ÿWPCÛ/ …U .V %„bŠ 0JŽØn­è 0T• 0 (éU: w@K 4‹ 0^Ÿ 0 ™ý 0D– U:Ú 0h 0r| 0|î 0†j 0ð 1u€ 0dõ B)Y 0@‚ BÂDCßU *" AMLß™fx D3Þ<iM¶A¾ÿßT÷ÿK ›J#v~å&vÓc( AO6.Æ…. 0DK/ D// B¾/<þ6X9`(CourierX ù2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô3|xõ«<þ6X9`(CourierXôxþ6X@ɹ`7ûX@2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial Regular ÒÓvÔÕçèDéDêeëìÓ€Ô¡¨ 2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô(I(2$$¤¤Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÔ€X¸0XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó, øð AZ"Arial Regular26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ% Line 7 d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d 7Border 1dd< Œ 9p`(Arial€!%Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÕÝ ƒ !ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌJuly€31,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ""""'ÿÿdxd 2Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€court€also€imposed€a€$2,000€fine€and€ordered€$250€restitution,Ïwhich€actions€have€not€been€appealed.Ì _Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€court€also€imposed€a€$1,000€fine€and€ordered€$75€restitution,€whichÏactions€have€not€been€appealed.€€These€terms€were€part€of€the€plea€agreement.Ì 7Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝApparently,€the€defendant€was€in€the€room€at€the€time€of€this€transactionÏbut€not€actively€involved€in€its€consummation.Ì Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€evidence€on€this€issue€is€not€fully€developed€in€the€record€onÏappeal.€€The€defendant€admits€in€his€statement€in€the€presentence€report€that€heÏarranged€for€another€drug€dealer€from€his€hometown€to€bring€the€cocaine€to€theÏdefendant's€house,€where€the€undercover€officer€picked€it€up€and€left€the€moneyÏfor€it.€€We€have€not€been€provided€with€the€trial€transcript€and€are€unaware€of€theÏstate's€evidence€which€may€or€may€not€contradict€this€contention.€€We€note,Ïhowever,€there€has€been€no€challenge€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€that€theÏdefendant€was€guilty€of€the€sale€of€cocaine.Ì ÕÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAmong€the€trial€judge's€relevant€comments€are€the€followingÌÌÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒI€think€[based€on]€.€.€.€the€deterrence€of€seeing€that€people€who€areÏin€these€situations€should€have€to€face€the€consequences€of€theirÏactions,€I€would€deny€Judicial€Diversion€in€this€case.Ì.€.€.€ÌI€would€impose€a€sentence€of€four€years,€and€I€think€that€he€shouldÏserve€90€days€straight€time€so€we€can€make€sure€that€he€gets€theÏmessage[.]ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒThe€court€also€indicated€its€concern€with€appropriately€dealing€with€anÏindividual€who€sold€drugs€on€a€college€campus.€€We€believe€the€trial€courtÏproperly€considered€whether€diversion€would€serve€the€public's€and€theÏaccused's€interests€in€the€ends€of€justice,€notwithstanding€its€failure€toÏspecifically€denominate€its€findings€as€such.Ì JÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€state€submitted€three€enhancement€factors€for€the€trial€court'sÏconsideration.€€They€were€factors€1€(defendant's€criminal€history),€10€(noÏhesitation€to€commit€crime€where€risk€to€human€life€was€high),€and€16€(crimeÏcommitted€under€circumstances€in€which€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victimÏwas€great).€€Prior€to€sentencing,€the€state€conceded€the€inapplicability€of€factorÏ1.€€In€its€brief€to€this€court,€the€state€indirectly€concedes€the€inapplicability€ofÏfactor€10€but€maintains€the€propriety€of€factor€16.€€This€court€has€previouslyÏrecognized€that€factors€10€and€16€may€not€be€used€to€enhance€a€sale€ofÏcocaine€sentence€because€the€legislature€has€already€considered€theÏinherently€dangerous€characteristics€of€cocaine€by€classifying€it€as€a€Schedule€IIÏdrug,€and€to€use€this€rationale€for€enhancement€would€be€duplicative.€€òòState€v.ÏKeelóó,€882€S.W.2d€410,€419„21€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ì õÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defendant€may€have€been€eligible€for€classification€as€an€especiallyÏmitigated€offender,€due€to€his€lack€of€prior€felony€convictions,€the€absence€ofÏenhancement€factors€and€the€possible€presence€of€mitigating€factors.€€òòSeeóóÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„109€(1990).€€Such€a€determination€is€within€theÏdiscretion€of€the€trial€court.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„109,€Sentencing€Comm'nÏComments€(1990).€€The€appellant,€however,€has€not€challenged€the€trial€court'sÏdetermination€he€is€a€standard€offender,€and€we€decline€to€address€this€issue€òòexÏmero€motuóó.Ì ‘Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€&Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝCode€section€40„35„102€does€not€specifically€authorize€a€sentence€ofÏconfinement€followed€by€a€term€of€Community€Corrections.€€However,€thisÏsection€does€authorize€a€sentence€of€confinement€in€conjunction€with€a€term€ofÏprobation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(c)(4)€(Supp.€1996).€€The€CommunityÏCorrections€statute€authorizes€the€court€to€sentence€a€defendant€to€CommunityÏCorrections€as€a€condition€of€probation€in€conjunction€with€a€suspendedÏsentence,€split€confinement€or€periodic€confinement€under€chapter€35.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„36„106(f)€(Supp.€1996).€€Thus,€the€sentence€imposed€isÏgenerally€an€appropriate€alternative€to€incarceration.€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„36„302(b)€(Supp.€1996).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€!‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ !ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ñ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ќـ€ÙÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€&ÔßR€'(%A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌÌÑ€Ñò òà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌ€à@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌó óÌà@ àAPRIL€1997€SESSIONÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà àó ó)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAppellee,à àà àà à)à àC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9607„CC„00288Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àPutnam€Countyà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìò òMATTHEW€SCOTT€ALBERTSON,ó óà à)à àHonorable€Leon€Burns,€Jr.,ÏJudge€à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAppellant.à àà àà à)à à(Sale€of€Cocaine€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à0 àand€Sale€of€Marijuana)Ìà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 à)à0 àÌà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌMARTELIA€T.€CRAWFORDà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌ310A€E.€Broad€St.à àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌCookeville,€TN€€38501Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCLINTON€J.€MORGANÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€E.€GIBSONÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àOWEN€G.€BURNETTÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à145€S.€Jefferson€Ave.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCookeville,€TN€€38501ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€____________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDó óÌÌÌCURWOOD€WITT€ÌJUDGEÌÌÌÌÑ€)ÑÇÑ7€òWXXdðXXdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑØØÑ7€ ¸0 XXdðXXdð7Ñà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌÌÓÓà àThe€defendant,€Matthew€Scott€Albertson,€appeals€the€Putnam€CountyÏCriminal€Court's€denial€of€judicial€diversion€and€straight€probation€following€theÏdefendant's€convictions€of€sale€of€cocaine€and€sale€of€marijuana.€€The€trialÏcourt,€Judge€Leon€Burns,€Jr.,€presiding,€sentenced€the€defendant€on€the€sale€ofÏcocaine€conviction€to€four€years€and€suspended€all€but€90€days.€€He€ordered€theÏconfinement€to€be€served€in€the€county€jail€with€the€balance€of€the€sentence€onÏprobation€conditioned€upon€participation€in€Community€Corrections.× ƒ+ ××  ×€€For€theÏsale€of€marijuana€conviction,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€two„year€sentence€to€beÏserved€in€the€same€manner€as€the€cocaine€sentence.× ƒ, ××  ×€€The€sentences€wereÏordered€to€be€served€concurrently.€€The€defendant€complains€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€failing€to€grant€him€judicial€diversion,€and€alternatively,€that€he€shouldÏhave€been€granted€a€completely€probated€sentence.€€On€review,€we€affirm€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àà àIn€July€1991,€the€defendant,€then€an€undergraduate€student€atÏTennessee€Technological€University€in€Cookeville,€was€involved€in€the€sale€ofÏcontrolled€substances.€€As€a€result€of€an€undercover€investigation€by€local€lawÍenforcement€and€an€operative€from€the€Tennessee€Highway€Patrol,€theÏdefendant€and€two€other€individuals€were€indicted€with€various€offenses€relatingÏto€the€sale€of€controlled€substances.€€The€defendant€was€indicted€on€two€countsÏof€sale€of€marijuana€and€one€count€of€sale€of€cocaine,€in€violation€of€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€section€39„17„417(a)(3).€€The€defendant€was€tried€before€a€juryÏof€his€peers€and€convicted€of€the€sale€of€less€than€.5€gram€of€cocaine.€€HeÏpleaded€guilty€to€sale€of€over€one„half€ounce€of€marijuana€and€agreed€to€a€two„year€sentence,€with€the€manner€of€service€of€that€sentence€to€be€determined€byÏthe€court.€€The€state€agreed€to€òònolleóó€òòprosequióó€the€remaining€sale€of€marijuanaÏcount.× ƒ. ××  ×€€The€defendant€requested€judicial€diversion.ÌÌà àà àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€Brenda€Reed,€the€probation€officer€whoÏconducted€the€presentence€investigation,€testified€she€believed€the€defendantÏwas€amenable€to€correction€and€that€it€would€be€a€"wonderful€opportunity"€forÏhim€to€receive€judicial€diversion.€€When€questioned€whether€the€sale€ofÏmarijuana€and€cocaine€was€a€serious€problem€in€Putnam€County,€sheÏresponded€this€was€a€serious€problem€anywhere.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€testified€that€since€committing€the€offenses€forÏwhich€he€was€convicted,€he€has€received€his€bachelor's€degree€in€microbiologyÏfrom€Tennessee€Tech.€€Following€graduation,€he€obtained€a€position€in€whichÏhe€utilized€his€degree;€however,€he€had€to€leave€this€employment€after€receivingÏhis€felony€convictions€due€to€the€employer's€policy€against€employing€felons.€ÏSince€losing€that€job,€the€appellant€has€worked€as€a€chef€at€greatly€reducedÏwages.€€He€also€testified€he€has€married€and€has€made€plans€to€return€to€schoolÏto€earn€his€master's€degree.€The€defendant€admitted€knowing€his€actions€wereÏagainst€the€law€at€the€time€he€committed€them.€€He€testified,€however,€heÏstopped€using€marijuana€prior€to€his€last€year€of€college€and€asked€hisÏroommates€not€to€use€drugs€around€him.€According€to€the€defendant,€this€tookÏplace€prior€to€his€learning€he€faced€criminal€prosecution€for€the€sale€of€drugs.€ÏHe€expressed€his€remorse€and€desire€to€receive€a€second€chance.ÌÌà àà àKimberly€Bullington,€a€family€friend€from€the€defendant'sÏhometown,€testified€she€had€known€the€defendant€all€his€life€and€thought€heÏwould€benefit€from€a€second€chance.€€She€testified€the€defendant€had€taken€onÏsignificant€responsibility€within€the€past€two€years€due€to€illness€of€some€of€hisÏfamily€members.€€She€also€testified€the€defendant€sometimes€worked€two€jobsÏto€get€through€college.€€Likewise,€she€said€the€defendant€regretted€hisÍinvolvement€in€selling€drugs.ÌÌà àà àAccording€to€the€defendant's€statement€in€the€presentence€report,Ïthe€offenses€in€question€arose€when€the€defendant€first€sold€marijuana€to€anÏundercover€officer,€who€then€repeatedly€requested€that€the€defendant€sell€himÏsome€cocaine.€€The€defendant€had€no€cocaine,€although€he€eventually€obtainedÏsome€and€sold€it€to€€the€officer.× ƒ/ ××  ×€€The€defendant€admitted€having€previouslyÏused€marijuana€two€to€three€times€per€week€over€a€period€of€four€years€andÏdenied€ever€using€cocaine.€€Two€random€drug€screens€performed€at€the€requestÏof€the€probation€officer€were€negative€for€the€presence€of€cocaine€or€marijuana.€ÏThe€presentence€report€also€confirmed€the€defendant's€steady€work€history€andÏeducational€background.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€submitted€three€letters€of€reference€attesting€to€hisÏgood€character,€written€by€a€minister,€pharmacist€and€businessman€from€hisÍhometown.€€These€letters€uniformly€appealed€to€the€court€for€leniency.ÌÌà àà àIn€imposing€the€sentences€for€the€defendant's€two€convictions,€the€Ïtrial€court€first€denied€judicial€diversion€based€on€the€nature€and€circumstancesÏof€the€offense€and€the€need€for€deterrence.€€The€court€went€on€to€impose€aÏsentence€for€the€cocaine€offense€of€four€years€with€all€but€90€days€suspendedÏ"so€we€can€make€sure€he€gets€the€message"€with€the€balance€to€be€served€onÏprobation€conditioned€upon€Community€Corrections.€€In€imposing€this€sentence,Ïthe€court€did€not€enunciate€which,€if€any,€of€the€sentencing€considerations€or€theÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€it€relied€on.€€The€trial€judge€did€notÏannounce€the€manner€of€service€of€sentence€for€the€marijuana€offense€at€theÏsentencing€hearing.€€However,€a€judgment€form€in€the€technical€record€reflects€aÏsentence€of€two€years€with€all€but€90€days€suspended€and€the€balance€to€beÏserved€in€Community€Corrections.€€The€length€of€this€sentence€was€agreedÏupon€by€the€defendant€and€the€state€as€part€of€the€plea€agreement.ÌÌà@ àò òIó óÌà àà àIn€his€first€issue,€the€defendant€challenges€the€trial€court's€denial€ofÏjudicial€diversion.€€He€contends€the€trial€court€(1)€did€not€consider€all€of€theÏrelevant€factors€and€(2)€gave€undue€weight€to€two€of€the€factors,€theÍcircumstances€of€the€offense€and€the€deterrence€value€to€the€defendant€andÏothers.ÌÌà àà àThe€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€provides€in€pertinent€part:€ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÓÓIf€any€person€who€has€not€previously€been€convicted€of€a€felony€orÏa€Class€A€misdemeanor€is€found€guilty€or€pleads€guilty€to€aÏmisdemeanor€which€is€punishable€by€imprisonment€or€a€Class€C,ÏD€or€E€felony,€the€court€may,€without€entering€a€judgment€of€guiltyÏand€with€the€consent€of€such€person,€defer€further€proceedingsÏand€place€the€person€on€probation€upon€such€reasonableÏconditions€as€it€may€require€and€for€a€period€of€time€not€less€thanÏthe€period€of€the€maximum€sentence€for€the€misdemeanor€withÏwhich€he€is€charged,€nor€not€more€than€the€period€of€the€maximumÏsentence€of€the€felony€with€which€he€is€charged,€on€the€conditionÏthat€the€defendant€pay,€in€addition€to€the€payment€of€not€less€thanÏten€dollars€($10.00)€nor€more€than€thirty„five€dollars€($35.00)€perÏmonth,€as€determined€by€the€court€[as€part€payment€of€theÏexpenses€of€supervision€of€the€defendant].€.€Ñ ° Ñ.€.€ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„313(a)(1)€(Supp.€1996).€€ÓÓThe€procedure€under€thisÏprovision€is€commonly€referred€to€as€judicial€diversion.€€It€is€substantially€similarÏto€pretrial€diversion;€however,€judicial€diversion€follows€a€guilty€plea€and€theÏdecision€to€grant€diversion€rests€with€the€court,€not€the€prosecutor.€€òòState€v.ÏAndersonóó,€857€S.W.2d€571,€572€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).ÌÌà àà àThe€lower€court's€denial€of€judicial€diversion€is€subject€to€appellateÏreversal€only€if€that€court€abused€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Hammersleyóó,€650ÏS.W.2d€352,€356€(Tenn.€1983).€€When€a€defendant€challenges€the€denial€ofÏjudicial€diversion,€we€are€constrained€not€to€revisit€the€issue€if€the€recordÏcontains€any€substantial€evidence€supporting€the€trial€court's€decision.€ÍòòHammersleyóó,€650€S.W.2d€at€356;€òòaccordóó€òòState€v.€Carróó,€861€S.W.2d€850,€856Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(where€the€evidence€is€capable€of€justifying€differingÏresults,€this€court€allows€the€prosecutor€his€or€her€discretion€on€a€decision€ofÏwhether€to€allow€pretrial€diversion).€€€ÌÌà àà àIn€determining€whether€to€grant€judicial€diversion,€the€trial€courtÏmust€considerÌÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÓÓ(a)€the€accused's€amenability€to€correction,€(b)€the€circumstancesÏof€the€offense,€(c)€the€accused's€criminal€record,€(d)€the€accused'sÏsocial€history,€(e)€the€status€of€the€accused's€physical€and€mentalÏhealth,€(f)€the€deterrence€value€to€the€accused€as€well€as€others,Ïand€(g)€whether€diversion€will€serve€the€public's€and€the€accused'sÏinterests€in€the€ends€of€justice.€€€òòÌÌÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€163,€168€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(citationÏomitted).€€Moreover,€the€record€must€reflect€that€the€court€has€weighed€all€of€theÏfactors€in€reaching€its€determination.€€òòBonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€at€168€(citationsÏomitted).€€The€court€must€explain€on€the€record€why€the€defendant€does€notÏqualify€under€its€analysis,€and€if€the€court€has€based€its€determination€on€onlyÏsome€of€the€factors,€it€must€explain€why€these€factors€outweigh€the€others.€ÏòòBonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€at€168€(citations€omitted).€ÌÌà àà àIn€general,€the€presence€of€only€one€of€the€factors€is€sufficient€toÏsupport€a€denial€of€judicial€diversion.€€òòState€v.€Thomas€Daileyóó,€No.€02C01„CR„00008,€slip€op.€at€4€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Aug.€21,€1991)€(relying€on€òòStateÏv.€Baronóó,€659€S.W.2d€811€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983)€(applying€this€rule€in€theÍcontext€of€a€denial€of€probation)).€€However,€the€supreme€court€has€said€that€twoÏof€the€factors,€the€circumstances€of€the€case€and€deterrence,€may€not€be€givenÏ"òòcontrollingóó€weight€unless€they€are€'of€such€overwhelming€significance€that€theyÏ[necessarily]€outweigh€all€other€factors.'"€€òòState€v.€Washingtonóó,€866€S.W.2d€950,Ï951€(Tenn.€1993)€(pretrial€diversion€case)€(emphasis€in€original)€(quoting€òòStateÏv.€Markhamóó,€755€S.W.2d€850,€853€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988)).€ÌÌà àà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€made€its€findings€on€the€record€withÏrespect€to€the€relevant€factors.€€The€court€found€the€defendant€was€amenable€toÏcorrection.€It€found€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€"significant"€in€that€theÏdefendant€was€willing€to€sell€drugs€to€a€stranger,€obtained€cocaine€for€theÏstranger,€and€was€ready€and€willing€to€sell€drugs€on€a€college€campus.€€TheÏcourt€noted€the€defendant's€lack€of€a€criminal€record,€positive€social€history€andÏgood€physical€and€mental€health.€€On€the€other€hand,€the€court€foundÏdeterrence€of€this€defendant€and€others€was€an€important€consideration€andÏwas€better€accomplished€by€not€granting€judicial€diversion.€€The€court€did€notÏexplicitly€address€the€public's€and€the€accused's€interest€in€the€ends€of€justice,Ïalthough€it€is€apparent€from€the€trial€judge's€statements€at€sentencing€that€heÏweighed€this€factor€in€conjunction€with€the€others.× ƒ0 ××  ×€€As€such,€we€disagree€withÍthe€defendant's€assertion€that€the€trial€court€did€not€consider€all€of€the€relevantÏfactors.ÌÌà àà àIn€arriving€at€its€determination,€the€lower€court€relied€on€theÏcircumstances€of€the€offense€and€the€need€for€deterrence.€€It€is€obvious€from€theÏtrial€judge's€extensive€discussion€of€these€two€factors€on€the€record€that€he€gaveÏthem€controlling€weight€over€the€other€relevant€factors.€€The€court's€discussionÏof€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€and€the€need€for€deterrence€consumes€theÏvast€majority€of€the€judge's€comments€about€the€relevant€considerations.€€InÏparticular,€the€trial€court€was€troubled€with€the€defendant's€willingness€to€sellÏdrugs€to€a€stranger,€the€fact€the€defendant€was€engaged€in€his€criminalÏenterprise€in€a€college€campus€environment,€the€need€for€this€type€of€crime€toÏhave€consequences,€and€the€need€for€the€defendant€to€learn€his€lesson.€ÏContrary€to€the€appellant's€assertion,€we€do€not€believe€the€trial€court€abused€itsÏdiscretion€in€weighing€these€factors€more€heavily€than€the€others.€€SubstantialÏevidence€exists€to€support€this€action.ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€we€must€hold€there€is€no€error€in€the€trial€court'sÍdenial€of€judicial€diversion.€€The€defendant's€first€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òIIÌà àà àó óThe€remaining€issue€challenges€the€propriety€of€the€sentenceÏimposed€on€the€defendant.€€In€determining€whether€the€trial€court€has€properlyÏsentenced€an€individual,€this€court€engages€in€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€recordÏwith€a€presumption€the€trial€court's€determinations€were€correct.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1990).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€upon€theÏaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingÏprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€conducting€our€òòde€novoóó€review,€we€mustÏconsider€the€evidence€at€sentencing,€the€presentence€report,€the€sentencingÏprinciples,€the€arguments€of€counsel,€the€statements€of€the€defendant,€theÏnature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense,€any€mitigating€and€enhancementÏfactors,€and€the€defendantððs€amenability€to€rehabilitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððððÏ40„35„210(b),€40„35„103(5)€(1990);€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€168.€€On€appeal,€theÏappellant€has€the€burden€of€showing€the€sentence€imposed€is€improper.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d),€Sentencing€Comm'n€Comments€(1990);€òòAshbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€at€169.ÌÌà àà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€failed€to€place€on€the€record€anyÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€it€found,€as€required€by€the€Sentencing€Act.€ÏòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(f)€(Supp.€1996).€€€It€is€imperative€that€the€trialÍcourt€note€its€findings€relative€to€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€on€theÏrecord€in€order€for€this€court€to€undertake€meaningful€review€of€the€propriety€ofÏthe€defendant's€sentence.€€Because€the€court€did€not€do€so,€we€conduct€our€òòdeÏnovoóó€review€without€the€presumption€that€the€trial€court€properly€sentenced€theÏappellant.ÌÌà àà àFirst,€with€respect€to€the€length€of€the€sale€of€cocaine€sentence,€allÏof€the€enhancement€factors€submitted€to€the€trial€court€by€the€state€areÏinapplicable€as€a€matter€of€law.× ƒ1 ××  ×€€In€the€absence€of€any€enhancement€factors€toÏovercome€the€presumptive€minimum€sentence,€the€defendant€must€receive€noÏmore€than€the€minimum€sentence.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c)€(Supp.Ï1996).ò ò€€ó óIn€this€case€of€a€Class€C€felony€committed€by€a€Range€I€offender,× ƒ2 ××  ×€thatÍsentence€is€three€years.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„111(b)(3)€(1990).€€Thus,Ïwe€modify€the€length€of€the€defendant's€sentence€for€sale€of€cocaineÏaccordingly.ÌÌà àà àWith€respect€to€the€sentence€for€the€sale€of€marijuana€conviction,Ïthe€defendant€agreed€to€the€two„year€length€of€this€sentence€as€part€of€the€pleaÏagreement.€€The€parties€agreed€this€sentence€would€be€concurrent€to€theÏsentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€for€the€sale€of€cocaine€conviction€andÏsubmitted€only€the€manner€of€service€to€the€trial€court€for€its€consideration.€ÏThus,€the€defendant's€effective€sentence€for€the€two€convictions€is€three€years.ÌÌà àà àNext,€we€turn€to€the€issue€of€the€manner€of€service€of€this€sentence.€ÏHaving€received€a€sentence€of€less€than€eight€years,€the€defendant€is€presumedÏto€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„102(6)€(1990).€€Moreover,€he€is€eligible€for€probation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„303(a)€(Supp.€1996).€€He€argues€he€should€receive€straightÏprobation,€rather€than€confinement€coupled€with€probation€conditioned€uponÏCommunity€Corrections.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€Ìà àà àFirst,€we€point€out€that€the€defendant€did€receive€an€alternativeÏsentence.€€Split€confinement€is€an€alternative€sentencing€option.€€òòState€v.€JamesÏA.€Howardóó,€No.€03C01„9608„CC„00284,€slip€op.€at€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏKnoxville,€February€24,€1997),€òòappl.€perm.€app.€filedóó€(Tenn.,€May€6,€1997);€òòStateÏv.€James€E.€Allredóó,€No.€03C01„9504„CR„00110,€slip€op.€at€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏKnoxville,€March€20,€1996);€òòState€v.€Marjorie€Jeanette€Sneedóó,€No.€03C01„9410„CR„00369,€slip€op.€at€3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€October€17,€1995);€€òòErnestÏLee€Lands,€Jr.€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9404„CR„00145,€slip€op.€at€3€€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Knoxville,€May€19,€1995),€€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1995);€òòState€v.€DannyÏAllisonóó,€No.€03C01„9403„CR„00106,€slip€op.€at€3€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,ÏMarch€23,€1995);€òòState€v.€Alvin€Lee€Lewisóó,€No.€01C01„9404„CC„00125,€slip€op.Ïat€7„8€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€March€14,1995),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.Ï1995);€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„104(c)€(Supp.€1996).€€The€benefit€theÏdefendant€enjoyed€in€being€presumed€a€suitable€candidate€for€alternativeÏsentencing€has€been€depleted.ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€we€move€to€the€question€of€probation.€€The€defendantÏseeks€total€probation.€€Probation€is,€indeed,€an€alternative€sentencing€option.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„104(c)(3)€(Supp.€1996);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b)€(Supp.€1996).€€However,€the€burden€rests€with€the€defendant€to€showÍthat€he€is€entitled€to€probation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b)€(Supp.€1996);Ïòòseeóó€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€455€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€app.Ïdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€òòBinghamóó,€this€court€observed:€ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÓÓIt€should€be€pointed€out€that€determining€whether€a€defendant€isÏentitled€to€an€alternative€sentence€necessarily€requires€a€separateÏinquiry€from€that€of€determining€whether€the€defendant€is€entitledÏto€full€probation.€€This€is€so€because€the€inquiries€involve€differentÏburdens€of€proof.€€Where€a€defendant€is€entitled€to€the€statutoryÏpresumption€of€alternative€sentencing,€the€State€has€the€burden€ofÏovercoming€the€presumption€with€evidence€to€the€contrary.€ÏConversely,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€of€establishingÏsuitability€for€full€probation,€even€if€the€defendant€is€entitled€to€theÏstatutory€presumption€of€alternative€sentencing.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓòòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€455.€€To€prevail€in€the€quest€for€full€probation,€aÏdefendant€must€demonstrate€that€probation€ð ðwill€ððsubserve€the€ends€of€justiceÏand€the€best€interest€of€both€the€public€and€the€defendant.ðððð€òòBinghamóó,€910ÏS.W.2d€at€456€(quoting€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€259€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1990)).€€In€òòBinghamóó,€we€cited€the€following€factors€which,€although€ð ðnotÏcontrolling€the€discretion€of€the€sentencing€court,ðð€should€be€considered€inÏdetermining€the€appropriateness€of€probation:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  Ò(1)€The€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€crime,€under€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„210(b)(4)€(Supp.€1996);Ì(2)€the€defendantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation,€under€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„103(5)(1990);€Ì(3)€whether€full€probation€would€ð ðunduly€depreciate€theÏseriousness€of€the€offense,ðð€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B)€(1990);€andÌ(4)€whether€a€sentence€of€full€probation€would€ð ðprovide€anÏeffective€deterrent,ðð€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B)Ï(1990).ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒòòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€456.€€The€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminalÏconduct€involved€is€a€factor€that€is€related€logically€to€the€issue€of€depreciatingÏthe€seriousness€of€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Hartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€370,€375€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1991).€€When€these€factors€serve€as€the€only€basis€for€denyingÏprobation,€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense€must€be€ð ðespeciallyÏviolent,€horrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,€offensive,€òòoróó€otherwise€of€anÏexcessive€or€exaggerated€degree,ðð€outweighing€all€other€factors€favoringÏprobation.€€òòState€v.€Travisóó,€622€S.W.2d€529,€534€(Tenn.€1981)€(emphasisÏadded).€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€òòHartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€at€375.ÌÌà àà àBearing€in€mind€that€our€review€in€this€case€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóó,€without€aÏpresumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€decision,€we€take€note€ofÏpertinent€undisputed€facts€in€evidence.€€The€defendant€presents€a€history€ofÏgood€citizenship€prior€to€his€use€of€marijuana€and€his€sale€of€not€only€this€drugÏbut€also€cocaine.€€He€has€demonstrated€a€capacity€for€productive€living€and€inÏdealing€with€family€members€with€illnesses,€has€shown€compassion€andÏcommitment.€€Moreover,€the€trial€courtððs€sentence€entails€the€payment€ofÏsubstantial€fines€which€have€not€been€contested€on€this€appeal.ÌÌà àà àThere€are,€of€course,€counterweights€to€these€considerations.€€WeÏshare€the€trial€courtððs€expressed€concern€that€the€defendant€engaged€in€thisÏactivity€on€or€near€a€campus€of€higher€learning.€€The€defendant€was€willing€toÏplace€these€controlled€substances€into€commerce€by€selling€to€a€stranger.€ÏFurthermore,€although€his€college€degree€is€certainly€the€product€of€discipline,Ïdiligence,€and€hard€work,€we€acknowledge€that€the€defendantððs€educationalÏattainment€and€professional€capabilities€also€encumber€him€with€theÏwherewithal€and€the€responsibility€to€understand€and€obey€societyððs€rules.€ÏThese€aspects€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved€are€sufficiently€offensive,Ïtending€to€outweigh€other€considerations€favoring€the€grant€of€probation,€so€asÏto€compel€us€to€conclude€that€the€defendant€has€not€carried€his€burden€ofÏdemonstrating€that€he€is€entitled€to€full€probation.ÌÌà àà àHaving€so€concluded,€we€hold€that€split€confinement€isÏappropriate.€€We€modify€the€sentence€in€order€to€require€that€the€defendantÏserve€60€days€in€confinement€in€the€county€jail,€with€the€balance€of€the€effectiveÏsentence€of€three€years€to€be€probated€conditioned€upon€participation€inÏCommunity€Corrections€for€and€during€the€first€year€following€release€fromÏcustody.ÌÌÓÓÏà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCURWOOD€WITT,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE