ÿWPC÷2 …UNV %¤U:ªä 0 ôþ w@ 4F 0NZ 0D¨ ì 0Jò 0T< 0^ 0hî 0rV 0|È 0†D 0Ê 1uZ 0dÏU>3U *qB)›DCÄ AMšTÎî½¼ D3yû¬§ 0@¬ Bì: ¾C"v~*vÓ+ AOR1Æ¡1 0Dg2 D/«2 BÚ2(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular3|xè(â,A$¡¡Ñ  ÑÔ€Xå6XXXÔÔ€XÛÃXXXå6ÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÑÑÑ  ÑÑTRY 3Ø'Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  Ó ÔÕÖEרDÙÚÛVÜUÝÓ€Úƒç"(þ(3Öû$¤¤Ý ƒ,A!ÝÑ  ÑÔ€XÅrXXXÔÔ€XûàXXXÅrÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÑÑÑ  ÑÑTRY3Ø'Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóH2 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€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÔ€#ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€#XÔÌÌò òSeptember€9,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€#ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ÄÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àEach€count€represents€a€separate€indictment.€€Ì ³Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€defendant€does€not€challenge€the€eight„year€sentences€for€hisÏtwo€convictions€for€sale€of€cocaine€as€they€are€the€minimum€sentences€possibleÏfor€class€B€felonies.€€Nor€does€he€challenge€the€eleven€month€and€twenty„nineÏday€sentence€he€received€for€possession€of€drug€paraphernalia.Ì....'ÿÿdxd ñÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àNeither€the€defense€nor€the€state€presented€any€new€evidence€atÏthe€resentencing€hearing.€€Ì ûÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€trial€court€also€found€that€the€fact€€that€the€defendant€had€noÏprior€felony€convictions,€that€he€confessed€to€his€crimes€and€pled€guilty,€and€thatÏhe€had€skills€that€made€him€employable€were€not€mitigating€factors€applicableÏto€sentencing.€Neither€the€state€nor€the€defense€has€challenged€these€findings,Ïand€we€see€no€reason€to€disturb€them€on€appeal.Ì("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d 0Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° Òà àÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àBecause€of€the€prevalence€of€enhancement€factor€(1),€whenÏbalanced€against€the€asserted€mitigating€factors,€we€have€not€attempted€toÏassess€the€appropriateness€of€the€mitigating€factors,€especially€mitigating€factorÏ(1).€€The€sentence€is€supported€in€the€record€even€if,€òòarguendoóó,€this€mitigatingÏfactor€applies.€We€note,€however,€this€court€has€previously€issued€opinionsÏwhich€hold€that€mitigating€factor€(1)€is€not€applicable€in€cases€of€drug€dealing.€ÏòòState€v.€Thomas€Gardneróó,€No.€01C01„9302„CR„00060€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏNashville,€August€12,€1993);€òòState€v.€Johnny€Arwoodóó,€No.€335€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Knoxville,€May€9,€1991).à àÌ ´Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° Òà àÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àà à(b)€The€court€may€order€sentences€to€runÏconsecutively€if€the€court€finds€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that:Ìà à(1)à àThe€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€has€knowinglyÏdevoted€himself€to€criminal€acts€as€a€major€source€of€livelihood;Ìà8 à(2)à àThe€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€of€criminalÏactivity€is€extensive;Ìà8 à(3)à àThe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentally€abnormal€person€soÏdeclared€by€a€competent€psychiatrist€who€concludes€as€a€result€ofÏan€investigation€prior€to€sentencing€that€the€defendant's€criminalÏconduct€has€been€characterized€by€a€pattern€of€repetitive€orÏcompulsive€behavior€with€heedless€indifference€to€consequences;Ìà8 à(4)à àThe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whose€behaviorÏindicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€and€no€hesitation€aboutÏcommitting€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high;Ìà8 à(5)à àThe€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€more€statutoryÏoffenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor€with€consideration€ofÏthe€aggravating€circumstances€arising€from€the€relationshipÏbetween€the€defendant€and€victim€or€victims,€the€time€span€ofÏdefendant's€undetected€sexual€activity,€the€nature€and€scope€ofÏthe€sexual€acts€and€the€extent€of€the€residual,€physical€and€mentalÏdamage€to€the€victim€or€victims;Ìà8 à(6)à àThe€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offense€committed€whileÏon€probation;€orÌà8 à(7)à àThe€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.ÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b).€€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€"ÔÑ  ÑÔ€#ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° Òò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€ÅrXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÙ€€ÙßR€&'%A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌ€à@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌó óÌò òà@ àJUNE,€1997€SESSIONó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€à àó ó)Ìà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€03C01„9610„CR„00365Ìà àAppellee,à àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà à)Ìvs.à àà àà àà à)à àSullivan€Countyà àÌà àà àà àà à)Ìò òDAVID€L.€MAYESó ó,à àà àà à)à àHonorable€Frank€L.€Slaughter,ÏJudge€Ìà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àAppellant.à àà à)à à(Conspiracy€to€sell€cocaine,€possession€Ìà àà àà àà à)à à€and€sale€of€cocaine,€possession€ofÏdrug€à àà àà àà à)à à€paraphernalia)Ìà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌNAT€H.€THOMASà àà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌ317€Shelby€St.à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌSuite€304ÌKingsport,€TN€37660à àà àà àSARAH€M.€BRANCHÌà àà àà àà àà àCounsel€for€the€StateÌà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€Divisionà àÌà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àH.€GREELEY€WELLSÌà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àBlountville,€TN€37660ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€____________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€ó óÌÌÌCURWOOD€WITT€ÌJUDGEÌÌÌÇà@ àOPINIONÓÓÓ` °‚X˜XÓÌà àThe€defendant,€David€L.€Mayes,€pleaded€guilty€on€January€18,Ï1995€in€the€Criminal€Court€of€Sullivan€County€to€one€count€of€conspiracy€toÏdeliver€or€sell€more€than€26€grams€of€cocaine,€one€count€of€possession€with€theÏintent€to€deliver€or€sell€six€ounces€of€cocaine,€two€counts€of€the€sale€of€cocaine,Ïand€the€unlawful€possession€of€drug€paraphernalia.× ƒ( ××  ×€€After€a€hearing,€the€trialÏjudge€sentenced€him€to€serve€an€effective€sentence€of€eighteen€years€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction€as€a€Range€I€offender.€€€€The€defendant€appealed€hisÏsentences€to€the€Tennessee€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€and,€in€its€opinionÏissued€on€March€11,€1996,€this€court€remanded€the€case€to€the€trial€court€forÏresentencing€because€the€trial€court€had€not€placed€on€the€record€the€findingsÏrequired€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Sections€40„35„115,€„209€and€„210(f).€ÏòòState€v.€David€Lewis€Mayesóó,€No.€€03C01„9505„CR„00134,€slip€op.€at€5€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Mar.€11,€1996).€€On€July€26,€1996,€the€trial€court,€at€theÏclose€of€the€hearing,€€resentenced€the€defendant€to€an€effective€Range€IÏsentence€of€eighteen€years.ÌÌà àThe€defendant€pleaded€guilty€to€four€class€B€felonies.€€As€a€RangeÏI€offender,€the€sentencing€range€for€each€offense€is€from€eight€to€twelve€years.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112€(1990).€€€For€both€the€conspiracy€conviction€andÏthe€possession€conviction€he€received€two€ten„year€concurrent€sentences.€ForÏeach€of€the€two€convictions€for€selling€cocaine,€he€received€the€minimumÏsentence€of€eight€years.€€These€sentences€run€concurrently€with€each€other.€ÏThe€two€eight„year€sentences€run€consecutively€to€the€ten„year€sentences.€€ForÏhis€misdemeanor€conviction€for€possession€of€drug€paraphernalia,€the€judgeÏordered€him€to€serve€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€concurrently€with€theÏother€sentences.€€€ÌÌà àIn€this€appeal,€the€defendant€raises€several€issues€concerning€hisÏresentencing.€€For€the€purposes€of€this€opinion,€we€have€consolidated€theÏissues€into€two:€(1)€whether€the€ten„year€sentences€for€conspiracy€andÏpossession€with€the€intent€to€sell€or€deliver€are€excessive,× ƒ) ××  ×€and€(2)€whether€theÏtrial€court€erred€by€imposing€consecutive€sentences.€€For€the€reasons€discussedÏbelow,€we€affirm€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€ofÏservice€of€a€sentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€withÏa€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)(1990).€This€presumption€is€"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.2dÏ166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€€The€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€thatÏthe€sentence€is€improper.€€òòIdóó.€In€the€event€the€record€fails€to€demonstrate€theÏappropriate€consideration€by€the€trial€court,€appellate€review€of€the€sentence€isÏpurely€òòdeóó€òònovoóó.€€òòIdóó.€If€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€properly€consideredÏall€relevant€factors€and€the€record€adequately€supports€its€findings€of€fact,€thisÏcourt€must€affirm€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€a€different€result.€ÏòòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).ÌÌà àIn€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court,€at€theÏconclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€determines€the€sentencing€range,€theÏspecific€sentence,€and€the€propriety€of€imposing€a€sentence€involving€anÏalternative€to€total€confinement.€€The€trial€court€must€consider€(1)€any€evidenceÏpresented€at€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,€(2)€the€presentence€report,€(3)€theÍsentencing€principles.€(4)€the€arguments€of€counsel,€(5)€any€statements€theÏdefendant€has€made€to€the€court,€(6)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€theÏoffense,€(7)€any€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€and€(8)€the€defendantððsÏamenability€to€rehabilitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„103(5),€and€40„35„210(a),€(b)€€(1990);€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1993).€€€The€trial€court€must€begin€with€a€presumptive€minimum€sentence.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€The€sentence€may€then€be€increased€by€anyÏapplicable€enhancement€factors€and€reduced€in€the€light€of€any€applicableÏmitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(d),(e).ÌÌà àÔ% € Ô€In€conducting€our€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review,€we€must€consider€the€evidenceÏat€sentencing,€the€presentence€report,€the€sentencing€principles,€the€argumentsÏof€counsel,€the€statements€of€the€defendant,€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€theÏoffense,€any€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€and€the€defendantððsÏamenability€to€rehabilitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„103(5),€„210(b)€Ï(1990);€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€168.ÌÌà àFrom€the€written€proposed€findings€filed€by€both€the€state€and€theÏdefense€and€the€evidence€and€testimony€presented€at€the€first€sentencingÏhearing,€the€trial€judge€found€that€three€enhancement€factors€and€two€mitigatingÍfactors€were€applicable€to€the€convictions.× ƒ+ ××  ×€€Based€on€the€defendantððs€record€ofÏseveral€misdemeanor€convictions€and€his€admitted€addiction€to€cocaine,€theÏtrial€court€held€that€he€had€a€history€of€convictions€and€criminal€behavior€inÏaddition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(1)(1990).€€€Because€the€defendant€was€on€probation€whenÏthe€present€offenses€occurred,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€defendant€had€aÏprevious€history€of€unwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentenceÏinvolving€release€into€the€community.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(8).€€WeÏnote€that€the€defendant€also€committed€a€previous€offense€while€on€a€formerÏprobation.€€€These€two€factors€apply€to€all€five€convictions.€€The€trial€courtÏapplied€a€third€factor,€that€the€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€firearmÏduring€the€commission€of€the€offense,€only€to€the€convictions€for€conspiracy€andÏpossession€with€the€intent€to€deliver€or€sell.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(9).€ÏAs€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€court€held€that€the€defendantððs€actions€neitherÏthreatened€nor€caused€serious€bodily€harm€and€that€he€had€assisted€theÏauthorities€in€apprehending€his€co„defendant.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„113Í(1),€(9).× ƒ, ××  ×€€The€trial€court€applied€the€first€mitigating€factor€to€all€the€€sentences,Ïthe€second,€only€to€the€sentences€for€conspiracy€and€possession.€€ÌÌà àThe€gravamen€of€the€defendantððs€argument€is€that€the€trial€courtÏenhanced€his€sentences€two€years€beyond€the€eight„year€minimum€and€thenÏfailed€to€grant€any€reduction€warranted€by€the€mitigating€factors.€€See€Tenn.€ÌÌÌCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(e)(1990).€€We€respectfully€disagree.€€The€existence€ofÏmitigating€factors€does€not€automatically€entitle€a€defendant€to€a€reduction€inÏsentence.€€òòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€116,€125€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€ÏThe€weight€afforded€any€existing€enhancement€or€mitigating€factor€is€left€to€theÏtrial€courtððs€discretion€so€long€as€it€complies€with€the€purposes€and€principles€ofÏsentencing€and€its€findings€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record.€€òòState€v.ÏShropshireóó,€874€S.W.2d€634,€642€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€the€record€fully€supports€the€ten„year€sentencesÏimposed€by€the€trial€court.€€Based€on€this€record€we€are€unable€to€conclude€thatÏthe€trial€judge€ignored€the€mitigating€factors€in€imposing€the€sentences.€The€trialÏcourt€found€that€the€enhancement€factors€outweighed€the€mitigators;€thereforeÏsome€enhancement€was€appropriate.€€The€record€indicates€that€the€defendantÏhad€six€prior€convictions€for€misdemeanors.€Given€the€fact€that€the€defendantÏadmitted€that€he€had€been€€ð ðdealingðð€cocaine€on€a€fairly€regular€basis€andÏdescribed€those€deals€in€some€detail,€we€find€that€enhancement€factor€(1)€aloneÏwould€be€sufficient€to€justify€enhancing€the€sentence€from€eight€to€ten€years.€€€€ÌWithout€the€presence€of€the€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€court€may€well€haveÏimposed€an€even€lengthier€sentence.× ƒ/ ××  ×ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThe€defendantððs€last€challenge€is€to€the€trial€courtððs€decision€toÏimpose€consecutive€sentences€because€he€was€an€offender€ð ðwhose€record€ofÏcriminal€activity€is€extensive.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(2)(1990).€€TheÍappellant€contends€that€his€criminal€record€is€not€so€extensive€as€to€justifyÏconsecutive€sentencing.€€ÌÌà àConsecutive€sentencing€may€be€imposed€in€the€discretion€of€theÏtrial€court€upon€a€determination€that€one€or€more€of€the€criteria€in€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€section€40„35„115(b)€exist.× ƒ0 ××  ×€€Consecutive€sentences,€however,Íshould€not€be€routinely€imposed€even€for€the€offender€whose€record€of€criminalÏactivity€is€extensive.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115€sentencing€commission€œÌÌÌÌcomments;›€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€739€S.W.2d€227,€230€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);€òòStateÏv.€Roscoe€C.€Smithóó,€No.€01C01„9502„CR„00031,€slip€op.€at€10€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Nashville,€October€12,€1995).€€The€Sentencing€Reform€Act€requires€theÏapplication€of€the€sentencing€principles€set€forth€in€the€Act€and€ð ða€principledÏjustification€for€every€sentence,€including,€of€course,€consecutive€sentences.ðð€ÏòòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933,€938€(Tenn.€œ1995).€€The€principles€ofÏsentencing€include€the€notions€that€the€sentence€should€reasonably€relate€toÏthe€severity€of€the€offense€and€that€any€punishment€imposed€should€beÏnecessary€in€order€to€protect€the€public€from€a€defendant€with€a€lengthy€historyÏof€criminal€conduct.›€œ€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(1),€(3)(B)€(Supp.€1996).ÌÌà à€In€this€case,€the€trial€judge€found€that€the€defendantððs€past€criminalÏhistory€which€included€six€misdemeanor€convictions€and€the€use€of€marijuanaÍand€cocaine€over€a€twenty„year€period€was€sufficient€to€warrant€consecutiveÏsentencing.€€Although€in€many€instances€these€facts€might€not€be€sufficient€toÏwarrant€an€eighteen„year€sentence€for€these€crimes,€the€record€also€indicatesÏthat€the€defendant€was€deeply€involved€in€drug€dealing€and€that€he€continued€toÏsell€even€after€he€made€his€first€statement€to€the€police€and€had€assisted€them€inÏapprehending€his€co„defendant.€€A€reviewing€court€must€look€at€the€totality€ofÏthe€circumstances€presented€in€the€record€to€determine€whether€the€trial€courtÏproperly€imposed€a€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€235€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1976).€€ÌÌà àIn€this€instance,€the€record€establishes€that€the€public€needs€to€beÏprotected€from€further€serious€criminal€activity€by€the€defendant.€€The€defendant€Çstands€convicted€of€four€Class€B€felonies€involving€the€distribution€of€cocaine.€ÏAn€eighteen„year€sentence€reasonably€relates€to€the€seriousness€of€theseÏoffenses.€€ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€in€all€respects€affirmed.ÌÓÓÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà à__________________________à àÌà àà àà àà àà àCURWOOD€WITT,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________ÌJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JudgeÌ