Can a defense attorney face any serious repercussions for trying to induce jury nullification?

Question

Say the prosecution has irrefutablly concrete evidence that the defendant commited the crime of which he is accused. Knowing this, the attorney of the defendant plays on empathy and convincing the jury that, yes, the defendant commited the crime, but with good reason. If a not guilty verdict is returned obviously through jury nullification, and it is also clear that was the defending attorney's aim, could they face any repercussions. I know that jury nullification is legal through the facts that a jury cannot be punished for an incorrect verdict and once acquitted a person cannot be re-tried, but can an attorney be punished for inducing nullification?

Answer 1

Yes

The first suggestion the attorney is angling for this will get a warning from the judge. If they persist, this is contempt- a criminal offense. They will also be referred to the bar association for disciplinary action up to and including disbarment.

Answer 2

canada

The trial judge must ensure that the jury is properly instructed on the applicable law. See R. v. Abdullahi, 2023 SCC 19 at para 32.

It is improper for a lawyer to argue that a jury ignore that law. See R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 SCR 30. The Chief Justice of Canada wrote:

I agree with the trial judge and with the Court of Appeal that Mr. Manning was quite simply wrong to say to the jury that if they did not like the law they need not enforce it. He should not have done so.

An acquittal after such a statement to the jury would be overturned and result in a new trial. See e.g. R. v. Morgentaler (1985), 52 OR (2d) 353 (C.A.).

One of the canons of legal ethics is that:

A lawyer should not attempt to deceive a court or tribunal by offering false evidence or by misstating facts or law

To tell the jury that it would be proper to not apply the law as described by the judge would be a breach of that canon and would leave the lawyer at risk of professional discipline.

An improper closing address to the jury, against the instructions of the judge, can be contempt of court. See R. v. Anderson, 2014 SCC 41 at para 58:

[The court's inherent jurisdiction] includes the power to penalize counsel for ignoring rulings or orders, or for inappropriate behaviour such as tardiness, incivility, abusive cross-examination, improper opening or closing addresses or inappropriate attire. Sanctions may include orders to comply, adjournments, extensions of time, warnings, cost awards, dismissals, and contempt proceedings.