State v. Townsend

A person commits second-degree forgery when, "with intent to injure or defraud, the person utters a written instrument which the person knows to be forged,” ORS 165.007(1)(b), and in that context, “utter” means “to issue, deliver, publish, circulate, disseminate, transfer or tender a written instrument or other object to another,” ORS 165.002(7).

Defendant appealed a judgment convicting her of two counts of identity theft, pursuant to ORS 165.800(1). Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s order denying her motion for judgment of acquittal. On appeal, Defendant argued that she did not “utter” the personal identification of another person when she signed a hospital intake form using a fake name, and provided a false social security number. In response, the State argued that the Defendant did “utter” the personal identification of another. The Oregon Supreme Court defines “utter” in the same sense that it is used in the forgery statute. A person commits second-degree forgery when,“with intent to injure or defraud, the person utters a written instrument which the person knows to be forged,” ORS 165.007(1)(b), and in that context, “utter” means “to issue, deliver, publish, circulate, disseminate,  transfer or tender a written instrument or other object to another,” ORS 165.002(7). The Court reasoned that the Defendant “uttered” the personal identification of another because she expected hospital staff to disseminate the information she provided on the intake forms in order to benefit from the use of a false identity to obtain medical services. Affirmed.