Closing Arguments

Closing arguments in a jury trial is often the best time an attorney can persuade the jury. The evidence has been heard and there is an opportunity for an attorney, unlike when examining a witness on direct or cross-examination, to directly tell the jury (or judge) why the evidence justifies a decision in one party’s favor.
Attorneys are given quite a bit of flexibility in making closing arguments. “[T]he permissible field of argument is broad, and so long as counsel does not go beyond the evidence and the issues drawn by the instructions, or urge prejudicial matters, or a claim or defense which the evidence and issues drawn by the instructions do not justify, [an attorney] is permitted wide latitude in his [or her] comments.” Peterson v. Progressive Contractors, Inc., 399 S.W.3d 850, 856 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). At the same time, though, misstatements of law are impermissible during closing argument and the court has a duty to restrain and correct and such arguments. Id. . In summary, then, the Court should only prohibit arguments in closing argument which misrepresent the evidence or the law, introduce irrelevant prejudicial matters, or otherwise tend to confuse the jury. Id.
Contact with questions.