ÿWPCL æa1„áp4}éNEÌÖ´«äă4ëÛ–H„c|±ÀFÑ+™·‹tx !"(&72ôÛA>ï܉ë™Z‡Òu{ø×Qþ·cŒtê4U{Ѽ‰„Þ¸æ·'Ó¥ºej¨{Ú¥C²…JÀþÙÁ­«¾×€øî±TÊ{ɶ”+Yü•‚–WWFÍÁšO -ÿÛüKg(læßŒ_º¢GÊR˜Õ‡Åèå­ zÙ8­§ÆnF\9,kd棡IR+hÝÿáŽaR$GŠI"V”èˆÉÔ Î¡:„ÚÌ>*)psS5S‚4ð”çß´YAV3Ö„s8zÎx™,þ£†»adÌ Œûã [ö‚ÿ Nê[總~–Êæls¿OZS›Âãé†G“¤möe¯…‰QóÏž[—šhåE2‡%¶Ê9[ýD7*âðæ,6çÙ YñÅøXªtÕ™4ãKaJñobU˜âÖÏìñ¸1q<ÑÓƒûMÌk˜þhT¦Sj²N¹Y¸ôDb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U%N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz UN‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ11N÷ 0DùùE========================b???????????????????????????????????? 0ëGGGG B22 0¤O D5ó D-( 0KUU AS Æó 0¤¹ 0D] A«¡˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»犔)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular•jW)Á¤opÄ´¤ ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2ÇA$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Iu»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôçò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Iu»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Iu»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Iu»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Iu»»»ÔÑ8€ÙXXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îQ„IuÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼Iu»îîQ„ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€26,€2000Ð üL ÐÔ‡XÙX»¼IuÔÌò òÔ#†¼Iu»XXÙ#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€GARY€ANTHONY€BURNSÔ‡XÙX»¼IuÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€S41,€549€€€€€€Phyllis€Miller,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„02610„CCA„R3„CD€Ð ¥õ  ÐDecember€20,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔThe€Defendant,€Gary€Anthony€Burns,€pleaded€guilty€to€two€counts€of€theft€over€$500.00.€€The€trialÐ xÈ  Ðcourt€sentenced€the€Defendant€as€a€Range€I€standard€offenderÔ#†XÙXX XÙÒ#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÔ#† ¼Iu»X XÙ’#ÔÔ‡ XÙX» ¼IuÔ€to€two€years€on€each€theft€count€andÐ d´ Ðordered€the€sentences€to€be€served€concurrently.€€The€trial€court€then€suspended€the€two„yearÐ P  Ðsentence€and€ordered€the€Defendant€to€be€placed€on€six€years€probation€after€€service€of€ninety€daysÐ <Œ Ðin€the€Sullivan€County€jail,€day€for€day.€€The€Defendant€now€appeals,€arguing€that€the€trial€courtÐ (x Ðunlawfully€denied€him€alternative€sentencing.€€We€conclude€that€the€Defendantððs€sentence€is€properÐ d Ðand€therefore€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð P ÐÔ#†XÙXX XÙÆ#ÔÔ#†¼Iu»XXÙ#ÔÔ‡XÙX»¼IuÔÌÓÆÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ Ä ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Iu»àXÙÍ#ÔÔ‡XÙX.¼IuÔRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€òòóóandÐ œì ÐòòJohn€Everett€Williams,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ˆØ ÐÌRichard€A.€Tate,€Assistant€Public€Defender,€for€the€appellant,€Gary€Anthony€Burns.Ð `° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Mark€A.€Ô_ÔFulksÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€H.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐGreeley€Wells,€Jr.,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Teresa€Murray„Smith,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ $"t! ÐGeneral;€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð #`" ÐÓk ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Iu»XXÙš #ÔÔ‡XÙX»¼IuÔÐ è$8 $ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Iu»XXÙ¾ #ÔÔ‡XÙX»¼IuÔÓ  Óò òÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔà@  (ìàFactsó óˆÐ À&"& Ðà  àOn€September€15,€1999,Ô#†XÙXX XÙJ #ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÔ#† ¼Iu»X XÙ #ÔÔ‡ XÙX» ¼IuÔ€the€Defendant,€Gary€Anthony€Burns,€pleaded€guilty€without€aÐ ¬'ü"' Ðrecommendation€on€sentencing€to€two€counts€of€theft€over€$500.€€The€Defendant€admitted€toÐ ˜(è#( Ðunlawfully€cashing€two€checks€belonging€to€his€employer€totaling€$1,768.91€while€he€was€anÐ „)Ô$) Ðemployee€of€€Photo€Express€in€Bristol,€Tennessee.€€The€Defendant€and€his€former€manager€at€PhotoÐ p*À%* ÐExpress€both€testified€that€the€Defendant€repaid€an€amount€totaling€$1,600.00€after€discovery€of€theÐ \+¬&+ Ðcrimes.€€Ð H,˜', ÐÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôà  àOn€November€4,€1999,€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€County€conducted€a€sentencingÐ ° Ðhearing.€€In€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court€considered€as€enhancement€factorsÐ œì Ðthe€Defendantððs€previous€criminal€history,€the€fact€that€the€Defendant€committed€the€crime€while€onÐ ˆØ Ðbail€for€a€prior€felony€conviction,€and€the€abuse€of€a€position€of€private€trust€involved€in€the€crime.€Ð tÄ ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1),€(13)(A),€(15).€€The€trial€court€found€the€absence€of€bodilyÐ `° Ðinjury€to€be€a€mitigating€factor,€but€granted€it€only€slight€weight,€reasoning€that€mitigating€factor€(1)Ð L œ Ðalways€applies€in€theft€cases.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„113(1).€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€sentenced€theÐ 8 ˆ ÐDefendant€to€two„years€incarceration,€but€suspended€the€two„year€sentence,€concluding€that€theÐ $ t ÐDefendant€was€entitled€to€a€presumption€of€alternative€sentencing.€€However,€the€court€alsoÐ  ` Ðconcluded€that€some€confinement€was€necessary.Ô#†XÙXX XÙÞ #ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÔ#† ¼Iu»X XÙ #ÔÔ‡ XÙX» ¼IuÔ€€Therefore,€the€court€ordered€the€Defendant€toÐ ü L  Ðserve€ninety€consecutive€days€in€jail€followed€by€Ô#†XÙXX XÙ;#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÔ#† ¼Iu»X XÙ}#ÔÔ‡ XÙX» ¼IuÔsix€years€probation.€Ð è 8  ÐÌò òà@‚‚&ìàAnalysisó óˆÐ À  Ðà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€him€an€alternative€sentence.€€InÐ ¬ü  Ðsupport€of€his€argument,€he€contends€that€because€he€paid€Photo€Express€$1,600€after€charges€wereÐ ˜è  Ðfiled€against€him,€mitigating€factor€(5)€should€have€been€applied€in€his€case.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àWhen€a€criminal€defendant€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,Ð \¬ Ðthe€reviewing€court€must€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€sentence€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ H˜ Ðdeterminations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€òòóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€ThisÐ 4„ Ðpresumption,€however,€ð ðis€conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÐ  p Ðconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Ð  \ ÐS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€the€event€that€the€record€fails€to€show€such€consideration,€theÐ øH Ðreview€of€the€sentence€is€purely€òòdeóó€òònovoóó.€€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ä4 Ð1992).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€making€its€sentencing€determination,€the€trial€court,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencingÐ ¨ø Ðhearing,€determines€the€range€of€sentence€and€then€determines€the€specific€sentence€and€the€proprietyÐ ”ä Ðof€sentencing€alternatives€by€considering€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€theÐ €Ð Ðsentencing€hearing,€(2)€the€presentence€report,€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€toÐ l¼ Ðsentencing€alternatives,€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved,€(5)Ð X ¨ Ðevidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€(6)€anyÐ D!” Ðstatements€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€the€defendant's€behalf€about€sentencing,€and€(7)€theÐ 0"€  Ðpotential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€òòóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„210(a),€(b),€„103(5);€òòState€v.Ð #l! ÐWilliamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€258€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ð $X" ÐÌà  àThe€presumptive€sentence€to€be€imposed€by€the€trial€court€for€a€Class€B,€C,€D€or€E€felonyÔ#†XÙXX XÙ5#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔ€isÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€minimum€within€the€applicable€range€unless€there€are€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors€present.€Ð Ì&"% ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€If€there€are€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors,€the€court€must€startÐ ¸'#& Ðat€the€presumptive€sentence,€enhance€the€sentence€as€appropriate€for€the€enhancement€factors,€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthen€reduce€the€sentence€in€the€range€as€appropriate€for€the€mitigating€factors.€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„210(e).€Ð )à$( ÐThe€weight€to€be€given€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.€€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854Ð |*Ì%) ÐS.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€However,€the€sentence€must€be€adequately€supportedÐ h+¸&* Ðby€the€record€and€comply€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€Ð ° ÐòòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€237€(Tenn.€1986).Ð œì ÐÌà  àWhen€imposing€a€sentence,€the€trial€court€must€make€specific€findings€of€fact€on€the€recordÐ tÄ Ðsupporting€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„209(c).€€The€record€should€also€include€anyÐ `° Ðenhancement€or€mitigating€factors€applied€by€the€trial€court.€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„210(f).€€Thus,€if€the€trialÐ L œ Ðcourt€wishes€to€enhance€a€sentence,€the€court€must€state€its€reasons€on€the€record.€€The€purpose€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðrecording€the€courtððs€reasoning€is€to€guarantee€the€preparation€of€a€proper€record€for€appellateÐ $ t Ðreview.€€òòState€v.€Ervinóó,€939€S.W.2d€581,€584€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Ô#†XÙXX XÙ€ #ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔBecause€the€record€in€thisÐ  ` Ðcase€indicates€that€the€trial€court€adequately€considered€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€asÐ ü L  Ðwell€as€the€underlying€facts,€our€review€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.Ô#†XÙXX XÙ-'#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÐ è 8  ÐÔ#†XÙXX XÙx(#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÌà  àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencing€procedure,€that€theÐ À  Ðcourt€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€and€proper€weight€to€theÐ ¬ü  Ðfactors€and€principles€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€areÐ ˜è  Ðadequately€supported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€"even€if€we€would€haveÐ „Ô  Ðpreferred€a€different€result."€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Ô#†XÙXX XÙÏ(#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔTheÐ pÀ Ðdefendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence€imposed.€€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2dÐ \¬ Ðat€169.òòóóÐ H˜ ÐÔ#†XÙXX XÙ`+#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÔ#† ¼Iu»X XÙw#ÔÔ‡ XÙX» ¼IuÔÌà  àThe€Defendant€in€this€case€argues€that€he€should€have€been€granted€some€form€of€alternativeÐ  p Ðsentencing.€€However,€the€trial€court€did€in€fact€impose€one€of€the€alternative€sentencing€optionsÐ  \ Ðdelineated€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„104.€€Among€the€possible€sentencing€alternativesÐ øH Ðspecified€by€our€legislature€are€(1)€ð ð[p]ayment€of€restitution€to€the€victim€€or€victims€either€alone€orÐ ä4 Ðin€addition€to€any€other€sentence€authorized€byðð€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„104(c);€(2)€ð ð[a]Ð Ð  Ðsentence€of€confinement€which€is€suspended€upon€a€term€of€probation€supervision€which€mayÐ ¼  Ðinclude€community€service€or€restitution,€or€bothðð;€and€(3)€ð ð[a]€sentence€of€periodic€confinementÐ ¨ø Ðwhich€may€be€served€in€a€local€jail€or€workhouse€in€conjunction€with€a€term€of€probation.ðð€€Tenn.Ð ”ä ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„104(c)(2),€(3),€(4);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€304€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð €Ð ÐApp.€1994)€(stating€that€split€confinement€is€one€of€the€alternative€sentencing€options€underÐ l¼ ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„104).€€€In€this€case,€the€Defendantððs€two„year€sentence€wasÐ X ¨ Ðsuspended,€he€received€split„confinement€probation,€and€he€was€ordered€to€pay€restitution€to€theÐ D!” Ðvictim€of€his€crime.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àHowever,€in€his€brief,€the€Defendant€also€argues€that€ð ðthe€Trial€Court€should€have€grantedÐ $X" Ðprobation€or€intensive€probation€to€the€defendant€without€confinement€in€the€Sullivan€County€Jail.ðð€Ð ô$D # ÐWe€will€therefore€consider€whether€the€Defendant€should€have€been€granted€full€probation.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àWith€certain€exceptions,€a€defendant€is€eligible€for€probation€if€the€sentence€imposed€is€eightÐ ¸'#& Ðyears€or€less.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(a).€€Although€probation€ð ðmust€be€automaticallyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconsidered€as€a€sentencing€option€for€eligible€defendants,€the€defendant€is€not€automatically€entitledÐ )à$( Ðto€probation€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€€òòIdóó.€ðð€40„35„303(b)€sentencing€commððn€cmts.€€In€determiningÐ |*Ì%) Ðwhether€to€grant€or€deny€probation,€the€trial€court€must€consider€the€nature€and€circumstances€of€theÐ h+¸&* Ðoffense;€the€defendantððs€criminal€record,€background,€and€social€history;€the€defendantððs€presentÐ ° Ðcondition;€the€deterrent€effect€on€other€criminal€activity;€and€the€likelihood€that€probation€is€in€theÐ œì Ðbest€interests€of€both€the€public€and€the€defendant.€€òòState€v.€Goodeóó,€956€S.W.2d€521,€527€(Tenn.Ð ˆØ Ð1997).€€ð ðThe€defendantððs€lack€of€credibility€is€also€an€appropriate€consideration€and€reflects€on€aÐ tÄ Ðdefendantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation.ðð€òò€Id.óó€€The€Defendant€has€the€burden€of€establishing€suitabilityÐ `° Ðfor€total€probation.€€òòId.óó;€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àWe€further€note€that€even€if€a€defendant€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€forÐ $ t Ðalternative€sentencing€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„102(6),€the€statutory€presumptionÐ  ` Ðof€an€alternative€sentence€may€be€overcome€ifÐ ü L  Ðà8  àà ` à(A)€€[c]onfinement€is€necessary€to€protect€society€by€restraining€a€defendantÐ è 8  Ðwho€has€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct;ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(B)€[c]onfinement€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€theÐ À  Ðoffense€or€confinement€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€toÐ ¬ü  Ðothers€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses;€orИè Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(C)€òòóó[m]easures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€frequently€or€recentlyÐ „Ô  Ðbeen€applied€unsuccessfully€to€the€defendant€.€.€.€.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A)„(C).€€In€choosing€among€possible€sentencing€alternatives,€theÐ H˜ Ðtrial€court€should€also€consider€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„103(5),€òòDowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€atÐ 4„ Ð305,€which€states,€in€pertinent€part,€ð ðThe€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€the€rehabilitation€orÐ  p Ðtreatment€of€a€defendant€should€be€considered€in€determining€the€sentence€alternative€or€length€ofÐ  \ Ða€term€to€be€imposed.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5).Ð øH ÐÌà  àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing€in€this€case,€the€trial€judge€found€that€theÐ Ð  ÐDefendantððs€sentence€was€ð ðnecessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€orÐ ¼  Ðparticularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrenceðð€and€that€the€Defendant,€between€1994€andÐ ¨ø Ð1998,€had€a€ð ðcriminal€history€demonstrating€a€clear€disregard€for€the€morals€and€the€laws€of€society.ðð€Ð ”ä ÐThe€trial€judge€then€addressed€the€Defendant,€stating,Ð €Ð Ðà8  àI€find€that€youððve€not€been€totally€honest,€truthful€here€today.€€I€find€that€you€haveÐ l¼ Ðvery€little€potential€for€rehabilitation€in€spite€of€what€sort€of€therapy€youððve€goneÐ X ¨ Ðthrough.€€I€find€that€you€donððt€truly€accept€responsibility€for€what€you€did€.€.€.€.€So,Ð D!” Ðfull€probation€will€be€denied€.€.€.€.€I€find€that€some€confinement€is€necessary,Ð 0"€  Ðespecially€considering€your€testimony€here€today.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àÔ#†XÙXX XÙX,#ÔÔ‡ XÙXXXÙÔÔ#† ¼Iu»X XÙš,#ÔÔ‡ XÙX» ¼IuÔWe€conclude€that€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€demonstrate€that€he€was€entitled€to€fullÐ ô$D # Ðprobation.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€Defendant€was€untruthful.€€The€trial€court€also€consideredÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€Defendantððs€criminal€history€and€concluded€that€the€Defendant€had€very€little€potential€forÐ Ì&"% Ðrehabilitation€without€some€period€of€confinement€being€a€part€of€the€sentence€imposed.€€As€thisÐ ¸'#& ÐCourt€has€stated,€Ð ¤(ô#' Ðà8  àIt€is€unrealistic€to€assume€that€someone€who€has€just€pled€guilty€to€a€felonyÐ )à$( Ðconviction,€who€then€offers€perjured€testimony€to€the€court,€denies€any€criminalÐ |*Ì%) Ðwrongdoing€for€the€offense€for€which€they€have€just€pled,€and€is€in€generalÐ h+¸&* Ðunrepentant€is€someone€who€could€immediately€return€to€their€community€and€beÐ ° Ðexpected€to€assume€a€role€as€a€functioning,€productive€and€responsible€member€ofÐ œì Ðsociety.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌòòDowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€at€305.€€We€thus€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€inÐ `° Ðdenying€the€Defendant€full€probation.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€weighed€all€appropriate€factors€under€the€statutory€guidelines.€€MitigatingÐ $ t Ðfactor€(5)€is€not€applicable€in€the€instant€case€because€the€restitution€paid€to€Photo€Express€beforeÐ  ` Ðthe€sentencing€hearing€was€not€paid€before€detection€of€the€crime€and€therefore€should€not€have€beenÐ ü L  Ðconsidered€by€the€court.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(5).€€Moreover,€we€note€that€theÐ è 8  Ðapplication€of€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€was€primarily€utilized€by€the€trial€court€toÐ Ô$  Ðdetermine€the€length€of€the€Defendantððs€sentence,€which€the€Defendant€has€not€challenged€on€appeal.Ð À  ЀÌà  àAccordingly,€the€ruling€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.Ô#†XÙXX XÙÙC#ÔÔ#†¼Iu»XXÙD#ÔÔ€XÙX»¼IuÔÐ ˜è  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð H˜ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àROBERT€W.€WEDEMEYER,€JUDGE