# FILED March 11, 1999 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Cou rt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L APPEALS OF T ENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE JANUARY SESSION, 1999 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9804- CC-00176 ) Appellee, ) ) ) MARSHALL COUNTY VS. ) ) HON. CHARLES LEE CHARLES HAYES, ) JUDGE ) Appe llant. ) (Sentencing)

ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUI T COURT OF MARSHALL COUNTY FOR THE APPELLANT : FOR THE APPELLEE : CLIFFORD K . McGOWN, JR. JOHN KNOX WALKUP 113 North Court Squ are Attorney Generaland Reporter Wa verly, TN 37185 DARYL J. BRAND Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenu e North Nashvill e, TN 37243 MIKE McCOWEN Distri ct Attorney General P.O. Box 45 Fayettevi lle, TN 37334 OPINION FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED IN ACCOR DANCE W ITH RULE 20 DAVID H. WELLES , JUD GE-2- 

# OPINION

The Defendant pleaded gui lty to and was c onvic ted of two counts of aggravated burglary, t wo count s of theft, an d one c ount of ev ading a rrest. Sentencing was left to the discr etion of t he trialjudge. On appeal, the Defendant argues that his sentence is excessive. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the trial cou rt.
For the aggravate d burglary convicti ons (Class C fel onies) the Defendant was sent en ced as a Range III persiste nt offender to consecutive terms of fourt een years, six m onths a nd thirteen years, six m onths. O ne of his th eft con victi ons was a Class D felon y for whi ch he was sentenced as a car ee r offender to twelve ye ars to be serve d conc urrently with his burglary sentences. His other thef

t convict ion was a Class E felony, for which he was sentenced t o six years as a ca reer offend er to be served consecutive to his aggr avated burglary sentences. For his misdemean or evading arr est convic

tion, he was sentenced to a concurre nt term of el even months and twent y-nine days . His effective sentence for the se crimes w as thirty-four ye a rs. All sentences w ere ordered serv ed co nsecutively to the sentence he was servi ng on parole at the time he comm itted these offenses .
The tri al judge or

dered the sente nces served consecut ively because h e found that the D efenda nt is an o ffende r whos e reco rd of crim inal ac tivity is extensive. The Defendant does not ch allenge t his fi nding. It appears from the record that he has over thirt y felony convicti ons, incl uding at least ten burgl aries,-3-

six thefts, numerous other property offenses and two fel ony escape convictions. He had b een re lease d on p arole just si x months prior to committi ng the offens es in the case sub judice . The trial co urt found the se ntenc es we re reas onab ly related to the severity of the offens es and were necessary to protect s ociety f rom the Defe ndan t’s further criminal activity. The rec ord supports t hese findi ngs. The record also refl ects that the tri al court considered thesentencing princip als and all relevant fa cts and c ircums tances .
We conc lu de thatno erro r of law re quiring a rever sal of th e judg men t is apparenton the re cord. Ba sed up on a tho rough re ading o f the record , the briefs of the parti es, and the law governi ng the issues pr esented for r

eview, t he judgment of the trial cou rt is affirmed in accord ance w ith Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeal s of Tennessee.

____________________________________ DAVID H. WELLES , JUD GE
CONCUR:

___________________________________ JOHN H. PEAY, JUDGE

___________________________________ JERRY L . SMI TH, J UDGE