WPC ;UBJ %U.nX 0P(4x 1m 0cw@d 0j 0DB   Z 0J` 0T 0@ 0^> 0h B D3! 0rT 0| 0B 0 1uX 0d AQ1 0D 0D D/  B9U6VB)DC AMJEv~sv<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%2A`ArialTT3|X5<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP(($D  ӧa" #*e37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;$2*e  0  .3  0  UUbbD !(Ee)Ӏ5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(D(3$ !D      0  (#$  0  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5H2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  ("$    2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23   d 'dxd2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  "#$% ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X+,-C<< C(3$ !  ($$   1  ..' dxdP Pd<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d44447Border 1dd5C << G @ !  #d#3 D    +"     YYY FILEDX August8,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk   !#d#3 D     $       EffectiveJuly1,1997,theRulesofCriminalProcedurehavebeenamendedtoallowreviewofthetrialcourtsdenialofrelieftothedefendantunderT.C.A.4015105(b)(3)byappealasofrightaswellasbyinterlocutoryappeal.Tenn.R.Crim.P.38.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . 3 D    ݛ X 7R?XXdXXd7  \RA'\ `   %  Ԝ   INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE̜R675A1-j|.'` 81 `@Rߛ@ ATJACKSON  @ MAY1997SESSION STATEOFTENNESSEE,   )       )  C.C.A.NO. 02C019608CC00270   Appellee, 򀀀  )      ) HENRYCOUNTY VS.      )      ) HON.JULIANP.GUINN,KATRINADENEANTEAGUE,  ) JUDGE      )   Appellant.   )  (Sentencing)FORTHEAPPELLANT:    FORTHEAPPELLEE: VICKIH.HOOVER     JOHNKNOXWALKUP 123NorthPoplarSt.    AttorneyGeneral&ReporterParis,TN38242       WILLIAMDAVIDBRIDGERS         Asst.AttorneyGeneral       450JamesRobertsonPkwy.       Nashville,TN372430493       ROBERT(GUS)RADFORD        DistrictAttorneyGeneral              VICKIS.SNYDER        Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral       CourtSquare       Paris,TN38242                  OPINIONFILED:____________________ AFFIRMED JOHNH.PEAY, Judge    @ OPINION   Thedefendantwasindictedfortwocountsofaggravatedburglary,aClassCfelony.T.C.A.3914403(b).ShepledguiltytobothcountspursuanttoapleaagreementunderwhichshewassentencedtothreeyearsoneachcountasaRangeIstandardoffender.Atthehearingforthedeterminationofhowthesentencewouldbeserved,thetrialcourtorderedthedefendanttoserveninetydaysincontinuousconfinementandthebalanceofthesentenceintheCommunityCorrectionsProgram.Thecourtalsoorderedhertopayrestitutionofthreethousandfourhundredtwentythreedollars($3,423.00).Thedefendantnowappeals,claimingthathersentence isexcessiveandundulyharsh.Shealsocontendsthatshewaswronglydeniedpretrialdiversion.Afterreviewingtherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.  Whenadefendantcomplainsofhisorhersentence,wemustconductadenovoreviewwithapresumptionofcorrectness.T.C.A.4035401(d).Theburdenofshowingthatthesentenceisimproperisupontheappealingparty.T.C.A.4035401(d)SentencingCommissionComments.Thispresumption,however, isconditionedupontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166,169(Tenn.1991).  T.C.A.4035103setsoutsentencingconsiderationswhichareguidelinesfordeterminingwhetherornotadefendantshouldbeincarcerated.Theseincludetheneed toprotectsocietybyrestrainingadefendantwhohasalonghistoryofcriminalconduct,theneed toavoiddepreciatingtheseriousnessoftheoffense,thedeterminationthat confinementisparticularlysuitedtoprovideaneffectivedeterrencetootherslikelytocommitsimilaroffenses,orthedeterminationthat measureslessrestrictivethanconfinementhavefrequentlyorrecentlybeenappliedunsuccessfullytothedefendant.T.C.A.4035103(1).  Indeterminingthespecificsentenceandthepossiblecombinationofsentencingalternatives,thecourtshallconsiderthefollowing:(1)anyevidencefromthetrialandsentencinghearing,(2)thepresentencereport,(3)theprinciplesofsentencingandtheargumentsconcerningsentencingalternatives,(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsoftheoffense,(5)informationofferedbytheStateorthedefendantconcerningenhancingandmitigatingfactorsasfoundinT.C.A.4035113and114,and(6)thedefendantsstatementsinhisorherownbehalfconcerningsentencing.T.C.A.4035210(b).Inaddition,thelegislatureestablishedcertainsentencingprincipleswhichincludethefollowing: D      (5)Inrecognitionthatstateprisoncapacitiesandthefundstobuildandmaintainthemarelimited,convictedfelonscommittingthemostsevereoffenses,possessingcriminalhistoriesevincingacleardisregardforthelawsandmoralsofsociety,andevincingfailureofpasteffortsatrehabilitationshallbegivenfirstpriorityregardingsentencinginvolvingincarceration;and(6)Adefendantwhodoesnotfallwithintheparametersofsubdivision(5)andisanespeciallymitigatedorstandardoffenderconvictedofaClassC,DorEfelonyispresumedtobeafavorablecandidateforalternativesentencingoptionsintheabsenceofevidencetothecontrary. D   D          T.C.A.4035102.  Afterreviewingthestatutessetoutabove,itisobviousthattheintentofthelegislatureistoencouragealternativestoincarcerationincaseswheredefendantsaresentencedasstandardormitigatedoffendersconvictedofC,D,orEfelonies.However,itisalsoclearthatthereisanintenttoincarceratethosedefendantswhosecriminalhistoriesindicateacleardisregardforthelawsandmoralsofsocietyandafailureofpasteffortstorehabilitate.   Withrespecttothedefendantscontentionthathersentence isexcessiveandundulyharsh,wefirstnotethatsheagreedtoitslengthandthatitistheminimumsentenceforaRangeIstandardoffender.T.C.A.4035112(a)(3).Obviously,then,hersentenceisnotexcessive.Norisit undulyharsh.Indecidingtoincarceratethedefendantforabrieftime,thecourtbelowtookintoaccountthesentencingconsiderationssetoutinT.C.A.4035103.Thecourtconcludedthat,inviewofthedefendantspreviousconvictionsforassaultandbattery,shoplifting,violatingthebadchecklaw,petitlarcenyandlarcenyfromaperson,therewasaneedtoprotectsocietybyrestrainingher.Thecourtnotedthatlessrestrictivemeasureshadbeenunsuccessfullyappliedtothedefendantinthepast,thataperiodofconfinementmightdeterherfromfuturecriminalconduct,andthatconfinementwasnecessarytoavoiddepreciatingtheseriousnessoftheoffense.Thecourtspecificallyfoundthatafullysuspendedsentencewasnotinthebestinterestofjustice,thepublicorthedefendant.Thedefendanthasnotcarriedherburdenofprovingthatthisdecisionbythetrialcourtwasimproper.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  Thedefendantalsocontendsthatshewaswronglydeniedpretrialdiversion.TherecordindicatesthattheDistrictAttorneyGeneraldeniedherapplication;herbriefunaccountablyclaimsthatthetrialcourtdeniedherapplication.TherecorddoesnotindicatethatshepetitionedthetrialcourtforreviewoftheDistrictAttorneyGeneralsdecisionpursuanttoT.C.A.4015105(b)(3).However,evenassumingthatthecourtbelowheardanddeniedapetitionfromthedefendant,shehaswaivedthisissuebyfailingtopursueaninterlocutoryappealpriortotrialandconviction.T.R.A.P.9and10;Statev.Mecord,815S.W.2d218,219(Tenn.Crim.App.1991);Statev.Wilson,713S.W.2d85,8687(Tenn.Crim.App.1986). 8   ׀Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  Forthereasonssetforthabove,thedefendantssentenceisaffirmed.              JOHNH.PEAY,JudgeCONCUR:̀GARYR.WADE,Judge򀀀󀀀THOMAST.WOODALL,Judge