Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. HAFF

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Jun 4, 1981
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Subdivision 3 of section 107 of the Civil Service Law is a valid regulation of partisan political conduct. What it proscribes is the giving within a building occupied for governmental purposes by a public officer to his subordinates of notice that they are to collect and receive political contributions (People v Haff, 47 N.Y.2d 695). Limited as to place, its regulation of speech is reasonable (Civil Serv. Comm. v Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548; Broadrick v Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601; Ex Parte Curtis, 106 U.S. 371). Nor, in view of the commonly understood meaning of the words in which it is phrased, can it be held void for vagueness (Broadrick v Oklahoma, supra, at pp 607-608).

The evidence of defendant's guilt was sufficient since as People v Haff (supra) makes clear the section does not require that coercive language be used, and since there was nonaccomplice testimony fairly tending to connect defendant with the commission of the crime (People v Glasper, 52 N.Y.2d 970).

We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.