Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501 (2026)
Definitions for Sections 39-13-501 - 39-13-511
✓ current as of May 2026
As used in §§ 39-13-501 - 39-13-511, except as specifically provided in § 39-13-505, unless the context otherwise requires:
- (1) "Coercion" means threat of kidnapping, extortion, force or violence to be performed immediately or in the future or the use of parental, custodial, or official authority over a child less than fifteen (15) years of age;
- (2) "Intimate parts" includes semen, vaginal fluid, the primary genital area, groin, inner thigh, buttock or breast of a human being;
- (3) "Mentally defective" means that a person suffers from a mental disease or defect which renders that person temporarily or permanently incapable of appraising the nature of the person's conduct;
- (4) "Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling the person's conduct due to the influence of a narcotic, anesthetic or other substance administered to that person without the person's consent, or due to any other act committed upon that person without the person's consent;
- (5) "Physically helpless" means that a person is unconscious, asleep or for any other reason physically or verbally unable to communicate unwillingness to do an act;
- (6) "Sexual contact" includes the intentional touching of the victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's intimate parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's intimate parts, if that intentional touching can be reasonably construed as being for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification;
- (7) "Sexual penetration" means sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of the victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's body, but emission of semen is not required; and
- (8) "Victim" means the person alleged to have been subjected to criminal sexual conduct and includes the spouse of the defendant.
Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 172, s 1, eff. 7/1/2013.
Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1997 , ch. 256, § 2; 2005, ch. 456, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 754
cases (95 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: State v. Johnson, 53 S.W.3d 628 (Tenn. 2001).
State v. Johnson, 53 S.W.3d 628 (Tenn. 2001). “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501(2). [4] While the dissent characterizes our reliance upon the plural term used in the statute as a "startling conclusion," the law is clear that the plain language of a statute is the best indication of legislative intent.”
State of Tennessee v. Fred Chad Clark, II, 452 S.W.3d 268 (Tenn. 2014). “] First, this statutory definition explicitly applies to Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 39-13-501 through-511 — a—range which includes aggravated sexual battery in Tenn.”
State v. Bowles, 52 S.W.3d 69 (Tenn. 2001). “” See Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-502 (1997). By comparison, the elements of sexual battery are as follows: (1) An unlawful sexual contact, defined in Tenn.”
State v. Evans, 108 S.W.3d 231 (Tenn. 2003). “Unlawful sexual contact includes “the intentional touching of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, if…”
State v. Hayes, 899 S.W.2d 175 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). “See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-501(1), -503(a)(1), and - 505(a).”
State v. Elkins, 102 S.W.3d 578 (Tenn. 2003). “" Furthermore, Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-501(7) (1997) defines sexual penetration as "sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal…”
Hart v. State, 21 S.W.3d 901 (Tenn. 2000). “In our analysis of the appellant’s argument, we note that sexual penetration, as defined in Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501, means “sexual intercourse, eunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person’s body or of any object…”
State v. Cleveland, 959 S.W.2d 548 (Tenn. 1997). “The legislature has included aggravated assault among the "assaultive offenses" set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-101 through -107, while aggravated rape is among the "sexual offenses" listed in Tenn.”
Ruff v. State, 978 S.W.2d 95 (Tenn. 1998). “Rather, one must ascertain the requisite mental state by referring to the definitions in Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501, found in the same chapter.”
State v. Bolin, 922 S.W.2d 870 (Tenn. 1996). “"Sexual penetration" is defined in Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501 (7) as "sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of the victim's, the…”
State v. Smith, 891 S.W.2d 922 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501(7) (1991). (Emphasis added).”
State v. Barney, 986 S.W.2d 545 (Tenn. 1999). “Thus, each of the offenses requires proof of an additional fact that the other does not, and the offenses are not the same under Block-burger. Second, to prove aggravated sexual battery the State must present evidence that the defendant intentionally touched the intimate parts…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(1) — 20 cases
State v. McKnight, 900 S.W.2d 36 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
State v. Hayes, 899 S.W.2d 175 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). “See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-501(1), -503(a)(1), and - 505(a).”
State of Tennessee v. Donald Wade Goff (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003).
State of Tennessee v. Donald Wade Goff (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003).
State of Tennessee v. Tarrants Chandler (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(2) — 111 cases
State v. Johnson, 53 S.W.3d 628 (Tenn. 2001). “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501(2). [4] While the dissent characterizes our reliance upon the plural term used in the statute as a "startling conclusion," the law is clear that the plain language of a statute is the best indication of legislative intent.”
State v. Taylor, 63 S.W.3d 400 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001).
State v. Blanton, 926 S.W.2d 953 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
State v. Smith, 42 S.W.3d 101 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
State v. Howard, 926 S.W.2d 579 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(2010) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Stephen Brian Wilcox (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(3) — 3 cases
State v. Schaller, 975 S.W.2d 313 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
State v. Kenneth Schaller (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
State of Tennessee v. Jerry Wade Sherrill (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(4) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Cory Lamont Batey (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(5) — 4 cases
United States v. Christopher James, 810 F.3d 674 (9th Cir. 2016).
Boone v. Commonwealth, 155 S.W.3d 727 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).
State of Tennessee v. Ladarius Lockhart (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
State of Tennessee v. Kireek Kaseem Steele (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(6) — 237 cases
State v. Johnson, 53 S.W.3d 628 (Tenn. 2001). “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501(2). [4] While the dissent characterizes our reliance upon the plural term used in the statute as a "startling conclusion," the law is clear that the plain language of a statute is the best indication of legislative intent.”
State of Tennessee v. Fred Chad Clark, II, 452 S.W.3d 268 (Tenn. 2014). “] First, this statutory definition explicitly applies to Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 39-13-501 through-511 — a—range which includes aggravated sexual battery in Tenn.”
State v. Hayes, 899 S.W.2d 175 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). “See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-501(1), -503(a)(1), and - 505(a).”
State v. Evans, 108 S.W.3d 231 (Tenn. 2003). “Unlawful sexual contact includes “the intentional touching of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, if…”
State v. Bowles, 52 S.W.3d 69 (Tenn. 2001). “” See Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-502 (1997). By comparison, the elements of sexual battery are as follows: (1) An unlawful sexual contact, defined in Tenn.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(6)(2006) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. John Davis (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(7) — 270 cases
State v. Elkins, 102 S.W.3d 578 (Tenn. 2003). “" Furthermore, Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-501(7) (1997) defines sexual penetration as "sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal…”
State v. Bowles, 52 S.W.3d 69 (Tenn. 2001). “” See Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-502 (1997). By comparison, the elements of sexual battery are as follows: (1) An unlawful sexual contact, defined in Tenn.”
State of Tennessee v. Lemaricus Devall Davidson, 509 S.W.3d 156 (Tenn. 2016).
State v. Evans, 108 S.W.3d 231 (Tenn. 2003). “Unlawful sexual contact includes “the intentional touching of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim’s, the defendant’s, or any other person’s intimate parts, if…”
Campbell v. Sundquist, 926 S.W.2d 250 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(7)(B) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Evelyn D. Kennedy & Christopher L. Kennedy (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(8) — 4 cases
State v. Smith, 891 S.W.2d 922 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-501(7) (1991). (Emphasis added).”
STATE of Tennessee v. DeWayne COLLIER AKA Patrick Collier, 411 S.W.3d 886 (Tenn. 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Roger Dean Guin (Tenn. Crim. App. 2023).
State of Tennessee v. Bobby Neil Mathis, Jr. (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(a) — 1 case
State v. Fitz, 19 S.W.3d 213 (Tenn. 2000).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-501(a)(1) — 1 case
State v. Jones, 953 S.W.2d 695 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
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.