Case Citator › State v. Brown

State v. Brown

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of Tennessee
Citation
836 S.W.2d 530
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
34 of 34
Citing cases (total)
34
Treatment dates
2002
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. State v. Brown's requirement of a separate deliberation element for first degree murder was superseded by Tennessee's revised murder statute. All 34 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The confirmed treatment is listed below. Courts continue to cite Brown for surviving rules, including proof of premeditation, evidence, and discovery; later references to statutory supersession generally report the change described in State of Tennessee v. Robin Davis rather than decide it anew. Source note: The texts assigned as citing opinions in State v. Hurley (2455853) and People v. LaValle (2094171) contain no citation to Brown; both were read and showed no treatment. State of Tennessee v. Robin Davis (1074642) is the opinion anchoring the entry and is saved with the citing opinions.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

34 later cases cite State v. Brown; 34 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on State v. Brown?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by Statute

  • The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals held that Brown's separate deliberation requirement no longer governed first degree murder under the revised statute, which removed that element.

    State of Tennessee v. Robin Davis · Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals · filed

    To support his argument, the defendant cites State v. Brown, 836 S.W.2d 530 (Tenn. 1992), in which our supreme court held that the element of deliberation requires “time to reflect.” Id. at 540. However, the defendant’s reliance on Brown is misplaced. The murder statute in effect at the time of the killing in Brown included elements of both premeditation, which our supreme court recognized may “arise instantaneously,” id., and deliberation, which the court determined, “cannot be formed in an instant.” Id. at 543 (emphasis in original). ... The defendant in the instant case was charged under the statute that is currently in effect in Tennessee, which no longer includes the element of deliberation.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads State v. Brown and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace