ÿWPC  ‘ªâÊ¿ksP·±•,´~ø¹áÅN_å¾òòØ;+ŠZè¥õR)&% •Qðš7otoÂú§ÖŒ(ÇÛ´­¹¢3èú%>í±ñ÷Ï‘_©¯r½Šô³o[ dÄj2‰XÙÜÊÎ5ÜvΨ ì‘½»ÖcñU=vÐÑP€íÀ„sv‹Øç%›A]a-b9l¢m€ü"—ÇôxïÅŽ(I´söîˆñ´³WÜ]Mv ݈øO”=X¹ÑNÈ ™}ô.o¦ß\‘(¸TñÁ†þÝ$:ÿ?ÑVËC>[eæuQé°Ì)ƒzÐþi†¤¥;>þö⵿±cÕò»GûX_˜$Œ‡žª)>Ž…S › }=íÉ"z'5ÛÙâëÉ:›“CŠ  æKL¹¥!„’ƒ×0õ7þ^3Vš†•SÛëâ2F‰'æ"-+Q©,[`ϵK† Då°×§"UH³üS¼?ÖòJØ·yÿZùlê æQ jÖ,±$¦Eü#d¿§äÖÐd‘½•0#K‚5ó8—XÕÝvüÿBÛ4ÍH8Y .¢ÒÕ¶Ù) ñ‘¾X•žöëÉ—-¶Ûý*«n$ç#ôºøŸIò`m_¸ò Luy ú™¬ÁLqVeN(…# F U>Q % 0í• UB‚ 4Ä Ø n­ç U :” fÎ 4 "< w@^ èž 01† 0D·U:ûé5U:UNXU:¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ Bàààààààà D3ýýý 0D0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 AOtÆÃà 0D‰ D/Í Bü˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ<èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX(ÅÕÐ$¡¡Ñ  ÑÑ7€'CXXdÈXXdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓ<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiuM%3|xo«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ Ñ Ü ÑÑ  Ñ QRPSPTDUVDWXUYÓ€c ÞÔ€X¬žXXXÔÔ€É8XX¬žÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¬žXÉ8ÔÐ  ÐÌJanuary€14,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó(á(3 1$¤¤Ý ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ7€KèXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ßÔ€X¬žXXXÔÔ€É8XX¬žÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¬žXÉ8ÔÐ  ÐÌDecember€29,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d""""'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒÕÐ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ7€KèXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:ð<H? A°œXiÓÝ  ݛѰÑÑܰÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÑ€ †ÑÑ€ í:ÑÔ€ X¬žXXXÔÑ7€ ¬ž XXdæXXdÈ7ÑñYñœñYññcññYñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@E  ` 8ttxPXð  rßñYññcññcñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@E  ` 8ttxPXð  rßñcññYñ›ñYñ€à8 ¸ àà@Ñ Ñ D¸ x¸ xàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@ƒƒ%DàAT€NASHVILLEà@@66-Rà€€€€€€€€€ˆÌà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€€€€€€AUGUST€1998€SESSIONÌÌÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à h àà À à)à  àÐ 80 Ѐà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð   Ðà ¸ àAppellee,€à h àà À à)à  àNo.€01C01„9712„CR„00566Ð ü  Ðà ¸ à€€€€€à  àà h à€€à À à)Ð êâ  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àPutnam€CountyÐ ÐÈ  Ðv.à ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€€€€€€€€€Ð ¶®  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHonorable€John€Turnbull,€Judge€€€€€Ð œ”  Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ÌCHARLES€B.€LUKE,à h àà À à)à  à(Certified€Question€of€Law)Ð h` Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€€€€€€€€Ìà ¸ àAppellant.à h àà À à)Ð 4, ÐÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð ÌÄ ÐÌDonald€G.€Dickersonà h àà À àà  àJohn€Knox€Walkupà  àà x àÐ ˜ Ð310D€East€Broad€Streetà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€of€TennesseeÐ ~v ÐCookeville,€TN€38501à h àà À àà  àà p àandà È àà  àà x àà Ð àÐ d\ Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTimothy€BehanÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€General€of€Tennessee€¼à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€Northà x àà Ð àÐ ! Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWilliam€Edward€GibsonÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€à p àandÐ ”%Œ" Ðà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àShawn€FryÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à145€South€Jefferson€AvenueÌà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCookeville,€TN€38501ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌCONVICTION€AFFIRMED;€REMANDED€FOR€SENTENCE€MODIFICATIONÌÌJoseph€M.€TiptonÌJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÐ >:639W ЇÌÓÓòòò òà@õõ)DàO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óóóà@@DD/DàˆÐ îæ ÐÌà ¸ àThe€defendant,€Charles€B.€Luke,€was€convicted€pursuant€to€his€plea€ofÏòònoloóó€òòcontendereóó€in€the€Putnam€County€Criminal€Court€of€driving€under€the€influence€ofÐ ^ V Ðan€intoxicant€(D.U.I.),€a€Class€A€misdemeanor.€€The€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendantÏto€five€months,€twenty„nine€days€confinement€in€the€county€jail€with€all€but€forty„eightÏhours€to€be€served€on€probation€and€a€fine€of€œthreeñQñ€ñQñhundred€sixty›€dollars.€€TheÏdefendant€appeals€as€of€right€upon€the€following€certified€question€of€law€that€isÏdispositive€of€this€case,€òòseeóó€T.R.A.P.€3(b);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€37€(b)(2)(i):Ð ZR ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àDoes€a€police€dispatch€based€on€a€phoned„in€tipÏproviding€a€description€of€a€vehicle,€license€number€andÏstatement€that€[the]€driver€ð ðhas€no€business€drivingððÏjustify€the€stop€of€a€motoristððs€vehicle€who€has€exhibitedÏno€bad€driving,€when€the€arresting€officer€did€not€speakÏto€or€know€the€name€of€the€informant€and€has€no€otherÏinformation€about€the€defendant€other€than€that€relayedÏby€the€dispatcher?Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€stop€was€justified.€€However,€we€note€that€the€Ïsentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€was€improper,€and€we€remand€the€case€forÏimposition€of€a€sentence€of€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days€instead€of€five€months,Ïtwenty„nine€days.€ÌÌÔ€X@jXX X¬žÔà ¸ àÔ€X¬žXXX@jÔThe€defendant€filed€a€Motion€to€Suppress€the€evidence€obtained€from€theÐ 8)0"& Ðinvestigatory€stop€that€led€to€his€arrest.€€At€the€suppression€hearing,€Angela€Chesebro,Ïa€dispatcher€for€the€Cookeville€Police€Department,€testified€that€on€April€12,€1997,€sheÏreceived€a€telephone€call€from€the€Holiday€Inn.€€The€tape€of€that€telephone€call,€whichÏwas€exhibit€one€at€the€hearing,€states€as€follows:ÌœÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àChesebro:€à h àCookeville›€Police€Department,€Operator€œà @n à€Ð 42,+0 Ѐ€€€€€à  àà h àChesebro,›€may€I€help€you?Ð3,1¸ x¸ x ÐÌœà8 ¸ àDerwin:€€€€€€à h àHi,›€this€is€the€Holiday€Inn.€€My€security€œà @Ö àà @Ö àà @Ö àà @Ö àñRñà @Ö àà @Ö àÐ æ4Þ-3 ÐñRñguard›€wanted€me€to€call€you€and€tell€you€œà  àà @  àthat›Ð Ì5Ä.4 Ðthere€is€a€white€Chevy€pickup€just€œà È àà  àà @  àà @  àñSñà @  àà @  àñSñexited›Ð ²6ª/5 Ðâ âour€parking€lot€and€headed€north€on€œà È àà  àÐ ˜706 ÐJefferson.›€€The€guyððs€got€no€œbusiness€à È àà  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  àà @  à€€€€€€€€€€€Ð  Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€driving›€and€I€have€a€plate€number.Ð ¸ x¸ x Ðâ âÌà ¸ àChesebro:à h àWhat€is€the€plate?Ð º ² ÐÌà ¸ àDerwin:à h àIt€is€D€for€dealer.Ð † ~ ÐÌà ¸ àChesebro:à h àUh„huh.Ð R J ÐÌà ¸ àDerwin:à h à48397.Ð   ÐÌà ¸ àChesebro:€à h àWhite€Chevy€pickup?Ð êâ  ÐÌà8 ¸ àDerwin:à h àWhite€Chevy€pickup.€€Heððs€headed€north€Ð ¶®  Ðà  àà h àon€Jefferson.Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà ¸ àChesebro:à h àCould€I€get€your€name,€maððam?Ð h` ÐÌà8 ¸ àDerwin:à h àMy€name€is€Dorinda,€D„O„R„I„N„D„A.€€LastÐ 4, Ðà  àà h àname€Derwin,€D„E„R„W„I„N.Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà ¸ àChesebro:à h àOkay,€maððam,€weððll€notify€our€officers,€okay?Ð æÞ ÐÌà ¸ àDerwin:à h àOkay,€thank€you.Ð ²ª ÐÌà ¸ àChesebro:à h àAlright,€œbye€bye›.Ð ~v ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓœDispatcher›€Chesebro€testified€that€she€wrote€this€information€on€a€complaint€card€andÏstamped€the€card€with€the€time,€which€was€3:16€a.m.€€She€stated€that€she€then€handedÏthe€card€to€Dispatcher€Lana€Smith,€who€was€in€charge€of€the€radio.ÌÌà ¸ àLana€Smith,Ô‡ Xü¬XXXü¬Ô€a€dispatcher€for€the€Cookeville€Police€Department,€testifiedÔ#†Xü¬XX Xü¬Ý#ÔÐ z&r# Ðthat€on€April€12,€1997,€she€radioed€a€dispatch€concerning€a€white€Chevrolet€pickupÏtruck€based€upon€information€she€received€from€Dispatcher€Chesebro.€€A€tape€of€thisÏdispatch,€which€was€exhibit€three€at€the€hearing,€stated€as€follows:ÌÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ àSmith:€€€Cookeville€City€east€side€units,€just€leaving€the€¼à  à€€€Holiday€Inn€going€northbound€on€Jefferson,€we€¼à  à€€have€a€10„49€driver€be€in€a€white€Chevy€€€€à @( à€€€à @Ð à€€à @@ à€€Ï€€€€€€€€€€€€€pickup.€€License€number€David€48397,€48397.Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓDispatcher€Smith€testified€that€a€10„49€driver€is€a€driver€suspected€to€be€under€theÏinfluence.Ìâ âÐ À5¸.4 ÐÑ í:ÑÑÜÜÑÑÑÑ  ÑñSñÑ í:ÑÑÜÜÑÑÑÑ  ÑÑ í:ÑÑÜÜÑÑÑÑ  ÑñSññRñÑ í:ÑÑÜÜÑÑÑÑ  ÑÑ í:ÑÑÜÜÑÑÑÑ  ÑñRññQñÑ í:ÑÑÜÜÑÑÑÑ  ÑñQñà ¸ àSergeant€David€Dukes,€an€officer€with€the€Cookeville€Police€Department,Ïâ âtestified€that€on€April€12,€1997,€he€received€a€dispatch€concerning€a€white€ChevroletÏpickup€truck.€€He€stated€that€within€three€or€four€minutes,€he€spotted€the€truck€at€a€gasÏstation€œtwoñTñ„ñTññUñ€ñUñhundred›€yards€north€of€the€Holiday€Inn.€€Sergeant€œDukes›€stated€that€heÏradioed€Officer€Matt€and€Officer€Demming€about€the€truck,€then€he€pulled€into€a€nearbyÏbusiness€to€watch€for€the€truck€to€leave€the€gas€station.€€Sergeant€œDukesñMñ€ñMñtestified›€that€aÏfew€minutes€later,€he€saw€the€truck€leave€the€gas€station.€€He€stated€that€a€short€timeÏlater,€he€saw€Officer€Demming€responding€to€his€radio€call.ÌÌà ¸ àOfficer€Yvette€Demming€of€the€Cookeville€Police€Department€testified€thatÏon€April€12,€1997,€she€heard€the€dispatch€from€Dispatcher€Smith€concerning€a€whiteÏpickup€truck.€€She€stated€that€after€communicating€with€Sergeant€œDukes,›€she€met€himÏas€he€was€following€a€white€Chevrolet€pickup€truck€with€dealer€plates€and€then€gotÏbehind€the€truck€as€Sergeant€œDukes›€pulled€away.€€She€said€that€once€she€got€behindÏthe€truck,€she€activated€the€video€camera€in€her€car.€€She€stated€that€she€followed€theÏtruck€for€one€mile€before€activating€her€blue€lights.€€Ô‡ Xü¬XXXü¬ÔOfficer€Demming€testified€that€theÐ ü!ô Ðtruck€was€in€the€right€lane€of€three€lanes€of€traffic.€€She€said€that€the€driver€of€the€truckÏturned€on€the€left€blinker€and€moved€into€the€center€lane.€€She€stated€that€the€truckÏremained€in€this€lane,€although€the€driver€did€not€turn€off€the€blinker.€€Ô#†Xü¬XX Xü¬¾(#ÔOfficer€DemmingÐ `'X $ Ðfurther€testified€that€as€she€followed€the€truck,€it€accelerated€as€it€approached€a€redÏlight.€€She€stated€that€when€the€truck€stopped€at€the€light,€its€bumper€bounced€up€andÏdown.€€She€stated€that€when€she€stopped€behind€the€truck€at€the€traffic€light,€sheÏconfirmed€that€the€license€plate€number€matched€the€one€given€in€the€dispatch.€€OfficerÏDemming€testified€that€she€then€turned€on€her€blue€lights€and€stopped€the€truck€in€aÏparking€lot.€€Officer€Demming€stated€that€she€would€not€have€stopped€the€defendantÏbased€solely€on€his€driving€without€the€information€from€the€dispatch.€€She€testified€thatÏat€the€time€of€the€stop,€she€had€no€information€about€the€source€of€the€dispatch.ÌÐ Œ7„06 Ðà ¸ àGary€Murphy€testified€that€he€was€working€as€a€security€guard€at€theÏHoliday€Inn€œat€the€time€of€the€offense.›€€The€trial€court€limited€Murphyððs€testimony€to€theÏcommunications€he€had€with€Dorinda€Derwin€and€found€this€testimony€relevant€not€forÏits€truth€but€to€establish€the€information€known€to€Derwin€when€she€telephoned€theÏpolice.€€Murphy€testified€that€he€asked€Derwin€to€call€the€Cookeville€City€PoliceÏDepartment€to€notify€them€that€a€man€was€leaving€the€Holiday€Inn€parking€lot€and€thatÏMurphy€did€not€think€the€man€should€be€driving.