is de novo with no presumption of correctness. Id. As a preliminary matter, the State contends that the Defendant waived this issue by not raising it before the Court of Criminal Appeals or in his brief requesting permission to appeal. The Defendant addressed the propriety of the attempt jury instruction within his argument- challenging the sufficiency of the evidence in his appellate brief before the Court of Criminal Appeals and his brief submitted with his application pursuant to Rule 11 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. Within that argument, he addressed relevant case law and cited to the record. Accordingly, the Defendant sufficiently raised this issue at both levels to allow this Court’s review of the issue. See Hodge v. Craig, 382 S.W.3d 325, 333-37 (Tenn.2012) (<HOLDING>); Ramirez v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 414
holding that failure to raise issue in brief constitutes waiver of appeal of the issue holding that failure to discuss an issue in an appellate brief constitutes abandonment of that issue recognizing that failing to list an issue in the appropriate section of the appellate brief may result in waiver holding that an issue is abandoned when not raised in an appellate brief holding that appellant waived argument by failing to raise argument before workers compensation board and failing to list or brief issue in administrative appeal to superior court