 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Holloway1/15/1999
The appellant, George Rudolf Holloway, referred herein as the defendant, appeals as of right from the judgment of the Anderson County Criminal Court denying probation. The defendant was convicted of two counts of sale of cocaine, a Class C felony. The defendant entered two pleas of guilty and agreed to three-year concurrent sentences and a $2,000 fine for each count. The defendant requested a probation hearing. At the Conclusion of the sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the defendant an alternative sentence and ordered the defendant to confinement in the Department of Correction.
The defendant presents two issues for our review: (1) Whether the trial court failed to consider relevant sentencing principles and thus the standard of review for denial of probation is de novo with no presumption of correctness; and (2) the trial court abused its discretion by failing to sentence the defendant in accordance with the Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989.
After a review of the entire record, briefs of the parties, and appropriate law, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Anderson County Grand Jury indicted the defendant in two counts for the two separate sales of cocaine less than one-half gram on February 14, 1996. On June 18, 1997, the defendant entered two guilty pleas to the sale of cocaine and requested a sentencing hearing to determine the merits of an alternative sentence, more specifically intensive probation. The defendant sought probation at the sentencing hearing.
Wade Adcock, state probation officer, testified he prepared a presentence report on the defendant after a personal interview. As part of the defendant's personal history, Adcock found a lengthy prior criminal record. Between May, 1988 and July, 1997, the defendant had eleven convictions for public intoxication. On September 15, 1995, the defendant was convicted of the possession of a counterfeit controlled substance and was placed on probation. The defendant's other prior convictions include: three convictions for driving on a revoked license, three convictions for criminal trespass, one conviction for vandalism, two convictions for driving under the influence of intoxicants, one conviction for theft less than $500, and one conviction for reckless driving. At the time of the hearing, the defendant had sentencing for a theft offense and a hearing for revocation of probation pending in Anderson County. In Knox County, the defendant had pending offenses of driving under the influence of an intoxicant and driving on a revoked license.
Adcock testified the defendant's employment was sporadic and described the defendant as a self-employed "shade tree mechanic." Although the defendant reported he lived with his parents, Adcock could not verify this information with the defendant's mother.
As part of the defendant's history, Adcock determined the defendant served in the U.S. Marine Corp from 1971 to 1976, but was dishonorably discharged due to drug charges and a sexual assault case. The defendant received alcohol/drug counseling in West Virginia in 1985, but rehabilitation was unsuccessful based on his current record. The defendant admitted to using cocaine a week prior to the interview with Adcock. Adcock did not believe the defendant could successfully complete a drug/alcohol treatment program. When the defendant committed the instant offenses, he was on probation stemming from a conviction for possession of a counterfeit controlled substance. Adcock testified Anderson County has an intensive supervised probation program.
David H. Beams, Oak Ridge Police Chief, testified he has known the defendant since 1970
Page 1 2 3 4 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|