Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-133 (2026)
Order of adjudication - Noncriminal
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) Except as provided in § 37-1-190, an order of disposition or other adjudication in a proceeding under this part is not a conviction of crime and does not impose any civil disability ordinarily resulting from a conviction or operate to disqualify the child in any state service or civil service application or appointment. A child shall not be committed or transferred to a penal institution or other facility used primarily for the execution of sentences of persons convicted of a crime, except as provided in § 37-1-134.
- (b) The disposition of a child and evidence adduced in a hearing in juvenile court may not be used against such child in any proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after reaching majority, except in dispositional proceedings after conviction of a felony for the purposes of a pre-sentence investigation and report, a proceeding pursuant to § 39-17-1352, or in a criminal prosecution for a violation of the prohibition on purchasing or possessing firearms imposed under § 37-1-190.
- (c) A child found to be delinquent shall be exempt from the operation of laws applicable to infamous crimes, and such child shall not be rendered infamous by the judgment of the juvenile court in which such child is tried.
Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 973,s 9, eff. 7/1/2024.
Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 973,s 8, eff. 7/1/2024.
Acts 1970, ch. 600, § 33; T.C.A., § 37-233; Acts 2012 , ch. 800, § 49.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Biscan v. Brown, 160 S.W.3d 462 (Tenn. 2005).
Biscan v. Brown, 160 S.W.3d 462 (Tenn. 2005). “Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-133(b) (2001) provides: The disposition of a child and evidence adduced in a hearing in juvenile court may not be used against such child in any proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after *470 reaching…”
State v. Hicks, 835 S.W.2d 32 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992). “Womac does not fit the especially mitigated category, and his previous felony conviction can be used to enhance his punishment because it is not necessary to use the conviction to establish the range.”
Doe v. Norris, 751 S.W.2d 834 (Tenn. 1988). “In fact, T.C.A. § 37-1-133 expressly provides that the disposition and proceedings relative to juveniles are noncriminal and that no criminal disabilities attach to the juveniles as a result of those proceedings.”
State v. McGhee, 746 S.W.2d 460 (Tenn. 1988). “…was presented in the motion for new trial after verdict as required by T.R.A.P., Rule 3(e) in jury cases. 2 . Now T.C.A. § 37-1-133.”
State v. Stockton, 733 S.W.2d 111 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1986). “T.C.A. § 37-1-133 is adapted from the Uniform Juvenile Court Act, and provides in pertinent part that “the disposition of a child and evidence adduced in a hearing in juvenile court may not be used against him in any proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether…”
State v. King, 718 S.W.2d 241 (Tenn. 1986). “The State now concedes that error was committed in examining defendant as to his actions as a juvenile, T.C.A. § 37-1-133(b); State v. Dixon, 656 S.”
Jennifer Biscan v. Franklin Brown (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). “On appeal, the Biscans assert that the trial court’s order was proper based on Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-133 (b) and Tenn. R.”
State v. Shane Pillow (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). “§ 37-1-133(b), the trial court erroneously allowed the assistant district attorney general to question him during the sentencing hearing about his prior juvenile court proceedings and that the trial court improperly used this evidence to enhance his sentence.”
In Re: Allyn Hood d/b/a/ A-Hood Bonding Co. (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “” Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-133(b) (2001) provides that: the disposition of a child and evidence adduced in a hearing in juvenile court may not be used against such child in any proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court whether before or after reaching…”
In the Matter of Wayne H. (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). “Neither Rule 13(d) nor Rule 13(e) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure envision appellate review of the hybrid created by Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-133 wherein it provides in part: "(a) An order of disposition or other adjudication in a proceeding under this part is…”
Codie Hadley v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2022). “8, 2008) (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-133 (a)). Rather, collateral challenges to juvenile adjudications may be raised pursuant to the Juvenile Post- Commitment Procedures Act.”
Baker v. Claiborne Cnty., Tennessee (E.D. Tenn. 2024). “94 at 9-10 (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-133 (b)]. But in an action in federal court under Section 1983 with supplemental state law claims, state evidentiary law does not bind a federal court.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-133(a) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Jacob Kyle Tipton (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).
State of Tennessee v. Recardo Dale (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-133(b) — 7 cases
Biscan v. Brown, 160 S.W.3d 462 (Tenn. 2005). “Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-133(b) (2001) provides: The disposition of a child and evidence adduced in a hearing in juvenile court may not be used against such child in any proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after *470 reaching…”
State v. King, 718 S.W.2d 241 (Tenn. 1986). “The State now concedes that error was committed in examining defendant as to his actions as a juvenile, T.C.A. § 37-1-133(b); State v. Dixon, 656 S.”
State v. Shane Pillow (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). “§ 37-1-133(b), the trial court erroneously allowed the assistant district attorney general to question him during the sentencing hearing about his prior juvenile court proceedings and that the trial court improperly used this evidence to enhance his sentence.”
In Re: Allyn Hood d/b/a/ A-Hood Bonding Co. (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “” Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-133(b) (2001) provides that: the disposition of a child and evidence adduced in a hearing in juvenile court may not be used against such child in any proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court whether before or after reaching…”
State of Tennessee v. Ricky Terrell Cox (Tenn. Crim. App. 2009).
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.