WPC # VU:a % 0(w@4  , 4 0J< 0T 0^ 0h8 0r 0| 0 0 1u U, 0dE U, U* B) DC( AMk Bv~v1 D3 0@7 AOw 0D D/ BHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 ,rAZ"Arial RegularX($ UDUDDӀGav 3|x2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd-#C << G d !!  !   YYY FILED!XMay15,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &  Xd&#  Xd#!    \RA'\ћ7XXdd7ќL$&#;+'h|`  `Lߛ@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ WESTERNSECTIONATNASHVILLESTATEOFTENNESSEE,EXREL )ADRIENNEA.HARDISON,  )      ) 󜀀Petitioner/Appellee, )BedfordJuvenileNo.1961      )VS.      )AppealNo.01A019506JV00262      )KENNETHK.GARRETT,   )      )  Defendant/Appellant. ) @ APPEALFROMTHEJUVENILECOURTOFBEDFORDCOUNTY@ ATSHELBYVILLE,TENNESSEE@ THEHONORABLEW.NOWLINTAYLOR,JUDGE ROBERTS.PETERSPATRICIADIANECOOKSWAFFORD,PETERS&PRIEST Winchester,TennesseeAttorneysforAppellant CHARLESW.BURSONAttorneyGeneral&ReporterJAMESH.TUCKER,JR.AssistantAttorneyGeneral Nashville,TennesseeAttorneyforAppellee AFFIRMED          ALANE.HIGHERS,J.CONCUR:DAVIDR.FARMER,J.HOLLYKIRBYLILLARD,J.  Appellee,AdrienneHardison,filedaPetitiontoEstablishPaternityintheJuvenile7XXdXXd7CourtofBedfordCounty,namingappellant,RobertK.Garrett,asthenaturalfatherofherminorchild,AngelMichelleHardison.Followingahearing,thetrialcourtorderedDNA/bloodtestingofthepartiesandoftheminorchild.ThebloodtestsϜsubsequentlyestablishedtoa99.58%probabilitythatappellantisthenaturalfatherofthechild. AppellantcontendsthathemadeanoralobjectiontotheintroductionofthetestresultsonthebasisthattheywereincompleteatahearingheldonAugust25,1994.Accordingtoappellant,thetrialcourtruledfromthebenchthatthetestswereinadmissible.ItisundisputedthatappellantmadenowrittenobjectiontotheϜadmissibilityofthebloodtestsandthatnoorderwasenteredfollowingtheAugusthearing.̜ AnotherhearinginthematterwassetforDecember12,1994.ThestateintervenedinthesuitandfiledaNoticeofIntenttoAdmitReportofParentageTestingintoevidence.Inresponse,appellantfiledaMotiontoEnforcePriorRuling,arguingthatthetrialjudgehadpreviouslyruledthatthetestswereinadmissible.Thetrialcourtadmittedthebloodtestsintoevidenceoverappellantsobjection.Followingthehearing,thetrialjudgeheldthatappellantwasthenaturalfatheroftheminorchildandϜorderedhimtopaychildsupportintheamountof$78.00perweek.ThetrialcourtalsoϜdeniedappellantsMotiontoEnforcePriorRulingbecausenoorderhadbeenenteredpursuanttothepriorhearinginAugust. Appellanthasraisedtwoissuesonappeal,whichare:(1)whetherthetrialcourterredinadmittingthebloodtestsintoevidencewhenthecourthadpreviouslyheldsuchteststobeinadmissibleandwhennoproperfoundationwaslaid;and(2)Ϝwhetherappellantwasdenieddueprocessoflawbecausehewasnotaffordedafairandcompletehearing. T.C.A.247112(b)(2)(A)provides:8 8 Inanyproceedingwherethepaternityofanindividualisatissue,thewrittenreportofblood,genetic,orDNAtestresultsbythetestingagentconcerningthepaternityisadmissiblewithouttheneedforanyfoundationtestimonyorotherproofoftheauthenticityoraccuracyofthetestunlessawrittenobjectionisfiledwiththecourtandserveduponallpartiesthirty(30)dayspriortothehearing.T.C.A.247112(b)(2)(A)(Supp.1995).̜ AppelleereliesontheabovestatuteinsupportofherpositionthatthebloodϜtestswereproperlyadmittedbecauseappellantfailedtofileawrittenobjectiontothe͜admissibilityoftheteststhirtydayspriortothehearing.AppellantrespondsthathewasunabletofileanobjectionbecausehisattorneydidnotreceiveacopyofthebloodtestresultsuntilJuly26,1994,whichwaslessthanthirtydaysbeforethehearing. WeagreewithappelleethatT.C.A.247112controlsthecasesubjudice.Thestatuteprovidesthatbloodtestsareadmissibleintoevidenceunlessawrittenobjectionisfiled30dayspriortothehearing.Appellantfailedtofileandservesuchanobjectionwithintheprescribedtimelimit.Appellanthadampleopportunitytofileamotionforcontinuancepriortothedatesetfortheoriginalhearing,butfailedtodoso.Consequently,thetestsareadmissibleintoevidencewithoutfoundationtestimonyandwithoutproofregardingauthenticityoraccuracy.T.C.A.247112(b)(2)(A)(Supp.1995).Accordingly,appellantsfirstcontentioniswithoutmerit. Appellantsassertionthathedidnotreceiveafullandfairhearingissimilarlywithoutmerit.Noverbatimtranscriptoftheproceedingswasfiledwiththiscourt,nordoestherecordcontainaproperstatementoftheevidence.Wheretherecordisincompleteanddoesnotcontainatranscriptoftheproceedingsrelevanttoanissuepresentedforreview,thiscourtisprecludedfromconsideringtheissue.J.C.Bradford&Co.V.MartinConstr.Co.,576S.W.2d586,587(Tenn.1979).InsofarasappellantattemptstoraiseaconstitutionalchallengetoT.C.A.247112,itiswellestablishedthatconstitutionalissuesmaynotberaisedforthefirsttimeonappeal,unlessthestatuteisclearlyandblatantlyunconstitutional.Lawrencev.Stanford,655S.W.2d927,929(Tenn.1983).WeperceivenosuchblatantunconstitutionalityinT.C.A.247112. Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsonappealaretaxedtoappellant,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.        򀀀        HIGHERS,J.CONCUR:򀀀FARMER,J.򀀀LILLARD,J.