Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant, including a juvenile defendant, has a fundamental constitutional right to make a closing argument in a bench trial. Because the juvenile court denied S.S.’s counsel the opportunity to present closing argument, the court reversed and remanded for a new trial, while declining to require reassignment to a different judge.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a juvenile defendant in a nonjury criminal proceeding has a constitutional right to have counsel present a closing argument.
- Whether denial of that right can be treated as harmless error.
- Whether the case should be retried before a different judge.
Holdings
- A criminal defendant, whether juvenile or adult and whether tried by a jury or by the court, has a fundamental constitutional right to make a closing argument through counsel. The right applies to state criminal prosecutions through the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Denial of a defendant's constitutional right to make a closing argument is not harmless error because it is impossible to know whether an appropriate summation could have affected the judgment.
- A new trial before a different judge was not required because S.S. presented no convincing reason to believe the trial judge could not be fair on remand.
Key quotations
“The Herring court reasoned that the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel ensures the criminal defense “the opportunity to participate fully and fairly in the adversary factfinding process.”” (422 U.S. at 858)
“It can hardly be questioned that closing argument serves to sharpen and clarify the issues for resolution by the trier of fact in a criminal case. For it is only after all the evidence is in that counsel for the parties are in a position to present their respective versions of the case as a whole. Only then can they argue the inferences to be drawn from all the testimony, and point out the weaknesses of their adversaries’ positions. And for the defense, closing argument is the last clear chance to persuade the trier of fact that there may be reasonable doubt of the defendant’s guilt.” (422 U.S. at 862)
“the counsel for the defense has a right to make a closing argument... , no matter how strong the case for the prosecution may appear to the presiding judge.” (422 U.S. at 858-859)
Factual background
S.S. was tried in a bench proceeding in the juvenile division of the Benton County Circuit Court for possession of a controlled substance. After both sides rested, the judge immediately found him guilty and refused defense counsel's request to present a closing argument. The judge then placed S.S. on supervised probation.
Procedural history
After the State and S.S. rested, the juvenile-division trial judge found S.S. guilty without allowing defense counsel to make a closing argument. Counsel objected, asserting rights under the Sixth Amendment and Article II, section 10, of the Arkansas Constitution. The State conceded error, and the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, while declining to require that the new trial be conducted before a different judge.
Remand instructions
Conduct a new trial. The court denied the request that the new trial be held before a different judge.