ÿWPC¶ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µÝbåw@í4- A 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ U,- 0dY U,½ U>é U*'B)QDCz AM½ B &'v~MvÓË D3ž 0@Ñ AOÆ` 0D& D/j B™˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- ­D®¯D°±²³´µ¶Ó€Ô¡¨ µ<"|x¿2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€!ÔÔ€!ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€!XÔÌÌSeptember€5,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ ŠÔÔ€!ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€ejXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÙ€€ÙßL€$&#;+'h|` ç `€€LßIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OFÏTENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌJULY€SESSION,€1996ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à à)à àC.C.A.€NO.Ï01C01„9511„CC„00366Ìà àà àà àà àà à)ó óÌà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHICKMAN€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€CORNELIA€A.€CLARKó óÌò òMARC€A.€BURRIDGE,ó óà àà àò ò)à àJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)à àó ó(Driving€Under€the€Influence)Ìà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à àó ó(Evading€Arrest)Ìà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà à(Driving€on€a€Revoked€License)Ìà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà à(DUI€Prior)ò òÌó óÌÌò òÓ  ÓON€APPEAL€FROM€THE€JUDGMENT€OF€THEÌCIRCUIT€COURT€OF€HICKMAN€COUNTYó óÌÌÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌMICHAEL€J.€FLANAGANà àà àCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌDALE€M.€QUILLENà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ208€Cavalier€BuildingÌ95€White€Bridge€Roadà àà àà àCHARLOTTE€H.€RAPPUHNÌNashville,€TN€37205„1427à àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àLISA€A.€NAYLORÌà àà àà àà àà àà àLegal€AssistantÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJOE€D.€BAUGH,€JR.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÇò òòòÓ  ÓÔ€!°ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ€!ŠÔÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  Ó›à àThe€Defendant€was€convicted€on€a€jury€verdict€of€driving€under€theÏinfluence€of€an€œintoxicant€(DUI),›€driving€on€a€revoked€license,€and€evading€arrest.€ÏThe€basis€of€this€appeal€is€an€instruction€given€by€the€trial€judge€when€the€juryÏinitially€returned€an€incomplete€verdict.€€The€Defendant€œargues€that€this›€instructionÏamounted€to€a€directed€verdict€of€guilt,€which€deprived€him€of€his€SixthÏAmendment€right€to€a€jury€trial.€€We€find€the€instruction€was€proper,€and€affirm€theÏdecision€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àThe€facts€in€the€record€are€summarized€as€follows.€€On€July€19,€1991,€theÏDefendant€was€arrested€for€driving€under€the€influence€of€œan€intoxicant€on›ÏHighway€100€in€Hickman€County,€Tennessee.€€Upon€arrest,€the€DefendantÏagreed€to€submit€to€a€blood€test,€so€the€officer€escorted€the€Defendant€toÏHickman€County€Hospital.€€Upon€arrival€at€the€hospital,€the€œunhandcuffed›ÏDefendant€escaped€from€custody,€and€was€not€recaptured€until€October€22,Ï1992.ÌÌà àOn€May€2,€1994,€the€Grand€Jury€for€Hickman€County,€TennesseeÏreturned€an€indictment€charging€the€Defendant€œwith€DUI,›€driving€on€a€revokedÍlicense,€evading€arrest,€and€of€having€a€prior€DUI€conviction.€€The€DefendantÏwaived€the€right€to€a€jury€trial€for€the€DUI€prior€charge.ÌÌà àA€trial€before€Judge€Cornelia€A.€Clark€was€convened€in€Centerville,ÏTennessee€on€April€19,€1995.€€After€both€sides€submitted€their€cases€to€the€jury,Ïthe€jury€returned€with€guilty€verdicts€on€the€counts€of€DUI,€driving€on€a€revokedÏlicense,€and€evading€arrest,€but€indicated€to€the€Judge€that€they€had€failed€toÏreach€unanimous€decisions€on€œfines›€for€two€of€the€convictions.ÌÌà àThe€basis€of€this€appeal€concerns€the€trial€judgeððs€subsequent€instructionÏto€the€jury:Ìà8 àÓÓœ[L]adies›€and€gentlemen,€I€believe€you€have€reported€a€partialÏverdict,€but€I€must€ask€you€to€return€to€the€jury€room€and€continueÏdeliberating€on€the€issue€of€fines€in€any€case€where€you€have€notÏagreed€unanimously.€€I€will€ask€you€to€recall,€and€I€will€reinstructÏyou,€as€to€all€the€instructions€I€gave€you€earlier€about€the€fines.€ÏThey€are€discretionary,€but€you€must€ultimately€agree€or€report€ifÏafter€the€deliberations€for€some€reason€you€cannot.€€òòThe€parts€ofÏthe€verdict€that€you€have€reported€that€you€agree€on,€you€do€notÏneed€to€discuss€further,€óóbut€I€will€ask€you€now€to€return€to€the€juryÏroom,€continue€deliberating€on€those€fines€where€there€was€notÏunanimous€agreement€and€report€back€at€the€conclusion€of€thatÏdeliberation.€€ÌÌœ(emphasis€added).ÌÌ›ÓÓ€€à àThe€Defendant€immediately€objected€to€the€instruction,€claiming€the€judge€Ïforeclosed€the€possibility€that€the€jury€œmight,›€in€further€deliberations,€reverse€itsÍinitial€determination€and€return€with€an€acquittal.€€The€judge€overruled€theÏobjection,€and€the€jury€eventually€returned€with€the€same€findings€of€guilt,€andÏunanimous€decisions€regarding€the€fines.€€Specifically,€the€jury€imposed€a€$1,000Ïfine€for€DUI,€a€$500€fine€for€driving€on€a€revoked€license,€and€a€$1,745€fine€forÏevading€arrest.€€The€judge€then€found€the€Defendant€guilty€on€the€DUI€prior,€andÏsentenced€the€Defendant€to€a€œsix„month›€jail€sentence,€suspended€after€servingÏ60€days.€€The€Defendant€was€also€sentenced€to€11€months,€29€days€probationÏon€the€DUI€œcharge;›€a€œsix„month›€jail€sentence,€suspended€after€serving€15€days,Ïfor€driving€on€a€revoked€œlicense;›€and€an€11€month,€29€day€jail€sentence,Ïsuspended€œafter›€serving€65€days,€for€evading€arrest.€€All€sentences€wereÏordered€to€run€concurrently.ÌÌà àThe€issue€on€appeal€is€whether€the€trial€judge€directed€a€guilty€verdict€andÏthereby€denied€the€Defendant€a€fair€trial€when€she€instructed€the€jury,€as€theyÏreturned€a€verdict€lacking€unanimity€on€the€penalties,€that€they€need€not€revisitÏthe€issue€of€guilt€in€their€later€deliberations.ÌÌÓ  ÓI.ÌÌÓ  Óà àAs€a€general€rule,€if€there€is€any€uncertainty€or€contingency€as€to€theÏfinality€of€a€jury€verdict,€there€simply€is€no€verdict.€€òòState€ex.€œrel.›€Myers€v.€Brownóó,Íœ209€Tenn.€141,€150,€351›€S.W.2d€385,€389€œ(1961).›€€While€this€is€the€general€rule,Ïit€is€perhaps€more€accurate€to€state€that€in€such€a€situation,€the€jury€hasÏreturned€an€ð ðincomplete,ðð€ð ðimproper,ðð€or€ð ðimperfectðð€verdict.€€When€a€jury€returnsÏsuch€a€verdict,€the€œtrial€court›€has€the€power€and€duty€to€command€the€jury€toÏcorrect€it.€€òòMeade€v.€Stateóó,€530€S.W.2d€784,€787€(Tenn.€Crim.€œApp.),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,Ïòòidóó.€(Tenn.€1975).›€€Specifically,€the€judge€must€send€the€jury€back€to€the€jury€roomÏwith€instructions€to€correct€or€amend€that€incomplete,€improper,€or€imperfectÏverdict.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€554€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.ÏMorrisóó,€788€S.W.2d€820,€825€(Tenn.€Crim.€œApp.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€Ï(Tenn.€1990).›€€Thus,€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó,€and€as€the€œDefendant›€concedes,Ïthe€œtrial€court›€was€correct€when€it€sent€the€jury€back€to€continue€its€deliberations.ÌÌà àAs€held€in€òòStephensonóó€and€òòMorrisóó,€the€jury€must€be€sent€back€to€eitherÏòòcorrectóó€or€òòamendóó€œits›€initial€verdict.€€In€situations€where€a€jury€returns€with€a€verdictÏof€guilty,€but€fails€to€agree€as€to€punishment,€a€trial€judge€may€instruct€the€jury€toÏcontinue€deliberations€so€to€òòamendóó€œits›€verdict€with€a€proper€finding€ofÏpunishment.€€For€example,€in€òòGwinn€v.€Stateóó,€595€S.W.2d€832€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏœApp.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1979),›€a€second„degree€murder€case,Ïthe€jury€returned€a€guilty€verdict€and€assessed€a€sentence,€but€did€so€on€aÏverdict€œform›€which€listed€outdated€penalties.€€The€court€sent€the€jury€back€toÏamend€the€verdict€and€put€it€in€the€proper€form,€or€simply,€recalculate€theÍsentence,€but€òònotóó€to€revisit€the€issue€of€guilt,€a€practice€which€œthis€court€found›Ïpermissible.€€òòIdóó.€œat›€835.ÌÌà àA€judge€may€also€rely€on€a€juryððs€intent€to€find€guilt€as€œthe›€œjudge€limits›Ïfurther€deliberations€upon€receipt€of€an€incomplete€verdict.€€In€òòState€v.€Danielóó,Ï663€S.W.2d€809€(Tenn.€Crim.€œApp.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1983),›Ïanother€second„degree€murder€case,€the€jury€returned€a€guilty€verdict,€but€erred€inÏassessing€punishment.€€The€judge€sent€the€jury€back€to€deliberate€further€solelyÏon€the€issue€of€punishment.€€œThis€court€again›€affirmed,€allowing€the€trial€judge€toÏbase€his€action€in€limiting€the€further€proceedings€in€the€juryððs€apparent€intent€toÏfind€guilt.€€òòIdóó.€œat›€812.€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Underwoodóó,€669€S.W.2d€700,€705Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€œApp.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòrehearóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóóÏòòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1984).›ÌÌà àIn€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó,€in€the€face€of€an€incomplete€verdict,€the€trial€judgeÏœstated,›€ð ðThe€parts€of€the€verdict€that€you€have€reported€that€you€agree€on,€youÏdo€not€need€to€discuss€further....ðð€€This€is€entirely€consistent€with€a€judgeððs€dutyÏto€charge€a€jury€to€deliberate€further€so€to€correct€or€amend€an€imperfect€verdict.€ÏIn€this€case,€as€in€òòDanielóó,€it€was€clear€that€the€jury€intended€to€find€guilt,€so€anÏinstruction€which€focused€the€remainder€of€the€deliberations€on€the€penalty€wasÍproper.€€Although€a€jury€certainly€could€revisit€the€issue€of€guilt,€there€is€noÏTennessee€authority€which€indicates€that€a€trial€judge€òòmustóó€make€that€instruction.ÌÌà àTherefore,€because€portions€of€incomplete€verdicts€may€be€corrected€orÏamended€without€specifically€requiring€a€jury€to€reconsider€all€its€priorÏdeliberations,€there€was€no€error.ÌÌÓ  ÓII.ÌÌÓ  Óà àWhile€it€is€clear€that€a€judge€may€instruct€a€jury€to€amend€an€incompleteÏverdict,€the€Defendant€œargues€that›€this€particular€instruction€amounted€to€aÏdirected€verdict€of€guilt,€which,€if€true,€would€be€an€unconstitutional€deprivation€ofÏliberty.€€This€argument€is€not€well„taken,€as€the€instruction€in€question€falls€shortÏof€the€threshold€generally€recognized€regarding€directed€criminal€verdicts.ÌÌà àThe€well„established€general€rule€in€œTennessee€is€that€a›€trial€judge€mayÏnot€direct€a€verdict€of€guilt€in€a€criminal€trial,€no€matter€how€overwhelming€orÏconclusive€the€evidence.€€òòNance€v.€Stateóó,€œ210€Tenn.€328,€331,€358›€S.W.2d€327,Ï328€œ(1972).›€€òòSeeóó€òòalsoóó€òòUnited€Brotherhood€of€Carpenters€and€Joiners€of€AmericaÏv.€United€Statesóó,€330€U.S.€395,€œ408€(1947).€€If,€however€a€judge€believes€theÏevidence€to€be€insufficient€to€warrant€a€conviction,€the€court,€upon€a€partyððsÍmotion€or€on€its€own€motion,›€may€direct€the€jury€to€acquit€the€œdefendant.€€Tenn.ÏR.€Crim.€P.€29;›€òòHill€œv.›€Stateóó,€œ4€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€325,€337,€470›€S.W.2d€853,€858Ïœ(1971).ÌÌà àA€directed€verdict€of€criminal€guilt€not€only€violates€established€commonÏlaw,€but€also€infringes€on€the€constitutional€rights€of€the€accused.€€A€directedÏguilty€verdict€violates€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€Fifth€Amendment€and€theÏright€to€a€speedy€and€public€trial€outlined€in€the€Sixth€Amendment€to€the€UnitedÏStates€Constitution,€as€well€as€Sections€Six,€Eight,€and€Nine€of€Article€I€of€theÏTennessee€Constitution.€€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€637€S.W.2d€471,€472€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1982).€ÌÌà àThe€Defendant›€œargues›€that€by€not€instructing€the€jury€that€œit›€mayÏreconsider€the€issue€of€guilt,€the€court€removed€that€conclusive€function€from€theÏœjury€and,€therefore,€violated€the€Defendantððs€constitutional€rights.›€€This€claim€mustÏfail€for€two€reasons.€€First,€at€no€time€was€the€ability€to€find€guilt€or€innocenceÏremoved€from€the€juryððs€grasp.€€A€bench€statement€that€it€is€not€necessary€toÏrevisit€the€issue€of€guilt€is€not€equivalent€to€a€prohibition.€€œThis›€was€œa›€clarificationÏof€the€juryððs€duties€at€that€point€in€œits€deliberations,›€not€an€absolute€restriction€ofÏdiscussion€or€action.€€Second,€at€no€point€did€the€judge€create€a€situation€whereÏa€finding€of€guilt€was€inevitable.€€The€jury€had€òòalreadyóó€returned€with€a€conclusionÍof€guilt.€€œThe€trial€judgeððs€instruction€would€not€make€it€more€likely€that€the€finalÏverdict€would€be€ð ðguilty€on€all€countsðð€when€the€jury€had€already€made€thatÏdecision.€€The€instruction€was€too€late€to€influence€the€juryððs€decision.ÌÌà àIn€conclusion,€the€trial€judge€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó€properly€instructed€theÏjury€to€amend€its€incomplete€verdict.€€In€doing€so,€she€did€not€infringe€upon€theirÏtraditional€province€or€fact„finding€responsibilities,€nor€did€she€actually€orÏeffectively€direct€a€verdict€of€guilt.€€Because€the€Defendantððs€constitutional€rightsÏwere€not€violated,€and€no€error€was€committed,€the€decision€of€the€lower€court€isÏaffirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGE