Determine the Headings for the Appellate Brief
(a) indicates that the QP should not be “argumentative,” the question can, and indeed should, advocate a particular position favorable to your client. Allowing an initial opportunity for persuasion to slip away is akin to standing on rather than stealing a base because the catcher should have a good arm. Sure it’s safe, but no Hall of Famer will you make. This is not to say that the tone of your QP should be worded in such a one-sided way as to make no reasonable person answer the question differently than your desired result. That is not a wise strategy.
These three examples help show the various argumentative tones a question can take.
Should triple-hearsay evidence be admitted and considered by district courts when sentencing a defendant under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines?
This example is straightforwardly objective. It does not hint at the correct answer. Such questions are acceptable. But check out these questions:
Did the district court err by admitting and then considering triple-hearsay evidence that substantially increased petitioner’s sentence under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines?
