State v. Matt Kroll

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: July 27, 1999
• Docket: 03C01-9808-CR-00283
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

JUNE 1999 SESSION

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9808-CR-00283 Appellee, ) ) MONROE COUNTY FILED V. S ) July 27, 1999 ) HON. CARROLL L. ROSS, MATT KROLL, ) JUDGE Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appe llate Court ) Clerk Appellant. ) (DrivingUndertheInfluence)

FORTHEAPPELLANT: F RT EA P L E : O H P EL E

JULIE A. MARTIN PAUL G. SUMMERS P.O.Box426 Attorney General &Reporter Knoxville, TN 37901-0426 (OnAppeal) MARVIN S. BLAIR, JR. Asst. Attorney General CHARLES CORN JohnSevierBldg. District PublicDefender 425FifthAve., North Nashville, TN 37243-0493 THOMAS E. KIMBALL Assistant PublicDefender JERRY N. ESTES 110½W ngton Ave No ashi ., rtheast District Attorney General Athens, TN 37303 (A T l) t ria CHALMERS THOMPSON Asst. District Attorney General P.O.Box647 Athens, TN 37303

OPINIONFILED:____________________

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

JOHN H. PEAY, Judge OPINION

Thede da c llenge th s fen nt ha s e ufficie y o theev nc c victin h of d nc f ide e on g im rivingun r theinfluen (D I), de ce U

secondoffense, andtheadmissionoflaywitnessopiniontestim W affirmpursuant toRule20of theRulesof theCourt of ony. e

Crim Appeals ofTennessee. inal

A trial, theevidenceestablishedthat aschool busbacked or ro intothefront ofthecar thedefendant was t lled

driving. Accordingtothetestim thedefendant left thesceneshortlyafterthecollision, butlaterreturnedandattem to park ony, pted

thecar hewasdrivingbehindthebus inapproxim thesamepositionit hadbeenduringthecollision. Twocitizens, thebus ately

driver andapasserby, testifiedthat intheir opinions, thedefendant appearedtobedrunk andshouldnothavebeenoperatinga

vehicle. Thearrestingofficer alsotestifiedthat thedefendant’sspeechwas unintelligible, that hewasunsteady onhisfeet and

neededtoleanagainst avehiclefor support, andthat hesmelledstronglyof alcohol. Accordingtotheofficer, thedefendant failed

a field sobriety test and was, in his opinion, impaired by an intoxicant to the extent he could not safely operate a vehicle. The

officer testifiedthat afterhearrestedth d nd t fo D I, the defenda refused a intoxime test. Ba onthis evidence e efe an r U nt n ter sed

and the defense’s later stipulation to a prior DUI offense, the jury returned a gulty verdict for DU secondoffense. i I,

Thedefendant nowarguesthattheconvictingevidenceisinsufficientbecausetherewa noscientificevidence s

of the am of alcohol in his blood, no one saw him drinking alcohol, and the evidence showed he had trouble walking and ount

perfo ingthefieldsobrietytestsbecausehehadundergonetwobacksurgerieswithinthepastthreeyears. Healsoarguesthat rm

the trial court erred in adm into evidence the testim of the bus driver and the pa itting ony sserby that the defendant wa so s

intoxicatedthat his a todrivewasim bility pairedbecause, thedefendant claim thisevidencewasnotproperlaywitnessopinion s,

testimon O re wof th re rd and applicable lawdisc s n erro A ord y. ur vie e co lose o r. cc ingly, w affirmthe tria court’s judgm e l ent

pursuant toRule20of theRulesof theCourt ofCrim Appeals ofTennessee. inal

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J O H N H . P E A Y , J u d g e

2 C O N C U R :

______________________________ DAV G HAY Judge ID . ES,

______________________________ JOH EV TTW N ERE ILLIAM JudgeS,