 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hawks v. Greene12/18/2001
The Tennessee Department of Safety, appellant, seeks review of the decision of the Chancery Court for Davidson County reversing the State's order forfeiting the vehicle owned by Ms. Marie Hawks, appellee. Because we find that forfeiture of the van, under the facts of this case, constitutes an excessive fine, we affirm the trial court.
Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed and Remanded
Patricia J. Cottrell, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Ben H. Cantrell, P.J, M.S., joined. William C. Koch, Jr., filed a concurring opinion.
OPINION
On April 25, 1996, Ms. Hawks's driver license was revoked by the Tennessee Department of Safety ("the Department") as the result of a DUI conviction on March 28, 1996. Although she became eligible to reinstate her license or apply for a new license one year after the revocation, she did not do so until December of 1997.
On September 10, 1997, while at work, Ms. Hawks received information that her one year old child was sick and running a high fever. She left work and received another page that her five year old son, at school, was also sick and had to be picked up. On her way to pick up her sick children to take them to the doctor, Ms. Hawks was stopped for speeding by the Lakewood Police. When asked to produce her driver license, Ms. Hawks told the police officer that she did not have a license as it had been revoked. Later, Ms. Hawks stated that, although she was aware that her license had been revoked, she had been driving in order to hold a job. She viewed the job as an opportunity to improve her family's situation and to raise the money necessary to pay the costs and fees necessary to obtain a new or reinstated license. Ms. Hawks resided in a subsidized housing project, has four children and has no other family residing in Nashville.
On September 16, 1997, the Department issued a forfeiture warrant pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-50-504(h)(1). On December 19, 1997, Ms. Hawks ultimately paid the fees for a new license and completed the other necessary steps. She was issued a new license.
A hearing on the forfeiture was held before an administrative law judge ("ALJ"). Ms. Hawks was not represented by counsel at the hearing. After considering the evidence, the ALJ ordered forfeiture of Ms. Hawks's van, and Ms. Hawks filed a petition for review to the Chancery Court. Upon review, the trial court reversed the ALJ's order of forfeiture ruling that the forfeiture violated the Excessive Fines Clauses of the United States and Tennessee Constitutions. This appeal followed.
I.
Decisions of administrative agencies are reviewed by courts under the standard established in the Tennessee Administrative Procedures Act. Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-322 (1998). Generally, the court's review is limited to the record, and the court's authority to reverse an agency decision is limited to specific situations set out by statute. Tenn Code Ann. § 4-5-322(g) and (h). The trial court herein reversed the Department's forfeiture decision because it found, pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-322 (h)(1), that "the rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions or decisions are in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions." Because the trial court's determination that the forfeiture violates the constitutional prohibition on excessive fines presents a question of law, our review is de novo. " he question whether a fine is constitutionally excessive calls for the application of a constitutional standard to the facts of a particular case, and in this context de novo review of tha
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|