Tennessee Criminal Lawyer Blog

Our blog today once again delves into the mitigating factors that are available for use by a criminal defendant at sentencing by exploring the mitigating factor of provocation. Tennessee law provides that the fact that “the defendant acted under strong provocation” can be used as a mitigating factor by the sentencing court when determining a defendant’s sentence. Basically, this factor allows the defendant to claim that he or she would not have committed the offense if not provoked by another person or factor. Note that the provocation must be “strong,” meaning the defendant will not be able to claim he or she was provoked if the defendant beats someone to death with a tire iron for cutting line at the movies.

The reaction will have to at least seem proportional to the provocation for this mitigating factor to legitimately apply. This, of course, will depend on both the offense for which the defendant has been convicted and the strength of the alleged provocation. One type of case where you could probably expect to see this factor used would be where one spouse attacks or kills another spouse or their paramour after discovering an affair. The defendant in such a situation would undoubtedly try to say that he or she experienced something so angering or upsetting, like catching the illicit lovers in the act or maybe just discovering the affair, that it was not at all unreasonable to believe that someone who had such an experience could be driven to commit the offense of murder. This mitigating factor will frequently be used in cases involving violent crimes, as defendants often feel they were provoked by someone or something. The bad news for defendants attempting to rely on this factor is that the provocation will have to be extreme in order to be considered sufficient to provoke a serious offense like murder. However, like all mitigating factors, provocation should be argued at sentencing whenever possible in the event that it serves to reduce the defendant’s sentence, even if it seems like a long shot.

Whether it be in the family home, a college dormitory, or a nursing home or assisted living facility, living with a roommate can often be a contentious situation. Every person has a certain way he or she likes to enjoy being at home, and roommates often fight about issues such as noise, space, organization, and cleanliness. In cases where the roommates are free to explore other living arrangements, such disagreements usually result in the roommates deciding to live elsewhere. In cases where roommates are not free to live somewhere else (brothers who share a room in the family home, e.g.), these disagreements often result in physical and verbal confrontations; rarely, however, do such confrontations turn deadly.

Unfortunately, such a confrontation did turn deadly in Massachusetts recently, with a ninety-eight year-old woman being accused of strangling her one hundred year-old roommate in a Massachusetts as a result of a disagreement about a bedside table. The victim was found dead with a shopping bag tied loosely around her head and an autopsy indicated that she had been strangled. The nursing home was aware that the table had been a source of controversy, with the victim complaining that the table obstructed her path to the restroom. The victim had also been complaining that her ninety-eight year-old roommate was making her life miserable in the weeks leading up to the apparent murder. The nursing home says it presented the victim with the chance to change rooms twice, but that the victim declined. A nursing home spokesman also said the two were like “sisters.” The ninety-eight year-old accused of the murder has been indicted on a second degree murder charge.

Continue reading "Ninety-Eight Year-Old Woman Accused of Strangling Centenarian Roommate" »

Few things are capable of inflaming the passions of the populace like sports. This is especially true when it comes to college football, which has a more passionate fan base than most. Thus, it is not at all uncommon to see fights and arguments break out during important games or rivalry games, especially when the ending to those games is a controversial one. Last Saturday’s Big 12 Championship Game between the University of Texas and the University of Nebraska (both of which have extremely loyal and passionate fanbases) seemed an exceptionally favorable situation for such disputes, with the game deciding whether or not Texas would play for the BCS Championship. Unfortunately, such a dispute did occur and turned deadly.

Perhaps the saddest aspect of this dispute is that it was reportedly between friends, both Marines, who were scuffling around as a result of some smack-talking that took place after the game. The two men apparently got into it a little bit after the game’s controversial finish, and one of the men happened to have a firearm that discharged during the fracas. The shot proved fatal, killing the man’s friend. The gun owner has been charged with involuntary manslaughter.
In Tennessee, the man would probably be charged with criminally negligent homicide, which has replaced the crime formerly known as involuntary manslaughter in Tennessee. To be guilty of criminally negligent homicide in Tennessee, a person must be guilty of criminally negligent conduct that causes the death of someone else.

Continue reading "Man Dies in Argument over Football Game" »

The grisly murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom have led to a series of trials that is still ongoing, with two of the defendants already being convicted and sentenced and a third currently on trial. Attorneys for George Thomas, the defendant currently on trial, plan to file a motion for acquittal under Rule 29 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure which basically asks that the court make a finding that the evidence presented against the defendant is insufficient to convict the defendant of one or more of the offenses with which he or she is charged.

This is a motion that is commonly used but infrequently granted because the discretion to weigh the evidence and make a determination as to guilt or innocence ordinarily rests with the jury. However, it is a valuable tool for Tennessee defense lawyers as an attorney could potentially get one or more charges dismissed against a defendant merely by filing a motion if the prosecution’s proof has shown to be inadequate.

Continue reading "Defendant in Christian-Newsom Murders to Move for Acquittal" »

A mail carrier is faced with a variety of charges after she hit a Tennessee Highway Patrol Trooper head-on Friday night while driving under the influence in her postal vehicle. The Trooper was apparently trying to turn into a gas station when the lady crossed lanes and struck his vehicle. The Trooper was taken to the hospital, but he was treated and released without critical injuries. The charges against the drunken driver include DUI, driving without insurance, failure to keep control of a vehicle, and vehicular assault.

Tennessee law provides that a driver can be charged with vehicular assault when, as a result of that driver’s intoxication, the driver recklessly causes serious bodily injury to another person by the operation of a motor vehicle. Intoxication in this context includes intoxication by both alcohol and drugs. Vehicular assault in Tennessee is a Class D felony, punishable by two to twelve years in prison and a fine of up to five thousand dollars.

Continue reading "Vehicular Assault" »

People often use the phrase, “You scared me to death!” in a joking fashion, but authorities say that is literally what happened to a seventy-nine year old grandmother in North Carolina recently. Apparently, the elderly lady suffered a heart attack when a man broke into her home while looking for somewhere to hide after robbing a bank. The man did not call for help, and the lady died from the heart attack. Police say the man thus literally killed the grandmother without ever touching her. He was found guilty of killing someone by kidnapping them, which carries an automatic life sentence in North Carolina.

In Tennessee, the man would be charged much the same way. The law allows someone to be charged with first-degree murder in Tennessee if they kill someone during “the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy.”

Continue reading "Man Literally Scares Grandmother to Death" »

If you have ever been to New York, you know that it seems like there are literally ten thousand people in each subway car, all struggling for a place to sit or a rail to hold on to for balance. Fighting for these prime positions on the subway can often result in contentious disputes that lead to violence. In the case of Gerardo Sanchez, a 37 year-old man from New York, a subway seat dispute led to murder. Apparently Sanchez got into a dispute over a seat with another passenger that resulted in Sanchez stabbing the man in the head and neck several times, eventually killing the victim. A train conductor alerted the authorities, and Sanchez was arrested when the train made its next stop. He was charged with murder and criminal possession of a deadly weapon.

In Tennessee, Mr. Sanchez would likely be charged with second-degree murder. A “knowing killing of another” is sufficient to qualify as second-degree murder under the Tennessee statute, which basically means that any time a person kills another person intentionally, they can be charged under the second-degree murder statute. It is possible that since Mr. Sanchez was obviously enraged by the victim taking his seat that he could be charged with the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter, which is the intentional or knowing killing of another person while “in a state of passion produced by adequate provocation sufficient to lead a reasonable person to act in an irrational manner.”

Continue reading "New York Man Killed Over Subway Seat" »

In a somewhat novel but seemingly legitimate defense strategy, a Florida man accused of killing his stepson in New Jersey recently used his obesity as an alibi. The circumstances surrounding the murder indicated that the killer fired a shot into the victim’s leg, sprinted up a flight of steps and then fired four more extremely accurate shots at the victim. After shooting the victim, the murderer apparently made a quick getaway before anyone could get a good look at him. Edward Ates, the man accused of the crime, argued that at 5’8” and approximately three-hundred pounds, he was simply too fat to have pulled the crime off in such a manner. Mr. Ates presented experts that testified that his physical condition would have rendered him unable to steadily fire four shots at the victim after running up a flight of steps because he would have been out of breath and his hands and legs would have been shaking due to the physical stress such an act would place on his body. He also argued that he would have been physically unable to drive for twenty-one straight hours to get back to his home in Florida, which the prosecution alleged was the case, after shooting the victim because his obesity would have prevented him from doing so. Unfortunately for Mr. Ates, this defense carried no weight (no pun intended) with the jury, and he was convicted of first-degree murder.

Tennessee law holds that first-degree murder can encompass three types of criminal activity:

1. “A premeditated and intentional killing of another;


2. A killing of another committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy; or


3. A killing of another committed as the result of the unlawful throwing, placing or discharging of a destructive device or bomb.”

Continue reading "Man's "Too Fat to Kill" Defense Fails" »

In modern society, debates rage about which methods of discipline are appropriate for parents to use with their children. Most of the debate is focused on the ethics of spanking versus non-physical means of punishment and proponents of both sides differ as to what is acceptable and what amounts to going too far. In an effort to define with greater clarity what does indeed “go too far,” an Iraqi immigrant father living in Arizona recently ran his daughter over with the family car because he felt she was becoming too Americanized. The dad was apparently upset that the daughter was not living in comport with traditional Iraqi values and thus ran her over with the belief that she had caused the family too much dishonor to be allowed to live. He was later arrested at the Atlanta airport, but there is no word yet on what charges he will face. As of the writing of this article, the daughter remains hospitalized.

In Tennessee, the father would be looking at a litany of charges, most notably some sort of attempted murder charge (assuming the victim does not die from the injuries) depending on the circumstances surrounding the incident and the father’s mental state. Criminal attempt is an “inchoate offense,” which basically means that the person charged is accused of acting with the intent to commit the offense or attempting to commit the offense but did not actually follow through with the commission of the offense in such a manner that the offense attempted can be charged. For example, the father in this case allegedly attempted to kill his daughter by running over her with his vehicle and took steps to accomplish that goal. If the father’s plan would have been successful, he would have been guilty of murder. However, if the daughter does not die as a result of the attack, one of the necessary elements of a murder charge, a “killing,” is absent under the circumstances. Thus, the father can only be charged with attempted murder.

Continue reading "Dad Runs Daughter Over with Car as Punishment: Criminal Attempt" »

The 2007 murders of two college students in Knoxville, known to some as the Chipman Street Murders, have captured the attention of many Tennesseans. In addition, they have produced some of the most high-profile criminal trials in the East Tennessee area in quite some time. One of the most recent developments in this series of trials is that the judge has ruled that Lemaricus Davidson, one of the defendants accused of the murders, has until Monday to decide whether or not he wants to testify in his own defense. While Davidson seems to want to do so, it may be problematic for him because his taking the stand will allow the prosecution to question him about a Tennessee aggravated robbery charge that was levied against him in 2001. Ultimately, the decision is up to Davidson, as the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a defendant’s right to testify is guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant’s right to testify by giving the defendant the right to compulsory process to obtain witnesses in the defendant’s favor. Clearly this would give the defendant the right to call witnesses to the stand, and the defendant can be such a witness. Additionally, the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of due process of law has been found to give the defendant the right to testify on his own behalf, as this right is an essential part of the adversarial system. The Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause has been further construed to apply these rights to the states, so that the right to testify is guaranteed in both state and federal court.

Continue reading "Defendant in Chipman Street Murders Mulls Decision to Testify" »

Juries are critically important in the American legal system. In civil trials, they often decide if the plaintiff was harmed by the defendant, and how much harm was done. In criminal trials, they often decide not only if the defendant is guilty, but how much time the defendant will have to spend in prison. In more serious criminal trials, they literally decide whether or not someone guilty of a crime has forfeited the right to live. Because having an impartial jury is critical to the outcome of a defendant’s case, the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure contains safeguards to ensure that the jury selected is fair and unbiased. One such safeguard is the right of both the prosecution and defense to exercise peremptory challenges during jury selection.

Tenn. R. Crim. P. Rule 24 allows parties to use peremptory challenges during jury selection to eliminate specific jurors during the jury selection process that either side feels should not be on the jury for one reason or another. The number of peremptory challenges allowed depends on the seriousness of the offense and ranges from three in misdemeanor cases to fifteen in death penalty cases. The Rule also provides for an additional peremptory challenge for each additional or alternate juror that is selected by the court. For example, the court may pick the twelve jurors and then add two jurors as alternates before hearing the case. Likewise, the court may empanel fourteen jurors, hear the case, and then randomly select who the two alternates will be before deliberations begin. Either way, each side would be awarded two additional peremptory challenges for use during the jury selection process.

Continue reading "Peremptory Challenges During a Jury Selection" »

Of all the rights protected by the American legal system, the right to life is the most fundamental and is thus protected in a myriad of ways. It also may be the most controversial, having the ability to spark furious debate on topics such as abortion, assisted suicide, and the death penalty. One important concept protecting the right to life in the death penalty arena is that the person awaiting execution must be competent to be executed.

Tennessee’s two-prong standard for determining whether or not a person is competent to be executed is currently at the forefront of an extremely controversial Tennessee murder case. In 1985, Gregory Thompson was convicted of murdering twenty-eight year-old Brenda Lane with a butcher knife. According to Thompson, he abducted and killed the victim so he could use her car because he believed a gang of Ku Klux Klan members was chasing him. Thompson has had an execution date set more than once, but his case remains unsettled because the issue of his competency to face execution keeps surfacing.

To be competent to face execution in Tennessee, a person must both understand that his execution is imminent and understand the reason for which he is being executed. In Mr. Thompson’s case, he has told psychologists and psychiatrists who examined him that an attempt at execution will not actually kill him but that he will survive the attempt and be retried for the crime at a later date by a professional jury. Mr. Thompson’s comments indicate that he not only fails to understand that his impending execution will end his life but also that he may not understand that he has been found guilty of a crime at all, instead believing that he has yet to face an appropriate jury.

Continue reading "Competency's Role in Executions" »

Americans often like to cite the various rights guaranteed them by the United States Constitution and with good reason; these guarantees protect and empower Americans in various ways. These rights, however, are anything but guaranteed. The Sixth Amendment gives a defendant the right to assistance of counsel in criminal prosecutions, but this right, like any right, can be taken away if it is not used responsibly. A recent Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals case illustrates this idea.

Mr. Willis, the defendant, was charged with four counts of Tennessee first-degree murder and three counts of abusing corpses, and the State of Tennessee was seeking the death penalty. Mr. Willis, in an effort to delay his impending trial, attempted to get his appointed counsel to withdraw from representation so he would be appointed a different attorney and, more importantly, his trial date would be pushed back to give that attorney time to get familiar with the case. As trial dates approached, Mr. Willis would refuse to communicate with his attorney, would file complaints against his attorney with the Board of Professional Responsibility, or would attempt to sue his attorney in some fashion in order to get the court to dismiss the attorney and appoint someone else.

The first time Mr. Willis employed this tactic, the trial court had a lengthy discussion with him and explained to him that although he had a right to assistance of counsel, abuse of that right would lead to both its forfeiture and Mr. Willis representing himself in his murder trial. The court explained how difficult and dangerous it was for defendants to represent themselves, but Mr. Willis was apparently unconvinced.

Continue reading "Assistance of Counsel is Not an Absolute Right" »

By way of introduction, I discuss in this entry the General Assembly’s express purposes in enacting the Criminal Sentencing Reform Act.

The Reform Act is the end result of comprehensive penal and sentencing reform legislation enacted in 1989 to address inconsistencies found in the penal code. Addressing these inconsistencies, the General Assembly set standards for crime classification and sentencing methodology. Principles underlying this unifying approach were also codified (or re-codified) in TCA 40-35-102 to ensure fairness and justice in sentencing procedures. Five principles are discussed below:

First, every defendant is to be punished by a sentence he or she justly deserves in relation to the seriousness of the offense. As will be seen, violent crimes like homicide and aggravated assault generally carry more severe consequences than other crimes. Furthermore, the seriousness of theft and vandalism offenses depends on the value of the property stolen or destroyed.

Second, defendants are assured fair and consistent treatment by eliminating unjustified disparities in sentencing and by providing a fair sense of predictability. In pursuit of this goal, the legislature examined the crimes in Tennessee and ranked them according to the perceived seriousness of each defense. The General Assembly created 5 classes of felonies (A through E) with each class carrying a defined prison and fine range. For example, the prison range for a Class E felony is one to 6 years, whereas the prison range for a Class A felony is 15 to 60 years. The General Assembly also created 3 separate ranges for misdemeanors.

Third, the goal of punishment is to prevent crime and promote respect for the law. Accordingly, sentences should provide an effective deterrent to those who are likely to violate the law, restrain defendants with lengthy criminal histories, encourage rehabilitation through alternative sentencing and correctional programs, and encouraging restitution to victims where appropriate.

Continue reading "Criminal Sentencing in Tennessee: Purposes of the Reform Act" »

From time to time, I am asked what a person is legally supposed to do if he or she is involved in a Tennessee motor vehicle accident that results in injury. TCA 55-10-101 spells out a driver’s legal duties when involved in such accidents and imposes serious penalties on those who fail to comply.

The driver’s initial duty under the law is to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident. The law instructs that the vehicle should be stopped in a place that does not obstruct traffic anymore than is necessary.

The driver is also required to provide certain information to law enforcement personnel and to other drivers who were involved in the accident. The driver must provide the officer with his or her name, address and registration number of the vehicle driven. He must also, upon request, exhibit his license to the person struck or other attending person.

The driver is also under a duty to render “reasonable assistance.” This duty includes carrying, or the making of arrangements for the carrying, of the person to a physician, surgeon or hospital for medical or surgical treatment if it is apparent that treatment is necessary or if carrying is requested by the injured person.

Continue reading "Responsibilities of Drivers When Involved in Car Accidents in Tennessee" »

In 2007, a Clarksville coach and teacher, Willard Ross, was shot and killed by a stray bullet in a Wal-Mart parking lot. The man who shot Coach Ross had a prior criminal record and did not have lawful possession of the handgun.

After receiving a letter from Mr. Ross’s family, representative Joe Pitts along with Senator Tim Barnes sponsored a bill intended to give law enforcement officers another tool to keep guns out of the hands of felony offenders. The law was passed in May 2009 and was officially entitled the Coach Willard Ross Act of 2009.

Effective July 1, 2009, the Act creates a Class A misdemeanor offense for purchases or attempted purchases of firearms by those who are prohibited from owning, possessing or purchasing firearms by state or federal law. The Act also creates a Class A misdemeanor offense for an individual who sells or offers to sell a firearm to a person whom he knows is prohibited from owning, purchasing or possessing a firearm according to state or federal law.

Continue reading "Coach Willard Ross Act of 2009" »

In the paper this week was an article about how a younger brother intervened in an altercation between his older brother and mother resulting in a fatal stabbing of the older child. While the younger child could be charged with a homicide offense, the case brings to mind the defense of third persons defense recognized under Tennessee law.

Under T.C.A. 39-11-612, a person is justified in threatening or using force against another to protect a third person, if under the circumstances as the person reasonably believes them to be, the person would be justified in threatening or using force to protect against the use or attempted use of unlawful force reasonably believed to be threatening the third person sought to be protected. A person is justified if the person has reasonable belief that there is imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to the third person, the danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real or honestly believed to be real at the time, and the belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.

Continue reading "Defense of Others Under Tennessee Law" »

According to the Knoxville Police Department, there were 109 home invasion robberies last year within the Knoxville city limits. There have already been 60 home-invasion robberies since January of this year.

The KPD insists that these numbers don’t mean that there is an epidemic of violent robberies in Knoxville. A spokesman for the KPD indicated that, since 2003, only 3 people have died and “several others” have been injured during the course of a home invasion.

He also indicated that most home invasions are usually fueled by the illegal drug trade. “In nearly every single incident, the facts of the investigation have indicated that there had been some kind of prior [illicit] business dealing between the suspects and the victims, or that it was family related. It’s very rare to have a complete stranger home invasion.”

Nevertheless, homeowners and tenants in Tennessee generally have the right to defend themselves against home invaders.

Under Tennessee law, a person can use deadly force to protect against someone who unlawfully and forcibly enters his or her home, without having the duty to retreat, if he or she has a reasonable belief that there is imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. (The danger creating the belief of imminent bodily injury must also be real or honestly believed to be real at the time of the invasion, and the belief of danger must be founded upon reasonable grounds.)

Continue reading "Home Invasions in Tennessee" »

Tennessee classifies crimes in one of two categories: misdemeanor and felony. For both of these categories, the state must prove that the suspect committed an unlawful act with criminal intent. For example, first degree murder in Tennessee is a felony and is characterized as the premeditated and intentional killing of another. The unlawful act is the “killing of another”. The criminal intent element is doing the act with premeditation and with intent to kill.

Likewise, the unlawful act in an assault crime—a misdemeanor—is the defendant’s causing of another to fear bodily injury. The intent element is satisfied when the state proves that the defendant acted with the intent to cause the defendant to fear harm.

Felony, however, is distinguishable from misdemeanor based on the penalty ranges assigned. Penalties for felonies range from one year to 60 years. Penalties for misdemeanors range from one day to 364 days. On the other hand, conduct punishable only by fine is not considered a crime but rather is classified as an infraction or violation.

Continue reading "Felony Versus Misdemeanor in Tennessee" »

When charged with a violent crime, including homicide or assault in Tennessee, the defendant may enter a plea of not guilty along with a plea of self-defense. If proven, self-defense is a complete bar to criminal liability.

When people are threatened by the use of force or threat of force, creating in their mind a reasonable belief of imminent fear of death or serious bodily injury, they are legally justified in threatening or using force to defend themselves—even to the extent of killing the initial aggressor.

If while in his or her home or business, a defendant is presumed to have exercised lawful self-defense if he or she uses force or threat of force against someone who is believed to have unlawfully and forcefully entered the defendant’s home.

However, there are several caveats to self-defense that must be thoroughly understood by the client and the client’s criminal defense attorney before raising self-defense as a justification for an otherwise unlawful assault.

Continue reading "Defenses to TN Crimes: Self-Defense" »

On May 14, 2009, before Judge Baumgartner, defense counsel for Vanessa Colemen in the now-infamous carjack slaying case argued that Tennessee homicide charges against his client should be dropped because Ms. Coleman testified before a grand jury on issues related to the charges now levied against her.

According to Tennessee Criminal Law and Rules of Criminal Procedure, if a witness is called before a grand jury and the witness decides not to incriminate herself, the district attorney may compel the witness to answer by granting the witness immunity from prosecution.

The problem with Coleman’s case, however, is that while her recently retired defense attorney applied for the immunity, Ms. Coleman never followed through with the application. Rather, she voluntarily testified before the district attorney ever considered her as a suspect.

Her defense attorney now seems to argue that immunity is automatic even though immunity typically applies when the defendant is under indictment. Even if counsel wins on this issue, there’s still another problem. The case is a federal proceeding, and there is no equivalent rule in a federal case granting immunity to those who testify before a grand jury.

If you have been charged with a crime in Tennessee, you will want an experienced Sevierville criminal defense attorney who can foresee such problems as described above and who will aggressively defend your rights. Call 866-853-2888 today for a case evaluation.

Under present law, first degree murder in Tennessee is:
• A premeditated and intentional killing of another;
• A killing of another committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy; or
• A killing of another committed as the result of the unlawful throwing, placing or discharging of a destructive device or bomb.

Senate Bill 1093 expands first degree murder as homicide crimes in Tennessee by including within the actions that constitute first degree murder the killing of another while committing domestic abuse if there was a past pattern of abuse upon the victim or another family or household member and the death occurs under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to human life.

Under Tennessee domestic abuse law, domestic abuse victims include:
• Adults or minors who are current or former spouses;
• Adults or minors who live together or who have lived together;
• Adults or minors who are dating or who have dated or who have or had a sexual relationship,
• Adults or minors related by blood or adoption;
• Adults or minors who are related or were formerly related by marriage.

To constitute extreme indifference to human life, the defendant’s conduct must be so lacking in concern for the lives of others that it warrants the same criminal liability as if the crime was done for the purpose of taking life.

If charged with first degree murder, you are facing the most severe punishments available under Tennessee law. Sentences can include life in prison or even the death penalty. This is why you will want a skilled attorney who has had considerable success in defending people who have been accused of this most serious crime. Call the experienced Knoxville assault attorneys today at Baker Associates for a free and comprehensive case evaluation.

In 1980, Gary Bradford Cone was convicted of brutally beating an elderly couple to death in their Memphis home. At trial, Cone claimed that he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder caused by his service in Vietnam, and that this post-traumatic stress left him incapable of having the requisite mental state to commit first-degree murder in Tennessee. He also claimed that he was a habitual drug user. Prosecutors aggressively challenged Cone’s claims, often mocking him while doing so, and a jury convicted him of first-degree murder. He was sentenced to death.

So what is the problem? It turns out that at the time of the trial, prosecutors were in possession of evidence that could have substantiated Cone’s claims of mental instability. This evidence was withheld from Cone’s attorney, the judge, and the jury. It is this simple act of withholding that has resulted in the United States Supreme Court ordering Cone be granted a new hearing so that this “new” evidence may be considered. Under criminal evidence procedure, prosecutors are required to supply potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense. Failing to do so is a denial of due process and can result in the denial of a fair trial – a Constitutional guarantee.

Since Cone’s trial 1980, lower courts have consistently refused to hear the new evidence, and the United States Supreme Court finally decided to hear his case in December 2008. The Supreme Court did not overturn cone’s conviction, as the justices agreed that the evidence bore no weight on whether Cone actually committed the murders; however, the evidence is vitally important to the issue of Cone’s intent to commit the murders, and could result in his conviction being reduced to second-degree murder. The effect could be a reduction in his sentence from death to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court demanded that Cone be given a new hearing to allow this evidence to finally be considered, nearly 30 years after his initial trial.

Cone’s nearly 30-year battle has resulted in an important victory for defendants’ rights. As evidenced by Cone’s trial, prosecutors carry extraordinary powers and, if left unchecked, can abuse those powers to the detriment of the rights of criminal defendants. Nonetheless, aggressiveness and persistence of do pay off in the criminal justice system, even if it takes 30 years.

If you have been charged with a crime in Tennessee, the skilled Pigeon Forge criminal defense attorneys at Baker Associates can help. Call 866-853-2888 for a case evaluation.

There have been a number of recent developments in the Knoxville trial of four individuals accused of murdering University of Tennessee student Channon Christian and her boyfriend Christopher Newsom. Whatever one’s opinions over the case may be, the actions of the court-appointed defense attorneys provide an example of model criminal defense.

A number of commentators, and the public at large, have been highly critical of the tactics that have been employed by the defense. Most of this criticism stems from high public outrage over the brutality of the murders in Tennessee, as well as the racial factors involved in the case. Particularly outrageous to the commentators is that the defense has filed a number of motions aimed at blocking certain evidence from being presented and other motions aimed at ensuring fairness within the courtroom.

One of the recent motions was to have evidence thrown out that was obtained in a search of the house where the bodies were found. The defense argued that the affidavit provided to the court, which signified that the search was conducted legally, was not signed by the detective in charge of the search. The detective’s signature is an affirmation that the contents of the affidavit are true. The judge has yet to rule on this motion, but the ruling will have a monumental effect on the rest of the trial.

Another recent motion was to remove from the courtroom the unusually large number of police officers that have been assigned to protect the defendants. Police officials have assigned a large contingent of officers to inner-courtroom security in response to death threats aimed at the defendants. The Tennessee criminal defense attorneys argued that the presence of the officers within the courtroom might prejudice the jury into believing that the defendants were guilty, rather than being able to objectively hear the case. The judge ruled that the officers should remain for safety reasons, but must now be dressed in street clothes to remove the prejudice.

Public outrage has been directed at the defense for trying so aggressively to ensure the defendants a fair trial, but this is exactly what a defense attorney is supposed to do. In reality, a defense attorney who does not do everything within their power to have their client acquitted is committing malpractice. Most importantly, we must never forget that a criminal defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. As such, attorneys and the court are obligated to ensure that a fair trial is conducted that gives criminal defendants the benefit of the doubt.

At Baker Associates, the skilled Knoxville criminal defense attorneys have the knowledge and experience to protect your rights if you have been charged with a crime in Tennessee. If you have any questions regarding criminal offenses or if you are in need of a free consultation, please call 866-853-2888 today.

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 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 § 39-13-212 defines Criminally Negligent Homicide as criminally negligent conduct that results in death.

Criminally Negligent Homicide:
In order to be found guilty of Criminally Negligent Homicide, the State of Tennessee must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant's conduct resulted in the death of the alleged victim;
and
(2) That the defendant acted with criminal negligence, i.e., the defendant ought to have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the alleged victim would be killed. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it 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 "criminal negligence" is established if it is shown that the defendant acted either intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.

In homicide cases, the mental state of the accused at the time he or she allegedly killed must be carefully considered in order to determine whether the accused will be convicted of First or Second Degree Murder 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, Criminally Negligent Homicide, or another homicide offense. Criminally Negligent Homicide is a Class E felony. A person convicted of Criminally Negligent Homicide is punished by imprisonment from 1 year to 6 years and can be fined up to $3,000.00.

If you or a close friend or relative has been charged with Criminally Negligent 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.

Sources: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-212; Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-111; T.P.I. Crim. 7.07.

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 § 39-13-211 defines Voluntary Manslaughter as the intentional or knowing killing of another person in a state of passion produced by adequate provocation sufficient to lead a reasonable person to act in an irrational manner. Voluntary Manslaughter is commonly referred to as a "crime of passion."

Voluntary Manslaughter:
In order to be found guilty of Voluntary Manslaughter, the State of Tennessee must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant unlawfully killed the alleged victim;
and
(2) That the defendant acted intentionally, i.e., it was the defendant's conscious objective or desire to cause the death of the alleged victim, or acted knowingly, i.e., acted with an awareness that his or her conduct was reasonably certain to cause the death of the alleged victim;
and
(3) That the killing resulted from a state of passion produced by adequate provocation sufficient to lead a reasonable person to act in an irrational manner.

In homicide cases, the mental state of the accused at the time he or she allegedly killed must be carefully considered in order to determine whether the accused will be convicted of First or Second Degree Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter, or a lesser offense. The distinction between Voluntary Manslaughter and Second Degree Murder is that voluntary manslaughter requires that the killing result from a state of passion produced by adequate provocation sufficient to lead a reasonable person to act in an irrational manner.

It is important to hire a Tennessee criminal defense lawyer if you are charged with Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter, or another homicide offense. Voluntary Manslaughter is a Class C felony. A person convicted of Voluntary Manslaughter is punished by imprisonment from 3 years to 15 years and can be fined up to $10,000.00.

If you or a close friend or relative has been charged with Voluntary Manslaughter, contact our experienced criminal defense attorneys as soon as possible. Our team of attorneys will work quickly and utilize our legal staff, private investigators, and experts to investigate and prepare your defense.

Sources: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-211; T.P.I. Crim. 7.06.

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, Crminally Negligent Homicide, Assisted Suicide, and Vehicular Homicide.

Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-210(a) defines Second Degree Murder as:
(1) A knowing killing of another;
or
(2) A killing of another that results from the unlawful distribution of any Schedule I or Schedule II drug, when the drug is the proximate cause of the death of the user.

Additionally, subsection (b) further states that in a prosecution for second degree murder, if the defendant knowingly engages in multiple incidents of domestic abuse, assault or the infliction of bodily injury against a single victim, the trier of fact (i.e., the jury) may infer that the defendant was aware that the cumulative effect of the conduct was reasonably certain to result in the death of the victim, regardless of whether a single incident would have resulted in the death.

Second Degree Murder: Killing of Another Using a Schedule I or Schedule II Drug

In order to be found guilty of Second Degree Murder due to unlawful distribution of a Schedule I or II Drug, the State of Tennessee must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) That the defendant unlawfully distributed a Schedule I or Schedule II drug;
and
(2) That the drug was the proximate cause of the death;
and
(3) That the defendant acted either intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.

An example of a Second Degree Murder charge by distributing Schedule I or Schedule II drugs would arise where a defendant injects a person with Heroin, a Schedule I narcotic, and that person dies from a drug overdose.

It is important to hire a Tennessee criminal defense lawyer if you are charged with Second Degree Murder or another homicide offense. The penalties for Second Degree Murder are severe--Second Degree Murder is a Class A felony. A person convicted of Seond Degree Murder is punished by imprisonment from 15 years to 60 years and can be fined up to $50,000.00.

If you or a close friend or relative has been charged with Second Degree Murder, contact our experienced criminal defense attorneys as soon as possible. Our team of attorneys will work quickly with our legal staff, private investigators, and experts to investigate and prepare your defense.

Sources: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-210; T.P.I. Crim. 7.05(b).

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 § 39-13-210(a) defines Second Degree Murder as:
(1) A knowing killing of another;
or
(2) A killing of another that results from the unlawful distribution of any Schedule I or Schedule II drug, when the drug is the proximate cause of the death of the user.

Additionally, subsection (b) further states that in a prosecution for second degree murder, if the defendant knowingly engages in multiple incidents of domestic abuse, assault or the infliction of bodily injury against a single victim, the trier of fact (i.e., the jury) may infer that the defendant was aware that the cumulative effect of the conduct was reasonably certain to result in the death of the victim, regardless of whether a single incident would have resulted in the death.

Second Degree Murder: Knowing Killing

In order to be found guilty of Knowing Second Degree Murder, the State of Tennessee must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant unlawfully killed the alleged victim;
and
(2) That the defendant acted knowingly, i.e., acted with an awareness that his or her conduct was reasonably certain to cause the death of the alleged victim.
Additionally, the requirement of "knowingly" is also established if it is shown that the defendant acted "intentionally."

In homicide cases, the mental state of the accused at the time he or she allegedly killed another person must be carefully considered in order to determine whether the accused will be convicted of Second Degree Murder or a lesser offense.

It is important to hire a Tennessee criminal defense lawyer if you are charged with Second Degree Murder or another homicide offense. The penalties for Second Degree Murder are severe--Second Degree Murder is a Class A felony. A person convicted of Seond Degree Murder is punished by imprisonment from 15 years to 60 years and can be fined up to $50,000.00.

If you or a close friend or relative has been charged with Second Degree Murder, contact our experienced criminal defense attorneys as soon as possible. Our team of attorneys will work quickly with our legal staff, private investigators, and experts to investigate and prepare your defense.

Sources: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-210; T.P.I. Crim. 7.05(a).

The Tennessee 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 § 39-13-202 defines First Degree Murder as
(1) A premeditated and intentional killing of another;
(2) A killing of another committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy (i.e., Felony Murder); or
(3) A killing of another committed as the result of the unlawful throwing, placing or discharging of a destructive device or bomb.

First Degree Murder: Destructive Device or Bomb:

There is no requirement for a culpable mental state to be found guilty of First Degree Murder pursuant to this statute. The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person intended to commit the act of unlawfully throwing, placing or discharging of a destructive device or bomb which resulted in the killing of a another.

A person convicted of First Degree Murder pursuant to the Destructive Device or Bomb portion of the statute faces the same severe penalties as if the killing were premeditated and intentional or if committed during the attempt or commission of a serious felony. If convicted of First Degree Murder by Destructive Device or Bomb, a person is punished by one of three sentences:
(1) Death;
(2) Imprisonment for life without possibility of parole; or
(3) Imprisonment for life.

It is extremely important to contact a qualified Tennessee criminal defense attorney if you or a friend or relative has been charged with First Degree Murder or another homicide offense. The attorneys at Baker Associates will work diligently to begin actively investigating your case and utilizing private investigators and forensic experts to further aid in your defense. Contact Baker Associates today for a free consultation for First Degree Murder defense.

Sources: T.C.A. § 39-13-202; T.P.I. Crim. 7.03(b).

The Tennessee 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 § 39-13-202 defines First Degree Murder as
(1) A premeditated and intentional killing of another;
(2) A killing of another committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy (i.e., Felony Murder); or
(3) A killing of another committed as the result of the unlawful throwing, placing or discharging of a destructive device or bomb.

First Degree Murder: Felony Murder:
In Tennessee, there is a "felony murder" statute which provides that a person who engaged in one of the listed felony offenses and another person was killed during the commission of the felony or during an attempt to commit the felony, that person may be found guilty of First Degree Murder. Under this part of the statute, the State is not required to prove that the killing was "premeditated and intentional." For example, to be found guilty of First Degre Murder pursuant to the Felony Murder statute for a killing during the perpetration of Child Rape, the State must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) that the defendant unlawfully killed the alleged victim;
and
(2) that the killing was committed in the perpetration of or the attempt to perpetrate the alleged Rape of a Child; that is, that the killing was closely connected to the alleged Rape of a Child and was not a separate, distinct and independent event;
and
(3) that the defendant intended to commit the alleged Rape of a Child.
The intent to commit the Rape of a Child must exist before or at the same time as the commission of the act causing the death of the victim. Proof that such intent to commit the underlying felony existed before or at the same time of the act of killing is a question for the jury.

A person convicted of First Degree Murder pursuant to the Felony Murder portion of the statute faces the same severe penalties as if the killing were premeditated and intentional. If convicted of First Degree Felony Murder, a person is punished by one of three sentences:
(1) Death;
(2) Imprisonment for life without possibility of parole; or
(3) Imprisonment for life.

It is extremely important to contact a qualified Tennessee criminal defense attorney if you or a friend or relative has been charged with Felony Murder or another homicide offense. Our attorneys have successfully handled many cases involving serious felonies, including rape, robbery, burglary, aggravated child abuse, and rape of a child. Because a charge of felony murder involves the attempt or commission of at least one other serious felony offense, please contact our attorneys so that we may begin actively investigating your case.

Sources: T.C.A. § 39-13-202 ; T.P.I. Crim. 7.03(b).

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 § 39-13-202 defines First Degree Murder as:
(1) A premeditated and intentional killing of another;
(2) A killing of another committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy; or
(3) A killing of another committed as the result of the unlawful throwing, placing or discharging of a destructive device or bomb.

First Degree Murder: Premeditated and Intentional Killing
In order to be found guilty of Premediated and Intentional First Degree Murder, the State of Tennessee must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant unlawfully killed the alleged victim;
and
(2) That the defendant acted intentionally, i.e., it was the defendant's conscious objective or desire to cause the death of the alleged victim;
and
(3) That the killing was premeditated, i.e., the killing was done after the exercise of reflection and judgment and that the intent to kill must have been formed prior to the act of killing itself.

In homicide cases, the mental state of the accused at the time he or she allegedly decided to kill must be carefully considered in order to determine whether the accused will be convicted of First Degree Murder or a lesser offense.

It is important to hire a Tennessee criminal defense lawyer if you are charged with First Degree

Murder or another homicide offense. The penalties for First Degree Murder are severe. A person convicted of First Degree Murder is punished by one of three sentences:
(1) Death;
(2) Imprisonment for life without possibility of parole; or
(3) Imprisonment for life.

If you or a close friend or relative has been charged with First Degree Murder, contact our experienced criminal defense attorneys as soon as possible. Our team of attorneys will work quickly and utilize our legal staff, private investigators, and experts to investigate and prepare your defense.

Sources: Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-202; T.P.I. Crim. 7.01(b).