Building criminal law competency without having previous experiences

[beachhouse]

So, aside from upper-year courses in evidence/advanced procedures, I have relatively little exposure to criminal law. Nevertheless, I want to build competency in this field and would be open to suggestions on the route to doing so starting from scratch and wanted to ask the criminal defence folks here how they would approach it.

I understand the defence bar doesn't generally like lawyers who haven't shown a dedicated commitment to this field in the past, so I am open to taking casual or part-time roles if there is training value. 

Edited April 19 by beachhouse

[CleanHands]

Casual or part-time crim defence roles aren't really a thing.

You are right that it's hard to transition to working for someone else in criminal law, as a lawyer without crim experience. I do know some full service firm/corporate lawyers who made the switch to criminal defence, but every single one of them that I know personally immediately hung their own shingle in criminal defence. This seems like an incredibly intimidating route to me, but there are conferences, CPD courses and materials, criminal defence organizations with support for members, etc.

In any event I don't have the best advice to give about this and I apologize for that, but given your OP I just wanted to say that landing a casual or part-time crim defence gig seems less likely than getting hired as an full-time associate, not more, to me. And to be honest if there's a crim defence firm out there that will hire an associate (who they have no existing relationship with) with no crim experience, it's probably not a firm you want to work for.

EDITED TO ADD: I actually I do know a former BigLaw associate that got a legal aid staff lawyer position in a remote location where they have trouble recruiting; if you're willing to relocate at least for a bit that could be a way to get the requisite experience.

Edited April 19 by CleanHands

[SNAILS]

Firms outside of the major cities are more likely to have a more diversified practice. I only say this because I assume you ( @beachhouse ) have some experience in an area of law other than criminal and you just want to test the waters. So if you works for a smaller town civil/real estate/family/criminal form you might be able to take on some criminal files without too much commitment, and you'd perhaps have the flexibility of getting out of the crim or deeper into crim based on your preferences once you know if you like it.

[Phaedrus]

After brushing up on the basics, I'd do two things: (1) go to arraignment court a lot, and (2) contact legal aid and let them know you're interested in accepting certificates (at least in my jurisdiction they keep an internal roster for clients to consult). For arraignment court days, I would show up early with my Code and offer to speak with anyone that doesn't have counsel. I'd explain what's going to happen that day and, if I have the time, the bare minimums about their charge (e.g., "you're charged with assault. Assault is a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown can proceed by summary conviction - less serious - or by indictment - more serious. If the Crown proceeds by summary conviction, there is maximum punishment of two years' incarceration, a $5000 fine, or both upon conviction. There is no minimum punishment. What's going to happen when you go into court is ..."). This is a very easy way to start drumming up business.  

For a lot of us, gaining experience is about knowing our competency level and scope of our criminal practice. Starting off, you'll accept a lot of legal aid certificates and your files will focus on low level or as-close-to-transactional criminal files as you can find: assault simpliciter, theft under $5000, mischief, impaired operation, breach of undertaking/release order, possession of property obtained by crime, and simple CDSA possession until you become more proficient. You'll take on these files for the first year or two until you've cut your teeth and can responsibly accept clients facing more serious jeopardy. The most serious files are culpable homicide files and, I really don't care what people say or think about this, but I won't touch them until I have ~8-10 years criminal experience. 

You absolutely need to have a working relationship with a mid-level or senior defence counsel. If you don't know anyone, reach out to your law society and asked to be connected with a practice mentor. My principal was 35+ years at the bar, my current office has a mid-level and senior criminal lawyer, and we have another 40-year veteran in the community I rely on for advice and precedents when I've exhausted what I can figure out for myself. It's really easy to isolate yourself as a criminal lawyer, and because none of us know everything we need to know all the time, it's really important to be intentional about mentoring and being mentored. 

On 4/19/2024 at 5:44 PM, CleanHands said:

EDITED TO ADD: I actually I do know a former BigLaw associate that got a legal aid staff lawyer position in a remote location where they have trouble recruiting; if you're willing to relocate at least for a bit that could be a way to get the requisite experience.

I wanted to respond to the above specifically because the idea that someone not competent enough to get practice experience locally can simply accept a remote position is infuriating. To be clear, CH, I know you're not suggesting that but there's a mentality that flows from the reasoning that really rubs me the wrong way. There's a serious access to justice issue for our northern communities (and largely Indigenous clients) and the experiences told to me by colleagues that accepted some of those positions are horrifying. Articling students running contested bail hearings/conducting substantive hearing, <5th year calls running homicide cases, having "senior counsel" with <10 years' experience. There are good offices, for sure, but take a few minutes to look at the combined experience of the legal aid bar in communities like La Ronge and The Pas. I feel for those communities who have to accept parachute newbies who view them as little more than a stepping stone before their real career starts. 

[CleanHands]

1 minute ago, Phaedrus said:

I wanted to respond to the above specifically because the idea that someone not competent enough to get practice experience locally can simply accept a remote position is infuriating. To be clear, CH, I know you're not suggesting that but there's a mentality that flows from the reasoning that really rubs me the wrong way. There's a serious access to justice issue for our northern communities (and largely Indigenous clients) and the experiences told to me by colleagues that accepted some of those positions are horrifying. Articling students running contested bail hearings/conducting substantive hearing, <5th year calls running homicide cases, having "senior counsel" with <10 years' experience. There are good offices, for sure, but take a few minutes to look at the combined experience of the legal aid bar in communities like La Ronge and The Pas. I feel for those communities who have to accept parachute newbies who view them as little more than a stepping stone before their real career starts. 

You can find this offensive or not, but you acknowledge it's the reality.

I personally have the experience of being put in situations where I was asked to do things well above my pay grade on matters of serious import, and it certainly gave me a first hand appreciation of the access to justice problems in certain geographical areas that you allude to. There were times where I felt that I wasn't good enough and the clients deserved better. And I have been 100% crim-focused since the minute I first set foot on a law school campus.

Still, it is what it is. And there are some positions that will hire another equally inexperienced person if the OP doesn't apply. It's a systemic issue and nothing is going to change for the worse just because I advise someone without criminal law experience that such positions with such hiring standards exist.

[Phaedrus]

It's still not something we should be shepherding people to as a last-resort without regard to the systemic issues that we're contributing to. Advising others it's an option might not change the situation for the worse, per se, but doing so without addressing the other reality that it  can perpetuate systemic issues and result in serious, negative outcomes for already marginalized and underserved people sure isn't making it better. We have an obligation to do better, especially where students and fresh calls come to this forum for advice. 

I would hope that anyone applying for rural/northern positions would have base-level competency because you're absolutely going to be given files far above your pay grade and your "learning experience" will have very real consequences for actual, real people. 

Edited Monday at 08:16 PM by Phaedrus

[CleanHands]

25 minutes ago, Phaedrus said:

I would hope that anyone applying for rural/northern positions would have base-level competency because you're absolutely going to be given files far above your pay grade and your "learning experience" will have very real consequences for actual, real people. 

And if people with base-level competency apply, they will get the jobs over people with no relevant experience like OP. When people with no relevant experience get hired, the alternative is nobody getting hired and accused people going unrepresented or existing lawyers in those underserved areas getting even more insane case loads and all of their files getting even less attention.

I'm not invalidating any of the legitimate issues that you raise, and no fair-minded reader of this thread would think that I was.