### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL AP PEALS OF TENNES SEE ATJAC KSON A ssi gne d O n B ri ef

s N ove m be r 10, 200 9 STATE OF TENNESS EE v . LANCE MURRAY
D irec t A p p ea l f

ro m th e C rim ina l C o u rt fo r S h elb y C o u n ty N o. 07- 01811 Jam es M . L am m ey, Jr. , Judge

N o. W 2009- 00332- C C A
- R 3- C D - F i l ed M arch 19, 2010

A S h e l b yCo u n t y j u r y c o n v i c t e d t h e De f e n d a n t , L a n c e M u r r a y , o f f a c i l i t a t i o n o f

r o b b e r y . On appea l , t he D efe ndantcont ends t hatt he evi dence i s i ns uffi ci entt o s us t ai n h is c onvi ct i on. A fter a th o rou g h rev iew o f the rec o rd an d ap p li ca b le au tho ri ti es, w e a ff irm the tri al co u rt ’s ju d g m e n t.
T enn. R . A pp. P . 3 A ppeal as of R i ght ; Judgm ent of

t he C ri m i nal C ourt A f f i rm ed
R OB ER T W. W EDE MEY ER , del i ver ed the opi n ion o f the C our t , i n w hi ch J OH N E VER ETT W I L L I AMS a n d J

. C. M C L IN , J J

. , j oi ned.
S cottH al l (att ri al ), M em ph i s, T enn essee, and H arryE

. S ay le III (on app eal ), M em ph i s, T e n n e s s e e , f

o rt h e A p p e l l a n t , L a n c e M u r r a y. R o b e rt E

. C o o p e r, Jr., A tto rn e y G e n e ra l a n d R e p o rte r; M ich a e l E

. M o o re , S o licito r G e n e ra l; C amer on L

. H y der , A ssist ant A t t or neyG ener al ; W i l l i am L

. G i bbons , D i s t r i ctA t t or ney G ener al ; Pam el a Fl emi ng, A s s i s t ant D ist ri ct A t t or neyG ener al , fort he A ppel l ee, St at e of T ennes s ee. OP I NI ON
T hi s cas e ar i s es fr om t he r obbery of an A dvance d A ut o Par t s s t or e i n O ct oberof 2006. For t hi s cr i m e, a Shel byC ount ygr and j ur yi ndi ct ed the D efe n d ant on one countof aggr avat ed r obbery . A tt he tri al on t hi s char ge, t he fol l ow i ng evi dence w as pr es ent ed: A nt oni o Sm i t h t es t i fi ed that , on O ct ober16, 2006, betw een 11: 00 and 1 1 :45 a. m . , he w as w or ki ng atan A dvance A ut o Part s st or e w ai t i ng on a cus t om erw hen the D efe ndant appr oache d hi m poi nt i ng a gun. Sm i t h not i ced the D efe ndanthad a “ di s t i nct i ve voi ce, ” a

“ d e e p so u th e rn d ra w l typ e v o ice , ca ju n typ e .” H e d e sc rib e d th e D e f e n d a n t as a b lac k m a le w ear i ng bl ack pant s , a j acke t , a dar k- col or ed bandana t hatcover ed hi s nos e and mout h, and-2-

a h a t

. S mi t h e s t i ma t e d t h a tt h e De f e n d a n twa s a p p r o x i ma t e l y5 ' 8 " t o 6 ' t a l l wi t h a “ me d i u m” b u ild

. T h e D e f

e n d a n t to ld S m ith , “G e t b a c k , g e t b a c k

. I j u st w a n t th e m o n e y ,” a n d th e n sa id a fe w cur s e w or ds

. Sm i t h i m m edi at el y compl i ed and backe d up, and t he cus t om er fl ed t o t he back r oom of the s t or e. T he D efe ndantgr abbed the ca s h r egi s t erdr aw er , r an outt he fr ont door , and cont i nued runni ng t o t he l efts i de of the bui l di ng. Sm i t h des cr i bed the ca s h r egi s t er dr aw eras a tw o- and- a- hal f t o t hr ee f eetw i de, det acha bl e, bei ge box w i t h a s i l verdoorand e stim a ted th a t th e c a sh re g iste r d ra w e r c o n tain e d a p p ro x im a te ly $ 3 4 0 to $ 3 5 0 . S m ith r eca l l ed thatt he D efe ndant al s o t ook t he cust om er ’ s tw enty dol l arbi l l t hatw as l y i ng on t he count er . Sm i t h s t at ed thatt he ent i r e i nci dentw as captur ed on the s t or e’ s vi deo s ur vei l l ance .

Sm i t h t es t i fi ed that he i m m edi at el y cal l ed pol i ce a nd t ol d t hem w hathad happe ned. L ater that s ame day , t he pol i ce br oughta ca s h r egi s t erdr aw ert o t he s t or e, and the s er i al num berand the keyt o t he ca s h r egi s t erdr aw erm at ched the d raw er thathad bee n s t ol en. Sm i t h r eca l l ed that t he pol i ce r etur ned agai n a fe w day s l at erw i t h a vi deo l i ne- up, and, aft er vi ew i ng t he l i n e - u p , Smi t h i d e n t i f i e d t h e Def

e n d a n ta s t h e p e r s o n who r o b b e d t h e s t o r e. Sm i t h test ifi ed t hat , beca us e he ne vers aw the fa ce of t he per s on w ho r obbed the s t or e, he m ade the i dent i fi cat i on bas ed onl yupon the D ef endant ’ s voi ce, w hi ch he w as abl e t o hear on t he vi deo. H e s t at ed that , al t hough t he acce nt of the voi ce he i dent i fi ed w as notas s t r ong a s h e re c a lle d , h e w a s a b le to id e n tif yth e v o ic e . M artha S t row d e r tes ti fi ed thatshe w as ather hom e on 13 00 C um m i ng s, M em ph i s, T ennes s ee, O ct ober16, 2006, w hen s he hear d a noi s e out s i de. She l ooked outherbedr oom w i ndow , w hi ch fa ces t he s t r eet , and s aw a y oung m an put s om ethi ng i nt o her garbage c an and t hen cl ean of

f hi s hands

. St r ow der m oved t o t he l i vi ng r oom door , s o s he coul d geta bett er l ook at the y oung m an, w ho s he s aw geti n a truck thathad unus ual m ar ki ngs , i ncl udi ng a pl at e w i t h a pai nt i ng of skel et ons l ocat ed w her e the l i cens e t ag i s nor m al l yhung. T he truck d ro v e to h e r ne ig h b o r’s h o u se a n d th e n sto p p e d a g a in . S tro w d e r sa id th e tru c k ’s o c c u p a n ts w at ched he ras s he s t ood i n t he door w ay and s eemed hes i t ant t o l eave but fi nal l ydr ove off and turned o nto T ri gg S t reet

. S t row der t est i fi ed she then w ent out si de an d fo u nd a cash r egi ster d raw eri n hergarbage c an, s o s he ca l l ed the pol i ce. St r ow dert es t i fi ed thatpol i ce det ect i ves l at ers how ed herpi ctur es of the D efe ndant ’ s t ruck, and s he i dent i fi ed t he truck as th e o n e s h e s a w in f

ro n t o f h e r h o m e . On c r o s s - e x a mi n a t i o n , S t r o wd e rt e s t i f i e d t h a ts h e s a w t h r e e p e o p l e i n t h e t ru c k , t wo peopl e i n the fr onts eatand one pe r s on i n t he bac k s eat

. She s ai d t hatt he per s on i n t he pas s engers eatw as t he “y oung bl ack man” w i t h a “l ow hai r cut , ” w ear i ng dar k pant s and a dar k s hi r t , w ho w as s t andi ng overher garbage can. St r ow derw as s how n a phot ogr aphi c l i ne--3-

u p , b u t s h e w a s o n ly ab le to n a rr o w th e s u s p e c t d o w n to tw o in d iv id u a ls

