Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Edwin G. Axel, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1971-12-20
Citations: 69 Misc. 2d 216
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Edwin G. Axel, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 69
Pages: 216–217

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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 con sent. 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.