State v. Hunley

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE FILED NOVEMB ER SESSION, 1998 January 6, 1999

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9712-CC-00539 )

Appellee, )

)

) ANDERSON COUNTY

VS. )

) HON. JAMES B. SCOTT, JR.

TIMOTHY HUNLEY, ) JUDGE )

Appe llant. ) (Sentencing)

ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE CRIMINAL COURT OF ANDERSON COUNTY

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

NANCY MEYER JOHN KNOX WALKUP Assistant Public Defender Attorney General and Reporter 101 South Main Street, Suite 450 Clinton, TN 37716 TODD R. KELLEY Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenu e North

Nashville, TN 37243

JAMES N. RAMSEY

District Attorney General

JAN HICKS

Assistant District Attorney General 100 North Main Street, Suite 127 Clinton, TN 37716

OPINION FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED IN ACCOR DANCE W ITH RULE 20 DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE

ORDER

The Defen dant, Tim othy Hu nley, app eals as o f right pursu ant to Tennessee Rule of A ppellate P rocedu re 3(b). Defendant appeals the sentence imposed for his conviction upon g uilty plea to theft of property valued more than $1,000, a Class D felony. By the terms of his plea, Defendant agreed to a sentence of two years as a Range I standard offender, with the manner of service of the sentence to be determined by the trial judge. Defendant contends that the trial court e rred by denyin g him probation or other alternative sentence, requiring him instea d to se rve his sentence in confinement. We find no abuse of the trial court’s discretion and affirm Defendant’s sentence.

Defendant pleaded guilty to theft of a genera tor valu ed at a pprox imate ly $1400. The victim’s wife testified at Defendant’s probation hearing that he “threatened to burn [their] home down” after he was charge d with the th eft, and that the victim and his wife had called the sheriff’s department “numerous times” because Defendant had waited in his car near their house or circled the house. Defendant denied these allegations; however, the trial court found that Defendant lacked credibility. The record suports this finding.

Defe ndan t’s presen tence re port reflects conviction s for theft of p roperty valued less than $500, public intox ication, res isting arres t, another theft less than $500, and a nothe r public intoxication in 1996 alone. In addition, the presentence report reveals that Defe ndant was convicted in 199 2 for DUI, driving on suspended license , and p ublic intoxication . In 1986 Defendant was convicted of

3

reckless driving and armed robbery, am ong oth er offens es for wh ich com plete information was u navaila ble. In 1 990, p resum ably wh ile serving his sentence for robbery, Defendant was convicted of felony escape. Finally, the report indicates, “At this time [Defendant] has two DUI charges pending in Knox and Union Coun ties as well as a charg e of poss ession o f alcohol o n TVA property .” According to the presentence report and testimony at his probation hearing, Defen dant wa s release d from th e state penitentiary only five weeks prior to the theft at issue here.

Defendant has e xhibited an un willingn ess to com ply with th e laws of this state for nearly half his life. We find no error in the trial court’s denial of alternative sente ncing in this case. Based on a thorough reading of the record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee.

____________________________________

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE

CONCUR:

___________________________________

JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., JUDGE

___________________________________

L.T. LAFFERTY, SENIOR JUDGE