WPC =4@'ߏT'B)6EY KGi|W㨗qPu|zlEX85{l&yuɲpIbeyl5(sBUi R//#gy 7]ZR]Ԇµ%c J2g(J481FXjN!ӏ-M^F!W$7Ȭת5奐 .=~7D|!oYƨ*ҎE&0_%ϏYȪ[rdVt hm?Y"I*79m"#ik k HA>7[uHѻ<=7 vsj݂f^m=' kYMA!VD5)Ic j@6h~*[h'6Ul2̝77Q(C᥃ 4B&TsZ%\`ϡ3h0L]ov*# LUNW % 0(U:b  0U : 0U :w@43qBR AQ V ( U:RXU: B  0D 0D 0DWW D/ B D3HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nL(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($,|AZ"Arial Regular- -(A8$X+XXXB XX+  0  ,  AZ"Arial Regular(*2K~$ !   XXXX &K&X X   `   0  ,  AZ"Arial Regular {EEӀeE%3|x g  cJ$ XlXXX &+ &X Xl   `   1    &+ & & &+Due,inturn,tothedefendantsfailuretodecisivelyacceptorrejecttheaddituronthe `  record.# &+ & &&+ի# H  cJ$ XfXXX &{&X Xf   `   3    WenotethattheStateraisedthisissueinitsbrieffiledonFebruary25,1998; `  however,thedeficiencywasapparentlynotcorrected.!"#$&C<< C   cJ$ XlXXX &+ &X Xl   `   2    Seesupraat2.Thedifferencesareprocedural"therulelistsmotionsavailableunder `  theTennesseeRulesofCivilProcedurethattollrunningofthetimeforappealuntildecidedbythetrialcourt.  ""  X1 XXX;(  XX1   Ad FILEDX1 X ;(   October12,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr. XX1AppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular H   $X+XXX& &X X+   `   3    WenotethattheStateraisedthisissueinitsbrieffiledonFebruary25,1998; `  however,thedeficiencywasapparentlynotcorrected.,  AZ"Arial Regular dLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  ((' dxdP Pd 'dxd !  `  XXCa TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7\XXdXXd7      r)<,(j 8` `@Ef ` ttx$,` rߛINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE `  ATKNOXVILLE̜JULYSESSION,1998  STATEOFTENNESSEE,  )  C.C.A.NO.093C019711CR00497 `  `     h   )  `  ` Appellee,   h   ) `   `     h   ) `     h   )  McMINNCOUNTY `  МVS. `     h   )   `   `     h   )  HON.EARLEG.MURPHY  `   BILLYBIVENS,    h   )  JUDGE  `  `     h   )  `  ` Appellant.   h   )  (OfficialMisconduct;Assault) `    ONAPPEALFROMTHEJUDGMENTOFTHECRIMINALCOURTOFMcMINNCOUNTY  FORTHEAPPELLANT: h     FORTHEAPPELLEE: 0  ̜DONALDB.REID   h     JOHNKNOXWALKUP  " 10WestMadisonAvenue    AttorneyGeneralandReporter # P.O.Box628Athens,TN373710628 h     CLINTONJ.MORGAN %  `     h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral `     h     4255thAvenueNorth `     h     Nashville,TN372430493 `     h     JERRYN.ESTES `     h     DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h     WashingtonAvenue `     h     Athens,TN37303OPINIONFILED________________________̜*APPEALDISMISSEDDAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE  4(+,S   *Ca 7 dXXd7OPINION Ca* `     ` TheDefendant,BillyBivens,appealsfromhisconvictionsforofficialmisconductinviolationofTennesseeCodeAnnotated3916402andassaultinviolationof3913101.ThetrialcourtenteredjudgmentonbothconvictionsonMay30,1997,andDefendantfiledaMotionforaNewTrialand/orAcquittalonApril11,1997.Becausethismotionhasnotyetbeengrantedordenied,DefendantsappealisnotproperlybeforethisCourt.Wethereforedismisstheappealforabsenceofafinaljudgment. ` TennesseeRuleofAppellateProcedure4prescribesthat8 ` ifatimelymotionorpetitionundertheTennesseeRulesofCriminalProcedureisfiledinthetrialcourtbythedefendant...underRule29(c)forajudgmentofacquittal[or]underRule33(a)foranewtrial...,thetimeforappealforallpartiesshallrunfromentryoftheorderdenyinganewtrialorgrantingordenyinganyothersuchmotionorpetition. ` !` ! Tenn.R.App.P.4(c).AdvisoryCommissionCommentstothissectionsuggestthat itwouldbeundesirabletoproceedwiththeappealwhilethetrialcourthasbeforeitamotionthegrantingofwhichwouldvacateoralterthejudgmentappealedfrom,andwhichmightaffecteithertheavailabilityoforthedecisionwhethertoseekappellatereview.Id.(AdvisoryCommnComments). .$%  ` Werecentlyconsideredthispreciseissueandconcludedthatitisnotsimplyamatterofdesirability,butoneofjurisdiction;andthisCourtdoesnothavejurisdictionoveranappealwherethetrialcourtretainsjurisdictionoveraposttrialmotion.Statev.LandyG.Kash,C.C.A.No.01C019705CR00179, 7f./ SmithCounty(Tenn.Crim.App.,Nashville,Feb.23,1998)( ThisCourts 9V01 appellatejurisdictionislimitedtoreviewofthefinaljudgmentsoftrialcourts,andtherefore,wecannotentertainthisappealaswearewithoutjurisdictiontodoso.). ` Furthermore,thesupremecourthasprovidedsomeguidanceinEvansv.   Wilson,776S.W.2d939,940(Tenn.1989).Inthatcivilcase,theplaintiffstimely   filedamotionfornewtrialand,alternatively,amotionforadditur.Id.Thetrial   courtruledthatthejuryverdictwasinadequate,suggestedanadditur,andoverruledthemotionfornewtrialonallotherpoints.Id.If,however,the  defendanthadrejectedtherecommendedadditur,thentheplaintiffswouldhavebeenentitledtoanewtrial.Id.Theplaintifffiledanoticeofappeal,basedupon ` thetrialcourtsdenialofthemotionfornewtrial,eventhoughtherecordreflectednoactionbythedefendanttoacceptorrejecttheadditur.Id.  @  ` InEvans,thesupremecourtaffirmedthecCourtofaAppealsremandofthe $  casebecausethemotionfornewtrialhadnotdecisivelybeengrantedordenied. 8 %    1      ׀ p& Thecourtheld, Theordersuggestingadditurandgrantinganewtrialisonlyprovisionalandisnotselfexecuting.Theordergrantinganewtrialisnotafinaljudgmentandisnotappealableasofright.Id.at941(citingTenn.R.App.P. ,0#$ 3(a)).Inholdingthatthenoticeofappealfiledbytheplaintiffwas withouteffect,thesupremecourtbaseditsreasoninguponTennesseeRuleofAppellateProcedure4(b),whichspecifiesthetimeforappealincivilcases.Id.at942. 2H)*  BecauseRule4(b)issubstantivelyidenticaltotheruleunderconsiderationinthis 4P+, case,Rule4(c), 8      2      ׀wereaffirmourdecisioninKashthatthisappealmustbe `   dismissed.ThetimeforenteringanappealdoesnotbegintorununtilthetrialcourthasenteredanordergrantingordenyingDefendantsMotionforaNewTrialand/orAcquittal. 8r  rr  r  3      ׀ h    x  `    ̜   `  `     h   ____________________________________ `     h   DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________̜GGARYR.WADE,JUDPREWSIDINGJUDGE___________________________________̜JOSEPHM.TIPTON,JUDGE