’WPC!% óąŌ6ü9)8Ųź!€_ūŽyą y}eŖ0˜ū‚I\kn( ¶źŠxǦ"­iž.zŌ陯=?ž3]εGøŹźÅļ[c²a`$)°B:"žaÆ×{óQš4”|z\F›żā {vōzš±&łą£…%̌/Ļ% •ŹĪxt)*/|é˜r”–0ģEh^PŖ!ėŒ»y|o¦ß™ŁP:`Zīcļw·xj=—-nėÓD£Dßö¦¬$,‰Ī /Ńa]”ßŲIætļŪQī=JŻ2LčKܲBG .E°Uœaŗ§lęośX®?éõō{tX¶lŁnrųGLšéĘI9xįwR?ŽÖą$7EM\}įķ µtĢEšgd3€ 9sqā¹ųf^#ĢN˜ÓĮ3 ōIõlLśÆV“¦įŲhxĢĆ&2sX…#m_ 5¬=i„{5½”/TŽ·=ŗ«(ܶ¦i²ĘŸ–Œ”#dŒ¶E«ši7f¬ŁŠ¦ ŠQ•S¼%z9LģÅqÜĄe@ƒ.É(čnāŌÕIšOŚ)uõųćԁ>%ģąņ ņSENTENCING€ó óˆŠ $ t Šą  ąWe€turn€now€to€the€Defendantššs€claim€that€the€trial€court€erred€š šin€refusing€to€grant€[him]Š  ` Šthe€services€of€a€psychological€expert€for€sentencing€purposes.šš€€A€review€of€the€chronology€of€the€Š ü L  ŠDefendantššs€alleged€attempts€to€obtain€such€an€expert€will€be€helpful.€€The€jury€returned€its€verdictŠ č 8  Šfinding€the€Defendant€guilty€on€January€19,€2001.€€On€that€same€date,€the€trial€court€set€theŠ Ō$  Šsentencing€hearing€for€February€12,€2001.€€At€the€beginning€of€that€hearing€on€February€12,€2001,Š Ą  Šdefense€counsel€requested€a€continuance€for€š štime€to€have€[the€Defendant]€examined€by€the€prisonŠ ¬ü  Špsychologist.šš€€The€examination,€according€to€defense€counsel,€š šwould€only€go€to€„„€to€possibleŠ ˜č  Šmitigating€factors.šš€€Defense€counsel€referred€to€a€1993€document€entitled€š šMental€HealthŠ „Ō  ŠEvaluationšš€as€indicating€that€the€Defendant€š šmay€have€been€acting€under€some€sort€of€physical€orŠ pĄ Šmental€debility€that€„„€that€would€somehow€mitigate€[the€Defendantššs€sentences]€because€of€hisŠ \¬ Špsychological€problems.šš€€The€trial€court€denied€the€Defendantššs€request€for€a€continuance;€however,Š H˜ Šprior€to€the€State€calling€any€witnesses,€the€sentencing€hearing€was€continued€until€March€16,€2001,Š 4„ Šon€other€grounds.€Š  p ŠĢą  ąOn€March€16,€2001,€the€Defendantššs€sentencing€hearing€recommenced.€€The€record€beforeŠ ųH Šus€contains€no€motions€filed€prior€to€this€time€requesting€a€psychological€evaluation.€€At€the€closeŠ ä4 Šof€the€Stateššs€proof,€however,€defense€counsel€stated,€š šwe€would€like€to€file€a€formal€written€motionŠ Š  Šfor€an€expert€in€the€field€of€brain€injuries,šš€and€again€requested€a€continuance.€€The€record€does€notŠ ¼  Šcontain€a€copy€of€the€š šformal€written€motion,šš€but€does€contain€copies€of€the€documents€defenseŠ Øų Šcounsel€submitted€in€support€thereof:€€the€1993€š šMental€Health€Evaluationšš€performed€by€a€clinicalŠ ”ä Špsychologist,€and€a€1989€letter€to€the€Defendant€from€a€psychological€examiner.€€The€1993Š €Š Ševaluation€references€a€possible€organic€component€to€the€Defendantššs€behavioral€problems,€and€theŠ l¼ Š1989€letter€references€a€š šdiagnostic€impressionšš€of€š šmixed€substance€abuse€and€a€mixed€personalityŠ X Ø Šdisorder,€both€severe.šš€€Defense€counsel€argued€that€the€Defendant€should€be€reevaluated€forŠ D!” Šmitigation€purposes.€€The€trial€judge€denied€the€Defendantššs€requests€for€an€expert€and€for€aŠ 0"€  Šcontinuance€due€to€considerations€of€timing€and€š šthe€nature€of€the€motion,šš€but€stated€that€he€wouldŠ #l! Šconsider€the€proffered€reports€š šin€relation€to€the€general€sentencing.ššŠ $X" ŠĢą  ąWe€recognize€that€Š ą%0!$ Šą  ąą8 ` ąą ø ą[i]n€the€trial€and€direct€appeals€of€all€criminal€cases€in€whichŠ Ģ&"% Šthe€defendant€is€entitled€to€appointed€counsel€.€.€.€the€court€in€an€ņņexóóŠ ø'#& Šņņparteóó€hearing€may€in€its€discretion€determine€that€investigative€orŠ ¤(ō#' Šexpert€services€or€other€similar€services€are€necessary€to€ensure€thatŠ )ą$( Šthe€constitutional€rights€of€the€defendant€are€properly€protected.Š|*Ģ%)` x` x ŠŠ h+ø&* ŠTenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€13€šš€5(a).€€ņņSee€alsoóó€ņņState€v.€Barnettóó,€909€S.W.2d€423,€431€(Tenn.€1995).€€Indeed,Š ° Šthis€Court€has€previously€reviewed€a€trial€courtššs€denial€of€expert€assistance€in€conjunction€with€aŠ œģ Šdefendantššs€efforts€to€develop€mitigation€evidence€in€a€non„capital€case.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€DonavanŠ ˆŲ ŠEdward€Danielóó,€No.€W2000„00981„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€Tenn.Crim.€App.€LEXIS€967,€at€*26„34Š tÄ Š(Jackson,€Dec.€28,€2001).€€In€this€case,€however,€the€Defendant€did€not€make€his€request€for€theŠ `° Šprovision€of€an€expert€until€mid„way€through€his€sentencing€hearing,€although€he€relied€onŠ L œ Šinformation€available€to€him€in€1989€and€1993€in€making€his€request.€€The€verdict€against€theŠ 8 ˆ ŠDefendant€was€returned€on€January€19,€2001.€€The€Defendant€did€not€request€the€provision€of€expertŠ $ t Šservices€until€March€16,€2001,€after€the€State€had€already€rested€its€case€in€the€sentencing€hearing.׃ ׯ ƒ*#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś4Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊  ` ŠAccordingly,€the€Defendant€coupled€his€request€with€a€motion€for€a€continuance,€which€the€trialŠ ü L  Šcourt€denied.€€Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąš šA€trial€courtššs€denial€of€a€request€for€a€continuance€will€only€be€reversed€upon€a€showingŠ Ą  Šof€abuse€of€discretion.šš€€ņņCoe€v.€Stateóó,€17€S.W.3d€193,€218€(Tenn.€2000).€€No€such€showing€has€beenŠ ¬ü  Šmade€here.€€The€Defendant€has€put€forth€no€excuse€as€to€why€he€did€not€move€the€court€for€theŠ ˜č  Šprovision€of€expert€services€prior€to€the€commencement€of€his€sentencing€hearing.€€Accordingly,€heŠ „Ō  Šhas€not€demonstrated€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€denying€his€motion€for€aŠ pĄ Šcontinuance.Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąMoreover,€before€an€indigent€criminal€defendant€is€entitled€to€expert€services€at€the€StateššsŠ 4„ Šexpense,€š šthe€defendant€must€make€a€threshold€showing€of€particularized€need.šš€€ņņBarnettóó,€909Š  p ŠS.W.2d€at€431.€€In€order€to€make€such€a€showing,€š š[t]he€defendant€must€demonstrate€by€referenceŠ  \ Što€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€his€particular€case€that€appointment€of€a[n]€.€.€.€expert€is€necessaryŠ ųH Što€insure€a€fair€trial.šš€€ņņId.óó€€Furthermore,€š š[w]hether€or€not€a€defendant€has€made€the€thresholdŠ ä4 Šshowing€is€to€be€determined€on€a€case„by„case€basis,€and€in€determining€whether€a€particularizedŠ Š  Šneed€has€been€established,€a€trial€court€should€consider€all€facts€and€circumstances€known€to€it€at€theŠ ¼  Štime€the€motion€for€expert€assistance€is€made.šš€€ņņId.óó€€The€trial€courtššs€decision€of€whether€to€authorizeŠ Øų Šsuch€services€will€not€be€reversed€on€appeal€absent€a€showing€of€an€abuse€of€discretion.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.óóŠ ”ä ŠĢą  ą€The€Defendant€has€failed€to€demonstrate€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€denyingŠ l¼ Šhis€motion€for€expert€services.€€His€general€assertion€at€the€sentencing€hearing€that€he€š šmay€haveŠ X Ø Šbeen€acting€under€some€sort€of€physical€or€mental€debilityšš€was€simply€not€sufficient€to€demonstrateŠ D!” Šhow€a€further€psychological€evaluation€may€have€served€to€mitigate€his€sentences.€€The€trial€courtŠ 0"€  Šhad€at€its€disposal€the€information€contained€in€the€two€documents€submitted€by€the€Defendant,€andŠ #l! Šdetermined€that€neither€of€these€indicated€the€need€for€further€evaluation€in€the€context€of€sentencing.€Š $X" ŠThe€Defendant€having€failed€to€demonstrate€that€the€trial€courtššs€ruling€was€an€abuse€of€discretion,Š ō$D # Šwe€find€this€issue€to€be€without€merit.Š ą%0!$ ŠĢņ ņó óą  ąThe€Defendant€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€applied€certain€enhancementŠ ø'#& Šfactors€to€his€sentences,€refused€to€apply€any€mitigating€factors,€and€thereby€sentenced€him€to€theŠ ¤(ō#' Šmaximum€terms€for€each€crime.€€Ō‡X\XXX\ŌWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€serviceŠ ° Šof€a€sentence,€this€Court€has€a€duty€to€conduct€a€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€review€of€the€sentence€with€a€presumptionŠ œģ Šthat€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„401(d).€Š ˆŲ ŠThis€presumption€is€š šconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtŠ tÄ Šconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.šš€€ņņState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Š `° ŠS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).Š L œ ŠĢą  ąWhen€conducting€a€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€Court€must€consider:€(a)€the€evidence,Š $ t Šif€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencing€hearing;€(b)€the€presentence€report;€(c)€the€principles€ofŠ  ` Šsentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(d)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€theŠ ü L  Šcriminal€conduct€involved;€(e)€any€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(f)€any€statementŠ č 8  Šmade€by€the€defendant€regarding€sentencing;€and€(g)€the€potential€or€lack€of€potential€forŠ Ō$  Šrehabilitation€or€treatment.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€40„35„102,€„103,€„210Ō#†X\XXX\ä²#ŌŌ‡X\XXX\Ō;€ņņState€v.€Breweróó,€875Š Ą  ŠS.W.2d€298,€302€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€ņņState€v.€Thomasóó,€755€S.W.2d€838,€844€(Tenn.€Crim.Š ¬ü  ŠApp.€1988).Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencing€procedure,€that€theŠ pĄ Šcourt€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€and€proper€weight€to€theŠ \¬ Šfactors€and€principles€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€courtššs€findings€of€fact€areŠ H˜ Šadequately€supported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€haveŠ 4„ Špreferred€a€different€result.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Pikeóó,€978€S.W.2d€904,€926„27€(Tenn.€1998);€ņņState€v.Š  p ŠFletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Š  \ ŠŌ#†X\XXX\cø#ŌĢą  ąThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€rape,€a€Class€A€felony,€and€aggravated€burglary,Š ä4 Ša€Class€C€felony.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€39„13„502(b),€39„14„403(b).€€The€presumptive€sentenceŠ Š  Šfor€a€Class€A€felony€is€midpoint€in€the€applicable€range,€increased€as€appropriate€by€applicableŠ ¼  Šenhancement€factors,€and€decreased€as€appropriate€for€applicable€mitigating€factors.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„Š Øų Š210(c),€(e).€€The€presumptive€sentence€for€a€Class€C€felony€is€the€minimum€in€the€applicable€range,Š ”ä Šincreased€as€appropriate€by€applicable€enhancement€factors,€and€decreased€as€appropriate€forŠ €Š Šapplicable€mitigating€factors.€€ņņId.óó€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€on€the€aggravated€rapeŠ l¼ Šas€a€Range€II,€multiple€offender,€which€designation€the€Defendant€does€not€contest.€€The€Range€IIŠ X Ø Šsentence€for€a€Class€A€felony€is€twenty„five€to€forty€years,€with€a€midpoint€sentence€of€thirty„twoŠ D!” Šand€one„half€years.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„112(b)(1).€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€on€theŠ 0"€  Šaggravated€burglary€as€a€Range€III,€persistent€offender,€also€uncontested€by€the€Defendant.€€TheŠ #l! ŠRange€III€sentence€for€a€Class€C€felony€is€ten€to€fifteen€years.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņid.ó󀚚€40„35„112(c)(3).€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąThe€trial€court€applied€four€enhancement€factors€to€the€Defendantššs€sentence€for€aggravatedŠ ą%0!$ Šrape:€€that€the€Defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€inŠ Ģ&"% Šaddition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range;€that€he€treated€the€victim€withŠ ø'#& Šexceptional€cruelty€during€the€commission€of€the€offense;€that€the€rape€was€committed€to€gratify€theŠ ¤(ō#' ŠDefendantššs€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement;€and€the€Defendant€has€a€previous€history€ofŠ )ą$( Šunwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€the€community.€€ņņSeeóóŠ |*Ģ%) Šņņid.ó󀚚€40„34„114(1),€(5),€(7),€&€(8).€€The€trial€court€also€applied€factors€(1),€(7)€and€(8)€to€theŠ h+ø&* ŠDefendantššs€sentence€for€aggravated€burglary.׃ ׯ ƒ*#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś5Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€The€Defendant€challenges€the€trial€courtššs€use€of€Š ° Šfactors€(5)€and€(7);€the€State€concedes€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€applying€factor€(7),€that€theŠ œģ ŠDefendant€committed€the€crimes€to€gratify€his€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement.€€We€agree€with€theŠ ˆŲ ŠState€that€the€record€simply€does€not€contain€sufficient€proof€to€support€this€factor,€and€the€trial€courtŠ tÄ Štherefore€erred€in€applying€it.׃ (ׯ ƒ*#ĆŻņņŚ  Ś6Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊ `° ŠĢą  ąIn€finding€that€the€Defendant€treated€the€victim€with€exceptional€cruelty€during€the€rape,€theŠ 8 ˆ Štrial€court€relied€on€the€Defendantššs€treatment€of€the€victim€after€he€ejaculated:€€he€wrapped€her€upŠ $ t Šin€a€comforter,€thereby€immobilizing€her,€covered€her€head€in€a€pillowcase,€dragged€her€into€theŠ  ` Šbathroom,€and€there€attempted€to€dunk€her€vaginal€area€in€a€sink€full€of€hot€water.€€Failing€in€thatŠ ü L  Šendeavor,€he€repeatedly€splashed€the€victimššs€vaginal€area€with€water€from€his€hands.€€The€trial€courtŠ č 8  Šdescribed€these€activities€as€causing€further€š šterroršš€to€the€victim€after€the€actual€rape.Š Ō$  ŠĢą  ąWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€these€facts€support€application€of€the€š šexceptional€crueltyššŠ ¬ü  Šenhancement€factor.€€Our€supreme€court€has€recently€reiterated€that€this€enhancement€factor€isŠ ˜č  Šproperly€applied€where€there€is€š ša€finding€of€cruelty€.€.€.€ššover€and€abovešš€what€is€required€to€sustainŠ „Ō  Ša€conviction€for€[the]€offense.šš€€ņņState€v.€Arnettóó,€49€S.W.3d€at€258.€€That€is,€the€facts€mustŠ pĄ Šdemonstrate€š ššša€culpability€distinct€from€and€appreciably€greater€than€that€incident€tošš€the€crime.šš€Š \¬ ŠņņId.óó€(quoting€ņņState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€98€(Tenn.€1997)).€€Psychological€abuse€may€constituteŠ H˜ Šexceptional€cruelty€as€contemplated€by€the€enhancement€factor.€€ņņId.óó€Š 4„ Šą  ąThe€victim€in€this€case€testified€that,€after€the€Defendant€ejaculated,€he€wrapped€her€in€herŠ  p Šcomforter€and€put€a€pillowcase€over€her€head.€€The€Defendant€then€began€dragging€the€victim.€€SheŠ  \ Štestified€that€the€Defendant€never€turned€any€lights€on,€and€she€was€not€able€to€see.€€Certainly,€theŠ ųH ŠDefendantššs€actions€in€immobilizing€the€victim,€eliminating€her€ability€to€see,€and€dragging€her€outŠ ä4 Šof€her€bedroom,€would€have€caused€further€terror€and€fear€that€she€was€going€to€be€abducted.€€AfterŠ Š  Šthe€Defendant€dragged€the€victim€into€her€bathroom,€he€turned€on€the€water€in€her€sink€and€tried€toŠ ¼  Šmake€her€sit€in€the€sink.€€When€the€victim€struggled,€the€Defendant€put€her€on€the€floor€on€her€knees,Š Øų Štook€š švery€hot€water€from€the€sink,šš€and€š šwashed€off€[her]€vaginal€area€several€times.šš€€This€tactic,Š ° Šwe€believe,€was€exceptionally€cruel€in€adding€to€the€victimššs€sense€of€violation€and€humiliation€and,Š œģ Šcombined€with€immobilizing€and€blindfolding€the€victim,€demonstrate€the€requisite€culpabilityŠ ˆŲ Šš šdistinct€from€and€appreciably€greater€than€that€incident€tošš€the€aggravated€rape.€€Accordingly,€weŠ tÄ Šfind€that€the€trial€court€properly€applied€this€enhancement€factor€and€this€issue€is€therefore€withoutŠ `° Šmerit.Š L œ ŠĢą  ąFinally,€the€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€apply€any€mitigatingŠ $ t Šfactors.€€He€claims€that€an€š šin„depth€mental€examšš€might€have€confirmed€earlier€reports€of€a€possibleŠ  ` Šorganic€brain€dysfunction;€that€he€submitted€proof€of€š šhis€lack€of€violent€naturešš€and€š šhelpful€andŠ ü L  Špolite€naturešš;€and€that€his€š šgood€reports€.€.€.€while€incarceratedšš€all€should€have€served€to€save€himŠ č 8  Šfrom€maximum€sentences.€€Š Ō$  ŠĢą  ąIn€considering€mitigation,€the€trial€court€acknowledged€that€š šsome€witness[es]€indicate€thatŠ ¬ü  Šwhen€the€defendant€wasnššt€in€prison,€he€seemed€like€a€nice€guy.€€Sometime€back€in€1996,€someŠ ˜č  Špeople€wrote€a€letter€for€him,€which€is€good.€€But€nothing€that€really€mitigates€the€crime.šš€€The€trialŠ „Ō  Šcourt€then€concluded€that€š š[u]pon€a€review€of€all€the€proof,€the€Court€can€find€no€substantialŠ pĄ Šmitigating€factor€in€this€case.šš€€The€court€then€ruled€that€š šthe€enhancing€factors€are€so€overwhelmingŠ \¬ Šin€this€case€that€the€Court€would€not€be€warranted€in€sentencing€any€.€.€.€except€the€maximumŠ H˜ Šprovided€by€law.šš€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąIt€is€the€Defendantššs€burden€to€demonstrate€to€this€Court€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€itsŠ  \ Šfindings€with€respect€to€mitigation.€€The€Defendant€has€simply€failed€to€carry€this€burden.€€TheŠ ųH Šrecord€supports€the€application€of€three€enhancement€factors€to€the€Defendantššs€sentence€forŠ ä4 Šaggravated€rape,€and€the€application€of€two€enhancement€factors€to€his€sentence€for€aggravatedŠ Š  Šburglary.€€These€factors,€combined€with€the€lack€of€mitigating€factors,€support€the€trial€courtššsŠ ¼  Šimposition€of€maximum€terms€for€the€Defendantššs€convictions.€€This€issue€is,€therefore,€withoutŠ Øų Šmerit.Š ”ä ŠņņóóĢą  ąThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€€€€€ą p ąą Č ąą  ąą x ąą Š ąŠ l¼ Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ą___________________________________€Š X Ø Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ąDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE