Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-303 (2026)
Petition requesting analysis
✓ current as of May 2026
Notwithstanding part 1 of this chapter, or any other provision of law governing post-conviction relief to the contrary, a person convicted of and sentenced for the commission of first degree murder, second degree murder, aggravated rape, rape, aggravated sexual battery or rape of a child, the attempted commission of any of these offenses, any lesser included offense of these offenses, or, at the direction of the trial judge, any other offense, may at any time, file a petition requesting the forensic DNA analysis of any evidence that is in the possession or control of the prosecution, law enforcement, laboratory, or court, and that is related to the investigation or prosecution that resulted in the judgment of conviction and that may contain biological evidence.
Acts 2001, ch. 444, § 1; T.C.A. § 40-30-403.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 100
cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1999–2026 · leading case: Powers v. State, 343 S.W.3d 36 (Tenn. 2011).
Powers v. State, 343 S.W.3d 36 (Tenn. 2011). “*48 Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-303. In consequence, there is no statutory time limit on requests for testing and “the right to DNA analysis under the Act may not be waived by implication.”
Griffin v. State, 182 S.W.3d 795 (Tenn. 2006). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-303 (2003 & Supp.”
Wiley v. State, 183 S.W.3d 317 (Tenn. 2006). “§ 40-30-303 (2003). A petition for DNA analysis may be granted where the court finds: (1) A reasonable probability exists that analysis of the evidence will produce DNA results which would have rendered the petitioner’s verdict or sentence more favorable if the results had been…”
Bondurant v. State, 208 S.W.3d 424 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-303. 5 See also Griffin v.”
Jackson v. State, 139 A.3d 976 (Md. 2016). “Codified Laws § 23 -5B-1 (2016); Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-303 (2016); Tex.Code Crim.”
State v. Dupigney, 988 A.2d 851 (Conn. 2010). “Codified Laws § 1166 (2009); Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-30-303 through 40-30-305 (2006); Tex.”
Alley v. Key, 431 F. Supp. 2d 790 (W.D. Tenn. 2006). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-30-303. Therefore, Plaintiff contends, there is no limitations period for his suit.”
William Hackworth v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). “avated rape, rape, aggravated sexual battery or rape of a child, the attempted commission of any of these offenses, any lesser included offense of these offenses, or at the direction of the trial judge, any other offense, may at any time, file a petition requesting the forensic…”
William Heath v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-303 . A post-conviction court must order DNA testing when the following requirements are met: (1) A reasonable probability exists that the petitioner would not have been prosecuted or convicted if exculpatory results had been obtained through DNA…”
State of Tennessee v. Courtney Watkins (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “-5- Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-303 (emphasis added).”
Eric Tolley v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “” T.C.A. § 40-30-303 (2003). Because the Act allows for a request of DNA analysis “at any time,” this language overrides any general statute of limitation, regardless of whether a request for DNA testing was made at trial.”
State of Tennessee v. Ricky Lee Nelson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014). “T.C.A. § 40-30-303. The Act further provides that: After notice to the prosecution and an opportunity to respond, the court shall order DNA analysis if it finds that: (1) A reasonable probability exists that the petitioner would not have been prosecuted or convicted if…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-303(1) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Ricky Lee Nelson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014). “T.C.A. § 40-30-303. The Act further provides that: After notice to the prosecution and an opportunity to respond, the court shall order DNA analysis if it finds that: (1) A reasonable probability exists that the petitioner would not have been prosecuted or convicted if…”
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.