State v. Eastman
This text of 151 P. 967 (State v. Eastman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
The affidavit upon which the order to show cause was based was insufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the court to make the order. It is in the third person, and Section 829, L. O. L., provides: “In all affidavits and depositions, the witness must be made to speak in the first person.” The true test of the sufficiency of an affidavit is whether or not a charge of perjury could be based upon it: 1 R. C. L. 773; Miller v. Munson, 34 Wis. 579 (17 Am. Rep. 461). It is obvious •that it would be a good defense to a prosecution for perjury for making a false affidavit to show that the paper in question was not in legal contemplation an affidavit but something else. Proceedings of this character are quasi criminal, and the defendant is entitled to demand a substantial compliance with the statute before a penalty can be imposed which may result in his imprisonment.
The proceeding is dismissed. Dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
151 P. 967, 77 Or. 522, 1915 Ore. LEXIS 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-eastman-or-1915.