7.5 Criminal Penalties for Notarial Misconduct & Election Offenses

Civil liability and administrative discipline are not the only consequences of notarial misconduct. Section 578.700 RSMo, enacted with the 2020 notary law, makes knowing violations crimes. The election code adds a felony-level offense for notaries who knowingly break election law. Section 578.700.1 adopts every definition in Section 486.600.

The Notary's Own Misconduct (Section 578.700.2-3)

The key word is knowingly. An honest mistake can still lead to civil liability or discipline, but the crime requires knowledge. Note what the statute does not say: Missouri's notary statute does not label these offenses by class (such as "class A misdemeanor"), and it sets the specific penalty itself.

Examples that fall within Section 578.700.3 when done knowingly: notarizing for a spouse, charging for an absentee ballot notarization, notarizing a blank document, using "notario publico" in an ad, or failing to keep the journal.

Offenses by Others (Section 578.700.4-7)

For electronic notaries, Section 486.1010 applies the Section 578.700.6 penalties to impersonating an electronic notary and to soliciting, coercing, or improperly influencing one to commit official misconduct.

The penalties in Section 578.700 "shall not preclude other sanctions and remedies provided by law" (Section 578.700.8). A single act can lead to prosecution, revocation, a bond claim, and a civil judgment.

Election Offenses (Section 115.631)

Notaries regularly handle election documents, especially absentee ballot envelopes, which carry a jurat (Section 5.2). Section 115.631 lists class one election offenses, which "are deemed felonies connected with the exercise of the right of suffrage." Conviction is punishable by:

• imprisonment of not more than five years; or
• a fine of not less than $2,500 but not more than $10,000; or
• both.

Subdivision (22) covers this conduct: "On the part of a notary public acting in his or her official capacity, knowingly violating any of the provisions of this chapter or any provision of law pertaining to elections."

Practical examples of election-document misconduct include completing a jurat on an absentee ballot envelope without watching the voter sign, or notarizing for a "voter" the notary did not identify. Chapter 486's ordinary rules (presence, identification, no fee, journal entry) still apply to the act itself.

Comparing the Three Tracks

Staying Clear of Criminal Exposure

Because every Section 578.700 offense requires knowing conduct, the notary's best protection is a consistent routine:

• Require physical presence (or a properly registered remote session) and identify every principal, every time.
• Never sign or seal a certificate that is incomplete or that states something you did not see.
• Refuse pressure from employers and clients. The person applying the pressure commits the crime under Section 578.700.6, and the employer is liable to you for retaliation under Section 486.805.4.
• Record refusals and their reasons in the journal (Section 486.705.3).
• Report a lost or stolen seal or journal to law enforcement and the Secretary within ten days (Sections 486.725.4 and 486.715.3), so later misuse is not attributed to you.

Exam Scenarios

• Phone acknowledgment. A notary knowingly certifies that a signer "personally appeared" when the signer was only on the phone. That is both failing to require presence and executing a false certificate: a misdemeanor with up to $500, up to six months, or both.
• Shredded journal. A business owner shreds his employee's notary journal to hide a transaction. He has destroyed a notary's journal, a misdemeanor punishable by a fine up to $500.
• Absentee envelopes. A notary knowingly completes jurats on absentee ballot envelopes for voters who never appeared. That knowing violation of election law by a notary acting officially is a class one election offense.