ÿWPC  :³Óþ;CünÏ)¤‚ÍÅ´°+ ¿#rT­H‚²2 !Ó4#6ÞëÚ¾%’oÝÔ0¶5øJçÖôZîA{öd„rʱËO)yŸ¦÷ ÒiPÁ7½í'Á·j¿rýÿ2OÎlü]‰j}BJRïSqê¾ÙXJÛ7X,Û¥dšêù‹š•„à¿P™læUÓøÀmYs¸I Š…ÆÏ˜#ë,÷Ùr4À”üΧXc“ŸI*3åõ±$#~5âØ°?·Ê$`+õ ª"z»K¿'H^£Hm.#˜ÚâÃ%µšù÷¦OîÛ[ò5f2ËDS'‹&qæÈ"ÐâM¹‰çño!(ß§sÕ9¦SÃTBÎ еï3D ö^ÊCd6&y„Ô½j¶º(öI"Ïo)S„îˆl¶Êô±‰{á’òˆx¬€µ¥yâtZ6mº'û^ŸŠ^Ê$íô{a•i”poÔA…Tz÷a¥¬;a//TøSaRìòr^‘Üs3íøKu¼õSن̢:ïð÷ òó5FV§²ÉºK lŠ“}¯Zól/¶”"¤‚ ‡ŒðÕ~uŸºHËòðGG)íâÙ1Q’7úÌ{ÚƒOkaR[v5H’˾€ ŸèzXbseV…, %hw@n 0Ü®U:Š4ÄØU:ç!¸!$Ù 0 ý 0DU:a`›U:û\5&‘U:·····­ññññññññ Bžž 0D» D3ÿÿÿÿ AQ2ƃ 0DI 0D D/Ñ B X ~D€D‚„D…†E‡ˆÓ€(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularV&3|x“, øð AZ"Arial Regular ®Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÐ  ÐÒ°ÒÔ€ ô3ûôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôÁ‹ôôô3ûÔThe€appellant€Allen€challenged€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€his€motion€for€judgment€ofÐ ’Š Ðacquittal€following€the€Stateððs€case€in€chief.€€We€note€this€issue€is€waivedÔ#† ô3ûôôôÁ‹È#ÔÔ‡ôÁ‹ôôô3ûÔ€because€the€appellantÐ ZR Ðtestified€and€offered€evidence€in€his€own€defense€rather€than€rest€his€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð "  ÐCampbellóó,€904€S.W.2d€608€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995);€òòState€v.Ð ê â G ÐSmithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€862€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€We€note€that€this€does€not€waive€theÐ  Ðdefendantððs€right€to€present€evidence€in€his€defense€at€trial€nor€does€it€waive€his€right€for€a€laterÏsufficiency€review.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€762€S.W.2d€110,€115€(Tenn.€1988),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€489Ð ˜ ÐU.S.€1091,€109€S.Ct.€1559€(1989);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€29(a).€€If€the€defendant€chooses€to€proceedÏwith€his€defense,€the€defendant€has€òòonlyóó€waived€the€review€of€the€quantum€of€evidence,€òòi.e.óó,€òòsolelyóóÐ (  Ðthat€evidence€presented€in€the€Stateððs€case€in€chief.€Ô#† ô3ûôôôÁ‹Æ#Ô€ Ò°ÒÔ€ô#‚ôXXÔÝ ƒ a˜ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7À<ÚXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôQÎôôô#‚ÔWe€note€that€the€appellant€Allen€raised€a€òòBatsonóó€issue€within€his€brief.€€However,€theÐ  Ðappellant€conceded€that€the€issue€was€without€merit€and€withdrew€it.€€Thus,€we€will€not€address€it.€€Ï(Ð(3a˜$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€<ÚXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular VÒ°ÒÔ€ô3ûôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôÁ‹ôôô3ûÔThe€appellant€Allen€challenged€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€his€motion€for€judgment€ofÐ  Ðacquittal€following€the€Stateððs€case€in€chief.€€We€note€this€issue€is€waivedÔ#†ô3ûôôôÁ‹p#ÔÔ‡ôÁ‹ôôô3ûÔ€because€the€appellantÐ ÐÈ Ðtestified€and€offered€evidence€in€his€own€defense€rather€than€rest€his€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð ˜ ÐCampbellóó,€904€S.W.2d€608€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995);€òòState€v.Ð ` X w ÐSmithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€862€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€We€note€that€this€does€not€waive€theÐ  Ðdefendantððs€right€to€present€evidence€in€his€defense€at€trial€nor€does€it€waive€his€right€for€a€laterÏsufficiency€review.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€762€S.W.2d€110,€115€(Tenn.€1988),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€489Ð ˜ ÐU.S.€1091,€109€S.Ct.€1559€(1989);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€29(a).€€If€the€defendant€chooses€to€proceedÏwith€his€defense,€the€defendant€has€òòonlyóó€waived€the€review€of€the€quantum€of€evidence,€òòi.e.óó,€òòsolelyóóÐ (  Ðthat€evidence€presented€in€the€Stateððs€case€in€chief.€Ô#†ô3ûôôôÁ‹n#Ô€, øð AZ"Arial Regular RÒ°ÒÔ€ô3ûôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝQ.€(Prosecutor):€Okay,€Do€you€see€him€here€today?Ð  Ðà8 ` à€A.€€(Webb):€€Yes,€sir.€€I€do.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` àQ.€€Where€is€he?Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` àA.€€The€gentlemen€beside€Mr.€Moody,€there€(indicating).Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` à€.€.€.€Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` àQ.€€(Mr.€Moody):€And€so€now€which€is€correct?Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` àA.€€(Webb):€That€gentleman,€right€there,€(indicating)€was€the€one€I€saw. Ý ƒ(¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X<ÚXXXÔÔ€º XX<ÚÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X<ÚX ºÔÐ  ÐÌò òMarch€15,€1999Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô#‚ôXX<ÚÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular £Ò°ÒÔ€ô3ûôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ôÁ‹ôôô3ûÔUnder€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„106(a)(1)€(1997),€a€multiple€offender€has€ð ð[a]€minimumÐ  Ðof€two€(2)€but€not€more€than€four€(4)€prior€felony€convictions€within€the€conviction€class,€a€higherÏclass,€or€within€the€next€two€(2)€lower€felony€classes€.€.€.ðð d(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý'ÿÿdxd'(!)*Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó++'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€<ÚXXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÓ ÔþÓò òñˆñßr€&"<,(j 8` `€€@EÈ ` ttx$ð Õrßñˆñà@. . ®àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@ÓÓ(®àAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌà@€€#®àDECEMBER€SESSION,€1998ˆÌÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à h àà À à)Ð | t Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àNo.€03C01„9712„CC„00547Ð h` Ðà ` àAppelleeà  àà h àà À à)Ð TL  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHAMBLEN€COUNTYÐ @8  Ðvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð ,$  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHon.€JAMES€E.€BECKNER,€JudgeÐ   ÐWALTER€LEE€"STEVE"€ALLENà À à)Ð ü  Ðand€GARY€L.€HANEY,à h àà À à)à  à(Robbery)Ð ðè  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà ` àAppellantsà  àà h àà À à)Ð ÈÀ ÐÌó óÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantsóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð ld ÐÌò òLaura€D.€Perryó óà  àà h àà À àà  àò òñ„ñPaul€G.€Summersñ„ññ†ññ…ñjOHN€ñ…ññ†ññ‡ñJohn€Knox€Walkupñ‡ñó óÐ 80 ÐPerry€&€Perryà  àà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ $ Ðò òAttorney€for€Appellant,ó óà h àÐ   Ðò òGary€L.€Haneyó óà  àà h àà À àà  àò òEllen€H.€Pollackó óÐ öî Ð503€North€Jackson€Streetà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà Ð àà (# àÐ âÚ ÐMorristown,€TN€€37814à h àà À àà  àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÐ ÈÀ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à2d€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌò òEdward€H.€Moodyó óà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à x àà Ð àà (# àÐ z"r ÐAsst.€Public€Defenderà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àà  àÐ f#^ Ðò òAttorney€for€Appellant,Ð L$D  ÐWalter€Lee€Allenà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àÐ 8%0! Ðó ó1609€College€Park€Drive,€Box€11à À àà  àò òC.€Berkeley€Bell,€Jr.ó óÐ $&" ÐMorristown,€TN€€37813„1618à À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÐ ' # ÐÌò òGreg€W.€Eichelmanà h àà À àà  àVictor€Vaughnó óÐ Ü(Ô!% ÐDistrict€Public€Defenderà h àà À àà  àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÐ È)À"& Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à510€Allison€StreetÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àMorristown,€TN€€37814ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 0 )- ÐÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REMANDED€IN€PARTÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÐ v5n.3 ÐJudgeÐ  b6Z/4S ÐÓÓÔ‡X¾[XXXÔà@+®àò òòòOPINIONˆÐ  ÐÌà ` àóóó óThe€appellants,€Walter€Lee€ð ðSteveðð€Allen€and€Gary€L.€Haney,€appeal€theÐ È À Ðverdict€of€a€Hamblen€County€jury€finding€them€guilty€of€robbery,€a€Class€C€felony.€€AtÏthe€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€sentenced€each€appellant€as€range€II€multipleÏoffenders€to€the€maximum€applicable€sentence€of€ten€years.€€The€appellants€raiseÏthree€issues€for€our€review€in€their€appeal€as€of€right:€(1)€challenges€to€theÏidentification€process;€(2)€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence;€and€(3)€the€trialÏcourtððs€imposition€of€an€ð ðexcessiveðð€sentence€and€the€imposition€of€consecutiveÏsentences.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð èà ÐÌà ` àAfter€a€review€of€the€record€and€the€applicable€law,€we€affirm€the€judgment€ofÏconviction€for€each€appellant.€€Additionally,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€imposition€ofÏten€year€sentences€for€each€appellant;€however,€as€the€State€concedes,€we€hold€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€ordering€that€the€robbery€conviction€for€each€appellant€be€servedÏconsecutive€to€a€conviction€in€Jefferson€County€where€no€sentence€had€yet€beenÏimposed.€€Accordingly,€we€remand€this€cause€for€judgments€of€conviction€consistentÏwith€these€findings.€€ÌÌà@ÅÅ)®àBACKGROUND€ˆÌÌà ` àOn€July€13,€1997,€Patricia€Keith€was€employed€as€a€clerk€at€the€Kwik€ShopÏMarket€which€is€located€adjacent€to€the€Waffle€House€in€Morristown.€€Shortly€after€7Ïa.m.€that€morning,€Ms.€Keith€heard€the€gas€pumps€start€and€went€to€the€front€of€theÏstore€to€await€the€entrance€of€the€customer.€€Two€black€males€entered€the€store.€ÏOne€man€[Allen]€wore€a€hooded€ð ðsweat€jacketðð€inside€out;€and€the€other€manÐ è5à.2 Ð[Haney]€wore€a€white€tee€shirt€with€red€writing€and€a€baseball€cap.€€The€two€menÏwent€to€the€back€of€the€store€and€began€selecting€various€items.€€Ms.€Keith€becameÏsuspicious€of€the€men€because€one€of€the€men€was€wearing€a€hood€in€the€middle€ofÏthe€summer.€€Thereafter,€the€customer€at€the€gas€pumps€entered€the€store,€paid€forÏhis€gasoline,€and€left.€€While€the€cash€register€was€still€open,€the€two€menÏapproached€the€clerk€and€one€of€them€said,€ð ðthis€is€a€holdup.ðð€€When€Ms.€KeithÏturned€around,€a€gun€was€lying€on€top€of€their€merchandise.€€The€shorter€of€the€twoÏmen€picked€up€the€gun€and€cocked€it.€€In€fear,€Ms.€Keith€took€the€bills€from€theÏdrawer€and€placed€them€in€a€bag.€€Then,€the€two€men€fled€the€store€in€the€directionÏof€the€Waffle€House.€€Ms.€Keith€sounded€the€store€alarm€and€called€the€police.€€TheÏtwo€men€took€$93€from€the€Kwik€Shop€Market.€€When€the€officer€arrived,€she€relatedÏwhat€had€happened;€however,€she€did€not€feel€that€she€would€be€able€to€identify€theÏmen€other€than€their€height€and€clothing.€€She€told€the€officer€that€they€both€tried€toÏhide€their€faces€and€that€she€could€not€see€them€very€well.€ÌÌà ` àThe€following€week,€Detective€Riner€of€the€Morristown€Police€DepartmentÏrequested€that€Ms.€Keith€come€to€the€police€station€for€a€photographic€lineup.€€SheÏtestified€that€Riner€read€her€the€form€on€the€back€of€the€lineup€and€then€sheÏidentified€the€two€men€ñ~ñwhoñ~ñññthatññ€robbed€the€store€from€two€separate€photographic€arrays.€ÏShe€identified€the€man€from€the€first€lineup€quickly€[Haney];€however,€in€identifyingÏthe€man€from€the€second€lineup€[Allen],€she€hesitated€ð ða€little€bitðð€but€she€wasÏcertain€it€was€him.€€Then€she€wrote€the€events€of€the€crime€on€the€bottom€of€theÏform.€€ÌÌà ` àUpon€cross„examination,€she€acknowledged€that,€in€her€initial€description€toÏthe€officer,€she€said€that€one€of€the€men€was€five€foot€seven€inches,€one€hundredÏand€seventy€pounds€and€the€other€was€five€foot€four€inches,€one€hundred€and€fifty„¼five€pounds.€€She€related€that€the€top€portion€of€the€photographic€identification€formÐ ¨9 26 Ðwas€not€filled€out€when€she€filled€out€the€lower€portion€on€either€of€the€identificationÏforms.€€Although€at€trial€she€testified€that€the€appellant€Haney€held€the€gun€andÏcocked€it,€she€had€written€on€the€identification€form€that€the€appellant€Allen€had€theÏgun.€€When€Ms.€Keith€earlier€testified€at€the€preliminary€hearing,€she€testified€thatÏshe€had€the€faces€of€the€two€men€correct,€however,€she€had€confused€their€bodies.€ÏShe€noted€no€noticeable€injuries€to€either€manððs€face.€€She€read€the€notations€on€theÏphotographic€identification€forms€into€evidence€and€beside€each€appellantððs€nameÏwas€the€word€ð ðsuspect.ðð€ÌÌà ` àOn€redirect€examination,€she€testified€that€Detective€Riner€only€read€her€theÏinstructions€before€she€identified€the€appellants.€€He€did€not€give€her€names€of€anyÏpotential€suspects€nor€did€he€point€anything€out€to€her.€€€She€stated€that€she€hasÏnever€had€any€doubt€as€to€the€faces€of€the€two€men.€€ÌÌà ` àJames€ð ðRedðð€Long,€the€other€customer€at€the€Kwik€Shop€on€the€day€of€theÏrobbery,€testified€that€he€was€filling€his€vehicle€and€two€cans€with€gasoline.€HeÏrelated€that€there€were€two€other€people€in€the€store;€but€he€could€not€identify€them.€ÏHe€described€one€man€as€being€tall€and€the€other€short.ñ€ñ€€ñ€ñññ€ññHe€recalled€that€one€of€theÏmen€wore€a€sweater€with€a€hood€and€the€other€man€wore€a€baseball€cap.€€He€couldÏonly€identify€the€man€in€the€baseball€cap€as€African„American.€€He€did€not€view€theÏphotographic€lineup.ÌÌà ` àMark€McElhaney,€an€officer€with€the€Morristown€Police€Department,€testifiedÏthat€he€responded€to€a€police€dispatch€at€7:19€a.m.€advising€that€a€robbery€hadÏoccurred€at€the€Kwik€Shop€Market.€€He€unsuccessfully€attempted€to€find€theÏsuspects€that€matched€the€description€given€by€Ms.€Keith.€€Later,€he€turned€the€caseÏover€to€Detective€Riner.€€ÌÐ ¨9 26 Ðà ` àKaren€Webb,€assistant€manager€at€the€Waffle€House,€testified€that€she€wasÏworking€on€the€morning€of€the€robbery.€€She€stated€that,€while€she€was€pulling€theÏblinds€down,€she€saw€two€men€walking€around€in€the€parking€lot€near€the€dumpsterÏof€the€Kwik€Shop.€€She€observed€that€both€men€were€black;€one€man€was€ð ðreal€tallððÏand€the€other€man€was€much€shorter.€€She€described€the€clothing€just€as€the€otherÏwitnesses€but€only€observed€the€face€of€the€taller€man.€€Thereafter,€she€was€askedÏto€view€a€photographic€lineup.€€Ms.€Webb€only€identified€one€of€the€men€[Allen]€fromÏthe€photographic€lineup€as€the€man€she€saw€by€the€dumpster€in€the€hoodedÏsweatshirt.€ÌÌà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Ms.€Webb€stated€that€after€viewing€the€photographicÏlineup€and€identifying€Allen,€the€officer€provided€her€with€the€appropriate€forms€forÏidentification.€€On€the€photographic€identification€form,€she€stated€that€it€was€Mr.ÏHaney€that€she€had€seen€and€that€she€could€not€identify€Mr.€Allen.€€€She€said€thatÏDetective€Riner€never€pointed€anyone€out€to€her€as€a€suspect.€€She€explained€thatÏafter€she€identified€them€that€she€was€told€their€names.€€She€stated€that€both€of€theÏappellants€had€been€in€the€Waffle€House€earlier€that€morning.€€She€had€noticedÏthem€because€one€of€them€was€ð ðextremely€tall.ðð€€Although€the€record€indicates€someÏconfusion€between€the€two€appellants€regarding€Ms.€Webbððs€in„court€identification,Ïneither€the€prosecution€nor€the€defense€clarified€for€the€record€which€appellant€wasÏallegedly€misidentified.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€Ð ˆ,€%( Ðà ` à€€€€Ìà ` àDetective€Steve€Riner€of€the€Morristown€Police€Department€testified€that€heÏcompiled€a€photographic€lineup€during€the€investigative€stage€of€the€robbery.€€HeÐ (2 +. Ðshowed€the€lineup€to€both€Ms.€Keith€and€Ms.€Webb.€€With€regard€to€Ms.€Keith,€heÏstated€that€she€had€no€difficulty€identifying€the€appellant€Haney.€€He€provided€herÏthe€other€lineup€and€left€the€room.€€When€he€returned,€she€had€identified€theÏappellant€Allen.€€After€she€had€identified€both€men€from€the€lineups,€he€testified€thatÏhe€gave€her€the€forms.€€He€testified€that€he€filled€in€the€names€and€that€she€was€notÏinformed€of€their€names€until€after€she€had€identified€both€appellants.€€He€also€statedÏthat€he€did€not€point€out€any€potential€suspects.€€He€stated€that€he€wrote€the€wordÏð ðsuspectðð€beside€each€appellantððs€name€after€Ms.€Keith€had€identified€them.€€HeÏstated€that€when€he€gave€the€form€to€Ms.€Keith€the€top€portion€was€blank.€€After€heÏfilled€out€the€top€portion€and€before€she€filled€out€the€bottom€portion,€he€made€copiesÏof€the€form.€€à ¸ àÐ ÈÀ Ðà ` àÌà ` àIn€defense€of€the€appellant€Allen,€Penny€Morgan€testified€that,€at€the€time€ofÏthe€robbery,€the€appellant€Allen€lived€with€her€and€her€children.€€She€stated€that€onÏthe€morning€of€the€robbery€ð ð[t]hat€early€in€the€morning,€we€were€usually€still€in€theÏbed,€but€he€was€home€on€Sundays.€.€.€.€We€were€always€home€on€Sunday.ðð€€SheÏhad€no€specific€recollection€of€that€particular€Sunday€other€than€the€kids€were€havingÏa€swimming€party.€€She€continuously€repeated,€ð ðif€it€was€a€Sunday,€we€were€atÏhome.ðð€€ÌÌà ` àSelina€Haney,€sister€of€the€appellant€Haney,€testified€that€around€6:15€a.m.Ïon€the€morning€of€the€robbery,€she€heard€a€knock€at€the€window.€€The€appellantÏAllen€was€knocking€on€her€brotherððs€window.€€After€she€saw€the€appellant€Allen,€sheÏproceeded€to€shower€and€get€ready€for€work.€€She€testified€that€her€brother€wasÏsleeping€in€that€room€and€that€he€did€not€get€up€before€she€left€for€work€at€6:55€a.m.€ÏShe€stated€that€her€brother€had€a€terrible€cold€that€weekend,€had€a€cast€on€his€wrist,Ïand€scratches€on€his€face.€€She€stated€that€when€she€left€for€work,€the€appellantÏAllen€had€already€left.€Ð ¨9 26 Їà ` àPatricia€Haney,€the€appellantððs€mother,€testified€that€the€appellant€Allen€cameÏto€her€home€the€morning€of€the€robbery.€€She€told€the€appellant€Allen€that€her€sonÏwas€asleep€and€Allen€walked€off€the€porch.€€After€she€answered€the€door€for€Allen,Ïshe€went€back€and€laid€down€on€the€couch€until€9:00€or€9:30€a.m.€without€going€byÏher€sonððs€room.€€She€prepared€breakfast€for€her€son,€but€he€never€came€out€hisÏroom.€€Although€she€admitted€she€never€saw€him,€she€testified€that€he€remained€inÏbed.€€She€reiterated€that€her€son€had€a€cold,€a€cast€on€his€wrist,€and€a€scratch€on€hisÏface.€ÌÌà ` àAlthough€the€indictments€charged€the€appellants€with€aggravated€robbery,€theÏjury€returned€a€guilty€verdict€for€both€appellants€on€the€lesser€charge€of€robbery.€€ÌÌà@ee ®àI.€€IDENTIFICATION€CHALLENGESˆÌÌà ` àIn€their€first€issue,€the€appellants€challenge€their€identification€by€theÏwitnesses€Patricia€Keith€and€Karen€Webb€and€the€procedures€employed€by€theÏpolice€in€the€identification€process.€€The€appellant€Allen€raises€the€identificationÏissue€within€the€context€of€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€his€motion€to€suppress.€€TheÏappellant€Haney€challenges€only€his€identification€by€the€witness€Keith€and€arguesÏthat€the€ð ðphotographic€identification€was€tainted€by€the€actions€of€the€MorristownÏPolice€Department.ðð€€ÌÌà ` àAt€this€juncture,€we€are€compelled€to€note€that€both€appellantsðð€arguments€areÏmisplaced.€€The€appellantððs€argue€only€that€the€line„up€identification€and€theÏpreliminary€hearing€identifications€should€have€been€excluded€because€of€theirÏð ðtaint.ðð€€The€relevant€issue,€however,€is€whether€those€alleged€ð ðtaintedðð€out€of€courtÏidentifications€affected€the€witnesses€in„court€identifications.€€Ìà ` àÐ ¨9 26 Ðà ` àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€Detective€Riner€testified€that€he€read€the€formÏinstructions€to€Ms.€Keith,€and€then€he€gave€her€two€different€photographic€arraysÏeach€containing€one€of€the€appellants.€€She€identified€both€appellants€and€then€theÏidentification€forms€were€filled€out€by€both€Ms.€Keith€and€Detective€Riner.€€The€wordÏð ðsuspectðð€was€then€written€beside€both€appellantsðð€names€on€the€two€different€forms.€ÏÌà ` àMs.€Keith€explained€that€when€she€gave€the€description€of€the€individuals€justÏafter€the€incident€that€she€was€ð ðvery€disturbed.ðð€€€At€that€time€she€did€not€believe€thatÏshe€would€be€able€to€identify€the€perpetrators.€€Upon€viewing€the€photographicÏarray,€she€testified€that€she€ð ðinstinctively€.€.€.€picked€the€first€one€.€.€.€easily;ððÏhowever,€after€a€ð ðlittle€bitðð€of€hesitation€[three€to€five€minutes]€she€was€certain€thatÏshe€identified€the€second€perpetrator.€€She€also€stated€that€the€forms€were€filled€outÏfollowing€her€identification€of€the€appellants.€€She€admitted€that€in€General€SessionsÏCourt€she€had€said€appellant€Allen€had€the€gun,€however,€she€acknowledged€thatÏher€error€was€ð ðin€the€identification€of€the€bodies€but€not€the€faces.€€I€did€not€get€theirÏbodies€right.ðð€€She€stated€that€there€was€no€doubt€in€her€mind€that€these€were€theÏtwo€appellants€who€committed€the€robbery.€€ÌÌà ` àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€the€motion€to€suppressÏMs.€Keithððs€identification€of€the€appellant.€€The€trial€court€observed:ÌÓÓà8 ` àThese€are€good€photo€lineups.€€There€is€nothing€peculiar€or€suggestiveÏabout€any€one€person€in€the€lineup.€€The€only€real€issue€here€isÏwhether€there€was€some€other€suggestion€made€or€if€the€testimonyÏand€statements€of€the€witness€are€so€inconsistent€as€to€be€conduciveÏto€misidentification.€.€€.€.€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ à[T]he€uncontradicted€testimony€is€that€the€witness€did€not€lookÏat€the€forms€until€after€the€identifications€were€made.€€Then€the€formsÏwere€filled€out€as€to€the€word€suspect.€€The€witness€did€not€see€thatÏform,€did€not€see€the€word€suspect€until€after€the€identification€wasÏmade,€and€then€she€and€the€officer€filled€the€form€out€together.€ÏThereððs€nothing€that€contradicts€that,€so€thereððs€nothing€suggestiveÏabout€that.Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ àHer€testimony€has€been€a€little€bit€inconsistent€from€the€originalÏstatement€made€to€the€officer€to€the€present€time;€but€weððve€all€beenÏaround€long€enough€to€know€.€.€.€that€peopleððs€focus€and€attentionÐ ¨9 26 Ðdoes€not€get€to€feet,€legs,€pants,€[and]€even€shirts.€€We€know€fromÏexperience€that€people€are€so€focused€on€faces€and€guns.€.€.[t]hisÏwitness€is€certain€about€that.€€Her€opportunity€to€view€the€perpetratorsÏwas€good€even€though€they€were€trying€.€.€.€[to]€hide€themselves.€€TheyÏdid€not€wear€masks.€€Sheððs€absolutely€certain€about€the€clothing€andÏwho€wore€what.€€Her€description€.€.€.€is€pretty€accurate,€considering€allÏthe€facts€and€circumstances.€€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ àHer€level€of€certainty€.€.€.€is€great€here.€€She€pointed€to€oneÏdefendant€in€one€photo€lineup€and€just€without€any€hesitation€made€anÏidentification.€€The€other€one,€to€her€credit,€she€considered€for€a€longÏtime,€and€then€she€was€certain€.€.€.€at€the€preliminary€hearing€.€.€.€[and]Ïtoday.€€Relatively€little€time€elapsed€between€the€crime€and€theÏconfrontation€with€the€photo€lineups,€not€such€a€long€time€as€to€causeÏfailing€of€memory.€€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ àAnd€thereððs€certainly.€.€.€not€been€a€corruptive€influence€orÏsuggestive€identification.Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ à[T]his€court€.€.€.€conclude[s]€that€the€circumstances€and€factorsÏwere€not€conducive€to€misidentification.€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àà ¸ àCertainly,€.€.€.€defense€counsel€can€use€any€inconsistenciesÏbefore€the€trier€of€fact€to€try€to€convince€them€that€the€credibility€ofÏidentification€should€not€be€made.€[I]t€just€goes€to€the€credibility€of€theÏwitness€and€not€the€legal€admissibility€of€the€evidence.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€ÌÓÓà ` àAs€pronounced€by€the€United€States€Supreme€Court,€a€violation€of€dueÏprocess€has€occurred€if€the€court€finds€that€the€identification€procedure€was€soÏsuggestive€as€to€give€rise€to€a€very€substantial€likelihood€of€irreparableÏmisidentification.€€òòSeeóó€€òòNeil€v.€Biggersóó,€409€U.S.€188,€93€S.Ct.€375€(1972);€òòUnitedÐ (#  ÐStates€v.€Wadeóó,€388€U.S.€218,€87€S.Ct.€1926€(1967);€òòGilbert€v.€Californiaóó,€388€U.S.Ð %  Ð263,€87€S.Ct.€1951€(1967);€òòStovall€v.€Dennoóó,€388€U.S.€293,€87€S.Ct.€1967€(1967).€Ð è&à" ÐThis€standard€has€been€adopted€by€our€stateððs€supreme€court.€€òòSeeóó€òòBennett€v.Ð È(À!$ ÐStateóó,€530€S.W.2d€511,€512„515€(Tenn.€1975);€òòSloan€v.€Stateóó,€584€S.W.2d€461,Ð ¨* #& Ð466„470€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978);€òòProctor€v.€Stateóó,€565€S.W.2d€909,€911„912€(Tenn.Ð ˆ,€%( ÐCrim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1978);€òòRippy€v.€Stateóó,€550€S.W.2d€636,Ð h.`'* Ð639„640€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€€ð ð[R]eliability€is€the€linchpin€in€determining€theÏadmissibility€of€identification€testimony€[pursuant€to€principles€of€due€process].ðð€ÏòòManson€v.€Brathwaiteóó,€432€U.S.€98,€114,€97€S.Ct.€2243,€2253€(1977).€€A€finding€thatÐ 4-0 Ðthe€pre„trial€identification€was€unreliable€will€also€require€the€exclusion€of€aÏsubsequent€in„court€identification€by€the€same€witness.€€òòId.óó€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.Ð È7À04 ÐPhilpottóó,€882€S.W.2d€394,€400€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ð ¨9 26 Ð1994);€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€872€S.W.2d€950,€956€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appealÐ  Ðdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1993);€òòSloanóó,€584€S.W.2d€at€470.€€The€court€must€view€the€totality€ofÐ èà Ðthe€circumstances.€€òòProctoróó,€565€S.W.2d€at€911„912.€€In€òòBiggersóó,€409€U.S.€at€199„Ð È À Ð200,€93€S.Ct.€at€382,€the€Supreme€Court€announced€factors€to€be€considered€inÏdetermining€whether€a€violation€of€due€process€has€occurred:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€the€opportunity€of€the€witness€to€view€the€criminal€at€the€time€of€theÏcrime;Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à(2)€the€witnessðð€degree€of€attention€at€the€time€of€the€crime;Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à(3)€the€accuracy€of€her€prior€description€of€the€criminal;Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à(4)€the€level€of€certainty€demonstrated€at€the€confrontation;€and€Ð ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àÐ ` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à(5)€the€time€elapsed€between€the€crime€and€the€confrontation.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓòòSee€alsoóó€òòPhilpottóó,€882€S.W.2d€at€400.€€Unless€the€evidence€preponderates€againstÐ ¸° Ðthe€judgment,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€following€a€suppression€hearing€areÏconclusive€on€appeal.€€òòDavisóó,€872€S.W.2d€at€956.€€In€the€instant€case,€the€recordÐ xp Ðclearly€supports€the€trial€courtððs€findings.€€Although€the€Stateððs€witness€at€times€wasÏinconsistent€in€her€testimony,€the€trial€court€properly€noted€that€these€inconsistenciesÏonly€went€to€the€credibility€of€the€witnessððs€identification€and€not€the€reliability€of€theÏphotographic€identification.€€The€testimony€was€undisputed€that€the€word€ð ðsuspectððÏwas€written€after€the€witness€made€the€identifications€and€there€exists€no€evidenceÏto€the€contrary.€€Therefore,€viewing€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€the€trial€courtÏproperly€denied€the€motion€to€suppress.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€€€€€€€€€Ìà ` à€€€€Ìà@àà®àII.€€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEˆÌà ` àÌà ` àNext,€the€appellants€contend€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€sustain€theirÏconvictions€for€robbery.ñ‚ñ׃×ñ‚ññ‚ñ׃ ×ñ‚ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Specifically,€they€emphasize€(1)€Ms.€Keithððs€inability€toÐ ø4ð-1 Ðidentify€her€assailants€immediately€following€the€robbery;€(2)€her€inaccurate€physicalÏdescriptions;€(3)€her€misidentification€at€the€preliminary€hearing€of€which€appellantÏhad€the€gun;€(4)€the€word€ð ðsuspectðð€written€on€the€photographic€identification€formÏbeside€the€appellantsðð€names;€(5)€Ms.€Webbððs€misidentification€at€trial€of€appellantÏAllen;€and€(6)€the€lesser€verdict€rendered€by€the€jury€indicating€reasonable€doubt.€ÏThey€assert€that€the€lineup€is€ð ðquestionableðð€and€ð ðso€suggestive€and€conducive€toÏmistaken€identityðð€rendering€the€trial€testimony€unreliable€and€inadmissible.€€Thus,Ïthey€argue€that,€without€the€identification€testimony,€the€evidence€is€not€sufficient€forÏa€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€them€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ÌÌà ` àA€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€aÏdefendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal,€aÏconvicted€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€isÏinsufficient.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€In€determining€theÐ h` Ðsufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€does€not€reweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€ÏòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€On€appeal,€the€State€isÐ (#  Ðentitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€orÏlegitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2dÐ è&à" Ð54,€75€(Tenn.€1992),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€507€U.S.€954,€113€S.Ct.€1368€(1993).€€ViewingÐ È(À!$ Ðthe€evidence€under€these€criteria,€it€is€this€courtððs€responsibility€to€affirm€theÏconviction€if€the€proof€was€sufficient€for€any€rational€trier€of€fact€to€have€found€theÏessential€elements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,Ð h.`'* Ð443€U.S.€307,€317,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979);€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,Ð H0@), Ð259€(Tenn.€1994),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€513€U.S.€1086,€115€S.Ct.€743€(1995);€Tenn.€R.€App.Ð (2 +. ÐP.€13(e).€€€€ò òÐ 4-0 Ðó ó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð  Ðà ` àIn€òòState€v.€Stricklandóó,€885€S.W.2d€85,€87„88€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993),€thisÐ èà Ðcourt€held€that€the€testimony€of€a€victim€identifying€the€perpetrator€is€sufficient€in€andÏof€itself€to€support€a€conviction.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€No.€01C01„9505„CC„Ð ¨   Ð00144€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Mar.€22,€1996),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,Ð ˆ€ Ðòòconcurring€in€results€onlyóó,€(Tenn.€Nov.€12,€1996).€€Moreover,€the€credibility€ofÐ h`  Ðeyewitness€testimony€identifying€the€accused€as€the€perpetrator€of€the€criminalÏoffense€for€which€he€stands€trial€is€a€question€of€fact€for€the€determination€of€the€juryÏupon€consideration€of€all€competent€proof.€€òòStricklandóó,€885€S.W.2d€at€87€(citingÐ  ÐòòState€v.€Crawfordóó,€635€S.W.2d€704,€705€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982));€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.Ð èà ÐWilliamsóó,€623€S.W.2d€118,€120€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€Ð ÈÀ ÐÌà ` àThe€victim,€Keith,€identified€both€appellants€on€three€occasions:€(1)€from€aÏpolice€photo€lineup;€(2)€at€the€preliminary€hearing;€and€(3)€finally€at€trial.€€TheÏwitness,€Webb,€identified€both€appellants€as€having€been€in€the€Waffle€House€on€theÏmorning€of€the€robbery€and€on€direct€examination€identified€Allen€as€the€person€sheÏsaw€behind€the€Kwik€Market.€€Although€testimony€of€the€the€Stateððs€witnessesÏcontained€some€inconsistencies,€counsel€for€both€appellants€thoroughly€cross„¼examined€these€witnesses€regarding€their€ability€to€perceive,€recall,€and€identify€theÏappellants.€€Additionally,€although€both€appellants€presented€an€alibi€defense,€òòi.e.óó,Ð ¨* #& Ðthe€testimony€of€Allenððs€ex„girlfriend€and€the€mother€and€sister€of€Haney,€the€jury,€byÏreturning€a€guilty€verdict,€accredited€the€testimony€of€the€Stateððs€witnesses.€€WeÏconclude€that€the€evidence€is€sufficient€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€theÏappellants€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌÌÐ ¨9 26 Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à@vv&®àIII.€€SENTENCINGˆÐ  ÐÌà ` àIn€their€final€issue,€the€appellants€contend€that€the€trial€courtððs€imposition€ofÏthe€maximum€sentence€of€ten€years€was€excessive.€€Moreover,€the€appellantsÏcontend€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€ordering€this€sentence€to€run€consecutively€to€aÏsentence€that€had€not€yet€been€imposed€in€another€county.€€Both€appellants€wereÏsentenced€as€Range€II€Multiple€Offenders€for€robbery,€a€Class€C€felony,€for€whichÏthe€range€of€punishment€is€six€to€ten€years.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„401;Ð (  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(b)(3)€(1997).€€Both€appellants€received€the€maximumÏten€year€sentence.€€This€courtððs€review€of€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€ofÏa€sentence€is€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€that€the€determination€made€by€the€trialÐ ÈÀ Ðcourt€is€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1997).€€This€presumption€is€onlyÏapplicable€if€the€record€demonstrates€that€the€trial€court€properly€considered€relevantÏsentencing€principles.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€Here,Ð h` Ðthe€presumption€applies.€€The€burden€is€on€the€appellant€to€show€that€the€sentenceÏimposed€was€improper.€€Sentencing€Commission€Comments,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„401(d).€€ÌÌà@  ®à€€A.€€Walter€Lee€ð ðSteveðð€AllenˆÌà ` àÌà ` àThe€record€reflects€that€this€appellant€Allen€is€twenty„seven€years€old,Ïunmarried,€and€has€a€high€school€education.€€No€present€employment€or€history€ofÏemployment€is€contained€within€the€presentence€report.€€The€appellant€Allen€admitsÏto€alcohol€abuse.€€He€has€a€lengthy€prior€criminal€history€from€1989€to€the€presentÏincluding€the€following€convictions:€aggravated€burglary,€theft€over€$1,000,€DUI€andÏleaving€the€scene€of€an€accident.€€Additionally,€he€has€two€misdemeanor€convictionsÏof€public€intoxication€and€two€convictions€for€thefts€under€$500.€€He€has€also€beenÏpreviously€revoked€while€on€probation€and€parole.€€Ð ¨9 26 Їà ` àWith€regard€to€enhancement€factors,€the€trial€court€applied,€ð ðprevious€historyÏof€criminal€convictions€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriateÏrange,ðð€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1)€(1997),€and€ð ðprevious€history€ofÐ È À Ðunwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€theÏcommunity.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(8).€€The€trial€court€applied€noÐ ˆ€ Ðmitigating€factors.€€Appellant€Allen€argues€that€the€court€misapplied€the€firstÏenhancement€factor€because€it€was€already€utilized€to€establish€the€appellant€as€aÏmultiple€offender.€€This€argument€is€misplaced.€€When€the€State€filed€its€notice€toÏseek€punishment€as€multiple€offender׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×,€it€relied€only€upon€his€convictions€forÐ  Ðaggravated€burglary€and€theft€over€$1,000.€€A€plethora€of€convictions€beyond€theseÏtwo€existed€for€the€trial€court€to€use€in€support€of€this€enhancement€factor.€€€€€€€ÌÌà ` àAfter€conducting€òòde€novoóó€review,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€properlyÐ ˆ€ Ðapplied€the€appropriate€enhancing€factors€and€agree€that€no€mitigating€factors€applyÏin€this€case.€€€When€the€sentencing€court€finds€only€enhancement€factors€applicableÏwithout€any€mitigating€factors€present,€the€court€may€set€the€sentence€above€theÏminimum€in€the€range€but€still€within€the€range.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð %  Ð210(d).€Thus,€we€conclude€that€the€appellantððs€ten€year€sentence€for€robbery€isÏjustified.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€Ìà ` àÌà@&®àB.€€Gary€L.€HaneyˆÌÌà ` àThe€appellant€Haney€is€twenty„six€years€old,€single,€and€dropped€out€ofÏschool€in€the€ninth€grade€after€being€expelled.€€The€presentence€report€reflects€aÏhistory€of€alcohol€and€drug€abuse.€€The€record€contains€no€indication€of€currentÏemployment€or€of€an€employment€history.€€This€appellant€also€demonstrates€anÐ è5à.2 Ðextensive€criminal€history€from€1989€to€the€present€including:€aggravated€robbery,Ïtwo€aggravated€burglaries,€attempted€burglary€of€an€automobile,€burglary€of€anÏautomobile,€and€three€thefts€over€$500.€€Additionally,€the€appellant€has€numerousÏmisdemeanor€convictions€for€resisting€arrest,€evading€arrest€and€several€offensesÏinvolving€alcohol€and€related€offenses.€€The€appellantððs€probation€has€been€revokedÏon€three€occasions.ÌÌà ` àWhen€determining€the€appropriate€sentence,€the€trial€court€applied€theÏfollowing€enhancement€factors€for€the€appellantððs€conviction€of€robbery:€(1)€ð ð[t]heÏdefendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€inÏaddition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range,ðð€òòseeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ ÈÀ ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(1);€(2)€ð ðthe€defendant€was€a€leader€in€the€commission€of€anÏoffense€involving€two€(2)€or€more€criminal€actors,ðð€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð ˆ€ Ð114(2);€(3)€ð ðthe€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€unwillingness€to€comply€with€theÏconditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€the€community,ðð€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð H!@ Ððð€40„35„114(8);€and€(4)€ð ðthe€felony€was€committed€while€on€probation€for€anotherÏfelony,ðð€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(13).€€The€trial€court€applied€no€mitigatingÐ %  Ðfactors€and€imposed€the€maximum€ten€year€sentence.ÌÌà ` àUpon€òòde€novoóó€review,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€correctly€applied€theÐ ¨* #& Ðappropriate€enhancement€factors.€€Furthermore,€we€agree€that€no€mitigating€factorsÏapplied€to€this€appellant.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€imposition€of€theÏmaximum€sentence€of€ten€years€for€this€appellant.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@¨¨!®àIV.€€CONSECUTIVE€SENTENCESˆÌÌà ` àBoth€appellants€challenge€the€trial€courtððs€order€requiring€that€their€respectiveÏrobbery€convictions€be€served€consecutive€to€a€robbery€conviction€in€JeffersonÐ ¨9 26 ÐCounty.€€The€record€reflects€that,€on€the€date€of€the€appellantsðð€sentencing€hearingsÏin€this€case,€both€appellants€had€been€convicted€in€Jefferson€County€of€aggravatedÏrobbery.€€However,€the€sentencing€hearing€for€that€conviction€had€not€been€held€andÏthus€no€sentence€had€been€imposed.€€€ÌÌà ` àIn€support€of€their€argument,€the€appellants€cite€òòState€v.€Thompsonóó,€565Ð h`  ÐS.W.2d€889€(Tenn.€1977)€and€òòState€v.€Arnoldóó,€824€S.W.2d€176€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð H@  Ð1991).€€The€State€concedes€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€the€robberyÏconvictions€consecutive€to€the€Jefferson€County€convictions.€€We€agree.€€InÏòòThompsonóó,€565€S.W.2d€at€890,€the€supreme€court€held€that€consecutive€sentencesÐ èà Ðmay€only€be€ordered€in€conjunction€with€a€òòpreviouslyóó€òòimposedóó€òòsentenceóó.€(EmphasisÐ ÈÀ Ðadded).€€This€court€has€held€that€ð ðthe€last€sentencing€court€should€have€theÏresponsibility€to€determine€whether€or€not€a€sentence€should€be€servedÏconsecutively.ðð€òòArnoldóó,€824€S.W.2d€at€178€(citing€òòState€v.€Staffordóó,€368€N.W.2d€364,Ð h` Ð366€(Minn.€App.€1985)).€€ð ðThe€consecutive€sentencing€is€no€less€in€futuro€evenÏthough€the€ððconvictionðð€existed€at€the€time€of€the€sentencing.ðð€€òòArnoldóó,€824€S.W.2d€atÐ (#  Ð178€(citing€òòState€v.€Whiteóó,€18€Ohio€St.€3d€340,€481€N.E.2d€596,€598€(1985)).Ð %  ÐÌà ` àTherefore,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€imposing€the€ten€yearÏsentences€consecutive€to€pending€sentencing€decisions€to€occur€òòin€futuroóó€for€bothÐ ¨* #& Ðappellants.€€However,€we€find€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€run€appellantÏHaneyððs€sentence€consecutive€to€the€outstanding€seven€year€sentence€for€theft€inÏCocke€County.€€At€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€that€Haneyððs€criminalÏactivity€was€extensive€and€that€he€was€on€probation€at€the€time€the€present€offenseÏof€robbery€was€committed.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(2)€and€(6)€(1997).€€WeÏconclude€that€consecutive€sentences€are€necessary€to€protect€the€public€from€theÏpossibility€of€the€appellant€Haneyððs€future€criminal€conduct€and€the€aggregate€ÌÐ ¨9 26 Ðsentence€is€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€present€offenses.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð  ÐWilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€939€(Tenn.€1995).€€Ð èà ÐÌà@||'®àV.€€CONCLUSIONˆÌÌà ` àThe€judgments€of€convictions€for€both€appellants€are€affirmed.€€Moreover,€weÏaffirm€the€trial€courtððs€imposition€of€the€ten€year€sentence€for€each€appellant;Ïhowever,€we€hold€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€consecutive€sentences€for€theÏappellants€with€regard€to€the€pending€sentences€in€Jefferson€County.€€The€appellantÏHaneyððs€consecutive€sentence€with€Cocke€County€is€affirmed.€€ÌÌà ` àThis€case€is€remanded€for€entry€of€judgments€of€conviction€consistent€withÏthis€opinion.€€ÌÔ#†X·XXX®bh#ÔÌÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJñxññwñAMES€ñwññxññyñERRY€L.€SMITH,€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJAMES€CURWOOD€WIñyññzññyñLLñyññzññ{ñTT,€JR.,€Judgeñ{ñ