Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-405 (2026)

Court order if probable that results would have resulted in a more favorable verdict or sentence

✓ current as of May 2026

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

After notice to the prosecution and an opportunity to respond, the court may order fingerprint analysis if the court finds that:

(1) A reasonable probability exists that analysis of the evidence will produce fingerprint results that would have rendered the petitioner's verdict or sentence more favorable if the results had been available at the proceeding leading to the judgment of conviction;

(2) The evidence is still in existence and in such a condition that fingerprint analysis may be conducted;

(3) The evidence was not previously subjected to fingerprint analysis, was not subjected to the analysis that is now requested which could resolve an issue not resolved by previous analysis, or was previously subjected to analysis and the person making the motion under this part requests analysis that uses a new method or technology that is substantially more probative than the prior analysis; and

(4) The application for analysis is made for the purpose of demonstrating innocence and not to unreasonably delay the execution of sentence or administration of justice.

Added by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 355, s 2, eff. 7/1/2021.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Crawford v. State, 151 S.W.3d 179 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Crawford v. State, 151 S.W.3d 179 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-405 states: After notice to the prosecution and an opportunity to respond, the court may order DNA analysis if it finds that: (1) A reasonable probability exists that analysis of the evidence will produce DNA results which would have…”

Oscar Smith v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). · cites it 18× “§ 40-30-404(1) (the court shall order analysis if “[a] reasonable probability exists that the petitioner would not have been prosecuted or convicted if exculpatory results had been obtained through fingerprint analysis”) with T.C.A. § 40-30-405(1) (the court may order analysis…”

Tony Von Carruthers v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026). · cites it 7× “T.C.A. § 40-30-405. A petitioner must satisfy all four elements of section 404 or section 405 before the trial court will order fingerprint analysis.”

Rhynuia L. Barnes v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “at § 40-30-404; cf T.C.A. § 40-30-405. A petitioner must satisfy all four elements of section 404 or section 405 before the trial court will order fingerprint analysis.”

Henry Rankins v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-405 (emphasis added) (recodified at Tenn.”

State of Tennessee v. Nakomis Jones (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “Compare T.C.A. § 40-30-405(3) (“After notice to the prosecution and an opportunity to respond, the court may order fingerprint analysis if the court finds that: (3) The evidence was not previously subjected to fingerprint analysis, was not subjected to the analysis that is now…”

Kenneth Brown v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-405 . The Fingerprint Analysis Act, other than substituting the word fingerprint for DNA, is identical to the test in the Post-Conviction DNA Analysis Act, which provides for mandatory testing in certain cases and discretionary testing in others.”

Marcus Nixon v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-405 is similar, but applies when the results would have resulted in a more favorable verdict or sentence.”

Willie Tom Ensley v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Further, Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-405 provides that if DNA analysis would have produced a more favorable verdict or a more favorable sentence, trial courts "may" order it when the petitioner satisfies the same conditions.”

Rhynuia L. Barnes v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “§ 40-30-405. In the case under submission, the petitioner cited to the mandatory provision of section 404 in his petition, and the post-conviction court limited its analysis to the terms of that section.”

Danny R. King v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). “§ 40-30-405. The Act also states that “[t]he court may, at any time during proceedings instituted under this part, appoint counsel for an indigent petitioner.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-405(1) — 4 cases

Oscar Smith v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). “§ 40-30-404(1) (the court shall order analysis if “[a] reasonable probability exists that the petitioner would not have been prosecuted or convicted if exculpatory results had been obtained through fingerprint analysis”) with T.C.A. § 40-30-405(1) (the court may order analysis…”

Rhynuia L. Barnes v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). “at § 40-30-404; cf T.C.A. § 40-30-405. A petitioner must satisfy all four elements of section 404 or section 405 before the trial court will order fingerprint analysis.”

Tony Von Carruthers v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026). “T.C.A. § 40-30-405. A petitioner must satisfy all four elements of section 404 or section 405 before the trial court will order fingerprint analysis.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-405(2) — 1 case

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-405(3) — 2 cases

State of Tennessee v. Nakomis Jones (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). “Compare T.C.A. § 40-30-405(3) (“After notice to the prosecution and an opportunity to respond, the court may order fingerprint analysis if the court finds that: (3) The evidence was not previously subjected to fingerprint analysis, was not subjected to the analysis that is now…”

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.