ÿWPCK< U½OBm›q#ÛŽ:ËUþÕ žå'I€ ôzÌ¿¥!…Ÿ¹î?c²ò1á„>fË¡°€Øà"üF1 ‚Œû´ Év:}ùÀÕä ’¿¨£Ö*#¢ÒuÈŽæ:°uÂdWëK1̸¤{32ÏPå~ÓBvEµáÚÖ[ ×[›`·íï“6ç¦ߎ¿§1f1تØ?¯#W Xˆ¢ÂÈ?±ÕÃn­`†” ïš=ðaœ;s½ëŽö'ŽWB„GÇy⬡Žý*QÒ´ŸÌa``फ़6:þ0êbð·R禧ó%ÅY°t—ÿ6ž+°â=â{(h³wB‘/ýÂc4Ëäí-ž¤‘›_‡¨³±‹Wj}oM»è„?xˆ-áfŽã®r Áˆ<Ü÷1ñÞ7¯Ž¢ˆE$æHأ˾‘‹í$'@Š“Ëöû;)„¥x¼:–²[ÈØ»úÇM$Ã2y»ZtiCY,Öèx_ð©˜OŽ]´á5›€H„f°H[“«('0…2þÜÉ!kB;»÷\äÕPðo5¿‡§­¢“Ò½I‚¸Ý²V6e£†lWI6‚Sò±ªB@úLu{wЏL…h¾‘$ ýÌÏ“™³Ýè6˜QQir›…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ U:Í b w@ 4O c UNr 0 ÒÀ 0D’ jÖ Ü @î Ø™ U :q"ƒ «".,U:4/jn/U:Ø23U:¡6ØÛ6U:³8í8ãõ8U:Ø9 B::::::::::: D3/:/:/: 0Db:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b:b: AO¦:Æõ:õ: 0D»; D/ÿ; B.<˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,“í|AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- 67D8D9D:D> e?D@DAUBÓ€uM%3|xK(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(‚(2¨[$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XZüXXXÔÔ€ô¥ÇôXXZüÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó `Ý ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xj“XXXÔÔ€ô•“ôXXj“ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€original€opinion€in€òòWeiskopfóó€was€filed€on€February€4,€1998,€wherein€this€Court€held€Tenn.€CodeÐ `  ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„201(b)€to€be€unconstitutional€as€it€is€violative€of€the€due€process€clauses€of€the€federal€and€stateÏconstitutions.€€òòState€v.€Jason€M.€Weiskopfóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9611„CR„00381,€1998€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXISÐ Ü | Ð153,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€February€4,€1998,€at€Jackson).€€The€Supreme€Court€remandedÏthe€case€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€for€reconsideration€of€the€issue€in€light€of€the€Courtððs€holding€in€òòKingóó.€Ð X ø ÐòòState€v.€Jason€M.€Weiskopfóó,€1998€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€1228,€at€*1. Ò Ý ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xj“XXXÔÔ€ô•“ôXXj“ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-201(b)€provides:Ð `  ÐÌà8 ` à(1)€In€all€contested€criminal€cases,€except€for€capital€crimes€which€are€governed€by€theÏprocedures€contained€in€ðððð€39-13-204€and€39-13-205,€upon€the€motion€of€either€party,€filedÏwith€the€court€prior€to€the€selection€of€the€jury,€the€court€shall€charge€the€possible€penaltiesÏfor€the€offense€charged€and€all€lesser€included€offenses.Ð ` (#` (# ÐÌà8 ` à(2)(A)(I)€When€a€charge€as€to€possible€penalties€has€been€requested€pursuant€to€subdivisionÏ(b)(1),€the€judge€shall€also€include€in€the€instructions€for€the€jury€to€weigh€and€consider€theÏmeaning€of€a€sentence€of€imprisonment€for€the€offense€charged€and€any€lesser€includedÏoffenses.€Such€instruction€shall€include€an€approximate€calculation€of€the€minimum€numberÏof€years€a€person€sentenced€to€imprisonment€for€the€offense€charged€and€lesser€includedÏoffenses€must€serve€before€reaching€such€person's€earliest€release€eligibility€date.€SuchÏcalculation€shall€include€such€factors€as€the€release€eligibility€percentage€established€by€ððÏ40-35-501,€maximum€and€minimum€sentence€reduction€credits€authorized€by€ðð€41-21-236Ïand€the€governor's€power€to€reduce€prison€overcrowding€pursuant€to€title€41,€chapter€1,€partÏ5,€if€applicable.Ð ` (#` (# ЀÌà8 ` à(ii)€Such€instructions€to€the€jury€shall€also€include€a€statement€that€whether€a€defendant€isÏactually€released€from€incarceration€on€the€date€when€such€defendant€is€first€eligible€forÏrelease€is€a€discretionary€decision€made€by€the€board€of€paroles€based€upon€many€factors,Ïand€that€such€board€has€the€authority€to€require€the€defendant€to€serve€the€entire€sentenceÏimposed€by€the€court.Ð ` (#` (# ÐÌà8 ` à(B)€On€an€annual€basis,€the€department€of€correction€shall€provide€each€judge€exercisingÏcriminal€trial€court€jurisdiction€with€the€approximate€calculation€required€in€subdivision€(2)(a).ÏSuch€calculation€shall€be€broken€down€to€show€the€effect€of€each€factor€used€in€making€suchÏcalculation.€If€the€calculation€provided€by€the€department€to€the€judges€changes€because€ofÏa€change€in€the€law€or€correctional€policy,€court€intervention,€the€governor's€prisonÏovercrowding€policy€or€any€other€such€circumstance,€the€department€shall€send€a€revisedÏcalculation€to€the€judges€as€such€changes€occur. äÝ ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xj“XXXÔÔ€ô•“ôXXj“ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Effective€May€18,€1998,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„201(b)€was€amended€to€provide€the€following:Ð `  ÐÌà8 ` àIn€all€contested€criminal€cases,€except€for€capital€crimes€which€are€governed€by€theÏprocedures€contained€in€ðððð€39-13-204€and€39-13-205,€and€as€necessary€to€comply€with€theÏConstitution€of€Tennessee,€article€VI,€section€14,€and€ðð€40-35-301,€the€judge€shall€not€instructÏthe€jury,€nor€shall€the€attorneys€be€permitted€to€comment€at€any€time€to€the€jury,€on€possibleÏpenalties€for€the€offense€charged€nor€all€lesser€included€offenses. …Ý ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xj“XXXÔÔ€ô•“ôXXj“ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Currently€pending€before€the€Supreme€Court€is€the€issue€whether€a€trial€court€is€required€to€makeÐ `  ÐòòWilkersonóó€findings€when€consecutive€sentencing€is€based€upon€criteria€other€than€the€ð ðdangerous€offenderððÐ  ¾ Ðstandard€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(4).€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€David€Keith€Laneóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9607„Ð Ü | ÐCC„00259,€1997€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€566,€Bradley€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€June€18,€1997,€atÏKnoxville),€òòperm.€to€app.€grantedóó€(Tenn.€February€2,€1998).€€Nevertheless,€under€our€review€of€this€issue,€weÐ Z ú Ðwill€require€òòWilkersonóófindings€regardless€of€the€statutory€basis€for€consecutive€sentencing. ÎÝ ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xj“XXXÔÔ€ô•“ôXXj“ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€According€to€the€presentence€report,€Appellant€was€arrested€for€driving€on€a€suspended€license€inÐ `  ÐJuly€1992,€but€failed€to€appear€in€court.€€In€January€1995,€he€was€arrested€due€to€his€prior€failure€to€appearÏand€convicted€on€the€offense€of€driving€on€a€suspended€license.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular y Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-201(b)€provides:Ð `  ÐÌà8  à(1)€In€all€contested€criminal€cases,€except€for€capital€crimes€which€are€governed€byÏthe€procedures€contained€in€ðððð€39-13-204€and€39-13-205,€upon€the€motion€of€eitherÏparty,€filed€with€the€court€prior€to€the€selection€of€the€jury,€the€court€shall€charge€theÏpossible€penalties€for€the€offense€charged€and€all€lesser€included€offenses.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à(2)(A)(i›)€When€a€charge€as€to€possible€penalties€has€been€requested€pursuant€toÏsubdivision€(b)(1),€the€judge€shall€also€include€in€the€instructions€for€the€jury€toÏweigh€and€consider€the€meaning€of€a€sentence€of€imprisonment€for€the€offenseÏcharged€and€any€lesser€included€offenses.€Such€instruction€shall€include€anÏapproximate€calculation€of€the€minimum€number€of€years€a€person€sentenced€toÏimprisonment€for€the€offense€charged€and€lesser€included€offenses€must€serve€beforeÏreaching€such€person's€earliest€release€eligibility€date.€Such€calculation€shall€includeÏsuch€factors€as€the€release€eligibility€percentage€established€by€ðð€40-35-501,Ïmaximum€and€minimum€sentence€reduction€credits€authorized€by€ðð€41-21-236€andÏthe€governor's€power€to€reduce€prison€overcrowding€pursuant€to€title€41,€chapter€1,Ïpart€5,€if€applicable.Ð Ð Ð  ЀÌà8  à(ii)€Such€instructions€to€the€jury€shall€also€include€a€statement€that€whether€aÏdefendant€is€actually€released€from€incarceration€on€the€date€when€such€defendant€isÏfirst€eligible€for€release€is€a€discretionary€decision€made€by€the€board€of€paroles€basedÏupon€many€factors,€and€that€such€board€has€the€authority€to€require€the€defendant€toÏserve€the€entire€sentence€imposed€by€the€court.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à(B)€On€an€annual€basis,€the€department€of€correction€shall€provide€each€judgeÏexercising€criminal€trial€court€jurisdiction€with€the€approximate€calculation€requiredÏin€subdivision€(2)(a).€Such€calculation€shall€be€broken€down€to€show€the€effect€ofÏeach€factor€used€in€making€such€calculation.€If€the€calculation€provided€by€theÏdepartment€to€the€judges€changes€because€of€a€change€in€the€law€or€correctionalÏpolicy,€court€intervention,€the€governor's€prison€overcrowding€policy€or€any€otherÏsuch€circumstance,€the€department€shall€send€a€revised€calculation€to€the€judges€asÏsuch€changes€occur. üÝ ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xs" XXXÔÔ€ôõÎô XXs"ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Effective€May€18,€1998,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„201(b)€was€amended€to€provide€the€following:Ð `  ÐÌà8 ` àIn€all€contested€criminal€cases,€except€for€capital€crimes€which€are€governed€by€theÏprocedures€contained€in€ðððð€39-13-204€and€39-13-205,€and€as€necessary€to€comply€with€theÏConstitution€of€Tennessee,€article€VI,€section€14,€and€ðð€40-35-301,€the€judge€shall€not€instructÐ X ø  Ðthe€jury,€nor€shall€the€attorneys€be€permitted€to€comment€at€any€time€to€the€jury,€on€possibleÏpenalties€for€the€offense€charged€nor€all€lesser€included€offenses.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular `Ý ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xs" XXXÔÔ€ôõÎô XXs"ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€The€original€opinion€in€òòWeiskopfóó€was€filed€on€February€4,€1998,€wherein€this€Court€held€Tenn.€CodeÐ `  ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„201(b)€to€be€unconstitutional€as€it€is€violative€of€the€due€process€clauses€of€the€federal€and€stateÏconstitutions.€€òòState€v.€Jason€M.€Weiskopfóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9611„CR„00381,€1998€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXISÐ Ü | Ð153,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€February€4,€1998,€at€Jackson).€€The€Supreme€Court€remandedÏthe€case€to€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€for€reconsideration€of€the€issue€in€light€of€the€Courtððs€holding€in€òòKingóó.€Ð X ø ÐòòState€v.€Jason€M.€Weiskopfóó,€1998€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€1228,€at€*1.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular …Ý ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xs" XXXÔÔ€ôõÎô XXs"ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Currently€pending€before€the€Supreme€Court€is€the€issue€whether€a€trial€court€is€required€to€makeÐ `  ÐòòWilkersonóó€findings€when€consecutive€sentencing€is€based€upon€criteria€other€than€the€ð ðdangerous€offenderððÐ  ¾ Ðstandard€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(4).€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€David€Keith€Laneóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9607„Ð Ü | ÐCC„00259,€1997€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€566,€Bradley€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€June€18,€1997,€atÏKnoxville),€òòperm.€to€app.€grantedóó€(Tenn.€February€2,€1998).€€Nevertheless,€under€our€review€of€this€issue,€weÐ Z ú Ðwill€require€òòWilkersonóófindings€regardless€of€the€statutory€basis€for€consecutive€sentencing.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ÎÝ ƒ #Ö$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Xs" XXXÔÔ€ôõÎô XXs"ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€According€to€the€presentence€report,€Appellant€was€arrested€for€driving€on€a€suspended€license€inÐ `  ÐJuly€1992,€but€failed€to€appear€in€court.€€In€January€1995,€he€was€arrested€due€to€his€prior€failure€to€appearÏand€convicted€on€the€offense€of€driving€on€a€suspended€license.,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ÙÔ€XZüXXXÔÔ€ö XXZüÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XZüX öÔÐ  ÐÌMay€6,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñBññ>ñ›ñ>ññBñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€Š‚óŠXXÔÔ€Š£ ŠŠŠ‚óÔÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€6rXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñBñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` 8ttxP,` ð  rß›ñBñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌNOVEMBER€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À à)à  àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9712„CR„00564Ð ` 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  àDAVIDSON€COUNTYÐ Xø  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHON.€CHERYL€BLACKBURNó óÐ Xø  Ðò òRAYMOND€HALE,ó óà h àà 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€Appeal€„€Class€C€Felony)Ð Xø Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð 8Ø ÐÌJEFFREY€A.€DEVASHERà À àà  àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ ( È ÐAssistant€Public€Defenderà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ  !À Ð(On€Appeal)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDARYL€J.€BRANDÌJOAN€A.€LAWSONà h àà À àà  àSenior€CounselÐ $¨ ÐAssistant€Public€Defenderà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÐ %  Ð(At€Trial)à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€€37201„1649Ð ø%˜ Ð1202€Stahlman€BuildingÌNashville,€TN€€37201à h àà À àà  àVICTOR€S.€JOHNSONÐ è'ˆ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAN€HAMMÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àSHARON€BROXÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€AttorneysÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à222€Second€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€€37201„1649ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÐ  p6-. ÐÓ  ÓÔ€°_°ŠŠ£ Ôò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€Š£ а°_ÔÐ `  ÐÌñ8ñÌÌñ8ñÓ  ÓÓÓñ9ññ6ñÔ‡ Š¢†ŠŠŠ²*Ôñ6ññ9ññ:ññ6ñÔ‡Xs" XŠŠ²*Ôñ6ññ:ññ6ñÑ7€6rXXdìXXdì7Ññ6ññ8ññ6ñÌñ6ññ8ññ6ñÌà ` àThe€appellant,€Raymond€A.€Hale,€Jr.,€was€convicted€by€a€Davidson€CountyÏjury€of€one€(1)€count€of€robbery,€a€Class€C€felony.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€himÏas€a€Range€I€offender€to€five€(5)€years€in€community€corrections€and€ordered€thatÏAppellantððs€sentence€run€consecutively€to€his€sentence€on€an€unrelated€offenseÏfor€which€he€was€on€probation€at€the€time€the€present€offense€was€committed.€ÏOn€appeal,€Appellant€raises€the€following€issues€for€our€review:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(1)€whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€sustain€the€juryððs€verdict€ofÏguilt;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€theÏlesser€included€offense€of€attempted€theft;Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(3)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€charging€the€jury€with€the€ð ðtruth€inÏsentencingðð€instruction;€andÐ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(4)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€consecutive€sentences.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓAfter€a€thorough€review€of€the€record€before€this€Court,€we€conclude€that€thereÏis€no€reversible€error.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌà@II,®àò òòòFACTSó óóóˆÐ 6*Ö ! ÐÌà ` àAt€approximately€8:00€p.m.€on€December€13,€1996,€Delores€Butler,€herÏdaughter€and€her€granddaughter€left€the€Walgreensðð€drugstore€on€Gallatin€PikeÏin€Nashville.€€€As€they€were€walking€to€their€car,€a€man€approached€Ms.€ButlerÏand€demanded€that€she€give€him€her€purse.€€Butler€responded,€ð ðno,€Iððm€not.ðð€€ÏThe€man€reached€for€her€purse,€and€as€Butler€stepped€away€from€the€man,€sheÏfell€backwards.