WPC; UB %U\. 0C. 0Jq 0T 0^ 0hm 0r 0|G 0 0I 1u UW,N 0dz U, UW6 B)@ DCi AK  &, 0  !0'"fW#[$)f+*+ l-w/012DZ5678 0D889:;<-x=!>?I@!*BNKCKEFG I?J|KPMQWR7TV\XZ[T\Ng]_4aMbJDcduPfg/hjnXj 0Z4pk Bk4k D3kwllmnopqsuvwxqyZzD{(|}} AO~! 0DЀ D/ BC`C1v~vh<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%2A`ArialTT($    2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d7Border 1ddC << G b!     YYY FILEDX March13,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk   b!#d#    X        Statev.Stephenson,878S.W.2d530,544(Tenn.1994);Statev.Makoka,885S.W.2d366,37172(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1994);Statev.Gentry,881S.W.2d1,5(Tenn.Crim.App.1993),per.app.denied(Tenn.1994);Statev.Ray,880S.W.2d700,704(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1993);Statev.Adams,859S.W.2d359,362(Tenn.Crim.App.1992),per.app.denied(Tenn.1993);Statev.Woods,806S.W.2d205,208(Tenn.Crim.App.1990),cert.denied,502U.S.1079,112S.Ct.986,117L.Ed.2d148(1992);Statev.Aucoin,756S.W.2d705,710(Tenn.Crim.App.1988),cert.denied,489U.S.1084,109S.Ct.1541,103L.Ed.2d845(1989).  b!#d#    X        Stephenson,878S.W.2dat544;Statev.Smith,868S.W.2d561,570(Tenn.1993);Statev.Bobo,727S.W.2d945,948(Tenn.),cert.denied,484U.S.872,108S.Ct.204,98L.Ed.2d155(1987);Statev.O'Guinn,709S.W.2d561,56566(Tenn.),cert.denied,479U.S.870,107S.Ct.244,93L.Ed.2d169(1986);Statev.Harbison,704S.W.2d314,318(Tenn.1986);Statev.Kelly,603S.W.2d726,729(Tenn.1980);Makoka,885S.W.2d37172;Ray,880S.W.2dat704;Adams,859S.W.2dat362;Aucoin,756S.W.2dat710.  b!#d#     X        Wootenv.State,203Tenn.473,481,314S.W.2d1,45(1958). b!#d#     X        Aucoin,756S.W.2d70810. b!#d#     X        Smith,868S.W.2dat57071.(UG28$ bT!   X ` X'XXX  0   b!#d#     X        Stephenson,878S.W.2dat544. b!#d#     X      384U.S.436,86S.Ct.1602,16L.Ed.2d694(1966).  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at468,86S.Ct.at1624,16L.Ed.2dat720.  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at46768,86S.Ct.at1624,16L.Ed.2dat720.  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at469,86S.Ct.at1625,16L.Ed.2dat72021.  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at471,86S.Ct.at1626,16L.Ed.2dat723.  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at473,86S.Ct.at1627,16L.Ed.2dat723. b!#d#    X      Miranda,384U.S.at477,86S.Ct.at1629,16L.Ed.2dat720. & b!#d#     X        Californiav.Prysock,453U.S.355,359,101S.Ct.2806,2809,69L.Ed.2d696,701(1981). \ b!#d#     X        Prysock,453U.S.at35960,101S.Ct.at2809,69L.Ed.2dat701(quotingMiranda,384U.S.at476,86S.Ct.at1629,16L.Ed.2dat725)). Q b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at444,86S.Ct.at1612,16L.Ed.2dat706;seeStansburyv.California,511U.S.____,114S.Ct.1526,1528,128L.Ed.2d293,298(1994);Minnesotav.Murphy,465U.S.420,430,104S.Ct.1136,114344,79L.Ed.2d409,421(1984);Californiav.Beheler,463U.S.1121,112324,103S.Ct.3517,3519,77L.Ed.2d1275,127879(1983);Oregonv.Mathiason,429U.S.492,495,97S.Ct.711,714,50L.Ed.2d714,719(1977);Beckwithv.UnitedStates,425U.S.341,346,96S.Ct.1612,1616,48L.Ed.2d1,7(1976);Statev.Smith,868S.W.2d561,570(Tenn.1993);Statev.Brown,836S.W.2d530,546(Tenn.1992);Statev.Davis,735S.W.2d854(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1987);Statev.Stapleton,638S.W.2d850,859(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1982).  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at444,86S.Ct.at1612,16L.Ed.2dat706. \ b!#d#     X        Beheler,463U.S.at1125,103S.Ct.at3520,77L.Ed.2dat1279(quotingMathiason,429U.S.at495,97S.Ct.at714,50L.Ed.2dat719)).  b!#d#     X        See,e.g.,Beckwithv.UnitedStates,425U.S.341,96S.Ct.1612,48L.Ed.2d1(1976)(anaccusedwasnotentitledtotheMirandawarningswhenspecialagentsoftheInternalRevenueServicequestionedBeckwithinthediningroomofhishome).  b!#d#     X        SeeDavisv.UnitedStates,____U.S._____,114S.Ct.2350,2355,129L.Ed.2d362,37172(1994)(accusedinvokeshisFifthAmendmentrighttocounselwhenhestateshisrequestsuchthat"areasonablepoliceofficerinthecircumstanceswouldunderstandthestatementtobearequestforanattorney").  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at44445,86S.Ct.at1612,16L.Ed.2dat707.  b!#d#     X        Miranda,384U.S.at44445,86S.Ct.at1612,16L.Ed.2dat707. b!#d#    X      Statev.Crump,834S.W.2d265,270(Tenn.1992).  b!#d#     X        Oregonv.Bradshaw,462U.S.1039,1044,103S.Ct.2830,2834,77L.Ed.2d405,41112(1983)(interpretingEdwardsv.Arizona,451U.S.477,485,101S.Ct.1880,1885,68L.Ed.2d378,387(1981));Statev.Claybrook,736S.W.2d95,10203(Tenn.1987);seeSmithv.Illinois,469U.S.91,95,105S.Ct.490,493,83L.Ed.2d488,49394(1984);Statev.Tidwell,775S.W.2dat379,38687(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1989). : b!#d#     X        Bradshaw,462U.S.at104447,103S.Ct.at283435,77L.Ed.2dat41112;Crump,834S.W.2dat27071. b!#d#    X      Crump,834S.W.2dat270. b!#d#     X        SeeClaybrook,736S.W.2dat10203.(3$ b!   b!#d#    X      Crump,834S.W.2dat272.  b!#d#    X      Theofficerwhoappliedthemacewasalsoanemergencymedicaltechnician. b!#d#     X        Tenn.CodeAnn.5510406(a)(1). b!#d#     X      Tenn.CodeAnn.5510406(a)(3). b!#d#    X      Tenn.CodeAnn.5510406(b). # b!#d#     X        Statev.TerryFowler,LakeCountyNo.4,(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,November6,1985).  b!#d#     X        Schmerberv.California,384U.S.757,86S.Ct.1826,16L.Ed.2d908(1966).  b!#d#     X        Breithauptv.Abram,352U.S.432,77S.Ct.408,1L.Ed.2d448(1957). ? b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.757,86S.Ct.1826,16L.Ed.2d908;Breithaupt,352U.S.432,77S.Ct.408,1L.Ed.2d448.  b!#d#     X        SouthDakotav.Neville,459U.S.553,103S.Ct.916,74L.Ed.2d748(1983). D b!#d#     X        InStatev.TerryFowler,LakeCountyNo.4(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,November6,1985),thisCourtheldthissubsectionofTenn.CodeAnn.5510406isconstitutional.SeeStatev.Bullington,702S.W.2d580,583(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1985),wherethisCourtsaidindictathatthestatutewasconstitutional. A b!#d#     X        384U.S.at768,85S.Ct.at1834,16L.Ed.2dat918(emphasisadded)(theCourtheldthatthepoliceactionwasjustified).  b!#d#     X        459U.S.553,103S.Ct.916,74L.Ed.2d748(1983)(emphasisadded).  b!#d#     X        459U.S.at559,103S.Ct.at920,74L.Ed.2dat756(emphasisadded).  b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at767,86S.Ct.at1834,16L.Ed.2dat918;Statev.Blackwood,713S.W.2d677,679(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1986). 5 b!#d#     X        384U.S.at767,86S.Ct.at1834,16L.Ed.2dat918,citedwithapprovalinBlackwood,713S.W.2dat679. r b!#d#     X      InTennessee,compelledbloodalcoholtestsarealsosubjecttotheprerequisitesof5510406unlesstheprosecutionfallsunder5510406(e)asdiscussedsupra.  b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at76870,86S.Ct.at183435,16L.Ed.2dat919;Statev.TerryFowler,LakeCountyNo.4(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,November6,1985);Peoplev.Ryan,171Cal.Rptr.854,861(Cal.Ct.App.1981);Statev.Sickler,488N.W.2d70,73(S.D.1992);Statev.Lanier,452N.W.2d144,145(S.D.1990);Statev.Krause,484N.W.2d347,350(Wis.Ct.App.1992).InBullington,wheretheaccusedwasconvictedofaggravatedassaultwhileoperatingamotorvehicleundertheinfluenceofanintoxicant,thisCourtsaidindictathat"[t]heStatemaycompelsubmissiontothetestingiftheofficerhasreasonablegroundstobelievethatthemotoristisintoxicated."702S.W.2d580,583(citationsomitted).  b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at77071,86S.Ct.at183536,16L.Ed.2dat91920;Statev.TerryFowler,LakeCountyNo.4(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,November6,1985);Lanier,452N.W.2dat145;Krause,484N.W.2dat350. M b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at771,86S.Ct.at1836,16L.Ed.2dat920;Sickler,488N.W.2dat73;Lanier,452N.W.2dat145.  b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at77172,86S.Ct.at1836,16L.Ed.2dat920;Hammerv.Gross,932F.2d842,845(9thCir.)(enbanc),cert.denied,____U.S.____,112S.Ct.582,116L.Ed.2d607(1991);Sickler,488N.W.2dat73;Lanier,452N.W.2dat145;Krause,484N.W.2dat351;Carletonv.SuperiorCourt,216Cal.Rptr.890,893(Cal.Ct.App.1985);Ryan,171Cal.Rptr.at861;Peoplev.Kraft,84Cal.Rptr.280,284(Cal.Ct.App.1970).  b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at77071,86S.Ct.at183536,16L.Ed.2dat91920;Statev.TerryFowler,LakeCountyNo.4(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,November6,1985)Lanier,452N.W.2dat145;Krause,484N.W.2dat350. R b!#d#     X        Schmerber,384U.S.at77071,86S.Ct.at183536,16L.Ed.2dat91920;Fowler,supra;Krause,484N.W.2dat350. b!#d#    X      384U.S.at771,86S.Ct.at1836,16L.Ed.2dat920. b!#d#     X        384U.S.at771,86S.Ct.at1836,16L.Ed.2dat920. J b!#d#    X      Tenn.CodeAnn.5510410hasbeenamended(effectiveinMay,1995)andprovidesotherqualifiedpersonnelwhomayprocureabloodsample. D b!#d#     X        Thefactthatsomeonenotenumeratedinthestatutedrawstheblooddoesnot,asamatteroflaw,preventthestatefromusingthebloodalcoholtestresults.Itappearsthatthebloodmaybedrawnbyanyonetrainedtoperformthisprocedure.Statev.Stowers,649S.W.2d607,60809(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1983)(laboratoryassistant). u b!#d#     X        SeeCarleton,216Cal.Rptr.at89495;Sickler,488N.W.2dat73;Statev.Meyers,464N.W.2d608,60809(S.D.1990);Lanier,452N.W.2dat145.  b!#d#     X        SeeBurnsv.State,807S.W.2d878,883(Tenn.Ct.App.1991). b!#d#     X        Stowers,649S.W.2dat60809. @ b!#d#     X        SeeStatev.McKinney,605S.W.2d842,845(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1980).  b!#d#     X        Grahamv.Connor,490U.S.386,388,109S.Ct.1865,186768,104L.Ed.2d443,450(1989);Hammerv.Gross,932F.2d843,845(9thCir.)(enbanc),cert.denied,_____U.S._____,112S.Ct.582,116L.Ed.2d607(1991). k b!#d#     X        Graham,490U.S.at396,109S.Ct.at1872,104L.Ed.2dat455(citingBellv.Wolfish,441U.S.520,559,99S.Ct.1861,1884,60L.Ed.2d447,481(1979).  b!#d#     X        Graham,490U.S.at396,109S.Ct.at1872,104L.Ed.2dat455. % b!#d#     X        Graham,490U.S.at39697,109S.Ct.at1872,104L.Ed.2dat45556.(Citationsomitted).3|x<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP( T$   dSk cccc'dxdӀ  b!#d#     X        SouthDakotav.Neville,459U.S.553,559,n.9,103S.Ct.916,920,n.9,74L.Ed.2d748,756,n.9(1983);Schmerber,384U.S.at760,n.4,86S.Ct.at1830,n.4,16L.Ed.2dat913,n.4;Burns,807S.W.2dat883.  b!#d#     X        Hammer,932F.2dat846;Krause,484N.W.2dat352.  b!#d#     X        Hammer,932F.2dat846;Krause,484N.W.2dat351. b!#d#     X        Carleton,216Cal.Rptr.at896.  b!#d#     X        Hammer,932F.2dat846;Krause,484N.W.2dat351.  b!#d#     X        Neville,459U.S.at559,n.9,103S.Ct.at920,n.9,74L.Ed.2dat756,n.9;Schmerber,384U.S.at760,n.4,86S.Ct.at1830,n.4,16L.Ed.2dat913,n.4;Hammer,932F.2dat846;McCann,588A.2dat1102;Burns,807S.W.2dat883.  b!#d#     X        Neville,459U.S.at559,n.9,103S.Ct.at920,n.9,74L.Ed.2dat756,n.9;Schmerber,384U.S.at760,n.4,86S.Ct.at1830,n.4,16L.Ed.2dat913,n.4;Carleton,216Cal.Rptr.at893;Kraft,84Cal.Rptr.at28586;Burns,807S.W.2dat883. b!#d#     X      171Cal.Rptr.854(Cal.Ct.App.1981). b!#d#     X        171Cal.Rptr.at862. b!#d#     X        216Cal.Rptr.890(Cal.Ct.App.1985). b!#d#     X        216Cal.Rptr.at896. b!#d#     X        588A.2d1100(Del.1991). b!#d#     X        452N.W.2d144(S.D.1990). b!#d#    X      Lanier,452N.W.2dat147. b!#d#     X        464N.W.2d608(S.D.1990). b!#d#    X      Meyers,464N.W.2dat609. b!#d#     X      464N.W.2dat609.<C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 b!#d#     X        488N.W.2d70(S.D.1992).($$   1  ' dxdP Pd b!#d#     X        488N.W.2dat7374. b!#d#     X      807S.W.2d878(Tex.Ct.App.1991). b!#d#     X        807S.W.2dat883. b!#d#     X        484N.W.2d347(Wis.Ct.App.1992). b!#d#     X   Ӏ     484N.W.2dat352.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA: T Monaco  BA: T Monaco b! . &Xd&#Xd#    X   \RA'\INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEL;+'h|e`  `LATJACKSONOCTOBER1994SESSION  STATEOFTENNESSEE,   )      )   APPELLEE, )      ) No.02C019310CC00233      )      ) FayetteCountyv.      )      ) JonKerryBlackwood,Judge      )      ) (VehicularHomicide,Leavingthe      ) SceneofanAccident,andDriving      ) onaRevokedLicense)CLEOMASON,    )      )   APPELLANT. )FORTHEAPPELLANT:    FORTHEAPPELLEE:KarenT.Fleet     CharlesW.BursonAttorneyatLaw     AttorneyGeneral&Reporter116MainStreet,South    450JamesRobertsonParkwayBolivar,TN38008     Nashville,TN372430493       SharonS.Selby       AssistantAttorneyGeneral       450JamesRobertsonParkway       Nashville,TN372430493       ElizabethT.Rice       DistrictAttorneyGeneral       302MarketStreet       Somerville,TN38068OPINIONFILED:__________________________________AFFIRMEDJoeB.Jones,Judge7'XXdXXd7    OPINION    Theappellant,CleoMason,wasconvictedofvehicularhomicide,aClassCfelony,leavingthesceneofanaccident,aClassEfelony,anddrivingonarevokedlicense,aClassBmisdemeanor.ThetrialcourtfoundthattheappellantwasastandardoffenderandimposedthefollowingRangeIsentences:(a)CountI,vehicularhomicide,confinementforfive(5)yearsintheDepartmentofCorrectionand(b)CountIV,leavingthesceneofanaccident,confinementforone(1)yearintheDepartmentofCorrection.Thetrialcourtsentencedtheappellanttoconfinementforten(10)daysintheFayetteCountyJailfordrivingafterhislicensewasrevoked.Thesentencesaretobeservedconcurrently. Threeissuesarepresentedforreview.Theappellantcontendsthattheevidencecontainedintherecordisinsufficient,asamatteroflaw,tosupportafindingbyarationaltrieroffactthathewasguiltyofvehicularhomicidebeyondareasonabledoubt.Hefurthercontendsthatthetrialcourtcommittederrorofprejudicialdimensionsindenyinghismotionstosuppress(a)astatementhegavetolawenforcementofficersand(b)theresultsofabloodtest. Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed. OntheeveningofDecember26,1992,TwillaHenderson,herrelatives,andfriendsweretravellingfromColliervilletoCovington.AsMs.HendersondrovethroughSomervillelatethatevening,hervehiclewasstruckonthedriver'ssidebyavehicletravellingintheoppositedirection.Theoncomingvehiclecrossedthecenterlineoftheroadway,strucktheleftfrontfender,andmaintainedcontactwiththeHendersonvehiclealongtheentiredriver'sside.Bothdoorsandthepostbetweenthefrontdoorandthebackdoorweresheeredfromthevehicle.TheHendersonvehiclewascompletelyopenonthedriver'ssidefollowingtheimpact. TyroneHenderson,whowasseatedinthebackseatoftheHendersonvehicle,waskilled.Hewaspronounceddeadatthehospitalapproximatelytwohoursafterthecollision. ThevehiclethatstrucktheHendersonvehicleleftthesceneofthecollision.Itwassubsequentlydiscoveredinayardapproximatelyonehalfblockfromthesitusofthecollision.Thisvehicle,aLincolnTowncar,lefttheroadway,passedthroughaditch,wentupahill,crossedthesidewalk,destroyedaportionofahedge,grazedatree,struckanothertree,andcametorestnexttoadwelling.Thevehiclehadmassivedamagetothefrontleftbumperandfender. TheofficerstracedtheLincolntoEttaMason,theappellant'smother,wholivedinMoscow,Tennessee.Mrs.Masondidnotdrivethevehiclebecauseitwastoobigforher.WhiletheappellanttoldhismotherthathewasnotdrivingtheLincolnonthenightinquestion,aMoscowpoliceofficertestifiedthattheappellantwastheonlypersonwhodrovetheLincoln.Inaddition,twooftheappellant'sfriends,whotestifiedasdefensewitnesses,sawtheappellantdrivingtheLincolninSomervilleshortlybeforethecollisionoccurred. Theappellantgaveastatementtolawenforcementofficers.Inthestatement,theappellantadmittedthathewasdrivingtheLincolnwhenitcollidedwiththeHendersonvehicle.Healsoadmittedthathehadbeendrinkingalcoholicbeveragespriortothecollision.Hestatedhehadconsumedapproximatelysixcansofbeer.Officersfoundtwofullwinecoolerbeveragesandoneemptybottleinsidethevehicle.Thecoolerswerestillcoolwhentheofficerstouchedthem. Severallawenforcementofficerssawtheappellantafterhisarrest.Alloftheseindividualstestifiedthattheappellantwasintoxicated.Theappellantwasunsteadyonhisfeet,"veryuncoordinated,"hisspeechwasslurredtosomeextent,heemittedastrongorderofanintoxicatingbeverage,andhewascombativeandargumentative.Hehadabloodalcoholcontentof.22%. Adriver'slicensecheckrevealedthattheappellant'sdrivingprivilegeshadbeenrevokedpriortotheeveninginquestion.Aspreviouslystated,therewasevidencethattheappellantleftthesceneofthecollision.HeeventuallywenttothehomeofafriendinSomerville.Hisfrienddrovehimtohismother'shomeinMoscow.  I.    Whenanaccusedchallengesthesufficiencyoftheconvictingevidence,thisCourtmustreviewtherecordtodetermineiftheevidenceadducedattrialissufficient"tosupportthefindingbythetrieroffactofguiltbeyondareasonabledoubt."Tenn.R.App.P.13(e).Thisruleisapplicabletofindingsofguiltbasedupondirectevidence,circumstantialevidence,oracombinationofdirectandcircumstantialevidence.Statev.Dykes,803S.W.2d250,253(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1990). Indeterminingthesufficiencyoftheconvictingevidence,thisCourtdoesnotreweighorreevaluatetheevidence.Statev.Matthews,805S.W.2d776,779(Tenn.Crim.App.),per.app.denied(Tenn.1990).NormaythisCourtsubstituteitsinferencesforthosedrawnbythetrieroffactfromcircumstantialevidence.Liakasv.State,199Tenn.298,305,286S.W.2d856,859,cert.denied,352U.S.845,77S.Ct.39,1L.Ed.2d49(1956).Tothecontrary,thisCourtisrequiredtoaffordtheStateofTennesseethestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidencecontainedintherecordaswellasallreasonableandlegitimateinferenceswhichmaybedrawnfromtheevidence.Statev.Cabbage,571S.W.2d832,835(Tenn.1978). Questionsconcerningthecredibilityofthewitnesses,theweightandvaluetobegiventheevidence,aswellasallfactualissuesraisedbytheevidenceareresolvedbythetrieroffact,notthisCourt.Cabbage,571S.W.2dat835.InStatev.Grace,493S.W.2d474,476(Tenn.1973),ourSupremeCourtsaid:"Aguiltyverdictbythejury,approvedbythetrialjudge,accreditsthetestimonyofthewitnessesfortheStateandresolvesallconflictsinfavorofthetheoryoftheState." Sinceaverdictofguiltremovesthepresumptionofinnocenceandreplacesitwithapresumptionofguilt,theaccused,astheappellant,hastheburdeninthisCourtofillustratingwhytheevidenceisinsufficienttosupporttheverdictsreturnedbythetrieroffact.Statev.Tuggle,639S.W.2d913,914(Tenn.1982).ThisCourtwillnotdisturbaverdictofguiltduetothesufficiencyoftheevidenceunlessthefactscontainedintherecordareinsufficient,asamatteroflaw,forarationaltrieroffacttofindthattheaccusedisguiltybeyondareasonabledoubt.Tuggle,639S.W.2dat914. Basedupontheforegoingsummaryoftheevidence,theevidencecontainedintherecordissufficienttosupportafindingbyarationaltrieroffactthattheappellantwasguiltyofvehicularhomicide,leavingthesceneofanaccident,anddrivingamotorvehicleafterhislicensehadbeenrevokedbeyondareasonabledoubt.Tenn.R.App.P.13(e);seeJacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,99S.Ct.2781,61L.Ed.2d560(1979).ThisCourtwillnowaddresstheadmissibilityofthestatementtheappellantmadetolawenforcementofficers.  II.    Whentheappellantwasarrestedathismother'shomeduringtheearlymorninghoursofDecember27,1992,hewasreadtheMirandawarnings.TheofficertransportingtheappellanttotheCityofSomervillePoliceDepartmenttestifiedthattheappellant"didn'twanttotalkaboutanythingortalktoanyone."Shortlyaftertheappellantarrivedatthepolicedepartment,hereiteratedthathedidnotwanttomakeastatementandadvisedtheofficersthathewantedalawyer.Theappellantrefusedtotakeachemicalbreathtest,butheagreedtoprovidetheofficerswithabloodspecimen.Whiletheappellantwasatthehospitalfortheextractionofthebloodspecimen,Somervillepoliceofficersbeganquestioninghimabouttheoffenseshewasallegedtohavecommitted.Later,theappellantwastakentotheFayetteCountyJail. ThechiefofpoliceandanofficerwenttotheFayetteCountyJailat8:00a.m.onthemorningofDecember27,1992,tointerrogatetheappellant.TheofficersadvisedtheappellantoftheMirandawarningsandattemptedtointerrogatehimabouttheeventsofthepreviousnight.Theappellantrefusedtogivetheofficersastatement.Thereafter,theofficerscontactedtheappellant'smother,EttaMason.Theyaskedhertocontacttheappellantandencouragehimtogiveastatementtothepolice.Anofficerdialedanumber,gavethetelephonetoMrs.Mason,andshetalkedtotheappellant.Shetoldtheappellantthatheshouldtellthetruthaboutwhathappenedthepreviousnight.TheappellanttoldMrs.MasonthathewasnotdrivingtheLincolnwhenitcollidedwiththeHendersonvehicle.Mrs.Masontoldtheappellantinthepresenceofthepolicechiefandanotherofficerthatshewasgoingtohireanattorneytorepresenthim. Thechiefofpolice,knowingthattheFayetteCountysheriffhadbeenafriendoftheappellant'sfamilyformanyyears,askedthesherifftoseeifhecouldobtainastatementfromtheappellant. OntheafternoonofDecember27,1992,thesheriffmetwiththeappellant.Theyhadageneralconversation,"notparticularlyaboutthewreck."Theappellanttoldthesheriffthathewouldrathernotdiscussthematterwithhim. ThesheriffwasapproachedbyatrusteeatthejailontheafternoonofDecember28,1992.Thetrusteetoldthesheriffthattheappellantwantedtotalk.Thesheriffhadtheappellantbroughttohisoffice.Whentheappellantarrivedatthesheriff'spersonaloffice,hetoldthesheriffthathewantedtomakeastatementabouthisinvolvementonthenightinquestion.Thesheriffaskedtheappellantifhewasrepresentedbyalawyer.Theappellanttoldthesheriffthathewasnotrepresentedbyanattorneyinthiscase.̀ Thesheriffcalledthechiefofpolice.TheappellantwasagaingiventheMirandawarnings.Heexecutedawrittenwaiverofhisrighttoremainsilentandhisrighttocounsel.Thechiefofpolicetookanincriminatingstatementfromtheappellant. Theappellant'sversionaboutthematterwasdifferent.Theappellantdeniedhavingthetrusteecontactthesheriff.Theappellanttestifiedthatthesherifftoldhim:    [I]twasn'tnothingbutanaccident,thatwasn'ttoomuchgoingtobedid,[sic]Ineededtogoaheadonandsignsomepaperssohecouldgetmeonoutofthere,soIcouldmakebond....[A]ssoonasIgetout...onbond,Icouldtalktomylawyer....[Iwould]beheldwithoutbondif[Ididn'tgiveastatement].   X Thesherifftestifiedthathedidnotrememberdiscussingabondbutthathecouldhavediscussedthepossibilityofbondwiththeappellant.However,thesherifftestifiedthathedidnottelltheappellanthehadtogiveastatementbeforehecouldbereleasedonbailortalkwithanattorney.   A.    Thestandardofreviewapplicabletosuppressionissuesiswellestablished.Whenatrialcourtmakesafindingoffactsattheconclusionofasuppressionhearing,thefactsfoundbythetrialcourtareaffordedtheweightofajuryverdict.    ׀Asaresult,thesefactsarebindinguponthisCourtiftheevidencecontainedintherecorddoesnotpreponderateagainstthefindingsofthetrialcourt.    ׀. Thisstandardhasbeenappliedtoavarietyofconfessionissuessince1958.    ׀Theappellatecourtshaveinvokedthisstandardwhentheissuepresentedforreviewwaswhether(a)theaccusedwasgiventheMirandawarningsbeforetheinterrogationcommenced, !   ׀(b)theaccusedwasincustodywheninterrogated, "   ׀and(c)thestatementwasfreelyandvoluntarilygiven. $   ׀  B.    InthelandmarkcaseofMirandav.Arizona, %   ׀theUnitedStatesSupremeCourt,notingthe"inherentpressuresoftheinterrogationatmosphere," &   ׀formulatedwarningsthatmustbegivenasuspectbeforethecommencementofcustodialinterrogation.Mirandarequireslawenforcementofficerstowarnasuspect"inclearandunequivocalterms"that(a)"hehastherighttoremainsilent," '   ׀(b)"anythingsaidcanandwillbeusedagainst[him]incourt," (   ׀(c)hehas"therighttoconsultwithalawyerandtohavethelawyerwithhimduringinterrogation," )   ׀and(d)if"indigentalawyerwillbeappointedtorepresenthim." *   ׀Thepurposeofthesewarningsistoprotecttheaccused'sFifthAmendmentprivilegeagainstselfincrimination. ,   ׀Thereis"notalismanicincantation...requiredtosatisfy[Miranda's]strictures." -   ׀However,theactualwarningsgiventothesuspectmustbea"fullyeffectiveequivalent"oftheMirandawarnings. .    TheholdinginMirandaislimitedto"custodialinterrogations." /   ׀TheCourtdefinedthephrase"custodialinterrogation"as"questioninginitiatedbylawenforcementofficersafterapersonhasbeentakenintocustodyorotherwisedeprivedofhisfreedomofactioninanysignificantway." 0   ׀Apersonis"incustody"withinthemeaningofMirandaiftherehasbeen"a'formalarrestorrestraintonfreedomofmovement'ofthedegreeassociatedwithaformalarrest." 1   ׀TheCourthasrefusedtoextendMirandatononcustodialinterrogations. 2     C.    Whenasuspectclearlyarticulates 3   ׀duringcustodialinterrogationthathewishestoinvoketheprivilegeagainstselfincriminationortherighttocounsel,theofficersconductingtheinterrogationmuststopquestioningthesuspect. 4   ׀AsTheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsaidinMiranda:8 8 If...[thesuspect]indicatesinanymannerandatanystageoftheprocessthathewishestoconsultwithanattorneybeforespeakingtherecanbenoquestioning.Likewise,iftheindividualisaloneandindicatesinanymannerthathedoesnotwishtobeinterrogated,thepolicemaynotquestionhim.Themerefactthathemayhaveansweredsomequestionsorvolunteeredsomestatementsonhisowndoesnotdeprivehimoftherighttorefrainfromansweringanyfurtherinquiriesuntilhehasconsultedwithanattorneyandthereafterconsentstobequestioned. 5    Theappellantinvokedbothhisrighttoremainsilentandhisrighttoconsultwithcounselorhavecounselpresentbeforebeinginterrogated.Therefore,theSomervillepoliceofficersandthesheriffshouldnothaveattemptedtointerrogatetheappellantuntilhevoluntarilydecidedtotalkandcounselwasmadeavailabletohim.However,theappellant'sfreeandvoluntaryconfessionwaspurgedofthetaintoftheofficers'continuouseffortstoquestionhim. 6   ׀Oneachoccasion,hehadtoldtheofficersthathedidnotwanttogiveastatement,andtheofficersceasedtheinterview.  D.    Ifasuspectinitiatescontactwithalawenforcementofficerafterinvokingtheprivilegeagainstselfincriminationand/ortherighttoconferwithandhavecounselpresent,thelawenforcementofficermayconversewiththesuspect. 7   ׀Whatthesuspecttellstheofficerisadmissibleasevidenceifitisestablishedatthesuppressionhearingthat(a)theaccusedinitiatedthecontactwiththeofficer,(b)thewaiverisknowinglyandintelligentlymade, 8   ׀and(c)thetaintoftheconstitutionalviolationoffailingtoscrupulouslyhonortheinvocationoftheseFifthAmendmentrightsispurged. 9    Inthiscase,thestatementgivenbytheappellantwasadmissibleasevidence. :   ׀Therecordestablishesthatnolawenforcementofficerhadcontactedtheappellantforapproximatelytwentyfourhourspriortohissendingthemessagerequestingthesheriff.TheappellantadvisedthesheriffthathewantedtomakeastatementabouthisinvolvementinthecollisionontheeveningofDecember26,1992.Hestatedthathedidnothaveanattorney,andheexecutedawrittenwaiverofhisMirandarights.Consideringappellant'svoluntaryinitiationofthestatementfollowedbythegivingofproperMirandawarningstwentyfourhoursafterthelastattemptatquestioning,thisCourtfindsthetainttobesufficientlypurged. =    Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  III.    Theappellantcontendsthatthetrialcourtcommittederrorofprejudicialdimensionindenyinghismotiontosuppresstheresultsofbloodtestsperformeduponbloodremovedfromhisbody.Hearguesthatanintrusivesearchwasexecuteduponhimandthebloodsamplewasseizedasaresultofthesearch.HepredicatesthisargumentonthetheorythatthesearchandseizurewasunreasonableandillegalbecauseitviolatedtheFourthAmendmenttotheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates,ArticleI,7oftheTennesseeConstitution,andvariousstatutes.HealsoarguesthatthemannerinwhichthebloodwastakenviolatedTenn.CodeAnn.5510410(a). Aspreviouslystated,theincidentinquestionoccurredontheeveningofDecember26,1992.Theinvestigationrevealedthattheabandonedmotorvehiclewasregisteredtotheappellant'smother,EttaMason,buttheappellantwastheonlypersonwhodrovethevehicle.Therewerewinecoolerbeveragesfoundinthevehicle.Theywerestillcoolwhentouchedbyanofficer.Anofficersecuringthesceneshortlyaftertheaccidentobservedtheappellantwhenhereturnedtothescene.Theofficertestifiedthattheappellantappearedtobeintoxicated.Theappellantwasarrestedat1:15a.m.onthemorningofDecember27,1992.Anofficertestifiedthattheappellantappearedtobeintoxicatedatthetimeofhisarrest. Theappellantwasaskedifhewouldtakeachemicalbreathtesttodeterminethealcoholiccontentofhisblood.Theappellantrefused.HewassubsequentlytakentotheFayetteCountyJail,booked,andplacedinacell.Thedistrictattorneygeneraladvisedthechiefofpolicetoobtainabloodspecimenforabloodalcoholtest.Anofficerwenttothejailandtalkedtotheappellant.Theappellantadvisedtheofficerthathewouldpermitbloodtobedrawnforabloodalcoholtest.Theappellantwasthentakentoalocalhospital. Theappellantwasloudandbelligerentwhileintheemergencyroomofthehospital.Hecreated"quiteadisturbance."Onthreeorfouroccasionstheappellantsaidhewasreadytohavetheblooddrawnandextendedhisarmsforward.Whenthenursewouldapproachwithasyringetodrawtheblood,theappellantwoulddrawhisarmstohischest.Sincetheappellantwasdisturbingthepatientsbeingtreatedintheemergencyroom,theofficersremovedhimtoalocationimmediatelyoutsidetheemergencyroomdoor.Thisareaiscoveredbyacanopy. Therewerefourtofiveofficerspresent.Eachtimetheywouldtrytorestraintheappellant,hewouldpullawayandstandup.Thisoccurredonseveraloccasions.Finally,anofficer >   ׀sprayedtheappellantwithmaceforonehalfsecond.Theofficerssubduedtheappellant,placedhimontheground,extendedhisleftarm,andthenursedrewthebloodsamplethatwastestedforalcoholcontent.TheappellantwasthenreturnedtotheFayetteCountyJail.  A.    TheimpliedconsentlawsinthisjurisdictionprovidethatapersonwhooperatesamotorvehicleinTennesseeisdeemedtoconsent"toatestforthepurposeofdeterminingthealcoholic...contentofthatperson'sblood." ?   ׀However,whenanaccusedischargedwiththeoffenseofdrivingwhileundertheinfluenceandrefusestotakeachemicalbreathtestorabloodalcoholtesttodeterminethealcoholiccontentofhisorherblood,thetestisnottobeadministeredtotheaccused. @   ׀Ifthebloodisdrawnfromanaccusedchargedwithdrivingwhileundertheinfluencewhileunconsciousandthebloodistestedforalcoholiccontent,theresultsofthetestmaynotbeadmittedasevidenceovertheobjectionoftheaccused. A   ׀Thesestatutesprovidegreaterprotectionthaneitherthefederalorstateconstitution. B    TheUnitedStatesConstitutionpermitsthetakingofbloodsamplesfromaconscious C   ׀orunconscious D   ׀personaccusedofdrivingwhileundertheinfluencewithorwithoutthepermissionoftheaccused.Thetestresultsareadmissibleasevidence. E   ׀Ifastatepermitstheoperatorofamotorvehicletorefusetotakeachemicalbreathtestorprovideabloodspecimentodeterminethealcoholiccontentoftheperson'sblood,thestatemayintroducethefactthatthetestwasrefusedintoevidence. F    Whenanaccusedhascommittedtheoffenseofvehicularhomicideoraggravatedassault,theprotectionaffordedby5510406isnotapplicable.Subsection(e)ofTenn.CodeAnn.5510406provides:    Nothinginthissectionshallaffecttheadmissibilityinevidence,incriminalprosecutionsforaggravatedassaultorhomicidebytheuseofamotorvehicleonly,ofanychemicalanalysisofthealcoholic...contentofthedefendant'sbloodwhichhasbeenobtainedbyanymeanslawfulwithoutregardtotheprovisionsofthissection. G     X Thefirstquestionthatispresentediswhetherthephrase"byanymeanslawful"permitsalawenforcementofficertousephysicalforcetoobtainabloodspecimentotestforalcoholiccontentwhentheaccused,ashere,ischargedwithvehicularhomicide.  B.   InSchmerberv.California,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtstatedthatoneofthequestionspresentedwas"whetherthepolicewerejustifiedinrequiring[theaccused]tosubmitto[a]bloodtest." H   ׀InSouthDakotav.Neville, I   ׀theCourtstatedthatSchmerber"clearlyallowedaStatetoforceapersonsuspectedofdrivingwhileintoxicatedtosubmittoabloodalcoholtest." J   ׀ Intrusionsintoaperson'sbodyaresubjecttotheconstraintsoftheFourthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionandArticleI,7oftheTennesseeConstitution. K   ׀AstheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsaidinSchmerber:    Itcouldnotreasonablybeargued,andindeedrespondentdoesnotargue,thattheadministrationofthebloodtestinthiscasewasfreeoftheconstraintsoftheFourthAmendment.Suchtestingproceduresplainlyconstitutesearchesof"persons,"anddependantecedentlyuponseizuresof"persons,"withinthemeaningofthatAmendment. L     X Ӏ Schmerber,aswellasotherstatedecisions,establishseveralprerequisitesthatmustbeestablishedbeforebloodalcoholtestresultsmaybeintroducedintoevidence. M   ׀Beforethetestresultsofacompelledbloodalcoholtestareadmissibleintoevidence,thestatemustprovebyapreponderanceoftheevidencethat: a)Theofficercompellingtheextractionofbloodfromtheaccusedhasprobablecausetobelievethattheaccusedcommittedtheoffenseofaggravatedassaultorvehicularhomicidewhileundertheinfluencesofanintoxicantordrug,andthereisaclearindicationthatevidenceoftheaccused'sintoxicationwillbefoundifthebloodistakenfromtheaccused'sbodyandtested; N   ׀ b)Exigentcircumstancesexisttoforegothewarrantrequirement; O    c)Thetestselectedbytheofficerisreasonableandcompetentfordeterminingbloodalcoholcontent; P   ׀and d)Thetestisperformedinareasonablemanner. Q   ׀   (1)    Inthiscase,theofficershadprobablecausetoarresttheappellantforvehicularhomicide.Hismother'smotorvehiclewasinvolvedinthecollisionthatresultedinthedeathofapassengerintheothercar.Theofficerslearnedthattheappellantwastheonlypersonwhodrovethevehicle.Theinteriorofthevehiclehadastrongodorofanintoxicatingbeverage.Therewereseveralwinecoolersinsidethevehicle,whichwerestillcoolwhentheofficersdiscoveredthevehicle.Theofficerswereawarethatthepassengerhadexpiredatthehospital.Theappellantappearedintoxicatedatthescenesoonaftertheaccident.Whentheofficerswenttoarresttheaccused,heappearedtobeintoxicated.Therefore,theofficershada"clearindication"thatabloodalcoholtestwouldrevealevidenceofintoxication.Thisprongwasmetinthiscase.  (2)    Also,theremustbeexigentcircumstancestopermitthewithdrawalofbloodfromanaccused. R   ׀Itiscommonknowledgethatthealcoholcontentofblooddissipatesovertimeasaresultofaperson'snaturalbodilyfunctions. S   ׀Consequently,exigentcircumstanceswillusuallybepresentwhenanaccusedcommitsaggravatedassaultorvehicularhomicidewhileundertheinfluenceasthepassageoftimewillresultinthedestructionoftheevidencethattheaccusedwasintoxicated.Thepreparationofasearchwarrant,findingamagistratewhocanissuethewarrant,andservingthewarranttakestime.Theevidenceofthelevelofintoxicationwoulddiminishwhiletheofficerperformsthisfunction.̀ Therewereexigentcircumstancespresenttopermitthedrawingofthebloodwithoutasearchwarrant.Theinvestigationatthesceneofthecollisionconsumedaconsiderableamountoftime.Theappellanthadleftthescene.Theofficershadtotalktothewitnesses,determinetheownerofthevehicle,drivetotheappellant'shome,andreturntheappellanttoSomerville.Duringthisentiretimetheevidenceoftheappellant'sintoxicationwasdissipatingthroughnaturalmeans.Also,amagistratemighthavebeendifficulttofindbecauseitwastheChristmasholidayseasonandthecourtswereclosed.Therefore,thisprongwassatisfied.  (3)   Ӏ̀ Thetestselectedbytheofficermustbereasonableandcompetentfordeterminingthebloodalcoholcontentoftheaccused.Thetestingofaperson'sbloodisareasonableandcompetentwayofmeasuringbloodalcoholcontent.InSchmerber,theCourtsaidthatabloodalcoholtest"isareasonableone.Extractionofbloodsamplesfortestingisahighlyeffectivemeansofdeterminingthedegreetowhichapersonisundertheinfluenceofalcohol." T   ̀ Thedrawingofabloodspecimenforabloodalcoholtestresultsinaminimalamountofbloodlossand"theprocedureinvolvesvirtuallynorisk,trauma,orpain." U   ׀Therefore,thisprongwasalsosatisfied.  (4)    Thedrawingofbloodforabloodalcoholtestmustalsobereasonable.Theoretically,thespecimenshouldbetakenbyapersonwhohastrainingorexpertiseindrawingblood.Tenn.CodeAnn.5510410addresseswhomaydrawtheblood.Subsection(a)statesthataregisterednurse,licensedpracticalnurse,clinicallaboratorytechnologistortechnician,licensedemergencymedicaltechnicianorlicensedparamedic V   ׀mustdrawthebloodforthebloodalcoholtest. W   ׀Itfurtherprovidesthatbloodspecimensaretobetaken"underproceduresestablishedbythedepartmentofhealth."However,thestatutedoesnotstatethelocationwherethespecimenistobeobtained.Othercourtshaveheldthatthebloodmaybedrawnatthejail X   ׀oronthefloorofanemergencyroom. Y   ׀ThisCourtconcludesthatthedrawingofabloodspecimendoesnothavetobedrawninahospitalenvironmentsolongasthepersondrawingthebloodisqualified,thebloodistakeninconformitywiththe"procedures"establishedbythedepartmentofhealth,anditdoesnotthreatenthesafetyorhealthoftheaccused. Thepurposeofthestatuteinquestionisto"protectthedonor...frombeingsubjectedtounhealthfulconditionsintheprocurementofabloodsampleandtoprohibitthedonorfrombeingsubjectedtounqualifiedpeopletakingsamples." Z   ׀ Theappellantdidnotprovethe"procedures"establishedbythedepartmentofhealth. [   ׀ThisCourtcannottakejudicialnoticeofthese"procedures."Furthermore,theappellantfailedtoestablishthattheofficerandhospitalpersonnelsubjectedhimtounhealthfulconditionsintheprocurementofthebloodspecimen.Thepersondrawingtheappellant'sbloodwasanurse,oneoftheprofessionslistedinthestatute.Theofficerwhoappliedthemaceandhelpedrestraintheappellantwasalsoanemergencymedicaltechnician,oneoftheprofessionslistedinthestatute. Itmustberememberedthattheofficerstooktheappellanttotheemergencyroomtohavetheblooddrawn.Theappellantrefusedtocooperatewiththehospitalpersonnelassignedtodrawtheblood.Inaddition,theappellantbecamebelligerentandloud.Hewasdisturbingseveralpeoplebeingtreatedintheemergencyroom.Thus,theofficershadtoremovehimfromtheemergencyroom.Inshort,theappellantisavictimofhisownconduct.  Thephysicalforceusedbyapoliceofficertoobtainabloodspecimenmustbereasonableinlightofthefactsandcircumstancesthatconfronttheofficerwhenthedecisionismadetoapplyforce. Whendeterminingwhetheranofficerhasusedexcessiveforceinobtainingabloodspecimenfromanaccused,acourtmustapplythe"objectivereasonablenessstandard." \   ׀Unfortunately,the"testofreasonablenessundertheFourthAmendmentisnotcapableofprecisedefinitionormechanicalapplication." ]   ׀Therefore,eachcasemustbedeterminedbaseduponitsfactsandcircumstances. Thereasonablenessoftheforceusedbyanofficerinobtainingabloodspecimen"mustbejudgedfromtheperspectiveofareasonableofficeronthescene,ratherthanwiththe20/20visionofhindsight." ^   ׀AstheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsaidinGrahamv.Connor:    Thecalculusofreasonablenessmustembodyallowanceforthefactthatpoliceofficersareoftenforcedtomakesplitsecondjudgmentsincircumstancesthataretense,uncertain,andrapidlyevolvingabouttheamountofforcethatisnecessaryinaparticularsituation.   X 8 8 AsinotherFourthAmendmentcontexts,however,the'"reasonableness"'inquiryinanexcessiveforcecaseisanobjectiveone:thequestioniswhethertheofficers'actionsare'"objectivelyreasonable"'inlightofthefactsandcircumstancesconfrontingthem,withoutregardtotheirunderlyingintentormotivation....Anofficer'sevilintentionswillnotmakeaFourthAmendmentviolationoutofanobjectivelyreasonableuseofforce;norwillanofficer'sgoodintentionsmakeanobjectivelyunreasonableuseofforceconstitutional. _   ׀ Whenapplyingtheobjectivelyreasonablestandard,thecourtshouldconsider,amongothercircumstances,(a)whethertheofficerinitiatedthephysicalviolence, n   ׀(b)whethertheaccusedwascombative,uncooperative,orunruly, o   ׀(c)whethertheaccused'sconductisanimmediatethreattotheofficer'ssafetyorthesafetyofothers, p   ׀(d)thesizeandphysicalstrengthoftheaccused, q   ׀(e)theseriousnessofthecrimethattheaccusedcommitted, r   ׀(f)whethertheofficerrefusedtheaccused'sreasonablerequesttosubmittoadifferentformofmeasuringthebloodalcohollevel, s   ׀and(g)whethertheofficerrespondedtotheaccused'scombativeresistancewithinappropriateforce. t   ׀Areviewofdecisionspermittingtheuseofforcetoobtainabloodspecimenishelpfulindeterminingwhethertheforceinthiscasewasobjectivelyreasonable. InStatev.Ryan, u   ׀aCaliforniacase,fiveofficersrestrainedtheaccusedwhileabloodtechniciandrewbloodfromtheaccused'sarm.Accordingtothecourt,therewas"noevidence...thatthepoliceusedmoreforcethannecessarytoovercome[theaccused's]resistanceorintroducedanywantonness,violenceorbeatings." v   ׀InCarletonv.SuperiorCourt, w   ׀anotherCaliforniacase,theaccusedbeganstrugglingwiththeofficersafterhearrivedatthejail.Herefusedtosubmittoachemicalbreathtest,providetheofficerswithurine,orprovideabloodspecimen.Sixofficershadtorestraintheaccusedtoobtainabloodspecimen.Adeputyheldeachlegandeacharmwhileanotherdeputyheldtheaccusedina"carotidrestraint"chokehold.Thereafter,aregisterednursedrewbloodfromtheaccused'sarm.Thetrialcourtdeniedtheaccused'smotiontosuppresstheresultsofthebloodalcoholtest.Inaffirmingthetrialcourt'sdenialoftheaccused'smotiontosuppress,thecourtsaid:"Althoughthisdegreeofforcemayapproachthebrinkofexcessiveness,itwasnotexcessive.Carleton'sselfinducedbriefphysicalrestraintbeforeandduringthewithdrawalofabloodsampleisnotconscienceshocking." x    InMcCannv.State, y   ׀theaccusedrefusedtogiveabloodspecimenafterbeingtransportedtoahospital.Astruggleensued.Theofficerandamedicaltechnicianattemptedtoholdtheaccused'sarmdownsothatabloodsamplecouldbeobtained.Eachtimethiswasattempted,theaccusedwasabletowithdrawhisarm.Whentheaccusedattemptedtobitetheofficer,theofficerappliedastunguntotheaccused'sarm.Theaccused'sarmwentlimpandthebloodspecimenwasobtained.TheDelawarecourtheldthattheforcedusedtoobtainthebloodspecimenwasreasonable. InStatev.Lanier, z   ׀theaccusedwastakentothejail.There,headvisedofficershewouldnotpermitthemedicaltechniciantodrawbloodfromhisbody.Whenthetechnicianattemptedtodrawtheblood,theaccusedresisted.Ittookfiveorsixofficerstorestraintheaccusedwhilethetechnicianobtainedthebloodspecimen.TheSouthDakotacourtheldthattheforceusedbytheofficers"didnotexceedtheamountnecessarytoeffect"thedrawingoftheblood. {   ׀ InStatev.Meyers, |   ׀anotherSouthDakotacase,theofficerstransportedtheaccusedtothelocaljail.Theaccusedwasaskedtopermitabloodspecimentobedrawnfromhisarm.Hetoldtheofficers:"Hellno,youain'ttakingnothing." }   ׀Healsorejectedtherequestofthemedicaltechnician.Fiveofficersassistedinrestrainingtheaccusedwhilethetechnicianobtainedthebloodspecimen.Theaccusedwasplacedinachairandanofficerheldeachlegandtherightarmwhiletwoofficersheldtheaccused'sleftarm.Hecontinuedtoresistwhilerestrained.TheSouthDakotacourtsaidthat"[u]nderthesefacts,itwasnotunreasonableforthepoliceofficerstoforegoafutileandpotentiallydangerous,unrestrainedblooddraw." ~   ׀ InSicklerv.State,    ׀yetanotherSouthDakotacase,theaccusedwastakentothelocaljailratherthanahospitalduetohis"extremelyunrulybehavior."Adeputysheriffplacedtheaccusedinachairandrestrainedtheaccusedwhileadeputysheriff,whowasalsoalaypracticalnurse,drewabloodspecimen.TheSouthDakotacourtheldthattheprocedureemployeddidnotthreatentheaccused'ssafetyorhealth,thebloodwaswithdrawninamedicallyapprovedmannerbyaqualifiednurse,andtheprocedurewasnotoverlyintrusive.     InBurnsv.State,    ׀twopoliceofficersforciblytooktheaccusedtotheemergencyroomofalocalhospital.Theaccusedcursed,resisted,andfoughttheofficers.Intheemergencyroomtheofficerswrestledtheaccusedtothefloorandalabtechnicianobtainedabloodspecimen.TheTexascourt,notingthattheaccusedinitiatedtheviolence,heldthatthe"policeofficersdidnotoverreact:[theaccused]wasmerelyrestrainedafterhestruggledtoavoidhavingthelaboratorytechniciandrawhisblood."     InStatev.Krause,    ׀theaccusedwasunrulyandcombativeenroutetothehospital.Herefusedtopermitabloodspecimentobedrawn,heshoutedvulgarities,hecontinuedtospitattheofficersandthehospitalpersonnel,andwasgenerallyunruly.Threeofficersplacedapillowcaseovertheaccused'shead,tiedhisfeet,andheldhisarmwhileamedicaltechnicianobtainedthebloodspecimen.Therestraintcausedtheneedletoinjuretheaccused'sarm,hebithistongue,andbrokeatooth.TheWisconsincourtheldthat"theforcedusedtorestrain[theaccused]...wasreasonableinlightofthetotalityofthecircumstancesfacingtheofficers"whenthemedicaltechnicianattemptedtodrawtheblood.     Inthiscase,theforceusedbytheofficerswasobjectivelyreasonablegiventheconductoftheappellant.Herefusedtocooperateinsidetheemergencyroom,hewasloud,andhedisturbedotherpeoplebeingtreated.Someofthepeoplebeingtreatedhadbeeninjuredwhentheappellantstrucktheirvehicle.Oncetheappellantwasmovedoutsidetheemergencyroomdoor,hecontinuedtoresistfourtofiveofficers.Theofficers'onlyalternativewastophysicallyrestraintheappellantsothatthenursecouldobtainthebloodspecimen.Onlyaftertheseattemptsfailedwasthemaceapplied.Anofficertestifiedthattheyonlyusedtheforcenecessarytoobtainthespecimen.Thefactscontainedintherecordsupporttheofficer'sstatement.Therefore,thisprongwassatisfied.      _____________________________________________      JOEB.JONES,JUDGECONCUR:________________________________________̀GARYR.WADE,JUDGE________________________________________̀PAULG.SUMMERS,JUDGE