Criminal Rules of Procedure & Rules of Evidence

When a person is charged with a crime, there are several aspects to the case that a criminal defense attorney must evaluate critically. Two important factors include whether (1) the proper procedures were followed from investigation and prior to arrest all the way through trial and possible appeal and (2) what/whether evidence will be admissible at trial. 

The Criminal Rules of Procedure is the “guidebook” by which the attorney considers how the case should be (or should have been) handled from start to finish. 

The Rules of Evidence is much more narrow and govern what evidence is allowed to be presented at trial. Depending on how the investigation and arrest were handled, the remedy may be to exclude certain evidence at trial under the Rules of Evidence (and interpretative caselaw).

As mentioned above, the CRs are broad in nature and cover the entire process of a criminal case to ensure that the rights of the accused are protected. Examples include governing how evidence can be collected, notifying the accused of their rights (right to remain silent, the right to an attorney, etc.), and timelines (statute of limitations, speedy trial rules etc.). 

The CRs are intended to create order and predictability in the justice system as well as provide clear rules regarding the the rights of the accused. For the most part, caselaw then dictates the judicial remedies where the CRs are violated.

The Rules of Evidence (ER) are essentially a manual for running a trial. These rules guide the attorneys and judge on what information can be considered during the trial. The overarching goal is to make sure only reliable and relevant information is considered by the jury or a judge in a bench trial. The ERs are intended to filter out unreliable or unfairly prejudicial information so that the ultimate determination of guilty is not based on misleading information. 

For example, Evidence Rules determine what kinds of testimony, documents, and physical items can be admitted as evidence, how witnesses are questioned, and what constitutes hearsay (and whether it is admissible). Ultimately, admissibility is what the attorneys are arguing about when it comes to Rules of Evidence. Depending on reliability and relevancy (as well as prejudicial value), the judge is ultimately ruling whether the disputed evidence is admissible or inadmissible (i.e. will the jury hear or see it during trial).

While the descriptions of these unique rules sound as though they are separate, ultimately, there is significant overlap in a criminal trial. For example, if a person being charged with theft was stopped by the police while driving and evidence of stolen goods were found, the evidence of the stolen goods in the vehicle would likely be admissible at the time of trial. However, if the initial stop of the vehicle was determined through pretrial motions to be an invalid or pretextual stop, the judge may rule that all evidence found during that stop (stolen goods) are “fruits of the poisonous tree” and exclude that evidence at trial. 

So, while the Rules of Criminal Procedure govern the rules of the stop, the Rules of Evidence guide the judge as to admissibility of certain evidence acquired from the stop. As you can see, all criminal defense cases are evaluated with both sets of rules in mind.

DUI Main Page

Assault / Domestic Violence Main Page

While your defense attorney and prosecutor will discuss or negotiate cases with these rules in mind, they really come into play at trial (although there may be a reason to argue CRs/ERs for dismissal at or prior to arraignment as well as pre-trial motions). Both attorneys will have a strong sense as to what evidence the judge is likely to “let in” at trial. 

This is where criminal defense experience really comes into play when evaluating a case. A potential client may believe they have a way to “explain away” the situation but they don’t understand that their explanations are likely inadmissible (usually irrelevant to the elements of the crime or too prejudicial). That reality may leave the state with a stronger case than the defendant initially thought. 

If you hired the best counsel, your defense attorney should be explaining the pros and cons of taking a case to trial — not just confirming what the client wants to hear. Trials are extremely risky and, since the state has endless resources, the facts are typically stacked against the accused. Often, once a defendant is educated about what evidence is likely coming in at trial, they have a change of heart about how strongly they feel about “fighting the charges at trial.” 

It’s very hard for defense attorneys who sympathize with the accused that a bad act or situation was taken out of context. However, the best defense attorney should not be lining up a client in front of the firing squad of a jury if the risks are too high. If there is a better resolution without risk of jail or conviction, a client should be educated about those alternatives — even one who has good reason to fight the charges. For this reason, client education is critical in every criminal defense case. 

If you are facing a DUI or other misdemeanor criminal charge in Kitsap, Thurston, or Clark counties or the cities in those ares, feel free to reach out to our attorneys for a phone consultation. We are here 7 days a week. (360) 792-1000