State of Georgia v. James Lamar Crowder, 348 Ga. App. 850

TSA notified Clayton County officers that a woman (Shara Cumins) passed security with a carry-on containing a large amount of cash; officers located and questioned her at the gate.
Officers searched with consent and found $46,820 wrapped in plastic/paper; Cumins said the money came from her father, James Crowder, but gave inconsistent statements and refused to identify others.
State filed an in rem forfeiture complaint naming the currency; Cumins initially answered claiming Crowder owned the funds and later withdrew her claim; State amended to add Crowder as a potential claimant.
State attempted personal service at a presumed Opelika, Alabama address (sheriff not found; certified mail unclaimed), obtained court permission to serve Crowder by publication, and published notice in the local paper.
Crowder filed an unverified, deficient answer (no address, verification, acquisition details, or supporting documentation); trial court nevertheless awarded the currency to Crowder after a bench trial finding insufficient evidence of illegal use.
State appealed denial of its motion to dismiss Crowder’s answer; Crowder cross-appealed claiming insufficient service; State also appealed the trial court’s release of the funds while its appeal was pending.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Crowder)	Held
Whether Crowder’s answer complied with OCGA § 9-16-12(c)(1) pleading requirements	Answer failed strict statutory requirements (verification, address, acquisition facts, documents); should be dismissed	Answer was sufficient to contest ownership	Court: Crowder’s answer did not comply; trial court erred in denying State’s motion and in failing to dismiss the answer
Whether service by publication was proper	Service by publication was authorized because claimant resided out of state; due diligence to personally serve not required when statute permits publication for out-of-state residents	Publication was improper under the Act and State failed to exercise due diligence	Court: Service by publication was proper; trial court did not err in denying Crowder’s motion to dismiss for insufficient service
Whether laches barred the forfeiture action due to delay adding Crowder as claimant	Delay did not produce prejudice; Crowder had full opportunity to defend	Delay (129 days) prejudiced Crowder and should bar action	Court: Laches not shown; no prejudice; claim not barred
Whether trial court erred by releasing funds while State’s appeal was pending	Filing a timely notice of appeal operates as supersedeas; trial court lacked authority to release funds pending appeal	Trial court could grant release despite appeal	Court: Trial court erred; release should have been stayed pending appeal

Coffey v. State of Ga., 339 Ga. App. 367 (trial court properly struck insufficient forfeiture answer)
Loveless v. State of Ga., 337 Ga. App. 250 (claimant’s answer must meet statutory specificity; failure warrants striking)
State of Ga. v. Alford, 264 Ga. 243 (legislature may impose special pleading requirements in statutory proceedings)
Mathis v. State, 336 Ga. App. 257 (interpretation of disjunctive statutory language permitting publication)
Upton v. Jones, 280 Ga. 895 (notice of appeal operates as supersedeas depriving trial court of power to affect appealed judgment)
SRB Inv. Servs., LLLP v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 289 Ga. 1 (laches requires prejudice to succeed)
Portee v. State of Ga., 277 Ga. App. 536 (unverified answer in forfeiture action fails statutory requirements)