Member
| You might have to - I am thinking of the line, "The State would reoffer all evidence introduced during the guilt phase of the trial," - but you would certainly want to in most cases.
This jury does not know anything about the previous case. If you had stupid facts and just avoided a jury nullification, maybe you want to gloss over a lot of it. However, if you had a decent case with compelling facts, you still want the jury to hear every bit of it. Along the way, I would make sure that they heard the language from the indictment so that they know what the guilty guy (you can say that in this trial) was guilty of in the first place. Otherwise, they might decide that he really did not do what he is charged with.
Had a plea of guilty to the jury before where the judge went straight into punishment without first instructing the jury that, "On defendant's plea of guilty you are instructed to find him guilty..." and having them return verdicts of guilt. On his five count trial, they decided that he really did not do one of the things alleged and tried to sentence him to zero years in prison, probated. It was a bit late for "I told you so," - mistrial on one count. On the plus side, I get a chance at a jury that will feel less sorry for a poor Vietnam vet traumatized by his experiences - making it okay for him to stalk and threaten his ex-girlfriend at gunpoint. Especially since he was a helicopter mechanic. |
| Posts: 70 | Location: Lockhart, Texas | Registered: October 05, 2004 | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/401e1/401e1354d49559dbad327a78f250f48e0d46b12e" alt="Reply With Quote Reply With Quote" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/401e1/401e1354d49559dbad327a78f250f48e0d46b12e" alt="Edit or Delete Message Edit or Delete Message"
IP
|
|