ÿWPC} 1 %¾w@Ä 0ÜU:à4. AQ=Ž 0 – 0D¶ 0Jú 0TD 0^˜ 0hö 0r^ 0|Ð 0†L 0Ò 1ub 0d× B; ÆX 0D 0@b 0D¢ D/æ U * B? D3\B)DC¸ AMûÊH^¼pv~,vÓªX >e?D@AEBDCDDEDFÓ€R(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regularn~<$f€the€term€ð3|xR !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ(Ð(33™$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€¬ÌXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxd< Œ 9p`(ArialüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d))))7Border 1dd "*Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÀÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€&ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òMayÏ15,Ï1998ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó TÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€&ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€&ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7À¬ÌXXdædæ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóMartin€F.€Ford€€was€indicted€along€with€the€appellants.€€He€also€entered€a€guilty€plea€to€theÏoffense€of€theft€of€property€over€$1000.Ì ²Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€&ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€&ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀLˆXXdædæ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€sentencing€hearings€for€all€three€indicted€defendants€were€conducted€at€the€sameÏtime.€€Following€the€introduction€of€all€of€the€proof,€the€trial€court€announced€its€sentencingÏdecisions.€€Rather€than€reciting€findings€relevant€to€each€defendant,€the€court€generalized€itsÏfindings€as€to€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€and€the€ð ðattitudeðð€of€all€three€defendants.€€WeÏnote€that€codefendant€Ford€was€ordered€to€serve€90€rather€than€45€days€due€to€his€prior€criminalÏhistory.ÌPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€&ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  Óò ò›œ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ àAPRIL€SESSION,€1998ÌÙ€ ÙœßR€+,*A1-j|` | `€€@ÿRß›ÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02C01„9708„CR„00302Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àSHELBY€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€BERNIE€WEINMAN,€JudgeÌERIC€D.€HENDERSON€andà à)ÌJAMES€F.€HILL,à àà àà à)à à(Theft€of€Property€over€$1000)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellantsà àà àà à)à àÌó óÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantsóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌò òHoward€L.€Wagermanó óà àà àò òà àCharles€W.€Bursonó óÌAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌSuite€1313,€200€Jeffersonà àÌMemphis,€TN€€38103à àà àà àò òMarvin€E.€Clements,€Jr.ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà àà à€€€€€€ÏAttorney€for€Eric€D.€Hendersonà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àò òHoward€Brent€Manisó óà àÌAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àà àà àÌSuite€1313,€200€Jeffersonà àà àà àò òWilliam€L.€Gibbonsó óÌMemphis,€TN€€38103à àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌAttorney€for€James€F.€Hillà àà àò òà àP.€T.€Hooveró óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€ComplexÌà àà àà àà àà àà àSuite€#301,€201€Poplar€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌœAFFIRMED›ÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àò òòòOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellants,€Eric€D.€Henderson€and€James€F.€Hill,€appeal€the€sentencingÏdecision€of€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court€following€their€entry€of€guilty€pleas€toÏone€count€of€theft€of€property€over€$1000,€a€class€D€felony.× ƒ- ××  ×€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€39„14„105(3)(1990).€€Pursuant€to€a€negotiated€plea€agreement,€both€appellantsÏreceived€sentences€of€two€years€and€six€months€and€a€fine€of€$3000.€€The€mannerÏof€service€of€each€of€the€sentences€was€submitted€to€the€trial€court€forÏdetermination.€€Following€a€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€suspended€all€butÏforty„five€days€of€each€appellantððs€sentence€and€ordered€that€the€time€be€served€inÏthe€Shelby€County€Correctional€Center€on€weekends.€€Additionally,€both€appellantsÏwere€placed€on€probation€for€a€period€of€five€years€and€were€ordered€to€payÏrestitution€in€the€amount€of€$4400.€€In€this€appeal,€both€Henderson€and€Hill,Ïcontend€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€denied€their€requests€for€judicial€diversion,Ïor,€in€the€alternative,€that€the€trial€court€improperly€denied€their€requests€for€totalÏprobation.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€the€record€and€the€applicable€law,€we€affirm€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court.€ÌÌà@ àò òBackgroundó óÌÌà àThe€proof€at€the€sentencing€hearing€established€that,€in€March€1996,€JamesÏHill€received€a€telephone€call€from€an€individual€referred€to€as€ð ðT„Bird,ðð€concerningÏthe€possible€sale€of€tires€for€Hillððs€truck.€€Hill€responded€that€he€was€interested.€ÏUpon€inspection€of€the€tires,€he€realized€that€the€tires€were€the€wrong€size.ÏNonetheless,€Hill,€seizing€the€opportunity€to€make€some€quick€money,€purchasedÏeighteen€or€nineteen€tires€from€ð ðT„Birdðð€for€$200.€€Hill€conceded€at€the€sentencingÏhearing€that€he€presumed€the€tires€to€be€stolen.€€Unable€to€haul€all€of€the€tires€in€hisÏtruck,€Hill€contacted€co„defendant€Ford€and€instructed€him€to€rent€a€U„Haul€vehicleÏin€which€to€transport€the€tires.€€The€tires€were€part€of€a€shipment€of€one€hundredÏand€fifty€tires€that€were€previously€stolen€from€a€tractor€trailer.ÌÌà à€Hill,€a€close€friend€of€Henderson,€contacted€Henderson€and€asked€him€if€heÏknew€of€any€person€that€wanted€to€buy€approximately€eighteen€or€nineteen€tires.€ÏHenderson€did€not€dispute€the€fact€that€he€knew€that€the€tires€were€stolen.€ÏApproximately€one€or€two€hours€later,€Henderson€notified€Hill€that€he€wouldÏparticipate€in€the€sale€of€the€tires.€€Subsequently,€Hill,€accompanied€by€co„defendant€Ford,€picked€Henderson€up€at€his€residence€in€a€rented€U„Haul€truck.€ÏHenderson€then€directed€Hill€to€City€Wide€Towing€as€a€suggested€place€where€theÏtires€might€be€sold.€€Upon€arrival,€Henderson€negotiated€the€sale€of€some€of€theÏtires€to€the€tire€company.€€Eventually,€all€of€the€eighteen€tires€were€sold€byÍHenderson,€Hill€and€Ford.€ÌÌà àHenderson€is€a€thirty€year€old€diesel€mechanic€and€truck€driver.€€He€is€a€highÏschool€graduate€and€received€a€certificate€of€completion€from€the€MATA€TruckÏDriving€School€in€St.€Louis,€Missouri.€€Since€graduating€from€high€school€in€1985,ÏHenderson€has€maintained€continuous€and€stable€employment.€€He€regularlyÏattends€the€Mount€Pisgah€Middle€Baptist€Church€and€is€president€of€the€MagnoliaÏSports€Association,€a€youth€program,€where€he€coaches€peewee€football.€ÏHenderson€testified€that€he€has€never€used€illegal€drugs€and€drinks€alcohol€aboutÏtwice€a€month€on€the€weekends.€€He€has€no€prior€record€of€criminal€convictions.€AtÏthe€time€of€this€offense,€Henderson€was€living€with€his€fiancee€and€her€two€minorÏchildren.€€He€was€also€paying€child€support€for€his€nine€year€old€son€from€a€priorÏrelationship.€€He€verified€that€he€was€current€on€all€of€his€financial€obligations.€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€Hill€is€twenty„nine€years€old,€married,€and€the€father€of€aÏsixteen€month€old€son.€€He€is€a€high€school€graduate,€a€veteran€of€the€army,€andÏattended€State€Technical€Institute€in€Memphis€for€two€years€with€plans€to€completeÏhis€education€in€the€future.€€He€states€that€he€abuses€neither€alcohol€nor€drugs.€€ÏFor€the€eight€months€preceding€the€sentencing€hearing,€Hill€has€been€employed€asÏa€railroad€piggy€backer€at€All€Coastal€Intermodal.€€Prior€to€this€employment,€heÏworked€at€Landstar€Gemini€and€CSX€Intermodal€as€a€truck€driver.