AUSA or FPD Forum

[rn2010]

I'm currently in the private sector (litigator) but want to get more experience in litigation in the public sector. Should I aim for AUSA position or FPD? What would open up more doors down the road?

[nixy]

Do you not actually have any personal preference between defending criminal defendants and prosecuting them?

[<3waitlists]

"opening up doors" is not a good reason to go into public service. AUSA b/c hopefully you'll do less damage that way

[ninthcircuitattorney]

If it's experience you want, do the FPD route. AFPD have a lot more autonomy. (In Chicago, they are known to handle their own cases entirely from their first day.) But be weary, these positions are hyper competitive. T14 and BigLaw associate experience alone won't cut it.

[The_MJ]

If you want trial experience, I recommend you go the AUSA route. Most federally charged defendants plea guilty; those who go to trial may be represented by privately retained attorneys or pro bono counsel from the CJA panel. In my district, it seemed that the majority of contested trials involved retained or CJA counsel. Thus, as a FPD, most of your job is sentencing and/or convincing the feds to drop the case before trial. Sure, you'll see a trial once in a while, but not to the extend your state counterparts will.

AUSAs on the other hand are more likely to go to trial because you can always join a case as a second chair. I've never seen a FPD "team up" with a private attorney or CJA counsel on a trial, but maybe someone can correct me.

As others have mentioned, the competition is tough. Elite stats help, but alone are insufficient. I think the AUSAs are looking for people with a demonstrated history of public service and public interest.

[CanadianWolf]

Probably easier to land a position as an AUSA if coming from biglaw without any state level public defender experience.

[andythefir]

AUSAs have a brand that make it easier to get some kinds of jobs down the road, but the job itself is more stressful, requires you to do more, and pays less. So if your truly indifferent, then go USAO for a short stint, FPD for a longer stint.

[nixy]

This is weirdly subjective - not sure why prosecuting would be inherently more stressful than defending. FD requires working with clients in a way that AUSA doesn’t, for instance, which can be more stressful (especially since when an AUSA loses, their clients don’t go to prison). FD usually have lower caseloads because they’re expected to spend more time on each.

Also all the FD job postings I’ve seen expressly peg salary to AUSA salaries.

[12YrsAnAssociate]

I don't think there are exit options from FPDs. But I also don't think there are many great landing spots for AUSAs outside of the tip-top offices. Most AUSAs I know that left and went to biglaw end up in "special counsel" positions where they make less than I do and are under pressure to build a book or take a hike. I think you should do criminal work because you like criminal work, not for exit options.

As an aside, I called up the local FPD and some members of the CJA panel a few years back and I was able to tag along as second chair for a few trials. I had to sell it to the firm as pro bono that was raising our profile in the city. And it was stressful because (1) the firm didn't stop giving me billable work and (2) the indigent clients were oddly mad at me all the time because I couldn't immediately get them free by like waiving a wand. But it was fun work. If my work ever slows down, I plan to ask to do a 1- or 2-month stint at the local DA's office based on the same sell.

[Anonymous User]

I don't think there are exit options from FPDs. But I also don't think there are many great landing spots for AUSAs outside of the tip-top offices. Most AUSAs I know that left and went to biglaw end up in "special counsel" positions where they make less than I do and are under pressure to build a book or take a hike. I think you should do criminal work because you like criminal work, not for exit options.

As an aside, I called up the local FPD and some members of the CJA panel a few years back and I was able to tag along as second chair for a few trials. I had to sell it to the firm as pro bono that was raising our profile in the city. And it was stressful because (1) the firm didn't stop giving me billable work and (2) the indigent clients were oddly mad at me all the time because I couldn't immediately get them free by like waiving a wand. But it was fun work. If my work ever slows down, I plan to ask to do a 1- or 2-month stint at the local DA's office based on the same sell.

The elite firms with "special counsel" don't pay line AUSAs less than associates. In fact, many of them are guaranteed partner like compensation for a few years, but will not be made partner unless they build or show promise in building a book of business.

I do agree there aren't many great landing spots for AUSAs but that's mainly because being an AUSA is far superior to working for a firm or inhouse or in almost any other position in the federal government.

Edit: Anon b/c i'm an AUSA and have insight into what some firms pay former AUSAs as special counsel at least in DC/NYC.

[12YrsAnAssociate]

The elite firms with "special counsel" don't pay line AUSAs less than associates. In fact, many of them are guaranteed partner like compensation for a few years, but will not be made partner unless they build or show promise in building a book of business.

I do agree there aren't many great landing spots for AUSAs but that's mainly because being an AUSA is far superior to working for a firm or inhouse or in almost any other position in the federal government.

I don't disagree with this, but I think you and I are referring to different USAOs and different biglaw firms. I know the local v20-ish firms will take on senior AUSAs from the local (non-big name) USAO, but the financial arrangement isn't anything I'd be interested in. I'm sure SDNY and EDVA AUSAs have a totally different set of options.