ÿWPC# …U:V % 0 B–w@Ø4,; 0 ; 0D[ 0JŸ 0Té 0^= 0h› 0r 0|u 0†ñ 0w 1u 0d|B)àDC  BL AKiU*´ØÞӶxý*ü'v~# D3¡vÓÔ 0D§! AOë!Æ:" 0D# D/D# Bs#, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX("ÿÿ$¡¡Ý ƒÿÝÝ  Ý UVDWDXPYZ[D\]D^Ó€·‚^!pp8pp,3|xi(Ð(3Ñ$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€ ÓXXdæXXdì7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 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% Line 7 d7Border 1dd d€Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ÎÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ€!ÔÔ€!ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€!XÔÌÌò òNovember€27,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€!ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ÉÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€ôÔÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7À ÓXXdæXXdì7ÑÑ  Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAlthough€the€presentence€report€indicates€that€the€shotgun€belonged€to€Dykes,Ïthe€record€does€not€indicate€which€man€was€bearing€the€shotgun€and€which€man€wasÏbearing€the€rifle.€Ì åÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó"From€9/26/89€to€1/25/90€David€has€been€involved€in€fifteen€incidentsÏrequiring€intervention€from€the€principal.€€The€breakdown€of€behaviors€are€as€follows:€Ïdisorderly€conduct€(six€incidents);€fighting€(two€incidents);€harassment€(twoÏincidents);€and€one€incident€of€each€of€the€following:€truancy,€misuse/destruction€ofÏschool€property;€use€of€foul/abusive€language;€insubordination;€and€refusing€to€do€hisÏwork.€€The€consequences€of€these€behaviors€include:€after€school€detention;€in„schoolÏsuspension;€warnings;€sitting€in€the€principal's€office;€writing€a€theme;€counseling;Ïcalling€his€father,€and€signing€a€pact€with€David."Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€appellant's€comments€in€the€presentence€report€reveal€that€"he€is€currentlyÏpurchasing€an€automobile€for€$1200,€he€owes€$1000.€€He€gives€his€mother€half€of€hisÏpaycheck€toward€household€expenses€and€between€that€and€the€car€payment,€he€makesÏ'just€enough€to€keep€myself€in€cigarettes.'"Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€trial€court€did€recommend€boot€camp€in€this€case,€however,€the€appellantÏwas€later€found€ineligible€for€this€program€due€to€the€violent€nature€of€the€offense.Ì óÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóContrary€to€the€appellant's€contentions,€the€trial€court€did€consider€all€relevantÏfactors,€not€only€the€circumstances€of€the€offense.Ì òÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€trial€court€correctly€considered€this€factor€because€the€appellant€pled€guiltyÏto€òòrobberyóó€and€not€òòaggravated€robberyóó.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h'ÿÿdxdStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  inion Geneva ÒÒ  inion Geneva Ò(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÝ  Ýò òÙ€€ÙÙ€€ÙßR€ "A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRßà@ àÞ ÞÌÓ  ÓIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌSEPTEMBER€SESSION,€1996Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€03C01„9512„CC„00385Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àSULLIVAN€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€R.€Jerry€Beck,€JudgeÌò òCHARLES€DAVID€WELLSó ó,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Robbery;Aggravated€Assault)Ìà àAppellantà àÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌStephen€M.€Wallaceà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌà àÌGale€K.€Flanaryà àà àà àà àà àElizabeth€T.€RyanÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà à€€€€€€€€€€ÏPost€Office€Box€839à àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌBlountville,€TN€€37617à àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àH.