Terrible blood chain of custody DUI case
In a stunning reversal of a DUI dismissal, the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee sent a case back to the trial court finding that the trial judge abused his discretion in ruling that the chain of custody for the blood test had not been established.
The Cite: Tennessee v. Dyer, Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Issued November 19, 2008.
The facts (which rely on hearsay and speculation to establish):
The facts of the case herein reveal that Officer Mara took Appellee to the hospital and witnessed what he believed to be a nurse or a nurse practitioner draw Appellee's blood and place it into the blood kit that Officer Mara provided. There is no indication that his belief was incorrect. Officer Mara testified that he placed the blood kit in the trunk of his car and transported it back to police headquarters where he placed it in an evidence bag and put it inside an evidence locker. The key to the evidence locker is possessed only by the evidence technician at the police department. Special Agent Crews testified that the blood sample was hand-delivered to the TBI by Mike Durham and received by the TBI evidence technicians. Special Agent Crews explained the TBI procedure for the receipt and processing of blood samples. The sample was sealed when it was received by Special Agent Crews, and he had "no reason to believe the blood sample wasn't in good condition."
The strange ruling:
We determine that the State sufficiently established the chain of custody of the blood sample. Therefore, the trial court erred in excluding the results of the blood test, dismissing the indictment, and dismissing the case with prejudice. Accordingly, we reverse and remand this case for reinstatement of the indictment and a new trial.
My comments: This one is a hard DUI decision to swallow. My guess is that this opinion remains unpublished because it is so bad. My hope is that they attorneys involved take this case up higher. To allow the evidence presented here to suffice as a proper chain of custody effectively renders a bad chain of custody in Tennessee an affirmative defense for which the DUI defendant has the burden of proof.
My hat goes off to the trial judge who did the right thing.
Tennessee DUI Law - Defendant's appearance insufficient to toll statute of limitations
New Caselaw Alert: Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Knoxville.
STATE of Tennessee v. Roy Anthony FERRANTE. No. E2007-00180-SC-R11-CD. Sept. 4, 2008 Session. Oct. 28, 2008.
The Tennessee Supreme Court has ruled that a defendant's presence in court on a DUI case is not sufficient to toll the statute of limitations when the complaint in the case is deficient, and the deficiency is not cured until after the running of the statute of limitations.
This opinion was issued on October 28, 2008 and at the time of this entry has not yet been published.
We granted permission to appeal to determine whether a criminal defendant's appearance in court is sufficient to commence a prosecution for purposes of tolling the statute of limitations where the purported charging instrument is void ab initio. We hold that a defendant's appearance in court following the issuance of an affidavit of complaint that is void from inception does not toll the running of the statute of limitations. The fatal deficiencies in the affidavit of complaint in this case were not overcome until after the limitations period had expired. Accordingly, the Defendant's motion to dismiss the charge against him in this case must be granted. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals reinstating the charge against the Defendant is reversed, and the charge against the Defendant is dismissed. (Emphasis added).
ANALYSIS: A defendant has the right to a timely and speedy trial. A defendant also has the right to know precisely the charges against him or her. It is the State's job to charge and charge correctly. This case got it right by saying that a prosecutor will not escape the negative consequences of sloppiness through judicial coddling. Great result! Congratulations to the excellent DUI defense lawyers involved.