€€He€stated€that€he€told€Derwin€that€theÏman€was€driving€a€white€Chevrolet€pickup€truck€with€a€red€dealerððs€license€tag€with€theÏnumber€D„48397.€€Murphy€testified€that€he€gave€this€information€to€Derwin€as€he€stoodÏin€the€doorway€looking€out€on€the€parking€lot€and€watched€the€defendant€attempting€toÏleave€the€parking€lot€in€his€truck.€€He€stated€that€he€heard€Derwin€make€the€telephoneÏcall€to€the€police.ÌÌà ¸ àAt€the€close€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€made€the€following€factualÏfindings€œas€summarized›€below:ÌÓÓÓ  Óà8 ¸ à(1)€€that€Officer€Demmingððs€stop€was€not€based€uponÏany€bad€driving€on€the€part€of€the€defendant,Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(2)€€that€Officer€Demmingððs€stop€was€based€upon€aÏpolice€dispatch€to€be€on€the€lookout€for€a€possible€D.U.I.Ïinvolving€a€white€Chevrolet€pickup€truck€with€licenseÏplate€number€D„48397€which€left€the€Holiday€Inn€at€3:16Ïa.m,Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(3)€€that€within€three€minutes€of€the€dispatch,€OfficerÏDemming€spotted€a€vehicle€matching€that€descriptionÏand€with€that€license€plate€number€and€after€followingÐ ¸ x¸ x Ðà8 ¸ àthe€pickup€for€a€considerable€length€of€time,€sheÏstopped€the€defendant,Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(4)€€that€the€information€Officer€Demming€received€inÏthe€dispatch€was€based€upon€a€telephone€call€from€theÏclerk€at€the€Holiday€Inn,€who€described€the€make,€colorÏand€license€plate€number€of€the€vehicle€and€stated,Ïð ðThis€guyððs€got€no€business€driving,ðð€Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(5)€€that€based€upon€this€information€from€the€clerk,€theÏdispatcher,€Angela€Chesebro,€issued€a€complaint€cardÏindicating€a€possible€D.U.I.,Ð ¸ x¸ x Ðâ âÐ Œ7„06 Ðà8 ¸ à(6)€€that€under€the€given€time€and€circumstances,€it€wasÏâ âreasonable€to€conclude€that€a€report€that€someoneÏshould€not€be€driving€was,€in€fact,€a€report€of€D.U.I.,€Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(7)€€that€a€second€dispatcher,€Lana€Smith,€then€placedÏa€dispatch€for€officers€to€be€on€the€lookout€for€aÏpossible€D.U.I.,€and€the€dispatch€contained€theÏinformation€upon€which€Officer€Demming€based€herÏstop€of€the€œdefendant,›Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(8)€€that€when€Officer€Demming€confirmed€that€theÏdescription€and€license€plate€number€matched€theÏdefendantððs€vehicle,€this€adequately€validated€theÏinformation€given€in€the€dispatch€and€was€sufficient€toÏlead€her€to€believe€the€informationððs€validity€evenÏthough€she€had€not€received€it€personally,€andÐ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8 ¸ à(9)€€that€the€information€given€to€the€dispatcher€andÏreceived€and€confirmed€by€Officer€Demming€providedÏreasonable€and€articulable€facts€which€generatedÏreasonable€suspicion€that€a€crime€was€being€committedÏby€the€driver€of€a€white€Chevrolet€pickup€truck€with€theÏlicense€plate€number€D„48397.Ð ¸ x¸ x ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓAccordingly,€the€trial€court€denied€the€Motion€to€Suppress.ÌÌà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€Motion€toÏSuppress€because€the€information€provided€in€the€telephone€tip€from€Derwin€failed€toÏjustify€the€stop.€€He€argues€that€the€tip€did€not€state€that€he€was€engaged€in€any€illegalÏactivity,€the€informant€gave€no€factual€basis€for€her€tip€and€the€arresting€officerððsÏpersonal€observations€did€not€verify€any€illegal€conduct€on€the€part€of€the€defendant.€€ÏThus,€the€defendant€argues€that€Officer€Demmingððs€stop€was€not€supported€byÏreasonable€suspicion.ÌÌà ¸ àIn€reviewing€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€a€Motion€to€Suppress,€we€accept€theÏtrial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.Ð \0T). ÐYearganóó,€958€S.W.2d€626,€629€(Tenn.€1997).€€However,€the€law€as€applied€to€thoseÐ (2 +0 Ðfacts€is€subject€to€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review.€€òòIdóó.€€The€defendant€bears€the€burden€ofÐ ô3ì,2 Ðdemonstrating€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings.€€òòStateÐ À5¸.4 Ðv.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€22„23€(Tenn.€1996).€€€€€€€Ð Œ7„06 ÐÑ †ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑœñLñÌñLñ›à ¸ àAn€automobile€stop€constitutes€a€seizure€within€the€meaning€of€both€theÐ  ÐFourth€Amendment€of€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€Section€7€of€theÏTennessee€Constitution.€€òòSeeóó€òòMichigan€Depððt€of€State€Police€v.€Sitzóó,€496€U.S.€444,€450,Ð   ˜ Ð110€S.€Ct.€2481,€2485€(1990);€òòState€v.€Pullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€29,€30€(Tenn.€1993);€òòState€v.Ð l d ÐBinionóó,€900€S.W.2d€702,€705€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€The€police€may€stop€a€vehicle€ifÐ 80 Ðthey€have€reasonable€suspicion€based€upon€specific€and€articulable€facts€that€anÏoccupant€is€violating€or€is€about€to€violate€the€law.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Brignoni„Ð ÐÈ  ÐPonceóó,€422€U.S.€873,€881,€95€S.€Ct.€2412,€2416€(1975);€òòState€v.€Watkinsóó,€827€S.W.2dÐ œ”  Ð293,€295€(Tenn.€1992);€òòHughes€v.€Stateóó,€588€S.W.2d€296,€305€(Tenn.€1979).Ð h` ÐÌà ¸ àWhen€a€stop€is€based€upon€the€tip€of€an€informant,€the€factors€set€forth€inÏòòState€v.€Jacuminóó,€778€S.W.2d€430,€436€(Tenn.€1989),€are€useful€in€evaluating€theÐ ÌÄ Ðsufficiency€of€the€tip.€€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€31.€€In€òòJacuminóó,€our€supreme€court€adoptedÐ ˜ Ðthe€two„prong€test€of€òòAguilar€v.€Texasóó,€378€U.S.€108,€84€S.€Ct.€1509€(1964),€and€òòSpinelliÐ d\ Ðv.€United€Statesóó,€393€U.S.€410,€89€S.€Ct.€584€(1960).€€òòJacuminóó,€778€S.W.2d€at€436.€€InÐ 0 ( ÐòòAguilaróó,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€concluded€that€there€must€be€a€ð ðbasis€ofÐ ü!ô Ðknowledgeðð€when€an€officer€relies€on€an€informantððs€tip.€€The€ð ðveracityðð€prong€of€theÏòòAguilar„Spinellióó€test€requires€a€showing€that€the€informant€is€credible€or€the€informationÐ ”%Œ" Ðis€reliable.€€The€òòJacuminóó€court€held€that:Ð `'X $ ÐÓ  ÓÓÓà8 ¸ àwhile€independent€police€corroboration€could€make€upÏdeficiencies€in€either€prong,€each€prong€represents€anÏindependently€important€consideration€that€ð ðmust€beÏseparately€considered€and€satisfied€in€some€way.ððÐ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌÓ  ÓÓÓ778€S.W.2d€at€436€(quoting€òòCommonwealth€v.€Uptonóó,€476€N.E.2d€548,€557€(Mass.Ð ª-¢&+ Ð1985));€òòseeóó€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€31.€€An€investigatory€stop€based€upon€reasonableÐ v/n(- Ðsuspicion€requires€ð ððða€lower€quantum€of€proof€than€probable€cause.ðððð€€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2dÐ B1:*/ Ðat€31.€€ÌÓ  ÓÓÓà8 ¸ àð ðReasonable€suspicion€is€a€less€demanding€standardÏthan€probable€cause€not€only€in€the€sense€thatÏreasonable€suspicion€can€be€established€withÏinformation€that€is€different€in€quantity€or€content€thanÏthat€required€to€establish€probable€cause,€but€also€inÐ r8j17 Ðthe€sense€that€reasonable€suspicion€can€arise€fromÏinformation€that€is€less€reliable€than€that€required€toÏshow€probable€cause.ððÐ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÓÓIdóó.€at€32€(quoting€òòAlabama€v.€Whiteóó,€496€U.S.€325,€330,€110€S.€Ct.€2412,€2416€(1990)).€Ð   ˜ ÐThe€question€of€reasonable€suspicion€is€answered€by€considering€the€totality€of€theÏcircumstances,€including€looking€at€the€gravity€of€the€public€concern€at€stake,€theÏdegree€the€police€intrusion€advances€that€concern,€and€the€severity€of€the€intrusion.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€30;€òòWatkinsóó,€827€S.W.2d€at€294.€Ð ÐÈ  ÐÌà ¸ àThe€defendant€first€faults€the€information€provided€by€Derwin€by€arguingÏthat€it€does€not€state€that€the€defendant€was€engaged€in€or€about€to€engage€in€anyÏillegal€activity.€€The€tape€of€Derwinððs€call€to€the€dispatcher€shows€that€she€stated€thatÏthe€defendant€had€no€business€driving.€Ô‡ Xü¬XXXü¬Ô€€The€trial€court€found€that€under€the€given€timeÐ ÌÄ Ðand€circumstances,€a€reasonable€person€could€conclude€that€a€report€that€someone€€€€Ïshould€not€be€driving€was,€in€fact,€a€report€of€D.U.I.Ô#†Xü¬XX Xü¬ P#Ô€€€We€hold€that€the€evidence€doesÐ d\ Ðnot€preponderate€against€this€finding.€€ÌÌà ¸ àWhen€analyzing€whether€an€officer€had€reasonable€suspicion€for€anÏinvestigatory€stop,€our€supreme€court€has€distinguished€between€information€providedÏby€a€known€citizen€informant€and€that€obtained€from€a€criminal€or€professionalÏinformant.€€òòState€v.€Cauleyóó,€863€S.W.2d€411,€417€(Tenn.€1993);€òòState€v.€Melsonóó,€638Ð ,)$"& ÐS.W.2d€342,€354€(Tenn.€1982).€€Information€supplied€by€a€criminal€informant€must€beÏanalyzed€under€the€òòJacuminóó€test,€while€the€known€citizen€informant€is€presumed€to€beÐ Ä,¼%* Ðreliable.€€òòCauleyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€417.€€Citizen€informants,€whether€they€be€victims€orÐ .ˆ', Ðwitnesses,€have€necessarily€gained€their€information€through€first„hand€experience.€ÏœòòMelsonóó,›€638€S.W.2d€at€354„56€(citations€omitted).€€The€criminal€informant€providesÐ (2 +0 Ðinformation€in€exchange€for€some€consideration€„„€whether€it€be€monetary€or€theÏâ âgranting€of€some€exemption€or€privilege€„„€while€the€citizen€informant€acts€in€the€interestÐ À5¸.4 Ðof€society€or€personal€safety.€€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€867€S.W.2d€343,€347€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð  Ð1993)€(citing€òòState€v.€Paszekóó,€184€N.W.2d€836,€842„43€(1971)).Ð ÔÌ Ðâ âÌà ¸ àIn€this€case,€Officer€Demming€based€her€stop€of€the€defendant€uponÏinformation€given€to€the€police€dispatcher€by€a€known€citizen€informant,€Dorinda€Derwin,Ïthe€clerk€at€the€Holiday€Inn.€€An€officer€may€make€an€investigatory€stop€based€upon€aÏpolice€dispatch€as€long€as€the€individual€or€agency€placing€the€dispatch€has€theÏrequisite€reasonable€suspicion€supported€by€specific€and€articulable€facts€that€indicateÏcriminal€conduct.€€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€775€S.W.2d€372,€378€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989);€òòseeóóÐ h` ÐòòÔ‡ Xü¬XXXü¬ÔWhiteley€v.€Wardenóó,€401€U.S.€560,€568,€91€S.€Ct.€1031,€1037€(1971)Ô#†Xü¬XX Xü¬—X#Ô.€€The€presence€ofÐ 4, Ðreasonable€suspicion€may€be€assessed€by€looking€to€the€testimony€of€the€individualÏplacing€the€dispatch€or€the€testimony€of€the€individuals€who€witnessed€the€informationÏthat€is€eventually€passed€on€to€the€investigating€officer.€€òòMooreóó,€775€S.W.2d€at€378.€€Ð ˜ ÐÌà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€Derwin€is€not€a€known€citizen€informantÏbecause€even€though€she€gave€her€name,€location,€and€occupation€to€the€dispatcher,Ïð ðthere€is€no€proof€she€was€known€to€the€police€dispatcher.ðð€€The€defendant€argues€thatÏwhen€the€citizen€is€anonymous€or€unknown,€concern€over€the€informationððs€reliabilityÏresurfaces€due€to€the€potential€danger€of€false€reports.€€òòSeeóó€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€31.Ð `'X $ ÐÌà ¸ àThe€name€of€the€citizen€alone€is€not€sufficient€to€qualify€the€informant€as€aÏknown€citizen€informant,€thereby€raising€the€presumption€of€reliability.€€òòSmithóó,€867Ð Ä,¼%* ÐS.W.2d€at€348€(holding€that€an€affidavit€giving€the€informantððs€name€but€otherwiseÏfailing€to€indicate€who€he€was€or€how€he€got€the€information€did€not€give€probable€causeÏfor€the€issuance€of€a€search€warrant).€€For€reliability€to€be€presumed,€information€aboutÏthe€citizenððs€status€or€his€or€her€relationship€to€the€events€or€persons€involved€must€beÏpresent.€€òòSeeóó€òòMelsonóó,€638€S.W.2d€at€354„56€(presuming€reliability€when€the€affidavitÐ À5¸.4 Ðlisted€the€sources€of€the€information,€their€relationship€to€the€victim,€and€their€status€asÐ Œ7„06 Ðwitnesses€to€certain€events);€òòState€v.€Joe€Ed€Yorkóó,€No.€03C01„9609„CC„00345,Ð  ÐAnderson€County,€Ô‡ Xü¬XXXü¬Ôslip€op.€at€5€Ô#†Xü¬XX Xü¬¿_#Ô€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€June€12,€1997)€œ(holding›€that€anÐ ÔÌ Ðinformant€known€only€as€a€concerned€citizen€must€be€judged€under€the€òòJacuminóóÐ   ˜ Ðstandard).€€In€the€instant€case,€the€citizen€informant€stated€her€name,€Dorinda€Derwin,Ïand€she€gave€her€status€as€a€clerk€at€the€Holiday€Inn.€€Thus,€Derwin€would€ordinarilyÏqualify€as€a€known€citizen€informant€for€the€presumption€of€reliability.ÌÌà ¸ àThe€defendant€contends€that€the€information€Derwin€gave€to€theÏdispatcher€is€not€reliable€because€she€obtained€it€second„hand€from€the€security€guardÏrather€than€from€her€own€personal€observations.€€Ô‡ Xü¬XXXü¬ÔUnlike€the€typical€citizen€informant,Ð 4, ÐDerwin€did€not€gain€her€information€through€her€own€observations.€€Instead,€Derwin€toldÏthe€dispatcher€that€the€security€guard€gave€her€the€information.Ô#†Xü¬XX Xü¬Šb#Ô€€Ð ÌÄ ÐÌà ¸ àWhile€the€credibility€of€an€anonymous€informant€intrinsically€cannot€beÏverified,€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Kellyóó,€948€S.W.2d€757,€761€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996),€in€casesÐ 0 ( Ðinvolving€named€citizen€informants,€the€officer€has€the€ability€to€contact€the€citizenÏinformant€in€the€event€of€a€false€report.€€In€òòState€v.€Steven€Terrence€Russellóó,€No.Ð È#À  Ð02C01„9510„CC„00311,€Henry€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Feb.€28,€1997),€this€courtÏupheld€a€warrantless€search€of€a€student€at€school€based€in€part€upon€informationÏconcerning€drug€transactions€provided€by€the€principle€who€gained€the€information€fromÏstudent€witnesses.€€The€fact€that€the€officer€did€not€talk€to€the€student€witnesses€beforeÏsearching€the€defendant€was€immaterial.€€òòIdóó.,€slip€op.€at€5.€€€This€court€held€that€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðofficer€had€no€reason€to€doubt€the€credibility€of€the€student€witnesses€or€the€reliability€ofÏtheir€information€because€they€were€citizen€informants€and,€therefore,€presumedÏreliable.€€òòIdóó.€(also€noting€the€exigency€of€the€circumstances).€€In€this€case,€DerwinððsÐ (2 +0 Ðinformation€came€from€the€security€guard€with€whom€she€worked€at€the€Holiday€Inn.€ÏLike€the€student€witnesses€in€òòRussellóó,€there€is€no€reason€to€doubt€the€security€guardððsÐ À5¸.4 Ðcredibility.€€Thus,€because€Derwin€and€the€security€guard€can€be€regarded€as€citizenÐ Œ7„06 Ðinformants,€Derwinððs€tip€can€be€presumed€reliable€even€though€Derwin€did€not€gain€herÏinformation€through€personal€observation.ÌÌà ¸ àAlternatively,€the€instant€tip€is€still€sufficient€to€support€Officer€DemmingððsÏreasonable€suspicion€even€if€analyzed€as€if€it€came€from€an€anonymous€citizenÏinformant.€€The€analysis€of€an€anonymous€tip€involves€consideration€of€the€informantððsÏbasis€of€knowledge€and€reliability€and€of€any€corroborating€circumstances€known€to€theÏpolice.€€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€32.€€ð ðWhen€an€informant€reports€an€incident€at€or€near€theÐ œ”  Ðtime€of€its€occurrence,€a€court€can€often€assume€that€report€is€first„hand,€and€henceÏreliable.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Here,€Derwin€reported€that€the€security€guard€told€her€the€vehicle€inÐ 4, Ðquestion€had€just€left€the€Holiday€Inn€parking€lot.€€Sergeant€Dukes€testified€that€withinÏthree€to€four€minutes€of€hearing€the€dispatch,€he€located€the€vehicle€at€a€gas€station€œñXñÌñXñtwoñVñ„ñVññWñ€ñWñhundred›€yards€north€of€the€Holiday€Inn.€€He€then€radioed€Officer€Demming,€whoÏmet€up€with€Sergeant€Dukes€and€the€defendant.€€The€trial€court€found€that€based€uponÏthe€time€stamped€on€the€complaint€card,€the€dispatch€issued€at€3:16€a.m.€€The€trialÏcourt€also€noted€that€once€Officer€Demming€spotted€the€defendant,€she€activated€theÏvideo€camera€in€her€car€at€3:18:45€a.m.€€This€meant€that€the€defendant€exited€theÏparking€lot,€Derwin€called€the€police,€and€Officer€Demming€spotted€the€defendant€withinÏthree€minutes.€€ÌÌà ¸ àThe€officerððs€ability€to€corroborate€the€details€provided€by€the€anonymousÏinformant€helps€establish€the€reliability€of€the€tip.€€òòKellyóó,€948€S.W.2d€at€761.€€The€officerÐ Ä,¼%* Ðdoes€not€have€to€corroborate€every€detail€of€the€anonymous€informantððs€tip,€but€he€orÏshe€must€corroborate€more€than€a€few€minor€aspects,€especially€if€they€are€not€criminalÏin€nature.€€òòIdóó.€(citing€òòState€v.€Moonóó,€841€S.W.2d€336,€341€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)).€€InÐ (2 +0 Ðthis€case,€the€detailed€description€of€the€vehicle,€the€exact€match€of€the€license€plateÏnumber,€and€the€pinpointing€of€the€vehicleððs€location€as€corroborated€by€SergeantÏDukesðð€and€Officer€Demmingððs€observations€lend€credibility€to€Derwinððs€tip.€€AlthoughÐ Œ7„06 ÐOfficer€Demming€stated€that€she€would€not€have€stopped€the€defendant€based€on€hisÏdriving€alone,€she€testified€that€the€defendantððs€acceleration€at€a€red€light€and€the€factÏthat€he€left€on€his€blinker€though€he€had€already€changed€lanes,€in€combination€with€theÏinformation€of€a€possible€D.U.I.€from€the€dispatch,€caused€her€to€stop€him.€€ThisÏunusual€driving€lends€some€credence€to€the€presence€of€criminal€conduct,€in€this€caseÏD.U.I.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Brothersóó,€828€S.W.2d€414,€416€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(notingÐ ü  Ðthat€driving€ten€miles€per€hour€below€the€speed€limit€was€consistent€with€the€actions€ofÏintoxicated€drivers).ÌÌà ¸ àIn€this€case,€as€in€òòPullyóó,€the€potential€for€serious€harm€justified€the€stop.€Ð 4, ÐòòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€33„34.€€The€dangers€inherent€in€driving€on€the€public€streets€whileÐ ø Ðunder€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€are€obvious.€€We€conclude€that€the€tip€provided€byÏDerwin€is€sufficient€to€support€Officer€Demmingððs€reasonable€suspicion€and€justified€herÏinvestigatory€stop€of€the€defendant.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€theÏMotion€to€Suppress.ÌÌÔ‡ Xü¬XXXü¬Ôà ¸ àThe€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€five€months,€twenty„nine€daysÐ È#À  Ðconfinement€in€the€county€jail€with€all€but€forty„eight€hours€to€be€served€on€probation.€ÏThe€D.U.I.€statute,€T.C.A.€ðð€55„10„403(c),€ð ðmandates€a€maximum€sentence€for€D.U.I.,Ïwith€the€only€function€of€the€trial€court€being€to€determine€what€period€above€theÏminimum€period€of€incarceration€established€by€statute,€if€any,€is€to€be€suspended.ðð€ÏòòState€v.€Combsóó,€945€S.W.2d€772,€774€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„Ð Ä,¼%* Ð10„403(a)(1)€provides€a€mandatory€minimum€Ô#†Xü¬XX Xü¬w#Ôof€forty„eight€hours€of€confinement€and€aÐ .ˆ', Ðmandatory€maximum€of€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days.€€Imposition€of€a€five„month,Ïœtwenty„nine„day›€maximum€was€improper.€€We€remand€this€case€to€the€trial€court€for€theÏimposition€of€a€sentence€consistent€with€T.€C.€A.€ðð€55„10„403(a)(1)€and€(c).€Ì€€ÌÓÓà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à__________________________Ìà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÐ r8j17 ЇÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌJoe€G.€Riley,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌThomas€T.€Woodall,€Judge