How to be a Prosecution/PD Gunner? Forum

[Void]

In my state there's no way the PD would ever allow a law student to actively appear in a trial- let alone conduct one. I'm shocked that some states allow this- seems like it is inviting a constant flow of habeas petitions, and for good reason IMO. If I were facing charges I wouldn't want an unsupervised 2L representing me!

[Rocío]

I would agree with this person^ that you NEED jury trial experience if you're going to be competitive for a prosecutor position outside of your home market

I wouldn't necessarily say jury experience, since that can be really rare. But at least some bench trials and/or motions.

Ok yeah trial experience... sorry from PD perspective its almost always a jury trial

Umm everyone I know in my state has zero trial experience actually speaking during a trial that have worked for PDs. Motion experience and PH experience yes, and second chairing trials yes. Actual heading a trial no

Jury trial experience through a clinic/internship is really rare. I had two bench trials during a summer internship with a PD office and that was the most that any of the interns had - I scheduled about eight trials and only two went.

[Tanicius]

In my state there's no way the PD would ever allow a law student to actively appear in a trial- let alone conduct one. I'm shocked that some states allow this- seems like it is inviting a constant flow of habeas petitions, and for good reason IMO. If I were facing charges I wouldn't want an unsupervised 2L representing me!

Wait. Why are you assuming the trial is unsupervised?

[Anonymous User]

I know of a Miami SAO offer out today.

[Anonymous User]

In my state there's no way the PD would ever allow a law student to actively appear in a trial- let alone conduct one. I'm shocked that some states allow this- seems like it is inviting a constant flow of habeas petitions, and for good reason IMO. If I were facing charges I wouldn't want an unsupervised 2L representing me!

The students are supervised. The amount of supervision generally depends on the competence level of the intern and the comfort level of the supervising attorney. Sometimes you'll see interns who are able to get through an entire examination on their own, then briefly check with the supervisor to see if anything was missed. In other trials you will see the supervisor literally whispering every single question to the intern.

In terms of appeals, the supervising attorney is officially the attorney of record. They are responsible for everything that happens during the trial, so hopefully they aren't letting the interns make prejudicial error. There's no presumption of ineffectiveness just because a student is appearing on the record.

[Void]

In my state there's no way the PD would ever allow a law student to actively appear in a trial- let alone conduct one. I'm shocked that some states allow this- seems like it is inviting a constant flow of habeas petitions, and for good reason IMO. If I were facing charges I wouldn't want an unsupervised 2L representing me!

Wait. Why are you assuming the trial is unsupervised?

Because:

but I got 2 jury trial (1 100% by myself and the other with an attorney doing the closing and one of the crosses).

I guess I made the rookie mistake of assuming that "100% by myself" actually means "100% by myself."

[Tanicius]

In my state there's no way the PD would ever allow a law student to actively appear in a trial- let alone conduct one. I'm shocked that some states allow this- seems like it is inviting a constant flow of habeas petitions, and for good reason IMO. If I were facing charges I wouldn't want an unsupervised 2L representing me!

Wait. Why are you assuming the trial is unsupervised?

Because:

but I got 2 jury trial (1 100% by myself and the other with an attorney doing the closing and one of the crosses).

I guess I made the rookie mistake of assuming that "100% by myself" actually means "100% by myself."

All that means is that he's doing the work (he mentions things like cross examination for example). That doesn't mean it's unsupervised. I don't believe a law student in any state or court in the US can represent someone unsupervised. You can only do that once you have received your bar license.

In general I think you are overreacting. While I agree there are practical reasons not to allow supervised law students to represent a criminal defendant, law students are almost never permitted to do felonies. The cases that supervised law students try are typically misdemeanors with low expectations of jail time. And if a defendant is uncomfortable with it, they are more than within their rights to say "No. I want an actual licensed attorney doing the court proceedings."

[Void]

In my state there's no way the PD would ever allow a law student to actively appear in a trial- let alone conduct one. I'm shocked that some states allow this- seems like it is inviting a constant flow of habeas petitions, and for good reason IMO. If I were facing charges I wouldn't want an unsupervised 2L representing me!

Wait. Why are you assuming the trial is unsupervised?

Because:

but I got 2 jury trial (1 100% by myself and the other with an attorney doing the closing and one of the crosses).

I guess I made the rookie mistake of assuming that "100% by myself" actually means "100% by myself."

All that means is that he's doing the work. That doesn't mean it's unsupervised. I don't believe a law student in any state or court in the US can represent someone unsupervised. You can only do that once you have received your bar license.

Again, I apologize for stupidly reading "100% by myself" to mean that he was 100% by himself.

[Tanicius]

I guess I made the rookie mistake of assuming that "100% by myself" actually means "100% by myself."

All that means is that he's doing the work. That doesn't mean it's unsupervised. I don't believe a law student in any state or court in the US can represent someone unsupervised. You can only do that once you have received your bar license.

Again, I apologize for stupidly reading "100% by myself" to mean that he was 100% by himself.

I can't tell if you're being facetious, but if you are, then yes, you definitely read more into it than what he actually did say. Doing work by oneself doesn't mean they're doing it unsupervised. I can do "100%" of a trial while being supervised.

[Void]

I guess I made the rookie mistake of assuming that "100% by myself" actually means "100% by myself."

All that means is that he's doing the work. That doesn't mean it's unsupervised. I don't believe a law student in any state or court in the US can represent someone unsupervised. You can only do that once you have received your bar license.

Again, I apologize for stupidly reading "100% by myself" to mean that he was 100% by himself.

I can't tell if you're being facetious, but if you are, then yes, you definitely read more into it than what he actually did say. Doing work by oneself doesn't mean they're doing it unsupervised. I can do "100%" of a trial while being supervised.

But can you do it "100% by yourself" if you're not alone?

[Tanicius]

Yes. For example, I have seen many certified law students conduct entire probable cause hearings "by themselves". Their supervising attorney sat in the back and did absolutely nothing but watch the entire duration of the hearing.

[Rootbeer]

Certified Legal Interns in my state are allowed to appear totally by themselves as prosecutors, no attorney present, with consent. When I say by themselves, I mean nobody is even there to watch. They're not representing any particular client so it's not a big deal like it would be for PDs.

[Anonymous User]

anyone on the PD side thought about doing delinquency work? It was what originally attracted me to PD work, but then I kind of felt like having some background in child development should probably be required. Now I'm not so sure and am basically going to cast my net as wide as I can to get jobs doing defense work (I plan to also apply to work dependency cases).

I've been told by one hiring PD that starting out this way wouldn't be the worst thing but because these types of cases don't have jury trials, that I would be at a major disadvantage if I tried to transfer offices to do regular PD work. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[Anonymous User]

anyone on the PD side thought about doing delinquency work? It was what originally attracted me to PD work, but then I kind of felt like having some background in child development should probably be required. Now I'm not so sure and am basically going to cast my net as wide as I can to get jobs doing defense work (I plan to also apply to work dependency cases).

I've been told by one hiring PD that starting out this way wouldn't be the worst thing but because these types of cases don't have jury trials, that I would be at a major disadvantage if I tried to transfer offices to do regular PD work. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I know you said PD side, but I'm doing it now on the DA side. I can at least tell you that knowledge about child development is something that you SHOULD have and is useful when you're working in Juvenile (on both sides), but few people on either side have it or feel that they need it (though I think they're wrong). I say if that's what drew you to PD work, then go for it. People who actually give a crap about Juvenile make the system better. The developmental stuff is nothing you can't learn on your own and the more you work there the more you will know about everything important.

