Missouri Supreme Court’s decision in McCloskey v. State involved an appeal arising from a petition for replevin by Mark McCloskey, who sought the return of two firearms seized by the police. McCloskey and his spouse had brandished the firearms as a group of protesters passed by their home. They were initially charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon but later reached a plea agreement where McCloskey pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault and forfeited the ownership and possession of the firearms in exchange for the State dismissing the felony charge.
Subsequently, McCloskey was pardoned by the governor and filed a petition against the State, the Sheriff, and the Mayor seeking the return of the weapons based on the pardon. However, the court found that while the pardon did restore all rights forfeited by convicted McCloskey, it did not erase the fact of his guilt. Therefore, his guilty plea remained and forfeited the guns, meaning the pardon did not entitle him to recover the firearms.
Additionally, the court also dismissed McCloskey’s claims related to the unconstitutional seizure of the firearms, stating that he could not raise independent claims regarding the deprivation of constitutional rights after admitting guilt in open court.