Section 2641 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

the testimony of
<insert name of witness>, there must be
some other evidence that the defendant’s statement was false. This other
evidence may be direct or indirect. [However, if you conclude, based on
the defendant’s own testimony, that the allegedly false statement was in
fact false, then additional evidence is not required.]
If the defendant actually believed that the statement was true, the
defendant is not guilty of this crime even if the defendant’s belief was
mistaken.
The People allege that the defendant made the following false
statement[s]:
<insert alleged statement[s]>.
[You may not find the defendant guilty unless all of you agree that the
People have proved that the defendant made at least one false statement
and you all agree on which particular false statement the defendant
made. The People do not need to prove that all the allegedly false
statements were in fact false.]
[It is not a defense (that the oath was given or taken in an irregular
manner/ [or] that the defendant did not go before or take the oath in the
presence of the officer claiming to administer the oath) as long as the
defendant caused the officer administering the oath to certify that the
oath had been taken.]
[If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that after the defendant made
the statement[s] in the affidavit, (he/she) testified under oath in another
case involving the same facts, but made [a] statement[s] that (was/were)
different from (that/those) in the affidavit, you may, but are not required
to, rely on that testimony to conclude that the statement[s] in the
affidavit (is/are) false.]
[When a person makes a statement, without qualification, that
information is true, but he or she does not know whether the
information is true, the making of that statement is the same as saying
something that the person knows is false.]
[If the defendant attempted to correct the statement after it was made,
that attempt may show that the defendant did not intend to (testify[,]/
[or] declare[,]/ [or] depose[,]/ [or] certify) falsely. It is up to you to decide
the meaning and importance of that conduct.]
New January 2006
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of the
crime.
CALCRIM No. 2641
CRIMES AGAINST GOVERNMENT
524

The court has a sua sponte duty to define “material.” (People v. Kobrin (1995) 11
Cal.4th 416, 430 [45 Cal.Rptr.2d 895, 903 P.2d 1027] [materiality is a fact question
to be decided by the jury].) The first bracketed definition of material is appropriate
for court proceedings or legislative hearings. (People v. Hedgecock (1990) 51 Cal.3d
395, 405 [272 Cal.Rptr. 803, 795 P.2d 1260] [not appropriate for charge of perjury
on required disclosure forms].) For other types of proceedings, the court should use
the second bracketed sentence, inserting an appropriate definition in the blank
provided. (Ibid.)
The court has a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury about the need for
corroboration of the evidence of pe