WPC KQPE[cIxdB14p)|),;ꑎjLԞ-+Ni*R'C£hѨ".PhM'@1{ x$?xN7uIsjbr5&cEC㉺L36nm֦U4`O 1UW PP9H"j?GcO[Sv0ݏ?|+.Vw>}ijb0=8QhZ,[UrN?$59 PԥUSU1")kGM`Uw nFeck2.t;;) :^>CehMQC~d#35e]RNIpp+hـ57S(aϮI1Bȗi7z<t]C:s PY}(RxCjv=j7| `fb %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m #  U 0DmNEb 0 B 0 D3q D- 0K ASo 05 0D AlQ-s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularYo)LV3|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 4050 Series PCL 60  RW$      1     _ԀThedefendantwasinitiallychargedwithandconvictedbyajuryofsellingaScheduleIIcontrolledsubstance.  Onappeal,thisCourtreversedtheconvictionandremandedforanewtrialduetothetrialcourtsfailuretoinstructthe t juryontheappropriatelesserincludedoffenses.Statev.JerryWaymanTravis,2000Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS218 8 W1999-01089-CCA-R3-CD(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,Mar.10,2000).Thereafter,thedefendantpledguiltyto L facilitationofafelony.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0   - -(|G2W$ !.8=dd8         0  E d(|3i$ !.8=dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3i$ !.8=dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _   8^XXdd8@ttINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON# #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsJuly9,2002 L X^X #XX^#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.JERRY_WAYMON_ԀTRAVIS,X^X #XX^#_aka_ԀJERRY J _WAYMON_ԀRAYX^X   ^ @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforHenryCounty  ^ @@No.12746JulianP.Guinn,Judge  J @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200101914CCAR3CDFiledOctober14,_2002_   AV) ` dE<` A      ThedefendantclaimsitwaserrorforthetrialcourttosentencehimtotheDepartmentofCorrection  forthreeyears,thenorderoneyearsplitconfinementwiththebalanceonCommunityCorrections. x Thedefendantcontendsthataoneyearsplitconfinementsentencewillrequirehimtoserve1.2 d monthslongerinconfinementthanathreeyearsentenceat30%totheDepartmentofCorrection. P Weconcludethesentenceimposeddidnotviolatetheprinciplesofsentencingand,accordingly, < affirmthejudgmentfromthetrialcourtasmodified. (x  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmedas P Modified  <   #X^h#X^X.JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichNormaMcGeeOgleand  AlanE.Glenn,JJ.,joined.  GuyT.Wilkinson,DistrictPublicDefender,andW.Jeffery_Fagan_,AssistantPublicDefender,for  theappellant,Jerry_Waymon_ԀTravis. t  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;HelenaWalton_Yarbrough_,AssistantAttorney L"! General;G.Robert_Radford_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andStevenL._Garrett_,AssistantDistrict 8#" AttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. $$t# @@OO& OPINION #XX^#X^X &8"&     OnJuly19,2000,thedefendant,Jerry_Waymon_ԀTravis,_aka_ԀJerry_Waymon_ԀRay,pledguilty ($(  tofacilitationofthesaleofaScheduleIIcontrolledsubstance,aClassDfelony,andwassentenced )$)= asaRangeIstandardoffendertotwoyears,tobeservedinsplitconfinement.  #  1      ׀Thedefendantwas   orderedtoservesixtydayscontinuousconfinement#XX^ #X^Xinthecountyjailandtheremainderofthe  sentenceinaCommunityCorrectionsprogram.Whileincarcerated,thedefendantviolatedtheterms  ofhisCommunityCorrectionssentencebyintroducingdrugsintoapenalsystem.Afterare t sentencinghearing,thetrialcourtenhancedthedefendantssentencebaseduponhispriorhistory ` ofcriminalconvictionsandhispreviousunwillingnesstocomplywiththeconditionsofparole,bail, L  orprobation.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.40-35-114(1),(8).Thetrialcourtsentencedthedefendantto 8  threeyearsintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrectiontobeservedinsplitconfinement,withone $ t yearincontinuousconfinementandthebalancetobeservedonCommunityCorrections.  `   Thedefendantappealsthetrialcourtssentence.Essentially,thedefendantarguesthatthe  8  trialcourterredbyorderinghimtoserveoneyearincontinuousconfinement,becausehadhesimply $  beensentencedtothreeyearsasaRangeIoffender,hewouldhavebeeneligibleforreleaseafter   serving30%ofhisthree-yearsentence,orapproximately10.8months.      Analysis      Assumingthatanewsentencinghearingisconducted,atrialcourtgenerallyhastheauthority \ toincreasethelengthofarevokedCommunityCorrectionssentenceuptothemaximumsentence H withintheappropriatesentencerangefortheoffense.Tenn.CodeAnn.40-36-106(e)(2);Statev. 4 Samuels,44S.W.3d489,493(Tenn.2001).Inevaluatingtheproprietyofthe newsentence,itis  p thedutyofthisCourttoconductadenovoreviewwithapresumptionthatthedeterminationsmade  \ bythetrialcourtarecorrect.Tenn.CodeAnn.40-35-401(d).Thispresumptionis conditioned H upontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciples 4 andallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166,169(Tenn.1991);see   Statev.Jones,883S.W.2d597(Tenn.1994). Ifthetrialcourtappliesinappropriatefactorsor   otherwisefailstofollowthe1989SentencingAct,thepresumptionofcorrectnessfalls.Statev.  Shelton,854S.W.2d116,123(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).TheSentencingCommissionComments  providethattheburdenisonthedefendanttoshowtheimproprietyofthesentence.      Ourreviewrequiresananalysisof(1)theevidence,ifany,receivedatthetrialandsentencing X  hearing;(2)thepresentencereport;(3)theprinciplesofsentencingandtheargumentsofcounsel D! relativetosentencingalternatives;(4)thenatureandcharacteristicsoftheoffense;(5)anymitigating 0"  orenhancingfactors;(6)anystatementsmadebythedefendantinhisownbehalf;and(7)the #l! defendantspotentialforrehabilitationortreatment.Tenn.CodeAnn.40-35-102,-103,-210; $X" Statev.Smith,735S.W.2d859,863(Tenn.Crim.App.1987). $D #   %0!$   ThedefendantwasconvictedoffacilitationofthesaleofaScheduleIIcontrolledsubstance,   aClassDfelony.ThepresumptivesentencetobeimposedbythetrialcourtforaClassDfelonyis  theminimumwithintheapplicablerangeunlessthereareenhancementormitigatingfactorspresent.  Tenn.CodeAnn.40-35-210(c).Ifthereareenhancementormitigatingfactors,thecourtmuststart t atthepresumptivesentence,enhancethesentenceasappropriatefortheenhancementfactors,and ` thenreducethesentenceintherangeasappropriateforthemitigatingfactors.Id.40-35-210(e). L  Theweighttobegiveneachfactorislefttothediscretionofthetrialjudge.Shelton,854S.W.2d 8  at123. $ t   Intheinstantcase,thetrialcourtfoundtwoapplicableenhancementfactors:(1),the  L  defendantspriorhistoryofcriminalconvictionsand(8),thedefendantspreviousunwillingnessto  8  complywiththeconditionsofparole,bail,orprobation.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035114(1),(8).The $  trialcourtincreasedthedefendantssentencefromtwoyearstothreeyears.Inaddition,thetrial   courtfoundthat [b]ylaw,thisCourtmustconsideralternativemeansofservice,andsofindsthat   thisisanappropriatecasetosplitthesentenceandorderitservedsplit,withoneyearofcontinuous   confinementandthebalanceintheCommunityCorrectionsProgram.    XThejudgmentreflectsathreeyearsentenceintheDepartmentofCorrection,withoneyear \ tobeservedincontinuousconfinementandtwoyearsinCommunityCorrections.Adefendant H sentencedtosplitconfinementmaybeorderedtoserveuptooneyearincontinuousconfinement. 4 However,thetimeistobeservedinthelocaljailorworkhouse.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035306(a).  p   \ Thedefendantarguesthatthetrialcourtsorderofoneyearofcontinuousconfinement H violatestheprinciplesofsentencingbecausehisreleaseeligibilitydatewouldhaveoccurredafter 4 serving30%,or219days,hadhebeensentencedtoservehissentenceintheDepartmentof   Correction.Thedefendantcorrectlypointsoutthatatrialcourtmaynotorderadefendantsentenced   totwoyearsorlesstoserveasentenceofconfinementthatexceedshisorherreleaseeligibilitydate.  SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035501(a)(3)(mandatingthat inmateswithfelonysentencesoftwo(2)  yearsorlessshallhavetheremainderoftheiroriginalsentencesuspendeduponreachingtheir  releaseeligibilitydate).Theinstantdefendantwassentencedtothreeyearsandisnotentitledto l automaticreleaseuponreachinghisreleaseeligibilitydate.However,hecontendsthatthetrialcourt X  sentencedhimoutsidetherangeforaRangeIstandardoffenderbyextendinghisreleaseeligibility D! datebeyond30%. 0"   #l! ThisissuewasaddressedbythisCourtinStatev.JeremyMichael_Shelton_,No.W2000 $X" 00457CCAR3CD,2001WL846029(Tenn.Crim.App.July20,2001).Sheltoninvolvedan $D # identicalsentenceandconcludedasfollows: %0!$  X X X ` Inourview,thesentenceofsplitconfinementdoesnotviolatetheprinciples &"% ofsentencingmerelybecausethedefendantmayhavetoserve1.2monthsmorethan '#& hemayhavehadtoserveintheDepartmentofCorrection.Asthestatecorrectly (#' notes,thedefendantwouldhavenorighttoconditionalreleasepriortotheexpiration )$( ofhisDepartmentofCorrectionsentence.Greenholtzv.InmatesoftheNeb.Penal |*%) andCorrectionalComplex,442U.S.1,7(1979);Danielsv.Traughber,984S.W.2d h+&* 918,924(Tenn.Ct.App.1998);seeTenn.CodeAnn.4035503(b)(1997)  ( Releaseonparoleisaprivilegeandnotaright,....).Moreover,becausethe  defendantistobeconfinedinthelocaljail,thetrialcourtwillretainfulljurisdiction  overthemannerofserviceofhissentence.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035212(c);see t Tenn.R.Crim.P.35,CommitteeComment.Atanytime,thedefendantmayapply ` tothetrialcourttoservethebalanceofhissentenceofconfinementonprobation. L  Tenn.CodeAnn.4035306(c). 8   X XId.at*6. $ t  XAccordingly,thejudgmentismodifiedtoreflectasentenceofoneyearconfinementinthe  L  localjail,asopposedtotheDepartmentofCorrection,followedbytwoyearsinCommunity  8  Corrections. $               p  \  `     h     ___________________________________ H  `     h     JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE