Another Criminal Record Question

[anwalt2b]

I've read through a few related posts and found some useful tips. Nonetheless, I'd like to get some comments/suggestions/advise about the realities of my being accepted to a local law school.  

Scenario: 3 law schools within commutable distance from my home. Two 3/4Ts, One Top 50-60. Have yet to take LSAT. UGPA is 3.6 with dual major in Econ/German. Executive MBA from Top 20 program. I'm 37 now, will likely enter in 2011 at 38.

Convictions on my record are a DUI (1991), Misdemeanor Assualt (1992), and Disorderly Conduct while Intoxicated (1996). Also, as a juvenile, had a disorderly conduct w/possession of very small amount of marijuana, ca. 1988.

Since these events, I've graduated with my bachelors, lived overseas, gotten married,completed a rigorous EMBA program while working/traveling full time, have three kids - basically grew up. With the exception of my current stint 'in between opportunities', I've made a good living and held gainful employment with steadily increasing levels of responsibility.

These transgressions aside and pending my LSAT score, I feel I present a strong candidacy for the local Top50-60 program (where I received my undergrad degrees having received various cash awards and a full academic scholarship my senior year). However, it is known to be more on the conservative side.

I have a call into a local attorney who is on the state's Board of Commsissioner's on Conduct and Fitness to obtain his/her thoughts.

Would appreciate any comments from LSD members, including horror stories, success stories as well as suggestions, advise and commentary.

[CanadianWolf]

It will be interesting to see whether or not the local attorney will offer any advice as it might be viewed as a conflict of interest for him to comment on a matter that is likely to appear before him.

[CJScalia]

Convictions on my record are a DUI (1991), Misdemeanor Assualt (1992), and Disorderly Conduct while Intoxicated (1996). Also, as a juvenile, had a disorderly conduct w/possession of very small amount of marijuana, ca. 1988.

Nothing to worry about, just make sure to disclose stuff. In sum, it works like this;

1) Law schools do not give a *&^%. They just want to make sure they don't waste 3 years on you if you can't get admitted to the bar.
2) C&F generally don't give a *&^% about what you have done in your past, they want to know whether you're honest, trustworthy and have learned from your past.

With the exception of murder and terrorism, there's literally no crime that will be automatically rejected by C&F. If you have a history of embezzlement it might get trickier, since you're looking for a job where you'll be handling clients money. Even so, as long as you're not a major repeat offender, and this is far back in time, no worries at all.

It will be interesting to see whether or not the local attorney will offer any advice as it might be viewed as a conflict of interest for him to comment on a matter that is likely to appear before him.

Of course the bar association's lawyer will give any advice; that's their job. Why would there be any form of conflict of interest here? This makes absolutely 0 sense to me.

[anwalt2b]

Thank you for your replies.

The attorney from the state C&F Board did return my call, and basically said what you stated CJ. I expected that type of response, but simply wanted to get insight from one who makes those calls if possible. He did also mentioned that he couldn't give me a personal ruling but nothing that he heard would cause particular concern. He did elect to not answer several of my questions saying it would be inappropriate.

Two points were brought up which may be helpful to others. First, if you do have something one your record, you can start the process of C&F review earlier, like in the first year of school. I guess most wait until late second year to do this. Starting early will expedite the process and ensuring one doesn't waste three years and tens of thousands of dollars if he/she is not cleared. Little consolation if you ask me.

Also, and I believe I may have seen this elsewhere on this site, if you have an alcohol or drug conviction, the bar admission committee will look closely at whether or not a substance abuse problem or addiction may be lurking. Again, if one's background is sufficiently questionable such that intervention or treatment is suggested to show the bar admission board rehabilitation has occured, this can be initiated during 1L. There may be a Dean of Student Affairs or similar person who facilitates this with a given state's Lawyers Assistance Program (or other party) which likely offers advise/help for free.

Thanks again for your replies and input.

[CanadianWolf]

@CJScalia:
The bar association lawyer's job is to give advice to his or her client. The potential conflict of interest here is quite clear & should be clear even to a non-lawyer such as yourself.

[CJScalia]

@CJScalia:
The bar association lawyer's job is to give advice to his or her client. The potential conflict of interest here is quite clear & should be clear even to a non-lawyer such as yourself.

1) The members of the Committee on Character and Fitness do not have clients.
2) Their job is to advice people, including prospective bar applicants on their status.
3) Yes, they will answer this question
4) There is no conflict of interest here (read the f-ing RPC, nitwit)
5) I've been a lawyer since 1998
6) You're an idiot.

[CanadianWolf]

I disagree with your points 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6. I don't have enough information to assess your claim in point #5.
The OP responded above that the C&F attorney did refuse to comment on some areas as it would be inappropriate.

[CJScalia]

I disagree with your points 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6. I don't have enough information to assess your claim in point #5.
The OP responded above that the C&F attorney did refuse to comment on some areas as it would be inappropriate.

I really don't feel like turning this into another internet pissing contest. As was clearly indicated by OP in his response, the answers he got from the C&F attorney were largely what I said they would be. No surprise there. He said he couldn't give a personal ruling. Obviously he couldn't, this is done by the committee for natural reasons.

He also said that he couldn't answer some of the questions because that would be inappropriate. Inappropriate and conflict of interest are two different things; surely you know this. Since you made a (false) point of me not being a lawyer, I would assume your claim is that you are. There's really no point speculating what those questions were and why it would be inappropriate to answer, this is a private issue for OP that is none of our business.

That being said, as the nature of an internet forum is to provide information to future readers, not only the OP, it needs to remain said that points 1 through 4 are indisputably correct. Point 5 is correct, but irrelevant to the validity of points 1 through 4, although you tried to impeach me on lack of credibility. Point 6 is a very subjective statement only based on a few posts I've seen from you, so I'll leave that one up to debate.

[CanadianWolf]

I didn't think that you are an attorney based on your postings in this thread. I still have my doubts.

[CJScalia]

I didn't think that you are an attorney based on your postings in this thread. I still have my doubts.

Any examples?