Definition
False personation is a criminal offense consisting of falsely representing oneself to be another specific person and acting in that assumed character for an unlawful purpose. The offense requires both the false representation and some act taken in the assumed identity — mere false naming alone does not complete the crime.
The offense typically encompasses two distinct harmful purposes:
1. Obtaining property or exercising rights: Assuming another's identity in order to gain money, property, or a legal benefit belonging to that person.
2. Subjecting another to liability: Assuming another's identity in order to expose that person to legal obligation, prosecution, or other adverse legal consequence — as where an impersonator commits a crime or incurs a debt under another's name.
Modern statutes have expanded coverage considerably beyond these two traditional branches. Federal law and most state codes now specifically criminalize false personation of public officials, law enforcement officers, military personnel, and credentialed professionals, recognizing the distinct public harm created when the assumed identity carries governmental authority.
---
Common Confusion
FALSE PERSONATION vs. FRAUD vs. IDENTITY THEFT: These three concepts overlap but are not interchangeable. Fraud is the broader genus — false personation is one species of fraud, distinguished by the requirement that a specific real person's identity be assumed. Identity theft, the modern statutory formulation, typically adds the element of unauthorized use of identifying information and may not require acting in character as the victim. Researchers working in historical sources will find the personation offense defined in terms of assumed character and legal consequence, not data theft; the modern identity theft framework emerged separately and should not be read back into older materials.
FALSE PERSONATION vs. IMPERSONATION: In casual usage these terms are synonymous. Legally, some jurisdictions use impersonation specifically for the offense of assuming the identity of a public officer or official, reserving false personation for private persons. The distinction is not universal — many codes use both terms interchangeably or have consolidated them.
---
Core Elements
The traditional common law and early statutory formulation required:
1. A false representation: The defendant actively presented themselves as a specific, identifiable other person — not merely a false name, but a real person's identity.
2. Acting in the assumed character: Some affirmative act taken while occupying the false identity.
3. Qualifying purpose or effect: Either (a) intent to obtain property or exercise a right belonging to the person personated, or (b) the act subjected the person personated to legal liability.
Modern statutes often drop or relax the third element, making the act of false personation itself — particularly of officials — an offense regardless of proven intent to profit or to harm.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The historical definitions in the shelf dictionaries are narrower than current law and can mislead researchers working across time periods. Burrill's formulation — property acquisition or imposition of liability — captures the nineteenth-century statutory core but predates the proliferation of official-impersonation and professional-licensing variants now central to the offense in most jurisdictions.
Researchers using Bouvier's will find only a cross-reference to PERSONATION, with no independent analysis; Bouvier is unhelpful on this term and should not be treated as authoritative. Black's entry in available historical editions is similarly compressed.
The federal false personation statute (18 U.S.C. § 912, impersonation of federal officers or employees) operates on different elements than the traditional personation offense — it does not require intent to gain property — and represents a distinct statutory lineage. Researchers conflating the federal scheme with the historical common law offense will reach incorrect conclusions about required mental state and harm.
In historical primary source research, the offense appears under multiple headings: false personation, personation, impersonation, false pretenses, and fraud. Cross-referencing all variants is essential for pre-1900 materials, where indexing is inconsistent.
The connection to False Claims Act (government contract fraud) is conceptual rather than doctrinal — both involve false representations to extract governmental benefit — but the statutory elements and procedural posture are entirely different. Do not treat them as related offenses in legal argument.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill provides the most useful historical entry, synthesizing the traditional two-branch structure (property/rights vs. liability exposure) with statutory reference to New York law and Stephens' Commentaries. This formulation was standard through the late nineteenth century and reflects the offense as it existed before the expansion of official-impersonation statutes.
Black's available text is fragmentary and unhelpful — the surviving excerpt concerns new trials, apparently a printing artifact, and provides no analytical support. Bouvier defers entirely to the PERSONATION entry rather than providing an independent definition.
None of the three shelf sources address modern dimensions of the offense: digital identity, synthetic personation, use of biometric or account credentials, or the official-impersonation statutes that now dominate prosecutorial practice. Researchers working on contemporary questions should treat the historical dictionaries as background on the offense's traditional core only.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Federal law criminalizes false personation of officers and employees of the United States as a distinct offense with its own elements. State statutes vary significantly — some retain the traditional property/liability structure, others have replaced it with broader identity theft or impersonation codes. A handful of jurisdictions distinguish between personation of private individuals and personation of officials, with the latter carrying enhanced penalties.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
The Law Mind Criminal Law Encyclopedia — Government Contract Fraud (False Claims Act) (criminal_98): Conceptual overlap in the use of false representations to obtain governmental benefit; distinct statutory framework.
---