WPC& LUj]:*ttKʲԖT(ӯ K1ШJEN@o!V:Αmc:Cso@3X78R$fQ5QL?w0XRwzy]</FX_2^u+:^1^ό<fCe@D=yii*|J~osa2/P"]R ׺ g6ԅg#6aFeqjgYժ+]1# 2%s\ mR9)٭3RZG(bM=;0JXz 0 &Lħd~}x[f»xГ@Le <}UvxSEs5t_ᗨm]gmx*FLMC8 7 0ivEa^`Qj1BHY˽{KU.F %t bz ~ = U: ! n1  0( U: wH 4  0 0DU:U:M9CU:'U:U:U: BU: D3    0D================================================================================== AO 0D D/ B <6X9`(CourierX  $XXXX `   1    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.3913102(Supp.1995)(amended1996). $XXXX `   2    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.3913103(1997).,cAZ"Arial Regular3|xM<6X9`(CourierXx6X@`7X@($,  AZ"Arial Regular'E(D)*+D,D-.6D78D9:E;U<P=D>P?P@APBDCUDDEDFDGBeHDIJӀKuM% XXXX7XX   Ad FILEDXX7  September30,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM (I(2$  !  XyXXX `   0  (#$  0  ,cAZ"Arial Regular XXXX7XX   Ad FILEDXX7  September29,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular C $XOGXXX `   3    Theonlyproblemswiththesentencingprocessare(1)thetrialcourt `  declinedtoapplysomeenhancementfactorsbecauseitwasnotsurewhethertheywereelementsoftheconvictionoffense,whichIthinkshecouldhaveapplied(ofcoursethedefendantisntcomplainingaboutthatbutthestatedoesarguetheseadditionalfactorscouldhavebeenfound),and(2)thecourtdoesagreatjobofannouncingeverythingexceptitsconsiderationofalternativesentencesotherthanprobation(however,theDonlyaskedforprobationorconfinementcoupledw/workrelease).Giventhetrialcourtsgoodjoboverall,itseemedterriblypickytostripthepresumptionbasedontheseslighterrors.   $XOGXXX `   3    However,thetrialcourtaddressedbothenhancementandmitigating `  factorsinorderlyform,anditessentiallywentdownthestatutorylistofboth.Webelievethecourtconsideredthefactor,rejectedit,andmadenoexplicitfindingsbecausenoissuehadbeenraisedofthefactorsapplicability. $XOGXXX `   2    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.3913103(1997).,cAZ"Arial Regular  $XOGXXX `   3    However,thetrialcourtaddressedbothenhancementandmitigating `  factorsinorderlyform,essentiallygoingdownthestatutorylistofboth.Webelievethecourtconsideredthefactorbutrejectedit,makingnoexplicitfindingsbecausenoissuehadbeenraisedofthefactorsapplicability.,cAZ"Arial Regular $XOGXXX `   1    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.3913102(Supp.1995)(amended1996).,cAZ"Arial Regular $ XOGXXX `   2    SeeTenn.CodeAnn.3913103(1997).,cAZ"Arial Regular  $#XOGXXX `   3    However,thetrialcourtaddressedbothenhancementandmitigating `  factorsinorderlyform,anditessentiallywentdownthestatutorylistofboth.Webelievethecourtconsideredthefactor,rejectedit,andmadenoexplicitfindingsbecausenoissuehadbeenraisedofthefactorsapplicability. d,cAZ"Arial Regular""""'dxd(3$  !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd  !  GGGG`   TR[A'Legal3'A' Legal3'T XiXXX7 i XXdd7  Kr*<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP`  rKKr*<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP`  rJJK @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE P  ̀@@@'ATNASHVILLE 0  @77%JUNE1998SESSION    STATEOFTENNESSEE,    ) p   `     h     ) p  `   `  Appellee, h     ) p C.C.A.No.01C019708CC00338 P   `     h     )vs. `     h     ) p HMontgomeryHIDavidsonICounty x  0   `     h     ) SANFORDL.WILSON, h     ) p Hon.CherylBlackburn,Judge  p   `     h     ) `  `  Appellant. h     ) p (RecklessEndangerment) P  `     h     ) `     h     FORTHEAPPELLANT: h      p FORTHEAPPELLEE:   THOMASH.MILLER h      p JOHNKNOXWALKUP  p  AttorneyatLaw   h      p AttorneyGeneral&Reporter !` P.O.Box681662Franklin,TN370681662 h      p MARVINE.CLEMENTS,JR.  #@  `     h      p Asst.AttorneyGeneral `     h      p 425FifthAve.N.,2dFloor  %    `     h      p Nashville,TN372430493 p&  `     h      p VICTORS.JOHNSON,III  P(!   `     h      p DistrictAttorneyGeneral @)"  `     h      p DANHAMM  +!$  `     h      p Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral ,"%  `     h      p WashingtonSquare `     h      p 222SecondAve.N.,Ste.500 `     h      p Nashville,TN372011649 OPINIONFILED:________________AFFIRMEDCURWOODWITT,JUDGE  P7-1   @8.2 @qq* OPINION  `   `  Thedefendant,SanfordL.Wilson,appealsfromhisconvictionoffelonyrecklessendangerment.HereceivedhisconvictionattheconclusionofajurytrialintheDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt.ThetrialcourtimposedaGGtwoyearGGGGsentence.GGInthisdirectappeal,Wilsonappealsthelengthandmannerofserviceofthatsentence.Havingreviewedtherecordandthebriefsoftheparties,wefindnoerroroflawrequiringreversalandaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. `  Thedefendantsconvictionarisesfromanaltercationwithaneighborandmembersofhisneighborsfamily.Attrial,asharpfactualdisputeexistedregardingthealtercation.Thedefendantadmittedhethrewpaintthinnerontheneighborandsethimonfire,butheclaimedhedidsoinselfdefense.ThestatesevidencedidnotsupportthedefendantsGGselfdefenseGGtheory.Thejuryacquittedthedefendantoftwocountsofaggravatedassault,oneresultingfromseriousbodilyinjuryandtheotherfromuseofadeadlyweapon,G  GGGGG #  1      GGbutconvictedhimofonecount #@ ofthelesseroffenseoffelonyrecklessendangerment.G##G.GvGGG... #  2      GG %   `  Atthesentencinghearing,thetrialcourtthoroughlyandthoughtfullyconsideredtherelevantcriteria.ItimposedamaximumRangeIsentenceofGGtwoGGGGyears. `  Thedefendantsappellategrievancesrelatetothesentenceimposed.XXX XiInGGdeterminingwhetherthetrialcourthasproperlysentencedanindividual,this 2@), courtengagesinadenovoreviewoftherecordwithapresumptionthatthetrial l4 +. court'sdeterminationswerecorrect.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d)(1997).Thispresumptionis"conditionedupontheaffirmativeshowingintherecordthatthetrialcourtconsideredthesentencingprinciplesandallrelevantfactsandcircumstances.Statev.Ashby,823S.W.2d166,169(Tenn.1991).Inconducting  ourdenovoreview,wemustconsidertheevidenceatsentencing,thepresentence  report,thesentencingprinciples,theargumentsofcounsel,thestatementsofthedefendant,thenatureandcharacteristicsoftheoffense,anymitigatingandenhancementfactors,andthedefendantsamenabilitytorehabilitation.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035210(b),4035103(5)(1997);Ashby,823S.W.2dat168.# XOGXXXOGD#XOGXX XOGOnappeal, ` theappellanthastheburdenofshowingthatthesentenceimposedisimproper.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035401(d),SentencingComm'nComments(1997);Ashby,   823S.W.2dat169.# XOGXXXOGx# `  Inthecaseatbar,wefindthetrialcourtsdeterminationGGisentitledGGtothepresumptionofcorrectness.' #  3      ' `  Thedefendantclaimsthetrialcourterroneouslyfailedtoapplycertainmitigatingfactorsinsentencinghim.First,heclaimsthetrialcourterredinfailingtoapplymitigatingfactors(2)and(3),that [t]hedefendantactedunderstrongprovocationandthat [s]ubstantialgroundsexisttendingtoexcuseorjustifythedefendantscriminalconduct,thoughfailingtoestablishadefense[,]respectively.Tenn.CodeAnn.GG(sec.())GG4035113(2),(3)(1997).GGHeclaimsthesefactorsshouldbeappliedbecausehisactofdousingthevictiminpaintthinnerandsettinghimonfirecameasaresponsetohisfearforhisownlifeandthelifeofhisgirlfriendduringahostileinvasionofhishomebythevictimandthevictimsnephew.TheGGtrialcourtdeclinedtoapplythesefactors,findingGGtheyGG weretakenintoconsiderationbythejuryinthiscase;thatis,GG[thejury]GGreducedyouroffensefromaggravatedassaultto  :04 recklessendangerment[.]Wehavepreviouslyobservedthatthereisnoperse `  prohibitionagainst doubleGGmitigationofGGasentencebyapplyingamitigatingfactoreventhoughthejuryhasextendedleniencytothedefendantonthesamebasis;however, doublemitigationisinappropriateifadditionalconsiderationoftherelevantfactsisnotmerited.Statev.SamuelD.Braden,No.01C019610CC  00457,slipop.at12(Tenn.Crim.App.,Nashville,Feb.18,1998)(citationsomitted).Wefinditimplicitinthetrialcourtsfindingthatthedefendantreceivedallofthemitigationrelevanttofactors(2)and(3)viathejuryverdicttowhichheisentitled.GGAsnotedabove,thefactsattrialweresharplydisputed.TheGGGGdefendantrespondedradicallyGGtowhatmaywellhavebeenamutuallyacrimoniousGGconfrontationratherthantheunprovokedattackheclaimsoccurred.GGGGFurthermore,GGwenotethatthedefendantstheoryattrialwasthatheactedinselfdefense,notthatheactedunderprovocation.GG*Thetwoarenotthesame.*++GGSeeSamuelD.Braden,slipop.at12.   `  Thedefendantalsoarguesfortheapplicationofmitigatingfactor(11),that althoughguiltyofthecrime,[he]committedtheoffenseundersuchunusualcircumstancesthatitisunlikelythatasustainedintenttoviolatethelawmotivatedhisconduct.Tenn.CodeAnn.GG,sec.,--GG4035113(11)(1997).Thisfactorwasneitherurgedbythedefendantatthesentencinghearingnoritsnonapplicabilityspecificallyaddressedbythetrialcourt.G..G.GGG!G... #  3      GGNotwithstanding,therecordsupportsthe -#& trialcourtsfailuretoapplyit.Bythedefendantsownadmission,helivedalifeofdrugabuseatthetimeofhiscrimes.Heclaimedthatdrugabuseledhimtocommitmultiplecriminalactsaroundthetimeofthisoffense.Whilethedefendantmaynothavehadasustainedintenttosetotherhumanbeingsonfire,hehadasustained 4 +. intentatthetimeofthiscrimetoGGabuseillegaldrugs,andthisdruguseledhimtocommitfurtherviolationsofthelaw.Thedefendanthasfailedtosustainhisburdenofdemonstratingthatmitigatingfactor(11)shouldhavebeenapplied.GG `  Thedefendantalsoclaimsheshouldhavereceivedanalternativesentence.However,thetrialcourtfoundthatconfinementwasnecessarytoprotectthepublicfromthedefendantandthatmeasureslessrestrictivethanconfinementhadfrequentlyorrecentlybeenappliedwithoutsuccess.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.GGGG   4035103(1997).Thesefindingsareadequatelysupportedbytherecord. `  AsweobservedinStatev.Fletcher,805S.W.2d785(Tenn.Crim.   App.1991):8 ` Ifappellatereviewreflectsthatthetrialcourt,byfollowingthestatutorysentencingprocedure,imposedalawfulsentence,afterhavinggivendueconsiderationandproperweighttothefactorsandprincipleswhicharerelevanttosentencingundertheAct,andthatthetrialcourtsfindingsoffactuponwhichthesentenceisbasedareadequatelysupportedintherecord,thenwemaynotdisturbthesentenceevenifwewouldhavepreferredadifferentresult. ` `  Fletcher,805S.W.2dat789.Appliedtothecaseatbar,Fletcherprecludesusfrom `'  disturbingthetrialcourtssentencingdetermination. `  Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.GGXOGXX XOGBBGGDCCD# XOGXXXOG2#66<<< ` <<<< <<<<  <<<< h <<<<  <<<<  <<<@<__________________________< @= `  `  `  ` =GG p GG8_____________________________ p  p  p  p  p  p 8:9__9:?  ??  ?? x ?? ?A ` AA AA  AA h AA  A?  ??__________________________?;;> `     h     >CURWOODGGWITT,JUDGEGG7CONCUR:7GGGGGGEE_____________________________GGGGJOEG.RILEY,JUDGEGGFFGGGG_____________________________R.LEEMOORE,JR.,SPECIALJUDGE  :04 Ї