Prosecutor’s Closing Arguments in a California DUI

During a California driving under the influence (DUI) trial after both sides have presented their case, the prosecution and the California DUI defense attorney are given the opportunity to make closing arguments.  Closing arguments in  CA drunk-driving cases provide each side with the opportunity to summarize their positions as to whether or not they feel a California DUI defendant is guilty or not guilty.  Because the prosecution has the burden of proof establishing the DUI defendant’s guilt, the prosecution will typically go first.  In addition, the prosecution is allowed to rebut statements made by the defense during its closing argument.


In order for a jury to convict a DUI defendant, the prosecution must prove every fact of the California drunk-driving case “beyond a reasonable doubt.”  Experienced prosecutors will often try to minimize this burden by making it seem as though the defense has the burden of proving the defendant’s innocence.  Even though jurors are instructed that the prosecution must prove its case instead of the defense, oftentimes jurors will forget this fact when the prosecutor is presenting closing arguments.  It is up to the savvy California DUI defense lawyert o remind the jurors that this is not so during his or her closing arguments.