State of Tennessee v. Brannon Harrison Shockley, E2016-00261-CCA-R3-CD

Defendant Brannon Shockley pleaded guilty to aggravated assault by strangulation (Class C felony) with an agreed four-year sentence; trial court to determine manner of service.
Victim was strangled while asleep; injuries included bruising and throat scratches; defendant had been intoxicated (marijuana, alcohol, and reported Xanax) and later damaged the victim's phone and car tire.
Presentence report showed long-term substance abuse beginning in adolescence, prior misdemeanor convictions, and a revoked judicial diversion for a prior drug offense.
Defense sought alternative sentencing (regular probation, enhanced probation, or community corrections); programs indicated they would accept Shockley if he completed inpatient treatment and lived in a halfway house.
Defendant declined lengthy inpatient wait (9+ months), expressed desire to reunite with his children and resume work, and stated willingness to accept outpatient treatment; court concluded he was more focused on early release than treatment.
Trial court denied alternative sentencing, finding Shockley not amenable to rehabilitation and that less-restrictive measures had been unsuccessfully applied; this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying alternative sentencing	State: denial proper due to defendant's substance history, lack of amenability, and failure to accept responsibility	Shockley: court punished him for expressing desire to reunite with children; alternatives available and programs would accept him	Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; court reasonably found defendant not amenable and less-restrictive measures had failed

State v. Caudle, 388 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2012) (standard of review for within-range sentences and presumption of reasonableness)
State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1991) (sentencing considers nature of offense and totality of circumstances)
State v. Trotter, 201 S.W.3d 651 (Tenn. 2006) (grounds permitting confinement when probation inappropriate)
State v. Souder, 105 S.W.3d 602 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002) (defendant bears burden to show probation serves public and defendant's interests)
State v. Dykes, 803 S.W.2d 250 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990) (standard on who must establish suitability for probation)
State v. Kendrick, 10 S.W.3d 650 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999) (community corrections eligibility discussion)