What to Know
- New Jersey's Supreme Court reversed the conviction Monday of a woman who was accused of stealing documents from her ex-lover's truck in order to help a whistleblower's complaint against him
- In a unanimous opinion, the court tossed out Donna Alessi's convictions on charges of burglary, lying to police and hindering apprehension
- According to court documents, Alessi, a Hunterdon County woman, worked at a construction company and dated a married co-worker who was the subject of a whistleblower suit by an employee
New Jersey's Supreme Court reversed the conviction Monday of a woman who was accused of stealing documents from her ex-lover's truck in order to help a whistleblower's complaint against him.
In a unanimous opinion, the court tossed out Donna Alessi's convictions on charges of burglary, lying to police and hindering apprehension.
According to court documents, Alessi, a Hunterdon County woman, worked at a construction company and dated a married co-worker who was the subject of a whistleblower suit by an employee.
After the couple broke up in 2013, Alessi was accused of stealing documents from his truck and mailing them along with a letter to the whistleblower, ostensibly to help his lawsuit.
When it was discovered the documents had been taken, authorities used surveillance video at the post office where the package was mailed to help determine it was Alessi who had sent the documents.
After unsuccessful attempts to contact her, a police officer stopped Alessi as she drove away from her home. During a subsequent interview, she claimed she mailed the documents to implicate the whistleblower and another person in the office; later, though, when police showed her surveillance video from the bar that showed her entering the truck, she admitted she sent the documents to the whistleblower to spite her former lover.
On appeal, Alessi argued the police officer didn't have reasonable suspicion to make the traffic stop, partly because she hadn't committed a traffic violation. The state countered that Alessi's earlier avoidance of police and the fact authorities knew of the video evidence that she'd mailed the documents justified the stop.
The Supreme Court disagreed Monday, holding that police could have sought a "field inquiry"- a voluntary encounter - or, if warranted, applied for a subpoena.
"A law enforcement officer cannot use an automobile stop merely for the purpose of a police interview," they wrote. "In short, an officer cannot conduct an investigatory stop without observing a traffic violation or having a reasonable suspicion of other criminal activity."
An appeals court had tossed the convictions on charges of lying to police and hindering apprehension but allowed the burglary conviction to stand. The justices reversed that Monday, writing that the statements from Alessi's unconstitutional traffic stop were used to impeach her credibility at trial.
A message was left Monday with the state attorney general's office seeking comment.
