ÿWPC– …U:V % 0Ü–w@r 4² Æ Õ 0 Ý 0Dý 0JA 0T‹ 0^ß 0h= 0r¥ 0| 0†“ 0 1u© 0dU*‚ B¬B)ÉDCò AM5«‚v~-vÓ« D3~ 0@± AOñÆ@ 0D D/J By,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ ST[U[VWEXYPZE[\Ó€Ô¡¨ t3|xe(Ð(3™$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€™ÐXXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial d% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ¡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌOcto…berÏ24,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏW.ÏCrowsonÌAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva Ò'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýò òÙ€€ÙßR€"#!A1-j|` õ `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌà@ àMAY€SESSION,€1997ÌÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€01C01„9607„CC„00315Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àBEDFORD€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€William€Charles€Lee,€JudgeÌANTONIO€D.€MASON,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Attempted€First€Degree€œMurder;›Ìà àAppellantà àà àà àœ)à àAttempted€Aggravated€Robbery;Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àAggravated€Assault)›Ìó óÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌò òCURTIS€H.€GANNó óà àà àò òà àà àCHARLES€W.€BURSONó óÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ105€South€Mainà àÌP.€O.€Box€1119à àà àà àà àò òJANIS€L.€TURNERó óÌFayetteville,€TN€€37334à àà àà àAssistant€AttorneyÏGeneralà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌ(ON€APPEAL)à àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àò òMICHAEL€D.€RANDLESó óà àà àÌAssistant€Public€Defenderà àà àà àà àà àà àÌ117€S.€Main,€STE.€203ò òà àà àà àWILLIAM€MICHAEL€MCCOWNó óÌShelbyville,€TN€€37160à àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌ(AT€TRIAL)à àà àà àà àà àò òROBERT€CRIGLERó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌò òJOHN€HARWELL€DICKEYó óà àà àOne€Public€Square,€STE€100ÌDistrict€Public€Defenderà àà àà àShelbyville,€TN€€37160ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Antonio€D.€Mason,€appeals€his€jury€convictions€for€Ïattempted€first€degree€murder,€attempted€aggravated€robbery,€and€aggravatedÏassault.€€The€Bedford€County€Circuit€Court€imposed€sentences€of€twenty„threeÏyears€and€six€months€for€the€attempted€first€degree€murder€conviction,€six€yearsÏfor€the€attempted€aggravated€robbery€conviction,€and€four€years€and€six€monthsÏfor€the€aggravated€assault€conviction.€€The€attempted€aggravated€robberyÏconviction€was€ordered€to€run€consecutive€œto›€the€attempted€first€degree€murderÏconviction,€resulting€in€a€total€effective€sentence€of€twenty„nine€years€and€sixÏmonths.€€In€this€appeal,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€presented€atÏhis€jury€trial€was€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction€for€attempted€first€degreeÏœmurder.€€Second,›€the€appellant€asserts€that€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trialÏcourt€were€excessive.ÌÌà àAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.Ìà@ àÌà@ àò òFactual€Backgroundó óÌÌà àOn€the€evening€of€March€7,€1995,€the€appellant€and€his€brother€enteredÏSmithððs€Food€Town,€a€grocery€store€located€in€Shelbyville.€€They€purchased€aÏbag€of€potato€chips€and€left€the€store.€€Mildred€Smith,€the€owner€of€the€store,Íasked€a€customer€to€remain€in€the€store€until€the€two€left.€€After€the€customer€left,€Ïthe€appellant€returned€to€the€store.€€He€brandished€a€gun€and€held€it€to€Ms.ÏSmithððs€head.€€The€appellant€stated,€ð ðThis€is€a€robbery.€€This€is€a€robbery.€€IððmÏgoing€to€kill€you.€€Iððm€going€to€kill€you.€€Give€me€your€money.€€Give€me€yourÏmoney.ðð€€The€victim,€at€this€point,€attempted€to€wrestle€œaway›€from€the€appellant.€ÏHearing€a€disturbance€at€the€front€of€the€store,€part„time€employee,€Morris€DeanÏArnold,€emerged€from€the€back€where€she€had€been€working.€€The€appellantÏsaw€Ms.€Arnold€and€immediately€announced€that€he€was€going€to€kill€her,€too.€ÏHe€repeated€that,€if€Ms.€Smith€did€not€give€him€the€money,€he€would€kill€Ms.ÏArnold.€€At€this€time,€Ms.€Smith€sprayed€the€appellant€with€mace.€€According€toÏMs.€Arnold,€the€appellant€then€turned€and€ran€to€the€door.€€Within€moments,€heÏturned€back€toward€them€and€said,€ð ðIððm€going€to€kill€you.ðð€He€then€aimed€the€gunÏat€Ms.€Smith,€fired,€and€ran€from€the€store.€€The€bullet€grazed€the€left€side€of€Ms.ÏSmithððs€head€and€lodged€in€the€light€fixture€over€the€register.€€Officer€Stacey€ofÏthe€Shelbyville€Police€Department€arrived€at€the€scene€shortly€thereafter.€€HeÏfound€the€two€women€inside€the€store.€€Ms.€Smithððs€head€was€bleeding.€€SheÏwas€treated€at€Bedford€County€Hospital€for€a€laceration€caused€by€the€bullet.€ÏAfter€a€two€day€search,€the€police€arrested€the€appellant€and€his€brother.€€DuringÏquestioning€at€the€police€station,€the€appellant€admitted€that€he€held€a€gun€toÏMs.€Smithððs€head€and€threatened€to€kill€her.€€Despite€these€admissions,€heÏstated€that€he€had€no€intent€to€kill€his€victim€and€that€the€gun€went€offÏaccidentally€when€he€was€trying€to€rub€the€mace€from€his€eyes.€€He€furtherÍexplained€that€the€robbery€was€a€ð ðspur€of€the€momentðð€happening€and€that€heÏneeded€ð ðsome€money€to€buy€dope.ððÌÌà àBased€upon€this€evidence,€the€jury€œreturned›€guilty€verdicts€on€theÏœcharges›€of€attempt€to€commit€first€degree€murder,€criminal€attempt€to€commitÏaggravated€robbery,€and€aggravated€assault.Ìà@ àò òÌà@ àAnalysisó óÌÌò òI.€€à àSufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óà àÌà àWhen€reviewing€a€trial€courtððs€judgment,€the€appellate€court€will€notÏdisturb€a€verdict€of€guilt€unless€the€facts€of€the€record€and€inferences€which€mayÏbe€drawn€from€it€are€insufficient€as€a€matter€of€law€for€a€rational€trier€of€fact€toÏfind€the€defendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€Tenn.R.App.P.€13(e);ÏòòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€In€other€words,€this€courtÏwill€not€reevaluate€or€reweigh€the€evidence€brought€out€at€trial.€€It€is€presumedÏthat€the€judge€or€jury€has€resolved€all€conflicts€in€the€testimony€and€drawn€allÏreasonable€inferences€from€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.ÏSheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2dÏ832,€835€(Tenn.€1978);€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€ÏSince€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€a€defendantððs€innocenceÏand€replaces€it€with€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€ofÍproof€on€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€at€the€appellate€œlevel.€›€òòGraceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€at€476.ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€as€a€matter€of€law€toÏsupport€his€conviction€for€criminal€attempt€to€commit€first€degree€murder.€€HeÏadmits€that,€while€he€entered€the€store€to€rob,€he€had€no€intent€to€kill€anyone.ÌÌà àBefore€a€defendant€can€be€convicted€of€an€attempt€to€commit€first€degreeÏmurder,€the€proof€must€establishÓÓ€that€the€defendant:ÌÌà8 à[Acted]€with€the€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€or€cause€aÏresult€that€would€constitute€the€offense€[first€degree€murder]€underÏthe€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€as€the€person€believesÏthem€to€be€and€the€conduct€constitutes€a€substantial€step€towardÏthe€commission€of€the€offense.ÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„12„101(3).€€Whether€the€appellant€ð ðintendedðð€to€kill€is€aÏquestion€of€fact€for€the€jury.€€The€appellantððs€ð ðintentðð€may€be€inferred€fromÏsurrounding€circumstances,€including€his€conduct.€€The€proof€established€thatÏthe€appellant€placed€a€gun€to€the€head€of€his€victim€and€repeatedly€told€her€thatÏhe€was€going€to€kill€her.€€After€being€sprayed€with€mace,€he€aimed€the€gun€andÏfired,€the€bullet€grazing€the€side€of€the€victimððs€head.€€Clearly,€from€these€facts€aÏjury€could€rationally€infer€that€the€appellant€was€carrying€out€his€announcedÏintent€to€kill€the€victim.€€We€find€the€evidence€sufficient€to€establish€his€guilt€ofÏattempt€to€commit€first€degree€murder€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€This€issue€isÍwithout€merit.ÌÌÌò òII.€€à àSentencingó óÌà àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€imposed€excessiveÏsentences€for€his€three€convictions.€€Review,€by€this€court,€of€the€length,€range,Ïor€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence€is€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€that€theÏdetermination€made€by€the€trial€court€is€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)(1990).€€This€presumption€only€applies,€however,€if€the€recordÏdemonstrates€that€the€trial€court€properly€considered€relevant€sentencingÏprinciples.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€making€ourÏreview,€this€court€must€consider€the€evidence€heard€at€trial€and€at€sentencing,Ïthe€presentence€report,€the€arguments€of€counsel,€the€nature€and€characteristicsÏof€the€offense,€any€mitigating€and€enhancement€factors,€the€appellantððsÏstatements,€and€the€appellantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððððÏ40„35„102,„1„3(5),„210(b)€(1990);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Byrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,€379Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)€(citing€òòAshbyóó,€923€S.W.2d€at€168).€€The€burden€is€onÏthe€appellant€to€show€that€the€sentence€imposed€was€improper.€€€SentencingÏCommission€Comments,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€applied€two€enhancement€factors€to€the€appellantððsÏsentence€for€attempted€first€degree€murder;€five€enhancement€factors€to€hisÍsentence€for€attempted€aggravated€robbery;€and€three€enhancement€factors€toÏhis€sentence€for€aggravated€assault.€€The€trial€court€found€no€mitigating€factors.€ÌÌò òA.€€à àMitigating€FactorsÌà àó óThe€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€consider€twoÏrelevant€mitigating€factors€when€sentencing€him€on€all€three€convictions.€€First,Ïhe€claims€that,€because€he€was€merely€eighteen€at€the€time€he€committed€theÏoffenses,€he€lacked€substantial€judgment€while€committing€the€offense.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(6)€(1990).€€However,€the€trial€court€declined€to€considerÏthis€œmitigator›€due€to€the€appellantððs€lengthy€record€as€a€juvenile€offender,Ïincluding€delinquent€adjudications€for€shoplifting,€theft,€and€aggravated€robbery.€€ÏThe€application€of€this€mitigating€factor€is€not€determined€simply€by€theÏchronological€age€of€the€offender€but,€rather,€upon€the€offenderððs€ð ðyouth€inÏcontextðð€of€various€pertinent€circumstances€tending€to€demonstrate€his€or€herÏability€or€inability€to€appreciate€the€nature€of€his€or€her€conduct.€€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,Ï864€S.W.2d€31,€33€(Tenn.€1993);€òòSee€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Carteróó,€No.€01C01„9312„CC„00447€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Apr.€27,€1995),€òòperm.€to€app.€œdeniedóó,›Ï(Tenn.€Sept.€5,€œ1995).›€€The€appellantððs€first€petition€for€adjudication€as€aÏdelinquent€occurred€at€the€age€of€ten.€€His€record€reflects€repeated€juvenileÏadjudications€culminating€in€his€commitment€to€the€Department€of€YouthÏDevelopment€until€his€nineteenth€birthday.€€We€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€theÏproof€in€the€record€does€not€support€consideration€of€this€mitigating€factor.ÌÌà àSecond,€the€appellant€contends€that,€as€a€non„enumerated€mitigatingÏfactor,€he€is€entitled€to€consideration€for€ð ðtelling€the€truth.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ40„35„113(13).€€The€trial€court€rejected€this€factor,€finding€that€the€appellant€didÏnot€testify€truthfully€at€trial€to€the€facts€relating€to€the€charge€of€attempted€firstÏdegree€murder.€€As€noted€by€the€trial€court,€ð ð[Y]ou€shouldnððt€look€for€someÏreward€for€telling€the€truth,€.€.€œ.€.ð𛀀We€agree€and€find€that€the€proof€before€usÏdoes€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€rejection€of€this€factor.Ìà àÌò òÌB.à àEnhancement€Factorsó óÌà à1.€€òòEnhancement€Factors€(1)€and€(4)óóÌà àThe€trial€court€found€that€œenhancement›€factors€(1),€previous€criminalÏhistory,€and€(4),€victim€particularly€vulnerable,€applied€to€all€three€of€theÏappellantððs€convictions.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1),€„€114(4)€(1995ÏSupp.).€€The€appellant€does€not€challenge€application€of€factor€(1),€however,€heÏdoes€contest€the€courtððs€finding€that€the€victims€were€vulnerable€due€to€theirÏage.€€The€State€contends€that€Ms.€Smith,€who€was€65€years€old€at€the€time€of€theÏcrimes,€and€Ms.€Arnold,€who€would€not€give€her€age€at€trial€but€was€old€enoughÏto€be€retired,€were€particularly€vulnerable.€€The€appellant€argues,€on€the€otherÏhand,€that€age€alone€is€not€the€dispositive€factor.€€Our€supreme€court,€in€theÏrecent€case€of€òòState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€96€(Tenn.€1997),€reaffirmed€theÍprinciple€that€more€than€mere€proof€of€the€victimððs€age€is€necessary€to€establishÏthe€victimððs€particular€vulnerability.€€òòBut€seeóó€òòPooleóó€943€S.W.2d€at€99,€(DrowotaÏœJ.,›€œdissenting)›œ.›ÌÓÓà8 àA€personððs€age€alone€may€have€little€or€no€bearing€on€size,Ïstrength€or€vitality.€€Thus,€unless€the€State€produces€evidence€ofÏphysical€or€mental€limitations€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€along€withÏproof€of€the€victimððs€age,€it€cannot€be€presumed€that€the€victim€wasÏòòparticularlyóó€vulnerable€based€solely€on€her€age.ÌÌÓÓòòIdóó.€at€98.€€Because€the€record€is€absent€this€proof,€œenhancement›€factor€(4)€is€notÏapplicable.ÌÌà à2.€€òòEnhancement€Factor€(7)óóÌà àThe€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factor€(7),€the€offense€wasÏcommitted€to€gratify€the€defendantððs€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement,€to€theÏappellantððs€convictions€for€attempted€aggravated€robbery€and€aggravatedÏassault.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(7)€(1995€Supp.).€€The€court€applied€thisÏfactor€based€upon€its€finding€that€the€appellantððs€attempt€to€rob€the€store€and€theÏassault€of€Ms.€Arnold€œwere€committed€for›€the€purpose€of€purchasing€marijuana,Ïa€non„physically€addictive€œdrug.›€€Thus,€the€court€reasoned€that,€because€theÏmarijuana€was€sought€for€recreational€use,€the€crimes€were€solely€for€theÏappellantððs€desire€for€pleasure€or€œexcitement.€€This›€court,€in€òòState€v.€Pooleóó,€No.Ï02C01„9506„CC„00178€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Jan.€31,€œ1996),›€òòaffððd€œbyóó,›Ï945€S.W.2d€at€93,€refused€to€apply€this€enhancement€factor€where€the€recordÍrevealed€that€ð ðthe€motivation€for€the€crime€was€to€steal€from€the€victim€for€theÏpurpose€of€buying€œdrugs.›€€The€State€did€not€carry€the€burden€of€proving€that€theÏoffense€was€done€to€gratify€the€Defendantððs€desire€for€pleasure€or€œexcitement."›€ÏœAccordingly,€in€the€instant€case,€we€find›€that€the€State€has€not€met€its€burden,Ïœtherefore,›€factor€(7)€is€found€inapplicable.ÌÌòòà àóó3.€€òòEnhancement€Factors€(2)€and€(3)óóÌà àThe€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factor€(2),€defendant€was€a€leader€inÏthe€offense,€and€(3),€the€offense€involved€more€than€one€victim,€to€theÏappellantððs€conviction€for€criminal€attempt€to€commit€aggravated€robbery.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€œðð›€40„35„114(2)€and€114(3)€(1995€Supp.).€€The€appellant€challengesÏthe€application€of€both€enhancement€factors.€€The€proof€supports€the€trial€courtððsÏfinding€that€the€appellantððs€brother€remained€outside,€acting€as€a€lookout,€whileÏthe€appellant€attempted€to€rob€the€store.€€In€reference€to€enhancement€factor€(3),Ïthe€trial€court€found€that€the€attempted€robbery€also€involved€the€victim,€Ms.ÏArnold,€for€which€no€charges€were€brought,€because€ð ðboth€Ms.€Smith€and€Ms.ÏArnold€were€part€and€parcelðð€of€the€attempted€robbery.€€From€the€proofÏintroduced,€we€find€application€of€both€enhancing€factors€(2)€and€(3)Ïappropriate.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà à4.€€òòLength€of€SentencesóóÌà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€applied€various€enhancing€factors€but€found€noÍmitigating€factors.€€In€determining€the€appropriate€sentence€for€a€felonyÏconviction,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(d)(1990)€instructs€the€sentencingÏcourt€that€ð ð[t]he€presumptive€sentence€shall€be€the€minimum€sentence€in€theÏrange€.€.€.€if€there€are€enhancement€and€no€mitigating€factors,€the€court€is€free€toÏincrease€the€defendantððs€sentence€within€the€standard€range€as€the€courtÏdeems€appropriate€after€considering€all€the€aspects€of€the€case.€€In€arriving€at€itsÏsentencing€decision,€the€trial€court€placed€great€weight€on€the€appellantððsÏlengthy€juvenile€criminal€history€which€included€a€prior€adjudication€for€a€crimeÏof€violence€involving€use€of€a€weapon.€€The€courtððs€decision€to€weigh€a€factorÏheavily€is€œproper›€given€the€discretion€allowed€a€trial€court€when€consideringÏenhancing€factors.€€òòState€v.€œBoggsóó,›€932€S.W.2d€467,€475€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1996).€€òòÌÌà àóóAlthough€we€have€found€œenhancing›€œfactor€(4)›€inapplicable€to€all€of€theÏappellantððs€sentences€and€œfactor€(7)›€inapplicable€to€œhis›€œsentences€for€attemptedÏaggravated€robbery€and€aggravated€assault,›€we€find,€upon€òòde€novo€óóreview,€thatÏthe€remaining€enhancement€factors€are€sufficient€to€justify€the€respectiveÏsentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court.òòÌÌà àóóThe€judgment€of€conviction€for€the€offense€of€criminal€attempt€to€commitÏfirst€degree€murder€and€the€appellantððs€effective€sentence€of€twenty„nine€yearsÏand€six€months€are€affirmed.ÌÌà àÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€Judge