ÿWPCN 0h _ûY~µ8Î)´@@ 9ôülÝ«´ï¶å›¿²z4É?]…éA3ŸBd1Kh 0‚¡Éh‡.u<~ÿ^v3ˆ¤—=C÷'\~O:x€)mùõ½jÅúÉÄê àz—;½ìi*ø#^BG3a U÷Ä3?S±~SÙHb''ñ[ áÿ=R9UBh^®Gʆa2¤Øävø*ür/W~e$â°ÓÌο6r¦Ú¯:í–)›‹Da²(.º¢Ç(iÔ± VPqH¯ÀÃæì¬ª{¾‰×þö{}“öª ;â™^|4 /duèÍ"çœï%s.^]:Z·í“ù&W'¾'¾ŽºWzUoµøB­e¬þPh†ó/„þY<㛪b¾arÚjPÍe#ÚÊÊÆÒËþDb2fCµƒ–jåsïëÃ'y6§¨†hþtÛ’—LüŒŸ\FzûÇf@×xÁ8˜ŽFײ©u$tÜø|ÅóÌí3¥M¶è9ªnùi\8X¬^¬n+Ÿháþ7•NÙâj ´ù’±ÊygkYõs@½Îsþ½W¨QäNl 1«íˆ4é¦òïšo_ù&a~ÙÀÙ$¢ ßn¡ÈiÏ`•Ìå™Î b#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% U N­ û û z Ò} zO ÒÉ ^ › w§ Æ« Æq Æ7Æý4ÃN×ÙèEê mìU@bCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 0ëKKKK B66 0¤S D3÷ D-* 0KWW AS¢Æõ 0¤» 0D_ A«£˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt"qD-s Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 53j1, ¡ ¡0Á£3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman - ù-(|G2ÅM$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€]-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôûUò»»Ô d(|3}$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€]-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3}$¢¢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€!XXdì»»d8ÑÔ€¼]-»»¼]-Ôà@ttìàÔ‡îRÃ]-ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼]-»îîRÃ+#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€August€20,€2002Ð üL ÐÔ‡X!X»¼]-ÔÌò òÔ#†¼]-»XX!?#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€ERWIN€SCOTT€PATTERSONÔ‡X!X»¼]-Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Hamilton€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€235211€€€€€€Stephen€M.€Ô_ÔBevilÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½ ` AßÐ ¾   ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2001„02652„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¹  ÐOctober€4,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant,€Erwin€Scott€Patterson,€entered€pleas€of€guilt€to€three€counts€of€vehicular€assault,Ð ŒÜ  Ðreckless€endangerment,€and€violation€of€the€driver's€license€law.€€A€charge€of€driving€under€theÐ xÈ  Ðinfluence€of€an€intoxicant€was€dismissed.€€The€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€four€years€for€oneÐ d´ Ðcount€of€vehicular€assault,€two€years€for€the€remaining€vehicular€assault€convictions,€two€years€forÐ P  Ðreckless€endangerment,€and€30€days€for€violation€of€the€driver's€license€law.€€An€application€forÐ <Œ Ðalternative€sentencing€was€denied.€€In€this€appeal,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€four„year€sentenceÐ (x Ðfor€vehicular€assault€was€excessive€and€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€an€alternative€sentence.€Ð d ÐThe€judgments€are€affirmed€as€modified.Ð P ÐÓúÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgments€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmed€as€Modifiedó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼]-»àX!°#ÔÔ‡X!X.¼]-ÔGary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,óó€andÐ ° ÐòòRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌÔ_ÔArdenaÔ_Ô€J.€Garth,€Public€Defender€(on€appeal),€Donna€Robinson,€Assistant€Public€Defender€(onÐ tÄ Ðappeal),€and€Ô_ÔMyrleneÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔMarsaÔ_Ô€and€Christian€J.€Coder,€Assistant€Public€Defenders€(at€trial),€for€theÐ `° Ðappellant,€Erwin€Scott€Patterson.Ð L œ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Kathy€D.€Ô_ÔAslingerÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€andÐ $"t! ÐThomas€E.€Kimball,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð #`" ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼]-»XX!0 #ÔÔ‡X!X»¼]-ÔÐ è$8 $ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼]-»XX!^ #ÔÔ‡X!X»¼]-ÔÓ  Óà  àOn€the€night€of€Ô#†¼]-»XX!¼ #ÔÔ€X!X»¼]-ÔNovember€19,€2000,€the€defendant,€who€had€been€drinking€at€the€Governor'sÐ À&"& ÐLounge€in€Chattanooga,€drove€his€vehicle€onto€Bonny€Oaks€Drive€at€speeds€in€excess€of€70€milesÐ ¬'ü"' Ðper€hour€and€passed€a€vehicle€driven€by€Sherry€Wilson.€€While€in€the€wrong€lane€of€traffic,€theÐ ˜(è#( Ðdefendant€sideswiped€a€car€driven€by€Meredith€Ô_ÔStalyonÔ_Ô€and€occupied€by€Ashley€Ô_ÔHobbsÔ_Ô.€€HisÐ „)Ô$) Ðautomobile€then€struck€head„on€a€vehicle€driven€by€Dustin€Norman,€age€22.€€The€defendant€andÐ p*À%* ÐNorman€were€seriously€injured.€€Norman€suffered€broken€feet,€a€broken€elbow,€and€crushed€hips,Ð \+¬&+ Ðwhich€required€reconstruction.€€His€spleen€and€liver€were€lacerated,€causing€a€loss€of€75%€of€hisÐ H,˜', Ðblood.€€Norman's€face€was€crushed€from€his€chin€to€his€eye€sockets.€€By€the€time€of€the€sentencingÐ 4-„(-ýÊ ÐÔ_Ôhearing,€he€had€undergone€six€different€surgeries€and€faced€three€more€operations€for€reconstructionÐ ° Ðand€bone€grafting€of€his€face.€€His€college€education€was€interrupted€and€medical€bills,€only€someÐ œì Ðof€which€were€paid€by€insurance,€had€accumulated€to€approximately€$200,000.00.€€Norman's€fatherÐ ˆØ Ðis€disabled€and€his€mother,€who€provided€care€for€the€victim,€missed€a€considerable€amount€of€timeÐ tÄ Ðfrom€her€work.€€The€amount€of€the€medical€bills,€which€were€in€Ms.€Norman's€name,€resulted€in€herÐ `° Ðfiling€bankruptcy.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThe€probation€officer€reported€that€the€defendant,€23€years€old€at€the€time€of€the€crimes,€hadÐ $ t Ðgraduated€from€high€school€in€1995.€€Divorced,€the€defendant€had€joint€custody€with€his€ex„wife€ofÐ  ` Ðtwo€children,€ages€two€and€three€and€a€half.€€He€had€a€blood€alcohol€level€of€.23€at€the€time€of€theÐ ü L  Ðaccident€and€tested€positive€for€benzodiazepines.€€By€the€time€of€the€hearing,€the€defendant€had€beenÐ è 8  Ðemployed€as€a€cook€for€four€and€a€half€months€at€a€restaurant.€€The€defendant€was€current€in€childÐ Ô$  Ðsupport€payments.€€The€defendant€suffered€a€concussion,€a€broken€collar€bone,€a€broken€sternum,Ð À  Ðfractures€to€the€ribs€on€his€left€side,€a€lung€puncture,€a€broken€right€arm,€a€broken€foot,€and€severalÐ ¬ü  Ðlacerations€in€the€accident.€€The€severity€of€the€injuries€to€his€left€arm€had€prevented€him€fromÐ ˜è  Ðcontinuing€his€employment€as€a€welder.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAbout€three€and€one„half€months€after€the€offenses,€the€defendant€pled€guilty€to€14€countsÐ \¬ Ðof€passing€worthless€checks€and€was€ordered€to€pay€restitution€in€the€approximate€sum€of€$3,000.00.€Ð H˜ ÐAt€the€time€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€he€had€timely€made€payments€in€accordance€with€the€order.€Ð 4„ ÐHe€had€no€other€criminal€convictions.€€The€defendant€made€the€following€statement€to€the€probationÐ  p Ðofficer:Ð  \ ÐÌà8  àà ` àI€take€full€responsibility€for€the€accident.€€When€I€got€into€my€car€that€night,Ð ä4 ÐI€did€not€feel€intoxicated,€but€I€was€too€sleepy€to€be€driving.€€In€my€opinion,€that€isÐ Ð  Ðjust€as€bad€as€being€drunk.€€Ð¼ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€only€one€enhancement€factorÐ ”ä Ðapplicable,€that€the€injuries€to€the€victim€were€particularly€great.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð €Ð Ð114(6).€€It€concluded€that€the€family€and€community€support€for€the€defendant€qualified€as€aÐ l¼ Ðmitigating€factor€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„113(13).€€Because€the€trial€courtÐ X ¨ Ðdetermined€that€the€mitigating€factor€was€far€outweighed€by€the€seriousness€of€the€injuries€to€theÐ D!” Ðvictim,€it€imposed€a€four„year€sentence,€the€maximum€within€the€range.€€At€a€hearing€on€a€motionÐ 0"€  Ðto€reconsider,€the€state€conceded€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€applied€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ #l! Ððð€40„35„114(6).€€Because€the€personal€injuries€suffered€by€the€victim€were€an€element€of€the€offenseÐ $X" Ðof€vehicular€assault,€the€state€acknowledged€that€the€enhancement€factor€could€not€be€applied.€€òòSeeóó€òòÐ ô$D # ÐState€v.€Williamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€82€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(citing€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2dÐ à%0!$ Ð597,€602€(Tenn.€1994)).€€The€trial€court€declined€to€modify€the€sentence€on€the€basis€that€theÐ Ì&"% Ðdefendant€had€failed€to€comply€with€the€terms€of€his€release€by€passing€worthless€checks.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð ¸'#& ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(13).€€The€defendant€argues€that€the€four„year€sentence€for€the€vehicularÐ ¤(ô#' Ðassault€of€Dustin€Norman€was€excessive€and€that,€in€any€event,€he€should€have€been€grantedÐ )à$( Ðprobation€or€a€sentence€of€split€confinement.€€The€defendant€also€asserts€that€the€trial€court€shouldÐ |*Ì%) Ðhave€applied€an€additional€mitigating€factor:€€that€the€defendant€committed€the€offense€under€suchÐ h+¸&* Ðunusual€circumstances€that€it€is€unlikely€that€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€law€motivated€hisÐ ° Ðconduct.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(11).€€Ð œì Ðà  àÌà  àThe€state€submits€that€the€four„year€sentence€is€warranted€because€the€defendant€qualifiedÐ tÄ Ðas€having€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thoseÐ `° Ðnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range,€an€enhancement€factor€under€Tennessee€CodeÐ L œ ÐAnnotated€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€Because€the€defendant€had€14€misdemeanor€convictions€for€passingÐ 8 ˆ Ðworthless€checks€totaling€$3,281.02€by€the€time€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€state€contends€that€theÐ $ t Ðenhancement€factor€should€be€given€considerable€weight,€thereby€warranting€the€maximum€possibleÐ  ` Ðsentence€for€the€Norman€vehicular€assault.€€The€state€does€not€argue€that€the€defendant€had€failedÐ ü L  Ðto€comply€with€the€terms€of€his€release€on€bail.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àWhen€there€is€a€challenge€to€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€it€is€theÐ À  Ðduty€of€this€court€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinations€made€byÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€"conditioned€uponÐ ˜è  Ðthe€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€allÐ „Ô  Ðrelevant€facts€and€circumstances."€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.Ð pÀ ÐJonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€600€(Tenn.€1994).€€"If€the€trial€court€applies€inappropriate€factors€orÐ \¬ Ðotherwise€fails€to€follow€the€1989€Sentencing€Act,€the€presumption€of€correctness€falls."€€òòState€v.Ð H˜ ÐSheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€123€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€The€Sentencing€Commission€CommentsÐ 4„ Ðprovide€that€the€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€the€impropriety€of€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ  p ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„401,€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àOur€review€requires€an€analysis€of€(1)€the€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencingÐ ä4 Ðhearing;€(2)€the€presentence€report;€(3)€the€principles€of€sentencing€and€the€arguments€of€counselÐ Ð  Ðrelative€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(4)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€offense;€(5)€any€mitigatingÐ ¼  Ðor€enhancing€factors;€(6)€any€statements€made€by€the€defendant€in€his€own€behalf;€and€(7)€theÐ ¨ø Ðdefendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€„210;Ð ”ä ÐòòState€v.€Smithóó,€735€S.W.2d€859,€863€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àIn€calculating€the€sentence€for€a€Class€B,€C,€D,€or€E€felony€conviction,€the€presumptiveÐ X ¨ Ðsentence€is€the€minimum€in€the€range€if€there€are€no€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ D!” ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„210(c).€€If€there€are€enhancement€but€no€mitigating€factors,€the€trial€court€may€set€theÐ 0"€  Ðsentence€above€the€minimum,€but€still€within€the€range.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(d).€€AÐ #l! Ðsentence€involving€both€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€requires€an€assignment€of€relativeÐ $X" Ðweight€for€the€enhancement€factors€as€a€means€of€increasing€the€sentence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð ô$D # Ð210(e).€€The€sentence€must€then€be€reduced€within€the€range€by€any€weight€assigned€to€the€mitigatingÐ à%0!$ Ðfactors€present.€€òòId.óóÐ Ì&"% ÐÌà  àEspecially€mitigated€or€standard€offenders€convicted€of€Class€C,€D,€or€E€felonies€are,€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcourse,€presumed€to€be€favorable€candidates€"for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€the€absence€ofÐ )à$( Ðâ âevidence€to€the€contrary."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-102(6).€€With€certain€statutory€exceptions,€noneÐ |*Ì%) Ðof€which€apply€here,€probation€must€be€automatically€considered€by€the€trial€court€if€the€sentenceÐ ° Ðimposed€is€eight€years€or€less.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-35-303(b)€(Supp.€2000).€€Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àAmong€the€factors€applicable€to€probation€consideration€are€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,Ð tÄ Ðthe€defendant's€criminal€record,€social€history€and€present€condition,€and€the€deterrent€effect€uponÐ `° Ðand€best€interest€of€the€defendant€and€the€public.€€òòState€v.€Grearóó,€568€S.W.2d€285,€286€(Tenn.€1978).€Ð L œ ÐThe€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€offenses€may€often€be€so€egregious€as€to€preclude€the€grant€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðprobation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Poeóó,€614€S.W.2d€403,€404€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€A€lack€of€candor€mayÐ $ t Ðalso€militate€against€a€grant€of€probation.€€òòState€v.€Bunchóó,€646€S.W.2d€158,€160€(Tenn.€1983).€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àOur€review€must€be€de€novo€without€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€The€trial€court€Ð è 8  Ðincorrectly€relied€upon€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„114(6),€that€the€injuries€inflicted€uponÐ Ô$  Ðthe€victim€were€particularly€great.€€The€state€concedes€in€this€appeal€that€because€the€injuries€qualifyÐ À  Ðas€an€element€of€the€offense€of€vehicular€assault,€that€the€injuries€were€particularly€great€may€not€beÐ ¬ü  Ðutilized€as€an€enhancement€factor.€€Further,€the€apparent€reference€to€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ ˜è  Ððð40„35„114(13),€that€the€felony€was€committed€while€the€defendant€was€on€bail€for€the€felonyÐ „Ô  Ðcharge,€would€not€be€applicable€because,€as€indicated,€the€defendant€had€apparently€written€theÐ pÀ Ðchecks€prior€to€the€accident,€even€though€the€warrants€were€issued€afterward.€€According€to€theÐ \¬ Ðtestimony€of€the€defendant,€he€had€written€the€checks€in€Alabama€prior€to€the€time€he€wasÐ H˜ Ðhospitalized€and€"they€were€clearing€while€I€was€out€of€work."€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àIn€this€appeal,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€prior€criminal€history€enhancement€factor€shouldÐ  \ Ðnot€be€applied€because€the€convictions€did€not€occur€until€after€the€date€of€the€offense€and€becauseÐ øH Ð"the€checks€only€became€worthless€[when€he]€did€not€receive€his€paycheck€while€in€the€hospital€andÐ ä4 Ðthen€was€unable€to€work€for€a€long€period€of€time€due€to€his€own€extensive€injuries."€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIf€the€checks€were€written€prior€to€the€accident€without€sufficient€funds€in€his€account,€thatÐ ¨ø Ðwould€qualify,€in€our€view,€as€criminal€behavior€and€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„114(1)Ð ”ä Ðwould€apply.€€That€the€warrants€were€issued€afterward€would€not€make€a€difference.€€Furthermore,Ð €Ð Ðany€criminal€behavior€occurring€prior€to€the€sentencing€hearing€may€be€considered€as€anÐ l¼ Ðenhancement€factor€whether€the€criminal€behavior€occurred€before€or€after€the€commission€of€theÐ X ¨ Ðoffense.€€This€court€so€decreed€in€òòState€v.€Burl€Jarrettóó,€No.€02C01„9710„CC„00418€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð D!” ÐApp.,€at€Jackson,€Aug.€21,€1998),€and€òòState€v.€John€Allen€Chapmanóó,€No.€01C01„9604„CC„00137Ð 0"€  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Nashville,€Sept.€30,€1997).€€In€summary,€the€trial€court€could€have€appliedÐ #l! Ðprior€criminal€history€as€an€enhancement€factor.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àAll€of€the€defendant's€prior€offenses€were€misdemeanors€which€resulted€in€suspendedÐ à%0!$ Ðsentences€and€orders€of€restitution.€€€Because€the€testimony€at€trial€established€that€the€defendant€wasÐ Ì&"% Ðcurrent€in€all€orders€of€restitution€and€also€in€his€child€support€payments,€this€court€will€not€giveÐ ¸'#& Ðgreat€weight€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€It€is€arguable,€at€least,€that€no€warrantsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwould€have€been€issued€had€the€defendant€not€been€out€of€work€due€to€his€own€injuries.€Ð )à$( ÐParenthetically€speaking,€this€court€would€observe€that€a€maximum€sentence€would€have€beenÐ |*Ì%) Ðentirely€appropriate€if€the€severity€of€the€injuries€to€Norman€could€have€been€considered.€€Because,Ð h+¸&* Ðhowever,€this€factor€may€not€be€considered€and€because€the€defendant's€prior€criminal€behaviorÐ ° Ðshould€be€given€lesser€weight,€this€court,€in€consideration€of€the€mitigating€factor€found€applicableÐ œì Ðby€the€trial€judge,€can€add€only€one€year€to€the€two„year€presumptive€sentence.€€This€court€rejectsÐ ˆØ Ðthe€defendant's€claim€that€the€offense€was€committed€under€such€unusual€circumstances€that€it€isÐ tÄ Ðunlikely€that€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€law€motivated€his€conduct.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð `° Ð35„113(11).€€There€is€little€proof€on€his€claim,€but€the€amount€of€time€the€defendant€spent€consumingÐ L œ Ðalcohol€prior€to€operating€his€vehicle€suggests€that€his€choice€to€drive€was€not€a€spontaneous€act.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐEven€if€that€mitigating€factor€were€applicable,€this€court€would€not€lessen€the€sentence€on€thatÐ $ t Ðground.€€Accordingly,€this€court€must€modify€the€sentence€for€vehicular€assault€from€four€to€threeÐ  ` Ðyears.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àNext,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€an€alternative€sentence.€Ð Ô$  ÐThe€defendant€points€to€a€reported€case€in€which€one€convicted€of€vehicular€homicide€was€grantedÐ À  Ðprobation€in€the€trial€court.€€He€argues€that€a€sentence€of€split€confinement,€intensive€supervisedÐ ¬ü  Ðprobation,€mandatory€counseling,€and€extended€community€service€was€a€reasonable€alternativeÐ ˜è  Ðgiven€his€remorse€and€his€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àWhile€the€defendant€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€an€alternative€sentence€inÐ \¬ Ðthe€event€of€evidence€to€the€contrary,€it€is€evident€in€this€instance€that€confinement€is€necessary€toÐ H˜ Ðavoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense.€€"Each€case€must€be€bottomed€upon€its€own€facts."€Ð 4„ ÐòòState€v.€Tayloróó,€744€S.W.2d€919,€922€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€The€trial€court€specificallyÐ  p Ðdetermined€that€the€defendant€had€demonstrated€a€flagrant€disregard€for€the€safety€of€others€byÐ  \ Ðoperating€his€vehicle€at€a€high€rate€of€speed€while€having€an€unusually€high€blood€alcohol€content.€Ð øH ÐThe€consequences€were€devastating,€especially€for€Norman.€€In€our€view,€the€proof€established€thatÐ ä4 Ðthe€defendant€drove€his€vehicle€at€a€high€rate€of€speed€on€the€wrong€side€of€the€road.€€He€passed€oneÐ Ð  Ðvehicle€and€sideswiped€another€before€striking€Norman's€vehicle€head„on.€€The€record€establishesÐ ¼  Ðthat€the€injuries€suffered€by€the€victim€were€extensive,€of€a€permanent€nature,€and€required€aÐ ¨ø Ðsubstantial€amount€of€medical€care€and€treatment.€€òòóóIn€our€view,€the€trial€court€properly€denied€theÐ ”ä Ðalternative€sentence.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€sentence€for€the€vehicular€assault€of€Dustin€Norman€is€modified€from€fourÐ X ¨ Ðto€three€years;€otherwise,€the€judgments€are€affirmed.Ð D!” ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ô$D # Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGE