Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 17-A
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703 (2026)

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 forgery if, with the intent to defraud or deceive another person or government:  
A. The person falsely makes, completes, endorses or alters a written instrument, or knowingly utters or possesses such an instrument. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime;   [PL 2001, c. 383, §75 (AMD); PL 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]
A-1. The person violates paragraph A and:  
(1) The face value of the written instrument or the aggregate value of the instruments is more than $10,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class B crime;  
(2) The face value of the written instrument or the aggregate value of the instruments is more than $1,000 but not more than $10,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class C crime; or  
(3) At the time of the forgery, the person has 2 or more prior convictions for any combination of the Maine offenses listed in this subparagraph or for engaging in substantially similar conduct to that of the Maine offenses listed in this subparagraph in another jurisdiction. The Maine offenses are: theft; any violation of this section; any violation of section 401 in which the crime intended to be committed inside the structure is theft; any violation of section 405 in which the crime intended to be committed inside the motor vehicle is theft; any violation of section 651; any violation of section 702 or 708; or attempts to commit any of these crimes. Section 9‑A governs the use of prior convictions when determining a sentence. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class C crime;   [PL 2007, c. 476, §26 (AMD).]
B. The person causes another, by deception, to sign or execute a written instrument, or utters such an instrument. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; or   [PL 2001, c. 383, §75 (AMD); PL 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]
B-1. The person violates paragraph B and:  
(1) The face value of the written instrument or the aggregate value of the instruments is more than $10,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class B crime;  
(2) The face value of the written instrument or the aggregate value of the instruments is more than $1,000 but not more than $10,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class C crime; or  
(3) At the time of the forgery, the person has 2 or more prior convictions for any combination of the Maine offenses listed in this subparagraph or for engaging in substantially similar conduct to that of the Maine offenses listed in this subparagraph in another jurisdiction. The Maine offenses are: theft; any violation of this section; any violation of section 401 in which the crime intended to be committed inside the structure is theft; any violation of section 405 in which the crime intended to be committed inside the motor vehicle is theft; any violation of section 651; any violation of section 702 or 708; or attempts to commit any of these crimes. Section 9‑A governs the use of prior convictions when determining a sentence. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class C crime.   [PL 2007, c. 476, §27 (AMD).]
[PL 2007, c. 476, §§26, 27 (AMD).]
2. 
[PL 2001, c. 667, Pt. D, §13 (RP); PL 2001, c. 667, Pt. D, §36 (AFF).]
3.  Amounts of value involved in forgeries may be aggregated in the same manner as provided in section 352, subsection 5, paragraph E. Prosecution of an aggregated forgery may be brought in any venue in which one of the aggregated forgeries was committed.  
[PL 1989, c. 187, §3 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). PL 1975, c. 740, §§77,78 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 510, §58 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 317, §21 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 187, §§2,3 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 224, §6 (AMD). PL 2001, c. 383, §§75,76 (AMD). PL 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF). PL 2001, c. 389, §6 (AMD). PL 2001, c. 667, §§D13,14 (AMD). PL 2001, c. 667, §D36 (AFF). PL 2007, c. 476, §§26, 27 (AMD).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: Trevor Drakes v. Charles W. Zimski, Acting Dir. of Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. Janet Reno, Attorney Gen., 240 F.3d 246 (3rd Cir. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Trevor Drakes v. Charles W. Zimski, Acting Dir. of Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. Janet Reno, Attorney Gen., 240 F.3d 246 (3rd Cir. 2001). “020 (2000); Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. tit. 17-A § 703 (1999); Neb.”
Mark Richards v. John Ashcroft, 400 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2005). “11, § 861 (same); Idaho Code § 18-3603 (same); Me.Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A § 703 (same).”
Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976). · cites it 2× “17-A MRSA § 703, sub-§ 1, ¶[ A, as enacted by PL 1975, c.”
State v. Burns, 2011 ME 92 (Me. 2011). · cites it 2× “The jury found Bums not guilty of one count of forgery (Class C), 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(A-1)(2) (2007) (This paragraph has since been amended, though that amendment is not relevant in the present case.”
State v. Tracy, 2010 ME 27 (Me. 2010). · cites it 4× “[¶ 1] Deane Tracy appeals from a judgment of conviction of forgery (Class D), 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(A) (2009), 1 entered in the Superior Court (Kennebec County, Jabar, J.”
State of Maine v. Emanuel J. Sloboda, 2020 ME 103 (Me. 2020). “[m]aking loud and unreasonable noises”); 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(B) (2020) (setting out the elements of forgery, including that the defendant “causes another, by deception, to sign or execute a written instrument”); 17-A M.”
State v. Mahoney, 459 A.2d 1073 (Me. 1983). · cites it 3× “After a trial in Superior Court (Penobscot County), a jury found the defendant guilty of Forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 703 (1983), Class D, and Theft, 17-A M.”
State v. McKenna, 1998 ME 49 (Me. 1998). · cites it 2× “) after a jury trial convicting him of forgery in violation of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 703 (1983 & Supp. 1994). McKenna asserts that he was denied his constitutional right to confront a witness against him because that witness was intoxicated during much of his testimony, and a portion…”
State v. McCray, 1999 ME 151 (Me. 1999). · cites it 3× “) after he pled guilty to the charge of forgery in violation of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 703 (1983 & Supp.1998) (Class C).”
State v. Lamson, 640 A.2d 1076 (Me. 1994). “§ 5332 (1990) (Class D), forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 703 (1983 & Supp. 1993) (Class D), theft by unauthorized taking or transfer, 17-A M.”
State v. Caldwell, 2003 ME 85 (Me. 2003). “) after the court denied his motion to withdraw a plea of guilty to two counts of forgery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 703 (1983 & Supp.2002); receiving stolen property, 17-A M.”
State v. Newbert, 928 A.2d 769 (Me. 2007). “BACKGROUND [¶2] On November 24, 2004, Newbert was charged with forgery (Class D), 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(A) (2006); theft by unauthorized taking or transfer (Class E), 17-A M.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703(1) — 2 cases
State v. Burns, 2011 ME 92 (Me. 2011). “The jury found Bums not guilty of one count of forgery (Class C), 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(A-1)(2) (2007) (This paragraph has since been amended, though that amendment is not relevant in the present case.”
State of Maine v. Terri Moulton, 2026 ME 6 (Me. 2026).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703(1)(A) — 5 cases
State v. Tracy, 2010 ME 27 (Me. 2010). “[¶ 1] Deane Tracy appeals from a judgment of conviction of forgery (Class D), 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(A) (2009), 1 entered in the Superior Court (Kennebec County, Jabar, J.”
State v. Newbert, 928 A.2d 769 (Me. 2007). “BACKGROUND [¶2] On November 24, 2004, Newbert was charged with forgery (Class D), 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(A) (2006); theft by unauthorized taking or transfer (Class E), 17-A M.”
State v. Morrison, 723 A.2d 869 (Me. 1998).
State of Maine v. Stambaugh (Me. Super. Ct 2023).
State of Maine v. Terri Moulton, 2026 ME 6 (Me. 2026).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703(1)(B) — 1 case
State of Maine v. Emanuel J. Sloboda, 2020 ME 103 (Me. 2020). “[m]aking loud and unreasonable noises”); 17-A M.R.S. § 703(1)(B) (2020) (setting out the elements of forgery, including that the defendant “causes another, by deception, to sign or execute a written instrument”); 17-A M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703(2)(C) — 1 case
State v. Billadeau, 597 A.2d 414 (Me. 1991).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703(3) — 1 case
State of Maine v. Thomas G. Coffill III, 2026 ME 18 (Me. 2026).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 703(B) — 1 case
State v. Martines, 1998 ME 21 (Me. 1998).
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.