€€Like€his€co„defendant,€Henderson,€Hill€is€active€in€his€community,€serving€as€vice„president€ofÍthe€Magnolia€Sports€Association,€where€he€also€coaches€peewee€football.€ÏAppellant€Hill€has€one€prior€conviction€in€1992€for€driving€on€a€suspended€license.ÌÌà àRegarding€the€current€offense,€both€appellants€repeatedly€admitted€theirÏinvolvement€in€the€criminal€activity€and€their€remorse€and€embarrassment€over€theirÏactions.€ÌÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€proof,€the€trial€judge€found€that€all€three€co„defendants€had€ð ðbad€attitudes.ðð€€In€so€finding,€the€trial€judge€opined€that€HendersonÏand€Hill€were€only€remorseful€for€getting€caught€with€the€merchandise,€but€not€forÏactually€committing€the€crime.€€He€added€that€the€appellantsðð€version€of€theÏcircumstances€were€less€than€believable€and€he€attributed€the€theft€of€the€entireÏshipment€of€one€hundred€and€fifty€tires€to€Henderson,€Hill€and€Ford.€€The€judgeÏfurther€remarked€about€the€lack€of€concern€for€the€victim,€commenting€upon€theÏappellantsðð€failure€to€make€restitution€prior€to€the€hearing,€and€the€lack€of€concernÏfor€the€seriousness€of€the€appellantsðð€own€actions€in€the€transactions.€€A€sentenceÏof€split€confinement€to€be€served€on€weekends€was€imposed€coupled€withÏrestitution€in€the€amount€of€$4400,€which€represented€one„third€of€the€total€value€ofÏthe€eighteen€stolen€tires.€ÌÌà àWhen€the€manner€of€service€of€sentence€is€challenged€on€appeal,€this€courtÏconducts€a€òòde€novoóó€review€conditioned€upon€the€presumption€that€theÍdetermination€made€by€the€trial€court€is€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„201(d)Ï(1996€Supp).€€This€presumption€only€applies,€however,€if€the€record€demonstratesÏthat€the€trial€court€properly€considered€relevant€sentencing€principles.€€òòState€v.ÏAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€the€present€case,€the€recordÏindicates€that€the€trial€court€did€not€distinguish€in€its€findings€relevant€factorsÏattributable€to€the€respective€codefendants.× ƒ. ××  ×€€Our€sentencing€considerationsÏprovide€that€the€sentence€imposed€should€fit€not€only€the€offense€committed,€butÏalso€the€individual€offender€as€well.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€at€301,€305Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Moreover,€there€is€no€indication€that€the€trial€courtÏconsidered€all€relevant€sentencing€principles,€including€consideration€of€€judicialÏdiversion.€€Further,€œthe›€failure€of€a€defendant,€represented€by€counsel,€to€initiate€aÏprogram€of€restitution€prior€to€sentencing€œand›€the€implication€of€a€defendant€inÏcrimes€for€which€insufficient€proof€exists€are€not€relevant€sentencingÏconsiderations.€€Accordingly,€we€are€unable€to€attach€the€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€that€the€statute€affords.ÌÌà àIn€spite€of€the€failure€of€the€trial€court€to€address€all€relevant€sentencingÏprinciples,€the€record€supports€the€requirement€for€the€service€of€forty„five€days€onÍthe€weekends€and€the€denial€of€judicial€diversion.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Hill€andÏHenderson€both€lacked€remorse€and€did€not€have€an€appropriate€rehabilitativeÏattitude.€€The€trial€court€was€in€a€position€to€judge€their€credibility€based€upon€theirÏappearance€and€demeanor€while€testifying.€€The€trial€court€further€found€œtheir›Ïtestimony€less€than€candid.€€The€decision€of€whether€to€place€a€defendant€onÏjudicial€diversion€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,Ï953€S.W.2d€701,€705€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€As€to€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€totalÏprobation,€a€defendant€has€the€burden€of€establishing€suitability€for€total€probation.€ÏòòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€467,€477€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Based€on€our€òòdeÏnovoóó€review,€we€conclude€the€sentence€of€the€trial€court€was€appropriate.€ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOE€G.€RILEY,€Judgeà àÌÌÌ