This invites jurors to believe that they can find a defendant guilty based on whatever level of proof they want. I have heard multiple prosecutors tell potential jurors during jury selection that there is “no definition” of beyond a reasonable doubt in Texas and that, therefore, “beyond a reasonable doubt” can mean whatever the potential juror wants it to mean. The Court of Criminal Appeals decided that the concept of “beyond a reasonable doubt” is difficult to define and that trial judges are better off not even trying. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (Texas’ highest criminal appeals court), told Texas criminal trial courts that they should not try to define “beyond a reasonable doubt” in their instructions to juries about the law they must follow. This article discusses how defense counsel can respond to the prosecutor’s arguments to protect the rights of the accused. If jurors accept this argument, they could find someone guilty of a crime based on a lower showing than our law requires. I also believe that some prosecutors try to convince jurors that it is a lower standard than it is. It is also an elusive concept that is sometimes difficult for jurors to grasp. John Helms Dallas criminal lawyer discusses “beyond a reasonable doubt”-an elusive but fundamental concept for criminal defense attorneys.Īlmost everyone has heard the phrase “beyond a reasonable doubt.” It is the standard that the government’s proof must meet in order for a jury to find a defendant guilty of a crime, explains John Helms, Dallas criminal lawyer.
0 kommentar(er)
