WPC 2QJ&MΩF@ƻږ$9~7Si;׽JXq7F*Ey#XS-ֆ/kehwB{P[0xL'L.;؎v:VC6r{IYs1`pM7#lvJ뾊@m 3UC^7G"SOdH$q[X5$Z !s`z]&(*Q*ptt210tҵZ 3];ZJ} KqnhBH!ǣm3YQ\iZ9w* bCjwoH.Pģ鍺|nGAaT+cq"W>6ƤR:kj$Mg VݕQr"){oRQB5nb %\^ b 0nU&NwD4H\ zk m #   _ %  NEb 0 B 0 D3 D- 0K AS*} 0C 0D A+y3+ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularyG*3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUHP LaserJet 40500 Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  X - -(|G2h$ !.8dd8         0   d(|3$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _   8FqXXdd8/V@tt|INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#|#Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsAugust21,2001 L XFqX #XXFq1#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.TRACY_GOBER_XFqX  J @@ InterlocutoryAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforBradleyCounty  J @@No.00185CarrollLeeRoss,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200100296CCAR9CO   September18,_2001_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Theissueishowtocomputethenumberofprioroffensesavailableforconsiderationindetermining x  multipleoffenderstatuspursuanttoTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection5510403(a)(3).We d concludetocomputethenumberofpriorconvictionsavailableforconsideration,thecourtmustfirst P determinewhetherthedefendanthasanypriorconvictionsoccurringwithintenyearsofthedateof < theinstantconviction.Ifso,allpriorconvictionsshallbecountedoccurringwithintwentyyearsof (x thedateoftheinstantconvictionprovidednoperiodgreaterthantenyearshaselapsedbetweenany d twoprecedingpriorconvictions.Anexampleiscontainedintheopinion.Wereversethetrial P courtsorderamendingtheindictmenttochargethirdoffenseandreinstatetheoriginalindictment < chargingninthoffensedrivingundertheinfluence. (  Tenn.R.App.P.9;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtReversed     #XFq#XFqX.JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichGaryR.Wade,_P.J._,and  AlanE.Glenn,J.,joined. t PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MarkA._Fulks_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;Jerry L  N._Estes_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andJosephVictor_Hoffer_,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral, 8!  fortheappellant,StateofTennessee. $"t! Jerry_Hoffer_,Cleveland,Tennessee,fortheappellee,Tracy_Gober_. #L# Ѐy  4-(- Ї@@OO& OPINION  Facts @       OnFebruary3,2000,thedefendant,Tracy_Gober_,wasindicted,inBradleyCounty,incount ` onefordrivingundertheinfluence,( _DUI_).SeeTenn.CodeAnn.#XXFq #XFqXԀ5510401.Counttwoofthe L  indictmentallegedthatthedefendanthadbeenpreviouslyconvictedof_DUI_Ԁandhadthuscommitted 8  aninth_DUI_Ԁoffense.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.5510403(a)(3).Theindictmentlistedthefollowing $ t eightpriorconvictions:  `  X5/23/19840 KnoxCounty,Tennessee L  (# (# 4/17/19860 AndersonCounty,Tennessee 8  (# (# 4/17/19860 AndersonCounty,Tennessee$  (# (# 8/11/19860 ClaytonCounty,Georgia  (# (# 6/11/19870 CobbCounty,Georgia  (# (# 6/11/19870 CobbCounty,Georgia#XXFq#XFqX  (# (# 8/06/19920 _McMinn_ԀCounty,Tennessee  (# (# 5/14/19980 BradleyCounty,Tennesseep (# (#  X@    Thedefendantmovedtodismisscounttwooftheindictment.Defensecounselstated: H 8  WhenIlookattheindictment,IseethatMr._Gober_simmediatelypreceding  p convictionisMay14,1998.IfIgotenyearsbackthereisonlyoneotheradditional  \ _DUI_,thatbeingonAugust6,1992.SoIwouldaskthecourttodismissthe H indictment.Heisreallyonlychargedwiththirdoffense_DUI_,thewayIhave 4 interpretedthestatute.    Thetrialcourtagreedwiththedefendantscontentionandorderedtheindictmentamendedtocharge  thirdoffense_DUI_.TheStatesoughtaninterlocutoryappealpursuanttoRule9,TennesseeRulesof  AppellateProcedure,whichwasgranted.Applicationforpermissiontoappealwasgrantedbythis  courtandfiledMarch9,2001. l    Analysis  X    ThecontrollingstatuteisTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection5510403(a)(3),whichsets 0"  forththeappropriatemethodforcalculatingmultiple_DUI_Ԁoffensesasfollows: #l!  X X ` Forpurposesofthissection,apersonwhoisconvictedofa[_DUI_]violation $D # ...shallnotbeconsideredarepeatormultipleoffenderandsubjecttothepenalties %0!$ prescribedinsubsection(a),iften(10)ormoreyearshaveelapsedbetweensuch &"% convictionandanyimmediatelyprecedingconvictionforaviolation.If,however, '#& apersonhasbeenconvictedofa[_DUI_]violation...withinten(10)yearsofthe (#' presentviolation,thensuchpersonshallbeconsideredamultipleoffenderandis )$( subjecttothepenaltiesimposeduponmultipleoffendersbytheprovisionsof |*%) subsection(a).Ifapersonisconsideredamultipleoffenderunderthissubdivision, h+&* /V X   theneveryconvictionfora[_DUI_]violation...withinten(10)yearsofthe  immediatelyprecedingviolationshallbeconsideredindeterminingthenumberof  prioroffenses,butinnoeventshallaconvictionforaviolationoccurringmorethan  twenty(20)yearsfromthedateoftheinstantconvictionbeconsideredforsuch t purpose. `  X XTenn.CodeAnn.5510403(a)(3)(2000). 8      Thedefendantcontendsthattheproperwaytocalculatewhichpriorconvictionsshouldbe  ` consideredtodeterminemultipleoffenderstatusistodeterminethedateofthefirstconviction  L  immediatelyprecedingtheinstantconvictionandcountbacktenyearsfromthatdate.Onlythe  8  priorconvictionsoccurringbetweenthosedatesareappropriateforconsideration.Asappliedtothe $  instantcase,thefirstimmediatelyprecedingconvictionoccurredonMay14,1998.Thedefendant   wouldhaveusgobacktenyearstoMay14,1988asthecutoffpoint.Sincethereareonlytwoprior   convictionsoccurringbetweenMay14,1998andMay14,1988,thedefendantcontendshecould   onlybechargedwiththirdoffense_DUI_.#XXFq#XFqX       TheTennesseeSupremeCourthassetforththatrulesofstatutoryconstructionrequireeffect \ tobegiventothelegislativeintentwithoutundulyrestrictingorexpandingtheintendedscopeofa H statute.Sealsv.State,23S.W.3d272,276(Tenn.2000).#XXFq"#XFqXԀWeshould,therefore,examinethenatural 4 andordinarymeaningofastatuteslanguagewithinthecontextoftheentirestatutewithoutforced  p orsubtleconstructionthatwouldextendorlimititsmeaning.Statev._Flemming_,19S.W.3d195,  \ 197(Tenn.2000).#XXFqF$#XFqXԀ#XXFq%#XFqXStatutoryconstructionshouldnotrenderportionsofthestatuteinoperative.State H v.Turner,913S.W.2d158,160(Tenn.1995).#XXFq5&#XFqXԀIfanambiguityisfoundtoexist,weshouldlookto 4 theentirestatutoryschemeinseekingtoascertainthetruelegislativeintent.Owensv.State,908   S.W.2d923,926(Tenn.1995).#XXFq'#XFqX     #XXFq:(#XFqX      Aswereviewtheplainlanguageofthestatuteandthelegislativehistory,itisclearthat  wheneveranoffendermaintainsatenyear_DUI_Ԁconvictionfreeperiod,thestateisbarredfromusing  anypriorconvictionsbeyondthatperiodforpurposesofenhancedpunishment.Thistenyear_DUI_ l convictionfreeperiodisimportantintwoways.First,inordertobeconsideredasamultiple X  offenderonemusthaveaprior_DUI_Ԁconvictionoccurringwithintenyearsfromthedateoftheinstant D! conviction.Second,ifatanytimeatenyear_DUI_Ԁconvictionfreeperiodexistsbetweenpreceding 0"  priorconvictions,theStateisbarredfromusinganypriorconvictionbeyondthattenyearperiodfor #l! thepurposesofenhancedpunishmentWeshouldbeclear,however,thatinnoeventmayaprior $X" convictionbeusedforthepurposeofenhancedpunishmentifitoccurredmorethantwentyyears $D # beforethedateoftheinstantconviction. %0!$ ExampleOne '#&  X XDefendantXsinstantconvictionoccurredApril1,2001.Thedefendanthasfour (#' prior_DUI_Ԁconvictions,alloccurringsixyearsapart;April1,1995;April1,1987; )$( April1,1981;April1,1975.Firstquestion.Doesthedefendanthaveaprior_DUI_ |*%) convictionoccurringwithintenyearsoftheinstantoffense?Theanswerisyes,April h+&* 1,1995.Secondquestion.Doesthedefendanthaveatenyear_DUI_Ԁconvictionfree T,'+  periodbetweenanyprecedingpriorconviction?Theanswerisno,allconvictionsare @-(, sixyearsapart.Thirdquestion.Doesthedefendanthaveanypriorconvictionsmore   thantwentyyearsfromtheinstantconviction?Theanswerisyes,April1,1975.  Therefore,thedefendantmaybechargedwithfourthoffensedrivingunderthe  influence. t  X- X-ExampleTwo L   X XDefendantXsinstantconvictionoccurredonJuly1,2001.DefendantXhastwo 8  priorconvictionsoccurringonJuly3,1991andJuly3,1981.DefendantXhasa $ t priorconvictionwithintenyearsofhis/herinstantconviction,July3,1991.Exactly  ` tenyearspriortoJuly3,1991andjustdaysshyoftwentyyearspriortotheinstant  L  conviction,defendanthadanotherpriorconvictiononJuly3,1981.DefendantX  8  shouldbechargedwiththirdoffensedrivingundertheinfluence. $   X2 X2  Thisdefendantsargumentdirectlycontradictstheexistenceofthetwentyyearlimit   containedinthestatue.Hence,renderingthetwentyyearlimitinapplicable.Weagreewiththe   StatethataslongasthismatterisconcludedonorbeforeMay22,2004twentyyearsfromthe   oldestpriorconviction!noneofthedefendantsconvictionsareexcludedfromconsiderationfor p enhancedpunishment.#XXFq(#XFqXԀApplyingouranalysistotheinstantcase,wefirstassumethatthedefendants \ instantconvictionoccursonorbeforeMay22,2004.Thisdefendanthadapriorconvictionfor_DUI_ H onMay14,1998,whichiswithintenyearsoftheinstantconviction.#XXFqF7#ԀXFqXFurthermore,thereisnoperiod 4 greaterthantenyearsbetweenanyofthedefendantspriorprecedingconvictions.Therefore,all F convictionsoccurringwithintwentyyearsfromthedateoftheinstantconvictionmaybeconsidered 2 indeterminingthedefendantsmultipleoffensestatus.Counttwooftheindictmentchargingthis n defendantwithninthoffensedrivingundertheinfluenceiscorrect.  Z    Conclusion  2     Weconcludethetrialcourterredinamendingtheindictmenttochargethirdoffensedriving   undertheinfluenceandwereinstatetheoriginalindictmentchargingthedefendantwithninth  offensedrivingundertheinfluence.  Ѐ   @  @`  @  @  @h ___________________________________ .$~"      `     h JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE