Tennessee Senate Bill SB0490

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/29/25
• Failed: 3/11/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39 and Title 40, Chapter 32, relative to destruction of records.

Summary

This bill amends Tennessee’s record-destruction statute to add a new offense to the list of convictions eligible for expungement or destruction of records. Specifically, it adds the offense of official misconduct under Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-16-402, to the provisions in Title 40, Chapter 32 governing destruction of records. In practical terms, the bill expands the set of criminal records that may be removed from public access under existing expungement/destruction procedures. It does not create a new criminal offense or change the elements of official misconduct; rather, it changes the post-conviction record-relief consequences for people convicted under that statute.

Impact

The bill directly amends Tennessee Code Annotated Section 40-32-101(g)(1)(A) by adding official misconduct to the list of offenses covered by the state’s record-destruction framework. This affects courts, criminal justice agencies, and individuals seeking relief from the collateral consequences of a conviction, because records for this offense may become eligible for destruction under the applicable statutory process. The bill does not alter Title 39’s definition of official misconduct, but it broadens the scope of record relief available under Title 40.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears technical and limited in scope, with a neutral-to-supportive policy posture focused on record relief rather than substantive criminal law changes.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided record. If debated, likely issues would have centered on whether official misconduct should be treated like other offenses eligible for destruction of records, balancing rehabilitation and privacy interests against transparency and accountability concerns for public officials and law-enforcement-related misconduct.