Sara Menz named champion of oral advocacy competition
—By Lori Craig
Three federal appeals court judges named Sara Menz ’10 champion of the 2008-09 Hale Moot Court Honors Program following an hour-long final round of arguments before friends, family and the USC Law community March 6.
Craig Rader ’10 was runner-up; Jill Parker ’10 and Benjamin Rubinfeld ’10 were the other finalists. Forty 2Ls participated in the annual months-long competition, which kicks off at the start of each school year.
Menz represented a fictional defendant charged in federal district court with organ trafficking. She argued that a federal agent violated her client’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel by interrogating him without counsel, though he already had legal representation in a state case charging the same crime.
The case, which involved a man stopped by police while driving a borrowed rental car with a black-market heart in the trunk, also raised the question of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. Parker and Rubinfeld represented the state; Menz and Rader represented the defendant.
A lively panel of judges presided over the final round, firing a stream of questions at the four finalists. The judges included the Honorable Karen Nelson Moore of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Richard A. Paez of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; and Neil M. Gorsuch of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“Shouldn’t there be some sort of cooperation between the state and the feds?” Judge Paez asked Menz, after she argued that police acted improperly when they suggested federal agents interview the suspect while he was still in state custody.
“Yes, your honor, cooperation—“ Menz began.
“Isn’t that really all that took place here?” Paez said.
“No, your honor, that is not what took place here,” Menz responded. “Agent Wells, as is stated in the record, wanted to interview the defendant before [he was released from state custody] because he would be more cooperative while he was in custody. At this point in time, Mr. Hobs had been incarcerated for over 12 days. …
“Because the police are in a position of superior knowledge, because they may take advantage of the defendant unnecessarily, hence the reason we give them attorneys to make sure that they are not inappropriately taken advantage of in that situation.”
Before naming a champion, the judges lauded each of the participants for their “wonderful” performances.
“I think each of you did a very strong job and one that you should be proud of,” Moore said. “There is no doubt that each one of you could go into a U.S. Court of Appeals and be able to handle the responsibility to your clients in a wonderful way that would bring credit to you.”
Menz will receive the BAR/BRI Award, a scholarship for half the cost of a bar review course. All four students who participated in the final round will receive the Judge E. Avery Crary Award, a cash prize established in memory of 1929 USC Law graduate “Jud” Crary.
Six Hale Moot Court participants received honors for their written advocacy. Nancy Chang, Chris Koepsel, Colleen Popken and Laura Waluch received the Barger & Wolen Written Advocacy Award for best briefs; Henry Hattemer and Allison Sanchez received the LexisNexis Written Advocacy Award for runner-up best briefs.
Established in 1948, the Hale Moot Court Honors Program is a student-run competition, named for former USC Law Dean William Greene Hale. Each year, 40 1Ls are chosen for the program based on their oral and written advocacy in a qualifying competition. The program is organized and run by a board of previous participants, who create the hypothetical case, organize the rounds and mentor the participants. Oral arguments begin in October and the preliminary, quarterfinal and semifinal rounds are judged by distinguished members of the bar and of the local, state and federal benches.
Previous Article
