ÿWPCø  G{Ýz˜ñ1 lˆÓA©eäL2H+¨ÓÄÃù£ýž ð%ÃÔ‡]Å d¼dx!L®õNõ±¯Äü%˜SôGZ;]nù…_èÝêÀË WÓûR…3˜_B¬|$(e( @v­ñŸj,å ßxÔsÖå™[–Ÿ$$CÅÑ\çý?Á\’ëÁŸráw±4IÂTb!‰ýmåë8&‡ôÜxPˆãCrK+ôònaÚÕ zÂÛ¿oÝ„çØš—óÇîêâÙ«>—…Åô2Ø…Áµ”œšhYf¹e1;ÿ«ñ¸<âªÊ-öz~MÂUSQ(¡|÷ÿà¤)`É\{T<)iºjÏOÐáhG³Ð`VÚWl~·ã /s”³ÿ CI’òw9œÑ‚«|n$Žã¯00cŽÑ”¡CdL¾°¥ØóežbàIßZ)žû´Þ¸!š¿ÀÖ½0‚;Xzü9tKK³¬ÂÌê]Q]ÉYú8¶Ú||©r×ÑgE… %F U:L 0(† UN® w@ü 4< P _ g U:… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … B¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ D3Ü Ü Ü 0D                                                                                  AOS Æ¢ ¢ 0Dh D/¬ BÛ X, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular($¡¡(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular DEDE !Ó€ýhµ&3|x, Ô€ XÅXXXÔÔ€ îë‰îX XÅÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ Áî îë‰ÔÐ  ÐÌò òJune€22,€1999Ð ¶¶ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ô …ô ÁÔAppellate€CourtÐ –– ÐClerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d%%%%'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ!ñ›ñ!ñÒ°ÒÒ8°ÒÔ€XÅXXXÔÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  Óñ!ñßr€ *<,(j 8 `€€@EŽ± tt0"Æ°¨Órß›ñ!ñà@Ô Ô Tàò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° ÐÌà@yy'TàAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌÌà@UU$TàAPRIL€1999€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ó óà@33-Tà)ˆÐ  ` Ðà@33-Tà)ˆà p àò òNO.€03C01„9707„CR„00290ó óÐ ü L  Ðà ` àAppellee,à@33-Tà)ˆÐ è 8  Ðà@33-Tà)ˆà p àò òHAMILTON€COUNTYó óÐ Î  Ðò òVS.ó óà@33-Tà)ˆÐ º  Ðà@33-Tà)ˆà p àò òHON.€DOUGLAS€A.€MEYER,Ð ¦ö  ÐWILLIAM€E.€GOTHARD€III,ó óà@33-Tà)ˆà p àò òJUDGEó óÐ ’â  Ðà@33-Tà)ˆÌà ` àAppellant.à@33-Tà)ˆà p àà È àà  àà x àà Ð àà (# àÐ d´ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à p à(Arson€of€Personal€Property;€à (# à€€€Ð Jš Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à  àà h àà À à€€€€€€€€€€€)à p àFraudulent€Insurance€Claim)Ð 0€ ÐÌÌÌÒ(ä „¸ @ # #(Òò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:Ð È ÐÌARDENA€J.€GARTHÌ(On€Appeal)ó óÐ ŒÜ ÐDistrict€Public€DefenderÌÌò òDONNA€ROBINSON€MILLERÐ D” Ð(On€Appeal)ó óÐ 0€ ÐAssistant€Dist.€Public€DefenderÌ701€Cherry€Street,€Ste.€300ÌChattanooga,€TN€€37402„1910ÌÌò òA.€CHRISTIAN€LANIER€IIIÐ ´#" Ð(At€Trial)Ìó óLindsay€Street,€Ste.€150Ð Œ%Ü $ ÐChattanooga,€TN€€37403„3457Ð r&Â!% Ðò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð È% ÐÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERSó óÐ  ð' ÐAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌò òERIK€W.€DAABó óÐ X¨* ÐAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌ425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌò òWILLIAM€H.€COX€IIIó óÐ Â"0 ÐDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌò òC.€LELAND€DAVISÐ z%Ê 3 ÐCALDWELL€HUCKABAYó óÐ f&¶!4 ÐÓ  ÓAssistant€District€Attorneys€€€€€ÏGeneralÌ600€Market€Street,€Ste.€310ÌChattanooga,€TN€€37402ÌÌÐ Ð+ ': ÐÒ(ä „¸ @ìì(ÒÌÌÌÌÌÌò òOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 3P.@ ÐÌÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€MODIFIED€IN€PART;€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌJOE€G.€RILEY,ÌJUDGEÐ  L;œ6I Ðó óÑ7€c^XXdìXXdì7ÑÓ  Óà@'Tàò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óóóˆÐ ° ÐÌÌÓÓà ` àDefendant,€William€E.€Gothard€III,€was€convicted€by€a€Hamilton€County€jury€ofÏthe€offenses€of€arson€of€personal€property,€a€Class€E€felony,€and€filing€a€fraudulentÏinsurance€claim€over€$10,000€in€value,€a€Class€C€felony.€€He€also€pled€òònoloÐ  P Ðcontendere€óóto€the€offense€of€failing€to€appear,€a€Class€E€felony.€€The€trial€courtÐ Ð   Ðsentenced€the€defendant€to€concurrent€terms€of€one€and€four€years€for€arson€ofÏpersonal€property€and€filing€a€fraudulent€claim,€respectively,€and€one€yearÏconsecutive€for€failure€to€appear.€€In€this€appeal€the€defendant€presents€the€followingÏissues:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` H!` H!à1.€€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€€€€€€€€Ï€€€€€convictions;€€Ð ¸ ð¸ ð ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` H!` H!à2.€€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€excluding€testimony€€Ï€€€€€relating€to€an€alleged€bribe€of€a€witness€and€other€€€€€Ï€€€€€impeachment€testimony;€Ð ¸ ð¸ ð ÐÌÓ  Óà8 ` àà8¸ ` H!` H!à3.€€whether€the€trial€judge€and€prosecutor€committed€€€€€€Ï€€€€€misconduct€so€as€to€deprive€the€defendant€of€a€fair€€€Ï€€€€€trial;€and€€Ð ¸ ð¸ ð ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` H!` H!à4.€€whether€the€defendant€was€properly€sentenced.€€Ð ¸ ð¸ ð ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€that€the€conviction€for€filing€aÏfraudulent€insurance€claim€over€$10,000€must€be€ò òMODIFIEDó ó€to€filing€a€fraudulentÐ J#š" Ðinsurance€claim€over€the€value€of€$1,000€and€the€sentence€reduced€accordingly.€€TheÏcase€must€also€be€ò òREMANDEDó ó€to€correct€a€clerical€error.€€In€all€other€respects,€theÐ î&>"& Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€ò òAFFIRMEDó ó.Ð Æ($( ÐÌà@  +Tàò òòòFACTSó óóóˆÐ j,º', ÐÌà ` àDefendant€was€the€owner€of€a€1983€Bluebird€school€bus€and€was€underÏcontract€with€Hamilton€County€to€provide€transportation€services€for€students.€€OnÏSeptember€29,€1995,€the€bus€was€extensively€damaged€as€a€result€of€a€fire.€€TheÏdefendant€contended€that€the€fire€started€as€a€result€of€a€transmission€fluid€leak.€€HeÏfiled€an€insurance€claim€with€State€Farm€for€the€ð ðvalue€of€bus.ðð€€A€specific€monetaryÏamount€was€not€set€forth€on€the€affidavit€relating€to€the€vehicle€fire.€€Ð  9Z4: Їà ` àThe€fire€occurred€while€the€bus€was€on€a€public€road.à  à€Representatives€of€theÐ ° Ðfire€department€and€Hamilton€County€œSheriffññððsññ›€Department€discovered€a€puddle€ofÏtransmission€fluid€approximately€100€feet€from€the€location€of€the€bus.€€Burned€paperÏdebris€was€discovered€near€the€fluid,€indicating€an€intentional€attempt€to€set€fire€to€theÏfluid.€€Two€empty€transmission€fluid€bottles€were€discovered€just€across€a€fenceÏapproximately€25€feet€from€the€fluid.€€Similar€bottles€of€transmission€fluid€were€foundÏin€the€bus.Ìà ` àThe€fire€department€chief,€arson€investigator€for€the€Sheriffððs€Department,€asÏwell€as€an€independent€fire€investigator€retained€by€State€ññœññFarm,ññ›ññ€all€reached€the€sameÏconclusion.€€The€origin€of€the€fire€was€in€the€front€passenger€compartment€of€the€busÏat€floor€level.€€All€three€agreed€the€fire€did€not€start€within€the€engine€compartment€orÏon€the€underside€of€the€bus€as€contended€by€the€defendant.€€The€independent€fireÏinvestigator€ññœññtestified€theññ›ññ€fire€was€of€ð ðincendiaryðð€origin,€meaning€that€it€wasÏintentionally€set.€€Photographs€of€the€damaged€school€bus€corroborate€theirÏtestimony.€€Ìà ` àAn€investigator€from€State€Farm€testified€that€the€defendant€made€a€claim€forÏthe€value€of€the€ññœññbus.ññ›ññ€€The€investigator€further€testified€that€the€defendant€ð ð[i]n€hisÏexamination€under€oath,€he€„„€I€donððt€have€a€copy€of€that€at€hand.€€He€claimedÏbetween€[$25,000]€and€$30,000€I€believe€at€one€time.ðð€€The€investigator€furtherÏtestified€that€he€determined€the€fair€market€value€of€the€bus€in€good€condition€to€beÏjust€under€$7,400.€€Due€to€the€investigation€indicating€arson,€State€Farm€made€noÏoffer€of€payment€on€the€claim.€€Ìà ` àSeveral€acquaintances€of€the€defendant,€including€three€fellow€bus€drivers,Ïtestified€on€behalf€of€the€defendant.€€Each€indicated€they€had€seen€the€bus€emitÏconsiderable€smoke€at€some€time€prior€to€the€fire.€€Two€of€the€witnesses€testified€theyÏhad€also€seen€a€flame€or€flash€just€prior€to€the€fire.€€The€defendant€did€not€testify.€€Ìà ` àBased€upon€the€testimony,€the€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€arson€ofÏpersonal€property,€a€Class€E€felony,€and€filing€a€fraudulent€insurance€claim€over€theÏvalue€of€$10,000,€a€Class€C€felony.€€This€appeal€followed.ÌÐ Ì84: Їà@ Tàò òòòSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óóóˆÐ ° ÐÌà ` àDefendant€contends€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€convictions.€ÏAlthough€we€agree€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€classify€the€fraudulent€claim€asÏexceeding€$10,000,€we€reject€defendantððs€contentions€in€all€other€respects.€€Ìà ` àIn€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€jury€in€aÏcriminal€trial.€€A€jury€verdict€accredits€the€state's€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflictsÏin€favor€of€the€state.€€€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.Ð P   ÐHarrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€theÐ l Ðstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€mayÏbe€drawn€therefrom.€òòId.óó;€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€Ð ´ ÐMoreover,€a€guilty€verdict€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€which€the€appellantÏenjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493Ð P  ÐS.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€thisÏpresumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óóÐ è8 Ðà ` àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€for€anÏappellate€court€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÏthe€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÏthe€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.Ð %l $ ÐVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.Ð è&8"& ÐAbramsóó,€935€S.W.2d€399,€401€(Tenn.€1996).€The€weight€and€credibility€of€theÐ ´($( Ðwitnesses'€testimony€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€ÏòòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.€Breweróó,€932€S.W.2dÐ L,œ', Ð1,€19€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Ìà ` àThis€Court€must€review€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€state.€€TheÏstateððs€evidence€was€that€the€fire€was€intentionally€set€in€the€front€passengerÏcompartment€on€the€floor.€€The€circumstantial€evidence€corroborated€this€theory.€ÏTransmission€fluid€with€burned€paper€debris€was€found€near€the€bus.€€Two€emptyÏbottles€of€transmission€fluid€were€found€nearby.€€A€visual€examination€of€the€bus€ññœññÌÐ à804: Ðrevealsññ›ññ€that€the€fire€was€not€on€the€underside€of€the€bus.€€The€state€furtherÏestablished€that€the€defendant€filed€an€insurance€claim€based€upon€the€fire.€€Ìà ` àIt€was€for€the€jury€to€determine€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses.€€The€juryÏobviously€determined€that€the€defendant€intentionally€set€the€fire€and€soughtÏinsurance€benefits.€€The€evidence€was€more€than€sufficient€to€support€thisÏdetermination.€€€€Ìà ` àHowever,€we€conclude€the€evidence€is€not€sufficient€to€support€theÏclassification€of€the€fraudulent€insurance€claim€ññœññin€an€amount€overññ›ññ€$10,000.€€The€filingÏof€a€fraudulent€insurance€claim€falls€under€the€statutes€relating€to€theft€and€ð ðisÏpunished€as€in€the€case€of€theft.ðð€òò€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„133.€€The€classificationÐ Ü, Ðor€seriousness€of€the€penalty€for€theft€depends€upon€the€value€of€the€property€orÏservices.€òò€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„105.€€If€the€value€of€the€property€is€at€leastÐ xÈ Ð$10,000€but€less€than€$60,000,€it€is€a€Class€C€felony.€òò€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„14„Ð H˜ Ð105(4).€€If€the€value€of€the€property€is€at€least€$1,000€but€less€than€$10,000,€it€is€aÏClass€D€felony.€òò€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„105(3).€€Ð ä4 Ðà ` àThe€defendantððs€affidavit€of€claim€does€not€indicate€a€specific€monetaryÏamount,€but€rather€seeks€the€ð ðvalue€of€bus.ðð€€The€only€testimony€in€the€record€givingÏany€support€to€the€stateððs€theory€is€the€testimony€of€the€investigator€for€the€insuranceÏcompany€who€stated,€ð ðI€believe€at€one€timeðð€that€defendant€claimed€between€$25,000Ïand€$30,000.€€The€investigator€further€testified€that€the€fair€market€value€of€the€busÏwas€just€under€$7,400.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(36)(A)(defining€ð ðvalueððÐ °($( Ðas€the€fair€market€value€of€the€property€at€the€time€and€place€of€the€offense).€€We,Ïtherefore,€conclude€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€establish€the€Class€C€felonyÏamount€of€$10,000€or€more.€€The€proof€does€establish€beyond€a€reasonable€doubtÏthat€the€value€of€the€property€was€over€$1,000;€therefore,€we€reduce€the€classificationÏof€the€offense€to€a€Class€D€felony.€€ÌÌÌÌÐ à804: Ðà@$Tàò òòòBRIBERY€OF€WITNESSó óóóˆÐ ° ÐÌà ` àDefendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in€disallowing€two€witnesses€to€testifyÏconcerning€their€observations€just€outside€the€courtroom€of€an€alleged€payment€byÏone€prosecution€witness€to€another€prosecution€witness.€€Under€the€circumstances,Ïwe€conclude€there€was€no€reversible€error.Ìà ` àThe€stateððs€witnesses€indicated€that€the€battery€was€not€on€the€bus€after€theÏfire€and€had€apparently€been€removed€by€the€defendant€prior€to€the€fire.€€The€wreckerÏoperator€testified€that€he€saw€no€one€remove€the€battery€at€the€scene€or€thereafter.€Ïà ` àIn€a€jury„out€hearing€two€witnesses€indicated€they€observed€the€œSheriffññððsññ›ÏœDepartmenññtððsññññtññññ›€ññññ€ññarson›€investigator€give€something€to€the€wrecker€operator€just€outsideÏthe€courtroom€after€the€wrecker€operator€testified.€€One€witness€indicated€it€wasÏsomething€ð ðgreenðð€but€could€not€say€it€was€money.€€The€other€witness€indicated€thatÏit€was,€in€fact,€money.€€Ìà ` àAfter€an€extended€discussion,€the€trial€judge€advised€defense€counsel€that€theÏtestimony€would€not€be€allowed€before€the€jury€at€that€time;€however,€he€might€allowÏit€later€in€the€trial.€€Subsequently,€defense€counsel€advised€the€court€that€ð ðweððre€justÏnot€going€to€go€into€that€area.ðð€€Since€the€trial€court€had€deferred€a€final€ruling€on€thisÏissue€and€œdefenññse›€counselññññññfñññññ ñdantñ ñ›€chose€not€to€attempt€to€present€the€testimony,€defendant€isÏentitled€to€no€relief.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a).€€Ð à&0"& ÐÌà@  #Tàò òòòIMPEACHMENT€TESTIMONYó óóóˆÐ |*Ì%* ÐÌà ` àIn€a€related€issue€defendant€contends€one€of€the€above€witnesses€was€alsoÏprohibited€from€testifying€that€the€insurance€company€investigator,€while€recording€anÏinterview€with€her,€would€turn€off€the€recorder€and€tell€her€to€answer€questions€aÏcertain€way.€€The€trial€court€found€the€proposed€testimony€immaterial.€€DefendantÏcontends€the€testimony€was€proper€to€impeach€the€investigator€who€had€testified.€€ÌÌÐ è884: Ðà ` àRegardless€of€the€propriety€or€impropriety€of€the€ruling,€defendant€was€notÏprejudiced.€€The€investigator€primarily€testified€about€the€amount€of€the€claim€madeÏby€the€defendant.€€This€Court€has€reduced€the€classification€of€the€offense.€€Thus,Ïeven€if€the€trial€court€should€have€allowed€such€evidence,€the€error€would,€at€most,Ïbe€harmless.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b).€€Ð à 0 ÐÌà@¯¯(Tàò òòòMISCONDUCTó óóóˆÐ |Ì  ÐÌà ` àDefendant€contends€he€was€denied€a€fair€trial€as€a€result€of€the€trial€judge€andÏprosecuting€attorney€repeatedly€advising€certain€witnesses€in€a€jury„out€hearing€of€theÏpossibility€of€perjury€charges.€€Firstly,€we€note€that€this€issue€was€not€raised€in€theÏwritten€motion€for€new€trial€and€is,€therefore,€waived.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e).€ÏAlthough€counsel€orally€moved€to€amend€his€motion€to€include€this€issue,€the€recordÏdoes€not€contain€a€written€request€or€order€allowing€the€amendment.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.Ð l ÐCrim.€P.€33(b).€€Nevertheless,€we€will€address€the€issue€on€its€merits.€€Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€conducted€an€extensive€jury„out€hearing€relating€to€the€proposedÏtestimony€of€two€defense€witnesses.€€It€is€apparent€that€the€trial€judge€and€theÏprosecuting€attorney€were€unimpressed€with€the€credibility€of€the€allegations.€ÏDefense€counsel€was€admonished€by€the€trial€judge€and€the€prosecuting€attorney€ofÏhis€ethical€obligations€not€to€present€perjurious€testimony.€€The€two€witnesses€wereÏalso€at€various€times€cautioned€that€they€were€under€oath€and/or€advised€of€ð ðtheÏpotential€if€you€should€testify€falsely.ðð€€Ìà ` àIn€òòState€v.€Schaferóó,€973€S.W.2d€269,€278€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997),€this€CourtÐ L,œ', Ðfound€that€multiple€threats€of€prosecution€for€perjury€by€the€state€and€trial€court€andÏrepeated€declarations€by€the€trial€court€that€the€witness€was€untruthful€mandated€aÏnew€trial.€€This€Court€found€prejudice€to€the€defendant€as€the€witness€subsequentlyÏchanged€his€testimony.€€òòIdóó.€€Although€a€trial€court€may€admonish€a€witness€suspectedÐ |3Ì.4 Ðof€untruthfulness€of€the€significance€of€lying€under€oath,€the€trial€court€should€notÏdeclare€its€belief€of€untruthfulness€and€threaten€the€witness€with€prosecution€to€such€ÌÐ ä844: Ðññaññ›ññññññ€degree€that€the€witness€changes€his€or€her€testimony€to€the€detriment€of€theÏdefendant.€€òòIdóó;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Dwight€Milleróó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9708„CC„00300,Ð |Ì ÐHaywood€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€December€29,€1998,€at€Jackson).€Ìà ` àThe€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€case€at€bar€do€not€reach€the€magnitudeÏof€òòSchaferóó€and€òòDwight€Milleróó.€€We€also€note€the€questioning€and€warnings€did€notÐ ä 4 Ðtake€place€in€the€juryððs€presence.€€However,€the€repeated€questioning€and€warningsÏby€the€trial€court€do€appear€to€have€crossed€the€line.€€Nevertheless,€the€defendantÏhas€suffered€no€prejudice.€€One€of€the€witnesses€testified€before€the€jury€inÏconfirmation€of€his€earlier€jury„out€testimony.€€Although€the€other€witness€was€notÏcalled€to€testify€before€the€jury,€her€jury„out€testimony€was€of€no€real€benefit€to€theÏdefendant.€€Therefore,€defendant€is€entitled€to€no€relief.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b).€Ð ¬ü ÐÌà@ÄÄ(Tàò òòòSENTENCINGó óóóˆÐ H˜ ÐÌà ` àDefendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€by€enhancing€the€fraudulent€insuranceÏclaim€sentence€by€one€year€above€the€minimum,€erred€in€ordering€consecutiveÏsentencing,€and€erred€in€denying€alternative€sentencing.€€Although€we€reduce€theÏfraudulent€insurance€claim€conviction€from€a€Class€C€felony€to€a€Class€D€felony,€weÏalso€enhance€the€sentence€by€one€year€above€the€minimum.€€We€affirm€theÏimposition€of€consecutive€sentences€and€affirm€the€denial€of€alternative€sentencing.ÌÌà@"Tàò òA.€€òòStandard€of€Reviewó óóóˆÐ €*Ð%* Ðà ` àThis€Courtððs€review€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóó€withÐ X,¨', Ða€presumption€of€correctness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumptionÏis€conditioned€upon€an€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€judgeÏconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.€€òòStateÐ À1-2 Ðv.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€If€the€trial€court€fails€to€comply€with€theÐ Œ3Ü.4 Ðstatutory€directives,€there€is€no€presumption€of€correctness€and€our€review€is€òòde€novoóó.€Ð X5¨06 ÐòòState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€96€(Tenn.€1997).Ð (7x28 ÐÐ ô8D4: Ðà ` àIf€no€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors€for€sentencing€are€present,€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c)€provides€that€the€presumptive€sentence€shall€be€theÏminimum€sentence€within€the€applicable€range.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Lavenderóó,€967€S.W.2dÐ H˜ Ð803,€806€(Tenn.€1998);€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€788€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð  h Ð1991).€€However,€if€such€factors€do€exist,€a€trial€court€should€start€at€the€minimumÏsentence,€enhance€the€minimum€sentence€within€the€range€for€enhancement€factorsÏand€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€the€range€for€the€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„210(e).€€No€particular€weight€for€each€factor€is€prescribed€by€the€statute,Ïas€the€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€asÏthe€trial€court€complies€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€sentencing€act€and€itsÏfindings€are€supported€by€the€record.€€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€238€(Tenn.Ð ¬ü Ð1986);€òòState€v.€Leggsóó,€955€S.W.2d€845,€848€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997);€òòState€v.Ð xÈ ÐSantiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€116,€125€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð D” Ð35„210€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.€€ÌÌà@"Tàò òB.€€òòLength€of€Sentenceó óóóˆÐ ¬ü Ðà ` àDefendant€challenges€his€four„year€sentence€on€the€Class€C€felony€of€filing€aÏfraudulent€insurance€claim.€€Since€we€have€reduced€the€offense€to€a€Class€D€felony,Ïa€new€sentence€must€be€determined.€€This€Court€will€determine€the€sentence.€€òòSeeóóÐ %l $ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(c)(2).€€Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€applied€the€following€mitigating€factors:€the€crime€did€not€causeÏor€threaten€serious€bodily€injury,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(1);€the€defendant€wasÏsuffering€from€a€mental€condition€reducing€his€culpability,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„¼113(8);€and€the€defendant€has€rendered€ññœññsignificant€communityññ›ññññññ€and€charitable€service,ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(13).€€Ìà ` àThe€trial€court€noted€that€the€defendant€had€a€prior€conviction€for€theft€and€has€Ïfailed€to€file€income€tax€returns,€thereby€finding€the€defendant€had€a€previous€historyÏof€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€WeÏalso€note€that€defendant€exhibited€criminal€behavior€by€willfully€failing€to€appear€at€hisÏoriginal€sentencing€hearing.€€A€sentencing€court€can€consider€criminal€behavior€whichÐ ä844: Ðoccurred€prior€to€the€sentencing€hearing,€regardless€of€whether€the€criminal€behaviorÏoccurred€before€or€after€the€commission€of€the€offense€under€consideration.€€òòStateÐ |Ì Ðv.€Burl€Jarrettóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9710„CC„00418,€Hardeman€County€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð H˜ ÐApp.€filed€August€21,€1998,€at€Jackson).€€Ìà ` àThe€range€of€punishment€for€a€ññœññRange€I€standardññ›ññññññ€offender€for€a€Class€D€felonyÏis€from€two€to€four€years.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(4).€€Just€as€did€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðtrial€court,€we€enhance€the€sentence€one€year€above€the€minimum.€€Therefore,€theÏsentence€shall€be€three€years€for€filing€a€fraudulent€insurance€claim€over€$1,000.€€ÌÌà@.. Tàò òC.€€òòConsecutive€Sentencingó óóóˆÐ à0 Ðà ` àDefendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in€ordering€his€one„year€sentence€forÏfailure€to€appear€to€run€consecutively€to€the€other€two€sentences.€€The€stateÏconcedes€that€none€of€the€statutory€factors€set€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115Ïapplies€and€confesses€error.€€We€respectfully€disagree€with€both€the€defendant€andÏthe€state.€€Ìà ` àAlthough€the€trial€court€erroneously€noted€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼115(b)(6)€ññœññapplied,ññ›ññññññ€the€Assistant€District€Attorney€General€reminded€the€trial€court€ofÏthe€applicability€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„609.€€This€statute€specifically€providesÏthat€a€sentence€for€failure€to€appear€ð ðmay€be€ordered€to€be€served€consecutively€toÏany€sentence€received€for€the€offense€for€which€the€defendant€failed€to€appear.ðð€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„16„609(f).€€The€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€inÏordering€this€sentence€to€be€served€consecutively.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Scotty€Ray€Haynesóó,Ð |*Ì%* ÐC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9706„CC„00227,€Bedford€ññœññCountyññ›ññññññ€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€MarchÏ27,€1998,€at€Nashville);€òòState€v.€John€David€Rankin,€Jr.ò òóó,€ó óC.C.A.€No.€03C01„9511„CC„Ð .h). Ð00369,€Sullivan€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€August€19,€1996,€at€Knoxville).€€Ìà ` àÌà@ Tàò òD.€€òòAlternative€Sentencingó óóóˆÐ ˆ3Ø.4 Ðà ` àDefendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€alternative€ññœññsentencing.€Ïññ›ññññœññAgain,€weññ›ññññññ€ññœññdisagree.ññ›ññññññ€€ÌÐ ø8H4: Ðà ` àUnder€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€trial€judges€areÏencouraged€to€use€alternatives€to€incarceration.€€An€especially€mitigated€or€standardÏoffender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,€D€or€E€felony€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorableÏcandidate€for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€the€absence€of€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).Ìà ` àA€court€may€also€consider€the€mitigating€and€enhancing€factors€set€forth€inÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„113€and€114€as€they€are€relevant€to€the€ðð€40„35„103Ïconsiderations.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(b)(5);€òòState€v.€Bostonóó,€938€S.W.2dÐ D”  Ð435,€438€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Additionally,€a€court€should€consider€theÏdefendantððs€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€when€determining€if€anÏalternative€sentence€would€be€appropriate.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5);€òòStateÐ ¨ø Ðv.€Bostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€438.Ð tÄ Ðà ` àThe€trial€court€noted€the€defendantððs€persistent€untruthfulness€and€failure€toÏaccept€responsibility€for€his€criminal€act.€€The€defendant€ññœññexhibitedññ›ññññññ€no€remorse.€€WeÏalso€note€defendantððs€prior€criminal€behavior.€€€Ìà ` àIn€determining€a€defendantððs€suitability€for€total€probation,€the€trial€court€mayÏproperly€consider€credibility,€remorse,€and€candor€as€they€reflect€upon€potential€forÏrehabilitation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5);€òòState€v.€Bunchóó,€646€S.W.2dÐ <#Œ" Ð158,€160€(Tenn.€1983);€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€306€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð  %\ $ Ð1994).€€The€trial€court€is€in€a€better€position€than€this€Court€to€determine€defendantððsÏcredibility€and€remorse.€€Considering€these€factors€as€well€as€defendantððs€priorÏcriminal€behavior,€we€are€unable€to€conclude€ññœññthat€theññ›ññññññ€trial€court€erred€in€its€denial€ofÏalternative€sentencing.€€Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.€€ÌÌà@   Tàò òòòCLERICAL€ERROR€IN€JUDGMENTó óóóˆÐ  1ð,2 ÐÌà ` àWe€note€that€the€judgment€of€conviction€for€the€offense€of€arson€of€personalÏproperty€contains€a€clerical€error€in€that€the€judgment€indicates€the€offense€is€a€Class€ÌÐ Ü8,4: ÐD€felony.€€Upon€remand,€the€trial€court€shall€enter€an€amended€judgment€reflectingÏthis€offense€to€be€a€Class€E€felony€rather€than€a€Class€D€felony.€€ÌÌà@´´(Tàò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ  d ÐÌà ` àThe€conviction€for€filing€a€fraudulent€insurance€claim€over€$10,000€shall€beÏmodified€to€filing€a€fraudulent€insurance€claim€over€$1,000,€a€Class€D€felony,€with€aÏsentence€of€three€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€The€trial€court€shall€enterÏan€amended€judgment.€€The€trial€court€shall€also€enter€an€amended€judgmentÏreflecting€that€ññœññarsonññ›ññññññ€of€personal€property€is€a€Class€E€felony€rather€than€a€Class€DÏfelony.€€In€all€other€respects,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€ÌÓÓÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEó óÐ 2‚ ÐÌÌÌÌÌò òÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌó ó____________________________ò òÐ $&t!% ÐJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌó ó____________________________ò òÐ º* &* ÐNORMA€McGEE€OGLE,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó ó