BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam Forum

[Blue Ivy]

Any advice for a slow reader? I was going through my MBE simulation and realized I have a decent grasp on substantive law, but my score needs work because timing was an issue, especially in the afternoon section. When I pick up the pace I tend to make silly mistakes. I'm trying to find that perfect medium between fast yet careful reading. Any advice?

[victortsoi]

So my grades in NY for the two essays I sent in were 35 and later 45. I did however not answer the crim pro question in the later essay, so that probably cost me points. Is the consensus really that this is a scare tactic?

[DesperadoOfColumbia]

Can anyone explain the specific differences between conspiracy and accomplice liability -- really in the context for an essay. It seems like one would necessarily involve the other in most instances because they share basically the same elements, but on some of the essay examples they mention conspiracy, but not accomplice liability, so I'm guessing there must be some palpable difference. Thanks!

Conspiracy is just that - a meeting of the minds to conspire to commit a crime. Your crime is the meeting of the minds (your K prof will hate this phrase, alas, c'est ca).


For an essay I'd mention this:

Elements

a) A meeting of the minds (your K prof will hate you) between more than 2 people. Obviously you can't conspire alone. There's no requirement for express agreement, no "HEY OK JACK JOE AND ANDY WE ARE ROBBING THIS BANK". Implied agreement is enough, and not all parties need to know each other. Maybe someone doesn't know the getaway driver, maybe like in the Dark Knight you don't know that the Joker is in on the part where he shoots everyone at the beginning and different people are shooting different people to get them out of the way, but it qualifies as a conspiracy nonetheless.

b) Intent: Parties need to intend to enter into the agreement and intend to commit the target crime or objective. No accidents here, you mean it.

c) There needs to be an overt act to further the crime but literally almost ANYTHING would do, for MPC purposes at least. This isn't a common law element. See what they test for but if it's an essay mention both. Like almost ANY SMALL THING, from the Joker stealing that bus to someone buying a gun to the guy getting to the rooftop is enough for the conspiracy.

Conspiracy ends when the crime is complete or fails. The crime does not need to actually happen in full or in common law, happen at all. You get a couple of guys Ocean's Eleven and in the end everyone chickens out but there's enough to fulfill corpus delcti to show conspiracy, the charge can stick. Under the MPC (and I think majority state rules) you need to have like at least scouted out the place or bought some drills or hired Don Cheadle's awful British accent for that conspiracy to stick. There are almost no defenses to conspiracy. Factual impossibility still renders the conspiracy alive - the bank had moved, suddenly the store is having a huge giveaway and everything is free and you can't steal things, you have still conspired. Withdrawal is not a defense, but if a co-conspirator goes on to commit another crime - again, let's use TDKR - the Joker steals a schoolbus to get away in that line blending in and leaving the scene, if you have withdrawan by then, you would be guilty of the conspiracy for the bank robbery but nothing related to the bus theft unless you were in on it the whole time.

Let's talk about accomplice liability:

Accomplice is someone who aids, encourages, or counsels the principle (principal? can never get these two right in the crim context). Basically being an accomplice, you need to have provided some assistance, with intent, to further the crime. Intent is very important. If you inadvertently helped someone (leased a car while working at Hertz, turns out they used it to rob a bank) you're not an accomplice. Also, just being there is not enough. Just because you happen to be at the crime but provided no intentional assistance, encouragement, or counsel, then you're not an accomplice. You're at a Wal-Mart, it's being robbed and the guy's running at the automatic doors and you're coming in and you trigger the automatic doors so he gets out as you come in, there's no prerequisite intent element there for you to be an accomplice.

The liability is that you're liable for both the original and any foreseeable crime committed by the principal in its furtherance. Your principal robs a bank and you are the getaway driver, you can be found of being guilty of both the robbery and anything that happens on the getaway (high speed chase., hitting someone, etc). In contrast (I realize the hypos get silly), if you two rob a bank and then after you're done he goes and decides to dump a bunch of oil in the ocean for some reason after you leave, you're not an accomplice to that pollution charge even if you acted in concert on an earlier set of offenses.

It's hard to say on the MBE or essay how far they want to take the accomplice liability thing. IRL I've worked a case where a person was charged with being an accomplice by allowing his uncle to borrow his car to drive his girlfriend home, but the uncle shot and killed the girlfriend and raped her, even though he only had knowledge of the transport section. He was found not guilty, btw, but I'm just making an example as to what sometimes crazy shit happens IRL as to accomplice liability (and how overzealous some prosecutors are).

Compared to conspiracy, there are way more defenses and exceptions for accomplice liability. You can withdraw if the withdrawal happens before the crime happens or becomes unstoppable. If you guys rented a storage unit for the money you were gonna store from robbing a bank, but nothing else have happened yet, you can say "fuck this I'm outta here and done" and that'd be an withdrawal. The crime is not unstoppable yet. As an accomplice though, you must negate or repudiate the initial encourage. "This was a mistake, I'm getting rid of this storage unit" would suffice. It would not be sufficient if the bank robbery is happening and you're waiting outside and had a change of heart and just took off, you've already allowed and encouraged the crime to happen and it's too late. I see that fact pattern a lot - last minute getaway driver gets a change of heart, well, tough, you went a bit too far and will be an accomplice to the bank robbery (although if some other unforseeable crime happens in the meantime like say if the guy coming out not seeing you around decides to go on a shooting spree, you would not be an accomplice to that. The crime must be foreseeable. Even though you ditching your partner may have caused that shooting spree, it doesn't necessarily render you as an accomplice (although I'm 100% that some overzealous ADA would charge you as one, for the purposes of the bar I'd say you're fine).

If you're a member of a protected class you won't be liable as an accomplice. If you're Traci Lords shooting porno at 15 with a fake ID, you're obviously encouraging the pornographers intentionally into shooting child porn, but you will not be considered an accomplice. Same for Statutory rape an stuff.

There are also statutes that do not provide for accomplice. Drug buyers are not accomplices to drug sellers, guy buying chop shop parts aren't accomplices to the chop shop action unless they specifically told the guy to steal the car and chop it, that sort of thing.

There's also some accessory issues, but that's different from accomplice liability. That's basically rendering criminal assistance after the fact, helping escape or apprehension, with no involvement with the original crime. Let me give you a real life example of how this works (and a good reason why you shouldn't go on CL to find a roommate). At law school I found someone to share my 2BR to cut costs, but sexually harassed my girlfriend one night and since this was before he signed the lease I was able to get his ass out and get a no contact order on him.

A month later he went to a party where some 17 year old kid ate a shard of meth (wtf right?) and of course, overdosed the fuck out and died. My old roomie here had nothing to do with the meth, he didn't have the meth, he wasn't using it, he was just around, but he helped put the body in an old safe they had, trucked it into the middle of the woods, and dug a hole and put the safe in there. He helped the principals (the guys giving the kid drugs) avoid apprehension, but he was not an accomplice to that crime, merely rendered assistance, since he did not aid, encourage, or counsel the principals nor did he help to commit it. He was responsible only for the body disposal to cover up the crime (and later snitching, incidentally). This may come up as an obstruction of justice charge, we called it rendering criminal assistance, it's something you should take note because it does involve something similar to being an accomplice, but he was no, legally speaking, an accomplice to the murder conviction here.

I hope that helps!

TL;DR:
Conspiracy:
1) Meeting of minds (two or more people)
2) Intent to enter into the agreement
3) Intent to commit THAT PARTICULAR crime not just (let's just drive around and see if we wanna pick up a hooker or if convenient, rob a McDicks)
4) MPC - the smallest amount of over act.
5) Can't withdrawal from the conspired crime.
6) Crime doesn't need to be successful, but the conspiracy ends when it terminates either with success or lack thereof


Accomplice:

1)Someone who aids, encouragees, or counsels principals to commit a crime intentionally. Must provide assistance.
2) Liable for the whole crime and anything foreseeable.
3) Can withdraw before crime is committed or unstoppable, but must negate or repudiate the aid or encouragement
4) Not applicable to protected classes or parties not provided for in statutes
5) Distinguish from people rendering aid after the fact. Accomplices must have been there at the beginning or prior to the crime being committed or attempted.

[DesperadoOfColumbia]

Any advice for a slow reader? I was going through my MBE simulation and realized I have a decent grasp on substantive law, but my score needs work because timing was an issue, especially in the afternoon section. When I pick up the pace I tend to make silly mistakes. I'm trying to find that perfect medium between fast yet careful reading. Any advice?

I get wicked tired in the PM and I tend to spread questions out by the call and go for the ones I know I'll do well first. This way I'm not worried as much if I miss one I can get easily and let the complicated ones bog me down and lower my score.

[kykiske]

Here's my short-hand outline for attacking MPT. Hope you find it useful.

MPT Strategy

a. Analysis of Case or Client File: Minute 0 to minute 15.
i. Task Memo.
1) Contains the "factual" information about the assignment.
2) Start with the "assignment clause,"--usually the second to last paragraph.
3) Then read the rest of Task Memo.
a) Ensure that your answer strictly follows Task Memo.'s instructions.
i) Determine the MPT form, tone, and audience.
4) May or may not contain the format.
a) If Task Memo. does not contain format, read the Instruction Sheet.

b. Analysis of Library: Minute 15 to Minute 30.
i. Legal Resources
1) Contains cases, statutes, rules, or any other authority.
ii. Always read the cases first.
1) If more than one, read the earliest case first.
a) Do not ignore footnotes.
i) Citing to them is fair game.
iii. Dealing with contrary authority
1) Focus on facts, law, reasoning, and public policy in distinguishing given cases from your Client's case.

c. Consolidate Information: Minute 30 to Minute 45.
i. Consolidate the relevant facts.
ii. Write down key elements of the legal authority.
iii. Re-read the Task Memo.'s instructions.

d. Write Answer: Minute 45 to Minute 90.
i. In writing the answer, always keep audience, tone, and format in mind.

[mrs_featherbottom]

Are people in NY just focusing on the most heavily tested state-specific subjects (Wills, NY Practice, Domestic Relations, etc.)? Not sure what to do with topics like Workers Comp/No Fault Insurance that don't seem as important.

[kyle010723]

For the "Half Day" and "Full Day" in the MPQ, I don't think they are assigned? So just extra questions to practice with?

[EAsports]

For the "Half Day" and "Full Day" in the MPQ, I don't think they are assigned? So just extra questions to practice with?

That's my impression. I did both and found them harder than the Mixed Sets. Let me know what you think!

[Notmyfavbar]

Are people in NY just focusing on the most heavily tested state-specific subjects (Wills, NY Practice, Domestic Relations, etc.)? Not sure what to do with topics like Workers Comp/No Fault Insurance that don't seem as important.

That's my plan, but I also am ridiculously behind so idk if that helps.

[RaleighStClair]

Just finished all of Emmanual's and only averaged 63.5 % like what the fuck I thought it was supposed to be easier than Barbri. I scored 59% correct on the Barbri full day test (51% percentile as of today). I haven't been doing all of the essays because I really thought I'd be able to be at 70% right by now so essays wouldn't be an issue but I think that strategy has failed me. I pulled a 16 hour, totally focused day today and I'm going to fucking lose it if I don't have a major break through today. I might be too retarded to pass this test. Going to bed, good luck yall.

When you say all of Emanuel's are you talking about each section with all the specific questinos, or the 200 question practice MBE?

And you're doing fine. Just go over every question you got wrong, understand clearly why you got it wrong, and keep doing more q's.

[RaleighStClair]

Anyone know if there's a way to figure out how you're doing compared to others on the Mixed Sets? If not, is there a general consensus on whether people do better on the mixed sets than the StudySmart ones? I tried searching through the posts on here, but it's hard to tell.

I did better on Set 2 than Set 1, but both were definitely higher than my average percentage correct on the MPQs that we input into Study Smart. 68% on Set 1, 78% on Set 2, and my average on StudySmart ones is 61%. I guess I'm wondering if I'm actually improving or if I'm just doing easier questions.

To give you one person to compare to (who will undoubtedly make u feel good about yourself):

Mixed Set 1 - 54%
Mixed Set 2 - 76%
Mixed Set 4 - 54%

Going to do Mixed Set 3 today -- aiming for 60% -- I feel like with that plus doing fairly middle ground on the essay, I should be able to pass... am i wrong?

Oh absolutely. Sounds like you're doing about median on the MBE, and with a middle ground essay section you're more than fine!

[RaleighStClair]

Anyone know if there's a way to figure out how you're doing compared to others on the Mixed Sets? If not, is there a general consensus on whether people do better on the mixed sets than the StudySmart ones? I tried searching through the posts on here, but it's hard to tell.

I did better on Set 2 than Set 1, but both were definitely higher than my average percentage correct on the MPQs that we input into Study Smart. 68% on Set 1, 78% on Set 2, and my average on StudySmart ones is 61%. I guess I'm wondering if I'm actually improving or if I'm just doing easier questions.

Probably both. Consensus is the mixed set questions are easier than MPQs. Consensus is also that the real MBE questions will be easier than both.

Ok, good to know. Thanks.

[phillyboy101]

Can anyone explain the specific differences between conspiracy and accomplice liability -- really in the context for an essay. It seems like one would necessarily involve the other in most instances because they share basically the same elements, but on some of the essay examples they mention conspiracy, but not accomplice liability, so I'm guessing there must be some palpable difference. Thanks!

Conspiracy is just that - a meeting of the minds to conspire to commit a crime. Your crime is the meeting of the minds (your K prof will hate this phrase, alas, c'est ca).


For an essay I'd mention this:

Elements

a) A meeting of the minds (your K prof will hate you) between more than 2 people. Obviously you can't conspire alone. There's no requirement for express agreement, no "HEY OK JACK JOE AND ANDY WE ARE ROBBING THIS BANK". Implied agreement is enough, and not all parties need to know each other. Maybe someone doesn't know the getaway driver, maybe like in the Dark Knight you don't know that the Joker is in on the part where he shoots everyone at the beginning and different people are shooting different people to get them out of the way, but it qualifies as a conspiracy nonetheless.

b) Intent: Parties need to intend to enter into the agreement and intend to commit the target crime or objective. No accidents here, you mean it.

c) There needs to be an overt act to further the crime but literally almost ANYTHING would do, for MPC purposes at least. This isn't a common law element. See what they test for but if it's an essay mention both. Like almost ANY SMALL THING, from the Joker stealing that bus to someone buying a gun to the guy getting to the rooftop is enough for the conspiracy.

Conspiracy ends when the crime is complete or fails. The crime does not need to actually happen in full or in common law, happen at all. You get a couple of guys Ocean's Eleven and in the end everyone chickens out but there's enough to fulfill corpus delcti to show conspiracy, the charge can stick. Under the MPC (and I think majority state rules) you need to have like at least scouted out the place or bought some drills or hired Don Cheadle's awful British accent for that conspiracy to stick. There are almost no defenses to conspiracy. Factual impossibility still renders the conspiracy alive - the bank had moved, suddenly the store is having a huge giveaway and everything is free and you can't steal things, you have still conspired. Withdrawal is not a defense, but if a co-conspirator goes on to commit another crime - again, let's use TDKR - the Joker steals a schoolbus to get away in that line blending in and leaving the scene, if you have withdrawan by then, you would be guilty of the conspiracy for the bank robbery but nothing related to the bus theft unless you were in on it the whole time.

Let's talk about accomplice liability:

Accomplice is someone who aids, encourages, or counsels the principle (principal? can never get these two right in the crim context). Basically being an accomplice, you need to have provided some assistance, with intent, to further the crime. Intent is very important. If you inadvertently helped someone (leased a car while working at Hertz, turns out they used it to rob a bank) you're not an accomplice. Also, just being there is not enough. Just because you happen to be at the crime but provided no intentional assistance, encouragement, or counsel, then you're not an accomplice. You're at a Wal-Mart, it's being robbed and the guy's running at the automatic doors and you're coming in and you trigger the automatic doors so he gets out as you come in, there's no prerequisite intent element there for you to be an accomplice.

The liability is that you're liable for both the original and any foreseeable crime committed by the principal in its furtherance. Your principal robs a bank and you are the getaway driver, you can be found of being guilty of both the robbery and anything that happens on the getaway (high speed chase., hitting someone, etc). In contrast (I realize the hypos get silly), if you two rob a bank and then after you're done he goes and decides to dump a bunch of oil in the ocean for some reason after you leave, you're not an accomplice to that pollution charge even if you acted in concert on an earlier set of offenses.

It's hard to say on the MBE or essay how far they want to take the accomplice liability thing. IRL I've worked a case where a person was charged with being an accomplice by allowing his uncle to borrow his car to drive his girlfriend home, but the uncle shot and killed the girlfriend and raped her, even though he only had knowledge of the transport section. He was found not guilty, btw, but I'm just making an example as to what sometimes crazy shit happens IRL as to accomplice liability (and how overzealous some prosecutors are).

Compared to conspiracy, there are way more defenses and exceptions for accomplice liability. You can withdraw if the withdrawal happens before the crime happens or becomes unstoppable. If you guys rented a storage unit for the money you were gonna store from robbing a bank, but nothing else have happened yet, you can say "fuck this I'm outta here and done" and that'd be an withdrawal. The crime is not unstoppable yet. As an accomplice though, you must negate or repudiate the initial encourage. "This was a mistake, I'm getting rid of this storage unit" would suffice. It would not be sufficient if the bank robbery is happening and you're waiting outside and had a change of heart and just took off, you've already allowed and encouraged the crime to happen and it's too late. I see that fact pattern a lot - last minute getaway driver gets a change of heart, well, tough, you went a bit too far and will be an accomplice to the bank robbery (although if some other unforseeable crime happens in the meantime like say if the guy coming out not seeing you around decides to go on a shooting spree, you would not be an accomplice to that. The crime must be foreseeable. Even though you ditching your partner may have caused that shooting spree, it doesn't necessarily render you as an accomplice (although I'm 100% that some overzealous ADA would charge you as one, for the purposes of the bar I'd say you're fine).

If you're a member of a protected class you won't be liable as an accomplice. If you're Traci Lords shooting porno at 15 with a fake ID, you're obviously encouraging the pornographers intentionally into shooting child porn, but you will not be considered an accomplice. Same for Statutory rape an stuff.

There are also statutes that do not provide for accomplice. Drug buyers are not accomplices to drug sellers, guy buying chop shop parts aren't accomplices to the chop shop action unless they specifically told the guy to steal the car and chop it, that sort of thing.

There's also some accessory issues, but that's different from accomplice liability. That's basically rendering criminal assistance after the fact, helping escape or apprehension, with no involvement with the original crime. Let me give you a real life example of how this works (and a good reason why you shouldn't go on CL to find a roommate). At law school I found someone to share my 2BR to cut costs, but sexually harassed my girlfriend one night and since this was before he signed the lease I was able to get his ass out and get a no contact order on him.

A month later he went to a party where some 17 year old kid ate a shard of meth (wtf right?) and of course, overdosed the fuck out and died. My old roomie here had nothing to do with the meth, he didn't have the meth, he wasn't using it, he was just around, but he helped put the body in an old safe they had, trucked it into the middle of the woods, and dug a hole and put the safe in there. He helped the principals (the guys giving the kid drugs) avoid apprehension, but he was not an accomplice to that crime, merely rendered assistance, since he did not aid, encourage, or counsel the principals nor did he help to commit it. He was responsible only for the body disposal to cover up the crime (and later snitching, incidentally). This may come up as an obstruction of justice charge, we called it rendering criminal assistance, it's something you should take note because it does involve something similar to being an accomplice, but he was no, legally speaking, an accomplice to the murder conviction here.

I hope that helps!

TL;DR:
Conspiracy:
1) Meeting of minds (two or more people)
2) Intent to enter into the agreement
3) Intent to commit THAT PARTICULAR crime not just (let's just drive around and see if we wanna pick up a hooker or if convenient, rob a McDicks)
4) MPC - the smallest amount of over act.
5) Can't withdrawal from the conspired crime.
6) Crime doesn't need to be successful, but the conspiracy ends when it terminates either with success or lack thereof


Accomplice:

1)Someone who aids, encouragees, or counsels principals to commit a crime intentionally. Must provide assistance.
2) Liable for the whole crime and anything foreseeable.
3) Can withdraw before crime is committed or unstoppable, but must negate or repudiate the aid or encouragement
4) Not applicable to protected classes or parties not provided for in statutes
5) Distinguish from people rendering aid after the fact. Accomplices must have been there at the beginning or prior to the crime being committed or attempted.

Wow that was awesome - extremely helpful and entertaining. To follow up, isn't it the case that a conspirator is also liable for all foreseeable crimes that happen in the course of the particular conspiracy crime? Also, if a question is asking to list crimes for which someone can be charged, and someone was an accomplice in a murder for example, is that person charged with being an accomplice to murder, or just for murder. TYIA

[3|ink]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

[RaleighStClair]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

Definitely noticed this on Set 1. My Set 2 misses were pretty evenly spaced out though.

[3|ink]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

Definitely noticed this on Set 1. My Set 2 misses were pretty evenly spaced out though.

sets 5 and 6 go hard early on

[diowad]

For MBE/UBE takers (or whatever bar you have that doesn't have like 10 or 12 state-only extra topics), how are you approaching Conflicts of Law? My state's (MBE) bar website says that Conflicts is not a stand-alone essay topic, but is "embedded" in others. I feel like if I have to sacrifice missing 1/3 or 1/4 of the possible points on one essay in exchange for freeing up that several hours of study time for the other subjects is worth it. Thoughts?

[murray18]

For MBE/UBE takers (or whatever bar you have that doesn't have like 10 or 12 state-only extra topics), how are you approaching Conflicts of Law? My state's (MBE) bar website says that Conflicts is not a stand-alone essay topic, but is "embedded" in others. I feel like if I have to sacrifice missing 1/3 or 1/4 of the possible points on one essay in exchange for freeing up that several hours of study time for the other subjects is worth it. Thoughts?

Personally, I'm going to go ahead and do a little bit of work on conflicts. I'm not going to give it as much weight, but its worth a couple hours later one to ensure that I can at least spew something coherent on an essay that brings it up. Could be easy points.

[charlesxavier]

The essay answers are making me nervous. I look at some of them and think there's no way it would receive more than the minimum passing score...if that. Either these essay answers are not indicative of good scores or I'm beginning to question how anybody has failed.

I just did a state specific criminal law question and the answer relied on the common law elements and then threw in a few state specific exceptions.

They asked which crimes the suspect could be charged with and part of the answer (abbreviations added and I edited for clarity):

S can be charged with robbery. Robbery is taking of personal property with force or threat of force. S took item at gunpoint (force). Elements of robbery have been met.

First degree/premeditated murder is unlawful killing with premeditation. Here, S shot and killed V, a killing of a person. Earlier statement by S indicated intent to kill V. Assuming who he was referring to was V, it indicates the premeditation required for murder.

[BVest]

.

Wow that was awesome - extremely helpful and entertaining. To follow up, isn't it the case that a conspirator is also liable for all foreseeable crimes that happen in the course of the particular conspiracy crime? Also, if a question is asking to list crimes for which someone can be charged, and someone was an accomplice in a murder for example, is that person charged with being an accomplice to murder, or just for murder. TYIA

Yes, a conspirator is liable for foreseeable crimes in the course, e.g. car theft to use as a getaway car when conspiring to rob a bank. One more note on conspiracy, specifically on the intent aspect: at least two of the alleged conspirators must intend to commit the crime; so if one criminal and one undercover cop "conspire" to rob a bank, there is no conspiracy because the cop doesn't actually intend to accomplish the bank robbery.

And accomplices are charged with the crime. If you are an accomplice to murder, the charge you face is murder.

[kyle010723]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

Definitely noticed this on Set 1. My Set 2 misses were pretty evenly spaced out though.

Are you guys just far ahead of schedule? Or your PSP assigned mix set 2 already? For IL, we just did mix set 1 a few days ago and just started MPQ 5 on substantive topics. But on here, it seems that lots of people already finished MPQ 5 for most topics and some already went through mix set 4.

[xlawschoolhopefulx]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

Definitely noticed this on Set 1. My Set 2 misses were pretty evenly spaced out though.

Are you guys just far ahead of schedule? Or your PSP assigned mix set 2 already? For IL, we just did mix set 1 a few days ago and just started MPQ 5 on substantive topics. But on here, it seems that lots of people already finished MPQ 5 for most topics and some already went through mix set 4.

NY's PSP assigned through mixed set 4 this past week.

[kmp127]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

Definitely noticed this on Set 1. My Set 2 misses were pretty evenly spaced out though.

Are you guys just far ahead of schedule? Or your PSP assigned mix set 2 already? For IL, we just did mix set 1 a few days ago and just started MPQ 5 on substantive topics. But on here, it seems that lots of people already finished MPQ 5 for most topics and some already went through mix set 4.

Seeing as I have 100+ overdue items on my PSP, it's fair to say I'm pretty much doing anything and everything I physically can, in any order. At this point, it's simply GO time.

[kyle010723]

NY's PSP assigned through mixed set 4 this past week.

Oh wow, that is intense, IL does not even assign mix set 3 to 7.

[diowad]

I'm noticing that the mixed sets try to throw you off by giving you the hardest questions right away.

Definitely noticed this on Set 1. My Set 2 misses were pretty evenly spaced out though.

Are you guys just far ahead of schedule? Or your PSP assigned mix set 2 already? For IL, we just did mix set 1 a few days ago and just started MPQ 5 on substantive topics. But on here, it seems that lots of people already finished MPQ 5 for most topics and some already went through mix set 4.

I am wondering this as well. I don't assigned MPQ mixed sets 2 and 3 until the Sunday before the Exam