Tennessee Criminal Lawyer Blog

Any time a DUI-related statute undergoes a change, you can bet a lot of Tennesseans will be affected. Almost 4,000 Tennesseans every year are cited for driving under the influence by the Tennessee Highway Patrol alone and countless more are cited by the law enforcement officials of the various cities and counties in Tennessee. A charge of violating the implied consent law often goes hand-in-hand with a DUI charge. To put it simply, anyone who drives a motor vehicle in Tennessee gives their implied consent that they will submit to testing for the drug or alcohol content of their blood by a law enforcement official who has reasonable grounds for desiring the test. What this law essentially does is punish Tennesseans who refuse to submit to such testing in an effort to avoid a DUI conviction. On January 1, 2011 a big change was made to the implied consent law which will impact Tennesseans.

Continue reading "New Year Brings Changes to Implied Consent Law" »

An often overlooked question with regard to DUI discussion is what type of conduct actually constitutes a DUI. This is defined in Tennessee Code Annotated §55-10-401, which basically provides that it is unlawful to drive or “be in physical control of” a motor-driven vehicle on a public road, highway, alley, or street, or any other place that is frequented by the public while you are:
(1) Under the influence of an intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic, or drug producing stimulating effect on the central nervous system, or
(2) The blood alcohol concentration (BAC) in your breath is eight hundredths of one percent (.08%) or more.
The penalties for violation of this statute are set out later in the Tennessee Code and generally become more severe as a defendant commits more DUI offenses. The punishment methods can vary depending on the circumstances and include jail time, fines, suspension and revocation of a driver’s license, and other forms of punishment such as community service.

Continue reading "Driving Under the Influence" »

DUI Statutes

The primary evil that the DUI statutes are designed to prevent is that of a person trying to control some sort of automobile or other machinery on the public roads or highways while intoxicated and thereby posing a danger to themselves or other drivers. However, that doesn’t mean that someone can escape a DUI charge simply by using a less-dangerous means of transportation such as a lawn mower, moped, or even a Barbie car. A man from the UK learned this lesson the hard way when he received a three-year suspension of his driver’s license (partially because he had a prior DUI offense) after being caught operating a Barbie car while intoxicated. The man and his son had reportedly rigged the car, which is capable of reaching speeds up to a screaming four miles per hour, up with bigger tires and he wanted to take it for a test drive. Unfortunately, a grown man stuffed into a Barbie car tends to attract attention and the man was apprehended.

Continue reading "Man Loses License for Drunk Driving in Barbie Car" »

Mootness is an issue that is not encountered all too often in criminal law, but it can have important consequences when it surfaces. When an issue is moot, it basically means that circumstances surrounding or pertaining to the issue are such that there is no reason to take further legal proceedings with regard to the issue or that the issue is beyond the scope of court proceedings. Basically, it just means there is no reason to discuss or treat the issue any further. The doctrine of mootness is well-illustrated by a case that recently came before the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.

In State v. Willis, the defendant was charged with DUI and went to trial. At the trial, there was an issue as to whether a breathalyzer machine was available and the defendant objected to the court’s admission of the breathalyzer results into evidence. The jury, even after considering the breathalyzer results, found the defendant not guilty of DUI per se, but he was still convicted of DUI by impairment. He was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days, sixty days to be served in a workhouse and the rest on probation. He tried to appeal the decision based on the trial court’s admission of the breathalyzer results.

The Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that the issue he raised for appeal was moot, because the jury acquitted the defendant of DUI per se, which is what the breathalyzer test establishes. The defendant was convicted of Tennessee DUI by impairment based on other evidence which included that the officer saw defendant toss beer can into back seat of his truck, the defendant smelled of alcohol, had bloodshot eyes, and stumbled when he walked, and that the defendant failed three field sobriety tests on scene and failed them again when he repeated the tests at the police station. The Court thus found that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of DUI by impairment.

In this case, the admission of the breathalyzer test was a mot issue because the breathalyzer results portended only to the issue of whether the defendant was guilty of a DUI per se, which by statute is established if a defendant has a BAC in excess of the legal limit. Since the defendant was acquitted by the jury on the DUI per se charge, it made no difference for all practical purposes whether the breathalyzer results were admitted properly. Thus, the defendant stood nothing to gain by pressing the issue on appeal.

Source: (State v. Willis, 35 TAM 11-27, 1/20/10, Jackson, McLin, 7 pages.)

Intoxication often leads individuals to make less than optimal decisions, which is exactly what an Indiana man did early Sunday morning when he decided it might be a good idea to try to steal a backhoe. The man apparently climbed over a fence to get to the backhoe and then crashed the backhoe through the fence to make his escape. A host of witnesses reportedly saw the man try to make his escape and called the police, with one even following him down the highway while talking to police on his mobile phone. To make matters worse for the man, he reportedly attempted to make his escape by zig-zagging between his own lane and oncoming traffic on the backhoe. Police said he showed signs of intoxication. The personal injury consequences of this situation are discussed here.

The man in this scenario is likely looking at a charge of evading arrest in addition to DUI and whatever other charges he may be saddled with. In Tennessee, a person can be charged with evading arrest when he or she intentionally flees from any person that the suspect knows to be a law enforcement officer if the suspect knows the officer is trying to arrest them or if they have already been arrested. This is illegal both if the suspect flees on foot and if the suspect flees in a motor vehicle. Fleeing on foot is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to eleven months and twenty nine days in jail. Fleeing in a motor vehicle after having received any signal to stop from a law enforcement officer is a Class E felony, unless such conduct creates a risk of death or serious injury to a third party (which could have very well happened in the scenario above) in which case it is a Class D felony.

The good news for suspects facing a charge of evading arrest is that it is a defense that the attempted arrest was unlawful. There are many ways an attempted arrest or traffic stop can be illegal, and a skilled criminal defense attorney can assist a suspect in going through those options. It is also a defense that the suspect did not know that he or she was being arrested or asked to pull over for a traffic stop, but that defense is not likely to succeed unless it is very cleverly made.

Source: http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2010/02/09/20100209man-flees-in-backhoe.html

A recent Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals decision interpreted Tennessee’s DUI statute in a way that may prove confusing in the future. In the case, styled State v. Wright, the defendant was convicted of DUI based on the evidence that the officer saw him swerve over the center line of the road three times, the defendant approached a stop sign and turned left without stopping, the officer detected the odor of alcohol when she approached the vehicle, that defendant needed support when he exited the vehicle, and that the defendant failed all five field sobriety tests. Despite this, the defendant’s BAC level was only .03%, well below the legal limit of .08%. The court held that although the defendant’s BAC level was not sufficient to give rise to the legal inference that the defendant was driving under the influence, the evidence nevertheless supported a finding that the defendant was guilty of DUI. This is probably the right result in the case, as intoxication does not necessarily have any correlation to alcohol or BAC level and the defendant seems clearly to have been intoxicated. However, this case begs the question of what purpose the BAC restriction has at all.

Tennessee’s DUI statute, T.C.A. section 55-10-401, provides that it is unlawful for a person to control a motor vehicle on a public roadway or place while:

1. Under the influence of any intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic drug, or drug producing stimulating effects on the central nervous system; or


2. The alcohol concentration in the person's blood or breath is eight-hundredths of one percent (.08 %) or more.

Continue reading "BAC Level is not Dispositive in Tennessee" »

A New Jersey man pleaded guilty today to assault by automobile, two counts of aggravated assault and driving while intoxicated stemming from an accident in which the man’s drunk driving was responsible for seriously injuring three women. At the time of the wreck, which occurred on April 18, 2009, the man’s blood-alcohol content was reportedly twice the legal limit. According to his plea deal he will be facing up to five years in prison, a far cry from the decades of prison time he would have been facing had he gone to trial. The injuries to the victims in his case were severe. One victim in particular had her skull detached from her spinal column and miraculously survived. She also suffered brain trauma and has undergone fifteen operations as a result of the accident. The personal injury ramifications of this incident are discussed here.

This situation is a perfect example of how plea bargaining can aid defendants in avoiding lengthy sentences. In situations like this one, where the defendant will almost certainly be found guilty considering all the circumstances, the defendant may be better off pleading guilty and foregoing the trial process. The downside of pleading guilty is that the defendant waives several constitutional rights that are generally available to them, such as the right to a trial by jury, the right to present witnesses in their favor, and the right to confront witnesses against them.

Continue reading "Plea Bargaining Helps Man Avoid Lengthy Sentence" »

The scope of Minnesota’s DUI statute was extended substantially last Thursday when the Supreme Court of Minnesota upheld a DUI conviction for a man who was found intoxicated behind the wheel of an inoperable vehicle. Officers found the man asleep in his legally parked car at his apartment complex. The engine was cold to the touch, giving no indication that the vehicle had been driven, and the keys were in the console instead of the ignition. The man admitted to having consumed a multitude of beers earlier that night. He was arrested and found to have a blood-alcohol content of .18, well over the legal limit. The officers inserted the keys into the ignition and tried to start the car, but it would not start and was inoperable at the time. The defendant was convicted of DUI and appealed at every turn, eventually taking his case all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court on the argument that he could not be convicted of DUI since he was behind the wheel of a vehicle that could not be driven. With this most recent ruling, the Minnesota Supreme Court has decided that the operability of a vehicle is not a bar to a DUI conviction.

The good news for defendants in Tennessee (assuming the police intervention in this case was legal, which is questionable) is that Tennessee law currently does not recognize that a defendant can get a DUI behind the wheel of an inoperable vehicle. In fact, Tennessee courts have implied in several opinions that the inoperability of the vehicle would in fact bar a prosecution for DUI since a defendant cannot technically “control” a vehicle that is inoperable. It should be noted, however, that the vehicle will have to be literally inoperable; being in park or having the keys lying in the console alone is not enough. Such circumstances merely indicate that the driver was not operating the car at that particular moment. It is thus entirely possible that they have previously been operating the vehicle while intoxicated or were about to operate the vehicle while intoxicated. This law may change some time in the future, but as it now stands, being behind the wheel of an inoperable vehicle is a defense to a DUI charge in Tennessee.

Source: http://thenewspaper.com/news/30/3030.asp

One potential mitigating factor that defendants can use at sentencing in an effort to get a reduced sentence is where “the defendant, although guilty of the crime, committed the offense under such unusual circumstances that it is unlikely that a sustained intent to violate the law motivated the criminal conduct.” This mitigating factor is one that will not be used all that often because it requires that the circumstances surrounding the conduct be unusual, but when such unusual circumstances give rise to the criminal conduct in question, this factor can be highly effective.

One example of when this factor might be applicable comes from a somewhat bizarre story that took place on Monday in Syracuse, New York, where a man was apparently hanging out on a street corner while intoxicated when he became the victim of a random drive-by shooting. The man, wounded in his shoulder by a single gunshot, then tried to drive himself to the hospital. Unfortunately, he began his trek on the wrong side of the road and failed to correct that mistake, smashing into another vehicle. He was charged with DWI. The personal injury law consequences of this ill-fated decision are discussed here.

Continue reading "Mitigating Factors: Unusual Circumstances" »

A fifty-five year-old bus driver from New York recently pleaded guilty to child endangerment and driving while intoxicated after she took students on a terrifying bus ride while reportedly driving a school bus while intoxicated. Students apparently begged the driver to stop because she was in no condition to operate the school bus. The driver felt that the students were overreacting and continued to drive, reportedly speeding, running over a mailbox, and rolling backwards down a hill. Some students finally opened the emergency door at the back of the bus so they could get out, putting a stop to the incident. Luckily, neither the bus driver nor any of the passengers suffered any injuries. The bus driver’s attorney said that her actions were caused by a bad reaction between alcohol and some prescription medication she was taking. The personal injury issues concerning her conduct are further discussed here.

DUI has been discussed at length in some of our previous blogs, so this blog will take an alternate path and deal with child endangerment. Tennessee’s codification of the crime of child endangerment can be found in T.C.A. section 39-15-401(c). This statute deals primarily with child abuse cases, but the statute is constructed in such a way that it could technically be applicable to the bus driver’s situation. The most interesting thing about this statute from a criminal defense standpoint is its requirement that a person “knowingly” expose a child to personal injury in order to be convicted of the offense of child endangerment.

Continue reading "Child Endangerment: "Knowing" Requirement" »

In a criminal trial, there is a substantial difference between questions of law and questions of fact. While the issue of what distinguishes the two questions is ultimately more complex than the examination necessary for the purposes of this blog, it will be sufficient here to say that questions of law are decided by the court while questions of fact are decided by a jury. This means that the jury can decide not only whether the fact is true or false, but how much weight should be attributed to the fact for purposes of making a guilt or innocence determination.

One issue that is a question of fact is the result of a field sobriety test performed pursuant to a DUI stop. In State v. Lowe, the defendant was arrested and charged with a DUI for, among other things, failing to perform a field sobriety test adequately. The defendant apparently was administered the “walk-and-turn” test and the “one-legged stand” test and was unable to successfully perform either. The defendant argued that the results of such tests should not be considered by the jury because the police officer responsible for administering the tests testified at trial that the results of both tests are less than 70% accurate. The court correctly ruled that both the evidence regarding the defendant’s performance on such tests and the ability of the tests to measure a driver’s impairment are issues of fact for the jury to decide.

Continue reading "Field Sobriety Test Results are Issues of Fact" »

DUI cases are a pretty common occurrence today, but it is not every day you see someone charged with a DUI for operating a forklift. A man from Fairbanks, Alaska pleaded guilty recently to just that after police caught him operating the machinery while drunk a couple of weeks ago as he was trying to pull two trucks out of a ditch. Apparently the man’s friend had gotten his truck stuck in a ditch which prompted the man to attempt to use his truck to free his friend’s vehicle. Unfortunately, the man’s truck also became stuck in the ditch after he attempted to pull his friend out, prompting the man to seek out the forklift to free both vehicles. As the man arrived with the forklift, the police showed up and, determining that both men were intoxicated, arrested both the man and his friend.

Tennessee’s DUI law states that a person can be guilty of DUI if they are operating an automobile or any other motor-driven vehicle on any public road, street, alley, parking lot, or any other place frequented by the public. As has been discussed before on this blog, the wording of the statute means that a DUI can be committed while operating not only an automobile, but also a go-cart, lawnmower, or even motorized bar stool. Since a forklift is motor-driven, it would also be covered by Tennessee’s statute. The penalty for a DUI charge is contained in T.C.A. §55-10-403 and increases with each successive DUI charge. The penalty for a first-time DUI offense is a possible fine of $350 to $1500, up to eleven months and twenty-nine days of incarceration, suspension of the offender’s drivers license for one year, and assignment to a roadway litter clean-up crew for a period of twenty-four hours to be served in three shifts of eight hours each.

It is never a good idea to drive a vehicle while intoxicated. It is an even worse idea to get that vehicle stuck in a ditch and then go get another vehicle while you are still intoxicated with which to pull the first one out of the ditch. It is also important to remember that the Tennessee statute covers any motor-driven vehicle, including vehicles like forklifts which are rarely driven on public roads (for good reason).

Source: http://newsminer.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Yes-+you+can+get+a+DUI+on+a+forklift+in+Fairbanks%20&id=5253084-Yes-+you+can+get+a+DUI+on+a+forklift+in+Fairbanks&instance=home_news_window_left_top_3

In what reads like part of a script from a good comedy movie, a woman has been charged with DUI after her escapades resulted in her trying to pay a police officer for her food at a Sonic drive-in. A 911 caller reported that the woman had nearly struck several vehicles while trying to navigate the complex obstacle course that is the Sonic parking lot before safely settling in a parking space. When the police arrived, they found the woman slumped over the steering wheel. When a police officer tried to get the woman’s attention, the woman does what any good customer at Sonic does and attempted to pay for her food by handing a $20 bill to the officer. The officer then informed the woman that she was a police officer, not a Sonic employee, but the woman remained undeterred and continued to try to offer the officer the $20 bill. The intoxicated driver was arrested and police found a syringe, a spoon with a white powdery residue, and numerous bottles of prescription medication in the car. She was charged with DUI and possession of drug paraphernalia.

DUI has been discussed fairly often on this blog, but possession of drug paraphernalia has not been examined too frequently. Tennessee makes it a crime to possess, use, or deliver drug paraphernalia. An extremely in-depth definition of what constitutes drug paraphernalia can be found in T.C.A. §39-17-402(12), but it basically means anything that is used in the growth, manufacture, packaging, or use of a controlled substance. The determination of whether or not an item constitutes drug paraphernalia is made upon the consideration of a number of factors, including but not limited to: any statements made by the person in control of the object, prior convictions of the person in control of the object for controlled substance offenses, the existence of any residue on the object, and the community’s perception of the object and it’s use. Possession of drug paraphernalia is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to eleven months and twenty-nine days in jail. However, if such paraphernalia is delivered or manufactured or possessed with the intent to deliver, the offense is upgraded to a Class E felony, punishable by up to six years in prison.

Source: http://www.semissourian.com/story/1587285.html

Around this time of year, a popular hobby for kids around the world is to try to catch a glimpse of Santa Claus or maybe even catch up with him for a brief visit and discussion about what toys they would like to get for Christmas. In keeping with the Christmas spirit, a policeman from Sparta, Wisconsin received a call that Santa had been spotted and rushed to find him immediately.

Unfortunately for Santa, the cop found him and immediately issued Santa a ticket for violation of the Open Container Law. Apparently someone had seen what appeared to be a drunk driver operating a vehicle with someone dressed as Santa in the passenger seat. Once the drunk driver pulled over, a witness saw Santa stumble over to some kids, give them a hug, and ask them where his reindeer were. Luckily for Santa, he did not find the reindeer or he could be looking at a DUI charge as well.

Continue reading "Santa Claus Cited for Violation of Open Container Law" »

A Wisconsin woman recently took the idea of “doing your civic duty” to a whole new level. Noticing that there was a drunk driver on the road, the woman immediately called to report the offender to emergency services. The 911 operator was shocked to find that the woman reported that the drunk driver was none other than herself, responding to the question of, “Are you behind them?”, with the reply of, “I am them.” The dispatcher recommended the woman pull over, and she obliged. She was later charged with driving drunk and operating a vehicle with a blood-alcohol level of .1 or more. While her voluntary confession did not result in her being able to avoid the charges altogether, it may aid her in obtaining a more lenient punishment from the court.

In Tennessee, a person can be charged with driving under the influence under T.C.A. section 55-10-401 if they are operating an automobile or other motor-driven vehicle while:

1. “Under the influence of any intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic drug, or drug producing stimulating effects on the central nervous system; or


2. The alcohol concentration in the person's blood or breath is eight-hundredths of one percent (.08 %) or more.”

While self-reporting may not help you avoid a DUI charge in Tennessee, it can help mitigate the penalty imposed for the offense. The penalties for DUI in Tennessee range from misdemeanors to serious felony charges based on the circumstances surrounding the offense and the number of times a particular offender has been arrested for driving under the influence. Thus, a DUI conviction can be accompanied by stiff consequences, such as a decade or more of imprisonment.

Continue reading "Woman Reports Herself for Driving Drunk" »

Life is full of surprises. One can go from the highest of highs to the lowest of lows in a matter of seconds. One minute you can be living the good life, ruling the road in your motorized recliner, and the next thing you know you are getting bushwhacked by a parked car. To make matters worse, the ambush could lead to your arrest for driving under the influence while not causing you serious enough injury for anyone to feel bad about making fun of you. While this hypothetical situation may seem far-fetched, it is exactly the scenario in which a Minnesota man found himself in August of 2008 and resulted in him pleading guilty recently to the charge of driving under the influence.

While it may seem odd to be charged with driving under the influence from the comfort of your easy chair, Tennessee law allows the offense to be charged against anyone who operates a “motor driven” vehicle while the alcohol concentration in the person’s breath or blood is .08% or more. The recliner in this case had been equipped with a converted lawnmower motor, steering wheel, stereo system, and cup holders, so the Tennessee statute clearly would apply to the vehicle. Also, the man’s blood alcohol content was allegedly .29% at the time of the offense, almost four times the legal limit in Tennessee. Although it seems rare that someone would be charged with a DUI on a piece of furniture, the Tennessee statute is drafted so that such activity is actually covered. Citizens would be well-advised to learn more information on the penalties for DUI in Tennessee.

Continue reading "Man Gets DUI in Recliner Chair" »

If you are someone who likes to enjoy a few beers while traveling on horseback down a dark road, then you can sympathize with a man from McMinn County, Tennessee who was recently arrested for doing just that. According to WBIR.com, the police received complaints about someone riding a horse down a country road at night and sent a deputy out to see what was happening. Upon arriving, the deputy found a man riding his horse down the dark road and noticed that the man was slurring his speech and had several empty beer cans and prescription pills in his saddlebags.

Police arrested the man apparently as much for his own safety as anything else, as the speed limit on the road was fifty-five miles per hour, making it an extremely unsafe area for after-hours equestrian travel. The bad news for the man is that he was charged with public intoxication for his tipsy trek, a Class C misdemeanor under T.C.A. section 39-17-310 punishable by up to thirty days imprisonment. There is some good news for him, however, in that driving under the influence is only applicable to operation of a “motor vehicle” in Tennessee, thus preventing him from being faced with an additional fine of up to $1,500 and suspension of his drivers’ license for one year in accordance with T.C.A. section 55-10-403.

To be guilty of driving under the influence in Tennessee, the statute requires that a person must be in physical control of an automobile or “motor-driven” vehicle at the time of the alleged offense. Thus, while the statute would clearly apply to the operation of an automobile, golf cart, tractor, lawnmower, motorized scooter, or any other similar vehicle it does not apply to the riding or control of animals.

Continue reading "DUI Applies to Motor Vehicles Only" »

Under current DUI law, the introduction of the results of a blood alcohol test cannot be admitted into evidence without the defendant’s consent if blood was taken from the defendant while he or she was incapable of refusing the test (e.g., the defendant was unconscious).

The new law adds an exception to the blood alcohol test consent requirement. Enacted into law in May of 2009, the new law requires a law enforcement officer to cause the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to another to be tested to determine the alcohol or drug content of the driver's blood, but only if the officer had probable cause to believe that the defendant driver had committed one of the following offenses:

• Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol;
• Vehicular assault and aggravated vehicular assault; or
• Vehicular homicide.

Continue reading "New Law Allows Admission of Blood Alcohol Test Results Regardless of Defendant's Consent" »

With summer in full swing, residents and out-of-state visitors alike have taken their boats out onto East Tennessee’s numerous rivers and lakes. Many like to have a good time—whether fishing, skiing, or just simply relaxing.

While boating recreation involves good food, good fishing and good company, it also frequently involves alcohol. For those boat operators out there, you should know that the same Tennessee DUI laws applicable to motor vehicles apply similarly to boats. Accordingly, you could be subject to a felony and all of its consequences upon arrest for and conviction of driving a boat while under the influence of alcohol (or “BUI”).

In Tennessee, it is unlawful to:

• operate a vessel subject to registration, and


• while on public waters of Tennessee,


• while under the influence of any intoxicant or with a blood alcohol content of .08 percent or greater.

Continue reading "Alcohol and Boating (BUI) Don’t Mix" »

Last week, a blog discussed the right of the defendant to have certain non-essential witnesses sequestered so as to prevent the potential for bias. Failure to properly sequester a witness can result in a new trial and potentially an acquittal. Using the same facts as described in the Tennessee DUI case, State v. Anderson, the “chain of custody” issue will be discussed here.

Chain of custody refers to the documentation of evidence as it passes from person to person, agency to agency. Because evidence is used to convict people of crimes, the state has the initial burden to prove that evidence was scrupulously and carefully handled so as to prevent, for example, the appearance that evidence may have been fraudulently planted or mistakenly identified. If the state fails in this burden, a skilled Knoxville criminal defense attorney may allege tampering or misconduct in an attempt to get his or her client acquitted or to overturn a guilty verdict on appeal. If you have been charged with a DUI in Tennessee, call Baker Associates at 866-853-2888 for a free consultation.

Over the defendant’s objections in Anderson, the trial court allowed the prosecution to introduce the test kit used to determine the defendant’s blood alcohol level. On appeal, the defendant challenged the sufficiency of the state’s evidence establishing the chain of custody of defendant’s blood test kit.

At the hearing, the defendant called the appeals court’s attention to the state’s failure to present testimony regarding the steps taken to distinguish the defendant’s test kit from any other test kits. In particular, the State did not present any evidence of distinguishing marks (such as an evidence ID number) that could show definitively that the test kit belonged to the defendant. Consequently, the appeals court ruled that the test kit evidence for the DUI in Tennessee case should not have been admitted, that the mistake was not harmless error, and that a new trial should be granted.

Under Tennessee’s DUI law, it is unlawful for any person to drive any automobile or other motor driven vehicle on any public roads, alleys, or parking lots frequented by the public with a blood alcohol level of .08% or more. If you have been charged with this crime in Tennessee, it is essential that you get an experienced Knoxville DUI attorney to represent you.

The state’s DUI case is only as good as the evidence it has against you. In two parts, I will discuss two evidentiary issues the defendant in State v. Anderson brought on appeal from his DUI conviction in Tennessee.

In 2005, the Defendant, Michael R. Anderson, crashed a red Camaro into a tree. An officer arrived on the scene and after smelling alcohol, asked the defendant if he would volunteer to take a blood test at a local hospital. The defendant consented. The blood test revealed that defendant had a high concentration of alcohol in his system.

At trial, expert testimony and a blood test revealed a blood alcohol level of .21, which, according to the expert, was equivalent to 14 drinks consumed by a two-hundred pound man. And the blood test was taken approximately 2 hours after the accident! On this evidence, Mr. Anderson was convicted of DUI and sentenced to almost a year in jail.

On appeal, the defendant challenged the expert’s testimony upon proof that the expert had discussed aspects of the case with an officer/witness and a prosecutor during a court recess. Based on this fact, the defendant asserted that the state violated the rule of sequestration, which basically orders all persons not to discuss live trial testimony or exhibits with witnesses who have been excluded from hearing such live testimony.

Although the expert had been specifically excluded by the court, the court of appeals found that the expert was essential to the case, which according to a rule of evidence, means that the expert should not have been excluded from discussing live testimony. If, however, the witness had not been an expert or otherwise deemed non-essential, the case may have resulted in an acquittal.

Like many other procedural and evidentiary rules, witness sequestration was developed to protect the accused from bias that may arise in a witness when he or she observes live testimony or evidence in a judicial proceeding. When you have been charged with a crime, you will want an attorney who has the knowledge and the experience to protect your right to a fair trial. Call 866-853-2888 today to speak with the skilled Tennessee DUI defense attorneys at Baker Associates.

Tennessee’s open container law, TCA § 55-10-416, is much different from Tennessee’s DUI laws or DWI statutes, though they all aim to prevent the same end result. Tennessee’s open container statute states that it is against the law for a driver to consume any alcoholic beverage, or to possess an open container of alcohol while operating a motor vehicle. This is markedly different from DUI and DWI in that it does not require the driver to actually be under the influence, but only to be in possession of or consuming an alcoholic beverage.

Under TCA § 55-10-416, as a Tennessee traffic violation, an open container is any container that has an alcoholic beverage inside, the contents of which are immediately capable of being consumed or the seal of which has been broken. Also, a driver is deemed in possession of the container when it is not in the possession of a passenger and is not located in a closed compartment or other nonpassenger area of the vehicle. This statute comes into play any time the engine of the motor vehicle is on, despite whether the vehicle is actually moving.

An open container violation in Tennessee is a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a fine only, and not imprisonment. Additionally, a police officer is to only issue a citation for a violation of the statute, unless the offender refuses to sign or accept the citation, at which point the officer may take the driver into custody.

TCA § 55-10-416 specifically states that local municipalities may criminalize the possession of an open alcohol container by a passenger; however, the default rule in Tennessee is that only the driver of the motor vehicle may be cited for possessing an open container. This makes Tennessee one of only eleven states to not criminalize the possession of an open alcohol container by the passenger of a motor vehicle.

If you are facing charges for violating Tennessee's open container law or if you are facing DUI charges, it may be in your best interest to contact a skilled criminal defense lawyer in Pigeon Forge. At Baker Associates, we will aggressively defend your rights and ensure that you understand the complexities of your case. Call us today for a comprehensive evaluation.

DUI is one of the most common offenses that criminal defense attorneys in Tennessee deal with, but the issues related to DUI can be very complex. Tennessee’s DUI statute is located at TCA § 55-10-401.

Under Tennessee law, DUI can be charged in a number of different situations. All of these situations pertain to operating any motor vehicle, and that operation can take place on any public road or highway of the state, any street or alley, or on the premises of any shopping center, trailer park, apartment complex, or any other premises generally frequented by the public at large. This is often surprising to persons who are charged with DUI in Tennessee while not operating the vehicle on an actual road. DUI is charged when a person operates a vehicle on one of these surfaces while under the influence of any intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic drug, or drug that produces stimulating effects on the central nervous system. It is also illegal for a person to operate a vehicle while having a blood alcohol concentration of .08%.

DUI is a strict liability offense, meaning that a person’s intent is irrelevant to the charge. This makes the offense particularly inflexible, but there a number of complexities involved in DUI cases, often related to the methods used by law enforcement in ascertaining a person’s blood alcohol content, that can provide defenses to a Sevierville DUI charge. This is why it is particularly important to employ the services of an attorney when facing a DUI charge, as these defenses often involve technical legal issues.

Under the statute, a first offense related to DUI results in a fine of between $350 and $1500. Additionally, a person convicted of DUI shall have their license revoked for one year. This punishment can increase depending upon a number of factors, including an unusually high blood alcohol concentration, or having a child in the vehicle while under the influence. Punishment may also be increased for subsequent offenses.

If you or someone you care about is being charged with a DUI offense in Tennessee, the experienced Sevierville DUI attorneys at Baker Associates can help. Those facing DUI charges need to be familiar with their rights. Call us today for a free consultation.

The Benefits of Retrograde Extrapolation in DUI and Vehicular Homicide Cases

Retrograde extrapolation is a process by which law enforcement attempts to estimate the blood alcohol content (BAC) of a person at a certain time. Usually, this is done by taking the BAC as measured at a police station and employing a list of variables to determine the person’s BAC at any time before that.

Retrograde extrapolation is beneficial to law enforcement in that it can provide officers with a reasonable estimation of a person’s BAC at any given time. Thus, if a person refused to take a breathalyzer test when pulled over, officers could use retrograde extrapolation from a later test to determine whether the person would have been legally intoxicated when they were pulled over for a Tennessee DUI. It is also beneficial in cases of vehicular homicide in Tennessee, allowing officers to determine whether a person would have been legally intoxicated at the time of the accident. The determination of whether a driver is intoxicated at the time of an accident is imperative to the person being charged with the correct crime.

Retrograde extrapolation can also be beneficial to defendants. Just as it can be used to estimate that a person was legally intoxicated at a certain time, it can similarly be used to estimate that a person was not legally intoxicated at that time.

Retrograde extrapolation has come under intense scrutiny. Most criticism is focused on the rigidity of the factors employed. In order to develop the system, a number of assumptions about the human body, as well as a number of inflexible variables, had to be made. Thus, factors that do not fall within the standard parameters can often lead to inaccurate results. For example, a person with an abnormal alcohol absorption rate can be unfairly pegged by extrapolation, because the system supposes a standard absorption rate for all persons. This is only one of a number of criticisms of retrograde extrapolation.

The law behind DUI defense in Tennessee has become increasingly complicated in recent years. By investigating issues such as the validity of field sobriety tests and witness credibility, Baker Associates matches Tennessee’s investigative power with our DUI lawyer’s own, often finding flaws and weaknesses in the government’s case.

If you have been charged with Vehicular Assault in Knoxville or Gatlinburg, Tennessee, you should contact our experienced criminal defense lawyers. It is important to act quickly so that our vehicular assault attorneys can begin investigating your case. In some cases, it is necessary to seek independent testing if a blood sample was taken after the traffic accident and to take pictures at the accident scene to ensure it is in the same or similar condition as the time of the accident.

Under Tennessee law a person commits Vehicular Assault who, as the proximate result of the persons' intoxication, recklessly causes serious bodily injury to another person by the operation of a motor vehicle, including both alcohol and drug intoxication. Commonly, persons charged with Vehicular Assault will also face prosecution for Driving Under the Influence - DUI - in Tennessee.

To be found guilty of Vehicular Assault, the State must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant caused serious bodily injury (bodily injury that involves a substantial risk of death, protracted unconsciousness, extreme physical pain, protracted or obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or substantial impairment of a function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty) to the alleged victim by the operation of a motor vehicle;
and

(2) That the serious bodily injury was the proximate result of the driver's intoxication (i.e., mental or physical condition which is the result of taking intoxicants or drugs in any form and which deprives one of that clearness of mind and control of oneself which one would otherwise possess);
and
(3) that the defendant acted recklessly (i.e., the defendant was aware of, but consciously disregarded, a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the alleged victim would be killed. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the defendant's standpoint.) The requirement of "recklessly" is established if it is shown that the defendant acted either intentionally or knowingly.

Vehicular Assault in Tennessee is a Class D Felony, punishable by 2 to 12 years imprisonment, a fine up to $5,000, and the loss of driving privileges dependent upon the driver's prior criminal convictions for vehicular assault, vehicular homicide, and/or driving under the influence. The judge may also impose additional penalties such as alcohol and drug treatment, Victim Impact Panel, DUI School, Repeat Offender's School, community service, or other measures deemed necessary by the trial judge.

The penalties for Vehicular Assault are severe. A felony criminal conviction means the loss of rights, privileges, and liberty. If you have been charged with DUI, Vehicular Assault, or other alcohol or driving related offense, contact the experienced Vehicular Assault attorneys at Baker Associates in Sevierville, Tennessee for a free consultation.

Sources: T.C.A. § 39-13-106; T.P.I. Crim. 6.04.

The criminal defense attorneys at Baker Associates have successfully represented individuals charged with homicide offenses in Tennessee. Criminal homicide is the unlawful killing of another person. Under Tennessee law, criminal homicide is broken down into seven classifications: First Degree Murder, Second Degree Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter, Reckless Homicide, Criminally Negligent Homicide, Assisted Suicide, and Vehicular Homicide.

Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-213 defines Vehicular Homicide as the reckless killing of another by the operation of an automobile, airplane, motorboat or other motor vehicle, as the proximate result of:
(1) Conduct creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to a person;
(2) The driver's alcohol or drug intoxication;
(3) Conduct constituting the offense of Drag Racing.

Vehicular Homicide -- Intoxication:

In order to be found guilty of Vehicular Homicide by intoxication, the State of Tennessee must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant killed the alleged victim by the operation of a motor vehicle, automobile, airplane, or motorboat;
(2) That the defendant acted recklessly, i.e., the defendant was aware of, but consciously disregarded, a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the alleged victim would be killed. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the defendant's standpoint.
The requirement of "recklessly" is established if it is shown that the defendant acted either intentionally or knowingly.
and
(3) That the killing was the proximate result of the driver's intoxication, i.e., having a blood alcohol level of .08% or higher or acting "under the influence" of any intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic drug, or drug producing stimulating effects on teh central nervous system or under the influence of alcohol. "Under the influence" includes any mental or physical condition which is the result of taking intoxicants or drugs in any form and which deprives one of that clearness of mind and control of oneself which one would otherwise possess. It is not necessary that the person be in such a condition as would make him or her guilty of public drunkenness; the law merely requires that the person be under the influence of an intoxicant or drugs.

In vehicular homicide cases, the impairment or intoxication level of the alleged driver must be carefully considered in order to determine whether the accused will be convicted of Vehicular Homicide by intoxication, Vehicular Homicide by reckless conduct, or a lesser offense such as Criminally Negligent Homicide.

It is important to hire a Tennessee criminal defense lawyer if you are charged with Murder, Vehicular Homicide, or another homicide offense. Vehicular Homicide by intoxication under section (2) is a Class B felony. A person convicted of Vehicular Homicide by intoxication is punished by imprisonment from 8 years to 30 years and can be fined up to $25,000.00. Additionally, a person convicted of vehicular homicide will be prohibited from driving a vehicle in the State of Tennessee for at least 3 years up to a maximum of 10 years.

If you or a close friend or relative has been charged withVehicular Homicide or another homicide offense in Knoxville, Sevierville, or Maryville, Tennessee, contact our experienced criminal defense attorneys as soon as possible. Our team of attorneys will work quickly to investigate and prepare your defense, as well as seek the services of a private investigator and an accident reconstructionist to adequately defend you.

For additional information on DUI and other Alcohol-related offenses, click here.

Sources: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-213; Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-111; T.P.I. Crim. 7.08(b) and (c).

The criminal defense attorneys at Baker Associates have successfully represented numerous clients charged with alcohol-related offenses ranging from DUI to open container violations. In Tennessee, purchasing alcohol for a minor is a criminal offense.

A person can be charged with a Class A misdemeanor for purchasing alcoholic beverages or beer for a minor, i.e., a person under twenty-one (21) years of age, or for providing alcoholic beverages or beer to a minor. To be convicted for purchasing alcohol for or providing alcohol to a minor, the State of Tennessee must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1)(a) That the accused bought intoxicating alcoholic beverages for or on behalf of any child under the age of twenty-one (21) years;
or
(1)(b) That the accused furnished intoxicating alcoholic beverages to any child under the age of twenty-one (21) years for any purpose;
and
(2) That the accused acted either intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.

It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that any person accused of giving or buying alcoholic beverages or beer for a minor acted upon a reasonably held belief that the minor was of legal drinking age. This belief may be acquired by the minor making a false statement about his or her age or presenting false identification that shows the minor is twenty-one years of age or older.

If a person is convicted of Class A misdemeanor Purchasing or Providing Alcohol to a Minor, he or she may be sentenced to up to eleven months and twenty-nine days in jail and a fine not to exceed $2,500.00. Additionally, persons convicted under this statute must perform at least one hundred (100) hours of community service work. The judge may also suspend driving privileges of a person convicted of purchasing alcohol for a minor. If the person has no driver license, the judge may increase the community service work up to a maximum of two hundred (200) hours.

If you have been charged with selling alcohol to a minor or purchasing beer for a minor, it is important to contact an experienced criminal defense lawyer. The criminal defense attorneys at Baker Associates in Knoxville, Tennessee, have represented many clients charged with alcohol-related offenses, including sales of alcohol to a minor. If you or a relative has been charged with selling alcohol to a minor, DUI, or another alcohol-related offense, contact our office today for a free case consultation.

Sources: T.C.A. § 39-15-404; T.P.I. Crim. 21.03.

Knoxville DUI attorneys are dedicated to fighting DUI cases. Our East Tennessee DUI lawyers are trained and educated in the different aspects of DUI defense. Our office maintains high standards of continuing education to bring our clients up-to-date scientific knowledge and legal skills to defend DUI cases all across East Tennessee. The preservation of your rights is important.

Underage Driving While Impaired is an offense in Tennessee that closely resembles DUI. Under Tennessee law, a person age sixteen or over but under age twenty-one may not drive or be in physical control of an automobile or other motor driven vehicle while:

• The alcohol concentration in the person's blood is more than two hundredths of one percent;
• Under the influence of alcohol;
• Under the influence of any intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic drug, or drug producing stimulating effects on the central nervous system; or
• Under the combined influence of alcohol and any other drug to a degree which makes the person's driving ability impaired. Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-415 (2007).

It is usually not a defense to Underage Driving While Impaired that the individual under the influence of narcotic drugs or barbital drugs is or has been entitled to use such drugs under the laws of this state.

It is important to realize that the penalties for Underage Driving While Impaired and DUI are different. The offense of underage driving while impaired for a person age eighteen or over but under age twenty-one is a Class A misdemeanor punishable only by a driver license suspension of one year and by a fine of two hundred fifty dollars. As additional punishment, the court may impose public service work.

Underage Driving While Impaired for a person age sixteen or over but under the age of eighteen is considered to be a delinquent act. This is punishable only by a driver license suspension of one year and by a fine of two hundred fifty dollars. As additional punishment, the court may impose public service work.

If you or a loved one has been charged with Underage Driving While Impaired or DUI in the East Tennessee area, contact a Knoxville DUI lawyer. A Knoxville DUI attorney will discuss the legal aspects applicable in your case.

Knoxville DUI lawyers realize that a DUI charge can be intimidating, especially if you don't know a lot about Tennessee DUI law. Tennessee DUI lawyers can help you understand Tennessee law, and explain your rights and options. If you have questions about the automatic license suspension or the impact a DUI conviction might have on your insurance costs, you may want to talk with a Knoxville DUI lawyer.

You should not wait until your initial court appearance to start asking questions about your particular case. Contact a Knoxville DUI lawyer before you appear in court so that your Knoxville DUI attorney can gather important information he or she needs to make informed decisions about your case. A Tennessee DUI lawyer can assess your case from your point of view, and advise you on Tennessee DUI law as it applies to your situation.

If you have questions about the sentence you face including whether the mandatory jail time provisions apply to you, contact a Tennessee DUI lawyer. You may think that there's no way to successfully challenge a DUI charge, but Knoxville DUI lawyers know that many cases have weaknesses. These weaknesses often open doors to dismissals or acquittals. Any crack in the state’s case could create an opportunity for a Tennessee DUI lawyer to negotiate for reduced charges or a favorable plea bargain.

Take advantage of the opportunity to learn about your rights under Tennessee law before you take a step in any direction. Contact a Tennessee DUI attorney if you have been charged with DUI in East Tennessee. Our DUI attorneys handle DUI cases in Knoxville, Loudon, Maryville, Gatlinburg, Pigeon Forge, Sevierville, Newport, Johnson City, Chattanooga, Nashville, and Bristol.

Knoxville DUI attorneys understand that if you are charged with DUI for the first time, you are probably concerned and worried about your future. Our Knoxville DUI lawyers realize that Driving Under the Influence is typically not a crime involving malice. Many individuals charged with DUI are not familiar with the criminal justice system. The DUI laws and regulations are confusing and seem to change frequently.

Under Tennessee law, any person convicted for a first offense DUI shall be fined between $350 and $1,500. The court will prohibit a convicted person from driving a vehicle in the state of Tennessee for a period of one year. Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-403 (2007). A first offense DUI violation is a Class A misdemeanor. The jail time depends upon the circumstances surrounding the conviction.

If you are less than twenty-one years of age at the time of the offense, the court shall sentence you to confinement in the county jail or workhouse for a minimum of forty-eight hours to a maximum of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration. As a condition of probation, you must remove litter during daylight hours from state route highways or state-aid highways, for a period of twenty-four hours. The period of litter removal shall be served in three shifts of eight consecutive hours each.

If you are twenty-one years of age or older at the time of the offense, the court shall sentence you to confinement in the county jail or workhouse for not less than twenty-four hours nor more than eleven months and twenty-nine days. As a condition of probation, you must remove litter during daylight hours from state route highways or state-aid highways for a period of twenty-four hours. The period of litter removal shall be served in three shifts of eight consecutive hours each.

• If at the time of the offense the alcohol concentration in your blood or breath is twenty hundredths of one percent (.20%) or greater, the minimum period of confinement for you must be seven consecutive calendar days rather than forty-eight hours.

• If at the time of the offense, you were accompanied by a child under eighteen years of age, you must be punished by a mandatory minimum incarceration of thirty days and a mandatory minimum fine of one thousand dollars $1,000.

• If at the time of the offense, you were accompanied by a child under eighteen years of age, and the child suffers serious bodily injury as a result of the DUI, the violation is a Class D felony.

• If at the time of the offense, you were accompanied by a child under eighteen years of age, and the child is killed as a result of the DUI, the violation is a Class C felony.

Contact a Knoxville DUI lawyer to talk about the facts and circumstances surrounding your case. A Knoxville DUI attorney can discuss different legal avenues applicable to you. Our Knoxville attorneys handle DUI cases in Knoxville, Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, Gatlinburg, Loudon, Maryville, and Newport.

Knoxville DUI lawyers handle DUI cases across the East Tennessee area. If you are charged with DUI, contact one of our attorneys. Our DUI lawyers will examine the facts of your case and advise you on how to approach your particular situation. The crime of DUI is one of the most committed crimes in Tennessee and the United States today. DUI laws have stiffened over the years and the penalties exponentially increase with multiple DUI convictions.

DUI 2 is considered a Class A misdemeanor under Tennessee law. The period of confinement substantially increases compared to a DUI 1. If convicted, the offender must serve at least 45 days confinement up to 11 months and 29 days confinement in the county jail or workhouse. The difference between the time actually served and 11 months and 29 days must be served on probation.

The costs for a DUI 2 are expensive. Besides expensive court costs, DUI 2 is punishable by fine between $600 and $3,500. In addition, if you are convicted you will lose your license for a period of two years. A second offender may also forfeit his or her vehicle and be subject to an ignition lock device.

DUI is unusual in that people from all walks of life tend to commit the offense. If you are charged with DUI, it is important to contact an experienced DUI attorney. Our firm defends clients charge with DUI in Knoxville, Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, Gatlinburg, Newport, Maryville, Loudon, and Morristown.

Knoxville DUI lawyers know the seriousness of any DUI conviction. The consequences include jail time, loss of your license, and expensive fines and court fees. If you are charged with DUI in the East Tennessee area, contact a Knoxville DUI attorney. One of our DUI lawyers will assess your case, and discuss options for moving forward.

The penalties for subsequent DUI convictions increase tremendously. Previous blogs have discussed the penalties for a first DUI offense. A DUI 3 carries the harshest DUI penalties under misdemeanor DUI law. If a person receives a DUI 4 within the requisite time period, it is considered a felony under Tennessee law.

The third conviction of DUI in Tennessee is still considered to be a Class A misdemeanor. The mandatory minimum incarceration period is 120 days up to 11 months and 29 days. The difference between the time actually served and 11 months and 29 days must be served on probation according to the statute. DUI 3 carries stiff fines as well. DUI 3 is punishable by fine of $1,100 to $10,000. In addition, an individual convicted of DUI 3 will lose his or her license between 3 and 10 years. Besides heavy fines and jail time, a convicted individual is subject to forfeiture of his or her automobile, and an ignition interlock device.

A third DUI conviction within the requisite time will have HMVO (Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender) implications. Contact a Knoxville DUI lawyer to discuss your case further. All initial consultations are free. Our DUI attorneys handle DUI cases in Knoxville, Gatlinburg, Pigeon Forge, Sevierville, Morristown, Dandridge, Maryville, and Newport.

Tennessee criminal lawyers defense lawyers know that the birth of each New Year is a time for celebration for many Americans. New Year’s Eve and New Years Day is customarily a big holiday for going out, visiting friends and family, and watching football. With so many people celebrating, law enforcement agencies closely monitor the public. The police will pay special attention to different types of alcohol related crimes in East Tennessee such as DUI, underage consumption, and public intoxication.

The public drunkenness statutes across the nation vary significantly in each jurisdiction. Tennessee has a public intoxication statute to protect not only the offender from danger, but also to protect the public from the offender. Under Tennessee law, a person commits the offense of public intoxication who appears in a public place under the influence of a controlled substance or any other intoxicating substance to the degree that:

• The offender may be endangered;
• There is endangerment to other persons or property; or
• The offender unreasonably annoys people in the vicinity. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-310 (2007).

Unless committed publicly, drunkenness is not a crime or a punishable offense. The offense of public intoxication is considered to be a Class C misdemeanor, the lowest level of misdemeanor in terms of seriousness. Class C misdemeanors in Tennessee are punishable as a maximum of thirty days incarceration, or a fine not to exceed fifty dollars, or both.

If you are charged with public intoxication, or any other alcohol related crime, contact a criminal defense attorney. Our criminal defense attorneys handle public intoxication charges in Knoxville, Gatlinburg, Sevierville, Morristown, Maryville, Newport, and Johnson City.

Knoxville DUI lawyers help individuals charged with DUI in the East Tennessee area. Depending on the circumstances, an individual convicted of DUI in Tennessee must participate in litter removal. Many individuals have questions concerning the circumstances and conditions of litter removal.

If the offender is a resident of Tennessee, the litter removal portion of the sentence shall occur in the offender's county of residence according to Tennessee law. If the offender is not a resident of Tennessee, the litter removal portion of the sentence shall occur in the county where the violation occurred.

In order to reimburse the sheriff for costs related to the supervision of the offender while on a litter removal work crew, the offender shall pay to the sheriff a fee equivalent to the jailer's fee for misdemeanants for each day the offender participates in a litter removal program. The fee must be received by the sheriff before the sheriff certifies that the offender has completed this condition of probation.

Upon request, the sheriff shall provide the offender with a schedule of the times and dates when litter removal crews will be working. Crews shall only be scheduled to work during daylight hours and only on state route highways or state-aid highways. The sheriff should attempt to provide enough opportunities to work on a litter removal crew that an offender may complete the required three days of litter removal within a ninety-day period. Offenders may work with other prisoners on litter removal crews organized by the county or a municipality within the county.

The offender shall notify the sheriff not less than twenty-four hours in advance of a scheduled work date to indicate that the offender desires to participate. The sheriff, in the sheriff's discretion, may set a maximum number of participants on a work crew and allow participation on a first-come, first-serve basis. The offender is responsible for arranging transportation to and from the work site or other location where the sheriff directs offenders to report. Except for the vest discussed below, offenders are also responsible for furnishing their own clothing and food while engaged in litter removal.

Each offender ordered to remove litter shall be required to wear a blaze orange or other distinctively colored vest with the words "I AM A DRUNK DRIVER" stenciled or otherwise written on the back of the vest, in letters no less than four inches in height.

It shall be within the discretion of the sheriff to select the state route highways or state-aid highways from which offenders remove litter. If the highway selected is a state route highway, the department of transportation shall provide a truck or trucks to remove the litter removed by the offenders. If the highway selected is a state-aid highway, the appropriate county shall provide a truck or trucks to remove the litter removed by the offenders. Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-403 (2007).

If you have been charged with DUI in East Tennessee, contact a DUI lawyer. Our offices handle DUI charges in Knoxville, Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, Gatlinburg, Newport, Maryville, and Loudon.

Tennessee homicide attorneys provide aggressive representation for clients charged with any of the eight homicide offenses recognized in Tennessee. The penalty for any homicide crime is significant. Tennessee homicide lawyers understand how important these charges are and will fight for you at every stage of the legal proceeding.

Many negative connotations are associated with the word homicide. Not all homicides are committed with malicious intent. This is often the case in vehicular homicide cases. According to Tennessee law, vehicular homicide is the reckless killing of another by the operation of an automobile, airplane, motorboat or other motor vehicle, as the proximate result of:

• Conduct creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to a person;
• As the proximate result of conduct constituting the offense of drag racing; or
• By the driver's intoxication. Intoxication includes alcohol intoxication, drug intoxication, or both.

Vehicular homicide under the first two bullets is considered to be a Class C felony. Vehicular homicide under the last bullet is a Class B felony. Not only does the accused face jail time, the court will take away driving privileges if convicted of a vehicular homicide charge. The court shall prohibit a defendant convicted of vehicular homicide from driving a vehicle in Tennessee for no less than three years or more than ten years. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-213 (2007).

Vehicular homicide can become aggravated in certain circumstances. Aggravated vehicular homicide is vehicular homicide, as discussed above where:

• The defendant has two or more prior convictions for:
A) DUI; B)Vehicular assault; C) or a combination of the two.
• The defendant has one or more prior convictions for the offense of vehicular homicide; or
• There was, at the time of the offense, .20% or more, by weight of alcohol in the defendant's blood and the defendant has one prior conviction for:
A) DUI; or B) Vehicular assault.

The term prior conviction here means an offense for which the defendant was convicted prior to the commission of the instant vehicular homicide and includes convictions occurring prior to July 1, 1996. The term prior conviction could also include convictions under the laws of another state, government, or country depending upon the circumstances.

Aggravated vehicular homicide is a serious charge in Tennessee. It is a Class A felony, the highest level of felonies. If you are charged with vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, or another homicide charge, contact a Tennessee homicide lawyer. Tennessee homicide attorneys assist clients in the Knoxville, Sevierville, Johnson City, Greenville, Maryville, Bristol, and Kingsport areas.

DUI laws in Tennessee are vast, complex, and technical. A conviction can affect your license, employment, and reputation with your family and community. If you are charged with a DUI or DWI, in the Knoxville, Gatlinburg, Sevierville, or Pigeon Forge areas, then you should contact a Tennessee DUI lawyer. Tennessee DUI attorneys can guide you through the intricate procedural maze of criminal law and force the state to prove its heavy burden under Tennessee law and the United States Constitution. People seemed to be confused about how much a person can drink before he or she is legally allowed to drive in the state of Tennessee. So, can a person legally drive if he or she has had only one drink? The short answer is maybe.

Under Tennessee law, it is unlawful for any person to drive or be in physical control of any automobile or other motor driven vehicle on any of the public roads and highways of the state, or on any streets or alleys, or while on the premises of any shopping center, trailer park or any apartment house complex, or any other premises which is generally frequented by the public at large, while:

• The alcohol concentration in such person's blood or breath is eight-hundredths of one percent (.08 %) or more; or
• Under the influence of any intoxicant, marijuana, narcotic drug, or drug producing stimulating effects on the central nervous system. Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-401 (2007).

There are two different avenues the state may pursue to obtain a driving under the influence (DUI) conviction. To find a person guilty under the first definition above, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person's blood alcohol content (BAC) equaled or exceeded .08 % at the time he or she drove on public roads. Every state has a different blood alcohol level that constitutes drunk driving so there in not uniformity across state lines. In fact, special interest groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) have successfully lobbied the state legislature into lowering what BAC constitutes DUI in Tennessee.

The state may also pursue a DUI conviction under the second definition. The second definition is completely independent of the first definition. This definition does not refer to any particular BAC. Instead, it focuses on whether the person is “under the influence” of alcohol or a drug while driving on public roads. If the person's driving is impaired by the consumption of alcohol, he or she can be found guilty of DUI.

Instead of presenting BAC evidence to the judge or jury, the prosecution usually admits evidence about the person's driving and alcohol consumption. Witnesses such as police officers describe the illegal driving behavior that caused the vehicle to be pulled over. The state usually presents evidence that the person was not able to perform field sobriety tests. Testimony from other witnesses may be given about how much the person had to drink that day. If the state proves that the person was “driving under the influence” beyond a reasonable doubt, then a person may be convicted for DUI in Tennessee. Alcohol influences all people differently. A person’s impairment for each drink depends upon numerous factors including body weight, how much food was consumed that day, and strength of the drink. If a smaller person becomes impaired due to one drink, then he or she might not be capabe of driving under the statute. If you are charged with DUI in East Knoxville DUI lawyerTennessee, contact a for more information.
.

Tennessee Attorneys understand that underage consumption is one activity in Tennessee and across the nation that will persist no matter what the warnings or penalties. In Knoxville, most college students at the University of Tennessee do not turn 21 until their junior or sometimes senior year. However, most college freshmen and sophomores have numerous and frequent experiences with alcohol. Whether it’s tailgating at a University of Tennessee football home game, having mixers with other sororities or fraternities, drinking on the strip, or simply hanging out with friends in the dorm or the apartment, alcohol will always be drunk by people under the age of 21.

There is much scholarly debate as to whether underage consumption should even be a crime for individuals 18 or older. On the one side, alcohol is usually a contributing factor in a young person’s premature death. This is sometimes caused by alcohol poisoning. Other times, it is the young person’s mistake of getting behind the wheel of an automobile and hurting either himself or someone else. People argue that 18 year olds are too immature to handle the affects of alcohol - that is, people say that it’s too much responsibility for an 18 or 19 year old to have.

On the other side, if 18 year olds are mature enough to vote, serve on juries, and die for their county in the military, then people say that they are mature enough to make the correct decisions regarding alcohol. Nevertheless, underage consumption is illegal in the state of Tennessee. According to state law, it is unlawful for any person in Tennessee under the age of twenty-one to purchase, possess, transport or consume alcoholic beverages, wine, or beer. There are two important exceptions to this law:

• Any person eighteen years of age or older may transport, possess, sell, or dispense alcoholic beverages, wine, or beer in the course of such person's employment; and

• Any such priest or minister may utilize and administer alcohol or wine at a communion service, bat mitzvah, bar mitzvah, or other similar religious service or ceremony, in accordance with the practices of such denomination or sect. Tenn. Code Ann. §1-3-113 (2007).

Underage consumption carries stiff penalties in Tennessee. It is considered to be a Class A misdemeanor, the highest level of the three misdemeanors. If you are convicted, you could serve a sentence of up to eleven months and twenty-nine days and a fine up to two thousand five hundred dollars. If you are charged with underage consumption in the Knoxville, Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, Gatlinburg, Maryville, or Johnson City area, it is important to contact a Tennessee Criminal Attorney. We understand the procedures and heavy burdens that the state must prove to convict you of this charge.

Knoxville DUI attorneys understand the significance of a DUI charge in Tennessee. DUI laws in Tennessee and across the U.S. are constantly changing and everyone is vulnerable. When George W. Bush was thirty years old, he pleading guilty to a driving offense involving alcohol in Kennebunkport, Maine. In September of 1976, a police officer pulled Bush's car to the side of the road because Bush was driving too slowly after consuming a number of beers. His blood-alcohol content was determined to be 0.10, the legal limit at the time.

Bush simply paid a $150.00 fine and his driving privileges were suspended for one month in Maine. If the most powerful man in the western free-world got into trouble with drinking and driving, then so can your average American. Often, these crimes do not involve malice and are not of moral turpitude. Usually, the standard American simply makes a costly mistake. However, DUI penalties are very stiff in Tennessee and across the nation today.

The laws have changed significantly since the mid 1970’s. Special interests groups like M.A.D.D. (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) have successfully lobbied and harsher punishments have been enumerated for alcohol-related driving offenses. Publicly elected lawmakers are not likely to turn down legislation maintaining the safety of Tennessee’s roads. This is especially true considering who the legislation would be protecting if legislation is indeed turned down.

In spite of the harsh penalties and negativity associated with drunk drivers, there are ways one charged with an alcohol-related driving offense can fight back. If you are facing a charge of Driving Under the Influence in the Knoxville, Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, or Gatlinburg area, it’s important for you to understand the long-term implications of a conviction. A Tennessee DUI Attorney can help you deal with your legal options and bring your situation to the best resolution possible for you and your family.

Alcohol, University of Tennessee football and enthusiastic fans are all classic elements of football season in Tennessee. However, as our Tennessee criminal attorneys know, the wrong combination of those elements can lead to criminal charges such as disorderly conduct, public intoxication and underage consumption. Three University of Tennessee football players dealt with the Tennessee courts after being charged with underage consumption and disorderly conduct in November of 2006. The charges were related to events that occurred the night following a football game. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2650347.

Underage consumption occurs when any person under the age of twenty-one consumes alcohol. In the experience of our Tennessee criminal attorneys, criminal charges can result when a person under twenty-one years of age transports alcohol. An exception exists if the person is over eighteen years old and is transporting the alcohol in the course of their employment. Underage consumption is a Class A misdemeanor. Conviction can carry a sentence of up to eleven months and twenty-nine days and a fine up to two thousand five hundred dollars.

The recently charged UT football players faced charges of underage consumption as well as disorderly conduct. Our Tennessee criminal attorneys find that this combination of charges is very common. Disorderly conduct occurs when a person engages in fighting or violent and threatening behavior in a public place. Our Tennessee attorneys also find that refusal to obey an official order to disperse in the case of an emergency can result in a charge of disorderly conduct. Additionally, unreasonable noise that prevents others from carrying on lawful activities is disorderly conduct.

Often, those facing underage consumption and disorderly conduct charges may also be charged with public intoxication. Our criminal attorneys also frequently represent clients facing charges of public intoxication. Our Tennessee criminal attorneys find that public intoxication charges may result when a person appears in a public place under the influence of a controlled substance or other intoxication substance. The person must be intoxicated to the point where he or she is endangering himself or herself or others in the vicinity. Additionally, public intoxication charges may result when a person is publicly intoxicated enough to annoy other persons in the vicinity. Disorderly conduct and public intoxication is a Class C misdemeanor and can result in a sentence of up to 30 days in jail and a fine of fifty ($50.00) dollars.

Our Tennessee criminal attorneys understand that any criminal charges can have long-lasting effects on you and your family. It’s very important to find an experienced Tennessee criminal attorney to protect your rights. Our Tennessee criminal attorneys will conduct a thorough investigation of your case and actively pursue the best possible resolution for you and your family.

A Tennessee DUI Attorney entered a not-guilty plea to DUI charges for former State Senator Kathryn Bowers on September 21. The charges stemmed from an incident on August 31, when police said Senator Bowers sideswiped a UPS truck.

Bowers' attorney stated that Bowers had recently changed her blood pressure medication and he would like to see the charge dismissed. Bowers won the Democractice primary for re-election on August 3 but resigned from office earlier this month, citing health problems.

Bowers is also facing federal bribery charges related to the Tennessee Waltz Investigation. She is scheduled for trial in those charges in April. Bowers is one of eleven people facing charges in the Tennessee Waltz Investigation which came to public attention in May 2005 after an extensive sting operation. Five former state officials are among those facing charges of bribery and corruption.

Sources:knoxnews.com, wbir.com

Tennessee DUI Laws could get tougher for anyone pulled over on suspicion of drunk driving.

The AAA Club is lobbying for a law that would allow the Department of Safety to revoke your license if you fail or refuse to take a blood or breathalyzer test. Under the proposal, if you're pulled over, the officer takes your license and gives you a substitute that is good for 10 days. During the 10 day period you would be afforded a hearing on the revocation.

The Department of Safety would hold your license until that period expires, at which point they decide whether or not to suspend your license.

A spokesperson from AAA was quoted as saying the immediate license revocation, "has shown in 40 states to reduce drunk driving deaths and injuries. It has been shown as an effective counter measure to drunk driving, it's been shown as an effective deterrent to drunk driving." AAA has been pushing the administrative license revocation law since the early 90's.

The erosion of the accused's rights when dealing with allegations of a DUI charge seems to never end. What other criminal offense requires self-incrimination without the right to consult with an attorney?

A Tennessee DUI slogan is drawing criticism from national organizations. Mother's against drunk driving believes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's new slogan, "Drunk Driving. Over the Limit. Under Arrest," is sending the wrong message to drivers.
MADD argues that the slogan suggests that drinking and driving is OK as long as drivers don't exceed .08 percent blood alcohol content, the limit at which a driver is presumed drunk under Tennessee law.

Tennessee DUI law was changed in 2003 lowering the presumption of an impaired state from .10 to .08. "We shouldn't lull driver's into thinking it's OK to drive right up to that limit," a MADD spokesperson said. "It shouldn't be .07, you're not drunk, and as soon as you hit the magic number .08, you are."

A Tennessee-based advertising firm, The Tombras Group, compiled 500 possible replacement slogans by brainstorming, searching the Internet and polling states and the American Beverage Institute, said Alice Mathews, senior vice president for Tombras.

A narrowed list of 40 slogans went before focus groups, which whittled the list down to "Drunk Driving. Over the Limit. Under Arrest" and "Drunk driving. Do the crime. Do the time." U.S. Transportation Secretary Maria Cino made the final decision.