Court Opinion

ID: 9645966
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 21:41:07.53053+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:33.546612
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON PETITION TO REHEAR
LLOYD TATUM, Special Judge.
The defendant has filed a petition to rehear in which he takes us to task for overlooking his argument with regard to the failure of proof as to the “element of causation.” We did not overlook this argument although we did not consider it worthy of elaborate discussion. After reviewing the evidence in the opinion, we stated that the evidence would support a conviction for murder and the finding of the jury that the victim was “killed by the defendant with a blunt instrument.”
In support of his contention that the evidence did not establish the “element of causation,” the defendant cites Keller v. State, 155 Tenn. 633, 299 S.W. 803 (1927); Letner v. State, 156 Tenn. 68, 299 S.W. 1049 (1927); Fine v. State, 193 Tenn. 422, 246 S.W.2d 70 (1952); Seagroves v. State, 198 Tenn. 633, 281 S.W.2d 644 (1955). These cases hold in summary that the State must prove that the cause of death was from a criminal agency and that a conviction for homicide cannot rest on conjecture or speculation as to the cause of death. We stated in our original opinion that the evidence was sufficient to establish the homicide by a blow to the neck with a blunt instrument. There is no evidence that this did not cause the death of the victim or that any other cause intervened. The cause of death was not left to conjecture or speculation.
Other arguments are advanced in the Petition to Rehear. We have considered them and adhere to our original opinion.
The Petition to Rehear is overruled.
DWYER and SCOTT, JJ., concur.