ÿWPCó ,ƒÓà¥%KûõÕ4ïÚv%¤H6½Ž`©+ˆ^6Kþõó¥Ë¦x¢†h¥0jÐ…µ¿b Ø,Þ+ÞH ­&±þ$>ðûDQm\âèÍkë'Šð ª¤éèvN²QA–BJyEOX6ÍUmv˜fH+®'8F !ã…ÆDt £”õG˜–F¯ÅìÀŸ(_ýwbõ„FŸ‹¦6dÜ{c ùþ¾àÄVõJMt\Æ+Îqdí¾qw˜.™ŸitãÝŽïâs†§`‰sü›_JþW«<탃W)1žáŠŒå‹ÃB ÀïŸKm® Ÿ¸ÃBKÑ)›Üáì‚þO½yß^n˜ (y¹d~`)J6ÛR„R`T5éÞ6Ï0“*‡ÕTš,ƒoïû!¨dª•lÑ%Qµc=ˉÛÐeM;z#‚ŸõfuQNfƒth¼l>üó¿7k ^PqM¤2×ê·n}õ\ ˆÞ`„—VoóÚHT½¶:W%Sëàofb %\Nb 0ˆdU'Nìì z:Ò´ z† Ò NÒ Ò Ò zÔ ÆN Æ ÆÚ Æ  ÒfN8UN: 0DˆEÌÌ^ ÎwÚ4ÞÞò m#Éãããããããããããããbææææææææææææææææææææææææææææææææææææ 0ëîîîî BÙÙ 0¤ö D5š D-Ï 0Küü ASGÆš 0¤` 0D A«H»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular˜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 ˜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˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5C:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2z1Ï  ~‰/ê:i¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0 ùÝ ƒR]>$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôàLò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€appellant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€applied€the€improper€presumptive€minimum€sentence,€starting€atÐ ° Ðthe€midpoint€in€the€range€rather€that€the€minimum.€€At€sentencing,€the€trial€court€stated,€ð ðNow€I€considered€at€a€midrangeÐ qÁ Ð10€years€or€8€years€as€if€I€could€go€down€from€the€10€years€and€I€couldnððt.ðð€€We€are€unable€to€conclude€from€thisÐ 2‚ Ðlanguage€that€the€trial€court€sentenced€from€the€midpoint€in€the€range.€€Rather,€we€believe€that€the€trial€court€correctedÐ óC Ðhis€misstatement€that€the€presumptive€minimum€was€the€midpoint,€ten€years.€€- ù-(|G2]>$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ó)»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôàLò»»Ô d(|38­$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ó)»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|38­$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ó)»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ó)»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ó)»»»ÔÑ8€‹—XXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡î-ÖÓ)ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼Ó)»îî-Ö#ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€September€14,€2004Ð öF ÐÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)ÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ó)»XX‹—1#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€CHRISTOPHER€Ô_ÔKIRKENDALLÔ_ÔòòóóÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)Ôó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€02„02070€€€€€€W.€Fred€Ô_ÔAxleyÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„02393„CCA„R3„CD€€„€Filed€November€30,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡XæëXXX‹—ÔThe€appellant,€Christopher€Ô_ÔKirkendallÔ_Ô,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€aggravated€robbery.€€FollowingÐ V¦  Ða€hearing,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€twelve€years€incarceration€in€the€TennesseeÐ ? ÐDepartment€of€Correction.€€The€appellant€now€appeals,€challenging€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidenceÐ (x Ðand€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court.€€òòóóUpon€review€of€the€record€and€the€partiesðð€briefs,€weÐ a Ðaffirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€as€modified.Ô#†X‹—XXXæë"#ÔÔ#†¼Ó)»XX‹—Ï#ÔÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)ÔÐ úJ ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed€asÐ Ì ÐModified.ó óÐ ¶ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ó)»àX‹—¼#ÔÔ‡X‹—X.