Assigned on Briefs November 7, 2017
from the Circuit Court for Dyer County No. 15-CR-180 Russell
Lee Moore, Jr., Judge
Defendant, Kyle J. Dodd, was convicted by a jury of driving
under the influence (DUI), second offense, a Class A
misdemeanor. See Tenn. Code Ann. §§
55-10-401, -402(a)(2). The trial court imposed a sentence of
eleven months and twenty-nine days with fifty days to be
served in confinement and the remainder to be served on
supervised probation. On appeal, the Defendant contends that
the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his
statements to the investigating officer and "all
evidence derived from" his statements because the
officer did not properly inform him of his rights pursuant to
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). However,
our review of the record reveals that the Defendant failed to
raise this issue in a timely motion for new trial; thereby,
waiving full appellate review. Additionally, we conclude that
plain error review of the issue is not warranted.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit
Charles M. Agee, Jr., Dyersburg, Tennessee, for the
appellant, Kyle J. Dodd.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter;
Zachary T. Hinkle, Assistant Attorney General; C. Phillip
Bivens, District Attorney General; and Charles T. Dyer,
Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State
Kelly Thomas, Jr., J., delivered the opinion of the court, in
which James Curwood Witt, Jr., and Robert L. Holloway, Jr.,
KELLY THOMAS, JR., JUDGE
September 29, 2014, Tennessee Highway Patrol Trooper Jerry
Mealer responded to a report of "a pickup truck that had
run off the road and flipped into a yard." Trooper
Mealer determined that the truck was registered to the
Defendant and went to a nearby house where the Defendant had
been staying to question the Defendant about the accident.
Defendant admitted that he had been driving the truck but
initially denied having consumed any alcohol. Trooper Mealer
asked the Defendant to perform some field sobriety tests.
During the field sobriety tests, the Defendant admitted to
having had a drink earlier that night. The Defendant also
consented to a blood draw. Trooper Mealer arrested the
Defendant on suspicion of DUI after he failed the field
to trial, the Defendant filed a motion to suppress his
statements to Trooper Mealer along with the video of the
field sobriety tests and the results of his blood draw. The
trial court denied the motion, concluding that Trooper Mealer
was not required to give the Defendant Miranda
warnings prior to his initial questioning of the Defendant.
The trial court further concluded that the Defendant's
later admission of having had a drink was a voluntary
statement. The Defendant now appeals to this court.
Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(e) treats issues "upon
which a new trial is sought" as waived "unless the
same was specifically stated in a motion for a new
trial." The Defendant did not file a motion for new
trial raising his suppression issue. As such, we review this
issue solely for plain error. See State v. Maynard,
629 S.W.2d 911, 912 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1981) (holding that
failure to raise suppression issue in a written motion for
new trial waives the right to present the issue on appeal).
The doctrine of plain error applies when all five of the
following factors have been established:
(a) the record must clearly establish what occurred in the