 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Durham7/26/1999
taking Valium and also opined that a person who regularly ingests Valium and alcohol can develop a tolerance for both substances and be able to function fairly well, including operating an automobile, exercising judgment, and making decisions. In other words, he confirmed that, if the proof showed that the appellant "drank on a regular basis or drank from time to time on a weekly basis or -- or drank beer or whiskey occasionally and took some Valium pills, it is . . . entirely possible that [the appellant] could function and make conscious deliberate decisions." The pharmacist also stated that one could measure the effect of alcohol and Valium upon an individual by considering the following factors: the person's ability to operate an automobile; the person's ability to walk or physically move about; a person's ability to speak; and a person's ability to perform mechanical tasks that require physical dexterity.
Finally, Mr. Hamilton testified that a normal person would be comatose if he took sixty-seven five milligram Valium tablets within a twenty-four hour period. He again noted that an individual's tolerance will vary depending upon the person's history of taking the drug. However, the pharmacist testified that sixty-seven five milligram tablets would exceed a lethal dose of Valium.
Dr. Mark Harrell also testified on behalf of the appellant. He testified that he is a physician with the Emergency Department at Johnson City Medical Center. He testified that he treated the appellant on October 1, 1996, for a self-inflicted gunshot wound in his left lower chest and upper abdominal area. Dr. Harrell testified that, when the appellant was admitted to the hospital, he was intoxicated, registering a blood alcohol level of .131. Additionally, the appellant's urine tested positive for Benzodiazepine, a derivative of Valium. However, Dr. Harrell testified that he could not determine the quantity of Valium that the appellant had ingested or whether the appellant had ingested Valium on that day or five days ago.
Dr. Harrell also opined that a combination of alcohol and Valium would increase the intoxicating effects of both drugs and would make "it easier for you to do things you normally wouldn't do." He noted that, obviously, a higher dosage of Valium would more significantly decrease an individual's inhibitions. However, he also testified that a person under the influence of alcohol and Valium could make conscious deliberate decisions, plan, and carry out a plan. With respect to alcohol, the doctor testified that many people who regularly drink alcohol over a long period of time can function fairly well at .131 blood alcohol level. Moreover, Dr. Harrell stated that the mere presence of Valium in a person's urine does not necessarily indicate any impairment of the person's ability to function.
The appellant called Dr. Gary Wishart, a licensed clinical psychologist, to testify on his behalf. Dr. Wishart testified that he had been hired by the appellant's family following the murder to evaluate the appellant. He had met with the appellant on two occasions and had interviewed the appellant a total amount of nine hours. On the basis of these interviews, Dr. Wishart concluded that the appellant was suffering from a mental defect at the time of the murder. Dr. Wishart testified that the appellant had suffered from a severe anxiety disorder since childhood. The anxiety disorder had resulted in a dependent personality disorder and severe alcoholism. The psychologist particularly noted the appellant's complete dependence upon his wife. Dr. Wishart stated, " was utterly and totally dependent on his wife for his psychological well-being. She was more important for his psychological survival
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|