State v. Charles Barrier ( 2010 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON AUGUST SESSION, 1998 FILED October 2, 1998 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9711-CC-00448 ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk Appellee, ) ) ) HARDIN COUNTY VS. ) ) HON. C. CREED McGINLEY CHARLES DAVID BARRIER, ) JUDGE ) Appe llant. ) (DUI - Second Offense) ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HARDIN COUNTY FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: DANIEL L. SMITH JOHN KNOX WALKUP 614 Main Street Attorney General and Reporter Savannah, TN 38372 CLINTON J. MORGAN Assistant Attorney General 425 5th Avenu e North Nashville, TN 37243 ROBERT RADFORD District Attorney General JOHN OVERTON Assistant District Attorney General Hardin County Courthouse Savannah, TN 38372 OPINION FILED ________________________ AFFIRMED IN ACCOR DANCE W ITH RULE 20 DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE ORDER The Defendant was convicted on a jury verdict of driving while under the influence, second offense. In this appeal he argues that the evidence introduced against him is insufficient to support his conviction. We disagree and affirm the judgm ent of the tria l court. The jury heard testimony from the State’s witnesses that the vehicle the Defendant was driving was weaving back and forth from the Defendant’s lane of traffic to the turning lane. A police officer who stopped the vehicle said that when the Defendant got out of the vehicle, the officer noticed a strong smell of marijuana, that the Defendant’s eyes were swollen and very bloodshot, and that the Defendant smelled of alcohol. The officer testified that the Defendant failed to satisfactor ily perform two sep arate field sobriety tests. The officer stated that he believed the De fenda nt was unde r the influ ence of “som ething ” and th at his ability to drive was impaired. Another officer testified that he also smelled marijuana on the Defendant and observed that the Defendant was unsteady on his feet. The officer said that the Defendant stated he had smoked marijuana earlier that da y and a lso ha d con sum ed so me a lcoho l earlier th at nigh t. This officer also testified that in his opinion the Defendant’s ability to drive was impaired. A forensic scientist from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation testified that tests performed on samples of the Defendant’s blood and urine revealed the presence of diazepam, nordiazepam, phentermine, meprobamate, dihydrocodeinone, and marijuana. The forensic scientist testified that the marijuana found in the Defe ndan t’s urine would be consistent with the Defendant -2- having smoked marijuana shortly before the urine sample was taken, although the test was inconclusive on the time the drug was ingested. The Defendant presented evidence which contradicted the State’s proof that his driving ability was impaired due to alcohol or drugs. We believe the testimony presented at trial created a classic jury issue concerning the cred ibility of the witnes ses, the w eight and value to be given the evidence, and other factual issues. The jury resolved all of these conflicts in favor of the State. W e conc lude th at the e vidence presented is sufficient to support the finding by the trier of fact of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We further conclude that no error of law requiring a reversal of the judgment is apparent on the record. Based upon a thorough reading of the record, the briefs of the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, the jud gme nt of the trial cou rt is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee. ____________________________________ DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE CONCUR: ___________________________________ JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE ___________________________________ JOHN K. BYERS, SENIOR JUDGE -3-