Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Sign up
Share
help_outline
help
Pricing
Request Info
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Mock Trial Rubric --- Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Mock Trial Rubric --- Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys
Mock Trial Rubric --- Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys
This rubric will be used to assign grades to student lawyers. Grades will be determined by opening statement, use of objections, cross-examination, closing statement, and presentation style.
Rubric Code:
MXC5A25
By
loveb2
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject:
Law
Type:
Presentation
Grade Levels:
9-12
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
Lawyer Rubric
Excellent
20 pts
Good
16 pts
Average
14 pts
Poor
12 pts
Use of Class Time
Excellent
The attorney effectively used class time to work on the case. The attorney was never or rarely distracted and when distracted, quickly refocused. The attorney had no absences or up to 1 excused absences.
Good
The attorney used most of the class time to work on the case but seldomly got distracted during class. The attorney had no unexcused absences and up to 2 excused absences.
Average
The attorney seldomly used class time to work on the case. The attorney was often distracted during class. The attorney had no unexcused absences but more than 2 excused absences.
Poor
The attorney rarely used class time to work on the case. The attorney was frequently distracted during class time. The attorney had unexcused absences.
Opening Argument
Excellent
Attorney is completely at ease with the jury. Does not appear nervous; does not use notes. Moves away from podium. Uses easily comprehensible language with voice inflection and eye contact. Tells the jury what s/he expects it to do. Thanks the jury. Very polished.
Good
Attorney may be a bit nervous in front of the jury or maybe uses notes from time to time. Stands at the podium. A bit of a Monotonous voice, some eye contact. Argument is comprehensible. Mostly polished, with a few guffaws.
Average
Very nervous in front of the jury; perhaps because s/he is unprepared. Heavy dependency on notes. Stands at podium. Voice is very monotonous; eye contact is rarely used. Argument is confusing, and the presentation in general is flawed.
Poor
The attorney is completely unprepared. Notes used almost constantly. Completely monotonous voice tone and no eye contact. The jury seems very confused through no fault of its own.
Direct Examination
Excellent
The attorney clearly leads witnesses through the facts to which they testify with no errors. Effectively used evidence as necessary. Constructs a very strong case for the jury. Easily audible. Excellent eye contact and voice.
Good
The attorney for the most part leads witnesses through the facts to which they testify with only one or two procedural errors. May miss the opportunity to introduce some evidence into the court record, though these are minor elements that do not blow the case. Good eye contact, good voice.
Average
The attorney seems unprepared. Fumbles over words, seems unnecessarily nervous. Misses introducing key pieces of evidence, that may or may not have resulted in losing the case. Voice is weak / monotonous. Eye contact is poor.
Poor
Attorney is clearly and completely unprepared. Attorney seems unaware of evidence and in all likelihood loses the case for the state or his/her client. Monotonous voice and little= to-no eye contact.
Cross Examination
Excellent
Asks questions based on the witnesses testimony that questions the validity of the witness and/or disproves a piece of testimony. OR appropriately chooses not to cross examine witnesses. Excellent voice / excellent eye contact.
Good
Questions stray once or twice from testimony, facts, and evidence. Disproves at least one key piece of evidence but decision to not cross-examine a witness may seem questionable. Good voice / good eye contact.
Average
Questions mostly do not refer to the testimony, facts, and/or evidence previously submitted. By not cross-examining, key facts are left unchallenged. Somewhat monotonous voice / limited eye contact.
Poor
Questions are all sustained via objection as they attempt to introduce new evidence that was missed during direct. Refusal to cross-examine results in the opposing counsel's almost assured victory. Poor voice / poor eye contact.
Closing Argument
Excellent
The attorney effectively summarizes his/her key points AND effectively rebuts opposing counsel's case. Attorney rarely if ever uses notes. Attorney charges the jury with a responsibility. Speaks with confidence; strong voice / strong eye contact.
Good
Good summary of his/her case but does not adequately attack opposing counsel. Attorney occasionally uses notes. Maybe forgets to charge the jury. Good voice / good eye contact.
Average
The attorney seems unprepared in general and relies heavily on notes. Attorney does not use good presentation technique and style including voice and eye contact.
Poor
The attorney is clearly unprepared, stumbling over words and/or ideas. Attorney reads directly from notes Little thought and planning with regards to presentation technique. Overall, an ineffective closing.
Subjects:
Law
Types:
Presentation
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Law rubrics
More Presentation rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss
Discuss this rubric with other members.
Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.
Only with iRubric
tm
.
Copyright © 2024
Reazon Systems, Inc.
All rights reserved.
n98
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.