ÿWPC²= _Ì f:ÿë) dýRbqß¹+_ò7q¤(zä-I#œŒ4òwÝô£X‡N*rYŸÉo3vDi‚SKû¡+‚ÓWû!ù¿±þ2ßl®ŽGƒú tHó‹Å^Š C7‰® Öóß^/é÷.þ5þÚ;$s¼1ݸHË•¥Z¦¬|ÉäsŒy ÜÛ@ÿ¹G|’ÚÔ„Q_m°Á=_›,²Å(6u0tR¿‘|»hQ9¾½<Ú/kÿÄ" Ý lMk²Ë†E ÕŽ-åœùq²iÔ¥ªŽ‹ö®)ÛÜÂVðK%QÙë³¼<…³ eköÔÚ$A¸Óü‚Q<§’K×dË{Éw‚#(6Å|-qÃüNÌ3k† D‚iF¨(¸yÏÚ<-òÔX«óó¯òAà´Çê³ÖôIi<:_gŽ—–-…WÞ~[t&&Å6{ ksÒ\ -Wê‰AC ]ýr{׎3ƒ@@DËÖmÚ'‘CÖï¡´rÿ&Dš¹qéUg2.„ˆfæ±ÈÛP È >*ßœV{4çMñf¡D*èümÝ‹TÚ®…90ÕC¢nNE%)KšÂÖ|Šã8JçûÞ zµ»uºÔâ8€‘YÙU«ˆ0ÀÏR³dnb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ù‘ ÆŠÆPÆÆÜU@¢Nâ 0 DäUN(Evßx:Wƒ‘‘ø**æ" ð44¯ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5ø5b§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8§8 0 ë¯8¯8¯8¯8 Bš9š9 0¤·9 D3[: D-Ž: 0K»:»: AS;ÆY; 0¤< 0DÃ< A«=˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»xB)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular ;)¢Ø+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ïÝ ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€13(b)€provides:Ð ° Ðà8  àReview€generally€will€extend€only€to€those€issues€presented€for€review.€€The€appellate€court€shall€alsoÐ tÄ Ðconsider€whether€the€trial€court€and€appellate€court€have€jurisdiction€over€the€subject€matter,€whetherÐ 8ˆ Ðor€not€presented€for€review,€and€may€in€its€discretion€consider€other€issues€in€order,€among€otherÐ üL Ðreasons:€(1)€to€prevent€needless€litigation,€(2)€to€prevent€injury€to€the€interests€of€the€public,€and€(3)Ð À Ðto€prevent€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.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 (#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ÕÝ ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€òòWalker€v.€Stateóó,€273€S.W.2d€707,€711€(Tenn.€1954)€(citations€omitted).€ 0Ý ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ‡ôþíòòôþíÔState€v.€Ô_ÔCornellisonÔ_Ôóó,€166€Tenn.€106,€110,€59€S.W.2d€514,€515€(Tenn.€1933).Ô#†ôþíòòôþí#Ô yÝ ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôþíòòôþíÔWhile€the€sufficiency€of€the€indictment€in€òòHillóó€was€challenged€on€the€basis€of€€failure€to€explicitly€allege€òòmensÐ ° ÐÔ_ÔreaÔ_Ôóó,€the€decision€in€òòHillóó€was€not€limited€to€that€particular€challenge€as€the€defendant€argues€but€instead€discussed€inÐ tÄ Ðgeneral€the€requirements€of€a€legally€sufficient€indictment.€€òòSeeóó€òòHart€v.€Stateóó,€21€S.W.3d€901,€903€(Tenn.€June€22,€2000)Ð 8ˆ Ð(Birch,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court)€(stating€that€€ð ð[Ô_Ôi]nÔ_Ô€1997€this€Court€established€the€criteria€to€determine€whether€anÐ üL Ðindictment€performs€its€essential€constitutional€and€statutory€purposesðð).€ Ñ ` Ñ îÝ ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôþíòòôþíÔAs€support€for€his€assertion€that€the€indictment€is€void,€the€defendant€primarily€relies€upon€the€decision€of€the€Ð ° ÐCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals€in€òòState€v.€Clarkóó,€2€S.W.3d€233€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1998)€(no€òòperm.óó€òòapp.óó€filed).€€TheÐ tÄ Ðdefendantððs€reliance€upon€òòClarkóó€is€misplaced.€€The€indictment€at€issue€in€òòClarkóó€is€easily€distinguishable€from€theÐ 8ˆ Ðindictment€at€issue€in€this€case.€€Count€one€of€the€indictment€in€òòClarkóó€charged€only€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfullyÐ üL Ðand€knowingly€attempt€to€commit€the€criminal€offense€of€Aggravated€Robbery,€in€violation€of€Ô_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€ðð€39„12„102€andÐ À ÐÔ_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€39„13„402€.€.€.€.ðð€€Aggravated€robbery€is€ð ðrobbery€as€defined€in€ðð€39„13„401:€(1)€Accomplished€with€a€deadlyÐ „Ô Ðweapon€or€by€display€of€any€article€used€or€fashioned€to€lead€the€victim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€a€deadly€weapon;Ð H ˜ Ðor€(2)€Where€the€victim€suffers€serious€bodily€injury.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„402(a).€€Under€this€statute,Ð  \ Ðaggravated€robbery€has€two€elements:€(1)€robbery€as€defined€in€ðð€39„13„401€and€(2)(a)€use€or€display€of€a€deadly€weaponÐ Ð  Ðor€use€or€(b)€display€of€any€article€used€€or€fashioned€to€lead€the€victim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€a€deadly€weaponÐ ” ä  Ðor€(c)€serious€bodily€injury.€€The€indictment€in€òòClarkóó€did€not€allege€the€second€element€of€the€offense,€deadly€weaponÐ X ¨  Ðor€serious€bodily€injury.€€Unlike€òòClarkóó,€the€indictment€in€this€case€alleged€all€of€the€elements€of€the€offense€of€aggravatedÐ  l  Ðassault.Ô#†ôþíòòôþí~#Ô ÜÝ ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôþíòòôþíÔMany€other€decisions€also€support€this€proposition.€€For€example,€the€indictment€in€òòHillóó,€supporting€theÐ ° Ðconviction€for€aggravated€rape€charged€only€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€sexually€penetrate€[the€victim]€a€personÐ tÄ Ðless€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€39„13„502€.€.€.€.ðð€€Aggravated€rape€isÐ 8ˆ Ðdefined€in€pertinent€part€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„502€as€the€ð ðunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€the€victim€by€theÐ üL Ðdefendant€or€the€defendant€by€a€victim€accompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances.ðð€€The€phrase€ð ðsexualÐ À Ðpenetrationðð€is€defined€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„501(7)€to€mean€ð ðsexual€intercourse,€cunnilingus,€fellatio,€analÐ „Ô Ðintercourse,€or€any€other€intrusion,€however,€slight,€of€any€part€of€a€personððs€body€or€of€any€object€into€the€genital€or€analÐ H ˜ Ðopenings€of€the€victimððs,€the€defendantððs,€or€any€other€personððs€body,€but€emission€of€semen€is€not€required.ðð€€Like€theÐ  \ Ðsecond€element€of€aggravated€assault,€the€first€element€of€aggravated€rape,€unlawful€sexual€penetration,€is€defined€byÐ Ð  Ðstatute€in€a€number€of€different€ways€and€each€definition€involves€distinctive€conduct.€€Yet€this€Court€in€òòHillóó€upheld€theÐ ” ä  Ðsufficiency€of€the€indictment€even€though€the€indictment€did€not€allege€the€specific€type€of€sexual€penetration€the€StateÐ X ¨  Ðintended€to€rely€upon€to€establish€the€offense.€€Other€similar€aggravated€rape€indictments€have€been€upheld€withoutÐ  l  Ðrequiring€further€specificity.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòBarneyóó,€986€S.W.2d€at€547€(alleging€in€seven€counts€of€the€indictment€that€theÐ à 0  Ðdefendant€ð ðdid€engage€in€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€[Ô_ÔK.B.Ô_Ô],€a€child€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age,€in€violationÐ ¤ô  Ðof€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„13„522€.€.€.ðð€);€òòÔ#†ôþíòòôþí~#ÔÔ€ôþíòòôþíÔÔ_ÔCrittendenÔ_Ôóó,€978€S.W.2d€at€931€(charging€only€that€the€defendant€ð ðdidÐ h¸  Ðengage€in€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€[Ô_ÔR.C.Ô_Ô],€a€child€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age,€in€violation€of€TennesseeÐ ,|  ÐCode€Annotated€ðð€39„2„603€.€.€.ðð€but€not€specifying€the€nature€of€the€sexual€penetration);€òòDykesóó,€978€S.W.2d€at€529„30Ð ð@  Ð(charging€only€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€and€feloniously€sexually€penetrate€another€to„wit:€€[Ô_ÔB.H.Ô_Ô]€while€theÐ ´  Ðsaid€[Ô_ÔB.H.Ô_Ô]€was€then€and€there€a€child€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ xÈ  ÐSection€39„2„603.€.€.ðð€but€not€specifying€the€nature€of€the€sexual€penetration).€€Likewise,€indictments€charging€aggravatedÐ <Œ Ðsexual€battery€have€been€upheld€even€though€the€indictments€did€not€specifically€allege€the€type€of€conduct€which€theÐ P ÐState€relied€upon€to€establish€ð ðsexual€contact,ðð€a€€phrase€defined€by€statute€to€include€ð ðthe€intentional€touching€of€theÐ Ä Ðvictimððs,€the€defendantððs€or€any€other€personððs€intimate€parts,€or€the€intentional€touching€of€the€clothing€covering€theÐ ˆØ Ðimmediate€area€of€the€victimððs,€the€defendantððs,€or€any€other€personððs€intimate€parts,€if€that€intentional€touching€can€beÐ Lœ Ðreasonably€construed€as€being€for€the€purpose€of€sexual€arousal€or€gratification.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€39„13„501(6).€Ð ` ÐòòSee,€e.g.óó,€Ô‡ôþíòòôþíÔòòRuffóó,€978€S.W.2d€at€99€(alleging€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€engage€in€sexual€contact€with€[Ô_ÔA.K.Ô_Ô],€aÐ Ô$ Ðperson€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated,€Section€39„13„504€.€.€.€ðð€but€notÐ ˜è Ðspecifying€the€precise€nature€of€the€sexual€contact);€òòBarneyóó,€986€S.W.2d€at€547€(alleging€in€seven€counts€of€theÐ \¬ Ðindictment€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€engage€in€unlawful€sexual€contact€with€[Ô_ÔK.B.Ô_Ô],€a€child€less€than€thirteen€(13)€yearsÐ  p Ðof€age,€in€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„13„504€.€.€.ðð€but€not€specifying€the€precise€type€of€sexual€contact);Ð ä4 ÐòòState€v.€Ô_ÔStinnettÔ_Ôóó,€958€S.W.2d€329€(Tenn.€1997)€(alleging€that€the€defendant€did€engage€in€ð ðunlawful€sexual€contactððbutÐ ¨ø Ðnot€specifying€the€type€of€sexual€contact).Ô#†ôþíòòôþí¯#Ô æÝ ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôþíòòôþíÔòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔDuckerÔ_Ôóó,€___€S.W.3d€___€(Tenn.€2000)€(describing€the€elements€of€the€offense€of€reckless€killingÐ ° Ðof€a€child€as€(1)€reckless€killing;€(2)€of€a€child€victim€less€than€sixteen€years€of€age;€(3)€by€aggravated€child€abuse).Ô#†ôþíòòôþí~#Ô ¥Ý ƒR~a$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔGriffisÔ_Ôóó,€964€S.W.2d€577,€591€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1997)€(òòperm.óó€òòappóó.€denied€December€22,€1997);Ð ° ÐòòÔ_ÔVanArsdallÔ_Ô€v.€Stateóó,€919€S.W.2d€626,€630€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔJoynerÔ_Ôóó,€759€S.W.2d€422,€424€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.Ð tÄ ÐApp.€1987)€(òòperm.óó€òòapp.óó€denied€February€1,€1988).€€- ù-(|G2~a$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€QÕ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôþíò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€QÕ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€QÕ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€QÕ»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼QÕ»»»ÔÑ8€9XXdì»»d8ÑÔ€¼QÕ»»¼QÕÔÑ€Ÿ—ÑÓ=€QջлdÐd=Óà@™ ™ ìàÔ‡îܩQÕÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼QÕ»îîÜ©y#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Ó€May€3,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X9X»¼QÕÔÌò òÔ#†¼QÕ»XX9[#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€DONALD€RAY€Ô_ÔHAMMONDSÔ_ÔÔ‡X9X»¼QÕÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€by€Permission€from€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ú J ÐCriminal€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyÐ æ 6 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€S38,779€€€€€€Phyllis€H.€Miller,€JudgeÐ Ò " ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<•` AßÐ –æ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1997„00101„SC„R11„CD€„€Filed€October€2,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<h` AßÐ i¹  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ#†¼QÕ»XX9ê#ÔÔ€X9X»¼QÕÔThe€defendant/appellee€was€convicted€of€aggravated€assault€upon€an€indictment€which€charged€thatÐ d´ Ðon€February€23,€1996,€in€Sullivan€County,€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully,€feloniously,€intentionally,Ð P  Ðand€knowingly€commit€an€assault€[upon€the€victim]€by€using€and€displaying€a€deadly€weapon,€inÐ <Œ Ðviolation€of€[Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„102].ðð€€The€defendant€appealed€his€conviction,€and€the€CourtÐ (x Ðof€Criminal€Appeals€reversed€after€Ô_ÔsuaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔsponteÔ_Ô€examining€the€indictment€and€finding€it€insufficientÐ d Ðfor€failure€to€allege€that€the€defendant€caused€bodily€injury€or€imminent€fear€of€bodily€injury€to€theÐ P Ðvictim.€€We€granted€the€Stateððs€application€for€permission€to€appeal€to€determine€whether€anÐ ì< Ðaggravated€€assault€indictment€is€legally€insufficient€if€it€does€not€specifically€allege€the€theory€byÐ Ø( Ðwhich€the€State€intended€to€establish€the€second€element€of€the€offense€ð!ð€commission€of€an€assault.€Ð Ä ÐWe€hold€that€such€an€indictment€is€sufficient€so€long€as€the€indictment€both€protects€the€accusedððsÐ ° Ðconstitutional€rights€to€notice€and€satisfies€the€requirements€imposed€by€statute.€€For€the€reasons€thatÐ œì Ðfollow,€we€conclude€that€the€indictment€in€this€case€satisfies€these€constitutional€and€the€statutoryÐ ˆØ Ðrequirements.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€is€reversed,€and€theÐ tÄ Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reinstated.Ð `° ÐÌÓHÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€Appeal€by€Permission;€Judgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ $"t! ÐReversed;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Reinstated€ó óÐ #`" ÐÌÓ  ÓòòFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€Jóó.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòE.€Riley€Anderson,€C.J.,Ð è$8 $ ÐÔ_ÔAdolphoÔ_Ô€A.€Birch,€Jr.,€Janice€M.€Holder€óóand€òòWilliam€M.€Barkeróó,€JJ.€joinedÐ Ô%$!% ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Michael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General;€and€GordonÐ ¬'ü"' ÐW.€Smith,€Associate€Solicitor€General,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€State€of€Tennessee.€Ð ˜(è#( ÐÌRaymond€C.€Ô_ÔConkinÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€Kingsport,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Donald€Ray€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô.Ð p*À%* ÐÓÿ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÐ H,˜', ÐÐ 4-„(-ý ÐòòóóÓ  Óà@ÛÛ%ìàò òòòBackgroundóóó óˆÐ ° Ðà  àOn€May€15,€1996,€the€Sullivan€County€Grand€Jury€returned€an€indictment€charging€theÐ œì Ðdefendant/appellee,€Donald€Ray€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô,€with€aggravated€assault.€€The€indictment€alleged€asÐ ˆØ Ðfollows:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àThe€Grand€Jurors€for€Sullivan€County€Tennessee,€being€duly€empaneled€and€sworn,Ð L œ Ðupon€their€oath€present€and€say€that€òòò òDONALD€RAY€Ô_ÔHAMMONDSÔ_Ôó óóó€on€or€aboutÐ 8 ˆ ÐÔ_ÔFeburaryÔ_Ô€23,€1996€in€the€State€and€County€aforesaid€and€before€the€finding€of€thisÐ ( x ÐIndictment€did€unlawfully,€feloniously,€intentionally,€and€knowingly€commit€anÐ  d Ðassault€on€Michelle€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€by€using€and€displaying€a€deadly€weapon,€inÐ  P  Ðviolation€of€Section€38„13„102€of€the€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€and€Against€theÐ ì <  Ðpeace€and€dignity€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.ÐØ( Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àFollowing€a€plea€of€not€guilty,€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€was€tried€by€a€Sullivan€County€Criminal€CourtÐ °  Ðjury€on€October€28,€1996.€€For€purposes€of€the€appeal€in€this€Court,€the€State€and€the€defendant€agreeÐ œì  Ðthat€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€correctly€summarized€the€proof€introduced€at€trial€as€follows:Ð ˆØ  ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€defendant€and€the€victim,€Michelle€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô,€were€married€but€separated€atÐ `° Ðthe€time€of€the€offense.€€The€victim€was€living€in€Sullivan€County,€and€the€defendantÐ Lœ Ðwas€living€in€Johnson€County€with€the€victimððs€then€fifteen„year„old„niece,€AprilÐ 8ˆ ÐÔ_ÔDishnerÔ_Ô.€€At€11:30€p.m.€on€February€22,€1996,€the€victim€was€waiting€to€meetÐ $t Ðsomeone€at€the€bottom€of€the€hill€near€her€house€when€a€car€drove€up€in€which€theÐ ` Ðdefendant€was€a€passenger.€€The€defendant€forced€the€victim€into€the€car€and€slappedÐ üL Ðher€a€few€times,€cutting€the€inside€of€her€mouth.€€They€drove€to€Johnson€City€andÐ è8 Ðpicked€up€the€victimððs€niece.ÐÔ$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àWhen€the€defendant€returned€to€the€car,€he€had€a€gun.€€As€they€were€goingÐ ¬ü Ðback€to€the€victimððs€house€in€Sullivan€County,€the€defendant€removed€the€gun€fromÐ ˜è Ðhis€pocket,€shot€it€outside€the€window€about€three€times,€put€the€gun€to€the€top€of€theÐ „Ô Ðvictimððs€head,€and€threatened€to€kill€her.€€The€defendant€hit€the€victim€in€the€face€andÐ pÀ Ðchoked€the€victim€by€placing€his€hands€around€her€throat.€€The€victim€eventually€lostÐ \ ¬ Ðconsciousness.€€When€she€regained€consciousness,€the€defendant€stated€that€they€Ð H!˜ Ðwere€almost€to€the€victimððs€house.€€The€victimððs€niece€hit€her€a€few€times,€causingÐ 4"„  Ðher€to€lose€consciousness€again.€€The€victim€was€left€at€the€bottom€of€the€hill€at€herÐ  #p! Ðhouse.€€The€victim€suffered€multiple€bruises€and€abrasions€which€caused€swellingÐ  $\" Ðand€bleeding€and€her€nose€was€broken€in€seven€places.€Ðø$H #Ð Ð  ÐÌBased€upon€this€proof,€the€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€aggravated€assault,€and€the€trial€courtÐ Ð& "% Ðimposed€a€sentence€of€nine€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction€and€a€$5000€fine.Ð ¼' #& ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€appealed€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals.€€While€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€did€not€raiseÐ ”)ä$( Ðâ âthe€sufficiency€of€the€indictment€as€an€issue€on€appeal,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€examined€theÐ €*Ð%) Ðissue€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€Rule€App.€P.€13(b)׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€found€the€indictment€insufficient€becauseÐ ° Ðâ âit€failed€to€allege€whether€the€State€intended€to€establish€commission€of€an€assault€by€showing€thatÐ œì Ðthe€defendant€caused€bodily€injury€to€the€victim€or€by€showing€that€the€defendant€caused€the€victimÐ ˆØ Ðto€reasonably€fear€imminent€bodily€injury.€€Accordingly,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€reversed€theÐ tÄ Ðdefendantððs€conviction€and€dismissed€the€indictment.€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€found€theÐ `° Ðdefendantððs€other€claims€of€error€to€be€without€merit.€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThereafter,€the€State€filed€an€application€for€permission€to€appeal€asserting€that€the€Court€ofÐ $ t ÐCriminal€Appeals€erred€in€holding€the€indictment€insufficient.€€We€granted€the€State€permission€toÐ  ` Ðappeal€and,€for€the€following€reasons,€now€reverse€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ü L  Ðand€reinstate€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà@))%ìàòòò òDiscussionóóó óˆÐ À  Ðà  àUnder€both€the€United€States€and€the€Tennessee€Constitutions,€a€charging€instrument,€suchÐ ¬ü  Ðas€an€indictment,€must€inform€the€accused€of€ð ðthe€nature€and€cause€of€the€accusation.ðð€òòSeeóó€U.S.Ð ˜è  ÐConst.€amend.€VI;€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€9.€€In€addition€to€these€constitutional€guarantees,€the€formÐ „Ô  Ðof€an€indictment€in€Tennessee€is€prescribed€by€statute.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„13„202Ð pÀ Ðdirects€that€an€indictmentÐ \¬ ÐÌà8  àstate€the€facts€constituting€€the€offense€in€ordinary€and€concise€language,€withoutÐ 4„ Ðprolixity€or€repetition,€in€such€a€manner€as€to€enable€a€person€of€commonÐ  p Ðunderstanding€to€know€what€is€intended,€and€with€that€degree€of€certainty€which€willÐ  \ Ðenable€the€court,€on€conviction,€to€pronounce€the€proper€judgment€.€.€.€.€ÐøHÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àAs€previously€stated,€the€indictment€in€this€case€charged€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð Ð  Ðà8  àThe€Grand€Jurors€for€Sullivan€County,€Tennessee,€being€duly€empaneled€and€sworn,Ð ¼  Ðupon€their€oath€present€and€say€that€òòò òDONALD€RAY€Ô_ÔHAMMONDSÔ_Ôóóó ó€on€or€aboutÐ ¨ø ÐFebruary€23,€1996€in€the€State€and€County€aforesaid€and€before€the€finding€of€thisÐ ˜è ÐIndictment€did€unlawfully,€feloniously,€intentionally,€and€knowingly€commit€anÐ „Ô Ðassault€on€Michelle€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€by€using€and€displaying€a€deadly€weapon,€inÐ pÀ Ðviolation€of€Section€39„13„102€of€the€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€.€.€.€.Ð\ ¬Ð Ð  ÐÌAggravated€assault€is€defined€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€39„13„102€(a)€as€follows:Ð 4"„  ÐÌà8  à(a)€A€person€commits€aggravated€assault€who:Ð $\"Ð Ð  Ðà0  à(1)€Intentionally€or€knowingly€commits€an€assault€as€defined€in€ðð€39„13„101€and:Ðø$H #(#(# Ðà0  àà0` (#(#à(A)€Causes€serious€bodily€injury€to€another;€orÐä%4!$` (#` (# Ðà0  àà0` (#(#à(B)€Uses€or€displays€a€deadly€weapon;а` (#` (# ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„102(a).€€Aggravated€assault,€therefore,€consists€of€three€elements:€(1)€òòmensÐ ˆØ ÐÔ_ÔreaóóÔ_Ô;€(2)€commission€of€an€assault€as€defined€in€39„13„101;€and€(3)€(a)€serious€bodily€injury€or€(b)Ð tÄ Ðuse€or€display€of€a€deadly€weapon.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€The€second€element€of€this€offense,€commission€of€an€assaultÐ `° Ðas€defined€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„101,€may€be€established€by€proof€that€a€person:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  à(1)€Intentionally,€knowingly,€or€recklessly€causes€bodily€injury€to€another;Ð$ tÐ Ð  Ðà8  à(2)€Intentionally€or€knowingly€causes€another€to€reasonably€fear€imminent€bodilyÐ  ` Ðinjury;€or€Ðü L Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(3)€Intentionally€or€knowingly€causes€physical€contact€with€another€and€a€reasonableÐ è 8  Ðperson€would€regard€the€contact€as€extremely€offensive€or€provocative.