ÿWPCB …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 0JH 0T’ 0^æ 0hD 0r¬ 0| 0†š 0 1u° 0d% U>‰ U*Ç B)ñ DC AM]ªv~¼ B:vÓW D3* 0@] AOÆì 0D² D/ö B%˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- =>E?@DABDCDEDFÓ€Ô¡¨ 3|xO2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌSeptember€18,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h dStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€¶ XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÙ€€ÙßR€"#!A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌNOVEMBER€SESSION,€1996ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9601„CC„00048Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìó óà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àMONTGOMERY€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€JOHN€H.€GASAWAY,€IIIó óÌò òJAMES€W.€JACOBS,ó óà àà àò ò)à àJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à à(Direct€Appeal)Ìó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌGREGORY€D.€SMITHà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌOne€Public€Square,€Ste.€321à àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌClarksville,€TN€€37040Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCLINTON€J.€MORGANÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCounsel€for€the€StateÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€CARNEYÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àARTHUR€BIEBERÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà àà àà àà àà àà à204€Franklin€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àClarksville,€TN€€37040ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÇòòò òÓ  ÓÔ€„ÔOPINIONó óóóÔ€ŠÔÌÌÌÓÓÓ  ÓÔ€XÔà àA€Montgomery€County€Circuit€Court€jury€found€Appellant€James€W.€JacobsÏguilty€of€four€counts€of€aggravated€rape,€one€count€of€aggravated€sexual€battery,Ïand€one€count€of€attempted€aggravated€rape.€€He€received€a€twenty„two€yearÏsentence€for€each€of€three€aggravated€rape€convictions,€a€twenty„five€yearÏsentence€for€the€fourth€aggravated€rape€conviction,€a€fourteen€year€sentence€for€theÏaggravated€sexual€battery€conviction,€and€a€thirteen€year€sentence€for€theÏattempted€aggravated€rape€conviction.€€Except€for€the€aggravated€sexual€batteryÏsentence,€the€trial€court€ordered€each€of€the€sentences€served€consecutively,€for€anÏeffective€sentence€of€one€hundred€four€years€in€the€Tennessee€Department€ofÏCorrection.€€In€this€direct€appeal,€Appellant€presents€the€following€issues€for€review:Ï(1)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€for€a€state„paidÏdeoxyribonucleic€acid€(DNA)€expert;€(2)€whether€his€aggravated€sexual€batteryÏconviction€is€void;€and€(3)€whether€his€sentence€is€excessive.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€convictions€and€sentences.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓI.€€FACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óÌÓ  Óà àAs€accredited€by€the€juryððs€verdict,€the€proof€shows€that,€during€August€andÏSeptember€of€1993,€Appellant€attacked€five€women.€€On€August€22,€1993,ÍAppellant€asked€Bonnie€Polster€for€a€ride€home€from€the€Pancake€House€inÏClarksville.€€At€some€point€thereafter,€Appellant€grabbed€Ms.€Polster€by€the€neck,Ïtold€her€to€get€out€of€the€car,€and€threatened€to€hurt€her€if€she€ran.ò ò€€ó óHe€then€took€herÏinto€the€woods€and€raped€her.ò ò€ó óÌÌà àOn€August€28,€1993,€Appellant€approached€Jennifer€Thomason€from€behindÏas€she€left€a€party.€€He€placed€a€knife€to€her€throat,€directed€her€to€some€bushes,Ïand€raped€her€for€seven€to€eight€minutes.ò ò€€€ó óAppellant€then€left€momentarily,€butÏreturned€commenting€that€he€ð ðwanted€some€more,ðð€and€raped€Ms.€ThomasonÏagain,€this€time€for€twenty€to€twenty„five€minutes.