Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (2026)
Prior convictions - Driving record as evidence
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) Except as provided in subdivision (c)(1), for the sole purpose of enhancing the punishment for a violation a person who is convicted of a violation of § 55-10-401 shall not be considered a repeat or multiple offender and subject to the penalties prescribed in this part if ten (10) or more years have elapsed between the date of the present violation and the date of any immediately preceding violation of § 55-10-401 that resulted in a conviction for such offense. If, however, the date of a person's violation of § 55-10-401 is within ten (10) years of the date of the present violation, then the person shall be considered a multiple offender and is subject to the penalties imposed upon multiple offenders by this part. If a person is considered a multiple offender under this part, then every violation of § 55-10-401 that resulted in a conviction for such offense occurring within ten (10) years of the date of the immediately preceding violation shall be considered in determining the number of prior offenses. However, a violation occurring more than twenty (20) years from the date of the instant violation shall never be considered a prior offense for that purpose.
- (b) If a person is convicted of a violation of § 55-10-401 in this state, for purposes of determining if the person is a multiple offender, the state may use a conviction for an offense committed in another state that would constitute the offense of driving under the influence of an intoxicant under § 55-10-401, boating under the influence under § 69-9-217(a), vehicular assault under § 39-13-106, aggravated vehicular assault under § 39-13-115, vehicular homicide under § 39-13-213(a)(2), or aggravated vehicular homicide under § 39-13-218, if committed in this state. If an offense in a jurisdiction other than this state is not identified as one (1) of the offenses named in this subsection (b), it shall be considered a prior conviction if the elements of the offense are the same as the elements of the comparable offense in this state.
- (c)
- (1) For purposes of determining if a person convicted of a violation of § 55-10-401 is a multiple offender, a prior conviction for vehicular assault under § 39-13-106, aggravated vehicular assault under § 39-13-115, vehicular homicide under § 39-13-213(a)(2), or aggravated vehicular homicide under § 39-13-218 shall be treated the same as a prior conviction for driving under the influence of an intoxicant under § 55-10-401; provided, the person was convicted of the prior offense at any time before committing the present violation of § 55-10-401, regardless of whether the prior offense occurred within ten (10) years of the date of the present violation.
- (2) For purposes of determining if a person convicted of § 55-10-401 is a repeat or multiple offender, a prior conviction for boating under the influence under § 69-9-217(a) must be treated the same as a prior conviction for driving under the influence of an intoxicant under § 55-10-401 if the person was convicted of the prior offense within ten (10) years of the date of the present violation.
- (d) A certified computer printout of the official driver record maintained by the department of safety constitutes prima facie evidence of a prior conviction of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, vehicular assault, aggravated vehicular assault, vehicular homicide, or aggravated vehicular homicide. Following indictment by a grand jury, the defendant shall be given a copy of the department of safety printout at the time of arraignment. If the charge is by warrant, the defendant is entitled to a copy of the department printout at the defendant's first appearance in court or at least fourteen (14) days prior to a trial on the merits. If the defendant alleges error in the driving record in a written motion, the court may require that a certified copy of the judgment be provided for inspection by the court as to validity prior to the introduction of the department printout into evidence.
Amended by 2022 Tenn. Acts, ch. 910, Secs.s3, s4, s5 eff. 7/1/2022.
Amended by 2022 Tenn. Acts, ch. 910, s 2, eff. 7/1/2022.
Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 486, s 10, eff. 7/1/2019.
Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 486, s 9, eff. 7/1/2019.
Amended by 2016 Tenn. Acts, ch. 876, s 3, eff. 7/1/2016.
Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 154, s 5, eff. 7/1/2013.
Acts 1969, ch. 292, § 1; 1970, ch. 427, § 2; T.C.A., § 59-1044; Acts 1988, ch. 863, § 3.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: State v. Cottrell, 868 S.W.2d 673 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992).
State v. Cottrell, 868 S.W.2d 673 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (5). The statute under which the defendant was convicted provides in part as follows: Any person who drives any motor vehicle in the state of Tennessee shall be deemed to have given his or her consent to a test for the purpose of determining the…”
State v. Turner, 913 S.W.2d 158 (Tenn. 1995). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-10-405(5) (1993 Repl.”
State v. Johnson, 717 S.W.2d 298 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1986). “*303 The term “test” as used in this section of our code is defined in TCA § 55-10-405(5) as follows: Any chemical test designed to determine the alcoholic or drug content of the blood.”
State v. Bowery, 189 S.W.3d 240 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). “drives any motor vehicle in the state is deemed to have given consent to a test for the purpose of determining the alcoholic or drug content of that person’s blood; provided, that such test is administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer having reasonable grounds…”
State v. Jerry Huskins, 989 S.W.2d 735 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). “drives any motor vehicle in this state is deemed to have given consent to a test for the purpose of determining the alcoholic or drug content of that person’s blood; provided that, such test is administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer having reasonable grounds…”
State v. Ridge, 667 S.W.2d 502 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1982). “te of Tennessee shall be deemed to have given his or her consent to a test for the purpose of determining the alcoholic or drug content of his or her blood; provided that such test is administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer having reasonable grounds to believe…”
State of Tennessee v. Richard Faulk (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (d). The statute contains “shall” in the second sentence and continues to require the Defendant to receive a copy of the department of safety printout at the time of arraignment.”
State of Tennessee v. Benjamin Tate Brown (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). “White, 496 2 The Defendant conceded during oral argument that pursuant Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (a), which became effective approximately six months before his arrest, it is the ten-year time frame between offenses, rather than between convictions, that controls whether a…”
State of Tennessee v. Gil Jackson Groseclose (Tenn. Crim. App. 2020). “at Knoxville, May 11, 2001); see Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (a). Nevertheless, the State must prove the prior conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State of Tennessee v. Cristobal J. Quintana II (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). “Code section 55-10-405(a) further provides, -4- Except as provided in subdivision (c)(1), for the sole purpose of enhancing the punishment for a violation a person who is convicted of a violation of § 55-10-401 shall not be considered a repeat or multiple offender and subject to…”
State of Tennessee v. Robert S. Neal (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “In any event, Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (5) establishes that the test does not have to show the effect of alcohol or drugs on the individual, i.”
State v. Mark Scisney (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 55-10-405 - 406. Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-50-408 is a “per se” driving und er the influe nce statu te similar to the statutes in New Jersey, Kentucky, and Delaware.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405(5) — 5 cases
State v. Cottrell, 868 S.W.2d 673 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (5). The statute under which the defendant was convicted provides in part as follows: Any person who drives any motor vehicle in the state of Tennessee shall be deemed to have given his or her consent to a test for the purpose of determining the…”
State v. Turner, 913 S.W.2d 158 (Tenn. 1995). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-10-405(5) (1993 Repl.”
State v. Johnson, 717 S.W.2d 298 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1986). “*303 The term “test” as used in this section of our code is defined in TCA § 55-10-405(5) as follows: Any chemical test designed to determine the alcoholic or drug content of the blood.”
State of Tennessee v. Robert S. Neal (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “In any event, Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (5) establishes that the test does not have to show the effect of alcohol or drugs on the individual, i.”
State v. Mark Scisney (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 55-10-405 - 406. Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-50-408 is a “per se” driving und er the influe nce statu te similar to the statutes in New Jersey, Kentucky, and Delaware.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405(a) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Cristobal J. Quintana II (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). “Code section 55-10-405(a) further provides, -4- Except as provided in subdivision (c)(1), for the sole purpose of enhancing the punishment for a violation a person who is convicted of a violation of § 55-10-401 shall not be considered a repeat or multiple offender and subject to…”
State of Tennessee v. Benjamin Tate Brown (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). “White, 496 2 The Defendant conceded during oral argument that pursuant Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (a), which became effective approximately six months before his arrest, it is the ten-year time frame between offenses, rather than between convictions, that controls whether a…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405(d) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Richard Faulk (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-405 (d). The statute contains “shall” in the second sentence and continues to require the Defendant to receive a copy of the department of safety printout at the time of arraignment.”
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.