ÿWPCN  w8|šÖVXR¤½,÷9;3åY ™("µ“@°“Â1¨-sÃðX9é¥ ¤ï—:™éßi•Û›_ß6FéŽù2GêëÏÎûi^8•$jCg7Ê^ù¦Í&×µØ{ +Ë'à§oëŠ\{Ô«Â)ÁÀJ&Á  Séú™Ç«Ø±½›üâ^I‡ G"ëª=xj˜ß€ct!†§ÝTBxUÍm#º\ÐP žMvþSRè"¤hà¦LRœÏBÞÌîeài~¼¡æÃÒ(¯}9=ˆàÓ]DíI˜ë»Ï„·ƒË‚{«Y÷zà:<)!gž¢ÞŠ¿ÐL’TÁ.æÏ 0Ë„§,ëJ>Slhˆµ]Å85qcHô‰¨€÷æâ6 k¾–HH¹Ìxð}ZÇÀ™¥6”93öY¸9~Gèuá‹Ù]–¸À%ÜEÄ%Ƕø ‡GÏcìõºÐkû…‚ÙœÞ%!×i˜€mcq0?gp]!ãª=q©¶A¥²Žÿ®äÛØ?`o¾p JË’:½û ¾£BVïXº’LªöñÐG˜ÿ~±A}«úÓ)FÂb¦‰ê]×ï0†z½+E¹ûIkÖߨÓÃ鬜Âù<¥Þš“$BÅþÐ:;oËh‰ÄÛ^Ô7Åb#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% U N­ û û z Ò} zO ÒÉ ^ › w§ Æ« Æq Æ7Æý4ÃN×ÙèEê mìU @bCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 0ëKKKK B66 0¤S D3÷ D-* 0KWW AS¢Æõ 0¤» 0D_ A«£˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt£ª]+â Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5yG*DJ¨¬r¬3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman - ù-(|G2±¿$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç ò»»Ô d(|3v$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3v$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼E%»»»ÔÑ8€éXXdì»»d8ÑÔ€¼E%»»¼E%Ôà@ttìàÔ‡îJ›î»¼E%ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼E%»îîJ›+#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€August€21,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÌò òÔ#†¼E%»XXé?#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€DAVID€GLENN€Ô_ÔAYERSÔ_ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Anderson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99CR0274€€€€James€B.€Scott,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½ ` AßÐ ¾   ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2000„03074„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¹  ÐOctober€29,€2001Ð ¥õ  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant,€David€Glenn€Ô_ÔAyersÔ_Ô,€was€convicted€of€driving€under€the€influence,€second€offense.€Ð ŒÜ  ÐThe€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€11€months€and€29€days€with€release€eligibility€after€service€ofÐ xÈ  Ð75%.€€In€this€appeal€of€right,€the€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€argues€thatÐ d´ Ðthe€trial€court€should€have€set€aside€the€verdict€as€thirteenth€juror,€and€contends€that€the€sentence€isÐ P  Ðexcessive.€€The€judgment€is€affirmed.Ð <Œ ÐÓÖÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmedó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼E%»àXéÌ#ÔÔ‡XéX.¼E%ÔGary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJohn€Everett€Williamsóó€andÐ ì< ÐòòAlan€E.€Glenn,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð Ø( Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌAnn€D.€Coria,€Clinton,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€David€Glenn€Ô_ÔAyersÔ_Ô.€€Ð ° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€John€H.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€andÐ ˆØ ÐJan€Hicks,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.€€€Ð tÄ ÐÓ‰ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼E%»XXé¸#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÐ L œ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼E%»XXéÌ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XéX»¼E%Ôà  àAt€4:00€A.M.€on€Sunday,€July€18,€1999,€Officer€Shannon€Gray€of€the€Clinton€PoliceÐ $"t! ÐDepartment€observed€a€green€1998€Mazda€pickup€truck€being€driven€erratically€along€Ô_ÔAndersonvilleÔ_ÔÐ #`" ÐHighway.€€When€Officer€Gray€observed€the€vehicle€cross€the€center€line€of€the€highway€by€"a€foot,Ð ü#L# Ðfoot€and€a€half,"€and€cross€"the€white€fog€line€on€two€or€three€different€occasions,"€he€activated€hisÐ è$8 $ Ðblue€lights.€€When€the€vehicle,€which€was€being€operated€by€the€defendant,€did€not€immediatelyÐ Ô%$!% Ðrespond,€the€officer€turned€on€his€siren.€€When€the€vehicle€stopped,€Officer€Gray€confronted€theÐ À&"& Ðdefendant€and€smelled€alcohol.€€The€defendant€explained€that€he€had€been€at€the€Eagle's€Club€inÐ ¬'ü"' ÐÔ_ÔLafolletteÔ_Ô,€some€25€miles€from€Clinton,€and€was€on€his€way€to€his€girlfriend's€house€in€Oak€Ridge.€Ð ˜(è#( ÐAt€that€point,€the€officer€observed€a€wet€spot€in€the€crotch€area€of€the€defendant's€pants.€€When€askedÐ „)Ô$) Ðwhether€he€had€consumed€any€alcohol€at€the€Eagle's€Club,€the€defendant€answered€that€he€had€Ô_ÔhadÔ_ÔÐ p*À%* Ðeight€or€nine€beers€and€two€or€three€mixed€drinks.€€After€confirming€that€the€defendant€had€noÐ \+¬&+ Ðmedical€problems,€Officer€Gray€administered€field€sobriety€tests,€including€the€€heel„to„toe€walk,Ð H,˜', Ðone„leg€stand,€finger€dexterity,€and€alphabet€recitation€tests.€€In€the€opinion€of€the€officer,€theÐ 4-„(-ýŽ ÐÔ_Ôdefendant€was€able€to€perform€satisfactorily€only€on€the€alphabet€and€the€finger€dexterity€tests.€Ð ° ÐOfficer€Gray€described€the€defendant€as€having€slurred€speech€and€"a€little€red"€in€his€eyes.€€AfterÐ œì Ðplacing€the€defendant€under€arrest,€the€officer€searched€the€interior€of€the€vehicle€but€did€not€find€anyÐ ˆØ Ðcontainers.€€The€defendant€was€taken€to€the€Anderson€County€jail€where€he€declined€to€take€aÐ tÄ ÐBreathalyzer€examination.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€defendant,€who€was€working€as€a€construction€superintendent€for€a€company€located€inÐ 8 ˆ ÐPennington,€South€Carolina,€at€the€time€of€his€arrest,€testified€that€he€had€been€working€at€a€job€inÐ $ t ÐJamestown,€68€miles€from€his€residence.€€His€workday€began€at€4:00€A.M.€when€he€got€up€for€workÐ  ` Ðand€ended€at€approximately€5:30€P.M.€€After€work,€the€defendant€attended€a€birthday€party€for€aÐ ü L  Ðchild€and€later,€at€approximately€11:30€P.M.,€he€went€to€the€Eagle's€Club.€€At€trial,€he€testified€thatÐ è 8  Ðhe€had€talked€with€several€friends€and€had€consumed€three€or€four€mixed€drinks,€but€no€beer,€beforeÐ Ô$  Ðleaving€the€club€shortly€after€3:00€A.M.€€The€defendant€claimed€that€on€his€way€to€Oak€Ridge,€heÐ À  Ðstopped€at€an€Exxon€Market€to€purchase€a€snack€and€a€cup€of€coffee.€€The€defendant€testified€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðas€he€entered€Clinton,€he€hit€"a€rough€spot€in€the€road,€and€dropped€my€coffee€.€.€.€in€my€crotch€area."€Ð ˜è  ÐThe€defendant€explained€that€he€panicked€and€briefly€let€go€of€the€steering€wheel,€causing€him€toÐ „Ô  Ðswerve.€€He€testified€that€he€traveled€to€a€well„lighted€area€at€the€Get„and„Go€Market€in€ClintonÐ pÀ Ðbefore€stopping€his€vehicle.€€The€defendant€acknowledged€that€he€may€have€smelled€like€alcohol€butÐ \¬ Ðcontended€that€he€did€"fairly€well"€on€his€field€sobriety€tests€except€for€the€one„leg€stand,€which€heÐ H˜ Ð"totally€flunked."€€He€claimed€that€he€was€tired€and€unable€to€perform€the€test€because€of€a€backÐ 4„ Ðinjury€for€which€he€had€surgery€in€1991.€Ð  p ÐÌà@iiìàò òòòSufficiency€of€the€Evidenceóóó óˆÐ øH ÐÌà  àThe€initial€contention€of€the€defendant€is€that€the€proof€was€insufficient€to€establish€theÐ Ð  Ðoffense€of€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.€€Citing€òòState€v.€Ann€Elizabeth€Martinóó,€No.Ð ¼  ÐE1999„01361„CCA„R3„CD€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€Sept.€8,€2000),€the€defendant€contendsÐ ¨ø Ðthat€"a€momentary€drift€out€of€a€lane"€would€not€constitute€a€basis€for€the€arrest.€€He€argues€that€hisÐ ”ä Ðdriving€in€no€way€affected€any€other€cars€that€traveled€along€the€roadway€and€that€he€had€a€plausibleÐ €Ð Ðexcuse,€spilling€hot€coffee€into€his€lap,€for€a€temporary€lapse€in€the€control€of€his€vehicle.€€His€Ð l¼ Ðsuccessful€performance€in€two€of€the€four€field€sobriety€tests,€the€defendant€submits,€lends€credenceÐ X ¨ Ðto€his€claim€that€he€was€not€under€the€influence€of€alcohol.€€Ð D!” ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€of€course,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€andÐ #l! Ðall€reasonable€inferences€which€might€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ð $X" Ð(Tenn.€1978).€€The€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€to€be€given€their€testimony,€and€theÐ ô$D # Ðreconciliation€of€conflicts€in€the€proof€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€jury€as€the€trier€of€fact.€€€òòByrge€v.Ð à%0!$ ÐStateóó,€575€S.W.2d€292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€When€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€isÐ Ì&"% Ðchallenged,€the€relevant€question€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÐ ¸'#& Ðto€the€state,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðreasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983).€Ð )à$( ÐQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€wellÐ |*Ì%) Ðas€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòLiakas€v.€Stateóó,€199€Tenn.Ð h+¸&* Ð298,€286€S.W.2d€856,€859€(1956).€€Because€a€verdict€of€guilt€against€a€defendant€removes€theÐ ° Ðpresumption€of€innocence€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€convicted€criminal€defendant€bearsÐ œì Ðthe€burden€of€showing€that€the€evidence€was€legally€insufficient€to€sustain€a€guilty€verdict.€€òòState€v.Ð ˆØ ÐEvansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185,€191€(Tenn.€1992).Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€55„10„401(a)€prohibits€"any€person€or€persons€to€drive€or€toÐ L œ Ðbe€in€physical€control€of€any€automobile€or€any€motor„driven€vehicle€on€any€of€the€public€roads€andÐ 8 ˆ Ðhighways€of€the€State€of€Tennessee€or€on€any€streets€or€alleys€.€.€.€or€any€other€premises€which€isÐ $ t Ðgenerally€frequented€by€the€public€at€large€while€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.€.€.€."€€In€thisÐ  ` Ðinstance,€the€jury€heard€testimony€that€the€defendant€was€driving€erratically,€crossing€the€center€laneÐ ü L  Ðat€least€once€and€the€white€fog€line€located€on€the€right€edge€of€the€driving€surface€two€or€three€times.€Ð è 8  ÐOfficer€Gray€testified€that€this€manner€of€driving€continued€for€at€least€a€mile.€€The€defendantÐ Ô$  Ðcandidly€acknowledged€that€he€had€been€at€the€Eagle's€Club€in€Lafollette€and,€while€denying€that€heÐ À  Ðhad€any€beer€while€at€the€club,€he€conceded€that€he€had€consumed€"three€or€four€mixed€drinks€ofÐ ¬ü  ÐCrown€and€Coke."€€It€was€the€prerogative€of€the€jury€to€assess€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€takingÐ ˜è  Ðinto€consideration€the€relative€inexperience€of€the€officer€who€had€been€employed€as€a€policemanÐ „Ô  Ðfor€approximately€one€year,€and€to€conclude€that€the€defendant,€because€of€slurred€speech,€rednessÐ pÀ Ðof€the€eyes,€and€the€inability€to€perform€two€of€the€four€field€sobriety€tests,€was€operating€his€vehicleÐ \¬ Ðunder€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.€€When€there€is€proof€of€each€and€every€element€of€the€offense,Ð H˜ Ðthis€court€may€neither€second„guess€the€jury's€credibility€assessment€of€the€witnesses€nor€reweighÐ 4„ Ðthe€testimony.€Ð  p ÐÌà@11 ìàò òòòThirteenth€Juror€Ruleóóó óˆÐ øH ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€next€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€perform€its€duty€as€thirteenthÐ Ð  Ðjuror.€€Rule€33(f)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€provides€that€a€"trial€court€may€grantÐ ¼  Ða€new€trial€following€a€verdict€of€guilty€if€it€disagrees€with€the€jury€about€the€weight€of€the€evidence."€Ð ¨ø ÐThis€rule,€which€was€effective€July€1,€1991,€would€have€changed€the€holdings€of€our€supreme€courtÐ ”ä Ðin€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€692€S.W.2d€412€(Tenn.€1985),€and€òòState€v.€Atkinsóó,€786€S.W.2d€642€(Tenn.Ð €Ð Ð1990),€which€had€abolished€the€thirteenth€juror€rule€in€criminal€cases.€€In€òòState€v.€Carteróó,€896€S.W.2dÐ l¼ Ð119,€122€(Tenn.€1995),€our€supreme€court€acknowledged€the€restoration€of€the€thirteenth€juror€ruleÐ X ¨ Ðas€it€existed€at€common€law,€thereby€mandating€that€trial€judges€exercise€the€duty€to€function€as€aÐ D!” Ðthirteenth€juror€in€criminal€cases.€€An€order€overruling€a€motion€for€new€trial€establishes€aÐ 0"€  Ðpresumption€that€the€trial€court€has€exercised€the€duty.€€No€explicit€statement€on€the€record€isÐ #l! Ðrequired.€€òòCarteróó,€896€S.W.2d€at€122.€€It€is€only€when€the€trial€court€expresses€dissatisfaction€orÐ $X" Ðdisagreement€with€the€jury€verdict€or€makes€statements€indicating€that€it€has€absolved€itself€of€itsÐ ô$D # Ðresponsibility€that€the€judgment€should€be€set€aside.€€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Moatsóó,€906€S.W.2d€431€(Tenn.€1995),€the€state€conceded€that€the€trial€court€hadÐ ¸'#& Ðfailed€to€act€as€thirteenth€juror€by€entering€the€judgment€while€expressing€doubts€about€the€weightÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€the€evidence€and€concluding€that€it€was€inappropriate€to€overturn€the€jury€verdict.€€Our€supremeÐ )à$( Ðcourt€determined€that€because€the€trial€court€had€misconstrued€its€authority€to€grant€a€new€trial€underÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€thirteenth€juror€rule,€a€new€trial€was€necessary:Ð h+¸&* Ðà8  àThe€trial€judge€is€in€a€difficult€position€to€make€a€thirteenth€juror€determination€afterÐ ° Ða€remand€which€would€not€occur€until€after€the€case€works€its€way€through€theÐ œì Ðappellate€courts.€€By€that€time,€the€trial€judge€is€unlikely€to€have€an€independentÐ ˆØ Ðrecollection€of€the€demeanor€and€credibility€of€all€the€witnesses.ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌòòMoatsóó,€906€S.W.2d€at€431.€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àHere,€the€defendant€filed€a€motion€for€a€new€trial.€€As€one€of€the€grounds€for€relief,€theÐ $ t Ðdefendant€contended€that€the€"weight€of€the€evidence€mandates€that€the€court€set€aside€the€verdictÐ  ` Ðof€guilty€and€the€sentence€as€the€'thirteenth'€juror."€€The€order€overruling€the€motion€for€new€trialÐ ü L  Ðprovides€as€follows:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àIt€is€ordered€that€the€defendant's€motion€for€new€trial€is€overruled€for€the€reason€thatÐ À  Ðthe€defendant€failed€to€appear€on€the€date€set€for€the€motion.€€The€clerk€will€send€aÐ ¬ü  Ðcopy€of€this€order€to€the€parties.Иè Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€purpose€of€the€thirteenth€juror€rule€is€to€be€a€"safeguard€against€a€miscarriage€of€justiceÐ pÀ Ðby€the€jury."€€òòId.óó€at€434€(quoting€òòState€v.€Johnsonóó,€692€S.W.2d€412,€415€(Tenn.€1985)).€€The€ruleÐ \¬ Ðrequires€that€the€trial€judge€must€be€personally€satisfied€with€the€verdict.€€òòState€v.€Dankworthóó,€919Ð H˜ ÐS.W.2d€52,€56€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àIn€this€instance,€there€is€no€indication€that€the€trial€court€exercised€its€affirmative€duty€to€actÐ  \ Ðas€thirteenth€juror.€€Because€the€denial€of€the€motion€for€new€trial€was€based€upon€the€defendant'sÐ øH Ðfailure€to€appear,€the€record€is€silent€on€the€issue.€€Nevertheless,€this€court€has€ruled€that€the€trialÐ ä4 Ðcourt€"need€not€make€statements€in€the€record€of€its€approval€of€the€verdict,€rather,€when€it€simplyÐ Ð  Ðoverrules€a€motion€for€new€trial€without€comment,€this€[c]ourt€may€presume€that€the€trial€courtÐ ¼  Ðapproved€the€verdict€as€the€thirteenth€juror."€€òòState€v.€Robert€Baconóó,€No.€03C01„9608„CR„00308Ð ¨ø Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€Jan.€8,€1998).€€In€òòBaconóó,€this€court€emphasized€that€it€was€onlyÐ ”ä Ðwhen€the€trial€court€absolved€itself€of€the€responsibility€or€expressed€dissatisfaction€with€the€verdictÐ €Ð Ðthat€a€new€trial€was€in€order.€€Absent€evidence€to€the€contrary,€it€is€implicit€by€the€denial€of€theÐ l¼ Ðmotion€for€new€trial€and€the€entry€of€the€judgment€that€the€trial€court€exercised€its€responsibility.€Ð X ¨ ÐMoreover,€both€the€tone€and€content€of€the€comments€made€by€the€trial€judge€during€the€sentencingÐ D!” Ðhearing€signal€a€satisfaction€with€the€verdict.€€While€explicit€approval€would€have€been€preferableÐ 0"€  Ðfor€purposes€of€our€review,€statements€made€at€the€sentencing€hearing€establish€that€the€trial€courtÐ #l! Ðwas€satisfied€with€the€finding€of€guilt.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà@%ìàòòò òSentencingóóó óˆà p àÐ à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAs€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€sentence€of€11€months€and€29€days,€with€aÐ ¸'#& Ðrelease€eligibility€date€after€service€of€75%€of€the€sentence,€was€excessive.€€The€defendant€arguesÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthat€there€is€some€question€regarding€his€impairment€and€that€the€trial€court€did€not€consider€his€workÐ )à$( Ðrecord,€his€family€circumstances,€or€alternative€measures€such€as€alcohol€or€psychological€treatmentÐ |*Ì%) Ðbefore€imposing€the€relatively€lengthy€jail€sentence.€€The€state€argues€to€the€contrary.€€€€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€theÐ ° Ðduty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€byÐ œì Ðthe€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€uponÐ ˆØ Ðthe€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€allÐ tÄ Ðrelevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.Ð `° ÐJonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€600€(Tenn.€1994).€€"If€the€trial€court€applies€inappropriate€factors€orÐ L œ Ðotherwise€fails€to€follow€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€the€presumption€of€correctness€falls."€€òòState€v.Ð 8 ˆ ÐSheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€The€Sentencing€Commission€CommentsÐ $ t Ðprovide€that€the€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ  ` ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„401,€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àOur€review€requires€an€analysis€of€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencingÐ Ô$  Ðhearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€the€arguments€of€counselÐ À  Ðrelative€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)€any€mitigatingÐ ¬ü  Ðor€enhancing€factors;€(6)€any€statements€made€by€the€defendant€in€his€own€behalf;€and€(7)€theÐ ˜è  Ðdefendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€„210;Ð „Ô  ÐòòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àIn€misdemeanor€sentencing,€the€court€is€required€to€provide€the€defendant€with€a€reasonableÐ H˜ Ðopportunity€to€be€heard€as€to€the€length€and€manner€of€the€sentence.€€The€sentence€must€be€specificÐ 4„ Ðand€consistent€with€the€purposes€of€the€Act.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302(a),€(b).€€Not€greater€thanÐ  p Ð75€percent€of€the€sentence€should€be€fixed€for€service€by€a€misdemeanor€offender;€however,€a€DUIÐ  \ Ðoffender€may€be€required€to€serve€the€full€100€percent€of€his€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð øH Ð302(d);€òòPalmer€v.€Stateóó,€902€S.W.2d€391,€393„94€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€determining€the€percentage€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€sentence,€the€court€must€consider€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€as€well€as€the€legislativeÐ Ð  Ðpurposes€and€principles€related€to€sentencing.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302(d).€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àUpon€service€of€the€required€percentage,€the€administrative€agency€governing€theÐ ”ä Ðrehabilitative€programs€determines€which€among€the€lawful€programs€available€is€appropriate.€€TheÐ €Ð Ðtrial€court€retains€the€authority€to€place€the€defendant€on€probation€either€immediately€or€after€a€termÐ l¼ Ðof€periodic€or€continuous€confinement.€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-302(e).€€The€legislature€hasÐ X ¨ Ðencouraged€courts€to€consider€public€or€private€agencies€for€probation€supervision€prior€to€directingÐ D!” Ðsupervision€by€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-302(f).€€The€statutoryÐ 0"€  Ðscheme€is€designed€to€provide€the€trial€court€with€continuing€jurisdiction€in€the€misdemeanor€caseÐ #l! Ðand€a€wide€latitude€of€flexibility.€€The€misdemeanant,€unlike€the€felon,€is€not€entitled€to€theÐ $X" Ðpresumption€of€a€minimum€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó,€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ô$D # Ð1994).€€Appellate€review€of€misdemeanor€sentencing€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€Ð à%0!$ ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Troutmanóó,€979€S.W.2d€271€(Tenn.€1998).€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€it€was€established€that€the€defendant,€who€was€38€years€of€age,€hadÐ ¤(ô#' Ðprior€convictions€for€vehicular€homicide€by€means€of€intoxication€in€1987€and€driving€under€theÐ )à$( Ðâ âinfluence€and€driving€on€a€revoked€license€in€1991.€€The€defendant€received€a€nine„year€sentence€inÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€Department€of€Correction€for€the€vehicular€homicide€and€served€a€term€in€jail€for€the€prior€DUIÐ ° Ðoffense.€€€€Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€defendant€resides€with€his€parents€and€has€custody€of€a€three„year„old€son€jointly€withÐ tÄ Ðhis€mother.€€The€defendant€occasionally€resides€with€a€girlfriend€in€Scott€County€during€which€timeÐ `° Ðthe€defendant's€mother€retains€custody€of€his€son.€€The€defendant€is€employed€in€construction,Ð L œ Ðspecializing€in€commercial€metal€framing€and€drywall.€€At€the€time€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€heÐ 8 ˆ Ðreceived€$10.00€per€hour€in€compensation.€€The€defendant€expressed€remorse€for€having€usedÐ $ t Ðalcohol€before€driving€and€indicated€satisfaction€with€the€jury€despite€his€belief€that€he€"wasn't€at€thatÐ  ` Ðpoint"€of€intoxication.€€The€defendant€described€himself€as€an€alcoholic€and€stated€that€he€hadÐ ü L  Ðparticipated€in€alcohol€rehabilitation€while€in€prison€and,€prior€to€that,€received€further€treatmentÐ è 8  Ðwhile€in€a€community€corrections€program.€€While€acknowledging€that€he€had€"not€been€thereÐ Ô$  Ðfaithfully€like€[he]€should€have,"€the€defendant€stated€that€he€had€attended€a€few€AlcoholicsÐ À  ÐAnonymous€meetings.€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àIn€imposing€sentence,€the€trial€court€placed€particular€emphasis€on€the€defendant's€priorÐ „Ô  Ðconvictions€for€vehicular€homicide€and,€within€four€years€thereafter,€a€first€offense€for€driving€underÐ pÀ Ðthe€influence.€€The€trial€court€rejected€the€defendant's€assertion€that€he€was€able€to€control€hisÐ \¬ Ðdrinking.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àThe€minimum€possible€sentence€for€second€offense€driving€under€the€influence€is€45€days.€Ð  p ÐThe€record€demonstrates€that€the€trial€court€considered€sentencing€principles€and€guidelines€inÐ  \ Ðimposing€the€sentence.€€Certainly,€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€is€a€basis€to€enhanceÐ øH Ðthe€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€The€seriousness€of€the€offenses€and€theirÐ ä4 Ðsimilarity€to€the€current€offense€are€a€proper€basis€for€concern.€€As€our€supreme€court€ruled€in€òòStateÐ Ð  Ðv.€Troutmanóó,€"society€demands€protection€from€those€who€habitually€drink€and€drive€in€completeÐ ¼  Ðdisregard€for€the€welfare€of€others€and€for€the€laws€of€this€state."€€979€S.W.2d€at€274.€€In€our€view,Ð ¨ø Ðthe€trial€court€imposed€an€appropriate€sentence.€€€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€is€affirmed.Ð l¼ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð #l! Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGE