WPC <تH$NJxqQ_Ѭ& U$2'j.G>*qM.wHFHG{[W_sCW~b9<10fH! ph.gϲ{RjԢ8T7sL9kLN,~`xFs)Ao?=uUXm4,4x-7yFm4=!:kZKl0Ԣ5t[ѧ&B "?Q5!qƱU{ @a7fjR+Rf4 GGSaHW:rq<XfYw,h.ygvFt+RIX (nARvάSL퇛^ !:UC;~j2Upd !E}d 2~cF/w#`zwп `VTiʇ@9_ÑJbUN\ % 0^ 8wD4H\ zk m # UN   k 1 0DN;c=Eb 0 B 0 D3^ D- 0K AS \ 0" 0D A (hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ,-s PH,3|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 4000 Series PCL 6,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0   Y R$      1    _PriortothishearinginHumphreysCounty,theAppellanthadbeenincarceratedintheHickmanCountyjail  fromFebruary25,2001,toSeptember24,2001,onseparatechargesofprobationviolations. - -(|G2$ !.8.dd8         0   d(|3/$ !.8.dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3/$ !.8.dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8.dd8     _   .8g0XXdd8@tt2=.INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#.2= #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsAugust14,2002 L Xg0X. #.XXg0 #STATEOFTENNESSEEv.KENNETHRAYWHITEXg0X.  J @@ AppealfromtheCircuitCourtforHumphreysCounty  J @@No.CR9799ARobertE.Burch,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200200125CCAR3CDFiledSeptember11,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }      Xg0XXXg0TheAppellant,KennethRayWhite,appealsfromthesentencingdecisionofthe_Humphreys_ԀCounty x  CircuitCourtdenyinghisrequestforprobation.Inthisappeal,Whiteraisestheissueofwhetherthe d trialcourtabuseditsdiscretionbyorderingasentenceofincarcerationratherthanthelessrestrictive P alternativeofcommunitycorrections.Afterreview,wefindnoabuseofdiscretion.Assuch,the < trialcourtsdecisionisaffirmed. (x #Xg0XX Xg0##.XXg0#Xg0X. Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtisAffirmed.  P   #.Xg0r#Xg0X..DavidG.Hayes,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJoeG.RileyandNormaMcGee ( Ogle,JJ.,joined.  JakeLockert,DistrictPublicDefender;RichardD.Taylor,Jr.,AssistantPublicDefender,Ashland  City,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,KennethRayWhite.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelMoore,SolicitorGeneral;PeterM. ` _Coughlan_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;Dan_Mitchum_Ԁ_Alsobrooks_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;and L  Lisa_Donegan_,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. 8!  #.XXg0.#Xg0X.@@OO& OPINION #.XXg0 #Xg0X. #L#  FactualBackground  %$!% #.XXg0 #  Xg0X. Xg0XXXg00  OnAugust15,2000,theAppellantwasconvictedofaggravatedassaultandreceiveda'"'(#(# sentenceofthreeyearsprobation.Immediatelyfollowingsentencing,theAppellantwastransported (#( totheDicksonCountyjailtofaceadjudicationonchargespendingthere. )$)   TheAppellantsrepentantwayswereofshortduration.OnNovember1,2000,aprobation \+&+ violationwarrantwasissuedbasedupontheallegedviolationsof:(1)failuretoreporttothe H,', probationofficer;(2)failuretomakepaymentsonrestitutionandcosts;and(3)failuretoprovide 4-(-C aDNAsample.AttheprobationviolationhearingheldonSeptember25,2001,theAppellant  testifiedandadmittedhisfailuretocomplywiththetermsandconditionsofhisprobation.The  hearingresultedintherevocationoftheAppellantsprobationandreinstatementofhisoriginal  threeyearDepartmentofCorrectionsentence. #  1      ׀ t   OnNovember13,2002,theAppellantfiledaprosemotionseekingappointmentofcounsel L  forpurposesoffilinga MotionForEarlyRelease/MotionForReleaseonProbation/MotionFor 8  PostConvictionRelief.Followingappointmentofcounsel,theAppellantsmotionwasheardon $ t December27,2001.Atthehearing,thetrialcourtconsideredtheAppellantsmotionasoneseeking  ` earlyreleaseorreinstatementofprobation.TheAppellantassertedatthehearingthatthetrialcourt  L  shouldhavesentencedhimtoalessrestrictivepunishmentthanincarceration.Thiscontentionwas  8  baseduponthefactthathehadalreadybeenincarceratedfortheprevioustenmonthsonaseparate $  probationviolationinaseparatecounty,thelargenumberofchildrenhehad,thefacthehada   commitmentforajobuponrelease,andhehadastablehomeenvironment.Thetrialcourtdenied   theAppellantsmotionandthisappealfollowed.   @& Analysis p    Beforeentertainingreviewoftheissuepresented,weareconstrainedtonotethatthe H AppellantandtheStatebothframeandanalyzetheissueas anappealfromafindingthatAppellant 4 wasinviolationofhisprobationsentenceatahearingheldSeptember25,2001....TheAppellant  p andtheStatesuggestthattheAppellantsmotionofNovember13thbetreated asapetitionto  \ reconsideritspriororderrevokingprobation. H   ThetrialcourtsjudgmentofSeptember25,2001,revokingtheAppellantsprobation   becamefinalonOctober25,2001,whennoappealofthejudgmentwastaken.SeeTenn.R.App.   P.4.TheAppellantsmotionofNovember13,2001wasfiledaftertherevocationorderbecame  final;therefore,themotioncouldnotrelitigateissueswhichwereresjudicata.Nonetheless,wefind  thetrialcourtproperlyconsideredtheAppellantsmotionpursuanttoRule35oftheTennessee  RulesofCriminalProcedure,whichpermitscorrectionorreductionofasentence,iffiledwithin120 l daysafterthesentenceisimposedorprobationisrevoked.AlthoughatthetimetheAppellantwas X  sentencedtotheDepartmentofCorrection,thetrialcourtretainedsentencingjurisdictionasthe D! AppellantwashousedinthelocaljailawaitingtransfertotheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection. 0"  SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035303(e).Additionally,therecordreflectsthattheAppellants Motion #l! ForReleaseonProbationwasheardwithin120daysofthetrialcourtsorderrevokingprobation. $X" AppellatereviewofaRule35(b)rulingisgovernedbyan abuseofdiscretionstandard.Statev. $D # Irick,861S.W.2d375,376(Tenn.Crim.App.1993). %0!$   BecausetheAppellantchosenottoappealrevocationandreinstatementofhisoriginalthree '#& yearsentence,wearerequiredtopresumethatthetrialcourtsrulinginfavorofincarcerationwas (#' correct.Ourfocusisthusprimarilyuponproofoccurringsubsequenttothelastsentencing  determinationwhichdemonstratestheAppellantsamenabilityforprobation.Theproofinthiscase  islessthancompelling.Essentially,theonlyproofdevelopedsubsequenttotheAppellantslast  sentencinghearingestablished:(1)thathehadservedninetythreeadditionaldaysforhissentence; t (2)thathemayhaveajobifreleaseduponprobation;and(3)followinghisrevocationonSeptember ` 25th,theAppellantwasfoundincontemptformaking disrespectfulandunprovokedcommentsto L  theCourt.Reviewunderanabuseofdiscretionstandardsimplymeansthattheevidenceneedonly 8  showthatthetrialjudgehasexercised conscientiousandintelligentjudgmentinmakingthe $ t decisionratherthanactingarbitrarily.SeeStatev.Leach,914S.W.2d104,107(Tenn.Crim.App.  ` 1995)(citingStampsv.State,614S.W.2d71,73(Tenn.Crim.App.1980),perm.toappealdenied,  L  (Tenn.1981)).Basedupontherecord,wecannotconcludethatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretion  8  indenyingtheAppellantsmotiontomodifyhisthreeyearDepartmentofCorrectionsentence. $  Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.   #Xg0XX Xg0 #   `     h     ___________________________________ H    `     h     DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE