ÿWPC ƒIPp4æ¥8ì ùÊeK56%¡‘È›U:Š5_°ò—´+ÄÛƒòÄSçX­Eê”ír¶ïsnÖK’Sò…•Àõ0åGšÝ™ºâ#ãݺè/}»ªýUýÌ•‚9Yð:)Å”·Ð#e Â1˜d98àI=bæ×¹G¾Nb…~üz·ÜË*À¥Éöî >‚cžd…|ï¤7¢ùO/]1'Æ©ï£ù½Gly•ýÀ@b‚ä§ß>Æ—¿gô·29ñßJÞ6¤ÒéUè¨þáîÚ?_f–ý¯–Içp3Ë]`ŽÛC®Mˈð¤¢&Bœ·ScX#®2Ù3Ž_0“~=ݾRET€gz5;:M¶DmÚá”ÿ᪀7Gh0b[B#‚!:ö ”œ =ßThäRjìC¨¯$аwÃz1 ’9¡m-vé§”üY w&Ê:¿]4PwÔ%fûw@ž+î´vÀ¢Ÿœîcóo‡Ä!óO“zëv£æú´ž½]·©#9#"›Ž•x¥[erB\«³áÓ«;(Ls‰VÖKÅ#é¸)í¨Â‰ÃB\¿[í?I+×ÈM¤|Žz‹½ii˜2U:Ö¡‰Wo$ûÃpÚÉW. ¾U‚Òµ$bUN\ %ª 0ˆ°^ 8wD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ UN‘ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1÷NÿÿÿEb 0ë     Böö 0¤ D3· D-ê 0K ASbƵ 0¤{ 0D A«c(ÈhH  Z6Times New Roman Regular»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Óó¦*+â Yo†)  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˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(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 - ù-(|G2$$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€%´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô™Ìò»»Ô d(|3Çm$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€%´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Çm$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€%´»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€%´»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼%´»»»ÔÑ8€r¨XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î(¥î»¼%´ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼%´»îî(¥ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€July€11,€2001Ð üL ÐÔ‡Xr¨X»¼%´ÔÌò òÔ#†¼%´»XXr¨#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€RANDALL€KEITH€SMITHòòóóÔ‡Xr¨X»¼%´Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Henry€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€12999€€€€€€Julian€P.€Guinn,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2000„02596„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€September€6,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ Xr¨XXXr¨ÔThe€Appellant,€Randall€Keith€Smith,€appeals€from€the€denial€of€his€motion€to€suppress€evidenceÐ xÈ  Ðseized€in€his€residence€during€the€execution€of€a€search€warrant.€€A€written€ð ðmotion€to€suppressðð€wasÐ d´ Ðfiled€with€the€clerk€on€the€day€prior€to€Smithððs€scheduled€trial€for€drug€charges.€€€On€the€date€of€trial,Ð P  Ðfollowing€the€close€of€all€proof€in€the€case,€Smithððs€trial€counsel€orally€moved€to€suppress€theÐ <Œ Ðevidence€seized€as€a€result€of€the€search,€based€upon€the€grounds€recited€in€the€written€motion.€€TheÐ (x Ðtrial€court€denied€the€motion,€finding€that€(1)€there€was€no€factual€basis€to€support€suppression;€andÐ d Ð(2)€the€motion€was€untimely.€€The€jury€found€Smith€guilty€of€manufacturing€methamphetamine,€aÐ P Ðclass€C€felony,€and€he€received€a€three„year€community€corrections€sentence.€€After€review,€we€findÐ ì< Ðthe€Appellantððs€suppression€motion€untimely.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€is€affirmed.Ð Ø( ÐÔ#†Xr¨XX Xr¨Æ#ÔÔ#†¼%´»XXr¨—#ÔÔ‡Xr¨X»¼%´ÔÓºÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼%´»àXr¨c #ÔÔ‡Xr¨X.¼%´ÔDavid€G.€Hayes,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJerry€L.€Smithóó€and€òòAlan€E.Ð ˆØ ÐGlennóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌRosella€M.€Shackelford,€Paris,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Randall€K.