Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 11.56.240 (2026)
Definitions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 11.56.240. Definitions.
Article 3. Escape and Related Offenses.
In AS 11.56.200 — 11.56.240, unless the context requires otherwise,
(1) “statement” means a representation of fact and includes a representation of opinion, belief, or other state of mind when the representation clearly relates to state of mind apart from or in addition to any facts that are the subject of the representation;
(2) “sworn statement” means
(A) a statement knowingly given under oath or affirmation attesting to the truth of what is stated, including a notarized statement; or
(B) a statement knowingly given under penalty of perjury under AS 09.63.020.
In AS 11.56.200 — 11.56.240, unless the context requires otherwise,
(1) “statement” means a representation of fact and includes a representation of opinion, belief, or other state of mind when the representation clearly relates to state of mind apart from or in addition to any facts that are the subject of the representation;
(2) “sworn statement” means
(A) a statement knowingly given under oath or affirmation attesting to the truth of what is stated, including a notarized statement; or
(B) a statement knowingly given under penalty of perjury under AS 09.63.020.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1984–2016 · leading case: In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Ivy, 374 P.3d 374 (Alaska 2016).
In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Ivy, 374 P.3d 374 (Alaska 2016). “AS 11.56.240 broadly defines statements to include “representation[s] of fact[,] .”
Knix v. State, 922 P.2d 913 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “Given Swafford’s failure to administer an oath or affirmation and his failure to include a proper certification, the Knixes insist that their signed statement to Swafford cannot properly be considered a sworn statement as defined in AS 11.56.240(2)(A). However, in Gargan v.”
Harrison v. State, 923 P.2d 107 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “For purposes of this decision, we assume that the absence of a notary or any other official empowered to administer oaths bars Harrison’s affidavit from being deemed a sworn statement under subparagraph (A) of AS 11.56.240(2): “a statement knowingly given under oath or…”
Khan v. State, 204 P.3d 1036 (Alaska Ct. App. 2009). “The State bases this assertion on the legislative commentary to AS 11.56.240(1), the statute which codifies the definition of "statement" for purposes of the perjury statutes (AS 11.”
DeMan v. State, 677 P.2d 903 (Alaska Ct. App. 1984). ““Statement” is broadly defined in AS 11.56.240(1), which provides: (1) “Statement” means a representation of fact and includes a representation of opinion, belief, or other state of mind when the representation clearly relates to state of mind apart from or in addition to any…”
Joseph v. State, 315 P.3d 678 (Alaska Ct. App. 2013). “See AS 11.56.240(2), which defines "sworn statement" (for purposes of perjury prosecutions) as "[any] statement knowingly given under oath or affirmation attesting to the truth of what is stated, including a notarized statement", as well as "[any] statement knowingly given under…”
In Re Ivy (Alaska 2016). “AS 11.56.240 broadly defines statements to include “representation[s] of fact[,] .”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.56.240(1) — 4 cases
In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Ivy, 374 P.3d 374 (Alaska 2016). “AS 11.56.240 broadly defines statements to include “representation[s] of fact[,] .”
Khan v. State, 204 P.3d 1036 (Alaska Ct. App. 2009). “The State bases this assertion on the legislative commentary to AS 11.56.240(1), the statute which codifies the definition of "statement" for purposes of the perjury statutes (AS 11.”
DeMan v. State, 677 P.2d 903 (Alaska Ct. App. 1984). ““Statement” is broadly defined in AS 11.56.240(1), which provides: (1) “Statement” means a representation of fact and includes a representation of opinion, belief, or other state of mind when the representation clearly relates to state of mind apart from or in addition to any…”
In Re Ivy (Alaska 2016). “AS 11.56.240 broadly defines statements to include “representation[s] of fact[,] .”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.56.240(2) — 4 cases
In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Ivy, 374 P.3d 374 (Alaska 2016). “AS 11.56.240 broadly defines statements to include “representation[s] of fact[,] .”
Harrison v. State, 923 P.2d 107 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “For purposes of this decision, we assume that the absence of a notary or any other official empowered to administer oaths bars Harrison’s affidavit from being deemed a sworn statement under subparagraph (A) of AS 11.56.240(2): “a statement knowingly given under oath or…”
Joseph v. State, 315 P.3d 678 (Alaska Ct. App. 2013). “See AS 11.56.240(2), which defines "sworn statement" (for purposes of perjury prosecutions) as "[any] statement knowingly given under oath or affirmation attesting to the truth of what is stated, including a notarized statement", as well as "[any] statement knowingly given under…”
In Re Ivy (Alaska 2016). “AS 11.56.240 broadly defines statements to include “representation[s] of fact[,] .”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.56.240(2)(A) — 2 cases
Knix v. State, 922 P.2d 913 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “Given Swafford’s failure to administer an oath or affirmation and his failure to include a proper certification, the Knixes insist that their signed statement to Swafford cannot properly be considered a sworn statement as defined in AS 11.56.240(2)(A). However, in Gargan v.”
Harrison v. State, 923 P.2d 107 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “For purposes of this decision, we assume that the absence of a notary or any other official empowered to administer oaths bars Harrison’s affidavit from being deemed a sworn statement under subparagraph (A) of AS 11.56.240(2): “a statement knowingly given under oath or…”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.56.240(2)(B) — 2 cases
Knix v. State, 922 P.2d 913 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “Given Swafford’s failure to administer an oath or affirmation and his failure to include a proper certification, the Knixes insist that their signed statement to Swafford cannot properly be considered a sworn statement as defined in AS 11.56.240(2)(A). However, in Gargan v.”
Harrison v. State, 923 P.2d 107 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “For purposes of this decision, we assume that the absence of a notary or any other official empowered to administer oaths bars Harrison’s affidavit from being deemed a sworn statement under subparagraph (A) of AS 11.56.240(2): “a statement knowingly given under oath or…”
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.