ÿWPCH …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 0JH 0T’ 0^æ 0hD 0r¬ 0| 0†š 0 1u° 0d% U>‰ U*Ç B)ñ DC AM]ªv~ B@vÓ] D30 0@c AO£Æò 0D¸ D/ü B+˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- RESTEUVDWXDYZÓ€fƒ‰"3|xh2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òApril€28,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h dStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€VXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÙ€€ÙßR€"#!A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌOCTOBER€SESSION,€1996ÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9512„CC„00396Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìó óà àAppellee,à àà àà àò ò)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àROANE€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€E.€EUGENE€EBLENó óÌò òALBERT€SEALS,€JR.,ó óà àà àò ò)à àJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àAppellant.à àà àà àò ò)à à(Direct€Appeal)Ìó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌHAROLD€D.€BALCOM,€JR.à àà àCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌ350€E.,€Race€St.,€Suite€1à àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌP.€O.€Box€487ÌKingston,€TN€€37763à àà àà àHUNT€S.€BROWNÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCHARLES€HAWKÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àD.€ROGER€DELPÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€AttorneyÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNinth€Judicial€DistrictÌà àà àà àà àà àà àP.€O.€Box€703Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àKingston,€€TN€€37763ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÇòòò òÓ  ÓÔ€„ÔOPINIONóóó óÔ€ŠÔÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àAppellant€Albert€Seals€Jr.€pled€guilty€in€the€Roane€County€Criminal€CourtÏto€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.€€He€received€a€sentence€of€elevenÏmonths€and€twenty„nine€days.€€The€trial€court€ordered€that€he€serve€four€days€inÏthe€county€jail€with€the€balance€of€the€sentence€served€on€probation.€€PursuantÏto€Rule€37(b)(2)(i)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure,€AppellantÏreserved€the€following€certified€question€of€law:€whether€the€investigatory€stop€ofÏhis€vehicle€was€based€upon€a€reasonable€suspicion€supported€by€specific€andÏarticulable€facts.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓI.€€FACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óÓ  Óà àThe€proof€shows€that,€on€October€23,Ï1994,€Deputy€Herbert€Barnard€and€Deputy€Steve€Bryant,€both€of€the€RoaneÏCounty€Sheriff's€Department,€were€called€to€investigate€a€disturbance€in€whichÏthree€allegedly€intoxicated€individuals,€two€males€and€a€female,€were€arguingÏoutside€the€Huddle€House€on€Gallaher€Road€near€Kingston,€Tennessee.€ÌÌà àWhen€the€deputies€arrived€at€the€scene,€they€were€told€that€theÏindividuals€had€left€in€a€brown€Ford€Thunderbird€and€a€blue€Nissan€Maxima,Ítraveling€in€the€direction€of€the€interstate.€€After€looking€for€the€vehicles€forÏapproximately€five€minutes€with€no€success,€the€deputies€stopped€at€a€localÏstore€to€discuss€the€situation.€€While€there€and€approximately€twenty€minutesÏafter€the€original€dispatch,€the€deputies€observed€a€blue€car€that€appeared€toÏmatch€the€description€of€the€blue€Nissan€Maxima.€€As€a€result,€the€deputiesÏfollowed€the€car,€which€traveled€at€a€speed€well€below€the€speed€limit.€€BasedÏupon€the€information€received€from€witnesses€at€the€Huddle€House€andÏrecognizing€that€an€extremely€low€rate€of€speed€often€indicates€drunk€driving,ÏDeputy€Barnard€engaged€his€blue€lights.€€However,€despite€the€blue€lights,ÏAppellant€drove€on€for€another€quarter€mile,€entered€his€driveway,€and€parkedÏbeside€his€house.ÌÌà àWhen€Appellant€exited€his€vehicle,€Deputy€Barnard€detected€a€strongÏodor€of€alcohol€and€noticed€that€Appellant€was€unsteady€on€his€feet.€€He€thenÏconducted€field€sobriety€tests€and€concluded€that€Appellant€was€legallyÏintoxicated.ÌÌò òÓ  ÓII.€€REASONABLE€STOPó óÌÓ  Óà àAppellant€claims€that€the€stop€was€unreasonable€because€he€did€notÏbreak€any€traffic€laws€and€because€his€car€was€a€different€make€than€thatÏdescribed€by€the€witnesses€at€the€Huddle€House.€€Appellant€does€not€questionÍthe€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€but€rather€questions€the€trial€court's€conclusions€ofÏlaw€drawn€from€the€facts.ÌÌà àStopping€an€automobile€and€detaining€its€occupants€constitutes€a€seizureÏwithin€the€meaning€of€the€federal€and€state€constitutions.€€òòState€v.€Binionóó,€900ÏS.W.2d€702,€705€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€However,€a€police€officer€mayÏconduct€an€investigatory€stop€of€a€vehicle€when€the€officer€has€a€reasonableÏsuspicion,€supported€by€specific€and€articulable€facts,€that€a€crime€has€been€orÏis€about€to€be€committed.€€òòTerry€v.€Ohioóó,€392€U.S.€1,€21€(1968);€òòGriffin€v.€Stateóó,Ï604€S.W.2d€40,€42€(Tenn.€1980).€€An€investigatory€stop€based€on€reasonableÏsuspicion€requires€a€lower€quantum€of€proof€than€probable€cause.€€òòState€v.ÏPulleyóó,€863€S.W.2d€29,€31€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€determining€whether€reasonableÏsuspicion€exists,€the€reviewing€court€must€consider€the€totality€of€theÏcircumstances.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Cortezóó,€449€U.S.€411,€417€(1981).€€TheseÏcircumstances€include,€but€are€not€limited€to,€objective€observations€and€theÏrational€inferences€and€deductions€of€trained€police€officers.€€òòState€v.€Watkinsóó,Ï827€S.W.2d€293,€294€(Tenn.€1992).Ìà àIn€analyzing€the€reasonableness€of€an€investigatory€stop,€this€Court€isÏnot€bound€or€limited€in€its€consideration€of€the€facts.€€Instead,€this€Court€is€entitledÏto€draw€its€own€conclusions€from€the€facts€as€found.€€òòState€v.€Marshallóó,€870ÏS.W.2d€532,538€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).ÌÌà àMindful€of€the€foregoing€principles€of€law,€we€conclude€that,€given€theÏunique€circumstances€of€this€case,€no€investigatory€stop€occurred.€€Not€allÏcontact€between€the€police€and€a€citizen€constitutes€a€seizure.€€òòTerry€v.€Ohioóó,Ï392€U.S.€1,€20€n.16€(1968);€òòsee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,€776€S.W.2d€933,€935Ï(Tenn.€1989).€€According€to€Appellantððs€own€testimony,€he€was€on€his€wayÏhome€when€he€noticed€the€blue€lights€approximately€one€hundred€yards€from€hisÏdriveway.€€€Instead€of€responding,€he€drove€the€remaining€one€hundred€yards€toÏhis€driveway,€proceeded€another€three€hundred€yards€up€his€driveway,€andÏparked€next€to€his€house.€€Presumably€Appellant€would€not€have€doneÏanything€any€differently€had€no€police€car€been€following€him.€€It€was€only€at€thisÏpoint€that€the€officers€interacted€with€Appellant.€€The€strong€odor€of€alcohol€andÏAppellantððs€unsteadiness€then€gave€the€officers€probable€cause€to€conduct€fieldÏsobriety€tests.€€It€is€our€opinion€that€Appellant€stopped€his€vehicle€not€becauseÏOfficer€Barnard€engaged€his€blue€lights,€but€because€Appellant€had€arrived€atÏhis€predetermined€destination.€€Appellantððs€decision€to€stop€his€vehicle€was€notÏbased€upon€the€coercive€effect€of€police€conduct;€therefore,€there€was€noÏrestraint€on€his€liberty.€€òòSeeóó€òòMichigan€v.€Chesternutóó,€486€U.S.€567,€573€(1987).ÌÌà àEven€assuming€that€an€investigatory€stop€did€occur,€the€officersðð€actionsÏwere€reasonable€based€upon€the€following€facts:€€(1)€Appellantððs€car€matchedÍthe€general€description€given€by€witnesses€at€the€Huddle€House;€(2)€only€aÏshort€period€of€time€transpired€between€the€original€dispatch€and€the€observationÏof€the€vehicle;€and€(3)€Appellant€was€operating€his€vehicle€at€an€extremely€slowÏrate€of€speed€given€the€time€of€night€and€the€posted€speed€limit.€€These€specificÏand€articulable€facts€are€sufficient€to€warrant€an€investigatory€stop.€€Therefore,Ïthe€trial€court€properly€denied€Appellant's€motion€to€suppress.€ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE