ÿWPC ºe=R 7Œ(àÖÛ¦/Ýû¬óöm1Ðw6$ª]'IÑuæ$¯¾ ³ÕKmŒÓrØ$È Úmm¡¶w>z݈Lõ ôZO^çÐukתl2|f!\×ojEµçãØ .£%Ç}GÌÙ”¹DSLw†öåÏèuµo÷{vÄ…˜®ÕgoaPMX:íL}Q ¶JìãPyøeÓa ~9æ9Àlû”8Åoc¶jlògjŸ-ò§”·«uTYzÎøç³Dî`zÃå·»í“gé‡Â®xs„:5YŸ:ñ”÷Ï¡t¬3Eè+¡Gê/bȈˆ"@íšt(,•e¾º7'Ù±5ë÷[:?î* Í 3-hÞá]ÌöÇýqÈÕõuð%«»OÂ)øÍÒM‚.TŽ„-©€‹‡E¨ñGVö™ÜZýØ9ÆÅíÀJ¦ŠÙm­ðÚRréIôK± ‡Y((ÐïôXWy5$Ù·$Ì΢‘#]Ô­˜åØ 6gæo@­Š¿¥ÿD°yEò^lËúð),?—¬‚ôHí»<'±Ømq{ÙʼpÍ=ûhB›Äî%Ò5y7S³A3@s¤¼ŒÛÐØ>³ëÍϵéÕ<^\« —%æ-• ûb#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% UN­ û û z Ò} zO ÒÉ ^ › w§ Æ« Æq Æ7Æý4ÃN×ÙèEê mìììììììììììììììììììììììb 0ë     Böö 0¤ D3· D-ê 0K ASbƵ 0¤{ 0D A«c˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular  ˜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.wptÇž=)â Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5q\;'Tv£3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ- ù-(|G22 $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¿´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÒ¼ò»»Ô d(|3&$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¿´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3&$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¿´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¿´»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼¿´»»»ÔÑ8€®#XXdð»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îüG¿´ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼¿´»îîüG #ԈРÜ, ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJuly€26,€2000,€SessionÐ X ÐÔ‡X®#X»¼¿´ÔÌò òÔ#†¼¿´»XX®##ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€WILLIAM€BLAINE€CAMPBELLòòóóÔ‡X®#X»¼¿´Ôó óÐ  ` ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Washington€CountyÐ  h Ðà@@øøìàNo.€23956€€€€€€Lynn€W.€Brown,€JudgeÐ  X ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<×` AßÐ Ø(  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„02208„CCA„R3„CD€Ð ×'  ÐSeptember€29,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ Ç  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<¶` AßÐ ·  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant€appeals€the€sentence€imposed€for€the€offense€ofòòóó€furnishing€alcohol€to€a€minor.€€TheÐ ¶ Ðdefendant€contends€that€he€should€have€been€granted€judicial€diversion€and€full€probation.€€WeÐ ¦ö Ðaffirm€the€trial€court.Ð –æ ÐÓÁÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ vÆ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼¿´»àX®#“#ÔÔ‡X®#X.¼¿´ÔJoseph€M.€Tipton,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJohn€Everett€Williamsóó€andÐ V¦ ÐòòRobert€W.€Wedemeyer,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð F– ÐÌMark€D.€Slagle,€Johnson€City,€Tennessee,€attorney€for€appellant,€William€Blaine€Campbell.Ð &v ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€R.€Stephen€Jobe,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€JoeÐ V ÐC.€Crumley,€Jr.,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Victor€J.€Vaughn,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ öF ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð æ6 ÐÓfÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼¿´»XX®#•#ÔÔ‡X®#X»¼¿´ÔÐ Æ  ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼¿´»XX®#W #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X®#X»¼¿´Ôà  àThe€defendant,€William€Blaine€Campbell,€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€sentence€imposed€byÐ ¦"ö! Ðthe€trial€court€òòóófor€the€offense€of€furnishing€alcohol€to€a€minor,€a€Class€A€misdemeanor.€€TheÐ –#æ" Ðdefendant€was€sentenced€to€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days,€with€fourteen€days€to€be€served€€in€jailÐ †$Ö# Ðand€the€remainder€to€be€served€on€probation.€€On€appeal,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€courtÐ v%Æ $ Ðerred€in€denying€him€judicial€diversion€or€full€probation.Ð f&¶!% ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€indicted€on€eight€counts€of€especially€aggravated€sexual€exploitation€ofÐ F(–#' Ða€minor€and€one€count€of€contributing€to€the€delinquency€of€a€minor.€€After€the€trial€court€grantedÐ 6)†$( Ðthe€defendantððs€motion€to€suppress€evidence,€the€state€and€the€defendant€agreed€to€proceed€byÐ &*v%) Ðinformation€upon€a€charge€of€furnishing€alcohol€to€a€minor,€dismissing€all€nine€counts€of€theÐ +f&* Ðindictment.€€The€defendant€entered€òòóóa€guilty€plea€to€this€charge€but€did€not€acknowledge€guilt.€€òòSeeóóÐ ,V'+ ÐòòNorth€Carolina€v.€Alfordóó,€400€U.S.€25,€37,€91€S.€Ct.€160,€167€(1970);€òòDortch€v.€Stateóó,€705€S.W.2dÐ ö,F(, Ð687,€689€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€€The€trial€court€accepted€the€plea.€€The€defendant€requestedÐ æ-6)-ý Ðjudicial€diversion€and,€alternatively,€probation.€€The€trial€court€held€a€sentencing€hearing€on€theseÐ ° Ðrequests€and€denied€judicial€diversion€but€granted€probation,€subject€to€the€defendant€servingÐ  ð Ðfourteen€days€in€jail.Ð à ÐÌà  àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€defendant€was€the€only€witness,€and€he€testified€that€he€taughtÐ pÀ Ðat€East€Tennessee€State€University€School€for€seventeen€years.€€He€stated€that€one€of€his€students,Ð ` ° ÐSam€Harris,€had€written€an€extortion€note,€demanding€$36,820.€€The€note€alleged€that€the€defendantÐ P   Ðhad€sexually€assaulted€Harris.€€The€defendant€said€that€the€allegations€in€the€note€were€completelyÐ @  Ðfalse€and€that,€after€unsuccessfully€attempting€to€resolve€the€matter€with€Harris€and€Harrisððs€mother,Ð 0 € Ðhe€took€the€note€to€the€Johnson€City€Police€Department.€€The€defendant€testified€that€the€police€gotÐ  p  Ða€search€warrant€and€searched€his€home.€€The€search€uncovered€two€videotapes€of€Harris€in€the€nude.€Ð `  ÐThe€defendant€said€that€he€did€not€make€the€videotapes€and€had€no€knowledge€of€their€existence€untilÐ P  Ðthey€were€found€in€his€house.€€He€stated€that€he€believed€that€someone€planted€the€tapes€in€his€house,Ð ð@  Ðcommenting€that€a€neighbor€once€saw€Harrisððs€car€at€his€house.€€The€defendant€said€that€he€did€notÐ à0  Ðfurnish€alcohol€to€a€minor,€although€he€knew€that€Harris;€Tamara€Baker,€Harrisððs€ex„girlfriend;€andÐ Ð  ÐRitchie€Ô_ÔWisemanÔ_Ô,€Harrisððs€best€friend,€would€testify€that€he€did.€€He€said€that€he€was€entering€anÐ À ÐòòÔ_ÔAlfordÔ_Ôóó€plea€just€to€end€the€entire€matter.Ð ° ÐÌò òÓ  ÓI.€€JUDICIAL€DIVERSIONó ó€Ð à ÐÌÓÅÓà  àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€denying€him€judicialÐ pÀ Ðdiversion.€€The€defendant€argues€that€(1)€the€court€improperly€considered€the€sexual€offenses€thatÐ `° Ðhad€been€dismissed;€(2)€the€court€incorrectly€found€that€the€defendant€abused€a€position€of€trust;€andÐ P  Ð(3)€the€court€incorrectly€determined€that€the€defendant€was€not€amenable€to€correction.Ð @ ÐÌà  àThe€decision€whether€to€grant€or€deny€judicial€diversion€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€theÐ  p Ðtrial€court€and€can€only€be€overturned€on€appeal€by€the€showing€of€an€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòState€v.Ð ` ÐParkeróó,€932€S.W.2d€945,€958€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€We€will€not€interfere€with€a€denial€ofÐ P Ðjudicial€diversion€ð ðif€there€is€ððany€substantial€evidence€to€support€the€refusalðð€contained€in€theÐ ð@ Ðrecord.ðð€€òòId.óó€(quoting€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€857€S.W.2d€571,€572€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)).€€Ð à0 ÐÌà  àIn€making€its€determination,€the€trial€court€must€consider€the€following€factors:Ð À! ÐÌà8  à(a)€the€accusedððs€amenability€to€correction;€(b)€the€circumstances€of€the€offense;€(c)Ð  #ð! Ðthe€accusedððs€criminal€record;€(d)€the€accusedððs€social€history;€(e)€the€status€of€theÐ $à" Ðaccusedððs€physical€and€mental€health;€and€(f)€the€deterrence€value€to€the€accused€asÐ €%Ð # Ðwell€as€others.€€The€trial€court€should€also€consider€whether€judicial€diversion€willÐ p&À!$ Ðserve€the€ends€of€justiceð!ðthe€interests€of€the€public€as€well€as€the€accused.Ð`'°"%Ð Ð  ÐÌòòState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€163,€168€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(citing€òòState€v.€Hammersleyóó,€650Ð @)$' ÐS.W.2d€352,€355€(Tenn.€1983)).€€Further,€if€the€trial€court€refuses€to€grant€judicial€diversion,€thenÐ 0*€%( Ðit€is€required€to€place€in€the€record€specific€reasons€for€its€determination.€€òòBonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€atÐ  +p&) Ð169.Ð ,`'* Їà  àIn€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€considered€each€of€the€above€factors€and€placed€its€findingsÐ ° Ðin€the€record€as€follows:€€First,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€defendantððs€amenability€to€correctionÐ  ð Ðweighed€against€granting€judicial€diversion€because€the€defendant,€although€having€pled€guilty€toÐ à Ðfurnishing€alcohol€to€a€minor,€still€insisted€that€he€did€not€commit€the€offense.€€The€court€found€thatÐ €Ð Ðthis€denial€of€guilt€made€the€defendantððs€amenability€to€correction€questionable.€€Second,€the€trialÐ pÀ Ðcourt€found€that€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€of€furnishing€alcohol€to€a€minor€weighed€againstÐ ` ° Ðthe€defendant.€€The€court€focused€on€the€abuse€of€a€position€of€trust€that€was€involved€in€this€offense.€Ð P   ÐThird,€the€trial€court€found€that€both€the€defendantððs€clean€criminal€record€and€his€productive€socialÐ @  Ðhistory€weighed€in€his€favor.€€Next,€the€trial€court€stated€that€because€there€was€not€a€mentalÐ 0 € Ðevaluation€of€the€defendant€available,€the€physical€and€mental€health€of€the€defendant€was€a€neutralÐ  p  Ðfactor.€€The€trial€court€also€found€that€deterrence€was€not€a€factor€in€this€case.€Finally,€the€trial€courtÐ `  Ðfound€that€it€was€in€the€strong€interests€of€the€public€not€to€tolerate€teachers€furnishing€alcohol€toÐ P  Ðstudents.€€In€its€conclusion,€the€court€stated€that€after€weighing€all€of€these€factors,€it€was€denyingÐ ð@  Ðjudicial€diversion,€emphasizing€the€fact€that€the€defendant€had€abused€a€position€of€public€trust.Ð à0  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€reached€its€conclusion€based,€in€part,€on€the€natureÐ À Ðof€the€sexual€offenses€that€had€been€dismissed.€€Before€the€defendant€testified,€the€trial€court€inquiredÐ ° Ðabout€what€the€stateððs€witnesses€would€have€testified€concerning€the€sexual€offenses€that€had€beenÐ  ð Ðdismissed.€€Further,€during€and€after€the€defendantððs€testimony€in€which€he€gave€his€version€of€theÐ à Ðdismissed€offenses,€i.e.,€that€he€did€not€commit€the€acts€alleged,€the€trial€court€commented€on€severalÐ €Ð Ðoccasions€about€the€underlying€offenses.€€These€comments€were€largely€in€response€to€the€testimonyÐ pÀ Ðof€the€defendant.€Ð `° ÐÌà  àFirst,€we€do€not€believe€that€the€trial€court€is€prohibited€in€a€sentencing€hearing€fromÐ @ Ðconsidering€evidence€about€other€purported€offenses€even€if€charges€regarding€those€offenses€haveÐ 0€ Ðbeen€dropped.€€Obviously,€the€trial€court€in€the€present€case€could€not€consider€evidence€obtainedÐ  p Ðin€violation€of€the€defendantððs€constitutional€rights,€but€the€record€does€not€reflect€that€it€relied€uponÐ ` Ðthe€suppressed€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„209(b).€€òòóóIn€fact,€the€trial€court€stated€thatÐ P Ðit€was€inappropriate€to€consider€such€evidence.€€In€any€event,€we€note€that€the€factors€that€the€trialÐ ð@ Ðcourt€listed€in€considering€diversion€did€not€relate€to€the€dismissed€crimes.€€We€conclude€that€theÐ à0 Ðtrial€court€did€not€improperly€consider€the€dismissed€offenses.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€denying€judicialÐ °"  Ðdiversion€because€it€improperly€relied€on€abuse€of€trust€as€a€factor€in€its€decision.€€However,€the€Ð  #ð! Ðdefendantððs€abuse€of€trust€is€relevant€to€the€circumstances€of€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€DavidÐ $à" ÐE.€Smith,€Jr.óó,€No.€01C01„9805„CR„00224,€Davidson€County,€slip€op.€at€9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€JuneÐ €%Ð # Ð9,€1999);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Bostonóó,€938€S.W.2d€435,€438€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996)€(finding€abuse€ofÐ p&À!$ Ðtrust€as€part€of€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€in€a€probation€determination).€€Thus,€the€trial€courtÐ `'°"% Ðappropriately€considered€abuse€of€trust.€Ð P( #& ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€also€argues€that€even€if€an€abuse€of€trust€is€an€appropriate€consideration,€itÐ 0*€%( Ðdoes€not€exist€in€the€present€case.€€The€defendant€admits€that€the€teacher„student€relationship€is€oneÐ  +p&) Ðof€trust,€but€asserts€that€the€court€must€find€that€the€defendant€abused€his€position€during€theÐ ,`'* Ðcommission€of€the€offense.€€Here,€the€defendant€entered€an€òòAlfordóó€plea€to€the€offense€of€furnishingÐ ° Ðalcohol€to€a€minor.€€Moreover,€he€stipulated€that€the€stateððs€proof€would€have€been€that€he,€a€publicÐ  ð Ðschool€teacher,€provided€alcohol€to€several€of€his€students€during€a€party€hosted€by€him.€€TheseÐ à Ðcircumstances€indicate€that€the€defendant€abused€his€position€of€trust.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€defendantððs€last€argument€on€the€judicial€diversion€issue€is€that€the€trial€court€improperlyÐ ` ° Ðdetermined€that€he€was€not€amenable€to€correction.€We€note,€though,€that€the€trial€court€stated€onlyÐ P   Ðthat€his€amenability€to€correction€was€questionable.€€It€based€its€concerns€upon€the€evidence€showingÐ @  Ðthe€defendant€to€be€in€denial.€€The€defendant€asserts€that€the€mere€fact€that€he€entered€an€òòAlfordóó€pleaÐ 0 € Ðis€insufficient€to€justify€a€finding€that€he€was€not€amenable€to€correction.€€Ð  p  ÐÌà  àWhen€a€trial€court€exercises€its€discretion€to€accept€an€òòAlfordóó€plea,€we€question€its€use€of€theÐ P  Ðdefendantððs€mere€assertion€of€innocence€at€the€time€of€the€plea€as€a€basis€for€denying€diversion€orÐ ð@  Ðprobation€because€of€a€lack€of€amenability€to€correction.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Andrew€H.€Leoneóó,€No.Ð à0  Ð02C01„9206„CR„00148,€Shelby€County,€slip€op.€at€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Sept.€29,€1993).€€However,Ð Ð  Ðthe€trial€court€need€not€ignore€the€evidence,€including€the€defendantððs€testimony€at€the€sentencingÐ À Ðhearing.€€In€the€present€case,€the€defendant€testified€regarding€many€things€and€denied€that€anyÐ ° Ðwrong€doing€by€him€ever€happened.€€It€is€apparent€that€the€trial€court€did€not€credit€all€that€theÐ  ð Ðdefendant€claimed.€€The€record€supports€the€trial€courtððs€concern€regarding€amenability€to€correction.Ð à ÐÌà  àIn€any€event,€the€trial€court€based€its€denial€of€diversion€primarily€upon€its€determination€thatÐ pÀ Ðthe€defendant€abused€his€position€of€trust€as€a€teacher€by€providing€alcohol€to€minor€students.€€In€thisÐ `° Ðrespect,€we€note€that€ð ðthe€circumstances€of€the€offense€may€alone€serve€as€the€basis€for€denialðð€ofÐ P  Ðjudicial€diversion.€€òòState€v.€Kyteóó,€874€S.W.2d€631,€634€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòDavid€E.Ð @ ÐSmith,€Jr.óó,€slip€op.€at€9.€€The€trial€court€also€found€that€granting€diversion€would€be€against€the€strongÐ 0€ Ðinterests€of€the€public€in€not€tolerating€such€behavior€by€their€teachers.€€Sufficient€evidence€existsÐ  p Ðin€the€record€to€support€the€denial€of€diversion.€€€€€Ð ` ÐÌò òÓ  ÓII.€€FULL€PROBATIONó óÐ ð@ ÐÓ=ÓÌà  àThe€trial€court€granted€the€defendant€probation€but€ordered€him€to€serve€fourteen€days€inÐ Ð  Ðconfinement.€€The€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€requiring€any€confinement.€€TheÐ À! Ðdefendant€specifically€asserts€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€consider€the€applicable€sentencingÐ °"  Ðconsiderations.€€Ð  #ð! ÐÌà  àIn€reviewing€whether€the€trial€court€properly€sentenced€the€defendant,€we€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóóÐ €%Ð # Ðreview€of€the€record€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€ThisÐ p&À!$ Ðpresumption€of€correctness€is€conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€that€the€trial€courtÐ `'°"% Ðconsidered€the€relevant€facts,€circumstances,€and€sentencing€principles.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2dÐ P( #& Ð166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€Ð @)$' ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€first€argues€that€the€presumption€of€correctness€cannot€be€applied€in€this€caseÐ  +p&) Ðbecause€the€trial€court€failed€to€discuss€all€of€the€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors.€€This€argumentÐ ,`'* Ðis€without€merit.€€In€misdemeanor€sentencing,€a€trial€court€is€required€to€consider€òòóóthese€factors,€butÐ ° Ðit€is€not€required€to€place€specific€findings€on€the€record.€€òòState€v.€Troutmanóó,€979€S.W.2d€271,€274Ð  ð Ð(Tenn.€1998).€€Therefore,€the€presumption€of€correctness€applies€in€this€misdemeanor€sentencingÐ à Ðcase.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€consider€the€appropriate€sentencingÐ ` ° Ðconsiderations€for€imposing€a€sentence€involving€confinement€under€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103:€Ð P   ÐÌà8  à(1)€Sentences€involving€confinement€should€be€based€on€the€followingÐ 0 € Ðconsiderations:Ð p Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(A)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€protect€society€by€restraining€aÐ `  Ðdefendant€who€has€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct;ÐP ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(B)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousnessÐ ð@  Ðof€the€offense€or€confinement€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€anÐ à0  Ðeffective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses;€orÐÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(C)€Measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€frequently€orÐ À Ðrecently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€the€defendant.а` x` x ÐÌIn€the€present€case,€sections€(A)€and€(C)€are€inapplicable.€€In€fact,€the€trial€court€stated€that€theÐ à Ðdefendant€had€no€criminal€record.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that€section€(B)€also€does€not€apply.€€Section€(B)€contains€twoÐ `° Ðsentencing€considerations€for€confinement.€€The€first€is€that€confinement€is€necessary€to€avoidÐ P  Ðdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.€€Although€the€trial€court€did€not€specifically€state€thisÐ @ Ðconsideration€in€similar€words,€it€concluded€that€the€public€had€a€strong€interest€in€not€havingÐ 0€ Ðteachers€furnish€alcohol€to€students.€€Section€(B)ððs€second€consideration€is€that€confinement€isÐ  p Ðappropriate€when€it€is€ð ðparticularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€to€others€likely€toÐ ` Ðcommit€similar€offenses.ðð€€The€trial€court€stated€that€deterrence€was€not€a€factor,€noting€that€thereÐ P Ðwas€no€indication€that€the€offense€was€a€problem€in€the€community.€€Ð ð@ ÐÌà  àIn€our€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€was€justified€in€requiring€fourteenÐ Ð  Ðdays€in€confinement.€€In€the€context€of€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€when€a€teacher€suppliesÐ À! Ðalcohol€to€his€students,€it€is€a€particularly€aggravated€form€of€the€offense€of€furnishing€alcohol€to€aÐ °"  Ðminor.€€Its€seriousness€should€not€be€depreciated.€€Moreover,€contrary€to€the€trial€courtððs€view,€weÐ  #ð! Ðbelieve€that€confinement€is€particularly€suited€to€deter€other€teachers€from€furnishing€alcohol€to€theirÐ $à" Ðminor€students.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€defendantððs€confinement€is€justified.Ð €%Ð # ÐÌà  àIn€consideration€of€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€courtÐ `'°"% Ðis€affirmed.Ð P( #& ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð 0*€%( Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JUDGE