ÿWPC ¥I”÷Ye˜XCëøZw\3û{? F^P{Ÿô¸G?;HPã#ì²Îµ¡O¢ýH™ÕK“ºàU›´iVÀž!È5èl!¡E¿ °I¸lûÁ´ÞŒè¸E1?e3–ÇŒDiëK}kÈÜ9×,©AŒiñ5K©áίD$ãŽX“ÕË2¦ ©z嘛Ŕ?j)½ ~L~ârÄn•y2÷›¯ðsb@Tð#™wñ©ËuJÔ뉣ƒå§%^†09ë)¿¾Ð Dgß]á¢O¢@\îd× Îk‹CÞÚOAUKùN­û‚6l˜‹–¯>·NÛñsðKL¢ú½E®ì¶RãeOãîåîö0íEñ¡–Xn,ü—"OÒ-áËŠnýûŰ ÔòHü{ϵ@˜NÉòã&ë·ˆdÇ¥wºfëfkǼ”3wƒnÚQB­u8ÉžWþ'"~ R Ü´¡8âuÿu’b#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% UN­ U Nû û zI Òà z• Ò ^ á wí Æñ Æ· Æ}ÆC4 N.E0 m2òI 0D; 1‡’ 72 1uK 72À 0"còò 0wU 1‡Ì 1‡S 72Ú 72  1‡>> 72ÅÅÅÅÅb÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷ 0ëÿÿÿÿ Bêê 0¤ D5« D-à 0K   ASXÆ« 0¤q 0D A«Y˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ˜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.wpt ˜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.wptw|-)â Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ûr') œ`ÕŸ3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ èÝ ƒRÄ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ônM ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAnderson€is€serving€additional€time€for€various€drug€convictions€which€are€not€the€subject€of€this€appeal.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒRÄ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ônM ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔApparently,€the€26„year„old€victim€and€the€59„year„old€defendant€did€not€get€along€because€they€dated€the€sameÐ ° Ðwoman.€€(нCEKQW]cioAutoList1A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(Oé;$µµà0  àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à(UhCEKQW]cioAutoList31.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.0š}CEKQW]cioAutoList2A.1.A.A.A.A.A.A.$A.#1.(º½CEKQW]cioAutoList4A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.'A.- ù-(|G2Ä$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OD»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô6xò»»Ô d(|3Mü$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OD»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Mü$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OD»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G¬»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRY,3Ø' LetterXà3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼À¥»»»ÔÑ8€)\XXdê»»d 8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îÍDÀ¥ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼À¥»îîÍD`#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJune€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X‡ÙX»¼À¥ÔÌò òÔ#†¼À¥»XX‡Ùc#ÔState€of€Tennesseeòòóó€v.€Joe€C.€Anderson€a/k/a€Uncle€JoeòòóóÔ‡X‡ÙX»¼À¥Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Ô_ÔLoudonÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€9612€€€€€€E.€Eugene€Ô_ÔEblenÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½ ` AßÐ ¾   ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„02485„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¹  ÐSeptember€12,€2000Ð ¥õ  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓRaising€issues€of€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€and€improper€sentencing,€Joe€C.€Anderson€appeals€fromÐ ŒÜ  Ðhis€conviction€of€second€degree€murder€in€the€Ô_ÔLoudonÔ_Ô€County€Criminal€Court.€€Because€we€discernÐ xÈ  Ðno€error€requiring€reversal,€we€affirm.Ð d´ ÐÓ9ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ <Œ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼À¥»àX‡Ùê#ÔÔ‡X‡ÙX.¼À¥ÔJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayesóó€andÐ d ÐòòNorma€McGee€Ogle,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð P ÐÌJoseph€R.€Ford,€Ô_ÔLoudonÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€Kenneth€F.€Irvine,€Jr.,€Knoxville,€Tennessee€(on€appeal)€AlfredÐ Ø( ÐÔ_ÔHathcockÔ_Ô€and€Walter€Johnson,€Assistant€District€Public€Defenders€(at€trial),€for€the€appellant,€JoeÐ Ä ÐC.€Anderson.Ð ° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter,€Mark€A.€Ô_ÔFulksÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€CharlesÐ ˆØ ÐE.€Hawk,€District€Attorney€General,€Scott€Ô_ÔMcCluenÔ_Ô€and€Frank€Harvey,€Assistant€District€AttorneysÐ tÄ ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð `° ÐÓøÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼À¥»XX‡Ù'#ÔÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÌÔ€X‡ÙX»¼À¥ÔÓ  Óà  àà ` àJoe€C.€Anderson€appeals€from€his€conviction€of€the€second€degree€murder€of€KevinÐ 6#†" ÐAngel.€€Anderson€was€convicted€at€the€conclusion€of€a€jury€trial€in€the€Ô_ÔLoudonÔ_Ô€County€CriminalÐ "$r# ÐCourt.€€He€is€presently€serving€a€twenty„year€sentence€in€the€Department€of€Correction€for€thisÐ %^ $ Ðcrime.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€this€direct€appeal,€he€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€and€the€length€of€theÐ ú%J!% Ðsentence€imposed.€€Upon€review,€we€hold€that€the€evidence€sufficiently€supports€the€defendantððsÐ æ&6"& Ðconviction.€€Although€we€agree€with€the€defendant€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€make€appropriateÐ Ò'"#' Ðfindings€justifying€the€sentence€imposed,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€reached€an€appropriateÐ ¾($( Ðresult€on€the€facts€of€this€case.€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð ª)ú$) Ðâ âÐ –*æ%*ý8 ÐÔ_Ôà  àà ` àIn€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€the€victim€came€to€the€defendantððs€home€onÐ ° Ðâ âthe€evening€of€September€7,€1997.€€The€victim€had€been€ð ða€startinðð€troubleðð€at€the€defendantððs€shopÐ œì Ðin€the€preceding€days,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€so€the€defendant€got€his€gun.€€Two€of€the€defendantððs€houseguests€attemptedÐ ˆØ Ðto€keep€the€victim€from€coming€inside€the€defendantððs€trailer€home.€€The€victim€had€a€ð ðfour€footÐ tÄ Ðlevelðð€and€said€to€the€defendant,€ð ð[C]ððmon€out€here€ole€man€Iððm€gonna€whop€you€this€time.ðð€€TheÐ `° Ðdefendant€claimed,€ð ðI€just€took€all€I€could€take.ðð€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€victim€and€the€defendant€argued€for€ten€to€fifteen€minutes€inside€the€trailer,€untilÐ $ t Ðthe€defendant€told€one€of€his€houseguests€to€ð ðcall€the€law.ðð€€The€victim€became€upset€and€said€thatÐ  ` Ðthe€authorities€would€take€his€truck€because€he€had€no€driverððs€license.€€The€defendant€told€theÐ ü L  Ðvictim€he€was€going€to€lose€everything.€€The€victim€went€outside€and€started€beating€the€defendantððsÐ è 8  Ðsportscar€with€the€level.€€The€defendant€followed€the€victim€outside€and€began€shooting.€€Three€shotsÐ Ô$  Ðstruck€the€defendantððs€sportscar,€a€truck,€and€the€victim.€€According€to€the€defendant,€the€second€orÐ À  Ðthird€shot€was€the€one€which€struck€the€victim.€€The€shot€entered€the€victimððs€back,€perforated€bothÐ ¬ü  Ðlungs,€lacerated€the€aortic€arch€and€trachea,€and€exited€his€chest.€€The€wound€was€fatal.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€Detective€Jonathan€Sartin€of€the€Lenoir€City€Police€Department€arrived€at€theÐ pÀ Ðscene,€the€victim€was€already€loaded€into€an€ambulance,€and€the€defendant€and€his€houseguests€hadÐ \¬ Ðbeen€restrained€to€preserve€the€crime€scene.€€Detective€Sartin€described€the€defendant€as€ð ðkind€ofÐ H˜ Ðmad€because€of€what€had€happened.ðð€€However,€when€specifically€asked,€Sartin€denied€that€theÐ 4„ Ðdefendant€was€tearful,€crying,€enraged,€screaming,€hollering,€red„faced€or€breathing€hard.€€On€cross„Ð  p Ðexamination,€Detective€Sartin€acknowledged€that€the€victim€had€a€propensity€to€be€violent€andÐ  \ Ðaggressive.€€In€a€prior€encounter,€the€victim€had€injured€Detective€Sartin,€spit€in€Sartinððs€police€dogððsÐ øH Ðface,€and€warped€a€screen€inside€Sartinððs€patrol€car€through€physical€violence.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àà ` àDoctor€Sandra€Elkins,€who€performed€an€autopsy€of€the€victim,€testified€to€theÐ ¼  Ðmanner€of€death.€€She€also€testified€that€the€victimððs€blood„alcohol€content€was€.15,€and€he€wasÐ ¨ø Ðlegally€intoxicated.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€chose€not€to€present€evidence.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€the€charged€offense€of€second€degree€murder.