Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-20-107 (2026)

Verdict and sentence on felony conviction

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

Acts 1913, ch. 8, § 1; Shan., § 7202a1; Acts 1923, ch. 52, § 1; Code 1932, § 11766; Acts 1973, ch. 163, §§ 1, 2; 1974, ch. 768, § 1; 1979, ch. 318, § 15; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 40-2707.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1984–2013 · leading case: State v. Mays, 677 S.W.2d 476 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1984).
State v. Mays, 677 S.W.2d 476 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “TCA § 40-20-107(a). It is clear that the jury in fixing the minimum at four years in each case was not prejudiced by the erroneous instruction by the trial judge.”
State v. Hamlin, 499 A.2d 45 (Vt. 1985). “57, § 353 (West 1969); Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-20-107 (1982); Tex. Stat.”
State v. Garrard, 693 S.W.2d 921 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “§ 40-2707 (T.C.A. § 40-20-107), as the statute existed at that time.”
Carroll v. Raney, 953 S.W.2d 657 (Tenn. 1997). · cites it 2× “When a defendant was convicted of a felony, the jury was to impose a minimum and maximum term for the offense, i.”
Jack Layne Benson v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Although Tennessee has established a statutory right to post-conviction counsel, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-20-107 (b)(1) (2013), Tennessee courts have long held that there is no right to effective assistance of post-conviction counsel.”
Milburn L. Edwards v. Cherry Lindamood, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-20-107 “is the old jury sentencing statute which discusses the jury’s role in setting sentences for crimes committed prior to 1982.”
Ronald C. Howse v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “(a) If a person be sentenced for two (2) or more such separate offenses, sentence shall be pronounced for each offense, and imprisonment thereunder may equal, but shall not exceed, the total of the maximum terms provided by law for such offenses, which total shall, for the…”
Marvin Anthony Matthews v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007). “§ 40-20-101 and § 40-20-107, and was entered on the minutes.”
Marvin Anthony Matthews v. David Mills, Warden (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005). “§ 40-20-101 and § 40-20-107, and was entered on the minutes, that the Mittimus Writ of Confinement was valid on its face, and that the petitioner was properly adjudged guilty and sentenced.”
Marvin Anthony Matthews, pro se v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). “A panel of this Court affirmed the lower court’s denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the statute relied upon Petitioner, Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-20-107, is inapplicable to his case.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-20-107(a) — 1 case
State v. Mays, 677 S.W.2d 476 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1984). “TCA § 40-20-107(a). It is clear that the jury in fixing the minimum at four years in each case was not prejudiced by the erroneous instruction by the trial judge.”
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.