Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2011Moreover, the court noted that “Tennessee Courts have routinely affirmed judgments entered pursuant to a jury’s finding of an implied consent violation.” Id. at *10 (citing State v. Taylor, 70 S.W.3d 717, 721 (Tenn. 2002); State v. Thomas Lee Phillips, No. E2004-00760-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 Tenn. Crim. 2008See, e.g., State v. Taylor, 70 S.W.3d 717, 721 (Tenn. 2002); State v. Thomas Lee Phillips, No. E2004-00760-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 WL 1827838 , *5 (Tenn. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
State of Tennessee v. Antonio Freemangreen2 sentences2026Cf. State v. Freeman, 402 S.W.3d 643, 653 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012) (holding that “reasonable grounds” or probable cause is “not an element of the offense” of violation of the implied consent law) (quoting State v. Prater, No. M2009-00527-CCA-R3-CD, 2010 WL 4674288 , at *4 (Tenn. Crim. 2018A case involving only an implied consent violation is, therefore, “in the nature of a civil action[.]” Freeman, 402 S.W.3d at 648 . | 1 | 2 |
State v. Bakergreen1 sentence2026State v. Baker, 966 S.W.2d 429, 432 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Turnergreen1 sentence2026The violation of the implied consent law “does not constitute a criminal offense,” and the revocation of the driver’s license as a result of the violation “confers only an administrative penalty.” State v. Collins, 166 S.W.3d 721, 727 (Tenn. 2005) (citing State v. Turner, 913 S.W.2d 158, 163 (Tenn. 1995)); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-407 (a) (2019) (providing that if the court finds that the driver violated the implied consent statute, “the driver is not considered as having committed a criminal offense”); State v. Pinchak, 277 S.W.3d 912, 916 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pinchakgreen1 sentence2026The violation of the implied consent law “does not constitute a criminal offense,” and the revocation of the driver’s license as a result of the violation “confers only an administrative penalty.” State v. Collins, 166 S.W.3d 721, 727 (Tenn. 2005) (citing State v. Turner, 913 S.W.2d 158, 163 (Tenn. 1995)); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-407 (a) (2019) (providing that if the court finds that the driver violated the implied consent statute, “the driver is not considered as having committed a criminal offense”); State v. Pinchak, 277 S.W.3d 912, 916 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Collinsgreen1 sentence2026The violation of the implied consent law “does not constitute a criminal offense,” and the revocation of the driver’s license as a result of the violation “confers only an administrative penalty.” State v. Collins, 166 S.W.3d 721, 727 (Tenn. 2005) (citing State v. Turner, 913 S.W.2d 158, 163 (Tenn. 1995)); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-407 (a) (2019) (providing that if the court finds that the driver violated the implied consent statute, “the driver is not considered as having committed a criminal offense”); State v. Pinchak, 277 S.W.3d 912, 916 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gilleygreen1 sentence2015See Gilley, 297 S.W.3d at 763 . | 1 | 1 |
Clayton Dean Reeder v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See, e.g., Clayton Dean Reeder v. -6- State, -- S.W.3d --, No. 06-13-00126-CR, 2014 WL 1862669, at *4 (Tex. App. Apr. 29, 2014) (holding that motion to suppress blood sample should have been granted and reversing and remanding for a new trial). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Richardsongreen1 sentence2012See id., slip op. at 2. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Odomgreen1 sentence2004The trial court’s findings of fact “will be upheld unless the evidence preponderates otherwise.” State v. Odom, 928 S.W.2d 18, 23 (Tenn.1996). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kaingreen1 sentence2004State v. Kain, 24 S.W.3d 816, 819 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Russell v. Hackett
green
2 sentences1998Id. 1996Id. | 2 | 1996–1998 |
McGarity v. Jerrolds
green
1 sentence2018“The failure to cite authority to support an argument on appeal constitutes a waiver of the issue.” McGarity v. Jerrolds, 429 S.W.3d 562 , 566 n.1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.