 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Kearney12/7/1999
officer. We thus conclude that the Defendant is not entitled to an acquittal or a dismissal of the charges against him. This issue is without merit.
II. SENTENCING
The Defendant next argues that "the sentence imposed by the Trial Court was cruel and unusual in being excessive as an intended deterrent to prevent the defendant, and others similarly situated, from exercising the right in a misdemeanor case to a Trial by Jury in the future." However, the Defendant has not included in the record a transcript or summary of the sentencing hearing, nor does he cite to any authority in support of his argument. It is the appellant's responsibility to preserve an adequate record for review on appeal. See Tenn. R. App. P. 24(a). The Defendant has failed to preserve a record of the sentencing hearing in this case, to make appropriate references to the record, and to cite authority in support of his argument. This issue is therefore waived. See Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. R. 10(b); State v. Killebrew, 760 S.W.2d 228, 231 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988); Tenn. R. App. P. 27(a)(7), (g). The judgment of the trial court is accordingly affirmed.
DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE
CONCUR:
JOHN H. PEAY, JUDGE
JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE
|