California Bar Moral Character Application Forum

[Sobriquet44]

To my mind a letter of reconsideration and an appeal are not the same thing. The letter of reconsideration is essentially you asking the commitee to review their own decision, while an appeal goes to a separate and independent body, the state bar court to review the commitees decision and the comitees decision is also not given any weight. Also, when you are applying you have the burden to show that you are of good character, on appeal the burden switches to the Bar to prove that you are of bad moral character. I short on appeal any doubt is resolved in your favor, while at the commitee level it's the other way around. I also don't think you should be taking advice from the state bar counsel, as they are simply defending their client in this situation, and of course will try to get them out of litigation. Just my 2cents.

Hello, thanks for the advice and discussion. To clarify, after the first determination I did appeal, but withdrew the appeal, when State Bar Counsel and the judge at the case management conference, recommended a letter of reconsideration (which I didn't know was possible at the time, but State Bar Counsel, explained the exception I noted in a previous post).

I went forward with the reconsideration request, which did not work, and waited the two years.

.

[rcharter1978]

To my mind a letter of reconsideration and an appeal are not the same thing. The letter of reconsideration is essentially you asking the commitee to review their own decision, while an appeal goes to a separate and independent body, the state bar court to review the commitees decision and the comitees decision is also not given any weight. Also, when you are applying you have the burden to show that you are of good character, on appeal the burden switches to the Bar to prove that you are of bad moral character. I short on appeal any doubt is resolved in your favor, while at the commitee level it's the other way around. I also don't think you should be taking advice from the state bar counsel, as they are simply defending their client in this situation, and of course will try to get them out of litigation. Just my 2cents.

Hello, thanks for the advice and discussion. To clarify, after the first determination I did appeal, but withdrew the appeal, when State Bar Counsel and the judge at the case management conference, recommended a letter of reconsideration (which I didn't know was possible at the time, but State Bar Counsel, explained the exception I noted in a previous post).

I went forward with the reconsideration request, which did not work, and waited the two years.

.

That's interesting that it's basically reviewed de novo upon appeal and that the burden of proof shifts so dramatically.

But then I guess the question is what's the degree of "bad moral character" that has to be proven to preclude bar admission.

I wonder how many people successfully appeal a c&f denial. If its generally unsuccessful, it may be because even though the burden of proof shifts to the bar to prove unfit character that level of proof may be fairly low.

Would the bar need to prove that the OPs rehabilitative efforts weren't enough or would they have to prove that the judgment on his record was bad enough to bar admission...or both?

Of course this is all likely academic at this point as it sounds like OP is working with a C&F attorney and has a clear path forward but it seems like a pretty interesting area of law.

[Left Waiting]

Hello, I did not know about the shift in proof. That is interesting to know. I was told that there was a recent change in how the Committee operates and that a letter of reconsideration and appeal are considered the same now. However, I have always thought they were different as well. When I appealed and requested reconsideration though that was from the first denial, so that was easily two year ago or so. I don't know if the procedure has changed, but maybe I should look into it if that is not the case.

[Sobriquet44]

Yeah, I don't think it's true. If you read the report on the California bar exam leak, you will see that there is alot of tension between the Supreme court and the Committee, essentialy the Supreme court is being more critical of their decisions and increasing oversight and the committee resents that. It is feasible that they would try to keep all determinations "in-house" as a way to curb the oversight of the court. At the end of the day, what it comes down to is being honest with yourself and seeing if think you can win this case. Good luck either way.

Hello, I did not know about the shift in proof. That is interesting to know. I was told that there was a recent change in how the Committee operates and that a letter of reconsideration and appeal are considered the same now. However, I have always thought they were different as well. When I appealed and requested reconsideration though that was from the first denial, so that was easily two year ago or so. I don't know if the procedure has changed, but maybe I should look into it if that is not the case.

[kmbrenn2]

Just got my clearance this morning. Here’s a timeline for anyone who may be in a similar position:

App submitted - May 13, 2019
Notice of Completion/Filed App - Oct 23, 2019
Intro to Investigator - Dec 2, 2019
Request for More Info - Dec 9, 2019
Submitted Additional Info - Dec 10, 2019
Approved - Dec 11, 2019

The request for more info was for something pretty insignificant from 9 years ago, but they needed to follow up on it. I called my investigator, who was very kind, and asked exactly what she wanted from me. Was approved very shortly after that.

Now for more waiting to get my card so I can take the oath!

[Anonymous User]

Hi Friends,

I have a bit of a unique situation I wanted to run by you all before I call Admissions. I'm a lawyer - admitted in New York and Ontario (Canada). I sat for and passed the California bar February 2015. All of the requirements have been fulfilled - excepting the Moral Character Determination. I submitted my Moral Character Application in August of this year. The general reasons for the delay in submitting my moral character application are a combination of financial difficulty and family tragedy. The issue I'm looking for guidance on is that I need to be admitted to the bar within 5-years of passing the bar, which will be this coming February 2020. I don't plan on practicing in California (I live and practice in Canada), but all of the hard work, etc. will have been for nothing. I am hoping to see if Admissions will be able to make a determination before the deadline, or in the alternative, see if they will extend this until my application has been determined. Has anyone experienced this general situation? Advice is welcome!

[rcharter1978]

Hi Friends,

I have a bit of a unique situation I wanted to run by you all before I call Admissions. I'm a lawyer - admitted in New York and Ontario (Canada). I sat for and passed the California bar February 2015. All of the requirements have been fulfilled - excepting the Moral Character Determination. I submitted my Moral Character Application in August of this year. The general reasons for the delay in submitting my moral character application are a combination of financial difficulty and family tragedy. The issue I'm looking for guidance on is that I need to be admitted to the bar within 5-years of passing the bar, which will be this coming February 2020. I don't plan on practicing in California (I live and practice in Canada), but all of the hard work, etc. will have been for nothing. I am hoping to see if Admissions will be able to make a determination before the deadline, or in the alternative, see if they will extend this until my application has been determined. Has anyone experienced this general situation? Advice is welcome!

There was someone who had a related issue and he/she said that they had been advised that it was rare to get a timeline extension on the five years.

In his case though he was in the process and was likely going to be denied. I am not sure if they will be more amenable because you began the process prior to the deadline. You submitted in August so there is a chance that they could clear you before February....though for some reason I thought you'd have five years from the pass date.

[Moabit]

Rule 4.17 Admission certification and time limit

(A) No later than five years from the last day of administration of the California Bar
Examination the applicant passes,
(1) an applicant must meet all requirements for admission for certification by
the Committee to the California Supreme Court; and
(2) upon receipt of an order from the Court, take the attorney’s oath and meet
State Bar registration requirements to be eligible to practice law in
California.
(B) The State Bar may extend this five-year limit for good cause shown by clear and
convincing evidence in a particular case but not for an applicant’s negligence or
the result of an applicant having received a negative moral character
determination.

[Basile]

As a prospective law school applicant in California, does anybody know where I can get a copy of the bar character/moral fitness application? I'd like to see it before even applying to law school so I can get a head start on what's in store for me. I was arrested before, but the case got dismissed, record sealed. I know I have to mention that, but there's no way they could find out the details of the case, which is good. I can give my own "recollection" of events without even them knowing if they're true or not thanks to the sealed records, inability to access evidence, etc. That's the sheer beauty of having sealed arrest records, expunged/dismissed cases, and a clean record

[rcharter1978]

As a prospective law school applicant in California, does anybody know where I can get a copy of the bar character/moral fitness application? I'd like to see it before even applying to law school so I can get a head start on what's in store for me. I was arrested before, but the case got dismissed, record sealed. I know I have to mention that, but there's no way they could find out the details of the case, which is good. I can give my own "recollection" of events without even them knowing if they're true or not thanks to the sealed records, inability to access evidence, etc. That's the sheer beauty of having sealed arrest records, expunged/dismissed cases, and a clean record

Wowsers, you have schools you've forgotten and a prior arrest. You should get started right away. I'd think a copy would be on the calbar website.

I'm pretty sure you waive whatever privacy rights you'd have from a sealed record....meaning that you'd give the bar the right to access the record. Can't be 100% sure because I didn't have that issue.

If your memory is this shaky, law school may not be the right place for you. IJS.

