ÿWPCA GÍ7ÿN0ä3Àvf|šâé;XxþÚz/³ kNuN/yD¤)Ží¾6çÃ?‚q‘I:ÒÞ ,çóö{t¬è‘¿%1'ìc)††ªŽ´Üü±Dîå#@‚ÖM{^¿ÝyNg ,%2×RÀ]“”ÊöÖÜVÈ—íêÇ@(¹æ'cøYâXÁâ5ű°Eå¾tо”´µ;)æ,&ÑðÿÁŽùhCýFD=ûÖ›vNù̃rˆRÕºÚ;î­7ÉÞcöƒƒ·­;h5C½ÛãðÀIíY˜Mn$|™D(”u!yj5mßñÉ Û–?ô..…bD\îÕÏ3%{Ÿ§ ‰ª¶]VwSعòIãq›(þmÄ.']NSv|󣙞ÍÑr¬C™„lój‰ Ä­P’ æKôãɮ铴޳íhJ®O|Ʋõ_-Wmr÷*ÏU°,œ§nŧ°-4 Ôpoƒä:QØ22Y•{± zÃÉÉ$*ŽONp@]ãìžOŠ7ø@\InËÁÅ´ý·IÙÁdý©°áçeøxG aé1v¬Z¤žÌv³SžÑ~ÜowBòßdNõ•7ÿB ðž®ÎÅH ‘ÅßÞ£A$›L å,\nb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz 1‡‘ Æ ÆÞ Ƥ ÆjUN0N~U@€ 1uÀE5 0c7 1‡š 72!SSc[ 0D¾¾4b666666666666666666666666666666666666 0ë>>>> B)) 0¤F D3ê D- 0KJJ AS•Æè 0¤® 0DR A«–˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0»n¢P+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*  k1p#¤ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList1I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman 3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(EhCEKQW]cioAutoList2I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.i)  YÝ ƒRýr$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôè¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€In€the€hearing€on€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€new€trial,€the€trial€court€noted€that€the€case€had€been€continuedÐ ° Ðat€least€nine€times€before€it€was€moved€out€of€Sessions€Court€into€Criminal€Court.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó *Ý ƒRýr$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôè¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Although€the€defendant€frames€his€second€issue€on€appeal€as€ð ðThat€the€evidence€in€the€record€is€insufficientÐ ° Ðas€a€matter€of€law€to€sustain€the€convictions,ðð€he€limits€himself€in€his€brief€to€arguing€only€that€the€evidence€wasÐ tÄ Ðinsufficient€to€support€his€DUI€conviction.€€We€conclude€from€our€review€of€the€record,€however,€that€the€evidence€wasÐ 8ˆ Ðsufficient€to€support€his€conviction€for€driving€on€a€revoked€license,€third€offense.€€The€State€introduced€into€evidenceÐ üL Ða€certified€document€from€the€custodian€of€the€records€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Safety,€stating€that€the€status€ofÐ À Ðthe€defendantððs€license€at€the€time€of€his€arrest€was€ð ðrevoked.ðð€The€State€also€introduced€certified€copies€of€theÐ „Ô Ðdefendantððs€prior€convictions€for€driving€while€his€license€was€suspended,€revoked,€or€cancelled.€- ù-(|G2ýr$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€NÍ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôè¥ò»»Ô d(|3G$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€NÍ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€NÍ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€NÍ»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼NÍ»»»ÔÑ8€ 1XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îFNÍÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼NÍ»îîF #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€September€25,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡X 1X»¼NÍÔÌò òÔ#†¼NÍ»XX 1##ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€STEVE€BARBER,€a.k.a.€VERNON€S.€BARBERòòóóÔ‡X 1X»¼NÍÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€S42,091€€€€€€Phyllis€H.€Miller,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2001„00909„CCA„R3„CDÐ ¥õ  ÐOctober€16,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant€was€convicted€by€a€Sullivan€County€Criminal€Court€jury€of€driving€under€theÐ xÈ  Ðinfluence,€third€offense,€a€Class€A€misdemeanor,€and€driving€while€license€suspended,€revoked,€orÐ d´ Ðcancelled,€third€offense,€a€Class€B€misdemeanor.€€On€appeal€to€this€court,€he€argues,€òòinter€aliaóó,€thatÐ P  Ðthe€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€request€for€a€mistrial€and€in€admitting€expert€testimony€on€breathÐ <Œ Ðalcohol€testing€devices.€€After€a€careful€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÐ (x Ðcourt.€€However,€we€remand€for€entry€of€corrected€judgment€forms€to€reflect€that€the€defendantððsÐ d Ðconvictions€resulted€from€jury€verdicts,€rather€than€guilty€pleas.Ô#†¼NÍ»XX 1°#ÔÔ‡X 1X»¼NÍÔÐ P ÐÓåÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed€andÐ Ø( ÐRemanded€for€Entry€of€Corrected€Judgmentsó óÐ Ä ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼NÍ»àX 1'#ÔÔ‡X 1X.¼NÍÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€and€òòJoe€G.Ð œì ÐRiley,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ˆØ ÐÌCary€Taylor,€Kingsport,€Tennessee€(at€trial);€Stephen€M.€Wallace,€District€Public€Defender;€andÐ `° ÐWilliam€A.€Kennedy,€Assistant€Public€Defender€(on€appeal),€for€the€appellant,€Steve€Barber.Ð L œ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€John€H.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€H.Ð $"t! ÐGreeley€Wells,€Jr.,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Teresa€Murray„Smith,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ #`" ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ü#L# ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼NÍ»XX 1J #ÔÔ‡X 1X»¼NÍÔÐ Ô%$!% ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼NÍ»XX 1¸ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X 1X»¼NÍÔà  àThe€defendant,€Steve€Barber,€appeals€his€convictions€for€driving€under€the€influence,€thirdÐ ¬'ü"' Ðoffense,€and€driving€while€license€revoked,€third€offense.€€He€was€sentenced€to€eleven€months,Ð ˜(è#( Ðtwenty„nine€days€with€a€$7500€fine€for€the€driving€under€the€influence€conviction,€and€nine€monthsÐ „)Ô$) Ðwith€a€$2500€fine€for€the€driving€while€license€revoked€conviction,€with€the€sentences€ordered€to€runÐ p*À%* Ðconsecutively,€for€an€effective€sentence€of€twenty€months€and€twenty„nine€days€and€fines€totalingÐ \+¬&+ Ð$10,000.€€The€trial€court€suspended€all€but€120€days€of€the€driving€under€the€influence€sentence,€andÐ H,˜', Ðall€but€forty„five€days€of€the€driving€while€license€revoked€sentence,€and€ordered€that€the€defendantÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôserve€the€remainder€of€his€time€on€supervised€probation.€€Following€the€denial€of€his€motion€for€aÐ ° Ðnew€trial,€the€defendant€filed€a€timely€appeal€to€this€court,€presenting€the€following€as€issues€forÐ œì Ðreview:€€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌÓ€ (Eh83ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£0ÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€jury€verdict€was€contrary€to€the€law€and€the€evidence;݃3£0}ÝŒÐ`°¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£aÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚIIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€evidence€in€the€record€is€insufficient€as€a€matter€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðlaw€to€sustain€the€convictions;݃3£a®ÝŒÐ$ t¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£ÆÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚIIIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€evidence€at€trial€preponderates€against€the€guilt€of€theÐ ü L  Ðdefendant€and€in€favor€of€his€innocence;€Ýƒ3£ÆÝŒÐè 8 ¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£9ÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚIVÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€not€allowing€the€defendant€aÐ À  Ðcontinuance€prior€to€trial€based€upon€the€unavailability€of€twoÐ ¬ü  Ðwitnesses€the€defense€deemed€crucial;݃3£9†ÝŒÐ˜è ¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£ôÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚVÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€not€declaring€a€mistrial€orÐ pÀ Ðgranting€a€new€trial€after€allowing€testimony€concerningÐ \¬ Ðbreathalyzer€results€that€were€ruled€inadmissible€by€the€TrialÐ H˜ ÐCourt€during€the€trial;݃3£ôAÝŒÐ4„¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£ëÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚVIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€allowing€testimony€by€an€expertÐ  \ Ðon€breath€alcohol€testing€devices;€and݃3£ë8ÝŒÐøH¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£VÝÔ2EhÔÚ  ÚVIIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThat€the€defendant€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel;Ð Ð  Ðspecifically,€defense€counsel€failed€to€move€for€an€in€limineÐ ¼  Ðmotion€to€exclude€the€results€of€defendantððs€breathalyzer€testÐ ¨ø Ðwhich€was€subsequently€ruled€inadmissible.€Ýƒ3£V£ÝŒÐ”ä¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌà  àAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€supportÐ l¼ Ðthe€defendantððs€conviction€of€driving€under€the€influence,€and€that€no€error€occurred€in€the€trialÐ X ¨ Ðcourtððs€rulings.€€We€further€conclude€that€the€defendant€failed€to€show€that€he€was€denied€theÐ D!” Ðeffective€assistance€of€trial€counsel.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€Ð 0"€  ÐÌÓ€ (5h88Óà@ˆˆ%ìàò òòòDISCUSSIONóóó óˆÐ $X" ÐÌà  àAt€approximately€1:00€a.m.€on€March€15,€1998,€a€Tennessee€Highway€Patrol€OfficerÐ à%0!$ Ðpatrolling€Interstate€81€in€Sullivan€County€came€upon€a€1989€Mazda€stopped€in€the€emergency€laneÐ Ì&"% Ðwith€its€headlights€on€and€its€engine€running.€€The€defendant,€the€owner€of€the€vehicle,€was€reclinedÐ ¸'#& Ðin€the€driverððs€seat.€€Upon€being€roused,€he€exhibited€bloodshot€eyes,€slurred€speech,€and€an€unsteadyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðgait.€€He€also€smelled€of€alcohol€and€admitted€that€he€had€been€drinking.€€After€failing€field€sobrietyÐ )à$( Ðtests,€he€was€arrested€and€subsequently€charged€with€driving€under€the€influence;€driving€under€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðinfluence,€third€offense;€driving€on€a€revoked€license;€and€driving€on€a€revoked€license,€third€offense.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àTrooper€Patricia€Maines€Riggs,€the€highway€patrol€officer€who€arrested€the€defendant,€Ð ° Ðtestified€at€his€May€24„25,€1999,€trial€that€she€had€been€with€the€Tennessee€Highway€Patrol€sinceÐ œì Ð1984.€€She€said€that€she€was€driving€southbound€on€the€interstate€in€Sullivan€County€atÐ ˆØ Ðapproximately€1:00€a.m.€on€March€15,€1998,€when€she€observed€the€defendantððs€vehicle€stopped€inÐ tÄ Ðthe€emergency€lane€of€northbound€traffic.€€After€driving€approximately€three€miles€to€the€next€exitÐ `° Ðto€turn€around,€€she€drove€back€to€the€location€where€she€had€seen€the€defendantððs€vehicle.€€WhenÐ L œ Ðshe€arrived,€she€found€the€car€in€the€same€position,€with€its€headlights€on€and€engine€running,€butÐ 8 ˆ Ðwithout€any€emergency€flashers€or€flares.€€The€defendant,€whom€Trooper€Riggs€identified€in€court,Ð $ t Ðwas€reclined€in€the€driverððs€seat,€and€appeared€to€be€either€asleep€or€sick.€€There€was€no€sign€of€anyÐ  ` Ðother€occupant.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€not€alert,€and€Trooper€Riggs€had€to€tap€several€times€on€his€window€inÐ Ô$  Ðorder€to€rouse€him.€€When€awakened€and€asked€what€was€wrong,€he€answered€that€he€was€tired.€€HeÐ À  Ðtold€her€that€he€did€not€have€his€driverððs€license€with€him;€after€checking€with€her€dispatcher,Ð ¬ü  ÐTrooper€Riggs€learned€that€his€license€had€been€revoked.€€She€said€that€because€his€speech€wasÐ ˜è  Ðslurred€and€she€detected€a€ð ðstrong€odor€of€an€alcoholic€beverage,ðð€she€asked€him€to€step€outside.€Ð „Ô  ÐOutside€the€vehicle,€the€defendant€told€her€that€he€had€become€tired€and€sleepy,€and€had€pulled€toÐ pÀ Ðthe€shoulder€ð ðto€rest,€to€sleep€it€off.ðð€€He€also€told€her€that€he€had€had€a€fight€with€his€girlfriendÐ \¬ Ðearlier€in€the€evening,€and€that€he€had€gone€out€drinking.€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àTrooper€Riggs€testified€that€the€defendant€had€to€hold€onto€his€car€in€order€to€walk€withoutÐ  p Ðfalling€to€the€rear€of€his€vehicle,€where€she€had€him€attempt€two€field€sobriety€tests.€€He€almost€fellÐ  \ Ðthree€times€in€his€attempts€to€perform€the€ð ðwalk€and€turnðð€test,€and€again€almost€fell€in€his€attemptÐ øH Ðto€do€the€ð ðfinger€to€nose€test.ðð€€She€ended€the€tests€because€she€had€to€repeatedly€catch€him€toÐ ä4 Ðprevent€him€from€falling.€€Trooper€Riggs€testified€that,€in€her€opinion,€based€on€her€training€andÐ Ð  Ðexperience,€the€defendant€was€under€the€influence.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àAfter€placing€the€defendant€in€the€rear€of€her€patrol€car,€Trooper€Riggs€waited€at€the€sceneÐ ”ä Ðapproximately€thirty€minutes€for€a€tow€truck€to€arrive€to€tow€his€vehicle.€€She€then€transported€himÐ €Ð Ðto€the€Sullivan€County€Jail,€arriving€shortly€before€2:00€a.m.€to€turn€him€over€to€the€jailers€forÐ l¼ Ðbooking.€€From€the€time€that€she€placed€him€in€the€rear€of€her€patrol€car€until€she€arrived€with€himÐ X ¨ Ðat€the€jail,€the€defendant€continually€begged€her€to€let€him€go.€€He€said€nothing,€however,€about€hisÐ D!” Ðcar€having€broken€down,€and€did€not€tell€her€that€he€had€not€been€the€driver.€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àTrooper€Riggs€testified€that€as€the€defendant€was€being€searched€and€booked,€she€wentÐ $X" Ðupstairs€and€ð ð[p]roceeded€to€fill€out€the€implied€consent€[form]€and€observe€him€for€theÐ ô$D # Ðbreathalyzer[.]ðð€€She€testified€regarding€the€operation€of€the€intoximeter€machine,€its€calibrationÐ à%0!$ Ðstandards,€her€training€to€perform€the€test,€and€the€procedure€of€observing€the€subject€for€twentyÐ Ì&"% Ðminutes€prior€to€the€administration€of€the€test.€€She€then€identified€the€written€result€of€theÐ ¸'#& Ðdefendantððs€test,€testifying€that€it€showed€he€had€registered€.10%,€and€that€the€test€had€beenÐ ¤(ô#' Ðadministered€at€2:17€a.m.€€On€cross„examination,€she€testified€that€she€began€her€pre„test€observationÐ )à$( Ðof€the€defendant€at€approximately€2:00€a.m.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àJerry€Maines,€director€of€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation€(ð ðTBIðð)€Crime€LaboratoryÐ ° Ðin€Knoxville,€was€accepted€by€the€court€as€an€expert€in€the€field€of€breath€alcohol€testing€devices.€Ð œì ÐHe€testified€at€some€length€regarding€the€operation,€calibration,€and€inspection€of€breath€alcoholÐ ˆØ Ðmachines,€€including€the€ð ðintoximeter€ECIRðð€in€use€at€the€Sullivan€County€Jail.€€He€also€testifiedÐ tÄ Ðabout€the€standard€procedure€of€observing€a€subject€for€twenty€minutes€prior€to€administration€of€theÐ `° Ðtest.€€On€cross„examination,€he€explained€that€the€twenty„minute€observation€period€was€aÐ L œ Ðrequirement€of€the€manufacturer€of€the€machine,€as€well€a€procedure€adopted€by€the€TBI€to€ensureÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€any€alcohol€in€the€subjectððs€mouth€had€time€to€evaporate€before€administration€of€the€test.€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àFollowing€Mainesððs€testimony,€the€trial€court€initiated€a€jury„out€hearing€in€order€to€hearÐ ü L  Ðarguments€from€counsel€regarding€the€admissibility€of€the€breath€alcohol€test.€€At€its€conclusion,€theÐ è 8  Ðcourt€ruled€that€the€breath€alcohol€results€would€be€inadmissible€due€to€the€Stateððs€failure€toÐ Ô$  Ðdemonstrate€that€the€twenty„minute€observation€procedure€had€been€followed.€€The€defendantððsÐ À  Ðrequest€for€a€mistrial€was€denied.€€After€instructing€the€jury€to€disregard€the€breathalyzer€evidence,Ð ¬ü  Ðthe€court€polled€each€juror€individually€to€see€if€he€or€she€would€be€able€to€put€all€evidence€aboutÐ ˜è  Ðthe€defendantððs€blood€alcohol€level€out€of€his€or€her€mind€in€deciding€the€case.€€Each€answered€inÐ „Ô  Ðthe€affirmative.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€testified€that€on€the€evening€of€March€14,€1998,€his€girlfriend€at€the€time,€FayeÐ H˜ ÐNunley,€drove€the€two€of€them€in€his€1989€Mazda€MX6€coupe€to€the€ð ðHog€Wildðð€bar,€where€theyÐ 4„ Ðmet€his€girlfriendððs€sister€and€brother„in„law.€€According€to€the€defendant,€he€drank€three€beers€fromÐ  p Ðthe€time€that€they€arrived€at€the€bar€at€9:00€p.m.€until€their€departure€at€12:15€a.m.€€He€said€that€theyÐ  \ Ðleft€earlier€than€planned€because€Nunley€became€angry€when€she€saw€him€talking€to€another€woman.Ð øH ÐNunleyððs€sister€and€brother„in„law€left€the€bar€at€the€same€time,€following€in€their€car€as€he€andÐ ä4 ÐNunley,€with€Nunley€again€at€the€wheel,€drove€home€along€the€interstate.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€testified€that€as€they€drove€home,€the€power€steering€pump€on€his€car€went€out,Ð ¨ø Ðmaking€the€front„wheel€drive€vehicle€too€difficult€for€Nunley,€who€suffers€from€arthritis,€to€steer.