Kidnapping has been held to involve moral turpitude.[50]

 

Sharpe v. Riley, 271 F.Supp.2d 631 (E.D.Pa. July 3, 2003) (Pennsylvania conviction of unlawful restraint in violation of 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 2902 is a crime of moral turpitude, whether the offense involves risk of serious bodily injury or involuntary servitude);

United States v. Brown, 127 F.Supp.2d 392, 408-409 (W.D.N.Y. 2001) (Virginia conviction of abduction, under Va. Code 18.2-47, penalizing one who “by force, intimidation or deception and without legal justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another with intent to deprive such other person of his person liberty or to withhold or conceal him from any person, authority or institution lawfully entitled to his charge,” considered a crime involving moral turpitude) (dictum);

Matter of Nakoi, 14 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 1972);

Matter of CM, 9 I. & N. Dec. 487 (BIA 1961);

Matter of P, 5 I. & N. Dec. 444 (BIA 1953) (federal kidnapping conviction, for unlawfully and knowingly transporting a person in interstate commerce, for the purpose of ransom, constitutes a crime of moral turpitude).

 

But see Fuentes-Cruz v. Gonzales, 489 F.3d 724 (5th Cir. Jun. 18, 2007) (Texas conviction for unlawful transport, in violation of Tex. Penal Code Ann. section 20.05 [requiring unlawful transport of a person for pecuniary benefit, in a manner designed to conceal the person from the proper authorities, and where the transportation may involve a substantial risk of injury], is a crime involving moral turpitude, because the offense requires an intent to deceive law enforcement);

Hamdan v. INS, 98 F.3d 183 (5th Cir. 1996) (Louisiana conviction, under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:45, for attempted simple kidnapping was not a crime involving moral turpitude, since the statute covered some conduct that did not inherently involve moral turpitude, and there was no evidence that the defendant’s conduct did not fall within the portion of the statute that did not involve moral turpitude);

Matter of Farinas, 12 I. & N. Dec. 467 (BIA 1967) (Washington conviction of abducting a female under the age of 18 for the purpose of sexual intercourse or marriage without consent of her legal guardian held not CMT, since minimum conduct does not involve CMT);

Matter of R, 6 I. & N. Dec. 444 (1954) (transportation of a consenting adult female across state lines for purposes of illicit but not commercialized sex, in violation of the Mann Act, held not to be a crime involving moral turpitude).

[50] 9 U.S. Dep’t of State, Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) § 40.21(a) N.2.3-3(a).

Ninth Circuit

CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE " SIMPLE KIDNAPPING
Castrijon-Garcia v. Holder, 704 F.3d 1205 (9th Cir. Jan. 9, 2013) (California conviction of simple kidnapping, under Penal Code 207(a), is categorically not a crime involving moral turpitude making a noncitizen statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal, because it does not require an intent to injure, actual injury, or a special class of victims).