Criminal Law:


In a criminal trial, it is the duty of the jury to examine the evidence to decide whether, "beyond a reasonable doubt," this is a very high standard, the defendant committed the crime in question. A trial is the government's opportunity to argue its case, in the hope of obtaining a guilty verdict and conviction of the defendant. A trial is also the defense's chance to argue against the government's evidence, and to offer its own in some cases. After both sides have presented their arguments, the jury considers as a group whether to find the defendant guilty or not guilty of the crimes charged.
A complete criminal trial typically consists of six main phases, each of which is described in more detail below:
1)      Choosing a Jury

It is quite rare, but sometimes cases are heard only by a judge. Otherwise, one of the first steps in any criminal trial is selection of a jury. During jury selection, the judge (and usually the plaintiff and the defendant through their respective attorneys) will question a pool of potential jurors generally and as to matters pertaining to the particular case -- including personal ideological predispositions or life experiences that may pertain to the case. The judge can excuse potential jurors at this stage, based on their responses to questioning.
Also at this stage, both the defense and the prosecution may exclude a certain number of jurors, through use of "peremptory challenges" and challenges "for cause." A peremptory challenge can be used to exclude a juror for any non-discriminatory reason, and a challenge for cause can be used to exclude a juror who has shown that he or she cannot be truly objective in deciding the case.
2)      Opening Statements
Once a jury is selected, the first arguments at trial comes in the form of two opening statements: one from the prosecutor on behalf of the government, and the other from the defense. No witnesses testify at this stage, and no physical evidence is used.
Because the government has the "burden of proof" as to the defendant's guilt, the prosecutor's opening statement is given first and is often more detailed than that of the defense. In some cases, the defense may wait until the conclusion of the government's main case before making its opening statement.  
3)      Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination
At the center of every criminal trial is the "case-in-chief," the time at which each side presents its key evidence to the jury.
In its case-in-chief, the government methodically sets forth evidence in an attempt to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime. It is at this point that the prosecutor calls eyewitnesses and experts to testify. The prosecutor may also introduce physical evidence, such as photographs, documents, and medical reports.
Whether a witness is called by the government or the defense, the witness testimony process usually adheres to the following timeline:
·         The witness is called to the stand and takes an oath to tell the truth.
·         The party who called the witness to the stand questions the witness through direct examination, eliciting information from the witness through question-and-answer, to strengthen the party's position in the case.
·         After direct examination, the opposing party has an opportunity to question the witness through a cross-examination; attempting to poke holes in the witness's story, attack their credibility, or otherwise discredit the witness and his or her testimony.
·         After cross-examination, the side that originally called the witness has a second opportunity to question him or her, through re-direct examination, and attempt to remedy any damaging effects of cross-examination.
After the government concludes its case-in-chief, the defense can present its own evidence in the same proactive manner. However, in some cases the defense decides not to present a case-in-chief, rather choosing to make its key points through cross-examination of the government's witnesses, and challenges to its evidence.
4)      Closing Arguments
Like the opening statement, the closing argument gives the government and defense a chance to provide a summary of the case, recapping the evidence in a light favorable to their respective positions. This is the final chance for the parties to address the jury prior to deliberations, so in closing arguments the government attempts to show why the evidence requires the jury to find the defendant guilty. In turn, the defense tries to establish that the government has fallen short of its "burden of proof," so that the jury must find the defendant "not guilty."
5)      Jury Instruction
After both sides of the case have had a chance to present their evidence and make a closing argument, the next step toward a verdict is jury instruction. This is a process in which the judge gives the jury the set of legal standards it will need to decide whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty.
The judge decides what legal standards should apply to the defendant's case, based on the criminal charges and the evidence presented during the trial. Often, this process takes place with input and argument from the prosecution and defense. The judge then instructs the jury on those relevant legal principles decided upon, including findings the jury will need to make in order to arrive at certain conclusions. The judge also describes key concepts, such as "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," and defines any crimes the jury may consider, based on the evidence presented at trial.
6)      Jury Deliberation and Verdict
After receiving instruction from the judge, the jurors as a group consider the case through a process called deliberation, trying to agree on whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the crimes charged. This is the first opportunity for the jury to discuss the case, a methodical process that can last from a few hours to several weeks. Once the jury reaches a verdict, the jury foreperson informs the judge, and the judge usually announces the verdict in open court.
Most states require that a jury in a criminal case be unanimous in finding a defendant "guilty" or "not guilty." In such states, if the jury fails to reach a unanimous verdict and finds itself at a standstill (a "hung" jury), the judge may declare a "mistrial," after which the case may be dismissed or the trial may start over again from the jury selection stage.