Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 45-7-202 (2026)

False Swearing

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 45. CRIMES

CHAPTER 7. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Part 2. Perjury and Other Falsification in Official Matters

False Swearing

45-7-202. False swearing. (1) A person commits the offense of false swearing if the person knowingly makes a false statement under oath or equivalent affirmation or swears or affirms the truth of a statement previously made when the person does not believe the statement to be true and:

(a) the falsification occurs in an official proceeding;

(b) the falsification is purposely made to mislead a public servant in performing an official function; or

(c) the statement is one that is required by law to be sworn or affirmed before a notary or other person authorized to administer oaths.

(2) Subsections (4) through (7) of 45-7-201 apply to this section.

(3) A person convicted of false swearing shall be fined an amount not to exceed $500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both.

History: En. 94-7-203 by Sec. 1, Ch. 513, L. 1973; R.C.M. 1947, 94-7-203; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 407, L. 2007; amd. Sec. 9, Ch. 565, L. 2021.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Doty v. Montana Comm'r of Political Practices, 2007 MT 341 (Mont. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Doty v. Montana Comm'r of Political Practices, 2007 MT 341 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 8× “The Commissioner concluded there was insufficient evidence that Doty violated § 45-7-202, MCA, Montana’s “false swearing” statute, or § 13-35-207, MCA, Montana’s “deceptive election practices” statute, and thus elected not to pursue legal action against Doty on the basis…”

McDermott v. CARIE, LLC, 2005 MT 293 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 2× “See § 45-7-202, MCA (indicating that *310 such conduct constitutes false swearing punishable by fine and/or imprisonment).”

Larson v. State, 434 P.3d 241 (Mont. 2019). “or duplicate signatures," may request that the county attorney investigate whether a petition signer or signature gatherer committed a criminal offense, such as unsworn falsification, false swearing, or tampering with public records or information as respectively defined by §§…”

State v. Hunt, 2009 MT 265 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 2× “McDermott , ¶ 27 (citing §45-7-202, MCA (indicating that such conduct constitutes false swearing punishable by fine and/or imprisonment)).”

State v. Maloney, 2003 MT 288 (Mont. 2003). · cites it 2× “¶9 Maloney was charged with Attempted Theft, a Felony, in violation of § 45-4-103 and § 45-6-301, MCA (1999); False Reports to Law Enforcement Authorities, aMisdemeanor, § 45-7-205, MCA(1999); and *69 False Swearing, a Misdemeanor, § 45-7-202, MCA (1999). The False Swearing…”

State v. Carson, 2002 MT 234 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 4× “On July 9, 1998, the State amended the perjury charge to false swearing, a misdemeanor, in violation of § 45-7-202(1)(a), MCA, and Carson subsequently pled guilty to all of the misdemeanor offenses.”

CB1 v. Hove, 2025 MT 36 (Mont. 2025). “¶12 Further, a deliberate falsification of an unsworn declaration constitutes perjury, and § 1-6-105, MCA, provides the same punishment for falsifying a declaration as § 45-7-202, MCA, provides for falsifying an affidavit or other sworn oath.”

— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-7-202(1)(a) — 1 case

State v. Carson, 2002 MT 234 (Mont. 2002). “On July 9, 1998, the State amended the perjury charge to false swearing, a misdemeanor, in violation of § 45-7-202(1)(a), MCA, and Carson subsequently pled guilty to all of the misdemeanor offenses.”

— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-7-202(l)(a) — 2 cases

Doty v. Montana Comm'r of Political Practices, 2007 MT 341 (Mont. 2007). “The Commissioner concluded there was insufficient evidence that Doty violated § 45-7-202, MCA, Montana’s “false swearing” statute, or § 13-35-207, MCA, Montana’s “deceptive election practices” statute, and thus elected not to pursue legal action against Doty on the basis…”

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.