How I Study for Finals in Law School

Wow, can you believe we are done with classes and now in finals week? You should be extremely proud of yourself. For those of you who already completed your finals for the semester, YAY for You! You did it! For those of you who still have final exams to take, fear not, you will do well! You got this! To help, I have outlined below how I typically study for finals in law school. This is also the last blog for this semester! I’m so thankful for all the feedback I’ve been getting, the support, and the comments that fellow students have replied with. The whole purpose of my blogs is to inform, encourage, and support my fellow classmates. Hope this helps!

Finals Study Week:

Review Outlines in order of the first final exam that is approaching: 

- Go back to the very beginning and read through the outline from start to end;

- Take notes on a separate notepad while doing a read through since repetition is key;

- Highlight important points and anything you know will, without a doubt, be on the exam;

- Take breaks after every couple pages you review; and

- Make sure to note any concepts you still have a hard time understanding and seek help.

- I will typically take one full day just to review my outlines for classes.  

Make Flashcards in order of the first final exam that is approaching. The Flashcards entail:

- Major Topics of the class;

- Write the topic on the front;

- Write the definition and forgetful details about that topic on the back; and

- Study all the Flashcards once all them are done for that one particular class.

- I will typically have about 50 flashcards by the end, per class.  

Take Practice Exams in order of the first final exam that is approaching: 

- Posted on the MSLAW website are final exams for classes from past years;

- Try to do at least two (2) practice exams per class;

- Try to take them under timed conditions; and

- Take them as if you are taking the real final exam, meaning no notes. 

- Take advantage of them because it is great practice!

Week of Finals:

- Review your Flashcards --> Quiz yourself and set aside the flashcards you have memorized and                 focus on the ones you haven’t memorized fully.

- Review Outlines --> Actively read through your outlines and make sure you understand all the                 concepts you took notes on.

- Review your Practice Final Exams --> Go over your practice answers to the practice exams you did         and compare answers with your friends. 

- Watch Review Videos --> Watch videos to help you understand concepts you’re still not confident             about. Repetition is key, so reading your outline, studying your flashcards, and watching review                 videos will all be helpful. 

- Have Confidence --> You got this! You made it this far and you can finish successfully!

I’ve found this method to work for me and if you think this will be something that will work for you, please do it! Along with doing the above, in order to prepare for your finals, be sure to be kind to yourself and not be hard on yourself. Law school is hard. Law school finals are hard. Make time for yourself to take mini-breaks in between studying. Make time to enjoy yourself, because that will allow you to also enjoy the process. Hope a little insight into the way I study for finals has helped you! Wishing you a beautiful and blessed Holiday Season!

Is Consent Needed?

        Here we are in the second week of the last month of 2020! Just a couple more weeks and we will be done with this semester. Keep pushing through, you got this! This week I want to share with you an SJC case which ruled that blood alcohol content collected without the person’s consent is inadmissible at trial. Relax and happy reading!

On the evening of March 23, 2014, a Driver lost control of her vehicle on a highway and crashed into a guardrail. Her car came to rest with part of the car in the roadway. A short while after, the Defendant was driving down the same highway and crashed his vehicle into the Driver’s. At the moment, the Driver was outside of her vehicle standing on the side of the road, so due to a chain reaction, the Defendant’s act caused her car to strike her and also put her in the path of the Defendant’s car. The Driver sustained serious injuries when she was, “dragged underneath the Defendant’s vehicle for more than 20 feet.” 

The police arrived and noticed the Defendant had a wound on his forehead and appeared unsteady. The police observed the Defendant to have glossy and bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and a heavy smell of alcohol on his breath. When the police asked the Defendant what happened, the Defendant said that, “another car had come out of nowhere” and ran him over. The Defendant was transported to a hospital thereafter.

After the Defendant refused to consent to a blood draw, the police obtained a search warrant to obtain a blood sample based on suspected OUI. Defendant continuously objected to the blood draw, even after the presentation of a search warrant. Despite the Defendant’s objections, the police restrained the Defendant’s arms and legs and directed the nurses to draw his blood. The nurses drew two vials of the Defendant’s blood. It was found the Defendant’s blood alcohol content to be between a 0.16 and 0.26 at the time of the crash.

The Defendant moved to exclude the blood alcohol content evidence since it was taken in the absence of the Defendant’s consent as required by both G.L.c. 90, Section 24(1)(e) and G.L.c. 90, Section 24(1)(f)(1). 

G.L.c. 90, Section 24(1)(e) provides that when a test of a Defendant’s breath or blood is made by or at the direction of police, the test must be done with the defendant’s consent in order for the results to be admissible for prosecution of an OUI charge.

  G.L.c. 90, Section 24(1)(f)(1) provides that by driving on public roads, all drivers give consent to submit to a blood alcohol content test if arrested for an OUI. However, the statute goes on to state that if the defendant, “refuses to submit to such test or analysis… no such test or analysis must be made.” In such an event, the remedy would be to suspend the defendant’s license for at least six months.  

The state argued that the Defendant’s blood draw was lawful because the police acted pursuant to a valid search warrant. However, the SJC concluded that the plain language of the statutes at issue requires the Defendant’s consent to the blood draw. Justice Kimberly S. Budd wrote the following for the majority, “Both subsections require consent for OUI blood draws, and neither makes an exception for, or even mentions, warrants.”

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Volume 49, No. 47.

Do You Agree with the SJC’s Decision?