Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville
Session September 12, 2017
from the Criminal Court for Macon County No. 15-CR-81 Brody
Appellant, Sharon Daugherty, appeals the Macon County
Criminal Court's order denying her motion to recover
firearms confiscated during a search of her home. On appeal,
the Appellant contends that she is entitled to the return of
the property because the State dismissed the criminal charges
against her. Because the Appellant has no appeal as of right
from the denial of a motion to recover confiscated property,
we dismiss the appeal.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed
A. Christensen, Lebanon, Tennessee, for the appellant, Sharon
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; M.
Todd Ridley, Assistant Attorney General; Tom P. Thompson,
Jr., District Attorney General; and Jason Lawson, Assistant
District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of
H. Montgomery, Jr., J., delivered the opinion of the court,
in which John Everett Williams and Robert L. Holloway, Jr.,
H. MONTGOMERY, JR., JUDGE.
August 24, 2016, the Appellant filed a motion to recover
firearms confiscated from her home by the drug task force
after the execution of a search warrant. The motion stated
that the Appellant's husband, Tommy Daugherty, was
arrested on drug-related charges after the search. According
to the motion, Mr. Daugherty ultimately pleaded guilty to a
single drug-related offense in exchange for the dismissal of
the remaining charges, including a weapons-related offense
relative to the seized firearms. Although the motion does not
identify the State's charges against the Appellant, the
motion states that all of her charges were dismissed after
Mr. Daugherty pleaded guilty.
November 4, 2016 motion hearing, counsel stated that the
Appellant was initially charged with drug possession with the
intent to sell because the Appellant "had some personal
pharmaceuticals that apparently weren't satisfactorily up
to count." Counsel said that during plea negotiations
with the prosecutor, the parties agreed the charges against
the Appellant would be dismissed. Counsel conceded that he
and the prosecutor did not discuss the confiscated firearms
during plea negotiations but stated that no forfeiture
warrant was filed and that the police investigation was
closed. C ounsel stated that the Appellant had no pending
criminal charges against her, that she was not a convicted
felon, that she needed money to pay her mortgage during Mr.
Daugherty's confinement, and that she intended to sell
the firearms to meet her financial obligations.
prosecutor opposed the motion on the basis that Mr. Daugherty
pleaded guilty to selling narcotics, which were the same type
of narcotics for which the Appellant "was short on her
pill count." The prosecutor said that the Appellant and
Mr. Daugherty were charged after a controlled drug purchase.
The prosecutor also opposed the motion on the basis that the
Appellant had failed to provide proof of ownership of the
confiscated firearms. The prosecutor believed the firearms
belonged to Mr. Daugherty and stated the prosecutor could not
provide the firearms to a third party. The prosecutor stated
that Mr. Daugherty was prohibited from owning and possessing
firearms because he was now a convicted felon and without
proof that the firearms belonged to the Appellant, she was
not entitled to recover them.
questioning by the trial court, the Appellant testified that
she could not provide the dates upon which the firearms were
purchased. The following exchange occurred:
The Court: Tell me what guns you're wanting back.
[The Appellant]: I'd like to have all ...