WPCD Dn3p9 {,{Q0t+<}sMa ˤ}`7h3}ܟ[E|L݆HhYYb6cv@>ztVS̟]7`WN2U,vFtqHcfrs ggB5?d#ki-=dHRLBӟ҄5ʄr (@{6bte_;>uC2@E..5oOɔ5S|sr7cf&čԮ">@)G'Ielrމo|܄j̖/iNW(>,\`>yd{?NI8} #Naz4ELqi+b⚻@o _CyEk=d=r2FHȘf}c?mC7 AÜ9jh"koq&~êZ8v+)Pۄ d7l<݂Tu-/(oT##e % U6 0 UN U> U*" U@L z   ^ w4q7N mE# 0D 0U 0I 02b 0  0 0 0 0 0q 0CE 0 0_ 03 0 0 0 0e 0*! 0@! 0*" 0" 0# 0$ 0h% 00& 0& 0' 00t( 0<( 0( 0>) 0v) 0`R* 0`* 0`+ 0`r+ 0`+ 082, 0j, 0U- 02'. 0Y. BU/ 0:r/ 0/ D3P0 D-0 0K0 0#Y0 AST11 0m2 0D3 AU3 0_4 0 _4 0ji5 06 B*W8 D/8 08 D/4: 0c: 061; 0g; 0:o< 0^< 0<= 1eC= AM= 0N====================C>E>G?I@KAMBOC 1uQD 72D<6X9`(Courier New(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial( Z(Times New Roman  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt  R'i$      1    _TheDefendantpresentedevidencethatothercommissionershadmovedoutsidethedistricttheyrepresented  withnoconsequences.However,therewasnoevidencethatanyoftheseothercommissionerseverprovidedfalse t informationwhenregisteringtovote.-s F-:i+00Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 53|xUHP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6,,,,0(#$  0  *+ (_2623  ..*G+M (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *D+M (_24   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  - -*A+M (_23  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *>+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_1723  Ԁ*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  (DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  &2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      (&H2  (&H3  (&H4 XXX (&H5  (&H6  20Address(|G2'i$ !.8UdXXd8         0  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS d42Emphasis(|3A$ !.8UdXXd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  64Hyperlink    ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3A$ !.8UdXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK<:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/K<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7g(X7  ?%2A`Arial?  S\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7&  d df)1dxd<:zTop of For7i(X7  ?%2A`Arial?  S\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7f)2dxd0KS.SampleK<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  56789:;< 35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.X[ZA<< c(O$/research/buttonTFLink?_m=e5b9b7abbe40790dc1a5ad513f200208&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2001%20Tenn.%20/research/buttonTFLink?_m=e5b9b7abbe40790dc1a5ad513f200208&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2001%20Tenn.%20/research/buttonTFLink?_m=e5b9b7abbe40790dc1a5ad513f200208&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2001%20Tenn.%20/research/buttonTFLink?_m=e5b9b7abbe40790dc1a5ad513f200208&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2001%20Tenn.%20/research/buttonTFLink?_m=e5b9b7abbe40790dc1a5ad513f200208&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2001%20Tenn.%20/research/buttonTFLink?_m=e5b9b7abbe40790dc1a5ad513f200208&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDATA%5b2001%20Tenn.%203#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i) !.8Udd8     _   U8U)XXdd8@ttdUINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#Ud #Ԉ &    @  @` November19,2002Session L XU)XU #UXXU)#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.RUFUSSTEVENJOHNSXU)XU  J @@ AppealfromtheCircuitCourtforRutherfordCounty  J @@No.F49830J.SteveDaniel,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200200599CCAR3CDFiledDecember31,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     TheDefendant,RufusStevenJohns,enteredanolocontenderepleatoillegallyregisteringtovote, x  aclassEfelony.Afterasentencinghearing,thetrialcourtsentencedtheDefendantasaRangeI d standardoffendertoeighteenmonthstobeservedonprobation.Inthisappealasofright,heraises P threeissues:(1)whetherthedistrictattorneygeneralabusedhisdiscretionbydenyingtheDefendant < pretrialdiversion,(2)whetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionbyrefusingtograntjudicial (x diversion,and(3)whetherthetrialcourtimposedanexcessivesentence.Weaffirmthejudgment d ofthetrialcourt. P  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheTrialCourtAffirmed  (   #UXU)#XU)X.UDavidH.Welles,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJoeG.RileyandAlanE.Glenn#UXU)[#XU)X.U,  JJ.#UXXU) #XU)XU,joined.  JohnMitchell,Murfreesboro,Tennessee,fortheappellant,RufusStevenJohns. t PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;HelenaWalton_Yarbrough_,AssistantAttorney L  General;andWilliamC._Whitesell_,Jr.,DistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,Stateof 8!  Tennessee. $"t! ,@@OO& OPINION #UXXU)m #XU)XU #L#   #UXXU) #XU)XUXU)XXXU)  TheDefendant,RufusStevenJohns,waschargedbytheRutherfordCountyGrandJurywith &"& onecountofillegallyregisteringtovote,aClassEfelony,andthreecountsofofficialmisconduct, '"' alsoClassEfelonies.TheDefendantfiledanapplicationforpretrialdiversion,whichwasdenied (#( bythedistrictattorneygeneral.TheDefendantthenpetitionedthetrialcourtforawritofcertiorari, )$) appealingthedenialofpretrialdiversion.Afterahearing,thetrialcourtdeniedtheDefendants p*%* petition.UltimatelytheDefendantenteredapleaofnolocontenderetothechargeofillegal \+&+ registration,andthethreecountsofofficialmisconductweredismissed.Afterasentencinghearing, H,', thetrialcourtdeniedtheDefendantsrequestforjudicialdiversionandsentencedhimtoatermof 4-(- _eighteenmonths,tobeservedonprobation.Inthisappealasofright,theDefendantargues(1)that  theStateabuseditsdiscretionbydenyinghisapplicationforpretrialdiversion,(2)thatthetrialcourt  abuseditsdiscretionbyrefusingtograntjudicialdiversion,and(3)thatthesentenceofeighteen  monthsisexcessive. t   FortenyearstheDefendantservedasaRutherfordCountyCommissionerfortheEleventh L  District.OnSeptember17,1999,theDefendantmovedfromhisresidenceintheEleventhDistrict 8  toanewresidenceintheTenthDistrict.However,theDefendantcontinuedtoserveas $ t CommissionerfortheEleventhDistrictinspiteofthefactthathenolongerresidedinthatdistrict.  ` TheDefendantfailedtocorrectlylisthisaddressintheTenthDistrictwhenheregisteredtovote.  L  Indeed,whenheregisteredtovote,heusedhissistersaddress,whichwasintheEleventhDistrict.  8  Forthisreason,hewaschargedwithandenteredanolocontenderepleatointentionallyregistering $  tovotewherehewasnotentitledtoinviolationofTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection219107.     TheDefendantsfirstargumentisthatthedistrictattorneygeneralabusedhisdiscretionby   denyingtheDefendantsapplicationforpretrialdiversion.Thepretrialdiversionstatuteallowsa   districtattorneygeneraltosuspendtheprosecutionofaneligibledefendantforaperiodnottoexceed p twoyears.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4015105(a)(1)(A).Inordertoqualifyforpretrialdiversion,the \ defendantmustnothavepreviouslybeengranteddiversion;mustnothaveapriormisdemeanor H convictionforwhichasentenceofconfinementwasservedorapriorfelonyconvictionwithinafive 4 yearperiodaftercompletingthesentenceorprobationaryperiodforsuchconviction;andmustnot  p bechargedwithaclassAfelony,aclassBfelony,certainclassCfelonies,asexualoffense,driving  \ undertheinfluence,orvehicularassault.Seeid.4015105(a)(1)(B)(i)(a)(c). H   Thereisnopresumptionthatapersoneligibleforpretrialdiversionisentitledtodiversion.   SeeStatev.Curry,988S.W.2d153,157(Tenn.1999).The defendantbearstheburdenof   establishingthatpretrialdiversionisappropriateandintheinterestofjustice;therefore,itisthe  responsibilityofthedefendanttoprovide substantialfavorableevidenceforthedistrictattorney  generalsconsideration.Statev.Bell,69S.W.3d171,179(Tenn.2002).    Thedecisiontograntordenyanapplicationforpretrialdiversionrestswithinthediscretion X  ofthedistrictattorneygeneral.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4015105(b)(3). Whendecidingwhether D! toenterintoamemorandumofunderstandingunderthepretrialdiversionstatute[,]aprosecutor 0"  shouldfocusonthedefendantsamenabilitytocorrection.Anyfactorswhichtendtoaccurately #l! reflectwhetheraparticulardefendantwillorwillnotbecomearepeatoffendershouldbe $X" considered.Statev.Hammersley,650S.W.2d352,355(Tenn.1983). $D # 8  Amongthefactorstobeconsideredinadditiontothecircumstancesoftheoffense &"% arethedefendantscriminalrecord,socialhistory,thephysicalandmentalcondition '#& ofadefendantwhereappropriate,andthelikelihoodthatpretrialdiversionwillserve (#' theendsofjusticeandthebestinterestofboththepublicandthedefendant.)$(     |*%) Id.Ifpretrialdiversionisdenied,thedenialmustbewritten,mustlisttheevidenceconsidered,   discusswhichfactorswereconsidered,anddiscusstheweightaccordedtoeachfactor.SeeStatev.  Pinkham,955S.W.2d956,960(Tenn.1997). Thisrequiremententailsmorethananabstract  statementintherecordthatthedistrictattorneygeneralhasconsideredthesefactors.Curry,988 t S.W.2dat157(citationsomitted). `   Ifanapplicationforpretrialdiversionisdenied,thedefendantmayappealtothetrialcourt 8  forawritofcertiorari.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4015105(b)(3).Onreview,thetrialcourtis $ t constrainedtoconsideronlytheevidenceconsideredbythedistrictattorneygeneralandmust  ` determinewhetherthedistrictattorneygeneralhasabusedhisorherdiscretion.SeeBell,69S.W.3d  L  at177.Anabuseofdiscretionmayonlybefoundwheretheprosecutorfailstoconsiderallthe  8  relevantfactorsandtheirweightorreachesadecisionnotsupportedbysubstantialevidence.See $  id.Onreview,thedecisionmadebythedistrictattorneygeneralispresumedtobecorrect.See   Curry,988S.W.2dat158.Therefore,inaclosecasewheretheprosecutorcouldhavelegitimately   grantedordeniedtheapplication,thetrialcourtmustdefertothejudgmentoftheprosecutor.See   Statev.Carr,861S.W.2d850,856(Tenn.Crim.App.1993).Forpurposesofourreview,thisCourt   is boundbythefactualfindingsmadebythetrialcourtunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainst p them.Bell,69S.W.3dat177. \   However,iftheevidenceofrecordisundisputedandcallsfornofindingoffacttoresolve 4 theissue,atrialcourtsdeterminationsconstituteconclusionsoflawtowhichanappellatecourtis  p notbound.Carr,861S.W.2dat856(citationsomitted).Therefore,whenthefactsareundisputed,  \ theunderlyingissuethatthisCourtmustdetermineonappealremainswhether,asamatteroflaw, H thedistrictattorneygeneralabusedhisorherdiscretionindenyingpretrialdiversion.Seeid.;State 4 v.TerryA.Rogier,No.W200100551CCAR9CD,2001Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS783,at*9   (Jackson,Sept.19,2001);Statev.Brooks,943S.W.2d411,413(Tenn.Crim.App.1997).     Inthewrittenresponsedenyingpretrialdiversionthedistrictattorneygeneralstatedthatthe  Defendant hasnopriorcriminalrecord,astableworkhistory,nophysicalormentalimpairments,  andapparentlyastablemarriage.Theprosecutoralsopointedoutthatthereisnoreasontosuspect l drugusageoranyothercriminalconductontheDefendantspart,and [t]hesefactorsweight[sic] X  favorablyinMr.Johnsfavor.However,thedistrictattorneydeniedtheDefendantsrequestfor D! diversionbasedupontheDefendantsstatusasanelectedpublicofficial,hisabuseofhisposition 0"  ofpublictrust,thefactthathisactoffalsifyinghisvotingregistrationunderminedpublicconfidence #l! ingovernment,theneedtodeterothersimilarlysituatedelectedofficialsfromengaginginsimilar $X" conduct,  *#  1      ׀andthelikelihoodthatpretrialdiversionwouldnotservetheendsofjusticeandthebest $D # interestsofboththepublicandtheDefendant. %0!$   &"%   TheDefendantcontendsthatthedistrictattorneyshouldnotbeallowedtodenyhimdiversion   baseduponhisstatusasanelectedofficial.However,wehaveheldthatpublicofficialsarecalled  upontoactinaccordancewithahigherstandardthanthatappliedtoanaveragecitizen.See  Woodsonv.State,608S.W.2d591,594(Tenn.Crim.App.1980);Statev.Houston,900S.W.2d t 712,715(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).Theprosecutorcitedinhisletterthepositionofpublictrustheld ` bytheDefendantasanelectedofficialandhisabuseofthatposition,theneedfordeterrence,and L  thepublicinterestinmaintainingtheintegrityofgovernmentalprocessasthemainreasonsfor 8  denyingdiversion. $ t   TheDefendantalsoarguesthattheprosecutordidnotgivedueconsiderationtothediversion  L  applicationandthereforeabusedhisdiscretionbynotcontactingtheDefendantsreferences.  8  However,thedistrictattorneystatedinthehearingonthepetitionforwritofcertiorarithathe $  believedthatthereferenceswouldhavesupportedtheDefendantsapplicationfordiversionandthat   heconcededthatthereferencesweighedinfavorofdiversion.However,relyingprimarilyonthe   circumstancesoftheoffense,hedeterminedthattheapplicationforpretrialdiversionshouldbe   denied.AlthoughtheDefendantspersonalhistorydoesdemonstratehisamenabilityto   rehabilitation,thecircumstancesoftheoffenseandtheneedfordeterrencemayoutweighallother p relevantfactorsandjustifyadenialofpretrialdiversion.SeeCurry,988S.W.2dat158.#XU)XXXU)@ #XU)XXXU) \   Therewerenofactualdisputestoberesolvedbythetrialcourtinthiscase.Theissueis 4 thereforewhether,asamatteroflaw,theprosecutorabusedhisdiscretionbydenyingtheDefendant  p pretrialdiversion.SeeCarr,861S.W.2dat856.Weconcludethatthecircumstancesoftheoffense,  \ theneedtoservetheendsofjustice,andtheneedtoprotecttheinterestsofthepublicoutweighall H factorsinfavorofdiversion.Wethereforehold,asdidthetrialcourt,thatthedistrictattorney 4 generalsdenialofpretrialdiversiondidnotconstituteanabuseofdiscretion.Thisissueiswithout   merit.     ThesecondissueraisedbytheDefendantiswhetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionby  denyinghimjudicialdiversionafterthesentencinghearing.Thesentencingoptioncommonly  knownasjudicialdiversioniscodifiedatTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection4035313.A l defendantiseligibleforjudicialdiversionifheorshe(a) isfoundguiltyorpleadsto...aclassC, X  DorEfelony,(b)hasnotpreviouslybeenconvictedofafelony,and(c)consentstothedeferment D! ofproceedingsandplacementonprobation foraperiodoftime...notmorethantheperiodofthe 0"  maximumsentenceofthefelonywithwhichthepersonischarged.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035 #l! 313(a)(1)(A).However, $X" 8  thefactthatanaccusedmeetstheseprerequisitesdoesnotentitletheaccusedto %0!$ judicialdiversionasamatterofright.Thestatutestatesthatatrialcourt maygrant &"% judicialdiversioninappropriatecases....Thus,whetheranaccusedshouldbe '#& grantedjudicialdiversionisaquestionwhichaddressesitselftothesounddiscretion (#' ofthetrialcourt.)$(     |*%) Statev.Bonestel,871S.W.2d163,168(Tenn.Crim.App.1993),overruledonothergroundsby   Statev.Hooper,29S.W.3d1,9(Tenn.2000).    Tennesseecourtshaverecognizedthesimilaritiesbetweenjudicialdiversionandpretrial t diversionand,thus,havedrawnheavilyfromthecaselawgoverningpretrialdiversiontoanalyze ` casesinvolvingjudicialdiversion.Forinstance,indeterminingwhethertograntpretrialdiversion, L  adistrictattorneygeneralshouldconsiderthedefendantscriminalrecord,socialhistory,mentaland 8  physicalcondition,attitude,behaviorsincearrest,emotionalstability,currentdrugusage,past $ t employment,homeenvironment,maritalstability,familyresponsibility,generalreputation,and  ` amenabilitytocorrection;aswellasthecircumstancesoftheoffense,thedeterrenteffectof  L  punishmentuponothercriminalactivity,andthelikelihoodthatpretrialdiversionwillservetheends  8  ofjusticeandbestinterestsofboththepublicandthedefendant.SeeStatev.Washington,866 $  S.W.2d950,951(Tenn.1993).     Atrialcourtshouldconsidergenerallythesamefactorswhendecidingwhethertogrant   judicialdiversion.SeeBonestel,871S.W.2dat168;Statev.Hammersley,650S.W.2d352,355   (Tenn.1983);Statev.Anderson,857S.W.2d571,57273(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).If,after p assessingallrelevantfactors,thetrialcourtchoosestodenyjudicialdiversion,thecourtmust \ articulateontherecordboththespecificreasonssupportingthedenialandwhythosefactors H applicabletothedenialofdiversionoutweightheotherfactorsforconsideration.SeeBonestel,871 4 S.W.2dat168.  p   Inreviewingthedecisionofatrialcourttograntordenyjudicialdiversion,thisCourtapplies H  thesamelevelofreviewasthatwhichisapplicabletoareviewofthedistrictattorneygenerals 4 actionindenyingpretrialdiversion.Statev.George,830S.W.2d79,80(Tenn.Crim.App.1992);   seealsoAnderson,857S.W.2dat572.Inotherwords,thisCourtreviewstherecordtodetermine   whetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretion.SeeBonestel,871S.W.2dat168;Anderson,857  S.W.2dat572.Tofindanabuseofdiscretion,wemustdeterminethatnosubstantialevidenceexists  tosupporttherulingofthetrialcourt.SeeBonestel,871S.W.2dat168;Anderson,857S.W.2dat  572. l   Concerningthetrialcourtsdenialofjudicialdiversionaswellasitssentencingdecision, D!  thetrialcourtmaylookbehindapleaagreementandconsiderthetruenatureoftheoffense 0"  committed.Statev.LatoyaAnderson,No.02C019707CR00251,1998Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS #l! 950,at*6(Jackson,Sept.11,1998);seealsoStatev.Hollingsworth,647S.W.2d937,939(Tenn. $X" 1983);Statev.Biggs,769S.W.2d506,507(Tenn.Crim.App.1988).#XU)XXXU)79#XU)XXXU)ԀInthiscase,thetrialcourt $D # consideredthattheDefendanthadnopriorcriminalrecord,thathewasamenabletocorrection,and %0!$ thathissocialandfamilyhistorywascommendable.However,thecourtfoundthatthe &"% circumstancesoftheoffense,thatis,anelectedofficialfalsifyinginformationonhisvoting '#& registration,thedeterrencetootherpoliticalfigures,andtheendsofjusticeoutweighedthepositive (#' factors.Initssupplementalorder,thetrialcourtstated: )$(   |*%) 8   ` ThefactsofthiscaseestablishthatMr.Johnsmovedoutofhiscounty   commissiondistricttoanewresidence.Aftermakingthismove,thecitizensofthat  districtlosttheirlegalrepresentativeslawfulvoteinrepresentingtheirinterestinthe  countycommission.Mr.Johnscontendsthathehadnoknowledgethatmoving t outsideofhisdistrictwasillegal[,]andyetthefactsinthiscaseestablishthatwith ` fullknowledgethathelivedoutsidethedistrict,Mr.Johns[]registeredtovoteathis L  sistersresidence[,]whichwaslocatedinthecenterofthisparticulardistrictinorder 8  toperpetuatehisabilitytoberecognizedasacountycommissionerandtoreceivethe $ t financialbenefitsandemolumentsofofficeassociatedwiththatelectedposition.  ` Facedwiththedocumentedfactsassociatedwithhisactions,...Mr.Johnsdefends  L  himselfbyassertingthatothercommissionersattimeshavemovedoutsidetheir  8  districtstemporarilyandthereaftermovedbackintotheirdistrictsduringtheirterm $  ascountycommissioner.Commissionmemberswhomoveoutsideoftheirdistrict   in[e]ffectforfeittheirelectedposition[,]andthisgivesrisetothecitizenswithinthe   districthavingnolegalvoiceintheirlocalgovernment.Thistypeofconduct   underminesthelegitimacyofgovernmentaction.Thereisaneedtodeternotonly   Mr.Johns[,]butallotherswhowouldembarkonsuchactionsinparticipatinginsuch p activities.Therefore,thisCourtfindsthatthecircumstancesofthisoffense,the \ [deterrence]associatedwiththisconviction[,]andtheendsofjusticewouldnotbe H servedbyajudicialdiversion.Forthesereasons,therequestforjudicialdiversion 4 isdenied. p     TheDefendantcomplainsthatthetrialcourtdidnotsufficientlydescribethefactorsthatit H consideredindeterminingwhethertograntdiversionorwhythosefactorsweighedagainstthegrant 4 ofdiversion.However,therecordclearlyreflectsthatthetrialcourtplacedgreatemphasisonthe   factthattheDefendantwasanelectedofficialwhoabusedapositionofpublictrust.Thetrialcourt   madeitabundantlyclearthattheinstantoffenseconstitutedmorethanacitizenmerelyillegally  registeringtovote:itwasadeceitfulactbyanelectedgovernmentofficial.Thetrialcourtfoundthat  thecircumstancessurroundingtheoffenseoutweighedallthepositivefactors.Thetrialcourtdid  notabuseitsdiscretioninreachingthatconclusion.Accordingly,thisissueiswithoutmerit. l   Finally,theDefendantarguesthathissentenceofeighteenmonthsisexcessive.Whenan D! accusedchallengesthelength,range,ormannerofserviceofasentence,thisCourthasadutyto 0"  conductadenovoreviewofthesentencewithapresumptionthatthedeterminationsmadebythe #l! trialcourtarecorrect.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d).Thispresumptionis conditionedupon $X" theaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandall $D # relevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166,169(Tenn.1991). %0!$   Whenconductingadenovoreviewofasentence,thisCourtmustconsider:(a)theevidence, '#& ifany,receivedatthetrialandsentencinghearing;(b)thepresentencereport;(c)theprinciplesof (#' sentencingandargumentsastosentencingalternatives;(d)thenatureandcharacteristicsofthe )$( criminalconductinvolved;(e)anystatutorymitigatingorenhancementfactors;(f)anystatement |*%) madebythedefendantregardingsentencing;and(g)thepotentialorlackofpotentialfor h+&* rehabilitationortreatment.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035102,103,210#XU)XXXU)`P#XU)XXXU);Statev.Brewer,875  S.W.2d298,302(Tenn.Crim.App.1993);Statev.Thomas,755S.W.2d838,844(Tenn.Crim.  App.1988).    Ifourreviewreflectsthatthetrialcourtfollowedthestatutorysentencingprocedure,thatthe ` courtimposedalawfulsentenceafterhavinggivendueconsiderationandproperweighttothe L  factorsandprinciplessetoutunderthesentencinglaw,andthatthetrialcourtsfindingsoffactare 8  adequatelysupportedbytherecord,thenwemaynotmodifythesentenceevenifwewouldhave $ t preferredadifferentresult.SeeStatev.Pike,978S.W.2d904,92627(Tenn.1998);Statev.  ` Fletcher,805S.W.2d785,789(Tenn.Crim.App.1991).#XU)XXXU)Ce#XU)XXXU)  L    Acriminaldefendantchallengingatrialcourtssentencingdecisionhastheburdenof $  establishingthathisorhersentenceisimproper.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035401,Sentencing   CommissionComments;seealsoAshby,823S.W.2dat169.TheDefendanthasnotmethisburden   inthiscase.TheDefendant,asaRangeIstandardoffenderconvictedofaclassEfelony,was   subjecttoaonetotwoyearsentence.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035112(a)(5).Thepresumptive   sentencewasoneyear.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035210(c).TheDefendantmaintainsthatthetrial p courterredinitsapplicationofenhancingandmitigatingfactorsindecidinguponasentenceof \ eighteenmonths.Asanenhancementfactor,thetrialjudgecitedthat thedefendantabuseda H positionofpublicorprivatetrust....Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(16).However,thecourtalso 4 consideredasamitigatingfactorthat thedefendantscriminalconductneithercausednorthreatened  p seriousbodilyinjury.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035113(1).Also,thetrialcourtconsideredthatthe  \ Defendanthadnopriorcriminalhistoryandhadmadepositivecontributionstohiscommunityas H relevantmitigatingfactors.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035113(13).Obviously,whenthetrialcourt 4 settheDefendantssentenceateighteenmonths,itplacedmoreemphasisonthecircumstancesof   theoffenseunderlyingthepleaagreement,whichitwasentitledtodo.SeeHollingsworth,647   S.W.2dat939#XU)XXXU)h#XU)XXXU).Thetrialcourtdidnoterrinmakingitsdecision.Accordingly,thisissueiswithout  merit.    Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed. l   #XU)XXXU)p# p56789:;<(03\  \  \;rthe  \  \  \  \  \rthe  \  \tthe  \  ?+ ` hp x X?G  Gt  \  \  \  \tthe  \  \  \  \  \  \  \  \  \  \ vthe  \  \  4rO  5  \  6xrOxing  7x4rO  5  \  6[yrOoying  7y4rO  5  \  6/zrOCzing  7qz4rO  5  \  6{rO{ing  7E{4rO  5  \  6{rO{ing  7|4rO  5  \  6|rO|ing  7|4rO  5  \  6}rO}ing  7}Gtu݌̌     `     h     ___________________________________ $X"    `     h     DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE