A person is guilty of bribery if he directly or indirectly offers, confers or agrees to confer upon another, or solicits, accepts or agrees to accept from another:
a. Any benefit as consideration for a decision, opinion, recommendation, vote or exercise of discretion of a public servant, party official or voter on any public issue or in any public election; or
b. Any benefit as consideration for a decision, vote, recommendation or exercise of official discretion in a judicial or administrative proceeding; or
c. Any benefit as consideration for a violation of an official duty of a public servant or party official; or
d. Any benefit as consideration for the performance of official duties.
For the purposes of this section "benefit as consideration" shall be deemed to mean any benefit not authorized by law.
It is no defense to prosecution under this section that a person whom the actor sought to influence was not qualified to act in the desired way whether because he had not yet assumed office, or lacked jurisdiction, or for any other reason.
In any prosecution under this section of an actor who offered, conferred or agreed to confer, or who solicited, accepted or agreed to accept a benefit, it is no defense that he did so as a result of conduct by another constituting theft by extortion or coercion or an attempt to commit either of those crimes.
Any offense proscribed by this section is a crime of the second degree. If the benefit offered, conferred, agreed to be conferred, solicited, accepted or agreed to be accepted is of the value of $200.00 or less, any offense proscribed by this section is a crime of the third degree.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
34
cases (
11 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case:
United States v. Manzo, 851 F. Supp. 2d 797 (D.N.J. 2012).
United States v. Manzo, 851 F. Supp. 2d 797 (D.N.J. 2012).
· cites it 50× “Ronald Manzo in violation of the Travel Act and N.J.S.A. § 2C:27-2, concealed such knowledge and failed to make known the same as soon as possible to a judge or other person in civil authority under the United States.”
United States v. Joseph Ferriero, 866 F.3d 107 (3rd Cir. 2017).
· cites it 5× “Laws 664 , 712-13 (codified at N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:27-2), which is more narrow than the statute we construed in Dansker .”
United States v. Peter A. Murphy, 323 F.3d 102 (3rd Cir. 2003).
· cites it 5× “§ 1952 (the predicate offense being bribery under New Jersey law, N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2), and three counts of mail fraud, 18 U.”
United States v. Bryant, 556 F. Supp. 2d 378 (D.N.J. 2008).
· cites it 7× “The government argued that Murphy’s conduct violated the New Jersey Bribery Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2, and therefore that he had violated a sufficient state law duty to warrant a conviction for honest services fraud.”
United States v. Francis Raia, 993 F.3d 185 (3rd Cir. 2021).
“See N.J.S.A. §§ 2C:27-2(a) and 19:34-25(a). By the time of Raia’s trial in June 2019, most of his co- conspirators had reached agreements with the Government.”
United States v. John Bencivengo, 749 F.3d 205 (3rd Cir. 2014).
· cites it 2× “N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:27-2. The statute defines a “public servant” as “any officer or employee of government, including legislators and judges, and any person participating as juror, advisor, consultant or otherwise, in performing a governmental function.”
MacDougall v. Weichert, 677 A.2d 162 (N.J. 1996).
“See N.J.S.A 2C:27-2. Similarly, the general retaliation' *433 statute does not require any prior bribe, offer, or threat before the vote in order to render the retaliation criminal.”
United States v. Caruso, 241 F. Supp. 2d 466 (D.N.J. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Caruso (“Caruso”), pled guilty on January 27, 2000, to a one-count Superseding Information charging him with conspiring to travel in interstate commerce to promote and facilitate a corrupt payment in violation of N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:27-2, and the Federal Travel Act, 18 U.”
United States v. Louis Manzo, 712 F.3d 805 (3rd Cir. 2013).
· cites it 2× “or for any other reason,” N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:27-2 — “is that it encompasses prosecutions where the person whom the action was sought to influence was not yet qualified or [able] to act” (Supplemental App.”
Grecco v. O'Lone, 661 F. Supp. 408 (D.N.J. 1987).
“2C:5-2) and bribery (N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2(c) and N.J. S.A. 2C:2-6).”
United States v. DeLaurentis, 83 F. Supp. 2d 455 (D.N.J. 2000).
· cites it 2× “See N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2. Like many of the courts who have considered this issue before me, I will not permit this outcome absent a clear directive from the Congress that it was its intent in enacting 18 U.”
— N.J. Stat. § 2C:27-2(a) — 8 cases
United States v. Manzo, 851 F. Supp. 2d 797 (D.N.J. 2012).
“Ronald Manzo in violation of the Travel Act and N.J.S.A. § 2C:27-2, concealed such knowledge and failed to make known the same as soon as possible to a judge or other person in civil authority under the United States.”
United States v. Joseph Ferriero, 866 F.3d 107 (3rd Cir. 2017).
“Laws 664 , 712-13 (codified at N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:27-2), which is more narrow than the statute we construed in Dansker .”
United States v. Francis Raia, 993 F.3d 185 (3rd Cir. 2021).
“See N.J.S.A. §§ 2C:27-2(a) and 19:34-25(a). By the time of Raia’s trial in June 2019, most of his co- conspirators had reached agreements with the Government.”
United States v. Peter A. Murphy, 323 F.3d 102 (3rd Cir. 2003).
“§ 1952 (the predicate offense being bribery under New Jersey law, N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2), and three counts of mail fraud, 18 U.”
— N.J. Stat. § 2C:27-2(b) — 1 case
United States v. Manzo, 851 F. Supp. 2d 797 (D.N.J. 2012).
“Ronald Manzo in violation of the Travel Act and N.J.S.A. § 2C:27-2, concealed such knowledge and failed to make known the same as soon as possible to a judge or other person in civil authority under the United States.”
— N.J. Stat. § 2C:27-2(b)(2) — 1 case
— N.J. Stat. § 2C:27-2(c) — 7 cases
Grecco v. O'Lone, 661 F. Supp. 408 (D.N.J. 1987).
“2C:5-2) and bribery (N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2(c) and N.J. S.A. 2C:2-6).”
— N.J. Stat. § 2C:27-2(d) — 4 cases
United States v. Manzo, 851 F. Supp. 2d 797 (D.N.J. 2012).
“Ronald Manzo in violation of the Travel Act and N.J.S.A. § 2C:27-2, concealed such knowledge and failed to make known the same as soon as possible to a judge or other person in civil authority under the United States.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.