in reference to the circulation of forged or counterfeit documents as if they were genuine, id. — the precise context contemplated by § 1546(a), which prohibits both the production of counterfeit documents and subsequent acts involving counterfeit documents. See also id. at 1781 (defining “uttering” as “[t]he crime of presenting a false or worthless instrument with the intent to harm or defraud. — Also termed uttering a forged instrument ”); Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 1302 (1 tly obtained immigration document naturally occur in incidents of finite duration; they do not by nature involve “a continuous, unlawful act or series of acts.” Brazell, 489 F.3d at 668 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see United States v. Dunne, 324 F.3d 1158, 1165 (10th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). For example, using a fraudulent document to
holding that 18 usc  1919 did not implicitly repeal 18 usc  1001 holding that a statute which made it illegal for a person to knowingly use  any false writing or document did not involve a continuing offense because it contemplated a single act quoting 18 usc  1001 holding that 18 usc  1001 which criminalizes making false statements to a united states agency is specifically made applicable to the postal service by 39 usc  410b2 holding that 18 usc  1028aal which makes it an aggravated crime to knowingly transfer  without lawful authority a means of identification of another person requires proof that the defendant not only knowingly transferred something but that he knew it was a means of identification and that it belonged to another person holding that good faith is a defense to the willful filing of false statements under 18 usc  1001