¼Ó)ÔNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€whichòòóó€òòAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€joined.€Ð ‰Ù ÐGòòaryóó€R.€Wòòadeóó,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,€filed€a€separate€concurring€opinion.Ð r ÐÌRobert€Wilson€Jones,€Shelby€County€Public€Defender;€W.€Mark€Ward,€Assistant€Public€DefenderÐ D” Ð(on€appeal);€and€Robert€Trent€Hall,€Assistant€Public€Defender€(at€trial),€for€the€appellant,Ð -} ÐChristopher€Ô_ÔKirkendallÔ_Ô.Ð f ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Elizabeth€B.€Ô_ÔMarneyÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð è 8  ÐWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€and€David€Ô_ÔPritchardÔ_Ô€and€Jennifer€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô,€AssistantÐ Ñ!!! ÐDistrict€Attorneys€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð º" " ÐÓ’ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ó)»XX‹—Á#ÔÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)ÔÐ Œ$Ü$ ÐÌòòò òI.€€Factual€Backgroundó óóóÐ _&¯!& ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Ó)»XX‹—ÿ #ÔÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XæëXXX‹—Ôà  àOn€the€afternoon€of€November€21,€2001,€the€victim€stopped€at€a€ð ðlocal€.€.€.€corner€storeðð€toÐ 2(‚#( Ðpurchase€a€beverage.€€The€victim€testified€at€trial€that€as€he€got€into€his€truck€to€leave,€a€man,€laterÐ )k$) Ðidentified€as€the€appellant,€approached€and€asked€for€a€ride.€€The€appellant€told€the€victim€that€heÐ *T%* Ðð ðwanted€to€catch€up€with€his€buddy€just€up€the€road.ðð€€The€victim€agreed€to€give€the€appellant€a€ride.€Ð í*=&+ ÐAlthough€the€victim€did€not€know€the€appellantððs€name,€he€recognized€him€from€the€neighborhood.Ð Ö+&', Ðâ âÐ ¿,(-ým Ðà  àThe€victim€drove€the€appellant€a€short€distance€to€a€location€indicated€by€the€appellant.€Ð ° Ðâ âHowever,€the€appellantððs€friend€was€not€at€that€location.€€The€appellant€asked€the€victim€to€ð ðturnÐ ™é Ðaround.ðð€€The€victim€complied€and€returned€to€the€intersection€where€the€ð ðcorner€storeðð€was€located.€Ð ‚Ò ÐHe€stopped€his€truck€at€a€bus€stop€across€the€street€from€the€store€and€ð ðsuggested€that€[the€appellant]Ð k» Ðgo€ahead€and€get€out€there.ðð€€Instead,€the€appellant€asked€the€victim€to€drive€him€to€nearby€Ô_ÔCanfieldÔ_Ô,Ð T¤ Ðwhere€the€victim€assumed€the€appellant€lived.Ð =  ÐÌà  àAs€the€victim€drove€to€Ô_ÔCanfieldÔ_Ô,€the€appellant€told€him€to€stop.€€The€victim€complied.€Ð  _ ÐAccording€to€the€victim,€the€appellant€ð ðturned€to€the€right€like€he€was€going€to€get€out€and€put€hisÐ ø H Ðback€to€me€and€then€he€turned€around€with€the€pistol€in€his€hand.€.€.€.€He€said€give€me€your€moneyÐ á 1  Ðor€Iððm€going€to€kill€you.ðð€€The€victim€removed€his€money€from€his€shirt€pocket,€ð ðwadded€it€up,ðð€andÐ Ê   Ðthrew€it€out€of€the€truck€window.€€The€appellant€remained€seated€in€the€truck€and€told€the€victim,Ð ³  Ðð ðI€want€your€wallet€too.€.€.€.€[Ô_ÔG]iveÔ_Ô€me€your€wallet€or€Iððm€going€to€kill€you.ðð€€When€the€victimÐ œì  Ðinformed€the€appellant€that€he€did€not€have€a€wallet,€the€appellant€shot€the€victim€in€the€right€thigh.€Ð …Õ  ÐThe€appellant€then€exited€the€truck,€and€the€victim€drove€away.Ð n¾  ÐÌà  àThe€victim€drove€home€and€told€his€mother€to€call€9„1„1.€€Shortly€thereafter,€the€police€andÐ @ Ðan€ambulance€arrived.€€After€providing€the€officers€with€a€report€of€the€incident,€the€victim€wasÐ )y Ðtaken€to€the€hospital€where€he€was€treated€and€released.Ð b ÐÌà  àSeveral€days€later,€the€victim€observed€a€photograph€of€the€appellant€with€the€appellantððsÐ ä4 Ðname€underneath.€€The€victim€telephoned€the€robbery€squad€and€gave€Sergeant€Ralph€Ô_ÔPeperoneÔ_Ô€theÐ Í Ðappellantððs€name.€€Sergeant€Ô_ÔPeperoneÔ_Ô€asked€the€victim€to€come€to€the€robbery€squad€to€view€aÐ ¶ Ðphotographic€lineup.€€When€the€victim€viewed€the€lineup,€he€immediately€identified€the€appellantÐ Ÿï Ðas€the€man€who€robbed€and€shot€him.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àJoe€Stark,€a€crime€scene€investigator€with€the€Memphis€Police€Department,€testified€that€onÐ Zª ÐNovember€21,€2001,€he€was€called€to€investigate€the€crime€scene€in€the€instant€case.€€When€heÐ C“ Ðarrived€at€the€victimððs€house,€he€was€informed€that€the€victim€had€been€involved€in€a€shooting€in€hisÐ ,| Ðtruck.€€Stark€photographed€the€truck€and€dusted€the€passenger„side€door€for€fingerprints.€€He€wasÐ e Ðable€to€lift€two€sets€of€prints€from€the€interior€and€the€exterior€of€the€door.€€He€also€discovered€aÐ þN Ðspent€casing€on€the€floorboard.€€In€the€driverððs€seat,€Stark€observed€a€hole€with€what€appeared€to€beÐ ç 7 Ðblood€around€it.€€Believing€it€to€be€the€bullet€hole,€he€cut€the€hole€open€in€an€attempt€to€locate€theÐ Ð!   Ðbullet.€€Stark€observed€an€indentation€where€the€bullet€had€struck€the€metal€plate€underneath€the€seat,Ð ¹" ! Ðbut€he€was€unable€to€locate€the€bullet.Ð ¢#ò" ÐÌà  àNathan€Ô_ÔGathrightÔ_Ô,€a€latent€print€examiner€with€the€Memphis€Police€Department,€testified€thatÐ t%Ä $ Ðon€December€11,€2001,€he€received€a€request€from€Sergeant€Ô_ÔPeperoneÔ_Ô€to€compare€the€prints€liftedÐ ]&­!% Ðfrom€the€victimððs€truck€with€those€of€the€appellant.€€Ô_ÔGathrightÔ_Ô€found€three€matches.€€Bobby€Spence,Ð F'–"& Ða€fingerprint€technician€with€the€Records€and€Identification€Division€of€the€Shelby€County€SheriffððsÐ /(#' ÐDepartment€Ô_Ô(RÔ_Ô€&€I),€testified€at€trial€that€at€the€Stateððs€request€he€obtained€prints€of€the€appellantððsÐ )h$( Ðfingers€and€compared€them€to€the€prints€contained€in€R€&€I€file€number€305367,€which€file€belongedÐ *Q%) Ðto€the€appellant.€€The€prints€were€a€match.Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ ÐÔ_Ôà  àSergeant€Ralph€Peperone€testified€that€on€December€11,€2001,€the€victim€telephoned€andÐ ° Ðinformed€him€that€he€had€observed€a€photograph€of€the€individual€who€had€robbed€and€shot€him.€Ð ™é ÐThe€victim€also€provided€Sergeant€Peperone€with€the€individualððs€name.€€Sergeant€PeperoneÐ ‚Ò Ðobtained€the€fingerprints€lifted€from€the€victimððs€vehicle€and€asked€the€latent€print€examiners€toÐ k» Ðcompare€them€with€the€appellantððs€fingerprints.€€He€was€subsequently€advised€that€the€fingerprintsÐ T¤ Ðwere€a€match.Ð =  ÐÌà  àThat€same€day,€Sergeant€Peperone€telephoned€the€victim€and€asked€him€to€come€to€theÐ  _ Ðrobbery€squad€and€view€a€photographic€lineup.€€Sergeant€Peperone€prepared€a€photographic€lineupÐ ø H Ðthat€included€a€photograph€of€the€appellant.€€Upon€viewing€the€photographs,€the€victim€immediatelyÐ á 1  Ðidentified€the€appellant€as€the€individual€who€robbed€and€shot€him.Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àThereafter,€the€Shelby€County€Grand€Jury€returned€an€indictment,€charging€the€appellantÐ œì  Ðwith€two€counts€of€aggravated€robbery.€€Based€upon€the€evidence€presented€at€trial,€the€juryÐ …Õ  Ðconvicted€the€appellant€as€charged€in€count€one€of€the€indictment,€but€acquitted€the€appellant€onÐ n¾  Ðcount€two.€€Following€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€twelve€years€incarceration.€Ð W§  ÐThe€appellant€now€appeals€challenging€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€and€the€sentence€imposed€byÐ @ Ðthe€trial€court.Ð )y ÐÌòòò òÓ  ÓII.€€Analysisóóó óÐ ûK ÐÓ^)ÓÌÓ  ÓA.€€Sufficiency€of€the€EvidenceÐ Î ÐÓ£)ÓÌà  àÔ#†X‹—XXXæëÀ #ÔWhen€an€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€the€standard€forÐ  ð Ðreview€is€ð ðwhether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóóÐ ‰Ù Ðrational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonableÐ r Ðdoubt.ðð€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ð [« Ð13(e).€à  àOn€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€allÐ D” Ðreasonable€or€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2dÐ -} Ð832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses€and€the€weight€and€valueÐ f Ðto€be€afforded€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence,€are€resolved€by€theÐ ÿO Ðjury€as€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Blandóó,€958€S.W.2d€651,€659€(Tenn.€1997).€€This€court€will€not€reweighÐ è 8 Ðor€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòId.óó€€Because€a€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocenceÐ Ñ!!  Ðwith€which€a€defendant€is€initially€cloaked€at€trial€and€replaces€it€on€appeal€with€one€of€guilt,€aÐ º" ! Ðconvicted€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€to€this€court€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€Ð £#ó" ÐòòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ð Œ$Ü# ÐÌÔ‡XæëXXX‹—Ôà  àAggravated€robbery€is€defined€in€pertinent€part€as€ð ðthe€intentional€or€knowing€theft€ofÐ ^&®!% Ðproperty€from€the€person€of€another€by€violence,ðð€accomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ G'—"& ÐAnn.€ðððð€39„13„401(a),€„402(a)(1)€Ô#†X‹—XXXæë*0#ÔÔ‡XæëXXX‹—ÔÔ#†¼¨µ »XXæë• #ÔÔ‡XæëX »¼¨µÔ(2003).Ô#†X‹—XXXæë†1#ÔÐ 0(€#' ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case,€the€appellantððs€sufficiency€claim€is€based€upon€the€victimððs€identificationÐ *R%) Ðof€the€appellant.€€Specifically,€the€appellant€asserts€that€the€victimððs€identification€of€the€appellantÐ ë*;&* Ðas€the€perpetrator€of€the€offense€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€TheÐ Ô+$'+ Ðidentification€of€a€defendant€as€the€perpetrator€of€the€offense€for€which€he€is€on€trial€is€a€questionÐ ° Ðof€fact€for€the€jury€upon€consideration€of€all€competent€proof.€€òòState€v.€Stricklandóó,€885€S.W.2d€85,Ð ™é Ð87€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).Ô#†¼Ó)»XX‹—È1#ÔÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)Ô€€The€testimony€of€a€victim€identifying€the€perpetrator€is,€alone,Ð ‚Ò Ðsufficient€to€support€a€conviction.€€òòId.óó€at€87„88.Ð k» ÐÌà  àThe€proof€at€trial€reflected€that€as€the€victimÔ‡XæëXXX‹—Ô€drove€away€from€a€convenience€store€a€manÐ =  Ðasked€him€for€a€ride.€€The€victim€recognized€the€man€from€his€neighborhood€and€agreed€to€give€himÐ & v Ða€ride.€€During€the€drive,€the€man€ordered€the€victim€to€stop€the€truck.€€The€appellant€then€robbedÐ  _ Ðand€shot€the€victim.€€Several€days€later,€the€victim€observed€a€photograph€of€the€perpetrator€of€theÐ ø H Ðoffense.€€The€manððs€name€was€located€under€the€photograph.€€The€victim€reported€the€name€to€theÐ á 1  Ðpolice€and,€upon€viewing€a€photographic€lineup,€immediately€identified€the€appellant€as€the€manÐ Ê   Ðwho€robbed€and€shot€him.€€Moreover,€latent€prints€lifted€from€the€passenger„side€door€of€the€victimððsÐ ³  Ðtruck€matched€those€of€the€appellant.€€We€conclude€that€this€evidence€is€more€than€sufficient€toÐ œì  Ðsustain€the€appellantððs€conviction.Ð …Õ  ÐÌÓ  ÓB.€€SentenceÐ W§  ÐÓÀ9ÓÌà  àNext,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€was€excessiveÐ )y Ðbecause€the€trial€court€misapplied€certain€enhancement€factors.€€When€an€appellant€challenges€theÐ b Ðlength,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€de€novoÐ ûK Ðreview€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ ä4 ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(2003).€€However,€this€presumption€of€correctness€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€theÐ Í Ðaffirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€allÐ ¶ Ðrelevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€If€the€recordÐ Ÿï Ðdemonstrates€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€consider€the€sentencing€principles€and€the€relevant€factsÐ ˆØ Ðand€circumstances,€review€of€the€sentence€will€be€purely€de€novo.€€òòId.óóÐ qÁ ÐÌà  àIn€conducting€our€review,€this€court€must€consider€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€trialÐ C“ Ðand€at€the€sentencing€hearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€theÐ ,| Ðarguments€of€counsel€relative€to€the€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€theÐ e Ðoffenses;€(5)€any€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(6)€any€statements€made€by€the€appellant€onÐ þN Ðhis€own€behalf;€and€(7)€the€appellantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ç 7 Ððððð€40„35„102,€„103,€„210€(2003);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€168.€€The€burden€is€on€the€appellantÐ Ð!   Ðto€show€that€the€sentence€is€improper.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401,€Sentencing€CommissionÐ ¹" ! ÐComments.Ð ¢#ò" ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€was€sentenced€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender,€for€which€the€applicable€rangeÐ t%Ä $ Ðfor€a€Class€B€felony€is€eight€to€twelve€years.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(2)€(2003).€€TheÐ ]&­!% Ðpresumptive€sentence€for€a€Class€B€felony€is€the€minimum€within€the€applicable€range€if€there€areÐ F'–"& Ðno€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€If€the€trial€court€finds€thatÐ /(#' Ðsuch€factors€do€exist,€the€court€must€start€at€the€presumptive€sentence,€enhance€the€sentence€withinÐ )h$( Ðthe€range€as€appropriate€for€the€enhancement€factors,€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€the€rangeÐ *Q%) Ðas€appropriate€for€the€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(e).€€There€is€noÐ ê*:&* Ðmathematical€formula€for€valuating€factors€to€calculate€the€appropriate€sentence.€€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,Ð Ó+#'+ Ð932€S.W.2d€467,€475€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€ð ðRather,€the€weight€to€be€afforded€an€existing€factorÐ ° Ðis€left€to€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€so€long€as€the€trial€court€complies€with€the€purposes€andÐ ™é Ðprinciples€of€the€1989€Sentencing€Act€and€its€findings€are€adequately€supported€by€the€record.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ ‚Ò Ðat€475„76.Ð k» ÐÌà  àAt€the€sentencing€hearing,€defense€counsel€relied€upon€the€presentence€report.€€DefenseÐ =  Ðcounsel€acknowledged€the€appellantððs€extensive€juvenile€record,€but€noted€that€this€was€theÐ & v Ðappellantððs€first€conviction€as€an€adult.€€The€State€submitted€copies€of€the€victimððs€impact€statementÐ  _ Ðand€the€appellantððs€juvenile€history.€€The€State€also€presented€the€testimony€of€the€victim,€whoÐ ø H Ðtestified€that€the€appellant€had€shattered€his€ð ðsense€of€communityðð€and€that€he€now€carried€a€pistolÐ á 1  Ðfor€protection.Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àFollowing€the€victimððs€testimony€and€the€arguments€of€counsel,€the€trial€court€sentenced€theÐ œì  Ðappellant€to€twelve€years€incarceration,€finding,€Ð …Õ  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àI€know€that€you€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm€during€theÐ W§  Ðcommission€of€this€offense€and€that€you€had€no€hesitation€to€commitÐ @ Ðthis€crime€when€the€risk€to€human€life€was€high.€€You€could€haveÐ )y Ðkilled€him.Ðb` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àYou€knew€when€you€pulled€that€trigger€the€potential€forÐ ä4 Ðbodily€injury€was€great.€€And€you€pulled€that€trigger,€oddly€enough,Ð Í Ðafter€he€had€given€you€the€money,€not€to€make€him€give€you€theÐ ¶ Ðmoney€because€he€had€already€done€that.€.€.€.€Then€I€look€at€the€factÐ Ÿï Ðyou€were€adjudicated€to€have€committed€a€delinquent€act€or€acts€.€.€.Ð ˆØ Ðas€a€juvenile€that€would€constitute€a€felony€if€it€was€committed€as€anÐ qÁ Ðadult.ÐZª` x` x ÐÌà  àBased€upon€these€findings,€it€appears€that€the€trial€court€applied€the€following€enhancementÐ ,| Ðfactors:Ð e ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(10)€The€defendant€possessed€or€employed€a€firearm,€explosiveÐ ç 7 Ðdevice€or€other€deadly€weapon€during€the€commission€of€the€offense;ÐÐ!  ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(11)€The€defendant€had€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€whenÐ ¹" ! Ðthe€risk€to€human€life€was€high;€Ð¢#ò"` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(17)€€The€offense€was€committed€under€circumstances€under€whichÐ ‹$Û# Ðthe€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great;€andÐt%Ä $` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(21)€The€defendant€was€adjudicated€to€have€committed€a€delinquentÐ ]&­!% Ðact€or€acts€as€a€juvenile€that€would€constitute€a€felony€if€committedÐ F'–"& Ðby€an€adult.Ð/(#'` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114€(2003).Ð *Q%) Ðâ âÐ ê*:&* ÐÔ#†X‹—XXXæëâ5#Ôà  àOn€appeal,€the€appellant€challenges€the€application€of€enhancement€factors€(10),€(11),€andÐ ° Ðâ â(17).Ô‡XæëXXX‹—Ô׃!×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†X‹—XXXæëóR#Ô€€We€conclude,€and€the€State€concedes,€that€because€the€use€of€a€firearm€was€an€essentialÐ ™é Ðelement€of€the€instant€offense,€enhancement€factor€(10)€was€applied€in€error.€€òòState€v.€Nixóó,€922Ð ‚Ò ÐS.W.2d€894,€903€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€However,€the€State,€without€citing€any€authority,Ð k» Ðcontends€that€because€the€appellant€shot€and€wounded€the€victim€after€the€completion€of€the€robbery,Ð T¤ Ðapplication€of€factors€(11)€and€(17)€was€warranted€in€the€instant€case.€€We€disagree€with€the€StateððsÐ =  Ðcontention.€€This€court€has€previously€concluded€that€ð ð[t]he€offense€of€aggravated€robberyÐ & v Ðnecessarily€entails€a€high€risk€to€human€life€and€a€potential€for€great€bodily€harm.ðð€€òòState€v.Ð  _ ÐClaybrooksóó,€910€S.W.2d€868,€873€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€Thus,€enhancement€factors€(11)€andÐ ø H Ð(17)€are€inherent€in€the€offense€of€aggravated€robbery.€òòóó€Ô‡XæëXXX‹—ÔAccordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€courtÐ á 1  Ðimproperly€applied€enhancement€factors€(10),€(11),€and€(17).Ô#†X‹—XXXæëvW#ÔÔ#†¼Ó)»XX‹—ã4#ÔÔ‡X‹—X»¼Ó)ÔÐ Ê   ÐÔ‡XæëXXX‹—ÔÔ#†¼¨µ »XXæëYX#ÔÔ‡XæëX »¼¨µÔÌÔ#†X‹—XXXæëX#ÔÔ‡XæëXXX‹—ÔÔ#†¼¨µ »XXæëÏX#ÔÔ‡XæëX »¼¨µÔà  àIn€his€initial€appellate€brief,€€the€appellant€did€not€challenge€the€application€of€enhancementÐ œì  Ðfactor€(21).€€However,€Ô#†¼¨µ »XXæëTY#ÔÔ‡XæëX »¼¨µÔÔ#†X‹—XXXæëY#ÔÔ‡XæëXXX‹—Ôprior€to€our€review€on€appeal,€the€appellant€filed€a€motion€requesting€thisÐ …Õ  Ðcourt€to€consider€the€impact€on€his€sentence€of€the€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€inÐ n¾  ÐòòBlakely€v.€Washingtonóó,€__€U.S.€__,€124€S.€Ct.€2531€(2004).€€This€court€has€recognized€that€òòBlakelyóóÐ W§  Ðð ðcalls€into€question€the€continuing€validity€of€our€current€sentencing€scheme.ðð€€òòState€v.€Julius€E.Ð @ ÐSmithóó,€No.€E2003„01059„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WL€1606998,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,Ð )y ÐJuly€19,€2004);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Michael€Wayne€Poeóó,€No.€E2003„00417„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WLÐ b Ð1607002,€at€*9€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€July€19,€2004).€€In€òòBlakelyóó,€__€U.S.€__,€124€S.€Ct.Ð ûK Ðat€2537€(citations€omitted),€the€Supreme€Court€held€thatÐ ä4 ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àthe€ð ðstatutory€maximumðð€for€òòApprendi€[v.€New€Jerseyóó,€530€U.S.€466,Ð ¶ Ð120€S.€Ct.€2348€(2000)]€purposes€is€the€maximum€sentence€a€judgeÐ Ÿï Ðmay€impose€òòsolely€on€the€basis€of€the€facts€reflected€in€the€juryÐ ˆØ Ðverdict€or€admitted€by€the€defendantòòóóóó.€€In€other€words,€the€relevantÐ qÁ Ðð ðstatutory€maximumðð€is€not€the€maximum€sentence€a€judge€mayÐ Zª Ðimpose€after€finding€additional€facts,€but€the€maximum€he€mayÐ C“ Ðimpose€òòwithoutóó€any€additional€findings.€€When€a€judge€inflictsÐ ,| Ðpunishment€that€the€juryððs€verdict€alone€does€not€allow,€the€jury€hasÐ e Ðnot€found€all€the€facts€ð ðwhich€the€law€makes€essential€to€theÐ þN Ðpunishment,ðð€and€the€judge€exceeds€his€proper€authority.Ðç 7` x` x ÐÌà  àIn€his€òòBlakelyóó€argument,€the€appellant€contends€that€his€sentence€should€be€reduced€ð ðbecauseÐ ¹" ! Ðthe€trial€court€imposed€sentence€based€upon€facts€not€reflected€in€the€jury€verdict€or€admitted€by€theÐ ¢#ò" Ð[appellant].ðð€€However,€òòóówe€note€thatòòóó€at€sentencing€the€appellant€acknowledged€that€his€juvenileÐ ‹$Û# Ðrecord€was€extensive.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€there€was€no€error€in€the€application€ofÐ t%Ä $ Ðenhancement€factor€(21).€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tony€O.€Johnsonóó,€No.€W2003„02098„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WLÐ ]&­!% Ð2108234,€at€*6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Sept.€21,€2004);€òòState€v.€Steven€M.€Stinsonóó,€No.Ð ° ÐE2003„01720„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WL€1698203,€at€*8€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€July€29,Ð ™é Ð2004).€€Nevertheless,€because€only€one€enhancement€factor€is€applicable,€we€conclude€that€theÐ ‚Ò Ðappellantððs€sentence€should€be€modified€to€ten€years.òòóóÐ k» ÐÌòòò òÓ  ÓIII.€€Conclusionóóó óÐ =  ÐÓÕeÓÌà  àAccordingly,€the€appellantððs€sentence€is€modified€to€ten€years€confinement.€€The€judgmentÐ  ` Ðof€the€trial€court€is€otherwise€affirmed.€Ô#†X‹—XXXæëoZ#ÔÔ#†¼Ó)»XX‹—-Z#ÔÔ€X‹—X»¼Ó)ÔÐ ù I ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð í  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNORMA€McGEE€OGLE,€JUDGE