2015 February California Bar Exam Forum

[pineapple99]

I argued that while State will attempt to get it in under excited utterance, it does not satisfy the exception because she had no way of remembering the event based on the doctor's affidavit, therefore not satisfying the 3rd element. I don't think I talked about excited utterance for the 911 call which was a big mistake but I was running out of time.

[JDMBALLMMS]

Did anyone concede any issues on pt b? I conceded that the 911 was hearsay, but I think that was probably Completely wrong....

I sort of conceded the first part of the 911 transcript as being non-testimonial for the purpose of aiding an emergency, but said it became testimonial as per...Davis(?)...so the second half should be suppressed.

I also sort of conceded that if the 911 transcript fell under the public records exception that Peter's statements were hearsay within hearsay and should be suppressed. But that was only if the court found that the 911 operator was not acting as an agent of law enforcement.

I doubt if the examiners are looking for one right answer but more on arguing the case from both sides.

[Gopackgo2010]

I've been reading everyone's thoughts and one thing that I think is that we likely don't have to be perfect on every part of the exam to pass. I know it's hard to believe that in the moment though. I sure didn't. But, I keep reminding myself of some of the passing essays on baressays.com that don't even state the right law or miss what I think are big issues. It's good to strive for perfection just because your more likely to pass if your close to it, but in no way does it seem necessary or even possible.

For instance, I was scoring 85% on practice MBE and that PM session made me her bitch. Really, that's the biggest thing I worry about, since I was planning on the MBE giving me cushion. Got held up on some early questions and then had to race through the last 40 or so to finish on time. Disappointed I let that happen.

On a brighter note, It seems like I got something right on Essay #6 that no one has mentioned on here, which has not happened on any other essay lol. Thank g-d I used my probate code statute book from law school to study, and looked over some of the notes I wrote in the margins from law school. My bar prep certainly did not have what I'm talking about, and a google search did't bring it up right away either. Can't believe that's the kind of detail they test you on. G-d bless my Wills prof, you're a queen. But, really It'll probably be all good, I know I missed shit on other parts of the test, but I don't think they expect us to get everything, I just think it's good to try to do so.

Also, Essay #5 felt like a bitch to organize. Kept switching what order I would talk about the defendant's....annoying. It was like doing a puzzle lol.

[s1m4]

Were we to talk at all about relevance? I threw it in there at the end, that the wife's statements were not relevant and thus should not come in - I saw that relevance was one of the code sections we were provided.

What about authentication?

[injun]

Does anyone know if it is possible to get a score above a 50 if you write for the wrong side for at least part of a PT? I think I argued for the defense for the confrontation clause part, but completely messed up the hearsay part. Thanks for any info you can provide!

[a_ela1]

For PTb I excluded both saying they didnt meet excited utterance, only because 1) i didnt pick up on the biz record thing for the 911 call, and 2) because the prompt told us to argue hearsay so I did.

I think I said some garbage about the head movements being irrelevant, because they were conditionally relevant on whether or not she meant them as assertions,the doctor said the head movements prob didnt mean anything, therefore it couldnt be a statement. Then I said some crap about even if they were statements,she wasn't under "stress" from the event because she had been sedated, then a couple of those other factors from that one case, so it wasnt an EU given the totality or circ. For the dad I said his statements werent EU under some other TOC argument I pulled out of my ass. I think I said time had gone by and that it wasnt spontaneous, but the result of questioning, so no EU.

[Gopackgo2010]

Were we to talk at all about relevance? I threw it in there at the end, that the wife's statements were not relevant and thus should not come in - I saw that relevance was one of the code sections we were provided.

What about authentication?

I mentioned it, but probably didn't have to. They probably put it there for someone, like me, to mention it and waste time on that rather than writing other more important things.

Regarding relevance, how would her identifying the alleged assailant not be relevant to or make it more likely that the person identified actually committed the crime? Whether she was reliable is a question for the jury, but it doesn't make the evidence inadmissible. I wanted to start with how she lacked competence and her statements didn't mean anything, but then they wouldn't be assertions and the argument they wanted on the brief was hearsay, so that was a little confusing, since that's what I would have done in real life.

The instructions stated that the recording and transcript were certified I believe....not sure.

[s1m4]

^ Under the 3rd heading "Other relief court may grant" I wrote relevance: then talked about how they were not relevant because the doctor said she was so incapable of communicating that the statements did not mean anything and werent relevant to the case.

[dueprocess14]

^ Under the 3rd heading "Other relief court may grant" I wrote relevance: then talked about how they were not relevant because the doctor said she was so incapable of communicating that the statements did not mean anything and werent relevant to the case.

Same. Said it wasn't admissible bc relevance. But it was like 3 percent of my memo.

[auds1008]

i think we were all victorious by not getting a chapter 6 violation...

[PennJD83]

Under the 3rd heading, I think I said that the court should admit the mom's statement from her interview with Mary Lynch as an EU and I cited the Davis or whatever case said that the court still allowed in evidence as EU even after the startling event occurred.

[AguasAguas!]

Does anyone know if it is possible to get a score above a 50 if you write for the wrong side for at least part of a PT? I think I argued for the defense for the confrontation clause part, but completely messed up the hearsay part. Thanks for any info you can provide!

To make you feel better at my expense ... I got a 55 in July by basically not using the law library because I was so stressed out and used to just going through the BarBri book I didn't realize the law library was a separate folder underneath the facts until there were like 25 minutes left. So, I am sure you can get above a 50.

Were we to talk at all about relevance? I threw it in there at the end, that the wife's statements were not relevant and thus should not come in - I saw that relevance was one of the code sections we were provided.

What about authentication?

Yeah I thought the relevance statute was there just to mess with you. The arguments the motion to suppress were based off of were hearsay and the Confrontation Clause. Since ?he/she? didn't make any arguments on relevance, I didn't. I also didn't use authentication because with 10 minutes left I just was like... yeah idk what to do with this so instead I wrote a conclusion and polished up all formatting thanks to SoftTest.

[AguasAguas!]

^ Under the 3rd heading "Other relief court may grant" I wrote relevance: then talked about how they were not relevant because the doctor said she was so incapable of communicating that the statements did not mean anything and werent relevant to the case.

Good move s1m4 ... wish I had done the same.

[s1m4]

^ Under the 3rd heading "Other relief court may grant" I wrote relevance: then talked about how they were not relevant because the doctor said she was so incapable of communicating that the statements did not mean anything and werent relevant to the case.

Good move s1m4 ... wish I had done the same.

Honestly I think that time would have been better spent editing the substantive arguments - I was just really stressed and trying to throw everything in there the last 20 minutes.

[LawIsPrettyCool]

Some hypothetical questions not relating to the exam:

If I am renting property from you on your land and you live there too, and the fence we share breaks due to a storm, and my horses go on your land and f stuff up, am I responsible, or no because I wasn't negligent?

Did it ever occur, based only personal experience, that a correct answer was "no."?

Must the judge enter the default rather than the clerk if the party shows up?

Does an exclusive real estate agreement mean you have to give broker commission even if you find your own client?

If I contract for linseed oil with you for a year and you reserve the right to raise price whenever you want, can I rescind? I cannot rescind because it's implied you won't raise in bad faith right?

Is a trust for elephants at one zoo arguably either honorary for pet or charitable for elephant research and education for society? Would cy pres potentially revive even if all elephants went to elephant heaven?

I'll be taking the bar exam probably in July and just wanted to verify some things that may come up.

[Astronaut Teemo]

I've been reading everyone's thoughts and one thing that I think is that we likely don't have to be perfect on every part of the exam to pass. I know it's hard to believe that in the moment though. I sure didn't. But, I keep reminding myself of some of the passing essays on baressays.com that don't even state the right law or miss what I think are big issues. It's good to strive for perfection just because your more likely to pass if your close to it, but in no way does it seem necessary or even possible.

For instance, I was scoring 85% on practice MBE and that PM session made me her bitch. Really, that's the biggest thing I worry about, since I was planning on the MBE giving me cushion. Got held up on some early questions and then had to race through the last 40 or so to finish on time. Disappointed I let that happen.

On a brighter note, It seems like I got something right on Essay #6 that no one has mentioned on here, which has not happened on any other essay lol. Thank g-d I used my probate code statute book from law school to study, and looked over some of the notes I wrote in the margins from law school. My bar prep certainly did not have what I'm talking about, and a google search did't bring it up right away either. Can't believe that's the kind of detail they test you on. G-d bless my Wills prof, you're a queen. But, really It'll probably be all good, I know I missed shit on other parts of the test, but I don't think they expect us to get everything, I just think it's good to try to do so.

Also, Essay #5 felt like a bitch to organize. Kept switching what order I would talk about the defendant's....annoying. It was like doing a puzzle lol.

I think I know what you're talking about... I got it.

[Astronaut Teemo]

Some hypothetical questions not relating to the exam:

If I am renting property from you on your land and you live there too, and the fence we share breaks due to a storm, and my horses go on your land and f stuff up, am I responsible, or no because I wasn't negligent?

Did it ever occur, based only personal experience, that a correct answer was "no."?

Must the judge enter the default rather than the clerk if the party shows up?

Does an exclusive real estate agreement mean you have to give broker commission even if you find your own client?

If I contract for linseed oil with you for a year and you reserve the right to raise price whenever you want, can I rescind? I cannot rescind because it's implied you won't raise in bad faith right?

Is a trust for elephants at one zoo arguably either honorary for pet or charitable for elephant research and education for society? Would cy pres potentially revive even if all elephants went to elephant heaven?

I'll be taking the bar exam probably in July and just wanted to verify some things that may come up.

No.

[tearsforbeers]

I said no excited utterance because she was sedated when interrogated. She was on the gurney. The paramedic just gave her sedative before Officer asked. The paramedic said she was calm. Not so sure that it was a great argument but I think that's what the sedative fact went. I also referenced doctor's affidavit that she was likely incapable of remembering the event due to head injuries. I don't think I cited the relevance rule there but that would have been a good place for it. I used the lack of ongoing emergency (he had searched house to make sure assailant was gone) to state that the nods were testimonial.

The 911 transcript= nontestimonial after the point when dispatcher responded to emergency statement. Thereafter it was testimonial b/c she was interrogating. Used rule stating dispatchers can be agents for the police. B/c the testimonial parts were prepared in anticipation of prosecution, they're not reliable biz/public records, citing the cocaine affidavits. I conceded that dad's statements were excited utterances but the testimonial portions were 6th A violations.

Did anybody reference the interviews with the son or the mom? I didn't think they'd be usable in the motion.

[esq]

True, but in Jackson the victims statement was verbal, it wasn't assertive conduct.

[tearsforbeers]

I definitely brought up the riparian issue. It definitely, I thought, added more reason to allowing her to recover in equity over a pecuniary recovery.

Didn't mention riparian. I used the old trees and lake as natural monuments trumping asshole seller's defense the misidentified (artificial monuments) the contract. The trees were specifically mentioned in the contract. Also used the trees to argue for TRO.

I think I screwed up the legal damages part. Said expectation too speculative. Reliance a better measure. Find a similar piece of real estate and the difference between that and the 400K is the measure. I don't even know if that's right or not. I spent too long on that essay and it made the W/T essay even harder than it was.

I felt good about 1,2,4,5. Not so good about 3 and 6.
MBE was tough.
PT-A seemed fairly easy/ figure that most people did well on that one.
PT-B was a little tougher. I thought I was toast at the 2 hour mark.

My strategy for the PTs was different this time. I spent a good amount of time transcribing the rules from each case before even digging into the facts. That came in handy when time was tight I didn't have to go back to the library.

[esq]

Anyone have an idea about what a good page count would be on the written exam, assuming that you aren't just pen diarrheaing all over the pages?

[injun]

Sorry to bring it up again, just was hoping someone knew first hand or heard about a situtation in which you write an answer of an argument for the wrong side and still ended up getting at least a 55

[LawIsPrettyCool]

Some hypothetical questions not relating to the exam:

If I am renting property from you on your land and you live there too, and the fence we share breaks due to a storm, and my horses go on your land and f stuff up, am I responsible, or no because I wasn't negligent?

Did it ever occur, based only personal experience, that a correct answer was "no."?

Must the judge enter the default rather than the clerk if the party shows up?

Does an exclusive real estate agreement mean you have to give broker commission even if you find your own client?

If I contract for linseed oil with you for a year and you reserve the right to raise price whenever you want, can I rescind? I cannot rescind because it's implied you won't raise in bad faith right?

Is a trust for elephants at one zoo arguably either honorary for pet or charitable for elephant research and education for society? Would cy pres potentially revive even if all elephants went to elephant heaven?

I'll be taking the bar exam probably in July and just wanted to verify some things that may come up.

No.

Tl;dr

[LawIsPrettyCool]

Sorry to bring it up again, just was hoping someone knew first hand or heard about a situtation in which you write an answer of an argument for the wrong side and still ended up getting at least a 55

I don't think anyone has ever done that, hence the silence. It's like when you're hanging out with a group of friends and someone asks "guys you know those times when you get really mad at your mom so you key her car?" And everyone just tried to change the topic quickly.

[s1m4]

Sorry to bring it up again, just was hoping someone knew first hand or heard about a situtation in which you write an answer of an argument for the wrong side and still ended up getting at least a 55

What do you mean by writing for the wrong side? Do you mean that you were arguing that all the evidence would be admissible?