ÿWPCD †L+.Ͷàx†øMcHÍ?·¶„„>Ùe9IQ³ÂŠ8)è¬ûk[¸ßι¥í«Ú¦!ë­•^@ä1¼ñ¿:î2Î)úã_3OÛû'Œ 9 lÅdOP” Ù‡2x>¹—sdg¤4nAŸ‚»”y:›õ_ݤ'c…iÕ0¬PŒå{ (kš(ˆÒò$DN®O•!œi€ßrm(>&¥Ë@ìNø­ôb¥Ì¿m´Eïo£ƒtåÍú¯ P.Y+ìEEÓ–m~TL¬okw5ñ’AbCWˆÏ“²ÕöVÎ}3è<Ä€0w¡½‚‹Õâ«›çžòt†ò?%7 @ÐãSÍC˜—ø‹Ê”FOš\Mëü’¦åFG!f†:- î@â¼Mq¼øÓƒUúÉ}[{®+æ†ä/1|æGC‡,Ý'aî)cPÌ.‘‘äê)ÿÿ+ápóœib¾Œ’Ø™kUÌLåTÂ9@ÿ´Þ¡˜”CçNyw|Ì©Žþlµ}¡¸…q—ýµ{Úò8iiÜIÆcZ¦ÿ1×Ù]:(~e!ÜáZ|â ž ÛM’ºy$ 8øþn˾‡{£üýÁç—¼ jÙ,±}™°`;ï÷øá–ÛBF«Ä¨ïZ4e…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ LÍ U: bS w@[ 4› ¯ ¾ èÆ U:® éè U:Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ B      D3((( 0D[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ AOŸÆîî 0D´ D/ø B'˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT,“í|AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- IJKLDMNDOUPDQÓ€[uM%3|xd ÞÔ€ XŠXXXÔÔ€ ÕX XŠÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XŠX ÕÔÐ  ÐÌNovember€3,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ßÔ€XŠXXXÔÔ€ÕXXŠÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XŠXÕÔÐ  ÐÌ€October€30,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d%%%%'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñQñ›ñQñÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€ŠâŠXXÔÔ€Šà`ŠŠŠâÔÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€6PXXdìXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñ[ññQñßr€ *<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` 8ttxP,` ð  rßñQññ[ññ[ñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eôf ` 8ttxP,` ð  rßñ[ññQñ›ñQñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌJULY€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À à)à  àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9708„CC„00322Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó ó)Ð ` Ðà ` àAppellee,à  àà h àà À àò ò)Ð Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àFRANKLIN€COUNTYÐ Xø  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHON.€THOMAS€W.€GRAHAMó óÐ Xø  Ðò òLARRY€ALAN€MORRIS,ó óà À àò ò)à  àJUDGEó óÐ Xø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ Xø Ðà ` àAppellant.à  àà h àà À àò ò)à  àœ(ñKñSentencing)ñKññKñDirect€Appeal€„€Alternative€Sentence)Ð Xø ÐñKñó ó›Ð Xø ÐÌÓ  ÓÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð @à ÐÌVICKI€FRYE„FOWLKESà h àà À àà  àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ 0Ð Ð116€First€Avenue,€N.W.à h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ ( È ÐWinchester,€TN€€37398Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDARYL€J.€BRANDÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àSenior€CounselÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJ.€MICHAEL€TAYLORÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àSTEVEN€M.€BLOUNTÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à324€Dinah€Shore€Blvd.Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWinchester,€TN€€37398ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÐ  €4 +, ÐÓ  Óò òòòÔ‡„3ℊŠà`ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ#†Šà`Š„„3⥠#ÔÐ `  ÐÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà ` àOn€May€15,€1997,€Appellant,€Larry€Alan€Morris,€pled€guilty€to€aggravatedÏassault€by€causing€serious€bodily€injury€with€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon.€TheÏparties€agreed,€as€a€part€of€the€plea€agreement,€that€Appellant€would€serve€a€fiveÏyear€sentence.€The€manner€of€service€was€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court.ÏFranklin€County€Circuit€Court€œJudge,›€the€Honorable€Thomas€W.€Graham,Ïsentenced€Appellant€to€five€years€imprisonment€on€July€21,€1997.€At€the€requestÏof€the€State,€the€trial€court€noted€on€the€judgment€that€the€court€suggested€thatÏAppellant€be€placed€in€a€special€needs€facility.€Appellant€appeals€from€the€lengthÏof€his€sentence€and€a€denial€of€community€corrections€placement€or€otherÏalternative€sentence.€Ìà ` àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìò òÌà@II,®àFACTSó óˆÐ $¤ ÐÌà ` àThe€facts€presented€at€the€sentencing€hearing€revealed€that€on€June€22,Ï1996,€Appellant€was€at€the€Estill€Springs€Mobile€Home€Park€in€Franklin€County,Ïdrinking€and€hanging€out€with€friends.€An€altercation€arose€between€AppellantÏand€the€victim,€Gary€Taylor,€due€either€€to€Mr.€Taylorððs€lack€of€parking€expertiseÏor€due€to€Mr.€Taylor€yelling€at€his€father,€a€friend€of€Appellant.€Each€participantÏrecounts€that€the€other€was€the€first€to€escalate€to€physical€violence.€The€victimÏremembers€hitting€Appellant€once€or€twice€with€a€chain.€Mr.€Taylorððs€fatherÏattempted€to€break€up€the€fight,€but€Mr.€Taylor€responded€by€telling€Appellant€thatÏhe€was€going€to€get€a€gun€and€blow€Appellantððs€head€off.€€Mr.€Taylor€went€lookingÏfor€a€gun,€and€indeed€found€one,€but€laid€it€aside.€Mr.€Taylor€then€went€to€theÐ d901 Ðtrailer€where€Appellant€was.€In€response€to€Mr.€Taylorððs€threats,€AppellantÏemerged€from€the€trailer,€wielding€a€steak€knife.€The€two€again€became€entangledÏin€an€altercation.€Both€parties€agree€that€Mr.€Taylor€jumped€on€Appellant,Ïattempting€to€wrestle€the€knife€from€Appellantððs€grasp.€Appellant€stabbed€Mr.ÏTaylor€four€times,€causing€serious€injury€to€Mr.€Taylorððs€head€and€lung.€Mr.€TaylorÏgot€up,€ran€into€the€road,€and€collapsed.ÌÌà ` àProof€presented€at€the€sentencing€hearing€showed€that€Appellant€as€aÏlengthy€history€of€mental€health€problems,€some€related€to€alcohol€and€marijuanaÏabuse.€Appellant€has€been€hospitalized€several€times,€and€doctors€haveÏprescribed€antipsychotic€medication.€Appellantððs€wife€testified€that€when€notÏtaking€his€medicine,€Appellant€was,€at€times,€delusional,€would€loose€his€temper,Ïand€loose€control€of€his€actions.€According€to€the€presentence€report,€AppellantÏhas€a€history€of€non„compliance€with€his€treatment€program.€ÌÌà ` àAppellant€also€has€a€history€of€arrests€for€violent€behavior,€including€anÏincident€where€he€shot€into€a€newly€completed€house€after€a€dispute€with€theÏcontractor,€and€an€incident€where€he€beat€up€a€mechanic€because€he€hadÏimproperly€repaired€Appellantððs€wifeððs€car.€Appellant€€has€been€convicted€forÏreckless€driving,€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant,€and€driving€with€aÏrevoked€license.€At€the€time€of€this€crime,€charges€were€pending€againstÏAppellant€for€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant,€driving€on€a€revokedÏlicense,€and€possession€of€marijuana.ÌÌâ âÐ à7€.0 Ðà ` àWhen€a€defendant€complains€of€his€or€her€sentence,€we€must€conduct€aÐ `  Ðâ âòòde€novoóó€review€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð P ð Ð401(d).€The€burden€of€showing€that€the€sentence€is€improper€is€upon€theÏappealing€œparty.€€›Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€Sentencing€CommissionÏComments.€This€presumption,€however,€is€conditioned€upon€an€affirmativeÏshowing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€andÏall€the€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169Ð    Ð(Tenn.€1991).€The€Sentencing€Reform€Act€also€provides€that€the€trial€court€shallÏplace€on€the€record€either€orally€or€in€writing€what€enhancement€or€mitigatingÏfactors€it€found,€if€any.€These€findings€are€crucial€for€review€of€the€trial€courtððsÏdecision€upon€appeal.ÌÌà@ÔÔ%®àò òLENGTH€OF€SENTENCEˆÐ   @ ÐÌó óà ` àAppellant€complains€that€he€received€the€ð ðmaximum€sentenceðð€for€hisÐ  $@ Мconviction.ñLñ€›€However,›€for›€his›€conviction.›€ñLñ›œñMñ€€ñMññNñ›€ñNñHowever,›€as€a€Range€I€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C€felony€theÏmaximum€sentence€the€Appellant€could€receive€was€six€(6)€years.€€In€any€eventÏany€issue€with€respect€to€the€length€of€sentence€has€been€waived€by€the€entryÏand€acceptance€of€Appellantððs€guilty€plea€wherein€the€parties€agreed€to€aÏsentence€of€five€(5)€years.€€Under€these€circumstances€Appellant€may€not€appealÏfrom€the€length€of€the€sentence€imposed.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€37(b)(2)(ii).ÌÌÌœñOñÌñOñ›ÌÐ ð902 Ðà@} } ®àò òDENIAL€OF€ALTERNATIVE€SENTENCINGó óˆÐ `  ÐÌà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð40„35„103€sets€out€sentencingÏconsiderations€which€are€guidelines€for€determining€whether€or€not€a€defendantÏshould€be€incarcerated.€These€include€the€need€ð ðto€protect€society€by€restrainingÏa€defendant€having€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct,ðð€the€need€ð ð€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,ðð€the€determination€that€ð ðconfinementÏis€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€to€others€likely€to€commitÏsimilar€offenses,ðð€or€the€determination€that€ð ðmeasures€less€restrictive€thanÏconfinement€have€frequently€or€recently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€theÏdefendant.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1).€In€determining€the€specificÏsentence€and€the€possible€combination€of€sentencing€alternatives,€the€court€shallÏconsider€the€following:€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€theÏsentencing€hearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencingÏand€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristicsÏof€the€criminal€conduct€involved;€(5)€evidence€and€information€offered€by€theÏparties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€in€ðððð€40„35„113€and€40„35„¼114;€and€(6)€any€statement€the€defendant€wishes€to€make€in€his€own€behalf€aboutÏsentencing.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.ðð€40„35„210(b).€In€addition,€the€legislatureÏestablished€certain€sentencing€principles€which€include€the€following:€ÌÌÒ` ÒÒ` „ÒÓÓ(5)€In€recognition€that€state€prison€capacities€and€the€fundsÏto€build€and€maintain€them€are€limited,€convicted€felonsÏcommitting€the€most€severe€offenses,€possessing€criminalÏhistories€evincing€a€clear€disregard€for€the€laws€andÏmorals€of€society,€and€evincing€failure€of€past€efforts€atÏrehabilitation€shall€be€given€first€priority€regardingÏsentencing€involving€incarceration,€andÌâ âÐ è8ˆ/1 ÐÓU&ÓÓÓ(6)€A€defendant€who€does€not€fall€within€the€parameters€ofÏâ âsubdivision€(5)€and€is€an€especially€mitigated€or€standardÏoffender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,€D,€or€E€felony€isÏpresumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternativeÏsentencing€options€in€the€absence€of€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.ÌÒ` 9&ÒÒ„` G&ÒÓ(ÓÌTenn.€Code€Ann.ðð€40„35„102.ÌÌà ` àAn€examination€of€the€statutes€set€out€above,€reveal€that€the€intent€of€theÏlegislature€is€to€encourage€alternatives€to€incarceration€in€cases€whereÏdefendants€are€sentenced€as€standard€or€mitigated€offenders€convicted€of€C,€D,Ïor€E€felonies.€However,€it€is€also€clear€that€there€is€an€intent€to€incarcerate€thoseÏdefendants€whose€criminal€histories€indicate€a€clear€disregard€for€the€laws€andÏmorals€of€society€and€a€failure€of€past€efforts€at€rehabilitation.ÌÌà ` àAs€a€Range€I€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C€felony€Appellant€isÏpresumptively€entitled€to€some€form€of€sentencing€apart€from€one€involvingÏincarceration€in€the€penitentiary.€€However,€for€the€reasons€discussed€below€aÏplacement€in€the€community€corrections€program€is€not€one€of€the€alternatives€forÏwhich€Appellant€is€eligible.ÌÌòòCommunity€CorrectionsóóÐ 0.Ð$& ÐÌà ` àThe€Community€Corrections€Act€of€1985€established€a€community€basedÏalternative€to€incarceration€for€certain€offenders€and€set€out€the€minimumÏeligibility€requirements€for€a€placement€in€the€program.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Sec.Ï40„36„101€„„€306.€€One€of€the€eligibility€requirements€for€community€correctionsÏis€a€non„violent€crime.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Sec.€40„36„106(a)(3),€(5),€(6).€€Given€theÐ Ð9p02 Ðnature€of€the€crime€in€the€instant€case€and€Appellantððs€record€of€violent€acts,€heÏis€ineligible€for€community€corrections€unless€he€can€demonstrate€that€despite€hisÏgeneral€ineligibility€for€the€program,€he€has€ð ðspecial€needsðð€due€to€alcohol€or€drugÏabuse,€or€mental€health€problems€and€that€those€needs€can€be€better€served€inÏthe€community€rather€than€a€correctional€facility.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Sec.€40„36„¼106(c).ÌÌà ` àIn€this€case€the€record€reveals€that€Appellant€does€indeed€have€someÏmental€health€problems€due€to€alcohol€and€drug€abuse.€€However,€the€record€alsoÏshows€that€community€based€treatment€programs€have€failed€with€Appellant€inÏthe€past.€€Appellant€has€a€history€of€non„compliance€with€such€programs.€€Indeed,Ïafter€the€offense€in€this€case,€Appellant€again€failed€in€treatment€and€wasÏhospitalized€after€threatening€his€daughter€and€a€neighbor.€€The€trial€court€wasÏentirely€correct€in€finding€that€any€special€needs€Appellant€had€would€in€fact€beÏbetter€served€in,€rather€than€out€of,€the€penitentiary.€€Thus,€œiñHñsñHññOñ›ñOññIñtñIñ›€was€not€error€toÏdeny€Appellant€a€placement€in€community€corrections.ÌÌòòOther€Alternative€SentencingóóÐ P*ð " ÐÌà ` àDespite€his€ineligibility€for€community€corrections€Appellant€remainsÏpresumptively€entitled€to€certain€other€forms€of€non„incarcerative€sentencing.€ÏHowever,€œñJñas€stated€earlier,€ñJñthis›€presumption€may€be€rebutted€by€proof€thatÏconfinement€is€necessary:€à À à(1)€€to€protect€society€from€a€defendant€with€aÐ 4 *, Ðlong€history€of€criminal€misbehavior,€(2)€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€ofÏthe€offense,€(3)€to€deter€others€who€are€likely€to€commit€similar€crimes,€or€(4)Ïbecause€measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€been€applied€to€theÐ Ð9p02 Ðdefendant€without€success.€€In€the€matter€òòsub€judiceóó,€the€trial€court€found€thatÐ `  Ðconfinement€was€necessary€to€protect€the€public€from€Appellantððs€violentÏoutbursts.€This€finding€was€based€upon€evidence€of€Appellantððs€inability€to€controlÏhis€œtempñPñtñPñer,›€to€responsibly€follow€a€course€of€psychiatric€treatment,€and€to€controlÏhis€alcohol€consumption.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€further€found€that€confinement€is€necessary€to€avoidÏdepreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.€The€trial€court€noted€that€AppellantÏused€a€deadly€weapon€in€inflicting€serious€injury€that€nearly€killed€his€victim.€€TheÏcourt€also€indicated€that€Appellantððs€repeated€failure€to€successfully€complete€orÏmaintain€treatment€for€his€alcohol€and€mental€problems€demonstrates€thatÏmeasures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€not€been€successful€inÏrehabilitating€Appellant.€Upon€this€evidence,€the€trial€court€found€that€AppellantÏwas€not€a€suitable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing.€We€agree.ÌÌà ` àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÓ  ÓÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGE