Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 4.5-9

The defendant is charged [in count __] with perjury. The statute defining this offense reads in

pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of perjury if, in any official proceeding, (he/she) intentionally,

(under oath / in an unsworn foreign declaration), (makes a false statement / swears,

affirms or testifies falsely), to a material statement which (he/she) does not believe to

be true.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Testimony at an official proceeding

The first element is that the testimony was given at an official proceeding (under oath / in an

unsworn foreign declaration).

An “official proceeding” is any proceeding held or that may be held before any legislative,

judicial, administrative or other agency or official authorized to take evidence under oath,

including any referee, hearing examiner, commissioner or notary or other person taking evidence

in connection with any proceeding. The defendant must have, in the presence of an officer

authorized to administer an oath, unequivocally taken upon (himself/herself) the obligation of an

oath.

Element 2 - Intentionally made false statement

The second element is that the defendant intentionally (made a false statement / swore, affirmed,

or testified falsely) knowing or believing the statement to be false. The testimony must have

been intentionally and deliberately given falsely and not through inadvertence or by mistake; that

is, it was the defendant’s specific intent to deceive, and the defendant made the statements

knowing or believing that they were false.

<See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1, and Knowledge, Instruction 2.3-3.>

The state must prove that the defendant made a statement that was untrue in fact and that the

defendant believed that it was false.

The truth or falsity of the defendant’s testimony cannot be proved solely on the basis of the

uncorroborated testimony of a single witness, even if you find that witness’s testimony credible.

Rather, it requires corroborated proof through independent and material facts and circumstances

supplementing the testimony of the single witness. The corroborative testimony must be of such

a character that, when taken in connection with all the other testimony, the falsity of the

testimony is established beyond a reasonable doubt.

Element 3 - Material to the proceedings

The third element is that the statement made by the defendant was a statement material to the

proceedings. The test of materiality is whether the false testimony was capable of influencing or

had the potential to influence the fact finder in deciding the issues.3

[Affirmative Defense

The statute defining this offense also defines an affirmative defense, which the defendant has

raised. <See Affirmative Defense, Instruction 2.9-1.>

The defendant claims that (he/she) was coerced into giving the false testimony. Coercion has

two elements. <Insert the elements from Coercion, Instruction 6.12-1.>]

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant gave

testimony at an official proceeding (under oath / in an unsworn foreign declaration), 2) the

defendant intentionally gave false testimony, and 3) the statement was material to the

proceedings.

[<If defendant has not raised the affirmative defense:>

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of the crime of perjury, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the other hand, if you

unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the

elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.]

[<If defendant has raised the affirmative defense:>

If you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the

elements of the crime of perjury, you shall then find the defendant not guilty and not consider the

defendant’s affirmative defense.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the

elements, then you shall consider the defendant’s affirmative defense. If you unanimously find

that the defendant has proved (his/her) defense by a preponderance of the evidence, then you

shall find the defendant not guilty. If you unanimously find that the defendant has not proved

(his/her) affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence, then you shall find the

defendant guilty.]

1 The Uniform Unsworn Foreign Declarations Act was adopted by P.A. No. 10-33, effective

October 1, 2010. It applies to declarations made by person while physically located outside of

the United States. See General Statutes §§ 1-65aa through 1-65hh for the requirements that must

be met to qualify as an unsworn foreign declaration.

2 It may be inferred from proof of the falsity of the statement, that the defendant knew the

statement was false. State v. Kimber, 48 Conn. App. 234, 243, cert. denied, 245 Conn. 902

(1998); State v. Fantasia, 5 Conn. App. 552 (1985), cert. denied, 199 Conn. 806 (1986).

3 The materiality of the statement, as an element of perjury, is a question for the jury. United

States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 522-23, 115 S. Ct. 2310, 132 L. Ed. 2d 444 (1995) (repudiating

prior case law that held it was a pure question of law for the court); see also State v. Paige, 304

Conn. 426, 446 (2012).

4 The affirmative defense was added by P.A. No. 10-180, § 7, which became effective on June 8,

2010.