University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law 9-24-2008 TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY vs. DOCKET NOS. 19.01-100574J D.O.S. Case No. G8097, One 1997 Buick LeSabre, VIN No.: 1G4HP52K4VH567262, Aiptek Digital Camcorder, BM170016871, Compaq Laptop, CNF 6280HP3, Samsung Cell Phone, SC4A870, Seized from: Timothy A. Sturch, Date of Seizure: October 27, 2007, Claimant: Timothy A. Sturch, Lienholder: N/A Follow this and additional works at: http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_lawopinions This Initial Order by the Administrative Judges of the Administrative Procedures Division, Tennessee Department of State, is a public document made available by the College of Law Library, and the Tennessee Department of State, Administrative Procedures Division. For more information about this public document, please contact administrative.procedures@tn.gov
BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF THE TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT ) OF SAFETY ) ) v. ) DOCKET NOS. 19.01-100574J ) [D.O.S. Case No. G8097] One 1997 Buick LeSabre ) VIN No.: 1G4HP52K4VH567262 ) Aiptek Digital Camcorder, BM170016871 ) Compaq Laptop, CNF 6280HP3 ) Samsung Cell Phone, SC4A870 ) Seized from: Timothy A. Sturch ) Date of Seizure: October 27, 2007 ) Claimant: Timothy A. Sturch ) Lienholder: N/A ) INITIAL ORDER This matter was heard in Lawrenceburg, Tennessee on September 24, 2008, before Mattielyn B. Williams, Administrative Judge, assigned by the Secretary of State, Administrative Procedures Division, and sitting for the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Safety. Mr. Orvil Orr, Staff Attorney, Tennessee Department of Safety, represented the State. Claimant Timothy A. Sturch had been representing himself, with assistance from his mother, Ms. Tammy Sturch, but neither Claimant nor his mother appeared for the hearing. Ms. Tammy Sturch resides at 6687 Valley Park Drive Memphis, TN 38115. Although Twenty-Two Thousand Four Hundred Seventeen Dollars ($22,417.00) were also seized on October 27, 2007, those funds were seized by the Drug Enforcement 1
Administration and were not the subject of this proceeding. The remainder of the property listed above was seized by the Maury County Sheriff s Department. The subject of the hearing in this matter was the proposed forfeiture of the seized 1997 Buick LeSabre, based on the subject vehicle being used to facilitate an illegal drug transaction by serving as transportation, serving as a container, being obtained from proceeds, or otherwise involved in an illegal drug transaction, in violation of the Tennessee Drug Control Act, thus making the vehicle subject to seizure, pursuant to T.C.A. 53-11-451. The subject of the hearing was also the proposed forfeiture of the seized Aiptek digital camcorder and Compaq laptop, based on the camcorder and laptop being used to facilitate an illegal drug transaction, maintain records of an illegal drug transaction, or having been obtained through an exchange or from proceeds of an illegal drug transaction, in violation of the Tennessee Drug Control Act, thus making the property subject to seizure, pursuant to T.C.A. 53-11-451. The State indicated that although a Samsung cell phone was seized, Claimant did not petition for its return. No other person petitioned for the cell phone. Therefore, the seized Samsung cell phone was forfeited administratively. The State moved for default. The State called attention to Claimant s letter of April 15, 2008, advising that he was incarcerated and indicating that his mother was handling his affairs. The State filed Exhibit 1, a copy of a certified mail receipt, showing that Claimant received the Notice of Hearing at his mother s address, sometime before August 29, 2008, when the signed receipt was received at the Department of Safety. It 2
was noted that the signature on the receipt appeared to match Claimant s signature on his Petition. The State introduced Exhibit 2, a copy of the front of an envelope mailed to Claimant at his earlier address of 2735 Gentle Road, in Lewisburg, TN 37091, marked No Such Number; Return to Sender. Exhibit 3 was the copy of the front of an envelope showing that the State had attempted to serve the Claimant Notice at the Robertson County Detention Center, but, that envelope was returned to the State, marked Inmate Released. It was DETERMINED that the State made a reasonable and adequate effort to provide Claimant notice of the date, time, and location of the hearing, in this matter. The State s Motion for Default was GRANTED. NOTICE OF DEFAULT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THE CLAIMANT THAT THE CLAIMANT HAS BEEN HELD IN DEFAULT FOR THE CLAIMANT S FAILURE TO APPEAR AT A HEARING ON THE MERITS AFTER RECEIVING ADEQUATE NOTICE. T.C.A. 4-5-309. CLAIMANT HAS FIFTEEN (15) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO REQUEST THAT THIS FINDING OF DEFAULT BE SET ASIDE. THIS REQUEST MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE, ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES DIVISION, SUITE 800, WILLIAM R. SNODGRASS BUILDING, 312 EIGHTH AVENUE NORTH NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37243, WITHIN THAT 15-DAY PERIOD. THE 3
REQUEST TO HAVE THE FINDING OF DEFAULT SET ASIDE SHOULD INCLUDE THE REASONS TO JUSTIFY THE CLAIMANT'S FAILURE TO ATTEND. IF SUFFICIENT REASONS ARE GIVEN, THE ORDER MAY BE SET ASIDE AND A NEW HEARING SCHEDULED. IF THE CLAIMANT DOES NOT REQUEST THE DEFAULT TO BE SET ASIDE OR OTHERWISE APPEAL THE ACCOMPANYING INITIAL ORDER, THEN THE INITIAL ORDER WILL BECOME A FINAL ORDER SUBJECT TO COURT REVIEW. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS NOTICE OF DEFAULT OR THE STEPS NECESSARY TO HAVE IT SET ASIDE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE SIGNING THIS ORDER BY LETTER OR BY TELEPHONING (615) 741-4469. Claimant may move to have the Default Set Aside within fifteen (15) days, for good cause shown. ORDER The State moved that the claim of Timothy A. Sturch be struck, for failure to appear, come forward, and present evidence. The State s Motion to Strike Claimant Sturch s claim was GRANTED. The State also moved that Claimant Sturch s interest, if any, in the subject vehicle and property, be forfeited to the seizing agency for disposition as provided by law. The State s Motion to Forfeit Claimant Sturch s interest was GRANTED. 4
As an Officer of the Court, the State s attorney advised that there were no other pending claims for the return of the seized vehicle and property. There being no other claims, it is hereby ORDERED that the seized 1997 Buick LeSabre, Aiptek Camcorder, and Compaq laptop are hereby FORFEITED to the seizing agency, for disposition as provided by law. This Initial Order entered and effective this 15th day of December, 2008. Mattielyn B. Williams Administrative Judge Filed in the Administrative Procedures Division, Office of the Secretary of State this 15th day of December, 2008. Thomas G. Stovall, Director Administrative Procedures Division 5