1. LAW 1: CRIMINAL LAW
TRIAL PROCEDURES
TRIAL PROCEDURES

2. STEPS IN A CRIMINAL JURY TRIAL
TRIAL PROCEDURES

3. INTRODUCTION
A criminal trial is the government's opportunity to argue its case, in the hope of obtaining a guilty verdict and conviction of the defendant.
A trial also represents the defense's chance to refute the government's evidence, and to offer its own evidence in some cases.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

4. INTRODUCTION
The procedure for a trial is basically the same in every state and consists of the following phases: jury selection, opening statements, direct examination, cross-examination, closing statements, jury instruction, deliberation, verdict, and judgment.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

5. JURY SELECTION
Jury service is a very important civic duty; it is necessary to preserve the constitutional right to trial by jury.
Any adult U.S. citizen can be called to serve on a jury.
Most courts select potential jurors from registered voting lists or lists of licensed drivers.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

6. JURY SELECTION
Usually a questionnaire is sent out to potential jurors to determine whether they are eligible to serve.
Employers are required to let their employees take time off for jury service.
Most courts pay jurors a small daily stipend, and some courts also provide a transportation fee.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

7. JURY SELECTION
Some employers pay their employees during their jury service, but they are not required to do so.
Before a trial starts, a large number of potential jurors (usually 40 to 100) are called into the courtroom.
From this group, the lawyers and the judge select a jury through a process called VOIR DIRE.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

8. JURY SELECTION
The process varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but it generally includes the following steps.
The court clerk calls 12 people at random from the group and those people sit in the jury box.
The judge begins the voir dire by explaining a little about the case without revealing any details.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

9. JURY SELECTION
Then the judge asks each potential juror to state his or her name and occupation.
The judge asks other questions about the potential jurors’ lives—for example, whether they have had personal experience with cases similar to this one.
Ordinarily, the judge will dismiss anyone who has reason to be biased against either party.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

10. JURY SELECTION
If the judge believes that the trial will last more than a few days, he or she may also dismiss people whose lives would be seriously disrupted by long jury service.
The parties’ lawyers then have an opportunity to question the prospective jurors.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

11. JURY SELECTION
Each lawyer may issue challenges—that is, the lawyer may ask the judge to dismiss some individuals from the jury.
There are two kinds of challenges—a challenge for cause and a peremptory challenge.
Lawyers use both types to eliminate potential jurors who are likely to be biased.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

12. JURY SELECTION
A CHALLENGE FOR CAUSE is a challenge in which a lawyer states a reason.
If the judge agrees with the reason, he or she will dismiss the potential juror.
Both attorneys can make an unlimited number of challenges for cause.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

13. JURY SELECTION
A PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE is a challenge in which a lawyer does not give a reason.
Each attorney is permitted a limited number of peremptory challenges.
If a lawyer has a gut feeling that a potential juror is biased, they will often use a peremptory challenge to keep that person off the jury.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

14. JURY SELECTION
As each challenged individual is dismissed, they are replaced by another individual from the larger group.
Once the proper number of individuals has been approved by both attorneys, those persons become the jury.
If the trial is expected to be a long one, the lawyers will select one or two additional people to be alternate jurors.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

15. JURY SELECTION
The alternates sit with the rest of the jury throughout the trial.
If a regular juror becomes unable to serve (because of illness or other reasons), an alternate can take over with no loss of trial time.
Jurors are expected to respect the rules of the court.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

16. JURY SELECTION
In the courtroom, they must remain silent and pay close attention to the proceedings.
They must never talk with the judge, lawyers, parties, or witnesses.
Outside the courtroom, jurors must never discuss the case with anyone—even with other jurors.
They must not investigate the case on their own either.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

17. OPENING STATEMENTS
The attorneys for both sides begin the trial by making opening statements.
An OPENING STATEMENT is an outline of the case that the attorney intends to present during the trial.
The prosecutor speaks first, and because the opening statement is the first thing the jurors hear, it can have a powerful influence on them.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

18. OPENING STATEMENTS
The defendant’s lawyer speaks next, telling the defendant’s side of the story.
In some trials, the defendant’s lawyer does not present an opening statement until the prosecution has called all of their witnesses.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

19. EVIDENCE
The purpose of the opening statements delivered by the attorneys is to establish the framework, points of conflict, and issues of the case; they are not technically evidence, however.
EVIDENCE is any admissible information used to help prove or disprove a defendant’s guilt.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

20. EVIDENCE
Evidence, in general terms, can fall into two broad categories: direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.
DIRECT EVIDENCE proves a point without the need to draw any conclusions; on the other hand, CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE requires an inference to connect something to a conclusion of fact, without direct proof.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

21. EVIDENCE
Both physical and testimonial evidence fit into subcategories of direct evidence.
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE consists of tangible objects placed before the court and labeled as exhibits.
Examples of physical evidence include weapons, drugs, clothing, forensic samples, photographs, x-rays, documents, records, stolen property, and charts.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

22. EVIDENCE
Normally, the greater part of evidence consists of the sworn statements of witnesses—commonly referred to as testimonial evidence.
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE occurs when a person tells the court what they saw, heard, did, or experienced in relation to the case.
This type of evidence can be in the form of depositions, affidavits, and testimony itself.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

23. EVIDENCE
Both depositions and affidavits are taken before the trial begins, conducted outside the courtroom, given by a party or witness under oath, and transcribed before a court reporter, who then creates a written document for use in court at a later date.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

24. EVIDENCE
They differ, however, because DEPOSITIONS are transcripts of questioning conducted by one or both sides of the case, whereas AFFIDAVITS are simply written statements.
Depositions and affidavits are sometimes necessary because the witness cannot attend the trial, but, by law, they should be given the same consideration as TESTIMONY spoken from the witness stand.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

25. EVIDENCE
In general, evidence often tells a story and helps recreate the crime scene and establish the sequence of events.
Physical evidence can corroborate statements from the victim(s), witness(es) and/or suspect(s).
TRIAL PROCEDURES

26. EVIDENCE
If analyzed and interpreted properly, physical evidence is more reliable than testimonial evidence; testimonial evidence is more subjective in nature.
This is because an individual’s perception of events and memory of what happened can be incomplete or inaccurate.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

27. EVIDENCE
Physical evidence is objective and when documented, collected, and preserved properly, may be the only way to reliably place or link someone with a crime scene.
Physical evidence is therefore often referred to as the "silent witness."
TRIAL PROCEDURES

28. EVIDENCE
Direct evidence is generally considered to be more persuasive, powerful, and frequently used, but the prosecution may also introduce circumstantial evidence of a crime.
Circumstantial evidence is best explained by saying what it is not—for instance, it is not direct evidence from a witness who saw or heard something firsthand.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

29. EVIDENCE
It requires a jury to imply or draw a conclusion that some relevant fact occurred, without the aid of direct evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is generally admissible unless the connection between the fact and the inference is too weak to be of help in deciding the case.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

30. EVIDENCE
In a trial, juries must consider both direct and circumstantial evidence.
The law permits juries to give equal weight to both, but it is for the jury to decide how much weight to give to any evidence.
Many convictions for various crimes have rested largely on circumstantial evidence.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

31. EVIDENCE
Generally speaking, one of the most important jobs a lawyer has is to find evidence to support their side of the case and fight against the evidence the other side will try to use.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

32. EVIDENCE
Therefore, MOTIONS, or pleas to the court to order some action or rule on a matter pertinent to the case, are made by both sides concerning the admissibility or suppression of evidence and other tactical matters.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

33. DIRECT EXAMINATION
After the opening statements, each side presents its case through direct examination.
DIRECT EXAMINATION is the questioning, or examination, of a witness conducted by the lawyer who calls that person to the witness stand.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

34. DIRECT EXAMINATION
Both the prosecution and defense seek witnesses to establish the facts of the case and may do so with the aid of a subpoena if individuals are reluctant to testify.
A SUBPOENA is a command for a person to appear and testify in court or to produce relevant evidence in their possession.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

35. DIRECT EXAMINATION
Willful, unexcused failure to comply with a subpoena is a type of contempt of court and can be punished by the judge without a trial.
Depending on the case, direct examinations may take anywhere from an hour to several days, weeks, or months.
Like the opening statement, the prosecutor makes the first presentation.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

36. DIRECT EXAMINATION
The judge reminds the witness about the seriousness of the trial and the importance of being truthful.
The court clerk asks the witness to take an oath to tell the truth.
The lawyer then questions the witness about the facts of the case in full detail.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

37. CROSS-EXAMINATION
After the prosecutor completes direct examination of the first witness, cross-examination ensues.
CROSS-EXAMINATION is the questioning of a witness conducted by an attorney for the opposing side.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

38. CROSS-EXAMINATION
The primary purpose of cross-examination is to impeach a witness—to cast doubt on the witness’s testimony and convince the jury that the witness is unreliable.
After the cross-examination, the prosecutor is permitted a redirect examination.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

39. CROSS-EXAMINATION
REDIRECT EXAMINATION is the questioning of a witness by the party that called the witness after that witness has been subject to cross-examination.
The redirect examination is limited to issues that were discussed in the cross-examination.
When both lawyers are finished questioning the first witness, the prosecutor may call other witnesses.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

40. CROSS-EXAMINATION
The pattern of direct examination, cross-examination, and redirect examination is repeated for each witness.
There is no limit to the number of witnesses a lawyer may call.
Once the prosecution has questioned all of their witnesses, they rest their case, or conclude their presentation.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

41. CROSS-EXAMINATION
The defendant’s lawyer then calls witnesses to the stand.
Again, the pattern of direct examination and cross-examination is repeated for each witness.
This time, however, the defendant’s lawyer conducts the direct examination and the prosecution conducts the cross-examination.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

42. OBJECTIONS
Both attorneys must follow strict rules of evidence in making their presentations.
If either lawyer appears to break a rule of evidence—for example, by asking the wrong kind of question—the other lawyer may interrupt by making an objection.
An OBJECTION stops the questioning and brings the problem to the judge’s attention.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

43. OBJECTIONS
The objecting lawyer tells the judge what rule they think the first lawyer has broken.
The attorney accused of breaking the rule has a chance to defend the question they asked.
The judge then decides whether to OVERRULE (not permit) the objection or SUSTAIN (permit) it.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

44. OBJECTIONS
When a lawyer chooses to object to a question, they usually try to make the objection before the witness has time to answer.
Sometimes, however, the witness answers the question before the objection is made.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

45. OBJECTIONS
If the judge sustains the objection, the objecting lawyer may ask the judge to strike (remove) the witness’s answer from the transcript of the trial.
The members of the jury are therefore instructed to pretend that they never heard the witness’s answer, and also disregard it when they are deciding the case.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

46. OBJECTIONS
It is each attorney’s responsibility to know the rules of evidence and make sure the other attorney follows them.
If either lawyer breaks a rule of evidence, the judge may ask the lawyer to rephrase their question.
More often, however, the judge will remain silent unless the other lawyer objects.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

47. CLOSING STATEMENTS
After both lawyers have completed their presentations, each has a chance to deliver a closing statement.
A CLOSING STATEMENT is an attorney’s final summary statement to the jury in a trial which gives reasons why they think their side should prevail.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

48. CLOSING STATEMENTS
Like previous court proceedings, the prosecution goes first, followed by the defense.
Each attorney uses the closing statement to remind the jury of the evidence that supports their side.
Each lawyer also draws attention to the weak points of the opponent’s case.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

49. CLOSING STATEMENTS
They may try to cast doubt on whether events could have happened the way the other side claims they did.
Because closing statements are the last thing the jury will hear, they tend to be more forceful and emotional than opening statements.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

50. INSTRUCTING THE JURY
Before a jury can decide a case, the judge must instruct the jurors.
The judge begins by explaining the law that applies to the case.
The judge may remind the jurors to consider only the evidence they have heard in court and to disregard any testimony that was stricken from the record.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

51. INSTRUCTING THE JURY
The judge then explains each party’s burden of proof—that is, what each side is responsible for proving.
Generally speaking, the prosecution bears the entire BURDEN OF PROOF in a criminal case.
An exception is when the defendant invokes an affirmative defense, thus requiring a justification of their actions.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

52. INSTRUCTING THE JURY
The judge must also tell the jury which standard of proof applies to the case.
The standard of proof defines how far the prosecutor must go in convincing the jury.
The standard of proof in a criminal trial is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

53. INSTRUCTING THE JURY
In other words, the jury can find the defendant guilty only if the prosecutor has left no reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime.
Proving that the defendant probably committed a crime is not sufficient for a guilty verdict.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

54. DELIBERATION
After listening to the judge’s instructions the jurors leave the courtroom to DELIBERATE, or discuss the case.
The jurors attempt to agree on whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the crime(s) charged.
They select a foreman to lead the discussion and announce the verdict.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

55. DELIBERATION The jurors gather in a private room called the jury room.
The bailiff stands outside the room to make sure no one disturbs the jurors and to get them anything they need.
Depending on the case, the jury may deliberate for a few minutes, a few hours, or several weeks.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

56. DELIBERATION
There are almost no rules that tell a jury how to deliberate.
Jurors may decide among themselves whether to vote orally or in writing, for example.
In criminal cases, most states require that a jury reach a unanimous decision.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

57. DELIBERATION
If a jury can’t reach a decision after a reasonable amount of time, the foreman may ask the bailiff to tell the judge that the jury is deadlocked.
A jury that can’t reach a decision is sometimes called a HUNG JURY.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

58. DELIBERATION
If the judge believes that the jurors are still capable of reaching an agreement, he or she will order them back to the jury room to deliberate further.
If the judge accepts that the jury is deadlocked, he or she will declare the trial to be a MISTRIAL.
The case may be tried again later with a new jury.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

59. VERDICT
Once the jurors have agreed on a verdict, they let the bailiff know that they are ready to announce it.
A VERDICT is the formal decision or finding of a jury in a trial.
Everyone returns to the courtroom, and the judge asks the jury foreman to deliver the verdict.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

60. VERDICT
In a criminal trial, the jury declares the defendant guilty or not guilty.
In most cases, the jurors are not required to give any information about how they reached their decision.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

61. JUDGMENT
The decision of the jury doesn’t take effect until the judge enters a JUDGMENT on the decision—that is, an order that it be filed in public records.
In criminal cases, the judge generally has no authority to modify the verdict, thus the judgment is a restatement of the jury’s verdict.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

62. JUDGMENT
However, an attorney for one party may feel that the jury’s verdict does not reflect the true facts of the case.
Under those circumstances, the attorney may ask the judge to disregard the jury’s decision.
In some jurisdictions, the judge may grant a JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT.
TRIAL PROCEDURES

63. JUDGMENT
This type of judgment rules in favor of one side, even though the jury’s verdict originally ruled in favor of the opposing side.
Once the trial is over, the only way a party can contest the judgment is to appeal to a higher court.
TRIAL PROCEDURES