ÿWPCS …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 H 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ 0d- U>‘ U*Ï B)ù DC" AMe² BÍv~êvÓh D3; 0@n AO®Æý 0Dà D/ B6˜HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,ð,,,,,ð0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- òóDôõö÷DøùúDûÓ€Úƒç"3|x 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€ ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌò òDecember€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó dPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑÔ€ŠÔÔ€ ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€uHXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÙ€€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà0 à€IN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌJULY€SESSION,€1997ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` °†XDp”XÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9608„CR„00313Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àó óÌà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)à àHAMILTON€COUNTYÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌV.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€STEPHEN€M.€BEVIL,€JUDGEÌDAVIS€OLIVER€BROWN,à à)à àó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)à à(VEHICULAR€ASSAULT;€ó óÏà àà àà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à àVEHICULAR€HOMICIDE)ÌÓ ` °œXÓó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌò òARDENA€J.€GARTHà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUP€Ìó óDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌÌò òDONNA€ROBINSON€MILLERó óà àà àò òJANIS€L.€TURNER€ó óÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ701€Cherry€Street,€Suite€300à àà à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌChattanooga,€TN€37402à àà à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0943ÌÌò òà àà àà àó óà àà àà àò òWILLIAM€COX€Ìó óà àà àà àò òà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌò òà àà àà àà àó óà àà àò òJOHN€A.€BOBO,€JR.€ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à600€Market€Street,€Suite€310Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àChattanooga,€TN37402€ÌÌÌ€ÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMED€ÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEò ò€Ìó óÇÓ  ÓÔ€ °Ôò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€ ŠÔÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àThe€Defendant,€Davis€Oliver€Brown,€appeals€as€of€right€from€theÏsentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court€upon€his€pleas€of€guilty€to€vehicularÏhomicide€and€vehicular€assault€in€the€Criminal€Court€of€Hamilton€County.€ÏDefendant€pled€guilty€without€any€agreement€between€himself€and€the€State€asÏto€the€length€or€manner€of€service€of€the€sentences.€€The€trial€court€sentencedÏDefendant,€as€a€Range€I,€Standard€Offender,€to€the€maximum€sentence€ofÏtwelve€(12)€years€for€the€vehicular€homicide€conviction€and€the€maximumÏsentence€of€four€(4)€years€for€the€vehicular€assault€conviction.€€The€court€furtherÏordered€the€sentences€to€be€served€consecutively.€€In€this€appeal,€DefendantÏpresents€two€issues€for€review:€(1)€œwhether€the›€trial€court€erred€by€imposing€theÏmaximum€sentences€in€each€case€and€(2)€œwhether€the›€trial€court€erred€byÏordering€the€sentences€to€be€served€consecutively.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court.€ÌÌà àAt€approximately€11:18€p.m.€on€July€13,€1995,€the€Defendant€wasÏinvolved€in€a€two„vehicle€wreck€on€Interstate€24€within€the€city€limits€ofÏœChattanooga.€€The›€record€indicates€that€just€prior€to€the€œwreck›€Defendant€wasÏtraveling€eastbound€on€Interstate€œ24,›€and€the€victims,€Timothy€Clevenger€and€hisÏbrother,€Andy€Clevenger,€were€traveling€in€a€vehicle€westbound€on€Interstate€24.€ÍThe€collision€occurred€in€the€westbound€lane.€€œThe›€vehicle€was€owned€byÏTimothy€Clevenger,€who€died€as€a€result€of€the€wreck.€€Andy€Clevenger€sufferedÏextensive€injuries€as€a€result€of€the€collision.€€œFrom€the€photographs€of€the€wreckÏwhich€are€in€the€record,€and€from€the€traffic€accident€report,€it€is€indicated€that€theÏwreck€was€a€head„on€collision.€€Although€the€traffic€accident€report€indicates€thatÏit€consists€of€six€(6)€pages,€only€the€first€page€was€included€in€the€pre„sentenceÏreport€as€part€of€the€record€on€appeal.€€›ÌÌà àChattanooga€Police€Officer€Robert€Simpson€testified€during€the€sentencingÏhearing.€€After€the€wreck,€he€searched€the€Defendantððs€vehicle€pursuant€to€aÏsearch€warrant.€€He€found€various€papers€œwhich€were€introduced›€into€evidence,Ïincluding€documents€showing€that€the€Defendant€had€been€ordered€to€attend€aÏDUI€school€in€February€of€1995,€but€that€he€had€failed€to€attend€as€required.€ÏOfficer€Simpson€also€testified€that€he€found€numerous€beer€cans€inside€theÏDefendantððs€vehicle.€€The€victimsðð€father€testified€at€the€hearing€as€to€the€impactÏof€the€crime€upon€his€family€and€his€surviving€son.ÌÌà àAt€the€time€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€Defendant€was€32„years„old.€€HeÏhad€been€self„employed€prior€to€œthe›€charges€being€placed€against€him€in€theÏpresent€case.€€He€œtestified€that€he€takes›€full€responsibility€for€the€car€wreck.€€ÌÌà àDefendant€œadmitted›€during€his€testimony€that€he€had€ð ðbeen€drinking€allÏday€longðð€and€that€he€ð ðshouldnððt€have€been€out€there€driving.ðð€€The€pre„sentenceÏreport€shows€an€extensive€prior€record€of€Defendant.€€He€testified,€however,€thatÏsomeone€else€had€œused›€his€name€œin€the€past€and›€œtherefore,€several›€of€theÏoffenses€in€the€record€had€not€been€committed€by€him.€€The€State€offered€noÏevidence€to€contradict€Defendantððs€assertions€that€certain€of€the€listed€offensesÏhad€not€been€committed€by€him.€€However,€the€Defendant€did€admit€œto€at›€leastÏfour€(4)€prior€arrests€for€various€misdemeanors,€which€led€to€three€(3)€priorÏconvictions€and€one€disposition€by€diversion.€€These€prior€convictions€includedÏone€for€DUI,€œone€for›€reckless€driving€and€œone€for›€public€intoxication.€€FurtherÏevidence€at€the€sentencing€hearing€revealed€that€both€the€conviction€for€DUI€andÏthe€conviction€for€public€intoxication€had€occurred€in€1995,€and€that€DefendantÏwas€convicted€of€public€intoxication€while€on€probation€from€the€DUI€offense.€€InÏfact,€Defendant€had€been€charged€with€public€intoxication€approximately€oneÏmonth€prior€to€the€automobile€wreck€which€resulted€in€the€œpresent€charges›€ofÏvehicular€homicide€and€vehicular€assault.€€Defendant€admitted€that€he€was€anÏalcoholic,€but€that€he€had€never€received€treatment€for€his€alcohol€abuse€exceptÏfor€AA€meetings€while€in€jail€for€the€present€offenses.€€Defendant€expressed€hisÏsympathy€to€the€victimsðð€family€and€explained€that€he€wished€he€could€tradeÏplaces€with€Timothy€Clevenger.€€He€œstated€that›€œhe€thought€the›€accident€wouldÏprevent€him€from€ever€drinking€alcoholic€beverages€again.Ìà àà àÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€the€manner€of€serviceÏof€a€sentence,€this€court€has€a€duty€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€theÏsentence€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€areÏcorrect.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditionedÏupon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€theÏsentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,Ï823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àIn€conducting€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€Court€must€considerÏthe€evidence€adduced€at€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€presentenceÏreport,€the€principles€of€sentencing,€the€arguments€of€counsel€relative€toÏsentencing€alternatives,€the€nature€of€the€offense,€and€the€defendantððs€potentialÏfor€rehabilitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210;€òòState€v.€Parkeróó,€932€S.W.2dÏ945,€955„56€(Tenn.€œCrim.›€App.€1996).Ìà àÌà àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencingÏprocedure,€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€andÏproper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principals€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,Ïand€that€the€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record,Íthen€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€aÏdifferent€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Ìà àÌÓ  ÓI.€€LENGTH€OF€SENTENCEÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€imposing€the€maximumÏsentences€of€twelve€(12)€years€for€the€vehicular€homicide€conviction€and€four€(4)Ïyears€for€the€vehicular€assault€conviction.€€The€trial€court€found€that€five€(5)Ïenhancement€factors€were€applicable:€ÌÓÓà à(A)à0 àThe€Defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€orÏcriminal€behavior€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€theÏappropriate€range.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1);Ìà àÌà à(B)à0 àAs€to€the€vehicular€assault€conviction€only,€the€personal€injuriesÏinflicted€upon€the€victim€were€particularly€great.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€Ï40„35„114(6);ÌÌà à(C)à0 àThe€Defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€unwillingness€to€complyÏwith€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€into€theÏcommunity.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(8);ÌÌà à(D)à0 àAs€to€the€vehicular€assault€conviction€only,€the€Defendant€had€noÏhesitation€about€committing€a€crime€when€the€risk€to€human€lifeÏwas€high.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(10);€and€ÌÌà à(E)à0 àThe€felonies€were€committed€while€the€Defendant€was€on€a€form€ofÏrelease€œstatus,€if€such€release€is€from€a€prior€felony€conviction.›€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(13)(C).ÌÌÓÓÌThe€trial€court€found€that€no€mitigating€factors€applied.ÌÌà àTherefore,€the€trial€court€found€that€three€(3)€enhancement€factors€underÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„114€applied€to€the€vehicular€homicideÏconviction,€and€five€(5)€of€œthe›€enhancement€factors€in€that€statute€applied€to€theÏvehicular€assault€conviction.€€ÌÌà àWe€find€that€the€trial€court€properly€applied€enhancement€factor€numberÏ(1)€in€this€case.€€The€Defendant€has€at€least€four€(4)€prior€arrests€and€three€(3)Ïprior€convictions€for€offenses€involving€alcohol€or€drugs.€€Two€of€the€offensesÏalso€involve€unlawful€conduct€while€operating€a€œmotor€vehicle.›€€Even€though€allÏof€these€prior€offenses€were€misdemeanors,€the€statute€does€not€require€the€priorÏrecord€to€be€œcomprised›€of€felonies.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€We€alsoÏfind€that€enhancement€factor€number€(8)€was€properly€applied€by€the€trial€court.€ÏDefendant€was€on€probation€for€a€DUI€conviction€when€he€was€arrested€andÏconvicted€of€public€drunkenness€only€a€few€weeks€before€the€commission€of€theÏoffenses€under€review€in€this€case.€€Therefore,€it€is€clear€that€Defendant€isÏunwilling€to€comply€with€conditions€involving€release€into€the€community.€€ÌÌà àWe€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€applying€enhancement€factor€numberÏ(6)€to€the€vehicular€assault€conviction.€€In€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€œ597›€œ›Ï(Tenn.€1994),€our€supreme€court€held€that€ð ðproof€of€serious€bodily€injury€willÍalways€constitute€proof€of€particularly€great€injury.ðð€€œ883€S.W.2d€at€602.€€In›€òòStateÏv.€Rhodesóó,€917€S.W.2d€708€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995),€our€œcourt€held›€that€in€aÏvehicular€assault€case,€the€enhancement€factor€found€at€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€section€40„35„114(6)€was€an€element€of€the€offense€requiring€seriousÏbodily€injury.€€œ917€S.W.2d€at›€714.€€Ìà àÌà àIn€addition,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€applied€enhancementÏfactor€(13)(C).€€That€statute€plainly€states€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà8 à(13)€œThe›€felony€was€committed€while€on€any€of€the€following€formsÏof€release€status€if€such€release€is€from€a€prior€òòfelonyóó€convictionÌà à.€.€.Ìà à(C)€œProbation›Ìà à.€.€.ÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(13)(C)€(emphasis€added).ÌÌÌÓÓœSince›€Defendant€was€not€on€probation€from€a€prior€felony€conviction€at€the€timeÏof€the€commission€of€the€present€œoffenses,›€this€particular€enhancement€factorÏcannot€be€applied.ÌÌà àThe€Defendantalso€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€œapplied›Ïenhancement€factor€(10)€to€the€vehicular€assault€conviction.€€It€is€true€that€thisÏfactor€is€inapplicable€to€a€vehicular€assault€conviction€where€the€only€risk€toÏhuman€life€is€the€risk€to€the€victim.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hicksóó,€868€S.W.2d€729,€732Í(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€However,€the€factor€may€be€applied€in€circumstancesÏwhere€individuals€other€than€the€victim€are€in€the€area€of€the€defendantððs€criminalÏconduct€and€are€subject€to€injury.€€òòState€v.€Simsóó,€909€S.W.2d€46,€50€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1995).€€œÌà àThe›€trial€court€did€not€specifically€elaborate€upon€what€facts€were€involvedÏin€this€case€which€caused€the€court€to€believe€that€factor€(10)€was€applicable.€ÏHowever,€we€note€from€this€record€that€the€wreck€occurred€on€an€interstateÏhighway€within€the€city€limits€of€an€urban€area.€€The€proof€indicates€a€head„onÏcollision€wherein€the€Defendant€crossed€from€the€eastbound€lanes€of€InterstateÏ24€to€the€westbound€lanes€of€Interstate€24.€€It€was€undisputed€œthat€his›€bloodÏalcohol€content€following€the€wreck€was€.281.€€œÌÌà àAs›€stated€above,€this€case€proceeded€to€a€sentencing€hearing€followingÏguilty€pleas€entered€by€the€Defendant.€€Rule€œ11(f)€in€the›€Tennessee€Rules€ofÏCriminal€Procedure€states€that€ð ðNotwithstanding€the€acceptance€of€a€plea€ofÏguilty,€the€court€should€not€enter€a€judgment€upon€such€plea€without€makingÏsuch€inquiry€as€shall€satisfy€it€that€there€is€a€factual€basis€for€the€plea.ðð€€TheÏtranscript€of€the€guilty€plea€hearing€was€not€included€in€the€record€on€appeal€inÏthis€case.€€It€is€the€appellantððs€duty€to€have€prepared€an€adequate€record€inÏorder€to€allow€a€meaningful€review€on€appeal.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(b);€œòòState€v.ÏRobertsóó,€755€S.W.2d€833,€836€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€òòState›€v.€Bunchóó,€646ÍS.W.2d€158,€160€(Tenn.€œ1983).›€€It€would€have€been€much€simpler€and€easier€forÏthis€œCourt›€to€review€this€issue€if€the€entire€traffic€accident€report€had€beenÏincluded€within€the€pre„sentence€report,€or€if€the€State€had€elicited€further€proof€asÏto€the€particular€circumstances€of€the€offense€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€ÏHowever,€we€must€assume€that€the€trial€court€did€not€allow€a€judgment€to€beÏentered€upon€the€guilty€pleas€without€finding€a€factual€basis€for€the€pleas.€€ThisÏwould€normally€include€the€particular€circumstances€of€this€offense.€€In€addition,Ïwe€are€able€to€glean€from€this€record,€as€stated€above,€that€the€wreck€occurredÏon€an€interstate€highway€within€the€city€limits€of€an€urban€area€after€theÏDefendant€had€left€the€eastbound€lanes€and€entered€the€westbound€portion€ofÏthe€highway.€€Without€the€guilty€plea€hearing€being€made€a€part€of€theÏtranscript,€we€are€unable€to€say€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€applying€factor€(10).€ÏWe€are€able€to€reach€this€conclusion€even€though€from€this€record€it€is€clear€thatÏenhancement€factors€(6)€and€(13)(C)€are€not€applicable€by€their€very€nature.€€Ì€€à àÌà àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€find€that€heÏwas€remorseful€under€miscellaneous€mitigating€factor€(13).€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„113(13).€€At€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€Defendant€expressed€hisÏsympathy€to€the€victimsðð€family€and€said€he€would€trade€places€with€their€son,ÏTimothy,€if€he€could.€€€Although€the€record€does€reflect€some€expressions€ofÏremorse,€the€trial€court€heard€the€evidence,€saw€the€Defendant€firsthand,€andÍthen€ruled€based€upon€its€observation.€€When€a€factual€issue€is€œinvolved,€we›Ïmust€generally€defer€to€the€assessment€of€the€trial€court.€€Even€if€some€evidenceÏof€mitigation€did€exist,€where€the€mitigation€factors€are€strongly€outweighed€byÏthe€enhancement€œfactors,€the›€maximum€sentence€would€still€be€warranted.€ÏòòState€v.€Ruaneóó,€912€S.W.2d€766,€785€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌà àWe€therefore€find€that€there€was€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€application€ofÏenhancement€factors€(1)€and€(8)€to€both€convictions,€and€in€addition€theÏapplication€of€enhancement€factor€(10)€to€the€vehicular€assault€conviction.€ÏUnder€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€great€weight€should€be€placed€uponÏenhancement€factors€(1)€and€œ(8).›€€As€stated€above,€Defendant€pled€guilty€toÏDUI€in€early€1995.€€While€on€probation€for€this€offense,€he€committed€the€offenseÏof€public€intoxication.€€While€on€probation€for€both€of€these€alcohol€relatedÏoffenses,€one€of€which€also€involved€operation€of€a€motor€vehicle,€œhe›€committedÏthe€offenses€which€led€to€the€present€convictions€œon€appeal.€€We›€also€note€theÏrecord€reflects€that€when€arrested€for€public€intoxication€in€œJune€of›€1995,€he€wasÏpassed€out€inside€his€vehicle.€€We€hold€that€the€three€(3)€applicableÏenhancement€factors,€along€with€a€finding€of€no€mitigating€œfactors,›€justifies€theÏsentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÓ  ÓII.€€CONSECUTIVE€SENTENCINGÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€trial€court€ordered€consecutive€sentencing€after€making€a€finding€thatÏDefendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whose€behavior€indicates€little€or€no€regardÏfor€human€life,€and€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€toÏhuman€life€is€high.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(4).€€The€trial€court€also€notedÏon€the€consecutive€sentencing€issue€that€Defendant€was€on€probation€at€theÏtime€of€the€commission€of€the€offenses€of€vehicular€homicide€and€vehicularÏassault.€€Ìà àDefendant€strongly€argues€that€he€is€not€a€dangerous€offender€as€definedÏby€the€statute€and€case€law,€and€as€such,€the€trial€courtððs€order€of€consecutiveÏsentencing€should€be€reversed.€€However,€there€is€no€dispute€that€DefendantÏwas€on€probation€at€the€time€of€the€commission€of€the€offenses.€€Unlike€theÏenhancement€factor€found€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„114(13)(C)€in€which€there€is€a€requirement€that€the€Defendant€be€on€probationÏœfrom›€a€œfelony€conviction,›€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€œ40„35„115(6)€›Ïmerely€requires€that€to€justify€consecutive€sentencing,€the€Defendant€isÏsentenced€for€ð ðan€offense€committed€while€on€probation.ðð€€We€also€find€œfrom›€theÏrecord€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€necessary€to€protect€the€public€againstÏfurther€criminal€conduct€œby›€the€Defendant€and€that€consecutive€sentencing€isÏreasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offenses€committed.€€òòState€v.€Wilkersonóó,Ï905€S.W.2d€933,€939€(Tenn.€1995).€€ÌÌà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€ÌÓÓÌÌÌà àÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€Judge€ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOHN€K.€BYERS,€Senior€JudgeÌ