’WPCP …#†VUNÜ %* 0(0bX4`t 0Jƒ 0TĶ 0^! 0h 0rē 0|Y 0†Õ 0[ 1uė U,` 0dŒ U,š U> U*Z B)„ DC­ AMš I=v~† BvÓ! D3ō 0@' AOgʶ 0D| 0DĄ D/ B3˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTĄĢĄä䥥Ģ0ŁP w;^·V·^4Ÿœ4 (ÖĆ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($””- ł-3x23|xH2 ’’0Indent1Ō2ŌŌ3  Ō2" ’’0Indent2ą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2, ’’0Indent3ą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō26 ’’0Indent4ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2@ ’’0Indent5ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2J ’’0Indent6ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2T ’’0Indent7ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2^ ’’0Indent8ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō  ’’?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ’’8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cž’ << G’’ ?Ż ƒ!ŻŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŌ€ŌŌ€ŌŻ  ŻŻ ƒ"ŻŻ  ŻŌ€ŌŌ€ŌÓ  ÓŌ YYY ŌFILEDŌ€XŌĢĢņ ņFebruary€7,€1996ĢĢCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ĢŌ€ōŌAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHŚ(’į’āłFG(üHHŚ(d'@ dStyl{WP}01•ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆŠ ŠŠHHŠŠ  ŠŠ2ŠŠ’’øę$’ŠŠHHŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ  ŠŠ ŠŠ ŠŃŃŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŃ € ŃŃ<Px–ČŃŅŅŅ443!#4ŅŅ$ *$ŅŅ$*$ŅŅ ’KK ŅŅ  Geneva ŅŅ  Geneva ŅÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŃMonacoŃŃ ŃŅ  BA: T Monaco ŅŅ  BA: T Monaco Ņ%%%%'’’dxd("’’$££Ņ  ŅŅ  Ņ€-‚ƒCž’<< C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3Æ$¢¢Ż ƒ!ŻŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó ó„„'÷’ dxdü’P PdŻ ƒ!ŻŌ . ŌŌ€ŌÓ&€X„d&ÓŃ#€Xd#ŃŌ€ŌŻ  ŻŅ  ŅŅ „ ŅŃ ` ŃŌ€ŌŃ\R AŲ'\ŃŃ€ŃŃ7€†XXdģdČ7ŃŃ  ŃŃ  ŃÓ  Óņ ņIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEĢŁ€€ŁßL€"#!;+'h|¤w` Å `€€LßĢAT€JACKSONĢĢDECEMBER€SESSION,€1995ĢĢĢÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ą ąą ą)ą ąC.C.A.ĻNO.€02C01„9503„CC„00074Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)Ģó óą ąAppellee,ą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąHARDIN€COUNTYĢVS.ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąHON.€C.€CREED€MCGINLEYó óĢņ ņTRAVIS€LEE€HARDY,ó óą ąą ąņ ņ)ą ąJUDGEó óĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ó óĢą ąAppellant.ą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ó óą ą(Revocation€of€Community€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ó óą ąCorrections€Sentence)ĢĢĢÓ  Óņ ņON€APPEAL€FROM€THE€JUDGMENT€OF€THEĢCIRCUIT€COURT€OF€HARDIN€COUNTYó óĢĢĢÓ  ÓņņFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:ą ąą ąą ąņņFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ĢĢRICHARD€W.€DEBERRYą ąą ąą ąCHARLES€W.€BURSONĢAssistant€Public€Defenderą ąą ąą ąAttorney€General€and€ReporterĢ24th€Judicial€DistrictĢP.O.€Box€663ą ąą ąą ąą ąRUTH€A.€THOMPSONĢCamden,€TN€€38320ą ąą ąą ąAssistant€Attorney€GeneralĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą450€James€Robertson€ParkwayĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ĢĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąROBERT€RADFORDĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąDistrict€Attorney€GeneralĢĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąJOHN€OVERTONĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąHardin€County€CourthouseĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąSavannah,€TN€€38372ĢĢĢĢOPINION€FILED€________________________ĢĢAFFIRMEDĢĢDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEĒÓ  ÓŌ€°Ōņ ņņņOPINIONóóó óŌ€XŌĢĢĢĢÓ  ÓÓÓą ąThe€Defendant,€Travis€Lee€Hardy,€appeals€as€of€right€from€a€judgment€of€theĻtrial€court€revoking€his€community€corrections€sentence€and€requiring€him€to€serveĻin€confinement€the€sentence€previously€imposed.€€The€revocation€was€predicatedĻon€the€Defendant's€failure€to€make€his€monthly€payment€for€his€fines€and€courtĻcosts,€his€failure€to€make€a€monthly€payment€for€restitution,€and€his€failure€to€pass€aĻrandom€drug€and€alcohol€screening.ĢĢą ąThe€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€revoking€the€sentence.€ĻWe€disagree€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ģą ąĢą ąOn€August€26,€1992,€the€Defendant€was€convicted€of€one€count€of€the€sale€ofĻcocaine€over€.5€grams.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„17„417.€€On€the€same€day,€heĻentered€a€guilty€plea€to€one€count€of€driving€on€a€revoked€license.€€Tenn.€CodeĻAnn.€šš€55„50„504.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€to€serve€nine€years€inĻthe€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction€and€to€pay€$2,304.00€in€court€costs€andĻfines€and€$125.00€to€the€Twenty„fourth€District€Judicial€Task€Force€in€restitution€onĻthe€cocaine€charge.€€The€trial€court€suspended€the€sentence,€ordering€theĻDefendant€to€serve€one€year€in€the€county€jail,€with€the€remaining€eight€years€to€beĶserved€in€the€community€corrections€program.€€The€court€then€imposed€a€six„monthĻconcurrent€sentence€for€the€driving€on€a€revoked€license€offense.€€The€courtĻordered€that€the€fines€and€court€costs€were€to€be€paid€on€a€schedule€arranged€byĻthe€community€correction€officer.€€ĢĢą ąAs€part€of€the€community€corrections€sentence,€the€Defendant€read€andĻsigned€a€behavioral€agreement,€thereby€acknowledging€that€failure€to€comply€withĻany€of€the€conditions€would€lead€to€a€revocation€of€the€sentence.€€The€agreementĻset€forth€the€terms€of€the€sentence€and€included€the€specific€provisions€that€theĻDefendant€would€pay€his€court€costs€and€fines,€pay€restitution€to€the€drug€task€force,Ļfind€employment,€obey€all€laws,€meet€with€a€program€staffer€on€a€regular€basis,€andĻnot€partake€of€any€intoxicants.ĢĢą ąOn€December€4,€1994,€the€community€corrections€program€issued€aĻviolation€report€on€the€Defendant€for€three€violations:€€First,€he€had€tested€positiveĻfor€marijuana€in€a€random€drug€and€alcohol€screening;€second,€he€had€failed€toĻpay€court€costs€in€November;€and€third,€he€had€failed€to€make€restitution€to€the€drugĻtask€force€in€November.€€ĢĢą ąAfter€conducting€a€hearing€on€February€14,€1995,€the€trial€court€found€thatĻthe€Defendant€had€failed€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€the€communityĻcorrections€program.€€The€trial€court€revoked€the€Defendant's€suspended€sentenceĻand€ordered€him€to€serve€the€remainder€of€his€sentence€in€the€TennesseeĻDepartment€of€Correction.€€The€Defendant€now€appeals€that€judgment.€€ĢĢą ąEven€in€a€revocation€hearing,€the€accused€is€guaranteed€certain€basic€rightsĻby€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesĻConstitution€and€by€Article€I,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņGagnonĻv.€Scarpellióó,€411€U.S.€778,€786€(1993);€ņņState€v.€Wadeóó,€863€S.W.2d€406,€408€(Tenn.Ļ1993).€€The€minimum€rights€include:€(1)€a€written€notice€of€the€alleged€violation€thatĻjustifies€the€revocation€of€the€accused's€community€corrections€sentence;€(2)€theĻdisclosure€of€the€evidence€that€supports€the€alleged€violation;€(3)€the€opportunity€toĻbe€heard€in€person€and€present€evidence€in€support€of€his€or€her€defense;€(4)€theĻright€to€confront€the€State's€witnesses;€and€(5)€a€neutral€and€detached€trier€of€factsĻintroduced€by€the€respective€parties€to€the€proceeding.€€ņņGagnonóó,€411€U.S.€at€786;ĻņņWadeóó€863€S.W.2d€at€408;€ņņState€v.€Jimmie€C.€Rayóó,€No.€01„C„01„9501„CR„00022,ĻDavidson€County,€slip€op.€at€3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€filed€Aug.€4,€1995).€€€ĢĢą ąIn€a€revocation€proceeding,€the€State€carries€the€burden€of€establishing€theĻviolation€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€ņņState€v.€Harkinsóó,€811€S.W.2d€79,€82Ļ(Tenn.€1991).€€The€trial€court€has€the€discretion€to€revoke€the€community€correctionsĻsentence€upon€a€finding€that€the€defendant€has€violated€the€conditions€of€theĻagreement;€the€trial€court€may€then€order€the€defendant€to€serve€his€sentence€inĻconfinement.€€ņņHarkinsóó,€811€S.W.2d€at€82;€ņņRayóó,€slip.€op.€at€4.€€However,€before€a€trialĻcourt€may€revoke€a€community€corrections€sentence,€the€record€must€containĻsufficient€evidence€to€permit€the€trial€court€to€make€an€intelligent€and€conscientiousĻdecision.€€ņņHarkinsóó,€811€S.W.2d€at€82;€ņņRayóó,€slip€op.€at€4.€€When€revoking€aĻcommunity€corrections€sentence,€the€trial€court€must€place€its€findings€of€fact€andĻthe€reasons€for€the€revocation€on€the€record.€€ņņRayóó,€slip€op.€at€4„5;€€ņņseeóó€ņņGagnonóó,€411ĻU.S.€at€786.ĢĢą ąIn€ņņState€v.€Harkinsóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€held€that€an€abuse€ofĻdiscretion€standard€of€appellate€review€should€be€used€to€address€the€revocation€ofĻa€community€corrections€sentence.€€ņņHarkinsóó,€811€S.W.2d€at€82.€€To€find€an€abuse€ofĻdiscretion€by€the€trial€court,€the€reviewing€court€must€establish€that€"the€recordĻcontains€no€substantial€evidence€to€support€the€conclusion€of€the€trial€judge€that€aĻviolation€of€the€conditions€of€probation€has€occurred."€€ņņId.óó€€ĢĢą ąConsidering€the€record€before€us,€we€conclude€that€substantial€evidenceĻexists€to€establish€that€the€Defendant€violated€the€terms€of€his€communityĻcorrections€sentence.€€The€evidence€in€the€record€reflects€that€the€Defendant€hadĻthree€violations€of€his€sentence€by€testing€positive€for€marijuana,€failing€to€payĻrestitution,€and€by€failing€to€make€his€monthly€payment€for€court€costs€and€fines.€€ĢĢą ąIn€revoking€the€sentence,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€Defendant€had€failedĻto€live€up€to€the€terms€of€the€behavioral€agreement€he€signed.€€Although€the€courtĻacknowledged€that€the€Defendant€had€completed€a€drug€rehabilitation€programĻsince€his€violation,€the€trial€court€still€found€that€the€Defendant€could€not€abide€byĻthe€terms€of€the€agreement.€€Although€the€Defendant€told€the€court€he€planned€toĻapply€his€income€tax€refund€toward€the€debt,€no€evidence€in€the€record€shows€thatĻhe€did€so.€€Moreover,€the€court€noted€that€in€the€extended€length€of€time€since€theĻsentence€was€imposed,€the€Defendant€had€only€paid€one€hundred€twenty„nineĻdollars€toward€his€debt€for€court€costs,€fines,€and€restitution.€€The€court€further€foundĻthat€the€Defendant€obviously€could€not€abide€by€the€terms€of€the€sentence,€and€inĻlight€of€the€need€for€deterrence,€the€court€believed€revocation€of€the€Defendant'sĻcommunity€corrections€sentence€was€in€order.€ĢĢą ąWe€conclude€that€the€record€contains€ample€evidence€to€support€the€trialĻcourt's€finding€that€the€appellant€violated€the€terms€of€his€community€correctionsĻsentence.€€The€record€reflects€that€the€court€made€a€conscientious€decision€inĻrevoking€the€sentence€and€the€judge€placed€his€findings€and€conclusions€on€theĻrecord.€€Because€we€find€no€abuse€of€discretion,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isĻaffirmed.€€€€€€ĢĢĢÓÓą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą________________________________Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEĢĢĢĢĒCONCUR:ĢĢĢĢ___________________________________ĢGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEĢĢĢ___________________________________ĢJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JUDGE