Every person who shall wilfully and corruptly swear, testify, or affirm falsely to any material matter under any oath, affirmation, or declaration legally administered in any matter, cause, or proceeding pending in any court of law or equity, or before any officer thereof, or in any case where an oath or affirmation is required by law or is necessary for the prosecution or defense of any private right or for the ends of public justice, or in any matter or proceeding before any tribunal or officer created by the Constitution or by law, or where any oath may be lawfully required by any judicial, executive, or administrative officer, shall be guilty of perjury, and shall not thereafter be received as a witness to be sworn in any matter or cause whatever, until the judgment against him be reversed.
Codes, Hutchinson's 1848, ch. 64, art. 12, Title 5(1); 1857, ch. 64, art. 204; 1871, § 2660; 1880, § 2921; 1892, § 1243; 1906, § 1318; Hemingway's 1917, § 1051; 1930, § 1082; 1942, § 2315.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case:
White v. State, 532 So. 2d 1207 (Miss. 1988).
White v. State, 532 So. 2d 1207 (Miss. 1988).
“Without addressing the issue of sufficiency, this proposition is disposed of in its entirety in that what is required is a conviction of perjury (under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972)) and that is simply not the case.”
Hogan v. State, 516 So. 2d 474 (Miss. 1987).
· cites it 4× “The issue we address on this appeal is whether two mutually contradictory statements under oath can support a conviction for perjury under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972). We hold that it can, but only in certain cases where the State is unable to offer additional proof of…”
James Wesley Scott v. State of Mississippi, 231 So. 3d 1024 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016).
“See Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (Rev.2014) (“Every person who shall wilfully and corruptly swear, testify, or affirm falsely to any material matter under any oath, affirmation, or declaration legally administered in any matter, cause, or proceeding .”
Wright v. McAdory, 536 So. 2d 897 (Miss. 1988).
· cites it 2× “See Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972). The prosecution may not in its immunity grant, enlarge upon or redefine perjury except as it is defined in the statutes.”
Smallwood v. State, 584 So. 2d 733 (Miss. 1991).
· cites it 2× “The elements of perjury are provided in Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972): Every person who shall willfully and corruptly swear, testify, or affirm falsely to any material matter under any oath, affirmation, or declaration legally administered *736 in any matter, cause, or…”
Bogard v. State, 624 So. 2d 1313 (Miss. 1993).
“1991) (perjury requires stringent proof of falsity of accused's statement); Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972) (false affirmation is element of perjury); Greenlee v.”
Rush v. Wallace Rentals, LLC, 837 So. 2d 191 (Miss. 2003).
“" See Miss.Code Ann. § 97-9-59. [11] The language of this statute is the same as that in effect at all times mentioned herein.”
In Re Smith, 457 So. 2d 911 (Miss. 1984).
“If their affidavits are true, they have both committed perjury under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 , and subjected themselves to a sentence of at least ten years in the state penitentiary under Miss.”
Gullett v. State, 523 So. 2d 296 (Miss. 1988).
“Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972), charging that Gullett had lied at the Harden trial.”
McFee v. State, 510 So. 2d 790 (Miss. 1987).
“Was the prosecution's proof sufficient to sustain a conviction for perjury on the testimony of two witnesses or one witness and corroborating circumstances? The appellant's indictment charged the crime of perjury under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 (1972) which defined perjury as:…”
Tobias v. State, 505 So. 2d 1014 (Miss. 1987).
“Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-59 . The unequivocal affidavit submitted by Perryman is proof of this.”
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.