Editing Burden of proof (law) (section)

==== Clear and convincing evidence ====
Clear and convincing evidence is a higher level of burden of persuasion than "preponderance of the evidence", but less than "beyond reasonable doubt". It is employed intra-adjudicatively in administrative court determinations, as well as in [[civil procedure|civil]] and certain [[criminal procedure]] in the United States. For example, a prisoner seeking ''[[habeas corpus]]'' relief from [[Capital punishment in the United States|capital punishment]] must prove his factual innocence by clear and convincing evidence.<ref>''Calderon v. Thompson'', {{ussc|523|538|1998}}. The petitioner, Thomas M. Thompson, a convicted rapist/murderer, was executed on July 14, 1998.</ref> New York State uses this standard when a court must determine whether to involuntarily hospitalize a mentally ill patient or to issue an [[Assisted Outpatient Treatment]] Order.<ref>New York State Mental Hygiene Law §§ 9.33 & 9.60.</ref> This standard was also codified by the United States Supreme Court in all mental health civil commitment cases.<ref>Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (1979)</ref>

This standard is used in many types of [[Equity (law)|equity]] cases, including [[paternity (law)|paternity]], [[persons in need of supervision]], [[child custody]], the [[probate]] of both wills and [[living wills]], petitions to remove a person from [[life support]] ("[[right to die]]" cases),<ref>See, ''[[Quinlan case#Legal battle|Quinlan v. New Jersey]]'', and ''[[Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health]]'', 497 U.S. 261 (1990).</ref> mental hygiene and involuntary hospitalizations, and many similar cases.

Clear and convincing evidence is the standard of proof used for immunity from prosecution under Florida's [[stand-your-ground law]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html|title=Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes: Online Sunshine|access-date=2021-05-22|archive-date=2021-05-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210522181637/http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html|url-status=live}}</ref>{{non-primary source needed|date=May 2024}}{{or|date=May 2024}} Once raised by the defense, the state must present its evidence in a pre-trial hearing, showing that the statutory prerequisites have not been met, and then request that the court deny a motion for declaration of immunity. The judge must then decide from clear and convincing evidence whether to grant immunity.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.husseinandwebber.com/stand_your_ground.html |title=Florida Stand Your Ground Law &#124; Use of Deadly Force in Self-Defense |access-date=2013-07-29 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131104224306/http://www.husseinandwebber.com/stand_your_ground.html |archive-date=2013-11-04 }}</ref> This is a lower burden than "beyond a reasonable doubt", the threshold a prosecutor must meet at any proceeding criminal trial,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133/|title=Florida 'stand your ground' law yields some shocking outcomes depending on how law is applied|work=Tampa Bay Times|access-date=2013-07-29|archive-date=2021-12-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211207094545/https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133/|url-status=live}}</ref> but higher than the "probable cause" threshold generally required for [[indictment]].

Clear and convincing proof means that the evidence presented by a party during the trial must be highly and substantially more probable to be true than not and the trier of fact must have a firm belief or conviction in its factuality.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://congressionalresearch.com/98-990/document.php|quote=Clear and convincing evidence is  typically defined as that measure or degree of proof which will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as to the allegation sought to be established.|title=Standard of Proof in Senate Impeachment Proceedings|publisher=Congressional Research Service|author=Ripy, Thomas B.|access-date=2019-02-10|archive-date=2019-04-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190423160246/http://congressionalresearch.com/98-990/document.php|url-status=live}}</ref> In this standard, a greater degree of believability must be met than the common standard of proof in civil actions (i.e. preponderance of the evidence), which only requires that the facts as a threshold be more likely than not to prove the issue for which they are asserted.

This standard is also known as "clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence"; "clear, cognizant, and convincing evidence", and is applied in cases or situations involving an equitable remedy or where a presumptive civil liberty interest exists. For example, this is the standard or quantum of evidence use to [[probate]] a [[last will and testament]].