
Appeals and the Writ of Habeas Corpus
FAQ
From the Nolo.com Criminal Law Center
Defendants who think they've been wrongfully convicted
of a crime have a number of options.
A "not guilty" verdict on all charges normally ends a criminal
case. The prosecution cannot appeal once a defendant has been acquitted
of the originally charged offenses and any additional offenses the judge
may allow the jury to consider.
A "guilty" verdict, however, on some or all the charges, does
not necessarily mean the case is over. Defendants who think they've been
wrongfully convicted have a number of options.
- The defendant can make a motion asking the trial judge to overturn
the jury's guilty verdict and enter a verdict of not guilty.
- A defendant can move for a new trial -- that is, ask the judge to
set aside the jury's verdict, declare a mistrial and start over.
- Defendants can appeal (ask a higher court to reverse the conviction
because the jurors made a mistake).
What are the chances that my conviction will be reversed?
Appeals judges generally resist overruling trial court judgments and prefer
to give trial judges wide discretion in the conduct of trials. As many appellate
courts have said, defendants are not guaranteed "perfect" trials.
Normally an appellate court will overturn a guilty verdict only if the trial
court made an error of law that significantly contributed to the outcome.
Put differently, an error by the trial judge will not lead to a reversal
of a conviction as long as the error can reasonably be considered harmless.
Not surprisingly, most errors are deemed "harmless," and consequently
few convictions are reversed. However, some types of errors are so grievous
that they are presumed harmful, such as the use of a coerced confession
in violation of the 14th Amendment.
Sentences are a different matter. When the trial judge is given discretion
over the sentence, the appellate court will rarely interfere. However,
if the law requires a particular sentence and the judge gets it wrong,
the appellate court will usually send the case back for resentencing.
What is a writ?
The word "writ" traces its roots to English common law. In Old
English, writ means a letter, often written by an attorney. Writ was the
name for an action in the courts. There were different kinds of writs for
different actions -- writs to recover land or personal property, to enforce
judgments, to seek damages for broken contracts. Most of the common law
writs have been abolished and replaced by the civil actions we know today.
In another sense, the word writ meant, and still means, an order. For
example, an "original writ" in old England was a letter from
the king to the local sheriff ordering someone who committed a wrong to
either make repairs to the person wronged or appear in court to face formal
accusations. In this context, the original writ is most like our "summons"
ordering a party to appear in court.
In most modern American jurisdictions, a "writ" is an order
from a higher court to a lower court or to a government official such
as a prison warden. Defendants may seek several types of writs from appellate
judges directed at the trial court or at a lower appellate court. (Many
states have two levels of appellate courts -- an intermediate appellate
court and the state Supreme Court.) This section merely outlines common
writs. Writs, like appeals, are complex and involve picky details. Defendants
facing situations where they may be entitled to take a writ should consult
counsel.
What's the difference between a writ and an appeal?
Writs usually are considered to be extraordinary remedies, meaning they
are permitted only when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such
as an appeal. In other words, a defendant may take a writ to contest a point
that the defendant is not entitled to raise on appeal. As a general rule,
this applies to issues that are not apparent in the record of the case itself
(such as when an attorney fails to investigate a possible defense).
Any one of the following reasons, for example, may prohibit an appeal
(and justify a writ):
- The defense did not lodge a timely objection at the time of the alleged
injustice (but should have).
- A final judgment has not yet been entered in the trial court, but
the party seeking the writ needs relief at once to prevent an injustice
or unnecessary expense.
- The matter is urgent. (Writs are heard more quickly than appeals,
so defendants who feel wronged by actions of the trial judge may need
to take a writ to obtain an early review by a higher court.)
- The defendant has already lodged an unsuccessful appeal (defendants
may file multiple writs but the right to appeal is limited to one).
But filing a writ that simply mimics an unsuccessful appeal is a frivolous
writ and will be dismissed immediately.
What is a writ of habeas corpus?
Defendants who want to challenge the legality of their imprisonment -- or
the conditions in which they are being imprisoned -- may seek help from
a court by filing an application for what is known as a "writ of habeas
corpus.
A writ of habeas corpus (literally to "produce the body") is
a court order to a person (prison warden) or agency (institution) holding
someone in custody to deliver the imprisoned individual to the court issuing
the order. Many state constitutions provide for writs of habeas corpus,
as does the United States Constitution that specifically forbids the government
from suspending writ proceedings except in extraordinary times -- such
as war.
Known as "the Great Writ," habeas corpus gives citizens the
power to get help from courts to keep government and any other institutions
that may imprison people in check. In many countries, police and military
personnel, for example, may take people and lock them up for months --
even years -- without charging them, and those imprisoned have no avenue,
no legal channel, by which to protest or challenge the imprisonment. The
writ of habeas corpus gives jailed suspects the right to ask an appellate
judge to set them free or order an end to improper jail conditions, and
thereby ensures that people in this country will not be held for long
times in prison in violation of their rights. Of course, the right to
ask for relief is not the same as the right to get relief; courts are
very stingy with their writs.
| Potential Post-conviction
Remedies |
|
As discussed in this article, convicted defendants can
take a number of steps to challenge guilty verdicts and/or
to correct violations of constitutional rights, including
motions, appeals and writs. The following list illustrates
these steps. A defendant who loses at one may go on to the
next step, all the way down the list (up the legal chain)
in a process that can take many years -- especially for
serious felonies such as death penalty cases.
This list is merely an illustration of possible post-conviction
proceedings -- some of which may only be used in certain
cases. Also, defendants usually must first have unsuccessfully
sought relief through the available state remedies before
they will be allowed to seek relief in federal courts. For
these reasons and because of the complexities of these proceedings
and what is at stake (liberty or life), defendants should
consult counsel to determine which remedies are available
to them.
- Motion for Acquittal. A request that the judge
decide that there is not enough evidence to convict the
defendant. Depending on whether the trial is before a
judge or jury and depending on court rules, this motion
may be made either after the prosecution presents its
evidence or after all the evidence is presented.
- Motion for a New Trial. Request that trial judge
declare a mistrial and grant a new trial.
- Appeal to State Appellate Court. Contends that
trial judge made some legal error.
- Petition for Rehearing to State Appeals Court.
Requests that appeals court judges change their own decision.
- State Supreme Court Appeal. Requests that highest
court in the state review and overturn the decision of
the mid-level appeals court.
- U.S. Supreme Court Appeal. Requests that highest
court in the nation intervene to correct an error on the
part of the state courts that violated the U.S. Constitution.
- State Court Habeas Corpus Petitions. Requests
that the state appeals courts order the jail or prison
holding the defendant to release the defendant upon a
showing that the defendant is being held in violation
of some state law or constitutional right.
- Federal Habeas Corpus Petition to District Court.
Requests the federal trial court to order the jail or
prison holding the defendant to release the defendant
because the defendant is being held in violation of the
U.S. Constitution.
- Appeal of Federal Habeas Corpus Petition to Circuit
Court. Requests the mid-level federal court to review
the federal trial court's decision denying the writ.
- Appeal of Federal Habeas Corpus Petition to U.S.
Supreme Court. Requests the highest court in the land
to review the mid-level federal court's decision denying
the writ.
|
|
Click
here for related information and products from Nolo.com.
|