Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 702 (2026)

Aggravated forgery

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1. A person is guilty of aggravated forgery if, with intent to defraud or deceive another person or government, he falsely makes, completes, endorses or alters a written instrument, or knowingly utters or possesses such an instrument, and the instrument is:

A. Part of an issue of money, stamps, securities or other valuable instruments issued by a government or governmental instrumentality; [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

B. Part of an issue of stocks, bonds or other instruments representing interests in or claims against an organization or its property; [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

C. A will, codicil or other instrument providing for the disposition of property after death; [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

D. A public record or an instrument filed or required or authorized by law to be filed in or with a public office or public employee; or [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

E. [PL 1989, c. 187, §1 (RP).]

[PL 1989, c. 187, §1 (AMD).]

2. Aggravated forgery is a Class B crime.

[PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). PL 1975, c. 740, §76 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 187, §1 (AMD).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases, 1976–2018 · leading case: State v. Ray, 1999 ME 167 (Me. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Ray, 1999 ME 167 (Me. 1999). · cites it 8× “1 On appeal, Ray contends that the Superior Court erred as a matter of law when it found that Ray committed aggravated forgery as defined by 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (1988 & Supp.1998) by signing a false name on a Uniform Summons and Complaint.”

State v. Cook, 2010 ME 81 (Me. 2010). · cites it 2× “) for one count of aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(D) (2009); one count of burglary (Class B), 17-A M.”

State v. Guyette, 36 A.3d 916 (Me. 2012). “[¶ 6] Guyette was charged with aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(A) (2011), in relation to the counterfeit money, and unlawful possession of scheduled drugs (Class C), 17-A M.”

State of Maine v. Michaela C. Davenport, 2016 ME 69 (Me. 2016). “§ 354(1)(B)(1) (2015), and aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(D), (2) (2015), pursuant to an agreement that she reached with *1207 the State.”

State of Maine v. Abdi A. Hassan, 2018 ME 22 (Me. 2018). “§ 354 (2017); seven counts of aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702 (2017); one count of negotiating a worthless instrument (Class C), 17-A M.”

State v. Hassan, 179 A.3d 898 (Me. 2018). “§ 354 (2017) ; seven counts of aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702 (2017) ; one count of negotiating a worthless instrument (Class C), 17-A M.”

State v. Rollins, 961 A.2d 546 (Me. 2008). “Rollins appeals from a judgment of conviction of thirty-one counts of aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(D) (2007), entered following a jury trial in the Superior Court (Kennebec, Studstrup, J.”

State v. Pinkham-Murch, 432 A.2d 1297 (Me. 1981). · cites it 3× “Defendant Kay Pinkham-Murch appeals from her conviction by a Superior Court (Androscoggin County) jury for aggravated forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (Supp.1980), asserting that the evidence was insufficient to warrant a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.”

State v. Cyran, 586 A.2d 1238 (Me. 1991). · cites it 2× “§ 7373 (1981), and one count each of aggravated forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (1983), and false swearing, 17-A M.”

State v. Mahoney, 459 A.2d 1073 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “Facts and Procedure A grand jury (Cumberland County) indicted the defendant for Aggravated Forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702, Class B, and Theft, 17-A M.”

Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976). “17-A MRSA § 702, sub-§ 1, as enacted by PL 1975, c.”

Bennett v. State, 433 A.2d 431 (Me. 1981). “The Petitioner, Jonathan Peter Bennett, on June 15, 1978, was indicted for aggravated forgery in violation of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (1978). He pleaded not guilty to this charge.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 702(1) — 1 case

State v. Pinkham-Murch, 432 A.2d 1297 (Me. 1981). “Defendant Kay Pinkham-Murch appeals from her conviction by a Superior Court (Androscoggin County) jury for aggravated forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (Supp.1980), asserting that the evidence was insufficient to warrant a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 702(1)(A) — 2 cases

State v. Guyette, 36 A.3d 916 (Me. 2012). “[¶ 6] Guyette was charged with aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(A) (2011), in relation to the counterfeit money, and unlawful possession of scheduled drugs (Class C), 17-A M.”

State v. Ray, 1999 ME 167 (Me. 1999). “1 On appeal, Ray contends that the Superior Court erred as a matter of law when it found that Ray committed aggravated forgery as defined by 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (1988 & Supp.1998) by signing a false name on a Uniform Summons and Complaint.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 702(1)(D) — 4 cases

State v. Ray, 1999 ME 167 (Me. 1999). “1 On appeal, Ray contends that the Superior Court erred as a matter of law when it found that Ray committed aggravated forgery as defined by 17-A M.R.S.A. § 702 (1988 & Supp.1998) by signing a false name on a Uniform Summons and Complaint.”

State v. Cook, 2010 ME 81 (Me. 2010). “) for one count of aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(D) (2009); one count of burglary (Class B), 17-A M.”

State of Maine v. Michaela C. Davenport, 2016 ME 69 (Me. 2016). “§ 354(1)(B)(1) (2015), and aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(D), (2) (2015), pursuant to an agreement that she reached with *1207 the State.”

State v. Rollins, 961 A.2d 546 (Me. 2008). “Rollins appeals from a judgment of conviction of thirty-one counts of aggravated forgery (Class B), 17-A M.R.S. § 702(1)(D) (2007), entered following a jury trial in the Superior Court (Kennebec, Studstrup, J.”

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.