ÿWPC{  ½Y#ª1ZÝÏôàÔü= ™…‡ÖÏýK[ƒGÎÇùëø§`¬7o§ôûúØ&npÜPÂeèÅP!”O÷Mø«3'³Ã×âm@&G„º²‡vònBß¶ÂÞwÒ\,# hUNs %Á 0(ÇU:ïb)w@14q…”&œU: Büü 0D D3]]]] AQÆá 0D§ 0Dë D// B^ ˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLÜÏ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,Ù¹6 AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- EEDHe Ó€V&3|x+ Ý ƒ(¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ X«XXXÔÔ€ ô4X X«ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ X«X ô4ÔÐ  ÐÌò òMarch€17,€1999Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ô{™ ôX X«ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d(3¯$££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!ÝÝ  Ýñ ñ›ñ ñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Š—ŠXXÔÔ€Š&òŠŠŠ—ÔÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€%&XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñ ñßr€& "<,(j 8` `€€@E f ` ttx$X` ð Úrß›ñ ñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌOCTOBER€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À àà  à)à p àC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9801„CR„00005Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àó óÐ `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellee,ò òà h àà À àà  à)à p àKNOX€COUNTYÐ `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)ÌV.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€Ð `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àHON.€RICHARD€BAUMGARTNER,Ð `  ÐLONNIE€CANNON,à h àà À àà  à)à p àJUDGEó óÐ ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò òà  à)ó óà p àÐ ` Ѐà ` àà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À àò òà  à)à p à(AGGRAVATED€ASSAULT)Ð ` Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòà p àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð Hè ÐÌò òW.€ZANE€DANIELà h àà À àà  àà p àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUP€Ð 8Ø Ðó óDANIEL€&€OBERMANà h àà À àà  àà p àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ 8 Ø ÐNationsbank€Building,€Suite€950Ì550€West€Main€Avenueà h àà À àà  àà p àò òELLEN€H.€POLLACK€Ð ("È Ðó óKnoxville,€TN€37902à h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÐ (#È Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òRANDALL€E.€NICHOLS€€Ð (  Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÐ )   Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òMARSHA€SELECMAN€ó óÐ ð*!" Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àCity„County€Building€Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àKnoxville,€TN€37902ÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÐ  70./S ÐÓ  ÓÔ€°ø°ŠŠ&òÔò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€Š&òа°øÔÐ `  ÐÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà ` àThe€Defendant,€Lonnie€Cannon,€appeals€as€of€right€following€his€convictionÏand€sentencing€in€the€Knox€County€Criminal€Court.€€Defendant€was€charged€in€a€six„¼count€indictment€with€offenses€ranging€from€attempted€murder€to€aggravatedÏassault.€€The€jury€acquitted€the€Defendant€of€all€charges€except€for€recklessÏaggravated€assault.€€The€trial€court€held€a€sentencing€hearing€and€sentenced€theÏDefendant€as€a€Range€I€Standard€Offender€to€serve€a€total€sentence€of€four€(4)Ïyears,€served€by€split€confinement€comprising€nine€(9)€months€in€the€Knox€CountyÏJail€with€the€balance€suspended€on€intensive€probation.€€Defendant€argues€theÏsentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€was€excessive,€with€improper€application€of€bothÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors.€€He€also€argues€that€he€should€have€beenÏgranted€full€probation.