State of Tennessee v. Brandon Vance, W2016-01015-CCA-R3-CD

Victim Larry Wilkins was shot six times and died outside his Sycamore Lake apartment late on March 9, 2014; his black Ford Mustang (advertised for sale) was driven away after the shooting.
Neighbors observed 3–4 men around the Mustang and heard multiple gunshots; several saw individuals run and the Mustang flee the scene.
Police found a dark Chevrolet Monte Carlo at the complex containing documents in Brandon Vance’s name and a temporary tag linked to Vance’s address; the Mustang bore Vance’s fingerprint on the front bumper.
Vance voluntarily came to police, signed Miranda warnings, and gave a statement admitting participation in a plan to take the Mustang without paying: he lured the victim using a fake-number app and acted as a distraction while accomplices (Walter Collins and Martiness Henderson) seized the car.
Vance admitted dropping Henderson (who had a gun) at the complex, using walkie-talkies to coordinate, and that Henderson shot the victim; witnesses and the medical examiner corroborated the number of shots and the sequence of events.
Vance was convicted by a Shelby County jury of first-degree felony murder (robbery as the underlying felony) and received a life sentence; he appealed claiming insufficient evidence of intent to commit robbery.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for felony murder (robbery)	State: evidence shows a planned theft of the Mustang during which the killing occurred; Vance admitted intent and participation.	Vance: no evidence he intended to commit robbery; only a distraction—no intent to steal.	Affirmed: jury reasonably found Vance intended to commit robbery and was criminally responsible for the killing.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for appellate sufficiency review)
State v. Davis, 354 S.W.3d 718 (Tenn. 2011) (appellate scope and view of evidence in sufficiency review)
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (circumstantial evidence treated same as direct evidence on appeal)
State v. Buggs, 995 S.W.2d 102 (Tenn. 1999) (intent to commit underlying felony can be formed concurrent with killing and inferred from actions)
State v. Cureton, 38 S.W.3d 64 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000) (felony murder may be predicated on defendant’s own conduct or criminal responsibility for another)
State v. Watson, 227 S.W.3d 622 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006) (presence and companionship before/after a felony can support criminal responsibility)
State v. Maxey, 898 S.W.2d 756 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994) (criminal responsibility requires uniting with principal offender knowingly and voluntarily)
State v. Carson, 950 S.W.2d 951 (Tenn. 1997) (criminal responsibility requires intent to promote or assist commission or benefit from the offense)