Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.

Thorson: Practicing law, as a murderer


ASU law school graduate James Hamm is hitting a few more hurdles than the average prospective lawyer. On top of doing well on the LSATS, getting accepted into law school and passing the bar exam, Hamm must prove the quality of his character. For Hamm that's no easy task - it means proving that he is fully rehabilitated from his first-degree murder conviction.

He put himself in this position in 1974 when he was 26 years old and caught up in drugs. He shot Willard Morely Jr. twice at close range and killed him over a drug deal gone wrong. He has spent 31 years trying to get out of the hole he so deeply dug for himself.

Hamm was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. He was released after 17, during which he earned his undergraduate degree from NAU, and then finished his parole in 2001.

He also applied, and after some controversy, was accepted and graduated from ASU's College of Law. But his application to become a member of the state bar, and thus practice law, was denied by the Bar Association's Character and Fitness Committee in 2004. Now James is pleading his case before the Arizona State Supreme Court in an attempt to overturn the CFC ruling.

There is a part of us deep inside that abhors the thought that a man who took a life will one day be a free man. The vindictive side of human nature pulls us to believe that when Hamm cut Morely's life short, he also chose to forfeit the right to live his own life as he pleases.

On some level, most people want to think first-degree murderers will spend the rest of their lives in prison regretting their heinous choice, not out in society pursuing successful careers as lawyers. A KAET poll conducted in 1999, after Hamm first passed the bar exam, showed 57 percent of Arizonans support that sentiment, saying Hamm should not be allowed to practice law.

But that vengeful side of humanity must battle with the rational side. It's the side that says justice is more about restoring wrong to right rather than merciless punishment. The state of our current justice system is evidence that our rational sides have won and that we support the potential for redemption.

We operate under a system of justice based on rehabilitation and appeals. For example, Arizona Revised Statute 13-905 discusses the process for allowing convicted felons to apply to have their civil rights restored upon completion of their probation. This talk of dedication to the principle of rehabilitation is meaningless if we can't walk the walk.

Perhaps first-degree murder warrants life in prison. But under the system in which Hamm was sentenced, such truth in sentencing doesn't yet exist. It follows that since he served his sentence, completed his probation and made every effort to educate himself to the best of his ability, Hamm deserves the liberty of pursuing the career of his choice - including law.

The State Bar of Arizona's mission statement even includes the core value of diversity and emphasizes their commitment to "seek out members of underrepresented groups ... to ensur[e] that the legal profession and justice system reflect the community it serves in all of its social, economic and geographical diversity."

Hamm certainly represents a unique sector of society and would bring a diversity of perspective to the legal profession - especially with his experience as the co-founder of Middle Ground, a prison-reform advocacy group.

Hamm's situation is receiving so much attention because an Arizona State Supreme Court approval to his appeal for admittance to the bar, would set a national precedent in allowing a first-degree murderer to join the state bar.

Dave Wells of The Arizona Republic noted that, "the State Bar Board of Governors filed an amicus brief insisting that character cannot be changed." It is striking that the leaders of Arizona's professional organization for lawyers do not believe in the redemptive powers of the human spirit.

If what they argue is true, that a person's character cannot be changed, then I can't help but wonder how anyone can stand for a justice system in which child molesters and murderers are not locked up forever.

The integrity of our justice system is at stake. If the Arizona State Supreme Court wants to ensure that our system of justice is consistent in principle and in practice, then they must own up to what the citizens of Arizona have implemented as law.

If we believe convicted felons can never pay for their crimes, then our justice system needs a serious reevaluation. But if we believe a finite amount of prison time can be sufficient for justice to be served, then former felons like Hamm deserve the rights that come along with a complete rehabilitation.

Laura Thorson is a history and political science junior. Reach her at laura.thorson@cox.net.


Continue supporting student journalism and donate to The State Press today.

Subscribe to Pressing Matters



×

Notice

This website uses cookies to make your experience better and easier. By using this website you consent to our use of cookies. For more information, please see our Cookie Policy.