Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (2024)
Multiple convictions
✓ Justia copy: laws through about 2024 (2025 and 2026 sessions missing)
- (a) If a defendant is convicted of more than one (1) criminal offense, the court shall order sentences to run consecutively or concurrently as provided by the criteria in this section.
- (b) The court may order sentences to run consecutively if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that:
- (1) The defendant is a professional criminal who has knowingly devoted the defendant's life to criminal acts as a major source of livelihood;
- (2) The defendant is an offender whose record of criminal activity is extensive;
- (3) The defendant is a dangerous mentally abnormal person so declared by a competent psychiatrist who concludes as a result of an investigation prior to sentencing that the defendant's criminal conduct has been characterized by a pattern of repetitive or compulsive behavior with heedless indifference to consequences;
- (4) The defendant is a dangerous offender whose behavior indicates little or no regard for human life and no hesitation about committing a crime in which the risk to human life is high;
- (5) The defendant is convicted of two (2) or more statutory offenses involving sexual abuse of a minor with consideration of the aggravating circumstances arising from the relationship between the defendant and victim or victims, the time span of defendant's undetected sexual activity, the nature and scope of the sexual acts and the extent of the residual, physical and mental damage to the victim or victims;
- (6) The defendant is sentenced for an offense committed while on probation;
- (7) The defendant is sentenced for criminal contempt;
- (8) The defendant is convicted of two (2) or more offenses involving sexual exploitation of an elderly or vulnerable adult with consideration of the aggravating circumstances arising from the relationship between the defendant and victim, the nature and scope of the sexual acts, and the extent of the physical and mental damage to the victim;
- (9) The defendant was incarcerated at the time of the offense and is convicted of an offense enumerated in § 39-16-202(a)(2); or
- (10) The defendant is convicted of two (2) or more offenses involving more than one (1) victim, irrespective of whether the multiple offenses were part of a single criminal episode, and the court finds that a separate consecutive sentence for each offense is in the interest of justice.
- (c) The finding concerning the imposition of consecutive or concurrent sentences is appealable by either party.
- (d) Sentences shall be ordered to run concurrently if the criteria noted in subsection (b) are not met, unless consecutive sentences are specifically required by statute or the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Amended by 2023 Tenn. Acts, ch. 481, s 1, eff. 7/1/2023.
Amended by 2023 Tenn. Acts, ch. 347, s 2, eff. 7/1/2023.
Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 500, s 15, eff. 10/1/2021.
Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 6; 1990, ch. 980, §§ 31, 32.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,972
cases (210 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: State v. Imfeld, 70 S.W.3d 698 (Tenn. 2002).
State v. Imfeld, 70 S.W.3d 698 (Tenn. 2002). “Every offender convicted of two or more dangerous crimes is not a dangerous offender subject to consecutive sentences; consequently, the provisions of Section 40-35-115 cannot be read in isolation from the other provisions of the Act.”
State v. Lane, 3 S.W.3d 456 (Tenn. 1999). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 . The Act also includes general principles of sentencing which trial courts must consider in determining the length of a defendant’s sentence.”
State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933 (Tenn. 1995). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115. The Act did not invalidate the decisions in Gray and Taylor .”
State v. Pettus, 986 S.W.2d 540 (Tenn. 1999). “However, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals on the sentencing issue because the record supports the imposition of consecutive sentences under Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (b)(2)(Supp.l994).”
State v. Banks, 271 S.W.3d 90 (Tenn. 2008). “Based on our de novo review of the record, we have concluded, like the Court of Criminal Appeals, that the trial court, in accordance with Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115, did not err by ordering Mr.”
State of Tennessee v. James Allen Pollard, 432 S.W.3d 851 (Tenn. 2013). “Historical Background The Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1982 (the “1982 Act”) completely overhauled the state’s sentencing structure. See Act of Apr.”
State of Tennessee v. James Hawkins, 519 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2017). “- 58 - T.C.A. § 40-35-115(b). These criteria are stated in the alternative; therefore, only one need exist to support the appropriateness of consecutive sentencing.”
State v. Robinson, 146 S.W.3d 469 (Tenn. 2004). “A trial court may impose consecutive sentencing upon a determination that one or more of the criteria set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-115(b) exist. This section permits the trial court to impose consecutive sentences if the court finds, among other criteria,…”
State of Tennessee v. Allen Doane, 393 S.W.3d 721 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “" Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 40-35-115(b)(1) — (4), Sentencing Comm'n Cmts.”
State of Tennessee v. Kevin Anthony Dickson, Jr., 413 S.W.3d 735 (Tenn. 2013). “He also determined under Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (2010) that the sentences for attempted first degree murder should run consecutively rather than concurrently, because the Defendant had an extensive criminal record under Tenn.”
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (b)(4) (1997) (describing a “dangerous offender” as one “whose behavior indicates little or no regard for human life, and no hesitation about committing a crime in which the risk to human life is high”).”
State v. Allen, 259 S.W.3d 671 (Tenn. 2008). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (2006). 6 Additionally, Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 provides as follows: (c) Concurrent or Consecutive Sentences.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(1): 12 cases
State v. Michael Holmes, 995 S.W.2d 135 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).
State of Tennessee v. Monroe James Dodson, Jr., No. M2010-01615-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. July 12, 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Chimayne Lorreizn Talley, No. M2018-00304-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Apr. 24, 2019).
State of Tennessee v. Mark A. Vestal, No. E2012-00913-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 7, 2013).
State of Tennessee v. June LeeAnn Franks, No. M2006-02157-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. June 28, 2007).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(13): 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Stephano L. Weilacker, No. M2010-00497-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 3, 2011).
State of Tennessee v. Lavon Denise Ransom, No. M2009-00150-C-CA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 25, 2010).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(14): 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. George Coleman, No. W2015-00450-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. May 27, 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Aaron Reinsburg, No. W2014-02436-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. July 22, 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Rafael Moreno, Jr., No. M2016-01305-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. May 30, 2017).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(2): 23 cases
State v. Jones, 953 S.W.2d 695 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
State of Tennessee v. Joseph Wayne Graves, No. W2007-02552-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 13, 2009).
State of Tennessee v. Jeremy Lee Fleming, No. M2019-00573-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 8, 2021).
State of Tennessee v. David Wayne Felts, No. M2013-00939-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. July 8, 2014).
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Allen Stringer, No. E2017-01614-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 27, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(3): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Alan Ayotte, No. M2024-01529-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 17, 2025).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(4): 39 cases
State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933 (Tenn. 1995). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115. The Act did not invalidate the decisions in Gray and Taylor .”
State v. Price, 46 S.W.3d 785 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
State v. Howell, 34 S.W.3d 484 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
State of Tennessee v. Cephus D. Spicer, No. M2015-01739-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Nov. 1, 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Caleb Lawrence Mullins, No. W2013-02691-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 22, 2014).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(5): 12 cases
State v. Osborne, 251 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
State v. Hunter, 926 S.W.2d 744 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
State of Tennessee v. Sandy L. Binkley, No. M2010-00486-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 23, 2011).
State of Tennessee v. Terry Neal, No. M2011-00824-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. July 31, 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Dallas Jay Stewart, No. M2011-01994-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. July 22, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(5)(b): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Roger Glenn Dile, No. M2008-00389-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 24, 2009).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(6): 9 cases
State of Tennessee v. Sebastian A. Stevens, No. M2019-01036-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 21, 2020).
State of Tennessee v. Tycorrian M. Taylor, No. E2013-02875-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 20, 2014).
James E. Kenner v. State of Tennessee, No. M2014-00613-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. June 5, 2015).
State of Tennessee v. Decornick Moore, No. W2015-00169-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 26, 2015).
State of Tennessee v. Gary Robert Buchanan, No. M2016-01872-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 7, 2017).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(8): 1 case
State v. Cross, 362 S.W.3d 512 (Tenn. 2012).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(9): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Lavon Denise Ransom, No. M2009-00150-C-CA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 25, 2010).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(C): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Scottie Itzol-Deleon, No. M2014-02380-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 28, 2016).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(a): 90 cases
Lisa E. Burris v. James Morton Burris, 512 S.W.3d 239 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016).
Kisha Dean Trezevant v. Stanley H. Trezevant, III, 568 S.W.3d 595 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Moore, 942 S.W.2d 570 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
Edith Wenczl Simpkins v. Otto Kent Simpkins, 374 S.W.3d 413 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012).
State v. Meade, 942 S.W.2d 561 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(a)(2): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Thomas L. Agnew, No. E2011-02720-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 26, 2012).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(a)(4): 4 cases
State of Tennessee v. Willis Ayers, No. W2006-02441-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. May 6, 2008).
State of Tennessee v. Tavarski Childress, No. W2004-02545-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 27, 2006).
State of Tennessee v. Recardo Dale, No. W2003-02391-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Jan. 10, 2005).
State of Tennessee v. Larry Allen Whited, No. M2005-00167-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 7, 2006).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(a)(5): 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. David Earl Offutt, No. M2010-01296-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. June 30, 2011).
State of Tennessee v. Floyd Earl Rayner, III, No. M2001-00971-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. June 19, 2002).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(a)(6): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Rodney J. Campbell, No. M2004-02088-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 7, 2005).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(a)(b)(5): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Albert R. Neese, No. M2005-00752-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 15, 2006).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b): 852 cases
State of Tennessee v. James Hawkins, 519 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2017). “- 58 - T.C.A. § 40-35-115(b). These criteria are stated in the alternative; therefore, only one need exist to support the appropriateness of consecutive sentencing.”
State v. Banks, 271 S.W.3d 90 (Tenn. 2008). “Based on our de novo review of the record, we have concluded, like the Court of Criminal Appeals, that the trial court, in accordance with Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115, did not err by ordering Mr.”
State v. Robinson, 146 S.W.3d 469 (Tenn. 2004). “A trial court may impose consecutive sentencing upon a determination that one or more of the criteria set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-115(b) exist. This section permits the trial court to impose consecutive sentences if the court finds, among other criteria,…”
State v. Imfeld, 70 S.W.3d 698 (Tenn. 2002). “Every offender convicted of two or more dangerous crimes is not a dangerous offender subject to consecutive sentences; consequently, the provisions of Section 40-35-115 cannot be read in isolation from the other provisions of the Act.”
State of Tennessee v. James Allen Pollard, 432 S.W.3d 851 (Tenn. 2013). “Historical Background The Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1982 (the “1982 Act”) completely overhauled the state’s sentencing structure. See Act of Apr.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(1): 131 cases
State v. Thornton, 10 S.W.3d 229 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999).
State v. Little, 854 S.W.2d 643 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992).
State v. Samuels, 44 S.W.3d 489 (Tenn. 2001).
State v. Desirey, 909 S.W.2d 20 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
State v. Samuel, 243 S.W.3d 592 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(1)(2): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Glen Sewell, No. W2014-00984-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Apr. 29, 2015).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(10): 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Alan Ayotte, No. M2024-01529-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 17, 2025).
State of Tennessee v. Robin Lee Teague (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(1990): 1 case
State v. Kaufmann, No. 03C01-9607-CC-00260 (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 22, 1997).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(2): 316 cases
State v. Pettus, 986 S.W.2d 540 (Tenn. 1999). “However, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals on the sentencing issue because the record supports the imposition of consecutive sentences under Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (b)(2)(Supp.l994).”
State of Tennessee v. Kevin Anthony Dickson, Jr., 413 S.W.3d 735 (Tenn. 2013). “He also determined under Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (2010) that the sentences for attempted first degree murder should run consecutively rather than concurrently, because the Defendant had an extensive criminal record under Tenn.”
State of Tennessee v. Michael Lebron Branham, 501 S.W.3d 577 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016).
State v. Palmer, 10 S.W.3d 638 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999).
State v. Allen, 259 S.W.3d 671 (Tenn. 2008). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (2006). 6 Additionally, Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 provides as follows: (c) Concurrent or Consecutive Sentences.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(2)(6): 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Jody Candace Seaman, No. W2012-01755-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. July 26, 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Travis Lamonte Steed, No. W2014-00146-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. May 14, 2015).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(3): 6 cases
State v. Hallock, 875 S.W.2d 285 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993).
State of Tennessee v. Randy Antonio Rice, No. W2010-00146-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 9, 2011).
State of Tennessee v. William E. Blake, Jr., No. E2012-02268-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 6, 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Joseph Lantrip, No. W2001-01552-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 25, 2002).
State of Tennessee v. Dantis Lakka-Lako, No. M2023-00080-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 12, 2023).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(4): 362 cases
State v. Imfeld, 70 S.W.3d 698 (Tenn. 2002). “Every offender convicted of two or more dangerous crimes is not a dangerous offender subject to consecutive sentences; consequently, the provisions of Section 40-35-115 cannot be read in isolation from the other provisions of the Act.”
State of Tennessee v. James Allen Pollard, 432 S.W.3d 851 (Tenn. 2013). “Historical Background The Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1982 (the “1982 Act”) completely overhauled the state’s sentencing structure. See Act of Apr.”
State v. Robinson, 146 S.W.3d 469 (Tenn. 2004). “A trial court may impose consecutive sentencing upon a determination that one or more of the criteria set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-115(b) exist. This section permits the trial court to impose consecutive sentences if the court finds, among other criteria,…”
State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933 (Tenn. 1995). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115. The Act did not invalidate the decisions in Gray and Taylor .”
State v. Lane, 3 S.W.3d 456 (Tenn. 1999). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 . The Act also includes general principles of sentencing which trial courts must consider in determining the length of a defendant’s sentence.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(4)(6): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Elvin Portillo, No. M2020-01179-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 18, 2021).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(5): 168 cases
State of Tennessee v. Allen Doane, 393 S.W.3d 721 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). “" Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 40-35-115(b)(1) — (4), Sentencing Comm'n Cmts.”
State v. Lane, 3 S.W.3d 456 (Tenn. 1999). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 . The Act also includes general principles of sentencing which trial courts must consider in determining the length of a defendant’s sentence.”
State v. Schiefelbein, 230 S.W.3d 88 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
State v. Woodcock, 922 S.W.2d 904 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
State v. Osborne, 251 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(5)(1990): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Jay Dee Garrity, No. M2010-02592-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 11, 2012).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(5)(1997): 1 case
State v. Lane, 3 S.W.3d 456 (Tenn. 1999). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 . The Act also includes general principles of sentencing which trial courts must consider in determining the length of a defendant’s sentence.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(6): 100 cases
State v. Pettus, 986 S.W.2d 540 (Tenn. 1999). “However, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals on the sentencing issue because the record supports the imposition of consecutive sentences under Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115 (b)(2)(Supp.l994).”
State v. Hester, 324 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010).
State v. Franklin, 919 S.W.2d 362 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
State v. Smith, 891 S.W.2d 922 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
State v. Banks, 271 S.W.3d 90 (Tenn. 2008). “Based on our de novo review of the record, we have concluded, like the Court of Criminal Appeals, that the trial court, in accordance with Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-115, did not err by ordering Mr.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(7): 5 cases
Kisha Dean Trezevant v. Stanley H. Trezevant, III, 568 S.W.3d 595 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Turner, 914 S.W.2d 951 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995).
State v. Wood, 91 S.W.3d 769 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002).
State of Tennessee v. Myron Pierre Walton, No. E2014-01957-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 21, 2015).
In re A.J., No. M2014-02287-COA-R3-JV, 2015 WL 6438671 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2015).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(8): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Alan Ayotte, No. M2024-01529-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 17, 2025).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(b)(l): 6 cases
State v. Samuel, 243 S.W.3d 592 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
State v. Adams, 45 S.W.3d 46 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
State v. Scarborough, 300 S.W.3d 717 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2009).
State v. Jones, 953 S.W.2d 695 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996).
State v. Bell, 832 S.W.2d 583 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(c): 3 cases
Edith Wenczl Simpkins v. Otto Kent Simpkins, 374 S.W.3d 413 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Kenneth Gaines, No. W2016-01262-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Feb. 23, 2017).
Pete C. Jenkins v. State of Tennessee, No. M2011-02240-CCA-R3-HC (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 1, 2012).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(d): 14 cases
State v. Schiefelbein, 230 S.W.3d 88 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
State of Tennessee v. Alexis Mason, No. W2010-02321-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 27, 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Taiwan S. Hoosier, No. M2012-00536-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 26, 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Randy Parham, No. W2011-01276-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 26, 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Daniel G. Hampton, No. E2011-01836-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 17, 2012).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(d)(4): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Martez Dante Smith, No. E2017-02045-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Nov. 14, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(d)(6): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Farrow, No. W2014-02310-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 28, 2015).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115(l): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Bruce Elliot, 366 S.W.3d 139 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
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.