(a) No person shall knowingly give to any agent, employee, servant in public or private
employ, or public official any receipt, account, or other document in respect of which
the principal, master, or employer, or state, city, or town of which he or she is
an official is interested, which contains any statement which is false or erroneous,
or defective in any important particular, and which, to his or her knowledge, is intended
to mislead the principal, master, employer, or state, city, or town of which he or
she is an official.
(b) Any person who violates any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty
of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, shall be imprisoned, with or without hard
labor, for a term not exceeding one year or be fined not exceeding one thousand dollars
($1,000).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
17
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2022 · leading case:
State v. Smith, 662 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 1995).
State v. Smith, 662 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 1995).
· cites it 8× “1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-18-1, and conspiracy in filing a false document in violation of G.”
State v. Mollicone, 654 A.2d 311 (R.I. 1995).
· cites it 7× “The defendant contends that §§ 11-18-1 and 11-18-6 should have been identified as lesser included offenses of § 19-19-1.”
State v. Salvatore, 763 A.2d 985 (R.I. 2001).
· cites it 4× “1956 §§ 11-7-3 and 11-7-5, and count 9, filing a false document in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1. He was acquitted of all other charges.”
Mello v. DaLomba, 798 A.2d 405 (R.I. 2002).
· cites it 5× “Finally, plaintiff argues that the trial justice prematurely disposed of count 7 of his complaint, complaining that defendants filed false reports relating to his payroll in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1; G.L.1956 § 11-41-4 and 18 U.”
Malinou v. Miriam Hosp., 24 A.3d 497 (R.I. 2011).
· cites it 4× “Siddall-Bensson prepared and signed a death certificate containing false informa *513 tion, in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1, 17 because she failed to indicate aspiration as a possible cause of death and failed to indicate the “suspicion of accident.”
State v. LaPlante, 962 A.2d 63 (R.I. 2009).
· cites it 3× “1956 § 40-6-15 and for giving a false document to a public official in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1. This case came before the Supreme Court for oral argument on November 5, 2008, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in…”
State v. Elizabeth Mendez, 116 A.3d 228 (R.I. 2015).
· cites it 2× “11 (Count 3); and, he was also charged with knowingly providing a license request form containing a false statement intended to mislead in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1 (Count 5). The other co-defendant, Jonathan Espinal, Was only charged with Counts 1 and 2.”
State v. Udin, 419 A.2d 251 (R.I. 1980).
· cites it 3× “1956 (1969 Reenactment) §§ 11-41-4 and 11-41-5, on four counts for giving false documents to a public employee in violation of § 11-18-1, and on one count for violating G.”
State v. Wheeler, 496 A.2d 1382 (R.I. 1985).
“1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-23-3; conspiracy to commit involuntary manslaughter in violation of § 11-1-6; and knowingly giving a false statement with the intent to mislead in violation of § 11-18-1. On appeal defendants urge several grounds for reversal.”
City of Pawtucket, Police Div. v. Ricci, 692 A.2d 678 (R.I. 1997).
· cites it 3× “Subsequently the department charged respondent with knowingly providing an incomplete and incorrect application for employment in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1. 3 The department also charged respondent with violating various provisions of article 27, section 46, of the rules…”
State v. Canning, 541 A.2d 457 (R.I. 1988).
· cites it 2× “1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-18-1. 1 The jury also found the defendant guilty on one count of obtaining money by false pretenses, in an amount exceeding $500, pursuant to G.”
State v. Ricci, 704 A.2d 210 (R.I. 1997).
· cites it 3× “The state appeals from a trial justice’s grant of the defendant’s motion to dismiss a misdemeanor complaint charging the defendant with one count of filing a false document in violation of G.L.1956 § 11-18-1. After reviewing the memoranda submitted by the parties and after…”
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.