Commonwealth v. Davis
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 83 —INDICTMENT— APPEAL PROM SHELBY CIRCUIT COURT. It is not necessary to corroborate two witnesses swearing to the same state of fact to convict one of false swearing. One may be convicted of perjury or false swearing upon written or documentary evidence alone. (Greenleaf’s Evidence, vol. 1, sec. 258.) There is no difference in principle between perjury and false swearing. (Commonwealth v. Scowden, MS. Op., September Term, 1891.)
1Opinion of the Court
CHIEE JUSTICE HOLT
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellee, W. T. Davis, was indicted for false swearing, the oath as charged and proven being: “ That he had *461not upon that day (the day of his trial before a police judge upon the charge of peddling without license) nor the day before been at the house of W. D. Middleton (where Sallie Rhoda lived) nor of Bettie Waggoner, nor had he at either of said houses tried or offered to sell any clothes wringers or other goods.”
Upon the trial of this case Sallie Rhoda testified that at the time charged he was at the Middleton house and talked of…
2Cited by14 opinions
- People v. ToddCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- United States v. PaleseCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1943
- Goslin v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1905
- State v. CrowderWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1961
- Walker v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.