Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-204 (2026)

Dyed baby fowl and rabbits

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(a)
- (1) It is unlawful for any person to:
  - (A) Sell, offer for sale, barter or give away baby chickens, ducklings or goslings of any age, or rabbits under two (2) months of age, as pets, toys, premiums or novelties, if those fowl or rabbits have been colored, dyed, stained or otherwise had their natural color changed; or
  - (B) Bring or transport such fowl or rabbits into the state for the purposes mentioned in subdivision (a)(1)(A).
- (2) This section shall not be construed to prohibit the sale or display of baby chickens, ducklings, or other fowl or rabbits in proper facilities by breeders or stores engaged in the business of selling for purposes of commercial breeding and raising or laboratory testing.
- (3) Each baby chicken, duckling, other fowl or rabbit sold, offered for sale, bartered or given away in violation of this section constitutes a separate offense.

(b) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2000–2020 · leading case: Gdongalay P. Berry v. State of Tennessee, 366 S.W.3d 160 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gdongalay P. Berry v. State of Tennessee, 366 S.W.3d 160 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “§ 39-14-204(i)(6); and that the murder was knowingly committed, solicited, directed, or aided by the [petitioner] while the [petitioner] had a substantial role in commit *168 ting or attempting to commit robbery or kidnapping, see id.”

State v. Howell, 34 S.W.3d 484 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-204(i)(l). Cornett was in the van when it was driven over the dying body of Delfina Lillelid and took no action to shield Tabitha Lillelid from witnessing the murder of her parents.”

Bryant v. Parker (E.D. Tenn. 2020). “In its exposition of the law governing Petitioner’s sentencing, the trial court cited 16 to Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-204 as providing “that in this sentencing hearing, now that the death penalty has been withdrawn by the State, that the possible punishments for each…”

State v. Randall Best (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-204 (i)(5). It does not relate to the defendant’s explanation of his actions or his comments on the character of the victim.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-204(i)(6) — 1 case

Gdongalay P. Berry v. State of Tennessee, 366 S.W.3d 160 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “§ 39-14-204(i)(6); and that the murder was knowingly committed, solicited, directed, or aided by the [petitioner] while the [petitioner] had a substantial role in commit *168 ting or attempting to commit robbery or kidnapping, see id.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-204(i)(l) — 1 case

State v. Howell, 34 S.W.3d 484 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-204(i)(l). Cornett was in the van when it was driven over the dying body of Delfina Lillelid and took no action to shield Tabitha Lillelid from witnessing the murder of her parents.”

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.