WPC^ 0# U: % 0|w@w4 0J 0T, 0^ 0h 0rF 0| 04 0 1uJ 0d AQ# t 0D: 0@~ 0D U* D/, B[ Bx D3 B) DC AM4 N U>v~ vHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl,rAZ"Arial RegularX(Tv$TRY(3' LetterY(3' Letter3' Letter3' LetterT PEPEEEӀk`($3|x2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X !"#%C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ("$    ($$   1  <  9p`(Arial''' dxd dP Pd&&&&'dxd% Line 7 d))))7Border 1dd "*C << G D !$\R3'\  !"  $   YYY FILED$X February17,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.$AppellateCourtClerk <  9p`(&Times New RomanPtPtHH(EG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ! . $\R3'\     \RA'\ћ ̀$ @ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ ATJACKSON STATEOFTENNESSEE,  ) FORPUBLICATION       ) Filed:February17,1998  Appellee,    )       ) DYERCRIMINALv.      )  ٜR+,*A1-j|`  `@Rߛ      ) Hon.JoeG.Riley,GLENNBERNARDMANN,  ) Judge      ) Appellant,    ) SupremeCourt      ) No.02S019609CC00077-$@  ORDERONPETITIONTOREHEAR $XԀApetitionforrehearinghasbeenfiledonbehalfofappellant,GlennBernardManninwhichherequeststheopportunitytorebriefandrearguetheissuethathissentenceisdisproportionateunderthisCourtsrecentdecisioninStatev.Bland,__S.W.2d__(Tenn.1997).Heassertsthat thefailuretoallowhimthebenefitofthenewBlandprocedures...wouldviolatetheDueProcessClausesoftheFourteenthAmendmentandArticleI,Section8oftheTennesseeConstitution. Wedisagree.TheopinioninBlandplainlystatesthattheenumeratedfactorshadbeendrawnfrom areviewofthecomparativeproportionalitydiscussionscontainedinourpriordecisions.Therefore,theproceduresarenot new. AnamicuscuriaebriefoncomparativeproportionalityreviewhasbeensubmittedbyProfessorDwightAarons,oftheUniversityofTennesseeCollegeofLawandProfessorMichaelBlankenship,ofEastTennesseeStateUniversity.WenotethatthebriefwasduebeforethedecisionsinBlandandMannwerereleased,butitwasnotfileduntilaftertheirrelease.Theamicuscuriaesubmitsthatthepoolofsimilarcasesshouldincludeallfirstdegreemurdercases.Inaddition,theyarguethatsomeofthefactorsenumeratedintheBlanddecisiondonotaidtheanalysis,andothersareirrelevanttotheproportionalityquestion.AmajorityofthisCourtagreedupontheanalysissetforthinBland.ThoughtheCourtdidnothavethebenefitoftheamicuscuriaebrief,thedecisioninBlandaddressedtheissuesraisedtherein.ThemembersoftheCourtcontinuetoadheretotheirrespectiveopinionsinBland. Accordingly,amajorityofthisCourthaddeterminedthatthepetitiontorehearshouldbedenied.JusticeReidwouldgrantthepetitiontorehearandutilizesomeofthematerialintheamicuscuriaebrieftorefinetheproceduresannouncedinBland. Fortheforegoingreasons,thepetitiontorehearisdenied.  0 0 0 0 0 FORTHECOURT:                 _____________________________________     FrankF.Drowota,III,     Justice Concur: Anderson,C.J.Birch,Holder,JJ.Reid,J.Dissentsfromthedenialofthepetitiontorehear.