ÿWPCEA Å# ÖUNá %/ 0 45U:ib£U:«w@å4%9 0@H 0Dˆ 1mÌ 0d9& 0Jà 0T  0^a 0h¿ 0r' B™ 0|¶ 0†2 0¸ 0BH 1uŠ 0dÿ U>c!U*¡! D3Ë!U*þ!B)(" 0@Q"DC‘" AMÔ"!!#°B$½ò%à¯'B*€Ñ,v~Q2vÓÏ3 0¢9 0Š1: 0 »: 0´[; 0Ç< 0ÛÖ< 0ï±= AO >Æï> 0Dµ? D/ù? B(@ 0E@˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù-,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ú+UÛ+DÜ+UÝ+EÞ+ß+Uà+Uá+”eâ+Ó€î+j„"ŽŽ"3|xî+2 ÿÿ$Squareð ðà0 à(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóótuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  àPoole Supp2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô d2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2-¦$Squareð ðà0  à ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Times% Line 7 d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò,,,,7Border 1dd€-.Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌò òMay€12,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€)ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ¦Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒÄ$ÝÓ  ÓÑ À ÑÑ Ì ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ÔÔ€)ôÔò òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóó óÝ  Ý€€ð ðA€victim€of€the€offense€was€particularly€vulnerable€because€of€age€or€physical€or€mentalÏdisability.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4)(1990).Ì ³Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒÄ$ÝÓ  ÓÑ À ÑÑ Ì ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ÔÔ€)ôÔò òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóó óÝ  Ý€€€ð ðThe€defendant€treated€or€allowed€a€victim€to€be€treated€with€exceptional€cruelty€duringÏthe€commission€of€the€offense.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(5)(1990).Ì ÖÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒÄ$ÝÓ  ÓÑ À ÑÑ Ì ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ÔÔ€)ôÔò òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóó óÝ  Ý€The€dissent€argues€that€òòAdamsóó€should€be€limited€to€cases€in€which€the€victimððs€age€wasÏused€as€an€element€of€the€offense.€€We,€however,€did€not€limit€òòAdamsóó;€to€the€contrary,€we€notedÏgenerally€that€ð ðthe€vulnerability€enhancement€relates€more€to€the€natural€physical€and€mentalÏlimitations€of€the€victim€than€merely€the€victimððs€age.ðð€€Thus,€we€concluded€that€in€every€case,€theÏState€bears€the€burden€of€proving€this€factor€should€apply.Ì 8Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒÄ$ÝÓ  ÓÑ À ÑÑ Ì ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ÔÔ€)ôÔò òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóó óÝ  Ý€€Serious€bodily€injury€requires€proof€of€substantial€risk€of€death,€protractedÏunconsciousness,€extreme€physical€pain,€protracted€or€obvious€disfigurement,€and€protractedÏloss€or€substantial€impairment€of€a€function€of€a€bodily€member,€organ,€or€mental€faculty.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(33).€€Ì vÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒÄ$ÝÓ  ÓÑ À ÑÑ Ì ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ÔÔ€)ôÔò òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóóó óÝ  Ý€€The€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals,€although€reaching€a€variety€of€results,€has€used€a€similarÏanalysis€in€determining€whether€the€exceptional€cruelty€factor€is€appropriate€for€an€aggravatedÏoffense.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Nixóó,€922€S.W.2d€894€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)(properly€applied€toÏattempted€first„degree€murder€and€especially€aggravated€robbery);€òòState€v.€Kernóó,€909€S.W.2d€5Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)(properly€applied€to€aggravated€kidnapping€and€especially€aggravatedÏrobbery);€òòState€v.€Carteróó,€908€S.W.2d€410€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)(properly€applied€toÏaggravated€kidnapping€and€€aggravated€robbery).€€òòCf›.óó,€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€920€S.W.2d€247€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1995)€(ð ðexceptional€cruelty€is€usually€found€in€cases€of€abuse€or€tortureðð);€òòState€v.ÏœEmbry›óó,€915€S.W.2d€451€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)(not€applicable€because€facts€to€supportÏexceptional€cruelty€were€not€ð ðover€and€above€that€incidentðð€to€aggravated€rape);€òòManning€v.€Stateóó,Ï883€S.W.2d€635€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)(not€applied€where€facts€supporting€exceptional€crueltyÏsame€as€those€that€made€the€offense€aggravated€rape).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd(­+2:C$¤¤Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÑÀ°ÑÑ̰ÑÒ„°ÒÒ4°ÒÔ€X?ÂXXXÔÔ€ò@ÙòXX?ÂÔò òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóóó óÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ ° ÒÒ „ ÒÑ  ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÔ€)ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€?ÂXXdædÈ7ÑØ ØÓ&€++XÐd&Ó›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òòòFOR€PUBLICATIONÌÌó óóóà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òòòFiled:€œ€May€12,€1997ó ó›óóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àAppellant/Appellee,à àà à)à àHARDEMAN€CRIMINALÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌ€Vs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€€HON.€JON€KERRY€BLACKWOOD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà à€€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌCHAD€DOUGLAS€POOLE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àAppellee/Appellant.à àà à)€€€€€€No.€€02„S„01„9607„CC„00064ÌÌ̜ـ€ÙßR€/0.A1-j|)` Å `€€@ÿRß›ÌÌÌœò òòòFor›€Appellant/Appellee:à àà àà àFor€Appellee/Appellant:ó óóóÌÌœJohn€Knox€Walkup›à àà àà àà àGary€AntricanÌAttorney€General€&€Reporterà àà àPublic€DefenderÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌMichael€E.€Mooreà àà àà àà àJeannie€KaessÌSolicitor€Generalà àà àà àà àAssistant€Public€DefenderÌà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TennesseeÌKathy€MoranteÌDeputy€Attorney€œGeneralà àà àà àòòAt€Trial:óó›ÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àœC.€Michael€Robbins›Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Public€Defender›ÌœòòAt€Trial:óóÌElizabeth›€RiceÌDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌœÌJerry€NorwoodÌAssistant€District€AttorneyÌSomerville,€Tennessee›ÌÌÌÌÌò òÔ€)„Ôà@ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óÌÔ€)XÔÌÌÌœÌÌAFFIRMED›à àà àà àà àà àà àà àANDERSON,€J.ÇÓÓÑ  Ñà àWe€granted€this€appeal€to€determine€whether€the€trial€court€properly€Ïapplied€two€enhancement€factors€„„€whether€the€victim€was€ð ðparticularlyÏvulnerable,ðð× ƒ1 ××  ×€and€whether€the€victim€was€treated€with€ð ðexceptional€crueltyðð× ƒ2 ××  ×€„„€toÏincrease€the€defendantððs€sentence.€€ÌÌà àThe€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€decided€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€byÏapplying€the€ð ðexceptionally€cruelðð€factor€to€the€especially€aggravated€robberyÏconviction,€but€did€err€in€applying€the€ð ðparticularly€vulnerableðð€factor€becauseÏthe€State€must€prove€more€than€the€victimððs€age€to€prove€a€victim€is€ð ðparticularlyÏvulnerable.ðð€€We€agree.€€We,€therefore,€affirm€the€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsððÏjudgment.ÌÌà@ àò òòòBACKGROUNDó óóóÌà àThe€defendant,€Chad€Douglas€Poole,€entered€guilty€pleas€to€especiallyÏaggravated€robbery,€especially€aggravated€burglary,€and€two€counts€of€burglaryÏand€theft.€€Following€a€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€that€theÏdefendant€was€a€standard€Range€I€offender€and€imposed€the€minimumÏsentence€for€all€of€the€offenses€except€for€especially€aggravated€robbery,€whichÍhas€a€range€of€punishment€from€15€to€25€years,€and€for€which€it€imposed€a€termÏof€21€years.ÌÌà àThe€defendant€Poole€and€a€co„defendant€knew€that€the€victim,€a€70„year„Ïold€woman,€lived€alone€and€operated€a€small€grocery€store.€€After€planning€theÏrobbery,€they€obtained€a€baseball€bat,€which€Poole€wrapped€with€black€tape€toÏmake€it€less€visible.€€On€June€23,€1994,€they€entered€the€victimððs€home€andÏwaited€for€approximately€two€hours.€€When€the€victim€came€home,€the€co„defendant€struck€her€in€the€head€with€the€baseball€bat.€The€blow€rendered€theÏvictim€unconscious.€€Poole€and€the€co„defendant€then€took€the€victimððs€purseÏand€other€personal€items.€€ÌÌà àWhen€the€victim€failed€to€appear€at€her€grocery€store€the€next€day,€familyÏmembers€went€looking€for€her.€€They€found€her€where€she€had€fallen,€covered€inÏblood,€suffering€from€a€serious€head€injury.€€The€victim€was€hospitalized€for€overÏtwo€weeks,€including€four€days€in€intensive€care.€€According€to€the€victimððsÏsister,€the€victim€had€been€in€ð ðreal€good€healthðð€prior€to€the€offense.€€As€a€resultÏof€the€attack,€however,€the€victim€suffered€a€loss€in€her€hearing,€which€impairedÏher€balance€and€coordination.€€She€also€required€the€use€of€a€walker€and€couldÏno€longer€live€alone.€€ÌÌà àA€presentence€report€indicated€that€the€defendant€Poole€was€21€years€ofÏage€at€the€time€of€sentencing.€€He€had€quit€school€following€the€ninth€grade,€wasÏa€heavy€user€of€marijuana,€and€had€no€history€of€steady€employment.€€€TheÏreport€also€indicated€that€the€defendant€had€prior€convictions€for€burglary,Ïburglary€of€an€automobile,€and€two€counts€of€theft.€€Ìà àÌà àThe€defendant€testified€that€although€he€initially€ð ðdidnððt€want€to€be€a€partððÏof€the€robbery,€he€knew€the€co„defendant€planned€to€hit€the€victim€with€theÏbaseball€bat.€€He€also€testified€that€they€used€the€money€stolen€from€the€victim€toÏbuy€marijuana.€€A€letter€from€a€psychologist€who€evaluated€Poole€while€in€jailÏnoted€that€the€defendant€was€ð ða€non„assertive€follower€who€can€easily€beÏinfluenced€or€intimidated€by€his€peers.ððÌÌà àIn€imposing€the€21„year€sentence€for€especially€aggravated€robbery,€theÏtrial€court€applied€four€enhancement€factors:€the€defendantððs€prior€history€ofÏcriminal€convictions€and€behavior,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(1);€the€victimÏwas€particularly€vulnerable€due€to€her€age,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4);Ïthe€victim€was€treated€with€ð ðexceptional€cruelty,ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(5);€and€the€offense€was€committed€to€gratify€the€defendantððs€desire€forÏpleasure€or€excitement,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(7).€€The€trial€court€did€notÏmake€specific€factual€findings€with€regard€to€these€factors.€€€€€€ÌÌà àOn€appeal,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€held€that€the€trial€court€properlyÏapplied€factors€„114(1),€criminal€history,€and€(5),€exceptional€cruelty,€but€erred€inÏapplying€factors€„114(4),€particularly€vulnerable,€and€(7),€desire€for€pleasure.€ÏThe€State€concedes€that€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€correctly€found€that€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€applying€the€factor€„€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement,€andÏthe€defendant€concedes€that€the€lower€courts€properly€applied€the€factor€„€priorÏhistory€of€criminal€convictions€and€behavior.€€The€Court€reduced€the€punishmentÏfrom€21€to€19€years€in€light€of€the€inappropriate€enhancement€factors.€€WeÏgranted€this€appeal€to€address€the€Stateððs€contention€that€ð ðparticularÏvulnerabilityðð€was€a€proper€enhancement€factor€and€the€defendantððs€argumentÏthat€ð ðexceptional€crueltyðð€was€not€a€proper€enhancement€factor.€ÌÌà@ àò òòòSENTENCING€ACT€OF€1989ó óóóÌà àIn€imposing€a€sentence€pursuant€to€the€Sentencing€Act€of€1989,€the€trialÏcourt€first€must€determine€the€applicable€range€of€punishment€based€on€theÏseverity€of€the€offense€and€the€defendantððs€prior€criminal€convictions.€€TheseÏstatutory€classifications,€as€well€as€the€applicable€ranges€of€punishment,€areÏestablished€by€the€Legislature.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð40„35„106€to€„109Ï(1990€&€Supp.€1996).€€ÌÌà àAfter€determining€the€applicable€range€of€punishment,€the€court€mustÏpresume€that€the€minimum€sentence€in€the€applicable€range€is€the€presumptiveÍsentence€to€be€imposed.€€If€there€are€enhancement€factors€but€no€mitigatingÏfactors€in€the€record,€the€court€may€ð ðset€the€sentence€above€the€minimum€in€thatÏrange€but€still€within€the€range.ðð€€If€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€are€inÏthe€record,€the€trial€court€ð ðmust€start€at€the€minimum€sentence€in€the€range,Ïenhance€the€sentence€within€the€range€as€appropriate€for€the€enhancementÏfactors,€and€then€reduce€the€sentence€within€the€range€as€appropriate€for€theÏmitigating€factors.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(c),€(d),€&€(f)(1990);€òòStateÏv.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€597,€601€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€31,Ï33€(Tenn.€1993).ÌÌà àOnly€those€enhancement€factors€authorized€by€the€Legislature€in€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114€may€be€used€to€enhance€a€sentence.€€The€factors€mustÏbe€ð ðappropriate€for€the€offenseðð€and€ð ðnot€themselves€essential€elements€of€theÏoffense.ðð€€The€purpose€of€these€limitations€is€ÓÓto€ÌÌÌà8 àexclude€enhancement€factors€which€are€not€relevant€to€the€offenseÏand€those€based€on€facts€which€are€used€to€prove€the€offense.€ÏFacts€which€establish€the€elements€of€the€offense€charged€may€notÏalso€be€the€basis€of€an€enhancement€factor€increasingÏpunishment.€€The€legislature,€in€determining€the€ranges€ofÏpunishment€within€the€classifications€of€offenses,€necessarily€tookÏinto€account€the€culpability€inherent€in€each€offense.ÌÌÌòòÓÓState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€at€601.€€Determining€whether€an€enhancementÏfactor€should€be€applied€is€a€task€that€must€be€undertaken€on€a€case€by€caseÍbasis.€€To€facilitate€appellate€review,€the€trial€court€ð ðmust€place€on€the€record€itsÏreasons€for€arriving€at€the€final€sentencing€decision,€identify€the€mitigating€andÏenhancement€factors€found,€state€the€specific€facts€supporting€eachÏenhancement€factor€found,€and€articulate€how€the€mitigating€and€enhancementÏfactors€have€been€evaluated€and€balanced€in€determining€the€sentence.ðð€€òòIdóó.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„210(f)(1990).€€€As€an€appellate€courtÏreviewing€the€length,€range,€or€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€we€mustÏconduct€a€òòde€novoóó€review€of€the€record€with€a€presumption€that€theÏdeterminations€made€by€the€trial€court€were€correct.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€(1990).€€If,€as€in€this€case,€the€trial€court€fails€to€comply€with€theseÏstatutory€provisions,€there€is€no€presumption€of€correctness€and€our€review€is€òòdeÏnovoóó.€€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,€883€S.W.2d€at€600.€ÌÌà@ àò òòòPARTICULAR€VULNERABILITYó óà àóóÌà àThe€State€argues€that€the€trial€court€properly€enhanced€the€defendantððsÏsentence€because€the€70„year„old€victim€was€ð ðparticularly€vulnerable.ðð€TheÏdefendant€maintains€that€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€correctly€held€that€thereÏwas€no€evidence€in€the€record€to€show€that€this€victim€was€particularlyÏvulnerable.ÌÌà àThe€Legislature€has€determined€that€a€sentence€may€be€enhanced€if€ð ðaÏvictim€of€the€offense€was€particularly€vulnerable€because€of€age€or€physical€orÍmental€disability.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4).€€In€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€864ÏS.W.2d€at€35,€we€provided€a€framework€for€application€of€this€factor:ÌÓÓÌà8 à[T]he€vulnerability€enhancement€relates€more€to€the€naturalÏphysical€and€mental€limitations€of€the€victim€than€merely€to€theÏvictimððs€age.€.€.€.€òòThe€factor€can€be€used€.€.€.€if€the€circumstancesÏshow€that€the€victim,€because€of€his€age€or€physical€or€mentalÏcondition€was€in€fact€ððparticularly€vulnerable,ðð€i.e.,€incapable€ofÏresisting,€summoning€help,€or€testifying€against€the€perpetratoróó.€€ÌÌÌÓÓ(Emphasis€added;€citations€omitted).€€€We€stressed€that€the€determination€ofÏwhether€the€factor€applied€was€a€ð ðfactual€issue€to€be€resolved€by€the€trier€of€factÏon€a€case€by€case€basis.ðð€€Similarly,€in€òòState€v.€Kissingeróó,€922€S.W.2d€482,€487Ï(Tenn.€1996),€we€again€linked€the€vulnerability€to€proof€of€a€mental€or€physicalÏlimitation€that€created€an€ð ðinability€to€resist,€a€difficulty€in€calling€for€help,€or€aÏdifficulty€in€testifying€against€the€perpetrator.ðð€ÌÌà àAlthough€it€is€not€difficult€to€imagine€cases€in€which€the€victimððs€age,Ïwhether€very€young€or€very€old,€may€seem€to€equate€with€vulnerability,€weÏchose€in€òòAdamsóó€not€to€presume€such€a€conclusion€in€any€case.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€Moreover,Ïbecause€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4)€does€not€speak€to€specific€ages,€butÏrather€to€vulnerability,€we€could€not€create€a€bright„line€rule.€€Thus,€weÍconcluded€that€the€ð ðState€bears€the€burden€of€proving€the€victimððs€limitationsÏrendering€him€or€her€particularly€vulnerable.ðð€€òòState€v.€Adamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€atÏ35;€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Haynesóó,€899€S.W.2d€175€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌà àIn€determining€whether€the€State€has€met€its€burden,€the€trial€court€mustÏconsider€a€number€of€factors€and€must€make€factual€findings.€€It€should€considerÏwhether€evidence€in€the€record€with€regard€to€the€victimððs€age€or€physical€andÏmental€attributes€demonstrated€an€inability€to€resist€the€crime,€summon€help,€orÏtestify€at€a€later€date.€€òòSeeóó€òòe.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Claboóó,€905€S.W.2d€197€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1995)(factor€properly€applied€where€child€victim€of€sexual€offense€sufferedÏfrom€learning€disability);€òòState€v.€Buckmeiróó,€902€S.W.2d€418€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1995)(factor€proper€where€defendant€knew€victim€had€ð ðpassed€outðð€fromÏdrinking€and€was€unable€to€resist€the€commission€of€a€sexual€offense);€òòState€v.ÏMcKnightóó,€900€S.W.2d€36€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)(factor€properly€appliedÏwhere€victims€of€sexual€acts€were€very€young,€lacked€family€support,€and€lookedÏto€defendant€for€friendship€and€approval).€€Such€evidence,€whether€lay€or€expertÏtestimony,€must€relate€to€the€victimððs€physical€or€mental€capacity€at€the€time€ofÏthe€crime€and€not€at€the€time€of€trial€or€sentencing.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Rainesóó,€882ÏS.W.2d€376€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994)(court€erred€in€applying€factor€based€on€itsÏobservations€of€victimððs€ð ðfrail€physical€statureðð€at€some€ð ðundetermined€point€inÏthe€pastðð).€€The€evidence€need€not€be€extensive€and€additional€weight€may€beÏgiven€to€the€age€of€the€victim€in€those€cases€where€a€victim€is€extremely€youngÍor€old.€€Nonetheless,€the€State€must€prove€the€factor€is€applicable€and€thereÏmust€be€evidence€in€the€record€in€addition€to€the€victimððs€age.ÌÌà à€€The€dissent€contends€that€our€interpretation€ignores€the€plain€meaningÏof€the€statute,€which€it€finds€to€be€ð ðplain,€clear€and€unambiguous.ðð€€Yet€theÏdissent,€unable€to€hold€that€a€70„year„old€person€is€particularly€vulnerable€as€aÏmatter€of€law,€offers€no€plain€or€clear€guidance€on€when€the€factor€applies€orÏwhat€ages€will€be€presumed€particularly€vulnerable.€€Instead,€to€support€itsÏpresumption,€the€dissent€cites€ð ðage€òòand€circumstancesóó,ðð€specifically€observingÏthat€the€victim€lived€alone,€and€speculating€on€the€apparent€absence€of€homeÏsecurity€systems€or€guard€dogs.€€This€interpretation,€we€believe,€is€far€from€aÏplain€meaning€or€a€bright„line€test€and€would€likely€yield€more€arbitrary€andÏdisparate€results€than€the€analysis€in€òòAdamsóó,€which€relates€age€with€physical€orÏmental€limitations.€ÌÌà àMoreover,€because€the€Legislature€has€stated€that€an€enhancementÏfactor€must€be€ð ðappropriate€for€the€offense,ðð€the€court€must€necessarily€considerÏthe€nature€of€the€offense€and€the€manner€in€which€it€was€committed.€€ForÏexample,€a€perpetrator€of€a€crime€of€violence€may€prey€upon€a€different€type€ofÏvulnerability€than€would€someone€who€committed€crimes€of€misrepresentationÏor€fraud.€€Thus,€a€victim€with€a€severe€physical€disability€may€not€be€particularlyÏvulnerable€to€bribery€or€theft.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Sealsóó,€735€S.W.2d€849,€853€(Tenn.ÍCrim.€App.€1987)(elderly,€infirm€victim€not€particularly€vulnerable€whereÏdefendant€stole€checks€from€victimððs€mailbox).€€Similarly,€the€offense€may€beÏcommitted€in€such€a€manner€as€to€make€the€victimððs€vulnerability€irrelevant.€€InÏòòState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2d€305€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994),€for€example,€theÏdefendant€shot€and€killed€an€elderly€woman.€€The€Court€of€Criminal€AppealsÏheld€that€although€the€victim€had€a€physical€disability€and€used€a€walking€cane,Ïthe€State€failed€to€show€that€the€victimððs€vulnerability€was€a€factor€in€theÏcommission€of€the€offense€because€no€victim,€regardless€of€his€or€her€physicalÏor€mental€traits,€could€have€resisted€the€offense€committed€in€that€manner.€€InÏshort,€the€court€must€consider€all€of€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€the€offense€inÏdetermining€whether€the€particular€vulnerability€factor€is€appropriate€for€theÏoffense.€ÌÌà àThe€dissent€asserts€that€this€statement€is€a€ð ðsuspect€propositionððÏunsupported€by€authority.€€To€the€contrary,€as€we€have€already€discussed,€theÏLegislature€has€predicated€the€application€of€òòanyóó€enhancement€factor€on€itÏbeing€ð ðappropriate€for€the€offense.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114.€€The€casesÏwe€have€cited€from€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€merely€recognize€thisÏlimitation€expressed€by€the€Legislature.€€ÌÌà àMoreover,€the€dissentððs€fear€that€„114(4)€may€never€be€used€to€enhanceÏwhere€the€defendant€uses€a€gun€is€unfounded.€€The€use€of€a€gun€or€otherÍdeadly€weapon,€if€not€an€element€of€the€offense,€is€a€separate€basis€forÏenhancement€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(8).€€It€may€also€be€a€relevantÏconsideration€in€the€application€of€enhancement€factors€„114(10),€no€hesitationÏin€committing€a€crime€where€risk€to€human€life€is€high,€or€„114(16),€offenseÏcommitted€where€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great.€€ÌÌà àIn€applying€these€factors€to€this€case,€we€note€that€the€trial€court€made€noÏfindings€of€fact€beyond€its€mere€recitation€that€the€victim€was€particularlyÏvulnerable.€€Without€question,€this€70„year„old€victim€living€alone€wasÏvulnerable€to€the€type€of€offense€committed€by€the€defendant.€€We€do€not€holdÏnor€do€we€believe€otherwise.€€Yet€given€the€inherent€ambiguity€in€attempting€toÏdetermine€vulnerability€solely€from€oneððs€age,€we€are€unwilling€to€engage€inÏpotentially€unfounded€presumptions.€€A€personððs€age€alone€may€have€little€or€noÏbearing€on€size,€strength€or€vitality.€€Thus,€unless€the€State€produces€evidenceÏof€physical€or€mental€limitations€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€along€with€proof€of€theÏvictimððs€age,€it€cannot€be€presumed€that€the€victim€was€òòparticularlyóóvulnerableÏbased€solely€on€her€age.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude,€as€did€the€Court€ofÏCriminal€Appeals,€that€there€is€insufficient€evidence€in€this€record€to€supportÏapplication€of€this€factor.ÌÌà@ àò òòòEXCEPTIONAL€CRUELTYó óóóÌà àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€not€have€applied€theÏexceptional€cruelty€enhancement€factor€because€the€facts€used€to€establish€thisÏfactor€were€the€same€facts€used€to€prove€the€serious€bodily€injury€element€forÏespecially€aggravated€robbery.€€The€State€maintains€that€the€factor€was€properlyÏapplied€because€exceptional€cruelty€is€not€an€element€of€especially€aggravatedÏrobbery.€€Moreover,€the€State€stresses€that€the€defendantððs€actions€constitutingÏexceptional€cruelty€were€separate€and€distinct€from€those€necessary€toÏconstitute€serious€bodily€injury.ÌÌà àAs€we€have€previously€observed,€enhancement€factors€must€beÏð ðappropriate€for€the€offenseðð€and€ð ðnot€themselves€essential€elements€of€theÏoffense.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114.€€These€limitations€excludeÏenhancement€factors€ð ðbased€on€facts€which€are€used€to€prove€the€offenseðð€orÏð ð[f]acts€which€establish€the€elements€of€the€offense€charged.ðð€€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,Ï883€S.W.2d€at€601.€€The€purpose€of€the€limitations€is€to€avoid€enhancing€theÏlength€of€sentences€based€on€factors€the€Legislature€took€into€considerationÏwhen€establishing€the€range€of€punishment€for€the€offense.€€òòIdóó.€ÌÌà àWe€recognized€these€limitations€in€analyzing€the€enhancement€factors€inÏòòJonesóó,€òòsupraóó.€€The€defendant€was€charged€with€aggravated€assault€forÏintentionally,€knowingly€or€recklessly€causing€serious€bodily€injury€to€the€victim,Ïand€the€trial€court€enhanced€the€sentence€after€finding€that€the€victimððs€injuriesÍwere€ð ðparticularly€great.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(6).€€We€concluded€thatÏthe€conditions€for€proving€the€serious€bodily€injury€element× ƒ4 ××  ×€ð ðsatisfy€theÏdefinition€of€a€ððparticularly€greatðð€injuryðð€and€that€ð ðproof€of€serious€bodily€injuryÏwill€always€constitute€proof€of€a€particularly€great€injury.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€602.€€Thus,€weÏheld€that€the€ð ðparticularly€greatðð€injury€enhancement€factor€was€inappropriate€forÏthe€offense€of€aggravated€assault.ÌÌà àApplying€a€similar€analysis€to€this€case,€we€first€note€that€ð ðexceptionalÏcrueltyðð€is€not€an€element€of€especially€aggravated€robbery.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð39„13„403(a)(2)(1991).€€Moreover,€we€conclude€that€proof€of€serious€bodilyÏinjury,€which€is€an€element€of€especially€aggravated€robbery,€does€notÏnecessarily€establish€the€enhancement€factor€of€ð ðexceptional€cruelty.ðð€€In€otherÏwords,€the€facts€in€a€case€may€support€a€finding€of€ð ðexceptional€crueltyðð€thatÏð ðdemonstrates€a€culpability€distinct€from€and€appreciably€greater€than€thatÏincident€toðð€the€crime€of€especially€aggravated€robbery.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jonesóó,Ï883€S.W.2d€at€603.€€If€so,€a€sentence€may€be€properly€enhanced€on€this€basis.ÌÌà àAs€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€has€explained,€the€ð ðtrial€court€shouldÏstate€what€actions€of€the€defendant,€apart€from€the€elements€of€the€offense,Íconstituted€ððexceptional€cruelty.ðððð€€òòState€v.€Godwinóó,€909€S.W.2d€35,€45€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1995).œ× ƒ5 ××  ×›€ÌÌà àHere,€the€trial€court€made€no€findings€to€support€its€application€of€thisÏfactor.€€In€holding€that€the€factor€was€nonetheless€appropriate,€the€Court€ofÏCriminal€Appeals€said:ÌÓÓà8 àÌà8 àThis€elderly€woman€was€knocked€unconscious€by€a€blow€to€theÏhead€with€a€baseball€bat.€€Even€though€the€defendants€knew€thatÏthe€victim€lived€alone,€they€left€her€lying€unconscious€and€bleedingÏunder€such€circumstances€that€it€was€unlikely€that€her€conditionÏwould€soon€be€discovered.€€In€fact,€the€victim€remained€in€such€aÏcondition€all€night€long€and€was€discovered€by€family€members€theÏnext€day.€€Because€of€the€delay€in€receiving€medical€treatment,€theÏvictim€is€extremely€fortunate€to€have€survived€this€attack.ÌÌÓÓÌWe€agree€that€there€was€evidence€of€exceptional€cruelty€separate€and€apartÏfrom€the€actions€which€constituted€the€offense€of€especially€aggravated€robberyÍin€this€case.€€Accordingly,€we€agree€the€enhancement€factor€was€properlyÏapplied.€ÌÌà@ àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóÌà àWe€have€concluded€that€the€State€failed€to€prove€that€the€victim€wasÏð ðparticularly€vulnerableðð€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(4)€and€thatÏthis€factor€cannot€be€presumed€solely€from€the€victimððs€age.€€Accordingly,€thisÏfactor€should€not€have€been€applied€to€enhance€the€sentence.€€We€have€furtherÏconcluded€that€the€evidence€supported€a€finding€that€the€defendantððs€actions,Ïseparate€and€distinct€from€those€constituting€the€offense,€were€exceptionallyÏcruel.€€Accordingly,€this€factor€was€properly€applied€to€enhance€the€sentenceÏunder€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„114(5).€€We€therefore€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÏCourt€of€Criminal€Appeals.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àE.€RILEY€ANDERSON,€JUSTICEÌÌÌÌò òConcur:ó ó€€ÌBirch,€C.J.ÌReid,€J.ÌÌDrowota,€J.,€dissenting€„€see€separate€Dissenting€OpinionÌ