What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify whether the court opinion mentions that one or more of the members of the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed dissented. Focus on whether there exists any statement to this effect in the opinion, for example "divided," "dissented," "disagreed," "split.". A reference, without more, to the "majority" or "plurality" does not necessarily evidence dissent (the other judges may have concurred). If a case arose on habeas corpus, indicate dissent if either the last federal court or the last state court to review the case contained one. If the highest court with jurisdiction to hear the case declines to do so by a divided vote, indicate dissent. If the lower court denies an en banc petition by a divided vote and the Supreme Court discusses same, indicate dissent.

Opinion:
TENNESSEE v. MIDDLEBROOKS
No. 92-989.
Argued November 1,1993
Decided December 13, 1993
Charles W. Burson, Attorney General of Tennessee, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Kathy Morante Principe.
David C. Stebbins, by appointment of the Court, 508 U. S. 937, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Paul R. Bottei and Lionel R. Barrett, Jr.
Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the State of California et al. by Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General of California, George Williamson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette and Ward A Campbell, Deputy Attorneys General, and Mark L. Krotoski, Special Assistant Attorney General, and by officials for their respective States as follows: James H. Evans, Attorney General of Aabama, Winston Bryant, Attorney General of Arkansas, Grant Woods, Attorney General of Arizona, John M. Bailey, Chief State’s Attorney of Connecticut, Charles M. Oberly III, Attorney General of Delaware, Robert A Butterworth, Attorney General of Florida, Larry EchoHawk, Attorney General of Idaho, Pamela Carter, Attorney General of Indiana, Chris Gorman, Attorney General of Kentucky, Richard P. Ieyoub, Attorney General of Louisiana, J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General of Maryland, Mike Moore, Attorney General of Mississippi, Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General of Montana, Don Stenberg, Attorney General of Nebraska, Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney General of Nevada, Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General of New Jersey, Michael F. Easley, Attorney General of North Carolina, Susan B. Loving, Attorney General of Oklahoma, Ernest D. Preate, Jr., Attorney General of Pennsylvania, T. Travis Medlock, Attorney General of South Carolina, Mark Barnett, Attorney General of South Dakota, Dan Morales, Attorney General of Texas, and Joseph B. Meyer, Attorney General of Wyoming; for the Appellate Committee of the California District Attorney’s Association by Gil Garcetti and Harry B. Sondheim; and for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation by Kent S. Scheidegger.
Per Curiam.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
Justice Blackmun dissents.

Question: Does the court opinion mention that one or more of the members of the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed dissented?

Choices:
Yes
No

Answer: 0