Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1001 (2026)

Short title

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

This part shall be known and may be cited as the "Tennessee Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1990."

Acts 1990, ch. 1092, § 7.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 2004–2019 · leading case: State of Tennessee v. Jared Scott Aguilar, 437 S.W.3d 889 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Jared Scott Aguilar, 437 S.W.3d 889 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “The Sentencing Commission comments to Code section 39-17-1001 inform us that “[t]his part punishes persons involved in child pornography.” Id., Sentencing Comm’n Comments.”
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Whited, 506 S.W.3d 416 (Tenn. 2016). “Analysis ' The issues presented in this appeal require interpretation of Tennessee statutes on the sexual exploitation of children, specifically the Tennessee Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1990, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-17-1001 to -1008…”
State of Tennessee v. Anthony Jerome Miller, 575 S.W.3d 807 (2019). “' " Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1001 (2014) ("the Act").”
State of Tennessee v. John David Smartt (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Defendant analogizes the Tennessee Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act, T.C.A. § 39-17-1001 through -1008, with statutes proscribing the possession, manufacture, and distribution of controlled substances.”
Mark Alan Deakins v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “1, § 11; T.C.A. §§ 39-17-1001 to -1007. The Petitioner was convicted pursuant to section 1005(a) of the PCSEA, which provides: (a) It is unlawful for any person to knowingly promote, employ, use, assist, transport, or permit a minor to participate in the performance of, or the…”
State of Tennessee v. Patrick M. Lonie (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in its application of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35- 115 to the Tennessee Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1990, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1001 , et seq., and that, as a result, he should not have…”
State of Tennessee v. Roland R. Smith (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1001 , Sentencing Commission Comments.”
State of Tennessee v. Timothy Davis (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “The search warrant was issued, in part, for violations of the Tennessee Protection for Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1990 ( Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-17-1001 - 39-17-1007).”
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Hank Bohannon (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). “Whited, our supreme court addressed the interpretation of Tennessee statutes on the sexual exploitation of children, specifically the Tennessee Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1990, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-17-1001 to -1008 (“the Act”),…”
State of Tennessee v. Anthony T. Tollis (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). “The fact of whether “sexual activity,” an element of sexual exploitation of a child which the Defendant ultimately pleaded guilty to, was occurring or had occurred was not essential to establishing probable cause for issuance of the search warrant.”
State of Tennessee v. Charles D. Sprunger (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “4 The statute provides: If the district attorney general is of the opinion that §§ 39-17-1001 [through] 39-17-1005 are being violated, the district attorney general may file a petition in a circuit, chancery or criminal court of that district relating the opinion, and request…”
State of Tennessee v. Tracey C. Clark - Concurring (Tenn. Crim. App. 2008). “] (italicized emphasis added) The words “this part” include all of the criminal violations in part 13 of Tennessee Code Annotated chapter 39, title 17, or more specifically, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-17-1001 through 39-17-1361, except for certain numbered sections…”
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.