Commonwealth v. DeCost

Citations

• 35 Pa. Super. 88
• 1907 Pa. Super. LEXIS 214

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law— Perjury— Evidence — Materiality—■ Appeals— Indictment.</p> <p>Testimony may be assigned for perjury either where it directly tends to prove or disprove one side or the other of the main issue, or where under the established rules of evidence it directly tends to do so by corroborating or discrediting other evidence or the testimony of another witness. In the former case the materiality may usually be determined by reference to the pleadings without reference to the other testimony; in the latter case, the testimony being given on some secondary issue of fact arising on the trial of the case, its materiality is ordinarily determined by an examination of the other testimony which it is intended to corroborate or contradict.</p> <p>If the question whether or not the materiality of the testimony assigned as perjury was proved, is to be raised on appeal after judgment upon a verdict, it is highly important that the record, including the pleadings in the case in .which it was given, be brought up for examination by the appellate court.</p> <p>It is not absolutely essential in an indictment for perjury to set out the precise words of the testimony alleged to be false; it is sufficient to set forth its substance and effect, talcing care, however, that the meaning of the matter set forth is clearly apparent.</p> <p>Where the indictment contains several assignments of perjury, in order to convict on' any one there must be either two witnesses, or one witness and corroborative evidence to negative the truth of the matter in such assignments.</p>