ÿWPCó& …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ 0ˆ bˆ 0D 0JÔ 0T 0^r Ð 0hÐ 0r8 0|ª w& 0†6 0¼ L 1uT 0dÉ B- D3JU >}U*» 0@åB)%DCN AM‘ÞÇúÖÁÙ—pv~ývÓ{ AON%Æ% 0Dc& D/§& BÖ&˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡»{s 3|xo(8(2R$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ4°ÒÒ„°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔaÓ€m2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔQ# ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d$$$$'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd€-/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÔ€,ÔÔ€,ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€,XÔÌÌò òSeptember€30,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€,ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ½Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€+ôÔÔ€,ÔThe€appellantððs€argument€would€be€more€appropriately€directed€to€a€later€hearing€nearÏthe€end€of€his€probation€period€on€the€ability€or€inability€to€pay.€€If€the€appellant€discovers€at€theÏend€of€the€four€years€that€he€cannot€make€full€restitution,€he€may€petition€the€court€for€a€review.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304(f)€(1990).€€Alternatively,€if€the€appellant€faces€a€future€probationÏrevocation€hearing€for€failing€to€pay,€he€may€present€his€proof€to€the€trial€court€at€that€time.Ì ÌÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€,ÔÔ€,ôÔThe€Pennsylvania€statute€defines€ð ðvictimðð€as€ð ððð[a]ny€person,€except€an€offender,€whoÏsuffered€injuries€to€his€person€or€property€as€a€direct€result€of€the€crime.ðððð€òòGallowayóó,€448€A.2d€atÏ576€quoting€18€Pa.€C.S.A.€ðð1106(h).Ì ÏÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€,ÔÔ€,ôÔWe€note€that€the€dissent€in€òòGallowayóó€concluded€that€the€general€language€of€the€statuteÏdid€not€expressly€or€impliedly€preclude€restitution€payments€to€insurance€companies.€€òòGallowayóó,Ï448€A.2d€at€578.€€It€added€that€ð ð[w]hether€the€restitution€is€paid€to€the€insurer€directly€or€...€to€theÏinsured€victim,€the€sentence€of€restitution€will€serve€its€rehabilitative€purpose€of€impressing€uponÏthe€offender€the€loss€he€has€caused€and€his€responsibility€to€repair€that€loss.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€579.Ì ƒÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€,ÔÔ€,ôÔòòState€v.€Martinezóó,€899€P.2d€1302€(Wash.€App.€Div.€2€1995)€(finding€that€the€insuranceÏcompany€stands€in€the€shoes€of€the€victim);€òòAlger€v.€Commonwealthóó,€450€S.E.2d€765€(Va.€App.Ï1994)€(finding€insurance€company€is€victim€for€restitution€purposes);€òòState€v.€Sanchezóó,€869€P.2dÏ1133€(Wash.€App.€Div.€3€1994)€(stating€that€although€not€listed€in€the€indictment,€insuranceÏcompanies€are€ð ðsecondary€victimsðð€which€suffer€a€loss€through€the€principle€of€subrogation);ÏòòMartin€v.€Stateóó,€874€S.W.2d€674€(Tex.€Crim.€App.€1994)€(named€victim€in€the€indictment€is€notÏalways€the€only€victim);€òòState€v.€Brooksóó,€862€P.2d€57€(N.M.€App.€1993)€(appellantððs€argument€thatÏremedy€should€be€sought€in€civil€action€does€not€preclude€a€finding€that€an€insurance€company€isÏvictim€for€restitution€purposes);€òòHagler€v.€Stateóó,€625€So.2d€1190€(Ala.€Cr.€App.€1993)€(insuranceÏcompany€is€a€victim);€òòRogers€v.€Stateóó,€435€S.E.2d€457€(Ga.€App.€1993)€(insurance€company€is€aÏvictim);€òòL.S.€v.€Stateóó,€593€So.2d€296€(Fla.€App.€5th€Dist.€1992)€(the€thought€that€a€perpetratorÏshould€escape€penalty€for€his€criminal€acts€because€he€chose€a€victim€with€insurance€is€withoutÏlogic).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{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  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€,ÔÑ€ ÑÑ7€XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÙ€€ÙßL€01/;+'h|úÿå` Å `€€Lßà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINALÏAPPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓAT€JACKSONÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓAPRIL€1996€SESSIONó óÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌà àÓ ` ®DÓò òÌÓ` cÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àó ó)€ÌÓ ` ¸ cÓà àà à)€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9509„CC„00281€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àAppellee,à à)Ìà àà à)€Madison€CountyÌV.€€€€€€€à à)Ìà àà à)€Honorable€Franklin€Murchison,€JudgeÌò òà àó óà à)ò òÌMICHAEL€RALPH€ALFORD,ó óà à)€(Aggravated€Assault)€à àà à)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àAppellant.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌÓ` ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌDavid€L.€Hamblen€à àCharles€W.€BursonÌAttorney€at€Law€€€€à àAttorney€General€&€Reporter€Ì303€West€Church€Streetà à€€€ÌUnion€City,€TN€38261à àCharlotte€RappuhnÌà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌòòAt€Trialóó:à à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌJesse€Hill€Ford,€IIIà àNashville,€TN€37243ÌAttorney€at€Lawà àÌ111€West€Main€Street€à àJerry€WoodallÌJackson,€TN€38301à àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àDonald€H.€AllenÌà àAsst.€Dist.€Attorney€GeneralÌà àP.O.€Box€2825Ìà àJackson,€TN€38302Ìà àÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€___________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌó óÌÌò òPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,Ìó óJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ` ÚÓàQ àò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌàQ àÌÌÓ ` °§XÓÓÓà àThe€appellant,€Michael€Ralph€Alford,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€ofÏaggravated€assault€by€reckless€conduct.€€Sentenced€as€a€Range€I€offender,€theÏappellant€received€a€four„year€sentence€with€all€but€sixty€days€suspended.€€InÏaddition,€he€was€ordered€to€perform€two€hundred€hours€of€community€serviceÏand€to€pay€restitution€of€$4,791.01€to€the€victim€and€$68,589.09€to€the€victimððsÏhealth€insurance€provider.€€ÌÌà àIn€this€appeal,€the€appellant€raises€two€issues€for€review.€€First,€he€arguesÏthat€the€jury€erred€by€not€accepting€his€self„defense€claim€and€that€the€evidenceÏwas€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict.€€Secondly,€he€asserts€that€the€restitutionÏordered€is€contrary€to€the€provisions€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304.€ÏFollowing€our€review,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.ÌÌà àThe€testimony€at€trial€revealed€that€the€victim€was€pulling€into€the€parkingÏlot€of€a€convenient€market€when€he€spotted€the€appellant€exiting€the€parking€lot.€€ÍThe€victim€said€that€he€sat€in€his€vehicle€until€he€was€sure€the€appellant€wasÏgone.€€The€two€had€known€each€other€for€some€time€but€tensions€had€arisenÏseven€months€earlier€when€the€appellant€threatened€the€victim€over€theÏtelephone.€€The€threat€was€based€on€appellantððs€discovery€of€old€greeting€cardsÏthe€victim€had€given€the€appellantððs€girlfriend€when€they€dated€previously.€€TheÏappellant€told€the€victim€that€he€was€going€to€ð ðstomp€[the€victimððs]€buttðð€when€heÏsaw€him€in€public.€€€€ÌÌà àAfter€the€victim€made€his€purchase,€he€exited€the€store€where€heÏencountered€the€appellant.€€The€victim€said€that€the€appellant€just€stared€at€himÏand€did€not€say€anything.€€The€victim€told€the€appellant,€ð ðyou€know€I€canððt€fightÏyou.€€Iððve€got€a€bad€back€and€canððt€fight€you.ðð€€According€to€the€victim,€theÏappellant€responded€that€ð ðyou€[the€victim]€ainððt€going€to€have€no€choice.ðð€€TheÏappellant€hit€the€victim€in€the€shoulder€then€assumed€a€bear€hug€positionÏbehind€the€victim.€€Next,€the€appellant€continually€threw€the€victim€against€theÏvictimððs€truck.€€The€victim€repeatedly€asked€the€appellant€what€he€was€doing€butÏreceived€no€response.€€ÌÌà àThe€victim€attempted€to€reach€into€his€pocket€to€retrieve€his€pocket€knife.€ÏWhen€the€appellant€realized€what€the€victim€was€doing,€he€told€the€victim€that€ð ðifÏyou€pull€it€out,€Iððm€going€to€stick€you€with€it.ðð€€The€victim€responded,€ð ðmaybe€so,Ïbut€Iððm€going€to€make€you€turn€me€loose.ðð€€When€the€appellant€released€theÏvictim,€the€victim€pulled€out€his€pocket€knife€and€took€a€couple€of€steps€towardsÍthe€appellant.€€The€victim€said€he€was€trying€to€back€the€appellant€far€enoughÏaway€so€that€he€could€get€into€his€truck.€€The€appellant€ran€a€few€feet€away€fromÏthe€victim.€€The€victim€told€the€appellant€to€stay€away€from€him€and€leave€himÏalone.€€After€he€saw€that€the€appellant€was€some€feet€away,€the€victim€put€theÏknife€back€into€his€pocket.€€ÌÌà àAs€the€victim€reached€into€his€pocket€for€his€truck€keys,€he€spotted€theÏappellant€running€towards€him.€€An€eyewitness€said€that€when€the€appellantÏneared€the€truck,€it€appeared€he€was€preparing€to€fight€again.€€The€appellantÏgrabbed€a€four„way€lug€wrench€from€the€victimððs€truck€bed€and€hit€the€victim€inÏthe€side€with€the€sharp€end€of€the€wrench.€€The€sharp€point€went€into€the€victimððsÏabdomen€puncturing€his€left€lung.€€The€victim€attempted€to€drive€himself€awayÏbut€the€appellant€physically€pushed€him€across€the€seat€and€told€him€he€wasÏdriving€him€to€the€hospital.€€ÌÌà àThe€victim€was€initially€hospitalized€for€approximately€nineteen€days€afterÏhaving€had€surgery€for€a€ruptured€colon€and€receiving€a€temporary€colostomy.€ÏDue€to€complications€the€victim€returned€to€the€hospital€on€a€number€ofÏoccasions€for€further€surgeries€and€treatment.€€ÌÌà àThe€appellantððs€girlfriend,€Gloria€Evans,€testified€that€she€and€theÏappellant€saw€the€victim€pulling€into€the€parking€lot€of€the€market.€€The€appellantÏtold€her€that€he€was€going€to€go€back€and€talk€to€the€victim€to€ð ðpatch€things€up.ðð€ÍHowever,€Ms.€Evans€tried€to€discourage€the€appellant€because€she€was€afraidÏthere€would€be€trouble.€€From€the€car€she€could€see€they€were€talking€but€didÏnot€witness€the€precise€events.€€She€did€see€the€appellant€run€back€to€the€gasÏpumps.€€She€described€him€as€looking€"scared."€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€testified€in€his€own€behalf.€€He€said€that€when€he€saw€theÏvictim€pulling€into€the€market,€he€thought€it€would€be€a€good€opportunity€to€talk.€ÏThe€appellant€said€the€victim€exited€the€store€and€as€he€approached€theÏappellant€asked€him€what€he€was€going€to€do.€€He€next€testified€that€the€victimÏreached€into€his€pocket€and€pulled€out€the€knife.€€He€grabbed€the€victim€toÏprevent€him€from€opening€the€knife.€€The€appellant€told€the€victim€to€drop€theÏknife€and€nothing€would€happen.€€The€appellant€said€he€was€scared€as€theÏvictim€twisted€out€of€appellantððs€grip.€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€said€the€victim€told€him€he€would€show€him€what€he€wasÏgoing€to€do€with€the€knife.€€The€appellant€said€he€fled€to€the€gas€pumps€butÏreturned€to€the€back€of€the€victimððs€truck.€€He€said€he€looked€for€anything€heÏcould€get€his€hands€on€because€the€victim€was€coming€after€him.€€Appellant€saidÏhe€swung€the€tire€tool€to€knock€the€knife€out€of€the€victimððs€hand.€€Instead€theÏpoint€of€the€tool€hit€the€victim€in€the€side.€€At€that€point,€the€appellant€told€theÏvictim€to€drop€the€knife.€€He€said€the€victim€closed€the€knife€and€put€it€away.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àOne€eyewitness€saw€the€appellant€put€the€victim€in€a€bear€hug.€€HeÏexplained€that€when€the€appellant€released€the€victim,€the€appellant€fled€to€theÍother€side€of€the€victimððs€truck.€€He€did€not,€however,€see€the€victim€chase€theÏappellant€nor€did€he€see€the€victim€with€a€weapon.€€Another€witness€saw€theÏappellant€strike€the€victim€with€his€fist€then€place€the€victim€in€a€bear€hug.€€HeÏsaw€an€object€in€the€appellantððs€hand€but€could€not€identify€it.€€Neither€witnessÏsaw€how€the€injury€actually€occurred.€€€€ÌÌà@ àò òI.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óÌà àThe€appellantððs€first€issue€is€twofold.€€First,€he€contends€that€the€juryÏshould€have€believed€his€self„defense€claim.€€Secondly,€he€argues€that€theÏverdict€was€contrary€to€the€weight€of€the€evidence.€€More€specifically,€theÏappellant€claims€that€the€evidence€supports€intentional,€rather€than€reckless,Ïaggravated€assault.€€ÌÌà àIn€a€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€challenge,€the€relevant€question€onÏappellate€review€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÏfavorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€theÏessential€elements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJacksonÏv.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63€(Tenn.€1985);ÏT.R.A.P.€13(e).€€ÌÌà àIn€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€jury€in€aÏcriminal€trial.€€A€jury€verdict€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€state's€witnesses€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405Í(Tenn.€1983).€€Moreover,€a€guilty€verdict€replaces€the€presumption€of€innocenceÏenjoyed€at€trial€with€the€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€474€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€theÏpresumption€of€guilt.€€òòIdóó.€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€beÏdrawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832€(Tenn.€1978).ÌÌà@ àò òA.€€Self„Defenseó óÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€based€on€the€proof€the€jury€should€have€foundÏthat€he€acted€in€self„defense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611€provides€that:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 à[a]€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€forceÏagainst€another€person€when€and€to€the€degree€theÏperson€reasonably€believes€the€force€is€immediatelyÏnecessary€to€protect€against€the€otherððs€use€orÏattempted€use€of€unlawful€force.€€ÌÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611(a)€(1991).€€The€test€is€threefold:€(1)€the€defendantÏmust€reasonably€believe€he€or€she€is€threatened€with€imminent€loss€of€life€orÏserious€bodily€injury;€(2)€the€danger€creating€the€belief€must€be€real€or€honestlyÏbelieved€to€be€real€at€the€time€of€the€action;€and€(3)€the€belief€must€be€foundedÏon€reasonable€grounds.€€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€to€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„11„611(1991).€€ÌÌà àThe€testimony€indicated€that€the€appellant€initially€approached€the€victimÏas€he€was€exiting€the€market.€€The€victim€and€two€witnesses€testified€that€afterÍbeing€placed€in€a€bear€hug€by€the€appellant,€the€victim€reached€into€his€pocketÏfor€a€small€pocket€knife.€€One€witness€heard€the€victim€ð ðscreamðð€for€the€appellantÏto€ð ðkeep€[his]€hands€off€of€[him].ðð€€When€the€appellant€released€the€victim,€theÏvictim€moved€towards€the€appellant€a€couple€of€steps€to€ð ðrun€him€far€enough€...Ïso€[he]€could€get€back€in€[his]€truck.ðð€€The€victim€told€the€appellant€to€stay€awayÏfrom€him€and€leave€him€alone.€€ÌÌà àAlthough€the€testimony€at€this€juncture€was€somewhat€conflicting,€it€isÏclear€that€the€appellant€fled€some€distance€away€from€the€victimððs€truck.€€OneÏversion€of€the€facts€placed€the€appellant€at€the€gas€pumps€some€twenty€feetÏaway.€€Another€rendition€indicated€that€the€appellant€was€merely€at€the€back€ofÏthe€victimððs€truck.€€Neither€eyewitness€saw€the€victim€pursue€the€appellant.€ÏNonetheless,€the€victim€said€he€put€his€knife€back€into€his€pocket€and€attemptedÏto€get€into€his€truck.€€In€the€corner€of€his€eye,€the€victim€saw€the€appellantÏrunning€towards€him.€€Within€seconds,€the€appellant€reached€into€the€back€ofÏthe€victimððs€truck,€retrieved€a€tire€tool€and€swung€it€toward€the€appellant.€€TheÏstipulated€serious€bodily€injury€resulted€from€that€swing.Ì€à à€€The€appellant€admits€that€he€was€the€initial€aggressor€but€insists€thatÏwhen€he€released€the€victim€from€the€bear€hug,€he€effectively€withdrew.€€At€thatÏpoint,€he€claims,€the€victim€became€the€aggressor€and€he€simply€responded€inÏself„defense.€€However,€because€the€appellant€was€the€initial€aggressor,€self„defense€was€not€justified€unless€he€ð ðabandon[ed]€the€encounter€or€clearlyÏcommunicate[d]€to€the€other€the€intent€to€do€so.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„611(d)(1)€(1991).€€òòGann€v.€Stateóó,€214€Tenn.€711,€383€S.W.2d€32€(1964).€ÏWhether€the€appellant€retreated€so€as€to€justify€a€self„defense€claim€is€a€factualÏdetermination€for€the€jury.€€Obviously,€it€did€not€find€sufficient€credible€evidenceÏto€support€this€threshold€issue.€€€€€€€à àÌÌà àThe€weight€and€credibility€of€the€witnesses'€€testimony€are€mattersÏentrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676ÏS.W.2d€542€(Tenn.€1984);€òòByrge€v.€Stateóó,€575€S.W.2d€292€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1978).€€The€jury,€clearly€within€its€purview,€heard€the€appellantððs€proof€andÏrejected€the€self„defense€claim.€€This€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òB.€€Mental€Elementó óÌà àWithin€his€sufficiency€argument,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€juryÏcould€not€have€found€him€guilty€of€reckless€aggravated€assault.€€ð ðA€personÏcommits€aggravated€assault€who€...€[i]ntentionally,€knowingly€or€recklesslyÏcauses€...€serious€bodily€injury€to€another.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„101(a)(1)€andÌ„102(a)(1)(A)€(1991).€€The€appellant€argues€that€the€jury€should€have€found€himÏguilty€of€intentional€aggravated€assault.€€However,€this€argument€is€misguided.€ÏIn€the€hierarchy€of€mental€elements,€a€person€who€acts€intentionally€also€actsÏknowingly€and€recklessly.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„301€and€SentencingÏCommission€Comments.€€Thus,€if€the€appellant€concedes€that€he€actedÍintentionally,€he€also€necesÔ  Ôsarily€acted€recklessly.€€ÌÌÌà àRegardless,€we€find€that€sufficient€evidence€exists€to€support€theÏappellantððs€conviction€for€aggravated€assault.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ àò òII.€€RESTITUTIONó óÌà àIn€his€last€issue,€the€appellant€claims€that€the€restitution€ordered€isÏcontrary€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304.Ô€+Ô€€Ô€,ÔHis€argument€is€that€the€trial€courtÏfailed€to€consider€the€appellantððs€lack€of€financial€resources€and€failed€toÏestablish€a€payment€schedule.€€Section€40„35„304€provides€that:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 à[t]he€court€shall€specify€at€the€time€of€the€sentencingÏhearing€the€amount€and€time€of€payment€or€otherÏrestitution€to€the€victim€and€may€permit€payment€orÏperformance€in€installments.€€The€court€may€notÏestablish€a€payment€or€performance€scheduleÏextending€beyond€the€statutory€maximum€term€ofÏprobation€supervision€that€could€have€been€imposedÏfor€the€offense.€€ÌÌÔ% € ÔÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304(c)€(1990).€ÌÌà àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€proof€indicated€that€the€victim€incurredÏmedical€expenses€not€covered€by€insurance€totaling€$4,791.01.€€The€victimððsÏinsurance€company€paid€the€additional€$68,589.09Ô€+Ô.Ô€,Ô€€The€appellant€testified€thatÏhe€had€purchased€a€pool€supply€store,€which€would€also€encompass€videoÍrental€and€tanning€beds.€€Although€he€hoped€to€make€it€a€success,€he€had€putÏeverything€he€had€into€the€business.€€However,€the€appellant€did€indicate€thatÏhe€did€not€have€the€money€to€pay€the€victim€in€a€lump€sum€but€could€ð ðprobablyÏtake€care€of€it€this€summer.ðð€€The€appellant€testified€that€he€had€€$7,500€inÏaccounts€receivable€and€an€automobile€and€backhoe€each€worth€$12,000.€€NoÏfigure€was€given€as€to€expected€future€earnings€of€the€business.ÌÌà àThe€trial€judge€ordered€the€appellant€to€pay€restitution€totalingÏ$73,380.10€with€the€first€$4,791€going€to€the€victim.€€The€appellant€was€givenÏninety€days€to€pay€the€$4,791.€€However,€when€asked€about€the€paymentÏschedule€for€the€balance€of€the€restitution,€the€trial€judge€said€that€ð ðthe€balanceÏ...€is€going€to€have€to€be€set€up€by€schedule€the€best€they€can€with€the€probationÏoffice.ðð€€€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€judge€failed€to€follow€the€mandates€ofÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304(c)€set€out€above.€€The€mandatory€language€ofÏthis€section€requires€the€trial€judge€to€specify€at€the€hearing€the€amount€and€timeÏof€payment.€€Here,€the€trial€judge€specifically€set€out€the€amount€to€be€paid€inÏrestitution.€€In€addition,€the€judge€stated€that€the€probation€period€would€be€fourÏyears€and€that€the€probation€officer€would€establish€the€restitution€schedule€asÏto€the€insurance€carrier.€€The€restitution€owed€to€the€victim€would€be€paid€firstÏand€within€ninety€days.ÌÌà àWe€find€that€this€determination€substantially€complied€with€the€statutoryÏrequirements.€€Due€to€the€nature€of€the€appellantððs€business,€flexibility€in€theÏamounts€to€be€paid€was€justified.€€This€finding€allows€the€appellant€to€makeÏlower€payments€during€the€off„season€and€larger€payments€when€the€businessÏprofits.€€The€only€boundary€was€that€the€amount€be€paid€within€the€four€years.€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€statute€also€requires€the€trial€judge€toÏestablish€a€payment€schedule.€€We€disagree.€€Instead,€the€statute€contains€theÏdiscretionary€language€ð ðmay€permit€payment€or€performance€in€installments.ðð€ÏThis€cannot€be€interpreted€to€require€the€trial€judge€to€specifically€establish€suchÏpayments.€€In€light€of€the€fact€that€the€trial€judge€directed€the€probation€officer€toÏestablish€a€payment€plan,€we€find€no€error€in€this€claim.× ƒ2 ××  ×Ì€€à àÌà àWithin€this€issue€the€appellant€argues€that€the€statutory€provisionÏprovides€for€repayment€of€restitution€to€ð ðvictims.ðð€€From€this€language€theÏappellant€concludes€that€an€insurance€company€is€not€a€ð ðvictimðð€contemplatedÏby€the€legislature.€€In€this€issue€of€first€impression,€we€look€to€the€language€ofÏthe€statute€and€the€intended€purpose€behind€it.€ÌÌà àOur€restitution€statute€provides€that€ð ð[a]€sentencing€court€may€direct€aÍdefendant€to€make€restitution€to€the€victim€of€the€offense€as€a€condition€ofÏprobation.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304(a)€(1990).€€Victim€is€not€definedÏwithin€this€section.€€However,€the€Sentencing€Commission€ð ðbelieves€restitutionÏto€victims€is€an€important€part€of€public€policy€and€these€sections€are€intended€toÏenhance€that€policy.ðð€€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„304.€€With€this€policy€in€mind,€we€analyze€the€policies€adopted€by€otherÏjurisdictions.ÌÌà àThe€appellant€cites€òòCommonwealth€v.€Gallowayóó,€448€A.2d€568€(Pa.ÏSuper.€1982)€in€support€of€his€argument€that€an€insurance€company€cannot€beÏa€victim.€€In€òòGallowayóó,€the€Pennsylvania€court€stated€that€an€insurance€companyÏdid€not€suffer€injury€as€set€forth€in€the€Pennsylvania€statute.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€Further,€the€courtÏreasoned€that€the€insurance€company€merely€fulfilled€its€contractual€obligationÏto€the€victim.€€Such€a€payment€does€not€constitute€ð ðinjuryðð€as€required€by€statute.€ÏòòIdóó.€at€577.€€Thus,€it€refused€to€place€an€insurance€company€within€the€statutoryÏdefinition€of€ð ðvictim.ðð× ƒ4 ××  ×€€ÌÌà àOn€the€other€hand,€the€state€cites€òòLeFleur€v.€Stateóó,€848€S.W.2d€266€(Tex.ÍApp.€„„€Beaumont€1993),€in€support€of€its€opposing€position€that€an€insuranceÏcompany€can€be€a€victim€for€restitution€purposes.€€In€òòLeFleuróó,€the€appellantÏÑ  Ñargued€that€the€code€definition€of€victim€did€not€encompass€insuranceÏcompanies.€€òòIdóó.€at€271.€€The€court€held€that€the€victimððs€insurer€was€subrogatedÏand€substituted€in€place€of€the€victim€with€reference€to€crimes€and€could€receiveÏrestitution€payments.€€òòIdóó.€at€272.€€ÌÌà àThe€state€also€cites€òòHarrison€v.€Stateóó,€713€S.W.2d€760€(Tex.€App.€„„ÏHouston€1986)€which€similarly€found€that€the€insurance€company€was€a€victimÏin€such€circumstances.€€Other€jurisdictions€have€made€similar€findings.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€€€ÌÌà àIt€is€useful€to€read€the€statutory€language€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304€in€conjunction€with€the€purposes€of€that€section.€€We€cannot€conclude€thatÏthe€legislature€intended€to€so€narrowly€define€ð ðvictimðð€as€to€reward€an€offenderÏwho€happens€to€strike€a€victim€with€insurance.€€Had€the€victim€not€been€coveredÍby€insurance,€he€would€have€borne€the€full€brunt€of€his€medical€expenses.€ÏWithout€question€restitution€for€the€full€loss€would€have€been€proper.€€ÌÌà àThe€insurer€is€damaged€when€it€is€required€to€pay€such€an€enormousÏclaim€due€solely€to€a€criminal€act.€€It€can€be€said€that€it€then€suffered€a€lossÏunder€the€principle€of€subrogation.€€In€effect,€the€insurer€stands€in€the€shoes€ofÏthe€victim€as€to€financial€and€economic€loss.€€We€adopt€the€reasoning€of€òòLeFleuróóÏand€hold€that€the€appellant€cannot€take€advantage€of€the€victimððs€foresight€inÏcarrying€insurance.€€An€insurance€company€can€be€a€victim€for€theÌÔ  Ôpurposes€of€restitution€established€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304.€€ThisÏfinding€is€in€line€with€the€purposes€of€restitution€in€this€state.ÌÌà àThe€conviction€and€order€of€restitution€are,€in€all€respects,€affirmed.€ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€Judge