My Blog About Cyber Laws

The closing argument is one of the most important parts of the DUI trial. Next to voir dire, the closing argument can literally make or break a case. Far too often Defense Attorneys give a standard closing argument where they discuss the police officer's inconsistencies, read the beyond a reasonable doubt jury instruction, and then usually give a standard explanation on why the jury should find their client guilty.

This is not an effective method when giving a closing argument. Especially in a DUI case where the evidence is usually pretty stacked in favor of the Prosecution. Therefore a different approach needs to be taken in these types of cases. That is the use of narrative in the closing argument.

By definition narrative describes a sequences of events or tells a story, either fictional or non fictional. By using narrative in a DUI case you can put the jury in the shoes of the client, and take them back to the night of the arrest. Here are tips to focus when drafting your next closing argument.

Background of client: When using this method in your closing argument start off with a little background of the client. This will humanize the client, and show the jury they are not some monster but a regular person just like them. Describe what they did the night of the incident, where they went, how they were feeling. Emotion is very key for this section.

Clients version of events: Rather than simply going right into the testimony of the Prosecutions witnesses and attacking them. Try describing what took place when the client first observed they were being pulled over. How they felt when the officer was talking to them in the car. What was going through their mind during the field sobriety tests. Again the key thing to remember is to try and take the jury to that night. Describe everything that was going on. From the weather, to the tone of voice of the officer, to the fear and nervousness your client was having.

Counterargument: After a picture has been painted for the jury, and they have been taken back to the night of the arrest. Then this is the time to poke holes in the Prosecutions case. If the officer didn't administer the field sobriety tests correctly, then point it out. If the officer didn't observe slurred speech then point that out. The idea is to tip the scales of justice. All you need to show is there is a reasonable doubt as to whether the clients ability was affected by alcohol. So stay focused on these points, and don't go overboard.

Conclusion: After you have made your evidentiary arguments then take the jury back to the present. Describe the jury process. How your client is sitting there as a defendant in a criminal trial. Discuss the burden of proof. How the State hasn't met the burden due to the holes you have poked. Then lastly and confidently tell the Jury it is their duty to return the only just verdict in this case. One of Not Guilty.

Matthew Leyba is the founder of Leyba Defense PLLC, a Seattle DUI Law Firm located in Seattle, WA. His practice is devoted to defending those accused of DUI's and is widely considered a top Seattle DUI Lawyer.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article