Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (2026)

Automated selection of names for jury pool

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In any county in this state where the names of prospective jurors are obtained by automated means pursuant to § 22-2-301, the selection of names of prospective jurors to be summoned shall likewise be made by automated means in such a manner as to assure proportionate distribution of names selected without opportunity for the intervention of any human agency to select a particular name and in a manner that causes no prejudice to any person. It is the duty of the presiding judge of the judicial district to notify the jury coordinator of the number of names to be selected from the jury list, and these names shall constitute the jury pool.

(b) When the required number of names have been selected for the jury pool, the jury coordinator shall place a list of those names in an envelope, and with the list shall be enclosed a report prepared and signed by the jury coordinator. A copy of the list and report shall be retained by the jury coordinator for use under this chapter, and the report shall provide substantially as follows:
To the Honorable ____________________, Presiding Judge of the ______________ Judicial District, at ______________ County:
I, ____________________, the jury coordinator for such county, report that the enclosed names, which have been drawn according to law, constitute the jury pool for the upcoming jury service term:
This the ____________________ day of ______________, ____________________.
______________ Jury Coordinator

Acts 2008 , ch. 1159, § 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases, 1982–2010 · leading case: State v. Hester, 324 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Hester, 324 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010). · cites it 17× “§ 22-2-304 requires a showing of systematic exclusion.”

State v. Lynn, 924 S.W.2d 892 (Tenn. 1996). · cites it 8× “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (a)(1) (1994 Repl.”

Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004). · cites it 2× “204 (West 2002) (persons selected for inclusion on jury list may not be "infirm or decrepit"); Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (c) (1994) (authorizing judges to excuse "mentally and physically disabled" persons from jury service).”

State v. Stephens, 264 S.W.3d 719 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “§ 22-2-304(a)(2) (“It is the duty of the judge of such court to notify the board in writing before the time for drawing the panel of the number of names which shall be drawn for such term of court.”

State v. Elrod, 721 S.W.2d 820 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “A number of issues are raised, by the first of which defendant asserts reversible error was committed when the trial court denied a motion to quash the jury array because the jurors were not selected in accordance with T.C.A. § 22-2-304. Specifically it is charged there were…”

State v. Wiseman, 643 S.W.2d 354 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “TCA § 22-2-304(a)(l) provides that the board of jury commissioners shall unlock the box at the appointed time prior to a term of court and “after well shaking the same”, have drawn therefrom in their presence and in the presence of the clerk, by a child under ten years of age,…”

State v. Robinson, 971 S.W.2d 30 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “As can be seen, the defendants failed to establish a violation of Tenn.Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a)(l). Mr. Proffitt, the sole jury commissioner, the clerk, and the trial court were present when the child drew the names.”

State v. Jefferson, 769 S.W.2d 875 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “§ 22-228) Tenn.Code Ann. § 22-2-304. Drawing of names from jury box for jury service.”

United States v. Watson, Dwight W., 483 F.3d 828 (D.C. Cir. 2007). “204 ; Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (c) (1994); Pomerantz v.”

State v. Pat Bondurant (Death Penalty) (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). · cites it 5× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (a)(1) (Supp. 1991).”

State v. Robbie Davidson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000). “-5- Selection of the Jury Venire Tennessee Code Annotated § 22-2-304 requires that either a child, less than ten years of age, or a securely blindfolded person draw the names of prospective jurors from the jury box.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a) — 1 case

State v. Hester, 324 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010). “§ 22-2-304 requires a showing of systematic exclusion.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a)(1) — 1 case

State v. Lynn, 924 S.W.2d 892 (Tenn. 1996). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (a)(1) (1994 Repl.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a)(2) — 1 case

State v. Stephens, 264 S.W.3d 719 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007). “§ 22-2-304(a)(2) (“It is the duty of the judge of such court to notify the board in writing before the time for drawing the panel of the number of names which shall be drawn for such term of court.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a)(5)(A) — 1 case

State v. Pat Bondurant (Death Penalty) (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (a)(1) (Supp. 1991).”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a)(l) — 2 cases

State v. Wiseman, 643 S.W.2d 354 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1982). “TCA § 22-2-304(a)(l) provides that the board of jury commissioners shall unlock the box at the appointed time prior to a term of court and “after well shaking the same”, have drawn therefrom in their presence and in the presence of the clerk, by a child under ten years of age,…”

State v. Robinson, 971 S.W.2d 30 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “As can be seen, the defendants failed to establish a violation of Tenn.Code Ann. § 22-2-304(a)(l). Mr. Proffitt, the sole jury commissioner, the clerk, and the trial court were present when the child drew the names.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(d)(4) — 1 case

State v. Pat Bondurant (Death Penalty) (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304 (a)(1) (Supp. 1991).”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(d)(l) — 1 case

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-2-304(e) — 1 case

State v. Hester, 324 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010). “§ 22-2-304 requires a showing of systematic exclusion.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.