ÿWPC½ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝ4åù w@ 0lP 0D¼ 0J 0TJ 0^ž 0hü 0rd 0|Ö 0†R 0Ø 1uh U,Ý 0d  BmU,ŠU>¶U *ôB)DCG AMŠ D3×- P7 0@‡v~ÇvÓE AOÆg 0D- D/q B ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù-»~g <Ôô3|x» ¤À¥¦ªÀ«D¬­®¯e°Ó€((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd€-(Cþÿ << Gÿÿ 'ÿÿdxd #Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òMarch€11,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó FÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  Ýà à*Ô€&ÔThe€State€indicates€in€its€brief€that€the€Appellant€was€on€parole€from€the€StateÏà0 àof€Virginia€for€a€conviction€of€cocaine€possession.€€The€Stateððs€brief€referencesÏp.€8€of€the€technical€record€as€substantiating€this€allegation.€€(Stateððs€Brief€p.€8).€ÏThe€record€reflects€however€that€p.€8€appears€in€presentence€report€on€theÏAppellantððs€co„defendant.€€Appellant€apparently€has€no€prior€felony€convictions.ÌÔ€%Ô("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€$$X„d&ÓÑ#€$$Xd#ÑÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑÔ€&ÔÑ\R AØ'\ћрÑÑ7€V XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òœÙ€€ÙßL€)+(;+'h|` Å `€€Lß›IN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OFÏTENNESSEEÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌDECEMBER€SESSION,€1995ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEà àà à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9505„CR„00134Ìà 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 àSULLIVAN€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€FRANK€L.€SLAUGHTERó óÌò òDAVID€LEWIS€MAYES,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  ÓÌÌÓ  ÓòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌNAT€H.€THOMASà àà àà àà àCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌ317€œShelby›€Street,€Suite€304à àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌœKingsport›,€TN€€37660à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCLINTON€J.€MORGANÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àH.€œGREELEY›€WELLSÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àœBlountville›,€TN€€37617ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÇÓ  Óò òÔ€&„ÔOPINIONó óÔ€&XÔÌÌÓ  ÓÌÓÓ€à àIn€this€direct€appeal,€the€Appellant€challenges€his€sentence.€€He€asserts€that€Ïthe€trial€court€failed€to€place€on€the€record€the€mitigating€and€enhancement€factorsÏwhich€it€found,€€failed€to€properly€consider€the€proposed€mitigating€factors,€andÏerroneously€ordered€consecutive€sentences.€€We€find€this€case€must€be€remandedÏfor€œresentencing›€for€the€reasons€that€follow.€€On€October€19,€1994,€the€SullivanÏCounty€Grand€Jury€indicted€the€Appellant,€David€L.€œMayes›,€for€conspiracy€toÏdistribute€cocaine€and€for€possession€of€cocaine€with€the€intent€to€deliver€or€sell.€ÏApproximately€one€month€later,€three€more€indictments€were€returned€charging€theÏAppellant€with€two€counts€of€selling€cocaine€and€a€misdemeanor,€possession€ofÏdrug€paraphernalia.€€The€Appellant€pled€guilty€to€all€of€these€charges.€€After€aÏsentencing€hearing,€he€was€sentenced€as€a€Range€I€Standard€offender€with€anÏeffective€sentence€of€eighteen€years.ÌÌà àà àAll€four€of€the€felonies€to€which€the€Appellant€pled€guilty€are€class€BÏfelonies.€€€As€a€range€I€Standard€offender,€the€sentencing€range€for€each€offenseÏwas€from€eight€to€twelve€years.€€The€break€down€of€the€Appellant's€eighteen„yearÏsentence€is€as€follows.€€For€each€of€his€two€convictions€for€selling€cocaine,€heÏreceived€the€minimum€sentence€of€eight€years€to€run€concurrently€with€one€another.€ÍFor€both€his€conspiracy€and€possession€convictions,€he€received€two€ten„yearÏconcurrent€sentences.€€However,€the€judge€ordered€the€two€eight„year€sentences€toÏbe€served€consecutive€to€the€two€ten„year€sentences.€€Finally,€for€the€Appellant'sÏmisdemeanor€conviction,€the€judge€ordered€him€to€serve€eleven€months€andÏtwenty„nine€days€concurrently€to€his€other€sentences.ÌÌà àThis€court€reviews€criminal€sentences€in€accordance€with€the€TennesseeÏCriminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð40„35„117€(1990).€ÏOur€supreme€court€has€summarized€the€appropriate€procedure€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àTo€facilitate€meaningful€appellate€review,€the€Act€provides€that€the€trialÏcourt€must€place€on€the€record€its€reasons€for€arriving€at€the€finalÏsentencing€decision,€identify€the€mitigating€and€enhancement€factorsÏfound,€state€the€specific€facts€supporting€each€enhancement€factorÏfound€and€articulate€how€the€mitigating€and€enhancement€factorsÏhave€been€evaluated€and€balanced€in€determining€the€sentence.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40„35„210(f)€(1990).€.€.€.€€Where€the€trial€court€hasÏcomplied€with€these€provisions€of€the€statute,€the€sentence€isÏreviewed€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1990).ÓÓÌòòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€599„600€(Tenn.€1994).€€On€the€other€hand,€noÏpresumption€of€correctness€applies€when€there€is€no€"affirmative€showing€in€theÏrecord€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€factsÏand€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€judge€made€a€finding€at€the€close€of€the€sentencingÏhearing€that€the€Appellant€had€a€criminal€history.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1)€(œSupp›.€1995).€€He€stated€that€it€was€"not€sufficient€to€elevate€him€to€a€RangeÏII€Offender,€but€nevertheless,€he€has€a€history€of€being€involved€in€various€lawÏviolations,€assault,€larceny,€drug€problems."€€Additionally,€the€judge€had€notedÏearlier€in€the€hearing€that€the€record€revealed€that€the€Appellant€had€a€previousÏhistory€of€unwillingness€to€comply€with€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€releaseÏinto€the€community.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(8)€(œSupp›.€1995Ù*ÙÑ , ÑÑ   ÑÑ  ÑÑ€' §u` Ñ).Ô€&èÔ× ƒ, ××  ×Ô€&XÔ€Ìà àWith€regard€to€mitigators,€the€record€is€unclear€as€to€the€trial€court's€findings.€ÏThe€Appellant€urged€the€court€to€consider€the€fact€that€he€was€instrumental€inÏassisting€the€police€to€obtain€a€conviction€against€another€drug€dealer.€€€See€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(9).€€The€judge€felt€that€this€factor€was€entitled€to€someÏconsideration,€however,€he€noted€the€possibility€that€the€Appellant€was€motivatedÏby€a€plan€to€take€over€this€other€drug€dealer's€business.€€Additionally,€the€trial€judgeÏindicated€that€the€fact€that€the€Appellant€committed€the€two€counts€of€sellingÍcocaine€subsequent€to€his€police€cooperation€negated€the€mitigating€effect€of€anyÏcooperation€to€the€extent€that€it€indicated€remorse.ÌÌà àWhile€the€trial€judge€acknowledged€that€the€Appellant€was€educated€andÏpossessed€certain€marketable€skills,€these€factors€were€apparently€not€treated€asÏmitigators€in€light€of€the€judge's€feeling€that€"a€smart€aggressive€drug€dealer€is€aÏreal€danger€to€this€community€and€others."€Ìà àÌà àà àWhile€the€trial€judge€apparently€found€two€enhancement€factors€in€thisÏcase,€he€was€not€specific€as€to€the€interplay€of€enhancement€and€mitigating€factorsÏin€the€final€sentencing€determination.€€Furthermore,€the€judge€failed€to€makeÏseparate€findings€as€to€which€enhancement€factors€applied€to€which€offenses.€€ThisÏcourt€has€held€that€in€cases€involving€multiple€convictions€the€record€should€reflect,Ïwhich€factors€were€applied€to€which€crimes,€if€this€court€is€to€review€a€sentenceÏadequately.€€òòState€v.€œChrisman›óó,€885€S.W.2d€834,€839€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Ì€Ìà àIn€reviewing€the€Appellant's€challenge€to€the€trial€court's€decision€to€orderÏconsecutive€sentencing,€we€are€faced€with€the€same€problem.€€Because€the€judgeÏdid€not€expressly€state€any€reason€for€imposing€consecutive€sentences,€we€areÏunable€to€discern€the€legal€basis€upon€which€he€felt€they€were€justified.ÌÌà àIn€ordering€sentences€to€run€consecutively,€a€trial€judge€is€to€consider€theÏstatutory€criteria€established€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40„35„115.€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.ÏCrim.€P.€32(c).€€In€addition,€our€supreme€court€recently€held€thatÌÓÓà8 àthe€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences€on€an€offender€found€to€be€aÏdangerous€offender€requires,€in€addition€to€the€application€of€generalÏprinciples€of€sentencing,€the€finding€that€an€extended€sentence€isÏnecessary€to€protect€the€public€against€further€criminal€conduct€by€theÏdefendant€and€that€the€consecutive€sentences€must€reasonably€relateÏto€the€severity€of€the€offenses€committed.ÌÌÓÓòòState€v.€œWilkerson›óó,€1995€WL€495921,€at€*7€(Tenn.€1995).€€The€record€fails€toÏdemonstrate€the€trial€judges€adherence€to€these€principles€of€consecutiveÏsentencing.ÌÌà àAt€the€œresentencing›€hearing€the€trial€judge€shall€expressly€state€whichÏenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€he€finds€applicable€in€this€case.€€He€shall€alsoÏexpressly€set€forth€in€the€sentencing€order€which€enhancement€factors€he€findsÏapplicable€to€each€of€the€varying€offenses€of€which€the€Appellant€was€convicted,Ïand€how€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€relate€to€each€other€in€the€finalÏsentencing€determination.ÌÌà àFinally,€should€the€trial€judge€still€be€of€the€opinion€that€consecutiveÏsentencing€is€warranted€in€this€case,€he€shall€expressly€set€forth€in€the€sentencingÍorder€the€statutory€basis€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115.€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.ÏP.€32(c).€€The€judge€shall€also€state€in€the€sentencing€order€findings€indicating€thatÏan€extended€sentence€is€necessary€to€protect€the€public€and€that€the€consecutiveÏsentences€reasonably€relate€to€the€severity€of€the€offenses.€€òòState€v.€œWilkerson›óó,Ïòòsupraóó.€Ìà àBecause€the€trial€court's€findings€are€insufficient€to€allow€for€adequateÏreview,€this€case€must€be€reversed€and€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€resentencingÏpursuant€to€the€principles€set€forth€in€this€opinion.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGE