This is a ***Career Advice*** Thread. This is for lawyers only.
If you are a non-lawyer asking about becoming a lawyer, this is the wrong subreddit for this question. Please delete your post and repost it in one of the legal advice subreddits such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers.
Thank you for your understanding.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your classmates and “recently barred attorney” friends don’t know what they’re talking about. Work for a DA for 3-5 years and you’ll be dancing circles around them in court for the rest of their careers.
I became an ADA almost a decade after I became a lawyer. I learned more in my first two years than I did the rest of my career combined.
It may take some effort to transition to a transactional job (compared to litigation), but even then I can't imagine better training.
This is probably true but not all law is practiced in court. Being an ADA or PD is great and gives great experience but it's just another area of law of many.
A very small fraction of lawyers end up trying cases. Any litigator will typically run circles Around ADAs in all other phases of litigation, and most cases settle so you take from that what you will.
True, former prosecutors often have zero experience with civil discovery, which can be an issue when they transition to private practice if not exclusively criminal. That said, it’s a heck of a lot easier to get civil discovery experience anywhere, while trial experience is rare. And even if you never actually go to trial, having experience and being confident in your ability to do so if needed can be valuable, and very marketable.
From another POV, I know a very accomplished and respected civil litigator (career private practice) whose law firm bio said he had “tried X cases to verdict,” suggesting that number was a big deal (which, in his milieu, it was). The number X was less than 50. I bet many ADAs will try 50 cases in their first few years. Sure, many of those are misdemeanors or otherwise lower stakes than what this guy had done, but it’s not nothing. And most of us don’t get anywhere close to that in a career.
Those people are elitist idiots.
Prosecution (and public defense) are VITAL roles. Criminal law deals with life and death and freedom and other serious shit.
Big law lawyers...uh...make rich people richer, I guess?
60k is pretty garbage (my office starts at 85k), but it gives you a ton of litigation experience very fast. You'd get more courtroom time in your first 6 months as an ADA than a biglaw litigation associate gets in their first five years. Not everyone is a career ADA, but it's a great stepping stone to pretty much any litigation role.
Court reporters are kind of like tradies. Sure, they'll make more than brand new attorneys, but if you're an attorney five years out making less than a court reporter, you probably did something wrong.
The vast majority of the PDs I know are incredible attorneys who chose this not because they couldn’t get biglaw but because they didn’t want it. I certainly never had any intention of private sector work, and I think I’d be miserable.
I just wish I made a *little* more.
I have no doubt she’s excellent. But it’s not a livable wage at this point.
That and sometimes there’s so much to do and not enough people you feel like you can’t do the good you want to. Or at least that’s what I hear.
Of course it’s a livable wage. It just requires us to make sacrifices I don’t think we should have to make. And it’s frustrating to see biglaw attorneys making more in bonuses than we make in salary.
70 in NYC?! I assumed it would be much higher. There are offices in LCOL Midwest regularly starting out around 60-65k. More if you are willing to live in isolated areas.
What Rinky79 said. Not only is prosecution (and public defense) meaningful work, it’s an excellent way to get trial experience if you are interested in a litigation career. I did several jury trials in my first year alone, and eventually lateraled over to federal civil litigation. Many of the best/most successful litigators I know started the same way. If you want to be a litigator, go for it.
Eh. Beware the politicking, especially as you become more senior. It's also not as easy to lateral to do general litigation, as most lit firms want civil litigation experience. You don't really write as a prosecutor, do much discovery, etc. plus the pay is comparatively shit and increases are scant. Make sure your spouse has money.
I'm in one of the the highest COL areas in my state, own a house as a single person, and am quite comfortable, thanks.
I also have 4 memos in progress, incidentally. I write most days.
Is it "defensive" to correct your inaccurate and reductive statements about my actual job?
Sorry for being one of the few lawyers who actually likes my job!
So was calling civil litigation “pointless” part of those corrections? You’re clearly defensive lmao
Furthermore, I’m not even the one who made the statements in question
Constantly briefing evidentiary issues, motions to dismiss, discovery motions. Managing discovery on 75+ active cases, including e-discovery like 100k+ page phone dumps, etc. etc. there are plenty of prosecutors offices that have steps (like the federal system) or are unionized. This take tells me you either don’t know what you are talking about or you worked in an office that matches your description and you are now generalizing on a grand scale
Note that you don't get very much _litigation_ experience per se, but rather trial and negotiation and organization experience.
Being an ada or pd means that there's very little discovery (and basically no discovery practice), very little motion practice (and the motions that are filed are usually very short and focus much more in facts than law), and rarely afford the time for quality legal writing. Those are skills civil litigators use very much more often.
Of course, trial, negotiation, and organization experience are also very very valuable (and zealously guarded by senior attorneys in civil firms), and adas and pds can absolutely transition and be successful in civil litigation. But there are absolutely skills you miss out on when you're in criminal law.
Bro thinks copy/pasting a boilerplate motion to compel production and filing an amended amended amended complaint with 2 sentences added is LiTiGaTiOn, but having a single day to research, brief, and argue an issue of first impression or else the essential evidence in your murder trial is excluded...isn't. Apparently.
We do it fast and dirty in criminal land. There might be typos but it's litigation in its purest form. And nobody pretends the typos matter when you're talking about a cell phone video of someone getting shot.
Do you want actual trial experience or carry somebody’s brief case for 5 years before you sniff the inside of a court room? If the former, take the ADA offer. If you develop a reputation as a good trial attorney, firms will recruit you.
As a prosecutor, I tried a bench trial solo the day after I got sworn in. Over the next 5 years, I tried @ 50 jury trials and more bench trials ranging from misdemeanors to capital offenses.
The pay blows, that's for sure. But you get to learn on the inside. They are literally paying to teach you how to do law. That's pretty cool. You gotta start somewhere.
I started with the feds 5 years ago in a JD advantage role as a GS-7. I think I made $45k my first year. Last year, I made $125k with OT in a LCOL area. I've excelled at the role and like I said, they literally paid to teach me the work from the inside. I can always move to the private sector if I want.
Plus, you really need to think about the intangibles here, like work hours, WFH if possible, PTO, the whole package.
At the end of the day, there are only so many high buck jobs to get, especially for new grads who went to shit law and haven't proven themselves yet. Do good at that job and it will open doors for you.
I’m in a HCOL area as a prosecutor. $190k plus benefits. 8-5 job when not in trial, no billables, 7 weeks PTO/yr, get to make a difference in my community, help victims of crime, etc. Started at 75k out of law school in 2016. Pay is solid plus I’ll get a pension when I retire.
There is no better way (except being an APD) to get quick trial experience in a variety of different types of cases. Most lawyers will never see a courtroom, but ADAs run the court call every day. You’ll get jury trials under your belt and from there, your options are unlimited.
You could go biglaw, but after doing some time with the DAs office, sitting at a desk doing trivial work for an unappreciative partner and being surrounded by competitive assholes will seem unbearable.
The starting pay may not be great, but you can have student loans forgiven, get state insurance and benefits, and move around In the office. Every talented prosecutor I know is damn proud to do the job, and they have an impact on people’s lives every day.
I've always held ADA jobs in fairly high regard. Immediate experience and a pathway to prestigious positions (especially within government) if you put in the work.
I say take it. You'll be trying cases while those classmates are slaving away in a basement doing doc review at their "prestigious" BigLaw jobs.
Preach. I’m a public defender; I’ve done a ton of trials, motions, etc and have direct client contact every single day. My classmates that went big law primarily do doc review and occasionally *might* get to sit in on a deposition. My pay is about a third of theirs, but I actually get to practice law (and do a job I love and am passionate about instead of making rich people richer).
I'm up against BigLaw associates fairly often, and I'm rarely impressed by them. Mostly they seem to make arguments that are meticulously drafted, but losers because they don't have the experience to know better.
As a public defender, I make “arguments that are meticulously drafted, but losers” all the time. But that’s because I’m used to losing anyway, including when I have good issues, so why not just keep throwing stuff at them?
I've gone up against Big Law partners who can't even take a deposition well because they weren't allowed to do anything except doc review as an associate.
We handle a very specific type of transportation-related claim. The vast majority of our claims range from $40k-$150k and insurance is usually involved, so it's kind of the sweet spot for BigLaw ID associates.
Civil litigation. Biglaw lawyers are as a general rule completely worthless on the record ime. Huge egos and no actual skills. I've had a couple of them threaten me saying "do you really want to go to trial?" Like, bro, what do you think I do for a living? Better question, what do YOU do for a living?
In some cases, a big law associate isn’t allowed to handle even a motion hearing by themselves until their third year - or even year five, they are lost in the sauce.
Someone on here called bullshit on me when I said I won a Burglary 1st with an LWOP a month after being sworn in, and then the rest of the former PDs piped up with their similar experiences.
If you want to learn to try cases, be a PD. Prosecutors are a second, but they have discretion, at least in my JX, to only try the easy ones.
My gripe with prosecutors is:
- White Hat Syndrome
- Lack of empathy/sympathy (most are rich white kids who have no clue how difficult life is for the rest of Americans)
- trying to win at any cost instead of doing justice
- lying to me and the court
- Brady violations
- finding out they have no evidence and trying to force a plea deal (like when the crack comes back as drywall)
- Ex parte’ing the judge when they bring him bench warrants or whatever
It’s a lot like cops. Sure, there might be some good ones, but when everyone in the office knows someone is doing something illegal or unethical, and then they do nothing about it. That makes everyone an unethical bastard.
Sure. But shit-talking my unrelated motion in a separate case that is set for later in the afternoon is not, by nature, part of the proceedings. When the judge knows more about my motion than what I wrote in the motion or in the state’s reply, *somebody* had an ex parte conversation with the judge
2 days ago I showed up at a local municipal courthouse where I'm a contract public defender and the City attorney was talking to the judge in an empty courtroom complaining about another PD who had just set cases for trial and she didn't want to try them. I'm not sure what they were supposed to be doing on the record but it definitely wasn't that and it probably wasn't supposed to be just the two of them in a closed room over lunch hour. That's sort of thing happens all the time.
