Rules of Evidence? Sure, what do you want to know?

I had an interview for a job where I would get to do some criminal defense. It’s something I’m interested in but don’t know a lot about. One of the perks of this job is that there would be the potential to do a trial or two. In Oregon law students who have taken evidence and have a certain number of credit hours can be certified to appear before the court. Imagine a judge calling me "Counsel".
The other really cool thing about this job is the option to do juvenile defense work. When I grow up and pass the bar I would like to do defense work for juveniles who are undocumented. There’s a population of kids who migrated when they were very young, 1 or 2 years old, with their parents and grew up in the U.S. They get into some trouble when they’re 16 and find out they’re undocumented and they’re up for deportation. If the crime was violent there is very little chance that they can get a hearing to stay in the U.S. These are the folks I’d like to use my shiny new law degree to help. This job would provide some important training in that regard.
As I mentioned above one of the things I need to be court certified is the completion of evidence. I started evidence this semester, anticipating that I would be certified and ready to go by this summer. At this point I’ve had about 3 weeks of evidence. Prof. E was sick one day so I think I’ve had a total of 5 classes. We’ve talked about maybe 4 topics in the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE). I know them okay, but I have yet to spend much time really putting them in my brain.
The interview is going pretty much as most interviews go, let me tell you about what we do, tell me about you, why do you want to work here, where do you see yourself, etc. This interview is at a job fair and so each interviewee is only allowed 20 minutes. As I wind down my “I’m committed to community service and blah blah blah” answer the interviewer asks me a question.
“What can you tell me about FRE 611?”
I don’t have the FRE in front of me but I think I can answer this. “It deals with cross examination, and whether leading questions are appropriate or not.”
“When are they appropriate?”
“That depends on a lot of different factors, such as if the parties are adverse or not. Basically it’s governed by the judge’s discretion. I can’t remember the specific rule of the top of my head but I believe it’s 401.”
“How do you determine if the judge has abused his discretion?”
And on it goes. I’m doing okay as we go along, but I would never try to do this without having the FRE in front of me. I’m somewhat fresh on it but still I’m nervous.
We get to the best evidence rules and I start thinking “Crap, 1008 is the last rule we did in class and I haven’t done the reading for next week yet. If this goes much longer I’m screwed. I must stretch the next five rules out until the end of the interview. I must stop talking so fast b/c I’m nervous.”
I check my watch and I have eight minutes left, but the person who interviews after me isn’t around. How long can I possibly talk about the duplication exception. I’m down to the last rule, 1003, and still nobody has come up for the next interview. I start in on a lengthy explanation of FRE 1003 and my mouth is starting to dry up when the next interviewee walked up.
Thank god b/c there wasn’t a whole lot to say after that. So I had a nice pop quiz on evidence. I talked to some other people that interviewed and no one else got the pop quiz. I don’t know what that means.