ÿWPC» …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 H 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ U,- 0dY U,½ U>é U *'B)QDCz B½ AMÚ+'v~RvÓÐ D3£ 0@Ö AOÆe 0D+ D/o Bž˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- E  !Ó€÷}± 3|x,2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ !Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€"ÔÔ€"ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€"XÔÌÌò òMay€21,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€"ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€  X„d&ÓÑ#€  Xd#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑÔ€!ŠÔÔ€"ÔÑ\R AØ'\ћрÑÑ7€6,XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÓ` °ƒX/ ˜XÓIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OFÏTENNESSEEÌÙ€€ÙœßL€&'$;+'h|` Å `€€Lß›ÌAT€œKNOXVILLE›ÌÌœAPRIL›€SESSION,€œ1996›ÌÌÌÓ  ÓœSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,›à à)à àC.C.A.€NO.Ïœ03C01„9508„CR„00220›Ìà àà àà àà àà à)ó óÌà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àœBLOUNT›€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€œD.€KELLY€THOMAS,€JR.ó ó›Ìò òœCHARLES€JERRY€TALLEY,ó ó›à àò ò)à àJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à àœó ó(Denial€of€Probation€„€Misdemeanor)ò ò›Ìó óÌÌÓ  Óò òON€APPEAL€FROM€THE€JUDGMENT€OF€THEÌœCIRCUIT›€COURT€OF€œBLOUNT€COUNTY›ó óÌÌÌÓ  ÓòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌœKEVIN€W.€SHEPPHERD›à àà àœCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌ404€Ellis€Avenueà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌMaryville,€TN€37804Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCLINTON€J.€MORGANÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMIKE€FLYNNÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àEDWARD€P.€BAILEY,€JR.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àBlount€County€CourthouseÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMaryville,€TN€37804›ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌœAFFIRMED›ÌÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÇÓ  ÓÔ€"°Ôò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€"ŠÔÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àThe€Defendant,€Charles€Jerry€Talley,€brings€this€appeal€as€of€rightÏpursuant€to€Rule€3€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€œHe€was›Ïconvicted€upon€his€guilty€plea€to€three€misdemeanor€theft€charges.€€For€theseÏœconvictions,›€the€trial€court€sentenced€œhim€to›€three€concurrent€sentences€of€elevenÏmonths€and€twenty„nine€days€in€jail,€with€a€release€eligibility€date€of€thirtyÏpercent,€and€with€immediate€eligibility€for€work€release.€€œThe€Defendantððs€soleÏissue€on€appeal€is›€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€suspending€œhis›€sentence€andÏgranting€œhim›€probation.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€the€manner€of€serviceÏof€a€sentence,€this€court€has€a€duty€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€theÏsentence€with€a€presumption€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€areÏcorrect.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô€!ÔððÔ€"Ô€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditionedÏupon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€theÏsentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,Ï823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€ÌÌÓ ` °œXÓà àIn€conducting€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€court€must€consider:€Ï(a)€€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing;€(b)€theÏpresentence€report;€(c)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€toÏsentencing€alternatives;€(d)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conductÏinvolved;€(e)€any€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(f)€any€statementÏthat€the€defendant€made€on€his€own€behalf;€and€(g)€the€potential€or€lack€ofÏpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô€!Ôðððð€Ô€"Ô40„35„102,€„103,Ïand€„210;€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).