WPC( 41I+=i8pCJ/] I0 +v<3nM[n!NNʕh8S ~ #YvIKT#e3 F5+p6+$&W n@ -b_mѧt{+~o|闛2(L&1!~V>^ۆ<6$8{,dݔ5{:hF8ʙ^ 9ɡuo4ߨ쇛fz>T6mQ;rlfQ-yx2 g9:yac-(l*:̵@L4N+h5wwT8 7 q'ЃuY@Am2lJ,Js\z=]|BA+zc.`jeacbytuζ } ]b L5?_#P{ SF86bZU#] AlBc_+8EvlIv\|~b#d#!xU : % 0U: w  4# 7 F 0DN ^ (4 m6MGkQfFU4U:U: CCCCCCCCCCCCCC B b& & 0|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0#" D5$$$$$ AQ%S% 0#& 0D<(HP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0,  AZ"Arial RegularX(Dz$  7K<XXdXXd7    TRY3' LetterY3' Letter 3' Letter 3' LetterT,cAZ"Arial Regular@q'3|x  9c$  eXX   2    _ThetrialcourtsentencedthedefendantasaRangeII,multipleoffender,toimprisonmentof ,  fouryearsontheburglaryconviction,sevenyearsonthetheftconviction,andfouryearsonthe   habitualtrafficoffenderconviction.Thedefendantwasgivenasentenceofthirtydaysincountyjailfor   thefailuretoyieldconviction,ninemonthsfortheevadingarrestconviction,fourmonthsforthe  X resistingarrestconviction,andelevenmonths,twentyninedaysforthedrivingundertheinfluence L  conviction,withprobationafterserviceofthreehundreddays.Thesentencesfortheft,failuretoyield,  andresistingarrestwereorderedtorunconcurrentlywitheachother,butconsecutivelytotheother  sentencesimposed,allofwhichweretorunconsecutivelytoeachotherforatotaleffectivesentence x ofsixteenyearsandeightmonths.Thetrialcourtalsoorderedrestitutiontotaling$1,800,finedthe l@ defendant$1,100,andprohibitedthedefendantfromdrivingamotorvehicleinTennesseeforten 4  years.(#$  0   l'L U  9c$  eXX   4    _Incontrast,wenotedinAnthonythat [b]yanoverwhelmingmargin,themajorityviewinother ,  jurisdictionsisthatkidnappingstatutesdonotapplytounlawfulconfinementsormovementsincident   tothecommissionofotherfelonies.817S.W.2dat305.  9c$  eXX   5    _Statev.Barney,986S.W.2d545,548(Tenn.1999)(holdingthatthe essentiallyincidental ,  testdevelopedinAnthony isnothelpfulinthecontextofsexualoffenses);Statev.Dixon,957S.W.2d   532(Tenn.1997)(applyingAnthonyandupholdingaseparateconvictionforkidnappingfordetention   thatoccurredduringthecourseofanaggravatedassaultandattemptedsexualbattery);Statev.  X Coleman,865S.W.2d455,457(Tenn.1993)(vacatingaconvictionforkidnappingundertherule L  announcedinAnthony);compareDenton,938S.W.2dat378(statingthat [w]hileourdecisionin  Anthonyaddressedtheparticularlyanomalousnatureofthekidnappingstatute,itisconceivablethat  theprincipleofAnthonycouldapplytocircumstancesinvolvingoffensesotherthankidnapping). a 9c$  eXX   6    _AnydecisionoftheCourtofCriminalAppealsholdingtothecontraryisherebyexpressly ,  overruledincludingRoberts,943S.W.2dat407. G 9c$  eXX   1    _Tenn.CodeAnn.3914402(a)(4);3914103;558132;3916603;3916602;5550504; ,  5510616;5510401.  9c$  eXX   3    _JudgeTiptonalsofiledadissentingopinioninRobertsonthegroundthattheAnthonyanalysis ,  doesnotbarseparateconvictionsofattemptedburglaryandtheftofthesamevehicle. < b"   _X=XXXMXX=   Ad FILEDX=XM  November15,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdA  * b}"   _XXXXXX   Ad FILEDXX  November15,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdA ,cAZ"Arial Regular,cAZ"Arial RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 d- -(,(2$ Dz!  8=XXdd8    TRX3' Letter3'3' Letter3'T  XX   0  (3$ Dz!  8=XXdd8    TRX3' Letter3'3' Letter3'T  (((()!dxdxabZc[C<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ Dz!  8=XXdd8    TRX3' Letter3'3' Letter3'T  ($$   1  Dz!  8=XXdd8    TRX3' Letter3'3' Letter3'T  _, ` 7TR[A' LegalX3' LetterA' Legal3' LetterTX=XXX==XXdd=x`[B2.jzb`  `@E` ttx ( ,x_t`[>.*jze` `@EA ` 8ttxP t  0      8      @   @  INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE   @(ATNASHVILLE       0      8      FORPUBLICATION  Lp STATEOFTENNESSEE,   8 )  Filed:November15,1999  B   0      8 ) Appellant,0     8 )  WARRENCRIMINAL $$   0      8 )v.  0      8 )  Hon.Charles_Haston_,     0      8 )  Judge   LAWRENCERALPH,JR.,   8 )     0      8 )  SupremeCourt#X=XXX=# n   Appellee.0  0$$ 8 )  No.M199700019SCR11CDTx$$ FORAPPELLANT:     8     FORAPPELLEE:  PaulG.Summers0  0$$08$$08$8$0$$AubreyL.Harper$$ AttorneyGeneral&Reporter0 8 08$8$0$$_McMinnville_,Tennessee $$ MichaelE.MooreSolicitorGeneralDarylJ.BrandAssociateSolicitorGeneralNashville,TennesseeWilliamM.LockeDistrictAttorneyGeneral31stJudicialDistrict_McMinnville_,TennesseeThomasJ.MinerAssistantDistrictAttorney_McMinnville_,Tennessee  0      8      >XX=@VV( OPINION #X=X> #Ԉ 1&+ JUDGMENTOFCOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSREVERSED;JUDGMENTOFTRIALCOURTREINSTATED.0 @ 0@$@$0$$_DROWOTA_,J.#6+0$$= #Ї_ ThesoleissueinthisappealiswhetherthedueprocessanalysisdelineatedinStatev.Anthony,817S.W.2d299(Tenn.1991)barsthedefendantsseparate   convictionsforburglaryandtheftofthesameautomobile.TheCourtofCriminalAppeals,inasplitdecision,appliedthedueprocessanalysisofAnthonyandvacated d thedefendantsburglaryconvictiononthegroundthatitwasessentiallyincidentaltothetheftofthecar.OnejudgedissentedandarguedthattheanalysisadoptedinAnthonydoesnotapplyinthecontextofthiscase.Forthereasonsthatfollow,we   agreewiththedissentingjudgeandholdthattheanalysisadoptedinAnthonydoes   notapplytobarthedefendantsseparateconvictionsofburglaryandtheft.Accordingly,thejudgmentoftheCourtofCriminalAppealsvacatingthedefendantsconvictionofburglaryisreversed,andthejudgmentofthetrialcourtisreinstated.@) BACKGROUND    Atthetimetheseoffensesoccurred,thedefendant,LawrenceRalph,Jr.,wasaresidentofMcMinnville,Tennessee.HisfatherownedandoperatedapoolhallonMainStreetinMcMinnville.Mr.A.P.Ikeardwasapatronofthepoolhall.Atapproximately4p.m.onNovember2,1994,Mr.Ikeardleftthepoolhallwithaneighbortolookatsomedogwoodtrees.Mr.Ikearddrovehisneighborscaronthisoutingandparkedhisowncar,ablue1984FordLTD,behindthepoolhall.Mr.Ikeardhidthekeystothecarunderthedriversseatandtookwithhimthedistributorwiretopreventanyonefromdrivingthevehicle. Laterthatevening,atabout9:30p.m.,aMcMinnvillepoliceofficerbeganfollowingablue1984FordLTDaftertheofficerobservedthecarrunastopsignandmakeawidesweepingturn.Theerraticdrivingcontinued,andwhentheofficer X5,+0 activatedhisemergencylights,thevehiclespedawayandfledatspeedsinexcessofninetymilesperhour.Eventually,thedriverlostcontrolofthevehicle,andthecarhitaguardrailandstopped.Theofficerpulledalongsidethecarandrecognizedthe  defendantasthedriver.Seeingtheofficer,thedefendantexitedthecar,fledonfoot,  andrefusedtohaltwhenorderedtodosobytheofficer.Afterachasethroughthe `  woods,anotherofficercaughtuptothedefendantbutthedefendantresistedarrest l@  andhadtobesubduedwithpepperspray.Theofficerstestifiedthatthedefendant L  smelledofalcoholandwasunsteadyonhisfeetwhentheyapprehendedhim.Six , emptybeercanswerefoundintheautomobile.Thedefendantrefusedtosubmitto   fieldsobrietytestsora_breathalyzer_Ԁtest.   WhenMr._Ikeard_Ԁreturnedhome,havingtheintentionofretrievinghiscarthe   nextmorning,helearnedthathiscarwasmissing.Heimmediatelyreportedhiscar "` asstolenanddeniedgivingthedefendantpermissiontousethevehicle.Mr._Ikeard_ l$@ testifiedattrialthathiscarhadbeeningoodconditionandwasworthapproximately L&  $2,500. ,(   Thedefendantwaschargedinaneightcountindictmentwithburglaryofan +!$ automobile,theftover$1,000,failuretoyieldtoanemergencyvehicle,misdemeanor -#& evadingarrest,resistingarrest,drivingundertheinfluence!seventhoffense,driving /%( onarevokedlicense!thirdoffense,andviolationofhabitualtrafficoffenderstatus.  #  1       1`'* Eventually,theStatedismissedthechargeofthirdoffensedrivingonarevoked ,  license,andthejuryfoundthedefendantguiltyofalltheothercharges.    Thetrialcourtapprovedthejurysverdictandimposedsentencesoneachof  theconvictions.   #  2      ׀RelyinguponAnthony,theCourtofCriminalAppeals,inasplit  decision,vacatedtheburglaryconvictiononthegroundthatitwasessentially `  incidentaltothetheft.JudgeJoseph_Tipton_Ԁfiledadissentingopinionandargued l@  thattheAnthonyanalysisdoesnotapplytoseparateconvictionsforburglaryand L  theftofanautomobile.Thereafter,thisCourtgrantedtheStatesapplicationfor , permissiontoappealtoconsiderwhethertheAnthonyanalysisappliestobar   separateconvictionsofburglaryandtheftofthesameautomobile.   @]]) DISCUSSION  "`  InStatev.Anthony,817S.W.2d299(Tenn.1991),thisCourtheard l$@ consolidatedappealstodetermine theproprietyofa_kidnapping_Ԁconvictionwhere L&  detentionofthevictimismerelyincidentaltothecommissionofanotherfelony,such ,(  asrobberyorrape.Id.at300.ThedefendantsinAnthony,andinStatev.Martin,  *" thecasewithwhichAnthonywasconsolidated,hadbeenconvictedofboth ,  aggravated_kidnapping_Ԁandarmedrobbery.AttheoutsetwerecognizedinAnthony   that theoffensesofrobberyand_kidnapping_Ԁhaveseparateelementsandthatdual   convictions,evenforconductarisingfromthesamecriminalepisode,wouldnot  violatedoublejeopardy.Id.at301.However,weemphasizedthat theconviction  andpunishmentofadefendantfor_kidnapping_,basedonfactsinsufficienttosustain `  thatconviction,wouldclearlyviolatethedueprocessguaranteesfoundinboth[the l@  federalandstate]constitutions.Id.(emphasisadded).Wepointedoutthatthe L  potentialforobtainingaconvictionof_kidnapping_Ԁonfactsinsufficienttosustainthe , conviction   8 recursfrequentlybecausemodern,broadlydrawn_kidnapping_Ԁstatutes,  liketheTennesseestatuteinthesecases,nolongerrequirecommon  lawelementsoncenecessaryin_kidnapping_Ԁsuchassecrecyand  _asportation_.Literallyconstrued,theoffenseof_kidnapping_Ԁdefinedin  thesestatutesattimes  ! ! 8 80 ! !...couldliterallyoverrunseveralothercrimes,notably "` robberyandrape,andinsomecircumstancesassault, |#P sincedetentionandsometimesconfinement,againstthe l$@ willofthevictim,frequentlyaccompanythesecrimes.\%00 h0 h Anthony,817S.W.2dat303(quotingPeoplev.Levy,204N.E.2d842,844(N.Y. <' 1965)).Weobservedthat everyrobbery,bydefinition,involvessomedetention )! againstthewillofthevictim,ifonlylongenoughtotakegoodsormoneyfromthe * # personofthevictim,butemphasizedthat [_t]his_Ԁdoesnotmeanthatthelegislature ,"% intendedthateveryrobberyshouldalsoconstitutea_kidnapping_,eventhoughaliteral .$' readingofthestatutemightsuggestotherwise.Id.at306.Recognizingthat the 0p&) courtstaskistoapplythe[_kidnapping_]statutenarrowly,soastomakeitsreach |2P(+ fundamentallyfairandtoprotectthedueprocessrightsofeverycitizen,id.,we \40*- adoptedananalysisinAnthonytobeutilizedtopreventthepotentialdueprocess ,  problemposedbythebreadthofthestatutorydefinitionoftheoffenseof_kidnapping_.   Specificallywedirectedreviewingcourtsconsideringtheproprietyofa_kidnapping_   convictiontoinquire whethertheconfinement,movement,ordetentionisessentially  incidentaltotheaccompanyingfelonyandisnot,therefore,sufficienttosupporta  separateconvictionfor_kidnapping_,orwhetheritissignificantenough,inandofitself, `  towarrantindependentprosecutionandis,therefore,sufficienttosupportsucha l@  conviction.Id.at306.Wesuggestedthatonemethodofresolvingthesecond L  questionistoconsider whetherthedefendantsconductsubstantiallyincreasedthe , riskofharmoverandabovethatnecessarilypresentinthecrimeofrobberyitself.   Id.(internalquotationsandcitationsomitted).   Utilizingtheseinquiries,wefoundinAnthonyandMartinthat(1)the   confinementofthevictimsdidnotsubstantiallyincreasetheriskofharmtothe "` victims;(2)themovementwasslight,fromoneroomintoanother;(3)the l$@ confinementwasbrief,fiveminutesinonecaseandfourminutesintheothercase; L&  and(4)thevictimswerenotharmed.Id.at307.Baseduponthesefindings,we ,(  vacatedtheaggravated_kidnapping_Ԁconvictionsbecausetheywereessentially  *" incidentaltotheotherfelonyoffenseforwhichthedefendantshadbeenconvicted, +!$ armedrobbery. -#&  ThedefendantassertsthattheanalysisadoptedinAnthonyisequally 1`'* applicabletothecircumstancesofthiscasebecauseentryintotheautomobilewas l3@), inthiscasemerelyanessentialandincidentalstepinthetheftofthecarandtheact L5 +. ofentryisnotsignificantenough,inandofitself,towarrantanindependent ,  prosecutionwherethedefendantisalsoconvictedoftheft.Insupportofhis   argumentthedefendantreliesuponthedecisionoftheCourtofCriminalAppealsin   Statev.Roberts,943S.W.2d403(Tenn._Crim_.App.1996)  #  3      ׀inwhichtheintermediate  courtappliedAnthonyandsetasideburglaryconvictionswhenthedefendanthad  alsobeenseparatelyconvictedforattemptedtheft. `   Incontrast,theStatearguesinthisCourtthattheAnthonyanalysisdoesnot L  applyunderthecircumstancesofthiscasebecauseautomobileburglaryisnot , inherentineveryautomobiletheftand,therefore,dueprocessconcernsarenot   implicated.Inotherwords,theStatecontendsthat,unlike_kidnapping_,theoffense  ofburglaryisnotdefinedsobroadlythatitislikelytobeinherentineverytheftofan  automobile.Finally,theStatepointsoutthatthisCourthasneverextendedthe   analysisadoptedinAnthonybeyondthe_kidnapping_Ԁcontext.Forthereasonsthat "` follow,weagreewiththeStatethattheanalysisadoptedinAnthonyisnotapplicable l$@ inthecontextofthiscase. L&   UnderTennesseelaw, [a]personcommitsburglarywho,withouttheeffective  *" consentofthepropertyowner[_e]nters_Ԁanyfreightorpassengercar,automobile, +!$ truck,trailer,boat,airplaneorothermotorvehiclewithintenttocommitafelony,theft -#& orassaultorcommitsorattemptstocommitafelony,theftorassault.Tenn.Code /%( Ann.3914402(a)(4)(1997Repl.)(emphasisadded). Enterisdefinedasan 1`'*  [_i]ntrusion_Ԁofanypartofthebody;or[_i]nstrusion_Ԁofanyobjectinphysicalcontact ,  withthebodyofanyobjectcontrolledbyremotecontrol,electronicorotherwise.   Tenn.CodeAnn.3914402(b)(1997Repl.).Clearly,underthisstatutorydefinition,   thecrimeofburglaryiscompletewhenentryhasbeenmadeintoanautomobile  withouttheownersconsentandwithanintenttocommitafelony,theft,orassault.  SeealsoStatev.Lindsay,637S.W.2d886,889(Tenn._Crim_.App.1982). `  Consummationoftheintendedfelony,theft,orassaultisnotnecessarytocomplete l@  _thecrimeofburglary.SeeDuhacv.State,505S.W.2d237,239(Tenn.1973); L  Mellonsv.State,560S.W.2d634,635(Tenn.Crim.App.1977).Burglaryisan , offenseagainstthesecurityinterestinpossessionofpropertyratherthananoffense   againstthelegaltitleorownershipoftheproperty.SeeStatev.Davis,613S.W.2d  218,220(Tenn.1981);Hindmanv.State,215Tenn.127,384S.W.2d18,20(Tenn.  1964);Hobbyv.State,480S.W.2d554,556(Tenn.Crim.App.1972).    Incontrast,theftisanoffenseagainstthelegaltitleorownershipofthe l$@ property.InTennessee, [a]personcommitstheftofpropertyif,withintenttodeprive L&  theownerofproperty,thepersonknowinglyobtainsorexercisescontroloverthe ,(  propertywithouttheownerseffectiveconsent.Tenn.CodeAnn.3914103(1997  *" Repl.).Therefore,theftdoesnotoccuruntilthedefendantobtainsorexercises +!$ controloverthepropertywiththeintenttodeprivetheowneroftheproperty. -#&  Afterreviewingthesestatutes,weareconvincedthattheprinciplesofdue 1`'* processoffendedinAnthonybytheseparateconvictionsofkidnappingandrobbery l3@), arenotoffendedbyseparateconvictionsforburglaryandtheftinthiscase.Unlike L5 +. thekidnappingoffenseatissueinAnthony,theoffensesofburglaryandtheftare ,  definednarrowlybystatuteandclearlyrequireproofofdifferentelements.   Moreover,unlikeAnthony,noteverytheftofavehicleincludesasapracticalmatter   burglaryofthatvehicle.Forexample,apassengerwhohastheownerseffective  consenttobeinsideanautomobilecancommittheftwithoutcommittingburglaryby  simplydrivingawayintheautomobileiftheownerleavesthevehicletobuygasoline `  orfood.Moreover,thefactthattheftisdesignatedasoneofthefelonieswhichwill l@  supportaconvictionforburglaryclearlyindicatesthattheGeneralAssembly L  contemplatedseparateconvictionsforburglaryandtheft.Aspreviouslystated,the , offensesofburglaryandtheftclearlyaredesignedtoprotectdifferingproperty   interests.ThisCourthasconsistentlyheldthatwhenlegislativeintentisclear,a  defendantmaybeseparatelyconvictedoftwooffenseswhicharisefromonecriminal  transaction.SeeStatev.Denton,938S.W.2d373,379n.14(Tenn.1996)(upholding   separateconvictionsforfelonymurderandunderlyingfelony);Statev.Blackburn, "` 694S.W.2d934,93637(Tenn.1985)(same);Davis,613S.W.2dat221(upholding l$@ separateconvictionsforburglarywiththeintenttocommitlarcenyandlarceny); L&  compareMissouriv.Hunter,459U.S.359,103S.Ct.673,74L.Ed.2d535(1983) ,(  (discussingtheimportanceoflegislativeintentinthedoublejeopardycontext).  *" Finally,wenotethatthisCourtisrequiredtoconstruestatutesinareasonableand +!$ logicalfashion.McClellanv.BoardofRegentsofStateUniversity,921S.W.2d684, -#& 689(Tenn.1996).Underthedefendantsargument,apersonwhoentersan /%( automobilewithouttheownerseffectiveconsentandstealsanitemlocatedinside 1`'* thevehiclecouldbeconvictedofbothburglaryandtheft,whileapersonwhoenters l3@), anautomobileunlawfullyandstealstheentirevehiclecouldbeconvictedonlyof L5 +. theft.Sucharuleisneitherreasonableorlogical.Accordingly,wedeclinetoadopt ,  theargumentadvancedbythedefendant.    Finally,althoughnotcontrolling,wenotethatwhenfacedwiththisissue,  courtsinotherjurisdictionshaveupheldagainstdueprocesschallengesseparate  convictionsforburglaryandtheft.SeeStatev.Brown,936P.2d181(Ariz.Ct.App. `  1997);Peoplev.Teamer,25Cal.Rptr.2d296(Cal.Ct.App.1994);Statev.Stephens, l@  601So.2d1195(Fla.1992);Peoplev.Steppan,473N.E.2d1300(Ill.1985);_State L  v.Hernandez,865P.2d1206(N.M.Ct.App.1993).  #  4      ׀TheFloridaSupremeCourt , aptlysummarizedtherationalesupportingtheseholdingsasfollows:   8 aburglaryiscompletethemomentthedefendantentersorremains  withinthevehiclewiththerequisiteintent.Evenifthedefendant  changesplansanddecidesnottostealthevehicle,thecrimeof  burglarystillwouldexist.However,ifthedefendantthentakesthe  additionalstepofstartingthevehicleanddrivingawaywithit,the   separatecrimeofautotheftthenwillbecomplete.Insum,two !p separateevilsinvolvingtwodistincttemporaleventsareinvolvedinthe "` typicalautotheft.Nothinginourlawprohibitsthechargingofboth |#P offensesmerelybecausebothoftenoccurwithinasingletransaction.l$@ ! !   0      8 8 ...Theactofbreakingintoavehicleitselfisaseparateeviloften L&  involvingdamagetocomponentsofthatvehicle.Cartheftinvolvesthe <' separateevilofdeprivinganowneroftheentirecar.Webelievethe ,(  legislatureisfreetomakethelatteraseparatecriminalactifitso )! chooses. *" ! ! 5^Stephens,601So.2dat1197. ,"%   .$'  WeagreewiththerationaleoftheFloridaSupremeCourtandthereforehold ,   thatseparateconvictionsforburglaryandtheftofthesameautomobiledonotviolate   dueprocessprinciples.TheStatecorrectlypointsoutthattheanalysisadoptedin   AnthonyhasnotbeenappliedbythisCourtoutsidethe_kidnapping_Ԁcontext,  #  5      ׀andweXXXXz  declinetoextenditsapplicationinthiscasetoseparateconvictionsofburglaryand  theft.  #  6      ׀ xL  @,,) CONCLUSION     Forthereasonsstatedherein,thejudgmentoftheCourtofCriminalAppeals  vacatingthedefendantsconvictionforburglaryofanautomobileisreversedandthe  judgmentofthetrialcourtapprovingtheverdictofthejuryisreinstated.  T    0      8 _____________________________________ H'    0      8 FRANKF._DROWOTA_,III,   H!  #  .(!   0      8 JUSTICE   )"  * $  Concur:    Anderson,C.J.   Birch,Holder,Barker,JJ.#XzXXXe#