When we are picking a jury for a Texas Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) defense case one of the main points that we talk to the jury pool about is the standard for reasonable doubt. However, before we delve into reasonable doubt we must talk about another concept that goes hand in hand with it is the presumption of innocence. The following information will discuss these two concepts in not only Texas DWI defense cases but all cases.
Everybody who is charged with a crime in the United States is presumed innocent until proven guilty. This sounds easy enough; however, most of us do not have that engrained in our mindset. For instance, when my daughter comes home with a bad grade I immediately believe that she has not studied properly for the test or some reason that would be her fault. This type of thought is contrary as to individuals who are charged with a crime. We hold that if somebody is going to be stigmatized with a criminal offense or even sent to jail or prison, they should get the benefit that they are innocent and the State has the burden of proving them guilty.
It is difficult for the average citizen to see only one side having a burden, especially in a criminal offense. Questions are usually asked as to how come the Defendant does not have to produce any evidence or testify. The answer is that the State always carries the burden in a criminal case and that burden never shifts. What is the burden beyond a reasonable doubt (hereinafter BRD)? The Texas legislature in their wisdom has decided that it is up to the jurors to decide and we as lawyers cannot give you a definition. However, there are some burdens that we can talk about to give you an idea of what BRD is not. What a police officer needs to detain somebody is if that he or she can articulate specific facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a specific individual has been or will be involved in criminal behavior. Next is probable cause.
Probable cause is what it takes an officer to arrest somebody. If a police officer sees what they believe is a violation of the law then they can arrest that person. The next burden is preponderance of the evidence. This is what it would take to win a civil suit. For example, if your neighbor's tree fell on your fence and you sued him for damages. The jury would have to have a fifty percent, plus something, certainty that your neighbor was negligent. The next burden that we use in our court system is clear and convincing evidence. This is what it takes for the State to terminate parental rights. The shorthand definition of clear and convincing evidence is that the fact finder have a firm belief that it is true, thus, BRD falls somewhere after this burden and 100 percent certainty. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt is the highest burden in our country.
With these rights afforded to us it makes the State cross some difficult hurdles. This provides Texas DWI defense attorneys with some incredible tools in defending any case, including DWI. You see, our forefathers specifically added these rights for which they were not afforded. It behooves of us as U.S. citizens not to forget these rights as they were implemented for our individual freedoms. Remembering these rights upon first being stopped can be advantageous to your defense.
Related Articles:
- 10 things that I learned from smart attorneys for picking a jury
- Are police reports for DWI biased?
- How to Choose a Good San Antonio DWI Lawyer
Kyle Simpson - San Antonio DWI Attorney - 321 S. Flores - San Antonio, Texas 78204
Your Texas DWI Website | Google Review of Your Texas DWI