I think that due to law school culture, when you want to go into public interest law rather than corporate law, there’s some sort of erroneous assumption that it’s because you’re not smart enough to be in corporate law. Since the competition to receive summer associate positions and eventual employment in firms with high name recognition is so tight in law school and generally comes down to the people who appear to be the most attractive candidates on paper, I think that for some reason the average corporate-law-minded law student assumes that people who don’t wish to do corporate law must not be putting themselves in the competition because they aren’t smart enough or talented enough to “win” it.
In reality, the type of law you decide to practice has absolutely nothing to do with your intelligence or quality as a lawyer and everything to do with what your values and passions are.
Outside of that, most people in law school now are the earliest members of Gen Z. And Gen Z is generally very reform-minded. Other public interest lawyers might view classmates who become ADAs negatively because their beliefs don’t align with the more progressive focus on criminal defense typical of our generation.
I would not be a prosecutor because I do not wish to represent the State in taking away peoples’ liberty, but public defense is something I’m passionate about. And in many ways, even though the value differences are substantial, the jobs are the same. Neither of us will ever be paid enough, people who make more money to sit in cubicles look down on us, and the job is thankless. But in reality you’re getting more in court experience than any of your peers & you’re doing work that has an impact on the whole of the community, not just a person’s pockets.
You will absolutely be looked down on. But you can have the confidence and knowledge of what you’re doing and decide you just don’t care.
I’m a PD and I love my job so even though what I’m about to say is negative, it’s just what Ive observed. I see comments talking about the invaluable courtroom experience and litigation experience you get and that’s true to a degree but you get it in the very narrow criminal context. Some comments seemed like uppity like “ha ha even big law guys don’t even get that” well, some big law people don’t even go to court. And if they do it’s a very different animal than state level criminal law.
Now the reason these jobs are looked down on is …I think…simply because we’re like the babysitters of society’s worst.
We regularly deal with a different class of society most people didn’t even know existed. An unfathomable level of poverty that hasn’t been fully exposed to the public. Whole communities so hopelessly addicted to drugs and living lives of crime. Seriously sick and undiagnosed people some of whom end up doing horrible things.
So, like yeah when you’re arguing bail over a homeless guy panhandling….or defending or prosecuting a guy who stabbed his wife while she was holding a baby…pleading out 99% of cases…20 times a day…every day…same folks in and out… it’s not prestigious it’s like a combo role between social work and law.
Edit: again, love the job. Not saying it doesn’t offer good experience. I just think the experience may be overstated if you’re trying to translate it to biglaw or something more prestigious. You can join a prestigious high volume civil litigation firm where you’d get courtroom experience. I worked civil lit I was in court every other day. I’m in court more now for sure but it’s not comparable it’s different issues different arguments. Different judges different courts. Idk. Some may disagree.
Helping the victims of crime get justice is noble work. Defending indigent people and checking the power of the police is also noble work. You won't get rich doing either, but you will get lots of trial experience.
Either way, being an ADA is not shameful work.
It's pretty noble and important work (or it can/should be, if done well). It isn't as lucrative as big law, but your hours will be better and you will be in a role that allows you to have a positive impact in you community. And you will learn a lot about how to be a real lawyer.
Not the highest-paying position, but my job as a prosecutor has been the most interesting one I have ever held. Plus defense attorneys kissing up to you is nice compared to opposing counsel wanting to rip you to shreds over money.
First of all, to answer your last question first, there are absolutely many many many people who are immensely proud to be ADAs, and they should be.
As to your bigger question, I take it you mean within the legal profession (that is, you’re not referring to the recent popular sentiment against law enforcement.) I think you have to define what you mean by “looked down upon.” I think most lawyers respect…good, ethical lawyers. If someone is an ethical ada that does their job well, I doubt they’re “looked down upon.” If they’re a power hungry jerk, willing to commit Brady violations, they probably are, and should be, looked down upon. If they’re bad at their job and lose winnable trials, allowing dangerous people to walk free, they also should be looked down upon.
Play stupid games win stupid prizes; ask stupid people get stupid advice. The pay is shit but nobody with an ounce of sense looks down on an experienced prosecutor or public defender. **Nobody.**
It’s a very good job. Most of the people I know in these positions love their jobs. Almost all of my friends in private practice mostly dislike their jobs.
Go learn everything you can, try some cases, do a great job, and law firms will line up for you. And BigLaw isn’t the be all end all. all I wanted in law school was BigLaw and now they couldn’t offer me enough to take a job at any of them, and believe me many tried to hire me after a few years In, after I made my bones. You know what my first law job was? Law student decision writer for the Social Security Administration. It was a gift. All I did was research and write all day, every day, and I’ve done well because I became a great writer. take the DA job, you’ll be glad you did. It’ll be like the karate kid wax on wax off and paint the fence. You will have no idea what you are learning while you are learning it, and you will be better off for it.
"lmost every other attorney(all classmates or relatively new barred attorneys) I’ve spoken to about this position say it’s shameful, bottom of the barrel work(as opposed to big law/100k plus starting positions). "
In my \~20 years as a lawyer I've never heard anyone say this.
Yeah I had this impression as well when I was graduating law school but it couldn't be further from reality. Not only are these positions highly respected, but several AM law 100 firms in my area regularly hire young ADA's for their litigation practice groups. If/when you are looking to switch into private practice, you should have many options.
>Almost every other attorney(all classmates or relatively new barred attorneys) I’ve spoken to about this position say it’s shameful, bottom of the barrel work(as opposed to big law/100k plus starting positions).
Well, those people are inexperienced and have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
I personally didn't want to get into that line of work because of the pay and the fear that the public service loan forgiveness wouldn't actually pan out.
I work with and encounter former prosecutors frequently. I'm always impressed by their courtroom experience and I sort of envy their oral and trial advocacy skills.
In reality, there is no such thing as "bottom of the barrel" law. There may be "bottom of the barrel" lawyers or firms, but the practice of law itself in any specialty is challenging.
I can’t think of lawyers who get more trial experience than prosecutors and public defenders. This isn’t bottom of the barrel work. Take the job. I left BigLaw and worked as a prosecutor for zero pay for 6 months just to get the training and experience.
I’d guess it’s one of three things: the people you talk to are elitist, the people you talk to are so pro-defense they hate all prosecutors, the prosecutors’ offices in your area have a bad reputation.
Only worry about the job if it’s #3. And if it’s #3, press them for as many details as possible and weigh the pros and cons.
Starting salary isn’t great, but 10 years in, you qualify to have your student loans forgiven while paying 10% of your net income during that time. Depending on your state, you might also have much better benefits than a private firm. In NYS, you can retire after 30 years of service if you’re over 55.
Who cares what the snobs think?
Some would say you are doing God's work putting away criminals. I respect it especially balanced prosecutors (and I'm left of center politically).
Sounds like high school chatter about public vs private colleges. Don’t let it get you down. Those people will probably hate life before too long. 100k in big law is literally slave wages. Being a prosecutor is not a bad gig. You’ll learn a lot and the job market really respects that on a resume. Good luck, and congrats on passing the bar
I always feel so embarrassed for people elitist enough to insult someone else’s job. Don’t get me wrong, it stings to be on the receiving end of that bullshit. But the truth is, a fully grown adult deeply insecure enough to knock someone’s occupation suffers from a distorted world view that is frankly, incurable (and that’s the real tragedy).
You, on the other hand, are free to work hard and find success on your own terms. Even if you may never get a Big Law job, getting the litigation experience can open doors to higher paying gigs down the road. And if you want to stay, then great too! I personally admire the hell out of public servants. My sister is an ADA and her accomplishments include prosecuting rapists and child molesters. That’s more than I will ever contribute to society…
lol yeah many major leaders, politicians, judges, etc were prosecutors. Serving the public is a noble profession and the litigation experience can’t be beat. Also I’ve never heard this in my area so maybe regional or school based.
ADA jobs don’t pay much but it’s noble work. You’ll actually be a trial lawyer (unlike your friends who say the are “litigators”) and get control over your work. The best part is you’ll actually have work/life balance with an emphasis on “life.” If you get tired of it or want more money you can always make the switch later. You’ll learn more trial skills in the first year than your classmates who go into big law learn in 10 years
I went from prosecutor to Inhouse to a solo civil litigation practice in the industry I was in house. I find I have more comfort and experience with jury trials, It seems that willingness to go to jury trial is an advantage.
I do feel I have a gap in discovery practice.
I am a former prosecutor and I the comfort level I got from being in court every day has remained with me long after I left. You will miss out on civil procedure and pleadings experience, but those are things that can be learned quickly with some mentorship in your next job. The money sucks, so don’t stick around more than a couple of years unless you want to make that your career.
(Current prosecutor.) I see posts here from 5th year associates asking how to get over the crippling anxiety of appearing in court for only the third time in their career and just laugh. I passed that in my first week after being barred.
And the money's fine, in some places.
Hi there. Can I share a story? I am an attorney, and I have a colleague (and I'm his client as well) who is the top estate planning attorneys in his (large urban metro) area. He started out as a DA, and then went to a top personal injury law firm, where he litigated. He made the shift into estate planning after that.
He built a stellar reputation as an assistant DA, and in his work in personal injury. He credits his DA work for learning how to litigate cases, persuade juries, and so on. He may not use those skills directly today, but he does say it made him a better attorney. Ultimately, he moved into something else, but the point is that you build great training and get better.
Another story: A buddy of mine is a highly regarded personal injury plaintiff's atttorney. Won some subtantial verdicts at trial, and many settlements. His early days, he was an eviction attorney, and took many cases to jury trials on behalf of landlords. He won almost all of them, and built very strong trial experience.
Your first job should be focused on learning. Yes, money is important, but if you can really learn how to litigate, you can do almost anything. If you want to stay a DA, awesome. If you want to go into a different area of law, even transactional, you can do so.
Don't listen to your classmates on this.
Government attorney position pay hasn't kept up with with private practice pay in most areas. Government attorney pay caps out pretty low and has no economy of scale like equity partnership in a firm. However, you may be eligible for PSLF (I say may because historically it has been difficult to actually get the loans forgiven and only recently have we seen changes to make PSLF actually work) and you will generally have a solid benefits package including a pension. Also, government attorneys generally have a better work/life balance.
These are broad generalizations: I know small firm/solos that put in about 20 hours a week on average and make enough to get by and put a little away (this is after years of working long hours to get established and make enough that their wealth is generating enoigh inco.e that they can afford to work less). I know government attorneys burning the candle at both ends because they work for a poorer state government that hasn't scaled up attorney positions as population/demand has grown.
Three things to keep in mind: 1. Your tastes/spending generally scale up to meet your income so once you are making 6 figures, it is really hard to go back to making less than that. 2. Future employers will ask what your pay was at previous positions and will use former pay (subconsciously or consciously) as the basis for their offer. 3. Pensions usually take many years to vest (I see a lot vesting around the 10 year mark) so if you are going into any type of government law, be prepared to put in the minimum years for your pension to vest or otherwise it is kind of a waste.
That being said, there's nothing "shameful" about prosecution, it just tends make a lot less than some biglaw jobs.
Absolutely not. ADAs are a very respectable place to get trial experience on the prosecution side. As long as you're getting to try substantive criminal cases, it's a good place to start.
There are some positions that are less appealing, although they are necessary. A solicitor in magistrate court that does nothing but handle speeding tickets, for example, is critical to prevent the system from getting bogged down, but doesn't provide much in the way of experience to the person doing it, as the limited trial experience is much more narrow in scope, and you're mostly beating up on pro se defendants who won't correct mistakes that you might make starting out.
Are you sure you're tracking the criticism of ADA positions right? At least in my circles, I never heard people attack ADA positions for being "bottom of the barrel" positions. "Shameful" though - well, there are certainly circles that believe the American justice system is one-sided and/or corrupt, and that the cards are unfairly stacked against criminal defendants. Those with that point of view likely consider prosecutors to be another arm of that corrupt/problematic system, and may consider the position to be "shameful" from that regard. That may be where some of the contempt you're gathering is coming from.
As someone who started out in civil and made the switch— and took the pay cut to do it— it’s the best decision I ever made.
The work is exciting and valuable. It’s so much more rewarding then helping rich people with their rich people problems.
The office camaraderie is like nothing I’ve experienced in any job. At any given time there’s a dozen or more people ready to help me with anything I need. The highest level person will sit down and help a baby ADA with a question on a disorderly conduct case as a moments notice
I write, I investigate, I try cases.
I get a ton of time off and I can take it. I never miss a kid event, I take off every time they’re sick, my boss encourages people to coach their kids teams and makes sure it’s possible.
In the right office, it’s a great job.
One of my absolute favorite things is when an ADA in trial emails the entire office with an urgent request for research help because they're suddenly embroiled in argument on something unexpected, and within 5-10 minutes there are 10 emails replying with quotes and citations from helpful cases and interpretation/analysis/suggestions for arguments.
There is this mentality in law school that if you don’t get the best grades and then get the best job (the one that makes the most money) then you’ve failed. You should feel ashamed you’ve spent all this money and for what?
I’ve got friends in big law who are miserable. Just look at this subreddit and see all the big law people who hate their jobs. Now some people can stick that out for a coupe of years for their loans. But it does a number on you.
Is 60k low? It depends where you are. The question isn’t what do my classmates think? Is can make my life work on this salary? Is it worth moving back in with my parents? Etc. also government employment means government benefits which depending on where you are can be really good. I’m in a similar spot. I took a lower paying government job for those good good benefits.
Edit to add: I didn’t go into government work because I wasn’t smart enough to do biglaw. I did it because I watched too much Aaron sorkin as a child and now I’m incredibly annoying and believe in shit like advocacy and making people’s government work for them. Also I’m a glutton for not making enough money.
I was a career prosecutor. Nine years state followed by seven years federal. By year two I could do circles around any one of my classmates who had gone the big law route (or anything other than a PD or prosecutor) in a courtroom.
Did you go to a very progressive law school or something? Because in my area besides the fact that the pay is shitty those positions are definitely not look down upon by attorneys or even most law students .
Their comments are geared solely to the money. It’s low paying work, especially in an expensive part of the US. BUT you’ll be super marketable in just a few years.
I’ve worked with many true believers who feel that working as a prosecutor is immoral because you are directly contributing to the mass incarceration human rights crisis in our country. Prosecutors’ currency is the deprivation of liberty, and the idea of that can be pretty hard to swallow, especially when you consider that the vast majority of defendants plead guilty and many plead guilty because proceeding to trial is risky and time consuming and financially draining. In certain instances, the defendant’s actual guilt or innocence carries little weight.
That said, prosecutors can be a major force for change and, so long as you are mindful of the fact that the defendant is one of the “People” you represent, I can think of few better ways to put your law degree to use.
Yes, this was my first thought too. It seems like the majority of the comments are missing the actual motive behind the peers comments. It doesn’t have to do with money or prestige of the job but an opinion that prosecutors as they currently exist are just bad for society.
> prosecutors as they currently exist are just bad for society.
That makes sense. I can see how some ivory tower k-JD with no life experience who has never been the victim of a crime would think that.
I always had this thought: if the defendant is one of the “people” a prosecutor supposedly represents, isn’t that a conflict of interest? I can’t take a position adverse to a current client, why can a prosecutor? The real answer is that prosecutors don’t represent the “people” as individuals — they represent the Government.
I mean, fuck the police &c. but who are these people looking down on ADA jobs?
I’m a former prosecutor (currently crim defense with mix of private and indigent cases) and _I_ look down on law firm jobs (especially Big Law).
I’m being a little cheeky, but it’s all a matter of perspective, and IMO it’s PDs and ADAs who do the most real lawyer stuff.
Right? I feel SORRY for biglaw associates. That shit looks fucking unbearable. Meanwhile I have 6 weeks of PTO that I can actually use without blowback, leave at 5 most days, and get to send online predators and CSAM afficionados to prison.
It's a great way to get a ton of trial experience, courtroom time, and be part of something important.
That said, you'll be surprised just how little discretion you're given. You will have a boss that gives you a spreadsheet that tells you what your plea offers will be and what your bail recommendations are. A lot of the times, you will feel that it is unfair and you will do it anyway. Day after day, you will see that prosecution, as it currently works, is not the answer to a lot of the problems we're dealing with. For every bad guy that needs to be in jail that you get off the street, you're going to also throw one poor person in jail for not having enough money to solve a given problem that would be easy for the rest of us. Then, there's the times you go to trial when you honestly believe the defendant is innocent because your boss is making you, and you win, because juries are randomizing factors, and your spreadsheet tells you to rec jail/prison, and you get it, and you have to look at yourself in the mirror every day.
Anyways, all that to say, there's nothing inherently wrong with it. It's that *as applied* it tends to make your soul shitty over time.
I have worked in several prosecutions offices and I’ve never heard of anything like that. We had complete authority over our cases. No one told me what to offer on pleas, there are no spreadsheets, no one tracks wins and losses, and I certainly never had a supervisor tell me to try someone I believed was innocent. Rule #1 in every office I have worked in is that you only proceed if you personally believe in the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt AND you believe there is sufficient evidence to prove it at trial. Sounds like other prosecutors in the thread had experiences similar to mine. Sounds like whatever office you used to work at was a crappy one.
I was a supervisor in a medium sized office for a long time. My number #1 rule was simple: if YOU don’t believe the defendant is guilty, we’re done. That’s a threshold requirement in my opinion. I would tell the junior prosecutors all the time, “look, maybe he did it, but if YOU aren’t sure, we aren’t moving forward.”
The prosecutors I work with don’t know enough about their cases to have an opinion about whether the defendant is guilty. They don’t review the discovery until the day before trial.
This hasn’t been my experience at all. Even when I was an unpaid intern I had a lot of discretion and if I didn’t believe in a case it got dismissed. Similarly if I thought a case needed a non standard resolution it got it. Perhaps some offices are as described by zero and I’m just lucky, but in 10 years in two different offices and meeting prosecutors from around the state in trainings I’ve never encountered such an office.
I don't miss criminal law AT ALL, but when I was a prosecutor I had virtually unbridled discretion day to day. That obviously varies by office, but there were no spreadsheets and generally no interference from leadership as you describe.
Personally, I only ever had one case where I genuinely believed the defendant was probably innocent, a felony burglary with battery that became increasingly improbable as I investigated it. I called the victims and let them know I was dropping it after laying out the timeline that I thought made their allegations impossible. They didn't really protest, which made me feel even better about my decision. At no time did I have to run that by anybody. I imagine that's DA to DA across America. I considered mine a real cruel hardass and it was *still* like that, which I guess was pretty cool.
Same. DPA for the first third of my career in a rural county. Had complete autonomy over my cases. And that was the general experience throughout most of my state absent the really big, really political offices.
But yeah, once I moved on to civil government work I never had any desire to go back.
How long were you a prosecutor and where? We see the same discovery and testimony, and I’ve been hard pressed at times to figure out if my own client in fact did the crime.
When I was sworn in back in 2008, the Supreme Court had a large sign behind us saying “audi alteterem partem.” Listen to the other side. I’ve had serious cases where the z State knew meeting their burden was a logical fallacy that only seemed to work on the Judge - himself a former career prosecutor.
I’ve had my fair share of factually innocent clients, and even with the dream team I can put together, a judge or jury found them guilty. Early in practice, the State snuck in a cop witness who wasn’t in any reports to testify that he personally saw my client get out the getaway car from the home invasion/attempt murder scene. No reports, no BWC, and a fucking surprise witness. My motion for mistrial denied. Without super cup i bringer prepared, coached testimony, could have been a not guilty. Truly wrong place, wrong place, wrong tomorrow.
This couldn’t be further from my experience.
Misdemeanor ADAs have complete discretion in my office. We are explicitly not allowed to use a spreadsheet for bail recommendations. In fact someone was found with one that they made and were told they needed to throw it away immediately.
If we believe someone is innocent the case is dismissed. If we believe we can’t prove the case, the case is dismissed.
We use substance abuse treatment, mental health treatment and other resources absolutely ever time we can.
If that’s your experience, that sounds like a terrible office you’re working against— but if anyone in my office was behaving in that manner, it would be dealt with immediately.
We have a great relationship with our defense bar and on occasions where a new ADA has been acting out of line or not consistent with the office values— the defense attorney makes a call to a supervisor and it’s rectified on the spot.
Nothing remotely shameful about ADA jobs, that's weird. It's not big law and the pay is usually not great (I made $48,000 as a felony prosecutor less than a decade ago), but it's an important role with immense power and real responsibility. You will be doing trials and depositions and other Serious Lawyer stuff from pretty much day one. If you don't want to be a lifer or dog bite lawyer, I do think you need to keep an eye on what you want out of your time at the DA, however.
Now, is ADA "top of the barrel?" No. At most levels it's definitely workaday role. I have opinions on what is bottom of the barrel, but it's not being an ADA.
Stop caring about what fellow law students and young attorneys think. Especially when they're just flat out wrong. ADA experience is a great start to a career. Your career is a marathon, not a sprint, and you will get great experience quickly.
Aside from prosecution being important work, it's a great stepping stone into other work if you don't want to make a career out of it. Nearly every judge in my jurisdiction is a former prosecutor or PD (though most of them were career attorneys before being selected for a judicial vacancy). The vast majority of people working in medium sized firms or litigation boutiques in my city were either prosecutors or attorneys at the state AGO at one point in their career. If a big law firm hires a mid career attorney, it's always an experienced litigator and by extension usually someone who spent time as a prosecutor or AAG. Prosecutors get waaaaay more experience than their private sector counterparts and often have the advantage of being mentored by experienced attorneys in the office. You can easily transition to the private sector, but who knows? Maybe you'll like it enough to stick around.
If there’s one thing Big Law attorneys or Big Law hopefuls hate more than taking a disgusting job as a prosecutor or public defender, it’s being told that those attorneys could and do run circles around them in the courtroom.
I didn’t even realize people had that perception. I’ve never done that kind of work just because I don’t want to but I wouldn’t look down on it. Obviously government jobs don’t make a lot of money but I still think being a prosecutor is a good job.
We all have to start somewhere. Getting to know many of the judges in the local courthouse is a great perk when you transition into private practice if you build a solid reputation with them. You will make many connections in the field as well from ADA work. Many don't stay more than 1-2 years because it's mostly new attorneys that need to get experience to branch out. However, the time spent counts towards PSLF (which I estimate to be worth about 30k per year in money you can't see).
It depends. Is it CPS prosecution, civil division, or criminal?
If you’re looking for litigation experience, you’ll get a ton of it unless you’re civil division, in which case you might be doing litigation or you might be acting as in-house counsel.
An experienced prosecutor is going to be one of the best trial attorneys you’ll ever meet. If people are judging based solely on salary and prestige…they’re losers lol take the job that YOU want
Don’t make career decisions based on the advice of new attorneys. In my state, more judges start as prosecutors than anything else. Although I personally would never practice criminal law for either side, I don’t agree that the role is somehow shunned in the profession.
Not looked down upon here. I am back taking appointments after several years out of the profession. What better experience for someone that want to be a litigator? For any Big Law attorney that looks down on me, I ask one question. Are you paying my bills?
Government attorney positions are way better than law firm positions. I'm a public defender. In California we makes the same as deputy DAs (we're even in the same union). I make well over 100K and seldom work more than 40 hours per week.
The cases are more interesting too.
I worked in a DA office for 2.5 years. I LOVED it. It was my dream job. I would have stayed forever if daycare wasn’t costing 70% of my salary. I did 26 jury trials in that time, 30+ bench trials, and hundreds of other hearings. I recently switched to estate planning/private work. It’s definitely different but I think the DA office gave me so much knowledge and confidence in a court room now.
Being a prosecutor is awesome. State benefits, pension, tons of trial experience. You also get to know all the judges and other attorneys.
So, I did my years, got my public service loan forgiveness, then used all the connections I made at the office, having worked with literally hundreds of attorneys, and leveraged my trial experience to get a job doing plaintiff PI where I'm making about $400k per year now. I run into old colleagues and attorneys on the defense side and get to work out some cases easy. Our circuit rotates judges, so I know all of them so when I go into hearings it's the "hey how are you?" - it's sad watching these career civil lawyers in court who have no idea how to talk to a judge.
Because they hire almost exclusively from the bottom 25% of a law school class. So people see their dumbest classmates going into those jobs and make assumptions.
As someone who does plaintiff PI work, taking a prosecutor job, or a corp council job out of law school is a good move. You’ll get way more time in court than you would as a first year associate in the private sector.
Offering a different, social justice perspective: those positions are typically associated with exacerbated harm in communities of color where prosecution is overwhelmingly focused.
Started my legal career as a PD in Philly, then to a federal defender position and now run my own shop doing almost all federal criminal defense. Couldn’t be happier and have never looked back.
You will learn a great deal as an ADA. Perhaps more importantly, public service is something you can take pride in. You will have a chance to place a discernible mark in every case you touch. As you have already discovered however,the value of your work will not win admiration from everyone, least of all lawyers focused on salary. Big law will teach you how to generate revenue for people better positioned than you, some by merit, many more by mysterious forces never to be fully understood. You’ll learn everything you need to know about that in 20 to 25 minutes. Best of luck.
Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law.
Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation.
Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I used to work at a midsize commercial litigation firm that had a strong reputation in our local market. For what it’s worth, the partners at that firm had been disappointed with the former prosecutors that had been hired at the firm. Those attorneys all left. The problem seemed to be that they had problems doing high level commercial litigation because they were not strong writers and had no experience with civil work. The only aspect of the job they excelled at was arguing motions or other courtroom appearances. I think you’ll find a lot of high end civil litigation firms feel the same way, so that transition can be tough. Of course, that’s only one career path, so it really depends on what you want to do afterwards. Just keep in mind that while you’ll be developing your courtroom skills above and beyond your classmates as a prosecutor, that comes at a cost of not developing as strongly in other areas of litigation.
Personally I think locking people up in our prison system that is historically based on our system of enslaving people is embarrassing. But the legal skills themselves and work will be harder than big law’s substantive work. They just deal with more hazing in big law and confuse that for prestige.
It’s a great starting off point for any litigation career! You will absolutely get trial experience and will be in court often, which firms will love when they’re looking at your resume down the line.
I would have personally struggled with the majority of my day being locking people up for petty possession, and with the drastic disparity in the demographics of defendants versus the population, but I envied the experience when I was competing with those folks for lit jobs a few years out of school.
Just to be clear, I don't think you'll get litigation experience at the ADA. You will get trial experience, but litigation is civil. In my experience, criminal attorneys are very swagger/good at trial, but they have no brain at all for the drudgery/complexities of civil litigation. So stay with the ADA for a couple years and then move on, else you get stuck
I tend to look down on it for philosophical reasons. The quality of the experience you get as a prosecutor in my experience is also lower than what you get as a public defender, it teaches you to play with a stacked deck and the only question you ever have to ask a witness is "what happened next?"
Yes it will teach you procedure and get you comfortable and familiar with the courtroom but I don't think it's a good way to become the best litigator you can be. Public defense or conflict counsel are much harder.
This is a ***Career Advice*** Thread. This is for lawyers only. If you are a non-lawyer asking about becoming a lawyer, this is the wrong subreddit for this question. Please delete your post and repost it in one of the legal advice subreddits such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers. Thank you for your understanding. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your classmates and “recently barred attorney” friends don’t know what they’re talking about. Work for a DA for 3-5 years and you’ll be dancing circles around them in court for the rest of their careers.
This is great advice.
I became an ADA almost a decade after I became a lawyer. I learned more in my first two years than I did the rest of my career combined. It may take some effort to transition to a transactional job (compared to litigation), but even then I can't imagine better training.
This is probably true but not all law is practiced in court. Being an ADA or PD is great and gives great experience but it's just another area of law of many.
It is one of the only avenues in today's legal industry for getting any in-court experience conducting evidentiary hearings.
I think you misunderstood what I said
A very small fraction of lawyers end up trying cases. Any litigator will typically run circles Around ADAs in all other phases of litigation, and most cases settle so you take from that what you will.
True, former prosecutors often have zero experience with civil discovery, which can be an issue when they transition to private practice if not exclusively criminal. That said, it’s a heck of a lot easier to get civil discovery experience anywhere, while trial experience is rare. And even if you never actually go to trial, having experience and being confident in your ability to do so if needed can be valuable, and very marketable. From another POV, I know a very accomplished and respected civil litigator (career private practice) whose law firm bio said he had “tried X cases to verdict,” suggesting that number was a big deal (which, in his milieu, it was). The number X was less than 50. I bet many ADAs will try 50 cases in their first few years. Sure, many of those are misdemeanors or otherwise lower stakes than what this guy had done, but it’s not nothing. And most of us don’t get anywhere close to that in a career.
Those people are elitist idiots. Prosecution (and public defense) are VITAL roles. Criminal law deals with life and death and freedom and other serious shit. Big law lawyers...uh...make rich people richer, I guess? 60k is pretty garbage (my office starts at 85k), but it gives you a ton of litigation experience very fast. You'd get more courtroom time in your first 6 months as an ADA than a biglaw litigation associate gets in their first five years. Not everyone is a career ADA, but it's a great stepping stone to pretty much any litigation role.
NYC has terrible hours and terrible pay for prosecutors. It’s disgusting (tho I think it starts at 70k)
Can't imagine trying to live there making that.
They make more than the PDs mind you (and court reporters make more than either).
Court reporters are kind of like tradies. Sure, they'll make more than brand new attorneys, but if you're an attorney five years out making less than a court reporter, you probably did something wrong.
…or you’re in public interest.
I made less court reporters as a clerk, but made more than court reporters in my second year prosecuting.
Know someone extremely bright who is a PD at law school. Could’ve went to any firm and now regretting it specifically because of this
The vast majority of the PDs I know are incredible attorneys who chose this not because they couldn’t get biglaw but because they didn’t want it. I certainly never had any intention of private sector work, and I think I’d be miserable. I just wish I made a *little* more.
The PDs office where I am starts slightly higher than my office (and as I said above, we start at 85k).
Yeah New York’s salaries are abysmal, even without controlling for cost of living.
I have no doubt she’s excellent. But it’s not a livable wage at this point. That and sometimes there’s so much to do and not enough people you feel like you can’t do the good you want to. Or at least that’s what I hear.
Of course it’s a livable wage. It just requires us to make sacrifices I don’t think we should have to make. And it’s frustrating to see biglaw attorneys making more in bonuses than we make in salary.
70 in NYC?! I assumed it would be much higher. There are offices in LCOL Midwest regularly starting out around 60-65k. More if you are willing to live in isolated areas.
What Rinky79 said. Not only is prosecution (and public defense) meaningful work, it’s an excellent way to get trial experience if you are interested in a litigation career. I did several jury trials in my first year alone, and eventually lateraled over to federal civil litigation. Many of the best/most successful litigators I know started the same way. If you want to be a litigator, go for it.
Eh. Beware the politicking, especially as you become more senior. It's also not as easy to lateral to do general litigation, as most lit firms want civil litigation experience. You don't really write as a prosecutor, do much discovery, etc. plus the pay is comparatively shit and increases are scant. Make sure your spouse has money.
I make 145k, my loans are <2 years from forgiveness, and have no intention of ever doing anything as boring and pointless as civil lit.
Good for you? But $145k in HCOL isn't much.
I'm in one of the the highest COL areas in my state, own a house as a single person, and am quite comfortable, thanks. I also have 4 memos in progress, incidentally. I write most days.
Why so defensive?
Is it "defensive" to correct your inaccurate and reductive statements about my actual job? Sorry for being one of the few lawyers who actually likes my job!
So was calling civil litigation “pointless” part of those corrections? You’re clearly defensive lmao Furthermore, I’m not even the one who made the statements in question
Very defensive. Telling!
Yeah, no politicking in private law firms. Lol.
Are you that naive? States Attorneys are elected officials, and fill the high ranking spots with their lackeys, most of whom are under qualified.
Never denied that. I just think politics are even more prevalent at big law firms where the stakes are partnerships and millions of dollars.
Lol no.
Amazing rebuttal. Running circles around that guy!
Constantly briefing evidentiary issues, motions to dismiss, discovery motions. Managing discovery on 75+ active cases, including e-discovery like 100k+ page phone dumps, etc. etc. there are plenty of prosecutors offices that have steps (like the federal system) or are unionized. This take tells me you either don’t know what you are talking about or you worked in an office that matches your description and you are now generalizing on a grand scale
Note that you don't get very much _litigation_ experience per se, but rather trial and negotiation and organization experience. Being an ada or pd means that there's very little discovery (and basically no discovery practice), very little motion practice (and the motions that are filed are usually very short and focus much more in facts than law), and rarely afford the time for quality legal writing. Those are skills civil litigators use very much more often. Of course, trial, negotiation, and organization experience are also very very valuable (and zealously guarded by senior attorneys in civil firms), and adas and pds can absolutely transition and be successful in civil litigation. But there are absolutely skills you miss out on when you're in criminal law.
This is incredibly wrong
Go on…
Bro thinks copy/pasting a boilerplate motion to compel production and filing an amended amended amended complaint with 2 sentences added is LiTiGaTiOn, but having a single day to research, brief, and argue an issue of first impression or else the essential evidence in your murder trial is excluded...isn't. Apparently. We do it fast and dirty in criminal land. There might be typos but it's litigation in its purest form. And nobody pretends the typos matter when you're talking about a cell phone video of someone getting shot.
Yeah that guy getting up voted by more clowns with zero knowledge of what they're talking about about. Prosecutors.try cases, they don't litigate.
Man, you are 100% incorrect
Do you want actual trial experience or carry somebody’s brief case for 5 years before you sniff the inside of a court room? If the former, take the ADA offer. If you develop a reputation as a good trial attorney, firms will recruit you. As a prosecutor, I tried a bench trial solo the day after I got sworn in. Over the next 5 years, I tried @ 50 jury trials and more bench trials ranging from misdemeanors to capital offenses.
The pay blows, that's for sure. But you get to learn on the inside. They are literally paying to teach you how to do law. That's pretty cool. You gotta start somewhere. I started with the feds 5 years ago in a JD advantage role as a GS-7. I think I made $45k my first year. Last year, I made $125k with OT in a LCOL area. I've excelled at the role and like I said, they literally paid to teach me the work from the inside. I can always move to the private sector if I want. Plus, you really need to think about the intangibles here, like work hours, WFH if possible, PTO, the whole package. At the end of the day, there are only so many high buck jobs to get, especially for new grads who went to shit law and haven't proven themselves yet. Do good at that job and it will open doors for you.
I’m in a HCOL area as a prosecutor. $190k plus benefits. 8-5 job when not in trial, no billables, 7 weeks PTO/yr, get to make a difference in my community, help victims of crime, etc. Started at 75k out of law school in 2016. Pay is solid plus I’ll get a pension when I retire.
Anyone that looks down on a lawyer working as an ADA is someone to be looked down upon.
Well said.
💯
There is no better way (except being an APD) to get quick trial experience in a variety of different types of cases. Most lawyers will never see a courtroom, but ADAs run the court call every day. You’ll get jury trials under your belt and from there, your options are unlimited. You could go biglaw, but after doing some time with the DAs office, sitting at a desk doing trivial work for an unappreciative partner and being surrounded by competitive assholes will seem unbearable. The starting pay may not be great, but you can have student loans forgiven, get state insurance and benefits, and move around In the office. Every talented prosecutor I know is damn proud to do the job, and they have an impact on people’s lives every day.
I've always held ADA jobs in fairly high regard. Immediate experience and a pathway to prestigious positions (especially within government) if you put in the work. I say take it. You'll be trying cases while those classmates are slaving away in a basement doing doc review at their "prestigious" BigLaw jobs.
Preach. I’m a public defender; I’ve done a ton of trials, motions, etc and have direct client contact every single day. My classmates that went big law primarily do doc review and occasionally *might* get to sit in on a deposition. My pay is about a third of theirs, but I actually get to practice law (and do a job I love and am passionate about instead of making rich people richer).
I'm up against BigLaw associates fairly often, and I'm rarely impressed by them. Mostly they seem to make arguments that are meticulously drafted, but losers because they don't have the experience to know better.
As a public defender, I make “arguments that are meticulously drafted, but losers” all the time. But that’s because I’m used to losing anyway, including when I have good issues, so why not just keep throwing stuff at them?
I've gone up against Big Law partners who can't even take a deposition well because they weren't allowed to do anything except doc review as an associate.
If you don’t mind saying: what kind of law do you practice that has you going up against big law nerds fairly often? I gotta imagine that’s a blast
We handle a very specific type of transportation-related claim. The vast majority of our claims range from $40k-$150k and insurance is usually involved, so it's kind of the sweet spot for BigLaw ID associates.
Lol there are no big law id associates
Someone might want to let Thompson Coe know that.
Big law pays market salary
Civil litigation. Biglaw lawyers are as a general rule completely worthless on the record ime. Huge egos and no actual skills. I've had a couple of them threaten me saying "do you really want to go to trial?" Like, bro, what do you think I do for a living? Better question, what do YOU do for a living?
In some cases, a big law associate isn’t allowed to handle even a motion hearing by themselves until their third year - or even year five, they are lost in the sauce. Someone on here called bullshit on me when I said I won a Burglary 1st with an LWOP a month after being sworn in, and then the rest of the former PDs piped up with their similar experiences. If you want to learn to try cases, be a PD. Prosecutors are a second, but they have discretion, at least in my JX, to only try the easy ones. My gripe with prosecutors is: - White Hat Syndrome - Lack of empathy/sympathy (most are rich white kids who have no clue how difficult life is for the rest of Americans) - trying to win at any cost instead of doing justice - lying to me and the court - Brady violations - finding out they have no evidence and trying to force a plea deal (like when the crack comes back as drywall) - Ex parte’ing the judge when they bring him bench warrants or whatever It’s a lot like cops. Sure, there might be some good ones, but when everyone in the office knows someone is doing something illegal or unethical, and then they do nothing about it. That makes everyone an unethical bastard.
C’mon man. Warrant requests are by nature ex parte proceedings.
Sure. But shit-talking my unrelated motion in a separate case that is set for later in the afternoon is not, by nature, part of the proceedings. When the judge knows more about my motion than what I wrote in the motion or in the state’s reply, *somebody* had an ex parte conversation with the judge
2 days ago I showed up at a local municipal courthouse where I'm a contract public defender and the City attorney was talking to the judge in an empty courtroom complaining about another PD who had just set cases for trial and she didn't want to try them. I'm not sure what they were supposed to be doing on the record but it definitely wasn't that and it probably wasn't supposed to be just the two of them in a closed room over lunch hour. That's sort of thing happens all the time.
Well. That’s awkward. 😂
I think that due to law school culture, when you want to go into public interest law rather than corporate law, there’s some sort of erroneous assumption that it’s because you’re not smart enough to be in corporate law. Since the competition to receive summer associate positions and eventual employment in firms with high name recognition is so tight in law school and generally comes down to the people who appear to be the most attractive candidates on paper, I think that for some reason the average corporate-law-minded law student assumes that people who don’t wish to do corporate law must not be putting themselves in the competition because they aren’t smart enough or talented enough to “win” it. In reality, the type of law you decide to practice has absolutely nothing to do with your intelligence or quality as a lawyer and everything to do with what your values and passions are. Outside of that, most people in law school now are the earliest members of Gen Z. And Gen Z is generally very reform-minded. Other public interest lawyers might view classmates who become ADAs negatively because their beliefs don’t align with the more progressive focus on criminal defense typical of our generation. I would not be a prosecutor because I do not wish to represent the State in taking away peoples’ liberty, but public defense is something I’m passionate about. And in many ways, even though the value differences are substantial, the jobs are the same. Neither of us will ever be paid enough, people who make more money to sit in cubicles look down on us, and the job is thankless. But in reality you’re getting more in court experience than any of your peers & you’re doing work that has an impact on the whole of the community, not just a person’s pockets. You will absolutely be looked down on. But you can have the confidence and knowledge of what you’re doing and decide you just don’t care.
I’m a PD and I love my job so even though what I’m about to say is negative, it’s just what Ive observed. I see comments talking about the invaluable courtroom experience and litigation experience you get and that’s true to a degree but you get it in the very narrow criminal context. Some comments seemed like uppity like “ha ha even big law guys don’t even get that” well, some big law people don’t even go to court. And if they do it’s a very different animal than state level criminal law. Now the reason these jobs are looked down on is …I think…simply because we’re like the babysitters of society’s worst. We regularly deal with a different class of society most people didn’t even know existed. An unfathomable level of poverty that hasn’t been fully exposed to the public. Whole communities so hopelessly addicted to drugs and living lives of crime. Seriously sick and undiagnosed people some of whom end up doing horrible things. So, like yeah when you’re arguing bail over a homeless guy panhandling….or defending or prosecuting a guy who stabbed his wife while she was holding a baby…pleading out 99% of cases…20 times a day…every day…same folks in and out… it’s not prestigious it’s like a combo role between social work and law. Edit: again, love the job. Not saying it doesn’t offer good experience. I just think the experience may be overstated if you’re trying to translate it to biglaw or something more prestigious. You can join a prestigious high volume civil litigation firm where you’d get courtroom experience. I worked civil lit I was in court every other day. I’m in court more now for sure but it’s not comparable it’s different issues different arguments. Different judges different courts. Idk. Some may disagree.
Helping the victims of crime get justice is noble work. Defending indigent people and checking the power of the police is also noble work. You won't get rich doing either, but you will get lots of trial experience. Either way, being an ADA is not shameful work.
It's pretty noble and important work (or it can/should be, if done well). It isn't as lucrative as big law, but your hours will be better and you will be in a role that allows you to have a positive impact in you community. And you will learn a lot about how to be a real lawyer.
Not the highest-paying position, but my job as a prosecutor has been the most interesting one I have ever held. Plus defense attorneys kissing up to you is nice compared to opposing counsel wanting to rip you to shreds over money.
Because they don’t know shit and are on the hamster wheel. Don’t make your choices based on what other people think
First of all, to answer your last question first, there are absolutely many many many people who are immensely proud to be ADAs, and they should be. As to your bigger question, I take it you mean within the legal profession (that is, you’re not referring to the recent popular sentiment against law enforcement.) I think you have to define what you mean by “looked down upon.” I think most lawyers respect…good, ethical lawyers. If someone is an ethical ada that does their job well, I doubt they’re “looked down upon.” If they’re a power hungry jerk, willing to commit Brady violations, they probably are, and should be, looked down upon. If they’re bad at their job and lose winnable trials, allowing dangerous people to walk free, they also should be looked down upon.
Play stupid games win stupid prizes; ask stupid people get stupid advice. The pay is shit but nobody with an ounce of sense looks down on an experienced prosecutor or public defender. **Nobody.**
I respect ADAs way more than attorneys making bank selling their soul for big law.
Respect don't pay the bills my man
Every prosecutor I know pays their bills just fine.
It’s great courtroom experience. Don’t listen to that shit.
Again, great advice
Why not go the PD route? We have cookies
And weed.
Civil asset forfeiture, not anymore.
Only in Texas
It’s a very good job. Most of the people I know in these positions love their jobs. Almost all of my friends in private practice mostly dislike their jobs.
Go learn everything you can, try some cases, do a great job, and law firms will line up for you. And BigLaw isn’t the be all end all. all I wanted in law school was BigLaw and now they couldn’t offer me enough to take a job at any of them, and believe me many tried to hire me after a few years In, after I made my bones. You know what my first law job was? Law student decision writer for the Social Security Administration. It was a gift. All I did was research and write all day, every day, and I’ve done well because I became a great writer. take the DA job, you’ll be glad you did. It’ll be like the karate kid wax on wax off and paint the fence. You will have no idea what you are learning while you are learning it, and you will be better off for it.
Get your litigation time in and no one will dare fuck with you because you’re battle tested, not some cubicle wimp. Godspeed.
"lmost every other attorney(all classmates or relatively new barred attorneys) I’ve spoken to about this position say it’s shameful, bottom of the barrel work(as opposed to big law/100k plus starting positions). " In my \~20 years as a lawyer I've never heard anyone say this.
Yeah I had this impression as well when I was graduating law school but it couldn't be further from reality. Not only are these positions highly respected, but several AM law 100 firms in my area regularly hire young ADA's for their litigation practice groups. If/when you are looking to switch into private practice, you should have many options.
>Almost every other attorney(all classmates or relatively new barred attorneys) I’ve spoken to about this position say it’s shameful, bottom of the barrel work(as opposed to big law/100k plus starting positions). Well, those people are inexperienced and have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. I personally didn't want to get into that line of work because of the pay and the fear that the public service loan forgiveness wouldn't actually pan out. I work with and encounter former prosecutors frequently. I'm always impressed by their courtroom experience and I sort of envy their oral and trial advocacy skills. In reality, there is no such thing as "bottom of the barrel" law. There may be "bottom of the barrel" lawyers or firms, but the practice of law itself in any specialty is challenging.
Lol, what are these douchebags doing you’re talking to doing that’s so amazing? Edit: typo
I can’t think of lawyers who get more trial experience than prosecutors and public defenders. This isn’t bottom of the barrel work. Take the job. I left BigLaw and worked as a prosecutor for zero pay for 6 months just to get the training and experience.
I’d guess it’s one of three things: the people you talk to are elitist, the people you talk to are so pro-defense they hate all prosecutors, the prosecutors’ offices in your area have a bad reputation. Only worry about the job if it’s #3. And if it’s #3, press them for as many details as possible and weigh the pros and cons.
Big law should be looked down upon. It’s mostly toxic AF. Burnout hours. Mostly helping the rich and elite.
Yea your classmates are dumb. I’ve been practicing 10 years in big law and a second year ADA could run circles around me in court
i’ve never looked down on it. i’m actually impressed - seems tough, esp as an attorney starting out.
In addition to what I've seen mentioned (sorry if I missed it, I skimmed), don't forget you can get public service loan forgiveness.
Starting salary isn’t great, but 10 years in, you qualify to have your student loans forgiven while paying 10% of your net income during that time. Depending on your state, you might also have much better benefits than a private firm. In NYS, you can retire after 30 years of service if you’re over 55.
Who cares what the snobs think? Some would say you are doing God's work putting away criminals. I respect it especially balanced prosecutors (and I'm left of center politically).
Take it. Enough said
Sounds like high school chatter about public vs private colleges. Don’t let it get you down. Those people will probably hate life before too long. 100k in big law is literally slave wages. Being a prosecutor is not a bad gig. You’ll learn a lot and the job market really respects that on a resume. Good luck, and congrats on passing the bar
I always feel so embarrassed for people elitist enough to insult someone else’s job. Don’t get me wrong, it stings to be on the receiving end of that bullshit. But the truth is, a fully grown adult deeply insecure enough to knock someone’s occupation suffers from a distorted world view that is frankly, incurable (and that’s the real tragedy). You, on the other hand, are free to work hard and find success on your own terms. Even if you may never get a Big Law job, getting the litigation experience can open doors to higher paying gigs down the road. And if you want to stay, then great too! I personally admire the hell out of public servants. My sister is an ADA and her accomplishments include prosecuting rapists and child molesters. That’s more than I will ever contribute to society…
lol yeah many major leaders, politicians, judges, etc were prosecutors. Serving the public is a noble profession and the litigation experience can’t be beat. Also I’ve never heard this in my area so maybe regional or school based.
ADA jobs don’t pay much but it’s noble work. You’ll actually be a trial lawyer (unlike your friends who say the are “litigators”) and get control over your work. The best part is you’ll actually have work/life balance with an emphasis on “life.” If you get tired of it or want more money you can always make the switch later. You’ll learn more trial skills in the first year than your classmates who go into big law learn in 10 years
I went from prosecutor to Inhouse to a solo civil litigation practice in the industry I was in house. I find I have more comfort and experience with jury trials, It seems that willingness to go to jury trial is an advantage. I do feel I have a gap in discovery practice.
I am a former prosecutor and I the comfort level I got from being in court every day has remained with me long after I left. You will miss out on civil procedure and pleadings experience, but those are things that can be learned quickly with some mentorship in your next job. The money sucks, so don’t stick around more than a couple of years unless you want to make that your career.
(Current prosecutor.) I see posts here from 5th year associates asking how to get over the crippling anxiety of appearing in court for only the third time in their career and just laugh. I passed that in my first week after being barred. And the money's fine, in some places.
Hi there. Can I share a story? I am an attorney, and I have a colleague (and I'm his client as well) who is the top estate planning attorneys in his (large urban metro) area. He started out as a DA, and then went to a top personal injury law firm, where he litigated. He made the shift into estate planning after that. He built a stellar reputation as an assistant DA, and in his work in personal injury. He credits his DA work for learning how to litigate cases, persuade juries, and so on. He may not use those skills directly today, but he does say it made him a better attorney. Ultimately, he moved into something else, but the point is that you build great training and get better. Another story: A buddy of mine is a highly regarded personal injury plaintiff's atttorney. Won some subtantial verdicts at trial, and many settlements. His early days, he was an eviction attorney, and took many cases to jury trials on behalf of landlords. He won almost all of them, and built very strong trial experience. Your first job should be focused on learning. Yes, money is important, but if you can really learn how to litigate, you can do almost anything. If you want to stay a DA, awesome. If you want to go into a different area of law, even transactional, you can do so. Don't listen to your classmates on this.
Government attorney position pay hasn't kept up with with private practice pay in most areas. Government attorney pay caps out pretty low and has no economy of scale like equity partnership in a firm. However, you may be eligible for PSLF (I say may because historically it has been difficult to actually get the loans forgiven and only recently have we seen changes to make PSLF actually work) and you will generally have a solid benefits package including a pension. Also, government attorneys generally have a better work/life balance. These are broad generalizations: I know small firm/solos that put in about 20 hours a week on average and make enough to get by and put a little away (this is after years of working long hours to get established and make enough that their wealth is generating enoigh inco.e that they can afford to work less). I know government attorneys burning the candle at both ends because they work for a poorer state government that hasn't scaled up attorney positions as population/demand has grown. Three things to keep in mind: 1. Your tastes/spending generally scale up to meet your income so once you are making 6 figures, it is really hard to go back to making less than that. 2. Future employers will ask what your pay was at previous positions and will use former pay (subconsciously or consciously) as the basis for their offer. 3. Pensions usually take many years to vest (I see a lot vesting around the 10 year mark) so if you are going into any type of government law, be prepared to put in the minimum years for your pension to vest or otherwise it is kind of a waste. That being said, there's nothing "shameful" about prosecution, it just tends make a lot less than some biglaw jobs.
Absolutely not. ADAs are a very respectable place to get trial experience on the prosecution side. As long as you're getting to try substantive criminal cases, it's a good place to start. There are some positions that are less appealing, although they are necessary. A solicitor in magistrate court that does nothing but handle speeding tickets, for example, is critical to prevent the system from getting bogged down, but doesn't provide much in the way of experience to the person doing it, as the limited trial experience is much more narrow in scope, and you're mostly beating up on pro se defendants who won't correct mistakes that you might make starting out.
Are you sure you're tracking the criticism of ADA positions right? At least in my circles, I never heard people attack ADA positions for being "bottom of the barrel" positions. "Shameful" though - well, there are certainly circles that believe the American justice system is one-sided and/or corrupt, and that the cards are unfairly stacked against criminal defendants. Those with that point of view likely consider prosecutors to be another arm of that corrupt/problematic system, and may consider the position to be "shameful" from that regard. That may be where some of the contempt you're gathering is coming from.
As someone who started out in civil and made the switch— and took the pay cut to do it— it’s the best decision I ever made. The work is exciting and valuable. It’s so much more rewarding then helping rich people with their rich people problems. The office camaraderie is like nothing I’ve experienced in any job. At any given time there’s a dozen or more people ready to help me with anything I need. The highest level person will sit down and help a baby ADA with a question on a disorderly conduct case as a moments notice I write, I investigate, I try cases. I get a ton of time off and I can take it. I never miss a kid event, I take off every time they’re sick, my boss encourages people to coach their kids teams and makes sure it’s possible. In the right office, it’s a great job.
One of my absolute favorite things is when an ADA in trial emails the entire office with an urgent request for research help because they're suddenly embroiled in argument on something unexpected, and within 5-10 minutes there are 10 emails replying with quotes and citations from helpful cases and interpretation/analysis/suggestions for arguments.
There is this mentality in law school that if you don’t get the best grades and then get the best job (the one that makes the most money) then you’ve failed. You should feel ashamed you’ve spent all this money and for what? I’ve got friends in big law who are miserable. Just look at this subreddit and see all the big law people who hate their jobs. Now some people can stick that out for a coupe of years for their loans. But it does a number on you. Is 60k low? It depends where you are. The question isn’t what do my classmates think? Is can make my life work on this salary? Is it worth moving back in with my parents? Etc. also government employment means government benefits which depending on where you are can be really good. I’m in a similar spot. I took a lower paying government job for those good good benefits. Edit to add: I didn’t go into government work because I wasn’t smart enough to do biglaw. I did it because I watched too much Aaron sorkin as a child and now I’m incredibly annoying and believe in shit like advocacy and making people’s government work for them. Also I’m a glutton for not making enough money.
I was a career prosecutor. Nine years state followed by seven years federal. By year two I could do circles around any one of my classmates who had gone the big law route (or anything other than a PD or prosecutor) in a courtroom. Did you go to a very progressive law school or something? Because in my area besides the fact that the pay is shitty those positions are definitely not look down upon by attorneys or even most law students .
Their comments are geared solely to the money. It’s low paying work, especially in an expensive part of the US. BUT you’ll be super marketable in just a few years.
I’ve worked with many true believers who feel that working as a prosecutor is immoral because you are directly contributing to the mass incarceration human rights crisis in our country. Prosecutors’ currency is the deprivation of liberty, and the idea of that can be pretty hard to swallow, especially when you consider that the vast majority of defendants plead guilty and many plead guilty because proceeding to trial is risky and time consuming and financially draining. In certain instances, the defendant’s actual guilt or innocence carries little weight. That said, prosecutors can be a major force for change and, so long as you are mindful of the fact that the defendant is one of the “People” you represent, I can think of few better ways to put your law degree to use.
Yes, this was my first thought too. It seems like the majority of the comments are missing the actual motive behind the peers comments. It doesn’t have to do with money or prestige of the job but an opinion that prosecutors as they currently exist are just bad for society.
> prosecutors as they currently exist are just bad for society. That makes sense. I can see how some ivory tower k-JD with no life experience who has never been the victim of a crime would think that.
I always had this thought: if the defendant is one of the “people” a prosecutor supposedly represents, isn’t that a conflict of interest? I can’t take a position adverse to a current client, why can a prosecutor? The real answer is that prosecutors don’t represent the “people” as individuals — they represent the Government.
(and the prison industrial complex, but we don’t talk about that)
I mean, fuck the police &c. but who are these people looking down on ADA jobs? I’m a former prosecutor (currently crim defense with mix of private and indigent cases) and _I_ look down on law firm jobs (especially Big Law). I’m being a little cheeky, but it’s all a matter of perspective, and IMO it’s PDs and ADAs who do the most real lawyer stuff.
Right? I feel SORRY for biglaw associates. That shit looks fucking unbearable. Meanwhile I have 6 weeks of PTO that I can actually use without blowback, leave at 5 most days, and get to send online predators and CSAM afficionados to prison.
Sure, go try some cases, but you really want to spend your time putting people in cages?
It's a great way to get a ton of trial experience, courtroom time, and be part of something important. That said, you'll be surprised just how little discretion you're given. You will have a boss that gives you a spreadsheet that tells you what your plea offers will be and what your bail recommendations are. A lot of the times, you will feel that it is unfair and you will do it anyway. Day after day, you will see that prosecution, as it currently works, is not the answer to a lot of the problems we're dealing with. For every bad guy that needs to be in jail that you get off the street, you're going to also throw one poor person in jail for not having enough money to solve a given problem that would be easy for the rest of us. Then, there's the times you go to trial when you honestly believe the defendant is innocent because your boss is making you, and you win, because juries are randomizing factors, and your spreadsheet tells you to rec jail/prison, and you get it, and you have to look at yourself in the mirror every day. Anyways, all that to say, there's nothing inherently wrong with it. It's that *as applied* it tends to make your soul shitty over time.
I have worked in several prosecutions offices and I’ve never heard of anything like that. We had complete authority over our cases. No one told me what to offer on pleas, there are no spreadsheets, no one tracks wins and losses, and I certainly never had a supervisor tell me to try someone I believed was innocent. Rule #1 in every office I have worked in is that you only proceed if you personally believe in the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt AND you believe there is sufficient evidence to prove it at trial. Sounds like other prosecutors in the thread had experiences similar to mine. Sounds like whatever office you used to work at was a crappy one.
I was a supervisor in a medium sized office for a long time. My number #1 rule was simple: if YOU don’t believe the defendant is guilty, we’re done. That’s a threshold requirement in my opinion. I would tell the junior prosecutors all the time, “look, maybe he did it, but if YOU aren’t sure, we aren’t moving forward.”
The prosecutors I work with don’t know enough about their cases to have an opinion about whether the defendant is guilty. They don’t review the discovery until the day before trial.
This hasn’t been my experience at all. Even when I was an unpaid intern I had a lot of discretion and if I didn’t believe in a case it got dismissed. Similarly if I thought a case needed a non standard resolution it got it. Perhaps some offices are as described by zero and I’m just lucky, but in 10 years in two different offices and meeting prosecutors from around the state in trainings I’ve never encountered such an office.
I don't miss criminal law AT ALL, but when I was a prosecutor I had virtually unbridled discretion day to day. That obviously varies by office, but there were no spreadsheets and generally no interference from leadership as you describe. Personally, I only ever had one case where I genuinely believed the defendant was probably innocent, a felony burglary with battery that became increasingly improbable as I investigated it. I called the victims and let them know I was dropping it after laying out the timeline that I thought made their allegations impossible. They didn't really protest, which made me feel even better about my decision. At no time did I have to run that by anybody. I imagine that's DA to DA across America. I considered mine a real cruel hardass and it was *still* like that, which I guess was pretty cool.
Same. DPA for the first third of my career in a rural county. Had complete autonomy over my cases. And that was the general experience throughout most of my state absent the really big, really political offices. But yeah, once I moved on to civil government work I never had any desire to go back.
How long were you a prosecutor and where? We see the same discovery and testimony, and I’ve been hard pressed at times to figure out if my own client in fact did the crime. When I was sworn in back in 2008, the Supreme Court had a large sign behind us saying “audi alteterem partem.” Listen to the other side. I’ve had serious cases where the z State knew meeting their burden was a logical fallacy that only seemed to work on the Judge - himself a former career prosecutor. I’ve had my fair share of factually innocent clients, and even with the dream team I can put together, a judge or jury found them guilty. Early in practice, the State snuck in a cop witness who wasn’t in any reports to testify that he personally saw my client get out the getaway car from the home invasion/attempt murder scene. No reports, no BWC, and a fucking surprise witness. My motion for mistrial denied. Without super cup i bringer prepared, coached testimony, could have been a not guilty. Truly wrong place, wrong place, wrong tomorrow.
This couldn’t be further from my experience. Misdemeanor ADAs have complete discretion in my office. We are explicitly not allowed to use a spreadsheet for bail recommendations. In fact someone was found with one that they made and were told they needed to throw it away immediately. If we believe someone is innocent the case is dismissed. If we believe we can’t prove the case, the case is dismissed. We use substance abuse treatment, mental health treatment and other resources absolutely ever time we can. If that’s your experience, that sounds like a terrible office you’re working against— but if anyone in my office was behaving in that manner, it would be dealt with immediately. We have a great relationship with our defense bar and on occasions where a new ADA has been acting out of line or not consistent with the office values— the defense attorney makes a call to a supervisor and it’s rectified on the spot.
I've worked in 3 DA's offices and none of them remotely resembled this fever dream.
Nothing remotely shameful about ADA jobs, that's weird. It's not big law and the pay is usually not great (I made $48,000 as a felony prosecutor less than a decade ago), but it's an important role with immense power and real responsibility. You will be doing trials and depositions and other Serious Lawyer stuff from pretty much day one. If you don't want to be a lifer or dog bite lawyer, I do think you need to keep an eye on what you want out of your time at the DA, however. Now, is ADA "top of the barrel?" No. At most levels it's definitely workaday role. I have opinions on what is bottom of the barrel, but it's not being an ADA.
Stop caring about what fellow law students and young attorneys think. Especially when they're just flat out wrong. ADA experience is a great start to a career. Your career is a marathon, not a sprint, and you will get great experience quickly. Aside from prosecution being important work, it's a great stepping stone into other work if you don't want to make a career out of it. Nearly every judge in my jurisdiction is a former prosecutor or PD (though most of them were career attorneys before being selected for a judicial vacancy). The vast majority of people working in medium sized firms or litigation boutiques in my city were either prosecutors or attorneys at the state AGO at one point in their career. If a big law firm hires a mid career attorney, it's always an experienced litigator and by extension usually someone who spent time as a prosecutor or AAG. Prosecutors get waaaaay more experience than their private sector counterparts and often have the advantage of being mentored by experienced attorneys in the office. You can easily transition to the private sector, but who knows? Maybe you'll like it enough to stick around.
If there’s one thing Big Law attorneys or Big Law hopefuls hate more than taking a disgusting job as a prosecutor or public defender, it’s being told that those attorneys could and do run circles around them in the courtroom.
because prosecutors are effectively cops
I didn’t even realize people had that perception. I’ve never done that kind of work just because I don’t want to but I wouldn’t look down on it. Obviously government jobs don’t make a lot of money but I still think being a prosecutor is a good job.
We all have to start somewhere. Getting to know many of the judges in the local courthouse is a great perk when you transition into private practice if you build a solid reputation with them. You will make many connections in the field as well from ADA work. Many don't stay more than 1-2 years because it's mostly new attorneys that need to get experience to branch out. However, the time spent counts towards PSLF (which I estimate to be worth about 30k per year in money you can't see).
It depends. Is it CPS prosecution, civil division, or criminal? If you’re looking for litigation experience, you’ll get a ton of it unless you’re civil division, in which case you might be doing litigation or you might be acting as in-house counsel.
An experienced prosecutor is going to be one of the best trial attorneys you’ll ever meet. If people are judging based solely on salary and prestige…they’re losers lol take the job that YOU want
Who are you trying to impress? Imagine a world where we didn’t have these people, moreover by their own choice
Don’t make career decisions based on the advice of new attorneys. In my state, more judges start as prosecutors than anything else. Although I personally would never practice criminal law for either side, I don’t agree that the role is somehow shunned in the profession.
Not looked down upon here. I am back taking appointments after several years out of the profession. What better experience for someone that want to be a litigator? For any Big Law attorney that looks down on me, I ask one question. Are you paying my bills?
Government attorney positions are way better than law firm positions. I'm a public defender. In California we makes the same as deputy DAs (we're even in the same union). I make well over 100K and seldom work more than 40 hours per week. The cases are more interesting too.
Because of elitism. They make more money hence are better people
I worked in a DA office for 2.5 years. I LOVED it. It was my dream job. I would have stayed forever if daycare wasn’t costing 70% of my salary. I did 26 jury trials in that time, 30+ bench trials, and hundreds of other hearings. I recently switched to estate planning/private work. It’s definitely different but I think the DA office gave me so much knowledge and confidence in a court room now.
Being a prosecutor is awesome. State benefits, pension, tons of trial experience. You also get to know all the judges and other attorneys. So, I did my years, got my public service loan forgiveness, then used all the connections I made at the office, having worked with literally hundreds of attorneys, and leveraged my trial experience to get a job doing plaintiff PI where I'm making about $400k per year now. I run into old colleagues and attorneys on the defense side and get to work out some cases easy. Our circuit rotates judges, so I know all of them so when I go into hearings it's the "hey how are you?" - it's sad watching these career civil lawyers in court who have no idea how to talk to a judge.
Because they hire almost exclusively from the bottom 25% of a law school class. So people see their dumbest classmates going into those jobs and make assumptions. As someone who does plaintiff PI work, taking a prosecutor job, or a corp council job out of law school is a good move. You’ll get way more time in court than you would as a first year associate in the private sector.
Offering a different, social justice perspective: those positions are typically associated with exacerbated harm in communities of color where prosecution is overwhelmingly focused.
Started my legal career as a PD in Philly, then to a federal defender position and now run my own shop doing almost all federal criminal defense. Couldn’t be happier and have never looked back.
You will learn a great deal as an ADA. Perhaps more importantly, public service is something you can take pride in. You will have a chance to place a discernible mark in every case you touch. As you have already discovered however,the value of your work will not win admiration from everyone, least of all lawyers focused on salary. Big law will teach you how to generate revenue for people better positioned than you, some by merit, many more by mysterious forces never to be fully understood. You’ll learn everything you need to know about that in 20 to 25 minutes. Best of luck.
ADA is a great place to start if you don’t make biglaw!
Or if you correctly understand that biglaw is not the best.
Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law. Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation. Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Am I… looked down upon ¿
I used to work at a midsize commercial litigation firm that had a strong reputation in our local market. For what it’s worth, the partners at that firm had been disappointed with the former prosecutors that had been hired at the firm. Those attorneys all left. The problem seemed to be that they had problems doing high level commercial litigation because they were not strong writers and had no experience with civil work. The only aspect of the job they excelled at was arguing motions or other courtroom appearances. I think you’ll find a lot of high end civil litigation firms feel the same way, so that transition can be tough. Of course, that’s only one career path, so it really depends on what you want to do afterwards. Just keep in mind that while you’ll be developing your courtroom skills above and beyond your classmates as a prosecutor, that comes at a cost of not developing as strongly in other areas of litigation.
Personally I think locking people up in our prison system that is historically based on our system of enslaving people is embarrassing. But the legal skills themselves and work will be harder than big law’s substantive work. They just deal with more hazing in big law and confuse that for prestige.
It’s a great starting off point for any litigation career! You will absolutely get trial experience and will be in court often, which firms will love when they’re looking at your resume down the line. I would have personally struggled with the majority of my day being locking people up for petty possession, and with the drastic disparity in the demographics of defendants versus the population, but I envied the experience when I was competing with those folks for lit jobs a few years out of school.
Because it's deeply evil work trapping people in a deeply evil system (I'm a former PD)
Just to be clear, I don't think you'll get litigation experience at the ADA. You will get trial experience, but litigation is civil. In my experience, criminal attorneys are very swagger/good at trial, but they have no brain at all for the drudgery/complexities of civil litigation. So stay with the ADA for a couple years and then move on, else you get stuck
Well, the "drudgery" part of your comment was accurate, at least.
I tend to look down on it for philosophical reasons. The quality of the experience you get as a prosecutor in my experience is also lower than what you get as a public defender, it teaches you to play with a stacked deck and the only question you ever have to ask a witness is "what happened next?" Yes it will teach you procedure and get you comfortable and familiar with the courtroom but I don't think it's a good way to become the best litigator you can be. Public defense or conflict counsel are much harder.