Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (2026)
Motions to reopen
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) A petitioner may file a motion in the trial court to reopen the first post-conviction petition only if the following applies:
- (1) The claim in the motion is based upon a final ruling of an appellate court establishing a constitutional right that was not recognized as existing at the time of trial, if retrospective application of that right is required. The motion must be filed within one (1) year of the ruling of the highest state appellate court or the United States supreme court establishing a constitutional right that was not recognized as existing at the time of trial; or
- (2) The claim in the motion is based upon new scientific evidence establishing that the petitioner is actually innocent of the offense or offenses for which the petitioner was convicted; or
- (3) The claim asserted in the motion seeks relief from a sentence that was enhanced because of a previous conviction and the conviction in the case in which the claim is asserted was not a guilty plea with an agreed sentence, and the previous conviction has subsequently been held to be invalid, in which case the motion must be filed within one (1) year of the finality of the ruling holding the previous conviction to be invalid; and
- (4) It appears that the facts underlying the claim, if true, would establish by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner is entitled to have the conviction set aside or the sentence reduced.
- (b) The motion must set out the factual basis underlying its claims and must be supported by affidavit. The factual information set out in the affidavit shall be limited to information which, if offered at an evidentiary hearing, would be admissible through the testimony of the affiant under the rules of evidence. The motion shall be denied unless the factual allegations, if true, meet the requirements of subsection (a). If the court grants the motion, the procedure, relief and appellate provisions of this part shall apply.
- (c) If the motion is denied, the petitioner shall have thirty (30) days to file an application in the court of criminal appeals seeking permission to appeal. The application shall be accompanied by copies of all the documents filed by both parties in the trial court and the order denying the motion. The state shall have thirty (30) days to respond. The court of criminal appeals shall not grant the application unless it appears that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion. If it determines that the trial court did so abuse its discretion, the court of criminal appeals shall remand the matter to the trial court for further proceedings.
Acts 1995, ch. 207, § 1; 1996, ch. 995, §§ 8, 9; T.C.A. § 40-30-217; Acts 2011, ch. 290, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 216
cases (39 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012).
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “After a post-conviction proceeding has been completed and relief has been denied, as in this case, a petitioner may move to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief under the limited circumstances set out in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). This statute…”
State v. Gomez, 163 S.W.3d 632 (Tenn. 2005). “As another practical point, I note that we have implicitly held that Blakely / Apprendi claims are cognizable on post-conviction review pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). See Graham, 90 S.”
Reid v. State, 197 S.W.3d 694 (Tenn. 2006). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-117. We do not agree with Reid, however, that a stay should apply to all claims.”
Pervis Tyrone Payne v. State of Tennessee, 493 S.W.3d 478 (Tenn. 2016). “We decline to hold that Hall applies retroactively within the meaning of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117(a)(1). Coleman v. State and Van Tran v.”
Dellinger v. State, 279 S.W.3d 282 (Tenn. 2009). “Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 provides: "(a) A petitioner may file a motion in the trial court to reopen the first post-conviction petition only if .”
Artis Whitehead v. State of Tennessee, 402 S.W.3d 615 (Tenn. 2013). “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-30-117 (a)(1)-(3), -102(b)(1)-(3).”
Teague v. State, 772 S.W.2d 915 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). “See T.C.A. § 40-30-117. The affidavit recites in part: From the beginning of the interrogation the questions were aimed at blaming Randy Teague [the petitioner] and the police told me that if I did not answer their questions, they were going to charge me with first degree murder.”
Derrick Brandon Bush v. State of Tennessee, 428 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2014). “§ 40-30 — 102(b) (grounds for tolling the limitations period); Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a) (grounds for a motion to reopen).”
Coleman v. State, 341 S.W.3d 221 (Tenn. 2011). “§ 40-30-102(c) also states that the Act “contemplates the filing of only one (1) petition for post-conviction relief,” allowing a petition that has been resolved to be reopened only under the limited circumstances specified in Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 . To avoid dismissal, a…”
Wade v. State, 914 S.W.2d 97 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). “While the taking of testimony by deposition is authorized in post-conviction proceedings, T.C.A. § 40-30-117 (1990), the taking of a deposition must be warranted by exceptional circumstances.”
Heck Van Tran v. Roland Colson, 764 F.3d 594 (6th Cir. 2014). “The court in that case was determining whether the decision in Coleman could be grounds for reopening a case under Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(l), which permits a motion to reopen on the basis of “a final ruling of an appellate court establishing a constitutional right.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(1) — 1 case
Matthew Melton Jackson v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a) — 60 cases
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “After a post-conviction proceeding has been completed and relief has been denied, as in this case, a petitioner may move to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief under the limited circumstances set out in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). This statute…”
Derrick Brandon Bush v. State of Tennessee, 428 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2014). “§ 40-30 — 102(b) (grounds for tolling the limitations period); Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a) (grounds for a motion to reopen).”
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Jason Lee Fisher v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).
State of Tennessee v. Tony Wolfe (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a)(1) — 52 cases
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
State v. Gomez, 163 S.W.3d 632 (Tenn. 2005). “As another practical point, I note that we have implicitly held that Blakely / Apprendi claims are cognizable on post-conviction review pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). See Graham, 90 S.”
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “After a post-conviction proceeding has been completed and relief has been denied, as in this case, a petitioner may move to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief under the limited circumstances set out in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). This statute…”
Pervis Tyrone Payne v. State of Tennessee, 493 S.W.3d 478 (Tenn. 2016). “We decline to hold that Hall applies retroactively within the meaning of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117(a)(1). Coleman v. State and Van Tran v.”
Coleman v. State, 341 S.W.3d 221 (Tenn. 2011). “§ 40-30-102(c) also states that the Act “contemplates the filing of only one (1) petition for post-conviction relief,” allowing a petition that has been resolved to be reopened only under the limited circumstances specified in Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 . To avoid dismissal, a…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a)(2) — 12 cases
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Pervis Tyrone Payne v. State of Tennessee, 493 S.W.3d 478 (Tenn. 2016). “We decline to hold that Hall applies retroactively within the meaning of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117(a)(1). Coleman v. State and Van Tran v.”
Dellinger v. State, 279 S.W.3d 282 (Tenn. 2009). “Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 provides: "(a) A petitioner may file a motion in the trial court to reopen the first post-conviction petition only if .”
David Keen v. State of Tennessee - Dissent (Tenn. 2012).
Thomas Edward Clardy v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. 2024).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a)(3) — 10 cases
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Courtney Means v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025).
Larry C. Thompson, Jr. v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
Marcus DeAngelo Lee aka Marcus DeAngelo Jones v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2009).
Kenneth B. White v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a)(4) — 16 cases
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “After a post-conviction proceeding has been completed and relief has been denied, as in this case, a petitioner may move to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief under the limited circumstances set out in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). This statute…”
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Reid v. State, 197 S.W.3d 694 (Tenn. 2006). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-117. We do not agree with Reid, however, that a stay should apply to all claims.”
Curtis Wren v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a)(l) — 3 cases
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “After a post-conviction proceeding has been completed and relief has been denied, as in this case, a petitioner may move to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief under the limited circumstances set out in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). This statute…”
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Pervis Tyrone Payne v. State of Tennessee, 493 S.W.3d 478 (Tenn. 2016). “We decline to hold that Hall applies retroactively within the meaning of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117(a)(1). Coleman v. State and Van Tran v.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(a)(í) — 1 case
Pervis Tyrone Payne v. State of Tennessee, 493 S.W.3d 478 (Tenn. 2016). “We decline to hold that Hall applies retroactively within the meaning of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117(a)(1). Coleman v. State and Van Tran v.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(b) — 11 cases
State of Tennessee v. Tony Wolfe (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
Harold Wayne Nichols v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
Nicholas Todd Sutton v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020).
Abu-Ali Abdur'Rahman v. State of Tennessee - Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020).
Terry Lynn King v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2021).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(b)(1) — 2 cases
Nicholas Todd Sutton v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020).
Terry Lynn King v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2021).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(c) — 77 cases
Howell v. State, 151 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2004). “After a post-conviction proceeding has been completed and relief has been denied, as in this case, a petitioner may move to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief under the limited circumstances set out in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117 (2003). This statute…”
David Keen v. State of Tennessee, 398 S.W.3d 594 (Tenn. 2012). “test score did not amount to scientific evidence of actual innocence for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117 (a)(2) (2006) and because Coleman v.”
Stacy Ramsey v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Mack Transou (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
Michael L. McKillip v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(c)(2003) — 1 case
Ronald Dennis Crafton v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-117(e) — 1 case
Matthew Dixon v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015).
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.