WPC(8 ,p"_A.s_CB.*$nCW,(!(Czu忝!G*k2ܤ'E¨SD6vycL g4*VԄy(נy|ltʯ&3⌜bm`mC,/f+xYPUzCxqVf8+wZKb5t÷gGyO V Agm{nv Og !(EoV: Tes9QN͒P("$"o5t@N?9VUP+1]R$&h$ ;ՃDIS8-sTuIŦIRUP3WړW 4C]01(Q$A9*& E&QF1.G7I=4VRuRi}.;% F7| %F w@L 0 U :h 4   ~ 0  0D] U:A#{#U:4&n&U:D)~)U:g--U:;0u0U:x33U:44 B5U:5555555555 D3 6 6 6 0D?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6 AO666 0D7 D/7 B 8X DU eDUӀ(`$TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7GXXdXXd7  ,cAZ"Arial RegularuM%J33|x XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   2    Theappellantlateradmittedandindependentpoliceinvestigationconfirmedthe  similaritiesbetweentheappellantsinitialdescriptionofananonymousperpetratorandMarkHenley.((35$ `!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7XXdd7    `   0  (#$  0   XX  5@T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7XXdd7 @  `   1    Theappellantwasthe cleanuppersonattheHardeeslocation.Theproofwas  undisputedthathewouldbetheonlypersonintherestaurantfromclosingtimeat10:00p.m.untilhefinishedcleaningthefacility. XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   4    TheappellantsassertionthattheproofwasuncontrovertedastoMarkHenleys  participationastheprincipalactorinthetheftisnotsupported,beyondareasonabledoubt,bytherecord.TherecordcontainsnoproofotherthantheappellantsstatementsandtestimonytoindicatethatMarkHenleywasaparticipantinthecrime.Thus,weconcludethatitwasnotnecessaryfortheStatetorelysolelyuponatheoryofcriminalresponsibilityinordertoobtainaconviction. XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   5    Wenote,however,thattrialcounselexpresslyaskedthecourttoimposeatwoyear  sentenceonsupervisedprobation.Thecourtimposedsuchasentence. XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   6    Becausetheappellantfailedtomakeadefiniterequestforjudicialdiversion,wefindno  merittohisclaimthathiscaseshouldberemandedforresentencingduetothetrialcourtsfailuretoexpresslystateitsreasonsfordenyingjudicialdiversion. XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   3    Theappellanthasfailedtoincludeatranscriptofthejuryinstructionsgiveninthepresent  case.Assuch,weassumethatthetrialcourtproperlyinstructedthejuryonthetheoryofcriminalresponsibility. XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   1    Theappellantwasthe cleanuppersonattheHardeeslocation.Theproofwas  undisputedthathewouldbetheonlypersonintherestaurantfromclosingtimeat10:00p.m.untilhefinishedcleaningthefacility.,cAZ"Arial Regular XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   2    Theappellantlateradmittedandindependentpoliceinvestigationconfirmedthe  similaritiesbetweentheappellantsinitialdescriptionofananonymousperpetratorandMarkHenley.,cAZ"Arial Regular XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   3    Theappellanthasfailedtoincludeatranscriptofthejuryinstructionsgiveninthepresent  case.Assuch,weassumethatthetrialcourtproperlyinstructedthejuryonthetheoryofcriminalresponsibility.,cAZ"Arial Regular XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   4    TheappellantsassertionthattheproofwasuncontrovertedastoMarkHenleys  participationastheprincipalactorinthetheftisnotsupported,beyondareasonabledoubt,bytherecord.TherecordcontainsnoproofotherthantheappellantsstatementsandtestimonytoindicatethatMarkHenleywasaparticipantinthecrime.Thus,weconcludethatitwasnotnecessaryfortheStatetorelysolelyuponatheoryofcriminalresponsibilityinordertoobtainaconviction.,cAZ"Arial Regular XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   5    Wenote,however,thattrialcounselexpresslyaskedthecourttoimposeatwoyear  sentenceonsupervisedprobation.Thecourtimposedsuchasentence.,cAZ"Arial Regular XX  T@R[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T `   6    Becausetheappellantfailedtomakeadefiniterequestforjudicialdiversion,wefindno  merittohisclaimthathiscaseshouldberemandedforresentencingduetothetrialcourtsfailuretoexpresslystateitsreasonsfordenyingjudicialdiversion.,cAZ"Arial Regular XXXXEXX   Ad FILEDXXE  June10,1999CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular  XXXX EX X   Ad FILED XX E  June9,1999CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM  d,cAZ"Arial Regular'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd `!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7XXdd7     r*<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxP  rr*<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxP  r@. . INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@(ATNASHVILLE@&MAYSESSION,1999STATEOFTENNESSEE, h   ) | t  `     h   )  No.01C019805CR00224 h`  ` Appellee   h   ) TL   `     h   )  DAVIDSONCOUNTY @8  vs. `     h   ) ,$   `     h   )  Hon.SethNorman,Judge   DAVIDE.SMITH,JR., h   )    `     h   )  (TheftofPropertyover$1000)    ` Appellant   h   )    FortheAppellant:   h     FortheAppellee: zr  JeffreyA.DeVasher  h     PaulG.Summers  F> Asst.PublicDefender h     AttorneyGeneralandReporter 2* 1202StahlmanBuilding h   Nashville,TN37201 h     MarvinE.Clements,Jr.    `     h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral  (#   (ONAPPEAL)   h     CriminalJusticeDivision   `     h     425FifthAvenueNorth KarlDean     h     2dFloor,CordellHullBuilding   PublicDefender   h     Nashville,TN372430493 x   (#  !  `  `     h     VictorS.(Torry)JohnsonIII  T#L  StephenG.Young    h     DistrictAttorneyGeneral @$8   JosephE.Clifton    h      p      x   (#  ,%$! Asst.PublicDefenders h     PamelaAnderson  &" 1202StahlmanBuildingAsst.DistrictAttorneyGeneralNashville,TN37201 h     WashingtonSq.,Suite500 ' $  `     h     2222ndAvenueNorth(ATTRIAL)    h     Nashville,TN37201 )"& OPINIONFILED:򀀀 N-F&* AFFIRMED DavidG.Hayes  2+0 Judge  3,1 @+ OPINION    ` Theappellant,DavidE.Smith,Jr.,appealstheverdictofaDavidsonCounty   juryfindinghimguiltyofonecountoftheftofpropertyover$1,000,aclassDfelony.Forthisoffense,theappellantreceivedatwoyearsuspendedsentence.Onappeal,theappellantchallengesthesufficiencyoftheconvictingevidenceandcontendsthatthetrialcourterredbydenyinghisrequestforjudicialdiversion. ` Findingnoerrorsoflawrequiringreversal,weaffirm.@ff) Background    ` DuringtheearlymorninghoursofSeptember16,1996,MetroPoliceOfficerMichaelEvarespondedtoareportedrobberyattheHardeesRestaurantlocatedat5775OldHickoryBoulevard,Nashville.Uponhisarrival,hewasmetatthedoorbyemployeeDavidE.Smith,theappellantinthiscase.   #  1      ׀Theappellantreportedthat " hehadbeenrobbed. ` WhenquestionedbyOfficerEva,theappellantrelatedthattheperpetratorforcedhiswaythroughasidedooronthesouthsideofthebuilding.Hestatedthattheperpetratororderedhimtogetunderneathadeskinthemanagersoffice.Theappellantremainedbeneaththedeskwhiletheperpetratoropenedthecombinationsafeandtookonedepositbag.Additionally,hedescribedtheperpetratorasawhitemale,wearinggloves,ablackskimask,shorts,andaredandbluelightweightjacket.WhenOfficerEvainspectedtheallegeddoorofentry,heobservedthatthedoorwasstilllockedandhedetectednosignsofforcibleentry.Additionally,OfficerEvadidnotobserveanyindicationthatthesafehadbeenforciblyentered.Because 5.4 thesafewasclosed,OfficerEvacontactedWandaKeith,thestoremanager,requestingthatshecometothestoretoopenthesafe.Theproofestablishedthatonlyastoremanagerhadknowledgeofthesafescombination.Whenthesafewasopened,itwasdeterminedthatonedepositbagwasstolencontaining$2526.Moreover,OfficerEvadiscoveredthat thereweretwootherdepositbagsinthesafethat[werent]taken...,containingapproximately$1200.Theappellantreportedthattheincidentoccurredatapproximately1:10a.m.Theincidentwasnotreportedtolawenforcementauthoritiesuntil1:50a.m.,afortyminutelapsefromthereportedtimeofoccurrence.Inanattempttoexplainthetimelapse,theappellanttoldOfficerEvathat hedidntknowwhattodo.OfficerEvatheninstructeddispatchtoreleaseinformationregardingtherobberyandthedescriptionoftheallegedperpetratortoallpatrolcarsinthearea. ` Duetovariousinconsistenciesbetweentheappellantsstatementsandthecontradictoryphysicalevidenceatthescene,hebecameasuspectintheinvestigation.AfterOfficerEvainformedtheappellantofhisrights,theappellantresponded, Okay.Now,Imgoingtotellyouthetruth.Theappellantabandonedhisoriginalversionofeventsandrelatedthat,approximatelyfourdayspriortotheincident,MarkHenley,arecentlyfiredmanageratHardees,contactedhim tohelphimstealsomemoneyfromthebusiness.Theappellantreportedthat,despitehisunwillingnesstocooperatewithHenley,Henleycontinuedtocontacttheappellantregardinghisplan.TheappellantstatedthatHenleycametoHardeesonthenightoftheincident.Henleybeatonthedooruntiltheappellant,outofhisfearofHenley,lethiminside.Henleythenwenttothesafe,openedit,andtookthedepositbag.  #  2      ׀ \0T). Notwithstandinghisprioraffirmationthathewasgoingto tellthetruth,heagainchangedhisstory.Hestatedthat hedidagreetoletMarkHenleyinthebusiness 5.4 totakethemoney,andthatMarkHenleytoldhimtocometohishousewhenhegotoffworktogethishalfofthemoney. ` AftertheappellantsimplicationofHenleyinthecrime,OfficerMarkWebbproceededtotheresidenceofHenley.AsearchofHenleyshomedidnotrevealthestolendepositbagfromHardees.Moreover,officersalsodeterminedthatHenleysvehiclewasnotinoperatingconditionandobservedthataheavydewhadformedonthecarindicatingthatithadnotbeenmovedrecently. ` Attrial,theappellantofferedasomewhatmodifiedversionofhispreviousstatementstothepolice.HeagainrelatedthatHenleyhadpesteredhimabout helping[Henley]robthestore.Onthenightofthetheft,HenleyappearedattherestaurantandtheappellanttestifiedthathepermittedHenleytoenteronlybecausehefearedHenleywouldsomehowharmhisfamily. ` ItisundisputedthattheappellantdidnothaveakeytotheHardeesbuildingandthathedidnotknowthecombinationtothesafe.ItisalsouncontestedthatMarkHenley,aformermanageratHardeesdidknowthecombinationtothesafe,althoughhedidnothaveakeytothebuilding.Thedepositbagcontainingapproximately$2526wasneverrecovered.̀ ` Baseduponthisevidence,thejuryfoundtheappellantguiltyoftheftofpropertyover$1000.@! I.SufficiencyofEvidence 3,2  `  ` Theappellantfirstcontendsthattheevidenceintroducedagainsthimattrial 706 isinsufficientasamatteroflawtosupportaconvictionfortheftofpropertyover p9h28 $1000.Theappellantsargumentistwofold:(1) theStatesevidenceisentirelycircumstantialanddoesnotexcludeeveryreasonablehypothesisexceptthatofhisguilt;and(2) theevidencedoesnotprovebeyondareasonabledoubtthathewascriminallyresponsiblefortheconductofMarkHenley,thepersonwho,accordingtotheuncontrovertedproofinthiscase,tookthemoneyfromthesafeattherestaurant.   #  3          ` Initially,adefendantiscloakedwiththepresumptionofinnocence.Statev.   Tuggle,639S.W.2d913,914(Tenn.1982).However,ajuryconvictionremovesthis tl presumptionofinnocenceandreplacesitwithoneofguilt,sothatonappealaconvicteddefendanthastheburdenofdemonstratingthattheevidenceisinsufficient.Id.Indeterminingthesufficiencyoftheevidence,thiscourtdoesnot  reweighorreevaluatetheevidence.Statev.Cabbage,571S.W.2d832,835  (Tenn.1978).Onappeal,theStateisentitledtothestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidenceandalllegitimateorreasonableinferenceswhichmaybedrawntherefrom.Statev.Harris,839S.W.2d54,75(Tenn.1992).Itistheappellatecourt'sdutyto " affirmtheconvictioniftheevidenceviewedunderthesestandardswassufficientforanyrationaltrieroffacttohavefoundtheessentialelementsoftheoffensebeyondareasonabledoubt.Jacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,317,99S.Ct.2781,2789 l'd $ (1979);Statev.Cazes,875S.W.2d253,259(Tenn.1994);Tenn.R.App.P.13(e). 8)0"& Thisruleisapplicabletofindingsofguiltpredicatedupondirectevidence,circumstantialevidence,oracombinationofbothdirectandcircumstantialevidence.Statev.Matthews,805S.W.2d776,779(Tenn.Crim.App.1990). .',  ` Circumstantialevidencealonemaybesufficienttosupportaconviction.See 42,+0 Statev.Buttrey,756S.W.2d718,821(Tenn.Crim.App.1988);Statev.Cooper,736 4,2 S.W.2d125,129(Tenn.Crim.App.1987);Statev.Gilliam,No. 4,2 01C01-9603- 5.4 CC-00105(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,May7,1997)(forpublication).However,ifaconvictionisbasedpurelyoncircumstantialevidence,thefactsandcircumstancesmustbesooverwhelmingastoexcludeanyotherexplanationexceptforthedefendant'sguilt.Statev.Tharpe,726S.W.2d896,900(Tenn.1987);Cooper,736 l d S.W.2dat129.Inaddition,"itmustestablishsuchacertaintyofguiltoftheaccusedastoconvincethemindbeyondareasonabledoubtthatthe[appellant]istheonewhocommittedthecrime."Tharpe,726S.W.2dat896.Whenreviewing   thesufficiencyofcircumstantialevidence,thiscourtmustrememberthatthejurydecidestheweighttobegiventocircumstantialevidenceandthat"[t]heinferencestobedrawnfromsuchevidence,andtheextenttowhichthecircumstancesareconsistentwithguiltandinconsistentwithinnocencearequestionsprimarilyforthejury."Gilliam,No.01C01-9603-CC-00105(citationsomitted).   ` Inordertoobtainaconvictionfortheftofpropertyover$1000,theStatemustshow,beyondareasonabledoubt,that"aperson...,withintenttodeprivetheownerofproperty,...knowinglyobtainsorexercisescontroloverthepropertywithouttheowner'seffectiveconsent."Tenn.CodeAnn.39-14-103(1991);Tenn.CodeAnn.3914105(3)(1991).Additionally,Tenn.CodeAnn.3911401(a)(1991)providesthat: Apersoniscriminallyresponsibleasapartytoanoffenseiftheoffenseiscommittedbythepersonsownconduct,bytheconductofanotherforwhichthepersoniscriminallyresponsible,orbyboth. Apersoniscriminallyresponsibleforanoffensecommittedbytheconductofanotherif:(2)Actingwithintenttopromoteorassistthecommissionoftheoffense,ortobenefitintheproceedsorresultsoftheoffense,thepersonsolicits,directs,aids,orattemptstoaidanotherpersontocommittheoffense.Tenn.CodeAnn.3911402(2)(1991).Inotherwords,thejurymustfindthattheappellantsomehowassociatedhimselfwiththecommissionofthecrime,actedwithknowledgethatanoffensewasbeingcommitted,andsharedinthecriminalintentoftheprincipal.SeeStatev.Maxey, 706 898S.W.2d756,757(Tenn.Crim.App.1994). X9P28 Ї ` TheStatesproofdemonstratedthattheappellantwasthesoleoccupantintheHardeesrestaurantatthetimeofthetheft.Theproofwasundisputedthat,duringtheappellantsshift,nootherpersoncouldenterthebuildingexceptthroughtheuseofakey,byforce,orwiththeappellantsassistance.Theappellantreportedthetheftfortyminutesafteritsoccurrence.Whenpoliceofficersarrived,theydiscoverednosignsofforcibleentryintotherestaurant.Afterchanginghisstoryseveraltimes,theappellantfinallyadmittedthatheletMarkHenleyintotherestaurantandthatheknewthatMarkHenleyplannedtoopenthesafeandtakeonedepositbag.HestatedthathewasinstructedtogotoHenleysresidenceafterthethefttoobtainhishalfofthemoney.Fromthesefactsandcircumstances,ajurycouldhaverationallyinferredtheguiltoftheappellant.SeeStatev.Crawford,470  S.W.2d610,613(Tenn.1971).Accordingly,weconcludethat,whenviewedinthelightmostfavorabletotheState,theevidencepresentedattrialwassufficienttosupportthefindingsbythetrieroffactthattheappellantcommittedtheoffenseoftheftofpropertyundereitheradirectliabilityorcriminalresponsibilitytheory.   #  4      ׀Tenn. 0 ( R.App.P.13(e).Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  ! @#II.JudicialDiversion  x'p $  ` Theappellantcontendsthatthetrialcourterredbydenyinghisrequestforjudicialdiversion.Initially,wenotethattheappellantneverformallyrequestedthatthetrialcourtconsiderorgrantjudicialdiversion.Indeed,therecordisabsentanymentionofjudicialdiversionexceptforonestatementintheappellantsclosing argumentatthesentencinghearingwhereindefensecounselstated, Andheis L2D+0 eligiblefor4035313,expungeablesupervisedprobation.   #  5      ׀Thispassingcomment   canhardlybeconsideredanadequaterequesttoproperlybringtheissueofjudicialdiversionbeforethetrialcourt.    #  6      ׀See,e.g.,Statev.Starks,No.02C019704CR   00133(Tenn.Crim.App.atJackson,Jun.11,1998),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn. l d Dec.28,1998);Statev.Tidwell,No.01C019610CR00445(Tenn.Crim.App.at 80 Nashville,Mar.4,1998),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.Nov.9,1998).   Notwithstanding,weproceedtoaddresstheissueonitsmerits. ` Thedecisionofwhethertoplaceanappellantonjudicialdiversioniswithinthesounddiscretionofthetrialcourt.SeeStatev.Harris,953S.W.2d701,705 4, (Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Thus,uponreviewbyanappellatecourt,if anysubstantialevidence[existsintherecord]tosupporttherefusal,thedecisionofthetrialcourtwillbeupheld.SeeStatev.Hammersley,650S.W.2d352,356(Tenn.  1983). ` Inmakingthedeterminationofwhethertograntjudicialdiversion,thetrialcourtmustconsiderthefollowingfactors:8 ` (a)theaccusedsamenabilitytocorrection,(b)thecircumstancesoftheoffense,(c)theaccusedscriminalrecord,(d)theaccusedssocialhistory,(e)thestatusoftheaccusedsphysicalandmentalhealth,and(f)thedeterrencevaluetotheaccusedaswellasothers.Thetrialcourtshouldalsoconsiderwhetherjudicialdiversionwillservetheendsofjusticetheinterestsofthepublicaswellastheaccused. ` !` ! Statev.Lewis,978S.W.2d558,566(Tenn.Crim.App.1997),perm.toappeal +$) denied,(Tenn.1998)(citingStatev.Bonestel,871S.W.2d163,168(Tenn.Crim. -&+ App.1993)(citationomitted)).Additionalfactorswhichmaybeconsideredincludetheappellantsattitude,hisbehaviorsincehisarrest,hishomeenvironment,currentdrugusage,emotionalstability,pastemployment,generalreputation,family 3,1 responsibilities,andtheattitudeoflawenforcement.Id,(citingStatev.Washington,  866S.W.2d950,951(Tenn.1993)). `  ` Therecordinthepresentcaserevealsthattheappellanthasmaintainedconsistentemployment,hasexhibitedgoodbehaviorsincehisarrest,isemotionallystable,doesnotabuseeitheralcoholorillegaldrugs,andcontributestothesupportofhisfianceeandchild.Notwithstandingthesefactorsfavoringjudicialdiversion,thecircumstancesoftheoffenseitselfsupportadenialofjudicialdiversion,i.e.,the   appellantscrimewascommittedagainsthisemployer,herepeatedlymisledlawenforcementofficersinhisinitialreportoftheincident,andthestolenmoneywasneverrecovered.Theappellantsactionsindicateaviolationofapositionoftrust,asustainedintenttoviolatethelaw,andlackofcandorwithauthorities.Accordingly,weconcludethatthetrialcourtdidnotabuseitsdiscretioninrefusingtogranttheappellantjudicialdiversion.Thisissueiswithoutmerit. ` Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed. `     h   ____________________________________ `     h   DAVIDG.HAYES,JudgeCONCUR:______________________________}JERRYL.SMITH,}~}J}~Judge______________________________NORMAMCGEEOGLE,Judge `  `