ÿWPC ùJé‚àøoû½xŒ(½Vá@Z†:ÙƒìxB4Ú(n£3©AÍ+¶b¢é NVÜó×@lRâÎ¥*Æ5:„xˆÊVüjsÚ xG#¦Ê: û"Õón*&–•~+Œ)i¾PùÆ@SýðÆ$—z$^FŒ8OÓ“õ‡Q¨AvØ>_H!H‡ä€s 5-¥å¹ÀRF鸽ÿÆ\>6žØÀ xW A«:ðKᅫµX¢™…tÛåC¦´¢û·.¨$~×D #Æ„ªýÿKÏõ”aÈw·©†“ðkf¢M´R¦ðWQÆ!…¥ú^áòÝ“sU"RöÒ\PWÚí8Èq]Fx°gvc=¶N`GS ªý{ö%«‘æ³¹ãmÛZHU’=Â}C#´b %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ ¹ UNÐ Æ Æä ƪ Æp #Á6 N÷ùùEb 0ë     Böö 0¤ D3· D-ê 0K ASbƵ 0¤{ 0D A«c »Gzh+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularm~g+bk2\=±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.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0 - ù-(|G2ö$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ œ»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôz ò»»Ô d(|3Åð$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ œ»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Åð$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ œ»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ü»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€ ¼fG»» »ÔÑ8€k,XXdê»»d 8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡ îj6î» ¼fGÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#† ¼fG»î îj6#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àSeptember€11,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡ X(»X» ¼fGÔÌò òÔ#† ¼fG»X X(»&#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€MICHAEL€HILLòòóóÔ‡ X(»X» ¼fGÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99„11679€€€€€€James€C.€Ô_ÔBeasleyÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2000„02291„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€7,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€Defendant,€Michael€Hill,€pled€guilty€to€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant,€andÐ xÈ  Ðsubmitted€sentencing€for€determination€by€the€trial€court.€€Included€within€the€sentencing€was€aÐ d´ Ðdetermination€by€the€trial€court€as€to€whether€or€not€Defendantððs€prior€convictions€for€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€could€beÐ P  Ðused€to€sentence€him€as€a€multiple€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€offender€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„Ð <Œ Ð10„403.€€The€trial€court€determined€that€at€least€two€of€the€prior€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€convictions€could€be€used€toÐ (x Ðsentence€Defendant€as€a€multiple€third€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€offender.€€Defendant€was€sentenced€to€11€months€andÐ d Ð29€days,€with€all€but€180€days€suspended,€and€he€was€fined€$3,500.00.€€On€appeal,€Defendant€arguesÐ P Ðthat€all€of€the€prior€convictions€for€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€were€imposed€more€than€ten€years€prior€to€his€conviction€forÐ ì< ÐÔ_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€in€this€case,€and€that€he€should€be€sentenced€as€a€first€offender.€€We€agree,€and€reverse€theÐ Ø( Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€and€remand€this€case€for€a€sentencing€hearing€as€a€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€first€offender.Ð Ä ÐÓçÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Ð œì ÐReversed€and€Remanded€for€New€Sentencing€Hearing.€ó óÐ ˆØ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#† ¼fG»à X(»š#ÔÔ‡ X(»X. ¼fGÔThomas€T.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòNorma€McGee€Ogle,óó€andÐ `° ÐòòRobert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ô#† ¼fG»X X(»a #ÔÔ‡ X(»X» ¼fGÔÐ L œ ÐÌWilliam€W.€Ô_ÔHeatonÔ_Ô,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Michael€Hill.€Ð $"t! ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€John€H.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð ü#L# ÐWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Paul€Goodman,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ è$8 $ ÐGeneral;€and€Jim€Powell,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÓ2 ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#† ¼fG»X X(» #ÔÔ‡ X(»X» ¼fGÔÐ ¬'ü"' ÐÌÓ  Óà  àOn€October€7,€1999,€Defendant€was€indicted€by€the€Shelby€County€Grand€Jury€for€a€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_ÔÐ „)Ô$) Ðoffense€which€occurred€on€February€21,€1999.€€Ultimately,€the€trial€court€imposed€sentence€uponÐ p*À%* ÐDefendant€at€a€sentencing€hearing€in€August,€2000,€after€Defendant€entered€a€plea€of€guilty€to€theÐ \+¬&+ Ðunderlying€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€offense€on€February€23,€2000.Ð H,˜', ÐÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôà  àThe€Defendantððs€three€prior€DUI€convictions€occurred€on€February€16,€1989,€November€1,Ð ° Ð1989,€and€November€16,€1989.€€Two€of€these€convictions€occurred€within€ten€(10)€years€of€the€dateÐ œì Ðof€commission€of€the€offense€which€is€the€subject€of€this€appeal,€on€February€21,€1999.€€However,Ð ˆØ Ðall€three€convictions€occurred€more€than€ten€(10)€years€prior€to€the€date€of€his€conviction€in€this€case,Ð tÄ Ðon€February€23,€2000.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€generally€argues€that€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„403(a)(3)€isÐ 8 ˆ Ðunconstitutionally€vague€regarding€when€a€Defendant€is€to€be€sentenced€as€a€multiple€DUI€offender.€Ð $ t ÐHe€does€specifically€assert€that€the€ten„year€period€to€determine€whether€a€prior€conviction€can€beÐ  ` Ðused€to€determine€a€multiple€offender€must€be€from€the€date€of€conviction€of€the€prior€offense€to€theÐ ü L  Ðdate€of€conviction€of€the€present€offense.€€The€State,€on€the€other€hand,€argues€that€as€long€as€theÐ è 8  Ðmost€recent€offense€(rather€than€conviction€for€that€offense)€occurs€€within€ten€years€of€a€priorÐ Ô$  Ðconviction,€the€prior€conviction€can€be€used€to€establish€the€status€as€a€multiple€DUI€offender.€€AÐ À  Ðrecent€case€by€our€court€resolves€the€issue€in€favor€of€Defendant.€€In€òòState€v.€Conwayóó,€____€S.W.3dÐ ¬ü  Ð____,€No.€M2000„01263„CCA„R3„CD,€filed€at€Nashville,€May€8,€2001,€this€court€addressed€theÐ ˜è  Ðidentical€issue€presented€in€this€appeal.€€The€court€in€òòConwayóó€examined€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ „Ô  Ðsection€55„10„403(a)(3)€as€follows:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àà ` à€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55-10-403(a)(3)€was€amended€in€1998,€and€theÐ H˜ Ðamendment€became€effective€May€11,€1998.€€See€1998€Public€Acts,€Chapter€926.€Ð 4„ ÐThe€current€statute€reads€as€follows:Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[A]€person€who€is€convicted€of€a€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ øH Ð55-10-401€shall€not€be€considered€a€repeat€or€multiple€offender€andÐ ä4 Ðsubject€to€the€penalties€prescribed€in€subsection€(a),€if€ten€(10)€orÐ Ð  Ðmore€years€have€elapsed€between€such€conviction€and€anyÐ ¼  Ðimmediately€preceding€conviction€for€a€violation.€€òòIf,€however,€aÐ ¨ø Ðperson€has€been€convicted€of€a€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ”ä Ð55-10-401€within€ten€(10)€years€of€the€present€violationóó,€then€suchÐ €Ð Ðperson€shall€be€considered€a€multiple€offender€and€is€subject€to€theÐ l¼ Ðpenalties€imposed€upon€multiple€offenders€by€the€provisions€ofÐ X ¨ Ðsubsection€(a).€€If€a€person€is€considered€a€multiple€offender€underÐ D!” Ðthis€subdivision,€then€every€conviction€for€a€violation€of€ðð€55-10-401,Ð 0"€  Ðwithin€ten€(10)€years€of€the€immediately€preceding€violation€shall€beÐ #l! Ðconsidered€in€determining€the€number€of€prior€offenses,€but€in€noÐ $X" Ðevent€shall€a€conviction€for€a€violation€occurring€more€than€twentyÐ ô$D # Ð(20)€years€from€the€date€of€the€instant€conviction€be€considered€forÐ à%0!$ Ðsuch€purpose.€€(Emphasis€added).€€ÐÌ&"%` x` x ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€first€sentence€clearly€states€that€the€ten-year€time€frame€is€measured€fromÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconviction€to€conviction€without€any€reference€to€the€date€of€commission€of€theÐ )à$( Ðoffenses.€€The€second€sentence€measures€the€ten-year€period€from€the€date€of€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðprior€conviction€to€the€"present€violation."€€At€issue€is€whether€"present€violation"Ð h+¸&* Ðrefers€to€the€date€of€the€offense€or€the€date€of€the€conviction.€€If€the€"presentÐ ° Ðviolation"€refers€to€the€date€of€the€offense,€this€renders€the€first€sentence€of€the€statuteÐ œì Ðtotally€inoperative€and€meaningless.€€We€should€not€construe€statutes€to€render€aÐ ˆØ Ðsentence€inoperative.€€òòTurneróó,€913€S.W.2d€at€160.€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€theÐ tÄ Ðstatute€is€ambiguous.€€Accordingly,€we€must€ascertain€the€legislative€intent€and€lookÐ `° Ðto€the€entire€statutory€scheme.€€òòOwensóó,€908€S.W.2d€at€926.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€prior€statute€provided€as€follows:Ð $ t ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àFor€purposes€of€this€section,€a€person€whose€convictions€for€violatingÐ ü L  Ðthe€provisions€of€ðð€55-10-401€occur€more€than€ten€(10)€years€apartÐ è 8  Ðshall€not€be€considered€a€multiple€offender,€and€the€penalties€imposedÐ Ô$  Ðupon€multiple€offenders€by€the€provisions€of€subsection€(a)€do€notÐ À  Ðapply€to€such€person.€€Ð¬ü ` x` x ÐÌà8  àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55-10-403(a)(3)€(Supp.1997).€€Clearly,€the€former€statuteÐ „Ô  Ðmeasured€the€ten-year€time€period€from€conviction€to€conviction€without€anyÐ pÀ Ðreference€to€the€date€of€commission€of€the€offenses.€€See€òòState€v.€Marvin€E.Ð \¬ ÐSizemoreóó,€C.C.A.€No.€03C01-9209-CR-00326,€1994€WL€369733,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð H˜ ÐApp.€filed€July€15,€1994,€at€Knoxville).Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€current€statute€was€enacted€in€1998€and€rewrote€the€entire€subsection.€Ð  \ ÐSee€1998€Public€Acts,€Chapter€926.€€We€have€examined€the€legislative€history,Ð øH Ðincluding€various€discussions€among€legislators€about€the€legislation€prior€to€itsÐ ä4 Ðenactment.€€We€have€found€no€indication€that€the€legislature€intended€to€amend€theÐ Ð  Ðstatute€so€as€to€change€the€method€of€calculating€the€ten-year€period.€€Instead,€theÐ ¼  Ðlegislative€history€indicates€that€the€legislative€purpose€of€the€current€statute€wasÐ ¨ø Ðsimply€to€increase€the€reach€of€the€statute€as€far€back€as€twenty€(20)€years.€Ð ”ä ÐFurthermore,€the€last€sentence€of€the€current€statute€clearly€measures€the€twenty-yearÐ €Ð Ðtime€period€from€the€"date€of€the€instant€conviction."Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€view€of€the€ambiguity,€we€must€construe€the€statute€against€the€state€andÐ D!” Ðin€favor€of€the€defendant.€€òòRogersóó,€992€S.W.2d€at€400.€€Accordingly,€we€construe€theÐ 0"€  Ðstatute,€just€as€we€did€in€òòSizemoreóó,€to€measure€the€relevant€time€periods€fromÐ #l! Ðconviction€to€conviction€without€reference€to€the€date€of€commission€of€the€offenses.Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌòòConwayóó,€_____€S.W.3d€at€____,€slip€op.€at€9„10.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAn€application€for€permission€to€appeal€was€filed€in€òòConwayóó,€pursuant€to€Rule€11€of€theÐ ¸'#& ÐTennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€On€October€1,€2001,€the€application€was€denied,€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðpursuant€to€Rule€4(D),€Rules€of€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court,€it€was€denied€with€theÐ )à$( Ðrecommendation€by€the€supreme€court€that€this€courtððs€opinion€in€òòConwayóó€be€published.€€PursuantÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€Rule€4(H)(2),€òòConwayóó€is€controlling€authority€for€all€purposes.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àAs€the€court€did€in€òòConwayóó,€we€recognize€that€there€exists€an€exception€to€measuring€the€ten„Ð ° Ðyear€time€from€conviction€to€conviction.€€In€òòState€v.€McKinneyóó,€929€S.W.2d€404,€406€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð œì ÐApp.€1996),€our€court€tolled€the€ten„year€period€during€the€time€a€defendant€deliberately€absentedÐ ˆØ Ðhimself€from€the€jurisdiction.€€However,€in€the€case€at€bar,€as€in€òòConwayóó,€the€State€does€not€argue,Ð tÄ Ðand€the€record€does€not€reflect,€that€Defendant€Hill€has€absented€himself€from€the€jurisdiction€of€theÐ `° Ðcourt.€€Therefore,€the€exception€to€the€rule€does€not€apply.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àAll€of€the€Defendantððs€prior€convictions€for€DUI€occurred€more€than€ten€years€prior€to€theÐ $ t Ðconviction€for€the€present€offense€on€appeal,€which€was€February€23,€2000.€€Accordingly,€he€cannotÐ  ` Ðbe€sentenced€as€a€multiple€DUI€offender€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„Ð ü L  Ð403(a)(3).€Ô#† ¼fG»X X(»#ÔÔ‡ X(»X» ¼fGÔÐ è 8  ÐÌà@FF%ìàò òCONCLUSIONó óˆÐ À  ÐÌà  àAs€the€present€conviction€on€appeal€occurred€more€than€ten€years€after€any€of€DefendantððsÐ ˜è  Ðprior€convictions€for€DUI,€Defendant€was€improperly€sentenced€as€a€DUI€third€offender.€€TheÐ „Ô  Ðconviction€is€affirmed,€however,€to€the€extent€that€the€trial€court€sentenced€Defendant€as€a€thirdÐ pÀ Ðoffender,€we€reverse€the€judgment,€and€remand€this€case€for€re„sentencing€for€a€DUI,€first€offense.Ð \¬ ÐÔ#† ¼fG»X X(»,3#ÔÔ‡ X(»X» ¼fGÔÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÔ#† ¼fG»X X(»™5#ÔÐ  \ Ð