Indictment for Perjury — Defendant Testifying in His Own Behalf — Falsity of Oath — Corroborative Evidence.
1. Where, on the trial of one charged with an offense before a mayor of a town, he permits himself to be called by his counsel and sworn as a witness, and testifies in his own behalf, the examination being conducted by his counsel and the cross-examination by opposing counsel, and the caution and advice prescribed by section 1145 of The Code not being given, he will be deemed to be exercising the right to testify given by section 1353 of The Code, and not under the provisions of section 1145.
2. In the trial of an indictment for perjury it is necessary that the falsity of the oath be proven by two witnesses or by one witness and corroborative circumstances sufficient to turn the scales against the defendant's oath.
3. Where, in the trial of a defendant charged with falsely swearing on a trial before a mayor that he did not have an axe in a fight in which he was engaged, the person assaulted testified that the defendant did have an axe, with which he inflicted a wound on the witness' head, testimony of a physician that the wound "was made with a sharp-edged instrument" was sufficient corroboration to establish the falsity of defendant's oath.
BURWELL, J.
The testimony shows that when the defendant made in the mayor's court the statement which is alleged to have been false, he was not being examined under the provisions of section 1145 of The Code, but was testifying in his own behalf and of his own accord, and at the suggestion of his own counsel, then present. He had a right so to testify. The Code, section 1353. If he saw fit to exercise that right, as it seems he did, he is to be treated just as any other witness.
2. There was the testimony of one witness (Curtis) that the oath of the defendant was false. To prove its falsity it was necessary to supplement this either by the evidence of another like witness or else by proof of corroborative circumstances sufficient to turn the scale against the defendant's oath. S. v. Gales, 107 N.C. 832.
We think the evidence of Dr. Scruggs as to the nature of the wound furnished such corroboration. He said that it "was made with a sharp-edged instrument." An axe, though such a one as the witness Curtis described, is "a sharp-edged instrument" within the (716) meaning of those words as used by the witness.
No error.
Cited: S. v. Mallet, 125 N.C. 722.