ÿWPCŒ 2# ÌUN× %% 0(+w@S4“§¶ 0J¾ 0T 0^\ 0hº 0r" 0|” 0† 0– 1u& 0d›U>ÿ 0@= D3} B° bÍ U *Õ B)ÿ DC( AMk 2¸ AQê Æ; 0D 0DE D/‰ B¸ fÕ v~;vÓ¹˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ½ D¾ U¿ BeÀ Á U Dà UÄ DÅ Ó€Ñ äzz!3|xÑ 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d- ù-< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd* &Cþÿ << Gÿÿ (Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌò òApril€10,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€$ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd \Ñ\R AØ'\ÑPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ñ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ŠÔÔ€$ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€#ÑÑ7€õ0XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óœò òÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€JACKSONÌ̜ـ*ÙßR€'(&A1-j|×#` Å `€€@ÿRß›JANUARY€SESSION,€1997ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€à à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9609„CC„00297Ìà àà àà àà àà à)ó óÌà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àFAYETTE€COUNTYÌV.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€JON€KERRY€BLACKWOOD,€ó óÌò òTERRY€LOGAN,€ó óà àò òà àà à)à àJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à à(SECOND€DEGREE€MURDER)Ìó óÌÌÓ  ÓON€APPEAL€FROM€THE€JUDGMENT€OF€THEÌCRIMINAL€COURT€OF€FAYETTE€COUNTYÌÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌò òTIMOTHY€JOEL€WILLIAMSó óà àà àò òCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌó óAttorney€at€Law€€€€€€€à àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ147€Jefferson€Avenue,€Suite€909ÌMemphis,€TN€38103€€€€€à àà àà àò òDEBORAH€A.€TULLISó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€Parkway€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òELIZABETH€RICEÌà àà àà àà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òCHRISTOPHER€MARSHBURNó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à302€Market€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TN€38068ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEò òÌó óÇò òòòÓ  ÓÔ€$°ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ€$ŠÔÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àà àThe€Appellant,€Terry€Logan,€pled€guilty€as€charged€in€the€CircuitÏCourt€of€Fayette€County€to€the€offense€of€second€degree€murder€of€the€victim,ÏMichael€Hood.€€Following€a€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€sentenced€theÏAppellant€to€serve€the€presumptive€sentence€of€twenty€(20)€years€in€theÏDepartment€of€Corrections€as€a€Range€I€Standard€Offender.€€On€appeal,€theÏAppellant€submits€that€the€sentence€is€excessive.€€He€argues€three€issues€inÏhis€appeal:€(1)€That€an€enhancement€factor€applied€by€the€trial€court€does€notÏapply€to€his€case;€(2)€that€certain€mitigating€factors€were€not€applied€by€the€trialÏcourt;€and€(3)€that€the€presumption€of€correctness€normally€afforded€toÏsentencing€by€the€trial€court€should€not€be€applied€in€this€case.€€Finding€no€error,Ïwe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àà àIn€the€early€morning€hours€of€October€21,€1995,€the€Appellant€wasÏdrinking€beer€in€his€house€along€with€the€victim,€Susan€Bond,€and€AppellantððsÏroommate,€Johnny€Logan.€€Logan€and€Appellant€became€involved€in€anÏargument€over€the€rent€and€utility€bills.€€During€this€argument,€the€victim€got€into€aÏfist„fight€with€the€Appellant.€€After€the€altercation€ended,€the€Appellant€went€intoÏhis€bedroom€and€retrieved€a€wooden€baseball€bat.€€Appellant€returned€to€theÍdining€room,€where€the€victim€was€located,€and€struck€the€victim€in€the€headÏarea€with€the€baseball€bat€several€times,€leaving€the€victim€unconscious€on€theÏfloor.€€As€the€victim€lay€on€the€floor€unconscious,€Appellant€stood€over€the€victimÏand€delivered€another€blow€to€the€victimððs€head€with€the€baseball€bat.€€TheÏvictim€was€transported€to€a€hospital€and€died€the€following€day.Ìà àÌà àà àAppellant€told€a€deputy€sheriff€who€arrived€at€the€scene€that€ð ð[theÏvictim]€hit€me€in€my€own€house€and€I€beat€his€ass€with€a€bat.ðð€€At€theÏsentencing€hearing,€the€Appellant€admitted€that€he€told€the€deputy€that€ifÏAppellant€had€been€in€possession€of€a€firearm,€he€would€have€shot€the€victim.€ÌÌà àà àAs€an€enhancement€factor,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€AppellantÏallowed€the€victim€to€be€treated€with€exceptional€cruelty€during€the€commission€ofÏthe€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(5).€€The€trial€court€found€two€(2)Ïmitigating€factors,€that€€the€Appellant€acted€under€strong€provocation€and€that€heÏhad€admitted€his€guilt.€€œÌÌ›à@ àI.ÌÌà àà àIn€his€first€issue,€Appellant€submits€that€the€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€normally€afforded€to€a€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€must€fail€inÏthis€case€€ð ðdue€to€lack€of€specificity€in€the€record.ððÌÌà àà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€the€manner€ofÏservice€of€a€sentence,€this€court€has€a€duty€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€theÏsentence€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€areÏcorrect.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditionedÏupon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€theÏsentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,Ï823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àà àIn€conducting€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€court€mustÏconsider:€(a)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencingÏhearing;€(b)€the€presentence€report;€(c)€the€principles€of€sentencing€andÏarguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(d)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€theÏcriminal€conduct€involved;€(e)€any€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(f)Ïany€statement€that€the€defendant€made€on€his€own€behalf;€and€(g)€the€potentialÏor€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô€$XÔððððÔ€$ŠÔ€40„35„102,Ï„103,€and€„210;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1987).ÌÌà àà àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutoryÏsentencing€procedure,€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€dueÏconsideration€and€proper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principals€set€out€under€theÏsentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€are€adequatelyÏsupported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€weÏwould€have€preferred€a€different€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).ÌÌà àà àThe€Appellant€complains€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€follow€properÏsentencing€procedures€by€failing€to€make€specific€findings€of€fact€in€the€record.€ÏThe€comments€of€the€trial€court€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing€areÏas€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àTHE€COURT:à0 àMr.€Logan,€will€you€stand,€please,€sir.ÌÌà àà àà àà0 àUpon€entering€a€plea€of€guilty€to€Murder€in€the€SecondÏDegree,€the€Court€finds€that€you€allowed€the€victim€toÏbe€treated€with€exceptional€cruelty,€but€you€actedÏunder€strong€provocation€as€a€mitigating€offender,€andÏsentences€you€to€the€presumptive€sentence€of€20Ïyears€in€the€Department€of€Corrections,€as€a€StandardÏOffender,€to€serve€30€percent€before€youððll€be€eligibleÏfor€release€classification.€€ÌÌà àà àà àà0 àYouððll€be€given€credit€for€186€days€while€in€jail€awaitingÏtrial.Ìà àà àÌ€à àà àà àà0 àThank€you.ÌÓÓÌà àà àThe€sentencing€order€entered€by€the€trial€court€insofar€as€itÏaddresses€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors€states€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà8 àð ðAnd€it€appearing€to€the€Court€that€there€is€an€enhancement€factorÏthat€the€defendant€allowed€a€victim€to€be€treated€with€extremeÏcruelty,€and€the€Court€finds€the€mitigating€factors€that€the€defendantÏacted€under€strong€provocation€and€he€has€admitted€his€guilt.ððÌÓÓÌà àà àTennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40„35„209(c)€provides€in€part,Ïð ð[T]he€record€of€the€sentencing€hearing€is€part€of€the€record€of€the€case€and€òòshallóóÏinclude€specific€findings€of€fact€upon€which€application€of€the€sentencingÏprincipals€was€based.ðð€€(Emphasis€added).Ìà àà àÌà àà àAs€correctly€noted€by€the€Appellant,€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€910€S.W.2dÏ457€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.)€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1995)€stands€for€the€propositionÏthat€the€findings€by€the€trial€court€in€a€sentencing€hearing€must€be€recorded€inÏorder€to€allow€adequate€review€on€appeal.€€òòSmithóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€460.ÌÌà àà àThe€presumption€of€correctness€does€not€apply€in€this€case.€ÏHowever,€even€though€the€trial€court€should€have€stated€the€specific€findings€ofÏfact€from€the€record€to€support€application€of€the€enhancement€factors€andÍmitigating€factors€found€by€the€court,€we€do€not€find€that€the€failure€to€do€soÏrequires€a€new€sentencing€hearing€in€this€case€or€modification€of€the€sentence.ÌÌà àà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌà@ àII.ÌÓÓÌÑ  ÑÓÓà àà àIn€his€second€issue,€the€Appellant€argues€that€the€enhancementÏfactor€relied€upon€by€the€trial€court€is€an€essential€element€of€second€degreeÏmurder€and€therefore,€is€not€applicable€in€this€case.ÌÌà àà àSecond€degree€murder€is€the€knowing€killing€of€another.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210(a)(1).€€Appellant€maintains€on€appeal€that€the€ð ðmaliceððÏthat€caused€Appellantððs€crime€to€be€second€degree€murder€rather€than€voluntaryÏmanslaughter€constitutes€cruelty,€and€therefore€this€enhancement€factor€cannotÏbe€used.€€However,€malice€is€no€longer€an€element€of€second€degree€murder.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àà àThe€record€reflects€that€the€Appellant€struck€the€victim€several€timesÏabout€his€head€with€a€wooden€baseball€bat€until€the€victim€fell€to€the€floorÏunconscious.€€At€that€point,€the€Appellant€then€walked€over€to€the€victim€andÏdelivered€another€blow€to€the€victimððs€head€with€the€baseball€bat.€€There€isÏadequate€evidence€in€the€record€to€support€use€of€the€enhancement€factor€thatÍthe€Appellant€treated€the€victim€with€exceptional€cruelty€during€the€commission€ofÏthe€offense.€€In€addition,€as€correctly€pointed€out€by€the€State€in€its€brief,€theÏAppellant€employed€a€deadly€weapon,€the€baseball€bat,€during€commission€ofÏthe€offense.€€Therefore,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40„35„114(9)€is€anÏapplicable€enhancement€factor.€€This€court€is€allowed,€in€conducting€its€òòde€novoóóÏreview€to€consider€any€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors€supported€by€theÏrecord,€even€if€it€was€not€relied€upon€by€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€864ÏS.W.2d€31,€34€(Tenn.€1993);€òòSmithóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€460.€€ÌÌà àà àAppellantððs€second€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÑ ` ÑÌà@ àIII.ÌÌà àà àAppellantððs€third€issue€is,€ð ðWhether€any€mitigating€factors€apply€toÏyour€Appellant.ðð€€The€trial€court€did€find€two€(2)€mitigating€factors,€that€€theÏAppellant€acted€under€strong€provocation€and€that€the€Appellant€admitted€hisÏguilt.€€In€his€appeal,€the€Appellant€urges€that€the€trial€court€should€haveÏconsidered€the€following€additional€mitigating€factors:€(1)€That€the€AppellantÏassisted€the€authorities€in€locating€or€recovering€any€property€or€person€involvedÏin€the€crime;€(2)€that€the€Appellant€committed€the€offense€under€such€unusualÏcircumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€law€motivatedÍhis€conduct;€and€(3)€that€the€Appellant,€because€of€his€youth,€lacked€substantialÏjudgment€in€committing€the€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(10),(11),&Ï(16).€€ÌÌà àà àAppellant€relies€upon€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1992),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1993),€in€support€of€hisÏargument€that€the€mitigating€factor€that€Appellant€lacked€a€sustained€intent€toÏviolate€the€law€should€be€applicable.€€We€have€reviewed€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó€andÏconclude€that€it€is€distinguishable€from€Appellantððs€case.€€In€òòSheltonóó,€also€aÏsecond€degree€murder€case,€the€defendant€killed€his€wife€by€use€of€a€firearm.€ÏThis€Court€held€that€the€mitigating€factor€contained€in€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€40„35„113(11)€was€applicable€because€the€trial€court€did€notÏfind€that€the€domestic€difficulties€between€the€parties€related€to€a€sustained€intentÏto€violate€the€law€which€motivated€the€killing.€€òòSheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€at€123.Ñ€/ÑÇÌà àà àIn€Appellantððs€case,€he€was€involved€in€an€altercation€with€theÏvictim,€left€the€altercation€and€went€into€his€bedroom€and€retrieved€a€woodenÏbaseball€bat.€€He€returned€and€hit€the€victim€several€times€about€the€head€area,Ïand€struck€the€victim€at€least€one€more€time€on€the€head€after€he€had€fallen€toÏthe€floor€unconscious.€€When€the€first€law€enforcement€officer€arrived,€theÏAppellant€came€out€of€the€house€and€yelled€at€the€officer€ð ð(the€victim]€hit€me€inÏmy€own€house€and€I€beat€his€ass€with€a€bat.ðð€€Appellant€also€admitted€at€theÏsentencing€hearing€that€he€told€the€officer€that€he€would€have€shot€the€victim€ifÏhe€œhad€had›€a€gun.€€There€is€no€error€in€the€trial€court€not€applying€this€mitigatingÏfactor.ÌÌà àà àAppellant€urges€that€the€trial€court€should€have€applied€theÏmitigating€factor€that€he€assisted€authorities€in€locating€a€person€involved€in€aÏcrime.€€Appellant€called€911€following€the€incident.€€While€we€agree€that€thisÏmitigating€factor€is€applicable,€we€afford€it€very€little€weight.€€ÌÌà àà àFinally,€the€Appellant€argues€that€the€mitigating€factor€€that€heÏlacked€substantial€judgment€in€committing€the€offense€because€of€his€youthÏshould€have€been€applied€by€the€trial€court.€€The€record€reflects€that€theÏAppellant€was€one€month€shy€of€his€twenty„first€birthday€when€he€committedÍthe€offense.€€There€is€simply€nothing€in€this€record€to€indicate€that€this€mitigatingÏfactor€is€applicable.ÌÌà àà àAlthough€we€find€that€the€trial€court€should€have€applied€theÏmitigating€factor€contained€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„113(10),€weÏfind€that€this€mitigating€factor€should€be€afforded€little€weight€and€does€not€justifyÏa€modification€of€Appellantððs€sentence.€€ÌÌà àà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àà àIn€conclusion,€we€have€found€that€the€trial€court€properly€appliedÏone€enhancement€factor,€and€that€an€additional€enhancement€factor,€use€of€aÏdeadly€weapon€in€commission€of€the€offense,€is€applicable€in€this€case.€ÏFurthermore,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€properly€applied€two€(2)€mitigating€factors,Ïand€failed€to€apply€one€(1)€mitigating€factor,€though€it€is€entitled€to€little€weight.€ÏAppellant€was€€convicted€of€a€Class€A€felony,€and€the€presumptive€sentence,€ifÏthere€are€no€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors€is€20€years.€€If€there€areÏenhancement€factors€and€mitigating€factors,€the€court€must€start€at€theÏpresumptive€sentence€in€the€range,€enhance€the€sentence€as€appropriate€forÏenhancement€factors,€and€reduce€the€sentence€as€appropriate€for€mitigatingÏfactors.€€ÌÌà àà àAfter€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€we€have€determined€that€theÏtwenty„year€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€appropriate.€€The€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court€is€therefore€affirmed.ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€Judge