 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Guilds5/27/1999
On April 14, 1997, the Williamson County Grand Jury indicted Appellant Joel P. Guilds for driving under the influence of an intoxicant, second offense, and for driving on a revoked license. On October 15, 1997, Appellant filed a motion to have the two charges tried separately. The trial court initially denied the motion, but after Appellant's trial began on October 29, 1997, the trial court granted the motion to sever. Later that same day, a Williamson County jury convicted Appellant of driving under the influence of an intoxicant. On February 13, 1998, the trial court imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days. Appellant challenges his conviction, raising the following issues:
"1) whether Appellant was prejudiced by the late severance of the charges; "2) whether the trial court abused its discretion when it allowed a witness to testify who had not been disclosed to Appellant until the day of trial; "3) whether the evidence was sufficient to support Appellant's conviction; and "4) whether a comment by the prosecutor during closing argument constituted prosecutorial misconduct that deprived Appellant of a fair trial; "After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court."
I. FACTS
Officer Daniel Aloy of the Franklin, Tennessee Police Department testified that while he was responding to a call in downtown Franklin on February 13, 1997, he heard a loud crash. Aloy then turned around and saw that a car had struck a large flowerpot and a light pole a short distance away. When Aloy arrived at the scene, he saw that Appellant was in the driver's seat and was the only person in the car. Aloy then made contact with Appellant and observed that Appellant had slurred speech, appeared to be only semi-conscious, and had difficulty answering questions.
Officer Frank Soto of the Franklin Police Department testified that he arrived at the accident soon after it occurred and he "took over the scene." Shortly after Soto approached Appellant, Soto recognized him because Soto had known Appellant for approximately five or six years. Soto smelled the odor of alcohol coming from both the inside of the car and from Appellant's person and he saw a beer can on the floor of the car. Soto also observed that Appellant had slurred speech and glassy, red eyes. Soto further observed that Appellant appeared to have a head injury and that the windshield of Appellant's car had been broken by what Soto guessed was probably Appellant's head.
Soto testified that shortly after he arrived at the scene, Appellant was transported to the hospital by some paramedics. Soto subsequently met Appellant at the hospital and asked him to take a blood alcohol test. When Appellant refused, Soto asked him whether he had been drinking. Appellant then responded, "You know me." Appellant then stated that he had fallen asleep while he was driving his vehicle.
Soto testified that he did not ask Appellant to take a breath test for alcohol because the breathalyzer was at the Williamson County Jail and Appellant could not be transported there because of his medical condition. Soto also testified that he did not have Appellant perform any field sobriety tests because Appellant was injured. Soto admitted that he could not be sure whether Appellant's slurred speech and behavior were due to intoxication or to injury.
Nancy Steagal testified that she was one of the paramedics who treated Appellant at the scene of the accident. When Steagal made contact with Appellant, he complained of pain in his back, neck, wrist, and knee. Steagal observed that Appellant's words were not plain and sounded "sluggish." Steagal also noticed that an odor of alcohol was
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.
|
|