California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Rizo, 22 Cal.4th 681, 94 Cal.Rptr.2d 375, 996 P.2d 27 (Cal. 2000):
Thus, section 113, by its terms, focuses solely on the acts and intent of the violator. In fact, the absence of any statutory reference to the acts or intent of the recipient of the false documents strongly suggests that nothing from the recipient is necessary to complete the offense. (Cf. People v. Brigham (1945) 72 Cal.App.2d 1, 6-7, 163 P.2d 891 [the failure of 68 to refer to any acts by the victim of a bribe-seeker means that "[n]o action on the part of the victim, such as payment, delivery or otherwise, is necessary to complete the offense"].) The inclusion of manufacturing among the proscribed activities bolsters this conclusion because the act of manufacturing does not assume the existence of an identifiable recipient.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.