Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 18
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102 (2026)

Forgery

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) A person commits forgery, if, with intent to defraud, the person falsely makes, completes, alters, or utters a written instrument that is or purports to be, or that is calculated to become or to represent if completed:

(a) Part of an issue of money, stamps, securities, or other valuable instruments issued by a government or government agency; or

(b) Part of an issue of stock, bonds, or other instruments representing interests in or claims against a corporate or other organization or its property; or

(c) A deed, will, codicil, contract, assignment, commercial instrument, promissory note, or other instrument that does or may evidence, create, transfer, terminate, or otherwise affect a legal right, interest, obligation, or status; or

(d) A public record or an instrument filed or required by law to be filed or legally fileable in or with a public office or public servant; or

(e) A written instrument officially issued or created by a public office, public servant, or government agency; or

(f) Part of an issue of tokens, transfers, certificates, or other articles manufactured and designed for use in transportation fees upon public conveyances, or as symbols of value usable in place of money for the purchase of property or services available to the public for compensation; or

(g) Part of an issue of lottery tickets or shares designed for use in the lottery held pursuant to article 40 of title 44; or

(h) A document-making implement that may be used or is used in the production of a false identification document or in the production of another document-making implement to produce false identification documents.

(2) Forgery is a class 5 felony.

(3) Uttering a forged document to a peace officer shall create a presumption that the person intended to defraud such peace officer.

Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 434, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-5-102. L. 89: (2) amended, p. 834, § 50, effective July 1. L. 93: Entire section R&RE, p. 1988, § 16, effective July 1. L. 2000:

(1)(h) added, p. 647, § 3, effective July 1. L. 2003: (3) added, p. 1888, § 2, effective May 22. L. 2018: (1)(g) amended, (HB 18-1027), ch. 31, p. 363, § 9, effective October 1. L. 2023: IP(1) and

(1)(c) amended, (HB 23-1293), ch. 298, p. 1786, § 16, effective October 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: v. People, 2020 CO 54 (Colo. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
v. People, 2020 CO 54 (Colo. 2020). · cites it 27× “3As distinct from second-degree forgery, we refer to the crime of “forgery” under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2019), as “felony forgery” for the sake of clarity.”
People v. Cunefare, 102 P.3d 302 (Colo. 2004). · cites it 134× “(2004), and for forgery under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2004). We granted certiorari to determine two issues: first, what the prosecution is required to prove to sustain a conviction under section 18-8-707(1)(a); and second, whether a letter to the prosecutor urging him to drop…”
v. Vidauri, 2019 COA 140 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “§ 18-5-102(1)(c), C.R.S. 2018. The word “affect[]” appears in the definition of materiality, which limits “falsely completes,” a different element.”
People v. Randell, 297 P.3d 989 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 27× “" He contends that "Itlhe substance and structure of section 18-5-102 strongly suggest that the legislature did not intend subsection (1)(e) to apply in situations where the government-created or - issued instrument in question is either a check or some other instrument with an…”
v. Curtis, 2021 COA 103 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5× “The division concludes it did not, and, therefore, the prosecution had discretion to charge the defendant with a mail ballot offense as well as felony forgery under section 18-5-102(1)(d), C.R.S. 2020. The division also concludes that (1) the defendant’s convictions for forgery…”
People v. Wester-Gravelle, 2020 CO 64 (Colo. 2020). · cites it 4× “[an] instrument which document did or may have evidenced, created, transferred, terminated, or otherwise affected a legal right, interest, obligation, or status, namely: Home Care Aide Shift Charting Sheet; in violation of section 18-5-102(1)(c), C.R.S. [(2019)]. ¶11 The case…”
In re Marriage of Hogsett & Neale, 2021 CO 1 (Colo. 2021). · cites it 2× “(2020) (establishing scope of the marital privilege); § 14-10-113, C.R.S. (2020) (requiring equitable division of marital property upon divorce); § 15-11-102, C.”
People v. Riley, 2015 COA 152 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 18× “The Trial Court’s Constructive Amendment of the Information Requires Reversal of Defendant’s Second Degree Forgery Conviction ¶ 9 Defendant argues that the trial court erred when it instructed the jury on the uncharged offense of felony forgery under section 18-5-102, C.”
People v. Cunefare, 85 P.3d 594 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 16× “(c) A deed, will, codicil, contract, assignment, commercial instrument, promissory note, check, or other instrument which does or may evidence, create, transfer, terminate, or otherwise affect a legal right, interest, obligation, or status.”
Liggett v. People, 135 P.3d 725 (Colo. 2006). · cites it 3× “(1998), and one count of forgery, a class five felony under section 18-5-102(l)(c), C.R.S. (1998). The People later amended the indictment to include four habitual criminal counts for Liggett’s alleged prior convictions.”
In re the Marriage of Edi L. HOGSETT v. Marcia E. NEALE, 478 P.3d 713 (Colo. 2021). “( 2020 ) ( providing for spousal intestate succession ) ; § 18-5-102 (1) (d) , C.R.S. ( 2020 ) ( prohibiting forgery of false tax returns ) ; § 18-6-201 (2) , C.”
People v. Carlson, 72 P.3d 411 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “, §§ 18-5-102, 18-5-110, 18-5-301, 18-5-803, C.”
Show all 46 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(1) — 8 cases
v. People, 2020 CO 54 (Colo. 2020). “3As distinct from second-degree forgery, we refer to the crime of “forgery” under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2019), as “felony forgery” for the sake of clarity.”
People v. Randell, 297 P.3d 989 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “" He contends that "Itlhe substance and structure of section 18-5-102 strongly suggest that the legislature did not intend subsection (1)(e) to apply in situations where the government-created or - issued instrument in question is either a check or some other instrument with an…”
People v. Liggett, 114 P.3d 85 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
People v. Miralda, 981 P.2d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).
People v. Schuett, 833 P.2d 44 (Colo. 1992).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(1)(a) — 4 cases
v. People, 2020 CO 54 (Colo. 2020). “3As distinct from second-degree forgery, we refer to the crime of “forgery” under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2019), as “felony forgery” for the sake of clarity.”
People v. Randell, 297 P.3d 989 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “" He contends that "Itlhe substance and structure of section 18-5-102 strongly suggest that the legislature did not intend subsection (1)(e) to apply in situations where the government-created or - issued instrument in question is either a check or some other instrument with an…”
People v. Reese, 155 P.3d 477 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006).
Peo v. Lopez (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(1)(c) — 15 cases
People v. Cunefare, 102 P.3d 302 (Colo. 2004). “(2004), and for forgery under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2004). We granted certiorari to determine two issues: first, what the prosecution is required to prove to sustain a conviction under section 18-8-707(1)(a); and second, whether a letter to the prosecutor urging him to drop…”
v. Vidauri, 2019 COA 140 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “§ 18-5-102(1)(c), C.R.S. 2018. The word “affect[]” appears in the definition of materiality, which limits “falsely completes,” a different element.”
v. People, 2020 CO 54 (Colo. 2020). “3As distinct from second-degree forgery, we refer to the crime of “forgery” under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2019), as “felony forgery” for the sake of clarity.”
People v. Wester-Gravelle, 2020 CO 64 (Colo. 2020). “[an] instrument which document did or may have evidenced, created, transferred, terminated, or otherwise affected a legal right, interest, obligation, or status, namely: Home Care Aide Shift Charting Sheet; in violation of section 18-5-102(1)(c), C.R.S. [(2019)]. ¶11 The case…”
v. People, 2019 CO 78 (Colo. 2019).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(1)(d) — 4 cases
v. Curtis, 2021 COA 103 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “The division concludes it did not, and, therefore, the prosecution had discretion to charge the defendant with a mail ballot offense as well as felony forgery under section 18-5-102(1)(d), C.R.S. 2020. The division also concludes that (1) the defendant’s convictions for forgery…”
In re Marriage of Hogsett & Neale, 2021 CO 1 (Colo. 2021). “(2020) (establishing scope of the marital privilege); § 14-10-113, C.R.S. (2020) (requiring equitable division of marital property upon divorce); § 15-11-102, C.”
People v. Cunefare, 102 P.3d 302 (Colo. 2004). “(2004), and for forgery under section 18-5-102, C.R.S. (2004). We granted certiorari to determine two issues: first, what the prosecution is required to prove to sustain a conviction under section 18-8-707(1)(a); and second, whether a letter to the prosecutor urging him to drop…”
People v. Schmidt (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(1)(e) — 4 cases
People v. Randell, 297 P.3d 989 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “" He contends that "Itlhe substance and structure of section 18-5-102 strongly suggest that the legislature did not intend subsection (1)(e) to apply in situations where the government-created or - issued instrument in question is either a check or some other instrument with an…”
People v. James, 40 P.3d 36 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).
People v. Bowles, 226 P.3d 1125 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009).
People v. Clanton, 361 P.3d 1056 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(2) — 5 cases
v. Vidauri, 2019 COA 140 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “§ 18-5-102(1)(c), C.R.S. 2018. The word “affect[]” appears in the definition of materiality, which limits “falsely completes,” a different element.”
People v. Stansberry, 83 P.3d 1188 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).
People v. Smith, 579 P.2d 1129 (Colo. 1978).
People v. Clanton, 361 P.3d 1056 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
People v. Andersen, 58 P.3d 537 (Colo. 2000).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(a) — 1 case
People v. Hoggard, 2017 COA 88 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(e) — 3 cases
Valenzuela v. Coleman (D. Colo. 2020).
Valenzuela v. Coleman (D. Colo. 2021).
Valenzuela v. Coleman (D. Colo. 2022).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(e)(2) — 1 case
Valenzuela v. Coleman (D. Colo. 2020).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(l)(a) — 1 case
People v. Barringer, 61 P.3d 495 (Colo. 2001).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(l)(c) — 6 cases
Liggett v. People, 135 P.3d 725 (Colo. 2006). “(1998), and one count of forgery, a class five felony under section 18-5-102(l)(c), C.R.S. (1998). The People later amended the indictment to include four habitual criminal counts for Liggett’s alleged prior convictions.”
People v. Cunefare, 85 P.3d 594 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). “(c) A deed, will, codicil, contract, assignment, commercial instrument, promissory note, check, or other instrument which does or may evidence, create, transfer, terminate, or otherwise affect a legal right, interest, obligation, or status.”
People v. Riley, 2015 COA 152 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015). “The Trial Court’s Constructive Amendment of the Information Requires Reversal of Defendant’s Second Degree Forgery Conviction ¶ 9 Defendant argues that the trial court erred when it instructed the jury on the uncharged offense of felony forgery under section 18-5-102, C.”
People v. Medina, 926 P.2d 149 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).
People v. Barringer, 61 P.3d 495 (Colo. 2001).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-102(l)(e) — 2 cases
People v. Tucker, 232 P.3d 194 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009).
People v. Cunefare, 85 P.3d 594 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). “(c) A deed, will, codicil, contract, assignment, commercial instrument, promissory note, check, or other instrument which does or may evidence, create, transfer, terminate, or otherwise affect a legal right, interest, obligation, or status.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.