Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 29.1 Closing Argument
Rule 29.1 Closing Argument
Closing arguments proceed in the following order:

(a) the government argues;

(b) the defense argues; and

(c) the government rebuts.

New York State is different and, in my opinion, plain crazy because of a lack of rebuttal:

2022 New York Laws
CPL – Criminal Procedure
Part 2 – The Principal Proceedings
Title J – Prosecution of Indictments in Superior Courts–Plea to Sentence
Article 260 – Jury Trial–Generally
260.30 – Jury Trial; in What Order to Proceed.

Universal Citation: NY Crim Pro L § 260.30 (2022)
§ 260.30 Jury trial; in what order to proceed.
The order of a jury trial, in general, is as follows:

1. The jury must be selected and sworn.

2. The court must deliver preliminary instructions to the jury.

3. The people must deliver an opening address to the jury.

4. The defendant may deliver an opening address to the jury.

5. The people must offer evidence in support of the indictment.

6. The defendant may offer evidence in his defense.

7. The people may offer evidence in rebuttal of the defense evidence, and the defendant may then offer evidence in rebuttal of the people’s rebuttal evidence. The court may in its discretion permit the parties to offer further rebuttal or surrebuttal evidence in this pattern. In the interest of justice, the court may permit either party to offer evidence upon rebuttal which is not technically of a rebuttal nature but more properly a part of the offering party’s original case.

8. At the conclusion of the evidence, the defendant may deliver a summation to the jury.

9. The people may then deliver a summation to the jury.

10. The court must then deliver a charge to the jury.

11. The jury must then retire to deliberate and, if possible, render a verdict.

New York’s civil trial procedure is similar:

2022 New York Laws
CVP – Civil Practice Law and Rules
Article 40 – Trial Generally
R4016 – Opening and Closing Statements.

Universal Citation: NY CPLR § 4016 (2022)

Rule 4016. Opening and closing statements. (a) Before any evidence is offered, an attorney for each plaintiff having a separate right, and an attorney for each defendant having a separate right, may make an opening statement. At the close of all the evidence on the issues tried, an attorney for each such party may make a closing statement in inverse order to opening statements.

I agree, except for one thing: there are many Democrat voters who still trust the MSM to be truthful, and if the MSM says the trial isn’t political and Trump is a dictator, they believe it. If the trial is supposedly fair and Trump is supposedly set on becoming a dictator, there would be no reason not to hope for a guilty verdict.

Conservative commentators often talk about the ‘mask slipping’. It’s no longer slipping; it’s completely off. The media has put in minimal effort to portray this as anything but politically motivated. And they don’t care. Trump must be destroyed, by any means necessary. Of course, this will ultimately extend to his supporters and then to anyone who challenges the leftist agenda in any way.

We see a similar unfolding in the asinine Alito flag ‘controversy’. It’s ridiculous on its face; the media knows it and they do precious little to try to say otherwise. The point is to hound Alito into retiring while Democrats hold the Presidency and the Senate. That’s unlikely to happen, but, failing that, make his life as miserable as possible and tarnish his reputation.

So, there’s no mask anymore. The left’s raw will to power by any and all means is on full display.

(You know what they say about being “kind to the cruel”…)

+ Bonus:
“BIDEN TEAM CONFIRMS: Trump NYC Trial Was a Biden Produced Political Show Trial”—
https://pjmedia.com/victoria-taft/2024/05/28/the-beginning-of-the-end-of-the-trump-nyc-trial-n4929393
H/T Instapundit.
Opening grafs:

Joe Biden dispatched his political team to the microphones outside the courthouse where he sicced a DOJ transplant to prosecute his opponent, Donald Trump. Up to this point, the Biden regime gamely denied that this wasn’t a political show trial, claiming that it was a legitimate prosecution based on legal payments that they of course had nothing to do with.

But then he sent his political team to drum up votes outside the courthouse. Biden’s attempt to troll Trump while he was in court fighting for his freedom against bizarre bookkeeping charges confirmed what we’d known all along….

That “Biden” is a sphincter with absolutely no class, dignity or sense of propriety.
(But then why would a crook have any of those?)

Whose innocent chauvin the six people who committed suicide in the dc gulag

Ten guilty men can cause a lot of damage look at the major cities and see 19 men caused 3000 dead weve let perhaps hundreds of cells in the two million gotaways

That might be considered a crime you think

Excellent point! That is now the Republican party’s mentality, i.e., be sure to convict that one innocent man in order to make sure those “Ten guilty men” get convicted.

A slight tweak on the old Blackstone’s ratio – ‘It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer‘ – but it is 2024 and the Republican party has very modern views on ‘Da Law now…

You are incredibly naive. This will be the standard operating procedure for any prominent Republican from now on if it succeeds in this trial.