1.The question component of the issue- restate in a persuasive manner:
a. "...should the evidence be suppressed when...? In the case, the police failed to obtain a search warrant prior to searching a vehicle.
b."...did the court err when..?" In the case, the trial court admitted hearsay evidence.
2.The issues - restate in a persuasive manner, first from one side and then from the opposing side:
a. Under the provisions of the exclusionary rule should evidence be suppressed when law enforcement officers executed a search warrant by unannounced entry because they saw the defendant run into the apartment upon their arrival at the scene?
b.Does the privileged communications statute allow the admission into evidence of the defendant's threats of physical harm to his spouse?
3.Point headings - restate more persuasively:
a.THE TRIAL COURT'S ALLOWANCE OF THE PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE WAS PROPER. THE CHALLENGE WAS NOT RACIALLY MOTIVATED.
b.THE COURT SHOULD NOT GRANT THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
4.Rule of law presentations - restate more persuasively:
a.In determining whether an individual has constructive possession, the court decides whether the defendant had knowledge and control of the drugs.
b.Under the first part of the test, it must be shown the defendant had knowledge of the presence of drugs.
c.The court has stated that an arrest has taken place when a reasonable person would not feel free to leave.
To make the questions more persuasive, the reasons are given importance by stating them first.
a. "if the police did not obtain a search warrant before searching a vehicle, should the evidence obtained be suppressed?"
b. If the trial court admitted hearsay evidence, "did the court make an error?"
The reasonable explanation is given first, making the argument more persuasive:
a. The enforcement officers saw the defendant run into the apartment when they arrived on the scene. If the law enforcement officers executed a search warrant by ...
This solution explains and shows persuasive legal writing. The sources used are also included in the solution.
The Ability to Write Clearly and Concisely
Describe your ability to write clearly, concisely and persuasively, with particular emphasis on the ability to analyze and explain complex legal issues including regulatory, procedural and constitutional issues.View Full Posting Details