La. Admin. Code tit. 22 § XV-1915

Current through Register Vol. 50, No. 11, November 20, 2024

Section XV-1915 - Performance Standard 7: Trial

A. Counsels Duty of Trial Preparation

1. Throughout preparation and trial, counsel should consider the defense case theory and ensure that counsels decisions and actions are consistent with that theory. Where counsels decisions or actions are inconsistent with the theory, counsel should assess and understand why this is the case and then either change the conduct or change the theory to accommodate the new approach.

2. Counsel should complete the investigation, discovery, and research in advance of trial, such that counsel is confident that the most viable defense theory has been fully developed, pursued, and refined. Ordinarily, this process should be sufficiently advanced at least 180 days before trial to ensure that issues related to funding, expert witnesses, witness availability, securing witness attendance and accommodation, witness preparation and other trial preparation can proceed in an orderly and well planned fashion.

3. Counsel should not forgo investigation and preparation of a defense on the basis that the prosecution case appears weak or counsel believes that no penalty phase will be required.

4. Preparation for trial should include:

a. causing subpoenas to be issued for all potentially helpful witnesses, and all potentially helpful physical or documentary evidence:

i. counsel should ensure that all subpoenaed witnesses are aware of the correct date and time to appear in court, the action they should take when they appear in response to the subpoena and how to contact counsel if necessary;

ii. counsel should consider utilizing ex parte procedures for the subpoena of persons, documents or things when available;

iii. counsel should follow up on all subpoenas and follow procedures for informing the court of non-compliance and seeking enforcement;

iv. counsel may refrain from issuing subpoenas for particular witnesses based on strong tactical considerations and in the awareness of the waiver of the defendants rights to compulsory process that this may entail;

b. arranging for defense experts to consult and/or testify on evidentiary issues that are potentially helpful (e.g., testing of physical evidence, opinion testimony, etc.):

i. adequate arrangements for the funding, scheduling and, where necessary, transport and accommodation of expert witnesses should be made;

ii. counsel should prepare with the experts and should be fully aware of the experts opinions on all relevant matters, including relevant prior testimony, before deciding whether or not to present them at trial;

iii. counsel should determine the extent to which evidence to be addressed by an expert witness may be presented through lay witnesses;

c. ensuring that counsel has obtained, read and incorporated into the defense theory all discovery, results of defense investigation, transcripts from prior or related proceedings and notices, motions and rulings in the case;

d. obtaining photographs and preparing charts, maps, diagrams, or other visual aids of all scenes, persons, objects, or information which may assist the fact finder in understanding the defense;

e. ensuring that the facilities at the courthouse will be adequate to meet the needs of the trial and the defense team.

5. Counsel should have available at the time of trial all material relevant to both the guilt and penalty phases that may be necessary or of assistance at trial, including:

a. copies of all relevant documents filed in the case;

b. relevant documents prepared or obtained by investigators;

c.voir dire questions, topics or plans;

d. outline or draft of opening statements for both guilt and penalty phases;

e. cross-examination plans for all possible prosecution witnesses;

f. direct examination plans for all prospective defense witnesses;

g. copies of defense subpoenas and proof of service;

h. prior statements and testimony of all prosecution witnesses (e.g., transcripts, police reports) and counsel should have prepared transcripts of any audio or video taped witness statements. Counsel should also be prepared to prove the prior statements if required;

i. prior statements of all defense witnesses;

j. reports from defense experts;

k. a list of all defense exhibits, and the witnesses through whom they will be introduced (as well as a contingency plan for having necessary exhibits admitted if, for example, a witness fails to appear);

l. exhibits, including originals and copies of all documentary exhibits;

m. demonstrative materials, charts, overheads, computer presentations or other similar materials intended for use at trial;

n. proposed jury instructions with supporting case citations, and where appropriate, consider and list the evidence necessary to support the defense requests for jury instructions; and

o. relevant statutes and cases.

6. Counsel should be fully informed as to the rules of evidence, court rules, and the law relating to all stages of the trial process, and should be familiar with legal and evidentiary issues that can reasonably be anticipated to arise in the trial. During case preparation and throughout trial, counsel should identify potential legal issues and the corresponding objections or motions. Counsel should consider when and how to raise those objections or motions. Counsel should also consider how best to respond to objections or motions that could be raised by the prosecution.

7. Counsel should anticipate state objections and possible adverse court rulings that may impact the defense case theory, be prepared to address any such issues and have contingency plans should counsels efforts be unsuccessful. Counsel should consider in advance of trial and prepare for the possibility of any emergency writ applications which may be filed by either party as well as making arrangements to ensure that the defense team is able to efficiently and effectively litigate any unanticipated emergency writ applications.

8. Counsel should decide if it is beneficial to secure an advance ruling on issues likely to arise at trial (e.g., use of prior convictions to impeach the defendant, admissibility of particular items of evidence) and, where appropriate, counsel should prepare motions and memoranda for such advance rulings.

9. Counsel should advise the client as to suitable courtroom dress and demeanor. Counsel should ensure that the client has appropriate clothing and the court personnel follow appropriate procedures so as not to reveal to jurors that the client is incarcerated. Counsel should ensure that the client is not seen by the jury in any form of physical restraint. Counsel should ensure that steps are taken to avoid prejudice arising from any security measures in the court and object to the use of both visible restraints on the client and any concealed restraints that adversely impact the client physically or psychologically or impair the clients ability to consult freely with counsel.

10. Counsel should plan with the defense team the most convenient system for conferring throughout the trial. Where necessary, counsel should seek a court order to have the client available for conferences and all required court appearances.

11. Counsel should plan with the defense team for contingencies arising from the absence or unavailability of any team member and the procedure for accessing additional resources for the team whenever required. Lead counsel should ensure that additional resources, including legal, investigative and support personnel, are available and utilized as appropriate immediately prior to and during trial. Lead counsel should ensure that all members of the defense team are fully aware of their role and responsibilities at trial.

12. Throughout preparation and trial, counsel should consider the potential effects that particular actions may have upon the mitigation presentation and any verdict at the penalty phase if there is a finding of guilt.

13. Counsel shall take necessary steps to ensure full, official recordation of all aspects of the court proceeding including motions, bench conferences in chambers or at sidebar, opening statements, closing arguments, and jury instructions. If something transpires during the trial that is relevant and significant and has not been made a part of the record (for instance, communications out of the presence of the court-reporter or non-verbal conduct), counsel should ensure that the record reflects what occurred.

14. Counsel should make a written request for a continuance if he or she determines that the defense is not adequately prepared for trial or otherwise not able to present a high quality defense on the scheduled trial date. Counsel should be prepared to proffer a full justification for the continuance, explaining the incomplete preparation, unavailable witness, prejudice from late disclosure by the state or other reason for the continuance. Counsel should be prepared to demonstrate reasonable diligence in preparing for trial but should request any necessary continuance even where counsel has not shown reasonable diligence. Counsel should avoid prematurely exposing the defense case theory by seeking to make any proffer of the reasons for the continuance on an ex parte and under seal basis.

15. Counsel should take all necessary steps to secure conditions of trial that allow for the provision of high quality representation, that allow the client to participate meaningfully in his own defense and that make adequate accommodations for any special needs the client may have. Such conditions may include the hours of court, the number and length of breaks, particular technological resources, the use of interpreters or other assistants to the clients understanding and communication, the pace of questioning and argument, medical assistance for the client and adequate space in the courtroom for the clients family and supporters.

16. Counsel should attempt to present as much mitigation evidence as possible during the guilt-innocence phase.

B. Jury Selection

1. Preparing for Voir Dire

a. Counsel should be familiar with the procedures by which a jury venire is selected in the particular jurisdiction and should be alert to any potential legal challenges to the composition or selection of the venire, including the creation of the jury pool from which the venire is selected. Similarly, counsel should be familiar with the law concerning challenges for cause and peremptory challenges and be alert to any potential legal challenges to the law, practice or procedure applied. Counsel should undertake a factual as well as legal investigation of any potential challenges that may be made.

b. Counsel should be familiar with the local practices and the individual trial judge's procedures for selecting a jury from a panel of the venire, and should be alert to any potential legal challenges to these practices and procedures including any disproportionate impact the practices and procedures may have on the gender or racial makeup of the jury.

c. Counsel should determine whether any special procedures have been instituted for selection of juries in capital cases that present particular legal bases for challenge. Counsel should be mindful that such challenges may include challenges to the selection of the grand jury and grand jury forepersons as well as to the selection of the petit jury venire.

d. Prior to jury selection, counsel should seek to obtain a prospective juror list and should develop a method for tracking juror seating and selection. Counsel should be aware of available juror information and, where appropriate, should submit a request for a jury questionnaire by a pretrial motion. In those cases where it appears necessary to conduct a pretrial investigation of the background of jurors, investigatory methods of defense counsel should neither harass nor unduly embarrass potential jurors or invade their privacy and, whenever possible, should be restricted to an investigation of records and sources of information already in existence.

e. Counsel should develop voir dire questions in advance of trial. Counsel should tailor voir dire questions to the specific case. Voir dire should be integrated into and advance counsels theory of the case for both guilt and penalty phase. Creative use of voir dire can foreshadow crucial, complex, expert, detrimental, or inflammatory evidence, and emphasize the need for impartiality notwithstanding the nature of the offense charged. Effective voir dire will lay much of the ground work for the opening statement.

f.Voir dire questions should be designed to elicit information about the attitudes and values of individual jurors, which will inform counsel and the client in the exercise of peremptory challenges and challenges for cause. Areas of inquiry should include:

i. attitude towards the death penalty and, in particular, each jurors willingness and capacity to return a verdict of death or life if selected as a juror in the case;

ii. attitudinal bias or prejudice (including those based on race, religion, political beliefs, and sexual preference);

iii. pretrial publicity (including the nature, extent and source of the jurors knowledge, and whether they have learned information that will not be admitted at trial; have discussed what they have read or heard; have heard, formed or expressed opinions on guilt or innocence; and can set such knowledge and opinions aside);

iv. feelings regarding the nature of the offense;

v. juror experience (or that of a close relative) similar to evidence in the case;

vi. experience (or that of a close relative) as a crime victim, witness, or defendant;

vii. amount of weight given to testimony of a police officer (including any experience in law enforcement or relationship with those in law enforcement);

viii. acquaintance with witness, counsel or defendant;

ix. attitudes toward defenses;

x. ability to understand principles of law and willingness to accept the law as given by the court;

xi. prior experience as a juror;

xii. formal qualifications to serve as a juror;

xiii. ability to render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence; and

xiv. other areas of inquiry particular to the juror, such as whether a bilingual juror is willing to abide by the translators version of the testimony, or whether a hearing impaired juror will refrain from reading lips of parties having private conversations unintended for the jurors perception.

g. Among the other purposes voir dire questions should be designed to serve are the following:

i. to convey to the panel legal principles which are important to the defense case and to determine the jurors attitudes toward those legal principles (especially where there is some indication that particular legal principles may not be favored or understood by the population in general or where a principle is peculiarly based on specific facts of the case);

ii. to preview the case for the jurors so as to lessen the impact of damaging information which is likely to come to their attention during the trial;

iii. to present the client and the defense case in a favorable light, without prematurely disclosing information about the defense case to the prosecutor; and

iv. to establish a relationship with the jury. Counsel should be aware that jurors will develop impressions of counsel and the defendant, and should recognize the importance of creating a favorable impression.

h. Counsel should be familiar with the law concerning mandatory and discretionary voir dire inquiries so as to be able to defend any request to ask particular questions of prospective jurors.

i. Counsel should be familiar with the law concerning challenges for cause and peremptory challenges. Voir dire should be responsive to this legal framework and designed to ensure that any basis for a cause challenge is adequately disclosed by the questions and answers.

j. Counsel should be aware of the waiver of judicial review of any cause challenge denied by the trial court where the defense does not exhaust its peremptory challenges. Counsel should create an appropriate record in the trial court where peremptory challenges are exhausted without the defense successfully removing all jurors against whom an unsuccessful challenge for cause had been made.

k. Where appropriate, counsel should consider seeking expert assistance in the jury selection process. Recognizing the scope of the task of adequately recording all relevant information during the voir dire process, lead counsel should ensure that the team has secured adequate resources, in the form of additional personnel or equipment, to adequately perform this task.

2. Examination of the Prospective Jurors

a. Counsel should personally voir dire the panel.

b. If the court denies counsels request to ask questions during voir dire that are significant or necessary to the defense of the case, counsel should take all steps necessary to protect the voir dire record for judicial review including, where appropriate, filing a copy of the proposed voir dire questions or reading proposed questions into the record.

c. Counsel should consider requesting individual, sequestered voir dire, particularly in cases where the voir dire will canvas sensitive or potentially prejudicial subjects, for example, personal experiences of jurors of abuse, prior exposure to media coverage of the case and knowledge of the case. If particular voir dire questions may elicit sensitive or prejudicial answers, counsel should consider requesting that those parts of the questioning be conducted outside the presence of the other jurors. Counsel may also consider requesting that the court, rather than counsel, conduct the voir dire as to sensitive questions.

d. In a group voir dire, counsel should take care when asking questions which may elicit responses capable of prejudicing other prospective jurors. Counsel should design both questions and questioning style in group voir dire to elicit responses in a way that will minimize any negative effect and maximize any favorable effect on other prospective jurors having regard to counsels objectives in voir dire.

e. When asking questions for the purpose of eliciting information from a juror, counsel should usually phrase questions in an open-ended fashion that elicits substantive responses, rather than allowing the juror to respond by silence or with a simple yes or no.

f. Counsel should ensure that the record reflects all answers of all jurors to all questions asked. Counsel should ensure that the record clearly reflects which juror in a panel is being asked a particular question and which gives a particular answer. Where questions are asked of an entire panel or non-verbal responses are given, counsel should ensure that the record accurately reflects all of the responses given and which jurors gave those responses.

g. Counsel should ensure that other members of the defense team are making detailed notes of the responses of individual jurors, the responses of venire panels to more generally directed questions and the demeanor and reactions of members of the venire.

3. Death Qualification

a. Counsel should be intimately familiar with the constitutional, statutory and case law relating to questioning and challenging of potential jurors as they relate to "death qualification."

b. Counsel should apply techniques of voir dire designed to overcome the tendency of the process of death qualification to undermine the presumption of innocence and increase the perception of death as the appropriate penalty.

c. Counsel should ensure that an individual inquiry is made of each juror as to his or her views on the death penalty.

d. Counsel should apply techniques of voir dire designed to ensure that the view each juror expresses regarding the death penalty:

i. is pertinent to the situation the juror will face in penalty phase (e.g. after hearing all the evidence, full deliberation and a unanimous determination of guilt beyond reasonable doubt);

ii. is in the context of a finding of guilt of first degree murder having regard to the aggravator(s) in the case (e.g. specific intent to kill or cause great bodily harm to a child under 12); and

iii. is not obscured by consideration of any lawful defense or justification that will necessarily have been rejected by penalty phase (e.g. the killing was not in self-defense, he knew the difference between right and wrong, he was not in a sudden passion or heat of blood);

e. Counsel should determine the extent to which each juror could give meaningful consideration to mitigating circumstances, having particular regard to those circumstances defined as mitigating in the statute and the case law.

f. Counsel should determine the extent to which a jurors views on the death penalty or mitigation may substantially impair his or her ability to make an impartial decision at guilt or return a life verdict. Counsel may consider exploring factors such as the strength of the jurors views on the death penalty, the origin of those views, how long they have been held and whether the juror has discussed those views with others.

g. Counsel should apply techniques of voir dire designed to insulate jurors who are to be challenged for cause against rehabilitation based, in particular, upon their stated willingness to follow the law;

h. Counsel should mount a challenge for cause in all cases where there is a reasonable argument that the jurors views on the death penalty or mitigation would prevent or substantially impair the performance of the jurors duties in accordance with the instructions or the oath.

i. Counsel should apply techniques of voir dire designed to rehabilitate jurors who have expressed scruples against the infliction of capital punishment.

j. Counsel should apply techniques of voir dire designed to ensure that each prospective juror understands and accepts:

i. that each juror is entitled to their own opinion and vote and so each juror must individually decide whether the client is sentenced to life or death following a penalty phase;

ii. that while the juror must deliberate, the jurors opinion is not subject to negotiation or compromise and is free from criticism by or explanation to the judge, the prosecutor or others;

iii. that each juror can give life for whatever reason he or she wishes;

iv. that each juror is entitled to the assistance of the court in having his or her opinion respected; and

v. the procedures for bringing penalty phase deliberations to an end and the effect of a hung jury at penalty phase.

k. Counsel should consider exercising peremptory challenges solely or principally on the assessment of each jurors attitude to the death penalty and mitigation.

l. Counsel should document and, where appropriate litigate the effect of death qualification on the representativeness of the qualified jury venire.

4. Other challenges for Cause and Peremptory Challenges

a. Counsel should challenge for cause all prospective jurors against whom a legitimate challenge can be made when it is likely to benefit the client.

b. When a challenge for cause is denied, counsel should consider exercising a peremptory challenge to remove the juror.

c. In exercising challenges for cause and peremptory strikes, counsel should consider both the panelists who may replace a person who is removed and the total number of peremptory challenges available to the state and the defense. In making this decision counsel should be mindful of the law requiring counsel to use one of his or her remaining peremptory challenges curatively to remove a juror upon whom counsel was denied a cause challenge or waive the complaint on appeal, even where counsel ultimately exhausts all peremptory challenges.

d. Counsel should timely object to and preserve for appellate review all issues relating to the unconstitutional exclusion of jurors by the prosecutor or the court.

e. Counsel should request additional peremptory challenges where appropriate in the circumstances present in the case.

5. Unconstitutional Exclusion of Jurors

a. In preparation for trial, during voir dire and at jury selection, the defense team should gather and record all information relevant to a challenge to the states use of peremptory strikes based in part or in whole on race, gender or any other impermissible consideration. This will include: the race and gender of the venire, the panel, the petit jury and the jurors struck for cause and peremptorily; any disparity in questioning style between jurors; a comparative analysis of the treatment of similarly placed jurors; nonverbal conduct of potential jurors; historical evidence of policy, practice or a pattern of discriminatory strikes; and, other evidence of discriminatory intent. Such material should be advanced in support of any challenge to the exercise of a state peremptory strike where available and appropriate in the circumstances. Counsel should ensure that the record reflects the racial and gender composition of the jury pool, the venire, each panel, the peremptory challenges made by both parties, and of the petit jury. The record should also reflect the race and gender of the defendant, the victim(s) and potential witnesses, and any motivation the state may have to have regard to race or gender in exercising peremptory challenges. Counsel should also ensure that, where necessary the record reflects non-verbal conduct by jurors such as demeanor, tone and appearance.

b. Where evidence of the discriminatory use of peremptory strikes, including evidence of the presence of a motive for discriminatory use of peremptory strikes emerges after the jury is sworn, counsel should make or reurge any earlier objection to the states strikes.

c. Counsel should not exercise a peremptory strike on the basis of race, gender or any other impermissible consideration and should maintain sufficient contemporaneous notes to allow reasons for particular peremptory strikes to be proffered if required by the court.

6.Voir Dire After the Jury has been Impanelled

a. Counsel should consider requesting additional voir dire whenever potentially prejudicial events occur, for instance, when jurors are exposed to publicity during the trial, jurors have had conversations with counsel or court officials, jurors learn inadmissible evidence, it is revealed that jurors responded incorrectly during voir dire, or jurors otherwise violated the courts instructions.

b. Counsel should be diligent and creative in framing questions that not only probe the particular issue, but also avoid creating or increasing any prejudice. Counsel should consider requesting curative instructions, seating alternate jurors, a mistrial, or other corrective measures.

c. If the verdict has already been rendered, counsel should request a post-trial hearing and an opportunity to examine jurors within the scope permitted by law.

C. Objection to Error and Preservation of Issues for Post Judgment Review

1. Counsel should be prepared to make all appropriate evidentiary objections and offers of proof, and should vigorously contest the states evidence and argument through objections, cross-examination of witnesses, presentation of impeachment evidence and rebuttal. Counsel should be alert for, object to, and make sure the record adequately reflects instances of prosecutorial misconduct.

2. Counsel should make timely objections whenever a claim for relief exists under the law at present or under a good faith argument for the extension, modification or reversal of existing law unless sound tactical reasons exist for not doing so. There should be a strong presumption in favor of making all available objections and any decision not to object should be made in the full awareness that this may constitute an irrevocable waiver of the clients rights.

3. Where appropriate, objections should include motions for mistrial and/or admonishments to ignore or limit the effect of evidence. Counsel should seek an evidentiary hearing where further development of the record in support of an objection would advance the clients interests. Areas in which counsel should be prepared to object include:

a. the admissibility or exclusion of evidence and the use to which evidence may be put;

b. the form or content of prosecution questioning, including during voir dire;

c. improper exercises of prosecutorial or judicial authority, such as racially motivated peremptory challenges or judicial questioning of witnesses that passes beyond the neutral judicial role and places the judge in the role of advocate;

d. the form or content of prosecution argument, including the scope of rebuttal argument;

e. jury instructions and verdict forms; and

f. any structural defects.

4. Counsel should ensure that all objections are made on the record and comply with the formal requirements applicable in the circumstances for making an effective objection and preserving a claim for subsequent review. These formal requirements may relate to a range of considerations, including: timing of the objection; whether an objection is oral or written; the need to proffer excluded testimony or questions; requesting admonishment of the jury; requesting a mistrial; exhausting peremptory challenges; providing notice to the attorney-general; and, the specific content of the objection. In addition to the objection itself, counsel should ensure that information relevant to potential review is preserved in the record, i.e., that the transcript, the court file, or the exhibits preserved for review include all the information about the events in the trial court that a reviewing court might need to rule in the clients favor.

5. Before trial, counsel should ascertain the particular judges procedures for objections. If the judge orders that counsel not state the grounds for the objection in the jurys presence, or if the reasons for the objection require explanation or risk prejudicing the jury, counsel should request permission to make the objection out of the hearing of the jury, for example, by approaching the bench. Counsel should ensure that any objection and ruling is made on the record and where this is not possible at a bench conference, should request another procedure for making objections, such as having objections handled in chambers in the presence of the court reporter. Where, despite counsels efforts, objections are made or rulings announced in the absence of the court reporter, counsel should ensure that those objections and rulings are subsequently placed on the record in as full a detail as possible.

6. Where an objection is made, counsel should state the specific grounds of objection and be prepared to fully explain and argue all bases of the objection. Where a claim for relief exists based on constitutional grounds, counsel should ensure that the record reflects that the objection is brought on those constitutional grounds. Counsel should be particularly careful to ensure that the record reflects the federal nature of any objection based in federal constitutional law or any other federal law.

7. Counsels arguments to the court should explain both why the law is in the clients favor and why the ruling matters. Arguments should be precise; objections should be timely, clear and specific. For example:

a. if the court excludes evidence, counsel should proffer what the evidence would be, why it is important to the defense, and how its exclusion would harm the defense;

b. if the court limits cross-examination, counsel should proffer what counsel was attempting to elicit and why it is important;

c. if the court admits evidence over defense objection, counsel should, where appropriate, move for a limiting instruction;

d. if the court rules inadmissible prejudicial evidence already placed before the jury, counsel should seek a mistrial and/or an admonishment, as appropriate.

8. Counsel should not refrain from making objections simply because they are unsure of the precise legal principle or case name to invoke. In these situations, counsel should explain the clients position in factual terms, explaining why a certain ruling under specified facts is prejudicial to the client.

9. Counsel should not rely on objections made by co-defendants counsel unless the judge has made clear that an objection on behalf of one defendant counts as an objection for all defendants. Even in that situation, counsel may want to identify specific prejudice that would befall her client if the court ruled adversely.

10. Counsel should take care not to appear to acquiesce in adverse rulings, by, for example, ending the discussion with comments intended to reflect politeness (e.g. "Thank you, Your Honor") but which may appear in the transcript as an abandonment of counsels earlier objection and agreement with the trial courts rationale. Accordingly, counsel should find ways to be polite while making clear that the objection has not been abandoned.

11. Counsel should insist on adequate methods for recording demonstrative evidence. For example, diagrams should be drawn on paper instead of blackboards, and demonstrations not amenable to verbal descriptions should be videotaped. Requests for preservation of exhibits and diagrams should be made in a timely manner. Counsel should make sure that all references to exhibits contain the exhibit number.

12. Counsel at every stage have an obligation to satisfy themselves independently that the official record of the proceedings is complete and accurate and to supplement or correct it as appropriate.

13. If something transpires during the trial that is relevant and significant and has not been made a part of the record (for instance, communications out of the presence of the court-reporter or non-verbal conduct), counsel should ensure that the record reflects what occurred.

D. Opening Statement

1. Counsel should make an opening statement.

2. Prior to delivering an opening statement, counsel should ask for sequestration of witnesses, including law enforcement, unless a strategic reason exists for not doing so.

3. Counsel should be familiar with the law of the jurisdiction and the individual trial judges practice regarding the permissible content of an opening statement.

4. Counsel should consider the strategic advantages and disadvantages of disclosure of particular information during opening statement. For example, if the evidence that the defense might present depends on evidence to be introduced in the states case, counsel should avoid making promises of what evidence it will present because counsel may decide not to present that evidence. Counsel should not discuss in the opening statement the defense strategy with the jury to the extent that later defense decisions, such as putting the client or particular defense witnesses on the stand can be interpreted as concessions of the prosecution meeting its burden, or of weakness of the defense case. Counsel should consider the need to, and if appropriate, ask the court to instruct the prosecution not to mention in opening statement contested evidence for which the court has not determined admissibility.

5. Before the opening statement, counsel should be familiar with the names of all witnesses and the crucial dates, times and places, and should have mastered each witnesss testimony so that favorable portions can be highlighted. If the complainant and defendant know each other, counsel should consider discussing their relationship and previous activities to create a context for the alleged offense. Counsel may wish to disclose defense witnesses impeachable convictions, only if counsel is certain that the witnesses will testify. Where evidence is likely to be ruled inadmissible, counsel should refer to it only after obtaining a ruling from the court.

6. Counsels objectives in making an opening statement may include the following:

a. to provide an overview of the defense case, introduce the theory of the defense, and explain the evidence the defense will present to minimize prejudice from the government case;

b. to identify the weaknesses of the prosecution's case, point out facts that are favorable to the defense that the government omitted in its opening, create immediate skepticism about the direct testimony of government witnesses and make the purpose of counsels cross-examination more understandable;

c. to emphasize the prosecution's burden of proof;

d. to summarize the testimony of witnesses, and the role of each in relationship to the entire case and to present explanations for government witnesses testimony, i.e. bias, lack of ability to observe, intoxication and Giglio evidence;

e. to describe the exhibits which will be introduced and the role of each in relationship to the entire case;

f. to clarify the jurors responsibilities;

g. to point out alternative inferences from circumstantial evidence arising from either the governments case or evidence the defense will present, and to state the ultimate inferences which counsel wishes the jury to draw;

h. to establish counsel's credibility with the jury;

i. to personalize and humanize the client and counsel for the jury; and

j. to prepare the jury for the clients testimony or decision not to testify.

7. Counsel should consider incorporating the promises of proof the prosecutor makes to the jury during opening statement or the defense summation. Counsel should keep close account of what is proffered. Variances between the opening statement and the evidence may necessitate a mistrial, a cautionary instruction, or prove to be a fruitful ground for closing argument.

8. Whenever the prosecutor oversteps the bounds of proper opening statement (by, for example, referencing prejudicial material or other matters of questionable admissibility and assertions of fact that the government will not be able to prove), counsel should object, requesting a mistrial, or seeking cautionary instructions, unless clear tactical considerations suggest otherwise. Such tactical considerations may include, but are not limited to:

a. the significance of the prosecutors error;

b. the possibility that an objection might enhance the significance of the information in the jurys mind, or negatively impact the jury; and

c. whether there are any rules made by the judge against objecting during the other attorneys opening argument.

9. Improper statements that counsel should consider objecting to may include:

a. attempts to arouse undue sympathy for the victim of a crime or put the jurors in the shoes of the victim;

b. appeals to the passions and prejudices of the jurors;

c. evidence of other crimes;

d. defendants prior record;

e. reciting evidence at great length or in undue detail;

f. personal evaluation of the case or of any states witness;

g. argument on the merits of the case or the pertinent law; and

h. defendants possible failure to testify on present evidence.

E. Preparation for Challenging the Prosecutions Case

1. Counsel should attempt to anticipate weaknesses in the prosecution's proof. Counsel should systematically analyze all potential prosecution evidence, including physical evidence, for evidentiary problems and, where appropriate, challenge its admissibility and/or present other evidence that would controvert the states evidence. Counsel should make all appropriate challenges to improper testimony. Counsel should challenge improper bolstering of state witnesses.

2. Counsel should consider the advantages and disadvantages of entering into stipulations concerning the prosecutions case. If a fact or facts to be stipulated are harmful to the client but there is still an advantage to stipulating, counsel should make certain that the stipulation is true before consenting to a stipulation. While there may be strategic reasons to forgo cross-examination of particular witnesses or objections to evidence, counsel should make sure to subject the states case to vigorous adversarial testing.

3. In preparing for cross-examination, counsel should be familiar with the applicable law and procedures concerning cross-examinations and impeachment of witnesses. In order to develop material for impeachment or to discover documents subject to disclosure, counsel should be prepared to question witnesses as to the existence of prior statements which they may have made or adopted.

4. In preparing for cross-examination, counsel should:

a. consider the need to integrate cross-examination, the theory of the defense and closing argument;

b. consider whether cross-examination of each individual witness is likely to generate helpful information, and avoid asking questions that are unnecessary, might elicit responses harmful to the defense case or might open the door to damaging and otherwise improper redirect examination;

c. anticipate those witnesses the prosecutor might call in its case-in-chief or in rebuttal;

d. prepare a cross-examination plan for each of the anticipated witnesses;

e. be alert to inconsistencies, variations and contradictions in a witness testimony;

f. be alert to possible inconsistencies, variations and contradictions between different witnesses' testimony;

g. be alert to significant omission or deficiencies in the testimony of any witnesses;

h. review and organize all prior statements of the witnesses and any prior relevant testimony of the prospective witnesses;

i. have prepared a transcript of all audio or video tape recorded statements made by the witness;

j. where appropriate, review relevant statutes and local law enforcement policy and procedure manuals, disciplinary records and department regulations for possible use in cross-examining law enforcement witnesses;

k. be alert to and raise where appropriate issues relating to witness competency and credibility, including bias and motive for testifying, evidence of collaboration between witnesses, innate physical ability to perceive, external impediments to the witness perception, psychological hindrances to accurate perception, and faulty memory;

l. have prepared, for introduction into evidence, all documents which counsel intends to use during the cross-examination, including certified copies of records such as prior convictions of the witness or prior sworn testimony of the witness;

m. be alert to potential Fifth Amendment and other privileges that may apply to any witness;

n. elicit all available evidence to support the theory of defense; and

o. prepare a memorandum of law in support of the propriety of any line of impeachment likely to be challenged.

5. Counsel should consider conducting a voir dire examination of potential prosecution witnesses who may not be competent to give particular testimony, including expert witnesses whom the prosecutor may call. Counsel should be aware of the applicable law of the jurisdiction concerning competency of witnesses in general and admission of expert testimony in particular in order to be able to raise appropriate objections. Counsel should not stipulate to the admission of expert testimony that counsel knows will be harmful to the defense where there exists a viable claim regarding its admissibility. Counsel should be alert to frequently encountered competency issues such as: age (chronological and developmental), taint of witness ability to recall events by external factors such as suggestion, mental disability due to drug or alcohol abuse, and mental illness.

6. Before trial, counsel should ascertain whether the prosecutor has provided copies of all prior statements of the witnesses to the extent required by the law. If disclosure was not properly made counsel should consider requesting relief as appropriate including:

a. adequate time to review the documents or investigate and prepare further before commencing cross-examination, including a recess or continuance if necessary;

b. exclusion of the witness testimony and all evidence affected by that testimony;

c. a mistrial;

d. dismissal of the case; and/or

e. any other sanctions counsel believes would remedy the violation.

7. Counsel should attempt to mitigate the prejudicial impact of physical evidence where possible by: attempting to stipulate to facts that the government seeks to establish through prejudicial evidence, moving to redact irrelevant and unduly prejudicial information from documents, recordings and transcripts, and/or asking the court to exclude part of the proposed evidence as unnecessarily cumulative.

Where prejudicial physical evidence will be admitted, counsel should seek to lessen its prejudice by seeking restrictions on the form of the evidence (e.g. size of photographs, black and white, rather than color), the manner of presentation of the evidence and to bar undue emphasis or repetitive presentation of the evidence. Similarly, where necessary, counsel should object to the exclusion or redaction of exculpatory portions of evidence.

8. Counsel should become familiar with all areas in which expert evidence may be offered and should develop a strong knowledge of all forensic fields involved in the case with the assistance of experts as appropriate.

F. Presenting the Defendants Case

1. Counsel should develop, in consultation with the client, an overall defense strategy. Counsel should prepare for the need to adapt the defense strategy during trial where necessary. In extreme cases where a defense theory is no longer tenable, counsel should abandon that theory rather than losing all credibility with the jury, and proceed to emphasize the available defense evidence which supports another theory of defense. In deciding on defense strategy, counsel should consider whether the client's interests are best served by not putting on a defense case, and instead relying on the prosecution's failure to meet its constitutional burden of proving each element beyond a reasonable doubt. Even where no affirmative defense to guilt is mounted, counsel must be conscious of the potential for the case to proceed to penalty phase and should ensure that the guilt phase is conducted in a way that supports and extracts any available advantages in the guilt phase for the penalty phase presentation. Counsel should be conscious of the perils of a denial defense and the likely negative effect such a defense will have should the case proceed to penalty phase.

2. Counsel should not put on a non-viable defense but at the same time, even when no theory of defense is available, if the decision to stand trial has been made, counsel must hold the prosecution to its heavy burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

3. Counsel should discuss with the client all of the considerations relevant to the client's decision to testify, including but not limited to, the clients constitutional right to testify, his or her right to not testify, the nature of the defense, the clients likely effectiveness as a witness on direct and under cross-examination, the clients susceptibility to impeachment with prior convictions, bad acts, out-of-court statements or evidence that has been suppressed, the clients demeanor and temperament, and the availability of other defense or rebuttal evidence. Counsel should give special consideration to the likely impact of the clients testimony on any defenses and any possible mitigation presentation, particularly where questions of mental health and mental capacity are in issue. Counsel shall recommend the decision which counsel believes to be in the clients best interest. The ultimate decision whether to testify is the clients. Counsel should also be familiar with his or her ethical responsibilities that may be applicable if the client insists on testifying untruthfully. The client should be called to testify in a capital case only in rare circumstances, however, counsel should prepare for the possibility that the clients testimony may become essential to the defense case. Therefore, the client should be thoroughly prepared for both direct and cross-examination before trial. Counsel should familiarize the client with all prior statements and exhibits, and review appropriate demeanor for taking the stand. Counsel should be respectful of the client when conducting the direct examination, eliciting testimony that will be helpful to the clients defense. Counsel should avoid unnecessary direct examination that opens the door to damaging cross examination.

4. Counsel should be aware of the elements of any affirmative defense and know whether, under the applicable law of the jurisdiction, the client bears a burden of persuasion or a burden of production. Counsel should be familiar with the notice requirements for affirmative defenses and introduction of expert testimony.

5. In preparing for presentation of a defense case, counsel should, where appropriate:

a. consider all potential evidence which could corroborate the defense case, and the import of any evidence which is missing;

b. after discussion with the client, make the decision whether to call any witnesses and, if calling witnesses, decide which witnesses will provide the most compelling evidence of the clients defense. In making this decision, counsel should consider that credibility issues with particular witnesses can be overcome when several witnesses testify to the same facts. Counsel should not call witnesses who will be damaging to the defense;

c. develop a plan for direct examination of each potential defense witness;

d. determine the implications that the order of witnesses may have on the defense case;

e. determine what facts necessary for the defense case can be elicited through the cross-examination of the prosecution's witnesses;

f. consider the possible use and careful preparation of character witnesses, and any negative consequences that may flow from such testimony;

g. consider the need for, and availability of, expert witnesses, especially to rebut any expert opinions offered by the prosecution, and what evidence must be submitted to lay the foundation for the expert's testimony;

h. consider and prepare for the need to call a defense investigator as a witness;

i. review all documentary evidence that must be presented;

j. review all tangible evidence that must be presented;

k. consider using demonstrative evidence (and the witnesses necessary to admit such evidence); and

l. consider the order of exhibit presentation and, if appropriate, with leave of court prior to trial, label each exhibit.

6. In developing and presenting the defense case, counsel should consider the implications it may have for a rebuttal by the prosecutor.

7. Counsel should prepare all witnesses for direct and possible cross-examination. Where appropriate, counsel should also advise witnesses of suitable courtroom dress and demeanor, and procedures including sequestration.

8. Counsel should systematically analyze all potential defense evidence for evidentiary problems. Counsel should research the law and prepare legal arguments in support of the admission of each piece of testimony or other evidence. Counsel should plan for the contingency that particular items of evidence may be ruled inadmissible and prepare for alternative means by which the evidence, or similar evidence, can be offered. Similarly, counsel should have contingency plans for adjusting the defense case theory where important evidence may be ruled inadmissible. Counsel should not seek to have excluded prosecution evidence that is helpful to the defense.

9. Counsel should conduct a direct examination that follows the rules of evidence, effectively presents the defense theory, and anticipates/defuses potential weak points.

10. If a prosecution objection is sustained or defense evidence is improperly excluded, counsel should make appropriate efforts to rephrase the question(s) and/or make an offer of proof.

11. Counsel should object to improper cross-examination by the prosecution.

12. Counsel should conduct redirect examination as appropriate.

13. At the close of the defense case, counsel should renew the motion for a directed verdict of acquittal on each charged count.

14. Counsel should keep a record of all exhibits identified or admitted.

15. If a witness does not appear, counsel should request a recess or continuance in order to give counsel a reasonable amount of time to locate and produce the witness. Counsel should request any available relief if the witness does not appear.

16. Understanding that capital jurors frequently determine the applicable punishment prior to penalty phase and that the jury in penalty phase will be permitted to rely upon all evidence introduced in the guilt phase, counsel should actively consider the benefits of presenting evidence admissible in the guilt phase that is also relevant in mitigation of punishment.

G. Preparation of the Closing Argument

1. Counsel should make a closing argument.

2. Counsel should be familiar with the substantive limits on both prosecution and defense summation.

3. Counsel should be familiar with the court rules, applicable statutes and law, and the individual judges practice concerning limits and objections during closing argument, and provisions for rebuttal argument by the prosecution.

4. Well before trial, counsel should plan the themes, content, and organization of the summation. The basic argument should be formulated before the first juror is sworn, with accurate notes taken throughout the trial to permit incorporation of the developments at trial. In developing closing argument, counsel should review the proceedings to determine what aspects can be used in pursuit of the defense theory of the case and, where appropriate, should consider:

a. highlighting weaknesses in the prosecution's case, including what potential corroborative evidence is missing, especially in light of the prosecutions burden of proof;

b. describing favorable inferences to be drawn from the evidence;

c. incorporating into the argument:

i. the theory of the defense case;

ii. helpful testimony from direct and cross-examinations;

iii. verbatim instructions drawn from the expected jury charge;

iv. responses to anticipated prosecution arguments;

v. the promises of proof the prosecutor made to the jury during the opening statement; and

vi. visual aids and exhibits;

d. the effect of the defense argument on the prosecutors rebuttal argument.

5. Counsel should not demean or disparage or be openly hostile towards the client.

6. Whenever the prosecutor exceeds the scope of permissible argument or rebuttal, counsel should object, request a mistrial, or seek a cautionary instruction unless strong tactical considerations suggest otherwise.

H. Jury Instructions and Verdict

1. Counsel should be familiar with the Louisiana Rules of Court and the individual judges practices concerning ruling on proposed instructions, charging the jury, use of standard charges and preserving objections to the instructions.

2. Counsel should always submit proposed jury instructions in writing.

3. Counsel should review the courts proposed jury charge and any special written charge proposed by the state and, where appropriate, counsel should submit special written charges which present the applicable law in the manner most favorable to the defense in light of the particular circumstances of the case, including the desirability of seeking a verdict on a lesser included offense.

4. Where possible, counsel should provide citations to statute and case law in support of any proposed charge. Counsel should endeavor to ensure that all jury charge discussions are on the record or, at the very least, that all objections and rulings are reflected in the record.

5. Where appropriate, counsel should object to and argue against any improper charge proposed by the prosecution or the court.

6. If the court refuses to adopt a charge requested by counsel, or gives a charge over counsel's objection, counsel should take all steps necessary to preserve the record, including ensuring that a written copy of any proposed special written charge is included in the record.

7. During delivery of the charge, counsel should be alert to any deviations from the judge's planned instructions, object to deviations unfavorable to the client, and, if necessary request an additional or curative charge.

8. If there are grounds for objecting to any aspect of the charge, counsel should seek to object before the verdict form is submitted to the jury and the jury is allowed to begin deliberations.

9. If the court proposes giving a further or supplemental charge to the jury, either upon request of the jurors or upon their failure to reach a verdict, counsel should request that the judge provide a copy of the proposed charge to counsel before it is delivered to the jury. Counsel should be present for any further charge of the jury and should renew or make new objections as appropriate to any further charge given to the jurors after the jurors have begun their deliberations. Counsel should object to any charge which expressly or implicitly threatens to keep the jury sequestered indefinitely until a verdict is reached or is otherwise improperly coercive, for example, by omitting the caution to jurors that they should not abandon their deeply held beliefs.

10. Counsel should reserve the right to make exceptions to the jury instructions above and beyond any specific objections that were made during the trial.

11. Upon a finding of guilt, counsel should be alert to any improprieties in the verdict and should request the court to poll the jury. In a multi-count indictment, defense counsel normally should request a poll as to each count on which the jury has convicted.

I. The Defense Case Concerning Penalty

1. Preparation for the sentencing phase should begin immediately upon counsels entry into the case. Counsel at every stage of the case have a continuing duty to investigate issues bearing upon penalty and to seek information that supports mitigation, explains the offense, or rebuts the prosecutions case in aggravation. Counsel should not forgo investigating or presenting mitigation in favor of a strategy of relying only on residual doubt or sympathy and mercy. Counsel should exercise great caution in seeking to rely upon residual doubt as to the defendants guilt.

2. Trial counsel should discuss with the client early in the case the sentencing alternatives available, and the relationship between the strategy for the sentencing phase and for the guilt phase.

3. Prior to the sentencing phase, trial counsel should discuss with the client the specific sentencing phase procedures of the jurisdiction and advise the client of steps being taken in preparation for sentencing.

4. Counsel at every stage of the case should discuss with the client the content and purpose of the information concerning penalty that they intend to present to the jury, means by which the mitigation presentation might be strengthened, and the strategy for meeting the prosecutions case in aggravation.

5. As with the guilt phase, counsel should consider and discuss with the client, the advisability and possible consequences of the client testifying in the penalty phase.

6. Counsel should present to the jury all reasonably available evidence in mitigation unless there are strong strategic reasons to forgo some portion of such evidence. Counsel should make every effort to find a way to successfully present all of the mitigating evidence rather than to abandon a piece or pieces of mitigating evidence due to potential negatives arising from the evidence. Counsel should not make agreements with the prosecution whereby the defense agrees to put on little or no mitigation evidence.

7. Counsel should present mitigating evidence in an organized and coherent fashion, especially when it is of a complex nature involving expert testimony. Counsel should seek to present a narrative of the clients life story that serves to humanize the client and offers a cohesive theory for life rather than presenting each mitigating circumstance as separate and distinct from each other. Counsel should seek to illustrate the ways different pieces of mitigation evidence interrelate to ensure a comprehensive picture of the clients life and the mitigation case is produced. Counsel should consider the need to utilize an expert witness to synthesize or explain various and/or divergent elements of a mitigation presentation. However, counsel should be conscious of the desirability of presenting such evidence through lay witnesses, rather than relying too heavily upon expert testimony. Counsel should present all mitigating evidence in such a way that it maintains the defense theory of the case, and should avoid presenting or opening the door to evidence that undermines the defense theory.

8. In developing and advancing the defense theory of the case in the penalty phase, counsel should seek to integrate the defense theories at guilt and penalty phase into a complimentary whole or, where this is not possible, seek to minimize any discordance between the defense theories in guilt and penalty phase.

9. In deciding the defense theory in the penalty phase and which witnesses, evidence and arguments to prepare, counsel must exercise a high degree of skill and care as an advocate to determine the most persuasive course to adopt in the circumstances of each particular case. Counsel should consider evidence and arguments that would: be explanatory of the offense(s) for which the client is being sentenced; reduce the clients moral culpability for the offense; demonstrate the clients capacity for rehabilitation or adaptation to prison; demonstrate the clients remorse; rebut or explain evidence presented by the prosecutor; present positive aspects of the client and the clients life; humanize the client; engender sympathy or empathy in the jury,; or would otherwise support a sentence less than death. Counsel should always consider and seek to address the likely concern the jury has regarding the possibility that the client will represent a future danger if sentenced to life imprisonment, rather than death.

10. The witnesses and evidence that counsel should prepare and consider for presentation in the penalty phase include:

a. witnesses familiar with and evidence relating to the clients life and development, from conception to the time of sentencing, that would be explanatory of the offense(s) for which the client is being sentenced, would rebut or explain evidence presented by the prosecutor, would present positive aspects of the clients life, or would otherwise support a sentence less than death;

b. expert and lay witnesses along with supporting documentation (e.g. school records, military records) to provide medical, psychological, sociological, cultural or other insights into the clients mental and/or emotional state and life history that may explain or lessen the clients culpability for the underlying offense(s); to give a favorable opinion as to the clients capacity for rehabilitation, or adaptation to prison; to explain possible treatment programs; or otherwise support a sentence less than death; and/or to rebut or explain evidence presented by the prosecutor. Supporting documentation should be read, organized, evaluated and condensed to a form that is most conducive to explaining to the jury how and why this mitigation is relevant.;

c. Witnesses who can testify about the effect of a sentence of life imprisonment and/or the conditions under which a sentence of life imprisonment would be served;

d. witnesses who can testify about the adverse impact of the clients execution on the clients family and loved ones;

e. demonstrative evidence, such as photos, videos, physical objects and documents that humanize the client, portray him positively or add emphasis to an aspect of the testimony of a witness or witnesses.

f. witnesses drawn from the victims family or intimates who are able to offer evidence that may support an argument for a sentence other than death.

11. Among topics counsel should consider presenting through evidence and argument are:

a. positive character evidence and evidence of specific positive acts, including evidence of positive relationships with others, contributions to individuals and the community, growth and progress over his life and since arrest, adaptation to incarceration, prospects for rehabilitation during a life sentence and reputation evidence;

b. family and social history (including physical, sexual, or emotional abuse; family history of mental illness, cognitive impairments, substance abuse, or domestic violence; poverty, familial instability, neighborhood environment, and peer influence); other traumatic events such as exposure to criminal violence, the loss of a loved one, or a natural disaster; experiences of racism or other social or ethnic bias; cultural or religious influences; failures of government or social intervention (e.g., failure to intervene or provide necessary services, placement in poor quality foster care or juvenile detention facilities);

c. medical and mental health history (including hospitalizations, mental and physical illness or injury, trauma, intellectual impairment, alcohol and drug use, prenatal and birth trauma, malnutrition, developmental delays, and neurological damage). Evidence relating to medical and mental health matters should normally include the symptoms and effect of any illness rather than just solely presenting a formal diagnosis;

d. educational history (including achievement, performance, behavior, and activities), special educational needs (including mental retardation, cognitive limitations and learning disabilities) and opportunity or lack thereof, and activities;

e. military service, (including length and type of service, conduct, special training, combat exposure, health and mental health services);

f. employment and training history (including skills and performance, and barriers to employability);

g. record of prior offenses (adult and juvenile), especially where there is no record, a short record, or a record of non-violent offenses;

h. prior juvenile and adult correctional experience (including conduct while under supervision, in institutions of education or training, and regarding clinical services); and

i. a prior relationship between the client and the victim(s) which might help to explain the offense.

12. In determining what presentation to make concerning penalty, counsel should consider whether any portion of the defense case could be damaging in and of itself or will open the door to the prosecutions presentation of otherwise inadmissible aggravating evidence. Counsel should pursue all appropriate means (e.g., motions in limine) to ensure that the defense case concerning penalty is constricted as little as possible by this consideration, and should make a full record in order to support any subsequent challenges.

13. Trial counsel should determine at the earliest possible time what aggravating circumstances the prosecution will rely upon in the penalty phase, any adjudicated or nonadjudicated wrongful acts the prosecution intends to prove and the nature and scope of any victim impact evidence the prosecution may present. Counsel at all stages of the case should object to any non-compliance with the rules of discovery and applicable case law in this respect and challenge the adequacy of those rules.

14. Counsel at all stages of the case should carefully consider whether all or part of the evidence the state may seek to call in the penalty phase may appropriately be challenged as improper, unduly prejudicial, misleading or not legally admissible. Counsel should challenge the admissibility of evidence brought in support of an aggravating circumstance that cannot legally be established in the circumstances of the case. Counsel should investigate and present evidence that specifically undermines or mitigates the aggravating circumstances and any other adverse evidence to be presented by the prosecution.

15. If the prosecution is granted leave at any stage of the case to have the client interviewed by witnesses associated with the government, defense counsel should:

a. carefully consider:

i. what legal challenges may appropriately be made to the interview or the conditions surrounding it, and

ii. the legal and strategic issues implicated by the clients co-operation or non-cooperation;

b. ensure that the client understands the significance of any statements made during such an interview, including the possible impact on the sentence and later potential proceedings (such as appeal, subsequent retrial or resentencing); and

c. attend the interview, unless prevented by court order.

16. Counsel at every stage of the case should take advantage of all appropriate opportunities to argue why death is not a suitable punishment for their particular client.

17. Counsel should make an opening statement.

18. In closing argument, counsel should be specific to the client and should, after outlining the compelling mitigating evidence, explain to the jury the significance of the mitigation presented. Counsels closing argument should be more than a general attack on capital punishment and should not minimize the jurys verdict. Counsel should never ask, instruct, or give permission to the jury to return a death sentence, but rather should appeal to the jury for, and provide reasons for, a life sentence. Counsels closing argument should not be contradictory. Counsel should not demean, disparage, be hostile towards, or make inappropriate comparisons regarding the client.

19. Trial counsel should request jury instructions and verdict forms that ensure that jurors will be able to consider and give effect to all relevant mitigating evidence. Trial counsel should object to instructions or verdict forms that are constitutionally flawed, or are inaccurate, or confusing and should offer alternative instructions.

La. Admin. Code tit. 22, § XV-1915

Promulgated by the Office of the Governor, Public Defender Board, LR 4175 (1/1/2015).

AUTHORITY NOTE: Promulgated in accordance with R.S. 15:148.