01/20/2026
What is ‘moral turpitude’?
According to Merriam-Webster, “moral turpitude” has two legal meanings:
An act or behavior that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted standard of the community.
A quality of dishonesty or other immorality that is determined by a court to be present in the commission of a criminal offense
How do state Notary laws define moral turpitude crimes?
Notaries witness the ex*****on of document signings. In general terms, a person cannot be trusted to perform Notary services impartially and honestly if they have been convicted of a crime that involves moral turpitude. In some states, persons convicted of crimes of moral turpitude may be disqualified from applying for a Notary commission.
Moral turpitude, as applied to Notary laws, seldom has an exact definition. This concept gives state commissioning authorities wide flexibility in deciding whether someone should receive or keep a Notary commission.
Not every state lists moral turpitude in its Notary laws as a disqualification for a Notary commission, but many do.
California law states moral turpitude as grounds for the denial, suspension or revocation of a commission (Government Code 8214.1[b]). The California Secretary of State’s Notary Public Disciplinary Guidelines list examples of offenses of moral turpitude that can lead to revocation of a Notary’s commission or denial of a commission application. The examples include but are not limited to: assault, arson, auto theft, burglary, possession or sale of illegal drugs, embezzlement, forgery, fraud, failure to pay child support or failure to comply with a court order.
The California Supreme Court has handled many cases in which crimes of moral turpitude were at issue. In one case, the Court said, “Although we have variously defined ‘moral turpitude’ in such broad terms as ‘baseness, vileness or depravity’…, we have also decided that the question of whether a conviction involves moral turpitude so as to warrant revocation or suspension of a license to practice a professional cannot be determined in the abstract but depends rather on whether the conviction demonstrates unfitness to practice that profession” (Cartwright v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners, 16 Cal. 3d 762, 548 P.2d 1134, 129 Cal. Rptr. 462, 1976 Cal. LEXIS 258).
