Skip to main content
iRubric: Mock Trial Rubric --- Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys

iRubric: Mock Trial Rubric --- Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys

preview rubric


edit print email Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run apply to... delete

Mock Trial Rubric --- Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys built by Tahir07

Rubric Code: PX9X4BA
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.
ready Ready to use    public Public Rubric

Directly link to this rubric or embed it on your website:
Keywords: (None)
Categories: Subjects: Law  
Types: Presentation  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric Lawyer Rubric
10 pts
8 pts
7 pts
6 pts
Opening Argument

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.

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.

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.

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

The attorney clearly leads (without leading in a legal sense) witnesses through the facts to which they testify. Uses physical and verbal evidence from both witnesses and experts effectively and prudently. Constructs a very strong case for the jury. Easily audible. Excellent eye contact.

The attorney for the most part leads (without leading in the legal sense) witnesses through the facts to which they testify with only one or two procedural errors. May miss the introduction of some evidence into the court record, though these are minor elements that do not blow the case. Good eye contact, good voice.

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.

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

Asks questions related only to evidence introduced by opposing counsel. By doing so, effectively disproves at least one key piece of evidence that opposing counsel argues. OR appropriately does not cross examine witnesses or experts. Excellent voice / excellent eye contact.

Questions stray once or twice from testimony, facts, and evidence. Disproves at least one key piece of evidence but decision to not cross-examine may seem questionable. Good voice / good eye contact.

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.

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.
Use of Objections

Objections are used with a high degree of efficacy and accuracy. They are used not only as defense to refute opposing counsel's case, but also to draw attention to unstated fact / opinion. Strong voice and eye-contact.

Objections are made with a moderate degree of efficacy and accuracy. However, the attorney's may make a mistake in two in the assignment of causation for the objection. Strong voice / strong eye contact.

Objections seem to be made with little legal consideration. Or objections are not made when they should be - more than three times. Good voice / good eye contact.

The concept of the "objection" seems completely lost on the attorney. Objections seems to be made for the sake of making them. Or objections are not being used and opposing counsel is getting facts into evidence that should not be. Poor voice / poor eye contact.
Closing Argument

The attorney effectively summarizes his/her key points AND helps to dismantle opposing counsel's case. Attorney charges the jury with a responsibility. Speaks with confidence; strong voice / strong eye contact.

Good summary of his/her case but does not adequately attack opposing counsel. Maybe forgets to charge the jury. Good voice / good eye contact.

The attorney seems unprepared in general and does not use good presentation technique and style including voice and eye contact.

The attorney is most clearly unprepared, stumbling over words and/or ideas. Little thought and planning with regards to presentation technique. Overall, an ineffective closing.

Discuss this rubric

Do more with this rubric:


Preview this rubric.


Modify this rubric.


Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.


Show a printable version of this rubric.


Add this rubric to multiple categories.


Bookmark this rubric for future reference.

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.


Build a gradebook to assess students.


Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.


Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.


Email this rubric to a friend.


Discuss this rubric with other members.

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.

Bookmark this page:   RCampus RCampus   twit this twitter   delicious   digg Digg   facebook Facebook  
Copyright © 2017 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.