Wait so this is a REQUIREMENT for ALL criminal law cases in EVERY state??
Yes, of course. Everyone is presumed innocent and guilt has to be proven by proving all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. That is what the jury is for. In juvenile cases it is usually just a judge, juvenile cases are different as are the consequences, but the presumption is the same. This is a fundamental premise of our legal system.
The fact finder (judge or jury) is the one who determines what facts to believe. The lawyer's job is to get all the important facts into evidence. If there is a legal error, or a clear abuse of the standard in application to the facts, then an appeal should be considered. Post conviction remedies are also sometimes available, for example if the defendant had ineffective assistance of counsel at trial (a defense which also has specific legal requirements that must be proven)
Yes I see Mrs. Morcroft, I am trying to find a statute or jury instruction to show PROOF to a judge that ALL ELEMENTS of the crime were NOT proven that my loved one was convicted of. In fact, one of the elements states exactly that "You cannot convict someone of ____________ if the defendant _________ _____ ______. When my loved one did just that of which the statute says you cannot convict someone of doing if they done this. Would that Texas Jury instruction be some evidence to bring forth to a judge in a brief with other elements??
Well, that's the problem. A statute or a jury instruction is not proof of anything. Failure to properly apply the statute or failure to allow a jury instruction may be a legal error which is appealable if it can be shown to have caused harm. Proof is the facts that are introduced at trial and determined by the judge or jury. What the judge or jury determines to be the facts ARE legally the facts. The only way to appeal a determination of fact is if is is impossible or incrediby unlikely for it to match the legal standard. So, for example, if it was impossible or completely unreasonable for a judge or jury to conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based upon all the facts introduced at trial then that could be an appealable issue. An appellate court does not normally reweigh the facts and decide that the judge or jury reached the wrong conclusion, and should have focused on other facts. I don't know if you are doing an appeal or what, but it sounds as if you are in way over your head and need to get an attorney.
Great answers ! Thank you Mrs. Morcroft, I'll tell the defendant about what you wrote & see what we can do further.