 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hall4/13/2005
I. Facts and Procedural Background
The following proof was presented at the defendant's trial. Officer James Forrest of the Henry County Sheriff's Department testified that at roughly 8:18 p.m., on August 14, 2003, while on patrol on Cypress Road in Henry County, Tennessee, he "came up on a vehicle sideways in the road and up against a telephone pole." The defendant was outside the vehicle flagging down traffic. Officer Forrest noticed a car driving away from the scene, but otherwise, no one else was at the scene other than the defendant. As Officer Forrest approached, the defendant "just started to walk off." Upon asking the defendant what had happened, the defendant told Officer Forrest "two or three different stories, but nothing really made sense."
The defendant told Officer Forrest that the driver of the wrecked vehicle left in the car that Officer Forrest had previously observed driving away from the scene. However, after speaking further with the defendant, Officer Forrest determined that the defendant had driven and wrecked the vehicle. Although Officer Forrest did not observe any alcohol inside or around the vehicle, he testified that he smelled a "very strong odor of alcohol coming from [the defendant's] breath." After administering several field sobriety tests, Officer Forrest determined the defendant to be intoxicated and arrested him for D.U.I.
After Officer Forrest arrested the defendant, Tennessee Highway Patrol Trooper Monte Belew and David Brown, the owner of the vehicle that had collided with the telephone pole, arrived at the scene. Officer Forrest testified that, on the way to the accident, he had seen Brown in the parking lot of B&D's Grocery, which was approximately "three-quarters of a mile to a mile" from the scene of the accident.
On cross-examination, Officer Forrest admitted that he had not seen the defendant operate the vehicle, had not seen the defendant inside the vehicle, and had no knowledge as to the location of the ignition key at the time of arrest. Officer Forrest also acknowledged that he did not know whether the vehicle was operable or how long it had been there at the time he arrived.
Trooper Belew testified that the defendant "obviously was intoxicated. No two ways about that." He indicated that the vehicle was resting against a utility pole in a ditch, but had only minor damage. Trooper Belew stated, " he owner of the truck [Brown] had a slight odor of alcohol about him, so I told him that he could not drive the vehicle home." However, Trooper Belew stated that, based upon his investigation, he believed that Brown was not the driver who wrecked the vehicle.
On cross-examination, Trooper Belew admitted that he did not see the defendant operate the vehicle and that he had no knowledge as to the location of the ignition key. Although Trooper Belew could not testify as to exactly how long the vehicle had been in the ditch, he thought it to be a "short time." He stated that B&D's Grocery was "probably about three-to four-tenths of a mile" from the scene of the accident.
At the conclusion of the State's proof, the defendant moved for judgment of acquittal, arguing that "the only evidence that's been proffered is that [the defendant] was standing next to this vehicle when Officer Forrest arrived." The State argued:
We've elicited testimony from the officer that there was nobody else around when the officer came on the scene and that there were no other occupants or, apparently, no other occupants of the car; therefore, the reasonable inference being that the Defendant drove the truck and wrecked it. Admittedly, it's circumstantial evidence, but we feel like th
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.
|
|