Discuss ways that an attorney can anticipate what objections might be raised at trial during both sides' cases-in-chief, and how those objections might be argued to the court to maximize the likelihood that his/her position will prevail.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

The best answer will include a careful evaluation of the evidence that both sides will present, the determination of any admissibility issues that evidence might involve, and thorough research to ensure that the attorney has the best possible legal arguments to either support or refute each objection should it be raised.
-----------------
A case-in-chief is when the prosecutor or defendant presents sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt or innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. During a defendant's case-in-chief, they may also prove affirming defenses that relieve a defendant of liability for a crime.
Objections are challenges to the admissibility of evidence raised during the course of a trial. Objections raised at trial, during a case-in-chief, may be anticipated by the attorney. If there is a witness presenting evidence, they can be cross-examined, so the attorney may ask certain questions that will answer questions they anticipated the other side would ask. If a complete background of an expert witness isn't provided before questioning, an objection would occur. This objection may be argued to the court to maximize the likelihood that their position will prevail because the expert's background can be given and the questions can resume. If an objection is sustained, the evidence should not be admitted. If the objection is overruled, the evidence should be admitted.