State of Tennessee v. David Alexander Hayes

The Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction
of resisting arrest. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-16-602(a) (“It is an offense for a person to
intentionally prevent or obstruct anyone known to the person to be a law enforcement
officer, or anyone acting in a law enforcement officer’s presence and at the officer’s
direction, from effecting a stop, frisk, halt, arrest or search of any person, including the
defendant, by using force against the law enforcement officer or another.”). The gravamen
of the Defendant’s challenge is not the sufficiency of the evidence offered to establish his
use of “force.” Instead, the Defendant asks us to focus on when the “force” occurred or
the Defendant’s pre- and post-arrest conduct. Because the State did not offer any evidence
of the Defendant’s use of force before his arrest, the Defendant argues, and I agree, that the
evidence supporting the resisting arrest conviction is insufficient as a matter of law.