(a) The definitions in Sections 13A-10-1 and 13A-10-60 are applicable in this article unless the context otherwise requires.
(b) The following definitions are also applicable in this article:
(1) SWEARS FALSELY and FALSE SWEARING. The making of a false statement under oath required or authorized by law, or the swearing or affirming the truth of such statement previously made, which the declarant does not believe to be true. A false swearing in a subscribed written instrument shall not be deemed complete until the instrument is delivered by its subscriber, or by someone acting in his behalf, to another person with intent that it be uttered or published as true.
(2) MATERIAL. A statement is “material,” regardless of the admissibility of the statement under the rules of evidence, if it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding. It is no defense that the declarant mistakenly believed the falsification to be immaterial. Whether a falsification is material in a given factual situation is a question of law.
(3) OATH. Such term includes an affirmation and every other mode authorized by law of attesting to the truth of that which is stated. For the purposes of this article, written statements shall be treated as if made under oath if:
a. The statement was made on or pursuant to form bearing notice, authorized by law, to the effect that false statements made therein are punishable; or
b. The statement recites that it was made under oath, the declarant was aware of such recitation at the time he made the statement and intended that the statement should be represented as a sworn statement, and the statement was in fact so represented by its delivery or utterance with the signed jurat of an officer authorized to administer oaths appended thereto.
(4) REQUIRED OR AUTHORIZED BY LAW. An oath is “required or authorized by law” when the use of the oath is provided for by statute or municipal ordinance.
(5) OFFICIAL PROCEEDING. Any proceeding heard before any legislative, judicial, administrative or other government agency or official authorized to hear evidence under oath.
(6) JURAT. A clause wherein a notary public or other attesting officer authorized by law to administer oaths in connection with affidavits, depositions and other subscribed written instruments certifies that the subscriber has appeared before him and sworn to the truth of the contents thereof.
(Acts 1977, No. 607, p. 812, §4901.)
Notes of Decisions
Roe v. Mobile Cnty. Appointment Bd., 676 So. 2d 1206 (Ala. 1995).
· cites it 2× “" "[S]wears falsely" is defined in § 13A-10-100(b)(1) as "[t]he making of a false statement under oath required or authorized by law.”
Ikner v. State, 600 So. 2d 435 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “" Ala.Code 1975, § 13A-10-100(2). "Regardless of the scope of the proceeding in which testimony is given, .”
Barnette v. State, 855 So. 2d 1129 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003).
“” § 13A-10-121(a), Ala.Code 1975 (emphasis added).”
Johnson v. State, 932 So. 2d 979 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005).
“Section 13A-10-100(a)(5), Ala.Code 1975, defines “official proceeding” as “[a]ny proceeding heard before any legislative, judicial, administrative or other government agency or official authorized to hear evidence under oath.”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
· cites it 12× “Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
· cites it 12× “Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Cooner v. State, 272 So. 3d 206 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
· cites it 3× “" § 13A-10-100(b)(1), Ala. Code 1975. Finally, a person's statement is "material to the proceeding in which it is made" if "it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.”
Fort v. State, 668 So. 2d 888 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995).
“Furthermore, § 13A-10-100(b)(2) defines “material,” for purposes of perjury, as follows: “A statement is ‘material,’ regardless of the admissibility of the statement under the rules of evidence, if it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.”
Bogle v. State, 477 So. 2d 507 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985).
· cites it 4× “” § 13A-10-100(b)(3) (emphasis added). “An oath is ‘required or authorized by law’ when the use of the oath is provided for by statute or municipal ordinance.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(2) — 1 case
Ikner v. State, 600 So. 2d 435 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992).
“" Ala.Code 1975, § 13A-10-100(2). "Regardless of the scope of the proceeding in which testimony is given, .”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(a)(5) — 3 cases
Johnson v. State, 932 So. 2d 979 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005).
“Section 13A-10-100(a)(5), Ala.Code 1975, defines “official proceeding” as “[a]ny proceeding heard before any legislative, judicial, administrative or other government agency or official authorized to hear evidence under oath.”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(b)(1) — 4 cases
Roe v. Mobile Cnty. Appointment Bd., 676 So. 2d 1206 (Ala. 1995).
“" "[S]wears falsely" is defined in § 13A-10-100(b)(1) as "[t]he making of a false statement under oath required or authorized by law.”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Cooner v. State, 272 So. 3d 206 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“" § 13A-10-100(b)(1), Ala. Code 1975. Finally, a person's statement is "material to the proceeding in which it is made" if "it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(b)(2) — 2 cases
Fort v. State, 668 So. 2d 888 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995).
“Furthermore, § 13A-10-100(b)(2) defines “material,” for purposes of perjury, as follows: “A statement is ‘material,’ regardless of the admissibility of the statement under the rules of evidence, if it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.”
Cooner v. State, 272 So. 3d 206 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“" § 13A-10-100(b)(1), Ala. Code 1975. Finally, a person's statement is "material to the proceeding in which it is made" if "it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(b)(3) — 2 cases
Roe v. Mobile Cnty. Appointment Bd., 676 So. 2d 1206 (Ala. 1995).
“" "[S]wears falsely" is defined in § 13A-10-100(b)(1) as "[t]he making of a false statement under oath required or authorized by law.”
Bogle v. State, 477 So. 2d 507 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985).
“” § 13A-10-100(b)(3) (emphasis added). “An oath is ‘required or authorized by law’ when the use of the oath is provided for by statute or municipal ordinance.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(b)(4) — 1 case
Bogle v. State, 477 So. 2d 507 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985).
“” § 13A-10-100(b)(3) (emphasis added). “An oath is ‘required or authorized by law’ when the use of the oath is provided for by statute or municipal ordinance.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(b)(5) — 4 cases
Barnette v. State, 855 So. 2d 1129 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003).
“” § 13A-10-121(a), Ala.Code 1975 (emphasis added).”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Habel v. State, 268 So. 3d 651 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“Habel contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction because, she says, the false statement at issue was not made during an official proceeding, as that term is defined in § 13A-10-100, Ala. Code 1975, and as is required for a…”
Cooner v. State, 272 So. 3d 206 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018).
“" § 13A-10-100(b)(1), Ala. Code 1975. Finally, a person's statement is "material to the proceeding in which it is made" if "it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-10-100(b)(l) — 1 case
Bogle v. State, 477 So. 2d 507 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985).
“” § 13A-10-100(b)(3) (emphasis added). “An oath is ‘required or authorized by law’ when the use of the oath is provided for by statute or municipal ordinance.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.