People sometimes think of criminal appeals as a second trial. The first trial happened and a person was convicted on criminal charges. They want another chance to go through the process and get a better outcome. They think they can appeal the decision and ask for a new trial.
But an appeal is actually just a chance for the appellate court to reconsider the outcome. It’s not a new trial, but a reexamining of the first.
Often, an appeal is based on a perceived legal error. Maybe the evidence used in court should have been excluded under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine because it was illegally gathered, for example. The judge allowed that evidence to be used anyway, which led to the conviction. The person who was convicted may appeal on the grounds that the law was interpreted or applied incorrectly and illegal evidence was used. The appellate court could then overturn the conviction if they agree.
Does the appeal involve new evidence?
No. This is also a common misconception. People believe they can bring new evidence to an appeal that will clear their name.
But the goal for the court is actually to reexamine the existing evidence. Typically, nothing new has to be submitted at all. The court just looks at the evidence that already exists and determines if the law was applied properly. If there were no errors in the first case, they may decide that the conviction has to stand.
Starting an appeal
It can be very valuable to appeal a conviction, in many cases. It’s just important to know when and why to do so. If you’re considering an appeal, be sure you know precisely what legal steps to take.