Nashville, Tenn. – Today, the Tennessee Supreme Court issued an opinion in State v. William Rimmel III affirming Rimmel’s conviction for attempted aggravated assault but reversing his conviction for reckless endangerment with a handgun.
Rimmel’s convictions arose from a 2018 road-rage incident on I-24 in Marion County. Rimmel, who was driving a motorcycle, claimed that a car driven by Bobbie Burke cut him off on the interstate. Rimmel aggressively pursued Burke and eventually forced her to pull over. Once Burke was stopped, Rimmel broke her passenger window by slamming the slide of his loaded handgun against it. But Rimmel never fired the handgun or pointed the barrel of the gun in Burke’s direction. At the time of the incident, Burke was unaware that the object used to break the window was a gun.
A jury convicted Rimmel of attempted aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and felony reckless endangerment with a handgun. Rimmel challenged both convictions. He argued that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of attempted aggravated assault because Burke did not know that he had a gun. He further argued that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of felony reckless endangerment with a handgun because his conduct did not create a reasonable probability that Burke would suffer death or serious bodily injury.
The Court of Appeals affirmed both convictions. The Tennessee Supreme Court granted review and affirmed in part and reversed in part.
The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed Rimmel’s conviction for attempted aggravated assault. The Court reasoned that because this was a conviction for attempted aggravated assault, the State need only prove that the defendant intended to cause Burke to reasonably fear imminent bodily injury by use of a deadly weapon and that he took a substantial step toward doing so. The Court concluded that a rational juror could have found that both these elements were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, even if Burke was unaware that the object used to break the window was a gun.
However, the Court reversed Rimmel’s conviction for felony reckless endangerment with a handgun. The Court concluded that no rational juror could find that Rimmel’s handgun-related conduct created a reasonable probability that Burke would be killed or sustain serious bodily injury because there is no evidence that the barrel of the gun was ever pointed in Burke’s direction.
To read the Court’s unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Sarah K. Campbell, click here.