WPC  H7ĵ6x-Z'dKe zf&2Rww,^oЊBu=HD:lD_v IRu‘T\\(at7>x&}ʼn m;hNMv[=$VpY ~>fe ] #%?"<+D4׌kEwJ8$&Պ^ RíNDGԓ *j<_8ǡSc*QDM^ugeXJˢ9k wlG7q]lۉ;1ZYh\dk;cؾT=a^J>}k{#<YR ֶ-RYd/H ?_E>qZvlkBB2] G0|P SBV 95ivU^s2A*ԣGBtdn2g@*]KNϡmN1?{)# >U:I % 0(U:w@43GV mX~oU: AQ)z 0D@ 0D 0D D/ B; BX D3u HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl,cAZ"Arial RegularX($,  AZ"Arial Regular De !U"E#Ӏ-n~<$ 3|x-U WeakleypportHarkins CrimHachel LTLTipton !"  XXXX&}XX   Ad FILEDXX&}  July15,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh ,cAZ"Arial Regular !"#%C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  ''' dxd dP Pd&&&&'dxd !  XTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TX[XXX  Ӝ---##r (<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxPX  r-##INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  -t (>.*jxo` `@E` 8ttxP  tߛ-ATJACKSONAPRIL1999SESSION  STATEOFTENNESSEE, h   )  p   `     h   )  C.C.A.No.02C019807CC00231 `   ` Appellee,   h   ) P   `     h   )  CarrollCounty @  v. `     h   )   p  0   `     h   )  HonorableJulianP.Guinn,Judge   MICHAELALLENHATCHEL,  )   `     h   )  (ProbationRevocation)   ` Appellant.   h   )  FORTHEAPPELLANT: h     FORTHEAPPELLEE: 0 JamesH.Bradberry h     PaulG.Summers ` P.O.Box789   h     AttorneyGeneral&Reporter P Dresden,TN38225 h      @  `     h     PatriciaC.Kussmann `     h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral `     h     425FifthAvenueNorth `     h     Nashville,TN372430493 `     h     G.GusRadford `     h     DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h     EleanorCahill `     h     AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h     111ChurchStreet `     h     P.O.Box686 `     h     Huntingdon,TN383440686OPINIONFILED:_____________________________AFFIRMEDL.T.LAFFERTY,SENIORJUDGE  0948 _XX[  7XXdXXd7OPINION  #X[X% #   ` Theappellant,MichaelAllenHatchel,hereinreferredtoas thedefendant,appeals  asofrightfromthejudgmentoftheCarrollCountyCircuitCourtrevokinghisprobation.Hepresentsoneappellateissue:whetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninrevokingthedefendantsprobationwithinonemonthofthedefendantcompletinghisoriginalterm. ` Afterareviewoftherecord,briefsoftheparties,andappropriatelaw,weaffirmthetrialcourtsjudgment.  FACTUALBACKGROUND     ` TheCarrollCountygrandjuryreturnedatwocountindictmentagainstthedefendant  forpassingtwoworthlesschecks,onJanuary18,1995,andJanuary23,1995,totheTriCountyElectricCompanyintheamountsof$701.46and$1042.45.OnJuly12,1995,thedefendantenteredapleaofguiltytopassingbothworthlesschecks.Asperthepleaagreement,thetrialcourtimposedconcurrenttwoyearsentencesforeachoffenseandplacedthedefendantonsupervisedprobationfortwoyears,withrestitutionandcourtcoststobepaidonJuly12,1995. ` OnMay20,1996,aprobationviolationreportwasfiledwiththetrialcourt,allegingaviolationofprobationbasedonthedefendantsconvictiononMarch27,1996,fortheftunder$500inWeakleyCounty.Forthatconviction,thecourtsentencedthedefendanttosixmonths,suspendedthesentence,andorderedthedefendanttopayrestitutionandcourtcostsof$575.50.OnJuly24,1996,attheprobationrevocationhearing,thetrialcourtfoundthedefendanthadviolatedtheconditionsofhisprobationand,inlieuofconfinement,extendedthedefendantsprobationforoneyear,foratotalofthreeyearssupervisedprobation. 837 Ї ` OnApril8,1998,asecondprobationviolationreportwasfiledwiththetrialcourt.ThereportrevealsthedefendantenteredapleaofguiltyintheWeakleyCountyCircuitCourtonApril3,1998,totheftofpropertyover$10,000.Thedefendanthaddisposedofcertainproperty,towit,variousappliances,belongingtoRentersChoicebetweenJuneandDecember,1997.Thedefendantwassentencedtosixyearsatthe_Westate_CorrectionsNetworkafterservingthreemonthsintheWeakleyCountyJail.Thedefendantwasorderedtopayrestitutionof$19,327.31.  REVOCATIONHEARING  Ѐ    ` AttheconclusionofaprobationrevocationhearingonJune25,1998,thetrialcourt p revokedthedefendantsprobationandorderedconfinementintheDepartmentofCorrection.Ms.MichelleLadd,probationofficer,testifiedsheverifiedthedefendantsconvictionsofJanuary,1996,andApril,1998.Asofthedateofthehearing,June25,1998,thedefendanthadnotmadeanyrestitutionpaymentstoRentersChoice. ` ThedefendanttestifiedheisaresidentofMartin,Tennessee,andselfemployedownerofMikesAppliancesforseventeenyears.Thedefendantismarriedandhaswiththreechildren.ThedefendantwasstillincustodyonhisthreemonthsentenceintheWeakleyCountyJail.Thedefendanttestifiedthat,ifgivensplitconfinement,hecouldstillworkandmakerestitution.ThedefendantswifeisemployedatDairyQueen.Thedefendantadmittedheviolatedtheconditionsofhisprobation.Thedefendanttestifiedhewasremorseful,stating, ImIguessthebestwordisImbroke,Imdone.ImtiredofIjustwanttogoon,justgetitallbehindme. ` RoyHarper,thedefendantsfatherinlaw,testifiedthathetrainedthedefendantintheappliancerepairbusinessandoftenworksparttimewiththedefendant.Thedefendantwouldonlybeabletopayhisbillsandmakerestitutionifhewereallowedsometypeofsplitconfinement. 0948 Ї ` Baseduponthisevidence,thetrialcourtrevokedthedefendantsprobationandorderedconfinementintheDepartmentofCorrection.  LEGALANALYSIS P      ` Thedefendantcontendsthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninrevokinghisprobation `  onemonthbeforehisprobationtermwastoexpire.Thestatecounterstherewasampleevidenceforthetrialcourttorevokethedefendantsprobation. ` Atrialcourtmayrevokeprobationandordertheimpositionoftheoriginalsentenceuponafindingbyapreponderanceoftheevidencethatapersonhasviolatedtheconditionsofprobation.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035311(Supp.1998).Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtwillnotbedisturbedonappealunlessitappearsthattherehasbeenanabuseofdiscretion.Statev.Harkins,811S.W.2d79,82(Tenn.1991).Foranappellatecourt ` tobewarrantedinfindinganabuseofdiscretioninaprobationrevocationcase,itmustbeestablishedthattherecordcontainsnosubstantialevidencetosupporttheconclusionofthetrialcourtthataviolationoftheconditionsofprobationhasoccurred.Id.Theevidence "  attherevocationhearingneedonlyshowthatthetrialcourtexercisedaconscientiousandintelligentjudgmentinmakingitsdecisiontorevokeprobation.Id . ;Statev.Leach,914 p&!$ S.W.2d104,106(Tenn.Crim.App.1995)."!!" ` Thedefendantarguesthatthetrialcourtsandothertribunalsinthecriminaljusticesystemroutinelytakeintoconsiderationtimeservedinvariouscapacities.Hefurtherarguesthat,ifhewereincarcerated,hisfamilywouldloseitsprimarysupport,andhewouldbeunabletocomplywiththeordersoftheWeakleyCountyCircuitCourtastorestitution.However,wemustbalancethisargumentandtheevidencewiththereasonswhythetrialcourtbelieveditnecessarytorevokethedefendantsprobation.Initsruling,thetrialcourtcommentedonthedefendantstwotheftconvictions,oneofwhichwasaseriousfelonyinvolvingasubstantialamountofmoney.Thedefendantsprobationwas 0948 extendedtocontinuerehabilitation.Thetrialcourtheld:8 ` 8 ` (#` (#InthiscasetheCourtfeelsthatithasgoneoutofitswaytogiveMr.Hatcheleveryreasonableopportunitytoconformhisbehaviortotherequirementsofthelaw.Despitethat,hishistoryofsupervisionis,quitesimplyitjustdoesntmeetthestandardsthatwouldbeexpected.Heseemstogetintroubleatthedropofahat.    ` Itisobviousthetrialcourt,initsruling,wasfrustratedwiththedefendantsdisregardoftheconditionsofprobation.Therefore,basedontheevidenceinthisrecord,wecannotfindthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninorderingthedefendanttoservethesentencesimposed. ` Thetrialcourtsjudgmentisaffirmed.XzXXX `     h     ________________________________________ 0  `     h     L.T.LAFFERTY,SENIORJUDGECONCUR:___________________________________JOSEPHM.TIPTON,JUDGE___________________________________#XXXXz)# +&* DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE `     h