Tennessee House Bill HB1024

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Refer: 2/10/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 40, Chapter 33, relative to civil forfeiture.

Summary

HB1024 amends Tennessee’s civil forfeiture laws by raising the burden of proof the state must meet in forfeiture proceedings. Under current law, the state must prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence; this bill changes that standard to clear and convincing evidence in two sections of Title 40, Chapter 33. The bill applies only to seizures occurring on or after July 1, 2025. In practical terms, the bill makes it harder for the government to permanently take property through civil forfeiture, requiring stronger evidence before property can be forfeited. The change affects law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and property owners whose cash, vehicles, or other property may be seized in connection with alleged criminal activity.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 40, Chapter 33, by replacing the evidentiary standard for civil forfeiture from a preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing evidence in Sections 40-33-210(a) and 40-33-213(a). This is a significant procedural change that increases the state’s burden in forfeiture cases and may reduce the number of successful forfeitures or increase the scrutiny required before property can be permanently taken. The law applies prospectively to seizures on or after July 1, 2025.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes, the available context suggests a neutral-to-reform-oriented posture rather than clear controversy in the record provided. The measure appears designed to strengthen property-owner protections and raise due-process safeguards in civil forfeiture cases. Because no transcripts or vote history are included, there is no documented evidence here of formal support or opposition from specific lawmakers or committees.

Contention

The main point of contention inherent in the bill is the higher evidentiary threshold for civil forfeiture. Supporters would likely view the change as a due-process protection that helps prevent unjust deprivation of property, while opponents may argue it makes it more difficult for law enforcement to disrupt criminal enterprises and recover assets tied to illegal conduct. The affected parties are primarily property owners, law enforcement agencies, and prosecutors handling forfeiture actions under Tennessee’s civil asset forfeiture statutes.