Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418 (2026)

Maximum allowable fee - Reports

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) From January 1, 2011, until June 30, 2012:
- (1) An ignition interlock provider shall not charge more than seventy dollars ($70.00) for installing one (1) ignition interlock device; and
- (2) An ignition interlock provider shall not charge more than a total of one hundred dollars ($100) per month for leasing, purchasing, monitoring, removing and maintaining an ignition interlock device.

(b) By July 1, 2012, the department of safety shall establish, through rules and regulations promulgated in accordance with the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, compiled in title 4, chapter 5:
- (1) The maximum fees that may be charged for installing, leasing, purchasing, monitoring, removing and maintaining an ignition interlock device; and
- (2) Requirements that ensure that certified ignition interlock providers have the ability to provide devices to any resident in the state.

(c)
- (1) From January 1, 2011, until January 1, 2012, the department of safety in consultation with the treasurer shall conduct a study to determine:
  - (A) The amount of fee that should be established pursuant to § 55-10-413(a) in order to keep the electronic monitoring indigency fund solvent;
  - (B) The maximum fees to be charged pursuant to subsection (b), taking into consideration the goal of making the interlock device affordable to all offenders in this state; and
  - (C) The necessary requirements that should be established in order to ensure that providers have the ability to provide devices to any resident in the state.
- (2) The department of safety shall report the findings of its study conducted pursuant to subdivision (c)(1) to the judiciary committees of the senate and the house of representatives on or before January 1, 2012.

(d) Any licensed ignition interlock provider providing a functioning ignition interlock device to a person pursuant to this part shall report to the department of correction, or any other agency, department, program, group, private entity or association that is responsible for the supervision of a person who is ordered to drive only a motor vehicle with a functioning ignition interlock device installed on such vehicle as a condition of such person's probation, any evidence of such person's:
- (1) Altering, tampering with, bypassing, or removing a functioning ignition interlock device;
- (2) Failing to abide by the terms or conditions ordered by the court, including, but not limited to, failing to appear for scheduled monitoring visits; and
- (3) Attempting to start the motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

(e) The department of safety, beginning February 1, 2012, and thereafter annually, on or before February 1, shall report in writing to the judiciary committee of the senate and the criminal justice committee of the house of representatives the number of offenders who have, in the previous year, had installed on their motor vehicles functioning ignition interlock devices and whether the installation of each device was pursuant to the requirement set out in:
- (1) § 55-10-409(b)(2)(B);
- (2) § 55-10-409(b)(2)(D);
- (3) § 55-10-409(d)(2);
- (4) § 55-10-417(a)(1); or
- (5) § 55-10-417(k).

(f) For purposes of this section, "previous year" means from January 1 to December 31 of the year immediately preceding the February 1 reporting date.

(g) An ignition interlock provider shall charge an annual administrative fee of twelve dollars and fifty cents ($12.50) from each ignition interlock user. The proceeds of the fee shall be transmitted to the department of safety and shall be used to fund the administrative costs of implementing compliance-based ignition interlock use, pursuant to § 55-10-425.

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 64, s 117, eff. 3/29/2021.

Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 345, s 126, eff. 5/10/2019.

Amended by 2016 Tenn. Acts, ch. 888, s 5, eff. 7/1/2016.

Amended by 2016 Tenn. Acts, ch. 993, s 8, eff. 7/1/2016.

Amended by 2016 Tenn. Acts, ch. 876, s 16, eff. 7/1/2016.

Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 154, s 17, eff. 7/1/2013.

Acts 1998, ch. 1046, § 4; 2002, ch. 855, § 10.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases, 2001–2014 · leading case: State v. Humphreys, 70 S.W.3d 752 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Humphreys, 70 S.W.3d 752 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “Humphreys challenges both his conviction and sentence raising the following issues on appeal: (1) the trial court’s failure to suppress results of the BAC test; (2) the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury as to the offense of driving while impaired, Tenn. Code Ann. §…”

State of Tennessee v. Daniel Cleveland & Matthew Harville (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005). · cites it 6× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-603 (2)(A)(xii) and (xiii).”

State of Tennessee v. Stephen Lester Thomas (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 6× “Whether the court erred in refusing to charge defendant’s special jury instruction on Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418 (a) as a lesser- included offense of DUI.”

State of Tennessee v. Willie G. Lofton (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418 (1997). We respectfully disagree.”

State of Tennessee v. Evelyn Cotton Self (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “See T.C.A. § 55-10-418 (repealed 2003). At the conclusion of the sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days for her Class A misdemeanor offense.”

Kristen Cox Morrison v. Paul Allen (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418 (a). -3- §§ 55-10-401 and -418(a); State v.”

State of Tennessee v. Terry L. Tabor (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “For instructional purposes, we would note that a violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-10-418 (repl’d July 1, 2003) may be used to enhance a sentence for DUI.”

State of Tennessee v. Andrew Phillip Stover (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “” Under Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-10-418(d)(1) (1997) (repealed July 1, 2003), a first conviction for adult driving while impaired is a Class B misdemeanor.”

State of Tennessee v. Philip R. Haven (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “-6- Lesser Included Instruction In his fifth issue the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by determining that Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-10-418(a), dealing with adult driving while impaired, was not a lesser included offense of Tennessee Code Annotated section…”

State of Tennessee v. Robert G. Bean (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Motion to Instruct the Jury on Lesser-Included Offense The appellant next alleges that the trial court erred in refusing his request that it instruct the jury on adult driving while impaired, Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418 (1998), as a lesser- included offense of driving under the…”

State of Tennessee v. Frank L. Glavin (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). “iolated this -9- subsection (a), except as otherwise provided in subdivision (a)(5), the driver shall not be considered as having committed a criminal offense; however, the court shall revoke the license of the driver for a period of: (i) One (1) year, if the person does not…”

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Hembrook (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “er violated this subsection (a), except as otherwise provided in subdivision (a)(5), the driver shall not be considered as having committed a criminal offense; however, the court shall revoke the license of the driver for a period of: (i) One (1) year, if the person does not…”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418(a) — 2 cases

State v. Humphreys, 70 S.W.3d 752 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “Humphreys challenges both his conviction and sentence raising the following issues on appeal: (1) the trial court’s failure to suppress results of the BAC test; (2) the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury as to the offense of driving while impaired, Tenn. Code Ann. §…”

State of Tennessee v. Philip R. Haven (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002). “-6- Lesser Included Instruction In his fifth issue the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by determining that Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-10-418(a), dealing with adult driving while impaired, was not a lesser included offense of Tennessee Code Annotated section…”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-418(d)(1) — 1 case

State of Tennessee v. Andrew Phillip Stover (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). “” Under Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-10-418(d)(1) (1997) (repealed July 1, 2003), a first conviction for adult driving while impaired is a Class B misdemeanor.”

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.