Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2014 Exam Forum

[numbertwo88]

How many of you are doing the simulated MBE today?

I'm not taking it today ... I may take it next week. I feel like my time is better spent working on essays/my weak MBE areas. Time is precious and I just can't afford 6 hours when I know I need a lot more work.

[whirledpeas86]

How many of you are doing the simulated MBE today?

I'm not taking it today ... I may take it next week. I feel like my time is better spent working on essays/my weak MBE areas. Time is precious and I just can't afford 6 hours when I know I need a lot more work.

I'm taking it today, just finished the first 100 questions. My thought on spending the day going through this living nightmare is that it will give me a better sense of what areas to concentrate on in these last couple weeks. Also, it will be motivation to keep pushing by showing me how much further I have to go to get a passing score. Plus, I think stamina is going to be a HUGE factor come the day of. I don't want to realize on the day of the test that I absolutely don't have it in me to concentrate on the full 200 question deal.

[hous]

I vaguely remember something but I can't pinpoint it.

It was something about when you use your home for crime (grow house) you can't use deadly force against trespassers in the home. Is that accurate? Its been bothering me. I was reviewing the self-defense question in Milestone 2 and thought of it.

[puttycake]

CA people stressed about essays, do look at BarEssays.com if you can afford it (it's 100 dollars). I'm still stressed about the test, but it will put the essays into way more perspective for you, I bet.

[Rosebud523]

I just bit the bullet and finally purchased Adaptibar and am really happy with it! You should definitely try it out you can save $50 if you use my promo code - HHZLIEXP

[kapital98]

I just got a question about whether it was a crime to steal another guys pot (licensed question). Here's the model answer:

The correct answer is B. The defendant took the property of another, the student's marijuana, without the owner's consent and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. It is irrelevant that the owner's possession of the property was likely illegal. Thus, the defendant should be found guilty of larceny.

[puttycake]

I just got a question about whether it was a crime to steal another guys pot (licensed question). Here's the model answer:

The correct answer is B. The defendant took the property of another, the student's marijuana, without the owner's consent and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. It is irrelevant that the owner's possession of the property was likely illegal. Thus, the defendant should be found guilty of larceny.

I think that makes sense from a criminal law standpoint, so that the court wouldn't have to go down the rabbit hole every time of whose property it is. The important thing is that it's not the defendant's property. He may not actually be stealing from the person he thinks he's stealing from, but he's stealing from someone.

[Tanicius]

I just got a question about whether it was a crime to steal another guys pot (licensed question). Here's the model answer:

The correct answer is B. The defendant took the property of another, the student's marijuana, without the owner's consent and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. It is irrelevant that the owner's possession of the property was likely illegal. Thus, the defendant should be found guilty of larceny.

I think that makes sense from a criminal law standpoint, so that the court wouldn't have to go down the rabbit hole every time of whose property it is. The important thing is that it's not the defendant's property. He may not actually be stealing from the person he thinks he's stealing from, but he's stealing from someone.

Even more importantly, it's not like we want to legalize crimes against other criminals. Think of what that would do to our society. That's the source of a ton of crime and violence. You can't stick up a drug dealer, for example, and get off scott-free because just because the person you assaulted or shot happened to be an evil or even a convicted drug dealer. Why should you be able to steal drugs either?

[071816]

I'm feeling like a burnt out piece of trash again :/

[kapital98]

I just got a question about whether it was a crime to steal another guys pot (licensed question). Here's the model answer:

The correct answer is B. The defendant took the property of another, the student's marijuana, without the owner's consent and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. It is irrelevant that the owner's possession of the property was likely illegal. Thus, the defendant should be found guilty of larceny.

I think that makes sense from a criminal law standpoint, so that the court wouldn't have to go down the rabbit hole every time of whose property it is. The important thing is that it's not the defendant's property. He may not actually be stealing from the person he thinks he's stealing from, but he's stealing from someone.

Even more importantly, it's not like we want to legalize crimes against other criminals. Think of what that would do to our society. That's the source of a ton of crime and violence. You can't stick up a drug dealer, for example, and get off scott-free because just because the person you assaulted or shot happened to be an evil or even a convicted drug dealer. Why should you be able to steal drugs either?

There should be a separation between the good and a physical act. I can understand why we would want to prevent burglary and assault from occurring. Both of those happen to either a person or their legal property. However, larceny is purely related to an illegal activity. It doesn't make sense from a public policy standpoint to criminalize this activity. You would essentially be providing criminals legal protection to promote criminal activity.

This just seems absurd to me.

[Tanicius]

There should be a separation between the good and a physical act. I can understand why we would want to prevent burglary and assault from occurring. Both of those happen to either a person or their legal property. However, larceny is purely related to an illegal activity. It doesn't make sense from a public policy standpoint to criminalize this activity. You would essentially be providing criminals legal protection to promote criminal activity.

This just seems absurd to me.

They don't have legal protection though. If it's contraband, they don't get it back when the thief is arrested -- the police just confiscate it.

[puttycake]

There should be a separation between the good and a physical act. I can understand why we would want to prevent burglary and assault from occurring. Both of those happen to either a person or their legal property. However, larceny is purely related to an illegal activity. It doesn't make sense from a public policy standpoint to criminalize this activity. You would essentially be providing criminals legal protection to promote criminal activity.

This just seems absurd to me.

From my point of view, this would provide legal protection to promote criminal activity: "You can steal from anyone who obtained their money illegally." If you think about the chain of thefts that can occur and what the courts would then need to figure out, it's a nightmare.

But if you say, from the POV of the person who stole, "You are not allowed to take something that doesn't belong to you" that doesn't require any nightmarish tracking of the property. Each person on the chain, then is liable for the theft when they steal it.

[numbertwo88]

Is anyone feeling good about the bar exam right now?

& I'm upset I wasted an hour of my life on that agency lecture. I'm also upset MA has such a wide range of essay topics.

I'm feeling like a burnt out piece of trash again :/

I'm right there with you! Just 20 days to go. I seriously never want to go through this ever again. I can't do it.

[bobanderson]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

[bld2414]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

Pleasantly surprised with a 140/200.

[Rirruto]

Is anyone feeling good about the bar exam right now?

I was until I got crushed to the tune of about 64% on my last set of mixed questions. I had been crushing them up until that. I feel like every time I start to feel good about the bar something like that happens to bring me back down.

I think the key for is to not get too high or too low. At the end of the day, none of this really matters.

[Genuine4ps]

I'm right there with you! Just 20 days to go. I seriously never want to go through this ever again. I can't do it.

This. And to make matters worse, the MBE will have civ pro.

[jigglypuffdreams]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

Got a 69 on the first part, 58 on the second part... so I guess I'm a morning person? 127 total now that I added it up. Honestly I think the questions were a lot harder than what I've been seeing in the Themis question bank and in my BarMax question bank (full of NCBE questions) but it was good practice to see how I do under test-like conditions.

[TooManyLoans]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

Got a 69 on the first part, 58 on the second part... so I guess I'm a morning person? 127 total now that I added it up. Honestly I think the questions were a lot harder than what I've been seeing in the Themis question bank and in my BarMax question bank (full of NCBE questions) but it was good practice to see how I do under test-like conditions.

Ugh. Was feeling good going into it (have been doing much better on the mixed mbe pqs) Then got a 59 in the morning and a 66 in the afternoon. Felt like shit but then I saw the average and I feel a little bit better but still bummed.

[whirledpeas86]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

Got a 69 on the first part, 58 on the second part... so I guess I'm a morning person? 127 total now that I added it up. Honestly I think the questions were a lot harder than what I've been seeing in the Themis question bank and in my BarMax question bank (full of NCBE questions) but it was good practice to see how I do under test-like conditions.

Ugh. Was feeling good going into it (have been doing much better on the mixed mbe pqs) Then got a 59 in the morning and a 66 in the afternoon. Felt like shit but then I saw the average and I feel a little bit better but still bummed.

Where can you see the average? I got 127/200. I'm so tired, I want to die.




ETA: nvm, I found. I'm still so tired I want to die, though

[kapital98]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

Pleasantly surprised with a 140/200.

Nice score! If you keep that up you should bass the bar without any significant difficulties.

[kapital98]

There should be a separation between the good and a physical act. I can understand why we would want to prevent burglary and assault from occurring. Both of those happen to either a person or their legal property. However, larceny is purely related to an illegal activity. It doesn't make sense from a public policy standpoint to criminalize this activity. You would essentially be providing criminals legal protection to promote criminal activity.

This just seems absurd to me.

From my point of view, this would provide legal protection to promote criminal activity: "You can steal from anyone who obtained their money illegally." If you think about the chain of thefts that can occur and what the courts would then need to figure out, it's a nightmare.

But if you say, from the POV of the person who stole, "You are not allowed to take something that doesn't belong to you" that doesn't require any nightmarish tracking of the property. Each person on the chain, then is liable for the theft when they steal it.

This makes sense.

[bld2414]

For those who took the simulated MBE today, how did you do? I'm feeling pretty discouraged about my score.

Pleasantly surprised with a 140/200.

Nice score! If you keep that up you should bass the bar without any significant difficulties.

Thanks!! Thats good to hear. Is this even more the case if my state weighs the MBE 50%? Im taking the FL bar.

[bedefan]

Here's a question:

Police arrested a suspect for criminal trespass. On two occasions, five minutes apart, police had observed the suspect within the fenced-in grounds of a cooperative. The entrances to the cooperative displayed "No Trespassing" signs. Upon approaching the suspect, the police learned from the suspect that he did not live in the cooperative and was on the cooperative grounds without a particular purpose. Under state law, criminal trespass is defined as entering and occupying real property with the specific intent to dispossess those lawfully entitled to possession. Based on reasonable suspicions, police arrested the suspect for criminal trespass. The police had probable cause to arrest the suspect for an unrelated misdemeanor that was punishable only by fine. A search of the suspect subsequent to his arrest uncovered illegal drugs. The suspect was charged with possession of illegal drugs. Asserting that his arrest was unconstitutional, the suspect moved to suppress the illegal drugs and dismiss the charge.

Should the court rule that the suspect's arrest was constitutional?
A. (...)
B. Yes, because the police had probable cause to arrest the suspect for an unrelated crime.
C. (...)
D. No, because the police had probable cause to arrest the suspect for only a non-jailable misdemeanor.

Incorrect: Answer choice B is correct. If the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect for a crime, the arrest is not constitutionally unreasonable simply because the police inform the suspect that he has been arrested for another crime for which the police lack probable cause. . . . Answer choice D is incorrect because an arrest of a suspect for a non-jailable misdemeanor does not constitute an unreasonable seizure.

I picked D. Am I crazy, or is Themis wrong on this one?

Crim Pro outline at I.B.4.c. says, "A warrantless arrest of a person for a misdemeanor punishable only by a fine is not an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. (citation) Note that the misdemeanor must have been committed in the presence of the arresting party; probable cause to believe that a misdemeanor was committed, without actually witnessing the crime, is not sufficient for a valid warrantless arrest."

It can't possibly be good test-taking strategy to assume facts contrary to what the question implies... uhh, can it?

(I did write my attorney advisor, no response yet, and I really want to know...)

[bport hopeful]

Im guessing D would be right if it were accurate, but they didn't ONLY have PC for a non jailable offense, they had PC the unrelated crime as well.