 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Bowman4/6/2004
During the evening hours of February 11, 2003, Jennifer Anderson, a drive-thru employee at a Taco Bell in Cookeville, received a number of harassing telephone calls while at work from a man who identified himself as "Russ." According to Ms. Anderson, the caller claimed to have been drinking. Ms. Anderson identified the defendant as the caller when he described an order that he had placed at the drive-thru earlier in the evening. Later, the defendant drove through the Taco Bell service window and offered to pay Ms. Anderson $40.00 if she would let him smell her feet and suck her toes. A manager at Taco Bell then telephoned the police.
Officer Frank Lenna of the Cookeville Police Department was dispatched to the scene. At the time of Officer Lenna's arrival, the defendant was still parked in the drive-thru lane of the restaurant. When the officer activated his blue lights, the defendant drove out of the parking lot and onto a public street at a very low rate of speed. The officer activated his siren and followed the defendant approximately one quarter of a mile before the vehicle was stopped in the parking lot of the Putnam Farm Supply. As Officer Lenna approached the vehicle driven by the defendant, he observed a twelve-pack of beer on the rear floor board of the car. The defendant had an open beer, smelled of alcohol, and had red, watery eyes. According to Officer Lenna, the defendant admitted drinking two or three beers. When questioned, the defendant informed the officer that he had no physical impairments other than high blood pressure and agreed to perform three field sobriety tests. In the opinion of the officer, the defendant performed poorly on the tests. While performing the one-legged stand, for example, the defendant tried twice and was unable to get past the count of two before placing his lifted foot back to the ground. The defendant refused to submit to a blood alcohol test.
At trial, the defendant acknowledged that he had consumed two or three beers on the night in question and explained he drove away because he thought Officer Lenna was attempting to drive around him rather than attempting to make an investigatory stop. The defendant contended that he was not under the influence of alcohol and contended that he had an injury to his leg, which later required surgery, that affected his performance on the field tests.
The defendant's brother, James Ronnie Bowman, testified that he was with the defendant shortly before the arrest. Bowman claimed that he saw the defendant drink only one beer before the defendant drove his vehicle to the Taco Bell.
In this appeal, the defendant claims that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the jury verdict. On appeal, the state is entitled to the strongest legitimate view of the evidence and all reasonable inferences which might be drawn therefrom. State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Tenn. 1978). The credibility of the witnesses, the weight to be given their testimony, and the reconciliation of conflicts in the proof are matters entrusted to the jury as the trier of fact. Byrge v. State, 575 S.W.2d 292, 295 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1978). When the sufficiency of the evidence is challenged, the relevant question is whether, after reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Tenn. R. App. P. 13(e); State v. Williams, 657 S.W.2d 405, 410 (Tenn. 1983). Questions concerning the credibility of the witnesses, the weight and value of the evidence, as well as all factual issues raised by the evidence are resolved by the trier of fact. Liakas v. State, 199 Tenn. 298, 286 S.W.2d 856
Page 1 2 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|