indigency hearing (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

indigency hearing in Tennessee

7 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2025 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.

Followed or applied (9)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Dubrockgreen
tenncrimapp · 1983 · cited in 4 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2008
2 sentences

2008See State v. Dubrock, 649 S.W.2d 602, 606 (Tenn.Crim.App.1983) (finding that the defendant should have been afforded an indigency hearing when he put the trial court on notice prior to trial that he was then unable to pay for a lawyer, even though he had previously retained an attorney).

2008See Dubrock, 649 S.W.2d at 605 .

24
Fisher v. Cromwell Co.green
tenn · 1977 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025Gulch’s filings in the appellate record do not appear to take any position on Mr. Ford’s indigency, and we note the court indicated that Gulch did not appear at the indigency hearing. -3- (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 29, 2008) (“[U]nless a party perfects its de novo appeal within ten days from the date of the judgment, the circuit court does not obtain jurisdiction over the appeal.”); see City of Jackson v. Bledsoe, 830 S.W.2d 71, 72 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991) (“A party must appeal from an adverse decision of the general sessions court within ten days of the date of entry of the general sessions court judg

11
City of Jackson v. Bledsoegreen
tennctapp · 1991 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025Gulch’s filings in the appellate record do not appear to take any position on Mr. Ford’s indigency, and we note the court indicated that Gulch did not appear at the indigency hearing. -3- (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 29, 2008) (“[U]nless a party perfects its de novo appeal within ten days from the date of the judgment, the circuit court does not obtain jurisdiction over the appeal.”); see City of Jackson v. Bledsoe, 830 S.W.2d 71, 72 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991) (“A party must appeal from an adverse decision of the general sessions court within ten days of the date of entry of the general sessions court judg

11
Jackson Energy Authority v. Diamondgreen
tennctapp · 2005 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025Gulch’s filings in the appellate record do not appear to take any position on Mr. Ford’s indigency, and we note the court indicated that Gulch did not appear at the indigency hearing. -3- (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 29, 2008) (“[U]nless a party perfects its de novo appeal within ten days from the date of the judgment, the circuit court does not obtain jurisdiction over the appeal.”); see City of Jackson v. Bledsoe, 830 S.W.2d 71, 72 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991) (“A party must appeal from an adverse decision of the general sessions court within ten days of the date of entry of the general sessions court judg

11
Taylor v. Allstate Insurance Co.green
tennctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Taylor v. Allstate, 158 S.W.3d 929, 931 (Tenn. Ct. 3 This third issue refers to an indigency hearing and the appointment of counsel for Mr. Starkey.

11
Sapio v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 1969 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008Moreover, “[t]he financial condition of a *601 defendant’s relatives has no bearing on the question of the defendant’s solvency.” State v. Gardner, 626 S.W.2d 721, 724 (Tenn.Crim.App.1981) (citing Sapio v. State, 223 So.2d 759, 760-61 (Fla.App.1969)); see also State v. Robert Miller, No. W2002-00640-CCA-R3-CD, 2003 WL 1618070 , at *4-6 (Tenn.Crim.App., Jackson, Mar. 28, 2003).

11
State v. Gardnergreen
tenncrimapp · 1981 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008Moreover, “[t]he financial condition of a *601 defendant’s relatives has no bearing on the question of the defendant’s solvency.” State v. Gardner, 626 S.W.2d 721, 724 (Tenn.Crim.App.1981) (citing Sapio v. State, 223 So.2d 759, 760-61 (Fla.App.1969)); see also State v. Robert Miller, No. W2002-00640-CCA-R3-CD, 2003 WL 1618070 , at *4-6 (Tenn.Crim.App., Jackson, Mar. 28, 2003).

11
United States v. Ishmael Gallopgreen
ca4 · 1988 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
1 sentence

2002In connection with this issue, we note that a trial court has the “inherent power to control the administration of justice.” United States v. Gallop, 838 F.2d 105, 108 (4th Cir. 1988); see also United States v. Dunegan, 251 F.3d 477, 478 (3rd Cir. 2001).

11
United States v. Dennis Dunegangreen
ca3 · 2001 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
1 sentence

2002In connection with this issue, we note that a trial court has the “inherent power to control the administration of justice.” United States v. Gallop, 838 F.2d 105, 108 (4th Cir. 1988); see also United States v. Dunegan, 251 F.3d 477, 478 (3rd Cir. 2001).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-14-202 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

IN 75 (1987–2025) TX 28 (1983–2026) TN 7 (2002–2025) GA 5 (1989–1998) NY 5 (1983–2017) OH 4 (2000–2018) PA 3 (1993–2018) WI 3 (1995–2018) MI 3 (1980–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check