---
title: "Table the criminal history against the sentencing issues in this matter"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/criminal-law/table-the-criminal-history-against-the-sentencing-issues-in-this-matter"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A20-T1-R7"
practice_area: "Criminal Law"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Table the criminal history against the sentencing issues in this matter

> From the supplied record, table priors, dates, outcomes and how the prosecution is likely to use them, plus gaps (spent convictions, appeals).

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/criminal-law/table-the-criminal-history-against-the-sentencing-issues-in-this-matter  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Criminal Law](https://ailawframework.com/practice/criminal-law.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | From the supplied record, table priors, dates, outcomes and how the prosecution is likely to use them, plus gaps (spent convictions, appeals). |
| What the lawyer must review | Confirm the record with the court or police source Do not treat a generated table as the certified history |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer review required**

The responsible lawyer reviews the work against the instructions, sources and intended use.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Review the original source set for relevant material absent from the output, including contrary evidence, qualifications and unresolved gaps.
2. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
3. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
4. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/practice/criminal-law/table-the-criminal-history-against-the-sentencing-issues-in-this-matter/united-states.md) | Yellow |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*