Tennessee § 39-11-203 - Defense.

§ 39-11-203. Defense.

A defense to prosecution for an offense in this title is so labeled by the phrase: “It is a defense to prosecution under … that …” The state is not required to negate the existence of a defense in the charge alleging commission of the offense. The issue of the existence of a defense is not submitted to the jury unless it is fairly raised by the proof. If the issue of the existence of a defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall instruct the jury that any reasonable doubt on the issue requires the defendant to be acquitted. A ground of defense, other than one (1) negating an element of the offense or an affirmative defense, that is not plainly labeled in accordance with this part has the procedural and evidentiary consequences of a defense. Defenses available under common law are hereby abolished. Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1. Sentencing Commission Comments. This section describes the procedural consequences of criminal defenses. The defendant has the burden of introducing admissible evidence that a defense is applicable. If the defense is at issue, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense does not apply. Subsection (d) outlines the content of a jury charge on a defense and codifies prior case law. King v. State, 91 Tenn. 617, 20 S.W. 169 (1892). Compiler's Notes. The sentencing commission terminated June 30, 1995. Sentencing Commission Comments have been retained, but do not reflect 1995 or subsequent legislation. Cross-References. Defenses excluded, § 39-11-407 . General defenses, title 39, ch. 11, part 5. Law Reviews. “No Provincial or Transient Notion”: The Need for a Mistake of Age Defense in Child Rape Prosecutions, 57 Vand. L. Rev. 693 (2004).