On Tuesday, March 22, 2022, a three-judge panel of the Circuit Court for Benton County, Tennessee, issued an order declaring that Tennessee Code Annotated § 70-1-305(1) is unconstitutional, unlawful, and unenforceable, and that warrantless searches of private property under Tennessee Code Annotated § 70-1-305(1) and (7) by the Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency ("TWRA") are unconstitutional and unlawful.1, 2
For background, this order comes after Terry Rainwaters and Hunter Hollingsworth, two Tennessee landowners, filed a Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief concerning the actions taken by TWRA officers who, without a warrant or probable cause, installed surveillance cameras on both Rainwaters' and Hollingsworth's property to monitor for potential violations of state wildlife laws.3 Specifically, Rainwaters and Hollingsworth alleged such actions by the TWRA officers were in violation of Article I, Section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution.4
In reaching its decision, the three-judge panel, in pertinent part, addressed the following issues:
(1) Whether Tennessee Code Annotated § 70-1-305(1) and (7) implicate constitutionally protected property;
(2) Whether Tennessee Code Annotated § 70-1-305(1) and (7) authorize searches of that property; and
(3) Whether authorized searches pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 70-1-305(1) and (7) are unreasonable.
As to each issue, the three-judge panel answered in the affirmative. Specifically, the three-judge panel noted that while Article I, Section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution were identical in intent and purpose, Tennessee's prohibition on unreasonable searches offers a broader guarantee of security for an individual's real property than its federal counterpart-i.e., Article I, Section 7 protects more than just the home and the curtilage, and private property is expressly protected from warrantless searches by the TWRA pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated subsections 70-1-305(1) and (7).5
As this Order was issued by a lower court, the TWRA may appeal this decision. However, for now, the three-judge panel's Order stands.
Footnotes
1. Rainwaters v. Tenn. Wildlife Resources Agency, No. 20-CV-6 (Cir. Ct. Benton Co., Tenn., Memorandum and Order, entered March 22, 2022).
2. The provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated subsections 70-1-305(1) and (7) state as follows:
The executive director of the wildlife resources agency has the power to:
(1) Enforce all laws relating to wildlife, and to go upon any property, outside of buildings, posted or otherwise, in the performance of the executive director's duties;
. . .
(7) Designate employees of the agency, officers of any other state or of the federal government who are full-time wildlife enforcement personnel, to perform the duties and have the powers as described in this section except subdivision (9) . . . .
3. Rainwaters v. Tenn. Wildlife Resources Agency, No. 20-CV-6 (Cir. Ct. Benton Co., Tenn., Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, filed April 14, 2020).
4. Article I, Section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution provides as follows:
That the people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions, from unreasonable searches and seizures; and that general warrants, whereby an officer may be commanded to search suspected places, without evidence of the fact committed, or to seize any person or persons not named, whose offences are not particularly described and supported by evidence, are dangerous to liberty and ought not to be granted.
5. Rainwaters v. Tenn. Wildlife Resources Agency, No. 20-CV-6 (Cir. Ct. Benton Co., Tenn., Memorandum and Order, entered March 22, 2022).
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
