How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Sam Your Own Question
Sam, Attorney at Law
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 27011
Experience:  More than 20 years of experience practicing law.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Sam is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Under california law, specifically orange county can a

Customer Question

under california law, specifically orange county can a defendant acting as he own attorney be denied a summation, ie; under tennesee law, ref; Scopes versus Bryant, 1925 monkey trial if one side declines summation the other side cannot give summation.?
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Legal
Expert:  Sam replied 1 year ago.


This is Samuel and I will discuss this and provide you information in this regard.
Every party in a civil or criminal jury trial has a right to give a closing argument.

It is a fundamental part of the due process right to be heard. Most states have a statute that reads something like this:

Scope of argument. At the close of the evidence, the respective parties, or their counsel, shall be entitled to sum up the facts to the jury. In their addresses to the jury they shall be allowed ample scope and latitude for argument upon, and illustration of any and all facts involved in the cause, and the evidence tending either to prove or disprove the same. They shall not be forbidden to argue the law of the case to the jury, but shall not assume to instruct the jury upon the law in such a manner as to encroach upon the function of the court to so instruct the jury

See, e.g., Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853 (1975) (criminal defendant has sixth amendment right to give closing argument); Speer v. Barry, 503 A.2d 409, 411 (Pa. Super. 1985) (civil litigant has right to argue)