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„101.€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€found€the€indictment€in€this€caseÐ ¬ü  Ðinsufficient€because€it€does€not€specifically€allege€which€of€these€three€means€or€theories€the€StateÐ ˜è  Ðwas€relying€upon€to€prove€the€second€element€of€the€offense.€€The€State€argues€that€the€Court€ofÐ „Ô  ÐCriminal€Appeals€erred€in€finding€the€indictment€insufficient€on€these€grounds.€€We€agree.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAt€common€law,€pleading€requirements€for€indictments€were€strict€because€the€elements€ofÐ H˜ Ðcriminal€offenses€were€not€easily€ascertainable€by€reference€to€a€statute.€€€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.2dÐ 4„ Ð724,€728€(Tenn.€1997).€€€More€than€175€years€ago,€however,€the€highest€court€of€this€StateÐ  p Ðrecognized€thatÐ  \ ÐÌà8  àthe€strictness€required€in€indictments€had€grown€to€be€a€blemish€and€inconvenienceÐ ä4 Ðin€the€law€and€the€administration€thereof.€€That€more€offenders€escaped€by€the€over„Ð Ð  Ðeasy€ear€given€to€exceptions€to€indictments,€than€by€the€manifestation€of€theirÐ ¼  Ðinnocence;€and€that€the€grossest€crimes€had€gone€unpunished€by€reason€of€theseÐ ¨ø Ðunseemly€niceties.€.€.€.€€[Ô_ÔW]hileÔ_Ô€tenderness€ought€always€to€prevail€in€criminal€cases,Ð ”ä Ðyet,€that€it€does€not€require€such€a€construction€of€words€as€would€tend€to€render€theÐ €Ð Ðlaw€nugatory€and€ineffectual,€nor€does€it€require€of€us€to€give€into€such€nice€andÐ l¼ Ðstrained€critical€objections€as€are€contrary€to€its€true€meaning€and€spirit.€.€.€.€€[Ô_ÔI]nÔ_ÔÐ X ¨ Ðcriminal€cases,€where€the€public€security€is€so€deeply€interested€in€the€promptÐ D!” Ðexecution€of€justice,€it€seems€the€minor€consideration€should€give€way€to€the€greater,Ð 0"€  Ðand€technical€objections€be€overlooked,€rather€than€the€ends€of€society€be€defeated.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌòòState€v.€Pearceóó,€7€Tenn.€(Peck)€66,€67€(1823).€€This€ð ðgrowing€inclination€.€.€.€to€escape€from€theÐ ô$D # Ðembarrassment€of€technicalities€that€are€empty€and€without€reason,€and€[that]€tend€to€defeat€law€andÐ à%0!$ Ðright,ððÔ_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€three€years€ago€resulted€in€a€comprehensive€unanimous€decision€of€this€Court€authored€byÐ Ì&"% ÐJustice€Birch,€òòState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.2d€725€(Tenn.€1997).€€In€òòHillóó,€this€Court€reconsideredÐ ° Ðindictment€pleading€requirements€in€light€of€modern€procedural€rules€and€the€passage€of€the€CriminalÐ œì ÐSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€in€òòHillóó€had€held€the€indictment€void€because€it€failed€toÐ `° Ðexplicitly€allege€òòmens€Ô_ÔreaÔ_Ôóó,€one€of€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape.€€òòId.óó€atÐ L œ Ð726.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€In€reversing€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€this€Court€explained€that€an€indictment€isÐ 8 ˆ Ðsufficient€to€satisfy€the€constitutional€guarantees€of€notice€to€the€accused€if€the€indictment€containsÐ $ t Ðallegations€that€(1)€enable€the€accused€to€know€the€accusation€to€which€answer€is€required;€(2)Ð  ` Ðfurnish€the€trial€court€an€adequate€basis€for€entry€of€a€proper€judgment;€and€(3)€protect€the€accusedÐ ü L  Ðfrom€a€subsequent€prosecution€for€the€same€offense.€€òòId.óó€at€727€(citations€omitted).€€This€Court€alsoÐ è 8  Ðrecognized€in€òòHillóó€that€the€statute€prescribing€the€form€of€an€indictment€is€procedural€in€nature€andÐ Ô$  ÐÌà8  àwas€originally€enacted€in€1858,€one€hundred€and€thirty„one€years€prior€to€enactmentÐ ¬ü  Ðof€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€which€expressly€abolished€common€lawÐ ˜è  Ðoffenses€and€statutorily€specified€the€conduct€necessary€to€support€a€criminalÐ „Ô  Ðprosecution€in€Tennessee.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐòòÌId.óó€at€728.€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àWe€emphasized€in€òòHillóó€that€ð ðan€indictment€need€not€conform€to€traditionally€strict€pleadingÐ  p Ðrequirements.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€727.€€Since€common€law€offenses€no€longer€exist,€ð ðwe€now€approach€ððattacksÐ  \ Ðupon€indictments,€especially€of€this€kind,€from€the€broad€and€enlightened€standpoint€of€commonÐ øH Ðsense€and€right€reason€rather€than€from€the€narrow€standpoint€of€petty€preciosity,€pettifogging,Ð ä4 Ðtechnicality€or€hair€splitting€fault€finding.ðððð€€òòHillóó,€954€S.W.2d€at€728€(quoting€òòUnited€States€v.Ð Ð  ÐÔ_ÔPurvisÔ_Ôóó,€580€F.2d€853,€857€(5th€Cir.€1978)).€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àIn€many€decisions€since€òòHillóó€discussing€the€sufficiency€of€indictments,€we€have€repeatedlyÐ ”ä Ðemphasized€the€relaxation€of€strict€common€law€pleading€requirements.€€For€example,€in€òòÔ_ÔCrittendenÔ_ÔÐ €Ð Ðv.€Stateóó,€978€S.W.2d€929,€931€(Tenn.€1998)€(Birch,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court)€(internal€citationsÐ l¼ Ðomitted),€this€Court€declared:Ð X ¨ ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔW]eÔ_Ô€emphasize€the€fact€that€the€Court€has€moved€away€from€the€strict€pleadingÐ 0"€  Ðrequirements€adhered€to€under€the€common€law.€€As€we€noted€in€òòHillóó,€ð ðthe€purposeÐ #l! Ðof€the€traditionally€strict€pleading€requirement€was€the€existence€of€common€lawÐ $X" Ðoffenses€whose€elements€were€not€easily€ascertained€by€reference€to€a€statute.€€SuchÐ ô$D # Ðcommon€law€offenses€no€longer€exist.ðð€€Were€we€to€hold€otherwise,€we€would€beÐ à%0!$ Ðembracing€technicalities€that€are€empty€and€without€reason.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ЇLikewise,€in€òòRuff€v.€Stateóó,€978€S.W.2d€95,€100€€(Tenn.€1998)€(Birch,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court),€thisÐ ° ÐCourt€declared,€ð ð[Ô_Ôb]yÔ_Ô€this€ruling,€we€wish€to€make€clear€that€the€Court€has€relaxed€the€strict€pleadingÐ œì Ðrequirements€of€common€law.ðð€€Again,€just€last€year,€in€òòState€v.€Barneyóó,€986€S.W.2d€545,€546€(Tenn.Ð ˆØ Ð1999)€(Birch,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court),€this€Court€noted,€ð ð[Ô_Ôi]nÔ_Ô€conclusion,€we€wish€to€emphasizeÐ tÄ Ðonce€again€the€fact€that€the€Court€has€moved€away€from€the€strict€pleading€requirements€of€commonÐ `° Ðlaw.ðð€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àRelaxation€of€the€strict€pleading€requirements€of€the€common€law€is€also€apparent€fromÐ $ t Ðrecent€decisions€of€this€Court€holding€that€an€indictment€which€references€the€statute€defining€theÐ  ` Ðoffense€is€sufficient€and€satisfies€the€constitutional€and€statutory€requirements€of€òòHillóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð ü L  ÐSledgeóó,€15€S.W.3d€93,€94€(Tenn.€2000)€(Holder,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court)€(holding€an€indictmentÐ è 8  Ðalleging€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€kill€[the€victim]€during€the€perpetration€of€AggravatedÐ Ô$  ÐRobbery,€in€violation€of€Ô_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€39„13„202"€sufficient€because€it€contained€a€specific€reference€toÐ À  Ðthe€statute€which€was€ð ðsufficient€to€place€the€accused€on€notice€of€the€charged€offense.ðð);Ô‡X9XXX9Ô€òòState€v.Ð ¬ü  ÐCarteróó,€988€S.W.2d€145,€148€(Tenn.€1999)€(Holder,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court)€(holding€that€referenceÐ ˜è  Ðto€the€appropriate€statute€was€sufficient€in€felony€murder€indictments€alleging€that€the€defendant€didÐ „Ô  Ðð ðunlawfully€kill€[the€victims]€during€the€perpetration€of€Aggravated€Robbery,€in€violation€of€Ô_ÔT.C.A.Ô_ÔÐ pÀ Ð39„13„202ðð);€òòRuffóó,€978€S.W.2d€at€100€(Tenn.€1998)€(Birch,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court)€(holding€thatÐ \¬ Ðð ðan€indictment€which€cites€the€pertinent€statute€and€uses€its€language€will€be€sufficient€to€supportÐ H˜ Ða€Ô_ÔconvicitionÔ_Ô.ðð).Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAnother€even€more€recent€decision€further€highlights€our€relaxation€of€common€law€pleadingÐ  \ Ðrequirements.€€In€òòHart€v.€Stateóó,€21€S.W.3d€901,€903€(Tenn.€2000)€(Birch,€J.,€writing€for€the€Court),Ð øH Ðthis€Court€considered€an€indictment€which€charged€that€the€defendant€ð ðdid€unlawfully€andÐ ä4 Ðfeloniously€have€carnal€knowledge€of€[the€victim],€his€wifeððs€daughter,€contrary€to€the€Statute€.€.€.Ð Ð  Ð.ðð€€Although€the€indictment€was€couched€in€the€language€of€a€recently€repealed€statute,€rather€thanÐ ¼  Ðthe€applicable€newly€enacted€incest€statute,€this€Court€found€the€indictment€valid€because€the€termÐ ¨ø Ðð ðcarnal€knowledgeðð€had€been€defined€by€case€law€to€mean€ð ðpenetration€of€the€sexual€organ€of€theÐ ”ä Ðfemale€by€the€sexual€organ€of€the€maleðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€therefore€afforded€the€defendant€sufficient€notice€ofÐ €Ð Ðthe€offense€he€was€alleged€to€have€committed.€€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àThe€foregoing€authority€illustrates€this€Courtððs€relaxation€of€common€law€pleadingÐ D!” Ðrequirements€and€its€reluctance€to€elevate€form€over€substance€when€evaluating€the€sufficiency€ofÐ 0"€  Ðindictments.€€Indeed,€òòHillóó€and€its€progeny€leave€little€doubt€that€indictments€which€achieve€theÐ #l! Ðoverriding€purpose€of€notice€to€the€accused€will€be€considered€sufficient€to€satisfy€both€constitutionalÐ $X" Ðand€statutory€requirements.€€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àRecent€decisions€of€this€Court€also€indicate€that€an€indictment€need€not€allege€the€specificÐ Ì&"% Ðtheory€or€means€by€which€the€State€intends€to€prove€each€element€of€an€offense€to€achieve€theÐ ¸'#& Ðoverriding€purpose€of€notice€to€the€accused.€€For€example,€in€òòWyatt€v.€Stateóó,€__€S.W.3d€__€(Tenn.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐJuly€27,€2000),€the€indictment€charged€Ð )à$( Ðà8  àthat€ò òòòWILLIAM€TERRY€WYATTóóó ó€on€the€7òòthóó€day€of€March,€1994,€in€CumberlandÐ ° ÐCounty,€Tennessee,€and€before€the€finding€of€this€indictment,€did€unlawfully,Ð  ð Ðintentionally,€deliberately€and€with€premeditation€attempt€to€kill€Billie€Carey€inÐ ŒÜ Ðviolation€of€Ô_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€39„12„101€.€.€.€.ÐxÈÐ Ð  ÐÔ#†X9XXX9‰P#ÔÌIn€evaluating€the€sufficiency€of€€this€indictment,€we€recognized€that€criminal€attempt€is€ð ðdivided€intoÐ P   Ðthree€different€subsections€which€describe€three€different€types€of€proscribed€acts.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€__.€€Next,Ð < Œ Ðwe€acknowledged€that€indictments€in€Tennessee€must€ð ðstate€the€facts€constituting€the€offense€inÐ ( x Ðordinary€and€concise€language,€òòwithout€prolixity€or€repetitionóó€.