ÿWPCù ‚²®‘ŠZ($ÇTJ/úMr•JRåwñÐØ›Ð%»½kºv©_Y¡€¾Úmúgø7Þø7íØiçzà6‘}\,Óë£W“`MqÞïÝ32Œï›éж3ø¦W¨ŽZØšÖ•Þƒ™j–žü,A\[SÎhš Û…ñ ñé/óœ¼@îÕˆ”ŽòêèOÞ»_-®›¼=gW¤ƒ²ý~£@.ýüÒBEÑÏäãÍ,²á­ákq,®…°d}—8#¥zÿ‡¢ MÞ%¿€£—àmWAß,nþ²SHÛIªKúþå;QÐOí• 5wü •¾M#Û}¥?eÒ/â½z†IèY)‚ï3f5Ëé¸|z,èi7Û(­“¤y™çD €~ôk¦Ì)‚—±ÁA8 ÛRϰ‡Qëm’ ©ÛíÿÈÓÔ± ±T›ñ“J)| %þSx¶ûzžÿ¯ÀpY“Ú*¦‘¦÷ÙãSbΙjÞÔ»i¾¸uçQ$z9û´Œ,ŠAtÈ1³= lÞL¢º[)C s…æÅ'¹Vè²Ó^WªI½oÝš7hèmÊN’×@‰¢<é·lõ$ ­ŠX†°o²n>â~¬x˜­%iKˆ¥ìQà¹×²a%ÿ…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ U:Í b w@ 4O c .r 0Æ  0Df .ª íØU:ÅU:ÿí9U:&`hU:†††††††††† BÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ D3ÝÝÝ 0D AOTÆ££ 0Di D/­ BܘHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLÐ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,“í|AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- G eHEIJEKLMPNOPÓ€ýhµ&3|x[ $Ý ƒ )$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xy XXXÔÔ€ô¸äô XXyÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€At€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€suppress,€the€ð ðWallðð€was€described€as€a€high€crime€area€alongÐ `  ÐDavis€Street.€(v(2ÇŸ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xw«XXXÔÔ€ôøÎôXXw«Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó $Ý ƒ ÇŸ$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xw«XXXÔÔ€ôøÎôXXw«Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€At€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€suppress,€the€ð ðWallðð€was€described€as€a€high€crime€area€alongÐ `  ÐDavis€Street.€ ãÝ ƒ €_$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xa}XXXÔÔ€ô®½ôXXa}Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€officer€conducted€a€patdown€search€of€all€three€(3)€men,€but€apparently€began€with€theÐ `  Ðappellant€as€he€was€ð ðthe€closestðð€to€Officer€Hartman€at€the€time.€€ò òó óNeither€of€the€other€men€were€chargedÐ Ö v Ðwith€a€criminal€offense€as€a€result€of€the€officerððs€patdown€search.ò òó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ãÝ ƒ )$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xy XXXÔÔ€ô¸äô XXyÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€officer€conducted€a€patdown€search€of€all€three€(3)€men,€but€apparently€began€with€theÐ `  Ðappellant€as€he€was€ð ðthe€closestðð€to€Officer€Hartman€at€the€time.€€ò òó óNeither€of€the€other€men€were€chargedÐ  ¾ Ðwith€a€criminal€offense€as€a€result€of€the€officerððs€patdown€search.ò òó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ô€Xw«XXXÔÔ€îtëîXXw«ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ŠåîîtëÔÐ  ÐÌò òJune€16,€1999Ð ¶¶ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôøÎôŠåÔAppellate€CourtÐ –– ÐClerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñPññGñ›ñGññPñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€Š‚ÆŠXXÔÔ€Š£ ŠŠŠ‚ÆÔÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€ö=XXdìXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñPñßr€*<,(j 8 `€€@E<f  tt0"t` ¨Ørß›ñPñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌAPRIL€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À à)à  àC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9706„CR„00222Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó ó)Ð ` Ðà ` àAppellee,à  àà h àà À àò ò)Ð Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àGREENE€COUNTYÐ Xø  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHON.€JAMES€E.€BECKNERó óÐ Xø  Ðò òÔ‡Xw«XŠŠ£ ÔREGINALD€ALLAN€GILLESPIEÔ#†Š£ ŠXXw«Ó#Ô,ó óà À àò ò)à  àJUDGEó óÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ Xø Ðà ` àAppellant.à  àà h àà À àò ò)à  à(Direct€œAppealñIñ€„€Possession€with€ñIññMñà (# àñMññMñÐ Xø Ðà ` àñMññMñà ¸ àñMññMñà  àñMññNñà h àà À àñNññNññMñà h àñMññNññMñ)à  àñMññIñInteñIññJññIñst€ñIññJññKñnt€to€Sell€ContñKññLñrolled€SubstanceñLñ)›Ð Xø Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð 8Ø ÐÌGREG€W.€EICHELMANà h àà À àà  àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ (!È ÐOffice€of€the€Public€Defenderà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ  "À Ð1609€College€Park€Drive,€Box€11ÌMorristown,€œñGñTnñGññGñTNñGññHññGñ..ñGññHñ›€€37813„1618à À àà  àSANDY€C.€PATRICKÐ $° Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€ñGñTNñGññGñTN.ñGñ€€37243„0943ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àC.€BERKELEY€BELLÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àERIC€D.€CHRISTIANSENÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à109€South€Main€StreetÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGreeneville,€ñGñTNñGññGñTN.ñGñ€€37743ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÐ  x6-.S ÐÓ  ÓÔ€°z1 °ŠŠ£ Ôò òòòÔ‡„`“ „ °°z1ÔOPINIONÔ#†°z1 ° „„`“|#Ôóóó óÔ€Š£ Š °°z1ÔÐ `  ÐÓ  ÓÓÓÑ7€ö=XXdìXXdì7Ñà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌà ` àThe€appellant,€Reginald€Allan€Gillespie,€was€convicted€by€a€Greene€CountyÏjury€of€one€(1)€count€of€possession€of€with€the€intent€to€sell€more€than€0.5€gramsÏof€cocaine,€a€Class€B€felony,€one€(1)€count€of€simple€possession€of€marijuana,€aÏClass€A€misdemeanor,€and€one€(1)€count€of€unlawful€possession€of€a€weapon,Ïa€Class€E€felony.€€He€was€sentenced€as€a€Range€I,€standard€offender€to€ten€(10)Ïyears€for€possession€of€cocaine€with€the€intent€to€sell,€one€(1)€year€for€unlawfulÏpossession€of€a€weapon€and€eleven€(11)€months€and€twenty„nine€(29)€days€forÏpossession€of€marijuana.€€On€appeal,€Appellant€raises€three€issues:€ÌÓÓà8 ` à1)€whether€the€trial€court€properly€denied€Appellantððs€motion€toÏsuppress€the€evidence€seized€in€the€search€of€Appellantððs€person;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à2)€€whether€there€was€sufficient€evidence€at€trial€to€support€the€juryððsÏverdict;€andÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à3)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€his€sentences.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓAfter€a€review€of€the€record€before€this€Court,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt.€ÌÌò òà@II,®àòòFACTSˆÐ Ä)d ! Ðó óÌóóà ` àOn€August€14,€1996,€Officer€Tim€Hartman€of€the€Greeneville€PoliceÐ ´-T$% ÐDepartment€was€patrolling€Davis€Street€in€Greeneville€when€he€observed€theÏappellant€and€two€other€men€standing€along€the€ð ðWall.ððñGñ׃ ×ñGññGñ׃ ×ñGñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€ò ò€ó óOfficer€Hartman€wasÐ ”14() Ðtraveling€at€a€low€rate€of€speed€and€the€windows€were€down€on€his€police€cruiser.€ÏUpon€his€detection€of€the€odor€of€burning€marijuana,€the€officer€stopped€his€car,Ð „5$,- Ðrequested€back€up€and€exited€his€vehicle.€As€he€approached€the€three€men,ò ò€ó óheÐ `  Ðsaw€smoke€lingering€about€them.€€€Officer€Hartman€asked€the€men€where€theÏmarijuana€was€located,€but€did€not€receive€a€response.Ìà ` àOfficer€Hartman€instructed€the€men€to€turn€around€and€face€the€wall,Ïspread€their€legs€and€put€their€hands€on€the€wall.€ò ò€ó óHe€conducted€a€patdownÐ ˆ(  Ðsearch€of€the€appellant,€and€as€he€did€so,€he€felt€a€large€lump€in€the€appellantððsÏright€and€left€front€pants€pocket.€ò ò€ó óBecause€the€officer€recognized€the€ð ðlumpðð€in€theÐ ˜8 Ðappellantððs€left€front€pocket€as€being€a€ð ðplastic€bag€of€material,ðð€he€pulled€out€theÏcontents€of€the€pocket.€This€search€produced€a€lighter,€$103€in€cash,€and€aÏplastic€bag€containing€thirty€rocks€of€crack€cocaine.€€The€officer€further€discoveredÏanother€plastic€bag€which€contained€one€rock€of€crack€cocaine€in€the€vicinityÏwhere€the€appellant€had€been€standing.€€€Following€the€search,€Officer€HartmanÏarrested€the€appellant.€ò òÐ È#h Ðó óà ` àSubsequently,€another€officer€arrived€on€the€scene,€and€he€conducted€aÐ Ð%p Ðsecond€search€of€the€appellantððs€person.€€His€search€of€the€appellant€producedÏa€gun,€a€loaded€clip,€and€3.6€grams€of€€marijuana.€Ìà ` àThe€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€possession€with€intent€to€sell€moreÏthan€0.5€grams€of€cocaine,€simple€possession€of€marijuana,€and€unlawfulÏpossession€of€a€deadly€weapon.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€him€to€concurrentÏterms€of€ten€(10)€years€for€possession€with€the€intent€to€sell,€eleven€(11)€monthsÏand€twenty„nine€(29)€days€for€simple€possession€and€one€(1)€year€for€unlawfulÏpossession€of€a€weapon.€€From€his€convictions€and€sentences,€the€appellant€nowÏbrings€this€appeal€as€of€right.ÌñEñÐ  :À00 ЇñEñÌò òà@àà%®àòòMOTION€TO€SUPPRESSó óˆÐ h  ÐÌóóà ` àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€toÐ x Ðsuppress€the€evidence€seized€as€a€result€of€the€officersðð€search€of€his€person.€€HeÏargues€that€the€initial€patdown€search€conducted€by€Officer€Hartman€wasÏunreasonable€as€it€was€not€supported€by€reasonable€suspicion€or€probableÏcause.Ìà@BB-®àò òA.ó óˆÐ  @ Ðà ` àAt€the€suppression€hearing,€Officer€Hartman€testified€that€he€was€patrollingÏin€a€high€crime€area€on€Davis€Street€when€he€noticed€the€appellant€and€two€otherÏmen€standing€along€the€ð ðWall.ðð€€€His€car€windows€were€rolled€down,€and€heÏdetected€the€scent€of€burning€marijuana.€€Officer€Hartman€was€familiar€with€theÏodor€of€burning€marijuana€as€a€result€of€his€training€as€a€police€officer.€€As€theÏofficer€exited€his€vehicle€and€approached€the€men,€he€observed€smoke€lingeringÏabout€them.€€€In€addition,€he€recognized€the€strong€odor€of€burning€marijuana.€ÏAt€this€point,€the€officer€conducted€a€patdown€search€of€the€appellantñGñ׃×ñGññGñ׃×ñGñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€felt€aÐ à)€  Ðlarge€lump€in€both€of€the€appellantððs€front€pants€pockets.€€The€officer€thenÏemptied€the€contents€of€the€appellantððs€left€front€pants€pocket€and€discovered€aÏlighter,€$103€in€cash€and€a€plastic€bag€which€contained€crack€cocaine.€€TheÏappellant€was€arrested,€and€another€search€of€the€appellantððs€person€producedÏâ âa€handgun€and€two€bags€containing€marijuana.€Ð 4¨** Ðà ` àIn€denying€the€motion€to€suppress,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€patdownÏâ âsearch€of€the€appellant€was€supported€by€reasonable€suspicion.€€The€court€notedÏthat,€upon€the€officer€detecting€the€smell€of€burning€marijuana,€it€was€logical€toÏconclude€that€someone€in€the€group€of€three€was€smoking€marijuana,€given€theÏfact€that€there€was€no€one€else€present.€€The€court€further€stated€that€the€officerÏð ðmay€very€well€haveðð€had€probable€cause€to€search€the€appellant€and€hisÏcompanions.€€The€trial€court€recognized€the€easily€disposable€nature€of€the€drugsÏand€concluded€that€there€were€exigent€circumstances€which€justified€the€moreÏintrusive€search€of€the€appellantððs€person.€€As€a€result,€the€trial€court€concludedÏthat€the€search€of€the€appellantððs€person€was€constitutionally€permissible.€Ìà@BB-®àò òB.ó óˆÐ °P Ðà ` àIn€reviewing€a€trial€courtððs€denial€of€a€motion€to€suppress,€this€Court€isÏbound€by€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÏotherwise.€òòState€v.€Yearganóó,€958€S.W.2d€626,€629€(Tenn.€1997).€€However,€theÐ È#h Ðlaw€as€applied€to€those€facts€is€subject€to€òòde€novoóó€review.€€òòId.€óó€The€appellantÐ Ð%p Ðbears€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€theÏtrial€courtððs€findings.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€22-23€(Tenn.€1996).Ð à)€  Ðà@BB-®àò òC.ó óˆÐ è+ˆ"" Ðà ` àThe€Constitution€of€the€State€of€Tennessee€guarantees€that€ð ðthe€peopleÏshall€be€secure€in€their€persons,€houses,€papers€and€possessions,€fromÏunreasonable€searches€and€seizures.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€7.€The€FourthÏAmendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€provides€the€same€guarantee.€€AnyÏsearch€conducted€without€a€warrant€is€presumed€illegal.€€òòState€v.€Crabtreeóó,€655Ð 6°,, ÐS.W.2d€173,€179€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€The€state€has€the€burden€of€showingÏthat€a€warrantless€search€was€conducted€within€a€recognized€exception€to€theÐ  :À00 Ðwarrant€requirement.€òòState€v.€McClanahanóó,€806€S.W.2d€219,€220€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð `  ÐApp.€1991).€€One€such€recognized€exception€is€a€search€supported€by€probableÏcause€and€conducted€under€exigent€circumstances.€€òòState€v.€Shrumóó,€643€S.W.2dÐ p  Ð891,€893€(Tenn.€1982);€òòState€v.€Blakelyóó,€677€S.W.2d€12,€16€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð x Ð1983).€€ð ðProbable€cause€has€been€defined€as€a€reasonable€ground€for€suspicion,Ïsupported€by€circumstances€indicative€of€an€illegal€act.ðð€€òòState€v.€Henningóó,€975Ð ˆ(  ÐS.W.2d€290,€294€(Tenn.€1998).Ìà@BB-®àò òD.ó óˆÐ ˜8 Ðà ` àAlthough€the€trial€court€concluded€that€Officer€Hartman€had€reasonableÏsuspicion€which€would€warrant€an€investigatory€detention,€the€courtÏacknowledged€that€the€officer€ð ðmay€very€well€haveðð€had€probable€cause€when€heÏdetected€the€scent€of€burning€marijuana.€€We€agree.€€The€appellant€and€two€otherÏmen€were€standing€alone€in€a€high€crime€area.€€The€officer,€as€he€was€drivingÏslowly€past€the€men,€noticed€the€odor€of€burning€marijuana.€€He€stopped€his€car,Ïexited€his€vehicle€and€approached€the€men.€€Smoke€was€lingering€about€the€men,Ïand€the€officer€noticed€a€strong€smell€of€marijuana.€€Certainly,€the€officerððsÏdetection€of€the€strong€odor€of€marijuana€and€his€observation€of€smoke€aroundÏthe€three€men€gave€the€officer€a€ð ðreasonable€ground€for€suspicion,€supported€byÏcircumstances€indicative€of€an€illegal€act.ðð€€òòState€v.€Henningóó,€975€S.W.2d€at€294.€Ð ð-$$ ÐThus,€we€conclude€that€Officer€Hartman€had€probable€cause€to€believe€that€theÏmen€were€committing€an€illegal€act.Ìà ` àMoreover,€Officer€Hartman€was€confronted€with€the€possibility€that€theÏappellant€might€flee€from€his€presence.€€Additionally,€as€observed€by€the€trialÏcourt,€the€appellant€had€the€ability€to€dispose€of€the€drugs,€even€in€the€presenceÏof€the€officers.€€In€our€view,€to€have€failed€to€search€under€such€circumstancesÐ  :À00 Ðwould€have€meant€risking€loss€of€the€contraband.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Shrumóó,€643Ð `  ÐS.W.2d€at€893.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€there€were€exigent€circumstances€whichÏjustified€the€warrantless€search€of€the€appellantððs€person.Ìà ` àBecause€Officer€Hartmanððs€search€was€supported€by€probable€cause€andÏwas€conducted€under€exigent€circumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€courtÏproperly€denied€the€appellantððs€motion€to€suppress.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òà@îî!®àòòSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEòòó óˆÐ ˜8 ÐóóóóÌà ` àIn€his€first€issue,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€toÏsupport€his€conviction€for€possession€with€the€intent€to€sell.€€Appellant€complainsÏthere€was€no€actual€sale€or€any€direct€evidence€of€a€sale€submitted€to€the€jury.€ÏHe€further€asserts€that€the€stateððs€reliance€on€the€presence€of€cash,€a€beeper,Ïand€the€amount€of€cocaine€was€insufficient€to€prove€that€the€cocaine€found€on€hisÏperson€was€possessed€for€the€purpose€of€resale.Ìà@BB-®àò òA.ó óˆÐ Ø'x Ðà ` àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€CourtÏmust€review€the€record€to€determine€if€the€evidence€adduced€during€the€trial€wasÏsufficient€ð ðto€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€This€rule€is€applicable€to€findings€of€guiltÏpredicated€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence€or€a€combination€ofÏdirect€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Breweróó,€932€S.W.2d€1,€19€(Tenn.Ð 4¨** ÐCrim.€App.€1996).Ìà ` àIt€is€well„settled€that€a€criminal€offense€may€be€established€exclusively€byÏcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Lequireóó,€634€S.W.2d€608,€614€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð  :À00 ÐApp.€1981);€òòState€v.€Haileyóó,€658€S.W.2d€547,€552€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€Ð `  ÐFurther,€to€support€a€conviction€based€upon€circumstantial€evidence€alone,€theÏfacts€and€circumstances€ð ðmust€be€so€strong€and€cogent€as€to€exclude€every€otherÏreasonable€hypothesis€save€the€guilt€of€the€defendant.ðð€€òòState€v.€Crawfordóó,€225Ð x ÐTenn.€478,€470€S.W.2d€610,€612€(1971).Ìà ` àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€does€not€reweighÏor€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.Ð 0  Ð1978).€€Nor€may€this€Court€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trierÏof€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286Ð  @ ÐS.W.2d€856,€859€(1956).€€To€the€contrary,€this€Court€is€required€to€afford€the€stateÏthe€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€as€well€asÏall€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€ÏòòState€v.€Tuttleóó,€914€S.W.2d€926,€932€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€ð ðA€guilty€verdictÐ À!` Ðby€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnessesÏfor€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€State.ðð€€òòStateÐ Ð%p Ðv.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€Questions€concerning€theÐ Ø'x Ðcredibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence€as€wellÏas€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€by€the€jury€as€the€trierÏof€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuttleóó,€914€S.W.2d€at€932.Ð ð-$$ Ðà ` àBecause€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€andÏreplaces€it€with€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused€has€the€burden€in€this€CourtÏof€illustrating€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€returned€byÏthe€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982);€òòState€v.Ð 6°,, ÐGraceóó,€493€S.W.2d€at€476.Ð 8¸.. Ðà@BB-®àò òB.ó óˆÐ  :À00 Ðà ` àTo€convict€the€appellant€for€the€crime€of€possession€of€a€controlledÏsubstance€with€the€intent€to€sell,€the€state€was€required€to€prove€that€theÏappellant€ð ðpossessed€a€controlled€substance€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliverÏor€sell€such€controlled€substance.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„417€(a)(4).€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€39„17„419€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€ð ð[i]t€may€be€inferred€from€theÏamount€of€a€controlled€substance€or€substances€possessed€by€an€offender,€alongÏwith€other€relevant€facts€surrounding€the€arrest,€that€the€controlled€substance€orÏsubstances€were€possessed€with€the€purpose€of€selling€or€otherwise€dispensing.ððÌà ` àIn€the€present€case,€Officer€Hartman€found€thirty€(30)€rocks€of€cocaine€onÏthe€appellantððs€person.€€In€our€view,€the€€large€amount€of€cocaine€found€onÏAppellantððs€person€and€the€location€of€the€crime€support€an€inference€of€intent€toÏsell€as€opposed€to€personal€use.€€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€915€S.W.2d€3,€8€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ¸X ÐApp.€1995).€€Furthermore,€the€appellant€was€carrying€a€handgun€and€a€beeperÏat€the€time€of€his€arrest,€which€is€also€circumstantial€evidence€indicating€an€intentÏto€sell.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Willie€J.€Wadeóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9709„CC„00359,€1998Ð Ð%p ÐTenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€630,€Fayette€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€June€11,Ï1998,€at€Jackson);€òòState€v.€Ronald€Mitchellóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9702„CC„00070,Ð à)€  Ð1997€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€871,€Lauderdale€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filedÏSeptember€15,€1997,€at€Jackson);€òòState€v.€Reginald€T.€Smithóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„Ð ð-$$ Ð9204„CR„00097,€1993€œñOñ(ñOñTenn.›€Crim.€App.€filed€February€17,€1993,€at€Jackson).€ÏBased€upon€the€foregoing€cogent€circumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€jury€couldÏhave€reasonably€found€each€of€the€elements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÐ  :À00 Ðò òà@ÌÌ)®àòòSENTENCINGóó€ó óˆÐ `  ÐÌ€à ` àFinally,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposingÐ 6 ,. Ðâ âexcessive€sentences.€€Specifically,€he€claims€that€the€trial€court€erroneouslyÐ ð7.0 Ðapplied€an€enhancement€factor€in€sentencing€him€on€his€convictions€forÏpossession€with€the€intent€to€sell€cocaine€and€simple€possession€of€marijuana.Ìâ âà@EE-®àò òA.ó óˆÐ @ à Ðà ` àThis€Court's€review€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóóÐ @à Ðwith€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d).€€ThisÏpresumption€is€conditioned€upon€an€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trialÏjudge€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€andÏcircumstances.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€If€the€trialÐ    Ðcourt€fails€to€comply€with€the€statutory€directives,€there€is€no€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€and€our€review€is€òòde€novoóó.€€òòState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€96€(Tenn.Ð à€ Ð1997).Ìà ` àOrdinarily,€a€trial€court€is€required€to€make€specific€findings€on€the€recordÏwith€regard€to€sentencing€determinations.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„Ð ° P Ð209(c),€40„35„210(f).€€However,€with€regard€to€misdemeanor€sentencing,€ourÏSupreme€Court€has€recently€held€that€this€Courtððs€review€of€misdemeanorÏsentencing€is€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€even€if€the€trial€court€didÐ €&  Ðnot€make€specific€findings€of€fact€on€the€record€because€ð ða€trial€court€need€onlyÏconsider€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€inÏorder€to€comply€with€the€legislative€mandates€of€the€misdemeanor€sentencingÏstatute.ðð€€òòState€v.€Troutmanóó,€979€S.W.2d€271,€274€(Tenn.€1998).Ð @.à$& Ðà ` àThe€burden€is€upon€the€appealing€party€to€show€that€the€sentence€isÏimproper.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d)€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.€ÏIn€conducting€our€review,€we€are€required,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40-35-210,€to€consider€the€following€factors€in€sentencing:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€[t]he€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencingÏhearing;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÐ à9€02 Ðà8 ` à(2)€[t]he€presentence€report;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(3)€[t]he€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencingÏalternatives;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(4)€[t]he€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(5)€[e]vidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€theÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€ðððð€40-35-113€and€40-35-114;ÏandÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(6)€[a]ny€statement€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€the€defendant'sÏown€behalf€about€sentencing.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓà ` àUnder€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€the€presumptive€sentence€is€the€minimumÏwithin€the€applicable€range€if€no€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors€for€sentencingÏare€present.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(c);€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2dÐ Ðp Ð785,€788€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€However,€if€such€factors€do€exist,€a€trial€courtÏshould€start€at€the€minimum€sentence,€enhance€the€minimum€sentence€within€theÏrange€for€enhancement€factors€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€the€range€forÏthe€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(e).€€No€particular€weight€forÏeach€factor€is€prescribed€by€the€statute,€as€the€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€leftÏto€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€as€its€findings€are€supported€by€theÏrecord.€€òòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€116,€125€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€€òòseeóóÐ `(  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.Ìà ` àMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€controlled€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-302,Ïwhich€provides€€that€the€trial€court€shall€impose€a€specific€sentence€consistentÏwith€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€Ð  0À&( ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Palmeróó,€902€S.W.2d€391€(Tenn.€1995).€€One€convicted€of€aÐ 2°(* Ðmisdemeanor,€unlike€one€convicted€of€a€felony,€is€not€entitled€to€a€presumptionÏof€a€minimum€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó,€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ð5,. ÐApp.€1994).€€Misdemeanor€sentences€do€not€contain€ranges€of€punishments,€andÏa€misdemeanor€defendant€may€be€sentenced€to€the€maximum€term€provided€forÐ Ð9p02 Ðthe€offense€as€long€as€the€sentence€imposed€is€consistent€with€the€purposes€ofÏthe€sentencing€act.€€òòState€v.€Palmeróó,€902€S.W.2d€at€393.Ð P ð Ðà@BB-®àò òB.ó óˆÐ @ à Ðà ` àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€one€enhancement€factorÏand€no€mitigating€factors€applicable.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„114(9),€that€the€appellant€€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm€during€theÏcommission€of€the€offense€to€be€applicable€to€the€appellantððs€sentences€forÏpossession€with€the€intent€to€sell€cocaine€and€simple€possession€of€marijuana.€ÏThe€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€ten€(10)€years€for€appellantððs€sentence€forÏpossession€with€the€intent€to€sell,€a€Class€B€felony,€and€eleven€(11)€months€andÏtwenty„nine€(29)€days€for€simple€possession.€€Because€no€enhancement€factorsÏwere€applicable€to€the€appellantððs€conviction€for€unlawful€possession€of€aÏweapon,€the€trial€court€imposed€the€minimum€sentence€of€one€(1)€year€for€theÏClass€E€felony.Ìà@BB-®àò òC.ó óˆÐ $0 Ðà ` àEnhancement€factors€can€be€utilized€by€the€trial€judge€if€these€factors€areÏð ðnot€themselves€essential€elements€of€the€offense€as€charged€in€the€indictment.ðð€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114,€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.€€In€theÏpresent€case,€the€trial€court€used€the€deadly€weapon€enhancement€factor€toÏenhance€the€appellantððs€sentence.€€In€our€view,€this€was€clearly€proper.€ÏPossession€of€a€deadly€weapon€is€not€an€essential€element€of€either€the€offenseÏof€possession€with€intent€to€sell€or€simple€possession€of€marijuana.€€Thus,€the€trialÏcourt€appropriately€applied€this€enhancement€factor.Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€found€no€mitigating€factors€and€one€(1)€enhancement€factorÏfor€the€possession€convictions.€€The€weight€for€each€enhancement€factor€is€leftÏto€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€as€its€findings€are€supported€by€theÐ ð902 Ðrecord.€€òòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€at€125.€€€For€possession€with€the€intentÐ `  Ðto€sell,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€ten€(10)€years,€the€middle€of€theÏrange€for€a€Class€B€felony.€€This€sentence€was€entirely€appropriate.€€Furthermore,Ïfor€simple€possession€of€marijuana,€a€Class€A€misdemeanor,€there€is€noÏpresumption€of€a€minimum€sentence.€€Thus,€the€trial€court€imposed€appropriateÏsentences€for€the€appellantððs€convictions€for€possession€of€cocaine€with€the€intentÏto€sell€and€simple€possession€of€marijuana.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@ØØ)®àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ Ðp ÐÌà ` àThe€search€of€the€appellantððs€person€was€constitutionally€permissible,€andÏthe€trial€court€did€not€err€in€denying€the€appellantððs€motion€to€suppress.€ÏFurthermore,€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€appellantððs€convictions,€andÏthe€trial€court€imposed€appropriate€sentences.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court€is€affirmed.ÌñFñÌà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àÌÌÌÌñFñÓ  ÓñFñà ` àÌñFñÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€Not€Participating€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 5¨+- ÐPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.