ÿWPCG …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 H 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ 0d- U>‘ U*Ï B)ù DC" AMe² BÁv~ÞvÓ\ D3/ 0@b AO¢Æñ 0D· D/û B*˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- ãEäÎeåæçDèéêeeëÓ€õuM%3|x÷2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€ ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌAugust€18,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó dPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ ` ÑÔ€ŠÔÔ€ ÔÑ\R AØ'\ћрÑÑ7€µPXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òœÙ€€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÌAPRIL€SESSION,€1998ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€à àà à)à àC.C.A.€NO.€01C01„9705„CC„00188Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àó óÌà àà àAppellee,ò òà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àMONTGOMERY€COUNTYÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€ROBERT€W.€WEDEMEYER,€ó óÌò òGREGORY€KEITH€WEAVER,€à àà à)€€€€€€€ó óà àò òJUDGEó óÌà àà àà àà àà àò òà à)ó óà àÌà àà àAppellant.à àà àò òà à)à à(DUI;€RECKLESS€DRIVING)€Ìó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àòòà àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌò òPETER€M.€OLSON€€à àà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUP€Ìó óOLSON€&€OLSON,€PLCà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌ114€Franklin€Street€ÌClarksville,€TN€37040ò òà àà àà àà àKAREN€M.€YACUZZOÌó óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òJOHN€WESLEY€CARNEY,€JR.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó óDistrict€Attorney€General€ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òLANCE€BAKERÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó óAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à204€Franklin€Street,€Suite€200Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àClarksville,€TN€37040ÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€________________________ÌÌAFFIRMED€ÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÇÓ  ÓÔ€ °Ôò òòòOPINIONóóó óÔ€ ŠÔÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àThe€Defendant,€Gregory€Keith€Weaver,€appeals€as€of€right€from€hisÏconvictions€of€DUI,€fourth€offense,€reckless€driving,€driving€on€a€revoked€license,Ïsecond€offense,€violating€the€open€container€law,€and€violating€the€implied€consentÏlaw€following€a€jury€trial€in€the€Montgomery€County€Criminal€Court.€€In€this€appeal,ÏDefendant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€Motion€to€Suppress€allÏevidence€obtained€as€a€result€of€the€investigatory€stop€of€him€immediatelyÏpreceding€his€arrest€for€DUI€and€the€other€related€offenses.€€€We€affirm€the€judgmentÏof€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àOn€October€3,€1995,€the€Clarksville€police€dispatcher€notified€patrol€officersÏthat€the€police€department€had€received€a€report€of€a€reckless€driver€who€wasÏpossibly€drunk.€€According€to€the€report,€the€suspect€vehicle€was€a€red€FordÏRanger€being€driven€by€a€white€male€with€dark€hair€and€a€bad€complexion.€€TheÏreport€further€indicated€that€the€Ranger€had€left€the€area€near€the€Texaco€stationÏand€was€traveling€toward€Kroger.ÌÌà àShortly€after€the€dispatcher€relayed€this€information€to€the€Clarksville€officers,ÏOfficer€Joe€Papastathis€informed€Officer€Robert€Miller€that€he€had€seen€the€suspectÏvehicle€at€the€reported€location€which€was€in€Officer€Millerððs€patrol€area.€€OfficerÍMiller€then€saw€the€vehicle€and€began€to€follow€it€in€an€attempt€to€corroborate€theÏreport.€€Officer€Miller€observed€Defendant€make€a€ð ðslightly€wider€turn€than€whatÏmost€cars€would€take€if€you€turned.ðð€€At€this€point€Defendant€pulled€into€theÏdriveway€to€his€home€and€stopped.€€Officer€Miller€pulled€into€Defendantððs€drivewayÏand€parked€the€patrol€car€directly€behind€Defendantððs€vehicle.€€At€the€time,€OfficerÏMiller€was€unaware€that€the€driveway€belonged€to€Defendant.ÌÌà àAt€some€point€after€Officer€Miller€pulled€into€the€driveway,€but€before€heÏconfronted€Defendant,€Officer€Robert€Smith€radioed€Officer€Miller€and€told€him€thatÏthe€suspectððs€vehicle€had€nearly€hit€his€car€when€he€was€driving€to€work€just€a€fewÏminutes€earlier.€€Thereafter,€Officer€Miller€approached€Defendantððs€truck,€where€heÏsmelled€alcohol€and€saw€an€open€bottle€of€whiskey€in€the€car.€€Officer€Miller€askedÏDefendant€if€he€had€been€drinking,€and€Defendant€admitted€that€he€had,€and€thatÏhe€had€ð ðprobably€had€too€much.ððÌÌà àPrior€to€trial,€Defendant€filed€a€motion€to€suppress€the€evidence€garnered€fromÏthe€encounter€with€Officer€Miller.€€The€proper€standard€of€review€for€suppressionÏissues€was€set€forth€by€our€supreme€court€in€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23Ï(Tenn.€1996):ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€party€prevailing€in€the€trial€court€is€entitled€to€theÏstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€adduced€at€theÏsuppression€hearing€as€well€as€all€reasonable€andÍlegitimate€inferences€that€may€be€drawn€from€thatÏevidence.€€So€long€as€the€greater€weight€of€the€evidenceÏsupports€the€trial€courtððs€findings,€those€findings€shall€beÏupheld.€€In€other€words,€a€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€in€aÏsuppression€hearing€will€be€upheld€unless€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€otherwise.ÌÌÌ€€ÓÓà àDefendant€argues€in€this€appeal€that€Officer€Miller€lacked€the€reasonableÏsuspicion€necessary€to€detain€and€question€him.€€More€specifically,€he€contendsÏthat€Officer€Millerððs€observations€did€not€provide€sufficient€corroboration€of€theÏinformation€supplied€by€the€anonymous€call€placed€to€the€dispatcher,€as€is€requiredÏby€òòState€v.€Pullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€29€(Tenn.€1993).€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àÌà àWe€first€note€that€we€find€Officer€Millerððs€actions€to€be€an€ð ðinvestigatory€stopððÏaccording€to€constitutional€standards.€€ð ð[S]topping€an€automobile€and€detaining€itsÏoccupants€constitute€a€ððseizureðð€within€the€meaning€of€[the€Fourth€and€FourteenthÏamendments€of€the€United€States€Constitution],€even€though€the€purpose€of€theÏstop€is€limited€and€the€resulting€detention€quite€brief.ðð€€òòDelaware€v.€Prouseóó,€440€U.S.Ï648,€653,€99€S.€Ct.€1391,€1396,€59€L.€Ed.€2d€660€(1979)€(citations€omitted).€€InÏsome€circumstances,€an€officer€may€briefly€detain€a€suspect€without€probableÏcause€in€order€to€investigate€possible€criminal€activity.€€òòBrown€v.€Texasóó,€443€U.S.Ï47,€51,€99€S.€Ct.€2637,€2641,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€357€(1979).€€A€person€is€seized€ð ðif,€inÏview€of€all€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€incident,€a€reasonable€personÏwould€have€believed€that€he€was€not€free€to€leave.ðð€€òòUnited€States€v.€Mendenhallóó,Í446€U.S.€544,€554,€100€S.€Ct.€1870,€1877,€64€L.€Ed.€2d€497€(1980).€€When€OfficerÏMiller€pulled€into€the€driveway,€and€then€approached€Defendantððs€parked€car,€aÏreasonable€person€would€have€believed€he€was€no€longer€free€to€leave.ÌÌà àThis€type€of€investigatory€stop€is€constitutionally€permissible€only€when€aÏpolice€officer€has€a€reasonable€suspicion,€supported€by€specific€and€articulableÏfacts,€that€a€criminal€offense€has€been€or€is€about€to€be€committed.€€òòSeeóó€òòTerry€v.ÏOhioóó,€392€U.S.€1,€88€S.€Ct.€1868,€20€L.€Ed.€2d€889€(1968).€€In€order€to€determine€theÏspecific€and€articulable€facts,€this€Court€must€consider€the€ð ðtotality€of€theÏcircumstances.ðð€€òòState€v.€Watkinsóó,€827€S.W.2d€293,€294€(Tenn.€1992)€(citationÏomitted).€€Among€the€relevant€elements€to€be€considered€are€ð ðobjectiveÏobservations,€information€obtained€from€other€police€officers€or€agencies,€informationÏobtained€from€citizens,€and€the€pattern€of€operation€of€certain€offenders.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€ÌÌà àWhen€the€information€relied€upon€is€provided€by€an€anonymous€person,Ïheightened€concerns€are€raised€about€the€reliability€of€the€information€because€ofÏthe€possible€danger€of€ð ðfalse€reports,€through€police€fabrication€or€from€vindictive€orÏunreliable€informants.ðð€€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€31.€€As€a€result,€our€courts€haveÏdeveloped€a€methodology€for€evaluating€the€reliability€of€citizen€information.€€ForÏshowings€of€probable€cause€based€on€an€informantððs€tip,€our€supreme€court€hasÏfollowed€the€former€federal€two„pronged€test€that€requires€proof€of€the€informantððsÍbasis€of€knowledge€and€credibility.€€òòSeeóó€€òòSpinelli€v.€United€Statesóó,€393€U.S.€410,€89ÏS.€Ct.€584,€21€L.€Ed.€2d€637€(1969);€òòAguilar€v.€Texasóó,€378€U.S.€108,€84€S.€Ct.Ï1509,€12€L.€Ed.€2d€723€(1964);€òòState€v.€Jacuminóó,€778€S.W.2d€430,€436€(Tenn.Ï1989).€€While€this€standard€is€typically€used€to€determine€probable€cause,€courts€ofÏthis€State€have€held€this€standard€is€to€be€used€as€a€guide€in€assessing€theÏreliability€of€an€informantððs€tip€supporting€an€investigative€detention.€€òòPullyóó,€863ÏS.W.2d€at€31;€òòStateóó€òòv.€Colemanóó,€791€S.W.2d€504,€505€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989),Ïòòperm.€to€appealóó€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€1990).€€We€also€note€that€reasonable€suspicionÏrequires€a€lower€level€of€proof€than€probable€cause,€allowing€for€citizen€informationÏthat€is€less€reliable€than€that€required€for€probable€cause€showings.€€òòPullyóó,€863ÏS.W.2d€at€32€(òòcitingóó€òòAlabama€v.€Whiteóó,€496€U.S.€325,€330,€110€S.€Ct.€2412,€2416,Ï110€L.€Ed.€2d€301€(1990)).€€ÌÌà àWe€must€determine€if€there€was€sufficient€corroboration€of€the€informationÏsupplied€to€Officer€Miller€by€the€dispatcher€to€support€a€reasonable€suspicion€ofÏillegal€activity.€€The€record€indicates€that€the€Clarksville€police€dispatcher€received€aÏtelephone€call€from€an€unknown€citizen€warning€of€a€potential€drunk€driver€in€a€redÏFord€pickup€truck€in€the€area€of€the€Texaco€station€and€Kroger.€€The€suspect€wasÏdescribed€by€the€caller€as€a€white€male€with€dark€hair€and€a€bad€complexion.€€ÏAlthough€the€callerððs€basis€of€knowledge€is€unclear€from€the€record,€theÏcircumstances€in€which€the€information€was€given€and€the€language€of€the€callerÍsuggest€first„hand,€eyewitness€knowledge.€€ð ðWhen€an€informant€reports€an€incidentÏat€or€near€the€time€of€its€occurrence,€a€court€can€often€assume€that€the€report€is€first„hand,€and€hence€reliable.ðð€€òòPullyóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€32.€The€proximity€in€time€betweenÏthe€anonymous€call€to€the€dispatcher€and€Officer€Millerððs€subsequent€information€isÏsignificant€in€assessing€the€reliability€of€the€information.€€òòSeeóó€òòidóó.€€(citations€omitted).€ÏOfficer€Miller€received€corroboration€of€that€information€from€Officer€Papastathis,€whoÏradioed€that€he€had€just€seen€the€red€truck€in€the€area€described€by€theÏanonymous€caller.€€Thereafter,€Officer€Miller€saw€the€truck€and€began€to€follow€it.€ÏHe€then€observed€Defendant€make€a€ð ðwider€turn€than€most€cars€would€take.ðð€€AsÏOfficer€Miller€continued€following€Defendant€in€an€attempt€to€corroborate€theÏinformation€that€had€been€given€to€him,€Defendant€pulled€into€a€driveway.€€OfficerÏMiller€testified€at€the€hearing€that€ð ð[Q]uite€frankly,€I€thought€maybe€[Defendant]€wasÏdoing€this€just€to€avoid€me€being€behind€him,€so€thatððs€why€the€observation€periodÏwas€not€that€long.ðð€€It€is€clear€from€the€facts€that€Officer€Miller€was€unaware€that€theÏdriveway€Defendant€pulled€into€was€actually€that€of€Defendantððs.€€Once€OfficerÏMiller€pulled€his€patrol€car€into€Defendantððs€driveway,€this€constituted€a€ð ðstopððÏaccording€to€constitutional€standards.€€ÌÌà àAt€some€point€after€Officer€Miller€pulled€into€Defendantððs€driveway,€heÏreceived€information€from€a€fellow€officer€saying€that€the€person€driving€the€red€truckÏhad€nearly€run€him€off€the€road€on€his€way€to€work€at€the€police€station€just€minutesÍearlier.€€However,€this€information€came€too€late,€i.e.,€after€the€stop,€to€be€consideredÏin€determining€whether€or€not€the€officerððs€corroboration€was€sufficient.€€We€thereforeÏdisagree€with€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€this€last€information€should€be€consideredÏin€the€analysis.€€ÌÌà àHowever,€even€though€the€trial€court€erred€in€considering€the€informationÏrelayed€to€Officer€Miller€from€his€fellow€officer€reporting€that€Defendant€had€nearly€hitÏhim,€we€are€nonetheless€able€to€uphold€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€sufficientÏcorroboration€existed€in€this€case.€€€We€base€this€finding€upon€the€informationÏprovided€to€Officer€Miller€by€the€dispatcher,€the€subsequent€corroboration€fromÏOfficer€Papastathis,€Defendantððs€unusually€wide€turn,€Officer€Millerððs€personalÏobservations,€and€his€reasonable€belief€that€Defendant€pulled€into€the€driveway€toÏavoid€being€pursued€by€police.€€Based€on€all€the€foregoing,€we€find€that€theÏinformantððs€reliability€and€his€basis€for€knowledge€were€sufficiently€substantiated€inÏthis€case€to€establish€the€necessary€ð ðreasonable€and€articulable€suspicionððÏrequired€by€our€state€constitution.€òòSeeóó€òòColemanóó,€791€S.W.2d€at€507.Ìà àÌà à€We€must€also€look€to€the€reasonableness€of€the€investigatory€detentionÏwhich€turns€on€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€each€particular€case.€€òòSeeóó€òòPullyóó,€863ÏS.W.2d€at€34€(òòcitingóó€òòMendenhallóó,€446€U.S.€at€561,€100€S.€Ct.€at€1881,€64€L.€Ed.€2dÏ497€(Powell,€J.,€concurring)).€€In€order€to€judge€the€reasonableness€of€theÍinvestigatory€detention€involved€in€the€case€before€us,€we€must€weigh€ð ðthe€gravityÏof€the€public€concern,€the€degree€to€which€the€seizure€advances€that€concern,€andÏthe€severity€of€the€intrusion€into€individual€privacy.ðð€€òòPullyóó€863€S.W.2d€at€30€(citationÏomitted).€€The€public€interest€served€by€the€investigatory€detention€in€this€case€wasÏthe€prevention€of€a€drunk€driving€accident.€€Certainly€the€gravity€of€the€concern€overÏdrunk€driving€is€significant€because€of€its€threat€to€the€safety€of€any€citizen€on€theÏpublic€roads.€€Also,€the€brief€detention€of€Defendant€for€questioning€was€a€relativelyÏminor€intrusion€into€Defendantððs€privacy.€€Thus,€we€find€the€detention€of€DefendantÏin€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó€to€be€reasonable.ÌÓ  Óà àÌà àThe€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€ÏDefendantððs€motion€to€suppress€the€evidence€gained€as€a€result€of€the€encounterÏwith€Officer€Miller.€€We€accordingly€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌGARY€R.€WADE,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌL.€T.€LAFFERTY,€Special€Judge