Here is an example model answer to one part of an essay question:

 

A proper arrest is one that is based on probable cause.  Facts supporting probable cause may come from a number of different sources including a police officer’s personal observations.  Here, the state law granted police officers discretion to arrest for any traffic infraction, including violation of the state’s seat belt law.  The officer personally observed a violation of the seat belt law and so had probable cause to make the stop and arrest.  Therefore, the stop and arrest were constitutional.  The constitutionality of the stop and arrest is not affected by the relatively minor nature of the violation or by the officer’s ulterior motive for making the stop.  Rather, the pertinent factors taken into consideration are whether or not there was probable cause to believe a traffic violation had occurred and whether or not state law authorized arrest for that particular violation.  Therefore, because there was probable cause for the traffic stop and state law authorized arrest for the traffic violation, neither the stop nor the subsequent arrest violated Suspect’s constitutional rights.

Here is how I answered:

Courts have held that a pretextual stop and arrest do not violate a person’s Constitutional rights.  Whether it is common practice or not for a specific officer to engage in a certain type of arrest is not relevant to the validity of an arrest.

Officer used the violation of the seat belt law as a pretext to stop and arrest.  The state allows arrests to be made for violations of the seat belt law.  Therefore Suspect’s Constitutional rights were not violated.

This problem has plagued me throughout law school.  I always found it funny that professors often said that people go to law school because they can’t do math.  I didn’t score great grades in law school not because I didn’t get the answers right.  I got average grades in law school because I didn’t do a very good job of showing my work.  Let’s consider the above example.  In the fact pattern, they say that the officer pulled this guy over because he saw that the driver wasn’t wearing a seat belt.  The officer just had a hunch that the guy had drugs on him, but pulled him over for the seat belt violation as a pretext to stop him.  He was fishing.
I screwed up here because I never explained the probable cause aspect, ect.  I never think, “I should say the officer had probable cause to arrest him because he witnessed the violation.  I should explain what probable cause is.  I should explain that you need probable cause for an arrest.”  I think, “Okay, he saw the guy not wearing his seatbelt and can arrest him.  No need to discuss the obvious.”  Basically, I lose a lot of very easy points because even though I’m showing my work like my math teacher wants, I didn’t show the steps where I did addition.
I take solace only in the fact that my MBE score is increasing to about 75% right.  These essay questions are but 30% of my total grade.
Bar Tally: 359 Hours.