6 th Annual Professor Bernie L. Segal National Mock Trial Competition: IN VINO VERITAS. October 26 29, United States of America v.

Transcription

1 6 th Annual Professor Bernie L. Segal National Mock Trial Competition: IN VINO VERITAS October 26 29, 2017 United States of America v. Blair Pickus The 2017 In Vino Veritas problem was drafted by GGU Law alumnus Erik Knuppel (JD 10) and current GGU Law student Zach Porter in association with the Director of GGU Law s Litigation Center, Professor Kaelyn Romey and 2017 Judge Lee D. Baxter Fellows in Litigation, Dustin Cameron (JD 17) and Erica Chu (JD 16). The 2017 Competition Problem is property of the GGU Litigation Center.

2 COMPETITION SCHEDULE *Problem Distributed......September 5, 2017 Clarification Questions Due..... September 19, 2017 October 26, 2017 **Coaches Meeting (6:00 PM)....GGU Campus Student Competitors Meet Witness Provided by GGU (6:00 PM).....GGU Campus October 27, 2017 Team Registration (8:00 AM 8:15 AM).....GGU Campus First Preliminary Round (9:00 AM 12:00 PM).....GGU Campus Break (12:30 PM 1:30 PM)....GGU Campus Second Preliminary Round (2:00 PM 5:00 PM)...GGU Campus Reception (6:00 PM 9:00 PM)...The University Club of San Francisco Announcement of the pairings for the Quarterfinals (by 7:30 PM) The University Club 800 Powell Street October 28, 2017 Quarterfinal Round (9:00 AM 12:00 PM) GGU Campus Break (12:30 PM 1:30 PM) GGU Campus Announcement of Semifinals (1:45 PM).... GGU Campus Semifinal Round (2:30 PM 5:30 PM) GGU Campus Announcement of Teams Advancing to the Final Round (6:30 PM)... GGU Campus October 29, 2017 ***Final Round Sonoma County #1 Bus to Petaluma Courthouse finalists depart (7:30 AM)... Park Central Hotel #2 Bus to Sonoma Wine Tour - Tour departs (8:30 AM)......Park Central Hotel Final Round (9:00 AM 12:00 PM) Petaluma Court House Presentation of Final Awards (1:30 PM).. Griffo Distillery Petaluma Courthouse - 11 English Street, Petaluma CA, ALL TIMES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. *The problem will be made available on GGU s website, at **The first mandatory event is the Coaches Meeting. At least one coaching representative of each team must attend. During the Coaches Meeting, teams will find out their initial pairings of the first two preliminary rounds.

3 RULES & PROCEDURES A. COMPETITION COMMITTEE AND FORUM 1. Competition Committee Defined a. The Competition Committee is comprised of the Competition Director, Kaelyn Romey; Erik Knuppel, Zach Porter, Dustin Cameron, and Erica Chu. Other members may be appointed to serve on the Competition Committee. Members of the Competition Committee will not be actively affiliated with any team registered to participate in the Competition. 2. Powers of the Competition Committee a. The Competition Committee has the sole discretion to interpret and enforce all Competition rules. No interpretation of the Competition rules is valid unless obtained in writing from the Competition Committee. b. The Competition Committee has the sole discretion to answer questions about the Record and all other papers that constitute the problem. c. The Competition Committee has the sole power to resolve any dispute that may arise during the Competition. d. The Competition Committee has the power to change or supplement the Competition rules, should any changes or supplements become necessary. Changes and supplements will be communicated in writing, to all participating teams. 3. Questions and Inquiries a. All questions and clarifications must be sent to the Competition Committee via at no later than 5:00 PM PST, on Tuesday, September 19, b. The Competition Committee will host a conference call on Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 1:00 PM PST to address all questions. c. Responses to all questions will be ed at 5:00 PM PST on Monday, September 25, d. A revised case file reflecting all necessary changes will be released to teams on Friday, September 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM via Competition Committee Contact Information a. Mail: Golden Gate University School of Law Attn: In Vino Veritas 536 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA b. baxterfellow@ggu.edu c. Telephone: (415)

