ÿWPCÈ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU:Ýw@ 4W k U Bz ¼ Ä 0JÄ 0T 0^b 0hÀ 0r( 0|š 0† 0œ 1u, U,¡ 0dÍ U,1B)]DC† AMÉ BU*3]v~_vÓÝ D3° 0@ã AO#Ær 0D8 D/| B«˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (aê® Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT fDghijDklDmDnÓ€z©U!3|xz< Œ p`‹*Times New RomanTT2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d< Œ 9p`(Arial øÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òSeptember€9,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€!!X„d&ÓÑ#€!!Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X Òò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›à@ àÔ€ ¼ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE€Ì̜ـ€ÙÙ€€ÙßL€$'#;+'h|Ìa` Å `€€Lß›à@ àAT€€KNOXVILLEÌÌà@ àDECEMBER€1994€SESSIONÌÔ€ XÔÌó óÌÌÌÌÌÔˆˆÔò òð#ðó óÌÔˆˆÔò òððó ó€€€€€No.€œ03C01›„9407„CR„00246€€€Ìò òÔ€ ¼ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,ÔJJÔò òÔ€ XÔððó ó€Ìœà àà àAppellee,ÔÖÖÔò òððó 󛀀€€€œROANE›€COUNTYÔ”ø”øÔÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô Ôò òððó ó€Ìà àà àà àà àà à€vs.Ô  Ôò òð*ðó ó€€€€€œHon.€Russell›€œSimmons,€Jr.,›€Judge€ÌÔˆˆÔò òððó ó€€€€€ÌÔˆˆÔò òððó ó€€€€€œ(Attempt›€to€CommitÌœò òÔ€ ¼ÔMACK€DEVANEY,€€€€€€€Ô&&ÔÔ€ XÔððó 󛀀€€€œAggravated€Robbery)›Ì€€€€€€€€€€œ€€€€€€€€€€€€€Appellant.ÔÄÄÔò òððó 󛀀€€€€€ÌÔˆˆÔò òð$ðó óÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€œòòà àà àFOR›€THE€APPELLEEóó:€€ÌÌJoe€H.€Walker€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€œà àà àCharles›€W.€œBurson›ÌPublic€Defender€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€œà àà àAttorney›€General€&€ReporterÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌWalter€B.€Johnson,€II€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€œà àà àDarian›€B.€Taylor€ÌAssistant€Public€Defender€€€à à€€€€€€€€€€€€€œà àà àAssistant›€Attorney€GeneralÌP.O.€Box€334€€€€à àà àà à€œ€à àà àCriminal›€Justice€DivisionÌœHarriman›,€œTN›€œ€37748›à àà àà à€œ€à àà à450›€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€œà àà àNashville,›€TN€œ€37243„0493›ÌÌà àà àà àà àà à€œ€à àà àCharles›€E.€HawkÌà àà àà àà àà à€œ€à àà àDistrict›€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà à€œà àà àFrank›€HarveyÌà àà àà àà àà à€œà àà àAssistant›€œDistrict›€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà à€œà àà àP.O.›€Box€703€€Ìà àà àà àà àà à€œà àà àKingston,€TN›€œ€37763›ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€_______________________ÌÌÌÌò òÔ€ ¼ÔAFFIRMED€Ô€ XÔÌÌÌó óRobert€E.€Burchò òÌó óSpecial€JudgeÌà à€€€ÌÌÌÑ7€ßXXdÖXXdì7ÑÌà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌÌÓÓÌà àAppellant€was€convicted€in€the€trial€court€of€the€offense€of€attempt€to€commit€aggravatedÏrobbery€for€which€he€received€a€sentence€of€ten€years€consecutive€to€the€sentence€that€he€wasÏalready€serving€when€he€was€sentenced.€€He€appeals€to€this€court€and€presents€for€review€twoÏissues:Ìà àà à(1).€The€sufficiency€the€evidence€to€sustain€a€conviction€of€that€offense,€specificallyÏwhether€the€facts€in€the€record€constitute€an€attempt€to€commit€aggravated€robbery€or€even€simpleÏrobbery:€and,Ìà àà à(2).€Whether€the€trial€court€properly€ordered€his€sentence€to€be€served€consecutivelyÏwith€his€prior€sentence€for€a€separate€offense.Ìà@ àò òFACTSó óÌà àThe€facts€in€this€case€qualify€for€inclusion€in€one€of€the€current€publications€recounting€theÏmisadventures€of€inept€criminals.Ìà àAt€approximately€9:20€a.m.€on€June€20,€1994,€Officer€Dale€Duncan,€a€patrolman€with€theÏKingston€Police€Department,€responded€to€a€call€by€driving€to€Robinsonððs€Jewelry€in€Kingston.€ÏHe€described€the€weather€as€sunny€and€hot.€€The€store€was€scheduled€to€open€at€10:00€a.m.€ÏOfficer€Duncan€testified€that€he€saw€a€man,€later€identified€as€the€appellant,€wearing€a€trench€coat,€aÏhat€and€sunglasses,€and€carrying€a€cane€and€briefcase,€standing€€ð ðdirectlyðð€in€front€of€the€door€of€Íthe€Robinson€Jewelry€store.€€Officer€Duncan€stated€the€appellant€caught€his€eye€because€of€hisÏheavy€attire€on€such€a€warm,€summer€day.€Ìà àOfficer€Duncan€stated€that€he€saw€a€silver€œChevette›€without€a€license€tag€backed€into€theÏœJ.T.P.A.›€building,€which€was€located€about€thirty€feet€up€the€street€from€the€jewelry€store.€TheÏofficer€approached€the€appellant,€who€then€started€walking€towards€him.€€Officer€Duncan€stoppedÏappellant€and€asked€him€if€the€suspicious€car€belonged€to€him.€€Appellant€replied€in€the€affirmativeÏand€stated€that€he€must€have€lost€the€license€tag.€€Appellant€then€resumed€walking€towards€the€car.Ìà àDuncan€followed€the€appellant,€and€when€they€reached€the€car,€Officer€Duncan€requestedÏthat€the€appellant€provide€some€form€of€identification.€€€Appellant€gave€Officer€Duncan€his€driver'sÏlicense.€Officer€Duncan€called€in€a€check€on€the€appellant,€and€learned€that€there€was€anÏoutstanding€warrant€for€his€Ó ` °¥XÓarrest.€€At€that€point,€the€appellant€was€placed€under€arrest.€€A€patÏdown€of€appellantððs€person€revealed€a€loaded€pistol€tucked€into€the€left€side€waistband€ofÏappellantððs€trousers,€under€the€œtrench€coat›.€ÌÓ` °p` ¤XÓà àOfficer€Brian€œMullins›€of€the€Kingston€Police€Department€was€called€œto€the›€scene€and€arrivedÏabout€the€time€that€Officer€Duncan€arrested€appellant.€€Officer€œMullins›€opened€appellant's€briefcase.€€ÏThe€case€contained€a€blue€notebook,€an€assortment€of€sunglasses,€and€a€stethoscope.€€€TheÏnotebook€contained€the€initials€M.D.,€and€inside€the€pad,€a€note€was€clipped€onto€the€first€page.€ÏThe€note€read,€"Put€all€your€jewelry€in€the€case,€all€of€it€and€you€won't€be€hurt,€and€your€money.€ÏDon't€look€back.€€I€don't€want€to€hurt€you,€please."€€Surprisingly,€considering€the€facts€of€thisÏcase,€the€note€was€not€signed.Ìà@ àò òSTANDARD€OF€REVIEW€„€SUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óÌà àOn€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€allÏreasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó€571€œS.W.›€2dÏ832€(Tenn.€1978).€€A€verdict€of€guilt,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theÏState's€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.€œTownsend›óóÍ525€S.W.2d€842€(Tenn.€1975).€€The€presumption€of€innocence€is€thereby€removed€and€aÏpresumption€on€guilt€exists€on€appeal.€òòœAnglin›€v.€Stateóó€553€œS.W.›€2d€616€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€ÏThe€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€this€presumption.€€òòState€v.€Brown€óó551€œS.W.›€2d€329Ï(Tenn.€1977).Ìà àWhen€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged€on€appeal,€the€test€is€whether,€afterÏreviewing€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€couldÏhave€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€òòState€v.€Duncan€óó698ÏœS.W.›€2d€63€(Tenn.€1985);€òòRule€13(e),€T.R.A.P.Ìóóà àThe€facts€of€this€case€are€almost€undisputed.€€Appellant€insists€that€the€facts€demonstrate€thatÏOfficer€Duncan€did€not€see€appellant€actually€standing€in€front€of€the€door€to€œRobinsonððs›€JewelryÏbut€that,€when€first€observed,€appellant€was€walking€past€the€said€door€in€the€officerððs€direction.€ÏThe€record€does€not€bear€out€this€interpretation.€€Under€direct€examination,€Officer€Duncan€plainlyÏstated€that€appellant€was€standing€ð ðdirectlyðð€in€front€of€the€door€to€œRobinsonððs›€Jewelry.€ÏAppellantððs€counsel€did€attempt€to€get€the€officer€to€state€that€he€did€not€see€appellant€actuallyÏstanding€at€the€door.€€Our€reading€of€the€record€indicates€that€he€was€unsuccessful€in€this€endeavor.€ÏIn€any€event,€we€must€resolve€all€conflicts€in€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€State.€òòState€v€Cabbageóó,Ïsupra.€€Therefore,€for€the€purposes€of€our€examination,€appellant€was€standing€in€front€of€the€doorÏof€the€Robinson€jewelry€store.Ìà àThe€question,€then,€is€whether€these€essentially€undisputed€facts€constitute€an€attempt€toÏcommit€aggravated€robbery€or€even€an€attempt€to€commit€robbery.€€Ìà àFor€many€years,€the€leading€case€in€the€area€of€what€constitutes€an€attempt€has€been€the€case€ofÏòòœDupuy›€v.€State€óó325€œS.W.›€2d€238€(Tenn.€1959).€€The€òòœDupuy›óó€case€required€òòinter€aliaóó€an€overt€actÏtoward€the€commission€of€a€crime.€€Over€the€years,€the€requirement€of€the€overt€act€has€become€soÏstringent€that€it€was€difficult€to€commit€œa›€legally€sustainable€attempt€without€committing€the€crimeÏitself.€€Under€the€òòœDupuy›óó€doctrine,€it€is€doubtful€that€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó€could€stand.Ìà àIn€1989,€the€legislature€revised€the€criminal€code.€€The€definition€of€criminal€attempt€wasÏchanged€substantially.€€T.C.A.€ðð€39„12„101€now€reads,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ X ÒÒ ¸ ÒÒ S ÒÓÓ(a)€A€person€commits€criminal€attempt€who,€acting€with€the€kind€ofÏculpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense:Ì€€€(1)€...Ì€€€(2)...Ì€€€(3)€Acts€with€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€or€cause€aÏresult€that€would€constitute€the€offense,€under€the€circumstancesÏsurrounding€the€conduct€as€the€person€believes€them€to€be,€and€theÏconduct€constitutes€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€theÏoffense.Ì(b)€Conduct€does€not€constitute€a€substantial€step€under€subdivisionÏ(a)(3)€unless€the€personððs€entire€course€of€action€is€corroborative€ofÏthe€intent€to€commit€the€offense.ÌÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ X ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓà àWhat€constitutes€a€ð ðsubstantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€the€offenseðð€under€the€statuteÏand€an€ð ðovert€actðð€under€òòœDupuy›óó€are€quite€different.€€In€the€recent€case€ofòò€State€v€Reevesóó€916ÏS.W.2d€909€(Tenn.€1996),€Justice€œDrowota›€explains€the€difference.€€Facts€which€did€not€constituteÏan€attempt€under€òòœDupuy›óó€now€do€constitute€an€attempt€under€the€statute.€€See€òòState€v€Reeves,óó€supra.Ìà àThe€legislature€declined€to€define€ð ðsubstantial€stepðð,€preferring€instead€to€leave€the€issue€ofÏwhat€constitutes€a€substantial€step€to€the€courts€for€determination€in€each€particular€case.€T.C.A.Ïðð39„12„101,€Comments€of€the€Sentencing€Commission.Ìà@ àò òANALYSIS€„€SUFFICIENCY€OF€PROOFó óÌà àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€appellant€apparently€removed€the€license€plates€from€his€vehicle€inÏorder€to€delay€identification€(although€the€effectiveness€of€this€action€is€doubtful)€and€backed€it€intoÏa€parking€space€so€that€it€faced€the€street€in€order€to€facilitate€a€rapid€departure€from€the€area.€€HeÏwrote€a€ð ðholdup€noteðð€and€placed€it€in€his€briefcase,€which€doubled€as€a€repository€for€the€soon„to„be€stolen€goods.€€Appellant€armed€himself€and€donned€a€œtrench€coat›€to€cover€the€pistol.€€The€darkÏglasses€and€hat€were€apparently€for€the€purpose€of€disguising€his€identity.€€Appellant€thenÏpositioned€himself€at€the€door€of€the€jewelry€store€either€to€await€the€arrival€of€the€owner€or€theÏopening€of€the€store.€€At€the€point€at€which€Officer€Duncan€observed€him,€appellant€had€gone€as€farÏas€he€could€go€toward€committing€the€crime€and€was€waiting€for€some€event€which€he€did€notÍcontrol€to€occur€in€order€to€consummate€the€crime.€€Appellant€had€gone€beyond€preparation,€heÏwas€executing€his€plan,€such€as€it€was.€€His€situation€is€not€unlike€an€individual€arming€himselfÏand€lying€in€wait€for€his€victim.€€He€waits€only€for€the€arrival€of€his€victim€in€order€to€consummateÏthe€crime.€€Appellant€had€taken€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€the€crime.€€To€requireÏmore€would€be€to€have€appellant€actually€begin€the€robbery€itself,€with€the€attendant€danger€to€theÏpublic.Ìà àWe€also€find€that,€as€required€by€T.C.A.€ðð39„12„101(b),€appellantððs€entire€course€of€action€isÏcorroborative€of€the€intent€to€commit€the€offense.Ìà àThe€legislature€did€not€intend€to€adopt€the€examples€of€the€Model€Penal€Code€when€theyÏenacted€T.C.A.ðð39„12„101,€although€the€definitions€of€attempt€are€the€same€in€both€the€statute€andÏthe€Model€Penal€Code.€òòState€v€Reevesóó,€supra.€€We€realize€that€when€the€Supreme€Court€examinedÏthe€facts€of€òòReevesóó€in€light€of€one€of€these€examples€(subsection€(f)€of€the€Model€Penal€CodeÏdefinition€of€attempt)€the€reliance€thereon€was€limited€to€the€facts€of€that€case.€€However,€weÏobserve€that€the€reasoning€of€subsection€(f)€would€also€apply€in€this€case.ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ X ÒÒ ¸ ÒÒ  ÒÓÓ(f)€possession,€collection€or€fabrication€of€materials€to€be€employedÏin€the€commission€of€the€crime,€at€or€near€the€place€contemplated€forÏits€commission,€where€such€possession€,€collection€or€fabricationÏserves€no€lawful€purpose€of€the€actor€under€the€circumstances;ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ X ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌAs€did€the€Supreme€Court,€we€agree€with€the€reasoning€underlying€this€subsection.€€òòState€vÏœReeves,óósupra›€at€œf.n.›€#3.€€Likewise,€we€do€not€adopt€the€examples€contained€in€the€Model€PenalÏCode,€but€the€particular€example€is€persuasive.Ìà àIn€this€case,€appellantððs€actions€were€exactly€described€by€subsection€(f).€€The€jury€wasÏentitled€to€find,€as€they€did,€that€he€had€taken€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commission€of€theÏcrime.€€Obviously,€since€appellant€possessed€a€firearm,€he€intended€to€use€the€same€at€the€properÏtime€to€induce€the€store€owner€to€part€with€his€merchandise.€€The€evidence€fully€supports€theÏverdict.Ìà@ àò òSTANDARD€OF€REVIEW€„€SENTENCINGó óÌà àÔ€ ŠÔAppellate€review€of€a€sentence€is€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record€with€a€presumption€that€theÏtrial€courtððs€determinations€are€correct.€T.C.A.€ðð40„35„401(d).€€As€noted€in€theÏSentencing€Commission€Comments€to€this€section,€the€burden€is€now€on€appellant€toÏshow€that€the€sentence€imposed€was€improper.Ìà àIn€conducting€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€Court€must€consider€(1)€theÏevidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencing€hearing,€(2)€œthe€presentence›€œ€report,Ï(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives,€(4)€theÏnature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct,€(5)€any€mitigating€or€statutoryÏenhancement€factors,€(6)€any€statement€that€the€defendant€made€on€his€own€behalf€andÏ(7)€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€T.C.A.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103€and€„210;€seeÏòòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229€(Tenn.€1986);€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785€(TennÏCrim€App.€1991).Ìà àInitially,€it€should€be€noted€that€the€record€on€appeal€does€not€contain€theÏpresentence€report€nor€the€certified€copies€of€appellantððs€prior€convictions,€both€ofÏwhich€were€exhibited€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€No€testimony€was€presented€at€theÏsentencing€hearing,€which€consisted€of€the€presentation€of€the€presentence›€report€andÏprior€convictions,€arguments€of€counsel€and€the€trial€courtððs€sentencing€determination.€ÏThe€duty€falls€upon€an€appellant€to€prepare€such€a€€record€necessary€to€convey€a€fair,Ïaccurate€and€complete€account€of€what€transpired€relative€to€the€issues€on€appeal.€ÏT.R.A.P.€24(b).€€In€fact,€this€Court€has€held€that€it€must€presume€that€a€sentence€wasÏappropriate€when€the€record€did€not€contain€either€the€presentence€report€or€a€transcriptÏof€the€sentencing€hearing.€State€v.€Beech,€744€S.W.2d€òò585,€588óó€(Tenn€œCrim.App›.€1987).€ÏObviously,€the€failure€of€the€record€to€contain€material€which€is€required,€under€œT.C.A›Íðð40„35„210,€to€be€considered€in€determining€a€sentence,€necessarily€prohibits€this€CourtÏfrom€conducting€an€appropriate€òòde€novoóó€review.Ìà àWithout€an€adequate€record,€it€is€presumed€that€the€trial€courtððs€determinations€madeÏof€record€at€the€time€of€the€sentencing€were€fully€supported.€€In€this€regard,€the€trialÏcourt€held€that€there€was€an€extensive€history€of€criminal€convictions€and€that€theÏpotential€for€serious€bodily€injury€was€great.€See€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„114.€Ìà@ àò òANALYSIS€„€SENTENCINGó óÌà àWe€note€from€an€examination€of€the€record€that€the€sentence€imposed€was€theÏminimum€within€the€range,€therefore,€an€examination€of€enhancing€and€mitigating€factorsÏis€not€necessary.€€In€his€statements€on€the€record,€His€Honor€found€that€appellantððs€priorÏconvictions€placed€him€in€range€III€and€established€that€his€criminal€history€wasÏextensive.€€The€trial€court€ordered€the€sentence€for€this€crime€to€be€served€consecutivelyÏwith€the€sentence(s)€that€he€was€already€serving.Ìà àWe€note€from€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€that€appellant€had€seven€priorÏconvictions,€apparently€felonies€committed€on€different€occasions.€€T.C.A.€ðð40„35„107(a)(1)€allows€a€sentence€with€range€III€if,€òòinter€alia,€óóappellant€had€five€prior€felonyÏconvictions€(the€conviction€òòsub€judiceóó€is€a€class€C€felony).€€With€seven€prior€felonyÏconvictions,€appellantððs€criminal€history€was€extensive.Ìà àAppellant€insists€that€the€trial€court€was€in€error€in€using€the€same€convictions€toÏestablish€a€sentence€in€range€III€and€also€to€establish€that€appellantððs€criminal€historyÏwas€extensive,€thus€allowing€consecutive€sentencing.€€This€Court€has€previously€ruledÏthis€exact€procedure€to€be€proper.€€òòState€v.€Bobby€Ed€Begleyóó€(unreported)€œ#01C01„9411„CR„00381›€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€at€Nashville,€opinion€dated€January€11,€1996.€ÏThe€issue€has€no€merit.Ìà àThe€judgement€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÔ€ XÔÔ€ÔÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àRobert€E.€Burch,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSpecial€JudgeÌÌÌò òÔ€¼ÔCONCUR:ó óÔ€XÔÌÌ_________________________Ì€Gary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌÌÌ_________________________Ì€Joseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÔ€ Ô