Witness sequestration rule

The Witness sequestration rule is a courtroom procedure intended to keep witnesses from changing or tailoring their testimony in response to what they hear from other witnesses. Bryan Stevenson invoked it during a postconviction evidentiary hearing, making the rule part of a dispute over who would present evidence and how the hearing would proceed.

Purpose and Operation

In criminal cases, witnesses who are expected to testify are required to wait outside the courtroom. The separation is meant to prevent them from hearing other witnesses and adjusting their own accounts accordingly. The rule therefore addresses the conditions under which testimony is given, rather than deciding whether a witness is truthful or what weight the court should give the testimony.

Invocation at the Hearing

As the hearing began, Stevenson told the court that he intended to call several law-enforcement officers who were present in the courtroom and invoked the rule. The State objected, arguing that the officers were investigators who had solved the crime and were needed in court to present its case. Stevenson answered that the State did not bear the burden of presenting a case in the proceeding: it was a postconviction evidentiary hearing, and his side was responsible for presenting evidence.

Procedural Significance

The exchange placed the rule within a broader disagreement about the character of the proceeding. The State treated the investigators’ presence as necessary to presenting its account; Stevenson emphasized that this was not a criminal trial and that the burden of going forward rested with the defense. The evidence records his invocation and the State’s objection, but does not establish the court’s ruling. The rule’s significance here lies in its practical role: it would separate witnesses from courtroom testimony while the parties contested the structure and responsibilities of the hearing.