In a typical
criminal trial, after they have selected the jury, the prosecution and defense
have the opportunity to give an opening statement. (For information on jury
selection, see Jury
Selection in Criminal Cases. To read about closing argument, see Closing Argument in Criminal Trials.)
The opening
statement allows both sides to give the judge and jury an overview of the case,
including what they plan to prove and how they plan to prove it (what evidence
they will offer in support of their claims).
Prosecutors and
defense attorneys generally have considerable latitude in what they're allowed
to say in opening statement. That said, they're not allowed to "argue" (argument is saved for closing), nor are
they allow to refer to inadmissible evidence or facts they don't intend to or
can't prove.
Opening Statement Examples
The following are
examples of opening-statement comments that courts have found improper:
- A defense attorney said that the defendant had
offered to take a polygraph test in or to prove that he was innocent. (Evidence
regarding lie detectors was inadmissible.) (Simmons
v. State, 208 Md. App. 677 (2012).)
- A prosecutor asserted a fact that could have
been proven only if an informant had been available to testify in support of it. The
prosecutor knew the informant would not be testifying. (State v. Bernier,
486 A.2d 147 (Me. 1985).)
- A defense attorney tried to argue legal principles relating to eyewitness
identification. (State v. Elliott, 69 N.C. App. 89 (1984).)
On the other hand, courts
frequently allow lawyers to push the boundaries of acceptable opening-statement
remarks. Consider the following comments, which appellate courts validated:
- A prosecutor described the alleged crime as a
"mass execution" and its date as "one of the worst and most violent days in the
history of Boston." The statements were "enthusiastic rhetoric, strong
advocacy, and excusable hyperbole." (Com.
v. Siny Van Tran, 460 Mass. 535 (2011).)
- A prosecutor said, "You will learn that
defendant is a drug dealer." The appellate court said this merely amounted
to saying the defendant committed the crime in question. (State v. Smallwood, 230 S.W.3d 662 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).)
- A prosecutor commented that the defendant had
escaped from a prison camp shortly before abducting the victim. Even though
evidence of other crimes by a defendant aren't usually admissible, the
prosecutor had a reasonable expectation that evidence of the escape would be
admitted. (Ex parte Baldwin, 456 So. 2d 129 (Ala. 1984).)
Intervention
If a lawyer goes too
far astray in an opening statement, opposing counsel can object—if the objection is proper, the
judge will cut off the lawyer and potentially admonish the jury not to consider
what he or she just said. The judge will probably let the lawyer resume the
opening statement, but intervene if it gets off track again.