€Ð D!” ÐAt€a€later€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€imposed€an€incarcerative€sentence€of€twenty€years.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà@ÅÅ*ìàò òIó óˆÐ $X" Ðà  àà ` àThe€defendantððs€first€issue€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€HeÐ ô$D # Ðclaims€that€once€the€issues€of€self„defense€and€ð ðpassionðð€were€raised,€the€state€failed€to€disprove€theÐ à%0!$ Ðexistence€of€these€elements€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€In€essence,€the€defendant€argues€that€he€isÐ Ì&"% Ðguilty€of€nothing€because€he€acted€in€self„defense,€and€alternatively,€that€he€is€guilty€of€no€greaterÐ ¸'#& Ðcrime€than€voluntary€manslaughter.Ð ¤(ô#' Їà  àà ` àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€an€appellate€court'sÐ ° Ðstandard€of€review€is€whether,€after€considering€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÐ œì Ðprosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyondÐ ˆØ Ða€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€324,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2791-92€(1979);€òòStateÐ tÄ Ðv.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.€1985);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€This€rule€applies€to€findingsÐ `° Ðof€guilt€based€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€andÐ L œ Ðcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€253€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€court€should€not€reweigh€orÐ  ` Ðreevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€Ð ü L  ÐQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€wellÐ è 8  Ðas€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571Ð Ô$  ÐS.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Nor€may€this€court€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€theÐ À  Ðtrier€of€fact€from€the€evidence.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.€298,€305,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(1956);Ð ¬ü  ÐòòFarmer€v.€Stateóó,€574€S.W.2d€49,€51€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€On€the€contrary,€this€court€must€affordÐ ˜è  Ðthe€State€of€Tennessee€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€as€wellÐ „Ô  Ðas€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€€òòCabbageóó,€571Ð pÀ ÐS.W.2d€at€835.€€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€second€degree€murder,€which€is€the€ð ðknowing€killingÐ 4„ Ðof€another.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(a)(1)€(1997).Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€contrast,€the€crime€of€voluntary€manslaughter€ð ðis€the€intentional€or€knowing€killingÐ øH Ðof€another€in€a€state€of€passion€produced€by€adequate€provocation€sufficient€to€lead€a€reasonableÐ ä4 Ðperson€to€act€in€an€irrational€manner.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„211(a)€(1997).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€law€of€self„defense€providesÐ ¨ø ÐÌà8  àA€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€force€against€another€person€when€andÐ €Ð Ðto€the€degree€the€person€reasonably€believes€the€force€is€immediately€necessary€toÐ l¼ Ðprotect€against€the€other's€use€or€attempted€use€of€unlawful€force.€The€person€mustÐ X ¨ Ðhave€a€reasonable€belief€that€there€is€an€imminent€danger€of€death€or€serious€bodilyÐ D!” Ðinjury.€The€danger€creating€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€mustÐ 0"€  Ðbe€real,€or€honestly€believed€to€be€real€at€the€time,€and€must€be€founded€uponÐ #l! Ðreasonable€grounds.€€€Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39-11-611(a)€(1997).Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÌÌÌÓ€ (н83ÓÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚ 3£:.ÝÔ2нÔÚ  ÚAÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝSecond€Degree€Murder€or€Voluntary€Manslaughter݃ 3£:.j.ÝŒÐ|*Ì%)(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àó óThe€facts€of€this€case€establish€that€the€defendant€knowingly€killed€the€victim.€€WhenÐ ° Ðthe€victim€came€to€the€defendantððs€house,€the€defendant€retrieved€his€gun.€€He€argued€with€theÐ œì Ðvictim,€and€when€the€victim€exited€the€defendantððs€home€and€began€beating€on€the€defendantððs€carÐ ˆØ Ðwith€a€level,€the€defendant€fired€multiple€shots€at€the€victim,€one€of€which€struck€the€victim.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àNonetheless,€the€defendant€claims€that€the€stateððs€evidence€raised€the€issue€ofÐ L œ Ðð ðpassion€produced€by€adequate€provocation€sufficient€to€lead€a€reasonable€person€to€act€in€anÐ 8 ˆ Ðirrational€manner,ðð€thereby€establishing€voluntary€manslaughter.€€The€evidence€established€that€theÐ $ t Ðdefendant€and€the€victim€had€a€history€of€conflict,€that€the€victim€threatened€to€ð ðwhopðð€the€defendantÐ  ` Ðon€the€night€of€the€crime,€that€the€defendant€and€the€drunk€victim€argued€immediately€prior€to€theÐ ü L  Ðcrime,€and€that€the€defendant€was€still€mad€over€the€situation€when€Detective€Sartin€arrived€after€theÐ è 8  Ðshooting.€€Ultimately,€however,€it€for€the€jury€to€determine€whether€this€evidence€establishedÐ Ô$  Ðð ðpassion€produced€by€adequate€provocation€sufficient€to€lead€a€reasonable€person€to€act€in€anÐ À  Ðirrational€manner.ðð€€The€jury€determined€that€this€evidence€did€not€rise€to€the€level€of€passionÐ ¬ü  Ðrequired€for€voluntary€manslaughter.€€Upon€review,€we€conclude€that€a€rational€jury€could€reach€thisÐ ˜è  Ðconclusion€based€upon€the€evidence€of€record.€€Obviously,€in€weighing€and€evaluating€the€evidence,Ð „Ô  Ðthe€jury€determined€that€the€defendant€was€not€sufficiently€provoked€by€the€victimððs€actions€andÐ pÀ Ðthreats€and/or€that€a€reasonable€person€would€not€kill€another€over€property€damage€and€threats€ofÐ \¬ Ðviolence.€€Such€was€within€the€juryððs€province€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€909€S.W.2dÐ H˜ Ð461,€464€(Tenn.€Crim€App.€1995)€(whether€the€defendantððs€acts€ð ðconstitute€a€ððknowing€killingððÐ 4„ Ð(second€degree€murder)€or€a€killing€due€to€ððadequate€provocationðð€(voluntary€manslaughter)€is€aÐ  p Ðquestion€for€the€juryðð);òòState€v.€Keelsóó,€753€S.W.2d€140,€143€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988)€(issue€ofÐ  \ Ðdegree€of€homicide€is€for€the€jury€to€decide€in€view€of€all€of€the€facts€of€the€case).Ð øH ÐÌò òB.€à0  àSelf„DefenseÐÐ (#(# Ðó óÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€also€claims€that€the€stateððs€evidence€fairly€raised€the€issue€of€self„Ð ¨ø Ðdefense€and€that€the€state€failed€to€disprove€that€the€shooting€was€in€self„defense.€€The€defendant€isÐ ”ä Ðcorrect€that€he€has€no€burden€of€establishing€the€defense€once€its€existence€is€fairly€raised;€rather,€theÐ €Ð Ðstate€carries€the€burden€of€proof€to€negate€the€defense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Belseróó,€945€S.W.2d€776,€782Ð l¼ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€The€state€must€negate€the€defense€to€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€Ð X ¨ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€39„11„201(a)(3)€(1997);€òòBelseróó,€945€S.W.2d€at€783.€€Whether€the€state€has€metÐ D!” Ðits€burden€is€a€question€for€the€jury€to€determine.€òòState€v.€Fred€Edmond€Deanóó,€No.Ð 0"€  Ð03C01-9508-CC-00251,€slip€op.€at€10€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Jan.€10,€1997),€òòperm.€app.Ð #l! Ðdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1997);€€òòState€v.€Cliftonóó,€880€S.W.2d€737,€743€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ð $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àThese€principles€afford€the€defendant€no€relief,€however.€€The€evidence€demonstratesÐ à%0!$ Ðthat€the€victim€came€to€the€defendantððs€home€armed€with€a€level,€threatened€to€ð ðwhopðð€theÐ Ì&"% Ðdefendant,€argued€with€the€defendant,€and€vandalized€the€defendantððs€car.€€There€is€also€evidence,Ð ¸'#& Ðhowever,€that€the€victim€left€the€defendantððs€home€after€the€argument€and€was€in€the€process€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðvandalizing€the€defendantððs€car€when€he€was€shot€in€the€back.€The€defendant,€furthermore,€had€askedÐ )à$( Ða€houseguest€to€call€law€enforcement€to€handle€the€situation.€€The€juryððs€task€as€finder€of€factÐ |*Ì%) Ðrequired€it€to€assign€weight€and€value€to€all€of€the€evidence.€€In€so€doing,€the€jury€obviously€foundÐ h+¸&* Ðthat€the€state€negated€the€defendantððs€claim€of€self„defense.€€Viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÐ ° Ðfavorable€to€the€state,€we€see€no€error.€€Rational€jurors€could€find,€based€upon€the€evidence€of€record,Ð œì Ðthat€force€was€not€immediately€necessary,€that€there€was€no€imminent€danger€of€death€or€seriousÐ ˆØ Ðbodily€injury,€and/or€that€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€was€not€real,€or€notÐ tÄ Ðhonestly€believed,€and€not€founded€upon€reasonable€grounds.€€€òòSeeóóòòKeelsóó,€753€S.W.2d€at€143€(issueÐ `° Ðof€self„defense€is€for€the€jury€to€decide€in€view€of€all€of€the€facts€of€the€case).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€evidence€sufficiently€supports€the€defendantððs€conviction€of€second€degreeÐ $ t Ðmurder.Ð  ` ÐÌà@žž)ìàò òIIˆÐ è 8  Ðó óÌà  àà ` àThe€defendantððs€remaining€challenge€is€to€the€propriety€of€his€twenty„year€sentence.€Ð À  ÐHe€claims€that€the€sentence€is€too€lengthy€given€the€presence€of€several€mitigating€factors€and€theÐ ¬ü  Ðstateððs€failure€to€advance€any€enhancement€factors€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€itÐ pÀ Ðis€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ \¬ Ðdeterminations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„401(d)€(1997).€€ThisÐ H˜ Ðpresumption€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÐ 4„ Ðconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Ð  p ÐS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€ð ðThe€burden€of€showing€that€the€sentence€is€improper€is€upon€theÐ  \ Ðappellant.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€event€the€record€fails€to€demonstrate€the€required€consideration€by€the€trialÐ øH Ðcourt,€review€of€the€sentence€is€purely€òòde€novoóó.€€òòIdóó.€€If€appellate€review€reflects€the€trial€courtÐ ä4 Ðproperly€considered€all€relevant€factors€and€its€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€theÐ Ð  Ðrecord,€this€court€must€affirm€the€sentence,€ð ðeven€if€we€would€have€preferred€a€different€result.ðð€Ð ¼  ÐòòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court,€at€the€conclusion€of€theÐ €Ð Ðsentencing€hearing,€determines€the€range€of€sentence€and€then€determines€the€specific€sentence€andÐ l¼ Ðthe€propriety€of€sentencing€alternatives€by€considering€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trialÐ X ¨ Ðand€the€sentencing€hearing,€(2)€the€presentence€report,€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€argumentsÐ D!” Ðas€to€sentencing€alternatives,€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved,€(5)Ð 0"€  Ðevidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€(6)€anyÐ #l! Ðstatements€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€the€defendantððs€behalf€about€sentencing,€and€(7)€theÐ $X" Ðpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„210(a),€(b)€(1997);€Tenn.€CodeÐ ô$D # ÐAnn.€ðð40„35„103(5)€(1997);€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€summarily€announced€that€the€sentence€would€beÐ ¸'#& Ðtwenty€years€without€acknowledging€the€sentencing€principles€and€making€appropriate€findingsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbased€upon€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€case.€€Accordingly,€our€review€of€the€trial€courtððsÐ )à$( Ðsentencing€determination€is€òòde€novoóó€unaccompanied€by€the€presumption€of€correctness.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* ÐØ! !ØÓ€ $(š}08ÓÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚ 3£³RÝÔ2š}ÔÚ  ÚAÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝEnhancement€Factors݃ 3£³RãR݌а(#(# ÐŒÝ  Ýó óÌà  àà ` àOur€review€of€the€statutory€enhancement€factors€reveals€two€that€apply€on€the€factsÐ ˆØ Ðof€this€case.€€ð ðThe€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€inÐ tÄ Ðaddition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1)Ð `° Ð(1997).€€In€his€brief,€the€defendant€concedes€the€applicability€of€this€factor.€We€afford€it€substantialÐ L œ Ðweight,€particularly€in€light€of€three€prior€convictions€for€assault€and€over€30€alcohol„relatedÐ 8 ˆ Ðoffenses.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àà ` àSecond,€the€defendant€employed€a€firearm€during€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€òòSeeóóÐ ü L  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(9)€(1997).€€Use€of€a€firearm€is€not€an€element€of€second€degreeÐ è 8  Ðmurder.€€òòSee€generallyóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„210€(1997).€€Thus,€the€defendantððs€sentence€isÐ Ô$  Ðproperly€enhanced€with€this€factor.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Rainesóó,€882€S.W.2d€376,€385€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð À  ÐApp.€1994).€€We€afford€it€moderate€weight.€Ð ¬ü  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àÌà  àà ` àThe€state€advances€two€additional€enhancement€factors,€which€we€reject.€€First,€theÐ „Ô  Ðstate€argues€that€the€defendant€committed€the€crime€without€hesitation€despite€the€high€risk€to€humanÐ pÀ Ðlife.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(10)€(1997).€€This€factor€is€ordinarily€inapplicable€to€theÐ \¬ Ðcrime€of€second€degree€murder.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2d€305,€314€(Tenn.€1994).€€It€mayÐ H˜ Ðbe€applied,€however,€where€the€risk€is€to€the€life€of€someone€other€than€the€homicide€victim.€€òòSee,Ð 4„ Ðe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€909€S.W.2d€461,€464€n.1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€In€the€present€case,€thereÐ  p Ðis€evidence€that€others€were€present;€however,€the€record€is€devoid€of€evidence€that€they€were€in€aÐ  \ Ðzone€of€danger.€€The€defendantððs€houseguests€appear€to€have€been€inside€the€defendantððs€trailerÐ øH Ðduring€the€shooting,€which€took€place€outside.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Samuel€D.€Bradenóó,€No.€01C01„9610„CC„Ð ä4 Ð00457,€slip€op.€at€10„11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Feb.€18,€1998)€(factor€(10)€did€not€applyÐ Ð  Ðwhere€defendantððs€children€were€inside€house€when€defendant€shot€victim€in€carport€area).€€Thus,Ð ¼  Ðwe€reject€this€enhancement€factor.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€state€also€advances€the€enhancement€of€the€defendantððs€sentence€for€commissionÐ €Ð Ðof€the€offense€while€the€defendant€was€on€bail€for€another€felony.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð l¼ Ð114(13)(A)€(1997)€(enhancement€appropriate€if€defendant€committed€offense€while€on€bail€ð ðif€theÐ X ¨ Ðdefendant€is€ultimately€convicted€of€such€prior€felonyðð).€€€€In€its€brief,€the€state€recites€that€theÐ D!” Ðdefendant€was€arrested€on€December€14,€1997€and€May€29,€1998€for€felony€drug€offenses.€€However,Ð 0"€  Ðthis€offense€occurred€on€September€7,€1997,€before€those€arrests€took€place.€€Thus,€it€would€beÐ #l! Ðimpossible€for€the€defendant€to€have€been€on€bail€for€the€drug€offenses€at€the€time€he€murdered€theÐ $X" Ðvictim.€€This€enhancement€factor€does€not€apply.Ð ô$D # ÐÌÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚ 3£¬aÝÔ2š}ÔÚ  ÚBÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝMitigating€Factors݃ 3£¬aÜaÝŒÐÌ&"%(#(# ÐŒÝ  Ýó óÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€advocates€the€application€of€seven€mitigating€factors:Ð ¤(ô#' ÐØ! !ØÓ€ #(Uh80$ÓÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£¡cÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€defendant€acted€under€strong€provocation;݃ 3£¡cÚcÝŒÐ)à$(` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£«dÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝSubstantial€grounds€exist€tending€to€excuse€or€justify€the€defendantððs€criminalÐ |*Ì%) Ðconduct,€though€failing€to€establish€a€defense;݃ 3£«dädÝŒÐh+¸&*` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£fÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€defendant,€because€of€youth€or€old€age,€lacked€substantial€judgment€inÐ ° Ðcommitting€the€offense;݃ 3£fWf݌Мì` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£qgÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú4Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€defendant,€although€guilty€of€the€crime,€committed€the€offense€underÐ ˆØ Ðsuch€unusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€a€sustained€intent€to€violateÐ tÄ Ðthe€law€motivated€the€criminal€conduct;݃ 3£qgªgÝŒÐ`°` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£8iÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú5Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€defendant€has€significant€health€problems;݃ 3£8iqiÝŒÐL œ` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£CjÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú6Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€defendant€expressed€remorse€about€the€victimððs€death;݃ 3£Cj|jÝŒÐ8 ˆ` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚ 3£\kÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú7Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€defendant€served€in€the€military€and€received€an€honorable€discharge.݃ 3£\k•kÝŒÐ$ t` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(2),€(3),€(6),€(11),€(13)€(1997).Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€are€unconvinced€that€the€defendantððs€sentence€should€be€mitigated€because€heÐ Ô$  Ðacted€under€strong€provocation.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(2)€(1997).€€The€defendantððsÐ À  Ðresponse€to€the€situation€was€uncalled€for€and€excessive.€€There€is€no€indication€that€the€victim€didÐ ¬ü  Ðanything€so€inflammatory€that€the€defendant€was€strongly€provoked€into€his€course€of€action.€€WeÐ ˜è  Ðdecline€to€apply€this€mitigating€factor.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àLikewise,€we€see€no€substantial€grounds€tending€to€excuse€or€justify€the€defendantððsÐ \¬ Ðcriminal€conduct.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(3)€(1997).€€We€acknowledge€that€the€victimÐ H˜ Ðand€the€defendant€did€not€get€along€and€argued€just€prior€to€the€offense,€that€the€victim€threatenedÐ 4„ Ðto€ð ðwhopðð€the€defendant,€and€that€the€victim€was€in€the€process€of€vandalizing€the€defendantððsÐ  p Ðsportscar€when€he€was€shot.€€However,€absolutely€nothing€of€record€even€remotely€justifies€theÐ  \ Ðdefendantððs€excessive€response€to€the€situation.€€The€defendant€did€not€wait€for€law€enforcementÐ øH Ðofficers€to€arrive€to€handle€the€situation.€The€victim€was€engaged€in€acts€of€property€damage€and€wasÐ ä4 Ðnot€threatening€human€life€or€health€when€the€defendant€shot€him.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€likewise€reject€the€defendantððs€contention€that€his€sentence€should€be€mitigatedÐ ¨ø Ðbecause€he€lacked€substantial€judgment€due€to€advanced€age.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(6)Ð ”ä Ð(1997).€€There€is€nothing€of€record€to€establish€that€the€defendant,€who€was€59€at€the€time€of€theÐ €Ð Ðoffense,€had€any€age„related€lack€of€substantial€judgment€at€the€time€of€the€offense.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àSimilarly,€we€decline€to€mitigate€the€defendantððs€sentence€based€upon€commissionÐ D!” Ðof€the€offense€under€such€unusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€he€had€a€sustained€intent€toÐ 0"€  Ðviolate€the€law.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(11)€(1997).€€The€defendant€has€three€priorÐ #l! Ðconvictions€for€assault.€€Mitigation€would€be€inappropriate€here,€as€it€appears€the€defendant€has€aÐ $X" Ðhistory€of€physical€violence€against€others.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€argues€for€mitigation€based€upon€his€significant€health€problems.€Ð Ì&"% ÐAccording€to€the€presentence€report,€the€defendant€has€a€history€of€two€heart€attacks€and€one€stroke.€Ð ¸'#& ÐCode€section€40„35„113(8)€allows€for€mitigation€where€a€defendantððs€mental€or€physical€conditionÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsignificantly€reduces€the€defendantððs€culpability€for€the€offense;€however,€the€defendant€argues€thatÐ )à$( Ðmitigation€for€ill€health€should€be€applied€to€him€under€section€40„35„113(13),€the€so„calledÐ |*Ì%) Ðð ðcatchallðð€factor.€€òòCompareóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(8)€(1997)€òòwithóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð h+¸&* Ð113(13)€(1997).€€The€record€does€not€support€mitigation€under€subsection€(8);€there€is€no€evidenceÐ ° Ðof€record€that€the€defendantððs€physical€infirmities€played€any€role€in€his€offense.€€Furthermore,€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€has€failed€to€carry€his€burden€of€establishing€why€this€factor€should€otherwise€be€appliedÐ ˆØ Ðas€a€function€of€section€40„35„113(13).€€òòSeeóóòòState€v.€Anthony€Raymond€Bellóó,€No.€03C01„9503„CR„Ð tÄ Ð00070,€slip€op.€at€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Mar.€11,€1996)€(mitigation€for€ill€health€rejectedÐ `° Ðunder€factors€(8)€and€(13)).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€defendant€also€argues€for€mitigation€based€upon€his€showing€of€remorse.€€òòSeeóóÐ $ t ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(13)€(1997).€€The€defendant€offered€a€letter,€the€substance€of€whichÐ  ` Ðread,€ð ðI€am€sorry€that€Kevin€Angel€is€dead.€€My€sister,€Louis€Price,€and€I€helped€raise€Kevin.€€I€knewÐ ü L  Ðhim€since€he€was€a€boy.€€The€events€of€September€7,€1997€are€on€my€mind€twenty„four€hours€a€day.ðð€Ð è 8  ÐThis€court€has€recognized€that€genuine,€sincere€remorse€is€a€proper€basis€upon€which€to€mitigate€aÐ Ô$  Ðdefendantððs€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Williamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€83€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€However,Ð À  Ðð ðthe€mere€speaking€of€remorseful€words€or€a€genuflection€in€the€direction€of€remorse€will€not€earnÐ ¬ü  Ðan€accused€a€sentence€reduction.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€present€case,€we€find€that€the€defendantððs€cursory€letterÐ ˜è  Ðcarries€the€burden€of€establishing€this€mitigating€factor€only€marginally,€if€at€all.€€Accordingly,€weÐ „Ô  Ðafford€it€very€slight€weight.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àFinally,€the€defendant€seeks€mitigation€based€upon€his€prior€military€service,€whichÐ H˜ Ðculminated€in€an€honorable€discharge.€€€€The€record€does,€indeed,€reflect€that€the€defendant€servedÐ 4„ Ðhonorably€in€the€Navy€for€over€four€years.€This€is€a€proper€basis€for€mitigation.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.Ð  p ÐVincent€Gerrard€Overtonóó,€No.€02C01„9510„CC„00303,€slip€op.€at€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,Ð  \ ÐJune€2,€1997),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1998).€€We€afford€this€factor€moderate€weight.Ð øH ÐÌÓ€ '(º½88#ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚ 3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚ 3£àƒÝÔ2º½ÔÚ  ÚCÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝSentencing€Determinationó ó݃ 3£àƒ„ÝŒÐÐ (#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌà  àà ` àThus,€the€defendant€has€two€enhancement€factors€and€two€mitigating€factors.€InÐ ¨ø Ðmaking€a€sentencing€determination€for€a€Class€A€felony,€the€sentencing€court€must€start€at€theÐ ”ä Ðmidpoint€of€the€applicable€range.€€òòState€v.€Chanceóó,€952€S.W.2d€848€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997);€òòseeóóÐ €Ð ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c)€„€(e)€(1997)€(amended€1998).Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€present€case,€given€the€greater€weight€of€the€enhancement€factors€in€contrastÐ D!” Ðto€the€lesser€weight€of€the€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€courtððs€mid„range€sentence€of€twenty€years€wasÐ 0"€  Ðgenerous€to€the€defendant.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€length€of€the€defendantððs€sentence.Ð #l! ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE