ÿWPC  u‡Wrʨú>º< ±&¹}V+QGªþ¤ )¤­?â²cÝV¦ís-üÖ’åëõ,¨Ðò,«! äŸMYüQÊjÃK®·h‘~IÅ ò ‰-¹K6 3¹€IS.è”Yî-=¿Ñ(©)»×4íËUK¤èÁ^W«w}g†ÉÞEÖ}L=!Þ@7xóI ]áZÍ‹“žW*òãüYˆï¡%Y­€_B¤‹[¤yøîŸº*€BT ñj ƒ˜BÛj+§ Ÿš”ŠÏdàÔ‹[଑5õºN9w·3ވܩ•½I] =ñnpë t2þÂ(åœA8ÏŒ«÷í†ÁŠ…œù ®]]{êÒNí¨2‡¥SÉï)í/•šÂÍ׈À¤xYÒ1ì€$*q=F2®t…ce9j“yg¬<š|ºoÉh½”¥Ë±´p¹âIJØv“ñØ,À9½Ý8­+˜p`œ¿‹™§¡ fɃ•¤û*tÓùÎɉ*/ºoÿG" ‡Š7pÆ OJ‚º‹ÝÏwHÞ±LÑå×ÏØ(ö—Ý›‰–»CmsKŸ©ð ö š³dt ©f(JßÁ¨J“ܪýÏÆœïpg¦(BN¥èR÷âSžƒ·„m]b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz UN‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1 0D÷N;=bSE[³]TodBÓóúb                                     0ë Býý 0¤ D3¾ D-ñ 0K ASiƼ 0¤‚ 0D& A«j˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»—+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*0î  ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ñ ° Ñ- ù- ©Ý ƒR:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAlthough€the€judgment€indicated€that€the€sentence€was€to€be€served€consecutively€to€the€Defendantððs€BlountÐ ° ÐCounty€sentence,€it€also€reflected€that€the€Defendantððs€Knox€County€sentence€would€expire€on€May€21,€2001,€eight€yearsÐ tÄ Ðfrom€the€entry€of€judgment. JÝ ƒR:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIt€is€not€clear€from€the€record€why€the€Defendant€was€transferred€to€the€Knox€County€community€correctionsÐ ° Ðprogram,€but€it€does€appear€that€the€Defendant€actually€lived€in€Knox€County. eÝ ƒR:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOnly€the€Blount€County€warrant,€issued€June€18,€1999,€is€in€the€record.€€However,€the€Defendantððs€probationÐ ° Ðofficer,€Shirley€Castelvecchi,€testified€that€the€two€warrants€were€filed€within€days€of€each€other. 8Ý ƒR:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAccording€to€the€Defendantððs€testimony,€Blount€County€had€placed€a€detainer€on€him€while€he€was€in€theÐ ° Ðpenitentiary€due€to€the€pending€probation€violation€warrant. éÝ ƒR:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€defendant€in€òòAllenóó€was€not€served€with€the€probation€violation€warrant€until€the€day€of€the€probationÐ ° Ðrevocation€hearing.€€He€had€been€incarcerated€on€other€charges,€and€no€action€was€taken€regarding€the€probationÐ tÄ Ðviolation€warrant€until€the€defendant€inquired€about€it.€€òòSeeóó€òòAllenóó,€505€S.W.2d€at€716. ðÝ ƒR:$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note€that€recent€cases€of€this€Court€have€cited€òòAllenóó€for€the€proposition€that€a€lengthy€delay€between€theÐ ° Ðissuance€of€a€probation€violation€warrant€and€the€hearing€on€the€probation€revocation€may€violate€a€defendantððs€right€toÐ tÄ Ða€speedy€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Randy€R.€Wilsonóó,€No.€M2000„01537„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€WL€523368,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð 8ˆ ÐApp.,€Nashville,€May€16,€2001);€òòState€v.€Lawrence€Ralph,€Jr.óó,€No.€M1999„01635„CCA„R3„CD,€2000€WL€775592,€atÐ üL Ð*1„2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€June€16,€2000),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€Dec.€27,€2000).€€Nevertheless,€we€believeÐ À Ðthat€the€conclusions€we€have€reached€in€this€case€best€follow€the€law€as€set€forth€by€the€supreme€court€in€òòUtleyóó.€€òòSeeóóÐ „Ô ÐòòUtleyóó,€956€S.W.2d€at€491.€ - ù-(|G2:$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G¥»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåýò»»Ô d(|3‡†$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G¥»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡†$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G¥»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G¥»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼G¥»»»ÔÑ8€iXXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îCäG¥ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼G¥»îîCä #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€June€27,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡XiX»¼G¥ÔÌò òÔ#†¼G¥»XXi#ÔòòSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEóó€v.€òòóóTIMOTHY€Ô_ÔTILLERYÔ_ÔÔ‡XiX»¼G¥Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€C„6503€€€€€€D.€Kelly€Thomas,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2000„01996„CCA„R3„CD€Ð ¥õ  ÐAugust€16,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ XiXXXiÔThe€Defendant,€Timothy€Ô_ÔTilleryÔ_Ô,€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€revocation€of€his€probation.€€On€appeal,Ð xÈ  Ðhe€argues€(1)€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€dismiss€the€probation€revocation€proceedingÐ d´ Ðbecause€his€right€to€a€speedy€trial€was€violated€and€(2)€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€revoking€hisÐ P  Ðprobation.€€We€find€no€error;€thus,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð <Œ ÐÔ#†XiXX Xi#ÔÔ#†¼G¥»XXiµ#ÔÔ‡XiX»¼G¥ÔÌÓ Óò òTenn.€R.€App.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼G¥»àXig#ÔÔ‡XiX.¼G¥ÔRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court.€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ô,€J.,€óódelivered€aÐ ì< Ðconcurring€opinion.€€€òòJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€J.óó,€concurred€in€the€result.Ð Ø( ÐÌMack€Garner,€Ô_ÔMaryvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Timothy€Ô_ÔTilleryÔ_Ô.Ð ° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Ô_ÔAngeleÔ_Ô€M.€Gregory,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ˆØ ÐMichael€L.€Flynn,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Edward€P.€Bailey,€Jr.,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ tÄ ÐGeneral,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð `° ÐÌÓÓà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼G¥»XXi/#ÔÔ‡XiX»¼G¥ÔÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÌÔ#†¼G¥»XXiî #ÔÔ€XiX»¼G¥ÔÓ  ÓÑ€OaÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€ i XXdìXXdì8Ñà  àThis€case€comes€to€us€with€a€rather€complicated€procedural€history.€€In€July€1992,€theÐ #`" ÐDefendant€pled€guilty€in€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ô€County€to€the€sale€of€cocaine.€€The€Honorable€D.€Kelly€Thomas,€Jr.,Ð ü#L# ÐCriminal€Court€Judge€for€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ô€County,€sentenced€the€Defendant€to€eight€years,€with€six€monthsÐ è$8 $ Ðof€the€sentence€to€be€served€in€the€county€jail€and€the€remainder€to€be€served€in€a€communityÐ Ô%$!% Ðcorrections€program.€€Subsequently,€in€May€1993,€the€Defendant€pled€guilty€in€Knox€County€toÐ À&"& Ðpossession€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€sell,€and€he€was€sentenced€by€the€Honorable€Mary€BethÐ ¬'ü"' ÐÔ_ÔLeibowitzÔ_Ô€to€eight€years€to€be€served€in€Knox€Countyððs€community€corrections€program,€known€asÐ ˜(è#( Ðâ âthe€Community€Alternatives€to€Prison€Program€(Ô_ÔCAPPÔ_Ô).€€Judge€Ô_ÔLeibowitzÔ_Ô€ordered€this€sentence€toÐ „)Ô$)ý ÐÔ_Ôbe€served€consecutively€to€the€Defendantððs€Blount€County€Sentence.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€On€May€26,€1993,€JudgeÐ ° Ðâ âThomas€ordered€that€the€Defendant€be€transferred€to€CAPP€in€Knox€County€to€continue€serving€hisÐ œì ÐBlount€County€sentence.€€In€his€order€transferring€the€Defendant,€Judge€Thomas€noted€that€theÐ ˆØ ÐDefendant€had€been€found€eligible€for€CAPP€by€Knox€County€and€that€he€was€to€serve€his€KnoxÐ tÄ ÐCounty€sentence€in€CAPP€consecutive€to€his€Blount€County€sentence.׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð `° ÐÌà  àOn€July€10,€1996,€Judge€Thomas€entered€an€order€transferring€the€Defendant€from€CAPP€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðregular€probation€for€his€Blount€County€conviction.€€The€Defendant€remained€on€regular€probation,Ð $ t Ðsupervised€in€Knox€County,€until€1999.€€In€June€1999,€following€the€Defendantððs€arrest€in€KentuckyÐ  ` Ðfor€trafficking€in€cocaine,€a€probation€violation€warrant€was€issued€against€the€Defendant€in€bothÐ ü L  ÐKnox€and€Blount€Counties,€alleging€that€the€Defendant€had€violated€his€probation.׃,×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€On€July€1,€1999,Ð è 8  Ðafter€a€probation€revocation€hearing,€Judge€Leibowitz€revoked€the€Defendantððs€probation€for€hisÐ Ô$  ÐKnox€County€conviction€and€ordered€him€to€serve€his€sentence€in€incarceration.€€The€Defendant€wasÐ À  Ðgiven€jail€credit€for€time€spent€in€custody€and€time€spent€in€CAPP€since€his€conviction€in€1993.€€TheÐ ¬ü  Ðtotal€amount€of€jail€credit€was€1197€days.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àOn€June€26,€2000,€the€Defendant€was€released€from€prison€on€parole€for€his€Knox€CountyÐ pÀ Ðconviction,€and€he€was€transferred€to€Blount€County,€where€the€Blount€County€probation€violationÐ \¬ Ðwarrant€was€served€on€the€Defendant.׃|×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Judge€Thomas€presided€over€a€probation€revocation€hearingÐ H˜ Ðconcerning€the€Blount€County€conviction€on€August€15,€2000,€at€which€time€he€held€that€theÐ 4„ ÐDefendant€had€violated€the€terms€of€his€Blount€County€probation.€€Judge€Thomas€then€ordered€theÐ  p ÐDefendant€to€serve€the€remainder€of€his€sentence€in€confinement.€€The€Defendant€was€given€jailÐ  \ Ðcredit€from€December€1,€1992€to€July€10,€1996€for€time€spent€in€jail€and€in€CAPP€for€the€BlountÐ øH ÐCounty€conviction,€and€he€was€also€given€credit€for€June€26,€2000€to€August€15,€2000€for€time€spentÐ ä4 Ðin€jail€awaiting€the€probation€revocation€hearing.€€Judge€Thomas€declined€to€give€the€DefendantÐ Ð  Ðcredit€for€time€spent€in€the€penitentiary€for€his€Knox€County€conviction.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà@ìàSPEEDY€TRIAL€VIOLATIONˆÐ ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€first€argues€that€the€probation€revocation€proceeding€should€have€beenÐ l¼ Ðdismissed€because€his€right€to€a€speedy€trial€was€violated.€€Both€the€United€States€and€TennesseeÐ X ¨ ÐConstitutions€guarantee€the€defendant€in€a€criminal€proceeding€the€right€to€a€speedy€trial.€€òòSeeóó€U.S.Ð D!” ÐÑOaÑâ âѰ°Ñâ âÑ  ÑConst.€amend.€VI;€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€9.€€The€right€to€a€speedy€trial€is€also€guaranteed€by€statuteÐ ° Ðin€Tennessee.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„14„101.€€According€to€the€Supreme€Court,€the€purpose€ofÐ œì Ðthis€guarantee€is€to€protect€the€accused€against€oppressive€pre„trial€incarceration,€the€anxiety€ofÐ ˆØ Ðconcern€due€to€unresolved€criminal€charges,€and€the€risk€that€evidence€will€be€lost€or€memoriesÐ tÄ Ðdiminished.€€òòDoggett€v.€United€Statesóó,€505€U.S.€647,€654€(1992).€€òòóóIn€determining€whether€the€rightÐ `° Ðto€a€speedy€trial€has€been€violated,€the€court€is€to€conduct€a€balancing€test€considering€four€factors:Ð L œ Ð(1)€the€length€of€the€delay;€(2)€the€reason€for€the€delay;€(3)€whether€the€defendant€asserted€a€claimÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€this€right;€and€(4)€whether€the€defendant€was€prejudiced€by€the€delay.€€òòBarker€v.€Wingoóó,€407€U.S.Ð $ t Ð514,€530€(1972);€òòState€v.€Bishopóó,€493€S.W.2d€81,€83„85€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€length€of€the€delay€mustÐ  ` Ðapproach€one€year€to€trigger€speedy€trialòòóó€analysis.€€òòDoggettóó,€505€U.S.€at€652.€€€€€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àIn€òòAllen€v.€Stateóó,€505€S.W.2d€715€(Tenn.€1974),€our€supreme€court€held€ð ðthat€a€probationÐ Ô$  Ðrevocation€proceeding€is€a€continuation€of€the€criminal€prosecution,€and,€as€such,€the€defendant€.€.Ð À  Ð.€has€a€constitutional€right€to€a€speedy€trial€on€ððthe€offense€of€violation€of€the€terms€of€probation.ððððÐ ¬ü  ÐòòId.óó€at€719;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòBlackwell€v.€Stateóó,€546€S.W.2d€828,€830„31€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1976).€€The€courtÐ ˜è  Ðin€òòAllenóó€determined€that€a€two€year€and€eight€month€delay€between€the€issuance€of€the€probationÐ „Ô  Ðviolation€arrest€warrant€and€the€probation€revocation€hearing€violated€the€defendantððs€right€to€aÐ pÀ Ðspeedy€trial.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€òòAllenóó,€505€S.W.2d€at€716„19.€€Relying€on€òòAllenóó,€the€Defendant€argues€here€thatÐ \¬ Ðthe€fourteen„month€delay€between€the€issuance€of€the€probation€violation€warrant€and€his€probationÐ H˜ Ðrevocation€hearing€violated€his€right€to€a€speedy€trial.€€òòóóHowever,€in€òòState€v.€Utleyóó,€956€S.W.2d€489Ð 4„ Ð(Tenn.€1997),€a€case€which€post„dates€òòAllenóó€by€twenty„three€years,€our€supreme€court€explicitly€heldÐ  p Ðð ðthat€the€issuance€of€an€arrest€warrant€alone€does€not€trigger€a€speedy€trial€analysis€and€that€the€rightÐ  \ Ðto€a€speedy€trial€is€not€implicated€until€there€is€an€arrest€or€a€formal€grand€jury€accusation.ðð€€òòId.óó€atÐ øH Ð491.€€Because€there€is€no€formal€grand€jury€accusation€in€a€probation€revocation€proceeding,€it€wouldÐ ä4 Ðappear€that€an€actual€arrest€for€the€probation€violation€would€be€the€triggering€factor€for€a€speedyÐ Ð  Ðtrial€right.׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„311(b)€(ð ðWhenever€any€person€is€òòarrestedóó€for€the€violationÐ ¼  Ðof€probation€and€suspension€of€sentence,€the€trial€judge€.€.€.€shall,€òòat€the€earliest€practicable€timeóó,Ð ¨ø Ðinquire€into€the€charges€and€determine€whether€or€not€a€violation€has€occurred.ðð)€(emphasis€added);Ð ”ä ÐòòState€v.€Steve€Joyneróó,€No.€03C01„9701„CC„00036,€1998€WL€47878,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð €Ð ÐKnoxville,€Feb.€6.€1998)€(finding€that€the€defendantððs€arrest€for€violation€of€probation€triggeredÐ l¼ Ðspeedy€trial€right).€€Accordingly,€the€Defendantððs€speedy€trial€right€was€not€triggered€until€June€26,Ð X ¨ Ð2000,€when€he€was€served€with€the€warrant€and€arrested€for€violation€of€probation.€€It€follows€thatÐ D!” Ðthe€month€and€a€half€delay€between€the€Defendantððs€arrest€and€his€probation€revocation€hearing€didÐ 0"€  Ðnot€violate€his€right€to€a€speedy€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòUtleyóó,€956€S.W.2d€at€494€(stating€that€the€ð ðdelay€mustÐ ° Ðapproach€one€year€to€triggerðð€speedy€trial€analysis).€€€€€€€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àNevertheless,€because€the€Defendantððs€main€complaint€is€the€delay€between€the€issuance€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€probation€violation€warrant€and€his€return€to€Blount€County€to€answer€to€the€warrant,€our€inquiryÐ `° Ðdoes€not€end€with€the€speedy€trial€analysis.€€While€the€delay€between€the€commission€of€an€offenseÐ L œ Ðand€the€formal€commencement€of€adversarial€proceedings€does€not€violate€a€defendantððsÐ 8 ˆ Ðconstitutional€right€to€a€speedy€trial,€that€delay€may€infringe€upon€a€defendantððs€right€to€due€processÐ $ t Ðunder€the€Fifth€and€Fourteenth€Amendments€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€ðð€9€ofÐ  ` Ðthe€Tennessee€Constitution.€€òòSeeóó€òòUtleyóó,€956€S.W.2d€at€495;€òòState€v.€Grayóó,€917€S.W.2d€668,€671Ð ü L  Ð(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€255€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€In€òòUnited€States€v.Ð è 8  ÐMarionóó,€404€U.S.€307€(1971),€the€Supreme€Court€stated,€ð ð[T]he€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€FifthÐ Ô$  ÐAmendment€would€require€dismissal€of€the€indictment€if€it€were€shown€at€trial€that€the€preindictmentÐ À  Ðdelay€.€.€.€caused€substantial€prejudice€to€appelleesðð€rights€to€a€fair€trial€and€that€the€delay€was€anÐ ¬ü  Ðintentional€device€to€gain€tactical€advantage€over€the€accused.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€324.€€In€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€thisÐ ˜è  ÐCourt€relied€on€òòMarionóó€to€set€forth€the€following€test€to€be€applied€in€assessing€pre„accusatorialÐ „Ô  Ðdelay:Ð pÀ Ðà8  àBefore€an€accused€is€entitled€to€relief€based€upon€the€delay€between€the€offense€andÐ \¬ Ðthe€initiation€of€adversarial€proceedings,€the€accused€must€prove€that€(a)€there€wasÐ H˜ Ða€delay,€(b)€the€accused€sustained€actual€prejudice€as€a€direct€and€proximate€result€ofÐ 4„ Ðthe€delay,€and€(c)€the€State€caused€the€delay€in€order€to€gain€tactical€advantage€overÐ  p Ðor€to€harass€the€accused.€€Ð \Ð Ð  ÐòòDykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€at€256.€€Although€our€supreme€court€altered€this€test€somewhat€in€situationsÐ øH Ðwhere€the€State€is€unaware€of€the€offense€during€the€period€of€delay,€it€has€indicated€that€the€òòDykesóóÐ ä4 Ðtest€is€the€appropriate€test€to€apply€in€cases€involving€pre„accusatorial€delay€were€the€State€is€awareÐ Ð  Ðof€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Caricoóó,€968€S.W.2d€280,€284„85€(Tenn.€1998);€òòUtleyóó,€956€S.W.2d€atÐ ¼  Ð495;€òòGrayóó,€917€S.W.2d€at€673.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àAccording€to€the€Criminal€Complaint€of€Bell€County,€Kentucky,€which€charges€theÐ €Ð ÐDefendant€with€trafficking€in€cocaine,€the€Defendant€committed€the€alleged€offenses€on€March€11Ð l¼ Ðand€March€12,€1999.€€He€was€arrested€in€Middlesboro,€Kentucky€for€those€offenses€on€May€11,Ð X ¨ Ð1999.€€It€is€not€clear€from€the€record€when€the€State€of€Tennessee€was€made€aware€of€theÐ D!” ÐDefendantððs€Kentucky€arrest,€but€the€probation€violation€warrant€was€filed€on€June€18,€1999.€€TheÐ 0"€  Ðwarrant€alleged€that€the€Defendant€violated€his€probation€by€failing€to€obey€the€laws€of€the€UnitedÐ #l! ÐStates,€failing€to€report€all€arrests,€failing€to€inform€his€probation€officer€before€leaving€the€state,€andÐ $X" Ðhaving€possession€of€illegal€drugs.€€The€warrant€was€not€served€on€the€Defendant€until€June€26,Ð ô$D # Ð2000.€€Thus,€it€is€evident€that€there€was€a€delay€of€over€a€year€from€the€time€the€Defendant€allegedlyÐ à%0!$ Ðcommitted€the€probation€violations€and€the€time€he€was€arrested€and€accused€of€those€violations.€Ð Ì&"% ÐHowever,€while€we€find€that€there€was€a€delay,€we€also€find€that€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€proveÐ ¸'#& Ðthat€he€was€prejudiced€by€the€delay€or€that€the€State€caused€the€delay€in€order€to€gain€tacticalÐ ¤(ô#' Ðadvantage€over€him€or€to€harass€him.€€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àIt€appears€that€the€delay€was€caused€in€part€by€confusion€on€the€part€of€the€trial€judge€in€KnoxÐ ° Ðâ âCounty€regarding€the€Defendantððs€Knox€County€sentence.€€Although€the€Defendantððs€Knox€CountyÐ œì Ðsentence€was€to€be€served€consecutively€to€his€Blount€County€sentence,€which€would€not€expire€untilÐ ˆØ ÐDecember€1,€2000,€the€judgment€erroneously€reflected€that€the€Defendantððs€Knox€County€sentenceÐ tÄ Ðwould€expire€on€May€21,€2001.€€Also,€the€Defendant€was€transferred€to€CAPP€in€Knox€County€toÐ `° Ðserve€his€Blount€County€sentence,€and€he€was€ultimately€transferred€from€CAPP€to€regular€probation,Ð L œ Ðwhere€he€was€supervised€in€Knox€County.€€The€Defendantððs€Knox€County€probation€officer€filedÐ 8 ˆ Ðprobation€violation€warrants€in€both€Knox€and€Blount€Counties.€€The€Knox€County€judge€then€heldÐ $ t Ða€probation€revocation€hearing€in€which€she€determined€that€the€Defendant€had€violated€hisÐ  ` Ðprobation,€and€she€ordered€him€to€serve€his€Knox€County€sentence€in€confinement.€€In€her€orderÐ ü L  Ðrevoking€the€Defendantððs€probation,€the€judge€noted€that€his€sentence€was€due€to€expire€on€May€21,Ð è 8  Ð2001,€and€she€gave€him€jail€credit€for€the€time€he€had€spent€in€jail€and€in€CAPP€since€the€date€of€hisÐ Ô$  Ðconviction€in€Knox€County€in€1993.€€In€short,€the€Knox€County€judge€did€not€require€that€theÐ À  ÐDefendant€serve€his€Knox€County€sentence€consecutively€to€his€Blount€County€sentence.€€TheÐ ¬ü  ÐDefendant€was€sent€to€the€state€penitentiary,€and€he€was€not€served€with€the€Blount€County€probationÐ ˜è  Ðviolation€warrant€until€after€his€release€on€parole€for€his€Knox€County€sentence.€€In€August€1999,Ð „Ô  Ðshortly€after€being€sent€to€the€state€penitentiary,€the€Defendant€filed€a€òòpro€seóó€petition€in€BlountÐ pÀ ÐCounty€to€allow€his€Blount€County€sentence€to€be€served€concurrently€with€his€Knox€CountyÐ \¬ Ðsentence,€and€in€September€1999,€the€public€defender€was€appointed€to€represent€the€Defendant€inÐ H˜ Ðthat€matter.€€However,€no€action€was€ever€taken€on€that€petition.€€Thus,€while€the€State€was€clearlyÐ 4„ Ðat€fault€for€the€delay,€it€does€not€appear€that€the€State€intentionally€caused€the€delay€in€order€to€harassÐ  p Ðthe€Defendant€or€to€gain€a€tactical€advantage€over€him.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€show€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€the€delay.€€HisÐ ä4 ÐKnox€County€probation€officer€was€available€to€testify€at€the€hearing,€and€no€other€potentialÐ Ð  Ðwitnesses€were€identified.€€The€Defendantððs€only€claim€of€prejudice€is€that€if€he€had€been€timelyÐ ¼  Ðserved€with€the€warrant€and€had€his€probation€revoked€in€Blount€County,€as€he€had€in€Knox€County,Ð ¨ø Ðhe€would€have€received€an€additional€year€of€jail€credit€toward€the€service€of€his€sentence.€€WhenÐ ”ä Ðthe€Blount€County€judge€revoked€the€Defendantððs€probation,€he€declined€to€give€the€Defendant€jailÐ €Ð Ðcredit€for€the€time€spent€in€jail€on€his€Knox€County€sentence€because€the€Knox€County€sentence€wasÐ l¼ Ðsupposed€to€be€served€consecutively€to€his€Blount€County€sentence.€€In€refusing€to€give€theÐ X ¨ ÐDefendant€that€jail€credit,€the€judge€noted€that€the€Defendant€has€ð ðgreatly€benefitted€from€the€wayÐ D!” Ðthis€has€developed.ðð€€We€agree€with€the€trial€judge.€€When€the€Defendant€was€originally€sentencedÐ 0"€  Ðin€Knox€County,€he€understood€that€his€Knox€County€sentence€was€to€be€served€consecutively€to€hisÐ #l! ÐBlount€County€sentence.€€He€cannot€now€claim€that€he€was€prejudiced€in€Blount€County€because€theÐ $X" ÐKnox€County€trial€judge€mistakenly€gave€him€jail€credit€that€he€did€not€deserve.€€Moreover,€insteadÐ ô$D # Ðof€prejudicing€the€Defendant,€the€delay€likely€benefitted€the€Defendant.€€Had€the€Defendant€first€hadÐ à%0!$ Ðhis€probation€revoked€in€Blount€County,€the€Knox€County€judge€likely€would€have€realized€theÐ Ì&"% Ðdiscrepancy€on€the€judgment€form€and€enforced€her€order€that€the€sentences€be€served€consecutively.€Ð ¸'#& ÐWe€therefore€find€no€actual€prejudice.Ð ¤(ô#' Ðâ âÐ )à$( Ðà  àBecause€the€Defendant€was€unable€to€establish€that€he€sustained€actual€prejudice€as€a€directÐ ° Ðand€proximate€result€of€the€delay€and€that€the€State€caused€the€delay€in€order€to€gain€a€tacticalÐ œì Ðadvantage€over€or€to€harass€him,€we€find€no€due€process€violation.€€This€issue€therefore€has€no€merit.Ð ˆØ Ðâ  €Ð tÄ Ðà@{{ìàREVOCATION€OF€PROBATIONˆÐ `° ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€revoking€his€probation.€€A€trial€courtÐ 8 ˆ Ðmay€revoke€a€sentence€of€probation€if€it€determines€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€theÐ $ t Ðconditions€of€probation€have€been€violated.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„311(e).€€Upon€revocation€ofÐ  ` Ðprobation,€the€trial€court€has€the€authority€to€cause€the€original€judgment€to€be€executed€as€it€wasÐ ü L  Ðoriginally€entered.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðð€40„35„310;€òòState€v.€Hunteróó,€1€S.W.3d€643,€646€(Tenn.€1999).€€TheÐ è 8  Ðdecision€to€revoke€probation€is€in€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.€€òòState€v.€Mitchellóó,€810Ð Ô$  ÐS.W.2d€733,€735€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€will€be€upheld€on€appealÐ À  Ðunless€there€has€been€an€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Williamsonóó,€619€S.W.2d€145,€146€(Tenn.Ð ¬ü  ÐCrim.€App.€1981).€€To€find€an€abuse€of€discretion€in€a€probation€revocation€case,€an€appellate€courtÐ ˜è  Ðmust€determine€that€the€record€is€void€of€any€substantial€evidence€that€would€support€the€trial€courtððsÐ „Ô  Ðdecision€that€a€violation€of€the€conditions€of€probation€occurred.€€òòState€v.€Grearóó,€568€S.W.2d€285,Ð pÀ Ð286€(Tenn.€1978);€òòState€v.€Delpóó,€614€S.W.2d€395,€398€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980).€€Proof€of€aÐ \¬ Ðprobation€violation€is€sufficient€if€it€allows€the€trial€court€to€make€a€conscientious€and€intelligentÐ H˜ Ðjudgment.€€òòState€v.€Miltonóó,€673€S.W.2d€555,€557€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).€€€€€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àWe€are€unable€to€find€an€abuse€of€discretion€in€this€case€because€substantial€evidenceÐ  \ Ðsupports€the€trial€judgeððs€conclusion€that€a€violation€of€the€conditions€of€probation€occurred.€€TheÐ øH ÐDefendantððs€probation€officer,€Shirley€Castelvecchi,€testified€that€she€filed€the€probation€violationÐ ä4 Ðwarrant€because€the€Defendant€was€arrested€in€Kentucky€on€new€drug€charges,€and€he€did€not€informÐ Ð  Ðher€of€those€new€charges.€€Also,€the€Defendant€did€not€have€permission€to€be€outside€the€state€ofÐ ¼  ÐTennessee,€and€she€discovered€that€he€maintained€an€apartment€in€Kentucky€that€she€did€not€knowÐ ¨ø Ðabout.€€She€discovered€this€information€about€new€charges€and€an€apartment€in€Kentucky€when€theÐ ”ä ÐKentucky€officials€contacted€her.€€At€the€time€of€the€hearing,€the€charges€in€Kentucky€wereÐ €Ð Ðunresolved.€€Castelvecchi€testified€that€the€Defendant€did€make€payments€on€his€court€costs,€but€heÐ l¼ Ðmade€sporadic€payments€instead€of€regular€payments.€€She€said€that€the€Defendant€had€to€go€to€courtÐ X ¨ Ðon€several€occasions€in€Knox€County€because€of€failure€to€pay€court€costs.€€Also,€while€theÐ D!” ÐDefendant€would€report€to€her,€he€would€often€cancel€his€appointments€and€then€reschedule€themÐ 0"€  Ðseveral€times€a€month.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€admitted€that€he€was€arrested€in€Kentucky€and€charged€with€trafficking€inÐ ô$D # Ðcocaine,€but€he€asserted€that€he€was€not€guilty€of€those€offenses.€€He€also€asserted€that€he€did€not€liveÐ à%0!$ Ðin€Kentucky€but€instead€lived€in€Knoxville.€€He€testified€that€he€had€paid€all€his€court€costs€in€KnoxÐ Ì&"% ÐCounty,€but€he€had€not€paid€any€in€Blount€County€because€he€did€not€know€that€he€had€any.€€HeÐ ¸'#& Ðadmitted€that€he€was€found€to€be€in€violation€of€probation€in€Knox€County,€and€he€did€not€appealÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthat€decision.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àIn€light€of€the€Defendantððs€admission€that€he€was€arrested€in€Kentucky€on€new€drug€charges,Ð ° Ðâ âthe€evidence€clearly€establishes€that€the€Defendant€was€outside€the€state€of€Tennessee.€€Also,€theÐ œì ÐDefendant€did€not€dispute€that€he€failed€to€inform€his€probation€officer€of€the€new€charges€or€thatÐ ˆØ Ðhe€did€not€have€permission€to€be€outside€the€state€of€Tennessee.€€The€Defendant€admitted€that€heÐ tÄ Ðfailed€to€pay€any€court€costs€in€Blount€County.€€Based€on€this€evidence€of€probation€violations,€weÐ `° Ðconclude€that€the€trial€judge€did€not€abuse€his€discretion€by€revoking€the€Defendantððs€probation.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð $ t ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð Ô$  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àROBERT€W.€WEDEMEYER,€JUDGE