http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8ABhatAfsA
:iagree:
this year is done, now onto summer holidays....:00hour
:iagree:
this year is done, now onto summer holidays....:00hour
a pretty fair review of law school....
- Thread starter DR STRANGELOVE
- Start date
I'll be there in less than a year...
needless to say..... :scared
I appreciate you posting that :nono:
Hey man... get my email from jack... Check out www.bsol.com and tell me what you think. I can't afford the 20k semester school's... so thats where i'm heading. tell me what ya think
Birmingham School of Law is a non-ABA accredited law school. Our graduates are eligible to sit for the Alabama bar exam. Check the bar association rules in other states regarding non-ABA degree graduates sitting for their bar exam.
TAOIST should be able to give you more insight on this. I know your school isn't an ABA school, but don't worry about it.
Chad, can you give justin some insight on this?
Also justin, have you taken a LSAT test yet? If you do well enough, you might be able to get a scholarship that will reduce tuition fees.
TAOIST should be able to give you more insight on this. I know your school isn't an ABA school, but don't worry about it.
Chad, can you give justin some insight on this?
Also justin, have you taken a LSAT test yet? If you do well enough, you might be able to get a scholarship that will reduce tuition fees.
Quite honestly I thought law school was great and not all that hard. First year - start in August and finals are in May with midterms that are only practice - it doesnt get better than that. Go out 5nights a week and come April start cramming. No attendance taken.
If you have decent memory and bullshitting skills it isnt that tough to do well. Those guys that studied 12 hours a day seemed to be the people who didnt do very well.
The biggest issue is that 80% of your classmates are complete assholes.
If you have decent memory and bullshitting skills it isnt that tough to do well. Those guys that studied 12 hours a day seemed to be the people who didnt do very well.
The biggest issue is that 80% of your classmates are complete assholes.
Hey Anthony (Dr. S--love that Kubrick flic),
score my e-mail if you want to hook up for a brew or java some time. I'm not as messed up in person.
Besides, I figure that within the next five or six years I might need a good lawyer.
Will leave it up to you. I've only ever hooked up with one other madjacker before--was Torontovigilante a few years back.
Regardless, enjoy the time off.
score my e-mail if you want to hook up for a brew or java some time. I'm not as messed up in person.
Besides, I figure that within the next five or six years I might need a good lawyer.
Will leave it up to you. I've only ever hooked up with one other madjacker before--was Torontovigilante a few years back.
Regardless, enjoy the time off.
- Apr 28, 2006
- 1,552
- 32
- 0
I totally agree. Law school is not that difficult, if you're remotely intelligent and can memorize. Also, I'd put the assh*le figure more at 90%.
The people who studied 12 hours a day usually needed to study 12 hours a day because they weren't that smart to start with. Also, if you freak out on tests you will have a problem with the bar exam. My classmates who didn't pass (and studied the most) freaked out. Some of them didn't pass three times.
Those of you thinking about law school need to understand that your LSAT score and ethnicity are going to dictate where you get in and whether you are able to get any type of scholarship. If you are a white male, good luck to you.
Need some help again.... My final is tomorrow and I need some insight on a case..
Its pertaining to an impartial jury trial
Sullivan v. Louiisiana
-Sullivan
court held that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction cannot be harmless error.
Does this pretty much mean that a judge's instruction to a jury has to be perject everytime pertaining to reasonable doubt?
Its pertaining to an impartial jury trial
Sullivan v. Louiisiana
-Sullivan
court held that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction cannot be harmless error.
Does this pretty much mean that a judge's instruction to a jury has to be perject everytime pertaining to reasonable doubt?
I remember that case!!!
In sum... A constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction cannot be harmless error. Perfect? Within reasonable grounds. But I think you got the jist of the holding!
I've got them all down.
its only 30 cases... but in 10 categories.
Thanks man... wish me luck tomorrow
I spent about 5 minutes trying to understand wtf that means doc. All I can come up with is this question...so is there a "textbook" reasonable doubt instruction that is supposed to be given versus 'winging it' for lack of a better term? sort of like how the miranda rights are a memorized set of rights that are always stated the same? May not be the best analogy, my brain wasn't meant for law!
Not a textbook out there, BUT, you would be amazed by how many cases a guy gets off due to incorrect jury instructions. Most of the time it's a mistrial or have to go through the entire procedure again.
Different countries/jurisdictions have procedures on this. I know in michigan it is a PITA.
I don't know about a bright line ruling in the "constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction case"... but in Miranda the court did establish a bright line... "you have a right to remain silent... yada yada"
To echo the others, it varies by state/jurisdiction. This is the standard for jury instructions in Arizona:
?The state has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt. There are very few things in this world that we know with absolute certainty, and in criminal cases the law does not require proof that overcomes every doubt. If, based on your consideration of the evidence, you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged, you must find him/her guilty. If, on the other hand, you think there is a real possibility that he/she is not guilty, you must give him/her the benefit of the doubt and find him/her not guilty.? State v. Portillo, 182 Ariz. 592, 596 (1995)
