WPC SFx 9 A0YX,.Y oΞ(936fйq,NJbw&V F0qy=p <FaxmVy=:Q< w R2ldZlԼ;`OIMD@)ʳ@r(Sh3o~pNPbNzx-p7"x `dƌPsj( 1JZ1En?}3!RA!lT,FN'pxc)oEg}Zek0!ME׎&~Ӻ!KѺ*Ps&ue vlD8{X>qd ö+#Y?! ~=%w٣.HhG0[Wm c# AZFcgaSIMsk9[VIB'l|CcXb %\+b 0UN c ^ * w6 z:  4   m   N #NE 0Db 0 B 0 D3 D- 0K ASB 0[ 0D AC ! R$      1    _Wedonotnecessarilyconcludethatthechildsresidenceistheonlylocationof thevicinitywherethechild  ...isfound.(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular R$      2    Wedrawnoconclusionastowhethervenuemayalsobeproperlyfoundelsewhere.E.s  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.wpt3j1,3|xULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5HP LaserJet 40500(#$  0  - -(|G2$ !.8dd8         0   d(|3t$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3t$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _   8]QXXdd8@tt INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE# #Ԉ &    @  @` July23,2002Session L X]QX #XX]Q#STATEOFTENNESSEEv.SHIRLEY_SPINA_ԀX]QX  J @@ AppealfromtheCriminalCourtforSullivanCounty  J @@Nos.S44,619PhyllisH.Miller,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200102933CCAR3CD   September23,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     TheDefendant,Shirley_Spina_,wasindictedinSullivanCountyforcustodialinterference.Onthe x  morningoftrial,thetrialcourtdismissedthechargeforlackofvenue.TheStatenowappeals.We d reversetherulingofthetrialcourtandremandthiscauseforfurtherproceedings. P  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheTrialCourt (x ReversedandRemanded  d   #X]Q#X]QX.DavidH.Welles,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJerryL.SmithandJoeG.Riley, < JJ.,joined. ( PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MarkA._Fulks_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;  GreeleyWells,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andKent_Chitwood_,AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,  fortheappellant,StateofTennessee.  Wayne_Culbertson_,Kingsport,Tennessee,fortheappellee,Shirley_Spina_.#XX]Q!#X]QX ` @66' OPINION #XX]Q #X]QXԈ 8!  #XX]Qk #X]QX  TheDefendantistheadoptivemotherofaminorchild.PursuanttoaJudgmentofAbsolute #`" DivorceenteredbytheChanceryCourtforSullivanCounty,custodyoftheminorchildwasplaced #L# withthefather,JamesMartin_Spina_.Mr._Spina_sresidenceisinSullivanCounty.TheDefendant $8 $ wasorderedtohaveregularvisitationwiththechild.BecausetheDefendantlivedinDavidson %$!% County,thepartieswereorderedbytheChanceryCourttomeetinKnoxCountytotransferthechild &"& betweenthemselvesfortheDefendantsperiodsofvisitation. '"'     AlthoughthefactssurroundingtheDefendantsallegedcriminalconducthavenotyetbeen )$) fullydeveloped,itappearsthatshefailedtoreturnthechildtoMr._Spina_Ԁfollowingavisitation p*%* period.ThechildwaseventuallyreturnedtoMr._Spina_ԀinSullivanCountybypoliceofficers. \+&+   TennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection3913306(a)provides,inpertinentpart,that 4-(- _  8 ` [i]tistheoffenseofcustodialinterferenceforanaturaloradoptive  parent...ofachildyoungerthaneighteen(18)yearsofage...to  knowinglydetainormovethechild...fromthevicinitywherethe  child...isfoundwhenthepersonknowsthatthedetentionor t movingofthechild...violatesatemporaryorpermanentjudgment ` orcourtorderregardingthechilds...custodyorcare.L ` x` x Inthiscase,thegravamenoftheStatesprosecution#XX]Q #X]QXisthattheDefendantknowinglydetainedthe $ t child fromthevicinitywherethechild...isfound.  `   ThetrialcourtfoundthattheDefendantsactionsindetainingthechildoccurredeitherin  8  DavidsonCounty,wheretheDefendantlived,orinKnoxCounty,wheretheDefendantwas $  supposedtodeliverthechildbacktoMr.Spina.ThetrialcourtfoundthattheDefendantdidnot   commitanyelementsoftheindictedoffenseinSullivanCounty.Accordingly,thetrialcourt   dismissedthecaseforlackofvenue.     Tennesseesconstitutionprovidesthatcriminaldefendantshavetherighttobetriedbyan p impartialjuryinthecountyinwhichthecrimewascommitted.SeeTenn.Const.art.I,9.A \ criminaltrialcourtsjurisdictionislimitedtothosecrimeswhichoccur,atleastpartially,withinthe H territorialboundariesofthecountyinwhichitsits.SeeEllisv.Carlton,986S.W.2d600,601(Tenn. 4 Crim.App.1998).Seealso,Tenn.CodeAnn.3911103(d)( Ifone(1)ormoreelementsofan  p offensearecommittedinone(1)countyandone(1)ormoreelementsinanother,theoffensemay  \ beprosecutedineithercounty.)Thus,theissuebeforeusiswhethertheDefendantcommittedany H oftheelementsofcustodialinterferencewithintheboundariesofSullivanCounty. 4   ItappearsundisputedthattheDefendanttookpossessionofthechildinKnoxCountyand   thentransportedthechildtoDavidsonCounty.TheDefendantwasrequiredbythetermsofthe  divorcetoreturnthechildtothechildsfatherinKnoxCountyattheendofthevisitationperiod.  TheDefendantdidnotreturnthechild,andatthatpoint,theunlawfuldetentioncommenced.The  issuebeforethisCourt,oneoffirstimpression,iswherethedetentionoccurredforpurposesof l venue. X    InordertoforvenuetolieinSullivanCounty,atleastoneoftheelementsofthecrimeof 0"  custodialinterferencemusthaveoccurredinthatcounty.Thestatutemakesitillegalforoneofthe #l! familymembersenumerated toknowinglydetainormovethechild...fromthevicinitywherethe $X" child...isfoundwhenthepersonknowsthatthedetention...violatesa...courtorderregarding $D # thechilds...custodyorcare.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913306(a)(emphasisadded).Thus,oneof %0!$ theelementsofthecrimeisremovingthechildfromthevicinitywhereheorsheisfound,orkeeping &"% thechildfromreturningtothevicinitywhereheorsheisfound.Thecrucialtermforthequestion '#& ofvenuebeforeus,then,iswherethechildis found. (#'    `     h      p      Asoursupremecourthasrecentlyreiterated, |*%)   8 ` [a] basicruleofstatutoryconstructionistoascertainandgiveeffect   totheintentionandpurposeofthelegislature.Indetermining  legislativeintentandpurpose,acourtmustnot undulyrestrict[]or  expand[]astatutescoveragebeyonditsintendedscope.Rather,a t courtascertainsastatutespurposefromtheplainandordinary ` meaningofitslanguage, withoutforcedorsubtleconstructionthat L  wouldlimitorextendthemeaningofthelanguage.8 ` x` x Gleavesv.CheckerCabTransitCorp.,Inc.,15S.W.3d799,80203(Tenn.2000)(citationsomitted).  ` Thestatutebeforeusdoesnotdefinetheword found.However,ourreadingofthecustodial  L  interferencestatuteconvincesusthatthelanguage thevicinitywherethechild...isfound  8  includesthechildslegalplaceofresidence. )#  1      ׀Inthiscase,thechildslegalplaceofresidencewas $  withMr.Spina,whoresidedinSullivanCounty.Thus,weholdthatvenueoftheinstantchargelies   inSullivanCounty. )#  2           Webaseourconclusiononacommonsenseinterpretationoftheword found.Obviously,   apersonmaybe foundwhereverthepersonisphysicallylocatedattherelevantmomentintime. p Fornumerouslegalpurposes,however,apersonmayalsobe foundwhereheorsheresides.For \ instance,apersonmaybe foundforserviceofprocesspurposesathisorher dwellinghouseor H usualplaceofabode.Tenn.R.Civ.P.4.04(1).Tennesseescivilcourtshavepersonaljurisdiction 4 overpersonswhoaredomiciledwithinthestate.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.202222(1).Weholdthat,  p forpurposesofprosecutingoffensesunderthecustodialinterferencestatute,childrensubjectto  \ custodialordersare foundattheresidenceoftheircustodialparent. H   Thestatutorylanguage, fromthevicinitywherethechild...isfoundrendersthechilds   legalresidence,i.e.theresidenceofthecustodialparent,anelementofthecrimeofcustodial   interference.Thus,thetrialcourtsofthecountyinwhichthecustodialparentresideshavevenue  incasesofcustodialinterference,irrespectiveofwheretheallegeddetentionactuallyoccurs.To  holdotherwisewouldbetodepriveTennesseecourtsofjurisdictionovercustodialinterferencecases  wherethenoncustodialparentlivesinanotherstateandrefusestoreturnthechildtothechilds l Tennesseeparent.Thisresultisabsurd,andwemuststrivetoconstruestatutesinsuchawayasto X  avoidabsurdresults.See,e.g.,Fletcherv.State,951S.W.2d378,382(Tenn.1997);Statev. D! Chance,952S.W.2d848,850(Tenn.Crim.App.1997). 0"    Thetrialcourterredindismissingthiscaseforlackofvenue.Accordingly,wereversethe $X" trialcourtsrulingandremandthiscaseforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion. $D #  &"% Ї   `     h     ___________________________________ L     `     h     DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE 8     ` 8