WPC e7ddS]]!"^4Jn䕕w-TZ y2gfzIi;ϭi{K1I]~۟0}ˀ׽pj(qd>^3?њ.=Zb ؤAjS~X `]'};If󤸂։)OO#Jĩ&nKBoՏ%Ê#;{UFUg3/9EğT{7-j g.hnh98= vJTwZc+l[P5mn\ŠGe-(3NyWExIO{&GQ:`V ξ+A\M_=~`o\o,dRWq,pc)($ЈvE!yFV;~Ϧ40KD]1b %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m #  _ %NEb 0 B 0 D5i D- 0K ASi 0/ 0D A=l0 (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular~/:i+003|x 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.wptU\\IB01S02\CLERKJAC,,,,0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- -(|G2I$ !.8dXXd8         0   d(|38$ !.8dXXd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|38$ !.8dXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     __   8XXdd8@hh+rINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#+r#Ԉ #    @  @` June2,2004Session F XX #XX #STATEOFTENNESSEEv.TIMOTHYELLIS_BALLARD_XX  ? @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforCarrollCounty  9 @@No.03CR80C.Creed_McGinley_,Judge  # @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200301593CCAR3CDFiledJuly8,_2004_   AV) ` dE<]` A ^     TheDefendant,TimothyEllis_Ballard_,wasfoundtohaveviolatedtheconditionsofhisprobation V  bytheGeneralSessionsCourtofCarrollCounty.Thegeneralsessionscourtpartiallyrevokedthe ? Defendantsprobationandorderedhimtoserveninetydaysinjail.TheDefendantappealed.After (x ahearing,theCarrollCountyCircuitCourtagreedthattheDefendanthadviolatedthetermsofhis a probationandremandedthecasetothegeneralsessionscourtforenforcementofthesentence.In J thisappeal,theDefendantarguesthatthecircuitcourterredbyfailingtoconductadenovoreview 3 ofthesentenceimposedbythegeneralsessionscourtandthathissentencewastheproductof  vindictiveprosecution.Becausethecircuitcourtfailedtoaddressthesentencingoptionsfollowing  probationrevocation,weremandthecasetothecircuitcourtforthatpurpose.   Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtReversedinPart; p Remanded  Z   #X#XX.DavidH.Welles,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidG.HayesandRobertW. -} _Wedemeyer_,JJ.,joined. f BenjaminS.Dempsey,Huntingdon,Tennessee,fortheappellant,TimothyEllis_Ballard_.  8  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelMarkham,AssistantAttorneyGeneral; " " Robert_Radford_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andEleanorCahill,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral, ## fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. $$  @@OO& OPINION #XX! #XX ^&!&   #XX6 #XX  OnApril18,2002,theDefendantwasplacedonprobationforelevenmonthsandtwenty )j$) ninedaysafterhepledguiltytodrivingundertheinfluence.OnAugust8,2002,aprobation *S%* violationwarrantwasissuedallegingthattheDefendanthadbeenarrestedfor_DUI_,violationofthe *<&+ impliedconsentlaw,childendangerment,anddrivingonarevokedlicense.OnApril3,2003,the +%',  CarrollCountyGeneralSessionsCourtenteredanorderpartiallyrevokingtheDefendants ,(- _probationandorderingtheDefendanttoserveninetydaysinjail,afterwhichhisprobationwould  bereinstated.TheDefendantappealedthisordertotheCarrollCountyCircuitCourt.     LaurieDianeScott,whooverseesallthesupervisedprobationcasesfromthegeneral k sessionscourtofCarrollCounty,testifiedbeforethecircuitcourtthat,whilehewasservinghis T sentenceofprobation,theDefendantpledguiltytoDUIanddrivingonarevokedlicense. =  Therefore,shefiledaprobationviolationwarrantagainsthim.Oncrossexamination,Ms.Scott & v testifiedthatshewas sureshehadbeeninvolvedinsimilarcasesingeneralsessionscourtwhere  _ thedefendantswerepartiallyrevokedandorderedtoserveonlytendaysinjail.Shedidnotknow  H whyinthiscasetheDefendantwasorderedtoserveninetydaysinjail.  1    ThecircuitcourtfoundthattheDefendanthadviolatedthetermsofhisprobationby   receivingnewcriminalconvictions.Thecourtthenremandedthecasetogeneralsessionscourtfor   enforcementofthesentencingorder.TheDefendantappealedthecircuitcourtsjudgmenttothis   Court. n    TheDefendantfirstarguesthatthecircuitcourterredbynotconductingadenovoreview @ ofthesentencingoptionsfollowingrevocationofhisprobation.Anappealfromageneralsessions )y courtdecisionshallbehearddenovointhecircuitcourt.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.275108(c). A b denovohearingencompassesmorethanjustthepresentationofproof.Statev.Cunningham,972 K S.W.2d16,18(Tenn.Crim.App.1998).Adenovohearingincludes aconsiderationofthevarious 4 sentencingoptionsifthereisafindingthatthedefendantviolatedthetermsandconditionsof  probation.Id.    Inthiscase,thecircuitcourtfailedtoconductanyreviewofthesentenceimposedbythe  generalsessionscourtanddidnotreexamineavailablesentencingoptions.Rather,thecourtsimply q statedthattheDefendanthadviolatedtheconditionsofhisprobation,andremandedthecasetothe Z generalsessionscourtforenforcementofthesentence.Therefore,theDefendantisentitledtohave C thiscaseremandedtothecircuitcourtforthelimitedpurposeofhavingthecourtconductadenovo ,| reviewofhissentence.Inadenovoreview,thetrialcourt isnotconcernedwithwhattookplace e inthelowercourt;thematteristriedasifnootherhearinghadoccurred.Id. N   TheDefendantalsoarguesthathissentenceistheproductofvindictiveprosecution.The !   Defendantscontentionhingesonhisbareallegationthatotherdefendantsinsimilarcaseshadto " ! serveonlytendaysinjailupontheirprobationbeingpartiallyrevoked.However,theDefendant #" hasfailedtoincludeanyevidenceoftheseothercasesintherecord.Itisthedutyoftheappellant $# tohavepreparedanadequaterecordinordertoallowmeaningfulreviewonappeal.SeeTenn.R. t% $ App.P.24(b);seealsoStatev.Max,714S.W.2d289,293(Tenn.Crim.App.1986)( Statements ]&!% inbriefsastowhatoccurredinthetrialcourtcannotbeconsideredunlesstheyaresupportedbythe F'"& record.).Thus,byfailingtoprepareanadequaterecord,theDefendanthaswaivedappellatereview /(#' ofthisissue. )h$(   Thecaseisremandedtothecircuitcourtforthepurposeofconductingadenovoreviewof *:&* thesentencingoptionsavailablefortheDefendantandentryofanorderofdispositionofsame. +#'+ Ї   `     h     ___________________________________     `     h     DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE