ÿWPCÈ! …# VU>a %Ÿ 0 ¥UB± 4ó  n­ U:à 0Pý 0DM ‘ 0J™ 0Tã 0^7 0h• 0rý 0|o 0†ëw@q 0± 1uA 0d¶ B D37U6jU.  0@ÎB)DC7U*z AM¤uñVff¼°"v~ÒvÓP AO# Ær 0D8! D/|! B«!˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ<èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX(ä Ø$¡¡Ô€ô´s ôXXÔÑ7€Ë”XXdÈ XXdæ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÑ  Ñ<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiÔ¡¨ 3|xï«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular((3œ$¤¤Ý ƒ Ø!ÝÔ€ôTôXXÔÑ7€„XXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÑ  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  Ô ÚDÛÝÞDßáãDäÀåæÓ€2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d$$$$'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Courier("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd< Œ 9p`(Arial€-/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ kÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÔ€+ôÔÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€0ÔÔ€0ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€0XÔÌÌJune€30,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó LÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÔ€+ôÔÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ h ÒÔ€0ÔÑ7À„XXdÈdÈ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAfter€the€events€in€this€case,€the€statute€under€which€the€defendant€was€prosecutedÏwas€amended,€effective€July€1,€1994,€to€provide€that€aggravated€child€abuse€of€a€victim€six€years€of€age€orÏless€is€a€Class€A€felony.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€39„15„402€(Supp.€1996).Ì \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ ¦Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÔ€+ôÔÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€0Ô€€€We€note€that€the€state€did€not€argue€in€the€trial€court€that€the€violation€of€private€trust€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïenhancement€factor€should€apply.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€+ÔÔ€+ôÔÑ#€,,Xd#ÑÑ#€,,Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÑ  ÑÝ  Ý›Ñ  ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ ° ÒÒ 4 ÒÒ h ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓӜـ€ÙÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€0ÔÔ€0XÔßR€12/A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà8 àà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEà@ à€€€€€€€€€Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€JUNE€œ1994€SESSION›ÌÌÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà à)€€€€€à àÌà àAppellant,à à€€€€€€€€€€€)à àNo.€01C01„9402„CC„00038€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà à)à àMaury€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€William€B.€Cain,€JudgeÌà àà àà àà à)ÌCHRISTOPHER€LANGLEY,à à)à à(Sentencing)Ìà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellee.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àòòà àFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌCharles€W.€Bursonà à€€€€€€€€€€à àà àDana€C.€HollowayÌAttorney€General€ofà àà àà àà à810€South€Garden€StreetÌ€Tennessee€€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€339Ì€€€andà àà àà àà àà àColumbia,€TN€38402„0339ÌKimbra€R.€Spann€€€€€ÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ€of€TennesseeÌ450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌT.€Michael€Bottoms€€ÌDistrict€Attorney€Generalà àÌ€€€andÌRobert€C.€Sanders€ÌAssistant€District€Attorney€Ì€General€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌMaury€County€Courthouse€Annex€€Buildingà àÌColumbia,€TN€38401ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:_______________________ÌÌÌœAFFIRMED›ÌÌJoseph€M.€TiptonÌJudgeÌÌÑ7€ Iš XXdæXXdÈ7ÑÓÓà@ àòòò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óà àÌÌà àThe€state€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€Maury€County€Circuit€Court'sÏimposing€a€minimum€sentence€upon€the€defendant,€Christopher€Langley,€andÏgranting€him€probation.€€The€defendant€was€convicted€in€a€jury€trial€of€aggravatedÏchild€abuse,€a€Class€B€felony,œ× ƒ3 ××  ×›€œfor›€which€he€received€the€minimum€sentence€of€eightÏyears€for€a€Range€I,€standard€offender.€€The€state€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏimposing€a€minimum€sentence€and€granting€probation€given€the€presence€of€severalÏenhancement€œfactors€and€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.›€ÌÌà àThe€victim€of€the€offense€is€the€defendant's€stepson,€who€was€tenÏmonths€old€at€the€time€of€the€offense.€€On€Wednesday,€February€24,€1993,€theÏdefendant€called€his€wife€at€her€place€of€employment€and€advised€her€that€the€victimÏhad€fallen€off€the€couch,€hit€his€head€and€was€not€acting€right.€€The€couch€was€locatedÏin€a€carpeted€room.€€The€victim's€mother€asked€the€defendant€to€bring€the€child€to€herÏso€that€she€could€look€at€him.€€When€they€arrived,€the€baby€was€sleeping€and€seemedÏto€be€fine.€€Later€that€day,€the€victim's€father€picked€him€up€for€visitation.€€TheÏdefendant€told€the€child's€father€that€the€child€had€fallen€off€the€couch€and€that€heÏshould€keep€an€eye€on€him.€€The€victim's€father€also€exercised€his€visitation€with€theÏchild€the€following€Friday€evening€through€Sunday€evening.€€ÌÌà àA€written€statement€signed€by€the€defendant€was€introduced€intoÏevidence€by€the€state.€€In€this€statement,€the€defendant€said€that€he€began€to€noticeÏthe€symptoms€shortly€after€the€victim€returned€home€from€weekend€visitation€with€hisÏnatural€father.€€ÌÌà àThe€victim's€father€testified€that€when€he€picked€his€son€up€on€FebruaryÏ24,€1993,€the€defendant€told€him€that€the€victim€had€fallen€off€the€couch€and€that€if€heÏstarted€acting€funny,€to€bring€him€back€and€they€would€take€him€to€the€clinic.€€TheÏfather€stated€that€his€son's€behavior€was€unusual€in€that€he€lay€limply€in€his€arms€andÏwhile€in€his€car€seat,€his€eyes€were€rolling€back€in€his€head€and€he€was€acting€like€heÍwas€"super€tired."€€He€said€that€he€took€the€victim€to€a€mall,€but€the€child€"just€actedÏlifeless,€like€he€was€really€sick€and€tired€and€drained€out."€€He€stated€that€he€then€tookÏthe€victim€home€around€7:30€that€evening€and€told€the€defendant€that€they€should€takeÏthe€victim€to€a€doctor.€€The€following€Friday,€the€victim€œvisited›€with€his€father€for€theÏweekend.€€The€father€testified€that€the€victim€"acted€like€he€had€an€ear€infection,Ïplaying€with€his€ear,€and€he€had€a€stiff€neck."€€When€he€returned€the€victim€to€theÏdefendant's€home,€he€said€he€told€them€that€the€victim€had€been€taking€long€naps€andÏslept€the€whole€weekend,€had€a€stiff€neck€and€was€playing€with€his€ear.€€The€fatherÏdenied€that€he€did€anything€to€harm€the€victim.ÌÌà àThe€victim€continued€to€exhibit€certain€symptoms€of€illness€or€injury€andÏan€appointment€was€made€to€see€a€doctor€on€Thursday,€March€4,€1993.€€On€the€day€ofÏthe€appointment,€the€victim€started€having€seizures.€€He€was€taken€to€the€MauryÏCounty€Regional€Hospital€where€tests€revealed€a€fracture€of€the€back€portion€of€theÏskull€and€a€collection€of€fluid€within€the€skull.€€The€victim€was€transported€to€VanderbiltÏHospital€where€tests€confirmed€a€crack€in€the€skull€and€the€presence€of€largeÏcollections€of€fluid.€€The€fluid€had€the€appearance€of€"old€blood"€with€some€clotting€thatÏwas€partially€dissolved.ÌÌà àThe€initial€treatment€at€Vanderbilt€Hospital€consisted€of€removingÏportions€of€the€blood€clots€by€inserting€a€needle€through€the€skull.€€This€was€done€onÍmultiple€occasions€for€several€days.€€Then,€a€permanent€drainage€device€wasÏinserted€through€the€victim's€skull.€€The€neurosurgeon€who€treated€the€victim€atÏVanderbilt€testified€that€this€consisted€œof›€a€little€"three€millimeter€tube€that€is€fed€intoÏthat€space€between€the€brain€and€skull,€and€then€tunneled€underneath€the€skin€intoÏthe€abdominal€cavity,€and€the€fluid€just€drains€in€there,€essentially,€continuously,€overÏa€period€of€months€or€even€years."€€The€victim€was€hospitalized€for€approximatelyÏtwenty€days.€€The€neurosurgeon€testified€that€although€the€injury€had€the€potential€toÏinterfere€with€the€victim's€future€development,€he€could€not€say€for€certain€that€thereÏwas€or€was€not€any€permanent€brain€damage.€ÌÌà àThere€was€no€evidence€introduced€that€disclosed€the€exact€manner€inÏwhich€the€injuries€were€actually€inflicted€upon€the€victim.€€However,€the€doctor€whoÏexamined€the€child€at€the€Maury€County€Regional€Hospital€testified€that€to€cause€suchÏinjuries,€a€"very€significant€force"€was€required,€such€as€a€"blow€to€the€head€or€aÏsignificant€fall."€€Also,€the€neurosurgeon€testified€that€he€concluded,€previously€fromÏthe€types€of€blood€clots€found,€that€a€great€deal€of€force€had€been€applied€to€theÏvictim's€head.€€He€said€that€a€fall€from€a€normal€height€couch€to€a€carpeted€floor€wouldÏnot€cause€such€injuries.€€He€stated€that€he€believed€that€the€child€was€abused€andÏassaulted.€€Also,€although€acknowledging€that€the€injuries€could€have€beenÏaccidental,€he€believed€the€type€of€accident€that€might€cause€such€injuries€would€beÏ"a€high„speed€motor€vehicle€accident€where€a€car€was€going€40,€60€miles€an€hourÍand€stopped€in€a€matter€of€micro„seconds,€or€some€fall€from€a€great€height,€say,€10,Ï15,€twenty€feet."€€ÌÌà àThe€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty.€€At€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€stateÏpresented€two€witnesses.€€Melinda€Langley€gave€the€following€testimony.€€She€hadÏbeen€previously€married€to€the€defendant.€€Their€marriage€ended€in€divorce€and€theÏdefendant€subsequently€married€his€present€wife,€the€victim's€mother.ÌÌà àAt€the€time€this€witness€and€the€defendant€married,€she€had€a€ten„month„old€child€from€a€œprior›€œrelationship.›€€They€met€in€Boise,€Idaho.€€She€testified€concerningÏa€child€abuse€investigation€conducted€by€Idaho€authorities,€apparently€concerningÏboth€her€and€the€defendant.€€Her€child€had€apparently€been€badly€bruised€and€theÏDepartment€of€Human€Services€removed€the€child€from€her€custody€and€placed€him€inÏfoster€care€with€her€mother.€€This€child€was€eventually€placed€for€adoption.ÌÌà àLater,€she€and€the€defendant€married€and€she€became€pregnant.€€SheÏtestified€that€the€defendant€had€"a€big€problem€with€marijuana"€and€that€the€defendantÏsmoked€pot€in€the€parking€lot€while€she€was€in€labor.€€She€further€testified€that€they€leftÏBoise,€Idaho,€and€moved€to€Tennessee€after€the€defendant€was€charged€by€his€formerÏemployer€with€"some€sort€of€embezzlement€or€œsomething.ð𛀀She€testified€as€to€oneÍoccasion€when€the€defendant€put€liquor€in€their€son's€baby€bottle.€€She€confrontedÏhim€and€he€promised€never€to€do€it€again.ÌÌà àTheir€marriage€deteriorated,€and€she€testified€concerning€theÏdefendant's€actions€during€the€course€of€the€separation€and€divorce.€€She€said€that€heÏassaulted€her,€that€he€intentionally€rammed€her€car€with€his€car,€that€the€police€caughtÏhim€at€her€bedroom€window€with€cameras€and€other€equipment€and€that€the€policeÏfound€a€marijuana€pipe€in€his€car.€€She€said€the€police€told€her€they€were€going€toÏcharge€him€with€possessing€drug€paraphernalia.€€She€further€testified€that€there€wasÏone€incident€when€the€defendant€rammed€her€car€at€an€intersection,€knocking€her€intoÏthe€intersection,€while€their€son€was€in€the€car€with€her.€€Also,€she€stated€that€while€theÏvictim€in€the€present€case€was€in€the€hospital,€the€defendant€called€her€and€admittedÏthat€he€had€been€the€one€to€bruise€her€child€in€Idaho,€but€said€that€he€did€not€hurt€theÏvictim.ÌÌà àTracy€Langley,€the€defendant's€wife€and€the€mother€of€the€victim,€was€theÏother€witness€who€testified€for€the€state.€€She€described€an€incident€that€occurred€inÏJanuary€of€1993.€€She€had€been€out€looking€for€a€job€and€the€victim€was€left€with€theÏdefendant.€€When€she€returned,€the€defendant€told€her€that€the€victim€had€fallen€in€hisÏplaypen€and€hit€a€toy.€€He€had€a€cut€on€his€head.€€She€went€to€work€that€afternoon€andÏwhen€the€defendant€picked€her€up€at€11:00€that€night,€he€told€her€that€the€victim€hadÍfallen€again€and€hit€his€chin€on€the€coffee€table.€€Within€a€day€or€two,€the€victim€startingÏacting€lethargic,€sleeping€often€and€throwing€up.€€The€first€diagnosis€was€a€strepÏinfection.€€Later,€the€victim€was€treated€at€Vanderbilt€Hospital.€€She€stated€that€theÏdoctors€told€her€that€the€victim's€sodium€was€low€in€his€blood€and€that€this€could€beÏcaused€by€a€blow€to€the€head.€€She€stated€that€during€the€time€the€victim€was€atÏVanderbilt€Hospital€being€treated€for€the€abuse€for€which€the€defendant€wasÏconvicted,€the€doctors,€at€that€time,€told€her€that€they€had€discussed€reporting€the€priorÏincident€as€the€possible€result€of€child€abuse.ÌÌà àShe€also€stated€that€the€defendant€was€never€violent€with€her€and€thatÏshe€never€saw€him€harm€the€victim€in€any€way.€€œShe›€added€that€while€the€victim€wasÏhospitalized,€the€defendant€appeared€very€concerned€about€his€condition.€€She€andÏthe€defendant€were€separated€at€the€time€of€the€trial.€€ÌÌà àThe€defendant's€father€and€mother€testified€at€the€sentencing€hearing€onÏbehalf€of€the€defendant.€€The€defendant's€father€testified€that€the€defendant€was€anÏideal€son€growing€up,€that€he€was€an€honor€student,€that€he€is€not€violent,€that€he€isÏnot€a€criminal€and€that€he€is€a€good€human€being.€€He€testified€that€the€defendantÏloved€his€son€very€much€and€had€an€excellent€relationship€with€him.€€He€said€that€theÏvictim's€mother€was€concerned€about€the€victim's€father€hurting€the€victim€duringÍvisitation.€€He€further€stated€that€the€defendant€could€live€in€his€home€if€the€courtÏgranted€probation.ÌÌà àThe€defendant's€mother€corroborated€her€husband's€testimony.€€SheÏsaid€that€the€defendant€is€a€very€gentle€person.€€She€further€testified€that€she€knewÏthat€her€son€did€not€hurt€the€victim€and€that€even€though€the€jury€found€him€guilty,€heÏwas€notÑ€4ÑÇguilty.€€She€stated€that€to€send€the€defendant€to€prison€for€something€that€he€œdid€not›Ïdo€would€probably€"ruin€him€for€life,€if€not€a€whole€lot€of€other€people€with€œit.ðð›ÌÌà àTwo€witnesses€from€the€defendant's€former€place€of€employmentÏtestified€that€the€defendant€was€an€excellent€employee,€that€he€got€along€well€withÏeveryone,€and€that€he€definitely€would€have€a€job€there€if€granted€probation.€€A€friendÏof€the€defendant's€family€testified€that€the€defendant€was€a€fine€person€and€that€sheÏhad€never€seen€him€show€any€signs€of€violence€at€all.€€The€defendant€submittedÏnumerous€letters€of€support€from€various€individuals.ÌÌà àThe€defendant€testified€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€He€stated€that€theÏincidents€of€alleged€abuse€in€Idaho€involved€both€him€and€his€former€wife€spankingÏthe€child,€but€that€they€never€intended€to€hurt€the€child.€€He€denied€assaulting€hisÏformer€wife,€stating€"maybe€it€was€a€cornering."€€He€said€that€he€and€his€former€wifeÏhad€a€long€custody€battle.€€œHe›€stated€that€he,€at€one€time,€had€a€marijuana€problem,Ïbut€that€it€had€been€over€a€year€since€he€had€"touched€anything."ÌÌà àThe€defendant€said€he€was€asking€the€court€for€probation€"mainly,Ïbecause€I€didn't€do€anything€to€Taylor.€€I€didn't€harm€him€in€any€way."€€He€deniedÏknowledge€of€any€warrant€outstanding€in€Idaho€for€his€arrest€for€embezzlement€orÏtheft.€€He€stated€that€he€did€run€into€his€ex„wife's€car€with€his,€but€œit›€was€accidental.€€HeÍadmitted€that€he€intentionally€hit€her€car€from€behind€at€the€time€his€child€was€in€theÏvehicle,€but€said€that€it€was€at€about€five€miles€an€hour€and€was€just€a€bump.ÌÌà àThe€presentence€report€reflects€that€the€defendant€is€a€high€schoolÏgraduate€with€a€good€employment€record.€€He€has€no€previous€criminal€convictionsÏand€was€twenty„three€years€old€at€the€time€of€sentencing.€€ÌÌà àIn€imposing€the€sentence,€the€trial€court€stated€the€following:ÌÓÓÓ  Óà8 àà àThe€matter€of€the€enhancing€factors€and€the€weightÏthat€they€are€to€be€given€is€a€matter€that€addresses€itself€toÏthe€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.€€Two€factors€are€apparent;Ïthat€is,€the€previous€incident€in€Idaho,€and€the€age€of€theÏchild.ÌÌà8 àà àMr.€Langley€has€an€exemplary€record€throughout€hisÏlife€in€all€instances€save€those€involving€a€child€of€veryÏtender€years.€€He€has€been€convicted.€€His€behaviorÏdoesn't€make€rational€sense,€but€then€seldom€does€childÏabuse€make€rational€sense.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€long€and€the€short€of€it€is,€I've€either€got€to€applyÏthe€enhancing€factors€and€send€him€to€the€penitentiary,€orÏapply€the€minimum€sentence€and€put€him€on€eight€years€ofÏprobation.€€No€matter€how€we€try€to€cut€it,€that's€theÏalternative,€and€that's€all€of€the€alternatives€that€areÏavailable€to€the€Court.ÌÌà8 àà àNo€useful€purpose€will€be€served€by€confining€him.€ÏThe€defendant€will€be€sentenced€to€eight€years€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction€as€a€Standard€Range€I€offender.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€application€for€probation€will€be€granted€onÏrather€strict€conditions,€Mrs.€Moorehead,€that€are€going€toÏhave€to€be€coordinated€with€Judge€Shipley€in€Nashville,Ïrelative€to€this€child,€Josh.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€child€is€his.€€He€must€have€a€relationship€withÏthe€child,€but€that€is€a€matter€that€really€addresses€itself€toÏJudge€Shipley,€not€to€the€criminal€court.€€But€yourÏoperations€are€going€to€have€to€be€coordinated€with€JudgeÏShipley.ÌÌà8 àà àDuring€the€course€of€probation,€or€at€least€untilÏfurther€hearing,€Mr.€Langley€is€to€have€no€contact€withÏminor€children.€€He€is€to€undergo€such€therapy€and€suchÏcounseling€as€you€deem€to€be€most€appropriate.ÌÌà8 àà àI€say€that€because,€as€observed€before,€Mr.ÏLangley's€record,€beyond€these€incidents€involving€theseÏsmall€children,€is€an€exemplary€record.€€He€is€a€hardÏworker.€€He€has€worked€all€of€his€life.€€He€is€a€goodÏemployee.€€He€has€the€potential€to€be€a€functioning€citizen.€ÏHis€employer€like[s]€him.€€He€has€family€support.ÌÌà8 àà àBut€on€the€other€side€of€that€coin€is€that€we€have€aÏseriously€injured€child,€who€somebody€„„€and€the€jury€saysÏMr.€Langley€„„€brutally€beat.€€And€that€child,€and€otherÏchildren€similarly€situated,€are€going€to€be€protected€andÏthe€Court€has€to€assume€at€this€point€that€this€defendant€isÏguilty,€and€that€he€will€be€subjected€to€such€intensity€ofÏsupervision€as€to€make€certain€that€this€does€not€happen€toÏanybody€else.ÌÌà8 àà àI€recognize€.€.€.€I'm€taking€a€chance.€€Probably€aÏchance€that,€on€the€hard€core€of€the€record,€might€not€beÏjustified.€€But€that's€a€shot€I€have€to€call,€and€I€have€to€takeÏthe€responsibility€for€it.ÌÓ  Ӝ̛ÓÓà àœÌà àThe›€trial€court€is€to€exercise€its€discretion€in€determining€the€specificÏsentence€and€the€appropriate€combination€of€sentencing€alternatives€with€thatÏdiscretion€to€be€guided€and€limited€by€the€sentencing€laws.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727ÏS.W.2d€229,€œ235„38›€(Tenn.€1986).€€In€this€respect,€the€1989€Sentencing€Act€mandatesÏprocedures,€while€enabling€the€trial€court€to€exercise€its€discretion€within€thoseÏprocedures.€€Thus,€to€determine€the€appropriate€sentence,€the€trial€court€is€required€toÏconsider:ÌÓÓÓ  Óà8 à(1)€The€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€theÏsentencing€hearing;ÌÌà8 à(2)€The€presentence€report;ÌÌà8 à(3)€The€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€œas›€toÏsentencing€alternatives;ÌÌà8 à(4)€The€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conductÏinvolved;ÌÌà8 à(5)€Evidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€theÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€ðððð€40„35„113€andÏ40„35„114;€and€ÌÌà8 à(6)€Any€statement€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€his€ownÏbehalf€about€sentencing.ÌÌÓÓÓ  ÓT.C.A.€ðð€40„35„210(b).€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€courtððs€sentencing€decision€is€given€the€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€upon€appellate€review.€€T.C.A.€ðððð€40„35„401(d)€and€„402(d).€€For€reviewÏpurposes,€the€trial€court€is€to€place€on€the€record€the€enhancement€or€mitigatingÍfactors€if€found€to€exist€and€to€make€findings€of€fact€upon€which€application€of€theÏsentencing€principles€was€based.€€T.C.A.€ðððð€40„35„209(c)€and€„210(f).€€In€this€fashion,Ïthe€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€action€ð ðis€conditioned€upon€theÏaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingÏprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,Ï169€(Tenn.€1991).€€Ultimately,€the€function€of€appellate€review€is€to€insure€that€the€trialÏcourt€complied€with€the€sentencing€laws€in€setting€a€sentence€and€if€it€did,€theÏsentence€will€be€affirmed€even€if€we€would€prefer€a€different€result.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.ÏFletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€ÌÌœà àThe€state€argues€that€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„114(1),€the€defendant'sÏhistory€of€criminal€behavior€relative€to€child€abuse,€assaultive€behavior,€marijuana€useÏand€theft€should€enhance€his€sentence.€€It€contends€that€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„114(4),€the€sentence€should€be€enhanced€because€the€victim's€age€rendered€himÏparticularly€vulnerable.€€Also,€it€submits€that€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„114(15)€applies€in€that€theÏdefendant,€as€the€victim's€stepfather,€abused€a€position€of€private€trust.€€RegardingÏprobation,€the€state€notes€that€enhancing€the€sentence€to€more€than€eight€years€wouldÏrender€the€defendant€ineligible€for€a€suspended€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„303(a).€€Finally,€it€argues€that€even€if€the€minimum€sentence€is€appropriate,€the€natureÏand€circumstances€of€the€offense€are€sufficiently€serious€as€to€render€probationÏinappropriate.€€ÌÌ›à àRegarding€the€length€of€a€sentence,€although€the€trial€court€has€noÏauthority€to€enhance€a€sentence€above€the€minimum€without€the€existence€of€aÏstatutory€enhancement€factor,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„210(c),€it€is€not€required€to€enhanceÏsolely€because€such€a€factor€is€shown€to€apply.€€It€remains€within€the€trial€court'sÏdiscretion€to€determine€what€weight,€if€any,€the€factor€merits€given€the€totality€of€theÏcircumstances€of€the€case.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„210(d)€(if€enhancing€but€no€mitigatingÏfactors,€"the€court€òòmayóó€set€the€sentence€above€the€minimum€€.€.€.€.")€and€SentencingÏCommission€Comments;€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€at€235.€€Thus,€the€mere€fact€thatÏan€enhancement€factor€applies€does€not€call€for€a€rote€increase€in€a€œsentence.€ÏMoreover,€the›€trial€courtððs€assessment€of€the€weight€to€be€given€applicable€factorsÏdoes€not€occur€in€a€vacuum.€€Essentially,€this€means€that€the€trial€court€may€view€aÏdefendantððs€positive€circumstances€to€mitigate€against€an€enhanced€sentence,€aÏconsideration€which€it€is€entitled€to€make.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„113(13).€€Also,€itÏmust€be€done€with€adherence€to€the€statutory€sentencing€principles.ÌÓÓÓ  Óà8 àThe€Act,€in€order€to€accomplish€its€ð ðforemost€purpose,ððÏwhich€is€to€ð ðpromote€justice,ðð€provides€that€the€sentenceÏimposed€must€be€the€least€severe€necessary€to€achieve€theÏpunishment€justly€deserved,€to€assure€fair€and€consistentÏtreatment€of€all€œdefendants,›€to€prevent€crime,€and€toÏpromote€respect€for€the€law.€€ÌÌÓÓòòÓ  ÓState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€168.€€It€is€a€case„by„case€process.€€ÌÌà àIn€reviewing€the€trial€courtððs€findings€and€determinations€in€this€case,€weÏnote€that€they€œdo›€not€expressly€address€every€contested€fact€or€claim€against€theÏdefendant.€€In€this€respect,€it€is€important€that€a€trial€courtððs€findings€are€sufficientlyÏdiscernable€from€the€record€to€afford€proper€appellate€review.€€œHowever,›€one€canÏrationally€conclude€from€the€trial€courtððs€statements€that€it€did€not€accredit€a€lot€of€whatÏthe€defendantððs€former€wife€claimed€and€gave€œno›€significance€to€the€defendantððsÏdiscontinued€marijuana€abuse€or€to€the€car€collision€incident€occurring€duringÏdomestic€strife.€€Also,€it€is€obvious€that€the€trial€court€found€that€the€positive€œaspects€of›Ïthe€defendantððs€background€and€personal€circumstances€outweighed€the€negative,Ïincluding€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€offense.€ÌÌà àIn€other€words,€after€hearing€all€of€the€testimony,€observing€theÏwitnesses€testify,€reviewing€the€circumstances€of€the€case€and€the€presentence€report,Ïincluding€the€many€letters€in€support€of€the€defendant,€œthe€trial€court€determined€that›Ïthe€defendantððs€previous€history€and€the€particular€vulnerability€of€the€victim€did€notÏwarrant€an€increase€in€the€sentence€above€the€minimum€provided€by€law.€€It€is€alsoÏapparent€that€the€trial€court€viewed€those€qualities€about€the€defendant€which€areÏconducive€to€a€grant€of€probation€to€be€relevant€to€the€length€of€the€sentence€to€beÏimposed.€€Whether€we€view€such€consideration€as€the€application€of€mitigating€factorsÏunder€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„113(13)€or€as€simply€a€reduction€in€the€weight€given€theÏenhancement€factors€under€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€we€conclude€that€theÍrecord€before€us€contains€œsufficient›€evidence€to€support€the€length€of€the€sentenceÏimposed€by€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àMoreover,€although€the€trial€court€did€not€specify€the€defendantððs€abuseÏof€a€position€of€private€trust€as€an€enhancement€factor,œ× ƒ5 ××  ×›€the€record€shows€that€theÏcourt€was€fully€aware€of€the€facts€upon€which€such€factor€is€based.€€In€fact,€it€showsÏthat€the€trial€court€addressed€its€concern€about€the€defendantððs€future€contact€with€hisÏchild€or€any€other€young€children€by€barring€such€contact€and€œby€requiring›Ïappropriate€counseling.€€Thus,€we€believe€that€the€trial€court€did€assess€the€relevantÏculpability€of€the€defendant€under€the€œfacts›€supporting€enhancement€factor€(15),€evenÏthough€it€did€not€note€its€application.€€ÌÌà àAs€for€the€manner€of€service€of€the€sentence,€the€state€primarily€contendsÏthat€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€requires€œa€denial›€of€probation.€€It€also€relies€uponÏthe€enhancing€factors€that€exist.€€Initially,€we€note€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€andÏconclusions€indicate€that€it€may€have€viewed€its€choices€to€be€the€penitentiary€or€fullÏprobation,€thereby€ignoring€split€or€periodic€confinement€as€alternatives.€€However,€itsÏconclusion€that€confinement€would€serve€no€useful€purpose€in€this€case€reflects€that€itÏconsidered€full€probation€as€the€proper€course€to€take.€€ÌÌà àIn€any€event,€we€believe€that€the€record€justifies€the€trial€courtððs€decision.€ÏAs€the€state€asserts,€probation€can€be€denied€due€to€the€nature€of€the€offense€and€thatÏa€negative€factor,€such€as€a€criminal€record,€may€be€sufficient€to€support€a€denial€ofÏprobation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Travisóó,€622€S.W.2d€529,€œ533„34€(Tenn.›€1981);€òòState€v.€Baronóó,€œÌ›ÌÌ659€S.W.2d€811,€815€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€Unquestionably,€the€offense€wasÏserious€in€terms€of€the€victimððs€injuries.€€However,€such€circumstances€and€criminalÏhistory€are€to€be€considered€with€all€of€the€other€relevant€factors€and€the€sentencingÏprinciples€by€the€trial€court.€€In€this€regard,€as€previously€noted,€it€is€apparent€that€theÏtrial€court€did€not€find€the€criminal€history€to€be€as€significant€as€the€state€asserts.€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€presided€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,Ïobserving€€all€of€the€witnesses.€€It€heard€the€defendantððs€former€wife€present€a€litany€ofÏcomplaints€about€the€defendantððs€previous€conduct,€but€It€observed€the€defendantÏrefute€or€substantially€minimize€her€testimony.€€It€heard€his€explanation€of€priorÏmarijuana€use€and€his€stopping€such€use€before€this€case.€€It€heard€his€account€of€hisÏcar€striking€his€former€wifeððs€car€at€a€low€rate€of€speed€and€his€motherððs€supportingÏaccount€of€the€car€damage€being€minimal.€€It€heard€his€account€of€how€he€spanked€hisÍown€child€and€of€his€denying€any€abuse.€€Also,€it€was€provided€substantial€evidence€atÏthe€sentencing€hearing€in€favor€of€the€defendant€that€would€support€probation.€€ÌÌà àUnder€the€foregoing€circumstances,€the€trial€court€chose€to€grantÏprobation,€noting€that€it€was€ð ðtaking€a€chance.ðð€€The€record€before€us€would€easilyÏsupport€a€denial€of€probation.€€However,€it€also€reflects€that€the€trial€court€sufficientlyÏconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€the€relevant€facts€and€circumstances€in€theÏcase€so€as€to€preserve€the€presumption€of€correctness€for€its€determinations.€€InÏconsequence,€the€grant€of€probation€was€within€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€and€weÏconclude€that€sufficient€evidence€exists€to€preclude€us€from€finding€an€abuse€of€Ïdiscretion€that€would€authorize€a€reversal€as€a€matter€of€law.ÌÌÇà àIn€consideration€of€the€foregoing,€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÌÌœÌCONCUR:›ÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌDavid€H.€Welles,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌStephen€M.€Bevil,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌà à€ÌÌÌà à€ÌÌà à