Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 33-6-402 (2026)
Detention without warrant authorized
✓ current as of May 2026
If an officer authorized to make arrests in the state, a licensed physician, a psychologist authorized under § 33-6-427(a), or a professional designated by the commissioner under § 33-6-427(b) has reason to believe that a person is subject to detention under § 33-6-401, then the officer, physician, psychologist, or designated professional may take the person into custody without a civil order or warrant for immediate examination under § 33-6-404 for certification of need for care and treatment.
Acts 2000, ch. 947, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2001–2023 · leading case: Mary C. Smith v. UHS of Lakeside, Inc., 439 S.W.3d 303 (Tenn. 2014).
Mary C. Smith v. UHS of Lakeside, Inc., 439 S.W.3d 303 (Tenn. 2014). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 33-6-402 (2007) (authorizing an officer to take an individual into custody for the purpose of obtaining an immediate examination for certification of need for emergency involuntary diagnosis and treatment).”
Barbara T. Collins v. HCA Health Servs. Of Tennessee, Inc., 517 S.W.3d 84 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “] Section 33-6-402 defines the individuals with authority to make involuntary detentions in Tennessee as: (1) an officer authorized to make arrests in the state; (2) a licensed physician; (3) a statutorily authorized psychologist; and (4) a professional designated by the…”
Mercer v. HCA Health Servs. of Tennessee, Inc., 87 S.W.3d 500 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “§ 33-6-402 and 403), a physician or a police officer can take a person into custody for immediate examination without a civil order or warrant if the person is mentally ill and he “poses an immediate substantial likelihood of serious harm” to himself or to others “because of the…”
State v. Simmons, 108 S.W.3d 881 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “Under this statutory scheme, a mentally ill individual who presents an “immediate substantial likelihood of serious harm” may be detained against his will in a mental health facility initially on the authority of a law enforcement officer or certain mental health professionals…”
In Re William B. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). “Section 33-6-401 provides as follows: IF AND ONLY IF (1) a person has a mental illness or serious emotional disturbance, AND (2) the person poses an immediate substantial likelihood of serious harm under § 33-6-501 because of the mental illness or serious emotional disturbance,…”
Hargis v. Overton Cnty., Tennessee (M.D. Tenn. 2023). “) Oldham authorized Hargis’s involuntary commitment “under Tenn. Code Ann. § 33-6-402 for immediate examination under Tenn.”
Pamela D. Vickroy v. Pathways, Inc., Dyersburg, TN, Kimberly Bord, J. Forstlam, M.D. Methodist Hosp., Coleman Foss, Adm'r, & W. Mental Health Inst. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “Section 33-6-404 states: IF (1)(A) a licensed physician, psychologist, or designated professional takes a person into custody under Section 33-6-402; OR 3 Tennessee Code Annotated Section 29-26-115 (a) - (b) states: a) In a malpractice action, the claimant shall have the burden…”
Jessica Abeyta v. HCA Health Servs. of TN, Inc. d/b/a Parthenon Pavillion (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “Like the case at bar, in Vickroy, the involuntary commitment statutes were at issue, specifically Tennessee Code Annotated Section 33-6-404, which states: IF (1)(A) a licensed physician, psychologist, or designated professional takes a person into custody under Section 33-6-402;…”
State of Tennessee v. Larry D. Simmons & Tyce Renard Jackson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 33-6-402 , - 422. -4- Statutory Construction “‘The most basic principle of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent without unduly restricting or expanding a statute's coverage beyond its intended scope.”
Rene Mercer v. HCA Health Servs. of TN, Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 33-6-402 and 403), a physician or a police officer can take a person into custody for immediate examination 1 The involuntary commitment statutes were modified and renumbered after the events that gave rise to this lawsuit.”
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.