People v. McDermott
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Court of Sessions of San Joaquin County. This was an indictment and conviction for the crime of perjury. The defendant executed his promissory note to one Michael O’Hear for five hundred dollars, upon which suit was brought in the Fifth District Court, and a copy of the note was set out in the complaint.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Sessions of San Joaquin County. This was an indictment and conviction for the crime of perjury. The defendant executed his promissory note to one Michael O’Hear for five hundred dollars, upon which suit was brought in the Fifth District Court, and a copy of the note was set out in the complaint. In his answer, which .was verified, the defendant stated that the note set out in the complaint was not his note—that the defendant admitted that about the date of the note sued on, he made a note for five hundred dollars to the plaintiff, but that note the defendant was…
1Opinion of the Court
Burnett, J., after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the Court—Field, J., concurring.
The only question necessary to be determined is, whether the oath taken by defendant was material to the issue. The rule is well established, that the false oath must be material to the issue, and, therefore, prejudicial to some one, otherwise, however willful, it cannot be perjury.
Taking the whole of the answer of defendant together, it *291is plain that he predicated his denial that the note set out in the complaint was not his note, upon the ground, that the note given by him did not contain the…
2Cited by9 opinions
- People v. BrophyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- People v. KobrinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Culbertson v. NelsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. PlanerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.