State v. Hayes

In a trial to the court, the trial judge found that defendant had knowingly made a false statement under oath. The majority reverses defendant’s conviction, because “a perjury prosecution may not be based on an inference that a defendant meant one thing when he said another, if the defendant’s response could have been clarified with more precise questioning.” 116 Or App at 290. Because that holding renders the legislature’s definition of “statement” meaningless and ignores our standard of review, I dissent.

A statement of fact or a statement of belief can be the subject of a perjury charge.1…