€As€she€fell,€Butler€dropped€her€belongings,€which€scatteredÏthroughout€the€parking€lot.€€€The€man€reached€over€Butler,€and€Butler€beganÐ Æ9f01 Ðkicking€and€screaming.€€The€man€then€ran€away€with€an€object€in€his€hands.€ÏSubsequently,€when€Butler€attempted€to€collect€her€belongings€in€the€parking€lot,Ïshe€was€unable€to€locate€her€wallet.€Ìà ` àBystanders€in€the€area€heard€the€victim€shouting€and€came€to€herÏassistance.€€Several€men€chased€the€perpetrator,€apprehended€him€and€broughtÏhim€back€to€the€Walgreensðð€parking€lot.€€Butler€identified€the€man€apprehendedÏby€the€bystanders€as€the€man€who€robbed€her.€€The€offender€was€identified€atÏtrial€as€the€Appellant.€Ìà ` àThe€next€morning,€Ms.€Butler€went€back€to€Walgreensðð€and€found€her€walletÏin€the€parking€lot.€€€The€wallet€was€found€in€close€proximity€to€where€the€incidentÏoccurred.€Ìà ` àThe€jury€found€Appellant€guilty€of€robbery,€and€the€trial€court€sentencedÏAppellant€to€five€(5)€years,€to€be€served€on€community€corrections.€€The€trial€courtÏfurther€ordered€that€Appellantððs€sentence€for€robbery€would€run€consecutively€toÏhis€sentence€on€an€unrelated€offense€for€which€he€was€on€probation€at€the€timeÏof€the€present€offense.€€From€his€conviction€and€sentence,€Appellant€now€bringsÏthis€appeal.ÌÌà@îî!®àò òòòSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óóóˆÐ @,à"$ ÐÌà ` àIn€his€first€issue€on€appeal,€Appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€theÏconvicting€evidence.€€Specifically,€he€claims€that€there€was€insufficient€evidenceÏto€establish€that€Appellant€obtained€or€exercised€control€over€Ms.€ButlerððsÏproperty.€€Therefore,€he€argues€that€he€did€not€commit€a€ð ðtheft€of€propertyðð€asÏrequired€by€the€robbery€statute,€and€no€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€himÏguilty€of€robbery€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ð à9€02 Ðà@EE-®àò òA.ó óˆÐ `  Ðà ` àWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€CourtÏis€obliged€to€review€that€challenge€according€to€certain€well„settled€principles.€ÏWhere€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€contested€on€appeal,€the€relevantÏquestion€for€the€reviewing€court€is€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€haveÏfound€the€accused€guilty€of€every€element€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€Ð °  ÐOn€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidenceÏas€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€ÏòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€In€conducting€ourÐ à€ Ðevaluation€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€is€precluded€from€reweighing€orÏreconsidering€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929€S.W.2d€380,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð À` ÐApp.€1996);€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€Ð ° P ÐMoreover,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€own€inferences€ð ðfor€those€drawn€byÏthe€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.ðð€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€atÐ $0 Ð779.Ìà ` àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€valueÏto€be€given€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€òòState€v.€Tuttleóó,€914€S.W.2d€926,€932Ð P,ð"$ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€A€verdict€of€guilty€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trialÏjudge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€stateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflictsÏin€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259Ð  2À(* Ð(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€at€75.€€Although€an€accused€isÐ 4°*, Ðoriginally€cloaked€with€a€presumption€of€innocence,€a€jury€verdict€removes€thisÏâ âpresumption€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt.€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,Ð ð7.0 Ð914€(Tenn.€1982).€Hence,€on€appeal,€the€burden€of€proof€rests€with€Appellant€toÏdemonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€òòId.óóÐ P ð Ðâ âà@BB-®àò òB.ó óˆÐ @ à Ðà ` àRobbery€is€defined€as€the€ð ðintentional€or€knowing€theft€of€property€from€theÏperson€of€another€by€violence€or€putting€the€person€in€fear.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ39„13„401(a).€€A€person€commits€a€theft€of€property€if€ð ðwith€intent€to€deprive€theÏowner€of€property,€the€person€knowingly€obtains€or€exercises€control€over€theÏproperty€without€the€ownerððs€effective€consent.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„103.Ìà@BB-®àò òC.ó óˆÐ ð Ðà ` àAppellant€argues€that€there€is€insufficient€evidence€to€establish€that€heÏobtained€or€exercised€control€over€Ms.€Butlerððs€property,€and€accordingly,€thereÏis€insufficient€evidence€that€he€committed€a€theft.€€He€bases€this€argument€on€theÏfact€that€the€victim€found€her€wallet€in€the€Walgreensðð€parking€lot€the€day€after€theÏincident.Ìà ` àThe€victim€testified€that€Appellant€approached€her€and€demanded€that€sheÏgive€him€her€purse.€€Butler€declined€to€turn€over€her€belongings,€stepped€awayÏfrom€Appellant€and€fell€backwards.€€Appellant€reached€over€her,€and€she€andÏAppellant€struggled.€€As€they€were€struggling,€Appellant€grabbed€an€object€andÏran€away€with€what€appeared€to€be€her€wallet€in€his€hands.€€€An€eyewitness€to€theÏincident€testified€that€he€saw€Appellant€grab€something€before€running€away.€ÏAnother€eyewitness€stated€that€Appellant€appeared€to€be€clutching€an€object€asÏhe€was€running€away€from€the€scene.€Ìà ` àAlthough€the€victim€found€her€wallet€the€next€day€in€the€general€vicinity€thatÏthe€incident€took€place,€it€was€a€jury€question€as€to€whether€Appellant€obtainedÏor€exercised€control€over€the€wallet.€€The€jury€could€have€properly€found€thatÏAppellant€seized€the€victimððs€wallet€and€then€dropped€the€wallet€during€theÐ ð902 Ðstruggle€with€Butler€or€as€he€fled€the€scene.€€This€Court€may€not€second„guessÏthe€juryððs€findings€in€this€regard.€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€there€is€sufficientÏevidence€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€Appellant€guilty€of€robbery€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@* * ®àò òòòLESSER€INCLUDED€OFFENSE€„€ATTEMPTED€THEFTó óóóˆÐ    ÐÌà ` àAppellant€contends€that€he€was€denied€a€fair€trial€when€the€trial€courtÏrefused€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€lesser€included€offense€of€attempted€theft€ofÏproperty.€€He€asserts€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€could€have€supportedÏa€finding€by€the€jury€that€Appellant€did€not€obtain€control€over€the€victimððs€propertyÏand€that€his€actions€did€not€place€the€victim€in€fear.€€Therefore,€he€claims€that€theÏevidence€would€support€an€instruction€on€attempted€theft,€and€the€trial€court€erredÏin€failing€to€so€instruct€the€jury.Ìà ` àIn€a€criminal€trial,€the€accused€has€a€right€to€a€correct€and€complete€chargeÏof€the€law€applicable€to€the€case.€€òòState€v.€Phippsóó,€883€S.W.2d€138,€142€(Tenn.Ð p(  ÐCrim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€Wrightóó,€618€S.W.2d€310,€315€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€Ð `*!" ÐIt€is€well„established€that€a€defendant€is€entitled€to€a€jury€instruction€ð ðon€all€lesserÏincluded€offenses€where€ððany€facts€.€.€.€are€susceptible€of€inferring€guilt€of€anyÏlesser€included€offense.ðððð€€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€305,€310€(Tenn.€1996)Ð 00Ð&( Ð(quoting€òòState€v.€Wrightóó,€618€S.W.2d€at€315).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-18-110(a)Ð  2À(* Ðprovides:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà ¸ àIt€is€the€duty€of€all€judges€charging€juries€in€cases€of€criminalÏprosecutions€for€any€felony€wherein€two€(2)€or€more€grades€orÏclasses€of€offense€may€be€included€in€the€indictment,€to€charge€theÏjury€as€to€all€of€the€law€of€each€offense€included€in€the€indictment,Ïwithout€any€request€on€the€part€of€the€defendant€to€do€so.€€Ðà9€02` ü!` ü! ЇÓÓà ` àð ðAn€offense€is€necessarily€included€in€another€if€the€elements€of€the€greaterÏoffense,€as€those€elements€are€set€forth€in€the€indictment,€include,€but€are€notÏcongruent€with,€all€the€elements€of€the€lesser.ðð€€òòHoward€v.€Stateóó,€578€S.W.2d€83,Ð @ à Ð85€(Tenn.€1979);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€310„11.€€In€other€words,Ð 0Ð Ðan€offense€is€considered€a€lesser€included€offense€ð ðif€the€elements€of€the€includedÏoffense€are€a€subset€of€the€elements€of€the€charged€offenseðð€and€ð ðthe€greaterÏoffense€cannot€be€committed€without€also€committing€the€lesser€offense.ðð€€òòStateÐ    Ðv.€Trustyóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€310.Ð ð  Ðà ` àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€trial€court€charged€the€jury€with€robbery,Ð à€ Ðattempted€robbery€and€theft€of€property.€€Appellant€requested€that€the€trial€courtÏinstruct€the€jury€on€attempted€theft,€but€the€trial€court€declined€to€do€so.Ìà ` àTheft€of€property€is€clearly€a€lesser€included€offense€of€robbery€as€theÏelements€of€theft€are€a€ð ðsubsetðð€of€the€elements€of€robbery€and€one€must€commitÏa€ð ðtheftðð€in€order€to€commit€the€offense€of€robbery.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Trustyóó,€919Ð "0 ÐS.W.2d€at€310;€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„13„401(a),€39„14„103.€€Furthermore,€atÏtrial€a€defense€theory€was€that€Appellant€did€not€complete€the€theft€because€heÏdid€not€obtain€or€exercise€control€over€the€victimððs€property.€€Under€theseÏcircumstances,€attempted€theft€was€a€lesser€included€offense€of€the€indictedÏoffense€of€robbery.€€ð ðIf€there€is€any€evidence€reasonable€minds€could€accept€asÏto€any€such€lesser€offenses,€the€accused€is€entitled€to€appropriate€instructionsÏregarding€the€lesser€offenses.ðð€€òòState€v.€Atkinsóó,€681€S.W.2d€571,€577€(Tenn.Ð  0À&( ÐCrim.€App.€1984).€€Thus,€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€as€to€theÏlesser€included€offense€of€attempted€theft.Ìà ` àHowever,€Appellant€is€not€necessarily€entitled€to€relief€as€a€result€of€thisÏerror.€€Our€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€a€trial€courtððs€failure€to€instruct€on€aÏlesser€included€offense€is€subject€to€harmless€error€analysis.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,Ð Ð9p02 Ð977€S.W.2d€101,€106„08€(Tenn.€1998).€€In€òòWilliamsóó,€the€defendant€was€chargedÐ `  Ðwith€premeditated€first€degree€murder,€and€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€onÏpremeditated€first€degree€murder,€second€degree€murder€and€reckless€homicide.€ÏòòId.óó€at€104.€€The€trial€court€rejected€a€defense€request€for€an€instruction€onÐ 0Ð Ðvoluntary€manslaughter.€€òòId.óó€€While€acknowledging€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÐ  À Ðrefusing€to€charge€the€jury€on€voluntary€manslaughter,€the€Court€held€such€errorÏwas€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòId.óó€at€106„08.€€The€Court€reasoned:Ð    ÐÓÓà8 ` à[b]y€convicting€the€defendant€of€first€degree€murder€the€juryÏdetermined€that€the€proof€was€sufficient€to€establish€all€the€elementsÏof€that€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€including€that€the€killingÏwas€ð ðintentional,€deliberate€and€premeditated.ðð€€In€other€words,€byÏfinding€the€defendant€guilty€of€the€highest€offense€to€the€exclusionÏof€the€immediately€lesser€offense,€second€degree€murder,€the€juryÏnecessarily€rejected€all€other€lesser€offenses,€including€voluntaryÏmanslaughter.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€courtððs€erroneous€failure€toÏcharge€voluntary€manslaughter€is€harmless€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt€because€the€juryððs€verdict€of€guilt€on€the€greater€offense€ofÏfirst€degree€murder€and€its€disinclination€to€consider€the€lesserÏincluded€offense€of€second€degree€murder€clearly€demonstrates€thatÏit€certainly€would€not€have€returned€a€verdict€on€voluntaryÏmanslaughter.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€106.Ð x% Ðà ` àThe€present€case€is€closely€analogous€to€òòWilliamsóó.€€The€trial€court€properlyÐ h' Ðcharged€the€jury€with€the€lesser€offenses€of€attempted€robbery€and€theft,€but€theÏjury€returned€a€guilty€verdict€on€the€indicted€offense€of€robbery.€€By€returning€aÏguilty€verdict€on€the€greatest€offense€to€the€exclusion€of€the€lesser€chargedÏoffenses,€the€jury€ð ðnecessarily€rejected€all€other€lesser€offenses.ðð€€òòId.óó€€As€a€result,Ð (/È%' Ðwe€must€conclude€that€the€error€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìœñ6ññAñÌñAñ›œñ6ññ6ññAñÌñAñ›ñ6ñÐ Ø8x/1 Ðà@* * ®àò òòòð ðTRUTH€IN€SENTENCINGðð€JURY€INSTRUCTIONó óóóˆÐ `  ÐÌà ` àIn€his€next€issue,€Appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€instructingÏthe€jury€on€the€minimum€number€of€years€he€would€serve€before€becomingÏeligible€for€parole.€€He€claims€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-201(b),ñ>ñ׃×ñ>ññ>ñ׃×ñ>ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€whichÐ 0Ð Ðrequires€that€parole€eligibility€be€charged€in€conjunction€with€a€range€of€penaltiesÏcharge,€is€unconstitutionally€vague,€violates€due€process,€deprives€a€defendantÏof€a€fair€and€impartial€jury€and€constitutes€an€unconstitutional€attempt€by€theÏlegislature€to€exercise€judicial€powers.Ìà@EE-®àò òA.ó óˆÐ à€ Ðà ` àThe€state€responds€that€this€issue€is€controlled€by€the€recent€TennesseeÏâ âSupreme€Court€case€òòState€v.€Kingóó,€973€S.W.2d€586€(Tenn.€1998),€wherein€theÐ Ðp ÐCourt€held€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„201(b)(2)€constitutional.ñ>ñ׃×ñ>ññ>ñ׃’×ñ>ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€òòKingóó,€the€CourtÐ `  Ðâ ârejected€similar€challenges€to€the€parole€eligibility€jury€instruction,€concluding€thatÏthe€statute€was€not€impermissibly€vague€and€did€not€violate€the€separation€ofÏpowers€clauses€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€òòId.óó€at€588„92.€€The€Court€alsoÐ 0Ð Ðnoted€that€the€jury€instruction€did€not€deprive€the€defendant€of€an€impartial€jury.€ÏòòId.óó€at€588,€n.€4.€€Furthermore,€the€Court€determined€that€the€defendantððs€dueÐ °  Ðprocess€rights€were€not€violated€by€the€instruction€and€observed:ÌÓÓà8 ` à[t]he€jurors€in€this€case€were€properly€instructed€that€the€State€mustÏprove€each€element€of€the€charged€offense€beyond€a€reasonableÏdoubt.€€òòSignificantly,€they€were€additionally€instructed€that€they€wereÐ à€ Ðnot€to€attempt€to€fix€punishment€for€the€offense€and€that€theÏsentencing€information€was€ð ðfor€your€information€onlyóó.ðð€€When€theÐ Ðp Ðtrial€court€explains,€as€it€did€here,€that€the€sentencing,€parole,€andÏearly€release€information€is€not€to€be€considered€in€theÏdetermination€of€guilt€or€innocence,€then€certainly€no€due€processÏviolation€has€occurred.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€592€(emphasis€added).Ð   @ Ðà ` àThe€holding€in€òòKingóó€was€limited,€however,€to€the€circumstances€of€thatÐ "0 Ðparticular€case.€€The€Court€concluded,€ð ð[i]n€sum,€under€the€circumstancesÏpresented€we€find€that€the€jury€instruction€given€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼201(b)(2)€did€not€deprive€the€appellant€of€his€due€process€right€to€a€fair€trial.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ `(  Ðà@BB-®àò òB.ó óˆÐ P*ð " Ðà ` àSubsequent€to€the€release€of€òòKingóó,€this€Court€filed€its€opinion€in€the€caseÐ P,ð"$ Ðof€òòState€v.€Jason€M.€Weiskopfóó,€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9611„CR„00381,€1998€Tenn.Ð @.à$& Ðâ âCrim.€App.€LEXIS€1228,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€December€4,Ð 00Ð&( Ð1998,€at€Jackson).ñ>ñ׃ ×ñ>ññ>ñ׃ ×ñ>ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Judge€Joe€G.€Riley,€writing€for€the€Court,€held€that€theÐ `  Ðâ âdefendantððs€due€process€rights€had€been€violated€by€the€parole€eligibility€juryÏinstruction.€€The€Court€distinguished€the€Supreme€Courtððs€holding€in€òòKingóóon€theÐ @ à Ðbasis€that,€unlike€in€òòKingóó,€the€jury€in€òòWeiskopfóówas€instructed€that€they€couldÐ 0Ð Ðð ðweigh€and€consider€the€meaning€of€a€sentence€of€imprisonment.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€*3„4.€Ð  À ÐThe€Court€observed€that€the€jury€does€not€determine€a€defendantððs€sentence€inÏnon„capital€cases,€and€therefore,€such€sentencing€information€is€irrelevant€to€theÏjuryððs€determination€of€guilt€or€innocence.€€òòId.óó€at€*4.€€As€a€result,€the€CourtÐ ð  Ðconcluded€that€instructing€the€jury€that€they€could€ð ðweigh€and€considerððÏextraneous,€irrelevant€information€deprived€the€defendant€of€a€fair€trial.€€òòId.óóÐ Ðp Ðà@BB-®àò òC.ó óˆÐ À` Ðà ` àIn€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€that€they€couldÐ À` Ðð ðweigh€and€consider€the€meaning€of€a€sentence€of€imprisonment.ðð€€€The€courtÏfurther€instructed€the€jury€as€to€the€range€of€punishment€for€robbery,€attemptedÏrobbery€and€theft.€€The€jury€was€instructed€that€the€earliest€release€eligibility€dateÏfor€robbery€was€.36€years€(131€days)€and€the€earliest€release€eligibility€date€forÏattempted€robbery€was€.24€years€(87€days).€€The€trial€court€also€instructed€theÏjury€that€punishment€for€theft€of€property€ð ðmay€be€set€up€to€eleven€(11)€monthsÏand€twenty„nine€(29)€days.ððÌà ` àWe€agree€with€the€òòWeiskopfóó€court€that€instructing€the€jury€to€ð ðweigh€andÐ @.à$& Ðconsider€the€meaning€of€a€sentence€of€imprisonmentðð€affects€an€accusedððsÏâ âconstitutional€right€to€a€fair€trial.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erredÐ  2À(* Ðin€instructing€the€jury€that€they€could€ð ðweigh€and€considerðð€such€irrelevantÏsentencing€information.Ìâ âà@BB-®àò òD.ó óˆÐ @ à Ðà ` àErroneous€jury€instructions€are€subject€to€harmless€error€review.€€òòState€v.Ð @à ÐBelseróó,€945€S.W.2d€776,€782€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€However,€if€the€error€isÐ 0Ð Ðconstitutional€in€nature,€there€must€be€a€reversal€unless€the€error€is€harmlessÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòId.óóÐ °  Ðà ` àIn€òòWeiskopfóó,€the€Court€declined€to€find€harmless€error.€€The€CourtÐ    Ðobserved€that€the€jury€was€instructed€that€the€earliest€release€eligibility€date€forÏfirst€degree€murder€was€25€years;€for€second€degree€murder,€the€earliest€releaseÏeligibility€date€was€1.06€years;€and€the€earliest€release€eligibility€date€for€voluntaryÏmanslaughter€was€.21€years.€€òòState€v.€Jason€M.€Weiskopfóó,€1998€Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð À` ÐLEXIS€1228,€at€*4.€€The€Court€stressed€the€gross€discrepancies€between€theÏrelease€eligibility€date€for€first€degree€murder€as€opposed€to€that€for€secondÏdegree€murder€and€voluntary€manslaughter.€€òòId.óó€€The€Court€stated,Ð $0 ÐÓÓà8 ` à[w]e€know€not€to€what€extent,€if€any,€the€jury€considered€theÏridiculously€low€release€eligibility€dates€for€second€degree€murderÏand€voluntary€manslaughter€as€compared€to€the€much€higherÏrelease€eligibility€date€for€first€degree€murder.€€Nevertheless,€we€areÏunable€to€conclude€that€this€information€had€no€impact€upon€the€juryÏsince€the€primary€issue€was€the€degree€of€homicide.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÌòòÓÓId.óóÐ H-è#% Ðà ` àIn€the€present€case,€the€jury€was€instructed€that€the€earliest€releaseÏeligibility€date€for€robbery€was€.36€years,€approximately€4€months,€11€days,€andÏ.24€years,€approximately€2€months,€27€days,€for€attempted€robbery.€€TheÏdistinction€between€the€release€eligibility€dates€is€slight€and€in€no€way€approachesÏthe€glaring€discrepancies€in€release€eligibility€dates€noticed€by€this€Court€inÏòòWeiskopfóó.€€Furthermore,€the€jury€was€not€instructed€on€a€minimum€releaseÐ è8ˆ/1 Ðeligibility€date€for€theft€of€property,€but€was€instructed€that€the€sentence€ð ðmay€beÏset€up€to€eleven€(11)€months€and€twenty„nine€(29)€days.ðð€€When€read€with€theÏremaining€instructions€as€to€sentencing€range,€this€statement€gives€theÏimpression€that€Appellant€could€be€required€to€serve€the€entire€eleven€(11)Ïmonths€and€twenty„nine€(29)€days,€clearly€a€more€lengthy€sentence€thanÏapproximately€4€months,€11€days€or€approximately€2€months,€27€days.Ìà ` àð ðJury€instructions€must€be€read€as€a€whole€rather€than€in€isolation.ðð€€òòStateÐ    Ðv.€Belseróó,€945€S.W.2d€at€782.€€After€reviewing€the€jury€instructions,€we€areÐ ð  Ðconvinced€that€the€parole€eligibility€jury€instruction€does€not€ð ðaffirmatively€appearÏto€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€the€merits.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(a).€ÏThe€error€was,€therefore,€harmless.Ìà ` àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@ÀÀ#®àò òòòCONSECUTIVE€SENTENCINGó óóóˆÐ "0 ÐÌà ` àIn€his€final€issue,€Appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€orderingÏthat€his€sentence€for€robbery€run€consecutively€to€his€sentence€for€a€prior€offense.€ÏAppellant€acknowledges€that€the€trial€court€properly€found€that€he€committed€theÏpresent€offense€while€on€probation€for€a€previous€offense.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð P,ð"$ Ððð€40„35„115(b)(6).€€However,€he€argues€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€notÏreasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offense€committed€and€is€not€necessaryÏto€protect€the€public€from€future€criminal€acts.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905Ð  2À(* ÐS.W.2d€933,€939€(Tenn.€1995).Ìà@EE-®àò òA.ó óˆÐ 6 ,. Мñ6ññ9ññ6ñÔ#†Xs" XX X #Ôñ6ññ9ññ?ññ6ñÔ‡Š¢†ŠŠŠ²*Ôñ6ññ?ñ›ñ6ñà ` àWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€ofÏa€sentence,€this€Court€conducts€a€òòde€novoóó€review€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ ð902 Ðdetermination€of€the€trial€court€was€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€ÏHowever,€this€presumption€of€correctness€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmativeÏshowing€that€the€trial€court€in€the€record€considered€the€sentencing€principles€andÏall€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169Ð 0Ð Ð(Tenn.€1991).€€In€the€event€that€the€record€fails€to€demonstrate€suchÏconsideration,€review€of€the€sentence€is€purely€òòde€novoóó.€€òòId.óó€€If€appellate€reviewÐ °  Ðreflects€that€the€trial€court€properly€considered€all€relevant€factors€and€its€findingsÏof€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record,€this€Court€must€affirm€theÏsentence.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ð à€ Ðà ` àIn€conducting€a€review,€this€Court€must€consider€the€evidence,€theÏpresentence€report,€the€sentencing€principles,€the€arguments€of€counsel,€theÏnature€and€character€of€the€offense,€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€anyÏstatements€made€by€the€defendant,€and€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€orÏtreatment.€€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€TheÐ "0 Ðdefendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence€imposed.€ÏòòState€v.€Gregoryóó,€862€S.W.2d€574,€578€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1993).ñ6ññ?ññ6ñÔ#†Š²*ŠŠŠ¢†ïi#Ôñ6ññ?ññ@ññ6ñÔ‡ Š¢†ŠŠŠ²*Ôñ6ññ@ññ6ñ›Ð p& Ðà ` àConsecutive€sentencing€is€governed€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-115.€ÏThe€trial€court€may€order€sentences€to€run€consecutively€if€it€finds€by€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€that€one€or€more€of€the€required€statutory€criteriaÏexist.€€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€924€S.W.2d€912,€917€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€Ð 0.Ð$& ÐFurthermore,€the€court€is€required€to€determine€whether€the€consecutiveÏsentences€(1)€are€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offenses€committed;Ïâ â(2)€serve€to€protect€the€public€from€further€criminal€conduct€by€the€offender;€andÐ 4 *, Ð(3)€are€congruent€with€general€principles€of€sentencing.€€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905Ð `  ÐS.W.2d€at€939.ñ>ñ׃×ñ>ññ>ñ׃×ñ>ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð P ð Ðâ âà@BB-®àò òB.ó óˆÐ @ à Ðà ` àThe€trial€court,€after€considering€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,Ïsentenced€Appellant€as€a€Range€I€offender€to€five€(5)€years€for€his€robberyÏconviction.€€The€court€further€found€that€Appellant€committed€the€present€offenseÏwhile€he€was€on€probation€for€a€previous€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼115(b)(6).€€After€considering€the€consecutive€sentencing€factors€enunciated€inÏòòWilkersonóó,€the€trial€court€ordered€that€Appellantððs€sentence€run€consecutively€toÐ ð Ðhis€sentence€for€a€prior€offense€for€which€he€was€on€probation€at€the€time€theÏpresent€offense€was€committed.Ìà@BB-®àò òC.ó óˆÐ À` Ðà ` àAppellant€concedes€that€the€present€offense€was€committed€while€he€wasÏon€probation€for€aggravated€burglary.€€Therefore,€consecutive€sentencing€wasÏappropriate€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(6).€€However,€AppellantÏcontends€that€there€is€insufficient€evidence€to€support€the€factors€required€byÏòòWilkersonóó.Ð €(   Ðà ` àThe€presentence€report€reflects€that€Appellant€has€a€criminal€historyÏincluding€convictions€for€aggravated€burglary,€aggravated€assault,€assault,Ïdisorderly€conduct€and€harassment.€€He€was€on€probation€for€aggravatedÏburglary€and€was€awaiting€trial€for€harassment€at€the€time€the€present€offenseÏâ âwas€committed.€€Furthermore,€he€was€arrested€for€driving€on€a€suspendedÐ 02Ð(* Ðlicense€while€on€probation€for€assault€in€1992,€and€was€subsequently€convictedÏof€that€offense.ñ>ñ׃×ñ>ññ>ñ׃×ñ>ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð P ð Ðâ âà ` àAppellant€has€shown€a€continuing€disregard€for€the€laws€of€this€state.€€HeÏhas€repeatedly€violated€the€terms€of€release€into€the€community.€€Moreover,€theÏseverity€of€his€crimes€have€escalated€over€time.€€After€considering€the€generalÏprinciples€of€sentencing,€we€conclude€that€consecutive€sentences€are€reasonablyÏrelated€to€the€severity€of€the€offense€committed€and€serve€to€protect€the€publicÏfrom€Appellantððs€further€criminal€conduct.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2dÐ ð  Ðat€939.Ìà ` àThis€issue€has€no€merit.ÌÌà@ØØ)®àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ °P ÐÌà ` àAfter€a€thorough€review€of€the€record€before€this€Court,€we€find€noÏreversible€error.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€œaffirmed.ñ6ññ@ññ6ñÔ#†Š²*ŠŠ Š¢†p#Ôñ6ññ@ññ:ññ6ñÔ#†Š²*Š XXs"®#Ôñ6ññ:ñ›Ìñ7ñÌà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àÌÌÌÌñ7ñÓ  Óñ7ñà ` àÌÌñ7ñÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JUDGE