WPCK* 'A{JrK CV I88 WY`"]y(6s3嶓蚧8F͋!Z񵊔:N}be+96k䘐/(͙réV`I= /9P&60|,̧D?fnRcx`;xrC/x=8[3Y|FWC=ƺhR+׹Q,I>oES\|Uݜ,ӛk +8WgHPI!iy1Eq^΍/ 䬷Mʠ,-;W!%H-WH(0.Ml6V=̫b%pcD PiK;Ÿ դ ߽ʈ oN_Rs٨^ w4! m# 1: 72 1u 72h 0c N  ! 0N!0!%" 0V;""""" 0V# 0# 0&$ 0D& 00c'(U*(U@(t)y)UQ@ *0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,2G+J 0_level1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2D+J 0_level2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2A+J 0_level3   ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2>+J 0_level4  ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2;+J 0_level5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  28+J 0_level6    DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  25+J 0_level7  h DDL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  22+J 0_level8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2/+J 0_level9    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2GJ 0_levsl1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2DJ 0_levsl2   ," <DL,23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2AJ 0_levsl3   ) <DL)23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2>J 0_levsl4  ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2;J 0_levsl5   #DL#23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  28J 0_levsl6    DL 23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  25J 0_levsl7  h DDL23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  22J 0_levsl8   L23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2/J 0_levsl9    L23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2GJ 0_levnl1  X /%4 4 <DL/23   2( 4 <DL2  2DJ 0_levnl2   ," <DL,23   2( 4 <DL2  2AJ 0_levnl3   ) <DL)23   2( 4 <DL2  2>J 0_levnl4  ` &<<DL&23   2( 4 <DL2  2;J 0_levnl5   #DL#23   2( 4 <DL2  28J 0_levnl6    DL 23   2( 4 <DL2  25J 0_levnl7  h DDL23   2( 4 <DL2  22J 0_levnl8   L23   2( 4 <DL2  2/J 0_levnl9    L23   2( 4 <DL2  <:Default Para\  `&Times New RomanY:s *>8hared3|xU(CEKQW]cioAutoList11)1)1)1)1)1)1)1)(1)3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)*i)(;3$2#  0  .3  0   3)USUS.,  _  Page  1  ڀof  6     (O$www.ncbex2.org/catalog/   (.3$ !USUS.,           7'USUS.,  _ !XoXXX@: : MULTISTATEPERFORMANCETEST #XoXX!Xo@#(.3$ !USUS.,  .n,Title    XXX?=%2A`Arial?  XXXS!\  `&Times New RomanS  6n4Body Text    XXX?=%2A`Arial?  XXXS!\  `&Times New RomanS  <z:Body Text 21  X   XXX?=%2A`Arial?  XXXS!\  `&Times New RomanS  X :q8Body Text 2    XXX?=%2A`Arial?  XXXS!\  `&Times New RomanS    %2A`Arial(9 Z(Times New Roman  j 7'USUS.,  _  MULTISTATEPERFORMANCETEST  3)USUS.,  _  Page  2  ڀof  6  (9 Z(Times New Roman !USUS.,  _   !XoXXX2Oa4Oa5V/Oa.  FEBRUARY2009  MULTISTATEPERFORMANCETEST(MPT) #XoXX!XoL# @ !XoXXXo   #XoXX!XoF#!XoXXXo     TheMPTQuestionadministeredbytheStateBoardofLawExaminersfortheFebruary2009  barexaminationwas Ronaldv.DepartmentofMotorVehicles. Tworepresentativegoodanswers   selectedbytheBoardareincludedhere,beginningatpage2.     TheNationalConferenceofBarExaminers(NCBE)publishestheMPTQuestionandthe    pointsheetdescribingtheissuesandthediscussionexpectedinasuccessfulresponsetotheMPT z   Question.The pointsheetisanalogoustotheBoardsAnalysispreparedbytheStateBoardofLaw t  Examinersforeachoftheessayquestions. n    TheNCBEdoesnotpermittheBoardtopublishtheMPTQuestionorthe pointsheetonthe b  Boardswebsite.However,theNCBEdoesoffertheMPTQuestionand pointsheetforsaleonits \  website. V   Materialsforanunsuccessfulapplicant: Anapplicantwhowasunsuccessfulonthe J February2009MarylandbarexaminationmayobtainacopyoftheMPTQuestion,hisorherMPT D answer,representativegoodanswersselectedbytheBoard,andthe pointsheetfortheFebruary > 2009MPTQuestionadministeredasacomponentoftheMarylandbarexamination.Thismaterialis 8 providedtoeachunsuccessfulapplicantwhorequests,inwriting,acopyoftheanswersinaccordance 2 withinstructionsmailedwiththeresultsofthebarexamination.Thedeadlineforanunsuccessful ,| applicanttorequestthismaterialisJune30,2009. &v    Materialsforanyoneotherthananunsuccessfulapplicant :Anyoneelsemayobtainthe j MPTQuestionandthe pointsheetonlybypurchasingthemattheNCBEOnlineStore. d Usethefollowinglinktoaccessthe NCBEOnlineStore :41 0O  5  www.ncbex2.org/catalog/6< 0OP   7 i ~ #XoXX!Xo#!XoXXXo  !R 6#XoXX!Xo #  +'( 2Oa 2 2  >X(XXXo ?68    >X(XX>X(X%XX>X(=XXXX%  #XoXX=X #@.8.   AXoXXXoREPRESENTATIVEANSWER18. ݌ f Ќ  AXoXXAXo>X(XXAXo>X(XX>X(   AXoXX>X(     1. ` OfficerBarryThompsondidnothaveareasonablesuspiciontostopBarbara Z  RonaldonthemorningofDecember19,2008. T     Apoliceofficermaymakeatrafficstopevenwhenhehasnoprobablecausetomakeanarrest. H  However,suchastopmustbebasedon specificandarticulatefactsthatgivetheofficerreasonable B suspicion.TaylorvDMV <    Astopmaybebasedonreasonablesuspicionevenifnosinglefactaloneprovidesreasonable 0  suspicion.Statev.Kessler.TheCourtofAppealshasrejectedanybrightlinerulesthatweavingwithin *  asinglelanedoesordoesnotgiverisetoreasonablesuspicion,buthasheldthatacourtmustlookatthe $  totalityofthecircumstancesinanyparticularcase.Prattv.MVBBank,Inc     Inthisparticularcase,Ms.Ronaldwasobservedweavingwithinherlane,butsheneverentered  theotherlane,norwasshespeeding.TheonlyadditionalfactthatOfficerThompsoncanpointtoasgiving   himareasonablesuspicionwasthattheincidentoccurredataroundthetimethebarswereclosing.    ThePrat  t    Ԁcourtnotedthat bartimecouldbeafactoringivingrisetoareasonablesuspicion.  However,justthosetwoobservationsthatMs.Ronaldwasweavingabitinthelane,whileviolatingno  trafficlaws,andthefactthatitwasaparticulartimeofnightdonotadduptoareasonableinferencethat | Ms.Ronaldwasdrivingwhileintoxicated. v   :  X  AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X:  2. ` ThebloodtestreportisnotsufficientinthiscasetosupportafindingthatMs. j Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration .:K݌ d Ќ  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo  X  X    ^ TheFranklinAPAprovidesthathearingevidencesuchasthebloodalcoholtestresultsare !X admissibleinadministrativehearings.Ifthehearsaywouldbeadmissibleunderahearingexceptionincourt, "R itwillbesufficienttosupportafindinginanadministrativehearing.Ifitwouldnotbeadmissibleundera #L hearsayexceptionincourt,itisadmissibleonlytosupplementorexplainotherevidenceinanadministrative $F hearing.Sec.115,FAPA. %@   &: ! Irregulationsintheadministrationofabloodalcoholtestmayrendersuchevidenceisadmissible '4!" underthepublicrecordsexception.SeeSchwartzvDMV,RodriguezvDMV.InRodrigueztheCourt (."# ofAppealsheldthatabloodalcoholtestwasinadmissiblehearsaywhenthetestdidnotconformto )(#$ regulationsintheFranklinCodeofRegulations. *"$% _ +%& 5V 5 5    :  XX  AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X:  Section121oftheFranklinCodeofRegulationsprovidesthatforensicbloodalcoholtestingmay r beperformedonlybyaforensicalcoholanalystwhohasbeentrainedinaccordancewiththerequirements l oftheFranklinBureauofInvestigation.Theanalysismustalsobecertifiedasauthenticbytherecords f custodianforthelaboratoryinwhichtheanalysiswasperformed.:B݌ `  Ќ  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo  XX  X Inthiscase,thetestresultwasnotactuallysignedbyForensicAlcoholAnalystDaniel_Gans_,butrather Z  signedonhisbehalfbylaboratorytechnicianCharlotteSwain.Thisleadsonetosupposethatthetest T  wasnotactuallyperformedbyMr._Gans_ԀbutratherbyMs.Swainwhoispresumablynottrainedand N  certifiedbytheFBI.Therefore,althoughthereportmaybeusedtosupplementtheevidence,itcannot H  initselfsupportafindingthatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration. B  3.  Inlightoftheflawedevidenceintroducedbythe_DMV_,the_DMV_Ԁhasnotmetits 6  burdenofprovingbyapreponderanceoftheevidencethatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwitha 0  prohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration. *   OfficerThompsondidnothavereasonablesuspiciontostopMs.Ronaldinthefirstplace,anddueto   irregularitiesinthebloodalcoholtest,itisinsufficienttosupportafindingagainstMs.Ronald.  Inaddition,Ms.Ronaldhasareasonableexplanationforherbehaviorthatnight,herfatigueandthe   tailgatingbyOfficerThompsoncausedherslightlyerraticdriving.Herfatigue,arthritis,highheels,and  nervousnessaboutbeingnearspeedingtrafficexplainherperformanceonthefieldsobrietytest.  Therefore,the_DMV_ԀhasnotmetitsburdenofprovingbyapreponderancethatMs.Ronaldwas  drivingwithanimpairedbloodalcoholconcentration. |  +%& 4Oa 4 4    _ ______REPRESENTATIVE_ԀANSWER2 r  '9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X9l(    9l()݌̌  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo   1.  BasedonthetotalityoftheCircumstances,PoliceOfficerBarryThompsondidnothave f reasonablesuspiciontostopMs.Ronald. `      OfficerThompsonpulledMs.Ronaldoverafterfollowingherforapproximatelyonemileon T  December19,2008.DuringtheadministrativehearingconductedonFebruary12,2009,Officer N  ThompsonwasaskedwhetherornothehadobservedMs.Ronaldspeedingorcrossingoutofherlane H  intootherlanesoftrafficwhiletravelingonU.S.Highway13.OfficerThompsontestifiedthatwhilehedid B notspecificallyrecallifMs.Ronaldhadbeenspeeding,heprobablywouldhavenoteditinhisreport. <  However,thepolicereportdoesnotmentionorsuggestthatMs.Ronaldwasspeeding.SeeExhibit1. 6    9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X9-    OfficerThompsonfurthertestifiedthathefollowedMs.Ronald closelywithhishighbeams *  engaged.Moreover,OfficerThomsonwasevasiveinhisanswerastowhetherornotMs.Ronaldbegan $  toweavepriortooronlyafterhebegantotailherwhenhewasaskedondirectexamination.Neither   OfficerThompsonsreportoftheincidentnorhistestimonyduringtheadministrativehearingindicatedthat  hehadanyotherreasontopullMs.Ronaldoverexceptforthefactthathehadobservedher weavingand  itwas1:00a.m..InthecaseofPrattv.DepartmentofMotorVehicles,theFranklinCourtofAppeals   explicitlyrejectedthepositionthat weavingwithinasinglelanealsogivesrisetoreasonablesuspicionthat  issufficienttoconductaninvestigativestop.Rather,thePrattcourtstatedthatthesituation,basedonthe  totalityofthecircumstancesmustbetakenintoaccountbeforeweavinginonesowntrafficlanecanlead  toreasonablesuspicionsufficientenoughtojustifyastop.9-;.݌  Ќ  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo   9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X93  934݌̌  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo     9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X X9M5  InthePrattcase,thecourtfoundthatthedefendantsweavingbetweenhislaneandtheparking v lane,togetherwiththetimeofday,andthearrestingofficersvividdescriptionofthedefendantserratic p drivingdidprovideenoughreasonableinferencesthattheofficerhadreasonablesuspiciontoconductan j investigativestop.However,thedetailsinthecaseatbardiffersignificantlyfromthoseinPrattsuchthat d theydonotandcouldnotleadOfficerThompsontothesameresultasthearrestingofficerinthePratt  ^ case.Forexample,inPratt,thearrestingofficerobservedthedefendantsvehicletravelingpartiallyinhis !X rightfuldrivinglaneandpartlyintheadjacentparkinglane,whereasinthecaseatbar,OfficerThompson "R testifiedthatMs.Ronaldremainedinherlanetheentiretimethatheobservedheruntilhehadherpullover.9M5 6݌ #L Ќ  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo     9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X9:  9:;݌ $F Ќ  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo     9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X9q<  AnotherimportantfactualdistinctionbetweenthecaseatbarandthePrattcaseisthatbasedon %@  theevidencethathasbeenpresented,evenifMs.Ronaldwasweaving,itwasonlyaftershehadbeen &: ! followedbyOfficerRonald closelywithhishighbeamsonforadistanceof1.4milesaccordingtothe '4!" _policereport.Thistypeofapursuit,lateatnight,islikelytomakeeventhemostunflappabledriveralittle (."# nervoussuchthattheyweavealittlewhileattemptingtodeterminewhoisfollowingthem.Althoughsome )(#$ oftheotherfactorsbetweenthecaseatbarandthePrattcasearesimilarsuchasthetimeofdaythateach *"$% defendantwasstopped,thesesimilaritiesdonotprovide9q< =݌ +%& /Oa / /  ь  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo   XenoughreasonableinferencessuchthatOfficerThompsoncoulddrawacumulativeconclusionthat r providedhimwithreasonablesuspiciontostopMs.Ronald. l 9    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X9KB  9KBB݌̌  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo   X 2. ` TheA&/ %XAXo353BloodAlcoholTestResultsReportcannotbeusedasthesolebasisto `  findthatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentrationbecauseit Z  containshearsayandwouldbeinadmissibleundertheFranklinEvidenceCode #AXoX %A&/C#A&/ %XAXo.#AXoX %A&/5E# <     *   X  AttheadministrativehearingonFebruary23,2009,theDepartmentofMotorVehicles(DMV) $  attemptedtosubmitintoevidenceaForensicBloodAlcoholTestingReport(hereinafter thereport).The  ReportwasnotsignedbyDanielGans,aForensicAlcoholAnalyst,butratherbyCharlotteSwain,a   SeniorLaboratoryTechnician.AftersigningforGans,Swainaddedanotationindicatingthatshehad   signedforGans.Thisstatementishearsaybecauseitisanoutofcourtstatement(madebySwain)offered    toprovethetruthofthematterasserted(thatshesignedtheReportatGansrequest).Therefore,   accordingtoA&/ %XAXo1279oftheFranklinEvidenceCode,thisdocumentwouldnotbeadmissible.Therefore,   accordingto#AXoX %A&/H# A&/ %XAXo #AXoX %A&/xI#A&/ %XAXo115oftheFranklinAdministrativeProcedureAct,sincetheReportwouldnotbeadmissible   undertheFranklinEvidenceCode,theReportisnotsufficientinitselftosupportafindingthatMs.Ronald v wasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration.Therefore,as115states,inadmissiblehearsay W mayonlybeused forthepurposeofsupplementingorexplainingotherevidence. 8       AsaresultofthefactthattheReportisinadmissible,furtherevidenceisneededinordertosupport l afindingthatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration.TheFranklinCourtof M Appealsaddressedthisveryissueinthecaseof#AXoX %A&/I#A&/ %XAXoRodriguezv.DepartmentofMotorVehicles#AXoX %A&/9M#A&/ %XAXo.#AXoX %A&/M#A&/ %XAXoԀInRodrigue#AXoX %A&/M#A&/ %XAXoz#AXoX %A&/BN#A&/ %XAXo, . theDMVattemptedtosubmitaReportthathadbeensignedbysomeoneotherthanaForensicAlcohol  Analyst.Initsanalysis,theRodriguezcourtemphasizedthat performanceofforensicalcoholanalysisis ~ subjecttostrictregulationby121authorizesonly forensicalcoholanalyststoperformforensicalcohol _ analysis!andnoneothers.(SeeRodriguez#AXoX %A&/N#A&/ %XAXo)#AXoX %A&/P#A&/ %XAXoԀAtthecaseatbar,althoughtheReportclaimstohavebeen @ signedatthedirectionofaforensicalcoholanalyst,itisbasedonahearsaystatement.Therefore,aspointed ! outinthecaseof#AXoX %A&/P#A&/ %XAXoSchwartzv.DepartmentofMotorVehicles#AXoX %A&/ R#A&/ %XAXo,whenthebloodalcoholtestdoesnotmeetthe t requirementsforadmissibilityunder#AXoX %A&/xR#115oftheAdministrativeProceduralAct,theDMVmustprovide U  additionalevidenceinordertomeetitsburdenofproof. O!       ;    AXoXXAXoX%XXAXo=XXXX%  AXoXX=X X;S  3. ` TheDepartmentofMotorVehicleshasfailedtoprovebyapreponderanceofthe C# evidencethatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration.;ST݌ =$  Ќ  AXoXXAXoAXoXXAXoAXoXXAXo    X ,  X ,IntheRodriguezcase,theFranklinCourtofAppealsheldthattheDMVhadfailedtomeetits 1&" burdentoshowthatthedefendantwasguiltyofhavinganexcessivebloodalcoholconcentrationwhenthe +' # DMVsonlyevidencewasbasedona policereportthatwasvoidofdetailandabloodtestreportthat %(!$ lacksproperfoundation.BasedonthefactthattheDMVreliesonsimilarevidenceinthecaseatbaras )"% itdidintheRodriguezcase,itstandstoreasonthattheDMVhasagainfailedtomeetitsburdenofproof *#&  toshowthatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration.While_Officer +$' ThompsonsincidentreportdoesdescribeMs.Ronaldsperformanceduringthecourseofthefieldsobriety r tests,testimonygivenbybothOfficerThompsonandMs. l  XRonaldduringtheadministrativehearingpresentedevidencewhichtendstoshowthatMs.Ronaldspoor f performanceduringthetestswasaresultofthefactthatsheperformedthemwhilewearinghighheels. `  Moreover,neitherthepolicereportnorOfficerThompsonstestimonyindicatedthathedetectedthesmell Z  ofalcohol,slurredspeechorothertelltalesignsthatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedblood T  alcoholconcentration. N      Therefore,thetestimony,policereportandinadmissiblebloodanalystreportindividuallyand B collectivelyfailtoprovidethe_DMV_Ԁwithenoughevidencetoestablishthenecessaryquantumofevidence <  thatMs.Ronaldwasdrivingwithaprohibitedbloodalcoholconcentration. 6  #XoXXAXo #