ÿWPC  0# °UN» %  0(b7w@?4“¢ 0Jª 0Tô 0^H 0h¦ 0r 0|€ 0†ü 0‚ 1u 0d‡U>ë 0@) D3i Bœ U*¹ B)ã DC AMO 5œ v~Ñ AQO Æ  0Df 0Dª D/î BvÓ:˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- 7D8À9:;U<D=U>U?Ó€KB\J#3|xK2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd d< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d$$$$7Border 1dd* %Cþÿ << Gÿÿ +Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€#ÔÔ€#ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€#XÔÌÌò òNovember€18,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€#ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€#ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€•\XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò ò›Þ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌ̜ـ*ÙßR€&'%A1-j|YC` Å `€€@ÿRß›AT€JACKSONÌÌAUGUST€SESSION,€1997ÌÌ€ÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)€€€€€€€C.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9610„CC„00365Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àó óÌà àà àAppellee,ò òà àà àà à)€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€LAUDERDALE€COUNTYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€HON.€JOSEPH€H.€WALKER,ó ó€€€€€€Ìò òDAVID€SCOTT€MOSS,à àà àà à)€€€€€€€JUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò òà à)ó ó€€€€€€€Ìà àà àAppellant.à àà àò òà à)€€€€€€€(DUI)€Ìó óÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÌòòÓ  ÓFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌò òWILLIAM€DAN€DOUGLAS,€JR.à àœà àJOHN›€KNOX€WALKUP€Ìó ó109€North€Main€à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌRipley,€TN€38063à0 àÌò òà àà àà àà àà àà àCLINTON€J.€MORGAN€Ìó óà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌà àà àà àà àà àà à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òELIZABETH€T.€RICE€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òMARK€DAVIDSONó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à302€Market€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€562Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TN€38068ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌCONVICTION€AFFIRMED;€SENTENCE€MODIFIEDÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÇœò òòòÓ  ÓÔ€#°ÔOPINIONóóó ó›ÌÌœ›Ô€#ŠÔÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àThe€Defendant,€David€Scott€Moss,€appeals€as€of€right€from€his€convictionÏof€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€(DUI)€following€a€non„jury€trial€in€theÏCircuit€Court€of€Lauderdale€County.€€In€his€sole€issue€on€appeal,€the€DefendantÏargues€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€sustain€the€conviction.€€We€affirmÏthe€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìà àÌà àWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€convicting€evidence,Ïthe€standard€is€whether,€after€reviewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorableÏto€the€prosection,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443ÏU.S.€307,€319€(1979).€€This€standard€is€applicable€to€findings€of€guilt€predicatedÏupon€direct€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence€or€a€combination€of€direct€andÏcircumstantial€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Matthewsóó,€805€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1990).€€On€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€ofÏthe€evidence€and€all€inferences€therefrom.€€òòState€v.óó€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€€832,Ï835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Because€a€verdict€of€guilt€removes€the€presumption€ofÏinnocence€and€replaces€it€with€a€presumption€of€guilt,€the€accused€has€theÏburden€in€this€court€of€illustrating€why€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€theÍverdict€returned€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€914€S.W.2d€940,€945Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995)€(citing€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.Ï1982)).ÌÌà àQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€andÏvalue€to€be€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€theÏevidence,€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€court.€€òòState€v.€Pappasóó,€754ÏS.W.2d€620,€623€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€òòidóó.€(Tenn.€1987).€ÏNor€may€this€court€reweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence.€€òòCabbageóó,€571€S.W.2dÏat€835.ÌÌà àOn€May€28,€1995,€at€approximately€1:30€a.m.,€Mike€Kirkpatrick,€a€deputy„sheriff€with€the€Lauderdale€County€Sheriffððs€Department,€observed€a€carÏweaving€back€and€forth€across€the€center€line€of€Highway€51€at€a€speed€of€60Ïmiles€per€hour.€€Kirkpatrick€pulled€the€car€over€and€asked€the€Defendant€to€stepÏout.€€Officer€Kirkpatrick€testified€that€at€this€point€he€could€smell€alcohol€on€theÏDefendant€and€that€his€speech€was€slurred.€€He€also€observed€six€empty€beerÏbottles€in€the€passenger€side€floor€board€with€ð ðno€alcohol€left€in€any€of€them,€youÏknow,€except€for€the€suds€in€the€bottom€of€them.ðð€€€He€then€asked€theÏDefendant€to€perform€field€sobriety€tests.€€ÌÌà àFirst,€Officer€Kirkpatrick€asked€Defendant€to€recite€the€alphabet€andÏDefendant€was€able€to€do€this.€€Second,€Defendant€attempted€the€one„legÏstand€test,€but€was€unable€to€keep€his€balance.€€€He€failed€this€test€twice.€ÏDefendant€told€Officer€Kirkpatrick€that€he€did€not€have€any€physical€injuries€to€hisÏlegs€that€would€prevent€him€from€performing€the€test.€€Third,€Defendant€performedÏthe€heel„to„toe€test,€during€which€he€could€not€walk€heel„to„toe€and€he€lost€hisÏbalance€several€times.€€Finally,€Officer€Kirkpatrick€conducted€the€horizontal€gazeÏnystagmus€test€on€Defendant.€€He€observed€that€Defendantððs€eyes€wereÏbloodshot€and€that€ð ðthey€were€jumpingðð€which€indicated€to€the€deputy€thatÏDefendant€had€been€drinking.€€The€Defendant€did€not€object€to€the€testimonyÏregarding€the€results€of€the€horizontal€gaze€nystagmus€test,€and€we€note€thatÏeven€if€he€had,€and€the€evidence€were€ruled€to€be€inadmissible,€that€ourÏconclusion€as€to€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€in€this€case€would€not€change.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Turneróó,€œC.C.A.€No.›€03C01„9604„CC„00151,€slip€op.€at€7,€CockeÏCounty€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€July€9,€œ1997)€(No€Rule€11€application€filed);›ÏòòState€v.€Murphyóó,€œC.C.A.€No.›€01C01„9412„CC„00401,€Davidson€County€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Nashville,€filed€Oct.€6,€œ1995),›€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappealóó€òògrantedóó€(Tenn.€1996).€€€€ÌÌà àOn€the€basis€of€Defendantððs€driving,€his€slurred€speech,€the€empty€beerÏbottles,€and€his€performance€on€the€field€sobriety€tests,€Deputy€KirkpatrickÍconcluded€that€Defendant€was€under€the€influence€of€alcohol€and€arrested€him.€ÏDefendant€refused€to€take€an€intoximeter€test.€€ÌÌà àFor€the€defense,€Stephanie€Spain€testified€that€on€May€28,€1995,€she€metÏthe€€Defendant€€in€Dyersburg,€Tennessee€so€they€could€ride€together€to€UnionÏCity,€Tennessee€for€a€œpolitical›€fund€raising€dinner.€€She€met€Defendant€aboutÏ6:00€p.m.€at€the€Holiday€Inn€in€Dyersburg.€€The€dinner€started€at€7:00€p.m.€andÏshe€said€that€no€alcoholic€beverages€were€served€at€the€function.€€After€dinner,Ïshe€and€Defendant€drove€back€to€Dyersburg€and€went€€to€a€bar€calledÏCheckers€at€approximately€10:30€p.m.€€She€testified€that€the€Defendant€drankÏone€beer€and€possibly€started€a€second€one€while€at€the€bar.€€They€then€leftÏand€went€to€the€Holiday€Inn€where€Defendant€had€left€his€car€earlier€thatÏevening.€€A€few€minutes€later€they€decided€to€go€for€a€drive€towards€the€river,Ïand€she€testified€that€neither€of€them€were€drinking.€€They€then€went€back€to€theÏHoliday€Inn€about€1:00€a.m.€where€Defendant€got€into€his€car€to€drive€toÏœMemphis,›€and€she€drove€home€to€Jackson.€€Ms.€Spain€testified€that€in€herÏopinion,€Defendant€did€not€appear€to€be€intoxicated.€ÌÌà àThe€Defendant€testified€at€trial€to€the€same€events€as€Ms.€Spain.€ÏFurthermore,€he€explained€that€the€reason€his€car€was€weaving€when€the€officerÏstopped€him€was€because€his€steering€was€out€of€line.€€He€admitted€to€theÍofficer€that€he€had€drank€one€or€two€beers€earlier€that€evening.€€€The€DefendantÏtestified€that€he€passed€the€field€sobriety€tests,€and€that€the€reason€he€was€aÏlittle€shaky€was€because€he€was€nervous€and€it€was€late€at€night.€€DefendantÏalso€testified€that€the€reason€he€refused€the€intoximeter€test€was€because€heÏwas€taking€allergy€medicine€and€he€was€concerned€that€it€would€affect€theÏresults€of€the€test.€€€€€ÌÌà àDriving€under€the€influence€is€defined€in€part€as€driving€or€being€in€physicalÏcontrol€of€an€automobile€on€any€of€the€public€roads€and€highways€of€the€StateÏof€Tennessee,€or€on€any€streets€or€alleys€while€under€the€influence€of€anyÏintoxicant.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„401(a)(1)€(Supp.€1996).€€Therefore,€theÏevidence€must€show€that€the€offender:€ð ð(1)€was€in€physical€control€of€anÏautomobile,€(2)€on€a€public€road€within€the€State€of€Tennessee,€and€(3)€wasÏunder€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.ðð€€òòState€v.€Waddeyóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9508„CC„00245,€slip€op.€at€3,€Williamson€County,€€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,ÏJuly€5,€1996)€(Rule€11€application€not€filed).ÌÌœÌÌÌ›à àFirst,€from€the€testimony€at€trial,€Defendant€was€clearly€in€physical€controlÏof€his€car.€€Officer€Kirkpatrick€observed€the€car€weaving€back€and€forth,€pulledÏthe€car€over,€and€Defendant€stepped€out€of€the€driverððs€side.€€Second,ÏDefendant€drove€his€car€on€Highway€51,€a€public€road€within€the€State€ofÏTennessee.€€Third,€based€on€Officer€Kirkpatrickððs€observations€of€DefendantÏand€his€experience,€he€determined€Defendant€to€be€clearly€under€the€influence€ofÏalcohol.€€The€trial€court€could€have€concluded€from€Defendantððs€erratic€driving,€hisÏslurred€speech,€the€empty€beer€bottles€in€his€car,€and€his€failure€to€adequatelyÏperform€œtwo€of›€the€field€sobriety€tests,€that€the€Defendant€was€under€theÏinfluence€of€œalcohol.Ì›Ìà àIn€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€theÏevidence€was€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€DUI.€This€issue€is€withoutÏœmerit.Ì›€Ìà àNeither€party€raised€the€length€of€sentence€for€Defendantððs€conviction€ofÏDUI€first€offense€as€an€issue€in€this€appeal.€€The€trial€court€sentencedÏDefendant€to€serve€six€(6)€months€in€the€county€jail€with€all€but€forty„eight€(48)Ïhours€suspended,€and€assessed€a€$350.00€fine.€€The€DUI€statutes€mandateÏthat€the€maximum€sentence€for€a€DUI€conviction€œis€eleven€(11)›€months€andÏœtwenty„nine€(29)›€days,€with€the€trial€court€to€determine€what€portion€of€theÍsentence€above€the€mandatory€minimum€punishment€must€be€served€prior€to€aÏdefendant€being€placed€on€probation.€€òòState€v.€Combsóó,€945€S.W.2d€770,€774Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ55„10„403(c).›€œ€Furthermore,€SectionÏ55„10„403(c)€requires€that€D.U.I.€offenders€be€placed€on€probation€for€theÏdifference€between€the€time€actually€served€and€the€maximum€possibleÏsentence.›€œ€Accordingly,›€we€affirm€the€Defendantððs€conviction€for€DUI€first€offense,Ïbut€modify€the€Defendantððs€sentence€by€increasing€it€to€eleven€(11)€months€andÏtwenty„nine€(29)€days,€with€all€but€œforty„eight›€(48)€hours€suspended.€€All€otherÏportions€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€shall€remain€the€same.€€TheÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court,€as€modified,€is€accordingly€affirmed.ÌÓÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€Judge€ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJERRY€L.€SMITH,€Judge