Paper Example on Appellate Process

The right to appeal is a constitutional right of any defendant in a given conviction. It is an important aspect of any criminal case as a trial court, the jury may err in interpreting the law, or the entire procedure of conviction may be wrong. In reviewing the trial courts conviction, it uses the practices and rules applied by the appellate court to rehear a sentence or conviction. To hear a case on appeal, the appellant will have the burden to persuade the court of appeal that the court either made a mistake in the entire conviction process or misinterpreted the law. In the case that the appellate court gives the go ahead for the appeal, it may reverse the trial court's decision in part or wholly. On the other hand, it may deny the appellant the appeal in which case the appellant court upholds the ruling of the trial court. According to Myers and Talarico (2012), it is important to note that the primary purpose of the appellant process is to review the trial process, decision, or legal mistakes that could have affected the final decision of the jury. The right to appeal is an important aspect of the Fifth Amendment, and a defendant has the right to appeal.

Justification for Appeal

The potential justification for an appeal in a given criminal case includes juror misconduct, legal error, and fruitless assistance of the advocate. In granting an appeal, the appellant court must point to the fact that the above errors were committed and affected the jury's decision (Posner 2013). The jury's contribution and participation in a criminal case are very significant, and any slight mistake may contribute to the wrongful conviction. In case the errors do not point to affect the outcome, the conviction will automatically stand, and the appellant will lose the chance for an appeal (Myers & Talarico 2012). In the case of a criminal trial, the appellant will have to prove to the appellate court that the jury made a mistake in their decision and that due to their actions; the outcome of the case could have been different.

The Process

Granting an appeal opens up a review of all the proceedings of the trial in addition to the records that will help determine the grounds of the appeal. The records looked into include all motions involved in the case pre and post trial, all evidence admitted, and word for word transcription in the trial (Posner 2013). The appellant court will additionally review briefs written and provided for by each party in addition to the jury's contribution and behavior during the entire process. The court will hear oral submissions from both advocates to give clarifications on the briefs provided. In the case of the criminal proceedings, the appellant court will review the jury's conduct, instructions, and decision and if it is decided that the jury's decision was improper, the appellate court will provide for a trial order with the possibility of reinstating the conviction (Myers & Talarico 2012). The court of appeal may thus reduce the sentence or uphold the conviction by the outcome of the hearing. The process is not a retrial but a review of the jury's deliberations and decision in addition to any adequate justification that may warrant a hearing of the entire process of the trial. An appellate court will thus uphold the conviction, reduce the sentence, or order a fresh retrial with a different jury.

References

Myers, M. A., & Talarico, S. M. (2012). The social contexts of criminal sentencing. Springer Science & Business Media.

Posner, R. A. (2013). Judicial Opinions and Appellate Advocacy in Federal Courts-One Judge's Views. Duq. L. Rev., 51, 3.