Tennessee House Bill HB1394

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25
• Refer: 2/12/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 8; Title 10, Chapter 7, Part 5 and Title 38, Chapter 6, relative to the Tennessee bureau of investigation.

Summary

HB1394 requires the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) to keep copies of all original investigative materials in the case file for each investigation it conducts. The bill defines “investigative materials” broadly to include audio and video files, recordings, transcripts, documents, reports, paperwork, and other print or digital media generated by the bureau and related to an investigation. The measure is a records-retention and case-file preservation bill focused on ensuring that original investigative materials remain with the TBI’s files. It does not create a new investigative power or change criminal penalties; instead, it directs how the bureau must maintain and preserve materials associated with its investigations. The bill takes effect immediately upon becoming law.

Impact

The bill would amend Tennessee Code Annotated Title 38, Chapter 6 by adding a new section governing TBI recordkeeping. It would require the bureau to retain copies of original investigative materials in each case file, affecting the agency’s internal document management, archival practices, and potentially future access to investigative records. The practical impact would fall on the TBI and, indirectly, on parties seeking records, reviewing investigations, or preserving evidence for oversight, litigation, or later proceedings.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided context, the overall sentiment appears neutral and administrative. The proposal is straightforward and procedural, with no evidence in the supplied materials of organized opposition or controversy. Its immediate-effect clause suggests the sponsor viewed the measure as a prompt operational fix for the bureau’s records practices.

Contention

No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided transcripts or voting history, and none are apparent from the bill text itself. If any concerns were raised, they would likely center on the administrative burden of retaining all original investigative materials, the scope of what qualifies as “investigative materials,” or how the requirement interacts with existing records-retention, confidentiality, and public records rules. However, the supplied context does not identify any member, agency, or stakeholder taking a formal opposing position.