problemsintn
Junior Member
What is the name of your state? tn.
I was convicted of dui, took my punishment, got a restricted driver license and during this time i had a bump in the road and am still dealing with it ,although i now have a valid tn driver license.
So im in a situation where i have a hearing coming up over civil forfeiture of my vehicle for accused driving on revoked drivers license due to a first offense dui or any subsequent offense dui (it doesnt matter)(TCA 55-50-
504, 40-33-201, et seq.)
This is a civil matter, not criminal so as i understand it the burden of proof is on the state. BUT the evidence does not have to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that "the vehicle lol" is guilty -just that the probability is high-preponderance of the evidence.
In other words, whoever has the most evidence wins-if the state plays the game fairly.
thats my assumption, but im not a lawyer so scold me if need be.
The problem with the states case is, the officer himself is the witness that supposedly saw ME driving the car. The officer never stopped the car in question to get a good look, ask for a driver license, registration ...nothing. SO i can bring in every person i was in contact that day with as an eyewitness to what i was doing that day, right? And as a result i would assume thats going to be open and shut ill be getting my car back? ok, im not presuming this because this state never ceases to amaze me with the tricks they pull out of their hat but anyway.
I dont deny my car was out and about the day he says it was but i do deny i was driving the car. However , i am wondering, if this case is to be won by me , what do i have to show and what would be a good idea to do?
The only good evidence i can think of are witnesses- and im wondering if the state will even allow their testimony.
yes im represented by an attorney, yes i still have to ask these questions.
I was convicted of dui, took my punishment, got a restricted driver license and during this time i had a bump in the road and am still dealing with it ,although i now have a valid tn driver license.
So im in a situation where i have a hearing coming up over civil forfeiture of my vehicle for accused driving on revoked drivers license due to a first offense dui or any subsequent offense dui (it doesnt matter)(TCA 55-50-
504, 40-33-201, et seq.)
This is a civil matter, not criminal so as i understand it the burden of proof is on the state. BUT the evidence does not have to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that "the vehicle lol" is guilty -just that the probability is high-preponderance of the evidence.
In other words, whoever has the most evidence wins-if the state plays the game fairly.
thats my assumption, but im not a lawyer so scold me if need be.
The problem with the states case is, the officer himself is the witness that supposedly saw ME driving the car. The officer never stopped the car in question to get a good look, ask for a driver license, registration ...nothing. SO i can bring in every person i was in contact that day with as an eyewitness to what i was doing that day, right? And as a result i would assume thats going to be open and shut ill be getting my car back? ok, im not presuming this because this state never ceases to amaze me with the tricks they pull out of their hat but anyway.
I dont deny my car was out and about the day he says it was but i do deny i was driving the car. However , i am wondering, if this case is to be won by me , what do i have to show and what would be a good idea to do?
The only good evidence i can think of are witnesses- and im wondering if the state will even allow their testimony.
yes im represented by an attorney, yes i still have to ask these questions.
Last edited: