The term "crimes involving moral turpitude" refers to categories of crimes that involve either dishonesty or base, vile, or depraved conduct that is shocking to a reasonable person. Some examples of California crimes that are commonly deemed to involve moral turpitude include murder, embezzlement, burglary, robbery, perjury, and aggravated assault.
Our Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys specialize in providing the necessary guidance and support in navigating the complexities of the law. We understand the anxiety and uncertainty that come with legal matters, and we are here to help you with confidence in such challenging situations.
Understanding the potential collateral consequences of a crime involving moral turpitude is crucial for clients. It can significantly impact decisions such as accepting a plea deal or fighting a case at trial. Loss of a professional license or adverse immigration action is are serious consideration that we can help you navigate.
Although much less serious for the typical client, it's essential to note that a conviction for a crime of moral turpitude can also affect the defendant's credibility in a future legal proceeding. This is a crucial consideration that we will guide you through.
Some clients, such as those in law enforcement, may expect to testify frequently in future cases and must consider whether a conviction for a crime of moral turpitude will negatively impact their ability to continue being effective in their jobs.
Collateral Consequences
It should be noted that a crime involving moral turpitude is not a specific offense charged separately. Rather, a crime involving moral turpitude is a type of classification often assigned to a specific crime. Thus, if the crime you are facing is classified as a crime of moral turpitude, you might be facing additional consequences.
There's no statutory definition for a moral turpitude crime; however, it's generally described as a crime involving dishonesty, fraud, or morally reprehensible conduct.
For a crime to be classified as involving moral turpitude (CIMT) by the Los Angeles County criminal court judge or jury, specific facts and evidence in the case are crucial. We will guide you through this process, ensuring you understand the implications of the conduct in question.
An important factor in determining crimes involving moral turpitude is that they typically are intentional crimes, meaning the elements of the crime must include some type of criminal intent. A crime of moral turpitude is considered morally reprehensible, not a mistake or a case of poor judgment.
Crimes that Shock the Conscience
In general, crimes of moral turpitude are those that either involve fraud or lying or those that “shock the conscience.” Given that general definition, the question of which specific crimes are or are not crimes of moral turpitude is the subject of much debate and disagreement among courts.
On both ends of the spectrum of criminal conduct, the answer is obvious. A misdemeanor conviction for possession of marijuana, for instance, is almost certainly not a crime of moral turpitude.
Murder, or any other heinous assault crime, will almost always qualify as a crime of moral turpitude. Thus, the specific crimes that are frequently classified as involving moral turpitude include the following:
- Lewd acts on a minor,
- Rape,
- Robbery,
- Spousal Abuse,
- Child Abuse,
- Arson,
- Homicide,
- Aggravated Assault,
- Felony Hit and Run,
- Kidnapping,
- Fraud Crimes,
- Grand Theft Auto,
- Perjury,
- Felon in Possession of a Firearm.
Disagreement arises in marginal cases where reasonable people can disagree about whether the conduct at issue is so harmful to society that it “shocks the conscience.” While different courts may hold differently, some general principles are worth noting.
First, in general, moral turpitude implies intentionally wrongful conduct. It is unlikely that a court would find someone's conduct morally shocking for a so-called “strict liability” crime, such as a parking offense or an offense that requires only negligence as a mental state.
Conversely, criminal statutes that require knowing or willful conduct are more likely to be considered crimes of moral turpitude. Courts disagree over whether crimes that require recklessness, a mental state between negligence and intentional conduct, can qualify as morally turpitudinous.
Federal Immigration Consequences
Federal courts frequently interact with the definition of moral turpitude in immigration consequences. For that reason, the federal courts have developed an analytical framework known as the “categorical approach.”
Under this test, the federal court will examine the generic offense, meaning simply the elements required to convict, of which the defendant was convicted. This approach is termed categorical because the specific facts of the actual case are not examined.
Rather, the federal court looks only at what facts the jury must have found to convict the defendant of the particular statute. The court then compares that definition to the standard for moral turpitude.
The situation is further complicated because many State statutes provide alternative theories under which a defendant may be convicted. In some cases, the federal court might be inclined to find crimes involving moral turpitude if the defendant was convicted on one of these theories but not others.
In these cases, a federal court employs the “modified categorical approach,” which begins with an examination of the generic offense as in the categorical approach but then moves on to encompass a limited amount of additional documents such as the indictment, the jury instructions, a guilty plea, if any, or the sentencing transcript.
These additional documents provide more context and details about the case, which can help the court make a more accurate assessment of moral turpitude. With these additional documents, the federal court can more accurately determine which version of the statute the defendant was actually convicted under and thereby assess moral turpitude.
Professional License Consequences
Outside of immigration, our clients most frequently encounter questions about moral turpitude in the context of professional licensing.
Certain jobs will require that you receive and maintain a professional license. For example, attorneys, teachers, and doctors could certainly face adverse consequences if convicted of a crime of moral turpitude. The potential loss of a professional license is a serious matter that we can help you navigate, as it has a significant impact on your career and livelihood.
It's not uncommon for professional boards to suspend or revoke a professional license if the license holder is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Clearly, the loss of a professional license will have a dramatic impact on your life.
Many professional licensing boards at the State level distinguish between criminal convictions that involve moral turpitude and those that do not.
These distinctions may include the requirement to self-report an arrest or conviction and the level of discipline that will be imposed on the licensee, up to and including loss of licensure.
For our clients with licensing concerns, we work closely with licensing specialists, union representatives, or other individuals familiar with the particular industry in which our client works. This collaboration is crucial in helping the client understand the pros and cons of their decisions, ensuring they are fully informed and supported throughout the process.
Witness Credibility Consequences
Finally, there is the issue of witness credibility. Being convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude will obviously limit your effectiveness as a reliable witness. This is a significant consideration that we can help you understand and address.
For example, if you are called to testify as a witness in a legal proceeding, you will be facing scrutiny. Once you are convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, the opposing attorney will frequently use your CIMT to impeach your credibility as a witness. Clearly, this means your prior crime can be used to challenge your testimony in court.
This is commonly known as the “impeachment of witnesses” and involves introducing evidence about a person's criminal history to convince the jury not to believe their testimony. In criminal trials, prior felony convictions that are considered crimes of moral turpitude can always be admitted to impeach a witness.
In fact, even a misdemeanor conviction for criminal conduct that constitutes a crime of moral turpitude can be admitted to impeach a witness. Jurors in criminal trials often distrust witness testimony if the witness has a prior conviction for a crime of moral turpitude, especially if it involves dishonesty.
Contact our Defense Law Firm
If you are facing criminal charges that could be considered a crime of moral turpitude, contact the Los Angeles criminal defense attorneys at Eisner Gorin LLP. A conviction can have life-altering consequences on your professional and personal life.
Our law firm handles State and federal criminal defense matters, often involving questions of moral turpitude.
If you or a family member is facing criminal charges and is particularly concerned with whether the charges will be considered a crime of moral turpitude, contact our experienced criminal defense attorneys at 877-781-1570 for a consultation.
Related Content:
If you have one phone call from jail, call us! If you are facing criminal charges,