Kevin Kennedy worked three years as a Davidson County prosecutor before moving to the defense side. He prosecuted serious felony cases and understands how the State evaluates allegations involving vehicle takings, force, threats, weapons, eyewitness identification, surveillance footage, and statements. Carjacking is a distinct Tennessee felony that focuses on the intentional or knowing taking of a motor vehicle from another person through a deadly weapon, force, or intimidation.
A carjacking conviction is a Class B felony and can expose a person to years in prison, substantial fines, and major collateral consequences. These cases often turn on identity, whether the vehicle was actually taken from another person’s possession, whether force or intimidation was used, and whether the accused acted intentionally or knowingly. If you are facing a carjacking charge in Nashville or Middle Tennessee, call Kevin Kennedy Law Firm to schedule a free, confidential consultation.
What Is Carjacking in Tennessee?
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13-404 defines carjacking as the intentional or knowing taking of a motor vehicle from the possession of another by use of a deadly weapon or by force or intimidation. Unlike ordinary auto theft, the statute centers on taking a vehicle directly from another person under coercive circumstances.
The prosecution therefore must prove more than unauthorized possession of a vehicle. It must prove the required mental state, a taking of a motor vehicle from another person’s possession, and the use of one of the methods specified by statute. The precise sequence of events can matter, particularly when the parties know one another, share use of a vehicle, or disagree about who had permission to possess it.
Taking a Motor Vehicle From Another Person
The phrase “from the possession of another” distinguishes carjacking from many other vehicle offenses. A case may involve a driver being ordered out of a car, keys being taken during a confrontation, a passenger forcing control of a vehicle, or another situation in which possession changes through force or intimidation. The facts surrounding control and possession should be examined closely.
Questions about ownership and permission can also matter. A vehicle may be titled to one person but regularly used by another. Family members, romantic partners, employees, or acquaintances may have shared access. Those facts do not automatically resolve a criminal charge, but they can affect whether the State can prove an intentional or knowing unlawful taking from another’s possession.
Deadly Weapon, Force, or Intimidation
The State must also prove that the taking was accomplished with a deadly weapon or through force or intimidation. The defense should examine exactly what was allegedly said or done, whether any weapon was actually recovered, whether the alleged victim saw an object, whether surveillance footage supports the account, and whether the initial statement differs from later testimony.
Intimidation can be highly fact-specific. A tense encounter is not automatically carjacking merely because a person later felt afraid. The evidence must establish the statutory connection between the force or intimidation and the taking of the motor vehicle. The timing of threats, physical contact, possession of keys, and departure in the vehicle can all matter.
What Are the Penalties for Carjacking?
Carjacking under § 39-13-404 is a Class B felony. Tennessee’s general sentencing statutes authorize a sentence of eight to thirty years for a Class B felony, depending on the defendant’s offender range and other sentencing rules. A Range I sentence is generally eight to twelve years. A Class B felony also carries an authorized fine of up to $25,000 unless another statute provides otherwise.
Carjacking allegations may also arise alongside other charges such as aggravated assault, robbery, theft, unlawful possession of a weapon, or offenses arising from conduct after the vehicle was taken. Whether multiple charges can stand and how they affect sentencing depends on the facts and the law applicable to the particular prosecution.
Common Defenses to Carjacking Charges
The defense strategy in a carjacking case depends on the evidence. Important questions include who was driving or present, who possessed the vehicle immediately before the alleged taking, whether the accused had permission, what force or threats were actually used, whether a weapon existed, and whether the State can reliably identify the accused.
Mistaken Identity and Unreliable Eyewitness Evidence
Carjacking cases may involve fast-moving encounters in parking lots, at gas stations, on streets, or outside homes and businesses. Stress, darkness, distance, masks, clothing, and brief observation can affect identification. Police may use show-ups, photo lineups, surveillance footage, license-plate-reader information, fingerprints, DNA, phone data, or testimony from co-defendants to build the case.
The defense should examine each identification procedure and each piece of corroborating evidence rather than assume that the first accusation is accurate. Surveillance footage may be incomplete, a vehicle description may be generic, and location data may not prove who possessed a phone at a particular moment.
Consent, Possession, and Claim of Permission
Some cases arise between people who know one another and have a history of sharing vehicles. A dispute over permission can become central. Text messages, insurance records, prior use of the vehicle, witness testimony, key possession, and communications before or after the incident may help establish whether the accused reasonably believed they were permitted to use or possess the vehicle.
Challenge Force, Intimidation, or Weapon Proof
Even when the State can show that a vehicle changed possession, it must still prove the force, intimidation, or deadly-weapon component required for carjacking. A defense attorney should compare the alleged victim’s account with video, 911 calls, physical injuries, witness statements, and any recovered object. If that component cannot be proven, the evidence may support a different offense rather than carjacking.
Move to Exclude Improperly Obtained Evidence
Police may search a recovered vehicle, another vehicle, a home, clothing, or a phone for keys, weapons, messages, location information, or other evidence. The defense should review warrants, probable-cause affidavits, consent claims, and exceptions relied upon by officers. Custodial statements should also be evaluated for Miranda compliance and voluntariness.
Getting Ahead of the State’s Carjacking Investigation
Carjacking allegations frequently generate video from businesses, traffic systems, parking areas, residences, and nearby vehicles. Some recordings are overwritten quickly. Early investigation can preserve video, locate neutral witnesses, document the condition and location of the vehicle, gather phone or receipt records, and identify evidence that supports an alibi or contradicts the prosecution’s timeline.
How Kevin Kennedy Defends Carjacking Cases
Carjacking cases hinge on force, fear, and identification, and Kevin works through each of those claims item by item. The defense begins with understanding the client’s account and then comparing it to the State’s evidence. That may include body-worn camera footage, surveillance video, 911 calls, photographs, police reports, witness statements, vehicle records, phone data, forensic evidence, and physical evidence recovered from the vehicle or other locations.
His experience as a former prosecutor helps him evaluate how the State is likely to frame the case and which weaknesses may matter in negotiations or at trial. Depending on the circumstances, the defense may challenge identification, dispute possession or consent, contest the force or intimidation element, attack weapon evidence, seek suppression of unlawfully obtained evidence, present favorable witnesses or records, negotiate for a reduction or dismissal, or prepare the case for trial.
Carjacking is a serious felony that deserves careful investigation from the beginning. If you or a family member is facing a carjacking charge in Nashville or Middle Tennessee, contact Kevin Kennedy Law Firm for a free, confidential consultation.
Legal references: Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-404, 39-11-106, and 40-35-111. This page is general information, not legal advice.