AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction Forum
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
Hey All,
So as the topic line states, I'm an AA URM with a 164 LSAT and a 3.21 GPA w/upward trend (2.61, 3.10, 3.81). My father passed away freshmen year, and it took awhile for me to deal with that. I also have a shop lifting infraction (not a misdemeanor or felony) from over a year ago. I've been told that my AA URM Status makes my numbers look good, but I'm worried about the infraction and if AdComs will think of my "overcoming adversity."
So as the topic line states, I'm an AA URM with a 164 LSAT and a 3.21 GPA w/upward trend (2.61, 3.10, 3.81). My father passed away freshmen year, and it took awhile for me to deal with that. I also have a shop lifting infraction (not a misdemeanor or felony) from over a year ago. I've been told that my AA URM Status makes my numbers look good, but I'm worried about the infraction and if AdComs will think of my "overcoming adversity."
Last edited by wbrother on Sun Nov 25, 2012 10:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
- wert3813
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:29 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
.
Last edited by wert3813 on Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
Yes, it was less than two years ago. It was October 2011.
- PickledPanda
- Posts: 292
- Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:43 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
Shoplifting is a bigger deal than something like possession of marijuana or assault and battery. Adcomms and the state bars all hate crimes involving dishonesty, which shoplifting does. Especially since this infraction is so recent, you will raise a lot of eyebrows. Of course, if you lie/hide it they may find out anyways and you'll face expulsion.
You're probably a WL/Out at all of the t-14, except maybe you will find sympathy from one or two 7-14. You're going to need to cast a wide net. HYSCCN definitely out though.
You're probably a WL/Out at all of the t-14, except maybe you will find sympathy from one or two 7-14. You're going to need to cast a wide net. HYSCCN definitely out though.
- wert3813
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:29 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
.
Last edited by wert3813 on Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- BruceWayne
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
This person is WAAAAAY OFF. You are DEFINITELY in at some of the top 14 assuming that they don't take into account the shoplifting. I don't really know how that kind of thing plays into admissions. But based off of your stats (Black 164 LSAT and 3.2 GPA) alone you should get into a top 14 or 2. You won't get HYS and probably not Columbia or Chicago. But the rest of them are very possible.PickledPanda wrote:Shoplifting is a bigger deal than something like possession of marijuana or assault and battery. Adcomms and the state bars all hate crimes involving dishonesty, which shoplifting does. Especially since this infraction is so recent, you will raise a lot of eyebrows. Of course, if you lie/hide it they may find out anyways and you'll face expulsion.
You're probably a WL/Out at all of the t-14, except maybe you will find sympathy from one or two 7-14. You're going to need to cast a wide net. HYSCCN definitely out though.
- wert3813
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:29 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
.
Last edited by wert3813 on Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
- BruceWayne
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
That's because the factor that the previous poster is (well at least what we're assuming) basing his/her response on (shoplifting) really isn't something that anyone can use to chance admissions unless they are an adcomm or they personally applied to top 14 schools as a Black 164 3.2 with a shoplifting. That is too specific to make any real estimate. On the other hand, a 3.2 Black applicant with a 164 is a known quantity. And someone with that profile will get into a top 14.wert3813 wrote: Lol. You accuse another persons prediction of being way off then openly admit that there is a giant factor you aren't considering. Shoplifting is a big deal. Finally you arrive at near the exact same conclusion 1-2 T14ers. Great post.
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
I'm honestly just hoping to get into some T50s, specifically Hastings. I know T14 is probably out of my reach. I'm just hoping that stupid decision doesn't completely alter the course of my life.
- sinfiery
- Posts: 3310
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
Then this would be the proper response to his post.BruceWayne wrote:That's because the factor that the previous poster is (well at least what we're assuming) basing his/her response on (shoplifting) really isn't something that anyone can use to chance admissions unless they are an adcomm or they personally applied to top 14 schools as a Black 164 3.2 with a shoplifting. That is too specific to make any real estimate. On the other hand, a 3.2 Black applicant with a 164 is a known quantity. And someone with that profile will get into a top 14.wert3813 wrote: Lol. You accuse another persons prediction of being way off then openly admit that there is a giant factor you aren't considering. Shoplifting is a big deal. Finally you arrive at near the exact same conclusion 1-2 T14ers. Great post.
Your initial response remains terrible and idiotic.
- BruceWayne
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
LOL you really gotta try to lose your virginity one of these days. It's great stress relief.sinfiery wrote:Then this would be the proper response to his post.
Your initial response remains terrible and idiotic.
- sinfiery
- Posts: 3310
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
ouchBruceWayne wrote:LOL you really gotta try to lose your virginity one of these days. It's great stress relief.sinfiery wrote:Then this would be the proper response to his post.
Your initial response remains terrible and idiotic.
my ego
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
So T14 is most likely out, but what about T50? Can my AA URM cancel out my Infraction?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- patrickd139
- Posts: 2883
- Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:53 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Upward Trend
This, 100% this.wert3813 wrote:Good Advice That You Don't Want To Hear: Wait a bit and let that shoplifting charge get a few years behind you.wbrother wrote:Yes, it was less than two years ago. It was October 2011.
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
In CA at least, if you the amount that you stole is less than a certain amount ($100 maybe, but I'm not sure), then you can get cited for an infraction. It's up to the arresting officer's discretion at the point of arrest, the DA's decision in court, and the Judge's decision after that. In my case, I had no priors and I stole $35 worth of groceries (no booze was the key). So I only got cited for a shoplifting infraction. I should also mention that I already applied to schools and disclosed this. Did I blow it, or do I still have T50 chances in your opinions?
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
Yeah, I definitely mentioned it was groceries. And I'm definitely not going to do anything stupid like that again. I guess I'll have to see which adcoms are forgiving. I'm just hoping I don't get shut out.Wormfather wrote:You still have a good shot, this will be an adcom by adcom thing. But seeing as how by the time you sit for the bar this will be 5+ years in your past most LS should be ok with it. Just stay out of trouble.wbrother wrote:In CA at least, if you the amount that you stole is less than a certain amount ($100 maybe, but I'm not sure), then you can get cited for an infraction. It's up to the arresting officer's discretion at the point of arrest, the DA's decision in court, and the Judge's decision after that. In my case, I had no priors and I stole $35 worth of groceries (no booze was the key). So I only got cited for a shoplifting infraction. I should also mention that I already applied to schools and disclosed this. Did I blow it, or do I still have T50 chances in your opinions?
Oh and in you're CF addendum, please mention that it was groceries. Dont explain why you stole groceries. I dont know you but when I read that someone stole groceries, I dont think "that criminal" I think "damn, how sad".
On XXX I was caught stealing $35 worth of groceries and charged with XXX and infraction. The result was XXX and I have not got into any trouble since.
-
- Posts: 11453
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
Curious about an earlier post which stated that shoplifting is viewed more seriously than assault & battery. Any basis for this claim ? Aren't acts of violence are viewed more seriously than shoplifting ?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 11453
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
Assault & battery, not just assault. Seems as if the circumstances would be important for each of these two offenses. Stealing food or diapers differs in degree of moral depravity than shoplifting a non-necessity such as an expensive piece of jewelry. Assault & battery in a roommate or family relationship might be mitigated by a permanent separation whereas attacking someone in public or in a business setting might arouse more serious questions & concerns. In short, it seems like the facts would be taken into consideration for these types of offenses &, therefore, it is hard to categorize one as more serious than the other (although my personal belief is that an offense involving violence such as assault & battery is the more serious of the two crimes).
To be clear, I don't know the answer--this is just my opinion.
To be clear, I don't know the answer--this is just my opinion.
-
- Posts: 11453
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
OP: A single incident of dishonesty, even though recent, may not be an absolute barrier to admission. Try to explain it as a lapse in judgment during a period of desperation (if true).
-
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:44 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
im sure ull get into a t-14. they might just be more wary about letting u use the library.
- wbrother
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:02 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
This is the best thing I've read on here.uvabro wrote:im sure ull get into a t-14. they might just be more wary about letting u use the library.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:44 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
thanks i need my writing in tip top shape for exams.wbrother wrote:This is the best thing I've read on here.uvabro wrote:im sure ull get into a t-14. they might just be more wary about letting u use the library.
-
- Posts: 11453
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
Coincidentally, Yahoo just shared a list of the top 10 most shoplifted items in the US. Number one on the list is filet mignon. So much for the desperation angle.
- red8aron
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 6:35 pm
Re: AA URM 164/3.21 Shoplifting Infraction
I woulden't be too confident. Infractions do major stuff to your app. Even more to URM students because soft factors are key. I had a friend with a 170 and 3.7 who went to a T2 because of a DUI. Just anecdotal, but you should put some serious time into explaining the infraction.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login