ÿWPCŸ …# VU>a %Ÿ 0í¥UB’ 4Ô è n­÷ U:¤ Þ w@æ 0J& 0Tp 0^Ä 0h" 0rŠ 0|ü 0†x 0þ 1uŽ 0dU6gU.U*ËB)õDC Ba AM~kËv~6vÓ´ D3‡ 0@º AOúÆI 0D D/S B‚˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ<èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX(ÅÕÐ$¡¡Ñ  ÑÑ7€'CXXdÈXXdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓ<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiƒ‰"3|x «<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular ÷øDùúDûDüýDþÿÓ€2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Courier< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ aÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÝ  ÝÔ€"ÔÔ€"ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€"XÔÌÌò òApril€17,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€"ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÑ#€!!Xd#ÑÑ#€!!Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÓ` °˜XÓÝ  Ý›Ñ  ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€"ÔÑ7€ ü• XXdæXXdÈ7ќـ€ÙßR€&'$A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌ€à8 àà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEà@ à€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€NOVEMBER€1996€SESSIONÌÌÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)à àÌ€à àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellee,€à àà à)à àNo.€03C01„9607„CR„00268Ìà à€€€€€à àà à€€à à)Ìà àà àà àà à)à à€Hamilton€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà à)à à€Hon.€Douglas€A.€Meyer,€Judge€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà à)ÌLARRY€GENE€ROGERS,à à€€€à à)à à€œ(Sentencing)›Ìà àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€€Ìà àAppellant.à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌWilliam€C.€Killianà àà àà àà àœJohn€Knox€Walkup›ÌNumber€One€Oak€Avenueà àà àà àAttorney€General€of€TennesseeÌJasper,€TN€37347à àà àà àà àà àandà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àMichael€J.€Fahey,€IIÌà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€General€of€TennesseeÏà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€Parkwayà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€H.€Cox,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àandÌà àà àà àà àà àDavid€W.€DenneyÌà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà à600€Market€Street,€Suite€310Ìà àà àà àà àà àCity„County€Bldg.Ìà àà àà àà àà àChattanooga,€TN€37402ÌÌÌÌÌœÌÌÌOPINION›€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌœAFFIRMED›ÌÌJoseph€M.€TiptonÌJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€defendant,€Larry€Gene€Rogers,€was€convicted€upon€his€guilty€pleasÏin€the€Hamilton€County€Criminal€Court€of€one€count€of€theft€of€property€valued€over€tenÏthousand€dollars,€a€Class€C€felony,€and€two€counts€of€theft€of€property€valued€over€oneÏthousand€dollars,€a€Class€D€felony.€€Pursuant€to€a€plea€bargain,€he€received€œthreeÏthree›„year€sentences€with€the€Class€D€felonies€to€be€served€concurrently,€butÏconsecutively€to€the€Class€C€felony.€€The€trial€court€ordered€that€the€defendant€serveÏeleven€months,€œtwenty„nine›€days€in€confinement,€œthen›€be€placed€on€unsupervisedÏprobation€for€the€remainder€of€the€œsix„year›€effective€sentence.€€The€defendant€appealsÍas€of€right€regarding€his€confinement,€contending€that€the€trial€court€erred€(1)€inÏconsidering€a€statutory€enhancement€factor€relative€to€the€issue€of€confinement,€òòseeóóÏT.C.A.€ðð€œ40„35„114(1),›€(2)€in€not€affording€the€defendant€the€statutory€presumption€inÏfavor€of€alternative€sentencing,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„102(6),€and€(3)€in€concluding€thatÏthe€confinement€was€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offenses.€ÏòòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).€€We€affirm€the€trial€court.€€ÌÌà àAlthough€the€guilty€plea€hearing€transcript€is€not€before€us,€we€determineÏthe€following€facts€from€the€record€on€appeal.€€The€defendant€helped€in€the€theft€of€carsÏby€driving€an€accomplice€to€the€car€to€be€stolen,€then€following€him€to€a€chop€shop.€€AtÏthe€shop,€the€defendant€was€œvideotaped›€for€two€of€the€cars€and€his€conversations€wereÏtaped.€€The€defendant€testified€that€he€was€paid€one€hundred€dollars€per€car.€€TheÏthree€thefts€for€which€he€pled€guilty€occurred€on€January€28,€February€17,€andÏSeptember€16,€1993.€€However,€the€defense€acknowledged€that€he€was€involved€inÏseven€car€thefts€in€this€manner.ÌÌà àAlso,€the€record€reflects€that€in€September€œ1993,›€the€defendantÏaccompanied€an€accomplice€to€Washington,€œD.C.,›€where€the€accomplice€burglarized€aÏdrug€store,€stealing€drugs€and€cash.€€On€the€return€trip,€they€stole€a€car€in€MarylandÏand€abandoned€it€in€Knoxville.€€œUltimately,›€the€defendant€was€charged€with€drugÏconspiracy€and€pled€guilty€in€federal€district€court€in€Knoxville€to€one€count€of€feloniousÍpossession€of€pharmaceutical€drugs.€€The€court€placed€him€on€supervised€probationÏfor€five€years.€€ÌÌà àThe€presentence€report,€the€federal€probation€report€and€the€testimony€atÏthe€sentencing€hearing€reflect€that€the€defendant€is€a€thirty„one„year€old€high€schoolÏœdropout›€working€at€a€coal€company€in€Grundy€County.€€He€is€a€divorced,€noncustodialÏfather€of€one€daughter€whom€he€is€supporting.€€He€is€living€with€his€mother,€who€heÏsays€is€a€stroke€victim,€and€he€testified€that€he€helped€her€with€moral€support,€payingÏsome€bills,€and€some€transportation.€€He€denied€having€a€drug€or€alcohol€abuseÏproblem.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€stated€that€it€was€considering€the€defendantððs€criminalÏhistory€in€determining€the€manner€of€service€of€the€sentences,€including€an€alternativeÏform€of€punishment€rather€than€confinement.€€It€determined€that€the€defendant€was€notÏa€serious€threat€to€society€at€that€time€and€that€he€had€probably€learned€his€lesson.€ÏHowever,€the€trial€court€ordered€confinement€for€eleven€months,€œtwenty„nine€days›Ïwithout€work€release€because€it€concluded€that€the€time€was€necessary€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offenses.€€Also,€the€trial€court€indicated€that€theÏfederal€district€œcourtððs›€grant€of€probation€occurred€without€knowledge€that€theÏdefendant€was€about€to€be€charged€relative€to€seven€automobile€thefts.€€ÌÌà àThe€review€of€the€defendantððs€sentencing€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€on€the€record€with€aÏpresumption€that€the€trial€courtððs€determinations€are€correct.€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€AsÏthe€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€to€this€section€note,€the€burden€is€now€on€theÏdefendant€to€show€that€the€sentencing€is€improper.€€However,€ð ðthe€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€which€accompanies€the€trial€courtððs€action€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.2d€166,Ï169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€conducting€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review,€we€must€consider€(1)€the€evidence,Ïif€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencing€hearing,€(2)€the€presentence€report,€(3)€theÏprinciples€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives,€(4)€the€natureÏand€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct,€(5)€any€mitigating€or€statutoryÏenhancements,€(6)€any€statement€that€the€defendant€made€on€his€behalf€and€(7)€theÏpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€T.C.A.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103€and€„210;€òòseeóó€òòÏAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€168€(Tenn.€1991);€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229€(Tenn.€1986).€€ÌÌà àThe€defendant€now€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€not€haveÏconsidered€the€statutory€enhancement€factor€regarding€his€criminal€history,€òòseeóó€T.C.A.Ïðð€40„35„114(1),€in€determining€whether€to€confine€him.€€However,€as€we€previouslyÏœindicated,›€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„210(b)€œprovides›€that€the€trial€court€must€consider€theÏapplicable€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€determining€the€specific€sentence,Ïincluding€sentencing€alternatives.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hayesóó,€894€S.W.2d€298,€300€(Tenn.ÍCrim.€App.€1994).€€The€trial€court€properly€considered€the€defendantððs€history€ofÏcriminal€conduct.€€ÌÌà àWe€next€consider€the€defendantððs€remaining€two€complaints€together€asÏthey€necessarily€relate€to€his€confinement.€€The€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€courtÏdid€not€give€him€the€benefit€of€the€presumption€of€alternative€sentencing€under€T.C.A.€ððÏ40„35„102(6)€and€that€it€relied€too€heavily€upon€a€concern€for€the€offensesððÏseriousness€in€confining€him€for€eleven€months,€œtwenty„nine€days.›€€We€note€that€theÏtrial€court€made€no€mention€of€the€presumption€for€alternative€sentencing€in€itsÏdeterminations.€€In€fact,€we€view€the€trial€courtððs€limited€findings€on€the€record€to€beÏless€than€œadequate€compliance›€with€the€1989€Sentencing€Actððs€requirements€forÏplacing€complete€findings€and€conclusions€on€the€record€for€appellate€reviewÏpurposes.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðððð€40„35„209(c),€„210(f);€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€599„600€(Tenn.€1994);€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.€€ÌÌà àHowever,€given€the€trial€courtððs€stated€reason€for€confinement€under€theÏrecord€actually€before€us,€including€the€trial€courtððs€general€references€to€relevantÏsentencing€provisions,€we€do€not€believe€that€the€trial€court€simply€ignored€theÏpresumption€of€alternative€sentencing.€€Rather,€the€record€reflects€that€the€trial€courtððsÏview€of€the€seriousness€of€the€defendantððs€offenses€outweighed€all€otherÏconsiderations.€€In€this€respect,€the€record€indicates€that€the€trial€courtððs€view€stemmedÍfrom€the€extent€of€the€defendantððs€criminal€conduct,€not€from€the€circumstances€of€anyÏgiven€crime.€€Although€the€facts€of€a€particular€offense€may€not€justify€confinementÏunder€T.C.A.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B)€in€the€face€of€the€presumption€for€alternativeÏsentencing,€the€fact€that€the€defendant€received€multiple€convictions€and€is€shown€toÏhave€committed€other€similar€offenses€can€reflect€sufficient€criminal€conduct€to€warrantÏa€conclusion€that€the€presumption€of€alternative€sentencing€is€overcome.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,ÏòòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1991).ÌÌ›à àFrom€our€perspective,€such€is€the€case€before€us.€€In€substance,€althoughÏthe€trial€court€did€not€provide€as€detailed€or€complete€a€record€of€findings€andÏconsiderations€as€is€contemplated€by€our€sentencing€laws,€we€believe€that€the€recordÏsupports€and€justifies€the€sentences€it€imposed.€€The€defendant€acted€in€concert€withÏan€automobile€theft€ring€over€a€proven€period€of€nine€months€with€the€termination€ofÏcriminal€activity€only€occurring€with€his€arrest€on€federal€drug€charges.€€Under€theseÏcircumstances,€we€cannot€quarrel€with€the€trial€courtððs€sentence€to€confinement€evenÏthough€the€defendant€exhibited€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€and€had€familyÏresponsibilities.€€ÌÌà àIn€consideration€of€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€theÏjudgments€of€conviction€entered€by€the€trial€court€are€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÌœÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________ÌPaul€G.€Summers,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ___________________________ÌJohn€K.€Byers,€Senior€JudgeÌà àà àà à›Ì