ÿWPCn …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ 0l 0Dl ° w° 0JÀ 0T 0^^ 0h¼ 0r$ 0|– 0† 0˜ 1u( U, 0dÉ U,-U>YB)—DCÀ AMU*Pøzvrv~èvÓf D39 Bl 0@‰ AOÉÆ 0DÞ D/" BQ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0†(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡nnG 3|x]((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóSÓ€]2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial îÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌFebruary€21,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó lÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ýò ò(b)€€When€an€Appeal€Liesó ó.€€An€appeal€lies€from€any€order€or€judgment€in€a€criminalÏproceeding€where€the€law€provides€for€such€appeal,€and€from€any€judgment€of€conviction:Ìà8 à€.€.€.€.Ìà8 à(2)€upon€a€plea€of€guilty€or€nolo€contendere€if:Ìà8 àà à(i)€€defendant€entered€into€a€plea€agreement€under€Rule€11(e)€but€explicitlyÏreserved€with€the€consent€of€the€State€and€of€the€court€the€right€to€appeal€a€certifiedÏquestion€of€law€that€is€dispositive€of€the€case;ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò++++'ÿÿdxd d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌó óà à)ò òÌJOE€IVA€MURPHY,ó óà à)à àDavidson€County€Chancery€CourtÌà à)à àRule€No.€94„725„IIIÌ€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.A.€No.€01A01„9507„CH„00322Ìà à)Ìò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó óà à)ÌÙ€€Ùò òßL€#%";+'h|ÿ\` ç `€€LßDEPARTMENT€OF€SAFETYó ó,à à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellee.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Davidson€County€at€Nashville.Ìò òHonorable€Robert€S.€Brandt,€Chancellor€€ó óÌÌÌÌò òLionel€R.€Barrett,€Jr.ó ó,€Nashville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellant.ÌÌÌÌò òCharles€W.€Bursonó ó,€Attorney€General€and€ReporterÌò òRebecca€Lyford,ó ó€Counsel€to€the€StateÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌÌÌà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌHIGHERS,€J.ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òWILLIAMS,€Sp.€J.€ó ó:€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓAppellant,€Joe€Iva€Murphy,€appeals€from€the€judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€for€DavidsonÏCounty,€affirming€the€decision€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Safety€("Department")€thatÏAppellant's€1989€Chevrolet€Astro€van€and€$1,589€be€forfeited€under€the€Tennessee€Drug€ControlÏAct.€ÌÌà àThe€undisputed€facts€in€this€case,€as€set€forth€in€the€findings€of€the€AdministrativeÏLaw€Judge,€are€as€follows:€ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àAround€10:30€a.m.€on€the€morning€of€February€1,€1993,ÏSergeant€James€McWright€of€the€20th€Judicial€District€Drug€TaskÏForce,€Metropolitan€Police€Department,€was€contacted€by€aÏconfidential€informant,€who€provided€information€to€the€effect€thatÏtwo€individuals€had€arrived€in€the€Nashville€area€and€were€sellingÏcocaine.€€The€informant€gave€the€following€specific€details€as€to€theÏidentity€and€description€of€these€individuals:€€they€were€black€males;Ïone€was€named€"Joe"€and€the€other€was€named€"Shonee"€orÏ"Shanea";€they€were€from€California;€they€were€residing€in€a€coupleÏof€apartments€at€1039€Third€Avenue€South€in€Nashville,€DavidsonÏCounty,€at€the€time;€they€were€driving€a€late€model,€two„tone€gray€orÏsilver€Chevy€Astro€van;€the€van€bore€California€license€plates;€theyÏwere€storing€cocaine€underneath€the€armrest€in€the€back€left€sideÏpanel€of€the€van;€and€the€confidential€informant€knew€of€the€specificÏlocation€of€the€cocaine€within€the€van,€because€the€informant€hadÏseen€the€cocaine€in€that€location€within€the€van€when€the€cocaine€hadÏbeen€shown€to€him€and€offered€to€him€for€purchase€by€one€of€theÏindividuals€so€described.ÌÌà8 àà àSergeant€McWright€testified€at€the€hearing€on€this€matter€thatÏthis€particular€confidential€informant€had€proven€reliable€in€the€pastÏby€virtue€of€the€fact€that€the€informant€had€previously€providedÏinformation€to€McWright€that€resulted€in€the€arrest€and€conviction€ofÏtwo€individuals€from€California.€€These€individuals€had€hidden€twoÏkilos€of€cocaine€under€a€sink€at€a€Best€Western€Motel.€€Acting€uponÏthe€information€provided€by€this€confidential€informant,€officersÏexecuted€a€search€warrant€and€found€and€seized€the€two€kilos€ofÏcocaine€that€were€located€as€specifically€described€by€the€informantÏin€that€previous€incident.ÌÌà8 àà àBased€upon€the€knowledge€obtained€from€the€confidentialÍinformant€on€the€morning€of€February€1,€1993,€Officer€DavidÏGrisham€of€the€20th€Judicial€District€Drug€Task€Force€wasÏdispatched€to€South€Third€Street€off€Murfreesboro€Road€in€order€toÏlocate€the€van€that€the€informant€had€described.€€A€van€meeting€theÏinformant's€description€was€not€there,€but€one€fitting€the€informant'sÏdescription€arrived€at€that€location€10„15€minutes€later,€with€a€blackÏmale€driving€and€a€black€female€and€child€as€passengers.€€TheÏofficer€observed€a€two„tone€Silver€Chevy€Astro€van€with€CaliforniaÏlicense€plates€arriving€at€the€same€address€that€the€informant€statedÏthe€individuals€from€California€were€staying.€€Officer€GrishamÏradioed€this€information€back€to€the€office.ÌÌà8 àà àUpon€receiving€the€information€from€Officer€Grisham€thatÏthe€van€described€by€the€informant€had€been€located,€SergeantÏMcWright€and€Officer€Ed€Rigsby€of€the€Davidson€County€DrugÏTask€Force,€left€the€office€to€join€Officer€Grisham€in€hisÏsurveillance.€€However,€within€five€minutes€of€the€van's€arrival€atÏthe€1039€Third€Avenue€South€apartment€location,€the€van€again€left,Ïand€Officer€Grisham€followed€it.€€The€van€proceeded€out€EighthÏAvenue,€down€Franklin€Road€to€Harding€Place€and€continued€untilÏreaching€the€K„Mart€at€Nolensville€Road€and€Harding€Place,€whereÏthe€van€stopped.€€The€occupants€of€the€van€went€into€the€store€forÏabout€twenty€minutes.€€While€the€occupants€of€the€vehicle€wereÏinside€the€store,€Sergeant€McWright,€who€had€arrived€at€thatÏlocation,€radioed€the€airport€detail€and€requested€that€a€drug€canineÏbe€sent€to€the€Nolensville€Road€K„Mart€parking€lot.€€The€black€male,Ïfemale€and€child€returned€to€the€van€and€began€to€leave€the€location.€ÏThe€officers€who€were€following€the€van€blocked€it€from€leavingÏand€requested€that€the€black€male€exit€the€van.€€Sergeant€McWrightÏrequested€permission€to€search€the€van€and€was€refused€by€the€blackÏmale.€€Within€5€minutes,€the€drug€canine€had€arrived.€€The€drugÏcanine€was€put€into€the€front€area€of€the€van€and€gave€no€alert.€ÏWhen€the€dog€was€then€placed€in€the€side€door€of€the€van,€it€wentÏstraight€across€the€back€seat€of€the€van€to€the€left€rear€armrest€area,Ïwhere€the€dog€alerted€by€scratching,€biting€and€chewing,€therebyÏindicating€that€the€scent€of€drugs€had€been€detected.€€This€was€theÏspecific€location€that€the€confidential€informant€had€indicated€thatÏmorning€that€cocaine€would€be€found.€€Officer€McWright€testifiedÏthat€this€particular€dog€had€been€trained€to€specifically€detectÏmarijuana,€cocaine€and€dilaudid.€€The€dog€was€then€removed€fromÏthe€van.ÌÌà8 àà àSergeant€McWright€entered€the€side€door€of€the€van€andÏproceed€to€the€left€rear€armrest.€€He€opened€up€the€folding€top€of€theÏarmrest€and€looked€inside,€spotting€two€bolts€which€bolted€it€intoÏplace.€€Another€officer€who€was€searching€the€front€of€the€vanÏlocated€in€the€right€front€door€panel€pocket€a€3/8"€ratchet€with€a€1/2"Ïor€9/16"€deep€well€socket,€the€only€such€tools€found€within€the€van.€ÏThese€tools€fit€the€bolts€inside€the€armrest€and€Sergeant€McWrightÏused€these€tools€to€remove€the€armrest€bolts.€€When€the€armrest€wasÏremoved,€Sergeant€McWright€looked€down€into€the€side€panel€of€theÏvan€and€spotted€plastic€bags€containing€approximately€2.5€ounces€ofÏcrack€cocaine€and€a€semi„automatic€chrome„plated€pistol.€€UponÏfinding€the€cocaine€and€the€pistol,€the€black€male,€who€had€beenÍidentified€at€this€point€as€Joe€Iva€Murphy,€the€Claimant,€was€placedÏunder€arrest€and€advised€of€his€rights.€€Officers€then€patted€downÏMr.€Murphy€for€weapons€and€removed€a€large€bulge€from€one€sock.ÏThe€bulge€was€a€bundle€of€bills€totalling€$1,000.00.€€Additionally,Ïthe€Claimant€was€carrying€$589.00€in€cash€in€his€wallet.€€There€wasÏno€testimony€at€the€hearing€as€to€where€Mr.€Murphy€obtained€theseÏmonies.€€The€subject€$1,589.00€in€cash€and€the€van€were€seized,Ïand€the€Claimant€subsequently€field€a€timely€claim€for€return€of€theÏmoney€and€the€van.ÌÌà8 àà àAfter€Sergeant€McWright€had€located€the€cocaine€andÏweapon,€the€cocaine€was€removed€from€the€side€panel€area€andÏphotographed€by€Officer€Ed€Rigsby,€who€was€wearing€rubberÏgloves.€€Officer€Grisham,€who€testified€that€he€at€no€point€hadÏhandled€the€cocaine,€removed€from€the€Claimant€the€money€that€heÏwas€carrying€and€placed€it€in€the€front€glove€box€of€the€van.€€TheÏdrug€canine€was€then€placed€in€the€front€part€of€the€van,€where€theÏdog€alerted€on€the€glove€box,€indicating€that€it€detected€the€scent€ofÏdrugs€on€the€money€within€the€glove€box.ÌÌà8 àà àWhen€Mr.€Murphy€was€placed€under€arrest,€he€indicated€toÏOfficer€Grisham€that€he€was€unemployed,€that€his€permanentÏaddress€was€Compton,€California€(near€L.A.)€and€that€his€nearestÏliving€relative€was€in€Compton,€California.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€cocaine€seized€from€the€van€was€submitted€to€the€T.B.I.Ïlab€for€analysis,€and€tested€positively€as€cocaine€base.ÌÌà8 àà àOfficers€then€went€back€to€the€apartments€at€1039€ThirdÏAvenue€South€were€the€confidential€informant€had€indicated€the€twoÏblack€males€from€California€were€staying.€€Officer€Grisham€testifiedÏthat€this€area€is€known€by€police€officers€to€be€an€area€frequented€byÏdrug€dealers€and€known€for€drug€activity.€€Both€apartments€wereÏregistered€in€the€names€of€two€females€blacks.€€One€of€theÏapartments€was€registered€in€the€name€of€a€Ms.€Austin,€who€wasÏdetermined€to€be€the€black€female€who€had€been€a€passenger€in€theÏvan€that€morning.€€The€other€apartment€was€registered€in€the€nameÏof€another€black€female.€€The€first€apartment€was€searched€withÏconsent€without€result.€€Officers€went€to€the€second€apartment€andÏrequested€consent€to€search€from€the€female€registered€occupant,Ïwhich€was€obtained.€€A€black€male,€who€came€to€the€door€of€theÏsecond€apartment,€originally€€identified€himself€with€a€false€name,Ïbut€upon€more€searching€inquiry,€finally€identified€himself€asÏ"Shanea"€and€stated€that€he€had€come€from€California€with€theÏClaimant,€Joe€Iva€Murphy.€€A€search€of€the€apartment€yielded€anÏadditional€12.6€grams€of€what€was€verified€by€T.B.I.€lab€analysis€toÏbe€crack€cocaine.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àAppellant€filed€a€petition€with€the€Department€to€have€the€seized€van€and€cashÏreturned.€€Based€upon€the€foregoing€facts,€the€Department€rejected€Appellant's€argument€that€theÍwarrantless€search€of€his€vehicle€and€person€violated€his€rights€under€both€the€Fourth€AmendmentÏto€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€Section€7€of€the€Constitution€of€the€State€ofÏTennessee.€€The€Department€noted€that€Appellant€had€advanced€this€argument€in€the€relatedÏcriminal€proceeding€pursuant€to€a€motion€to€suppress,€which€was€ultimately€denied.€€TheÏDepartment's€order€also€indicates€that,€at€the€beginning€of€the€hearing€on€the€petition,€AppellantÏmoved€to€suppress€the€evidence€seized,€propounding€the€same€theory.€€The€Department€concludedÏthat€the€officers€had€probable€cause€both€to€arrest€Appellant€and€to€search€the€van€for€cocaine.€€ItÏreasoned€that€the€information€provided€by€the€confidential€informant€led€to€the€arresting€officer'sÏlocating€of€the€van,€which€was€as€described€by€the€informant.€€Too,€the€driver€of€the€van€wasÏidentified€as€"Joe,"€which€the€informant€had€indicated€as€being€the€name€of€one€of€the€twoÏindividuals€who€had€come€from€California€to€sell€cocaine.€€The€Department€found€the€seizure€of€theÏapproximately€$1,600€incident€to€a€lawful€arrest€and€the€warrantless€search€of€the€van€justifiedÏunder€the€vehicle€exception€to€the€warrant€requirement€under€the€Fourth€Amendment.€€TheÏDepartment€concluded€that€the€items€in€question€were,€therefore,€subject€to€forfeiture.ÌÌà àAppellant€petitioned€for€review€in€accordance€with€T.C.A.€ðð€4„5„322€of€theÏUniform€Administrative€Procedures€Act.€€Upon€review,€the€chancery€court€found€substantial€andÏmaterial€evidence€to€support€the€Department's€decision€and€dismissed€the€petition.€€ÌÌà àOn€appeal,€Appellant's€sole€issue€concerns€whether€the€warrantless€search€of€theÏvehicle€violated€his€federal€and€state€constitutional€rights.€€As€with€any€review€of€this€type,€we€areÏlimited€to€determining€whether€the€rights€of€Appellant€have€been€prejudiced€because€theÏadministrative€findings€and€conclusions€are:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à(1)€€In€violation€of€constitutional€or€statutory€provisions;Ìà8 àà à(2)€€In€excess€of€the€statutory€authority€of€the€agency;Ìà8 àà à(3)€€Made€upon€unlawful€procedure;Ìà8 àà à(4)€Arbitrary€or€capricious€or€characterized€by€abuse€ofÏdiscretion€or€clearly€unwarranted€exercise€of€discretion;€orÌà8 àà à(5)€€Unsupported€by€evidence€which€is€both€substantial€andÍmaterial€in€the€light€of€the€entire€record.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òSeeóóó ó€T.C.A.€ðð€4„5„322(h).ÌÌà àòòò òState€v.€Murphy,€óóó óNo.€01C01„9406„CR„00210€(Tenn.€Cr.€App.€May€11,€1995),Ïappeal€denied,€is€the€separate€criminal€action€arising€from€this€matter.€€After€denial€of€his€motion€toÏsuppress€in€the€criminal€proceeding,€Appellant€pled€guilty€to€the€charges€for€which€he€wasÏindicted,€while€reserving€the€right€to€appeal€a€certified€question€of€law€in€accordance€with€RuleÏ37(b)(2)(i)€T.R.Cr.P.× ƒ& ××  ×€€òòò òMurphyóóó ó,€slip€op.€at€2.€€In€a€footnote,€òòò òMurphyóóó ó€notes:€€ÌÌÓÓà8 à[T]he€trial€court€filed€a€lengthy€memorandum€supporting€his€denialÏof€appellant's€motion€to€suppress.€.€.€.€€The€trial€judge€filed€anÏamended€judgment€order€with€this€court€stating€that€the€districtÏattorney€and€the€trial€court€agreed€with€appellant€that€the€questionÏwas€dispositive€in€this€case€and€that€the€issue€had€been€reserved€inÏconjunction€with€appellant's€guilty€pleas.€€The€amended€order€doesÏnot€specifically€define€the€issue€as€reserved€by€the€appellant.€ÏHowever,€the€lengthy€memorandum€prepared€by€the€trial€courtÏsufficiently€defines€the€issue€to€allow€a€review€of€the€merits.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òMurphy,óóó ó€slip€op.€at€2€n.1.€€According€to€òòò òMurphy,€óóó óthe€issue€before€it€was€"whether€theÏwarrantless€search€of€appellant's€vehicle€was€unreasonable€and€in€violation€of€the€FourthÏAmendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€Section€7€of€the€Constitution€of€theÏState€of€Tennessee."€€òòò òId.€óóó óat€2„3.€€ÌÌà àUpon€consideration€of€the€issue,€òòò òMurphyóóó ó€concluded€that€"the€record€supports€aÍconclusion€that€both€probable€cause€and€an€actual€exigency€existed."€€òòò òId.óóó ó€at€7.€€òòò òMurphyóóó ó€reasoned:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àProbable€cause€is€not€a€technical€calculation,€but€a€factualÏand€practical€consideration€of€everyday€life€upon€which€"reasonableÏand€prudent€[people],€not€legal€technicians,€act."€€òòò òState€v.ÏMelsonóóó ó,€638€S.W.2d€342,€351€(Tenn.1982)€(citations€omitted).€ÏOn€these€facts,€the€police€had€probable€cause€to€believe€that€the€two„tone€gray€Astro€van€with€California€plates,€which€they€followedÏfrom€the€address€given€them€by€the€confidential€informant,Ïcontained€contraband.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€police€were€faced€with€a€situation€which€requiredÏimmediate€action.€€The€vehicle€was€parked€in€a€public€lot.€€AlthoughÏappellant€was€under€arrest,€he€was€accompanied€by€a€woman€whoÏcould€drive€the€car€away.€€Moreover,€the€police€had€reason€toÏbelieve€that€two€men€were€involved€in€the€sale€of€drugs.€€If€theÏvehicle€were€left€unattended€in€the€lot,€any€evidence€of€illegal€activityÏcould€be€removed€by€either€the€woman€passenger€or€by€theÏunapprehended€accomplice.ÌÌà8 àà àIf€the€police€have€probable€cause€to€believe€that€anÏautomobile€contains€contraband,€they€may€either€seize€the€car€andÏthen€obtain€a€search€warrant€or€they€may€search€it€immediately.€€TheÏFourth€Amendment€authorizes€either€action.€€òòò òChambers€v.ÏMaroneyóóó ó,€399€U.S.€42,€52€(1970).€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 àà àThe€otherwise€reasonable€search€is€not€invalidated€by€the€factÏthat€the€police€could€have€obtained€a€warrant€earlier.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 àà àSince€the€police€had€probable€cause€to€believe€the€vanÏcontained€illegal€drugs€and€since€there€were€exigent€circumstancesÏwhich€required€immediate€action,€the€police€could€either€impoundÏthe€car€and€search€it€after€a€warrant€issued€or€they€could€search€it€atÏonce.€€òòò òChambersóóó ó,€399€U.S.€at€52.€€Their€decision€to€search€itÏimmediately€was€reasonable€under€the€circumstances€and€violatedÏneither€the€Fourth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€orÏArticle€I,€Section€7€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€The€trial€courtÏdid€not€err€in€denying€appellant's€motion€to€suppress€the€results€ofÏthat€search.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òIdóóó ó.€at€8„10.ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€we€are€confronted€with€the€issue€of€whether€or€not€the€Department'sÏdecision€upholding€the€forfeiture€of€Appellant's€property€is€within€the€confines€of€T.C.A.€ðð€4„5„322(h).€€The€only€argument€made€on€appeal€is€that€which€has€previously€been€addressed€by€theÍcourt€in€òòò òState€v.€Murphyóóó ó.€€Ordinarily,€a€plea€of€guilty€is€not€considered€conclusive€on€the€issuesÏin€a€subsequent€civil€action.€€òòò òGrange€Mut.€Casu.€Co.€v.€Walkeróóó ó,€652€S.W.2d€908€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1983).€€A€criminal€court€conviction,€however,€may€operate€as€an€estoppel€in€subsequent€civilÏlitigation€"where€the€issues€have€been€determined€in€the€previous€criminal€prosecution."€€òòò òGrangeÏMutualóóó ó,€652€S.W.2d€at€910.€€In€this€particular€case,€we€have€a€plea€of€guilty,€but€with€subsequentÏactual€litigation€and€adjudication€of€the€dispositive€issue€of€this€case.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€thatÏAppellant€has€had€opportunity€once€already€to€litigate€the€issue€and€that€Appellant€is€estopped€fromÏre„litigating€the€issue€here.ÌÌà àThe€court€in€òòò òMorris€v.€Esmark€Apparel,€Inc.,óóó ó€832€S.W.2d€563€(Tenn.€App.Ï1991),€defines€the€doctrine€of€collateral€estoppel€as€"the€judicially„promulgated€policy€of€reposeÏpreventing€relitigation€of€a€particular€dispositive€issue€which€was€necessarily€or€actually€decidedÏwith€finality€in€a€previous€suit€involving€at€least€one€of€the€parties€on€a€different€cause€of€action."€Ïòòò òMorrisóóó ó,€832€S.W.2d€at€565.€€Factors€to€consider€in€determining€whether€one€is€to€be€collaterallyÏestopped€from€re„litigating€an€issue€include€whether€the€issue€decided€in€the€prior€adjudication€wasÏidentical€with€the€present€issue€presented;€whether€the€party€against€whom€collateral€estoppel€isÏasserted€was€a€party€or€in€privy€to€the€party€to€the€prior€adjudication;€whether€the€party€againstÏwhom€collateral€estoppel€is€asserted€had€a€full€and€fair€opportunity€to€litigate€the€issue€in€the€priorÏsuit;€and€whether€the€prior€suit€resulted€in€a€judgment€on€the€merits.€€òòò òIdóóó ó.€at€566.ÌÌà àWe€conclude€that€the€procedural€history€of€this€case€clearly€warrants€application€ofÏthe€doctrine.€€The€judgment€of€the€chancery€court€affirming€the€Department's€decision€forfeiting€ÌAppellant's€property€is,€therefore,€affirmed.€€We€assess€costs€against€Joe€Iva€Murphy,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓ` Ü` È“XÓÓÓà à________________________________Ìà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌHIGHERS,€J.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌWILLIAMS,€Sp.€J.€(Concurs)