€.€.€,ðð€òòseeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„13„Ð  d Ð202€(emphasis€added),€and€we€noted€that€ð ðprolixityðð€means€ð ððð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€unnecessary€and€superfluousÐ  P  Ðstatement€of€facts€in€pleading€or€in€evidence.ðððð€€òòWyattóó,€__€S.W.3d€at€__€(quoting€Blackððs€LawÐ ì <  ÐDictionary€1378€(4òòthóó€ed.€1951).€€Applying€these€rules,€we€found€the€indictment€sufficient€to€satisfyÐ Ø(  Ðconstitutional€and€statutory€requirements€even€though€it€did€not€specifically€allege€which€of€the€threeÐ Ä  Ðstatutory€subsections€or€theories€the€State€intended€to€rely€upon€to€establish€the€theory€of€criminalÐ °  Ðattempt.€€In€so€holding€we€stated€as€follows:Ð œì  ÐÌà8  àWyatt€was€placed€on€notice€that€he€was€charged€with€the€intentional€deliberate€andÐ tÄ Ðpremeditated€attempt€to€kill€the€named€victim€on€a€date€certain.€€The€indictment€wasÐ `° Ðalso€sufficient€to€place€the€trial€court€on€notice€that€a€judgment€and€sentence€forÐ Lœ Ðattempted€first„degree€murder€were€proper€upon€conviction.€€Finally,€by€expresslyÐ 8ˆ Ðstating€that€the€attempt€to€kill€was€made€against€a€specific€victim€on€a€date€certain,Ð $t Ðthe€indictment€offers€Wyatt€double€jeopardy€protection€from€any€future€charge€ofÐ ` Ðattempted€murder€against€the€victim€on€that€date.€€Though€the€language€ððdid€.€.€.Ð üL Ðattempt€to€killðð€is€a€general€description,€especially€in€light€of€the€testimony€at€theÐ è8 Ðpreliminary€hearing€that€Wyatt€committed€multiple€acts€against€the€victim€which€theÐ Ô$ ÐState€could€have€relied€upon€to€obtain€a€verdict,€this€language€alleges€an€act€asÐ À Ðrequired€by€the€criminal€attempt€statute€and€was€sufficient€to€notify€Wyatt€of€theÐ ¬ü Ðaccused€crime,€to€confer€jurisdiction€upon€the€trial€court,€and€to€protect€againstÐ ˜è Ðdouble€jeopardy.€€òòHillóó,€954€S.W.2d€at€727.€€€€Ð„ÔÐ Ð  ÐòòÌWyattóó,€__€S.W.3d€at€__.€Ð \ ¬ ÐÌà  àAnother€recent€case,€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔLemacksÔ_Ôóó,€996€S.W.2d€166€(Tenn.€1999)€(Barker,€J.,€writing€forÐ 4"„  Ðthe€Court)€(Birch,€J.,€dissenting),€also€supports€the€view€that€alternative€means€or€theories€ofÐ  #p! Ðestablishing€a€single€element€of€an€offense€need€not€be€included€in€an€indictment.€€€The€indictmentÐ  $\" Ðin€òòÔ_ÔLemacksÔ_Ôóó€charged€that€ð ð[Ô_ÔLemacksÔ_Ô]€was€driving€or€was€in€control€of€a€motor€vehicle€on€a€publicÐ ø$H # Ðroad€in€Ô_ÔHumphreysÔ_Ô€County,€Ô_ÔTennessseeÔ_Ô€on€October€31,€1993,€while€under€the€influence€of€anÐ ä%4!$ Ðintoxicant.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€172.€Though€it€did€not€specifically€allege€criminal€responsibility,€this€Court€foundÐ Ð& "% Ðthe€indictment€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€ð ðbased€upon€[Ô_ÔLemackÔ_Ôððs]€own€commission€of€theÐ ¼' #& Ðoffense€or€by€criminal€responsibility€for€Sanchezðð€commission€of€the€offense.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€173.€€In€soÐ ¨(ø#' Ðholding,€this€Court€pointed€out:Ð ”)ä$( Ðâ âÐ €*Ð%) Ðà8  àthe€indictment€was€valid€in€describing€the€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€offense,€including€the€time,€date,€andÐ ° Ðâ âlocation€where€the€offense€allegedly€occurred.€òòThe€theories€available€to€support€aÐ œì Ðconviction€of€that€offense€were€not€required€to€be€included€in€the€indictmentóó.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌòòId.óó€at€172€(emphasis€added).Ð `° ÐÌà  àClearly,€òòWyattóó€and€òòÔ_ÔLemacksÔ_Ôóó€stand€for€the€proposition€that€Ô‡X9XXX9Ôan€indictment€which€alleges€allÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€elements€of€an€offense€will€not€be€held€insufficient€if€it€fails€to€allege€the€specific€theory€byÐ $ t Ðwhich€the€State€intends€to€prove€each€element.Ô#†X9XXX9ûn#ÔÔ_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ôà  àÐ  ` ÐÌà  àApplying€the€foregoing€principles,€we€conclude€that€the€indictment€in€this€case€satisfies€theÐ è 8  Ðconstitutional€and€statutory€requirements€and€sufficiently€charges€the€offense€of€aggravated€assault.€Ð Ô$  ÐThe€indictment€alleges€the€first€element€of€the€offense€€òòmens€Ô_ÔreaÔ_Ôóó€ð!ð€ð ðintentionally€and€knowingly.ðð€Ð À  ÐThe€indictment€also€alleges€the€second€element€of€the€offense,€commission€of€an€assault€ð!ð€ð ðdid€...Ð ¬ü  Ðcommit€an€assault.ðð€€And€finally,€the€indictment€alleges€the€third€element€of€the€offense,€use€orÐ ˜è  Ðdisplay€of€a€deadly€weapon€ð!ð€ð ðusing€and€displaying€a€deadly€weapon.ðð€€As€previously€explained,Ð ° Ðprior€decisions€of€this€Court€do€not€require€the€State€to€specify€in€the€indictment€the€precise€meansÐ œì Ðor€theory€by€which€the€State€intends€to€establish€each€element€of€the€offense.€€Where,€as€here,€all€theÐ ˆØ Ðelements€of€an€offense€are€specifically€alleged,€the€indictment€sufficiently,€ð ðenables€the€defendantÐ tÄ Ðto€know€the€accusation€to€which€answer€is€requiredðð€and€thus€satisfies€the€first€requirement€of€òòHillóó.€Ð `° Ð954€S.W.2d€at€727.€€Next,€because€of€its€clarity€and€specificity,€the€indictment€in€this€case€furnishesÐ L œ Ðto€the€court€an€adequate€basis€for€entry€of€a€proper€judgment,€thus€satisfying€the€second€requirementÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€òòHillóó.€€òòId.