Aggravated vehicular homicide is Tennessee’s highest-level intoxication-based vehicular homicide offense. It applies only after the State proves vehicular homicide by intoxication and then establishes specified prior convictions or a combination of an exceptionally high alcohol concentration and prior impaired-driving history. The result is a Class A felony.
Because the statute is built in stages, the defense should be built the same way. The first question is whether the State can prove intoxication-based vehicular homicide in the present case. Only then does the prosecution reach the prior-conviction and 0.20% aggravating provisions. Kevin Kennedy’s experience handling serious felony prosecutions gives him insight into how those layers are presented to a jury.
What Makes Vehicular Homicide Aggravated?
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-218 defines aggravated vehicular homicide as vehicular homicide by intoxication under § 39-13-213(a)(2) plus one of the statute’s aggravating circumstances.
One route requires two or more prior convictions for DUI, boating under the influence, vehicular assault, or a qualifying combination of those offenses. Another applies when the defendant has at least one prior vehicular-homicide conviction. A third applies when the defendant’s alcohol concentration was 0.20% or more and the defendant has one prior DUI, BUI, or vehicular-assault conviction.
The Present Case Must First Be Vehicular Homicide by Intoxication
Aggravated vehicular homicide cannot be based on the reckless-risk, drag-racing, or construction-zone forms of vehicular homicide. The underlying offense must be the intoxication form defined in § 39-13-213(a)(2).
That means the State must prove a reckless killing by operation of a motor vehicle or qualifying vessel and establish that intoxication was the proximate cause. The defense can challenge intoxication and causation before the prior-record enhancement is ever reached.
The Prior Conviction Rules Are Specific
For aggravated vehicular homicide, a qualifying prior conviction must have occurred before the commission of the current vehicular homicide. Tennessee law also allows qualifying out-of-state or foreign convictions when their elements would constitute one of the specified Tennessee offenses.
If the outside jurisdiction uses a different offense name, the Tennessee court looks at the elements rather than the label. Certified judgments, offense dates, and statutory elements should therefore be reviewed carefully.
The Jury Considers the Enhancement Separately
Section 39-13-218 requires the indictment to give notice of the prior convictions in a separate count. If the jury first convicts the defendant of vehicular homicide by intoxication, it then separately considers whether the required prior offenses or qualifying alcohol concentration have been established.
That procedure is designed to keep the enhancement determination distinct from the initial guilt decision. It also creates separate opportunities to challenge the proof.
The 0.20% Alcohol Concentration Provision
A defendant can qualify for aggravated vehicular homicide with one prior DUI, BUI, or vehicular-assault conviction if the alcohol concentration at the time of the current offense was 0.20% or more.
Because the threshold is high and tied to the time of the offense, the testing timeline can be critically important. Blood collection, hospital testing, warrants, chain of custody, laboratory methods, calibration, and retrograde-extrapolation testimony should be examined carefully.
A Class A Felony Changes the Stakes
Aggravated vehicular homicide is a Class A felony. Tennessee’s general sentencing statute authorizes fifteen to sixty years for a Class A felony, with the applicable sentencing range depending on prior record and other sentencing provisions.
That level of exposure makes it especially important to challenge not only the current crash evidence but also the legal use of each alleged prior conviction. A mistake in classifying a prior offense can materially affect whether the aggravated charge is available.
Intoxication Does Not Automatically Prove Causation
The most important factual issue in many fatal-crash cases is causation. A person may have alcohol or drugs in the body while another driver, roadway condition, mechanical failure, or other event is the primary cause of the collision.
The defense should examine event-data-recorder information, scene measurements, surveillance, dash-camera footage, weather, roadway design, autopsy findings, toxicology, and witness statements to determine whether the State can prove that intoxication proximately caused the death.
Prior Record Evidence Must Be Kept in Its Proper Place
The existence of prior DUI or vehicular-assault convictions can create a powerful emotional effect, but those convictions do not prove what happened in the current crash. The statutory bifurcation recognizes that distinction.
A careful defense keeps the focus first on the present offense: who was driving, what caused the collision, whether intoxication was proven, and whether the killing was reckless. Only after those questions are resolved should the enhancement evidence become relevant.
How Kevin Kennedy Approaches Aggravated Vehicular Homicide Cases
Kevin reviews these cases in two tracks. One track focuses on the crash itself, including reconstruction, toxicology, medical evidence, electronic vehicle data, witness accounts, and police procedure. The other focuses on the prior-conviction and alcohol-concentration allegations that elevate the charge.
That structure helps prevent the prior record from obscuring weaknesses in the present case. If you are charged with aggravated vehicular homicide in Nashville or Middle Tennessee, contact Kevin Kennedy Law Firm for a free, confidential consultation.
Legal references: Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-213, 39-13-218, 55-10-401, and 40-35-111. This page is general information, not legal advice.