“Intent to Defraud” Includes Using Another’s Name to Avoid a More Serious Crime

State v. Stahosky, Minn.Ct.App., 9/16/2013.  The cops pulled Carissa Jean over for speeding.  Ms. Stahosky’s license was cancelled at the time – inimical to public safety – so she could have been charged with a gross misdemeanor, driving after cancellation of her license.  To avoid this outcome, Ms. Stahosky offered up her sister’s name to the officer.  Since her sister apparently had a valid license, the officer only issued a speeding ticket.  Ms. Stahosky went over to the court house and met with a hearing officer.  She signed a continuance for dismissal, signed a payment agreement, and paid the fine.  Carissa Jean did all this in her sister’s name. 

When Ms. Stahosky’s sister found out about all this she ratted Carissa Jean out.  The state did not think Ms. Stahosky’s actions were the least bit cute.  Rather, they charged her with aggravated forgery.  Following a stipulated facts trial, the district court found her guilty.  Carissa Jean appealed.  She said that she did not intend to defraud anyone – an element of aggravated forgery – because she only intended to avoid being charged with the driving after cancellation; and besides she was paying the damn money on the speeding ticket so what’s the big deal?

Here’s the pertinent part of the aggravated forgery statute:

Whoever, with intent to defraud, falsely makes or alters a writing or object of an y of the following kinds so that it purports to have been made by another or by the maker or alterer under an assumed or fictitious name, or at another time, or with different provisions, or by authority of one who did not give such authority, is guilty of aggravated forgery and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) a writing or object whereby, when genuine, legal rights, privileges, or obligations are created, terminated, transferred, or evidenced, or any writing normally relied upon as evidence of debt or property rights, other than a check as defined in section 609.631 or a financial transaction card as defined in section 609.821[.]

The court concluded that Ms. Stahosky’s signing of the payment agreement and the continuance for dismissal in her sister’s name defrauded her sister, the police and the state.  Her sister got hit with a speeding ticket on her driving record that she didn’t disserve.  The cops and the state didn’t get to charge her with the correct (and more serious) offense.  Had the state obtained a conviction on the more serious offense – a gross misdemeanor – it could also have hit Ms. Stahosky with a three thousand dollar fine rather than the lousy three hundred (or whatever the total cost of the speeding ticket was).  If that’s not “intent to defraud,” what is?