Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402 (2026)

Criminal responsibility for conduct of another

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another, if:

Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 747 cases (81 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: State v. Dellinger, 79 S.W.3d 458 (Tenn. 2002).
State v. Dellinger, 79 S.W.3d 458 (Tenn. 2002). · cites it 18× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-11-402 states in relevant part that "A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if .”
State v. Robinson, 146 S.W.3d 469 (Tenn. 2004). · cites it 14× “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402 (1997). Significantly, facilitation requires the lack of criminal responsibility intent.”
State v. Rice, 184 S.W.3d 646 (Tenn. 2006). · cites it 10× “Therefore, a rational trier of fact could have found that the defendant was criminally responsible for the victim's murder even if Mario had been the one to actually stab her.”
State v. Austin, 87 S.W.3d 447 (Tenn. 2002). · cites it 13× “§ 39-11-402. Indeed, "[s]ubdivision (2) [of TENN.”
State v. Thomas, 158 S.W.3d 361 (Tenn. 2005). · cites it 8× “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-402. Irregardless of this identification, there was ample evidence from which any rational trier of fact could conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Defendant Thomas was guilty of first degree felony murder committed during the perpetration of a…”
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011). · cites it 4× “]” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-402(2) (1997). “[U]nder the theory of criminal responsibility, presence and companionship with the perpetrator of a felony before and after the commission of the crime are circumstances from which an individual’s participation may be inferred.”
State v. Burns, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999). · cites it 6× “BURNS on or about the 18th day of December, 1994, thereby becoming criminally responsible for the aforesaid conduct of MICHAEL SPADAFINA and VITO LICARI (T.C.A. 39-11-402) and committing the offense of First-degree MURDER, in violation of T.”
State of Tennessee v. Kevin Anthony Dickson, Jr., 413 S.W.3d 735 (Tenn. 2013). · cites it 8× “§ 39-12-101(a)(3) (2010); and, if so, (3) whether Ramirez acted with sufficient premeditation in his attempts to kill Hardin and Christopher Lyons within the meaning of TenmCode Ann.”
State v. Allen, 69 S.W.3d 181 (Tenn. 2002). · cites it 6× “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-402(2). [2] The dissenting opinion concludes that the evidence does not support an instruction on facilitation.”
State v. Carson, 950 S.W.2d 951 (Tenn. 1997). · cites it 12× “The issue presented by this appeal is whether the defendant, who assisted his co-defendants in committing an aggravated robbery, was criminally responsible under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402 (2) for additional offenses committed by them.”
State v. Maxey, 898 S.W.2d 756 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). · cites it 10× “The Circuit Court at Maury County entered a jury verdict finding Donna Maxey 1 guilty of the crime of the rape of a child pursuant to T.C.A. § 39-11-402 (1991) and T.C.A. § 39-13-522 (Supp.”
State v. Lemacks, 996 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1999). · cites it 8× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-402 (1991). As reflected in this case, criminal responsibility is not a separate, distinct crime.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(1) — 7 cases
State v. Burns, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999). “BURNS on or about the 18th day of December, 1994, thereby becoming criminally responsible for the aforesaid conduct of MICHAEL SPADAFINA and VITO LICARI (T.C.A. 39-11-402) and committing the offense of First-degree MURDER, in violation of T.”
State v. Guy, 165 S.W.3d 651 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(2) — 421 cases
State v. Dellinger, 79 S.W.3d 458 (Tenn. 2002). “Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-11-402 states in relevant part that "A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if .”
State v. Robinson, 146 S.W.3d 469 (Tenn. 2004). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402 (1997). Significantly, facilitation requires the lack of criminal responsibility intent.”
State v. Rice, 184 S.W.3d 646 (Tenn. 2006). “Therefore, a rational trier of fact could have found that the defendant was criminally responsible for the victim's murder even if Mario had been the one to actually stab her.”
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011). “]” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-402(2) (1997). “[U]nder the theory of criminal responsibility, presence and companionship with the perpetrator of a felony before and after the commission of the crime are circumstances from which an individual’s participation may be inferred.”
State of Tennessee v. Kevin Anthony Dickson, Jr., 413 S.W.3d 735 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 39-12-101(a)(3) (2010); and, if so, (3) whether Ramirez acted with sufficient premeditation in his attempts to kill Hardin and Christopher Lyons within the meaning of TenmCode Ann.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(3) — 11 cases
State v. Hodges, 7 S.W.3d 609 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).
State v. Burns, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999). “BURNS on or about the 18th day of December, 1994, thereby becoming criminally responsible for the aforesaid conduct of MICHAEL SPADAFINA and VITO LICARI (T.C.A. 39-11-402) and committing the offense of First-degree MURDER, in violation of T.”
Anthony Hodges v. Tony Parker, 493 F. App'x 704 (6th Cir. 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Donald Lee Harris (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
William D. Crowder v. Tre Hargett (Tenn. Ct. App. 2023).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(3)(1989) — 1 case
State v. Jackson, 944 P.2d 403 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(a) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(a)(2) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. Genore Dancy (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(a)(3) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(b) — 4 cases
State v. Hicks, 835 S.W.2d 32 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Ball (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
State v. John Charles Johnson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
State v. Seria D. Ward (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.