The question presented is whether a sheriff (1) who indisputably did not make an oral or written oath or affirmation to anyone and (2) who falsely signed a pre-printed affidavit stating that he had been "first duly sworn on oath," (3) which was in turn notarized by a fellow law enforcement officer who also falsely asserted in the jurat that the affidavit had been "sworn to," "supported [the warrant application] by Oath or affirmation" because, as the Wisconsin Supreme Court held, "the [original] officer was impressed with th[e] obligation" to tell the truth. App., infra, 4a-5a (quoting State v. Tye, 636 N.W.2d 473, 478 (2001)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Whether a sheriff who indisputably did not make an oral or written oath or affirmation to anyone and who falsely signed a preprinted affidavit stating that he had been 'first duly sworn on oath,' which was in turn notarized by a fellow law enforcement officer who also falsely asserted in the jurat that the affidavit had been 'sworn to,' 'supported [the warrant application] by Oath or affirmation' because, as the Wisconsin Supreme Court held, 'the [original] officer was impressed with th[e] obligation' to tell the truth