4 B. TEAM COMPOSITION 1. Team Defined. a. Each team must consist of four law students currently enrolled at the school they represent. b. During each trial round, two students MUST be advocates and two students MUST be witnesses for their own trial team. Every student must serve as a Witness and an Advocate. Students are prohibited from flipping sides during the competition. i. Each student must serve as an advocate for one side, and ii. Each student must serve as a witness for the other side. c. During each trial, each student advocate MUST conduct: i. One direct examination of a witness, ii. One cross examination of a witness, AND iii. One jury address, either opening statement or closing argument. 2. Qualification of Team Members. a. All four team members MUST be enrolled in a full-time or part-time Juris Doctor or equivalent program at the law school they represent. 3. Coaches & Advisors. a. A team should be accompanied by a faculty advisor (or coach ). More than one coach or advisor is permitted. If the team does not have a coach/advisor, the team must designate a representative to attend the Coaches Meeting on October 26, b. Coaches may be present during the competition, but cannot communicate with the team members whatsoever during a competition round. A particular round is considered complete after the scorecards have been collected from all evaluators. c. During the competition, if the coaches or advisors wish to remain in the courtroom during trial, they must remain in the classroom portion of the courtrooms. Coaches and Advisors are not permitted in the well and may not approach the bench for any reason. C. COMPETITION RULES 1. Timing. a. Each team is allotted 80 minutes to present their case in any manner they determine. Bailiffs will track and record time for each side. The bailiffs will provide two time checks indicating the time remaining at the end of each case-in-chief. b. All time used to argue objections will count against the objecting team. c. Housekeeping matters will not count against a team s time. d. The prosecution must request time for rebuttal and is limited to a maximum time of 5 minutes. 2. Motions in Limine. a. Trials will NOT include written or oral motions in limine. Advocates are permitted to address housekeeping matters, which are NOT substantive matters for the court.

5 b. Advocates are prohibited from submitting any prepared written motions in limine to the court. c. Advocates may NOT request a hearing before opening statements. All evidentiary disputes will be raised by timely objections during trial and requests for sidebar. The court has discretion to hear or not hear any sidebars. d. The government will not be permitted to enter any of the counts nolle prosequi at the beginning of the case. e. Stipulations are not constructively in the record, a team may choose to read the stipulations into the record should they so choose but it will be counted against your time. f. In regards to Stipulation O on Page 2 of the Pretrial Stipulations, no separate exhibit exists for the report, and teams are prohibited from arguing the best evidence rule with regards to the report. 3. Pretrial Order. a. The Competition Committee, trial court may issue a Pretrial Order before trial resolving any major evidentiary issues presented in the problem. The trial court also has discretion to determine if any evidentiary issues will be deferred until trial. b. All Pretrial Orders will be issued to all competitors in addition to any supplemental information. 4. Sidebars & Objections. a. All sidebars shall be held constructively (i.e. no approaching the bench). All sidebar requests will be granted or denied at the court s discretion. All evidentiary discussions that follow sidebar requests will take place in open court but are presumed to be taken outside of the presence of the jury. b. All discussions at sidebar for our purposes of this competition MUST be heard by ALL evaluators (not just the trial judge in an actual sidebar). c. The only lawyer who may object during witness testimony is the lawyer who will be examining that witness. d. In the mature of a mock trial competition, with limited witness availability, teams may NOT object based on the confrontation clause. Judges will be instructed to not entertain confrontation clause arguments. However, this does not preclude other evidentiary arguments, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence, to attack the veracity of statements made out of court. 5. Courtroom Technology a. Courtroom technology will be provided during all competition rounds held at Golden Gate University. Technology available for us includes a screen and projector connected to a computer. Each courtroom computers hard drive will contain all exhibits.

6 b. Advocates are permitted to control the courtroom technology or seek assistance from the bailiff to call up exhibits and demonstratives when appropriate. c. Teams are permitted to bring their own physical blowups of exhibits. The exhibits may not be altered in any way. The competition will NOT provide easels. Demonstratives may be created during trial as permitted by law. 6. The Case File Represents a Closed-Universe. a. Teams are not permitted to cite, argue, or reference outside case law, statutes, or federal regulations not included in the file. b. Teams are restricted to arguing the law contained in the case file. 7. Witnesses are Prohibited from Creating Facts. a. Witnesses are prohibited from testifying to any facts not contained in the case file. b. Witnesses are permitted to testify to reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the facts contained in the case file. Reasonable inferences are those drawn by a process of reasoning by which a fact or proposition sought to be established is deduced as a logical consequence from other facts, or a state of facts, already provided by the case file. c. The remedy for an advocate faced with a witness who is creating facts that are not reasonable inferences, is to impeach that witness through omission. It is against the spirit of the competition to cry foul to the judge that the witness is making stuff up. 8. Statements in Documents. a. Statements contained in the Investment Agreement and the Bill of Sale (or any other document in the file) may contain language inconsistent with Securities and Exchange Commission regulations. b. Factual and/or legal arguments surrounding misstatements of law or regulation in the area of corporate finance or SEC are against the spirit of the competition. c. Teams are limited to arguing the law contained in the case file. d. In regards to the actual text of the statutes enumerated in the indictment; the indictment is a charging document and may not be entered into evidence at trial. The relevant statutory law is contained in the jury instructions. e. The brackets within the elements of the jury instructions indicate there shall be an or between each bracket. f. There is no significance to the difference in appearance between the pitch deck and how it appears in the attachment in the from Pickus to Luzadas. Zmail s coding translated the PPV logo on the first slide of the pitch deck without transparency. There are no substantive differences between the pitch deck attached to the July 20, and the pitch deck as it appears in the case file. D. ANONYMITY

7 1. No Disclosure of School Affiliation to Judges & Evaluators. a. All team members and individuals affiliated with a team are prohibited from speaking with the judges and evaluators prior to the round. b. During the competition, participants will be identified by letter and number, and not by the school they attend. c. The judges and evaluators will award points to each team member s number. d. Teams prohibited from identifying represented school even if asked to do so by evaluators and judges. e. Teams are asked to exercise caution and good faith in this respect. f. If a judge or evaluator learns the identity of a school team, the judge should immediately refer the matter to the Competition Director so that a substitution can be promptly made. 2. Team Introduction by Number. a. Although counsel may introduce themselves to the Court in the usual manner (by team number), the team s law school affiliation may not be mentioned at any time during the competition, until the team is eliminated from the Competition. b. All team members, coaches, advisors, and observers must refrain from identifying a team s school at any time and in any manner, including, but not limited to, wearing any identifying items, such as school clothing, patches, or pins, or carrying identifying material (such as a pen, portfolio, or notebook with a school logo). 3. No Cell Phones. a. The coaches, advisors, and observers are not permitted to confer with the team members during the round, including the breaks. b. Team members are Prohibited from cell phone use including other similar electronic devices during the round, including during the breaks. E. EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. Team Seeding. a. During preliminary rounds, each team will present prosecution and defense one time. b. The Competition Committee will use head-to-head wins and scoring tiebreakers to seed the quarterfinal trials. c. In the quarterfinal, semifinal and final rounds, teams will prosecute or defend as follows: i. If the teams have met before, the teams will switch sides: ii. Teams may agree on which side to represent or: iii. A coin toss will be used to determine the assignment of sides.

8 2. Objections. a. Student advocates will be evaluated on their ability to make and respond to objections, both in front of the jury and at sidebar. b. All student advocates should recognize when arguments on objections are appropriate for the jury and when a discussion must be at sidebar. 3. Evaluators, Scoring & Brief Comments. a. A trial judge and a jury of experienced attorneys will score student performances as evaluators. b. Evaluators may provide comments to advocates in writing. c. After the competition committee collects all scoring ballots from evaluators, if time permits, the advocates may thank the trial judge and evaluators. 4. Professionalism. a. Evaluators will consider whether to deduct points from teams for failure to meet the basic standards of ethics, civility, and professionalism during trial. 5. No Tie Scores. a. An odd number of evaluators will vote in each trial. b. If there is an even number of evaluators, the Competition Committee will determine whether the judge s evaluation will count or an evaluator s ballot will count twice. c. There will be no ties on the ballots in any trial. 6. Trial Results Provided After the Competition. a. The competition committee will send each school trial results, evaluator ballots, and score sheets following the Competition. b. Do not request evaluator information during the competition. 7. A Sample Score Sheet is included below. F. WITNESSES 1. One Witness Provided. a. Each school will be assigned ONE GGU witness for the entire competition. b. Each team will meet their witness and have the opportunity to prepare them at the opening reception, held on October 26, 2017 after the coach mandatory meeting. During that time, a team may prep their witness. We remind teams to be respectful of each volunteer witness s time.

9 c. The GGU witness will be prepared to play the following witness roles: i. Alleged victim, Samuel Luzadas, AND ii. Defense witness, Caroline McCormick. 2. Mandatory Witnesses. a. The Prosecution MUST call two witnesses during their case-in-chief. i. Samuel Luzadas* (provided by GGU); ii. Emily Genge (team MUST provide) b. The Defense has three available witnesses, and MUST choose TWO witnesses for trial. i. The Defense MUST call Caroline McCormick *. (provided by GGU); and OR ii. Tiffany Hansen (if called, team provides) iii. Blair Pickus (if called, team provides) *(bold = witness is provided by GGU; underline = witness is played by non-performing advocates from each team) 3. Gender Neutral Witnesses. a. All witnesses may be either male or female. b. The witnesses/parts are written as gender neutral as possible. It is against the spirit of the competition to use any witness gender for material advantage during the competition. c. Teams may not refer to, or argue inferences, from the actual appearance of the person playing a witness role at trial (i.e. a male playing Tiffany Hansen). d. A team may not treat their own witness as a hostile witness on direct examination. 4. Defense has NO obligation to Identify Witness Before Trial. a. The defense team has NO obligation to inform the prosecution team which of the two optional defense witnesses it intends to call in its case (Tiffany Hansen or Blair Pickus) before the defense calls its next witness. b. The defense has properly listed all three defense witnesses on its witness list, and has no obligation to call the same two defense witnesses during any of their trials. c. In each trial, the defense may reserve its decision regarding which defense witnesses to call until it announces its next witness to the court during the defense case-in-chief. G. ROUNDS 1. All Teams Will Participate in Preliminary Rounds. a. Each team will compete in two trials during the preliminary round.

10 2. Quarterfinals. a. The top eight teams will advance to the quarterfinals. b. The Competition Committee reserves the right to adjust seeding of the quarterfinals. i. Best win-loss record in preliminary rounds: 1. If eight teams have 2-0 win/loss records based on the above rules, those teams progress into the quarterfinals. ii. Tie Breakers: 3. Semifinals. 4. Finals. H. ONLINE ACCESS 1. If teams have the same win/loss record, the highest total combined preliminary ballot score will be used. 2. The highest combined scores from both preliminary round trials will determine who advances into the quarterfinal round. 3. If teams have the same record and total ballot scores, the trial judge scores will be used. 4. If there is still a tie, the aggregate winning ballots of the teams opponents faced during the preliminary rounds will be used. 5. If necessary, the team with the least preliminary round deductions progresses. a. Four winning teams from the quarterfinals will advance to the semifinals. b. The semifinals will be reseeded with the four teams remaining. c. The highest seeded team remaining will face the lowest seeded team, followed by a trial between the middle seeded teams. a. The two winning teams from the semifinals will advance to the finals. 1. The case file will be published online at after it has been released to all competing teams.

11 SCORESHEET 2017 In Vino Veritas Mock Trial Competition POINTS FOR PROSECUTION TOTAL POINTS CATEGORY OPENING STATEMENT (Maximum 20 points) DIRECT OF PROSECUTION WITNESS #1 (Maximum 10 points) CROSS OF PROSECUTION WITNESS #1 (Maximum 15 points) DIRECT OF PROSECUTION WITNESS #2 (Maximum 10 points) CROSS OF PROSECUTION WITNESS #2 (Maximum 15 points) DIRECT OF DEFENSE WITNESS #1 (Maximum 10 points) CROSS OF DEFENSE WITNESS #1 (Maximum15 point) DIRECT OF DEFENSE WITNESS #2 (Maximum 10 points) CROSS OF DEFENSE WITNESS #2 (Maximum15 points) CLOSING ARGUMENT (Maximum 20 points) OBJECTIONS & RESPONSES (Maximum 10 points per team) Evaluate timeliness; appropriateness; & knowledge of the Evidence Code SUB-TOTAL (100 points possible for each team) TEAM PROFESSIONALISM (Deduct Maximum 5 points) Evaluate conduct for unprofessionalism before, during, or after trial The team with the highest point total wins A Tie is Not Permitted POINTS FOR DEFENSE TOTAL POINTS Evaluator/Judge s Name: Session (circle one): AM PM Evaluator/Judge s Room #: Prosecution team letter: Defense Team Letter:

12 2017 In Vino Veritas Competitors Barry University s Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law UC Hastings College of Law American University Washington College of Law Elizabeth Haub School of Law (PACE) University of South Dakota School of Law Loyola University Chicago School of Law Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law University of Illinois College of Law St. John s University School of Law Western State College of Law Tulane University Law School Brooklyn Law School John Marshall Law School Texas Tech University School of Law George Mason School of Law