ÿWPCF …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñb  w@ P X mZ 0Jq 0T» 0^ 0hm 0rÕ 0|G 0†Ã 0I 1uÙ 0dN U>² Bð U* B)7DC` AM£ D3ðí#v~ 0@ŽvÓÎ AO¡Æð 0D¶ D/ú B)˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡z! @ d3|x#- ù- DDDeÓ€# ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman d< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd€-(Cþÿ << Gÿÿ%%%%'ÿÿdxd ãÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òNovember€12,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPt HHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® ("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  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÓ` °‡XpÈ“XÓÔ€&ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œ›à àà àà àà àà ààQ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINALÏAPPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÙ€€ÙœßL€)+(;+'h|Å ` Å `€€Lß›ÌÓ  ÓAT€JACKSONÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓOCTOBER€1996€SESSIONó óÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌà àÓ ` ®DÓò òÌÓ` cÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àó ó)€ÌÓ ` ¸ cÓà àà à)€C.C.A.€No.€02C01„9510„CC„00307€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àAppellee,à à)Ìà àà à)€Haywood€CountyÌV.€€€€€€€à à)Ìà àà à)€Honorable€Dick€Jerman,€Jr.,€JudgeÌò òà àó óà à)ò òÌÓ ` ¸ cùÓPERCY€MARTIN,€JR.,à àó ó)à à(Driving€Under€the€Influence)ò òÌó óà àà à)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àAppellant.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌÓ` ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌD.€Nathaniel€Spencer€€€€€à àCharles€W.€BursonÌAttorney€at€Lawà àAttorney€General€&€Reporter€ÌP.O.€Box€865Ì28€S.€Washingtonà àRobin€L.€Harris€€€ÌBrownsville,€TN€38012à àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌBill€Barronà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌAttorney€at€Lawà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493Ì124€E.€Court€SquareÌTrenton,€TN€38382à àClayburn€L.€PeeplesÌ(At€Trial€Only)à àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àLarry€HardisterÌà àAsst.€Dist.€Attorney€GeneralÌà à109€E.€First€StreetÌà àTrenton,€TN€38382ÌÌÌÌÌà àÌOPINION€FILED:€€___________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDÌó óÌÌò òPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,ó óÌJudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÑ  ÑÑ7€v:XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ ÑÌÓ ` pÓò òÔ  Ôà ààQ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó ó€ÌÌÌÌÓ` ¸ <pÓÓÓà àThe€appellant,€Percy€Martin,€appeals€from€a€jury€verdict€convicting€him€ofÏdriving€under€the€influence.€€The€jury€fined€the€appellant€$1,000.€€The€trial€courtÏsentenced€him€to€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€confinement€with€all€butÏsixty€days€suspended€and€suspended€his€driverððs€license€for€two€years.€€TheÏappellant€contends€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€his€convictionÏand€that€his€fine€and€sentence€were€excessive.€€Upon€review€of€the€record,€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€as€modified.€€ÌÌÓ  Óò òFACTSó óÌÌÓ  Óà àOn€September€16,€1995,€Trooper€James€Tate€and€Trooper€Ronnie€BelewÏwere€conducting€a€roadblock€on€Highway€70€in€Haywood€County.€€AtÍapproximately€9:20€P.M.€the€appellant€approached€the€roadblock€in€a€ChevroletÏCamaro.€€Officer€Tate€noticed€that€the€appellantððs€speech€was€slurred€andÏinstructed€him€to€pull€off€to€the€side€of€the€roadway€where€a€field€sobriety€testÏwould€be€administered.€€€The€appellant€informed€the€officer€that€he€had€just€leftÏa€nearby€bar€and€had€consumed€three€to€four€beers.€€€The€appellant€refused€toÏtake€a€Breathalyzer€test€but€submitted€to€three€sobriety€tests.€€ÌÌà àFirst,€the€appellant€was€asked€to€count€to€four,€forward€and€backwards,Ïon€his€fingertips€and€to€touch€his€thumb€to€that€finger.€€Officer€Tate€testified€thatÏthe€appellant€ð ðwent€one,€two,€three,€four€and€did€not€touch€his€thumb€to€anyÏfinger€nor€did€he€count€backwards€to€four.ðð€€ÌÌà àOfficer€Tate€next€administered€the€ð ðone„leg€standðð€test.€€He€asked€theÏappellant€to€count€to€fifteen€by€thousands€while€elevating€one€leg€off€the€ground.€ÏThe€appellant€reached€six€before€he€put€his€foot€down€to€regain€his€balance.€€ÌÌà àThe€last€test€administered€on€the€appellant€was€the€ð ðhorizontal€gazeÏnystagmusðð€test.€€In€this€test€the€suspect€is€to€stand€with€his€feet€together€and€hisÏarms€by€his€sides.€€The€officer€holds€a€pen€above€the€suspectððs€head€and€hasÏhim€watch€the€tip€of€the€pen.€€The€suspect,€while€holding€his€head€still,€is€toÏfollow€the€movement€of€the€pen€with€only€his€eyes.€€Officer€Tate€testified€that€theÏappellantððs€eyes€ð ðwere€real€¢darty£€and€bounced€real€heavilyðð€and€were€red€andÏwatery.€€Officer€Belew€testified€that€he€witnessed€the€administration€and€failureÍof€the€sobriety€tests.€€Both€officers€testified€that€the€appellant€appeared€to€beÏunder€the€influence€of€alcohol.€€ÌÌÓ  Óò òSUFFICIENCY€OF€THE€EVIDENCEó óÌÌÓ  Óà àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€is€insufficientÏto€support€his€conviction.€€Great€weight€is€given€to€the€result€reached€by€the€juryÏin€a€criminal€trial.€€A€jury€verdict€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€stateððsÏwitnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€state.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657Ï¢S.W.2d£€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983).€€On€appeal,€the€state€is€entitled€to€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€beÏdrawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€¢S.W.2d£€832,€835€(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,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€This€rule€is€applicable€to€findings€ofÏguilt€predicated€upon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combinationÏof€both.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€TheÏappellant€has€the€burden€of€overcoming€this€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòGrace,óó€493ÏS.W.2d€at€476.€€€€€ÌÌà àWhere€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€forÏthis€Court€is€whether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÏthe€prosecution,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÍelements€of€the€crime€or€crimes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.ÏVirginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979);€òòState€v.€Duncanóó,€698€S.W.2d€63,€67€(Tenn.Ï1985);€Tenn.R.App.P.€€13(e).€€The€weight€and€credibility€of€the€witnessesððÏtestimony€are€matters€entrusted€exclusively€to€the€jury€as€the€triers€of€fact.€€òòStateÏv.€Pappas,óó€754€S.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€€€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€testified€that€he€had€consumed€three€to€four€beers€earlierÏthat€evening€but€was€not€impaired.€€Officers€Tate€and€Belew€testified€that€theÏappellant€failed€three€different€sobriety€test€and€visibly€appeared€to€beÏintoxicated.€€The€jury€obviously€accredited€the€testimony€of€the€two€arrestingÏofficers€and€resolved€the€conflicting€testimony€in€favor€of€the€State.€€TheÏevidence€in€the€record€supports€their€conclusion,€and€the€appellant€has€not€metÏhis€burden.€€The€evidence€is€legally€sufficient.€€€€€€€à àà àà àÌÓ  Óò òPROPRIETY€OF€SENTENCEó óÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ¸ pÓà àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€his€fine€and€sentence€were€excessive.€€€€ÏHe€was€sentenced€to€sixty€days€confinement,€fined€$1,000,€and€had€his€licenseÏsuspended€for€two€years.€€He€argues€that€deviation€from€the€minimum€statutoryÏsentence€is€unjustified€and€contrary€to€the€law.€€€As€a€basis€for€his€argument,€theÏappellant€contends€that€this€is€his€first€DUI,€he€has€no€prior€criminal€record,€andÏthe€court€found€no€enhancement€factors€to€allow€upward€deviation.€€€ÌÌà àWhen€a€sentencing€issue€is€appealed,€this€Court€shall€conduct€a€òòdeóó€òònovoóóÏreview€with€the€presumption€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€are€correct.€€òòState€v.ÏByrdóó,€861€S.W.2d€377,€379€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€The€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€is€conditioned€upon€an€affirmative€showing€that€the€trial€courtÏconsidered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€facts€and€circumstances.€ÏòòState€v.€Ashyóó,€823€S.W.2d€166,€169€(Tenn.€1991).€€ÌÌà àMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€controlled€by€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏSection€40„35„302,€which€provides€in€part€that€the€trial€court€shall€impose€aÏsentence€consistent€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€1989€CriminalÏSentencing€Reform€Act.€€In€determining€the€correct€sentence,€the€trial€courtÏshould€examine€the€case€in€light€of€the€nature€and€character€of€the€offense.€ÏòòState€v.€Gilboyóó,€857€S.W.2d€884,€889€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€€However,€theÏmisdemeanant,€unlike€the€felon,€is€not€entitled€to€the€presumption€of€a€minimumÏsentence.€€òòState€v.€Creasyóó,€885€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€ÌÌà àAt€the€time€the€appellant€committed€the€offense€the€minimum€sentence€forÏa€first€offense€DUI€is€forty„eight€hours€in€confinement€and€a€$250€fine.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€55„10„403.€€The€maximum€sentence€is€confinement€for€elevenÏmonths€and€twenty„nine€days€and€a€fine€of€$1,000.€€òòIdóó.€€In€addition€to€fines€andÏconfinement,€a€one€year€suspension€of€an€offenderððs€license€is€mandatory.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„403.€€€ÓÓÓ` ¸ pÓÔ  ÔÌÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€conducting€our€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review,€we€find€that€the€fine€assessed€by€theÏjury€was€within€their€discretion.€€The€appellantððs€fine€was€assessed€at€$1,000.€ÏThis€is€the€maximum€within€the€allowable€statutory€range.€€€This€was€the€juryððsÏprerogative.€€The€appellantððs€contention€as€to€his€fine€is€without€merit.€€ÌÌà àAlso,€we€find€that€the€confinement€imposed€upon€the€appellant€wasÏproper.€€€The€record€reveals€that€the€appellant€has€a€history€of€serious€trafficÏviolations€and€showed€no€remorse€for€his€conduct.€€The€imposition€of€a€sixty€dayÏsentence€is€supported€by€the€need€for€deterrence€and€for€not€depreciating€theÏseriousness€of€the€offense.€€The€appellant€has€failed€to€show€an€abuse€ofÏdiscretion.€€€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€appellantððs€sentence€in€this€regard.€€ÌÌà àThis€Court,€however,€finds€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€suspending€theÏappellantððs€drivers€license€for€a€two€year€period.€€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏSection€55„10„403€states€that€for€first€offense€DUI€the€ð ðcourt€shall€prohibit€suchÏconvicted€person€from€driving€a€vehicle€in€the€state€of€Tennessee€for€a€period€ofÏtime€of€one€(1)€year.ðð€€€This€statute€does€not€allow€discretionary€deviation.€ÏTherefore,€the€appellantððs€two€year€license€suspension€is€modified€to€one€yearÏin€compliance€with€the€statute.€€€The€trial€court€should€enter€an€order€modifyingÏthe€suspension€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€€€€ÌÌÌÓÓà àà à__________________________________ÌÓ ` ¸ Óà àà àPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌ€à àÌÌÌÌÌÌ