Presentation of evidence - Conviction of crime

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to identify and explain the types of evidence used to prove a criminal conviction, distinguish between direct and circumstantial evidence, understand the prosecution’s burden of proof, and apply these principles to MBE-style questions. You will also recognize common exam pitfalls and know how to approach questions on the sufficiency and admissibility of evidence for criminal convictions.

MBE Syllabus

For MBE, you are required to understand the rules and principles governing the presentation of evidence to prove a criminal conviction. This article focuses on the following syllabus points:

  • The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence in criminal cases.
  • The prosecution’s burden of proof: beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • The role of inferences and the sufficiency of evidence for conviction.
  • Admissibility of prior convictions and their use as evidence.
  • The effect of improperly admitted or insufficient evidence on appeal.
  • Common MBE traps regarding the presentation and sufficiency of evidence for criminal convictions.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

  1. Which of the following is true regarding the prosecution’s burden in a criminal trial?
    1. The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
    2. The prosecution must prove guilt by a preponderance of the evidence.
    3. The prosecution must prove guilt by clear and convincing evidence.
    4. The prosecution must prove guilt only if the defendant testifies.
  2. Which statement best describes circumstantial evidence?
    1. It is evidence that directly proves an element of the crime.
    2. It is evidence that requires an inference to establish a fact.
    3. It is inadmissible in criminal cases.
    4. It is only used to impeach witnesses.
  3. If a conviction is based solely on circumstantial evidence, is it valid?
    1. No, only direct evidence can support a conviction.
    2. Yes, if the evidence is sufficient for a rational jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
    3. No, unless the defendant confesses.
    4. Yes, but only for misdemeanors.

Introduction

In criminal trials, the prosecution must present evidence sufficient to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This evidence may be direct, circumstantial, or a combination of both. The rules governing the presentation and sufficiency of evidence are critical for the MBE, as questions often test your ability to distinguish between types of evidence, evaluate sufficiency, and spot errors in the use of prior convictions or inferences.

Types of Evidence in Criminal Convictions

Evidence in criminal cases falls into two main categories: direct and circumstantial. Both are equally admissible and can independently support a conviction if the jury finds them persuasive.

Key Term: Direct Evidence Evidence that, if believed, directly establishes a fact in issue without the need for inference (e.g., eyewitness testimony that the defendant committed the act).

Key Term: Circumstantial Evidence Evidence that requires the jury to draw an inference from one or more facts to establish a fact in issue (e.g., finding the defendant’s fingerprints at the scene).

The Burden of Proof

The prosecution always bears the burden of proving every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the highest standard in law and applies to all elements, including intent, conduct, and causation.

Key Term: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt The standard of proof in criminal cases requiring the prosecution to establish each element so that no reasonable doubt exists in the mind of a rational juror.

Sufficiency of Evidence

A conviction will be upheld if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Both direct and circumstantial evidence can satisfy this standard.

Use of Prior Convictions

Prior convictions may be admissible for limited purposes, such as impeachment or, in some cases, to prove an element of the current offense (e.g., felon-in-possession statutes). However, prior convictions cannot be used solely to show the defendant’s propensity to commit crimes.

Key Term: Propensity Evidence Evidence offered to show that a person acted in conformity with a character trait or prior conduct, generally inadmissible to prove guilt in criminal cases.

Inferences and Presumptions

Jurors may draw reasonable inferences from the evidence, but mandatory presumptions that shift the burden of proof to the defendant are unconstitutional. Permissive inferences are allowed if the jury may, but is not required to, draw the inference.

Appellate Review and Harmless Error

If a conviction is based on insufficient evidence, it must be reversed. However, if improper evidence was admitted but the remaining evidence is sufficient, the error may be deemed harmless and the conviction upheld.

Worked Example 1.1

A defendant is charged with burglary. The prosecution presents evidence that the defendant’s shoeprints match those found at the scene and that the defendant was seen near the building shortly before the crime. There are no eyewitnesses to the entry.

Question: Can the jury convict based solely on this circumstantial evidence?

Answer: Yes. Circumstantial evidence is sufficient to support a conviction if, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Worked Example 1.2

During a trial for armed robbery, the prosecution introduces evidence that the defendant was previously convicted of theft. The prosecution argues this shows the defendant is likely guilty of robbery.

Question: Is this use of the prior conviction proper?

Answer: No. Prior convictions cannot be used solely to show the defendant’s propensity to commit crimes. They may be admissible for impeachment or if relevant to an element of the current charge, but not to prove guilt by character.

Exam Warning

On the MBE, do not assume that circumstantial evidence is weaker or less valid than direct evidence. Both can independently support a conviction if the jury is properly instructed.

Revision Tip

Always check whether the prosecution has met its burden of proof for each element. If a question suggests the burden has shifted to the defendant, consider whether this is a constitutional error.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

  • The prosecution must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • Both direct and circumstantial evidence can support a conviction.
  • Circumstantial evidence requires inferences but is not inferior to direct evidence.
  • Prior convictions are generally inadmissible to prove guilt by propensity.
  • Mandatory presumptions shifting the burden of proof to the defendant are unconstitutional.
  • A conviction based on insufficient evidence must be reversed; harmless error applies if remaining evidence is sufficient.

Key Terms and Concepts

  • Direct Evidence
  • Circumstantial Evidence
  • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
  • Propensity Evidence
The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
AdaptiBar
One-time Fee
$395
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
BarPrepHero
One-time Fee
$299
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Quimbee
One-time Fee
$1,199

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal