WPC FgSdq^thO *u(s,9@Rbj&߼!elBb>c4sՑĘsVs׾uQ^;K@f`ۤ|FDž= Hͯg@TTAxͭ4*d_^P@f!}3y_ۂQ`#!@UNa % 0(U:b w 4# 7 F U:N 0 0DN U: f 12 72 N 1u ^ b n mp U B AQ J 0D 0DT 0D D3HP LaserJet 8000 DN PS0(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($,6 AZ"Arial Regular- -tpO'dTd3|x,yAZ"Arial Regular(v(2$ !  4X1XXXc>XX1   0  (#$  0  ,yAZ"Arial Regular \\RA' Legal\(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi)##37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)@T'L U K ["  X1XXX-qXX1  _  Ad FILED -q  October20,1999Cecil_Crowson_,Jr.AppellateCourt_ClerkdAx _ dZ[\]_C<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  'dxd !  _4!XX!8XXXdd8    X1XTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T  † _vY_@0,j: `@E tt Wv__ԀINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  ATKNOXVILLEAUGUST1999SESSION   DXXSTATEOFTENNESSEE,  * D C.C.A.#03C019902CR00052  TL    Appellee,#XX1#X1X     * D HAMILTONCOUNTY  ,$   VS.   <     * D HonorableStephenM.Bevil,Judge    PARISA.WEAVER#XX1m#X1X,    * D (AggravatedAssault)      Appellant#XX1#X1X.    *   FORTHEAPPELLANT:      D FORTHEAPPELLEE:  ^V  ARDENAJ.GARTH     D PAULG.SUMMERS 0( DistrictPublicDefender     D AttorneyGeneral&Reporter  DONNAROBINSONMILLER   D MARVINS.BLAIR,JR.  and   <      D AssistantAttorneyGeneral  #XX1h#X1XCHRISTIANCODER#XX1#X1X     D 425FifthAvenueNorth   #XX1F #X1XAssistantDistrictPublicDefender D Nashville,TN37243 ! 701CherryStreet,Suite300#XX1 #X1X z"r Chattanooga,TN37402#XX1 #X1X     D WILLIAMH.COX,III `#X    <      D DistrictAttorneyGeneral   <      D H.C.BRIGHT,III   <      D AssistantDistrictAttorney   <      D 600MarketStreet,Suite310   <      D Chattanooga,TN37402   <      D    <      D    <      D    <      D    <      D    <      D ̀   <      D      /(,    <      D OPINIONFILED:_______________ X X AFFIRMED  $705  JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS, :39  Judge: ;4: † TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT   X X#XX1 # M !     M ! ! MOPINION #  ! M|# X1X   ~   I @ NTRODUCTION  T L  Thedefendant,ParisA.Weaver,appealsfromtheHamiltonCounty , $ CriminalCourtsorderrevokinghisprobation.Thedefendantcontendsthatthe  trialcourthadinsufficientevidencetosupportrevocation.WeAFFIRMthetrial   courtsorderrevokingprobation.      BACKGROUND  (   OnJune3,1998,thedefendantpledguiltytoonecountofaggravated  assaultwithanagreedsentenceofeightyearsatRangeIItobeservedinsplit  confinement.Defendantwasrequiredtoserve100%ofanelevenmonthand  twentyninedayactiveconfinementsentenceandwasorderedtobereleasedon d\ November30,1998,withthebalancetobeservedinsupervisedprobation.The 0( defendantwasfurtherorderedbythecourtasaspecialconditionofprobationto   havenocontactofanykindwithAngelaBurrell,thevictimofdefendants " aggravatedassault. $   OnJuly2,1998,aPetitiontoRevokewasfiledbythestateinresponseto ,($!$ aletterwrittentothevictimbythedefendantwhilehewasincarcerated.On )"& September16,1998,theHamiltonCountyCourtheldahearinginconsideration +$( ofthestatespetition,atwhichthedefendantadmittedtowritingandmailingthe -&* letter.Thevictimtestifiedthatshefeltthreatenedbytheletterespeciallythe \/T(, words, Iwillseeyousoon.However,thedefendanttestifiedthattheletterwas (1 *. writtenwithnointenttothreatenorharassbutrathertoexpressregret,apology 2+0 andChristiansentiment.Thetrialcourtuponhearingthistestimonygrantedthe 4-2 PetitiontoRevokeandorderedthatthedefendantservehisfullsentencein 6/4 incarceration.Fromthatdecision,thedefendantnowappeals. X8P16  $:38    ANALYSIS    Thedefendantarguesthattherewasinsufficientevidencetosupportthe  HamiltonCountyCourtsdecisiontorevokehisprobation.Wedisagree.     Atrialcourtmayrevokeasentenceofprobationuponafindingbya D< preponderanceoftheevidencethatthedefendanthasviolatedtheconditionsof   hisprobation.Tenn.Code.Ann.4035311.Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtwill   notbedisturbedonappealabsentanabuseofdiscretion.SeeStatev.   Williamson,619S.W.2d145,146(Tenn.Crim.App.1981).Inorderforthis tl Courttobewarrantedinfindinganabuseofdiscretioninaprobationrevocation @8 case,itmustbeestablishedthattherecordcontainsnosubstantialevidenceto   supporttheconclusionofthetrialjudgethataviolationoftheconditionsof  probationhasoccurred.SeeStatev.Grear,568S.W.2d285,286(Tenn.1978);  Statev.Delp,614S.W.2d395,398(Tenn.Crim.App.1980).Theproofofa ph probationviolationneednotbeestablishedbeyondareasonabledoubt,butitis < 4 sufficientifitallowsthetrialjudgetomakeaconscientiousandintelligent " judgment.SeeStatev.Milton,673S.W.2d555,557(Tenn.Crim.App.1984). #   Ourreviewoftherecorddemonstratesthatthestateestablishedsufficient l'd $ factsduringthehearingtopermitthetrialjudgetomakeanintelligentjudgement. 8)0"& Atthehearing,itwasestablishedthat: +#(  4 ,DX(1)Asaspecialconditionofdefendantsprobation,thedefendant ,%*  wasorderedbythecourttohave nocontactofanykindwith -&+  thevictim; .', (2) Thedefendant,whileincarcerated,wrotealettertothevictim /z(-  statingamongotherthings, IknowthatIshouldnotdothisbut h0`).  Iamwritingtoyou...and Iwillseeyousoon;and N1F*/ (3) Thevictimfoundthisletterthreatening. 42,+0 r$4 V$d$" DX ,$"̀ Thetrialcourthadsufficientbasistofindaprobationviolation.The 5.4 probationordermadenoexceptionforwrittencommunication,andthusthetrial 706 courtreasonablyconcludedthattheletterconstitutedcontactinviolationof_the d9\28 probationcondition.Thevictimfurthertestified,quiteunderstandably,thatthis  letter,especiallythewords, Iwillseeyousoon,frightenedher.Thedefendant  wouldarguethatwetakethesewordsinnocentlyinarestrictivecontextconfined   totheplainlanguageoftheletter;butthiswewillnotdo.Defendantswords l d existinacomplicatedcontextofviolence,acontextwhereahistoryofabuse 80 culminatedinablowwithadeadlyobjecttothesideofthevictimshead,anda   contextwheresimplewordstriggerfear.Thecourtsoughttoendthisfearand   protectthevictimbyconditioningthedefendantsrelease.Thedefendant   acceptedthecourtsconditionandnowmustaccepttheconsequenceofits h` violation.Withoneletter,thedefendantviolatedtherightofhisvictimtobefree 4, fromfurtherharassmentandchallengedtheintegrityofthecourt.Accordingly,  weechothesentimentsofthetrialcourtandaffirmitsdecision:   4[_Y]oure_ԀtheonetheCourttoldtostayawayfromherandnotto  haveanycontactwithher.Youtoldmeyouwouldandyougetout ~v thereIcannothavepeople,Mr.Weaver,intimidatingpeoplethat d\ arevictimsoftheircriminalactivity,Icanthavethat. JB Ispecificallyorderedyounottohaveanycontactwithher ! whatsoever,andyoudiditanyway.Youveintimidatedherwhen ! youtoldheryoullseehersoon.Icanunderstandwhyshewould " havebeenthreatenedbythatandwhyshewouldhavefearafter #  everythingthatsgoneon.Icanttoleratethat,Mr.Weaver,Icant $! havepeopledeliberatelyviolatingtheorderwhenitsprotectionof %" somebodyelse,Ijustcanthavethatdone. z&r# 4 t-f-- Further,wenotethatthetrialcourtsdecisioncoincideswiththeimportant * #' legislativepolicyagainstdomesticabuse.See,e.g.,Tenn.CodeAnn.363 +$) 618.Werecognize,likethelegislature,theseriousnessofdomesticabuseasa -&+ crimeandthepressingneedtoafforditsvictimsassuranceandprotection.In v/n(- thiscase,thecourtsdutyistostandbehinditsorderandprovidethisvictimof B1:*/ abusesomelevelofsafetyandpeace. 3,1    CONCLUSION  6/5 4 WeAFFIRMthetrialcourtsorderrevokingthedefendantsprobation. ~8v17 1 J:B39 _ԇ   <     __________________________________  Ѐ# QX Xj# XjX Q    <     JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,Judge  CONCUR: R J ____________________________   JOSEPHM.TIPTON,Judge   ____________________________  ALANE.GLENN,Judge   #XjXX Xj# #QXXj5# X+ 4  XjXQ