Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 (2026)

Registration requirement

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

Acts 2007, ch. 451, § 1; 2008, ch. 1164, § 12; 2010, ch. 1138, § 12.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2013–2024 · leading case: Thorpe v. Tennessee Gen. Assembly (M.D. Tenn. 2024).
Thorpe v. Tennessee Gen. Assembly (M.D. Tenn. 2024). · cites it 5× “Plaintiff also asserts that the inmate registration statute does not apply to him because he does not satisfy the requirements for registration under Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 (a) because his physical location of confinement does not create an establishment of a primary or…”
Calcano De Millan, 26 I. & N. Dec. 904 (9th Cir. 2017). “§ 23-3-430 (F) (2016); Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 (West 2016); Tex.”
State of Tennessee v. Milvern Hoss, Jr. (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “20, 2009); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-201 . Both sexual and violent sexual offenses mandate registration.”
State of Tennessee v. Rickey Driver (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “20, 2009); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-201 . Both sexual and violent sexual offenses mandate registration.”
Sykes v. Flynn (E.D. Tenn. 2021). · cites it 2× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 (requiring sex offender registration for offenses defined under § 40-39-202); and § 40-39-202(20)(A)(ii) (defining aggravated statutory rape as “sexual offense”).”
State of Tennessee v. Jim George Conaser a.k.a. Jimmy George Conaser (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “20, 2009); see Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 . The legislative findings and declarations in support of the Act’s registration requirements are found at Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-39-201(b) and include the “compelling and necessary public interest” in making information…”
State of Tennessee v. Antoine Tony Blugh (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “The trial court found that while Code section 40-39-212(b) identified a category of offender that must register under the Act, it believed that the definition of “sexual offender” in Code section 40-39-202(19) included an individual like Blugh who had a “qualifying conviction.”
Thorpe v. Tennessee Gen. Assembly (M.D. Tenn. 2024). “(3) Notwithstanding subdivisions (b)(1) and (2), an offender who is incarcerated in this state in a local, state or federal jail or a private penal institution and who has not registered pursuant to § 40-39-212(a) or any other law shall, by August 1, 2011, be required to report…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212(a) — 3 cases
Thorpe v. Tennessee Gen. Assembly (M.D. Tenn. 2024). “Plaintiff also asserts that the inmate registration statute does not apply to him because he does not satisfy the requirements for registration under Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 (a) because his physical location of confinement does not create an establishment of a primary or…”
Thorpe v. Tennessee Gen. Assembly (M.D. Tenn. 2024). “(3) Notwithstanding subdivisions (b)(1) and (2), an offender who is incarcerated in this state in a local, state or federal jail or a private penal institution and who has not registered pursuant to § 40-39-212(a) or any other law shall, by August 1, 2011, be required to report…”
State of Tennessee v. Jim George Conaser a.k.a. Jimmy George Conaser (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). “20, 2009); see Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212 . The legislative findings and declarations in support of the Act’s registration requirements are found at Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-39-201(b) and include the “compelling and necessary public interest” in making information…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-39-212(b) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Antoine Tony Blugh (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015). “The trial court found that while Code section 40-39-212(b) identified a category of offender that must register under the Act, it believed that the definition of “sexual offender” in Code section 40-39-202(19) included an individual like Blugh who had a “qualifying conviction.”
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.