But I still think you're a troll, but you're a passionate troll and thats fun!

[Moabit]

As a prospective law school applicant in California, does anybody know where I can get a copy of the bar character/moral fitness application? I'd like to see it before even applying to law school so I can get a head start on what's in store for me. I was arrested before, but the case got dismissed, record sealed. I know I have to mention that, but there's no way they could find out the details of the case, which is good. I can give my own "recollection" of events without even them knowing if they're true or not thanks to the sealed records, inability to access evidence, etc. That's the sheer beauty of having sealed arrest records, expunged/dismissed cases, and a clean record

Trolling requires a bit more subtlety on this board that this.

[Basile]

It's absolutely clear that I'm no troll. I asked legitimate questions, but some deluded soul thinks that this is trolling (the classic fall-back, knee-jerk response when somebody likes to spew negativity for baseless and groundless reasons). And he/she claims that law school isn't for me when that person has no idea what trolling is? Unbelievable. *Sticks foot far down that person's throat where you can hear the gagging 5 miles away*

A prior arrest is not "wowsers" either. People actually get accepted with an arrest record, you know. And I know this is a fact because I attended a law school workshop where you saw actual applicant packages and you had to play admissions officer, deciding which applicant to accept. One of the applicants had an arrest record and juvenile delinquency history, and the college said that they accepted that applicant. So no, an arrest record doesn't automatically mean "wowsers." In fact, being on the wrong side of the law can actually be of great benefit to a would-be lawyer. You get to see what it's like to be on the opposite side for a change. In any case, when you get the case dismissed and records sealed up tight behind vaults bigger than Fort Knox because it was a wrongful arrest or the evidence was totally ridiculous, that will have no negative effect whatsoever on an application.

As for this statement:
"I'm pretty sure you waive whatever privacy rights you'd have from a sealed record....meaning that you'd give the bar the right to access the record. Can't be 100% sure because I didn't have that issue."

I don't think you know what you're talking about there. If you can't be 100% sure because you didn't have that issue yourself, then you don't know what you're talking about (obviously). You can't give the bar or a law school the right to access that record at all. There is no "waiving of rights" when it comes to sealed arrest records. A FORMAL COURT ORDER is required to unseal an arrest record, and for a legitimate reason..and believe me, it has to be for a very good reason too. If the law school or bar has an "inkling" that you could be lying about arrest details on your law school application, that's NOT a valid reason for getting a court order to unseal an arrest record. So tough cookies, law schools...you'll never get the juicy nitty gritty details no matter which way you slice it. All you need to know is the charge, a broad overview based on what I tell you, and the outcome (dismissal/expungement, not guilty, sealed records, etc). Maybe you don't even have to reveal all that stuff, who knows. It all depends on the question being asked, and I NEVER, EVER provide more than what they're asking for. When it comes to stuff like this, don't even dare go above and beyond to relinquish so much information. Only provide what they ask for at the bare minimum.

The interesting phrase I'm seeing in some C&F sections is "provide relevant facts." "Relevant.." what does that exactly mean? Well, I'll provide you with facts that I deem relevant, how's that sound? I'm not a lawyer yet, and you can't expect me to consult a lawyer just to fill out an application to law school. That's absurd. What I deem relevant will be provided, thank you very much. That's why I have YOU, the law school, to educate me on relevancy of evidence and facts upon admission. Duh.

[QContinuum]

FYI, Basile has been banned for 3 days for relentlessly promoting unethical and possibly illegal conduct, in this and other threads, even after receiving three warnings from two moderators. If s/he returns and continues, they will be re-banned.

[rcharter1978]

It's absolutely clear that I'm no troll. I asked legitimate questions, but some deluded soul thinks that this is trolling (the classic fall-back, knee-jerk response when somebody likes to spew negativity for baseless and groundless reasons). And he/she claims that law school isn't for me when that person has no idea what trolling is? Unbelievable. *Sticks foot far down that person's throat where you can hear the gagging 5 miles away*

A prior arrest is not "wowsers" either. People actually get accepted with an arrest record, you know. And I know this is a fact because I attended a law school workshop where you saw actual applicant packages and you had to play admissions officer, deciding which applicant to accept. One of the applicants had an arrest record and juvenile delinquency history, and the college said that they accepted that applicant. So no, an arrest record doesn't automatically mean "wowsers." In fact, being on the wrong side of the law can actually be of great benefit to a would-be lawyer. You get to see what it's like to be on the opposite side for a change. In any case, when you get the case dismissed and records sealed up tight behind vaults bigger than Fort Knox because it was a wrongful arrest or the evidence was totally ridiculous, that will have no negative effect whatsoever on an application.

As for this statement:
"I'm pretty sure you waive whatever privacy rights you'd have from a sealed record....meaning that you'd give the bar the right to access the record. Can't be 100% sure because I didn't have that issue."

I don't think you know what you're talking about there. If you can't be 100% sure because you didn't have that issue yourself, then you don't know what you're talking about (obviously). You can't give the bar or a law school the right to access that record at all. There is no "waiving of rights" when it comes to sealed arrest records. A FORMAL COURT ORDER is required to unseal an arrest record, and for a legitimate reason..and believe me, it has to be for a very good reason too. If the law school or bar has an "inkling" that you could be lying about arrest details on your law school application, that's NOT a valid reason for getting a court order to unseal an arrest record. So tough cookies, law schools...you'll never get the juicy nitty gritty details no matter which way you slice it. All you need to know is the charge, a broad overview based on what I tell you, and the outcome (dismissal/expungement, not guilty, sealed records, etc). Maybe you don't even have to reveal all that stuff, who knows. It all depends on the question being asked, and I NEVER, EVER provide more than what they're asking for. When it comes to stuff like this, don't even dare go above and beyond to relinquish so much information. Only provide what they ask for at the bare minimum.

The interesting phrase I'm seeing in some C&F sections is "provide relevant facts." "Relevant.." what does that exactly mean? Well, I'll provide you with facts that I deem relevant, how's that sound? I'm not a lawyer yet, and you can't expect me to consult a lawyer just to fill out an application to law school. That's absurd. What I deem relevant will be provided, thank you very much. That's why I have YOU, the law school, to educate me on relevancy of evidence and facts upon admission. Duh.

LOL, an arrest is pretty wowsers when you're a) hoping to be less than candid with the bar about the situation surrounding your arrest, b) actually did something to get arrested and c) trying to combine a and b with hiding schools you attended and test scores you received.

Your problem may not be law school admissions it's going to be bar admission. You try to obfuscate and misrepresent the situation and you'll find yourself in a lack of candor situation so good luck with that.

Your problem is going to be that the C&F from the bar will ask you all these questions and they will fact check your answers on the C&F AND they will fact check against your law school application.

If you lie and obfuscate on both - lack of candor. If you are honest on the C&F but we're less than honest on your LS app, you're still in big trouble. The bar will allow for honest mistakes on your LS application, but arguing that you "forgot" schools you attended and tests you took to apply to law school, but you had a strong enough memory to pass law school and the bar exam doesn't even pass the laugh test. You'll be in trouble for lack of candor. Particularly with a lower standard of proof.

Then you will be that guy/gal who wasted 3-4 years of your life in law school and never got admitted to the bar because you were too smart for your own good.

And the standard of proof to keep you out of the bar is not some super high bar.....it's pretty low.

LOL, you sign a waiver page at the end of the C&F that pretty much allows the bar unlimited access to whatever they want. I haven't read the waiver since my bar admission to know how far it goes, but from my understanding it's pretty extensive.

Your argument is apparently going to be that you forgot what schools you attended and your test scores and the relevant facts of your arrest for your C&F. If your memory is this terrible you shouldnt be in law school.

Yeah, altogether friend that is pretty wowsers and such an objectively ridiculous thing to do that if you aren't a troll I really feel sorry for you.

ETA: https://www.shouselaw.com/destroy-arrest-records.html#7

"Sealing also does not relieve the petitioner from:

.....The obligation to disclose the arrest as otherwise required by law in response to a direct question on an application for:

Public office,

Employment as a peace officer,

Licensing by any state or local agency

[rcharter1978]

So, basile - long story short, you have to disclose the arrest, even if sealed.

Because you're super smart you'll try to give "as little information" and "one sided information" on the C&F.

You will end up in an informal C&F conference because they are going to ask for more details. You'll be cagey and hostile and start yapping about how you don't have to tell anyone anything, even though you do. And then you'll end up with at least one denial for california bar admission.

Like I said. All things considered, including your terrible memory, maybe law school isn't the right place for you.

[Moabit]

Trolling requires a bit more subtlety on this board that this.

I take that back. From Basile's reply it is obvious that (s)he is no troll. It is also obvious that, having chosen a wrong professional school, I will not be able to help with the issues that the reply raises.

[Sobriquet44]

So, basile - long story short, you have to disclose the arrest, even if sealed.

Because you're super smart you'll try to give "as little information" and "one sided information" on the C&F.

You will end up in an informal C&F conference because they are going to ask for more details. You'll be cagey and hostile and start yapping about how you don't have to tell anyone anything, even though you do. And then you'll end up with at least one denial for california bar admission.

Like I said. All things considered, including your terrible memory, maybe law school isn't the right place for you.

Actually, if he is telling the truth about the case being dismissed he might not have to disclose the arrest. The current question about applicants criminal record on the moral character application is question twelve and it states:

"YOU ARE EXCLUDED FROM ANSWERING QUESTIONS REGARDING THE FOLLOWING INCIDENTS:
A. Arrests that did not result in a conviction, unless you are awaiting final adjudication of the matter."

Either way it never hurts to over disclose, and I would agree that the poster seems to have deeper character issues than this arrest.

[rcharter1978]

So, basile - long story short, you have to disclose the arrest, even if sealed.

Because you're super smart you'll try to give "as little information" and "one sided information" on the C&F.

You will end up in an informal C&F conference because they are going to ask for more details. You'll be cagey and hostile and start yapping about how you don't have to tell anyone anything, even though you do. And then you'll end up with at least one denial for california bar admission.

Like I said. All things considered, including your terrible memory, maybe law school isn't the right place for you.

Actually, if he is telling the truth about the case being dismissed he might not have to disclose the arrest. The current question about applicants criminal record on the moral character application is question twelve and it states:

"YOU ARE EXCLUDED FROM ANSWERING QUESTIONS REGARDING THE FOLLOWING INCIDENTS:
A. Arrests that did not result in a conviction, unless you are awaiting final adjudication of the matter."

Either way it never hurts to over disclose, and I would agree that the poster seems to have deeper character issues than this arrest.

Interesting, I'd admit that because I haven't been arrested I may have skimmed that section when reading the application when I filled out the app or maybe the question changed.

However, another issue that could arise for basile particularly is that he discloses the arrest (as little as possible and with facts he "deems relevant") to his law school and doesn't disclose on the bar c&f

Then CA bar just asks about it because it's a discrepancy and basile gives some over the top, super defensive "fuck-you-i-dont-gotta-tell-you-shit" response. And then it starts to look like there is a problem.

Because while you didn't have a duty to tell the bar about it on the c&f application, but once they specifically ask about it I imagine you do have a duty to be candid and forthright.

ETA: of course if the school's basile applies to don't ask about the arrest, I guess that's cool.....but I remember one of my references sending me pics of the questionnaire they were sent by the bar (which I did NOT ask them to do, but they thought they were doing me a solid). I remember there being catch all, open ended questions built in...so I could see someone spilling the beans about the arrest that way too.

Again, wouldn't mean that hypothetical basile would be denied admission if it came up....I just think the bar could ask for more information and want to know why or who knows once they know about the arrest maybe they can ask for more details ......and if they are stonewalled I can see that being an issue.

[Sobriquet44]

So, basile - long story short, you have to disclose the arrest, even if sealed.

Because you're super smart you'll try to give "as little information" and "one sided information" on the C&F.

You will end up in an informal C&F conference because they are going to ask for more details. You'll be cagey and hostile and start yapping about how you don't have to tell anyone anything, even though you do. And then you'll end up with at least one denial for california bar admission.

Like I said. All things considered, including your terrible memory, maybe law school isn't the right place for you.

Actually, if he is telling the truth about the case being dismissed he might not have to disclose the arrest. The current question about applicants criminal record on the moral character application is question twelve and it states:

"YOU ARE EXCLUDED FROM ANSWERING QUESTIONS REGARDING THE FOLLOWING INCIDENTS:
A. Arrests that did not result in a conviction, unless you are awaiting final adjudication of the matter."

Either way it never hurts to over disclose, and I would agree that the poster seems to have deeper character issues than this arrest.

Interesting, I'd admit that because I haven't been arrested I may have skimmed that section when reading the application when I filled out the app or maybe the question changed.

However, another issue that could arise for basile particularly is that he discloses the arrest (as little as possible and with facts he "deems relevant") to his law school and doesn't disclose on the bar c&f

Then CA bar just asks about it because it's a discrepancy and basile gives some over the top, super defensive "fuck-you-i-dont-gotta-tell-you-shit" response. And then it starts to look like there is a problem.

Because while you didn't have a duty to tell the bar about it on the c&f application, but once they specifically ask about it I imagine you do have a duty to be candid and forthright.

ETA: of course if the school's basile applies to don't ask about the arrest, I guess that's cool.....but I remember one of my references sending me pics of the questionnaire they were sent by the bar (which I did NOT ask them to do, but they thought they were doing me a solid). I remember there being catch all, open ended questions built in...so I could see someone spilling the beans about the arrest that way too.

Again, wouldn't mean that hypothetical basile would be denied admission if it came up....I just think the bar could ask for more information and want to know why or who knows once they know about the arrest maybe they can ask for more details ......and if they are stonewalled I can see that being an issue.

Yeah I think the question changed, it used to be arrests and now it's called "convictions". Eitherway I think if the case was dismissed then Basile really shouldn't have a problem disclosing what happened. You are also right that many law schools still ask about arrests and not just convictions. A good rule of thumb is just being honest and candid.

[lady_gaga]

Does anyone know where I can get a hard copy of the application? The online one simply does not work for me (tried different computers and browsers) and the bar office was next to worthless when I asked them to delete it so I could try to restart it.

^ I have the exact same problem anyone know?

[Sobriquet44]

Does anyone know where I can get a hard copy of the application? The online one simply does not work for me (tried different computers and browsers) and the bar office was next to worthless when I asked them to delete it so I could try to restart it.

^ I have the exact same problem anyone know?

You can send a letter to bar admissions requesting a paper copy. Fair warning they don't seem to like that at all. From the looks of it they really want applicants to use the portal.

[Anonymous User]

Just got my clearance this morning. Here’s a timeline for anyone who may be in a similar position:

App submitted - May 13, 2019
Notice of Completion/Filed App - Oct 23, 2019
Intro to Investigator - Dec 2, 2019
Request for More Info - Dec 9, 2019
Submitted Additional Info - Dec 10, 2019
Approved - Dec 11, 2019

The request for more info was for something pretty insignificant from 9 years ago, but they needed to follow up on it. I called my investigator, who was very kind, and asked exactly what she wanted from me. Was approved very shortly after that.

Now for more waiting to get my card so I can take the oath!

[Anonymous User]

LOVE this! Congratulations Counselor!!!! Hoping mine moves quickly.

Just got my clearance this morning. Here’s a timeline for anyone who may be in a similar position:

App submitted - May 13, 2019
Notice of Completion/Filed App - Oct 23, 2019
Intro to Investigator - Dec 2, 2019
Request for More Info - Dec 9, 2019
Submitted Additional Info - Dec 10, 2019
Approved - Dec 11, 2019

The request for more info was for something pretty insignificant from 9 years ago, but they needed to follow up on it. I called my investigator, who was very kind, and asked exactly what she wanted from me. Was approved very shortly after that.

Now for more waiting to get my card so I can take the oath!

[EAsports19]

Once you electronically submit your Moral Character Determination Application via the CA Bar portal, is there a way to view a copy of the application you submitted?

I find myself needing to refer back to exact dates quite often.

[existentcomp]

So when you get a letter saying now your application is deemed complete ( I got mine four months later which seems normal) does that mean they will now start conducting the background and contacting outside agencies etc? Someone at the LA admissions office told me no that it just goes to complete and they have everything they need at that point and gets approved. Someone else told me that know the background investigation just begins. Just wanted to know if anyone had some clarity on that ?