Different Types of Objections in Court

Courtroom dramas portray "objections" as pivotal moments in a trial. Objections in real courtrooms are more procedural than dramatic. While not as exciting, objections still play a vital role in ensuring fairness and enforcing the rules of evidence. Attorneys use objections to prevent improper, unreliable, or unfair evidence from being considered by the jury and to preserve legal issues for potential appeal.

What Is an Objection in Criminal Court?

An objection is a formal request by an attorney asking the judge to enforce courtroom procedures and evidentiary rules. Objections most often occur during witness examinations (direct and cross), but can happen at any point during a trial or pretrial proceeding, including opening statements, the introduction of exhibits, or closing arguments.

How Lawyers Make Objections

When lawyers make objections, they typically interrupt the proceeding by stating "objection," state the specific legal basis (often referring to a rule of evidence), and if necessary, provide brief clarification.

For example, if a prosecutor asks a witness what they overheard the victim say to the defendant, defense counsel might respond: "Objection, your honor. Hearsay." The prosecutor might then argue that the statement falls within a hearsay exception and ask the judge to overrule the objection.

Objections need to be made immediately—preferably before the potentially improper testimony or evidence is introduced and heard by the jury. Delayed objections can limit the court's ability to correct or prevent an error. Failing to object may waive both the objection itself and the right to raise that issue on appeal.

Judges' Rulings on Objections: Sustained vs. Overruled

Judges may rule on objections immediately or request additional argument from counsel. If further discussion is appropriate, the court will generally conduct it outside the jury's hearing—either through a sidebar conference at the bench or by briefly excusing the jury.

Sustained means the judge agrees with the objection, and the testimony or evidence is excluded or restricted. If an answer has already been given, the judge might strike it from the record and instruct the jury to disregard it.

Overruled means the judge disagrees with the objection and allows the question or evidence to proceed. The jury may then hear and consider the answer or exhibit as part of the case.

Judges will sometimes explain their ruling for the jury. For example, after sustaining an objection, a judge might say, "The jury will disregard that last answer and not consider it as evidence." After overruling an objection, a judge might say, "The objection is overruled. The witness may answer."

Purpose of Objections

Objections serve two primary functions—preventing improper evidence or argument from reaching the jury and preserving issues for appellate review.

Common reasons for making an objection include:

• excluding improper, unreliable, or unfairly prejudicial evidence
• challenging misleading or confusing questions
• objecting to inappropriate statements during opening statements or closing arguments
• preserving the record in case of an appeal, and
• maintaining orderly presentation of evidence.

Although attorneys must be vigilant in protecting their clients' rights, frequent or overly aggressive objections can frustrate judges or jurors. Effective trial lawyers need to balance assertiveness with judgment, only objecting when necessary and avoiding needless interruptions.

What Are Common Criminal Court Objections?

Objections typically fall into two categories—objections to questions and objections to evidence.

Common Objections to Questions

The following objections provide examples of inappropriate types of questions, focusing on how a question is phrased or the manner of questioning.

Argumentative. The attorney's question challenges or badgers the witness rather than seeks information.

Asked and answered. The question repeats one that the witness has already answered, often to emphasize a point unfairly.

Assuming facts not in evidence. The question includes facts that haven't been admitted into evidence.

Beyond the scope. The question goes beyond the topics covered during the earlier examination (for example, cross-examination going beyond the scope of direct).

Compound question. The attorney asks more than one question at the same time, making it unclear to the jury and on the record which part the witness is answering.

Conclusion. The question improperly asks the witness to make a legal or factual conclusion reserved for the judge or jury.

Counsel testifying. The attorney makes factual statements instead of asking a question, effectively "testifying" to the jury.

Immaterial or irrelevant. The question doesn't relate to an issue in the case or make any fact more or less probable.

Leading. The question suggests the answer (for example, "Isn't it true that…?"). Leading questions are generally allowed on cross-examination but not on direct examination.

Misleading. The question is confusing or inaccurately summarizes prior testimony.

Misstates evidence. The attorney incorrectly paraphrases or characterizes evidence already presented.

Speculative. The question invites the witness to guess about facts, motives, or events rather than testify from personal knowledge.

Common Objections to Evidence

These objections concern whether particular documents, statements, or physical items may be admitted into evidence for the jury's consideration.

Best evidence rule. When a document exists, the original is generally required rather than a witness's description of its contents, unless a valid excuse for its absence exists.

Foundation. The party seeking to introduce evidence hasn't established that the it's authentic, reliable, or connected to the case (for example, who created a document or where an item was found).

Hearsay. A witness seeks to repeat someone else's out-of-court statement to prove that what was said is true. Hearsay is generally inadmissible unless it falls within a recognized exception.

Improper impeachment. The attempt to attack a witness's credibility goes beyond what the rules allow, such as using certain prior bad acts or statements incorrectly.

Incompetent witness. The witness lacks the ability to understand the oath to tell the truth or can't comprehend the proceedings.

Inflammatory or prejudicial. The evidence will likely provoke strong emotion or bias that outweighs its value in proving a fact—for example, an excessive number of graphic crime-scene photos.

Lack of personal knowledge. The witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the matter and is instead speculating or repeating what others said.

Narrative. The witness gives a long, unstructured response instead of directly answering the question, which can lead to inadmissible or confusing information.

Non-responsive. The witness's answer goes beyond or avoids the question asked.

Opinion. A non-expert (lay) witness gives an opinion that requires specialized knowledge or expertise. Opinions are generally reserved for qualified expert witnesses.

Privileged communication. The testimony would reveal confidential communications protected by law, such as attorney-client, doctor-patient, or spousal communications.

What Objections Mean for Defendants, Witnesses, and Families

Objections are a normal and essential part of a criminal trial. They help maintain procedural fairness and ensure the jury hears only evidence that meets legal standards. Judges act as neutral gatekeepers, enforcing the rules of evidence while allowing each side to advocate for its position.

Tips for Handling Objections

Here are some tips for those involved in, or watching, criminal proceedings when objections are raised.

For defendants. Follow your attorney's guidance. Avoid reacting visibly to objections or rulings, and instead communicate questions or concerns privately with your lawyer, either in writing or quietly at counsel table.

For witnesses. When an objection is raised, stop speaking immediately. Wait for the judge to rule, and follow the judge's instructions about whether and how to answer the question.

For observers and family members. Don't assume that an objection means a lawyer or witness has done something wrong. An objection asks the judge to decide whether a particular question, answer, or piece of evidence follows the rules.

Working With an Attorney

If you're a defendant or witness in a criminal case, your attorney can explain which objections are most likely to arise in your matter and how the court in your jurisdiction typically handles them.