. O ffi cerC har l es C atheyw i t h t he M emphi s Pol i ce De p a rtme n tt e s t i f i e d th a t , o n Oct ober 16, 2006, he r es ponded t o a ca l l atSt r ow der ’ s hous e w her e he r ecove r ed a c as h r egi s t er d ra w e r, w h ich h e to o k to A d v a n c e A u to P a rts. O f f ice r C a th e y re c a lled th a t a n A d v a n c e A u to Par t s empl oy ee i dent i fi ed t he cas h r egi s t er dr aw er as t he one s t ol en ea r l i ert hatday

. O ffi cer C atheyt hen tur ned the ca s h r egi s t erdr aw er i n t o t he C r i m e Scene O ffi ce t o be pr oces s ed for fi ng erpr i nts

. R ober tC onner, an A dvance A ut o Par t s empl oy ee, t es t i fi ed he w as w or ki ng on O ct ober16, 2006, w hen the r obberyoccurr ed. C onners ai d he w as i n an off i ce s et apartfr om t he r es tof the s t or e att he t i m e of the r obberybutcoul d s ee w hatw as goi ng on t hr ough vi deo s ur vei l l ance . C onnertest i fi ed that$453. 18 w as t aken f r om t he ca s h r egi s t erdur i ng t he ro b b e ry. C onnerr eca l l ed that , aft ert he pol i ce i ni t i al l y r es ponded t o t he r obbery , t heyr etur ned l at er i n t he dayw i t h a ca s h r egi s t erdr aw ert heyhad r ecove r ed. C onnert es t i fi ed thathe w as a b le to o p e n th e d ra w e r w ith th e sto re ’s k e y a n d th a t th e d ra w e r co n tain e d c h e c k s w ritten to A d v a n c e A u to P a rt s . O f f ice r A n th o n yM o rris, w ith th e M e m p h is P o lice D e p a rtm e n t, res p o n d e d to a c a ll t o be on the l ook- outfora w hi t e t ruck bear i ng pi ctur es of s kul l and bones

. H e l ocat ed the vehi cl e i n t he dr i vew ayof a hous e l ocat ed on T r i gg and O r l eans . O ffi cerM or r i s w as advi s ed to c o n tin u e p a tro lli n g th e a re a , an d , as h e d id , h e h e a rd o v e r th e d isp a tch ra d io th a t th e w h ite t ruck had l eftt he hous e on T r i gg and O r l eans and w as now m ovi ng t ow ar d W al kerand L auder dal e. O ffi cer M or r i s s t at ed he w ent t o W al kerand Lauder dal e w her e, t he w hi t e truck had bee n s t opped bypol i ce, and ver i fi ed t hat t he vehi cl e s t opped w as t he s ame vehi cl e he ha d s een on Tr i gg and O r l eans . O ffi cerJ os eph Poi ndext er , w i t h t he M emphi s Pol i ce D epart m ent , t es ti fied he interview ed the D ef

en d an t o n the d ay o f the rob b ery , an d the D ef en d an t sa id the w h it e F o rd E xpl or er w as hi s vehi cl e. T he D efe ndant s ai d he had per s onal i zed t he vehi cl e byp laci ng s t i cker s of var i ous s kul l s and cr os s bones on t he das hboar d and the fr ontm i r r or . H e admi t t ed he w as dr i vi ng t he vehi cl e w hen i tw as s t opped at L au d erd ale and W al kerand thathe had b e e n th e o n ly o n e d ri v in g th e v e h ic le a ll d a y . O f f ice r P o in d e x ter sta ted th e D e f e n d a n t’s w a s c a rry in g $ 1 8 6 .0 6 in h is p a n ts p o c k e t. O f f ic e r P o in d e x te r re c a lle d th a t th e D e f e n d a n t h a d a “ th ic k C a

ju n a c c e n t, v e ry s o u t h e rn .” T he D efe ndant expl ai ned t hat he l i ved i n N ew O r l eans butw as di s pl ace d due t o H ur r i cane K a tr in a .-4-

O ffi cer Poi ndext ert es t i fi ed thati tw as appr oxi m at el y4. 6 m i l es fr om t he A dvance A ut o Par t s s t or e t o St r ow der ’ s hous e w her e pol i ce r ecove r ed t he cas h r egi s t er dr aw er , and t he dr i ve t ook hi m aboutt en mi nut es dur i ng rus h hour t r aff i c. O ffi cer Poi ndext ers t at ed that t h e d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n S t r o w d e r ’ s h o u s e a n d w h e r e p o l i c e f i r s ts a w t h e t ru c k i n a d r i v e w a y, a t T rig g a n d O rle a n s, w a s s e v e n -te n th s o f a m ile. T h e o f f ice r sa id it to o k h im a p p ro x im a tely th re e m in u te s to d ri v e th is d is ta n c e a t th e p o s te d s p e e d lim it.
O f f ic e rP o in d e x te rte s ti f

ie d th a t h e c r e a te d a v id e o li n e u p th a t i n c lu d e d th e D e f e n d a n t. H e expl ai ned thatt hi s w as nott he nor m al pr ocedur e butt hat , beca us e the s us pect ’ s fac e w as cover ed dur i ng t he robbe r y , t he mostdi s t i ngui s habl e fe atur e w as hi s voi ce. T he vi deo l i neup cont ai ned audi o, s o Sm i t h coul d heart he s ubj ect s i n t he l i neup sp ea k

. O ffi cerPoi ndext er s ai d t hatSm i t h had des cr i bed the D efe ndan t’ s v o ice as “C aj un s t y l e. ” O ffi cerPoi ndext er r e c a l l e d t h a t t h e Def

e n d a n t ’ s v o i c e i n t h e v i d e o l i n e u p was n o t c o n s i s t e n t wi t h hi s voi ce w hen theys poke dur i ng t he i nt er vi ew . H e r eca l l ed t hat , dur i ng t he t api ng of the vi deo l i neup, th e D e f e n d a n t “ tried to so f

ten [ h is ac c e n t] u p q u ite a b it” an d th a t “you d id n ’t h e a r th a t f u ll a c c e n t c o m in g o u t” in th e v id e o . O ffi cerPoi ndext err eca l l ed thathi s par t ner ’ s cel l phone, w hi ch r i ngs t o t he t heme of “The G ood, T he B ad and The U gl y , ” r ang d u ri n g the t api ng of the vi deo l i neup w hen the camer a w as focus ed on t he D efe ndant

. O ffi cer Poi ndext er expl ai ned t hat he di d not s t op t he v i d e o r e c o r d i n g a tt h i s p o i n tb e c a u s e h e h a d b e e n a d v i s e d t h a ts t a r t i n g a n d s t oppi ng a r ecor di ng coul d s ugges ty ou ar e cove r i ng up s om ethi ng. T he vi deo w as pl ay ed fo r Sm i t h, w h o id e n ti f

ied th e D e f

e n d a n t as th e p e rp e tra to r. A p h o to g ra p h ic lin e u p w a s s h o w n to St r ow der , w ho w as unabl e t o pos i t i vel yi dent i fyone i ndi vi dual , butnarr ow ed i tdow n t o t w o, o n e o f w h o m w a s th e D e f

e n d a n t. O ffi cerPoi ndex ter testi fi ed thathe col l ect ed a vi deo s ur vei l l ance t ape f r om t he A dvance A ut o Par t s s t or e t hat confi r m ed the vi ct i m ’ s acc ountof the r obberyand des cr i pt i on of th e p e rp e t r a t o r . Th e o f f i c e r s a i d t h e v i d e o f

i r s t s h o wed a whi t e Fo r d Ex p l o r er , w hi ch m at ched Str ow der ’ s des cr i pt i on, t r avel i ng w es t on t he r oad t hat bor der s t he nor t h s i de of t he s t or e. A few s econds l at er , the rob b er is se en ent er i ng t he s t or e fr om t he nor t h s i de of the s t or e. A ft ert he r obberl eave s t he s t or e, t he s ame w h it e For d E xpl or er , w i t h s kul l and cr os s bone s t i cker s , i s s een goi ng t he oppos i t e di r ect i on on B l uebi r d.
O n cr os s - exami nat i on, O ffi cer Poi ndext er agr eed that , w hi l e Sm i t h’ s des cr i pt i on of th e ro b b e r a s a m a n w ith a th ick , C a ju n a c c e n t w a s th e typ e o f in f o rm a tio n h e w o u ld nor m al l yi ncl ude i n a suppl ement r epor t , he had noti ncl uded thati nfor m at i on i n hi s i ni t i al r epor t

. O ffi cerPoi ndext eragr eed t hat hi s s uppl ement r epor tdi d notnot e the r obber ’ s C aj un a c c e n t u n til it d e s c ri b e d a m e e tin g w ith S m ith th a t o c c u rr e d tw o d a y s a f te r t h e ro b b e ry.-5-

B as ed up o n thi s evi dence , t he j ur yconvi ct ed the D efe ndantof the l es s er - i ncl uded o f f e n s e o f f a c i l i t a t i o n o f

r o b b e r y. II . A n a ly sis
T he D efe ndantchal l enges t he s uffi ci encyof the evi dence

. Speci fi cal l y , he cl ai m s t hat th e e v id e n c e is in su f

f ic ien t to e sta b lish h is id e n titya s th e ro b b e r in th is c a se . T h e S tate r es ponds t hatt he fol l ow i ng evi dence , w hi ch w as offe r ed at t r i al , s uppor t s t he j ur y ’ s fi ndi ng t hat t he D efe ndant w as t he r obber i n t hi s cas e: Sm i t h’ s i dent i fi cat i on of the D efe ndantbas ed on hi s t hi ck C aj un acc ent ; St r ow der ’ s i dent i fi cat i on of t he i ndi vi dual w ho discard ed the s t ol en A dvance d A ut o Par t s cas h r egi s t erdr aw eri n a garbage can i n fr ontof herhous e; St r ow der ’ s i dent i fi cat i on of the D efe ndant ’ s w hi t e For d E xpl or eras t he one s he s aw out s i de h e r h o u se ; an d th e sim ilarityb e tw e e n th e D e f e n d a n t’s w h it e F o rd E x p lo re r a n d th e w h ite F o r d E x p l o r e rt h a ta p p e a r s o n t h e s u r v e i l l a n c e v i d e o s h o r t l y b e f o r e t h e r o b b e r y.

W hen an acc us ed chal l enges t he s uffi ci encyof the evi dence , t hi s C our t ’ s s t andar d of r evi ew i s w hether , aft ercons i der i ng t he evi dence i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he St at e, “anyr at i onal t r i erof fa ctcoul d have f ound the esse n t i al el ement s of the cr i m e bey ond a r eas onabl e doubt

. ” J

a c k so n v . V irg in ia , 4 4 3 U .S . 3 0 7 , 3 1 9 (1 9 7 9 ); s ee Ten n. R. A pp . P. 1 3 (e ), S ta te v . G o o dw in , 143 S. W

. 3d 771, 775 ( T enn. 2004) ( ci t i ng S ta te v . R e id , 91 S. W

. 3d 247, 276 ( T enn. 2002) )

. T hi s rul e appl i es t o fi ndi ngs of gui l tbas ed upon di r ectevi dence , c ir c u m s ta n tia l ev id e n c e , o r a c o m b in a tio n o f b o th d ir e c t an d c ir c u m s ta n tia l ev id e n c e . S ta te v . P end ergrass , 1 3 S. W

. 3 d 3 8 9 , 3 9 2

- 9 3 ( Te n n . Cr i m. App

. 1 9 9 9 )

. A c o n v i c t i o n m aybe bas ed ent i r el yon ci r cumst ant i al evi dence w her e the fa ct s ar e “so cl ear l yi nt erw oven and connec t ed thatt he fi ngerof gui l ti s poi nt ed unerr i ngl yatt he D efe ndantand the D efe ndant al one. ” S ta te v . Sm ith , 8 6 8 S .W .2 d 5 6 1 , 5 6 9 (T e n n . 1 9 9 3 ). T h e ju ryd e c id e s th e w e ig h t to be gi ven t o ci r cumst ant i al evi dence , and “[t ] he i nfer ence s t o be dra w n fr om s uch evi dence , and t he ext ent t o w hich t he ci rcum st ances ar e con si st ent w i t h guil t and i nco nsiste n t w ith i nnocenc e, ar e quest i ons pr i m ar i l yfort he j ur y . ” St at e v. R i ce , 184 S. W

. 3d 646, 662 ( T enn. 2 0 0 6 ) (c itatio n s o m itt e d ). In d e ter m in in g th e su f f icie n c y o f th e e v id e n c e , this C o u rt sh o u ld n o t r e -w e ig h o r r e -e v a lu a te th e e v id e n c e . S t a t e v . Ma t th e ws , 805 S. W

. 2d 776, 779 ( T enn. C r i m . A pp. 1990)

. N or m ay t hi s C our t s ubs t i tut e i t s i nfer ence s for t hos e dr aw n by t he tr i er o f f a c t f ro m th e e v id e n c e . St at e v. B uggs , 9 9 5 S .W .2 d 1 0 2 , 1 0 5 (T e n n . 1 9 9 9 ); Li akas v. S ta te , 286 S. W

. 2d 856, 859 ( T enn. 1956)

. “Q ues t i ons conce r ni ng the cre di bi l i t yof t he w i t nes s es , t he w ei ghtand val ue of the evi dence , as w el l as al l fac tual i s s ues raised byt he evi dence ar e re so lved b y the t r i erof fa ct

. ” St at e v. B l and , 958 S. W

. 2d 651, 659 ( T enn. 1 9 9 7 ); Li akas , 286 S. W

. 2d at 859. “A gui l t y ver di ct by t he j ur y , appr oved byt he tr i al j udge, acc r edi t s t he t es t i m ony of t he w i t nes s es fort he St at e and r es ol ves al l confl i ct s i n favorof t he t heoryof the St at e. ” St at e v. C abbage , 5 7 1 S .W .2 d 8 3 2 , 8 3 5 (T e n n . 1 9 7 8 ); St at e v. G r ace ,-6-

493 S. W

. 2d 474, 479 ( T enn. 1973)

. T he Tennes s ee Supr eme C our ts t at ed the r at i onal e for t hi s rul e: T h is w ell -sett led ru le rests on a so u n d fo u n d ati o n . T h e tri al ju d g e a n d the ju ry s ee the w i t nes s es fac e t o fac e, hear t hei r t es t i m onyand obs er ve thei rdemeanor on t he s t and. T hus , t he tr i al j udge and j ur y ar e t he pr i m aryi ns t rum ent al i t yof j us t i ce t o det er m i ne the w ei ghtand cr edi bi l i t yt o be gi ven t o t he t es t i m onyof w itn e ss e s. In th e trial fo ru m a lo n e is th e re h u m a n a tm o sp h e re a n d th e to tality o f th e e v id e n c e c a n n o t b e re p ro d u c e d w ith a w ritten re c o rd in th is C o u rt.
B o lin v . S ta te , 405 S. W

. 2d 768, 771 ( T enn. 1996) ( ci t i ng C a rr o ll v. S ta te , 370 S. W

. 2d 523 ( T enn. 1963) )

. T hi s C our tm us taff or d t he St at e of Tennes s ee the s t r onges tl egi t i m at e vi ew of the evi dence cont ai ned i n t he r ecor d, as w el l as al l r eas onabl e i nfer ence s w hi ch maybe d ra w n f ro m th e e v id e n c e . G o o dw in , 143 S. W

. 3 d at775 ( ci t i ng S ta te v . Sm ith , 24 S. W

. 3d 274, 279 ( T enn. 2000) )

