State of Tennessee, Appellant v. Patrick L. Pruett, Appellee

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed the Court of Criminal Appeals, which had held that the stipulated facts — that the defendant drove on a paved roadway in a city-owned park — were insufficient to prove the roadways were 'premises open to the public' under the DUI statute. The Court reaffirmed that on sufficiency review an appellate court must afford the State the strongest legitimate view of the evidence and all reasonable and legitimate inferences, and may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its own inferences for those drawn by the trier of fact. Because the trial court found the park roadways open to the public, the intermediate court's contrary inference was an impermissible substitution of its judgment for that of the trier of fact. No separate opinions were filed.