WPC w(2 vk$CчPў(ųtOn^3P[>}+" On/'NsR9--wc7 U :~% . /\꽺b>T4De81xA% Ì4䫸s"&/:⤙[ S}W1h4稝`;t+xA e>@ޤq~잖cdN9nyxse֐qxu4a;w 6ranu3$*i2⨎T5T+XUay& BF_O޲!CdTT>(Z 踇V&–Th| ْtx6(FK=mo~m$]х.ʰpAOm_Vf<>'C8Qp*# LU:W % 0w@/4o 0 0D  0DU:SSn` AQz 0D 0D B D/66 Be D3HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh,rAZ"Arial RegularX(p$XTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  {  E E U   Ӏ s~&Jet 503|x    $X   5    +XXԀThiscodesectionprovides:    0 Ifthetrialjudgeshouldfindthatthedefendanthasviolatedtheconditions  0 ofprobationandsuspensionbyapreponderanceoftheevidence,the  0 trialjudgeshallhavetherightbyorderdulyenteredupontheminutesof  0 thecourt,torevoketheprobationandsuspensionofsentenceandcause  0 thedefendanttocommencetheexecutionofthejudgmentasoriginally     0 entered....    (Emphasisadded).((3{$ !XTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T     0  (#$  0     $X   3    +XXԀThe SpecialAlternativeIncarcerationUnitProgram(knownas bootcamp)isaprogramin  whicheligibledefendantsareplacedinaspecialincarcerationunitinlieuofconfinementinaregularstatepenalfacility.Insuchaunit,thedefendantisrequiredtoparticipateforaperiodofninety(90)daysinanintensiveregimenofwork,exercise,militarytypedisciplineandavailabletreatmentprograms.Ifthedefendantsuccessfullycompletestheprogram,thedefendantisreleasedonprobationforthebalanceofhisorheroriginalsentence.Shouldthedefendantfailtocomplywiththetermsandconditionsofsupervision,thereleasemayberevokedbytheoriginaltrialjudgepursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.4035311.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4020201to207.($$   1   ""  XgXXXXXg   Ad FILEDXgX  June7,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh  #Xd#\RA' Legal\,cAZ"Arial Regular   $X   2    +XXԀAlthoughappellantwasgrantedprobationonthesecharges,heremainedincarceratedonhis  convictionsin14075and14125. d  $X   4    +XXԀBecausetheinvalidsentencewastobeservedconcurrenttotheothercountsin14075andthe  sentencesin14125,theremovalofthisinvalidconvictiondoesnotreduceappellantstotaleffectivesentence. V  {$X   1    ػXXԀWhiletheappellantwasindictedformisdemeanortheft,thejudgmentorderreflectsthathe  wasconvictedandsentencedforClassDburglary.Aswillbediscussed,thisisaninvalidconviction.!"# &C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !   d((' dxdP Pd$$$$'dxd !XTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T  ݛ(=gXXdd=  ќ    r )<,(j 8` `@E  ` 8ttxPX  r   @ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE t )>.*jx` `@E&` 8ttxP^N  tߛ @  +ATJACKSON  STATEOFTENNESSEE,   8   )  FORPUBLICATION   ~   0      8   ) Appellee,     8   )  FILED:June7,1999  X P   0      8   )v.  0      8   )  GIBSONCOUNTY *"    0      8   )RONNIEWILLIAM(BILLY) 8   )  HON.DICKJERMAN,JUDGE   TAYLOR, 0      8   )     0      8   )  No.02SO19704CC00028    Appellant.     8   )     0      8   )  (BurglaryandTheft)   FortheAppellant:     8     FortheAppellee: @8 TomW.Crider     8     JohnKnoxWalkup   DistrictPublicDefender   8     AttorneyGeneralandReporter  Trenton,Tennessee  0      8     MichaelE.Moore  0      8     SolicitorGeneral   0      8     MichaelJ.Fahey,II  0      8     AssistantAttorneyGeneral  0      8     Nashville,Tennessee̜     ̛@OO- E  XX OPINION XgX  E Ԉ 3,1 ̜  AFFIRMED  񛀜 I  NPART  ;    8      @   BARKER,J. :52.3  (7TXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT   (7TXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7TXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT   (7TXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT   Ӝ REVERSEDINPART    6/4 (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT    (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT     (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT  (7gXXdXXd7TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT     WegrantedthisappealbyRonnieWilliam(Billy)Taylor,theappellant,inorder toaddressissuespertinenttothesentenceshereceivedinthetrialcourt.Inour (#Xd#\RA' Legal\   review,however,wenoticeasplainerroraninvalidconvictionthatwasimposeduponappellantforanoffensethatwasnotchargedintheindictment.  #  1      ׀Accordingly,forthe l d reasonsoutlinedbelow,wevacatetheinvalidburglaryconvictionandaffirmthetrialcourtsjudgmentasmodified.Thecauseisremandedtothetrialcourtforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.    @+BACKGROUND  tl  Thiscasehasalongandtorturedproceduralhistory.OnJanuary16,1990,theappellantwasindictedincasenumber14075foronecountofClassDburglaryandtwocountsofmisdemeanortheft.Twomonthslater,onMarch16,1990,appellantwasindictedinasecondcase,number14125,forClassDburglaryandmisdemeanortheft.OnMarch28,1990,appellantpledguiltyinbothcases. Incasenumber14075,althoughindictedforoneburglaryandtwothefts,appellantreceivedtwo(2)concurrenttwoyearsentencesfortwoburglaryconvictionsandaconcurrentelevenmonth,twentyninedaysentenceforasinglemisdemeanortheftconviction.Thesesentencesweretobeservedconcurrenttothesentencesin14125.Forcasenumber14125,appellantwassentencedtoservetwo(2)yearsfortheburglaryconvictionandeleven(11)monthsandtwentynine(29)daysforthemisdemeanortheftconviction,concurrentwitheachotherandthesentencesin14075.Thus,thetotaleffectivesentenceforbothcaseswastwo(2)yearstobeservedintheCommunityCorrectionsprogram,asaRangeIoffender.  4-2  Thereafter,onJuly16,1990,theappellantwasindictedincasenumber14180fortwocountsofClassDtheft.Thatsameday,thetrialcourtissuedanorderrevokingtheappellantscommunitycorrectionssentencesincasenumbers14075and14125.Thecourtorderedthattheappellantbeconfinedinthestatepenitentiaryforfour(4)years.Theorderwasstyledwithbothcasenumbers,butitdidnotspecifywhetherthesentencewasfouryearsoneachofthefelonycountsoracombinationofconcurrentandconsecutivesentencestotalingfouryears.Fourdayslater,onJuly20,1990,thetrialcourtissuedasecondorderin casenumber14075Burglary2counts.Theorderstatedthattheappellantwasresentencedtoservefour(4)yearsforeachcount,concurrentwitheachother,withconfinementdesignatedinthestatepenitentiary. OnSeptember26,1990,theappellantpledguiltytothechargesincasenumber14180.Hereceivedasentenceoftwo(2)yearsforeachcount,concurrenttoeachother,butconsecutivetocases14075and14125.Thetrialcourtsuspendedthesesentencesandgrantedtheappellantimmediateprobation.  #  2       "  WhilehewasintheDepartmentofCorrectionforcasenumbers14075and14125,theappellantattendedandcompletedthebootcampprogram.   #  3      ׀OnMarch17, 8(0!$ 1991,theappellantwasreleasedfromthebootcampprogramandplacedonsupervisedprobationfortheremainderofhissentence.OnSeptember9,1994,a +$( probationviolationwarrantwasissuedallegingthatappellanthadfailedtomakeanyrestitutionorpayanyfees.Asaresult,onSeptember19,1994,thetrialcourtrevokedtheprobationinallthreecasesandresentencedtheappellanttosix(6)yearsintheCommunityCorrectionsprogram. ShortlyafterenteringtheCommunityCorrectionsprogramforthesecondtime,theappellantagainviolatedtheconditionsofhissentence.ArevocationwarrantwasissuedonOctober13,1994,basedonnewchargesforassault,resistingarrest,disorderlyconductandpublicintoxication.OnJanuary17,1995,thetrialcourtagainrevokedappellantscommunitycorrectionssentencesandresentencedhimtoserveconsecutivesentencesoffour(4)yearsincase14075,four(4)yearsincase14125andtwo(2)yearsincase14180.Thetotaleffectivesentencewasten(10)yearsintheDepartmentofCorrection. OnFebruary27,1995,appellantfiledamotionforarrestofjudgmentallegingthatthesentencesincases14075and14125hadexpiredpriortotheinstitutionofprobationrevocationproceedingsinSeptemberof1994.Additionally,hefiledamotionforcorrectionandreductionofsentenceincasenumber14180,claimingthatbecausethesentencesinthepriorcaseshadexpired,thetrialcourthadtheauthorityonlytosentencehimtoamaximumofsix(6)years.Thetrialcourtdeniedbothmotions. TheCourtofCriminalAppealsaffirmedthetrialcourtsjudgment.Theintermediatecourtconcludedthattherecordwasnotsufficienttodeterminewhetherthepriorsentenceshadactuallyexpired,andtherefore,presumedthatthetrialcourtsjudgmentwascorrect.TheappellantnowrequeststhisCourttoreversetheintermediatecourtsdecisionandfindthathisrevocationwasimproper. 6/4 Ї@JJ/ I.    Althoughnotraisedasanissuebytheparties,thereisclearlyaninvalidconvictionincasenumber14075.Ordinarily,thisCourtwillnotconsiderissuesthatarenotraisedbytheparties.Statev.Walton,958S.W.2d724,727(Tenn.1997); xp Statev.Ogle,666S.W.2d58,60(Tenn.1984).However,iftheerrorisplainonthe PH  faceoftherecord,itisaproperconsiderationforanappellatecourtwhetherproperlyassignedornot.Walton,958S.W.2dat727;Ogle,666S.W.2dat60.Anerror   affectingthesubstantialrightsoftheaccusedmaybenoticedatanytimewherenecessarytodosubstantialjustice.Tenn.R.Crim.P.52(b);Walton,958S.W.2dat  727. Incasenumber14075,theappellantwasindictedforonecountofburglary(CountI)andtwocountsofmisdemeanortheft(CountII&III).However,therecordreflectsthathewasconvictedandsentencedfortwocountsofburglaryandonecountofmisdemeanortheft.Thereisasubstantialdifferenceinthesentencingrangesforthetwooffenses.ForaRangeIoffender,thesentenceforClassDburglaryisnotlessthantwo(2)yearsnormorethanfour(4)years,whilethesentenceformisdemeanortheftisnotgreaterthaneleven(11)months,twentynine(29)days.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035111(1990)&4035112(1990).Thetrialcourtsentencedappellanttoatwoyearsentenceontheinvalidburglaryconviction. Becausethelawrequiresthataconvictionbepremiseduponalawfulcharginginstrument,andthereisnoneforthesecondburglaryconviction,weareobligedtonoticethedeficiencyasplainerror.ThejudgmentorderonCountIIof14075is,whenconsideredwiththeindictment,void.Accordingly,thejudgmentandsentenceofburglaryinCountII,casenumber14075are,therefore,vacatedanddismissed.This 704 causeisremandedtothetrialcourtwithdirectionforittoenterajudgmentofconvictionandsentenceformisdemeanortheft,theoffensetowhichtheappellantpledguilty.  #  4         @00/ II.  h`  Appellantprimarilycontendsthatthesentencesincases14075and14125hadexpiredpriortotheinstitutionoftherevocationproceedingsand,therefore,therevocationwasimproper.HearguesthattheCourtofCriminalAppealserredinitsconclusionthatthetrialcourtsjudgmentwascorrectonthebasisthattherecordwasinsufficienttodeterminewhetherthesentencehadactuallyexpired.Wefindthattherecordissufficienttodeterminetheissueandweaffirmthetrialcourtsjudgmentasmodifiedherein. Whenanaccusedseeksappellatereviewofanissueinthiscourt,itisthedutyoftheaccusedtopreparearecordwhichconveysafair,accurateandcompleteaccountofwhattranspiredwithrespecttotheissueswhichformthebasisoftheappeal.Tenn.R.App.24(b);Statev.Bennett,798S.W.2d783(Tenn.Crim.App. p&h" 1990)cert.denied,500U.S.915,111S.Ct.2009,114L.Ed.2d98(1991). #  H(@!$ Whileweacknowledgethattherecordisfarlessthanideal,itprovidesasufficientamountofinformationtodeterminethisissue. Thetimeadefendantspendsonprobationisnotcountedtowardthecompletionofhisorhersentenceunlessadefendantsuccessfullycompletestheentiretermofprobation.Ifadefendantviolatesthetermsofhisorherprobation X3P,0 withinthemaximumtimeorderedbythetrialcourt,thecourtcanrevoketheprobationandreinstatetheentireoriginalsentence.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035310(1990)  &4035311(d)(1990);Statev.Duke,902S.W.2d424(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).    Itisclearfromtherecordthatappellantssentencehadnotexpiredpriortotheinstitutionoftherevocationproceedings.Afouryearsentencewillexpireafterserviceof1460days.Thereisevidenceintherecordtosupport549daysofsentencingcredits.Furthermore,appellantfailedtocompleteafouryeartermofprobation.Hedidsuccessfullycompleteatermofthreeyearsand186daysofprobation.However,hehadnotcompletedanentirefouryeartermofprobationpriortotherevocationproceedings.Clearly,theappellanthasneitherservedallofhistimenorsuccessfullycompletedthistermofprobation. Therefore,theappellantssentencehadnotexpiredbecausehehadneitherservedtheentirefouryearsnorsuccessfullycompletedafouryeartermofprobation.Thisissuehasnomerit.@. III.  $   Nevertheless,inourreviewoftherecord,weagreewiththeappellantthatthetrialcourterredwhenitincreasedhissentencetotenyearsatthefinalrevocationhearing.Whiletherevocationwasproper,thetrialcourthadnoauthoritytoincreasetheappellantsoriginalsentence. Webeginouranalysisofthisissuebyrecognizingthedistinctionbetweentherevocationofacommunitycorrectionssentenceandaprobationrevocation.WhenatrialcourtrevokesacommunitycorrectionssentenceundertheTennesseeCommunityCorrectionsActof1985,ithastheauthorityto resentencethedefendant 704 toanyappropriatesentencingalternative,includingincarceration,foranyperiodoftimeuptothemaximumsentenceprovidedfortheoffensecommitted,lessanytimeactuallyservedinanycommunitybasedalternativetoincarceration.Tenn.CodeAnn.4036106(e)(3)(1990);Statev.Bowling,958S.W.2d362,363(Tenn.Crim.   App.1997).However,whenatrialcourtdeterminesthataprobationviolationhasoccurred,itcanonlycauseexecutionoftheoriginaljudgmentasitwasoriginally @8  entered.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035310&4035311(d)(emphasisadded).    InJuly1990,whenappellantfirstviolatedtheconditionsofhissentence,thetrialcourtrevokedhiscommunitycorrectionssentencesincasenumbers14075&14125.Thetrialcourtresentencedhimtofour(4)yearsintheDepartmentofCorrectiononeachcount,concurrentwithoneanother.OncehewastransferredtotheDepartmentofCorrection,thetrialcourtlostjurisdiction.SeeTenn.CodeAnn. (  4035212(d)(1990);Bowling,958S.W.2dat363.Thereafter,theDepartmentof  CorrectionplacedhiminthebootcampprogramandthenonMarch17,1991,placedhimonprobationfortheremainderofhissentence.WhentheDepartmentofCorrectionplacedtheappellantonprobation,thetrialcourtregainedjurisdictiontorevokehisprobation.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4020206(1997). `&X"  InSeptember1994,aprobationviolationwarrantwasissuedagainsttheappellantforthesecondtime.Thetrialcourtrevokedappellantssentenceandproperlyorderedthatheserveasixyearsentence.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035 -&* 311(d)  #  5      . /(, Ї Whentheappellantviolatedtheconditionsofhissentenceforathirdtime,thetrialcourtincreasedhissentencetoten(10)yearsintheDepartmentofCorrection.Specifically,thetrialcourtresentencedhimtofouryearsincase14075,fouryearsincase14125andtwoyearsincase14180.Allthreesentenceswereorderedtobeservedconsecutively.Thetrialcourthadnoauthoritytoincreasethesentencesortorunthemconsecutivelyratherthanconcurrently.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035310 @8  &4035311(d).NeithertheCommunityCorrectionsActnorthestatutesdealingwithprobationauthorizeacourttoimposeanewsentenceundertheactafteradefendanthaspartiallyservedhissentenceintheDepartmentofCorrection.Bowling,958  S.W.2dat364.Thetrialcourthadtheauthoritytocommenceexecutionoftheoriginaljudgmentasitwasoriginallyentered,butitdidnothavetheauthoritytoincreasethedefendantsoriginalsentence.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035310&40 PH 35311(d);Bowling,958S.W.2dat364.Therefore,themaximumsentenceavailable (  tothecourtwassix(6)yearsinthestatepenitentiary.Accordingly,theamendedjudgmentofconvictionofthetrialcourtshouldbemodifiedtoreflectaneffectivesixyearsentence.@+ CONCLUSION  `&X"  Whilewefindthattheappellantssentenceshadnotexpiredpriortotheinstitutionoftherevocationproceedings,thetenyearsentenceimposeduponrevocationofthealternativesentencingwasimproper.ThepropersentenceissixyearsintheDepartmentofCorrection.Weaffirmthetrialcourtsjudgmentasmodified.Thecauseisremandedtothetrialcourtforcorrectionoftheimproperjudgmentincase14075andthereinstatementofthesixyearsentence. CostsareassessedtotheStateofTennessee. 704  5.4   0     0      8     ____________________________  0      8     WILLIAMM.BARKER,JUSTICE  PANEL  CONCUR :    Anderson,C.J.,  Drowota    ,Birch,Holder,J  .  J.