# FILED
October 15, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appe llate Court C lerk IN THE COURT OF CR IMINAL APPEALS OF T ENNESSEE AT JACKSON SEPTEMBER 1998 SESSION

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. No. 02C01-9805- CC-00135 Appellant, ) ) Madison County V. ) ) Honorable Whit LaFon, J udge ) WILLIAM EDWARD HUNT, ) (State Appeal - Probation Revocation) ) Appellee. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: John Knox Walkup Clifford K. McGown, Jr. Attorney General & Reporter Attorney at Law 113 North Court Square Marvin E. Clements, Jr. P.O. Box 26 Assistant Attorney General Waverly, TN 37185 Criminal Justice D ivision 425 Fifth Avenue North George Morton Googe Nashville, TN 37243-0493 District Public Def ender 227 West Baltimore Street James G. (Jerry) Woodall Jackson, TN 38301 District Attorney Gener al James W. Thompson Assistant District A

ttorney General 225 Martin Luther King Drive P.O. Box 2825 Jackson, TN 38302-2825

OPINION FILED: ___________________
REVERSED AND REMAN DED PAUL G. SUMMERS, Judge-2- O P I N I O N On April 1, 1996, the appellant, William Edward Hunt, was indicted by the Madison County Grand Jury for aggravated assault and poss ession of drug paraphernalia. On January 7, 1997, Hunt pled guilty to aggra vated assault. He was sentenced as a standard, R ange I offender and received a si x-year suspended sentence with intensi ve probation. On January 2, 1998, Hunt was arrested on a warrant for violation of his probation and held without bon d until his revocation hearing on March 10, 1998. At the revocation hea ring, the trial court revoked Hunt’s intensive probation, sentenced him to ti me served, and placed him on unsupervised probation. The state appeals, arguing th at the trial court’s decision was arbitrar

y and an abuse of discretion.

We reverse the decision below and remand for entry of an order reinstating Hunt’s intens ive probation.
In addition to the standard probation provisions, Hunt’s intensive probation required him to observe a 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. curfew ; to perform fifty hours of community service; to pay court costs, a fine, and restitution for the victim’s medical expenses; and to repor t to his probation officer weekly. On April 18, and June 24, 1997, Hunt’s probation o fficer filed probation v

iolation reports assert ing the following violations : failure to pay probation fees; absconding; failure to report; moving without per mission; failure to fol low instructions; fail ure to keep curfew; failure to pay costs, fine, and restitution; and failure to perform court ordered community serv ice. The testimony at H unt’s revocation hearing supported these allegations and w as, for the most part, uncont roverted. In fact, Hunt’s own testimony not only admits the violati ons, but reflects his dis regard of any attempt to comply with the conditions of his prob ation. For example, when asked why he did not report a change of address to his probati on officer, Hunt replied, “I was just saying forget about it because I wasn’t working and couldn’t-3- pay anything, so I just said I’d take it on my own and j ust forget about it.” In another question he was asked, “ Well what about the rest of your probation”? Hunt replied, “Well probably catch me anyway, like they did.”

While these violations m ay provide grounds for rev oking Hunt’s probation, the trial court’s ultimate remedy is perplexing. By revoking the intensive probation only to order unsupervised probation, the trial court essen tially rewarded Hunt for his vi olations. The only grounds offered by the trial court for its decision were the cou rt’s concern with the c ost of confinement and the expressed hope that the court w ould not have to deal with Hunt again.
In rewarding Hunt for his violations, we find that the trial court decisi on reaches an anomalous result, not envisioned by the senten cing guidelines. We therefore reverse the decision below and, utilizing our de novo review, order that Hunt’s supervised probati on be reinstated according to the prior conditions.-4- __________________________ PAUL G. SUMMERS, Judge
CONCUR:

_____________________________ DAVID H. WELLES, Judge

_____________________________ JOE G. RILEY, Judge