Tennessee Senate Bill SB1182

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25

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

SB1182 makes a narrow change to Tennessee’s criminal sentencing law by amending Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 40-36-202(a)(8). The bill replaces the existing reporting requirement for certain programs with a requirement that a report on program progress be submitted by February 1 of each year to the county legislative body. The bill is framed as an amendment to laws governing criminal sentencing, but the operative change is limited to the timing and recipient of a required progress report. Because the bill only revises one subdivision of the statute, its practical effect is administrative rather than substantive. It does not appear to change sentencing ranges, eligibility, or criminal penalties; instead, it adjusts oversight and reporting obligations for the affected programs. The act would take effect immediately upon becoming law.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 40, specifically Section 40-36-202(a)(8), to require an annual progress report by February 1 to the county legislative body. This changes the statutory reporting deadline and the entity receiving the report, which may affect local oversight of sentencing-related programs. No other statutes are altered in the text provided, and the bill does not create new offenses, penalties, or sentencing rules.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history provided, so the available context does not show formal debate or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears technical and administrative, suggesting a generally neutral or low-contention posture rather than a controversial policy change.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. If any concerns were raised, they are not reflected in the available transcripts or votes. The only potentially debatable issue apparent from the text is whether shifting the report deadline and recipient meaningfully improves local oversight of sentencing programs, but no stakeholder positions are recorded.