ÿWPC. 3‰¸ÚË¥Xxx‹q"9¼<šZ…š%¤éBضþ‰dé[ÿH@§E±Ë_bpNzÇ §Ø×«xTZpÎRý¶^§›§Ôô&Ùæ³½|Ä«´eAàPW´ÒªÂ>¾&uæA­BÖÅRÒ¶{0!+÷¦ró‘LqGHzCáSÜ6LTJý‡qˆ¡¤‚Æ3<’^¯ÎÃj’TôývØmËt{Ž£`Äø]´ˆ‹·+óôÍŽ/¢dV$«i0Ï_ºÇ<š\þø2›à>Ÿ1c©°§Ï—Œùˆv9V­+äSÕ¿AnÅæè_ì„tʵäo˜r5¸ê×ßsE™[ëÿÜÉ]m!Æ+PjÌkp«ñ{݆#0ÝzŒ |ó±ÎµOâ!úúïaÃíøÖlÃbYuÀ ©¿GŸw>RjíE)u¤Õ ÔÕšÞÀ¬£Æ8TÖ=£Ø™Stɯcjmšº¹™áAƒýdø ‡~ÆYýYà6WÀ æ¦ìh®èÙš˜^ú#¨‘¨U¢Åc ½×*‹—±£fq!máêr"w×Á#V·Ûç”auaïÜ=>è° •FOÌWg Cã-×ê¸ê÷ GîÔUD7_q1@w¸F… %F w@L 0ÜŒ U:h 4¢ ¶ ›Å ä` 0 D 0Dd3¨U:ÛÛÛÛÛÛDr YYYYYYYYYYYY BË+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+Ë+ D3è+è+è+ 0D,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, AO_,Æ®,®, 0Dt- D/¸- Bç-X ŽDD‘E’“D”D•–D—Ó€(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularuM%3|x  ‘Ô‡ôcØôXXÔÝ ƒ ‚™ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7ÀÌÛXXdædæ7ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€was€charged€by€indictment€with€the€second€degree€murder€of€his€step„Ð  Ðfather€Paul€Crosson. ÚÔ€ XÌÛXXXÔÔ€ dvX XÌÛÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XÌÛX dvÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€8,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó(Ð(3‚™$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€ÌÛXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó )Ô‡ô#ÛôXXÔÝ ƒ ¹ÿÝÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€ô#Ûôôô#ÛÔÒ°Òà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝA€large€portion€of€the€229€pages€of€sentencing€€testimony€plus€numerous€exhibits€in€theÐ  Ðrecord€are€totally€irrelevant€and€may€be€properly€characterized€as€an€assault€upon€the€victim'sÏcharacter,€òòe.g.óó,€testimony€relating€to€the€victimððs€discharge€from€the€military€due€to€heroinÐ „| Ðaddiction,€his€prior€felony€conviction,€his€incarceration€in€the€penitentiary,€€his€diagnosis€withÏsyphilis,€etc.€€We€note€that€the€majority€of€this€evidence€is€over€twenty€years€old.€€Additionally,€theÏrecord€also€reveals€that€both€the€State€and€the€defense€presented€irrelevant€information€relating€toÏNora€Lee€Crosson,€òòi.e.óó,€she€is€a€former€prostitute€and€drug€dealer,€and€the€family€in€general,€òòe.g.óó,Ð ~ v Ðthey€all€smoked€marijuana€together.€€We€would€acknowledge,€however,€that€evidence€of€theÐ > 6  Ðvictimððs€character€indicative€of€his€abusive€behavior€towards€his€wife,€that€is,€reflective€of€theÏnature€of€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€would€be€relevant€in€making€the€appropriateÏsentencing€determination.€€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular :Ô‡ô#ÛôXXÔÝ ƒ ¹ÿÝÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€ô#Ûôôô#ÛÔÒ°Òà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€imposing€a€sentence€of€four€years,€the€trial€court€determined€that€the€record€supportedÐ  Ðapplication€of€the€following€mitigating€factors:€Ìà8 ` à(2)€€The€defendant€acted€under€strong€provocation;Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` à(3)€€Substantial€grounds€exist€tending€to€excuse€or€justify€the€defendantððs€criminalÏconduct,€though€failing€to€establish€a€defense;Ð ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` à(11)€€The€defendant,€although€guilty€of€the€crime,€committed€the€offense€underÏsuch€unusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€theÏlaw€motivated€the€criminal€conduct;€andÐ ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` à(12)€€The€defendant€acted€under€duress€or€under€the€domination€of€anotherÏperson,€even€though€the€duress€or€the€domination€of€another€person€is€notÏsufficient€to€constitute€a€defense€to€the€crime.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113€(2),€(3),€(11),€(12)€(1997).€€Additionally,€the€court€appliedÏenhancement€factors€(9)€and€(10):Ìà8 ` à(9)€€The€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm,€explosive€device€or€otherÏdeadly€weapon€during€the€commission€of€the€offense;€andÐ ` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8 ` à(10)€€The€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€risk€toÏhuman€life€was€high.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114€(9),€(10)€(1997).€ h Ô‡ô#ÛôXXÔÝ ƒ ¹ÿÝÑT@R[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€ô#Ûôôô#ÛÔÒ°Òà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€his€brief,€the€appellant€concedes€that€the€trial€court€misapplied€one€unspecifiedÐ  Ðmitigating€factor€and€argues€the€misapplication€of€one€unspecified€enhancement€factor.€ÏEssentially,€his€argument€relies€upon€the€principle€that€both€factors€are€inherent€in€the€offense€ofÏvoluntary€manslaughter.€€Initially,€we€note€that€it€is€not€the€duty€of€this€court€to€speculate€as€toÏwhich€factors€are€challenged€by€the€appellant.€€It€is€incumbent€upon€the€appellant€to€state€withÏparticularity€the€grounds€upon€which€he€seeks€relief.€€The€appellant€has€failed€to€do€so.€€This€issueÏis€waived.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27(a)(7).€€Regardless€of€the€contested€enhancement€factor,€weÐ | t Ðfind€any€challenge€thereupon€unwarranted€under€the€facts€of€the€present€case.€The€proof€supportsÏa€finding€that€a€firearm€was€used€in€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð ø ð Ð35„114(9).€€Additionally,€factor€(10)€is€appropriately€applied€in€circumstances€where€personsÏothers€than€the€victim€are€present€and€could€have€been€injured.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Makokaóó,€885Ð tl  ÐS.W.2d€366,€373€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€proof€presentedÐ 2*  Ðrevealed€that€the€appellantððs€mother€was€beneath€the€victim€when€multiple€shots€were€fired€at€theÏvictimððs€head.€€ÌÌà ` àWe,€likewise,€find€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€application€of€mitigating€factors€(2),€(3),€(11)Ïand€(12).€€While€essential€elements€of€the€offense€cannot€be€enhancement€factors€under€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114,€there€is€no€corresponding€limitation€for€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„113.€€Thus,€ð ðdouble€mitigationðð€is€not€prohibited€by€the€statute.€€Nonetheless,€ð ðdoubleÏcreditðð€need€not€be€automatically€applied€in€voluntary€manslaughter€cases.€€Indeed,€while€theÏproof€of€provocation€may€have€been€adequate€to€reduce€the€degree€of€culpability,€the€nature€andÏcircumstances€of€the€killing€do€not€necessarily€demonstrate€the€kind€of€ð ðstrong€provocationððÏrequired€to€mitigate€a€sentence.€€òòState€v.€David€Paul€Martinóó,€No.€03C01„9412„CR„00448€(Tenn.Ð \T ÐCrim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Oct.€13,€1995),€òòaffððd€on€other€grounds€byóó,€950€S.W.2d€20€(Tenn.€1997).€Ð  ÐMoreover,€the€decision€to€double€mitigate€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€òòSeeóó€€òòMartinóó,Ð ÚÒ ÐNo.€03C01„9412„CR„00448.€€As€the€propriety€of€the€trial€courtððs€application€of€mitigating€factorsÏsuggestive€of€provocation€are€not€challenged€on€appeal,€we€will€not€disturb€the€trial€courtððsÏfindings. d'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€ÌÛXXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýñ—ñ›ñ—ñÓ ÔþÓò òñ—ñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@EÈ ` 8ttxPð  rß›ñ—ñà@. . ®àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@ÜÜ(®àAT€NASHVILLEˆÌà@ââ&®àMAY€SESSION,€1999ˆÌÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à h àà À à)Ð | t Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àNo.€01C01„9803„CR„00128Ð h` Ðà ` àAppelleeà  àà h àà À à)Ð TL  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àDAVIDSON€COUNTYÐ @8  Ðvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð ,$  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHon.€J.€Randall€Wyatt,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ   ÐLOUIS€LAVERGNE,à h àà À à)Ð ü  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  à(Voluntary€Manslaughter)Ð ðè  Ðà ` àAppellantà  àà h àà À à)Ð ÜÔ  Ðó óÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð zr ÐÌò òMark€C.€Scruggsó óà  àà h àò òà À àà  àPaul€G.€Summersó óÐ F> ÐAttorney€for€Appellantà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ 2* ÐP.€O.€Box€158932à  àÐ  ÐNashville,€TN€€37215„8932à À àà  àò òMarvin€E.€Clements,€Jr.ó óÐ þö Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà Ð àà (# àÐ êâ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à2d€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à x àà Ð àà (# àÐ ‚!z Ðà ` àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àVictor€S.€(Torry)€Johnson€IIIó óÐ 4$,  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àò òKaty€Novak€Milleró óÐ ì&ä# Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWashington€Sq.,€Suite€500Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à222„2nd€Avenue€N.Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€€37201„1649ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ /(, ÐÌAFFIRMED;€SENTENCE€MODIFIED€ÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÐ l4d-2 ÐJudgeÐ  X5P.3 ÐÓÓà@+®àòòò òOPINIONóóó óˆÐ  ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant,€Louis€Lavergne,€pled€guilty€to€the€offense€of€€voluntaryÏmanslaughter€in€the€Davidson€County€Criminal€Court.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Pursuant€to€the€pleaÐ x p Ðagreement,€both€the€length€of€the€sentence€and€the€manner€of€service€wereÏsubmitted€to€the€trial€court€for€determination.€€The€trial€court€subsequently€imposed€aÏfour€year€sentence€to€be€served€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€In€this€appeal,€theÏappellant€challenges€both€the€length€of€the€sentence€and€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€aÏsentencing€alternative€to€total€confinement.ÌÌà ` àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€the€appellantððs€four€year€sentence€is€affirmed,Ïhowever,€the€manner€of€service€is€modified€to€reflect€a€split€confinement€sentence€ofÏsix€months€confinement€in€the€local€jail€or€workhouse€with€the€remainder€of€the€fourÏyear€sentence€to€be€served€on€supervised€probation.Ìñ—ñœñ—ñ̛̜à@ff)®àò òBackgroundó óˆÐ Ô#Ì  М̛à ` àAt€the€time€of€the€offense,€the€forty„six€year€old€victim,€Paul€Crosson,€hadÏbeen€married€to€the€appellantððs€mother,€Nora€Lee,€for€six€years.€€Although€theÏmarriage€had€encountered€difficult€times,€during€the€latter€years,€the€couple€enjoyedÏa€good€relationship€and€a€stable€marriage.€€€The€couple€moved€from€Mississippi€toÏNashville€with€Nora€Leeððs€two€children,€the€appellant€and€his€younger€sister,€and,Ïeventually,€started€a€carpet€cleaning€business.€€Both€Paul€and€Nora€Lee€worked€inÏthe€business.ÌœÌÐ Ø5Ð.4 Ðñyñ›à ` àJanuary€6,€1997,€began€as€a€typical€day,€both€Paul€and€Nora€Lee€sharingÏdomestic€chores€within€the€home.€€€Later€that€morning,€Paul€went€to€work€and€NoraÏLee€proceeded€to€complete€errands€Paul€had€asked€her€to€do.€€Paul€returned€fromÏwork€around€4:30€that€afternoon.€€Upon€entering€the€residence,€Paul€kissed€NoraÏLee.€€Nora€Lee€then€gave€Paul€a€message€involving€their€carpet€cleaning€business.€ÏHowever,€she€could€not€remember€the€details€of€the€telephone€message.€€PaulÏbecame€angry.€€He€ð ðgrabbed€[her]€by€the€throat€and€threw€[her]€against€the€wall.ðð€ÏNora€Lee€fled€to€the€safety€of€her€bedroom;€but€Paul€followed€her.€€He€ð ðstartedÏcussing€[her]€and€cussing€a€whole€lot€of€other€people.€.€.€.€And€just€kept€on€hittingÏand€hitting€and€hitting.ðð€€Despite€her€pleas€for€mercy,€ðð[h]e€kept€on€pushing€[her],Ïthrowing€[her]€against€the€wall,€hitting€[her].ððÌÌà ` àThe€appellant,€who€had€been€in€bed€asleep,€was€awakened€by€theÏcommotion.€€He€remained€in€his€room€because€he€did€not€want€to€become€involvedÏin€the€argument.€€When€the€argument€subsided,€the€appellant€got€dressed,€went€intoÏthe€living€room,€and€confronted€his€crying€mother.€€€At€this€point,€Paul€had€left€theÏresidence.€€€The€appellant€observed€red€marks€on€his€motherððs€neck.€€Nora€LeeÏconfirmed€that€Paul€had€grabbed€her€by€the€throat€and€slammed€her€against€theÏwall.€€The€appellant€ð ðsat€there€for€a€little€while,ðð€before€ð ðwriting€out€[his]€check€forÏ[his]€truck€payment,ðð€which€was€due€that€day.€€ÌÌà ` àMeanwhile,€Paul€Crosson€reinitiated€his€argument€with€Nora€Lee.€€PaulÏð ðswung€at€her€a€couple€of€times,€trying€to€slap€her€or€something.ðð€€The€appellantÏinstructed€his€mother€ð ðto€sit€down€and€be€quiet,€just€to€leave€[Paul]€alone.ðð€€Paul€leftÏthe€room.€€Nora€Lee€went€into€the€coupleððs€bedroom;€Paul€followed€her€and€closedÏthe€door.€€The€argument€resumed.€€The€appellant€heard€his€mother€screaming€andÏPaul€shouting€profanities€and€derogatory€comments€at€her.€€In€fear€for€his€motherððsÏlife,€the€appellant€went€outside€to€his€truck,€retrieved€a€.25€caliber€pistol,€returned€toÏthe€house,€and€called€for€his€mother.€€He€opened€the€bedroom€door€and€saw€PaulÐ X9P28 Ðon€top€of€his€mother,€choking€her€with€his€left€hand,€and€hitting€her€with€his€rightÏhand.€€The€appellant€again€called€for€his€mother€and€simultaneously€fired€hisÏweapon.€€Paul€looked€up€but€continued€hitting€Nora€Lee.€€Realizing€that€his€first€shotÏhad€missed€his€stepfather,€the€appellant€moved€closer,€within€five€to€six€feet€of€hisÏvictim,€and€fired€the€weapon€two€more€times,€hitting€Paul€in€the€head€with€bothÏshots.€€The€appellant€ran€into€the€dining€room,€put€the€gun€on€the€kitchen€table,€andÏcalled€911.€€He€then€went€outside€and€waited€for€€the€paramedics.€€ÌÌà ` àAt€the€subsequent€sentencing€hearing,€proof€was€introduced€by€both€theÏdefense€and€the€prosecution€as€to€the€character€of€the€victim,€Paul€Crosson.€€TheÏStateððs€witnesses,€although€admitting€to€turbulent€times€early€in€Paul€and€Nora€LeeððsÏmarriage,€€testified€to€the€loving€relationship€between€the€couple.€€Countering€thisÏproof,€the€defense€presented€testimony€of€Paul€Crossonððs€violent€nature.€€Notwith„Ïstanding€the€contradictory€evidence€presented€by€both€parties,€the€evidence€isÏundisputed€that€the€victim,€Paul€Crosson,€had€only€physically€assaulted€Nora€Lee€onÏtwo€prior€occasions€early€in€their€marriage.€€Additionally,€the€appellant€testified€thatÏPaul€Crosson€had€only€assaulted€him€on€one€occasion€during€the€partiesðð€six€yearÏmarriage.€€This€incident€occurred€when€the€appellant€was€fifteen€years€old€and€hadÏshown€a€pornographic€video€tape€to€Crossonððs€eight€year€old€nephew.€€ÌÌà ` àWhile€the€character€of€the€victim€is€relevant€in€assessing€the€culpability€of€theÏdefendant€in€the€commission€of€the€offense,€we€fail€to€find€the€exhaustiveÏintroduction€of€testimony€regarding€the€ð ðlifeðð€€of€Paul€Crosson€relevant€to€theÏconsideration€of€the€principles€inherent€in€determining€the€sentence€that€will€bestÏserve€the€needs€of€the€òòappellantóó€and€society.œ×ƒ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€€€Moreover,€despite€the€number€ofÐ (2 +0 Ðwitnesses€presented€and€the€numerous€medical/psychiatric€exhibits€introduced€toÏestablish€the€character€of€the€deceased€victim,€the€only€substantive€evidenceÏrelating€to€the€character€of€the€appellant€is€contained€in€the€presentence€reportÏsubmitted€by€the€State.€€The€appellant,€a€twenty„one€year€old€at€the€time€of€theÏcrime,€is€a€high€school€graduate€and€has€no€prior€convictions€as€an€adult€or€as€aÏjuvenile.€€He€admits€to€limited€use€of€alcohol€and,€although€he€previouslyÏexperimented€with€illegal€substances,€denies€current€use€of€such€substances.€€TheÏappellant€has€maintained€continuous€employment€since€October€19,€1994,€changingÏemployment€only€to€accept€better€paying€positions.€€Finally,€numerous€letters€wereÏsubmitted€for€the€trial€courtððs€consideration€attesting€to€the€admirable€qualities€of€theÏappellant,€òòi.eóó.,€he€is€hard„working,€polite,€friendly,€dependable,€considerate,€andÐ ø Ðloyal.ÌÌà ` àBased€on€this€evidence€and€€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€trial€court,Ïapplying€four€mitigating€factors€and€two€enhancing€factors,€imposed€a€sentence€ofÏfour€years€for€the€offense€of€voluntary€manslaughter.€€Additionally,€in€order€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,€the€trial€court€ordered€that€the€sentenceÏbe€served€in€the€Department€of€Correction.ÌÌÌà@*®àò òAnalysisó óˆÐ ü*ô#( ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€imposing€a€sentence€of€fourÏyears€and€by€denying€him€a€sentencing€alternative€to€total€incarceration.€€AppellateÏreview€of€a€sentence€is€òòde€novo,óó€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€madeÐ 820+0 Ðby€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€is€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼401(d)(1997).€€This€presumption€only€applies,€however,€if€the€record€shows€that€theÐ Ô5Ì.4 Ðtrial€court€properly€considered€relevant€sentencing€principles.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Ð  ÐS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€the€present€case,€the€record€supports€applicationÏof€the€presumption.€€Moreover,€the€burden€is€upon€the€appellant€to€show€that€theÏsentence€imposed€is€improper.€€Sentencing€Commission€Comments,€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„401.€€In€determining€whether€the€appellant€has€met€this€burden,€thisÏcourt€must€consider€factors€listed€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(b)(1997)€and€theÏsentencing€principles€described€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102€and€„103€(1997).€€ÌÌà ` àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencingÏprocedure,€that€the€court€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€dueÏconsideration€and€proper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principles€set€out€under€theÏsentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€byÏthe€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€aÏdifferent€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.Crim.App.1991).Ð d\ ÐÌÌà@tt#®àò òA.€€Length€of€Sentenceó óˆÐ È#À  Ðà ` àAgain,€the€appellant€contends€that€his€offense€does€not€warrant€a€sentence€ofÏfour€years€incarceration€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€œñ€ñThe€record€reflects€thatÏthe€trial€court€applied€twoñ€ñññNeither›€party›€disputes›€the›€propriety›€of›€theññ›€enhancing€and€œñ‚ñfour€ñ‚ñmitigating›€œfactorsñƒñ€applied›€by›€the›€trial›€courtñƒñ.›×ƒ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð 8)0"& Ї̜ñ„ñAccordingly,›€as›€wñ„ññ…ñWñ…ñe›€find€the€trial€courtððs€determinations€to€be€supported€by€the€œrecordñŠñ,ñŠñ›€œñ†ñañ†ññ‡ññ†ñbñ†ññ‡ññˆñndñˆññ‰ñweñ‰ñ›€will€notÏdisturb€its€findings.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€œñ‹ñNoñ‹ññŒññ‹ñthñ‹ññŒñññtwithstandingñññŽñRatherñŽñ,›€the€appellant€asserts€that€the€trial€œcourtññððsññññ€failedÐ   ˜ Ðto€properly€weighñññ‘ñññtñññ‘ññ’ñ€theñ’ññ“ñ›€application›€ofñ“ñ›€four€mitigating€factors€and€œñ”ñonly›€ñ”ñtwo›€enhancement€œfactorsñ•ñ.€ÏAccordingly,€he€contends€that€he€is€entitled€to€ñ•ññ–ñ›€warrants›€the›€imposition›€of›€ñ–ña›€three€year€sentence,€the€minimumÏsentence€within€the€range.€ÌÌà ` àIn€determining€the€appropriate€sentence€for€a€felony€conviction,€theÏsentencing€court€must,€if€there€are€both€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors,€start€at€theÏminimum€sentence€within€the€range,€then€enhance€the€sentence€in€accordance€withÏthe€enhancing€factors,€then€reduce€the€sentence€in€accordance€with€the€mitigatingÏfactors.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(e)€(1997);€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2dÐ ÌÄ Ð467,€475€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996).€€There€is€noÐ ˜ Ðmathematical€formula€of€adding€and€subtracting€the€enhancement€and€mitigatingÏfactors€to€calculate€the€appropriate€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€€òòBoggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€at€475.€Ð 0 ( Ðð ðRather,€the€weight€to€be€afforded€an€existing€factor€is€left€to€the€trial€courtððsÏdiscretion€so€long€as€the€court€complies€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€theÐ È#À  Ð1989€Sentencing€Act€and€its€findings€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ  Ð(citations€omitted).ÌÌà ` à€The€appellant,€a€range€I€offender,€was€convicted€of€voluntary€manslaughter,Ïa€class€C€felony.€€Accordingly,€the€appropriate€sentencing€range€is€ð ðnot€less€thanÏthree€(3)€nor€more€than€six€(6)€years.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(3)€(1997).€ÏThe€trial€court,€after€weighing€and€considering€the€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors,€Ïimposed€a€sentence€of€four€years.€€Applying€the€presumption€of€correctnessÏafforded€the€trial€courtððs€decision,€€we€conclude,€upon€òòde€novoóó€review,€thatÐ h` Ðimposition€of€a€sentence€of€four€years€is€not€excessive.ÌÌà@77"®àò òB.€€Alternative€Sentenceó óˆÐ ÐÈ Ðà ` àIn€his€final€argument,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÏimposing€a€sentence€of€total€confinement,€rather€than€granting€a€sentencingÏalternative,€specifically€that€of€total€probation.€€Indeed,€the€trial€court€denied€theÏappellant€any€form€of€alternative€sentence€based€upon€the€ð ðseriousness€of€theÏoffense.ðð€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B)(1997).€€Specifically,€the€trialÐ Ø#Ð  Ðcourt€reasoned:ÌÓÓà8 ` à[the€appellant]€could€have€done€something€a€little€different€than€whatÏ[he]€did€on€that€day€when€[he€had]€been€going€around€with€that€loadedÏweapon€in€[his]€possession.€€And€I€think€the€fact€that€[he]€had€thatÏloaded€weapon€causes€us€to€be€here€now.€€And€had€[he]€not€had€it,Ïyou€would€probably€have€had€a€domestic€call€.€.€.€.€€And€to€put€[theÏappellant]€on€probation€today€would€depreciate€the€seriousness€ofÏwhat€[he]€did€that€I€do€not€find€was€justified.€€It€might€be€an€excuse€thatÏ[heððs]€got,€but€itððs€not€a€reason€that€[he]€had€to€shoot€this€man€in€theÏhead€twice€and€kill€without€him€ever€having€a€chance€to€say€anything.Ð ` ü!` ü! ÐÓð>ÓÌà ` àThe€appellant,€a€standard€offender€of€a€class€C€felony,€€in€the€absence€ofÏevidence€to€the€contrary,€is€considered€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternativeÏsentencing.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102(5),€„102(6);€òòsee€alsoóó€€òòState€v.Ð ê4â-3 ÐBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€453€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ð ¶6®/5 Ð1995)€(citing€òòState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€163,€167€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)).€Ð ‚8z17 ÐWhere€a€defendant€is€entitled€to€the€statutory€presumption€of€alternative€sentencing,Ð N:F39 Ðthe€State€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€the€presumption€with€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A)„(C).€€Conversely,€theÐ ÔÌ Ðdefendant€has€the€burden€of€establishing€his€suitability€for€full€probation,€regardlessÏof€the€applicability€of€the€statutory€presumption.€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð l d Ð303(b)(€1997);€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€455.Ð 80 ÐÌà ` àIn€order€to€deny€an€alternative€sentence€based€on€the€seriousness€of€theÏoffense,€ð ðthe€circumstances€of€the€offense€as€committed€must€be€especially€violent,Ïhorrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,€offensive,€or€otherwise€of€an€excessive€orÏexaggerated€degreeðð€and€the€nature€of€the€offense€must€outweigh€all€factorsÏfavoring€a€sentence€other€than€confinement.€€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€454€(quotingÐ ø ÐòòState€v.€Hartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€370,€374„75€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)).€€We€fail€to€findÐ ÌÄ Ðadequate€support€in€the€record€to€conclude€that€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€inÏthe€present€case€meet€the€standards€announced€in€òòHartleyóó.€The€mere€fact€that€aÐ d\ Ðdeath€occurred€or€that€a€firearm€was€employed€in€the€commission€of€the€offense€areÏnot€sufficient,€without€more,€to€justify€a€sentence€of€total€confinement.€€òòSeeóó€Ð ü!ô ÐòòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€454.€€Moreover,€the€overwhelming€evidence€favorsÐ È#À  Ðimposition€of€an€alternative€sentence.€€Indeed,€the€appellant€is€a€youthful€offenderÏwith€no€prior€criminal€history€and€an€excellent€work€history.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòBinghamóó,€910Ð `'X $ ÐS.W.2d€at€454.€€œWe›€conclude€that€the€State€has€not€met€its€burden€of€establishingÏthe€necessity€of€a€sentence€of€total€confinement.€€Thus,€the€question€remains€as€toÏthe€appropriate€sentencing€alternative.ÌÌà ` àThe€appellant€asserts€that€he€is€entitled€to€a€sentence€of€total€probation.€ÏAgain,€the€appellant€€bears€the€burden€of€establishing€suitability€for€total€probation.€ÏIn€order€to€meet€his€burden,€the€appellant€must€demonstrate€that€probation€willÏð ðsubserve€the€ends€of€justice€and€the€best€interest€of€both€the€public€and€theÏdefendant.ðð€€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€456€(citation€omitted).€€In€determining€theÐ Œ7„06 Ðdefendantððs€suitability,€the€sentencing€court€should€consider:€(1)€ð ðthe€nature€andÐ X9P28 Ðcircumstance€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved,ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„210(b)(4)Ï(1997);€(2)€the€defendantððs€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€,€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„34„103(5);€(3)€whether€a€sentence€of€total€probation€would€undulyÏdepreciate€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B);€andÏ(4)€whether€a€sentence€other€than€total€probation€would€provide€an€effectiveÏdeterrent€to€others€likely€to€commit€similar€crimes,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„¼103(1)(B).€€òòSeeóó€€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€456.Ð ÐÈ  ÐÌà ` àAgain,€the€fact€that€the€appellantððs€criminal€conduct€resulted€in€the€death€ofÏœanotherññ›ñññwññqñ,ñqññwñ€cannot,€by€itself,€support€a€denial€of€ñvñalone›€is›€not›€sufficient›€to›€deny›€ñvñtotal›€probation.€€òòSeeóó€€òòBinghamóó,€910Ð 4, ÐS.W.2d€at€456.€€However,€the€facts€and€circumstances€which€surround€the€criminalÏact€are€appropriate€considerations.€€òòId.óó€€Denial€of€probation€may€be€based€solelyÐ ÌÄ Ðupon€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€when€they€are€of€such€a€nature€as€toÏoutweigh€all€other€factors€favoring€probation.€€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€456€(citationÐ d\ Ðomitted).€€The€circumstances€of€this€offense,€as€testified€to€by€the€appellant€and€hisÏmother,€indicate€that,€although€the€appellantððs€actions€were€the€result€of€his€fear€forÏhis€motherððs€life,€other€alternatives€were€available€to€the€appellant.€€Indeed,€theÏappellantððs€own€testimony€revealed€that,€prior€to€the€shooting,€he€sat€in€the€livingÏroom€apparently€unperturbed€as€the€argument€ensued€and€later€he€was€againÏpresent€as€he€wrote€out€a€check€for€his€truck€payment.€€€Additionally,€the€appellantÏconceded€that€the€victim€had€left€the€house€on€at€least€two€occasions€during€theÏargument.€€While€we€do€not€agree€with€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€the€presenceÏof€alternatives€other€than€shooting€the€victim€requires€a€sentence€of€totalÏconfinement,€€we€do€agree€that€this€factor,€combined€with€the€manner€of€theÏshooting,€òòi.e.óó,€two€gunshot€wounds€to€the€back€of€the€head,€are€sufficient€to€deny€aÐ (2 +0 Ðsentence€of€total€probation.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€appellant€has€notÏmet€his€burden€of€establishing€his€suitability€for€a€sentence€of€total€probation.ÌÌÐ \9T28 Ðà ` àNotwithstanding,€we€do€conclude€that€a€sentence€of€split€confinement€wouldÏboth€serve€the€ends€of€justice€and€fulfill€the€needs€of€the€appellant.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ ÔÌ ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„306€(1997).€€While€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€imposition€of€a€four€yearÏsentence,€the€manner€of€service€of€this€sentence€is€modified€to€reflect€a€period€of€Ïsix€months€confinement€in€the€local€jail€or€workhouse€with€the€remainder€of€the€fourÏyear€sentence€to€be€served€on€supervised€probation.€€This€case€is€remanded€to€theÏtrial€court€for€entry€of€a€judgment€consistent€with€this€opinion€and€for€the€impositionÏof€any€conditions€of€probation€reasonably€related€to€the€purpose€of€the€appellantððsÏsentence.ÌÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JudgeÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌNORMA€MCGEE€OGLE,€JudgeÌ