T he“ Is su es Pre se nted F or R ev ie w ” se ctio n of B ro w n’ s brie f st at es th e is su e as “Whe th er or no t a 1 trial judg e w ho also s its as a member of the drug court team should hear a violationof probation after the defend ant h as been discharge d from the drug court program.” Because this issue is not briefed or ad dressed in an y o ther w ay w ithin Brow n’s b rief, w e pre sume it w as submitted in error. In so muchas Brow n inte nded for us to review this issu e, it is w aived. See T enn. Ct. Crim . App. R. 10(b) (“I ssues wh ich are not supp orted by argument, c it at io n to autho ri ti es , or ap pr op ri at e re fe re nc es to th e re co rd w il l b e tr eate d as w ai v ed in th is co urt. ”)

. 

### IN THE COURT OFCRIMI NAL AP PEALS OF TENNES SEE ATJAC KSON A ssi gne d onBrie fs January5, 201 0 STA TE OFTEN NES SEE v. MIC HAE L DEWAYNE BR OW N D irec t A p p ea l f

ro m th e C ircu itC o u rt fo r D y er C o u n ty N o. 08- C R - 371 R . L ee M oore, Jr. , Judge

N o. W 2009- 01742- C C A - R 3- C D - F i l ed M arch 12, 2010

T h e D efe n d an t- A p p ell an t, M icha el D ew ay n e B row n , w as c o n v ict ed b y a D y er C o u n ty jury of t hr ee c ount s of

s al e of coca i ne under0. 5 gr am s , a C l as s C fel ony. For ea ch co u n t, he r ece i ved an e i ght

- years ent ence i n t he Tennes s ee D epar t m entof C or r ect i o n , w i t h t he s ent ence s t o be s er ved conc ur r ent l y. B r ow n w as al s o as s es s ed a $2, 000 f i ne for e ach c o n v i c t i o n ; h o we v e r , t h e f i n e wa s s u s p e n d e d fo r c o u n t s t wo a n d t h r e e . On a p p e a l , Br o wn cl ai m s t he evi dence w as i ns uf f i ci ent t o s uppor t hi s convi ct i ons . U pon r evi ew , w e af f i r m t he 1 ju d g m e n ts o f th e trial c o u rt. T enn. R . A pp. P . 3 A ppeal as of R i ght ; Judgm ent of

t he C i rcui t C ourt A f

f i rm ed C AMI LLE R. M C M ULL EN , J

. , del i ver ed t he opi ni on of t he cour t , i n w hi ch A LAN E. G LEN N and J. C. M C L IN , J J

. , j oi ned. N oel H

. R i l ey, I I , D yer s bur g, T ennes s ee f or t he D ef

endant

- A ppel l an t, M i chae l D ew ayne B ro w n . R ober tE

. C ooper , J r . , A t t o r n e y Gen e r a l and R epor t er ; C am er on L

. H yder , A s s i s t antA t t or ney G ener al ; C

. Phi l l i p B i vens , D i s t r i ctA t t or ney G ener al ; and K are n B ur ns , A s s i s t antD i s t r i ct A t t or ney G ener al , for t he A ppel l ee, St at e of T ennes s ee. OP I NI ON-2-

F a cts

. T he cha r ges i n t hi s cas e r es ul t ed f r om t hr ee unde r coverdr ug pur chas es t hat occurr ed on M ay 5, 19, and 20 i n 2008. O ffi cerShan e A nder s on of t he D y er s bur g Pol i ce D epart m ent as si st ed w i t h all t hree un dercov er drug purchases. O n M ay 5, t he d ayof the fi rs t drug p u rch ase, O ffi cerA nder s on w as appr oache d bya conf i dent i al i nfor m ant( “the i nfor m ant ”)

. T he i nfor m antcl ai m ed he w as cont act ed bya drug deal erat a gas s t at i on. O f f i c e rA n d e r s o n s a i d t h a tt h e i n f o r m a n t a n d h i s v e h i c l e w e r e s e a r c h e d p r i o r t o t h e M a y 5 drug pur chas e. Fol l ow i ng t he pur chas e, O ffi cerA nder s on r ecove r ed the cr ack c ocai ne fr om t he i nfor m ant

