Can lawyers have a criminal record?

[alskdfjalksdf]

Hi everyone,

 

Was wondering if anyone had experience with attempting to become a Canadian practicing lawyer with a criminal record or a previous arrest. Is it a 100% firm rule that any sort of past criminal activity automatically disqualifies you? If not, does it operate on a case-by-case basis? Do you get a chance to explain the circumstances of your crime? Are there certain crimes that they consider more or less severe than others?

 

Sorry if this has been asked before or seems obvious, I appreciate any insights. Also, want to make it 100% clear that I am not planning a crime, I am just curious about how the system works.

[LMP]

This is dangerously close to asking for legal advice, which we don't provide on this forum. 

Different jursidcitions have different licensing rules and can choose to deny candidates based on the rules they set out. For more specific information you'd have to check with those licensing bodies.

[Pantalaimon]

59 minutes ago, LMP said:

This is dangerously close to asking for legal advice, which we don't provide on this forum. 

Different jursidcitions have different licensing rules and can choose to deny candidates based on the rules they set out. For more specific information you'd have to check with those licensing bodies.

To be fair, I don't think it's controversial to say that it's not an automatic disqualification from licensure.*

Edit: as a general statement, obviously, and noting that OP was referring to "any sort of past criminal activity".

Edited January 26, 2023 by Pantalaimon

[Ryn]

All Canadian law societies require that an applicant have good character. How that requirement takes into consideration criminal convictions is dependent on a lot of factors and is evaluated on a case by case basis.

If you have a criminal record and want to get licensed, I would contact a lawyer who specializes in this kind of thing who can provide answers.

[CleanHands]

FWIW they let terrorists and wife-beating cops become lawyers.

[Pantalaimon]

5 minutes ago, CleanHands said:

and wife-beating cops

That was the one I had in mind, lol.

[LabsFollow]

If you're curious, there are hundreds of good character hearings from Canada's various law societies on CanLII. 

[Turtles]

We had a mandatory moot in 1L that involved arguing whether a woman who tried to overthrow the government of a foreign dictatorship through violence met / did not meet the good character requirement. 

You can look up the applicable good character requirement in your province (incl. the exact wording of the questions asked during licensing and the guidance provided by the law society as to how to interpret and answer those questions), the process by which disputes over good character are adjudicated, and CanLii examples of cases that were or were not successful or where someone was found not of good character but through the passage of time / rehabilitation was later found to satisfy the relevant tribunal. Specific questions about your individual situation should go to your own lawyer.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Turtles

[LMP]

1 hour ago, Turtles said:

We had a mandatory moot in 1L that involved arguing whether a woman who tried to overthrow the government of a foreign dictatorship through violence met / did not meet the good character requirement. 

You can look up the applicable good character requirement in your province (incl. the exact wording of the questions asked during licensing and the guidance provided by the law society as to how to interpret and answer those questions), the process by which disputes over good character are adjudicated, and CanLii examples of cases that were or were not successful or where someone was found not of good character but through the passage of time / rehabilitation was later found to satisfy the relevant tribunal. Specific questions about your individual situation should go to your own lawyer.

Why did you remind me of that. I'd almost convinced myself that semester was a bad dream.

[capitalttruth]

Aren't all lawyers criminals in at least some sense? 😛

Edited January 27, 2023 by capitalttruth

[Diplock]

52 minutes ago, capitalttruth said:

Aren't all lawyers criminals in at least some sense? 😛

That's a one-liner that'll get you appreciation from anyone who's already had a few drinks at a cocktail party and knows nothing about the practice of law. But to anyone who actually functions in the system, it's about as funny (and clever) as "aren't all cops racists?" and "aren't all cheerleaders sort of strippers-in-training?" Every one of those lines gestures broadly at an idea that could possibly relate somehow to a valid point in some sense. But as a contained statement, all it actually says is that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I make that point because while it's forgivable for someone to leave that impression about a field they are not part of, if you drop that line as a law student you've got to ask yourself what audience you think you're ingratiating yourself to, by demonstrating you are completely clueless about your own chosen field of work.

Just...don't.

P.S. To answer the OP, it's uncontroversial to note that a criminal record is not, of itself, any kind of automatic disqualification. But certainly a record could cause problems. If you have concerns beyond that, you'll want to see qualified legal advice.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Diplock

[CrimeAndPunishment]

10 hours ago, alskdfjalksdf said:

Hi everyone,

 

Was wondering if anyone had experience with attempting to become a Canadian practicing lawyer with a criminal record or a previous arrest. Is it a 100% firm rule that any sort of past criminal activity automatically disqualifies you? If not, does it operate on a case-by-case basis? Do you get a chance to explain the circumstances of your crime? Are there certain crimes that they consider more or less severe than others?

 

Sorry if this has been asked before or seems obvious, I appreciate any insights. Also, want to make it 100% clear that I am not planning a crime, I am just curious about how the system works.

My friend from high school has been wanting to go to law school for the past 4 years but doesn’t because he spent 2 years in prison. He wrote the lsat and got 171, got into 2 law schools he applied to but decided not to attend yet. He told me he looked up cases and said generally, when they did something serious it typically took about 8 years after the fact to start considering the person to be of good character, that’s when the person was forthright and took responsibility. It’s a lot of money to spend with the lingering fear of being rejected so be careful and wait for the right time.

edit: wanted to add he got out about four years ago, so his plan is to wait another year and then go to law school so he finishes his articling around 9 years after he was released.

Edited January 27, 2023 by CrimeAndPunishment

[PhilosophyofLaw]

8 hours ago, Diplock said:

That's a one-liner that'll get you appreciation from anyone who's already had a few drinks at a cocktail party and knows nothing about the practice of law. But to anyone who actually functions in the system, it's about as funny (and clever) as "aren't all cops racists?" and "aren't all cheerleaders sort of strippers-in-training?" Every one of those lines gestures broadly at an idea that could possibly relate somehow to a valid point in some sense. But as a contained statement, all it actually says is that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I make that point because while it's forgivable for someone to leave that impression about a field they are not part of, if you drop that line as a law student you've got to ask yourself what audience you think you're ingratiating yourself to, by demonstrating you are completely clueless about your own chosen field of work.

Surely lawyers can joke about stereotypes of the profession, with the recognition that, well, the joke is just that - a stereotype. Or are you of the view that a one-liner of this sort, uttered in passing by someone in the field at cocktail party, perpetuates harmful myths about members of what is, in reality, a dignified and noble profession?

Edited January 27, 2023 by PhilosophyofLaw

[Diplock]

So far, if students want to pile on and insist they know better than I do about what to say and not say about the profession, I'm going to allow that attitude to speak for itself. But really, you don't even have a clue about the concern that prompted my reply, which might, on some reflection, motivate you to pull at least some of your head out of your ass.

Anyone practicing law - especially law that involves representing real individual people rather than larger entities and sophisticated parties - is familiar with the experience of interacting with a client or would-be client who genuinely believes that a lawyer is a liar-for-hire. The incredibly troubling thing about this experience isn't that it offends the lawyer's dignity. It's that any client who subscribes to this bizarre belief is crippling their own ability to function in a legal setting and to navigate their very real legal problems. And that is, quite frankly, tragic.

Encouraging people to believe all lawyers are liars and crooks is as responsible and encouraging people to believe all doctors are quacks and that sound medical advice is more readily available on twitter. It's all really funny, until you read about some deluded parents who actually believe it and tried to treat their real, sick child with clover and honey. Now remember that in my job I don't just read about those stories, I interact with people who actually believe the stupid, harmful shit that you're passing off as a funny one liner. Because all lawyers are really just crooks, and all doctors are really just quacks, right?

So I'm offended on two bases. One, you're being stupid. And two, you're being stupid because (I'm virtually certain of this) your perspective on legal work is so limited that you can't even conceive of ignorant, individual people trying to deal with their legal problems. You're only thinking in terms of entities, corporations, etc. like so many law students. And that's fine, if that's what you want from your career. But a little more perspective will hopefully cure you of that. And even lawyers who do work in "big law" know enough not to make such a dumbass joke. You should too.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Diplock

[CleanHands]

@capitalttruth - Your joke sucked.

@Diplock - You're way too butthurt about it.

[Pecan Boy]

I pray that I'm never so up my own ass about my profession that I can't take a dumb joke about it without melting down

Edited January 27, 2023 by Pecan Boy

[Diplock]

56 minutes ago, CleanHands said:

@capitalttruth - Your joke sucked.

@Diplock - You're way too butthurt about it.

You may be right. But the parade of students who honestly can't see a legitimate concern because all they want to see is a lawyer they imagine must be full of himself just reinforces the validity of the point. Even if I can't keep arguing for it without seeming even more butthurt, as you say.

A doctor doesn't need to argue "it's important to believe in the legitimacy of medicine not because I'm full of myself as a doctor but because believing in it is an important social good." As a lawyer, I shouldn't need to cram that same basic truth about the law down anyone's throat - least of all a current or wannabe law student. But if a law student chooses to view any lawyer speaking that truth as full of themselves, rather than addressing a meaningful social truth, that's on them. My original, basic point was that you're going to look like an idiot making a joke like that around real lawyers. I suppose it's also useful to have the really ignorant law students self-identify so clearly. So I'll leave it alone now.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Diplock

[Hegdis]

Way back on The Old Forum I once ran a thread titled So You Want To Do Criminal Defence. I recall one of my early observations in this moderately popular topic was "You think lawyer jokes are funny now - you won't when it's your blood, sweat and tears all over a file and some jackass wants to take a steaming dump on it and then laugh about it".

So, you know, reasonable people can disagree. Personally haven't laughed at any joke implying that I or my colleagues are criminals in... a long time. Because I just don't find those funny. Matter of perspective, that's all... pretty sure that's what's happening here.

 

ALSO, I am contractually obligated to point out that if your butt hurts, you're doing it wrong. Every time I see that phrase.

 

As for jokes that are actually funny, what's the difference between unlawful and illegal?

[mimi123]

My g they literally let a guy who was involved in terrorist activities become a lawyer in Ontario. You jus have to display to them that you have grown from the incident and u r a different person. If this happened a while ago too I highly doubt they would not give u one as there have been ppl who have committed quite serious crimes be licensed. Everyone makes mistakes and thats okay u r human and u will be able to make it!

[FlyingFish]

A criminal record will not necessarily disqualify you from being called. A legal society will determine whether an applicant is of sufficient good character to be admitted on a case by case basis. I am not sure if there is any way other than seeking legal advice to determine the likelihood that any given person will satisfy the good character requirement of a given law society. 

I have a friend who is articling at the moment and has a somewhat extensive criminal record who is not sure if they will be admitted yet. So they could potentially have gone to law school, completed articles, and not be admitted. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by FlyingFish

[Hegdis]

ONE IS AGAINST THE LAW AND THE OTHER IS A SICK BIRD

[GreyDude]

On 1/27/2023 at 11:48 PM, Hegdis said:

As for jokes that are actually funny, what's the difference between unlawful and illegal?

7 hours ago, Hegdis said:

ONE IS AGAINST THE LAW AND THE OTHER IS A SICK BIRD

May I just say: I am mightily impressed that you waited over two weeks to drop the punchline.

Edited February 13, 2023 by GreyDude