4.2 Prohibited Acts and Penalties

The SB693 Criminal Offense (Government Code 406.0091)

The single most exam-tested change in Texas notary law is the criminal offense created by Senate Bill 693, effective September 1, 2025 and codified at Government Code Section 406.0091. A notary commits an offense by performing any notarization with knowledge that the signer, grantor, maker, or principal did not personally appear before the notary at the time the act was executed.

Note the key triggers: the conduct must be knowing, and the real-property element is what escalates the misdemeanor to a felony. A jurat on a routine affidavit signed by an absent person is a Class A misdemeanor; the same misconduct on a deed or deed of trust is a state jail felony.

"Personal appearance" under SB693 includes a traditional in-person appearance and a qualifying remote appearance through a two-way audio-video system that meets Chapter 406 requirements, so an online notarization done properly still satisfies the appearance element.

The Affirmative Defense

The law gives one narrow affirmative defense. It applies when the person who did personally appear knowingly presented an apparently valid proof of identification identifying them as the signer, regardless of their true identity, and the fraud could not have been detected. In short: it protects the careful notary fooled by a good fake ID, not the notary who skipped appearance or ignored red flags.

Conflict-of-Interest Prohibitions

A Texas notary may not act when they are disqualified by interest:

A notary is generally not disqualified merely by being an employee of a party, but should never notarize a document in which they hold a personal stake. When in doubt, refer the signer to a disinterested notary.

Unauthorized Practice of Law

A notary commission is not a license to practice law. The boundary:

The 'Notario Publico' Prohibition

In many Spanish-speaking countries a 'notario publico' is a licensed attorney. Texas law and federal immigration rules make it illegal for a notary to use 'notario,' 'notario publico,' or similar terms in advertising, or to imply authority to give immigration or legal advice. Violations can bring commission revocation and criminal exposure.

Other Prohibited Acts and the Fee Cap

Texas caps notary fees by statute; $10/$1 are maximums, you may charge less or nothing. Fees must be posted conspicuously, and overcharging is a violation. SB693 also strengthened recordkeeping: the record book is mandatory and must be retained 10 years, and failure to keep or retain it is now grounds for action against the commission.

Grounds for Revocation After SB693

'Good cause' to revoke a commission now expressly includes:

• Knowingly notarizing without personal appearance (the 406.0091 offense).
• Failure to maintain the required record book, or to retain records for 10 years.
• Any violation of the notary statutes or rules.

Exam Focus

Expect questions on the classification of the SB693 offense (Class A misdemeanor; state jail felony for real property), the knowing mental state, the narrow affirmative defense, the $10/$1 fee cap, and the line between permitted notarial conduct and the unauthorized practice of law.

Worked Scenario: Pressure to Cut Corners

A loan signing agent calls and says, "The borrower is out of town, just notarize the deed of trust today and they'll initial later." Under SB693 this is a request to commit a state jail felony: a real-property document, notarized with knowledge that the signer did not personally appear. There is no "sign now, appear later" exception. The correct response is to refuse and require the borrower's appearance (in person or by approved remote technology). The fact that you were merely following a third party's instruction is not a defense.

Worked Scenario: The Good Fake ID

Now contrast that with a signer who actually appears, presents a Texas driver's license that you inspect carefully, and whose forgery is undetectable. The document later turns out to be fraudulent because the appearing person was an impostor. Here the affirmative defense in 406.0091 may apply: the person personally appeared and knowingly presented an apparently valid credential whose fraud could not be detected. The difference between this scenario and the prior one is appearance plus diligence, which is exactly why the journal entry recording the ID matters.

Penalties Snapshot

The through-line of Chapter 4 is that identity and appearance are non-negotiable: verify who is in front of you, make sure they are actually in front of you, charge no more than the law allows, stay out of legal advice, and keep the record. Do those five things and the prohibited-acts penalties never reach you.