Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104 (2026)

Goals of this chapter - Use of funding - Appropriation of funding

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

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 409, s 14, eff. 7/1/2021.

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 409, s 13, eff. 7/1/2021.

Acts 1985 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 3, § 4.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases, 1987–2020 · leading case: State v. Taylor, 744 S.W.2d 919 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987).
State v. Taylor, 744 S.W.2d 919 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “§ 40-36-104(4). Furthermore, the defendant has demonstrated special need, namely, the treatment of his mental illness.”
State of Tennessee v. Mark Anthony McNack, 356 S.W.3d 906 (Tenn. 2011). · cites it 6× “2d at 126 (quoting Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104). A further objective was to alleviate the overcrowded conditions in the state prison system.”
State v. Sutton, 166 S.W.3d 686 (Tenn. 2005). · cites it 2× “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(4) (2003). Sentences which are solely performed in a community corrections program do not involve a period of confinement' and thus do not affect the overcrowded conditions in the state prison system.”
State v. Harkins, 811 S.W.2d 79 (Tenn. 1991). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 40-36-104. The Court of Criminal Appeals relied upon T.”
United States v. Wright, 607 F.3d 708 (11th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “1992) (quoting Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104). [5] In Illinois, conditional discharge is a discretionary alternative to imprisonment.”
State v. Byrd, 861 S.W.2d 377 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(4) (1990 Repl.”
State v. Grigsby, 957 S.W.2d 541 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(5); Taylor 744 S.”
State v. Kendrick, 10 S.W.3d 650 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “40-36-102(5) (1990); T.C.A. § 40-36-104(4) (1990); T.C.A. § 40-36-106(e)(1) (1990).”
State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 883 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(2) (1990). The purpose of restitution is not only to compensate the victim but also to punish and rehabilitate the guilty.”
State v. Cummings, 868 S.W.2d 661 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “” T.C.A. § 40-36-104. The Community Corrections Act has been misunderstood by many.”
State v. Millsaps, 920 S.W.2d 267 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104 (2) (1990). (2) Embezzlement over $200.”
State v. Meeks, 779 S.W.2d 394 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “” T.C.A. § 40-36-104(4) (Supp.1988) [Emphasis added].”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104(1): 4 cases
State of Tennessee v. Mark Anthony McNack, 356 S.W.3d 906 (Tenn. 2011). “2d at 126 (quoting Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104). A further objective was to alleviate the overcrowded conditions in the state prison system.”
State v. Haycraft (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).
State v. Boston (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
State v. Haynes (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104(2): 2 cases
State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 883 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(2) (1990). The purpose of restitution is not only to compensate the victim but also to punish and rehabilitate the guilty.”
State v. Anderson, 7 S.W.3d 100 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104(4): 7 cases
State v. Sutton, 166 S.W.3d 686 (Tenn. 2005). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(4) (2003). Sentences which are solely performed in a community corrections program do not involve a period of confinement' and thus do not affect the overcrowded conditions in the state prison system.”
State v. Byrd, 861 S.W.2d 377 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(4) (1990 Repl.”
State v. Kendrick, 10 S.W.3d 650 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). “40-36-102(5) (1990); T.C.A. § 40-36-104(4) (1990); T.C.A. § 40-36-106(e)(1) (1990).”
State v. Taylor, 744 S.W.2d 919 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). “§ 40-36-104(4). Furthermore, the defendant has demonstrated special need, namely, the treatment of his mental illness.”
State v. Meeks, 779 S.W.2d 394 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). “” T.C.A. § 40-36-104(4) (Supp.1988) [Emphasis added].”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104(5): 4 cases
State v. Taylor, 744 S.W.2d 919 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). “§ 40-36-104(4). Furthermore, the defendant has demonstrated special need, namely, the treatment of his mental illness.”
State v. Grigsby, 957 S.W.2d 541 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104(5); Taylor 744 S.”
State of Tennessee v. Mark Anthony McNack, 356 S.W.3d 906 (Tenn. 2011). “2d at 126 (quoting Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-36-104). A further objective was to alleviate the overcrowded conditions in the state prison system.”
State v. Huff, 760 S.W.2d 633 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-36-104(e): 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Kelly Ruth Osteen (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
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.