State v. Hodde, 181 N.J. 375

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a conviction for receiving stolen property under N.J.S.A. 2C:20-7a and N.J.S.A. 2C:20-2b(2)(b) requires the State to prove that the property was actually stolen, not merely that the defendant knew or believed it was stolen. The court reversed the conviction because the jury was instructed that the State did not need to prove actual theft and remanded for a new trial.

Holdings

1. To convict a defendant of receiving stolen property under N.J.S.A. 2C:20-7, the State must prove that the property was actually stolen; proof that the defendant merely knew or believed the property was stolen is insufficient.
2. The trial court committed plain error by instructing the jury that the State was not required to prove that the property actually had been stolen, because the instruction omitted and affirmatively negated an element of the offense.

Questions Presented

1. Whether N.J.S.A. 2C:20-7a and the related grading provision, N.J.S.A. 2C:20-2b(2)(b), require the State to prove that property involved in a receiving-stolen-property prosecution was actually stolen.
2. Whether the trial court's instruction that the State need not prove that the property was actually stolen constituted plain error requiring reversal and a new trial.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded