July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this forum
Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:48 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
rbbt808488000416 wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
whosinthehousejc wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:What the **** is a misdemeanor

Haha yeah, wasn’t expecting to see that.


Theft of water though?


yeah what were they getting at with this question? the one offense rule?


Seemed to me like a multiplicitous prosecution issue (which is rooted in the Fifth amendment similar to Double Jeopardy). Not sure if Texas Crim Pro has a special name or rule, but basically just said it was unconstitutional.


Hey, hypothetically if i had an expert testify and you were a prosecutor that wanted records on which she based her opinion, would you be able to get that or something else, if anything?

What are the first two steps in a criminal trial?

What is the procedure called when defendant enters her plea, other than being called the entry of the plea?

All hypo questions
Last edited by Guccifer91 on Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:50 pm

Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:02 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
rbbt808488000416 wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
whosinthehousejc wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:What the **** is a misdemeanor

Haha yeah, wasn’t expecting to see that.


Theft of water though?


yeah what were they getting at with this question? the one offense rule?


Seemed to me like a multiplicitous prosecution issue (which is rooted in the Fifth amendment similar to Double Jeopardy). Not sure if Texas Crim Pro has a special name or rule, but basically just said it was unconstitutional.


Hey, hypothetically if i had an expert testify and you were a prosecutor that wanted records on which she based her opinion, would you be able to get that or something else, if anything?

What are the first two steps in a criminal trial?

What is the procedure called when defendant enters her plea, other than being called the entry of the plea?

All hypo questions


Plea entry pretty sure is arraignment. First steps are technically reading indictment and entry of plea again, but goes to opening statements after (I provided more than 2 steps). Not sure if you can get the records, but definitely sure you can cross examine on them under Rule 705

User avatar
whosinthehousejc

Bronze
Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 11:54 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby whosinthehousejc » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:03 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
rbbt808488000416 wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
whosinthehousejc wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:What the **** is a misdemeanor

Haha yeah, wasn’t expecting to see that.


Theft of water though?


yeah what were they getting at with this question? the one offense rule?


Seemed to me like a multiplicitous prosecution issue (which is rooted in the Fifth amendment similar to Double Jeopardy). Not sure if Texas Crim Pro has a special name or rule, but basically just said it was unconstitutional.


Hey, hypothetically if i had an expert testify and you were a prosecutor that wanted records on which she based her opinion, would you be able to get that or something else, if anything?

What are the first two steps in a criminal trial?

What is the procedure called when defendant enters her plea, other than being called the entry of the plea?

All hypo questions


Plea entry pretty sure is arraignment. First steps are technically reading indictment and entry of plea again, but goes to opening statements after (I provided more than 2 steps). Not sure if you can get the records, but definitely sure you can cross examine on them under Rule 705


The first two steps noted above are listed as the correct answer on previous P&E exams.

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:05 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:09 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:12 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:19 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Also apparently Texas does not adopt the Hinkley Rule under FRE 704(b) .... oops.

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:19 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Would you give partial credit if I blanked and called the procedure for a defendant to making a plea the entry of a plea? Why do I need to know it could be called an arraignment? Aren't you as the grader more concerned about me knowing what a plea is and where it falls in the criminal procedure process? I think I am looking at 32/40 if there is no partial credit. Can't believe I missed the arraignment question.

When you say the expert can be cross-examined, are you saying you do not need to provide anything more than name and address of expert witness doctor, which was the correct answer to the earlier question?

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:22 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Would you give partial credit if I blanked and called the procedure for a defendant to making a plea the entry of a plea? Why do I need to know it could be called an arraignment? Aren't you as the grader more concerned about me knowing what a plea is and where it falls in the criminal procedure process? I think I am looking at 32/40 if there is no partial credit. Can't believe I missed the arraignment question.

When you say the expert can be cross-examined, are you saying you do not need to provide anything more than name and address of expert witness doctor, which was the correct question to the earlier question?


I am still not 100% on what (and when) you need to provide stuff. I know initially all that is required is name and address; however, not sure if you need to provide more once the witness gets on the stand. What I am certain is though is that once the witness is on the stand then he is subject to cross examination and thus Rule 705 would require him to provide any information about the underlying facts and data he used in reaching his opinion.

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:23 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Also apparently Texas does not adopt the Hinkley Rule under FRE 704(b) .... oops.


Are you saying that an expert can testify to a defendants mental state at trial in Texas? If so, make that 31/40

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:25 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Would you give partial credit if I blanked and called the procedure for a defendant to making a plea the entry of a plea? Why do I need to know it could be called an arraignment? Aren't you as the grader more concerned about me knowing what a plea is and where it falls in the criminal procedure process? I think I am looking at 32/40 if there is no partial credit. Can't believe I missed the arraignment question.

When you say the expert can be cross-examined, are you saying you do not need to provide anything more than name and address of expert witness doctor, which was the correct question to the earlier question?


I am still not 100% on what (and when) you need to provide stuff. I know initially all that is required is name and address; however, not sure if you need to provide more once the witness gets on the stand. What I am certain is though is that once the witness is on the stand then he is subject to cross examination and thus Rule 705 would require him to provide any information about the underlying facts and data he used in reaching his opinion.


That makes sense. But would the defense attorney provide this or would the expert provide this? the question asked what June's attorney must disclose, no?

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:48 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Also apparently Texas does not adopt the Hinkley Rule under FRE 704(b) .... oops.


Are you saying that an expert can testify to a defendants mental state at trial in Texas? If so, make that 31/40


Yeah Texas only has the language from 704(a). Texas Court of Criminal affirmed this language apparently. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-court-of ... 22613.html

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:50 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Would you give partial credit if I blanked and called the procedure for a defendant to making a plea the entry of a plea? Why do I need to know it could be called an arraignment? Aren't you as the grader more concerned about me knowing what a plea is and where it falls in the criminal procedure process? I think I am looking at 32/40 if there is no partial credit. Can't believe I missed the arraignment question.

When you say the expert can be cross-examined, are you saying you do not need to provide anything more than name and address of expert witness doctor, which was the correct question to the earlier question?


I am still not 100% on what (and when) you need to provide stuff. I know initially all that is required is name and address; however, not sure if you need to provide more once the witness gets on the stand. What I am certain is though is that once the witness is on the stand then he is subject to cross examination and thus Rule 705 would require him to provide any information about the underlying facts and data he used in reaching his opinion.


That makes sense. But would the defense attorney provide this or would the expert provide this? the question asked what June's attorney must disclose, no?


Still not 100% sure and not investing in in depth research right now, but am sure the witness must answer QUESTIONS about what he relied upon. Not sure if anyone needs to produce documents.

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:59 pm

NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
NonbindingPrecedent wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:Is there anything needed to authenticate a video? What additional testimony could a shop owner provide to properly allow the prosecutor to submit surveillance footage of me stealing from BestBuy in my trial for grand larceny


Not 100% on video, but would presume it would just be similar to a photograph and just satisfy 901.


Would it be fair to say the prosecutor reads the charging document first if the question does not specify if this is a misd. or felony trial


Pretty sure charging document would still be read. While the charging documents used in misdemeanor v. felony differ (i.e. information v. indictment) there still is a charging document.


Also apparently Texas does not adopt the Hinkley Rule under FRE 704(b) .... oops.


Are you saying that an expert can testify to a defendants mental state at trial in Texas? If so, make that 31/40


Yeah Texas only has the language from 704(a). Texas Court of Criminal affirmed this language apparently. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-court-of ... 22613.html


This case only talks about what a non-expert can or can’t do pursuant to rule 704. Where does it explicitly say an expert can testify to the ultimate mental state of D at the time of the act? I thought this was properly in the province of the jury to decide but I guess this is going to be the most incorrect answer?

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:05 pm

Also apparently Texas does not adopt the Hinkley Rule under FRE 704(b) .... oops.[/quote]

Are you saying that an expert can testify to a defendants mental state at trial in Texas? If so, make that 31/40[/quote]

Yeah Texas only has the language from 704(a). Texas Court of Criminal affirmed this language apparently. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-court-of ... 22613.html[/quote]

This case only talks about what a non-expert can or can’t do pursuant to rule 704. Where does it explicitly say an expert can testify to the ultimate mental state of D at the time of the act? I thought this was properly in the province of the jury to decide but I guess this is going to be the most incorrect answer?[/quote]

The exact language of TRE 704 only includes the language from FRE 704(a). Did only a quick skim from the case, but when it references 704 it seems to suggest TRE 704 has no ban on mental states

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:11 pm

It seems off to allow the mens rea to be allowed to be asserted by an expert instead of left to a jury. I haven't come across a source explicitly saying otherwise. Wasn't Hinkley himself from texas. Maybe you have an article/case saying that texas has refused to follow this hinkley rule you speak of? I feel like 704 only talks about the limits of nonexperts relative to experts but says nothing about experts re: ultimate mental state. We are only 20% of the test down. Seems like it is best to just move on

NonbindingPrecedent

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby NonbindingPrecedent » Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:21 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:It seems off to allow the mens rea to be allowed to be asserted by an expert instead of left to a jury. I haven't come across a source explicitly saying otherwise. Wasn't Hinkley himself from texas. Maybe you have an article/case saying that texas has refused to follow this hinkley rule you speak of? I feel like 704 only talks about the limits of nonexperts relative to experts but says nothing about experts re: ultimate mental state. We are only 20% of the test down. Seems like it is best to just move on


Maybe I am wrong, but I know US Congress explicitly enacted 704(b) because Republicans were pissed that Hinkley could get off as insane for shooting Reagan (and mental state testimony by an expert by used for this purpose). The Texas rule does not contain this additional language, thus I think they may have been testing on the distinction. Either way, it is only one question I believe if you somehow recognized and referenced that fact that you are dealing with an ultimate issue and that ultimate issue testimony is typically allowed, I think you are bound to get part credit. The graders will devise a repubric that allocates out the points for each question (each question is weighted equally, but the BLE has free range to split up subparts as the see fit). If this is a big enough issue (as I suspect it was), I would not be surprised if they gave part credit to applicants who recognized this was an ultimate issue question and no credit to applicants who were totally in left field. Regardless, don't sweat it and just be glad you know the FRE for tomorrow.

Big Red

Gold
Posts: 3271
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:29 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Big Red » Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:29 pm

yeah guys this is insanely counterproductive, esp considering it's only 10%. Dunno how the "curve" is going to workout (to the extent that I understand the curve they do at all), but I guarantee you everyone who took had to at least think twice about literally half those crim questions.

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 7:53 pm

Big Red wrote:yeah guys this is insanely counterproductive, esp considering it's only 10%. Dunno how the "curve" is going to workout (to the extent that I understand the curve they do at all), but I guarantee you everyone who took had to at least think twice about literally half those crim questions.


So is the consensus that the MPT was hard to finish in time. What were the three headers? Something like: 1) The evidence was not material, would not have changed the result at trial and therefore did not prejudice the defendant; 2) the State did not have possession of the exculpatory material and therefore the material was not suppressed; and 3) there was no violation of the spousal privilege and 804(b)(6) because the marriage was conceived with the purpose of preventing the wife from testifying. One case per each heading but not enough time to do the application portion adequately for all three headers. Right? RIGHT

AmericanEagleee

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 11:07 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby AmericanEagleee » Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:44 pm

Made a pretty flagrant mistake and discussed "possession" of the recantation as the main issue there (Unsure how I read that the recantation occurred AFTER the trial). Nailed organization otherwise and got the other two points analyzed well.

How fucked am I on the MPT?

rbbt808488000416

New
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:16 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby rbbt808488000416 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:46 pm

whosinthehousejc wrote:
rbbt808488000416 wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
whosinthehousejc wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:What the **** is a misdemeanor

Haha yeah, wasn’t expecting to see that.


Theft of water though?


yeah what were they getting at with this question? the one offense rule?


I guessed with double jeopardy, Blockburger, same elements and same criminal episode? obviously different res, but that's all I could come up with.



Maybe they were getting at the collateral estoppel rule? But I don't know how we could guess that without being given the factual findings from the jury's not guilty verdict

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:51 pm

AmericanEagleee wrote:Made a pretty flagrant mistake and discussed "possession" of the recantation as the main issue there (Unsure how I read that the recantation occurred AFTER the trial). Nailed organization otherwise and got the other two points analyzed well.

How fucked am I on the MPT?


I think the goal for a median score is 2/3 of this essay being on point. There was not enough time to really nail every section for the majority of test takers in light of their lack of prep or skill in general. For me, I made a point to get all three cases discussed under each heading but was not on point trying to apply the facts of the case to the law as well as id have liked. I rmemeber the possession issue being related to Trublott's comments to the ambulance driver which was analogous to the county hospital and the wife's records that were deemed to not have been in the prosecutions possession to suppress. The recantation was given to a detective who put it into the case file and that point went to the fact that there was an open file policy. I didnt have time to discuss how the open file policy could be attacked as misleading in its own right. I needed another 20 minutes man, and im guessing a lot of people did too to keep it all straight

AmericanEagleee

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 11:07 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby AmericanEagleee » Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:55 pm

Guccifer91 wrote:
AmericanEagleee wrote:Made a pretty flagrant mistake and discussed "possession" of the recantation as the main issue there (Unsure how I read that the recantation occurred AFTER the trial). Nailed organization otherwise and got the other two points analyzed well.

How fucked am I on the MPT?


I think the goal for a median score is 2/3 of this essay being on point. There was not enough time to really nail every section for the majority of test takers in light of their lack of prep or skill in general. For me, I made a point to get all three cases discussed under each heading but was not on point trying to apply the facts of the case to the law as well as id have liked. I rmemeber the possession issue being related to Trublott's comments to the ambulance driver which was analogous to the county hospital and the wife's records that were deemed to not have been in the prosecutions possession to suppress. The recantation was given to a detective who put it into the case file and that point went to the fact that there was an open file policy. I didnt have time to discuss how the open file policy could be attacked as misleading in its own right. I needed another 20 minutes man, and im guessing a lot of people did too to keep it all straight



I had gone in finishing practice MPTs easily ahead of time, but made a pretty critical mistake starting on the Evidence issue and then working backwards. We just need 67.5% is all I'm gonna tell myself. Lets kill the MBE tomorrow !

Guccifer91

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 pm

Re: July 2018 Texas Bar Exam

Postby Guccifer91 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:03 pm

AmericanEagleee wrote:
Guccifer91 wrote:
AmericanEagleee wrote:Made a pretty flagrant mistake and discussed "possession" of the recantation as the main issue there (Unsure how I read that the recantation occurred AFTER the trial). Nailed organization otherwise and got the other two points analyzed well.

How fucked am I on the MPT?


I think the goal for a median score is 2/3 of this essay being on point. There was not enough time to really nail every section for the majority of test takers in light of their lack of prep or skill in general. For me, I made a point to get all three cases discussed under each heading but was not on point trying to apply the facts of the case to the law as well as id have liked. I rmemeber the possession issue being related to Trublott's comments to the ambulance driver which was analogous to the county hospital and the wife's records that were deemed to not have been in the prosecutions possession to suppress. The recantation was given to a detective who put it into the case file and that point went to the fact that there was an open file policy. I didnt have time to discuss how the open file policy could be attacked as misleading in its own right. I needed another 20 minutes man, and im guessing a lot of people did too to keep it all straight



I had gone in finishing practice MPTs easily ahead of time, but made a pretty critical mistake starting on the Evidence issue and then working backwards. We just need 67.5% is all I'm gonna tell myself. Lets kill the MBE tomorrow !


hell yea.



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: airdudeme, scard and 27 guests