New Hampshire Revised Statutes
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 638:1 (2024)
Forgery
✓ 2024 N.H. RSA (Justia copy): later sessions are not included
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NH-GCgc.nh.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
638:1 Forgery. –
I. A person is guilty of forgery if, with purpose to defraud anyone, or with knowledge that he is facilitating a fraud to be perpetrated by anyone, he:
(a) Alters any writing of another without his authority or utters any such altered writing; or
(b) Makes, completes, executes, authenticates, issues, transfers, publishes or otherwise utters any writing so that it purports to be the act of another, or purports to have been executed at a time or place or in a numbered sequence other than was in fact the case, or to be a copy of an original when no such original existed.
II. As used in this section, "writing" includes printing or any other method of recording information, checks, tokens, stamps, seals, credit cards, badges, trademarks, and other symbols of value, right, privilege, or identification.
III. Forgery is a class B felony if the writing is or purports to be:
(a) A security, revenue stamp, or any other instrument issued by a government, or any agency thereof; or
(b) A check, an issue of stocks, bonds, or any other instrument representing an interest in or a claim against property, or a pecuniary interest in or claim against any person or enterprise.
III-a. Forgery is a class A misdemeanor if the writing is or purports to be a fake or counterfeit certificate of insurance.
IV. All other forgery is a class B misdemeanor.
V. A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if he knowingly possesses any writing that is a forgery under this section or any device for making any such writing. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this paragraph that the possession was without an intent to defraud.
I. A person is guilty of forgery if, with purpose to defraud anyone, or with knowledge that he is facilitating a fraud to be perpetrated by anyone, he:
(a) Alters any writing of another without his authority or utters any such altered writing; or
(b) Makes, completes, executes, authenticates, issues, transfers, publishes or otherwise utters any writing so that it purports to be the act of another, or purports to have been executed at a time or place or in a numbered sequence other than was in fact the case, or to be a copy of an original when no such original existed.
II. As used in this section, "writing" includes printing or any other method of recording information, checks, tokens, stamps, seals, credit cards, badges, trademarks, and other symbols of value, right, privilege, or identification.
III. Forgery is a class B felony if the writing is or purports to be:
(a) A security, revenue stamp, or any other instrument issued by a government, or any agency thereof; or
(b) A check, an issue of stocks, bonds, or any other instrument representing an interest in or a claim against property, or a pecuniary interest in or claim against any person or enterprise.
III-a. Forgery is a class A misdemeanor if the writing is or purports to be a fake or counterfeit certificate of insurance.
IV. All other forgery is a class B misdemeanor.
V. A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if he knowingly possesses any writing that is a forgery under this section or any device for making any such writing. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this paragraph that the possession was without an intent to defraud.
Source. 1971, 518:1. 1992, 269:15, eff. July 1, 1992. 2019, 281:1, eff. Sept. 17, 2019.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1984–2020 · leading case: State v. Allegra, 533 A.2d 338 (N.H. 1987).
State v. Allegra, 533 A.2d 338 (N.H. 1987). “RSA 638:1, 1(a) and (b). RSA 638:1, III and IV grade the seriousness of the offense by these provisions: “HI.”
State v. Spencer, 826 A.2d 546 (N.H. 2003). “The defendant, Geraldine Spencer, appeals from her conviction of one count of forgery, see RSA 638:1 (1996), and one count of theft by unauthorized taking, see RSA 637:3 (1996).”
State v. Skidmore, 636 A.2d 64 (N.H. 1993). “), the defendant, John Skidmore, was convicted of one count of forgery, RSA 638:1 (1986 & Supp. 1992), and one count of receiving stolen property, RSA 637:7 (1986).”
State of New Hampshire v. James Perry, 166 N.H. 716 (2014). “” RSA 638:1, II (2007). We will address each argument in turn.”
State v. DeMatteo, 591 A.2d 1323 (N.H. 1991). “The defendant was indicted on May 5,1987, by a grand jury on one count of forgery, RSA 638:1. At a hearing on October 10,1989, on the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial, the defendant’s counsel orally raised the issue of the sufficiency of the indictment.”
State v. Sheedy, 474 A.2d 1042 (N.H. 1984). “) of three counts of forgery, as defined by RSA 638:1. The defendant argues, inter alia, that the Superior Court (DiClerieo, J.”
State v. Koehler, 669 A.2d 788 (N.H. 1995). “See RSA 626:8 (1986); RSA 638:1 (1986). On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a prior bad act under New Hampshire Rule of Evidence 404(b).”
State v. Donnelly, 765 A.2d 680 (N.H. 2000). “The defendant, Jeanne Donnelly, appeals her conviction on eleven counts of forgery, see RSA 638:1 (1992), arguing that the Superior Court (Mohl, J.”
Charles R. Estes v. P ECMC Grp., Inc., 2020 DNH 159 (D.N.H. 2020). “Finally, the legislature has enacted other statutes that 10 The first page of plaintiffs’ complaint and ¶ 27 of Count III cite RSA 638:1- 29 as the legal basis for this count.”
Griffiths v. Certain Underwriters, 2010 DNH 069 (D.N.H. 2010). “On June 1 6 , 2005--less than one year before Griffiths signed the application--he was indicted by a grand jury in Merrimack County Superior Court on six felony counts of forgery, in violation of N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 638:1 . Griffiths 10 had also been indicted by another…”
State of New Hampshire v. William Roy, No. 2014-0364 (N.H. Sept. 17, 2015). “See RSA 638:1, I, III (2007). On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court erred by: (1) refusing to admit into evidence the terms of the divorce decree between the defendant and his ex-wife, Mary Anne Holland; and (2) failing to declare a mistrial after Holland…”
Estes v. ECMC Grp., Inc., No. 1:19-cv-00822 (D.N.H. Sept. 16, 2020). “Finally, the legislature has enacted other statutes that 10 The first page of plaintiffs’ complaint and ¶ 27 of Count III cite RSA 638:1- 29 as the legal basis for this count.”
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.