ÌÌà àOn€September€4,€1993,€Appellant€accosted€Angela€Kim€as€she€walked€out€ofÏa€bar.ò ò€ó ó€Wielding€a€knife,€he€forced€her€to€a€wooded€area,€threatened€to€kill€her,€andÏthen€raped€her.ò ò€ó óÌÌà àOn€September€11,€1993,€Appellant€approached€Sue€Trei€from€behind€asÏshe€made€her€way€into€a€club.€€He€placed€a€hand€over€her€mouth€and€a€knife€to€herÏthroat,€and€then€pulled€her€up€a€nearby€hill.ò ò€ó ó€He€raped€her€for€approximately€oneÏhour,€forcing€her€into€different€sexual€positions.€€Afterwards,€he€moved€her€into€aÏweeded€area€where€he€performed€cunnilingus€on€her.ò ò€ó óÌÌà àOn€September€18,€1993,€Appellant€approached€Angela€Rood€as€she€left€aÏteenage€club.ò ò€ó ó€€Despite€the€knife€Appellant€placed€at€her€throat,€Ms.€Rood€was€ableÏto€signal€her€friends€for€help.€€Appellant€fled€the€area€but€was€soon€apprehendedÏby€the€police.ò ò€ó óÌÌà àOn€November€1,€1993,€the€Montgomery€County€Grand€Jury€indictedÏAppellant€on€six€counts€of€aggravated€kidnapping,€five€counts€of€aggravated€rape,Ïand€one€count€of€attempted€aggravated€rape.€€The€kidnapping€charges€were€laterÏdismissed.ÌÌà àOn€July€15,€1994,€Appellant,€through€counsel,€filed€a€motion€for€theÏappointment€of€a€state„paid€DNA€expert.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion.ÌÌà àFrom€July€18€to€20,€1994,€Appellant€was€tried€before€a€Montgomery€CountyÏCircuit€Court€jury.€€For€the€attacks€on€Ms.€Polster,€Ms.€Thomason,€and€Ms.€Kim,€theÏjury€found€Appellant€guilty€of€aggravated€rape.ò ò€€ó óFor€the€attack€on€Ms.€Trei,€the€juryÏfound€Appellant€guilty€of€both€aggravated€rape€and€aggravated€sexual€battery.ò ò€ó ó€ForÏthe€attack€on€Ms.€Rood,€the€jury€found€Appellant€guilty€of€attempted€aggravatedÏrape.ò ò€€ó ó€As€noted€previously,€following€a€sentencing€hearing€on€September€9,€1994,Íthe€trial€court€imposed€an€effective€sentence€of€one€hundred€four€years.ò ò€€ó óThe€trialÏcourt€also€found€Appellant€to€be€a€multiple€rapist€pursuant€to€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€39„13„523(a)(2),€which€provides€that€such€a€defendant€is€toÏserve€his€entire€sentence€undiminished€by€any€sentence€reduction€credits.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓII.€€DNA€EXPERTó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€first€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€for€aÏstate„paid€DNA€expert.€€At€the€time€of€Appellantððs€motion,€Tennessee€law€did€notÏprovide€for€such€expert€assistance€in€non„capital€cases,€and€the€trial€court€properlyÏdenied€the€motion.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„14„207(b);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€411€(Tenn.1983);€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€866€S.W.2d€583,€585Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€On€appeal,€however,€Appellant€relies€upon€òòState€v.ÏBarnettóó,€909€S.W.2d€423€(Tenn.€1995),€a€Supreme€Court€case€which€post„dates€theÏtrial€courtððs€ruling.€€In€òòBarnettóó,€the€Supreme€Court€held€that,€where€an€indigentÏdefendantððs€need€for€a€state„paid€psychiatric€expert€touches€upon€a€due€processÏconcern,€a€trial€court€may€order€such€services€even€in€non„capital€cases,€providedÏthe€defendant€can€demonstrate€a€ð ðparticularized€need.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€431.€€While€òòBarnettóóÏdealt€with€a€psychiatric€expert,€this€Court€has€previously€extended€the€reasoning€ofÏòòBarnettóó€to€other€forms€of€expert€assistance.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€No.€03C01„9511„CR„00359,€1996€WL€715423€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Dec.€12,€1996)€(ballisticsÍexpert);€òòState€v.€Battlesóó,€No.€02C01„9212„CR„00294,€1996€WL€551786€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€Sept.€30,€1996)€(investigator).€€While€there€is€no€Tennessee€precedentÏfor€such€an€application€of€òòBarnettóó,€we€see€no€reason€why€its€constitutionalÏprotections€should€not€extend€to€an€indigent€defendantððs€request€for€a€DNA€expertÏin€a€non„capital€case.ÌÌà àHowever,€we€must€first€determine€whether€òòBarnettóó€constitutes€a€newÏconstitutional€rule,€requiring€retroactive€application€to€Appellantððs€case.€€AccordingÏto€our€Supreme€Court,€a€case€announces€a€new€rule€ð ðwhen€it€breaks€new€groundÏor€imposes€a€new€obligation€on€the€States€or€the€Federal€Government.ðð€€òòMeadowsÏv.€Stateóó,€849€S.W.2d€748,€751€(Tenn.1993)€(quoting€òòTeague€v.€Laneóó,€489€U.S.€288,Ï301€(1989)).€€Because€òòBarnettóó€now€requires€the€State€to€provide€expert€assistanceÏin€certain€non„capital€cases,€a€ð ðnew€obligationðð€as€anticipated€by€òòMeadowsóó,€weÏbelieve€that€it€does€indeed€announce€a€new€rule.€€In€Tennessee,€new€constitutionalÏrules€apply€retroactively€to€cases€pending€on€direct€review€when€the€new€rule€isÏannounced.€€òòState€v.€Robbinsóó,€519€S.W.2d€799,€800€(Tenn.1975).€€We€willÏtherefore€consider€Appellantððs€argument€in€light€of€òòBarnettóó.€ÌÌà àTo€establish€particularized€need€according€to€òòBarnettóó,€the€defendant€mustÏshow€that€expert€assistance€is€necessary€to€protect€the€right€to€a€fair€trial.€€òòBarnettóó,Í909€S.W.2d€at€431.€€In€his€motion,€Appellant€maintained€that,€because€the€StateÏintended€to€introduce€DNA€evidence€against€him,€he€required€his€own€DNA€expertÏto€verify€the€results.ò ò€€ó óWe€do€not€believe€that€the€foregoing€adequately€demonstratesÏparticularized€need,€as€required€by€òòBarnettóó.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòMorganóó,€1996€WL€715423,Ïat€*1„*2;€òòBattlesóó,€1996€WL€551786,€at€*6;€òòState€v.€Clevelandóó,€No.€03C01„9503„CR„00089,€1996€WL€146695,€at€*5„*6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Apr.€2,€1996),€òòperm.€app.Ïgrantedóó,€(Tenn.€Dec.€9,€1996).€€When€a€motion€for€expert€assistance€isÏð ðaccompanied€by€little€more€than€undeveloped€assertions€that€the€services€[are]Ïneeded€to€attempt€to€counter€the€State's€proof,"€the€trial€court€is€within€its€discretionÏin€denying€the€request.€€òòBarnettóó,€909€S.W.2d€at€430€(quoting€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875ÏS.W.2d€253,€261€(Tenn.1994)).€€Furthermore,€"[m]ere€hope€or€suspicion€thatÏfavorable€evidence€is€available€is€not€enough€to€require€that€such€help€beÏprovided."€€òòBarnettóó,€909€S.W.2d€at€430€(quoting€òòState€v.€Millsóó,€420€S.E.2d€114,€117Ï(N.C.€1992)).€€Thus,€even€when€considered€in€light€of€òòBarnettóó,€we€do€not€believeÏthat€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€denying€Appellantððs€motion€for€a€state„paid€DNA€expert.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIII.€€AGGRAVATED€SEXUAL€BATTERYó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€next€alleges€that€his€aggravated€sexual€battery€conviction€is€voidÏbecause€the€judgment€reflects€a€conviction€pursuant€to€Tennessee€CodeÍAnnotated€Section€39„2„606,€a€statute€repealed€prior€to€his€indictment€and€trial.€ÏFirst€and€foremost,€this€issue€was€not€set€out€in€Appellantððs€motion€for€new€trial€andÏis€therefore€waived.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P€3(e);€òòState€v.€Sextonóó,€917€S.W.2d€263,€266Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Moreover,€Appellant€cites€no€authority€in€support€of€hisÏproposition€that€this€conviction€is€void€and€fails€to€acknowledge€that€he€wasÏindicted,€tried,€and€found€guilty€by€a€jury€under€the€proper€statute,€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€39„13„504.€€Because€this€error€appears€merely€clerical€inÏnature,€we€cannot€find€that€the€aggravated€sexual€battery€conviction€is€void.€€SuchÏclerical€errors€may€be€remedied€by€motion€in€the€trial€court€pursuant€to€Rule€36€ofÏthe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pendergrassóó,€937ÏS.W.2d€834,€837€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Tuckeróó,€No.€02C01„9511„CR„00344,€1997ÏWL€113891,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Mar.€14,€1997).ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIV.€€SENTENCINGó óÌÓ  Óà àFinally,€Appellant€alleges€that€his€sentence€is€excessive.€€Specifically,ÏAppellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€sentenced€him€for€aggravatedÏsexual€battery€and€attempted€aggravated€rape€as€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€ÏAppellant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€determining€the€length€of€hisÏsentences€and€in€imposing€consecutive€sentences.ÌÌà àWhen€an€appeal€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€aÏsentence,€this€Court€conducts€a€òòde€novoóó€review€with€a€presumption€that€theÏdetermination€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,€169€(Tenn.Ï1991).€€In€the€event€that€the€record€fails€to€demonstrate€such€consideration,€reviewÏof€the€sentence€is€purely€òòde€novoóó.€€òòId.óó€€If€appellate€review€reflects€that€the€trial€courtÏproperly€considered€all€relevant€factors€and€its€findings€of€fact€are€adequatelyÏsupported€by€the€record,€this€Court€must€affirm€the€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805ÏS.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€In€conducting€a€review,€this€Court€mustÏconsider€the€evidence,€the€presentence€report,€the€sentencing€principles,€theÏarguments€of€counsel,€the€nature€and€character€of€the€offense,€mitigating€andÏenhancement€factors,€any€statements€made€by€the€defendant,€and€the€potential€forÏrehabilitation€or€treatment.€€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1993).€€The€defendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€the€impropriety€of€the€sentenceÏimposed.€€òòState€v.€Gregoryóó,€862€S.W.2d€574,€578€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).ÌÌà àFor€the€attacks€on€Bonnie€Polster,€Jennifer€Thomason,€and€Angela€Kim,ÏAppellant€was€convicted€of€one€count€of€aggravated€rape€each,€Class€A€felonies.€ÍòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„502(b).€€With€respect€to€these€convictions,€the€trialÏcourt€found€Appellant€to€be€a€Range€I€standard€offender.€€As€a€Range€I€standardÏoffender€convicted€of€a€Class€A€felony,€Appellantððs€statutory€sentencing€range€forÏeach€offense€was€fifteen€to€twenty„five€years.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„112(a)(1).€€The€trialÏcourt€found€the€following€applicable€enhancement€factors:ÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)€the€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminalÏconvictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thoseÏnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range;ÌÌ(2)€the€offense€involved€a€victim€and€was€committed€toÏgratify€the€defendantððs€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement;ÏandÌÌ(3)€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€underÏwhich€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€was€great.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓòòId.óó€ðð€40„35„114(1),€(7),€(16).€€The€trial€court€found€no€mitigating€factors.€€For€eachÏoffense,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€mid„range€sentence€of€twenty„two€years.ÌÌà àFor€the€attack€on€Susan€Trei,€Appellant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€rape,€aÏClass€A€felony,€and€aggravated€sexual€battery,€a€Class€B€felony.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðððð€39„13„502(b),€39„13„504(b).€€With€respect€to€the€aggravated€rape€conviction,€the€trial€courtÏfound€Appellant€to€be€a€Range€I€standard€offender.€€As€a€Range€I€standard€offenderÏconvicted€of€a€Class€A€felony,€Appellantððs€statutory€sentencing€range€was€fifteen€toÍtwenty„five€years.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„112(a)(1).€€The€trial€court€found€the€followingÏapplicable€enhancement€factors:ÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)€the€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminalÏconvictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thoseÏnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range;ÌÌ(2)€the€defendant€treated€or€allowed€a€victim€to€be€treatedÏwith€exceptional€cruelty€during€the€commission€of€theÏoffense;ÌÌ(3)€the€offense€involved€a€victim€and€was€committed€toÏgratify€the€defendantððs€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement;ÏandÌÌ(4)€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€underÏwhich€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€was€great.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓòòId.óó€ðð€40„35„114(1),€(5),€(7),€(16).€€The€trial€court€found€no€mitigating€factors.€€BasedÏon€these€findings,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€maximum€sentence€of€twenty„five€years.€ÏWith€respect€to€the€aggravated€sexual€battery€conviction,€the€trial€court€foundÏAppellant€to€be€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€€As€a€Range€II€multiple€offenderÏconvicted€of€a€Class€B€felony,€Appellantððs€statutory€sentencing€range€was€twelve€toÏtwenty€years.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„112(b)(2).€€The€trial€court€found€the€followingÏapplicable€enhancement€factors:Ò ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)€the€offense€involved€aÏvictim€and€was€committed€to€gratify€the€defendantððs€desireÏfor€pleasure€or€excitement;€andÌÌ(2)€the€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€underÏwhich€the€potential€for€bodily€injury€was€great.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓòòId.óó€ðð€40„35„114(7),€(16).€€The€trial€court€found€no€mitigating€factors.€€Based€on€theseÏfindings,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€mid„range€sentence€of€fourteen€years.ÌÌà àFor€the€attack€on€Angela€Rood,€Appellant€was€convicted€of€attemptedÏaggravated€rape,€a€Class€B€felony.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€39„12„107(a).€€With€respect€to€thisÏoffense,€the€trial€court€found€Appellant€to€be€a€Range€II€multiple€offender.€€As€aÏRange€II€multiple€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€B€felony,€Appellantððs€statutoryÏsentencing€range€was€twelve€to€twenty€years.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„112(b)(2).€€The€trialÏcourt€found€the€following€applicable€enhancement€factor:ÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)€the€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm,Ïexplosive€device,€or€other€deadly€weapon€during€theÏcommission€of€the€offense.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓòòId.óó€ðð€40„35„114(9).€€The€trial€court€found€no€mitigating€factors.€€For€this€offense,€theÏtrial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€thirteen€years.ÌÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€ordered€each€ofÏthe€sentences€served€consecutively,€except€for€the€aggravated€sexual€batteryÏsentence.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓA.€€RANGEó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€first€contends€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€sentenced€him€forÏaggravated€sexual€battery€and€attempted€aggravated€rape€as€a€Range€II€multipleÏoffender.€€According€to€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€Range€IIÏmultiple€offender€status€requires€a€minimum€of€two€but€not€more€than€four€priorÏfelony€convictions€within€the€conviction€class,€a€higher€class,€or€within€the€next€twoÏlower€felony€classes.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„106(a)(1).€€ð ðððPrior€convictionððÏmeans€a€conviction€that€has€been€adjudicated€prior€to€the€commission€of€the€moreÏrecent€offense€for€which€sentence€is€to€be€imposed.ðð€€òòState€v.€Blouvettóó,€904€S.W.2dÏ111,€113€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€sentencing€Appellant€for€aggravated€sexual€battery€andÏattempted€aggravated€rape,€Class€B€felonies,€the€trial€court€relied€upon€his€priorÏconvictions€of€assault€with€a€deadly€weapon,€a€Class€C€felony,€and€breaking€andÏentering,€a€Class€D€felony.ò ò€€ó óWe€find€no€error€here.Ìò òÓ  ÓÌB.€€LENGTH€OF€SENTENCEó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€next€maintains€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€determining€the€length€ofÏhis€sentences€by€improperly€applying€certain€enhancement€factors.ÌÌà àIn€the€absence€of€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€the€presumptiveÏlength€of€sentence€for€a€Class€B,€C,€D,€and€E€felony€is€the€minimum€sentence€in€theÏstatutory€range€while€the€presumptive€length€of€sentence€for€a€Class€A€felony€is€theÍmidpoint€in€the€statutory€range.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€Where€one€orÏmore€enhancement€factors€apply€but€no€mitigating€factors€exist,€the€trial€court€mayÏsentence€above€the€presumptive€sentence€but€still€within€the€range.€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„210(d).€€Where€both€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€apply,€the€trial€court€mustÏstart€at€the€minimum€sentence,€enhance€the€sentence€within€the€range€asÏappropriate€to€the€enhancement€factors,€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€theÏrange€as€appropriate€to€the€mitigating€factors.€€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„210(e).€€The€weightÏafforded€an€enhancement€or€mitigating€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€courtÏso€long€as€the€trial€court€complies€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€theÏTennessee€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€and€its€findings€are€supportedÏby€the€record.€€òòState€v.€Hayesóó,€899€S.W.2d€175,€185€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌò òÓ  Ó1.€€EXCEPTIONAL€CRUELTYó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€applied€enhancement€factorÏ(5)€to€his€sentence€for€the€aggravated€rape€of€Susan€Trei.€€The€application€of€thisÏenhancement€factor€requires€a€finding€of€cruelty€over€and€above€that€inherentlyÏattendant€to€the€offense.€€òòState€v.€Embryóó,€915€S.W.2d€451,€456€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1995).€€Aggravated€rape€requires€sexual€penetration€accompanied€by€the€use€of€aÏweapon.€€The€record€reveals€that€Appellant€held€Ms.€Trei€in€fear€and€raped€her€forÏapproximately€one€hour,€during€which€time€he€repeatedly€humiliated€her€by€forcingÍher€into€different€sexual€positions,€including€on€her€hands€and€knees.ò ò€€ó óBased€onÏthese€facts,€we€find€that€the€record€supports€the€application€of€enhancement€factorÏ(5)€to€Appellantððs€sentence€for€the€aggravated€rape€of€Ms.€Trei.ÌÌò òÓ  Ó2.€€DESIRE€FOR€PLEASURE€OR€EXCITEMENTó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€applied€enhancementÏfactor€(7)€to€his€sentences€for€each€of€the€aggravated€rapes€and€to€his€sentence€forÏaggravated€sexual€battery.€€In€òòState€v.€Kissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€482€(Tenn.€1996),€theÏTennessee€Supreme€Court€addressed€the€application€of€this€enhancement€factorÏto€rape€and€sexual€battery:ÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà àA€necessary€element€of€sexual€battery,€aggravated€orÏnot,€is€sexual€contact.€€Sexual€contact€is€"intentionalÏtouching€.€.€.€if€that€intentional€touching€can€be€reasonablyÏconstrued€as€being€for€the€purpose€of€sexual€arousal€orÏgratification.ðð€€Rape,€on€the€other€hand,€requires€sexualÏpenetration,€not€sexual€contact.€€Unlike€sexual€contact,Ïsexual€penetration,€as€defined€in€our€Code,€has€no€motiveÏcomponent.€€€Stated€otherwise,€a€rape€committed€to€abuseÏor€harm€is€no€less€a€rape€than€a€rape€which€is€sexuallyÏmotivated.€€€It€follows€that€enhancement€factor€(7),€thoughÏessential€to€a€finding€of€sexual€battery€or€aggravated€sexualÏbattery,€is€not€an€element€of€rape€or€aggravated€rape€and,Ïtherefore,€may€be€used€as€an€enhancement€factor€inÏappropriate€cases.ÌÌà àWe€have€held€that€a€sexually€motivated€rape€isÏcommitted€to€gratify€a€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement.€ÏConversely,€sexual€battery€requires€that€the€touching€be€forÏthe€purpose€of€sexual€arousal€or€gratification.€€€Thus,€theÍoffense€necessarily€includes€the€intent€to€gratify€a€desire€forÏpleasure€or€excitement.€€Since€the€factor€is€an€Ìessential€element€of€the€offense,€it€cannot€be€used€toÏenhance€the€sentences€of€sexual€battery€and€aggravatedÏsexual€battery.ÌÒ ` ÒÒ „ ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÒ „ ÒÌÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓòòId.óó€at€489„90€(citations€omitted).€ÌÌà à€In€light€of€òòKissingeróó,€we€find€that,€as€a€matter€of€law,€the€trial€court€erred€inÏapplying€enhancement€factor€(7)€to€Appellantððs€sentence€for€aggravated€sexualÏbattery.€€However,€the€seriousness€of€the€attack€on€Ms.€Trei€warrants€giving€greatÏweight€to€enhancement€factor€(2)€and€we€thus€affirm€the€sentence€of€fourteen€yearsÏfor€aggravated€sexual€battery.ÌÌà àIn€applying€enhancement€factor€(7)€to€each€of€Appellantððs€sentences€forÏaggravated€rape,€the€trial€court€relied€solely€upon€Ms.€Thomasonððs€testimony€that,Ïafter€the€initial€rape,€Appellant€stated€that€he€ð ðwanted€some€moreðð€and€proceededÏto€rape€her€again.€€We€believe€that€such€testimony€is€sufficient€to€justify€applicationÏof€enhancement€factor€(7)€to€Appellantððs€sentence€for€the€aggravated€rape€of€Ms.ÏThomason.€€However,€with€respect€to€the€aggravated€rapes€of€Ms.€Polster,€Ms.€Kim,Ïand€Ms.€Trei,€the€trial€court€made€no€specific€findings€to€support€the€application€ofÏthis€enhancement€factor.€€As€a€result,€we€must€conduct€a€purely€òòde€novoóó€review€ofÏthe€sentence€for€these€attacks.ÌÌà àBoth€Ms.€Kim€and€Ms.€Trei€testified€that€Appellant€ejaculated€during€theirÏrapes.€€€While€our€Supreme€Court€has€indicated€that€evidence€of€orgasm€alone€isÏinsufficient€to€justify€application€of€enhancement€factor€(7),€it€remains€a€factor€forÏconsideration.€€òòSeeóó€òòKissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€at€491.€€Ms.€Trei€further€testified€thatÏAppellant€kissed€her€mouth€and€breasts,€commented€that€ð ðit€would€help€if€[she]Ïwould€enjoy€itðð,€and€characterized€the€attack€as€a€ð ðflingðð€or€a€ð ðone„night€stand.ððò ò€€ó óTheÏregularity€in€which€the€attacks€took€place,€occurring€weekly€for€a€period€of€fiveÏweeks,€creates€an€inference€that€these€aggressive€actions€were€the€manner€inÏwhich€Appellant€satisfied€his€sexual€urges.€€Moreover,€the€juryððs€determination€thatÏAppellant€was€guilty€of€the€aggravated€sexual€battery€of€Ms.€Trei€lends€support€forÏthe€proposition€that€the€other€attacks€were€also€sexually€motivated.€€Mindful€of€theÏdictates€set€out€in€òòKissingeróó,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence,€when€considered€inÏthe€aggregate,€sufficiently€establishes€that€Appellantððs€desire€for€sexual€pleasureÏmotivated€his€actions.€€We€therefore€find€that€the€trial€courtððs€application€ofÏenhancement€factor€(7)€to€Appellantððs€sentences€for€the€aggravated€rapes€of€Ms.ÏPolster,€Ms.€Kim,€and€Ms.€Trei€was€proper.Ìò òÓ  ÓÌC.€€CONSECUTIVE€SENTENCINGó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€submits€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€consecutiveÏsentences.€€However,€he€makes€no€specific€argument€to€support€his€position.ÌÌà àÌÌà àWhen€imposing€sentences€for€multiple€offenses,€the€trial€court€has€theÏdiscretion€to€order€the€sentences€served€concurrently€or€consecutively.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„20„111(a);€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€880€S.W.2d€720,€727€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1994).€€The€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences€is€appropriate€if€theÏdefendant€has€been€convicted€of€more€than€one€offense€and€the€trial€court€finds,€byÏa€preponderance€of€the€evidence,€one€or€more€of€the€following€criteria:ÌÒ ` ÒÒ „ ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà à(1)€The€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€hasÏknowingly€devoted€himself€to€criminal€acts€as€a€majorÏsource€of€livelihood;Ìà à(2)€The€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€ofÏcriminal€activity€is€extensive;€Ìà à(3)€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentally€abnormalÏperson€so€declared€by€a€competent€psychiatrist€whoÏconcludes€as€a€result€of€an€investigation€prior€to€sentencingÏthat€the€defendant's€criminal€conduct€has€beenÏcharacterized€by€a€pattern€of€repetitive€or€compulsiveÏbehavior€with€heedless€indifference€to€consequences;€Ìà à(4)€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whoseÏbehavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€and€noÏhesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€toÏhuman€life€is€high;€Ìà à(5)€The€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€moreÏstatutory€offenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor€withÍconsideration€of€the€aggravating€circumstances€arising€fromÏthe€relationship€between€the€defendant€and€victim€orÏvictims,€the€time€span€of€defendantððs€undetected€sexualÏactivity,€the€nature€and€scope€of€the€sexual€acts€and€theÏextent€of€the€residual,€physical€and€mental€damage€to€theÏvictim€or€victims;Ìà à(6)€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offenseÏcommitted€while€on€probation;€or€Ìà à(7)€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b).ÌÌà àHere,€the€trial€court€relied€upon€Appellantððs€extensive€criminal€record€inÏordering€consecutive€sentences.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„115(b)(2).€€AppellantððsÏpresentence€report€reflects€three€convictions€for€breaking€and€entering,€threeÏconvictions€for€felony€escape,€a€conviction€for€assault€with€a€deadly€weapon,€aÏconviction€for€assault€with€intent€to€rape,€a€conviction€for€petit€larceny,€and€twoÏconvictions€for€marijuana€possession.€€In€light€of€the€foregoing,€we€find€that€the€trialÏcourt€acted€within€its€discretion€in€imposing€consecutive€sentencing€based€uponÏAppellantððs€criminal€record.€€We€further€find€that€consecutive€sentences€areÏnecessary€to€protect€the€public€from€Appellantððs€possible€future€criminal€conductÏand€that€the€aggregate€sentence€is€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€AppellantððsÏpresent€offenses.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€938€(Tenn.€1995);ÏòòState€v.€Woodcockóó,€922€S.W.2d€904,€915€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€convictions€and€sentences€are€affirmed.Ô€ŠÔà àÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE