Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Underdog

Criminal Law

: Underdog

The two-witness rule governs perjury convictions.

By Marks & Katz, LLC

On September 17, the D.C. Court of Appeals reversed a perjury conviction where the two-witness rule was not satisfied. Gaffney v. U.S., __ A.2d. _ (D.C., Sept. 17, 2009).  The Court described the two-witness rule as follows: According to the venerable ?two-witness? rule, ?the uncorroborated oath of one witness is not enough to establish the falsity of the testimony of the accused set forth in the indictment as perjury.? 7 The two-witness rule thus ?imposes an evidentiary minimum? that the government must meet to satisfy its burden of proving falsity.8 We agree with appellant that the testimony of Ms. Curtis and Mr. Smith did not meet the evidentiary minimum with respect to any of the three statements at issue.9  As explained in Hsu, the two-witness rule ?is somewhat misnamed today, for while two witnesses will accomplish the task, one witness plus independent corroborative evidence will also suffice...continue to full post

Full post as published by Underdog on September 24, 2009 (boomark / email).