ÿWPCT …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0JH 0T’ 0^æ 0hD 0r¬ 0| 0†š 0 1u° 0d% U>‰ U6Ç B)ý DC& AMiU*¶ Bàîýv~ëvÓi D3< 0@o AO¯Æþ 0DÄ D/ B7˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ËEÌÍeÎr‚Ïr‚ÐUÑÒÓ€Þß»{s 3|xå2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d äÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌò òSeptember€30,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€$ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ Ð ÒÓ  ÓÑ ` Ñò òÔ€ ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œ›ÌÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌÌÙ€€Ùò òœßL€#&";+'h|Ýc` Å `€€Lß›AT€JACKSONÌÌJANUARY€SESSION,€1996ÌÌÌó óÌÌÓ  Óò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à€]à àC.C.A.Ï#02C01„9503„CC„00065Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]Ìà àó óAppellee,à àà àà àà àò ò€]Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]à àMADISON€CRIMINALÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à€]Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]à àHON.€FRANKLIN€MURCHISONÌWILLIAM€HERBERT€œSTITTS,à àà à€]€€€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€]Ìó óà àAppellant.à àà àà à€ò ò]€€€€€€(Aggravated€Robbery)ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAFFIRMEDó ó€›ÌÌÌò òÌó óÔ€ÔÌÌòòÔ€ ÔFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌGEORGE€MORTON€GOOGEà àà àà àà àCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ227€W.€Baltimore€St.ÌJackson,€TN€38301à àà àà àà àCHARLETTE€REED€CHAMBERSÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€Generalððs€OfficeÌPAMELA€DREWERYà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493Ì227€West€Baltimore€StreetÌJackson,€TN€38301à àà àà àà àDON€ALLENÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€AttorneyÏGeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€2825Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€38301ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€___________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌLYNN€W.€BROWN,€SPECIAL€œJUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÑ ` ÑÓÓÑ7€¦tXXdìXXdì7ÑÌÌò òÌà@ àOPINIONÌó óÌà àThe€appellant,€William€Herbert€Stitts,€was€convicted€uponÏtrial€by€jury€of€aggravated€robbery.€€The€trial€court€imposed€aÏsentence€of€eleven€years.€€In€this€appeal€of€right€the€appellantÏraises€two€issues:€1)€whether€the€proof€at€trial€was€sufficientÏto€support€a€verdict€of€guilty,€and€2)€whether€the€sentenceÍimposed€was€proper.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àò òI.€€Sufficiency€of€the€evidenceó óÌà àThe€evidence€at€trial€may€be€summarized€as€follows.€€OnÏDecember€24,€1992,€Sadonna€Hart€was€working€alone€as€cashier€atÏthe€Q„Mart€store€in€Jackson,€Tennessee.€€She€testified€that€atÏabout€2:00€a.m.€a€man€entered€the€store,€pulled€a€tire€tool€fromÏthe€back€of€his€coat,€and€told€Ms.€Hart€to€give€him€the€money.€ÏShe€replied€that€she€would€do€so.€€The€man€told€her€to€hurry€upÏand€held€the€tire€tool€as€if€he€were€going€to€hit€her.€€BadlyÏscared,€Ms.€Hart€opened€the€cash€register,€from€which€the€manÏtook€the€money.€€The€man€then€left€the€store.ÌÌà àMs.€Hart€picked€up€the€telephone€to€call€911,€but€before€sheÏcould€do€so€a€police€car€pulled€up.€€Ms.€Hart€motioned€for€theÏpolice€officer€to€follow€the€man€who€had€just€left€the€store.€€AsÏthe€police€car€traveled€toward€the€end€of€the€building,€Ms.€HartÏsaw€a€red€car€leave€quickly,€almost€hitting€the€police€car.ÌÌà àThe€lighting€in€the€store€was€bright,€and€the€man€got€quiteÍclose€to€Ms.€Hart.€€She€identified€the€appellant€in€aÏphotographic€line€up€on€the€same€day€as€the€offense.€€At€trialÏMs.€Hart€testified€most€positively€that€the€appellant€was€the€manÏwho€robbed€her.€€The€events€of€that€evening€were€recorded€by€twoÏvideo€cameras€in€the€store,€and€the€video€tape€was€shown€to€theÏjury.ÌÌà àOfficer€Mike€Landreth€of€the€Jackson€Police€DepartmentÏtestified€that€while€on€patrol€that€early€morning,€he€pulled€intoÏthe€parking€lot€of€the€Q„Mart€while€doing€a€routine€check€ofÏbusinesses.€€The€officer€saw€a€male€leaving€the€front€door€of€theÏQ„Mart.€€From€the€way€the€man€looked,€Officer€Landreth€thought€Ïthere€was€something€wrong.€€The€officer€observed€the€clerkÏwaiving€and€pointing,€then€saw€the€man€get€into€a€small€red€carÏand€leave€the€parking€lot€at€a€high€rate€of€speed.€€OfficerÏLandreth€pursued€the€red€vehicle,€traveling€in€excess€of€oneÏhundred€miles€per€hour.€€While€in€pursuit,€the€officer€learned€byÏradio€that€a€robbery€had€occurred€at€the€Q„Mart.€€The€driver€ofÏthe€red€car€evaded€Officer€Landreth€and€four€other€patrol€carsÏwhich€had€joined€pursuit€by€turning€off€the€road€and€travelingÍthrough€a€private€yard.€€After€a€lapse€of€no€more€than€fiveÏminutes€the€officers€found€the€vehicle,€which€was€by€thenÏunoccupied.€€The€officers€did€find€cash€of€various€denominationsÏstrewn€throughout€the€red€car.ÌÌà àFinally,€the€state€called€the€appellant's€mother€as€aÏwitness.€€She€testified€that€the€red€car€in€question€belonged€toÏher,€and€that€the€appellant€was€the€last€person€who€was€allowedÏto€use€the€car€before€she€went€to€the€police€station€where€herÏcar€was€impounded.€€She€had€lent€the€car€to€the€appellant€atÏabout€6:00€p.m.€the€evening€before€the€robbery.ÌÌà àThe€defense€proof€consisted€only€of€the€appellant'sÏtestimony.€€He€testified€that€he€did€not€participate€in€anyÏrobbery€of€the€Q„Mart;€that€in€fact€he€was€at€the€Regency€InnÏwith€a€female€friend€named€Diane€Maxwell€when€the€robbery€tookÏplace.€€Ms.€Maxwell€could€not€be€located€and€did€not€testify.€ÏHowever,€the€appellant€did€admit€to€having€his€mother's€red€carÏthe€night€of€the€robbery.€€He€explained€that€he€parked€theÏvehicle€outside€the€motel€room€at€7:30€p.m.€on€the€evening€beforeÍthe€robbery,€and€that€was€the€last€time€he€saw€the€car.€€TheÏpetitioner€admitted€to€having€been€convicted€in€the€State€ofÏGeorgia€of€both€felony€possession€of€cocaine€and€felony€theft€byÏdeception€of€$5,950.00.€€Although€the€appellant€testified€to€theÏjury€that€he€had€explained€to€an€investigator€that€he€was€at€theÏRegency€Inn€at€the€time€of€the€robbery,€the€investigatorÏtestified€in€rebuttal€that€the€appellant€made€no€such€statement.ÌÌà àWhen€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€theÏstandard€of€review€by€an€appellate€court€is€whether,€afterÏconsidering€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÏprosecution,€a€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€theÏessential€elements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ÏòòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€61€L.€Ed.€2dÏ560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.€1985);ÏTenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).ÌÌà àA€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€withÏwhich€a€defendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€oneÏof€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal€a€convicted€defendant€has€the€burdenÍof€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòState€v.ÏTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913€(Tenn.€1982).€€It€is€not€the€function€ofÏthis€court€to€reweigh€evidence€adduced€at€a€criminal€trial.€AÏguilty€verdict,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€theÏtestimony€of€the€state's€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€inÏtestimony€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.ÏHatchettóó,€560€S.W.2d€627,€630€(Tenn.€1978).€€On€appeal€the€stateÏis€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€andÏall€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawnÏtherefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€ÌÌà àà àAfter€reviewing€all€of€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÏfavorable€to€the€state,€we€find€that€the€jury€as€rational€findersÏof€fact€could€easily€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÏaggravated€robbery€to€have€been€proven€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€ÏThe€evidence€was€also€sufficient€for€the€jury€to€find€that€theÏappellant€was€in€fact€the€person€who€committed€this€offense.ÌÌà àò òII.€Sentencing.ó óÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range€or€the€mannerÍof€service€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court,€we€areÏrequired€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record€with€aÏpresumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€areÏcorrect.€T.C.A.€ðð40„35„401(d).€€ÌÌà àIn€conducting€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€the€court€mustÏconsider€the€following:€€Ìà à(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€theÏsentencing€hearing;€€Ìà à(2)€the€presentence€report;€€Ìà à(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€of€counsel€asÏto€sentencing€alternatives;€€Ìà à(4)€The€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€criminal€conductÏinvolved;€€Ì€à à(5)€Any€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancing€factors;€€Ì€à à(6)€Any€statement€made€by€the€defendant€on€his€own€behalf;Ïand€€Ìà à(7)€The€defendant's€potential€or€lack€of€potential€forÏrehabilitation€or€treatment.€€T.C.A.€ðððð40„35„102,€„103,€„210.€ÏòòState€v.€Thomasóó,€755€S.W.2d€838€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€òòState€v.ÍFosteróó,€755€S.W.2d€846€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€defendant€was€a€Range€I,Ïstandard€offender€as€defined€in€T.C.A.€ðð40„35„106.€€This€findingÏis€not€contested.€€The€resulting€range€of€punishment€forÏaggravated€robbery,€a€Class€B€felony€is€eight€to€twelve€years.€ÏT.C.A.€ðð40„35„112.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€followingÏenhancement€factors€were€applicable:€€Ì€à à(1)€the€appellant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminalÏconvictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€those€necessaryÏto€establish€the€appropriate€range;€€Ìà à(2)€the€appellant€has€a€previous€history€of€unwillingness€toÏcomply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€theÏcommunity;€and€Ì€à à(3)€The€felony€was€committed€while€on€release€into€theÏcommunity€under€the€direct€or€indirect€supervision€of€theÏdepartment€of€correction€or€local€governmental€authority.€Ì€Ìà àà àWe€have€considered€the€evidence€in€the€record€and€findÏthat€each€of€these€enhancement€factors€has€been€established.€€TheÍtrial€court€apparently€found€no€statutory€mitigatingÏcircumstances€to€exist,€although€this€was€not€explicitly€statedÏas€it€should€have€been.€€We€have€examined€the€record€and€find€noÏmitigating€factors€to€lessen€the€defendant's€sentence.ÌÌà àIf€the€trial€court€finds€enhancement€factors,€it€must€startÏat€the€minimum€sentence€in€the€range€and€enhance€the€sentenceÏbased€upon€any€applicable€enhancement€factors,€then€reduce€theÏsentence€based€upon€any€appropriate€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð40„35„210(e).€€Furthermore,€the€trial€court€has€theÏdiscretion€regarding€the€weight€to€be€given€each€factor€as€longÏas€the€record€supports€its€findings€and€the€trial€court€compliesÏwith€the€principles€of€the€sentencing€act.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€ò òÌó óÌà àThe€trial€court€gave€particular€weight€to€the€appellant'sÏprior€convictions€for€two€felonies€and€two€misdemeanors.€€We€haveÏfound€nothing€in€the€record€to€overcome€the€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€with€which€we€must€accord€the€trial€court'sÏdetermination.ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àLynn€W.€Brown,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌDavid€G.€Hayes,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJerry€L.€Smith,€JudgeÌ€à àà à›