Criminal Law

Show Me The Money: Civil Asset Forfeiture in Tennessee

April 11, 2012 | by Freeman & Fuson

Civil Forfeiture

In Tennessee, the police can seize your car, take your money, take your personal property, take your home, sell these items and use the proceeds of that sale for their benefit without the person being found guilty of a crime. In fact, the police can seize and sell these items without even charging the owner with a crime. And worst of all, the laws in Tennessee promote this activity.

Civil forfeiture is different than criminal forfeiture. In Tennessee, in civil forfeiture cases the police only have to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the property sought to be seized is related to a crime or criminal activity. In criminal cases the court must prove a Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Next, in criminal forfeiture cases the property is seized following a criminal conviction. In civil forfeiture proceedings, no criminal charges need to exist. If they do exist, the police can take your property or money regardless of the outcome. Additionally, in criminal forfeiture cases the property is the object of the prosecution and the owner makes a claim on the property through the procedures set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. 40-33-201 et. seq. The majority of the forfeiture cases in Tennessee are civil.

State of Tennessee v. George Matthews

August 10, 2011 | by Freeman & Fuson

After four (4) years criminal and at the verge of a second trial, we resolved the State v. Matthews. Following a successful appeal to the Criminal Court of Appeals, the appellate Court remanded the case to the trial court for a new trial. See State of Tennessee v. George Washington Matthews, M2009-00692-CCA-R3-CD. The defendant was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of the lesser charge of facilitation of the sale of 0.5 grams or more of cocaine, a Class C felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. 0.5 grams. Following the appeal, Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr. reversed the judgments of the trial court because the trial court failed to fulfill its role as the thirteenth juror and remanded the case back to the trial court for a new trial. The second trial was set for Monday, August 8th, 2011 before the Honorable Seth Norman. Following negotiations with the State and as a result of a favorable ruling in the Court of Appeals, we finally reached a favorable settlement days before a second trial was scheduled to take place.

It goes to show that appeals work and if you fight hard enough you can get a favorable result for your clients. If anyone needs your case appealed to the Criminal Court of Appeals, contact my office and schedule a consultation.

Mistaken Identity Arrests On The Rise?

April 3, 2010 | by Freeman & Fuson

“A mistaken identity arrest occurs almost every day, said policing experts and officials at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.”

One lady in Colorado was discussed in this CNN report from February 2010.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/15/colorado.mistaken.identity.arrest/index.html

Defendant smacks lawyer and gets rewarded with new trial?

January 29, 2010 | by Freeman & Fuson

This is a Shelby County Case that was reported by the TN Supreme Court at http://www.tncourts.gov/OPINIONS/TSC/sc1qtr2010.shtml

State of Tennessee v. Tommy Holmes –Shelby County– Supreme Court granted permission to appeal in this case to address whether the trial court erred in ruling that an indigent defendant forfeited his right to counsel at trial by telling his appointed lawyer, “I know how to get rid of you,” and, at a subsequent meeting, physically assaulting his lawyer by striking the lawyer«s eyeglasses with his finger. The defendant was tried by a jury pro se and convicted of aggravated rape. Supreme Court held that, under the facts and circumstances of this case, the trial court committed reversible error in ruling that the defendant had forfeited his right to appointed counsel at trial. While the defendant«s physical attack on his lawyer was serious misconduct, it did not rise to the level of “extremely serious misconduct” sufficient to warrant an immediate forfeiture. State v. Carruthers, 35 S.W.3d516, 548 (Tenn. 2000). Because the defendant was erroneously denied his fundamental constitutional right to counsel, we must reverse his conviction and remand this matter for appointment of new counsel and a new trial. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed.