ÿWPCw Ò˜k4~¶ÍT8¼ÍV8–\ð^p¾‡ßªsçîý6èd 26¦X* qj^;· U,ÍOÛ>ÐBôQ}Æ’b¡¾Ò¿°Ë© ï:æäu«ï‹Ü*b•rŒòæâ(o~ ŠÎ‹G9ýkE<º? ødÕúbûM/wy®¼e%9=a>×£êZŸ(IµëféŽYÉË·ÔŸiœ}3 ™RMÿ[¢œ!8’·$dÒÇ5¦Às.;°çû]æw5? ÇŠ~ø¨mPøMÓƒëã’ýì˜wôyctB?öýDÁÏ þ¢VŒ@@Âi'Èp\¯_ñ«û³ÎŠœ#±ž30'I™þ¡t€ÖgÐî°¡¸ñ.ÃÉyó2Œ)à"[K'¦ 9\ùzÎ%7ÌÆ¢¿ý}5óµhãö˜”i+*ØŸfH'u™S@ÓÔÛ¿ È’ÚõĆÛ[¨‹LÕ8œwÂN—ƒãƒÅ¼Ñ¹;ù³]¾ÿŽyX!8ŠºæÐÊ ˜}¢øL•r{SÑO¡d `g#9ìsì…6¦dázº¹Êe^Þž:õl æŽ(½Û8n|g™ ¤Ø[Gk,£HþÜž è2g\Eš 0Åœ 0Ña 0³2 0­åL’ 0¡Þ 0› 0• 0D¯Nóóóóó õõõõ 1u 72||||b®®®®®®®®®® 0Y¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ 1e 0ëtttt B__ 0¤| D3  D-S 0K€€ ASËÆ 0¤ä 0Dˆ A«Ì˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6ÒV,,,,ÒV0»  DUITiptonLockertHayleeYarbroughAlsobrooks T.R.WelkerBumpusgurneyHumphreys CrimPappasBolinTuggleTroutmanSeatonGassawayZeoliaTenn.Crimreek[ed MNTGoode(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularº¬q/Ï  ˜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.wptlk.¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*22 ÿÿ(_13Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó(ÍO$——ÔÿÔòòóóÔÿÔô\  `‹&Times New Roman*AA ÿÿ(_17Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó*GG ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*88 ÿÿ(_15Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó*55 ÿÿ(_14Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó BÝ ƒRƒ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¨Ìò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔEffective€July€1,€2003,€subsection€(2)€was€amended€to:€€ð ðThe€alcohol€concentration€in€such€personððs€blood€orÐ ° Ðbreath€is€eight„hundredths€of€one€percent€(.08%)€or€more.ðð*// ÿÿ(_12Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó*,, ÿÿ(_11Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó*)) ÿÿ(_10Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÿÿSDU_143#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a))i)- ù-6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô ÿÿ35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(|G2ƒ$$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€™é»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¨Ìò»»Ô d(|3À¼$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€™é»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3À¼$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€™é»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€™é»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼™é»»»ÔÑ8€À×XXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡îq.™éÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@gg$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼™é»îîq. #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€August€19,€2003Ð öF ÐÔ‡XÀ×X»¼™éÔÌò òÔ#†¼™é»XXÀ× #ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€ALBERT€G.€GASSAWAYòòóóÔ‡XÀ×X»¼™éÔó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Stewart€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€4„1310„CR„00€€€€€€Robert€E.€Burch,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2002„02121„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€13,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€defendant,€Albert€G.€Gassaway,€appeals€his€conviction€for€DUI,€second€offense.€€The€trial€courtÐ V¦  Ðsentenced€the€defendant€to€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days,€with€six€months€to€be€served€in€theÐ ? Ðcounty€workhouse€and€the€remainder€on€probation,€ordered€him€to€pay€a€$600€fine,€and€suspendedÐ (x Ðhis€driving€privileges€for€two€years.€€The€defendant€appeals,€arguing€that€the€evidence€wasÐ a Ðinsufficient€to€support€his€conviction€for€DUI,€second€offense,€and€that€the€court€erred€in€imposingÐ úJ Ðmore€than€the€minimum€sentence.€€Following€our€review,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð ã3 ÐÓÆÓÔ#†¼™é»XXÀך#ÔÔ‡XÀ×X»¼™éÔÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó óÐ µ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼™é»àXÀ×Ã#ÔÔ‡XÀ×X.¼™éÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Tiptonóó€and€òòJohnÐ ˆØ ÐEverett€Williams,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð qÁ ÐÌWilliam€B.€Lockert,€III,€District€Public€Defender;€and€Haylee€Bradley,€Assistant€District€PublicÐ C“ ÐDefender,€for€the€appellant,€Albert€G.€Gassaway.Ð ,| ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Helena€Walton€Yarbrough,€Assistant€AttorneyÐ þN ÐGeneral;€Dan€M.€Alsobrooks,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Carey€J.€Thompson,€Assistant€DistrictÐ ç 7  ÐAttorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ô#†¼™é»XXÀ×~#ÔÔ‡XÀ×X»¼™éԀРÐ! ! ÐÓOÓÌÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼™é»XXÀ×H #ÔÔ‡XÀ×X»¼™éÔÐ ‹$Û$ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼™é»XXÀ×Ñ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÀ×X»¼™éÔòòò òÓ  ÓFACTSÐ ^&®!& Ðóóó óÓ` ÓÌà  àOn€May€22,€2000,€between€the€hours€of€8:00€and€9:30€a.m.,€the€defendant€was€driving€hisÐ 1(#( Ðpickup€truck€on€Highway€233€near€Cumberland€City€when€the€truck€drifted€across€the€road,€struckÐ )j$) Ðan€embankment,€went€slightly€airborne,€struck€a€metal€gate,€and€traveled€across€a€gravel€and€€aÐ *S%* Ðgrassy€area€before€becoming€lodged€between€two€trees,€the€truck€going€approximately€125€yardsÐ ì*<&+ Ðafter€leaving€the€pavement.€€A€subsequent€inspection€of€the€defendantððs€truck€revealed€severalÐ Õ+%', Ðopened€and€fifteen€to€twenty€unopened€containers€of€alcohol€and€beer.Ð ¾,(- Ѐ€Ð §-÷(.ýú ÐÔ_Ôà  àAt€the€trial,€Dale€Welker,€an€employee€of€the€United€States€Wildlife€Service,€testified€thatÐ ° Ðhe€responded€to€the€scene€of€the€defendantððs€accident.€€Upon€his€arrival,€he€observed€the€defendant,Ð ™é Ðstaggering€and€with€blood€on€his€face,€walking€down€the€highway€approximately€fifty€feet€from€theÐ ‚Ò Ðwreck.€€Welker€put€the€uncooperative€defendant€inside€his€truck€to€prevent€him€from€hurting€himselfÐ k» Ðuntil€the€ambulance€arrived.€€He€said€that€the€defendant€did€not€complain€of€a€head€injury€or€backÐ T¤ Ðpain€and€appeared€to€have€only€a€small€cut€on€his€head.€€Welker€further€testified€that€the€defendantÐ =  Ðð ðwas€reeking€of€beer€smellðð€and€appeared€to€be€intoxicated,€although€he€did€not€appear€confused.€Ð & v ÐHe€noticed€that€the€defendantððs€clothes€were€dry,€and€it€did€not€appear€that€the€defendant€had€spilledÐ  _ Ðanything€on€himself.€€He€also€testified€that€the€defendantððs€speech€was€ð ðsomewhat€slurred,ðð€but€heÐ ø H Ðdid€not€administer€a€field€sobriety€test€to€the€defendant€because€that€was€not€part€of€his€duties.Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àJoe€Campbell,€who€was€working€as€a€paramedic€with€the€Stewart€County€AmbulanceÐ ³  ÐService,€responded€to€a€call€regarding€the€defendantððs€accident.€€When€he€arrived,€he€noticed€theÐ œì  Ðdefendant€had€some€scratches€and€bleeding€on€his€face.€€The€defendant€was€uncooperative€andÐ …Õ  Ðagitated€during€Campbellððs€examination€of€him.€€The€defendant€complained€of€low€back€pain.€€OnÐ n¾  Ðcross„examination,€Campbell€stated€that€a€person€with€a€severe€head€injury€may€become€confusedÐ W§  Ðor€combative€and€that€a€broken€back€may€affect€the€ability€to€walk.€€These€characteristics,€accordingÐ @ Ðto€Campbell,€could€also€indicate€that€an€individual€was€intoxicated.€€He€did€not€recall€smelling€anyÐ )y Ðalcohol€on€the€defendantððs€breath.Ð b ÐÌÓ*°,X‡X7“X°œX*Óà  àChief€Deputy€Derek€White€testified€that,€upon€arriving€on€the€scene,€he€approached€theÐ ä4 Ðambulance€and€spoke€with€the€defendant€for€approximately€ten€minutes.€€The€defendant€said€thatÐ Í Ðhe€had€fallen€asleep€but€did€not€claim€that€his€steering€mechanism€had€become€disabled.€€WhiteÐ ¶ Ðnoticed€the€defendant€had€a€very€strong€odor€of€alcohol,€his€speech€was€slightly€slurred,€and€he€wasÐ Ÿï Ðvery€agitated€and€argumentative.€€White€did€not€administer€a€field€sobriety€test€because€theÐ ˆØ Ðdefendant,€who€appeared€to€be€injured,€was€already€in€the€back€of€the€ambulance,€and€he€did€notÐ qÁ Ðwant€to€interfere€with€the€defendantððs€medical€treatment.€€White€observed€several€opened€andÐ Zª Ðunopened€beer€cans€inside€the€defendantððs€truck€and€beside€the€passengerððs€side€door€on€the€ground.Ð C“ ÐÌÓ. °œX°,X‡X7“X¢.Óà  àTrooper€Brett€Bumpus€of€the€Tennessee€Highway€Patrol€testified€that€he€had€completedÐ e Ðtraining€in€the€areas€of€accident€reconstruction€and€DUI€investigation€and€was€also€a€DUI€instructorÐ þN Ðfor€other€state€troopers.€€He€determined€that€the€defendantððs€truck€was€traveling€in€the€westboundÐ ç 7 Ðlane€when€it€drifted€off€the€roadway,€struck€a€ditch€line€embankment,€went€slightly€airborne,€struckÐ Ð!   Ða€gate,€and€traveled€across€a€gravel€area€into€a€grassy€area€and€then€into€a€wooded€line.€€The€truckÐ ¹" ! Ðtraveled€some€125€yards€after€it€left€the€roadway.€€The€weather€that€day€was€clear€and€sunny,€andÐ ¢#ò" Ðthe€road€was€dry€on€the€straight€section€of€the€highway€where€the€accident€occurred.€€BumpusÐ ‹$Û# Ðrelated€that€there€were€no€brake€marks€on€the€highway€or€evasive€action€that€would€have€caused€theÐ t%Ä $ Ðvehicle€to€leave€the€highway€and€keep€on€going.€€The€absence€of€these€marks,€Bumpus€concluded,Ð ]&­!% Ðindicated€that€the€driver€of€the€vehicle€was€either€asleep€or€intoxicated.Ð F'–"& ÐÌà  àAs€for€the€defendantððs€vehicle,€Bumpus€did€not€notice€any€apparent€mechanical€defects,Ð )h$( Ðalthough€he€admitted€he€did€not€check€the€steering€system€or€fluid.€€He€found€several€opened€andÐ *Q%) Ðfifteen€to€twenty€unopened€containers€of€alcohol€and€beer€inside€the€defendantððs€truck.€€He€statedÐ ê*:&* Ðthat€the€cabin€of€the€truck€smelled€of€beer€but€acknowledged€that€the€smell€could€have€come€fromÐ Ó+#'+ Ðthe€opened€beer€cans,€noting,€however,€there€was€no€evidence€that€beer€had€been€spilled€in€the€cabÐ ° Ðof€the€truck.€€Bumpus€agreed€it€was€ð ðpossibleðð€that€the€impact€of€the€wreck€could€have€puncturedÐ ™é Ðsome€of€the€beer€cans,€causing€them€to€spill€in€the€cab€of€the€truck.Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà  àBumpus€interviewed€the€defendant€who€admitted€that€he€had€drunk€one€beer.€€OtherÐ T¤ Ðindications€that€the€defendant€had€been€drinking€included€his€bloodshot€eyes,€slurred€speech,€andÐ =  Ðthe€odor€of€alcohol€on€his€breath.€€When€Bumpus€leaned€over€the€gurney€to€speak€with€the€defendantÐ & v Ðat€the€hospital,€and€was€about€eight€inches€from€his€face,€he€smelled€alcohol€coming€from€theÐ  _ Ðdefendantððs€breath.€€He€was€ð ðsureðð€that€the€alcohol€odor€was€coming€from€the€defendantððs€breathÐ ø H Ðand€not€his€clothes€because€he€specifically€looked€for,€but€did€not€find,€any€indication€that€theÐ á 1  Ðdefendant€had€spilled€alcohol€on€his€clothing.€€The€defendant€refused€to€take€a€blood„alcohol€test.€Ð Ê   ÐBumpus€said€that€the€defendant€was€combative,€verbally€abusive,€and€uncooperative€with€him€andÐ ³  Ðthe€hospital€staff.€€Bumpus€testified€that,€based€on€his€training€and€experience,€the€defendant€wasÐ œì  Ðintoxicated.Ð …Õ  Ðà  àÌà  àTestifying€as€the€first€witness€for€the€defense,€the€defendant€said€that€on€the€day€of€theÐ W§  Ðaccident,€his€friend,€John€Manners,€visited€at€his€home€until€about€7:00€a.m.€and,€about€an€hour€later,Ð @ Ðhe€left€for€work.€€While€the€defendant€was€driving€to€work,€his€truck€ð ðgrabbed,ðð€causing€him€to€loseÐ )y Ðcontrol.€€The€truck€then€hit€a€signpost€and€left€the€ground.€€The€defendant€said€that,€as€a€result€of€theÐ b Ðaccident,€he€suffered€a€hairline€fracture€to€his€back€and€a€head€injury.€€However,€he€admitted€thatÐ ûK Ðhe€was€not€treated€for€a€fracture€at€the€emergency€room,€explaining€that€he€had€an€X„ray€of€his€backÐ ä4 Ðshowing€the€fracture€but€did€not€have€it€with€him€at€the€trial.€€The€defendant€did€not€recall€receivingÐ Í Ðtreatment€for€acute€alcohol€intoxication€while€at€the€hospital.Ð ¶ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€denied€having€drunk€any€beer€on€the€day€of€the€accident,€saying€that€the€beerÐ ˆØ Ðcans€in€his€truck€were€left€by€ð ðhis€friendðð€who€had€borrowed€the€truck€the€day€before€because€hisÐ qÁ Ðown€had€overheated.€€He€did€not€remember€telling€an€officer€that€he€would€not€take€a€blood€test€orÐ Zª Ðthat€he€had€drunk€a€beer€on€the€day€of€the€accident.Ð C“ ÐÌà  àJohn€Manners€testified€that€he€had€borrowed€the€defendantððs€truck€a€few€days€before€theÐ e Ðaccident€because€his€was€ð ðtore€up€a€little€bit,ðð€and€he€used€the€truck€to€clean€up€around€the€lakeÐ þN Ðwhere€he€went€fishing.€€He€said€that€he€collected€two€or€three€six„packs€of€beer€cans€at€the€lake€andÐ ç 7 Ðleft€them€behind€the€seat€in€the€defendantððs€truck.€€He€admitted€that€he€usually€took€a€few€beers€withÐ Ð!   Ðhim€to€the€lake€and€that€he€probably€left€some€unopened€cans€in€the€defendantððs€truck.€€He€did€notÐ ¹" ! Ðsee€the€defendant€drink€any€beer€prior€to€7:00€that€morning€when€he€left€the€defendantððs€residence.€Ð ¢#ò" ÐManners€said€that€he€and€the€defendant€had€replaced€the€carburetor€and€shocks€on€the€defendantððsÐ ‹$Û# Ðtruck€that€week.Ð t%Ä $ ÐÌà  àAfter€the€jury€had€convicted€the€defendant€of€DUI€and€violation€of€the€seatbelt€law,€the€StateÐ F'–"& Ðrecalled€Trooper€Bumpus€who€testified,€using€a€certified€copy€of€the€defendantððs€driving€record,Ð /(#' Ðwhich€had€been€entered€as€an€exhibit,€that€in€April€1999,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€DUI€inÐ )h$( ÐHumphreys€County.€€Accordingly,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€DUI,€second€offense.Ð *Q%) ÐÌò òÓ  ÓI.€€Sufficiency€of€the€EvidenceÐ Ó+#'+ ÐÓˆ2Óó óÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€at€trial€was€not€sufficient€to€support€his€convictionÐ ™é Ðfor€DUI,€second€offense,€because€ð ðthere€were€several€pieces€of€evidence€that€pointed€to€[theÐ ‚Ò Ðdefendant]€not€being€guilty€of€Driving€Under€the€Influence.ðð€€Specifically,€he€asserts€that€his€headÐ k» Ðinjury€caused€his€uncooperative€and€agitated€behavior,€and€his€head€injury€and€back€pain€caused€himÐ T¤ Ðto€stagger.€€Additionally,€the€testimony€of€John€Manners,€according€to€the€defendant,€explained€theÐ =  Ðpresence€of€beer€cans€in€the€defendantððs€truck€and€showed€that€the€defendant€had€not€been€drinkingÐ & v Ðthe€morning€of€the€accident.€€€Ð  _ ÐÌà  àIn€considering€this€issue,€we€apply€the€familiar€rule€that€where€sufficiency€of€the€convictingÐ á 1  Ðevidence€is€challenged,€the€relevant€question€of€the€reviewing€court€is€ð ðwhether,€after€viewing€theÐ Ê   Ðevidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€prosecution,€òòanyóó€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€foundÐ ³  Ðthe€essential€elements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,Ð œì  Ð319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€560,€573€(1979);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€838€S.W.2d€185,Ð …Õ  Ð190„92€(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Andersonóó,€835€S.W.2d€600,€604€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)òòóó;€Tenn.€R.Ð n¾  ÐApp.€P.€13(e)€(ð ðFindings€of€guilt€in€criminal€actions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€setÐ W§  Ðaside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€aÐ @ Ðreasonable€doubt.ðð).€€All€questions€involving€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€toÐ )y Ðbe€given€the€evidence,€and€all€factual€issues€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,Ð b Ð754€S.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987)òòóó.€€ð ðA€guilty€verdict€by€the€jury,€approved€by€the€trialÐ ûK Ðjudge,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€theÐ ä4 Ðtheory€of€the€State.ðð€€òòState€v.€Graceóó,€493€S.W.2d€474,€476€(Tenn.€1973).€€Our€supreme€court€statedÐ Í Ðthe€rationale€for€this€rule:Ð ¶ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThis€well„settled€rule€rests€on€a€sound€foundation.€€The€trialÐ ˆØ Ðjudge€and€the€jury€see€the€witnesses€face€to€face,€hear€their€testimonyÐ qÁ Ðand€observe€their€demeanor€on€the€stand.€€Thus€the€trial€judge€andÐ Zª Ðjury€are€the€primary€instrumentality€of€justice€to€determine€the€weightÐ C“ Ðand€credibility€to€be€given€to€the€testimony€of€witnesses.€€In€the€trialÐ ,| Ðforum€alone€is€there€human€atmosphere€and€the€totality€of€theÐ e Ðevidence€cannot€be€reproduced€with€a€written€record€in€this€Court.ÐþN` x` x ÐòòÌBolin€v.€Stateóó,€219€Tenn.€4,€11,€405€S.W.2d€768,€771€(1966)€(citing€òòCarroll€v.€Stateóó,€212€Tenn.€464,Ð Ð!   Ð370€S.W.2d€523€(1963)).€€A€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€with€which€aÐ ¹" ! Ðdefendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€on€appeal,€a€convictedÐ ¢#ò" Ðdefendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639Ð ‹$Û# ÐS.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).Ð t%Ä $ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€was€convicted€of€violating€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„401(a),€Ð F'–"& Ðwhich€provides:Ð /(#' ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIt€is€unlawful€for€any€person€to€drive€or€to€be€in€physicalÐ *Q%) Ðcontrol€of€any€automobile€or€other€motor€driven€vehicle€on€any€of€theÐ ê*:&* Ðpublic€roads€and€highways€of€the€state,€or€on€any€streets€or€alleys,€orÐ Ó+#'+ Ðwhile€on€the€premises€of€any€shopping€center,€trailer€park€or€anyÐ ° Ðapartment€house€complex,€or€any€other€premises€which€is€generallyÐ ™é Ðfrequented€by€the€public€at€large,€while:ЂÒ` x` x ÐÐ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(1)€Under€the€influence€of€any€intoxicant,€marijuana,€narcoticÐ T¤ Ðdrug,€or€drug€producing€stimulating€effects€on€the€central€nervousÐ =  Ðsystem;€or€Ð& v` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(2)€The€alcohol€concentration€in€such€personððs€blood€or€breathÐ ø H Ðis€ten„hundredths€of€one€percent€(.10%)€or€more.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ðá 1 ` x` x ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€it€is€undisputed€that€on€the€morning€of€May€22,€2000,€the€day€of€the€defendantððsÐ ³  Ðarrest,€the€weather€was€clear€and€the€road€dry.€€The€defendant€was€traveling€on€a€straight€stretch€ofÐ œì  Ðhighway€when€his€truck€drifted€across€the€oncoming€lane€of€traffic,€struck€an€embankment,€wentÐ …Õ  Ðslightly€airborne,€struck€a€metal€gate,€and€traveled€across€a€gravel€and€a€grassy€area€before€becoming€Ð n¾  Ðlodged€between€two€trees.€€The€defendantððs€truck€traveled€125€yards€from€the€road€to€the€pointÐ W§  Ðwhere€it€stopped.€€There€were€no€brake€or€skid€marks€to€indicate€that€the€defendant€took€any€evasiveÐ @ Ðaction€to€prevent€the€accident.€€€Ð )y ÐÌà  àThe€evidence€further€showed€that€there€were€several€opened€and€fifteen€to€twenty€unopenedÐ ûK Ðbeer€cans€in€the€defendantððs€truck€after€the€wreck.€€According€to€the€Stateððs€proof,€the€defendant€toldÐ ä4 ÐTrooper€Bumpus€that€he€had€drunk€one€beer€prior€to€the€accident.€€Trooper€Bumpus€also€testifiedÐ Í Ðthat€he€specifically€checked€the€defendantððs€clothing€to€determine€if€the€defendant€smelled€of€beerÐ ¶ Ðbecause€he€had€spilled€it€on€his€clothing,€but€there€was€no€indication€that€the€defendant€had€done€so,Ð Ÿï Ðnor€was€there€any€indication€that€beer€had€been€spilled€in€the€cab€of€the€defendantððs€truck.€€DaleÐ ˆØ ÐWelker€also€testified€that€the€defendantððs€clothes€were€dry€and€that€he€ð ðreek[ed]€of€beer€smell.ðð€Ð qÁ ÐBumpus€specifically€smelled€alcohol€coming€from€the€defendantððs€breath,€not€his€clothing;€theÐ Zª Ðdefendant€had€bloodshot€eyes;€and€his€speech€was€slurred.€€The€defendant€was€uncooperative,Ð C“ Ðverbally€abusive,€and€combative€after€the€accident.€€Although€the€defendant€argued€that€his€accidentÐ ,| Ðwas€caused€when€his€truck€ð ðgrabbedðð€and€that€his€friend€had€left€the€beer€cans€in€his€truck,€the€jury,Ð e Ðby€its€verdict,€rejected€this€explanation,€as€was€its€right€to€do.Ð þN ÐÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÌÓ °ûNÓÓ °íNÓà  àThis€evidence,€considered€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€was€sufficient€for€aÐ Ð!   Ðreasonable€jury€to€find€the€defendant€guilty€of€DUI,€second€offense,€with€the€certified€copy€of€hisÐ ¹" ! Ðdriving€record€sufficient€to€show€that€he€previously€had€been€convicted€of€DUI.€€Ð ¢#ò" ÐÌò òÓ  ÓÌII.€€€€€à0 @ àSentencingó óÐ ^&®!% ÐÓ‰PÓÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€sentencing€him€to€more€than€the€minimumÐ 1(#' Ðsentence€because,€according€to€his€argument,€the€court€improperly€applied€enhancement€factor€(16),Ð )j$( Ðthe€potential€for€bodily€injury€to€a€victim€was€great,€and€failed€to€apply€mitigating€factor€(1),€hisÐ ° Ðconduct€did€not€cause€or€threaten€serious€bodily€injury.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„114(16),€Ð ™é Є113(1)€(1997).€€Further,€the€defendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€considered€the€fact€that€heÐ ‚Ò Ðð ðsupposedly€lied€on€the€standðð€to€enhance€his€sentence,€thereby€punishing€him€for€going€to€trial.€Ð k» ÐWe€will€review€these€claims.Ð T¤ ÐÌà  àMisdemeanor€sentencing€is€controlled€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„35„302.€Ð & v ÐThis€courtððs€review€of€a€misdemeanor€sentence€is€òòÔ‡X›· XXXÀ×Ôde€novoÔ#†XÀ×X XX›·™T#Ôóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòStateÐ  _ Ðv.€Troutmanóó,€979€S.W.2d€271,€274€(Tenn.€1998).€€Although€the€Sentencing€Reform€Act€typicallyÐ ø H Ðtreats€misdemeanors€and€felonies€Ô‡X›· XXXÀ×Ôthe€same,€misdemeanors€are€not€given€the€presumption€of€aÐ á 1  Ðminimum€sentence.€Ô#†XÀ×X XX›·¼U#ÔòòóóòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Seatonóó,€914€S.W.2d€129,€133€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€OurÐ Ê   Ðsupreme€court€explained,€in€òòTroutmanóó,€the€procedures€for€misdemeanor€sentencing:òòÐ ³  ÐÌóóÓ °ÓÓ °Óà ¸ àThe€sentencing€considerations€generally€used€in€determiningÐ …Õ  Ðthe€manner€of€service€for€both€misdemeanors€and€felony€sentencesÐ n¾  Ðare€codified€at€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„35„102,€„103.€òòòòóóSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ W§  ÐAnn.€ðð€40„35„102€(noting€considerations€used€in€determining€whetherÐ @ Ðconfinement€shall€be€imposed);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„103Ð )y Ð(setting€forth€considerations€to€be€used€when€issuing€sentencing€ofÐ b Ðconfinement).€€In€addition€to€the€statutory€considerations€for€issuingÐ ûK Ðsentences€of€confinement,€the€misdemeanor€sentencing€statute€merelyÐ ä4 Ðrequires€a€trial€judge€to€consider€enhancement€and€mitigating€factorsÐ Í Ðwhen€calculating€the€percentage€of€a€misdemeanor€sentence€to€beÐ ¶ Ðserved€in€confinement.€€òòòòóóCompareóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„302òòóó€(ð ðtoÐ Ÿï Ðconsider€the€purpose€of€this€chapter,€the€principles€of€sentencing,€andÐ ˆØ Ðthe€enhancement€and€mitigating€factors€set€forth€hereinðð)€òòòòóówithóó€Tenn.Ð qÁ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„201(f)€(stating€court€shall€place€on€record€eitherÐ Zª Ðorally€or€in€writing€what€enhancement€or€mitigating€factors€it€found).Ð C“ ÐÓ °KWÓÓ °=WÓÌòòóó979€S.W.2d€at€273„74.Ð e ÐÌà  àAlthough€a€separate€sentencing€hearing€is€not€required€in€misdemeanor€sentencing,€the€trialÐ ç 7 Ðcourt€must€ð ðallow€the€parties€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€be€heard€on€the€question€of€the€length€ofÐ Ð!   Ðany€sentence€and€the€manner€in€which€Ô% ‡% ÔÔ%†%3^Ôthe€sentence€is€to€be€served.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„Ð ¹" ! Ð302(a)€(1997).€€A€misdemeanor€sentence,€unlike€a€felony€sentence,€has€no€sentence€range.€€òòState€v.Ð ¢#ò" ÐBakeróó,€966€S.W.2d€429,€434€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àÔ‡X›· XXXÀ×ÔThe€mandatory€sentence€for€a€DUI,€second€offense,€is€a€fine€between€$600€and€$3500,Ð ]&­!% Ðconfinement€for€not€less€than€forty„five€days€nor€more€than€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€daysÔ#†XÀ×X XX›·v_#Ô€inÐ F'–"& Ðthe€county€jail€or€workhouse,€and€a€two„year€loss€of€driving€privileges.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„Ð /(#' Ð403(a)(1)€(1998).€€Here,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€defendant€to€eleven€months,€twenty„nine€days,Ð )h$( Ðwith€six€months€to€be€served€in€confinement€and€the€balance€on€probation:Ð *Q%) Ðâ âÐ ê*:&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€finds€proof€that€the€defendant,€in€his€testimony,Ð ° Ðâ âwas€untruthful.€€He€denied€any€intoxication€and€so€forth.€€Obviously,Ð ™é Ðthis€is€not€the€case.ЂÒ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€proof€indicates€that,€although€we€donððt€know€what€hisÐ T¤ Ðalcohol€level€was,€he€was€obviously€highly€intoxicated€and€engagingÐ =  Ðin€conduct€which€endangered€the€public€by€operating€a€motor€vehicleÐ & v Ðat€a€high€rate€of€speed.€€As€he,€himself,€testified€to,€heððs€lucky€heððsÐ  _ Ðhere.€€And€he€is€also€lucky,€of€course,€that€someone€else€wasnððt€eitherÐ ø H Ðin€the€truck€with€him€or€on€the€road€at€that€time.Ðá 1 ` x` x ÐÔ‡X›· XXXÀ×ÔÌà  àAdditionally,€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€new€trial,€the€court€further€explained€the€basisÐ ³  Ðfor€the€sentence€imposed€on€the€defendant:Ð œì  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAs€far€as€the€sentence€that€was€excessive,€that€he€is€entitled€toÐ n¾  Ðprobation,€I€presume€that€he€was.€€Starting€out€I€presume€that€eachÐ W§  Ðdefendant€is€entitled€to€probation.Ð@` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIn€this€particular€case,€[the€defendantððs]€conduct€has€beenÐ b Ðdescribed€as€a€typical€second€offense€DUI.€€[The€defendant]€wasÐ ûK Ðdriving€alone,€left€the€road,€missed€the€light€pole,€hit€a€gate,€left€theÐ ä4 Ðground,€went€off€the€embankment€and€lodged€between€two€trees.€€HeÐ Í Ðvery€obviously€was€traveling€at€a€high€rate€of€speed.€€No€question€inÐ ¶ Ðmy€mind€that€if€anyone€else€would€have€been€in€that€area€and€hadÐ Ÿï Ðbeen€hit€by€him€they€would€have€been€seriously€injured€or€killed.ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€proof€showed€though€the€reason€for€the€court€sentencing,Ð Zª Ðthat€the€defendant€has€ð!ð€I€did€first€of€all€find€the€defendant€wasÐ C“ Ðuntruthful.€€That€in€itself€is€reason€enough€to€deny€probation.Ð,|` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àHe€was€obviously€highly€intoxicated.€€He€refused€the€test.€€HeÐ þN Ðwas€far€way€and€above€the€minimum€level€of€intoxication.€€And€heÐ ç 7 Ðengaged€in€conduct€over€and€above€just€DUI,€which€is€danger€to€theÐ Ð!   Ðpublic.€€All€of€these€three€factors€support€.€.€.€the€CourtððsÐ ¹" ! Ðdetermination€that€the€defendant€is€certainly€not€entitled€to€probationÐ ¢#ò" Ðand€would€not€get€a€minimum€sentence.Ћ$Û#` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€argues€that,€in€imposing€this€sentence,€the€trial€court€erred€by€considering€theÐ ]&­!% Ðfact€that€he€ð ðsupposedly€lied€on€the€stand;ðð€in€commenting€that€a€person€who€had€gotten€in€theÐ F'–"& Ðdefendantððs€way€ð ðwould€have€been€seriously€injured€or€killed;ðð€and€in€not€applying,€as€a€mitigatingÐ /(#' Ðfactor,€that€the€defendantððs€conduct€ð ðneither€caused€nor€threatened€serious€bodily€injury.ðð€Ð )h$( ÐÔ#†XÀ×X XX›·Ze#ÔÌà  àThe€defendant€was€alone€in€his€vehicle,€and€the€record€does€not€reflect€that€other€vehiclesÐ ê*:&* Ðor€persons€were€present€and€thus€endangered€by€the€defendantððs€vehicle.€€The€Stateððs€proof,€whichÐ Ó+#'+ Ðwas€accepted€by€the€jury,€was€that€the€defendantððs€vehicle€drifted€off€the€roadway,€struck€anÐ ° Ðembankment,€became€slightly€airborne,€and€crossed€an€area€with€both€gravel€and€grass,€travelingÐ ™é Ðapproximately€125€yards€after€leaving€the€road.€€Thus,€even€if€the€trial€court€should€have€applied,Ð ‚Ò Ðas€the€defendant€argues,€the€mitigating€factor€that€his€conduct€ð ðneither€caused€nor€threatened€seriousÐ k» Ðbodily€injury,ðð€this€factor€would€have€been€entitled€to€little€weight€because€of€the€egregious€natureÐ T¤ Ðof€the€accident,€with€others€not€being€threatened€simply€because€others€were€not€present€when€hisÐ =  Ðvehicle€left€the€road.€à ¸ àFurther,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€trial€courtððs€comments€as€to€theÐ & v Ðdefendantððs€having€been€untruthful€amounted€to€his€being€punished€for€going€to€trial.€€In€fact,€theÐ  _ Ðdefendant€and€his€witness€presented€a€fairly€elaborate€explanation€at€trial€as€to€why€he€was€not€guiltyÐ ø H Ðof€his€second€DUI€charge.€€The€jury€disbelieved€his€explanation,€as€did€the€trial€court.€€This€courtÐ á 1  Ðhas€held€that€a€ð ðdefendantððs€lack€of€credibility€is€.€.€.€an€appropriate€consideration€[in€whether€toÐ Ê   Ðgrant€probation]€and€reflects€on€a€defendantððs€potential€for€rehabilitation.ðð€€òòState€v.€Goodeóó,€956Ð ³  ÐS.W.2d€521,€527€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€sentencing€of€theÐ œì  Ðdefendant€was€within€the€discretion€allowed€to€the€trial€court€following€a€conviction€for€aÐ …Õ  Ðmisdemeanor.€€Ð n¾  ÐÌò òòòÓ  ÓCONCLUSIONÐ @ ÐÓwÓÌà  àó óóóBased€upon€the€foregoing€authorities€and€reasoning,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÐ d Ðcourt.òòò òó óóóÐ ýM Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ¡ñ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGEÐ ŠÚ Ð