ÿWPCc /# ¢U:­ %ç 0(íw@4UixU.€ 0J® 0Tø 0^L 0hª 0r 0|„ 0† 0† 1u 0d‹B)ï 0@ D3X B‹ DC¨ AMë ï8 v~' vÓ¥ AQxÆÉ 0D 0DÓ D/ BF˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ,†r‰AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡ ˆD‰DŠD‹DŒDeŽeeÓ€œ§aö"3|xœ%ä2¼A`ArialTT2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ% Line 7 d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d7Border 1dd* #Cþÿ << Gÿÿ åÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌò òAugust€5,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑœÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€JACKSON̜ـ*ÙßR€$%#A1-j|úýÙ` Å `€€@ÿRß›ÌJULY€1997€SESSIONÌÓ  Ó€ÌÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà à€€€APPELLEE,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02„C„01„9608„CC„00272Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àDecatur€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àC.€Creed€McGinley,€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Sale€of€Methamphetamine)ÌWILLIAM€K.€WILSON,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àAPPELLANT.à à)ÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌRichard€W.€DeBerryà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌP.O.€Box€663à àà àà àà à500€Charlotte€AvenueÌCamden,€TN€38320à àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0497ÌÌOF€COUNSEL:à àà àà àà àGeorgia€B.€FelnerÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌGuy€T.€Wilkinsonà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌP.O.€Box€663ÌCamden,€TN€38320à àà àà àR.€Robert€RadfordÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€686Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHuntingdon,€TN€38344„0686ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJames€W.€WallaceÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€637Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àParsons,€TN€38363„0637ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€W.€Overton,€Jr.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€484Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àSavannah,€TN€38372„0484ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:_______________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€JudgeÌÓ  ÓÇÑ7€w¨XXdæXXdæ7ÑØØÙ  Ùà àà àà àÔ€ „Ôò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌÓ  ÓÔ€ XÔÌÓÓÌà àThe€appellant,€William€K.€Wilson€(defendant),€was€convicted€of€two€counts€ofÏselling€€methamphetamine€(crank),€a€Class€C€felony,€by€a€jury€of€his€peers.€€The€trialÏcourt,€finding€the€defendant€to€be€a€standard€offender,€imposed€a€Range€I€sentenceÏconsisting€of€a€$10,000€fine€and€confinement€for€five€(5)€years€in€the€Department€ofÏCorrection€in€each€count.€€The€sentences€are€to€be€served€concurrently.€€In€this€Court,Ïthe€defendant€contends€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€his€convictions,€theÏsentences€imposed€were€excessive,€and€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€byÏrefusing€to€impose€an€alternative€sentence€to€incarceration.€€After€a€thorough€review€ofÏthe€record,€the€briefs€submitted€by€the€parties,€and€the€law€governing€the€issuesÏpresented€for€review,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€shouldÏbe€affirmed.Ìà àThe€criminal€investigation€division€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Safety€wasÏinvestigating€drug€trafficking€in€Decatur€County€during€1994€and€1995.€€Trooper€GaryÏAzbill€was€assigned€to€conduct€the€investigation.€€He€obtained€the€assistance€of€MaryÏSkates€to€aid€in€the€investigation.€€Skates€had€been€part€of€the€drug€culture€in€DecaturÏCounty.€€She€knew€the€defendant€and€had€lived€with€him€for€a€brief€period€of€time.Ìà àBefore€Skates€would€attempt€to€purchase€illicit€drugs,€Trooper€Azbill€providedÏher€with€the€money€to€purchase€the€drugs€and€equipped€Skates€with€a€recorder€so€theÏconversations€between€Skates€and€the€drug€trafficker€could€be€recorded.€€TrooperÏAzbill€would€also€search€Skates€and€her€vehicle€to€make€sure€she€did€not€have€illicitÏdrugs€in€her€possession.Ìà àOn€December€28,€1994,€and€January€5,€1995,€Skates€went€to€the€home€of€theÏdefendant.€€On€both€occasions€she€purchased€a€quantity€of€crank€from€the€defendant.€ÏEach€transaction€was€recorded.€€On€both€occasions€Skates€met€Trooper€AzbillÏimmediately€after€the€transaction.€€Skates€provided€him€with€the€illicit€drugs€sheÏpurchased€on€these€two€occasions,€and,€if€she€did€not€spend€all€of€the€money€providedÏby€Trooper€Azbill,€she€returned€the€remaining€money€to€him.Ìà àThe€defendant€testified€in€support€of€his€defense.€€He€admitted€living€withÏSkates,€whom€he€described€as€a€truck€driver.€€When€she€purchased€illicit€drugs€whileÏdriving€the€truck,€he€participated€in€the€consumption€of€the€drugs.€€He€claims€he€forcedÏher€to€leave€because€of€her€excessive€drug€use.€€The€defendant€opined€Skates€hadÏaccused€him€of€selling€her€the€illicit€drugs€because€she€was€angry€at€him.€€He€assertedÏSkates€wanted€a€very€close€relationship€with€him€and€he€spurned€the€relationship€byÏforcing€her€to€leave€his€residence.€€He€denied€selling€her€the€crank.Ìò òÓ  ÓÌI.ó óÌÓ  Óà àÌà àThe€defendant€contends€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€is€insufficient,€asÏa€matter€of€law,€to€support€his€convictions.€€The€argument€supporting€this€issue€isÏpredicated€exclusively€upon€the€credibility€of€Mary€Skates.Ìà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€thisÏCourt€must€review€the€record€to€determine€if€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€is€sufficientÏ"to€support€the€finding€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.€13(e).€This€rule€is€applicable€to€findings€of€guilt€based€upon€direct€evidence,Ícircumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòStateÏv.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€253€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).Ìà àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€this€Court€does€notÏreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).€€Nor€may€this€Court€substitute€itsÏinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact€from€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòLiakas€v.ÏStateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859,€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€352€U.S.€845,€77€S.Ct.Ï39,€1€L.Ed.2d€49€(1956).€€To€the€contrary,€this€Court€is€required€to€afford€the€State€ofÏTennessee€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€asÏwell€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€theÏevidence.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).Ìà àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€toÏbe€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€835.€€In€òòState€v.ÏGraceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973),€our€Supreme€Court€said:€€"A€guilty€verdictÏby€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€theÏState€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theory€of€the€State."Ìà àSince€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replaces€itÏwith€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused,€as€the€appellant,€has€the€burden€in€this€CourtÏof€illustrating€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdicts€returned€by€theÏtrier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€This€Court€will€notÏdisturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€due€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€unless€the€factsÏcontained€in€the€record€are€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€toÍfind€that€the€accused€is€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914.Ìà àClearly,€there€is€sufficient€evidence€contained€in€the€record€to€support€a€findingÏby€a€rational€trier€of€fact€that€the€defendant€is€guilty€of€two€counts€of€sellingÏmethamphetamine€(crank),€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);ÏòòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(Tenn.€1979).€€TheÏverdicts€returned€by€the€jury€establish€the€jury€accredited€the€testimony€of€Mary€SkatesÏ„„€the€jury€believed€her€„„€and€rejected€the€testimony€of€the€defendant€„„€the€jury€did€notÏbelieve€him.Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓII.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€defendant€contends€(a)€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court€wereÏexcessive€and€(b)€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€refusing€to€impose€alternativeÏsentences€to€incarceration.€€He€argues€the€trial€court€erred€by€applying€certainÏenhancement€factors€when€setting€the€sentence.ÌÌÓ  Óà àò òA.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length€and€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€itÏis€the€duty€of€this€Court€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€on€the€record€with€a€presumptionÏthat€"the€determinations€made€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct."€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€upon€theÍaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingÏprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,Ï169€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€presumption€does€not€apply€to€the€legal€conclusions€reachedÏby€the€trial€court€in€sentencing€the€accused€or€to€the€determinations€made€by€the€trialÏcourt€which€are€predicated€upon€uncontroverted€facts.€€òòState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2dÏ305,€311€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€891€S.W.2d€922,€929€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.),€òòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1994);€€òòState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€163,€166€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1993).€€However,€this€Court€is€required€to€give€great€weight€to€the€trialÏcourt's€determination€of€controverted€facts€as€the€trial€court's€determination€of€theseÏfacts€is€predicated€upon€the€witnesses'€demeanor€and€appearance€when€testifying.Ìà àIn€conducting€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€Court€must€consider€(a)€anyÏevidence€received€at€the€trial€and/or€sentencing€hearing,€(b)€the€presentence€report,Ï(c)€the€principles€of€sentencing,€(d)€the€arguments€of€counsel€relative€to€sentencingÏalternatives,€(e)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense,€(f)€any€mitigating€orÏenhancing€factors,€(g)€any€statements€made€by€the€accused€in€his€own€behalf,€and€(h)Ïthe€accused's€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðððð€40„35„103€and€„210;€€òòState€v.€Scottóó,€735€S.W.2d€825,€829€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Ïòòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1987).Ìà àThe€party€challenging€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court€has€the€burdenÏof€establishing€that€the€sentences€are€erroneous.€€Sentencing€Commission€CommentsÏto€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401;€€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169;€€òòButleróó,€900€S.W.2d€atÏ311.€€In€this€case,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€of€illustrating€the€sentences€imposedÏby€the€trial€court€are€erroneous.Ìò òÓ  ÓB.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€trial€court€correctly€found€the€record€supports€two€enhancement€factors.€ÏThe€€defendant€has€an€extensive€history€of€criminal€convictions€and€criminal€behavior.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€During€a€period€from€February€27,€1981€to€May€3,Ï1993,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€burglary€first€degree,€two€counts€of€petit€larceny,Ïassault€on€a€police€officer,€possession€of€a€controlled€substance€on€the€premises€of€aÏjail,€possession€of€.28€grams€of€marijuana€with€intent€to€sell,€possession€of€marijuanaÏwith€intent€to€sell,€possession€of€drug€paraphernalia,€possession€of€a€pistol€andÏsawed„off€shotgun€after€being€convicted€of€a€felony,€destruction€of€state€property,Ïmultiple€counts€of€driving€while€under€the€influence,€multiple€counts€of€publicÏintoxication,€multiple€counts€of€driving€a€motor€vehicle€after€his€driverððs€license€wasÏrevoked,€and€driving€while€his€driverððs€license€was€suspended.€€In€addition,€theÏdefendant€admitted€he€continued€to€ingest€marijuana€until€his€conviction.€€ThisÏconstituted€criminal€behavior.Ìà àThe€trial€court€also€correctly€found€the€defendant€had€a€previous€history€ofÏunwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€theÏcommunity.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(8).€€The€defendant€was€released€on€paroleÏin€€a€petit€larceny€case.€€He€was€subsequently€arrested€for€the€weapon€offense,€and€hisÏparole€was€revoked.Ìà àIn€the€argument€accompanying€this€issue,€the€defendant€does€not€challengeÏeither€of€these€enhancement€factors€as€the€issue€indicates.€€Instead,€he€argues€the€trialÏcourt€abused€its€discretion€by€failing€to€find€his€conduct€neither€caused€nor€threatenedÍserious€bodily€injury€to€a€victim.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(1).€€The€trial€courtÏrefused€to€apply€this€mitigating€factor€based€upon€the€nature€of€the€offense€and€theÏdrug€the€defendant€sold.ÌThe€court€was€correct€in€refusing€to€apply€this€mitigating€factor.€€The€factor€is€notÏavailable€when€the€defendant€has€been€convicted€of€an€offense€involving€a€seriousÏdrug€such€as€cocaine€or€crank.€€òòState€v.€Keelóó,€882€S.W.2d€410,€422€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),Ïòòperóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1994).ÌÌò òÓ  ÓC.ó óÌÓ  ÓÌà àThe€defendant€claims€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€refusing€to€imposeÏan€alternative€sentence€to€confinement.€The€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€inÏthis€regard.€€Ìà àAs€previously€stated,€the€record€establishes€the€defendantððs€extensive€record€ofÏcriminal€convictions€and€behavior.€€It€also€establishes€his€parole€for€a€prior€convictionÏwas€revoked€because€he€committed€a€felony€while€released€in€the€community.€€TheÏdefendant€has€also€been€placed€on€probation€or€given€short€sentences.€€Nevertheless,Ïthe€defendant€continued€to€engage€in€criminal€conduct.€€He€admitted€ingestingÏcocaine€until€March€of€1996,€the€date€this€case€was€tried.Ìà àConfinement€is€the€appropriate€punishment€for€the€defendant.€€He€should€not€beÏgranted€an€alternative€to€confinement€because:Ì€à à1.)€€He€has€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct.€€Therefore,€there€is€a€need€toÏprotect€society€from€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A).Ìà à2.)€€Confinement€in€this€case€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousnessÏof€the€offenses€committed€by€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).Ìà à3.)€€Confinement€in€this€case€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effectiveÏdeterrent€to€others€likely€to€engage€in€like€or€similar€conduct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).Ìà à4.)€€Measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€did€not€deter€the€defendant€fromÏcontinually€engaging€in€criminal€conduct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(C).Ìà à5.)€€Unfortunately,€the€defendantððs€extensive€criminal€record€and€conduct€clearlyÏestablishes€he€is€beyond€the€pale€of€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„103(5).€This€Court€is€convinced€the€defendant€will€commence€his€life€of€criminalÏconduct€if€granted€probation€or€a€community€corrections€sentence.€€This€has€been€hisÏlifestyle€his€entire€adult€life.Ìà àIn€summary,€society€will€be€best€served€if€the€defendant€is€incarcerated.€ÏMoreover,€the€defendant€is€not€a€proper€candidate€for€an€alternative€sentence€toÏincarceration€based€upon€the€aforementioned€criteria.Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÓÓÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€JOE€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________________Ìà à€€€€DAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ______________________________________Ìà à€€€€€€JOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGE