The Closing Stage of a Jury Trial: Renewal of the Motion for Acquittal; Closing Argument; Jury Instructions; the Jury's Deliberations and Verdict

• Author: Anthony G. Amsterdam/Martin Guggenheim/Randy A. Hertz
• Profession: University Professor and Professor of Law at New York University/Fiorello LaGuardia Professor of Clinical Law at New York University School of Law/Professor of Clinical Law at NYU School of Law
• Pages: 769-786

769

CHAPTER 36

THE CLOSING STAGE OF

A JURY TRIAL: RENEWAL

OF THE MOTION FOR

ACQUITTAL; CLOSING

ARGUMENT; JURY

INSTRUCTIONS; THE

JURY’S DELIBERATIONS

AND VERDICT

PART A. THE RENEWED MOTION FOR

JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL

§ 36.01 The Renewed Motion for Acquittal;

Partial Directed Verdicts

Chapter 35 described the nature and functions of the renewed motion for acquittal in

a bench trial, together with various legal doctrines that bear upon the motion. Most of

what was said about the latter doctrines there is also pertinent to jury trials. In a jury

trial, however, the motion has heightened importance because it determi nes whether the

case will go to the jury or be dismissed by t he judge.

The judge may grant a motion for acquittal in whole or in part. S/he may dismiss

counts of the Petition and submit others to the jury. S/he may grant an acquittal on the

offense charged in the charging paper and submit lesser included offenses to the jury.

Whereas defense arguments on the motion for acquittal and closing argument are

co nso lid ate d in a be nch tr ial , th ey a re , of c ou rse , se par ate in a ju ry t ri al . At the con clu sio n

770 | Trial M anual for Defense Attorne ys in Juvenile Delinquency C ases

of all of the evidence (when both prosecution and defense have “rested”), defense counsel

makes his or her renewed motion for acquittal, and the prosecutor responds. (Counsel

should request that the jury be excused while the motion is made, argued, and ruled on,

so that a denial of the motion does not convey to the jury the impression that the judge

has ratified the sufficiency of the prosecution’s case.) If the judge denies the motion in

whole or in part, the attorneys then submit requests for jury instructions (see § 36.02

infra) and thereafter make their closing arg uments to the jury (see §§ 36.10–36 .12 infra).

In a jury trial on a criminal or delinquency charge, the court may not direct a ver-

dict for the prosecution no matter how overwhelming and essentially uncontested the

evidence of guilt. See, e.g., United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 U.S. 564, 572–73

(1977) (dictum); Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510, 516 n.5 (1979) (dictum); Standefer

v. United States, 447 U.S. 10, 22 (1980) (dictum); Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 578 (1986)

(dic tu m); Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 277 (1993) (dictum).

PART B. REQUESTS FOR JURY INSTRUCTIONS

§ 36.02 The Conference on Instructions

In many jurisdictions it is customary or obligatory, prior to the closing arguments of

counsel, for the judge to confer with counsel to determ ine what the jury will be charged

(or to “settle” the instruct ions, as it is often called). This may be done as a matter of rou-

tine, or counsel may have to request a conference if s/ he wants one.

At the conference, the judge may read to counsel, or allow counsel to read, part or

all of what the judge proposes to instruct the jury. (Usually the “standard” parts of the

charge will not be read or made available to counsel unless specifically requested. If

counsel wants to see what the judge is going to charge about the role and obligations

of jurors, the process of jury deliberation, the attitudes with which the jurors should

approach their deliberations, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and other “boilerplate”

matters, counsel wil l have to ask explicitly to see these portions of the judge’s draft.) The

judge will then entertain objections and proposed modifications and will rule on them.

Whether or not s/he is required to or does disclose his or her own draft charge to

counsel, the court will receive and rule upon proposed instructions by both parties,

often called requests for charge or prayers or points for charge. These are ordinarily sub-

mitted to the court in writing; in some jurisdictions they must also be filed with the

clerk. At the conference the judge takes up each request for charge and rules on it, usu-

ally endorsing each request “allowed” (“granted”), “denied,” or “charged in substance”

(“covered”). (The last of these notations indicates that the judge accepts t he principle of

the requested instruction but has, or thinks s/he has, adequately dealt with the point in

another portion of the draf t charge.)

Local practice may require the attorneys to file their proposed instructions and to

serve them on opposing counsel at a specified time before the conference. The proce-

dure for preserving objections to the court’s refusal to adopt proposed instructions also