Green v. State
2014 Ark. 69
Ark.2014Background
- On December 14, 2009, Tenth Judicial District Drug Task Force seized $1,427 from Ronald Green in connection with alleged felony drug activity; a forfeiture complaint was filed December 17, 2009.
- A confiscation report signed by Green listed the seized currency. The State moved for and received an extension to effect service; Green was personally served on April 26, 2010.
- Green did not respond or appear; the State moved for default judgment, and on June 16, 2010 the circuit court entered default judgment forfeiting the $1,427 to the Tenth Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.
- On October 28, 2011, Green filed a pro se motion under Ark. R. Crim. P. 15.2 seeking return of the currency, arguing it was no longer needed for evidentiary purposes after criminal charges were dismissed.
- The State opposed as untimely and argued the default forfeiture remained valid; the circuit court denied Green’s Rule 15.2 motion, adopting the State’s reasoning. Green appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Green) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether seized currency must be returned under Ark. R. Crim. P. 15.2 because it is no longer evidentiary | Currency is no longer needed for evidence after charges were dismissed, so Rule 15.2 return is proper | Currency already forfeited by default judgment; Rule 15.2 relief unavailable once forfeiture order is final | Denied — Rule 15.2 relief unavailable after forfeiture judgment was entered |
| Whether the default judgment forfeiting the currency should be set aside (Ark. R. Civ. P. 55) | Default judgment should be set aside due to lack of proper service or other grounds | Green was personally served; he failed to appear or show a basis for relief under Rule 55(c) | Denied — Green showed no grounds (mistake, excusable neglect, voidness, fraud, or other justification) |
| Whether procedural defects (lack of notice/service) deprived Green of due process | Notice mailed to his mother’s address; he contends he did not receive proper service and lacked due process | Record shows personal service on April 26, 2010; no timely challenge below and no showing to set aside default | Not considered on appeal — arguments raised first on appeal are forfeited; circuit court’s finding of service stands |
| Whether Fourth Amendment or merits defenses negate forfeiture | Seizure was illegal and currency not connected to criminal activity; no conviction so no forfeiture | These substantive defenses were not timely raised below and cannot be considered on appeal | Not considered — raised for first time on appeal and therefore forfeited |
Key Cases Cited
- Divelbliss v. Suchor, 311 Ark. 8, 841 S.W.2d 600 (1992) (notice of default judgment not required where defendant has not appeared)
- McGraw v. Jones, 367 Ark. 128, 238 S.W.3d 15 (2006) (defendants are presumed to know failure to respond may result in default judgment)