DUI Lawyers Directory. Search for a dui lawyer near you. Operating a vehicle while drinking could cause judicial actions.
 Zip Code Search for DUI Lawyers
Defending Alleged Drunk Driving Criminal Acts Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Membership at DUI Defenders Discuss issues related to dui/dwi/owi Contact Us about a DUI Lawyer
facebook.com/MyDUI

  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

State v. Brent

10/26/2001

623 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). A guilty verdict by the jury, approved by the trial judge, accredits the testimony of the witnesses for the state and resolves all conflicts in favor of the theory of the state. State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d 474, 476 (Tenn. 1973). Because a verdict of guilt removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, the accused has the burden on appeal of illustrating why the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict returned by the trier of fact. State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982). This court will not disturb a verdict of guilt due to the sufficiency of the evidence unless the facts contained in the record and the inferences that may be drawn from the facts are insufficient, as a matter of law, for a rational trier of fact to find the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Matthews, 805 S.W.2d at 780.


The evidence presented in the instant trial was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The arresting police officer stopped the defendant for speeding in excess of twenty miles over the posted speed limit. Moreover, the police officer noticed an odor of alcohol emanating from the defendant, and the defendant admitted to having consumed alcohol. The police officer also testified that the defendant failed four sobriety tests. This evidence is sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find that the defendant was driving or in physical control of his vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-401 (1998). Therefore, we find that the defendant's challenge of the sufficiency of evidence at trial lacks merit.


Conclusion


For the foregoing reasons, we find that none of the defendant's allegations merit relief. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.






Page 1 2 3 

Tennessee DUI Attorneys    DUI Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites  |  Draeger FAQ
SiteMap | DUI Blog | DUI Lawyers | DUI Attorneys | Trading Partners | Member Agreement | Terms of Service
Attorneys Click Here | DUI Case Laws | FAQ | DUI Forum | Directory of DUI Attorneys | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2004. “DUI Defenders”. All rights reserved.