CASE 16.2
Criminal appeals are generally routine because they seldom raise meritorious issues
(Primus, 2007; Wold & Caldeira, 1980). Current standards of effective assistance of
counsel often force lawyers to appeal, no matter how slight the odds of appellate court
reversal. As a result, a significant number of criminal appeals lack substantial merit. For
example, of the roughly 5,125 written dispositions in criminal appeals filed by
defendants in the California Court of Appeals in 2010, the court reversed only 226 (4%)
convictions (Judicial Council of California, 2011). Why do criminal appeals rarely
succeed? First, the appellate standards of review applicable to most decision-making
during criminal trials are highly deferential to trial court outcomes (Primus, 2007).
Second, appellate courts often find that no reversible error was committed during the
trial court proceedings.
What defendants did Neubauer (1991) find were most likely to win on appeal?
a. defendants convicted of nonviolent offenses and who received a relatively lenient
sentence.
b. defendants convicted of violent offenses and who received a relatively lenient
sentence.
c. defendants convicted of nonviolent offenses and who received a relatively harsh
sentence.
d. defendants convicted of violent offenses and who received a relatively harsh
sentence.
CASE 16.3
One might think that the appeals and postconviction review processes would routinely
correct situations in which a defendant was wrongfully convicted, but that is clearly not
the case. Up until the mid-1990s, public perception was that criminal defendants had
gained too many rights during the Warren era, and, as a result, far too many criminal
defendants escaped criminal punishment on technicalities (Uphoff, 2006). Such
perceptions led manyincluding judges and several Supreme Court justicesto deny that
wrongful convictions were a major problem (see Herrera v. Collins, 1993). Since 1989,
though, over 329 inmates have been exonerated by DNA evidence, largely due to the
efforts of the Innocence Project, the Death Penalty Information Center, and similar
organizations (Innocence Project, 2015a; see also Zalman, Smith & Kiger, 2008). As a