Arrest record question Forum

[hopefullywonthurt]

Hi, I have a question concerning my arrest record and my upcoming cycle. In 2009 (was 18 at the time), a friend and I decided to play a prank on another friend; friend #1 and I intended to mix a few common household items in a water bottle and leave it outside of friend #2's house in the middle of the night. This would then go off with a loud bang and friend #2 would run outside surprised but have no idea where the sound came from. We had a vague idea that what we were doing was "bad", but before we could complete our plan, friend #1 gets pulled over, the officer searches his car and finds the household items, and infers what we are up to. He charges us with felony possession of weapons of mass destruction; we obviously didn't realize how serious what we were doing was.

Anyway, I'm unsure if it was because the officer did something illegal when he searched us, or if the D.A. realized that the charges were way too severe for what we had actually done, given that my friend and I were honor roll students in high school just trying to pull a prank, but the charges were dropped. Later, my record was expunged as well.

I'm aware that I should disclose everything in my applications, but does the serious nature of the charge hurt my admissions chances substantially more than an arrest for another crime, or will I be able to explain what happened in the totality of the circumstances? I have a completely clean record since, etc.

[fatduck]

He charges us with felony possession of weapons of mass destruction

gonna need to see that statute

[Magnolia]

If the circumstances weren't serious or convincing enough for the DA to bother prosecuting you, I can't imagine they're serious enough to keep you out of law school. Just disclose everything.

[D-ROCCA]

That must have been quite a large stick up that officer's ass to charge you with that. IRL, disclose and it won't matter at all.

[fatduck]

If the circumstances weren't serious or convincing enough for the DA to bother prosecuting you, I can't imagine they're serious enough to keep you out of law school. Just disclose everything.

do i need to tell you what the fuck you can do with an aluminum tube?

[hopefullywonthurt]

He charges us with felony possession of weapons of mass destruction

gonna need to see that statute

I believe this is it: http://ssl.csg.org/terrorism/ncsl2001470.htm. My lawyer at the time said something about what we had may not have constituted a weapon under the statute, but I'm not sure if that's why it was dropped. It seems hard to fit what we did under those definitions, but I guess that's what happens when an officer who is unaware of the law decides what to make the arrest for (he also thought he was charging us with a misdemeanor and never actually intended to charge us with a felony). Also it might be relevant that, regardless of what the statute says, we were charged with a class F felony, which is a relatively less serious (which seems odd considering its related to WMDs).

[hopefullywonthurt]

My main concern was that schools would immediately see the charge and throw my application away, but I suppose they'll see the totality of circumstances issue, thanks for the input.

[fatduck]

He charges us with felony possession of weapons of mass destruction

gonna need to see that statute

I believe this is it: http://ssl.csg.org/terrorism/ncsl2001470.htm. My lawyer at the time said something about what we had may not have constituted a weapon under the statute, but I'm not sure if that's why it was dropped. It seems hard to fit what we did under those definitions, but I guess that's what happens when an officer who is unaware of the law decides what to make the arrest for (he also thought he was charging us with a misdemeanor and never actually intended to charge us with a felony). Also it might be relevant that, regardless of what the statute says, we were charged with a class F felony, which is a relatively less serious (which seems odd considering its related to WMDs).

wow. that is hilarious.

anyway, most law school applications ask for all arrests, even for charges that were later dropped, sealed, expunged, etc. if this is the case, you definitely need to disclose. make sure you submit your applications on 9/11, too.

[hopefullywonthurt]

He charges us with felony possession of weapons of mass destruction

gonna need to see that statute

I believe this is it: http://ssl.csg.org/terrorism/ncsl2001470.htm. My lawyer at the time said something about what we had may not have constituted a weapon under the statute, but I'm not sure if that's why it was dropped. It seems hard to fit what we did under those definitions, but I guess that's what happens when an officer who is unaware of the law decides what to make the arrest for (he also thought he was charging us with a misdemeanor and never actually intended to charge us with a felony). Also it might be relevant that, regardless of what the statute says, we were charged with a class F felony, which is a relatively less serious (which seems odd considering its related to WMDs).

wow. that is hilarious.

anyway, most law school applications ask for all arrests, even for charges that were later dropped, sealed, expunged, etc. if this is the case, you definitely need to disclose. make sure you submit your applications on 9/11, too.

Yeah haha, I heard jokes about that quite a bit. And holy shit my memory sucks, this happened in 2007, not 2009, no idea how I forgot that.

[Paraflam]

anyway, most law school applications ask for all arrests, even for charges that were later dropped, sealed, expunged, etc. if this is the case, you definitely need to disclose.

Never understood this... if your charges were dropped or expunged after completing supervision or something, why is it that employers/schools still have the right to ask you about these things? If you've successfully fulfilled the requirements of getting a charge expunged off your record, why do you still have to deal with it potentially affecting your admissions cycle because the fact that it ever happened in the first place needs to be disclosed?

[armyparalegalnco]

anyway, most law school applications ask for all arrests, even for charges that were later dropped, sealed, expunged, etc. if this is the case, you definitely need to disclose.

Never understood this... if your charges were dropped or expunged after completing supervision or something, why is it that employers/schools still have the right to ask you about these things? If you've successfully fulfilled the requirements of getting a charge expunged off your record, why do you still have to deal with it potentially affecting your admissions cycle because the fact that it ever happened in the first place needs to be disclosed?

This is argued all the time on here. Some states (Texas for one) does not require expunged offenses. My personal opinion (and Im not a lawyer but I sure can read) is that you are in no way shape or form required to tell schools, even if they ask. However, you are required to tell the Bar. In addition, no one yet has come up with a single case of someone not getting their bar license by merely lying to the law school ONLY. Almost every case of "sorry" included other fators, namely lying to the BAR.