C&F Addendum Forum

[Uncreative123]

I'm torn with how to approach this issue because it literally was the result of something I didn't do. I'm not sure how to "own it"/accept responsibility. Is any of this acceptable? Should I even be trying to address or "prove" I didn't do this? (I have absolutely no criminal record aside from this one incident which was expunged about four years ago.) I tried making it very basic by only using very basic language.

"In October 2015 I received a call from the *city, state* (edited) police department asking me if I broke someone’s car door handle. I told them I didn’t break a car door handle and my girlfriend and I were at the gym when it apparently happened. I didn’t know the person who was claiming I broke their car door handle either. The police officer said the person followed me and gave them my license plate number. I had to go to the police station to sign a document, not admitting guilt, but just acknowledging the charge. I wasn’t arrested. The charge was for 5th degree criminal mischief, a simple misdemeanor in the state of [redacted].
I was assigned a public defender who I called immediately. I explained the situation and informed him I didn’t have any kind of prior record. He asked if anyone aside from the person claiming I broke their handle had witnessed it. I told him no, the police said it was only the one individual. He asked if I had an alibi for the time it happened, to which I said yes, my girlfriend was with me all day and all night because we live together. He asked if the police had obtained any proof or evidence of any kind linking me to the door handle and I said, “no.” He said the charge was ludacris and we would fight in court to have it dismissed. To illustrate his point, he asked if there were any issues with my car. I said yes, the windshield has a crack in it. “So what’s to stop you from saying this other person put the crack in your windshield even if you don’t have proof of it?” I understood his point. He told me the person probably wouldn’t even show up on the day of court, so I shouldn’t worry.
I didn’t speak with my public defender again until a month later when we were waiting outside the courtroom. He spoke with the state attorney and then told me the person who claimed I broke the door handle was there so he thought I should plead guilty and take a deferred judgement. I was confused because that was not what we had originally discussed, I didn’t break the handle, there was no evidence I broke the handle, and I pointed out there was no one else in the waiting area except for my girlfriend and mom. He asked what I wanted to do. In my naiveté I said I didn’t know, I just didn’t want probation or any kind of record. He persuaded me to accept a deferred judgement because he said it would be expunged from my record and I wouldn’t receive probation. After pleading, the magistrate informed me I would in fact have twelve months of probation. I was rather upset and later asked my public defender what happened. He didn’t offer much in terms of an explanation or solution. My probation was completed after only six months, I was never fined for the incident, and ultimately it was expunged from my record.
This incident was the single biggest motivator in my wanting to go to law school and for wanting to become a public defender. I do not want what happened to me to happen to anyone else. I don’t blame the public defender for the outcome. I know they have very heavy caseloads and it’s an extremely challenging position. I accept full responsibility for the outcome because ultimately it was I who pled guilty. I could have been (and should have been) better prepared. It was an invaluable lesson that I will never forget and it’s what always reminds me of why I want to be a public defender.

[cavalier1138]

This is waaaaaaayyyyy too long.

Don't try to relitigate your case. If you absolutely must let the adcomm know that you maintain that you were factually innocent, you can slip in a qualifier about pleading guilty "on the advice of counsel." But it really isn't important, and no one wants to read more than three sentences about this.

And under no circumstances should you use this as your "this is why I want to go to law school" story. It makes you sound like you have absolutely no concept of proportionality.

[nixy]

I agree that this is way too long and detailed (and defensive) for an addendum. An addendum would be something like, "In October 2015, I was charged with 5th degree criminal mischief for breaking a person's car handle door. At the advice of my court-appointed public defender, I pleaded guilty and originally received a sentence of 12 months' probation. My probation was terminated early at 6 months and the offense was expunged from my record. I have had no subsequent trouble with the police." (The last sentence is badly worded but something to show no problems since then.) Usually you'd throw in a sentence to show acceptance of your guilt along the lines of "I understand the seriousness of my actions and have learned [something very brief about the importance of complying with the law or whatever)," but given your circumstances that doesn't fit here and I'd just leave it out entirely.

My question is - how was it alleged that you broke the car door handle? Like was the idea that you went hulk smash on it and wrenched it off by brute force or with a sledgehammer or something? or that you hit it with your car and ran off, which is what following you and getting your license place number suggests? because just saying "broke the door handle" sounds more like the hulk smash version, and that's sort of concerning because it's weird and potentially violent. If you don't know what specifically you were alleged to have done (or even maybe if it is the hulk smash version) I'd go with a more generic verb like "damaged" rather than broke.

If you want to go into the entire story, then use it for your personal statement - an addendum is not an essay, it's literally a brief recitation of pertinent facts to provide additional explanation for something found else where in your application. The personal statement is where you can go into the stuff about why you want to be a public defender.

If you do, piggybacking on cav's comment about proportionality, I would try to broaden the perspective a little bit more - I'm sure it was an extremely frustrating experience, but "I don't want what happened to me to happen to anyone else" might read better if contextualized more like, "what happened to me made me realize how damaging the consequences could have been if I had been facing more serious charges" and a recognition about the problems of the system as a whole (one misdemeanor that got expunged is not anywhere near the same level as pressure to plead guilty/a false conviction for a serious felony).

You might also benefit from explaining a little bit about how you, personally, think you can/will escape the pressures that led your PD to taking the actions they did - the caseloads and pressure to get pleas/resolve cases won't be any different for you than they were for your PD.

[Uncreative123]

I agree that this is way too long and detailed (and defensive) for an addendum. An addendum would be something like, "In October 2015, I was charged with 5th degree criminal mischief for breaking a person's car handle door. At the advice of my court-appointed public defender, I pleaded guilty and originally received a sentence of 12 months' probation. My probation was terminated early at 6 months and the offense was expunged from my record. I have had no subsequent trouble with the police." (The last sentence is badly worded but something to show no problems since then.) Usually you'd throw in a sentence to show acceptance of your guilt along the lines of "I understand the seriousness of my actions and have learned [something very brief about the importance of complying with the law or whatever)," but given your circumstances that doesn't fit here and I'd just leave it out entirely.

My question is - how was it alleged that you broke the car door handle? Like was the idea that you went hulk smash on it and wrenched it off by brute force or with a sledgehammer or something? or that you hit it with your car and ran off, which is what following you and getting your license place number suggests? because just saying "broke the door handle" sounds more like the hulk smash version, and that's sort of concerning because it's weird and potentially violent. If you don't know what specifically you were alleged to have done (or even maybe if it is the hulk smash version) I'd go with a more generic verb like "damaged" rather than broke.

If you want to go into the entire story, then use it for your personal statement - an addendum is not an essay, it's literally a brief recitation of pertinent facts to provide additional explanation for something found else where in your application. The personal statement is where you can go into the stuff about why you want to be a public defender.

If you do, piggybacking on cav's comment about proportionality, I would try to broaden the perspective a little bit more - I'm sure it was an extremely frustrating experience, but "I don't want what happened to me to happen to anyone else" might read better if contextualized more like, "what happened to me made me realize how damaging the consequences could have been if I had been facing more serious charges" and a recognition about the problems of the system as a whole (one misdemeanor that got expunged is not anywhere near the same level as pressure to plead guilty/a false conviction for a serious felony).

You might also benefit from explaining a little bit about how you, personally, think you can/will escape the pressures that led your PD to taking the actions they did - the caseloads and pressure to get pleas/resolve cases won't be any different for you than they were for your PD.

I seriously appreciate the suggestions. The reason I included the thorough explanation was because one of the schools I'm applying to requested the following:
"If you answer "yes" to any of the following Character and Fitness questions, in an electronic attachment, describe each instance and/or circumstance. In your statement, please explain the impact (if any) this experience has had on you, and, in particular, on your decision to pursue a legal degree. "

Some sources have said for instances requiring more detailed explanations that two to three paragraphs can be acceptable. As far as the incident itself goes, I'm not able to access any information or details like exact dates/times or statements since it's been expunged. It wasn't a hit-and-run. There was no damage reported aside from the door handle (and the person didn't report it as a hit and run.) I wish I had a way of accessing it because I don't like using rough approximations like "October 2015" and I don't recall exactly what the person was claiming I did.

[cavalier1138]

I seriously appreciate the suggestions. The reason I included the thorough explanation was because one of the schools I'm applying to requested the following:
"If you answer "yes" to any of the following Character and Fitness questions, in an electronic attachment, describe each instance and/or circumstance. In your statement, please explain the impact (if any) this experience has had on you, and, in particular, on your decision to pursue a legal degree. "

You can do that in a much shorter way. And the "(if any)" gives you a way out of trying to make this into an I-saw-the-light experience. Just give the basic facts of what happened (i.e. accused of crime, took a plea on advice of PD, record was expunged).

Some sources have said for instances requiring more detailed explanations that two to three paragraphs can be acceptable.

That's not this instance. No one wants to read two to three paragraphs about your misdemeanor conviction. At a certain point, it just starts to sound like you're covering up a much more serious incident.

[FND]

just in case you don't listen to everyone telling you to shorten it, there's one thing in particular I want to nitpick on:

Ludacris is a person. Ludicrous is an adjective. If you're going to use fancy words (which, as a future attorney, you really shouldn't), use them correctly.

[Uncreative123]

just in case you don't listen to everyone telling you to shorten it, there's one thing in particular I want to nitpick on:

Ludacris is a person. Ludicrous is an adjective. If you're going to use fancy words (which, as a future attorney, you really shouldn't), use them correctly.

That's really weird, I didn't catch that. My predictive text filled it in and I only caught it because I saw it was capitalized as a proper noun. I even remember going back to correct it and then obviously didn't proofread. Thankfully it was already out of my most recent draft.

I did make it substantially shorter and rephrased quite a few things. From 624 words to 297. Still probably longer than most would like to see it, but I can't help being a bit of a windbag.

[cavalier1138]

I can't help being a bit of a windbag.

Well, no better time to start learning how to help that. Overly verbose writing isn't favored in law school or legal practice.

[FND]

I can't help being a bit of a windbag.

Well, no better time to start learning how to help that. Overly verbose writing isn't favored in law school or legal practice.

Still not as bad as when I was in business, where the guiding rule was:
If it's a page, it should be a paragraph, if it's a paragraph it should be a sentence, if it's a sentence it should be a bulletpoint, and everything should fit on one page with large fonts and lots of graphics.

My guiding rule to any kind of writing is it should be as short as possible, using the simplest words possible, and yet it should cover every eventuality. The writing style should be minimalist, the page length should reflect the complexity of the matter.

Mr. Windbag should learn to do likewise. Nobody wants to waste time reading long sentences or difficult words.

[LSATWiz.com]

I'm surprised that no one has pointed out the possibility that the public defender was in on it, and this case goes straight to the top. Your addendum reminds me quite a bit of Oliver Stone's 1991 take on JFK.

In all seriousness, these things should be no more than a few sentences. Nobody cares that you lived with your girlfriend or didn't. It's probably easiest just to pretend you did do it than it is to appear as though you're relitigating it. That's just going to create a lot of paperwork, and it's not like this is going to make or break your cycle.