Colorado § 13-26-104 - Uniform construction.

§ 13-26-104. Uniform construction.

This article shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purpose of making uniform the law of those states which enact it.

Source: L. 55: p. 374, § 2. CRS 53: § 52-2-2. C.R.S. 1963: § 52-2-2.

ARTICLE 27

Uniform Unsworn Declarations Act

13-27-101. Short title.

13-27-102. Definitions.

13-27-103. Applicability.

13-27-104. Validity of unsworn declaration.

13-27-105. Required medium.

13-27-106. Form of unsworn declaration.

13-27-107. Uniformity of application and construction.

13-27-108. Relation to "Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act".

PREFATORY NOTE

Declarations of persons are routinely received in state and federal courts and agencies. Many — but not all — of the declarations are affidavits and other documents sworn to by declarants before notaries public or authorized officials.

Courts and agencies do receive unsworn declarations. Unsworn declarations may be oral or in writing. For example, they may be in the form of:

○ testimony given under affirmation rather than oath. See, e.g., Fed. R. Evid. 603 ("a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully"); Ala. R. Evid. 603 ("every witness [must] declare that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation"); Mich. R. Evid. 603 (same); Wash. R. Evid. 603 (same);

○ an attested (or witnessed) will. See, e.g., Ala. Code § 43-8-131; Cal. Prob. Code § 6110; Colo. Rev. Stats. § 15-11-502; Tex. Estates Code § 251.051; Va. Code § 64.2-403;

○ other unsworn declarations authorized by a state's law or rules. See, e.g., Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2015.5; Fla. Stat. § 92.525; Kan. Stats. § 53-601; Va. Code § 8.01-4.3;

○ statements made while under a belief of impending death. See, e.g., Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(2) (statements under belief of imminent death); Ala. R. Evid. 804(b)(2) (statement under belief of impending death); Mich. Laws § 767.72 (dying declarations admissible as evidence in manslaughter cases); Ohio R. Evid. 804(b)(2) (statement under belief of impending death); or

○ declarations made by an officer of the court. See, e.g., Cox v. State, 279 So. 2d 143, 144-45 (Ala. Crim. App. 1973) ("[I]t was within the judge's judicial discretion as to whether or not he would take the unsworn statement of an officer of his court as evidence.").

In 2008 the Uniform Law Commission completed work on the Uniform Unsworn Foreign Declarations Act (UUFDA), which allows for the use of unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury when made outside the United States. The UUFDA extends to state proceedings the same flexibility that federal courts have had since 1976 under 28 U.S.C. § 1746. However, 28 U.S.C. § 1746 is broader than the UUFDA in that it also covers unsworn declarations made within the United States. Additionally, while working on the UUF DA, the ULC identified 22 states with existing laws, procedural rules or statutes having a similar effect as 28 U.S.C. § 1746. It is noted in the comments of the UUFDA that the Drafting Committee considered expanding the UUFDA to include unsworn declarations made within the United States but decided against it due to the limited charge of the Committee as well as time and enactability concerns.

Since its promulgation, the UUFDA has been adopted in over 20 states and the District of Columbia. It is under consideration in additional states. Additionally, a number of states have existing or procedural rules that permit the use of unsworn declarations made within the United States.

The Uniform Unsworn Declarations Act (UUDA) affirms the use in state legal proceedings of unsworn declarations made by declarants. Under the UUDA, if an unsworn declaration is made subject to penalties for perjury and contains the information in the model form provided in the act, then the statement may be used as an equivalent of a sworn declaration. The UUDA excludes use of unsworn declarations for depositions, oaths of office, oaths related to self-proved wills, declarations recorded under certain real estate statutes, and oaths required to be given before specified officials other than a notary.

The UUDA will extend to state proceedings the same flexibility that federal — and a number of state — courts and agencies have employed for decades. Since 1976, federal law (28 U.S.C. § 1746) has allowed an unsworn declaration to be recognized and valid as the equivalent of a sworn affidavit if it contained an affirmation substantially in the form set forth in the federal act. The courts, though, have ruled that 28 U.S.C. § 1746 is inapplicable to state court proceedings. Several states also authorize the use of unsworn declarations (e.g., Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2015.5; Fla. Stat. § 92.525; Kan. Stats. § 53-601), but the state procedures are not uniform.

Existing state legislation varies significantly in content, scope and form. Enactment of the UUDA harmonizes state and federal treatment of unsworn declarations. Uniformity is important because many matters as to which the use of unsworn declarations is valuable will involve more than one state or jurisdiction. Further, the UUDA will reduce aspects of confusion regarding differences in federal and state litigation practice. The act also eases some of the declarants' burdens in providing important information for state proceedings.

The Uniform Unsworn Declarations Act should be enacted in every state.