Opinion ID: 1060393
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 26

Heading: admission of missing person reports into evidence

Text: Appellants contend that the trial court erred when it allowed the State to introduce the two missing persons reports filed by Viola Griffin in which she stated that she had not seen or heard from Griffin since February 21, 1992, at 11:45 p.m. and she had not seen or heard from Branam since February 22, 1992, at 1:00 p.m. We conclude that Appellants have waived this issue. The record indicates that when the State sought to introduce the reports during rebuttal, Appellant Sutton objected on the ground that the reports were not proper rebuttal evidence. After a bench conference, Sutton objected again on the ground that the reports were irrelevant and immaterial. The trial court overruled the objection. On appeal, Appellants have abandoned the argument that the reports were improper rebuttal evidence. Thus, we do not address it. Instead, Appellants argue for the first time on appeal that the reports were inadmissible hearsay evidence. [11] It is elementary that a party may not take one position regarding an issue in the trial court, change his strategy or position in mid-stream, and advocate a different ground or reason in this Court. State v. Dobbins, 754 S.W.2d 637, 641 (Tenn.Crim.App.1988). Thus, this issue is waived.