Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 45. CRIMES · CHAPTER 6. OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY · Part 3. Theft and Related Offenses
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325 (2026)

Forgery

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 45
  3. CHAPTER 6
  4. Part 3
  5. 45-6-325 Forgery

TITLE 45. CRIMES

CHAPTER 6. OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY

Part 3. Theft and Related Offenses

Forgery

45-6-325. Forgery. (1) A person commits the offense of forgery when, with purpose to defraud, the person knowingly:

(a) without authority makes or alters a document or other object apparently capable of being used to defraud another in a manner that it purports to have been made by another or at another time or with different provisions or of different composition;

(b) issues or delivers the document or other object knowing it to have been thus made or altered;

(c) possesses with the purpose of issuing or delivering any such document or other object knowing it to have been thus made or altered; or

(d) possesses with knowledge of its character any plate, die, or other device, apparatus, equipment, or article specifically designed for use in counterfeiting or otherwise forging written instruments.

(2) A purpose to defraud means the purpose of causing another to assume, create, transfer, alter, or terminate any right, obligation, or power with reference to any person or property.

(3) A document or other object capable of being used to defraud another includes but is not limited to one by which any right, obligation, or power with reference to any person or property may be created, transferred, altered, or terminated.

(4) A person convicted of the offense of forgery shall be fined an amount not to exceed $1,500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both. If the forgery is part of a common scheme or if the value of the property, labor, or services obtained or attempted to be obtained exceeds $1,500, the offender shall be fined an amount not to exceed $50,000 or be imprisoned in the state prison for a term not to exceed 20 years, or both.

