WPC C˟GAFL|a@6|\EZl g<_w]<T=&!"zUtik['ܢI ?a 2'hЫNY;͝˽T`)*L! ˇ#'yYA A [׻ķEܡQ @cly5(>0Y Rs}Hi6YJ EAf4ذ\"0+y/#QmS @ pWˮ;H_PcǸe;/}(HG3tP=0̮weFCq B$>sVOAKr;`TO٦%VO$O\ny)Y'E059eYM #vʴl;9ko[k5­2Uet$nF钻 oW?\  j7(m= (gf0SF %\ U.b  nX 0P 4H \ 0d 0D w@< U:|    H 0KU: 0l D+ B D3 A AO 0D D/B Bq    X%2A`ArialTT3|Xh<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP(($D  uM%(D(3$ !D      0  (#$  0   VWUXEYZ[D\b]b^D_Ӏ,cAZ"Arial RegularH Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5( $ Figure  1      XTXX X*XXT   Ad FILEDXTX*  September18,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular(D3u$ !D   'dxd d$$$$'dxd!#&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK!C<< C($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !D   __` X  TR[A'Legal3'A' Legal3'TXXX X7 T XXdd7_r*<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP `  rߛ_  INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE `  @cc:;ATNASHVILLE@7;AUGUST1998SESSION STATEOFTENNESSEE,     T )  p     L      T )   C.C.A.NO.01C019705CC00167  `    Appellee,  򀀀   T ) P     L      T )  MONTGOMERYCOUNTY  @  VS.   L      T ) 0     L      T )  HON.JOHNH.GASAWAYIII,   MELVINWAYNEARCHULETA,   T )  JUDGE p    L      T )  Appellant.      T )  (Sentencing)  P  FORTHEAPPELLANT:     T   FORTHEAPPELLEE:   J.TIMOTHYSTREET     T   JOHNKNOXWALKUP   136FourthAve.,South      T   AttorneyGeneral&Reporter   p  Franklin,TN37064 !` Ѐ(OnAppeal) L      T   GEORGIABLYTHEFELNER "P    L      T   Asst.AttorneyGeneral #@  MICHAELJONES L      T   CordellHullBldg.,2ndFl. $0 PublicDefender L      T   425FifthAve.,North %     L      T   Nashville,TN372430493 COLLIERGOODLETT      T      `'  Asst.PublicDefender      T   JOHNW.CARNEY P(!  109SouthSecondSt.     T   DistrictAttorneyGeneral @)" Clarksville,TN37040     T    0* # Ѐ(AtTrial)  L      T   WILLIAMCLOUD   +!$    L      T   Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral   L      T   204FranklinSt.,Suite200   L      T   Clarksville,TN37040   L      T      L    L      T        L      T      L   OPINIONFILED:򀀀 p5,/  AFFIRMED  09/3  JOHNH.PEAY,  <26 Judge  =48 X  Ӝ\Oa\]L]@:; XXOPINION#XX#  `    Thedefendantwasindictedfortheftofpropertyoverfivehundreddollars($500)invalue.Hepledguiltytotheftofpropertylessthanfivehundreddollars($500).Followingasentencinghearing,thetrialcourtsentencedthedefendanttoelevenmonthsandtwentyninedays,toservesixmonthswiththebalanceprobated.Thedefendantnowappealsandarguesthatthetrialcourterredbynotsuspendinghisentiresentence.Afterareviewoftherecordandapplicablelaw,wefindthatthetrialcourtdidnoterrindenyingthedefendantsrequestforprobation.Thejudgmentofthecourtbelowisaffirmed.   Inthesummerof1995,thedefendantnoticedseveraltirerimsoutsideofHuffsTractorService.HethentooktherimsandseveraldayslaterheattemptedtoselltherimstoFriendlyTire.FriendlyTirenoticedmarkingsontherimsindicatingtherimswerethesamerimsFriendlyTirehadsenttoHuffsTractorServiceforrepair.FriendlyTirebecamesuspiciousandnotifiedMr.Huffoftheattemptedsale.Mr.Huffsubsequentlyreportedtheincidenttothepolice.   %  Whenadefendantcomplainsofhisorhersentence,wemustconductadenovoreviewwithapresumptionofcorrectness.T.C.A.4035401(d).Theburdenofshowingthatthesentenceisimproperisupontheappealingparty.T.C.A.4035401(d)SentencingCommissionComments.Thispresumption,however, isconditionedupontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823 56,/ S.W.2d166,169(Tenn.1991).  v7.1 Oa     `7.3 Oa  \\Y  Y YT.C.A.4035103setsoutsentencingconsiderationswhichareguidelines `  fordeterminingwhetherornotadefendantshouldbeincarcerated.Theseincludetheneed toprotectsocietybyrestrainingadefendantwhohasalonghistoryofcriminalconduct,theneed toavoiddepreciatingtheseriousnessoftheoffense,thedeterminationthat confinementisparticularlysuitedtoprovideaneffectivedeterrencetootherslikelytocommitsimilaroffenses,orthedeterminationthat measureslessrestrictivethanconfinementhavefrequentlyorrecentlybeenappliedunsuccessfullytothedefendant.T.C.A.4035103(1).YZ  Indeterminingthespecificsentenceandthepossiblecombinationofsentencingalternatives,thecourtshallconsiderthefollowing:(1)anyevidencefromthetrialandsentencinghearing,(2)thepresentencereport,(3)theprinciplesofsentencingandtheargumentsconcerningsentencingalternatives,(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsoftheoffense,(5)informationofferedbytheStateorthedefendantconcerningenhancingandmitigatingfactorsasfoundinT.C.A.4035113and114,and(6)thedefendantsstatementsinhisorherownbehalfconcerningsentencing.T.C.A.4035210(b).Inaddition,thelegislatureestablishedcertainsentencingprincipleswhichincludethefollowing:ZӜZ DZTTZUU(5)Inrecognitionthatstateprisoncapacitiesandthefundstobuildandmaintainthemarelimited,convictedfelonscommittingthemostsevereoffenses,possessingcriminalQQhistoriesevincingacleardisregardforthelawsandmoralsofsociety,andevincingfailureofpasteffortsatrehabilitationSSshallbegivenfirstpriorityregardingsentencinginvolvingincarceration;and̜(6)AdefendantwhodoesnotfallwithintheparametersofϜsubdivision(5)andisanespeciallymitigatedorstandardoffenderconvictedofaClassC,DorEfelonyispresumedtobeafavorablecandidateforalternativesentencingoptionsintheabsenceofevidencetothecontrary.̜VD VT.C.A.4035102.ZX̛WW 27-3 ЛX[[X  Afterreviewingthestatutessetoutabove,itisobviousthattheintentofthelegislatureistoencouragealternativestoincarcerationincaseswheredefendantsaresentencedasstandardormitigatedoffendersconvictedofC,D,orEfelonies.However,itisalsoclearthatthereisanintenttoincarceratethosedefendantswhosecriminalhistoriesindicateacleardisregardforthelawsandmoralsofsocietyandafailureofpasteffortstorehabilitate.X[[\\[ [\\[ [\\[ [\\[[  Thedefendantcomplainsthatthecourterredinnotgrantinghisrequestfor `  fullprobation.Indeterminingwhetherthedefendantshouldbegrantedprobation,thecourtmustconsiderthedefendantscriminalrecord,socialhistory,presentphysicalandmentalcondition,thecircumstancesoftheoffenses,thedeterrenteffectuponthecriminalactivityoftheaccusedaswellasothers,andthedefendantspotentialforrehabilitation.Statev.Bonestel,871S.W.2d163,169(Tenn.Crim.App.1993). \    Basedonthelengthycriminalrecordrevealedinthepresentencereportandtheabsenceofareasonableexpectationofrehabilitation,thejudgedeniedprobation.Thetrialjudgespecificallystatedthat,inlightofthepriorconvictions,therewasnoreasonforthecourttobelievethataprobatedsentencewouldbringaboutrehabilitation.Thetrialjudgeconcludedthatthedefendantappearedtobeincapableofbeingrehabilitated.Theevidencepresentedfullysupportsthesefindings. d#     Thedefendantfurthercontendsthatthetrialcourterredinfailingtonoteontherecordwhatenhancementandmitigatingfactors,ifany,werereliedoninthedecisionnottograntprobation.Thiscontentioniswithoutmerit.ThisCourthaspreviouslyheldtheCriminalSentencingReformActdoesnotrequiretrialjudgestoexplicitlylistontherecordapplicableenhancingandmitigatingfactorsinmisdemeanorcases.Statev.Loden,920 )X $ S.W.2d261,266(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).  Insum,theevidencepresentedfullysupportsthetrialcourtsfindings.Furthermore,thesefindingssupportthetrialcourtsconclusionthatprobationisnotproperforthisdefendant.Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisthereforeaffirmed.̜   L      T   ______________________________̜   L      T   JOHNH.PEAY,Judgè 906 L  ќ^^]]CONCUR:̜______________________________THOMAST.WOODALL,Judge̛̜̜______________________________L.TERRYLAFFERTY,SpecialJudge \