What is Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt in Minnesota?
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard in the legal system here in Minnesota and across the United States. The reason is simple. In criminal cases, the beyond reasonable doubt standard requires that the evidence presented at trial be so convincing that no reasonable person would ever question the defendant’s guilt. If you are facing serious criminal charges in Minnesota, contact an experienced criminal defense attorney.
A Little History
The United States owes much of its legal system to the British. Hence, many of our general legal concepts may seem familiar to the British and all of their former colonies including Canada, Australia, Kenya, Uganda and on and on. In fact, we still quote British court decisions and writings even today. An example would involve this extraordinarily high standard which was articulated by an English Judge named William Blackstone back in 1765 when he wrote “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffers.”
The purpose of this standard is to insure that only the truly guilty will be convicted. While this is certainly debatable, for our purposes, the more important question is: What Does Proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt actually mean?
What Does Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Mean?
While defining proof beyond a reasonable doubt can sometimes seem tricky, it might be easier to compare to other legal standards that apply in other kinds of cases in Minnesota and across the United States.
Preponderance of the Evidence: This is the lowest burden in our legal system. Generally, preponderance of the evidence means that it is a little more likely true than not. One example might be a thousand pebbles in one hand and a thousand and one pebbles in the other. All it takes is one single pebble and nothing more, just a smidge. This is a preponderance.
Clear and Convincing Evidence: This is a bit higher standard of proof. This is sometimes considered to be a high likelihood of probability. Some consider it about 75% likelihood that something happened.
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: This is simply the highest proof in American jurisprudence. In order to prove this, a jury must be convinced that the only reasonable way this event took place was that the defendant did it and the prosecutor proved each and every element by this standard.
Who has the Burden of Proof?
If somebody is accused of a crime, it is the government, the prosecutor, who is making the allegation. It is not the complaining witness or so-called victim. As a result, it is the prosecutor who has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant did anything wrong. That being said, the prosecutor does not need to eliminate all doubt. The prosecutor must convince there jury after considering all of the evidence jury that there is only one reasonable conclusion and that is that the defendant did it, the defendant is guilty.
“Just saying something doesn’t make it so. The prosecutor must prove it. It is the bedrock of our judicial system.”
In order to prove their case, a prosecutor will present evidence through witnesses including police officers, witnesses, DNA evidence forensic evidence, fingerprints and more. The purpose is to provide enough evidence to address every issue and address every reasonable doubt that a jury, or sometimes a judge, may have. If the prosecutor fails in their burden, a jury must come back with a Not Guilty verdict. This is frequently where the defense attorney can do more.
How Does a Defense Attorney Establishing Reasonable Doubt?
In order for a defense attorney to establish reasonable doubt, it may happen before the case goes to trial. However, once trial begins, its critical even during jury selection that they understand that it is the prosecution who has the complete burden to show that a crime was committed and the defendant committed that crime. The Defense has no obligation to prove anything or even provide any evidence at all. In fact, a defendant could sit quietly and do nothing and it doesn’t change the standard. This is the starting point. Of course, a good defense attorney does so much more.
“This is never a horse race. The prosecutor is the only horse on the track and if they fall, that’s their problem.”
A good criminal defense attorney can then use effective cross examination of the State’s witnesses and analysis of their so-called evidence to highlight and even create additional doubt. Finally, a good defense attorney always has the option of bringing in their own factual witnesses, character witnesses, experts and may even the defendant themselves to create additional doubt.
In the end, the burden is always on the prosecutor to prove guilt. If the prosecutor fails in their burden, there is only one option for the jury, Not guilty.
It should be noted that there are some defenses like self defense and insanity for instance in which there is a burden by the Defense to establish that they are viable. That being said, this is never a horse race. The prosecutor is the only horse on the track and if they fall, that’s their problem.
Go with the Best
If you are facing serious criminal charges in Minnesota, make sure you sit down with an experienced Minnesota criminal defense attorney. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is absolutely a high standard but that doesn’t mean that a jury can’t be convinced of somebody’s guilty using questionable evidence. They absolutely can and have.
Jack Rice is a Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist, former prosecutor and former U.S. Federal Officer. He is also the founder of Jack Rice Defense. Contact Jack Rice Defense for a free confidential consultation or call 651-447-7650 or 612-227-1339. Check out what others have said about Jack online. Watch his videos and read his articles too. Jack’s got your back.