ÿWPC­ m›ÀÑË9þâ£ãé™ÍZªƒyv°É é?nÿJ‚WšÑoÈê]˜­9,q·NX˜%“?Ú&p¸Yluta™Fì±%ëºJVÆ&I˜2š3šææU¸%»¯Ã=mbO*…ýÈÀÉÆ¿:ÈžFÎeÛËV:Äì)Ô¬¨#õüè–?V/2éîî¼Îö²³Ô÷× à‘¯MŒÑ]È^›Í“61NÛ'Ø›]Cbæk¥Nk}—އ‘CïžÆ˜3Å öÝþ¡6Vurùtýn6E€hNÍÚZçMÑ‹Æö#±ˆ!Æ£å’:Å`“8eÅ¢¹[Ae†¢·ùüZ¤²Yo¨Õ›9ôDIÂAÑlgµ›gâq!§Êýk}vÔ±½é„„ÏdH›žÞ Æm–Åq7ìšïÅe[&öƳ¡×'…BH¢”¬À3¤âQ¶êXF–—Ö[š§‰oyÜ_uå€Ë.¿ÈjRÁâ9‘¿v¶Ä1ÄÁ§ýºÉhÅl‹Ÿ›™y£.…“ÅJpùLeq¢œ`¢”¢ö”BĽm^Ž¡;Æt•KõIã¦Ç2Æ‚m6”¾p^·„}Ë-jMŸ¯@»6‹„¡1Ίexg'sÿæÛó& Å›ääok7õ¦:’ˆb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ U N‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1 1‡÷N~ 0c€ 0wãEZ 0Š\ 0 æ 0´† 0Ç: 0Û 0ïÜ 1uË 1‡@ 1‡Ç 72NNN"€€€€€€€€€€€b¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢ 0몪ªª B•• 0¤² D3V D-‰ 0K¶¶ ASÆT 0¤ 0D¾ A«»7x+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5h4ÞCEIMQUY]aAutoList1""""""""i)1)a)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(Oé;$µµà0  àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à(b·¤$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xir$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒÜ$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(ŸF$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³Àô$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(ǵ{$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)hDÞCEIMQUY]aAutoList2""""""""i)1)a)`TÞCEIMQUY]aAutoList3""""""""i)1)a)i) Ñ  ÑÑ  Ñ- ù-(|G2¦‰$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô§ ò»»Ô d(|3ÿ_$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÿ_$¢¢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€[éXXdì»»d8ÑÑ€#*Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îd%ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼%»îîd#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àApril€25,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X[éX»¼%ÔÌò òÔ#†¼%»XX[é%#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€CLAUDE€RONNIE€MORRISONÔ‡X[éX»¼%Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€S42,877€€€€€€Phyllis€H.€Miller,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2000„02048„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¥õ  ÐAugust€7,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ X[éXXX[éÔThe€defendant,€Claude€Ronnie€Morrison,€was€indicted€by€the€Sullivan€County€Grand€Jury€forÔ#†X[éXX X[éÖ#ÔÔ‡ X[éXXX[éÔÔ#† ¼%»X X[é—#ÔÔ‡ X[éX» ¼%ÔÐ xÈ  Ðsolicitation€to€commit€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„305,€a€Class€CÐ d´ Ðfelony.€€He€subsequently€entered€a€ð ðbest€interestðð€pleaÔ#†X[éXX X[éq#ÔÔ‡ X[éXXX[éÔÔ#† ¼%»X X[é³#ÔÔ‡ X[éX» ¼%Ô€to€the€chargeÔ#† ¼%»X X[é #ÔÔ‡ X[éX» ¼%ÔÔ#†X[éXX X[éÞ#ÔÔ‡ X[éXXX[éÔ.€€The€terms€of€the€pleaÐ P  Ðagreement€provided€that€Defendant€would€receive€a€sentence€of€three€years€and,€following€aÐ <Œ Ðsentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€sentenced€Defendant€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender€to€a€term€ofÐ (x Ðthree€years€in€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Correction.€€On€appeal,€Defendant€challenges€the€trialÐ d Ðcourtððs€denial€of€probation.€€After€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð P ÐÔ#†X[éXX X[é²#ÔÔ#†¼%»XX[ép#ÔÔ‡X[éX»¼%ÔÌÓÊÓò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼%»àX[é #ÔÔ‡X[éX.¼%ÔÔ‡ X[éXàX[éÔThomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòGary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,óó€andÐ ° ÐòòJerry€L.€Smithóó,€J.,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌRaymond€C.€Ô_ÔConkinÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€Kingsport,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Claude€Ronnie€Morrison.Ð tÄ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Ô_ÔAngeleÔ_Ô€M.€Gregory,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð L œ ÐH.€Greeley€Wells,€Jr.,€€District€Attorney€General;€and€Barry€P.€Ô_ÔStaubusÔ_Ô,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ 8!ˆ  ÐGeneral;€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $"t! ÐÔ#†X[éXX X[é #ÔÔ#†¼%»XX[éì #ÔÔ‡X[éX»¼%Ôòòóóà  à¹Ó½ Óà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼%»XX[é]#ÔÔ‡X[éX»¼%ÔÐ ü#L# ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼%»XX[éá#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X[éX»¼%Ôò òà@(( ìàI.€Factual€Backgroundó óˆÐ Ô%$!% ÐÌà  àAccording€to€the€probation€report€submitted€at€Defendantððs€sentencing€hearing,€on€MarchÐ ¬'ü"' Ð10,€1999,€Defendant€contacted€a€known€police€informant€for€assistance€in€soliciting€someone€toÐ ˜(è#( Ðconfine€his€61„year„old€ex„wife€against€her€will€and€inflict€serious€bodily€injury€upon€her.€€TheÐ „)Ô$) Ðinformant€subsequently€contacted€Charles€Scott,€an€undercover€agent€with€the€Tennessee€Bureau€ofÐ p*À%* ÐInvestigation,€who€posed€as€the€would„be€attacker.€€Scott€negotiated€with€Defendant€on€four€separateÐ \+¬&+ Ðoccasions,€all€of€which€were€tape€recorded.€€Transcripts€were€prepared€and€introduced€as€an€exhibitÐ H,˜', Ðduring€the€sentencing€hearing.€€During€the€course€of€these€meetings,€Scott€obtained€from€DefendantÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÑ#*Ñâ #âÑÑÑ  Ñâ #âÑ  ÑÔ_Ôone€thousand€dollars€(as€a€down€payment€on€the€agreed„upon€fee€of€six€thousand€dollars€forÐ ° Ðcommitting€the€crime),€a€photograph€of€the€intended€victim,€and€a€hand„drawn€map€of€the€interiorÐ œì Ðof€her€residence.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àAt€the€preliminary€hearing,€TBI€agent€Scott€testified€that€Defendant€initially€told€him€that€ð ðheÐ `° Ðwasnððt€wanting€to€hire€anyone€to€do€anything,€he€was€wanting€to€buy€information,€that€when€he€heardÐ L œ Ðthat€his€wife€had€been€messed€up,€then,€he€would€pay€for€that€information.ðð€€Thereafter,€Scott€andÐ 8 ˆ ÐDefendant€discussed€in€some€detail€what€Defendant€wanted€Scott€to€do.€€Among€other€things,Ð $ t ÐDefendant€wanted€his€ex„wife€ð ðbeat€up,ðð€her€face€disfigured,€and€her€jewelry€taken.€€DefendantÐ  ` Ðspecified€that€he€wanted€the€assault€to€look€like€a€robbery,€and€then€talked€with€Scott€about€the€bestÐ ü L  Ðtime€to€accomplish€the€job,€€the€security€guardððs€schedule,€and€whether€Scott€had€to€worry€about€theÐ è 8  Ðneighbors€or€an€alarm€system€in€the€house.€€A€transcript€of€the€conversation€between€Defendant€andÐ Ô$  ÐAgent€Scott€on€March€22,€1999€reveals€that€the€following€colloquy€occurred:Ð À  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒScott:€What€about€.€.€.€what€do€you€think€about€me€burning€the€placeÐ ˜è  Ðdown?€€Just€not€to€leave€no€fð"ðinðð€evidence€period?Ð „Ô  ÐÌDefendant:€Well€I€donððt€know.€€I€tell€you,€it€donððt€make€no€differenceÐ \¬ Ðto€me,€I€donððt€give€a€shit.Ð H˜ ÐÌÓ€ (TÞp3Óà@bbìà*€€€€€€€€€€*€€€€€€€€€€*ˆÐ  p ÐScott:€Yeah.€€I€know€he€said€something€about€fð"ðing€her€face€up€withÐ  \ Ða€razor€blade?Ð øH ÐÌDefendant:€Yeah,€Iððd€just€beat€the€shit€out€of€her€and€everything€.€.€.Ð Ð  Ðfð"ð€her€nose€up€.€.€.Ð ¼  ÐÌScott:€I€thought€about€putting€a€little€acid€.€.€.€just€splashing€her€faceÐ ”ä Ðwith€fð"ðing€acid€and€thatððll€fð"ðinðð€deform€her€for€good.Ð €Ð ÐÌDefendant:€Thatððll€be€all€right.€€I€donððt€give€a€shit€what€you€do.Ð X ¨ ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àThe€next€day€Defendant€and€Agent€Scott€had€another€conversation,€during€which€DefendantÐ 0"€  Ðinstructed€Scott€to€say€ð ðBrummit€said€.€.€.€[this€or€that]ðð€as€he€beat€up€the€victim.€€Defendant€toldÐ #l! ÐScott€that€he€wanted€to€make€it€appear€as€though€a€man€by€that€name€who€was€dating€the€victim€atÐ $X" Ðthat€time€was€involved€in€planning€the€assault.€€Toward€the€conclusion€of€the€conversation,Ð ô$D # ÐDefendant€said€that€he€would€ð ðlike€to€see€the€bitch€in€a€wheel€chair€.€.€.€[thatððs]€what€Iððd€like€to€see.ðð€Ð à%0!$ ÐWhen€Scott€warned€Defendant€that€he€ð ðmight€have€to€kill€the€bitchðð€if€she€ð ðput€up€resistance,ððÐ Ì&"% ÐDefendant€laughingly€replied,€ð ðI€donððt€give€a€damn.ððÐ ¸'#& ÐÌà  àOn€March€25,€1999,€Agent€Scott€met€with€Defendant€again.€€Scott€brought€photographs€ofÐ )à$( ÐDefendantððs€ex„wife€which€made€it€appear€as€though€she€had€suffered€serious€injuries€to€her€face,Ð |*Ì%) Ðand€then€demanded€the€five€thousand€dollars€Defendant€had€promised€him.€€Defendant€claimed€thatÐ h+¸&* Ðhe€was€ð ðnot€interestedðð€and€did€not€believe€Scott.€€Scott€told€Defendant€that€he€would€wait€at€a€placeÐ ° Ðhe€called€the€ð ðconvention€centerðð€and€for€Defendant€to€bring€him€his€money€within€twenty„fiveÐ œì Ðminutes.€€Defendant€never€appeared.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àDefendant€was€subsequently€indicted€for€solicitation€to€commit€especially€aggravatedÐ `° Ðkidnapping€and€responded€by€entering€an€ð ðAlford,ðð€or€best€interest€guilty€plea,€wherein€he€agreedÐ L œ Ðto€a€sentence€of€three€years.€€Eddie€Williams€and€Charles€Hunt,€two€men€who€have€known€DefendantÐ 8 ˆ Ðfor€most€of€their€lives,€testified€at€the€sentencing€hearing€as€to€Defendantððs€good€character,€honesty,Ð $ t Ðand€trustworthiness.€€Williams€testified€that€Defendant€had€become€irritable€after€he€was€diagnosedÐ  ` Ðwith€colon€cancer,€but€an€operation€to€remove€the€cancer€had€since€improved€his€attitude.€€HuntÐ ü L  Ðtestified€that€Defendant€was€a€law„abiding€citizen€and€that€he€was€surprised€by€the€current€chargesÐ è 8  Ðagainst€him.€€On€cross„examination,€both€witnesses€confessed€that€they€were€unaware€Defendant€hadÐ Ô$  Ðbeen€convicted€in€1979€for€public€drunkenness€and€carrying€firearms,€they€did€not€know€the€reasonsÐ À  Ðfor€Defendantððs€four€failed€marriages,€and€they€believed€that€his€previous€alcohol€problem€had€beenÐ ¬ü  Ðð ðstraightened€out.ðð€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€judge€denied€Defendantððs€request€forÐ ˜è  Ðprobation€and€ordered€him€to€serve€his€entire€sentence€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌò òà@éé$ìàII.€€Analysisó óˆÐ \¬ ÐÌà  àDefendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€him€probation€or€other€form€ofÐ 4„ Ðalternative€sentencing.€€Specifically,€he€argues€that€the€trial€court€improperly€applied€and€weighedÐ  p Ðthe€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€and,€further,€that€his€incarceration€violates€the€sentencingÐ  \ Ðconsiderations€as€set€out€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103.€€The€State€responds€that€the€trial€courtÐ øH Ðconsidered€the€proper€factors€and€adequately€noted€its€findings€on€the€record.€€Moreover,€the€StateÐ ä4 Ðurges€that€even€though€the€trial€court€chose€to€consider€irrelevant€statutory€enhancement€andÐ Ð  Ðmitigating€factors€in€making€its€determination€regarding€alternative€sentencing,€the€trial€courtððsÐ ¼  Ðsentence€is€nevertheless€proper€because€it€did€not€base€its€ultimate€decision€on€those€factors.€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àOur€review€of€a€trial€judgeððs€sentencing€determination€is€defined€by€statute.€€The€CriminalÐ €Ð ÐSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€provides€that€when€reviewing€the€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,Ð l¼ Ðincluding€the€grant€or€denial€of€probation,€the€appellate€court€shall€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€on€theÐ X ¨ Ðrecord€with€the€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€isÐ D!” Ðtaken€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1997).€€That€presumption€is€ð ðconditioned€uponÐ 0"€  Ðthe€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€allÐ #l! Ðrelevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€Because€theÐ $X" Ðrecord€shows€that€the€trial€judge€considered€the€sentencing€principles€as€well€as€the€relevant€factsÐ ô$D # Ðand€circumstances€in€this€case€but€misapplied€one€enhancement€factor,€we€review€its€determinationÐ à%0!$ Ðconcerning€the€manner€of€service€of€Defendantððs€sentence€without€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€InÐ Ì&"% Ðour€review,€we€must€consider€all€the€evidence,€the€presentence€report,€the€statutory€sentencingÐ ¸'#& Ðprinciples,€counselsðð€arguments,€appellantððs€statements,€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminalÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconduct,€and€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€òòId.óó€€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àAs€a€preliminary€matter,€we€address€the€Stateððs€comment€that€statutory€enhancement€andÐ ° Ðâ âmitigating€factors€may€be€used€only€to€determine€the€length€of€a€defendantððs€sentence€and€are€notÐ œì Ðrelevant€for€purposes€of€determining€manner€of€service.€€Prior€decisions€of€this€Court€reveal€a€splitÐ ˆØ Ðof€authority€concerning€this€precise€issue.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jesse€Cleo€Minoróó,€No.€M1998„00424„CCA„Ð tÄ ÐR3„CD,€1999€WL€1179143,€Davidson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€December€15,€1999)Ð `° Ðòòno€perm.€to€app.€filedóó€(enhancement/mitigating€factors€pertain€to€length€of€sentence€and€not€denialÐ L œ Ðof€probation);€òòCf.óó€òòState€v.€Robert€D.€Ringóó,€No.€E1999„02088„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€WL€201819,Ð 8 ˆ ÐSullivan€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€March€1,€2001)€€òòno€perm.€to€app.€filedóó€€(trial€courtððsÐ $ t Ðconclusion€that€enhancing€and€mitigating€factors€are€not€relevant€for€consideration€concerningÐ  ` Ðalternative€sentencing€was€misplaced);€òòState€v.€Roger€Lee€Fleenoróó,€No.€03C01-9611-CR-00400,Ð ü L  Ð1997€WL€621332,€Sullivan€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€October€9,€1997)€òòóó€òòno€perm.€toÐ è 8  Ðapp.€filedóó€(when€the€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence€is€challenged€on€appeal,€the€reviewing€courtððsÐ Ô$  Ðòòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€shall€examine,€òòinteróó€òòaliaóó,€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors);€òòState€v.€JohnÐ À  ÐP.€Pelfreyóó,€No.€01C01„9606„CR„00251,€1997€WL€383149,€Wilson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð ¬ü  ÐNashville,€July€11,€1997)€€òòno€perm.€to€app.€filedóó€(enhancement€factors€are€appropriate€considerationsÐ ˜è  Ðin€determining€the€manner€of€service€as€well€as€length€of€sentence).€€After€reconsideration€of€thisÐ „Ô  Ðissue€and€a€thorough€analysis€of€the€applicable€statutes€and€case€law,€we€now€hold,€consistent€withÐ pÀ Ðour€opinion€in€òòPelfreyóó,€that€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€are€appropriate€considerations€inÐ \¬ Ðdetermining€manner€of€service€as€well€as€length€of€sentence.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„Ð H˜ Ð35„210(b)€provides€the€following:€ð ðTo€determine€the€specific€sentence€òòand€the€appropriateÐ 4„ Ðcombination€of€sentencing€alternativesóó€that€shall€be€imposed€on€the€defendant,€the€court€shallÐ  p Ðconsider€[among€other€things,€the]€.€.€.€[e]vidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€theÐ  \ Ðenhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€ðððð€40„35„113€and€40„35„114€.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð øH Ð35„210(b)(5)€(1997)€(emphasis€added).€€The€provisions€of€subsection€(b)€were€designed€to€permitÐ ä4 Ðthe€court€ð ðthe€greatest€latitude€in€considering€òòallóó€available€information€in€imposing€the€appropriateÐ Ð  Ðsentence€òòand€sentence€alternativeóó.ðð€€Sentencing€Commission€Comments,€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„210€(emphasisÐ ¼  Ðadded).€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àPrior€to€ordering€that€Defendant€serve€his€three„year€sentence€in€confinement€,€the€trial€courtÐ €Ð Ðobserved€that€as€a€Range€I,€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C€felony,€Defendant€wasÐ l¼ Ðpresumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€the€absence€of€evidenceÐ X ¨ Ðto€the€contrary.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-102(6)€(1997).€€Determining€whether€a€defendant€isÐ D!” Ðentitled€to€full€probation€requires€a€separate€inquiry€from€that€of€determining€whether€the€defendantÐ 0"€  Ðis€entitled€to€alternative€sentencing.€€òòState€v.€Binghamóó,€910€S.W.2d€448,€455€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð #l! Ð1995)€òòoverruled€on€other€groundsóó,€òòState€v.€Hooperóó,€29€S.W.3d€1€(Tenn.€2000).€€When€a€defendantÐ $X" Ðis€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€options,€the€State€has€the€burdenÐ ô$D # Ðof€overcoming€the€presumption€by€presenting€evidence€to€the€contrary.€€òòId.óó€€Where€a€defendant€wantsÐ à%0!$ Ðto€be€placed€on€full€probation,€the€burden€shifts€to€the€defendant€who€must€establish€his€suitabilityÐ Ì&"% Ðfor€such€sentencing,€notwithstanding€the€statutory€presumption€regarding€alternative€sentencing.€€òòSeeóóÐ ¸'#& ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-303(b);€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€TheÐ ¤(ô#' Ðquestion€is€ð ðwhether€or€not€the€court€is€satisfied€that€[probation]€will€subserve€the€ends€of€justice€andÐ )à$( Ðthe€best€interests€of€both€the€public€and€the€defendant.ðð€€òòHooper€v.€Stateóó,€297€S.W.2d€78,€81€(Tenn.Ð |*Ì%) Ð1956).€€In€the€instant€case,€we€find€that€the€State€submitted€sufficient€evidence€to€overcome€theÐ h+¸&* Ðfavorable€presumption€regarding€alternative€sentencing€and€also€that€Defendant€failed€to€establishÐ ° Ðsuitability€for€probation.Ð œì ÐÌà  àAccording€to€statute,€a€trial€court€may€order€that€a€defendant€serve€his€sentence€inÐ tÄ Ðconfinement€if€it€determines€that€confinement€is€necessary€to€protect€society€from€a€defendant€whoÐ `° Ðhas€a€history€of€criminal€conduct,€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,Ð L œ Ðwould€provide€an€effective€deterrent€to€others,€or€that€less€restrictive€measures€have€frequently,Ð 8 ˆ Ðrecently€and€unsuccessfully€been€applied€to€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A)€„Ð $ t Ð(C)€(1997).€€In€making€its€determination,€a€trial€court€should€consider€the€defendantððs€criminalÐ  ` Ðrecord,€his€social€history,€his€present€physical€and€mental€condition,€and€his€potential€forÐ ü L  Ðrehabilitation.€€òòStiller€v.€Stateóó,€516€S.W.2d€617€(Tenn.€1974).€€Lack€of€truthfulness€is€probative€onÐ è 8  Ðthe€issue€of€amenability€to€rehabilitation€and€is,€therefore,€also€an€appropriate€factor€to€consider€inÐ Ô$  Ðgranting€or€denying€probation,€òòState€v.€Neelyóó,€678€S.W.2d€48,€49€(Tenn.€1984),€as€well€as€the€lackÐ À  Ðof€repentance€and€remorse.€€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Piersonóó,€678€S.W.2d€905€(Tenn.€1984).€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„210€further€provides€that€in€determining€theÐ „Ô  Ðappropriate€combination€of€sentencing€alternatives€to€be€imposed€on€the€defendant,€the€court€shallÐ pÀ Ðconsider€the€evidence€presented€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€information€contained€inÐ \¬ Ðthe€presentence€report,€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives,€theÐ H˜ Ðnature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€in€issue,€evidence€and€information€concerning€theÐ 4„ Ðapplicable€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors,€and€statements€from€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð  p Ððð€40„35„210(b)€(1997).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àNotwithstanding€the€statutory€presumption€which€favored€granting€Defendant€alternativeÐ ä4 Ðsentencing,€the€trial€court€found€that€confinement€was€necessary€in€this€case€to€protect€the€publicÐ Ð  Ðfrom€a€defendant€with€a€history€of€criminal€conduct€and€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€theÐ ¼  Ðoffense.€€The€trial€court€further€determined€that€the€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€offense€wereÐ ¨ø Ðð ðespecially€violent,€horrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,€offensive,€and€otherwise€of€an€excessive€orÐ ”ä Ðexaggerated€degree,ðð€and€that€Defendant€exhibited€a€low€potential€for€rehabilitation€because€he€hadÐ €Ð Ðrefused€to€accept€responsibility€for€his€crime€and€was€not€truthful€in€assisting€the€officers€whoÐ l¼ Ðprepared€his€pre„sentence€report.€€The€trial€court€found€two€enhancement€factors€applicable:€(1)Ð X ¨ Ðð ð[t]he€defendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€toÐ D!” Ðthose€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range,ðð€and€(15)€ð ð[t]he€defendant€.€.€.€used€a€special€skillÐ 0"€  Ðin€a€manner€that€significantly€facilitated€the€commission€or€the€fulfillment€of€the€offense,ðð€Tenn.Ð #l! ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1),€(15)€(1997),€and€decided€that€no€statutory€mitigating€factors€wereÐ $X" Ðappropriate€but€that€one€non„statutory€mitigating€factor€applied,€i.e.,€excellent€work€history.€€TheÐ ô$D # Ðcourt€did€not€give€it€much€weight,€however.€€Defendant€contends€and€we€agree€that€the€record€doesÐ à%0!$ Ðnot€support€the€application€of€enhancement€factor€(15).€€However,€the€record€justifies€the€trial€courtððsÐ Ì&"% Ðdenial€of€probation€or€other€form€of€alternative€sentencing€based€on€other€considerations.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àRegarding€the€application€of€enhancement€factors€in€Defendantððs€case,€the€record€shows€thatÐ )à$( Ðthe€trial€court€applied€factor€(1),€concerning€Defendantððs€history€of€criminal€behavior,€based€on€hisÐ |*Ì%) Ð1979€convictions€for€possessing€firearms€and€public€drunkenness€and€on€a€statement€from€the€victim,Ð h+¸&* ÐDefendantððs€ex„wife,€which€attested€to€a€pattern€of€physical€and€emotional€abuse€from€the€beginningÐ ° Ðof€their€marriage.€€The€victim€claimed€that€Defendant€had€beat€her€on€numerous€prior€occasions€andÐ œì Ðalso€threatened€to€kill€her.€€Based€on€these€facts,€we€find€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€application€ofÐ ˆØ Ðenhancement€factor€(1).€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àEnhancement€factor€(15)€is€a€different€matter.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Defendant€used€aÐ L œ Ðð ðspecial€skillðð€obtained€through€his€occupation€which€facilitated€the€commission€and€fulfillment€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€offense€charged.€Prior€to€owning/operating€a€used€car€lot,€Defendant€worked€as€a€lawÐ $ t Ðenforcement€officer.€€The€court€observed€that€Defendantððs€law€enforcement€experience€permittedÐ  ` Ðhim€to€know€the€informant€personally€and€also€trust€him€to€commit€the€crime.€€The€trial€court€alsoÐ ü L  Ðfound€that€Defendantððs€knowledge€of€the€layout€of€the€victimððs€house€and€other€personal€aspects€ofÐ è 8  Ðher€life€was€enhanced€by€his€former€career€in€law€enforcement€and€facilitated€the€commission€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðoffense.€€Ð À  ÐÌà  àWe€disagree€with€the€trial€courtððs€analysis,€finding€that€a€stronger€relationship€between€aÐ ˜è  Ðð ðskillðð€and€the€commission€of€a€crime€is€necessary€for€application€of€that€factor.€€The€plain€languageÐ „Ô  Ðof€the€statute€requires€a€ð ðsignificant€relationshipðð€between€the€application€of€the€skill€and€theÐ pÀ Ðfacilitation€of€the€crime.€€For€example,€the€enhancement€factor€may€be€properly€applied€when€aÐ \¬ Ðrespiratory€therapy€technician€uses€his€position€in€the€medical€field€and€relationship€to€medicalÐ H˜ Ðprofessionals€and€pharmacists€to€fraudulently€obtain€prescription„only€drugs€from€pharmacies.€€òòSeeóóÐ 4„ ÐòòState€v.€Ronald€Wayne€Ashbyóó,€No.€M1999-01247-CCA-R3-CD,€2000€WL€995256€at€*5,€LincolnÐ  p ÐCounty€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€July€12,€2000)€òòperm.€to€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2001)€(citing€òòStateÐ  \ Ðv.€Cummingsóó,€868€S.W.2d€661€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)).€€The€factor€may€also€be€appropriate€whenÐ øH Ðan€office€manager€and€bookkeeper€uses€her€position€with€an€employer€to€embezzle€funds€and/orÐ ä4 Ðcover€the€crime.€€òòId.óó€(citations€omitted);€òòCf.óó€òòState€v.€Phillip€Drew€Cantwellóó,€No.Ð Ð  Ð01C01-9701-CC-00035,€1998€WL€792220,€Maury€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Nov.€16,Ð ¼  Ð1998)€òòno€perm.€to€app.€filedóó€(when€the€owner€of€an€industrial€business€discharged€waste€inÐ ¨ø Ðcontravention€of€environmental€laws,€the€defendantððs€possession€of€ð ðspecialized€knowledgeÐ ”ä Ðregarding€the€òòmanufactureóó€of€chemicalsðð€did€not€indicate€exercise€of€a€ð ðskill€so€specialized€as€toÐ €Ð Ðfacilitate€the€commission€of€acts€of€environmental€vandalismðð€(emphasis€added)).€€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case,€any€correlation€between€Defendantððs€criminal€conduct€and€his€vocationÐ D!” Ðis€quite€minimal.€€His€knowledge€of€the€victimððs€house€and€neighborhood€were€obtained€through€hisÐ 0"€  Ðpersonal€relationship€with€her€and€could€have€been€easily€duplicated€by€any€friend€or€acquaintanceÐ #l! Ðnot€in€law€enforcement.€€Although€Defendant,€while€working€as€a€police€officer,€had€met€theÐ $X" Ðinformant€who€ostensibly€would€arrange€for€the€commission€of€the€crime,€the€two€characterÐ ô$D # Ðwitnesses€who€testified€at€the€sentencing€hearing€claimed€that€the€informantððs€status€was€commonÐ à%0!$ Ðknowledge€in€the€community.€€This€being€the€sole€tenuous€link€between€Defendantððs€formerÐ Ì&"% Ðoccupation€and€facilitation€of€the€crime,€we€find€that€factor€(15)€is€not€applicable.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àAs€previously€mentioned,€the€trial€judge€also€ordered€confinement€to€avoid€depreciating€theÐ )à$( Ðseriousness€of€the€offense€and€because€the€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€offense€were€ð ðespeciallyÐ |*Ì%) Ðviolent,€horrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,€offensive,€and€otherwise€of€an€excessive€or€exaggeratedÐ h+¸&* Ðdegree.ðð€€The€trial€court€also€determined€that€Defendant€exhibited€a€low€potential€for€rehabilitationÐ ° Ðbased€on€the€fact€that€he€had€refused€to€accept€responsibility€for€his€crime,€exhibited€no€remorse,€andÐ œì Ðwas€not€truthful€when€assisting€the€officers€who€prepared€his€pre„sentence€report.€€After€a€review€ofÐ ˆØ Ðthe€record,€we€find€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€probation€or€other€form€of€alternative€sentencing€wasÐ tÄ Ðproper€based€on€these€considerations.Ð `° ÐÌà  àClearly,€the€offense€was€shocking,€reprehensible,€and€of€an€excessive€degree.€€DefendantððsÐ 8 ˆ Ðgoal€was€for€his€ex„wife€to€spend€the€remainder€of€her€life€as€the€tragic,€severely€disabled€andÐ $ t Ðdisfigured€victim€of€a€vicious€assault.€€Add€to€this€the€cavalier€attitude€displayed€by€Defendant€whileÐ  ` Ðhe€discussed€her€possible€murder€and€disfigurement€by€acid,€and€his€intention€to€place€blame€for€thisÐ ü L  Ðheinous€crime€on€an€innocent€person,€the€denial€of€probation€or€other€form€of€alternative€sentencingÐ è 8  Ðbecomes€highly€appropriate.€€As€noted€above,€when€probation€is€denied€because€of€the€nature€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðoffense,€the€criminal€act€must€be€aptly€described€as€ð ðespecially€horrifying,€shocking,€reprehensible,Ð À  Ðoffensive,€or€otherwise€of€an€excessive€or€exaggerated€degree,ðð€and€it€must€be€clear€that€ð ðthe€natureÐ ¬ü  Ðof€the€offense,€as€committed,€outweighed€all€other€factors€.€.€.€which€might€be€favorable€to€a€grantÐ ˜è  Ðof€probation.ðð€€òòState€v.€Travisóó,€622€S.W.2d€529,€534€(Tenn.€1981);€òòState€v.€Byrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,Ð „Ô  Ð380€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€The€trial€court€found€that€this€ð ðespecially€horrifyingðð€criteria€wasÐ pÀ Ðsatisfied.€€We€agree€and€additionally€find€that€the€barbarous€circumstances€of€the€offense€outweighedÐ \¬ Ðall€other€factors€which€might€have€favored€granting€Defendant€probation.€€As€a€result,€incarcerationÐ H˜ Ðfor€three€years€is€also€necessary€and€proper€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àWe€also€concur€with€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€Defendantððs€behavior€fails€to€indicateÐ  \ Ðhe€is€amenable€to€rehabilitation.€€Rehabilitation€stands€a€greater€chance€of€success€when€a€defendantÐ øH Ðaccepts€òòsomeóó€responsibility€for€the€criminal€offense€to€which€he€pled€guilty.€€DefendantððsÐ ä4 Ðpresentence€report€contains€the€following€statement€from€him:€ð ðThis€offense€is€totally€out€ofÐ Ð  Ðcharacter€for€me.€€I€believe€injury€and€sickness€caused€me€to€be€talked€into€being€a€part€of€thisÐ ¼  Ðoffense.ðð€€However,€the€only€reference€in€Defendantððs€medical€records€to€a€psychological€disorderÐ ¨ø Ðis€found€in€a€one„paragraph€letter€from€a€psychiatrist€which€stated€that€ð ðhis€diagnoses€are€DepressiveÐ ”ä ÐDisorder€NOS,€Panic€Disorder€without€Agoraphobia,€Alcohol€Dependence€in€partial€remission€andÐ €Ð ÐPersonality€Disorder,ðð€without€any€further€explanation.€€This€statement€is€not€sufficient€to€show€thatÐ l¼ ÐDefendant€was€in€such€a€vulnerable€mental€state€that€he€could€be€ð ðtalked€into€being€a€part€of€thisÐ X ¨ Ðoffense.ðð€€Since€the€physical€problems€described€in€Defendantððs€medical€records€similarly€fail€toÐ D!” Ðprovide€evidence€to€support€this€claim,€and€he€further€neglected€to€offer€any€proof€concerning€òòwhoóóÐ 0"€  Ðallegedly€ð ðtalked€him€into€being€a€part€of€this€offense,ðð€we€are€unpersuaded€that€his€medicalÐ #l! Ðconditions€caused€his€criminal€conduct.€€Moreover,€the€proof€indicates€that€Defendant€was€notÐ $X" Ðcompletely€truthful€concerning€his€financial€status€nor€was€he€forthcoming€with€various€tax€recordsÐ ô$D # Ðrequested€by€the€State.€€Lack€of€truthfulness€is€probative€on€the€issue€of€amenability€to€rehabilitation.€Ð à%0!$ ÐòòState€v.€Neelyóó,€678€S.W.2d€48,€49€(Tenn.€1984)Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àFor€the€forgoing€reasons,€we€find€that€the€evidence€presented€by€the€State€successfullyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrebutted€the€statutory€presumption€that€Defendant€was€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternativeÐ )à$( Ðsentencing€and,€further,€that€Defendant€failed€to€establish€his€suitability€for€probation.€€In€this€case,Ð |*Ì%) Ðwe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€confinement,€not€release€into€the€community,€would€serve€ð ðthe€endsÐ h+¸&* Ðof€justice€and€the€best€interest€of€both€the€public€and€[D]efendant.ðð€€òòHooper€v.€Stateóó,€297€S.W.2d€78,Ð ° Ð81€(Tenn.€1956).€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€refusing€to€grant€probation,€andÐ œì ÐDefendant€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ð ˆØ ÐÌò òà@MM"ìàIII.€€Conclusionó óˆÐ `° ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€denial€of€Defendantððs€probation€or€other€form€of€alternative€sentencing€isÐ 8 ˆ ÐAFFIRMED.Ð $ t ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  à