To begin, you are going to briefly discuss the current legal status for the issue in question, and explain what is controversial, or more specifically what the (likely) two competing viewpoints are arguing.  This needs to be from an experimental research perspective, rather than a more societally-focused (i.e. sociological or criminological) perspective.

You will then take a stand, and to back this up, will discuss the latest empirical/experimental research to assist the court in deciding whether your view is valid.  For example, if you chose to discuss whether the sequential lineup was better than the simultaneous one, you would briefly state the two views (though note for topics such as this one, you need to do more than reiterate what is in the text or lecture modules – focus on the latest research), then pick a side, explaining what research supports this side.  So – you do need to address the ‘other side’ in order to refute the arguments that might come from that direction.  As you are writing a court ‘brief’ you will have to write clearly and succinctly so as to get across your key points in quite a limited space.

You need at least 2 solid empirical references, not review papers, or non-experimental – sources.  These experimental papers should be as current as possible, typically the last 5 years.  These articles should come from peer-reviewed psychology journals, not “pop” psych sources, the internet, or books (though you can include information from these other sources in addition to your main 2, but not instead of them). You should incorporate these references into your paper (as discussed below) and end with an overall conclusion on the topic in general. Note that your job is to incorporate this material into your paper by paraphrasing and summarizing the work (while still citing the source appropriately).