### IN THE COURT OFCRIMI NAL AP PEALS OF TENNES SEE ATJAC KSON A ssi gne d onBrie fs N ove mb er 10, 200 9 STA TE OFTEN NES SEE v. TITU S A . M ILLER D irec t A p p ea l f

ro m th e C ircu itC o u rt fo r M a d ison C o u n ty N o. 07- 676 D onal d H . A l l en, Judge

N o. W 2009- 00458- C C A - R 3- C D - F i l ed M ay 27, 2010

A M adi s on C ount y j ur y convi ct ed the def endant , T i t us A

. M il l er , of s i m pl e pos s es s i on of m ar i j uan a an d ev adi ng arr es t , bot h C l as s A m i s dem eanor s . T he tr i al cour ts ent ence d t he d e fe n d a n t to e lev e n m o n th s, tw e n ty -n in e day s f or each c o n v ictio n , to b e se rv e d c o n se c u tiv e ly t o eac h ot herand t o a s i xt y- m ont h feder al s ent ence . T he cour tor der ed the def endantt o s er ve th e se n ten c e s in th e c o u n ty jail, w ith a re lea se e lig ib ili ty p e rc e n tag e o f se v e n ty -fiv e p e rc e n t. O n appea l , t he def

endantar gues t hat t he evi dence w as i ns uf f i ci entt o s uppor thi s convi ct i ons and thatt he tr i al cour terr ed b y o rder i ng hi m t o s er ve hi s s ent ence s cons ecut i vel y. A f t er r evi ew i ng t he re cor d, t he par t i es ’ br i efs , and appl i cabl e l aw , w e aff i r m t he j udgm ent s of

t he M a d is o n C o u n ty C ir c u it C o u rt
. T enn. R . A pp. P . 3 A ppeal as of R i ght ; Judgm ent s of

t he C i rcui t C ourt A f

f i rm ed J

. C. M C L IN , J

. , del i ver ed the opi ni on of t h e co u r t , i n w hi ch J OH N E VER ETT W I LLI AMS and R OB ER T W. W EDE MEY ER , J J

. j oi ned. G reg o ry D

. G o o k in, Jack so n , T en n esse e, for the a p p ell an t, T itu s A

. M il ler.
R ober tE. Coo p e r , J r . , A t t or ney G ener al and R epor t er ; C am er on L

. H yder , A s s i s t antA t t or ney G ener al ; J err y W oodal l , D i s tr i ct A t t or ney G ener al ; and S haun A

. B r ow n, A l f r ed Ear l s and B r i an G i l l i am , A s s i s t antD i s tr i ctA t t or neys G ener al , fort he appe l l ee, St at e of T ennes s ee. OP I NI ON Backg r ound In D ecem ber 200 7, a M adis on C ou nty grand j ury i nd i ct ed the defenda nt on si x co un t s: ( 1) pos s es s i on of

m ar i j uana w i t h i nt entt o s el l ordel i ver ; ( 2) aggr avat ed as s aul t ; ( 3) evadi ng arr es t ; ( 4) r es i s t i ng arr est ; (5 ) d ri v i ng w hi l e undert he i nf l uence of

an i nt oxi cant ; and ( 6)-2-

vi ol at i on of

t he s eatbel tl aw . T he par t i es pr es ent ed the fol l ow i ng evi dence ata j ur y tr i al on O ct ober1, 2008. S ta te’ s P ro o

f. O f f i cerSam uel G i l l ey, of t he Jac ks on Pol i ce D epar t m ent , t es t i f i ed that ar ound 7: 30 p. m . on J une 20, 2007, he obser ved t he def endantdr i vi ng on H i ghl and A venue w i t houtw ear ing a s eatbel t
. O f f i cerG i l l ey i ni t i at ed hi s em er gency e qui pm ent , and the def endantpul l ed overat t he next s i de s tr eet
. A s econd pe r s on, M i chae l A l dr i ch, w as i n t he f r ontpas s engers eat
. O f f i cerG i l l ey as ked fort he def endant ’s licen se and r egi s tr at i on and not i ced thatt he def

endant ’ s eyes w er e bl oods hot , a s m el l of m ar i j uana w as com i ng f

r om t he def endant ’ s per s on and t he vehi cl e, and t he defendant ’ s s peec h w as s l ur r ed. O f f i cerG i l l ey b eli ev ed the de fen d an t w as i n tox icated an d ask ed h im to st ep o u t o f the ve h icl e “ to p erfo rm s om e f i el d s obr i et y t es t s on hi m . ” The defendantcom pl i ed. O f f i cerR ob ertson arrive d on t he s cene i n a s epar at e patr ol carand s t ayed on the p a ss e n g e r’s sid e o f th e c a r to w a tch M r. A ld ric h w h ile O ffic e r G ill e y to o k th e d e fe n d a n t to th e re a r o f th e c a r, o n th e d riv e r’s sid e . O ffic e r G ill e y tes tified th a t th e d e fe n d a n t “b e g a n to a c t a littl e fu n n y , re a c h in g a ro u n d in h is p a n ts , re a c h in g fo r h is w a is tb a n d a n d s tu ff lik e th a t.” O f f i cerG i l l ey as ked the def endant t o pl ace hi s hands on hi s head a nd began t o f r i s k hi m for a w e a p o n . T h e d e fe n d a n t b e c a m e ten se a n d sta rte d sh a k in g . O ffic e r G ille y “ to ld h im to r el ax . . . and he be gan att hatt i m e t o tr y t o r un and getaw ay f r om m e. ” H e gra bbed the d e fe n d a n t ar o u n d th e w a ist, a n d th e y “ stru g g led a lit tle b it .

. . .” T h e y ra n b y th e p a rtially opened dr i ver ’ s s i de door , and the def endantgr abbed the door

. T he door hi t O f f i cerG i l l ey i n t he face , and he “ m om ent ar i l y bl acke d out

. ” O f f i cerG i l l ey t es t i f

i ed that“w hat[ he] r em em ber [ ed] af

t ert hati s bei ng on t he gr ound w i t h hi m t us s l i ng” and he “s tr uck [ t he d e fe n d a n t] a c o u p le o f t im e s . . . in th e fa c ia l a re a .” A s a r es ul tof

t he al t er cat i on, O f

f i cer G i l l ey had a knotabove hi s r i ghteye a nd w as bl eedi ng f

r om hi s eye s ocket

. H e r ece i ved tr eat m entatC onveni entC ar e. H i s vi s i on w as bl ur r y, and he c ont i nued t o have pr obl em s w i t h hi s v isi o n , r es ul t i ng i n t he nee d t o w ear eyegl as s es . T he def

endants uf

fer ed i nj ur y t o hi s m out h and r ece i ved tr eat m ent atJ acks onM a d is o n C o u n ty G e n e ra l H o s p ita l. O f f i cerR o b e r t s o n h e l ped O f f i cerG i l l ey handc uf

f t he def endant

. W hen O f

f i cerG i l l ey w al ked t o t h e p a s s e n g e r - s i d e o f t h e c a rt o g e tM r . Al d r i c h “ u n d e rc o n tr o l , ” t h e d e fe n d ant began r unni ng aw ay w i t h O f f i cer R ober t s on chas i ng hi m . O f f i cerG i l l ey ca l l ed forback- up. W hen otherof

f i cer s arr i ved on t he s cene , O f f i cerG i l l ey r eques t ed thatO f f i cerT r ey T ru ll a s s is t h im in s e a rc h in g th e v e h ic le b e c a u s e h e “ w a s a littl e b it d is o ri e n te d a n d d iz z y .” T hey di s cover ed a ba g cont ai ni ng s ever al s m al l er bags of m ar i j uana i n t he ca r . O f

f i cer G i l l ey t es t i f

i ed thatt he pac kagi ng w as co n sist entw i t h t he w ay m ar i j uana i s packa ged for r es al e. T hey di d notf

i nd any dr ug par apher nal i a. O f f i cerR ober t s on r ecove r ed a s m al l bag-3-

of m ar i j uana thatt he def

endanthad dr opped dur i ng t he chas e. T h e bag f r om t he ca r a m o u n te d to 1 3 .9 g ra m s o f m a ri ju a n a , a n d th e b a g d ro p p e d b y th e d e fe n d a n t w e ig h e d 5 .5 gr am s of m ar i j uana. T he pas s enger , M r . A l dr i ch, eventuall y p led gui l t y t o pos s es s i on of m ar i j uana. O n c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , Off i c e r Gi l l e y t e s t i f

i e d t h a t i n J u n e 2 0 0 7 , h i s p a tr o l c ar w as equi pped w i t h a vi deo ca m er a, butt h e ca m er a w as notoper at i ng due t o a m al f unct i on. O ffi cerG i l l ey s ai d he s aw t he def endant“r i di ng up and dow n H i ghl and A venue thatday .

. . . ” T he f

i r s t t i m e O f

f i cer G i l l ey s aw hi m , t he def endantw as w ear i ng a s eatbel t , butf i f t een m in u tes late r, h e w a s n o t w e a rin g it. O ffic e r G ill e y p u lled h im o v e r b e c a u se o f th e se a t b e lt; how ever , he di d not fol l ow t he def endant l ong enough t o det er m i ne hi s dr i vi ng abi l i t y. T he d e fe n d a n ta l r e a d y h a d h i s l i c e n s e a n d r e g i s tr a t i o n r e a d y t o g i v e t o Of f i c e rGi l l e y b y t h e t i me h e re ac h ed the d efe n d an t’ s ca r. T h e d efe n d an t d id n o t stum b le o r fa ll w h en h e e x it ed the c ar. O f f i cer G i l l ey s ai d he s m el l ed bur ni ng m ar i j uana on the def

endantand i n t he def

endant ’ s car b u t d id n o t fin d a n y th in g in th e c a r th a t w o u ld in d ica te th a t th e o c c u p a n ts h a d re c e n tly s m oked m ar i

j uana. T he bag of

m ar i j uana f ound by t he of

f i cer s i n t he c ar w as s t uf fed b e tw e e n th e c o n so le a n d th e p a ss e n g e r se a t. P rio r to p u lli n g th e d e fe n d a n t o v e r, O ffic e r G ill e y h a d tak e n a b re a k . H e p a rk e d h is p a tr o l c a ra l o n g s i d e Of f i c e r Rob e r t s o n ’ s p a tr o l c a ri n t h e S o f t wa r e Ci t y p a r k i n g l o t
. He r eca l l ed thathe t es t i f

i ed att he pr el i m i nar y hear i ng t hat he and O f f i cerR ober t s on m i ghthave di s cus s ed the def

endantw hi l e they w er e on br eak, and one of t h em said , “L et ’ s go do s om ethin g. ” O f

f i cerR ober t s on arr i ved on the s cene s oon af t erO f f i cerG i l l ey pul l ed the def endantoverbeca us e he w as i n t he ar ea and hear d O f f i cerG i l l ey overt he r adi o; O f f i cer G ille y d e n ie d th a t th e y h a d p re v io u s ly o rc h e s tr a te d O ffic e r R o b e rt s o n ’s a rr iv a l. O f f i cerG i l l ey agr eed thathe punche d t he def endanteven though he had a bat on and peppers pr ay. H e deni ed hi t t i ng t he def endantas h ard as he coul d and s ugges t ed thatt he def endant ’ s i nj ur y m i ghthave c om e f r om hi t t i ng t he gr ound dur i ng t hei rs tr uggl e. O f f i cer R ober t s o n d i d n o ts tr i k e t h e d e fe n d a n ti n Off i c e rGi l l e y ’ s p r e s e n c e . He a g r e e d t h a tt he def endantw entt o t he R egi onal M edi cal C ent eri n M em p h is af t erhe w entt o J acks onM a d iso n C o u n ty G e n e ra l H o sp ital. O ffic e r G il le y d id n o t a sk th e d e fe n d a n t to su b m it t o bl ood t es t s , nor di d he obt ai n s am pl es of t he def endant ’ s bl ood f

r om t he hos pi t al fort es t i ng. O f f i cerA s hl ey R ober t s on, of t he J acks on Pol i ce De p ar t m ent , t es t i f i ed thaton J une 20, 2007, he and O f

f i cerG i l l ey t ook a br eak t ogether , and soon af t er t hey w ent back t o w or k, he h e a rd O ffic e r G ill e y sa y o v e r th e ra d io th a t h e w a s m a k in g a tra ffic sto p o n H ick s S tre e t. O f f i cerR ober t s on w as cl os e t o t hatl ocat i on, s o he w entt o H i cks St r eett o back up O f f i cer G i l l ey. H e w ent t o t he pass enger s i de of t he car and t r i ed t o get i dent i f i cat i on f r om M i chae l A ldri ch. H e hea r d O f f i cerG i l l ey t el l t he def endantt hathe w as goi ng t o f r i s k hi m for w eapons . O f

f i cerR ober ts on t hen hea r d a bang a nd s aw O f f i cerG i l l ey and the def

endant-4-

struggli ng on t he g round

. B y the t i m e he g ot t o them , t he d efendan tw a s o n h is fe e t, so O ffi cer R obe r t s o n t a c k l e d h i m , a n d Off i c e rGi l l e y h a n d c u f

fe d h i m . At t h a tt i m e , t he d efe n d an t com p lai n ed that h is j aw w as bro k en . O ffi ce r R o b ertson w as att em p ti n g to p erfo rm a s ear ch of

t he def endantw hen the def

endantr an aw ay. A s t he d efe n d ant w as r unni ng, O ffic e r R o b e rt s o n s a w h im re a c h in to h is p a n ts a n d th e n “ s o m e th in g [fe ll] o u t o f h is p a n ts .” T he def endanteventual l y r an i nt o a s tr uctur e at112 H i cks S tr ee t , w hi ch i s w her e O f f i cer R ober t s on caughtup t o hi m . O f f i cer R ober t s on had anotherof f i cerbacktr ack the cha s e, and t hatof f i cer found a bag of m ar i

j uana. O f

f i cer R ober t s on t es t i f

i ed thatt he bag w as cons i s t ent w ith w h a t h e sa w fa ll o u t o f th e d e fe n d a n t’s p a n ts. H e fu rth e r te stifie d th a t th e d e fe n d a n t d id n o t s tr ik e h im a t a n y p o in t. H e d id n o t tr a n s p o rt th e d e fe n d a n t to th e h o s p ita l. O n cr os s - exam i nat i on, O f f i cerR ober t s on s ai d t hatO f f i cerG il ley had s een the def endantaboutf

i f t een m i nut es pr i ort o t he tr af f i c s t op, dur i ng t hei rbr eak. H e agr eed that o n e o f th e m sa id e ith e r “ L e t’s g o to w o rk ” o r “ L e t’s g o d o so m e th in g ” a t th e e n d o f th e ir br eak. O f

f i cer R o b ertson t es t i f

i ed thathi s patr ol cardi d nothave a vi deo ca m er a thatday beca us e the depa r t m entw as i n t he pr oces s of r epl aci ng i t
. H e d eni ed punchi ng t he def endant

. H e s ai d t he def endantw as “s pi t t i ng outbi g puddl es of bl ood” and w as i nj ur ed ei t herf r om O f f i cerG i l l ey punchi ng hi m orO f f i cerR ober t s on fal l i ng on hi m . H e di d nots ee O fficer G il ley p u n ch the d efe n d an t and d id n o t r ec all tel li n g h im that h e h ad g o n e too far. O f f i cerR ober t s on s ai d t hatt he def endantdr opped m ar i

j uana dur i ng t he chas e butnoti ns i de hi s vehi cl e. O f f i cerT r ey Trul l , of

t he J acks on Pol i ce D epar t m ent , t es t i f i ed thaton J une 20, 2007, he r es ponded t o a ca l l ei t herforas s i s t ance ort hatt her e w as a footpur s ui t
. W hen he a r r i ved a t t h e s c e n e , h e o b s e r v e d Of f i c e r Gi l l e y l e a n i n g a g a i n s t a wh i t e Cr o wn Vi c t o r i a c a r . He a p p e a re d d a z e d a n d a s k e d O ffic e r T ru ll fo r a ss ista n c e in se a rc h in g th e c a r. O ffic e r T ru ll poi nt ed outt he bag of

m ar i j uana, w hi ch O f

f i cerG i l l ey r ecove r ed. O f f i cerT r ul l w as pr es ent w hen O f f i cerR ober t s on l ed t he def endantback t o t he vehi cl e. H e w as unabl e t o t el l w hat condi t i on t he def

endantw as i n att hatt i m e. Speci al A gentT ar s ha B ond, a for ens ic s cien ti s tw i t h t he Tennes s ee Bure au of I nves t i gat i on, t es t i f

i ed thats he t es t ed s ubs t ance s r el at ed t o t hi s cas e. She det er m i ned thatt he s ubs t ance s i n bot h t he bag c ont ai ni ng s m al l erbags and the i ndi vi dual bag w er e m ar i j uana. T he tot al w ei gh tof t he m ari j uan a i n b oth bags w as 15.6 gram s. D ef ens e Proof

. R enarda F ord t est i fi ed thaton June 2 0, 20 07 , she l i ved at32 0 E ast For es tA venue, nearH i ghl and A venue. O n t hatday, s he w i t nes s ed t he tr af f i c s t op on H i cks St r eet
. She t es t i f

i ed thats he

s aw [ t he def

endant ] get t i ng out of t he car and an of f i cert aki ng one hand a nd put t i ng i tbehi nd hi s back a nd put t i ng hi m on t he gr ound and t he of f i cert hen-5-

pl ace d hi s knee on the bac k of hi s neck. A f

t ert hat , anotherof

f i cercam e f

r om the p asse n g er side o f t h e c ar a rou n d an d start ed p u n ch ing [t h e d efe n d an t]

. S h e d id n o t see the de fen d an t p rov o k e th e officers or h it o n e o f t h e o ffi ce rs w ith a c ar d o o r. W h e n M s . F o r d s a w t h e i n c i d e n t , s h e d i d n o tr e c o g n i z e t h e d e fe n d a n t , wh o m s h e k n o ws th ro u g h a fr ie n d , b u t s h e le a rn e d la te r t h a t h e w a s in v o lv e d

. O n cro ss-ex am ination , M s. F o rd testi fi ed that sh e w as b eh ind the tw o p atrol ca rs du ri ng t he inci den tand w as far enou gh aw ay thatshe c o u ld no ti den t i fy t he faces of tho se in v o lv e d . S h e d id n o t r e p o rt th e in c id e n t to a u th o ri tie s . T he def endantt es t i f

i ed thaton J une 20, 2007, he w as w ear i ng hi s s eatbel tw hen O f f i cerG i l l ey pul l ed hi m over . H e w as notundert he i nf l uence of

any dr u g s and had not been s m oki ng m ar i

j uana. W hen he s t epped out of hi s car , he w as ner vous , and he t ol d t he of f i cert hathe had pul l ed hi m overforno r eas on. O f f i cerG i l l ey bec am e “i r at e” a nd t hr ew t he def endantt o t he gr ound. O f f i cerR ober t son cam e f

r om t he others i de of

t he ca rand began punc hi ng hi m , s even t o ei ght t i m es . T he of f i cer s handcuf

fed hi m w hi l e he w as l yi ng on t he ground and w al ked seve r al feetaw ay. H e hea r d O f f i cerG i l l ey t el l O f

f i cerR ober t s on th a t h e h a d g o n e to o fa r. T h e d e fe n d a n t s a id th a t th e o ffic e rs’ c o n v e rsa tio n m a d e h im a fra id forhi s l i fe becaus e he t houghtt hey m i ghtpl antevi dence on hi m and then ki l l hi m . H e got up and w ent t o a yard on H i cks St reet w here peo ple w ere out si de an d “lai d d ow n in t he g ras s s o th a t s o m e o n e w o u ld b e w itn e s s in g w h a t w a s g o in g o n . . . .”
T h e defend ant s ai d thatO ff i cer R ob ert son took h i m t o Jackso n-M adis on C ou n ty G e n e ra l H o sp ital. T h e d e fe n d a n t to ld th e n u rse s th a t th e p o lice h a d b e a ten h im . A fte r th irty m i nut es , O f

f i cerR ober t s on uncuf

fed hi m and l ef

t
. T he att endi ng doct ort ol d hi m t hatt he hos pi t al w oul d tr an sfer hi m t o t he R egi onal M edi cal C ent eri n M em phi s , w her e an or al s ur geon w oul d r epai rhi s j aw . T he def endantt es t i f

i ed thathi s m out h w as w i r ed s hutfort en w eeks

. H e i dent i f

i ed pi ctur es t hathe t ook of ot heri nj ur i es he s us t ai n ed o n Ju ne 20, i ncl udi ng s cr apes on t he l ef t s i de of hi s face , hi s s houl der , and hi s knees

. H e deni ed hi t t i ng O ff i cer G i l l ey w i t h a car do or and d enied t hat the sm al l bag of m ari j uan a w as hi s. On c r o s s - e x a mi n a t i o n , t h e d e fe n d a n ts a i d t h a th e h a d u s e d ma r i j u a n a i n t h e p a s t
. He r eca l l ed thatO f

f i cerR ober t s on s l i d on hi s knees , on har d pavem ent , w hen he c am e t o t he dr i ver ’ s s i de of t he car and began punchi ng hi m . T he def endants ai d t hatM i chae l A l dr i ch w i t nes s ed eve r yt hi ng and t es t i f i ed on hi s behal f

att he pr el i m i nar y hear i ng. M r . A l dr i ch had s i nce pl ed gui l t y to p o sses s i on of t he m ar i j uana i n t he ca r . T he def endants ai d t hatt he ma r i j u a n a i n t h e c a rwa s s o l e l y Mr

. Al d r i c h ’ s . W h e n a s k e d wh y t h e o f f i c e r s wo u l d b e a th i m, the def endants ai d he bel i eved the of f i cer s ’ conductw as r aci al l y- m ot i vat ed, and they had p lann ed to g ive “ a n ice li tt le be at do w n o n so m eb o d y ” w h il e the ir p atrol c ar ca m era s w ere notw or ki ng.The state dismissed the charge s whe n the defend ant pled guilty in fed eral co urt be cause the fed eral 1 and state ch arges were basedonthe same offen se. -6- A fte r d e lib e ra tio n s, th e ju ry fo u n d th e d e fe n d a n t n o t g u ilt y o f a g g ra v a ted a ss a u lt, r es i s t i ng arr es t , dr i vi ng w hi l e i nt oxi cat ed, and vi ol at i on of t he s eatbel tl aw . T he j ur y found hi m gui l t y of

evadi ng arr es tand the l esser-i ncl uded of fens e of s i m pl e pos s es s i on of m ar i j uana. T he tr i al cour theld a sen t enci ng hear i ng on O ct ober24, 2008. A tt he hea r i ng, t he def endantt es t i f

i ed thathe w as i ncar cer at ed i n W es t V i r gi ni a on a f el ony f i r ear m convi ct i on. T he fe d e r a l j u d g e s e n t e n c e d h i m t o s i x t y m o n t h s . Th e d e fe n d a n ta s k e d fo rc o ncur r ent s e n t e n c e s b a s e d o n t h e fa c tt h a tt h e j u r y a c q u i t t e d h i m o f fo u ro f t h e c h a r g e d o f

fe n s e s . He tes tified th a t h e w a s tw e n ty -se v e n y e a rs o ld a n d h a d a tw o -y e a r-o ld d a u g h ter , w h o liv e d in W e s t V ir g in ia w ith h e r m o th e r. T h e tri al co u rtfou n d that the d efe n d an t had an ex tens ive c ri m inal h ist o ry. T h e c o u rt d id n o t co n side r the de fen d an t’ s m ino r traffi c o ffen ses fo r en h an ce m en t pu rpo ses. T h e c o u rt cons i der ed the def

endant ’ s convi ct i ons f r om H ayw oo d C o u nt y, w hi ch w er e unl aw f ul pos s es s i on of

d rug par apher nal i a, evadi ng arr es t , and pos s es s i on of m ar i j uana; hi s convi ct i on i n Shel by C ount y for pos s es s i on of dr ugs ; hi s convi ct i ons i n M adi s on C ount y forpos s es s i on of m ar i j uana w i t h i nt ent t o s el l , pos s es s i on of a deadl y w eapon w i t h i nt entt o em pl oy i n t he com m i s s i on of

a f el ony, unl aw f

ul pos s es s i on of

dr ug par apher nal i a, s i m ple p o sses s i on of m a riju a n a (tw ice ), ev a d in g a rre st, a n d v io latio n o f th e se a t b e lt l a w ; h is c o n v ictio n in H ar dem an C ount y fo r se ll ing dr ugs ; and hi s feder al f i r ear m s convi ct i on. I n t ot al , t he def endanthad t w o C l as s E fel oni es , t en m i s dem eanorconvi ct i ons , and a f eder al fel ony c o n v ictio n . T h e c o u rt fo u n d th a t th e d e fe n d a n t h a d a h isto ry o f u n w ill in g n e ss to c o m p ly w ith t he condi t i ons of

pr obat i on beca us e he c om m i t t ed s ever al of fens es w hi l e on pr obat i on and h ad h is pro b ati o n rev o k ed o n ce . T h e c o u rtd id n o t f ind an y m it igating fa c to rs . T h e c o u rt s ent ence d t he def

endantt o elev en m ont hs , t w ent y- ni ne days forevadi ng arr es tand el even m ont hs , t w ent y- ni ne days for s i m pl e pos s es s i on. T he cour tor der ed the def endantt o s er ve t he s ent ence s cons ecut i vel y beca us e of hi s ext ensi v e cr i m i nal hi s t or y. T he cour tf ur t her or der ed thatt he s ent ence s be cons ecut i ve t o t he feder al s ent ence beca us e the def endantw as outon bond on s t at e cha r ges w hen he com m i t t ed t he i ns t ant of fens es . T he def

endantt hen 1 filed th is tim e ly a p p e a l. A n a ly sis O n a p p e a l, th e d e fe n d a n t alle g e s th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s in s u ffic ie n t to su p p o rt h is convi ct i ons of evadi ng arr es t and si m pl e poss es s i on of m ar i j uana. H e f

ur t herchal l enges t he tr i al cour t ’ s i m pos i t i on of cons ecut i ve sent enci ng, ar gui ng t hathi s cr i m i nal hi s t or y w as not so extensi ve as t o m eri tcon secut i ve sentences.-7- Suf f i ci ency of

t he Evi dence O urr evi ew begi n s w it h t he w el l

- es t abl i s hed rul e thatonce a j ur yfi nds a def endant gui l t y , hi s or her pr es um pt i on of i nnocenc e i s r emoved and re pl ace d w i t h a pre s um pt i on of g u ilt. Stat e v. E vans , 838 S. W

. 2d 185, 191 ( T enn. 1992)

. T her efor e, on appea l , t he convi ct ed def

endanthas t he bur den of demonstr at i ng t o t hi s cour tw hyt he evi dence w i l l not s u p p o rt th e ju ry’s v e rd ic t. Stat e v. C arruthers , 3 5 S

. W

. 3 d 5 1 6 , 5 5 7 -58 (T en n . 2 0 0 0 ); S ta te v . T u g g le , 63 9 S

. W

. 2d 91 3, 9 1 4 (T enn . 19 82 ). T o m eett his bu rden, t he d efen dan tm ust e s t a b l i s h t h a tn o “ r a t i o n a l t r i e r o f f a c t ” c o u l d h a v e f

o u n d t h e e s s e n t i a l e l e me n t s o f t h e c r i me b e y o n d a re a s o n a b le d o u b t. J a c k so n v . V irg in ia , 4 4 3 U .S . 3 0 7 , 3 1 9 (1 9 7 9 ); Stat e v. E vans , 108 S. W

. 3d 231, 236 (T en n . 2003) ; T enn. R

. A pp. P. 13( e)

. I n contr as t , t he j ur y ’ s ver di ct appr oved byt he tr i al j udge ac cr edi t s t he s t at e’ s w i t nes s es and r es ol ves al l confl i ct s i n favor o f th e sta te

. S ta te v . H a rr is , 839 S. W

. 2d 54, 75 ( T enn. 1992)

. T he s t at e i s ent i t l ed t o t he s t r o n g e s tl e g i t i ma t e v i e w o f t h e e v i d e n c e a n d a l l r e a s o n a b l e i n f e r e n c e s wh i c h ma yb e d r a wn f ro m th a t e v id e n c e . C arruthers , 3 5 S .W .3 d a t 5 5 8 ; T u g g le , 639 S. W

. 2d at 914. Q ues t i ons conce r ni ng t he cr edi bi l i t yof the w i t nes s es , confl i ct s i n t r i al t es t i m ony , t he w ei ghtand val ue t o be gi ven the evi dence , and al l fac tual i s s ues r ai s ed byt he evi dence ar e r es ol ved byt he tr i er o f f a c t a n d n o t th is c o u rt

. Stat e v. B l and , 958 S. W

. 2 d 6 5 1, 659 ( T enn. 1997)

. W e do not a tte m p t to re -w e ig h o r r e -e v a lu a te th e e v id e n c e . S ta te v . R e id , 91 S. W

. 3d 247, 277 ( T enn. 2 0 0 2 ); B l and , 9 5 8 S

. W. 2 d a t 6 5 9

. L i k e wi s e , we d o n o t r e p l a c e t h e j u r y ’ s i n f e r e n c e s d r a wn f ro m th e c ir c u m s ta n tia l e v id e n c e w ith o u r o w n in f e re n c e s . See Stat e v. E lki ns , 102 S. W

. 3d 5 8 1 , 5 8 2 (T e n n . 2 0 0 3 ); R e id , 91 S. W

. 3d at277.
T o s us t ai n t he def

end a n t ’ s c o n v i c t i o n fors i m pl e pos s es s i on of m ar i j uana, t he s t at e had t o pr ove beyond a r easo n ab l e doubtt hatt he def endantknow i ngl y pos s es s ed a c ontr ol l ed s u b s ta n c e , u n le s s th e s u b s ta n c e w a s o b ta in e d v ia a p re s c ri p tio n o f a p ra c titio n e r. See T enn. C o d e A n n . § 3 9 -1 7 -4 1 8 (a ). A s fo r th e d e fe n d a n t’s co n v ictio n fo r ev a d in g a r r e s t, th e s ta te had t o pr ove beyond a r eas onabl e doubtt hatt he def endanti nt ent i onal l y f

l ed, by any m eans of l ocom ot i on, f

r om anyone thatt he def endantknew t o be l aw enfor cem enti f t he def endant ei t herknew t he of

f i cerw as at t em pt i ng t o arr es thi m or t he off i cerhad arr es t ed hi m , and the a rr e s t w a s la w fu l. See T e n n . C o d e A n n . § 3 9 -1 6 -6 0 3

. V i ew i n g the ev i dence i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he s t at e, w e conc l ude thatt he evi dence w as s uf

f i ci ent t o s uppor t t he def endant ’ s convi ct i ons . I n t hi s m at t er , O ffi cer R o b ertson test if

ied th at t h e d efe n d an t dro p p ed a b ag w h il e h e w as ru n n ing from the o ffi ce r. A n o th e r o ffic e r re c o v e re d th e b a g , a n d a fo re n sic sc ien tist d e ter m in e d th a t th e su b sta n c e in th e b a g w a s m arij u an a. A d d it ion all y , the d efe n d an t t esti fi ed that h e ra n from the o ffi ce rs aft er he had been han dcu ff ed. O ff i cer G i l l ey tes t i fi ed thathe st op ped t he d efendan tbecau se t he def endantw as notw ear i ng a s eatbel t , i ni t i at ed a fri sk b ecaus e the def endantw as ag it ated , an d h an d cu ffed the d efe n d an t aft er th e de fen d an t’ s fi rstatt em p t t o fl ee . T h e jury ’s ver di ctacc r edi t ed the s tat e’s w i t nes s es and r es ol ved any c onf l i ct s i n favorof

t he s t at e.-8-

H a rr is , 8 3 9 S .W .2 d a t 7 5

. T he s t at e pr oved t hatt he def endantpos s es s ed a ba g of m ar i j uana t hathe dr opped w hi l e f

l eei ng, i n handcuf

f s , f r om l aw enfor cem ent
. T her efor e, t he evi dence i s s uf f i ci entt o s uppor tt he def endant ’ s co n v ict i ons forevadi ng arr es tand pos s es s i on of m a ri ju a n a . T h e d e fe n d a n t is w ith o u t r e lie f a s to th is is s u e . C ons ecut i ve Se nt enci ng A n ap pell at e cou rt ’s revi ew of a c hall eng ed sentence i s de novo on t he re cor d w i t h a pr es um pt i on t hatt he tr i al cour t ’ s det erm i nat i ons ar e corr ect

. T enn. C o d e A nn. § 40- 35- 401( d)

. T he Sent enci ng C om m i s s i on C om m ent s t o this se cti o n of the s t atut e i ndi cat e the d ef en d an t bea rs th e b u rde n o f estab li sh ing that the s en tenc e is i m p rop er. W h en the tri al co u rt fol l ow s t he s t atut or ys ent enci ng pr ocedur e and gi ves due cons i der at i on t o t he fa ct or s and pr i nci pl es r el evantt o s ent enci ng, t hi s cour tm aynot di s turb t he s ent ence . Stat e v. C ar t er , 254 S. W

. 3d 335, 344- 45 ( T enn. 2008)

. A t r i al cour ti s al l ow ed gr eat erfl exi bi li ty in se tt i ng m i s demeanors ent ence s t han fe lon y sen te n c e s . S tate v. Johns on , 1 5 S

. W. 3 d 5 1 5 , 5 1 8 ( T e n n . Cr i m. Ap p . 1 9 9 9 )

. No se p a ra te s e n te n c in g h e a rin g is re q u ire d , tho u g h th e c o u rt m u st g iv e th e d e f e n d a n t a r eas onabl e opportun it y to be hea r d r egar di ng t he l ength and mannerof s ervi ce of t he s ent ence . T enn. C ode A nn. § 40- 35- 302( a)

. T her e i s no pr es um pt i on o f a mi ni m um s e n te n c e . Stat e v. H

um phr eys , 7 0 S .W .3 d 7 5 2 , 7 6 8 (T e n n . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 1 ).
T he s ent ence m us tbe s peci fi c and i n ac corda nce w i t h t he pr i nci pl es , purpos es , and g o a ls o f th e S e n ten c in g A c t. T e n n . C o d e A n n . § 4 0 -3 5 -3 0 2 (b ); Stat e v. P alm er , 902 S. W

. 2d 391, 393 ( T enn. 1995)

. A det erm i nat e s ent ence s houl d be s etw it h a p erc ent age of not gr eat er t han 75 per centt o be s erved i n confi nement

. T enn. C ode A nn. § 40- 35- 302( d)

. T he t r i al cour ts houl d cons i dert he enha ncementand m it igat i ng fac t or s w hen ca l cul at i ng t he p e rc e n ta g e o f

th e s e n te n c e to b e s e rv e d in c o n f in e m e n t. Id .; Stat e v. Troutm an , 979 S. W

. 2d 271, 274 ( T enn. 1998)

. T he tr i al cour ti s author i zed t o pl ace t he m i s demeananton pr obat i on eith er im m ed iat elyo r af ter a term o f c o n fin em en t. T en n . C o d e A n n . § 4 0 -35 -30 2 (e).
A cour tm ayor der s ent ence s t o run cons ecut i vel y i f t he courtfi nds bya pr eponder ance o f th e e v id e n c e th a t: ( 1) [t ] he def

endanti s a pr ofes s i onal cr i m i nal w ho has know i ngl ydevot ed s uch defe ndant ’ s l i fe t o cr i m i nal act s as a maj ors our ce of l i vel i hood; (2 ) [ t]h e d e f

e n d a n t is a n o f

f e n d e r w h o se re c o rd o f c rim in a l ac tiv ityis ext ens i ve;-9-

( 3 ) [ t ] h e d e f

e n d a n t i s a d a n g e r o u s m e n t a l l y a b n o r m a l p e r s o n s o d e c l a r e d b y a c o m p e ten t p sy c h iatris t w h o c o n c lu d e s a s a r e su lt o f a n in v e stig a tio n p rio r to s e n t e n c i n g t h a tt h e d e f

e n d a n t ’ s c r i m i n a l c o n d u c th a s b e e n c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y a p a ttern o f

re p e tit iv e o r c o m p u lsiv e b e h a v io r w ith h e e d les s in d if f e re n c e to con sequen ces; ( 4) [t ] he def

endant i s a dange r ous offe nderw hos e beha vi ori ndi cat es l i t t l e or no r egar d for hum an l i fe, and no hes i t at i on about comm i t t i ng a cr i m e i n w hi ch t he r i s k t o hum an l i fe i s hi gh; ( 5) [t ] he def

endant i s convi ct ed of t w o ( 2) or m or e s t atut or yoffe ns es i nvol vi ng s exual abus e of a m i nor w i t h cons i der at i on of the aggr avat i ng ci r cumst ance s ar i s i ng fr om t he r el at i ons hi p betw een t he defe ndant and vi ct i m orvi ct i m s , t he t i m e s pan of defe ndant ’ s undet ect ed s exual act i vi t y , t he natur e and s cope of t he s exual act s and t he ext ent of the r es i dual , phy s i cal and ment al damage t o t he v ictim o r v ictim s; ( 6) [t ] he defenda nti s s ent ence d foran off ens e comm i t t ed w hi l e on pr obat i on; o r (7 ) [ t] h e d e f

e n d a n t is s e n te n c e d f

o r c ri m in a l c o n te m p t.
T en n . C o d e A n n . § 4 0 -35 -11 5 (b); see al so S ta te v . Im

feld , 7 0 S

. W

. 3 d 6 9 8 , 7 0 8 (T en n . 2 0 0 2 ). T he gene r al pr i nci pl es of sent enci ng r equi r e t hat t he l ength of s ent ence be “j us t l ydes erved i n r el at i on t o t he s er i ous nes s of the off ens e” a nd “be no gr eat ert han thatdes erved fort he offe ns e comm i t t ed. ” S ta te v . Im feld , 70 S. W

. 3d 698, 708 ( T enn. 2002) ( ci t i ng T enn. C ode A n n . § § 4 0 -35 -10 2 (1) a n d -10 3 (2)).
T h e d e fe n d a n t ad m its th a t h e h a s m o re th a n ten m isd e m e a n o r c o n v ictio n s, tw o sta te felon y co n v ict ion s, an d a fe d era l f elon y co n v ict ion

. H e arg u es, ho w ev er, th at t h e tri al co u rt sh o u ld n o t hav e co n side red tr affic v iolati o n s w h en d eterm ining the e x tent o f t h e d efe n d an t’ s c rim in a l h is to ry . T h e trial c o u rt sp e c ifica lly g a v e n o w e ig h t to th e n u m e ro u s tra ffic vi ol at i ons on t he def

endant ’ s r ecor d. I n fact , of t he t en m i s dem eanor s cons i der ed by the tr i al cour t , onl y one - a s eat bel t vi ol at i on t hat t he def endant com m i t t ed w hi l e on pr obat i on - w as a tr af f i c vi ol at i on. T he otherni ne m i s dem eanor s w er e r el at ed t o ei t herm ar i j uana pos s es s i on o r e v a d in g a rre st, th e e x a c t o ffe n s e s fo r w h ich th e ju ry c o n v icte d th e d e fe n d a n t o f in th is m att er. T h e d efe n d an t also h as a total o f th ree felon y co n v ict ion s. W e find the d efe n d an t’ s a rg u m e n t th a t h e d o e s n o t h a v e a n e x te n s iv e c r im in a l h is to ry to b e u n p e rs u a s iv e . W e concl ude thatt he tr i al cour tdi d no terri n i m pos i ng cons ecut i ve s ent ence s . T he def endant is , th e re fo re , w ith o u t r e lie f a s to th is is s u e .-10- C oncl usi on B a s e d o n th e fo re g o in g re a s o n s , w e a ffir m th e ju d g m e n ts o f t h e tr ia l c o u rt
.

___________________________________ J

. C. M c L I N, J UDGE