ÿWPC& Ó«.®Ä.~BIƒ²¸AÈ:raOOx^Û<çž+>A±|dâÌqªƒ­Á”Ûr¬Ž ,‡-ÞG>DÓb7’ÉAÀõ¦Asv 4.àøŒ\Ñ3Ò ®ÏŽîc‡á¦Î墩&£{¨ì ³obÐ.¶„H¥K´hˆµd’”cN^Â39d įøEôž~†$7ªP_¢¯òJÉL§Äw¡P'%é~îuÓ§½¥I[E ŽÖ©;Þ­¶ÊØq{¹ûÿöùãÝã‹£€ü@·ŠW-¤}¯ÛÂÛéÚk §¨ÝjI¥Èi€¢–²(añ”'f,'2«ˆ™»¿*e¥ÏÉ|NÒ*‚^ÉÂ5}áaF[_rñN¢K=î&òmÌ®ƒ9p‘N‡fïR¿xèQ{` ÚZ‡F¶NÏªÇ"NùR+8*¦‡ÜÄ÷žŒ^su}^ÏsÈ&ÜP”‘ñsýžL+-µl®ô×CÕWZ$ ß+€QŸX 'Hž¶ Dê‰/T‡¸ˆrrTŽa%oþ%;¤ëVfÙŒ3÷}–ð&çòÂÆZoÝô¬Ê'©:JÒ[ÇìU?ç`½´Œ«R[ë3þÉ–ãºíº ýÿ^ÍÓ&x m®1Àb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U-N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz U N‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1÷Nÿ 0 DhEE­ò¯œ¡(=†eëëÌ$ÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒbö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö ö 0 ëþ þ þ þ Bé!é! 0¤" D5ª" D-ß" 0K # # ASW#ƪ# 0¤p$ 0D% A«X%˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Ís+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular-C +bk1ôxª ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 (#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ^Ý ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Bonner€mentions€ð ðpetitioning€the€department€for€a€declaratory€orderðð€in€his€brief;€however€his€petitionÐ ° Ðto€the€trial€court€and€the€record€before€this€court€contain€no€mention€of€such€a€petition. èÝ ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€fact,€the€petition€in€the€trial€court€stated,€ð ð[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€petitioner€.€.€.€does€not€seek€judicial€review€of€theÐ ° Ðrespondentððs€decision€to€extend€his€release€eligibility€date,€but€does€contest€the€illegal€manner€in€which€the€respondentÐ tÄ Ð[has]€extended€his€release€eligibility€date.€.€.ðð ’Ý ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€letter€contained€no€explanation€for€the€modification.€€Under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„501(k)€and€TDOCÐ ° ÐPolicy€502.02,€the€Commissioner€has€discretion€to€extend€release€eligibility€up€to€the€maximum€for€the€specific€violationÐ tÄ Ðfound. Ý ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Departmentððs€brief€does€not€mention€the€forgery€conviction€or€sentence,€although€an€affidavit€filed€by€theÐ ° ÐDepartment€below€recites€that€Mr.€Bonner€was€sentenced€to€a€minimum€of€two€years€and€a€maximum€of€two€years€forÐ tÄ Ðforgery€on€the€same€date€that€his€other€sentences€were€imposed.€€Mr.€Bonnerððs€petition€includes€this€two„year€forgeryÐ 8ˆ Ðsentence. |Ý ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€Department€and€the€trial€court€interpreted€this€argument€as€a€contention€that€the€30%€increase€in€his€REDÐ ° Ðshould€have€applied€only€to€the€life€sentence€and€not€to€the€other€sentences.€€Regardless€of€the€correct€interpretation€ofÐ tÄ ÐMr.€Bonnerððs€position,€the€answer€is€the€same:€release€eligibility€is€computed€on€the€cumulative€consecutive€sentences.€Ð 8ˆ ÐThe€Commissioner€has€discretion€to€extend,€for€certain€rule€violations,€the€release€eligibility€date€ð ðin€any€amount€not€toÐ üL Ðexceed€the€full€sentence€originally€imposed€by€the€courtðð€as€long€as€such€extension€is€done€in€compliance€with€theÐ À ÐDepartmentððs€regulations.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„501(k). Ý ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Bonner€responded€to€this€statement€by€disputing€most€of€the€facts€or€explaining€why€they€were€notÐ ° Ðapplicable€to€his€claims. ÂÝ ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAnother€sentence€report,€dated€earlier,€indicates€no€such€extension. Ý ƒR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€1984,€when€the€petitioner€was€sentenced,€he€was€apparently€credited€for€his€ð ðjail€timeðð€awaiting€trial.€€Thus,Ð ° Ðhis€sentence€had€the€ð ðeffective€date€2/21/83.ðð€€He€was€sentenced€to€life€in€prison,€and€required€to€serve€thirty€years€beforeÐ tÄ Ðhe€was€eligible€for€parole.€€He€was€also€sentenced€to€two€years€for€forgery€and€required€to€serve€the€entire€sentence.€€HeÐ 8ˆ Ðwas€to€serve€35%€of€his€convictions€for€grand€larceny€(ten€years)€and€bad€checks€(eight€years)€before€he€was€eligible€forÐ üL Ðparole.€€Thus,€according€to€our€calculations€at€the€time€of€sentencing,€the€petitioner€was€to€serve€more€than€thirty€eightÐ À Ðyears€before€his€RED€(30€+€2€+€3.5€(35%€of€10)€+€2.8€(35%€of€8)€=€38.3€years).€€The€affidavit€filed€by€the€DepartmentÐ „Ô Ðdoes€not€provide€the€calculation€for€his€RED€at€his€entry€into€prison.€€Because€an€RED€can€be€reduced€by€variousÐ H ˜ Ðsentence€reduction€credits,€the€Departmentððs€statement€of€Mr.€Bonnerððs€current€RED€does€not€provide€the€informationÐ  \ Ðnecessary€for€us€to€calculate€the€original€RED.- ù-(|G2$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Kí»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»Ô d(|3‡$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Kí»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Kí»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Kí»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Kí»»»ÔÑ8€QXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îV KíÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Kí»îîV #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€August€16,€2000Ð üL ÐÔ‡XQX»¼KíÔÌò òÔ#†¼Kí»XXQÿ#ÔKENNETH€L.€BONNER€v.€TENNESSEE€DEPARTMENTÐ úJ ÐOF€CORRECTIONÔ‡XQX»¼KíÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€2656„III€€€€€€Ellen€Hobbs€Lyle,€ChancellorÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„00343„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€17,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€petitioner€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€dismissing€his€petition€regarding€the€DepartmentÐ ŒÜ Ðof€Correctionððs€calculation€of€his€release€eligibility€date.€€An€adjustment€of€the€release€eligibilityÐ xÈ Ðdate,€made€subsequent€to€the€filing€of€this€appeal,€€has€rendered€most€of€the€petitionerððs€argumentsÐ d´ Ðmoot.€Ô#†¼Kí»XXQ#ÔÔ‡XQX»¼KíÔ€As€to€the€remaining€issue,€we€affirm€the€dismissal€of€the€petitionÔ#†¼Kí»XXQ#ÔÔ‡XQX»¼KíÔ€because€we€agree€with€theÐ P  Ðtrial€court€that€it€lacked€jurisdiction€to€consider€the€petition.Ð <Œ ÐÓ×ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmedó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Kí»àXQ#ÔÔ‡XQX.¼KíÔPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.,óóÐ ì< Ðand€òòWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,€J.óó,€joined.Ð Ø( ÐÌKenneth€L.€Bonner,€Mountain€City,€Tennessee,€Pro€se.Ð ° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General,€Michael€Moore,€Solicitor€General,€Pamela€S.€Lorch,€AssistantÐ ˆØ ÐAttorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction.Ð t Ä ÐÓ(ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Kí»XXQW#ÔÔ‡XQX»¼KíÔÐ L"œ! ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Kí»XXQ“ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XQX»¼KíÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔà  àThe€petitioner,€Kenneth€L.€Bonner,€is€an€inmate€in€the€custody€of€the€Tennessee€DepartmentÐ $$t# Ðof€Correction€(ð ðthe€Departmentðð).€€He€pled€guilty€and€was€sentenced€in€1984€to€the€following:€lifeÐ %` $ Ðimprisonment€for€first€degree€murder,€ten€years€for€grand€larceny,€eight€years€for€writing€a€bad€check,Ð ü%L!% Ðand€two€years€for€forgery.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€sentences€are€consecutive.€€Mr.€Bonner€must€first€serve€the€lifeÐ è&8"& Ðsentence,€then€the€ten€year€sentence€for€grand€larceny,€then€the€eight€years€for€bad€checks,€followedÐ Ô'$#' Ðby€the€two€year€forgery€sentence.Ð À($(ý Їà  àThe€petitioner€contends€that€his€release€eligibility€date€(ð ðREDðð),€the€earliest€date€he€mightÐ ° Ðbe€considered€for€parole,€€was€originally€calculated€as€February€21,€2017,€ð ð30€years€on€the€lifeÐ œì Ðsentence;€4€years€combined€time€on€the€remaining€sentences.ðð€€He€claims€the€Department€extendedÐ ˆØ Ðhis€release€eligibility€date€in€1986€by€adding€two€years;€in€1989€by€adding€nine€years€ð ðfor€aÐ tÄ Ðdisciplinary€conviction€of€assault;ðð€and€in€1992€by€ð ðre„extending€the€release€eligibility€date€that€hadÐ `° Ðalready€been€extended.ðð€€The€petitioner€contends€that€the€1986€and€1992€extensions€were€illegal€ð ðinÐ L œ Ðthe€sense€that€[he]€had€not€received€any€type€of€disciplinary€convictions€that€called€for€or€mandatedÐ 8 ˆ Ðextension€to€his€release€eligibility€date.ððÐ $ t ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€filed€a€ð ðPetition€for€Common€Law€Writ€of€Certiorari€and/or€Petition€forÐ ü L  ÐJudicial€Reviewðð€in€the€Chancery€Court€in€Davidson€County,€ð ðpursuant€to€Tennessee€CodeÐ è 8  ÐAnnotated€27„8„101,€27„8„102,€and€4„5„322.ðð€€The€Department€responded€with€a€Motion€forÐ Ô$  ÐSummary€Judgment,€asking€the€court€toò ò€ó óð ðenter€summary€judgment€in€[the€Departmentððs]€favor€andÐ À  Ðdismiss€this€petition€for€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€and€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€for€whichÐ °  Ðrelief€may€be€granted.ðð€€Attached€to€the€motion€for€summary€judgment€were€a€statement€ofÐ œì  Ðundisputed€facts׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€the€affidavit€of€a€sentence€analyst€of€the€Department€of€Correction.Ð ˆØ  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€granted€the€Departmentððs€motion€on€three€grounds:€1)€the€petition€for€writ€ofÐ `° Ðcertiorari€regarding€the€imposition€of€the€30%€extension€of€his€RED€was€time„barred,€depriving€theÐ Lœ Ðcourt€of€jurisdiction€over€the€matter;€Ô#†XQXX XQ #Ô2)€the€petitionerððs€alternative€petition€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð 8ˆ Ððð€4„5„322€could€not€be€considered€because€this€was€not€a€ð ðcontested€caseðð€pursuant€to€Tenn.€CodeÐ $t ÐAnn.€ðð€4„5„106(b);€and€3)€the€petitioner€erroneously€claimed€that€the€30%€extension€of€his€releaseÐ ` Ðeligibility€should€have€been€calculated€on€only€one€of€his€sentences€when,€pursuant€to€statute,€theÐ üL Ð30%€extension€applies€to€each€separate€sentence.Ð è8 ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€filed€a€motion€to€consider€post„judgment€facts,€which€this€court€granted€afterÐ À Ðthe€Department€responded€that€it€did€not€object€to€our€consideration€as€long€as€Mr.€Bonner€did€notÐ ¬ü Ðrely€on€those€facts€to€raise€new€issues€before€this€court.€€The€petitionerððs€motion€stated:Ð ˜è ÐÌà8  àThe€respondent€in€this€cause€of€action€modified€the€release€eligibility€date€of€theÐ pÀ Ðappellant€from€12/23/2050,€to€reflect€a€new€RED€date€of€March€12,€2016.€€A€copyÐ \ ¬ Ðof€said€action€is€hereto€annexed€as€Exhibit€A.€€The€appellant€further€contends€that€heÐ H!˜ Ðstill€has€a€cause€of€action€in€that€his€release€eligibility€date€remains€incorrect.Ð4"„ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€attached€ð ðExhibit€Aðð€is€a€photocopy€of€a€letter€from€the€manager€of€SentenceÐ  $\" ÐInformation€Services€of€the€Department€of€Correction€to€the€petitionerððs€wife.€€The€letter€states€inÐ ø$H # Ðpart:€€Ð ä%4!$ Ðâ âÐ Ð& "% Ðà8  àEffective€June€7,€1999,€your€husbandððs€record€was€modified׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€to€reflect€a€one„yearÐ ° Ðâ âRED€extension.€€The€modification€was€approved€by€Commissioner€Campbell,€andÐ œì Ðreplaced€the€original€extension€due€to€the€guilty€verdict€for€assault€in€July,€1989.€€TheÐ ˆØ Ðcurrent€release€eligibility€date€(RED)€is€March€12,€2016.€€This€date€will€reduce€eachÐ tÄ Ðmonth€credits€are€earned€and€retained.€€When€your€husband€reaches€a€time„frame€forÐ `° Ðparole€consideration,€his€name€will€be€submitted€to€the€Board€of€Parole.€€He€is€notÐ L œ Ðeligible€at€this€time.Ð8 ˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€one„year€RED€extension€has€been€applied€to€the€Life€sentence€only,€even€thoughÐ  ` Ðthe€sentence€structure€reflects€a€string€of€consecutive€sentences,€for€which€theÐ ü L  Ðsummary€RED€is€based.€Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àDespite€this€significant€reduction€in€his€release€eligibility€date€after€the€trial€court€entered€itsÐ À  Ðorder,€the€petitioner€pursues€his€appeal,€alleging€that€his€RED€is€still€incorrectly€calculated.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÓ  ÓÌI.€Calculations€of€the€Release€Eligibility€DateÐ „Ô  ÐÓ "ÓÌÔ‡ XQXXXQÔà  àMr.€Bonnerððs€original€complaint€was€that€his€RED€had€been€extended€three€times,€in€1986,Ð \¬ Ðin€1989,€and€in€1992€while€there€was€a€legitimate€basis€for€only€one€extension.€€His€petition€makesÐ H˜ Ðit€clear€that€the€last€two€extensions€were€related€to€his€conviction€by€a€disciplinary€board€for€assaultÐ 4„ Ðon€a€guard.€€He€did€not€contest€the€merits€of€that€disciplinary€finding€or€the€authority€of€theÐ  p Ðcommissioner€to€extend€a€release€eligibility€date€by€up€to€thirty€percent€(30%)€for€such€a€violationÐ  \ Ðof€Department€rules.€€He€challenges€the€way€the€Department€calculated€the€30%€extension€in€1992,Ð øH Ðand€the€1986€calculation€of€the€RED.Ð ä4 ÐÌÓ  ÓA.€€The€1992€CalculationÐ ¼  ÐÓ™%ÓÌà  àIn€the€affidavit€submitted€in€support€of€its€motion€for€summary€judgment,€the€DepartmentÐ ”ä Ðexplained€the€extension€due€to€the€disciplinary€violation€as€follows:Ð €Ð ÐÌà8  àOn€July€17,€1989,€Mr.€Bonner€was€found€guilty€by€the€disciplinary€board€of€AssaultÐ X ¨ Ðon€an€Employee,€which€occurred€on€July€4,€1989.ÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àPer€Policy€502.02(F,€G)€the€release€eligibility€date€(RED)€was€to€be€extended€byÐ #l! Ðthirty€percent€(30%)€of€the€maximum€sentence€the€offender€was€serving€at€the€timeÐ $X" Ðof€the€infraction.€€Due€to€the€fact€that€Mr.€Bonner€is€serving€consecutive€sentences,Ð ô$D # Ðthe€RED€was€extended€on€each€sentence.€€His€Life€sentence€was€extended€by€thirtyÐ à%0!$ Ðpercent€(30%)€of€99€years€(29€years€8€months€12€days);€10„year€sentence€(3€years);Ð Ì&"% Ðand€his€8„year€sentence€(2€years€4€months€24€days).и'#&Ð Ð  Їà8  àHis€current€probable€parole€date€is€March€25,€2051.аРР ÐÌà  àThis€explanation€relates€to€the€1992€extension€complained€of€by€Mr.€Bonner,€who€makesÐ ˆØ Ðseveral€arguments€regarding€the€method€by€which€the€Department€applied€the€30%.€Both€Mr.€BonnerÐ tÄ Ðand€the€Department€rely€on€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„501(j),€which€requires€computation€of€releaseÐ `° Ðeligibility€for€consecutive€sentences€on€one€cumulative€sentence.€€That€statute€provides:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àThe€release€eligibility€date€provided€for€herein€is€separately€calculated€for€eachÐ $ t Ðoffense€for€which€a€defendant€is€convicted.€€For€consecutive€sentences,€the€periodsÐ  ` Ðof€ineligibility€for€release€are€calculated€for€each€sentence€and€are€added€together€toÐ ü L  Ðdetermine€the€release€eligibility€date€for€the€consecutive€sentence.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÔ#†XQXX XQm"#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔÌà  àMr.€Bonner€argues€that€the€Departmentððs€application€of€a€thirty€percent€extension€to€each€ofÐ À  Ðhis€consecutive€sentences€was€contrary€to€this€statute€and€thus€not€authorized€by€law.€€He€appearsÐ ¬ü  Ðto€argue€that€the€30%€should€have€been€added€to€his€cumulative€sentence,€when€instead€theÐ ˜è  ÐDepartment€calculated€and€added€the€30%€to€each€of€his€separate€consecutive€sentences€to€arrive€atÐ „Ô  Ðone€new€RED.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€fail€to€see€how€that€distinction€makes€a€difference.€€Thirty€percent€of€the€totalÐ pÀ Ðsentence€(life€plus€10€years€plus€8€years)€is€the€same€as€30%€of€life€plus€30%€of€10€years€plus€30%Ð \¬ Ðof€8€years.€€In€any€event,€we€find€no€irregularity€in€the€methodology€employed€by€the€Department,Ð H˜ Ðas€explained€in€its€affidavit,€because€it€complies€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40„35„501(j)Ô#†XQXX XQÖ-#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔ€and€with€ððÐ 4„ Ð40„35„501(k),€which€Ô#†XQXX XQ2#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔauthorizes€the€commissioner€of€correction,€for€violation€of€the€rules€of€theÐ  p ÐDepartment,€to€defer€a€release€eligibility€date€in€any€amount€not€to€exceed€the€full€sentence€originallyÐ  \ Ðimposed€by€the€court,€pursuant€to€regulations€giving€notice€of€the€length€of€increases€possible€forÐ øH Ðeach€violation.€€The€regulation€in€effect€at€the€time€of€the€1989€assault€authorized€adding€ð ð30%€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€offenderððs€original€maximum€sentence.ðð€Ô#†XQXX XQ€2#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔ€€The€trial€court€correctly€found€that€the€30%€extensionÐ Ð  Ðwas€properly€calculated.Ð ¼  ÐÔ#†XQXX XQÄ4#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔà8  àÔ#†XQXX XQ€5#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔÐ Ð Ð  Ðà  àMr.€Bonner€also€asserted€in€the€trial€court€that€the€1992€changes€to€his€RED€were€made€asÐ ”ä Ða€result€of€the€Departmentððs€implementation€of€a€new€computer€system€and€ð ðdoubled€backðð€andÐ €Ð Ðadded€30%€extensions€to€sentences€which€had€already€been€extended€in€1989€because€of€the€assault.€Ð l¼ ÐThe€affidavit€indicates€that€one€extension€of€thirty€percent€(30%)€was€made€due€to€the€assaultÐ X ¨ Ðfinding.€€The€1992€extension,€as€described€by€Mr.€Bonner,€reflects€the€extensions€which€areÐ D!” Ðexplained€in€the€affidavit.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àMr.€Bonnerððs€basic€argument€in€this€regard€is€that€there€was€no€basis,€such€as€a€new€ruleÐ $X" Ðviolation,€for€the€1992€extension.€€The€Department€does€not€assert€that€there€was.€€Instead,€theÐ ô$D # ÐDepartment€does€not€acknowledge€there€was€an€extension€other€than€the€30%€extension€in€July€1989.€Ð à%0!$ ÐThe€record€includes€the€disciplinary€report€authorizing€a€30%€extension€of€Mr.€Bonnerððs€RED,€andÐ ° Ðthe€affidavit€indicates€that€is€the€basis€for€the€extension€of€Mr.€Bonnerððs€RED.€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€problem,€as€it€appears€to€us,€is€that€the€Department€provided€Mr.€Bonner€with€aÐ tÄ Ðcomputation€in€1989€purporting€to€be€a€30%€extension€which€reflected€an€incorrect€number€of€yearsÐ `° Ð(9)€to€be€added€to€his€RED.€€To€the€extent€that€Mr.€Bonnerððs€complaint€is€based€on€documentationÐ L œ Ðhe€received€in€1989€that€incorrectly€calculated€the€extension€due€to€the€disciplinary€infraction,€weÐ 8 ˆ Ðfind€no€basis€for€requiring€the€Department€to€change€its€correct€application€of€the€extension.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àIn€the€trial€court,€Mr.€Bonner€also€argued€that€the€Department€had€improperly€applied€theÐ ü L  Ð30%€extension€to€his€two€year€sentence€for€forgery.€€He€asserts€that€the€30%€extension€could€not€beÐ è 8  Ðapplied€to€his€2„year€forgery€conviction€because€that€offense€was€committed€prior€to€enactment€ofÐ Ô$  Ðthe€statute€authorizing€extension€of€parole€eligibility€for€prison€disciplinary€offenses,€Tenn.€CodeÐ À  ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„501.€€Such€application,€he€contends,€would€violate€the€ex€post€facto€clause.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àAs€he€correctly€points€out,€the€Department€did€not€directly€address€this€issue.€€However,€theÐ „Ô  ÐDepartmentððs€affidavit€clearly€states€that€the€30%€extension€was€applied€to€the€murder,€grandÐ pÀ Ðlarceny,€and€bad€check€sentences.€€Because€the€affidavit€also€recognizes€the€existence€of€€Mr.Ð \¬ ÐBonnerððs€two€year€sentence€for€forgery,€the€clear€implication€is€that€no€part€of€the€30%€extension€ofÐ H˜ Ðhis€RED€was€related€to€the€forgery€sentence.€€€However,€attached€to€Mr.€Bonnerððs€filings€areÐ 4„ ÐDepartment€sentence€reports€which€reflect€that€the€two„year€sentence€for€forgery€carried€aÐ  p Ðdisciplinary€extension€of€30%.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Department€did€not€explain€this€discrepancy€in€itsÐ  \ Ðdocumentation€supporting€its€motion€for€summary€judgment.Ð øH ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€but€not€raised€in€the€trial€court,€Mr.€Bonner€also€complains€that€the€DepartmentÐ Ð  Ðincorrectly€applied€the€30%€extension€to€a€99€year€sentence,€when€it€should€have€used€60€years€asÐ ¼  Ðthe€presumptive€term€of€a€life€sentence€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„109(d)(1).€€AlthoughÐ ¨ø Ðnot€directly€responding€to€the€statutory€issue€raised€by€Mr.€Bonner,€the€Department€has€bolstered€itsÐ ”ä Ðcalculation€of€the€30%€extension€by€relying€on€Department€policies€relating€to€extensions€of€paroleÐ €Ð Ðeligibility€for€rule€violations€which€result€in€injury€to€employees.€€The€relevant€portion€states€that€forÐ l¼ Ðpurposes€of€calculating€an€extension,€ð ða€life€sentence€shall€be€considered€ninety„nine€years.ðð€€TDOCÐ X ¨ Ðpolicy€502.02(G).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àAll€of€the€preceding€arguments€raised€by€Mr.€Bonner€have€been€rendered€moot€by€theÐ #l! ÐDepartmentððs€action€replacing€the€30%€extension€with€a€one„year€extension€of€his€RED.€€BecauseÐ $X" ÐMr.€Bonner€asked€us€to€consider€this€action€as€a€post„judgment€fact,€it€is€properly€before€us€forÐ ô$D # Ðdetermination€of€mootness.€€Mr.€Bonner€readily€concedes€that€the€Department€had€the€authority€toÐ à%0!$ Ðextend€his€RED€up€to€30%€of€his€sentence€if€the€Department€applied€that€30%€correctly.€€Even€if€weÐ Ì&"% Ðwere€to€agree€with€all€his€arguments,€and€order€the€Department€to€recalculate€his€RED€accordingly,Ð ¸'#& Ð30%€of€only€his€life€sentence,€calculated€at€60€years€as€he€maintains€it€should€be,€is€18€years.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐObviously,€a€one„year€extension€is€within€the€Departmentððs€authority€even€under€Mr.€BonnerððsÐ )à$( Ðversion€of€its€authority.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€Mr.€Bonnerððs€claims€regarding€extension€of€hisÐ ° ÐRED€based€on€his€disciplinary€violation€are€moot.€Ð œì ÐÌÓ  ÓB.€€The€1986€CalculationÐ tÄ ÐÓ5KÓÌà  àMr.€Bonnerððs€claim€with€regard€to€the€1986€calculation€of€his€RED€which€he€calls€anÐ L œ Ðð ðextensionðð€is€unaffected€by€the€Departmentððs€recent€modification€of€the€RED.€Mr.€BonnerððsÐ 8 ˆ Ðcomplaint€is€that€when€he€entered€prison€in€1984,€he€was€given€sentencing€information,€included€inÐ $ t Ðthe€record,€which€stated€that€his€RED€was€February€21,€2017.€€Another€document€he€submitted,€aÐ  ` Ð1986€sentencing€report€generated€by€the€Department,€reflected€his€RED€as€June€6,€2019.€It€is€thisÐ ü L  Ðchange€that€Mr.€Bonner€characterizes,€understandably,€as€an€ð ðextension.ðð€€No€explanation€for€thisÐ è 8  Ðchange€appears€on€the€Departmentððs€documents€filed€by€Mr.€Bonner.€€€The€Department€did€notÐ Ô$  Ðaddress€this€issue€in€its€motion€for€summary€judgment€or€on€appeal.€The€Departmentððs€affidavitÐ À  Ðexplains€Mr.€Bonnerððs€original€sentence€and€the€application€of€the€30%€extension,€and€provides€aÐ ¬ü  Ðconclusory€statement€as€to€his€correct€RED.€€However,€the€affidavit€does€not€disclose€the€originalÐ ˜è  ÐRED€as€calculated€by€the€Department.€€Without€the€starting€point€for€application€of€the€extension,Ô#†XQXX XQÎ5#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔÐ „Ô  Ðthis€court€has€no€basis€for€determining€the€accuracy€of€the€Departmentððs€conclusion€as€to€his€RED.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àEven€though€the€record€provides€no€basis€for€us€to€determine,€as€a€matter€of€law,€whether€Mr.Ð H˜ ÐBonnerððs€RED€has€been€calculated€correctly,€the€specific€complaint€he€raises,€the€1986€ð ðextension,ððÐ 4„ Ðcan€be€explained€by€the€record.€€The€first€sentence€calculation€document€provided€to€Mr.€Bonner,€Ð  p Ðunder€the€section€for€calculation€of€his€RED,€indicated€that€he€was€required€to€serve€30€years€on€hisÐ  \ Ðlife€sentence€and€4€years€on€all€other€sentences€before€becoming€eligible€for€parole€consideration.€Ð øH ÐThe€next€document€submitted€by€Mr.€Bonner€indicates€his€parole€eligibility€for€the€sentencesÐ ä4 Ðconsecutive€to€the€life€sentence€was€based€on€35%€of€the€10€year€sentence,€35%€of€the€8€yearÐ Ð  Ðsentence€and€that€he€was€required€to€serve€two€years€on€the€forgery€conviction€before€becomingÐ ¼  Ðeligible€for€parole.€€The€Departmentððs€affidavit€is€consistent€with€these€statements.׃!×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Obviously,€thisÐ ¨ø Ðinformation€would€indicate€that€the€original€calculation€using€4€years€for€all€sentences€other€than€theÐ ”ä Ðlife€sentence€for€calculation€of€the€RED€was€incorrect.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€Department€is€required€to€calculate€sentences€in€accordance€with€the€sentencing€courtððsÐ X ¨ Ðjudgment€and€with€applicable€sentencing€statutes.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„501;€òòsee€State€v.Ð D!” ÐSheltonóó,€No.€E2000„01632„CCA„R3„CD,€2000€WL€1858996€at€*7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Dec.€20,€2000)Ð 0"€  Ð(perm.€app.€denied€Apr.€9,€2001)€(remanding€for€correction€of€record€ð ðso€that€the€Department€ofÐ #l! ÐCorrection€will€be€able€to€properly€calculate€the€release€eligibility€date).€€Therefore,€the€DepartmentÐ ° Ðcannot€be€required€to€alter€correct€sentence€calculations€because€information€based€on€an€incorrectÐ œì Ðcalculation€has€been€provided€to€the€prisoner.€€Conversely,€a€prisoner€is€not€precluded€from€seekingÐ ˆØ Ðcorrection€of€a€Department€mistake€which€incorrectly€prolongs€his€RED.€€As€we€have€stated,€theÐ tÄ Ðcourtsðð€interest€in€sentence€calculation€issues€is€simply€ð ðin€seeing€to€it€that€the€law€is€properlyÐ `° Ðapplied.ðð€€òòÔ#†XQXX XQ©P#ÔJones€v.€Reynoldsóó,€No.€01A01„9510„CH„00484,€1997€WL€367661€at€*7€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð L œ ÐJuly€2,€1997)Ô‡ XQXXXQÔ€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà@÷ ÷ ìàII.€Jurisdiction€to€Consider€the€ClaimsˆÐ  ` ÐÔ#†XQXX XQ”[#ÔÌÔ‡ XQXXXQÔà  àÔ#†XQXX XQh\#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔThe€trial€court€granted€the€Departmentððs€motion€for€summary€judgment€based€on€its€lack€of€Ð è 8  Ðjurisdiction€and€its€determination€that€the€petition€failed€to€state€a€claim.€€A€trial€courtððs€grant€of€aÐ Ô$  Ðmotion€for€summary€judgment€presents€a€question€of€law€that€we€review€òòde€novoóó€without€aÐ À  Ðpresumption€of€correctness.€€òòÔ#†XQXX XQ¶\#ÔFinister€v.€Humbolt€Gen.€Hosp.,€Inc.óó,€970€S.W.2d€435,€437€(Tenn.Ð ¬ü  Ð1998)òòóó.€€The€questionsòò€óóa€court€must€consider€in€determining€whether€to€grant€or€deny€a€motion€forÐ ˜è  Ðsummary€judgment€are€(1)€whether€a€factual€dispute€exists;€(2)€whether€that€fact€is€material;€and€(3)Ð „Ô  Ðwhether€that€fact€creates€a€genuine€issue€for€trialòò.€€Byrd€v.€Hallóó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€214€(Tenn.€1993).€Ð pÀ Ðð ðA€disputed€fact€is€material€it€if€must€be€decided€in€order€to€resolve€the€substantive€claim€or€defenseÐ \¬ Ðat€which€the€motion€is€directed.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€215.€€Summary€judgment€shall€be€denied€if€there€is€€ð ðanyÐ H˜ Ðdoubt€whether€or€not€a€genuine€issue€exists.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€211.€€òòóóThus,€a€summary€judgment€should€beÐ 4„ Ðgranted€only€when€the€undisputed€facts€reasonably€support€one€conclusion€-€that€the€moving€partyÐ  p Ðis€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€òòMcCall€v.€Wilderóó,€913€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.€1995).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àMr.€Bonner€contends€that€the€Department€was€not€entitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law€and€Ð ä4 Ðthat€the€trial€court€misconstrued€his€argument€when€it€determined€that€he€petitioned€for€a€writ€ofÐ Ð  Ðcertiorari€regarding€the€1989€extension€in€his€RED.€€Instead,€he€asserts€that€he€challenged€the€1986Ð ¼  Ðand€1992€ð ðillegal€increasesðð€in€his€RED.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р¨ø ÐÌà  àA€challenge€to€a€disciplinary€board€decision€is€properly€brought€through€a€petition€forÐ €Ð Ðcommon€law€writ€of€certiorari.€€òòBishop€v.€Conleyóó,€894€S.W.2d€294,€296€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ð l¼ ÐThe€trial€court€construed€Mr.€Bonnerððs€petition€as€a€challenge€to€the€30%€extension€for€the€1989Ð X ¨ Ðdisciplinary€action,€and€concluded€that€the€petition€was€time€barred.€€As€the€trial€court€found,€Tenn.Ð D!” ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€27„9„102€provides€a€sixty€(60)€day€statute€of€limitations€for€such€actions.€€Mr.€BonnerððsÐ 0"€  Ðpetition€was€obviously€filed€years€after€the€1989€determination€of€the€disciplinary€board.€Ð #l! ÐConsequently,€the€trial€court€dismissed€the€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari.€€To€the€extent€Mr.€BonnerððsÐ $X" Ðpetition€can€be€construed€as€seeking€judicial€review€of€the€1989€disciplinary€finding,€we€agree€it€isÐ ô$D # Ðtime€barred.Ð à%0!$ Ðâ âÐ Ì&"% Ðà  àThe€trial€court€also€determined€that€the€petition€must€€be€dismissed€because€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ° Ðâ âðð€4„5„322,€relied€on€by€Petitioner,€applied€only€to€contested€case€proceedings€under€theÐ œì ÐAdministrative€Procedures€Act€(APA).€€We€agree€that€the€statute€cited€did€not€provide€Mr.€BonnerÐ ˆØ Ðwith€a€mechanism€for€judicial€review.€€However,€another€section€of€the€APA€was€appropriate€for€Mr.Ð tÄ ÐBonnerððs€claim.Ô‡ XQXXXQÔ€€òòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„223.€€Mr.€Bonner€maintains€that€his€RED€has€beenÐ `° Ðincorrectly€calculated.€€He€specifically€questions€the€change€reflected€on€the€document€datedÐ L œ ÐSeptember€17,€1986€which€appears€to€extend€his€RED€without€any€explanation.€€He€contends€he€hasÐ 8 ˆ Ðcontinually€asked€for€an€explanation€and€has€received€none.€€The€Department€provided€noÐ $ t Ðexplanation€or€other€response€to€this€claim€in€the€lawsuit€before€us.Ô#†XQXX XQÐj#Ô€€It€is€settled€that€an€inmate€mayÐ  ` Ðseek€judicial€review€of€his€or€her€sentence€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„101€òòet€seqóó,€but€thatÐ ü L  Ðinmate€must€first€seek€a€declaratory€order€regarding€the€sentence€calculation€from€the€Department.Ð è 8  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„225(b);€òòWatson€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€of€Correctionóó,€970€S.W.2d€494,€497Ð Ô$  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998);òò€see€also€Jones€v.€Reynoldsóó,€1997€WL€367661€at€*2€(the€manner€of€calculationÐ À  Ðof€prisonerððs€sentence,€including€credits,€was€subject€to€review€by€petition€for€declaratory€judgment).Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€plain€language€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„225€requires€a€petitioner€to€seek€a€declaratoryÐ „Ô  Ðorder€from€the€agency€as€a€prerequisite€to€filing€a€petition€for€declaratory€judgment€with€the€court.€Ð pÀ ÐAbsent€evidence€that€such€an€order€was€sought,€the€petition€must€be€dismissed€for€lack€of€subjectÐ \¬ Ðmatter€jurisdiction.€€òòWatsonóó,€970€S.W.2d€at€497.€€We€find€no€indication€that€the€petitioner€everÐ H˜ Ðsought€a€declaratory€order€from€the€Department€regarding€the€calculation.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€the€trial€court€hadÐ 4„ Ðno€jurisdiction€to€consider€the€claimed€ð ðillegal€increasesðð€to€Mr.€Bonnerððs€RED.Ð  p ÐÌà  àRegardless€of€whether€the€challenge€is€to€the€1989€disciplinary€action€or€to€the€apparentÐ øH Ðchanges€to€calculation€of€the€RED€made€in€1986€and€1992,€we€must€agree€with€the€trial€courtððsÐ ä4 Ðdismissal€of€this€action.€€òòSee€Basily€v.€Rain,€Inc.óó,€29€S.W.3d€879,€884€n.3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000)Ð Ð  Ð(ð ðWe€may€affirm€a€judgment€upon€different€grounds€than€those€relied€on€by€the€trial€court€when€theÐ ¼  Ðtrial€court€has€reached€the€correct€result.ðð).Ð ¨ø ÐÌÓ  ÓIII.Ð €Ð ÐÓ uÓÌà  àMr.€Bonnerððs€petition€was€prompted€by€his€concern€over€whether€the€Department€hasÐ X ¨ Ðcorrectly€calculated€his€release€eligibility€date,€a€matter€of€great€importance€to€an€incarceratedÐ D!” Ðindividual.€€This€concern€was€apparently€created€by€the€Department€providing€him€with€documentsÐ 0"€  Ðwhich€reflect€inconsistent€calculations€and€appear€to€change€his€RED€without€justification€for€theÐ #l! Ðchange.€€His€petition€reflects€frustration€with€his€inability€to€get€the€Department€to€explain€theseÐ $X" Ðinconsistencies.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àAlthough,€based€on€the€record€before€us,€we€have€no€reason€to€conclude€that€his€RED€hasÐ Ì&"% Ðbeen€incorrectly€calculated,€that€same€record€makes€us€sympathetic€to€Mr.€Bonnerððs€frustration.€€ThisÐ ¸'#& Ðcourt€has€previously€discussed€the€problems€caused€by€ð ðthe€Departmentððs€preference€for€dilatoryÐ ¤(ô#' Ðpleadings€rather€than€direct€responses€to€[a€prisoner€petitionerððs]€assertions.ðð€€òòJones€v.€Reynoldsóó,Ð ° Ð1997€WL€367661€at€*1.€€In€òòJonesóó,€we€vacated,€for€the€second€time,€a€grant€of€summary€judgment€toÐ œì Ðthe€Department€in€an€action€wherein€the€prisoner€challenged€the€Departmentððs€calculation€of€hisÐ ˆØ Ðsentence€reduction€credits.€€The€result€was€required€because€the€record€did€not€include€the€specificÐ tÄ Ðinformation€necessary€for€a€determination€of€the€issues.€€The€Department€had€provided€affidavitsÐ `° Ðwhich€reached€different€results,€and€never€offered€an€explanation€of€the€inconsistencies.€Ð L œ ÐCommenting€on€the€fact€that€the€Department€had€provided€results€without€providing€the€calculationsÐ 8 ˆ Ðthemselves,€we€stated,€ð ðthis€response€is€inadequate€because€it€does€not€enable€the€courts€to€reviewÐ $ t Ðin€any€meaningful€way€how€the€Department€arrived€at€[its€figure].ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€*7.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àòòJonesóó€involved€sentence€reduction€credits,€the€calculation€of€which€involves€a€large€numberÐ è 8  Ðof€variables.€€Such€is€not€the€case€herein,€where€establishment€and€extension€of€a€release€eligibilityÐ Ô$  Ðdate,€without€reduction€for€earned€sentence€credits,€is€based€on€statute€and€documentedÐ À  Ðadministrative€action.€€Nonetheless,€neither€the€trial€court€nor€this€court€was€provided€with€theÐ ¬ü  ÐDepartmentððs€explanation€and€result€of€its€initial€calculation€of€Mr.€Bonnerððs€RED.€€Neither€haveÐ ˜è  Ðwe€been€provided€with€an€explanation€of€the€inconsistencies€appearing€in€the€various€documentsÐ „Ô  Ðprepared€by€the€Department€and€given€to€Mr.€Bonner.€€If,€as€we€suspect,€those€inconsistencies€wereÐ pÀ Ðthe€result€of€plain€mistake,€that€explanation€is€sufficient.€€Mr.€Bonner€has€no€right€or€legitimateÐ \¬ Ðexpectation€to€any€shortened€RED€calculation€which€does€not€comply€with€the€law.€€While€weÐ H˜ Ðcannot€conclude€that€the€time€and€expense€of€this€litigation€could€have€been€avoided€by€a€thoroughÐ 4„ Ðexplanation€of€the€various€documents€provided€to€Mr.€Bonner,€we€suggest€that€the€DepartmentÐ  p Ðprovide€such€an€explanation€if€it€has€not€previously€done€so.€€Mr.€Bonner€is€not€precluded€fromÐ  \ Ðseeking€a€declaratory€order€regarding€his€sentence€calculation€in€the€future.Ð øH ÐÌà@ll)ìàIV.ˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment€to€the€Department€of€Correction.€€ThisÐ ¨ø Ðcase€is€remanded€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€necessary.€€Costs€are€taxed€to€the€appellant,Ð ”ä ÐKenneth€L.€Bonner,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð €Ð ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð 0"€  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÐ #l! Ð