State of Tennessee v. Javonta Marquis Perkins, M2015-01025-CCA-R3-CD

On March 3, 2012, two men carjacked Maurice Hegwood at gunpoint, stealing his white 2009 Pontiac G6; Hegwood identified Perkins as the gunman and observed the perpetrators in well-lit conditions.
Shortly thereafter, two men in a light-colored vehicle attempted another robbery; the vehicle (matching Hegwood’s car) was later spotted by officers.
Police signaled the vehicle to stop; it fled at high speed, drove onto the wrong lane, went airborne after hitting a curb/dip, and crashed; two occupants fled on foot.
A K-9 unit tracked and apprehended Javonta Perkins near the wrecked vehicle; another man (Quentin McClain) was also captured.
Jury convicted Perkins of evading arrest with a motor vehicle (Class D felony because flight created risk to a third party); acquitted on aggravated assault; mistrial on remaining counts.
Perkins appealed, arguing (1) the criminal-responsibility jury instruction was not supported by the proof, and (2) insufficient evidence supported the evading-arrest conviction and the Class D classification.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury on criminal responsibility	The State: evidence showed two perpetrators acted in concert; instruction was supported by evidence of shared criminal intent and participation	Perkins: instruction was not fairly raised because the proof did not establish he aided or promoted the evasion	Court: Instruction was proper — evidence of joint action, presence in stolen car, flight, and capture near the vehicle fairly raised criminal responsibility
Whether evidence was sufficient to convict Perkins of felony evading arrest (including risk to third party)	The State: owner identified Perkins as a carjacker; two occupants fled and eluded police; Sergeant Sanderson (not the initiating officer) was endangered when the vehicle swerved into his lane, supporting Class D designation	Perkins: no proof he was the driver during the evasion (driver could have changed); no proof evasion endangered an innocent third party	Court: Sufficiency upheld — State need not prove Perkins was driver because criminal-responsibility theory applied; Sergeant Sanderson qualified as an endangered third party, justifying Class D felony

State v. Garrison, 40 S.W.3d 426 (Tenn. 2000) (defendant’s right to correct and complete jury charge)
State v. Hodges, 944 S.W.2d 346 (Tenn. 1997) (instruction reviewed as a whole; prejudicial error defined)
Carpenter v. State, 126 S.W.3d 879 (Tenn. 2004) (standard of review for jury instructions is de novo)
State v. Dickson, 413 S.W.3d 735 (Tenn. 2013) (criminal responsibility explained as theory to attribute another’s conduct to defendant)
State v. Lemacks, 996 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1999) (criminal responsibility codifies aiding/abetting)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (sufficiency review applies equally to direct and circumstantial evidence)
State v. Cross, 362 S.W.3d 512 (Tenn. 2012) (definition of innocent bystanders or third parties in evading statute)