€Ð ”ä ÐNunley€ð ðdriftedðð€the€car€onto€the€shoulder,€and€he€told€her€to€go€with€her€sister€and€brother„in„lawÐ €Ð Ðto€the€nearest€exit€to€call€his€daughter„in„law.€€When€he€became€cold€while€waiting,€he€moved€to€theÐ l¼ Ðdriverððs€seat€in€order€to€depress€the€clutch€to€start€the€engine€and€turn€on€the€heater.€€He€then€ð ðlaidÐ X ¨ Ðall€the€way€back€in€the€seatðð€and€went€to€sleep.€€In€the€meantime,€Nunley,€apparently€still€angry,Ð D!” Ðwaited€until€she€had€arrived€back€home€in€Abingdon,€Virginia,€before€telephoning€his€daughter„in„Ð 0"€  Ðlaw.€€The€defendant€said€that€he€told€Trooper€Riggs€about€the€trouble€with€his€car,€and€that€he€hadÐ #l! Ðnot€been€driving,€but€she€ð ðdidnððt€have€[any]€sympathy.ðð€He€said€that€Nunley€did€not€appear€on€hisÐ $X" Ðbehalf€because€she€was€angry€at€him€for€having€married€another€woman€in€the€meantime.€€HeÐ ô$D # Ðadmitted€that€Nunleyððs€sister€and€brother„in„law€had€also€not€appeared€on€his€behalf€either.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àBill€Riggs,€an€appraiser€at€Bristol€Auto€Auction,€testified€that€on€August€10,€1998,€heÐ ¸'#& Ðinspected€a€1989€Mazda€MX6€coupe€that€was€brought€in€by€a€title€loan€company.€€His€inspectionÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrevealed€that€the€power€steering€on€the€automobile€did€not€work,€and€that€it€was€very€difficult€toÐ )à$( Ðsteer.€€His€records€did€not€indicate€who€had€owned€the€car.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àTeresa€Ann€Kaiser€testified€that€she€had€known€the€defendant€since€she€was€three€years€old,Ð ° Ðbut€had€not€seen€him€for€about€fifteen€years,€when€she€ran€into€him€on€the€evening€of€March€14,Ð œì Ð1998,€at€the€Hog€Wild€bar€and€asked€him€for€a€ride€home.€He€told€her€that€he€did€not€have€a€driverððsÐ ˆØ Ðlicense€but€would€ask€the€woman€who€brought€him€to€give€her€a€ride.€€Later€in€the€evening,€KaiserÐ tÄ Ðapproached€the€defendant€again€to€tell€him€that€she€had€found€a€ride€with€another€man.€€When€sheÐ `° Ðdid€so,€the€defendantððs€companion,€ð ða€jealous€person,ðð€grabbed€his€arm€and€said,€ð ðLetððs€go.ðð€€KaiserÐ L œ Ðsaid€that€she€and€the€man€with€whom€she€obtained€a€ride€left€the€bar€at€about€the€same€time€as€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðdefendant,€around€12:15€a.m.€€As€she€was€going€out€the€door,€she€saw€the€defendantððs€companionÐ $ t Ðopen€the€car€door€to€let€the€defendant€into€the€passenger€seat€of€their€car,€before€going€around€andÐ  ` Ðgetting€in€on€the€driverððs€side.€€Kaiser€acknowledged€on€cross„examination€that€she€did€not€knowÐ ü L  Ðwhere€the€defendant€and€his€companion€had€gone€after€leaving€the€bar,€and€that€the€defendant€wasÐ è 8  Ða€close€family€friend.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àIn€rebuttal,€the€State€presented€the€testimony€of€Kenneth€E.€Ferslew,€Ph.D.,€who€wasÐ ¬ü  Ðaccepted€by€the€court€as€an€expert€in€the€field€of€toxicology.€€Dr.€Ferslew€testified€that,€dependingÐ ˜è  Ðon€the€level€of€alcohol€in€a€personððs€system,€some€effects€of€alcohol€consumption€includeÐ „Ô  Ðdrowsiness,€bloodshot€eyes,€slurring€or€slowing€of€speech,€delayed€reaction€time,€loss€ofÐ pÀ Ðcoordination,€and€loss€of€balance.€€He€opined€that€the€drowsiness,€difficulty€in€awakening,€slurredÐ \¬ Ðspeech,€bloodshot€eyes,€and€lack€of€coordination€exhibited€by€the€defendant€to€Trooper€Riggs€wouldÐ H˜ Ðnot€be€consistent€with€a€man€of€the€defendantððs€size€having€consumed€only€three€beers€in€a€periodÐ 4„ Ðof€three€and€one„quarter€hours.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àAfter€deliberating,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€DU€I€by€physical€control€of€a€motorÐ øH Ðvehicle,€and€driving€while€license€revoked.€€Upon€being€€presented€with€the€remaining€counts€of€theÐ ä4 Ðindictment,€as€well€as€certified€copies€of€his€prior€convictions,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guiltyÐ Ð  Ðof€DUI,€third€offense,€fixing€a€maximum€fine€of€$7500,€and€driving€on€a€revoked€license,€thirdÐ ¼  Ðoffense,€fixing€a€maximum€fine€of€$2500.€€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà@òò&ìàòòò òANALYSISˆÐ €Ð Ðó óóóÌà@÷÷ìàò òI.€€Sufficiency€of€the€EvidenceˆÐ X ¨ ÐÌà  àó óThe€defendantððs€first€three€issues€relate€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€in€support€of€hisÐ 0"€  ÐDUI€conviction.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€argues€that€without€the€breathalyzer€results,€the€evidence€was€not€sufficient€toÐ #l! Ðsupport€his€conviction€for€DUI.€€The€State€argues€that€the€evidence€in€the€case€was€sufficient€toÐ $X" Ðsupport€the€juryððs€verdict.€Ð ô$D # Їà  àWhen€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence€is€challenged€on€appeal,€the€relevantÐ ° Ðquestion€of€the€reviewing€court€is€ð ðwhether,€after€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÐ œì Ðto€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€of€the€offenseÐ ˆØ Ðcharged€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,Ð tÄ Ð61€L.€Ed.€2d€560€(1979).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185,€190„92€(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.Ð `° ÐAndersonóó,€835€S.W.2d€600,€604€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)òòóó;€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e)€(ð ðFindings€of€guiltÐ L œ Ðin€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficientÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð).€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àAll€questions€involving€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€to€be€given€theÐ ü L  Ðevidence,€and€all€factual€issues€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,€754€S.W.2dÐ è 8  Ð620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)òòóó.€€ð ðA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trial€judge,Ð Ô$  Ðaccredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€theoryÐ À  Ðof€the€State.ðð€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€Ô‡X 1XXX 1ÔWhen€the€credibility€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðwitnesses€is€resolved€by€the€jury€in€favor€of€the€State,€the€appellate€court€ð ðmay€not€reconsider€theÐ ˜è  Ðjuryððs€credibility€assessments.ðð€òòState€v.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,€558€(Tenn.€2000),€òòcert.€deniedóó,Ð „Ô  Ð___U.S.€___,€121€S.€Ct.€2600,€150€L.€Ed.€2d€757€(2001).€Ô#†X 1XXX 1Y#Ô€€In€other€words,€the€State€is€entitled€to€theÐ pÀ Ðstrongest€€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€that€might€be€drawn€fromÐ \¬ Ðthe€evidence.€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€The€burden€is€on€theÐ H˜ Ðdefendant€to€show€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.Ð 4„ Ð1982).Ð  p ÐÌà  àòòóóThe€jury€in€this€case€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€driving€under€the€influence€by€being€inÐ øH Ðphysical€control€of€a€motor€vehicle,€a€violation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€55„10„401(a).€Ð ä4 ÐThis€statute€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€that€it€is€ð ðunlawful€for€any€person€to€drive€or€to€be€in€physicalÐ Ð  Ðcontrol€of€any€automobile€or€other€motor€driven€vehicle€on€any€of€the€public€roads€and€highways€ofÐ ¼  Ðthe€state€.€.€.€while€under€the€influence€of€any€intoxicant€.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„401(a)(1)Ð ¨ø Ð(1998).€€€The€essential€elements€of€the€defendantððs€offense,€thus,€were€that€he€(1)€was€in€physicalÐ ”ä Ðcontrol€of€the€vehicle;€(2)€on€a€public€road;€(3)€while€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àViewed€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€the€evidence€in€this€case€was€more€thanÐ X ¨ Ðsufficient€to€support€the€defendantððs€conviction€for€DUI.€€There€was€no€dispute€that€the€vehicle€wasÐ D!” Ðon€a€public€road.€€There€was€also€no€dispute€that€the€defendant€was€found€in€the€driverððs€seat,€withÐ 0"€  Ðthe€engine€running€and€the€headlights€on.€€In€òòState€v.€Lawrenceóó,€849€S.W.2d€761,€765€(Tenn.€1993),Ð #l! Ðour€supreme€court€concluded€that€a€jury€is€to€consider€the€totality€of€the€circumstances€inÐ $X" Ðdetermining€whether€a€defendant€is€in€physical€control€of€a€vehicle€for€the€purposes€of€the€DUIÐ ô$D # Ðstatute,€including€the€defendantððs€location€in€the€car,€the€position€of€the€ignition€key,€whether€theÐ à%0!$ Ðengine€is€running,€and€the€extent€to€which€the€vehicle€is€capable€of€being€driven€or€moved.€€òòId.óó€òòóóÐ Ì&"% ÐAccording€to€Trooper€Riggs,€the€defendant€said€nothing,€at€the€time€of€his€arrest,€of€not€havingÐ ¸'#& Ðdriven€the€vehicle€to€the€location,€or€of€any€mechanical€problems€with€the€car.€€There€was€no€signÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€any€other€occupant.€€Although€the€defendant€testified€that€he€was€in€the€driverððs€seat€with€theÐ )à$( Ðengine€running€only€in€order€to€turn€the€heater€on€to€stay€warm,€the€jury€was€entitled€to€disbelieveÐ |*Ì%) Ðhis€testimony.€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àWe€explained€the€ambit€of€our€DUI€statutes€in€òòState€v.€Kainóó,€24€S.W.3d€816,€819€(Tenn.Ð ° ÐCrim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2000),€in€which€the€defense€was€that€the€intoxication€wasÐ œì Ðinvoluntary:Ð ˆØ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à[I]n€òòState€v.€Turneróó,€953€S.W.2d€213,€215€€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð `° ÐApp.1996),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.1997),€this€court€concluded€thatÐ L œ Ðð ðby€defining€the€offense€of€driving€under€the€influence€to€encompassÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€mere€physical€control€of€a€vehicle,€the€legislature€clearly€signaledÐ $ t Ðits€intention€to€create€a€crime€imposing€strict€liability.ðð€€Citing€theÐ  ` ÐModel€Penal€Code€ðð€2.01€(1985),€we€held€that€a€defendant,€who,Ð ü L  Ðwhile€intoxicated,€seated€himself€behind€the€steering€wheel€of€aÐ è 8  Ðstationary€motor€vehicle€with€the€headlights€turned€on€and€the€engineÐ Ô$  Ðrunning,€could€be€convicted€of€driving€under€the€influence.€€EvenÐ À  Ðthough€the€vehicle€had€not€moved,€the€defendant,€by€placing€himselfÐ ¬ü  Ðin€physical€control€of€the€vehicle€while€he€was€intoxicated,€committedÐ ˜è  Ðthe€necessary€voluntary€act.€€òòId.óó€at€216.€€This€court€ð ðhas€previouslyÐ „Ô  Ðobserved€that€there€is€no€culpable€mental€state€required€for€guilt€ofÐ pÀ Ðdriving€under€the€influence.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€215.Ð\¬` x` x ÐÌThe€circumstances€in€this€case€were€sufficient€for€the€jury€to€conclude€that€the€defendant€was€inÐ 4„ Ðphysical€control€of€the€car,€for€the€purposes€of€the€DUI€statute,€at€the€time€of€his€arrest.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àThere€was€also€sufficient€evidence€from€which€the€jury€could€conclude€€that€the€defendantÐ øH Ðwas€under€the€influence€of€alcohol€at€the€time€of€his€arrest.€€Trooper€Riggs€testified€that€theÐ ä4 Ðdefendant€was€difficult€to€rouse,€and€that€he€smelled€strongly€of€alcohol.€€€She€further€testified€thatÐ Ð  Ðhe€was€completely€unable€to€perform€two€field€sobriety€tests,€and€that€he€admitted€to€having€beenÐ ¼  Ðdrinking.€€€Furthermore,€his€speech€was€slurred,€his€eyes€were€bloodshot,€and€he€was€so€unsteady€onÐ ¨ø Ðhis€feet€that€he€was€unable€to€walk€to€the€rear€of€his€car€without€holding€onto€the€vehicle€for€support,Ð ”ä Ðand€Trooper€Riggs€had€to€catch€him€to€prevent€him€from€falling€as€he€attempted€the€field€sobrietyÐ €Ð Ðtests.€€Her€opinion,€based€on€her€many€years€of€experience€and€training€as€a€highway€patrol€officer,Ð l¼ Ðwas€that€he€was€under€the€influence€of€alcohol.€€The€Stateððs€toxicology€expert,€Dr.€Kenneth€Ferslew,Ð X ¨ Ðdescribed€the€effects€that€alcohol€has€on€the€central€nervous€system.€€In€response€to€a€hypotheticalÐ D!” Ðquestion,€he€testified€that€effects€such€as€those€described€by€Trooper€Riggs€would€not€be€consistentÐ 0"€  Ðwith€a€man€of€the€defendantððs€size€having€drunk€only€three€beers€in€three€hours.€€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àIn€the€light€of€this€strong€evidence€of€the€defendantððs€intoxication,€it€was€not€necessary€forÐ ô$D # Ðthe€jury€to€have€the€results€of€the€defendantððs€breathalyzer€test€in€order€to€find€him€guilty€of€DUI.€Ð à%0!$ Ðòòóóð ð[A]€defendant€may€be€convicted€of€DUI€based€on€either€evidence€of€intoxication€or€evidenceÐ Ì&"% Ðshowing€that€the€defendant€had€a€blood„alcohol€concentration€of€.10%€or€more.ðð€€òòState€v.€Everett€D.Ð ¸'#& ÐRobinsonóó,€No.€W1999„01348„CCA„RE„CD,€2000€WL€364844,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Apr.€7,Ð ¤(ô#' Ð2000)€(citing€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„401(a)).€€Certified€copies€of€the€defendantððs€prior€convictionsÐ )à$( Ðestablished€that€he€had€two€prior€convictions€for€DUI.€€We€conclude,€therefore,€that€the€evidence€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðsufficient€to€support€the€defendantððs€conviction€for€DUI,€third€offense.Ð h+¸&* Їà@}}ìàò òII.€€€Denial€of€ContinuanceˆÐ ° ÐÌó óà  àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€for€aÐ ˆØ Ðcontinuance.€€He€argues€that€he€needed€additional€time€to€ensure€the€presence€of€essential€witnessesÐ tÄ Ðfor€his€defense,€and€that€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€his€motion€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€his€case.€Ð `° ÐThe€State€argues€that€the€defendant€had€sufficient€time€to€contact€his€witnesses€prior€to€trial,€and€thatÐ L œ Ðthe€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€denying€his€request€for€a€continuance.€€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àThe€decision€to€grant€or€deny€a€request€for€a€trial€continuance€rests€within€the€sole€discretionÐ  ` Ðof€the€trial€court.€€òòState€v.€Mannóó,€959€S.W.2d€503,€524€(Tenn.€1997)€(citing€òòState€v.€Morganóó,€825Ð ü L  ÐS.W.2d€113,€117€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)òòóó.€€We€will€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€a€continuanceÐ è 8  Ðonly€upon€a€showing€that€the€denial€was€an€abuse€of€discretion,€and€the€defendant€was€prejudicedÐ Ô$  Ðby€the€denial,€in€that€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€had€the€continuance€been€granted,€theÐ À  Ðresult€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,€257Ð ¬ü  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990));€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,€261€(Tenn.€1994).òòóóÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  à€The€record€reveals€that€trial€counsel€did€not€request€the€continuance€at€issue€in€this€case€untilÐ pÀ Ðthe€morning€of€the€defendantððs€trial,€after€a€pool€of€jurors€had€already€been€brought€into€theÐ \¬ Ðcourtroom.€€In€a€bench€conference€outside€the€hearing€of€the€jury,€the€defendantððs€trial€counselÐ H˜ Ðrequested€more€time€to€secure€the€appearance€of€two€witnesses,€the€defendantððs€ex„girlfriend,Ð 4„ ÐNunley,€and€the€appraiser€from€the€auto€auction,€Bill€Riggs.€€Trial€counsel€informed€the€court€thatÐ  p Ðservice€had€been€attempted€on€Riggs€at€the€auto€auction,€but€he€had€not€been€there,€and€counsel€hadÐ  \ Ðlearned€that€he€would€not€return€from€vacation€until€the€following€week.€€Trial€counsel€said€that€heÐ øH Ðhad€finally€obtained€Nunleyððs€address€in€Virginia€and€had€her€served€with€a€subpoena€the€previousÐ ä4 Ðevening.€€However,€she€had€just€called€his€office€fifteen€minutes€before€to€inform€him€that€she€wouldÐ Ð  Ðnot€appear€in€court€because€her€attorney€had€told€her€that€the€subpoena€was€not€valid€across€stateÐ ¼  Ðlines.€€Therefore,€trial€counsel€needed€more€time€to€obtain€a€proper€subpoena€under€the€InterstateÐ ¨ø ÐCompact€Act.€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€first€observed€that€a€number€of€continuances€had€already€been€granted€in€theÐ l¼ Ðcase,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€from€the€date€that€the€matter€had€been€originally€set€for€trial,€on€April€28,€1998,€until€theÐ X ¨ Ðpresent€time,€May€24,€1999.€€€It€further€observed€that€the€defendant€had€known€that€Nunley€wouldÐ D!” Ðbe€an€important€witness€since€March€15,€1998,€and€yet€had€not€taken€measures€to€locate€andÐ 0"€  Ðsubpoena€her€until€the€last€minute€before€trial.€€Consequently,€the€court€denied€the€motion,€findingÐ #l! Ðthat€trial€counsel€had€already€had€ample€time€to€locate€and€secure€his€witnesses€for€trial.Ð $X" ÐÌà  à€€We€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€by€the€trial€court€in€this€matter.€€As€the€trial€court€observedÐ à%0!$ Ðin€its€order€denying€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€new€trial,€Bill€Riggs€did,€in€fact,€appear€to€testifyÐ Ì&"% Ðon€the€defendantððs€behalf€at€trial.€€With€regards€to€Nunley,€the€trial€court€found€that€there€was€noÐ ¸'#& Ðevidence€that€the€defendant€made€any€timely€effort€to€locate€her€in€the€months€that€the€case€wasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðpending€in€court.€€A€request€for€a€trial€continuance€may€be€appropriately€denied€when€there€has€beenÐ ° Ða€lack€of€diligence€or€neglect€on€the€part€of€the€moving€party.€€òòState€v.€Dorningóó,€682€S.W.2d€221,€223Ð œì Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984)€(citing€òòState€v.€Jeffersonóó,€529€S.W.2d€674€(Tenn.€1975)).€€The€defendantÐ ˆØ Ðfailed€to€offer€any€reason€for€his€failure€to€locate€Nunley€prior€to€the€day€before€trial,€or€to€issue€aÐ tÄ Ðproper€subpoena€for€her€appearance.€€The€trial€court,€therefore,€appropriately€denied€his€motion€forÐ `° Ða€continuance.€Ð L œ ÐÌà@..ìàò òIII.€€Denial€of€Request€for€MistrialˆÐ $ t ÐÌó óà  àThe€defendant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€request€for€a€mistrial€orÐ ü L  Ða€new€trial.€€Whether€or€not€to€declare€a€mistrial€lies€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court,Ð è 8  Ðand€we€will€not€disturb€the€courtððs€decision€absent€a€clear€showing€of€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòState€v.Ð Ô$  ÐLandóó,€34€S.W.3d€516,€527€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2000)€(citationsÐ À  Ðomitted).€€òòóóA€mistrial€should€be€declared€in€a€criminal€case€only€when€something€has€occurred€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðwould€prevent€an€impartial€verdict,€thereby€resulting€in€a€miscarriage€of€justice€if€a€mistrial€is€notÐ ˜è  Ðdeclared.òòóó€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€McPhersonóó,€882€S.W.2d€365,€370€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994));€òòStateÐ „Ô  Ðv.€Jonesóó,€15€S.W.3d€880,€893€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999)€(citing€òòArnold€v.€Stateóó,€563€S.W.2d€792,€794Ð pÀ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977)).€ð ðGenerally,€a€mistrial€will€be€declared€in€a€criminal€case€only€when€thereÐ \¬ Ðis€a€ððmanifest€necessityðð€requiring€such€action€by€the€trial€judge.ðð€òòState€v.€Millbrooksóó,€819€S.W.2dÐ H˜ Ð441,€443€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991)€(quoting€òòArnoldóó,€563€S.W.2d€at€794).€€The€burden€to€show€theÐ 4„ Ðnecessity€for€a€mistrial€falls€upon€the€party€seeking€the€mistrial.€€òòLandóó,€34€S.W.3d€at€527€(citing€òòStateÐ  p Ðv.€Williamsóó,€929€S.W.2d€385,€388€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996)).€Ð  \ ÐÌà  à€€The€defendant€argues€that€the€extensive€evidence€offered€on€breath€alcohol€testingÐ ä4 Ðmachines,€which€included€the€information€that€he€had€registered€.10%€on€his€test,€prevented€the€juryÐ Ð  Ðfrom€reaching€an€impartial€verdict,€thereby€necessitating€that€a€mistrial€be€declared.€€He€asserts€thatÐ ¼  Ðthe€jury€heard€ð ðso€much€testimony€concerning€the€breath€test€that€an€impartial€verdict€wasÐ ¨ø Ðautomatically€precluded.ðð€€We€disagree.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àAlthough€a€significant€amount€of€testimony€was€offered€about€breath€alcohol€testing€andÐ l¼ Ðbreath€alcohol€machines,€very€little€was€offered€concerning€the€results€of€the€defendantððs€test.€Ð X ¨ ÐFurthermore,€the€trial€court€clearly€instructed€the€jury€to€disregard€all€evidence€about€the€defendantððsÐ D!” Ðbreath€alcohol€test€results,€ordering€it€not€to€consider€the€evidence€ð ðin€any€way€whatsoeverðð€inÐ 0"€  Ðreaching€its€verdict.€€Jurors€may€be€presumed€to€follow€the€instructions€issued€by€the€trial€court.€€òòSeeóóÐ #l! ÐòòMillbrooksóó,€819€S.W.2d€at€443;€òòState€v.€Blackmonóó,€701€S.W.2d€228,€233€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€Ð $X" ÐAs€an€additional€safeguard,€however,€the€trial€court€individually€polled€each€juror€to€ensure€that€heÐ ô$D # Ðor€she€would€be€able€to€follow€the€instructions,€with€each€answering€affirmatively.€€Under€theseÐ à%0!$ Ðcircumstances,€there€was€no€need€for€a€mistrial€to€be€declared.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€theÐ Ì&"% Ðtrial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€denying€the€defendantððs€request€for€a€mistrial.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà@½ ½ ìàò òIV.€€ó ó€€ò òAllowance€of€Expert€TestimonyˆÐ )à$( Ðâ âÐ €*Ð%) Ðó óà  àAs€his€next€issue,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€committed€prejudicial€error€inÐ ° Ðâ âallowing€TBI€Crime€Laboratory€Director€Jerry€Maines€to€offer€expert€testimony€on€breath€alcoholÐ œì Ðtesting€devices€and€procedures.€€Asserting€that€it€had€already€been€made€clear€from€Trooper€RiggsððsÐ ˆØ Ðtestimony€that€the€twenty„minute€observation€period,€required€by€òòState€v.€Sensingóó,€843€S.W.2d€412,Ð tÄ Ð416€(Tenn.€1992),€had€not€been€followed,€he€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€not€have€allowedÐ `° ÐMaines€to€offer€his€ð ðextremely€prejudicialðð€testimony.€€The€State€argues€that€the€defendant€waivedÐ L œ Ðany€objection€to€the€testimony€by€his€failure€to€object€at€trial.€€The€State€further€argues€that€becauseÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€to€disregard€the€breathalyzer€evidence,€no€prejudice€resulted€to€theÐ $ t Ðdefendant€from€Mainesððs€testimony.€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€State.€€The€defendant€failed€to€object€to€Mainesððs€testimony€at€trial.€Ð è 8  ÐFailure€to€raise€a€contemporaneous€objection€to€the€testimony€waives€the€issue€for€appellate€review.€Ð Ô$  ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a);€òòMarsh€v.€Stateóó,€561€S.W.2d€767,€770€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977).€Ð À  ÐFurthermore,€we€have€already€determined€that€the€defendant€was€not€prejudiced€by€the€testimony,Ð ¬ü  Ðsince€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€to€disregard€all€evidence€concerning€the€breathalyzer€machinesÐ ˜è  Ðand€the€defendantððs€breath€alcohol€test€results€in€making€its€determination€of€his€guilt.€€This€issue,Ð „Ô  Ðtherefore,€is€without€merit.Ð pÀ ÐÌà@ã ã ìàò òV.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€CounselˆÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àó óAs€his€final€issue,€the€defendant€contends€that€his€trial€counsel€provided€ineffective€assistanceÐ  p Ðfor€his€failure€to€file€a€motion€in€limine€to€exclude€the€results€of€his€breathalyzer€test.€€This€claim€wasÐ  \ Ðmade€in€the€amended€motion€for€new€trial,€but€no€evidence€was€presented€at€the€hearing€on€theÐ øH Ðmotion.€€In€his€appellate€brief,€the€defendant€argues€that€had€trial€counsel€adequately€investigated€theÐ ä4 Ðmatter€before€trial,€he€could€have€readily€discovered€that€the€twenty„minute€observation€period€hadÐ Ð  Ðnot€been€followed,€and€therefore€moved€to€exclude€the€evidence€before€it€was€presented€to€the€jury.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àTo€be€successful€on€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€defendant€has€the€burdenÐ ”ä Ðof€showing€both€that€his€trial€counsel€was€deficient€in€his€performance,€and€that€trial€counselððsÐ €Ð Ðdeficient€performance€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€his€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ‡X 1XXX 1ÔStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.Ð l¼ Ð668,€687,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€2064,€80€L.€Ed.€2d€674€(1984);€òòseeÔ#†X 1XXX 1€£#Ô€alsoóó€òò€Ô‡X 1XXX 1ÔState€v.€Tayloróó,€968€S.W.2d€900,Ð X ¨ Ð905€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)òòóó€(noting€that€the€same€standard€for€determining€ineffective€assistanceÐ D!” Ðof€counsel€that€is€applied€in€federal€cases€also€applies€in€Tennessee).Ô#†X 1XXX 1I¤#Ô€€Since€the€defendant€must€meetÐ 0"€  Ðboth€prongs€of€the€test€in€order€to€succeed€on€this€claim,€failure€to€show€either€deficient€performanceÐ #l! Ðor€resulting€prejudice€will€result€in€a€failure€to€establish€his€claim.€€òòSeeóó€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,€960€S.W.2dÐ $X" Ð572,€580€(Tenn.€1997);€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€370€(Tenn.€1996).òòóóÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àIn€denying€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€new€trial,€the€trial€court€found€that€counsel€shouldÐ Ì&"% Ðhave€investigated€the€breathalyzer€results€and€filed€a€motion€to€suppress€the€evidence,€but€that€theÐ ¸'#& Ðdefendant€had€not€been€prejudiced€by€counselððs€failure€in€that€regard.€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àWe€concur,€although€for€different€reasons,€that€the€claim€of€ineffective€trial€counsel€must€fail.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐThe€defendant€had€the€burden€of€proving,€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence,€his€allegations€that€trialÐ h+¸&* Ðcounsel€was€ineffective.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210(f).€€For€this€court€to€conclude€that€trialÐ ° Ðcounsel€was€ineffective€because€he€did€not€file€a€motion€in€limine,€we€would€have€to€indulge€in€theÐ œì Ðassumption€that€he€could€have€had€no€basis€for€this€alleged€inaction.€€That€we€cannot€do.€Ð ˆØ Ðð ðAllegations€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€relating€to€matters€of€trial€strategy€or€tactics€do€notÐ tÄ Ðprovide€a€basis€for€post„conviction€relief.ðð€€òòTaylor€v.€Stateóó,€814€S.W.2d€374,€378€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð `° Ð1991).€€Not€filing€a€motion€in€limine€may€have€been€a€reasonable€strategy€of€trial€counsel,€or€it€mayÐ L œ Ðhave€been€an€oversight.€€However,€the€defendant€had€the€burden€of€demonstrating€it€was€the€latter.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐSince€no€proof€was€presented€at€the€motion€for€new€trial€in€this€regard,€it€would€be€rank€speculationÐ $ t Ðfor€us€to€conclude€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€on€this€basis.€€Accordingly,€this€assignment€isÐ  ` Ðwithout€merit.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà@FF%ìàò òòòCONCLUSIONˆÐ Ô$  Ðóóó óÌà  àBased€on€the€foregoing€reasoning€and€authorities,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð ¬ü  ÐHowever,€although€not€raised€by€the€parties€on€appeal,€we€note€that€the€judgment€forms€in€this€caseÐ ˜è  Ðreflect€that€the€defendantððs€convictions€resulted€from€guilty€pleas,€rather€than€jury€verdicts.€Ð „Ô  ÐAccordingly,€we€remand€to€the€trial€court€for€entry€of€corrected€judgments.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð 4„ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGE