Sec. 32.21. FORGERY. (a) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Forge" means:
(A) to alter, make, complete, execute, or authenticate any writing so that it purports:
(i) to be the act of another who did not authorize that act;
(ii) to have been executed at a time or place or in a numbered sequence other than was in fact the case; or
(iii) to be a copy of an original when no such original existed;
(B) to issue, transfer, register the transfer of, pass, publish, or otherwise utter a writing that is forged within the meaning of Paragraph (A); or
(C) to possess a writing that is forged within the meaning of Paragraph (A) with intent to utter it in a manner specified in Paragraph (B).
(2) "Writing" includes:
(A) printing or any other method of recording information;
(B) money, coins, tokens, stamps, seals, credit cards, badges, and trademarks; and
(C) symbols of value, right, privilege, or identification.
(b) A person commits an offense if he forges a writing with intent to defraud or harm another.
(c) Except as provided by Subsections (d), (e), and (e-1), an offense under this section is a state jail felony.
(d) Subject to Subsection (e-1), an offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the writing is or purports to be a will, codicil, deed, deed of trust, mortgage, security instrument, security agreement, credit card, check, authorization to debit an account at a financial institution, or similar sight order for payment of money, contract, release, or other commercial instrument.
(e) Subject to Subsection (e-1), an offense under this section is a felony of the second degree if the writing is or purports to be:
(1) part of an issue of money, securities, postage or revenue stamps;
(2) a government record listed in Section 37.01(2)(C); or
(3) other instruments issued by a state or national government or by a subdivision of either, or part of an issue of stock, bonds, or other instruments representing interests in or claims against another person.
(e-1) If it is shown on the trial of an offense under this section that the actor engaged in the conduct to obtain or attempt to obtain a property or service, an offense under this section is:
(1) a Class B misdemeanor if the value of the property or service is less than $100;
(2) a Class A misdemeanor if the value of the property or service is $100 or more but less than $750;
(3) a state jail felony if the value of the property or service is $750 or more but less than $2,500;
(4) a felony of the third degree if the value of the property or service is $2,500 or more but less than $30,000;
(5) a felony of the second degree if the value of the property or service is $30,000 or more but less than $150,000; and
(6) a felony of the first degree if the value of the property or service is $150,000 or more.
(e-2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, an offense under this section, other than an offense described for purposes of punishment by Subsection (e-1)(6), is increased to the next higher category of offense if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the offense was committed against an elderly individual as defined by Section 22.04.
(f) A person is presumed to intend to defraud or harm another if the person acts with respect to two or more writings of the same type and if each writing is a government record listed in Section 37.01(2)(C).
(f-1) For purposes of Subsection (e-1), it is presumed that a person in possession of money that is forged within the meaning of Subsection (a)(1)(A) intended to obtain a property or service of a value equal to the total purported value of the forged money.
(g) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1991, 72nd Leg., ch. 113, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1991; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 189, Sec. 1, eff. May 21, 1997; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1104, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 670 (H.B. 2328), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2009.
Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 977 (H.B. 351), Sec. 25, eff. September 1, 2017.
Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S., Ch. 132 (H.B. 1910), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2023.
Acts 2025, 89th Leg., R.S., Ch. 824 (S.B. 1379), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2025.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
437
cases (
42 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case:
Ramos v. State
Ramos v. State (2009)
texcrimapp · cites it 16×
“" [2] Our state forgery statute, Texas Penal Code § 32.21, provides: "(a) For purposes of this section: (1) "Forge" means: (A) to alter, make, complete, execute, or authenticate any writing so that it purports: (i) to be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) to…”
Shipp v. State (2011)
texcrimapp · cites it 18×
“[15] Compare TEX. PENAL CODE § 32.21 with MODEL PENAL CODE § 224.”
Oldham v. State (1998)
texcrimapp · cites it 4×
“Tex. Penal Code § 32.21. The Court of Appeals remanded appellant's case for a hearing on appellant's untimely motion for new trial.”
Reginald J. Qualls v. State (2018)
texapp · cites it 3×
“2017), 1 and upon accepting Appellant’s plea 1 Subsection (e-1), which, upon proof during trial that the actor committed forgery to obtain or attempt to obtain a property or service, classifies the offense level according to the value of that property or service, Tex. Penal Code…”
State v. Allen (2011)
texapp · cites it 14×
“See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 32.21 (West Supp.2009) (defining forgery).”
Ramos v. State (2008)
texapp · cites it 7×
“Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 32.21. Thus, to prove misdemeanor forgery, the State must show that the accused “with the intent to defraud or harm another .”
Pierce v. State (2003)
texapp · cites it 2×
“A person commits the offense of forgery when he or she “makes, 3 alters, completes, executes, or authenticates any writing so that it appears to be the act of another who did not authorize that act.”
Stone v. State (1992)
texapp · cites it 2×
“Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 32.21 (1989). 2 . Appellant has separated his legal-sufficiency and factual-sufficiency complaints in two separate points of error, avoiding the ambiguity of merely alleging that the evidence is “insufficient.”
Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (2013)
ca5 · cites it 2×
“Second, I do not agree that the Reinagels’ forgery argument is a red herring. Acknowledging a document at a different time or place than what was in fact the case is included in the Texas Penal Code’s definition of “forge.”
Oldham v. State (1999)
texapp · cites it 4×
“See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 32.21 (b) (Vernon 1989).”
United States v. Houston (2004)
ca5 · cites it 2×
“6 Although it appears that Houston’s possession of a false Florida identification card and false social security card likely constituted felonious forgery pursuant to Texas Penal Code § 32.21, there is no indication that his firearms were actually possessed “in connection with”…”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a) — 14 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1) — 6 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1)(A) — 20 cases
Pierce v. State (2003)
texapp
“A person commits the offense of forgery when he or she “makes, 3 alters, completes, executes, or authenticates any writing so that it appears to be the act of another who did not authorize that act.”
Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (2013)
ca5
“Second, I do not agree that the Reinagels’ forgery argument is a red herring. Acknowledging a document at a different time or place than what was in fact the case is included in the Texas Penal Code’s definition of “forge.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1)(A)(i) — 12 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1)(B) — 12 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1)(B)(i) — 1 case
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(1)(C) — 6 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(2)(A) — 1 case
Ramos v. State (2008)
texapp
“Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 32.21. Thus, to prove misdemeanor forgery, the State must show that the accused “with the intent to defraud or harm another .”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(l)(A)(i) — 3 cases
Ramos v. State (2008)
texapp
“Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 32.21. Thus, to prove misdemeanor forgery, the State must show that the accused “with the intent to defraud or harm another .”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(a)(l)(A)(iii) — 1 case
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(b) — 73 cases
Ramos v. State (2009)
texcrimapp
“" [2] Our state forgery statute, Texas Penal Code § 32.21, provides: "(a) For purposes of this section: (1) "Forge" means: (A) to alter, make, complete, execute, or authenticate any writing so that it purports: (i) to be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) to…”
Shipp v. State (2011)
texcrimapp
“[15] Compare TEX. PENAL CODE § 32.21 with MODEL PENAL CODE § 224.”
Stone v. State (1992)
texapp
“Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 32.21 (1989). 2 . Appellant has separated his legal-sufficiency and factual-sufficiency complaints in two separate points of error, avoiding the ambiguity of merely alleging that the evidence is “insufficient.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(b)(1)(A) — 1 case
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(c) — 4 cases
Shipp v. State (2011)
texcrimapp
“[15] Compare TEX. PENAL CODE § 32.21 with MODEL PENAL CODE § 224.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(d) — 34 cases
Shipp v. State (2011)
texcrimapp
“[15] Compare TEX. PENAL CODE § 32.21 with MODEL PENAL CODE § 224.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(e) — 10 cases
Ramos v. State (2009)
texcrimapp
“" [2] Our state forgery statute, Texas Penal Code § 32.21, provides: "(a) For purposes of this section: (1) "Forge" means: (A) to alter, make, complete, execute, or authenticate any writing so that it purports: (i) to be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) to…”
Shipp v. State (2011)
texcrimapp
“[15] Compare TEX. PENAL CODE § 32.21 with MODEL PENAL CODE § 224.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(e)(1) — 4 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(e)(2) — 2 cases
Ramos v. State (2008)
texapp
“Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 32.21. Thus, to prove misdemeanor forgery, the State must show that the accused “with the intent to defraud or harm another .”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(e)(3) — 4 cases
Ramos v. State (2009)
texcrimapp
“" [2] Our state forgery statute, Texas Penal Code § 32.21, provides: "(a) For purposes of this section: (1) "Forge" means: (A) to alter, make, complete, execute, or authenticate any writing so that it purports: (i) to be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) to…”
Ramos v. State (2008)
texapp
“Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 32.21. Thus, to prove misdemeanor forgery, the State must show that the accused “with the intent to defraud or harm another .”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(e)(l) — 1 case
Ramos v. State (2008)
texapp
“Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 32.21. Thus, to prove misdemeanor forgery, the State must show that the accused “with the intent to defraud or harm another .”
— Tex. Penal Code § 32.21(g) — 1 case
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.