Menu
Moral turpitude is a legal concept in the United States and prior to 1976, Canada, that refers to 'an act or behavior that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted standard of the community'. Nations on the exact point, namely, whether gambling, in violation of a statute prohibiting it, is a crime involving moral turpitude. The standard by which a misdemeanor, such as gambling, is to be judged, therefore, is that prevailing in tne united States as a whole, regarding the common view of our people con-cerning its moral character. Examples of property crimes that are considered offenses of moral turpitude include arson, blackmail, forgery, robbery, burglary, theft, illegal use of a credit card, issuing a worthless check, and possessing/transporting stolen property.
Chapter
Crimes of moral turpitude are based on the perpetrator having an evil intent: committing fraud, larceny, and having an intent to harm property or things. Moral turpitude means a crime, whether a felony or misdemeanor, that involves illegal gambling, bookmaking, embezzlement, theft, bribery, use of controlled substance, corruption, abuse of a minor, contribution to the delinquency of a minor, or any other act or conduct that could or may impair a person’s ability to perform his or her duties related to the supervision of the operation of a pachinko slot machine.
§ 9.44 14. Regulatory Offenses
For more text, click 'Next Page>'
Convictions for violation of regulatory statutes generally are not considered to involve moral turpitude because there is nothing inherently wrong with engaging in the particular activity, except that someone has passed a law against it.[86] See § 8.22, supra. Convictions for violating the following laws do NOT involve moral turpitude, unless the statute violated requires fraud or evil intent as an essential element.
Plasencia-Ayala v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 738, (9th Cir. Feb. 7, 2008) (Nevada conviction of failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of Nev. Rev. Stat. § 179D.550, does not constitute a crime involving moral turpitude within the meaning of INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), because the offense of conviction is a regulatory offense that is not inherently evil, but is an offense solely because a law was passed regulating it), following Fong v. INS, 308 F.2d 191, 195 (9th Cir. 1962) (holding that a noncitizen who was deportable for failing to register with the Attorney General had committed “only a minor infraction” and that his record showed “no moral turpitude whatever”);[87]
Chaunt v. United States, 81 S.Ct. 147, 5 L.Ed.2d 120 (1960) (conviction of distributing handbills in violation of city ordinance, concealed in the course of a naturalization proceeding, held not to be a crime involving moral turpitude);
Eyoum v. INS, 125 F.3d 889 (5th Cir. 1997) (importation of pancake turtles in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545 did not involve moral turpitude because it was illegal only because the defendant failed to complete the proper paperwork);
United States v. Carrollo, 30 F.Supp. 3 (W.D. Mo. 1939) (conducting a lottery was not considered CMT where intent to defraud was not a necessary element of the offense);
Matter of Mahmoud, File No. A24-883-732, 14 Immigr. Rep. B1-14 (BIA 1994) (possession of altered food stamps with knowledge that they were altered, but without use or intent to use them unlawfully);
Matter of S, 9 I. & N. Dec. 688 (BIA 1962) (violation of gambling laws);
Matter of K, 8 I. & N. Dec. 310 (BIA 1959) (ration law violation);
Matter of P, 6 I. & N. Dec. 795 (BIA 1955) (sale of oleo margarine labeled as butter “with intent to deceive and mislead” in violation of a federal statute was held to be a crime which necessarily involved moral turpitude, since the offense was inherently wrong and morally reprehensible, not merely prohibited by statute of recent origin);
Matter of B, 6 I. & N. Dec. 98 (BIA 1954) (conviction of conspiracy to violate New York Banking Law § § 340 (which prohibits the conduct of a small loan business without a license) and 357 (which prohibits a nonlicensee from charging more than 6 percent interest) (usury) is not a crime involving moral turpitude since those sections are only a licensing and regulatory enactment, and do not require any criminal intent, as negligent overcollection of interest is sufficient for conviction);
Matter of P, 5 I. & N. Dec. 582 (BIA 1953) (ration law violation);
Matter of J, 4 I. & N. Dec. 512 (BIA 1951) (conviction of attempt to escape from reformatory in violation of Chapter 268, § 16 of the Annotated Laws of Massachusetts is “malum prohibitum” and does not involve moral turpitude, since “escape” is not defined by statute and the wording of the statute does not require a specific criminal intent);
Matter of J, 2 I. & N. Dec. 99 (BIA 1944) (selling liquor to Native Americans).
Liquor law violations. Liquor law violations have generally been considered regulatory only, and not to involve moral turpitude.
United States v. Smith, 420 F.2d 428 (5th Cir. 1970) (Alabama misdemeanor conviction of possessing tax paid alcoholic beverages in a ‘dry’ county, under 29 Code of Alabama, Recompiled 1958, § 98 (4621), was not a crime involving moral turpitude for impeachment purposes);
United States ex rel. Berlandi v. Reimer, 113 F.2d 429 (2d Cir. 1940);
Iorio v. Day, 34 F.2d 920 (2d Cir. 1929) (not every violation of a prohibition law is a crime involving moral turpitude);
Coykendall v. Skrmetta, 22 F.2d 120 (5th Cir. 1927) (conviction for winemaking for personal use of 150 gallons of wine was held not to be a crime involving moral turpitude);
Matter of G, 7 I. & N. Dec. 114 (BIA 1956) (conviction for violation of 26 U.S.C. § § 2803(a) and 2812, transportation and possession of distilled spirits without tax stamps affixed thereto, is not crime involving moral turpitude);
Matter of J, 2 I. & N. Dec. 99 (BIA, AG 1944) (conviction of unlawful sale of liquor to a Native American over whom the government exercises control, in violation of 25 U.S.C. § 241, is not an offense involving moral turpitude);
Matter of H, 1 I. & N. Dec. 394 (BIA 1943) (carrying on the business of a retail liquor dealer without having paid the special tax required by § 3281 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, under 26 U.S.C. § 1397(a)(1), is not held to be a crime involving moral turpitude, since the statute is merely a revenue, regulatory, or licensing statute).
But see Rousseau v. Weedin, 284 F. 565 (9th Cir. 1922) (“jointist” convicted of operating disreputable establishment where liquor unlawfully sold held deportable).
But liquor law violations that deprive the government of revenue have been held to involve moral turpitude.
Morgano v. Pilliod, 299 F.2d 217 (7th Cir. 1962), cert. den., 370 U.S. 924, 8 L.Ed.2d 505, 82 S.Ct. 1564 (1962) (conspiracy to defraud the United States of taxes on distilled spirits was held to be a crime involving moral turpitude);
U.S. ex rel. Carrollo v. Bode, 204 F.2d 220 (8th Cir. 1953), cert. den., 346 U.S. 857, 74 S.Ct. 73, 98 L.Ed. 370 (1953) (conviction of conspiracy to defraud the United States by engaging in the business of wholesale liquor dealer while willfully failing to pay a special tax, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 3253, involved moral turpitude);
Maita v. Haff, 116 F.2d 337 (9th Cir. 1940) (conspiracy to violate the internal revenue laws by possessing and concealing distilled spirits with intent to defraud the United States of taxes, under 18 U.S.C. § 88, (now 18 U.S.C. § 371), and 26 U.S.C. § § 1155(f), 1440 and 1441 (now 26 U.S.C. § § 2806(f), 3320, 3321 (1934 ed.)), involves moral turpitude);
United States ex rel. Berlandi v. Reimer, 113 F.2d 429 (2d Cir. 1940) (conspiracy to violate the internal revenue laws by possessing and concealing distilled spirits with intent to defraud the United States of taxes, under 18 U.S.C. § 88, now 18 U.S.C. § 371, and 26 U.S.C. § § 1155(f), 1440 and 1441, now 26 U.S.C. § § 2806(f), 3320, 3321 (1934 ed.), is an offense that involves moral turpitude);
Moral Turpitude Gambling Laws
Guarneri v. Kessler, 98 F.2d 580 (5th Cir. 1938) (smuggling alcohol into the United States with intent to defraud the United States is a crime that involves moral turpitude);
Barrese v. Ryan, 203 F.Supp. 880, 882-883 (D. Conn. 1962) (conviction of carrying on retail liquor business without having paid federal occupational tax, in violation of Internal Revenue Code of 1939, § 3253, was a crime involving moral turpitude, since intent to defraud the United States was an element of the offense);
Matter of D, 9 I. & N. Dec. 605 (BIA 1962) (conviction for smuggling liquor with intent to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545 held to be a conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, even though there is no intent to have an impact on the revenue of the United States);
Matter of A, 6 I. & N. Dec. 242 (BIA 1954) (a conviction of violating 26 U.S.C. § 404 (R.S. 3296), removal of distilled spirits on which the tax has not been paid, to a place other than the distillery warehouse provided by law, is not a crime involving moral turpitude), citing Macklin v. United States, 79 F.2d 756 (9th Cir. 1935) (conviction for removal of spirits on which tax had not been paid from the warehouse, under 26 U.S.C. § 404 did not require any element of intent to defraud the United States of revenue as an essential element).
[86] But see, e.g., § § 9.96, 9.105, infra.
[87] But see Matter of Tobar-Lobo, 24 I. & N. Dec. 143 (BIA 2007) (California conviction of willful failure to register by a sex offender who has been previously apprised of the obligation to register, in violation of Penal Code § 290(g)(1), is a crime involving moral turpitude).
Third Circuit
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE ' UNLICENSED DEALING IN FIREARMS
Mayorga v. Attorney General U.S., ___ F.3d ___, 2014 WL 2898528 (3d Cir. Jun. 27, 2014) (federal conviction of unlicensed business of firearms dealing, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(1)(A) and (a)(2), did not categorically constitute a crime of moral turpitude, since the offense is a regulatory/licensing offense); see Matter of Abreu'Semino, 12 I. & N. Dec. 775, 776 (BIA 1968) (the violation of a regulatory, or licensing, or revenue provision of a statute is not a crime involving moral turpitude).
Moral Turpitude Gambling Meaning
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE ' FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER
Totimeh v. Attorney General, 666 F.3d 109 (3d Cir. Jan. 12, 2012) (Minnesota conviction of failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of Minn. Stat. 243.166.5, defined the offense as knowingly violat[ing] any of [the statutes] provisions or intentionally provid[ing] false information, is not a crime of moral turpitude, since it is a regulatory offense designed to assist law enforcement, and does not regulate a crime that of itself is inherently vile or intentionally malicious.); following Efagene v. Holder, 642 F.3d 918 (10th Cir. 2011) (Colorado conviction of failure to register as a sex offender, is not a CIMT).
Fourth Circuit
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPIUTDE ' SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION
Mohamed v. Holder, 769 F.3d 885 (4th Cir. Oct. 17, 2014) (Virgina conviction for violation of VaCodeAnn. 18.2-472.1, failure to register as a sex offender, is not a crime involving moral turpitude for immigration purposes, since it is merely a regulatory offense), disagreeing with Matter of Tobar-Lobo, 24 I&N Dec. 143 (BIA 2007).
Seventh Circuit
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE ' FAILURE TO APPEAR IN COURT
Obi v. Holder, 558 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. Mar. 3, 2009) (federal conviction of failure to appear in court, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 3146, is mentioned in dictum as a crime involving moral turpitude); but see Hussein v. Ashcroft, 2002 WL 31027604 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 12, 2002) (federal conviction of failure to appear in court, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 3146, was not found to be a crime of moral turpitude, but court denied naturalization based on a conclusion that other convictions showed a lack of good moral character).
Ninth Circuit
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE ' MISUSE OF PASSPORT
Nguyen v. Holder, ___ F.3d ___, ___ n.4, 2014 WL 3953758 (9th Cir. Aug. 14, 2014) (whether federal conviction of misuse of a passport without intent to facilitate an act of international terrorism, under 18 U.S.C. 1544, 2331, categorically constitutes a crime of moral turpitude, is an open question).
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE ' SEX OFFENSES ' FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER
Pannu v. Holder, ___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 1782959 (9th Cir. May 11, 2011) (remand to BIA to review issue of whether California conviction of failure to register as a sex offender, Penal Code 290(g)(1), categorically constituted a crime of moral turpitude), citing Plasencia-Ayala v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 738, 743 n.2, 747 (9th Cir. 2008) (Nevada conviction for failure to register as a sex offender under a similar law (Nev. Rev. Stat. 179D.550) did not categorically constitute a CMT, since that statute creates strict liability for failing to register or notify of a change of address, so that a defendant could be convicted for forgetting to register or even for accidentally sending his registration forms to the wrong address).
CRIME OF MORAL TURPITUDE - DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE WHILE KNOWING LICENSE HAS BEEN SUSPENDED IS A CMT
Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder, 558 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (Arizona conviction of driving under the influence while knowing that that one had a suspended license, in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes 28-1383(A)(1),constitutes a crime of moral turpitude for immigration purposes), deferring to Matter of Lopez-Meza, 22 I. & N. Dec. 1188 (BIA 1999).
Other
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE ' REGULATORY OFFENSES ' PRACTICE ADVISORY
Offenses classed as regulatory offenses generally are not considered to involve moral turpitude because although the behavior is illegal, there is nothing inherently wrong, fraudulent or evil about it. If it is not intrinsically wrong, the fact that it is illegal ' standing alone -- does not make it turpitudinous. However, there are inconsistencies in the BIA case law. See Quintero-Salazar v. Keisler, 506 F.3d 688, 693 (9th Cir. 2007) (Where an act is only statutorily prohibited, rather than inherently wrong, the act generally will not involve moral turpitude.), citing Beltran-Tirado v. INS, 213 F.3d 1179, 1184 (9th Cir. 2000); Matter of J, 4 I. & N. Dec. 512, 1951 WL 7052 (BIA 1951). For a comprehensive digest of moral turpitude holdings on regulatory cases, see Tooby, Rollin & Foster, Crimes of Moral Turpitude 8.22 (2008 and monthly updates since at nortontooby.com).
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE'POSSESSION OF A FIREARM BY AN UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT
Possession of a firearm, under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5), should not be considered to be a crime involving moral turpitude. Since possessing a firearm is not inherently evil and not malum prohibitum, the fact of being unlawfully undocumented when doing so should not make it a crime of moral turpitude. See Matter of Hernandez-Casillas, 20 I&N Dec. 262 (BIA 1990) (possessing a sawed-off shotgun not a crime of moral turpitude). See also Matter of Gabryelski, 20 I&N Dec. 750 (1993): [W]e point out that while the respondent's conviction for possession of a firearm establishes his deportability under section 241(a)(2)(C) of the Act, see Matter of Chow, Interim Decision 3199 (BIA 1993), it does not render him inadmissible for purposes of section 245 adjustment, as there is no corresponding exclusion ground. In Matter of Rainford, supra, the Board specifically held that a conviction for criminal possession of weapon did not preclude a finding of admissibility in connection with an application for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act, because it is not a ground of excludability. (Ibid.) Since it is not a ground of inadmissibility, it is not a crime involving moral turpitude. Thanks to Jonathan Moore.
Look up moral turpitude in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
Moral turpitude is a legal concept in the United States and prior to 1976, Canada, that refers to 'an act or behavior that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted standard of the community'.[1] This term appears in U.S. immigration law beginning in the 19th century.[2]
The concept of 'moral turpitude' might escape precise definition, but it has been described as an 'act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man.'[3]
The classification of a crime or other conduct as constituting moral turpitude has significance in several areas of law. First, prior conviction of a crime of moral turpitude (or in some jurisdictions, 'moral turpitude conduct', even without a conviction) is considered to have a bearing on the honesty of a witness and might be used for purposes of the impeachment of witnesses.[4] Second, offenses involving moral turpitude may be grounds to deny or revoke state professional licenses such as teaching credentials or denial of application for public notary[5] licenses to practice law,[6] or other licensed profession. Third, the concept is relevant in contract law since employment contracts and sponsorship agreements often contain a moral turpitude clause which allow the sponsor to terminate a contract without penalty if the employee or sponsored party commits an act of moral turpitude. What sort of acts constitute 'moral turpitude' can vary greatly depending on the situation and the exact terms of the contract, but the clause is often invoked in cases involving clearly non-criminal behavior and/or allegations for which there is insufficient evidence for a conviction (assuming the alleged act is even a criminal offence). Fourth, this concept is of great importance for immigration purposes in the United States, Canada (prior to 1976), and some other countries, since offenses which are defined as involving moral turpitude are considered bars to immigration into the U.S.[7]
American immigration law[edit]
A conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) causes a person to be inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(2)(a)(i) of the INA (Immigration and Nationality Act). There are petty offense exceptions to this rule, but these exceptions do not change the meaning of the question on the Visa Waiver Program or on the visa application form, and cannot be self-certified. A controlled substance violation causes the alien to be inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(2)(i)(II) of the INA. They are two different sections of the law. A controlled substance violation is a CIMT. The immigration administrative proceeding does not use a controlled substance violation as a CIMT. A visa waiver program applicant admissibility is determined at the port of entry and they are subject to section 212(a) and 217 of the INA.[8]
Visa Waiver Program[edit]
Moral Turpitude Gambling Definition
The second question on document I-94W for those visiting the U.S. on the Visa Waiver Program asks:
Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or been controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?
Little guidance is provided to the traveler as to which offenses are included in the definition. However, the Web site of the U.S. embassy in London states that:
Travelers who have been arrested, even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, those with criminal records, (the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply to U.S. visa law), certain serious communicable illnesses, those who have been refused admission into, or have been deported from, the United States, or have previously overstayed on the VWP are not eligible to travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program.[9]
This appears to be at variance with the question on form I-94W and information supplied by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, as there are many offenses that are not considered to involve moral turpitude.
U.S. government guidance on determining moral turpitude[edit]
A definition of moral turpitude is available for immigration purposes from the Foreign Affairs Manual, available on the U.S. Department of State website.[10] and the U.S. Government Publishing Office website (8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)(A)(i)).[11]
For offenses (or arrests on suspicion of such offenses) occurring outside the U.S., the locally defined offense must be considered against the U.S. definitions, and in such cases it is the definition of the offense (as defined in the appropriate country) which is considered for immigration purposes, and not the circumstances of the individual's actual case.[12]
Whether a state law offense constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude for federal immigration purposes is decided on a statute by statute basis, because each state statute might cover a different range of behaviors, some of which may not necessarily involve moral turpitude under the Federal definition. For an example of a criminal statute that seems like it would categorically involve moral turpitude, but actually does not because the statute covers some behavior that does not involve moral turpitude, see the Ninth Circuit case Castrijon-Garcia v. Holder, No. 09-73756 (9th Cir. 2013) (simple kidnapping under California Penal Code § 207(a) is not a categorical crime involving moral turpitude).[13]
Category | Crimes involving moral turpitude | Crimes not involving moral turpitude |
---|---|---|
Crimes Against Property | Fraud:
Evil intent:
|
|
Crimes Committed Against Governmental Authority |
|
|
Crimes Committed Against Person, Family Relationship, and Sexual Morality |
|
|
Attempts, Aiding and Abetting, Accessories and Conspiracy |
| N/A |
From the United States Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual[10] |
American Bar and DUI[edit]
An arrest or conviction for a Driving Under the Influence is not necessarily a reason to deny entry to law school or the bar. However, honesty during applications to law school or to sit for the bar are important since it speaks to the character of the applicant. In the eyes of many admissions committees, covering up a past criminal activity is a more serious offense than the crime itself.[15]
While every state is different, most states treat repeat issues involving substance abuse as evidence of moral turpitude. Substance abuse in general is a serious problem within the legal profession, and substance abuse affects lawyers at nearly twice the rate of the general population.[16] In a high percentage of cases where a lawyer was suspended or disbarred, he or she was struggling with drug or alcohol abuse.[17]
In 2011 the Georgia Supreme Court refused to allow two law school graduates to take the state bar exam partly because they did not reveal their entire criminal histories on their law school applications. John Payne, 57, disclosed all of his criminal history to the state bar, but he did not tell Southern Illinois University about some of his drunken driving history. He had six DUI convictions, as well as other felony and misdemeanor convictions, spanning from his youth to his mid-40s.[18] Roy Yunker Jr., 40, failed to disclose the various DUI offenses to both John Marshall Law School, where he earned his J.D., and to the Georgia State Bar.[18]
American state voting laws[edit]
Some US states, including Georgia and Alabama, have or had laws on the books preventing convicted felons from voting if their crime involved moral turpitude. In at least one case, such a law was struck down by the US Supreme Court as having its roots in Reconstruction erawhite supremacy. However voting laws involving moral turpitude remain on the books in both Georgia and Alabama. The definition of moral turpitude has varied in different states and at different times. In Georgia, all felonies are considered to be crimes involving moral turpitude. In Alabama, this was also formerly the case, but in 2017 the restriction was relaxed sufficiently that some more minor felonies, such as drug possession, no longer were considered to involve moral turpitude.[19]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
Moral Turpitude Gambling Law
- ^'Law Dictionary: moral turpitude'. Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 22 January 2017.
- ^A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude! What in the World is That? US immigration and visa lawyers in London
- ^Chadwick v. State Bar, 49 Cal. 3d 103, 110, 776 P.2d 240, 260 Cal.Rptr. 538 (1989) ; Sosa-Martinez v. United States AG, 420 F.3d 1338, 1341 (11th Cir. 2005)
- ^People v. Wheeler, 4 Cal.4th 284, 295-296, 841 P.2d 938, 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 418
- ^Ballard v. Independent School Dist., 320 F.3d 1119 (10th Cir. 2003)
- ^Chadwick v. State Bar, 49 Cal.3d 103, 776 P.2d 240, 260 Cal.Rptr. 538 (1989)
- ^8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(A); 8 CFR 316.10
- ^Ineligibilities and Waivers: LawsArchived 2017-09-15 at the Wayback Machine Section 212(a) and 217 of the INA
- ^'Archived copy'. Archived from the original on 2015-02-16. Retrieved 2015-02-15.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
- ^ abUnited States Department of State. 'U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 9 - Visas: 9 FAM 40.21(A) N2 Moral turpitude'(pdf). Retrieved 2008-12-07.
- ^http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-1994-title8/pdf/USCODE-1994-title8-chap11-subchapII_2-partV-sec1251.pdf
- ^'§ N.7 Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude'(PDF). Archived from the original(PDF) on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2015-12-24.
- ^http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/01/09/09-73756.pdf
- ^Lauren Durr Emery 'Failure to Register as a Sex Offender is Not a Crime of Moral Turpitude' The Wake Forest Law Review
- ^Lawson, Richard S. (January 1, 2018). 'Applying for Law School or the Bar Exam, With a DUI in Your Past'. Retrieved June 14, 2020.
- ^Abruzzese, Rob (March 22, 2013). 'Lawyers struggle with substance abuse at nearly twice the rate of general population'. Brooklyn Daily Eagle. Retrieved June 14, 2020.
- ^Doyle, Ty (June 18, 2015). 'Can someone become a lawyer if they were convicted of DUI at 20?'. Quora. Retrieved June 14, 2020.
- ^ abMystal, Elie (September 26, 2011). 'Law Graduates DENIED Opportunity To Sit For Bar Because They Lied To Law Schools About Their Criminal Records'. Above the Law. Retrieved June 14, 2020.
- ^Morton, Stephen (28 May 2019). 'Georgia's strictest possible reading of the law to stop felons from voting'. NBC News. Retrieved 3 December 2020.
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moral_turpitude&oldid=992199182'