Allana D.

Torres
Ed-31

Argumentation and Debate

Burden of Proof
A duty placed upon a civil or criminal defendant to prove or disprove a disputed fact.
Burden of proof can define the duty placed upon a party to prove or disprove a disputed fact, or it can define
which party bears this burden. In criminal cases, the burden of proof is placed on the prosecution, who must
demonstrate that the defendant is guilty before a jury may convict him or her. But in some jurisdiction, the
defendant has the burden of establishing the existence of certain facts that give rise to a defense, such as
the insanity plea. In civil cases, the plaintiff is normally charged with the burden of proof, but the defendant
can be required to establish certain defenses.
Burden of proof can also define the burden of persuasion, or the quantum of proof by which the party with
the burden of proof must establish or refute a disputed factual issue. In criminal cases, the prosecution must
prove the defendant's guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
Judges explain the REASONABLE DOUBT STANDARD to jurors in a number of ways. Federal jury instructions
provide that proof beyond a reasonable doubt is "proof of such a convincing character that a reasonable
person would not hesitate to act upon it in the most important of his own affairs." State judges typically
describe the standard by telling jurors that they possess a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt if,
based on all the evidence in the case, they would be uncomfortable with a criminal conviction. In giving
the reasonable doubt instruction, judges regularly remind jurors that a criminal conviction imposes a variety
of hardships on a defendant, including public humiliation, incarceration, fines, and occasionally
the Forfeiture of property. Reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof used in any judicial
proceeding.
Reasonable doubt is also a constitutionally mandated burden of proof in criminal proceedings. The U.S.
Supreme Court has ruled that the DUE PROCESS CLAUSE of the Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth
Amendments to the federal constitution prohibit criminal defendants from being convicted on any quantum
of evidence less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. in Re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 90 S. Ct. 1068, 23 L.
Ed. 2D 368 (1970). Although the reasonable doubt standard is not specifically mentioned anywhere in the
Constitution, the Court observed that the standard is so deeply rooted in the nation's history as to reflect the
fundamental value that "it is far worse to convict an innocent man than to let a guilty man go free."
In civil litigation the standard of proof is either proof by a PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE or proof by
clear and convincing evidence. Both are lower burdens of proof than beyond a reasonable doubt. A
preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other,
even by the smallest degree. Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that establishes the truth of a
disputed fact by a high probability. Criminal trials employ a higher standard of proof because criminal
defendants often face the deprivation of life or liberty if convicted while civil defendants generally only
face an order to pay money damages if the plaintiff prevails.

Burden of Persuasion; Due Process of Law; Evidence; Fifth Amendment; Fourteenth

Amendment; Proof; Reasonable Doubt.
n. the most important rule of evidence in the trial of civil (not criminal) cases. The burden of proof is on
the plaintiff (the party bringing the lawsuit) to show by a "preponderance of evidence" or "weight of
evidence" that all the facts necessary to win a judgment are probably true. In a criminal trial the burden of
proof is required of the prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused is "beyond a reasonable doubt," a much
more difficult hurdle. Unless there is a complete failure to present substantial evidence of a vital fact
(usually called an "element of the cause of action"), the ultimate decision as to whether the plaintiff has met
his/her burden of proof rests with the jury or the judge if there is no jury. However, the burden of proof is
not always on the plaintiff. In some issues it may shift to the defendant if he/she raises a factual issue in
defense, such as a claim that he/she was not the registered owner of the car that hit the plaintiff, so the
defendant must prove his/her claim. If at the close of the plaintiff's presentation he/she has not presented
any evidence on a necessary fact (e.g. any evidence of damage) then the case may be dismissed without the
defendant having to put on any evidence. (See: preponderance of the evidence, beyond a reasonable
doubt, prima facie)

noun adequate evidence, adequate proof legally presented at trial, burden of going forward, legal
responsibility, obligation of going forward, sufficient corroboration, sufficient evidence in a case,
sufficient evidence to establish a case, sufficient proof, sufficient proof of facts, validation of proof of a
case, verification of proof of a case
Associated concepts: cause of action or claim, evidence, evvdential burden, failure to
sustain, preponderance of the evidence, prima facie case, rebuttal, weight of evidence
Foreign phrases: Onus probani. Burden of proof.