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà ` àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range€or€the€manner€of€service€of€aÏsentence,€this€court€has€the€duty€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€sentence€withÐ N'î Ða€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmativeÏshowing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€andÏall€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.Ð /®%& Ð1991).ÌÌà ` àIn€conducting€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€court€must€consider:€(a)€theÐ Þ4~+, Ðevidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing;€(b)€the€presentenceÏreport;€(c)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives;Ð ¾8^/0 Ð(d)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved;€(e)€any€statutoryÏmitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(f)€any€statement€that€the€defendant€made€on€hisÏown€behalf;€and€(g)€the€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€and€„210;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2dÐ 0Ð Ð859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).ÌÌà ` àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencingÏprocedure,€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€andÏproper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principles€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,€andÏmade€findings€of€fact€adequately€supported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modifyÏthe€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€a€different€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,Ð À` Ð805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).ÌÌà ` àA€brief€summary€of€the€facts€is€helpful€for€our€review.€€Defendant,€a€twenty„¼nine€(29)€year€old€lifelong€resident€of€Knox€County,€went€into€the€œTekoa€Lounge›€atÏapproximately€10:30€p.m.€€While€Defendant€was€apparently€not€intoxicated,€he€mayÏhave€been€drinking.€€Defendant€attempted€to€shoot€pool€for€money,€but€œhe›€wasÏunable€to€find€œanyone€to€play€with€and€began›€to€create€a€disturbance.€€ThisÏdisturbance€became€very€loud€and€obnoxious,€eventually€disrupting€the€patrons€ofÏthe€establishment.€€The€victim,€the€owner€of€the€bar,€advised€the€victim€that€ð ð[he€had]Ïhad€enough€tonight€.€.€.€come€back€tomorrow.€€I€will€buy€you€a€beer€.€.€.€You€need€toÏleave,ðð€and€escorted€the€Defendant€to€the€door.€€As€Defendant€was€leaving,€he€spitÏon€one€of€the€customers€in€the€bar€with€whom€he€previously€had€a€confrontationÏearlier€that€same€evening.€€That€same€customer€became€angry€and€hit€theÏDefendant.€€ÌÐ Ð9p02 Ðà ` àDefendant€got€inside€his€œvehicle›€œparked›€œdirectly€outside›€the€œdoor€of€the€bar›Ïand€backed€it€up.€€He€drove€back€and€forth€in€the€parking€lot€several€times,€revvingÏhis€engine€at€a€high€speed.€€A€witness€who€was€in€the€rear€seat€of€the€DefendantððsÏcar€testified€that€he€was€being€thrown€around€in€the€back€seat€of€the€vehicle.€€All€theÏtestimony€reflected€that€the€victim€then€came€out€of€the€bar€into€the€parking€lot€andÏheld€up€his€hand€in€the€air€to€indicate€that€Defendant€should€stop.€€Defendant€droveÏhis€vehicle€in€a€line€towards€the€victim.€€His€car€hit€the€victim,€with€the€victim€goingÏup€over€the€hood,€hitting€the€windshield,€traveling€over€the€top€of€the€car€and€comingÏto€rest€in€the€parking€lot.€€Defendantððs€testimony€at€the€time€of€the€trial€and€theÏsentencing€hearing€was€that€he€did€not€know€that€he€had€hit€anyone.€€The€trial€courtÏreasoned€that€it€would€be€difficult€to€hit€an€adult€individual,€ð ðhave€them€come€acrossÏyour€hood,€hit€your€windshield,€and€fly€over€the€top€of€your€car,€and€not€know€thatÏyou€hit€anything.ðð€€ÌÌà ` àAfter€striking€the€victim,€the€Defendant€drove€out€of€the€parking€lot€towards€hisÏhome.€€Instead€of€driving€home€and€parking€his€car,€he€drove€to€a€nearby€homeÏwhich€was€vacant€and€parked€his€car€on€the€far€side€of€an€embankment.€€TheÏDefendant€then€walked€home€and€went€to€bed.€€When€Detective€Mike€Upchurch€laterÏarrived€at€Defendantððs€home,€Defendant€told€him€that€he€had€not€been€to€any€bar,Ïbut€had€been€home€watching€television€that€night€and€had€been€in€bed€for€over€fourÏ(4)€hours.€€The€trial€court€stated€ð ðthat€goes€to€further€show€not€only€that€[Defendant]Ïwas€aware€of€the€fact€that€he€had€hit€somebody€up€at€that€bar,€and€that€he€was€inÏtrouble,€but€he€took€active€steps€to€conceal€his€conduct€and€lied€to€the€police€whenÏinitially€confronted€with€this€revelation.ðð€€Ìâ âÐ à7€.0 Ðà ` àThe€trial€court€first€noted€that€it€was€ð ðcompelled€to€follow€the€sentencingÏâ âstatute,ðð€and€that€the€total€range€of€punishment€for€a€Class€D€felony€is€two€(2)€toÏtwelve€(12)€years.€€œTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„111(b)(4).›€œ€As›€a€Range€I€StandardÏOffender,€the€proper€range€of€punishment€is€two€(2)€to€four€(4)€years.€€œTenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(4).›€€The€trial€court€stated€that€it€took€into€account€the€testimonyÏat€trial,€the€statements€of€the€victims€and€the€Defendant€at€the€sentencing€hearing,Ïand€the€presentence€report.€€The€only€enhancement€factors€the€trial€courtÏdetermined€as€appropriate€were€that€the€personal€injuries€inflicted€upon€the€victimÏwere€particularly€great€and€that€the€Defendant€used€a€deadly€weapon,€his€vehicle,Ïin€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114€(6)€and€(9).€€Ìà ` àWhile€the€trial€court€agreed€that€aggravated€assault€involves€serious€bodilyÏinjury€as€an€element€of€the€offense,€he€based€the€application€of€factor€(6)€upon€theÏfact€that€proof€showed€the€victimððs€injuries€were€far€in€excess€of€those€contemplatedÏby€the€statute€defining€ð ðserious€bodily€injury.ðð€€The€trial€court€reasoned€that€the€fiftyÏ(50)€year€old€victim€nearly€died€as€a€result€of€these€injuries,€and€that€as€a€result€ofÏthese€injuries€he€had€not€only€permanent€physical€impairment,€but€permanentÏneurological€deficits€which€seriously€limit€his€physical€and€mental€abilities.€€œInÏapplying€factor€(9),€the€trial€court€stated€that€this›€offense€was€committed€by€virtue€ofÏDefendantððs€œcar.€€The›€trial€court€noted€that€if€the€Defendant€had€been€found€guilty€ofÏaggravated€assault€by€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon,€his€vehicle,€then€thisÏenhancement€factor€would€not€apply€because€it€would€be€ð ðpart€and€parcel€of€theÏoffense€itself.ðð€€However,€the€Defendant€was€found€guilty€of€reckless€conduct€causingÏserious€bodily€injury,€therefore€the€application€of€enhancement€factor€nine€(9)€isÏappropriate.Ìâ âÐ à7€.0 Ðà ` àWith€regard€to€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€œonly›€priorÏâ âcriminal€conduct€indicated€on€œDefendantððs›€record€was€a€charge€of€public€intoxication.€ÏThis€was€the€only€mitigating€factor€the€trial€court€deemed€appropriate.€€ÌÌà ` àAs€the€State€correctly€concedes€within€its€brief,€the€record€supports€theÏapplication€of€one€of€the€enhancement€factors€applied€by€the€trial€court,€but€not€both.€ÏThe€trial€court€may€not€consider€an€element€of€the€crime€as€an€enhancement€factor.€ÏòòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€602€(Tenn.€1994).€€œThe€aggravated›€assault€œoffenseÐ ð  Ðfor€which€Defendant€was€convicted€occurs›€whenever€a€person€recklessly€commitsÏan€assault€and€causes€serious€bodily€injury€to€another€or€uses€or€displays€a€deadlyÏweapon.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„102(a)(2).€€The€jury€found€the€Defendant€guiltyÏof€recklessly€causing€bodily€injury€to€another€and€that€such€bodily€injury€was€seriousÏpursuant€to€the€fifth€count€of€the€indictment€against€the€Defendant.€€Thus,€theÏimposition€of€enhancement€factor€(6)€was€inappropriate.€€œòòState›€v.€Croweóó,€914Ð "0 ÐS.W.2d€œ933,€940›€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€The€application€of€enhancement€factorÏ(9),€that€the€Defendant€used€a€deadly€weapon€during€the€commission€of€the€offense,Ïwas€correctly€imposed.