ÿWPC¤ ü`;QÃ’æ’”ƒDAß´„Žƒ˜þRBá£a z¬æRŽ5œ’”(™öݾ8Zê—ɕꑄœÜ?=}ð-Ä¢ƒöž™ÞìO1Çÿz™ÀhºŸ$,4Ñ¢„ˆª#|×±(*ìaD.F‘Ì~u0ý– Þy›õ>æu,"šüÏ…ì\ùaàØ þLXåD…Åõ‡Œ2ÍD§+=Á×~å1CÊòãio´kã ‰40”hé²°Äs'y,.a8e5é¥U·Þ‡AK¦úÈïΑ¢•(àO@Ñ31À¹ñÙ­(4„±(î1¶HH]NÛÌdz˜{rµ“«©ù{¦ˆ·IIñ&h¸wÑ-à{=ÚN"¾K´O:ÎbÜLþå¨Ë8ˆ.‘aú95˜y9Qê¾FŽMЍcãå½# j$ÚªåéÜûÃÐYÖñÀtÿóZ_nsò©Ðø>`ò§ OÓswÆ¿pY(¤oA›ÊÅšpÓm.v3ÃÄ"ÈóÚì\ëôÈõDçË%rà+QõÇD`×óÁ§ãþ½wä°Ø_l$½˜õ™q¡ šÜKÃVºJû¸¢x™±äHκ.ÀÂòléÿ–Á/Ú±ÞDãÄP½ÁC Ü¥%”îømb %\UNb 0ˆ°UN8R†^ Ø wä zè Òb 44 H W mY Æp Æ6 Æü ÆÂ #ɈNQQQESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS 0DUUUb™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™™ 0ë¡¡¡¡ BŒŒ 0¤© D3M D-€ 0K­­ ASøÆK 0¤ 0Dµ A«ù»(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular HÝ ƒRAb$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô»™ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWhile€the€video€tape€of€the€incident€provides€valuable€information,€we€note€that€technical€difficulties€preventedÐ ° Ðthe€audio€from€being€understandable€on€a€majority€of€the€recording.€¼œq1Þ  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptóbï.ê:i¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5˜\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2Ab$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô»™ò»»Ô d(|3u$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3u$¢¢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€A5XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îˆî»¼­ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼­»îîˆ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€September€28,€2004Ð üL ÐÔ‡XA5X»¼­ÔÌò òÔ#†¼­»XXA5##ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€V.€MICHAEL€Ô_ÔTREWÔ_ÔÔ‡XA5X»¼­Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Ô_ÔMeigsÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€3024€€€€€€E.€Eugene€Ô_ÔEbenÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2003„01915„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€November€17,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ԀР¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€an€appeal€as€of€right€pursuant€to€Rule€3€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€TheÐ xÈ  ÐDefendant,€Michael€Ô_ÔTrewÔ_Ô,€was€found€guilty€by€jury€verdict€of€driving€under€the€influence€of€anÐ d´ Ðintoxicant€(Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô),€a€Class€A€misdemeanor,€and€violating€the€implied€consent€law.€€The€DefendantÐ P  Ðwas€sentenced€to€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days,€with€seven€days€to€be€served€in€the€countyÐ <Œ Ðjail;€fined€$400;€and€had€his€driverððs€license€suspended€for€one€year.€€The€Defendant€now€appeals,Ð (x Ðclaiming€that€the€evidence€at€trial€was€insufficient€to€support€his€Ô_ÔDUIÔ_Ô€conviction€beyond€a€reasonableÐ d Ðdoubt.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð P ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼­»àXA5«#ÔÔ‡XA5X.¼­ÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€and€òòJohnÐ ° ÐEverett€Williams,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌJoe€H.€Walker€and€Walter€B.€Johnson,€Public€Defenders,€Harriman€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,Ð tÄ ÐMichael€Ô_ÔTrewÔ_Ô.Ð `° ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Jennifer€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð 8!ˆ  ÐJames€Scott€Ô_ÔMcCluenÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Frank€Harvey,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ $"t! ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð #`" ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼­»XXA56 #ÔòòóóÔ‡XA5X»¼­ÔÐ è$8 $ ÐÓ  ÓÔ#†¼­»XXA5 #ÔÔ€XA5X»¼­Ôòòóóà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌÓ  Óò òFACTSó óÐ À&"& ÐÓz Óà  àThe€record€shows€that€on€the€night€of€June€8,€2000,€Trooper€Phillip€Dunn€of€the€TennesseeÐ ¬'ü"' ÐHighway€Patrol€clocked€the€Defendant€driving€his€Ford€Mustang€72€miles€per€hour€on€a€portion€ofÐ ˜(è#( ÐHighway€68€in€Ô_ÔMeigsÔ_Ô€County€that€was€zoned€for€a€maximum€of€55€miles€per€hour.€€Trooper€DunnÐ „)Ô$) Ðactivated€his€blue€lights,€which€automatically€turned€on€a€dashboard€video€camera,€and€stopped€theÐ p*À%* ÐDefendant.€€When€Trooper€Dunn€approached€the€Defendant,€he€ð ðnoticed€a€strong€odor€of€intoxicantððÐ \+¬&+ Ðabout€the€Defendantððs€person.€€Upon€further€inspection,€Trooper€Dunn€observed€that€the€DefendantÐ H,˜', Ðhad€ð ðbloodshot€eyes,ðð€was€ð ðslurred€in€his€speech,ðð€and€ð ðappeared€to€be€intoxicated.ðð€€Ð 4-„(-ýÅ ÐÔ_Ô‡à  àTrooper€Dunn€attempted€to€administer€three€different€field€sobriety€tests.€€He€first€requestedÐ ° Ðthat€the€Defendant€perform€the€ð ðfinger€to€noseðð€test,€which€the€Defendant€was€able€to€complete€butÐ œì ÐTrooper€Dunn€believed€was€done€in€an€ð ðunsteadyðð€manner.€€Trooper€Dunn€also€requested€theÐ ˆØ ÐDefendant€perform€the€ð ðone€legged€standðð€test,€but€the€Defendant€refused,€citing€a€back€problem.€Ð tÄ ÐFinally,€Trooper€Dunn€had€the€Defendant€perform€the€ð ðwalk€and€turnðð€test,€noting€that€the€DefendantÐ `° Ðwas€ð ðunsteadyðð€and€ð ðstumbled,ðð€attempted€the€test€twice,€and€on€one€occasion€did€not€touch€his€toeÐ L œ Ðto€his€heel€as€requested.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àFollowing€the€Defendantððs€poor€performance€on€the€field€sobriety€tests,€Trooper€Dunn€placedÐ  ` Ðthe€Defendant€under€arrest€for€DUI.€€A€search€incident€to€the€arrest€produced€a€pair€of€brass€knucklesÐ ü L  Ðon€the€Defendantððs€person.€€Trooper€Dunn€advised€the€Defendant€of€his€rights€under€the€impliedÐ è 8  Ðconsent€law.€€The€Defendant€acknowledged€that€he€understood€his€rights€as€well€as€the€ramificationsÐ Ô$  Ðof€refusing€to€submit€to€a€blood€alcohol€test,€and€declined€to€submit€to€the€test.€€Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€record€also€reflects€that€during€Trooper€Dunnððs€interaction€with€the€Defendant€the€nightÐ ˜è  Ðof€the€incident,€the€Defendant€stated€that€he€had€consumed€ð ðtwo€or€threeðð€beers.€€Additionally,€afterÐ „Ô  Ðthe€Defendant€had€already€been€arrested€for€DUI,€he€requested€that€Trooper€Dunn€charge€him€onlyÐ pÀ Ðwith€€ð ðPD,ðð€presumably€referring€to€the€less€serious€charge€of€public€drunkenness.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àTrooper€Dunn€further€testified€that€as€he€sat€in€the€patrol€car€with€the€Defendant€after€theÐ 4„ Ðarrest,€it€ð ðwas€obviousðð€that€the€Defendant€was€intoxicated€and€incapable€of€safely€operating€a€motorÐ  p Ðvehicle.€€Trooper€Dunnððs€dashboard€camera€and€video€equipment€captured€much€of€the€incident€onÐ  \ Ðtape,€including€the€administration€of€the€field€sobriety€tests.€€€€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àA€grand€jury€returned€an€indictment€against€the€Defendant€with€four€separate€counts:€(1)Ð Ð  Ðdriving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€(DUI);€(2)€violating€the€implied€consent€law;€(3)€secondÐ ¼  Ðoffense€DUI;€and€(4)€possession€of€a€weapon€with€intent€to€go€armed.€€Prior€to€trial,€the€secondÐ ¨ø Ðoffense€DUI€was€disposed€of€and€the€weapons€charge€was€dismissed€due€to€a€faulty€indictment.€€AlsoÐ ”ä Ðprior€to€trial,€the€defense€and€the€State€agreed€to€edit€the€video€of€the€incident€that€would€be€shownÐ €Ð Ðto€the€jury€due€to€its€excessive€length.€€The€edited€tape€would€exclude€the€Defendantððs€request€to€beÐ l¼ Ðcharged€with€ð ðPDðð€instead€of€DUI,€but€by€agreement€this€evidence€would€be€admitted€through€theÐ X ¨ Ðoral€testimony€of€Trooper€Dunn.€€Ð D!” ÐÌà  àA€jury€trial€was€conducted,€wherein€Trooper€Dunn€was€the€sole€witness€to€offer€testimony,Ð #l! Ðand€the€video€of€the€incident€was€shown€to€the€jury.€€The€jury€returned€a€verdict€of€guilty€for€theÐ $X" Ðcharges€of€DUI€and€violating€the€implied€consent€law.€€A€sentencing€hearing€was€held€later€that€sameÐ ô$D # Ðday€and€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€Defendant€to:€(1)€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€days€withÐ à%0!$ Ðseven€days€to€be€served€in€the€Meigs€County€Jail€and€the€remainder€on€probation;€(2)€a€$400€fine;Ð Ì&"% Ðand€(3)€suspension€of€the€Defendantððs€driverððs€license€for€one€year€to€run€concurrently€with€his€lossÐ ¸'#& Ðof€license€for€violating€the€implied€consent€law.€€The€Defendant€timely€filed€a€motion€for€new€trial.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐAfter€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€the€motion.€€The€Defendant€timely€filed€a€Notice€of€Appeal.€Ð )à$( Ѐ€€€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÓ  Óò òÐ h+¸&* ÐANALYSISó óÐ ° ÐÓ¸!Óà  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€was€insufficient€to€convict€him,Ð œì Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€of€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.€€We€disagree.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àÔ‡XA5XXXA5ÔTennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€13(e)€prescribes€that€ð ð[f]indings€of€guilt€in€criminalÐ `° Ðactions€whether€by€the€trial€court€or€jury€shall€be€set€aside€if€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€supportÐ L œ Ðthe€findings€by€the€trier€of€fact€of€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€A€convicted€criminal€defendantÐ 8 ˆ Ðwho€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€on€appeal€bears€the€burden€of€demonstrating€why€theÐ $ t Ðevidence€is€insufficient€to€support€the€verdict,€because€a€verdict€of€guilt€destroys€the€presumptionÐ  ` Ðof€innocence€and€imposes€a€presumption€of€guilt.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Evansóó,€108€S.W.3d€231,€237€(Tenn.Ð ü L  Ð2003);€òòState€v.€Carruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€516,€557„58€(Tenn.€2000);€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,Ð è 8  Ð914€(Tenn.€1982).€€This€Court€must€reject€a€convicted€criminal€defendantððs€challenge€to€theÐ Ô$  Ðsufficiency€of€the€evidence€if,€after€considering€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€theÐ À  Ðprosecution,€we€determine€that€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€the€essential€elements€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€crime€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSeeóó€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443€U.S.€307,€319€(1979);€òòState€v.Ð ˜è  ÐHallóó,€8€S.W.3d€593,€599€(Tenn.€1999).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€allÐ \¬ Ðreasonable€and€legitimate€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€òòSeeóó€òòCarruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€atÐ H˜ Ð558;€òòHallóó,€8€S.W.3d€at€599.€€A€guilty€verdict€by€the€trier€of€fact€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€StateððsÐ 4„ Ðwitnesses€and€resolves€all€conflicts€in€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€prosecutionððs€theory.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ  p Ðv.€Blandóó,€958€S.W.2d€651,€659€(Tenn.€1997).€€Questions€about€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€theÐ  \ Ðweight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidence€are€resolved€byÐ øH Ðthe€trier€of€fact,€and€this€Court€will€not€re„weigh€or€re„evaluate€the€evidence.€€òòSeeóóòòEvansóó,€108€S.W.3dÐ ä4 Ðat€236;€òòBlandóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€659.€€Nor€will€this€Court€substitute€its€own€inferences€drawn€fromÐ Ð  Ðcircumstantial€evidence€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòEvansóó,€108€S.W.3d€at€236„37;Ð ¼  ÐòòCarruthersóó,€35€S.W.3d€at€557.Ô#†XA5XXXA5##ÔÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€was€convicted€of€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€in€violation€ofÐ €Ð ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„10„401.€€This€statute€makes€it€unlawful€for€ð ðany€person€toÐ l¼ Ðdrive€or€to€be€in€physical€control€of€any€automobile€or€other€motor€driven€vehicle€on€any€of€theÐ X ¨ Ðpublic€roads€or€highways€of€the€state€.€.€.€while:€Under€the€influence€of€any€intoxicant€.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.Ð D!” ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€55„10„401(a)(1).€€€The€Defendant€was€also€found€to€have€violated€Tennesseeððs€impliedÐ 0"€  Ðconsent€law€for€refusing€to€submit€to€a€blood€alcohol€content€test.€€The€implied€consent€law€statesÐ #l! Ðthat€ð ð[a]ny€person€who€drives€any€motor€vehicle€in€the€state€is€deemed€to€have€given€consent€to€aÐ $X" Ðtest€for€the€purpose€of€determining€the€alcoholic€or€drug€content€of€that€personððs€blood€.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.Ð ô$D # ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€55„10„406(a)(1).€€Provided€the€vehicle€operator€had€a€valid€driverððs€license,€no€priorÐ à%0!$ Ðconvictions,€and€no€one€was€injured€in€an€accident,€refusal€to€submit€to€a€blood€alcohol€test€does€notÐ Ì&"% Ðresult€in€a€ð ðcriminal€offense,ðð€but€does€carry€the€penalty€of€revocation€of€the€violatorððs€driverððsÐ ¸'#& Ðlicense€for€a€year.€€òòóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„406(a)(3).€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€Defendant€asserts€that€the€State€presented€insufficient€evidence€to€show€beyond€aÐ |*Ì%) Ðreasonable€doubt€that€the€Defendant€was€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€on€the€night€of€hisÐ h+¸&* Ðarrest.€€Specifically,€the€Defendant€claims€the€video€tape€of€the€field€sobriety€tests€shows€that€theÐ ° Ðð ðDefendant€was€not€impaired.ðð€€In€support€of€this€claim€the€Defendant€argues€that€the€video€tapeÐ œì Ðallows€this€Court€to€ð ðlook€at€the€same€circumstancesðð€that€the€trial€court€and€convicting€juryÐ ˆØ Ðconsidered.€€The€Defendant€further€argues€that€the€video€clearly€shows€that€he€successfullyÐ tÄ Ðcompleted€the€ð ðmost€difficult€taskðð€of€pointing€his€finger€to€his€nose.€€Thus,€the€Defendant€asserts,Ð `° Ðthe€video€is€proof€he€was€not€impaired€and€the€case€against€him€should€be€dismissed.€€However,€theÐ L œ ÐDefendantððs€argument€has€failed€to€account€for€all€of€the€evidence„„including€evidence€other€thanÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€video„„which€was€presented€at€trial.€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  à€€We€acknowledge€that€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€declared€that€an€appellate€court€isÐ ü L  Ðð ð[e]qually€as€capable€as€the€trial€court€of€reviewing€[video]€evidence.ðð€€òòState€v.€Binetteóó,€33€S.W.3dÐ è 8  Ð215,€219€(Tenn.€2000).€€€However,€this€does€not€change€the€fact€that€this€court€must€examine€all€ofÐ Ô$  Ðthe€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State.€€òòSeeóó€òòJacksonóó,€443€U.S.€at€319.€€Moreover,€weÐ À  Ðare€mindful€that€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence€is€to€be€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòSeeóóÐ ¬ü  ÐòòEvansóó,€108€S.W.3d€at€236.€€Unlike€the€facts€in€òòBinetteóó,€the€video€presented€to€the€jury€in€the€case€òòsubóóÐ ˜è  Ðòòjudiceóó€did€not€portray€all€of€the€relevant€evidence€presented€at€trial.€€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAccording€to€the€record,€Trooper€Dunn€testified€that€the€Defendant€had€an€odor€of€anÐ \¬ Ðintoxicant€about€him,€had€bloodshot€eyes,€and€slurred€speech.€€€Trooper€Dunn€also€testified€that€theÐ H˜ ÐDefendant€admitted€he€had€ð ðtwo€or€threeðð€beers,€and€somewhat€incriminated€himself€with€his€requestÐ 4„ Ðto€be€charged€with€ð ðPD.ðð€€Furthermore,€Trooper€Dunn,€who€had€fifteen€years€of€experience€with€theÐ  p ÐTennessee€Highway€Patrol,€testified€that€when€he€first€observed€the€Defendant€he€ð ðappeared€to€beÐ  \ Ðintoxicated,ðð€and€by€the€time€the€Trooper€had€spent€nearly€an€hour€with€the€Defendant,€it€wasÐ øH Ðð ðobviousðð€to€him€that€the€Defendant€was€intoxicated€and€would€be€unsafe€behind€the€wheel.€€All€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€preceding€constitutes€evidence€that€was€presented€to€the€jury,€but€not€reflected€in€the€video.€€WeÐ Ð  Ðnote€that€this€Court€has€often€found€that€an€arresting€officerððs€testimony€alone€is€sufficient€to€supportÐ ¼  Ða€defendantððs€conviction€for€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Vasseróó,€870Ð ¨ø ÐS.W.2d€543€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àMoreover,€this€Court€has€carefully€reviewed€the€video€of€the€incident€that€the€jury€viewed,Ð l¼ Ðand€has€determined€that€it€would€not€prevent€a€rational€trier€of€fact€from€concluding€that€the€StateÐ X ¨ Ðhad€indeed€shown€the€Defendant€to€be€guilty€of€driving€under€the€influence€of€an€intoxicant€beyondÐ D!” Ða€reasonable€doubt.€€The€video€does€not€contradict€the€trooperððs€testimony€that€the€Defendant€wasÐ 0"€  Ðð ðunstableðð€in€the€ð ðfinger€to€noseðð€test,€or€that€he€stumbled€and€missed€a€heel„to„toe€step€during€theÐ #l! Ðð ðwalk€and€turnðð€test.€€The€video€also€fails€to€either€substantiate€or€discredit€much€of€the€evidenceÐ $X" Ðpresented€at€trial,€such€as€the€odor€of€intoxicant€about€the€Defendant,€his€bloodshot€eyes,€slurredÐ ô$D # Ðspeech€or€incriminating€statements€or€actions.׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Furthermore,€the€issues€the€Defendant€raises€inÐ à%0!$ Ðreference€to€the€video€tape,€such€as€his€performance€on€the€field€sobriety€tests,€€go€to€the€weight€andÐ Ì&"% Ðcredibility€of€the€evidence,€and€this€Court€will€not€re„weigh€or€re„evaluate€the€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòEvansóó,Ð ¸'#& Ð108€S.W.3d€at€236.€€Ð ¤(ô#' Їà  àWhile€the€video€shows€that€the€Defendant€was€not€ð ðfalling„down€drunk,ðð€the€statute€he€wasÐ ° Ðconvicted€under€requires€only€that€the€prosecution€prove€the€Defendant€was€ð ð[u]nder€the€influenceÐ œì Ðof€an€intoxicant.ðð€òòóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„401(a)(1).€€€€The€Defendant€has€failed€to€carry€hisÐ ˆØ Ðburden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€his€conviction.€€AfterÐ tÄ Ðconsidering€all€of€the€evidence€presented€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€including€both€theÐ `° Ðvideo€of€the€incident€and€Trooper€Dunnððs€testimony,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€was€sufficientÐ L œ Ðto€support€the€Defendantððs€conviction€for€DUI€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÓ  Óò òCONCLUSIONó óÐ  ` ÐÓ±HÓà  àFor€the€above€stated€reasons,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð À  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE