Case ID: misc2d_69/html/0216-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Edwin G. Axel, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    December 20, 1971.
    
      Sidney Schreiberg for appellant. Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney (Michael R. Juviler, Bennett L. Gershman and Jonathan Lovett of counsel), for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

We reject the claim that the commercial bribing statute (Penal Law, § 180.00) is unconstitutional for vagueness (see State v. Brewer, 258 N. C. 533, app. dsmd. 375 U. S. 9). The statute gives clear warning to a citizen not to offer or pay anything to another’s employee with intent to influence his conduct in relation to his employer’s affairs without the latter’s consent. We find no merit to the appellant’s argument that the failure of the statute to specifically condemn improper ” influence is fatal (see, i.e., People v. Cilento, 2 N Y 2d 55; United States v. Kenner, 354 F. 2d 780, cert. den. 383 U. S. 958; United States v. Irwin, 354 F. 2d 192, cert. den. 383 U. S. 967).

The judgment of conviction should be affirmed.

Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Markowitz and Quinn, JJ.

Judgment of conviction affirmed.