Also known as: closing argument · closing statement · summation
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The phase of a trial after the close of all evidence in which counsel for each party address the factfinder. Counsel summarize the evidence presented and argue how that evidence supports a verdict or judgment in their client's favor.
Caleb Chang sued Central Dynamics after a commercial lease dispute. Both sides presented witnesses and documents showing the condition of the leased space. In closing arguments Caleb's lawyer walked the jury through the photos and emails to argue that the landlord had breached the covenant of quiet enjoyment. Central Dynamics's counsel responded by highlighting the tenant's payment history to urge a defense verdict.
Caitlin Crowley stood trial for first-degree murder. The prosecution called an accomplice who testified he saw Crowley fire the shots. In closing arguments the prosecutor urged the jury to believe the accomplice because his account matched the physical evidence. Defense counsel countered that the accomplice had every reason to lie to reduce his own sentence.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Christopher Collins was prosecuted for unlawful possession of a firearm. The defense introduced evidence that the gun belonged to a roommate. In closing arguments the prosecutor reminded the jury of Collins's prior admission that he kept the weapon for protection. The defense lawyer argued that the roommate's testimony created reasonable doubt on the element of knowing possession.
Corinne Cho faced murder charges. The prosecution withheld a witness statement that could have impeached its key identification witness. In closing arguments the prosecutor relied heavily on that witness. Defense counsel argued that the withheld statement undermined the entire case and required acquittal.
Carmen Choi was tried on drug conspiracy charges. The government's main witness was a cooperating informant who received a reduced sentence. In closing arguments the prosecutor stressed the informant's detailed testimony. Defense counsel urged the jury to reject the testimony because the informant had a powerful motive to please the government.
Chloe Chen stood trial for robbery. The prosecution introduced her stationhouse statement. In closing arguments the prosecutor told the jury the statement was freely given and corroborated by other evidence. Defense counsel argued that the circumstances showed coercion and that the jury should disregard the statement entirely.
The prosecution typically argues first, the defense follows, and the prosecution may rebut. This sequence is set by rule and gives the government the final word because it bears the burden of proof.
Supporting sources
Yes. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right of counsel to present a closing argument in both jury and nonjury criminal trials. A statute that categorically bars closing argument violates this right.
Supporting sources
Yes. When counsel has already presented mitigating evidence at trial and reasonably fears that argument would open the door to a strong rebuttal, the decision to waive closing argument is a strategic choice that does not violate the Sixth Amendment.
Supporting sources
Yes. A prosecutor may argue that the defendant had the opportunity to hear other witnesses and tailor testimony accordingly. Such comment does not violate the Constitution or penalize the exercise of the right to attend trial.
Supporting sources
…reasonably conclude” that Mullet shared the same non-religious motivations as the other assailants is simply not viable. During closing arguments, Mullet’s counsel hinted that family or community in-fighting might have motivated Mullet. But neither a jury nor this Court may speculate as to a theory raised only in closing arguments…