Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-420 (2026)

Fines and forfeitures

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

Amended by 2022 Tenn. Acts, ch. 900, s 2, eff. 7/1/2022.

Amended by 2018 Tenn. Acts, ch. 1044, Secs.s 1, s 2 eff. 5/21/2018.

Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1990, ch. 968, §§ 1, 2; 1994, ch. 607, § 1; 1994, ch. 923, § 1; 1995, ch. 305, § 102; 1997 , ch. 56, §§ 1-4, 7, 8; 1998, ch. 1020, § 1; 2003 , ch. 90, § 2; 2006, ch. 998, § 1; 2007 , ch. 106, § 6; 2007 , ch. 374, § 1; 2008 , ch. 1201, § 1; 2009 , ch. 511, § 1; 2010 , ch. 941, § 1; 2010 , ch. 1004, § 1; 2010 , ch. 1040, § 5; 2011 , ch. 78, § 1.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1994–2018 · leading case: Hill v. State of Tenn., 868 F. Supp. 221 (M.D. Tenn. 1994).
Hill v. State of Tenn., 868 F. Supp. 221 (M.D. Tenn. 1994). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-17-420, forfeited property or the proceeds thereof is awarded to the city or municipality which effected the initial seizure.”
State of Tennessee v. Sedrick Darion Mitchell (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “On appeal, Defendant claims that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions; that his simple possession conviction should be reversed because he was questioned without an attorney present; and he challenges the constitutionality of Tennessee Code Annotated section…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-420(h) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Sedrick Darion Mitchell (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). “On appeal, Defendant claims that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions; that his simple possession conviction should be reversed because he was questioned without an attorney present; and he challenges the constitutionality of Tennessee Code Annotated section…”
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.