ÿWPC¸ 8àþðû¶ð¸¢û3ƒÏ𵢌¥X:?“M3ù@Cwú+ÿÞĄ̃QKîjJ»­^Ø;+¦ôÊà0¥óm¸ÓݶùÑ=“íÕ6ÂøO£â…T)Áx—ðïHBÞƒŠà‰F_j2ŸuaÓËü‚ #šè¼_˜U,iªeÇ^Üü†b‹IZ“’”±ñ¼Æ%~Gð+n8±#37­“ÄiLµ»(i§iX[X Û Ø(CÙç¨<£¸Zê# íp#%©ëÿ”ö衞Ùm”Qª@®«UÀ*J|·'ymœÞ¤ƒ¢½à®% (¶™pÂê½µƒÊ¡Œ’è|qÕâí¦Kƒ +Jú!Èѳ¾ï¢`ºl–›&5yFb¶ñB’-t¥83zé¼U61ÉvËô@£»D 4iØ6Yq5—çæ"ñXTÝ«‡I­a‰l1z1hdüçZ̃ÛþK¹ëT”%åi·áekˆìí^6ëæÅåhpÚ¨€èê=d­ä(P<ùíé„Þ}m}½ ßGnõMv{@k ™üîùuÐ’Ž—+?J¬…ÞÍžÉÿ ÔM¢ãæOèwjspÓˆœ«/ïÚFYžH¥Ê¤œ? tD¦VÇè~x3Ã÷b#É\ %% UN+ 0ˆy UN 0ÑO ^ z, Ò¦ wx 4|  Ÿ Æ¡ ÆgÆ-Æó m¹NÐ 0ÅÒ 0D—EÛ 0³Ý 0­ 0§= 0¡ä 0›… 0•   1uµ 72*ê\\\\\\\\\\\\\\bFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF 1eNNNNNNNNNNNNN 0ë³³³³ Bžž 0¤» D5_ D-” 0KÁÁ AS Æ_ 0¤% 0DÉ A« ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6ÒV,,,,ÒV0»(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular*GG ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó=²ƒ1Ï  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpth_B03|x Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ*AA ÿÿ(_17Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó*88 ÿÿ(_15Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó*55 ÿÿ(_14Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó*22 ÿÿ(_13Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó*// ÿÿ(_12Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó*,, ÿÿ(_11Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó*)) ÿÿ(_10Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i) àÝ ƒRñï$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô­$ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note€that€in€òòState€v.€David€Lee€Ô_ÔBellamyÔ_Ôóó,€E2003„02936„CCA„R3„CD,€2004€WL€1936384,€at€*5€(Tenn.Ð ° ÐÔ_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Aug.€31,€2004),€Judge€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€in€a€concurring€opinion,€concluded€that€òòÔ_ÔBlakelyÔ_Ôóó,€ð ðmay€hamper€aÐ qÁ Ðtrial€judgeððs€authority€to€make€the€fact€findings€necessary€to€overcome€the€statutory€presumption€of€favorable€candidacyÐ 2‚ Ðfor€alternative€sentencing.ðð€€However,€in€the€case€herein,€the€appellant,€despite€a€òòÔ_ÔBlakelyÔ_Ôóó€claim€on€consecutiveÐ óC Ðsentencing,€does€not€raise€a€claim€founded€on€òòÔ_ÔBlakelyÔ_Ôóó€to€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€an€alternative€sentence.€€- ù- ÿÿ35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(|G2ñï$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€±»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô­$ò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€±»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢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€ÅoXXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡îwN±ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@gg$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼±»îîwN #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  ÓSeptember€22,€2004€SessionÐ öF ÐÔ‡XÅoX»¼±ÔÌò òÔ#†¼±»XXÅo#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€Ô_ÔDEMETRIEÔ_Ô€OWENSòòóóÔ‡XÅoX»¼±Ôó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Marshall€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€15306€€€€Charles€Lee,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2003„01454„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€December€3,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡X!.XXXÅoÔThe€appellant,€Ô_ÔDemetrieÔ_Ô€Owens,€was€found€guilty€by€a€jury€on€two€counts€of€theft€of€property€valuedÐ V¦  Ðbetween€$1,000€and€$10,000€and€one€count€of€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution.€€TheÐ ? Ðjury€found€the€appellant€not€guilty€of€possession€of€cocaine€with€the€intent€to€sell.€€At€the€sentencingÐ (x Ðhearing,€the€trial€court€merged€the€two€theft€convictions€and€sentenced€the€appellant€to€three€yearsÐ a Ðand€four€months€on€the€theft€and€four€years€and€eight€months€on€the€drug€offense.€€The€trial€courtÐ úJ Ðordered€the€sentences€to€run€consecutively.€€On€appeal,€the€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€ofÐ ã3 Ðthe€evidence,€the€jury€instructions€on€the€charge€of€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution,Ð Ì Ðand€his€sentence.€€Because€the€appellant€failed€to€include€his€challenge€to€the€jury€instructions€in€aÐ µ Ðmotion€for€new€trial,€that€issue€is€waived.€€As€to€the€remaining€issues,€we€determine€that€theÐ žî Ðevidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€convictions€and€that€the€trial€court€properly€sentenced€theÐ ‡× Ðappellant.Ð pÀ ÐÔ#†XÅoXXX!.´#ÔÔ#†¼±»XXÅo#ÔÔ‡XÅoX»¼±ÔÓ¨ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€Affirmed.Ð B’ Ðó óÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼±»àXÅo #ÔÔ‡XÅoX.¼±ÔJerry€L.€Smith,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayesóó€and€òòThomas€T.Ð e ÐÔ_ÔWoodallÔ_Ôóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð þN ÐÌÔ_ÔMerrilynÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔFeirmanÔ_Ô,€Nashville,€Tennessee€and€Andrew€Jackson€Fearing,€III,€Ô_ÔShelbyvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,Ð Ð! ! Ðfor€the€appellant,€Ô_ÔDemetrieÔ_Ô€Owens.Ð ¹" " ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Jennifer€L.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ‹$Û$ ÐMike€Ô_ÔMcCowenÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Ô_ÔWeakleyÔ_Ô€E.€Barnard,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ t%Ä % ÐGeneral,€€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ]&­!& Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ ¥-õ(.ý ÐÔ_ÔÔ#†¼±»XXÅo× #ÔÔ‡XÅoX»¼±Ôà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌÓ¨ Óà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼±»XXÅo#ÔÔ‡XÅoX»¼±ÔÐ ™é ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼±»XXÅo¿#ÔÓ  Óò òòòÔ‡¼k »»¼±Ôà@ÃÃ!ìàóóó óà@@ÈÈ!ìàÔ€X!.X »¼kÔòòFactual€BackgroundóóˆÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àOn€October€5,€2002,€Danny€Carrico,€the€owner€of€a€wrecker€service€in€Lewisburg,Ð > Ž ÐTennessee,€planned€to€take€one€of€his€wreckers€to€nearby€Fayetteville€for€service.€€Mr.€CarricoÐ ' w Ðattempted€to€get€one€of€his€employees,€Billy,€to€follow€him€to€Fayetteville.€€Mr.€Carrico€had€a€€1991Ð  ` ÐMazda€626€that€he€wanted€Billy€to€drive€to€Fayetteville€behind€the€wrecker.€€Mr.€Carrico€could€notÐ ù I Ðlocate€Billy,€so€he€asked€the€appellant,€whom€he€met€through€Billy,€to€follow€him€to€Fayetteville.€Ð â 2  ÐMr.€Carrico€even€offered€to€pay€the€appellant€for€the€trip.€€The€appellant€told€Mr.€Carrico€that€he€hadÐ Ë   Ða€driverððs€license€and€the€appellant€agreed€to€follow€Mr.€Carrico€in€the€Mazda.€€The€trip€toÐ ´  ÐFayetteville€was€uneventful.€€Mr.€Carrico€dropped€the€wrecker€off,€and€he€and€the€appellant€thenÐ í  Ðdrove€back€to€Lewisburg.€€Mr.€Carrico€drove€his€car€back€to€Lewisburg.€€€€Ð †Ö  ÐÌà  àDuring€the€drive€back,€the€appellant€asked€Mr.€Carrico€on€two€separate€occasions€if€he€couldÐ X¨  Ðborrow€the€Mazda.€€Mr.€Carrico€replied,€ð ðNo.ðð€€After€they€arrived€back€in€Lewisburg,€Mr.€CarricoÐ A‘ Ðdropped€the€appellant€off€at€a€residence€on€Fourth€Street.€€The€appellant€again€asked€if€he€couldÐ *z Ðborrow€the€car,€and€Mr.€Carrico€refused€for€a€third€time.€€The€appellant€told€Mr.€Carrico€that€heÐ c Ðwanted€to€borrow€the€car€to€visit€a€friend€in€Columbia.€€Ð üL ÐÌà  àLater€that€same€day,€Mr.€Carrico€and€Billy€went€to€Cornersville€to€cash€a€check.€€When€theyÐ Î Ðreturned€to€Lewisburg,€Mr.€Carrico€dropped€off€Billy€at€the€same€residence€on€Fourth€Street€whereÐ · Ðhe€had€dropped€€the€appellant€earlier.€€Mr.€Carrico€paid€the€appellant€$40.00€for€making€the€trip€toÐ  ð ÐFayetteville.€€Ð ‰Ù ÐÌà  àThat€evening,€Mr.€Carrico€drove€to€his€residence€on€West€Commerce€Street€and€backed€hisÐ [« Ðcar€into€the€driveway.€€He€left€the€doors€to€the€car€unlocked€and€left€the€keys€in€the€console.€€AtÐ D” Ðaround€midnight,€Mr.€Carrico€stepped€outside€to€retrieve€a€bag€of€dog€food€from€the€car.€€The€nextÐ -} Ðmorning,€October€6,€between€6:00€and€7:30€a.m.,€when€Mr.€Carrico€went€out€to€get€into€the€car,€itÐ f Ðwas€gone.€€Ð ÿO ÐÌà  àMr.€Carrico€immediately€notified€the€Lewisburg€Police€Department.€€Officer€Darryl€BirdsongÐ Ñ!!  Ðarrived€within€five€minutes.€€Mr.€Carrico€suspected€that€the€appellant,€also€known€as€ð ðMe„me,ðð€hadÐ º" ! Ðtaken€the€car.€€Officer€Birdsong€returned€to€the€police€department€after€taking€the€report€from€Mr.Ð £#ó" ÐCarrico€and€entered€the€information€about€the€stolen€vehicle€into€the€computer.€€Officer€BirdsongÐ Œ$Ü# Ðlearned€later€that€day€that€the€car€had€been€recovered€in€Columbia,€Tennessee.€€Mr.€Carrico€took€outÐ u%Å $ Ða€warrant€against€the€appellant€charging€him€with€theft€of€the€vehicle,€which€was€valued€atÐ ^&®!% Ðapproximately€$1,700.€€Officer€Birdsong€attempted€to€serve€the€warrant€on€the€appellant,€but€wasÐ G'—"& Ðunsuccessful.€€Ð 0(€#' ÐÌà  àDuring€the€early€morning€hours€of€October€6,€Officer€Jeremy€Haywood€was€on€duty€for€theÐ *R%) ÐColumbia€Police€Department€in€Maury€County,€Tennessee.€€He€initiated€a€traffic€stop€of€a€MazdaÐ ë*;&* Ð626€on€James€Campbell€Boulevard€for€speeding.€€The€car€was€headed€in€the€direction€of€LewisburgÐ Ô+$'+ Ðat€the€time€of€the€stop,€but€was€still€approximately€20€miles€away€from€Lewisburg.€€The€appellantÐ ° Ðwas€the€driver€of€the€Mazda€and€did€not€have€a€driverððs€license€or€any€type€of€identification.€€OfficerÐ ™é ÐHaywood€ran€a€check€of€the€appellantððs€name€and€date€of€birth€and€discovered€that€the€appellant€hadÐ ‚Ò Ða€suspended€license€for€failure€to€pay€a€citation.€€Officer€Haywood€arrested€the€appellant€and€hadÐ k» Ðthe€car€towed.€€Officer€Haywood€did€not€learn€until€after€the€appellant€was€released€that€the€vehicleÐ T¤ Ðhad€been€stolen€in€Lewisburg.€€Ð =  ÐÌà  àAt€around€11:00€p.m.€on€October€6,€Officer€Steve€Mitchell€of€the€Lewisburg€PoliceÐ  _ ÐDepartment€was€on€routine€patrol€when€he€saw€the€appellant€riding€in€the€back€seat€of€a€car€on€FifthÐ ø H ÐAvenue.€€Officer€Mitchell€stopped€the€car€and€arrested€the€appellant€on€the€outstanding€warrant.€Ð á 1  ÐThere€were€two€other€individuals€in€the€car.€€Officer€Mitchell€called€for€back„up,€and€OfficerÐ Ê   ÐRebecca€Lambert€arrived€on€the€scene€to€assist€him€in€the€stop.€€Officer€Mitchell€initiated€a€searchÐ ³  Ðof€the€vehicle€in€which€he€found€several€rocks€of€an€off„white€substance,€which€later€tested€positiveÐ œì  Ðfor€cocaine.€€The€cocaine€was€located€underneath€the€driver€and€passenger€seats,€but€was€only€visibleÐ …Õ  Ðfrom€the€back€seat.€€There€was€about€$500€on€the€appellantððs€person€at€the€time€of€the€arrest.€Ð n¾  ÐNeither€the€driver€nor€the€other€passenger€had€any€money€on€their€person€at€the€time€of€the€stop.€€Ð W§  ÐÌà  àOfficer€Lambert€was€responsible€for€transporting€the€appellant€to€the€Marshall€County€JailÐ )y Ðafter€his€arrest.€€Officer€Lambert€asked€the€appellant€if€he€had€any€ð ðsubstanceðð€on€him,€and€theÐ b Ðappellant€said,€ð ðNo.ðð€€Prior€to€entering€the€jail,€Officer€Lambert€told€the€appellant€again,€ð ð[i]f€youÐ ûK Ðhave€anything€on€you,€you€need€to€give€it€to€me€now€because€if€I€take€you€into€the€jail,€Iððm€goingÐ ä4 Ðto€charge€you€with€entering€of€contraband€into€a€penal€institution.ðð€€Once€at€the€jail,€Officer€LambertÐ Í Ðescorted€the€appellant€into€the€booking€area€and€unhandcuffed€him.€€Corrections€Officer€Jeff€HensenÐ ¶ Ðbegan€to€search€the€appellant,€who€had€both€of€his€hands€on€the€booking€counter€ð ðballed€up€in€a€fist.ðð€Ð Ÿï ÐThe€appellant€was€asked€several€times€to€open€his€hands.€€Each€time,€the€appellant€refused.€€OfficerÐ ˆØ ÐLambert€and€Officer€Hensen€then€grabbed€each€side€of€the€appellantððs€hands€and€pulled€them€apart.€Ð qÁ ÐTwo€plastic€bags€containing€rocks€of€a€white€substance€fell€from€the€appellantððs€left€hand€onto€theÐ Zª Ðcounter.€€Officer€Lambert€confiscated€the€bags€and€took€them€into€the€office.€€The€substance€laterÐ C“ Ðtested€positive€for€cocaine€and€weighed€3.3€grams.€€Ð ,| ÐÌà  àOn€October€7,€2002,€Mr.€Carrico€was€notified€that€his€car€had€been€impounded€in€MauryÐ þN ÐCounty,€Tennessee.€€Mr.€Carrico€had€to€pay€between€$130€and€$160€to€retrieve€his€car.€€€Ð ç 7 ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€was€indicted€by€the€Marshall€County€Grand€Jury€on€two€counts€of€theft€ofÐ ¹" ! Ðproperty€valued€between€$1,000€and€$10,000,€possession€of€more€than€.5€grams€of€cocaine€withÐ ¢#ò" Ðintent€to€sell€and€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution.€€Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àAfter€a€jury€trial,€the€appellant€was€found€guilty€of€the€two€counts€of€theft€of€property€andÐ ]&­!% Ðof€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution.€€The€jury€found€the€appellant€not€guilty€ofÐ F'–"& Ðpossession€of€cocaine.€€At€sentencing,€the€trial€court€merged€the€two€theft€convictions.€€The€appellantÐ /(#' Ðwas€sentenced€to€three€(3)€years€and€four€(4)€months€for€the€theft€conviction€and€four€(4)€years€eightÐ )h$( Ð(8)€months€for€the€drug€offense.€€The€trial€court€ordered€the€sentences€to€run€consecutively.€€Ð *Q%) Ðâ âÐ ê*:&* Ðà  àThe€appellant€filed€a€timely€notice€of€appeal€challenging€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€theÐ ° Ðâ âjury€instructions€on€the€charge€of€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution€and€his€sentenceÐ ™é Ðas€excessive.€€Ð ‚Ò ÐÌòòÓ  ÓWaiveróóÐ T¤ ÐÌÓ1Óà  àInitially€we€note€that€the€appellant€raised€only€the€following€issues€in€his€motion€for€newÐ & v Ðtrial:€(1)€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€sustain€a€conviction€for€theft€of€property€over€$1,000€andÐ  _ Ðpossession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution;€(2)€the€proof€at€trial€was€circumstantial€and€there€wasÐ ø H Ðno€ð ðweb€of€proof€woven€around€the€appellant€sufficient€to€exclude€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€allÐ á 1  Ðother€possibilities€save€that€the€.€.€.€[appellant]€committed€these€acts;ðð€and€(3)€the€sentence€asÐ Ê   Ðexcessive.€€On€appeal,€the€appellant€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€jury€instruction€on€the€charge€ofÐ ³  Ðintroduction€of€contraband€into€a€penal€institution.€€Because€the€appellant€did€not€challenge€the€juryÐ œì  Ðinstructions€in€a€motion€for€new€trial,€any€issue€regarding€jury€instructions€has€been€waived.€€òòSeeóóÐ …Õ  ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€940€S.W.2d€567,€569€(Tenn.€1997)€(holding€that€aÐ n¾  Ðdefendant€relinquishes€the€right€to€argue€on€appeal€any€issues€that€should€have€been€presented€in€aÐ W§  Ðmotion€for€new€trial).€€Ð @ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓSufficiency€of€the€EvidenceóóÐ b ÐÌÓÕ6Óà  àWhen€a€defendant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€this€Court€is€obliged€to€reviewÐ ä4 Ðthat€claim€according€to€certain€well„settled€principles.€€A€verdict€of€guilty,€rendered€by€a€jury€andÐ Í Ðð ðapproved€by€the€trial€judge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€theðð€Stateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€allÐ ¶ Ðconflicts€in€the€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€259€(Tenn.€1994);Ð Ÿï ÐòòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).€€Thus,€although€the€accused€is€originally€cloakedÐ ˆØ Ðwith€a€presumption€of€innocence,€the€jury€verdict€of€guilty€removes€this€presumption€ð ðand€replacesÐ qÁ Ðit€with€one€of€guilt.ðð€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€€Hence,€on€appeal,€theÐ Zª Ðburden€of€proof€rests€with€the€defendant€to€demonstrate€the€insufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.Ð C“ ÐòòId.óó€€The€relevant€question€the€reviewing€court€must€answer€is€whether€any€rational€trier€of€fact€couldÐ ,| Ðhave€found€the€accused€guilty€of€every€element€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð e ÐR.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòHarrisóó,€839€S€.W.2d€at€75.€€In€making€this€decision,€we€are€to€accord€the€State€ð ðtheÐ þN Ðstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€that€mayÐ ç 7 Ðbe€drawn€therefrom.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€at€914.€€As€such,€this€Court€is€precluded€from€re„Ð Ð!   Ðweighing€or€reconsidering€the€evidence€when€evaluating€the€convicting€proof.€€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€929Ð ¹" ! ÐS.W.2d€380,€383€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ¢#ò" ÐApp.€1990).€€Moreover,€we€may€not€substitute€our€own€ð ðinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€ofÐ ‹$Û# Ðfact€from€circumstantial€evidence.ðð€€òòMatthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€at€779.Ð t%Ä $ ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€herein,€the€appellant€was€charged€with€two€counts€of€theft€of€property€valued€atÐ F'–"& Ðmore€than€$1,000€but€less€than€$10,000,€possession€of€more€than€.5€grams€of€cocaine€with€the€intentÐ /(#' Ðto€sell,€and€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution.€€The€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€onÐ )h$( Ðthe€two€counts€of€theft€and€on€the€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution.€€On€appeal,€theÐ *Q%) Ðappellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence.€€Specifically,€he€contends€that€there€wasÐ ê*:&* Ðinsufficient€proof€both€that€he€ð ðunlawfully€intendedðð€to€introduce€contraband€into€the€penalÐ Ó+#'+ Ðinstitution€and€that€he€ð ðintended€to€deprive€the€owner€of€his€car.ðð€€The€appellant€contends€that€theÐ ° Ðjury€should€have€found€him€guilty€of€joyriding€rather€than€theft.€€The€State€argues€that€the€testimonyÐ ™é Ðat€trial€was€sufficient€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€to€support€the€convictions.€€€€Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà  àIn€order€to€convict€the€appellant€of€theft€of€property,€the€State€was€required€to€prove€that€theÐ T¤ Ðappellant€violated€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„14„103,€which€states,€ð ð[a]€person€commitsÐ =  Ðtheft€of€property€if,€with€intent€to€deprive€the€owner€of€property,€the€person€knowingly€obtains€orÐ & v Ðexercises€control€over€the€property€without€the€ownerððs€effective€consent.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„Ð  _ Ð14„103.€€To€deprive€is€to:Ð ø H ÐÌà8  à(A)€Withhold€property€from€the€owner€permanently€or€for€such€a€period€of€time€asÐ Ê   Ðto€substantially€diminish€the€value€or€enjoyment€of€the€property€to€the€owner;г Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(B)€Withhold€property€or€cause€it€to€be€withheld€for€the€purpose€of€restoring€it€onlyÐ œì  Ðupon€payment€of€a€reward€or€other€compensation;€orÐ…Õ Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(C)€Dispose€of€property€or€use€it€or€transfer€any€interest€in€it€under€circumstancesÐ n¾  Ðthat€make€its€restoration€unlikely.ÐW§ Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(8).Ð )y ÐÌà  àThe€proof€introduced€at€trial€showed€that€Mr.€Carrico€owned€a€1991€Mazda€626€worthÐ ûK Ðapproximately€$1,700.€€The€appellant€asked€Mr.€Carrico€three€times€if€he€could€borrow€the€car€andÐ ä4 Ðall€three€times€Mr.€Carrico€refused.€€On€the€night€of€October€5,€2002,€Mr.€Carrico€backed€his€car€intoÐ Í Ðthe€driveway€at€his€residence.€€He€left€the€keys€in€the€car€and€the€doors€unlocked.€€The€next€morning,Ð ¶ Ðthe€car€was€missing.€€Mr.€Carrico€notified€the€police€immediately.€€Ð Ÿï ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€was€stopped€for€speeding€by€Officer€Haywood€of€the€Columbia€PoliceÐ qÁ ÐDepartment€while€driving€Mr.€Carricoððs€Mazda€in€the€early€morning€hours€of€October€6,€2002.€€TheÐ Zª Ðcar€was€headed€in€the€direction€of€Marshall€County€but€was€approximately€20€minutes€away€fromÐ C“ ÐLewisburg€at€the€time€of€the€stop.€€The€appellant€was€arrested€for€driving€with€a€suspended€licenseÐ ,| Ðand€the€car€was€towed.€€Officer€Haywood€did€not€know€at€that€time€that€the€car€was€reported€stolenÐ e Ðin€Lewisburg.€€Ð þN ÐÌà  àAfter€the€appellant€was€released€from€custody€in€Maury€County,€Officer€Birdsong€learnedÐ Ð!   Ðthat€the€Mazda€was€impounded€there.€€He€notified€Mr.€Carrico€of€the€carððs€whereabouts.€€At€thatÐ ¹" ! Ðtime,€Mr.€Carrico€obtained€a€warrant€on€the€appellant.€€Mr.€Carrico€had€to€travel€to€Columbia€to€pickÐ ¢#ò" Ðup€the€car€from€impound€at€a€wrecker€service.€€Mr.€Carrico€spent€between€$130€and€$160€to€retrieveÐ ‹$Û# Ðthe€car.€€The€appellant€was€arrested€on€October€6,€2002,€in€Lewisburg.€€Ð t%Ä $ ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€appellant€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€circumstantial€evidence€of€theftÐ F'–"& Ðof€property,€specifically€regarding€his€intent€to€deprive€Mr.€Carrico€of€his€car.€€Although€theÐ /(#' Ðappellantððs€intent€to€deprive€was€not€directly€proven,€an€intent€to€deprive€an€owner€of€property€canÐ )h$( Ðbe€established€by€circumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Scatesóó,€524€S.W.2d€929,€931€(Tenn.€1975).€Ð *Q%) ÐFurther,€it€is€well€established€that€a€ð ðjury€may€infer€a€criminal€defendantððs€intent€from€theÐ ê*:&* Ðsurrounding€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Robertsóó,€943€S.W.2d€403,€410€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð Ó+#'+ Ð1996).€€The€appellant€contends€that€although€he€was€driving€the€car,€he€should€have€only€beenÐ ° Ðconvicted€of€the€lesser„included€offense€of€unauthorized€use€of€automobiles,€commonly€referred€toÐ ™é Ðas€joyriding,€because€the€proof€did€not€show€that€he€had€an€intent€to€deprive€Mr.€Carrico€of€the€car.€Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà  àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„14„106,€which€defines€joyriding,€states:€Ð T¤ ÐÌà8  à[a]€person€commits€a€Class€A€Misdemeanor€who€takes€anotherððs€automobile,Ð & v Ðairplane,€motorcycle,€bicycle,€boat€or€other€vehicle€without€the€consent€of€the€ownerÐ  _ Ðand€the€person€does€not€have€the€intent€to€deprive€the€owner€thereof.€Ðø HÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„106.€€Ð Ê   ÐÐ ÐThe€definition€of€ð ðdepriveðð€is€found€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„11„106(8)(a),€andÐ œì  Ðincludes€ð ð[w]ithhold[ing]€property€from€the€owner€permanently€or€for€such€as€period€of€time€as€toÐ …Õ  Ðsubstantially€diminish€the€value€or€enjoyment€of€the€property€to€the€owner.ðð€€The€record€indicatesÐ n¾  Ðthat€the€jury€heard€testimony€which€implied€a€criminal€intent€on€the€part€of€the€appellant.€€TheÐ W§  Ðappellant€was€told€not€once,€not€twice,€but€three€times,€that€he€òòcouldóó€òònotóó€borrow€Mr.€Carricoððs€car.€Ð @ ÐFurther,€the€trial€judge€instructed€the€jury€on€the€lesser„included€offense€of€joyriding,€but€the€juryÐ )y Ðconcluded€that€appellant€was€guilty€of€theft€of€property€over€$1,000.€€Based€upon€our€review€of€theÐ b Ðrecord€presented€on€appeal,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€the€conviction€forÐ ûK Ðtheft€of€property€over€$1,000.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àNext,€the€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction€forÐ ¶ Ðð ðintroduction€of€contraband€into€a€penal€institutionðð€because€he€was€under€arrest€at€the€time€andÐ Ÿï Ðinvoluntarily€taken€to€the€jail.€€Therefore,€he€asserts€that€the€evidence€as€insufficient€to€show€thatÐ ˆØ Ðhe€acted€with€ð ðunlawful€intent.ðð€€The€State€argues€that€the€appellant€was€convicted€of€possession€ofÐ qÁ Ðcontraband€while€present€on€a€penal€institution€rather€than€introduction€of€contraband€into€a€penalÐ Zª Ðinstitution€so€there€was€no€requirement€of€ð ðunlawful€intentðð€and€that€the€evidence€is€sufficient€toÐ C“ Ðsustain€the€conviction.€€Ð ,| ÐÌà  àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„16„201€makes€it€unlawful€for€any€person€to:Ð þN ÐÌà8  à(1)€[k]nowingly€and€with€unlawful€intent€take,€send€or€otherwise€cause€to€be€takenÐ Ð!   Ðinto€any€penal€institution€where€prisoners€are€quartered€or€under€custodialÐ ¹" ! Ðsupervision€any€weapons,€ammunition,€explosives,€intoxicants,€legend€drugs,€or€anyÐ ¢#ò" Ðcontrolled€substances€found€in€chapter€17,€part€4€of€this€title.Ћ$Û#Ð Ð  Ðà8  à(2)€Knowingly€possess€any€of€the€materials€prohibited€in€subdivision€(a)(1)€whileÐ t%Ä $ Ðpresent€in€any€penal€institution€where€prisoners€are€quartered€or€under€custodialÐ ]&­!% Ðsupervision€without€the€express€consent€of€the€chief€administrator€of€the€institution.€ÐF'–"&Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€was€convicted€of€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution€underÐ )h$( ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„16„201(a)(2)€which€does€not€require€an€ð ðunlawful€intent.ðð€Ð *Q%) ÐThe€evidence€introduced€at€trial,€viewed€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€shows€that€OfficerÐ ê*:&* ÐLambert€transported€the€appellant€to€the€Marshall€County€Jail€after€his€arrest.€€Prior€to€entering€theÐ Ó+#'+ Ðjail,€Officer€Lambert€asked€the€appellant€if€he€had€any€ð ðsubstanceðð€on€him,€and€the€appellant€said,Ð ° Ðð ðNo.ðð€€She€informed€the€appellant€that€she€would€charge€him€with€entering€contraband€into€a€penalÐ ™é Ðinstitution€if€he€did€not€tell€the€truth.€€While€booking€the€appellant,€Officer€Hensen€and€OfficerÐ ‚Ò ÐLambert€recovered€two€bags€containing€3.3€grams€of€cocaine€in€the€appellantððs€ð ðballed€upðð€fists.€Ð k» ÐBased€on€the€testimony€of€the€officers,€we€determine€that€there€was€ample€evidence€for€the€jury€toÐ T¤ Ðconclude€that€the€appellant€knowingly€possessed€contraband€in€a€penal€institution€as€required€by€theÐ =  Ðstatute.€€Moreover,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Randy€B.€Longóó,€No.€W2001„01467„CCA„R3„CD,€2002€WLÐ & v Ð1592716,€at€*6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€July€12,€2002),€òòperm.óó€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€Sept.Ð  _ Ð19,€2002€)€(determining€that€voluntary€entrance€into€a€penal€institution€is€not€a€requirement€of€theÐ ø H Ðoffense€of€introduction€of€contraband€into€a€penal€institution).Ð á 1  ÐÌòòÓ  ÓSentencingóóÐ ³  ÐÌÓdfÓà  àThe€appellant€also€argues€that€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€was€excessive€and€thatÐ …Õ  Ðhe€should€have€received€some€type€of€alternative€sentence€in€lieu€of€incarceration.€€Specifically,€heÐ n¾  Ðargues€that€the€trial€court€did€not€give€enough€weight€to€each€mitigating€factor€and€gave€too€muchÐ W§  Ðweight€to€the€appellantððs€prior€record€in€enhancing€his€sentence.€€Further,€the€appellant€argues€thatÐ @ Ðthe€trial€court€erred€in€ordering€the€sentences€to€be€served€consecutively.€€Finally,€in€a€supplementalÐ )y Ðbrief€filed€with€the€permission€of€this€Court,€the€appellant€argues€that€òòBlakely€v.€Washingtonóó,€542Ð b ÐU.S.€___,€124€S.€Ct.€2531€(2004),€renders€his€consecutive€sentences€illegal.€€Specifically,€heÐ ûK Ðcontends€that€consecutive€sentences€were€inappropriate€in€light€of€òòBlakelyóó€because€a€jury,€not€aÐ ä4 Ðjudge,€must€find€the€underlying€factors€necessary€to€determine€whether€sentences€should€be€servedÐ Í Ðconsecutively.€€The€State€argues€that€the€trial€court€correctly€sentenced€the€appellant€and€that€theÐ ¶ Ðappellant€waived€the€òòBlakelyóó€issue€for€failure€to€raise€it€in€a€timely€fashion€or,€in€the€alternative,€thatÐ Ÿï ÐòòBlakelyóó€does€not€apply€to€consecutive€sentencing.€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€recently€determined€that€òòBlakelyóó€does€not€apply€to€theÐ Zª Ðdecision€to€impose€consecutive€sentences.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Robinsonóó,€No.€W2001„01299„SC„R11„DD,Ð C“ Ð___€S.W.3d€___,€2004€WL€2158117,€at€*25€n.14€(Tenn.€Sept.€28,€2004)€(citing€òòPeople€v.€Sykesóó,€120Ð ,| ÐCal.€App.€4òòthóó€1331,€16€Cal.€Rptr.€3d€317,€327€(2€Dist.€2004))€(dismissing€defendantððs€challenge€toÐ e Ðconsecutive€sentences€relying€on€òòBlakelyóó€and€acknowledging€that€several€courts€have€ð ðrejected€theÐ þN Ðdefendantððs€contention€and€held€that€òòBlakelyóó€and€òòApprendióó€do€not€apply€to€the€decision€to€imposeÐ ç 7 Ðconsecutive€sentencesðð).€€This€argument€is€without€merit.€€Ð Ð!   ÐÌà  àLooking€to€the€appellantððs€remaining€challenges€to€his€sentence,€this€Court€is€instructed€toÐ ¢#ò" Ðð ðconduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€on€the€record€of€such€issues.€€Such€review€shall€be€conducted€with€aÐ ‹$Û# Ðpresumption€that€the€determinations€made€by€the€court€from€which€the€appeal€is€taken€are€correct.ðð€Ð t%Ä $ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-401(d).€€ð ðHowever,€the€presumption€of€correctness€which€accompaniesÐ ]&­!% Ðthe€trial€courtððs€action€is€conditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€courtÐ F'–"& Ðconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823Ð /(#' ÐS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€conducting€our€review,€we€must€consider€the€defendantððsÐ )h$( Ðpotential€for€rehabilitation,€the€trial€and€sentencing€hearing€evidence,€the€pre„sentence€report,€theÐ *Q%) Ðsentencing€principles,€sentencing€alternative€arguments,€the€nature€and€character€of€the€offense,€theÐ ê*:&* Ðenhancing€and€mitigating€factors,€and€the€defendantððs€statements.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððððÐ Ó+#'+ Ð40-35-103(5),€-210(b);€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.òòóó€€We€are€to€also€recognize€that€the€defendant€bearsÐ ° Ðð ðthe€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€sentence€is€improper.ðð€€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.Ð ™é ÐÌà  àTurning€more€specifically€to€the€facts€of€this€case,€the€appellant€was€convicted€of€theft€ofÐ k» Ðproperty€over€$1,000€and€possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution.€€Theft€of€property€is€aÐ T¤ ÐClass€D€felony,€so€the€range€of€punishment€is€two€(2)€to€four€(4)€years.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð =  Ð112(a)(4).€Possession€of€contraband€in€a€penal€institution€is€a€Class€C€Felony,€so€the€range€ofÐ & v Ðpunishment€is€three€(3)€to€six€(6)€years.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€€40„35„112(a)(3).€€Ð  _ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€three€(3)€years€and€four€(4)€months€on€the€theftÐ á 1  Ðoffense€and€four€(4)€years€and€eight€(8)€months€on€the€drug€offense€and€ordered€the€sentences€to€beÐ Ê   Ðserved€consecutively€for€a€total€effective€sentence€of€eight€(8)€years.Ð ³  ÐÌà  àIn€imposing€the€appellantððs€sentence,€the€trial€court€determined€that€the€appellant€was€notÐ …Õ  Ða€favorable€candidate€for€an€alternative€sentence€and€that€several€mitigating€and€enhancing€factorsÐ n¾  Ðapplied.€€The€trial€court€determined€that€the€appellantððs€sentence€should€be€mitigated€on€his€theftÐ W§  Ðoffense€because€his€conduct€neither€caused€nor€threatened€serious€bodily€harm€although€the€trialÐ @ Ðcourt€decided€to€give€this€mitigating€factor€little€weight.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(1).€€€TheÐ )y Ðtrial€court€enhanced€the€appellantððs€sentence€based€on€his€extensive€prior€record.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð b Ððð€40„35„114(2).€Ð ûK ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€explained€its€ruling€as€follows:Ð Í ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€defendant€is€a€Range€I€standard€offender,€and€that€is€not€at€issue€here€.Ð Ÿï Ð.€.€.€ÐˆØÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€Court€has€commented€on€various€other€occasions€where€the€mitigatingÐ Zª Ðfactor€that€the€defendantððs€conduct€neither€caused€nor€threatened€serious€bodilyÐ C“ Ðinjury€should€be€applied€to€offenses€that€are€inherently€non„violent.€.€.€.€€€So€if€thatÐ ,| Ðmitigating€factor€applies,€it€does€not€carry€much,€if€any,€weight€with€the€Court.€€SoÐ e Ðout€of€an€abundance€of€caution,€the€Court€will€find€that€if€it€applies,€then€the€CourtÐ þN Ðgives€it€little€weight.€€Ðç 7Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à.€.€.€.€Ð¹" !Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€the€defendant€does€have€a€history€of€criminal€convictionsÐ ‹$Û# Ðor€criminal€behavior,€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€the€appropriateÐ t%Ä $ Ðrange.€€The€Court€places€significant€weight€upon€the€fact€that€the€defendant€has€beenÐ ]&­!% Ðconvicted€of€a€felony,€of€the€same€type€of€felony,€for€which€the€defendant€now€standsÐ F'–"& Ðbefore€this€Court.€€Ð/(#'Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€Court€also€places€significant€fact€that€the€defendant€has€several€otherÐ *Q%) Ðconvictions€involving€the€possession€of€drugs.€.€.€.€Ðê*:&*Ð Ð  ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà8  àà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€the€defendant€has€a€history€of€failure€to€abide€byÐ ° Ðconditions€of€release€into€the€community.€.€.€.€Ð™éÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à.€.€.€.Ðk»Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àFor€those€reasons,€the€Court€will€set€the€defendantððs€sentence€at€three€yearsÐ =  Ðand€four€months€on€the€theft€case,€giving€greater€weight€to€the€enhancing€factor€thatÐ & v Ðthe€defendant€has€a€history€of€criminal€conviction€or€criminal€behavior€since€he€hasÐ  _ Ða€similar€theft€charge;€and€to€four€years€and€eight€months€on€the€introduction€ofÐ ø H Ðcontraband€into€the€county€facility.€Ðá 1 Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOrdinarily,€in€balancing€these€concerns,€a€trial€court€should€start€at€the€presumptive€sentence,Ð ³  Ðenhance€the€sentence€within€the€range€for€existing€enhancement€factors,€and€then€reduce€theÐ œì  Ðsentence€within€the€range€for€existing€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€€Ann.€ðð€40-35-210(e).€€NoÐ …Õ  Ðparticular€weight€for€each€factor€is€prescribed€by€the€statute.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Santiagoóó,€914€S.W.2d€116,Ð n¾  Ð125€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€The€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trialÐ W§  Ðcourt€as€long€as€it€comports€with€the€sentencing€principles€and€purposes€of€our€code€and€as€long€asÐ @ Ðits€findings€are€supported€by€the€record.€€òòId.óó€€€The€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€recent€opinion€inÐ )y ÐòòBlakelyóó,€however,€has€called€into€question€the€continuing€validity€of€our€current€sentencing€scheme.€Ð b ÐIn€that€case,€the€Court,€applying€the€rule€in€òòApprendi€v.€New€Jerseyóó,€566€U.S.€466,€490€(2000),Ð ûK Ðstruck€down€a€provision€of€the€Washington€sentencing€guidelines€that€permitted€a€trial€judge€toÐ ä4 Ðimpose€an€ð ðexceptional€sentenceðð€upon€the€finding€of€certain€statutorily€enumerated€enhancementÐ Í Ðfactors.€€òòBlakelyóó,€542€U.S.€___,€124€S.€Ct.€at€2537„38.€€The€Court€observed€that€ð ðthe€ððstatutoryÐ ¶ Ðmaximumðð€for€òòApprendióó€purposes€is€the€maximum€sentence€a€judge€may€impose€òòsolelyóó€òòonóó€òòtheóó€òòbasisóóÐ Ÿï Ðòòofóó€òòtheóó€òòfactsóó€òòreflectedóó€òòinóó€òòtheóó€òòjuryóó€òòverdictóó€òòoróó€òòadmittedóó€òòbyóó€òòtheóó€òòdefendantóó.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€2536€(emphasis€inÐ ˆØ Ðoriginal).€€Finally,€the€Court€concluded€that€ð ðevery€defendant€has€the€òòrightóó€to€insist€that€theÐ qÁ Ðprosecutor€prove€to€a€jury€all€facts€legally€essential€to€the€punishment.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€2543€(emphasis€inÐ Zª Ðoriginal).Ð C“ ÐÌà  àDespite€òòBlakelyóó,€it€does€not€appear€that€the€application€of€enhancement€factor€(2)€wouldÐ e Ðviolate€the€rule€established€in€òòApprendióó€because€factor€(2)€is€based€upon€prior€criminal€convictions.€Ð þN ÐFurther,€the€appellant€herein€did€not€raise€a€òòBlakelyóó€claim€regarding€the€trial€courtððs€application€ofÐ ç 7 Ðenhancement€factor€(2)€in€conjunction€with€his€òòBlakelyóó€claim€on€consecutive€sentencing.€€Finally,Ð Ð!   Ðthe€authority€of€trial€judges€to€apply€mitigating€factors€has€not€been€called€into€question.€€Therefore,Ð ¹" ! Ðwe€determine€that€the€trial€court€properly€set€the€length€of€the€appellantððs€sentences€at€three€(3)€yearsÐ ¢#ò" Ðand€four€(4)€months€incarceration€for€the€theft€offense€and€four€(4)€years€and€eight€(8)€months€forÐ ‹$Û# Ðthe€drug€offense.€€Ð t%Ä $ ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€further€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€grant€some€type€ofÐ F'–"& Ðalternative€sentence.€€In€regards€to€alternative€sentencing,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„Ð /(#' Ð35„102(5)€provides€as€follows:€Ð )h$( ÐÌà8  àIn€recognition€that€state€prison€capacities€and€the€funds€to€build€and€maintain€themÐ ê*:&* Ðare€limited,€convicted€felons€committing€the€most€severe€offenses,€possessingÐ Ó+#'+ Ðcriminal€histories€evincing€a€clear€disregard€for€the€laws€and€morals€of€society,€andÐ ° Ðevincing€failure€of€past€efforts€at€rehabilitation€shall€be€given€first€priority€regardingÐ ™é Ðsentencing€involving€incarceration.€Ð‚ÒÐ Ð  ÐÌA€defendant€who€does€not€fall€within€this€class€of€offenders€ð ðand€who€is€an€especially€mitigatedÐ T¤ Ðoffender€or€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,€D,€or€E€felony€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorableÐ =  Ðcandidate€for€alternative€sentencing€in€the€absence€of€evidence€to€the€contrary.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð & v Ððð€40„35„102(6).€€Furthermore,€unless€sufficient€evidence€rebuts€the€presumption,€ð ðThe€trial€courtÐ  _ Ðmust€presume€that€a€defendant€sentenced€to€eight€years€or€less€is€an€offender€for€whom€incarcerationÐ ø H Ðwould€result€in€successful€rehabilitation€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòState€v.€Byrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,€379„80€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð á 1  ÐApp.€1993);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(a).€€As€a€Range€I,€standard€offender€convictedÐ Ê   Ðof€and€sentenced€to€less€than€eight€(8)€years€for€each€of€these€offenses,€the€appellant€was€eligible€forÐ ³  Ðprobation.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6);€40„35„303(a);€òòByrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€at€379„80.€Ð œì  ÐHowever,€all€offenders€who€meet€the€criteria€are€not€entitled€to€relief;€instead,€sentencing€issuesÐ …Õ  Ðmust€be€determined€by€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€each€case.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€744€S.W.2dÐ n¾  Ð919,€922€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)€(citing€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€235€(Tenn.€1986)).€€EvenÐ W§  Ðif€a€defendant€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€under€TennesseeÐ @ ÐCode€Annotated€section€40„35„102(6),€the€statutory€presumption€of€an€alternative€sentence€may€beÐ )y Ðovercome€ifÐ b Ðà8  à€Ð Ð(A)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€protect€society€by€restraining€a€defendant€who€hasÐ ä4 Ða€long€history€of€criminal€conduct;€Ð Í Ð(B)€Confinement€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€orÐ ¶ Ðconfinement€is€particularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€to€others€likelyÐ Ÿï Ðto€commit€similar€offenses;€or€Ð ˆØ Ð(C)€Measures€less€restrictive€than€confinement€have€frequently€or€recently€beenÐ qÁ Ðapplied€unsuccessfully€to€the€defendant€.€.€.€.€€ÐZªÐ Ð  ÐÐ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(A)„(C).€€In€choosing€among€possible€sentencing€alternatives,€theÐ ,| Ðtrial€court€should€also€consider€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„103(5),€which€states,€inÐ e Ðpertinent€part,€ð ð[t]he€potential€or€lack€of€potential€for€the€rehabilitation€or€treatment€of€a€defendantÐ þN Ðshould€be€considered€in€determining€the€sentence€alternative€or€length€of€a€term€to€be€imposed.ðð€Ð ç 7 ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(5);€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€305€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ð Ð!   ÐThe€trial€court€may€consider€a€defendantððs€untruthfulness€and€lack€of€candor€as€they€relate€to€theÐ ¹" ! Ðpotential€for€rehabilitation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Nunleyóó,€22€S.W.3d€282,€289€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999);€òòseeóó€òòÐ ¢#ò" ÐÌalsoóó€òòState€v.€Bunchóó,€646€S.W.2d€158,€160„61€(Tenn.€1983);€òòState€v.€Zeoliaóó,€928€S.W.2d€457,€463Ð t%Ä $ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€òòState€v.€Williamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€84€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995);€òòDowdyóó,Ð ]&­!% Ð894€S.W.2d€at€305„06.Ð F'–"& ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€herein,€the€trial€court€learned€through€the€appellantððs€testimony€at€the€sentencingÐ )h$( Ðhearing€and€the€pre„sentence€report€that€the€appellant€had€a€long€history€of€criminal€conduct.€€TheÐ *Q%) Ðappellantððs€criminal€record€contained€convictions€for€contempt€of€court,€three€convictions€for€drivingÐ ê*:&* Ðon€a€revoked€license,€failure€to€appear,€three€convictions€for€simple€possession/casual€exchange€ofÐ Ó+#'+ Ða€controlled€substance,€driving€with€no€license,€simple€assault,€criminal€trespassing,€theft€of€propertyÐ ° Ðbetween€$1,000€and€$10,000,€evading€arrest,€two€convictions€for€resisting€arrest€involving€a€weapon,Ð ™é Ðdriving€on€a€suspended€license,€disorderly€conduct€and€gambling.€€The€appellant€was€placed€onÐ ‚Ò Ðprobation€at€least€six€times,€and€probation€violation€warrants€were€sustained€on€two€occasions.€Ð k» ÐFurther,€the€appellant€was€scheduled€to€be€placed€on€probation€for€a€different€offense€a€mere€twoÐ T¤ Ðdays€after€this€offense€occurred.€€The€trial€court€recognized€that€the€appellant€was€presumptivelyÐ =  Ðeligible€for€probation€or€some€other€form€of€alternative€sentencing,€but€chose€to€deny€alternativeÐ & v Ðsentencing.€€We€conclude€that€the€record€supports€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€alternative€sentencing.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р _ ÐÌÌà  àThe€appellant€also€claims€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€ordering€consecutive€sentencing.€Ð Ê   ÐConsecutive€sentences€may€be€imposed€in€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€only€upon€a€determinationÐ ³  Ðthat€one€or€more€of€the€following€criteria€exist:Ð œì  ÐÌà8  à(1)€The€defendant€is€a€professional€criminal€who€has€knowingly€devoted€himself€toÐ n¾  Ðcriminal€acts€as€a€major€source€of€livelihood;€Ð W§  Ð(2)€The€defendant€is€an€offender€whose€record€of€criminal€activity€is€extensive;€Ð @ Ð(3)€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€mentally€abnormal€person€so€declared€by€aÐ )y Ðcompetent€psychiatrist€who€concludes€as€a€result€of€an€investigation€prior€toÐ b Ðsentencing€that€the€defendantððs€criminal€conduct€has€been€characterized€by€a€patternÐ ûK Ðof€repetitive€or€compulsive€behavior€with€heedless€indifference€to€consequences;€Ð ä4 Ð(4)€The€defendant€is€a€dangerous€offender€whose€behavior€indicates€little€or€noÐ Í Ðregard€for€human€life,€and€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€riskÐ ¶ Ðto€human€life€is€high;€Ð Ÿï Ð(5)€The€defendant€is€convicted€of€two€(2)€or€more€statutory€offenses€involving€sexualÐ ˆØ Ðabuse€of€a€minor€with€consideration€of€the€aggravating€circumstances€arising€fromÐ qÁ Ðthe€relationship€between€the€defendant€and€victim€or€victims,€the€time€span€ofÐ Zª Ðdefendantððs€undetected€sexual€activity,€the€nature€and€scope€of€the€sexual€acts€andÐ C“ Ðthe€extent€of€the€residual,€physical€and€mental€damage€to€the€victim€or€victims;€Ð ,| Ð(6)€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€an€offense€committed€while€on€probation;€Ð e Ð(7)€The€defendant€is€sentenced€for€criminal€contempt.€ÐþNÐ Ð  ÐÐ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„115(b).€€The€length€of€the€sentence,€when€consecutive€in€nature,€must€beÐ Ð!   Ðð ðjustly€deserved€in€relation€to€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(1),€andÐ ¹" ! Ðð ðno€greater€than€that€deservedðð€under€the€circumstances,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(2);€òòState€v.Ð ¢#ò" ÐLaneóó,€3€S.W.3d€456€(Tenn.€1999).Ð ‹$Û# Ðâ âà0  àÐt%Ä $(#(# Ðà  àIn€ordering€consecutive€service€of€the€sentences€herein,€the€trial€court€in€this€case€stated€asÐ ° Ðâ âfollows:€Ð ™é ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€Court€believes€that€where€there€is€an€argument€to€be€made€that€theÐ k» Ðdefendant€should€be€considered€for€consecutive€sentencing,€that€rather€than€to€set€aÐ T¤ Ðsentence€within€the€range€and€then€determine€whether€there€is€consecutiveÐ =  Ðsentencing€eligibility€or€not,€and€then€merely€adding€one€or€more€convictionsÐ & v Ðtogether,€that€the€better€approach€is€to€first€make€a€determination€whether€theÐ  _ Ðdefendant€is€eligible€for€consecutive€sentencing;€and€then€if€he€is,€derive€a€totalÐ ø H Ðnumber€of€years€that€serves€the€ends€of€the€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989.€Ð á 1  ÐSo€the€Court€looks€at€the€Stateððs€argument€that€the€defendant€is€eligible€forÐ Ê   Ðconsecutive€sentencing.€€And€the€Court€finds€that€he€is,€that€his€record€of€criminalÐ ³  Ðactivity€is€extensive.€€As€the€State€points€out,€the€defendant,€in€a€two„year€period€ofÐ œì  Ðtime,€has€had€one€felony€already€and€16€misdemeanor€convictions.€€Ð…Õ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€Court€places€significant€„€„€and€I€comment€the€defendant€missed€a€secondÐ W§  Ðpossibility€of€being€eligible€for€consecutive€sentencing€by€only€two€days€because€theÐ @ Ðdefendant,€had€he€been€placed€on€probation€two€days€earlier,€would€have€been€onÐ )y Ðprobation€when€these€offenses€occurred.€€The€significance€of€that€is€that€is€goes€toÐ b Ðthe€extensiveness€of€the€defendantððs€criminal€conduct.€€ÐûKÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€trial€court€correctly€determined€that€consecutive€sentencing€was€appropriateÐ Í Ðunder€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„115(b)(2).€€The€defendant,€while€only€twenty„oneÐ ¶ Ðyears€old,€has€an€extensive€criminal€history.€€As€stated€previously,€according€to€the€presentenceÐ Ÿï Ðreport,€he€had€prior€convictions€for€contempt€of€court,€three€convictions€for€driving€on€a€revokedÐ ˆØ Ðlicense,€failure€to€appear,€three€convictions€for€simple€possession/casual€exchange€of€a€controlledÐ qÁ Ðsubstance,€driving€with€no€license,€simple€assault,€criminal€trespassing,€theft€of€property€betweenÐ Zª Ð$1,000€and€$10,000,€evading€arrest,€two€convictions€for€resisting€arrest€involving€a€weapon,€drivingÐ C“ Ðon€a€suspended€license,€disorderly€conduct,€and€gambling.€€The€appellant€was€placed€on€probationÐ ,| Ðat€least€six€times,€and€probation€violation€warrants€were€sustained€on€two€occasions.€€Under€theseÐ e Ðcircumstances,€we€determine€that€consecutive€service€of€the€two€sentences,€as€directed€by€the€trialÐ þN Ðcourt,€is€appropriate.Ð ç 7 ÐÌÌÐ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓConclusionóóÐ t%Ä $ ÐÌÓæ½Óà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€Ð F'–"& ÐÔ#†XÅoXXX!./#ÔÔ‡X!.XXXÅoÔÌÔ#†XÅoXXX!.°¾#ÔÔ‡X!.XXXÅoÔà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌÔ#†XÅoXXX!.ó¾#Ôà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð *Q%) Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGE