State of Tennessee v. Timothy Waymond Henderson
M2016-02122-CCA-R3-CD
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Jul 6, 2017Background
- Defendant Timothy Waymond Henderson pled guilty to sale and delivery of less than .5 grams of cocaine (merged convictions), Class C felonies; sentencing left to the trial court.
- Stated factual basis: a confidential informant, with audio/video and $200, purchased a white rock substance from Henderson at a predetermined location; substance collected as evidence.
- Presentence report showed multiple prior felony and numerous misdemeanor convictions, prior probation violations, long-term substance use, minimal recent employment, and child-support arrearage (~$13,800).
- Trial court found two enhancement factors: prior criminal history and failure to comply with conditions of prior community-based sentences; found one mitigating factor (no serious bodily injury) but gave it little weight.
- The trial court sentenced Henderson as a Range II, multiple offender to ten years (maximum in range) and denied alternative sentencing.
- Defendant appealed, arguing the sentence was excessive and alternative sentencing was improperly denied; the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by enhancing sentence above the minimum | State: within-range sentence appropriate after considering presentence report and sentencing principles | Henderson: sentence excessive given mitigating factors and statutory considerations | Affirmed: trial court properly applied enhancement/mitigating factors and acted within discretion (sentence reasonable) |
| Whether denial of alternative sentencing (probation) was erroneous | State: prior failures on community-based sentences and criminal history show alternatives inappropriate | Henderson: entitled to consideration for alternative sentencing; denial improper | Affirmed: record supports denial—past probation violations and inability to complete less-restrictive measures justified incarceration |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bise, 380 S.W.3d 682 (Tenn. 2012) (within-range sentences receive a presumption of reasonableness when proper sentencing principles are applied)
- State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335 (Tenn. 2008) (defendant not presumed favorable for alternative sentencing under revised Sentencing Act)
- State v. Goode, 956 S.W.2d 521 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997) (burden on defendant to show suitability for probation)
- State v. Boggs, 932 S.W.2d 467 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996) (probation eligibility requires demonstrating probation serves justice and public interest)
- State v. Bingham, 910 S.W.2d 448 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995) (no bright-line rule for probation; sentencing decisions are case-specific)