Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (2026)

Forgery

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: State of Tennessee v. Cynthia J. Finch, 465 S.W.3d 584 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
State of Tennessee v. Cynthia J. Finch, 465 S.W.3d 584 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). · cites it 10× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (a). The applicable terms “forge” and “writing” are defined as follows: (1) “Forge” means to: (A) Alter, make, complete, execute or authenticate any writing so that it purports to: (i) Be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) Have…”
Est. of Acuff v. O'Linger, 56 S.W.3d 527 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “The former statutory definition of forgery was “[Fjorgery is the fraudulent making or alteration of any writing to the prejudice of another’s rights.”
State of Tennessee v. Alkita M. Odom, 64 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 7× “§§ 39-14-114, 115. It can hardly be disputed that it is more serious to forge a writing in the amount of $300,000 with the intent to defraud or harm another than it is to forge a writing in the amount of $10 with the intent to defraud or harm another.”
Regions Bank v. Bric Constructors, LLC, f/k/a Bric Contractors, LLC, & Patricia McIntosh, 380 S.W.3d 740 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “In our view, the evidence in the record does not support the Defendants’ claim that the relevant documents were “forged.”
Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Curry, 266 S.W.3d 379 (Tenn. 2008). · cites it 2× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a). Thus, a necessary element of the act of forgery is an intent to defraud.”
State v. Jackson, 124 S.W.3d 139 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (a). There is no proof here that the Defendant was attempting to conceal anything other than *145 his own identity.”
State v. Knight, 969 S.W.2d 939 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a). The term “forge” includes altering, making, completing, executing or authenticating any writing so it purports to be the act of another who did not authorize that act.”
State v. Elam, 7 S.W.3d 103 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 39-14-114(c), -105(2). The state argues that TenmCode Ann.”
Barnwell v. State, 567 So. 2d 215 (Miss. 1990). “See, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (1989). Thus, Mississippi's maximum sentence for uttering a forgery exceeds the maximum possible sentence for each of the aforementioned states.”
State of Tennessee v. Ronald Lyons, James Michael Usinger, Lee Harold Cromwell, Austin Gary Cooper, & Christopher Alan Hauser (Tenn. Crim. App. 2021). · cites it 11× “All of the odd numbered counts of the indictment charged an individual defendant with one count of fraudulent filing of a lien in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-117 while all even numbered counts of the indictment charged forgery in violation of Tennessee…”
Aron J. Austin v. S. Roofing & Renovations, LLC (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 10× “Whether the Circuit Court erred in dismissing Appellant’s claim for violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-14-114 because it does not offer a private right of action.”
State of Tennessee v. Danyelle McCullough (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). · cites it 8× ““Forge” means to: (A) Alter, make, complete, execute or authenticate any writing so that it purports to: (i) Be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) Have been executed at a time or place or in a numbered sequence other than was in fact the case; or (iii) Be a…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a) — 24 cases
Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Curry, 266 S.W.3d 379 (Tenn. 2008). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a). Thus, a necessary element of the act of forgery is an intent to defraud.”
State of Tennessee v. Cynthia J. Finch, 465 S.W.3d 584 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (a). The applicable terms “forge” and “writing” are defined as follows: (1) “Forge” means to: (A) Alter, make, complete, execute or authenticate any writing so that it purports to: (i) Be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) Have…”
State of Tennessee v. Alkita M. Odom, 64 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “§§ 39-14-114, 115. It can hardly be disputed that it is more serious to forge a writing in the amount of $300,000 with the intent to defraud or harm another than it is to forge a writing in the amount of $10 with the intent to defraud or harm another.”
State v. Knight, 969 S.W.2d 939 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a). The term “forge” includes altering, making, completing, executing or authenticating any writing so it purports to be the act of another who did not authorize that act.”
Regions Bank v. Bric Constructors, LLC, f/k/a Bric Contractors, LLC, & Patricia McIntosh, 380 S.W.3d 740 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011). “In our view, the evidence in the record does not support the Defendants’ claim that the relevant documents were “forged.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a)(2003) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Carolyn J. Nobles (Tenn. Crim. App. 2007).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b) — 5 cases
State of Tennessee v. Cynthia J. Finch, 465 S.W.3d 584 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (a). The applicable terms “forge” and “writing” are defined as follows: (1) “Forge” means to: (A) Alter, make, complete, execute or authenticate any writing so that it purports to: (i) Be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) Have…”
State of Tennessee v. Alkita M. Odom, 64 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “§§ 39-14-114, 115. It can hardly be disputed that it is more serious to forge a writing in the amount of $300,000 with the intent to defraud or harm another than it is to forge a writing in the amount of $10 with the intent to defraud or harm another.”
State of Tennessee v. Keith A. Howard (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011).
Larry Wayne Webb v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
State v. Lori A. Little (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. Ashley Wheeler (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015).
State of Tennessee v. Danny Lynn Davis (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1)(A) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Jeffery Combs (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015).
State of Tennessee v. Terry Lynn Nuchols (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1)(A)(I) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. Larry Wayne Webb (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1)(A)(i) — 5 cases
State of Tennessee v. David Marsh (Tenn. Crim. App. 2006).
State of Tennessee v. Marcus Williams (Tenn. Crim. App. 2016).
State of Tennessee v. Calandra Clark (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017).
State v. Alonzo Watson (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1)(B) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. Ronald Lyons, James Michael Usinger, Lee Harold Cromwell, Austin Gary Cooper, & Christopher Alan Hauser (Tenn. Crim. App. 2021). “All of the odd numbered counts of the indictment charged an individual defendant with one count of fraudulent filing of a lien in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-117 while all even numbered counts of the indictment charged forgery in violation of Tennessee…”
State of Tennessee v. Kenna Jean Parrott (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005).
State of Tennessee v. Brigitte Pauli (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1)(C) — 1 case
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(1)(D) — 1 case
State v. James Walker (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(2) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Kenna Jean Parrott (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(2010) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Larry Wayne Webb (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(b)(l)(A)(i) — 1 case
State v. Knight, 969 S.W.2d 939 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-114(a). The term “forge” includes altering, making, completing, executing or authenticating any writing so it purports to be the act of another who did not authorize that act.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114(c) — 8 cases
State v. Elam, 7 S.W.3d 103 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 39-14-114(c), -105(2). The state argues that TenmCode Ann.”
State of Tennessee v. Alkita M. Odom, 64 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “§§ 39-14-114, 115. It can hardly be disputed that it is more serious to forge a writing in the amount of $300,000 with the intent to defraud or harm another than it is to forge a writing in the amount of $10 with the intent to defraud or harm another.”
State v. Jackson, 124 S.W.3d 139 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-114 (a). There is no proof here that the Defendant was attempting to conceal anything other than *145 his own identity.”
State of Tennessee v. Danyelle McCullough (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). ““Forge” means to: (A) Alter, make, complete, execute or authenticate any writing so that it purports to: (i) Be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) Have been executed at a time or place or in a numbered sequence other than was in fact the case; or (iii) Be a…”
State of Tennessee v. Calvin Louis Hill (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005).
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.