Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2026)
Grounds for relief
✓ current as of May 2026
Relief under this part shall be granted when the conviction or sentence is void or voidable because of the abridgment of any right guaranteed by the Constitution of Tennessee or the Constitution of the United States.
Acts 1995, ch. 207, § 1; T.C.A. § 40-30-203.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2,007
cases (378 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Burford v. State, 845 S.W.2d 204 (Tenn. 1992).
Burford v. State, 845 S.W.2d 204 (Tenn. 1992). “Under the Act, a prisoner may file a petition for post-conviction relief with the clerk of the court where the conviction occurred, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (1990), and "[r]elief shall be granted when the conviction or sentence is void or voidable because of the abridgement…”
Terrance N. CARTER v. Rickey BELL, 279 S.W.3d 560 (Tenn. 2009). “1 Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2003); see, e.”
Clark D. Frazier v. State of Tennessee, 495 S.W.3d 246 (Tenn. 2016). “32(f), and a claim for post-conviction relief, see Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2012). In light of these significant and comprehensive procedural mechanisms already in place to safeguard the guilty plea process, we disagree that we ―trivialize‖ the guilty plea proceeding by…”
Cauthern v. State, 145 S.W.3d 571 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2003). The petitioner bears the burden of proving factual allegations in the petition for post-conviction relief by clear and convincing evidence.”
Cooper v. State, 847 S.W.2d 521 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). “the appellate judges who reviewed such conviction, if ... available." This case was appealed directly to the Supreme Court pursuant to then existing law.”
Artis Whitehead v. State of Tennessee, 402 S.W.3d 615 (Tenn. 2013). “3 Currently, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103 directs Tennessee’s courts to grant prisoners post-conviction relief when their “conviction or sentence is void or voidable because of the abridgement of any right guaranteed by the Constitution of Tennessee or the Constitution of the…”
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “" Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2003). In order for a hearing to be granted, the petition must assert a "colorable claim.”
Stephen Bernard Wlodarz v. State of Tennessee, 361 S.W.3d 490 (Tenn. 2012). “Section 40-30-103 explains that “[r]elief under this part shall be granted when the conviction or sentence is void or voidable because of the abridgment of any right guaranteed -14- by the Constitution of Tennessee or the Constitution of the United States.”
Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2006). The habeas corpus procedures are mandatory and strictly applied.”
Cooper v. State, 849 S.W.2d 744 (Tenn. 1993). “The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court’s finding of ineffective assistance of counsel at the sentencing hearing, but transferred the case relative to the issue of effective assistance of counsel on direct appeal to this Court pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. §…”
Vaughn v. State, 202 S.W.3d 106 (Tenn. 2006). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2003); Howell v.”
Hickman v. State, 153 S.W.3d 16 (Tenn. 2004). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (2003); Taylor, 995 S.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(a) — 6 cases
Oliphant v. State, 806 S.W.2d 215 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991).
State v. McClintock, 732 S.W.2d 268 (Tenn. 1987).
Rhoden v. State, 816 S.W.2d 56 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991).
Laney v. State, 826 S.W.2d 117 (Tenn. 1992).
Conviction Relief. Judge Hayes Cites Ray v. State, 489 S.W.2D 849, 850 (Tenn. Crim. (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(a)(1) — 1 case
Dicks v. State (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(b) — 6 cases
State v. Masucci, 754 S.W.2d 90 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988).
Steadman v. State, 806 S.W.2d 780 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990).
Oliphant v. State, 806 S.W.2d 215 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991).
William B. Gatlin v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
Wilson v. State (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(b)(1) — 3 cases
Cooper v. State, 847 S.W.2d 521 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). “the appellate judges who reviewed such conviction, if ... available." This case was appealed directly to the Supreme Court pursuant to then existing law.”
Laney v. State, 826 S.W.2d 117 (Tenn. 1992).
Steadman v. State, 806 S.W.2d 780 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(b)(2) — 2 cases
Steadman v. State, 806 S.W.2d 780 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990).
William B. Gatlin v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(b)(l) — 4 cases
Cooper v. State, 849 S.W.2d 744 (Tenn. 1993). “The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court’s finding of ineffective assistance of counsel at the sentencing hearing, but transferred the case relative to the issue of effective assistance of counsel on direct appeal to this Court pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. §…”
Cooper v. State, 847 S.W.2d 521 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). “the appellate judges who reviewed such conviction, if ... available." This case was appealed directly to the Supreme Court pursuant to then existing law.”
Thompson v. State, 958 S.W.2d 156 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
State v. Clark, 774 S.W.2d 634 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1989).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103(f) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Seddrick Curry (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
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.