Kara Sears
Uttering is a crime that involves a person with the intent to defraud by knowingly selling, publishing, or passing a forged or counterfeited document. In the United States, uttering is defined as offering a forged document while knowing that it is forged. Uttering is a concurrent felony in Massachusetts and carries a punishment of up to 10 years in prison. In Virginia, uttering is a Class 5 felony, while forgery of a public record is a more serious Class 4 felony. Uttering a forged instrument can be a felony or misdemeanor, depending on the value of the instrument.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Definition | The act of knowingly passing on or using a forged document with the intent to defraud |
| Distinction from Forgery | Uttering is the use of a forged document, whereas forgery is the creation of a forged document |
| Criminal Offence | Yes, it is a criminal offence in Canada, the Republic of Ireland, Oklahoma, Virginia, and Massachusetts |
| Punishment | Imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, court fees, strict probation terms, and restitution |
| Proof of Offence | The Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant passed or attempted to pass a forged document with the intent to injure or defraud |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Uttering differs from forgery
Uttering and forgery are both serious offences that carry significant penalties, including jail time, court fees, and probation. However, the two crimes differ in their specific nature.
Forgery involves the creation of a false document or the false alteration of an existing document, with the intent to defraud. It is the fabrication of a forged instrument. This can include writing a false signature and representing it as authentic or creating a false writing that would be of legal effect if it were true. Forgery is typically a felony, though it was originally a misdemeanour.
On the other hand, uttering is the act of knowingly passing on, using, or presenting a forged document, with the intent to defraud. It is the publication of a forged instrument created by someone else. Uttering does not require that the person who presented the document actually forged or altered it themselves. For example, an underage person using a fake driver's license to enter a bar would be committing uttering, as would someone who forges a log for personal profit.
To summarise, the key difference is that forgery involves the creation of a false document, while uttering involves the use or presentation of a forged document created by another person.
Energy Markets: Can Law Keep Competition Fair?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Intent to defraud
Uttering is a common-law crime that involves the knowing presentation of a false document with the intent to defraud the recipient. It is often coupled with forgery, which is the act of creating a false document with the intent to defraud. However, they are distinct offences, with uttering being the use or passing of a forged document that someone else made.
The intent to defraud is a critical element of the crime of uttering. The accused must have had the intention to deceive or defraud another person or entity. This means that if it can be demonstrated that there was no intent to deceive or defraud, the charges may not stand in court.
To prove intent to defraud, the prosecution must establish that the accused knew the document was false, forged, or altered and that they presented or attempted to present it as genuine. For example, if an underage person uses a fake ID to purchase alcohol, they are committing uttering because they are presenting a false document (the ID) with the knowledge that it is false and with the intent to deceive the person checking their ID.
In some jurisdictions, the prosecution must also identify the specific person or entity that the defendant intended to defraud. Additionally, the document in question must be one that, if genuine, would have legal significance, such as the power to impose a legal liability or change legal rights or liabilities.
Defences against charges of uttering include lack of intent to defraud, lack of knowledge of forgery, and proving that the document was not presented as genuine (e.g., it was clearly marked as a copy or draft).
In-Laws: Unforgivable Actions and How to Move On
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Passing on a forged document
Under common law, uttering a forged document is a criminal offense that involves the passing or presenting of a forged or falsified document as genuine, with the intent to deceive or defraud. The term "uttering" refers to the act of offering or putting forward the forged document, and it is an essential element of the offense. The crime of uttering a forged document is often referred to as "forgery and uttering" or simply "uttering a forgery."
When an individual passes on a forged document, they are knowingly presenting it as genuine, often with the intent to gain some benefit or cause harm to another person or entity. For example, passing on a forged check to obtain money or providing false credentials to secure a job are both forms of uttering a forged document. Even if the person who passes on the document did not create the forgery themselves, they are still committing a crime by presenting it as authentic.
To prove the offense of passing on a forged document, several elements must be established. Firstly, it must be shown that the document in question is indeed forged or falsified in some material way. This could involve alterations, additions, or erasures that change the meaning or legal significance of the document. Secondly, it must be proven that the accused knew, or had reasonable grounds to believe, that the document was not genuine. This element addresses the intent to deceive, which is a crucial aspect of the crime. Lastly, it must be established that the accused presented or passed on the document as genuine to another party. This could involve giving, sending, or delivering the document, or even just showing it to someone, with the intention of having it accepted as authentic.
The penalties for passing on a forged document vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the case. Generally, it is considered a serious offense and can result in criminal charges, including fines, imprisonment, or both. The punishment often reflects the potential harm that could have been caused by the forgery and the intent behind the uttering. In some cases, additional charges may be brought if the forged document is linked to other criminal activities, such as identity theft or fraud.
It is important to note that simply possessing a forged document may not constitute a crime, but when an individual knowingly passes it on or uses it for deceptive purposes, they are committing the offense of uttering a forged document under common law.
Law Enforcement: The Unspoken Truths
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Criminal consequences
Uttering is a crime that involves the act of passing, publishing, or using a forged document, such as a forged check. It is closely related to the crime of forgery, which involves creating and fabricating a document with the intent to defraud. While forgery focuses on the creation of the forged instrument, uttering involves the use or publication of that instrument with the same fraudulent intent.
In the United States, uttering is defined as offering a forged document to another individual while knowing that the document is forged. It is important to note that the person presenting the document does not need to be the one who forged or altered it. For example, forging a university diploma or a log for personal profit could be considered uttering.
The criminal consequences of uttering vary depending on the jurisdiction. In Massachusetts, uttering is a felony offense, codified in M.G.L c. 267, § 5-6. To prove guilt, the prosecution must demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant passed or attempted to pass a forged document, knowing its false nature, with the specific intent to injure or defraud someone. The potential punishment for uttering in Massachusetts includes imprisonment in state prison for up to 10 years or imprisonment in the house of correction for up to 2 years. Additionally, restitution may be required for any monetary losses or injuries caused by the fraud.
In North Carolina, uttering a forged instrument containing a forged endorsement is also a felony criminal charge. It involves using a fraudulent document or "instrument" or some form of forged payment with the intention to defraud the victim. Under North Carolina Criminal Law 14-120, uttering a forged instrument is classified as a Class I Felony, with a maximum active period of incarceration of up to 24 months, depending on the prior record level.
In Canada, uttering a forged document is an indictable offense under Section 368 of the Criminal Code, punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years. Similarly, in the Republic of Ireland, uttering forged documents remains a criminal offense under the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offenses) Act 2001.
Common-Law Marriage Certificates: Texas Requirements and Process
You may want to see also
Distinction in Virginia
In Virginia, uttering and forgery are both crimes, but they are distinct offences. Forgery involves making a false writing that, if genuine, would be of some legal effect. For instance, forging a signature on a traffic summons or a check. On the other hand, uttering is the assertion, either by words or actions, that a forged writing is valid. This means that uttering involves presenting a forged document as genuine, with the knowledge that it is not, without having necessarily forged or altered it themselves.
Forgery and uttering are separate offences and can be charged separately. Both crimes carry the same penalty in Virginia, with a punishment of up to 10 years in prison as a Class 5 felony.
It is important to note that Virginia is not a common-law state and does not recognise common-law marriages. However, it does recognise common-law marriages created in other states as valid. In the context of uttering, this means that while Virginia has its own statutes regarding uttering and forgery, it may also recognise similar laws from other states as valid.
In summary, the distinction in Virginia regarding uttering is that it is a separate offence from forgery, and it involves the presentation and assertion of a forged document as genuine, regardless of whether the presenter forged it or not.
Adopting ALI Principles: Can States Adopt American Law?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Uttering is the act of knowingly passing or publishing a forged or counterfeited document with the intent to defraud.
Forgery involves the creation of a forged document, whereas uttering involves the passing or publication of a forged document that someone else made.
The legal consequences of uttering can be severe and may include jail or prison time, court fees, strict probation terms, and restitution.
Examples of uttering include passing a forged check, forging a university diploma, or presenting a third-party identification to a police officer.
It is essential to contact an experienced criminal defense attorney who can help build a strong defense. Facts that show the defendant acted without knowledge or intent may be critical to the defense.
