Possession or Use of a False Identification Card Does Not Support Aggravated Forgery Conviction.

State v. Reynua, Minn.Ct.App., 12/5/2011, petition for further review GRANTED, 2/28/2012.  Ms. Reynua possessed and used a Minnesota identification card with another person’s name as proof of identification when Hormel hired her, and to register two cars.  For this a district court judge found her guilty of aggravated forgery under Minn.Stat. 609.625, subd 1(1).  Ms. Reynua argued that because the identification card did not create any legal right or privilege her conduct in possessing it did not constitute aggravated forgery.  Here’s what the pertinent portion of the statute says:

Whoever, with intent to defraud, falsely makes or alters a writing or object of any of the following kinds . . . is guilty of aggravated forgery . . .:

(1) a writing or object whereby, when genuine, legal rights, privileges, or obligations are created, terminated, transferred, or evidenced, . . . .

The court of appeals agreed, concluding that the identification card is merely a document to establish identity.

The state also charged Ms.Reynua with five counts for her conduct involving a federal I-9 form, a federal form used to verify eligibility for employment based on citizenship or other legal status.  Ms. Reynua argued that federal law preempts any state prosecution for such conduct.  The court of appeals agrees with this argument but only in part.  A perjury prosecution for false statements on the I-9 form is preempted, but not so on a simple forgery charge based on the use of the Minnesota identification card.