Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103 (2026)
Criminal conspiracy
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) The offense of conspiracy is committed if two (2) or more people, each having the culpable mental state required for the offense that is the object of the conspiracy, and each acting for the purpose of promoting or facilitating commission of an offense, agree that one (1) or more of them will engage in conduct that constitutes the offense.
- (b) If a person guilty of conspiracy, as defined in subsection (a), knows that another with whom the person conspires to commit an offense has conspired with one (1) or more other people to commit the same offense, the person is guilty of conspiring with the other person or persons, whether or not their identity is known, to commit the offense.
- (c) If a person conspires to commit a number of offenses, the person is guilty of only one (1) conspiracy, so long as the multiple offenses are the object of the same agreement or continuous conspiratorial relationship.
- (d) No person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense, unless an overt act in pursuance of the conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by the person or by another with whom the person conspired.
- (e)
- (1) Conspiracy is a continuing course of conduct that terminates when the objectives of the conspiracy are completed or the agreement that they be completed is abandoned by the person and by those with whom the person conspired. The objectives of the conspiracy include, but are not limited to, escape from the crime, distribution of the proceeds of the crime, and measures, other than silence, for concealing the crime or obstructing justice in relation to it.
- (2) Abandonment of a conspiracy is presumed if neither the person nor anyone with whom the person conspired does any overt act in pursuance of the conspiracy during the applicable period of limitation.
- (3) If an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to that person only if and when the person, advises those with whom the person conspired of the abandonment, or the person informs law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of the person's participation in the conspiracy.
- (f) It is no defense that the offense that was the object of the conspiracy was not committed.
- (g) Nothing in this section is intended to modify the evidentiary rules allowing statements of co-conspirators in furtherance of a conspiracy.
Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 169
cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: State v. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d 514 (Tenn. 2007).
State v. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d 514 (Tenn. 2007). “*522 Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (2003). A conspiracy is "an agreement to accomplish a criminal or unlawful act.”
State v. Pike, 978 S.W.2d 904 (Tenn. 1998). “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (1991 Repl.”
State v. Walker, 910 S.W.2d 381 (Tenn. 1995). “Therefore, even though Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103 (Supp. 1989) was in effect at the time of the trial, I would determine the existence of the conspiracy under the statute in effect at the time the conspiracy occurred.”
State v. Thornton, 10 S.W.3d 229 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103, Sentencing Commission Comments.”
State v. Carter, 121 S.W.3d 579 (Tenn. 2003). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (2003). “No person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense unless an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by the person or by another with whom the person conspired.”
State of Tennessee v. Robert Fusco, 404 S.W.3d 504 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “Conspiracy “is committed if two (2) or more people, each having the culpable mental state required for the offense that is the object of the conspiracy, and each acting for the purpose of promoting or facilitating commission of an offense, agree that one (1) or more of them will…”
State of Tennessee v. Jerry Lewis Tuttle, 515 S.W.3d 282 (Tenn. 2017). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103 . The relevant offense to this appeal is defined as “knowingly .”
State v. Stephenson, 195 S.W.3d 574 (Tenn. 2006). “The defendant’s act of murder, which he committed by employing another to commit the murder for remuneration or the promise of remuneration, is separate and distinct from the defendant’s entering into an agreement with Thompson to have Mrs.”
State v. Watson, 227 S.W.3d 622 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006). “T.C.A. § 39-12-103(a) (1997). It is also required that “an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by the person or by another with whom the person conspired.”
State v. Watkins, 362 S.W.3d 530 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (1989) (criminal conspiracy).”
State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 (Tenn. 2009). “Defendant also argues that the phone call placed the caller at risk of prosecution for conspiracy to obstruct justice under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-12-103(e)(l) (2003). The trial court ruled that, because the caller did not identify himself, he could not have…”
State v. Keel, 882 S.W.2d 410 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “rmant Cocaine and then delivering the said cocaine to the said confidential informant thereby, committing an overt act in pursuant of the conspiracy, the said Glen Miller did supply to the said Randall Keel the cocaine which was then sold to the said confidential informant,…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) — 68 cases
State v. Pike, 978 S.W.2d 904 (Tenn. 1998). “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (1991 Repl.”
State v. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d 514 (Tenn. 2007). “*522 Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (2003). A conspiracy is "an agreement to accomplish a criminal or unlawful act.”
State v. Thornton, 10 S.W.3d 229 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103, Sentencing Commission Comments.”
State v. Watkins, 362 S.W.3d 530 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (1989) (criminal conspiracy).”
State v. Carter, 121 S.W.3d 579 (Tenn. 2003). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (2003). “No person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense unless an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by the person or by another with whom the person conspired.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(b) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Jesus Alfonso Castillo (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(c) — 4 cases
State of Tennessee v. Robert Fusco, 404 S.W.3d 504 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “Conspiracy “is committed if two (2) or more people, each having the culpable mental state required for the offense that is the object of the conspiracy, and each acting for the purpose of promoting or facilitating commission of an offense, agree that one (1) or more of them will…”
State of Tennessee v. Garrick Graham (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Robert Fusco (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Greg Harris (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(d) — 31 cases
State v. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d 514 (Tenn. 2007). “*522 Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (2003). A conspiracy is "an agreement to accomplish a criminal or unlawful act.”
State v. Carter, 121 S.W.3d 579 (Tenn. 2003). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-12-103(a) (2003). “No person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense unless an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by the person or by another with whom the person conspired.”
State v. Watson, 227 S.W.3d 622 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006). “T.C.A. § 39-12-103(a) (1997). It is also required that “an overt act in pursuance of such conspiracy is alleged and proved to have been done by the person or by another with whom the person conspired.”
State of Tennessee v. Jose Amates Martinez, 372 S.W.3d 598 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011).
United States v. Luciano Pascacio-Rodriguez, 749 F.3d 353 (5th Cir. 2014).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(e)(1) — 8 cases
State v. Walker, 910 S.W.2d 381 (Tenn. 1995). “Therefore, even though Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103 (Supp. 1989) was in effect at the time of the trial, I would determine the existence of the conspiracy under the statute in effect at the time the conspiracy occurred.”
State of Tennessee v. Kelley Hufford (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
State of Tennessee v. Xavier Tull-Morales (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Eric Tyre Patton (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
State of Tennessee v. Evelyn D. Kennedy & Christopher L. Kennedy (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(e)(l) — 3 cases
State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 (Tenn. 2009). “Defendant also argues that the phone call placed the caller at risk of prosecution for conspiracy to obstruct justice under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-12-103(e)(l) (2003). The trial court ruled that, because the caller did not identify himself, he could not have…”
State v. Walker, 910 S.W.2d 381 (Tenn. 1995). “Therefore, even though Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103 (Supp. 1989) was in effect at the time of the trial, I would determine the existence of the conspiracy under the statute in effect at the time the conspiracy occurred.”
State of Tennessee v. Jose Amates Martinez, 372 S.W.3d 598 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(f) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Roddarous Marcus Bond (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
State of Tennessee v. Terrance Williams (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-103(g) — 2 cases
State v. Gerald Henry (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999).
State of Tennessee v. Ronald Eugene Rickman & William Edward Groseclose (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002).
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.