Explain fully, how an attorney might decide what facts to proposed as stipulations to the other side, and what the concerns should be in making such a proposal.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

The best answer will identify the benefits of stipulations (saving time, generating good-will with the court, and possibly avoiding the presentation of evidence that will shock or anger the jury) and the pitfalls, including the possibility that the other side will not be able to present credible evidence sufficient to prove the fact.
-----------------
A stipulation is an agreement between a prosecutor and defense attorney that a fact is true without evidence. An attorney may decide what facts to propose as stipulations to the other side by determining how easily the fact can be proven. They may also think about what facts will add little weight to the prosecutor's case.
If the attorney is going to propose a stipulation to the other side and it is possible that the other side doesn't agree, the other side may require that the facts be proven with proof. If the other side doesn't agree with the attorney and wants there to be proof for a certain fact, the attorney may have to rethink how they want to present their case. And if a certain fact isn't actually true, this may present an argument that the other side can use against the attorney.
If the other side does not agree that a certain fact is true without the need for proof, it cannot be declared a stipulation, and the attorney will have to provide the proof which may take extra time that they do not have.