What constitutes a crime of “moral turpitude”?
Get Legal Help Today
Compare Quotes From Top Companies and Save
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
What constitutes a crime of “moral turpitude”?
Recently, I applied for certification as a substitute teacher in MO. I was arrested and convicted (and I did disclose it) of a trespassing injury to property in CA 24 years ago as part of a non-violent political protest in which myself and a group of others chained their necks to a gate. The police cut the locks and disassembled the gate, but no injury was actually done to the gate. The state is claiming that this is a crime involving “moral turpitude.” I am gathering any documents I have to gain clearance.
Asked on August 14, 2011 Missouri
Answers:
S.L,. Member, California Bar / FreeAdvice Contributing Attorney
Answered 13 years ago | Contributor
It could be argued that trespass as part of a political protest is NOT a crime of moral turpitude. You could also argue that since this occurred 24 years ago and if you have no other record since that this should not bar your employment as a substitute teacher.
The legal definition of moral turpitude is an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a person owes to others or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between one person and another.
Moral turpitude is conduct contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals.
As you can see from the legal definition, moral turpitude is rather vague and is determined based on a particular crime. You could argue that the trespass as a political protest did NOT involve baseness, vileness or depravity and therefore did NOT constitute moral turpitude.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Answer(s) provided above are for general information only. The attorney providing the answer was not serving as the attorney for the person submitting the question or in any attorney-client relationship with such person. Laws may vary from state to state, and sometimes change. Tiny variations in the facts, or a fact not set forth in a question, often can change a legal outcome or an attorney's conclusion. Although AttorneyPages.com has verified the attorney was admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction, he or she may not be authorized to practice law in the jurisdiction referred to in the question, nor is he or she necessarily experienced in the area of the law involved. Unlike the information in the Answer(s) above, upon which you should NOT rely, for personal advice you can rely upon we suggest you retain an attorney to represent you.