WPCE %U4 %JbPXnh 04U: # EPw@X 0& 0DU4 0J6 0T 0^ 0h2 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d Bw U* U6 v~ vr<6X9`(Courier 10X- -3|xV<6X9`(Courier 10Xx6X@29X@($  TR[A'LEGAL3'A' Legal3'T  X XXXX XXX Էe"-^AZ"Arial RegularHP DeskJet 560C PrinterDESKJETC,,,,,,0 MNEOPQDR eSDTUDV e((3$ !  TR[A'LEGAL3'A' Legal3'T  XXXXX2yXXX      0  (#$  0  )^A`AvantGarde2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d<  9p`(Arial<  9p`(Courier NewPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ! . !\RA'\  "  ݛ       X "!70XXdd7 @ !XINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLE` XXSTATEOFTENNESSEE,  )      ) C.C.A.NO.01C019708CC00364  Appellee,    )      ) LEWISCOUNTY VS.      ) (No.5505Below)      ) TheHon.DonaldP.HarrisROBERTGERRYJERNIGAN,  )       ) (CertifiedQuestionofLaw)  Appellant.    ) AFFIRMEDPURSUANTTORULE20@ ORDER   ThismatterisbeforetheCourtuponthestatesmotionrequestingthatthejudgmentintheabovestyledcausebeaffirmedpursuanttoRule20,TennesseeCourtofCriminalAppealsRules.Basedonourreview,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourtpursuanttoRule20.  Theappellantpledguiltytodrivingundertheinfluence,firstoffense,andattemptstoappealacertifiedquestionoflaw.Specifically,theappellantcontendsthatheiseligibleandentitledtojudicialdiversion.WhiletheappellantconcedesthatthisissuewasdecidedinStatev.Vasser,870S.W.2d543(Tenn.Crim.App.1993),heassertsthatthereasoninginVasserwaserroneous.Althoughwefindthisissueiswithoutmerit,theCourtmustfirstdeterminewhetheracertifiedquestionoflawisproperlybeforeus.  InStatev.Preston,759S.W.2d647(Tenn.1988),ourSupremeCourtstatedthatwhenadefendantpleadsguiltyandwishestoreserveacertifiedquestionoflawpursuanttoTenn.R.Crim.P.37(b)(2)(i)or(iv), thefinalorderorjudgmentfromwhichthetimebeginstoruntopursueaT.R.A.P.3appealmustcontainastatementofthedispositivecertifiedquestionoflawreservedbydefendantforappellatereviewandthequestionoflawmustbestatedsoastoclearlyidentifythescopeandthelimitsofthelegalissuereserved.Id.at650.Thedefendantmustassurethatthefinalordercomplieswiththeserequirementsandthattherecordonappealcontainstheproceedingsnecessarytoacompletedetermination.Id.  Inthiscase,theappellantfailedtoexplicitlyreservetherighttoappealacertifiedquestionoflawthatwasdispositiveofthecaseasmandatedbyTenn.R.Crim.P.37(b)(2)(iv)andPreston.SeealsoStatev.Pendergrass,937S.W.2d834,83738(Tenn.1996).Weare,therefore,precludedfromconsideringwhethertheappellantwasentitledtojudicialdiversion.Evenifweweretoreviewthisissueonthemerits,wewouldnotgrantreliefbasedonStatev.Vasser,870S.W.2d543,547.  ITIS,THEREFORE,ORDEREDthatthestatesmotiontoaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourtpursuanttoRule20,TennesseeCourtofCriminalAppealsRulesisgrantedandthejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsaretaxedtotheappellant.  ITISFURTHERORDEREDthattheappellant'sbondisherebyrevoked.Theappellantshallbetakenintocustodyimmediatelybytheproperauthorities.!  ENTER,thisthe____dayofOctober,1997.` X X      _____________________________      JOHNH.PEAY,JUDGECONCUR:_____________________________DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE_____________________________THOMAST.WOODALL,JUDGE