Stacey McCurry’s stolen ATV turned up. By then, a sheriff had already gotten a judge to sign it over to his office.
McCurry, of Stillwater, Oklahoma, is suing the Grady County Sheriff’s Office to recover an all-terrain vehicle that was stolen in Payne County in 2020. The case, McCurry v. Grady County Sheriff (CJ-2026-00297), was filed Aug. 28 in Grady County District Court as a petition for replevin and conversion, along with a request for an order to stay. Replevin is the centuries-old legal action for a simple demand: give me back my property.
The defendant isn’t whoever took the ATV. It’s the agency that ended up holding it.
Found, listed for destruction, then titled
According to reporting by KGOU, Oklahoma’s public radio station, the ATV turned up in Grady County in 2021. On June 9, 2025, Sheriff Gary Boggess filed a handwritten petition stating the ATV was unclaimed and had been placed on a list to be destroyed. A judge granted the sheriff’s office title the same day, KGOU reported.
The machine still had a paper trail, though. In 2026, the Payne County Sheriff’s Office contacted McCurry about the ATV after it came up in NCIC, the FBI-run National Crime Information Center that police agencies use to check for stolen vehicles and other property, according to KGOU.
That put two Oklahoma sheriff’s offices on opposite ends of the same four-wheeler: one letting McCurry know the stolen ATV had surfaced, and the other holding a court order that said it now belonged to the county.
McCurry asked Grady County for it back and was turned down, the station reported. The explanation, as described in court filings KGOU cited, came from Undersheriff Kori Brewer: the title had already been transferred, and the sheriff’s office had spent tax money repairing the ATV.
Boiled down, the stolen ATV can’t go home because the county fixed it.
What Oklahoma law lays out
Oklahoma does let a sheriff’s office keep unclaimed property for official use. The steps are in Title 22, Section 1325 of the state statutes, and they aren’t built to happen in an afternoon. The agency files an application in district court describing the property. The court sets a hearing no sooner than 10 days and no later than 20 days after that filing. Written notice of the hearing goes to each known owner by first-class mail at least 10 days ahead. Only if no owner appears does the court make the property available to the sheriff’s office.
If the June 9, 2025, petition was the entire process, it’s hard to see where a 10-day notice window would have fit. McCurry’s attorney, Ryland Rivas of Chickasha, told KGOU that if a separate application, notice, hearing record and order exist, they should answer the questions, and that if they don’t, the public deserves to know what process the sheriff’s office followed between recovering stolen property and claiming it under oath.
It’s also not clear from the public record what, if anything, the sheriff’s office checked before describing the ATV as unclaimed.
Where the case stands
The online court docket lists District Attorney Jason Hicks and Assistant District Attorney Charles Sifers as counsel on the county’s side. An entry of appearance was filed Sept. 18, and the sheriff’s office filed its answer to McCurry’s petition on Sept. 29. The Auto Wire has not reviewed that answer. The case is assigned to Judge Kory S. Kirkland, and no hearing date appeared on the docket as of Sept. 29. KGOU’s report did not include a response from Boggess.
Plate cameras can now flag a stolen vehicle within minutes, as one did when Florida troopers ran down a stolen Honda in Miami-Dade. Some never turn up at all, like several of the cars taken from Hot Rod Power Tour hotels in Joliet. McCurry’s did turn up, which was supposed to be the end of her problem.
Not the only property fight in Grady County
McCurry’s lawsuit isn’t the county’s only dispute over seized or recovered property. KGOU also reported on a 2022 case, CJ-2022-00006, stemming from burglary search warrants. Property worth more than $71,000 was seized, including multiple Ford pickups, a semi truck, a triple-axle gooseneck trailer, welding tools, liquor bottles, Barbie dolls and a bow and arrow, and much of it has not been returned despite a court order, according to the station. Some items went missing, and the sheriff’s explanation, KGOU reported, was that they had been stolen from the evidence container itself.
In another case filed in June, CJ-2026-187, a Canadian County woman’s two handguns seized in 2024 were eventually returned. Rivas, who also represents her, told KGOU the guns came back having been fired, taken apart, cleaned and put back together.
None of the claims in McCurry’s case have been decided. The question in front of the court is one that sounds like it shouldn’t need a judge: when a sheriff’s office recovers a stolen vehicle, whose is it?
If police recovered your stolen vehicle years later and had already put money into it, who should it belong to, and who should pay for the repairs?