WPCX HƊlT;ylXTOUrd}cLhWG$P=*mέ ۑ2iBY)&,v:%Wpey8TQdCiPkd(cV{cjFͯʉȇ*rv!^Ae^.EO" u0;V ckQ[q-LjfʇE{:黄qr?z*v@Χ$Eo0_Ȓ]eLdK!} %t?hGUj=.!N^7NduNudYivuWHn7j!Y9`cJj9.C_|[k΂&zDb1r)ՀՊ;BVe8 $nh=gCX#f4)L+Q.y@5 "<҅9b#\ %% ^ + 07 UN w 4 z%  q  m 0D   i/NNU@E9;U:U@A 0:b;;;;;;;; CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 0UUUU B@@ 0] D3 D-4 0Kaa AS 0 0Di A\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3,,,,0/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularb.C:i+00 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|xU(#$  0  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(9 Z(Times New Roman  RB$      1    _Thedefendantstestimonyregardingwhoshecalledwasimprecise.,{AZ"Arial Regular(9 Z(Times New Roman  Curwood WittWedemeyerBlountvilleFindley Crim42Emphasis- -7421-4(|G2B$ !.8Hudd8         0   d(|3ǀ$ !.8Hudd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ǀ$ !.8Hudd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Hudd8     _  Hu8XXdd8  @tt\HuINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#Hu\ #Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsSeptember23,2003 L XXHu #HuXX #STATEOFTENNESSEEv.LORIANNDUNCANXXHu  J @@ AppealfromtheCriminalCourtforSullivanCounty  J @@No.S45,509R.JerryBeck,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200300423CCAR3CD   December30,_2003_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     XXXXLoriAnnDuncanappealstheSullivanCountyCriminalCourtsrevocationofherprobationary x  sentence.Duncanclaimsthatthelowercourtabuseditsdiscretioninorderinghertoserveher d sentenceinincarcerationintheDepartmentofCorrection.However,weareunpersuadedandaffirm P thelowercourtsjudgment. < #XXXX##HuXX#XXHu Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtisAffirmed.  d   #HuX#XX.HuJamesCurwoodWitt,Jr.,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidH.Wellesand < RobertW.Wedemeyer,JJ.,joined. ( TerryL.Jordan,Blountville,Tennessee(attrial);andJulieA.Rice,Knoxville,Tennessee(on  appeal),fortheAppellant,LoriAnnDuncan.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneral&Reporter;DavidH.Findley,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;H. t GreeleyWells,Jr.,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andJosephEugenePerrin,AssistantDistrictAttorney ` General,fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. L  ? OPINION #HuXXn#XXHu $"t! #HuXXk #  XXHuXXXX   `       ` Convicteduponherguiltypleastoburglary,attemptedburglary,andpossessionof #L# drugparaphernalia,thedefendantwassentencedtoserveaneffectivesentenceofoneyearandsix $8 $ monthsonintensiveprobation.Duringthetermofhersentence,aviolationwarrantissuedwhich %$!% allegedthatshefailedtoattendGEDanddrugandalcoholprograms,failedtoundergoadrugand &"& alcoholevaluation,failedtoperformcommunityservice,andfailedtoabidebycurfewrestrictions. '"'    ` Ahearingwasconducted,atwhichKathyMoody,thedefendantsprobationofficer, )$) detailedinhertestimonythedefendantsnoncompliancewithherprobationaryterms.Ms.Moody p*%* testifiedthatthedefendantwasnothomeaftercurfew,andthatalthoughshecounseledthedefendant \+&+ aboutthematter,thedefendantfailedtocomplywithcurfewonsubsequentoccasions.The H,', defendantclaimedtohavebeenworkingonatleastsomeoftheoccasionsthatshewasnothome 4-(- aftercurfew,butshefailedtoprovidedocumentationfromheremployertoMs.Moodyto  substantiatetheclaim.Thedefendantalsoclaimedthatherabsencefromthehomewasoccasioned  byconflictswithherstepfather,butshenevercalledMs.Moodywhenshehadtoleavethehome.  Thedefendantfailedtoperformtherequirednumberofcommunityservicehours,andshereported t thattransportationproblemspreventedherfromdoingso.AccordingtoMs.Moody,thedefendant ` failedtoattendtwoappointmentsforadrugandalcoholabuseevaluation,andshetoldMs.Moody L  ononeofthesetwooccasionsthatshecouldnotfindthelocationwheretheevaluationwastotake 8  place.ThedefendantwassupposedtoattendGEDclassesandalcoholanddrugclassesattheDay $ t ReportingCenter,butherattendancewassporadic.Onseveraloccasionspriortoissuanceofthe  ` violationwarrant,Ms.Moodydiscussedwiththedefendantherprogressandshortcomingsin  L  complyingwiththeprobationaryterms.  8     ` BrandonHarold,whosupervisedthedefendantscompliancewithGEDandalcohol   anddrugclassesattheDayReportingCenter,testifiedthatthedefendantattendedherclasses   sporadicallyforatimeuntilafewweeksbeforeissuanceoftheviolationwarrant,whenshequit   attendingaltogether.Thedefendantwaswarnedthatshewasindangerofbeingfoundinviolation   ofherprobationbaseduponhernonattendance,butthebehaviorcontinued.Mr.Haroldmadetwo p appointmentsforthedefendantforadrugandalcoholevaluation,butthedefendantfailedtokeep \ eitherappointmentandnevergaveMr.Haroldanexplanationwhyshedidnotattendthe H appointments. 4    ` Thedefendanttookthestandatherviolationhearingandalthoughsheadmittedthe  \ factualallegations,sheofferedvariousexplanationsforherfailuretolivebytheletterofher H probationaryterms.Sheclaimedthatshewasnothomeaftercurfewbecauseshewasworking. 4 Likewise,shedidnotattendthealcoholanddrugclassesandGEDclassesbecauseshewasworking.   SheclaimedthatMs.Moodytoldhernottoworryaboutviolatingcurfewaslongasshewas   working.However,sheadmittedthatMs.Moodytoldhershewouldneeddocumentationtosupport  thatshewasworkingorthatshewouldneedtocallher,andthedefendantneitherprovidedthe  documentsnorcalled.ThedefendantalsoreportedtoMs.Moodythatshehadnotbeenhomeon  occasionduetoaconflictovermoneywithherstepfather.Shedidnotperformtherequired l communityserviceworkbecauseherstepfatherwouldnotprovidehertransportation,andhermother X  leftthehometooearly.Sheattemptedtoattendoneofthetwoalcoholanddrugevaluation D! appointments,butshecouldnotfindtheproperlocation.Shecalledeithertheevaluationcenteror 0"  Ms.Moody,  #  1      ׀andshewastoldtowaituntilaftertheholidaystoreschedule.Thedefendanttestified #l! thattransportationtoandfromworkwasprovidedforher.Althoughshehadafriendwho $X" sometimesletherusehercar,thecarwasnotalwaysavailableforthedefendantsuse.The $D # defendantadmittedthatshedidnotaskfordirectionstothealcoholanddrugevaluation %0!$ appointment,andshedeniedknowingthatMr.Haroldmadeasecondappointmentforher. &"%   '#&    ` Afterreceivingthisproof,thelowercourtfoundthedefendantinviolationofher  probationarysentence.Thecourtorderedthatthedefendantservehersentenceinincarceration.The  appealtothiscourtfollowed.   #XXXX #XoT XXX   ` #XX XXoT!#XXXXThestandardofreviewuponappealofanorderrevoking% 6 %6G"probationistheabuseof ` discretionstandard.Statev._Harkins_,811S.W.2d79,82(Tenn.1991).Inorderforanabuseof L  discretiontooccur,thereviewingcourtmustfindthattherecordcontainsnosubstantialevidence 8  tosupporttheconclusionofthetrialjudgethataviolationofthetermsofprobationhasoccurred. $ t Id.at82;Statev._Delp_,614S.W.2d395,398(Tenn.Crim.App.1980).Thetrialcourtisrequired  ` onlytofindthattheviolationofprobationoccurredbyapreponderanceoftheevidence.Tenn.Code  L  Ann.4035311(e)(2003).Uponfindingaviolation,thetrialcourtisvestedwiththestatutory  8  authorityto revokeprobationandsuspensionofsentenceandcausethedefendanttocommencethe $  executionofthejudgmentasoriginallyentered.Id.Furthermore,whenprobationisrevoked, the   originaljudgmentsorenderedbythetrialjudgeshallbeinfullforceandeffectfromthedateofthe   revocationofsuchsuspension.Id.4035310(2003).Thetrialjudgeretainsthediscretionary   authoritytoorderthedefendanttoservetheoriginalsentence.  ݀See_'_    Statev.Dukec(  ,902S.W.2d424,   427(Tenn.Crim.App.1995). p    ` Thedefendantadmittedatthehearingthatshewasguiltyoftheallegedviolations, H andonappealshedoesnotcontestthelowercourtsfindingsinthatregard.Wethereforeneednot 4 concernourselveswiththeproprietyoftherevocationitself.  SeeK*  Statev.Johnson,15S.W.3d515,  p 518(Tenn.Crim.App.1999)(defendantsconcessionofactconstitutingviolationofprobation  \ constitutessubstantialevidenceofviolation,andtrialcourtsrevocationbasedthereonisnotabuse H ofdiscretion).Theonlyquestionwemustansweriswhetherthecourtabuseditsdiscretionin 4 orderingthedefendanttoservetheremainderofhersentenceintheDepartmentofCorrection.      ` Thedefendantpresents,inmanyrespects,asympatheticcaseforasecondchance.  However,thismustbecontrastedwiththecontraryevidencethatthedefendantfailedtoprovidethe  minimalsubstantiationandtoexerttheminimaleffortinexchangeforanylenienciesthatmayhave  beenaffordedher.XoT XXXԀ#XX XXoT-.#XXXXOuravenueforrevisitingthelowercourtsdecisionisextremelynarrowgiven l theabuseofdiscretionstandardtowhichwemustadhere.Onbalance,wecannotconcludethatthe X  lowercourtabuseditsdiscretioninorderingthedefendanttoserveheroriginalsentence. D! Accordingly,thejudgmentofthelowercourtisaffirmed. 0"     `     h     ___________________________________ &"%    `     h     JAMESCURWOODWITT,JR.,JUDGE