óó€€Furthermore,€the€indictment€in€this€case€protects€the€defendant€against€double€jeopardyÐ $ t Ðbecause€the€offense€is€alleged€to€have€occurred€on€a€date€certain€and€against€a€specific€victim,€thusÐ  ` Ðsatisfying€the€third€requirement€of€òòHillóó.€€òòId.óó€€Finally,€this€indictment€satisfies€theòòóó€prescribed€statutoryÐ ü L  Ðform.€€Not€only€are€the€allegations€couched€in€the€pertinent€language€of€the€statute,€which€ordinarilyÐ è 8  Ðis€sufficient€for€constitutional€and€statutory€purposes,Ô_Ô׃!×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€the€indictment€contains€a€specific€referenceÐ Ô$  Ðto€the€statutory€provision€defining€the€offense€of€aggravated€assault.€€Clearly,€this€indictment€satisfiesÐ À  Ðthe€overriding€purpose€of€òòHillóó€and€its€progeny€which€is€to€provide€the€accused€sufficient€notice€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€charged€offense.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àOur€conclusion€is€supported€by€òòState€v.€Tateóó,€912€S.W.2d€785€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1995)€(noÐ pÀ Ðòòperm.óó€òòapp.óó€filed),€a€decision€of€the€intermediate€appellate€court€rendered€before€this€Courtððs€decisionÐ \¬ Ðin€òòHillóó.€€The€defendant€in€òòTateóó€was€charged€and€convicted€of€aggravated€assault€under€an€indictmentÐ H˜ Ðthatòòóó€chargedÐ 4„ ÐÌà8  à[the€defendant]€on€the€___€day€of€August,€1993,€in€COFFEE€County,€Tennessee,€andÐ  \ Ðbefore€the€finding€of€this€indictment,€unlawfully€and€intentionally,€knowingly,€orÐ øH Ðrecklessly€did€assault€[the€victim]€by€use€of€a€deadly€weapon,€to€wit:€A€MOTORÐ ä4 ÐVEHICLE,€as€used€in€violation€of€Ô_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€39„13„102€.€.€.€.ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐòòÌId.óó€at€786„87.€€In€rejecting€the€defendantððs€challenge€to€the€indictmentòòóó,€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÐ ¨ø Ðin€òòTateóó€explained:Ð ”ä ÐÌà8  àCount€II€of€the€indictment€sufficiently€charges€the€offense€of€aggravated€assault.€€TheÐ l¼ Ðindictment€alleges€that€(a)€the€offense€occurred€in€August€of€1993,€in€Coffee€County,Ð X ¨ Ð(b)€the€appellee€intentionally€and€knowingly€assaulted€Officer€Farrar,€and€(c)€theÐ D!” Ðaccused€used€a€dangerous€weapon€during€the€commission€of€the€assault,€namely,€aÐ 0"€  Ðmotor€vehicle.€€If€the€appellee€desires€more€details€regarding€the€facts,€he€can€file€aÐ #l! Ðmotion€for€a€bill€of€particulars.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€P.€7(c);€òòState€v.€Hicksóó,€666Ð $X" Ðâ âS.W.2d€54€(Tenn.€1984).Ðô$D #Ð Ð  ÐòòTateóó,€912€S.W.2d€at€789.€€The€indictment€in€òòTateóó€is€substantively€identical€to€the€indictment€at€issueÐ ° Ðin€this€appeal,Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€and€the€analysis€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€in€that€case€is€appropriate€andÐ œì Ðâ âapplies€here.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWhere,€as€here,€an€indictment€sufficiently€alleges€the€elements€of€the€offense€and€otherwiseÐ `° Ðcomplies€with€constitutional€and€statutory€requirements,€a€defendant€should€move€for€a€bill€ofÐ L œ Ðparticulars€if€additional€particular€information€about€the€nature€of€the€conduct€or€the€theory€uponÐ 8 ˆ Ðwhich€the€State€intends€to€rely€to€establish€the€criminal€offense€is€needed.€€Tennessee€Rule€ofÐ $ t ÐCriminal€Procedure€7(c)€provides€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôu]ponÔ_Ô€motion€of€the€defendant€the€court€may€direct€the€filingÐ  ` Ðof€a€bill€of€particulars€so€as€to€adequately€identify€the€offense€charged.ðð€€This€rule€became€effectiveÐ ü L  ÐJuly€13,€1978,€and€according€to€the€committee€comments,€the€rule€provides€for€a€bill€of€particularsÐ è 8  Ðð ðwhere€needed€by€the€defendant€in€order€that€the€defendant€can€know€precisely€what€he€or€she€isÐ Ô$  Ðcharged€with.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hicksóó,€666€S.W.2d€54€(Tenn.€1984)€(discussing€in€detail€the€functionÐ À  Ðof€a€bill€of€particulars).€€While€a€bill€of€particulars€certainly€will€not€save€an€otherwise€invalidÐ ¬ü  Ðindictment,€it€can€serve€to€narrow€a€general€indictment€and€provide€a€defendant€with€enoughÐ ˜è  Ðinformation€about€the€charge€to€allow€the€defendant€to€prepare€a€defense€and€avoid€prejudicialÐ „Ô  Ðsurprise€at€trial.€€òòState€v.€Byrdóó,€820€S.W.2d€739,€741€(Tenn.€1991).€€Because€the€indictment€in€thisÐ pÀ Ðcase€satisfied€all€the€statutory€and€constitutional€requirements€of€òòHillóó,€the€defendant€should€haveÐ \¬ Ðmoved€for€a€bill€of€particulars€if€more€specific€information€was€needed€to€prepare€his€defense.Ð H˜ ÐÌà@  %ìàòòò òConclusionóóó óˆÐ  p Ðà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€the€indictment€in€this€case€enabled€the€defendant€to€know€theÐ  \ Ðcharge€against€him,€furnished€the€court€with€an€adequate€basis€for€entry€of€a€proper€judgment,Ð øH Ðprotected€the€defendant€from€double€jeopardy,€and€met€the€prescribed€statutory€form.€€Therefore,€theÐ ä4 Ðindictment€in€this€case€was€sufficient€to€confer€jurisdiction€upon€the€trial€court.€€€Accordingly,€theÐ Ð  Ðjudgment€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€is€reversed€and€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isÐ ¼  Ðreinstated.Ð ¨ø ÐÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à___________________________________€Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àFRANK€F.€Ô_ÔDROWOTAÔ_Ô,€III,€JUSTICE