ÿWPCï õšgc¥}ºGþ茊•V›´¢ì ùÛîeU†ì»QƸz0}P%­±ü ù®çú#—%Ú|²#šÕŠÆ¯Rÿ(»O±ÆYNhö3´.Ü‚e¾…ùDsSŠ7ŒOåÅRuå{8hBøˆæ7qÔE45ÿ,i$>²8öìü”áqlsKEìòAïÊQ¦]w¿SHå5A±¸X2ò‡¸VñMþ¸œ_„3¸]à²ÿ´]Åä/š—¥¢¡OM­³g£Ÿ=–l7ú—¯yé6ËÏÊ ½á°™YüuY¿w6¾?#ê•8ø.qŒ±=ä–r/O«è&Kås©˜‰’Cºo€a<¡+›­‚+Á‘„ír1ˆÙM¿%¾VÍÒ”±®.[cÔ @zN™‰•¹¼»¬ÉUJ/nçéÂÙŒ÷8‘dr(‰ìò÷Ud ;NÕjÒ{² ­Ó0‰/gÉœ¨Ò2lÇ€˜§Ú”è bÀî.µ£Ò_Ç{FëBTúU 3öh™׿2RƒUÁçáÛ–húÍiª±›Ôgò¯L\]nFQís¶óWM¦S•+ ‹#|a¿mÀèšSÆM™«iŒ²1ÆÉéÕ2¸Ñ ß&¥FV *{nÖ˜˜vv»…# F UNQ %Ÿ 0(¥ U:Í b w@ 4O c r äz U:^ ä˜ U:| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | B¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ ¶ D3Ó Ó Ó 0D AOJÆ™™ 0D_ D/£ BÒ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,Ù¹6 AZ‹"Arial Regular- ù- ,H-e.r‚/D012e3D4Ó€>uM%3|x@ ÚÔ€ XËjXXXÔÔ€ ÔBX XËjÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XËjX ÔBÔÐ  ÐÌMay€13,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ÚÔ€XËjXXXÔÔ€ÔBXXËjÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XËjXÔBÔÐ  ÐÌMay€12,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d%%%%'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÑ` °ÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€Š¡ÈŠXXÔÔ€ŠÆŠŠŠ¡ÈÔÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€WXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òñ>ññ4ñßr€ *<,(j 8` `€€@E f ` 8ttxPX` ð  rßñ4ññ>ññ>ñßr€ *<,(j 8` `€€@E f ` 8ttxPX` ð  rßñ>ñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌJANUARY€SESSION,€1999ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À àà  à)à p àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9804„CC„00191€Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àó óÐ `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellee,ò òà h àà À àà  à)à p àÐ `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àWILLIAMSON€COUNTYÐ `  ÐV.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€€Ð `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àÐ `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àHON.€DONALD€P.€HARRIS,€JUDGEó óÐ ` Ðò òKELLY€A.€HANCOCK,à h àà À à€à  à)à p àÐ ` Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò òà  à)ó óà p àÐ ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À àò òà  à)à p à(DUI,€FIRST€OFFENSE)€Ð ` Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à h àà À àà  àòòà p àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð Hè ÐÌò òERIC€L.€DAVIS€à  àà h àà À àà  àà p àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUP€Ð 8 Ø Ðó ó317€Main€Street€à  àà h àà À àà  àà p àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÐ 8!Ø ÐFranklin,€TN€37064€Ìà ` àà ¸ àò òà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àKIM€R.€HELPER€Ð (#È Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÐ ($È Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àó óà À àà  àà p à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ð &¸ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àò òà h àà À àà  àà p àRONALD€L.€DAVIS€Ð )   Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÐ *  ! ÐÌò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àó óà h àà À àà  àà p àò òSHARON€E.€TYLER€Ð ð+"# Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÐ ð,#$ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à481€East€Main€StreetÌ€à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àHohenwald,€TN€38462€Ð à.€%& ÐÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDED€ÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÐ  80/0g ÐÓ  ÓÔ€°oê°ŠŠÆÔò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€ŠÆŠ°°oêÔÐ `  ÐÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà ` àThe€Defendant,€Kelly€A.€Hancock,€appeals€as€of€right€from€her€conviction€inÏthe€Williamson€County€Circuit€Court.€€Defendant€was€indicted€for€the€Class€AÏmisdemeanor€offense€of€DUI,€first€offense,€committed€on€February€20,€1997.€ÏDefendant€filed€a€motion€to€suppress€the€results€of€the€Stateððs€ethyl€alcohol€test€ofÏDefendantððs€blood€procured€on€February€21,€1997.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motionÏfollowing€a€hearing.€€Defendant€was€found€guilty€following€a€jury€trial.€€In€her€appeal,Ïthe€Defendant€presents€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà8 ` à1)à ¸ àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€Defendantððs€motion€toÐ ¶V Ðsuppress€the€ethyl€alcohol€test€results€of€Defendantððs€blood€based€uponÏthe€Stateððs€failure€to€comply€with€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€section€55„10„406;Ð ` (#` (# ÐÌà8 ` à2)à ¸ àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€State€to€question€itsÐ Ž. Ðforensic€toxicologist€regarding€the€disposition€of€Defendantððs€bloodÏsample€to€Quest€Diagnostic€Laboratories€for€independent€testing;Ð ` (#` (# ÐÌà8 ` à3)à ¸ àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€permitting€the€State€to€cross„Ð n# Ðexamine€the€Defendant€concerning€the€Defendantððs€Motion€to€PreserveÏBlood€Sample€for€testing€filed€on€April€30,€1997;€andÐ ` (#` (# ÐÌà8 ` à4)à ¸ àWhether€the€evidence€at€trial€failed€to€establish€the€DefendantððsÐ N'î Ðguilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Ð ` (#` (# ÐÌFor€the€reasons€stated€below,€we€reverse€and€remand€for€a€new€trial.ÌÌÌÓÓà ` àAt€the€hearing€on€Defendantððs€motion€to€suppress,€the€Defendant€testified€thatÏshe€was€involved€in€an€automobile€accident€on€Hillsboro€Road€in€Williamson€County,ÏTennessee.€€Defendant€was€driving€home€when€another€car€crossed€the€center€lineÏand€struck€her€van.€€As€a€result€of€the€accident,€Defendantððs€air€bag€inflated€and€herÏdriverððs€side€door€was€jammed.€€A€passing€motorist€stopped€at€the€scene€and€toldÏDefendant€he€had€notified€the€police.€€Defendant€telephoned€Randy€Wilkerson,€herÏdate€that€evening,€to€advise€him€of€her€accident€and€asked€him€to€come€to€theÐ ¾8^/0 Ðscene.€€She€stated€she€was€also€concerned€about€her€four€(4)€children€at€homeÏalone.ÌÌà ` àAfter€the€police€arrived,€she€explained€to€them€that€she€had€been€hit€by€theÏother€vehicle.€€Most€of€the€police€officers€went€to€the€other€vehicle€driven€by€MabelÏGarrett.€€Because€she€was€injured€Defendant€went€to€an€ambulance€which€hadÏarrived€at€the€scene.€€However,€she€refused€to€go€to€the€hospital€in€the€ambulanceÏbecause€she€thought€she€was€alright€and€had€already€called€Mr.€Wilkerson€to€pickÏher€up.€€The€police€questioned€Defendant€regarding€her€consumption€of€alcohol€andÏshe€initially€responded€that€she€had€not€been€drinking€but€had€been€to€a€concert€inÏdowntown€Nashville.€€Defendant€then€admitted€that€she€had€consumed€one€(1)€beerÏduring€dinner€and€two€(2)€beers€while€at€the€concert.€€She€agreed€to€submit€to€aÏbattery€of€field€sobriety€tests,€including€standing€on€one€(1)€leg€and€the€nose€to€fingerÏtests.€€Corporal€Larry€Williams€then€asked€Defendant€if€she€would€submit€to€a€bloodÏtest.€€Defendant€asked€Deputy€Marsha€Brolsma€what€would€happen€if€she€refusedÏto€submit€to€the€test.€€Deputy€Brolsma€responded€that€she€could€lose€her€driverððsÏlicense€for€six€(6)€months,€so€Defendant€agreed€to€submit€to€the€test.€€DefendantÏrecalled€that€the€officers€did€not€read€an€Implied€Consent€form€to€her,€but€did€provideÏit€for€her€signature.€€She€was€left,€unhandcuffed,€by€the€police€to€stand€by€herself€atÏher€van.ÌÌà ` àAfter€Randy€Wilkerson€arrived€at€the€scene,€they€left€the€scene€in€WilkersonððsÏtruck€to€go€to€the€hospital.€€While€en€route€to€the€hospital,€they€had€to€stop€as€theyÏdid€not€know€the€way€to€the€hospital.€€Deputy€Brolsma€was€following€them,€and€sheÐ  :À00 Ðagreed€to€lead€them€to€the€hospital.€€As€Defendant€was€unable€to€walk€when€sheÏarrived,€she€was€assisted€into€the€emergency€room.€€Defendantððs€blood€was€drawnÏfirst,€then€a€brace€was€placed€on€her€arm€and€her€leg.€€Her€arm€was€sprained,€herÏleg€was€fractured,€and€she€suffered€additional€burns€to€her€arm€and€face€from€theÏdeplosion€of€the€airbag.€€Wilkerson€left€the€hospital€and€went€to€Defendantððs€homeÏto€check€on€the€children.€€While€she€was€at€the€hospital,€Defendant€telephonedÏWilkerson€several€times.€€Defendant€also€called€her€secretary€and€a€cousin.€€AfterÏcalling€Wilkerson€a€final€time€to€ask€him€to€pick€her€up€from€the€hospital,€DeputyÏBrolsma€informed€Defendant€that€she€was€not€going€home€but€that€she€was€underÏarrest€for€DUI.€€The€Defendant€first€believed€the€deputy€was€joking.€€Defendant€was,Ïhowever,€taken€to€jail.ÌÌà ` àAccording€to€Wilkersonððs€testimony,€Defendant€called€on€February€20,€1997,Ïand€informed€him€that€she€had€been€involved€in€an€accident.€€Defendant€did€not€sayÏanything€over€the€telephone€to€lead€him€to€believe€she€was€under€arrest€for€DUI,Ïhowever€she€was€screaming€and€hysterical.€€After€he€arrived€at€the€accident€scene,ÏWilkerson€found€Defendant€standing€at€her€van€with€no€police€officers.€€She€told€himÏthat€her€foot€was€hurting,€so€he€asked€Deputy€Brolsma€if€he€could€take€DefendantÏto€the€hospital.€€After€conferring€with€Corporal€Williams,€Brolsma€responded€that€heÏcould€transport€her€to€the€hospital€and€that€she€(Brolsma)€would€follow.€€WilkersonÏassumed€the€officers€were€going€to€the€hospital€only€because€there€had€been€aÏmajor€accident.€Realizing€that€he€did€not€know€the€way€to€the€hospital,€WilkersonÏpulled€over€along€the€way€and€motioned€to€Brolsma€to€stop.€€Deputy€BrolsmaÏadvised€Wilkerson€to€follow€her€to€the€hospital.€€After€arriving€at€the€hospital,ÏWilkerson€left€to€go€to€Defendantððs€home€and€check€on€her€children.€€DefendantÐ  :À00 Ðcalled€him€several€times€while€he€was€at€her€home,€and€the€last€time€she€called€sheÏtold€him€she€had€been€arrested.ÌÌà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Wilkerson€recounted€their€alcoholic€beverageÏconsumption€on€February€20,€1997.€€Wilkerson€admitted€that€the€Defendant€hadÏconsumed€three€(3)€beers€that€evening.€€The€Defendant€dropped€him€off€followingÏtheir€date€at€10:00€p.m.ÌÌà ` àDeputy€Marsha€Brolsma€also€testified€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€toÏsuppress.€€Brolsma€had€been€with€the€Williamson€County€Sheriffððs€Department€forÏ1.5€years,€receiving€three€(3)€days€accident€investigation€training€and€two€(2)€daysÏDUI€investigation€training€at€the€Tennessee€Law€Enforcement€Training€Academy.€ÏThis€was€Deputy€Brolsmaððs€first€accident€investigation€and€her€first€DUI€investigation.€ÏOn€February€20,€1997,€she€was€on€duty€and€was€dispatched€to€the€scene€of€anÏaccident€on€Hillsboro€Road.€€After€arriving€at€the€scene€at€approximately€11:22€p.m.,ÏBrolsma€encountered€the€Defendant.€€While€trying€to€retrieve€her€license€andÏregistration,€Brolsma€identified€a€strong€odor€of€alcohol€about€the€DefendantððsÏperson.€€The€Defendant€admitted€that€she€had€consumed€one€(1)€Zima,€an€alcoholicÏbeverage,€but€was€noticeably€staggering€and€argumentative.€€Brolsma€observedÏCorporal€Williams€administer€some€field€sobriety€tests,€during€which€the€DefendantÏcontinued€to€swagger€and€argue€with€the€officers.ÌÌà ` àDeputy€Brolsma€read€the€content€of€the€Implied€Consent€form€to€theÏDefendant,€including€the€beginning€portion€of€the€form€which€states,€ð ðYou€are€underÏarrest.ðð€€Brolsma€then€inquired€whether€the€Defendant€understood€everything€thatÐ  :À00 Ðwas€read€to€her€from€the€form.€€The€Defendant€responded€affirmatively€and€agreedÏto€submit€to€a€blood€test.€€Corporal€Williams€also€signed€the€form€as€a€witness,€andÏBrolsma€then€left€the€area€to€continue€her€investigation€upon€the€assumption€thatÏCorporal€Williams€would€take€charge€of€the€Defendant.€€Upon€returning€to€that€area,ÏBrolsma€found€the€Defendant€in€Randy€Wilkersonððs€pickup€truck.€€After€inquiring€fromÏher€supervising€Sergeant€as€to€why€the€Defendant€was€in€Wilkersonððs€truck,€theÏSergeant€informed€her€that€he€had€given€permission€for€the€Defendant€to€ride€to€theÏhospital€with€Wilkerson.ÌÌà ` àUpon€cross„examination,€Brolsma€explained€that€Corporal€WilliamsÏadministered€the€field€sobriety€tests€to€the€Defendant€as€Brolsma€had€never€effectedÏa€DUI€arrest,€or€any€other€arrest,€and€had€not€at€that€time€attended€the€TennesseeÏLaw€Enforcement€Training€Academy.€€This€was€her€first€accident€investigation.€€SheÏadmitted€that€she€might€have€made€mistakes€such€as€not€handcuffing€the€DefendantÏor€placing€her€in€her€patrol€car€when€she€was€arrested.€€Brolsma€stated€that€sheÏequated€her€reading€the€Implied€Consent€Form€to€the€Defendant€with€placing€herÏunder€arrest.€€Because€she€misunderstood€her€supervisorððs€instructions,€BrolsmaÏfailed€to€handcuff€the€Defendant€or€place€her€in€the€patrol€car.€€While€Brolsma€did€notÏknow€Defendant€had€called€Wilkerson€to€pick€her€up€from€the€hospital,€Brolsma€didÏnot€recall€that€the€Defendant€was€surprised€when€she€was€arrested€at€the€hospital.ÌÌà ` àCorporal€Larry€Williams€also€testified€at€the€hearing€on€the€Motion€toÏSuppress.€€Upon€arriving€at€the€accident€scene€and€encountering€the€Defendant,ÏWilliams€described€her€as€argumentative,€irritated,€with€slurred€speech€and€havingÏan€odor€of€alcohol€about€her€person.€€Defendant€informed€him€that€she€had€one€(1)Ð  :À00 ÐZima€to€drink,€and€he€found€another€unopened€bottle€of€Zima€in€the€Defendantððs€van.€ÏAs€she€was€complaining€of€ankle€pain,€Williams€had€a€paramedic€examineÏDefendant€prior€to€administering€any€field€sobriety€tests.€€Because€of€the€obviousÏextent€of€her€injuries,€Williams€thought€Defendant€was€making€an€unwise€choiceÏwhen€she€refused€medical€assistance.€€After€asking€the€Defendant€to€perform€theÏfinger€to€nose€test€two€(2)€times€with€each€hand€and€her€failing€it€all€four€(4)€times,ÏWilliams€stated€that€€in€his€opinion€the€Defendant€was€drunk.€€ÌÌà ` àWilliams€observed€Deputy€Brolsma€read€the€Implied€Consent€form€to€theÏDefendant€and€then€witnessed€Defendant€sign€the€form.€€Specifically,€WilliamsÏrecalled€hearing€Brolsma€notify€Defendant€that€she€was€under€arrest€for€DUI€priorÏto€reading€the€form€to€her.€€Williams€stated€that€he€told€Brolsma€to€handcuff€theÏDefendant€and€place€her€in€the€patrol€car,€but€she€failed€to€do€so.€€Williams€then€leftÏand€went€to€the€second€car€involved€in€the€accident€to€do€technical€work.€€WhenÏWilliams€returned€to€find€the€Defendant€absent€from€the€scene,€Sergeant€OscarÏDavidson€explained€that€he€let€the€Defendant€go€to€the€hospital€as€he€did€not€knowÏshe€was€under€arrest.ÌÌà ` àAt€trial,€Deputy€Brolsma€testified€to€substantially€the€same€recurrence€ofÏevents€on€February€20€and€21,€1997.€€Additional€testimony€included€her€recollectionÏthat€Defendant€was€unable€to€touch€her€nose€every€time€she€attempted€the€finger€toÏnose€test,€was€ð ðwobblyðð€on€her€feet€and€was€confused€as€to€how€to€perform€the€test.€ÏWhile€at€the€hospital€having€Defendantððs€blood€drawn,€Brolsma€recalled€thatÏDefendant€stated,€ð ðTheyððd€better€hope€there€was€enough€alcohol€in€her€system,ðð€andÏbecame€very€aggressive.€€Brolsma€took€possession€of€the€blood€sample€andÐ  :À00 Ðchecked€it€into€evidence€at€the€Williamson€County€Sheriffððs€Department€later€thatÏday.€€On€cross„examination,€Brolsma€admitted€that€there€were€some€factualÏinconsistencies€within€her€Tennessee€Uniform€Accident€Report.€€Brolsma€admittedÏshe€had€no€knowledge€that€Defendant€had€a€fractured€leg,€a€sprained€wrist,€orÏinjuries€from€the€airbag.€€She€did€acknowledge€the€Defendant€was€injured€and€visiblyÏshaken€at€the€accident€scene.€€Brolsma€admitted€that€Defendant€was€leftÏunrestrained€for€nearly€fifty€(50)€minutes€at€the€scene€following€her€arrest.ÌÌà ` àThe€Stateððs€second€trial€witness€was€Corporal€Larry€Williams€who€has€hadÏextensive€training€and€experience€in€DUI€investigations.€€Williams€added€to€hisÏtestimony€from€the€motion€to€suppress€that€while€he€believed€the€Defendant€wasÏdrunk,€he€left€it€up€to€Deputy€Brolsma€to€determine€whether€the€Defendant€shouldÏbe€arrested.ÌÌà ` àSpecial€Agent€Michael€Little,€a€forensic€toxicologist€with€the€TennesseeÏBureau€of€Investigation,€testified€that€he€performed€an€ethyl€alcohol€analysis€of€theÏDefendantððs€blood.€€Defendantððs€blood€was€found€to€contain€0.16€grams€percent€ofÏethyl€alcohol.€€Little€also€described€that€he€performed€such€testing€using€proceduresÏto€confirm€the€accuracy€of€the€test€results.€€When€asked€if€he€destroyed€the€bloodÏsample€following€the€testing,€Little€explained€that€he€had€given€the€blood€sample€toÏa€representative€of€Quest€Diagnostic€Laboratory€to€perform€an€independentÏexamination€of€the€amount€of€ethyl€alcohol€in€Defendantððs€blood.€€On€cross„¼examination,€Agent€Little€conceded€that€he€performed€two€(2)€tests€of€theÏDefendantððs€blood€sample.€€The€first€test€registered€0.1620€grams€percent€of€ethylÏalcohol€and€was€taken€on€March€13,€1997,€and€the€second€test€of€May€6,€1997Ð  :À00 Ðregistered€0.1667€grams€percent€of€ethyl€alcohol.€€Little€explained€that€the€TBIÏroutinely€drops€the€final€two€digits€as€standard€operating€procedure,€therefore€bothÏtest€results€resulted€in€a€0.16€percentage.€€According€to€his€studies€with€theÏTennessee€Highway€Patrol€and€the€TBI,€Little€concluded€that€a€125€pound€female,Ïstanding€five€(5)€feet,€one€(1)€inches€tall,€would€have€to€consume€seven€(7)€to€nineÏ(9)€drinks€to€register€an€ethyl€alcohol€level€of€0.16.ÌÌà ` àRon€Perry€testified€as€a€character€witness€for€the€Defendant.€€He€stated€thatÏthe€Defendant€oversees€his€firmððs€benefits€department,€supervising€fifteen€(15)Ïemployees.€€While€Perry€had€seen€the€Defendant€consume€alcoholic€beverages€onÏoccasion,€he€had€never€seen€her€drunk€or€intoxicated.€€The€day€following€theÏaccident€of€February€20,€1997,€Defendant€was€unable€to€come€to€work€due€to€herÏinjuries.ÌÌà ` àJoy€Sullivan,€cousin€and€co„employee€with€the€Defendant,€stated€that€theÏDefendant€missed€approximately€one€(1)€month€of€work€following€this€accident.€€TheÏDefendant€was,€in€her€opinion,€a€ð ðvery€truthful,€honest€and€upstanding€member€ofÏthe€community.ððÌÌà ` àRandy€Wilkerson€testified€again€at€the€trial.€€Wilkerson€had€known€theÏDefendant€for€fifteen€(15)€years,€but€the€evening€of€February€20,€1997,€was€theirÏsecond€date.€€They€met€in€the€Green€Hills€area€that€night€after€work.€€The€DefendantÏdrove€them€to€dinner€on€2nd€Avenue€where€they€ate€oysters€and€drank€two€(2)€beersÏeach.€€They€walked€to€a€concert€at€the€nearby€Nashville€Arena,€where€they€bothÏconsumed€two€(2)€additional€beers.€€After€the€concert€concluded€around€10:00€p.m.,Ð  :À00 Ðthe€Defendant€drove€Wilkerson€to€his€truck€and€he€returned€to€his€home€in€Madison.€ÏThe€remaining€portion€of€his€testimony€was€substantially€the€same€as€his€testimonyÏfrom€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€suppress.€€However,€he€did€add€that€no€one€couldÏhave€judged€the€Defendantððs€state€of€sobriety€at€the€scene€of€the€accident€becauseÏshe€was€ð ðscared€to€death,ðð€screaming,€and€crying.ÌÌà ` àThe€Defendant€concluded€the€testimony€at€trial.€€In€addition€to€a€recollectionÏof€the€events€similar€to€what€she€previously€testified€to€at€the€hearing€on€the€motionÏto€suppress,€Defendant€testified€to€the€events€preceding€the€accident.€€On€FebruaryÏ20,€1997,€she€left€work€at€approximately€4:30€p.m.€€After€returning€home,€sheÏprepared€dinner€and€consumed€one€(1)€Zima€prior€to€leaving.€€She€threw€the€emptyÏZima€bottle€in€the€back€of€her€car,€then€drove€to€a€friendððs€home€to€pick€up€RandyÏWilkerson.€€She€drove€Wilkerson€to€the€Nashville€Arena€and€parked,€then€theyÏwalked€to€Joeððs€Crab€House€where€she€consumed€one€(1)€beer€and€ate€oysters€andÏshrimp.€€Defendant€specifically€stated€that€Wilkerson€was€mistaken€when€heÏdescribed€that€they€each€consumed€two€(2)€beers€at€dinner.€€While€she€was€at€theÏconcert,€Defendant€did€consume€two€(2)€additional€beers.€€She€believed€she€wasÏsober€and€fine€to€drive€her€car.€€ÌÌà ` àDefendant€also€stated€that€she€became€upset€at€the€scene€of€the€accidentÏbecause€the€police€officers€were€accusing€her€of€drinking€and€driving.€€She€becameÏfurther€irritated€when,€upon€entering€the€hospital,€she€was€required€to€give€a€bloodÏsample€before€they€would€examine€her€injuries.€Ìâ âÐ 8¸.. Ðà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Defendant€denied€any€knowledge€of€her€blood€sampleÏâ âbeing€sent€to€the€Quest€Diagnostic€Laboratory€for€independent€testing.€€SheÏsurmised€that€her€previous€attorney€might€have€requested€the€test.ÌÌà ` àThe€State€called€Eunetta€Creade,€Deputy€Clerk€with€the€Williamson€CountyÏCircuit€Court,€as€a€rebuttal€witness.€€Over€objection€by€the€Defendant,€Creade€readÏinto€the€record€the€Defendantððs€ð ðMotion€to€Preserve€Blood€Sample€for€Testingðð€whichÏwas€filed€before€the€trial.€€Creade€also€read€its€companion€Order€establishingÏpermission€to€preserve€the€Defendantððs€blood€sample€for€independent€analysis.ÌÌà@àà$DàI.€€òòMotion€to€SuppressˆÐ °P ÐóóÌà ` àDefendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€her€motion€to€suppressÏthe€results€of€her€ethyl€alcohol€test€performed€by€Agent€Michael€Little€because€theÏState€failed€to€comply€with€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sectionÏ55„10„406.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„406(a)€provides€that:ÌÓÓà8 ` àAny€person€who€drives€any€motor€vehicle€in€the€state€is€deemed€toÏhave€given€consent€to€a€test€for€the€purpose€of€determining€theÏalcoholic€or€drug€content€of€that€personððs€blood;€provided,€that€such€testÏis€administered€at€the€direction€of€a€law€enforcement€officer€havingÏreasonable€grounds€to€believe€such€person€to€have€been€driving€whileÏunder€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€or€drug,€as€defined€in€ðð€55„10„405.Ï.€.€.Ð ` (#` (# Ðà8 ` à(3)€If€such€person€having€been€placed€under€arrest€and€thereafterÏhaving€been€requested€by€a€law€enforcement€officer€to€submit€to€suchÏtest€and€advised€of€the€consequences€for€refusing€to€do€so,€refuses€toÏsubmit,€the€test€shall€not€be€given€and€such€person€shall€be€chargedÏwith€violating€this€subsection€.€.€.Ð ` (#` (# ÐÌÓÓThe€Defendant€asserts€that€because€she€was€not€properly€arrested,€a€necessaryÏstatutory€prerequisite€was€not€met€for€a€law€enforcement€officer€to€request€andÐ 9¼// Ðobtain€a€blood€sample.€€Therefore,€Defendant€argues€that€the€blood€sample€wasÏobtained€when€Defendant€was€not€under€valid€ð ðarrestðð€and€the€results€of€suchÏsample€are,€therefore,€inadmissible.ÌÌà ` àFollowing€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€suppress,€the€trial€court€found€thatÏthere€was€no€question€of€whether€the€police€officers€had€probable€cause€to€arrest.€ÏWhile€the€trial€court€did€not€find€that€the€Defendant€was€in€police€custody,€theÏDefendant€was€notified€that€she€was€under€arrest€and€agreed€to€the€terms€of€theÏImplied€Consent€form.€€The€miscommunication€between€the€police€officers€did€notÏmake€her€consent€illegal.€€The€trial€court€specifically€noted€that€under€the€authorityÏof€òòState€v.€Evettsóó,€670€S.W.2d€640€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984),€a€defendant€does€notÐ °P Ðhave€to€be€in€actual€physical€custody€for€a€valid€waiver€by€the€defendant€under€theÏterms€of€the€Implied€Consent€statute.ÌÌà ` àð ðThe€party€prevailing€in€the€trial€court€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€viewÏof€the€evidence€adduced€at€the€suppression€hearing€as€well€as€all€reasonable€andÏlegitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€from€that€evidence.ðð€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928Ð à)€  ÐS.W.2d€18,€23€(Tenn.€1996).€€The€findings€of€the€trial€court€shall€be€upheld€so€longÏas€the€greater€weight€of€the€evidence€supports€those€findings.€€òòIdóó.€€Unless€theÐ ð-$$ Ðevidence€preponderates€otherwise,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€in€the€suppressionÏhearing€will€be€upheld.€€Furthermore,€this€court€may€consider€the€entire€record,Ïincluding€the€evidence€submitted€both€at€the€suppression€hearing€and€at€trial,€inÏevaluating€the€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€on€Defendantððs€pretrial€motionÏto€suppress€the€results€of€her€ethyl€alcohol€blood€analysis.€€òòState€v.€Henningóó,€975Ð 8¸.. ÐS.W.2d€290,€297€(Tenn.€1998).€€Ð  :À00 Їà ` àBoth€during€the€suppression€hearing€and€the€trial,€Deputy€Brolsma€andÏCorporal€Williams€testified€that€the€Defendant€was€notified€that€she€was€under€arrestÏfor€DUI.€€Specifically,€Defendant€was€told,€ð ðYou€are€under€arrest.ðð€€While€theÏDefendant€testifies€that€she€was€never€notified€of€the€arrest€until€she€was€preparingÏto€leave€the€hospital€on€February€21,€1997,€all€other€testimony€is€contrary.€€The€trialÏcourtððs€findings€of€fact€must€be€upheld€so€long€as€the€evidence€does€notÏpreponderate€otherwise.€€òòOdomóó,€928€S.W.2d€at€23.€€All€reasonable€and€legitimateÐ 0  Ðinferences€from€the€testimony€indicate,€under€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€theÏevidence,€that€the€Defendant€was€notified€that€she€was€under€arrest€either€prior€toÏthe€reading€of€the€Implied€Consent€form€or€during€the€reading€of€the€Implied€ConsentÏform.ÌÌà ` àIn€addition,€even€if€there€is€a€some€validity€to€the€dispute€regarding€the€statusÏof€her€arrest,€the€purpose€of€the€statute€ð ðis€òònotóó€to€carve€out€a€rule€of€exclusion€whenÐ È#h Ðthe€provisions€.€.€.€have€not€been€followed.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jerry€Huskinsóó,€No.€01C01„Ð Ð%p Ð9707„CR„00253,€slip€op.€at€7,€Putnam€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Nashville,ÏSeptember€29,€1998),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1999).€€An€officerððs€non„Ð à)€  Ðcompliance€with€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„406Ïdoes€not€warrant€suppression€of€the€Defendantððs€blood€alcohol€test€results€at€trial.€ÏòòIdóó.Ð ø/˜&& ÐÌà@ÓÓ DàII.€€òòAdmissibility€of€EvidenceóóˆÐ 4¨** ÐÌà ` àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€the€State€toÏintroduce€testimony€concerning€the€disposition€of€Defendantððs€blood€sample€forÐ  :À00 Ðindependent€testing.€€Over€objection€by€the€Defendant,€Special€Agent€Michael€LittleÏwas€permitted€to€testify€that€he€gave€Defendantððs€blood€sample€to€a€representativeÏof€Quest€Diagnostic€Laboratory€on€May€6,€1997,€to€perform€an€independent€bloodÏalcohol€analysis€of€that€sample.€€The€State€argues€that€any€impropriety€in€this€lineÏof€questioning€is€harmless€error.ÌÌà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€provides€that€any€person€tested€in€accordanceÏwith€section€55„10„410€ð ðshall€be€entitled€to€have€an€additional€sample€of€blood€orÏurine€procured€and€the€resulting€test€performed€by€any€medical€laboratory€of€thatÏpersonððs€own€choosing€and€at€that€personððs€own€expense;€provided,€that€the€medicalÏlaboratory€is€licensed€pursuant€to€Title€68,€Chapter€29.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„¼410(e).€€This€court€has€recognized€the€defendantððs€right€to€have€an€independent€testÏof€her€blood€sample€conducted€for€its€ethyl€alcohol€content€under€the€authority€ofÏRule€16(a)(1)(C)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure.€€òòState€v.€Gilbertóó,Ð È#h Ð751€S.W.2d€454,€460€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988)€(citations€omitted).ÌÌà ` àIt€is€inappropriate€for€a€prosecutor€to€question€a€defendant€regarding€theÏdefendantððs€independent€testing€of€a€blood€sample€if€the€defendant€chooses€not€toÏintroduce€the€results€of€the€test€in€her€defense€proof.€€òòState€v.€Greggóó,€874€S.W.2dÐ ð-$$ Ð643,€645€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€While€the€court€found€the€error€to€be€harmlessÏfor€the€defendant€in€òòGreggóó,€we€cannot€find€this€questioning€as€harmless€forÐ 2 (( ÐDefendant€in€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó.€€In€òòGreggóó,€the€court€observed€that€prior€to€theÐ 4¨** Ðquestions€regarding€independent€testing,€the€proof€presented€to€the€juryÏdemonstrated€that€two€(2)€vials€of€blood€were€drawn€during€the€testing,€one€(1)€ofÏwhich€was€given€to€the€defendant.€€òòIdóó.€at€645.€€Furthermore,€the€court€noted€that€theÐ  :À00 Ðdefendant€herself€ð ðvolunteered€that€the€vial€in€her€possession€was€at€the€hospital€forÏtesting€but€was€not€initially€tested€because€her€name€was€misspelled.€€Thus,€the€juryÏwas€well€aware€of€the€fact€that€there€was€another€vial€of€blood€that€had€beenÏavailable€for€testing.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€In€the€case€of€this€Defendant,€no€other€evidence€had€beenÐ x Ðpresented€to€the€jury€regarding€any€independent€testing€of€the€Defendantððs€blood.€ÏÌà ` àIn€addition,€Defendant€also€contends€that€any€cross„examination€of€her€by€theÏState€regarding€an€earlier€ð ðMotion€to€Preserve€Blood€Sample€for€Testingðð€wasÏpermitted€in€error€by€the€trial€court.€€While€Defendant€denied€any€knowledge€of€suchÏmotion€during€her€cross„examination,€the€Deputy€Court€Clerk€was€later€called€as€aÏrebuttal€witness€by€the€State€and€permitted€to€read€the€contents€of€the€motion€andÏthe€companion€order€allowing€the€preservation€of€the€blood€sample€for€independentÏtesting.€€€€While€Defendant€does€have€a€right€to€obtain€an€additional€sample€or€obtainÏthe€existing€sample€of€blood€for€an€independent€ethyl€alcohol€analysis,€whatever€theÏdefendant€chooses€to€do€with€the€sample€is€her€prerogative.€€òòGreggóó,€874€S.W.2d€atÐ Ð%p Ð645.€€The€prosecutor€should€not€have€been€allowed€to€question€DefendantÏconcerning€the€test€results€or€to€present€rebuttal€testimony€from€the€court€clerk€sinceÏDefendant€chose€not€to€use€independent€test€results€in€her€proof.€€The€only€possibleÏrationale€for€this€line€of€questioning€was€to€create€a€negative€inference€for€the€jury.€ÏòòIdóó.€€In€addition,€as€Defendant€could€not€be€properly€impeached€by€a€motion€or€courtÐ ø/˜&& Ðorder€she€did€not€have€knowledge€of,€such€test€results€were€inadmissible€absent€anÏappropriate€evidentiary€foundation.€€òòIdóó.€€There€was€no€objection€to€this€line€ofÐ 4¨** Ðquestioning€of€the€Defendant.€€However,€the€State€conceded€during€oral€argumentÏin€this€court€that€it€was€error€to€allow€this€line€of€questioning.€€Particularly€in€light€ofÏthe€error€regarding€the€questioning€of€Agent€Michael€Little€about€independent€testingÐ  :À00 Ðof€the€blood€sample,€we€cannot€find€this€errorñ2ñ›ñ2ñ€to€be€harmless.€€The€cumulative€effectÏof€the€questioning€affected€theñ0ñ€ñ0ññ1ñsubstantial€ñ1ññ/ñ€sñ/ññ.ññ-ñ›ñ-ññ.ññ/ñubstantialñ/ññ0ñ€ñ0ñrights€of€the€accusedñ*ññ)ñ€ñ)ññ*ññ+ñ,€and€resulted€inÏprejudice€to€the€judicial€process.€€ñ+ññ,ñðð€to€her€prejudice.€€ñ,ñTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b).€Ï€€ñ2ñœñ2ñÌñ3ñÌñ3ñà@;;DàòòIII.€€Sufficiency€of€the€evidenceˆÐ €  ÐÌóóà ` àDefendant€argues€that€the€evidence€introduced€at€trial€failed€to€establish€theÐ 0  ÐDefendantððs€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€She€was€convicted€of€one€(1)€countÏof€driving€while€under€the€influence€with€a€blood€or€breath€alcohol€level€at€or€aboveÏ.10€percent.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„401(a)(2).€€Specifically,€Defendant€arguesÏthat€the€evidence€was€tainted€due€to€some€foreign€material€in€the€blood€sample€testÏtube.€€ÌÌà ` àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,€theÏstandard€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÏprosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€theÏcrime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979).€Ð à)€  ÐOn€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€andÏall€inferences€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€Ð ð-$$ ÐBecause€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replaces€it€withÏa€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused€has€the€burden€in€this€court€of€illustrating€why€theÏevidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict€returned€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.Ð 4¨** ÐTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982);€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476Ð 6°,, Ð(Tenn.€1973).ÌÐ  :À00 Ðà ` àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€toÏbe€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence,€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€court.€€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,€754€S.W.2d€620,€623Ð p  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òòdeniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1987).€€Nor€may€this€courtÐ x Ðreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€at€835.€€A€jury€verdictÐ €  Ðapproved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€Stateððs€witnesses€and€resolves€all€conflictsÏin€favor€of€the€State.€€òòGraceóó,€493€S.W.2d€at€476.Ð 0  ÐÌà ` àFirst,€we€observe€that€both€Brolsma€and€Williamson,€the€police€officersÏinvestigating€the€accident€scene,€testified€that€the€Defendant€had€the€odor€of€alcoholÏabout€her€person,€was€argumentative€and€was€staggering€following€the€accident.€ÏDefendant€was€also€unable€to€successfully€complete€any€of€the€field€sobriety€testsÏwhich€were€administered€to€her€at€the€scene.€€By€her€own€admission,€Defendant€hadÏbeen€drinking€and€driving€that€evening.€€Her€companion€that€night,€Randy€Wilkerson,Ïalso€testified€that€Defendant€had€consumed€at€least€(3)€alcoholic€beverages.€€A€ZimaÏbottle€was€found€in€Defendantððs€car€by€the€police.€€ÌÌà ` àRegarding€the€test€tube€sample,€TBI€Agent€Michael€Little€testified€that€heÏtested€the€Defendantððs€blood€sample€twice.€€He€also€described€routine€proceduresÏby€which€his€testing€of€Defendantððs€blood€was€monitored€and€confirmed€to€manifestÏaccurate€results.€€While€there€was€a€slight€variance€in€the€results€of€the€two€(2)€tests,ÏLittle€explained€that€such€variance€was€due€to€a€slight€variability€in€the€instrument.€ÏAs€the€State€points€out€within€its€brief,€any€suggestion€that€a€foreign€substance€wasÏin€the€test€tube€is€merely€speculation€by€the€Defendant.€€Any€questions€concerningÏthe€credibility€of€the€witnesses€and€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidenceÐ  :À00 Ðwas€determined€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€We€will€not€reweigh€the€evidence.€€In€theÏstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence,€there€is€more€than€sufficient€evidenceÏwhereby€the€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€Defendant€guilty€of€driving€under€theÏinfluence.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà@þþ*DàòòConclusionóóˆÐ ˆ(  ÐÌà ` àThe€Defendantððs€issues€challenging€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€and€theÏadmissibility€of€the€blood€tests€performed€by€the€TBI€are€without€merit.€€However,Ïfinding€reversible€error€regarding€Defendantððs€other€two€issues,€we€reverse€theÏjudgment€and€remand€this€case€for€a€new€trial.€€Ìñ&ñÓÓñ&ññ'ñÌñ'ñÌñ%ñà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€Judgeñ%ñ