guilty verdict removes presumption in Tennessee

2015“Because a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, on appeal a defendant bears the burden of showing why the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Wagner, 382 S.W.3d 289, 297 (Tenn. 2012); see also State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982).

2015“Because a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, on appeal a defendant bears the burden of showing why the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Wagner, 382 S.W.3d 289, 297 (Tenn. 2012); see also State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982).

2026State v. Evans, 838 S.W.2d 185, 191 (Tenn. 1992).

2018When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence this Court is obliged to review that claim according to certain well-settled principles A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt State v. Evans, 838 S.W.2d 185, 191 (Tenn. 1992).

1991In State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d 474, 476 (Tenn.1973), our Supreme Court said: “A guilty verdict by the jury, approved by the trial judge, accredits the testimony of the witnesses for the State and resolves all conflicts in favor of the theory of the State.” Since a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d at 476 , the accused has the burden in this Court of illustrating why the evidence is insufficient to support the guilty verdict returned by the trier of fact.

1991In State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d 474, 476 (Tenn.1973), our Supreme Court said: “A guilty verdict by the jury, approved by the trial judge, accredits the testimony of the witnesses for the State and resolves all conflicts in favor of the theory of the State.” Since a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d at 476 , the accused has the burden in this Court of illustrating why the evidence is insufficient to support the guilty verdict returned by the trier of fact.

2026Davis, 354 S.W.3d at 729 (citing State v. Sisk, 343 S.W.3d 60, 65 (Tenn. 2011)).

2026Davis, 354 S.W.3d at 729 (citing State v. Sisk, 343 S.W.3d 60, 65 (Tenn. 2011)).

2026Bland, 958 S.W.2d at 659 ; State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982).

2017Instead, it is the trier of fact, not this court, who resolves any questions concerning “the credibility of witnesses, the weight and value to be given the evidence, as well as all factual issues raised by the evidence.” State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651, 659 (Tenn. 1997). - 10 - A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt.

2015“Because a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, on appeal a defendant bears the burden of showing why the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Wagner, 382 S.W.3d 289, 297 (Tenn. 2012); see also State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982).

2015“Because a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, on appeal a defendant bears the burden of showing why the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Wagner, 382 S.W.3d 289, 297 (Tenn. 2012); see also State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982).

2016“Because a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, on appeal a defendant bears the burden of showing why the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Thacker, 164 S.W.3d 208, 221 (Tenn. 2005).

2014“Because a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, on appeal a defendant bears the burden of showing why the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Thacker, 164 S.W.3d 208, 221 (Tenn. 2005).

2025Our standard of review “is the same whether the conviction is based upon direct or circumstantial evidence.” State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370, 379 (Tenn. 2011) (quoting State v. Hanson, 279 S.W.3d 265, 275 (Tenn. 2009)) (internal quotation marks omitted). - 24 - A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence, replacing it with a presumption of guilt.

2025App. P. 27(a)(7). 6 Defendant cites a rejected theory that a conviction based on circumstantial evidence must “draw no other reasonable inference save the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.” As the State correctly asserts in its brief, the Tennessee Supreme Court explicitly rejected this standard nearly a decade ago in Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d at 379 . -8- A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with one of guilt on appeal; therefore, the burden is shifted to the defendant to prove why the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction.

2025Our standard of review “is the same whether the conviction is based upon direct or circumstantial evidence.” State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370, 379 (Tenn. 2011) (quoting State v. Hanson, 279 S.W.3d 265, 275 (Tenn. 2009)) (internal quotation marks omitted). - 24 - A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence, replacing it with a presumption of guilt.

2022Our standard of review “is the same whether the conviction is based upon direct or circumstantial evidence.” State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370, 379 (Tenn. 2011) (quoting State v. Hanson, 279 S.W.3d 265, 275 (Tenn. 2009)) (internal quotation marks omitted). 7 Defendant does not contest that the evidence was sufficient relative to his two aggravated assault convictions. - 26 - A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence, replacing it with a presumption of guilt.

2017Id. (citing State v. Parker, 350 S.W.3d 883, 903 (Tenn. 2011)).

2017Id. (citing State v. Parker , 350 S.W.3d 883 , 903 (Tenn. 2011) ).

2024Id. (citing State v. Rice, 184 S.W.3d 646, 661 (Tenn. 2006)).

2024Id. (citing State v. Rice, 184 S.W.3d 646, 661 (Tenn. 2006)).

2013Id.

2005See State v. Evans, 108 S.W.3d 231, 237 (Tenn. 2003); Carruthers, 35 S.W.3d at 557-58 ; State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982).

2017State v. Carruthers, 35 S.W.3d 516, 557-58 (Tenn. 2000).

2014State v. Carruthers, 35 S.W.3d 516, 557-58 (Tenn. 2000).

2016State v. Franklin, 308 S.W.3d 799, 825 (Tenn. 2010).

2015State v. Franklin, 308 S.W.3d 799, 825 (Tenn. 2010).

2010See State v. Williams, 657 S.W.2d 405, 410 (Tenn. 1983). -3- Moreover, a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence enjoyed by defendants at trial and replaces it with a presumption of guilt.

1999See State v. Williams, 657 S.W.2d 405, 410 (Tenn. 1983). -6- Moreover, a guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence enjoyed by defendants at trial and replaces it with a presumption of guilt.

2018“A guilty verdict removes the presumption of innocence, and it is replaced with a presumption of guilt.” Black v. Blount, 938 S.W.2d 394, 399 (Tenn. 1996).

2008Black v. Blount, 938 S.W.2d at 399 .

2021State v. Allison, 618 S.W.3d 24 , 33 (Tenn. 2021); State v. Gentry, 538 S.W.3d 413, 420 (Tenn. 2017).

2014State v. Reid, 91 S.W.3d 247, 277 (Tenn. 2002).

2007Id. at 399 ; see also Thigpen, 874 S.W.2d at 53 (“Persons convicted of criminal contempt lose their presumption of innocence . . . and bear the burden of overcoming their presumption of guilt on appeal.”).

2001State v. Buggs, 995 S.W.2d 102, 105-6 (Tenn. 1999).

1986State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d 474, 476 (Tenn.1973); Anglin v. State, 553 S.W.2d 616, 620 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1977); Williams v. State, 552 S.W.2d 772, 776 (Tenn.Crim.App.1977).

1986State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d 474, 476 (Tenn.1973); Anglin v. State, 553 S.W.2d 616, 620 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1977); Williams v. State, 552 S.W.2d 772, 776 (Tenn.Crim.App.1977).