WPC .o'72V]үlR26q7p䘠ao8h۟,N l,sqT,t.Wm4NJ*p8*eg.`£oGSLM3 nAde"܌\; BppdgkPO ``{FWǃ(ңt=z#%T񽧿Df1gK+ul>Wgб;++L[.kU'C2ᾕc2C*>"M[O :o)bGQhUOcF-OȦ9HDY|xs~LQq<]Ey ~Uml7~ze!nZ~0}6M5sAb %\U @b 0U N*^ xw4 z   m #   ] #NEb 0 B 0 D3 D- 0K   AST 0m 0D AU(I Z(Times New Roman (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularA~3-s 3j1,D C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xUHP LaserJet 40500Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 - -(|G2$ !.8dd8         0  u d(|3?q$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?q$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  8GXXdd8  @tt­INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#­+#Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsJuly24,2002 L XGX #XXG%#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.ALLENPRENTICE_BLYE_XGX  J @@ AppealfromtheCriminalCourtforSullivanCounty  J @@Nos.S42,293R.JerryBeck,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200101227CCAR3CD   September19,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     JoeG.Riley,J.,concurring.#XXG#XGX x    Iwriteseparatelytoexpressmyconcernoverutilizingtheexpartesearchwarrantprocess < ratherthananadversarialhearingtosecureabloodsamplefromadefendantafteradversarial (x proceedingshavebegunwheretherearenoexigentcircumstances.Tomyknowledge,thisissuehas d notbeenaddressedbyourstatesupremecourt. P   Themajorityopinioncorrectlynotesthatcasesfromthiscourtauthorizethestate,when ( seekingabloodsamplefromthedefendant,toeithersecureasearchwarrantorfileamotioninthe  trialcourtandhaveanadversarialhearing.SeeStatev.Baker,956S.W.2d8,13(Tenn._Crim_.App.  1997);seealsoStatev._Mabon_,648S.W.2d271,276(Tenn_Crim_.App.1982)(suggestingthata  searchwarrantshouldbeutilizedratherthananadversarialhearing).Intheabsenceofexigent  circumstances,Iquestionthewisdomoftheseholdings. t   Thereissomethinginherentlyinappropriatewhenthestatethroughlawenforcementofficers, L  whileacaseispending,approachesatrialjudgeexparte(withoutknowledgeofthedefendantor 8!  hiscounsel)andsecuresasearchwarrantforthedrawingofdefendant'sbloodintheabsenceof $"t! exigentcircumstances.Thisprocedurehasbeenthesubjectofcriticism;"[_i]ndeed_,insituations #`" wheretheintrusionintothebodyisofaseriousnature,anadversarialhearingmayberequired,or #L# atleastpreferred,overanexpartesearchwarrant."D._Raybin_, TennesseeCriminalPracticeand $8 $ Procedure 18.179,p.645(1984)(criticizingthe_Mabon_holdingas"unfortunate");seealso %(!% Winstonv.Lee,470U.S.753,763n.6,105S.Ct.1611,84L.Ed.2d662(1985)(decliningtoreach &"& theissueofwhetherafulladversarialproceedingisrequiredbeforethestatecancompelasurgical '#' procedurebecauseafulladversarialproceedingwas,infact,conductedinthetrialcourt);United (#( Statesv.Crowder,543F.2d312,316(D.C.Cir.1976),cert.denied429U.S.1062,97S.Ct.788, )$) 50L.Ed.2d779(1977)(approvingsurgicaloperationinsearchofevidence,butemphasizingthe x*%* trialcourt"heldanevidentiaryhearingatwhichthedefendantappearedwithcounsel");Statev. d+&+ Jackson,889S.W.2d219,222(Tenn._Crim_.App.1993)(notingthetakingofpubicandheadhairs P,', fromadefendantimmediatelyafterhisarrestdidnotinvoketheSixthAmendmentrighttocounsel <-(- _where"judicialproceedingshad[not]beeninitiatedagainsthimatthetimeoftheexamination");  3LaFave, SearchandSeizure 5.3(c)n.149(1996).Somejurisdictionshaveconcludedthatan  adversarialhearingwiththeopportunityforinterlocutoryappellatereviewisnecessarypriortoany  surgicalinvasiontoseizeevidence.SeeHughesv.State,56Md.App.12,466A.2d533,536 x (1983);Statev.Overstreet,551S.W.2d621,62728(Mo.1977);Statev.Lawson,187N.J.Super. d 25,453A.2d556,558(1982).Irealizethatmanyofthesecasesinvolvedsurgicalprocedures,not P  thewithdrawalofblood;however,Ibelievethesamerationaleshouldapplytobloodwithdrawals. <  Ѐ    Inthecasesubjudice,therewerenoexigentcircumstancesdictatingtheneedtoimmediately  P  takethebloodsamplewithoutgivingthedefendantandhiscounselnoticeandtheopportunitytobe  <  heard.Iwouldalsonote,however,thatprobablecauseexistedforthebloodwithdrawal,andit (  wouldinalllikelihoodhavebeenauthorizedbythetrialcourtafterahearing.I,nevertheless,   believethatanadversarialproceeding,attheveryleast,waspreferable.       Regardless,ourpublishedcasesauthorizetheexpartesearchwarrantprocess;thus,I   considerthemcontrollingauthority.SeeTenn.Sup.Ct.R.4(H)(2).Inaddition,evenifthetrial t courterroneouslyadmittedthebloodtestresults,Ibelieveitwasharmlessinlightoftheevidence ` attrial,includingthesalivatestestablishingthematchingDNA. L #XXG?#   `     h   򀀀 8    `     h   JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE