ÿWPCþ  k>/Õb€gZÿM0[§ÃhÚvó1) ³™@ì9îV[I>G–×y½o¸P£–ˆ–¨£^ZºÃ%Y®Ê­ € A Úf6Y‘—• ¬ëÜÂäðÞbó?0`,“X5gÅ×4 TÆå\È]û%sÛÒœ‹-°+Ol,‰.%*J[ß[¾Ÿ.äƒj˜ÆSÀ‰¿Ë*_ÖÂ-ÖWo†ÑŒèd\ȨßJFé/š¯ÌÛú ËÈ%:÷îÿƒcÅÛ"w Þ\]†åJ­¾ª²ÇZu• ­iñÜÞ¦r l‘Íå=©Êçõ‘³šR݆͜:*2Üþ\åIжP2¡ º°ËãË¢dHkÕºåïLTôäöCc_NRAÛ±Ó§á[Šý0Þ ÓÄóÆhfÑax¨±W?mP/è<. diö€ˆÖTÐm'ê¦çê$·½ùò¯¥Ü-ñü2ñ¿’¸c%ÆX“ûî¦Yáë×^ë´v ”sÌ—¤”g`›wz&èzD‚¡ãT klÏg ž§d-Xf>í b# úeêY…5†ýj,°eª•Üõ° \}82†[k³×œŽÎAÙh0ñÊöLÇoc)-P[i èËš11x`HW#ÁÂUNƒ %Ñ 0:×U@ ^ Q w] 4a u „ m† b ¥ N­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ E¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ 00± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± Bá ˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman ±u3+â yG*¢Ø+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ- ù- 0ÿÿ.Normal dÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡Xî˜XXXÔÔ‡î>œîXXî˜ÔÑ€ ÑÑ8€î˜XXdìdÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÔ#†Xî˜Xîî>œh#ÔÔ‡î>œîXXî˜Ôà@@ìì*ìàÐ ° ÐAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†Xî˜Xîî>œ7#ÔÔ‡¼6-»XXî˜ÔÐ Ö& ÐAssigned€on€Briefs€July€25,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ#†Xî˜X»¼6-¬#ÔÔ‡î>œîXXî˜ÔÌò òÔ#†Xî˜Xîî>œ8#ÔÔ‡¼6-»XXî˜ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€CHARLES€R.€FRANCISó óÐ 4 „ ÐÔ#†Xî˜X»¼6-~#ÔÌò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Morgan€CountyÐ 4 „ Ðà@@V V ìàNo.€8564€€€€€€E.€Eugene€Ô_ÔEblenÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ  p ÐÌSeptember€19,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ø H  Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<ã` AßÐ ä4  ÐÌà@@e e ìàNo.€E2000„02599„CCA„R3„CDÓVÓÐ ß/  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<¶` AßÐ ·  Ðó óÓ  ÓÌÓ–ÓIn€an€indictment€returned€by€the€Morgan€County€Grand€Jury,€Defendant,€Charles€R.€Francis,€wasÐ ­ý Ðcharged€with€fourth€offense€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô.€€Count€1€of€the€indictment€alleged€that€the€triggering€offense€ofÐ ™é ÐÔ_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€occurred€on€December€10,€1998.€€Count€2€of€the€indictment€alleged€that€he€had€previously€beenÐ …Õ Ðconvicted€of€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€on€three€separate€occasions€in€Morgan€County,€TenneÔ#†Xî˜XXXî˜I#ÔÔ‡Xî˜XXXî˜Ôssee.€€The€Defendant€enteredÐ qÁ Ða€ð ðblind€pleaðð€to€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô,€fourth€offense,€and€sentencing€was€submitted€to€the€trial€court€for€a€laterÐ ]­ Ðhearing.€€At€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€Defendant€was€convicted€of€the€ClassÐ I™ ÐE€felony€of€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô,€fourth€offense,€ordered€a€sentence€of€two€(2)€years,€with€service€by€splitÐ 5… Ðconfinement€of€150€days€in€the€county€jail,€and€the€balance€of€the€sentence€to€be€served€in€theÐ !q ÐCommunity€Corrections€program.€€Asserting€that€he€should€have€been€sentenced€for€commission€ofÐ  ] Ða€Class€A€misdemeanor€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô,€fourth€offense,€rather€than€a€Class€E€felony,€Defendant€has€appealed.€Ð ùI ÐThe€original€judgment€entered€by€the€trial€court€reflected€conviction€of€a€Class€A€misdemeanor,€butÐ å5 Ðthe€judgment€was€later€amended€to€reflect€conviction€of€a€Class€E€felony,€in€accord€with€the€trialÐ Ñ! Ðcourtððs€ruling€at€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing.€€We€affirm€the€amended€judgment€of€theÐ ½  Ðtrial€court.Ð ©ù ÐÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó ó.Ð !Ñ! ÐÓd ÓÌòòThomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,óóÐ ]#­# Ðand€òòRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ôóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð I$™$ ÐÌJoe€H.€Walker,€District€Public€Defender;€and€Walter€B.€Johnson,€II,€Assistant€Public€Defender,€òòóóforÐ !&q!& Ðthe€appellant,€Charles€R.€Francis.Ð  ']"' ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Patricia€C.€Ô_ÔKussmannÔ_Ô,€Assistant€AttorneyÐ å(5$) ÐGeneral;€J.€Scott€Ô_ÔMcCluenÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€Roger€Ô_ÔDelpÔ_Ô,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ Ñ)!%* ÐGeneral;€and€Frank€Harvey,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ô‡î>œîXXî˜ÔÐ ½* &+ ÐÔ#†Xî˜Xîî>œ#ÔÌÌò òÓ  ÓOPINIONó óÔ#†Xî˜XXXî˜c#ÔÔ‡Xî˜XXXî˜ÔÐ -Ñ(. ÐÔ_ÔÔ#†Xî˜XXXî˜#ÔÓ  ÓÌà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erroneously€ruled€that€his€fourth€offense€DUI€shouldÐ œì Ðbe€classified€as€a€Class€E€felony,€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„403(a)(1).€Ð ˆØ ÐSpecifically,€Defendant€contends€that,€in€order€for€the€offense€to€be€classified€as€a€Class€E€felony,Ð tÄ Ðone€of€the€prior€violations,€as€alleged€in€count€2€of€the€indictment,€must€have€occurred€after€July€1,Ð `° Ð1998,€the€effective€date€of€an€amendment€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„403(a)(1).€Ð L œ ÐThe€relevant€portion€of€that€statute,€as€amended€effective€July€1,€1998,€reads€as€follows:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÒ°ÒÒ°ÒÓ  ÓÓ  ÓNotwithstanding€any€other€provision€of€law€to€the€contrary,€the€fourth€or€subsequentÐ  ` Ðconviction€shall€be€a€Class€E€felony€punishable€by€a€fine€of€not€less€than€threeÐ ü L  Ðthousand€dollars€($3,000)€nor€more€than€fifteen€thousand€dollars€($15,000);€byÐ è 8  Ðconfinement€for€not€less€than€one€hundred€fifty€(150)€consecutive€days,€to€be€servedÐ Ô$  Ðday€for€day,€nor€more€than€the€maximum€punishment€authorized€for€the€appropriateÐ À  Ðrange€of€a€Class€E€felony;€and€the€court€shall€prohibit€the€person€from€driving€aÐ ¬ü  Ðmotor€vehicle€for€a€period€of€five€(5)€years.€For€the€provisions€of€the€precedingÐ ˜è  Ðsentence€to€apply,€at€least€one€(1)€of€the€violations€of€ðð€55-10-401€must€occur€on€orÐ „Ô  Ðafter€July€1,€1998.€Ð pÀ ÐÓÓÓ  ÓÒ°YÒÒ°gÒÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55-10-403(a)(1)€(Supp.€2000).€€The€State€argues€on€appeal€that€the€plainÐ H˜ Ðlanguage€of€the€statute€requires€that€a€defendant€have€only€one€violation€to€occur€on€or€after€July€1,Ð 4„ Ð1998.€€The€State€further€asserts€that€had€the€legislature€intended€to€require€that€one€of€a€defendantððsÐ  p Ðòòprioróó€violations€occur€on€or€before€July€1,€1998,€it€would€have€stated€such,€as€it€did€€in€subsectionÐ  \ Ð(k)(2)€of€ðð€55-10-403.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55-10-403(k)(2)€states:Ð øH ÐÌÒ°ÒÒ°ÒIn€order€for€the€provisions€of€subdivision€(k)(1)€to€be€applicable€to€a€vehicle,€theÐ Ð  Ðviolation€making€the€vehicle€subject€to€seizure€and€forfeiture€must€occur€inÐ ¼  ÐTennessee€òòand€at€least€one€(1)€of€the€previous€violations€must€occur€on€or€afterÐ ¨ø ÐJanuary€1,€1997óó,€and€the€second€offense€after€January€1,€1997,€occurs€within€five€(5)Ð ”ä Ðyears€of€the€first€offense€occurring€after€January€1,€1997.€(emphasis€added).Ð €Ð ÐÒ°†ÒÒ°xÒ€Ìà  àIt€is€undisputed€in€the€record€that€all€three€of€the€ð ðprior€violations,ðð€which€are€alleged€in€countÐ X ¨ Ð2€of€the€indictment,€were€for€violations€which€occurred€prior€to€July€1,€1998.€€Thus,€only€theÐ D!” Ðð ðtriggering€offense,ðð€alleged€in€count€1€of€the€indictment,€occurred€after€July€1,€1998.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àWhether€or€not€Defendant€received€proper€notice€in€any€of€his€ð ðprior€convictionsðð€that€aÐ $X" Ðsubsequent€conviction€might€lead€to€a€felony€conviction,€is€not€presented€as€an€issue€in€this€appeal.€Ð ô$D # ÐThe€very€narrow€and€specific€issue€presented€is€as€follows:€€à8 @p àDoes€at€least€one€of€the€ð ðpriorÐ à%0!$ Ðconvictions,ðð€which€triggers€a€ð ðfourth€offense€DUIðð€have€to€be€for€a€conviction€for€an€offense€whichÐ Ì&"% Ðoccurred€after€July€1,€1998,€or€is€it€only€required€that€just€the€fourth€offense€occur€on€or€subsequentÐ ¸'#& Ðto€July€1,€1998?€€We€conclude€that€the€plain€language€of€the€statute€does€not€require€one€of€the€threeÐ ¤(ô#' Ðð ðpriorðð€offenses€to€occur€on€or€after€July€1,€1998.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àThis€Courtððs€role€in€construing€a€statute€is€to€determine€and€to€ð ðgive€effect€to€the€legislativeÐ ° Ðâ âintent€without€unduly€restricting€or€expanding€a€statuteððs€coverage€beyond€its€intended€scope.ðð€Ð œì ÐòòOwens€v.€Stateóó,€908€S.W.2d€923,€926€(Tenn.€1995).€€We€must€determine€the€legislative€intent€fromÐ ˆØ Ðthe€plain€language€of€the€statute,€ð ðread€in€context€of€the€entire€statute,€without€any€forced€or€subtleÐ tÄ Ðconstruction€which€would€extend€or€limit€its€meaning.ðð€€òòState€v.€Davisóó,€940€S.W.2d€558,€561€(Tenn.Ð `° Ð1997).€€As€a€matter€of€statutory€construction,€a€specific€statutory€provision€will€control€over€a€moreÐ L œ Ðgeneral€statutory€provision.€€òòMatter€of€Harrisóó,€849€S.W.2d€334,€337€(Tenn.€1993).€€Moreover,€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðstatute€is€generally€presumed€to€operate€òòprospectivelyóó,€unless€the€legislature€indicates€a€specificÐ $ t Ðintention€otherwise.€€òòState€v.€Brimmeróó,€876€S.W.2d€75,€82€(Tenn.€1994)(emphasis€added).Ð  ` ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€the€statutory€language€in€ðð€55-10-403(a)(1)€is€unambiguous,€and€clearly€conveys€Ð è 8  Ðthe€legislatureððs€intent.€€The€amended€provision€distinctly€states€that€ð ðòòat€least€oneóó€(1)€of€òòtheÐ Ô$  Ðviolationsóó€of€ðð€55-10-401€must€occur€on€or€after€July€1,€1998.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55-10-403(a)(1)€Ð À  Ð(emphasis€added).€€The€language,€ð ðthe€violations,ðð€does€not€make€a€distinction€between€the€priorÐ ¬ü  Ðenhancing€violations€and€the€ð ðfourth€or€subsequent€charges.ðð€€As€argued€by€the€State,€the€legislatureÐ ˜è  Ðhas€previously€added€limiting€language€to€statutes€when€it€chose€to€limit€the€time€frame€or€theÐ „Ô  Ðapplication€of€a€statute,€but€it€declined€to€provide€such€limits€to€amended€ðð€55-10-403(a)(1).€€UnlikeÐ pÀ Ðsubsection€(k)(2),€subsection€(a)(1)€of€55„10„403€does€not€require€that€the€prior€or€previousÐ \¬ Ðviolations€occur€before€a€particular€date.€€Therefore,€we€must€apply€the€basic€tenet€that€ð ðwhere€theÐ H˜ Ðlegislature€includes€particular€language€in€one€section€of€a€statute€but€omits€it€in€another€section€ofÐ 4„ Ðthe€same€act,€it€is€generally€presumed€that€the€legislature€acted€purposefully€in€the€subject€includedÐ  p Ðor€excluded.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Lodenóó,€920€S.W.2d€261,€265€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€declaring€the€fourth€offense€DUI€to€be€aÐ ä4 ÐClass€E€felony,€contradicts€the€provisions€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55-10-403(g)(1)Ð Ð  Ðwhich€states€as€follows:ÓK$ÓÐ ¼  ÐÓÐ,ÓÒ°ÒÒ°Ò(g)(1)€Any€person€convicted€of€an€initial€or€subsequent€offense€shall€be€advised,€inÐ ”ä Ðwriting,€of€the€penalty€for€second€and€subsequent€convictions,€and,€in€addition,€whenÐ €Ð Ðpronouncing€sentence€the€judge€shall€advise€the€defendant€of€the€penalties€forÐ l¼ Ðadditional€offenses.€€Written€notice€by€the€judge€shall€inform€the€defendant€that€aÐ X ¨ Ðconviction€for€the€offense€of€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€committedÐ D!” Ðin€another€state€shall€be€used€to€enhance€the€punishment€for€a€violation€of€ððÐ 0"€  Ð55-10-401€committed€in€this€state.Ð #l! ÐÒ°-ÒÒ°-ÒÌà  àAs€stated€above,€the€issue€of€whether€or€not€Defendant€received€proper€notice€in€any€of€hisÐ ô$D # Ðprior€convictions€is€not€presented€in€this€appeal.€€Our€holding€that€the€trial€court€properly€enteredÐ à%0!$ Ðjudgment€that€Defendant€was€convicted€of€a€Class€E€felony€does€not€contradict€the€provisions€ofÐ Ì&"% ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„403(g)(1).€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐÓþÓò òÓ  ÓCONCLUSIONó óÐ ° ÐÓÒ1ÓÓ  ÓÌà  àFor€a€fourth€offense€DUI€conviction€to€be€classified€as€a€Class€E€felony,€only€the€last,€orÐ ˆØ Ðfourth€offense€need€be€for€a€violation€occurring€on€or€after€July€1,€1998.€€Therefore,€the€amendedÐ tÄ Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÐ $ t ÐÌÓ2Ó