Where does a Tennessee judicial district drug task force agent get police authority if hired directly by the task force?

Plain-English summary

Representative Mike Bell asked the AG two questions about Tennessee judicial district drug task forces: where does a directly-hired task force officer get police authority, and is a task force required to include at least one officer from each law enforcement agency in the district?

AG Cooper traced both answers to a single statute, Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a). On the first question: the statute itself authorizes task force directors, with the consent of the supervising district attorney general, to "commission" personnel "assigned to or hired by" the task force. The "commission" is the warrant of authority that empowers the person to execute official acts. So an officer hired directly by the task force (rather than assigned from another law enforcement agency) gets police authority through the director-plus-DA commissioning under § 8-7-110(a). The officer must also meet the minimum certification requirements of the Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission, but is not entitled to the police pay supplement that other certified officers receive.

On the second question: nothing in § 8-7-110(a) requires a task force to include an officer from each law enforcement agency in the judicial district. The AG said the statute addresses assignments, qualifications, and commissions but does not regulate task force composition beyond general officer qualifications.

Two interpretive notes from the opinion. First, the statute uses both "assigned to" and "hired by" in describing task force personnel; reading the statute to limit the task force to assigned officers (only) would render "hired by" meaningless. Second, the term "commission" is interpreted in its ordinary legal sense (a warrant of authority empowering official acts), drawing on Black's Law Dictionary, with Azbill v. Azbill cited for the principle that statutory terms are read in their natural and ordinary meaning.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2010. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Does the statute cover officers hired by a task force as well as officers assigned from other agencies?
A: Yes. Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a) expressly refers to officers "assigned to or hired by" a judicial district or multi-judicial district task force. The AG said omitting hired officers would make part of that wording meaningless.

Q: How does an officer assigned from a sheriff's office become part of the task force?
A: The statute quoted by the AG calls for a written assignment by the chief law enforcement official of the assigning jurisdiction. It says the assignment becomes effective after approval by the task force board and/or the district attorneys general of the judicial district.

Q: Can a task force hire its own officers, or only borrow them?
A: It can hire its own. § 8-7-110(a) refers to officers "assigned to or hired by" the task force, and authorizes the director to commission personnel "assigned to or hired by" the task force with the DA's consent. The opinion is explicit: "hired by" must mean what it says, or the term would be meaningless.

Q: Where does a directly-hired officer get police powers?
A: From the commissioning by the task force director with the consent of the district attorney general, under § 8-7-110(a). The opinion treats the act of "commissioning" as a grant of law enforcement authority. The officer also has to meet the minimum POST Commission certification requirements.

Q: Is the directly-hired officer paid the same as an assigned officer?
A: The statute quoted in the opinion says an officer employed by a judicial district drug task force is not entitled to a police pay supplement for POST certification. The opinion does not compare other compensation.

Q: Does every law enforcement agency in the district have to be represented on the task force?
A: No. The AG concluded that the statute does not require an officer from every law enforcement agency in the judicial district.

Q: Where did a directly hired task force officer get law enforcement authority?
A: The AG concluded that the officer's authority came from Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a), through a commission issued by the task force director with the supervising district attorney general's consent. The opinion did not decide the validity of any particular arrest or search.

Q: What is the POST Commission?
A: The statute refers to the peace officers standards and training commission. It requires law enforcement officers employed by or assigned to a judicial district drug task force to meet that commission's minimum certification requirements.

Background and statutory framework

The AG described judicial district task forces as government agencies whose authority comes from statutes and powers fairly implied by them. It analyzed Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a) to answer these two questions about drug and violent crime task forces.

The statute does several things in one tightly-packed paragraph:

1. Establishes that any law enforcement officer (or assistant district attorney general or DA criminal investigator) "assigned to or hired by" a task force has the same rights, powers, duties, and immunities throughout the judicial district as the officer has in his or her own jurisdiction.

2. Specifies that an assignment from another agency is written by the chief law enforcement official of that jurisdiction and becomes effective after approval by the task force board and/or district attorneys general.

3. Imposes minimum certification: every officer assigned or hired must meet POST Commission minimums, but officers employed directly by the task force are not entitled to the police pay supplement.

4. Authorizes the director of the task force to commission personnel assigned to or hired by the task force, with the approval of the district attorney general.

The opinion's interpretive moves are standard: ascertain legislative intent (State v. Sherman; Auto Credit v. Wimmer); when statutes are clear, use plain meaning (Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan); construe statutes so no part is inoperative (State v. Northcutt). Apply those tools to § 8-7-110(a) and the statute permits task forces to (a) employ their own officers and (b) borrow officers from other agencies. Two parallel mechanisms, both authorized.

For directly-hired officers, the legal source of police authority is the director's commissioning under § 8-7-110. The footnote on "commission" draws on Black's Law Dictionary's definition of "commission" as "a warrant or authority, from the government or a court that empowers the person named to execute official acts." The opinion takes "commissioning" as the legislative grant of law enforcement power to task force-hired personnel.

For composition, the AG found no statutory requirement that every law enforcement agency in the district supply an officer. The statute sets general qualifications for officers but does not otherwise regulate task force composition.

The opinion addresses the source of authority for directly hired officers and whether every local agency must be represented. It gives no conclusion about the validity of particular law enforcement actions by those officers.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a) (judicial district task force authority)

Cases:

• Sanifill of Tenn., Inv. v. Tenn. Solid Waste Control Bd., 907 S.W.2d 807 (Tenn. 1995), Tennessee Supreme Court (agency authority derives from statute)
• In re Sentinel Trust Co., 206 S.W.3d 501 (Tenn. App. 2005), Tennessee Court of Appeals
• State v. Sherman, 266 S.W.3d 395 (Tenn. 2008), Tennessee Supreme Court (legislative intent governs construction)
• Auto Credit v. Wimmer, 231 S.W.3d 896 (Tenn. 2007), Tennessee Supreme Court
• Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan, 263 S.W.3d 827 (Tenn. 2008), Tennessee Supreme Court (plain meaning of clear statutes)
• State v. Northcutt, 568 S.W.2d 636 (Tenn. 1978), Tennessee Supreme Court (no part inoperative)
• Azbill v. Azbill, 661 S.W.2d 682 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983), Tennessee Court of Appeals (natural and ordinary meaning)

External reference:

• Black's Law Dictionary, 8th ed. (2004) (definition of "commission")

Source

• Landing page: https://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/opinions.html
• Original PDF: https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/ops/2010/op10-028.pdf

Original opinion text

Law Enforcement Officers Employed By Judicial District Task Forces

QUESTION

1. If an agent of a judicial district drug task force is not attached to, hired or employed by a law enforcement agency within a judicial district in which the drug force operates, where and how does such agent obtain the authority to act as a law enforcement officer in that district?

2. Is a judicial district task force required to have assigned at least one officer from each of the constituent law enforcement agencies of the task force in order to exercise law enforcement powers?

OPINION

1. A law enforcement officer hired directly by a judicial district task force derives his police powers from Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a), which authorizes the director of the task force, with the consent of the supervising district attorney general, to issue commissions to personnel that are employed by the task force.

2. Judicial district task forces are not required to have at least one member from each of the law enforcement agencies that are located within the judicial district.

ANALYSIS

1. Judicial district task forces are agencies of government and, as such, have such authority as they are granted by statute. Such authority is derived from the express language of the statute and such powers as may be fairly implied from the statutory text. Sanifill of Tenn., Inv. v. Tenn. Solid Waste Control Bd., 907 S.W.2d 807 (Tenn. 1995); In re Sentinel Trust Co., 206 S.W.3d 501 (Tenn. App. 2005). Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a) sets forth the powers and authority of judicial district and multi-district task forces related to the investigation and prosecution of drug and violent crimes. It states:

Any law enforcement officer or assistant district attorney general or district attorney general criminal investigator assigned to or hired by a judicial district or multi-judicial district task force relating to the investigation and prosecution of drug and violent crime cases shall have the same rights, powers, duties and immunities in every jurisdiction within the judicial district as such officer has within the officer's own jurisdiction. Such assignment shall be made in writing by the chief law enforcement official of the assigning jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, sheriff offices, police departments, task forces, state law enforcement agencies and district attorneys general offices, and shall not become effective until approved by the board of directors or governing or advisory board of the task force and/or the district attorneys general of the judicial district. Any law enforcement officer employed by or assigned to a judicial district drug task force pursuant to this section must meet the minimum certification requirements of the peace officers standards and training commission; provided, however, that such officer employed by a judicial district drug task force shall not be entitled to receive a police pay supplement for that certification. The director of a judicial district drug task force shall have the authority to commission personnel assigned to or hired by the task force with the approval of the district attorney general.

The primary objective of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature. State v. Sherman, 266 S.W.3d 395, 401 (Tenn. 2008); Auto Credit v. Wimmer, 231 S.W.3d 896 (Tenn. 2007). When a statute is clear, legislative intent is found in the plain meaning of the statutory language. Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan, 263 S.W.3d 827 (Tenn. 2008). Statutes must be construed "so that no part will be inoperative, superfluous, void or insignificant." State v. Northcutt, 568 S.W.2d 636, 637-38 (Tenn. 1978).

The language of Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a) is clear. The plain meaning of the statutory text indicates that the legislature intended to authorize drug and violent crime task forces to employ their own law enforcement officers as well as utilizing personnel who have been assigned to such task forces, the offices of the district attorneys general, and other law enforcement agencies who are located in the area under the jurisdiction of such task force. Officers who are employed directly by drug and violent crime task forces derive their law enforcement authority under Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110. That authority is conferred on such persons by the director of the task force, with the approval of the district attorney general.

The first sentence of the statute authorizes the use of law enforcement personnel who are assigned to, as well as, those who are hired by the task force. The last sentence of the statute authorizes the director of the task force, with the consent of the district attorney general, to commission personnel who are assigned to or hired by the task force. To limit the authority of the task force to use personnel who are assigned to it from law enforcement agencies only within the district would render meaningless the words "hired by," which are also used in conjunction with the term "assigned to."

The last sentence of that statute authorizes the commissioning of such personnel. When interpreting statutes, legislative intent or purpose is to be ascertained primarily from the natural and ordinary meaning of the language used. Azbill v. Azbill, 661 S.W.2d 682, 686 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). A "commission" is "a warrant or authority, from the government or a court that empowers the person named to execute official acts." Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Ed. (2004). The use of the term "commissioning" in this context indicates that the legislature intended to confer law enforcement authority on persons who are employed by drug and violent crime task forces.

2. You have asked whether judicial district task forces must include at least one law enforcement officer from each of the law enforcement agencies that are located within the judicial district. Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-7-110(a) authorizes the assignment of officers from law enforcement agencies in a judicial district to drug and violent crimes task forces, establishes qualifications for such officers, and provides the procedures for commissioning such officers only. There is nothing in the statutory language that indicates that the legislature intended to regulate the composition of such task forces beyond setting general qualifications for officers serving on them.

ROBERT E. COOPER, JR.
Attorney General and Reporter

MICHAEL E. MOORE
Solicitor General

BENJAMIN A. WHITEHOUSE
Assistant Attorney General

Requested by:
The Honorable Mike Bell
State Representative
23rd Legislative District
109 War Memorial Building
Nashville, TN 37243