WPCU U:V % 0Cn 04w@4 0J 0Th 0^ 0h 0r 0| 0p 0 1u 0d U6_ B) DC AMU*N Bx^v~vj D3= 0@p AO 0D D/  B8<6X9`("Courier 10cpiX($    3|x!<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@8;X@( T$  DӀ !U!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)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d7Border 1dd-C << G<  9p`(Arial d !    !!   YYY FILED!X September17,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.!AppellateCourtClerk  T !#d#     Ҁ    Wenotetheissuesbeforeusseemtorepresentacaseofform'striumphoversubstance.Eitherpartycouldhaveavoidedthisappeal.Thestatecouldhavemovedtoamendtheindictmentsoastohaveremovedanyquestionsorthedefendantcouldhavefiledabillofparticulars.Fromthisrecordthedefendantcertainlycannotclaimthathehadinsufficientnoticeofthestate'sallegations.Ineithercaseneedlesslitigationcouldhavebeenavoided.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   BA Op Geneva  BA Op Geneva """"'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .          \RA'\L #;+'h|`  `L߀@ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATKNOXVILLE@ MARCH1996SESSION yXI STATEOFTENNESSEE ̀Appellee,V. DANNYW.SOLOMOǸ Appellant,FORTHEAPPELLANT:WilliamH.BellAttorneyatLaw114MainStreetGreenville,Tn.37743̀)C.C.A.No.03C019511CC00375))GreeneCounty))Hon.BenK.Wexler,Judge))(CertifiedQuestionofLaw)FORTHEAPPELLEE:CharlesW.BursonAttorneyGeneralandEugeneJ.HoneaAssistantAttorneyGeneral450JamesRobertsonParkwayNashville,Tn.37243C.BerkeleyBell,Jr.DistrictAttorneyGeneral andCecilC.Mills,Jr.AssistantDistrictAttorney113WestChurchStreetGreenville,Tn.37743ҀOPINIONFILED:______________________̀ AFFIRMED 򀀀CHARLESLEE ,̀SpecialJudge7'XXdXXd7Ӏ  @ OPINIOǸThisappealpresentsacertifiedquestionoflawunderTennesseeRuleofCriminalProcedure37(b)(2)(i).TheDefendant'scertifiedquestioniswhetherthetrialcourterredinfailingtodismissthesecondcountofanindictmentbecauseitdidnotallegethecourtoffirstconviction.TheDefendantpleadedguiltytoD.U.I.andreservedthisissueforappeal.Hereceivedasentenceofeleven(11)monthsandtwentynine(29)daysofwhichfortyfiveweretobeservedinthecountyjail.Weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. ThedefendantwasindictedbytheGreeneCountyGrandJuryinatwocountindictment.ThefirstcountallegedDrivingUndertheInfluenceofanIntoxicantinviolationofT.C.A.5510401.ThesecondcountoftheindictmentpurportedtonotifythedefendantthathewouldbetriedasasecondoffenderallegingthedefendanthadpreviouslybeenconvictedofaprioroffenseofDrivingUndertheInfluenceofanIntoxicant"OnMarch17,1986inGreeneCounty,Tennessee". Thedefendantfiledamotiontodismissthesecondcountoftheindictmentbecauseitdidnotallegethecourtinwhichtheprioroffenseoccurred.Thetrialcourtdeniedthemotion. Thestatenowinsiststhedefendant'sappealshouldbedismissedinthattheissueraisedhereinisnotdispositiveofthecase.̀ TheTennesseeSupremeCourtsetouttherequirementswhichmustbemetforanissuetobecertifiedforappealinStatev.Preston,759S.W.2d647(Tenn.1988).Thecourtsaid: 4    ThefinalorderorjudgmentfromwhichthetimebeginstoruntopursueaT.R.A.P.3appealmustcontainastatementofthedispositivecertifiedquestionoflawreservedbydefendantforappellatereviewandthequestionoflawmustbestatedsoastoclearlyidentifythescopeandthelimitsofthelegalissuereserved.Forexample,wherequestionsoflawinvolvethevalidityofsearchesandtheadmissibilityofstatementsandconfessions,etc.,thereasonsrelieduponbydefendantinthetrialcourtatthesuppressionhearingmustbeidentifiedinthestatementofthecertifiedquestionoflawandreviewbytheappellatecourtswillbelimitedtothosepasseduponbythetrialjudgeandstatedinthecertifiedquestion,absentaconstitutionalrequirementotherwise.Withoutanexplicitstatementofthecertifiedquestion,neitherthedefendant,theStatenorthetrialjudgecanmakeameaningfuldeterminationofwhethertheissuesoughttobereviewedisdispositiveofthecase....Also,theordermuststatethatthecertifiedquestionwasexpresslyreservedaspartofapleaagreement,thattheStateandthetrialjudgeconsentedtothereservationandthattheStateandthetrialjudgeareoftheopinionthatthequestionisdispositiveoftheissue.Ofcourse,theburdenisondefendanttoseethattheseprerequisitesareinthefinalorderandthattherecordbroughttotheappellatecourtscontainsalloftheproceedingsbelowthatbearuponwhetherthecertifiedquestionoflawisdispositiveandthemeritsofthequestioncertified.    ҀId.at650. Thestateinsiststhatshouldthiscourtagreewiththedefendant,"[T]hedefendantcouldbetriedonhiscurrentDUI;orthedistrictattorneygeneralcouldwithdrawand/oramendtheindictmenttoconformtotheordersofthisCourt".Therefore,itwouldfollowthatthequestionpresentedbythedefendantwouldnotdisposeofthecase.See,StateofTennesseevs.VirginiaBrown,DavidsonCounty,C.C.A.No.85217III,OpinionfiledMarch25,1986,atNashville.However,thisCourtnotesthatthisopportunitywaspresentedtothestateatthetimeofthedefendant'sfilinghismotiontodismissandforwhateverreasonsthestateelectedtoproceedonthemerits. $   ׀Tofollowtheprocedurenowinsisteduponbythestatewouldplacethedefendantinaproceduralrevolvingdoor. Wethereforechoosetoaddresstheissueonthemeritsbutnotasposedbytheparties.Thecertifiedquestionasposedbythepartiesreads: OnOctober2,1995,thedefendantfiledamotiontodismisscounttwo(theenhancementcount)oftheindictmentforfailureofthesecondcounttoallegetheCourtoffirstconvictionasrequiredbyFrostv.State,330S.W.2d303.Shouldthetrialcourthavegrantedthemotion?(emphasisadded) Thebroadquestion"Shouldthetrialcourthavegrantedthemotion?"doesnotcomporttotheformofTennesseeRuleofCriminalProcedure37(b)(2)(i)orthedictatesofStatev.Preston,Supra.Prestonrequiresfinalordersclearlyidentifythescopeandthelimitsofthelegalissuesinordertoassurethatappellatecourtsexercisetheirproperfunctionofreviewingfinaljudgmentsoftrialcourts.Wethereforelimitourreviewtothefollowingquestion: Isanindictmentwhichnotifiesthedefendantofthestate'sintentiontoseekenhancedpunishmentdefectiveonitsfaceifitfailstospecificallyidentifytheCourtofconvictionofthepreviousoffense. T.C.A.4013202requiresanindictmentto"statethefactsconstitutingtheoffenseinordinaryandconciselanguage...insuchamannerastoenableapersonofcommonunderstandingtoknowwhatisintended,andwiththatdegreeofcertaintywhichwillenablethecourt,onconviction,topronouncetheproperjudgment...."Itiswellsettledthatanindictmentissufficientifit(1)givesnoticeoftheoffensewithwhichthedefendantischarged;(2)enablesthecourttoenteraproperjudgment,and(3)describestheoffensesoastoallowtheaccusedtoraiseapleaofformerjeopardy.Statev.Davis,748S.W.2d207(Tenn.Crim.App.1987);seealsoHagnerv.UnitedStates,285U.S.427(1932).Therefore,itisnotnecessarythatanindictmentfollowaspecificformorcontainspecificlanguage.Wethereforeholdthatthemerefailureofanindictmentseekingenhancedpunishmenttoallegebynamethepriorconvictingcourtdoesnotinandofitselfrendertheindictmentdefective,ifitotherwisecomportswiththetenetsabove. Wenotethattheformofthecertifiedquestionbeforeusdoesnotaskustodetermineiftheindictmentinthiscaseissufficientandwelimitouropiniononlytothequestionasposed.Becauseoftheformofthecertifiedquestion,thedefendanthasnotbeenvictorious.However,theStateshouldnotrelyonthisopinionasapprovingitsprocedureortheformofitsindictments.Moreaccommodationatthetriallevelmakesforfewerappeals. Fortheforegoingreasons,weaffirmthejudgementofthetrialcourt.    _____________________________CharlesLee,SpecialJudge    &  CONCUR:____________________________PaulG.Summers,Judge____________________________JosephM.Tipton,Judge'