Evading arrest is a criminal charge that can turn a minor encounter with law enforcement into a serious felony case. In Tennessee, the charge of evading arrest under T.C.A. § 39-16-603 applies when a person intentionally flees from an officer who is attempting to make a lawful arrest. The penalties depend on how the person fled: running on foot is treated differently from fleeing in a motor vehicle, and creating a risk of death to others during a vehicle pursuit can elevate the charge to a Class D felony. If you are facing evading arrest charges in Nashville or Middle Tennessee, understanding the elements of the offense and the available defenses is critical to protecting your rights.
Evading arrest charges often arise in the heat of the moment. A person may panic during a traffic stop, or may not even realize that the officer is attempting to make an arrest rather than just asking questions. The law draws important distinctions based on the defendant’s state of mind, the method of flight, and whether anyone was endangered. These distinctions can mean the difference between a misdemeanor and a multi-year felony conviction.
Elements of Evading Arrest Under Tennessee Law
T.C.A. § 39-16-603 defines evading arrest as intentionally fleeing from a person the defendant knows is a law enforcement officer who is making or attempting to make a lawful arrest of the defendant. The statute has three core elements that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt:
- Flight: The defendant must have fled from the officer. This can be on foot, in a vehicle, or by any other means. Simply refusing to cooperate or verbally refusing to submit to arrest is not the same as flight. There must be an affirmative act of running, driving, or otherwise moving away from the officer.
- Knowledge: The defendant must have known that the person they were fleeing from was a law enforcement officer. This element is crucial. If the officer was in plain clothes, in an unmarked vehicle, or otherwise not identifiable as a police officer, the defendant may not have had the requisite knowledge.
- Lawful arrest: The officer must have been making or attempting to make a lawful arrest. If the officer had no legal authority to arrest the defendant, or if the attempted arrest was unlawful, this element is not satisfied.
All three elements must be proven for a conviction. The absence of any one element is a complete defense to the charge.
On Foot vs. In a Vehicle: How Classification Changes
Tennessee law treats flight on foot and flight in a vehicle very differently when it comes to evading arrest charges.
On foot (Class A misdemeanor): When a person flees from an officer on foot, the charge is a Class A misdemeanor. This carries a maximum penalty of 11 months and 29 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,500. While this is still a serious charge that will appear on your criminal record, the penalties are significantly less severe than for vehicular flight.
In a motor vehicle (Class E felony): When a person flees from an officer in a motor vehicle, the charge is elevated to a Class E felony. A Class E felony in Tennessee carries a sentence of one to six years in prison. The rationale for the harsher treatment is that vehicle pursuits create dangers to the public, to the officer, and to the defendant that do not exist when someone simply runs away on foot.
Creating risk of death (Class D felony): If the defendant’s flight in a motor vehicle creates a risk of death to innocent bystanders or pursuing officers, the charge can be elevated to a Class D felony. A Class D felony carries two to twelve years in prison. Factors that can support this enhancement include driving at extremely high speeds, running red lights or stop signs, driving on the wrong side of the road, driving through residential neighborhoods at dangerous speeds, or causing a collision during the pursuit. For more on how Tennessee classifies and sentences felonies, see Tennessee sentencing ranges explained.
The Knowledge Requirement: Must Know It Is a Police Officer
The knowledge element of T.C.A. § 39-16-603 is the most frequently litigated aspect of evading arrest charges. The statute requires that the defendant knew the person attempting the arrest was a law enforcement officer. This means the prosecution must prove more than just that the defendant ran. It must prove that the defendant knew who they were running from.
In cases involving uniformed officers in marked patrol cars with activated lights and sirens, the knowledge element is usually straightforward. The prosecution can argue that the lights and sirens made it obvious that a police officer was directing the defendant to stop.
The knowledge element becomes more contested in cases involving undercover officers, plainclothes officers, unmarked vehicles, or situations where the defendant claims they did not see or hear the officer’s signals. For example, a driver who fails to stop for an unmarked car with no lights or siren may argue that they did not know it was a police vehicle. A person on foot who is approached by someone in street clothes yelling commands may argue they thought they were being attacked, not arrested.
The defendant’s subjective state of mind matters, but courts also consider what a reasonable person would have understood in the same circumstances. If the officer was clearly identifiable as a police officer, and the circumstances would have made that clear to any reasonable person, the defendant’s claim of ignorance may not be believed.
Evading Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest
Evading arrest under T.C.A. § 39-16-603 and resisting arrest under T.C.A. § 39-16-602 are related but distinct offenses. Resisting arrest involves using force or the threat of force to prevent an officer from making an arrest. Evading arrest involves running or driving away from an officer who is attempting to make an arrest. A person can be charged with both offenses arising from the same incident if they both resisted physically and then fled.
The key distinction is the nature of the defendant’s conduct. Resisting arrest requires an element of force, such as pulling away, pushing the officer, striking the officer, or physically struggling against being handcuffed. Evading arrest requires flight, which is the act of trying to get away rather than physically confronting the officer.
A defendant can be charged with evading arrest without being charged with resisting, and vice versa. A person who runs from police but does not physically resist when caught has evaded but not resisted. A person who struggles with an officer but does not attempt to flee has resisted but not evaded. Both charges carry separate penalties and can result in consecutive sentences.
Defenses to Evading Arrest Charges
Several defenses may be available depending on the facts of the case.
No lawful authority to arrest. If the officer did not have probable cause to make the arrest, the arrest was not lawful, and the evading charge may fail. This defense overlaps with Fourth Amendment search and seizure protections. If the initial stop or arrest was unconstitutional, the defendant’s flight from that unlawful arrest may not constitute a criminal offense.
No knowledge of officer status. As discussed above, if the defendant did not know and could not reasonably have known that the person attempting the arrest was a law enforcement officer, this is a complete defense. The burden is on the prosecution to prove knowledge.
No intentional flight. The defendant must have intentionally fled. If the defendant was confused, disoriented, or in a mental health crisis, the intent element may not be satisfied. Similarly, if the defendant was driving and did not immediately pull over because they were looking for a safe place to stop, that is not the same as intentional flight.
Duress or necessity. In rare cases, a defendant may argue that they fled because they faced an immediate threat of harm from someone other than the officer, and that flight was necessary to avoid that harm. This defense is difficult to establish but may be available in extraordinary circumstances.
Each of these defenses requires careful factual development and legal argument. A criminal defense attorney can evaluate the evidence in your case and determine which defenses are strongest. For more on how pretrial motions can challenge the prosecution’s evidence, see suppression motions in Tennessee.
Consequences Beyond the Criminal Case
An evading arrest conviction carries consequences beyond the immediate criminal penalties. A felony conviction for vehicular flight will remain on your criminal record and can affect employment, housing, professional licensing, and the right to possess firearms. A Class D or Class E felony conviction also results in the loss of voting rights, though those rights can be restored in many cases. See Tennessee voting rights restoration for more information.
An evading arrest charge can also affect the outcome of the underlying case that led to the arrest. Prosecutors and judges view flight from law enforcement negatively, and it can influence plea negotiations, bond decisions, and sentencing. If the underlying charge was relatively minor, the evading arrest charge can become the more serious issue in the case.
For defendants who are on probation at the time of the evading arrest incident, the new charge can trigger a probation violation. A probation revocation hearing adds another layer of legal jeopardy. See probation revocation hearings in Tennessee for more on how new charges interact with existing probation.
Police Pursuit Policies and How They Affect Your Case
Law enforcement agencies in Tennessee have internal policies governing when officers may and may not engage in vehicle pursuits. These policies vary by department. The Metro Nashville Police Department, for example, has specific guidelines about when a pursuit should be initiated, when it should be terminated, and what supervisory oversight is required during a chase. Other Middle Tennessee agencies have their own policies that may be more or less restrictive.
These pursuit policies can be relevant to an evading arrest defense in several ways. If an officer violated departmental policy by initiating or continuing a pursuit in circumstances where the policy prohibited it, this may be relevant to the question of whether the officer was acting within lawful authority. It may also be relevant to any civil claims arising from injuries or property damage caused during the pursuit.
Additionally, the circumstances of the pursuit itself become part of the evidence in the case. Dash camera footage, body camera footage, radio communications, and GPS data from the patrol vehicle can all be relevant. This evidence can either support or undermine the prosecution’s account of what happened. A criminal defense attorney can subpoena this evidence and use it to challenge the prosecution’s narrative.
Evading Arrest and Bond Decisions
When a defendant is arrested for evading arrest, the question of bond is complicated by the nature of the charge. Evading arrest, by definition, involves flight from law enforcement. This means the prosecution can argue that the defendant is a flight risk who should be held on a high bond or denied bond altogether. For a full discussion of how Tennessee courts set bond, see bond hearings in Tennessee.
Judges considering bond in evading arrest cases look at the totality of the circumstances. A person who fled on foot during a momentary panic and then cooperated when caught is viewed differently from a person who led officers on a high-speed chase through residential neighborhoods. The seriousness of the underlying offense also matters. If the defendant was fleeing from a traffic stop, the bond will likely be lower than if the defendant was fleeing from a felony arrest warrant.
The defendant’s ties to the community, employment history, criminal record, and prior court appearances are all relevant to the bond determination. A defendant who has consistently appeared for court dates in the past may be able to argue that the evading incident was an aberration and does not reflect a general unwillingness to face the legal process. Having a criminal defense attorney present at the bond hearing to make these arguments is important.
Evading Arrest Charges Involving Motorcycles and ATVs
Evading arrest charges involving motorcycles, ATVs, and other non-standard vehicles present unique issues. Motorcycle pursuits are particularly dangerous because of the speed capabilities of motorcycles and the vulnerability of the rider. Many law enforcement agencies have policies that restrict or prohibit pursuing motorcycles at high speed because of the elevated risk of fatal crashes.
Tennessee courts have applied the vehicle enhancement to motorcycles, ATVs, dirt bikes, and other motorized vehicles. If you flee from a law enforcement officer on any motorized vehicle, you face the same felony enhancement as someone who flees in a car or truck. The risk-of-death enhancement under T.C.A. § 39-16-603 is also available if the pursuit creates a danger to bystanders or officers, which is often easier for the prosecution to establish in motorcycle pursuit cases given the inherent dangers involved.
ATV and dirt bike pursuits in rural areas of Middle Tennessee raise additional issues. Officers may pursue across fields, through woods, or on unpaved roads where the danger to bystanders is lower but the danger to the rider and the officer is substantial. The factual circumstances of these pursuits often provide opportunities for the defense to challenge the risk-of-death enhancement.
Multiple Charges from a Single Pursuit
A vehicle pursuit that ends in an arrest often results in multiple charges beyond just evading arrest. Depending on what happened during the chase, the defendant may also face charges for reckless driving, reckless endangerment, DUI, driving on a suspended or revoked license, possession of contraband found in the vehicle, or any number of other offenses. The evading arrest charge is layered on top of these other charges, and each carries its own potential penalties.
When multiple charges arise from the same incident, the question of concurrent versus consecutive sentencing becomes important. In Tennessee, the trial judge has discretion to order that sentences for multiple convictions run concurrently (served at the same time) or consecutively (served one after another). For felony evading arrest charges stacked with other felonies, the possibility of consecutive sentences can result in a very long total prison term. A criminal defense attorney’s goal in these cases is often to negotiate a resolution that addresses all pending charges in a package, rather than letting each charge be prosecuted independently.
Evidence found during or after the pursuit can also lead to additional charges. If the defendant threw contraband from the vehicle during the chase, if drugs or weapons were found in the car after the arrest, or if the pursuit revealed that the defendant had an outstanding warrant, each of these findings may result in a separate charge. The totality of the situation underscores why having a criminal defense attorney involved early in the process is important. For an overview of how felony and misdemeanor classifications affect the stakes, see felony vs. misdemeanor in Tennessee.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is evading arrest on foot a felony in Tennessee?
No. Evading arrest on foot is a Class A misdemeanor under T.C.A. § 39-16-603. It becomes a felony only when the defendant flees in a motor vehicle. If the vehicular flight creates a risk of death to others, the charge can be elevated to a Class D felony.
Can I be charged with evading arrest if I did not commit the crime the officer was arresting me for?
Yes. Evading arrest is a separate offense from whatever crime the officer was attempting to arrest you for. Even if you are ultimately acquitted of the underlying charge, you can still be convicted of evading arrest if the prosecution proves that you intentionally fled from an officer making a lawful arrest.
What if the officer was in an unmarked car?
The knowledge element requires that you knew the person was a law enforcement officer. If the officer was in an unmarked vehicle without activated emergency lights, you may have a strong argument that you did not know it was a police vehicle. However, if the officer activated emergency lights, or if there were other indicators of law enforcement status, the prosecution may still be able to prove knowledge.
Can a passenger be charged with evading arrest?
Generally, the evading arrest statute applies to the person who is fleeing, which in a vehicle pursuit is typically the driver. However, a passenger who actively encourages or assists the driver in fleeing may face charges for facilitation or accessory liability. A passenger who simply happened to be in the car during a pursuit is not typically charged with evading arrest.
What happens if someone is injured during a police pursuit?
If someone is injured during a vehicle pursuit, the defendant may face additional charges beyond evading arrest, including reckless endangerment, vehicular assault, or vehicular homicide depending on the severity of the injuries. The evading arrest charge carries its own penalties, and any additional charges for causing injury are separate offenses with separate penalties.
Talk to a Criminal Defense Lawyer
If you are facing criminal charges in Nashville or anywhere in Middle Tennessee, attorney Nathan Cate can help you understand your options and protect your rights. Nathan handles cases throughout Davidson County, Williamson County, Rutherford County, Sumner County, Wilson County, and Maury County. He has tried 53 jury trials to verdict and has been declared a criminal-defense expert witness by a Tennessee judge.
Call (615) 664-8083 to schedule a consultation, or visit the office at 222 2nd Avenue North, Suite 220, Nashville, TN 37201. The sooner you talk to a lawyer, the more options you have.