ÿWPCÙ …# VU>a %Ÿ 0í¥UB’ 4Ô è n­÷ ¤ w@¬ 01ì 0D 0Ja 0T« 0^ÿ 0h] 0rÅ 0|7 0†³ 09 1uÉ 0d> B¢U6¿U.õU*#B)MDCv AM¹j D3pv~£vÓ! 0@ô AO4ƃ 0DI D/ B¼˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ<èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX(ÅÕÐ$¡¡Ñ  ÑÑ7€'CXXdÈXXdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓ<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiÚƒç"3|xæ«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@ ÒDÓEÔÕÖDרÙEeÚÛÓ€(á(3ì+$¤¤Ý ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ7€[ŸXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Courier< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ `Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€#ÔÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÝ  ÝÔ€%ÔÔ€%ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€%XÔÌÌò òJuly€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€%ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó'ÿÿdxdPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€#ÔÑ  ÑÑ#€$$Xd#ÑÑ#€$$Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÝ  Ý›Ñ  ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€%ÔÞ ÞÌà8 àà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙßR€()'A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›à@ àAT€KNOXVILLEà@ à€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€OCTOBER€1995€SESSIONÌÌÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)à àÌ€à àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellee,€à àà à)à àNo.€03C01„9501„CR„00017Ìà à€€€€€à àà à€€à à)Ìà àà àà àà à)à àWashington€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà à)à à€Honorable€Lynn€W.€Brown,€Judge€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà à)ÌPHILLIP€BOWLING,€€€€€à à€€à à)à à€(Sentencing)Ìà àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€€Ìà àAppellant.à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌDavid€F.€Bautistaà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€of€TennesseeÌ€€€€€€€€andà àà àà àà àà àà àandÌDeborah€B.€Huskinsà àà àà àGeorge€LinebaughÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€General€of€Tennessee€€€€€€Ï142€E.€Market€Streetà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€Parkwayà àà àÌJohnson€City,€TN€37601à àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àDavid€E.€CrockettÌà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àRoute€19,€Box€99Ìà àà àà àà àà àJohnson€City,€TN€37601Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àandÌà àà àà àà àà àJoe€C.€Crumley,€Jr.Ìà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àWashington€County€CourthouseÌà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€38€Ìà àà àà àà àà àJonesborough,€TN€37659ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌAMENDED€JUDGMENT€VACATED;€REMANDEDÌÌJoseph€M.€TiptonÌJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÇà@ àòòò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€defendant€appeals€as€of€right€from€three,€concurrent€twelve„yearÏsentences€that€the€Washington€County€Criminal€Court€imposed€upon€him€after€itÏrevoked€his€suspended€sentence.€€He€contends€that€the€trial€court€erroneouslyÏenhanced€the€three,€ten„year€sentences€it€previously€imposed€in€this€case€by€applyingÏimproperly€two€enhancement€factors€and€ignoring€an€applicable€mitigating€factor.€€ÏBecause€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€was€without€the€authority€to€increase€theÏdefendantððs€sentence,€we€vacate€the€amended€judgments€of€the€trial€court€and€orderÏthat€the€defendant€serve€the€original€ten„year,€concurrent€sentences.ÌÌà àOn€May€7,€1992,€the€defendant€pled€guilty€to€three€cocaine„related€ClassÏB€felonies€and€received€three,€concurrent€ten„year€sentences€in€the€custody€of€theÏDepartment€of€Correction.€€Judgments€of€conviction€were€entered€on€that€date€and€heÏwas€transferred€to€the€Department€of€Correction€and€began€serving€his€time.€€TheÏDepartment€of€Correction€placed€him€in€the€boot€camp€program,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„20„201,€„207,€and€then,€effective€April€13,€1993,€placed€him€on€probation€for€theÏremainder€of€his€sentences.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„20„206.€€€ÌÌà àAfter€issuing€a€probation€revocation€warrant€in€August€1993,€the€trialÏcourt€entered€a€series€of€orders.€€The€first€stated€that€the€defendant€was€to€serve€tenÍyears€in€the€community€corrections€program,€from€October€15,€1993€to€October€15,Ï2003,€and€listed€conditions€of€his€release.€The€second€order€revoked€the€defendantððsÏprobation€and€ordered€that€he€serve€ten€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction€butÏnoted,€in€a€footnote,€that€the€defendant€was€placed€on€the€alternative€communityÏcorrections€program.€€The€third€order€provided€for€the€defendantððs€immediate€releaseÏand€stated€that€he€was€to€be€placed€in€the€community€corrections€program.ÌÌÌà àIn€May€1994,€the€trial€court€issued€a€warrant€alleging€that€the€defendantÏagain€violated€his€probation.€€After€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€revoked€the€defendantððsÏsuspended€sentence€and€sentenced€him€to€twelve€years€in€the€Department€ofÏCorrection€for€each€of€the€three€offenses.€€The€trial€court€cited€the€defendantððs€history€ofÏcriminal€behavior,€inability€to€abide€by€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€intoÏthe€community,€and€lack€of€mitigating€factors.€€The€trial€court€entered€amendedÏjudgments€that€reflect€that€the€defendantððs€sentences€were€increased€upon€revocationÏof€a€community€corrections€sentence.€€Although€we€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€Ïenhancement€of€the€defendantððs€sentence€would€have€been€appropriate€had€the€courtÏbeen€revoking€a€sentence€under€the€Tennessee€Community€Corrections€Act€of€1985,Ïòòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„36„106(e)(3),€it€was€not€proper€under€the€facts€of€this€case.ÌÌà àWe€begin€our€analysis€by€recognizing€the€distinction€between€theÏrevocation€of€a€community€correction€sentence€and€a€probation€revocation.€€When€aÏtrial€court€revokes€a€community€corrections€sentence€under€the€Tennessee€CommunityÏCorrections€Act€of€1985,€it€has€the€authority€to€ð ðresentence€the€defendant€to€anyÏappropriate€sentencing€alternative,€including€incarceration,€for€any€period€of€time€up€toÏthe€maximum€sentence€provided€for€the€offense€committed,€less€any€time€actuallyÏserved€in€any€community„based€alternative€to€incarceration.ðð€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„36„106(e)(3).€€By€contrast,€a€trial€court€that€determines€that€a€probation€violation€hasÏoccurred€can€cause€execution€of€the€original€judgment€as€it€was€originally€entered,€òòseeóóÏT.C.A.€ðð€40„35„310,€„311,€or€can€modify€the€defendantððs€conditions€of€supervision,Ïincluding€extending€the€defendantððs€probationary€period€for€up€to€two€years.€€òòSeeóóÏT.C.A.€ðð€40„35„308.ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€the€defendant€initially€received€a€ten„year€sentence€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction.€€Once€the€defendant€was€transferred€to€the€Department€ofÏCorrection,€the€trial€court€lost€jurisdiction.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„212(d).€€Pursuant€toÏT.C.A.€ðð€40„20„206,€when€the€Department€of€Correction€placed€the€defendant€onÏprobation€for€the€remainder€of€his€ten„year€sentence,€the€trial€court€had€jurisdiction€toÏuse€the€procedures€set€forth€in€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„311€to€revoke€the€probation.€€AlthoughÏthe€trial€court€properly€ordered€that€the€defendantððs€probation€be€revoked€and€that€heÏserve€his€ten„year€sentence€in€the€Department€of€Correction,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„311(d),€it€also€ordered€that€the€defendant€serve€ten€years€in€the€community€correctionsÏprogram,€from€October€15,€1993€until€October€15,€2003.ÌÌà àIt€is€apparent€that€the€trial€court€intended€to€convert€the€defendantððs€ten„year€sentence€into€a€community€corrections€sentence.€€However,€neither€theÏCommunity€Corrections€Act€nor€the€statutes€dealing€with€probation€authorize€a€court€toÏimpose€a€new€sentence€under€the€Act€after€a€defendant€has€partially€served€hisÏsentence€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€ÌÌà àAlthough€the€trial€court€lacked€jurisdiction€to€impose€a€communityÏcorrections€òòsentenceóó€when€it€determined€that€the€defendant€violated€his€probation,€itÏdid€have€the€authority€to€order€the€defendantððs€participation€in€the€communityÏcorrections€òòprogramóó€as€a€òòconditionóó€of€his€continuing€on€probation.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„108€(allowing€more€onerous€probation€conditions€resulting€from€a€revocationÏhearing);€T.C.A.€ðð€40„36„106(f)€(providing€for€use€of€a€community€corrections€programÏas€a€condition€of€probation).€€Thus,€the€orders€the€trial€court€entered€in€1993€effectivelyÏresulted€in€the€modification€of€the€defendantððs€conditions€of€probation,€not€theÏimposition€of€a€community€corrections€òòsentenceóó.ÌÌà àWhen€the€trial€court€revoked€the€defendantððs€suspended€sentence€inÏAugust€of€1994,€the€defendant€was€serving€the€remainder€of€his€original€ten„yearÍsentence€on€probation,€and€the€trial€court€was€to€proceed€under€the€probationÏrevocation€statutes.€€The€trial€court€had€the€authority€to€commence€execution€of€theÏoriginal€judgment€as€it€was€originally€entered,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„310,€„311,€or€theÏauthority€to€modify€the€defendantððs€conditions€of€supervision€and€to€extend€hisÏprobationary€period€for€up€to€two€years,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„308,€but€it€did€not€have€theÏauthority€to€increase€the€defendantððs€original€sentence.ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€amended€judgments€of€conviction€of€the€trial€court€areÏvacated€and€the€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€reinstatement€of€the€ten„yearÏsentences€imposed€in€the€original€judgments€of€conviction.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àóóJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóJohn€H.€Peay,€JudgeÌÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌDavid€G.€Hayes,€Judge€€