State v. Randy Watson

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON

SEPTEMBER 1997 SESSION

FILED

September 17, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) Appellate C ourt Clerk ) NO. 02C01-9610-CR-00377 Appellee, )

) SHELBY COUNTY

VS. )

) Hon. Bernie Weinman, Judge RANDY S. WATSON, )

) (Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender)

Appellant. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

BRETT B. STEIN JOHN KNOX WALKUP 100 N. Main Street Attorney General and Reporter Number 3102 Memphis, TN 38103 KENNETH W. RUCKER Assistant Attorney General Criminal Justice Division 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493

WILLIAM L. GIBBONS

District Attorney General

REGINALD HENDERSON

Assistant District Attorney General 201 Poplar Avenue, Suite 301 Memphis, TN 38103

OPINION FILED:

AFFIRMED

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

OPINION

Appellant contends the Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender Act (HMVO Act)

violates double jeopardy principles. On May 9, 1996, appellant was declared an Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender (HMVO) based upon appropriate prior convictions. His motion to dismiss based upon double jeopardy was denied.

We AFFIRM the order of the trial court.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND THE HMVO ACT

State v. Conley, 639 S.W.2d 435, 437 (Tenn. 1982), found the double jeopardy defense to be unavailable to the HMVO declaration since the revocation of driving privileges is remedial and not punitive in nature. This reasoning has been followed in recent months by this Court in State v. Spears, C.C.A. No. 02C01-9606- CR-00197 (Tenn. Crim. App. filed July 10, 1997, at Jackson), and State v. Rowlett, C.C.A. No. 01C01-9605-CC-00211 (Tenn. Crim. App. filed August 22, 1997, at Nashville). Upon review of the record before us, we find nothing to cause us to hold differently.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court.

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

CONCUR:

JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE