State v. Eric McKinnie

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: December 1, 2010
• Docket: 02C01-9611-CC-00419
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

DECEMBER 1997 SESSION FILED February 4, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr. STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) Appellate C ourt Clerk ) Appellee, ) C.C.A. No. 02C01-9611-CC-00419 ) v. ) Hardeman County ) ERIC MCKINNIE, ) Hon. Jon Kerry Blackwood, Judge ) Appellant. ) (Sentencing)

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

DAVID H. CRICHTON JOHN KNOX WALKUP P.O. Box 651 Attorney General & Reporter Bolivar, TN 38008 DEBORAH A. TULLIS Assistant Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493

ELIZABETH T. RICE Dist. Attorney General 302 Market Street Somerville, TN 38068

JERRY NORWOOD Asst. District Attorney General 302 Market Street Somerville, TN 38068

OPINION FILED: _____________

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

CURWOOD WITT, JUDGE OPINION

The defendant, Eric McKinnie, appeals the sentencing determination

of the Hardeman County Circuit Court. After a jury convicted the defendant of

aggravated robbery, a Class B felony, the trial court sentenced the defendant as a

standard offender to a nine-year term of incarceration. We affirm the judgment of

the trial court pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20.

The defendant and a co-defendant robbed the Whiteville Amoco

station of $900.00. Both the defendant and the co-defendant wore masks and

pointed guns at the clerk. The defendant’s prior criminal record included convictions

in 1995 for simple assault, in 1993 for possession of a controlled substance and

evading arrest, and for various traffic violations.

The trial court relied upon the defendant’s previous history of criminal

convictions or criminal behavior in addition to those necessary to establish the

range in enhancing the sentence from the minimum of eight years to nine years.

See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-114(1) (1997). The defendant’s single complaint on

appeal is that the nine-year sentence is excessive.

The record of the defendant’s prior criminal history and behavior, not

controverted at the sentencing hearing and admitted by the defendant in his brief,

adequately supports the trial court’s sentence enhancement of one year, especially

in view of the trial court’s discretion in weighing any enhancement and mitigating

factors. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-210, Sentencing Commission Comments (1997);

State v. Hayes, 899 S.W.2d 175, 185 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). If appellate review

reflects the trial court properly considered all relevant factors and its findings of fact

are adequately supported in the record, this court must affirm the sentence, “even

if we would have preferred a different result.” State v. Fletcher, 805 S.W.2d 785,

789 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Tenn. Ct.

2 Crim. App. R. 20.

_________________________ CURWOOD WITT, JUDGE

CONCUR:

______________________________ JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE

_______________________________ JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE