ÿWPC’ 0UN° %þ 0(w@,4l€ 0@ 0†Ï 0DU™ 0J¡ 0Të 0^? 0h 0r 0|w 0†ó 0y 1u  0d~ AQâÆ3 0Dù B= 0DZ D/ž U>Í B D3( U*[ B)… DC® AMñ > v~A vÓ¿(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ;D<U=>D?D@ADBeCÓ€On~<$t tô3|xO("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò(6(2Ä:$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ !#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New RomanüÿP Pd""""'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d****7Border 1dd +Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ùÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌò òJune€11,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€)ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHØ(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  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÙ€ ÙÓ  ÓÔ€)ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œßR€,-+A1-j|R™` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌà@ àMARCH€1998€SESSIONÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ó óà@ à)Ìà@ à)à àò òNO.€02C01„9704„CR„00133ó óÌà àAppellee,à@ à)Ìà@ à)à àò òSHELBY€COUNTYó óÌò òVS.ó óà@ à)Ìà@ à)à àò òHON.€CAROLYN€WADEÌCYNTHIA€G.€STARKS,ó óà@ à)à àò òBLACKETT,€JUDGEó óÌà@ à)Ìà àAppellant.à@ à)à à(Theft€over€$10,000)ÌÌÌÌÒ†„èyÒò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:ÌÌBILL€ANDERSON,€JR.Ìó ó138€North€Third€StreetÌMemphis,€TN€€38103„2007Éò òòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPó óÌAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌò òJANIS€L.€TURNERó óÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌ425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌò òJOHN€W.€PIEROTTIó óÌDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌò òJAMES€J.€CHALLEN,€IIIó óÌAssistant€District€AttorneyÏGeneralÌ201€Poplar€Avenue,€Suite€301ÌMemphis,€TN€€38103„1947ÉÒÒÌÌÌÌÌÌò òOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌJOE€G.€RILEY,ÌJUDGEÇó óÑ7€æGXXdìXXdì7ÑÓÓà@ àò òòòOPINIONó óóóÌÌà àThe€defendant,€Cynthia€G.€Starks,€pled€guilty€to€the€offense€of€theft€overÏ$10,000,€a€Class€C€felony.€€The€defendant€agreed€to€a€sentence€of€three€(3)Ïyears€as€a€Range€I€offender€and€a€fine€of€$500.€€The€trial€court€denied€theÏdefendantððs€petition€for€total€probation€and€refused€to€grant€her€judicialÏdiversion.€€The€trial€court€ordered€an€alternative€sentence€of€split€confinementÏrequiring€the€defendant€to€serve€weekends€at€the€Shelby€County€CorrectionalÏCenter€for€six€(6)€months€followed€by€three€(3)€years€probation.€€In€this€Court,€theÏdefendant€presents€the€following€issue€for€our€review:€ð ð[w]hether€the€trial€CourtÏerred€in€ordering€a€split€confinement€type€of€sentence€in€this€matter,€and,€in€lightÏof€the€Courtððs€determination,€whether€the€type€sentence€imposed€on€theÏDefendant€was€too€severe€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€€After€a€thorough€review€of€theÏrecord,€the€briefs€submitted€by€the€parties,€and€the€law€governing€the€issuesÏpresented€for€review,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€that€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt€should€be€affirmed.ÌÌà@ àò òIó óÌÌà àIn€1989,€the€defendant€began€working€as€the€administrative€assistant€toÏthe€vice„chairman€of€the€National€Bank€of€Commerce€(NBC).€€In€this€positionÏshe€was€responsible€for€making€payments€on€the€vice„chairmanððs€expenseÏaccounts.€€Beginning€in€1992,€the€defendant€placed€phone€orders€for€largeÍquantities€of€cosmetics€using€her€employerððs€Gold€MasterCard.€€In€1992,Ïdefendant€charged€$566€to€the€account.€€In€1993,€she€charged€$9,754€on€theÏcard.€€In€1994,€the€unauthorized€charges€totaled€$44,811.€€In€January€andÏFebruary€of€1995,€she€charged€an€additional€$3,711€to€the€account.€€Taking€intoÏaccount€an€additional€$617€cash€from€general€ledger€expense€tickets,€theÏdefendant€admitted€to€stealing€a€total€of€$59,514€from€NBC.Ìà àDefendant€paid€on€the€expense€account€as€the€charges€accumulated€byÏsubmitting€general€ledger€expense€tickets€to€the€vice„chairman€for€approval.€ÏShe€also€prepared€expense€tickets€with€fictitious€descriptions€and€forged€theÏvice„chairmanððs€signature.€€The€defendant€submitted€the€tickets€to€the€bankððsÏteller,€who€applied€them€as€payment€on€the€account.€€The€€vice„chairman€wasÏassigned€a€new€administrative€assistant€in€1995€who€noticed€the€discrepanciesÏin€the€bank€records.€€The€defendantððs€thefts€were€then€discovered.Ìà àThe€defendant€testified€that€she€used€the€account€to€purchase€cosmeticsÏbecause€she€suffered€from€depression€stemming€from€her€marital€difficulties.€ÏThe€defendant€also€claimed€she€was€under€the€influence€of€several€prescriptionÏmedications€for€depression€and€anxiety€during€this€period€of€time.€€She€statedÏshe€did€not€have€a€clear€recollection€of€using€the€charge€account€and€that€theÏmedications€made€her€feel€ð ðlike€[she]€was€floating€through€life.ðð€€Defendant€alsoÏtestified€that€she€no€longer€possessed€any€of€the€$59,000€worth€of€cosmeticsÏshe€purchased.€€She€claimed€that€she€did€not€sell€or€store€the€products,€butÏgave€them€away€to€friends€and€relatives.Ìà àDefendant€was€examined€by€a€psychiatrist,€Dr.€Thomas€Bannister,€whoÍsubmitted€a€letter€to€the€trial€court€stating€that€defendant€had€developed€theÏsymptoms€of€major€depression€in€1992.€€He€concluded€that€the€combination€ofÏmajor€depression,€psychotropic€medications€and€the€regular€use€of€alcohol€mayÏhave€ð ðdiminished€[her]€ability€to€control€[her]€.€.€.€impulsesðð€and€contributed€to€herÏbehavior.€€A€vice„president€from€NBC€also€testified€that€the€bank€was€notÏopposed€to€a€sentence€of€full€probation€for€the€defendant€as€long€as€she€met€herÏobligation€to€pay€$100€per€month€in€restitution€to€the€bank€in€accordance€with€aÏcivil€judgment.Ìà àIn€sentencing€the€defendant€to€split€confinement,€the€trial€court€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àà àI€still€think€she€needs€to€do€some€time.€€That€was€a€veryÏlarge€amount€of€money.€€Even€though€thereððs€„„€by€that€letterÏthereððs€evidence€of€some€type€of€mental€problem€with€her.€€SheÏstill€did€what€she€did,€and€she€continued€to€do€what€she€did.€€YouÏknow,€if€there€was€„„€if€she€was€completely€incapacitated€thatÏwould€be€a€completely€different€situation,€but€being€depressed€„„€aÏlot€of€people€get€depressed€.€.€.€but€they€donððt€go€out€and€steal€thatÏkind€of€money.ÌÌà8 à.€.€.€[I]f€she€had€done€it€one€time€just€as€a€last€resort,€gave€up€on€lifeÏor€something€I€could€understand€it.€€But€she€did€it€over€a€period€ofÏtime,€so€she€had€the€intent€to€do€that€and€not€only€do€it€but€justÏcontinue€to€do€it.€€The€only€reason€why€she€quit€was€she€gotÏcaught.€€And€if€they€hadnððt€caught€her,€sheððd€still€be€doing€it€now.ÌÌÓÓThe€trial€court€also€noted€that€the€defendant€did€not€appear€to€show€remorse€forÏher€actions.ÌÌà@ àò òIIó óÌÌà àThe€defendant€contends€the€trial€court€erred€by€ordering€a€sentence€ofÍsplit€confinement€rather€than€judicial€diversion€or€full€probation.€€The€defendantÏargues€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court,€requiring€her€to€serve€a€oneÏhundred€eighty€(180)€day€sentence€on€weekends,€was€too€severe€based€uponÏthe€evidence€and€was,€therefore,€erroneous€as€a€matter€of€law.Ìà@ àò òA.ó óÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length€and€manner€of€service€of€aÏsentence,€it€is€the€duty€of€this€Court€to€conduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€on€the€recordÏwith€a€presumption€that€ð ðthe€determinations€made€by€the€court€from€which€theÏappeal€is€taken€are€correct.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€ThisÏpresumption€is€ð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€theÏtrial€court€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€andÏcircumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€TheÏpresumption€does€not€apply€to€the€legal€conclusions€reached€by€the€trial€court€inÏsentencing€the€accused€or€to€the€determinations€made€by€the€trial€court€whichÏare€predicated€upon€uncontroverted€facts.€€òòState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2d€305,€311Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€891€S.W.2d€922,€929€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1994).€€However,€this€Court€is€required€to€give€great€weight€to€the€trial€courtððsÏdetermination€of€controverted€facts€as€the€trial€courtððs€determination€of€theseÏfacts€is€predicated€upon€the€witnessesðð€demeanor€and€appearance€whenÏtestifying.Ìà àWhen€a€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€committed€error€inÏrefusing€to€impose€a€sentence€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„313,Ïcommonly€referred€to€as€ð ðjudicial€diversion,ðð€a€different€standard€of€appellateÍreview€applies.€€In€reviewing€these€issues€this€Court€must€determine€whetherÏthe€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€failing€to€sentence€pursuant€to€the€statute.€ÏòòState€v.€Bonestelóó,€871€S.W.2d€163,€167€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993);€òòState€v.ÏAndersonóó,€857€S.W.2d€571,€572€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992);€òòState€v.€Georgeóó,€830ÏS.W.2d€79,€80€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€As€this€Court€said€in€òòState€v.€Andersonóó:ÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€standard€by€which€we€must€review€a€judicial€diversionÏdecision€is€not€specifically€provided€in€the€1989€Act.€€In€T.C.A.€ððððÏ40„35„401€and€„402,€appellate€review€of€the€range,€length€orÏmanner€of€service€of€a€sentence€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€withÏthe€trial€court's€determinations€being€presumed€correct.€€However,Ïjudicial€diversion€entails€more€than€these€sentencingÏcharacteristics„„it€affects€the€underlying€conviction€as€well.€€Also,Ïthe€sentencing€alternatives€provided€by€the€legislature€in€T.C.A.€ððÏ40„35„104€do€not€include€judicial€diversion.ÌÌà8 àà àWe€conclude€that€judicial€diversion€is€similar€in€purpose€toÏpretrial€diversion€and€is€to€be€imposed€within€the€discretion€of€theÏtrial€court€subject€only€to€the€same€constraints€applicable€toÏprosecutors€in€applying€pretrial€diversion€under€T.C.A.€ððÏ40„15„105.€€Therefore,€upon€review,€if€ð ðany€substantial€evidence€toÏsupport€the€refusalðð€exists€in€the€record,€we€will€give€the€trial€courtÏthe€benefit€of€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Hammersleyóó,€650€S.W.2d€352,Ï356€(Tenn.€1983).€€Only€an€abuse€of€that€discretion€will€allow€us€toÏoverturn€the€trial€court.ÌÌÓÓ857€S.W.2d€at€572.Ìà àWhen€the€accused€raises€sentencing€issues€in€this€Court,€the€accusedÏhas€the€burden€of€establishing€that€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€wasÏerroneous.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d),€Sentencing€CommissionÏComments;€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169;€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2dÏ785,€786€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ìà@ àò òB.ó óÌà àDefendant€contends€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€refusing€toÏgrant€her€judicial€diversion.€€However,€defendant€never€formally€requested€thatÏthe€trial€court€grant€judicial€diversion.€€Although€defense€counsel€brieflyÏmentioned€judicial€diversion€in€his€closing€statement€during€the€sentencingÏhearing,€we€do€not€find€this€to€be€sufficient€to€properly€bring€the€issue€of€judicialÏdiversion€before€the€trial€court.€€Nevertheless,€we€will€address€the€issue€on€itsÏmerits.ÌÌà àThe€criteria€that€must€be€considered€in€determining€whether€an€eligibleÏaccused€should€be€granted€judicial€diversion€include:€(a)€the€defendantððsÏamenability€to€correction;€(b)€the€circumstances€of€the€offense;€(c)€theÏdefendantððs€criminal€record;€€(d)€the€defendantððs€social€history;€(e)€theÏdefendantððs€physical€and€mental€health;€and€(f)€the€deterrence€value€to€theÏdefendant€as€well€as€to€others.€€òòState€v.€Parkeróó,€932€S.W.2d€945,€958€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1996).€€An€additional€consideration€is€whether€judicial€diversion€willÏserve€the€ends€of€justice,€i.e.,€the€interests€of€the€public€as€well€as€the€defendant.€ÏòòId.óóÌà àIn€this€case,€although€the€trial€court€did€not€address€the€propriety€ofÏjudicial€diversion,€by€ordering€a€period€of€confinement€the€court€implicitly€deniedÏjudicial€diversion.€€We€find€that€there€is€sufficient€evidence€to€support€a€denial€ofÏjudicial€diversion.€€While€the€defendant€had€no€prior€criminal€record€and€thereÏwas€evidence€she€suffered€from€mental€health€problems,€the€trial€court€notedÏthat€a€period€of€incarceration€was€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€theÍseriousness€of€the€offense€as€it€involved€the€theft€of€over€$59,000€over€a€periodÏof€years.€€Furthermore,€defendantððs€actions€exhibited€a€violation€of€private€trustÏand€a€sustained€intent€to€violate€the€law.€€Moreover,€our€review€of€defendantððsÏtestimony€indicates€that€she€was€not€completely€candid€with€the€trial€court.€ÏTherefore,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€refusingÏto€grant€the€defendant€judicial€diversion.Ìà àThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ìà@ àò òC.ó óÌà àThe€defendant€further€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€grant€totalÏprobation.€€An€especially€mitigated€or€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,ÏD€or€E€felony€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencingÏin€the€absence€of€evidence€to€the€contrary.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).€ÏHowever,€although€a€defendant€may€be€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidateÏfor€alternative€sentencing,€the€defendant€has€the€burden€of€establishingÏsuitability€for€total€probation.€€òòState€v.€Boggsóó,€932€S.W.2d€467,€477€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1996);€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b).€€Even€though€probation€mustÏbe€automatically€considered,€ð ðthe€defendant€is€not€automatically€entitled€toÏprobation€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„303(b)€SentencingÏCommission€Comments;€òòState€v.€Hartleyóó,€818€S.W.2d€370,€373€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1991).Ìà àIn€determining€whether€to€grant€or€deny€probation,€a€trial€court€shouldÏconsider€the€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€defendant's€criminal€record,€theÏdefendantððs€social€history€and€present€condition,€the€need€for€deterrence,€andÍthe€best€interest€of€the€defendant€and€€the€public.€€òòState€v.€Grearóó,€568€S.W.2dÏ285,€286€(Tenn.€1978);€òòState€v.€Boydóó,€925€S.W.2d€237,€244€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1995);€òòState€v.€Blackóó,€924€S.W.2d€912,€917€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€TheÏdefendant's€lack€of€credibility€is€also€an€appropriate€consideration€and€reflectsÏon€a€defendant's€potential€for€rehabilitation.€€òòState€v.€Dowdyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,Ï306€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ìà àIn€determining€if€incarceration€is€appropriate,€a€trial€court€may€considerÏthe€need€to€protect€society€by€restraining€a€defendant€having€a€long€history€ofÏcriminal€conduct,€the€need€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense,Ïwhether€confinement€is€particularly€appropriate€to€effectively€deter€others€likelyÏto€commit€similar€offenses,€and€whether€less€restrictive€measures€have€often€orÏrecently€been€unsuccessfully€applied€to€the€defendant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169;€òòState€v.€Grigsbyóó,€957ÏS.W.2d€541,€545€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).Ìà àAlthough€the€trial€court€granted€the€defendant€an€alternative€sentence€ofÏsplit€confinement,€the€court€refused€to€suspend€her€entire€sentence.€€The€trialÏcourt€stated€some€confinement€was€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€theÏseriousness€of€the€offense.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(1)(B).€€Based€uponÏthe€need€to€avoid€depreciating€the€seriousness€of€the€offense€and€the€longÏperiod€of€time€over€which€the€crimes€occurred,€the€defendant€was€not€entitled€toÏtotal€probation.€€However,€based€upon€the€fact€that€she€had€no€prior€record€andÏhad€mental€health€problems,€some€form€of€alternative€sentencing€wasÏappropriate.€€The€trial€court€reached€an€appropriate€compromise€in€sentencingÍthe€defendant.ÌÌà àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóò òÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌGARY€R.€WADE,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEó ó