and proved beyond a reasonable doubt (490).
Apprendi was supposed to be a “ringing endorsement of the right to trial by jury” (Allen and
others 2005, 1718). Sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum sentencing laws allowed
trial judges to decide facts related to defendants’ punishment. According to the majority,
guidelines and mandatory minimums threatened the democratic right to have our peers decide
those critical facts. Apprendi was supposed to eliminate that threat.
After a guilty verdict in a trial court, whether from a judge or a jury, all jurisdictions afford
the defendant at least one statutory right to appeal. This statutory right to appeal is usually
only to an intermediate appellate court. After the appeal, having the case considered further
by the state supreme court or SCOTUS is largely discretionary. After a state or SCOTUS
hearing or denial of discretionary appeal, a defendant can collaterally attack his or her
conviction through a habeas corpus proceeding.
Habeas corpus proceedings are noncriminal (civil) lawsuits and are considered separate cases
from the original criminal trial. The defendants in the criminal case are now the plaintiffs or
petitioners in the habeas corpus proceeding. They petition the court for a writ on the grounds
that they are being unlawfully detained. These habeas corpus proceedings may initially be
brought in a state court, but after the state court procedures are exhausted, they can be
brought in a United States District Court. From an unsuccessful petition in U.S. District
Court, the defendant can appeal to a circuit court of appeals and, ultimately, ask SCOTUS to
hear his or her case on a writ of certiorari.
CRPR.SAMA.18.14.05 – Know that there’s no constitutional right to appeal, but every
jurisdiction has created a statutory right to appeal. Understand why habeas corpus is a
“collateral attack” and how civil trials are used to determine whether convicts have been
unlawfully detained.