ÿWPC¿ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0lH 0D´ 0Jø 0TB 0^– 0hô 0r\ 0|Î 0†J 0Ð 1u` 0dÕ U>9B)wDC  AMãU*0ìZ‹FzÑîKv~9 D3· BêvÓ 0@Ú AOÆi 0D/ D/s B¢˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ S T U V W£XYZÓ€fh·‚^!íÿÿ3|xj((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial âÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌò òOctober€11,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€$ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝRule€17€sets€forth€the€following€visitation€schedule:ÌÌà8 àà àa.à à1st€and€3rd€weekends€from€Friday€at€6:00€PM€to€Sunday€atÏ6:00PM.ÌÌà8 àà àb.à àDecember€25€at€6:00€PM€to€January€1€at€6:00€PM.ÌÌà8 àà àc.à àJuly€1„15€each€year.ÌÌà8 àà àd.à àThanksgiving€holidays,€from€Wednesday€at€6:00€PM€to€Sunday€atÏ6:00€PM.ÌÌà8 àà àe.à àThe€childððs€spring€vacation.ÌÌà8 àà àf.à àPhone€communication€at€such€times€and€with€such€frequency€as€isÏreasonable.ÌÌà8 àà àg.à àAll€exchanges€of€the€child€shall€be€done€between€6:00€PM€and€6:15ÏPM,€with€the€actual€transportation€done€by€that€parent€who€is€receiving€the€child.ÌÌKnox€County€Cir.€Ct.€Div.€4€R.€17(A).Ì pÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝRule€13(e)€provides€that:ÌÌà8 àFindings€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€setÏaside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€finding€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guiltÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ÌÌT.R.A.P.€13(e).Ì äÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Father€and€his€attorney€even€agreed€at€trial€that€the€Father€would€not€smoke€aroundÏthe€child€while€out€of€doors.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h++++'ÿÿdxd dStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  Ý›Ñ\R AØ'\ÑÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÞ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌœ›à@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌó óà à)ò òÌBARBARA€ANN€SMITH,ó óà à)à àKnox€County€Circuit€CourtÌà à)à àDiv.€IV,€No.€65563Ì€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellee.à à)Ìà à)̜ـ€ÙßR€#%"A1-j|ž` Å `€€@ÿRß›VS.à à)à àC.€A.€NO.€03A01„9603„CV„00078Ìà à)Ìò òMARION€HOWARD€SMITH,ó óà à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Circuit€Court€of€Knox€County€at€Knoxville.Ìò òHonorable€Bill€Swann,€Judge€€ó óÌÌÌÌò òJeffrey€L.€Halló ó,€Jacksboro,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellant.ÌÌÌÌò òJ.€Elaine€Burkeó ó,€Knoxville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌÌÌà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òLILLARD,€J.€ó ó:€œ(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ›ÌÓÓÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓœà àDefendant„Appellant,€Marion€Howard€Smith€(ð ðFatherðð),€appeals€the€trial€courtððsÏorder€finding€the€Father€guilty€of€two€counts€of€criminal€contempt€and€suspending€the€FatherððsÏvisitation€privileges€with€the€partiesðð€minor€child.ÌÌà àThe€parties€were€divorced€in€June€1995.€€Pursuant€to€the€partiesðð€agreement,€theÏfinal€divorce€decree€awarded€sole€custody€of€the€partiesðð€minor€daughter€to€Plaintiff„Appellee,ÏBarbara€Ann€Smith€(ð ðMotherðð).€€The€Father€was€granted€visitation€rights€as€set€forth€in€the€trialÏcourtððs€Local€Rule€17.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Knox€County€Cir.€Ct.€Div.€4€R.€17.× ƒ& ××  ×€€The€decree€also€adopted€RuleÏ17's€restriction€against€exposing€children€to€tobacco€smoke:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àCircuit€Court€Division€Four€takes€judicial€notice€of€theÏdangers€of€second„hand,€or€passive,€smoke.€€Parents€will€notÍexpose€their€children€to€tobacco€smoke€in€enclosed€spaces,€or€allowÏothers€to€expose€them€to€it.€€That€means€NO€SMOKING€indoors€orÏin€vehicles€with€the€children€present.€€It€means€not€allowing€them€toÏbe€in€the€presence€of€others€who€do€so.€€It€means€parents€must€keepÏthe€air€in€their€home€clean.ÌÌà8 àà àIf€children€are€exposed€to€smoke,€it€will€be€strong€evidenceÏthat€the€exposing€parent€does€not€take€good€care€of€them.ÌÌÓÓÌKnox€County€Cir.€Ct.€Div.€4€R.€17(B).€€Further,€the€decree€made€permanent€certain€injunctionsÏcontained€in€the€courtððs€previous€orders,€including€one€enjoining€the€parties€ð ðfrom€coming€aboutÏthe€other€or€their€home€or€place€of€employment€or€from€any€telephone€contact€with€the€other.ðð€€ÌÌà àWithin€days€of€entry€of€the€final€divorce€decree,€the€Mother€filed€a€motion€forÏcontempt€alleging,€òòò òinter€aliaó óóó,€that€the€Father€was€in€contempt€of€the€trial€courtððs€previous€ordersÏbecause€the€Father€came€to€the€Motherððs€home€on€June€6,€1995,€and€because€the€Father€smokedÏaround€the€child€and€subjected€her€to€cigarette€smoke€during€visitation.€€Regarding€the€firstÏincident,€the€Mother€testified€that€she€and€the€child€were€returning€home€between€9:30€and€9:45Ïp.m.€on€June€6,€1995,€when€the€Mother€observed€the€Father€coming€out€of€the€carport€of€herÏcondominium.€€The€Father€proceeded€ð ðdown€the€street€with€his€hands€in€his€pockets€not€ten,Ïtwenty€feet€away€from€[the€Mother]€in€the€direct€beam€of€[her]€headlights.ðð€€The€Mother€testified:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àAnd€I€kind€of€followed€along,€and€[the€Father]€duckedÏbehind€the€building€across€from€me,€and€I€turned€the€car€aroundÏgoing€back€towards€my€condominium.€€And€he€ran€across€in€frontÏof€the€headlight€again,€coming€the€other€direction.€€So€I€saw€himÏtwice.ÌÌà8 àà à....ÌÌà8 àà à...€€I€then€was€curious€because€he€was€on€foot,€so€I€droveÏaround€to€the€front€entrance€of€the€condominium€and€then€observedÏhim€in€his€vehicle,€in€his€car€[a€white€Geo€Tracker].€€ÌÌÓÓÌà àRegarding€the€childððs€exposure€to€cigarette€smoke,€the€Mother€testified€that,€whenÏthe€child€returned€from€visitation€with€the€Father,€ð ð[h]er€clothes€and€her€hair€will€smell€likeÍcigarettes,€and€sometimes€even€the€clothes€in€her€overnight€bag€will€smell.ðð€€One€time€the€childÏreturned€from€visitation€with€a€cigarette€burn€on€her€hand.€€The€child€told€the€Mother€that€sheÏreceived€the€burn€when€she€reached€for€the€Fatherððs€hand,€not€realizing€that€the€Father€had€a€litÏcigarette€in€his€hand.€€The€childððs€maternal€grandfather,€James€R.€Martin,€testified€that,€severalÏtimes€when€he€picked€up€the€child€from€visitation,€he€ð ðcould€smell€heavy€smoke€on€her€clothing.ðð€ÏNo€witnesses€had€observed€the€Father€smoking€around€the€child€in€an€enclosed€area,€but€once€theÏgrandfather€saw€the€Father€smoking€as€the€Father€walked€with€the€child€across€the€parking€lot€fromÏhis€car.ÌÌà àThe€Father€denied€being€in€the€area€of€the€Motherððs€condominium€on€the€evening€ofÏJune€6,€1995.€€The€Father€testified€that€he€was€near€Harrison,€Tennessee,€making€a€sales€callÏbetween€the€hours€of€7:10€and€9:30€p.m.,€and€he€introduced€a€Customer€Appointment€Form€toÏcorroborate€his€testimony.€€The€Father€also€produced€telephone€records€showing€that€he€tried€toÏcall€the€child€at€8:05€p.m.€on€June6,€1995,€from€Georgetown,€Tennessee.€€The€Father€insisted€thatÏhe€could€not€have€traveled€from€Georgetown€to€the€Motherððs€condominium€between€8:05€and€9:45Ïp.m.€€ÌÌà àThe€Father€also€denied€smoking€around€the€child€in€enclosed€spaces.€€The€FatherÏtestified€that€he€only€smoked€around€the€child€in€open€places,€but€he€stated€that,€in€the€future,€heÏwould€not€smoke€in€front€of€the€child€in€any€type€of€area,€whether€inside€or€outside.€€The€FatherÏfrequently€asked€others€not€to€smoke€around€the€child.€€The€Father€admitted€taking€the€child€to€aÏformer€wifeððs€house,€where€several€family€members€smoked,€but€the€Father€stated€that€they€did€notÏsmoke€in€the€house€when€the€Father€took€the€child€over€there.€€ÌÌà àIn€its€subsequent€order,€the€trial€court€found€the€Father€guilty€of€two€counts€ofÏcriminal€contempt.€€Specifically,€the€trial€court€found€ð ðthat€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€the€fatherÏhas€exposed€the€child€repeatedly€to€cigarette€smoke,€either€he€is€smoking€around€the€child€or€he€isÍallowing€others€to€do€so,€or€both.ðð€€The€trial€court€also€found€ð ð[t]hat€[the€Father]€came€about€[theÏMother]€on€June€6,€1995,€in€violation€of€the€specific€strictures€of...€the€partiesðð€Final€Decree.ðð€ÏThe€trial€court€sentenced€the€Father€to€ten€days€incarceration€for€each€contempt€conviction€butÏsuspended€eighteen€days€of€the€total€twenty„day€sentence.€€The€trial€court€additionally€ordered€thatÏthe€Father€ð ðshall€have€no€further€co„parenting€time...€with€the€partiesðð€minor€child€until€the€CourtÏis€persuaded€that€[the€Father]€intends€to€protect€the€child€from€any€and€all€exposure€to€tobaccoÏsmoke€in€enclosed€spaces€or€elsewhere.ðð€€Finally,€the€trial€courtððs€order€broadened€Local€Rule17'sÏprohibition€against€smoking€around€the€child€in€enclosed€spaces€to€prohibit€ð ðboth€parents€fromÏexposing€the€child€to€tobacco€smoke€inside,€[and]€in€the€out€of€doors,€by€themselves€or€othersÏaround€the€child.ðð€€ÌÌà àOn€appeal,€the€Father€presents€the€following€issues€for€review:ÌÌÓÓà à1.à8 àWas€[the€Father]€guilty€of€criminal€contempt€forÏviolating€the€trial€courtððs€local€rule€17€(as€to€smokingÏin€the€presence€of€his€child)?ÌÌà à2.à8 àWas€[the€Father]€guilty€of€criminal€contempt€forÏviolating€an€injunction€forbidding€him€from€comingÏabout€[the€Mother]€or€her€residence?ÌÌà à3.à8 àShould€[the€Fatherððs]€visitation€privileges€with€hisÏminor€child€be€restored?ÌÌÓÓÌà àWe€begin€by€reviewing€the€standard€of€proof€to€be€applied€in€criminal€contemptÏcases.€€Persons€charged€with€criminal€contempt€are€presumed€innocent,€and€the€prosecution€has€theÏburden€of€proving€them€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€ò òòòThigpen€v.€Thigpenó óóó,€874€S.W.2dÏ51,€53€(Tenn.€App.€1993);€ò òòòStorey€v.€Storeyó óóó,€835€S.W.2d€593,€599€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€OnceÏthey€are€convicted€of€criminal€contempt,€however,€ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àPersons...€lose€their€presumption€of€innocence,Ïò òòòRobinson€v.€Air€Draulics€Engððg€Co.ó óóó,€214€Tenn.€30,€37,€377ÏS.W.2d€908,€912€(1964),€and€bear€the€burden€of€overcoming€theirÍpresumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€ò òòòNuclear€Fuel€Servs.,€Inc.€v.ÏLocal€No.€3„677,€Oil,€Chem.,€&€Atomic€Workers€IntððlÏUnionó óóó,€719€S.W.2d€550,€552€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1986).€ÏAppellate€courts€do€not€review€the€evidence€in€a€light€favorable€toÏthe€accused€and€will€reverse€criminal€contempt€convictions€onlyÏwhen€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€trier„of„factððsÏfinding€of€contempt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ÌÌÓÓÌò òòòThigpen€v.€Thigpenó óóó,€874€S.W.2d€at€53€(citing€T.R.A.P.€13(e)).ÌÌà àApplying€this€standard,€we€must€affirm€the€Fatherððs€two€convictions€for€criminalÏcontempt€in€this€case.€€Regarding€the€contempt€conviction€for€coming€about€the€Motherððs€home,Ïthe€Mother€positively€identified€the€Father€as€being€the€person€she€observed€coming€out€of€herÏcarport€€between€9:30€and€9:45€p.m.€on€June€6,€1995.€€Although€the€Father€testified€that€he€was€inÏHarrison,€Tennessee,€that€evening€and€could€not€have€reached€the€Motherððs€home€by€9:45p.m.,Ïthe€trial€court€obviously€did€not€find€the€Fatherððs€testimony€credible.€€We€conclude€that€theÏevidence€was€sufficient€to€support€this€criminal€contempt€conviction.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€T.R.A.P.€13(e).× ƒ' ××  ×ÌÌà àThe€Father€also€denied€exposing€the€child€to€cigarette€smoke€in€enclosed€spaces,€butÏthe€Mother€testified€that,€when€the€child€returned€from€visitation€with€the€Father,€her€clothes€andÏhair€smelled€like€cigarettes€and€that€sometimes€even€the€clothes€in€the€childððs€overnight€bag€smelledÏlike€smoke.€€The€grandfather€corroborated€the€Motherððs€testimony,€stating€that€he€had€smelledÏð ðheavy€smokeðð€on€the€childððs€clothing€when€she€returned€from€visitation.€€We€conclude€that€thisÏevidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€Father€had€exposed€the€child€toÏcigarette€smoke€in€enclosed€spaces€in€violation€of€Local€Rule€17€and€the€final€divorce€decree.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÍò òòòBowman€v.€Stateó óóó,€362€S.W.2d€255,€256€(Tenn.€1962)€(holding€that,€if€there€is€circumstantialÏevidence€in€record€to€support€conclusion€that€defendant€was€guilty€of€criminal€contempt€beyondÏreasonable€doubt,€then€appellate€court€is€not€warranted€in€disturbing€final€judgment).ÌÌà àThe€Father€additionally€argues€that€his€criminal€contempt€conviction€for€exposingÏthe€child€to€cigarette€smoke€should€be€reversed€on€the€ground€that€Local€Rule€17€is€invalid.€€TheÏFather€first€challenges€the€validity€of€Rule€17€by€contending€that€the€hazards€of€second„handÏtobacco€smoke€are€not€sufficiently€established€to€be€the€proper€subject€of€judicial€notice.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÏT.R.E.€201(b).€€Alternatively,€the€Father€contends€that€Rule€17€is€unconstitutional€because€it€isÏoverbroad€and€because€it€violates€a€parentððs€constitutionally€protected€right€of€privacy.€€ò òòòSeeóóó ó€Tenn.ÏConst.€art.€I,€ðð8.ÌÌà àWe€need€not€reach€the€merits€of€these€arguments€because€the€Father€has€waived€thisÏissue€for€purposes€of€appellate€review€by€failing€to€challenge€the€validity€of€Local€Rule€17€at€theÏtrial€court€level.€€òòò òSeeó óóó€òòò òBarnhill€v.€Barnhilló óóó,€826€S.W.2d€443,€458€(Tenn.€App.€1991)€(holdingÏthat€issue€was€waived€for€purposes€of€appellate€review€where€husband€failed€to€argue€at€trial€courtÏlevel€that€allowing€non„lawyer€judge€to€decide€custody€and€property€issues€constituted€denial€ofÏdue€process€and€equal€protection);€ò òòòDement€v.€Kittsó óóó,€777€S.W.2d€33,€35„36€(Tenn.€App.€1989)Ï(holding€that€defendant€waived€issue€of€constitutionality€of€statute€by€failing€to€raise€it€below€whereÏprovision€challenged€on€appeal€was€not€facially€unconstitutional).€€At€trial,€both€the€Father€and€theÏFatherððs€attorney€affirmatively€agreed€that€the€Father€would€abide€by€the€smoking€restrictions€ofÏRule€17.× ƒ( ××  ×€€Further,€even€if€the€trial€court€was€without€authority€to€impose€these€restrictions,€weÏnote€that€the€final€decree€indicates€that€Father€specifically€agreed€to€be€bound€by€the€smokingÏrestrictions€of€Rule€17€in€the€partiesðð€marital€dissolution€agreement.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòPenland€v.€Penlandó óóó,Ï521€S.W.2d€222,€224€(Tenn.€1975)€(holding€that,€although€father€had€no€legal€duty€to€supportÍchildren€beyond€age€of€majority,€such€obligation€was€valid€contractual€area€for€parties€in€divorceÏproceeding);€ò òòòHolt€v.€Holtó óóó,€751€S.W.2d€426,€428€(Tenn.€App.€1988)€(stating€that€parties€toÏdivorce€proceeding€ð ðshould€be€free€to€obligate€themselves€by€agreement€beyond€what€the€courtsÏcould€order€them€to€do€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð).€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€Father€may€notÏchallenge€the€validity€of€Rule17€for€the€first€time€on€appeal.ÌÌà àThe€most€troubling€issue€in€this€case€is€whether€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretionÏin€suspending€the€Fatherððs€visitation€privileges€based€solely€on€evidence€that€the€Father€hadÏexposed€the€child€to€cigarette€smoke.€€Decisions€involving€child€custody€and€visitation€areÏð ðpeculiarly€within€the€broad€discretion€of€the€trial€judge,...€and...€will€not€ordinarily€beÏreversed€absent€some€abuse€of€that€discretion.ðð€€ò òòòSuttles€v.€Suttlesó óóó,€748€S.W.2d€427,€429Ï(Tenn.€1988)€(citing€ò òòòEdwards€v.€Edwardsó óóó,€501€S.W.2d€283,€291€(Tenn.€App.€1973)).€ÏAlthough€the€law€clearly€favors€the€noncustodial€parentððs€right€to€reasonable€visitation,€the€trialÏcourt€may€limit€or€eliminate€visitation€rights€if€the€record€contains€definite€evidence€that€the€exerciseÏof€such€rights€will€jeopardize€the€childððs€physical€or€moral€well„being.€€ò òòòSuttles€v.€Suttlesó óóó,€748ÏS.W.2d€at€429.€€For€example,€the€trial€court€ð ðmay€deny€or€condition€continuing€visitation€on€theÏgrounds€of€parental€neglect.ðð€€ò òòòTurner€v.€Turneró óóó,€919€S.W.2d€340,€346€(Tenn.€App.€1995).ÌÌà àIn€addition€to€testimony€that€the€child€had€burned€her€finger€on€the€Fatherððs€litÏcigarette,€the€Mother€testified€without€objection€that€the€child€suffered€from€certain€medicalÏproblems€which€could€be€related€to€exposure€to€cigarette€smoke:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àWell,€sheððs€had€some€problems€during€the€winter€withÏallergies,€with€sinus€that€did€develop€into€an€ear€infection....€€AndÏshe€does€have€ongoing€allergies.ÌÌà8 àà à....ÌÌà8 àà àSheððs€always€sick€when€she€comes€home€[from€visitationÏwith€the€Father];€takes€her€a€couple€of€days€to€get€over€it.€€SheððllÏhave€a€runny€nose.€€ÌÌÓÓÌà àWe€are€mindful€that€the€suspension€of€a€noncustodial€parentððs€right€of€visitation€isÏnot€to€be€used€as€a€punitive€measure.€€ò òòòTurner€v.€Turneró óóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€346.€€The€record€in€theÏpresent€case,€however,€contains€evidence€that€the€Fatherððs€cigarette€smoking€has€jeopardized€theÏchildððs€physical€well„being.€€In€addition€to€the€above€testimony€suggesting€that€exposure€toÏcigarette€smoke€has€exacerbated€the€childððs€allergy€problems,€the€evidence€demonstrates€a€directÏlink€between€the€Fatherððs€smoking€habits€and€the€burn€on€the€childððs€hand.€€Under€theseÏcircumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€suspending€theÏFatherððs€visitation€privileges.€€In€so€holding,€we€note€that€the€suspension€was€effective€only€untilÏthe€court€was€ð ðpersuaded€that€[the€Father]€intends€to€protect€the€child€from€any€and€all€exposure€toÏtobacco€smoke€in€enclosed€spaces€or€elsewhere.ðð€€Thus,€the€trial€court€retains€continuing€control€toÏmodify€its€order€upon€a€proper€showing€by€the€Father.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòSuttles€v.€Suttlesó óóó,€748€S.W.2dÏ427,€429€(Tenn.€1988);€òòò òMittwede€v.€Mittwedeó óóó,€490€S.W.2d€534,€538€(Tenn.€App.€1969);Ïòòò òPalanki€v.€Palankió óóó,€1990€WL€51350,€at€*2€(Tenn.€App.€1990).ÌÌà àThe€trial€courtððs€order€finding€the€Father€guilty€of€two€counts€of€criminal€contemptÏand€suspending€the€Fatherððs€visitation€privileges€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€theÏFather,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓÓ` Ü` È“XÓà à______________________________Ìà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌ______________________________ÌLILLARD,€J.€(Concurs)›