Opinion
Nos. M2002-00803-CCA-R3-CD.
Filed September 25, 2003.
Circuit Court for Bedford County; No. 14999 Circuit Court for Marshall County Nos. 14816, 14818, 14829, 14830, 14833.
ORDER
The appellant, Shawn Michael Ward, entered guilty pleas to numerous burglary and theft charges. The parties agreed that the question of sentencing would be left entirely to the trial court. The trial court ordered some of the numerous sentences to run concurrently and others consecutively for an effective sentence of 21.6 years as a Range II multiple offender. In this appeal the appellant contends his sentence is excessive. Because we find that the trial judge considered appropriate enhancing and mitigating factors and that consecutive sentencing is appropriate, we affirm the judgments of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
Although it appears the appellant experienced a troubled childhood and adolescence, he also has an extensive criminal background. He was on bond when most of the instant offenses were committed, he has a history of unwillingness to comply with the conditions of a community release sentence. The appellant committed acts in the past that would constitute felonies if committed by an adult. Two of the instant burglary offenses were committed on school property. These are all applicable enhancement factors which justify the lengths of the appellant's individual sentences. See generally Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-114.
The appellant stipulated at sentencing that he qualified as a Range II, multiple offender. The appellant has an extensive record of criminal activity which justifies the imposition of consecutive sentences. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(2). Under these circumstances we cannot say the trial judge erred in imposing consecutive sentences.
Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Because it appears to the Court that appellant is indigent, costs will be taxed to the State.