State of Tennessee v. Tavis Bowers, W2016-01007-CCA-R3-CD

In January 2011 officers responded to a disturbance at Vanessa Robertson’s home; Robertson told them the defendant, Tavis Bowers, was inside intoxicated and would not leave.
Officers entered, announced themselves, found Bowers lying on a bed, and asked him to get up; after an officer grabbed his arm, Bowers allegedly pulled away, struck Officer Byrd, and a struggle ensued during which officers restrained and handcuffed him.
Officers testified Valdes used an ASP baton and Washburn deployed chemical spray; Byrd and Washburn testified they repeatedly identified themselves and stated Bowers was under arrest.
Bowers and Robertson offered a different account: Bowers said officers did not announce themselves, struck him with a flashlight, sprayed him, and jumped on him; Robertson testified Byrd struck Bowers with a flashlight.
Bowers was convicted by a jury of two counts of assault by offensive or provocative touching and one count of resisting arrest (all Class B misdemeanors); trial court imposed concurrent six-month sentences for the assaults to run consecutively to a six-month sentence for resisting arrest.
On appeal Bowers challenged (1) sufficiency of the evidence and (2) plain error from the trial court’s failure to sua sponte instruct the jury on self-defense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Bowers)	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to support convictions for assault and resisting arrest	Officers’ testimony established Bowers struck Officer Byrd, threw Officer Washburn into a dresser, and continued resisting after being told he was under arrest; evidence viewed in State’s favor supports convictions	Bowers pointed to his medical records and conflicting testimony to argue officers’ version was unreliable and entry lacked justification	Affirmed: Credibility resolved by jury; evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia standard
Failure to instruct jury on self-defense (plain error review)	No plain error: evidence did not fairly raise self-defense because Bowers knew officers were law enforcement responding to the call; statutory exceptions bar the presumption of justified force against officers	Bowers argued self-defense was fairly raised by his testimony that officers attacked him without provocation and did not identify themselves	Affirmed: Plain error not shown; self-defense instruction not warranted where evidence would not allow reasonable minds to accept defense and statutory law excludes defense against officers performing duties

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Bolin v. State, 405 S.W.2d 768 (Tenn. 1966) (trial judge and jury are primary finders of witness credibility)
State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913 (Tenn. 1982) (burden on appellant to show insufficiency after jury conviction)
State v. Farner, 66 S.W.3d 188 (Tenn. 2001) (defendant entitled to correct and complete charge; instruction only required if evidence fairly raises defense)
State v. Sims, 45 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2001) (trial court must view evidence in light most favorable to defendant when assessing whether defense instruction is warranted)