Top Law Schools

.

Way too many details. You want the bare minimum. Also, it's pled or pleaded for past tense. There is a lot of debate as to which but plead definitely cannot be used in the past tense.

Yeah, I think you should cut it down to just the bare facts. Date, charge, outcome. They don't need the whole story.

edited

hamsamitchguy03 wrote:

These are “minor misdemeanors” in [state], which do not create a criminal record and carry only fines.

No criminal record?

I just wouldn't disclose it then. How would they find out?

You sir, are a moron. Every other bit of advice in this thread is credited. This is just stupid. Do not (and I mean this), give any further advice on topics in which you know absolutely nothing about. It is blithering stupidity like this that forces me to police threads that address the topic of CF disclosures.

I honestly liked it a lot, but yeah, i think these ppl are right, just trim it up. I heard they do like to see a bit of reflection though, so that's good.

edited for brevity

hamsamitchguy03 wrote:

reasonable_man wrote:

hamsamitchguy03 wrote:

These are “minor misdemeanors” in [state], which do not create a criminal record and carry only fines.

No criminal record?

I just wouldn't disclose it then. How would they find out?

You sir, are a moron. Every other bit of advice in this thread is credited. This is just stupid. Do not (and I mean this), give any further advice on topics in which you know absolutely nothing about. It is blithering stupidity like this that forces me to police threads that address the topic of CF disclosures.

[img]






but seriously, explain how they would find out. Not questioning your response just curious.

C&F have access to everything, even expunged or sealed records in most states. They would have access to the fact that fines were issued. Your traffic record for example is not criminal and yet it still exists. These kinds of offenses may not be "criminal" but they still show in the state's system. When I was a cop even we had access to them despite them being mere violations. We could see the original citation, the court date, the judge, what the charge was reduced from, etc. We could watch videos of people running red-light cameras. (I could also see every single cop to ever run your drivers license or record and their stated reason for it...this is what protects you from identity theft etc.) When performing an investigation, we could pull all of the original records electronically, including lab reports, evidence photos, prosecutor notes, etc. If they weren't electronic, we were provided with information of where to obtain them. Not every state is this elaborate but we could get at least some of this information from national databases regardless of the level of the original charge. (Enough to know to go request more from that state.) C&F investigators have even greater access. If you think you showed up in court (even by proxy) and no record was created you're an idiot. Big brother is always watching (for better or worse). The information available to the state itself is far different than what appears on a "criminal record" that you may be able to obtain.

C&F routinely compare bar applications against law school disclosures. Getting caught not disclosing would potentially prohibit you from ever being admitted to the bar thereby making law school one expensive ass hobby. You may get away with it...but would it be worth the risk? The charge isn't going to keep you out of school or the bar...but lying about it may. From this point forward, everything you do must be above reproach.

blowhard wrote:

hamsamitchguy03 wrote: but seriously, explain how they would find out. Not questioning your response just curious.

C&F have access to everything, even expunged or sealed records in most states. They would have access to the fact that fines were issued. Your traffic record for example is not criminal and yet it still exists. These kinds of offenses may not be "criminal" but they still show in the state's system. When I was a cop even we had access to them despite them being mere violations. We could see the original citation, the court date, the judge, what the charge was reduced from, etc. We could watch videos of people running red-light cameras. (I could also see every single cop to ever run your drivers license or record and their stated reason for it...this is what protects you from identity theft etc.) When performing an investigation, we could pull all of the original records electronically, including lab reports, evidence photos, prosecutor notes, etc. If they weren't electronic, we were provided with information of where to obtain them. Not every state is this elaborate but we could get at least some of this information from national databases regardless of the level of the original charge. (Enough to know to go request more from that state.) C&F investigators have even greater access. If you think you showed up in court (even by proxy) and no record was created you're an idiot. Big brother is always watching (for better or worse). The information available to the state itself is far different than what appears on a "criminal record" that you may be able to obtain.

C&F routinely compare bar applications against law school disclosures. Getting caught not disclosing would potentially prohibit you from ever being admitted to the bar thereby making law school one expensive ass hobby. You may get away with it...but would it be worth the risk? The charge isn't going to keep you out of school or the bar...but lying about it may. From this point forward, everything you do must be above reproach.

Credited. Plus, bar examiners have access to III, if I remember correctly.

[/quote]

C&F have access to everything, even expunged or sealed records in most states. They would have access to the fact that fines were issued. Your traffic record for example is not criminal and yet it still exists. These kinds of offenses may not be "criminal" but they still show in the state's system. When I was a cop even we had access to them despite them being mere violations. We could see the original citation, the court date, the judge, what the charge was reduced from, etc. We could watch videos of people running red-light cameras. (I could also see every single cop to ever run your drivers license or record and their stated reason for it...this is what protects you from identity theft etc.) When performing an investigation, we could pull all of the original records electronically, including lab reports, evidence photos, prosecutor notes, etc. If they weren't electronic, we were provided with information of where to obtain them. Not every state is this elaborate but we could get at least some of this information from national databases regardless of the level of the original charge. (Enough to know to go request more from that state.) C&F investigators have even greater access. If you think you showed up in court (even by proxy) and no record was created you're an idiot. Big brother is always watching (for better or worse). The information available to the state itself is far different than what appears on a "criminal record" that you may be able to obtain.

C&F routinely compare bar applications against law school disclosures. Getting caught not disclosing would potentially prohibit you from ever being admitted to the bar thereby making law school one expensive ass hobby. You may get away with it...but would it be worth the risk? The charge isn't going to keep you out of school or the bar...but lying about it may. From this point forward, everything you do must be above reproach.[/quote]

I've grown so tired of having to repeat this. Thank you. TITCR.

wow, thats some good information that everyone needs to hear right there. mad daps. So, say they don't ask, do you still go out of your way to disclose? Or, for example, if they say "Aside from minor traffic violations, have you ever been charged with a misdemeanor or felony?" and say I got a misdemeanor but it was expunged. Do I write an addendum?

Da1andOnlyPharo wrote:wow, thats some good information that everyone needs to hear right there. mad daps. So, say they don't ask, do you still go out of your way to disclose? Or, for example, if they say "Aside from minor traffic violations, have you ever been charged with a misdemeanor or felony?" and say I got a misdemeanor but it was expunged. Do I write an addendum?

You disclose exactly what they ask for. The bar will make you disclose what they want. You just cannot mislead anyone.

Edit: If it was expunged, you were still charged. Heck, even if found not guilty that question would reach it. I'd disclose it and say it was expunged.

edited for brevity

oaken wrote:Hey, I've been trying to find the best way to deal with the little skeleton in my closet on these applications, here's what I've got so far:

On [date], 2008, while visiting some friends in [city, state], I was flagged down by two police officers for being in a park after closing hours (in [city], I learned, parks close at sunset). The officers saw a pipe for smoking marijuana inside the car, and searched the car with my consent. They also found a small bag of marijuana. I was not officially arrested but was, in their words, “ticketed” for one count of possession of drug paraphernalia and one count of possession of a controlled substance, both 4th-degree misdemeanors in the state of [state]. At my arraignment on [date], 2009, I plead “not guilty” to the charges (by proxy). At my pretrial on [date], 2009, I plead guilty to the reduced charge of two counts of disorderly conduct. These are “minor misdemeanors” in [state], which do not create a criminal record and carry only fines.
Although this is not a space meant for lengthy reflection and introspection, they say that every cloud has its silver lining. This otherwise unfortunate event was certainly a “wake-up call” for me, and has positively influenced my decision to abstain from illegal substance abuse ever since, something which I now really pride myself on.

What do you guys think? Too dodgy? Not dodgy enough? I tried to be as concise as possible without trying to sound like I avoided the question, but maybe it's a bit overboard...? It's all true, by the way, I haven't "touched the stuff" since.

Also, how seriously do you think this will affect my chances for admission, especially at schools that are a bit (but not too much) of a reach already?

Thanks! Aside from a minor traffic violation which I think I only have to mention on one or two schools' applications, this is the entirety of the essay that I'll be submitting for every school that requests it.

I'm in the same boat more or less. I applied last cycle and all of the schools to which my numbers matched up for getting admitted I was admitted to and the schools that were far reaches I was rejected. It doesn't affect you, especially if it was 1) a while ago 2)you've stayed out of trouble since then and 3) it was basically your first time getting in serious trouble. My charges were reduced to one misdemeanor and based on how the questions were worded when I applied I told the schools I got arrested for x & y, and my charge was reduced to z. As long as you're not hiding anything and are honest about it all from the get go you should be fine to gaining admission to both law school and a state bar. You have nothing to worry about, just don't hide anything.

oaken wrote:Hey, I've been trying to find the best way to deal with the little skeleton in my closet on these applications, here's what I've got so far:

On [date], 2008, while visiting some friends in [city, state], I was flagged down by two police officers for being in a park after closing hours (in [city], I learned, parks close at sunset). The officers saw a pipe for smoking marijuana inside the car, and searched the car with my consent. They also found a small bag of marijuana. I was not officially arrested but was, in their words, “ticketed” for one count of possession of drug paraphernalia and one count of possession of a controlled substance, both 4th-degree misdemeanors in the state of [state]. At my arraignment on [date], 2009, I plead “not guilty” to the charges (by proxy). At my pretrial on [date], 2009, I plead guilty to the reduced charge of two counts of disorderly conduct. These are “minor misdemeanors” in [state], which do not create a criminal record and carry only fines.
Although this is not a space meant for lengthy reflection and introspection, they say that every cloud has its silver lining. This otherwise unfortunate event was certainly a “wake-up call” for me, and has positively influenced my decision to abstain from illegal substance abuse ever since, something which I now really pride myself on.

What do you guys think? Too dodgy? Not dodgy enough? I tried to be as concise as possible without trying to sound like I avoided the question, but maybe it's a bit overboard...? It's all true, by the way, I haven't "touched the stuff" since.

Also, how seriously do you think this will affect my chances for admission, especially at schools that are a bit (but not too much) of a reach already?

Thanks! Aside from a minor traffic violation which I think I only have to mention on one or two schools' applications, this is the entirety of the essay that I'll be submitting for every school that requests it.

I'm in the same boat more or less. I applied last cycle and all of the schools to which my numbers matched up for getting admitted I was admitted to and the schools that were far reaches I was rejected. It doesn't affect you, especially if it was 1) a while ago 2)you've stayed out of trouble since then and 3) it was basically your first time getting in serious trouble. My charges were reduced to one misdemeanor and based on how the questions were worded when I applied I told the schools I got arrested for x & y, and my charge was reduced to z. As long as you're not hiding anything and are honest about it all from the get go you should be fine to gaining admission to both law school and a state bar. You have nothing to worry about, just don't hide anything.

Misdemeanors are indeed criminal. Ordinance violations and "minor" traffic violations can arguably be described as non-criminal. I agree with most posters, be brief and cut out more detail. Call them misdemeanors, do not call them "non-criminal". Accept responsibility and move one. These charges will show up on a background search, and most likely your original arrest will show up as well. Full disclosure, even though it sucks, is the only route.