法学研究方法作.docVIP

法学研究方法作业 The Forgotten dinner Guest: The “Beyond a reasonable doubt” Standard in a motion for a Judgment of acquittal in a Federal Bench Trial Jared Kneitelt abstract In comparison to civil trials, criminal trials are decided on more stringentstandardsofproof however, motionsforjudgmentofacquittal in criminal non-jury trials are currently decided on a mere legal sufficiency standard as opposed to the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard. This article examines the lack ofreasoning and uniformity in deciding these motions as well as the potential dangers and injustices posed to a defendant by applying a lower standard. Through an examination of both domestic andforeign law, the author argues for the application ofthe “beyond a reasonable doubt “standard when determining motions for judgment of acquittal in criminal non-jury trials. welcome to the dinner Party: Introduction The standard for judging a civil trial is lower than the standard for judging guilt in a criminal trial, and there is no jury in a non-jury trial. Somehow-despite these two very obvious conclusions-the nineteenth century standard for determining a motion for a directed verdict in a civil jury trial is still applied to our modem motion for a judgment of acquittal in a criminal non-jury trial. In a criminal trial, at the close of the government’s case-in-chief, the defense may make a motion for a judgment of acquittal on one or more offenses charged.’ If the motion is unsuccessful and the defense calls ? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????? a case, the defense may make another motion for ajudgment of acquittal at the close of its case.This article concerns only the motion at the end of the government’s case. at present, the motion will succeed only if the government has not presented legally sufficient’ evidence of all the elements of the particular offense or offenses. This article discusses why, in a non-jury trial, the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard should be app