By NANCY WEST, InDepthNH.org
CONCORD – A judge has denied state Supreme Court Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi’s motion to dismiss all indictments against her alleging she tried to improperly influence a criminal investigation into her husband, Geno Marconi, director of the state Division of Ports and Harbors.
Her attorney Richard Guerriero argued at a hearing Feb. 3 that she had judicial immunity, and her conduct was otherwise protected by her right to free speech and to petition her government.
The indictments allege Hantz Marconi met with then-Gov. Chris Sununu on June 6, 2024, and told him that an investigation into “Geno Marconi was the result of personal, petty, and/or political biases;” that there was no merit to the allegations and that the investigation needed to wrap up quickly because she was recused from important cases pending before the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
The indictments also allege that on April 19, 2024, Hantz Marconi solicited Pease Development Authority Chairman Steve Duprey for a governmental privilege regarding the employment of her husband constituting the crime of misuse of position. The PDA oversees the Division of Ports and Harbors.
Hantz Marconi argued the indictments against her should be dismissed because she is entitled to judicial immunity, her alleged conduct is protected by her rights to free speech and to petition the government, and the statutes under which she was charged are vague and overbroad.
The Attorney General’s Office contended that the motion to dismiss the indictments should be denied because Hantz Marconi relies on unverified factual assertions, failed to thoroughly brief vagueness and overbreadth, and the relevant statutes do not encompass protected conduct because she acted with a criminal purpose.
As to free speech, Merrimack County Superior Court Judge Martin Honigberg wrote: “Both the Supreme Court of the United States and the New Hampshire Supreme Court have held that speech integral to criminal conduct is not protected speech.”
In an order made public Wednesday, Honigberg said: “The grand jury determined that there was enough evidence to find probable cause that (Hantz Marconi) acted with the intent to interfere with the investigation into her husband. While the State will have to prove that intent beyond a reasonable doubt at trial, at this stage the Court must defer to the grand jury’s determinations.”
Hantz Maroni is charged with two Class B Felony charges of Criminal Solicitation and Attempt of Improper Influence, and five Class A Misdemeanor charges of Criminal Solicitation of Official Oppression and Misuse of Position, Official Oppression, and Obstructing Government Administration.
Honigberg determined Hantz Marconi is not judicially immune from criminal prosecution for her alleged conduct.
“Rather, the indictments allege (Hantz Marconi) sought to influence an investigation into her husband by telling then-Governor Sununu that the investigation was ‘the result of personal, petty, and/or political biases,’ and that ‘there was no merit to allegations against or subsequent investigation into Geno Marconi; and/or that the investigation . . . needed to wrap up quickly because she was recused from important cases pending or imminently pending before the New Hampshire Supreme Court.”
“In addition, because (Hantz Marconi) is currently on administrative leave and is not actively sitting in on cases before the New Hampshire Supreme Court, the resulting effect on her ability to exercise independent and reasoned judgment due to her criminal exposure is non-existent.
“Accordingly, the Court determines that (Hantz Marconi) is not judicially immune from criminal prosecution for her alleged conduct.”
The Feb. 3 hearing in Merrimack County Superior Court on Hantz Marconi’s motion to dismiss all of the indictments against her was attended by a number of people there to support her and her husband.
The criminal charges appear relatively minor to critics who have been outspoken in their belief that the charges are politically motivated.
Geno Marconi, 73, was indicted for allegedly falsifying physical evidence by deleting a voicemail and or voicemails from a phone on April 22, 2024. He was also indicted for allegedly retaliating against PDA Board Vice Chairman Neil Levesque, who is also the director of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm College, by providing confidential motor vehicle records pertaining to Levesque to Bradley Cook, in violation of the Driver Privacy Act.
The indictment doesn’t provide details of the alleged retaliation.
Cook, who had spoken out publicly in favor of Geno Marconi, was later indicted for allegedly lying to the grand jury investigating Geno Marconi.
During the Feb. 3 hearing, Guerriero said: “Our position is that even Supreme Court justices have a right to speak with public officials about matters of public concern and about matters of private concern. We don’t think these indictments – any of them state a crime.”
The state’s own witnesses say there was no crime, Guerriero said.
“Here we have the governor of New Hampshire who says, ‘I didn’t see anything illegal and the legal counsel to the governor, now a superior court judge, who said there was nothing illegal and Steve Duprey who says (Hantz Marconi) didn’t ask for any information, she didn’t do anything inappropriate,” Guerriero said.
He was referring to transcripts of interviews with Sununu and Duprey that had been made public as part of this case.
At the Feb. 3 hearing, Assistant Attorney General Joe Fincham argued the case shouldn’t be decided by the judge before trial, but by the jury after they hear all of the evidence.
Read more of InDepthNH.org’s reporting on the case here. https://indepthnh.org/?s=hantz+marconi