What sets the length of a courtroom trial? How does the judge determine what’s a “right” amount of time so it doesn’t go forever?

Question

Seems like this must be a very judge-dependent and judge-controlled thing? I imagine lawyers must want to try to throw in the kitchen sink and have tons and tons of witnesses going down every rabbit hole, but the judge has to say no to some things.

Do they set a time limit based on the complexity of the topic? Do they make a gut feel call about whether any particular witness actually adds new information and say “that’s enough”?

Can the judge “game” this and favor one side (intentionally or unintentionally if they don’t believe the side saying that more complexity and duration of witnesses is needed, like for example in a complicated technical case?)

I read about the judicial system being swamped, but are judges using time limits to help move things along better?

In: 2116

Answer 1

Judges have a lot of leeway when deciding how their courts should be run. But you might be imagining things like TV shows or movie depictions of trials.

Trials are very “scripted”. Lawyers don’t get to introduce surprise witnesses, they cannot suddenly drop in new evidence. There are usually things like pre-trial conferences, depositions taken from witnesses, etc etc that both sides participate in separately and together. By the time the trial starts, they know exactly who will be called to witness and probably have a really good guess as to how the witness will respond.

Judges take a VERY dim view if they think a lawyer is wasting time. By the time the trial starts, all evidence and witness statements are ALREADY ON RECORD. A witness changing their statements during trial will be, at a minimum, scolded by the judge.

Pretty much the facts of the case (as far as possible) will already be agreed to by both sides before trial. The lawyers argue their case but they cannot simply add to facts without giving the other side an opportunity to review and examine before trial.

99.9% of the time, lawyers AVOID pissing off the judge. In fact that might the biggest rule for trial lawyers. The defendant might be facing the judge and trial for the first time but lawyers have to deal with the same set of judges pretty often. Piss off the judge enough and the judge can request for a sanction on the lawyer. Few lawyers will risk this since this is their livelihood not to mention their professional, sworn duty.