€Greeley€Wells,€Jr.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPhyllis€MillerÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àBlountville,€TN€€37617Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Charles€David€Wells,€was€indicted€by€a€SullivanÏCounty€Grand€Jury€in€a€two€count€presentment€charging€him€with€one€countÏof€aggravated€robbery€and€one€count€of€aggravated€assault.€€Pursuant€to€aÏnegotiated€plea€agreement€with€the€State,€the€appellant€pled€noloÏcontendere€to€one€count€of€robbery€as€a€range€II€offender€and€one€count€ofÏaggravated€assault€as€a€range€I€offender.€€The€agreed€sentence€was€sevenÏyears€for€the€robbery€conviction€and€three€years€for€the€aggravatedÏassault€conviction,€to€run€concurrently.€€The€manner€of€service€of€theÏsentence€was€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€Following€aÏsentencing€hearing,€the€Sullivan€County€Criminal€Court€denied€any€form€ofÏalternative€sentence€and€imposed€a€sentence€of€incarceration€in€theÏDepartment€of€Correction.€€The€appellant€now€appeals€this€decision.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt.ÌÌÌà@ àò òI.€€BackgroundÌÌà àó óIn€the€early€morning€hours€of€July€28,€1994,€the€appellant€and€hisÏco„defendant,€Kevin€Dykes,€prepared€to€enter€the€Coastal€Mart€convenienceÏstore€in€Kingsport.€€The€men€were€armed€with€a€shotgun€and€a€.22€caliberÏrifle.€€They€were€dressed€in€dark€clothing€and€their€faces€were€covered.€ÏAs€the€two€men€approached€the€store,€Barney€Lee€Fields€was€leaving.€€OneÏof€the€men€aimed€the€shotgun€at€Fields€and€ordered€him€to€"lay€down."× ƒ# ××  ×€ÏThe€man€with€the€shotgun€went€inside€the€store,€while€the€man€with€theÏ.22€rifle€covered€Fields.€€Linda€Marie€Given,€a€clerk€at€the€store,€reportedÏthat€the€man€with€the€shotgun€demanded€that€she€"give€[him]€all€yourÏmoney€now."€€While€making€his€request,€he€aimed€the€shotgun€at€Given'sÏface.€€After€obtaining€the€cash,€the€two€men€fled€the€store€on€foot.€€KevinÏDykes€later€confessed€to€the€crime€and€implicated€the€appellant.€€WhenÏquestioned€by€the€police,€the€appellant€attempted€to€blame€another€personÏin€lieu€of€himself.€€However,€the€police€eliminated€this€individual€as€aÏsuspect€and€determined€that€the€appellant€and€Dykes€"definitelyÏcommitted€the€robbery."€€Moreover,€although€he€gave€three€separateÏstatements€to€the€police,€the€appellant€"never€did€tell€the€truth."ÌÌà àAt€the€sentencing€hearing€on€July€28,€1995,€the€trial€court€reliedÍupon€the€information€provided€in€the€presentence€report€along€with€theÏtestimony€of€the€appellant's€mother€and€fiancee.€€The€appellant€declinedÏthe€opportunity€to€testify.€€The€presentence€report€revealed€that€theÏappellant€was€an€eighteen€year€old€high€school€graduate€at€the€time€of€theÏoffenses.€€The€appellant€does€not€use€drugs€or€alcohol.€€Although€theÏappellant€does€not€have€a€prior€adult€record,€the€report€reveals€that€theÏappellant€has€several€reported€offenses€on€his€juvenile€record,€includingÏone€shoplifting€charge,€one€assault€charge,€and€one€assault€conviction.€ÏThe€appellant€violated€his€placement€on€"indefinite€probation"€from€theÏassault€conviction.€€Moreover,€the€appellant€has€a€history€of€disciplinaryÏproblems€throughout€his€educational€years.× ƒ$ ××  ×ÌÌÌà àThe€presentence€report€also€reveals€that,€in€1990,€school€personnelÏreferred€the€appellant€for€a€psychological€evaluation.€€Pursuant€to€thisÏevaluation,€the€appellant€was€determined€to€be€"seriously€emotionallyÏdisturbed"€and€was€placed€in€"resource€classes."€€However,€in€1993,€theÍappellant€was€re„evaluated,€at€which€time€he€attained€a€full€scale€IQ€ofÏ102.