Criminal Defense Attorney Kevin Kennedy prosecuted interference with emergency calls cases as a prosecutor in the Davidson County District Attorney’s Office. He now uses that practical experience to defend clients accused of interference with a 911 call. Kevin holds his law degree from Vanderbilt Law School and is an active member of the Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
Client Reviews
What Clients Say
“10/10 was a great help in working my case and helped to an extraordinary degree communicating everything that was going on and that would transpire. I completely would recommend Kevin Kennedy to anyone that needs legal help!!!!”Cameron
Grabbing a phone during an argument can become a separate criminal charge. In Tennessee, intentionally preventing or hindering someone from calling 911 or another emergency service is prosecuted as interference with emergency calls under Tenn. Code Ann. § 65-21-117 — a charge that most often appears alongside domestic assault allegations and must be proven on its own elements.
If you are facing an interference-with-emergency-call charge in Nashville or Middle Tennessee, call Kevin Kennedy Law Firm for a free, confidential consultation. This page focuses specifically on interference with an emergency call; related charges such as harassment, false imprisonment, violation of release conditions, and violation of an order of protection are covered on their own pages.
The Tennessee Statute: T.C.A. § 65-21-117
Interference with a 911 call is not prosecuted under the assault statutes. Tennessee’s interference-with-emergency-calls offense is found in Tenn. Code Ann. § 65-21-117, within the chapter governing 911 and emergency communications. The statute addresses intentionally preventing or hindering another person from placing or completing an emergency call, and interference with emergency communications equipment. You may see the charge described on a citation or docket as “interference with emergency calls” or “interference with emergency communications” — those descriptions refer to this offense.
The Elements of the Offense
The State must prove that the accused intentionally prevented, hindered, or interrupted another person’s call or attempted call to emergency services. Intent is the core element: the interference must be deliberate, not accidental. The prosecution must also connect the accused’s conduct to a qualifying emergency communication — the statute is about emergency calls, not ordinary arguments over a phone.
Preventing Someone From Contacting Emergency Services
The most common allegation is that the accused physically stopped another person from calling 911 — grabbing or taking a phone, pulling a phone away, or blocking access to it. These cases are usually built on the alleged victim’s account, and that account can be tested against the recordings, the records, and the physical evidence.
Taking or Disabling a Telephone
Taking, damaging, or disabling a phone to prevent an emergency call can satisfy the statute even if no call was ever connected. The same conduct may also be charged as vandalism or theft-related conduct in some cases, and the State’s choice of charges should be examined for what it actually has to prove.
Interrupting an Emergency Call
Interrupting a call already in progress — hanging it up, ending it, or disrupting it — is another form of the offense. Here the 911 recording itself is often the central piece of evidence: what was said, what is heard in the background, and whether the recording actually supports the allegation.
Intent Requirements
The offense requires intentional interference. A phone grabbed during a struggle over something else, a call disconnected accidentally, or conduct without any purpose of preventing an emergency call does not satisfy the statute. Where the accused’s purpose is genuinely in dispute, the intent element is a real defense.
Must an Emergency Actually Exist? Must the Call Be Completed?
Two recurring questions are whether the underlying situation must qualify as an actual emergency and whether the call must be completed. Preventing a call from being placed can violate the statute even without a completed connection, and the scope of the “emergency” requirement depends on the statutory language applied to the facts. Both questions can be contested, and both should be analyzed in the specific case.
The Evidence Prosecutors Rely Upon
These cases are typically built from the alleged victim’s statement, 911 call recordings and dispatch logs, telephone records, officer observations at the scene, and body-camera footage. Each source can be examined: recordings may contradict the account, logs may not show what the State claims, and body-camera footage may capture the scene differently than the report describes.
Witness Statements, Telephone Records, and Body Cameras
Because these charges usually arise from two-person domestic disputes, the evidence is often one person’s word against another’s. Telephone records can show whether a call was placed, when, and how it ended. Body-camera footage can show the condition of the scene and the phones. Witness statements taken in the moment can be compared against later accounts for consistency.
Potential Defenses
- Lack of the required intent — the interference was not deliberate.
- Insufficient evidence that any interference occurred.
- Disputes over what actually occurred during the incident.
- Mistaken identification of who did what.
- The conduct did not involve a qualifying emergency communication.
- The statutory elements are not satisfied on the evidence.
- The accusation is false or exaggerated, as can happen in contested domestic situations.
Penalties
Interference with emergency calls is a misdemeanor offense under Tennessee law, carrying potential jail time and fines. The precise classification and penalty range under the law in effect on the offense date should be confirmed for the specific charge — and the practical stakes are often higher than the classification suggests, because the charge usually travels with a domestic assault case and its bond conditions.
Related Nashville Defense Pages
- Nashville Domestic Violence Lawyer
- Nashville Harassment Lawyer
- Nashville False Imprisonment Lawyer
- Nashville Order of Protection Violation Lawyer
- Nashville Violation of Release Lawyer
- All Felonies and Misdemeanors
Frequently Asked Questions About Interference With a 911 Call
Is interfering with a 911 call a crime in Tennessee?
Yes. Tenn. Code Ann. § 65-21-117 makes it an offense to intentionally prevent or hinder another person from making or completing a call to 911 or another emergency communications service, or to interfere with emergency communications equipment. The charge is often called interference with emergency calls or interference with emergency communications.
What does the State have to prove?
The State must prove the accused intentionally prevented, hindered, or interrupted another person’s emergency call or request for emergency assistance. Intent is the core element — accidental conduct does not satisfy the statute.
Is this charge usually filed with domestic assault?
Frequently. These charges commonly arise from domestic disputes in which one person allegedly grabbed a phone, hung up a call, or stopped the other from calling for help. The interference charge is separate from any assault charge and must be proven on its own elements.
Does an emergency actually have to exist?
The statute focuses on interference with a call to emergency services. Whether the underlying situation must qualify as an actual emergency, and whether the call must be completed, are questions that depend on the statutory language and the facts — and both can be contested.
Does the 911 call have to be completed for a conviction?
Not necessarily. Preventing a person from making the call in the first place — taking or disabling the phone, for example — can satisfy the statute even if no call was ever connected. The specific allegations matter.
What are the penalties?
Interference with emergency calls is a misdemeanor offense under Tennessee law, with potential jail time and fines. The classification and penalties under the law in effect on the offense date should be confirmed for the specific charge.
What evidence do prosecutors use?
Typically the alleged victim’s statement, 911 call recordings and logs, telephone records, officer observations, and body-camera footage. Each can be examined — recordings may contradict the account, and phone records may not show what the State claims.
What if the accusation is false or exaggerated?
These charges often arise in heated domestic situations where accounts diverge sharply. Disputes over what actually occurred, mistaken identification of who did what, and insufficient evidence of intent are all genuine defenses.
Can an interference conviction be expunged?
Certain misdemeanor convictions may be eligible for expungement after the statutory waiting period, and dismissed or diverted charges follow different rules. Eligibility depends on the final disposition and the person’s full record.
What should I do if I am charged with interfering with a 911 call?
Remain silent and contact a defense lawyer promptly. Preserve any messages, call logs, or recordings from the encounter, and write down your recollection of what happened while it is fresh.
Legal references: Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 65-21-117 and 40-35-111. This page is general information, not legal advice. Penalty provisions change, and the law in effect on the offense date controls.
If you are facing an interference-with-emergency-call charge in Nashville or Middle Tennessee, call or text Kevin Kennedy Law Firm at (615) 205-7311 for a free, confidential consultation.