Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108 (2026)

Answer or response

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The district attorney general shall represent the state except as provided in § 40-30-114(c). The state shall file an answer or other responsive pleading within thirty (30) days, unless extended for good cause. Good cause will not be met by a routine statement that the press of other business prevents a response within the thirty-day period. Failure by the state to timely respond does not entitle the petitioner to relief under this part.

(b) If the petition does not include the records or transcripts, or parts of records or transcripts that are material to the questions raised therein, the district attorney general is empowered to obtain them at the expense of the state and may file them with the responsive pleading or within a reasonable time thereafter.

(c) The district attorney general has the option to assert by motion to dismiss that:
- (1) The petition is barred by the statute of limitations;
- (2) The petition was not filed in the court of conviction;
- (3) The petition asserts a claim for relief from judgments entered in separate trials or proceedings;
- (4) A direct appeal or post-conviction petition attacking the same conviction is currently pending in the trial or appellate courts;
- (5) The facts alleged fail to show that the petitioner is entitled to relief; or
- (6) The facts alleged fail to establish that the claims for relief have not been waived or previously determined.

(d) The answer shall respond to each of the allegations of the petition and shall assert the affirmative defenses the district attorney general deems appropriate.

Amended by 2023 Tenn. Acts, ch. 182, s 3, eff. 4/28/2023.

Acts 1995, ch. 207, § 1; T.C.A. § 40-30-208.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Potts v. State, 833 S.W.2d 60 (Tenn. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Potts v. State, 833 S.W.2d 60 (Tenn. 1992). · cites it 3× “T.C.A. § 40-30-108 instructs trial courts to treat habeas petitions as post-conviction petitions "when the relief and procedure authorized by [the Post-Conviction Procedure Act] appear adequate and appropriate.”

Archer v. State, 851 S.W.2d 157 (Tenn. 1993). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 40-30-108. Finally, we take this opportunity to note that in affirming the trial court’s dismissal of Archer’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that the appellant’s petition was also subject to dismissal for failure to comply with…”

Wiley v. State, 183 S.W.3d 317 (Tenn. 2006). · cites it 2× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-108 (2003). A petitioner must establish the allegations by clear and convincing evidence.”

Cole v. State, 798 S.W.2d 261 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 40-30-108. 3 . T.C.A. § 40-30-121.”

Fredrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 927 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “He contends that the post-conviction statute of limitations barred his writ of habeas corpus in contravention of both the federal and state constitutions.”

Rucker v. Rose, 626 F. Supp. 416 (M.D. Tenn. 1985). · cites it 2× “See T.C.A. § 40-30-108. Such petition was dismissed; but, instead of taking an appeal from the order of dismissal, Mr.”

Carlos D'Juan Campbell, Jr. v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “]” Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108 (a); see Tenn.”

Watkins v. State, 903 S.W.2d 302 (Tenn. 1995). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 40-30-108. It seeks not to convict, but to set aside a conviction which is void or voidable because of the abridgement of constitutional rights.”

Kimberly Holliday v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “” T.C.A. § 40-30-108. We fail to see how section 108 supports the Petitioner’s argument.”

Clifford Leon Farra v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108 (a) (2003). Further, the petitioner has failed to establish that he was prejudiced by the state's failure to respond.”

Raymond Andrew Herbst v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “28, § 5(G); T.C.A. § 40-30-108. Also, when applicable, “[t]he state shall file a motion to dismiss which includes the facts relied upon to support the motion to raise a defense that .”

David Delgado Echeveria v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108 (a). The Hickman County Circuit Court did not address the issue of timeliness; instead, in the order requiring the State to file a response, the court stated that it would “proceed as though a petition for post-conviction relief ha[d] been filed.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108(a) — 4 cases

Mario Hernandez Castillo v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020).

Jacob Evan Coyne v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).

Raymond Andrew Herbst v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015). “28, § 5(G); T.C.A. § 40-30-108. Also, when applicable, “[t]he state shall file a motion to dismiss which includes the facts relied upon to support the motion to raise a defense that .”

Nehad Sobhi Abdelnabi v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108(c)(5) — 1 case

Daniel David Eden v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015).

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-108(c)(6) — 1 case

Henry Ford Williams, Jr. v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2008).

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.