Chapter 10 31-41

Standard of proof required in criminal cases.
Evidence must convincingly demonstrate defendant's guilt without leaving reasonable doubt.
Essential to reducing risks of wrongful convictions; presumes innocence until proven guilty.

Established to protect rights during the criminal justice process.
Reinforced by 20th-century U.S. Supreme Court decisions; regarded as a due process and constitutional requirement.
Different from civil standards, which only require a preponderance of evidence.

Category	Definition	Ruling
Absolute certainty	100% certainty, no possibility of error.	Not used in civil or criminal law.
Beyond a reasonable doubt	Conclusive proof of guilt; any possibility of innocence favors the defendant.	Criminal trial.
Clear and convincing	Evidence that is prevailing and persuasive to the trier of fact.	Civil commitments, insanity defense evidence.
Preponderance of evidence	Greater weight of evidence; more convincing than the opposition.	Civil trial.
Probable cause	Sufficient facts warranting belief a crime has been committed.	Arrests, preliminary hearings.
Reasonable suspicion	Rational belief that facts warrant investigation, less than probable cause.	Police investigations.
Less than probable cause	Mere suspicion of criminal activity.	Prudent police investigations to ensure safety.

Conducted in a formal manner, following specific rules of criminal law, procedure, and evidence.
Involves an adversarial process where both prosecution and defense present their case.
Prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; defense can challenge evidence.

Jurors are selected randomly from licensing or voter registration lists.
Process known as voir dire:
- Potential jurors are questioned about biases and knowledge of the case.
- Can be dismissed for cause (bias) or by peremptory challenge (no reason given).

Racial bias criticized, particularly via peremptory challenges. Upheld in Batson v. Kentucky.
Importance of impartial jurors amid the influence of media.

Jury Selection: Challenge jurors for bias, finalize jury.
Opening Statements: Overview of cases presented by prosecution and defense.
Presentation of Evidence:
- Direct and cross-examinations of witnesses.
- Types of evidence: testimonial, real, documentary, circumstantial.
Closing Arguments: Review of case facts aimed at persuading the jury.
Jury Deliberations: Jurors discuss and decide on a verdict.
Sentencing: If guilty, the judge proceeds with appropriate sentencing per statutory guidelines.

Defendants can appeal on procedural grounds if legal errors occurred during the trial.
The right to appeal generally secured; direct appeals are guaranteed.
Writ of Habeas Corpus allows for judicial review of detention.

Case	Issue	Decision
Baldwin v. New York	Right to a jury trial	Constitutional right to a jury trial for prison sentences > 6 mo.
Batson v. Kentucky	Peremptory challenges	Racial exclusion in jury selection unconstitutional.
Gideon v. Wainwright	Right to counsel	Right to counsel applies to state courts.
Faretta v. California	Waiver of right to counsel	Defendants can represent themselves (pro se defense).
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts	Forensic evidence	State lab reports are testimonial evidence; confrontation rights apply.