1 We decline to i dentify by name the minor vict ims of chil d abuse. 

### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON Assigned on

Briefs J une 5, 2002
STATE OF TENN ESSEE v. SHANNO N LEE WOOD
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Benton County No. 99-CR857 Julian P. Guinn, Judge

No. W2000-01612-CCA-R3-CD - August 7, 2002

Following a jury tri a l, the defenda nt, Shannon Lee Wood, was convicted of the July 4, 1999 aggra va ted child abuse of his eighteen-month-old stepdaughter, for which he r eceived a 20-year sentence as a violent offender. Now on appeal, the defendant’s sole issue is whether the convicting evidence is sufficient to support the conviction. It is, and we affirm.

Tenn. R. App.P. 3; Judgm ent of the Circuit C ourt Aff

irmed.

J AMES C URWOOD W ITT , J R ., J., delive red the o pinion of t

he court , in which J OSEPH M. T IPTONand J ERRY L. S MITH , JJ., joined.

Louis W. Ringger, Jr. (at trial), Decaturville, T ennessee; and Guy T. Wilkerson (on appeal), Camden, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Shannon Lee W ood.

Paul G. Summe

r s, Attorney General & Reporter; Helena Wa lton Yarbrough, Assistant Attorney Genera l; G. Robert Radford, D i strict Attorney General; and Beth Boswell, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.
OPINION

Silver Rae Wood, the defendant’s wife, testified that she wa s at their Big Sandy trailer homeon July 4, 1999 with the defendant and her eighteen-month-old daughter, R. T. 1 R. T. was the defendant’s stepdaughter; at the time, Ms. Wood was in the final month of pregnancy with the couple’s only child. During the afternoon, Ms. Wood had been out of the home five to ten minutes and “when [she] left the house everything was f ine.” When she returned, she foundboth the defendant and the child in the living room crying. R. T. was “hysterical” an d could no t walk; her leg was swollen and she could not put weight on it. Ms. Wood testified that the defendant “said that he had took [sic] [R. T.] in the bedroom to pick up her . . . toys and he got mad at her because she wouldn’t.2 M s. Wood add itionally testified th at she w as afra id of the defendant; he had “h urt [her] several ti mes before

[and] hit [her] with about anyt

hing he coul d get hi s hands on, [ incl uding] chain s.” Sh e testified that he had prev iously beaten both R. T. and her . She ha d lef t hi m on previous occas ions, incl uding Ch ristm as 19 98 w hen she re ceive d he lp from a soci al a gency i n being pl aced i nto a hous ing proje ct i n Lexingt on. The def endant cam e to h er ap artm ent an d said “thathe w as no t goin g to lea ve [her and R. T. ] al ive a nd that eit her [Ms. Wood] was going to .

. . come back home or he w as go ing to kill them both right th ere.” S he lef t the ho using pro ject an d retu rned hom e w ith the d efen dan t.

3 Both th e defen dant an d Sha ne W ood were c om me rcial truck driv ers.

4 The Depar

tment of Chi ldr en’s Ser vic es a ss umed cus tody of R. T., and a soci al agency facili tated Ms. Wo od’s place ment in a sh elter. A fter w earin g a “body cas t” for se vera l wee ks, R . T.’s in jury heale d, an d she app aren tly
reco vere d fu lly.
-2- So he threw her on theground to make her pick up her toys.” The defendant said R. T. hurt her leg.

Ms. Wood te stified th at she ur ged the de

fendant to allow her to take the child to the hospital, offering to lie to hospital personnel about the cause of the injury, but he re fuse d and indicatedthat he was not going to jail for child abuse. “That’s when he started getting all mad at me. He was saying he was going to kill us, that he w ould rathe r go to jail for murder.” She and the defendant fought, and he threatened her with a load ed shotgun. 2 She testified that, later in the evening, he took Ms. Wood and the child with him to his brother Shane’s house and instructed Ms. Wood not to tell Shane or his wife, Buffy, what had happened to R. T. Ms. Wood testified that during the visit, the defendant retrieved his handgun from his br

other. A fter a w hile, the defenda nt took Ms. Wood and

R. T. back

home, whe

re R. T. sl ept throu ghout the n ight.