Though it varies by office, in most cases Juvenile is seen as a training ground for n00bs by DAs/PDs. Functionally, adjudication hearings are pretty much the same as adult trials. I'm surprised that the PD said it would be a disadvantage, since most offices don't have interns or fresh employees doing jury trials. The experience you'd get in Juvenile isn't much different than what you'd get doing adult bench trials. In fact, Juvenile gets you handling more serious felony cases, making it better, in many respects, than work in magistrate courts.

You won't even get the chance to touch a jury trial until at least a couple years out in the offices I've seen. I guess if you're in a place where Juvenile is a specialized unit and that's the only thing you do in the office for years on end, then what she said makes more sense. That doesn't seem to be the norm, though, and Juvenile tends to be treated as a step in the ladder. If you're not at the point where you're expecting to start off doing jury trials in a new office, it shouldn't matter. Either way, I think if you want to do juvenile stuff you should do it. You should do it with pride and gusto. Even if folks disrespect it, I think it's one of the most important things a DA/PD can do if they have a passion for it.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have an idea what the final interview with BDS is like? Did not really get any information about it, so I'm not sure what to expect.

[Anonymous User]

anyone on the PD side thought about doing delinquency work? It was what originally attracted me to PD work, but then I kind of felt like having some background in child development should probably be required. Now I'm not so sure and am basically going to cast my net as wide as I can to get jobs doing defense work (I plan to also apply to work dependency cases).

I've been told by one hiring PD that starting out this way wouldn't be the worst thing but because these types of cases don't have jury trials, that I would be at a major disadvantage if I tried to transfer offices to do regular PD work. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I know you said PD side, but I'm doing it now on the DA side. I can at least tell you that knowledge about child development is something that you SHOULD have and is useful when you're working in Juvenile (on both sides), but few people on either side have it or feel that they need it (though I think they're wrong). I say if that's what drew you to PD work, then go for it. People who actually give a crap about Juvenile make the system better. The developmental stuff is nothing you can't learn on your own and the more you work there the more you will know about everything important.

Though it varies by office, in most cases Juvenile is seen as a training ground for n00bs by DAs/PDs. Functionally, adjudication hearings are pretty much the same as adult trials. I'm surprised that the PD said it would be a disadvantage, since most offices don't have interns or fresh employees doing jury trials. The experience you'd get in Juvenile isn't much different than what you'd get doing adult bench trials. In fact, Juvenile gets you handling more serious felony cases, making it better, in many respects, than work in magistrate courts.

You won't even get the chance to touch a jury trial until at least a couple years out in the offices I've seen. I guess if you're in a place where Juvenile is a specialized unit and that's the only thing you do in the office for years on end, then what she said makes more sense. That doesn't seem to be the norm, though, and Juvenile tends to be treated as a step in the ladder. If you're not at the point where you're expecting to start off doing jury trials in a new office, it shouldn't matter. Either way, I think if you want to do juvenile stuff you should do it. You should do it with pride and gusto. Even if folks disrespect it, I think it's one of the most important things a DA/PD can do if they have a passion for it.

Kind of related to this, I'm assigned to the juvenile division at my local DA office this summer. I am really excited about it and actually would be really happy to end up working with juveniles. I am a little worried that it might pigeonhole me.

Does anyone else have experience with working for a very specific division?

[Anonymous User]

Kind of related to this, I'm assigned to the juvenile division at my local DA office this summer. I am really excited about it and actually would be really happy to end up working with juveniles. I am a little worried that it might pigeonhole me.

Does anyone else have experience with working for a very specific division?

I would be astounded and confounded if any summer assignment pigeonholed you, especially Juvenile. I worked in a different specialized unit during my 1L summer and never thought of it being anything other than a strength. If you're doing Juvenile as a 2L and they are letting you do hearings, then the experience you get will put you in a great position.

[Anonymous User]

Kind of related to this, I'm assigned to the juvenile division at my local DA office this summer. I am really excited about it and actually would be really happy to end up working with juveniles. I am a little worried that it might pigeonhole me.

Does anyone else have experience with working for a very specific division?

I think it's common in large offices to get assigned to a specific division. You shouldn't care about which division sounds the most fun or interesting. You'll want to be in a division that will get you into court and meeting influential people. You'll start to figure out which divisions those are after you spend some time in the office. If you work there for more than one summer, don't be afraid to ask for a transfer to get new experiences and meet new people. It's probably not ideal to spend two summers and four semesters all in the juvenile division.

[Anonymous User]

anyone on the PD side thought about doing delinquency work? It was what originally attracted me to PD work, but then I kind of felt like having some background in child development should probably be required. Now I'm not so sure and am basically going to cast my net as wide as I can to get jobs doing defense work (I plan to also apply to work dependency cases).

I've been told by one hiring PD that starting out this way wouldn't be the worst thing but because these types of cases don't have jury trials, that I would be at a major disadvantage if I tried to transfer offices to do regular PD work. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

PDS actually starts folks off in juvenile work. You don't get to touch a jury trial before you finish your juvenile rotation.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have an idea what the final interview with BDS is like? Did not really get any information about it, so I'm not sure what to expect.

Not sure if you had yours already, but I just had mine a couple days ago and there was nothing to it. When I asked them they told me it would be a panel interview, but it was really just a sit down and chat with Lisa Schreibersdorf and a couple other higher ups. Very informal. Why do you want to be here? What do you like about being a PD? etc. It was definitely just so they can make sure the people who reviewed you earlier weren't out of their minds.

There's some good news and bad news. Essentially, she said if she's meeting with you you're almost certainly getting an offer if they get funded, BUT they are not certain they're getting funded until after they submit a proposal to the city and meet with them in April sometime.

[Anonymous User]

Has anyone heard back from the Orange County DA about their fellowship decisions yet? Should come this week.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know the process of applying for post-bar DA internships in Texas?

[Jeremyl]

Anyone know the process of applying for post-bar DA internships in Texas?

yeah, just call office and ask them directly. Some offices will have programs set up, and a lot of those offices were on symplicty (most have already finished interviews). Some won't have programs yet will still take on interns. Each office will vary.

Once you call, they will send you an application to fill out. You'll send that back along with a resume and cover letter usually, and they will set up an interview (some over the phone, some in the office). Then, hopefully you get accepted.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have an idea what the final interview with BDS is like? Did not really get any information about it, so I'm not sure what to expect.

Not sure if you had yours already, but I just had mine a couple days ago and there was nothing to it. When I asked them they told me it would be a panel interview, but it was really just a sit down and chat with Lisa Schreibersdorf and a couple other higher ups. Very informal. Why do you want to be here? What do you like about being a PD? etc. It was definitely just so they can make sure the people who reviewed you earlier weren't out of their minds.

There's some good news and bad news. Essentially, she said if she's meeting with you you're almost certainly getting an offer if they get funded, BUT they are not certain they're getting funded until after they submit a proposal to the city and meet with them in April sometime.

Was the final round with Lisa your second or third interview and also, was your process 2 or 3 interviews total? I had my first-round about 2-3 weeks ago and I'm waiting to hear about continuing on but wasn't sure where I stand exactly. Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have an idea what the final interview with BDS is like? Did not really get any information about it, so I'm not sure what to expect.

Not sure if you had yours already, but I just had mine a couple days ago and there was nothing to it. When I asked them they told me it would be a panel interview, but it was really just a sit down and chat with Lisa Schreibersdorf and a couple other higher ups. Very informal. Why do you want to be here? What do you like about being a PD? etc. It was definitely just so they can make sure the people who reviewed you earlier weren't out of their minds.

There's some good news and bad news. Essentially, she said if she's meeting with you you're almost certainly getting an offer if they get funded, BUT they are not certain they're getting funded until after they submit a proposal to the city and meet with them in April sometime.

Was the final round with Lisa your second or third interview and also, was your process 2 or 3 interviews total? I had my first-round about 2-3 weeks ago and I'm waiting to hear about continuing on but wasn't sure where I stand exactly. Thanks!

also curious about this