€SmithÐ L œ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Michael€Moore,€Solicitor€General;€John€H.Ð $"t! ÐÔ_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€Robert€ð ðGusðð€Ô_ÔRadfordÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€StevenÐ #`" ÐL.€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ü#L# ÐÔ#†¼%´»XXr¨ #ÔÔ‡Xr¨X»¼%´ÔÌÓð ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONÐ À&"& Ðó óÔ#†¼%´»XXr¨ #ÔÔ‡Xr¨X»¼%´ÔÌò òFactual€Backgroundó óÐ ˜(è#( ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼%´»XXr¨¨ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€Xr¨X»¼%´Ôà  àÔ‡ Xr¨XXXr¨ÔOn€January€19,€2000,€Henry€County€Deputies€William€David€Archie€and€Adam€Killion€droveÐ p*À%* Ðto€the€Appellantððs€residence€for€the€purpose€of€obtaining€the€Appellantððs€signature€on€a€forfeitureÐ \+¬&+ Ðreceipt.€€Officer€Archie€explained€that€the€purpose€for€his€presence€at€the€Appellantððs€residence€wasÐ H,˜', ÐbecauseÐ 4-„(-ý Ðà8  àI€had€arrested€a€Jeffrey€Neese€two€or€three€days€prior€to€this.€€And€I€was€seizing€aÐ ° Ðvehicle€that€belonged€to€Mr.€Smith€for€Mr.€Neese€being€revoked€in€Tennessee€forÐ œì ÐDUI€and,€also,€for€a€drug€seizure.€€And€I€had€to€obtain€a€signature€for€receipt.ЈØÐ Ð  Ðà8  à.€.€.€ÐtÄÐ Ð  Ðà8  àI€had€to€have€a€statement€from€Mr.€Smith€that€he€knew€what€was€going€on€with€theÐ `° Ðvehicle.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌOfficer€Archie€related€that,€on€this€occasion,€Neese€was€arrested€on€charges€of€driving€on€a€revokedÐ $ t Ðlicense,€felony€evading€arrest€and€possession€of€methamphetamine.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àUpon€arrival€at€the€Appellantððs€residence,€the€door€was€answered€by€Neese.€€The€officersÐ è 8  Ðasked€to€speak€with€the€Appellantò òó ó.€€Neese€closed€the€door€and€proceeded€to€get€the€Appellant,€whoÐ Ô$  Ðwas€also€inside€the€residence.€€At€this€time,€the€officers€smelled€ammonia.€€When€the€AppellantÐ À  Ðappeared€at€the€door,€the€officers€requested€permission€to€enter€the€residence€in€order€to€fill€out€theÐ ¬ü  Ðpaperwork€concerning€the€forfeiture€receipt.€€The€Appellant€agreed€and€allowed€the€officers€inside.€Ð ˜è  ÐOnce€inside,€the€odor€of€ammonia€was€even€stronger.€€Also,€Officer€Archie€testified€that€he€observedÐ „Ô  Ðan€empty€jar€in€the€kitchen.€€Officer€Archie€suspected€that€the€individuals€were€involved€in€illegality,Ð pÀ Ðbased€upon€the€ammonia€odor,€the€empty€jar,€and€the€prior€arrest€of€Neese€for€methamphetamineÐ \¬ Ðpossession€two€days€previously.€€Additionally,€Officer€Killion€observed€a€jar€with€white€residue€andÐ H˜ Ða€smoking€bong€in€one€of€the€bedrooms.€€This€information€was€relayed€by€Officer€Archie€to€anotherÐ 4„ Ðdeputy€and,€based€upon€these€facts€and€other€known€information€concerning€the€Appellant€andÐ  p ÐNeeseððs€involvement€in€drug€activity,€a€warrant€was€obtained€to€search€the€Appellantððs€residence.€Ð  \ ÐOfficers€Archie€and€Killion€remained€at€the€residence€while€the€search€warrant€was€being€obtained.Ð øH ÐÌà  àOfficers€arrived€on€the€scene€with€a€search€warrant€approximately€three€hours€later€and€aÐ Ð  Ðsearch€of€the€Appellantððs€residence€was€conducted.€€The€officers€found,€in€addition€to€7.06€gramsÐ ¼  Ðof€methamphetamine,€numerous€articles€used€in€the€manufacturing€of€methamphetamine.Ð ¨ø ÐÌÌÓ  Óò òProcedural€Historyó óÐ l¼ ÐÌÓ  Óà  àOn€March€6,€2000,€the€Appellant€and€Jeffrey€Neese€were€indicted€by€a€Henry€CountyÐ D!” ÐGrand€Jury€for€manufacturing€methamphetamine.€€The€Appellant€was€arraigned€on€this€charge€onÐ 0"€  ÐMarch€13,€2000,€and,€after€being€found€indigent,€the€public€defenderððs€office€was€appointed€toÐ #l! Ðrepresent€him.€€On€this€date,€a€scheduling€order€was€entered€by€the€trial€court€which€directed€thatÐ $X" Ðthe€last€date€for€filing€pre„trial€motions€was€March€23,€2000.€€As€no€ð ðsettlementðð€of€the€case€wasÐ ô$D # Ðreached,€the€case€was€scheduled€for€trial€on€July€3,€2000.€€On€June€12,€2000,€substitution€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðcounsel€was€entered.€€In€order€to€accommodate€substituted€counselððs€schedule,€the€trial€date€wasÐ Ì&"% Ðcontinued€until€July€13,€2000.€€On€July€12òòthóó,€Appellantððs€trial€counsel€filed€a€motion€to€suppressÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€evidence€seized€as€a€result€of€the€search,€alleging€that€the€deputiesðð€entry€into€the€AppellantððsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðresidence€was€made€without€permission€or€authority€and,€as€such,€the€warrant€was€invalid.€€OnÐ )à$( ÐJuly€13òòthóó,€the€case€proceeded€to€trial.€€Following€the€close€of€all€proof€in€the€case,€but€prior€toÐ |*Ì%) Ðclosing€arguments,€the€Appellant€moved€to€suppress€the€evidence,€which€had€already€beenÐ h+¸&* Ðintroduced€before€the€jury.€€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion,€holding€that€(1)€there€was€noÐ ° Ðfactual€basis€to€support€it;€and€(2)€the€motion€was€untimely€filed.ò òÐ œì ÐÓ‘ÓÓ  ÓÌÌÓ!ÓAnalysisÐ `° ÐÌó óÓ  Óà  àOn€appeal,€the€Appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€error€when€itÐ 8 ˆ Ðð ðfailed€to€permit€the€pretrial€motion€of€suppression€to€be€argued€even€though€such€motion€wasÐ $ t Ðnot€timely€filed.ðð€ò òó ó€Denial€of€the€motion€was€based€upon€(1)€the€trial€courtððs€holding€that€theÐ  ` Ðmotionððs€filing€date€violated€the€scheduling€order;€and€(2)€the€motion€was€without€merit.€€TheÐ ü L  Ðuntimely€presentation€of€the€motion€violated€Rule€12(b)(3)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CriminalÐ è 8  ÐProcedure€which€requires€that€a€ð ðmotion€to€suppress€evidenceðð€òòmustóó€be€raised€prior€to€trial.€€òòSeeÐ Ô$  Ðalsoóó€òòState€v.€Davidsonóó,€606€S.W.2d€293,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980).€€ð ðPrior€to€trialðð€meansÐ À  Ðsometime€earlier€than€the€day€of€the€trial.€€òòState€v.€Hamiltonóó,€628€S.W.2d€742,€744€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð ¬ü  ÐApp.€1981);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€12,€Note€3.€€The€failure€to€pursue€a€motion€to€suppress€ð ðprior€toÐ ˜è  Ðtrialðð€constitutes€waiver€unless€good€cause€is€shown€for€the€failure€to€move€for€suppression€in€aÐ „Ô  Ðtimely€manner.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€12(f);€òòHamiltonóó,€628€S.W.2d€at€744;€òòState€v.€Zylaóó,€628€S.W.2dÐ pÀ Ð39,€41€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981);€òòDavidsonóó,€606€S.W.2d€at€295.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€rationale€underlying€Rule€12's€requirement€that€a€motion€to€suppress€be€raised€ð ðpriorÐ 4„ Ðto€trialðð,€as€stated€by€this€Court€in€òòFeagins€v.€Stateóó,€596€S.W.2d€108€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1979),€is:Ð  p ÐÌà0  àIt€avoids€interrupting€a€trial€in€progress€with€auxiliary€inquiries€which€break€theÐ øH Ðcontinuity€of€the€juryððs€attention€and€it€avoids€inconveniencing€jurors€and€witnesses€byÐ ä4 Ðrequiring€them€to€stand€by€idly€while€the€court€hears€a€motion€to€suppress.€€The€practiceÐ Ð  Ðprevents€mistrials€from€the€juryððs€exposure€to€unconstitutional€evidence.€€It€is€to€theÐ ¼  Ðadvantage€of€both€the€prosecution€and€defense€to€know€prior€to€trial€whether€certain€itemsÐ ¨ø Ðwill€or€will€not€be€admitted€into€evidence.€€Granting€the€pre„trial€motion€might€result€inÐ ”ä Ðabandonment€of€the€prosecution;€if€the€pre„trial€motion€is€denied,€then€the€defendant€mayÐ €Ð Ðeither€plead€guilty€and€gain€whatever€concession€might€be€obtained€from€the€State,€orÐ l¼ Ðchange€his€trial€strategy.€ÐX ¨(#(# ÐÌà0  àFurther,€the€consideration€of€a€motion€to€suppress€after€the€beginning€of€the€trial€canÐ 0"€  Ðadversely€affect€the€Stateððs€right€to€appeal€an€adverse€ruling.€€When€a€pre„trial€judgmentÐ #l! Ðis€adverse€to€the€State,€the€Stateððs€right€to€appeal€is€preserved.€€Jeopardy€attaches€when€aÐ $X" Ðjury€is€sworn.€€This€prevents€an€appeal€by€the€State€from€judgment€suppressing€evidenceÐ ô$D # Ðrendered€after€the€beginning€of€a€trial.€€òòIdóó.€at€110;€òòSeeóó€òò€Davidsonóó,€606€S.W.2d€at€296.Ðà%0!$(#(# ÐÌà  àThus,€not€only€do€we€find€that€the€motion€to€suppress€was€untimely€for€failure€to€raise€itÐ ¸'#& Ðð ðprior€to€trialðð,€but€we€also€find€that€the€motion€was€untimely€because€it€did€not€comply€with€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðscheduling€order€of€the€trial€court.€€ð ðThe€court€may,€at€the€time€of€the€arraignment€or€as€soonÐ )à$( Ðthereafter€as€practicable,€set€a€time€for€the€making€of€pretrial€motions€or€requests€and,€if€required,Ð |*Ì%) Ða€later€date€of€hearing.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€12(c).€€Failure€to€comply€with€the€time€set€by€the€trialÐ h+¸&* Ðcourt€constitutes€waiver,€but€the€trial€court€may€grant€relief€from€waiver€for€ð ðcause€shown.ðð€Ð ° ÐTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€12(f).€€In€this€case,€no€threshold€showing€of€good€cause€for€the€AppellantððsÐ œì Ðfailure€to€make€a€timely€motion€is€shown€or€even€suggested.€€Accordingly,€the€Appellantððs€FourthÐ ˆØ ÐAmendment€argument€was€procedurally€defaulted.ò òÐ tÄ ÐÌÌÓ  ÓCONCLUSIONó ó€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÓ2Óà  àWe€hold€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€ruling€the€Appellantððs€motion€to€suppress€wasÐ  d Ðuntimely€filed.€€Pursuant€to€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure,€a€motion€to€suppressÐ  P  Ðmust€be€raised€ð ðprior€to€trial.ðð€€Furthermore,€the€motion€was€untimely€because€it€did€not€complyÐ ì <  Ðwith€the€trial€courtððs€scheduling€order.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€Henry€County€CircuitÐ Ø(  ÐCourt€is€affirmed.€Ô#†Xr¨XX Xr¨V#ÔÐ Ä  ÐÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð `° Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGE