(1) Where a person charged with perjury or false swearing has made inconsistent material statements under oath, both having been made within the period of the statute of limitations, the prosecution may proceed by setting forth the inconsistent statements in a single count alleging in the alternative that one or the other was false and not believed by the defendant. In such case it shall not be necessary for the prosecution to prove which statement was false but only that one or the other statement was false and not believed by the defendant to be true.
(2) The highest offense of which a person may be convicted in such an instance shall be determined by hypothetically assuming each statement to be false. If the assumption establishes perjury of different degrees, the person may be convicted of the lesser degree at most. If perjury or false swearing is established by the making of the two statements, the person may be convicted of false swearing at the most.
Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 464, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-8-505. L. 73: p. 535, § 4.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2
cases, 1986–1988 · leading case:
People v. Fueston, 749 P.2d 952 (Colo. 1988).
People v. Fueston, 749 P.2d 952 (Colo. 1988).
· cites it 2× “Section 18-8-505(1), 8B C.R.S. (1986), recognizes another exception to the "two witness" rule by providing as follows: Where a person charged with perjury or false swearing has made inconsistent material statements under oath, both having been made within the period of the…”
People v. Fueston, 717 P.2d 978 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).
“except a prosecution based upon inconsistent statements pursuant to § 18-8-505, falsity of a statement may not be established solely through contradiction by the uncorroborated testimony of a single witness.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-505(1): 1 case
People v. Fueston, 749 P.2d 952 (Colo. 1988).
“Section 18-8-505(1), 8B C.R.S. (1986), recognizes another exception to the "two witness" rule by providing as follows: Where a person charged with perjury or false swearing has made inconsistent material statements under oath, both having been made within the period of the…”
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.