Critical Pass & crim diagram update

hi folks, I just wanted to apoligize that the criminal law diagram has not been uploaded yet, our contributor who made the diagram sent me a copy but with the disclaimer that he had not had the time to proof read it yet and while he had checked it against his handout, had yet to run through the outline to double check for accuracy,  which was a practice we had agreed on before our first post. So, keep your eyes open for both contracts and criminal law diagrams tomorrow. 

With regard to Critical  Pass, just a quick reminder again that our discount referral link has changed and can be found here or, should that link not work for some reason, at this URL: http://criticalpass.refr.cc/ubestudying

Also please note that they are currently now including their app and access thereto for a 1 year period for free, and while you will need to wait for the cards to ship (either free for standard shipping or if you choose a faster method you pay for), you should be granted immediate access to their app at purchase. 

That is all from me for the night, I ended at 11 and it is time for bed so I can hit the grind again tomorrow. Good night fellow Bar Preppers! 

Down to the Grind: Tips & Update

As we close in on the bar exam, a few things to note:

  1. Keep track of your time and budget it wisely. If you are taking the UBE and are NOT sure how to allocate your time I suggest locking down the “big 7” MBE topics and the MPT. Why? The MBE is 50% of the score, your MPT’s are 20%, and since the big 7 are fair game for the MEE, assume conservatively (this can be argued, but since there have been recent test sessions with as many as 4 MBE focused or related essays, I will call this a conservative estimate) that 2 of your 6 essays are either entirely MBE topics or that they will be mixed in with hybrid essays, such that they account for a portion of your total score equal to two essays. That would mean that the Big 7 and MPT’s alone can add up to 80% of your total score.
  2.  At this point, trust your gut and your practice essays and MBE question sets to identify what subjects  or subtopics need attention (i.e. identify your weak points and study, practice, review, practice, study, practice, then repeat.
  3. Whatever you do, do not panic. Remember, this exam is only as much of a beast as you make it.
  4. Use what you know! Cant fit any more mneumonics, acronyms, or songs into your brain? Use what you know best and try analogizing. Have a book or movie series you know by heart? A lot of rules and tests can be put into the context of your choice. Have a memorable law school moment or real life experience that applies? Then use that – whatever works best!
  5. Do not be afraid to ask for help! If there is a major subtopic you do not understand, reach out to someone, whether it be someone at a bar prep company or a study buddy or people online, whether it is one of us, a friend, a discussion or thread in a forum (top law schools appears to have fairly lively, and multiple, bar prep threads/discussions).

Finally, two minor announcements. Look for more tips in the future on twitter and here. They will be under a new category: “Quick Tips.” Lastly, as the exam draws nearer, expect some motivational or inspirational quotes to keep that head held high! Remember: you deserve this!

Evidence and so on

This is the home stretch everyone! I will be uploading my hearsay flow chart today but be forewarned, I do not delve into “non-hearsay exemptions,” for spacial concerns as well as the confusing seemingly interchangeable terminology, which I think is more a result of your prep company/evidence lecturer preference, outline or material-writer preference, and law school professor preference. For example, I learned exemptions, exclusions, and exceptions in law school, but my bar prep company uses the terms in a different way.  In bar prep, exclusions and exceptions seem synonymous and are used to describe both exceptions requiring unavailability and where unavailability is immaterial; further, while my bar prep company refers to rule 801(d) exceptions as “non-hearsay exclusions,” while my 2014 copy of the FRE and some cursory research reveals the rule itself refers to them as exclusions and “Statements That Are Not Hearsay.” At the same time, a contributor and friend of mine using a different company and a secondary resource/study system stated that they (still on rule 801) used the terms non-hearsay and exemptions. I have therefore used both “not hearsay exclusions,” and “non-hearsay exemptions,” where i touch on 801. Simply bear in mind that there are uses or purposes for certain non-hearsay purposes (i.e. not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted) such as effect on the listener, a statement offered to show the declarants mental state or state of mind, and/or impeachment purposes. Remember, this is intended to help you so if it causes confusion due to terminology ignore it or perhaps print it out and integrate your preferred terminology. If you have questions or feel there are errors, as always feel free to contact me. Last note: we do not need to know number rules for the Bar, as I understand, but I incorporated rule numbers where applicable for those of you who do prefer to go by rule number.

Evidence and so on

This is the home stretch everyone! I will be uploading my hearsay flow chart today but be forewarned, I do not delve into “non-hearsay exemptions,” for spacial concerns as well as the confusing seemingly interchangeable terminology, which I think is more a result of your prep company/evidence lecturer preference, outline or material-writer preference, and law school professor preference. For example, I learned exemptions, exclusions, and exceptions in law school, but my bar prep company uses the terms in a different way.  In bar prep, exclusions and exceptions seem synonymous and are used to describe both exceptions requiring unavailability and where unavailability is immaterial; further, while my bar prep company refers to rule 801(d) exceptions as “non-hearsay exclusions,” while my 2014 copy of the FRE and some cursory research reveals the rule itself refers to them as exclusions and “Statements That Are Not Hearsay.” At the same time, a contributor and friend of mine using a different company and a secondary resource/study system stated that they (still on rule 801) used the terms non-hearsay and exemptions. I have therefore used both “not hearsay exclusions,” and “non-hearsay exemptions,” where i touch on 801. Simply bear in mind that there are uses or purposes for certain non-hearsay purposes (i.e. not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted) such as effect on the listener, a statement offered to show the declarants mental state or state of mind, and/or impeachment purposes, etc. Remember, this is intended to help you so if it causes confusion due to terminology ignore it or perhaps print it out and integrate your preferred terminology. If you have questions or feel there are errors, as always feel free to contact me. Last note: we do not need to know number rules for the Bar, as I understand, but I incorporated rule numbers where applicable for those of you who do prefer to go by rule number.