WPC+ fRXod+V+\_r΢M {⩑"~~a}j&vod2xu0a\l>Y6F<]%gݵ x7B2P|7Ep 3 l 'ˣ@IJv),^צL[xm?YV %3G C,`G ghļ J<?!=ex\ޭ~9ո}I A}W=79\*ڭ)Q!R|>3}l&JLN2/ 0~Nd>\{0XPgld$4._ǜ痞 kD(Pc񶥗4Tsך ?ogh] [rHmT'}\ iY &j!tJmydk_&14.!c 5߼S|FtLJb,Fߧ):y3$UBF % U.  nX 0P$ 4t  0 0D$ w@h U:    U:BU:#! NAC mEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE B\\\\\\ D3yyy 0l 0l AQ 0D D/ B<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpi X%2A`ArialTT3|Xo<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP(($D  {Z='(D(3$ !D      0  (#$  0   fEghibjKekDlmDnoӀ,cAZ"Arial RegularH  XXX X@XX   Ad FILEDj@   August31,1999  CecilCrowson,Jr.jAppellateCourt  Clerk g"Arial Regular   $D     1     X XԀBeforepleadingguilty,thedefendantfiledaninterlocutoryappealwiththisCourtseekinga `  reviewofthetrialcourtsorderdenyinghismotiontosuppressevidence.ThisCourtdeniedthedefendantsapplicationforaninterlocutoryappeal.,cAZ"Arial RegularHP LaserJet 8000 DN PS0U d$$$$'dxd(D3u$ !D   (D3u$ !D   _-*C<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !D   jj` X8XXdd8  TR[A'Legal3'A' Legal3'TXXX Xor*<,(j 8 `@Ef tt0(R` ro_  INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE `  @``:;ATKNOXVILLE@ZZ8;JUNE1999SESSION STATEOFTENNESSEE,     T )  F     L      T )   C.C.A.NO.jj03C01jj9808CR00300  2    Appellee,  򀀀   T ) ~     L      T )  jjROANEjjCOUNTY  j  jjVSjj.   L      T ) V     L      T )  HON.E.EUGENEjjEBLENjj, B  JERRYDARRELLDUNCAN,   T )  JUDGE .     L      T )  Appellant.      T )  (PossessionofaControlledSubstance     L      T   withIntenttoDeliver)    FORTHEAPPELLANT:     T   FORTHEAPPELLEE: *  CHARLESB.HILL,II     T   PAULG.SUMMERS <   P.O.Box852 L      T   AttorneyGeneral&Reporter  (!  Kingston,TN37763  "  (OnAppeal)  L      T   MARVINS.BLAIR,JR. "     L      T   Asst.AttorneyGeneral  # JOEWALKER L      T   CordellHulljjBldgjj.,jj2ndjjFl. $f DistrictPublicDefender     T   425FifthAve.,North %R    L      T   Nashville,TN372430493 WALTERB.JOHNSON      T      \    !  ~'! Asst.DistrictPublicDefender    T   SCOTTjjMcCLUENjj  j( " 502jjRoanejjSt. L      T   DistrictAttorneyGeneral V)# P.O.Box334 L      T  <* $ jjHarrimanjj,TN377480334     T   CHARLESHAWK,  "+!%  (AtHearing) L      T   DENNISHUMPHREY,  !  ,"&    L      T     and  ,#'    L      T   FRANKHARVEY  -$(    L      T   Asst.DistrictAttorneysGeneral   L      T   P.O.Box703   L      T   Kingston,TN377630703 !  0>'+    L      T      L   OPINIONFILED:򀀀 64*/  AFFIRMED  7n.3  JOHNH.PEAY,  :&16 Judge  X<28 jjiXijjiiiXi7ɄXXdXXd7h  h@:; OPINION `     Thedefendantpledguiltytothreecountsofpossessionofacontrolledsubstancewiththeintenttodeliver.  #  1      ׀Thedefendantssubsequentmotiontowithdrawhis  guiltypleawasdeniedbythetrialcourt.Thedefendantreceivedaneffectivesentenceofthreeyearswithatermofsixtydaystobeservedinthecountyjailandthebalancetobeservedincommunitycorrections.Thedefendantnowappealsandpresentsthefollowingissuesforourreview:  1.Whetherthetrialcourterredbyrefusingtosetasidethedefendants  guiltyplea;    2.Whetherthetrialcourterredinnotgrantingthedefendantpermission  tocertifyquestionsoflawtothisCourt;and    3.Whetherthetrialcourterredinsentencingthedefendanttoserve  sixtydaysinjailinadditiontoatermincommunitycorrections.#  OnNovember18,1997,thedefendantpledguiltyandwassentencedinaccordancewithhispleaagreement.Atthatpoint,theonlyissuenotagreeduponinthepleaagreementwastheissueofsplitconfinement.Beforeahearingcouldbeheldwithregardtosplitconfinement,thedefendantfiledamotiontowithdrawhisguiltyplea.OnMarch16,1998,thetrialcourt,afterahearing,deniedthedefendantsmotiontowithdrawhisguiltyplea.OnJuly6,1998,thetrialcourtheldahearingtodeterminewhetheranypartofthedefendantsagreeduponsentencewouldbeservedinjail.Atthishearing,thedefendantaskedthetrialcourttocertifyquestionsoflawwithregardtosuppressionofevidenceanddoublejeopardytothisCourt.Thetrialcourtdidnotaddressthisissue.Thetrialcourtthenorderedthedefendanttospendsixtydaysofhisthreeyearsentenceinjailwiththebalancetobeservedincommunitycorrections. `6-0  X6,2   Thedefendantfirstcontendsthatthetrialcourterredinrefusingtoallowhimtowithdrawhisguiltyplea.Adefendantwhosubmitsaguiltypleaisnotentitledtowithdrawthepleaasamatterofright.Statev.Turner,919S.W.2d346,355(Tenn.   Crim.jjApp.1995)jj(citingStatev.Anderson,645S.W.2d251,25354(Tenn.Crim.App. d 1982)).Thedecisiontoallowthewithdrawalofaguiltyplearestswithinthesounddiscretionofthetrialcourtandisnotsubjecttoreversalexceptwhereitclearlyappearsthattherewasanabuseofdiscretion.Id.jjThejjrecordmustcontainsomesubstantial (  evidencetosupportthetrialcourtsdecision.jjGoosbyjjv.State,917S.W.2d700,705   (Tenn.Crim.App.1995).  AccordingtotheTennesseeRulesofCriminalProcedure,atrialcourtmaypermitthewithdrawalofaguiltypleauponashowingbythedefendantof anyfairandjustreason...beforesentenceisimposed.Tenn.R.Crim.P.32(f).However,afterthedefendantissentencedbutbeforethejudgmentbecomesfinal,atrialcourtmaypermitthewithdrawalofthedefendantsguiltypleaonlytocorrectmanifestinjustice.Tenn.R.Crim.P.32(f).  Inhisappellatebrief,thedefendantarguesthat hethoughthismotionswouldbepreservedwhenhemadehisguiltyplea.Hejustdidnotrealizehewouldbegivinguphisrightsunlesstheissues[ofsuppressionofevidenceanddoublejeopardy]werecertified....[jjH]ejjwasnevermadeawarethathewaslosinghisrightsinregardtoanappealoftheseissues.Thedefendantclaimsjjthatjjbasedontheforegoing, itwasanabuseofdiscretionnottosetasidehisguiltyplea.Hedidnothavefullknowledgeandwasmistakenastowhatwouldhappentohisappeal.  However,therecordcontainsthe WaiverofTrialbyJuryandRequestforAcceptanceofPleaofGuiltywhichclearlystates  thatbypleadingguilty,[thedefendantis]waivingorgivingup 906   [his]righttoappealallnonjurisdictionaldefectsorerrorsinthese d#  `    proceedings,includinganycomplaints...that[thedefendant]  wasunlawfullyarrested,that[his]propertyorpossessionswere d#  ,    unlawfullysearchedorseized,that[his]rightagainstself  incriminationorrighttocounselwereviolated,orthat[he]was$  deniedarighttoaspeedytrial.Thiswaiverwassignedbythedefendantonthedayhepledguilty.Inlightoftheforegoing,thedefendanthasfailedtoprovethatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninrefusingtoallowhimtowithdrawhisguiltyplea.Assuch,thiscontentioniswithoutmerit.  ThedefendantnextcontendsthatthetrialcourterredinnotallowingthedefendanttocertifytheissuesinhismotiontosuppressandhismotiontodismisstothisCourt.TherecordindicatesthatonJune30,1998,thedefendantsattorneyfiledamotionaskingthetrialcourttocertifytheseissues.OnJuly6,1998,ahearingwasheldtodeterminetheissueofsplitconfinement.Atthishearing,thedefendantsattorneymentionedtheissueofcertification.However,thetrialcourtneveraddressedtheissue.Inaddition,thedefendantsattorneyneverrequestedthatthetrialcourtruleonitsmotionforcertification,andnorulingwasevermade.TherewasnojudgmententeredintherecordthatsetforththecertifiedquestiontobeconsideredbythisCourt.Thereisalsonomentionofanyreservationofacertifiedquestionoflawinthepleaagreementsignedbythedistrictattorneygeneral,thedefendant,andthedefendantsattorney.  OurSupremeCourthassetoutprerequisitestotheconsiderationofacertifiedquestionoflaw.Theserequirementsareasfollows:  Regardlessofwhathasappearedinpriorpetitions,orders,  colloquyinopencourtorotherwise,thefinalorderorjudgment  fromwhichthetimebeginstoruntopursueajjT.R.A.P.jj3appeal  mustcontainastatementofthedispositivecertifiedquestionof  lawreservedbydefendantforappellatereviewandthequestion  oflawmustbestatedsoastoclearlyidentifythescopeandthe,  limitsofthelegalissuereserved.jjStatejjv.jjPrestonjj,759S.W.2d647,650(Tenn.1988).OurSupremeCourthasrelaxed 27-3 thejjPrestonjjrequirementstosomeextentbyallowingacertifiedquestiontobe 8/5 incorporatedinanindependentdocument.SeeStatev.Irwin,962S.W.2d477,479 `  (Tenn.1998).However,theburdenisonthedefendanttoseethatthemandatoryprerequisitesofPrestonaresatisfied.Preston,759S.W.2dat650.     Inthecaseatbar,thefinaljudgmentsmakenoreferencetoareservationofadispositivequestionoflaw.Thesejudgmentsalsodonotrefertoorincorporateanyotherindependentdocumentthatwouldreserveacertifiedquestionoflaw.Thedefendantdidnotrequestarulingontheissueofcertificationanddidnotmakesurethatthecertifiedquestionswereincludedinthefinaljudgmentoranyotherdocument.AsitistheresponsibilityofthedefendanttocomplywiththeguidelinessetoutinPreston,his , contentioniswithoutmerit.SeePreston,759S.W.2dat650;seealsoNashville, X МCk.klllhattanoogal&St.Lm.mnnnouisnjjRyjj.v.Hayes,99jjS.W.jj362,366(Tenn.1907)(holdingthatitis $ thedutyofthepartyfilingamotiontotakeactiontoinsurethetrialjudgerulesonsuchmotion).  Thedefendantnextcontendsthatthetrialcourterredinsentencinghimtosixtydaysinjailinadditiontoplacinghimincommunitycorrections.Thedefendantarguesthatthetrialcourtdidnotplaceontherecordthefactorsandspecificfindingsoffactthatitreliedupontoimposehissentence.  Whenadefendantcomplainsofhisorhersentence,wemustconductadenovoreviewwithapresumptionofcorrectness.T.C.A.4035401(d).Theburdenofshowingthatthesentenceisimproperisupontheappealingparty.T.C.A.4035401(d)SentencingCommissionComments.Thispresumption,however, isconditionedupontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.jjAshbyjj,823S.W.2d166, L6,2 169(Tenn.1991). 906   T.C.A.4035103setsoutsentencingconsiderationswhichareguidelinesfordeterminingwhetherornotadefendantshouldbeincarcerated.Theseincludetheneed toprotectsocietybyrestrainingadefendantwhohasalonghistoryofcriminalconduct,theneed toavoiddepreciatingtheseriousnessoftheoffense,thedeterminationthat confinementisparticularlysuitedtoprovideaneffectivedeterrencetootherslikelytocommitsimilaroffenses,orthedeterminationthat measureslessrestrictivethanconfinementhavefrequentlyorrecentlybeenappliedunsuccessfullytothedefendant.T.C.A.4035103(1).  Indeterminingthespecificsentenceandthepossiblecombinationofsentencingalternatives,thecourtshallconsiderthefollowing:(1)anyevidencefromthetrialandsentencinghearing,(2)thepresentencereport,(3)theprinciplesofsentencingandtheargumentsconcerningsentencingalternatives,(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsoftheoffense,(5)informationofferedbytheStateorthedefendantconcerningenhancingandmitigatingfactorsasfoundinT.C.A.4035113and114,and(6)thedefendantsstatementsinhisorherownbehalfconcerningsentencing.T.C.A.4035210(b).  Inthecaseatbar,thetrialcourtsentencedthedefendant,pursuanttoapleaagreement,toatermofoneyearfortheClassEfelonyofpossessionwithintenttodeliverascheduleVIcontrolledsubstance,atermofthreeyearsfortheClassCfelonyofpossessionwithintenttodeliverascheduleIIcontrolledsubstance,andatermoftwoyearsfortheClassDfelonyofpossessionwithintenttodeliverascheduleIVsubstance.Thesearetheminimumsentencesavailablefortheseconvictions.SeeT.C.A.4035 0', 111.Inaddition,thesentencesweretorunconcurrently.Ineffect,thedefendantreceivedasentenceofthreeyearsinacommunitycorrectionsprogramwithsixtydaystobeservedinthecountyjail.Thedefendantdoesnotchallengethelengthofhissentence,buthecontendsthetrialcourterredinrequiringhimtoservesixtydaysinconfinement.Thedefendantcontendsthatthetrialcourtofferednoexplanationwith 906 regardtothetermofconfinement.Asthereisnoshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredtheapplicablesentencingfactors,ourreviewofthedefendantssentenceisdenovowithoutapresumptionofcorrectness.Nevertheless,therecordandapplicablesentencingguidelinessupportjjajjjjjjsplitsentence.jjjj  Trialcourtsmay,attheirdiscretion,requireadefendantreceivingacommunitycorrectionssentencetoserveaportionofthesentenceincontinuousconfinement.T.C.A.4035306(a);T.C.A.4036106(f);seeStatev.JohnW.Hill,No.   jj01C01jj9802CC00072,jjFranklinCounty(Tenn.Crim.App.filedFebruary25,1999,atNashville).Thereisnomathematicalequationtobeutilizedindeterminingsentencingalternatives.Thesentenceshouldfittheoffenderaswellastheoffense.T.C.A.4035103(2);Statev.jjBoggsjjjj,932S.W.2d467,477(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Individualized $ punishmentistheessenceofalternativesentencing.Statev.Dowdy,894S.W.2d301,  305(Tenn.Crim.App.1994).Sentencingmustbedeterminedonacasebycasebasisandeachsentencemustbetailoredtothatparticulardefendantbaseduponthefactsofthatcaseandthecircumstancesofthatdefendant.Statev.Moss,727S.W.2d229,235 T$ (Tenn.1986).Inaddition,trialjudgesaretraditionallyvestedwithbroaddiscretionarypowersinsentencingmatters.Appellatecourtsshouldnotplacetrialjudgesinajudicialstraightjacketinsentencingmatters,andweshouldbereluctanttointerferewiththeirtraditionaldiscretionarypowers.jjMotenjjjjv.State,559S.W.2d770,773(Tenn.1977). +$"&   BecausethedefendantwasastandardoffenderconvictedofClassC,D,andEfelonies,hewaspresumedtobeafavorablecandidateforanalternativesentencingoption.Thetrialjudgegavethedefendantthebenefitofthisstatutorypresumptionbysentencinghimtosplitconfinement,analternativesentencingoption. 4 +0 SeeStatev.AdamShort,No.jj03C01jj9703CC00090,jj%  jjBledsoejjjjCounty(Tenn.Crim.App. L6,2 filedJanuary28,1998,atKnoxville).Thedefendantnowseeksthemorefavorablealternativeofservinghisentiresentenceincommunitycorrections.However,the 906 presentencereportreflectsthatthedefendantwasfortytwoyearsoldatthetimeofhisconviction.Hehadpreviouslybeenconvictedofdrivingwitharevokedlicense,publicintoxication,anddrivingundertheinfluence.Thedefendanthadalsobeenconvictedofaweaponsoffensenotspecificallydefinedinthepresentencereport.Inlightofthedefendantspreviouscriminalhistoryandtheseriousnessoftheconvictionsinthecaseatbar,weconcludethatsplitconfinementisproper.Assuch,thiscontentioniswithoutmerit.  Insum,wefindnomerittothedefendantscontentionsandthusaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialjjcourt.aaaaaabbc   L      T   ______________________________cdc_cde   L      T   JOHNH.PEAY,JudgeCONCUR:______________________________DAVIDG.efe.HAYefgHAYES,Judge______________________________JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,Judgegbbjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj