As part of Lundgren & Johnson, PSC, Criminal Defense Attorney’s series, “Criminal Legal Terms Defined/Explained,” criminal defense lawyer David R. Lundgren explains Minnesota’s definition of “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.”
Do you have a criminal legal term that you’d like our lawyers to define or explain? Contact one of our lawyers and they will follow up as soon as possible.
Transcript of “Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”
Hello, David Lundgren here. I am criminal defense lawyer located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and today I’m going to talk a little bit about proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is such proof as ordinarily prudent people would act upon in their most important affairs. A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense. It does not mean a fanciful or capricious doubt, nor does it mean beyond all possibility of doubt.
This is perhaps the most important legal concept in a criminal case. Although proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not equate to doubt based upon speculative reasons or conjecture, it is still a very high standard that the prosecutor must meet to prove a defendant’s guilt.
Going back to the definition, it relies heavily upon each individual juror’s notion about what their most important affairs are. Some common examples include deciding whether to move forward with an important medical procedure, deciding whether to change careers late in life when your family is dependent on your income, or deciding whether to buy a home.
At its most fundamental level, proof beyond a reasonable doubt requires jurors to be so convinced by the prosecutor’s evidence that the defendant is guilty, that they are willing to agree that they would move forward with a similar decision in their own most important affairs based on the totality of the evidence before them.
If they are not convinced that the prosecutor’s evidence is believable, or that the circumstantial evidence before them leads so strongly to the conclusion of guilt as opposed to a reasonable and rational hypothesis of innocence, or if the prosecutor has not answered all of their questions that they would otherwise require in their own most important affairs, then they must find the defendant not guilty.
Again, my name is David Lundgren and it’s been my pleasure to help explain and define one of the most important criminal defense concepts as a practicing criminal defense lawyer here in Minneapolis, Minnesota.