ÿWPCÌ …UBV %˜U.žÌnXÜ 0P4 4„ 0”˜ 0D, p w p 0Jz 0TÄ 0^ 0hv 0rÞ 0|P 0†Ì 0R 1uâ U,W 0dƒU,çU6 BIB)fDC AMÒEÿd D3cv~–vÓ 0@ç AO'Æv 0D< D/€ B¯<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|XÎ «<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Óà~| (D(3¾Á$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóóà Ó€2 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)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(Courier New d% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd€-&Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ;Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€#ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òAprilÏ18,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó õÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€#ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔThe€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€indicates€that€an€oral€motion€for€a€new€trial€may€haveÏbeen€previously€made€by€counsel€but€we€do€not€find€such€in€the€record.€€Also,€there€is€no€indication€thatÏit€was€ever€reduced€to€writing€and€filed€as€required€by€the€rules.Ì$$$$'ÿÿdxdPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA:Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA:Op Monaco Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€""X„d&ÓÑ#€""Xd#ÑÔ€#ÔÒ D ÒÒ ¦ ÒÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÑ X ÑÑ7€gàXXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÔ€ÔÙ€€ÙßL€'(&;+'h|` 81 `€€Lßà àà àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINALÏAPPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÓ  Óà@ àJANUARY€1996€SESSIONÌÌÌÌó óÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óà àò òC.C.A.ÏNO.€03C01„9503„CR„00114ó óÌà àà àAppellee,à àò ò€€€€€à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àWASHINGTON€COUNTYó óÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.ÏARDEN€L.€HILL€,ÌBILLY€PAULÏMOTTERN,à àà àà à)à àJUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óAppellant.ò òà àà àà à)à àó ó(DrivingÏUnder€the€Influence)ò òÌó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà àà àà à€€€€€òòà àFOR€THEÏAPPELLEE:óóÌÌÌò òSTEVEÏFANDUZZà àà àà àà àà àCHARLES€W.ÏBURSONÌó ó€€€€€€€(At€Trial)à àà àà àà àà àAttorney€GeneralÏ&€Reporterò òÌÌSTEVEÏJOHNSONó óà àà àà àà àò òà àELIZABETH€T.ÏRYANó óÌ1113€Sunset€Dr.à àà àà àà àà àAsst.ÏAttorney€GeneralÌJohnson€City,€TN€€37601€€à àà àà àà à450€JamesÍRobertson€Pkwy.Ì(At€Sentencing€andà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ì€New€Trial€Motion)Ìà àà àà àà àò òà àà àà àDAVID€CROCKETTó óÌò òJACK€D.€HODGESó óà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌ205€West€Walnut€St.ÌJohnson€City,€TN€€37604à àà àà àà àò òKENT€GARLANDó óÌ€€€€€€(On€Appeal)à àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.€O.€Box€38Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJonesborough,€TN€€37659à àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àÌOPINION€FILED:____________________ÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÌÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÌJudgeÌÇÑ  Ñà@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌó óóóÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àà àThe€defendant€was€convicted€at€a€jury€trial€of€driving€under€theÏinfluence€of€an€intoxicant€(DUI),€third€offense.€€He€received€a€sentence€of€elevenÏmonths€and€twenty„nine€days€and€a€fine€of€five€thousand€dollars€($5,000)€for€thisÏconviction.€€In€this€appeal€he€contests€only€his€conviction,€presenting€three€issues.€€InÏhis€first€issue€he€contends€that€there€was€not€"reasonable€suspicion"€for€the€officer€toÏmake€a€traffic€stop.€€In€his€second€issue€he€contends€that€the€evidence€to€support€hisÏconviction€was€insufficient,€and€in€his€final€issue€he€contends€that€the€trial€judgeÏerred€in€sending€the€court€reporter€on€errands€during€the€showing€of€video€evidenceÏto€the€jury.€€After€a€review€of€the€record€in€this€cause,€the€judgment€below€is€affirmed.ÌÌà àà àOfficer€Michael€Templeton€of€the€Johnson€City€Police€DepartmentÏtestified€on€behalf€of€the€State.€€This€officer€had€received€training€at€the€TennesseeÏPolice€Academy€which€included€"DUI€detection"€and€had€made€"many"€stops€andÏarrests€for€DUI.€€He€testified€that€at€11:53€p.m.€the€left€turn€signal€on€a€vehicle€that€hadÏjust€turned€left€remained€on€for€a€long€period€of€time.€€When€he€followed,€the€driverÏaccelerated.€€He€further€testified€that,€although€the€speed€limit€was€thirty€miles€perÏhour,€the€defendant's€vehicle€had€reached€speeds€of€forty„seven€miles€per€hour€on€aÍvery€curvy€road.€€He€stated€that€the€driver's€side€wheels€had€crossed€the€doubleÏyellow€lines,€and€that€both€passenger€side€wheels€had€gone€into€the€gravel€on€aÏcurve€and€the€vehicle€had€almost€struck€a€guardrail.€€Officer€Templeton€also€testifiedÏthat,€after€he€had€arrived€at€a€safe€area€and€stopped€the€defendant,€the€defendantÏhad€immediately€exited€his€vehicle€and€started€toward€the€officer's€vehicle.€€OfficerÏTempleton€further€stated€that€the€defendant€had€been€noticeably€unstable€on€his€feet,Ïthat€he€had€swayed€slightly€and€had€a€strong€odor€of€alcohol€about€his€person.€€HeÏquoted€the€defendant€as€having€insisted€that€he€(the€defendant)€be€given€a€breakÏand€that€he€had€only€consumed€a€couple€of€drinks€at€a€local€hotel.ÌÌà àà àOfficer€Templeton€testified€that€the€defendant€had€not€complained€ofÏany€foot€or€leg€problems,€that€he€had€failed€three€field€sobriety€tests,€and€that€the€Ïhorizontal€gaze€nystagmus€test€had€indicated€an€impairment.€€Upon€inventorying€theÏvehicle€the€officer€found€an€open€beer€can€in€the€seat€with€a€small€amount€of€alcohol,Ïand€a€brown€sack€with€one€empty€beer€can€under€the€driver's€seat.€€Additionally,€fourÏunopened€cans€of€beer€were€found€in€another€bag€in€the€vehicle.€€After€beingÏtransported€to€the€local€jail,€the€defendant€refused€the€intoximeter€test.€€Five€moreÏsobriety€tests€were€administered€and€recorded€on€a€video€camera€at€the€jail.€€TheÏofficer€opined€that€the€defendant€had€been€in€an€impaired€condition.€€The€video€wasÍshown€to€the€jury€after€the€officer's€testimony€and€before€cross„examination.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€testified€in€his€own€behalf€and€denied€that€his€ability€toÏdrive€had€been€impaired€since€he€had€only€consumed€two€twelve€ounce€beers€and€aÏ"sip"€of€a€third.€€He€further€testified€that€his€eyes€were€habitually€bloodshot€and€thatÏhe€had€undergone€surgery€for€torn€ligaments€in€a€knee€which€still€presented€aÏproblem.€€These€matters€were€offered€by€the€defendant€in€defense€of€the€officer'sÏtestimony€concerning€his€failure€of€the€sobriety€tests,€but€the€defendant€deniedÏhaving€refused€a€chemical€test€offered€by€the€officer.€€Further,€the€defendant€deniedÏthat€he€had€almost€struck€a€guardrail€or€crossed€over€the€center€line€prior€to€the€timeÏthe€officer€had€stopped€him.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant's€wife,€from€whom€the€defendant€was€separated,€alsoÏtestified€on€behalf€of€the€defendant€and€stated€that€he€had€consumed€only€two€beersÏwhile€present€with€her€just€prior€to€his€arrest.€€She€further€denied€that€he€had€shownÏany€evidence€of€having€been€drinking€prior€to€the€time€he€arrived€at€the€motel€whereÏshe€was€residing.ÌÌà àà àThe€defendant€contends€in€his€first€issue€that€the€investigatory€stopÍmade€by€the€officer€was€not€based€on€reasonable€suspicion,€supported€by€specificÏand€articulable€facts.€€He€contends€in€his€third€issue€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏsending€the€court€reporter€on€an€errand€while€a€video€introduced€into€evidence€wasÏbeing€shown€to€the€jury.€€We€note€that€no€written€motion€was€filed€for€a€new€trial€asÏrequired€under€our€rules.€€Such€a€motion€is€required€to€be€filed€in€writing,€or€if€madeÏorally€in€open€court€shall€be€reduced€to€writing,€within€thirty€days€of€the€date€the€orderÏof€sentence€is€entered.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€33(b).× ƒ) ××  ×€€For€this€reason,€we€find€that€theÏdefendant's€first€and€third€issues,€on€the€basis€of€which€he€seeks€a€new€trial,€haveÏbeen€waived.€€However,€even€if€not€waived,€we€think€the€evidence€is€sufficient€toÏsupport€the€trial€judge's€finding€that€the€officer€had€sufficient€cause€to€stop€theÏdefendant.€€As€to€the€defendant's€issue€concerning€the€absence€of€the€court€reporter,Ïthere€has€been€no€allegation€of€prejudice€and€therefore€this€alleged€error€wouldÏhave€been€harmless€at€most.ÌÌà àà àIn€the€defendant's€second€issue€he€contests€the€sufficiency€of€theÏevidence.€€Failure€to€file€a€motion€for€a€new€trial€does€not€deprive€this€Court€ofÏjurisdiction.€€òòState€v.€Givhanóó,€616€S.W.2d€612,€613€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980).€€In€hisÍissue€attacking€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€the€defendant€does€not€seek€a€newÏtrial€but,€rather,€a€reversal€and€dismissal€of€the€charge.€€For€this€reason,€this€issue€isÏnot€waived€by€the€failure€to€file€a€new€trial€motion.€€We€also€note€that€the€defendant'sÏnotice€of€appeal€was€not€timely€filed.€€However,€because€of€the€death€of€defendant'sÏcounsel€after€trial€and€prior€to€perfecting€appeal,€in€the€interests€of€justice€we€willÏwaive€the€timely€filing€of€the€notice€of€appeal.€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€27„1„123€(Supp.€1990).ÌÌà àà àA€defendant€challenging€the€sufficiency€of€the€proof€has€the€burden€ofÏillustrating€to€this€Court€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdictÏreturned€by€the€trier€of€fact€in€his€or€her€case.€€This€Court€will€not€disturb€a€verdict€ofÏguilt€for€lack€of€sufficient€evidence€unless€the€facts€contained€in€the€record€and€anyÏinferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€the€facts€are€insufficient,€as€a€matter€of€law,€forÏa€rational€trier€of€fact€to€find€the€defendant€guilty€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòState€v.ÏTuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).ÌÌ€à àà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convictingÏevidence,€we€must€review€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecutionÏin€determining€whether€"òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.Í307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€61€L.Ed.2d€560€(1979).€€We€do€not€reweigh€or€re„evaluateÏthe€evidence€and€are€required€to€afford€the€State€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€theÏproof€contained€in€the€record€as€well€as€all€reasonable€and€legitimate€infer‚encesÏwhich€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.Ï1978).€ÌÌà àà àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€valueÏto€be€given€to€the€evidence,€as€well€as€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€areÏresolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835.€€A€guiltyÏverdict€rendered€by€the€jury€and€approved€by€the€trial€judge€accredits€the€testimonyÏof€the€witnesses€for€the€State,€and€a€presumption€of€guilt€replaces€the€presumption€ofÏinnocence.€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).ÌÌà àà àIn€reviewing€the€testimony€offered€at€trial,€we€find€more€than€sufficientÏproof€to€support€the€jury's€verdict€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€The€juryÏobviously€accepted€the€State's€proof€and€rejected€the€defendant's€proof.ÌÌà àà àFor€the€reasons€hereinabove€set€forth,€we€affirm€the€defendant'sÏconviction€for€driving€under€the€influence.ÌÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJOE€B.€JONES,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€Judge