State of Tennessee v. Lloyd Crawford, W2019-02056-CCA-R3-CD

Background

Dec. 31, 2016: Lloyd Crawford (defendant), Andrew Ellis (codefendant), and Muwani Dewberry attempted a robbery that resulted in Dewberry being fatally shot and victim Keith Crum being shot in the left hand.
Crum met a silver BMW, entered the car to sell marijuana, was shot inside the vehicle, escaped through a window leaving his gun and shoe, and later identified Crawford, Ellis, and Dewberry in a photo lineup.
Surveillance footage showed a silver car stopping where Dewberry’s body was later found; police seized Burris’s silver BMW (returned earlier by Crawford) with a broken vent window and presumptive blood detected throughout the interior.
Witnesses (Dewberry’s nephew and Rhia Perry) placed the three together earlier that day and identified weapons and robbery planning; Perry reported admissions by the codefendant about the shooting.
Forensic pathologist testified Dewberry died from a gunshot to the head consistent with being shot from the front passenger seat while seated in the back; vehicle processing and witness testimony linked Crawford to the scene and post-shooting cleaning of the car.
Jury convicted Crawford of first-degree felony murder, attempted first-degree murder, employing a firearm during a dangerous felony, attempted especially aggravated robbery, and tampering with evidence; the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed on sufficiency review.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for felony murder	State: evidence supports that the killing occurred during an attempted robbery by Crawford and co-defendants	Crawford: Crum’s account is implausible and conflicts with physical evidence; jury should not credit it	Affirmed — viewed most favorably to State, evidence supported jury inference that Crawford shot and killed Dewberry during an attempted robbery
Attempted first-degree murder	State: multiple shots at an occupant, use of deadly weapon, and circumstances support intent/premeditation	Crawford: testimony implausible; insufficient proof of intent to kill	Affirmed — jury could infer intent and premeditation from circumstances and conduct
Employing a firearm during dangerous felony	State: Crawford fired a gun while committing attempted first-degree murder (a dangerous felony)	Crawford: challenges the underlying sufficiency	Affirmed — evidence showed Crawford employed a firearm during the commission/attempt of a dangerous felony
Attempted especially aggravated robbery	State: shooting occurred during an attempted theft by violence with serious bodily injury to Crum	Crawford: dispute over credibility and whether elements were met	Affirmed — jury could find Crawford intended robbery, used a deadly weapon, and Crum suffered serious bodily injury
Tampering with evidence	State: Crawford cleaned the BMW knowing an investigation would follow to impair evidence	Crawford: disputes inferences from vehicle condition	Affirmed — evidence of post-shooting cleaning plus blood traces permitted an inference of intent to impair evidence

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (establishes standard for sufficiency review: evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Wagner, 382 S.W.3d 289 (Tenn. 2012) (appellate courts must not reweigh evidence or substitute their judgment for the jury)
State v. Hanson, 279 S.W.3d 265 (Tenn. 2009) (defendant bears burden on appeal to show insufficiency)
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (sufficiency standard same for direct and circumstantial evidence)
State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651 (Tenn. 1997) (factors for inferring premeditation)
State v. Young, 196 S.W.3d 85 (Tenn. 2006) (premeditation may be inferred from circumstances)
State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 (Tenn. 2009) (examples of circumstances supporting premeditation)
State v. Millsaps, 30 S.W.3d 364 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000) (credibility and weight of witness testimony are for the jury)
State v. Campbell, 245 S.W.3d 331 (Tenn. 2008) (jury determines credibility and resolves conflicts in evidence)
State v. Rice, 184 S.W.3d 646 (Tenn. 2006) (jury decides inferences from circumstantial evidence)