€€A€motor€vehicle€may€properly€be€determined€to€be€a€deadlyÏweapon.€€òòState€v.€Tateóó,€912€S.W.2d€œ785,€787›€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1995)€(citationsÐ P*ð " Ðomitted).›ÌÌà ` àWhile€one€enhancement€factor€was€incorrectly€applied,€this€court€has€reviewedÏthe€evidence€and€finds€that€an€additional€enhancement€factor€should€have€beenÏapplied.€€Testimony€indicated€that€the€victimððs€wife€was€in€the€direct€vicinity€of€theÏvictim€when€he€was€assaulted€by€the€Defendant.€€In€fact,€she€had€to€jump€out€of€theÏway€of€the€oncoming€car€in€order€to€escape€serious€injury.€€Therefore,€as€proofÏestablished€that€there€was€risk€to€life€to€the€victimððs€wife,€enhancement€factor€(10)Ð Ð9p02 Ðapplied€as€a€person€other€than€the€victim€was€in€the€area€and€was€potentially€subjectÏto€injury.€€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€909€S.W.2d€œ46,€50›€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1995)€(citationsÐ P ð Ðomitted).›ÌÌà ` àBased€upon€the€review€of€the€applicable€mitigating€factors,€this€court€finds€noÏerror€in€the€trial€courtððs€application€of€only€one€(1)€mitigating€factor.€€TestimonyÏreflected€that€it€was€the€Defendant€who€began€the€disturbance€at€the€bar€that€nightÏand€continued€the€disturbance€until€he€was€asked€to€leave€by€the€victim.€€On€his€wayÏout€of€the€bar,€the€Defendant€spit€at€another€customer.€€When€the€Defendant€hadÏescaped€the€scene,€he€continued€to€cause€the€disturbance€by€revving€his€motor€andÏattempting€to€ram€the€victimððs€bar€with€his€vehicle.€€When€the€victim€asked€him€toÏstop,€he€drove€his€vehicle€directly€towards€the€victim,€hitting€him,€and€then€œfled›€theÏscene.€€Even€though€some€testimony€indicated€that€Defendant€was€hit€by€a€customerÏof€the€bar,€there€is€not€sufficient€evidence€to€mitigate€the€Defendantððs€sentence€dueÏto€his€own€actions.€€ÌÌà ` àBased€upon€the€application€of€two€(2)€enhancement€factors€and€one€(1)Ïmitigating€factor,€a€sentence€of€four€(4)€years€is€amply€justified€by€the€record.€€TheÏweight€to€be€afforded€each€mitigating€and€enhancement€factor€is€determined€by€theÏtrial€court.€€There€is€no€merit€to€Defendantððs€argument€regarding€the€length€of€theÏsentence€imposed.ÌÌà ` àDefendant€further€argues€that€he€was€unjustly€denied€any€type€of€alternativeÏsentence.€€However,€as€the€record€and€judgment€aptly€reflect,€the€trial€courtÏsuspended€all€of€the€Defendantððs€four€(4)€year€sentence€except€for€nine€(9)€months.€ÏDefendant€was€therefore€given€an€alternative€sentence€involving€split€confinement.€Ð Ð9p02 ÐConvicted€of€a€Class€D€felony,€Defendant€was€entitled€to€the€presumption€that€heÏwas€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€the€absence€ofÏevidence€to€the€contrary.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).€€While€the€trial€court€wasÏrequired€to€automatically€consider€the€Defendant€for€an€alternative€sentence,Ïincluding€probation,€the€Defendant€bore€the€burden€of€establishing€both€his€suitabilityÏand€that€an€alternative€to€incarceration€would€ð ðsubserve€the€ends€of€justice€and€theÏbest€interest€of€both€the€public€and€the€defendant.ðð€€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,Ð    Ð259€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990)€(citations€omitted).€The€Defendant€bears€the€burdenÏof€establishing€suitability€for€full€probation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b).€€ÌÌà ` àIn€deciding€whether€to€grant€or€deny€probation,€a€trial€court€should€considerÏthe€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€defendantððs€potential€or€lack€of€potential€forÏrehabilitation,€whether€full€probation€will€unduly€depreciate€the€seriousness€of€theÏoffense,€and€whether€a€sentence€other€than€full€probation€would€provide€an€effectiveÏdeterrent€to€others€likely€to€commit€similar€crimes.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„¼210(b)(4),€„103(5),€„103(1)(B);€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€œ467,›€477€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð p& ÐApp.€1996).€€In€determining€that€Defendantððs€sentence€would€involve€nine€(9)€monthsÏof€confinement,€the€trial€court€based€his€decision€upon€the€fact€that€confinement€wasÏnecessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€this€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„103(1)(B).€€Also,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€Defendant€was€not€credibleÏand€had€tried€to€hide€his€crime.€€A€lack€of€œtruthfulness›€is€indicative€of€a€defendantððsÏlack€of€ð ðpotential€for€rehabilitation.ðð€€òòState€v.€Byrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,€380€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð 2°(* ÐApp.€1993).€€In€sentencing€Defendant€to€serve€nine€(9)€months,€with€the€remainderÏto€be€served€on€probation,€the€trial€court€reasoned€that€the€injuries€sustained€by€theÏvictim€were€extensive€while€the€victim€was€merely€trying€to€diffuse€the€situation.€ÏFurthermore,€the€trial€court€again€relied€upon€the€Defendantððs€actions€of€attemptingÐ Ð9p02 Ðto€conceal€the€car€on€the€night€of€the€offense€and€then€refusing€to€accept€anyÏresponsibility€for€his€actions.€€ÌÌà ` àWhile€Defendant€argues€that€he€was€denied€alternative€sentencing,€that€is€notÏcorrect.€€Defendant€was€given€alternative€sentencing€in€the€form€of€probation€for€theÏmajority€of€his€sentence,€with€only€nine€(9)€months€to€be€served€in€the€county€jail.€ÏSentencing€must€be€determined€on€a€case„by„case€basis,€with€each€sentenceÏtailored€to€that€particular€defendant€based€upon€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€thatÏdefendant.€€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€235€(Tenn.€1986).€€The€trial€courtÐ à€ Ðconcluded€that€Defendant€did€not€meet€his€burden€of€establishing€suitability€for€fullÏprobation,€and€our€review€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€with€a€presumptionÐ À` Ðof€correctness.€€òòBoggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€at€œ476.›€€Based€upon€the€nature€andÐ °P Ðcircumstances€of€this€offense€and€the€Defendantððs€lack€of€rehabilitative€potential€dueÏto€his€established€lack€of€credibility,€we€conclude€that€Defendant€has€failed€to€meetÏhis€burden€of€entitlement€to€total€probation.€€€€ÌÌà ` àThe€Defendant€also€alludes€to€the€argument€that€the€trial€court€should€haveÏsentenced€him€to€the€Community€Alternatives€to€Prison€Program€(CAPP),€which€isÏthe€Community€Corrections€Program€established€pursuant€to€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€section€40„36„101€òòetóó€òòseqóó€in€Knox€County.€€From€the€record,€it€appearsÐ 0.Ð$& Ðthat€Defendant€did€not€urge€this€alternative€sentence€to€the€trial€court€until€after€theÏsentencing€hearing€was€complete€and€the€trial€court€had€imposed€the€sentence.€€InÏany€event,€the€record€indicates€that€the€eligibility€criteria€for€CAPP,€according€to€itsÏown€report€concerning€Defendant,€requires€for€a€defendant€to€be€eligible,€that€thereÏâ âbe€no€serious€bodily€harm€to€the€victim.€€œTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„36„10ññ6ññ(a)(ññ3)ññññññ(ññññññññ€ññññññ.€€ññFor›Ð à7€.0 Ðthis€reason€and€under€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€inÏññdeclining€ññññœññññmodifying›€the›€previously›€imposed›€sentence›€ññto›€allow€service€of€the€sentence€under€the€CAPP€program.Ìâ âÌà ` àAfter€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€the€briefs€and€the€applicable€law€in€thisÏcase,€we€find€no€error€in€the€Defendantððs€sentence€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court.Ìà ` àœññ¹ññ›¹Ó  ÓÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€Judgeà0 À à