1. You have two (3) hours for this exam. You may allocate your time as you wish.

2. This is a closed book exam.

3. There are 3 parts to this exam:

a) PART 1 consists of 29 objective questions. Recommended time is one (1) hour. This segment is worth about 1/3 of your grade. Correct objective answers are to be marked on the separate “ParSCORE TEST FORM” using pen or pencil and following the instructions on that form. If you change your answer, place a clear X through the wrong answer and mark the correct answer. A machine will score the exam and any ambiguities will be counted as a wrong answer.

b) PART 2 consists of two (2) essay questions. Recommended time is one (1) hour for EACH essay. This segment is worth about 2/3 of your grade.

4. Write your exam number on your exam envelope. Put your correct class section and student exam # at the top of this page, each page of questions, each blue book, and the “ParSCORE TEST FORM.” Do not use your name, student ID number or Social Security Number on any exam materials.

5. Please answer these questions in the blue books provided to you. Write only on the right hand side of the page (skipping a page each time) and double-space your work. Please write clearly.

6. At the conclusion of the exam, return all test materials, including blue books, ParScore answer sheet, scratch paper, and this exam packet to the envelope and submit it to the proctor. DO NOT seal the envelope. Students who do not return all exam materials at the end of the exam may not be graded.

GOOD LUCK!

ESSAY QUESTION I
Recommended time: One Hour

To: My Law Clerk
From: Rhoda Ruin, Esq.

My client, Dan Dork (D), was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to sell (a felony). At trial, police officer Connie Copp (C) testified as follows:

Q: Could you please describe the events of April 24?
A: I was working undercover. At 7 p.m. on a Friday evening, we received a tip that a young white male wearing a SF Giants cap was smoking marijuana at the corner of First and Mission. I went to that location in plain clothes, with Nick Nark (N), a uniformed back-up officer, a ways behind me. I saw a young white male wearing a SF Giants cap. I asked him if would sell me some marijuana. He winked and showed me a small baggie containing what appeared to be marijuana. Just then, he caught sight of Nark and started to run. Nark tried to grab him, but the man pushed Nark off and ran away. I radioed in a description of him, and another officer arrested Dork about 30 minutes later at 5th and Mission. He searched Dork, but did not find any marijuana.

Q: Do you see in court the man who showed you the baggie of marijuana?

A: I believe it was that man in the blue suit sitting at the defense counsel table, Defendant Dork. He’s dressed differently, so I’m not positive, but I think it was him.

Because Dork has some prior drug offenses, I did not have him testify. Here is a portion of my closing argument to the jury:

Officer Copp failed to positively identify Mr. Dork as the man with the baggie. And the man with the baggie did not offer to sell the marijuana. So the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Because of my sterling performance, the jury returned a verdict of “Not Guilty.”

But these S.F. DA’s play pretty rough. Prosecutor Sam just filed new charges against Dork, alleging that on April 24, at First and Mission at 7 p.m., Dork committed the crimes of possession of marijuana and assaulting a police officer (by shoving Nark). I filed a motion to dismiss both charges, on the ground of double jeopardy. When Sam received my motion, he offered to drop the charges if Dork would plead guilty to one charge of disturbing the peace (a misdemeanor). While this is a pretty good deal, I will not accept it if I have a good chance of winning the motion to dismiss. Should I accept?

ESSAY QUESTION II
Recommended time: 1 hour

Propose changes to at least one and no more than two features of the American criminal justice system that we discussed in this course. Draft a short statute that would implement each of your proposed changes.

Include the following in your discussion:

1. What policy objections to your statute(s) are likely to be made, and what is your response to them?

2. What arguments can be made that your statute(s) are unconstitutional, as the Constitution is presently written and interpreted by the Supreme Court? How will the Court rule on these arguments? If the Court might strike down your statute(s), how would you amend the Constitution to ensure that your statutes are constitutional?

END OF EXAM
Have a nice summer!