State v. Scott
North Dakota Supreme Court
Prosecution for perjury. Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, Honorable X. 'E. Leighton, Judge. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Statement of facts by Bruce, Ch. J. This is a prosecution for perjury.
Read the full summary
Prosecution for perjury. Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, Honorable X. 'E. Leighton, Judge. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Statement of facts by Bruce, Ch. J. This is a prosecution for perjury. The information charges: “That, heretofore, to wit, on or about the 28th day of January, in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, at the county of Ward, in said state of North Dakota, one Peter Scott, late of said county of Ward and state aforesaid, did wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously, knowingly, and falsely commit the crime of perjury committed as…
1Opinion of the Court
Bruce, Ch. J.
(after stating the facts as above). It is first alleged that the trial court erred in overruling an objection to the introduction ■of evidence under the information, on the ground that the latter did' not state a cause of action.
The defendant and appellant asserts that “the information is grossly unfair and vicious. We are in effect charged with pigging, with a penalty of perjury if convicted. We are therein accused of false swearing in half a dozen instances, whereof there was no testimony produced. And to cap the climax, the information merely (if carefully read) •charges that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. CaywoodSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- State v. MalmbergNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
- Cothran v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
- State v. SwaffordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- State v. CloughSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. KenstlerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1921
- State v. HansonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981