Trials

Definition: Formal processes of adjudication, from arraignment through verdicts

Significance: Judicial trials represent a high point in criminal justice processing and symbolize justice. When they are conducted fairly, they reinforce public confidence in the criminal justice system, raise public awareness that crime does not pay, and demonstrate the principle that under constitutional government, the innocent are vindicated.

Judicial trials take two forms: bench trials and jury trials. Bench trials are nonjury trials in which judges act as the sole arbiters. Jury trials are judicial processes in which groups of selected impartial average citizens are sworn to reach verdicts by considering relevant facts to find the truth. The history of jury trials is deeply rooted in English history, going back at least as far as King John’s signing in 1215 of the Magna Carta, which granted the right to trial by jury of peers to English noblemen.

In the United States, jury trials are a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, which provided that trials of all crimes were to be by juries selected in the states in which the crimes were allegedly committed. That right was further affirmed in 1791 by the ratification of the Bill of Rights, whose Sixth Amendment, which gives accused persons the right to speedy and public trials by impartial juries in all criminal prosecutions.

Fundamental to court trials is the fact that the United States practices an adversarial system of justice, which is based on the premise that every dispute has two sides to it. Trials offer the opposing sides—prosecution and defense—the opportunity to present their evidence and arguments before judges or impartial juries.

Typical court trial processes consist of a series of major steps, beginning with opening statements and ending with the verdict. The underlying purpose of all trials is to find the truth—guilty verdicts when charges against defendants are proven, and acquittals when the charges are not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Where not guilty verdicts are rendered, the accused are immediately discharged. When guilty verdicts are rendered, sentencing and appeals may follow.

Types of Trials

The two basic types of court trials in the United States are criminal and civil. Criminal trials are proceedings designed to enforce or protect public rights. Penalties in criminal trials range from simple fines to death, depending on the charges and the circumstances in which the crimes are committed.

Civil trials, on the other hand, are proceedings designed to permit individuals, organizations, and institutions to seek monetary redress, to protect private rights, and prevent private wrongs. Penalties in civil trials are almost always monetary awards.

Stages in Judicial Trials

The first step in any jury court trial isjury selection. It begins with the summoning of eligible citizens—whose names are taken from the master jury lists—who are then questioned in a process known as voir dire to determine their eligibility to serve as jurors. The master jury list is usually compiled from voter registration lists, driver’s license lists, or city telephone directories. By employing unlimited challenges for cause and limited peremptory challenges, counsel for the prosecution and the defense whittle down the numbers of potential jurors to the required size, which is usually twelve jurors and several alternates.

The second step is presentation of brief opening statements by prosecutors and defense attorneys that outline what each side intends to prove in evidence. The primary purpose of opening statements is to acquaint judges and jurors with the essentials of the cases and to prepare them for the arguments that are to come. These statements are often limited to the scope of what the prosecutors and defense attorneys intend to cover in evidence. The prosecution usually presents its opening statement first.

Prosecution Strategies and Procedures

The next step in court trial is the fuller presentation of the plaintiff or prosecution’s case. In judicial trials, the plaintiff or prosecution is typically the first to present its case to the judge or jury. It is an opportunity to call and lead witnesses in evidence, as well as to present other evidence that will bolster the case. Prosecution witnesses present their evidence through direct examination as led by the prosecutors. They may include victims, eyewitnesses, police officers, and expert witnesses such as forensic scientists and medical specialists.

Four basic types of evidence may be presented at trial: real evidence, testimonial evidence, direct evidence, and circumstantial evidence. Real evidence includes physical objects of almost any kind, such as weapons, documents, and other tangibles, that are related to the case. Testimonial evidence consists of statements of any sort by competent witnesses. Direct evidence consists of eyewitness testimony by third parties who have observed incidents relating to the cases. Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence, that is, indirect proofs of material facts relating to cases without direct observation of the action.

After prosecutors directly examine witnesses, the defense attorneys are given the opportunity to cross-examine the same witnesses. In cross-examinations, the defense attorneys ask questions to clarify the defendants’ roles in the cases. The defense also uses cross-examination to point out inconsistencies in witnesses’ testimony that damage their cases and, if possible, raise doubts in the minds of the juries about the credibility of the witnesses and their testimony.

In like manner, the defense may also challenge the reliability and relatedness of other types of evidence presented by the prosecution. However, the judges ultimately rule on the admissibility or nonadmissibility of contested evidence. Prosecutors may reexamine their own witnesses after defense cross-examinations are completed to provide answers to new information and points raised during cross-examination.

Defense Tactics and Procedures

Immediately following the presentation of the prosecution’s case, the defense may request the court to dismiss the case on grounds of failure of the prosecution to prove its case. If the motion is sustained, the judge will direct the jury to acquit the defendant and then dismiss the case. If motion is denied, then the defense presents its own case.

Defense attorneys present their cases in the same manner as the prosecution by calling their own witnesses. The defense usually involves direct examination of defense witnesses and presentation of other types of evidence. As the defense finishes examining witnesses, the prosecution can cross-examine them. The prosecution tries to establish inconsistencies in the defense witnesses’ testimony, just as the defense has earlier tried to discredit the prosecution witnesses.

It should be noted that because defendants are deemed innocent until proven guilty, the defense may elect not to present any witnesses or evidence at all. The prosecution carries the burden of proof—the legal standard requiring it to prove the accused guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.

Rebuttal and Surrebuttal

At the conclusion of the defense case, the prosecution may present rebuttal witnesses or evidence. Rebuttal evidence is evidence that tends to refute the opponents’ evidence or undermine their alibis. It may also take the form of discrediting the credibility of defense witnesses based on misrepresentations of facts or proof of incentives to lie, especially for witnesses who have criminal conviction records of their own.

Sometimes rebuttals may involve bringing in new evidence that was not introduced during the prosecutors’ case. The defense may choose to exercise a surrebuttal by examining rebuttal witnesses, and may in turn introduce other evidence or witnesses. Surrebuttal is evidence directed toward countering rebuttal evidence, or strengthening the defense evidence. Rebuttal/surrebuttal exchanges may continue indefinitely, until both parties exhaust all witnesses and new evidence. When that happens, the defense may again submit a motion for directed verdict. If the motion is denied, both the prosecution and defense present their closing arguments.

From Closing Arguments to Jury Deliberation

Closing arguments are summary statements delivered by the prosecution and the defense following the presentation of all evidence. Defense attorneys usually present their arguments first, followed by the prosecutors, who wrap up the cases. The goal of each closing statement is to attack the credibility of the opponent’s evidence and witnesses. Closing statements must be based on facts, supported by evidence, and aimed at convincing judges or juries as to why they must rule in favor of their arguments. Factual summaries may be either short or prolonged.

After the closing arguments, the judges inform jurors of the general legal principles and standards they are to observe as they deliberate to reach their verdicts. Judges typically remind jurors that the accused are be deemed innocent until they are proven guilty and that convictions must be based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The judges also advise jurors on any special aspects of the crimes in question that may be relevant to their deliberations.

Because jurors are mostly average citizens, the instructions they receive are designed to educate them on the legal rules, principles, and standards applicable to the particular cases, as well as general principles. The instructions are also designed to clear away any misconceptions that may constitute grounds for appeal. Sometimes, judges invite the prosecutors and defense attorneys to participate in drawing up their jury instructions.

After jurors hear the judges’ instructions, they retire into seclusion to discuss the cases and reach verdicts. Deliberation processes may involve exhaustive discussions and analyses of all evidence presented at trial. When in doubt about specific points, the jurors may call for clarification from the judges on aspects of their instructions or for portions of the case transcripts.

During their deliberations, jurors are cut off from all outside influences until they reach their verdicts. Deliberations may last only a few hours or drag on for several days. When jurors cannot reach verdicts in one day, they are instructed by the judges not to discuss the cases with anyone until they return the next day to continue their deliberations. In highly politicized or celebrated cases, jurors may be sequestered in jury or hotel rooms and not allowed to leave until after they reach verdicts. Jury sequestration is the keeping together of juries and separating them from the general public throughout trials or deliberation processes to protect them from outside influences that may affect their decisions unfairly.

Verdicts

Verdicts represent the jurors’ final decisions after detailed analyses of all evidence presented in cases. Typical jury verdicts are either guilty or not guilty. Jury decisions must be unanimous in all criminal cases, and guilty verdicts must meet the standard of proof beyond all reasonable doubt, that is, a clear and convincing belief that any reasonable person would accept that the defendant is guilty as charged.

When jurors fail to reach agreement after deliberating, the trials are said to end in hung juries. In some jurisdictions, a hung jury constitutes grounds for a judge to declare a mistrial and dismiss the jury. Mistrials mean the termination of trials before verdicts are reached due to intervening circumstances that make it impossible to secure fair trials or for the trials to continue. When hung juries or mistrials are declared, charges are dismissed and the defendants are released. However, prosecutors reserve the right to file for new trials of the defendants on the same charges without breaching the defendants’ constitutional right against double jeopardy.

When juries inform the judges that they have reached verdicts, they are invited back into the courtrooms to announce their verdicts. Trial verdicts of not guilty bring cases to an end, and the defendants are freed of all pending bonds. On the other hand, when jury forepersons announce guilty verdicts, the jurors are usually polled individually to voice their decisions in open court. After guilty verdicts are finalized, judges order presentencing investigations and set dates for sentencing the convicted defendants.

Postverdict Motions and Sentencing

After guilty verdicts are announced, defense attorneys can file two types of postconviction motions in the hope of giving their clients second opportunities at freedom. The first type of motion is a motion in arrest of judgment. This type of motion asks the court to set aside and reverse the jury verdict on grounds that errors were made by the jury in the trial that require the case to be dismissed and the defendant acquitted. The second type is a motion for a new trial. This unusual request is based on assertions that serious errors have been made at trial by either the trial judge or the prosecutor. Sometimes the motions are based on newly discovered evidence that justifies setting aside a guilty verdict and granting a new trial. However, such motions are rarely granted by presiding judges.

Sentences are penalties imposed by courts on persons found guilty of criminal wrongdoing. It is the responsibility of the presiding judges to impose criminal sentences. Penalties are often tied to recommendations made by probation officers in presentence investigation (PSI) reports. Types of judicial penalty include monetary fines, probation, imprisonment, restitution, intermediate sanctions, commitment to hospitals or other treatment agencies, and death. Judicial sanctions may combine two or three of these punishments.

Appeals

Appeals mark the end of the road in court trial processes. Losing sides in trials may file for judicial reviews from appellate courts when the trial court judges refuse their post-trial motions for relief from the verdicts. Possible reasons for appeals include refusals of trial judges to admit relevant or exculpatory evidence during trial, inclusion of irrelevant or damaging evidence at trial, and improper jury instruction—especially when the losing attorneys’ objections to such measures are ignored by the trial judges.

The first major step in the appeals process involves the filing of formal notice of appeal document in the appellate court. The next phase is to apply for a transcript proceeding from the trial court. On fixed dates, both the prosecution and the defense present their cases to the appeals courts under a regulated schedule. Appellate court decisions may include upholding the rulings of the lower court or reversing the trial court decisions and discharging the cases. Appellate courts may also reverse and remand cases for fresh trials.

Bibliography

Baum, Lawrence. American Courts: Process and Policy. 5th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001. Standard textbook covering all aspect of U.S. courts, from their organization and structure to the procedures they employ.

Bodenhamer, David J. Fair Trial: Rights of the Accused in American History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Succinct history of changing constitutional rulings that have steadily ensured greater fairness in criminal procedures.

Carp, Robert A., and Ronald Stidham. Judicial Process in America. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2001. Congressional Quarterly, 1996. General survey of trial procedures in the larger context of criminal justice processes.

Epstein, Lee, and Thomas G. Walker. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Rights, Liberties, and Justice. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2004. Up-to-date study of constitutional law with considerable attention to the role of the Supreme Court.

Mauet, Thomas A. Trial Techniques. 6th ed. New York: Aspen Publishers, 2002. Textbook explaining trial procedures and the tactics and strategies that prosecution and defense attorneys can employ.

Neubauer, David W. America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System. 8th ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2005. Comprehensive analysis of the dynamics of criminal justice in action as seen in the relationship of judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney.

Siegel, Larry J. Criminology. 8th ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2004. Gives a thorough overview of the discipline of criminology and the entire criminal justice process, legal concepts, and justice perspectives, featuring high-profile cases, events, and relevant materials in a comprehensive, balanced, and objective fashion.

Wellman, Francis L. The Art of Cross-Examination. 4th ed. New York: Macmillan, 1936. Reprint. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1998. Reprint of a classic work on the crucial trial attorney skill of cross-examination.