Sysop at 00:24, 26 August 2024

2024-08-26T00:24:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:24, 26 August 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Closing argument'''		'''Closing argument'''

			''People v. Pitts'' (1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 606

	==Improper==		==Improper==

Sysop at 04:59, 26 May 2016

2016-05-26T04:59:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:59, 26 May 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Closing argument'''		'''Closing argument'''

			==Improper==

			Improper to argue that the presumption of innocence applies only until the charges are read. (''People v. Cowan'' (May 23, 2016, B258587
			) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, available at [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B258587.PDF].)

	==Supplemental arguments==		==Supplemental arguments==

Sysop: Created page with "'''Closing argument''' ==Supplemental arguments== Supplemental arguments are arguments made after both sides have made closing arguments and the case has been submitted to t..."

2014-04-11T09:49:42Z

Created page with "'''Closing argument''' ==Supplemental arguments== Supplemental arguments are arguments made after both sides have made closing arguments and the case has been submitted to t..."

New page

'''Closing argument'''

==Supplemental arguments==

Supplemental arguments are arguments made after both sides have made closing arguments and the case has been submitted to the jury.

California Rules of Court, [[rule 2.1036]], adopted 2007, gives trial courts the express power to order supplemental arguments when the jury has reached an impasse. People v. Ardoin (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 102, People v. Young (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1165, and People v. Davis (1957) 48 Cal.2d 241 all discuss the trial court's discretionary power to allow for supplemental arguments. United States v. Evanston, 651 F.3d 1080 (9th Cir. 2011) provides a contrary federal perspective.

As for California cases on the topic of supplemental arguments after it's been submitted to the jury, they're usually about re-opening the case because of additional evidence. There's People v. Christensen (1890) 85 Cal. 568, People v. Green (1980) 27 Cal.3d 1, People v. Frohner (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 94, People v. Newton (1970) 8 Cal.App.3d 359, People v. Kohn (1968) 258 Cal.App.2d 368. Supplemental arguments are within the judge's discretion, but Newton sets out a four-factor test. "Factors to be considered in reviewing the exercise of such discretion include the stage the proceedings had reached when the motion was made, the diligence shown by the moving party in discovering the new evidence , the prospect that the jury would accord it undue emphasis, and the significance of the evidence."

Closing argument - Revision history

Sysop at 00:24, 26 August 2024

Sysop at 04:59, 26 May 2016

Sysop: Created page with "'''Closing argument''' ==Supplemental arguments== Supplemental arguments are arguments made after both sides have made closing arguments and the case has been submitted to t..."