Legal Opinion

State v. Aguilar

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided September 10, 1982No. 13171Published

1Dissent

McFADDEN, Justice,

dissenting. .

I must dissent from the opinion of the majority because the trial court improperly directed the jury that as a matter of law Aguilar was under oath at the time of the alleged false statement. The elements of perjury as defined in I.C. § 18-5401 are (1) that defendant has taken an oath, (2) before a competent tribunal, officer or person, and (3) that he wilfully made a false statement (4) as to a material matter.

The state must allege and prove to the jury each essential element of the crime charged. See, e.g. State v. Dunn, 44 Idaho 636, 258 P. 553 (1927); State…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. D. H. Roe and Stratoray Oil, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
  2. United States v. Scott Sheldon and Mitchell Paul SolomonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
  3. Willie Ray Harrell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
  4. Thomas H. Brooks and August J. Maureau, Jr. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
  5. State v. ScheminiskyIdaho Supreme Court · 1918

4 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