 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Sneed5/5/1999
me final." In Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-50-503, conviction is defined for the purposes of the Driver Licenses chapter as a "final conviction."
In considering what a "final conviction" means, this court stated that it should look to "the context of the entire statutory scheme" and quoted from what it called the legislature's stated "purposes of the motor vehicle statute." Loden, 920 S.W.2d at 264. This court also stated that "a defendant is presumed guilty after judgment," citing a case that states this proposition relative to an appellate standard of review in determining if the evidence is sufficient to convict. Id.; see State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982). It then concluded that "to allow an individual convicted of and presumed to be guilty of driving while intoxicated to continue to operate a motor vehicle pending appeal would be inconsistent with the legislature's statement of public policy." Loden, 920 S.W.2d at 264.
We view Loden to be precedential authority to which we will adhere. This means that the defendant's predicate convictions were final for the purpose of declaring him to be a habitual motor vehicle offender.
In consideration of the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Joseph M. Tipton, Judge
CONCUR: Joe G. Riley, Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr., Judge
Page 1 2 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|