Ó` °ƒX/ ˜XÓÌÌà àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencingÏprocedure,€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€andÏproper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principals€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,Ïand€that€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record,Ïthen€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€aÏdifferent€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€was€indicted€on€six€felony€charges€of€extortion€and€theft€inÏviolation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sections€39„14„103€and€39„14„112.€ÏThe€charges€stemmed€from€three€different€instances€in€which€the€Defendant,€aÏformer€bail€bondsman,€accepted€money€from€œpeople›€who€were€involved€inÍcriminal€proceedings€by€making€representations€that€he€might€be€able€to€assistÏthem€in€getting€œmore›€favorable€treatment€in€court.ÌÌà àAt€the€time€of€the€incidents,€the€Defendant€worked€as€a€used€carÏsalesman€at€a€Blount€œCounty€car›€dealership.€€He€first€agreed€to€help€a€co„worker€get€a€pending€DUI€charge€dismissed€or€reduced€in€return€for€money.€€TheÏDefendant€did€not€help€the€co„worker€in€this€matter.€€Several€months€œlater,›€inÏNovember€1989,€another€co„worker€gave€the€Defendant€money€in€exchange€forÏthe€Defendantððs€help€in€taking€care€of€œa›€charge.€€The€Defendant€accompaniedÏthe€co„worker€to€court,€but€the€co„worker€subsequently€pleaded€guilty€to€his€DUIÏcharge.€€The€Defendant€apparently€reimbursed€the€co„worker€for€the€money.€ÌÌà àA€third€co„worker,€Al€Lewis,€Sr.,€requested€the€Defendantððs€assistance€inÏgetting€sexual€assault€charges€against€his€son€dismissed.€€After€two€or€threeÏmeetings,€the€Defendant€told€Lewis€that€he€could€do€nothing€to€help€him.€€TheÏDefendant€later€agreed€to€help€after€Lewis€offered€to€pay€him€twenty„fiveÏthousand€dollars€in€cash.€€The€Defendant€again€met€with€Lewis€and€acceptedÏan€envelope€œthat€was›€purported€to€contain€the€money.€€Lewis,€however,€wasÏworking€for€the€law€enforcement€œauthorities.€€While›€acting€under€their€supervision,Ïœhe€taped›€the€conversation€and€gave€the€Defendant€an€envelope€containingÏonly€paper.€€When€the€Defendant€œleft€with€the€envelope,›€FBI€€officersÍapprehended€him.€€œThe›€FBI€released€the€œDefendant€after€questioning€him.€€HeÏwas€later€indicted€on€the€six€charges€of€theft€and€extortion.›ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€said€that€he€took€the€money€as€loans€which€he€intendedÏto€repay.€€He€said€that€his€son€suffered€from€cancer€and€that€he€needed€theÏmoney€to€defray€medical€expenses€and€other€costs.€€The€DefendantÏsubsequently€agreed€to€plead€guilty,€and€the€charges€were€reduced€toÏmisdemeanor€theft.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€to€three€concurrentÏsentences€of€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days,€with€a€release€eligibility€dateÏof€thirty€percent,€to€be€followed€by€supervised€probation,€and€with€immediateÏeligibility€for€work€release.€€The€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdenying€his€request€œfor€immediate›€probation.€Ì€€Ìà àMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€controlled€by€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏsection€40„35„302,€which€provides€in€part€that€the€trial€court€shall€impose€aÏsentence€consistent€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€œCriminal›ÏœSentencing›€Reform€Act.€€In€determining€the€correct€sentence,€the€trial€court€shouldÏexamine€the€case€in€the€light€of€the€nature€and€character€of€the€offense.€€òòState€v.ÏGilboyóó,€857€S.W.2d€884,€889€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€Among€the€factorsÏapplicable€to€the€Defendantððs€application€for€probation€are€the€circumstances€ofÏthe€offense,€his€criminal€record,€social€history€and€present€condition,€and€theÍdeterrent€effect€upon€and€best€interest€of€the€Defendant€and€the€public.€€òòState€v.ÏGennoeóó,€851€S.W.2d€833,€837€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€òòid.óóÏ(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€designed€to€provide€the€trial€court€withÏcontinuing€jurisdiction€and€a€great€deal€of€flexibility.€€The€œtrial›€court€retains€theÏauthority€to€place€the€Defendant€on€probation€either€immediately€or€after€a€timeÏof€periodic€or€continuous€confinement.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302(e).ÏBecause€especially€mitigated€or€standard€offenders€convicted€of€Class€C,€D,€orÏE€felonies€are€presumed€to€be€favorable€candidates€for€alternative€sentencing,Ïthe€same€presumption€would€logically€apply€to€misdemeanors.€€òòGennoeóó,€851ÏS.W.2d€at€837;€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).€€However,€theÏmisdemeanant,€unlike€the€felon,€is€not€entitled€to€the€presumption€of€a€minimumÏsentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€toÏappeal€deniedóó,€òòid.óó€(Tenn.€1994).€€Additionally,€the€burden€of€establishingÏsuitability€for€probation€rests€with€the€Defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b).€ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€is€married€and€has€two€children.€€The€presentence€reportÏindicates€that€he€has€no€prior€criminal€œhistory€other›€than€a€traffic€offense€andÏthree€arrests€for€passing€worthless€checks,€two€of€which€were€dismissed€andÍthe€third€was€nolled€on€payment€of€restitution.€€The€report€reflects€that€theÏDefendant€was€in€good€œhealth›€and€did€not€have€any€drug€or€alcohol€problems.€€à àà àà àà àÌà àThe€Defendant€contends€that€the€following€mitigating€factors€should€haveÏbeen€applied€to€his€case:€(1)€That€his€criminal€conduct€neither€caused€norÏthreatened€bodily€injury;€(7)€that€he€was€motivated€by€a€desire€to€provideÏnecessities€for€his€family;€(11)€that€he€committed€the€offense€under€such€unusualÏcircumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€lawÏmotivated€his€conduct;€(13)€that€he€made€restitution€in€these€case€prior€to€theÏentry€of€his€guilty€pleas€or€sentencing,€and€(13)€that€he€has€no€previous€historyÏof€criminal€convictions.€€Ô€"XÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÔ€"ŠÔ€40„35„113.€€ÌÌà àIn€denying€œprobation,›€the€court€considered€the€testimony€at€the€sentencingÏhearing,€the€circumstances€of€the€crimes,€the€presentence€report,€and€characterÏletters€submitted€by€various€people€on€the€Defendantððs€behalf.€€The€trial€courtÏnoted€that€although€the€crimes€were€not€violent,€œthey›€were€conducted€over€theÏperiod€of€a€year,€not€on€the€spur€of€the€moment.€€The€trial€court€denied€probationÏprimarily€because€the€Defendant€intentionally€convinced€others€to€think€that€theÏcriminal€justice€system€could€be€subverted€if€they€paid€large€sums€of€money.€ÏThe€court€said€that€from€listening€to€the€taped€conversation€of€the€Defendant€andÏLewis,€œthe›€Defendant€was€very€convincing€in€his€representations€that€he€couldÏget€the€œcase€ððfixed.ð𛀀The€court€also€found€as€an€enhancement€factor€that€theÍDefendant€abused€a€position€of€trust€among€his€œco„workers.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„35„114(15)›€€The€trial€court€noted€that€the€Defendant€was€originally€chargedÏwith€Class€D€and€E€felonies€carrying€a€much€harsher€sentencing€range,€and€inÏlight€of€the€nature€of€the€offenses,€he€could€not€œgrant€immediate›€probation.ÌÌà àAs€previously€set€forth,€the€trial€judgeððs€denial€of€probation€is€clothed€withÏa€presumption€of€correctness.€€We€have€performed€the€required€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€reviewÏof€the€record€and€find€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€theÏœfindings€of€the›€trial€court.€€We€conclude€that€the€factors€considered€by€the€trialÏjudge€in€denying€probation€were€proper€and€that€the€judge€did€not€err€in€decliningÏto€œapply€any›€mitigating€factors.€€œThis€court€should€not€place€trial€judges€in€aÏjudicial€straight„jacket€in€the€area€of€sentencing,€and€we€should€exercise€restraintÏin€interfering€with€their€traditional€discretionary€powers.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€166,€171€(Tenn.€1991).€€We€cannot€conclude€that€the€trial€judge€erred€orÏabused€his€discretion€in€denying€immediate€probation.›ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àœà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________›Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌœÇCONCUR:›ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌœGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGE›ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌœWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGE›