Section 708-850 provides definitions of terms used repeatedly throughout this Part; it does not specify any offense. A discussion of the definitions, when called for, is found in the commentary on the sections employing the terms defined.

Act 155, Session Laws 1988, added the term "falsely endorses" to this section. Previously, forging a written instrument did not include false endorsements as a method of forging a written instrument; therefore, false endorsement was prosecuted as a theft. House Standing Committee Report No. 467-88.

Act 13, Session Laws 1993, amended the definition of "forged instrument" to specify that a false endorsement is a method of forging a written instrument. The legislature found that this amendment added clarity and consistency to definitions regarding forgery and related offenses in the penal code, and was also consistent with the legislative intent as established in Act 155, Session Laws 1988, which included false endorsement as a method of committing the offense of forgery to strengthen the existing forgery laws at that time. House Standing Committee Report No. 84, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1064.

Act 243, Session Laws 1997, made it an offense of forgery if a person fraudulently encoded the magnetic ink character recognition numbers on a written instrument. The Act amended this section by adding a definition for "fraudulently encode magnetic ink character recognition numbers". The Act also amended this section by adding "issuing commercial establishment" to the class of issuers protected from forgery, false making, false completion, false altering, and false endorsement.

The legislature found that increasingly advanced technology has changed the way in which commercial paper can be handled between parties. One of the technological changes involved the use of magnetic character recognition numbers that enable scanners to quickly obtain information from the document. Changing the magnetic codes effectively tells the scanner different information than that intended, making it a forgery in fact, if not in name. However, that type of document alteration was not currently prohibited by law. The legislature found that the Act would protect parties in that type of situation. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1551, House Standing Committee Report No. 987.

"Falsely complete": in a prosecution for forgery, the element of completing a check without authority of the ostensible drawer may be proven by circumstantial evidence. 79 H. 175 (App.), 900 P.2d 172.