. R egar di ng t he s econd pur chas e on M ay 19, O ffi cer A nder s on s ai d he w at ched t he i nfor m an t w alk to the ca rw as h and s peak w i t h B r ow n. I n al l ot herr es pect s , O ffi cer A nder s on cor r obor at ed Ser geantT odd T hay er ’ s t es t i m onyr egar di ng t he drug pur chas es on M ay19 and 20. H ow ever , O ffi cerA nder s on acknow l edged thathe di d notw i t nes s t he drug e x c h a n g e s . I nves t i gat orC hr i s G or m an of the D y erC o u n tySh e r i f f’ s o f f i ce t es t i fi ed thathe w or ked w i t h O ffi cer A nder s on on t he M ay 5 drug pur chas e. T he pur chas e occ ur r ed atan apa r t m ent compl ex. B efor ehand, I nves t i gat orG or m an and O ffi cer A nder s on s ear ched t he i nfor m ant an d h is ve h icl e f

o r m o n eyan d co n tr ab an d

. Inv esti g ator G o rm an b eli ev ed the in fo rm an t w o re an audi o t r ans m i t t erdur i ng t he pur chas e. I nves t i gat or G or m an conf i r m ed thaton M ay5, t he i nfor m antr etur ned fr om t he apa r t m entcompl ex w i t h cr ack c ocai ne. Ser geantT odd T hay erof t he D y er s bur g P o li ce D epart m entas s i s t ed w i t h t he drug pur chas es on M ay19 and 20. H e w or ked i n t he fi el d of i l l egal nar cot i cs forei ghty ear s and had tr ai ni ng i n t he det ect i on of i l l egal drugs . For bot h pur chas es , Ser geant T hay erconfi r m ed t hathe w or ked w i t h O ffi cerSh an e A nder s on and the i nfor m ant

. Ser geantT hay ers ai d he w orked p revi ou sl yw i t h the i nfo rm ant on fift een to t w entyun dercov er drug pu rchases. O n M ay1 9 , the s econd drug pur chas e, Ser geantT hay erand O ffi cerA nder s on m et w i t h t he i nfor m ant befor e t he under cover drug pur chas e. T hey s ear ched the i nfor m antand hi s vehi cl e fordrugs , m oney , and w eapons . Ser geant T hay er s ai d an audi o t r ans m i t t erw as at t ache d t o t he i nfor m ant

. T he audi o t r ans m i t t eract ed i n conj unct i on w i t h a r ece i veri n t he patr ol vehi cl e; w hi ch al l ow ed t he offi cer s t o “hea r every t hi ng that[w as ] goi ng on. ” A vi deo r ecor der w as al s o pl ace d on t he i nfor m ant

. Ser geant T hay er s ai d t he i nfor m an t w as g ive n the m o n ey n eeded t o m ake the pur chas e. A ccor di ng t o Ser geantT hay er , t he i nfor m ant pr ovi ded the fol l ow i ng i nfor m at i on abouthi s cont actw i t h B r ow n: [ T h e i n f o r ma n t ] t o l d u s h e c o u l d b u yc r a c k c o c a i n e f r o m Mr

. Br o wn . He ref erred to h im as a n o ther n am e at th at tim e. A t tha t ti m e, w e d idn ’t k n o w M r. B ro w n ’s r e a l n a m e . [T h e in f o rm a n t] h a d p ro v id e d a tele p h o n e n u m b e r, a c e ll num ber , and he had cal l ed M r . B r ow n and M r . B r ow n agr eed t o m eethi m at t he ca rw as h on Sam ps on and s el l hi m $60. 00 w or t h of cr ack c ocai ne.-3-

A ft er t he phone cal l w as m ade, Ser geantT hay erand I nves t i gat orA nder s on w entt o t he ca r w as h and s etup vi deo equi pm ent

. Ser geantT hay ers ai d h e taped t he drug pur chas e fr om a c ro ss th e stre e t u sin g a c a m c o rd e r. A t trial, h e d e sc rib e d w h a t tran sp ire d : [The i nfor m ant ] got t o t he car w as h. H e pul l ed up i n a car w as h bay

. H e got o u t o f h is c a r. M r. B ro w n w a s s tan d in g o n B a x ter S tre e t at th e to p o f th e h ill

. [The i nfor m ant ] w al ked up t o M i chae l B r ow n and gave hi m t he $6 0

. 0 0 buy m on ey , and att hat t i m e, M i chael B row n sai d, “It ’s do w n ther e att he car w ash in th e c o rn e r.” Ser geantT hay ert es t i fi ed t hatt he i nfor m antr etr i eved t he drugs , got i nt o hi s car , and dr ove t o an arr anged meet i ng poi ntw her e the cr ack c ocai ne w as r ecove r ed. T he vi deo r ecor di ng fr om camcor derw as pl ay ed t o t he j u ry . T he j ur yw as al s o s how n foot age f r om t he vi deo r ecor d e ra t t a c h e d t o t h e i n f o r ma n t

. La s t l y , t h e j u r ywas p r e s e n t e d wi t h p i c tu r e s o f Br ow n w a lk in g u p th e h ill n e x t to th e c a r w a s h

. Ser geantT hay ert es t i fi ed thaton M ay 20, t he t hi r d drug pur chas e, he and I nves t i gat or A n d e rso n m e t w ith th e in f o rm a n t ag a in . S e rg e a n t T h a y e r sta ted : I tw as s etup pr et t ym uch the w ay itw as on t he pervi ous day

. T he [i nfor m ant ] cal l ed t he s ame phone num b er . . . t o geta[] hol d of M r . B r ow n. M r. B ro w n a g re e d to se ll h im $ 7 0 .0 0 w o rth o f c ra c k c o c a in e a n d th e yw e re to m e e t a t th e P e rr yV in s o n A p a rt m e n ts o n L a k e R o a d in D y e rs b u rg . T h e o f f ic e r s s e a rc h e d th e in f

o rm a n t an d h is v e h icle b e f o re h a n d a n d su p p lied h im w ith s eventydol l ar s . T he i nfor m antw as equi pped w i t h an audi o t r ans m i t t erand a vi deo ca m er a; h o w ev er, Se rge an t T h ay er sa id, “T h e su n interfe red w ith the ca m era so m u ch that y o u ca n ’t s ee nothi ng. ” Ser geantT hay er test i fi ed thathe met w i t h t he i nfor m antaft ert he drug pur chas e att he apa r t m entcompl ex, and the i nfor m anttur ned overt he cr ack c ocai ne. Ser geantT hay ert es t i fi ed thathe di d not w i t nes s ei t her drug t r ans act i on. H e s ai d t he i nfo rm ant w as pai d o ne h un dred do l l ars for each purchase. S ergeant Th ay er di d n ot pr om i se t he i nfor m antl eni encyon a pendi ng pr obat i on vi ol at i on. S erg ea n t T h ay ers ai d he di d not know B r ow n’ s name unt i l M ay29, s t at i ng: [The i nfor m ant ] des cr i bed t he vehi cl e thatM r . B r ow n dr ove, and I had t al ked t o anot heroffi cerand des cr i bed thatvehi cl e and he sai d, “W el l , thats ounds lik e M ich a e l B ro w n ’s v e h icle ,” so I th e n g o t a p h o to M ich a e l B ro w n f ro m h is D r i ver ’ s L i cens e phot o, and on M ayt he 29th, w hi ch w as ni ne day s aft ert he las t d e a l, I ju st sh o w e d [ th e in f o rm a n t]

. . . th e p h o to a n d a sk e d h im , “W h o is-4-

t hi s ?” and he s ai d, “W el l t hat ’ s . . . A nt oni o. ” I s ai d, “H ow do y ou know A n to n io ? ” H e s a id , “ W e ’v e b o u g h t f ro m h im th re e tim e s .” Ser geantT hay ers ai d B r ow n r efe r r ed t o hi m s el f as A nton io w hen he f i r s ts poke w i t h t he in f o rm a n t. T he confi dent i al i nfor m ant t es t i fi ed t hathe as s i s t ed the D y er s bur g Pol i ce D epart m ent w i t h t he under coverdrug pur chas es on M ay5, 19, an d 2 0. T he i nfor m antconfi r m ed that pr i ort o eac h pur chas e, t he off i cer s s ear ched hi s vehi cl e and hi s per s on, and he w as equi pped w i t h v i d e o a n d a u d i o e q u i p me n t

. Th e i n f o r ma n t f i r s t e n c o u n t e r e d Br o wn whi l e ata gas sta ti o n . T h e in f

o rm a n t re c o g n ize d B ro w n f ro m a ro u n d th e a re a , b u t th e yh a d n e v e r m e t. B r ow n t ol d t he i nfor m antt hati f he “ neede d s om ethi ng t o hol l erathi m . ” The i nfor m antt ook t his t o m ean thatB row n w as w i l l i ng t o sel l him drugs. A tt he g as st at i on , t he inform ant al so r ece i ved a phone num ber fr om B r ow n. T he i nfor m ant s ubs equent l y cal l ed Ser geantT hay er to a rr a n g e a n u n d e rc o v e r d ru g p u rc h a s e . O n M ay5, t he i nfor m ant cal l ed B r ow n and s ai d he w ant ed t o pur chas e cr ack c ocai ne. A tB r ow n’ s di r ect i on, t he i nfor m antdr ove t o an apart m entcompl ex. T he i nfor m ants ai d he “pul l ed up be s i d e [ Br o wn] a n d h e h a n d e d me t h e d o p e a n d I h a n d e d h i m t h e mon e ya nd drove o ff. ” T he inform ant s ai d B row n w as i n an old, grayB uick t hat had ex pen si ve ri m s. T h e in f o rm a n t m a d e a n o th e r d ru g p u rc h a se f ro m B ro w n o n M a y1 9 . H e sta ted : [B r ow n] t ol d m e t o m eethi m at t he car w as h, and I pul l ed up t o t he ca rw as h, par ked my cari n a s t al l , and he w as up t he hi l l and I w alke d up t he hi l l and g a v e h i m mo n e y a n d t o l d h i m h e wa s s t a n d i n g i n p o i s o n o a k , a n d h e t o l d me to g o b a c k a n d it w a s d o w n o n th e g ro u n d , so I w e n t a n d g o t th e d o p e a n d lef t. T he i nfor m antr etr i eved the cr ack c ocai ne and pl ace d i t i n t he cons ol e of hi s car . H e dr ove a w a yf ro m th e c a r w a s h a n d to o k th e c ra c k c o c a in e to th e o f f ic e rs . On M a y2 0 , t h e i n f

o r ma n t s a i d h e c a l l e d Br o wn a g a i n t o p u r c h a s e c r a c k c o c a i n e . He m etw i t h the officer s befo rehand , and t heysear ched him and his veh i cl e. T he o ffi cers al so prov ided hi m w i t h a vi deo r ecor der

. T he i nfor m antt hen dr ove t o an apa r t m entcompl ex w her e he metw i t h B r ow n. T he i nfor m ants t at ed, “W e t al ked and I gave hi m t he money , and he t ol d m e i t w as by t he m ai l box. ” T he i nfor m ant w al ked t o t he m ai l box ar ea and r etr i eved t he cr ack coca i ne. H e dr ove aw ay fr om t he apart m ent compl ex and ga ve the cr ack c ocai ne t o t he pol i ce. O n a l at erdat e, t he i nfor m ant s ai d t he offi cer s as ked hi m i f he c oul d i dent i fy so m e o n e in a p h o to

. T h e in f o rm a n t to ld th e o f

f ice rs h e re c o g n ize d th e in d iv id u a l. A t trial, t he i nfor m ants ai d t he i ndi vi dual i n t he phot o w as B r ow n.-5-

T he i nfor m antt es t i fi ed thatatt he t i m e of the drug pur chas es he w as on pr obat i on for a drug- r el at ed off

ens e. H e s ai d he w as notoffe r ed l enien cy as t o a pendi ng pr obat i on viol at i on . T he i nfo rm ant ad m i t t ed t hat he w as a drug user at the ti m e of the drug p urchases. H e w as pai d one hundr ed dol l ar s for eac h drug pur chas e. T he def ens e as ked the i nfor m ant i f he us ed any of t he m oney fr om t he hundre d- dol l ar paym ent s t o pur chas e cr ack coca i ne for hi m s el f. H e r es ponded, “I i m agi ne s o[. ] ” T he i nfor m ant s t at ed t hat dur i ng t he M ay5 drug pur chas e, he met w i t h B r ow n i n per s on foraboutfi ve s ec o n d s. O n M ay19 and 20, t he in f o rm a n t sa id th e ir f

a c e -to -f a c e in ter a c tio n las ted a b o u t o n e m in u te

. H e d id n o t re c a ll p u rc h a s in g d ru g s f

ro m B ro w n b e f

o re M a y5

. A t e c h n i c i a n f

o rth e Te n n e s s e e Bur e a u of I nves t i gat i on C r i m e Labor at or yt es t i fi ed that s he ana l y zed the s ubs t ance s r ecove r ed fr om t he M ay 5, 19, and 20 drug pur chas es . T he tr i al cour tfound t hat s he qual i fi ed as an expert i n drug i dent i fi cat i on. T he t echni ci an det er m i ned th a t a ll th re e s u b s ta n c e s c o n ta in e d c o c a in e w e ig h in g le s s th a n 0 .5 g ra m s . B r ow n t es t i fi ed and deni ed s el l i ng cr ack c ocai ne t o t he i nfor m ant

. H e s ai d t hatpr i or to trial, h e sa w th e in f

o rm a n t o n c e b e f

o re o n M a y1 9 . H e sta ted : I w as w al ki ng fr om m yaunt i e’ s hous e. I tw as hot , y ou kn o w , an d the n I r eal i zed thatI di dn’ thave a lot o f shade, y ou know , s o I j us tbacke d up and s m oked my l as t ci gar et t e. A dude w al ked up, t ol d m e I w as i n poi s on oak, and I ’ ve gots ens i t i ve s ki n, s o I t ook heed t o t he conve r s at i on. Br o wn d e n i e d s e l l i n g d ru g s t o a n y o n e o n M a y 5 , 1 9 , a n d 2 0

. He t e s t i f i e d t h a th e d i d n o to wn a p h o n e . B ro w n sa id h e d r o v e a g r a y B u ic k L e S a b re , b u t h e c laim e d it d id n o t h a v e “ b ig f a n c yri m s .” H e d e n ie d e v e r u s in g th e a lia s o f A n to n io

. O n cr os s - exami nat i on, t he S t at e quest i oned B r ow n r egar di ng t he vi deo fr om M ay19. T he St at e as ked, “So t hatw as y ou att he ca rw as h on Sam ps on St r eet , w al ki ng ar ound up t he hi l l and bac k t ow ar d t he l ea v es o r p o i s on oak orw hat everi tw as ?” B r ow n acknow l edged t hathe w as t he i ndi vi dual i n t he vi deo. H e di d notr eca l l t el l i ng the inf o rm an t, “‘ I t ’ s over th e re w ra p p e d u p in tissu e .’” B ro w n tes tifie d th a t th e ir c o n v e rsa tio n w a s lim ited to di s cus s i ng t he poi s onous oak and hi s s ens i t i ve ski n. B r ow n s ai d hi s vehi cl e has fi ft een- i nch c h ro m e ri m s . Fol l ow i ng t he pr oof att r i al , t h e jury co nvi ct ed B r ow n of t hr ee c ount s of s al e of coca i ne under0. 5 gr am s , a C l as s C fel ony. B r ow n f i l ed a m ot i on for new t r i al , al l egi ng t he e v i d e n c e wa s i n s u f

f i c i e n tt o s u p p o r th i s c o n v i c t i o n s . T h i s mo t i o n wa s d e n i e d

. Br o wn s u b s e q u e n tly fi le d a tim e ly n o tic e o f a p p e a l.-6- A N A L Y S IS
I . Suff i ci ency of t he E vi dence . B ro w n c laim s th e e v id e n c e w a s in su f f icie n t to s uppor thi s convi ct i ons . I n par t i cul ar , he ar gues t he evi dence di d noti dent i fyhi m as t he perpetr at or w ho s ol d cr ack coca i ne t o t he i nfor m ant

. I n r es pons e, t he St at e cl ai m s a r at i onal j ur ycoul d have found B r ow n gui l t yof t hr ee c ount s of s al e of coca i ne under0. 5 gr am s . U pon r evi ew , w e agr ee w i t h t he St at e. T he St at e, on appea l , i s ent i t l ed t o t he s t r onges t l egi t i m at e vi ew of t he evi dence and al l r eas on ab le infer ence s w hi ch m ay be dr aw n f r om t he evi dence

. St at e v. B l and, 958 S. W

. 2d 651, 659 ( T enn. 1997)

. W hen a def endantchal l enges t he s uf f i ci ency of

t he evi dence , t he s t andar d of

r evi ew appl i ed by t hi s cour ti s “w het her , af t er r evi ew i ng t he evi dence i n t he l i ght m os tfavor abl e t o t he pr os ecut i on, any r at i onal t r i erof factcoul d have f

ound t he e s s e nt i a l e l e m e nt s of

t he c r i m e be yo nd a r e a s on a bl e do ub t
. ” J a c ks on v. V i r gi ni a , 44 3 U. S. 307, 319, 99 S. C t
. 2781, 2 7 8 9 (19 7 9 )

. Si m i l ar l y, R ul e 13( e) of t he Tennes s ee Rul es of A p p ell ate P roc ed u re states, “F ind ing s o f gu il t i n crim inal ac ti o n s w h ethe r b y the tri al co u rt or j ur y s hal l be s etas i de i f t he evi dence i s i ns uf

f i ci entt o s uppor t a fi ndi ng by t he tr i erof fact of gui l tbeyond a r eas onabl e doubt

. ” A ver di ctof

gui l tr em oves t he p resu m p ti o n of i nnocenc e and r epl ace s i tw i t h a pr es um pt i on of

gui l t ; t her efor e, a def

endanton appea l has t he bur den of s how i ng t h att he evi dence i s i ns uf

f i ci ent t o s uppor t t he j ur y’ s ver di ct
. St at e v. T hacke r , 164 S. W

. 3d 208, 221 (Ten n. 20 05 ) ( ci t i ng S t at e v. E van s, 10 8 S

. W

. 3d 23 1, 23 7 (Ten n. 20 03 ); S t at e v. C arr uther s, 3 5 S

. W

. 3 d 5 1 6 , 5 5 7 -58 (T en n . 2 0 0 0 ); S tat e v . T u g g le, 6 3 9 S

. W

. 2 d 9 1 3 , 9 1 4 (T en n . 1 9 8 2 )). A g u il ty v erd ictb ythe ju ry , ap p rov ed b ythe tri al j u d g e, acc red it s the test im o n yo f th e S tat e’s w i t nes s es and r es ol ves al l confl i ct s i n t he evi dence i n t he St at e’ s favor

. B l and, 958 S. W

. 2d at659 ( ci t i ng St at e v. G r ace , 493 S. W

. 2d 474, 476 ( T en n . 1 9 7 3 ))

. I s s ues r egar di ng t he cr edi bi l i t yof w i t nes s es , t he w ei ghtand val ue of the evide n ce , and al l fac tual i s s ues r ai s ed byt he evi dence ar e r es ol ved by t he j ur y as t he tr i erof fa ct , and thi s cour tdoes notr e- w ei gh o r re-ev alua te t h e e v iden ce . Id. (cit ing S tat e v . C ab b ag e, 57 1 S

. W

. 2 d 8 3 2 , 8 3 5 (T en n . 1 9 7 8 ), s u p e r s e d e d b y s t at ut e on ot hergr ounds as s t at ed i n St at e v. B ar one, 852 S

. W

. 2 d 216, 218 ( T enn. 1993) )

. G ui l t m ay be found beyond a r eas onabl e doubti n a ca s e w her e t her e i s di r ect evi dence , ci r cum s t ant i al evi dence , o r a co m b i nat i on of t he t w o. St at e v. M at t hew s , 805 S. W

. 2 d 7 7 6 , 7 7 9 ( Te n n . Cr i m . App

. 1 9 9 0 ) ( c i t i n g St a t e v . Br o wn, 5 5 1 S. W

. 2d 329, 331 ( T enn. 1977) ; Far m er v. St at e, 343 S. W

. 2d 895, 897 ( T enn. 1961) )

. H ow ever , “[ a] ver di ct o f a ju ry m a y n o t b e b a s e d a lo n e u p o n c o n je c tu re , g u e s s , s p e c u la tio n o r a m e re p o s s ib ility .” St at e v. T har pe, 726 S. W

. 2d 896, 900 ( T enn. 1987) ( quot i ng Sul l i van v. St at e, 513 S. W

. 2d 1 5 2 , 1 5 4 (T e n n . 1 9 7 4 ))

. “T h e ide n ti ty o f t h e p erp etrator is an esse n ti al elem en t o f an y crim e.” S tat e v . R o b ert W a y n e P ry o r, N o . M 2 0 0 3 -0 2 9 8 1 -C C A -R 3 -C D , 2 0 0 5 W L 9 0 1 1 4 0 , a t * 3 (T e n n . C ri m . A p p .,-7-

at N ash v il le, A p r. 1 9 , 2 0 0 5 ) (cit ing S tat e v . T h o m p so n , 5 1 9 S

. W

. 2 d 7 8 9 , 7 9 3 (T en n . 1 9 7 5 )). T he r e fo r e , t h e St a t e h a s t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g “ t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h e d e fe n d a n ta s t he per petr at or beyond a r eas onabl e doubt

. ” I d. ( ci t i ng St ate v . Sneed, 908 S. W

. 2d 408, 410 ( T enn. C r i m . A pp. 1995) )

. T he i dent it y o f the de fendantas t he perpetr at or m ay be es t abl i s hed by di rec tevi dence , ci r cum s t ant i al evi dence , or a com bi nat i on of t he t w o. T h o m p so n , 5 1 9 S .W .2 d a t 7 9 3 . “T h e c r e d ib le tes tim o n y o f o n e id e n tifica tio n w itn e ss is s uf f i ci entt o s uppor t a convi ct i on i f t he w i t nes s vi ew ed t he accus ed unders uch ci r cum s t ance s as w oul d per m i ta pos i t i ve i dent i f i cat i on t o be m ade. ” St at e v. R adl ey, 29 S. W

. 3d 532, 537 ( T enn. C r i m . A pp. 1999) ( ci t i ng St at e v. St r i ckl and, 885 S. W

. 2d 85, 87- 88 ( T enn. C r i m . A pp. 19 93 ))

. T his cou rtst at ed thatt he ident i fi cat i on of t he d efendan tas t he p erpet rat or i s a ques t i on of fact for t he j ur y af t ercons i der i ng al l t he r el evantpr oof

. St r i ckl and, 885 S. W

. 2d a t 8 7 (c itin g S ta te v . C ra w fo rd , 6 3 5 S .W .2 d 7 0 4 , 7 0 5 (T e n n . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 2 ))

. B r ow n w as convi ct ed underT ennes s ee Code A nnot at ed s ect i on 39- 17- 417, w hi ch sta tes in re lev a n t p a rt: ( a ) I ti s a n o f

f e n s e f o ra d e f e n d a n tt o k n o w i n g l y: (3 ) S e ll a c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e [ .] ( c) A vi ol at i on of s ubs ect i on ( a) w i t h r es pectt o: ( 2) ( A ) A n yot herSchedul e I I contr ol l ed s ubs t ance , i ncl udi ng coca i ne o r m e th a m p h e tam in e in a n a m o u n t o f les s th a n p o in t f

iv e (.5 ) g ra m s, is a C lass C fel onyand, i n addi t i on, m aybe fi ned notm or e than one h u n d re d th o u s a n d d o lla rs ($ 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 )[ .] . . .
U pon ourr evi ew , t he evi dence , w hen exa m i ned i n t he l i ghtm os tfav o rab le t o t he St at e, w as s uffi ci entt o s uppor tt he t hr ee c onvi ct i ons . C ountone of the i ndi ct m entaddr es s es the u n d erc o v er dru g p u rch ase o n M ay 5 , 2 0 0 8

. T h e i n fo rm an t test ifi ed that so m e ti m e b ef o re M a y5 , h e wa s a p p r o a c h e d b yBr o wn a t a g a s s t a t i o n . Ac c o r d i n g t o t h e i n f o r ma n t , Br o wn pr ovi ded a phone n um berand s t at ed thati f t he i nfor m ant“nee ded s om ethi ng t o hol l erat hi m . ” The i nfor m ant t es t i fi ed t hathe ca l l ed B r ow n on M ay5 and arr anged t o pur chas e cr ack coca i ne. B r ow n t ol d hi m t o go t o an apa r t m entcompl ex. O ffi cerA nder s on and I nves t i gat or G or m an t es t i fi ed t hat t hey m et w i t h t he i nfor m antbefor e the drug pur chas e. T heys ear ched th e in f o rm a n t an d h is v e h icle f o r dr u g s, m o n e y , a n d w e a p o n s. T h e in f o rm a n t th e n d ro v e to t he apart m ent compl ex. T he i nfor m ant s ai d he “pul l ed up bes i de [B r o w n ] an d [B r ow n] handed me t he dope a nd I handed hi m t he m oney and dr ove off

. ” B ot h O ffi cerA nder s on and I nves t i gat orG or m an t es t i fi ed t hat t he i nfor m ant tur ned over t he cr ack c ocai ne fol l ow i ng t he u n d e r c o v e rd ru g p u r c h a s e . Th e t e c h n i c i a n f o r t h e Te n n e s s e e Bu r e a u o f I n v e s t i g a t i o n Cr i me-8-

L abor at or yt es t i fi ed thatt he s ubs t ance r ecove r ed fr om t he M ay5 drug p u rch as e cont ai ned coca i ne w ei ghi ng l es s t han 0. 5 gr ams. B as ed on t hi s evi dence , a r at i onal j ur ycoul d fi nd t hat on M ay5, B r ow n know i ngl y s ol d t he i nfor m ant a contr ol l ed s ubs t ance t hat w ei ghed l es s t han 0 .5 g ra m s . C ountt w o of t he i ndi ct m entaddr es s ed the M ay1 9 under coverdrug pur chas e. T he i nfor m antt es t i fi ed that h e agai n cal l ed B r ow n and expr es s ed hi s des i r e t o pur chas e cr ack c o c a in e . T h e in f

o rm a n t sa id h e w a s to ld to g o to a c a r w a sh . T h e in f o rm a n t m e t w ith Ser geantT hay erand O ffi cerA nder s on pr i ort o t he pur chas e. Ser geantT hay er t es t i fi ed that th e in f o rm a n t an d h is v e h icle w e re a g a in se a rc h e d . T h e in f o rm a n t w a s th e n e q u ip p e d w ith a vi deo rec o rde r and an audi o t r ans m i t t er . T he i nfor m antt es t i fi ed thathe dr ove t o t he ca r w a sh , p a rk e d h is v e h icle , a n d m e t w ith B ro w n o n a n e a rb yh ill . T h e in f o rm a n t sa id h e p a id B r ow n and w as t ol d w here to retri eve the cr ack c ocai ne. T he i nfor m antt es t i fi ed thathe found t he coc ai ne w her e B r ow n s ai d i tw oul d be. T he i nfor m ant stat ed t hathe pl ace d t he coca i ne i n t he cons ol e of hi s caran d d r ove t o an arr anged meet i ng poi ntw her e he met Ser geantT hay erand O ffi cer A nder s on. Ser geant T hay er t es t i fi ed t hat he re cover ed the cr ack coca i ne fr om t he i nfor m ant

. Ser geantT hay ers ai d he r ecor ded the drug pur chas e ac r os s t he s t r e e tf r o m t h e c a rw a s h u s i n g a c a m c o r d e r . T h i s v i d e o r e c o r d i n g w a s s h o w n t o t h e j u r y. B r ow n admi t t ed t o bei ng at t he car w as h on M ay 19 and s peaki ng w i t h t he i nfor m ant

. T he t echni ci an fort he Tennes s ee Bure au of In v est i gat i on C r i m e Labor at or yt es t i fi ed thatt he s ubs t ance r ecove r ed fr om t he M ay 19 drug pur chas e cont ai ned coca i ne w ei ghi ng l es s t han 0. 5 gr ams. T hi s evi dence , w hen t aken i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he St at e, s uppor t s t he ju ry ’s f in d in g o f g u ilt

. L as t l y , countt hr ee r el at es t o t he M ay20 drug pur chas e. T he i nfor m ants ai d he ca l l ed B r ow n fora thi r d t i m e, and they ar r anged t o m eet atan apa r t m entcompl ex. T he i nfor m ant tes ti f ie d th a t h e f

irst m e t w ith O f

f ice r A n d e rso n a n d In v e stig a to r G o rm a n , an d th e ya g a in s ear ched hi m and hi s vehi cl e. T he i nfor m ant t es t i fi ed t hat he dr ove t o t he apa r t m entcompl ex w her e he metw i t h B r ow n. T he i nfor m ants t at ed, “W e t al ked and I gave hi m t he money , and he t ol d m e i tw as byt he ma il b o x . ” T he i nfor m ants ai d he w entt o t he mai l box ar ea a nd r etr i eved the cr ack c ocai ne. H e dr ove aw ayfr om t he apa r t m entcompl ex and ga ve t he coca i ne t o t he off

i cer s . I nves t i gat or G or m an t es t i fi ed t hat t he i nfor m antr etur ned fr om t he apart m entcompl ex w i t h cr ack c ocai ne. T he t echni ci an for the Tennes s ee Bure au of I nves t i gat i on C r i m e L abor at or y t es t i fi ed t hat t he subs t ance r ecove r ed fr om t he M ay20 drug pur chas e cont ai ned coc ai ne w ei ghi ng l es s t han 0. 5 gr ams. B as ed on t hi s evi dence , a r at i onal j ur y coul d fi nd that on M ay20, B r ow n know i ngl ys ol d t he i nfor m anta contr ol l ed s ubs t ance th a t w e ig h e d le s s th a n 0 .5 g ra m s . B row n arg u es th at t h e e v iden ce d id n o t s u ff ici en tl yiden ti fyh im as th e p erp etrator. H e cl ai m s s ever al fac t s negat e the el ement of i dent i fy

. Fi r s t , B row n poi nt s t o t he fa ctt hat-9-

nei t hert he i nfor m antort he o ff icer s knew B r ow n’ s r eal name w hen the under coverdrug purch ase s o ccur r ed. H e al s o r efe r s t o t he s hor tdur at i on of t he drug pur chas es , t he i nfor m ant ’ s ques t i onabl e cr edi bi l i t y , and t he fact t hat t he offi cer s never vi ew ed the exc hange of drugs or m oney . T hi s cour thas s t at ed t he i dent i f i cat i on of

t he def endantas t he perpetr at or i s a q u e s t i o n o f fa c t fo r t h e j u r y . Se e Str i c k l a n d , 8 8 5 S. W

. 2 d a t 8 7 ( c i t i n g Cr a wfo r d, 635 S .W .2 d a t 7 0 5 ). A l l fac tual i s s ues r ai s ed byt he evi dence ar e r es ol ved by t he j ur yas t he tr i er of fa ct , and thi s cour t does not r e- w ei gh or r e- eval uat e t he evi dence

. B l and, 958 S. W

. 2d at 659 . H e re , th e in fo rm a n t p re se n ted d ire c t te stim o n y th a t B ro w n w a s th e p e rp e tra to r w h o so ld hi m cr ack c ocai ne t hr ee t i m es . T he jur y found t hatt he i nfor m antw as m or e cr edi bl e t han B ro w n , a n d w e w ill n o t o v e rr id e th is d e te rm in a tio n . A d d it ion all y , n o thin g in the rec o rd s uppor t s B r ow n’ s cl ai m t hat S erg eantT hay eri m pr oper l y“s ugges t ed” thatB r ow n w as t he d rug d ea ler. A s a d d re ss e d a b o v e , a ra tio n a l ju ry c o u ld fin d th e e v id e n c e w a s s u ffic ien t to s u p p o rt B ro w n ’s c o n v ic tio n s . T h e re fo re , h e is n o t e n title d to re lie f. CO NC L US I ON
B a s e d o n th e fo re g o in g , th e ju d g m e n ts o f t h e tr ia l c o u rt a re a ffir m e d

.

______________________________ CA M I L L E R. M c M UL L E N, J UDGE