8/2/2019 Trial Order of Events

1/2

Trial Order of Events

I.Pre-Trial MotionsA. MY SUBSTANTIVE MOTIONMove to exclude the June 23, 2009 Grand Jurytestimony made by Pat Siewart.

1. Under Rule 403 the probative value is NOT substantially outweighed by thedanger of unfair prejudice. The only crime at issue is that the defendant is accused

of personal burglary and possession of stolen property. Mentioning theunsubstantiated fraud allegations will make this a trial about the fraud andseverally harm client. TOO MANY ISSUES and SEVERE PREJUDICE.

2. Additionally, the testimony is not supportable as character evidence. UnderRule 404evidence of other crimes or acts is not admissible to prove thecharacter of a person in order to show conformity therewith.

B. RESPONSE to Prosecutions motion to exclude Donnies misdemeanor conviction1. The underlying charge was a felony that was reduced to a misdemeanor. Rule 609(a) should apply because the crime was punishable by a year before beingreduced and also is a crime that is determinative of TRUTHFULNESS to get in

under Rule 609(a)(2).C. MY PROCEDUAL MOTIONSdont forget1. Motion to move about freely2. Motion for constructive sequestration per Rule 615

II. Opening StatementsA. Prosecution Opens

1. Mark down what they are going to prove, and if they do not show that evidencemove for mistrial at DV.

B. Piayon gives Opening

III. Prosecution Direct ExaminationA. MY Cross-Examination of DonnieUse printed questions andmake notes during prosecutions direct

1. Be sure to object with 404 that Pat is arguing character2. Call for an admonishment of the jury per Rule 105

B. Piayons Cross of PatC. Checklist Prosecution must meet to make case ofBurglary

1. D entered the dwelling of another2. D did not have authority to enter3. D had the intent of theft

D. Checklist for Possession of Stolen Property

1. Establish Pat as owner of stuffed dog2. That D intended theft (not borrowing)3. That D intended to deprive Pat of use

Or 3. That D knowingly possessed to deprive PatOr 3. That D possessed the dog knowing it probably would deprive PatAnd 4. That the property was $2,500 (have to enter into evidence!)

8/2/2019 Trial Order of Events

2/2

Trial Order of Events

IV. Motion for Directed VerdictA. Go over checklist and make sure they did not miss a crucial element. Otherwise arguethe tenuous connection of the evidence.

1. Use Fortsen v. State of Indiana in Memo to show that possession of stolengoods does not equal theft without more evidence of which there is none here.

V. Defense Direct ExaminationA. MY DIRECT of Connie Cutteruse printout of questions.Introduce Defense exhibit A and make sure to publishB. Piayons Direct of Leslie

V. Closing StatementsA. Prosecution goes firstB. MY CLOSING STATEMENTEmphasize elements of both crimes

1. Overall theme: a. Connie is not stupidb. Everyone had access to closetc. Pat had ax to grind with Connie and opportunity tohurt herd. ELEMENTS OF THE CRIMES were not met!!!