravatingcircumstance(i)(6).TennCodeAnn.3913204(i)(6)("murderwascommittedforthepurposeofavoiding,interferingwithorpreventingalawfularrest..."). Limiting(i)(8)'sapplicationtoonlythosecircumstancesinwhichtheproofestablishesthatthedefendantkilledanothertofurtherhisescapewouldrenderthethirdprongof(i)(8)duplicativeduplicitousof(i)(6).Idonotbelievethatthelegislatureintendedthethirdprongof(i)(8)toapplyonlywhen(i)(6)isapplicable.Moreover,IfindittenuoustodistinguishthiscasefromOdomespeciallywhen  thefactsinOdomwereneitherdevelopednorarguedonthe(i)(8)issuenow h` beforethisCourt. Inconclusion,IwouldoverruleOdom'sinterpretationof(i)(8).Iwould %  holdthat(i)(8)isapplicablewhenaprisonercommitsmurderduringanunauthorizeddeparturefromlawfulconfinement.#XlXXXlT'# (!$    <      D T$T$MT$ h.`'*    <      D JANICEM.HOLDER,JUSTICE