Communicate/Featured

Explain a plea offer to your client

Turns a prosecutor's offer into a client memo that states the sentence in days and dollars, walks every collateral consequence this client actually faces, and hands the decision back where it belongs.

About 12 minstarterCriminal defense, Solo / small firm

Your prompt4,476 characters

Still to fill in: Court and governing law, Charges and the offer, Client profile, Evidence and motion posture

RoleYou are a criminal defense lawyer who has sat with hundreds of clients on plea day. You translate legal language into days, dollars, and dates, you lead with the consequence the client has not thought about rather than the one they have, and you will not tell a client what to do: you lay out the tradeoffs and let them decide.What I needA privileged memo to my client explaining the offer below, under Court and governing law, written so the client understands it on one read with me not in the room.InputsCharges and offer: Charges and the offer Client: Client profile Evidence and pending motions: Evidence and motion posture Court and governing law: Court and governing law Offer expires: When the offer expiresHow to work this1. Open with the deal in two sentences: what they plead to, what they get, what gets dismissed. Nothing before it. Write the whole memo at an eighth-grade reading level: no Latin, no "count subject to enhancement." 2. Convert every sentencing term into days, dollars, and dates. "364 suspended" becomes "no jail today, but you owe 364 days if you violate probation before May 2028." 3. Walk collateral consequences one at a time against Client profile: immigration, license or job, firearms, driving, housing, benefits, registration, custody, and name the ones you dropped. For a non-citizen, immigration gets its own section naming the statutory ground and whether this plea structure triggers it. 4. Give trial both ways: the realistic sentence after conviction, and a candid acquittal estimate tied to Evidence and motion posture that says what a suppression ruling would change. Rank what is still negotiable (charge, sentence length, probation conditions, diversion, restitution) and close with the questions only the client can answer, never a recommendation.Close with these four sections, every time, without being askedAssumptions I made. Every factual and legal assumption, marked [verify] or [safe]. Name whose law you applied and flag anything assumed about status, prior record, or firearms. Where this is weakest. The two or three statements most likely to be wrong: the acquittal estimate, a consequence tied to a status I did not confirm, a range that swings by judge. Name the sentence. What only you can decide. Options with tradeoffs, not flags. At minimum: counter for a charge that avoids the immigration or firearms trigger (better long-term outcome, but the offer can be pulled and the clock runs) versus taking the structure as written (certain today, locks in the consequence); and answering now versus waiting on the suppression ruling (leverage if we win, a worse offer if we lose). What would make this materially better. Ranked by impact: discovery I have not sent, the client's actual immigration documents, this judge's sentencing history, whether this prosecutor has ever dropped a DV designation.Output formatA memo headed PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL, addressed to the client by name, tracking steps 1–7 in that order, with one subheading per collateral consequence that applies. Short paragraphs, no block text.Never do this- If this memo would read the same for any defendant charged with anything anywhere, it is too generic. Rebuild it around this client's status, record, and charges. - No hedging filler. Cut "arguably," "it should be noted," and "it depends." Never tell the client to consult an attorney. I am the attorney, and this is the advice. - Every code section, maximum penalty, registration trigger, and sentencing range must come from my inputs or carry [UNVERIFIED - confirm before I send this]. Never invent a statute or a penalty number. - Where you do not know how Court and governing law classifies this offense, or how it is treated for immigration purposes, say you do not know and name who I should ask. Do not smooth over the gap with fluent prose. - Do not pad. A simple offer with one real consequence gets a short memo. Length is not value.Before you answer- Did immigration get a named statutory ground, or did I write "may affect immigration status"? - Is every sentencing term expressed in days, dollars, or dates? - Did I give a real acquittal estimate, or dodge behind "depends on the evidence"? - Would this memo be useless to any other client in this courthouse? It should be.

Adds driver's-seat tunes: options instead of answers, questions before work, every citation flagged. Your values come with it.

Pressure-test it

Makes the AI switch hats and attack its own answer.

The immigration lawyer you are bringing in as co-counsel has spent a career watching criminal defenders hand clients a removal order dressed up as a good deal. Give her the memo. Find every immigration error and omission. Then rewrite the immigration section so it does the real work: the deportability and inadmissibility grounds by statute, the categorical-approach question this record of conviction raises, and the plea structures that would avoid the trigger: different statute, no DV designation, deferred prosecution, alternative count, ranked by how likely this prosecutor is to agree.

Go deeper

Pushes the work further once the basics are right.

Someday post-conviction counsel will pull this file looking for what I failed to tell him. Draft the one-page Padilla advisement to accompany the memo: my specific written advice on removal, inadmissibility, bars to relief, and naturalization consequences for this exact plea, with the INA provisions cited, plus a signature block where the client acknowledges receiving it. This is the document that protects the file if the plea is later attacked as ineffective assistance.

Before you run it

What to gather first

The offer sheet or the prosecutor's email, verbatim
Client's citizenship status, occupation, licenses, and prior record
Discovery you have: body cam, 911, statements, lab
Any pending suppression or dismissal motion and when it will be ruled on
The exact date and event at which the offer expires

Watch for

Padilla v. Kentucky requires advice specific to this conviction. "May affect your immigration status" is the language that produces ineffective-assistance claims. Make the model name the ground or admit it cannot.
A domestic violence misdemeanor triggers the federal firearms bar under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) no matter how the state classifies it. The model routinely misses federal consequences of state pleas.
Sentencing ranges, registration triggers, and probation conditions vary by state and often by county practice. Verify every number against the actual code and this judge's habits before sending.
Do not paste identifying client facts into a tool your firm has not cleared. This memo is privileged and the inputs are the whole file.
The client decides (Model Rule 1.2(a)). Deliver options, document the advice and the client's choice, and never let the memo read as your decision.

What comes back

A privileged client memo, addressed by name: the deal in two sentences, what you get, what gets dismissed, what probation looks like day to day, collateral consequences broken out one subheading at a time, trial worst case and best case with a real acquittal estimate, remaining negotiation room, the deadline, questions only the client can answer, and a framework for deciding. Closes with Assumptions / Where this is weakest / What only you can decide / What would make this better.

See an example of what you’ll get

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - FOR HUGO MENDEZ The deal in two sentences. The State will drop the felony if you plead guilty to misdemeanor DV Assault 4, with no jail time today, two years of probation, treatment, community service, and a fine. The catch is the label: this is a *domestic violence* misdemeanor, and that label (not the sentence) is what causes the real damage in your case. What you get if you take it. A misdemeanor, not a felony. 364 days in jail, all suspended: you serve none of it now, but you owe all of it if you violate probation before May 2028. Two years of probation. A DV evaluation and whatever treatment it recommends, typically 26 weekly sessions. 24 hours of community service. $1,500 fine plus roughly $300 in costs. A two-year no-contact order. What gets dismissed. Felony Assault 3 (RCW 9A.36.031), which carries up to 5 years and a felony record, and the Interference with Reporting count. Immigration: read this part twice. You are a lawful permanent resident, not a citizen. A conviction for a crime of domestic violence makes you deportable under INA § 237(a)(2)(E)(i). That is triggered by the DV designation on the plea, not by the jail sentence, so "no jail" does not protect you. Pleading to this offense as written puts you at real risk of removal proceedings even though the felony goes away. I am not signing off on this structure until immigration counsel reviews the exact statute and the record of conviction. There may be a fix: pleading to Assault 4 without the DV tag, or to disorderly conduct under RCW 9A.84.030, may avoid the ground entirely. Whether the prosecutor agrees is the open question. Firearms. Federal law bars anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence from possessing a firearm, permanently (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)). Your hunting rifle would have to go, and it does not come back. Your CDL. A DV misdemeanor is not an automatic federal disqualification under 49 C.F.R. § 383.51 [UNVERIFIED - confirm against the current table before you rely on this]. Your employer's own policy is the bigger risk; I need to see it. Trial: realistic worst case. Conviction on the felony. Standard range for a first offender is roughly 1–3 months, likely work release. But the felony conviction is the worse immigration outcome by a wide margin, and it ends the CDL question. Trial: realistic best case. Acquittal. I put it at moderate-to-good, and it turns almost entirely on the suppression motion. The complainant has recanted in writing. If the judge suppresses your statement, the State is left with a neighbor's 911 call and a photograph. Two-day trial, roughly $3,500 more in fees. Deadline. Friday, May 8, 2026, when the court takes the bench. Questions only you can answer. Are you willing to accept any risk of removal? Can your family absorb a two-day trial and the cost? Are you prepared to testify? How much does keeping the rifle matter against everything else on this page? How to think about this. Do not weigh jail against no jail. You are not going to jail either way under this offer. Weigh the DV label against the felony risk, and tell me which one you can live with. Then we decide together whether to counter, wait for the ruling, or set it for trial. --- Assumptions I made. The reduced count is Assault 4 under RCW 9A.36.041 and the judgment will carry the domestic-violence designation [verify - the offer says "DV Assault 4" without a citation, and whether the DV finding lands on the judgment is what decides the removal question]. Hugo has no prior arrests, no prior removal proceedings, and no immigration filings beyond the 2019 green card [verify - I have your one-line profile and nothing else]. Probation runs 24 months from the May 8 plea, so the suspended time stays exposed until May 2028 [safe - arithmetic from the offer]. The $300 in costs is the King County default; the court sets the real figure at sentencing [verify]. INA § 237(a)(2)(E)(i) and 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) are cited from general knowledge, not from your inputs [UNVERIFIED - check the current text of both before this goes out]. Where this is weakest. Two sentences. "I put it at moderate-to-good" is the acquittal estimate, and it rests entirely on the suppression motion. If the statement comes in, the recantation stops carrying the case and that estimate should read poor. And "A DV misdemeanor is not an automatic federal disqualification under 49 C.F.R. § 383.51" is flagged [UNVERIFIED] on the page, but Hugo will read it as reassurance about his livelihood and decide on it. What only you can decide. Three calls, none of them mine. Structure: counter for a non-DV disposition: Assault 4 with the designation struck, or disorderly conduct under RCW 9A.84.030, which removes both the deportability ground and the lifetime firearms bar, but tells the prosecutor that immigration is the pressure point and puts the current offer at risk; or take the structure as written, which ends the felony exposure on May 8 and locks in both consequences permanently. Timing: answer by the deadline, or ask to continue readiness until the suppression ruling. If the statement goes out, a non-DV disposition gets cheap; if it comes in, the misdemeanor offer usually disappears with it. Delivery: send this memo as written, or hold it until immigration counsel has read the record of conviction. Hugo has to decide by Friday either way, and "I am not signing off on this structure yet" reads as candor or as delay depending on whether he hears it from you first. What would make this materially better. Ranked by impact: (1) The offer in writing with the exact statute, and whether the State will strike the DV designation. Every consequence on this page turns on that one word. (2) Hugo's immigration file: the green card, any prior applications, any contact with CBP, so counsel can check for grounds beyond this plea. (3) His employer's written policy on criminal convictions for CDL drivers, which is the real threat to the job whatever the federal table says. (4) Whether this deputy prosecutor has agreed to drop a DV designation before in this courthouse.

Why this prompt is built the way it is

## Framework 1. **The deal in two sentences, first.** What they plead to, what they get, what gets dismissed, at an eighth-grade reading level, no Latin. 2. **Days, dollars, dates.** Not "364 suspended" but "no jail today, but you owe 364 days if you violate probation in the next 24 months." 3. **Collateral consequences against this client's profile.** Immigration, license, firearms, driving, housing, benefits, registration, custody. Skip what does not apply and say you skipped it. Immigration gets its own section for any non-citizen, with the statutory ground named; Padilla requires specific advice, not "may affect your status." 4. **Trial both ways, then what is still negotiable.** Realistic post-trial sentence, a candid acquittal estimate tied to the evidence and pending motions, and the negotiation room ranked by what would most help this client. 5. **The decision is the client's.** End with the questions only they can answer. Model Rule 1.2 makes this theirs, not yours.