Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-17-104 (2026)
Petition for protective order prohibiting the defendant and defendant's counsel from publishing victim, informant, or witness's name, contact information, or statements at any time prior to or during trial - Issuance of protective order - Violation
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) If a district attorney general is required to disclose to the defendant information including the name, contact information, or statements of a victim of a sexual offense under title 39, chapter 13, part 5; law enforcement informant, or witness who is expected to testify against a defendant charged with a crime involving a weapon or the use of force, then the district attorney general may petition the court for a protective order prohibiting the defendant and the defendant's counsel from publishing the victim, informant, or witness's name, contact information, or statements at any time prior to or during the trial. The petition must:
- (1) Be certified or supported by an affidavit of the victim, informant, or witness;
- (2) Identify the specific information that should be subject to prohibition from publication; and
- (3) Show good cause for issuing the protective order, which may include that allowing the defendant to publish the information is likely to result in coercion, intimidation, or harassment designed to discourage the victim, informant, or witness from testifying at trial or appearing as a witness.
- (b) If, after reviewing the petition, the court finds there is good cause for prohibiting the publishing of the information, then the court shall issue the protective order expressly limiting the publication of the victim, informant, or witness's information at any time prior to or during the trial.
- (c) This section does not restrict the right of a defendant or defendant's counsel to conduct an investigation or interviews to be used at trial.
- (d) A person who knowingly violates a protective order issued pursuant to this section commits a Class E felony.
Added by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 586,s 1, eff. 7/1/2021.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1994–2003 · leading case: State v. Hurley, 876 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn. 1994).
State v. Hurley, 876 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn. 1994). “Prior to the adoption of the Rules of Evidence, T.C.A. § 40-17-104 provided that in all criminal cases, the husband or the wife were competent witnesses to testify for or against each other.”
State v. Powers, 101 S.W.3d 383 (Tenn. 2003). “161, § 1 (later codified at Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-17-104 (1990)(repealed 1991) and recognized by the adoption of Tenn.”
State v. Price, 46 S.W.3d 785 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-17-104 (repealed 1991).”
Brown v. State, 753 A.2d 84 (Md. 2000). “Prior to the adoption of the Rules of Evidence, T.C.A. § 40-17-104 provided that in all criminal cases, the husband or the wife were competent witnesses to testify for or against each other.”
State of Tennessee v. Gerald Powers - Dissenting (Tenn. 2002). “161 (later codified at Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-17-104 and recognized by the adoption of Tennessee Rule of Evidence 501).”
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.