WPC Dsթ9N7^f-8&LprK6V7걞\{r7$nTqTa^5]|w?"eTC=$:fj%Iҽ_j>#[;f.g[NѦGE|b{ujP%](p, \e Hi;4pDS7p0H9;\=|)O/#Q{6'0#a$z"Wz<#yѝCř0y X[`)J (/a.ygYT,$@<g 7,& k^rY]ymö,=@U)y2[8'\_pKZW.rpK&虜T$IlC#O5?l'0!}4װ([KH;%3M"6T 췘XBUUb %\^ b 0nwUN4H\ zk m #    c 0D)NmU=@oE b 0 B 0 D3 D- 0K AS4 0M 0D A5z ) (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularJ~'B 3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUHP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 60 v R$      1  X2X  _=XX2JudgeThomasH.Shriverpresidedovertheappellantstrial.DuetoJudgeShriversuntimelydeath,Judge  SethNormanpresidedoverthesentencinghearing.#X2X=~#ԁLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0  (9 Z(Times New Roman   R$      3  X2X  _=XX2Wewillexaminetheseclaimseventhoughtheappellantdoesnotsupporthisallegationsbyargument,citation  toauthorities,orappropriatereferencestotherecord.Suchbaldassertionsaregenerallytreatedaswaivedbythiscourt. n Tenn.R.Ct.Crim.App.10(b).#X2X=~#   R$      2  X2X  =XX2_SeeStatev.Cunningham,No.02C019801CR00022,1999WL395415,at*4(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,  June15,1999)(itwasunnecessarytoforcethevictimtoremaininhercarinordertostealthevehicle);Statev.Price, n No.01C019810CR00421,1999WL1063414,at*2(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,November24,1999)(the ,| aggravatedrobberycouldhavebeencompletedwhenthedefendantfirstapproachedthecarwithoutforcingthevictim : todrivearoundtofindasecludedareaforcompletion).#X2X=n#- -(|G2$ !.8^0dd8         0  X2X d(|3{$ !.8^0dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3{$ !.8^0dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8^0dd8     _^082XXdd8@HHINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @$ATNASHVILLE  X2X^0   `    FEBRUARY2000SESSION   #^0XX2k#  STATEOFTENNESSEEv.RONALDJEROMEBUTLERX2X^0   @  AppealasofRightfromtheCriminalCourtforDavidsonCounty   @ No.96A1307SethNorman,Judge r  @*AV) ` dE<#` A߈ $t  @ No.M199901034CCAR3CDFiledAugust11,_2000_Ԉ i  AV) ` dE<` A 5   RonaldJeromeButlerwasconvictedbyajuryintheDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt#^0XX2L#X2X^0Ԁofonecount *  ofaggravated_kidnapping_Ԁandonecountofaggravatedrobbery,bothclassBfelonies.Forthe  offenseofaggravated_kidnapping_,thetrialcourtsentencedtheappellant#^0XX2#X2X^0ԀasaRangeIoffendertoten  yearsincarceration#^0XX2_#X2X^0ԀintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection,requiringhimtoserveonehundred  percentofhissentenceinconfinement.Fortheoffenseofaggravatedrobbery,thetrialcourt r sentencedtheappellanttotenyearsincarcerationintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection, X requiringhimtoservethirtypercentofhissentenceinconfinement.Thetrialcourtfurtherordered > thatthesentencesbeservedconsecutively.Onappeal,theappellantraisesthefollowingissuesfor $t review:(1)whetherhisconvictionofaggravated_kidnapping_Ԁviolatesprinciplesofdueprocess;and  Z (2)whetherthetrialcourterredinsentencinghim.Uponreviewoftherecordandthepartiesbriefs, @ weaffirmthejudgmentsofthetrialcourt. &  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtisAffirmed.   NormaMcGeeOgle#^0X2#X2X.^0,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidH.WellesandDavid n G.Hayes,JJ.,joined. T JenniferLynnThompson,Nashville,Tennessee,andCalvinTurner,Nashville,Tennessee,forthe  !p! appellant,RonaldJeromeButler. "V" PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter,ElizabethT.Ryan,AssistantAttorneyGeneral, #"$ NicholasBailey,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,andJon_Seaborg_,AssistantDistrictAttorney $ % General,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. % & @55' OPINION #^0XX2B #X2X^0Ԉ j'"( @''  I.FactualBackground  P(#)    ` OnthenightofDecember14,1995,atapproximately9:30p.m.,Julie_Nabors_Ԁstopped 6)$* fordinnerattheSonicdriveinrestaurantonLebanonRoadinHermitage#^0XX26#X2X^0,Tennessee.Theappellant *l%+ approachedtheopenwindowofMs._Nabors_Lexusautomobile,putaguntoherhead,andordered +R&, herto scootovertothepassengerseat.Ms._Nabors_Ԁpledwiththeappellanttotakehercarandher +8'- pursebuttolethergo.Theappellant,however,refusedtoreleaseMs._Nabors_Ԁandagainorderedher ,(. tomovetothepassengerseat.Whenshecomplied,theappellantputhisguninhisjacketpocketand -)/B _satinthedriversseat.Hisaccomplicesatinthebackseat.     ` TheappellantexitedtheSonicanddrovetheLexusthroughtheparkinglotofa | nearbyTexacogasstation.Atthegasstation,agroupofyoungpeoplecrowdedaroundthecarand b cheeredtheappellant.Afterafewminutes,theappellantleftthegasstationanddrovedownthe H street.Ms.Naborswasstillinthecar,pleadingtobereleased.Theappellantassuredherthatshe . ~ wouldbereleased.  d    ` Whiledrivingdownthestreet,theappellantandhisaccomplicerummagedthrough  0 Ms.Naborspurseandfoundherautomatictellermachine(ATM)card.Theyaskedherhowmuch    moneyshehadinthebank.Ms.Naborstoldthemthatshehadabouttwohundreddollarsinher    account.Accordingly,theappellantdrovetotheclosestbranchofMs.Naborsbankandordered   hertowithdrawtheentiretwohundreddollarsfromheraccount.AsMs.Naborsfollowedthe x  appellantsorders,theappellantandhisaccomplicewatchedherclosely.WhenMs.Naborsreturned ^  tothecar,shehandedthemoneytotheappellant.TheappellantagainrefusedtoreleaseMs. D  Nabors.Rather,afterleavingtheATM,theappellantdroveeightmilestoaboatdock,wherehe *z  releasedMs.Naborsandfledwithhisaccomplice.Theentireincidentlastedaboutthirtyorforty ` minutes. F    ` TheappellantwasconvictedbyajuryintheDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt#^0XX2#X2X^0Ԁofone  countofaggravatedkidnapping,aclassBfelony,andonecountofaggravatedrobbery,aclassB  felony.  #  1      ׀Indeterminingtheappropriatesentences,thetrialcourtfoundthatthereweretwo  enhancementfactorsapplicabletotheappellant:(1)theappellanthasaprevioushistoryofcriminal t convictionsorcriminalbehavior,and(8)theappellanthasaprevioushistoryofunwillingnessto Z complywiththeconditionsofasentenceinvolvingreleaseinthecommunity.Tenn.CodeAnn. @ 4035114(1997).Thetrialcourtfoundnomitigatingfactors.#^0XX2#X2X^0ԀAccordingly,fortheoffenseof &v aggravatedkidnapping#^0XX2#X2X^0,thetrialcourtimposedaRangeIsentenceoftenyearsincarcerationinthe  \ TennesseeDepartmentofCorrectionandorderedtheappellanttoserveonehundredpercentofhis B sentenceinconfinement.Fortheoffenseofaggravatedrobbery#^0XX2l#X2X^0,thetrialcourtimposedasentence ( oftenyearsincarcerationandorderedtheappellanttoservethirtypercentofhissentencein  confinement.Thetrialcourtfurtherrequiredtheappellanttoservehissentencesconsecutively.  @$ II.Analysis  p!     ` Onappeal,theappellantfirstcontendsthatthefactssupportinghisaggravated V"! kidnappingconvictionwereincidentaltothefactssupportinghisaggravatedrobberyconviction; <#" therefore,hiskidnappingconvictionviolatesdueprocess.Theappellantalsoarguesthatthetrial "$r# courterredinsentencinghim.Althoughsomewhatunclearfromhisbrief,theappellantisapparently %X $ challengingthelengthofbothhissentences.Moreover,hecontendsthatthetrialcourterredin %>!% requiringhimtoservehissentencesconsecutively#^0XX2#X2X^0. &$"&    `     h      (#( @A.AggravatedKidnapping     ` Theappellantarguesthathisaggravatedkidnappingconvictionviolateshisdue  processrights,becausethefactssupportingthatconviction,i.e.,theconfinementanddetentionof | Ms.Nabors,areincidentaltothosefactswhichsupporthisaggravatedrobberyconviction.#^0XX2"#^0^0X2X^0InState b v.Anthony,817S.W.2d299,306(Tenn.1991)#^0XX2p%#X2X^0#X2XXX2Q%#X2XXX2,oursupremecourtheldthattherelevantinquiry H underthesecircumstancesiswhether . ~ 8  theconfinement,movementordetentionisessentiallyincidentaltothe[robbery]and  d isnot,therefore,sufficienttosupportaseparateconvictionforkidnapping,or  J whetheritissignificantenough,inandofitself,towarrantindependentprosecution  0 andis,therefore,sufficienttosupportsuchaconviction#X2XXX2C&#X2XXX2#^0XX2&#X2X^0.     #X2XXX2(##^0XX2(#X2X^0ThecourtX2XXX2#^0XX2\)#X2X^0Ԁnotedthat everyrobbery,bydefinition,involvessomedetentionagainstthewillofthe    victim,ifonlylongenoughtotakegoodsormoneyfromthepersonofthevictim.Id.#^0XX2)#X2X^0#X2XXX2)#X2XXX2Ԁ#X2XXX2+#However,   becausethe aggravatedkidnappingstatutedoesnotrequireaparticulardistanceofremovalorany x  particulardurationorplaceofconfinement,#^0XX2*#X2X^0Ԁ#^0XX2Q,#^0^0X2X^0 anyrestraintinadditiontothatwhichisnecessaryto ^  consummate...robberymaysupportaseparateconvictionforkidnapping.Statev.#X2XXX2,#X2XXX2Dixon#X2XXX2-#X2XXX2#^0XX2,#X2X^0,957 D  S.W.2d532,535(Tenn.1997).#^0XX2*.##^0^0-#X2X^0ԀX2XXX2InDixon#X2XXX2.##^0XX2.#X2X^0,oursupremecourtfurtherrefined#^0XX2i/#X2X^0ԀtheX2XXX2Anthony#X2XXX2/##^0XX2/#X2X^0Ԁtest#^0XX2d0#X2X^0X2XXX2.#X2XXX20##^0XX20#X2X^0ԀThe *z  courtheldthatiftheX2XXX2Anthony#X2XXX21##^0XX2<1#X2X^0Ԁthresholdismet,thatis,iftheconfinementwasbeyondthatnecessary ` tocommittherobbery,acourtmustalsoinquirewhethertheadditionalconfinement(1)prevented F thevictimfromsummoninghelp;(2)lessenedtheappellantsriskofdetection;or(3)createda , significantdangerorincreasedthevictimsriskofharm.X2XXX2Dixon#X2XXX23##^0XX21#X2X^0,957S.W.2d#^0XX24#X2X^0Ԁat535.     ` Inthepresentcase,Ms.Naborsdetentionwasnotessentialtothetheftofhercar. #  2      ׀#^0XX2e4#X2X^0  Ms.Naborsbeggedtheappellanttotakehercarandherpurseandreleaseher.Theappellantcould t haveeasilycomplied,butherefusedtoreleaseMs.Nabors.Furthermore,theappellantonlyordered Z Ms.NaborstogivehimmoneyafterheandhisaccomplicediscoveredherATMcard.Infact,even @ afterobtainingtheadditionaltwohundreddollars,theappellanttookMs.Naborstoaboatdockeight &v milesawaybeforereleasingher,ratherthanleavingherattheATMuponcompletionoftherobbery.  \ #^0XX25#X2X^0TheappellantsrestraintofMs.Naborswasmorethanthatrequiredtocommittherobbery. B Therefore,thefirstpartoftheAnthonyDixonanalysisismet. (    ` WemustnowdetermineiftheappellantsrestrictionofMs.Naborspreventedher  fromsummoninghelp,lessenedtheappellantsriskofdetection,createdasignificantdangertoMs.   Nabors,orincreasedherriskofharm.X2XXX2Dixon#X2XXX2V:##^0XX2=8#X2X^0,957S.W.2d#^0XX2:#X2X^0Ԁat535.Althoughonlyoneofthe p!  additionalelementsisneeded,thefactsofthiscasesupportalloftheelements.#^0XX2;#X2X^0Itisclearthat V"! detainingMs.Naborsinthecarpreventedherfromsummoninghelp.Shewasunabletonotify <#" anyoneofthetheftofhercarorhermoneyuntiltheappellantreleasedher.Further,becauseMs. "$r# Naborswasnotfreetonotifyanyoneoftherobbery,theappellantsriskofdetectionwaslessened. %X $ Also,thereducedriskofdetectionincreasedMs.Naborsriskofharm.SeeX2XXX2Dixon#X2XXX2=##^0XX2;#X2X^0,957S.W.2d#^0XX2P>#X2X^0Ԁat %>!% 536.#^0XX2>#X2X^0ԀTheappellant,whileinpossessionofagun,forcedMs.Naborstoremaininthecar.Despite &$"& hisassurancestothecontrary,theappellantcouldhaveshotMs.Nabors#^0XX2>#X2X^0Ԁatanytimeduringher  confinementinthecar.Therefore,bothprongsoftheAnthonyDixon#^0XX2?#X2X^0Ԁtestaresatisfied.The  appellantsaggravatedkidnappingconvictiondoesnotviolatedueprocessandmustbeupheld.This | issueiswithoutmerit. b @$B.Sentencing . ~    ` Theappellantalsoarguesthatthetrialcourterredinimposinghissentences.First,  d theappellantcontendsthatthetrialcourterredinenhancinghissentencesforbothaggravated  J kidnappingandaggravatedrobbery#^0XX2@#X2X^0Ԁtwoyearsabovetheminimumsentencesofeightyears.Second,  0 theappellantallegesthatthetrialcourterredbyrequiringhimtoservehissentencesconsecutively#^0XX2 C#X2X^0. #  3             ` X2XXX2Generally,appellatereviewofthelengthofasentenceisdenovowithapresumption   ofcorrectness.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d)(1997).#X2XXX2D#X2XXX2#^0XX2D#X2X^0ԀThepresumptionofcorrectnessis x  contingentupontherecordrevealingthatthetrialcourtadequatelyconsideredsentencingprinciples ^  andallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.SeeStatev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166,169(Tenn.1991).#X2XXX2E##^0XX2E#X2X^0X2XXX2Ԁ#^0XX2nG#X2X^0#X2XXX2G#X2XXX2 D  Thetrialcourtsfailuretoproperlyconsiderthesefactorsremovesthepresumptionofcorrectness. *z  SeeStatev.Poole,945#X2XXX2H##^0XX2G#X2X^0ԀX2XXX2S.W.2d93,96(Tenn.1997).#X2XXX2LI##^0XX2,I#X2X^0ԀX2XXX2Inanyevent,theburdenisontheappellant ` todemonstratetheimproprietyofhissentences.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401,Sentencing#X2XXX2I##^0XX2I#X2X^0 F X2XXX2CommissionComments.#X2XXX2$K##^0XX2J#X2X^0 ,    ` X2XXX2Initsdenovoreview,thiscourtconsidersthefollowingfactors:(1)theevidence,if  any,receivedatthetrialandthesentencinghearing;(2)thepresentencereport;(3)theprinciples  ofsentencingandargumentsastosentencingalternatives;(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsofthe t criminalconductinvolved;(5)evidenceandinformationofferedbythepartiesonenhancementand Z mitigatingfactors;(6)anystatementbythedefendantinhisownbehalf;and(7)thepotentialfor @ rehabilitationortreatment.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035102,103,210(1997).SeealsoAshby,823 &v S.W.2dat168.#X2XXX2K##^0XX2K#X2X^0  \    ` Thetrialcourtmustalsoconsiderthesefactorsinsentencingadefendant.Tenn.Code ( Ann.4035103(1).Moreover,indeterminingtheappropriatesentence,thetrialcourtmust  determinetheappropriaterangeofsentence.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210(a).Theappellantinthis  caseisastandardoffender,andaggravatedkidnappingandaggravatedrobberyarebothclassB   felonies.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913304(b)(1),402(b)(1997).Therefore,theappropriatesentencing p!  rangeisfromeighttotwelveyearsincarceration.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035112(a)(2)(1997).#^0XX24O#X2X^0ԀThe V"! appellantssentencewithintherangedependsuponthetrialcourtsapplicationofenhancementand <#" mitigatingfactors.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210(b)(5).Becauseweconcludethatthetrialcourt "$r# improperlyconsideredenhancementfactorsandfailedtoconsiderastatutorilymandatedmitigating %X $ factor,wereviewtheappellants#^0XX2NR#X2X^0Ԁsentenceswithoutapresumptionofcorrectness.#^0XX2!% @jj1.Lengthofsentences ' #'    ` X2XXX2First,theappellantchallengesthetrialcourtsimpositionoftenyearsentencesfor  hisconvictionsofaggravatedkidnappingandaggravatedrobbery,sentencesthatareinexcessofthe  statutoryminimumforeachoffense.#X2XXX2|U##^0XX2T#^0^0X2X^0ԀWithregardtothesentenceforaggravatedkidnapping,the | appellantspecificallyclaimsthatthetrialcourterredbyfailingtotakeintoaccounthisvoluntary b releaseofthevictimalive#X2XXX2V#X2XXX2#^0XX2 W#X2X^0,astatutorilymandatedmitigatingfactor.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913 H 304(b)(2).#X2XXX23X##^0XX2uX#X2X^0X2XXX2Ԁ#X2XXX2`Y##^0XX2AY#X2X^0TheStateconcededatoralargumentthatthetrialcourtwasrequiredtoconsiderthe . ~ X2XXX2appellantsvoluntaryreleaseofthevictim,andweagree#X2XXX2VZ#X2XXX2#^0XX2Y#X2X^0.#X2XXX2Z##^0XX2[#X2X^0  d    ` Withregardtobothtenyearsentences,thetrialcourtfoundthattwoenhancement  0 factorswereapplicabletotheappellant:(1)theappellanthasaprevioushistoryofcriminal    convictionsorcriminalbehaviorinadditiontothosenecessarytoestablishtheappropriaterange,    and(8)theappellanthasaprevioushistoryofunwillingnesstocomplywiththeconditionsofa   sentenceinvolvingreleaseinthecommunity.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114.#^0XX2|[#X2X^0Inapplying x  enhancementfactor(8)totheappellant,#^0XX2^#X2X^0Ԁthetrialcourtnotedthat#^0XX2^#X2X^0Ԁ hewasonprobation,asI ^  understandit,outofthejuvenilecourtatthetimehecommittedtheseacts.However,themerefact D  thattheappellantcommittedthecurrentoffensewhileonprobationdoesnotindicateaprevious *z  historyofunwillingnesstocomplywithconditionsofasentenceinvolvingreleaseintothe ` community.SeeStatev.Hayes,899S.W.2d175,185186(Tenn.Crim.App.1995)(commission F oftheoffenseforwhichadefendantisbeingsentencedshouldnotmakefactor(8)applicable).But , seeStatev.Martin,No.03C019711CR00508,1998WL707798,at*4(Tenn.Crim.App.at  Knoxville,October12,1998)perm.app.denied(Tenn.1999)(theaccusedwasonprobationwhen  thecurrentoffensewascommitted,whichindicatedunwillingnesstocomplywithconditionsof  release).Thecourtalsocouldnotconsidertheappellantspreviousviolationofparoleasajuvenile t inapplyingenhancementfactor(8).X2XXX2Statev.Faulkner,No.03C01-9806-CR-00217,1999WL Z 1039714,at*7(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,November12,1999)(whenimposingasentencefor @ anoffensecommittedafterenactmentofTenn.CodeAnn.4035114(20),thetrialcourtcouldnot &v considerthedefendants probationrevocationthatoccurredwhenhewasajuvenile#X2XXX2c##^0XX2^#^0^0X2X^0).Thus,the  \ courtimproperlyappliedenhancementfactor(8).#X2XXX2e##^0XX2e#X2X^0 B    ` #^0XX2wf#X2X^0Additionally,becausealloftheappellantsprioroffenseswerecommittedbyhim  asajuvenile,thecourtimproperlyconsideredenhancementfactor(1).SeeStatev.Brown,No.  02C019710CC00419,1998WL742350,at*2(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,October26,   1998)(factor(20)becametheexclusivefactorforenhancingasentencebasedonanappellants p!  juvenilerecordafterTenn.CodeAnn.4035114wasamendedin1995).#^0XX2f#X2X^0Ԁ#^0XX2!% ifcommittedbyanadult.Tenn.CodeAnn.3914105(2),3913403(b),3912107(a)(1997).#^0XX2|k#X2X^0 &$"& Accordingly,factor(20)isapplicabletotheappellant. ' #'    ` Whenthereareenhancementandmitigatingfactorsthatapplytoanappellant,the )$) trialcourtmuststartattheminimumsentenceintherange,enhancingthesentenceasappropriate l*%* inlightofanyenhancementfactorsandreducingthesentenceasappropriateuponconsiderationof R+&+ anymitigatingfactors.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210(e).Thetrialcourt,initsdiscretion, 8,', determinestheweighttobegiventotheenhancementandmitigatingfactors.SeeStatev.Hayes,  899S.W.2d175,185(Tenn.Crim.App.1995);Price#^0XX2pl#X2X^01999WL1063414,at*6.Thiscourthasnoted  that, | 8  8`   themerenumberofexistingenhancementfactorsisnotrelevant!the b importantconsiderationbeingtheweighttobegiveneachfactorin H lightofitsrelevancetothe[appellants]personalcircumstancesand . ~ backgroundandthecircumstancessurroundinghiscriminalconduct. d` x` x Hayes,899S.W.2dat186.#^0XX2o#X2X^0ԀWithregardtotheappellantssentenceforaggravatedkidnapping,the  J enhancementfactoroftheappellantsviolent,juvenilecriminalhistory#^0XX2r#X2X^0Ԁweighsheavilyagainstthe  0 mitigatingfactorofthevoluntaryreleaseofMs.Nabors.Withregardtotheappellantssentencefor    aggravatedrobbery,thetrialcourtcorrectlyfoundthattherearenoapplicablemitigatingfactors.    Weconcludethat#^0XX2r#X2X^0therecordsupportstheappellantstenyearsentencesforboththeaggravated   kidnappingconvictionandtheaggravatedrobberyconviction. x  @2.ConsecutiveSentences D     ` Lastly,theappellantchallengesthetrialcourtsimpositionofconsecutivesentences. *z  Tenn.CodeAnn.4035115(a)(1997)governs#^0XX2ut#X2X^0Ԁthecourtsabilitytosentenceanappellantwhois ` convictedofmorethanonecriminaloffense#^0XX2gv#X2X^0Ԁtoconsecutiveorconcurrenttermsofincarceration.#^0XX2 w#X2X^0Ԁ F SeealsoTenn.R.Crim.P.32(c)(1).X2XXX2Thetrialcourtmayorderconsecutivesentencesifoneormore , ofthefollowingfactorsispresent:(1)theappellantisaprofessionalcriminalwhohasknowingly  devotedhimselftocriminalactsasamajorsourceoflivelihood;(2)theappellantisanoffender  whoserecordofcriminalactivityisextensive;(3)theappellantisadangerousmentallyabnormal  personsodeclaredbyacompetentpsychiatristwhoconcludesasaresultofaninvestigationprior t tosentencingthatthedefendant'scriminalconducthasbeencharacterizedbyapatternofrepetitive Z orcompulsivebehaviorwithheedlessindifferencetoconsequences;(4)theappellantisadangerous @ offenderwhosebehaviorindicateslittleornoregardforhumanlife,andnohesitationabout &v committingacrimeinwhichtherisktohumanlifeishigh;(5)theappellantisconvictedoftwoor  \ morestatutoryoffensesinvolvingsexualabuseofaminorwithconsiderationoftheaggravating B circumstancesarisingfromtherelationshipbetweentheappellantandvictimorvictims,thetime ( spanofappellantsundetectedsexualactivity,thenatureandscopeofthesexualactsandtheextent  oftheresidual,physicalandmentaldamagetothevictimorvictims;(6)theappellantissentenced  foranoffensecommittedwhileonprobation;or(7)theappellantissentencedforcriminal   contempt.#X2XXX2w#Id.at(b)(1)(7). p!     ` Thepresenceofasinglefactorisenoughtojustifytheimpositionofconsecutive <#" sentences.SeeStatev.Black,924S.W.2d912,917(Tenn.Crim.App.1995);X2XXX2Covingtonv.State,#X2XXX2#X2XXX2#^0XX2w#X2X^0 "$r# No.01C019401CR00010,1994WL548751,at*1(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,October6, %X $ 1994).#X2XXX2 ##^0XX2O#^0^0X2X^0Ԁ#X2XXX2=##^0XX2\#X2X^0Inthiscase,thetrialcourtfoundthattheappellantcommittedtheaggravatedkidnappingand %>!% aggravatedrobberywhileonprobationforoffensesadjudicatedinjuvenilecourt.#^0XX2Á#X2X^0ԀTenn.CodeAnn. &$"& 4035115(b)(6).Weaffirmthetrialcourtsimpositionofconsecutivesentences. ' #' @MM" III.Conclusion. l*%*    ` TheappellanthasfailedtodemonstratethathisaggravatedkidnappingofMs.Nabors R+&+ wasincidentaltotheaggravatedrobbery.Theappellanthasalsofailedtocarryhisburdenof 8,', demonstratingtheimproprietyofhissentences.Weaffirmthejudgmentsofthetrialcourt.     `     h   򀀀 |    `     h   NormaMcGeeOgle,Judge b    `    `    `    `    ` #^0XX2ɂ#X2X^0#^0XX2#X2X^0