offense charged defense (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

offense charged defense in Tennessee

5 Tennessee opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2015 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. DuBosegreen
tenn · 1997 · cited in 5 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 1999–2015
2 sentences

2015Evid. 401; see DuBose, 953 S.W.2d at 653 (“The relevance of proffered evidence is determined by the issues presented for resolution in the trial, which, in turn, are determined by the elements of the offense charged and the defense asserted by the accused.”); see also Parton, 694 S.W.2d at 302 (“[E]vidence that the defendant committed another crime is admissible only if the ground for relevance is actually being contested in the case on trial.”) (quoting Bunch v. State, 605 S.W.2d 227, 230 (Tenn. 1980))).

2014State v. Dubose, 953 S.W.2d 649, 653 (Tenn. 1997).

55
Bunch v. Stategreen
tenn · 1980 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015Evid. 401; see DuBose, 953 S.W.2d at 653 (“The relevance of proffered evidence is determined by the issues presented for resolution in the trial, which, in turn, are determined by the elements of the offense charged and the defense asserted by the accused.”); see also Parton, 694 S.W.2d at 302 (“[E]vidence that the defendant committed another crime is admissible only if the ground for relevance is actually being contested in the case on trial.”) (quoting Bunch v. State, 605 S.W.2d 227, 230 (Tenn. 1980))).

11
State v. Partongreen
tenn · 1985 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015Evid. 401; see DuBose, 953 S.W.2d at 653 (“The relevance of proffered evidence is determined by the issues presented for resolution in the trial, which, in turn, are determined by the elements of the offense charged and the defense asserted by the accused.”); see also Parton, 694 S.W.2d at 302 (“[E]vidence that the defendant committed another crime is admissible only if the ground for relevance is actually being contested in the case on trial.”) (quoting Bunch v. State, 605 S.W.2d 227, 230 (Tenn. 1980))).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Where else courts name it

TX 24 (1988–2023) DC 9 (1979–1991) GA 9 (1976–2004) CA 7 (1947–2017) NY 5 (1934–2001) TN 5 (1999–2015) IN 4 (1929–1980) NH 4 (2009–2025) HI 3 (1995–2012) AK 3 (1969–1974) NC 3 (1938–1989) PA 2 (1985–1987) MS 2 (1994–2001) FL 2 (1991–2004) VA 2 (1982–2019)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check