€€"It€was€concluded€that€there€was€a€significant€discrepancy€betweenÏhis€full€scale€IQ€and€his€present€academic€achievement€and€that€he€didÏmeet€the€criteria€as€learning€disabled."ÌÌà àRegarding€his€employment€history,€the€appellant€began€employmentÏat€the€Piccadilly€Cafeteria€as€a€dishwasher€several€weeks€prior€to€hisÏsentencing€hearing.€€In€this€position,€the€appellant€earns€approximatelyÏ$4.25€per€hour€and€works€approximately€thirty€hours€per€week.× ƒ% ××  ×€€Prior€toÏthis€employment,€the€appellant's€work€history€is€sporadic,€consistingÏmainly€of€summer€employment.ÌÌà àThe€appellant's€mother,€Mary€Wells,€testified€that€the€appellant€doesÏnot€have€a€prior€criminal€record.€€She€explained€that€the€appellant€agreedÏto€the€range€II€offender€status€because€he€"believed€it€in€his€best€interestÏto€accept€the€State's€offer."€€Mrs.€Wells€acknowledged€the€appellant'sÏtrouble€with€authority€as€a€juvenile.€€However,€she€attributed€theseÏjuvenile€matters€to€the€appellant's€emotional€disturbance€caused€by€hisÍrelationship€with€his€"abusive"€father.€€In€addition€to€verifying€theÏappellant's€employment€and€educational€history,€Mrs.€Wells€stated€that,Ïsince€this€incident,€"[the€appellant]€is€withdrawn.€€He€doesn't€go€outÏanymore,€he€mostly.€.€.€just€to€work€and€home."€€Continuing,€she€testifiedÏthat€the€appellant€no€longer€associates€with€the€same€people,€rather€heÏspends€his€time€with€his€family€and€his€fiancee.€€The€appellant's€fiancee,ÏChristy€Davis,€stated€that€she€has€known€the€appellant€for€two€and€one„half€years€and€that€they€planned€to€get€married€and€start€a€family.€€SheÏremarked€that,€after€committing€the€instant€offenses,€"[the€appellant]Ïdoesn't€go€out€as€much."€€Both€Mrs.€Wells€and€Ms.€Davis€confirmed€that€theyÏwould€provide€the€appellant€with€moral€and€social€support€if€he€was€givenÏan€alternative€sentence.€ÌÌà àAfter€considering€the€evidence€presented,€the€trial€court€deniedÏalternative€sentencing.€€In€making€its€decision,€the€trial€court€focused€onÏthe€nature€of€the€offense,€i.e.,€it€was€committed€with€a€weapon€in€a€publicÏplace€and€it€involved€two€victims.€€The€court€also€considered€theÏappellant's€unwillingness€to€cooperate€with€the€police€and€his€attempt€toÏimplicate€another€in€the€crimes.€€Further,€the€court€found€that€"theÏ[appellant]€made€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€where€the€risk€toÏhuman€life€was€high;"€"[the€appellant]€does€have€a€prior€juvenile€record;Í"he€had€violated€the€terms€of€his€[juvenile]€probation;"€and€"he€has€aÏhistory€of€disruptive€behavior€at€school."€€While€not€disregarding€theÏappellant's€youthfulness€and€his€past€psychological€problems,€the€court,Ï"laying€great€weight€to€the€nature€of€the€offense;€.€.€.the€defendant's€priorÏjuvenile€record€.€.€.;€poor€school€record,€[and]€poor€social€history,"€deniedÏ"alternative€sentencing€in€all€respects."× ƒ& ××  ×ÌÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Analysisó óÌÌà àWhen€a€defendant€challenges€the€manner€of€his€sentence,€this€courtÏmust€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€with€the€presumption€that€theÏdetermination€made€by€the€trial€court€is€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)(1990).€€This€presumption€only€applies,€however,€if€the€recordÏdemonstrates€that€the€trial€court€properly€considered€relevant€sentencingÏprinciples.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€theÏpresent€case,€the€trial€court€properly€considered€such€principles.× ƒ' ××  ×€€TheÏpresumption€of€correctness€applies.ÌÌà àIn€determining€the€appellant's€suitability€for€an€alternativeÏsentence,€we€first€determine€whether€the€appellant€is€entitled€to€theÏstatutory€presumption€that€he€is€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternativeÏsentencing.€€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€453€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Ïòòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995)€(citing€òòState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2dÏ163,€167€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)).€€To€be€eligible€for€the€statutoryÏpresumption,€three€requirements€must€be€met.€€The€appellant€must€beÏconvicted€of€a€class€C,€D,€or€E€felony.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6)Ï(1994€Supp.).€€He€must€be€sentenced€as€a€mitigated€or€standard€offender.€ÏòòIdóó.€€And,€the€defendant€must€not€fall€within€the€parameters€of€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„35„102(5)€(1994€Supp.).€€This€means€that€the€defendant€cannotÏhave€a€criminal€history€evincing€either€a€"clear€disregard€for€the€laws€andÏmorals€of€society"€or€"failure€of€past€efforts€at€rehabilitation."€€òòIdóó.€€TheÏappellant€was€sentenced€as€a€range€II€offender.€€Therefore,€he€is€notÏafforded€the€presumption€favoring€alternative€sentencing.ÌÌà àMoreover,€we€conclude€that,€even€if€the€appellant€was€entitled€to€theÏpresumption,€the€presumption€is€rebutted€by€"evidence€to€the€contrary."€€ÏSuch€evidence€may€be€found€in€the€presentence€report,€the€evidenceÏpresented€by€the€State,€the€testimony€of€the€accused,€or€any€other€sourceÍprovided€that€it€is€part€of€the€record.€€òòBonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€at€167;€òòseeÏalsoóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).€€Guidance€as€to€what€constitutesÏ"evidence€to€the€contrary"€may€be€found€in€the€sentencing€considerationsÏcodified€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103€(1990):ÌÒ ` ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ` ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓ(1)€€Sentencing€involving€confinement€should€beÏbased€on€the€following€considerations:ÌÌà à(A)€€Confinement€is€necessary€to€protectÏsociety€by€restraining€a€defendant€who€has€a€longÏhistory€of€criminal€conduct;ÌÌà à(B)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€orÏconfinement€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€andÏeffective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commitÏsimilar€offenses;€orÌÌà à(C)€€Measures€less€restrictive€thanÏconfinement€have€frequently€or€recently€beenÏapplied€unsuccessfully€to€the€defendant.ÌÒ  ÒÒ ` ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓÌòòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€454€(citing€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169).€€AÏcourt€may€also€apply€the€mitigating€and€enhancing€factors€set€forthÏin€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€ðð40„35„113€(1990)€and€„114€(1994€Supp.),€asÏthey€are€relevant€to€the€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103€considerations.€ÏòòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Zeoliaóó,€No.€03C01„9503„CR„00080€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€atÏKnoxville,€Mar.€21,€1996)€(citing€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210Ï(b)(5)).€€Finally,€the€appellant's€potential€or€lack€of€potential€forÏrehabilitation€is€a€proper€consideration€in€determining€whether€anÍalternative€sentence€should€be€granted.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5).ÌÌà àA€trial€court's€denial€of€an€alternative€sentence€based€on€theÏseriousness€of€the€offense€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B)Ïcan€only€be€upheld€if€there€is€evidence€in€the€record€that€indicatesÏthat€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€as€committed,€wereÏespecially€violent,€horrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,€offensive,€orÏotherwise€of€an€excessive€or€exaggerated€degree,€and€the€nature€ofÏthe€offense€outweighs€all€factors€favoring€a€sentence€other€thanÏconfinement.€€òòBinghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€at€454€(citations€omitted).€€TheÏcourt€primarily€considered€the€following€factors:€€a€weapon€wasÏused€in€the€commission€of€the€offense;× ƒ( ××  ×€the€appellant€made€noÏhesitation€about€committing€a€crime€where€the€risk€to€human€lifeÏwas€high;€and€the€offenses€involved€two€victims.€€While€theseÏenhancement€factors€are€clearly€present€in€this€case,€we€are€unableÏto€conclude€that€the€circumstances€of€these€offenses€were€moreÏexaggerated€than€those€in€other€robbery€and€aggravated€assaultÏcases.ÌÌà àNonetheless,€the€trial€court€properly€considered€the€appellant'sÏjuvenile€record€in€denying€an€alternative€sentence.€€First,€hisÏjuvenile€record€was€relevant€since€the€appellant€was€only€eighteenÏyears€old€at€the€time€of€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó€€òòZeoliaóó,€No.€03C01„9503„CR„00080.€€The€disposition€of€a€child€in€a€juvenile€court€may€be€usedÏagainst€the€child€only€in€"dispositional€proceedings€after€convictionÏof€a€felony€for€the€purposes€of€a€presentence€investigation€andÏreport."€€òòIdóó.€€(citing€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„133€(1991)).€€Moreover,Ïthis€court€has€considered€the€failure€of€probation€following€juvenileÏadjudications€in€denying€an€adult€appellant€an€alternative€sentence.€ÏòòIdóó.€€(citing€òòState€v.€Staceyóó,€No.€01C01„9111„CC„00341€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€at€Nashville,€Apr.€29,€1992)).€€In€considering€the€appellant'sÏjuvenile€record,€the€trial€court€properly€concluded€that€the€appellantÏhas€a€"long€history€of€criminal€conduct"€and€that€"measures€lessÏrestrictive€than€confinement€have€.€.€.been€applied€unsuccessfully€toÏthe€defendant."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A),€„(1)(C).€€òòSee,Ïe.g.óó,€€òòState€v.€Osborneóó,€€No.€01C01„9402„CC„00047€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ïat€Nashville,€May,€4,€1995);€€òòState€v.€Elliottóó,€No.€02C01„9408„CR„00154€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Dec.€14,€1994);€òòState€v.ÏHarrisonóó,€€No.€02C01„9103„CR„00042€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,ÍOct.€16,€1991).€€€ÌÌÌà àAdditionally,€the€trial€court€commented€on€the€appellant'sÏunwillingness€to€cooperate€with€the€police€exemplified€by€hisÏblaming€another€individual€for€the€offenses€and€his€persistentÏrefusal€to€tell€the€truth.€€A€defendant's€lack€of€candor,€credibility,Ïand€willingness€to€accept€responsibility€for€his€crime€are€relevantÏconsiderations€in€determining€his€potential€for€rehabilitation.€€ÏòòUnited€States€v.€Graysonóó,€438€U.S.€40,€98€S.Ct.€2610€(1978);€òòState€v.ÏDowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€306€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòsee€alsoóó€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5).€€The€appellant€has€clearly€shown,€via€hisÏactions€with€the€police,€that€he€is€a€poor€candidate€forÏrehabilitation.€€ÌÌà àAfter€conducting€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record€in€this€case,Ïwith€a€presumption€that€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€correct,Ïwe€conclude€that€the€appellant€has€failed€to€carry€his€burden€ofÏestablishing€that€he€is€entitled€to€alternative€sentencing.€€TheÏappellant's€untruthfulness€combined€with€his€poor€social€history,Ïpoor€employment€history,€prior€criminal€history,€and€past€failedÍefforts€at€rehabilitation€sufficiently€support€his€total€confinementÏin€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A),Ï„103(1)(C).€€For€these€reasons,€we€affirm€the€decision€of€the€trialÏcourt.€ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€Judge