ÿWPC»# …U:V % 0Ü–w@r 4² Æ Õ 0 Ý 0Dý 0JA 0T‹ 0^ß 0h= 0r¥ 0| 0†“ 0 1u© 0d B‚U *ŸB)ÉDCò AM5«‚Å-žòÂv~RvÓÐ D3£! 0@Ö! AO"Æe" 0D+# D/o# Bž#, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ RESTEUVEWXeYZD[Ó€Ô¡¨ œœtœ3|xd(Ð(3¼˜$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€|µXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ¡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌDe…cember€5,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏW.ÏCrowsonÌAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó ó »Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7À|µXXdædæ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€appellant€is€referred€to€in€the€record€as€ð ðJames€R.€Cotham,ðð€ð ðJames€Randy€Cotham,ððÏand€ð ðRandy€Cotham.ðð€€However,€pursuant€to€the€policy€of€this€court,€we€use€the€name€of€theÏappellant€as€reflected€in€the€indictment.Ì ”Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóMrs.€Cotham€testified€at€trial€that€she€left€the€appellant,€because€he€had€assaulted€her.Ì ¸Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAt€trial,€Mrs.€Cotham€testified€that,€following€the€separation,€she€spoke€with€the€appellantÏon€the€telephone€several€times€and€met€with€him€twice.€€However,€Mrs.€Cotham€asserted€that€sheÏnever€attempted€a€reconciliation,€nor€did€she€communicate€to€the€appellant€a€desire€to€resolveÏtheir€differences.€€She€explained€that€she€did€not€pursue€a€divorce€due€to€financial€difficulties.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  inion Geneva ÒÒ  inion Geneva Ò'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýò òÙ€€ÙÙ€€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|` õ `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌà@ àJUNE€SESSION,€1996Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€01C01„9509„CC„00287Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHUMPHREYS€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Allen€W.€Wallace,€JudgeÌò òRANDY€COTHAMó ó,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Attempted€Voluntary€Manslaughter)Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌShipp€R.€Weemsà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌà àÌRobert€H.€Stovall,€Jr.à àà àà àMary€Ann€QueenÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àLegal€AssistantÌP.€O.€Box€160ÌCharlotte,€TN€€37036à àà àà àCharlotte€H.€RappuhnÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÏà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDan€Mitchum€AlsobrooksÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àGeorge€C.€SextonÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àRoom€206Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHumphreys€County€CourthouseÌà àà àà àà àà àà àWaverly,€TN€€37185ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌÌà àOn€February€28,€1995,€the€appellant,€Randy€Cotham,× ƒ% ××  ×€was€convicted€byÏa€Humphreys€County€jury€of€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter,€a€class€DÏfelony.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„211€(1991);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„101(a)(3)€(1991).€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€as€a€multiple,€range€IIÏoffender€to€eight€(8)€years€imprisonment€in€the€Tennessee€Department€ofÏCorrection,€the€maximum€authorized€punishment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(4)€(1990).€€On€appeal,€the€appellant€contends€that€his€sentence€isÏexcessive.ÌÌà@ àò òFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óÌà àOn€the€afternoon€of€July€29,€1994,€the€appellantððs€estranged€wife,€SharonÏCotham,€was€seated€in€her€car€in€the€parking€lot€of€the€Stetson€Boot€CompanyÏin€Waverly,€Tennessee.€€The€appellant€drove€up€beside€his€wifeððs€vehicle,€shotÏhis€wife€two€times€with€a€twelve€gauge€shotgun,€and€fled€the€scene€of€the€crime.€ÏHe€was€subsequently€apprehended€by€the€police,€whereupon€the€appellantÏconfessed€to€shooting€his€wife€and€informed€the€police€of€the€location€of€hisÏweapon.€€Mrs.€Cotham€survived€the€shooting,€and,€on€October€3,€1994,€theÍHumphreys€County€Grand€Jury€returned€an€indictment€against€the€appellant,Ïcharging€him€with€attempted€first€degree€murder.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202Ï(1994€Supp.);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„101(a)(3).€€Following€a€trial€by€jury,€theÏappellant€was€convicted€of€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€conducted€a€sentencing€hearing€on€March€31,€1995.€€TheÏappellant€stipulated€that€he€was€a€range€II,€multiple€offender.€€The€only€issue€atÏthe€sentencing€hearing€was€the€length€of€the€appellantððs€sentence.€€TheÏappellant€testified€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€He€indicated€that€he€met€his€wifeÏin€1992,€shortly€after€being€released€from€prison€where€he€had€been€servingÏsentences€for€burglary€and€grand€larceny.€€The€appellant€and€the€victim€œwereÏmarried€in›€1993.€€According€to€the€appellant,€his€relationship€with€the€victim€wasÏsomewhat€tumultuous€due€to€the€victimððs€ð ðnumerous€adulterous€affairs.ðð€€ÌÌà àIn€February,€1994,€Mrs.€Cotham€separated€from€the€appellant€and,€inÏMarch,€1994,€moved€in€with€a€boyfriend,€Danny€McBride.× ƒ& ××  ×€€According€to€theÏappellant,€Mrs.€Cotham€returned€to€her€husband€several€times,€but€resumed€herÏrelationship€with€Mr.€McBride€following€each€reconciliation.× ƒ' ××  ×€€Finally,€theÍappellant€decided€to€confront€Mr.€McBride,€who€worked€at€the€Stetson€BootÏCompany€in€Waverly.€€However,€when€the€appellant€arrived€at€the€parking€lot€ofÏthe€Stetson€Boot€Company,€he€observed€his€wife€in€her€car.€€The€appellantÏstated€that,€when€she€informed€the€appellant€that€she€was€awaiting€Mr.€McBride,Ïhe€ð ðjust€lost€it.€€I€pulled€a€gun€and€I€shot€my€wife€twice.ðð€€The€appellant€furtherÏtestified:ÌÓÓà8 àIððm€just€a€man€that€was€pushed€to€his€limit.€...€€ÌÌà8 àI€know€what€I€done€was€wrong,€and€I€know€Iððll€have€to€pay€for€it.€ÏAnd€I€have€no€objection€to€doing€that.€€Iððm€flat€guilty€of€shooting€myÏwife,€but€Iððm€telling€you€there€was€circumstances€that€would€driveÏany€man€to€do€what€I€done.€€ÌÌà8 àSince€that€time,€Iððve€laid€in€my€jail€cell€every€night€and€I€donððt€thinkÏabout€hatred€toward€my€wife€or€toward€Mr.€McBride€or€towardÏanybody.€€I€just€pray€to€God€that€before€anything€else€happens€thatÏsheððll€just€see€that€what€she€was€doing€was€wrong€as€I€see€what€IÏdone€was€wrong.€€ÌÌÓÓThe€appellant€asserted€that€he€regretted€his€actions.ÌÌà àThe€State€introduced€the€testimony€of€Gene€Headrick,€the€StateÏProbation€Officer€assigned€to€Humphreys€County.€€Mr.€Headrick€indicated€thatÏhe€had€prepared€the€appellantððs€pre„sentence€report€and€confirmed€theÏaccuracy€of€the€report.€€The€appellantððs€pre„sentence€report€reflects€priorÏcriminal€convictions€for€driving€with€a€revoked€license,€driving€under€theÏinfluence€of€an€intoxicant,€joyriding,€burglary,€theft€of€property,€harassment,€andÏassault.€€Mr.€Headrick€testified€that€he€had€supervised€the€appellant€previously.€ÍMoreover,€Headrick€confirmed€that€the€appellantððs€convictions€for€assault€andÏharassment€in€1987€resulted€from€acts€committed€by€the€appellant€against€hisÏfirst€wife.€€He€further€proffered€a€certified€copy€of€the€appellantððs€conviction€inÏDavidson€County€in€June,€1994,€for€assault.€€In€the€Davidson€County€case,€theÏappellant€was€charged€with€assaulting€the€victim€in€the€instant€case,€SharonÏCotham.€€However,€he€was€ultimately€convicted€of€assaulting€a€police€officerÏduring€a€court€hearing€on€the€initial€complaint.€€As€a€result€of€this€conviction,€theÏappellant€was€on€probation€at€the€time€of€the€instant€offense.€€Finally,€inÏpreparing€the€pre„sentence€report€in€the€instant€case,€Mr.€Headrick€spoke€withÏthe€appellant€once.€€Mr.€Headrick€stated€at€the€sentencing€hearing:ÌÓÓà8 àI€saw€remorse€in€Randy€...€shortly€after€the€incident€occurred.€€IððmÏnot€sure€if€it€was€remorse€actually€for€what€he€did€or€the€situationÏthat€he€was€involved€in€at€the€time.ÌÌÓÓÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€in€imposing€a€sentence€ofÏeight€years€confinement€in€the€Department€of€Correction,€the€trial€court€appliedÏthe€following€enhancement€factors€as€set€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114Ï(1994€Supp.):ÌÓÓà8 à(1)à8 àThe€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminalÏconvictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thoseÏnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range.Ìà8 à(6)à8 àThe€personal€injuries€inflicted€upon€...€the€victimÏw[ere]€particularly€great.Ìà8 à(8)à8 àThe€defendant€has€a€previous€history€ofÏunwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€aÏsentence€involving€release€in€the€community.Ìà8 à(9)à8 àThe€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm€...Ïduring€the€commission€of€the€offense.Ìà8 à(10)à8 àThe€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€aÏcrime€when€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high.ÌÌÓÓThe€trial€court€declined€to€apply€the€mitigating€factor€that€the€defendant€actedÏunder€strong€provocation,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(2)€(1990),€as€theÏappellant€had€already€received€the€benefit€of€this€factor€from€the€juryððs€verdict.€ÏThe€trial€court€also€found€that€there€were€no€substantial€grounds€tending€toÏexcuse€or€justify€the€appellantððs€criminal€conduct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(3).€€With€respect€to€the€assistance€rendered€by€the€appellant€to€authoritiesÏin€recovering€his€weapon,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(10),€the€trial€courtÏobserved€that€the€appellant€only€assisted€authorities€after€he€was€capturedÏfollowing€his€flight€from€the€scene€of€the€crime.€€With€respect€to€the€appellantððsÏremorse,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113€(13),€the€trial€court€entered€the€followingÏfindings:ÌÓÓà8 àWhat€I€see,€what€this€Court€sees€and€those€listening€to€Mr.€CothamÏtestify,€watching€his€demeanor€throughout€both€trials,€I€donððt€getÏthat€from€Mr.€Cotham.ÌÌà8 àHere€is€what€the€bottom€line€of€Mr.€Cothamððs€testimony€is.€€I€had€aÏwife.€€She€was€mine.€€She€stepped€out€of€line.€€I€drove€up€besideÏher€with€a€shotgun€and€I€put€two€holes€in€her€...€.€€Thatððs€the€bottomÏline.€€She€deserved€it.€€You€listened€to€his€testimony€this€morningÏand€I€really€believe€Mr.€Cotham€thinks€in€his€mind€today€that,€sheÏwas€mine€and€she€deserved€what€she€got.ÌÌà8 àNow,€thatððs€what€I€hear€today.€€Thatððs€totally€unacceptable€in€ourÏsociety.ÌÌÓÓFinally,€the€trial€court,€applying€general€principles€of€sentencing,€considered€theÍseriousness€of€the€crime€and€deterrence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(1),€(3)(A)€(1994€Supp.);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B),€(2),€(4)€(1990).ÌÌà@ àò òANALYSISó óÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€his€offense€does€not€warrant€a€sentence€ofÏeight€years€incarceration€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Review,€by€this€court,Ïof€the€length€of€a€sentence€is€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinationÏmade€by€the€trial€court€is€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1990).€€ThisÏpresumption€only€applies,€however,€if€the€record€demonstrates€that€the€trialÏcourt€properly€considered€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€andÏcircumstances.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€If€the€trialÏcourt€applies€inappropriate€factors€or€otherwise€fails€to€comply€with€the€1989ÏSentencing€Act,€the€presumption€of€correctness€falls.€€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854ÏS.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ï1993).€€In€the€instant€case,€the€trial€court€made€a€general€reference€toÏdeterrence€in€determining€the€length€of€the€appellantððs€sentence.€€A€finding€ofÏdeterrence€cannot€be€conclusory,€but€must€be€supported€by€the€evidence.€€òòStateÏv.€Dockeryóó,€917€S.W.2d€258,€261€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)(citing€òòAshbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€at€170).€€Accordingly,€for€the€purposes€of€this€appeal,€the€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€does€not€accompany€the€sentence€imposed.ÌÌÌà àNevertheless,€the€appellant€bears€the€burden€of€establishing€that€theÏsentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€erroneous.€€òòState€v.€Leeóó,€No.€03C01„9308„CR„00275€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€April€4,€1995).€€In€determiningÏwhether€the€appellant€has€met€this€burden,€this€court€must€consider€the€factorsÏlisted€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(b)(1990)€and€the€sentencing€principlesÏdescribed€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102€and€ðð€40„35„103.ÌÌà àMoreover,€with€respect€to€the€length€of€a€sentence,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„210€provides€that€the€minimum€sentence€within€the€appropriate€range€isÏthe€presumptive€sentence.€€If€there€are€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors,€theÏcourt€must€start€at€the€minimum€sentence€in€the€range€and€enhance€theÏsentence€as€appropriate€for€the€enhancement€factors€and€then€reduce€theÏsentence€within€the€range€as€appropriate€for€the€mitigating€factors.€€òòIdóó.€€If€thereÏare€no€mitigating€factors,€the€court€may€set€the€sentence€above€the€minimum€inÏthat€range,€but€still€within€the€range.€€òòIdóó.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Diesóó,€829€S.W.2dÏ706,€710€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€"[T]here€is€no€particular€value€assigned€byÏthe€1989€Sentencing€Act€to€the€various€factors€and€the€'weight€affordedÏmitigating€or€enhancement€factors€derives€from€balancing€relative€degrees€ofÏculpability€within€the€totality€of€the€circumstances€of€the€case€involved.'"€€òòState€v.ÏMarshallóó,€870€S.W.2d€532,€541€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,Ï(Tenn.€1993)(citation€omitted).€€The€weight€assigned€to€any€existing€factor€isÏgenerally€left€to€the€trial€judge's€discretion.€€òòIdóó.€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€appliedÏenhancement€factors€(6)€and€(10)€in€determining€the€length€of€his€sentence,€asÏthese€factors€are€inherent€in€the€offense€of€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter.€ÏòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114.€€The€1989€Sentencing€Act€provides€that€anÏenhancement€factor€may€be€applied€to€increase€the€appellant's€sentence€withinÏthe€appropriate€range€if€the€factor€is€not€an€"essential€element"€of€the€offense.€ÏòòIdóó.€€The€test€for€determining€if€an€enhancement€factor€is€an€essential€element€ofÏan€offense€is€whether€the€same€proof€necessary€to€establish€the€enhancementÏfactor€would€also€establish€an€element€of€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883ÏS.W.2d€597,€601€(Tenn.€1994).€€Moreover,€factors€that€are€inherent€in€aÏparticular€offense,€even€if€not€designated€as€an€element,€may€not€be€applied€toÏincrease€the€appellant's€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Claybrooksóó,€910€S.W.2d€868,€872Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995).ÌÌà àThis€court€has€previously€applied€factor€(6),€relating€to€the€infliction€ofÏparticularly€great€injuries,€to€enhance€a€sentence€for€attempted€voluntaryÏmanslaughter.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€No.€01C01„9207„CC„00237€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€at€Nashville,€May€13,€1993).€€Indeed,€in€òòState€v.€Nixóó,€922€S.W.2d€894,€903Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996),€this€court€heldÏthat€ð ð[p]articularly€great€injuries€are€not€essential€to€the€commission€ofÏ[attempted€first€degree€murder],€but€prove€greater€culpability.ðð€€Similarly,€thisÍcourt€in€òòState€v.€Gibsonóó,€No.€01C01„9503„CC„00099€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville,€January€26,€1996),€applied€this€factor€to€enhance€a€sentence€forÏattempted€first€degree€murder,€noting€that€ð ðmurder€may€be€attempted€withoutÏactually€causing€any€injury€...€.ðð€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Foxóó,€03C01„9503„CR„00061Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€June€21,€1996)(factor€(6)€may€be€applied€whereÏappellant€was€convicted€of€attempted€first€degree€murder);€òòState€v.€Brooksóó,€No.Ï02C01„9411„CV„00261€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€July€19,€1995)(factor€(6)Ïapplicable€where€appellant€convicted€of€attempted€second€degree€murder).€€InÏthe€instant€case,€the€proof€at€trial€established€that€the€victim€suffered€twoÏshotgun€wounds€to€the€neck€and€shoulder.€€The€wound€to€the€victimððs€shoulderÏwas€large€enough€that€the€hand€of€a€treating€nurseððs€assistant€accidentallyÏslipped€into€the€wound.€€The€victim€remained€in€the€hospital€for€two€weeksÏfollowing€the€shooting,€and€continued€to€receive€treatment€for€several€monthsÏthereafter.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€record€supports€the€application€ofÏfactor€(6).ÌÌà àWith€respect€to€enhancement€factor€(10),€relating€to€the€high€risk€toÏhuman€life,€we€agree€that,€generally,€this€factor€would€be€inapplicable€inÏdetermining€the€length€of€a€sentence€for€attempted€voluntary€manslaughter.€ÏòòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòNixóó,€922€S.W.2d€at€903€(factor€(10)€inherent€in€attempted€first€degreeÏmurder);€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€No.€01C01„9507„CR„00226€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville),€òòperm.€to€appeal€dismissedóó,€(Tenn.€1996)(attempted€second€degreeÍmurder);€òòState€v.€Denamióó,€No.€01C01„9309„CR„00307€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996)(attempted€first€degreeÏmurder);€òòState€v.€Hesteróó,€01C01„9410„CC„00352€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995)(attempted€second€degreeÏmurder);€òòState€v.€Crowóó,€01C01„9310„CR„00348€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville),Ïòòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995)(attempted€second€degree€murder).€ÏHowever,€in€òòState€v.€Makokaóó,€885€S.W.2d€366,€373€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€toÏappeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994),€this€court€held€that€factor€(10)€is€not€inherent€inÏattempted€murder€when€other€people€present€at€the€scene€of€the€crime€couldÏhave€been€injured€by€the€appellantððs€actions.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€No.Ï01C01„9309„CR„00308€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€October€20,€1994).€€InÏthe€instant€case,€the€proof€established€that,€at€the€time€of€the€shooting,€thereÏwere€several€other€people€sitting€in€the€parking€lot€of€the€Stetson€Boot€CompanyÏor€ð ðmilling€around.ðð€€In€fact,€the€shooting€occurred€during€the€course€of€a€changeÏin€shifts€at€the€company.€€We€conclude€that€the€record€supports€the€applicationÏof€enhancement€factor€(10).ÌÌà àFinally,€the€appellant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€did€not€adequatelyÏconsider€mitigating€factors€in€determining€the€length€of€his€sentence.€ÏSpecifically,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€appliedÏmitigating€factors€(2)€and€(3),€relating€to€strong€provocation€and€substantialÏgrounds€tending€to€excuse€or€justify€the€appellantððs€criminal€conduct.€€òòSeeóóÍTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113.€€However,€in€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€No.€03C01„9412„CR„00448€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€October€13,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appealÏgrantedóó,€(Tenn.€1996),€this€court€upheld€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€apply€theseÏfactors€when€the€appellant€had€been€indicted€for€the€first€degree€murder€of€hisÏwife€but€convicted€of€voluntary€manslaughter.€€The€trial€court€reasoned€thatÏthese€factors€had€been€taken€into€account€by€the€jury€in€reaching€the€verdict.€€òòIdóó.€ÏThis€court€noted€that,€although€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113€does€not€prohibitÏð ðdouble€mitigation,ðð€the€decision€to€double€mitigate€is€subject€to€the€discretion€ofÏthe€trial€court.€€òòIdóó.;€òòState€v.€Clantonóó,€No.€01C01„9302„CC„00072€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€at€Nashville,€December€30,€1993).€€òòSee€generallyóó€òòState€v.€Phillipsóó,€No.Ï03C01„9502„CR„00047€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€March€25,€1996)(ð ðtheÏtrial€courtððs€giving€little€or€no€weight€to€various€mitigating€factors€raised€by€theÏdefendant€is€an€act€of€discretion€that€will€not€be€overturned€on€appeal€so€long€asÏthere€is€material€or€substantial€evidence€in€the€record€to€support€it).€€The€court€inÏòòMartinóó,€No.€03C01„9412„CR„00448,€concluded:ÌÓÓà8 àð ð[D]ouble€creditðð€need€not€be€automatically€applied€in€voluntaryÏmanslaughter€cases.€€And,€while€the€proof€of€provocation€mayÏhave€been€adequate€to€convince€the€jury€to€reduce€the€degree€ofÏculpability,€the€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€killing€do[]€notÏnecessarily€demonstrate€the€kind€of€ð ðstrong€provocationðð€requiredÏto€mitigate€a€sentence.ÌÌÓÓIn€the€instant€case,€as€well,€we€must€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€mitigatingÏfactors€(2)€and€(3)€should€be€afforded€little,€if€any,€weight.ÌÌà àLikewise,€we€conclude€that€the€record€supports€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€toÏaccord€significant€weight€to€mitigating€factor€(10),€relating€to€the€appellantððsÏassistance€to€authorities,€and€factor€(13),€which€encompasses€the€appellantððsÏmilitary€service€and€his€expressions€of€remorse.€€Specifically,€with€respect€to€theÏappellantððs€military€service,€honorable€military€service€may€always€beÏconsidered€as€a€mitigating€factor€consistent€with€the€purposes€of€the€1989ÏSentencing€Act.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Yelloweyesóó,€No.€01C01„9407„CC„00256€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€at€Nashville),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995).€€However,€suchÏservice€will€be€considered€in€the€context€of€other€applicable€factors.€€Clearly,€theÏapplicable€enhancement€factors€in€the€instant€case€heavily€outweigh€theÏappellantððs€past€military€service.ÌÌà àWith€respect€to€the€appellantððs€expressions€of€remorse,€ð ðgenuine,€sincereÏremorse€is€a€proper€mitigating€factor.ðð€€òòState€v.€Williamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€83Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)(citing€òòState€v.€Buttreyóó,€756€S.W.2d€718,€722€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988)).€€However,€ð ðthe€mereÏspeaking€of€remorseful€words€or€a€genuflection€in€the€direction€of€remorse€willÏnot€earn€an€accused€a€sentence€reduction.ðð€€òòWilliamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€83.€ÏIndeed,€most€persons€facing€a€lengthy€prison€sentence€feel€or€express€remorseÏfor€their€actions.€€òòState€v.€Garrisonóó,€01C01„9407„CC„00236€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏNashville,€September€20,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996).€€TheÏtrial€court€concluded€in€the€instant€case€that€the€appellant€expressions€ofÍremorse€for€his€conduct€were€not€genuine€and€we€cannot€disagree.€€ÌÓÓà8 àThe€finding€of€the€presence€or€absence€of€remorse€requires€theÏweighing€of€evidence,€which€only€the€trial€judge€can€do.€€AppellateÏcourts€cannot€make€that€type€of€determination€from€the€cold,Ïwritten€record,€since€remorse€or€the€lack€thereof€is€extremelyÏsubjective€and€dependent€upon€many€factors€besides€the€writtenÏword.ÌÌÓÓòòDenamióó,€No.€01C01„9309„CR„00307.ÌÌà àFollowing€a€òòde€novoóó€review,€we€conclude€that€a€sentence€of€eight€yearsÏimprisonment€is€entirely€appropriate€in€the€instant€case.€€Accordingly,€we€affirmÏthe€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€Judge