Assigned on Briefs August 5, 2014
Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County Nos. 12-01502 & 12-01503 Lee V. Coffee, Judge
James Edward Thomas, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Marcus Moore.
Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Jonathan H. Wardle, Assistant Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; and Katie Ratton, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Roger A. Page, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Thomas T. Woodall and Alan E. Glenn, JJ., joined.
ROGER A. PAGE, JUDGE
At appellant's July 30, 2013 guilty plea submission hearing, the State offered the following factual bases for the pleas:
[O]n March 9th of 2011, [appellant] broke into Republic Coffee . . . He was linked to this burglary based on the video surveillance taken at Republic Coffee and, also, admitted to this burglary. [He] admitted to breaking into Republic Coffee through the top window, breaking into it with an ashtray, breaking the glass, going into the coffee house and stealing muffins and soda . . . .
[T]he facts of [the second case] are, on March 15th of 2011, [appellant] broke into Central Wine and Spirits using the same sort of way in the sense that he broke out a top glass of the exterior of the building. He broke into the building, which was also caught on surveillance, stole a bottle of liquor and left the building the same way he came in. He was questioned . . . about the Central Wine and Spirits burglary, to which he confessed. He was also wearing during his confession the exact same Kellogg's jacket that he had on in the video of Central Wine and Spirits.
The trial court advised appellant of his rights, and appellant indicated that he understood his rights and wished to waive them and enter the guilty pleas. As part of the plea agreement, the parties submitted the issue of sentencing to the trial court for determination.
The trial court held a sentencing hearing on October 18, 2013. The court noted that the State had filed a notice of intent to seek enhanced punishment and a motion for consecutive sentencing. The presentence report was entered into evidence, and no witnesses were presented.
Appellant's criminal history as outlined in the presentence report included juvenile adjudications for shoplifting and theft-related offenses, as well as three drug offenses and a grand larceny offense that would have been felonies if they had been committed by an adult. His adult record contained felony convictions for burglary (seven counts); theft (three counts); vandalism (one count); and possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell (one count). Appellant had also amassed thirty-six misdemeanor convictions for the following offenses: fifteen theft convictions for criminal trespass; seven convictions for theft of property; four convictions for assault; three convictions for vandalism; two convictions for possession of drug paraphernalia; two convictions for evading arrest; and one conviction each for aggravated criminal trespass, illegal possession of a weapon, and disorderly conduct.
With regard to sentence alignment,  the trial court considered the purposes and principles of the sentencing act and concluded that appellant was a professional criminal who had devoted himself to criminal acts as a major source of livelihood and that he had a record that showed extensive criminal history and convictions. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(1), (2). The trial court did, however, consider in appellant's favor that he pleaded guilty and took responsibility for his crimes. The trial court sentenced ...