Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (2026)

Petition - Affidavit

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Code 1858, §§ 3722, 3725; Shan., §§ 5502, 5505; Code 1932, §§ 9673, 9676; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), §§ 23-1806, 23-1807.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 333 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007).
Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007). · cites it 6× “The pleading requirements for filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus are set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107. Section 29-21-107(a) provides that the petition for writ of habeas corpus must be signed and verified by affidavit.”
Hickman v. State, 153 S.W.3d 16 (Tenn. 2004). · cites it 4× “§ 29-21-107 (2000). Finally, in a footnote, the majority indicated that if the defendant is presently in federal custody, as he alleged in another case attacking his 1986 conviction, then he is barred from obtaining habeas corpus relief by Tennessee Code Annotated section…”
Cox v. State, 53 S.W.3d 287 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107 requires (a) a verified petition stating the specific facts of a petitioner’s restraint, (b) the attachment of a copy of the legal process on which the restraint is based, and (c) an affirmation that the claim of illegality of the…”
State v. Henretta, 325 S.W.3d 112 (Tenn. 2010). · cites it 4× “nretta argues in the alternative that if he was transferred from Leavenworth pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, the writ was void and without effect because 1) the trial court did not have constitutional or statutory authority to issue a writ against an…”
Moody v. State, 160 S.W.3d 512 (Tenn. 2005). “§ 29-21-107 (2000). The procedures for filing a habeas corpus petition are codified in Tennessee Code Annotated sections 29-21-101 through 29-21-130.”
Billy Gene DeBow v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). · cites it 12× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (b). Furthermore, “[t]he application should be made to the court or judge most convenient in point of distance to the applicant, unless a sufficient reason be given in the petition for not applying to such court or judge.”
Patrick Marshall v. Brandon Watwood, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). · cites it 12× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (a). A petition has been “verified by affidavit” if said affidavit has been notarized or verified under oath.”
Paul Williams EL v. Sheriff Andy Dickson, Carroll Cnty. (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016). · cites it 10× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (b)(3)-(4). Further, the “Affidavit” attached to the Petition was not notarized and therefore was not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107(a).”
Timothy L. Jefferson v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). · cites it 9× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (b)(2), (b)(4); Summers, 212 S.”
Patrick Thurmond v. David Sexton, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 14× “In response, the State initially asserts that the habeas corpus court did not err in dismissing the petition without a hearing since the Petitioner failed to meet the procedural requirements for habeas corpus relief as stated in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107(2) and…”
Connie Arnold v. Doug Cook, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016). · cites it 8× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (b)(3), (4). In addition, the petition was not verified by affidavit, as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107(a).”
Michael Williams v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). · cites it 8× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (b)(4). Whether the petitioner is entitled to habeas corpus relief is a question of law.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(2) — 3 cases
Patrick Thurmond v. David Sexton, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “In response, the State initially asserts that the habeas corpus court did not err in dismissing the petition without a hearing since the Petitioner failed to meet the procedural requirements for habeas corpus relief as stated in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107(2) and…”
Tommy Dixon v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(4) — 2 cases
State v. William Lee (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(B)(2) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(a) — 50 cases
Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007). “The pleading requirements for filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus are set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107. Section 29-21-107(a) provides that the petition for writ of habeas corpus must be signed and verified by affidavit.”
Hickman v. State, 153 S.W.3d 16 (Tenn. 2004). “§ 29-21-107 (2000). Finally, in a footnote, the majority indicated that if the defendant is presently in federal custody, as he alleged in another case attacking his 1986 conviction, then he is barred from obtaining habeas corpus relief by Tennessee Code Annotated section…”
Patrick Marshall v. Brandon Watwood, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (a). A petition has been “verified by affidavit” if said affidavit has been notarized or verified under oath.”
Kevin Lawrence v. Kevin Genovese, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024).
Alexa Williams EL v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b) — 30 cases
Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007). “The pleading requirements for filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus are set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107. Section 29-21-107(a) provides that the petition for writ of habeas corpus must be signed and verified by affidavit.”
Hickman v. State, 153 S.W.3d 16 (Tenn. 2004). “§ 29-21-107 (2000). Finally, in a footnote, the majority indicated that if the defendant is presently in federal custody, as he alleged in another case attacking his 1986 conviction, then he is barred from obtaining habeas corpus relief by Tennessee Code Annotated section…”
Charles Owens v. Kevin Genovese, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
Patrick Thurmond v. David Sexton, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “In response, the State initially asserts that the habeas corpus court did not err in dismissing the petition without a hearing since the Petitioner failed to meet the procedural requirements for habeas corpus relief as stated in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107(2) and…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b)(1) — 11 cases
Christopher Mimms v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
Juan LaSean Perry v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
Timothy A. Baxter v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
Quinton Cage v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b)(2) — 78 cases
Michael J. McCann v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
Martin Hughes v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
Antonio Kendrick v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025).
Rickey Benson v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b)(2)(2000) — 1 case
Tony Hoover v. Henry Steward, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b)(2003) — 1 case
David Wayne Britt v. Ricky Bell, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b)(3) — 7 cases
Bobby V. Summers v. Johnny Fitz, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).
Kenya Davis v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(b)(4) — 43 cases
Billy Gene DeBow v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107 (b). Furthermore, “[t]he application should be made to the court or judge most convenient in point of distance to the applicant, unless a sufficient reason be given in the petition for not applying to such court or judge.”
Danny Ray Lacy v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
Charles D. Johnson v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018).
Courtney R. Logan v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
Asata D. Lowe v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-21-107(c) — 1 case
Cory Myers v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
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.