Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-14-101 (2026)
Speedy trial - Right to be heard
✓ current as of May 2026
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused is entitled to a speedy trial and to be heard in person and by counsel.
Code 1858, § 4992 (deriv. Const. 1834, art. 1, § 9); Shan., § 6951; Code 1932, § 11492; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 40-2001.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 113
cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: State v. Berry, 141 S.W.3d 549 (Tenn. 2004).
State v. Berry, 141 S.W.3d 549 (Tenn. 2004). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-14-101 (2003). In addition, the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure provide for the dismissal of an indictment, presentment, information or criminal complaint "[i]f there is unnecessary delay in presenting the charge to a grand jury against a defendant…”
State v. Utley, 956 S.W.2d 489 (Tenn. 1997). “The right to a speedy trial is also statutory in Tennessee: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused is entitled to a speedy trial_” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-14-101 (1990). The purpose of the speedy trial guarantee is to protect the accused against oppressive pre-trial…”
Momon v. State, 18 S.W.3d 152 (Tenn. 2000). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-14-101 (1998) ("In all criminal prosecutions, the accused is entitled to a speedy trial, and to be heard in person and by counsel.”
State v. Jefferson, 938 S.W.2d 1 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996). “61 This “balancing test” is applied to claims made pursuant to the Sixth Amendment, Article I, § 9 of the Tennessee Constitution, and Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-14-101. 62 There are four factors that must be balanced.”
State v. Simmons, 54 S.W.3d 755 (Tenn. 2001). “Const, amend. VI. 4 Similarly, the Tennessee Constitution provides that “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused hath the right to .”
State v. Frazier, 683 S.W.2d 346 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1984). “This rule has been abolished in the *353 United States.”
State v. Bowman, 327 S.W.3d 69 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2009). “The defendant objected to any additional delay in the proceedings, but the trial court granted a continuance until August 11, 2005, and lowered the defendant’s bond from $100,000 to $10,000 as a remedy to the continued incarceration.”
State v. Thomas, 818 S.W.2d 350 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). “48(b) which provides as follows: If there is unnecessary delay in presenting the charge to a grand jury against a defendant who has been held to answer to the trial court, or if there is unnecessary delay in bringing a defendant to trial, the court may dismiss the indictment,…”
State v. Vickers, 985 S.W.2d 1 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “9; Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-14-101 (1990); Tenn.R.”
State v. Hudgins, 188 S.W.3d 663 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005). “An identical right is found in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-14-101, which provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused is entitled to a speedy trial, and to be heard in person and by counsel.”
State v. Vaughan, 144 S.W.3d 391 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). “We agree with the State on this issue. A criminal defendant is entitled to a speedy trial under both the United States and Tennessee constitutions.”
State v. Kolb, 755 S.W.2d 472 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). “2d 1 (1967), Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution of Tennessee, and T.C.A. § 40-14-101. Therefore, defendants in criminal cases in Tennessee have both a constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial.”
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.