WPC QpK QL'EpU ΂3FIOQ]Մq0Auuy׹1eFsX`P>n[靷k`P̬KpB cO9_@m_pM(xΜFSYkS3Q)s+x"*GsbLKPOS < 8R6` lGyP$OZnZC2O,y+$4MҩQ[tXShF=܏^kz%ęMT/ X0O=~;|q=#[ |\$? ȕ#uA?[lj6Dn 5ZGm]n'礼3%9o!Aub#\ %% UN+ 0y U N 0O ^ z,  wx 4|    g- mN 0 0DE 0 0 0= 0 0 0   1u 72****\\\\\\\\\\\bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb 1ejjjjjjjjjjjjj 0 B 0 D5{ D- 0K AS({ 0A 0D A)HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6V,,,,V0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular*GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   :1  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptJ13|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5U *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  (#$  0  *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)  R$      1    __In_Ԁ_Apprendi_Ԁv.NewJersey,530U.S.466(2000),theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthat, [_o]ther_Ԁthanthe  factofapriorconviction,anyfactthatincreasesthepenaltyforacrimebeyondtheprescribedstatutorymaximummust q besubmittedtoajury,andprovedbeyondareasonabledoubt.Id.at490.InRingv.Arizona,536U.S.584,587 2 (2002),theCourtapplied_Apprendi_toholdthatbecauseArizonaconditionedeligibilityforthedeathpenaltyuponthe C presenceofanaggravatingfactthatwasnotanelementoffirstdegreemurder,theSixthAmendmentguaranteedthe  defendantarighttoajurydeterminationofthatfact.- - 35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(|G2$ !.8Udd8         0   d(|3$ !.8Udd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8Udd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Udd8     _   U8XXdd8@hh`UINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @gg$ATNASHVILLE#U` #Ԉ #   AssignedonBriefsJanuary6,2004 F XXU #UXX#STATEOFTENNESSEEv._RICKY_ԀGROVERAARON ? XXU @@ AppealfromtheCriminalCourtforDavidsonCounty  9 @@No.99D2360WalterKurtz,Judge  # @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200202288CCAR3CDFiledDecember13,_2004_   AV) ` dE<]` A ^     #UXX#XXUX?XXX  InJuneof2001,theappellant,_Ricky_ԀGroverAaron,wasconvictedbyajuryofespecially V  aggravatedsexualexploitationofaminorandfalseimprisonment.Asaresultofhisconvictions, ? thetrialcourtsentencedtheappellanttoeleven(11)yearsfortheconvictionforespecially (x aggravatedsexualexploitationofaminorandelevenmonths,twentyninedaysonhisconviction a forfalseimprisonment.Thetrialcourtfurtherorderedthattheappellantssentencesbeserved J concurrentlytoeachother,butconsecutivelytoafederalsentencehewasalreadyserving. 3   OnJuly8,2004,thisCourtaffirmedboththeappellantsconvictionsandthesentence  imposedbythetrialcourt.SeeStatev._Ricky_ԀGroverAaron,No.M200202288CCAR3CD,2004  WL1533825(Tenn._Crim_.App.atNashville,Jul.8,2004).OnJuly14,2004,theappellantfiled  apetitiontorehear,urgingthisCourttoconsidertheimpactoftheUnitedStatesSupremeCourts p decisionin_Blakely_Ԁv.Washington,542U.S.___,124S.Ct.2531(2004),deliveredonJune24, Y 2004,onhissentence.Findingthepositionwelltakenduetothepotentialimpactofthe_Blakely_ B decisionuponthecurrentTennesseeSentencingAct,thisCourtgrantedthepetitiontorehearon +{ August2,2004.Thepartiesfiledsupplementalbriefsfullyaddressingtheirviewoftheimpactof d _Blakely_ontheappellantssentence.Afterathoroughreview,weconcludethatinlightof_Blakely_, M thetrialcourtimpermissiblyconsideredcertainenhancementfactorstoarriveattheappellants  6  sentenceforespeciallyaggravatedsexualexploitationofaminor.Therefore,wemodifythe !! appellantssentenceforespeciallyaggravatedsexualexploitationofaminorfromeleven(11)years "" tonine(9)years.Accordingly,theportionofthepreviousopinionofthisCourtaffirmingthe ## appellantssentenceisvacated.AllotherportionsofthisCourtspreviousopinionareaffirmed. $$ #XXXX?##UXX#XXU Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheTrialCourtisVacatedinPart; \&!& AffirmedinPart;SentenceModified.  F'"'   #UX#XX.UJerryL.Smith,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichThomasT._Woodall_,J.,concurred )i$) inresultsandDavidG.Hayes,J.,dissented#UXX#XXU. *R%* Jeffrey_DeVasher_,AssistantPublicDefender,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheappellant,_Ricky_ԀGrover +$', Aaron. , (-  -(. PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneral&Reporter;KimR.Helper,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;Victor  S.Johnson,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;Brian_Holmgren_ԀandLisa_Naylor_,AssistantDistricts  AttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee.  @@OO& OPINION #UXX#XXUԀ ONREHEARING  =  #UXX#p$ U X?X p$    FACTUALBACKGROUND   b w  Theappellanthereinwasconvictedofespeciallyaggravatedsexualexploitationofaminor,  5  aClassBfelony.AClassBfelonyispunishableby notlessthaneight(8)normorethantwelve    (12)years.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035112(a)(2).AsaRangeI,standardoffenderthepresumptive   sentenceforaClassBfelonyistheminimumsentenceintherangeiftherearenoenhancementor   mitigatingfactors.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210_(c_).Thetrialcourtinthiscaseimposedasentence   ofeleven(11)yearsbasedontheapplicationofthefollowingstatutoryenhancementfactors:(1) r   Thedefendanthasaprevioushistoryofcriminalconvictionsorcriminalbehaviorinadditionto [  thosenecessarytoestablishtheappropriaterange.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(2);(2) The D offenseinvolvedavictimandwascommittedtogratifythedefendantsdesireforpleasureor -} excitement.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(8);(3) Thedefendantabusedapositionofpublicor f privatetrust....Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(16). O   Theappellantarguesthatthetrialcourtviolatedhisrighttotrialbyjury,guaranteedtohim ! bytheDueProcessClauseoftheFourteenthAmendment,whenitenhancedhissentence,atleast   inpart,byfindingfactsnotsubmittedtothejuryandprovenbeyondareasonabledoubt.See  _Blakely_,542U.S.at___,124S.Ct.at2537.Specifically,theappellantarguesthatbecausefactors  (8)and(16)were neitheradmittedbythedefendantnorrelatedtoapriorconvictionasrequired u by_Blakely_,thisCourtmustreducetheappellantssentence correspondingtotheweightthisCourt ^ gavethosefactorsinaffirmingthetrialcourtssentence.TheStatecountersthat anysentencing G challengeavailabletothedefendantunder_Blakely_isnowwaivedbecausethedefendantdidnot 0 properlyobjectatsentencingorraisetheissueondirectappealorinhisappellantbriefs.Further, i theStatearguesthatanyerrorbythetrialcourtinapplyingenhancementfactorsisharmlessbeyond  R areasonabledoubt.  ;   Priortothereleaseof_Blakely_,inordertodetermineadefendantssentence,atrialcourt " ! startedatthepresumptivesentence,enhancedthesentencewithintherangeforexisting #" enhancementfactors,andthenreducedthesentencewithintherangeforexistingmitigatingfactors $# inaccordancewithTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection40-35-210(e).Noparticularweightforeach x% $ factorisprescribedbythestatute;theweightgiventoeachfactorislefttothediscretionofthetrial a&!% courtaslongasitcomportswiththesentencingprinciplesandpurposesofourcodeandaslongas J'"& itsfindingsaresupportedbytherecord.SeeStatev.Santiago,914S.W.2d116,125(Tenn._Crim_. 3(#' App.1995).ThisCourthasrecentlyrecognizedthat_Blakely_ callsintoquestionthecontinuing )l$( validityofourcurrentsentencingscheme.Statev.JuliusE.Smith,No.E200301059CCAR3 *U%)  CD,2004WL1606998,at*4(Tenn._Crim_.App.atKnoxville,July19,2004);seealsoStatev. *>&* _ MichaelWaynePoe,No.E200300417CCAR3CD,2004WL1607002,at*9(Tenn.Crim.App.  atKnoxville,July19,2004).     InBlakely,theSupremeCourtdeterminedthatthe statutorymaximumsentencefor k Apprendi# #  1      ׀purposesis themaximumsentenceajudgemayimposesolelyonthebasisofthefacts T reflectedinthejuryverdictoradmittedbythedefendant.542U.S.at___,124S.Ct.at2537.In =  otherwords: & v 8  [T]herelevant statutorymaximumisnotthemaximumsentenceajudgemay  H imposeafterfindingadditionalfacts,butthemaximumhemayimposewithoutany  1  additionalfindings.Whenajudgeinflictspunishmentthatthejurysverdictalone    doesnotallow,thejuryhasnotfoundallthefacts whichthelawmakesessential   tothepunishment,andthejudgeexceedshisproperauthority.    Id.󀀀BlakelyinvolvedthesentencingschemeoftheStateofWashingtonwherethecriminalcode n  establishesmaximumsentencesforfeloniesaccordingtotheclassoffelony.Washingtonalsohas W  presumptivesentencingrangesbasedontheseriousnessleveloftheoffenseandtheoffenders @ criminalhistory.InWashington,ajudgeispermittedtoimposeasentenceabovethepresumptive )y rangewhenthereexists substantialandcompellingreasonsjustifyinganexceptionalsentence. b Blakely,542U.S.at___,124S.Ct.at2535.Ajudgemayimposeanexceptionalsentenceutilizing K oneofthese reasonsillustratedintheSentencingReformActonlyifitisnotalreadytakeninto 4 accountinthecalculationofthepresumptiverange.    Blakelypledguiltytoseconddegreekidnappingwithafirearm.AsaclassBfelony,itwas  punishablebyasentenceofupto10years.TheSentencingReformActofWashington,however,  specifiedapresumptiverangeof49to53months.Thesentencingjudgeimposedanexceptional q sentenceof90monthsonthegroundthatthedefendanthadactedwith deliberatecruelty,a Z statutorilyenumeratedgroundforupwarddeparture.TheSupremeCourtultimatelydeterminedthat C WashingtonssentencingprocedureviolatedthedefendantsSixthAmendmentrighttoatrialby ,| jury.Id.542U.S.at___,124S.Ct.at2538. e   TheStatecontendsthattheappellanthaswaivedanyBlakelyissuebecausehefailedtoraise  7 itinthetrialcourt.TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasstatedthat whenadecisionofthiscourt !   resultsinanewrule,thatruleappliestoallcriminalcasesstillpendingondirectreview.Schriro " ! v.Summerlin,___U.S.___,124S.Ct.2519,2522(2004).TheStatearguesthatBlakelydoesnot #" establishanewrulebutmerelyclarifiestheruleannouncedinApprendiv.NewJersey,530U.S. $# 366(2000).Insupportofitsargument,theStatenotesthattheSupremeCourtstatedinBlakelythat t% $  thiscaserequiresustoapplytheruleweexpressedinApprendi.Blakely,542U.S.at___,124  S.Ct.at2536.    Acase announcesanewrulewhenitbreaksnewgroundorimposesanewobligationon k theStatesortheFederalgovernment.VanTranv.State,66S.W.3d790,81011(Tenn.2001) T (quotingTeaguev.Lane,489U.S.288,301(1989)).Inotherwords, acaseannouncesanewrule =  iftheresultwasnotdictatedbyprecedentexistingatthetimethedefendantsconvictionbecame & v final.Teague,489U.S.at301.  _   ThedefendantinApprendiwasconvictedofmultipleoffenses,includingseconddegree  1  possessionofafirearmforanunlawfulpurpose.530U.S.466(2000).NewJerseystatelaw    prescribedasentenceoffive(5)toten(10)yearsforaseconddegreeoffense,butahatecrime   statuteineffectatthetimeprovidedthatajudgecouldenhancethedefendantssentenceabovethe   maximumintherangeifthecrimewasraciallymotivated.Pursuanttothestatute,thetrialcourtin   Apprendisentencedthedefendanttotwelve(12)years,two(2)yearsabovetherange.TheUnited n  StatesSupremeCourtreversed,determiningthat [o]therthanthefactofapriorconviction,anyfact W  thatincreasesthepenaltyforacrimebeyondtheprescribedstatutorymaximummustbesubmitted @ toajury,andprovedbeyondareasonabledoubt.Id.at490. )y   TheargumentadvancedbytheStatehereinisthattheruleinBlakelymerelyextendstherule K previouslyannouncedinApprendi.However,inGrahamv.State,90S.W.3d687,692(Tenn.2002), 4 oursupremecourtheldthatthenoncapitalsentencingprocedureinthisstatecompliedwith  Apprendi,saying,  8  InApprendi,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtreviewedaNewJerseyprovisionthat  allowedajudgetoimposeasentenceexceedingthestatutorymaximumforan q offenseifthejudgefinds,byapreponderanceoftheevidence,thattheoffense Z constitutedahatecrime.The[Tennessee]SupremeCourtstrucktheprovisiondown, C holdingthatdueprocessrequiresthat anyfact,otherthanapreviousconviction, ,| usedtoenhanceasentenceabovethestatutorymaximummustbe:(1)chargedinthe e indictment,(2)submittedtothejury,and(3)provenbeyondareasonabledoubt. N Statev.Dellinger,79S.W.3d458,466(Tenn.2002)(quotingApprendi,530U.S.at  7 476,120S.Ct.2348).However,theCourtemphasizedthatthejudgestillretainshis !   discretiontoconsiderallenhancingandmitigatingfactors withintherange " ! prescribedbythestatute.Apprendi,530U.S.at481,120S.Ct.2348(emphasis #" added).$#     Theappellanthereinreceivedasentenceofeleven(11)years,asentencewithinthestatutory ]&!% maximumforespeciallyaggravatedsexualexploitationofaminorasaRangeIstandardoffender. F'"& Accordingly,thetrialcourtwaswellwithinitsdiscretionandstatutoryauthoritytoconsider /(#' enhancingfactorsforthepurposeofsentencingwithouttheassistanceofthejury.Thus,Apprendi )h$( providesnorelieftotheappellant. *Q%)   *:&*   ThisCourthasacknowledgedthatBlakely extendedApprendisholdingthat,underthe   SixthAmendment,ajurymustfindallfactsusedtoincreaseadefendantssentencebeyondthe  statutorymaximum.SeeStatev.CharlesBenson,No.M200302127CCAR3CD,2004WL  2266801,at*8(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Oct.8,2004).Insodoing,thisCourtwentonto k statethat: T 8  [N]othinginApprendisuggestedthatthephrase statutorymaximumequatedto & v anythingotherthanthemaximumintherange.Tothecontrary,theUnitedStates  _ SupremeCourtstatedtheissueinApprendias whetherthe12yearsentence  H imposed...waspermissible,giventhatitwasabovethe10yearmaximumforthe  1  offensechargedinthatcount.530U.S.at474,120S.Ct.at2354.Wealsonote    thattheSupremeCourthasconsideredtheretroactiveeffectoftheholdinginRing   v.Arizona536U.S.584,59293,122S.Ct.2428,2435n.1,153L.Ed.2d556   (2002),asanewruleforcapitalcaseseventhoughitwasbasedonApprendi.See   Schriro,___U.S.at___,124S.Ct.at252527....WeconcludethatBlakelyalters n  Tennesseecourtsinterpretationofthephrase statutorymaximumandestablishes W  anewruleinthisstate....@   Id.at*9.Weconcludedthatthedenialoftherighttoajurytrialcouldnotbeharmlesserroras b arguedbytheStateevenifBlakelydidnotestablishanewrule,becauseabsentawrittenwaiverof K therighttoajurytrial, itmustappearfromtherecordthatthedefendantpersonallygaveexpress 4 consent[towaiveajurytrial]inopencourt.Id.at*9(quotingStatev.Ellis,953S.W.2d216,221  (Tenn.Crim.App.1997)).Thesameanalysisappliesherein.Therecordinthiscasecontains  neitherawrittenwaiveroftherighttoajurytrialnoranexpresswaiverfromtheappellant.    Thetrialcourthereinappliedenhancementfactor(2)baseduponthefactthattheappellant q hadtwofederalconvictionsforpossessionofchildpornographyandwasservingafederalsentence Z atthetimeofsentencinganddemonstratedprior criminalbehaviorthatwas overandabovethat C whichwasnecessarytosupporthisconvictionsinFederalcourt.Atthesentencinghearing, ,| defensecounselagreedthattherecordcontainedproofthattheappellant downloadedother e sexuallyexplicitmaterialinvolvingchildpornographyoverandabovethatusedforhispleasin N federalcourt.Irrespectiveofthefactthatthetrialcourtconsideredprior criminalbehavior,  7 Blakelymakesclearthatatrialcourtmayenhanceasentencebaseduponpriorconvictions. !   Blakely,542U.S.at___,124S.Ct.at2536.Wedeterminethatthetrialcourtsapplicationoffactor " ! (2)fortheappellantspriorconvictionswasproper.However,thetrialcourtalsoapplied #" enhancementfactors(8)and(16).Webelievethatthetrialcourtsapplicationofthesefactors $# violatesBlakely.SeeStatev.LawrenceWarrenPierce,No.M200301924CCAR3CD,2004WL t% $ 2533794,at*12(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Nov.9,2004)(determiningthattrialcourts ]&!% applicationoffactor(8)violatedBlakelywheretherewas noproof,asrequiredbyBlakely,forits F'"& application);Statev.BobbyNorthcutt,No.M200302805CCAR3CD,2004WL2266798,at*7 /(#' *8(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Oct.7,2004)(concludingthattrialcourtsapplicationoffactor )h$( (8)andfactor(16)violatedBlakelywheretheenhancementfactorswerenotsubmittedtoorfound *Q%) byajuryoradmittedbythedefendant). *:&* _  +#'+   Becausethetrialcourterredinsentencingtheappellant,wewillreviewhissentencedenovo  withnopresumptionofcorrectness.Wehavealreadydeterminedthattherecordsupportsthe  impositionofenhancementfactor(2).Therecordreflectsthattheappellanthadtwopriorfederal  convictionsforpossessionofchildpornographyandwasservingafederalsentenceforthosecrimes k atthetimeofthesentencinghearingherein.Inlightofthefactthattheseconvictionsarosefrom T thesamebasicsetofcircumstancesastheconvictionforespeciallyaggravatedsexualexploitation =  ofaminor,thisenhancementfactorisentitledtolittleweight.Theremainingenhancementfactors & v areprohibitedby_ Blakely_ fromconsiderationbythetrialjudge.Thus,wemodifytheappellants  _ sentencefromeleven(11)yearstonine(9)years.  H   Conclusion   |Z  Accordingly,theportionofthepreviousopinionofthisCourtaffirmingtheappellants n  sentenceisvacated.Theappellantssentencefortheconvictionofespeciallyaggravatedsexual W  exploitationofaminorismodifiedtonine(9)years.TheremainderofthisCourtsopinion @ affirmingtheappellantsconvictionsisaffirmed. )y    K _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ #XXXX?'##UXXL#_ _ p$ U_ #U p$g^#p$ U#U p$^#0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#XXU___________________________________T(#(#    `     h   JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE