 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hart6/25/1999
maining witness to the accident besides the defendant, testified that the defendant was driving at the time of the wreck. Mr. McKinney, Mr. Talley, Tony Hart and the defendant himself all testified that the defendant had been drinking before the accident. The defendant's blood alcohol content level was .27 percent. Based on this evidence, the jury could have reasonably concluded that the defendant's failure to perceive the risk of driving after consuming alcohol constituted a gross deviation from the standard of care, resulting in the death of Ms. Taylor. The evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.
The defendant also summarily contends that his sentence was incorrect or excessive, providing no specifics. We note that appellate review of sentencing is de novo on the record with a presumption that the trial court's determinations are correct. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-401(d). As the Sentencing Commission comments to this section note, the burden is on the defendant, as the appealing party, to show that the sentence is improper. A general claim that a sentence is incorrect or excessive avails the defendant nothing. It is not our function to rummage through a record to glean support for a general claim of excessive sentencing, and such a claim will generally lead to a summary affirmance of the sentence. In any event, under our de novo review of the record, we conclude that the sentence and fine are proper.
In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
Joseph M. Tipton, Judge
CONCUR:
Gary R. Wade, Presiding Judge
Thomas T. Woodall, Judge
|