Appeals - Revision history

IBJadmin: /* Grounds for Appeal */

2012-09-28T07:39:28Z

Grounds for Appeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:39, 28 September 2012
Line 47:		Line 47:
	* '''Weight of the Evidence''' - In some jurisdictions the intermediary appellate court may be able to review both the lower court's findings of law and the lower court's finding of facts. When a defendant claims the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence, they are arguing that no reasonably jury could find the defendant guilty, given the evidence presented at trial. Intermediary courts are obviously hesitant to second guess the lower court findings, especially since they can only look at the appellate record and cannot gauge the demeanor of the witnesses. Strategically, an appeals lawyers may want to include an argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because this may strengthen the defendants argument that other errors were not harmless error.		* '''Weight of the Evidence''' - In some jurisdictions the intermediary appellate court may be able to review both the lower court's findings of law and the lower court's finding of facts. When a defendant claims the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence, they are arguing that no reasonably jury could find the defendant guilty, given the evidence presented at trial. Intermediary courts are obviously hesitant to second guess the lower court findings, especially since they can only look at the appellate record and cannot gauge the demeanor of the witnesses. Strategically, an appeals lawyers may want to include an argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because this may strengthen the defendants argument that other errors were not harmless error.

	* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a ~~crime \| elements of the~~ crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.		* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.

	* '''[[Ineffective Assistance of Counsel]]''' - A defendant is guaranteed the right to competent legal counsel during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Failure on the part of the defense attorney to represent her client may result in a valid claim for retrial on the basis of a violation of the right to counsel.		* '''[[Ineffective Assistance of Counsel]]''' - A defendant is guaranteed the right to competent legal counsel during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Failure on the part of the defense attorney to represent her client may result in a valid claim for retrial on the basis of a violation of the right to counsel.

IBJadmin at 13:03, 27 September 2012

2012-09-27T13:03:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:03, 27 September 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Languages\|Appeals}}


	= Background on Appeals=		= Background on Appeals=

IBJadmin: /* Grounds for Appeal */

2012-09-10T12:19:36Z

Grounds for Appeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:19, 10 September 2012
Line 46:		Line 46:
	* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a crime \| elements of the crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.		* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a crime \| elements of the crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.

	* '''[[Ineffective Assistance of Counsel]]''' - A defendant is ~~gauranteed~~ the right to competent legal counsel during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Failure on the part of the defense attorney to represent her client may result in a valid claim for retrial on the basis of a violation of the right to counsel.		* '''[[Ineffective Assistance of Counsel]]''' - A defendant is guaranteed the right to competent legal counsel during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Failure on the part of the defense attorney to represent her client may result in a valid claim for retrial on the basis of a violation of the right to counsel.

	== If the Defendant Loses the Initial Appeal ==		== If the Defendant Loses the Initial Appeal ==

IBJadmin: /* Grounds for Appeal */

2012-09-10T12:10:45Z

Grounds for Appeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:10, 10 September 2012
Line 42:		Line 42:
	A defendant may have one or more basis for their appeal in law. Listed below are a few of the most common grounds on which a convicted defendant may appeal a conviction:		A defendant may have one or more basis for their appeal in law. Listed below are a few of the most common grounds on which a convicted defendant may appeal a conviction:

	* '''Weight of the Evidence''' - In some jurisdictions the intermediary appellate court may be able to review both the lower court's findings of law and the lower court's finding of facts. When a defendant claims the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence, they are arguing that no reasonably jury could find the defendant guilty, given the evidence presented at trial. Intermediary courts are obviously hesitant to second guess the lower court findings, especially since they can only look at the appellate record and cannot ~~guage~~ the demeanor of the witnesses. Strategically, an appeals lawyers may want to include an argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because this may strengthen the defendants argument that other errors were not harmless error.		* '''Weight of the Evidence''' - In some jurisdictions the intermediary appellate court may be able to review both the lower court's findings of law and the lower court's finding of facts. When a defendant claims the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence, they are arguing that no reasonably jury could find the defendant guilty, given the evidence presented at trial. Intermediary courts are obviously hesitant to second guess the lower court findings, especially since they can only look at the appellate record and cannot gauge the demeanor of the witnesses. Strategically, an appeals lawyers may want to include an argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because this may strengthen the defendants argument that other errors were not harmless error.

	* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a crime \| elements of the crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.		* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a crime \| elements of the crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.

Ibjadmin: /* Grounds for Appeal */

2011-05-18T08:08:49Z

Grounds for Appeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:08, 18 May 2011
Line 44:		Line 44:
	* '''Weight of the Evidence''' - In some jurisdictions the intermediary appellate court may be able to review both the lower court's findings of law and the lower court's finding of facts. When a defendant claims the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence, they are arguing that no reasonably jury could find the defendant guilty, given the evidence presented at trial. Intermediary courts are obviously hesitant to second guess the lower court findings, especially since they can only look at the appellate record and cannot guage the demeanor of the witnesses. Strategically, an appeals lawyers may want to include an argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because this may strengthen the defendants argument that other errors were not harmless error.		* '''Weight of the Evidence''' - In some jurisdictions the intermediary appellate court may be able to review both the lower court's findings of law and the lower court's finding of facts. When a defendant claims the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence, they are arguing that no reasonably jury could find the defendant guilty, given the evidence presented at trial. Intermediary courts are obviously hesitant to second guess the lower court findings, especially since they can only look at the appellate record and cannot guage the demeanor of the witnesses. Strategically, an appeals lawyers may want to include an argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because this may strengthen the defendants argument that other errors were not harmless error.

	* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[elements of a crime \| elements of the crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.		* '''Sufficiency of the Evidence''' - A defendant may also argue that the evidence presented by the prosecutor failed to prove one or more [[Defenses\|elements of a crime \| elements of the crime]]. Unlike arguments based on "weight of the evidence" this argument does not ask the judge to examine the value of the evidence presented at trial. The question is simply whether the prosecution presented any evidence that would prove all the elements of a crime.

	* '''[[Ineffective Assistance of Counsel]]''' - A defendant is gauranteed the right to competent legal counsel during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Failure on the part of the defense attorney to represent her client may result in a valid claim for retrial on the basis of a violation of the right to counsel.		* '''[[Ineffective Assistance of Counsel]]''' - A defendant is gauranteed the right to competent legal counsel during all stages of the criminal proceedings. Failure on the part of the defense attorney to represent her client may result in a valid claim for retrial on the basis of a violation of the right to counsel.

Ibjadmin: /* The Appellate Process */

2011-05-18T08:08:13Z

The Appellate Process

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:08, 18 May 2011
Line 35:		Line 35:
	* It is important to know the grounds on which the defendant can file for an appeal. Trials that had fundamental errors in the criminal trial process or court errors that had a substantial negative impact on the outcome of the case are good issues for appeal.		* It is important to know the grounds on which the defendant can file for an appeal. Trials that had fundamental errors in the criminal trial process or court errors that had a substantial negative impact on the outcome of the case are good issues for appeal.
	* In most U.S. states, a judge in an intermediate appellate court conducts the appeal. This judge reviews the court records and comes to a conclusion as to whether the defendant's right to a fair trial or due process was violated.		* In most U.S. states, a judge in an intermediate appellate court conducts the appeal. This judge reviews the court records and comes to a conclusion as to whether the defendant's right to a fair trial or due process was violated.
	* The parties to an appeal submit written "briefs" to the appellate court, along with a copy of the trial court [[~~Transcript~~\|transcript]] and any exhibits that were used a trial. Oral arguments may be scheduled. Arguments are typically very short in duration, and tend to focus on the legal issues.		* The parties to an appeal submit written "briefs" to the appellate court, along with a copy of the trial court [[Transcripts\|transcript]] and any exhibits that were used a trial. Oral arguments may be scheduled. Arguments are typically very short in duration, and tend to focus on the legal issues.
	* The defense lawyer should understand the defendant's due process rights. The defendant has the right to both procedural due process and substantive due process. Procedural due process involves the safeguard's to a person's liberty and property, set forth in the Constitution, such as the right to an attorney, the right to appointed counsel, the right to compel witnesses to appear at trial, and the right to obtain a transcript of trial proceedings. Substantive due process involves the broad notion that a person shall not be arbitrarily deprived of his life, liberty, or property. If a defendant is deprived of the opportunity to appeal a court decision, or is convicted when the prosecutor fails to produce evidence which tends to prove that person's innocence, his substantive due process rights have been violated.		* The defense lawyer should understand the defendant's due process rights. The defendant has the right to both procedural due process and substantive due process. Procedural due process involves the safeguard's to a person's liberty and property, set forth in the Constitution, such as the right to an attorney, the right to appointed counsel, the right to compel witnesses to appear at trial, and the right to obtain a transcript of trial proceedings. Substantive due process involves the broad notion that a person shall not be arbitrarily deprived of his life, liberty, or property. If a defendant is deprived of the opportunity to appeal a court decision, or is convicted when the prosecutor fails to produce evidence which tends to prove that person's innocence, his substantive due process rights have been violated.
	* An appeal can be filed upon the defendant's conviction or upon the defendant's sentencing if defendant wishes to appeal the sentence but not the conviction.		* An appeal can be filed upon the defendant's conviction or upon the defendant's sentencing if defendant wishes to appeal the sentence but not the conviction.

Ibjadmin: /* The Appellate Process */

2011-05-18T08:07:34Z

The Appellate Process

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:07, 18 May 2011
Line 35:		Line 35:
	* It is important to know the grounds on which the defendant can file for an appeal. Trials that had fundamental errors in the criminal trial process or court errors that had a substantial negative impact on the outcome of the case are good issues for appeal.		* It is important to know the grounds on which the defendant can file for an appeal. Trials that had fundamental errors in the criminal trial process or court errors that had a substantial negative impact on the outcome of the case are good issues for appeal.
	* In most U.S. states, a judge in an intermediate appellate court conducts the appeal. This judge reviews the court records and comes to a conclusion as to whether the defendant's right to a fair trial or due process was violated.		* In most U.S. states, a judge in an intermediate appellate court conducts the appeal. This judge reviews the court records and comes to a conclusion as to whether the defendant's right to a fair trial or due process was violated.
	* The parties to an appeal submit written "briefs" to the appellate court, along with a copy of the trial court transcript and any exhibits that were used a trial. Oral arguments may be scheduled. Arguments are typically very short in duration, and tend to focus on the legal issues.		* The parties to an appeal submit written "briefs" to the appellate court, along with a copy of the trial court [[Transcript\|transcript]] and any exhibits that were used a trial. Oral arguments may be scheduled. Arguments are typically very short in duration, and tend to focus on the legal issues.
	* The defense lawyer should understand the defendant's due process rights. The defendant has the right to both procedural due process and substantive due process. Procedural due process involves the safeguard's to a person's liberty and property, set forth in the Constitution, such as the right to an attorney, the right to appointed counsel, the right to compel witnesses to appear at trial, and the right to obtain a transcript of trial proceedings. Substantive due process involves the broad notion that a person shall not be arbitrarily deprived of his life, liberty, or property. If a defendant is deprived of the opportunity to appeal a court decision, or is convicted when the prosecutor fails to produce evidence which tends to prove that person's innocence, his substantive due process rights have been violated.		* The defense lawyer should understand the defendant's due process rights. The defendant has the right to both procedural due process and substantive due process. Procedural due process involves the safeguard's to a person's liberty and property, set forth in the Constitution, such as the right to an attorney, the right to appointed counsel, the right to compel witnesses to appear at trial, and the right to obtain a transcript of trial proceedings. Substantive due process involves the broad notion that a person shall not be arbitrarily deprived of his life, liberty, or property. If a defendant is deprived of the opportunity to appeal a court decision, or is convicted when the prosecutor fails to produce evidence which tends to prove that person's innocence, his substantive due process rights have been violated.
	* An appeal can be filed upon the defendant's conviction or upon the defendant's sentencing if defendant wishes to appeal the sentence but not the conviction.		* An appeal can be filed upon the defendant's conviction or upon the defendant's sentencing if defendant wishes to appeal the sentence but not the conviction.

Ibjadmin at 09:17, 4 May 2011

2011-05-04T09:17:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:17, 4 May 2011
Line 70:		Line 70:
	=Notes=		=Notes=
	<references/>		<references/>
			{{Languages\|Appeals}}

Ibjadmin: /* Limits on the Right to Appeal */

2011-02-08T12:50:35Z

Limits on the Right to Appeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:50, 8 February 2011
Line 24:		Line 24:
	* '''Concurrent Sentence Doctrine''' - If a defendant challenges his conviction on one of several counts and he has been sentenced to concurrent terms, reversal of one count will not reduce the underlying sentence. Thus some courts have held that the case is not appealable under this doctrine. This doctrine should be rejected because a defendant has the right to challenge each and every count. The case is not moot because collateral consequences of additional counts may become relevant in a future case.		* '''Concurrent Sentence Doctrine''' - If a defendant challenges his conviction on one of several counts and he has been sentenced to concurrent terms, reversal of one count will not reduce the underlying sentence. Thus some courts have held that the case is not appealable under this doctrine. This doctrine should be rejected because a defendant has the right to challenge each and every count. The case is not moot because collateral consequences of additional counts may become relevant in a future case.
	* '''Timeliness''' - In most jurisdictions a defendant has a specific period of time in which he must file for an appeal. Failure to file in the statutory limit an be deemed a waiver of the right to appeal.		* '''Timeliness''' - In most jurisdictions a defendant has a specific period of time in which he must file for an appeal. Failure to file in the statutory limit an be deemed a waiver of the right to appeal.
	* '''Waiver''' - The defendant may agree in writing to waive their right to appeal. Many courts have rejected formal plea waivers as against public policy and the defense attorney should argue that the waiver is void either 1) because of public policy or 2) because of the facts surrounding the actual plea and waiver.		* '''[[Waiver]]''' - The defendant may agree in writing to waive their right to appeal. Many courts have rejected formal plea waivers as against public policy and the defense attorney should argue that the waiver is void either 1) because of public policy or 2) because of the facts surrounding the actual plea and waiver.
	* '''Presevation''' - A defendant who disagrees with a judge's ruling should strive to make a timely and specific objection to the ruling in order to preserve the issue for appeal. Failure to do so may be deemed a waiver of the error by the appeals judge. The rationale behind this rule is that a defendant is obligated to cure error as soon as it occurs to increase both the speed and accuracy of case outcomes. Furthermore, a defendant who strategically decides to forgo raising an error at trial should not be able to raise that same error at a later date.		* '''Presevation''' - A defendant who disagrees with a judge's ruling should strive to make a timely and specific objection to the ruling in order to preserve the issue for appeal. Failure to do so may be deemed a waiver of the error by the appeals judge. The rationale behind this rule is that a defendant is obligated to cure error as soon as it occurs to increase both the speed and accuracy of case outcomes. Furthermore, a defendant who strategically decides to forgo raising an error at trial should not be able to raise that same error at a later date.
	* '''[[Harmless Error]]''' - In those cases where an error is preserved, the court may determine that the error is harmless and would not have affected the outcome of the case. Generally, there are two types of errors: those that are subject to harmless error analysis and those that, once proven, automatically result in reversal or modification of the conviction.		* '''[[Harmless Error]]''' - In those cases where an error is preserved, the court may determine that the error is harmless and would not have affected the outcome of the case. Generally, there are two types of errors: those that are subject to harmless error analysis and those that, once proven, automatically result in reversal or modification of the conviction.

Ibjadmin: /* Collateral Attacks on Appeal */

2011-01-13T16:07:37Z

Collateral Attacks on Appeal

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:07, 13 January 2011
Line 62:		Line 62:
	==Collateral Attacks on Appeal==		==Collateral Attacks on Appeal==
	* [[Right to Habeas Corpus \| Habeas Corpus]]		* [[Right to Habeas Corpus \| Habeas Corpus]]
	* Judgement Notwithstanding the Verdict		* [[Judgement Notwithstanding the Verdict]]

	=France=		=France=