ÿWPCÖ$ …# V %aUNg 0Ƶ4{  0 ž ¨ w@° U:ð 0D* 0Jn 0T¸ 0^  0hj 0rÒ 0|D 0†À 0F 1uÖ 0dK B¯U>ÌU * B)4DC] AM  D3í³ ·Ó 0@ŠÊv~àvÓ^ AO1#Æ€# 0DF$ D/Š$ B¹$˜HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,ð,,,,,ð0nLhÎX(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular(žjÆ$¡¡Ñ` ` ÑÑÜÜÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓÚƒç"3|xï(º(3eB$¤¤Ý ƒjÆ!ÝÑ` °ÑÑܰÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÝ  Ýà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÛÜÝEÞßà+áâãäÓ€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 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 d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd€-(Cþÿ << Gÿÿ$$$$'ÿÿdxd ©Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òJanuaryÏ6,Ï1998ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó ­Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÓÓÔ€&ôÔA€Range€I€sentence€for€a€Class€E€felony€is€one€to€two€years;€a€Range€III€sentence€is€four€to€sixÏyears.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112.€€Our€supreme€court€approved€such€hybrid€sentences€as€longÏas€they€are€the€product€of€a€"plea€agreement€entered€voluntarily€and€knowingly."€€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€945ÏS.W.2d€706€(Tenn.€1997).€€Ì("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ôÔÓÓDeterrence€is€a€factor€in€every€criminal€case€and,€therefore,€the€statutory€denial€of€probationÏbecause€of€deterrence,€alone,€must€be€supported€by€evidence€indicating€some€special€need€orÏconsideration€relative€to€that€jurisdiction€which€would€not€be€addressed€by€the€normal€deterrenceÏinherent€in€any€criminal€penalty.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jenkinsóó,€733€S.W.2d€528,€535€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);ÏòòState€v.€Vanceóó,€626€S.W.2d€287,€290€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€This€standard€appears€in€section€40„35„103(1)(B)€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.,€which€provides€for€confinement€if€it€is€"particularly€suited€to€provideÏan€effective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses."€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€%ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÑ  ÑÔ€&ÔÑ7€ ³¾ XXdædÈ7ÑÙ€€ÙßR€)+(A1-j|` ´- `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÌà@ àòòAT€KNOXVILLEóóÌà@ àOCTOBER€1997€SESSIONÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à*à àC.C.A.€#€03C01„9701„CR„00032Ìà àà àAppellee,à àà àà à*à àCARTER€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à*à àHon.€Arden€L.€Hill,€JudgeÌÓÓANTHONY€CHARLES€GODSEY,€à à*à à(Sexual€Battery)ÌÌà àà àAppellant.à àà àà à*ÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€Appelleeóó:ÌÌRobert€Y.€Oakesà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌOffice€of€the€Public€Defenderà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌFirst€Judicial€District€à àÌMain€Courthouse€à àà àà àà àGeorgia€Blythe€FelnerÌElizabethton,€TN€€37643à àà àà àCounsel€for€the€State€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌGerald€L.€Gulley,€Jr.à àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌAttorneyÌP.O.€Box€1708à àà àà àà àKenneth€C.€BaldwinÌKnoxville,€TN€€37901„1708à àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌ(on€appeal€only)à àà àà àà à900€East€Elk€AvenueÌà àà àà àà àà àà àElizabethton,€TN€€37643€ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:__________________________ÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÇÓÓà@ àòòOPINIONóóÌà àà àThe€defendant,€Anthony€Charles€Godsey,€was€indicted€by€a€CarterÏCounty€Grand€Jury€for€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€Pursuant€to€a€plea€agreement,Ïthe€defendant€entered€a€guilty€plea€to€sexual€battery,€a€Class€E€felony.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„505.€€The€trial€court€approved€a€Range€I,€five„year€sentence€butÏdenied€the€defendant's€application€for€probation.× ƒ, ××  ×€ÌÌà àà àIn€this€appeal€of€right,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€courtÏshould€have€granted€probation,€split€confinement,€or€Community€Corrections.€€WeÏfind€no€error€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àà àOn€the€evening€of€August€3,€1995,€the€defendant€delivered€someÏfirewood€to€the€residence€of€his€friend,€Lawrence€"Buck"€Hite.€€Hite's€ex„wife,€Nellie,Ïand€her€two€minor€daughters€were€present.€€After€drinking€several€beers€with€Hite,Ïthe€defendant€"laid€down€on€the€couch€like€on€numerous€occasions"€to€spend€theÏnight.€€During€the€early€morning€hours€of€the€next€day,€the€defendant€went€to€theÏbed€of€the€eight„year„old€victim,€"pulled€down€her€panties,€kissed€her€around€herÍvagina,€and€made€digital€penetration...."€€When€the€victim€began€to€cry,€theÏdefendant€left€her€bedroom.€€Later,€the€victim€told€her€grandmother€who,€in€turn,€toldÏMs.€Hite.€€A€physical€examination€of€the€victim€at€Northside€Hospital€indicatedÏsexual€abuse.€€ÌÌà àà àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€serviceÏof€a€sentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€with€aÏpresumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€upon€the€affirmativeÏshowing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€andÏall€relevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.Ï1991).€€The€Sentencing€Commission€Comments€provide€that€the€burden€is€on€theÏdefendant€to€show€the€impropriety€of€the€€sentence.€€ÌÌà àà àOur€review€requires€an€analysis€of€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€atÏthe€trial€and€sentencing€hearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€ofÏsentencing€and€the€arguments€of€counsel€relative€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€theÏnature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)€any€mitigating€or€enhancing€factors;Ï(6)€any€statements€made€by€the€defendant€in€his€own€behalf;€and€(7)€theÏdefendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€and€Ì„210;€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).ÌÌà àà àAmong€the€factors€applicable€to€the€defendant's€application€forÏprobation€are€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€defendant's€criminal€record,Ïsocial€history,€and€present€condition,€and€the€deterrent€effect€upon€and€best€interestÏof€the€defendant€and€the€public.€€òòState€v.€Grearóó,€568€S.W.2d€285,€286€(Tenn.€1978).€€Ìà àà àEspecially€mitigated€or€standard€offenders€convicted€of€Class€C,€D,€orÏE€felonies€are€presumed€to€be€favorable€candidates€"for€alternative€sentencingÏoptions€in€the€absence€of€evidence€to€the€contrary."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).€€With€certain€statutory€exceptions,€none€of€which€apply€here,€probation€mustÏbe€automatically€considered€by€the€trial€court€if€the€sentence€imposed€is€eight€yearsÏor€less.€€Tenn.€Code€€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(a),€(b).ÌÇœà àà àThe›€purpose€of€the€Community€Corrections€Act€of€1985€was€toÏprovide€an€alternative€means€of€punishment€for€"selected,€nonviolent€felonyÏoffenders€in€front„end€community€based€alternatives€to€incarceration."€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„36„103.€€The€Community€Corrections€sentence€provides€a€desiredÏdegree€of€flexibility€that€may€be€both€beneficial€to€the€defendant€yet€serve€legitimateÏsocietal€aims.€€òòState€v.€Griffithóó,€787€S.W.2d€340,€342€(Tenn.€1990).€€That€aÏdefendant€meets€the€minimum€requirements€of€the€Community€Corrections€Act€ofÏ1985,€however,€does€not€mean€that€he€is€entitled€to€be€sentenced€under€the€œAct›€asÏa€matter€of€law€or€right.€€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€744€S.W.2d€919€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€ÏThe€following€offenders€are€eligible€for€Community€Corrections:ÌÒ ä ÒÒ  ÒÓÓ(1)€Persons€who,€without€this€option,€would€beÏincarcerated€in€a€correctional€institution;ÌÌ(2)€Persons€who€are€convicted€of€property„related,€orÏdrug/alcohol„related€felony€offenses€or€other€felonyÏoffenses€not€involving€crimes€against€the€person€asÏprovided€in€title€39,€chapter€2€[repealed],€parts€1„3€andÏ5„7€or€title€39,€chapter€13,€parts€1„5;ÌÌ(3)€Persons€who€are€convicted€of€nonviolent€felonyÏoffenses;ÌÌ(4)€Persons€who€are€convicted€of€felony€offenses€inÏwhich€the€use€or€possession€of€a€weapon€was€notÏinvolved;ÌÌ(5)€Persons€who€do€not€demonstrate€a€present€or€pastÏpattern€of€behavior€indicating€violence;ÌÌ(6)€Persons€who€do€not€demonstrate€a€pattern€ofÏcommitting€violent€offenses;€€andÌÌ(7)€Persons€who€are€sentenced€to€incarceration€or€onÏescape€at€the€time€of€consideration€will€not€be€eligible.€€ÌÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„36„106(a).ÌÌà àà àSubsection€(2)€would€initially€exclude€the€defendant€from€receiving€aÏCommunity€Corrections€sentence€because€sexual€battery€is€a€"crime[]€against€theÏperson"€codified€in€"title€39,€chapter€13,€parts€1„5."€€òòSeeóó€òòDwight€Leatherwood€v.ÏStateóó,€No.€113€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€Oct.€4,€1990).€€He€is€possiblyÏeligible,€however,€under€the€special€needs€provision€of€the€Act,€which€allows€someÏindividuals€who€commit€crimes€against€the€person€to€be€placed€on€CommunityÏCorrections€if€they€have€special€needs€œarising€from€mental›€health€œproblems€forÏwhich€treatment€is€available.›€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„36„106(c).€€ÌÌà àà àThe€1989€Act€does€provide€that€the€record€of€the€sentencing€hearingÏ"shall€include€specific€findings€of€fact€upon€which€application€of€the€sentencingÏprinciples€was€based."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€40„35„209(c).€€And,€while€weÏacknowledge€that€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€appellate€review€does€not€relieve€the€trial€judge€fromÏcompliance€with€the€provisions€of€ðð€40„35„209(c),€we€are€nonetheless€able€toÍconclude€that€the€record€is€adequate€to€support€the€denial€of€an€alternativeÏsentence.€€€ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant,€thirty„one€years€of€age,€has€an€eleventh€gradeÏeducation€and€has€worked€as€a€roofer.€€An€alcoholic€who€has€drunk€heavily€sinceÏthe€age€of€sixteen,€the€defendant€has€stated€that€he€is€"willing€to€do€whatever€isÏnecessary€to€try€to€treat"€€his€problem€with€alcohol.€€The€defendant€provides€little€inÏthe€way€of€support€for€his€only€child,€a€thirteen„year„old€daughter.€€He€is€divorcedÏand€lives€with€his€parents.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€presentence€report€reveals€that€the€defendant€has€had€a€numberÏof€brushes€with€law€enforcement€since€the€time€he€was€nineteen€years€old.€€TheÏrecord€establishes€that€the€defendant€had€eleven€prior€convictions€for€publicÏintoxication,€and€prior€convictions€for€driving€under€the€influence,€destruction€ofÏprivate€property,€driving€on€an€expired€license,€driving€on€a€revoked€license,Ïreckless€burning,€resisting€arrest,€and€disorderly€conduct.€€After€being€placed€on€anÏintensive€probation€program€in€1990,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€driving€underÏthe€influence€within€a€year€thereafter.€€The€defendant€became€intoxicated€while€onÏwork€release€and€took€marijuana€into€the€county€jail;€that€resulted€in€an€additionalÏthirty„day€incarcerative€sentence€and€another€year€of€probation.€€In€1995,€theÍdefendant€was€convicted€of€reckless€burning,€resisting€arrest,€and€disorderlyÏconduct;€he€committed€sexual€battery€while€on€probation€for€those€offenses.€€ÌÌà àà àWhile€stating€a€belief€that€the€defendant€was€not€a€"full€blown"Ïpedophile,€the€trial€court€determined€that€the€defendant's€continuous€abuse€ofÏalcohol€presented€a€significant€risk€to€others.€€It€denied€probation€upon€the€basisÏthat€conditional€release€from€incarceration€had€not€worked€in€the€past.€€TheÏdefendant's€prior€criminal€history€was€a€significant€factor€in€the€denial.€€The€trial€Ïcourt€also€pointed€to€deterrence,€both€individual€and€general.€€It€concluded€that€theÏvictim€had€been€"injured€for€the€rest€of€her€life,"€based€upon€testimony€by€herÏmother€that€she€suffered€both€physical€and€psychological€consequences€from€theÏassault.ÌÌà àà àIn€our€view,€the€defendant's€prior€criminal€history€militated€against€theÏgrant€of€probation.€€Although€an€important€sentencing€consideration€is€to€imposeÏthe€least€severe€punishment€necessary,€the€grant€of€probation€might€tend€toÏdepreciate€the€seriousness€of€this€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).€ÏHis€failure€to€rehabilitate€after€a€number€of€previous€jail€terms€and€periods€ofÏprobation€indicates€a€lack€of€amenability€for€rehabilitation.€€Measures€lessÏrestrictive€than€confinement€have€been€unsuccessful.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(C).€€The€number€of€the€prior€offenses€as€much€their€gravity€tend€to€supportÏthe€denial€of€probation€or€a€sentence€of€split€confinement.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„306.€€ÌÇà àà àDeterrence,€of€course,€can€rarely€be€the€sole€reason€for€the€denial€ofÏan€alternative€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Cummingsóó,€868€S.W.2d€661,€668€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1992);€òòState€v.€Hartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€370,€375€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).œ× ƒ. ××  ×›€€YetÏsentencing€requires€an€individualized,€case„by„case€approach.€€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727ÏS.W.2d€229,€235€(Tenn.€1986).€€That€method€of€analysis€necessarily€embodies€theÏexercise€of€discretion€at€the€trial€court€level.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Thus,€there€is€a€sound€basis€for€the€presumptiveÏcorrectness€standard€of€appellate€review:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIt€is€not€the€policy€or€purpose€of€this€Court€to€place€trialÏjudges€in€a€judicial€œstrai[gh]t„jacket›€in€this€or€any€otherÏarea,€and€we€are€always€reluctant€to€interfere€with€theirÏtraditional€discretionary€powers.€€ÌÌÓÓòòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€171€(Tenn.€1991).€€That€principle€prevails€here€onÏthe€matter€of€probation,€split€confinement,€and€Community€Corrections.€€In€our€view,Ïthe€trial€court€acted€within€its€discretion€in€denying€an€alternative€sentence.ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€Judge€ÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌDavid€H.€Welles,€Judge€ÌÌÌ____________________________ÌJerry€L.€Smith,€Judge€