ÿWPCF ­Rã:ÌA?'¬*\s,WCâ7Ô[ªò7z‹Y刴õ¥®ÞyÔE,álîÔMO¦ŠÑ.Àï&ø ¥P`˜.Mhâæø_ ¬«^שo-›Š‚Üþn ‰¼ã™(”(Fš«!A@eB™ ïŸMÊðv‡g$5ZÒJLáú¯o:vI¹Ê¦ý¸œKÅtÖxü^oÅm+¼F¶?3æEZËMo$?8ÛÙè““›Zû”>~à$üœ¬{MnìÎs!ku8¸Í˜ê?TiÛC‰ª›8GT@ Em…¨-¥gi3œ¼_Î=ý´ÂXþ(®ñUœ¼÷àÒ–…F‹æŸ_51¦­xö¾I$Và g“¡ßqjŸ¡§SýîK[… 8ÂÐu½X" ´ጮóe(­iÕ¥yHtx3Mæ­z§Mð‡¸u@ȉƒ€ë>„ïÿA´èÁË:Õrp¿q¨×€é{Èo¶:}>I£T 0Mj”Ëôå>ÿ9ê˹¹tÑQ5&>÷S¹Ìª‰&»'ËAÒ-·í»]¡È»dV´@£/Ö¶“(T€¹Ù~`Ç‚G¹ƒj[&ÚÍècp[tÛtÀ Òà'ü± ¾dL¿¤ ÃiMŒm¬‡Üa…UBF %ˆ U.Ž ¼ nXÌ 0P$ 4t ˆ 0Ò 0cb w@Å U: U:? U:y  ³ U:ÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓ B       D3*** 0D]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] AO¡Æðð 0D¶ D/ú B)<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|X•«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Óƒƒ '(‚(2Ow$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€ôm•ôXXÔÔ€ô$Õôôôm•Ôà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó("ˆ$Ô€ X<=XXXÔòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ‚EƒD„£…b†U‡DˆD‰ŠÓ€g"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular Ô€X·:XXXÔÔ€îÞ îXX·:ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€¿­  îîÞÔÐ  ÐÌò òAugust€17,€1999Ð ¶¶ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô$Õô ¿­ÔAppellate€CourtÐ –– ÐClerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d$$$$'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  ÝñŠñ›ñŠñÑ` °ÑÑX°ÑÒPDÒÒŽ¦ÒÑ  ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  ÓÔ€Xi€XXXÔÑ7€ i€ XXdðXXdð7ÑñŠñßr€*<,(j 8 `€€@E2f  tt0"j` ¨Ørß›ñŠñà ¨ àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌà@SS:MàAT€KNOXVILLE€ˆÌÌÓ  Óà@ll8MàJUNE€1999€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ° àà  àà ` à)ó óÐ Ðp  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)ó óà ¸ àò òC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9810„CR„00370ó óÐ À`  Ðà ¨ àà àAppellee,à ° àò ò€€€€€à  àà ` à)Ð °P  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àHAMILTON€COUNTYó óÐ  @  ÐVS.à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àò ò)Ð 0  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àHON.€DOUGLAS€A.€MEYER,Ð €  ÐDANNY€RAY€DAVIS,à ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àJUDGEÐ p Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àó ó€ò òÐ ` Ðà ¨ àà àó óAppellant.ò òà ° àà  àà ` à)à ¸ àó ó(Driving€Under€the€Influence)ò òÐ Pð Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà ° àà  àà ` à€€€€€òòà ¸ àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÐ ° ÐÌÌò òJOHNNY€D.€HOUSTON,€JR.à  àà ` àà ¸ àPAUL€G.€SUMMERSÐ à€ Ðó óFlatiron€Bldg.,€Suite€402à ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ Ð p Ð707€Georgia€Ave.ÌChattanooga,€TN€37402„2048ò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àERIK€W.€DAABó óÐ °"P Ðò òà ¨ àà àà X àó óà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAsst.€Attorney€GeneralÐ  #@ Ðò òà ¨ àó óà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJohn€Sevier€Bldg.Ð $0 Ðò òà ¨ àà àà X àó óà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à425€Fifth€Ave.,€Northà ! àà p# à€€€€€€Ð €%  Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ìà ¨ àÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àò òWILLIAM€H.€COXó óÐ P(ð! Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àPARKE€MASTERSONó óÐ  +À!$ Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àAsst.€District€Attorney€Generalà p# àÐ ,°"% Ðà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à600€Market€St.Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àChattanooga,€TN€37402ÌÌœñ†ñÌñ†ññ†ñÌñ†ñ›à ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àÌà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÐ P7ð-1 ÐÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÐ  :À04 ÐJudgeÌÐ  < 26S Мñ…ñÑXÑñ…ññ„ñ›ñ„ññ…ññ„ñœñ„ññ…ññ…ñѰXÑñ…ññ„ñÓ  Óñ„ñà@™™:Màò òòòÔ‡¼§G¼XXi€ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ#†Xi€X¼¼§Gö#ԈР`  ÐÌÌó óóóÌÓÓà ¨ àà àA€jury€convicted€the€defendant€of€driving€under€the€influence€(DUI),€thirdÏoffense,€and€the€defendant€received€an€eleven€month,€twenty„nine€day€workhouseÏsentence.€€He€now€appeals,€arguing€that€the€juryððs€verdict€is€contrary€to€the€weight€of€theÏevidence€and€that€the€trial€court€denied€his€due€process€rights€by€not€allowing€him€toÏrecall€a€State€witness.€€Finding€no€merit€to€the€defendantððs€arguments,€we€affirm€hisÏconviction.ÌÌà ¨ àà àAt€trial,€the€State€presented€two€witnesses,€Officer€Ezra€Harris,€theÏinvestigating€police€officer,€and€Denise€Lawson,€a€paramedic.€€Officer€Harris€testified€heÏresponded€to€a€dispatch€of€a€motor€vehicle€accident€in€the€early€morning€hours€ofÏSeptember€21,€1996.€€He€testified€that€when€he€arrived€at€the€scene,€he€saw€a€ToyotaÏCorolla€registered€in€the€defendantððs€name€that€had€crashed€head„on€into€a€tree.€ÏAccording€to€Officer€Harris,€the€windshield€in€front€of€the€driverððs€seat€was€stained€withÏblood€and€looked€as€if€a€personððs€head€had€smashed€against€it.€€Officer€Harris€testifiedÏthat€no€individuals€were€at€the€scene,€but€he€located€the€defendant€and€his€brother„in„law,ÏJames€Carney,€at€a€nearby€house.€€According€to€Officer€Harris,€the€defendant€admittedÏhe€was€driving,€and€both€he€and€Carney€denied€that€anyone€else€was€involved€in€theÏaccident.€€Upon€Officer€œHarrisðð€request,€the€defendant€gave€him€the€car€keys.ÌÌà ¨ àà àA›€photograph€of€the€defendant€taken€shortly€after€the€accident€reflects€cutsÏand€wounds€to€his€forehead€and€nose,€and€Officer€Harris€testified€that€the€defendant€hadÏblood€on€his€face.€€According€to€Officer€Harris,€however,€the€defendant€refused€medicalÏtreatment.€€Because€the€defendant€smelled€of€alcohol,€Officer€Harris€arrested€him€for€DUI.€ÏIn€Officer€œHarrisðð›€opinion,€the€defendant€was€too€intoxicated€to€drive,€and€a€later€breathÏtest€revealed€a€blood€alcohol€content€of€.19%.€€On€cross„examination,€Officer€HarrisÐ F:æ04 Ðtestified€that€œhe€had€been€trained€to€determine€from€ñ}ññ|ñthe€seatñ|ññ}ññ~ña€seat€beltñ~ññññ~ñ€ñ~ññññ€ñððs€appearance€whether€itÐ :¾06 Ðhad€been€used€during€an€accident€and€that€ñ€ñññin€this€case,€ñññ‚ñññthe€ñññ‚ñit€did€not€appear€the€defendantÏwas›€œwearing›€his€œseatbeltñƒñ€during›€the›€ñƒññ„ñ›ñ„ññƒñaccident€because€...ñƒñ.€€Officer€Harris€testified€that€even€so,€the€defendant€did›€notÏappear€to€have€any€chest€injuries€caused€by€hitting€the€steering€wheel.ÌÌà ¨ àà àDenise€Lawson,€a€paramedic,€testified€that€she€responded€to€the€accidentÏscene.€€She€testified€that€both€the€defendant€and€Carney€claimed€they€were€the€onlyÏindividuals€involved€in€the€accident,€but€both€also€denied€driving.€€According€to€Lawson,Ïthe€defendant€indicated€to€her€he€had€been€drinking.€€Lawson€confirmed€that€theÏdefendant€refused€medical€treatment,€but€from€talking€with€him,€it€did€not€appear€to€herÏthat€he€had€any€chest€injuries.€€She€also€testified,€however,€that€it€was€not€unusual€forÏdrunk€drivers€to€escape€œñ‡ñchest›€ñ‡ñinjurñˆñiesñˆññ‰ñyñ‰ñ›€in€an€accident€because€ð ðtheir€response€is€a€little€slower€andÏthey€donððt€tend€to€brace€themselves€for€the€accident.ððÌÌà ¨ àà àSeveral€defense€witnesses€testified€that€during€the€hours€prior€to€theÏaccident,€the€defendant€had€spent€time€with€a€friend,€Steve€Webb.€€The€defendantÏtestified€that€Webb€had€been€driving€him€and€Carney€from€a€Krystal€fast„food€restaurantÏwhen€they€crashed.€€According€to€the€defendant,€he€was€sleeping€in€the€back€seat€andÏCarney€was€riding€in€the€front€passenger€seat€at€the€time€of€the€crash.€€He€testified€thatÏbecause€of€a€head€injury,€he€did€not€remember€any€of€the€events€surrounding€theÏaccident,€but€he€was€certain€that€Webb€was€driving.€€He€also€claimed€not€to€have€had€theÏcar€keys.€€He€admitted€drinking€approximately€fourteen€beers€in€the€hours€preceding€theÏcrash.€€Carneyððs€testimony€substantially€corroborated€the€defendantððs,€in€that€CarneyÏtestified€that€Webb€was€driving,€that€the€defendant€was€in€the€back€seat,€and€that€he€wasÏin€the€front€passenger€seat.€€According€to€Carney,€the€impact€hurled€the€defendantÏforward,€causing€the€defendant€to€land€on€top€of€him€in€the€front€passenger€seat.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€argues€that€because€the€weight€of€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€against€the€juryððs€verdict,€this€Court€should€reverse€his€conviction.€€WhileÐ ä9„06 Ða€trial€court€has€the€authority€to€reverse€a€juryððs€verdict€when€it€determines€that€the€verdictÏis€contrary€to€the€weight€of€the€evidence,€òòseeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33(f),€this€Court€may€notÐ , Ì Ðreweigh€the€evidence€on€appeal,€òòsee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835Ð ø ˜ Ð(Tenn.€1978).€€Thus,€to€the€extent€the€defendant€argues€the€juryððs€verdict€is€against€theÏweight€of€the€evidence,€his€argument€must€fail.ÌÌà ¨ àà àWhile€a€defendant€may€not€challenge€on€appeal€the€weight€of€the€convictingÏevidence,€he€or€she€may€challenge€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence.€€To€theÏextent€that€the€defendantððs€argument€may€be€construed€as€a€challenge€to€the€sufficiencyÏof€the€evidence,€his€argument€still€fails.€€The€record€reflects€that€the€defendant€admittedÏdriving€on€a€public€road€after€drinking€approximately€fourteen€beers.€€Although€theÏdefense€presented€evidence€that€the€defendant€was€not€driving€at€the€time€of€theÏaccident,€the€jury€was€within€its€province€to€disregard€that€evidence€in€favor€of€the€StateððsÏevidence€that€the€defendant€was€driving.€€òòSeeóó€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835.€€In€short,Ð ¼ \ Ðthe€evidence,€construed€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€would€allow€any€rationalÏtrier€of€fact€to€find€the€essential€elements€of€DUI€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóóÐ T$ô ÐòòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979).Ð  &À  ÐÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€denied€his€due€process€rightsÏby€not€allowing€him€to€recall€Officer€Harris€to€the€stand€in€order€to€attempt€to€impeach€him.€ÏAccording€to€the€defendant,€Officer€œHarrisðð›€testimony€was€key€to€his€conviction€and€if€heÏhad€been€allowed€to€attempt€to€impeach€his€credibility,€the€jury€would€have€acquitted€him.ÌÌà ¨ àà àOn€cross„examination,€Officer€Harris€testified€that€he€had€takenÏphotographs€of€the€Corolla€at€the€crime€scene,€but€that€they€were€of€poor€quality€and€thatÏhe€did€not€bring€them€to€trial.€€Defense€counsel€began€to€question€Officer€Harris€usingÏphotographs€taken€by€the€defendant,€but€Officer€Harris€could€not€positively€identify€theÏcar€in€the€photographs.€€The€State€objected€to€defense€counselððs€questioning€unless€theÐ ä9„06 Ðphotographs€could€be€properly€authenticated,€and€the€trial€court€conducted€a€jury„outÏhearing€to€determine€whether€Officer€Harris€could€authenticate€the€photographs.€€WhenÏOfficer€Harris€could€not€recognize€the€car€in€the€photographs€as€the€defendantððs€car,Ïdefense€counsel€requested€that€Officer€Harris€retrieve€his€photographs,€even€though€heÏadmittedly€did€not€subpoena€them.€€Defense€counsel€argued€that€the€State€should€haveÏsupplied€him€with€the€photographs€pursuant€to€his€request€for€discovery,€but€the€StateÏinsisted€it€opened€its€file€to€defense€counsel€and€defense€counsel€had€access€toÏeverything€it€had.€€Officer€Harris€again€stated€that€the€pictures€were€ð ðvery€poor€qualityððÏbecause€dim€lighting€prevented€anything€from€being€recognizable.€€Defense€counselÏmaintained€that€even€so,€he€wanted€to€see€the€pictures.€€The€trial€court€ruled€that€defenseÏcounsel€could€have€access€to€the€photographs€after€trial.ÌÌà ¨ àà àLater,€after€several€defense€witnesses,€defense€counsel€attempted€to€recallÏOfficer€Harris€to€the€stand.€€Defense€counsel€represented€to€the€trial€court€that€he€hadÏbeen€reviewing€the€accident€report€and€noticed€that€on€the€report,€Officer€Harris€indicatedÏhe€did€not€take€any€photographs€of€the€scene.€€Defense€counsel€stated€he€wanted€toÏrecall€Officer€Harris€for€the€sole€purpose€of€attempting€to€impeach€his€prior€testimony€thatÏhe€did€take€photographs.€€The€trial€court€denied€defense€counselððs€request€to€recallÏOfficer€Harris,€stating€that€he€œhad€had›€his€opportunity€to€cross„examine€him.€€The€recordÏshows€that€defense€counsel€had€the€accident€report€in€his€possession€when€he€cross„¼examined€Officer€Harris€and€in€fact€had€attempted€to€impeach€his€trial€testimony€on€otherÏgrounds€by€using€the€accident€report.ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€decision€to€allow€the€recall€of€a€witness€rests€within€the€trial€courtððsÏdiscretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Caughronóó,€855€S.W.2d€526,€539€(Tenn.€1993).€€Here,€the€onlyÐ €4 +0 Ðreason€defense€counsel€wished€to€recall€Officer€Harris€was€to€attempt€to€impeach€hisÏprevious€testimony€by€using€the€accident€report.€€As€the€defendant€admits,€however,€theÏdefense€had€a€copy€of€the€accident€report€during€Officer€œHarrisðð€testimony€and€defenseÐ ä9„06 Ðcounsel€even€attempted€to€impeach€his€testimony€in€other€regards€using€the€accidentÏreport.€€Thus,€because€defense€counsel€had€ample€opportunity€to€attempt€to€impeachÏOfficer€Harris€during€cross„examination,€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€by€notÏallowing€the€defendant€to€recall€Officer€Harris.ÌÌà ¨ àà àEven€assuming€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion,€any€resulting€error€isÏharmless.€€During€the€hearing€on€the€defendantððs€motion€for€new€trial,€Officer€HarrisÏtestified€he€indicated€on€the€accident€report€that€no€photographs€were€taken€because€heÏdid€not€have€any€photographs€ð ðof€substantial€quality.ðð€€We€must€assume€that€if€he€hadÏbeen€asked€to€explain€to€the€jury€the€seeming€discrepancy€between€his€trial€testimonyÏand€the€accident€report,€Officer€Harris€would€have€replied€similarly.€€Moreover,€defenseÏcounsel€cross„examined€Officer€Harris€about€other€apparent€discrepancies€between€hisÏtrial€testimony€and€what€he€recorded€on€the€accident€report.€€Specifically,€Officer€HarrisÏtestified€during€trial€that€the€car€keys€the€defendant€had€given€him€were€bent€and€thatÏthere€had€been€blood€on€the€car€windshield,€but€he€did€not€note€either€of€these€details€inÏthe€accident€report€because,€as€he€maintained,€he€had€noted€only€important€details€onÏthe€accident€report.€€Given€that€Officer€Harris€had€an€explanation€for€indicating€on€theÏaccident€report€that€no€photographs€were€taken€and€that€defense€counsel€had€attemptedÏto€impeach€Officer€Harrisðð€trial€testimony€on€two€other€points€by€using€the€accident€report,Ïwe€cannot€conclude€that€the€juryððs€verdict€was€affected€by€the€trial€court€not€allowingÏdefense€counsel€to€recall€Officer€Harris€for€the€sole€purpose€of€attempting€to€impeach€hisÏcredibility€further€with€the€accident€report.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(a)€(error€is€harmlessÐ /¼%* Ðunless€it€affirmatively€appears€to€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€the€merits).ÌÌà ¨ àà àThe€defendant€also€suggests€that€he€was€deprived€of€his€due€process€rightsÏwhen€the€State€failed€to€produce€Officer€Harrisðð€photographs€despite€his€motion€forÏdiscovery€requesting,€inter€alia,€photographs€of€the€crime€scene.€€The€defendant€claimsÏthe€photographs€ð ðcould€have€.€.€.€shown€Officer€Harris€to€be€untruthfulðð€and€ð ðmay€wellÐ ä9„06 Ðhave€shownðð€that€the€driver€did€not€hit€the€windshield€as€Officer€Harris€testified.€€TheÏdefendant€fails€to€cite€any€authority€supporting€his€position,€thus€waiving€this€argument.€ÏRules€of€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€of€Tennessee€10(b).€€Moreover,€nothing€in€theÏrecord€shows€that€the€photographs€were€exculpatory€or€otherwise€supports€the€notion€thatÏthe€State€violated€the€rules€of€discovery.€€Accordingly,€this€argument€will€not€afford€theÏdefendant€relief.ÌÌÔ‡ XXXXÔà ¨ àà àFinding€no€merit€to€the€defendantððs€arguments,€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€isÐ ô”  Ðaffirmed.ÌÌÓÓà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ à_______________________________Ìà ¨ àà àà X àà ° àà  àà ` àà ¸ àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÔ#†XXX Xb>#ÔÌÌÌ______________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJOHN€EVERETT€WILLIAMS,€Judge