Tenn. R. Crim. P. 4
Advisory Commission Comments.
Note that the affidavit of complaint may be buttressed by additional affidavit(s) and that the magistrate or clerk may also examine under oath the complainant and any other witnesses.
A criminal summons may be issued instead of an arrest warrant; when a clerk is performing this judicial function, the district attorney general is empowered to direct the clerk whether to issue a warrant or a criminal summons upon a finding of probable cause.
Section (a)(3) requires that a docket book be kept in which every warrant and summons issued in a given county is recorded. This rule is meant to require any person issuing such a warrant or criminal summons who is not the clerk, to communicate this fact to the clerk of the court of general sessions and to see to it that the issuance is properly recorded. Rigid compliance with this rule is very important to the proper administration of criminal justice, and thus the rule is meant to be mandatory in nature.
Under section (b) probable cause for the issuance of arrest warrants and criminal summonses may be based in whole or in part upon credible hearsay. A different rule applies to the preliminary hearing structured under Rule 5.1, in which the “evidence may not be inadmissible hearsay except documentary proof of ownership and written reports of expert witnesses.”
The form of the arrest warrant, as set out in Rule 4(c)(1), makes no distinction between warrants issued for persons not yet arrested and those warrants issued for persons already arrested without a warrant. Such a warrant serves a dual function: first, as the authority for an arrest (where an arrest has not already been lawfully made) and, secondly, as a statement of the charge which the accused is called upon to answer. The commission did not recommend two separate warrant forms, one for use where the accused had not yet been arrested, and the second to merely state the charge against one already under arrest, because it is more utilitarian to have only the one form. The command to arrest is obviously surplusage where the warrant is directed against one already in custody; but a warrant in such cases still serves as the official charging instrument, issued after a judicial finding of probable cause, and gives notice of the charge which must be answered.
Rule 4 was substantially derived from the corresponding federal rule and § 40-6-202 of the Law Revision Commission’s proposed code.
Note that the rule provides specifically for the reissuance of unexecuted complaints and summonses.
Wherever the words “magistrate” and “clerk” appear in Rule 4, they are to be understood as being qualified by the words “who is neutral and detached and who is capable of the probable cause determination required by this rule.” See Shadwick v. City of Tampa, 407 U.S. 345 (1972).
See T.C.A. § 39-15-101 which sets limits on the issuance of arrest warrants for violation of support orders.
Advisory Commission Comments [2007].
Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-6-205 and 40-6-215 require that a summons be issued instead of a warrant in certain circumstances.
Advisory Commission Comments [2011].
Rule 4(a)(3) requires the general sessions court clerk to “promptly record in a docket book the issuance of every warrant and summons in the county.” (Emphasis added.) The words “docket book” must be interpreted in light of Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7- 12 1 (a)(l), which provides (in pertinent part): “Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, any information required to be kept as a record by any government official may be maintained on a computer or removable computer storage media. . .instead of bound books or paper records,” if four standards listed in the statute are met.
Advisory Commission Comments [2016].
Consistent with simultaneous amendments to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5 and 5.1, the fourth paragraph of the original Advisory Commission Comments to Rule 4 is amended to substitute the term “preliminary hearing” for the obsolete term “preliminary examination.” No substantive changes are made to the Rule.