ÿWPC$ áTÖ6¿RrÁ Æo¦Fk=.“šýèÌÝfæ”^¸QÚCM7$)°ŸPã¢Ðñ¤ò_è~-¼mðWãìÐ1ÞŸŽšè1:ü çæñÞ¢:|ÚsQp¥;3 m“N"`©ðF‰BÃBž¯+ø+8Y‡¯zºcd¦M\$ù@:xú½oE†5›Ðï¦KõF0YZC RUšLåªIH²ùëúØtúiZô±ËXôZ¡„ù‰óu£ÃF.?/uú7OÅ""î£=SÌÛ‘s÷bfó)öö›ÅEŒ£lž4ûµ(¡æ÷+3‰x*Ôç^Ík7ÛK‰ìñ¸ã¹*¢†š ÏP ¶ÐÁGÚ爅;WÄ!çú,“BRT8Åüù™àAúòËqAŸ=‰dº¡Ug¨Ù ÐÞ¼«só"4ñËÉQå g©ðkø#†Eí’Ú ÂÓ]«ú#¹_K¤þÀÜÑ+Ç3¬+ñä2CïLü-×­ÕYç¢9ž¡îjY›¶Ta§WÖ”ŠízÍ¢ÍÑiQ)$€¦Ü—ž· éš,{‹#©¡N¦£=¯YAõÄd›G><ëqšlÐ[;¶[+ؖ©0_f]¿Ùrà6Ì6²Zo*›·×¿ÉÛÆº”"C˜e £C8è­ÉhŸb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz UN‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1÷NÿEb 0ë!!!! B   0¤) D3Í D- 0K-- ASxÆË 0¤‘ 0D5 A«y˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»±€5+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*ÐP¡k1Àüœ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  Ñ e Ñ- ù-(|G2±¿$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôç ò»»Ô d(|3v$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3v$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E%»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼E%»»»ÔÑ8€éXXdì»»d8ÑÑ€ïOÑà@ttìàÔ‡îNdE%ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼E%»îîNd#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€June€27,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÌò òÔ#†¼E%»XXé/#ÔòòSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEóó€v.€òòóóMARVIN€W.€HILL,€JR.Ô‡XéX»¼E%Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNos.€C„9577,€C„9582,€C„12035€and€C„12231€€€€€€D.€Kelly€Thomas,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2000„02789„CCA„R3„CD€Ð ¥õ  ÐSeptember€21,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓIn€July€1999,€the€Defendant€pled€guilty€to€evading€arrest€and€possession€of€marijuana,€both€Class€AÐ xÈ  Ðmisdemeanors,€and€received€concurrent€sentences€of€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€Ð d´ Ðsupervised€probation.€€In€December€1999,€the€Defendant€was€indicted€for€assault€and€aggravatedÐ P  Ðcriminal€trespass,€both€of€which€are€also€Class€A€misdemeanors.€€In€January€2000,€a€violation€ofÐ <Œ Ðprobation€warrant€was€issued€against€the€Defendant,€alleging€that€he€had€violated€his€probation€inÐ (x Ðthe€first€two€cases.€€In€March€2000,€the€Defendant€pled€guilty€to€the€assault€and€aggravated€criminalÐ d Ðtrespass€charges,€and€a€combined€sentencing€hearing€and€probation€violation€hearing€was€held€byÐ P Ðthe€trial€court.€€The€trial€court€revoked€the€Defendantððs€probation€in€the€first€two€cases€and€imposedÐ ì< Ðconcurrent€sentences€of€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€incarceration.€€The€court€also€imposedÐ Ø( Ðsentences€of€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€incarceration€in€the€second€two€cases,€to€runÐ Ä Ðconcurrently€with€each€other€but€consecutively€to€the€sentences€imposed€in€the€first€two€cases.€€OnÐ ° Ðappeal,€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€imposing€sentences€of€incarceration€in€eachÐ œì Ðcase.€€Because€our€review€of€the€record€reveals€that€the€sentences€were€proper,€we€affirm€theÐ ˆØ Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð tÄ ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó óÐ L œ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼E%»àXéª#ÔÔ‡XéX.¼E%ÔRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€andÐ $"t! ÐòòJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð #`" ÐÌSteve€Ô_ÔMcEwenÔ_Ô€(on€appeal),€Mountain€City,€Tennessee;€and€Shawn€Graham,€Ô_ÔMaryvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee;Ð è$8 $ Ðfor€the€Appellant,€Marvin€W.€Hill,€Jr.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Peter€M.€Ô_ÔCoughlanÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ¬'ü"' ÐMichael€L.€Flynn,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Bill€Reed,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€forÐ ˜(è#( Ðthe€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð „)Ô$) ÐÓÔ ÓÌÌÌÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼E%»XXé #ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÐ ° ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThe€Defendant,€Marvin€W.€Hill,€Jr.,€was€indicted€in€August€1996€by€the€Blount€CountyÐ ˆØ ÐGrand€Jury€for€possession€of€marijuana€and€evading€arrest,€Class€A€misdemeanor€offenses.€€In€July€Ð tÄ Ð1999,€the€Defendant€pled€guilty€to€both€offenses€and€received€concurrent€sentences€of€eleven€monthsÐ `° Ðand€twenty„nine€days€with€immediate€supervised€probation.€€In€December€1999,€the€Blount€CountyÐ L œ ÐGrand€Jury€indicted€the€Defendant€for€assault€and€aggravated€criminal€trespass,€also€Class€AÐ 8 ˆ Ðmisdemeanor€offenses.€€While€these€charges€were€pending€disposition,€a€warrant€was€issued€allegingÐ $ t Ðthat€the€Defendant€was€in€violation€of€his€probation€on€the€first€two€cases.€€In€March€2000,€theÐ  ` ÐDefendant€entered€guilty€pleas€to€the€assault€and€aggravated€criminal€trespass€charges,€with€the€trialÐ ü L  Ðcourt€to€determine€the€appropriate€sentence€at€a€sentencing€hearing.€€The€disposition€of€the€pendingÐ è 8  Ðwarrant€for€violation€of€probation€in€the€first€two€cases€was€also€set€for€the€same€date.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€court€heard€the€testimony€of€the€victim€of€the€assault€andÐ ¬ü  Ðaggravated€criminal€trespass€charges,€as€well€as€the€testimony€of€the€Defendant.€€The€court€orderedÐ ˜è  Ðthat€the€Defendantððs€probation€in€the€first€two€cases€be€revoked€and€that€he€be€required€to€serve€theÐ „Ô  Ðoriginal€sentences€of€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€DefendantÐ pÀ Ðto€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days€incarceration€for€the€assault€charge€and€eleven€months,€twenty„Ð \¬ Ðnine€days€for€the€aggravated€criminal€trespass€charge.€€The€assault€and€aggravated€criminal€trespassÐ H˜ Ðsentences€were€ordered€to€be€served€concurrently€with€each€other,€but€consecutively€to€the€first€twoÐ 4„ Ðsentences.€€The€trial€court€imposed€a€seventy„five€percent€ð ðminimum€service€prior€to€releaseðð€for€theÐ  p Ðassault€and€aggravated€criminal€trespass€charges.Ð  \ ÐÌòòò òÓ  ÓANALYSISóóó óÐ ä4 ÐÓûÓÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€Defendant€concedes€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€revokingÐ ¼  Ðthe€Defendantððs€probation,€but€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€ordered€the€Defendant€to€serveÐ ¨ø Ðhis€sentences€in€the€county€jail€rather€than€on€probation.€€More€specifically,€the€Defendant€arguesÐ ”ä Ðthat€there€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€principles€ofÐ €Ð Ðsentencing€or€any€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors€before€sentencing€the€Defendant€to€the€countyÐ l¼ Ðjail.Ð X ¨ ÐÌÔ‡ XéXXXéÔà  àÔ#†XéXX Xé¶#ÔOur€analysis€begins€with€well„settled€principles€that€govern€our€review€of€a€sentenceÐ 0"€  Ðdetermination€imposed€under€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.€€Ô#†¼E%»XXé#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÔ‡ XéXXXéÔIn€making€its€sentencingÐ #l! Ðdetermination,€the€trial€court,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€determines€the€range€ofÐ $X" Ðsentence€and€then€determines€the€specific€sentence€and€the€propriety€of€sentencing€alternatives€byÐ ô$D # Ðconsidering€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,€(2)€theÐ à%0!$ Ðpresentence€report,€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives,€(4)Ð Ì&"% Ðthe€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved,€(5)€evidence€and€information€offeredÐ ¸'#& Ðby€the€parties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€(6)€any€statements€the€defendant€wishesÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€make€in€the€defendant's€behalf€about€sentencing,€and€(7)€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€orÐ )à$( Ðtreatment.€òòóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„210(a),€(b),€„103(5);€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247,€258Ð |*Ì%) Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ð h+¸&* ÐÔ#†XéXX Xéù#ÔÔ#†¼E%»XXéÚ#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%Ôà  àIn€misdemeanor€sentencing,€a€separate€sentencing€hearing€is€not€mandatory,€but€the€trial€courtÐ ° Ðis€required€to€allow€the€parties€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€be€heard€on€the€question€of€the€length€ofÐ œì Ðthe€sentence€and€the€manner€in€which€it€is€to€be€served.€€òòóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302(a).€€In€thisÐ ˆØ Ðcase,€the€trial€court€did€so.€€Further,€the€sentence€imposed€must€be€specific€and€consistent€with€theÐ tÄ Ðpurposes€and€principles€of€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.€€òòIdóó.€ðð€40„35„302(b).€€AÐ `° Ðpercentage€of€not€greater€than€seventy„five€percent€of€the€sentence€should€be€fixed€for€service,€afterÐ L œ Ðwhich€the€Defendant€becomes€eligible€for€ð ðwork€release,€furlough,€trusty€status€and€relatedÐ 8 ˆ Ðrehabilitative€programs.ðð€€òòIdóó.€ðð€40„35„302(d).€Ô#†¼E%»XXé‚!#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÐ $ t ÐÌà  àThe€misdemeanant,€unlike€the€felon,€is€not€entitled€to€the€presumption€of€a€minimumÐ ü L  Ðsentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó,€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€However,€in€determiningÐ è 8  Ðthe€percentage€of€the€sentence€to€be€served€in€actual€confinement,€the€court€must€considerÐ Ô$  Ðenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€as€well€as€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€CriminalÐ À  ÐSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€and€the€court€should€not€impose€such€percentages€arbitrarily.€€Tenn.Ð ¬ü  ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302(d).Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àWhen€a€criminal€defendant€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,Ð pÀ Ðthe€reviewing€court€must€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€sentence€with€a€presumption€that€theÐ \¬ Ðdeterminations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€òòIdóó.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€The€Tennessee€SupremeÐ H˜ ÐCourt€has€held€that€in€misdemeanor€sentencing€a€trial€court€is€not€required€to€place€specific€findingsÐ 4„ Ðon€the€record.€€òòState€v.€Troutmanóó,€979€S.W.2d€271,€274€(Tenn.€1998).€€A€trial€court€need€onlyÐ  p Ðconsider€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€order€to€comply€withÐ  \ Ðthe€legislative€mandates€of€the€misdemeanor€sentencing€statute.€òòIdóó.€at€274.€€Because€this€caseÐ øH Ðinvolves€misdemeanor€sentencing€rather€than€felony€sentencing,€a€lack€of€findings€by€the€trial€courtÐ ä4 Ðis€no€basis€for€holding€the€trial€court€in€error.€€òòState€v.€Russellóó,€10€S.W.3d€270,€278€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð Ð  ÐApp.€1999).€€Additionally,€although€the€trial€court€did€not€make€findings€relative€to€specificÐ ¼  Ðenhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€the€presumption€of€correctness€nevertheless€applies€in€this€case.€Ð ¨ø ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àAfter€a€careful€review,€we€conclude€that€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court€areÐ l¼ Ðsupported€by€the€appropriate€principles€of€sentencing,€enhancement€factors,€and€the€mitigatingÐ X ¨ Ðfactors€proposed€by€the€Defendant.€€Ô#†¼E%»XXé]%#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔThe€Defendant€has€an€extensive€criminal€history€involvingÐ D!” Ðnumerous€convictions.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€The€convictions€include€both€felonies€andÐ 0"€  Ðmisdemeanors.€€The€record€also€indicates€that€the€Defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€unwillingnessÐ #l! Ðto€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€the€community.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„Ð $X" Ð114(8).€€Thus,€the€record€supports€the€application€of€two€enhancement€factors.€€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àAs€for€mitigating€factors,€the€Defendant€alleges€that€he€was€suffering€a€ð ðflashbackðð€duringÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€assault€and€the€aggravated€criminal€trespass,€and€therefore,€the€offenses€were€committed€underÐ ¸'#& Ðsuch€unusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€a€substantial€intent€to€violate€the€law€motivatedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðhis€conduct.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„113(11).€€However,€this€mitigating€factor€is€far€outweighed€by€the€twoÐ )à$( Ðâ âpreviously€stated€enhancement€factors.€€Likewise,€we€are€not€persuaded€that€the€jail€time€alreadyÐ |*Ì%) Ðserved€by€the€Defendant€on€these€charges,€or€to€be€served€on€unrelated€federal€charges,€is€anÐ ° Ðappropriate€mitigating€factor.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€Defendant€has€the€burden€of€establishing€suitability€for€total€probation.€€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,Ð tÄ Ð932€S.W.2d€467,€477€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€A€defendant€seeking€full€probation€bears€the€burdenÐ `° Ðon€appeal€of€showing€the€sentence€imposed€is€improper€and€that€full€probation€will€be€in€the€bestÐ L œ Ðinterest€of€the€defendant€and€the€public.€€òòState€v.€Bakeróó,€966€S.W.2d€429,€434€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð 8 ˆ Ð1997).€€Further,€the€burden€is€upon€the€defendant€to€demonstrate€the€impropriety€of€his€sentence.€Ð $ t ÐòòState€v.€Grigsbyóó,€957€S.W.2d€541,€544€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).Ð  ` ÐÌà  àSentences€of€confinement€are€justified€in€this€case€for€several€reasons.€€First,€confinementÐ è 8  Ðis€necessary€to€protect€society€from€this€Defendant€who€has€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct.€Ð Ô$  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.òòóó€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A).€€Next,€the€record€indicates€that€measures€less€restrictive€thanÐ À  Ðconfinement€have€frequently€and€recently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€the€Defendant.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ððÐ ¬ü  Ð40„35„103(1)(C).€€With€regard€to€the€Defendantððs€suitability€for€full€probation,€it€is€appropriate€toÐ ˜è  Ðconsider€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€Defendantððs€potential€or€lack€of€potential€forÐ „Ô  Ðrehabilitation,€whether€full€probation€will€unduly€depreciate€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,€andÐ pÀ Ðwhether€a€sentence€other€than€full€probation€would€provide€an€effective€deterrent€to€others€likely€toÐ \¬ Ðcommit€similar€crimes.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Parkeróó,€932€S.W.2d€945,€958€(Tenn.€1996).€€Denial€of€probationÐ H˜ Ðmay€be€based€solely€upon€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€when€they€are€of€such€a€nature€as€toÐ 4„ Ðoutweigh€all€other€factors€favoring€probation.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð  p ÐApp.€1991).€€Ð  \ ÐÔ#†¼E%»XXé³.#ÔÔ‡XéX»¼E%ÔÌà  àIn€this€case,€the€victim€was€taking€a€nap€on€her€couch€in€her€apartment€when€she€was€attackedÐ ä4 Ðand€terrorized€by€the€Defendant.€€The€911€tape€exhibited€at€the€sentencing€hearing€reveals€the€extentÐ Ð  Ðto€which€the€victim€was€terrorized.€€Her€testimony€at€the€sentencing€hearing€indicates€that€she€wasÐ ¼  Ðstill€suffering€from€the€injuries€inflicted€upon€her€by€the€Defendant.€€The€Defendantððs€extensive€priorÐ ¨ø Ðcriminal€history€indicates€a€lack€of€potential€for€rehabilitation.€€The€Defendant€has€failed€to€meet€hisÐ ”ä Ðburden€in€establishing€his€suitability€for€full€probation.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€we€AFFIRM€the€judgments€of€the€trial€court.Ð X ¨ ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________________Ð #l! ÐÔ#†¼E%»XXé{<#Ôà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àROBERT€W.€WEDEMEYER,€JUDGE