1. STATE V.S. MIKEY
1
State V.S. Mikey
A Criminal Court Case Procedure
Haley Bell
Grays Harbor College

2. STATE V.S. MIKEY
2
Abstract
During the last three months of studying Criminal law, I got the chance to observe a real court
case and put words with a real situation. I watched the court case of State V.S. Mikey a criminal
court case, and got to see the court room I read about in text, come to life. In the case Mikey was
charged with two counts of assault in the second degree in a bar fight in January 2014, causing
substantial bodily injury. I only got to see the second day of trail, where the state and defense
lawyer had one last chance to persuade the jury to convict or to not convict Mikey. The outcome
is unknown of to me due to the long hours of deciding done by the jury in which case I had to
leave the court house.
State V.S. Mikey

3. STATE V.S. MIKEY
3
On January 1, 2014, Mikey and a couple of friends headed out for a night of drinking at
the bar. Another group of men was out when a drunken dispute of football broke through, as the
argument to the outside a fight broke loose when Mikey punched two men. Breaking one man’s
nose and another man’s jaw. When the cops finally arrived Mikey was mad and was arrested.
Later on he was charged with two counts of assault in the second degree; causing substantial
bodily injury is a crime.
First the judge went over the court instructions, explaining about 25 rules and instructions
to the jury in order to help them find a decision in convicting or not convicting Mikey. He
explained that the only way they could reach a verdict was if majority of them believed that
beyond a reasonable doubt that Mikey; had punched the victims giving them substantial bodily
injury, that he committed the crime in the state of Washington and that any evidence that was
given in court was the only evidence they could use when making a verdict. Any other evidence
or opinion by lawyer or personal was to be discarded as it was not practical evidence. We learned
that the only evidence that can be used in the court case if the evidence that is backed up by the
courts and proves that beyond a reasonable doubt that the evidence is pure.
While learning about the courts and how our criminal justice system works we studied
how juries were selected and how the courts proceed to convict a criminal. Although I was only
there for the second day of trail, I witnessed the rebuttal process. Mikey had proceeded as “Not
Guilty” and had received a trial. In which the state was presented to the jury first. The state
attorney got up and proceeded to talk to the jury members about how drunk Mikey was and that

4. STATE V.S. MIKEY
4
his behavior was unacceptable, exaggerating on the fact that he had punched someone so hard he
broke bones. His evidence was pictures of those who were injured and a police patrol video
showing Mikey very angry, swearing, and throwing a fit in the back of the patrol car. He
reminded the jury of testimonies done by the witnesses and victims.
The defense attorney then took the stand to tell the jury how Mikey was so drunk he was
unable to make clear decisions and didn’t know how hard he was throwing punches at the
victims. He reminded the jury how Mikey was also a victim when he was bullied in the
beginning of the fight enraging Mikey to the point of getting in a fight. He was using self-
defense against the men when the fight had begun. The court then dismissed the jury to begin the
process of debating for the verdict.
I soon realized that court had followed all procedures exactly has I had read them in text.
An arrest had been made against Mikey harming two individuals. The case had moved to the
prosecutor who had then put together information and a hearing. When they couldn’t decide in
the small hearing it then moved into selecting a jury for trails. I was unable to witness the first
day of court when witnesses and testimonies were heard, but I was briefed on them by the
defense attorney. Giving me a wider insight into the court as he explained the process through
the first day while we discussed how all witness must swear to tell the truth and begin
questioning in the witnesses. He explained how all guidelines of making sure the trail is fair by
electing 12 jury members who know nothing about him or the case to avoid and favoritism. The
jury began with the opening statements by the prosecutors and defense then they was presented

5. STATE V.S. MIKEY
5
with the prosecution’s evidence and all the witnesses. The rebuttal as I seen in day two, were
then presented to the jury where they both ended with their closing arguments. All steps followed
the trail process step by step.
After apply all the knowledge given from the text I learned this semester, it was easier to
recognize all the puzzle pieces of court come together. The rules and law are followed exactly
every day in the court system. It truly is a complex but well-oiled system where we solve cases
and fight for justice under a constitution of law and order maintaining the pureness in all until
proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.