Legal Opinion

(1996)

Maryland Attorney General Reports

Decided October 21, 1996Published

1Opinion of the Court

Dear Mr. O'Donnell:

You have requested our opinion whether (1) a false statement on a financial disclosure form filed pursuant to the Public Ethics Law could potentially result in a perjury prosecution under Article 27, § 435 of the Maryland Code; and (2) whether financial disclosure statements must be notarized.

Our opinion is as follows:

1. Although the oath on the financial disclosure form omits any reference to "penalties of perjury," this omission does not preclude a perjury prosecution under Article 27, § 435. Nevertheless, so that the form correctly reflects this possibility and does not…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Romm v. FlaxCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  2. State v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1972
  3. Goldstein v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  4. Greenwald v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1960
  5. Collins v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1971

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API