ÿWPCr  bt?Ö‚—íp\¯'0Õ–Eò«!Zþ¨®ûu)Ôå ž˜Ž50)mµµóóöúÿ¿!Ñ ,„ú˜¥ˆvŸxty€ÞÂÕE’êpµ¿Ä/ZÜœµÐ¾©ÖvÎÃyè&à Y’øzôöøÓø€²2Ú’”ׇ,‡¹žo4 l É?@Ö¹^äç‚>8î"I^ó,@ƒ?dóì_ü® Œ}™h¡- –ô|@ Q}­Y¡7±x3£zajoˆoï‚´2vÜ‚Bï"ã­hòc@²6b4 n:Þvù^G2ñø;©GBCõ‹ÉÝÆÄEöëS§ûÔðD_ˆÕØ™åîóÞXŠÚ2hª?H L2Æd@Õj¤°æ’)9¼‡o¹Ož«5ëf¸¦žl’¢tiâzû€ãb:^Œ$¹YW0ƒgö;6wü¬Þ”y¿tHm‰€D¸ü_‘Ù’ (mm":Ä­Ox0õFF²ÙÄù$¸ö7-•zm·‡*©1`kâkosÖ’ª€ÿ‹†ÉIMÐSÊ£@DÞV­ò³ž†Xà׊¾r1¥'«QobŠYz3|¢s ıDÊášl§eHÛfÜ ?ó†”Ó~UˆéŽ7»¾“HkW#ÁÂU:ƒ %½ 0:ÃU NýU@K U:‹ U@Å ^  w 4 ) 8 m: NQ Q Q Q Q Q Q ES S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S BU ˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman , øð AZ‹"Arial Regular(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman ùz:)â q\;'d3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ dÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÔÔ‡¼¸¼»XX¸ûÔÑ8€ÕÒXdædÈ8Ñà@ttìàÔ#†X¸ûX»¼¸¼\#ÔÔ‡îë'îXX¸ûÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†X¸ûXîîë'è#ÔÔ‡¼¸¼»XX¸ûԈРÜ, ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJuly€2000€SessionÐ X ÐÔ#†X¸ûX»¼¸¼‹#ÔÌò òÔ‡¼¸¼»XX¸ûÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€AMY€BOYDÔ#†X¸ûX»¼¸¼1#Ôó óÐ  ` ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Hawkins€CountyÐ  h Ðà@@øøìàNo.€7612€€€€€€James€E.€Ô_ÔBecknerÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ  X ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<×` AßÐ Ø(  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„02218„CCA„R3„CDÐ ×'  ÐSeptember€26,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ Ç  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<¶` AßÐ ·  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant€was€indicted€on€two€counts€of€aggravated€assault.€€A€Hawkins€County€jury€found€herÐ ¶ Ðguilty€of€one€count€and€not€guilty€of€the€other.€€In€this€appeal€as€of€right,€the€defendant€challengesÐ ¦ö Ðthe€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence€and€the€trial€court's€denial€of€alternative€sentencing.€€UponÐ –æ Ða€thorough€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€defendant'sÐ †Ö Ðconviction€for€aggravated€assault€and€that€alternative€sentencing€was€properly€denied.€€Thus,€theÐ vÆ Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð f¶ ÐÓÃÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ F– ÐÌòòÓ  ÓJoe€G.€Riley,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJohn€Everett€Williamsóó€and€òòRobertÐ &v ÐW.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ôóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð f ÐÌGreg€W.€Ô_ÔEichelmanÔ_Ô,€District€Public€Defender;€and€Russell€Mattocks,€Assistant€District€PublicÐ öF ÐDefender,€Ô_ÔMorristownÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Amy€Boyd.Ð æ6 ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Mark€A.€Ô_ÔFulksÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€C.Ð Æ  ÐBerkeley€Bell,€Jr.,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Michelle€Green,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ ¶!  ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ¦"ö! ÐÌÓåÓà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÐ †$Ö# ÐÌòòò òFACTSó óóóÐ f&¶!% ÐÓ  Óà  àÌÌà  àIn€the€early€morning€hours€of€August€15,€1999,€Michelle€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€went€to€the€defendant'sÐ 6)†$( Ðapartment€looking€for€her€brother.€€She€encountered€the€defendant,€and€the€two€became€involved€inÐ &*v%) Ða€brief€altercation.€€Thereafter,€the€defendant€entered€her€apartment€and€Ô_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€followed.€Ð +f&* ÐÔ_ÔHammondsÔ_Ô€testified€that€she€was€invited€into€the€apartment€by€the€defendant,€but€the€defendantÐ ,V'+ ÐÔ_Ôtestified€to€the€contrary.€€Hammonds€testified€that€once€inside€the€apartment,€the€defendant€withoutÐ ° Ðprovocation€stabbed€her€in€the€face€with€a€butcher€knife.€€Dustin€Ramsey,€another€guest€in€theÐ  ð Ðapartment,€attempted€to€shield€Hammonds€from€further€attack€and€was€stabbed€in€the€arm.€Ð à ÐHammonds,€her€brother€and€Ramsey€left€the€apartment€and€drove€to€the€hospital.€€The€defendant€andÐ €Ð Ðher€neighbor€also€left€the€apartment.€€€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àDefendant€testified€that€Hammonds€ran€into€the€house€after€her,€and€she€acted€in€self„defense.€Ð P   ÐDefendant€conceded€she€did€not€see€Hammonds€with€a€weapon.€€The€defendant€further€admittedÐ @  Ðconsuming€twelve€beers€and€two€Xanax€pills€prior€to€the€altercation.Ð 0 € ÐÌà  àWhen€officers€arrived€at€the€apartment€they€discovered€a€trail€of€blood€leading€from€theÐ `  Ðapartment€and€a€knife€wrapped€in€a€bloody€towel€in€the€kitchen.€The€defendant€returned€to€the€sceneÐ P  Ðand€told€officers€ð ðI€did€it.ðð€€Later,€in€a€handwritten€statement,€she€stated€that€Hammonds€attackedÐ ð@  Ðher€on€the€steps€in€front€of€her€apartment.€€She€claimed€she€was€intimidated€by€Hammonds€and€wasÐ à0  Ðangry€because€Hammonds€"disrespected€her."€€The€defendant€further€stated€that€if€Ramsey€had€notÐ Ð  Ðintervened,€she€probably€would€have€killed€Hammonds.€€€€Ð À ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€indicted€for€the€aggravated€assault€on€Hammonds€and€for€the€aggravatedÐ  ð Ðassault€on€Ramsey.€€The€jury€found€her€guilty€of€the€aggravated€assault€on€Hammonds,€but€not€guiltyÐ à Ðfor€the€aggravated€assault€on€Ramsey.€€The€defendant€now€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€theÐ €Ð Ðconvicting€evidence€and€the€trial€court's€denial€of€alternative€sentencing.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌÌÓ  Óòòò òSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEÐ @ ÐÌóóÓ  ÓA.€€Standard€of€ReviewÐ  p ÐÌà  àó ó€€Ô#†XÕÒXXX¸û=#ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÕÒÔIn€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€jury€in€a€criminal€trial.€€AÐ P Ðjury€verdict€accredits€the€state's€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€€òòState€v.Ð ð@ ÐBigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÐ à0 Ðlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€òòId.óó;Ð Ð  ÐòòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Moreover,€a€guilty€verdict€removes€theÐ À! Ðpresumption€of€innocence€which€the€appellant€enjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€onÐ °"  Ðappeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€ofÐ  #ð! Ðovercoming€this€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óóÐ $à" ÐÌà  àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€for€an€appellate€courtÐ p&À!$ Ðis€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€any€rationalÐ `'°"% Ðtrier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonableÐ P( #& Ðdoubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789,€61Ð @)$' ÐL.Ed.2d€560€(1979);€òòState€v.€Abramsóó,€935€S.W.2d€399,€401€(Tenn.€1996).Ô#†XÕÒXXX¸ûM#ÔÔ‡XÕÒXXXÕÒÔÐ 0*€%( ÐÌò òÔ#†XÕÒXXXÕÒK#ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÕÒÔÐ ,V'* ÐB.€€AnalysisÐ ° ÐÌà  àó ó€The€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€Specifically,€sheÐ à Ðclaims€the€state€failed€to€negate€her€claim€of€self„defense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€and€argues€theÐ €Ð Ðconflicting€testimony€from€the€stateððs€witnesses€is€insufficient€to€sustain€her€conviction€forÐ pÀ Ðaggravated€assault.Ð ` ° ÐÌà  à€The€issue€of€self„defense€is€a€matter€for€the€jury€to€decide.€€òòState€v.€Ivyóó,€868€S.W.2d€724,Ð @  Ð727€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€However,€once€evidence€is€admitted€supporting€the€defense,€the€stateÐ 0 € Ðmust€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€did€not€act€in€self€defense.€€òòState€v.€Belseróó,Ð  p  Ð945€S.W.2d€776,€783€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„201(a)(3).€€Tenn.€CodeÐ `  ÐAnn.€ðð€39„11„611(a)€states€thatÐ P  ÐÌà8  àa€person€is€justified€in€threatening€or€using€force€against€another€person€when€and€toÐ à0  Ðthe€degree€the€person€reasonably€believes€the€force€is€immediately€necessary€toÐ Ð  Ðprotect€against€the€otherððs€use€or€attempted€use€of€unlawful€force.€€The€person€mustÐ À Ðhave€a€reasonable€belief€that€there€is€an€imminent€danger€of€death€or€serious€bodilyÐ ° Ðinjury.€€The€danger€creating€the€belief€of€imminent€death€or€serious€bodily€injuryÐ  ð Ðmust€be€real,€or€honestly€believed€to€be€real€at€the€time,€and€must€be€founded€uponÐ à Ðreasonable€grounds.€€There€is€no€duty€to€retreat€before€a€person€threatens€or€usesÐ €Ð Ðforce.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€trial€the€jury€heard€conflicting€testimony€regarding€the€defendantððs€claim€of€self„defense.€Ð P  ÐHowever,€the€evaluation€of€witnessesðð€credibility,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€to€the€evidence,Ð @ Ðand€resolution€of€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€left€to€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòCabbageóó,€571Ð 0€ ÐS.W.2d€at€835.€€Therefore,€taking€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€we€concludeÐ  p Ðthe€jury€could€have€found€the€defendantððs€claim€of€self„defense€was€negated€by€the€stateððs€proof.€€Ð ` ÐÌà  àAt€trial,€the€defendant€testified€that€Hammonds€followed€her€into€the€house€and€stated€thatÐ ð@ Ðshe€was€going€to€ð ðkick€her€assðð€and€ran€at€her.€€However,€this€testimony€was€contradicted€by€theÐ à0 Ðvictim.€€The€victim€stated€that€the€defendant€stabbed€her€without€provocation.€The€victim€alsoÐ Ð  Ðtestified€that€the€defendant€instigated€the€initial€confrontation,€and€then€invited€Hammonds€into€herÐ À! Ðhome.€€Furthermore,€the€defendant€stated€she€was€angry€because€Hammonds€ð ðdisrespectedðð€her€andÐ °"  Ðstated€that€if€Ramsey€had€not€intervened,€she€would€have€probably€killed€Hammonds.€€The€jury€wasÐ  #ð! Ðjustified€in€rejecting€the€claim€of€self„defense.Ð $à" Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àà  àÌÌÓ  Óòòò òSENTENCINGÐ `'°"% ÐÌóóó óÓ  Óà  àThe€defendant€acknowledges€that€she€received€the€minimum€sentence€available€forÐ @)$' Ðaggravated€assault;€however,€she€argues€the€erroneous€application€or€non„application€of€certainÐ 0*€%( Ðenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€affected€the€courts€decision€to€order€full€confinement.€Ô#†XÕÒXXX¸û¦#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔÐ  +p&) ÐAdditionally,€she€contends€there€was€no€proof€regarding€the€need€for€deterrence;€therefore,€sheÐ ,`'* Ðcontends€the€trial€court€inappropriately€applied€that€factor€to€deny€an€alternative€sentence.€€SheÐ ° ÐÔ#†XÕÒX XX~Bq+#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔfurther€claims€the€trial€court€erred€in€concluding€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€required€confinement.€Ô#†XÕÒX XX~B³,#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔÐ œì ÐÔ#†XÕÒX XX~B]-#ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÕÒÔò òòòÌóóA.€€Standard€of€ReviewÐ xÈ ÐÌÔ#†XÕÒXXX¸û´-#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔà  àó óThis€Courtððs€review€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumptionÐ X ¨ Ðof€correctness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€conditioned€upon€anÐ D ” Ðaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€judge€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€allÐ 0 € Ðrelevant€facts€and€circumstances.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€burdenÐ  l Ðis€upon€the€appealing€party€to€show€that€the€sentence€is€improper.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)Ð  X  ÐSentencing€Commission€Comments.€Ð ô D  Ðà  àÌà  àÔ#†XÕÒX XX~B,.#ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÕÒÔUnder€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€trial€judges€are€encouraged€to€useÐ Ì  Ðalternatives€to€incarceration.€€An€especially€mitigated€or€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,Ð ¼  ÐD€or€E€felony€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€theÐ ¬ü  Ðabsence€of€evidence€to€the€contrary.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).Ð œì  ÐÌà  àIn€determining€if€incarceration€is€appropriate,€a€trial€court€may€consider€the€need€to€protectÐ |Ì Ðsociety€by€restraining€a€defendant€having€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct,€the€need€to€avoidÐ l¼ Ðdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,€whether€confinement€is€particularly€appropriate€toÐ \¬ Ðeffectively€deter€others€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses,€and€whether€less€restrictive€measures€haveÐ Lœ Ðoften€or€recently€been€unsuccessfully€applied€to€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1);Ð <Œ Ðòòsee€alsoóó€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.Ð ,| ÐÌà  àA€court€may€also€consider€the€mitigating€and€enhancing€factors€set€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð  \ Ððððð€40„35„113€and€114€as€they€are€relevant€to€the€ðð€40„35„103€considerations.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ üL Ð40„35„210(b)(5);€òòState€v.€Bostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€435,€438€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Additionally,€aÐ ì< Ðcourt€should€consider€the€defendantððs€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation€whenÐ Ü, Ðdetermining€if€an€alternative€sentence€would€be€appropriate.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5);Ð Ì ÐòòBostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€438.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àThere€is€no€mathematical€equation€to€be€utilized€in€determining€sentencing€alternatives.€€NotÐ œ!ì Ðonly€should€the€sentence€fit€the€offense,€but€it€should€fit€the€offender€as€well.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ Œ"Ü  Ð40„35„103(2);€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€467,€476„77€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Indeed,Ð |#Ì! Ðindividualized€punishment€is€the€essence€of€alternative€sentencing.€€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2dÐ l$¼" Ð301,€305€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€In€summary,€sentencing€must€be€determined€on€a€case„by„caseÐ \%¬ # Ðbasis,€tailoring€each€sentence€to€that€particular€defendant€based€upon€the€facts€of€that€case€and€theÐ L&œ!$ Ðcircumstances€of€that€defendant.€€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€235€(Tenn.€1986).Ð <'Œ"% ÐÔ#†XÕÒXXX¸û#1#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔà  à€ò òÔ#†XÕÒX XX~B‹;#ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÕÒÔòòÐ ,(|#& Ðà  àóóó óWe€will€now€examine€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€as€they€relate€to€the€Tenn.€CodeÐ )h$' ÐAnn.ðð€40„35„103€factors€for€confinement€and€alternative€sentencing.€€òòSeeóó€òòBostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€atÐ *X%( Ð438.€€òòò òÐ ø*H&) ÐÐ è+8'* ÐóóB.€€Enhancement€FactorsÐ ° ÐòòÌÌóóà0  à1.€€Previous€Criminal€HistoryЀÐ(#(# ÐÌà  àó óThe€trial€court€erroneously€considered€the€defendantððs€juvenile€adjudications€for€vandalism,Ð ` ° Ðresisting€arrest,€and€unlawful€possession€of€alcohol€underòò€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€ForÐ P   Ðoffenses€committed€after€July€1,€1995,€juvenile€adjudications€can€only€be€considered€under€Tenn.Ð @  ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(20),€which€requires€the€offense€to€be€a€felony€if€committed€by€an€adult.€Ð 0 € ÐòòState€v.€Glynnon€Bradshawóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9810„CR„00439,€Wilson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð  p  Ðfiled€September€22,€1999,€at€Nashville).€€Nevertheless,€the€trial€court€placed€little€weight€upon€theseÐ `  Ðadjudications.ò òòòÐ P  ÐÌà  àóóó óThe€trial€court€noted€that€the€defendant€had€been€on€juvenile€probation€for€one€month€fromÐ à0  Ðan€adjudication€for€ungovernable€and€unruly€behavior€when€she€committed€€underage€possession€andÐ Ð  Ðdrinking€of€alcohol,€vandalism€and€resisting€arrest.€€She€was€again€given€probation.€€We€concludeÐ À Ðthe€trial€court€appropriately€considered€the€twenty„year„old€defendantððs€past€failure€at€rehabilitationÐ ° Ðin€denying€alternative€sentencing,€since€measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€had€been€appliedÐ  ð Ðunsuccessfully.€€òòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(C).€€Ð à ÐÌò òà  à2.€€Bodily€Injury€To€A€Person€Other€Than€the€VictimÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àó óThe€defendant€argues€the€trial€court€inappropriately€considered€Ramseyððs€injuries€to€enhance€Ð P  Ðher€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(12).€€She€claims€the€trial€court€should€not€have€Ð @ Ðconsidered€Ramseyððs€injuries€because€the€jury€granted€an€acquittal€on€the€charge€of€aggravatedÐ 0€ Ðassault€against€him.€ò òòòà ¸ àÐ  p ÐÌà  àóóó óThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€recently€held€that€a€sentencing€courtððs€consideration€of€factsÐ P Ðunderlying€a€charge€for€which€there€had€been€an€acquittal€was€consistent€with€the€statutoryÐ ð@ Ðsentencing€scheme€established€by€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.€€òòState€v.€ò òó óWinfieldóó,€Ð à0 Ð___S.W.3d€___,€___€(Tenn.€2000).€òòóó€The€Act€does€not€preclude€consideration€of€facts€proven€by€aÐ Ð  Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence,€even€where€the€facts€are€the€basis€of€a€charge€for€which€there€hasÐ À! Ðbeen€an€acquittal.€òòId.óó€at€___.Ð °"  ÐÌà  àDespite€the€juryððs€acquittal€for€the€Ramsey€assault,€there€was€ample€evidence€at€trial€fromÐ $à" Ðwhich€the€trial€court€could€conclude€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€the€defendant€willfullyÐ €%Ð # Ðinflicted€bodily€injury€on€him.€€The€defendant€herself€admitted€stabbing€Ramsey.€€Thus,€we€concludeÐ p&À!$ Ðthe€trial€court€appropriately€considered€this€factor€in€denying€alternative€sentencing.ò òó óÐ `'°"% ÐÌò òC.€€Mitigating€FactorsÐ @)$' ÐÌà  àó óThe€trial€court€found€the€defendant€acted€under€strong€provocation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð  +p&) Ð35„113(2).€€However,€the€defendant€argues€the€trial€court€should€have€also€found€(1)€substantialÐ ,`'* Ðgrounds€existed€tending€to€excuse€or€justify€her€criminal€conduct,€and€(2)€the€defendant,€althoughÐ ° Ðguilty€of€the€crime,€committed€the€offense€under€such€unusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€thatÐ  ð Ða€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€law€motivated€her€conduct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(3),€(11).ò ò€Ð à ÐÌà  àó óThe€defendant€argued€she€was€acting€in€self„defense.€€However,€the€jury€and€trial€judgeÐ pÀ Ðobviously€disregarded€her€claims€and€chose€instead€to€believe€the€stateððs€version€of€events.€Ð ` ° ÐAdditionally,€the€defendant€stated€that€she€probably€would€have€killed€Hammonds€if€Ramsey€hadÐ P   Ðnot€intervened.€ò òó ó€The€defendant€and€the€victim€entered€into€an€altercation,€and€instead€of€removingÐ @  Ðherself€from€the€situation,€the€defendant€retrieved€a€knife€and€stabbed€her.€€Thus,€we€conclude€theÐ 0 € Ðtrial€court€properly€refused€to€consider€mitigating€factors€(3)€and€(11).€€Ð  p  ÐÌò òD.€€General€ConsiderationsÐ P  Ðà  àó óÔ#†XÕÒXXX¸ûÝ;#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÌà  àÔ#†XÕÒX XX~BÍO#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔThe€trial€court€held€total€confinement€was€necessary€to€deter€others€from€committing€similarÐ Ü,  Ðoffenses.€€In€so€holding€the€trial€court€noted€that€in€the€Third€Judicial€District,€there€is€ð ðan€epidemicÐ È  Ðof€violence€to€the€person€offenses,ðð€often€involving€alcohol.€€The€defendant€claims€this€was€anÐ ´ Ðinappropriate€consideration.€Ð  ð ÐÔ#†XÕÒX XX~BXP#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔÌà  àA€trial€court€may€not€deny€alternative€sentencing€on€the€ground€of€deterrence,€unless€thereÐ xÈ Ðis€some€evidence€contained€in€the€record€that€the€sentence€imposed€will€have€a€deterrent€effect€withinÐ d´ Ðthe€jurisdiction.€€òòState€v.€Grissomóó,€956€S.W.2d€514,€519€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Our€SupremeÐ P  ÐCourt€has€held€that€ð ðdeterrence€cannot€be€conclusory€only€but€must€be€supported€by€proof.ðð€€òòStateÐ <Œ Ðv.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€170€(Tenn.1991).€Ð (x ÐÌà  àIn€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€940€S.W.2d€558€(Tenn.€1997),€our€Supreme€Court€concluded€the€recordÐ P Ðadequately€supported€application€of€the€deterrence€factor.€€òòId.€€óóat€560.€€However,€the€trial€court€hadÐ ì< Ðmade€specific€findings€in€the€context€of€a€labor€dispute€in€the€local€community.€€òòId.óó€€We€find€òòDavisóóÐ Ø( Ðto€be€distinguishable.€€Ð Ä ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€recently€concluded,€after€a€detailed€analysis,€that€a€trial€court€can€take€judicialÐ œì Ðnotice,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€201,€of€300€indictments€for€drug„related€offenses€returned€overÐ ˆ Ø Ða€two„year€period€within€the€judicial€district.€€òòState€v.€Jennifer€Nunleyóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9809„CC„Ð t!Ä Ð00395,€Coffee€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€July€9,€1999,€at€Nashville)€òòperm.€to€app.€deniedóóÐ `"°  Ð(Tenn.€2000).€€We€noted,€however,€many€pertinent€factors€relating€to€deterrence€are€not€reflected€byÐ L#œ! Ðthe€sheer€number€of€indictments.€€Thus,€we€concluded€that€this€alone€did€not€establish€an€adequateÐ 8$ˆ" Ðbasis€for€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€a€need€for€deterrence€existed.€€òòId.€aóót€*€5.€€€€Ð $%t # ÐÌà  àWe€reach€the€same€conclusion€in€this€case.€€Assuming€the€trial€court€can€take€judicial€noticeÐ ü&L"% Ðof€the€amount€of€crime€within€a€jurisdiction,€this€does€not€òòipso€factoóó€satisfy€the€deterrent€factor.€Ð è'8#& ÐMore€specifically,€the€amount€of€crime€itself€within€the€district€does€not€establish€that€ð ðconfinementÐ Ô($$' Ðis€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrent€to€others€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses,ððÐ À)%( Ðas€required€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).€€Ð ¬*ü%) ÐÐ ˜+è&* Ðà  àEven€though€we€conclude€the€record€was€inadequate€to€support€the€deterrence€factor,€weÐ ° Ðconclude€the€record€is€otherwise€adequate€to€support€the€denial€of€alternative€sentencing.€€This€courtÐ œì Ðhas€previously€held€that€a€defendantððs€credibility€and€willingness€to€accept€responsibility€is€germaneÐ ˆØ Ðto€their€rehabilitative€potential.€€òòSee€€óóòòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€306€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€Ð tÄ ÐFurthermore,€our€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€a€defendantððs€refusal€to€accept€culpability€justifies€aÐ `° Ðsentence€of€confinement€in€order€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.€€òòSee€óóòòState€v.Ð L œ ÐGutierrezóó,€5€S.W.3d€641,€647€(Tenn.€1999).€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÔ#†XÕÒX XX~B5R#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔÌà  àIn€its€oral€findings,€the€trial€court€noted€that€the€defendant€seemed€to€show€little€remorse€forÐ  ` Ðher€actions.€€There€were€two€people€injured€in€the€instant€case,€and€the€defendant€admitted€that€ifÐ ü L  ÐRamsey€had€not€intervened,€she€likely€would€have€killed€Hammonds.€€As€a€result€of€the€attack,Ð è 8  ÐHammonds€suffered€permanent€facial€disfigurement.€Ô#†XÕÒX XX~BL_#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔ€Additionally,€tÔ#†XÕÒX XX~B,a#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔhe€trial€court€noted€theÐ Ô$  Ðdefendant€abused€alcohol€and€drugs€and€had€a€poor€work€history.€Ô#†XÕÒX XX~B~a#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔ€The€defendant€was€still€under€theÐ À  Ðlegal€drinking€age€when€the€current€attacks€occurred.€€€She€candidly€testified€that€she€continued€toÐ ¬ü  Ðabuse€alcohol,€and€stated€that€on€the€night€in€question€she€consumed€twelve€beers€and€two€XanaxÐ ˜è  Ðtablets.Ô#†XÕÒX XX~B-b#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔ€€Furthermore,€the€defendant€was€previously€placed€on€probation€as€a€juvenile,€and€admittedÐ „Ô  Ðviolating€her€probation€by€committing€an€alcohol„related€offense.€€Ô#†XÕÒX XX~B›c#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€the€trial€court€appropriately€denied€the€defendantððs€request€for€an€alternativeÐ H˜ Ðsentence€based€upon€the€seriousness€of€the€violent€offense,€the€failure€of€past€non„confinementÐ 4„ Ðmeasures€to€stop€her€criminal€conduct,€her€refusal€to€accept€culpability€and€her€lack€of€potential€forÐ  p Ðsuccessful€rehabilitation.€€Ð  \ ÐÌÌòòò òÓ  ÓCONCLUSIONÐ Ð  ÐÓlfÓÌóóó óà  àWe€conclude€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€defendantððs€conviction€for€aggravatedÐ ¨ø Ðassault.€€Furthermore,€the€trial€court€appropriately€denied€alternative€sentencing.€€€Thus,€the€judgmentÐ ”ä Ðof€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€ò òòòóóó óÔ#†XÕÒX XX~Bd#ÔÔ‡X~B XXXÕÒÔÐ €Ð ÐÔ#†XÕÒX XX~Búg#ÔÔ‡X¸ûXXXÕÒÔò òó óÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌòòóóà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð <"Œ  Ѐà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JR.,€JUDGEÔ#†XÕÒXXX¸ûQh#Ô