6 Tennessee opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2021 1 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Piercegreen2 sentences2021Requiring a causal connection between the homicide and the underlying felony promotes the deterrent effect of the rule by precluding a first degree murder conviction for “killings which are collateral to and separate from the underlying felony.” State v. Pierce, 23 S.W.3d 289, 296 (Tenn. 2000). 2020Requiring a causal connection between the homicide and the underlying felony promotes the deterrent effect of the rule by precluding a first degree murder conviction for “killings which are collateral to and separate from the underlying felony.” State v. Pierce, 23 S.W.3d 289, 295 (Tenn. 2000). | 6 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Buggs
green
2 sentences2021“Moreover, requiring a close nexus between the [underlying felony] and the killing is particularly appropriate given that the felony murder rule is ‘a legal fiction in which the intent and the malice to commit the underlying felony is “transferred” to elevate an unintentional killing to first-degree murder.’” Id. (quoting Buggs, 995 S.W.2d at 107 ). 2020“Moreover, requiring a close nexus between the [underlying felony] and the killing is particularly appropriate given that the felony murder rule is ‘a legal fiction in which the intent and the malice to commit the underlying felony is ‘transferred’ to elevate an unintentional killing to first-degree murder.’” Id. (quoting Buggs, 995 S.W.2d at 107 ). 2 During oral argument, the State noted that the charge of first degree felony murder in the indictment did not specify whether the victim of the underlying kidnapping was Ms. Taylor or Mr. Lampkin and that the evidence was sufficient to show that | 6 | 2013–2021 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.