Tennessee License Plate Reader Laws

Status at a glance

Retention: 90 days, as enacted in 2014

In 2014, Public Chapter 625 added a new section to Title 55, Chapter 10, Part 3, effective July 1, 2014. It is codified as § 55-10-302. Its core rule, as enacted:

“Any captured plate data collected or retained by any governmental entity through the use of an automated license plate recognition system may not be stored for more than ninety (90) days unless the data is retained or stored as part of an ongoing investigation, and in that case, the data shall be destroyed at the conclusion of either: (1) An investigation that does not result in any criminal charges being filed; or (2) Any criminal action undertaken in the matter involving the captured plate data.”

That is the text we verified, from the 2014 public chapter. The current codified version is published on Lexis, and we haven’t reviewed it. A 2022 bill (SB 1999 / HB 2586) appeared in secondary trackers as raising the limit from 90 to 100 days. We haven’t confirmed whether it or any later amendment was enacted. The 90-day figure on this page is the 2014 enacted figure.

The section defines an automated license plate recognition system as “one (1) or more fixed high-speed cameras combined with computer algorithms to convert images of license plates into computer-readable data.” A “governmental entity” is “any lawfully established department, agency or entity of this state or of any political subdivision of this state.” The definition mentions fixed cameras only. The text doesn’t say whether the limit reaches mobile readers. See ALPR data retention and sharing.

What § 55-10-302 doesn’t address

As enacted, the section contains only definitions and the retention rule. It doesn’t limit the purposes for which police may use ALPRs, restrict sharing with other agencies, set rules for stops based on alerts, require audits or search logs, or create a penalty or an exclusionary rule. It applies to data collected or retained by a governmental entity, so it doesn’t govern privately owned cameras. See private and HOA cameras.

Captured plate data is confidential

In 2021, Public Chapter 201 added a subdivision to Tennessee’s public records exceptions in § 10-7-504(a). It says: “Captured plate data from automatic license plate reader systems must be treated as confidential and shall not be open for inspection by members of the public.” This provision’s definition covers “one (1) or more mobile or fixed automated high-speed cameras,” which is broader than the retention section’s.

As enacted, the subdivision was to be “repealed effective July 1, 2026.” In 2026, Public Chapter 672, signed April 7, 2026, deleted subdivision (a)(32)(B) and several other expiration clauses. The General Assembly’s bill summary explains that the ALPR confidentiality provision “was originally set to terminate July 1, 2026, but this bill removes the termination language.” So the confidentiality rule didn’t expire.

The provision addresses inspection by members of the public. On its face, it doesn’t address discovery in a criminal case. See public records requests for ALPR and requesting ALPR records in discovery.

One agency’s policy: Knoxville

The Knoxville Police Department’s General Order 4.26, revised July 28, 2026, sets a shorter limit than the statute. It says captured plate data “shall not be stored for more than thirty (30) days unless the data is retained or stored as part of an ongoing investigation” (¶ 29). Paragraph 30 says that, “As stated in TCA 10-7-504,” captured plate data “must be treated as confidential and shall not be open for inspection by members of the public.” The statute’s 90 days, as enacted, is a ceiling, and an agency may keep data for less.

This is one agency’s policy. Other Tennessee agencies may set different retention periods and rules.

What this can mean in a Tennessee case

• What is the current text of § 55-10-302, and was it amended after 2014?
• Was the data kept past the statutory limit? If so, was it retained as part of an ongoing investigation?
• Was the camera fixed or mobile, and does that affect which rules apply?
• What does the agency’s own policy say about retention, access and sharing, and was it followed?
• How is ALPR data being requested: through a public records request, or through discovery or a subpoena in the criminal case?
• For a stop based on an alert, what did officers do to confirm it? See ALPR alert traffic stops.