WPC 2 ZB0ZJHP LaserJet 8000 Series PSXN\  PXPX0Í ÍX0Í ÍҫXN\  PXP(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularXa2PP,6 AZ"Arial RegularPXXa2PP,6 AZ"Arial Regular2PP,cAZ"Arial Regular<2PP,cAZ"Arial Regular2PP,6 AZ"Arial Regulara2PP,6 AZ"Arial Regular23|x `   X #a2PP# A'Legal @--@#PX#  #a2PP#Њ 9ddddPdd@ddddPdd@9dddd 1 dddd 1  !#2PP#FILED#<2PP# November 23, 1999 Cecil CROWS ON, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk  IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE NOVEMBER SESSION, 1999 STATE OF TENNESSEE,)pppC.C.A. NO. 03C019905CR00175 ) Appellee, ) )pppMEIGS COUNTY V.) ) )pppHON. E. EUGENE EBLEN, JUDGE LARRY TRUEBLOOD,hhh)   hhh)ppp(AGGRAVATED ASSAULT; Appellant. )pppKIDNAPPING) FOR THE APPELLANT:FOR THE APPELLEE: JOE H. WALKER hhhPAUL G. SUMMERS District Public Defender pppAttorney General & Reporter ALFRED LEE HATHCOCK, JR.ELIZABETH B. MARNEY Assistant Public DefenderAssistant Attorney General P.O. Box 334hhh2nd Floor, Cordell Hull Building Harriman, TN 37748 ppp425 Fifth Avenue North  hhhNashville, TN 37243  J. SCOTT McCLUEN ` ` ` hhh  District Attorney General   FRANK HARVEY  Assistant District Attorney General P.O. Box 703 Kingston, TN 377630703 OPINION FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20 THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE #2PP# ORDER #a2PP#   In this case the Defendant appeals as of right from the trial courts decision that his sentences be served by incarceration in the Department of Correction rather than through a communitybased alternative sentence. In the trial court and in his brief, Defendant urges that a sentence of split confinement would be more appropriate. Defendant pled guilty to two counts of aggravated assault and one count of kidnapping. He received sentences of three (3) years for each aggravated assault and six (6) years for the kidnapping conviction. One aggravated assault sentence was agreed in the plea agreement to be served concurrently with the kidnapping, with the sentence for the other aggravated assault conviction to be served consecutively, for an effective sentence of nine (9) years. The only determination left to the trial court was for the manner of service. No one testified at the sentencing hearing, although the Defendant did make a statement to the court pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 4035210(b)(6). The only evidence presented was the presentence report. The Defendant also filed a brief sentencing memorandum.  The presentence report reflects that Defendant, though only twentyseven (27) years old at the time of sentencing, had a rather lengthy criminal history. It includes several convictions for traffic offenses, in addition to more serious convictions for misdemeanor reckless endangerment, evading arrest (three convictions), misdemeanor theft, possession of marijuana, criminal trespass, and most seriously and recently, felony child abuse. The record also reflects that he was initially given a sentence of split confinement on the felony child abuse, the probation was revoked and he was placed on community corrections. Subsequently, his community corrections sentence was revoked and he was incarcerated in another county on that conviction at the time of sentencing in these cases. In the prior convictions in which Defendant was subject to punishment by incarceration, he was given alternative sentences, including full probation. Tennessee Code Annotated section 4035103(1)(C) provides that a sentence involving confinement can be based upon the fact that measures less restrictive than confinement have frequently or recently been applied unsuccessfully to the Defendant. Normally, one who is sentenced as a standard offender and convicted of a Class C, D, or E felony is presumed a favorable candidate for alternative sentencing options under Tennessee Code Annotated section 4035102(6). However, a Defendant who possesses a criminal history evincing a clear disregard for the laws and morals of society or shows a failure of past efforts at rehabilitation, is not entitled to the presumption to be a favorable candidate for alternative sentencing. Tenn. Code Ann.  4035102(5)(6)(1997). The trial court was justified in declining to order an alternative sentence for Defendant in these cases. As this was a proceeding before the trial judge without a jury, and is not a determination of guilt, and the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of the trial judge, and no error of law requiring a reversal of the judgment is apparent on the record, this case is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee. ____________________________________ THOMAS T. WOODALL, Judge CONCUR: ___________________________________ JOSEPH M. TIPTON, Judge ___________________________________ JERRY L. SMITH, Judge