The Law Offices of Nuttall & Coleman has experience in the handling of criminal appeals and writs.
Appeals of Criminal Convictions
A criminal appeal is taken following conviction or judgment in the trial court. With regard to a state court conviction, following the filing of a Notice of Appeal in the trial court, the matter is reviewed by the state appellate court. In the San Joaquin Valley, following conviction or judgment out of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Stanislaus, Tulare or Tuolumne, the appeal is heard before the California Court of Appeal for the Fifth District in Fresno.
An appeal provides a full and fair opportunity to secure an adjudication of all claimed errors or of deprivations of an individual's constitutional or statutory rights. (In re Sterling (1965) 63 Cal.2d 486, 488.) Appellate review discourages unfairness in criminal trials. (People v. Bolton (1979) 23 Cal.3d 208, 215.)
After the record on appeal has been filed, the appellant will file an Appellant's Opening Brief, asserting its contentions of error. Thereafter, the California Attorney General's Office will file a Respondent's Brief to address the issues raised by appellant. Appellant will then file a Reply Brief. Following completed briefing, oral argument is scheduled. In the absence of a waiver, oral argument is held before a three-judge appellate panel. The appellate court will then file its written decision or opinion.
Where the appellate court finds error, the judgment may be reversed and/or the matter remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the appellate court's opinion. Where the appellate court affirms the judgment, a Petition For Review may be filed with the California Supreme Court, seeking review of the appellate court's decision. An appeal to the California Supreme Court, except in a death penalty case, is discretionary.
Following a federal conviction after proceedings in the United States District Court (in the San Joaquin Valley, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California), an appeal is made to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. A briefing schedule is ordered by the court, and the matter proceeds similarly to that process described above.
Further discretionary review may be sought to the United States Supreme Court in a Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, following completed review by either the California Supreme Court or Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Writs
There are many types of writ petitions. The most common writs are mandamus, prohibition and habeas corpus. Typically, petitions for writ of mandamus or prohibition seek the appellate court's review of a trial court's decision prior to judgment or conviction. A habeas corpus petition seeks review after conviction or judgment, in a somewhat different manner than the review undertaken on direct appeal (see above).
A writ of habeas corpus often acts as a second or collateral review in the state court system. Review in the federal court system by way of a habeas corpus petition is possible where state court remedies have been exhausted. In other words, the federal court may review the state court judgment once the state's highest court - here, the California Supreme Court - has been presented with the claim or claims and has had an opportunity for review. Notably, writs may be denied summarily. In other words, the court is not required to file a written decision or opinion.
A brief note about federal habeas corpus practice. The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) is a complex statute. As the Ninth Circuit once noted, "[a]s even the most seasoned of lawyers knows, AEDPA is a confusing, at times impenetrable statute." Crenshaw v. Hubbard, 2001 WL 111495 (9th Cir. Feb. 7, 2001). Engaging the services of Nuttall & Coleman for the purpose of federal habeas corpus review provides the client with attorneys experienced in the complexities of the AEDPA.
As the California Supreme Court has stated, appellate counsel "serves both the court and his client by advocating changes in the law if argument can be made supporting change." (People v. Feggans (1967) 67 Cal.2d 444, 447.) The attorneys at Nuttall & Coleman are experienced appellate practitioners. They are familiar with the rules and procedures particular to appellate practice and can assist clients in obtaining appellate review at all stages.
Website Designed by BCT Consulting, Inc..