If the defense does not offer evidence, what is the sequence of closing arguments?

In a trial where the defense chooses not to present any evidence, the sequence of closing arguments typically allows the state to present its closing argument first, followed by the defense's closing argument. This is rooted in the procedural norms of criminal trials, where the prosecution bears the burden of proof. The state's closing argument serves to summarize the evidence it has presented and to articulate how that evidence proves the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

By allowing the state to close first, it ensures that the jury hears the prosecution’s perspective on the evidence without interruption. The defense, even if it does not present evidence, has the opportunity to respond to the prosecution’s arguments, reinforcing the presumption of innocence and pointing out any reasonable doubts that may have arisen from the state’s case.

This structure is designed to maintain fairness in the trial process by allowing the defense to address the points raised by the prosecution directly. It aligns with the principles of judicial procedure and the rights of the defendant.