ÿWPCè ’o|‹|b‡û¿]ˆÔ¸ÌI†#ÿ9Qãnú¢˜§ß”ÿù>5ßuÒ·þŠÝTàž²ûôè¶öÊíì´_È'í&qª Cyml!ƒîP”‡û Z¬.­b»JI À±£]Go,Pyõ!×öjÞö›f›o”pJ«[Àò9u)‘cIRëîzó/þhFùî]ýŠ˜Ö?ÈýÙÞË]Eݘ´µzs„ç¥BM«i“=0ÿi0…ZŽ ¬ð\ ×d,•ºåÑ´ó&_Ó9ACU1ÍnÐ…Ì'l¾ºíHIØ ×ÈìS“S•µF’CEyoæ“}Ž–wX3oÉkÔ®B÷^é¥~»ï”!JQ+k©Ër‡øÙå_„lž¢gÍ^Ã}ܦÒf1å|‹´‹éñaÜlx¡ãË f•gê¹óT'QqØHå$ïe>à$z¤sû‹«\cthF\‘Î(§Vk^çåÒ§7/r:³¬^kõFËÇ ím³i‰ö xêÔŸnݽ;!~°‡SrµÓ#ï Í0'ÒDÉðÚ¸éÕÝEs—ý1ñ…Þê›—î4äxíøüéÃ'#z¢žv0ܶ 0Dù A«=˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0»·¤D)â (w`>$¡¡Ô  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€..ÑÑ8€D%»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ýý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularq\;' œk1\ÓŸ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ²Ý ƒR)“$ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÉœò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„527.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ²Ý ƒR)“$ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÉœò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„505.(ƒð Z‹(Times New Roman (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular ¾Ý ƒR)“$ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÉœò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ð[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€trial€court€may€look€behind€a€plea€agreement€and€consider€the€true€nature€of€the€offense€committed.ðð€Ð ° ÐòòState€v.€Ô_ÔLatoyaÔ_Ô€Andersonóó,€No.€02C01„9707„CR„00251,€1998€WL€599527,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Sept.€11,Ð xÈ Ð1998)€(citing€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔHollingsworthÔ_Ôóó,€647€S.W.2d€937,€939€(Tenn.€1983);€òòState€v.€Ô_ÔBiggsÔ_Ôóó,€769€S.W.2d€506,€507€(Tenn.Ð @ ÐCrim.€App.€1988)). °Ý ƒR)“$ÝÔ  ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÉœò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€should€have€imposed€the€minimum€sentence€for€each€Class€E€felony,Ð ° Ðwhich€is€one€year.€€It€appears€from€the€record,€however,€that€the€two€concurrent€two„year€sentences€were€a€part€of€theÐ xÈ ÐDefendant's€plea€agreement. - ù-(“G2)“$¤¤Ý ƒ`>!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÉœò»»Ô d(“3ýó$££Ý ƒ`>!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(“3ýó$¢¢Ý ƒ`>!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ`>!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»´»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼»´»»»ÔÑ8€¹sXXdð»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îó§î»¼»´ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼»´»îîó§#ԈРÜ, ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAugust€2000€SessionÐ X ÐÔ‡X¹sX»¼»´ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»´»XX¹s#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€RICHARD€EUGENE€Ô_ÔTRIVETTEÔ_ÔòòóóÔ‡X¹sX»¼»´Ôó óÐ  ` ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyÐ  h Ðà@@øøìàNo.€S42,187€€€€€€Phyllis€H.€Miller,€JudgeÐ  X ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<×` AßÐ Ø(  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„00944„CCA„R3„CDÐ ×'  ÐOctober€4,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ Ç  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<¶` AßÐ ·  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€two€counts€of€sexual€battery.€€His€plea€agreement€provided€forÐ ¶ Ðconcurrent€sentences€of€two€years€for€his€convictions,€with€the€manner€of€service€of€the€sentencesÐ ¦ö Ðto€be€determined€by€the€trial€judge.€€The€trial€judge€ordered€that€the€Defendant€serve€280€days€of€hisÐ –æ Ðsentences€in€the€county€jail,€with€the€balance€to€be€served€on€intensive€probation.€€On€appeal,€theÐ †Ö ÐDefendant€argues€that€the€trial€judge€erred€by€ordering€him€to€serve€280€days€in€jail.€€We€modify€theÐ vÆ Ðsentences€imposed€by€the€trial€court.Ð f¶ ÐÓéÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€3€Appeal;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Modified.ó óÐ F– ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼»´»àX¹s»#ÔÔ‡X¹sX.¼»´ÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€and€òòRobertÐ &v ÐW.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð f ÐÌRichard€A.€Ô_ÔSpiveyÔ_Ô,€Kingsport,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Richard€Eugene€Ô_ÔTrivetteÔ_Ô.Ð öF ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€R.€Stephen€Ô_ÔJobeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð Ö& ÐGreeley€Wells,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Greg€Newman,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,Ð Æ  Ðfor€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ¶!  ÐÓõÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼»´»XX¹s$#ÔÔ‡X¹sX»¼»´ÔÐ –#æ" ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼»´»XX¹sp #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X¹sX»¼»´Ôà  àThe€Defendant€was€indicted€for€two€counts€of€sexual€battery€by€an€authority€figure,€eachÐ v%Æ $ Ðbeing€a€Class€C€felony.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Pursuant€to€a€plea€agreement,€he€pleaded€guilty€to€one€count€of€the€lesserÐ f&¶!% Ðincluded€offense€of€sexual€battery€and€entered€a€plea€of€òònoloóó€òòcontendereóó€to€another€count€of€sexualÐ V'¦"& Ðbattery,€each€offense€being€a€Class€E€felony.׃X×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€was€to€receive€concurrent€sentences€of€two€yearsÐ F(–#' Ðfor€each€conviction€as€a€Range€I€standard€offender.€€The€manner€of€service€of€the€sentence€was€leftÐ 6)†$(ý ÐÔ_Ôto€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge,€with€the€understanding€that€the€Defendant€would€seek€probationÐ ° Ðor€other€alternative€sentencing€options.€€Following€a€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€judge€ordered€thatÐ  ð Ðthe€Defendant€serve€280€days€in€the€county€jail,€with€the€balance€of€the€sentence€to€be€served€onÐ à Ðintensive€probation.€€On€appeal,€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€judge€erred€by€ordering€him€toÐ €Ð Ðserve€280€days€in€jail.€€He€argues€that€he€should€have€received€either€total€probation€or€a€lesserÐ pÀ Ðamount€of€time€in€jail.Ð ` ° ÐÌÔ‡X|Ö XXX¹sÔà  àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€this€CourtÐ @  Ðhas€a€duty€to€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€the€sentence€with€a€presumption€that€the€determinationsÐ , | Ðmade€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€isÐ  h  Ðð ðconditioned€upon€the€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€sentencingÐ T  Ðprinciples€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.Ð ð@  Ð1991).Ð Ü,  ÐÌà  àWhen€conducting€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€of€a€sentence,€this€Court€must€consider:€(a)€the€evidence,Ð ´  Ðif€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€sentencing€hearing;€(b)€the€presentence€report;€(c)€the€principles€ofÐ  ð  Ðsentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencing€alternatives;€(d)€the€nature€and€characteristics€of€theÐ ŒÜ Ðcriminal€conduct€involved;€(e)€any€statutory€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors;€(f)€any€statementÐ xÈ Ðmade€by€the€defendant€regarding€sentencing;€and€(g)€the€potential€or€lack€of€potential€forÐ d´ Ðrehabilitation€or€treatment.€€òòState€v.€Thomasóó,€755€S.W.2d€838,€844€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€Tenn.Ð P  ÐCode€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103,€„210.Ð <Œ ÐÌà  àIf€our€review€reflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencing€procedure,€that€theÐ d Ðcourt€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€and€proper€weight€to€theÐ P Ðfactors€and€principles€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€areÐ ì< Ðadequately€supported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€haveÐ Ø( Ðpreferred€a€different€result.€€òòState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ð Ä ÐÔ#†X¹sX XX|Ö#ÔÌÔ‡X|Ö XXX¹sÔà  àA€defendant€who€ð ðis€an€especially€mitigated€or€standard€offender€convicted€of€a€Class€C,€DÐ  ð Ðor€E€felony€is€presumed€to€be€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing€options€in€the€absenceÐ ŒÜ Ðof€evidence€to€the€contrary.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„102(6).€€Our€sentencing€law€also€providesÐ x È Ðthat€ð ðconvicted€felons€committing€the€most€severe€offenses,€possessing€criminal€histories€evincingÐ d!´ Ða€clear€disregard€for€the€laws€and€morals€of€society,€and€evincing€failure€of€past€efforts€atÐ P"   Ðrehabilitation€shall€be€given€first€priority€regarding€sentencing€involving€incarceration.ðð€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„Ð <#Œ! Ð102(5).€€Thus,€a€defendant€sentenced€to€eight€years€or€less€who€is€not€an€offender€for€whomÐ ($x" Ðincarceration€is€a€priority€is€presumed€eligible€for€alternative€sentencing€unless€sufficient€evidenceÐ %d # Ðrebuts€the€presumption.€€However,€the€act€does€not€provide€that€all€offenders€who€meet€the€criteriaÐ &P!$ Ðare€entitled€to€such€relief;€rather,€it€requires€that€sentencing€issues€be€determined€by€the€facts€andÐ ì&<"% Ðcircumstances€presented€in€each€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€744€S.W.2d€919,€922€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð Ø'(#& Ð1987)€(citing€òòState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€228,€235€(Tenn.€1986)).€€Ð Ä($' ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€the€principles€of€sentencing€reflect€that€the€sentence€should€be€no€greater€thanÐ œ*ì%) Ðthat€deserved€for€the€offense€committed€and€should€be€the€least€severe€measure€necessary€to€achieveÐ ˆ+Ø&* Ðthe€purposes€for€which€the€sentence€is€imposed.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103(3)„(4).€€The€courtÐ ° Ðshould€also€consider€the€potential€for€rehabilitation€or€treatment€of€the€defendant€in€determining€theÐ œì Ðsentence€alternative.€€òòId.óó€ðð€40„35„103(5).Ô#†X¹sX XX|Öã#ÔÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àA€transcript€of€the€guilty€plea€proceeding€is€not€contained€in€the€record.€€We€therefore€gleanÐ d´ Ðthe€facts€from€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€along€with€the€presentence€report€and€otherÐ T ¤ Ðinformation€contained€in€the€record.€€The€victim€was€the€thirteen„year„old€daughter€of€theÐ D ” ÐDefendant's€first€cousin.€€The€Defendant€had€known€the€victim€all€of€her€life.€€In€the€presentenceÐ 4 „ Ðreport,€the€Defendant€stated€that€he€and€the€victim's€father€were€ð ðmore€like€brothers€than€cousins.ðð€Ð $ t ÐThe€Defendant's€family€and€the€victim's€family€attended€church€together.€€According€to€theÐ  d  Ðpresentence€report,€the€Defendant€stated€that€he€was€ð ðprivileged€to€lead€[the€victim]€to€Christ.ðð€€OneÐ T  Ðof€the€sexual€battery€offenses€was€based€on€the€allegation€that€the€Defendant€placed€his€hand€insideÐ ôD  Ðthe€victim's€shirt€and€fondled€her€breast.€€The€other€sexual€battery€offense€was€based€on€a€separateÐ ä4  Ðincident€in€which€the€Defendant€was€alleged€to€have€placed€his€hand€inside€the€victim's€clothing€onÐ Ô$  Ðher€genital€area.€€Information€in€the€presentence€report€reflects€that€the€victim€reported€that€theÐ Ä  ÐDefendant€penetrated€her€vagina€with€his€finger.€€The€Defendant€denied€any€penetration.Ð ´ ÐÌà  àAt€the€time€of€sentencing,€the€Defendant€was€thirty„seven€years€old€and€married.€€He€hadÐ ”ä Ðbeen€married€three€times€previously€and€had€two€children.€€He€has€a€high€school€education€and€aÐ „Ô Ðhistory€of€steady€employment.€€He€was€convicted€of€robbery€with€the€use€of€a€firearm€in€Bristol,Ð tÄ ÐVirginia€in€1985,€for€which€he€apparently€received€an€effective€sentence€of€five€years€in€theÐ d´ Ðpenitentiary.€€While€he€was€serving€this€sentence,€he€was€charged€with€possessing€a€controlledÐ T¤ Ðsubstance€while€serving€time€on€a€felony€charge,€which€was€reduced€to€simple€possession€of€aÐ D” Ðcontrolled€substance€to€which€he€pleaded€guilty€and€received€a€twelve„month€jail€sentence.€€At€theÐ 4„ Ðsentencing€hearing,€the€Defendant€stated€that€he€was€ordered€to€pay€restitution€in€connection€withÐ $t Ðhis€1985€robbery€conviction.€€He€stated€that€his€parole€on€that€conviction€had€been€extended€to€allowÐ d Ðhim€to€continue€to€pay€restitution.€€He€acknowledged€that€he€had€not€satisfied€his€obligation€to€makeÐ T Ðrestitution€and€that€he€did€not€know€whether€he€had€been€discharged€from€parole.Ð ôD ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€expressed€his€remorse€concerning€his€actions€with€the€victim.€€While€heÐ Ô$ Ðadmitted€that€he€had€placed€his€hand€between€the€victim's€legs€on€her€genital€area,€he€denied€theÐ Ä  Ðseparate€incident€involving€his€fondling€the€victim's€breast.€€He€denied€that€he€penetrated€the€victim'sÐ ´! Ðvagina€with€his€finger.€€The€Defendant's€pastor,€the€Defendant's€step„father,€and€the€Defendant's€wifeÐ ¤"ô  Ðall€testified€in€support€of€the€Defendant€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€The€victim's€step„mother€testifiedÐ ”#ä! Ðthat€these€events€had€had€an€extremely€detrimental€effect€upon€the€victim.€€She€stated€that€she€hadÐ „$Ô" Ðnoticed€a€definite€adverse€effect€on€the€victim's€grades€in€school,€that€the€victim€had€lost€interest€inÐ t%Ä # Ðattending€church,€and€that€ð ð[j]ust€her€whole€attitude,€her€whole€way€of€thinking€has„„„„it's€reallyÐ d&´!$ Ðaffected€her.ððÐ T'¤"% ÐÌà  àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€judge€stated€that€she€was€consideringÐ 4)„$' Ðthe€relevant€sentencing€principles,€along€with€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€offense,€includingÐ $*t%( Ðâ âthe€legal€presumption€that€the€Defendant€was€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing.€€SheÐ +d&) Ðstated€that€she€was€required€to€consider€full€probation€but€noted€that€the€burden€was€on€theÐ ° ÐDefendant€to€establish€that€he€was€a€suitable€candidate€for€full€probation.€Ð  ð Ðâ âÌà  àIn€sentencing€the€Defendant,€the€trial€judge€found€and€applied€as€an€enhancement€factor€thatÐ €Ð Ðthe€Defendant€had€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thatÐ pÀ Ðnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€range.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1).€€ThisÐ ` ° Ðenhancement€factor€is€clearly€supported€by€the€Defendant's€convictions€of€robbery€and€possessionÐ P   Ðof€a€controlled€substance.€€The€judge€also€found€that€the€Defendant€had€a€previous€history€ofÐ @  Ðunwillingness€to€comply€with€the€conditions€of€a€sentence€involving€release€in€the€community.€€òòSeeóóÐ 0 € Ðòòid.óó€ðð€40„35„114(8).€€The€trial€judge€based€this€finding€on€the€Defendant's€admission€that€he€had€notÐ  p  Ðcomplied€with€a€previous€order€of€restitution€in€connection€with€his€parole€from€the€robbery€sentenceÐ `  Ðin€Virginia.€€The€judge€stated,€however,€that€she€was€giving€this€factor€little€weight.€€The€judge€alsoÐ P  Ðfound€as€an€enhancement€factor€that€the€Defendant€had€abused€a€position€of€private€trust.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€Ð ð@  Ððð€40„35„114(15).€€She€stated€that€she€was€giving€this€enhancement€factor€more€weight€than€theÐ à0  ÐDefendant's€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions.€€Although€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€trialÐ Ð  Ðcourt€erred€in€applying€this€enhancement€factor,€we€believe€it€is€clearly€supported€by€the€record.€€TheÐ À Ðvictim€was€the€daughter€of€the€Defendant's€first€cousin.€€He€had€known€her€all€her€life.€€She€wasÐ ° Ðallowed€to€spend€the€night€in€his€home€and€in€fact€was€staying€with€him€overnight€when€theseÐ  ð Ðoffenses€occurred.€€The€record€thus€establishes€that€the€Defendant€stood€in€a€relationship€to€theÐ à Ðvictim€that€promoted€confidence,€reliability€and€faith.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Kissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€482,€488Ð €Ð Ð(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€McKnightóó,€900€S.W.2d€36,€55€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòState€v.€DavidÐ pÀ ÐSharpeóó,€No.€M1999„00262„CCA„R3„CD,€2000€WL€291452,€at€*2€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,Ð `° ÐMar.€21,€2000).Ð P  ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€apply€as€a€mitigating€factor€thatÐ 0€ Ðhis€conduct€neither€caused€nor€threatened€serious€bodily€injury.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð  p Ð113(1).€€In€view€of€the€testimony€presented€concerning€the€detrimental€effect€the€Defendant's€actionsÐ ` Ðhave€had€on€the€victim's€academic€performance€and€attitude€in€general,€we€find€no€error€with€the€trialÐ P Ðcourt's€refusal€to€apply€this€factor€in€mitigation.€€If€applicable,€this€factor€would€be€entitled€to€littleÐ ð@ Ðweight.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Harold€Leon€Sutton,€Jr.óó,€No.€03C01„9708„CC„00344,€1998€WL€126250,€at€*4Ð à0 Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Mar.€23,€1998).€€While€the€trial€judge€noted€the€Defendant's€stableÐ Ð  Ðemployment€history€as€a€non„statutory€mitigating€factor,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„113(13),€sheÐ À! Ðfound€that€the€enhancement€factors€far€outweighed€any€mitigating€factors.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð °"  ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€he€is€entitled€to€full€probation.Ô‡X|Ö XXX¹sÔ€€In€determining€whether€to€grantÐ $à" Ðprobation,€the€judge€must€consider€the€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€offense,€the€defendantððsÐ %à # Ðcriminal€record,€his€background€and€social€history,€his€present€condition,€including€his€physical€andÐ |&Ì!$ Ðmental€condition,€the€deterrent€effect€on€other€criminal€activity,€and€the€likelihood€that€probation€isÐ h'¸"% Ðin€the€best€interests€of€both€the€public€and€the€defendant.€€òòStiller€v.€Stateóó,€516€S.W.2d€617,€620Ð T(¤#& Ð(Tenn.€1974).€€The€burden€is€on€the€Defendant€to€show€that€the€sentence€he€received€is€improper€andÐ ° Ðthat€he€is€entitled€to€probation.€€òòAshbyóó,€823€S.W.2d€at€169.Ô#†X¹sX XX|Öè@#ÔÐ œì ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€denied€the€Defendant€total€probation,€stating,Ð xÈ Ðà8  àI€find€that€you€have€not€carried€the€burden€of€demonstrating€to€the€court€that€fullÐ h¸ Ðprobation€would€serve€the€ends€of€justice€or€yourself€or€the€community.€€I€find€thatÐ X ¨ Ðsome€period€of€incarceration€is€necessary.€€I€find€that€because€of€the€seriousness€ofÐ H ˜ Ðthe€offenses,€because€of€the€fact€that€I€find€that€you€are€not€truthful,€and€because€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€fact€that€using€common€sense€I€accept€the€victim's€version€of€the€offense.€€I€findÐ ( x Ðit€was€actually€a€rape.Ð h Ð Ð  ÐÌIn€evaluating€the€Defendant's€veracity€and€credibility,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€Defendant'sÐ øH  Ðexpressions€of€remorse€were€not€sincere.€€It€is€clear€from€the€record€that€the€judge€did€not€credit€theÐ è8  ÐDefendant's€testimony€concerning€his€version€of€the€events€giving€rise€to€these€charges.€Ð Ø(  ÐÌà  àA€defendant's€lack€of€truthfulness€or€candor€has€long€been€considered€an€appropriateÐ ¸ Ðconsideration€in€denying€probation,€because€this€conduct€reflects€poorly€on€the€Defendant's€potentialÐ ¨ø Ðfor€rehabilitation.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Doughtyóó,€894€S.W.2d€301,€306€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóóÐ ˜è ÐòòState€v.€Neeleyóó,€678€S.W.2d€48,€49€(Tenn.€1984).€€The€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€offenses,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ˆØ Ðtogether€with€the€Defendant's€record€of€previous€convictions,€also€reflect€negatively€on€theÐ xÈ ÐDefendant's€suitability€for€full€probation.€€Based€on€our€review€of€the€record,€we€are€unable€toÐ h¸ Ðconclude€that€the€trial€judge€erred€or€abused€her€discretion€in€denying€the€Defendant€full€probation.Ð X¨ ÐÌà  àThe€State€concedes€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€ordering€the€Defendant€to€serve€280€days€inÐ 8ˆ Ðthe€county€jail.€€We€agree.€€The€Defendant€received€two€concurrent€felony€sentences€of€two€yearsÐ (x Ðin€length.€€Our€legislature€has€provided€that€inmates€with€felony€sentences€of€two€(2)€years€or€lessÐ h Ðòòshallóó€have€the€remainder€of€their€original€sentence€suspended€upon€reaching€their€release€eligibilityÐ X Ðdate.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„501(a)(3).€(emphasis€added).€€The€trial€court€seemed€to€express€itsÐ øH Ðdisagreement€with€the€mandatory€release€provision€established€by€the€legislature.€€In€ordering€theÐ è8 ÐDefendant€to€serve€280€days€ð ðday€for€dayðð€in€the€local€jail,€the€trial€judge€stated,€ð ðThe€reason€is,€isÐ Ø( Ðbecause€I€think€the€community€deserves€more€protection€than€the€community€would€get€if€I€justÐ È  Ðdenied€all€forms€of€alternative€sentencing,€okay.ðð€€Nevertheless,€this€court€has€held€that€a€trial€courtÐ ¸! Ðmay€not€circumvent€the€mandatory€provision€of€the€statute€by€ordering€a€€term€of€ð ðsplit€confinementððÐ ¨"ø  Ðin€excess€of€the€release€date€provided€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„501(a)(3).€€òòStateÐ ˜#è! Ðv.€Charles€Justin€Osborneóó,€No.€01C01„9806„CC„00246,€1999€WL€298220€at€*7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,Ð ˆ$Ø" ÐNashville,€May€12,€1999);€òòState€v.€John€W.€Hillóó,€No.€01C01„9802„CC„00072,€1999€WL€92948€atÐ x%È # Ð*1„2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Feb.€25,€1999).€€The€Defendant's€release€eligibility€date€is€30%Ð h&¸!$ Ðof€two€years,€which€equates€to€219€days.€€We€therefore€conclude€that€the€Defendant's€sentence€mustÐ X'¨"% Ðbe€modified€to€provide€that€he€serve€219€days€in€the€county€jail.€€In€all€other€respects,€the€judgmentÐ ° Ðof€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð  ð ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  p  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE