 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Kelly1/19/1999
The defendant, Victor S. Kelly, Jr., stands convicted of driving under the influence following a jury trial in the Williamson County Circuit Court. Kelly was sentenced to eleven months and 29 days supervised probation, with six months service in the county jail suspended after service of 48 hours. Terms of his sentence include revocation of his driver's license and attendance of alcohol safety school. He was fined $1,000. In this direct appeal, Kelly poses various challenges to the soundness of his conviction:
(1) Whether there was sufficient competent proof to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was under the influence of an intoxicant at the time he was driving his motor vehicle.
(2) Whether the trial court adequately instructed the jury on the permissible inference of intoxication which may be drawn from blood alcohol test results.
(3) Whether the trial court properly determined that the state met its burden of establishing an unbroken chain of custody for the defendant's blood sample.
(4) Whether the trial court committed plain error by admitting testimony of the TBI toxicologist regarding controlled sobriety test studies absent the witness having any underlying documentation with him at trial.
Having reviewed the record, studied the briefs of the parties and heard the oral arguments of counsel, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
In the early morning hours of March 21, 1996, Trooper Richard Cash of the Tennessee Highway Patrol observed the defendant operating a motor vehicle at an excessive rate of speed on Interstate 65 in Williamson County. Trooper Cash clocked the defendant's speed at 90 miles per hour and initiated pursuit. After Trooper Cash stopped the defendant, he noticed the smell of alcohol coming from the defendant and his vehicle. The defendant was unsteady on his feet and admitted to having a martini and two other mixed drinks in the previous hour. The defendant performed poorly on field sobriety tests. Trooper Cash had no doubt in his mind that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol. At 1:30 a.m., Trooper Cash placed the defendant under arrest for driving under the influence .
Trooper Cash transported the defendant to Williamson Medical Center, and at 2:10 a.m., John Marshall Osborne, a licensed laboratory technician, drew a blood sample from the defendant. Trooper Cash and Mr. Osborne filled out a form entitled "Alcohol/Toxicology Request" with the defendant's name, sex, race, date of birth, driver's license number, date and time of collection of the blood sample. Both Trooper Cash and Mr. Osborne signed the request form. Trooper Cash took the blood sample from Mr. Osborne and sealed it along with the request form in a test kit, which he mailed to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation ("TBI").
The test kit was received at the TBI crime lab by Julie Fleak, an evidence technician. She followed standard procedures in opening the kit, putting identifying numbers on the sample vial, and placing the vial in a refrigerator. Ms. Fleak noticed that the vial did not have the defendant's name written on it, so she wrote his name on the vial. She then placed the sample in the refrigerator.
Special Agent John W. Harrison of the TBI, who is a toxicologist, retrieved the sample from the refrigerator and analyzed it using a scientific instrument used for that purpose. His analysis revealed that the blood alcohol content was .14 grams percent of ethyl alcohol. Special Agent Harrison explained that the TBI lab, which enjoys national accreditation, has stringent quality control standards which yield accurate blood alcohol analysis. The lab maintains a reliable
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|