cdTOCtest

L. 1999, c. 440 § 98 rewrote the section as part of a
comprehensive legislative effort to strengthen the laws on
public contracts. The new provision was approved on
January 18, 2000. The grading provision, N.J.S.A.
2C:27-4c, is unchanged from prior law. See discussion in
I.G., supra.

In Fleming v. UPS, 255 N.J. Super. 108, 148 (Law
Div. 1992), the court ruled that it was not a violation of
the bribery statutes, nor of the rules governing Attorney
Ethics, for United Parcel Service (UPS) to have paid a
municipal prosecutor for prosecuting a UPS employee for
theft in municipal court, and summarily dismissed the
employee’s claim on this ground.

IV. RETALIATION FOR PAST OFFICIAL ACTION (N.J.S.A. 2C:27-5)

N.J.S.A. 2C:27-5 provides:

A person commits a crime of the fourth degree if he harms
another by any unlawful act with purpose to retaliate for
or on account of the service of another as a public servant.

The term “public servant” is defined in N.J.S.A.
2C:27-1g. See discussion in I.B.4., supra.

V. GIFTS TO PUBLIC SERVANTS (N.J.S.A. 2C:27-6)

A. Elements

A. Elements

This statute also was amended by L. 1999, c. 440 as
part of the Legislature’s comprehensive revision of the
laws on public contracts. The statute now provides, in
subsection a., that a public servant commits a crime if the
person knowingly and under color of office directly or
indirectly solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any benefit
not allowed by law, adding the provision “for that person
or another.” N.J.S.A. 2C:27-6a.

Subsection b. provides that a person commits a crime
if the person, directly or indirectly, confers or agrees to
confer any benefit not allowed by law to a public servant.
There are exceptions to both provisions for lawful fees and
benefits, gifts and benefits conferred on account of
kinship or other relationship independent of official
status, or for trivial benefits involving no risk that the
public servant would perform official duties in a biased
manner. N.J.S.A. 2C:27-6d.

Subsection c, the provision of the prior statute

containing a presumption of capacity to influence a

public servant under certain conditions, was deleted, as

was that element itself from subsections a. and b. Thus

the element of intent to influence the performance of

official duties, critical under the former statute, has been

eliminated.

B. Grading

An offense under this section is a crime of the third

degree, N.J.S.A. 2C:27-6e, unless the gift is valued at

$200 or less, in which case the offense is of the fourth

degree.

C. Benefit

In State v. Woodward, 298 N.J. Super. 390, the

defendant’s argument that his offer to withdraw his

candidacy for city counsel and endorse the incumbent

did not constitute a “benefit not allowed by law” was

rejected. While acknowledging that a candidate is free to

withdraw from the race and support another, the Court

noted that he is not free to do so for “money or other

valuable consideration.” 298 N.J. Super. at 395, citing

N.J.S.A. 19:34-38e. The Court rejected Woodward’s

attempt to dissect his conduct into discrete episodes, and

concluded that he was properly charged with violating

the prior statute. 298 N.J. Super. at 395.

VI. COMPENSATING PUBLIC SERVANT FOR

ASSISTING PRIVATE INTERESTS IN RELA-

TION TO MATTERS BEFORE HIM (N.J.S.A.

2C:27-7)

This section was repealed by L. 1999, c. 440, § 108.

VII. PUBLIC SERVANT TRANSACTING BUSI-

NESS WITH CERTAIN PERSONS (N.J.S.A.

2C:27-9)

A. Elements

A public servant, while performing his official

functions on behalf of a governmental entity, knowingly

transacts any business with himself, a member of his

immediate family, or a business organization in which

the public servant or an immediate family member has an

interest.

The above section, also enacted by L. 1999, c. 440,

as part of the Legislature’s comprehensive effort to