History: En. 94-6-310 by Sec. 1, Ch. 513, L. 1973; R.C.M. 1947, 94-6-310; amd. Sec. 7, Ch. 198, L. 1981; amd. Sec. 7, Ch. 581, L. 1983; amd. Sec. 9, Ch. 616, L. 1993; amd. Sec. 12, Ch. 397, L. 1999; amd. Sec. 12, Ch. 473, L. 2009; amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 321, L. 2017; amd. Sec. 6, Ch. 583, L. 2025.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case: State v. Richards, 906 P.2d 222 (Mont. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Richards, 906 P.2d 222 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 10× “This statute provides, in pertinent part: (1) A person commits the offense of forgery when with purpose to defraud he knowingly: (a) without authority makes or alters any document or other object apparently capable of being used to defraud another *225 in such manner that it…”
State v. White, 2001 MT 149 (Mont. 2001). · cites it 2× “¶3 White raises the following issue: Was White denied effective representation of counsel which prejudiced her right to a fair trial? FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶4 An Information was filed on December 16, 1997, charging White with three counts of felony forgery in…”
Est. of Pruyn v. Axmen Propane, Inc., 2009 MT 448 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 4× “NOTES [1] Criminal charges were brought against Kimbrell and he was eventually found guilty of forgery in violation of § 45-6-325, MCA, and sentenced to twenty years at Montana State Prison with all twenty years suspended.”
State v. Ellenburg, 2000 MT 232 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 4× “¶1 By Information filed on October 14,1997, in the District Court for the Fourth Judicial District in Missoula County, the Defendant, Michael Ellenburg, was charged with the following offenses: three counts of common scheme theft, a felony, in violation of § 45-6-301(l)(a) and…”
State v. Wilson, 631 P.2d 1273 (Mont. 1981). · cites it 3× “Section 45-6-325(4), MCA. Therefore, the District Court did not have juris *320 diction to try the charge.”
State v. Walker, 930 P.2d 60 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 4× “On January 19, 1995, the State charged Walker by Information with forgery, a felony, pursuant to § 45-6-325, MCA. On June 12 through 14, 1995, a jury trial was conducted which resulted in a guilty verdict.”
Garrett v. State, 2005 MT 197 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 3× “*167 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶4 On December 16, 1997, the State filed an Information charging Garrett with three counts of felony forgery in violation of § 45-6-325(l)(a) and (b), MCA. The State alleged that Garrett altered two checks received by her former employer,…”
State v. Howard, 637 P.2d 15 (Mont. 1981). · cites it 3× “For example, see the definitions of solicitation, section 45-4-101, MCA (“with the purpose that an offense be committed”); burlgary, section 45-6-204, MCA (“with the purpose to commit an offense therein”); and forgery, section 45-6-325, MCA (“with purpose to defraud”).”
State v. Senn, 795 P.2d 973 (Mont. 1990). · cites it 2× “Harkin presiding, charging defendant for the offenses of forgery, a felony pursuant to § 45-6-325, MCA, and accountability to forgery, a felony pursuant to §§ 45-2-301 and 45-6-325, MCA.”
State v. Lane, 927 P.2d 989 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 5× “Was there sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict finding Robert guilty of one count of forgery? Factual and Procedural Background On April 14, 1994, Robert was charged by complaint with two counts of forgery pursuant to § 45-6-325, MCA. The charges stemmed from two…”
State v. Slice, 753 P.2d 1309 (Mont. 1988). · cites it 3× “Slice, was tried on sixteen criminal counts: three counts of issuing a bad check, Section 45-6-316, MCA (felonies); one count of forgery, Section 45-6-325, MCA (felony); eight counts of deceptive practices Section 45-6-317, MCA (felonies); two counts of felony theft Section…”
State v. Matthews, 894 P.2d 285 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 2× “On May 12, 1993, Matthews was charged by information with six counts of forgery, all felonies, in violation of § 45-6-325, MCA, or in the alternative six counts of felony theft, in violation of § 45-6-301, MCA.”
Show all 37 citing cases →
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(1): 4 cases
State v. Krinitt, 823 P.2d 848 (Mont. 1991).
State v. Renz, 628 P.2d 644 (Mont. 1981).
State v. Johnston, 885 P.2d 402 (Mont. 1994).
State v. Johnston, 885 P.2d 402 (Mont. 1994).
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(1)(a): 3 cases
State v. Buckman, 768 P.2d 1361 (Mont. 1989).
State v. Heather Erin Wylie, 2012 MT 118N (Mont. 2012).
State v. Hollis, 182 P.3d 763 (Mont. 2008).
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(1)(a)(b): 1 case
State v. Yarde, 377 Mont. 136 (Mont. 2014).
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(1)(b): 3 cases
State v. Stallcup, 377 Mont. 25 (Mont. 2014).
State v. Ring, 2018 MT 40N (Mont. 2018).
State v. Azure, 676 P.2d 785 (Mont. 1984).
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(4): 5 cases
State v. Wilson, 631 P.2d 1273 (Mont. 1981). “Section 45-6-325(4), MCA. Therefore, the District Court did not have juris *320 diction to try the charge.”
State v. McVey, 373 Mont. 79 (Mont. 2013).
State v. Howlett, 373 Mont. 48 (Mont. 2013).
State v. Griffin, 377 Mont. 12 (Mont. 2014).
Drimmel v. Moran (In re Drimmel), 143 B.R. 249 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1992).
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(l)(a): 3 cases
State v. Ellenburg, 2000 MT 232 (Mont. 2000). “¶1 By Information filed on October 14,1997, in the District Court for the Fourth Judicial District in Missoula County, the Defendant, Michael Ellenburg, was charged with the following offenses: three counts of common scheme theft, a felony, in violation of § 45-6-301(l)(a) and…”
Garrett v. State, 2005 MT 197 (Mont. 2005). “*167 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶4 On December 16, 1997, the State filed an Information charging Garrett with three counts of felony forgery in violation of § 45-6-325(l)(a) and (b), MCA. The State alleged that Garrett altered two checks received by her former employer,…”
State v. Daugherty, 603 P.2d 1041 (Mont. 1979).
Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-325(l)(b): 2 cases
State v. Gwin, 373 Mont. 75 (Mont. 2013).
State v. Ring, 373 Mont. 103 (Mont. 2013).
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.