ÿWPCLj …UNV %¤U:ªä 0! ôþ w@ 4F 0NZ 0D¨ 0Jì 0T6 0^Š 0hè 0rP 0| 0†> 0Ä 1uT 0dÉU>- D3k žU!*¤ 0@Î BB)+DCT AM—Œäpz€(ú"£ù²[«"=%ÐC(Ï*Ïâ+1±-Lâ0½.3ë5fù7š_;®ù=ŧAÈlEÚ4HyMú‡OQ€žSW¢%ZúÇ\•Á^v~VavÓÔb AO§hÆöh 0D¼i D/j B/j(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular3|x *(â,A$¡¡Ñ  ÑÔ€Xå6XXXÔÔ€XÛÃXXXå6ÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÑÑÑ  ÑÑTRY 3Ø'Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  Ó Ž*U*D*V‘*D’*“*E”*•*D–*D—*Ó€Ô¡¨ (þ(3ùÍ$¤¤Ý ƒ,A!ÝÑ  ÑÔ€X%iXXXÔÔ€X[÷XXX%iÔÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÑÑÑ  ÑÑTRY3Ø'Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman....'ÿÿdxdH< Œ 9p`(Arial("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d% Line 7 d////7Border 1dd€-0Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ‚Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÔ€,ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€,XÔÌÌJuly€31,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àHereafter,€we€refer€to€the€Putnam€County€cases€as€#714,€#715,Ïand€#716,€and€the€Cumberland€County€case€as€#3831.Ì pÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€judgment€forms€and€the€findings€of€the€trial€court€that€appearÏin€the€transcript€are€not€entirely€clear€on€the€subject€of€Quilterððs€splitÏconfinement.€€We€address€this€issue€in€more€detail€later€in€this€opinion.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€judgment€forms€do€not€reflect€the€trial€courtððs€sentencing€orderÏcontained€in€the€record€with€respect€to€restitution€and€fines.€€Ì wÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€trial€record€is€not€included€in€the€record€on€appeal.€€We€haveÏgleaned€these€facts€from€the€judgment€forms,€an€Order€of€Conviction€in€MichaelÏWilsonððs€record,€and€from€the€comments€of€the€attorneys€and€the€trial€court.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€Wilsonððs€guilty€pleas€were€entered€on€July€10€in€CumberlandÏCounty€and€July€25,€1995€in€Putnam€County.€€Ì ïÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àMichael€Wilsonððs€prior€convictions€include€four€convictions€forÏburglary€and€theft€and€five€convictions€for€receiving€stolen€property€in€NewÏJersey.€€He€was€convicted€in€Pennsylvania€for€robbery€and€conspiracy.€€A€NewÏJersey€warrant€for€violation€of€parole€was€outstanding.€€The€defendant€did€notÏdispute€the€existence€of€these€convictions.€€Ì QÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àWe€need€not€discuss€the€enhancement€factors€or€the€trial€judgeððsÏfindings€in€detail€as€Michael€Wilson€does€not€challenge€either€the€length€or€theÏconsecutive€service€of€his€sentence.€€Ì 3Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€record€does€not€contain€a€judgment€form€for€the€conviction€inÏcount€3€of€#€3831.€€The€other€forms,€in€addition€to€the€sentences€pronounced€byÏthe€trial€court€at€the€hearing,€reflect€the€fines€imposed€by€the€jury€in€€#716€andÏrestitution€in€714,€715,€and€count€1€of€3831.€€The€trial€judge€made€no€mention€ofÏany€fines€at€the€hearing€and€made€no€findings€concerning€the€appropriatenessÏor€amount€of€restitution.Ì ÆÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40„35„114(2)€(Supp.€1996).Ì ÅÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(3)€(Supp.€1996).Ì ÅÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(9)€(Supp.€1996).Ì 'Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€record€does€not€contain€judgment€forms€for€either€count€ofÏ#3831.€€The€other€forms,€in€addition€to€the€sentences€pronounced€by€the€trialÏcourt€at€the€hearing,€reflect€the€fines€imposed€by€the€jury€in€€#716€and€restitutionÏin€#714,€#715,€and€count€1€of€#3831.€€The€trial€judge€made€no€mention€of€anyÏfines€at€the€hearing€and€made€no€findings€concerning€the€appropriateness€orÏamount€of€restitution.Ì BÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àQuilter€was€arrested€on€September€21,€1994.€€He€did€not€makeÏbail€and€on€July€25,€1995,€the€date€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€he€had€servedÏthree€€hundred€seven€(307)€days.€€Ì ³Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àQuilterððs€judgment€forms,€unlike€the€transcript€of€the€sentencingÏhearing,€€reflect€that€in€addition€to€split€confinement,€he€must€make€restitution€toÏthe€victims.€€The€forms€also€reflect€that€he€was€given€credit€for€the€24€daysÏbetween€July€25€and€August€18€against€his€sentence.€€Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€record€does€contain€a€transcript€of€the€hearing€on€the€motionÏto€suppress€as€well€as€a€copy€of€the€motion.Ì \Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€judgment€forms€reflect€the€following€amounts€of€restitution:Ìà8 à#714€:€€$1,718.48€to€Legge€Insurance;€$100€to€Howard€and€à àà àÏVivian€MayberryÌà à€#715:à àNo€restitutionÌà à€#716:€€€$1,867.92€to€Donald€and€Marcia€SpurlockÌà8 à€#3831:à à(Count€1)€€$2,038€to€Farm€Bureau€Insurance:€$100€toÏà àà àAnthony€FarrisÌà àà àà à(Count€3)€$2,449€to€Farm€Bureau€InsuranceÌ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àWe€are€aware€that€none€of€the€defendants€challenged€either€theÏpayment€of€restitution€or€fines€in€this€appeal.€€However,€we€consider€theseÏissues€as€part€of€our€de€novo€review€of€the€sentences€of€Sean€Wilson€andÏKenneth€Quilter.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€2.€Ì ¤Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àWe€express€no€opinion€on€the€appropriateness€of€awardingÏrestitution€to€insurance€companies.€€We€note€that€in€òòState€v.€Michael€RalphÏAlfordóó,€No.€02C01„9509„CC„00281€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Sept.€30,€1996)Ïa€panel€of€this€court€held€that€an€insurance€company€can€be€a€victim€for€theÏpurposes€of€restitution€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40„35„304.€€TheÏTennessee€Supreme€Court€granted€the€appellantððs€application€for€permission€toÏappeal€on€April€14,€1997€on€that€issue€and€has€not€yet€rendered€its€decision.Ì »Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àIn€1995€when€the€defendants€were€sentenced,€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€40„35„104(c)(2)€listed€as€a€sentencing€alternative€ð ð[a]Ïsentence€of€confinement€which€is€suspended€upon€a€term€of€probationÏsupervision€which€may€include€community€service€or€restitution,€or€both.ðð€€TheÏlegislature€amended€the€statute,€and€as€of€July€1,€1996,€the€statute€allows€forÏð ð[p]ayment€of€restitution€to€the€victim€or€victims€either€alone€or€in€addition€to€anyÏother€sentence€authorized€by€this€subsection.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„104Ï(1996€Supp.)Ì ¾Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àMichael€Wilson€has€not€challenged€his€sentence.€€However,€sinceÏthe€recent€decision€of€our€supreme€court€in€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€940€S.W.2d€558,€562Ï(Tenn.1997)€makes€an€order€of€restitution€clearly€illegal,€we€correct€the€error€inÏhis€sentences€in€the€interests€of€justice.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€2.Ì ÐÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àIn€this€case,€the€presentence€reports€contain€only€the€victimsððÏstatements€as€to€the€amount€of€loss.€€At€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€probationÏofficers€conceded€that€the€amounts€were€those€reported€by€the€victims€to€theirÏinsurance€companies.€€The€two€victims€who€testified€gave€only€€very€generalÏstatements€as€to€the€amount€of€pecuniary€loss€they€had€suffered€and€thoseÏamounts€were€not€entirely€consistent€with€those€in€the€presentence€reports€or€inÏthe€testimony€of€the€probation€officers.€€The€record€contains€no€explanation€as€toÏhow€the€victims€arrived€at€the€reported€amounts.€€In€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€this€courtÏfound€that€the€amount€the€victim€had€placed€on€a€proof€of€loss€provided€by€anÏinsurance€company€was€not€sufficient€to€establish€the€loss€actually€incurred.€Ï898€S.W.2d€742,€747€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ì oÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àWe€note€that€the€record€on€appeal€does€not€contain€Sean€WilsonððsÏjudgment€forms€in€#€3831.€€We€have€gleaned€this€information€from€the€trialÏjudgeððs€findings€contained€in€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing.Ì ðÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àBoth€Donald€Spurlock€(€#716)€and€Greg€Goodwin€(Count€3€ofÏ#3831)€testified€at€the€hearing.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àIn€fact,€the€record€indicates€that€the€defendants€carefully€selectedÏonly€empty€houses€and€entered€during€daylight€hours.€€€€Ì vÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThis€court€has€held€that€an€unwanted€pregnancy€that€is€the€resultÏof€a€rape€warrants€the€use€of€enhancement€factor€six.€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€910ÏS.W.2d€457,€461(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€889€S.W.2d€225,€231Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994),€and€that€depression€and€other€psychologicalÏdifficulties€requiring€treatment€may€be€personal€injuries€in€rape€cases.€€€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€259€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóóÏ(Tenn.€1996).Ì ýÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° Òà àÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àThe€legislature€has€provided€for€enhanced€sentences€forÏthe€burglary€of€a€habitation.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€39„14„402Ïdefines€ð ðburglaryðð€of€a€building€other€than€a€habitation€as€either€a€Class€D€or€EÏfelony.€€Burglary€of€a€habitation,€however,€is€aggravated€burglary€and€is€a€ClassÏC€felony.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„404€(1990).Ì ˜Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àOne€could€plausibly€argue€that€when€Sean€Wilson€carried€stolenÏgoods€from€the€Goodwin€home€with€a€pistol€strapped€around€his€waist€that€heÏpossessed€a€firearm€during€the€commission€of€the€theft.€€However,€the€theftÏcharge€was€dismissed€in€the€Goodwin€case.€€Ì ðÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àWe€consider€the€issue€of€consecutive€sentencing€separately€inÏsection€IIE€of€this€opinion.Ì ‹Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÑ  ÑÔ€,ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R3Ø'\ÑÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ @ ÑÑ\R3Ø'\Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóà àWe€have€considered€the€applicability€of€enhancement€factors(3)Ïand€(9)€in€our€discussion€of€Sean€Wilsonððs€sentence.€€As€they€wereÏinappropriate€to€enhancing€Wilsonððs€convictions€for€aggravated€burglary,€theyÏare€equally€inappropriate€here.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€%iXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÙ€€ÙßR€120A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌ€à@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌó óÌò òà@ àAPRIL,€1997€SESSIONó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€à àà àó ó)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAppellee,à àà à)à àNo.€€01CO1„9602„CC„00073Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àœ)€€€€à àPutnam›€œCounty;Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àCumberland€County›Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìò òMICHAEL€WILSON,€€à àà àà àó ó)à àHonorable,€Leon€C.€Burns,€ò òÏSEAN€KEVIN€WILSON,€andà àà àó ó)à àJudge€à àÌò òKENNETH€QUILTER,€JR.à àà àà àó ó)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Aggravated€Burglary)Ìà àAppellant.à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Ìà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌFOR€MICHAEL€WILSON:à àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌGARY€LOVELLETTEà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌBox€675€à àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ306€E.€12thÌCookeville,€TN€38503„0675à àà àMERRILYN€FEIRMANÌà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌFOR€SEAN€KEVIN€WILSON:€€€à àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌCHARLES€L.€HARDINà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àÌ117€S.€Jefferson€Ave.ÌCookeville,€TN€38501à àà àà àWILLIAM€EDWARD€GIBSONÌà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌFOR€KENNETH€QUILTER,€JR.à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àBEN€FANN€andÌCRAIG€P.€FICKLINGà àà àà àDAVID€A.€PATTERSONÌRonald€Thurman€&€Associatesà àà àAssistant€District€Attorneys€GeneralÌArcade€Buildingà àà àà àà à145€S.€Jefferson€Ave.Ì9C€So.€Jeffersonà àà àà àà àCookeville,€TN€38501ÌCookeville,€TN€38501ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€____________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDó óÌò òAND€REMANDEDó óÌÌCURWOOD€WITT€ÌJUDGEÌÌÌÓ  Óà@ àòòò òOPINIONÓÓÓ` °‚X˜XÓó óóóÌà àThe€defendants,€Michael€Wilson,€Sean€Kevin€Wilson,€and€KennethÏQuilter,€Jr.,€pleaded€guilty€to€two€counts€of€aggravated€burglary€in€PutnamÏCounty€Criminal€Court€in€Indictments€No.€94„714€and€No.€94„715€and€to€twoÏcounts€of€aggravated€burglary€in€Cumberland€County€in€Indictment€No.€3831.œ× ƒ3 ××  ×›€ÏMichael€Wilson€and€Sean€Kevin€Wilson€were€convicted€by€a€Putnam€CountyÏjury€of€aggravated€burglary,€theft,€and€conspiracy€to€commit€aggravated€burglaryÏand€theft€in€#716.€€Kenneth€Quilter,€Jr.,€plead€guilty€to€a€single€count€ofÍaggravated€burglary€in€#716.€€The€trial€court€imposed€sentences€for€all€theÏconvictions€after€a€single€sentencing€hearing.€€Michael€Wilson€received€anÏaggregate€sentence€of€sixteen€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction€as€aÏRange€II€offender.€€Sean€Kevin€Wilson,€a€Range€I€offender,€€received€anÏaggregate€sentence€of€ten€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€KennethÏQuilter,€also€sentenced€as€a€Range€I€offender,€received€an€aggregate€sentenceÏof€8€years.€€Quilter€was€ordered€to€serve€his€sentence€in€split€confinement.× ƒ4 ××  ×€ÏAccording€to€€the€judgment€forms,€the€jury€assessed€$9,000€in€fines€against€theÏWilsons,€and€the€three€defendants€are€jointly€and€severally€liable€for€œ$8,273.40Ïin›€restitution.× ƒ5 ××  ×€ÌÌà àIn€this€appeal,€Michael€Wilson€contends€that€the€items€seized€in€aÏwarrantless€search€of€his€trailer€should€have€been€suppressed.€€Sean€WilsonÏœand€€Kenneth›€Quilter€challenge€the€length€and€the€consecutive€service€of€theirÏrespective€sentences.€€In€addition,€Quilter€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÍrefusing€to€credit€against€his€sentence€the€307€days€he€spent€in€jail€prior€toÏsentencing.Ìà àÌà àOur€review€discloses€that€Michael€Wilson€has€failed€to€preserveÏthe€suppression€issue€for€appeal,€and,€therefore,€we€affirm€his€convictions.€€€ÏHowever,€€the€record€discloses€a€number€of€sentencing€errors€that€we€mustÏaddress.€€We€affirm€the€defendantsðð€sentences€as€modified€in€this€opinion.ÌÌà àA€short€summary€of€the€facts€will€provide€the€necessary€context€forÏthe€issues€in€this€appeal.€€Beginning€August€29,€1994,€Michael€Wilson,€hisÏbrother€Sean,€€Kenneth€Quilter,€and€two€co„defendants€who€are€not€involved€inÏthis€appeal€committed€a€series€of€five€burglaries€in€Putnam€and€CumberlandÏCounties.€€The€crime€spree€ended€when€the€Wilsons,€Quilter,€and€their€co„defendants€were€arrested€on€September€21,€1994.€€The€Putnam€County€grandÏjury€issued€separate€€œindictments,›€#714,€#715,€and€#716,€€for€each€burglaryÏcommitted€in€that€county.€€€The€counts€included€aggravated€burglary,€theft€ofÏproperty€valued€at€one€thousand€dollars€or€more,€and€conspiracy€to€commitÏaggravated€burglary€and€theft.€€The€single€indictment€from€Cumberland€CountyÏ(#3831)€contained€two€counts€of€aggravated€burglary€and€two€counts€of€theft€ofÏproperty€valued€at€one€thousand€dollars€or€more.€€ÌÌà àTrial€was€set€in€Putnam€County€in€#716€on€May€25,€1995.€€TwoÏdays€prior€to€trial,€Quilter€pleaded€guilty€to€five€counts€of€aggravated€burglary.€ÏThe€prosecution€dismissed€the€remaining€charges.€€After€a€one„day€trial,€the€juryÏfound€both€Wilsons€guilty€of€aggravated€burglary,€theft,€and€conspiracy€andÏassessed€fines€totaling€$9,000.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€€The€Wilsons€then€agreed€to€plead€guilty€toÏfour€counts€of€aggravated€burglary,€and€the€state€dismissed€the€remaining€theftÏand€conspiracy€charges.× ƒ7 ××  ×€€€The€trial€court€conducted€a€single€sentencingÏhearing.€€The€probation€officers€who€prepared€the€pre„sentence€reports€and€twoÏof€the€victims€testified€for€the€state.€€€The€defendants€put€on€no€proof.€ÌÌà àThe€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€reflects€that€the€trial€judgeÏfound€that€Michael€Wilson€had€the€requisite€number€of€prior€convictions€toÍqualify€for€Range€II€sentencing.× ƒ8 ××  ×€€€€€€The€trial€judge€found€that€five€enhancementÏand€no€mitigating€factors€were€applicable€to€Wilsonððs€sentence€and€concludedÏthat€his€extensive€criminal€record€justified€consecutive€sentencing.× ƒ9 ××  ×€€€€In€#714Ïand€€#715€and€Count€3€of€#3831,€the€trial€court€imposed€concurrent€sentencesÏof€eight€years€for€aggravated€burglary.€In€€#716,€the€case€tried€to€a€jury,€the€trialÏcourt€ordered€an€eight„year€sentence€for€aggravated€burglary,€six€years€for€theft,Ïand€three€years€for€conspiracy.€€These€sentences€are€to€be€served€concurrent€toÏeach€other€and€to€those€imposed€in€#714,€€#715,€and€to€Count€3€of€#3831.€€€ForÏthe€aggravated€burglary€conviction€in€Count€1€of€#3831,€the€trial€court€imposedÏan€eight„year€sentence€to€be€served€consecutively€to€the€aggravated€burglaryÍconviction€in€€#716€resulting€in€an€aggregate€sentence€of€sixteen€years.× ƒ: ××  ×€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€judge€followed€a€similar€pattern€in€sentencing€the€otherÏdefendants.€€In€sentencing€Sean€Wilson,€the€trial€court€applied€threeÏenhancement€factors€finding€that€(1)€he€was€a€leader€in€the€commission€of€anÏoffense€involving€two€or€more€criminal€actors,× ƒ; ××  ×€(2)€the€offense€involved€moreÏthan€one€victim,× ƒ< ××  ×€and€(3)€he€possessed€a€firearm€during€the€commission€of€theÏoffense.× ƒ= ××  ×€€The€court€found€no€mitigating€factors€of€any€consequence.€€€The€courtÏimposed€Range€I€sentences€of€five€years€for€the€five€aggravated€burglaryÏconvictions,€three€years€for€theft,€and€one€year€for€conspiracy.€€Because€of€theÏnumber€of€burglaries€involved,€the€trial€court€ordered€that€the€five„yearÍsentences€for€count€1€of€€#716€and€count€1€of€#3831€be€served€consecutively€forÏa€sentence€of€ten€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.× ƒ> ××  ×ÌÌà àQuilter,€€a€Range€I€offender,€€received€five€four„year€sentences€for€Ïhis€five€aggravated€burglary€convictions.€€With€respect€to€enhancement€andÏmitigating€factors€the€trial€judge€made€no€specific€findings€although€he€mentionsÏQuilterððs€juvenile€problems€and€his€misdemeanor€conviction€for€casualÏexchange€and€underage€possession.€€He€found€that€Quilter€was€not€a€leader€inÏthe€offenses€and,€without€further€discussion,€noted€that€there€were€someÏmitigating€factors€worthy€of€consideration.€€Because€of€ð ðhis€extensiveÏinvolvement€in€these€cases,€number€of€cases€that€are€involved€here,ðð€the€courtÏordered€that€Quilter€serve€the€sentences€in€€#716€and€Count€3€of€#3831Ïconsecutively€for€an€eight„year€aggregate€sentence.€€ÌÌà àThe€court€also€concluded€that,€because€of€Quilterððs€ð ðyouthful€ageÏand€immaturity,ðð€his€confinement€should€be€served€in€split€confinement.€€TheÍtrial€judge€ordered€that€he€serve€one€year€in€the€county€jail€beginning€on€theÏday€of€sentencing€and€the€balance€on€Community€Corrections€or€probation€for€aÏtotal€of€12€years.€€When€defense€counsel€asked€if€Quilter€would€be€given€creditÏfor€the€ten€months× ƒ? ××  ×€he€had€already€served,€the€trial€court€responded€that€ð ðI€thinkÏhe€should€have€beginning€one€year€from€today€is€my€ruling€if€thatððs€justifiable.ðð× ƒ@ ××  ×€€ÌÌà àMichael€Wilson€contends€in€this€appeal€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdenying€his€motion€to€suppress€the€evidence€seized€from€his€trailer€during€aÏwarrantless€search€and€that€the€admission€of€the€illegally€obtained€evidence€atÏtrial€was€not€harmless€error.€€The€other€two€defendants€raise€sentencing€issues.€ÏWe€address€the€suppression€issue€first.ÌÌà@ àò òI.€€Admission€of€Illegally€Seized€EvidenceÌó óÌà àAfter€the€arrest€of€the€five€burglars,€the€police€conducted€aÏwarrantless€search€of€a€trailer€rented€by€Michael€and€Sean€Wilson.€€During€thisÏsearch€they€discovered€and€seized€property€that€had€been€stolen€during€theÏvarious€burglaries€in€Putnam€and€Cumberland€Counties.€€At€least€some€of€thisÏproperty€was€admitted€into€evidence€at€trial€in€€#716.€€We€are,€however,€€unableÏto€review€either€the€constitutionality€of€the€search€or€the€degree€to€which€theÏalleged€ð ðfruit€of€the€poisonous€treeðð€may€have€affected€the€jury€verdict.€ÌÌà àThe€record€before€us€contains€neither€the€trial€courtððs€orderÏdenying€the€motion€for€new€trial€nor€a€transcript€of€the€trial€itself.× ƒA ××  ×€€The€failure€toÏraise€an€issue€in€a€motion€for€new€trial€waives€that€issue€on€appeal€if€aÏresolution€favorable€to€the€appellant€would€result€in€a€new€trial.€€òòState€v.ÏSowderóó,€827€S.W.2d€924,€926€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3.€ÏWith€respect€to€#716,€€the€inadequacy€of€the€record€precludes€our€considerationÏof€the€legality€of€the€search.€€Moreover,€even€if€this€court€found€that€theÏwarrantless€search€was€unconstitutional,€we€would€be€unable€to€determineÏwhether€the€error€had€adversely€affected€the€trialððs€outcome€because€theÏdefendant€failed€to€include€a€transcript€of€the€trial€in€the€record.€€It€is€theÍappellantððs€obligation€to€prepare€a€record€that€will€allow€for€meaningful€reviewÏupon€appeal.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(b).€€We€cannot€consider€an€issue€unless€theÏœrecordÇcontains›€a€fair,€accurate€and€complete€account€of€what€transpired€belowÏrelevant€to€that€issue.€€òòState€v.€Ballard,€óó€855€S.W.2d€557,€560„561€(Tenn.€1993).€€Ìà àIn€addition€to€the€convictions€in€the€trial€of€€#716,€Michael€WilsonÏpleaded€guilty€to€four€counts€of€aggravated€burglary€in€indictments€€#714,€€#715,Ïand€#3831.€€A€defendant€who€pleads€guilty€may€preserve€an€issue€for€appeal€ifÏcertain€conditions€are€satisfied.€€òòState€v.€Prestonóó,€759€S.W.2d€647,€650€(Tenn.Ï1988);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€37(b)(2).€€€In€òòPrestonóó€the€supreme€court€said:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ¸ ÒÒ ¸ ÒÓÓRegardless€of€what€has€appeared€in€priorÏpetitions,€orders,€colloquy€in€open€court€orÏotherwise,€the€final€order€or€judgment€.€.€.€mustÏcontain€a€statement€of€the€dispositive€certifiedÏquestion€of€law€reserved€by€the€defendant€forÏappellate€review€and€the€question€of€law€mustÏbe€stated€so€as€to€clearly€identify€the€scopeÏand€the€limits€of€the€legal€issue€reserved.€.€.€.ÏAlso,€the€order€must€state€that€the€certifiedÏquestion€was€expressly€reserved€as€part€of€theÏplea€agreement,€that€the€State€and€the€trialÏjudge€consented€to€the€reservation,€and€thatÏthe€state€and€the€trial€judge€are€of€the€opinionÏthat€the€question€is€dispositive€of€the€case.ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ¸ ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓ759€S.W.2d€at€650.€€€The€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€satisfy€the€mandatoryÏrequirements€of€Rule€37€as€interpreted€in€òòPrestonóó.€€òòState€v.€Pendergrassóó,€937ÏS.W.2d€834,€837€(Tenn.1996).€€ÌÌà à€In€this€instance,€the€judgment€orders€do€not€mention€any€certifiedÏquestion€of€law.€€The€only€indication€in€the€record€of€the€defendantððs€intent€toÏreserve€œsuch›€a€question€is€a€pleading€captioned€ð ðMotion€to€Preserve€Issue€ofÏSearch€and€Seizure.ðð€€By€itself,€such€a€motion€is€insufficient€to€reserve€aÏcertified€question€of€law.€€A€guilty€plea€constitutes€a€waiver€of€allÏnonjurisdictional€and€procedural€defects€or€constitutional€infirmities.€€òòState€v.ÏBilbreyóó,€816€S.W.2d€71,€75€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Since€the€defendant€hasÏignored€the€requirements€œof€›€Rule€37(b)€and€failed€to€preserve€the€issue€in€aÏmotion€for€new€trial,€€the€issue€regarding€the€constitutionality€of€the€search€ofÏWilsonððs€trailer€is€waived.ÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Sentencing€Issuesó óÌÌà àSean€Wilson€and€Kenneth€Quilter€argue€that€their€sentences€areÏexcessive€and€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€his€order€that€two€of€the€sentences€runÏconsecutively.€€€Michael€Wilson€has€raised€no€sentencing€issues€on€appeal;Ïhowever,€our€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€record€has€uncovered€other€sentencingÏerrors€which€will€affect€his€sentence€as€well€as€those€of€the€other€twoÏdefendants.€€œÌ›Ìà 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€consecutive€sentences€or€oneÏinvolving€an€alternative€to€total€confinement.€€The€trial€court€must€consider€(1)Ïany€evidence€presented€at€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,€(2)€the€presentenceÏreport,€(3)€the€sentencing€principles.€(4)€the€arguments€of€counsel,€(5)€anyÍstatements€the€defendant€has€made€to€the€court,€(6)€the€nature€andÏcharacteristics€of€the€offense,€(7)€any€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€andÏ(8)€the€defendantððs€amenability€to€rehabilitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„103(5),€and€40„35„210(a),€(b)(Supp.€1996);€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€The€trial€court€must€begin€with€a€presumptive€minimumÏsentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€The€sentence€may€then€beÏincreased€by€any€applicable€enhancement€factors€and€reduced€in€the€light€ofÏany€applicable€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(d),(e).ÌÌà àDue€to€the€many€inconsistencies€between€the€judgment€formsÏcontained€in€the€record€and€the€pronouncement€of€the€trial€court€at€theÏsentencing€hearing€as€well€as€the€incompleteness€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings,Ïwe€€review€these€sentences€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€without€the€presumption€of€correctness.€ÏAlthough€the€trial€court€made€some€factual€findings€with€respect€to€theÏenhancement€factors€applicable€to€the€Wilsonsðð€sentences,€the€court€did€notÏdistinguish€between€the€applicability€of€the€factors€to€the€various€offenses,€Ïmade€only€a€vague€reference€to€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€andÏalternative€sentencing€in€Quilterððs€case,€€and€made€none€of€the€requiredÏfindings€concerning€the€appropriateness€of€consecutive€sentencing€for€both€theÏWilsons€and€Quilter.€€The€judgment€forms€reflect€that€the€trial€court€€imposedÍfines€on€the€Wilsons€in€€#716€amounting€to€$9,000€and€restitution€equalingÏ$8,273.40€jointly€and€severally€against€each€defendant€even€though€theÏtranscript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€contains€no€reference€to€any€fines€and€noÏfindings€concerning€the€appropriateness€of€restitution€in€these€cases.œ× ƒB ××  ×›€ÏMoreover,€at€the€hearing€the€trial€court€refused€to€give€Quilter€credit€for€the€307Ïdays€he€served€in€jail€prior€to€sentencing.€€The€judgment€forms,€on€the€otherÏhand,€€indicate€that€Quilter€received€credit€for€24€days€of€pre„sentence€jail€credit.€ÏUnder€these€circumstances,€the€presumption€of€correctness€must€fall.€€ÌÌà àBefore€we€turn€to€those€issues€which€affect€the€individualÏsentences€of€Sean€Wilson€and€Kenneth€Quilter,€we€address€those€errors€thatÍconcern€more€than€one€defendant,€namely€the€orders€of€restitution€and€theÏpayment€of€fines.× ƒD ××  ×ÌÌà@ àò òA.€€Restitutionó óÌÌà àThe€judgment€forms€in€the€record€indicate€that€the€trial€court€madeÏeach€defendant€jointly€and€severally€liable€for€restitution€in€four€of€the€fiveÏburglaries€totaling€œ$8,273.40.›€€The€defendants€were€ordered€to€pay€a€total€ofÏ$6,205€to€three€insurance€companies€and€the€balance€directly€to€the€victims.× ƒE ××  ×€ÏThe€transcript,€however,€does€not€include€such€an€order,€and€if€the€court€hadÏordered€restitution,€the€order€would€have€been€contrary€to€law.Ì€Ìà àBoth€Wilsons€were€sentenced€to€serve€their€sentences€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction,€and€the€trial€court€was€without€authority€to€imposeÏrestitution€as€part€of€a€sentence€of€confinement.€€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€œ940›€S.W.2dÏ558,€561„62€(Tenn.1997).€€At€the€time€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€TennesseeÏstatutes€expressly€authorized€a€sentence€of€restitution€only€as€part€of€a€term€ofÏsupervised€probation.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„104(c)(2)€(1990).× ƒF ××  ×€€€We€cannotÏaffirm€a€sentence€that€is€not€expressly€authorized€by€the€legislature.€€òòState€v.ÏDavisóó,€940€S.W.2d€at€562.€€Therefore,€we€remand€this€case€to€the€trial€court€forÏthe€preparation€of€new€judgment€forms€for€Michael€Wilson€and€Sean€Wilson€inÏcases€#714,€€#716,€and€#3831€that€omit€the€orders€of€restitution.× ƒG ××  ×€€ÌÌà àOn€the€other€hand,€œthe›€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€splitÏconfinement€on€Kenneth€Quilter.€€Split€confinement€includes€a€period€ofÏprobation,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„306(a)€(1990),€and€a€trial€court€may€orderÏrestitution€as€a€condition€of€probation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„104(c)(2).€€TheÏrecord€on€appeal€contains€the€presentence€reports,€testimony€from€the€victims,Ïand€testimony€from€the€officers€who€prepared€the€presentence€reports€in€whichÏdamages€in€various€amounts€are€alleged.€The€defense€objected€to€the€amountsÏreported€by€the€victims€and€the€probation€officers€both€at€the€hearing€and€in€theÏpre„sentence€report€because€of€the€lack€of€documentation.€€The€trial€court€madeÏno€findings€concerning€the€amount€of€restitution€œnor›€did€the€court€considerÏQuilterððs€financial€resources€or€his€future€ability€to€pay.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„304(d)€(1990).€€€In€fact,€the€judge€did€not€mention€restitution€when€heÏsentenced€Quilter.€€The€judgment€forms,€on€the€other€hand,€€order€Quilter€to€payÏrestitution€as€follows:€à àÌÓÓà à#714€€Legge€Insurance:à àà àà à$1,€718.00Ìà àà à€€Howard€&€Vivian€Mayberry:€à à€€€€€€100.00Ìà à#715€€NoneÌà à#716€€Donald€and€Marcia€Spurlockà à€$1,867.92Ìà à#3831(1)€Farm€Bureauà àà àà à€$2,038.00Ìà àà à€€€Anthony€Farris€à àà àà à€€€€€€100.00Ìà à€€€€€€€€(3)€Farm€Bureauà àà àà à€$2,449.00ÓÓÌÌAfter€on€our€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€that€these€orders€ofÏrestitution€cannot€stand,€based€upon€either€of€two€reasons.ÌÌà àFirst,€the€amount€of€restitution€a€defendant€is€ordered€to€pay€mustÏbe€based€upon€the€victimððs€pecuniary€loss€and€the€financial€condition€andÏobligations€of€the€defendant.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ40„35„303(d)(10)€(Supp.›Ï1996);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€898€S.W.2d€742,€747€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€The€trialÏcourt€must€determine€the€actual€loss€based€on€realistic€values,× ƒH ××  ×€and€theÏamount€of€restitution€need€not€equal€or€mirror€the€exact€pecuniary€loss€of€theÏvictim.€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€898€S.W.2d€at€747.€€The€trial€court€must€consider€theÏdefendantððs€ability€to€pay€given€his€current€means€and€his€likely€ability€to€pay€inÏthe€future.€€The€amount€of€restitution€must€be€reasonable€and€one€that€theÏdefendant€can€reasonably€be€expected€to€pay€during€his€probationary€period.€€ÍTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„304(d)(Supp.€1996);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€898€S.W.2d€atÏ747.€€The€record€does€not€show€that€any€of€these€requirements€were€met€at€theÏsentencing€hearing.€€€€ÌÌà àSecond,€the€order€for€restitution€to€be€paid€by€Quilter€is€not€evidentÏin€the€record€of€the€sentencing€hearing.€€In€those€cases€where€the€trial€court€hasÏordered€restitution€but€failed€to€make€the€appropriate€findings,€an€order€ofÏremand€would€allow€the€trial€judge€to€make€the€requisite€findings€on€the€recordÏso€that€the€propriety€of€restitution€could€be€reviewed€upon€appeal.€òòSeeóó€òòe.g.óó,ÏòòState€v.€Smithóó,€898€S.W.2d€at€747;€òòState€v.€Thomas€Wayne€Johnsonóó,€No.€Ï03C01„9606„CC„00214,€slip€op.€at€9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€May€19,Ï1997).€€€However,€in€this€instance,€a€remand€is€not€appropriate.€€Tennessee€lawÏrequires€that€restitution,€as€a€condition€of€probation,€shall€be€specified€at€theÏtime€of€the€sentencing€hearing.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ40„35„304(c)€(Supp.›€1996).€€ÏIn€this€case,€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€mentions€no€order€ofÏrestitution€in€any€amount€for€any€of€the€defendants.€€The€trial€court€did€notÏspecify€that€restitution€was€a€condition€of€the€probationary€portion€of€QuilterððsÏsentence.€€The€judgment€€forms€are,€therefore,€€in€conflict€with€the€transcript€ofÏthe€proceedings.€€This€court€has€held,€under€similar€circumstances,€that€€theÏtranscript€controls.€€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€814€S.W.2d€381,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Í1991).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Zylaóó,€628€S.W.2d€39,€42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981);ÏòòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€50€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€€Therefore,€theÏjudgment€forms€are€in€error€and€must€be€corrected€upon€remand€to€conform€toÏthe€findings€and€order€of€the€trial€court€as€they€are€contained€in€the€transcript.ÌÌà@ àò òB.€€Finesó óà àÌÌà àThe€judgment€forms€are€also€inconsistent€with€the€trial€courtððsÏorders€as€recorded€in€the€transcript€with€respect€to€fines.€€In€€#716,€€a€juryÏconvicted€the€Wilsons€of€aggravated€burglary,€theft€over€$1,000,€and€conspiracyÏto€commit€aggravated€burglary€and€theft.€€€The€record€contains€an€order€ofÏconviction€styled€ð ðState€of€Tennessee€v.€Michael€Wilson,ðð€signed€by€the€trialÏjudge€and€dated€May€25,€1995,€which€indicates€that€the€jury€assessed€fines€ofÏ$5,000,€$2,500,€and€$1,500€respectively.€€The€transcript€of€the€sentencingÏhearing€contains€no€mention€of€these€fines.€€The€trial€judge€made€no€findingsÏconcerning€the€amount€of€the€fines€nor€did€he€order€the€defendants€to€pay€anyÏfines€when€he€imposed€sentence€upon€them€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencingÏhearing.€€Michael€and€Sean€Wilsonððs€judgment€forms,€however,€include€theÏpayment€of€the€fines€as€assessed€by€the€jury€ÌÌà àThe€Tennessee€constitution€provides€that€a€trial€judge€may€notÏimpose€a€fine€in€excess€of€$50.00.€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€6€ðð€14.€€In€those€casesÏwhere€the€range€of€punishment€includes€a€fine€in€excess€of€$50.00,€current€lawÏrequires€that€the€jury€report€any€fine€it€wishes€to€assess€with€its€guilty€verdict.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„301(b)(1990).€€However,€the€statute€also€provides€thatÏthe€trial€judge€€ð ð[w]hen€imposing€sentence,€after€the€sentencing€hearing,€òòshallÏimposeóó€a€fine,€if€any,€not€to€exceed€the€fine€fixed€by€the€jury.ðð€òòIdóó.€(emphasisÏadded).€€Therefore,€the€trial€court€is€obligated€to€evaluate€the€fine€fixed€by€theÏjury€and€impose€the€exact€amount€of€the€fine,€if€any,€as€part€of€the€sentence.€ÏòòState€v,€Robert€Harrison€Blevinsóó,€No.€€03C01„9606„CC„00242,€slip€op.€at€13Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€May€23,€1997);€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„301(b).€€The€fine€may€not€exceed€the€amount€fixed€by€the€jury,€and€the€trialÏjudge€may€reduce,€suspend,€or€release€fines€even€after€the€judgment€is€final.€ÏòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„24„101,€102,€and€104€(1990€&€Supp.€1996).ÌÌà à€Under€current€Tennessee€law,€the€fine€assessed€by€the€jury€is€notÏa€final€judgment,€and€the€trial€court€may€not€simply€impose€the€fine€as€fixed€byÏthe€jury.€€òòState€v.€Robert€Harrison€Blevinsóó,€slip€op.€at€13.€€The€fine€andÏincarceration€are€inextricably€linked,€and€a€trial€court€must€consider€the€fine€asÏpart€of€the€entire€sentencing€package.€€òòState€v.€Bryantóó,€805€S.W.2d€762,€766Í(Tenn.1991).€In€òòState€v.€Bryantóó,€our€supreme€court€discussed€the€role€of€the€trialÏcourt€in€setting€fines:ÌÓÓà8 àIt€is€clear€that€when€the€fine€is€imposed€after€theÏsentencing€hearing,€the€trial€judge,€unlike€the€jury,Ïknows€the€facts€developed€in€the€sentencing€hearing.€ÏThe€trial€judge€learns€about€prior€offenses,€potentialÏfor€rehabilitation,€mitigating€and€aggravating€circum„stances,€and€other€matters€relevant€to€an€appropriateÏsentence.€€At€that€stage€an€informed€judgment€can€beÏmade€as€to€the€sentence,€including€the€amount€ofÏfine,€confinement,€or€any€other€sentencingÏalternatives€offered€by€the€Reform€Act.€€ÌÌÓÓ805€S.W.2d€at€765.€€ÌÌòòà àDeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€a€sentence€imposed€pursuant€to€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€Section€40„35„401(a)€cannot€be€accomplished€withoutÏreviewing€ð ðthe€amount€of€the€fine,€the€defendantððs€ability€to€pay€that€fine,€andÏother€factors€of€judgment€involved€in€setting€the€total€sentence.ðð€€òòState€v.€Bryantóó,Ï805€S.W.2d€at€766.€Although€the€defendantððs€ability€to€pay€a€fine€is€notÏnecessarily€a€controlling€factor,€an€oppressive€fine€can€disrupt€futureÏrehabilitation€and€prevent€a€defendant€from€becoming€a€productive€member€ofÏsociety.€€òòState€v.€Marshallóó,€870€S.W.2d€532,€542€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€AÏsignificant€fine€is€not€automatically€precluded,€however,€simply€because€it€worksÏa€substantial€hardship€on€the€defendant.€€òòIdóó.€ÌÌà àThe€jury€assessed€$9,000€in€fines€against€both€Michael€WilsonÏand€Sean€Wilson.€€We,€however,€must€consider€each€defendantððs€sentenceÏseparately.€€Michael€Wilson€was€twenty„six€years€old€at€sentencing.€€HeÏadmitted€to€a€long€history€of€drug€abuse€including€marijuana,€LSD,€cocaine,Ïheroin€and€angel€dust.€€His€criminal€record€contains€several€convictions€forÏburglary,€robbery,€and€theft.€€His€employment€history€is€virtually€non„existent.€ÏHis€proven€disregard€for€the€laws€of€society€and€his€lack€of€honest€effort€toÏprovide€for€himself€and€those€who€depend€upon€him€do€not€bode€well€forÏrehabilitation.€€The€fines€of€$5,000€for€aggravated€burglary,€$2,500€for€theft,€andÏ$1,500€for€conspiracy€are€warranted€for€punishment€and€deterrence.€€€In€theÏfuture,€the€trial€court€may€grant€such€relief€it€deems€appropriate€given€hisÏconduct€and€circumstances€at€that€time.€€€€The€amount€of€fines€recorded€onÏMichael€Wilsonððs€judgment€forms€in€counts€1,€2,€and€3€of€€#716€are€affirmed.ÌÌà àOn€the€other€hand,€Sean€Wilson,€who€was€twenty„four€years€old,Ïhas€no€prior€criminal€record€and,€other€than€the€use€of€marijuana,€no€extensiveÏrecord€of€criminal€behavior.€€€€His€education€includes€two€years€of€junior€college,Ïand€the€record€indicates€that€if€the€opportunity€were€available€he€would€seekÏfurther€educational€opportunities.€€In€Sean€Wilsonððs€case,€we€find€that€fines€ofÍ($3,000)€for€aggravated€burglary,€($1,500)€for€theft,€and€($500)€for€conspiracyÏare€consistent€with€the€purposes€of€our€sentencing€law.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„102€(Supp.€1996).€€Upon€remand,€the€trial€court€shall€prepare€judgmentÏforms€consistent€with€these€findings.ÌÌà@ àò òC.€€The€Length€of€Sean€Wilsonððs€Sentencesó óÌÌà àSean€Wilson,€a€Range€I€standard€offender,€€received€a€five„yearÏsentence€for€each€of€five€aggravated€burglary€convictions,€three€years€for€theft€ofÏproperty€worth€$1,000€or€more,€and€3€years€for€conspiracy€to€commit€burglaryÏand€theft.€€The€trial€court€ordered€that€all€the€sentences€run€concurrently€exceptÏfor€the€aggravated€burglary€convictions€in€count€one€of€€#716€and€count€three€ofÏ#3831€which€run€consecutively€for€an€effective€sentence€of€ten€years€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction.× ƒI ××  ×€€€In€this€appeal,€Sean€Wilson€contends€that€the€trialÏjudge€erroneously€applied€enhancement€factors€to€enhance€his€punishmentÏbeyond€the€minimum€in€the€range,€that€he€failed€to€find€two€mitigating€factors,Ïand€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€consecutive€sentences.€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€evidence€supported€the€existence€ofÏthe€three€following€enhancement€factors€and€apparently€applied€them€uniformlyÏto€each€of€the€eight€sentences:ÌÓÓà à(2)à8 àThe€defendant€was€a€leader€in€theÏcommission€of€an€offense€involving€twoÏ(2)€or€more€criminal€actors.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„114(2)€(Supp.€1996)€.ÌÌà à(3)à8 àThe€offense€involved€more€than€oneÏvictim.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(3).ÌÌà à(9)à8 àThe€defendant€possessed€or€employedÏa€firearm€during€the€commission€of€theÏoffense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(9).ÌÌÓÓÌà àThe€record€supports€a€finding€that€Sean€Wilson€was€a€leader€inÏthe€commission€of€the€offense.€€Co„defendant€Erica€Peters€testified€withoutÏcontradiction€that€the€two€Wilsons€were€the€leaders€in€the€burglary€ring.€€Thus€Ïfactor€(2)€applies€with€equal€weight€to€each€conviction.€€ÌÌà àThe€other€two€factors€are€more€problematic.€€With€respect€to€factorÏ(3),€the€trial€judge€found€that€more€than€one€person€who€lived€in€each€residenceÍhad€been€harmed€by€the€defendantððs€activities.€€It€isnððt€clear€from€the€recordÏwhether€the€trial€judge€used€this€factor€to€enhance€only€the€burglaries€or€appliedÏit€to€the€theft€and€conspiracy€convictions€as€well.€€He€noted€only€that€heÏaccorded€this€factor€limited€weight.€Testimony€at€the€hearing€demonstrates€thatÏin€two€of€the€burgled€households€the€defendants€took€property€belonging€toÏmore€than€one€person.× ƒJ ××  ×€€The€same€two€witnesses€testified€that€the€burglariesÏhad€made€other€members€of€their€families€nervous€and€afraid.€€As€the€stateÏconcedes,€the€factor€should€not€be€applied€to€those€convictions€for€which€noÏproof€was€offered,€that€is,€in€#714,€€#715,€and€Count€1€of€#3831.€€œIts›€use€in€€#716Ïand€Count€3€of€#3831€must€be€examined.ÌÌà àAggravated€burglary€occurs€when€a€person€enters€a€habitationÏwithout€the€effective€consent€of€the€owner€with€the€intent€to€commit€a€felony€orÏtheft.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„14„402,€403€(1990).€€If€the€intruder€has€theÏrequisite€intent,€the€offense€is€complete€the€moment€any€part€of€the€body€or€anyÏobject€in€physical€contact€with€the€body€intrudes€into€the€habitation.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„14„402€(b).€€€€We€have€examined€Tennessee€case€law€and€haveÏfound€no€instance€in€which€this€factor€has€been€used€to€enhance€a€convictionÍfor€aggravated€burglary€unless€more€than€one€victim€were€present€at€the€timeÏthe€crime€was€committed.€€òòSeeóó€òòe.góó.,€òòState€v.€Derek€Dentonóó,€No.€02C01„9409„CR„00186€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Aug.€2,€1996)(two€victims€present€andÏinjured€during€a€burglary,€assault,€and€murder);€òòJames€H.€Register€v.€Stateóó,€No.Ï01CO1„9210„CC„00329€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€€August€12,€1993)(two„year€old€and€mother€present€during€burglary€and€robbery).€€In€the€case€beforeÏus,€none€of€the€victims€were€present.× ƒK ××  ×€ÌÌà à€A€victim,€as€used€in€this€enhancement€factor€is€defined€as€ð ðaÏperson€or€entity€that€is€injured,€killed,€had€property€stolen,€or€had€propertyÏdestroyed€by€the€perpetrator€of€the€crime.ðð€€òòState€v.€Rainesóó,€882€S.W.2d€376,Ï384€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Neither€òòRainesóó€nor€the€Criminal€SentencingÏReform€Act€defines€the€words€ð ðinjuredðð€or€ð ðinjury.ðð€€€In€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€891ÏS.W.2d€922,€930€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994),€€this€court€considered€the€differenceÏbetween€ð ðpersonal€injuryðð€as€used€in€enhancement€factor€six€and€ð ðbodily€injuryððÏin€factors€eleven,€twelve,€and€sixteen€and€concluded€that€the€term€ð ðpersonalÍinjuryðð€is€broad€enough€to€embrace€emotional€injuries€and€psychologicalÏœscarring›€that€a€victim€of€rape€may€suffer.× ƒL ××  ×ÌÌà àTherefore,€we€do€not€consider€the€term€ð ðinjuryðð€to€include€only€aÏphysical€bodily€injury.€€It€may€be,€òòarguendoóó,€that€upon€proper€proof€€a€singleÏburglary€could€victimize€œmultiple€residents›€who€were€absent€at€the€time€of€theÏburglary,€but€the€proof€in€this€case€is€insufficient€to€support€a€conclusion€thatÏfactor€(3)€applies€to€the€offense€of€burglary€in€cases€#716€and€#3831,€œCount›€3.× ƒM ××  ×ÌÌà àAlthough€enhancement€factor€three€may€not€be€used€to€enhanceÏSean€Wilsonððs€sentences€for€aggravated€burglary,€the€record€supports€the€useÏof€this€factor€to€enhance€his€conviction€for€theft€in€count€2€of€€#716.€€DonaldÍSpurlockððs€testimony€that€the€defendant€took€jewelry€belonging€to€his€wife€and€aÏpistol€that€was€his€property€is€uncontradicted.€€The€trial€court€appropriately€usedÏthis€factor€when€sentencing€Sean€Wilson€for€theft€of€property.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€also€found€that€the€defendant€possessed€orÏemployed€a€firearm€during€the€commission€of€the€offense€and€enhanced€hisÏsentences€accordingly.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(9)(Supp.€1996).€€TheÏrecord€does€not€support€the€use€of€this€factor.€€Testimony€in€the€record€indicatesÏthat€the€defendants€stole€weapons€from€two€of€the€households.€€Co„defendantÏEricka€Peters€testified€that€Michael€Wilson€left€a€weapon€taken€from€theÏSpurlock€home€in€the€car€with€her€during€the€second€Cumberland€CountyÏburglary.€€She€testified€that€Sean€Wilson€had€a€gun€in€a€holster€strapped€to€hisÏwaist€as€he€carried€a€large€TV€set€from€the€Goodwin€home.€€On€crossÏexamination,€she€conceded€that,€€to€her€knowledge,€€no€weapons€were€everÏcarried€into€the€houses.€€As€we€discussed€above,€a€burglary€is€complete€theÏmoment€any€part€of€the€body€or€any€object€in€physical€contact€with€the€bodyÏintrudes€into€the€habitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„402€(b)(1990).€€AÏweapon€found€after€the€building€or€habitation€is€entered€was€neither€possessedÏnor€employed€during€the€commission€of€the€burglary.€€With€respect€to€theÏSpurlock€weapon,€Peters€testified€that€Michael,€not€Sean,€left€the€Ruger€in€theÍcar€during€the€burglary€of€the€Goodwin€home.€€In€short,€the€record€containsÏnothing€that€shows€that€Sean€Wilson€either€used€or€possessed€a€firearm€duringÏthe€commission€of€any€of€the€burglaries.× ƒN ××  ×ÌÌà àBased€on€our€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€we€find€that€the€record€supports€theÏapplication€of€one€enhancement€factor,€that€the€defendant€was€a€leader€in€theÏcommission€of€an€offense€involving€two€or€more€criminal€actors,€to€each€of€SeanÏWilsonððs€convictions.€€Factor€(3),€that€the€offense€involved€more€than€one€victim,Ïmay€be€used€to€enhance€Sean€Wilsonððs€conviction€for€theft€in€€#716.€€The€trialÏcourt€found€no€mitigating€factors,€and€our€independent€review€has€disclosedÏnone.€€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€sentenced€Sean€Wilson€to€five€years€ofÏincarceration€for€each€of€the€five€aggravated€burglary€convictions€and€to€threeÏyears€each€for€theft€and€conspiracy.€€Aggravated€burglary€is€a€Class€C€felony.€ÏThe€sentencing€range€for€a€Range€I€offender€is€three€to€six€years.€€Conspiracy€toÏcommit€aggravated€burglary€and€theft€is€a€Class€D€felony€with€a€sentencingÍrange€of€two€to€four€years€for€Range€I€offenders.€€Given€the€existence€of€a€singleÏenhancement€factor,€but€one€that€is€entitled€to€significant€weight,€and€noÏmitigating€factors,€we€find€that€sentences€of€œfive›€years€for€each€conviction€forÏaggravated€burglary€and€of€three€years€for€conspiracy€are€appropriate€under€theÏprinciples€and€considerations€of€sentencing€and€consistent€with€the€interests€ofÏjustice.€€€Two€enhancement€factors,€numbers€(2)€and€(3),€apply€to€theÏdefendantððs€conviction€for€theft€of€property€valued€more€than€$1,000€but€lessÏthan€$10,000,€a€Class€D€felony.€€In€this€instance,€the€three„year€sentence€set€byÏthe€trial€court€is€also€appropriate.× ƒO ××  ×ÌÌà@ àò òD.€€The€Length€of€Kenneth€Quilterððs€Sentencesó óÌà àÌà àThe€trial€judge€followed€a€similar€pattern€in€sentencing€KennethÏQuilter.€Quilter€received€four„year€sentences€for€each€of€his€five€convictions€forÏaggravated€burglary.€€Unlike€Michael€and€Sean€Wilson,€Quilter€has€noÏconvictions€for€theft€or€conspiracy€because€the€state€dismissed€the€otherÏcharges€against€him€upon€entry€of€his€guilty€pleas€to€aggravated€burglary.€€TheÏtrial€court€ordered€that€all€the€sentences€run€concurrently€except€for€theÍaggravated€burglary€convictions€in€€#716€and€count€three€of€#3831€which€runÏconsecutively€for€an€effective€sentence€of€eight€years.€€The€trial€judge€concludedÏthat€Quilter€should€serve€his€sentence€in€split€confinement€and€sentenced€him€toÏserve€a€year€in€confinement€and€twelve€years€in€community€corrections.€€TheÏtrial€judge€refused€to€include€the€307€days€Quilter€had€already€spent€in€jail€asÏpart€of€the€year€of€confinement.€€In€this€appeal,€Quilter€contends€that€he€shouldÏhave€received€the€minimum€sentence€in€each€conviction,€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€failing€to€give€him€credit€for€the€time€he€served€pretrial,€and€that€hisÏsentences€should€be€served€concurrently.€€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€did€not€clearly€articulate€for€the€record€its€reasons€forÏenhancing€Quilterððs€sentence€beyond€the€minimum€in€the€range.€€The€trial€judgeÏnoted€that€he€had€some€problems€as€a€juvenile€and€that€his€only€adultÏconviction€was€a€misdemeanor€for€exchange€and€underage€possession.€ÏQuilter,€who€was€19€years€old€when€he€was€arrested,€ran€away€from€home€as€aÏjuvenile,€was€assigned€to€a€special€school€for€those€with€learning€disabilitiesÏand€behavior€problems,€and€was€charged€twice€with€criminal€trespass€as€aÏjuvenile.€The€trial€court€found€that€Quilter€was€not€a€leader€in€the€offense€but€didÍnot€identify€any€other€enhancement€factors.× ƒP ××  ×€€€The€trial€judge€found€that€thereÏwere€mitigating€factors€that€were€entitled€to€some€weight€but€did€not€point€to€anyÏspecific€factor.€€The€court,€however,€alluded€to€Quilterððs€ð ðyouthful€age€andÏimmaturityðð€when€determining€that€split€confinement€was€appropriate.€€ÌÌà àWe€have€carefully€reviewed€the€record€in€this€case.€ÏUncontradicted€testimony€in€the€record€shows€that€Quilter€merely€followed€theÏlead€of€the€older,€more€experienced€defendants.€Factor€(2)€is€inapplicable€in€hisÏcase.€€€However,€we€find€that€based€on€Quilterððs€record€as€a€juvenile€and€hisÏadmitted€use€of€marijuana€and€speed,€some€weight€must€be€given€to€hisÏprevious€history€of€criminal€behavior.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1)(Supp.Ï1996).€€We€also€find€that€the€defendant,€because€of€his€youth,€lacked€substantialÏjudgment€in€committing€these€offenses.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(6)(Supp.Ï1996).€€Therefore,€one€enhancement€factor€and€one€mitigating€factor€apply€toÏeach€of€Quilterððs€sentences.€€ÌÌà àTo€arrive€at€the€appropriate€sentence,€we€must€begin€with€aÏpresumptive€minimum€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c)(Supp.Ï1996).€€The€sentence€may€then€be€increased€by€any€applicable€enhancementÏfactors€and€reduced€in€the€light€of€any€applicable€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„210€(d),€(e).€€ÌÌà àQuilterððs€juvenile€record€includes€two€criminal€trespass€violationsÏand€he€admits€the€use€of€illegal€substances.€€His€prior€criminal€behaviorÏoutweighs€the€mitigating€factor€in€this€case,€and€sentences€one€year€above€theÏminimum€are€appropriate.€We€affirm€Quilterððs€sentences€for€four€years€in€eachÏaggravated€burglary€conviction.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓE.€€Consecutive€Sentencingó óÌÓ  Óà àÌÓ  Óà àBoth€Sean€Wilson€and€Kenneth€Quilter€argue€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€ordering€that€two€of€their€convictions€run€consecutively€for€effectiveÏsentences€of€ten€and€eight€years€respectively.€€ÌÌà àà àConsecutive€sentencing€may€be€imposed€in€the€discretionÏof€the€trial€court€upon€a€determination€that€one€or€more€of€the€following€criteriaÏexist:ÌÓÓÌà8 à(1)à àThe€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€whoÏhas€knowingly€devote€himself€to€criminal€acts€as€aÏmajor€source€of€livelihood;ÌÌà8 à(2)à àThe€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€ofÏcriminal€activity€is€extensive;ÌÌà8 à(3)à àThe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentallyÏabnormal€person€so€declared€by€a€competentÏpsychiatrist€who€concludes€as€a€result€of€anÏinvestigation€prior€to€sentencing€that€the€defendant'sÏcriminal€conduct€has€been€characterized€by€a€patternÏof€repetitive€or€compulsive€behavior€with€heedlessÏindifference€to€consequences;ÌÌà8 à(4)à àThe€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whoseÏbehavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,Ïand€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€whichÏthe€risk€to€human€life€is€high;ÌÌà8 à(5)à àThe€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€moreÏstatutory€offenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minorÏwith€consideration€of€the€aggravating€circumstancesÏarising€from€the€relationship€between€the€defendantÏand€victim€or€victims,€the€time€span€of€defendant'sÏundetected€sexual€activity,€the€nature€and€scope€ofÏthe€sexual€acts€and€the€extent€of€the€residual,Ïphysical€and€mental€damage€to€the€victim€or€victims;ÌÌà8 à(6)à àThe€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offenseÏcommitted€while€on€probation;€orÌÌà8 à(7)à àThe€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminalÏcontempt.ÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b)(1990).€€In€considering€consecutive€sentences,Ïthe€trial€€court€must€insure€that€the€aggregate€sentence€imposed€is€the€leastÏsevere€measure€necessary€to€protect€the€public€from€a€defendantððs€futureÏcriminal€conduct€and€should€bear€some€relationship€to€a€defendantððs€potentialÏfor€rehabilitation.€€òòState€v.€Desireyóó,€909€S.W.2d€20,€33€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€made€no€findings€relevant€to€consecutiveÏsentencing€except€a€single€statement€that€consecutive€sentences€wereÏwarranted€because€of€the€extensive€involvement€of€both€Sean€Wilson€andÏKenneth€Quilter€in€the€five€burglaries.€€œWe›€have€examined€the€record€in€light€ofÏthe€statutory€criteria€and€conclude€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€not€justified€inÏeither€case.€€€Neither€defendant€has€an€extensive€criminal€record.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„115(2).€€€In€fact,€Sean€Wilson€has€none€at€all.€€Both€were€youngÏwhen€the€crimes€were€committed€and€neither€can€have€much€in€the€way€of€anÏemployment€history.€€Sean€Wilson€attended€junior€college€in€Florida€and€aÏnineteen„year€old€Kenneth€Quilter€was€unlikely€to€have€had€many€opportunitiesÍto€establish€a€solid€employment€record.€€We€cannot€conclude€that€eitherÏdefendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€has€derived€a€major€source€of€hisÏlivelihood€from€criminal€activities.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(1).€€NeitherÏwas€on€probation€or€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(6),€(7).€€Nothing€in€the€record€demonstrates€that€either€is€a€dangerousÏmentally€abnormal€person€or€a€dangerous€offender€who€had€no€hesitationÏabout€committing€crimes€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„115€(3),€(4).€€€In€fact,€testimony€in€the€record€indicates€that€theÏdefendants€attempted€to€minimize€the€dangers€associated€with€burglary€andÏtook€care€not€to€enter€homes€that€were€occupied.€€The€multiplicity€of€the€offensesÏunder€indictment€may€well€be€relevant€in€making€some€other€sentencingÏdetermination,€such€as€the€length€of€the€sentence€or€the€suitability€of€alternativeÏsentencing€options,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Zeoliaóó,€No.€03C01„9503„CR„00080€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€March€21,€1996),€but€the€œlegislature›€has€not€seen€fit€toÏinclude€this€factor€among€the€bases€for€ordering€consecutive€sentencing.ÌÌà àWe€conclude€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€not€required€to€protectÏsociety€from€these€defendants€and€that€concurrent€sentencing€satisfies€theÏinterests€of€justice.€€òòState€v.€Desireyóó,€909€S.W.2d€20,€33€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1995).€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓF.€€Alternative€Sentencing€(Quilter)€à àó óÌà àÌÓ  Óà àNeither€the€state€nor€the€defendant€has€challenged€the€trial€courtððsÏorder€that€Quilterððs€sentence€be€served€in€split€confinement.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„306€(1990);€however,€we€discern€certain€issues€that€must€beÏresolved€with€respect€to€the€split€confinement€aspect€of€Quilterððs€alternativeÏsentencing.ÌÌà àThe€difficulty€is€that€the€neither€the€transcript€of€the€sentencingÏhearing€nor€the€judgment€forms€themselves€are€clear€as€to€the€terms€of€the€splitÏconfinement.€€Moreover,€the€trial€judge€refused€to€give€the€defendant€credit€forÏthe€307€days€he€had€already€spent€in€jail.€€€The€transcript€reveals€that€the€trialÏjudge€ordered€that€Quilter€serve€ð ðone€year€in€the€county€jail€beginning€todayÏand€then€the€balance€would€be€on€community€corrections.ðð€€The€followingÏconversation€then€ensued:€€ÌÓÓà àGen.€Patterson:à8 àYour€Honor,Ïis€that€anÏeight€yearÏterm?ÌÌà àThe€Court:à àà8 àFor€a€total€ofÏ12€years€onÏCommunityÏCorrectionsÏor€probation.ÌÌà àMr.€Fickling:€à àà8 àYour€Honor,Ïis€Mr.€QuilterÏgiven€creditÏfor€timeÏserved?ÌÌà àThe€Court:€à àà8 àHow€muchÏtime€does€heÏhaveÏserved?ÌÌà àMr.€Fickling:à àà8 àHeððs€servedÏten€months,ÏYour€Honor?ÌÌà àThe€Court:à àà8 àWell,€I€thinkÏhe€shouldÏhaveÏbeginningÏone€yearÏfrom€today€isÏmy€ruling€ifÏthatððsÏjustifiable.ÌÌÓÓà àThe€judgment€forms€show€that€Quilter€was€sentenced€to€serve€ð ð4Ïyears€with€1€additional€year€to€serve€beginning€7„25„95"€in€the€TDOC.€€TheÏblock€before€ð ðProbationðð€has€been€checked€and€the€abbreviation€ð ðComm.€Corr.ððÍinserted€after€the€word€ð ðProbation.ðð€€The€forms,€which€are€dated€August€22,Ï1995,€state€that€the€probationary/community€corrections€period€is€to€last€12Ïyears€beginning€July€25,€1996.€€Under€pre„trial€jail€credit,€the€forms€give€theÏdefendant€credit€for€the€twenty„four€days€between€July€25,€1995€and€August€21,Ï1995.€€The€forms€are€inaccurate€and€confusing.ÌÌà àThe€first€problem€that€is€apparent€in€Quilterððs€sentence€is€the€lackÏof€credit€for€pre„trial€jail€time.€€Tennessee€law€requires€that€a€convictedÏdefendant€receive€credit€on€his€sentence€for€time€spent€in€jail,€workhouse€orÏpenitentiary€prior€to€any€conviction€arising€out€of€the€original€offense€for€whichÏthe€defendant€was€tried.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„201(b)(Supp.€1996);€òòStubbsÏv.€Stateóó,€216€Tenn.€567,€393€S.W.2d€150,€154€(Tenn.€1965);€òòState€v.€EdwardÏFrank€Henryóó,€No.€01CO1„9604„CC„00176,€slip€op.€at€2€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏNashville,€Feb.€20,€1997);€€òòState€v.€Recardo€McClellanóó,€No.€œ02CO1„9208„CC„00190,›€slip€op.€at€3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Feb.€24,€1993).€€The€purpose€ofÏthe€requirement€to€provide€jail€time€credit€is€to€eliminate€the€unjust€disparity€thatÏwould€be€created€ð ðbetween€the€person€of€means€who€could€make€bond€and€theÏperson€who€could€not€and€was€forced€to€languish€in€jail.ðð€€òòState€v.€Abernathyóó,Ï649€S.W.2d€285,€286€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€The€trial€court€erred€inÍsentencing€Quilter€to€serve€a€year€of€incarceration€without€allowing€credit€for€theÏten€months€that€he€had€already€spent€in€confinement.€ÌÌà àThe€question€of€jail„time€credit€is€interwoven€with€the€trial€courtððsÏattempt€to€structure€the€split€confinement,€the€second€alternative€sentencingÏproblem€apparent€in€the€case.€€This€interweaving€happens€because€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€section€40„35„306(a),€the€statute€that€authorizes€splitÏconfinement,€contains€a€limitation€on€the€amount€of€confinement€that€can€beÏordered.€€It€provides:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ¸ ÒÒ ¸ ÒÓÓA€defendant€receiving€probation€may€beÏrequired€to€serve€a€portion€of€the€sentence€inÏcontinuous€confinement€for€up€to€one€(1)€yearÏin€the€local€jail€or€workhouse,€with€probationÏfor€a€period€of€time€up€to€and€including€theÏstatutory€maximum€time€for€the€class€of€theÏconviction€offense.ÌÒ  ÒÒ ¸ ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„306(a)€(1990).€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(c)€(Supp.€1996).€€The€trial€court€expressed€his€intention€to€confine€QuilterÏfor€a€year€from€July€25,€1995,€while€at€the€same€time€disallowing€credit€for€307Ïdays€already€served.€€Since€the€trial€court€was€compelled€to€award€307€daysÏcredit,€the€trial€court€effectively€established€a€confinement€period€ofÏapproximately€twenty„two€months€òòas€a€part€of€a€split€confinement€planóó.€€UnderÍsection€40„35„306(a)€the€portion€of€ð ðthe€sentenceðð€to€be€served€in€splitÏconfinement€may€not€exceed€one€year.€€Perhaps€the€trial€court€intended,€byÏestablishing€two€four„year€sentences€to€run€consecutively,€to€utilize€twoÏð ðsentencesðð,€thereby€tacking€two€section€306(a)€confinement€periods€togetherÏfor€an€aggregate€maximum€confinement€of€two€years.€€We€can€discern€no€otherÏrationale€for€ordering€the€service€of€an€òòadditionalóó€year€while€using€the€splitÏconfinement€option.€€However,€we€do€not€have€to€determine€whether€the€phraseÏð ðthe€sentenceðð€in€section€306(a)€is€capable€of€such€a€construction€because€weÏhave€already€determined€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€not€supported€in€theÏrecord.€€The€result€is€that€Quilter€has€one€effective€sentence€of€four€years,€and€ifÏsplit€confinement€is€to€be€used,€not€only€is€one€year€the€maximum€amount€ofÏconfinement€allowable,€but€the€pre„sentence€jail€time€must€be€allowed€as€aÏcredit.ÌÌà àBased€upon€the€record€in€this€case,€we€hold€the€alternativeÏsentencing€option€of€split€confinement€is€appropriate€and€that€the€maximumÏconfinement€period€of€one€year€should€be€ordered,€subject€to€the€credit€for€307Ïdays€previously€served.ÌÌà àThe€third€difficulty€with€Quilterððs€alternative€sentence€arises€out€ofÏthe€somewhat€murky€relationship€between€probation€and€the€communityÏcorrections€program.€€At€the€hearing,€the€trial€judge€sentenced€Quilter€to€serveÏð ða€total€of€12€years€on€€community€corrections€or€probation.ðð€€Probation€andÏcommunity€corrections€are€two€separate€and€distinct€sentencing€possibilities.€ÏòòState€v.€Michael€Richmondóó,€No.€02C01„9410„CR„00217,€slip€op.€at€4€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Jackson,€Sept.€13,€1995).€€However,€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏsection€40„36„106(f)€provides€that€ð ðnothing€herein€shall€prevent€a€court€fromÏpermitting€an€eligible€defendant€to€participate€in€a€community„based€alternativeÏto€incarceration€as€a€condition€of€probation€in€conjunction€with€a€suspendedÏsentence,€split€confinement€or€periodic€confinement€as€provided€in€Chapter€35Ïof€this€title.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„36„106(f)€(1996€Supp.);€òòState€v.€DavidÏEdward€Tiffin,€Jr.óó,€No.€01CO1„9308„CR„00254,€slip€op.€at€6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏNashville,€May€5,€1994).€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„36„302(b)(1990).€€WeÏread€the€ambiguous€language€on€the€judgment€forms€to€mean€that€theÏdefendant€was€to€be€released€on€probation€with€placement€for€twelve€years€inÏthe€community€corrections€program€as€a€condition€of€that€probation.€€ÌÌà àOur€law€provides€that€in€a€sentence€involving€split€confinement,Ïthe€defendant€may€be€required€to€serve€a€probationary€period€up€to€andÍincluding€the€statutory€maximum€time€for€the€class€of€the€conviction€offense.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„306(a)(1990).€€Aggravated€burglary€is€a€Class€CÏfelony€with€a€statutory€maximum€of€fifteen€years.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„111(c)€(1990).€However,€the€community€corrections€statute€states€that€inÏsentencing€an€eligible€defendant€to€a€community„based€alternative,€ð ðthe€courtÏshall€possess€the€power€to€set€the€duration€of€the€sentence€within€theÏòòappropriate€sentence€rangeóó.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„36„106(e)(2)€(Supp.Ï1996)€(emphasis€added).€€As€a€Range€I€offender,€Quilterððs€appropriateÏsentencing€range€for€a€Class€C€felony€is€three€to€six€years.€€Therefore,€althoughÏtwelve€years€would€be€a€legal€sentence€for€the€probationary€period,€theÏcommunity€corrections€portion€cannot€exceed€six€years.€€€€ÌÌà àBased€on€our€€Ô% €+ Ôòòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€evidence€at€sentencing,€theÏpresentence€report,€the€sentencing€principles,€the€nature€and€characteristics€ofÏthe€offense,€the€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€and€the€defendantððsÏamenability€to€rehabilitation,€we€conclude€that€a€probationary€period€of€four€Ïyears,€commencing€on€date€confinement€should€have€ended,€shall€be€servedÏwithin€the€Community€Corrections€program.€Quilter€is€not€an€offender€with€aÏlong€history€of€criminal€conduct€from€whom€the€public€must€be€protected.€€He€isÏa€young€man€who€needs€adequate€supervision€to€ensure€that€he€refrains€fromÍthe€illegal€use€of€drugs€and€that€he€acquires€education€and€job€skills€trainingÏthat€will€enable€him€to€live€a€productive€life.€€The€trial€judge€shall€prepare€newÏjudgment€forms€indicating€that€the€four„€year€probationary€period€commencingÏon€the€date€Quilter€should€have€been€released€from€confinement€according€toÏthe€provisions€of€this€opinion.€ÌÌà@ àò òG.€òòà@ àóóConclusionó óÌÌà àWe€summarize€our€conclusions€as€follows:Ìà àòòMichael€Wilsonóó:€His€convictions€and€sentence€are€affirmed€asÏimposed€by€the€trial€court€except€for€the€order€to€pay€restitution€which€isÏreversed.€€ÌÌà àòòSean€Wilsonóó:€His€three„year€sentence€for€theft€is€affirmed.€€HisÏfive„year€sentences€for€aggravated€burglary€are€affirmed€and€the€three„yearÏsentence€for€conspiracy€is€affirmed.€€All€sentences€will€be€served€concurrently.€ÏThe€trial€courtððs€order€that€he€pay€restitution€is€reversed.€€The€order€for€theÏpayment€of€fines€is€modified.€€ÌÌà àòòKenneth€Quilteróó:€Each€of€his€five€burglary€sentences€of€four€yearsÏis€affirmed.€€All€sentences€will€be€served€concurrently.€€The€trial€judgeððs€orderÏthat€his€sentence€be€served€on€split€confinement€is€affirmed.€€The€confinementÏportion€of€the€sentence€is€fixed€at€one€year,€subject€to€307€days€credit.€€TheÏdefendant€is€ordered€to€serve€four€years€of€probation€with€a€community„basedÏalternative€program€being€a€condition€of€probation.€€His€probationary€periodÏbegan€on€the€date€his€confinement€should€have€ended.€€The€trial€courtððs€orderÏthat€he€pay€restitution€is€reversed.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€will€prepare€new€judgment€forms€that€are€consistentÏwith€the€findings€in€this€opinion.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCURWOOD€WITT,€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JudgeÌÌÌ_________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€Judge