STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. IVONNE SAAVEDRA
A-1449-12T4
Defendant was employed by the North Bergen Board of
Education as a clerk to the child study team. She was
indicted with one count of second-degree official
misconduct and one count of third-degree theft for
allegedly taking confidential student records to assist her
attorney in the prosecution of her civil employment
discrimination claims against her employer. Relying on
Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 204 N.J. 239 (2010),
defendant unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the indictment
before the trial court.
We granted leave to appeal and now affirm. We reject
defendant's argument that she had an absolute right to take
confidential student records to support her wrongful
termination suit against the Board. Quinlan does not
establish a bright-line rule decriminalizing conduct that
is otherwise sufficient to support an indictment under
State v. Hogan, 144 N.J. 216 (1996). The trial judge was
not required to apply the multi-factor test in Quinlan to
determine whether the State presented a prima facie case to
support the indictment against defendant. Defendant is
free, however, to raise Quinlan at trial to negate the
state of mind requirements of official misconduct under
N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2a and theft under N.J.S.A. 2C:20-2b(2)(g),
as an affirmative defense.
Judge Simonelli dissents. She would have dismissed the
indictment with prejudice on fundamental fairness grounds. 12/24/13
A-1449-12T4
Defendant was employed by the North Bergen Board of
Education as a clerk to the child study team. She was
indicted with one count of second-degree official
misconduct and one count of third-degree theft for
allegedly taking confidential student records to assist her
attorney in the prosecution of her civil employment
discrimination claims against her employer. Relying on
Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 204 N.J. 239 (2010),
defendant unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the indictment
before the trial court.
We granted leave to appeal and now affirm. We reject
defendant's argument that she had an absolute right to take
confidential student records to support her wrongful
termination suit against the Board. Quinlan does not
establish a bright-line rule decriminalizing conduct that
is otherwise sufficient to support an indictment under
State v. Hogan, 144 N.J. 216 (1996). The trial judge was
not required to apply the multi-factor test in Quinlan to
determine whether the State presented a prima facie case to
support the indictment against defendant. Defendant is
free, however, to raise Quinlan at trial to negate the
state of mind requirements of official misconduct under
N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2a and theft under N.J.S.A. 2C:20-2b(2)(g),
as an affirmative defense.
Judge Simonelli dissents. She would have dismissed the
indictment with prejudice on fundamental fairness grounds. 12/24/13
