Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303 (2026)

Probation - Eligibility - Terms

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 874,s 3, eff. 7/1/2024.

Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 760,s 1, eff. 7/1/2024.

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 409, Secs.s 17, s 20 eff. 7/1/2021.

Amended by 2016 Tenn. Acts, ch. 1021, s 1, eff. 1/1/2017.

Amended by 2016 Tenn. Acts, ch. 993, s 14, eff. 7/1/2016.

Amended by 2014 Tenn. Acts, ch. 902, Secs.s 3, s 5 eff. 7/1/2014.

Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 154, s 38, eff. 7/1/2013.

Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 33, s 1, eff. 3/20/2013.

Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 6; 1990, ch. 982, § 4; 1990, ch. 1030, § 32; 1991, ch. 458, § 2; 1992, ch. 1009, § 1; 1993, ch. 221, § 3; 1994, ch. 978, § 3; 1995, ch. 410, § 4; 1997 , ch. 211, § 6; 2000, ch. 740, § 1; 2000, ch. 947, § 8E; 2003 , ch. 408, § 1; 2005, ch. 353, § 7; 2005, ch. 433, § 1; 2005, ch. 455, § 1; 2005, ch. 482, § 7; 2006, ch. 973, § 2; 2007 , ch. 311, § 1; 2007 , ch. 528, § 1; 2009 , ch. 186, § 6; 2010 , ch. 981, §§ 4, 6; 2010 , ch. 1100, § 66; 2012 , ch. 575, § 1; 2012 , ch. 652, § 1; 2012 , ch. 727, § 44; 2012 , ch. 848, § 35.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,474 cases (149 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: State v. Martin, 146 S.W.3d 64 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004).
State v. Martin, 146 S.W.3d 64 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). · cites it 46× “June 15, 1995), this Court held that the 1989 Sentencing Reform Act superseded all former provisions and that a motor vehicle offender's felony sentence could be suspended pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) (1990). We, however, investigated this issue.”
State v. Langston, 708 S.W.2d 830 (Tenn. 1986). · cites it 26× “*831 The State argued in the trial court that T.C.A., § 40-35-303, rendered the defendant ineligible for consideration for probation because the total term of imprisonment resulting from the multiple convictions was twelve years and thus that the "sentence actually imposed" was…”
Grindstaff v. State, 297 S.W.3d 208 (Tenn. 2009). · cites it 6× “Further, to be eligible for community corrections under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-36-106(c), a defendant must first be eligible for probation under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-303. State v. Staten, 787 S.”
State of Tennessee v. Kevin E. Trent, 533 S.W.3d 282 (Tenn. 2017). · cites it 6× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303 (a), (b) (2010) (emphasis added).”
State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335 (Tenn. 2008). · cites it 4× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) (2006). No longer is any defendant entitled to a presumption that he or she is a favorable candidate for probation, however.”
State v. Hartley, 818 S.W.2d 370 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). · cites it 10× “T.C.A. § 40-35-303(a). Likewise, it has provided similar eligibility for community corrections sentencing alternatives.”
State v. Bottoms, 87 S.W.3d 95 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 8× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303 Sentencing Commission Cmts.”
State v. Goode, 956 S.W.2d 521 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a). A defendant with a total effective sentence in excess of eight years is eligible for probation if the individual sentences imposed for the convictions fall within the probation eligibility requirements.”
State v. Mathes, 114 S.W.3d 915 (Tenn. 2003). · cites it 12× “The record does not show that Ms. Mathes is failing to meet her family responsibilities.”
State v. Housewright, 982 S.W.2d 354 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(b). “A defendant shall be eligible for probation under the provisions of this chapter if the sentence actually imposed upon such defendant is eight (8) years or less.”
State v. Davis, 940 S.W.2d 558 (Tenn. 1997). · cites it 6× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(b) (1990) (Sentencing Commission Comments).”
State v. Pettus, 986 S.W.2d 540 (Tenn. 1999). · cites it 4× “For example, the Sentencing Commission Comments to Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) state that a court may allow “a defendant sentenced to community corrections to be placed on probation, including an offender originally ineligible for probation, after service of one (1) year on…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(A) — 5 cases
State of Tennessee v. Ebony Robinson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) — 477 cases
State v. Martin, 146 S.W.3d 64 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). “June 15, 1995), this Court held that the 1989 Sentencing Reform Act superseded all former provisions and that a motor vehicle offender's felony sentence could be suspended pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) (1990). We, however, investigated this issue.”
State v. Langston, 708 S.W.2d 830 (Tenn. 1986). “*831 The State argued in the trial court that T.C.A., § 40-35-303, rendered the defendant ineligible for consideration for probation because the total term of imprisonment resulting from the multiple convictions was twelve years and thus that the "sentence actually imposed" was…”
Grindstaff v. State, 297 S.W.3d 208 (Tenn. 2009). “Further, to be eligible for community corrections under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-36-106(c), a defendant must first be eligible for probation under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-303. State v. Staten, 787 S.”
State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335 (Tenn. 2008). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) (2006). No longer is any defendant entitled to a presumption that he or she is a favorable candidate for probation, however.”
State v. Bottoms, 87 S.W.3d 95 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303 Sentencing Commission Cmts.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a)(1)(A) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a)(2003) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. David Earl Nixon (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a)(2014) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Charles L. Hartley (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(b) — 430 cases
State v. Hartley, 818 S.W.2d 370 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). “T.C.A. § 40-35-303(a). Likewise, it has provided similar eligibility for community corrections sentencing alternatives.”
State v. Goode, 956 S.W.2d 521 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a). A defendant with a total effective sentence in excess of eight years is eligible for probation if the individual sentences imposed for the convictions fall within the probation eligibility requirements.”
State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1991).
State v. Housewright, 982 S.W.2d 354 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(b). “A defendant shall be eligible for probation under the provisions of this chapter if the sentence actually imposed upon such defendant is eight (8) years or less.”
State v. Fletcher, 805 S.W.2d 785 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(c) — 16 cases
State v. Pettus, 986 S.W.2d 540 (Tenn. 1999). “For example, the Sentencing Commission Comments to Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(a) state that a court may allow “a defendant sentenced to community corrections to be placed on probation, including an offender originally ineligible for probation, after service of one (1) year on…”
State v. Grissom, 956 S.W.2d 514 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
State v. Porter, 885 S.W.2d 93 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
State of Tennessee v. Sterling Panchikal (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(c)(1) — 17 cases
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Bolton (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014).
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Guy (Tenn. Crim. App. 2023).
In Re Kaitlyn D. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2024).
S.A.M.D. v. J.P.D. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(c)(2) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Guy (Tenn. Crim. App. 2023).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(c)(2)(A) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(c)(2)(B) — 2 cases
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d) — 19 cases
State v. Mathes, 114 S.W.3d 915 (Tenn. 2003). “The record does not show that Ms. Mathes is failing to meet her family responsibilities.”
State v. Smith, 735 S.W.2d 859 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987).
State v. Dowdy, 894 S.W.2d 301 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
State v. Robinson, 139 S.W.3d 661 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004).
State v. Burdin, 924 S.W.2d 82 (Tenn. 1996).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(1) — 2 cases
State v. Keena Mathes (Tenn. 2003).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(10) — 6 cases
State v. Davis, 940 S.W.2d 558 (Tenn. 1997). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(b) (1990) (Sentencing Commission Comments).”
State v. Mathes, 114 S.W.3d 915 (Tenn. 2003). “The record does not show that Ms. Mathes is failing to meet her family responsibilities.”
State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 883 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
State of Tennessee v. Janet Lynn Jared (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(10)(1990) — 1 case
State v. Davis, 940 S.W.2d 558 (Tenn. 1997). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-35-303(b) (1990) (Sentencing Commission Comments).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(11)(A) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Eric James Miller (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(3) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Tamela Scott (Tenn. Crim. App. 2008).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(4) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(6) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(7) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(8) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Nora Hernandez (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(9) — 12 cases
State v. Burdin, 924 S.W.2d 82 (Tenn. 1996).
State v. Davis, 191 S.W.3d 118 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006).
State v. Matheny, 884 S.W.2d 480 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
State v. Smith, 776 S.W.2d 141 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1989).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(d)(l) — 1 case
State v. Mathes, 114 S.W.3d 915 (Tenn. 2003). “The record does not show that Ms. Mathes is failing to meet her family responsibilities.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(e) — 6 cases
State of Tennessee v. Jonathan David Patterson, 564 S.W.3d 423 (Tenn. 2018).
State v. Moore, 814 S.W.2d 381 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991).
State of Tennessee v. Vidal Chad Bryant (Tenn. Crim. App. 2026).
State of Tennessee v. Marilda Evon Green (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(h) — 1 case
State v. Gray (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-303(i)(3) — 1 case
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.