WPC s$ڴ"F~KsFzD>Ƿ7zҡ_nGJY3v8Io31cHAŢT O=3H8M|UD`7 )ut7l߽]Q$U Mj4x /㬔Խ{ڔ8Ro'.xj>}<اOKgS.VJf,}˒^Gt4e-toEҳO0`Zl_% gX) @`x/L1 ¤s52bFtp-rwSݟ4Ygt3?eMJ85׫롽4K^WZdf65%u4*N @zk-+JSye)_v$9e{kOǗIUZ,LI>G C"@yD`Ԝ[_<"9%#-2#߮zM=U.F %t bz ~ c U: K n[  0( U:8 wr 4$ $ 08 0D U: BOOOOOOOO D3lll 0D AO22 0D D/< Bk<6X9`(CourierX  XXXXXX   Ad FILEDXX  June30,1999CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM  $XXXX `   1    ݀Tenn.CodeAnn.3914103,105(3)(1997).,cAZ"Arial Regular3|xW<6X9`(CourierXx6X@`7X@($,  AZ"Arial RegularWDWWWDWWEWWeWWWWWEWW{WW{WWEWWDWDWWDWDWWWeWӀuM%(I(2$  !  XXXX `   0  (#$  0  ,cAZ"Arial Regular d""""'dxd(3$  !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd  !  WWWWWWWW`   TR[A'Legal3'A' Legal3'T XHXXX7 H XXdd7  Wr*<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP`  rߛW @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE P  ̀@@@'ATNASHVILLE 0  @$APRIL1999SESSION    STATEOFTENNESSEE, h     ) p  p   `     h     ) p  `   `  Appellee, h     ) p C.C.A.No.01C019806CC00275 P   `     h     ) p  @  vs. `     h     ) p MarionCounty 0   `     h     ) p       CALVIND.HAVNER, h     ) p Hon.ThomasA.Graham,Judge p  `     h     ) p  `   `  Appellant. h     ) p (Theft) P  `     h      p  `     h      `     h      p FORTHEAPPELLANT: h      p FORTHEAPPELLEE:   PAULD.CROSS   h      p PAULG.SUMMERS   1020WestMainStreet h      p AttorneyGeneral&Reporter  P.O.Box99    h   p Monteagle,TN37356 h      p CLINTONJ.MORGAN  !`  `     h      p AssistantAttorneyGeneral "P  `     h      p 425FifthAve.N.,2dFloor  #@  `     h      p Nashville,TN372430493  $0   `     h    `     h      p JAMESMICHAELTAYLOR  p&  `     h      p DistrictAttorneyGeneral `'   `     h      p 265ThirdAvenue,Suite300 `     h      p Dayton,TN37321 `     h      p  `     h      p STEVENH.STRAIN   +!$  `     h      p AssistantDistrictAttorney `     h      p P.O.Box130 `     h      p Jasper,TN373470130 OPINIONFILED:________________AFFIRMEDJAMESCURWOODWITT,JR.,JUDGE   :04  <26 @qq* OPINION  `  XXX XH'X, XX' # XHXXX-#Thedefendant,CalvinD.Havner,appealsfromhisconvictionfortheft   ofpropertyover$1000butlessthan$10,000, #  1      ׀aClassDfelony,intheMarion  CountyCircuitCourt.Thetrialcourtimposedasentenceoftwoyearsandsixmonthswiththedefendantservingelevenmonthsand29daysinthelocaljailsubjecttoworkreleaseprivilegesandtheremainderonprobation.Inthisdirectappeal,thedefendantraisestwoissues:(1)whetherthetrialcourterredingivinga missingwitnessjuryinstructionandinprohibitingthedefendantfromtestifyingthathewasafraidofthemissingwitness,and(2)whetherthetrialcourtproperlysentencedthedefendantbynotgrantingWWWstraightWprobationWWWWorcommunitycorrections.Afterareviewoftherecord,thebriefsoftheparties,andtheapplicablelaw,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. Thestatepresentedthefollowingproofattrial.RobertBynumtestifiedthatheownsandoperatesagolfcourseinAlabama.OnOctober25,1996,hediscoveredthatseveralitemshadbeenstolenfromhisgolfcourse,includingtwofourwheelers.Mr.Bynumfollowedthevisibletracksleadingawayfromthegolfcourse.Thesetracksledthroughwoodsandfieldstothedefendantsfathershouse,approximatelytwomilesbehindthegolfcourseinMarionCounty,Tennessee.Thefourwheelerwasa1991modelhehadpurchasedfor$5500to$5600.Heusesthefourwheelerstotravelacrossthegolfcoursecarryingtoolsbecausegolfcartsaretooslow.XXX XH OfficerKenTudersoftheMarionCountySheriffsDepartmenttestified L6,0 