of Elections, 303 N.J. Super. 371 (Ch. Div.), aff’d 303 N.J.
Super. 352 (App. Div.), certif. 149 N.J. 139 (1997).
However, this statutory provision does not apply to a vote
cast by a municipal corporation officer while exercising
the rights and duties of his office. Galloway v. Council of
Clark Twp., N.J. Super. 409 (Law Div. 1966), aff’d 94
N.J. Super. 27 (App. Div. 1967).
In Hitchner v. Cumberland County Board of Elections,
163 N.J. Super. 560 (Co. 1978), the Court held that a
convicted criminal was entitled to vote in an election
when free on his own recognizance pending his future
surrender date to prison, and the Superintendent of
Elections failed to notify him that he was disqualified, so
that he was only informed of his disqualification when he
was refused the right to vote at the polling place.
In State v. Musto, 188 N.J. Super. 106 (App. Div.
1983), the Court held that N.J.S.A. 2C:51-2, which
mandates forfeiture of public office upon conviction, was
constitutional notwithstanding that the state constitu-
tion limits eligibility for membership in the State Senate
to persons entitled to the right of suffrage.
VI. COMPETENCY TO VOTE
The state constitution, N.J. Const.1947, Art. 2, ¶ 1
and N.J.S.A. 19:4-1 deny the right of suffrage to “idiots
or insane persons” both.
Voters who are involuntarily committed residents of
a psychiatric hospital, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 30:24 to 80,
are presumed competent to vote. In The Matter of
Absentee Ballots Cast by Five Residents of Trenton Psychiatric
Hospital, 331 N.J. Super. 31 (App. Div. 2000).
VII. CONTRIBUTIONS
N.J.S.A. 19:44-21 makes the concealment or
misrepresentation of contributions or expenditures a
fourth degree crimes. N.J.S.A. 19:34-45 prohibits
corporations in certain industries from making political
contributions.
Thus, a bank’s purchase of ten $100 tickets to a
political reception and dinner, payment of which was by
check payable to a candidate’s campaign committee,
violated N.J.S.A. 19:34-45. State v. Bank of New Jersey,
139 N.J. Super. 593 (Law Div. 1976).
In Markwardt v. New Beginnings, 204 N.J. Super.
522 (App. Div. 1997), the Court held that individuals,
corporations, businesses and continuing political
committees may not evade the restrictions on the
amounts of contributions that may be made, set forth in
N.J.S.A. 19:44A-1 to 19:44A-47, the Campaign
Contributions and Expenditure Reporting Act, by
entering into an agreement to funnel monies to a
candidate or candidate’s campaign committee.