Ms. Wood testified that

about 9:00 on the morning of July 5, 1999, the defendant left to take Shane Wood to Reagan, Tennessee to allow Shane to pick up his road tractor. 3 Immediat ely after he l eft, Ms. Wood called the Benton County Sheriff’s Office and asked f or help in taking her child to the hospital. Deputy Sheriff Clarence Lee Hassell arrived a t the Wood home a few minutes later and transported

Ms. Wood a

nd R. T. to

the hospital. Radiological tests revealed a nondisplaced fracture of R. T.’s left femur. 4

In the afternoon of July 5, the defendant drove his Camaro to the she riff’s of fice to inquire abou t his wife, whereupon he was arrested f or child abuse. Afterward, upon finding the Camaro parked

at the sheriff’s office, Silver Wood retrieved the trailer keys from inside the Camaro and found the defendant’s shotgun in the back seat. She retrieved it an d delive red it to D eputy Hassell.

Ms. Wood testified that at the time of trial, her divo rce from the defendant was pending and that the defendant, who had made bond on or about September

17, 1999, had harrassed her in the weeks prior to his trial, causing her to move four times and change jobs three times. She testified that in the week prior to trial, her car had bee n stolen and vandalized and that she “had two5 Sha ne W ood ackn ow ledg ed th at “[w ]e’re n ot no doc tors, . . . we ’ve ju st got fiv e kid s, you kno w.”
-3- girls come up to [her] and [tell her] they was going

to whop [s ic] [he

r] ass and [she] was not going to be here to testify this week, that Shannon had paid them to have them whop [sic] [he r] ass.” Deputy Hassell’ s trial te stimony co rrobora ted that Ms

. Wood made the July 5 call to the sheriff’s office and that he trans ported he

r and the child tothe hospital, although he testified that she placed her call around 11:00 a.m., rather 9:00 a.m. At trial, he testified that when he arrived at the home, Ms. W

ood was “ shaking,”

“frant ic[],” and “re ally frightened about being [at the trailer].” The child “wasn’t acting like children usually do. She was just [lying] there.” While at the trailer, he saw a shotgun in a living-room gun rack and identifie d it as the same shotgun that Ms. Wood retrieved from the Camaro and gave to him later that day after the defendant had bee n incarcerated.

The stat e off

ered expert medical evidence tha t R. T. had suffered a nondisplaced fractureto her

left femur, that the fracture was the r esult of substantial force being applied, and that the fracture was consistent with someone throwing, dropping, or perhaps forcing the child onto the floor, but not consistent with twisting the leg.

Before testifyin g in his own defense , the def

endant c alled his broth er and sister-in-law, Shane and Buffy Wood, to testify about the visit of the defendant, Silver Wood, and R. T. to Shane and Buffy’s house the evening of July 5, 1999. Shane and Buffy Wood were in general a greement that R. T.’s leg was injured. There being no discoloration of the leg and nothing indicating to them that the leg was broken, and believing that R. T. had suffered a sprain, Shane Wood suggested that the ch ild be soaked in warm water and that Icy Hot be applied to her leg. 5 It was obv

ious to both Shane and Buffy Wood that something was wrong with R. T., and they testified that when they asked the defendant

and Silver Wood what had happened to R. T., “they” replied that R. T. had fallen off
a bed. Buffy Wood testified that both the defendant and Silver Wood were conce rned about R. T. and were in a quandar y about wh

ether to take her to the hosp ital.

The defenda

nt testified that, on the afternoon of July 4, 1999, he had been mowing the yardand had come into the trailer to drink ice water. Silver Wood and R. T. were inside. R. T. was appare ntly cra nky beca use the de

fendant had not le

t her go ou

tside to pla

y, and he had take n her to her bedroom. He was alone in the bedroom with her, and prior to his touching her , she was limping. He decided he was going to take her outside. When she would not stop crying and would not pick up hersunglasses, he told her to sit down. When she would not, he knelt on the floor, ra ised he r about a foot off the floor

with both his hands being placed between her waist and armpits, and “sa t [sic] her down on her

butt.” He testified that, in the process of setting her “on her butt,” her left leg “went sideway s.” He a

dmitted be

ing somewh at forc eful in

his placement of

the child on the floor but denied using excessive force.

The defenda nt denied

that he r efused t o allow R. T . to be tak

en to the hospital a

n d deniedthat he threatened Silver Wood with the shot gun or otherwise. He admitted that after he6 Apparentl y, the gun was unloade d when found ins ide t he Camaro, a nd no ammunition was found i nside the
car or on the de fendant ’s pe rson.
7 The convic ti on offens e was cont ained in count two of t he indi ctment. The jur y acqui tt ed the defendant on count one , an a ll egati on that the de fendant

abused R. T. i n June 1999 by holding her underwater at a sw imm ing h ole during a famil y outi ng. -4- returned from Reagan and found his wife and R. T. gone, he placed the shotgun in the Camaro, but he insiste d he di d so because he planned to raise money by pawning the we apon. He testified that the shotgu

n was not lo aded an d that he t ook no ammu

nition with

him. 6

Based upon this evidence, the jury convicted the defendant of aggrava ted child abuse, which is committe d by one who knowingl y treats a child unde

r the age of 18 in suc

h a manne

r as to inflictinjury or

neglect s such chi

ld so as to a

dversel y affect the child ’s health

and welfare, when such treatment or neglect results in serious b odily injur

y to the child. Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-15-401(a), -402(a) (1997). 7 The def endant a rgues on a

ppeal tha t the evid ence is insu fficient to s upport the conviction. As an appellate court, we essentially view a diffe rent evidential mosiac than did the trier of fact. Wesee the same tesserae as did the trier of fact, but on appeal the full mosaic has been altered: Different hues emanate from the fact trier’s infer ences and credibility shadings, and from the appella te perspective of the

overall image, we

see in highlight the f

eature s most favo

rable to the state. See Stat e v. C

abbage , 571 S.W.2d 832, 836 (Tenn. 1978) (on appeal, the state is entitled to the strongest legitimate view of the evidence and all reasonable or legitimate inferences whic h may be drawn therefrom). Our

critique of the image, thus highlighted, is aimed at determining whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential ele ments of the crime beyond a reasona ble doubt. Jackson v. Virgini

a , 443 U.S. 307, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 2782 (1979); Tenn. R. Crim. P. 13(e).

A jury’s verdict of guilty re moves the presumption o f innoce nce and raises a presumption of

guilt on appeal. State v. Grace , 493 S.W.2d 474, 4 76 (Tenn . 1973); Anglin v. State , 553 S.W.2d 616, 620 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1977). The jury’s guilty verdict, approved by the trial judge,
accre dits the testimony of the witnesses for the state andresolves all conflicts in favor of the theory of the state. State v. H

atchett , 560 S.W.2d 627, 630 ( Tenn. 197 8); State v. Townsend , 525 S.W.2d 842, 843 (Tenn. 1975). On appeal, the defendant has the burden of overcoming the presumption of guilt. State v. B rown , 551 S.W.2d 329, 331 (Tenn. 1977).

Applying these principles of law, we hold that sufficient evidence suppor ts the conviction. The elements of aggravated child abuse were supplied by the testimony of SilverWard and the treating medical e xpert. W e fully re alize tha

t other witnesses c ontradicted some a spects of Silver Wood’s te stimony an d that th e def endant denied treating the child in a “manner as to inflict injury.” In identifying various points of conflicting evidence, however, the defenda nt merely justifies the need for the fact-finding crucible of a trial. As long as the fact finde r heard e vidence which logically established the elements of the conviction offense, as the jury did in this case, the f actual-5-

conflic ts have been legally resolved, albeit against the defenda nt. In othe

r words, he had “his day in court,” and on appeal, we are powerle ss to disturb the jury’s verdict, as a rational end-product of the trial process.

___________________________________ JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE