Tennessee House Bill HB1111

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Refer: 3/17/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 8; Title 16; Title 37; Title 39; Title 40 and Title 41, relative to criminal sentencing.

Summary

HB1111 makes a narrow amendment to Tennessee’s criminal sentencing laws by changing a reporting requirement in Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-36-202(a)(8). Under the bill, the referenced program report must be made by February 1 of each year to the county legislative body, replacing the prior language in that subdivision. The bill does not create a new sentencing program or substantially revise sentencing policy; instead, it updates the administrative reporting deadline and recipient for an existing program. Because the bill is limited to a single statutory subdivision, its practical effect is primarily administrative. It affects the operation of programs governed by Title 40, Chapter 36, which concerns criminal sentencing and related supervision or alternative sentencing structures. County legislative bodies would receive the annual progress report on a set schedule, which may improve oversight and consistency in local review of these programs.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-36-202(a)(8) within the state’s criminal sentencing framework. Its legal impact is confined to changing the annual reporting requirement for the relevant programs, specifying that the report be submitted by February 1 each year to the county legislative body. No other statutes are altered, and the bill does not appear to change sentencing eligibility, penalties, or substantive criminal law.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee discussion or voting history provided for HB1111, so there is no direct evidence of support, opposition, or debate. Based on the text alone, the bill appears technical and noncontroversial, focused on administrative timing rather than policy change. The absence of amendments, votes, or transcript remarks suggests it was likely treated as a routine statutory cleanup or process update.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. If any concerns were to arise, they would likely center on the administrative burden of reporting, the usefulness of the February 1 deadline, or whether the county legislative body is the appropriate recipient for the report. However, none of these issues are reflected in the provided legislative history.