Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.72.030 (2026)
Perjury in the second degree
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) A person is guilty of perjury in the second degree if, in an examination under oath under the terms of a contract of insurance, or with intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his or her duty, he or she makes a materially false statement, which he or she knows to be false under an oath required or authorized by law.
(2) Perjury in the second degree is a class C felony.
Notes:
Purpose—Effective date—2001 c 171: See notes following RCW 9A.72.010.
Effective date—1995 c 285: See RCW 48.30A.900.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1986–2017 · leading case: State v. Pascal, 736 P.2d 1065 (Wash. 1987).
State v. Pascal, 736 P.2d 1065 (Wash. 1987). “The Legislature has determined that for defendants with no criminal history the following crimes, among others, may warrant a sentence of or about 90 days: second degree perjury (RCW 9A.72.030); intimidating a public servant (RCW 9A.”
Stiley v. Block, 925 P.2d 194 (Wash. 1996). “Assuming Respondent Block made a false certification on the deed of trust, it is at least subject to debate whether it constitutes perjury as defined in RCW 9A.”
In re the Recall of Pearsall-Stipek, 10 P.3d 1034 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 9A.72.030(1). There has been no allegation that Pearsall-Stipek made false statements under these circumstances.”
In Re Recall of Pearsall-Stipek, 10 P.3d 1034 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 9A.72.030(1). There has been no allegation that Pearsall-Stipek made false statements under these circumstances.”
State v. Arquette, 314 P.3d 426 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “¶21 In asserting that the State failed to meet its burden to prove second degree perjury, Arquette does not contend that the State failed to present evidence in support of the essential elements of the charge as set forth in RCW 9A.72.030. Instead, Arquette argues that the State…”
State v. Dial, 720 P.2d 461 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “RCW 9A.72.030(1) states that: A person is guilty of perjury in the second degree if, with intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his duty, he makes a materially false statement, which he knows to be false under an oath required or authorized by law.”
Stiley v. Block, 925 P.2d 194 (Wash. 1996). “020 (perjury in the first degree) and RCW 9A.72.030 (perjury in the second degree).”
Basil D. Bena, Resp/cross-app. v. Nathan B. Schleicher & Mary L. Schleicher, App/cross-resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “RCW 9A.72.030. We generally do not consider conclusory arguments unsupported by citation to authority.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.72.030(1) — 4 cases
In re the Recall of Pearsall-Stipek, 10 P.3d 1034 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 9A.72.030(1). There has been no allegation that Pearsall-Stipek made false statements under these circumstances.”
In Re Recall of Pearsall-Stipek, 10 P.3d 1034 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 9A.72.030(1). There has been no allegation that Pearsall-Stipek made false statements under these circumstances.”
State v. Arquette, 314 P.3d 426 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “¶21 In asserting that the State failed to meet its burden to prove second degree perjury, Arquette does not contend that the State failed to present evidence in support of the essential elements of the charge as set forth in RCW 9A.72.030. Instead, Arquette argues that the State…”
State v. Dial, 720 P.2d 461 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “RCW 9A.72.030(1) states that: A person is guilty of perjury in the second degree if, with intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his duty, he makes a materially false statement, which he knows to be false under an oath required or authorized by law.”
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.