State v. Howard

Citations

• 91 Wash. 481
• 158 P. 104
• 1916 Wash. LEXIS 1095

Syllabus

<p>Perjury — False Swearing — Statutes. A prosecution for perjury in the second degree may he predicated upon an affidavit as to the financial condition of a hank voluntarily made by one of its officers and not required by law; under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 2353, defining perjury in the second degree as false swearing concerning any matter whatsoever by any person “whether as a volunteer or in a proceeding or investigation authorized by law”; the use of the disjunctive plainly manifesting the intent to treat voluntary false swearing the same as false swearing in a proceeding or investigation.</p> <p>Same — “Oath”—Statutes. An “oath” as a basis of a prosecution for false swearing or perjury in the second degree does not imply a form of inquiry required by law; especially in view of Rem. & Bal. Code, § 2354, defining an oath as “an affirmation and every other mode authorized by law of attesting the truth of that which is stated,” and declaring that any person who shall state any matter under oath shall be deemed to swear thereto.</p> <p>Same — Sworn Statements — Affidavits Before Notary. Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 8298, authorizing a notary public to take affidavits and administer all oaths required by law to be administered, false swearing or perjury in the second degree may be predicated upon a false affidavit sworn to before a notary public, although the affidavit was not required by law; an affidavit being not only a written oath but a statement of things sworn to.</p>