THE STATE OF TEXAS VS ROBERT ARCHBALD Bribery

THE STATE OF TEXAS VS. ROBERT ARCHBALD Bribery

Assistant District Attorneys Davi Kligman

PHASES OF A CRIMINAL TRIAL ØVoir Dire ØGuilt/Innocence ØPunishment/Sentencing

PURPOSE OF VOIR DIRE • • “To Speak The Truth” Educate venire about the law. No facts/Not evidence. Who will follow the law. Not meant to embarrass or attack. No right or wrong answers. Favorable for State/Defense.

Our Responsibility Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 2. 01 “…to see that justice is done. ”

JUDGE Makes rulings, gives the jury the law to follow. JURY The “fact finders. ”

State’s Burden • The State has the burden of proof, always! • The State’s burden does not shift. • The State has to prove every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. • The State only has to prove the elements, nothing more…but not required to prove motive.

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT • Same burden in all criminal trials. • No legal definition. • What it’s not: § Beyond all doubt § Beyond the shadow of a doubt § 100% certainty • You can still have doubt…must be reasonable.

Why Reasonable Doubt? Who are the only people who can be 100% sure about what happened? • Perpetrator • Victim/Injured party • Eyewitness

Verdict • At the conclusion of this trial, you will be asked to convict the accused and label him/her criminal. • Who will require proof beyond all doubt or be 100% certain before you can convict? • Who will hold us to a higher burden?

BRIBERY Texas Penal Code § 36. 02 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) On or about a certain date In ___ County, Texas A Person [the accused] Intentionally or knowingly Confers, or agrees to confer on another, or solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept from another: Ø Any benefit in exchange for a vote Ø Any benefit in exchange for some other outcome, i. e. favorable ruling, other benefit person would not otherwise get

Personal Bias • Personal experience that means you cannot be fair and impartial as a juror in a criminal trial for bribery? ØKnow a victim? ØKnow someone accused or charged? ØWere a victim or accused yourself?

BUT CAN YOU BE FAIR? • I don’t need details…but if you fall into the previous category, can you agree to set aside your personal experience, and promise to follow the law and make a decision based only on the evidence you hear in this case? • Who cannot be fair and impartial in this case based on a personal experience?

Rights of Accused • The Defendant has no burden. • The Defendant does not have to prove his innocence. • Defendant has the right to testify or not testify as he/she so chooses. • Defendant cannot be forced to testify by the state. • Defendant has the presumption of innocence unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

5 TH AMENDMENT • Human nature: want to hear both sides. • Defendant may choose not to testify in this case. • Law says you cannot consider this as evidence of guilt. • If Defendant chooses not to testify, who will find him guilty? ▫ Stated another way, who will hold it against the Defendant if he doesn’t testify? ▫ Who will require the defendant to testify in this case in order to determine whether guilty or not guilty?

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE • A person is innocent unless proven guilty by the State beyond a reasonable doubt. • The law says you cannot decide that the accused is guilty unless and until you hear all of the evidence. • Right now, you have not heard any evidence, therefore your verdict must be NOT GUILTY. • Why is this a presumption?

Can you follow the law? • I have already told you about the presumption of innocence. • It applies to every person accused of a crime in all criminal trials. • Is there anyone here who believes that simply because the defendant is charged he is guilty, and therefore cannot give the defendant the presumption of innocence?

POI & THE MEDIA “The court of public opinion. ” • Heard about or read an article about this case? • Is there anyone here who already decided that the defendant is guilty because of something you heard/read, and therefore will not follow the law which affords the defendant the presumption of innocence?

ONE WITNESS RULE • The law allows me to prove my case through the testimony of just one witness, and • I am entitled to a conviction based on that one witness as long as you believe that witness BRD. • Is there anyone here who will require more than one witness even if that one witness can testify to each and every element and you believe that one witness beyond a reasonable doubt?

WITNESS CREDIBILITY • Credibility: the quality of being trusted, convincing or believed. ▫ Truthfulness! • All witnesses swear an oath to tell the truth. • Jury finds the facts. • Jury decides which witnesses to believe. • Jury decides which witnesses are truthful. • If there is a conflict in witness testimony, the jury gets to resolve that conflict.

MORE ON CREDIBILITY • Law says jurors can decide credibility on any basis except ▫ Cannot automatically believe or disbelieve a witness just because of who they are. ▫ Must wait until you hear what the witness has to say before deciding if they are credible. • Law requires that everyone start off with equal credibility ▫ Once you hear about a witness’ training, experience, education and/or history, you may give that person more (or less) credibility.

LAW ENFORCEMENT WITNESSES • We just learned that jurors can’t base credibility on a person’s job, right? • Cannot say “cops always lie” or “cops always tell the truth”. There are good cops and bad cops. • Are you someone who will automatically believe or disbelieve a police officer? I don’t need to know what category you fall into. • Who cannot be fair and impartial, and follow the law that says you must start a law enforcement witness off with equal credibility?

PUNISHMENT

PUNISHMENT “TOOLBOX” • • 2 nd Degree Felony 2 -20 years in prison And, may give up to $10 K fine You must consider this range, it doesn’t mean you will give. What can you consider?

PUNISHMENT CONTINUED • “Punishment should fit the crime. ” • Don’t know the facts, no evidence presented yet. • Not asking you to tell us now what punishment you would give! • Don’t need you to commit. • Can you follow the law and consider full range of punishment (use all of the tools)?

PROBATION (Community Supervision) § If a defendant found guilty by jury is qualified for probation, option of probation should be considered by jury. Ø Prison sentence 10 years or less; and Ø Defendant has no prior felony convictions anywhere (Texas, another state or federal system). § Instead of defendant actually going to prison, jury recommends the prison sentence be suspended. Ø Community supervision for 2 -10 years. Ø Court is overseeing defendant’s behavior and places conditions on him. § Defendant’s eligibility ≠ have to give or that it’s appropriate based on the evidence. § Again, must consider but doesn’t mean you will actually give.

Hypo Case A The District Attorney offers a constituent $10, 000 in exchange for his vote. Once he takes office, he plans to have the grand jury indict (criminally charge) all of the people who voted against him for murder. Case B The District Attorney offers a constituent $10, 000 in exchange for his vote. Once he takes office, he wants to drastically reform the criminal justice system so that less people go to prison.

What can you consider? • At this point, just explaining what the range is and asking you to be open to using the full range. • Who cannot consider, under any set of facts/circumstances the minimum prison sentence of two (2) years? • Who cannot consider the maximum sentence of 20 years? • Who cannot consider the possibility of giving probation?

Final Request • Is there are ANY OTHER REASON you feel you cannot sit on this case? Please let us know! • Something I did not cover? • “If they would have just asked me this…” • Is there anyone that needs to discuss something in private? • Recognize attorneys, accused, bailiff, judge, court reporter, witnesses, know each other?