. B eca us e a ve r di ctof gui l tagai ns ta def endantr emoves the pr e s u m pt i on of i nnocenc e and r ai s es a pr es um pt i on of gui l t , t he convi ct ed cr i m i nal defe ndant b e a rs th e b u rd e n o f

s h o w in g th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s le g a llyin su f f icie n t to su sta in a g u ilty v e rd ic t. Stat e v. C arruthers , 3 5 S .W .3 d 5 1 6 , 5 5 7 -5 8 (T e n n . 2 0 0 0 ).
T h e D e f e n d a n t in th is c a se w a s c o n v icte d o f f a c ili tatio n o f

ro b b e ry . O n e is c rim in a lly re sp o n sib le f

o r th e f a c ili tatio n o f

a f e lo n y , “if

, k n o w in g th a t an o th e r in ten d s to c o m m it a s peci fi c fe l ony , butw i t houtt he i nt entr equi r ed forcr i m i nal r es pons i bi l i t yu nder§ 39- 11- 402( 2) , t he per s on know i ngl yfurni s hes s ubs t ant i al as s i s t ance i n t he comm i s s ion o f t he fel ony . ” T. C

. A

. § 3 9 -11 -403( a) ( 2006)

. R obbery , as appl i cabl e t o t he ca s e atbar , i s “the i nt ent i onal orknow i ng t heft of prope r t yfr om t he per s on of anotherby

. . . put t i ng t he per s on i n fea r . ” T. C

. A

. § 39- 13- 401( a) ( 2006)

. T heft of pr oper t y occur s w hen a per s on w ho i nt ends to d e p riv e th e o w n e r o f p ro p e rty“ k n o w in g lyo b tain s o r e x e rc ise s c o n tro l o v e r th e p ro p e rty w i t houtt he ow ner ’ s eff ect i ve cons ent

. ” T

. C

. A

. § 39- 14- 103 ( 2006)

. Fearas an el ement of r obberyi nvol ves fea rof “pr es entper s onal per i l fr om vi ol ence offe r ed ori m pendi ng” and m us tbe a f

earof “bodi l yd an g er o r i m pendi ng per i l t o t he per s on w hi ch i nt i m i dat es or pr om ot es s ubm i s s i on t o t he t heft of t he pr oper t y . ” St at e v. B ow l es , 52 S. W

. 3d 69, 80 ( T enn. 2 0 0 1 ) ( c ita tio n s o m itte d ).
A ft era r evi ew of t he evi dence i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he St at e, w e conc l ude t hatt her e w as su ffi ci entevi dence pr es ent ed att r i al fora r at i onal t r i erof fa ctt o fi nd t he D ef en d an t gu il tyo f f

ac il it ati o n o f ro b b ery . S m ith test ifi ed that a blac k m an d resse d in d ark cl ot hi ng ent er ed the s t or e and, at gunpoi nt , demanded m oneyand t ook t he s t or e ca s h r egi s t er dr aw ert hatcont ai ned $453. 18. Sm i t h t es t i fi ed thatt he r o b b er sp o k e w i t h a di s t i nct , t hi ck C aj un acc ent

. U pon r evi ew i ng a vi deo l i neup t hat i ncl uded audi o, Sm i t h w as abl e t o i dent i fy t he D efe ndantas the r obberbas ed upon the D efe ndant ’ s acc ent

. T he D efe ndant ’ s vehi cl e,-7-

a w hi t e Fo r d Ex p l o r e r wi t h s k u l l a n d c r o s s b o n e s t i c k e r s a n d n o l i c e n s e t a g , was s e e n on s ur vei ll ance vi deo j us tbefor e the r obberydr i vi ng i n t he s ame ar ea f r om w hi ch the r obber ent er ed the s t or e. T he s ame di s t i nct i ve vehi cl e w as s een l eavi ng t he ar ea j us taft ert he ro b b e ry . S h o rtlyth e re a f ter , n e a r th e a re a o f

th e ro b b e ry , S tro w d e r n o tice d th e sa m e w h ite F ord E xp l orerou t si de h er hom e and a m an d res sed i n d ark cl othi ng dis card t he st olen cash r egi s t erdr aw er i n one of her garbage c ans . Pol i ce f ound t he D efe ndanti n t he ar ea, dr i vi ng a w hi t e For d E xpl or er , d resse d i n dar k cl ot hi ng, w i t h $186. 06 i n cas h on hi s per s on. T he D e f e n d a n t ad m itt e d o w n e rsh ip o f th e w h ite F o rd E x p lo re r, a n d h e sta ted th a t h e w a s th e o n ly p e r s o n w h o d r o v e t h e c a ro n t h a td a y. T h e D e f e n d a n t ar g u e s th a t th e id e n tific a tio n o f th e D e f e n d a n t a s the p e rp e tra to r in th is cr i m e i s fl aw ed

. H e bas es t hi s ar gum enton t he fa ctt hatSm i t h coul d onl yi dent i fyhi m by hi s v o i c e . He f

u r t h e r a s s e r t s t h a t t h e l i n e - u p was t a i n t e d b y a c e l l p h o n e r i ng pl ay i ng t he t h e me s o n g f

r o m “ Th e Go o d , t h e Ba d , a n d t h e Ug l y , ” wh i l e t h e c a me r a wa s f o c u s e d o n h i m, a n d S tr o w d e r c o u ld n o t p o s itiv e ly id e n tif yth e D e f e n d a n t f ro m th e p h o to g ra p h ic lin e u p . W e ag ree that the id en ti tyo f the p erp etrator is a n esse n ti al e lem en t o f an ycrim e, an d there fo re m u s t b e p ro v e n b y th e S ta te b e y o n d a re a s o n a b le d o u b t. St at e v. R i ce , 184 SW

. 3d 646, 662 ( T enn. 2006) ( ci t i ng St at e v. Thom ps on , 51 9 S

. W

. 2d 78 9, 79 3 (Ten n. 19 75 ). W e w ou l d als o n o te th a t i s s u e s o f

id e n tity a n d c re d ib ility a re c la s s ic ju ry q u e s tio n s . Stat e v. G regory Mul l i ns , N o. E 2004- 02314- C C A

- R 3- C D , 2005 W L 2045151, at * 5 (T enn. C r i m . A pp. , at K n o x v ille , A u g . 2 5 , 2 0 0 5 ), no Tenn. R

. App. P

. 11 appl i cat i on f i l ed

. A nd, as s t at ed above , q u e s tio n s c o n c e rn in g th e c re d ib ility o f th e w itn e s s e s a re re s o lv e d b yth e tr ie r o f f a c t. E vans , 1 0 8 S .W .3 d a t 2 3 6 . T h is C o u rt d o e s n o t se c o n d -g u e ss th e w e ig h t, va lu e , o r c r e d ib il ity aff or ded t o t he evi dence byt he j u ry . T her efor e, w e conc l ude thatt he St at e pr es ent ed s u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e o f

id e n tity to s u p p o rt th e D e f e n d a n t's c o n v ic tio n s . B as ed upon the evi dence , w e concl ude t hat a ra t i onal t r i er of fa ctcoul d fi nd, bey ond a r eas onabl e doubt , t hatt he D efe ndanti s gui l t yof fa ci l i t at ion o f robbe r y . T hus , t he D efe ndanti s notent i t l ed t o r el i ef on thi s i s s ue. I I I . C oncl usi on A fter a th o rou g h rev iew o f th e re co rd a n d ap p li ca b le l aw , w e c o n clud e the rec o rd s u f f i c i e n t l ys u p p o r t s t h e De f e n d a n t ’ s c o n v i c t i o n f

o rf a c i l i t a t i o n o f

r o b b e r y . As s u c h , we a f f ir m th e tr ia l c o u rt ’s ju d g m e n t.

_________________________________ RO BE RT W. WEDE M E YE R, J UDGE