ÿWPCÝ …# V %a 0(gw@4ÏãU.ò 0l 0DŒ Ð UNØ 0J& 0Tp 0^Ä 0h" 0rŠ 0|ü 0†x 0þ 1uŽ 0d BgU>„B)ÂDCë AM.è{ D3c–v~§ 0@%vÓe AO8Ƈ 0DM D/‘ BÀ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MSÈðððÈð0X($¡¡ ÀEÁÂÃEÄÅEÆEÇUÈÉÓ€Úƒç"x88p8°3|xÔ%ä2¼A`ArialTT((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular2 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 d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÞÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€ ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌò òJuly€9,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó####'ÿÿdxd Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€A€person€commits€an€offense€who€acts€intentionally,€knowingly,€recklessly€or€with€à à€€Ïcriminal€negligence.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{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€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  Ý›Ñ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\Ñò òœÙ€€ÙÓ  ÓÔ€ ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€()'A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALSÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌAPRIL€1997€SESSIONÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9606„CC„00229Ìà àó óAppellee,ò òà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àGREENE€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€JAMES€E.€BECKNER,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJUDGEÌJOSEPH€L.€FLETCHER,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àó ó(Driving€Under€the€Influence„2ndÏò òà àó óAppellant.à àò òà àà àà à)à àó óOffense)ò òÌÌòòÌó óFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:òòà àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ìò òÌWILLIAM€H.€BELLà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌó óP.O.€Box€1876à àà àà àò òà àà àó óAttorney€General€&€Reporterò òÌó óGreeneville,€Tennessee€37743ò òÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTIMOTHY€F.€BEHANÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó óAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0493Ìò òÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.€BERKELEY€BELL,€JR.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌò òÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àERIC€D.€CHRISTIANSENÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó óAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à113„J€West€Church€St.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àGreeneville,€TN€37743Ìò òÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€_________________ÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌJOE€G.€RILEY,ÌJUDGEó óÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÑ7€úXXdðXXdð7ÑÓ  Óò òOPINIONó óÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àDefendant,€Joseph€L.€Fletcher,€appeals€as€of€right€a€jury€conviction€for€drivingÏunder€the€influence€(DUI),€second€offense.€€He€was€sentenced€to€eleven€monthsÏand€twenty„nine€days€and€fined€$610.€€Fletcher€presents€four€issues€for€our€review:€œÌ1)›€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€conviction;€2)€whether€the€stateÏis€required€to€prove€a€culpable€mental€state€for€a€DUI€conviction;€3)€whether€the€trialÏcourt€abused€its€discretion€in€allowing€testimony€about€certain€drugs;€and€4)Ïwhether€the€sentence€is€excessive.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓFACTSó óÌÓ  Óà àThe€facts€of€this€case€involve€a€two„vehicle€collision€where€defendant€rear„ended€two€individuals,€Mr.€and€Ms.€Musick,€occupying€another€car.€€On€August€19,Ï1994,€the€Musicks€were€traveling€on€U.S.€Highway€11„E€œBypass.›€€Mr.€Musick,€theÍdriver,€came€to€a€red€light€and€stopped.€€Mr.€and€Ms.€Musick€then€heard€aÏð ðsqueallingðð€sound€of€tires€behind€them€which€was€followed€by€the€impact€ofÏdefendantððs€van€with€the€rear€of€their€vehicle.€€Defendant€and€Mr.€Musick€got€out€ofÏtheir€vehicles€to€assess€the€damage.€€Musick€observed€defendant€€ð ðbarefooted€andÏsort€of€limpingðð€and€ð ðmumbling€around,€like€he€was€real€nervous.ðð€€They€returned€toÏtheir€respective€vehicles€where€Musick€noticed€defendant€doing€something€with€aÏred€bag.€€When€police€arrived€Musick€informed€the€officer€that€he€thought€defendantÏhad€been€drinking.€Ìà àOfficer€Todd€Shelton€of€the€Greeneville€Police€Department€responded€to€theÏaccident.€€He€observed€defendant€as€ð ðunsteady€on€his€feetðð€and€needing€to€ð ðlean€onÏthe€side€of€the€van€to€hold€himself€up.ðð€€Officer€Shelton€asked€defendant€if€he€hadÏbeen€drinking€or€was€on€any€drugs.€€Defendant€indicated€that€he€had€not€hadÏanything€to€drink;€however,€the€response€to€the€taking€of€drugs€was€muffled€andÏunclear.€€Officer€Shelton€did€not€perform€certain€field€sobriety€tests€due€toÏdefendantððs€leg€and€back€disability.€€Nevertheless,€Officer€Shelton€concludedÏdefendant€was€ð ðdefinitely€impairedðð€and€€placed€him€under€arrest.Ìà àOfficer€Shelton€later€found€in€defendantððs€vehicle€a€red€gym€bag€containingÏseveral€prescription€medication€bottles.€€He€listed€the€medication€as€dilantin,Ïamitriptylin,€lorazepam,€methocarbamol,€and€œmonopril.›€€Shelton€then€hadÏdefendantððs€vehicle€towed,€explained€the€implied€consent€form€to€which€defendantÏagreed,€and€took€defendant€to€the€hospital€where€his€blood€was€drawn.€€AfterÏreceiving€the€blood€sample,€Shelton€requested€an€alcohol€and€drug€screen€from€theÍTennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation€(TBI).€€€Ìà àJanice€Gangwer,€a€TBI€toxicologist,€analyzed€the€blood€sample.€€Her€analysisÏrevealed€that€defendantððs€blood€contained€diazepam,€nordiazepam,€butalbital,Ïphenobarbital,€and€phenytoin.€€She€classified€the€drugs€as€central€nervous€systemÏdepressants€capable€of€impairing€oneððs€driving€ability.€Ìà à€Defendant€testified€on€his€own€behalf.€€He€testified€regarding€injuries€from€aÏcar,€motorcycle,€and€gun€accident€which€ultimately€resulted€in€his€current€epilepticÏcondition.€€He€admitted€to€taking€medication€that€evening,€but€stated€that€the€bagÏcontained€his€wife€and€sonððs€medications€as€well.€€He€had€taken€the€medication,Ïlaid€down€for€a€couple€of€hours,€and€then€commenced€to€drive.€€He€stated€that€heÏwent€down€below€the€bypass€and€the€next€thing€he€remembered€was€being€in€theÏpolice€car.€€Ìà àMike€Fincher,€a€correctional€officer€for€the€local€detention€center,€also€testifiedÏfor€the€defense.€€As€the€intake€officer€that€filled€out€defendantððs€paperwork,€FincherÏdescribed€an€intake€card€to€which€defendant€had€responded.€€It€indicated€thatÏdefendant€experienced€epileptic€seizures,€breathing€problems,€back€pain€and€had€aÏleg€gunshot€wound.€€Fincher€further€observed€that€defendant€was€ð ðunsteady€on€hisÏfeet.ðð€€Ìà àEarl€Fletcher,€defendantððs€father,€provided€additional€testimony€for€theÏdefense.€€He€had€witnessed€some€of€defendantððs€previous€seizures.€€Ìœ›œÌ›à àà àà àò òà àSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCE€€ó óÌÌà àDefendant€contends€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€prove€guilt€beyond€aÏreasonable€doubt.€€In€Tennessee,€great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€theÏjury€in€a€criminal€trial.€€A€jury€verdict€accredits€the€stateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€allÏconflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994);ÏòòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.1992).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€toÏthe€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€whichÏmay€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòIdóó.;€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832€(Tenn.€1978).€ÏMoreover,€a€guilty€verdict€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€which€theÏappellant€enjoyed€at€trial€and€raises€a€presumption€of€guilt€on€appeal.€€òòState€v.ÏGraceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474€(Tenn.€1973).€€The€appellant€has€the€burden€of€overcomingÏthis€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòIdóó.Ìà àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€for€anÏappellate€court€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÏthe€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÏthe€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e);€òòJackson€v.ÏVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307€(1979);€òòState€v.€Abramsóó,€935€S.W.2d€399,€401€(Tenn.€1996).ÏThe€weight€and€credibility€of€the€witnesses'€testimony€are€matters€entrustedÏexclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542€(Tenn.Ï1984);€òòState€v.€Breweróó,€932€S.W.2d€1,€19€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).Ìà àThe€testimony€at€trial€consisted€of€several€witnesses€that€observedÏdefendantððs€behavior€on€the€night€in€question.€€Each€witness€relayed€the€same€storyÍthat€defendant€was€unsteady€on€his€feet€and€appeared€unable€to€drive.€€The€alcoholÏand€drug€screen€revealed€five€different€central€nervous€system€depressants€orÏdrugs€in€defendantððs€system.€€Although€the€defense€strategy€at€trial€emphasizedÏdefendantððs€epileptic€state€as€the€cause€of€the€accident,€this€did€not€negate€hisÏadmitted€testimony€of€taking€drugs€whose€cumulative€effect€severely€hampered€hisÏdriving.€€The€nature€of€the€accident€itself,€the€several€eyewitness€observations,€andÏthe€drug€screen€provide€more€than€sufficient€proof€to€convince€a€reasonable€jurorÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€defendant€was€driving€under€the€influence€of€anÏintoxicant.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌÌà àà àà àò òREQUIREMENT€OF€MENTAL€STATE€FOR€DUIó óÌÌà àIn€order€to€sustain€a€DUI€conviction,€defendant€argues€the€state€was€requiredÏto€prove€his€òòmensóó€òòreaóó.€€He€contends€that€taking€prescription€drugs€within€the€normalÏrange€does€not€provide€the€necessary€culpable€mental€state€as€defined€in€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€39„11„301€(a),(b).œ× ƒ+ ××  ×›€€He€argues,€in€effect,€that€as€a€lawful€user€of€theseÏdrugs€he€cannot€be€guilty€of€DUI.€€€It€is€no€defense€to€DUI€that€the€defendant€isÏentitled€to€use€such€drugs.€€œTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð55„10„402.€€This›€Court€hasÏpreviously€held€that€ð ðthere€is€no€culpable€mental€state€required€for€guilt€of€DUI.ðð€ÍòòState€v.€Turneróó,€1996€WL€555237,€*2€No.€03C01„9510„CC„00321€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ïfiled€October€1,€1996,€at€Knoxville);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Fioritoóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01„9401„CR„00032,€Blount€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€filed€November€27,€1995,€atÏKnoxville).€€Regardless€of€whether€defendant€intended€to€drive€under€the€influenceÏof€these€drugs,€he€chose€to€drive€and€his€ability€to€drive€was€clearly€impaired.€€ÏAccordingly,€this€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òà àà àà àà àABUSE€OF€DISCRETIONó óÌà àDefendant€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€allowingÏOfficer€Shelton€to€testify€regarding€the€drugs€that€were€found€in€defendantððsÏpossession.€€Since€these€drugs€were€not€found€in€his€blood,€defendant€contendsÏthey€were€irrelevant€and€highly€prejudicial.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.Ìà àTrial€courts€have€a€wide€degree€of€discretion€when€determining€whether€toÏadmit€or€exclude€relevant€evidence€and€will€be€reversed€only€for€an€abuse€of€thatÏdiscretion.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Forbesóó,€918€S.W.2d€431,€439€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€Ïð ðRelevant€evidenceðð€is€evidence€ð ðhaving€any€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€anyÏfact€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€have€been€without€the€evidence.ðð€ÏTenn.€R.€Evid.€401.€Ìà àOfficer€Shelton€testified€that€he€found€several€bottles€of€prescription€drugs€in€Ïa€red€bag€in€defendantððs€vehicle.€€He€started€to€list€the€drugs€beginning€with€dilantinÏand€defense€counsel€objected€attempting€to€limit€the€testimony€to€those€drugsÏspecifically€found€in€defendantððs€blood.€€The€objection€was€overruled.€€The€TBIÍtoxicologist€later€testified€as€to€the€actual€amount€of€medications€found€inÏdefendantððs€blood.€€She€found€.5€micrograms€of€diazepam,€.18€micrograms€ofÏnordiazepam,€13€micrograms€of€butalbital,€and€noted€the€presence€of€phenobarbitalÏand€phenytoin.€€Ìà àAbsent€a€showing€that€the€drugs€listed€by€Officer€Shelton€were€derivatives€ofÏthe€drugs€found€by€the€toxicologist,€we€agree€that€it€was€error€to€admit€suchÏtestimony.€€However,€given€defendantððs€admission€of€taking€drugs€prior€to€drivingÏand€the€other€evidence€against€him,€the€fact€that€he€had€other€drugs€in€hisÏpossession€had€no€harmful€influence€upon€the€verdict.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€œ36(a);›€òòseeóóÏòòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Streetóó,€1996€WL€529993,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9508„CC„00257€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€filed€September€19,€1996,€at€Nashville).€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òà àà àà àœà àEXCESSIVE›€SENTENCEó óÌÌà àDefendant€finally€attacks€the€propriety€of€his€sentence.€€This€Courtððs€review€ofÏthe€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€ofÏcorrectness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€conditionedÏupon€an€affirmative€showing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€judge€considered€theÏsentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.€€òòState€v.€Ashbyóó,€823ÏS.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€burden€is€upon€the€appealing€party€to€showÏthat€the€sentence€is€improper.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„401(d)€SentencingÏCommission€Comments.€Ìà àUnder€the€1989€Act,€sentences€which€involve€confinement€are€to€be€basedÏon€the€following€considerations€contained€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„103(1):ÌÓÓà àà à(A)€œconfinement›€is€necessary€to€protect€society€Ì€€€à àà àby€œrestraining›€a€defendant€who€has€a€long€history€Ìà àà àof€criminal€conduct;Ìà àà àÌà àà à(B)€œconfinement›€is€necessary€to€avoid€depreciating€Ìà àà àthe€seriousness€of€the€offense€or€confinement€is€Ìà àà àparticularly€suited€to€provide€an€effective€deterrence€Ìà àà àto€others€likely€to€commit€similar€offenses;€or€ÌÌà àà à(C)€œmeasures›€less€restrictive€than€confinement€haveÌà àà àfrequently€or€recently€been€applied€unsuccessfully€to€Ìà àà àthe€defendant€.€.€.€.€ÌÌòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Millsapsóó,€920€S.W.2d€267,€270€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€controlled€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302,Ïwhich€provides€in€part€that€the€trial€court€shall€impose€a€specific€sentence€consistentÏwith€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€Criminal€Sentencing€Reform€Act.€€òòSeeóóÏòòState€v.€Palmeróó,€902€S.W.2d€391€(Tenn.€1995).€€€One€convicted€of€a€misdemeanor,Ïunlike€one€convicted€of€a€felony,€is€not€entitled€to€a€presumption€of€a€minimumÏsentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó,€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).Ìà àAfter€the€guilty€verdict€of€driving€under€the€influence,€the€defendant€stipulatedÏthis€was€his€second€offense€DUI.€€A€conviction€for€driving€under€the€influence,Ïsecond€offense,€is€a€œmisdemeanor›€for€which€defendant€could€receive€45€days€toÏeleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€and€a€fine€between€$600€and€$3500.€ÏDefendant€was€fined€$610€and€received€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€withÏa€30%€minimum€program€eligibility.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€defendant€had€aÍhistory€of€prior€convictions€consisting€of€assault,€resisting€arrest,€and€driving€on€aÏsuspended€license.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„35„114(1).€€Furthermore,€the€trial€courtÏfound€that€this€crime€was€committed€under€circumstances€for€which€the€potential€forÏbodily€injury€to€the€victims€was€great.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð40„35„114(16).€€The€trialÏcourt€specifically€and€properly€rejected€the€mitigating€factors€suggested€by€theÏdefendant€and€œrecited›€œthe€various›€principles€of€sentencing.€€Defendant€has€notÏovercome€the€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€sentence.€€This€issue€is€withoutÏmerit.Ìà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€AFFIRMED.ÌÓÓÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________Ìœà àà à›à àà àà àà àà àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌCHRIS€CRAFT,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