ÿWPC  …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñb 0‹ 0D“ × ß ç wï  0J 0TY 0^­ 0h s 0r{ 0|í 0†i 0ï 1u Bô 0d D3u 0@¨U>èB)&DCOU *’ AM¼â 8ë­#XÐv~(vÓ¦ AOyÆÈ 0DŽ D/Ò B ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡Ô¡¨ ½¬ @ d3|x’- ù-(;(2¹/$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝòòÒ4°ÒÒ„°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó.XDYZ[]^D_`aDbcedefDghDijkDlmDnoDpqersDtuvwxy}~D€e‚ƒD„…D†‡DˆU‰Ó€2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a) dP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ$$$$'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d////7Border 1dd< Œ 9p`(Arial€-0Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ØÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌNovember€6,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó .Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝòòÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ôÔThis,€although€antiquated€but€viable€legal€doctrine,€is€known€as€òòcrimen€trahit€personamóó.€€Translated€it€means€theÏcrime€carries€the€person.€€In€practice,€€it€means€that€the€commission€of€the€crime€through€an€agent€gives€the€courts€of€the€placeÏwhere€the€crime€is€committed€jurisdiction€over€the€principal€offender.€€Ô€1XÔÌ £Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝòòÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ôÔThe€presentence€report€reveals€that€the€appellant€had€previously€been€arrested€and/or€convicted€of€fraud€involvingÏcredit€cards,€bad€checks,€larcenies,€and€theft€of€property€crimes.€€Ô€1XÔÌ NÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝòòÒ 4 ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ôÔThe€record€also€reveals€that€the€appellant€was€out€on€bail€when€the€present€crime€was€committed.€€Ô€1XÔÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€.ÔÝ  Ý›Ò 4 ÒÒ ° ÒÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ќـ€ÙÔ€1ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€230A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÓ ` ܆XDp”X Óà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€à à€€€€àQ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌà àÓ` °‡XDp”XÓ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à ààQ àà àMAY€1997€SESSIONó óÌÌÌÌÌà àÓ ` ®DÓò òÌÓ` cÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àó ó)€ÌÓ ` ¸ cDÓà àà à)à àC.C.A.€No.€€œ01C01„9604„CC„00151›€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àAppellee,à à)Ìà àà à)à àDickson€CountyÌV.€€€€€€€à à)Ìà àà à)à àHonorable€Leonard€W.€Martin,€JudgeÌò òà àó óà à)ò òÌDOROTHY€SHELDON,ó óà à)à à(Forgery)à àà à)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àAppellant.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌÓ` ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌMichael€J.€Flanagan€à àCharles€W.€BursonÌDale€M.€Quillen€€€€€€à àAttorney€General€&€Reporter€ÌAttorneys€at€LawÌ95€White€Bridge€Roadà àEugene€J.€HoneaÌSuite€208,€Cavalier€Buildingà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌNashville,€TN€37205à àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àDan€M.€AlsobrooksÌà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àRobert€S.€WilsonÌà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àP.O.€Box€580€Ìà àCharlotte,€TN€37036ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€___________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌó óÌÌò òPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,ó óÌJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÑ  ÑÑ7€–uXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ ÑÓ ` ¸ pÓò òÔ  Ôà àà ààQ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌÓÓÌÓ ` °§XÓà àThe€appellant,€Dorothy€Sheldon,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€forgery.€€SheÏwas€sentenced€as€a€Range€III,€persistent€offender€to€four€years€incarceration.€ÏShe€appeals€raising€the€following€issues€for€our€review:ÌÓÓà8 à1.€€Whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€her€conviction;ÌÌà8 à2.€€Whether€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€establish€venue€in€€€€€€€ÏDickson€County;€and€ÌÌà8 à3.€€Whether€the€manner€of€service€of€her€sentence€is€proper.€ÌÓÓÌUpon€review,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€of€conviction€and€sentence.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓFACTSÌÌÓ  Óó óà àThe€appellant€called€Leader€Furniture€in€Dickson€County€andÏrepresented€herself€to€be€Victoria€Spann.€€She€requested€financing€andÏordered€several€items€of€furniture€to€be€delivered€to€her€home€in€HumphreysÍCounty.€€She€gave€the€store€clerk€her€correct€address€and€phone€number€butÏused€a€bogus€name€and€social€security€number.€€This€information€was€used€toÏcomplete€a€credit€application€which€was€forwarded€to€Tennessee€CreditÏCorporation€(Tennessee€Credit)€for€approval.€€Tennessee€Credit€noticed€theÏaddress€discrepancy€but€nevertheless€approved€the€application.€€The€furnitureÏwas€delivered€to€the€appellant's€residence€in€Humphreys€County.€€Upon€arrival,Ïshe€forged€the€name€Victoria€Spann€to€the€store's€sale€invoice€and€to€a€securityÏagreement.€€ÌÌà àA€diligent€UPS€employee€noticed€the€scheduled€delivery€to€VictoriaÏSpann.€€He€called€the€real€Victoria€Spann€and€told€her€that€furniture€had€beenÏdelivered€under€her€name€to€a€strange€address.€€Ms.€Spann€was€puzzled€andÏbegan€to€investigate€the€situation.€€She€informed€Tennessee€Credit€thatÏsomething€was€afoot.€€Tennessee€Credit€and€Leader€Furniture€began€toÏinvestigate.€€Apparently,€at€this€point€the€appellant€thought€it€prudent€to€rectifyÏher€fraud.€€She€called€Leader€Furniture€and€stated€that€she€had€mistakenlyÏgiven€an€incorrect€social€security€number€on€her€credit€application.€€SheÏinsisted€that€her€correct€number€be€inserted€on€the€credit€application.€ÏThereafter,€the€appellant€sent€a€cashier's€check€to€Tennessee€Credit€to€pay€offÏthe€debt€in€full.€€However,€she€overpaid.€€Tennessee€Credit€requested€that€sheÏcome€to€its€office€in€Dickson€County€and€pick€up€the€$4.23€overpayment.€€TheÏappellant€complied€and€accepted€the€refund€check€endorsing€it€in€the€name€ofÏVictoria€Spann.€€Subsequently,€she€was€arrested€and€indicted€for€forgery.€€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIÌÌÓ  Óó óà àIn€her€first€issue€the€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€presented€atÏtrial€is€insufficient€to€support€her€conviction.€€Specifically,€she€argues€that€theÏstate€failed€to€prove€that€she€forged€a€writing€and€failed€to€prove€that€sheÏintended€to€defraud€anyone€because€the€debt€was€paid€in€full.€€We€disagree.€€ÌÌà àGreat€weight€is€afforded€a€verdict€reached€by€a€jury€in€a€criminal€trial.€€AÏjury€verdict€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€stateððs€witnesses€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657€S.W.2d€405,Ï410€(Tenn.€1983).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawnÏtherefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Moreover,€aÏguilty€verdict€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€which€the€appellantÏenjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493ÏS.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcomingÏthis€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòId.óó€€€ÌÌà àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€forÏthis€Court€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÏthe€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.ÍVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.Ï1985);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€The€weight€and€credibility€of€the€witnessesððÏtestimony€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòStateÏv.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547€(Tenn.€1984);€òòByrge€v.€Stateóó,€575€S.W.2dÏ292,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).ÌÌà àThe€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€appellantððs€conviction.€€TheÏstate€presented€strong€circumstantial€evidence€that€the€appellant€called€LeaderÏFurniture€with€the€intent€to€defraud€it€out€of€furniture.€€Evidence€was€presentedÏthat€someone€at€the€appellant's€residence€forged€the€name€Victoria€Spann€to€aÏsales€invoice€and€a€security€agreement.€€Testimony€was€elicited€that€it€was€theÏappellant€who€paid€off€the€furniture€"purchase"€when€an€investigation€began.€ÏFurthermore,€the€appellant€appeared€in€person€at€Tennessee€Credit€to€claimÏher€refund€check.€€The€testimony€presented€at€trial,€albeit€circumstantial,Ïoverwhelmingly€points€to€the€appellant€as€the€person€who€committed€theÏforgery.€€A€reasonable€jury€could€have€concluded€the€appellant€committed€everyÏelement€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIIÌÓ  Óó óÌà àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€state€failed€to€prove€that€the€crimeÏoccurred€in€Dickson€County.€€Therefore,€she€claims€that€there€is€insufficientÏevidence€to€establish€venue.€€We€disagree.ÌÌà à€Article€I,€ðð€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€provides€that€in€all€criminalÏprosecutions€by€indictment€or€presentment,€the€accused€has€the€right€to€a€publicÏtrial€in€the€county€in€which€the€alleged€crime€was€committed.€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.ÏCrim.€P.€18.€€The€state€has€the€burden€of€proving€that€the€offense€was€committedÏin€the€county€of€the€indictment.€€òòHarvey€v.€Stateóó,€376€S.W.2d€497€(Tenn.€1964).€ÏVenue€may€be€shown€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence,€which€may€be€eitherÏdirect,€circumstantial,€or€a€combination€of€both.€€òòHopper€v.€Stateóó,€326€S.W.2dÏ448€(Tenn.€1959).€€Slight€evidence€with€respect€to€venue€will€be€sufficient€toÏcarry€the€state's€burden€of€proof.€€òòState€v.€Bennettóó,€549€S.W.2d€949€(Tenn.Ï1977).€€Furthermore,€the€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€provide€that€"if€one€orÏmore€elements€of€an€offense€are€committed€in€one€county€and€one€or€moreÏelements€in€another,€the€offense€may€be€prosecuted€in€either€county."€€Tenn.€R.ÏCrim.€P.€18(b).€€ÌÌà àA€person€commits€an€offense€of€forgery€when€he€or€she€forges€a€writingÏwith€the€intent€to€defraud€or€harm€another.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„114(a)Ï(1991).€€The€statutory€definition€of€"forge"€is€to€"[a]lter,€make,€complete,€executeÏor€authenticate€any€writing€so€that€it€purports€to€...[b]e€the€act€of€another€who€didÏnot€authorize€the€act[.]"€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„114(b)(1)(A)(I)€(1991).€ÏTherefore,€the€state€was€required€to€prove€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidenceÏthat€the€appellant€committed€one€element€of€the€offense€in€Dickson€County.€€ÌÌà àThe€record€reveals€that€the€appellant€signed€the€name€of€Victoria€SpannÏto€a€sales€invoice€and€security€agreement€in€Humphreys€County.€€The€stateÏcontends€that€the€appellant€became€nervous€when€Tennessee€Credit€began€toÏinvestigate€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€transaction.€€In€order€to€avoidÏdetection,€she€paid€off€the€outstanding€debt.€€But,€she€overpaid.€€As€a€result€ofÏher€overpayment,€she€entered€Dickson€County€and€forged€a€bogus€name€on€theÏrefund€check.€€This,€the€state€argues,€establishes€venue€in€Dickson€County.€€TheÏappellant€argues€that€the€time€of€the€signing€of€the€refund€check€she€had€noÏintent€to€defraud.€€It€is€her€position€that€this€cannot€be€used€as€evidence€ofÏforgery€concerning€other€documents€executed€on€a€prior€date€in€a€differentÏcounty.€€ÌœÌ›Ìà àThis€issue€presents€an€interesting€question.€€The€record€establishes€thatÏthe€appellant€placed€a€phone€call€to€Leader€Furniture€in€Dickson€County€withÏthe€intent€to€defraud.€€The€òòactusóó€òòreaóó,€i.e.,€the€forging€of€a€writing,€took€place€inÏHumphreys€County.€€We€find€that€the€appellant€was€constructively€present€in€theÏindictment€county€with€the€mental€intent€to€defraud.€€The€rationale€for€such€aÏholding€is€articulated€below.€€ÌÌà àFirst,€it€is€a€settled€principal€of€law€that,€when€one€puts€in€force€an€agencyÏfor€the€commission€of€a€crime,€that€person,€in€legal€contemplation,€accompaniesÍthe€agent€to€the€point€where€the€crime€becomes€effectual.× ƒ4 ××  ×€€An€analogous€caseÏto€the€present€situation€which€illustrates€this€point€is€œòòGirdley›€v.€Stateóó,€29€S.W.2dÏ255€(Tenn.€1930).€€In€œòòGirdleyóó,›€the€defendant€gave€a€bus€driver€a€forged€check.€ÏHe€requested€that€the€bus€driver€take€the€check€to€a€bank€in€the€next€county€andÏcash€it.€€The€bus€driver,€unaware€of€the€forgery,€attempted€to€comply€and€wasÏapprehended.€€He€led€the€authorities€to€the€true€offender.€€The€offender€wasÏtried€and€convicted€in€the€county€in€which€the€bank€was€located.€€On€appealÏfrom€his€conviction,€the€Supreme€Court€held€that€when€the€offense€of€forgery€isÏcommitted€through€an€agent,€venue€is€proper€where€the€acts€were€done€by€theÏagent.€€òòId.óó€€The€actual€physical€location€of€the€true€offender€is€inconsequential.€ÏòòId.óó€€ÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€the€appellant,€possessing€the€requisite€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€forÏforgery,€placed€a€phone€call€into€Dickson€County.€€The€clerk€at€Leader€FurnitureÏfilled€out€a€credit€application€for€the€appellant.€€In€doing€so,€she€became€theÏappellant's€agent.€€Because€the€agent€was€furthering€the€appellant's€fraud,€theÏappellant€"committedðð€the€mental€element€of€forgery€in€Dickson€County€andÏbecame€subject€to€its€jurisdiction€and€venue.€€€€ÌÌà àA€second,€equally€tenable€theory€in€support€of€a€finding€of€venue€inÏDickson€County€is€the€fact€that€the€appellant€set€into€motion€a€series€of€acts€inÍDickson€County€with€the€intent€to€defraud€a€retailer.€€This€crime€was€ongoingÏand€continuous€until€its€consummation,€i.e.,€the€signing€of€the€refund€check€inÏDickson€County.€€€Regardless€of€the€rationale€used€to€reach€this€result,€we€holdÏthat€venue€was€proper€in€Dickson€County.€€This€issue€is€overruled.€€€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓIIIÌÓ  Óó óÌà àIn€her€last€issue€the€appellant€contends€that€the€trial€court€improperlyÏsentenced€her€to€four€years€incarceration.€€She€argues€that€she€is€a€viableÏcandidate€for€community€corrections€or€split€confinement.€€We€disagree.€€ÌÌà àWhen€a€sentencing€issue€is€appealed,€this€Court€shall€conduct€a€òòde€novoóóÏreview€with€the€presumption€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€are€correct.€€òòState€v.ÏByrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,€379€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€The€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€is€conditioned€upon€an€affirmative€showing€that€the€trial€courtÏconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.€ÏòòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€ÌÌà àThe€record€reveals€that€the€state€introduced€several€potentialÏenhancement€factors€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€The€appellant€also€introducedÏseveral€mitigating€factors€on€her€own€behalf.€€The€trial€judge€found€none€ofÏthese€factors€applicable.€€He€based€his€decision€to€incarcerate€the€appellant€onÍthe€fact€that€she€has€a€long€history€of€committing€similar€type€crimes× ƒ5 ××  ×€and€theÏfact€that€she€has€shown€an€"unwillingness€on€previous€occasions€to€abide€byÏmeasures€less€restrictive€than€confinement."€× ƒ6 ××  ×€€ÌÌà àThe€record€reveals€that€the€trial€court€properly€considered€the€principlesÏof€sentencing.€€Nothing€in€the€record€suggests€the€trial€judge€improperlyÏsentenced€the€appellant.€€She€has€not€overcome€the€presumption€ofÏcorrectness.€€This€issue€is€overruled.€€ÌÌà àFinding€no€error€of€law€mandating€reversal,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court.€€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JudgeÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à