WPC bf.z<y+ޒ;<, zupKY8'ia8r stS|#p)o'IŬkV%O4ƽ|j{rhF9r6%.)[b0 >_#hN~\ 1.U+Mcy+)#c;$%LFC*? LreM/2+N ߯rVu|| &]!w~طkxI:¶ v ٶM?檙v+3^tXLouMt{S7\fTݦƣBqLt\azb3:h1znJcFsJ$;~E= M?i8VbΪPdfjK}a//`G<G}@*dn}Db %\Nb 0dU4N: z3  z  N 0D  z  YN}UN^ Ew4 m#b 0 B 0 D5 D- 0K ASE 0^ 0D AF(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular  R$      1  )   _Duetoanoutburstattheconclusionofthesentencinghearing,thetrialcourtfoundtheappellantincontempt  ofcourt.Thetrialcourtimposedafiftydollarfineandsentencedtheappellanttotendaysconfinementtobeserved t consecutivelytotheinstantoffenses.Theappellantdoesnotchallengethissentenceonappeal.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(#$  0   C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5C:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt(9 Z6Times New Roman Regularfn2 b.:i+003|xU\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3,,,,0- -(|G2$ !.8)dd8         0   d(|3d$ !.8)dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3d$ !.8)dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _   8NXXdd8@ttXINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#X #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsNovember16,2004 L XNX #XXN"#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.GARYALDENBOWERSXNX  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforCarterCounty  J @@Nos.S15928,S15986,S16190LynnW.Brown,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200400697CCAR3CDFiledMarch_14,2005_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     XNXXXNTheappellant,GaryAldenBowers,pledguiltyintheCarterCountyCriminalCourttothreecounts x  ofaggravatedburglary,onecountofburglary,twocountsoftheftofpropertyover$500,twocounts d oftheftofpropertyunder$500,andonecountoffelonyfailuretoappear.Followingasentencing P hearing,thetrialcourtsentencedtheappellanttoaneffectivesentenceoftwentyyearsincarceration < intheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection.Onappeal,theappellantchallengesthesentences (x imposedbythetrialcourtinlightoftheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsdecisionin_Blakely_Ԁv. d Washington,542U.S.__,124S.Ct.2531(2004).Uponreviewoftherecordandthepartiesbriefs, P weaffirmthejudgmentsofthetrialcourt.#XNXXXN##XXN#XNX <  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentsoftheCriminalCourtareAffirmed.     #XN#XNX.NormaMcGeeOgle,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidH.WellesandDavid  G.Hayes,JJ.,joined.  RobertY.Oaks,_Elizabethton_,Tennessee,fortheappellant,GaryAldenBowers. ` PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichelleChapman_McIntire_,AssistantAttorney 8!  General;Joe_Crumley_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andKennethC.Baldwin,AssistantDistrict $"t! AttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. #`"  @@OO& OPINION #XXN #XNX $8 $  I.FactualBackground  &"&     #XXN #XNXOnMay6,2002,theCarterCountyGrandJuryreturnedapresentmentchargingtheappellant (#( withfelonyfailuretoappear,aClassEfelony.OnSeptember3,2002,thegrandjuryreturnedan )$) indictmentchargingtheappellantwiththreecountsofaggravatedburglary,ClassCfelonies;two p*%* countsoftheftofpropertyover$500,ClassEfelonies;andonecountoftheftofpropertyunder \+&+ $500,aClassAmisdemeanor.OnJanuary6,2003,theappellantwasindictedononecountof H,', burglary,aClassDfelony,andonecountoftheftofpropertyunder$500,aClassAmisdemeanor. 4-(- _Theappellantsubsequentlyenteredguiltypleasoneachcountaschargedintheindictments,with  thelengthandmannerofserviceofthesentencestobedeterminedbythetrialcourt.Therecord  beforethiscourtdoesnotincludeatranscriptofthesubmissionhearing,andthetranscriptofthe  sentencinghearingdoesnotreflectthefactualbasesunderlyingthepleas.#XXNv #XNX t   AtthesentencinghearingonMarch11,2004,theStateinformedthetrialcourtthatitwas L  relyinguponthepresentencereport.Thereafter,thetwentythreeyearoldappellanttestifiedthatas 8  achild,helivedwithhisgrandmotheranduncleandneverknewhisfather.Althoughtheappellant $ t didnotgraduatefromhighschool,heobtainedaGED.Hehadpreviouslybeenemployedin  ` landscapingand layingblock.  L    Theappellantconcededthathefailedtoappearforaprobationhearingonpriorcharges,but $  claimedthatatthetimeheandhiswife,withwhomhehadayoungson,were havingalotof   trouble.Theappellantrelatedthathe wasonthebondmonitoringforthethreeyearsentences,   whichpreventedthecouplefromspendingtimetogether.Theappellantsubsequentlylearnedthat   hiswifewas cheating,andthecoupleseparated.Theappellanttestifiedthatuponseparatingfrom   hiswife,herevertedtoabusingdrugssuchasmorphineandOxyContinand itjustwentdownfrom p there. \   Theappellanttestifiedthatinadditiontofailingtoappearfortheprobationhearing,hefailed 4 toreporttohisprobationofficerforascheduledmeeting.Whentheappellantcontactedhis  p probationofficertoinformhimthathewouldbeunabletoreportbecauseofalackoftransportation,  \ theprobationofficer toldmeIwasviolated.Thereafter,theappellantlefthisgrandmothers H residencetoliveinatentontheAppalachianTrial.Accordingtotheappellant,beinghomeless 4 motivatedtheinstantoffensesofburglaryandtheft.Hetradedstolenitemsinorderto liveand   supplyhisdrughabit.Oncrossexamination,theappellantstatedthatafterservingthepasttwo   yearsinjailonpriorcharges,hisoutlookhadchanged.Theappellantclaimedthathewantedthe  opportunitytobeapartofhissonslife.    Afterconsideringthepresentencereport,theappellantstestimony,andtheargumentsof l counsel,thetrialcourtsentencedtheappellantasaRangeIImultipleoffendertoXNXXXNtenyears X  incarcerationfortheaggravatedburglaryconvictions,eightyearsfortheburglaryconviction,four D! yearsforthetheftofpropertyover$500convictions,andfouryearsforthefelonyfailuretoappear 0"  conviction.Foreachoftheconvictionsoftheftofpropertyunder$500,thetrialcourtimposed #l! sentencesofelevenmonthsandtwentyninedaysconfinement.Thetrialcourtorderedthat#XNXXXNn##XXN7#XNXthe $X" sentenceforfailuretoappearbeservedconsecutivelytohispriorsentences.Thetrialcourtfurther $D # orderedthatthefirstandthirdcountsofaggravatedburglarybeservedconsecutively,andthe %0!$ remainingsentencesbeservedconcurrently,foratotaleffectivesentenceoftwentyyears &"% incarceration.#XNXXXN##XXN#XNX '#&   Theappellantnowappeals,arguingthattheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsdecisionin )$(  XNXXXNBlakelyv.Washington,542U.S.__,124S.Ct.2531(2004)#XNXXXNz!##XXN #XNXԀ requiresthatthiscourtreviewth[e] |*%) sentence[s]andreducethelengthofeachsentencetotheminimumwithintherangeandleavein  effectthemannerofserviceassetbythe[trial]court.#XXN"#XNX  #  1            II.Analysis  t   XNXXXN  Asnoted,therecordbeforethiscourtdoesnotincludeatranscriptoftheguiltypleahearing, L  andthetranscriptofthesentencinghearingdoesnotrevealthefactualbasesunderlyingthepleas. 8  Generally,atranscriptoftheguiltypleahearingisnecessarytoconductaneffectiveappellatereview $ t ofsentencingbecauseitallowsthiscourttoascertainthefactsandcircumstancessurroundingthe  ` offenses.Statev.Keen,996S.W.2d842,84344(Tenn.Crim.App.1999).Intheabsenceofa  L  transcriptoftheguiltypleahearing,thiscourtmustgenerallypresumethatthesentenceimposedby  8  thetrialcourtwascorrect.Id.at844.However,becausetheevidencepresentedatthesentencing $  hearingprovidesasufficientrecordforreview,wewilladdressthemeritsoftheissueraisedbythe   appellant.#XNXXXN&$##XXNN##XNX     XNXXXNWhenanappellantchallengesthelength,range,ormannerofserviceofasentence,itisthe   dutyofthiscourttoconductadenovoreviewwithapresumptionthatthedeterminationsmadeby p thetrialcourtarecorrect.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d)(2003).However,thispresumptionof \ correctnessis conditionedupontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsidered H thesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166, 4 169(Tenn.1991).Iftherecorddemonstratesthatthetrialcourtfailedtoconsiderthesentencing  p principlesandtherelevantfactsandcircumstances,reviewofthesentencewillbepurelydenovo.  \ Id. H   Inconductingourreview,thiscourtmustconsider(1)theevidence,ifany,receivedattrial   andatthesentencinghearing;(2)thepresentencereport;(3)theprinciplesofsentencingandthe   argumentsofcounselrelativetothesentencingalternatives;(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsofthe  offenses;(5)anymitigatingorenhancementfactors;(6)anystatementsmadebytheappellantonhis  ownbehalf;and(7)theappellantspotentialforrehabilitationortreatment.Tenn.CodeAnn.40  35102,103,210(2003);seealsoAshby,823S.W.2dat168.Theburdenisontheappellantto l showthatthesentenceisimproper.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401,SentencingCommission X  Comments. D!   TheappellantwassentencedasaRangeIImultipleoffender,forwhichtheapplicablerange #l! forClassCfeloniesissixtotenyears,forClassDfeloniestheapplicablerangeisfourtoeightyears, $X" andforClassEfeloniestheapplicablerangeistwotofouryears.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035 $D # 112(b)(3)(5)(2003).ThepresumptivesentenceforClassB,C,D,andEfeloniesistheminimum %0!$ withintheapplicablerangeiftherearenoenhancementormitigatingfactors.Tenn.CodeAnn. &"% 4035210(d)(2003).Ifthetrialcourtfindsthatsuchfactorsdoexist,thecourtmuststartatthe '#& presumptivesentence,enhancethesentencewithintherangeasappropriatefortheenhancement  factors,andthenreducethesentencewithintherangeasappropriateforthemitigatingfactors.Tenn.  CodeAnn.4035210(e).#XNXXXN(#XNXXXN#XXNr(#XNXTheauthorizedsentenceforaClassAmisdemeanorisaperiodnot  greaterthanelevenmonthsandtwentyninedays.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035111(e)(1)(2003). t   Insentencingtheappellant,thetrialcourtappliedthefollowingenhancementfactors: L  8  8`   (2)Thedefendanthasaprevioushistoryofcriminalconvictionsor $ t criminalbehaviorinadditiontothosenecessarytoestablishthe  ` appropriaterange; L ` x` x 8  8`   (9)Thedefendanthasaprevioushistoryofunwillingnesstocomply  8  withtheconditionsofasentenceinvolvingreleaseinthecommunity; $  and ` x` x 8  8`   (14)Thefelonywascommittedwhileon...[a]nyothertypeof   releaseintothecommunityunderthedirectorindirectsupervisionof   thedepartmentofcorrectionorlocalgovernmentalauthority. ` x` x Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(2003).Thetrialcourtaffordedgreatweighttoenhancementfactors \ (2)and(9).#XNXXXN3#XNXXXN#XXN4#XNXThetrialcourtconsideredasamitigatingfactorthattheappellantscriminalconduct H neithercausednorthreatenedseriousbodilyinjury,butaffordedthisfactornoweight.Tenn.Code 4 Ann.4035113(1)(2003).  p   Baseduponthesefindings,thetrialcourtsentencedtheappellantoneachconvictiontothe H maximumsentenceintherange.#XNXXXN@9##XXN9#XNXRelyingontheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtdecisioninBlakely 4 v.Washington,542U.S.__,124S.Ct.2531(2004),theappellantarguesonappealthateachofhis   sentencesmustbereducedtotheminimumwithinthesentencingrange.#XNXXXN;##XXN;#XNXTheappellantdoesnot   challengethemannerofserviceimposedbythetrialcourt.    ThiscourthasrecognizedthatBlakely callsintoquestionthecontinuingvalidityofour  currentsentencingscheme.Statev.JuliusE.Smith,No.E200301059CCAR3CD,2004WL l 1606998,at*4(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,July19,2004);seealsoStatev.MichaelWayne X  Poe,No.E200300417CCAR3CD,2004WL1607002,at*9(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,July D! 19,2004).InBlakely,542U.S.at__,124S.Ct.at2537(citationsomitted),theSupremeCourtheld 0"  that #l! 8  8`   the statutorymaximumforApprendi[v.NewJersey,530U.S.466, $D # 120S.Ct.2348(2000)]purposesisthemaximumsentenceajudge %0!$ mayimposesolelyonthebasisofthefactsreflectedinthejury &"% verdictoradmittedbythedefendant.Inotherwords,therelevant '#&  statutorymaximumisnotthemaximumsentenceajudgemay (#' imposeafterfindingadditionalfacts,butthemaximumhemay )$( imposewithoutanyadditionalfindings.Whenajudgeinflicts |*%) punishmentthatthejurysverdictalonedoesnotallow,thejuryhas h+&* notfoundallthefacts whichthelawmakesessentialtothe  punishment,andthejudgeexceedshisproperauthority.` x` x   Aspreviouslynoted,thetrialcourtappliedenhancementfactors(2),(9),and(14)in t sentencingtheappellant.T#XNXXXN<=##XXN[=#XNXheapplicationofenhancementfactor(2),whichisbaseduponthe ` appellantspriorcriminalconvictions,doesnotviolatethedictatesofBlakely.SeeApprendi,530 L  U.S.at490,120S.Ct.at236263.Moreover,Blakelyindicatestheapprovaloftheuseof 8  enhancementfactorssupportedbyfacts admittedbythedefendant.Blakely,542U.S.at__,124 $ t S.Ct.at2537;seealsoApprendi,530U.S.at490,120S.Ct.at236263.AstheStatenotes,the  ` appellantconcededatthesentencinghearingthathehadbeenreleasedon bondmonitoringwhen  L  hefailedtoappearattheprobationhearing.Accordingly,weconcludethatthetrialcourtcommitted  8  noerrorinapplyingenhancementfactors(2)and(14).However,weconcludethatthetrialcourt $  improperlyappliedenhancementfactor(9),whichwasnotbaseduponpriorconvictionsoradmitted   bytheappellant.Nevertheless#XXND#XNX,inlightofthegreatweightaffordedenhancementfactor(2),we   concludethattherecordsupportsthesentencesimposedbythetrialcourt.      III.Conclusion  p     Findingnoreversibleerror,weaffirmthejudgmentsofthetrialcourt. H #XXNI#XNX   `     h     ___________________________________ 4    `     h     NORMAMcGEEOGLE,JUDGE