Opinion ID: 1060660
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: jury instruction on assault and aggravated assault

Text: Finally, the appellee argues that the circuit court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the offenses of assault and aggravated assault as lesser-included offenses of especially aggravated kidnapping. [5] Irrespective of whether the crimes of assault and aggravated assault are lesser-included offenses of especially aggravated kidnapping, however, we conclude that the appellee was not entitled to such an instruction. Before a defendant is entitled to an instruction on a lesser included offense, the offense must actually be a lesser-included offense of the offense charged, and the proof in the record must be legally sufficient to support a conviction on the lesser-included offense. See State v. Burns, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn.1999). In this case, the appellee is not entitled to such an instruction because he has not shown that the proof is legally sufficient to support a conviction in Tennessee on the charges of assault or aggravated assault. Unlike aggravated kidnapping, the elements of the crime of assault do not contemplate a continuing course of conduct. See Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 39-13-101 to102 (1997). Rather, the crime itself contemplates that it is consummated or completed the moment bodily injury occurs. Because there was no proof that any bodily injury occurred in Tennessee, the evidence was legally insufficient to support a conviction in this state for assault or aggravated assault based upon bodily injury. See generally Burns, 6 S.W.3d at 470. Therefore, we hold that the appellee was not entitled to an instruction on assault or aggravated assault even if those offenses were lesser-included offenses of especially aggravated kidnapping.