Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 2904 (2026)

False swearing; false declaration

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(Cite as: 13 V.S.A. § 2904)

§ 2904. False swearing; false declaration

(a) A person of whom an oath is required by law, who willfully swears falsely in regard to any matter or thing respecting which such oath is required, shall be guilty of perjury and punished as provided in section 2901 of this title.

(b) A person who declares, certifies, or verifies in a signed writing that a statement is true and is made under the pains and penalties of perjury, and who willfully makes a false statement in the declaration, certification, or verification, shall be guilty of perjury and punished as provided in section 2901 of this title. (Amended 2019, No. 77, § 5, eff. June 19, 2019.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1976–1996 · leading case: State v. Wheel, 587 A.2d 933 (Vt. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Wheel, 587 A.2d 933 (Vt. 1990). · cites it 2× “Defendant Jane Wheel, a former assistant judge in Chittenden Superior Court, appeals a jury conviction on three counts of false swearing, in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 2904. 1 We affirm. Defendant was a Chittenden County assistant judge from 1975 to 1987.”

Jane L. Wheel v. Stuart Robinson, Superintendent of Chittenden Cnty. Corr. Ctr., 34 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 1994). “Wheel sought to overturn her Vermont state court conviction on three counts of perjury in violation of Vt.Stat.Ann. tit. 13, § 2904. 1 The statements that led to the perjury charges occurred during an inquest proceeding held to investigate Wheel’s possible misconduct while she…”

State v. Lawrence, 360 A.2d 55 (Vt. 1976). · cites it 4× “Defendant now appeals from the resulting conviction and judgment of guilty on each count. Defendant claims that the State’s evidence tended to prove a violation of the crime of common law perjury, a violation of 13 V.”

State v. Tinker, 676 A.2d 785 (Vt. 1996). “The trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for acquittal for perjury, 13 V.S.A § 2904. Our law “requires that perjury be proved by the testimony of two witnesses, or by the testimony of one witness with independent corroborating evidence.”

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.