Tennessee Senate Bill SB2182

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 38, Chapter 6; Title 39 and Title 40, relative to the collection of DNA samples.

Summary

SB2182 makes a narrow procedural change to Tennessee’s DNA sample collection laws. The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-35-321(e)(2) by requiring that the relevant notification be made “in writing,” adding a formal written-notice requirement to an existing duty to notify. The act takes effect immediately upon becoming law. Although the caption references Title 38, Title 39, and Title 40 and describes the measure as relating to the collection of DNA samples, the operative text in the bill is limited to this single wording change. As a result, the bill appears designed to clarify or strengthen the documentation of notice in the DNA collection process rather than to expand the categories of people subject to DNA sampling or to create a new collection program.

Impact

The bill would amend Tennessee’s criminal procedure/statutory framework governing DNA sample collection by requiring written notice in the specified section of Title 40. This change affects the procedures used by state officials, likely including courts, corrections personnel, or other agencies involved in DNA collection and related offender notification. It does not appear to alter substantive eligibility for DNA collection, but it does impose a clearer recordkeeping and notice requirement on the state.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text alone and the absence of committee transcripts or recorded votes, there is no evidence of significant controversy or opposition. The measure appears technical and administrative in nature, suggesting a generally neutral or routine legislative posture rather than a highly debated policy change.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. If any concerns existed, they would most likely have centered on the added administrative burden of requiring written notice versus oral or informal notice, or on whether the change meaningfully improves due process and documentation in DNA collection cases. However, no speakers, amendments, or votes are provided to indicate active disagreement.