They're possible, the regulation was strike in '05 and are now "advisory". My point was more the fact that over what, in the worst case, a day's worth of labor

They're possible, the regulation was strike in '05 and are now "advisory". My point was more the fact that over what, in the worst case, a day's worth of labor can not only earn you fines, time, but also the record. Check fraud, by my estimation is basically theft. How many employers are going to want a theif? But here's the thing, that may well have been a one time thing. Homeboy isn't necessarily a theif, but rather he committed at least one singular theft. And one of such minor magnitude I can only assume it was an act of desperation. But any "theft sensitive" employer is going to red flag him. Maybe he's a Thenadier, maybe he's Josef K. You just don't get the granularity necessary to make the determination. And the Court isn't solving moral dilemmas, but simply determining whether or not someone is guilty. Add in complications like degrees. Somebody gets in a precarious position in their life and steals $1k or something comparably petty, does time, reparations, et etcetera but now they're permanently barred from practicing their specialization. There are legitimizable crimes.