§ 4902. Perjury.
(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of perjury, a felony of the third degree, if in any official proceeding
he makes a false statement under oath or equivalent affirmation, or swears or affirms
the truth of a statement previously made, when the statement is material and he does
not believe it to be true.
(b) Materiality.--Falsification is material, regardless of the admissibility of the statement under
rules of evidence, if it could have affected the course or outcome of the 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.
(c) Irregularities no defense.--It is not a defense to prosecution under this section that the oath or affirmation
was administered or taken in an irregular manner or that the declarant was not competent
to make the statement. A document purporting to be made upon oath or affirmation at
any time when the actor presents it as being so verified shall be deemed to have been
duly sworn or affirmed.
(d) Retraction.--No person shall be guilty of an offense under this section if he retracted the falsification
in the course of the proceeding in which it was made before it became manifest that
the falsification was or would be exposed and before the falsification substantially
affected the proceeding.
(e) Inconsistent statements.--Where the defendant made inconsistent statements under oath or equivalent affirmation,
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 was false and not believed by the defendant
to be true.
(f) Corroboration.--In any prosecution under this section, except under subsection (e) of this section,
falsity of a statement may not be established by the uncorroborated testimony of a
single witness.
Cross References. Section 4902 is referred to in sections 3218, 4903, 4904, 5708 of this title; sections
1518, 3905 of Title 4 (Amusements); sections 916, 3505 of Title 5 (Athletics and Sports);
section 1714 of Title 25 (Elections); sections 5552, 5947, 9543.1 of Title 42 (Judiciary
and Judicial Procedure); section 3103 of Title 73 (Townships).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
82
cases (
16 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. King, 939 A.2d 877 (Pa. 2007).
Commonwealth v. King, 939 A.2d 877 (Pa. 2007).
· cites it 16× “The Superior Court concluded that the trial court erred by failing to conduct an individualized analysis of the alleged perjurious statements.”
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Kingston, S., 143 A.3d 917 (Pa. 2016).
· cites it 3× “18 Pa.C.S. §§ 4902, 5105. A jury convicted Kingston of all six counts, and the trial court imposed a consecutive sentence for each.”
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 626 A.2d 514 (Pa. 1993).
· cites it 10× “ A person is guilty of perjury, a felony of the third degree, if in any official proceeding he makes a false statement under oath or equivalent affirmation, or swears or affirms the truth of a statement previously made, when the statement is material and he does not believe it…”
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 582 A.2d 336 (Pa. 1990).
· cites it 8× “ROWLEY, Judge: On the basis of testimony given by appellee Leonard Johnson in a personal injury action, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, appellant herein, charged appellee with two counts of perjury, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902, two counts of false swearing in official matters, 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Brown, 872 A.2d 1139 (Pa. 2005).
· cites it 2× “The oath conveys to the declarant a sense of the very real consequences of a falsehood, including the potential for a felony perjury prosecution, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902, while the oath and certification alike convey to the tribunal at least some level of assurance that the declarant…”
Commonwealth v. Kelly, 369 A.2d 438 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1976).
· cites it 4× “334, § 1, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902 (1973). [2] Act of December 6, 1972, P.”
Commonwealth v. Holston, 211 A.3d 1264 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 4902. This Court has explained that perjury is more than false testimony: The crime of perjury is not synonymous with "false testimony".”
Commonwealth v. Demarco, 809 A.2d 256 (Pa. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Based on the inconsistencies between his earlier statements and his testimony at Zarcone's trial, Appellant was charged with two counts of perjury, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902, two counts of false swearing, 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Weitkamp, 386 A.2d 1014 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
· cites it 3× “18 Pa.C.S. § 4902. 2 . Although the events prompting the investigation occurred in York County, the Crime Commission hearings were held in Dauphin County.”
Com. v. Hardy, W., 274 A.3d 1240 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 2× “--In any motion under subsection (a), under penalty of perjury, the applicant shall: *** (2)(i) in a sworn statement subject to the penalties under 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 4902 (relating to perjury) and 4903 (relating to false swearing), assert the applicant’s actual innocence of the…”
Commonwealth v. Hude, 425 A.2d 313 (Pa. 1980).
· cites it 2× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902(a) (false testimony must be material).”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4902(a) — 16 cases
Commonwealth v. Hude, 425 A.2d 313 (Pa. 1980).
“See 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902(a) (false testimony must be material).”
Commonwealth v. King, 939 A.2d 877 (Pa. 2007).
“The Superior Court concluded that the trial court erred by failing to conduct an individualized analysis of the alleged perjurious statements.”
Commonwealth v. Weitkamp, 386 A.2d 1014 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 4902. 2 . Although the events prompting the investigation occurred in York County, the Crime Commission hearings were held in Dauphin County.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4902(b) — 2 cases
Commonwealth v. King, 939 A.2d 877 (Pa. 2007).
“The Superior Court concluded that the trial court erred by failing to conduct an individualized analysis of the alleged perjurious statements.”
Commonwealth v. Weitkamp, 386 A.2d 1014 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1978).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 4902. 2 . Although the events prompting the investigation occurred in York County, the Crime Commission hearings were held in Dauphin County.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4902(c) — 1 case
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4902(d) — 1 case
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4902(e) — 4 cases
Commonwealth, Aplt v. Kingston, S., 143 A.3d 917 (Pa. 2016).
“18 Pa.C.S. §§ 4902, 5105. A jury convicted Kingston of all six counts, and the trial court imposed a consecutive sentence for each.”
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 582 A.2d 336 (Pa. 1990).
“ROWLEY, Judge: On the basis of testimony given by appellee Leonard Johnson in a personal injury action, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, appellant herein, charged appellee with two counts of perjury, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902, two counts of false swearing in official matters, 18 Pa.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4902(f) — 6 cases
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 626 A.2d 514 (Pa. 1993).
“ A person is guilty of perjury, a felony of the third degree, if in any official proceeding he makes a false statement under oath or equivalent affirmation, or swears or affirms the truth of a statement previously made, when the statement is material and he does not believe it…”
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 582 A.2d 336 (Pa. 1990).
“ROWLEY, Judge: On the basis of testimony given by appellee Leonard Johnson in a personal injury action, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, appellant herein, charged appellee with two counts of perjury, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4902, two counts of false swearing in official matters, 18 Pa.”
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.