ÿWPCã ƒwVaf0¯AO1³ÍÐ@ hÎj\X}‰<ǯ‡vÅEæŽÏbÊhi„u@j3!×÷ߎT2²±7Àêß¼/!4B)ìûOͲÉj¹×Ì. fèn6ÇeÓúpóÉ^d8ƒƒ'ˆä…%ð×!@´yàÙNší–ìÝèk§Im” c·zëÀ’¶ )¨Žê"¼ÈØ–è©’â³ø ¦=Ë‘è ô½# -[Ee´¾ _Ìt°ÚErÈ7’/çÏî¿ùe,bóÔÈFö (6_“‰Í4ÃED:)”Þl¥ê[\×¢#4¸ñKQß)ZJ¥¢Å© 89aªd+4â® ¯cw›@MQá»qÊEn"0%‰©íûÚæØkŒ.×OJÆÝÝ£ÿPóÜÕa½ú ºÃ²§ß§œÀìäw™0ì óDzïÙÍþdÌð l2)Ü1¶zI>|,§&çõ€;›u“^¸pó¯ù#-™&üÈizùƒ&F±Àä²;ýç‰pÿë²°|ŒlH«A”Ÿä¶áÓër°Kˆ"¤Õü¨(ʉÁ“x\ìnÓà,rn.3lD½Ùô§ZB ïà$¥ä¡Þé# ½ÏÆ[SÙËÓ4á®ÇÝ–©?K%”‚¶ŒØéW,U8ËŠÕŽb#Á\ % U1N# 0ˆq UNù ù ^ G zS ÒÍ wŸ 4£ · Æ ÆÈ ÆŽ ÆT Æ màN÷ 0Dù’=EÏ¿ÑU3@˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜˜bØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØØ 0ëàààà BËË 0¤è D3Œ D-¿ 0Kìì AS7ÆŠ 0¤P 0Dô A«8˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(®i)  ˜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.wptÖJ~'M%Z³Progra3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ˆÝ ƒRÒ:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô2ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-114(15)€states:€€"The€defendant€abused€a€position€of€public€or€private€trust,€or€usedÐ ° Ða€special€skill€in€a€manner€that€significantly€facilitated€the€commission€or€the€fulfillment€of€the€offense."Ð n¾ ÐÌ€ µÝ ƒRÒ:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô2ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ô2òòô2ÔThe€trial€court€also€held€that€a€sentence€of€confinement€was€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousnessÐ ° Ðof€the€offense,€and€that€the€sentence€was€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commitÐ n¾ Ðsimilar€crimes.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).€€Although€the€record€does€not€support€a€denial€of€alternativeÐ ,| Ðsentencing€based€solely€on€a€need€for€deterrence,€òòseeóó€òòState€Ô_Ôv.Ô_Ô€Hooperóó,€„„„€S.W.3d€„„„€(Tenn.€2000),€this€is€of€noÐ ê: Ðconsequence,€because€measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€had€recently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€theÐ ¨ø Ðdefendant,€as€noted€above.€Ô#†ô2òòô2~#Ô (ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman - ù-(|G2Ò:$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô2ò»»Ô d(|3Vw$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Vw$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼U»»»ÔÑ8€4 XXdæ»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îk#UÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼U»îîk# #ԈРР ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJune€20,€2000€SessionÐ ð@ ÐÔ‡X4 X»¼UÔÌò òÔ#†¼U»XX4 #ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€BOBBY€GARNERòòóóÔ‡X4 X»¼UÔó óÐ ä4 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€as€of€Right€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Montgomery€CountyÐ Ø ( Ðà@@øøìàNo.€40078€€€€€€Robert€W.€Wedemeyer,€JudgeÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<o` AßÐ pÀ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„01427„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€9,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ eµ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<0` AßÐ 1  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔFollowing€a€Montgomery€County€Grand€Jury€indictment,Ô#†X4 XXX4 Ä#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€Bobby€Garner,€the€defendant€andÐ &v  Ðappellant,€pled€guilty€to€one€count€of€aggravated€burglary€and€one€count€of€theft€of€property€overÐ  \ Ðone„thousand€dollars.€€After€a€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€serveÐ òB Ðfive€years€for€aggravated€burglary€and€three€years€for€theft.€€The€trial€court€ordered€the€defendant€toÐ Ø( Ðserve€the€sentences€consecutively.€€On€appeal,€the€defendant€argues€(1)€that€the€sentences€imposedÐ ¾ Ðwere€excessive,€(2)€that€he€should€have€been€sentenced€alternatively,€and€(3)€that€consecutiveÐ ¤ô Ðsentences€were€inappropriate.€€After€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÐ ŠÚ Ðtrial€court.Ô#†X4 XXX4 :#ÔÔ#†¼U»XX4 ‡#ÔÔ‡X4 X»¼UÔÐ pÀ ÐÓ¸ÓÌò òÔ€X4 XXX4 ÔTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€of€MontgomeryÐ <Œ ÐCounty€is€Affirmedó óÐ "r ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼U»àX4 ­#ÔÔ‡X4 X.¼UÔJerry€L.€Smith,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€H.€Welles,óó€and€òòJohnÐ î> ÐEverett€Williams,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð Ô$ ÐÌCharles€S.€Bloodworth,€Assistant€Public€Defender,€Clarksville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€BobbyÐ  ð ÐGarner.Ð † Ö  ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter,€Jennifer€L.€Bledsoe,€Assistant€Attorney€GeneralÐ R"¢" Ðand€John€Carney,€District€Attorney€General,€James€B.€Crenshaw,€Assistant€District€Attorney,Ð 8#ˆ# Ðattorneys€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $n$ ÐÓª ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼U»XX4 Ù #ÔÔ‡X4 X»¼UÔÐ ê%:!& ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼U»XX4 · #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X4 X»¼UÔò òòòÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÓÓà@€€!ìàFactual€Backgroundó óóóˆÐ ¶'#( ÐÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÓÓ€€à  àThe€defendant€broke€into€a€house€belonging€to€his€parents„in„law€where€he€stole€jewelry€andÐ ‚)Ò$* Ðcash.€€The€defendant€was€indicted€for€one€count€each€of€aggravated€burglary€and€theft€over€one„Ð h*¸%+ Ðthousand€dollars.€€After€the€defendant€pled€guilty€to€the€charges,€the€trial€court€held€a€sentencingÐ N+ž&, Ðâ âhearing.€€A€presentence€report,€prepared€by€a€probation€officer,€was€made€an€exhibit€to€that€hearing.€Ð 4,„'-ý2 ÐThe€presentence€report€contained€excerpts€from€a€written€victim€impact€statement€prepared€by€HellaÐ ° ÐLindsay,€the€victim.€€The€presentence€report€quotes€the€victim€impact€statement€as€follows:Ð –æ Ðâ âà8  àAccording€to€Ms.€Hella€Lindsay[,]€Defendant€was€fired€from€Trane€Company€due€toÐ |Ì Ðnot€passing€a€drug€test.€€She€also€stated€ð ðthe€drugs€have€taken€over€his€life€to€theÐ b² Ðextent€that€he€put€his€two€small€sons€in€danger€while€he€made€a€pick„up.€€Drugs€areÐ H˜ Ðhis€life.€€He€will€not€change.€€His€only€thought€is€to€get€more€drugs,€no€matter€whatÐ . ~ Ðit€takes.ððÐ dÐ Ð  ÐÌMs.€Lindsayððs€written€statement€also€contained€the€following€recommendation:€ð ðI€request€that€[theÐ à 0 Ðdefendant]€be€given€the€maximum€prison€sentences€the€crimes€.€.€.€allow.€€That€should€be€at€leastÐ Æ   Ðthirty€years€without€the€possibility€of€parole.ðð€€€€The€presentence€report€also€contained€a€factualÐ ¬ ü  Ðsummary€of€the€defendantððs€history€of€drug€use.€€The€summary,€taken€verbatim€from€a€letter€writtenÐ ’â  Ðby€the€defendantððs€wife,€reads€as€follows:Ð xÈ  ÐÌà8  àArmy€sent€him€to€Cumberland€Hall.€€Few€days€later€on€drugs€again.€€Army€sentÐ D”  Ð[him]€to€Clarksville€Memorial€then€on€to€Eisenhower€RTF€program.€€WhenÐ *z  Ðcompleted€was€on€drugs€within€one€month.€€Sent€back€to€Eisenhower€after€attemptedÐ ` Ðoverdose.€€Was€returned€from€Eisenhower€with€diagnosis€of€no€hope€to€ever€get€offÐ öF Ðdrugs.ÐÜ,Ð Ð  Ðà  à.€.€.€.€Ð  Ðà8  àOctober€ð!ð€Life€Center€for€six€months.€€Five€days€into€he€admitted€to€doing€drugs,Ð ¨ø Ðreceived€five€days€suspension,€and€re„entered.€€December€ð!ð€admitted€to€drug€useÐ ŽÞ Ðagain,€was€in€direct€violation.€€Instead€of€being€sent€to€jail€[,€the€defendant]€was€sentÐ tÄ Ðby€Life€Center€to€Florida.€€Stayed€on€the€run€and€evaded€authorities€until€twenty„Ð Zª Ðsixth€of€January.€€The€Public€Defender€made€a€deal€and€got€him€into€mission€acres.Ð@Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€Ms.€LindsayÔ#†X4 XXX4 F #ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€wasÔ#†X4 XXX4 %#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€the€stateððs€only€witness.€€Ms.€LindsayððsÐ  \ Ðtestimony€was€similar€to€her€victim€impact€statement:€€Ð òB ÐÌà8  àIððd€like€to€see€Mr.€Garner€to€go€to€jail€for€the€rest€of€his€life.€€Because€he€has€put€usÐ ¾ Ðthrough€so€much€misery.€€Not€just€myself.€€Also€my€daughter.€€My€daughter€has€twoÐ ¤ô Ðchildren€from€him.€€He€has€not€paid€a€penny€since€heððs€out€of€rehab€or€anything.€Ð Š Ú ÐHeððs€a€free€loafer.€€He€is€no€good.€€As€far€as€I€care,€he€can€rot€in€jail.€Ðp!À Ð Ð  ÐÌò òó óÌà  àThe€defendant€also€testified€at€the€hearing.€€He€explained€that€he€had€been€convicted€of€twoÐ "$r# Ðmisdemeanors€before€committing€the€crimes€in€this€case,€and€that€he€received€probation€for€the€priorÐ %X $ Ðcrimes.ò ò€€€ó óHe€also€admitted€that€he€did€not€successfully€complete€that€probation,€and€that€theÐ î%>!% Ðprobation€was€extended€in€order€to€give€him€more€ð ðtime€to€pay.ðð€€€ò òó óÔ#†X4 XXX4 k#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔThe€defendant€testified€that€heÐ Ô&$"& Ðwas€still€serving€probation€when€he€committed€the€crimes€in€this€case.€€ò òó óÔ#†X4 XXX4 »#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔThe€defendant€claimed€thatÐ º' #' Ðall€of€his€criminal€history,€including€the€present€case,€were€due€to€his€drug€problems.€€ò òó óÔ#†X4 XXX4 #ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔHe€alsoÐ  (ð#( Ðtestified€that,€after€he€was€arrested€for€the€present€charges,€he€successfully€completed€a€drugÐ †)Ö$) Ðrehabilitation€program.€€ò òó óFollowing€his€release€from€the€drug€rehabilitation€program,€the€defendantÐ l*¼%* Ðâ âpled€guilty€to€these€charges.€€ò òó óAfter€his€guilty€plea,€however,€the€defendant€failed€to€appear€at€hisÐ R+¢&+ Ðsentencing€hearing,€and€he€was€arrested.€€ò òó óÔ#†X4 XXX4 O#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€The€defendant€told€the€court€that€his€failure€to€appear€wasÐ ° Ðmerely€an€oversight.ò òó óÔ#†X4 XXX4 W!#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ –æ Ðâ âÔ#†X4 XXX4 "#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ôà  àIn€imposing€the€defendantððs€sentence,€the€trial€court€found€the€existence€of€three€statutoryÐ |Ì Ðenhancement€factors:€(1)€that€the€defendant€had€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€orÐ b² Ðcriminal€behavior€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð H˜ Ððð€40-35-114(1);€(2)€that€the€defendant€had€a€previous€history€of€unwillingness€to€comply€with€theÐ . ~ Ðconditions€of€release€into€the€community,€òòId.óó€ðð€40-35-114(8);€and€(3)€that€the€defendant€abused€aÐ  d Ðposition€of€private€trust.€òòId.óó€ðð€40-35-114(15).€€The€trial€court€then€found€the€following€mitigatingÐ ú J Ðfactors:€(1)€that€the€defendantððs€conduct€neither€caused€nor€threatened€serious€bodily€injury,€òòId.óó€ððÐ à 0 Ð40-35-113(1);€(2)€that€the€defendant€completed€a€drug€rehabilitation€program,€€òòId.óó,€ðð€40„35„113(13);Ô#†X4 XXX4 e"#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ Æ   Ðand€(3)€that€the€defendant€entered€an€open€guilty€plea,€saving€the€time€and€expense€of€a€trial.€€òòIdóó.Ô#†X4 XXX4 ~&#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ԀР¬ ü  ÐAs€a€result,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€serve€five€years€for€aggravated€burglary€andÐ ’â  Ðthree€years€for€theft.€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 ?'#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ xÈ  Ðà  àThe€trial€court€further€determined€that€consecutive€sentencing€was€appropriate€under€Tenn.Ð ^®  ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40-35-115.€€Specifically,€the€court€found€that€the€appellant€committed€the€presentÐ D”  Ðoffenses€while€on€probation.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40-35-115(b)(6).€€Thus,€the€trial€court€imposed€anÐ *z  Ðeffective€eight„year€sentence.€€Finally,€the€trial€court€denied€the€defendant€alternative€sentencing€andÐ ` Ðordered€the€defendant€to€serve€his€sentence€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Corrections.€Ð öF ÐÔ#†X4 XXX4 ((#ÔÓà ÓÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÌò òòòÓ  ÓStandard€of€Review€óóó óÔ#†X4 XXX4 ä*#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ Â ÐÓ +ÓÓ  Óà  àWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€this€CourtÐ ¨ø Ðconducts€a€de€novo€review€with€a€presumption€that€the€determination€of€the€trial€court€was€correct.€Ð ŽÞ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40-35-401(d).€€However,€this€presumption€of€correctness€is€"conditioned€uponÐ tÄ Ðthe€affirmative€showing€that€the€trial€court€in€the€record€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€allÐ Zª Ðrelevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€Ð @ Ðà  àIf€appellate€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€properly€considered€all€relevant€factors€and€itsÐ &v Ðfindings€of€fact€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record,€this€Court€must€affirm€the€sentence.€€òòStateÐ  \ Ðv.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€In€conducting€a€review,€this€Court€mustÐ òB Ðconsider€the€evidence,€the€presentence€report,€the€sentencing€principles,€the€arguments€of€counsel,Ð Ø( Ðthe€nature€and€character€of€the€offense,€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€any€statements€madeÐ ¾ Ðby€the€defendant,€and€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€òòState€v.€Hollandóó,€860€S.W.2d€53,Ð ¤ô Ð60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€The€defendant€bears€the€burden€of€showing€the€impropriety€of€theÐ Š Ú Ðsentence€imposed.€€òòState€v.€Gregoryóó,€862€S.W.2d€574,€578€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).Ð p!À  Ðà  à€Ô#†X4 XXX4 R+#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ V"¦! ÐÓ–+Óòòò òÓ  ÓLength€of€Sentencesó óóóÐ <#Œ" ÐÓ<2ÓÓÓà  àFirst,€the€defendant€complains€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€found€that€the€defendant€abusedÐ "$r# Ða€position€of€private€trust.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€argues€that€the€evidence€used€to€establish€this€enhancement€factor,Ð %X $ Ði.e.,€the€victim€impact€statement€and€the€victimððs€testimony,€were€irrelevant€and€prejudicial.€€HeÐ î%>!% Ðfurther€claims€that€the€evidence€did€not€establish€any€position€of€private€trust.Ð Ô&$"& ÐÐ º' #' ÐÓ†2ÓÓ  ÓA.Ð ° ÐÓç4ÓÓ!Óà  àInitially,€we€note€that€the€trial€courtððs€consideration€of€the€victim€impact€statements€wasÐ –æ Ðappropriate.€€The€Tennessee€Code€specifically€allows€trial€courts€to€consider€a€statement€from€aÐ |Ì Ðvictim€or€an€immediate€family€member€of€a€crime€victim;€such€statements€are€subject€only€to€theÐ b² Ðlimitations€that€the€statement€must€be€reliable€and€that€the€defendant€has€a€fair€opportunity€to€rebutÐ H˜ Ðthe€statement.€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 ò1#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÔ#†X4 XXX4 @7#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ôðð€40-35-209(b);Ô#†X4 XXX4 –7#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€40-38-203(1);€òòState€v.€Mossóó,Ô#†X4 XXX4 ê7#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€13€S.W.3d€374,€386Ô#†X4 XXX4 O8#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ . ~ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999).Ô#†X4 XXX4 ¤8#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€Ô#†X4 XXX4 9#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€Furthermore,€the€Legislature€has€clearly€expressed€a€desire€that€thoseÐ  d Ðstatements€be€as€comprehensive€as€possible;€the€statement€should€address€"financial,€emotional,€andÐ ú J Ðphysical€effects€of€the€crime€.€.€.€and€specific€information€about€the€victim,€the€circumstancesÐ à 0 Ðsurrounding€the€crime,€and€the€manner€in€which€it€was€perpetrated."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ Æ   Ð40-38-203(2).€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 V9#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔIn€this€case,€the€statements€were€made€by€the€defendantððs€ex„wife€and€his€ex„mother„Ð ¬ ü  Ðin„law.€Although€the€trial€court€did€not€specifically€find€the€statements€to€be€reliable,€we€have€noÐ ’â  Ðreason€to€doubt€their€veracity,€because€the€sentencing€report,€prepared€by€a€probation€officer,€verifiedÐ xÈ  Ðtheir€source.€òòCompareóó€òòMossóó,€13€S.W.3d€at€386€(finding€that€numerous€unsigned€letters€wereÐ ^®  Ðimproperly€considered€by€the€trial€court).€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 ^;#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔEspecially€where,€as€here,€the€sentencing€hearing€was€inÐ D”  Ðfront€of€a€judge,€not€a€jury,€we€are€disinclined€to€find€that€the€evidence€should€have€been€excluded.Ð *z  ÐÌÔ#†X4 XXX4 ¨=#ÔÓ5ÓÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÓ  ÓB.Ð öF ÐÓá>ÓòòóóÔ#†X4 XXX4 Â>#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÓ#Óà  àWe€cannot€agree,€however,€that€the€defendant€abused€a€position€of€private€trust.€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 =?#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔTenn.€CodeÐ Ü, ÐAnn.€ðð€40-35-114(15)Ô#†X4 XXX4 í?#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô.€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€heldÐ Â ÐÌà8  à[t]he€determination€of€the€existence€of€a€position€of€trust€does€not€depend€on€theÐ ŽÞ Ðlength€or€formality€of€the€relationship,€but€upon€the€nature€of€the€relationship.€€Thus,Ð tÄ Ðthe€court€should€look€to€see€whether€the€offender€formally€or€informally€stood€in€aÐ Zª Ðrelationship€to€the€victim€that€promoted€confidence,€reliability,€or€faith.€€If€theÐ @ Ðevidence€supports€that€finding,€then€the€court€must€determine€whether€the€positionÐ &v Ðoccupied€was€abused€by€the€commission€of€the€offense.Ð \Ð Ð  Ѐ€Ð òB ÐòòState€v.€Kissingeróó,Ô#†X4 XXX4 e@#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€922€S.W.2d€482,€488Ô#†X4 XXX4 C#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€(Tenn.€1996).€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 ÕC#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔRecently€addressing€this€issue,€the€TennesseeÐ Ø( ÐSupreme€Court€held€that€the€enhancement€factor€was€only€appropriate€where€the€evidence€showedÐ ¾ Ðð ð[a]€relationship€which€promotes€confidence,€reliability,€or€faith€usually€includes€a€degree€ofÐ ¤ô Ðvulnerability.€€It€is€the€exploitation€of€this€vulnerability€to€achieve€criminal€purposes€which€isÐ Š Ú Ðdeemed€more€blameworthy€and€thus€justifies€application€of€the€enhancement€factor€.€.€.€.ð ð€€òòState€v.Ð p!À  ÐGutierrezóó,€5€S.W.3d€641,€646€(Tenn.€1999);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Blackstockóó,€ð"ð€S.W.3d€ð"ð€(Tenn.Ð V"¦! Ð2000).Ô#†X4 XXX4 'D#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ <#Œ" Ðà  àHere,€the€defendant€was€married€to€the€victimsðð€daughter€at€the€time€of€the€burglary.€€BÔ#†X4 XXX4 G#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔeyondÐ "$r# Ðthe€familial€relation,€however,€there€is€no€evidence€in€this€small€record€that€shows€a€relationship€thatÐ %X $ Ðpromotes€confidence,€reliability,€or€faith€that€created€a€vulnerability€on€the€part€of€the€victims.€€ToÐ î%>!% Ðthe€contrary,€the€victim€testified€that€she€completely€lacked€any€confidence€or€faith€in€the€defendant.€Ð Ô&$"& ÐIndeed,€she€thought€that€the€defendant€was€no€good€and€was€a€drug€addict.€€Furthermore,€the€onlyÐ º' #' Ðevidence€that€the€defendant€exploited€the€relationship€was€the€victimððs€testimony€that€ð ðhe€knew€weÐ  (ð#( Ðwere€out€of€townðð€and€the€defendantððs€testimony€that€he€knew€where€the€jewels€were.€€We€do€notÐ †)Ö$) Ðfind€this€sufficient€to€support€the€imposition€of€this€factor.€€€€€Ð l*¼%* ÐÓ\?ÓÔ#†X4 XXX4 ×G#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÌÓ  ÓC.Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÓœKÓÓ  Óà  àNonetheless,€we€find€the€length€of€the€defendantððs€sentences€appropriate.€€IÔ#†X4 XXX4 |K#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ôf€no€mitigatingÐ ° Ðor€enhancement€factors€for€sentencing€are€present,€the€presumptive€sentence€shall€be€the€minimumÐ –æ Ðsentence€within€the€applicable€range.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(c)Ô#†X4 XXX4 YL#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô.€€However,€if€such€factorsÐ |Ì Ðdo€exist,€a€trial€court€should€start€at€the€minimum€sentence,€enhance€the€minimum€sentence€withinÐ b² Ðthe€range€for€enhancement€factors€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€the€range€for€the€mitigatingÐ H˜ Ðfactors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(e).€€No€particular€weight€for€each€factor€is€prescribed€by€theÐ . ~ Ðstatute.€€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€238€(Tenn.€1986).Ô#†X4 XXX4 |M#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ  d ÐÔ#†X4 XXX4 —O#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ôà  àIn€this€case,€the€defendant€pled€guilty€to€aggravated€burglary€and€theft€of€property€over€one„Ð ú J Ðthousand€dollars.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„14„403,€39„14„103.€€The€sentencing€range€for€aggravatedÐ à 0 Ðrobbery€was€between€three€and€six€years,€and€the€presumptive€sentence€was€three€years.€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„Ð Æ   Ð112(a)(3).€€The€sentencing€range€for€theft€over€one„thousand€dollars€was€between€two€and€four€years,Ð ¬ ü  Ðand€the€presumptive€sentence€was€two€years.€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„112(a)(4).Ô#†X4 XXX4 îO#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€€Thus,€the€trial€courtððs€sentenceÐ ’â  Ðof€five€years€for€the€aggravated€burglary€was€slightly€greater€than€the€midpoint€of€the€range,€whileÐ xÈ  Ðthe€three„year€sentence€for€theft€was€exactly€the€midpoint€in€the€range.€€After€giving€dueÐ ^®  Ðconsideration€to€the€mitigating€factorsÔ#†X4 XXX4 qR#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 Ô€and€to€the€enhancement€factors€which€were€properly€applied,Ð D”  Ðwe€find€the€length€of€the€defendantððs€sentences€appropriate.Ð *z  ÐÓÏKÓ€€Ð ` Ðò òòòÓ  ÓAlternativeÔ‡„ù‡ „XX4 Ô€Ô#†X4 X „„ù‡U#ÔSentencingóóó óÐ öF ÐÓíTÓÓ  Óà  àNext,€the€defendant€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€alternative€sentencing.€€He€arguesÐ Nž Ðthat€the€state€did€not€overcome€the€presumption€that€the€defendant€was€entitled€to€alternativeÐ 4„ Ðsentencing.€€The€Tennessee€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€recognizes€the€limited€capacityÐ j Ðof€state€prisons€and€mandates€that€"convicted€felons€committing€the€most€severe€offenses,€possessingÐ P Ðcriminal€histories€evincing€a€clear€disregard€for€the€laws€and€morals€of€society,€and€evincing€failureÐ æ6 Ðof€past€efforts€of€rehabilitation€shall€be€given€first€priority€regarding€sentencing€involvingÐ Ì Ðincarceration."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40-35-102(5).€€A€defendant€who€does€not€qualify€as€such€andÐ ² Ðwho€is€an€especially€mitigated€or€standard€offender€of€a€Class€C,€D,€or€E€felony€is€"presumed€to€beÐ ˜è Ða€favorable€candidate€for€sentencing€options€in€the€absence€of€evidence€to€the€contrary."€€òòId.óó€ððÐ ~Î Ð40-35-102(6);€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.€€However,€this€presumption€may€be€rebutted€by€evidenceÐ d´ Ðto€the€contrary.€€Such€evidence€may€include€the€following€sentencing€considerations:Ð Jš ÐÌà8  à(A)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€protect€society€by€restraining€a€defendant€who€hasÐ  f Ða€long€history€of€criminal€conduct;Ðü LÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  à(B)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€orÐ È"! Ðconfinement€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€to€others€likelyÐ ®#þ" Ðto€commit€similar€offenses;€orД$ä#Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à(C)€Measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€frequently€or€recently€beenÐ `&°!% Ðapplied€unsuccessfully€to€the€defendant.€€ÐF'–"&Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-103(1).€€In€this€case,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€theft€of€property€overÐ )b$( Ðone„thousand€dollars,€a€Class€D€felony,€and€aggravated€burglary,€a€Class€C€felony,€and€sentencedÐ ø)H%) Ðâ âas€a€standard,€Range€I€offender.€€Ð Þ*.&* Ðà  àEven€assuming€that€the€defendant€was€entitled€to€the€presumption€in€favor€of€alternativeÐ ° Ðâ âsentencing,€however,€we€find€that€the€presumption€was€rebutted.€€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 üS#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔAs€the€trial€court€noted,Ð –æ Ðð ð[m]easures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€recently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€thisÐ |Ì Ðdefendant.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(C).€€The€evidence€adduced€at€the€sentencingÐ b² Ðhearing€proved€that€the€defendant€was€on€probation€when€he€committed€the€instant€offenses,€and€thatÐ H˜ Ðhe€had€violated€probation€in€the€past.€€We€find€this€sufficient€to€support€a€sentence€of€confinement.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р. ~ ÐòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Elamóó,€7€S.W.3d€103,€107„108€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999).à  àÐ  d ÐThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð ú J Ðà  à€Ô#†X4 XXX4 Q_#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ à 0 ÐÓ|UÓÓ  Óò òòòConsecutive€Sentencesóóó óÐ Æ   ÐÓêbÓÓ  Óà  àNext,€the€defendant€complains€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€ordering€consecutive€sentences.Ð ¬ ü  ÐConsecutive€sentencing€is€governed€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-115.€€A€trial€court€may€orderÐ ’â  Ðsentences€to€run€consecutively€if€it€finds€that€one€or€more€of€the€statutory€criteria€exists€by€aÐ xÈ  Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-115(b);€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€924€S.W.2d€912,Ð ^®  Ð917€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€Under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40-35-115(b)(6),€a€trial€court€may€imposeÐ D”  Ðconsecutive€sentences€after€determining€that€the€appellant€committed€the€offenses€while€on€probationÐ *z  Ðfor€another€offense.€€It€is€undisputed€that€the€appellant€committed€the€present€offenses€while€he€wasÐ ` Ðon€probation.€€Thus,€the€trial€court's€imposition€of€consecutive€sentences€was€proper.€€Ô#†X4 XXX4 ¦b#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔÐ öF ÐÔ#†X4 XXX4 g#ÔÔ‡X4 XXX4 ÔThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð Ü, Ðà  àAccordingly,€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.Ô#†X4 XXX4 gg#ÔÐ Â ÐÓ