thatheencounteredthedefendantnearhisresidenceafewdaysafterthefourwheelerswerestolen.Theofficeraskedthedefendantifhehadafourwheelerandifhecouldexamineit.Thedefendantrodeinthepatrolcarwiththeofficertothedefendantshome.Whentheyarrived,thefourwheelerwasinthedefendantsfrontyardandthedefendantpossessedthekey.TheofficercheckedthevehicleidentificationnumberandwasinformedthatafourwheelerwiththatnumberhadbeenstolenfromJacksonCounty,Alabamaafewdaysearlier.ThedefendanttoldtheofficerthatheboughtthefourwheelerfromMikethroughtheSwapandShopradioprogram.ThedefendantswifetoldtheofficeritwasMichaelKnightwhosoldthemthefourwheeler.Thedefendantnevershowedtheofficerabillofsaleortitletothefourwheeler. Thedefensepresentedthefollowingproofattrial.Thedefendanttestifiedthatin1996helivedinSweetensCoveonGourdneckRoadandworkedforHighStandardPad.Beforepurchasingahomethere,helivedbehindhisparentshome.InWWlate1995WWtherewasafireathisparentshomeinwhichthedefendantandhisfamilylosteverything.Hewasinsuredandhereceivedmoneytoreplacehisfamilyspersonalproperty.HischildrenfromapreviousmarriagewantedafourwheelertobepurchasedwithsomeoftheinsuranceWWproceeds.WOnWWWWednesdaWWWWyorTWWWWyWWWWednesdayWWWWorWWWThursdayWWWThursdayWWWWnightpriortohWWWsiaWWWisarrest,tWW񛀛TWheWWWWdefendantcontactedWWWaWWWWWWWWtheSwapandShopWWWWWradioprogramwhereitemscanbepurchasedandWWsoldWnamedtheSwapandShopontheWednesdayorThursdaypriortohisarrestW.WWWWHereceivedaphonecallfromanindividualinterestedinsellingthedefendantafourwheeler.Thedefendantpurchasedafourwheelerfor$1200fromamanhelaterdiscoveredwasMikeGodsby.Mr.Godsbygavethedefendantabillofsaleforthefourwheelerwhichthedefendantlostormisplaced. Thedefendantandhisfamilyrodethefourwheelerforthreeorfour  :04 daysallaroundtheirhome.ThedefendantstestimonyregardingOfficerTudersinvolvementwassubstantiallysimilartoOfficerTuderstestimony.However,thedefendanttestifiedthathewaslockedinthebackseatofthepatrolcarastheofficercheckedthevehicleidentificationnumber,andhewasunabletoretrievethebillofsalebecausetheofficerwouldnotallowhimtoleavethepatrolcar.Thedefendantdidnotknowthefourwheelerwasstolenatthetimeofpurchase.HetoldtheofficerthatMikesoldhimthefourwheeler,buthedidnotknowMikeslastnameatthetimeofarrest.OnlyrecentlydidhediscoverthatthepersonwasMikeGodsby.Thedefendantswifestestimonywasessentiallythesameasthedefendantstestimony.Shehadseenabillofsaleforthefourwheelerintheirhome.Shetestifiedthatshedidnotknowitwasstolenatthetimeofpurchase.# X>XXX>#X>XX X>Ԁ   GraceSullivantestifiedthatshelivednearthedefendantandsawhimridingafourwheeleratleasttwotimes.JeffHavner,thedefendantsuncle,testifiedthatthedefendantcametohishousetoseeifhewantedtopurchasethefourwheelerortradeitforasmallerfourwheeler.ErnestKingtestifiedthathehadseenafourwheelerinthebackofthedefendantstruckontwooccasionsafewdaysbeforethearrest.Thedefendantdidnottrytoconcealthefourwheelerwhileitwasinthebackofhistruck. Onthisevidence,thejuryfoundthedefendantguiltyofonecountoftheftofpropertyover$1000butlessthan$10,000.# X>XXX>%#X>XX X>   0`'*    I.  4 +. ( # X>XXX>(#First,thedefendantchallengesthetrialcourtsjuryinstructionasto `6-0 WWWtheWWaWWWmissingwitnessandthetrialcourtsprohibitingthedefendantfromtestifyingthathewasafraidofthemissingWWwitnessW,MikeWWWWGodsbyWWW.WWX>XX X>Foramissingwitnessjury  :04 instructiontobeproper,threerequirementsmustbemet.Theevidencemustshow [1]thewitnesshadknowledgeofmaterialfacts,[2]thatarelationshipexistsbetweenthewitnessandthepartythatwouldnaturallyinclinethewitnesstofavorthepartyand[3]thatthemissingwitnesswasavailabletotheprocessoftheCourtforthetrial.Delkv.State,590S.W.2d435,440(Tenn.1979).Theserequirements   aretobestrictlyconstrued,particularlywhentherightsofacriminaldefendantmaybeaffected.Statev.Francis,669S.W.2d85,89(Tenn.1984).Oursupreme @  courtinstructedtrialjudgesto makeaninformeddecisionastotheabsentwitnessavailabilitytotheprocessofthecourt,thewitnesscapabilitytoelucidatethetransactionatissue,andwhetherarelationshipexistsbetweenthewitnessandthepartythatwouldnaturallyinclinethewitnesstofavortheparty.Id.Thepurpose   ofthemissingwitnessjuryinstructionistoallowapermissiveinferencethatthetestimonyofthemissingwitnesswouldhavebeenunfavorabletothepartyfailingtocallthematerialwitness.Id.at88(citingGravesv.UnitedStates,150U.S.118, !` 121,14S.Ct.40,41(1893)). ThefirstrequirementofDelkissatisfied# X>XXX>*#X>XX X>Ԁinthiscase.Themissing `'  witnesswasMikeGodsby,whoallegedlysoldthefourwheelertothedefendant.Thesaleofthefourwheelerisamaterialfactindeterminingwhetherthedefendantcommittedtheft.Mr.Godsbypossessesknowledgematerialtothiscaseregardingwhetherhesoldthefourwheelertothedefendant. ThesecondandthirdrequirementsofDelkaremoredifficultto 2@), ascertainfromtherecord.Regardingthethirdrequirementthatthewitnessbeavailabletotheprocessofthecourt,thereisnoinformationintherecordaboutthewitnesslocation.Wecannotassumethatthewitnesswouldhavebeenavailabletotheprocessofthetrialcourt.Thesecondrequirement,thatarelationshipexists  :04 betweenthewitnessandthepartywhichwouldnaturallyinclinethewitnesstofavortheparty,isnotsatisfiedbythefactsofthiscase.Therelationshipbetweenthedefendantandthewitnessisbuyerandseller.Fromthisrelationshipwecannotassumethatthewitnesswouldnaturallybeinclinedtofavorthedefendant.Infact,itismorelikelythatthewitnesswoulddenysellingstolenpropertytoprotecthimselffromprosecution.SeeStatev.LarryG.Hart,No.02C019406CC00111,slipop. `  at8(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,June28,1995).Thetrialcourtmadenofindingsregardingthesetworequirements.Accordingly,wefindthatthetrialcourterredingivingthemissingwitnessjuryinstruction.# X>XXX>0#X>XX X>Ԁ `  Althoughthetrialcourterredininstructingthejuryregardingthemissingwitness,weapplyaharmlesserroranalysistotheimproperinstruction.Harmlesserrorisanerrorwhichdoesnot affirmativelyappeartohaveaffectedtheresultofthetrialonthemerits.Tenn.R.Crim.P.52(a).ThemissingwitnessjuryinstructionallowsapermissiveWWinferenceWWtobeWWdrawn,WWfromthefailureofapartytosubpoenaamissingWWwitnessorgivereasonableexplanationforfailuretodoso,thatthetestimonywouldhavebeenunfavorabletothatparty# X>XXX>6#X>XX X>.WWWWSeeStatev.Wilson,687 `'  S.W.2d720,724(Tenn.Crim.App.1984). FromWWalltheevidenceadducedattrial,WWproofofthedefendantsguiltwassubstantial.ThevictimfollowedfourwheelertrackstothedefendantsWWWfathersWhome.WWWWThedefendantadmittedthatthefourwheelerwasinhisfrontyardandhepossessedthekey.Thedefendantcouldnotproduceanyevidencethathepurchasedthefourwheeler,suchasabillofsaleortitletothefourwheeler.Fromthisevidence,thejurycouldlogicallyinferthatthedefendantcommittedtheft.Accordingly,weWWfindthemissingwitnessjuryinstructionWWwasWWharmlesserror.  :04  Thedefendantchallengesthetrialcourtsexclusionofhistestimonythathewasafraidofthemissingwitness.Apparently,thedefendantwasattemptingtoexplainthereasonhehadnotsubpoenaedthemissingwitness.Areviewofthetranscriptofthetrialrevealsthatthedefendanttestifiedhewas afraidofwhat[themissingwitness]mightdoto[his]familybecausehehad numerousthingshappento[his]wifescarand[his]truck.Thestateobjectedtothistestimonyasirrelevant,andthecourtsustainedtheWWobjection.Thedefendantsassertionthatthistestimonyshouldhavebeenallowediscorrect,butfromthetranscriptitseemsthatthetestimonywasessentiallyallowed.# X>XXX>9#X>XX X>TheWWtestimonywas ` neverstrickenfromtherecord,andnojuryinstructiontodisregardthestatementwasgivenorWWrequested.WWThistestimonywasrelevanttothesecondprongofDelk   regardingtherelationshipbetweenthemissingwitnessandthedefendantandwhetherthemissingwitnesswouldhavebeenfavorabletothedefendant.WWBysustainingtheobjection,thetrialcourtdidnotconsidertheimpactofthedefendantstestimonyonwhetherthemissingwitnessjuryinstructionwasappropriate.TheWWtrialcourterredinnotWWconsideringthisWWtestimony;however,wefindthiswasharmlessWWerror.Asstatedpreviously,proofofthedefendantsguiltwasWWWWWWsubstantialwithoutthepermissiWWblWWWvWeinfWerenceWWallowedbyWWWofWWWWWthemissingwitnessjuryinstruction.WWW   II.  .%( ;D Next,thedefendantchallengesthesentenceimposedbythetrialcourt.Thedefendantcontendsthatthecourterredinfindingenhancementfactorsanddenyingmitigatingfactors,inweighingthefactors,andindenyingprobationorcommunitycorrections. Whenthereisachallengetothelength,range,ormannerofservice  :04 ofasentence,itisthedutyofthiscourttoconductadenovoreviewoftherecord `  withapresumptionthatthedeterminationsmadebythetrialcourtarecorrect.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d)(1997).Thispresumptionis conditionedupontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d  166,169(Tenn.1991). Theburdenofshowingthatthesentenceisimproperisupontheappellant.Id.Intheeventtherecordfailstodemonstratetherequired @  considerationbythetrialcourt,reviewofthesentenceispurelydenovo.Id.If   appellatereviewreflectsthetrialcourtproperlyconsideredallrelevantfactorsanditsfindingsoffactareadequatelysupportedbytherecord,thiscourtmustaffirmthesentence, evenifwewouldhavepreferredadifferentresult.Statev.Fletcher,805   S.W.2d785,789(Tenn.Crim.App.1991). Inmakingitssentencingdetermination,thetrialcourt,attheconclusionofthesentencinghearing,determinestherangeofsentenceandthendeterminesthespecificsentenceandtheproprietyofsentencingalternativesbyconsidering(1)theevidence,ifany,receivedatthetrialandthesentencinghearing,(2)thepresentencereport,(3)theprinciplesofsentencingandargumentsastosentencingalternatives,(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsofthecriminalconductinvolved,(5)evidenceandinformationofferedbythepartiesontheenhancementandmitigatingfactors,(6)anystatementsthedefendantwishestomakeinthedefendantsbehalfaboutsentencing,and(7)thepotentialforrehabilitationortreatment.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210(a),(b)(1997);Tenn.CodeAnn.4035103(5)(1997);Statev.Holland,860S.W.2d53,60(Tenn.Crim.App.1993). 4 +.  Adefendantwho isanespeciallymitigatedorstandardoffenderconvictedofaClassC,D,orEfelonyispresumedtobeafavorablecandidatefor  :04 alternativesentencingoptionsintheabsenceofevidencetothecontrary.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035102(6)(1997).Thus,adefendantwhomeetsthecriteriaofsection4035102(6)ispresumedeligibleforalternativesentencingunlesssufficientevidencerebutsthepresumption.However,offenderswhomeetthecriteriaarenotautomaticallyentitledtosuchreliefbecausesentencingissuesshouldbedeterminedbythefactsandcircumstancespresentedineachcase.Statev.Taylor, `  744S.W.2d919,922(Tenn.Crim.App.1987).# X>XXX>@#X>XX X> @  # X>XXX>P# Indeterminingwhethertograntprobation,thejudgemustconsiderthenatureandcircumstancesoftheoffense,thedefendantscriminalrecord,hisbackgroundandsocialhistory,hispresentcondition,includinghisphysicalandmentalcondition,thedeterrenteffectonothercriminalactivity,andthelikelihoodthatprobationisinthebestinterestsofboththepublicandthedefendant.See  Statev.Bonestel,871S.W.2d163,169(Tenn.Crim.App.1993);Stillerv.State, !` 516S.W.2d617,620(Tenn.1974).Thedefendantbearstheburdenofestablishingsuitabilityforprobation,evenwhenthedefendantispresumedtobeeligibleforprobation.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035303(a)(b)(1997);Statev.Bingham,910 `'  S.W.2d448,455(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).X>XX X> Therecordofthecaseatbarreflectsthatthetrialcourtthoroughlyconsideredtherelevantsentencingprinciples.Accordingly,itsdeterminationisentitledtothepresumptionofcorrectness.# X>XXX>T#X>XX X> 0`'*  # X>XXX>U#Indeterminingthesentence,thetrialcourtfoundthatthe 4 +. enhancementfactorofapriorcriminalrecordappliedbecausethedefendantX>XX X>had `6-0 apriortheftconviction.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035114(1)(1997).Contraryto @8.2 thedefendantsassertionthatthetrialcourtdeniedthemitigatingfactorsthe  :04 defendantpresented,thetrialcourtfoundtwoapplicablemitigatingfactors.Thetrialcourtfoundthedefendantsconductneithercausednorthreatenedseriousbodilyinjuryandthedefendantassistedtheauthoritiesinlocatingorrecoveringproperty.πSeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035113(1),(10)(1997).Inweighingthesefactors,the  trialcourtfoundthepriortheftconvictionfaroutweighedthemitigatingfactors.Thetrialcourtfoundconfinementwasnecessarytoavoiddepreciatingtheseriousnessoftheoffenseandbecausemeasureslessrestrictivehavefrequentlyorrecentlybeenappliedunsuccessfullytothisdefendant.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035   103(1)(B),(C)(1997).Therefore,thetrialcourtenhancedthedefendantssentencebysixmonthsandorderedsplitconfinement. Thetrialcourtsfindingsaresupportedbytherecord.Althoughthedefendantwaspresumedtobeeligibleforcommunitycorrections,therewassufficientevidencetorebutthispresumption.Additionally,thedefendanthasnotcarriedtheburdenofestablishinghissuitabilityforWWWtotalWprobation.WWThetrialcourtfoundthedefendantwasnottruthfulduringthesentencinghearingabouthispriortheftconviction.Alackoftruthfulnessisanindicationofadefendantspotentialforrehabilitation.Statev.Neeley,678S.W.2d48,49(Tenn.1984);Statev.Bunch, @)" 646S.W.2d158,160(Tenn.1983);Statev.Zeolia,928S.W.2d457,463(Tenn.  +!$ Crim.App.1996);Statev.Williamson,919S.W.2d69,84(Tenn.Crim.App.1995); -#& Statev.Dowdy,894S.W.2d301,30506(Tenn.Crim.App.1994).Thetrialjudge .%( isinthebestpositiontoassessadefendantscredibilityandpotentialforrehabilitation.Adefendantspotentialforrehabilitation shouldbeconsideredindeterminingthesentencealternativeorlengthofatermtobeimposed.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035103(5)(1997).Thetrialcourtproperlysentencedthedefendanttoaperiodofconfinement.# X>XXX>V#X>XX X> @8.2  # X>XXX>`#  :04  Inconsiderationoftheforegoingandtherecordasawhole,weaffirmthetrialcourt.    h     ________________________________    h     JAMESCURWOODWITT,JR.,JUDGECONCUR:_______________________________JOHNH.PEAY,JUDGE_______________________________DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE