WPCz  oJRHLIPL[+|Ӫ6z?3fkӔ. }M)"x 6۸Vfa(pa\N]lUGK,_'MZSEJ77(z_0{Et#[IT#Z( ȫ@Ȇ)[KKcYڕ 7sL /GjG] #^o6a1",)pv (,lyKc\B׃ڼCWR?!~l'U d@tOvv@/σRF/6m4 "Y{\El1J>6?9! \zD`Ԛt/|Tҷ:KfSXzΥ$M[uhѰ5[SQs9 dC=f$G*i&q|G ? ۯ'=*/Z# CY-͟\k bbUN\ % 0^ 8wD4H\ zk m # U@   ] # 0DN- 1/ 0 cE2! 1uSV 72Sboooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0wwww Bbb 0 D3# D-V 0K AS! 0 0D A(hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    () J~'L3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUHP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 60(9 Z(Times New Roman Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0  (CEMU]emu}AutoList1(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(;3$2#  0  .3  0   ( R?$      1  V  _ VVTheAppellantwasoriginallychargedwithfourthoffense_DUI_,whichisafelony.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.  5510403(a)(1)(1998Repl.).Thischargewaslateramendedtothirdoffense_DUI_,whichisamisdemeanor.SeeTenn. n CodeAnn.5510403(a)(1)(1998Repl.).3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)  R?$      2  V  _ VVPriortotrial,theAppellantpledguiltytoDORLandtheviolationoftheopencontainerlaw.Basedonthe  Appellantsguiltyplea,theStateagreedtonolleprosequithecountchargingapriorDORL.Thus,thejuryonly n consideredtheDUIoffense. L R?$      3  V  _Theindictmentrecitedthe VVfollowingpriorconvictionsfor_DUI_:   (83"3"  8  32(  1  )3  0`     February26,1990,intheGeneralSessionsCourtofShelbyCounty,Tennessee;3݌n` `  Ќ  "3"  8  32(  2  )3  0`     November15,1991,intheJusticeCourtof_Yalobusha_ԀCounty,Mississippi;3݌,|` `  Ќ  "3"  8  32(  3  )3  0`     March4,1994,intheGeneralSessionsCourtof_Fayette_ԀCounty,Tennessee.3=݌:` `  Ќ  i) I R?$      4  V  _Interestingly,TrialExhibitFiveconsistsoftheAppellants StateofTennesseeDepartmentofSafetydriving  recordwhichreflectsseventeenvariouslicensinginfractions.- -(|G2?$ !.8 dd8         0  V d(|3j$ !.8 dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3j$ !.8 dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8 dd8     _    8OXXdd8@tt INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#  #Ԉ      @  @` AssignedonBriefsNovember15,2000 @ XOX  # XXO"#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.MARKA.SCARBOROUGHXOX   4 @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtfor_Hickman_ԀCounty  ( @@No.995123CRITimothyL.Easter,Judge   @@*AV) ` dE<o` A p  @@TTNo.M200001359CCAR3CDFiledDecember28,_2000_ e  AV) ` dE<0` A 1      XOXXXOMarkA.Scarboroughappealsthesentencingdecisionofthe_Hickman_ԀCountyCircuitCourt  \ followinghisjuryconvictionofdrivingundertheinfluence.Theissueofenhancedpunishmentas B aprior_DUI_Ԁoffenderwassubmittedtothetrialcourt.ThecourtfoundtheAppellantguiltyof_DUI_, ( thirdoffense,andsentencedhimtoelevenmonths,twentyninedayswith180daystobeservedin  confinementfollowedbysixmonthsprobation.Atthemotionfornewtrial,thetrialcourtmodified  itspriorrulingandreducedtheAppellantsconvictionto_DUI_,secondoffense.TheAppellants180  dayperiodofconfinementwasnotmodified.Onappeal,theAppellantarguesthatthetrialcourt p erredinfailingtoreducehissentenceafteritreducedhisconvictionfrom_DUI_,thirdoffense,to_DUI_, V secondoffense.Becausetherecordisincompleteforreview,weaffordthesentenceimposedbythe < trialcourtthepresumptionofcorrectness.Accordingly,weaffirm. "r #XOXX XO## XXO#XOX  Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmed.  $   # XO #XOX. DavidG.Hayes,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJerryL.SmithandNorma    McGeeOgle,JJ.,joined. l!! GaryM.Howell,Columbia,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,MarkA.Scarborough. 8## PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter,MichaelMoore,SolicitorGeneral,MarvinE. %T % Clements,Jr.,AssistantAttorneyGeneral,RonaldL.Davis,DistrictAttorneyGeneral,andLee %:!& Dryer,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. & "' # XXOe #XOX 6 @@OO& OPINION # XXO #XOX  -j(. # XXOu#  XOX  XOXXXO  InNovemberof1999,theAppellant,MarkA.Scarborough,wasindictedbya_Hickman_  CountyGrandJuryuponchargesof(1)drivingundertheinfluence,fourthoffense;_ #  1      _Ԁ(2)drivingon | arevokedlicense,secondoffense;and(3)violationoftheopencontainerlaw.OnFebruary24, b 2000,ajuryfoundtheAppellantguiltyof_DUI_. #  2      ׀Followinghis_DUI_Ԁconviction,theAppellant H waivedhisrighttoajuryandagreedtosubmittheissueofenhancedpunishmenttothecourt._ #  3      _ԀThe . ~ trialcourtfoundtheAppellantguiltyof_DUI_,thirdoffense.The VerdictOrderincludedinthe  d recordstatesasfollows:  J 8  Defendantissentencedto11/29at75%toserve180daysdayfordayin_Hickman_    CountyJailreducedto150daysifDefendanthasmadearrangementstoattenda30    dayinpatienttreatmentprogrambeforereportingon32400.Drivingprivilegesare   suspendedfor4years.x    e  OnMarch13,2000,theAppellantfiledamotionfornewtrial,whichwasheardandlater D  deniedbythetrialcourt.Thetrialcourtdid,however,modifyitsoriginalrulingandfoundthatthe *z  prior1991convictionfor_DUI_ԀinMississippishouldnothavebeenadmittedbecauseit couldnotbe ` satisfiedthattheMississippiconvictioncompliedwiththerequirementsofthelawsofthisState. F Thus,thetrialcourtreducedtheAppellantsconvictionfromthirdoffense_DUI_Ԁtosecondoffense , _DUI_.Althoughthetrialcourtorderedthatthefineandsentenceremainthesame,thecourtdidreduce  thesuspensionoftheAppellantsdrivingprivilegesfromfouryearstotwoyears.Onappeal,the  Appellantassertsthatthetrialcourterredinfailingtoreducehissentencewhenitreducedhis  convictionfromthirdoffense_DUI_Ԁtosecondoffense_DUI_.  t   The"technical"recordsubmittedbytheCircuitCourtClerkof_Hickman_ԀCountycontainsthe @ notation: Therewasnocourtreporterinthiscasethereforenotranscriptwillbesent.Also &v conspicuouslyabsentfromtherecordisthetrialcourtshearingfollowingthejurytrialontheissue  \  ofenhancedpunishment,theAppellantssentencinghearing,andtheAppellantsmotionfornewtrial B whichresultedinmodificationofhis_DUI_Ԁconviction.Insum,otherthanfiveexhibitsintroducedat  trial,noevidenceisincludedintherecord. #  4      ׀     Inhisbrief,theAppellantrequeststhiscourtto reducetheperiodofconfinementin b Appellantssentencefrom180[days],whichisoneandonehalftimestheminimumforthirdoffense, H to67days,whichisoneandonehalftimestheminimumforsecondoffense.Wedecline . ~ applicationoftheAppellantsproposedmathematicalsentencingformula.Thesentencinglawsof  d thisstaterequirethiscourttoconductadenovoreviewontherecordwhenadefendantssentence  J ischallengedonappeal.SentencingCommissionComments,Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d).  0 Denovoreviewentailsexaminationofthosesamefactsasconsideredbythetrialcourtincludingthe    evidenceattrial,theevidenceatthesentencinghearing,thenatureandcharacteristicsofthecriminal    conductinvolvedandenhancingandmitigatingfactors.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210(b)(1)(4)(5).   Therecordinthiscaseisdevoidofsuchfactualinformation.Whennoreport,recitalortranscriptis x  available,theAppellanthasadutytoprepareastatementofevidence fromthebestavailablemeans, ^  includingtheappellantsrecollection.SeeTenn.R.App.P.24(c).TheAppellantfailedtomeetthis D  requirement.Wehaverepeatedlyheldthatfailuretoincludethetranscriptofthetrialcourt *z  proceedingsintherecordprohibitsthiscourtfromconductingameaningfuldenovoreview.Inthe ` absenceofatranscriptoftheproceedingsrelevanttoanissuepresentedforreview,theappellatecourt F isprecludedfromconsideringthemeritsoftheissue.SeeTenn.R.App.P.24(b).Iftheappellate , recordisinadequate,thereviewingcourtmustpresumethatthetrialcourtruledcorrectly.SeeState  v.Ivy,868S.W.2d724,728(Tenn._Crim_.App.1993).Theobligationofpreparingacompleteand  adequaterecordfortheissuespresentedonappealrestsupontheappealingparty.SeeTenn.R.App.  P.24(b).Forthisreason,theissueiswaived. t    CONCLUSION &v     Becausetheappellaterecordwasincompleteuponappeal,wemustpresumethetrialcourt B ruledcorrectly.Accordingly,theappealisdismissedandthejudgmentofthe_Hickman_ԀCounty ( CircuitCourtisaffirmed.    #XOXX XO#     m     u   ___________________________________ <#"      m     u   DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE