About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

63 S.D. L. Rev. 1 (2018-2019)
Objection: Psychological Perspectives on Jurors' Perceptions of in-Court Attorney Objections

handle is hein.journals/sdlr63 and id is 25 raw text is: OBJECTION! PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON JURORS' PERCEPTIONS OF IN-COURT ATTORNEY OBJECTIONS KRYSTIA REEDt BRIAN H. BORNSTEINtt Trial attorneys have the difficult task of deciding when to object at trial. On the one hand, objections can correct an error immediately or preserve the record for review; on the other hand, many attorneys and legal scholars are concerned that objections can harm attorney credibility with the jury. Although trial attorneys are therefore forced to conduct an immediate balancing test weighing the costs and benefits of objecting versus not objecting, social scientists have not yet provided guidance to help attorneys with this decision. This article examines the legal basis and understanding of objections and then discusses psychological theories that may explain how objections influence juror perceptions. This article concludes with a summary of the empirical research and a discussion of the implications and recommendations for trial attorneys. I. INTRODUCTION Attorneys are responsible for the important task of objecting to evidence during trial; objections can correct an error immediately, or at least preserve the record for review.I However, the decision to object can be a Catch-22 according to many lawyers, with disastrous consequences if an important objection is missed or if an objection is made improperly.2 Many legal professionals fear that objections can harm credibility with the jury-if the objection is sustained, the jury may believe the attorney is trying to hide something; if the objection is overruled, the jury may believe that the attorney is wrong or wasting time. The objection may even lead the jury to pay more attention to the evidence and give it more weight. Thus, trial attorneys are forced to conduct an immediate balancing test weighing the costs and benefits of objecting with those of not objecting. Although trial attorneys are frequently required to make speedy decisions about objecting that could potentially make or break their case, social scientists have not provided much guidance to aid lawyers in this difficult choice. However, Copyright C 2018. All Rights Reserved by Brian H. Bornstein, Krystia Reed, and the South Dakota Law Review. t Krystia Reed, J.D., Ph.D., is a National Science Foundation Post-Doctoral Associate at Cornell University. ft Brian H. Bornstein, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Courtesy Professor of Law at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 1. JOHN H. BLUME & EMILY C. PAAVOLA, OBJECTION HANDBOOK 2 (2008), http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/death-penalty-project/upload/objection-20handbook.pdf. 2. Christopher C. vanNatta & Timothy J. Cothrel, The Object of My Objection, 33 LrrIG. 26, 26 (2006).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most