ÿWPCF {EÉF´&H¶±&D™ÛAIâ?Ç?÷&Fžãï3ñsðJ÷Y^u2Øÿþ6XÛ‹–ÂCi!ónD˜@Õ߃?|†@qr9ïbèAÞ5Æl˜š?üUÉ¡kö™Ûž€ïìÙ¦n@G®Ÿv×tÛW_BD‡VR.WMÄ ºý‰Õ¿Ó‚¼€ÛUŸ­™.Ê&N{“RrKEâ³øÔ,:¥n7J'ÿ>ÍAÏ%®a ƾ“im²l›_¬´ôã+½7ò°=½OªVHl¢Ë7Æ­ D‚ß'Ô‰0L+,"<—/çàT‹ZB5yPÚRa&Œ/f-ÜçO8¦qW<ñ†µ~ù©·bXƒÖ€ó)j8V÷0‚·UÅ’ÊÉ ÎrÙ8Ù;¸Ò æ¬/Mõ¦Ÿs[› ¡Cd Ä=yl-ól_>[¶Œ”6Ë]ÚMÚa¹•.Ý]Ò\¿cÚæh=ˆ2ÕòZ‹…ÊsÚ¸ŸNã& ÷§îˆQ6’¥çôØÂl…]«º°ýÕ}'®ó²;ßj+ÖôÐ~¨´ 3Ø XÒ;€o³ÅlOpká\D…tbînæ1ø ÙÆ¾Ý“MÑZÓlÅd@WГ²MHEšŠn–8'«/_ço`+ðѪ5Q®Ì¥Ö…Í·ªzöb %\U@b 0ˆ¢UN*UNx^ ÆwÒ zÖÒP 4" 6 E mG Æ^ Æ$ Æê ư #Áv N777E999999999999999999999999b;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; 0ëCCCC B.. 0¤K D3ï D-" 0KOO ASšÆí 0¤³ 0DW A«›»(ƒð Z‹(Times New Roman (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular6¤-  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptC|b*8M§k2` ­3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0- ù-(|G2}¬$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ …»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô²ýò»»Ô d(|3ÿm$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ …»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÿm$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ …»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ …»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼ …»»»ÔÑ8€V¹XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡ît …ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼ …»îît #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€24,€2002Ð üL ÐÔ‡XV¹X»¼ …ÔÌò òÔ#†¼ …»XXV¹#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€Ô_ÔRICKYÔ_Ô€RAY€HUMPHREYÔ‡XV¹X»¼ …Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Campbell€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€10513€€€€€€E.€Ô_ÔShayneÔ_Ô€Sexton,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2001„00512„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¥õ  ÐAugust€20,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓOn€October€19,€2000,€the€Defendant€entered€ð ðbest€interestðð€guilty€pleas€to€two€counts€of€child€abuseÐ xÈ  Ðand€neglect€and€three€counts€of€indecent€exposure.€€Pursuant€to€his€plea€agreement,€the€DefendantÐ d´ Ðreceived€five€sentences€of€11€months€and€29€days€to€be€served€at€75%.€€The€plea€agreementÐ P  Ðapparently€contemplated€a€hearing€to€determine€the€manner€of€service€of€the€sentence.€€FollowingÐ <Œ Ða€hearing,€the€trial€court€ordered€the€Defendant€to€serve€a€split€sentence€on€the€first€count€with€threeÐ (x Ðmonths€to€be€served€on€county€work€release€and€the€balance€of€the€sentence€to€be€served€onÐ d Ðsupervised€probation.€€The€court€ordered€each€of€the€remaining€sentences€to€be€served€on€probationÐ P Ðand€consecutive€to€the€split€sentence,€for€an€effective€sentence€of€five€years.€€It€is€from€this€order€theÐ ì< ÐDefendant€now€appeals€as€of€right.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð Ø( ÐÓ÷ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmedó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼ …»àXV¹¬#ÔÔ‡XV¹X.¼ …ÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJerry€L.€Smithóó€and€òòJoe€G.€Riley,Ð ˆØ ÐJJ.óó,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌTimothy€P.€Webb,€Ô_ÔJacksboroÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Ô_ÔRickyÔ_Ô€Ray€Humphrey.Ð L œ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Thomas€E.€Williams,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð $"t! ÐWilliam€Paul€Phillips,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Michael€Ripley,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ #`" ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ü#L# ÐÓ› ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼ …»XXV¹Ê #ÔòòóóÔ‡XV¹X»¼ …ÔÐ Ô%$!% ÐÓ  ÓÓÓÔ#†¼ …»XXV¹º #ÔÔ€XV¹X»¼ …ÔòòÔ‡XV¹XXXV¹Ôóóà  àà ` àà ¸ àÌÓÓà  àThe€Defendant,€Ô_ÔRickyÔ_Ô€Ray€Humphrey,€entered€ð ðbest€interestðð€guilty€pleas€to€two€counts€ofÐ ˜(è#( Ðchild€abuse€and€neglect,€class€A€misdemeanors,€and€three€counts€of€indecent€exposure,€also€class€AÐ „)Ô$) Ðmisdemeanors.€€In€accordance€with€the€plea€agreement,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€toÐ p*À%* Ðfive€consecutive€sentences€of€11€months€and€29€days€at€75%.€€Whether€the€sentences€were€to€beÐ \+¬&+ Ðserved€in€confinement€or€on€probation€was€to€be€decided€by€the€trial€court.€€The€first€sentence€wasÐ H,˜', Ðordered€served€in€split€confinement,€with€the€first€three€months€to€be€served€on€county€work€releaseÐ 4-„(-ý¾ Ðand€the€balance€of€the€sentence€to€be€served€on€supervised€probation.€€Each€of€the€remaining€fourÐ ° Ðconsecutive€sentences€was€to€be€served€on€probation€as€well.€€The€Defendant€raises€one€issue€in€thisÐ œì Ðdirect€appeal:€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€properly€considering€any€enhancing€or€mitigatingÐ ˆØ Ðfactors€while€deciding€the€manner€of€service€of€the€Defendantððs€sentence.€€The€Defendant€asks€thisÐ tÄ ÐCourt€to€vacate€the€sentencing€order€and€remand€to€the€trial€court€for€Ô_ÔresentencingÔ_Ô€or,€in€theÐ `° Ðalternative,€order€that€the€Defendant€be€placed€on€probation€for€the€length€of€his€sentence.€€WeÐ L œ Ðdecline€in€both€respects.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àÔ#†XV¹XXXV¹Q #ÔÔ‡XV¹XXXV¹ÔMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€controlled€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„302,Ð  ` Ðwhich€provides€in€part€that€the€trial€court€shall€impose€a€specific€sentence€consistent€with€theÐ ü L  Ðpurposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð è 8  Ð35„302(b).€€Misdemeanor€sentencing€is€designed€to€provide€the€trial€court€with€continuingÐ Ô$  Ðjurisdiction€and€a€great€deal€of€flexibility.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔTroutmanÔ_Ôóó,€979€S.W.2d€271,€273€(Tenn.Ð À  Ð1998);€òòState€v.€Bakeróó,€966€S.W.2d€429,€434€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1997).€€One€convicted€of€aÐ ¬ü  Ðmisdemeanor,€unlike€one€convicted€of€a€felony,€is€not€entitled€to€a€presumptive€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ ˜è  Ðv.€Ô_ÔCreasyÔ_Ôóó,€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1994).€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àIn€misdemeanor€sentencing,€a€separate€sentencing€hearing€is€not€mandatory,€but€the€court€isÐ \¬ Ðrequired€to€provide€the€defendant€with€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€be€heard€as€to€the€length€andÐ H˜ Ðmanner€of€service€of€the€sentence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302(a).€€The€trial€court€retains€theÐ 4„ Ðauthority€to€place€the€defendant€on€probation€either€immediately€or€after€a€time€of€periodic€orÐ  p Ðcontinuous€confinement.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„302(e).€€€€Ô#†XV¹XXXV¹ä#ÔÔ‡XV¹XXXV¹ÔÐ  \ ÐÌà  àUnlike€the€felony€sentencing€statute,€the€misdemeanor€sentencing€statute€ð ðmerely€requiresÐ ä4 Ða€trial€judge€to€consider€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€when€calculating€the€percentage€of€aÐ Ð  Ðmisdemeanor€sentence€to€be€served€in€confinement.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔTroutmanÔ_Ôóó,€979€S.W.2d€271,€274Ð ¼  Ð(Tenn.€1998).€€Trial€courts€are€not€required€to€place€findings€of€enhancement€and€mitigating€factorsÐ ¨ø Ðin€the€record€when€conducting€misdemeanor€sentencing.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Russellóó,€10€S.W.3d€270,€278Ð ”ä Ð(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1999)€(citing€òòÔ_ÔTroutmanÔ_Ôóó,€979€S.W.2d€at€274€(Tenn.€1998)).€€Therefore,€ourÐ €Ð Ðconcern€in€reviewing€misdemeanor€sentencing€is€whether€the€trial€court€considered€the€enhancingÐ l¼ Ðand€mitigating€factors€and€did€not€act€arbitrarily.€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€without€explicit€reference€to€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors€andÐ 0"€  Ðsentencing€principles€in€the€record,€the€judgment€is€arbitrary€òòperóó€òòseóó.€€We€disagree.€€This€Court€hasÐ #l! Ðheld€that€even€where€ð ðthe€defendant€is€correct€that€the€trial€court€did€not€make€explicit€findings€ofÐ $X" Ðenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€.€.€.€[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€lack€of€findings€is€no€basis€for€holding€the€trial€courtÐ ô$D # Ðin€error.ðð€€òòRussellóó,€10€S.W.3d€at€278.€€Therefore,€even€if€the€trial€court€did€not€refer€to€or€mentionÐ à%0!$ Ðsentencing€principles€or€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors€when€determining€misdemeanorÐ Ì&"% Ðsentencing,€there€is€no€reversible€error€so€long€as€the€trial€court€considered€said€factors.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€chose€to€hold€a€separate€sentencing€hearing.€€At€that€hearing,€theÐ )à$( Ðcourt€heard€testimony€from€the€Defendant€and€one€of€the€victims€in€the€case.€€The€court€also€heardÐ |*Ì%) Ðargument€from€both€the€Defendant€and€the€State€regarding€sentencing.€€The€record€on€appealÐ h+¸&* ÐÔ_Ôcontains€little€information€concerning€the€facts€underlying€the€convictions.€€Apparently,€theÐ ° ÐDefendant€on€numerous€occasions€exposed€himself€to€young€female€victims€while€they€were€visitorsÐ œì Ðin€his€home.€€Prior€to€the€hearing,€the€court€reviewed€two€victim€impact€statements€and€theÐ ˆØ ÐDefendantððs€pre„sentence€report.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€court,€in€denying€the€Defendant€full€probation,€said,€with€regard€to€the€DefendantððsÐ L œ Ðattitude,€ð ðSome€of€your€answers€on€the€stand€were€very€flippant€as€if€you€didnððt€understand€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðconsequences,€significance€of€what€has€happened€here.ðð€€The€court€went€on€to€say,€Ð $ t Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à.€.€.€I€hope€during€the€nights€that€you€spend€here€[sleeping€at€the€jail,Ð  ` Ðthough€on€work€release]€that€something€will€come€over€you.€€I€reallyÐ ü L  Ðdonððt€think€it€has€yet.€€I€mean,€I€donððt€think,€based€on€your€testimonyÐ è 8  Ðtoday,€that€you€understand€the€pain€that€you€have€caused€some€ofÐ Ô$  Ðthese€people.€€I€donððt€think€you€have.€€I€hope€you€do.ÐÀ ` x` x ÐÔ#†XV¹XXXV¹^#ÔÌBased€on€the€testimony€of€one€of€the€victims€that€she€had€been€seeking€counseling€and€psychiatricÐ ˜è  Ðcare,€the€court€said,€ð ðI€think€Ms.€Cooper€has€obviously€been€traumatized.ðð€€The€court,€explaining€itsÐ „Ô  Ðrole€in€the€sentencing€process,€said,€ð ðThe€Courts€donððt€fix€these€types€of€things.€€Courts€try€to€makeÐ pÀ Ðamends€and€show€punishment€when€they€need€to€and€show€leniency€when€they€need€to.ðð€€AfterÐ \¬ Ðdiscussing€its€belief€that€the€Defendant€was€not€taking€responsibility€for€his€actions,€the€court€stated,Ð H˜ Ðð ðAnd€you€think€youððre€over€it.€€I€hope€you€are.€€These€types€of€offenses€generally€donððt€go€away€thatÐ 4„ Ðquick.€€I€mean,€you€need€to€have€some€continued€care.€€I€hope€you€make€it.ðð€€Regarding€the€natureÐ  p Ðof€the€Defendantððs€three€monthsðð€incarceration,€the€court€said,€ð ðI€am€not€opposed€to€you€getting€workÐ  \ Ðrelease€.€.€.€.€€I€donððt€want€your€family€to€suffer€monetarily€if€we€can€help€it.ðð€€At€the€close€of€theÐ øH Ðhearing€the€trial€judge€sentenced€the€Defendant€to€five€consecutive€sentences€of€11€months€and€29Ð ä4 Ðdays€at€75%€with€the€Defendant€to€serve€the€first€three€months€of€the€first€sentence€on€work€release.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€there€is€sufficient€evidence€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€the€trial€court€didÐ ¨ø Ðconsider€sentencing€principles€and€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors€in€determining€the€manner€ofÐ ”ä Ðservice€of€the€Defendantððs€sentence.€€The€trial€court€did€not€act€arbitrarily,€but€gave€specific€reasonsÐ €Ð Ðfor€its€decision€based€on€the€evidence.€€We€conclude€that€the€trial€judge€acted€within€his€discretionaryÐ l¼ Ðauthority.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð 0"€  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE